A Reuters article this week suggests that Gainesville is a dying community.

I think the article gets some things right and others wrong.

Gainesville home sales are jumping. And in the lower prices we're seeing bidding wars and/or multiple offers. That doesn't signal to me that the entire community is dying. And, yes, there are still a lot more foreclosures to come. If they come at a measured pace the market will quickly absorb them.

On the other hand, I continue to see buyers less willing to do the long commute. So, unless the pool of jobs within a reasonable driving distance of Gainesville increases, the community has some tough times ahead.

And, the further out you go (think Fauquier County) the more commuters have opted out.

Are new, good jobs going to be created in these communities? Or, are we simply going to be smaller?

Did you know that only 2% of homeowners ever challenge their property tax assessments? But the ones who do have a 75% success rate!

What if the dying inner cities of a generation ago will now be replaced by dying suburbs as gas prices soar? We're already seeing evidence of revitalized city centers and emptying suburbs full of McMansions. Temprorary blip or permanent restructuring?

A court in California ruled that the clause in a new home purchase contract mandating that disputes after settlement go through binding arbitration rather than court was "unconscionable" and therefore unenforcable. The court said it was unconscionable because of "oppression" and "surprise". According to the court "oppression arises when the parties have unequal bargaining power, leading to no real negotiation and lack of meaningful choice. Surprise may arise when challenged terms are hidden in a 'prolix wordy or long-winded printed form' drafted by a party in a superior bargaining position." I find the rationale in this as interesting as the decision itself. What does this say about builder's contracts in general?