AOL Real Estate - Blog

Latest Surgeon General's Warning: Your Neighborhood?

Amy Cortese — 2010-05-07T10:01:00 00:00

Filed under: Design

In the interest of public health, the Surgeon General has issued warnings about vices including cigarettes and alcohol. But what does the nation's top doctor have to say about the neighborhood you live in? Should poorly designed communities that discourage walking, social interaction and accessibility come with a similar warning?

That's a question raised by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in a new report that lends considerable weight to the case for creating walkable, sustainable communities.

You might not get cancer from it, but the fact is, the community you live in can affect your physical and mental health. Many of the chronic diseases that the CDC deals with -- such as asthma, obesity, diabetes and depression -- have been linked to poor neighborhood design. These diseases also contribute mightily to the nation's soaring healthcare costs. That's why the CDC has been turning its attention to issues that are typically the domain of developers, architects and city planners.
"How we build and maintain our communities' transportation systems, infrastructure, and public spaces can either exacerbate or reduce obesity, chronic diseases, injury rates, poor mental health, and the adverse effects of climate change," says Dr. Howard Frumkin, special assistant to the director of the CDC for Climate and Health.

The report, based on results from a gathering last fall of experts from academia, architecture, building, development, government, planning, and public health, looks at ways to bring health experts into the planning and development of housing and communities.

Much of the discussion centers on pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods and reducing the need for cars. But other considerations include promoting social interaction, reducing carbon footprints, providing access to grocers, and preserving green space. According to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, two-thirds of U.S. adults and nearly one-third of children are overweight or obese.

It takes more than getting health officials a seat at the table in local decisions, says Ellen Dunham-Jones, associate professor with the Georgia Institute of Technology's College of Architecture and co-author of "Retrofitting Suburbia: Urban Design Solutions for Redesigning Suburbs."

"We need to fundamentally build on the legal basis of protecting health, safety and welfare, and figure out how we get to the point of having Surgeon General warnings on zoning codes and subdivision regulations," she said in the report. "Imagine the impact of, 'The Surgeon general warns: This zoning code may be bad for your community's health.' That would really change the system."

Dunham-Jones is also the chair of The Congress for the New Urbanism's CNU 18 conference being held May 19-22 in Atlanta with assistance from the CDC, which will pick up on many of these issues.

There's no official word on whether the Surgeon General is considering a neighborhood warning, but the Surgeon General's "Vision for a Healthy and Fit Nation" does include this:

Improving our communities - Neighborhoods and communities should become actively involved in creating healthier environments. The availability of supermarkets, outdoor recreational facilities and the limitation of advertisements of less healthy foods and beverages are all examples of ways to create a healthier living environment.

The CDC report cites examples of communities that have taken coordinated steps to become more pedestrian friendly and healthful, such as Decatur, Ga., Tyson's Corner, Va., and Lakewood, Colo., where a mixed-use urban village replaced an old, car-dependent mall.

Better performance measures are needed, the authors acknowledge. But plenty of studies point to the benefits of designing healthy communities that promote walking, reduce the need for cars, and provide plenty of green space and opportunity for interaction.

A study funded by the National Institute of Health found that a 5 percent increase in a neighborhood's "walkability" index was associated with a 0.23-point drop in Body Mass Index.

Research conducted in Alameda, Calif., meanwhile, makes the case that unhealthy neighborhoods play a far greater role in triggering diseases than germs, bad genes or irresponsible behavior.

But the most persuasive results of all might involve another kind of green: homes in areas with a higher walkability rating have kept their value better during the housing downturn. A recent analysis using data from WalkScore.com found that the 10 least walkable cities on the Case-Shiller index suffered price drops of more than a third, while prices in the 10 most walkable cities have dropped by less than a quarter overall since June 2006.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Art Meets Foreclosure in Portland, Oregon

Amy Cortese — 2010-04-28T14:30:00 00:00

Filed under: Design,News,Economy

Like millions of homeowners around the country, Charles Wittenmeier found himself deeply underwater and facing foreclosure. After months of unemployment, a divorce and mounting debts, he will be vacating his house on May 28th. But before he does, Wittenmeier, a once-thriving advertising director, is turning his misfortune into art.

On May 1, he will transform his empty house in Portland, Oregon's Mount Tabor neighborhood into a communal artists' studio and performance space.

The artists and musicians will come with specific projects in mind and collaborate on others, with the resulting work to be compiled into a book, an album, and a feature-length documentary, all of them titled "28 Days in May."

Wittenmeier and his co-director, Jordan Kinley, are trying to raise $10,000 for the project on the funding website, Kickstarter.com. The social media-savvy pair are also chronicling the "28 Days in May" project on Facebook.
The 44-year old Wittenmeier, who helped hawk everything from Coca-Cola to Tabasco Sauce over his career, sees the project as a way to come to terms not only with his personal situation, but the broader crisis unfolding across the country.

"One day I was sitting in the empty house after my wife moved out and I realized my life has become the Talking Heads song. How did we get here and where do we go? As Americans we've been sold a bill of goods, and I've helped sell it," writes Wittenmeier on Kickstarter.com.

That's when he called Kinley, his 23-year-old assistant and friend, with the idea for "28 Days in May."

"This is an experiment to finish the things I've always wanted to finish, collaborate with people I've always wanted to collaborate with and ultimately gain insight into myself," says Wittenmeier.

"This is not a sob story," he insists. "It's about closing one chapter and starting a new one."

Wittenmeier moved into the 1913 Swiss chalet-style house, which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, with his wife in 2003. They raised three kids there, but as Wittenmeier's work tailed off and debts mounted, the relationship strained, and last summer they decided to divorce. When the project concludes, Wittenmeier will be renting a house nearby.

Kinley said the documentary will explore Wittenmeier's life, from his successful days to his slide into foreclosure. "The trajectory of his life is the trajectory of the American Dream," says Kinley.

So far, they have raised just $1,350 or so from 24 backers on Kickstarter, with just three days to go until the funding deadline. (According to Kickstarter's rules, if the goal is not reached, Wittenmeier will get nothing).

The donors, in return, receive assorted items salvaged from Wittenmeier's basement, such as an expired Campbell's Soup can, a "150-pack of nice elegant plastic utensils," or in some cases a copy of the 28 Days album. The money would help pay for the artists' transportation, food and equipment, said Kinley. "But it's going to happen regardless."

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Et Tu, WaMu? Seattle Bank Was Subprime 'Polluter'

Amy Cortese — 2010-04-15T07:30:00 00:00

Filed under: News,Economy

Of all the wing-tipped execs that have been paraded before government officials investigating the roots of the financial crisis, the former Washington Mutual executives are surely among the most shameful.

Tuesday's all-day Senate hearing, conducted by Sen. Carl Levin, aired enough dirty laundry to stink up all of Capital Hill. WaMu, according to the Senate investigation, pursued a deliberate strategy of peddling high-risk, often fraudulent loans, and selling them off to investors. Employees were compensated on quantity, not quality, and even some accused of fraud were lavished with trips to Hawaii. All the while, officials ignored warnings. In fact, when the housing market started to deteriorate, the bank ratcheted up its efforts to push the ill-fated loans in a final push for profits. WaMu was seized by federal regulators in September 2008 and later acquired by JPMorgan Chase in a fire sale, but not before handing its departing CEO a $15 million gift.

"Washington Mutual built a conveyor belt that dumped toxic mortgage assets into the financial system like a polluter dumping poison into a river," said an outraged Levin (pictured). In its wake, WaMu and its peers have left the financial equivalent of a Superfund site that will take years and billions of dollars to clean up.

The hearing, the first of a series planned by the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations looking into the financial crisis, focused on Washington Mutual as a case study in what went wrong. Through the testimony of former WaMu execs and hundreds of pages of internal documents and emails, a picture emerged of a company fueled by greed and profit with lax management and even laxer federal oversight.

It wasn't until the mid-2000s, according to the investigators, that Seattle-based WaMu made a strategic decision to focus on lucrative subprime loans, including option-adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs), Alt-A and home equity loans. Key to that strategy was the 1999 purchase of Long Beach Mortgage Co. in Southern California, where some of the most egregious practices occurred.

Loan officers apparently routinely helped borrowers fudge applications -- in so-called "no doc" or "liar loans." Even a mariachi singer with a supposed six-figure income (but no proof) was approved for a mortgage by a meth-snorting loan officer, according to a 2008 article by the New York Times.

From 2000 to 2007, WaMu and Long Beach sold more than $115 billion in Option Arm loans, and packaged some $77 billion subprime loans into toxic securities. In the five years before the bank's collapse, WaMu CEO Kerry Killinger raked in more than $100 million in compensation.

There were several warnings. An internal review in 2005 of loans originated by two top WaMu loan officers, for example, found that more than half were fraudulent -- and up to 83 percent in the case of one officer. Yet, as the Senate subcommittee pointed out, "no steps were taken to address the problems." In fact, the officers were awarded prizes for their performance.

Some executives, such as Ronald J. Cathcart, the company's chief risk officer starting in 2005, said they raised alarms, to no avail. Instead, Cathcart was fired.

As late as June 2007, when the housing market was starting to show signs of distress, the bank was still pushing ahead with its subprime strategy. In a memo titled "WaMu Strategic Direction, Mr. Killinger wrote to directors "we will continue to emphasize higher-risk adjusted return products such as home equity, subprime first mortgages, ALTA mortgages and proprietary products such as Mortgage Plus," according to the Wall Street Journal. Killinger noted declining home prices and the potential for the housing bubble to deflate, but said there was "no way for the company to achieve earnings targets without more loan activity."

Incredibly, Killinger (he of the golden parachute) used his testimony in part to complain about what he believes was unfair treatment of the bank compared to the "too clubby to fail" TARP recipients. "I just don't think the company was treated in the same equal-handed, fair manner that all other financial institutions were," he told Sen. Levin.

Former WaMu officials testified that they tried to rein in the reckless lending starting as early as 2005 but ultimately failed or ran out of time. "WaMu took a series of steps to adopt more conservative credit policies and to move away from loan products with greater credit risk," testified David Schneider, WaMu's president of home loans from 2005 to 2008.

In the end, Levin's evidence and vivid imagery of WaMu's "toxic conveyor belt" leaves the lasting impression. And he rightfully points out that WaMu did not act alone. "Down river, there was Wall Street, with its huge appetite for these mortgage-backed securities," said Levin. "They bottled that polluted water, slapped a label on it from the credit rating agencies that said it was safe drinking water, and sold it to investors."

And let's not forget the watchdogs. On Friday, the inspectors general for the Treasury Department and the FDIC are expected to release a report criticizing the two agencies' oversight of Washington Mutual.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Hearings Shine a Spotlight on the Conflicted World of Credit Raters

Amy Cortese — 2010-01-18T09:45:00 00:00

Filed under: News,Economy

One of the more interesting observations in the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission hearings last week came not from the witness stand, but from one of the commission members. In his questioning, Byron Georgiou, a lawyer who played a lead role in the Enron prosecutions (and pictured left), called attention to the conflicts embedded in the business practices of the rating agencies at the heart of the financial crisis -- as he termed it, "a conflict of interest of gigantic proportions."

Sure, it's often pointed out the credit rating agencies -- Standard & Poor's, Moody's Investors Service and Fitch Ratings, the only three raters designated as nationally recognized statistical-rating organizations by the SEC -- have an inherent conflict of interest, since they are paid by the very institutions who issue the securities being rated.

But that's just the start of it.

You might presume that the rating organizations are getting a flat fee from the issuers for their services. But, as Georgiou noted, frequently, the raters are paid as a percentage of the ultimate deal. The higher the rating, the bigger their likely fee.

No buyers? No fee.

Since pension funds and some other big institutional investors by law can only buy tripe A-rated securities, the credit agencies have a major incentive to give securities AAA ratings to ensure they get sold, and at lofty prices. In a system like that, it's easy to see how junky subprime loans, with a little financial slicing and dicing, were regularly transformed into securities with stellar triple-A ratings -- the same grade given to the US government!

Yet, despite those conflicts and the reliance that investors put upon the ratings, credit rating agencies enjoy a Teflon-like aura of protection from accountability. Thanks to the Credit Rating Agency Reform Act of 2006, the organizations are shielded from prosecution or punishment by the SEC. They've generally been shielded from lawsuits as well.

"The credit rating agency issue is more serious than just the issuers paying," Georgiou said. "I think it's very important for the public to understand what happens here."

In the five years leading up through 2007, the agencies gave top ratings to $3.2 trillion worth of securities stuffed with subprime loans -- most of which has been since written down. During the same period, they booked record profits.

The rating agencies got their share of scrutiny back in the fall of 2008, when the financial meltdown prompted an investigation by a House Oversight Committee. (That's when an email exchange between two S&P employees discussing a particularly risky mortgage-backed security were made public, with one employee writing, "We rate every deal. It could be structured by cows and we would rate it.")

But little has been changed since then. Indeed, the agencies seem to have been forgotten, or at least overshadowed by the furor over Wall Street bonuses and the theater of big bank chiefs being grilled on the stand.

Georgiou suggested that perhaps it might be a good idea to change the compensation structure for the raters, so that their pay is tied to the long term success of failure of the securities they rate, thereby giving them some skin in the game. (That notion has been referred to as "eating your own cooking" at the hearings. But the correct phrase -- "eating your own dog food" -- seems much more apt.)

SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro said her agency is exploring "risk retention" measures, and has proposed that credit rating agencies be subject to liability the same way that auditors and lawyers are.

It seems a very reasonable step to take.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Xmas is for Tree Lovers, not Tree Killers

Amy Cortese — 2009-12-24T12:45:00 00:00

Filed under: News

It's that time of year again. Christmas lights adorn the brownstones in my Brooklyn neighborhood, and from their lighted windows come cheery glimpses of lovingly-decorated Christmas trees.

But not in my home.

My fiance, an avid gardener and nature lover, has banned the tradition in our abode. Why? Well, there's the issue of messy pine needles that must be vacuumed up. But the real issue is this: arborcide.

Each year, as the holidays draw closer, a conversation along these lines takes place.

Me: Honey, can we get a tree this year? Just a small one?

Fiance: Don't you find something strange about celebrating Jesus' birth by slaughtering millions of innocent trees?
Me: But honeypie, they're farmed! it's not like we're killing a wild tree. New trees will be planted!

Fiance: Does that lessen their pain? Imagine being hacked off from the lifeblood of the very earth that's nurtured you since you were a seedling! Imagine the horror of of being bound in twine and crammed into a truck with all of your rootless friends. Friends you've whispered to for comfort on dark, stormy nights. Friends whose giddy happiness you've shared on those early spring days. Then what? New days of fear follow: you're propped up against a cold wall on some sidewalk, like a circus animal on display, tormented by endless loops of sappy Christmas music as your own sap slowly bleeds away. Then, suddenly, you are hoisted, hog-tied and moving, maybe strapped to the top of a car. Imagine a tree's torment when it senses it is traveling! Then, this once tall and proud tree is rammed into a metal harness, its base ringed metal barbs and violated by merciless screws before being hoisted up high as if from an inverted gallows.

Enough, you say? But, no, a final outrage must occur. Torn from its home, borne to a foreign land, impaled in a pot, the tree is now garlanded in gayly colored lights and made-in-China tinsel. Imagine the horror, if you will, of standing before a clamoring brood hungering for more cheaply-made toys and disposable gadgets, oblivious to the fact that your life is ebbing away. The final darkness is approaching, yet you can't greet it with dignity because... you are covered in twinkling bulbs!

Needless to say, this year, once again, our living room is treeless. And I have to admit, when I walk by the frozen green carcasses littering the sidewalks come January, I am glad for it. But, as we head to my family's this afternoon, I look forward to the cozy feeling that comes with gathering around a beautiful tree, basking in the glow of familial warmth and tradition, the tree as silent, suffering witness.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Picketing the Fat Cats

Amy Cortese — 2009-12-16T11:00:00 00:00

Filed under: News

Is consumer frustration with the slow pace of loan modifications finally becoming more than silent resentment? If Monday's protest at the New York offices of JPMorgan Chase is any indication, the answer might be yes. With a little goading from the president, who on Sunday called America's bank presidents "fat cats," a new populist strain is perking up.

While CEO Jamie Dimon was in Washington meeting with President Obama -- one of the few major bank chiefs that made it in person -- hundreds of protesters stormed the bank's New York lobby. They carried signs reading, "You're a mean one, Mr. Dimon," and "Don't CHASE us out of our homes."
The protest was organized by the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America (NACA), a Boston-based non-profit community advocacy group that was founded in 1988 to fight predatory lending. Recently, the group has focused on helping troubled borrowers renegotiate their mortgages and stay in their homes, and has held protests like Monday's as well as mass "Save the Dream" gatherings that draw thousands of homeowners seeking help. (A Save the Dream event is taking place this week at New York's Jacob Javitz Center).

Similar uprisings have been bubbling up across the country, as people begin to channel their frustration. On Dec. 4, dozens of people gathered in downtown San Jose, Calif., an area hard hit by foreclosures, to protest Bank of America's dismal record in helping troubled homeowners. Among their demands: that BofA not foreclose on homes that have an outstanding application for a loan modification, and that the bank establish a 45 day deadline to respond to modification requests (instead of letting them languish in a Kafka-esque limbo).

Days later, in downtown San Francisco, demonstrators picketed Wells Fargo and Bank of America to demand more action from the banks to help stem foreclosures.

But the public display of outrage is still muted, given the level of anger many Americans feel over the taxpayer-funded bailout out of banks, which are once again raking in profits while ordinary Americans continue to lose jobs, benefits and homes.

It's actually surprising that there have been no mass demonstrations, no Million Man Marches. Where is the Move On for mortgage reform? You don't have to be kicked out of your home to be mad as hell over the way that reckless financial institutions brought us to the brink of catastrophe, took our money, and then left us holding the bag. Sure, they've paid back their TARP funds. But what gets glossed over is the fact that the banks are still at the government till -- in the form of more than a trillion dollars of cheap loans and loan guarantees that have enabled their record profits.

And where do those profits go? Not to strapped consumers, homeowners or small businesses that might use the loans to expand and hire. No. The bank chiefs would like to reward themselves and their employees for a job well done, and pay lobbyists to block any meaningful reform.

This much is clear: President Obama has lost his leverage over the banks, and Congress has lost (or never had) the will to pass truly effective reforms (hello, cramdown). Maybe a Million Mortgage March would get their attention.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Obama Gets Serious About Foreclosure Help

Amy Cortese — 2009-11-30T17:05:00 00:00

Amid rising foreclosures and public outrage over taxpayer-funded handouts to banks, the Obama administration is trying to put some teeth into its program to help ailing homeowners.

The Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), announced in February, dangled financial incentives to banks and mortgage servicers willing to lower mortgage payments for borrowers facing foreclosure. At the time, the administration said it hoped HAMP would modify mortgages for 3-4 million homeowners over a period of three years. To date, almost 651,000 homeowners have had their mortgages lowered on a trial basis, through the program, according to government data.

But relief has been fleeting for most participants. Just over 1 percent of trial mortgage adjustments have been made permanent, according to the Congressional Oversight Panel. And everyday, it seems, come reports of banks misplacing paperwork and dragging their feet on providing permanent relief. One reason is that mortgage servicers often stand to make more money collecting fees on delinquent loans than on helping make them affordable.

With a new effort announced on Monday by the Treasury Department and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the administration is tightening the screws on unresponsive lenders. Specifically, the new Mortgage Modification Conversion Drive requires banks and servicers to report on their plans and progress in aiding homeowners who have applied for permanent modifications. Banks that fail to abide by the rules could face fines or sanctions. Treasury will also send "S.W.A.T. teams" into banks to help identify obstacles holding up the process.

For homeowners, the process of applying for a loan modification has been simplified and streamlined. Details can be found here.

In the meantime, delinquencies and foreclosures have been rising at an alarming rate. And it is no longer just sub-prime loans. Prime, fixed rate loans have been increasing, and made up 33 percent of foreclosures started in the third quarter.

The administration says that 375,000 borrowers who have their mortgage payments lowered on a trial basis are scheduled to convert to permanent status by year end. That's good news for some. But ultimately, the most effective remedy will be robust job creation and a resumption of hiring. The Obama administration will turn its attention to jobs later this week. With unemployment at a 26-year high, it's not a moment too soon.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Is Flat the New Up?

Amy Cortese — 2009-11-30T08:00:00 00:00

Filed under: News

It's not time to give thanks yet for a recovery.

According to newly released data, home prices were essentially flat in September, taking the steam out of what looked like building economic momentum. Despite the resumption of growth in GDP (albeit lower than originally reported) and improved home sales and consumer spending, housing prices have stalled, causing some experts to warn of more price drops to come.

The Standard & Poors/Case-Shiller home price index, which tracks prices in 20 major U.S. housing markets, rose an anemic .3 percent in September, on a seasonably-adjusted basis, from the prior month. The increase, though smaller than expected, managed to eke out a fifth straight monthly gain for the closely watched index.
Still, 11 of the 20 Case-Shiller metro markets experienced negative or zero price movement. And the index is down nearly 10% in from last year.

The Federal Housing Authority, meanwhile, reported that prices of homes tracked by the agency remained flat from August to September.

Many observers took the news as a reassuring sign that we are on the path to normalcy -- aka, ever-rising real estate prices. But is that just so much irrational exuberance and wishful thinking? Are we still driven by a speculative mindset?

Some observers dared to rain on the parade. John Silvia, chief economist at Wells Fargo, told The Times he expected prices to fall by another 10 percent. Barry Ritholtz, CEO of Fusion IQ and a noted economic blogger, is even more pessimistic. In an interview with Yahoo!, he argued that national home prices are still over-valued by as much as 15 percent to 20 percent, when you take into consideration the oversupply of housing, depressed income levels, and artificial price supports in the form of low interest rates and tax credits.

Ritholtz noted that most of the sales activity has occurred in regions hardest hit by foreclosures. According to the National Association of Realtors, foreclosures and short sales made up 30% of sales transactions in the third quarter.

The fact is, home prices have traditionally been closely correlated to income (and inflation). Locals markets vary greatly, but generally, median home prices have historically averaged 2.5 to 3 times median income. At a multiple of 3.0 or less, housing is considered affordable. During the height of the bubble, some over-heated markets reached median price levels of ten or more times median income. (Two good discussions of the median home price to household income relationship can be found here and here). Home prices have tumbled by almost a third since their July 2006 peak. Still, prices may have a way to go before they are in line again with fundamentals.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Not Just Chinese Drywall, U.S.-Made Material Toxic, Too

Amy Cortese — 2009-11-26T09:00:00 00:00

Filed under: Lifestyle,Lifestyle

As thousands of homeowners around the country have complained of health problems, corroded electrical wiring and a noxious rotten-egg smell, Chinese drywall has been fingered as the culprit. The Consumer Product Safety Commission recently released a report linking the problems with hydrogen sulfide gas emitted from Chinese drywall, which was imported by home builders during the construction boom when domestic supplies were tight.

But a recent investigation by CBS News suggests that domestically produced drywall may be a culprit as well.

In fact, CBS News found that 10 out of 44 cases studied by the CPSC and categorized as "imported drywall," actually involved domestically-made drywall.

In addition, a team of researchers at the University of Florida spent five months examining samples of both American and Chinese-made drywall. The surprising results: all but one of the U.S. samples emitted sulfur gasses. Although the American-made drywall generally had lower levels of gas emissions than the Chinese-made material, in some cases it was higher than some Chinese samples.

The CPSC and other agencies are continuing to study the issue. In a statement released on Nov. 23, the CPSC said it "is investigating drywall from other sources that may mimic the problems found with Chinese drywall." It added that the agency is meeting with drywall manufacturers and others who are studying the issue.

In an email, a CPSC spokesman said, "Our researcher pointed out that not all drywall is alike and not all Chinese drywall may be alike. It depends on what it's made of, not necessarily the country it comes from."

The drywall issue is more than a headache for affected homeowners - some have had their insurance policies cancelled as a result. In the meantime, lawmakers and the CPSC are pressing the Internal Revenue Service to allow affected homeowners to deduct drywall-related costs.

Drywall, made from gypsum, a chalky white mineral, is considered safe in its pure form. Drywall alternatives include plaster (which also contains gypsum), as well as new eco-friendly options such as EcoRock.

Click here to read our story on how to detect the presence of toxic drywall in your home.

Permalink | Email this | Comments