I applaud you for the setting clear guidelines for the determination of the Conforming Loan amounts. However, I would like to suggest a bigger reduction in home prices needs to occur than the 1% that is proposed before triggering a reduction in the conforming loan limit. In the past when reductions were made, they were very trivial. It was almost comical that the limit was reduced $150 in 1989. Why bother. I think the decision in 1993 and 1994 to leave the limit unchanged, despite the decrease in home prices was the proper philosophy.

Once it is determined to raise the limit, leave it alone until data indicates another increase is needed. There are several high cost areas of the Nation that are not included in the higher conforming loan limits enjoyed by Alaska and Hawaii. California and several other states need to be included in the higher limits. Until this happens, if the conforming loan limits are lowered, it hurts the consumers in these states.

Bob Finn, Certified Mortgage Planning Specialist^tm
UNION TRUST MORTGAGE SERVICES
707 836-9264
707 581-2019 private fax
P.O. Box 2355, Windsor, CA 95492

bfinn@utms.com

"If you don't know where you're going, you'll wind up somewhere else." - Yogi Berra

The information contained in this message is the property of GMAC Home Services Division (Residential Capital, LLC) and/or its direct and indirect subsidiaries and is intended only for the confidential use of the persons or entities to whom it is addressed. This message, together with any attachments, is proprietary and confidential, may contain inside information, and may be subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. If the reader of this message is not one of the addressees set forth above: (a) the reader has received this message in error and is directed to destroy this message, together with any attachments, and notify the sender at 925.820.5676 and (b) any review, dissemination, use, or distribution of this message or any attachments is prohibited. Thank you.