If we are going to have a good faith discussion of the 2012 Guilford County Property Revaluation process, it is essential all concerned become familiar with the Schedule of Values. ...As there is no need to punch in macro factors, there is no opportunity to game the system. Of course, I suppose a dedicated group of assessors could contrive to value individual properties toward a desired outcome, but we still return to unanswered questions of motivation and effectiveness.
Given the standards of professionalism and data categorization, I maintain it is neither likely, nor even possible to game the property revaluation for a designed outcome, in this case an overall property tax rate desired by the county commissioners. Anyone who says otherwise must overcome the burden of proof. It is highly unlikely a layman can meet this burden, relegating argument to the realm of conjecture.
Jeff "Fec" Martin
NOVEMBER 19, 2012
Hartzman
November 19, 2012 6:05 pm
“As there is no need to punch in macro factors, there is no opportunity to game the system.”
What is the basis for this statement?
Are there macro factors?
It would be news to me.
.
.
.
“a dedicated group of assessors could contrive to value individual properties toward a desired outcome, but we still return to unanswered questions of motivation and effectiveness.”
My thinking is a group couldn’t do it.
If it happened, it would be like including an inflation rate to the whole, or parts
most likely by one user.
That’s why I asked for the instruction manual,
which they won’t provide.
That’s why I asked for any macro type factors,
which they won’t provide.
The other unprovided info from a prior info request not included,
was which homes at what prices were not included as non-arm length transactions
because of them considered “distressed sales.”
Fec
November 19, 2012 7:54 pm
You don’t seem to understand the system is set up so a specific property can be validated and changed after an appeal. The lone gun after the fact is more plausible than any theory. If that happened, a paper trail might prove it. So, is there a conspiracy of one to falsify the results and also to cover it up? That’s not very plausible.
Hartzman
November 19, 2012 6:08 pm
“In regards to your requests for 1) data broken down by neighborhoods
and 2) properties not included in the revaluation
that were not between an willing and financially able buyer and willing seller,
the county does not currently have use for the referenced data
structured in the requested fashion
and your request would necessitate extensive programming and/or cost to the county
in order to retrieve the information.
As a result, the County is not able to provide these records at this time.”
Guilford County Attorney’s Office
.
.
.
“Page 3 of the Guilford County “Schedule of Values,”
which covers data behind this year’s real-estate tax revaluation,
cites a statute that says market value is defined as
“the price estimated in terms of money at which the property would sell
between a willing and financially able buyer and a willing seller,
neither being under any compulsion to buy or to sell.”
But on page 7, under “Distressed and Forced Sales,” it says,
“Both foreclosure and short sales have been largely responsible
for a 20 percent decline in the average selling price of existing homes
over the last three years.”
And “staff appraisers will consider all sales that have occurred
in each appraisal neighborhood over the last several years
but a greater weight will be given to comparable sales
that have happened without duress.”
If computer model-based “mass appraisals” were the main tool,
which appears to be the case,
how did the county know which sales were distressed or forced?
How can anyone know?
If these two sets of measures contradict each other,
how can anyone know what actually happened to whom in the revaluation
if Guilford County won’t release the data?
Hartzman
November 20, 2012 11:24 am
“is there a conspiracy of one to falsify the results and also to cover it up?”
I don’t know because they won’t release any info.
Fec
November 20, 2012 4:00 pm
I pick my battles and have no desire to go up against professional property appraisers. I caught a nasty case of insurance poisoning programming rating manuals and have no desire to repeat it.
Hartzman
November 21, 2012 6:22 pm
You are challenging a battle I among others have chosen to pick.
You don’t even know what you’re defending.
Fec
November 20, 2012 11:27 am
Definitely evidence of a cover up. Maybe you’ll get lucky and they’ll confess.
Hartzman
November 20, 2012 11:26 am
Received this via Facebook;
“Bought my home last yr for 110,000 – tax value was 166,00 at that time.
We are appealing our current tax value of 192,000.
2012 value was first assessed at 220,000 – they then lowered it to 192,000.
This was not a foreclosure or short sale – small 2 bedroom, 2 bath on W Friendly
in poor condition.
Thank you for attempting to get answers for those of us who know this is bogus!”
Fec
November 20, 2012 11:28 am
So your plan is to indict with volunteered anecdotes? Good luck with that.
Hartzman
November 20, 2012 12:16 pm
“You don’t seem to have a point.”
My point is that it should be looked into.
Your point seems to be blindly following authority is OK.
Hartzman
November 20, 2012 12:19 pm
“So your plan is to indict with volunteered anecdotes?”
Are you just being an ass for fun?
Fec
November 20, 2012 4:00 pm
I pick my battles and have no desire to go up against professional property appraisers. I caught a nasty case of insurance poisoning programming rating manuals and have no desire to repeat it.
November 21, 2012 6:22 pm
You are challenging a battle I among others have chosen to pick.
You don’t even know what you’re defending.
Fec
November 21, 2012 6:30 pm
That’s ridiculous. I’m defending a professional society of property assessors and their science. I’m defending Guilford County’s excellent conformance to industry standards. I’m defending the people who undertake the difficult task of assessing 250K properties in 2500 geographic zones. I’m defending this process against a fucking lunatic who has presented nothing but anecdotes as evidence the process has been falsified.
Idiot.
Hartzman
November 21, 2012 11:16 pm
So far Io’m an idiot who asked a few questions someone didn’t want answered.
If this thing got screwed up, and it is in a broad based software variable,
it would make sense to not release any information to the public.
It would most likely be a one user issue.
I am not accusing anyone of anything at this point.
You’re implying it’s rude to ask the questions.
I disagree.
Fec
November 23, 2012 12:33 am
You need to either publish the details of some appeals or find some examples from GIS which were rated wrong. You’re asking public officials to prove a negative. The proper approach is to present them with specific examples of disparity. Of course, I realize the juvenile MO of hurling bombs with no accountability for your actions is not subject to change. Thus your continuing treatment as not being serious.
Hartzman
November 23, 2012 9:53 am
If 6632 Bobwhite just sold for $425,000,
why was Guilford County’s Tax Assessment $84,000 higher?
Tax Assesment Value – $509,000.00
Sales Price – $425,000
Difference – $84,000
.
.
If 31 Creswell Court just sold for $317,800,
why was Guilford County’s Tax Assessment $94,200 higher?
Tax Assesment Value – $412,000.00
Sales Price – $317,800
Difference – $94,200
.
.
If 1901 Market just sold for $225,500,
why is Guilford County’s Tax Assessment $64,300 higher?
Tax Assesment Value – $289,800.00
Sales Price – $225,500
Difference – $64,300
.
.
If 401 Sunset Drive just sold for $1,725,000…?
Tax Assesment Value – $2,023,100.00
Sales Price – $1,725,000
Difference – $298,100
.
.
If 1 Sailview Cove just sold for $965,000,
why is the Guilford County Tax Assessment $268,200 higher?
Tax Assessment Value – $1,233,200.00
Sales Price – $965,000
Difference – $268,200
.
.
.
These are posted at inquistion.
I can understand how you may not have seen them,
on account of I am being censored by your buddy Roch.
Hartzman
November 23, 2012 10:21 am
5104 Nantucket Road, Sold on 5/1/12 for $175,000.
Guilford County Appraisal: $202,100
Last sold on 3/15/2009: Price: $154,000
.
.
05 TURNSTONE TRL
7/18/12 Sales price: $192,000
3/15/2004 Price: $195,000
1/1/12 Tax Valuation: $212,800
.
.
1802 TRADD CT
3/15/2007 Price: $245,000
9/17/12 Price: $255,000
1/1/12 Reval: $218,300
.
.
5817 BAYLEAF LN 6/28/12 Price: $251,000
7/15/1997 Price: $187,900
1/1/12 reval: Total Assessed Value $200,600
.
.
5217 SOUTHWIND RD
8/27/12 price: $160,000
9/15/2003 Price: $175,000
1/1/12 Total Assessed Value: $193,200
.
.
1905 ROSEVILLA LN
Total Assessed Value: $360,600
4/15/2006 Price: $398,250
5/10/12 Sales Price: $340,000
.
.
5 Leeward
1/1/12 Total Assessed Value: $494,800
4/11/12 price: $395,000
8/15/2002 $463,500
7/15/1995 Price: $397,500
.
.
.
I believe we have already discussed these.
Hartzman
November 23, 2012 10:37 am
Of the 12 North Carolina counties that revalued in 2012, 5, including had a NC State “Sales Ratio” as of January 1, 2011 which indicated real estate tax assessments were overvalued. Real estate prices fell in Guilford County during 2011. Rutherford County lost about 12% more than their 2011 Sales Ratio values on 1/1/12, Cabarrus County lost about 5.5% more, New Hanover County lost about 3% more, and Cherokee County’s values fell 26%. Guilford was the only North Carolina county in 2012 whose real estate values were supposed to fall by the state’s metric that didn’t.
Residential homes now valued at $250,000+ increased in value by an average of $9,981.20. Guilford County’s 2012-13 proposed budget pre-real estate revaluation included a 9.5 cent tax increase, but instead of falling about or more than 3.72% as the 1/1/11 Sales Ratio and house prices during 2011 suggested, Guilford County’s values rose 1.5% and tax rates decreased slightly.
Those I spoke with who sell the software.said tax directors/counties interpretations of the reval law vary widely, and that all counties don’t incorporate the same information, meaning results may vary.
Fec
November 23, 2012 11:15 am
Pick a case, pull up the GIS and research how they arrived at a valuation.
To even engage in a conversation with county staff, you must be familiar with Schedule of Values because that is the language of the argument. You are asking them to prove they didn’t falsify the process to achieve a desired tax rate. Therefore, it is your responsibility to provide evidence of misinterpretation of property values. It is not enough that you spam county staff or anyone else with anecdotes.
This is why your argument should be doomed, but probably will live on and continue to be picked up and used like a cudgel by other whackjobs who fail to make sense.
Hartzman
November 23, 2012 1:13 pm
“it is your responsibility to provide evidence of misinterpretation of property values.”
I am trying to do so, but the county is withholding the information.
“whackjobs who fail to make sense.”
What doesn’t make sense Fec?
Fec
November 23, 2012 1:14 pm
You’re done here.
No comments:
Post a Comment