Chapter 1
Overview of County Appraisal District1.1
County History and DemographicsAccording to the Handbook of Texas, Coryell County was formed in 1854 and named for frontiersman James Coryell.
Coryell County is in central Texas bordered by Hamilton, Bosque, McLennan, Bell, and Lampasas counties. Gatesville, the county seat is on US Highway 84 and State Highway 36, about eighty miles north of Austin and 110 miles southwest of Dallas. Coryell County also has a large portion of Fort Hood.
The present county comprises 1,031 square miles of plateaus and grasslands in the Grand Prairie region, with elevations ranging from 600 to 1,493 feet above sea level. Its two principal streams are the Leon River, which drains the northern and eastern parts of the county, and Cowhouse Creek, which drains the western and southern areas. Soils vary widely in the county, but most are alkaline with limestone underneath. Approximately 25 percent of the county is considered prime farmland. The remaining area is devoted to raising livestock principally cattle and sheep.
The population of the county for 2003, according to the County Information Project, was 75,195 residents, with the City of South Mountain having 414 residents, the City of Oglesby having 459 residents and the City of Gatesville having 15,373 residents. The City of Copperas Cove, which is partially located in the county, is the largest population center. The balance of the county residents live in smaller cities and towns and the rural areas.
The county includes the Evant Independent School District, Gatesville Independent School District, Oglesby Independent School District, Jonesboro Independent School District, and Copperas Cove Independent School District.
1.2
Appraisal District Organization and StaffingThe appraisal district was formed in 1981 and became active in 1982. Coryell CAD has a total of eight full time staff with one supervisory position and one part time position. Five of the positions are full time appraisers, and one is a part time mapper. The district contracts with Capital Appraisal Group for professional appraisal services on mineral and industrial appraisals.
Exhibit 1 outlines the district organization.
Scope of Office
The board of directors has no authority to set values or appraisal methods. The chief appraiser carries out the appraisal district's legal duties, hires the staff, makes the appraisals and operates the appraisal office.
The district provides appraisal services for ten taxing units, Coryell County, Evant Independent School District, Gatesville Independent School District, Oglesby Independent School District, Jonesboro Independent School District, Copperas Cove Independent School District, City of Copperas Cove, City of Gatesville, City of Oglesby, and Central Texas College District.
Exhibit 2 presents the types of properties appraised by Coryell CAD in tax year 2003. In-house staff handles all property categories except Category G (minerals), Category J (utilities), and part of Category F2/L2 (industrial - real/personal), which is appraised by CAG.
Exhibit 2
Coryell CAD Property by Category Summary with Assigned Responsibility
Tax Year 2003
Property Category Account Type Description Responsible for Appraisal Category A Residential In-house staff Category B Multi-Family In-house staff Category C Vacant Lots In-house staff Category D/E Farm/Ranch Land w/Impr. In-house staff Category F1 Commercial Real In-house staff Category L1 Commercial Personal In-house staff Category G Minerals Contracted Appraisal Firm Category J Utilities Contracted Appraisal Firm Category F2 Industrial Real In-house & Contracted Appraisal Firm Category L2 Industrial Personal Contracted Appraisal Firm Source: Coryell CAD, April 2005. Most appraisal districts contract out some of its appraisal to contract appraisal firms. PTD does not track parcel counts appraised by external appraisers in appraisal districts. Appraisal district contracts with external appraisers routinely do not include a parcel count for the number of appraisals an external appraisal company will perform. In assessing the staff to parcel count ratio in each appraisal district, PTD uses parcel counts reported in the district's 2003 self report and the county's independent school districts self reports to calculate the parcels per appraisal district staff. PTD does include all of the commercial real and personal property parcels in the calculation, since PTD is unable to determine exactly how many parcels are assigned to in-house staff versus a contract appraisal firm. The total parcels appraised in-house are calculated by summing the total number of parcels reported in Categories: A, single family residential; B, multifamily residential; C, vacant lots; D, rural land; E, rural improvements; F1, commercial real property; L1, commercial personal property; M1, mobile homes; O, residential inventory; and S, special inventory, as shown in Exhibit 3.
Exhibit 3
Reported Data on Parcels, Categories Staffing,
Training and Operations Comparison
to State and Group Averages
General Information Coryell State Avg. Group Avg. Parcel Size Group (by number of locally appraised parcels) 50,000 - 74,999# Estimated # Locally Appraised Parcels 50,679# 55,463 60,639 # Taxing Units 10 15 15 Locally Appraised Parcels to Staff 6,335 3,404 3,061 2003 Composition by Percentage
of Value (Self Report):Coryell State Avg. Group Avg. Residential Value 53.3% 52.6% 49.8% Non-Residential, Non Mineral 46.7% 43.6% 46.6% Non-Residential, Mineral 0.0% 3.7% 3.6% 2003 Composition by Account Category Type (Operations Survey): Real Property 30,897 45,804 54,655 Mineral Property 15 13,536 24,213 Business Personal Property 1,214 4,689 3,715 Individual Personal Property 737 1,342 1,291 Total Accounts 32,863 65,372 83,874 2003 Composition by Locally Appraised Parcel Category (Estimated from Self Report): Coryell State Avg. Group Avg. Parcel Type # Parcels % of Parcels A 26,123 51.5% 44.1% 42.4% B 1,497 3.0% 1.0% 1.1% C 3,775 7.4% 13.1% 17.0% D 7,859 15.5% 24.7% 18.2% E 8,026 15.8% 4.5% 7.3% F1 1,617 3.2% 3.1% 3.6% L1 1,148 2.3% 5.7% 5.3% M1 590 1.2% 2.2% 3.8% O 0 0.0% 1.4% 1.2% S 44 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% Total 50,679# 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% PTD estimated that Coryell CAD staff is responsible for appraising about 50,679 parcels. The International Association of Assessing Officer (IAAO) Standards state that small taxing units run from 1,500 to 1,700 parcels per staff member and large taxing units run from 3,000 to 3,500 parcels per staff member with an average of 2,500.
Comparable districts in size to Coryell are Atascosa, Walker, Wharton and Pecos. The number of parcels per staff member for Coryell CAD was 6,335. Atascosa CAD was 2,383, Walker CAD was 2,302, Wharton CAD was 4,019 and Pecos was 4,391. Of course workloads in appraisal districts may vary, sometimes drastically, due to any number of considerations other than parcel count. Geography or the size of an appraisal district may have a significant impact on the time required to work all parcels. The types of properties may also have an impact. More complex commercial and sometime even residential properties may require more staff to appraise. The data given here is meant to give the reader at least some comparison to other appraisal districts with similar parcel counts and the standards determined by IAAO.
Exhibit 3 includes reported data concerning CAD and state and group averages.
Exhibit 3
Reported Data on Parcels, Categories Staffing, Training and Operations Comparison to State and Group Averages (continued)
Financial and Staffing
Information (Operations Survey)Coryell State Avg. Group Avg. 2003 Budget $452,868 $1,079,695 $1,091,303 2003 Surplus $0 $71,620 $60,399 2003 Surplus as % of Budget 0.0% 6.6% 5.5% 2004 Budget $478,220 $1,104,961 $1,138,380 % Change in Budget 5.3% $0 4.3% 2004 Budget per Total Local Parcel $9.44 $19.92 $18.77 Staffing Full Time 8 18 20 Part Time 1 2 2 Supervisory 2 3 4 Programmers * 2 1 Supervisory to Staff Ratio 1:4 1:5 1:5 Chief Appraiser Performs Appraisals? Yes 2004 Total Compensation $45,400 $53,564 $69,633 Appraisers Full - Time 4 8 7 Part - Time 1 0 2 Salary Range: Low $38,200 $24,504 $27,191 High $41,300 $37,521 $46,557 Training Budget $6,000 $8,832 $9,554 # Registered with BTPE (1) 7 9 11 Types of BTPE Certification: RPA (2) RTA (3) RTC (4) All 6 1 0 0 Operations Information
(Operations Survey)Coryell State Avg. Group Avg. Reappraisal Last Year of Reappraisal 2003 Next Year of Reappraisal * Type of Appraisal: Complete Method of Appraisal: In House Protests 100 3,131 1,761 Protests per Parcel 0.3% 4.7% 2.2% Consolidated Collection No Collection Budget $0 Geographic Information System (GIS)? Yes Percent GIS Complete 60% 80% 90% Board of Directors Members 6 6 6 Tax Assessor Votes? No Elected Members 5 3 2 #Coryell CAD's 2003 self report for locally appraised parcel counts appears too high as compared with its historical parcel counts. The 50,679 parcel counts shifted Coryell CAD in to a different parcel size group than if historical data was applied.
Note: An asterisk (*) is shown where data was not reported.
Source: Coryell CAD and ISDs 2003 Self Reports and Comptroller 2003-2004 Appraisal District Operations Report and Comptroller comparative data for state and group averages from district self reports and the Appraisal District Operations Report.
Notes: (1) BTPE - Board of Tax Professional Examiners. (2) RPA - Registered Professional Appraiser. (3) RTA - Registered Texas Assessor-Collector. (4) RTC - Registered Texas Collector.1.3
Self Evaluation QuestionnaireIn preparation for the Appraisal Standards Review, Coryell CAD was requested to complete the IAAO's Self Evaluation Questionnaire. This instrument allows an appraisal district to assess their compliance with acceptable procedures, standards and organization. Each district receives an electronic version of the question and the complete IAAO manual explaining each question with information on how to answer each question. Each district undergoing an appraisal standards review is requested to perform the self assessment, with the goal of assisting the district in determining how well it is performing.
Coryell County answered 109 out of 110 questions. The district's answers are included in Appendix 15.
In Chapter 1, on legal issues and assessment cycles, the district noted that it felt it has adequate staff to perform its duties.
In Chapter 2, on resource management, the district noted its office funding is sufficient, and it felt that it runs a well organized and well managed operation, and the district stated its staff are quality conscious concerning their work. The district does not consider its office space adequate, however.
Chapter 3, on computerization, and Chapter 4, mapping, the district noted it provides web access to the public and that the district is working on its cadastral maps, so its maps are not integrated with its appraisal system.
In Chapter 5, data collection, the district noted it did not use hand held computers for data collection. The district noted it does not routinely collect income data and they use a three-year appraisal plan.
Land Evaluation, Chapter 6, the district answered yes to about half of the questions and noted that while land sales are analyzed in terms of value per unit, the per unit values are not plotted on their maps. In Chapters 7, 8, and 9, on residential property valuation, commercial property valuation, and sales data, respectively, the district noted its cost schedules are not fully computerized and that its depreciation schedules are not based on sales analysis. The district noted it uses Marshall and Swift to assist it in assessing commercial properties.
In Chapter 10, on personal property assessment, the district noted it inspects business personal property.
In Chapter 11, on assessment administration, the district noted it does update ownership and legal description information within 30 days of a deed transfer most of the time. The district noted in Chapter 12, defense of values, that it does not obtain independent reviews when assessing difficult and complex properties.
In public relations, Chapter 13, the district noted it does have an active public relations program, although it did not elaborate on what kind of program.
1.4
Findings of the Property Value Study and Summary WorksheetsThe Property Value Study (PVS) determines the total property value in each school district in the Coryell County Appraisal District (CAD). With a few notable exceptions, all CADs and the Property Tax Division (PTD) are required by law to appraise property at market value. Agricultural land and timberland are appraised according to productivity value. Market value, in short, is the price that a property would transfer from a willing seller to a willing buyer. For it to be a market transaction, neither party may be under duress to buy or sell, the sale must be on the market for a reasonable time and the parties to the sale may not be related.
Local tax roll value, or local value, is determined by the county appraisal district and submitted to PTD on its annual self-report. The PTD staff estimates the total taxable value in a school district, referred to as state value, by determining market value or by accepting the local appraised value in each property category (see Exhibit 2) in the district and then adding these category values for an overall school district value. PTD then deducts state-mandated homestead exemptions, disabled veterans' exemptions, value limitations, reinvestment zones, freeport exemptions, the loss between market value and productivity value appraisal of qualified agricultural lands, the school tax ceiling for homeowners over age 65 or disabled and other state-mandated exemptions.
PTD issues a preliminary and final PVS each year. School districts and county appraisal districts may protest the findings of the preliminary PVS through an administrative hearings process with the Comptroller, and school districts may protest the findings of the final PVS in district court. The administrative hearings process requires the protester to file a written protest with supporting documentation within 40 days of the issuance of the preliminary PVS. The PTD may amend the findings of the preliminary PVS based on the submission of the written protest, an informal hearing or a formal hearing. Formal hearings are held by a hearings examiner, appointed by the Comptroller's General Counsel, and reporting directly to the Comptroller. The hearings examiner is not an employee of the PTD.
When conducting the property value study, PTD assigns properties to various categories, such as residential, commercial and rural property. Properties are divided into categories so that like properties are assessed together.
Coryell CAD appealed the findings of the preliminary study for Oglesby and Jonesboro ISDs. The district appealed category F in both districts, but it failed to provide evidence to make changes. As a result Oglesby school district was identified as eligible in July 2004.
A review of the school districts in the county indicates that Coryell CAD is inconsistently appraising the single-family and rural residences as determined by the PTD. Also the native pastureland that qualifies for the special productivity appraisal is consistently assessed above market value and the dry cropland is consistently assessed below market value as determined by the PTD. In the 2003 PVS, Oglesby, and Jonesboro school districts fell outside the study's statistical margin of error. Jonesboro school district was not identified as eligible in July 2004 because it received invalid values in PVS directly preceding the 2003 PVS. Single-family residences (category A), and rural real property (category D) are the primary reasons that the school's values are not within the acceptable range determined by the study.
There are two property categories tested in Oglesby ISD: (1) category A, single-family residences, making up 21 percent of the district's value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.8809; and (2) category D, rural real, making up 61.6 percent of the district's value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9226. In general, a ratio of between 0.95 and 1.05 in any property category makes it more likely that the district is appraising property within the margin of error, or that it is appraising property at or near market value, according to the PVS.
Oglesby ISD is outside the confidence interval limit. Oglesby ISD category A makes up 24.4 percent of the tested value. The appraisal district is placing a value on the category A single-family residences below market value. A review of the category A properties indicates that the district appraised from as low as 59 percent to a high of 130 percent of market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.8809. Category D, rural real makes up 75.6 percent of the tested value and is below market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9226. Category D represents rural properties and contains two subcategories: D1 and D2. Subcategory D1, productivity value of qualifying acres, is primarily farm and ranch land that qualifies for the special productivity appraisal. Subcategory D2, non-qualifying acres and farm and ranch improvements, is primarily rural homes and land that does not qualify for farming or ranching or timberlands. The differences in value between qualified and non-qualified rural land are often wide since D1 land is appraised using a special statutory method to determine the lands productivity value and D2 is based on what the land would sell for in an open market transaction. Oglesby ISD subcategory D1 consists of 27.1 percent of category D's value and 20.5 percent of the tested value. D1 tested primarily in dry crop appraisals with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9477. Subcategory D2, however, makes up 72.9 percent of category D's value and 55.1 percent of the school district's total tested value. D2 tested below market value. The district appraised rural homes from as low as 62 percent to a high of 110 percent of market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9136.
There are two property categories tested in Jonesboro ISD: (1) category A, single-family residences, making up 12.3 percent of the district's value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9300; and (2) category D, rural real, making up 74.5 percent of the district's value with a weighted mean ratio of 1.1422.
Jonesboro ISD is outside the confidence interval limit. Jonesboro ISD category A makes up 13.5 percent of the tested value. The appraisal district is placing a value on the category A single-family residences below market value. A review of the category A properties indicates that the district appraised from as low as 69 percent to a high of 171 percent of market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9300. Category D, rural real makes up 86.5 percent of the tested value and is above market value and above the margin of error by a weighted mean ratio of 1.1422. Jonesboro ISD subcategory D1 consists of 28.6 percent of category D's value and 24.8 percent of the tested value. D1 tested primarily in native pasture appraisals with a weighted mean ratio of 1.0387. Subcategory D2, however, makes up 71.4 percent of category D's value and 61.7 percent of the school district's total tested value. D2 tested above market value. The district appraised rural homes from as low as 64 percent to a high of 163 percent of market value with a weighted mean ratio of 1.1899.
Besides Oglesby and Jonesboro ISDs, the other school districts in the county are Evant, Gatesville, and Copperas Cove ISD.
Evant ISD is within the confidence interval limit. Category A makes up 14.4 percent of the district's value and 16.3 percent of the tested value. The appraisal district is placing a value on the category A single-family residences below market value. A review of the category A properties indicates that the district appraised from as low as 59 percent to a high of 162 percent of market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9325. Category D, Rural real makes up 70.4 percent of the district's value and tested above market value with a weighted mean ratio of 1.0721. Evant ISD subcategory D1 consists of 29.6 percent of category D's value and 24.8 percent of the tested value. D1 tested primarily in the native pasture appraisal with a weighted mean ratio of 1.1194. Subcategory D2, however, makes up 70.4 percent of category D's value and 58.9 percent of the school district's total tested value. D2 tested above market value. The district appraised rural homes from as low as 43 percent to a high of 199 percent of market value with a weighted mean ratio of 1.0534.
Gatesville ISD is within the confidence interval limit. Category A makes up 43.2 percent of the district's value, and 48.3 percent of the tested value. The appraisal district is placing a value on the category A single-family residences above market value. A review of the category A properties indicates that the district appraised from as low as 73 percent to a high of 193 percent of market value with a weighted mean ratio of 1.0136. Category D, Rural real makes up 31 percent of the district's value and tested below market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9558. Gatesville ISD subcategory D1 consists of 18.4 percent of category D's value and 6.7 percent of the tested value. D1 tested primarily in the native pasture appraisal with a weighted mean ratio of 1.0461. Subcategory D2, however, makes up 81.6 percent of category D's value and 29.8 percent of the school district's total tested value. D2 tested below market value. The district appraised rural homes from as low as 60 percent to a high of 206 percent of market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9376. Category F1, Commercial Real property is 8.1 percent of the district's value and tested below market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.8076. The district valued the commercial real property from as low as 33 percent to a high of 156 percent of market value. Category L1, Commercial Personal property is 5.1 percent of the district's value and tested below market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9659. The district valued the Commercial Personal property from as low as 33 percent to a high of 129 percent of market value.
Copperas Cove ISD is within the confidence interval limit. Category A makes up 72.9 percent of the district's value, and 83.4 percent of the tested value. The appraisal district is placing a value on the category A single-family residences near market value. A review of the category A properties indicates that the district appraised from as low as 85 percent to a high of 168 percent of market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9967. Category B, Multi-Family property is 6.8 percent of the district's value and tested below market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9809. The district valued the Multi-Family property from as low as 72 percent to a high of 200 percent of market value. Category D, Rural Real makes up 3.3 percent of the district's value and tested near market value with a weighted mean ratio of 1.0085. Copperas Cove ISD subcategory D1 consists of 6.9 percent of category D's value and .3 percent of the tested value. D1 tested primarily in the native pasture appraisal with a weighted mean ratio of 1.1401. Subcategory D2, however, makes up 93.1 percent of category D's value and was not tested in this school district. Category F1, Commercial Real property is 7.6 percent of the district's value and tested below market value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.8098. The district valued the Commercial Real property from as low as 36 percent to a high of 152 percent of market value.
In summary, the Coryell CAD is inconsistently appraising in every category where a sampling of properties was tested. Coryell CAD needs to focus its energies on category A valuation of single-family residences. Coryell CAD is inconsistently appraising single-family residences from as low as 59 percent to 193 percent of market value. The CAD is inconsistently appraising multi-family residences (category B) from as low as 72 percent to 200 percent of market value, and rural residences (category D2) from as low as 43 percent to 206 percent of market value. The farm and ranch land (category D1) is consistently assessing dry cropland below market value and native pasture above market value with the primary concern in native pasture. Coryell CAD is inconsistently appraising commercial real property from as low as 33 percent to 156 percent of market value, and commercial personal property from as low as 33 percent to 129 percent of market value.
For a statistical explanation of why the district was selected as eligible, see Appendix 18.
