Henderson County Appraisal District
Appraisal Standards Review Follow-Up Report
January 20, 2009
Mr. C.A. Hawn, Board Chairman
Mr. Bill Jackson, Chief Appraiser
Henderson County Appraisal District
P.O. Box 430
Athens, Texas 75751-0430
Dear Chairman Hawn and Chief Appraiser Jackson:
This letter constitutes the Comptroller’s follow-up review of the Appraisal Standards Review (ASR) of the Henderson County Appraisal District (Henderson CAD) originally released in October 2007. We commend the cooperation of Henderson CAD’s board, chief appraiser and staff in conducting this follow-up review.
CADs play an integral part in setting property values because they have the statutory responsibility for determining local property values, which in turn affect funding to public schools.
The ASR made two mandatory recommendations and six optional recommendations to help Henderson CAD achieve accurate local value in the annual Property Value Study and improve operations.
While work is in progress, Henderson CAD has not fully implemented mandatory recommendations 1 and 2. Enclosed is more detail on what the CAD still needs to do.
This letter is available on our Window on State Government Web site at www.window.state.tx.us/taxinfo/proptax/cadreports/asr/henderson01/.
I hope this information is helpful. Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely,
Susan Combs
Enclosure
cc: Superintendent and Board of Trustees, Frankston Independent School District; Athens Independent
School District; Brownsboro Independent School District; Crossroads Independent School District;
Eustace Independent School District; Malakoff Independent School District; Trinidad Independent School
District; Murchison Independent School District; La Poynor Independent School District;
Kemp Independent School District; Mabank Independent School District; and
Van Independent School District
Henderson CAD Board of Directors
Henderson County Appraisal District
Appraisal Standards Review Follow-Up Report
What Remains to Be Done
The Comptroller’s office will continue to monitor Henderson CAD’s progress toward meeting the state’s legal requirements. The following outlines steps Henderson CAD still needs to take.
RECOMMENDATION 1:
Establish written procedures for gathering and analyzing sales.
On Feb. 28, 2008, Property Tax Assistance Division (PTAD) sent a letter to Henderson CAD clarifying documentation necessary to complete this recommendation. Attached to that letter was a 28-page example of procedures for gathering and analyzing sales from Nueces CAD.
In November 2008, Henderson CAD (HCAD) responded to this recommendation with HCAD Procedures for Gathering and Analyzing Sales Information. This procedure consists of four paragraphs of a high level description of the process used by HCAD. For example, the first sentence states that “Sales letters will be mailed each month, generated from the deed transfers that have taken place and been recorded at the County Clerk’s office.” The procedure does not describe how deed transfers are obtained from the county clerk’s office, how deed transfers are used to develop sales letters, what information is included in the sales letters, who sales letters are sent to or who handles these tasks within the HCAD office.
As stated in the Feb. 28, 2008, letter, documentation that would establish compliance with recommendation 1 includes:
- A written procedure (as opposed to a high-level policy statement) that:
- outlines the current steps the CAD uses to gather sales information and states at a minimum: what each step is, who is responsible for the step, and when the step is taken;
- outlines the CAD’s current practice for analyzing sales data that it intends to use in its ratio studies, taking into account the summary provided with this letter and Appendix A of the International Association of Assessing Officers’ (IAAO) Standard on Ratio Studies 2007; and
- complies with generally accepted industry practices or techniques for gathering and analyzing sales intended for use in ratio studies.
- Copies of all material that are referenced in the procedures; for example: exhibits, other procedures, policies, practices, computer screen prints, sales questionnaires, etc. that are referenced in the procedures.
To complete this recommendation, the CAD must complete the procedures for gathering and analyzing sales information and forward a copy to PTAD by the end of April 2009.
RECOMMENDATION 2:
Conduct more in-depth analyses of ratio studies to eliminate unequal levels of appraisal within categories of property and to ensure all categories of property are being appraised at current market value.
On Feb. 28, 2008, PTAD sent a letter to HCAD clarifying documentation necessary to complete this recommendation. HCAD did not provide any responsive documentation to this recommendation in its November 2008 response to PTAD’s follow-up to the appraisal standards review.
As stated in the Feb. 28, 2008, letter, documentation that would establish compliance with recommendation 2 includes:
- Written procedures for ratio studies that comply with the IAAO Standard on Ratio Studies 2007;
- Ratio studies that the CAD has conducted on each property category that was included in the study of eligible school districts (for HCAD, those categories were: A, C, D, F1 and L1);
- Copies of ratio studies conducted by the CAD to identify areas that need review or appraisal maintenance and evidence that the CAD, through the use of these ratio studies, identified properties requiring CAD review or maintenance;
- Evidence of the steps the CAD took to re-appraise the identified properties, including but not limited to, changes in procedures, changes in cost or land schedules, changes in practices, changes to appraisal cards, etc.;
- Ratio studies conducted by the CAD that show a new level of appraisal on the properties identified by prior ratio studies (see the third bullet in this list), after the steps were taken that show new level of appraisals; and
- Evidence showing the new levels of market value on the properties that were identified by CAD ratio studies (see the third bullet) and re-appraised by the CAD (see the fourth bullet) and on which the follow-up ratio study was conducted (see the fifth bullet).
To complete this recommendation, the CAD must complete written procedures for ratio studies and submit a copy of it along with copies of current ratio studies, evidence of reappraisal and evidence of new levels of markets identified to PTAD by the end of April 2009.