Chapter 1
Overview of County Appraisal District
1.1
County History and Demographics
According to The Handbook of Texas, the state of Texas authorized the creation of Jackson County in 1836 in honor of President Andrew Jackson.
Jackson County is located on the Texas coast off Lavaca and Carancahua Bays. Six counties surround Jackson County, including Colorado, Wharton, Matagorda, Calhoun, Victoria and Lavaca. The city of Edna, located on U.S. Highway 59 100 miles southwest of Houston, serves as the county seat.
Nearly half of the county's land is good farmland. Hunting and fishing contribute significantly to the local economy as do tourist attractions such as the Texana Museum, Brackenridge Plantation campground and Lake Texana State Park.
The 2005 county population, according to the Texas State Data Center, was 14,346, with the city of Edna having 5,987 residents and the city of Ganado 1,967 residents. The county's remaining population resides in a variety of small towns and unincorporated areas.
The county includes the Edna, Ganado and Industrial Independent School Districts.
1.2
Appraisal District Organization and Staffing
Local taxing entities organized Jackson CAD in 1981 and it became active in 1982. As of March 2006, Jackson CAD had eight full-time staff positions. The chief appraiser and deputy chief appraiser serve as supervisors (Exhibit 1).
Exhibit 1 presents the appraisal district's current organization chart. The chief appraiser oversees an administrative assistant and the deputy chief appraiser. A part-time mapper, two deed clerks and three appraisers report to the deputy chief appraiser. Jackson CAD is made up of the following personnel:
Chief Appraiser
Administrative Assistant
Deputy Chief Appraiser
Mapper (Part-time)
Deed Clerks (2)
Appraisers (3)
The CAD filled one vacancy, a full-time appraiser position approved in the 2006 budget, in April 2006. The chief appraiser supervises the deputy chief appraiser and an administrative assistant. The deputy chief appraiser oversees the work of a part time mapper, two deed clerks, and three appraisers.
The CAD has a contract with a professional appraisal services company to appraise minerals, utilities and industrial accounts.
The chief appraiser carries out the appraisal district's legal duties, hires its staff, makes appraisals and operates the appraisal office.
Jackson CAD provides appraisal services for 11 taxing units (Exhibit 2).
Exhibit 2
Jackson CAD
Taxing Units
| Name of Taxing Entity |
|---|
| City of Edna |
| City of Ganado |
| Edna Independent School District |
| Ganado Independent School District |
| Industrial Independent School District |
| Jackson County |
| Jackson County Emergency Services District |
| Jackson County Fire Control District |
| Jackson County Hospital District |
| Jackson Water Control and Improvement District #1 |
| Jackson Water Control and Improvement District #2 |
Source: Jackson CAD, March 2005.
Most appraisal districts contract out some work to private firms. Jackson CAD appraises all categories of properties in-house with the exception of Category F2, Real Property: Industrial, Category G, Oil, Gas and Other Minerals and Category J, Real and Personal Property: Utilities. PTD does not track appraisals performed by external appraisers, because contracts with external appraisers generally do not include a parcel count for the number of appraisals the external firm performs. In assessing the staff-to-parcel count ratio in each appraisal district, PTD uses parcel counts reported in the appraisal district's 2004 self-report and the independent school district self-reports.
PTD includes commercial real and personal property parcels in the calculation, since it cannot determine how many parcels in-house staff appraises versus private firms. PTD calculates the total parcels appraised in-house by summing the total number of parcels reported in categories:
- A, Real Property: Single-Family Residential;
- B, Real Property: Multifamily Residential;
- C, Real Property: Vacant Lots and Tracts;
- D, Real Property: Acreage (D1 and D2);
- F1, Real Property: Commercial;
- L1, Personal Property: Commercial;
- M, Mobile Homes and Other Tangible Personal Property (M1 and M2);
- O, Real Property: Residential Inventory; and
- S, Special Inventory.
Jackson CAD appraised 3,052 parcels per full time employee. The IAAO Property Appraisal and Assessment Administration, Chapter 16, Staffing Patterns states that the ratio of parcels per full-time employees for a small appraisal district is between 1,500 and 1,700. For a large appraising entity, these numbers are between 3,000 and 3,500. Jackson CAD's total parcel count may be artificially low because overlapping parcels are not included in the total count, causing the cost per parcel to be artificially high.
Workloads in appraisal districts may vary due to considerations other than parcel count. The geographic size of an appraisal district, for instance, may have an impact on the time required to work all parcels. Complex commercial and some residential properties may require more staff work to appraise. The data presented here only gives the reader some basis for comparison with other appraisal districts having similar parcel counts.
For analytical purposes, PTD groups appraisal districts according to the number of parcels. Jackson CAD is included with appraisal districts with 20,000 - 24,999 parcels (Exhibit 3). The Property Tax Division calculates the number of locally appraised parcels. Actual locally appraised parcel counts for 2004 and 2005 provided by Jackson CAD in April 2006 do not match the PTD estimates. The Real Property: Acreage (Category D) represents the sum of data reported in ISD Self-Reports of Value in the County Appraisal District. Exhibit 3 totals may not add to 100 percent due to rounding.
Exhibit 3
Reported Data on Parcels and Categories Comparison to State and Group Averages
Parcel Size Group: 20,000 - 24,999
| Parcels and Categories | Jackson | State Average1 | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Estimated Number Locally Appraised Parcels | 21,365 | 49,497 | 22,264 |
| Number Taxing Units | 11 | 15 | 11 |
Composition by Percentage of Value (Self-Report):
| Parcels and Categories | Jackson | State Average1 | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Estimated Locally Appraised Parcels per Staff | 3,052 | 2,985 | 3,064 |
| Residential Value | 23.2% | 51.3% | 22.8% |
| Non-Residential, Non Mineral | 70.0% | 45.0% | 57.7% |
| Non-Residential, Mineral | 6.8% | 3.7% | 19.5% |
Composition by Locally Appraised Parcel Category (Self-Report)
| Parcel Type | Number of Jackson Parcel | Percent of Jackson Parcels |
Percent of
State Parcels |
Percent of Group Parcels |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A - Real Property: Single-Family Residential | 3,697 | 17.3% | 50.0% | 29.1% |
| B - Real Property: Multifamily Residential | 21 | 0.1% | 1.2% | 0.4% |
| C - Real Property: Vacant Lots and Tracts | 5,634 | 26.4% | 14.7% | 16.8% |
| D - Real Property: Acreage | 6,337 | 29.7% | 14.4% | 29.7% |
| E - Real Property: Farm and Ranch Improvements | 4,000 | 18.7% | 5.1% | 12.9% |
| F1 - Real Property: Commercial | 538 | 2.5% | 3.4% | 3.4% |
| L1 - Personal Property: Commercial | 739 | 3.5% | 6.8% | 4.6% |
| M1 - Mobile Homes and Other Tangible Personal Property | 389 | 1.8% | 2.5% | 2.3% |
| O - Real Property: Residential Inventory | 0 | 0.0% | 1.8% | 0.8% |
| S - Special Inventory | 10 | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| Total | 21,365 | 100.0% | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Appraisal District Operations Report (2004 and 2005 Data), March 2006 and Appraisal District Self-Report of Value, 2004.
Jackson CAD's staffing and budget are comparable to other similar-sized appraisal districts (Exhibit 4). The Property Tax Division calculated the state and group averages; the 2004 surplus as a percentage of the budget; the percentage change in the budgets; the 2004 budget per total parcel; and the 2004 budget per estimated locally appraised parcel. As of April 3, 2006, the CAD had eight full-time staff until one appraiser departed effective April 21, 2006. Plans were underway to fill the vacated appraiser position.
Exhibit 4
Reported Staffing and Training Data Comparison to State and Group Averages
Financial Information
| Financial Information | Jackson | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 Budget | $493,515 | $1,108,158 | $475,265 |
| 2004 Surplus | $19,126 | $48,656 | $30,980 |
| 2004 Surplus as Percentage of Budget | 3.9% | 4.4% | 6.5% |
| 2005 Budget | $519,835 | $1,150,302 | $496,938 |
| Percentage Change in Budget | 5.3% | 3.8% | 4.6% |
| 2004 Budget per Total Parcel | $15.41 | $9.33 | $8.94 |
| 2004 Budget per PTD Estimated Locally Appraised Parcel | $23.10 | $22.30 | $21.35 |
Staffing
| Staffing - 2004 Budget | Jackson | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full-Time | 7 | 17 | 7 |
| Part-Time | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Supervisory | 2 | 3 | 2 |
| Programmers | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Supervisory to Staff Ratio1 | 1:3.5 | 1:5 | 1:4 |
Chief Appraiser
| Chief Appraiser | Jackson | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Chief Appraiser Perform Appraisals? | Yes | ||
| 2004 Total Compensation - Actual | $56,610 | $52,557 | $49,727 |
Appraisers
| Appraisers - 2004 Budget | Jackson | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full-Time | 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Part-Time | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Salary Range: Low | $24,510 | $25,476 | $25,662 |
| Salary Range: High | $38,255 | $38,313 | $34,315 |
| 2004 Training Budget | $10,500 | $9,140 | $5,257 |
| Appraisers Registered with Board of Tax Professional Examiners | 7 | 8 | 5 |
Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Appraisal District Operations Report (2004 and 2005 Data), March 2006.
Jackson CAD has a lower occurrence of protests than other similar-sized appraisal districts (Exhibit 5). PTD calculated the state and group averages as well as the protests per locally appraised parcel.
Exhibit 5
Reported Operations Data Comparison to State and Group Averages
Reappraisal
| Operations Information | Jackson | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Last Year of Reappraisal | 2002 | Not applicable | Not Applicable |
| Next Year of Reappraisal | 2005 | Not applicable | Not applicable |
| Type of Reappraisal: | Complete | Not applicable | Not applicable |
| Method of Reappraisal: | Combination | Not applicable | Not applicable |
Protests
| Operations Information | Jackson | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Protests (2004 tax year) | 221 | 3,164 | 249 |
| Protests per Estimated Locally Appraised Parcel1 | 1.0% | 6.0% | 7% |
Collections
| Operations Information | Jackson | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consolidated Collection | No | Not applicable | Not applicable |
| Collection Budget | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable |
Geographic Information System (GIS)
| Operations Information | Jackson | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appraisal district has or plans to purchase GIS? | Yes | Not applicable | Not applicable |
| Percent GIS complete | 50.0% | 80.0% | 74.0% |
Board of Directors - 2004
| Operations Information | Jackson | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Members | 7 | 6 | 7 |
| Does the Tax Assessor vote? | Yes | Not applicable | Not applicable |
| Number of elected members | 2 | 3 | 2 |
Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Appraisal District Operations Report (2004 and 2005 Data), March 2006.
1.3
Self-Evaluation Questionnaire
In preparation for this ASR, PTD asked Jackson CAD to complete the IAAO's Self Evaluation Questionnaire, which asks the appraisal district to assess its compliance with acceptable procedures, standards and organization. Each appraisal district receives an electronic version of the questionnaire and an IAAO manual that explains each question and how to answer them. PTD asks each appraisal district undergoing an ASR to perform the self-assessment. Jackson CAD provided an electronic survey response in April 2006 with mostly yes or no answers to the 111 questions and did not outline CAD strengths and weaknesses.
In Chapter 1, on legal issues and assessment cycles, the CAD indicated an understanding of the legal framework, value standard and assessment cycles required. In 2006, Jackson CAD added an additional appraiser position in an effort to achieve effective and efficient assessments.
In Chapter 2, on resources and management, Jackson CAD indicated that it conducts formal planning using accepted budgeting methods and is satisfied with the personnel training, management, organization, training, pay and current skill level of the staff. The response specifically noted that staff have the right skills for their job description, but are always trying to sharpen those skills. The forced relocation after a 2004 fire caused a problem with too little space but the CAD believes it solved the problem when it moved to a new space in December 2005.
In Chapter 3, on computerization, the CAD answered yes to all 11 questions, asserting that it has in place the necessary computer capabilities and tools, computer workstations and security.
In Chapter 4, on mapping, Jackson CAD indicated that it has a mapping system with the necessary tools, but is in the process of integrating its maps and records to become part of a multipurpose GIS. Other processes or items not yet fully operating include computerized maps and displaying geographic coordinates on cadastral maps.
In Chapter 5, on data collection, the CAD indicated knowledge of what data Comptroller rules, state law and appraisal standards require. Jackson CAD indicated it physically inspects properties at least every three years and noted that it does not routinely collect income data for commercial properties because this type of data is not readily available in a rural county.
In Chapter 6, on land valuation, Jackson CAD indicated it understands and follows the requirements of situs (the location of a property for taxation purposes), size, location, shape, density, unit measurements, zoning and adjustments for negative influences with the following exception: it does not yet use spreadsheets or statistical software to help develop land values. The CAD scheduled four employees to and they attended a course about spreadsheets in January 2006.
In Chapter 7, on residential property valuation, the Jackson CAD answered "yes" to most questions, with a clarifying "where applicable or available," and "no" to having comparable sales readily available and used for residential property valuation, analysis and value support.
In Chapter 8, on commercial property valuation, the CAD answered "yes" to all questions with a future clarification that the CAD would use spreadsheets and GIS when available.
In Chapter 9, on sales data, ratio studies and stratification, the Jackson CAD answered "yes" to all questions. Many of the sales and stratification task capabilities discussed in Chapter 9, such as stratifying residential properties by market area and neighborhoods and using the stratification in ratio studies, did not exist before April 2006.
In Chapter 10, on personal property assessment, the CAD answered "yes" to all questions. Tasks covered in this chapter include employing all appropriate approaches to personal property appraisal, systematically using several methods to discover taxable personal property, collecting the appropriate data for different businesses and industries, including fully depreciated items, auditing returns and inspecting businesses to ensure complete and accurate reporting.
In Chapter 11, on assessment administration, Jackson CAD answered "yes" to all questions. Tasks covered in this chapter include updating ownership and legal description information within 30 days of recording a transfer, ensuring computer records contain the source of all appraised or assessed values, verifying eligibility for exemptions or other tax relief and producing computerized assessment rolls, recapitulations of the rolls and associated indexes to all of the properties.
In Chapter 12, on defense of values, the CAD indicated the appraisal review board is the reviewing body with the power to review values and valuation methods on its initiative. Jackson CAD answered "yes" to all other questions except that it does not obtain independent appraisal reviews for difficult or large value appraisals as part of the defense in a formal appeal.
In Chapter 13, on public relations, the Jackson CAD indicated that the chief appraiser is required to submit information to a regulatory body for approval and that the office has an active public relations program through brochures and newspapers. The CAD sends a representative to taxing entity board meetings and local organization meetings to keep the public informed of actions that may affect them. The public can access CAD property records by parcel identifier, situs address or owner. The office provides a non-technical description of information such as how the county assesses property taxes and calculates tax bills.
1.4
Findings of the Property Value Study
The PVS determines the total property value in each school district in the Jackson CAD. Generally, the law requires all CADs and PTD to appraise property at market value according to Section 403.302 Government Code and Section 23.01 Tax Code. Productivity value is the basis used for appraising agricultural land and timberland. Property Tax Code Section 1.04(7) defines market value as the price at which property would transfer for cash or its equivalent under prevailing market conditions if:
- exposed for sale in the open market with a reasonable time for the seller to find a purchaser;
- both the seller and the purchaser know of all the uses and purposes to which the property is adapted and for which it is capable of being used and of the enforceable restrictions on its use; and
- both the seller and purchaser seek to maximize their gains and neither is in a position to take advantage of the exigencies of the other.
Local tax roll value, or local value, is determined by the county appraisal district and submitted to the PTD by the CAD and each school district on their annual self-reports. 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 in the school district, 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 informal administrative hearings process. 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. PTD may amend the findings of the preliminary PVS based on the submission of the written protest, an informal hearing or a formal hearing. A hearings examiner who is appointed by the Comptroller's General Counsel, who reports directly to the Comptroller, holds formal hearings. The hearings examiner is not an employee of PTD.
When conducting the property value study, PTD assigns properties to various categories, such as residential, commercial and rural property. PTD divides properties into categories so that it can appraise like properties together.
Edna and Industrial ISDs formally appealed properties in the study findings of the 2004 preliminary PVS. Industrial ISD received designation as an eligible school district after it fell outside the confidence interval.
In general, a ratio indicates the percentage of market value at which a property or group properties appraise. A ratio between 0.95 and 1.05 in any property category makes it more likely the appraisal district appraises that property category within the margin of error or that it is appraising at or near market value.
Eligible School District
The PVS results placed Industrial ISD as an eligible district, because its value was outside of the confidence interval limit. There are four property categories tested in Industrial ISD: Category A, Category D, Category G and Category J.
Category A has 15.3 percent of the tested value and makes up 5.3 percent of the school district's value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9735.
Category D makes up 17.8 percent of the school district's value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.8563. Category D contains two subcategories: D1 and D2. Subcategory D1 is primarily farm and ranch land that qualifies for the special productivity appraisal. Subcategory D2 is primarily rural homes and land that does not qualify as farming or ranching land or timberlands. The differences in value between qualified and non-qualified rural land are often wide since appraisers use a special inventory method to appraise D1 land to determine the land's productivity value and base D2 value on what the land would sell for in an open market transaction. Subcategory D1 consists of 29 percent of Category D's value and 15.7 percent of the tested value. D1 tested with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9862. Subcategory D2, however, makes up 71 percent of Category D's value and 38.5 percent of the school district's total tested value with a weighted mean ratio of 0.8126.
Category G is 6.7 percent of the school district's value and tested with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9609.
Category J is 7.5 percent of the school district's value and tested with a weighted mean ratio of 1.0164.
Coefficient of Dispersion
The coefficient of dispersion (COD), the primary measure of appraisal uniformity, measures the average percentage by which individual ratios vary from the median ratio.
According to IAAO in Property Appraisal and Assessment Administration, a low COD indicates the CAD appraises properties within a category uniformly, and a high COD indicates the CAD appraises properties inconsistently compared with market value. According to IAAO in the Standard on Ratio Studies, single-family residential properties should generally be 15.0 or less, and for new and homogeneous areas, 10.0 or less. For rural residential, the COD should be 20.0 or less, and for vacant lots the COD should be 20.0 or less. For other real property and personal property, CODs should reflect the nature of the properties, market conditions and the availability of reliable market indicators.
The 2004 COD for Jackson CAD single-family residential properties was 10.13 and the COD for rural real properties was 22.14. The COD for commercial real properties was 10.15; for oil, gas and mineral properties, it was 4.78; and for commercial personal properties, it was 15.72.
Jackson CAD Summary
In summary, the Jackson overall CAD median ratio is 0.99. Nevertheless, there are wide ranges within these categories. For example:
- In Category A sample ratios range from 0.60 to 1.56 with a median ratio of 0.98, with 61.7 percent of residential properties within 10 percent of the median and 95.4 percent within 25 percent of the median;
- Category D3 sample ratios range from 0.22 to 1.90 with a median ratio of 0.90, with 32.8 percent of rural real properties within 10 percent of the median and 77.0 percent within 25 percent of the median;
- Category F1 sample ratios range from 0.66 to 1.90 with a median ratio of 1.00, with 70.4 percent of commercial real properties within 10 percent of the median and 90.7 percent within 25 percent of the median;
- Category G1 sample ratios range from 0.32 to 1.17 with a median ratio of 0.99, with 90.2 percent of mineral properties within 10 percent of the median and 94.1 percent within 25 percent of the median;
- Category J sample ratios range from 0.96 to 1.17 with a median of 1.01, with 77.8 percent of utility properties within 10 percent of the median and 100 percent within 25 percent of the median; and
- Category L1 sample ratios range from 0.92 to 2.75 with a median ratio of 1.03, with 81.0 percent of commercial personal properties within 10 percent of the median and 85.7 percent within 25 percent of the median.