Chapter 1
Overview of County Appraisal District
1.1
County History and Demographics
According to The Handbook of Texas Online, Van Zandt County was established by the Legislature in 1848 from part of Henderson County and named for Republic of Texas leader Isaac Van Zandt. Sabine Lake (Jordan's Saline) was named the county seat, a crude log courthouse was built and court was held for the first time in December 1848. In 1850, Wood County was carved out of Van Zandt County, and the Van Zandt county seat was moved to Canton.
Van Zandt County, located in northeastern Texas, is on Interstate 20, 50 miles east of Dallas. The center of the county is near the county seat of Canton. Van Zandt County covers 855 square miles, with altitudes ranging from 421 to 573 feet. The Neches River rises in eastern Van Zandt County, and the Sabine River forms part of the northeastern county line. Creeks in the eastern portion of the county are part of the Trinity River watershed.
Natural resources include oil, gas, salt, iron ore and clays. The eastern two-thirds of the county is in the Post Oak Savannah vegetation area, with tall grasses and post and black jack oak predominating. The western third is in the Blackland Prairies vegetation region, which is characterized by tall grasses, mesquite, oak, pecan and elm trees along streams.
In the early 1990s Van Zandt was a leading producer of beef cows, hay and sweet potatoes. Nursery stock, grains, vegetables and cotton also contribute to the county's agricultural bounty. Oil, tourism, agribusinesses, light manufacturing and salt production remain important to the economy, as does retail trade, manufacturing and professional services. Nonetheless, a large percentage of the work force is employed in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
The area provides numerous opportunities for hunting, fishing, hiking and picnicking. Local attractions include the famous First Monday Trade Days, a gigantic flea market in Canton, Lake Tawakoni, the Salt Festival and Rodeo held in Grand Saline, and the County Fair and Rodeo and Bluegrass Festival held in Canton.
The January 2006 estimated county population, according to the Texas State Data Center, was 50,662. Major population centers include Canton, the county seat, with a population of 3,353; Wills Point (3,703); Van (2,438); Grand Saline (3,088); and Edgewood (1,337).
Van Zandt County includes Canton, Edgewood, Grand Saline, Martins Mill, Van, Wills Point and Fruitvale Independent School Districts.
1.2
Appraisal District Organization and Staffing
Van Zandt CAD, formed in 1981, became active in 1982. As of December 2006, Van Zandt CAD has 16 full-time staff positions with four supervisory positions. The CAD has five appraisal positions and an appraisal director. For 2007, The CAD plans on hiring an additional appraiser. Van Zandt CAD contracts with an external appraisal firm for professional appraisal services of complex properties.
Exhibit 1 presents Van Zandt CAD's current organization.
The board of directors oversees the appraisal district. The chief appraiser reports directly to the board of directors. The GIS director, the appraisal director, the administrative assistant, the office manager and the data processing director report directly to the chief appraiser. The agricultural appraiser, the personal property appraiser, three appraisers and the appraisal secretary report directly to the appraisal director. The assistant office manager, two collections clerks and the assistant GIS director/records report directly to the office manager. Thus, the CAD's four-tiered chain of command is as follows:
Board of directors
- Chief appraiser
Chief appraiser
- GIS director
- appraisal director
- administrative assistant
- office manager
- data processing director
Appraisal director
- agricultural appraiser
- personal property appraiser
- three appraisers
- appraisal secretary
Office manager
- assistant office manager
- two collections clerks
- assistant GIS director/records
The Van Zandt CAD board of directors has no authority to set values or determine appraisal methods. The chief appraiser carries out the appraisal district's legal duties, hires its staff, is responsible for appraisals and manages the appraisal office.
Van Zandt CAD provides appraisal services for the 16 taxing units in Exhibit 2.
Exhibit 2
Van Zandt CAD Taxing Units
| Name of Taxing Entity |
|---|
| Van Zandt County |
| Canton Independent School District |
| Edgewood Independent School District |
| Grand Saline Independent School District |
| Martins Mill Independent School District |
| Van Independent School District |
| Wills Point Independent School District |
| Fruitvale Independent School District |
| City of Canton |
| City of Edgewood |
| City of Grand Saline |
| City of Van |
| City of Wills Point |
| Trinity Valley Community College District (split with Anderson, Henderson, Kaufman CADs) |
| Tyler Junior College District (split with Smith CAD) |
| Van Zandt County ESD #1 |
Source: Van Zandt CAD, December 2006.
PTD does not track appraisals performed by external appraisers. PTD uses parcel counts reported in the appraisal district's 2005 self-report and school district self-report.
PTD includes commercial real and personal property parcels in the calculation, since it cannot determine how many parcels the CAD assigns to the in-house staff versus contracted firms. PTD determined the number of parcels appraised in-house by adding the number of parcels reported in Categories A, Single-Family Residential; B, Multifamily Residential; C, Vacant Lots and Tracts; D1, Qualified Agricultural Land; D2, Non-Qualified Land; E, Farm and Ranch Improvements; F1, Commercial Real Property; L1, Commercial Personal Property; M1, Mobile Homes; O, Residential Inventory; and S, Special Inventory.
Exhibit 3 contains Van Zandt CAD parcel counts by property category. It compares Van Zandt CAD's data to the state and group averages. For analytical purposes, PTD groups appraisal districts according to the number of parcels. Van Zandt CAD is included with appraisal districts that have 50,000 - 74,999 parcels.
Exhibit 3
Reported Data on Parcels and Categories
Comparison to State and Group Averages
Parcel Size Group (by number of locally appraised parcels): 50,000 - 74,999
| Parcels and Categories | Van Zandt CAD | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Estimated Number Locally Appraised Parcels | 54,943 | 51,112 | 63,495 |
| Number Taxing Units | 16 | 15 | 17 |
| Estimated Locally Appraised Parcels per Staff | 3,232 | 2,971 | 3,101 |
Composition by Percentage of Value (Self-Report):
| Parcels and Categories | Van Zandt CAD | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Residential Value | 44% | 47% | 46% |
| Non-Residential, Non-Mineral | 53% | 4% | 5% |
| Non-Residential, Mineral | 3% | 48% | 48% |
Composition of Locally Appraised Parcel Category (Self-Report):
| Parcels and Categories Parcel Type | Van Zandt CAD Number of Parcels | Van Zandt CAD Percent of Parcels | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A - Single-Family Residential | 12,901 | 23% | 50% | 45% |
| B - Multifamily Residential | 81 | 0% | 1% | 1% |
| C - Vacant Lots | 6,340 | 12% | 14% | 15% |
| D - Agricultural | 18,884 | 34% | 14% | 15% |
| E - Farm and Ranch Improvements | 10,197 | 19% | 5% | 9% |
| F1 - Commercial Real | 1,526 | 3% | 3% | 4% |
| L1 - Commercial Personal | 1,983 | 4% | 7% | 6% |
| M1 - Mobile Homes | 2,344 | 4% | 3% | 4% |
| O - Residential Inventory | 642 | 1% | 2% | 2% |
| S - Special Inventory | 45 | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Total | 54,943 | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Appraisal District Operations Report (2005 and 2006 Data), September2006 and Appraisal District Self Report of Value, 2005.
Exhibit 4 provides financial and staffing data for Van Zandt CAD and compares them with other appraisal districts in its group and throughout the state.
Exhibit 4
Reported Budget, Staffing and Training Data
Comparison to State and Group Averages
Financial Information
| Financial and Staffing Information | Van Zandt CAD | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 Budget | $719,707 | $1,144,025 | $1,212,624 |
| 2005 Surplus | $0 | $95,915 | $74,602 |
| 2005 Surplus as Percent of Budget | 0% | 8% | 6% |
| 2006 Budget | $755,775 | $1,200,084 | $1,279,588 |
| Percent Change in Budget | 5% | 5% | 6% |
| 2005 Budget per Total Parcel | $12.94 | $21.96 | $18.86 |
| 2005 Budget per PTD Estimated Locally Appraised Parcel | $13.10 | $22.38 | $19.10 |
Staffing - 2005 Budget
| Financial and Staffing Information | Van Zandt CAD | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full Time | 17 | 17.20 | 20.47 |
| Supervisory | 5 | 3.33 | 3.89 |
| Supervisory to Staff Ratio | 1:3 | 1:6 | 1:5 |
Chief Appraiser
| Financial and Staffing Information | Van Zandt CAD | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performs Appraisals? | Yes | N/A | N/A |
| 2005 Total Compensation - Actual | $41,400 | $52,766 | $68,619 |
Appraisers - 2005 Budget
| Financial and Staffing Information | Van Zandt CAD | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appraiser Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Employees | 16 | 6.42 | 8.37 |
| Salary Range Low | $24,000 | $25,687 | $26,508 |
| Salary Range High | $36,000 | $39,505 | $47,418 |
| 2005 Training Budget | $8,000 | $9,267 | $13,172 |
| Number Registered with Board of Tax Professional Examiners (BTPE) | 13 | 9 | 11 |
Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Appraisal District Operations Report (2005 and 2006 Data), September 2006.
Exhibit 5 provides operations information for Van Zandt CAD, state and group.
Exhibit 5
Reported Operations Data Comparison to State and Group Averages
Reappraisal
| Operations Information | Van Zandt CAD |
|---|---|
| Last Year of Reappraisal | 2006 |
| Next Year of Reappraisal | 2007 |
| Type of Reappraisal: | N/A |
Protests
| Operations Information | Van Zandt CAD | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Protests (2005 tax year) | 800 | 3,435 | 2,366 |
| Protests per Estimated Locally Appraised Parcel | 0.01 | 0.07 | 0.05 |
Collections
| Operations Information | Van Zandt CAD |
|---|---|
| Consolidated Collection | Yes |
| Collection Budget | $267,844 |
Geographic Information System (GIS)
| Operations Information | Van Zandt CAD | State Average | Group Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| District Has or Plans to Purchase GIS? | Yes | N/A | N/A |
| Percent GIS Complete | 0% | 50% | 71% |
Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Appraisal District Operations Report (2005 and 2006 Data), September 2006.
Based on this comparison, Van Zandt CAD appraised 3,232 parcels per full-time employee. Chapter 16, Elements of Administration, Staffing Patterns and the Effect of Computerization, in the IAAO's Property Appraisal and Assessment Administration states that the ratio of parcels per full-time employee for a small appraisal district typically is between 1,500 and 1,700. For a large appraising entity, these numbers typically are between 3,000 and 3,500.
Workloads in appraisal districts can vary due to any number of 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, as can property type. Complex commercial and some residential properties may require more staff work to appraise. The data given here are meant only to provide the reader with some basis for comparison with other appraisal districts with similar parcel counts.
1.3
Self-Evaluation Questionnaire
In preparation for this ASR, Van Zandt CAD was asked to complete the IAAO's Self-Evaluation Questionnaire, which requires the appraisal district to assess its compliance with acceptable procedures, standards and organization. Each appraisal district received an electronic version of the questionnaire and an IAAO manual explaining each question and how to answer them.
The Van Zandt CAD answered all of the 111 questions, providing specific, clear and concise responses where necessary. A summary of the self-evaluation follows.
In responding to the self-assessment, Van Zandt CAD identified certain strengths; among them are:
- the CAD appraisal staff possesses education, skills and experience to perform individual duties well;
- the CAD has hired an appraisal director with seven years of commercial appraisal experience;
- performance evaluations are conducted yearly;
- a personnel handbook contains clear guidelines for conduct; and
- the CAD has developed an effective method for collecting land sales data in which new owners are mailed a sales verification form along with an agricultural use application.
Van Zandt CAD also indicated some areas of concern, including:
- the lack of mandatory sales disclosure is detrimental in establishing market value for commercial property;
- the impact of appraisal staff shortage on improving efficiency and effectiveness of the appraisal department; and
- the rural nature of the county is changing, which will require appraisers with more knowledge of commercial income-producing properties.
In Chapter 1, which discusses legal issues and assessment cycles, the CAD indicated it understands the legal framework, value standards and assessment cycles required. The chief appraiser and other staff members attend legislative seminars to stay informed of laws and legislative action. The CAD conducts ratio studies quarterly to help ensure the CAD is assigning fair market value. The CAD believes measures that impede market value standards, besides the lack of sales disclosures, are various caps and exemptions, which might result in attempts to undervalue some properties to provide tax relief. The CAD appraises approximately 54,000 real estate parcels with five appraisers, an appraisal director and appraisal secretary. The chief appraiser believes with the planned hiring of an additional appraiser in 2007, the CAD will have the resources to perform the assessment function effectively and efficiently.
In Chapter 2, which deals with resources and management, the CAD indicated that it is satisfied with the budget process, personnel training, management and organization. Of particular note is the CAD's plan to add 2,000 to 2,500 square feet to the CAD office to provide sufficient office space for the appraisal department. The chief appraiser also advised that the county is changing from its rural nature, which will soon require appraisers with more knowledge of commercial income-producing properties.
In Chapter 3, on computerization, the CAD indicated its system meets computer and application software requirements for assessment office operations. The CAD noted that each employee in the office has a desktop computer at his or her workstation. In addition, there are two computers in the public access area, one in the boardroom and one desktop computer for tax attorneys to use. The CAD further explained that it has an appraisal software as well as a GIS mapping system, both of which will integrate with the CAMA system. The CAD expects to integrate the GIS and CAMA systems within the next year.
In Chapter 4, which covers mapping, the CAD indicated it maintains a complete set of cadastral maps showing each parcel's size, shape and location These maps are available to the public via printed maps. Deed records are received two weeks after file date and parcel splits and combinations are then mapped within two to four weeks.
In Chapter 5, which covers data collection, the CAD indicated it knows what data is required by Comptroller Rules, state law, and appraisal standards. The CAD stated that commercial data is collected by an experienced appraiser. The CAD recently hired an appraisal director with seven years of commercial appraisal experience.
In Chapter 6, which covers land valuation, the CAD indicated that it understands the requirements of situs, size, location, shape, density, unit measurements and adjustments for negative influences. These are all required either by appraisal standards, state law or Comptroller Rules.
In Chapter 7, concerning residential property valuation, the CAD indicated that it understands the three approaches to value and the data requirements to achieve an effective appraisal program for residential property. The answers indicate that the CAD follows the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
In Chapter 8, regarding commercial property valuation, the CAD indicated that it uses the three approaches to value when valuing larger properties, such as hotels, apartment complexes and office buildings. The CAD noted that it makes an effort to collect income and expense information, but the data is hard to obtain. The CAD is able to obtain capitalization rates and expense ratios from MAI appraisers. The CAD also said it currently does not maintain an automated income data system, but the CAD plans to implement a workable system within two years. Cost schedules are developed from local information and reconciled with Marshall & Swift.
In Chapter 9, which deals with sales data, ratio studies and stratification, the CAD indicated that it uses sales in the valuation analysis. The CAD noted that all sales are confirmed by owner, Multiple Listing Service (MLS), seller or real estate professional. The CAD conducts ratio studies by category, class and market area twice a year. The CAD also noted that it had not used time adjustments in the past few years, but that they might be helpful in some instances. The ratio study software program performs statistical testing including computing levels of uniformity and confidence intervals.
In Chapter 10, which covers personal property assessment, the CAD indicated that it follows the accepted procedures for discovery and personal property appraisal. The CAD responded that it audits returns and inspects businesses to ensure complete and accurate reporting. The CAD confirmed it follows up on non-returned property declaration forms by making supplemental mailings, inspections and estimated assessments.
In Chapter 11, which deals with assessment administration, the CAD indicated that it is following the accepted practices of assessment administration in Comptroller Rules and International Association of Assessing Officers Standards. However, the CAD noted that the computer records do not contain the source of all appraised or assessed values.
In Chapter 12, regarding defense of values, the CAD noted it had about 1,200 protests filed; 942 were scheduled for a formal hearing; and only 200 actually met with the ARB.
In Chapter 13, which covers public relations, the CAD indicated it believes it has an effective public relations program.
1.4
Findings of the Property Value Study and Summary Worksheets
The PVS determines the total property value in each school district in the Van Zandt CAD. With a few notable exceptions, the law requires all CADs and PTD 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 willing buyer would pay a willing seller for the property. 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 by the CAD and each school district on their annual self-reports. 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 CADs 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 holds formal hearings. The hearings examiner is not a PTD employee.
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.
Despite Canton and Martins Mill ISDs' successful informal appeals of findings of invalid taxable value on the 2005 Preliminary PVS, Wills Point ISD's informal appeal was unsuccessful and the school district's taxable value was found to be invalid, but local value was certified because the school district was eligible for the first year of a grace period. The 2006 PVS found the taxable values of all Van Zandt CAD school districts to be valid and local values were certified.
In general, a ratio indicates the percentage of market value at which a property or group of properties is appraised. A ratio between 0.95 and 1.05 in any property category means that the appraisal district is appraising property within 5 percent of its market value, according to the PVS.
Eligible School District
Wills Point ISD was identified as an eligible district when its local value fell outside of the confidence interval limit determined by the 2005 PVS. There were four property categories tested in Wills Point ISD: Category A, Single-Family Residential; Category D, Rural Real; Category F1, Commercial Real and Category J, Utilities.
Category A, Single-Family Residential was 48 percent of the total test values and made up 41 percent of the school district's value. A review of Category A in the 2005 PVS indicates that the CAD appraised sample parcels from as low as 49 percent to a high of 175 percent of market value and tested with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9003.
Category D, Rural Real made up 36 percent of the school district's value and tested with a weighted mean ratio of 1.0313. 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 as farm, ranch or timberlands. The differences in value between Qualified and Non-Qualified Acres wide. D1 land is appraised using a special statutory method to determine the land's productivity value and D2 is based on what the land would sell for in an open-market transaction.
Subcategory D1 comprised 7 percent of Category D's value and 3 percent of the total test values. D1 had a category ratio of 1.523. Subcategory D2 made up 93 percent of Category D's value and 33 percent of the school district's total test values. The CAD appraised Non-Qualified Acres and Rural Improvements in a range from 63 percent to 287 percent of market value, with a weighted mean ratio of 1.0068.
Category F1, Commercial Real, which was 6 percent of the school district's value, tested with a weighted mean ratio of 0.6618. The CAD valued sample properties from as low as 31 percent to a high of 95 percent of market value.
Category J, Utilities, which was 6 percent of the school district's value, tested with a weighted mean ratio of 1.0022. The CAD's external appraiser valued Utilities properties from as low as 64 percent to a high of 120 percent.
Other School Districts
Although the remainder of the Van Zandt CAD school districts' local values fell within their respective confidence interval limits on the 2005 PVS, there were several individual property categories in which appraisal performance needs monitoring.
In Canton ISD, Category A, Single-Family Residential, made up 37 percent of the school district's total property value and tested with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9071. Category D, Rural Real, represents rural properties and contains two subcategories: D1 and D2. Subcategory D1 comprised 2 percent of the school district's total value. D1 had a category ratio of 1.55. Category F1, Commercial Real, which comprised 18 percent of the school district's total property value, tested with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9347.
In Edgewood ISD, Category A, Single-Family Residential, made up 35 percent of the school district's total property value, and sample parcels tested with a weighted mean ratio of 0.9089. Subcategory D1 comprised 2 percent of the school district's total value and had a category ratio of 1.65.
In Grand Saline ISD, Category F1, Commercial Real, made up 5 percent of the school district's total value, and sample parcels tested with a weighted mean ratio of 0.7568. Subcategory D1 comprised 3 percent of the school district's total value and had a category ratio of 1.66.
In Martins Mill ISD, Category A, Single-Family Residential, made up 18 percent of the school district's total property value and tested with a weighted mean ratio of 0.8768. In Category D, Rural Real, Subcategory D1 comprised 5 percent of the school district's total property value and had a category ratio of 1.51. Sample parcels in Subcategory D2, Non-Qualified Acres and Rural Improvements, tested with a weighted mean ratio of 1.11.
Qualified Acres in Van ISD comprised 3 percent of the school district's total property value on the 2005 PVS and had a category ratio of 1.45.
In Fruitvale ISD, Category A, Single-Family Residential, made up 27 percent of the school district's total property value, and sample parcels tested with a weighted mean ratio of 0.8794. In Category D, Rural Real, Subcategory D1 comprised 3 percent of the school district's total property value and had a category ratio of 1.60. In Subcategory D2, Non-Qualified Acres and Rural Improvements, which made up 34 percent of the school district's total property value, sample parcels tested with a weighted mean ratio of 1.06.
Van Zandt CAD Summary
In summary, Van Zandt CAD's overall median ratio is 0.98.
- in Category A, Single-Family Residential, the sample ratios range from 0.40 to 1.85 with a median ratio of 0.94;
- in Subcategory D1, Qualified Acres, the CAD's special appraisal of open-space land consistently exceeds 150 percent of productivity value;
- in Subcategory D2, Non-Qualified Acres and Rural Improvements, the sample ratios range from 0.31 to 2.87 with a median ratio of 1.04;
- in Category F1, Commercial Real, the sample ratios range from 0.17 to 1.28 with a median ratio of 0.82;
- in Category G, Oil, Gas & Minerals, the sample ratios range from 0.80 to 1.51 with a median ratio of 1.00;
- in Category J, Utilities, the sample ratios range from 0.64 to 1.30 with a median ratio of 1.00; and
- in Category L1, Commercial Personal, the sample ratios range from 0.91 to 1.20 with a median ratio of 1.01.
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 that appraisals within a category of property are uniform and a high COD indicates properties are being appraised at inconsistent percentages of market value. Also, according to IAAO in the Standard on Ratio Studies, Category A, Single-Family Residential, should generally be 15 or less, and for new and fairly homogeneous areas, 10 or less. For Category C, Vacant Lots, the COD should be 20 or less, and for income-producing properties, the COD should be 20 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 2005 COD for Van Zandt CAD Category A was 13.66; Category D2 was 22.35; Category F1 was 22.56; Category G was 8.70; and Category J was 4.56.
The 2005 COD for Wills Point ISD Category A was 13.63; Category D2 was 25.94; Category F1 was 19.53; and Category J was 6.91.
The COD data indicate uniformity of appraisal in the CAD and ISDs, with the districtwide exception of Subcategory D2, Non-Qualified Acres and Rural Improvements and Category F1, Commercial Real.