HomeMy WebLinkAbout20132686.tiffRECEIVED
SEP 8 2913
WELD COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
2013
WELD C Y
PROPERTY ASSESSMENT
ST Y
:J
1
J
_.I
1
J
r'1
J
7
LA
r1
if)}WILDRC SE
Audit Division
cc.' ,4-55e
2013-2686
S WILD ' O, E
Audit Division
September 15, 2013
Mr. Mike Mauer
Director of Research
Colorado Legislative Council
Room 029, State Capitol Building
Denver, Colorado 80203
RE: Final Report for the 2013 Colorado Property Assessment Study
Dear Mr. Mauer:
Wildrose Appraisal Inc. -Audit Division is pleased to submit the Final Reports for the 2013 Colorado
Property Assessment Study.
These reports are the result of two analyses: A procedural audit and a statistical audit.
The procedural audit examines all classes of property. It specifically looks at how the assessor develops
economic areas, confirms and qualifies sales, develops time adjustments and performs periodic physical
property inspections. The audit reviews the procedures for determining subdivision absorption and
subdivision discounting. Valuation methodology is examined for residential properties and commercial
properties. Procedures are reviewed for producing mines, oil and gas leaseholds and lands producing,
producing coal mines, producing earth and stone products, severed mineral interests, and non -
producing patented mining claims.
Statistical audits are performed on vacant land, residential properties, commercial/industrial properties
and agricultural land. A statistical analysis is performed for personal property compliance on the eleven
largest counties: Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Denver, Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Larimer, Mesa,
Pueblo and Weld. The remaining counties receive a personal property procedural study.
Wildrose Appraisal Inc. — Audit Division appreciates the opportunity to be of service to the State of
Colorado. Please contact us with any questions or concerns.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1/114('
Harry J. Fuller
Project Manager
Wildrose Appraisal Inc. — Audit Division
1
1
1
«'II.1D1:OS
Audit Division
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 3
Regional /Historical Sketch of Weld County 4
Ratio Analysis 6
Time Trending Verification 8
Sold/Unsold Analysis 9
Agricultural Land Study 1 1
Agricultural Land 1 1
Agricultural Outbuildings 13
Agricultural Land Under Improvements 13
Sales Verification 1 4 -
Economic Area Review and Evaluation 16
Natural Resources 1 7
Earth and Stone Products 1 7
Producing Oil and Gas /
Vacant Land 18
Possessory Interest Properties 19
Personal Property Audit 20
Wildrose Auditor Staff 22
Appendices 2 3
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 2
IlkAPPRAISAL I`.r
Audit Division
WILD
INTRODUCTION
I le
Colorado
The State Board of Equalization (SBOE)
reviews assessments for conformance to the
Constitution. The SBOE will order
revaluations for counties whose valuations do
not reflect the proper valuation period level of
value.
The statutory basis for the audit is found in
C.R.S. 39-1-104 (16)(a)(b) and (c).
The legislative council sets forth two criteria
that are the focus of the audit group:
To determine whether each county assessor is
applying correctly the constitutional and
statutory provisions, compliance requirements
of the State Board of Equalization, and the
manuals published by the State Property Tax
Administrator to arrive at the actual value of
each class of property.
To determine if each assessor is applying
correctly the provisions of law to the actual
values when arriving at valuations for
assessment of all locally valued properties
subject to the property tax.
The property assessment audit conducts a two-
part analysis: A procedural analysis and a
statistical analysis.
discounting procedures.
methodology for vacant
residential properties and commercial
properties is examined. Procedures for
producing mines, oil and gas leaseholds and
lands producing, producing coal mines,
producing earth and stone products, severed
mineral interests and non -producing patented
mining claims are also reviewed.
The procedural analysis includes all classes of
property and specifically looks at how the
assessor develops economic areas, confirms and
qualifies sales, and develops time adjustments.
The audit also examines the procedures for
adequately discovering, classifying and valuing
agricultural outbuildings, discovering
subdivision build -out and subdivision
Valuation
land, improved
Statistical analysis is performed on vacant land,
residential properties, commercial industrial
properties, agricultural land, and personal
property. The statistical study results are
compared with State Board of Equalization
compliance requirements and the manuals
published by the State Property Tax
Administrator.
Wildrose Audit has completed the Property
Assessment Study for 2013 and is pleased to
report its findings for Weld County in the
following report.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
201 3 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
f
1
WILDE
APPR%I!•.\L INCOKPOR%Tin
Audit Division
REGIONAL/HISTORICAL SKETCH OF
WELD COUNTY
Regional Information
Weld County is located in the Front Range
region of Colorado. The Colorado Front
Range is a colloquial geographic term for the
populated areas of the State that are just east
of the foothills of the Front Range. It includes
Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Broomfield,
Denver, Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Larimer,
Pueblo, and Weld counties.
1
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 4
01PP Aft,' \NAL I•.i •!RPllk\TEth
WILD ' E
Audit Division
Historical Information
Weld County has a population of
approximately 252,825 people with 63.32
people per square mile, according to the U.S.
Census Bureau's 2010 census data. This
represents a 39.73 percent change from the
2000 Census.
Weld County covers an area of 4,004 square
miles in north central Colorado. It is bordered
on the north by Wyoming and Nebraska and on
the south by the Denver metropolitan area.
The third largest county in Colorado, Weld
County has an area greater than that of Rhode
Island, Delaware and the District of Columbia
combined.
Major Stephen H. Long made an expedition to
the area now known as Weld County in 1821.
In 1835 a government expedition came through
the general area; the next year a member of
that party, Lt. Lancaster Lupton, returned to
establish a trading post located just north of the
present town of Fort Lupton. In 1837 Colonel
Ceran St. Vrain established Fort St. Vrain; Fort
Vasquez was built south of Platteville about
1840. The latter was rebuilt in the 1930's by
the State Historical Society.
The county seat is Greeley which began as the
Union Colony, which was founded in 1869 as
an experimental utopian community of "high
moral standards" by Nathan C. Meeker, a
newspaper reporter from New York City.
Meeker purchased a site at the confluence of
the Cache la Poudre and South Platte Rivers
(that included the area of Latham, an Overland
Trail station), halfway between Cheyenne and
Denver along the tracks of the Denver Pacific
Railroad formerly known as the "Island Grove
Ranch." The name Union Colony was later
changed to Greeley in honor of Horace
Greeley, who was Meeker's editor at the New
York Tribune, and popularized the phrase "Go
West, young man."
Weld County's cultural assets include
Centennial Village, an authentic recreation of
pioneer life on the Colorado plains. The
Meeker Museum in Greeley is a national
historic site. Fort Vasquez in southern Weld
County has an exciting history as an early
Colorado trading post. The Greeley
Philharmonic Orchestra is one of the oldest
symphony orchestra west of the Mississippi.
The University of Northern Colorado's Little
Theatre of the Rockies is one of America's
premier college dramatic organizations.
(www.co.weld.co.us, www.wikipedia.org)
org)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
I
1
i
1
201 3 Weld ('minty Property Assessment Study — Page 5
1
I
S
1
1
I
1
1
1
t
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
WILDIZOSE
APPR t,. Isis c R MD
Audit Division
RATIO ANALYSIS
Methodology
All significant classes of properties were
analyzed. Sales were collected for each
property class over the appropriate sale period,
which was typically defined as the 18 -month
period between January 2011 and June 2012.
Counties with less than 30 sales typically
extended the sale period back up to 5 years
prior to June 30, 2012 in 6 -month increments.
If there were still fewer than 30 sales,
supplemental appraisals were performed and
treated as proxy sales. Residential sales for all
counties using this method totaled at least 30
per county. For commercial sales, the total
number analyzed was allowed, in some cases,
to fall below 30. There were no sale quantity
issues for counties requiring vacant land
analysis or condominium analysis. Although it
was required that we examine the median and
coefficient of dispersion for all counties, we
also calculated the weighted mean and price -
related differential for each class of property.
Counties were not passed or failed by these
latter measures, but were counseled if there
were anomalies noted during our analysis.
Qualified sales were based on the qualification
code used by each county, which were typically
coded as either "Q" or "C." The ratio analysis
included all sales. The data was trimmed for
counties with obvious outliers using IAAO
standards for data analysis. In every case, we
examined the loss in data from trimming to
ensure that only true outliers were excluded.
Any county with a significant portion of sales
excluded by this trimming method was
examined further. No county was allowed to
pass the audit if more than .5% of the sales were
"lost" because of trimming. For the largest 11
counties, the residential ratio statistics were
broken down by economic area as well.
Conclusions
For this final analysis report, the minimum
acceptable statistical standards allowed by the
State Board of Equalization are:
ALLOWABLE STANDARDS RATIO GRID
Property Class
uinmercial / industrial
Condominium
Single Family
Vacant Land
Unweighted
Median Ratio
Between .95-1.05
Between .95-1.05
Between .95-1.05
Between .95-1.05
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Less than 20.99
Less than 15.99
Less than 15.99
Less than 20.99
1
201 3 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 6
likAll'HALSAL INCt iv 1- !! i II
WILD ' O E
Audit Division
The results for Weld County are:
Weld County Ratio Grid
Property Class
Number of Unweighted Price
Qualified Median Related
Sales Ratio Differential
Coefficient
of
Dispersion
Time Trend
Analysis
Commercial/Industrial
Condominium
Single Family
Vacant Land
167
N/A
5,608
235
1.000
N/A
0.976
1.000
1.038
N/A
1.019
1.067
8.2
N/A
10.3
16
Compliant
N/A
Compliant
Compliant
Ratio Statistics for CLflTOT / TASP
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
982
1 017
095
0
978
1011
091
2
975
1 015
090
3
.977
1 012
076
4
.985
1 026
124
5
.971
1 010
140
6
976
1.028
155
7
967
1.014
153
8
964
1 011
127
9
976
1 020
107
Overall
976
1 019
103
After applying the above described
methodologies, it is concluded from the sales
ratios that Weld County is in compliance with
SBOE, DPT, and Colorado State Statute
valuation guidelines.
Recommendations
None
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
Y
1
1
1
1
201 3 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 7
r
WILDROSE
No.;, •It%II I'
Audit Division
TIME TRENDING
Methodology
While we recommend that counties use the
inverted ratio regression analysis method to
account for market (time) trending, some
counties have used other IAAO-approved
methods, such as the weighted monthly median
approach. We are not auditing the methods
used, but rather the results of the methods
used. Given this range of methodologies used
to account for market trending, we concluded
that the best validation method was to examine
the sale ratios for each class across the
appropriate sale period. To be specific, if a
county has considered and adjusted correctly
for market trending, then the sale ratios should
remain stable (i.e. flat) across the sale period.
If a residual market trend is detected, then the
county may or may not have addressed market
VERIFICATION
trending adequately, and a further examination
is warranted. This validation methodology also
considers the number of sales and the length of
the sale period. Counties with few sales across
the sale period were carefully examined to
determine if the statistical results were valid.
Conclusions
After verification and analysis, it has been
determined that Weld County has complied
with the statutory requirements to analyze the
effects of time on value in their county. Weld
County has also satisfactorily applied the results
of their time trending analysis to arrive at the
time adjusted sales price (TASP).
Recommendations
None
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 8
WILD ' O; E
1
Aril, \i•UU_ INccstrott rtri
Audit Division
SOLD/UNSOLD ANALYSIS
Methodology
Weld County was tested for the equal
treatment of sold and unsold properties to
ensure that "sales chasing" has not occurred.
The auditors employed a multi -step process to
determine if sold and unsold properties were
valued in a consistent manner.
All qualified residential and commercial class
properties were examined using the unit value
method, where the actual value per square foot
was compared between sold and unsold
properties. A class was considered qualified if
it met the criteria for the ratio analysis. The
median value per square foot for both groups
was compared from an appraisal and statistical
perspective. If no significant difference was
indicated, then we concluded that no further
testing was warranted and that the county was
in compliance in terms of sold/unsold
consistency.
If either residential or commercial differences
were significant using the unit value method, or
if data limitations made the comparison invalid,
then the next step was to perform a ratio
analysis comparing the 2012 and 2013 actual
values for each qualified class of property. All
qualified vacant land classes were tested using
this method. The sale property ratios were
arrayed using a range of 0.8 to 1.5, which
theoretically excluded changes between years
that were due to other unrelated changes in the
property. These ratios were also stratified at
the appropriate level of analysis. Once the
percent change was determined for each
appropriate class and sub -class, the next step
was to select the unsold sample. This sample
was at least 1% of the total population of
unsold properties and excluded any sale
properties. The unsold sample was filtered
based on the attributes of the sold dataset to
closely correlate both groups. The ratio
analysis was then performed on the unsold
properties and stratified. The median and
mean ratio distribution was then compared
between the sold and unsold group. A non -
parametric test such as the Mann -Whitney test
for differences between independent samples
was undertaken to determine whether any
observed differential was significant. If this test
determined that the unsold properties were
treated in a manner similar to the sold
properties, it was concluded that no further
testing was warranted and that the county was
in compliance.
If a class or sub -class of property was
determined to be significantly different by this
method, the final step was to perform a multi-
variate mass appraisal model that developed
ratio statistics from the sold properties that
were then applied to the unsold sample. This
test compared the measures of central tendency
and confidence intervals for the sold properties
with the unsold property sample. If this
comparison was also determined to be
significantly different, then the conclusion was
that the county had treated the unsold
properties in a different manner than sold
properties.
These tests were supported by both tabular and
chart presentations, along with saved sold and
unsold sample files.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 9
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
WILDRQSE
At•TN Its\4 IV I 'MATED
Audit Division
Sold/Unsold Results
Property Class
Commercial/Industrial
Condominium
Single Family
Vacant Land
Results
Compliant
N/A
Compliant
Compliant
Conclusions
Recommendations
After applying the above described None
methodologies, it is concluded that Weld
County is reasonably treating its sold and
unsold properties in the same manner.
1
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 10
ilik
APPRAISAL 1"_.: •RPOIL%TI I
WILD ' O E
Audit Division
AGRICULTURAL LAND STUDY
Acres By Subclass
Meadow Hay
17.
60,000,000
50,000,000
40,000,000
30,000,000
20,000,000
10,000,000
0
Value By Subclass
Sprinkler Flood Dry Farm Meadow Grazing Waste
Hay
Agricultural Land
County records were reviewed to determine
major land categories such as irrigated farm,
dry farm, meadow hay, grazing and other
lands. In addition, county records were
reviewed in order to determine if: Aerial
photographs are available and are being used;
soil conservation guidelines have been used to
classify lands based on productivity; crop
rotations have been documented; typical
commodities and yields have been determined;
orchard lands have been properly classified and
valued; expenses reflect a ten year average and
are typical landlord expenses; grazing lands
have been properly classified and valued; the
number of acres in each class and subclass have
been determined; the capitalization rate was
properly applied. Also, documentation was
required for the valuation methods used and
any locally developed yields, carrying
capacities, and expenses. Records were also
checked to ensure that the commodity prices
and expenses, furnished by the Property Tax
Administrator (PTA), were applied properly.
(See Assessor Reference Library Volume 3
Chapter 5.)
Conclusions
An analysis of the agricultural land data
indicates an acceptable appraisal of this
property type. Directives, commodity prices
and expenses provided by the PTA were
properly applied. Expenses used by the county
were allowable expenses and were in an
acceptable range. Grazing lands carrying
capacities were in an acceptable range. The
data analyzed resulted in the following ratios:
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 11
WI I .,DRQSE
�rrrr 1., , x♦ il)
Audit Division
Weld County Agricultural Land Ratio Grid
Abstract
Code
4107
4117
4127
4137
4147
4167
Total/Avg
Land Class
Sprinkler
Flood
Dry Farm
Meadow Hay
Grazing
Waste
Number
O1
Acres
107,506
232,225
564,344
14,321
970,231
105,893
1,994,520
County
Value
Per Acre
171.00
226.00
22.00
44.00
6.00
2.00
45.00
County
Assessed
Total Value
18, 359,681
52,493,528
12,213,013
629,070
5,418,170
184,844
89,298,307
WRA
Total
Value
18,501,359
52,829,152
12,229,551
629,070
5,418,170
184,844
89,792,146
Ratio
0.99
0.99
1.00
1.00
1.00
1 .00
0.99
Recommendations
None
201 3 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 12
aWILD ' O, E
Apr ► I �s %Te i
Audit Division
Agricultural Outbuildings
Methodology
Data was collected and reviewed to determine
if the guidelines found in the Assessor's
Reference Library (ARL) Volume 3, pages 5.74
through 5.77 were being followed.
Conclusions
Weld County has substantially complied with
the procedures provided by the Division of
Property Taxation for the valuation of
agricultural outbuildings.
Recommendations
None
Agricultural Land Under Improvements
Methodology
Data was collected and reviewed to determine
if the guidelines found in the Assessor's
Reference Library (ARL) Volume 3, pages 5.19
and 5.20 were being followed.
Weld County utilized the following discovery
method(s):
• Questionnaires
• Phone Interviews
• In -Person Interviews
• Written Correspondence
• Personal Knowledge of Owners and
Tenants
Conclusions
Weld County has substantially complied with
the procedures provided by the Division of
Property Taxation for the valuation of land
under residential improvements that may or
may not be integral to an agricultural
operation.
Recommendations
None
t
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 13
WILD
APPRAISAL ISCORPORU I
Audit Division
J
SALES VERIFICATION
According to Colorado Revised Statutes:
A representative body of sales is required when
considering the market approach to appraisal.
(8) In any case in which sales prices of comparable
properties within any class or subclass are utilized
when considering the market approach to appraisal in
the determination of actual value of any taxable
property, the following limitations and conditions
shall apply:
(a)(I) Use of the market approach shall require a
representative body of sales, including sales by a
lender or government, sufficient to set a pattern, and
appraisals shall reflect due consideration of the
degree of comparability of sales, including the extent
of similarities and dissimilarities among properties
that are compared for assessment purposes. In order
to obtain a reasonable sample and to reduce sudden
price changes or fluctuations, all sales shall be
included in the sample that reasonably r fect a true
or typical sales price during the period specified in
section 39-1-104 (10.2). Sales of personal property
exempt pursuant to the provisions of sections 39-3-
102, 39-3-103, and 39-3-119 to 39-3-122 shall
not be included in any such sample.
(b) Each such sale included in the sample shall be
coded to indicate a typical, negotiated sale, as
screened and verified by the assessor. (39-1-103,
C. R. S.)
The assessor is required to use sales of real property
only in the valuation process.
(8) f Such true and typical sales shall include only
those sales which have been determined on an
individual basis to r lect the selling price of the real
property only or which have been adjusted on an
individual basis to r lect the selling price of the real
property only. (39-1-103, C.R.S.)
Part of the Property Assessment Study is the
sales verification analysis. WRA has used the
above -cited statutes as a guide in our study of
the county's procedures and practices for
verifying sales.
WRA reviewed the sales verification
procedures in 2013 for Weld County. This
study was conducted by checking selected sales
from the master sales list for the current
valuation period. Specifically WRA selected 58
sales listed as unqualified.
All but two of the sales selected in the sample
gave reasons that were clear and supportable.
Two sales had insufficient reason for
disqualification.
For residential, commercial, and vacant land
sales with considerations over $ 500, the
contractor has examined and reported the ratio
of qualified sales to total sales by class and
performed the following analyses of unqualified
sales:
The contractor has examined the
manner in which sales have been
classified as qualified or unqualified,
including a listing of each step in the
sales verification process, any
adjustment procedures, and the county
official responsible for making the final
decision on qualification.
When less than 50 percent of sales are •
qualified in any of the three property
classes (residential, commercial, and
vacant land), the contractor analyzed
the reasons for disqualifying sales in
any subclass that constitutes at least 20
percent of the class, either by number
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 14
WILDROSE
APPRAISAL_ 1...
Audit Division
of properties or by value, from the
prior year. The contractor has
reviewed with the assessor any analysis
indicating that sales data are
inadequate, fail to reflect typical
properties, or have been disqualified
for insufficient cause. In addition, the
contractor has reviewed the
disqualified sales by assigned code. If
there appears to be any inconsistency
in the coding, the contractor has
conducted further analysis to
determine if the sales included in that
code have been assigned appropriately.
If 50 percent or more of the sales are
qualified, the contractor has reviewed a
statistically significant sample of
unqualified sales, excluding sales that
were disqualified for obvious reasons.
Weld County did not qualify for in-
depth subclass analysis.
Conclusions
Weld County appears to be doing a good job of
verifying their sales. There are no
recommendations.
Recommendations
None
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
201.3 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 15
1
St
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
WTI.IDT E
Audit Division
q!111 II
ECONOMIC AREA REVIEW AND
EVALUATION
Methodology
Weld County has submitted a written narrative
describing the economic areas that make up the
county's market areas. Weld County has also
submitted a map illustrating these areas. Each
of these narratives have been read and analyzed
for logic and appraisal sensibility. The maps
were also compared to the narrative for
consistency between the written description
and the map.
Conclusions
After review and analysis, it has been
determined that Weld County has adequately
identified homogeneous economic areas
comprised of smaller neighborhoods. Each
economic area defined is equally subject to a set
of economic forces that impact the value of the
properties within that geographic area and this
has been adequately addressed. Each economic
area defined adequately delineates an area that
will give "similar values for similar properties
in similar areas."
Recommendations
None
201 3 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 16
1Ilk: n wu.iu_ I\nwPORATF.I
WILD' • r
Audit Division
NATURAL
Earth and Stone Products
Methodology
Under the guidelines of the Assessor's
Reference Library (ARL), Volume 3, Natural
Resource Valuation Procedures, the income
approach was applied to determine value for
production of earth and stone products. The
number of tons was multiplied by an economic
royalty rate determined by the Division of
Property Taxation to determine income. The
income was multiplied by a recommended
Hoskold factor to determine the actual value.
The Hoskold factor is determined by the life of
the reserves or the lease. Value is based on two
variables: life and tonnage. The operator
determines these since there is no other means
to obtain production data through any state or
private agency.
Conclusions
The County has applied the correct formulas
and state guidelines to earth and stone
production.
Recommendations
None
Producing Oil and Gas
Methodology
Assessors Reference Library (ARL) Volume 3,
Chapter 6: Valuation of Natural Resources
STATUTORY REFERENCES
Section § 39-1-103, C.R.S., specifies that
producing oil or gas leaseholds and lands are
valued according to article 7 of title 39, C.R.S.
RESOURCES
Actual value determined - when.
(2) The valuation for assessment of leaseholds
and lands producing oil or gas shall be
determined as provided in article 7 of this title.
§ 39-1-103, C.R.S.
Article 7 covers the listing, valuation, and
assessment of producing oil and gas leaseholds
and lands.
Valuation:
Valuation for assessment.
(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this
section, on the basis of the information
contained in such statement, the assessor shall
value such oil and gas leaseholds and lands for
assessment, as real property, at an amount
equal to eighty-seven and one-half percent of:
(a) The selling price of the oil or gas sold there
from during the preceding calendar year, after
excluding the selling price of all oil or gas
delivered to the United States government or
any agency thereof, the state of Colorado or
any agency thereof, or any political subdivision
of the state as royalty during the preceding
calendar year;
(b) The selling price of oil or gas sold in the
same field area for oil or gas transported from
the premises which is not sold during the
preceding calendar year, after excluding the
selling price of all oil or gas delivered to the
United States government or any agency
thereof, the state of Colorado or any agency
thereof, or any political subdivision of the state
as royalty during the preceding calendar year.
§ 39-7-102, C.R.S.
Conclusions
The county applied approved appraisal
procedures in the valuation of oil and gas.
Recommendations
None
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 17
C:� WII,DICSE
\a :I1�t 1., .,RATED
Audit Division
VACANT LAND
Subdivision Discounting
Subdivisions were reviewed in 2013 in Weld
County. The review showed that subdivisions
were discounted pursuant to the Colorado
Revised Statutes in Article 39-1-103 (14).
Discounting procedures were applied to all
subdivisions where less than 80 percent of all
sites were sold using the present worth
method. The market approach was applied
where 80 percent or more of the subdivision
sites were sold. An absorption period was
estimated for each subdivision that was
discounted. An appropriate discount rate was
developed using the summation method.
Subdivision land with structures was appraised
at full market value.
Conclusions
Weld County has implemented proper
procedures to adequately estimate absorption
periods, discount rates, and lotvalues for
qualifying subdivisions.
Recommendations
None
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 18
r
WILD
Audit Division
POSSESSORY INTEREST PROPERTIES
Possessory Interest
Possessory interest property discovery and
valuation is described in the Assessor's
Reference Library (ARL) Volume 3 section 7
in accordance with the requirements of
Chapter 39-1-103 (17)(a) (II) C.R.S.
Possessory Interest is defined by the Property
Tax Administrator's Publication ARL Volume
3, Chapter 7: A private property interest in
government -owned property or the right to the
occupancy and use of any benefit in
government -owned property that has been
granted under lease, permit, license,
concession, contract, or other agreement.
Weld County has been reviewed for their
procedures and adherence to guidelines when
assessing and valuing agricultural and
commercial possessory interest properties.
The county has also been queried as to their
confidence that the possessory interest
properties have been discovered and placed on
the tax rolls.
Conclusions
Weld County has implemented a discovery
process to place possessory interest properties
on the roll. They have also correctly and
consistently applied the correct procedures and
valuation methods in the valuation of
possessory interest properties.
Recommendations
None
1
1
1
i
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
201 3 Weld County
J Property Assessment Study — Page 19
1
r
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
,APPR.!SM I .p., kit li
WILDROSE
Audit Division
PERSONAL PROPERTY AUDIT
Weld County was studied for its procedural
compliance with the personal property
assessment outlined in the Assessor's Reference
Library (ARL) Volume 5, and in the State
Board of Equalization (SBOE) requirements for
the assessment of personal property. The
SBOE requires that counties use ARL Volume
5, including current discovery, classification,
documentation procedures, current economic
lives table, cost factor tables, depreciation
table, and level of value adjustment factor
table.
The personal property audit standards narrative
must be in place and current. A listing of
businesses that have been audited by the
assessor within the twelve-month period
reflected in the plan is given to the auditor.
The audited businesses must be in conformity
with those described in the plan.
Aggregate ratio will be determined solely from
the personal property accounts that have been
physically inspected. The minimum assessment
sample is one percent or ten schedules,
whichever is greater, and the maximum
assessment audit sample is 100 schedules.
For the counties having over 100,000
population, WRA selected a sample of all
personal property schedules to determine
whether the assessor is correctly applying the
provisions of law and manuals of the Property
Tax Administrator in arriving at the assessment
levels of such property. This sample was
selected from the personal property schedules
audited by the assessor. In no event was the
sample selected by the contractor less than 30
schedules. The counties to be included in this
study are Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Denver,
Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Larimer, Mesa,
Pueblo, and Weld. All other counties received
a procedural study.
Weld County is compliant with the guidelines
set forth in ARL Volume 5 regarding discovery
procedures, using the following methods to
discover personal property accounts in the
county:
• Public Record Documents
• MLS Listing and/or Sold Books
• Chamber of Commerce/Economic
Development Contacts
• Local Telephone Directories,
Newspapers or Other Local
Publications
• Personal Observation, Physical
Canvassing or Word of Mouth
• Questionnaires, Letters and/or Phone
Calls t.o Buyer, Seller and/or Realtor
The county uses the Division of Property
Taxation (DPT) recommended classification
and documentation procedures. The DPT's
recommended cost factor tables, depredation
tables and level of value adjustment factor
tables are also used.
Weld County submitted their personal
property written audit plan and was current for
the 2013 valuation period. The number and
listing of businesses audited was also submitted
and was in conformance with the written audit
plan. The following audit triggers were used
by the county to select accounts to be audited:
• Businesses in a selected area
• Accounts with obvious discrepancies
• New businesses filing for the first time
• Incomplete or inconsistent declarations
• Accounts with omitted property
• Same business type or use
• Businesses with no deletions or
additions for 2 or more years
201 3 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 20
Ilk .APPR.OSAI_ INCORPORATED
Audit Division
WILD ' • . E
• Non -filing Accounts - Best Information
Available
• Accounts close to the $7,000 actual
value exemption status
• Accounts protested with substantial
disagreement
Weld County's median ratio is 1.00. This is
in compliance with the State Board of
Equalization (SBOE) compliance requirements
which range from .90 to 1.10 with no COD
requirements.
Conclusions
Weld County has employed adequate
discovery, classification, documentation,
valuation, and auditing procedures for their
personal property assessment and is in
compliance with SBOE requirements.
Recommendations
None
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study - Page 21
1
1
1
t
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
WILD
A %tut
E
'IUTfn
Audit Division
WILDRoSE AUDITOR STAFF
Harry J. Fuller, Audit Project Manager
Suzanne Howard, Audit Administrative Manager
Steve Kane, Audit Statistician
Carl W. Ross, Agricultural /Natural Resource Analyst
J. Andrew Rodriguez, Field Analyst
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 22
0lkAPPRA[NAL I Sex )K i ' )3? %TEL)
WILDRCSE
Audit Division
APPENDICES
2013 Weld County Property Assessment Study — Page 23
WILD'O.E
A17. -\L h.cwernIAnn
Audit Division
STATISTICAL COMPLIANCE REPORT
FOR WELD COUNTY
2013
I. OVERVIEW
Weld County is an urban county located along Colorado's Front Range. The county has a total of
123,809 real property parcels, according to data submitted by the county assessor's office in 2013. The
following provides a breakdown of property classes for this county:
80,000 —
60.000 -
C
0j 40,000
20.000 -
0
Real P[QRertyClass Distribution
13,735
T
Vacant Land
73,509
Res Imp
Other
Comm/Ind Imp
typ•
The vacant land class of properties was dominated by residential land. Residential lots (coded 100 and
1112) accounted for 80.5% of all vacant land parcels.
For residential improved properties, single family properties accounted for 92.0% of all residential
properties.
Commercial and industrial properties represented a much smaller proportion of property classes in
comparison. Commercial/industrial properties accounted for 3.6% of all such properties in this
county.
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY
Page 24
II 1)10-1.
Audit Division
II. DATA FILES
The following sales analyses were based on the requirements of the 201 3 Colorado Property
Assessment Study. Information was provided by the Weld Assessor's Office in April 201 3. The data
included all 5 property record files as specified by the Auditor.
III. RESIDENTIAL SALES RESULTS
There were 5,608 qualified residential sales that occurred in the 18 month sale period prior to June 30,
2012. The sales ratio analysis results were as follows:
Case Processing Summary
is ount
Percent
ECONAREA.
240
4.3%
ci
573
10.2%
.=
1657
29.5%
3
1413
25.2%
4
329
5.9%
5
71
1.3%
6
1104
19.7%
7
26
.5%
8
27
.5%
9
168
3.0%
Overall
5608
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
5608
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT I TASP
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
.982
1.017
095
o
.978
1.011
.091
a.
.975
1.015
.090
.977
1.012
.076
4
.985
1.026
.124
`,
.971
1.010
.140
e,
.976
1.028
.155
.967
1.014
.153
.964
1.011
.127
9
.976
1.020
.107
Overal
.976
1.019
.103
Itire
OP -
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
r
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 25
SWILDRCSE
Arena.LWO.n*Aicn
Audit Division
The above ratio statistics were in compliance with the standards set forth by the Colorado State Board
of Equalization (SBOE) for the overall residential sales. The following graphs describe further the sales
ratio distribution for these properties:
Mean = 1 00
Std Dev = 0 147
N -5,6O8
800 -
600 -
400 -
200 -
i
000
0.50
1 00
salesratio
1 SO
Residential Sale Price by Sales Ratio
M
♦
4•
•
•
•
1
2.00
a
$1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000
TASP
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 26
VVILDI�E
IL I�••Ynry'.Ilh
Audit Division
The above graphs indicate that the distribution of the sale ratios was within state mandated limits.
Residential Market Trend Analysis
We next analyzed the residential dataset using the 18 -month sale period for any residual market
trending and broken down by economic area, as follows:
Coefficientsa
ECONAREA
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
Sig
B
Std. Error
Beta
t
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.988
.003
.015
.002
.126
64.562
1.953
.000
.052
0
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.981
.002
.009
.001
.066
107.511
1.580
.000
.115
2
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.974
.002
.006
.001
.096
176.945
3.910
.000
.000
3
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.967
.003
.005
.001
.127
201.918
4.800
.000
.000
4
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.969
.004
.019
.002
.123
51.713
2.233
.000
.026
5
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.938
.006
.040
.004
.167
23.659
1.404
.000
.165
6
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.959
.007
.011
.001
.173
83.939
5.823
.000
.000
7
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.984
-.002
.073
.008
-.041
13.538
-.203
.000
.841
8
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.907
.001
.054
.006
.044
16.889
.222
.000
.826
9
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.968
.002
.023
.002
.074
41.530
.957
.000
.340
a. Dependent Variable: salesratio
1P
fPI
ate
Pr
2013 Statistical Report: MID COUNTY Page 27
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
S
1
1
1
1
1
salesratio
2.00 —
1.50 —
1.00
0.50 —
0.00 —
41, WILD
istr Audit Division
•
I
.
Residential Sale Price Market Trend
. • . .
•
•
•
♦
♦
•
•
•
• •
•
•
♦
I
•
• ♦
I
I
•
• • $
♦
•
♦ •
S•
.
• ••
•
•
•
•
t
•
. •
i
I
Z
•
•
•
•
t
•
•
• • •
♦ ♦ •
5
10
SaIiP•riod
I I
15 20
There was no residual market trending present in the sale ratio data for any of the economic areas.
While four economic areas had statistically significant results, the magnitude of each trend was not
significant; we therefore concluded that the assessor has adequately addressed market trending in the
valuation of residential properties.
Sold/Unsold Analysis
In terms of the valuation consistency between sold and unsold residential properties, we compared the
median actual value per square foot for 2013 between each group. The data was analyzed both as a
whole and broken down by economic area, as follows:
Group
N
Median
Mean
Unsold
67,562
$101
s l O l
Sold
c,608
$110
sill
1
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 28
WILD • O.E
\.H1r 'r �i lv.re..r�tgu
Audit Division
ECONAREA
Group
N
Median
Mean
0
Unsold
5,131
S112.75
$113.59
So1c1
573
$115.51
$116.03
Unsold
18,087
S116.01
S117.55
Sold
1,657
$122.59
S124.87
Unsold
13,123
$113.80
$114.81
Sold
1,413
$118.23
$120.68
4
Unsold
5,600
$76.51
$77.16
Sold
329
$87.81
$88.64
5
Unsold
1,256
$63.72
$70.37
Sold
71
$79.34
$82.09
6
Unsold
17,223
$87.66
$85.52
Sold
1,104
593.79
$90.70
7
Unsold
747
$47.81
$60.5;
Sold
26
S57.84
$63.86
Unsold
609
$60.61
$65.94
Sold
27
$67.79
S7i.14
`)
Unsold
2,192
$105.16
$100.91
Sold
168
$116.29
$110.60
The above results indicate that sold and unsold residential properties were valued in a consistent
manner.
IV. COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL SALE RESULTS
There were 167 qualified residential sales that occurred in the 18 month sale period prior to June 30,
2012. The sales ratio analysis results were as follows:
Median
1.000
Price Related Differential
1.03 8
Coefficient of Dispersion
.082
The above table indicates that the Weld County commercial/industrial sale ratios were in compliance
with the SBOE standards. The following histogram and scatter plot describe the sales ratio distribution
further:
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 29
WILD' O.E
Audit Division
IIIIIIP ,rile ki. u. I.arMhlit‘iiU
50 —
50 —
40 —
0
C
W
J
W 30Is-
I-
0
A
U,
N
S
R
N
10—
I T
03 0 75
salesratio
1 _^c 1 5
Mean = 1 01
Sid Dev = 0 122
N=167
1.5 -
1.25 -
Commercial Sale Price by Sales Ratio
x
x
0.75
x
x
x
x
0.5 -
I I I I I I
$0 $2,500,000 S5,000,000 $7,500,000 $10,000,000 $12,500,000
TASP
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY
Page 30
r
lakAnt 11,1•1 I'multrokAttt.
WILDRCSE
Audit Division
Commercial/Industrial Market Trend Analysis
The 167 commercial/industrial sales were next analyzed, examining the sale ratios across the 18 month
sale period with the following results:
Coefficientsa
- Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
B
Std. Error
Beta
t
Sig.
-
1 (Constant)
1.019
.016
64.624
.000
SalePeriod
-.001
.002
-.033
-.426
.670
a. Dependent Variable: salesratio
1.5-
1.25 —
O
is 1
N
0.75 —
0.5-
Commercial Market Trend Analysis
+
+ + + +
+ + + + $ +
+
$
* tt + + + * * + +
as $+ i 4. + + + +
3.* "'
tt* ++$+++ ++
*+ +
+ + + + +
+
+
+
I
0
I I
5
10
SalePeriod
I I
15
0.
There was no residual market trending present in the commercial sale ratios. We concluded that the
assessor has adequately considered market trending adjustments as part of the commercial/industrial
valuation.
iffr
S
S
2013 Statistical Report: WIlD COUNTY Page 31
W WILD
Amuuu. INCORPORATED
Audit Division
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Sold/tInsold Analysis
We compared the median actual value per square foot for 2013 between sold and unsold groups to
determine if sold and unsold properties were valued consistently, as follows:
Group
No. Props
Median
Val/SF
Mean
Val/SF
Unsold
4,009
$60
$76
Sold
166
$65
$79
The above results indicated that sold and unsold commercial/industrial properties were valued
consistently.
V. VACANT LAND SALE RESULTS
There were 235 qualified residential sales that occurred in the 18 month sale period prior to June 30,
2012. The sales ratio analysis results were as follows:
Median
1.000
Price Related Differential
1.067
Coefficient of Dispersion
.160
The above ratio statistics were in compliance overall with the standards set forth by the Colorado State
Board of Equalization (SBOE) for the overall vacant land sales. The following graphs describe further
the sales ratio distribution for all of these properties:
60 -
T
OS 1 1.5 2 :5
SalesRatio
Mean = 1 OS
Std Dev = 0 273
N•235
1
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 32
0
OC
0
•
Ti
U)
Ilk.V11111-\I hnwNw,nU
WILDROSE
Audit Division
2-
1.5-
1
•
0.5-
x
x Vacant Land Sale Price by Sales Ratio
x
A
ix
kik
x
x
a
M
x
I
$0 $500,000 11,000,000 51,500,000 52,000,000 52,500,000 53,000,000
VTASP
The above histogram indicates that the distribution of the vacant land sale ratios was within state
mandated limits. No sales were trimmed.
Vacant Land Market Trend Analysis
J
We next analyzed the 235 vacant land dataset using the 18 -month sale period, with the following
results:
Coe11fictef tsa
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
B
Std. Error
Beta
1 (Constant)
VSalePeriod
1.091
-.007
.027
.003
-.127
40.716
-1.957
.000
.052
a. Dependent Variable: SalesRatio
S
S.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2013 Statistical Report: WILD COUNTY Page 33
1
*WILD'O•E
Ar►..�w. L..o.,oR..rri.
Audit Division
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
SalesRatio
Vacant Larid Sales Market Trend Analysis
+
15-
1
05-
�+ +
*.t.*+t. "+
*
4
+ + +
T
0
5
i
10
VSalsPoriod
1 I
1s 20
The above analysis indicated that no significant market trending was present in the vacant land sale data.
We concluded that the assessor has adequately dealt with market trending for vacant land properties.
Sold/Unsold Analysis
In terms of the valuation consistency between sold and unsold vacant land properties, we compared the
median change in value for 2010 and 2013 between each group. We stratified the vacant land
properties by subdivision and found overall consistency. The following results present the overall
comparison results:
Subdivno
Group
No.
Median
Mean
TOTAL
Unsold
11,634
0.9966
1.0681
Sold
214
0.7692
0.8586
Overall, we concluded that the county assessor valued sold and unsold vacant properties consistently.
V. AGRICULTURAL IMPROVEMENTS ANALYSIS
The final statistical verification concerned the assigned actual values for agricultural residential
improvements. We compared the 2013 median improved value per square foot for this group and
compared it to the 2013 median improved value per square foot for residential single family
improvements in Weld County.
1
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 34
«'II,DRCSE
Audit Division
The following indicates that both groups were valued in essentially the same manner:
Descriptive*
ABSTRIMP
Statistic
Std Error
Imp
SFR
Mean
$275 40
$18 039
VaISF
95% Confidence Interval for
Lower Bound
$240 04
Mean
Upper Bound
$310 75
5% Tnmmed Mean
S82 56
Median
$84 03
Vanance
2, 1
Std Deviation
$4.691
721
Minimum
SO
Maximum
$303.990
Range
$303,990
Interguartile Range
$36
Skewness
28 367
009
Kurtosis
951 513
019
AG
Mean
S699 49
$235 027
RES
95% Confidence Interval for
Lower Bound
$238 38
Mean
Upper Bound
$1,160 60
5% Trimmed Mean
$8 44
Median
$79 11
Variance
6,6 7
Std Deviation
$8,138185
Minimum
$0
Maximum
$181.594
Range
$181.594
Interquartile Range
$51
Skewness
15 642
071
Kurtosis
277 722
141
VI. CONCLUSIONS
Based on this 2013 audit statistical analysis, residential, commercial /industrial and vacant land
properties were found to be in compliance with state guidelines.
1
i
1
S
S
0'
1
i
1
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 35
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
STATISTICAL ABSTRACT
Residential
I
Coefficient of
Variation
Mean
Centered
I-
1w
—
0
52
m tt
Zr. m
caO)
O ,3
U
M
O
r
Price Related
Differential
to
O
95% Confidence Interval for
Weighted Mean
Upper Bound
N
a
a)
Lower Bound
h
I-
co
Weighted
Mean
a
a,
o
95% Confidence Interval for Median
•
A a
2s
a
o
C
Upper Bound
0
1-
a
Lower Bound
M
r
a
Median
to
i...
a
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Upper Bound
0
O
O
r
Lower Bound
a
a
a
o
m
I
to
0
ar
a
C_
E
a
a
a
a
V
m
Ca -
0
u
g
m
v
u
m
0
to
E
m
a
a
m
5
c
A
6
1*
A
A
a
a
a
E
m
a
Ag
of
a
A
ao
a
O
O
a
ai
El,
oa
m
Ea
as
fis
c
o
cg
ma
n
L V
Ca
o€ u
a
z
E
C
U
Coefficient of
Variation
12
c E
to to
.7
` S m
U
Ot
o
IN
Coefficient of
Dispersion
cm
a
O
Price Related
Differential
as
M
0
r
95% Confidence Interval for
Weighted Mean
Upper Bound
In
a)
a
Lower Bound
CO
In
a
a
Me
47) I
m
a
95% Confidence Interval for Median
O
Ili fl
co
a
Upper Bound
0
0
Lower Bound
a
a
a
Median
O
O
O
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Upper Bound
H
M
O
r
Lower Bound
In
a.
a.
c
,r
Z
-
o
a
C_
E
a
A
V
a
Y
C
0
0
O
a
a
C
m
c
0
v
0
0
8
V
m
m
a
a
m
a
c
a
fi
0
a
0
a
s
a
a
a
A
tc
00
n
a
a
VT
A
o«
m O
s
fi
36
o
go
Eva
L
re -
9v
L
Z
a
Vacant Land
5
4
I
.a
Coefficient of
Variation
Mean
C entered
S
co
ca
Coefficient of
Dispersion
0
0
r
Price Related
Differential
n
O
O
r
95% Confidence Interval for
Weighted Mean
Upper Bound
0
O
r
Lower Bound
a)
a)
Weighted
Mean
ses
a.
95% Confidence Interval for Median
Actual
Coverage
a
Upper Bound
0
O
0
r
Lower Bound
0
O
0
C
a
a
1E
O
O
O
r
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Upper Bound
O
a
q
.-
V
C
Z
0
CO
I
0
1.-
O
r
C
a
Z
;+
o
r
a
C
E
J
a
a
a
b
V
3
u
7
a
C
O
u
A
a
a
2
m
m
u
C
m
a
c
0
u
a
L_
O
C
m
u
m
a
a
m
5
C
A
fi
a
A
m
co
m
a
E
m
a
a
Ts
a
oe
g.
a
a
as
So
7v
a
m
v
00
va
Ea
fi v
OE
8�
c
ao
cg
a
caco _
C10
o€
u0
a
Fa
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY
1
0
Audit Division
WILDROSE
:\I'PN 1. \I I'..,
Residential Median Ratio Stratification
Sale Price
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
SPRec LT $25K
6
1%
$25K to $50K
83
1.5%
$50K to $100K
637
11.4%
$100K to $150K
1259
22.5%
$150K to $200K
1395
24.9%
$200K to $300K
1533
27.3%
$300K to $500K
618
11.0%
$500K to $750K
65
1.2%
$750K to $1,000K
7
1%
Over $1,000K
5
.1%
Overall
5608
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
5608
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT TASP
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Centered
LT $25K
1.175
.958
.269
34.8%
$25K to $50K
1.217
1.000
.187
22.7%
$50K to $100K
1.065
1.007
.162
20.9%
$100K to $150K
.980
1.001
.116
15.4%
$150Kto $200K
.982
1.000
.082
11.5%
$200K to $300K
.966
1.001
.072
9.9%
$300K to $500K
.948
1.001
.080
11.3%
$500K to $750K
.936
1.001
.096
14.0%
$750K to $1,000K
.820
.997
.088
11.6%
Over $1,000K
.911
.975
.086
12.3%
Overall
.976
1.019
.103
15.2%
IT
1
1
201 3 Weld County Property Assessment Study - Page 37
1
1
f
1
1
1
1
S
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Subclass
WILDROSE
E
Audit Division
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
ABSTRIMP 1212
5272
94.0%
1214
2
.0%
1214
1
.0%
1215
64
1.1%
1220
23
.4%
1225
1
0%
1230
240
4.3%
1880
1
.0%
1979
1
0%
2212
1
.0%
9250
2
.0%
Overall
5608
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
5608
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT I TASP
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Centered
1212
.976
1.018
103
15.1%
1214
.967
.998
.060
8.4%
1214
.763
1.000
.000
,
1215
.960
1.011
124
17.0%
1 220
1.007
1.044
.129
23.0%
1225
1.013
1.000
.000
%
1230
.982
1.017
.095
13.6%
1880
1.900
1.000
000
%
1979
.622
1.000
.000
%
2212
.878
1.000
.000
%
9250
1.038
1.006
.027
3.8%
Overall
.976
1.019
.103
15.2%
1
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 3S
a
WILDIeE
\N+,,.„ Pnwnw�n ii
Audit Division
F
Age
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
AgeRec Over 100
133
2.4%
75 to 100
133
2.4%
50 to 75
329
5.9%
25 to 50
871
15.5%
5 to 25
2902
51.7%
5 or Newer
1240
22.1 %
Overall
5608
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
5608
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT I TASP
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Centered
Over 100
.970
1.056
213
28.8%
75 to 100
.966
1.036
.213
29.3%
50 to 75
.974
1.036
.167
22.2%
25 to 50
.977
1.026
146
20.5%
5 to 25
.981
1.016
.092
12.5%
5 or Newer
.971
1.005
.058
8.4%
Overall
.976
1.019
.103
15.2%
r
r
2013 Statistical It (tort: «V1 1.1) (1 MINTY
Page 39
WILDR SE
Audit Division
Improved Area
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
ImpSFRec LE 500 sf
2
.0%
500 to 1,000 sf
498
8.9%
1,000 to 1,500 sf
1955
34.9%
1,500 to 2,000 sf
1646
29.4%
2,000 to 3,000 sf
1160
20.7%
3,000 sf or Higher
347
6.2%
Overall
5608
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
5608
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Centered
LE 500 sf
1.175
.878
.175
24.7%
500 to 1,000 sf
.957
1.047
.179
23.7%
1,000 to 1,500 sf
.977
1.018
.105
15.4%
1,500 to 2,000 sf
.982
1.014
.085
12.6%
2,000 to 3,000 sf
.972
1.013
.088
12.4%
3,000 sf or Higher
.969
1.023
.121
18.9%
Overall
.976
1.019
.103
15.2%
1
2013 Statistical Report: Will) COUNTY Page 40
"'tr.Audit Division
Improvement Quality
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
QUALITY 1
136
2.4%
2
1505
26.8%
3549
63.3%
4
374
6.7%
34
.6%
6
10
.2%
Overall
5608
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
5608
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT I TASP
c,r iI.,1-i
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Median
Centered
1
.965
1.055
.212
29.4%
.973
1.030
.148
20.5%
.
.978
1.013
.082
11.7%
4
.972
1.017
.091
13.0%
5
.969
1.008
.072
10.9%
6
1.005
1.032
.135
17.0%
Overall
.976
1.019
.103
15.2%
L
L
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 41
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
*WILDROSE
Audit Division
Improvement Condition
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
CONDITION 1
16
.3%
2
67
1.2%
3
5514
98.3%
4
11
.2%
Overall
5608
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
5608
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT I TASP
Group
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Median
Centered
1
.977
.961
.180
32.6%
2
1.058
1.052
.179
23.8%
3
.976
1.018
.102
14.9%
4
.978
1.041
.156
21.9%
Overall
.976
1.019
.103
15.2%
1
2013 Statistical Report: %Y11.1) COUNTY Page 42
WILDRCSE
101Dr �rr4 H•�r �\�..Y i..u. r�l�
Audit Division
Commercial Median Ratio Stratification
Sale Price
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
SPRec LT $25K
3
1.8%
$25K to $50K
3
1.8%
$50K to $100K
45
26.9%
$100K to $150K
23
13.8%
$150K to $200K
10
6.0%
$200K to $300K
17
10.2%
$300K to $500K
12
7.2%
$500K to $750K
16
9.6%
$750K to $1,000K
13
7.8%
Over $1,000K
25
15.0%
Overall
167
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
167
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT f TASP
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Centered
LT $25K
1.159
1.001
.076
11.6%
$25K to $50K
1.357
.978
.122
21.3%
$50K to $100K
1.024
1.000
.072
9.5%
$100K to $150K
1.013
.992
.093
13.1%
$150K to $200K
1.003
1.002
.132
21.9%
$200K to $300K
.995
1.001
.068
9.2%
$300K to $500K
1.004
.999
.044
6.9%
$500K to $750k
.995
1.004
.056
8.7%
$750K to $1,000K
.985
1.000
.079
12.2%
Over $1,000K
959
.977
.058
10.4%
Overall
1.000
1.038
.082
12.2%
Pwr
r
a
I
1
1
1
1
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 43
1
WILED
OPP A�y+.u. U. IN.. uv 11.11:E
D
Audit Division
Subclass
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
ABSTRIMP 1212
1
.6%
2108
1
.6%
2122
1
6%
2212
30
18.0%
2215
1
.6%
2220
12
7.2%
2224
2
1.2%
2225
2
1.2%
2228
3
1.8%
2229
1
6%
2230
33
19.8%
2231
1
.6%
2233
2
1.2%
2235
10
6.0%
2245
52
31.1 %
2723
1
.6%
2725
1
.6%
3212
2
1.2%
3215
10
6.0%
9259
1
.6%
Overall
167
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
167
2013 Statistical Report: Vail) COUNTY
Page 44
*WILDRC�E
��'1'Y \I• \I Iii \NM.Y lfl4
Audit Division
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT I TASP
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Centered
1 2 12
1.034
1 000
.000
%
2108
1.120
1.000
.000
.%
2122
.943
1.000
000
%
2212
1.005
1.117
.107
16.6%
2215
1.006
1.000
000
.%
2220
1.012
1 043
067
10.5%
2224
.968
.995
.017
2.4%
2225
.986
1.004
.029
4.1%
2228
.991
1.027
.039
6.7%
2229
.923
1.000
.000
2230
.987
1.040
.070
11 1%
2231
.968
1.000
.0001
2233
.993
1.000
.005
.8%
2235
.996
.991
.038
5.7%
2245
1.034
1.006
.097
13.3%
2723
1.176
1.000
.000
%
2725
.938
1.000
000
%
3212
.951
.953
.052
7.3%
3215
.972
.987
.053
8,2%
9259
1.008
1.000
.000
Overall
1.000
1.038
.082
12 2%
1
p
2013 Statistical Report: WELL) COUNTY Page 45
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Age
�%j WILD • .'E
P
Audit Division
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
AgeRec Over 100
10
6.0%
75 to 100
9
5.4%
50 to 75
13
7.8%
25 to 50
29
17.4%
5 to 25
82
49.1%
5 or Newer
24
14 4%
Overall
167
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
167
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT ' TASP
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Centered
Over 100
1.009
1.000
038
5.5%
75 to 100
1 024
1.023
.095
14.7%
50 to 75
.964
1.041
.044
6.2%
25 to 50
1.000
1.030
.081
12.0%
5 to 25
1.004
1.048
.083
13.0%
5 or Newer
.978
992
.095
12.7%
Overall
1 000
1 038
.082
12.2%
1
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 46
r
WILD I : L'
Audit Division
Improved Area
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
ImpSFRec LE 500 sf
3
1.8%
500 to 1,000 sf
19
11.4%
1,000 to 1,500 sf
23
13.8%
1,500 to 2,000 sf
17
10.2%
2,000 to 3,000 sf
19
11.4%
3,000 sf or Higher
86
51.5%
Overall
167
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
167
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Centered
LE 500 sf
1.003
1.052
.106
19.1%
500 to 1,000 sf
1.037
1.026
.100
14.1%
1,000 to 1,500 sf
1.012
.993
.083
11.7%
1,500 to 2,000 sf
1.011
1.014
.078
11.5%
2,000 to 3,000 sf
.987
1.007
.079
14.0%
3,000 sf or Higher
.991
1.034
.075
11.9%
Overall
1.000
1.038
.082
12.2%
PP -
f
S
L
V
6
F
2013 Statistical Report: WITI) COUNTY Page .;
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
1
U
flit\VILI LOSE
Audit Division
Improvement Quality
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
QUALITY 1
6
3.6%
2
15
9.0%
3
121
72.9%
4
24
14.5%
Overall
166
100.0%
Excluded
1
Total
167
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Group
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Median
Centered
1
.977 9
1.021
.045
6.6%
2
1.017
1.048
.083
12.3%
3
1.000
1.028
.080
11.6%
4
1.004
1.064
.095
16.0%
Overall
1.000
1.038
.082
12.3%
U
2013 Statistical Report: WI I.1) COI IN I } Page .48
•
WILDICSE
Ar•rw u'.0 h,".", n n
Audit Division
rr-
Improvement Condition
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
CONDITION 2
5
3 0%
3
160
95.8%
4
2
12%
Overall
167
100 0%
Excluded
0
Total
167
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT I TASP
Group
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Median
Centered
2
1.001
1.124
.098
18.6%
3
1.000
1.036
.082
12.2%
4
.988
1.008
.024
3.4%
Overall
1.000
1 038
082
12 2%
F
L
r
iS
S
1
L
1
p
`r
2013 Statistical Report: WI:I D COUNTY Page 49
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
IPt
S
a
1
lipWII.tia
Audit Division
Vacant Land Median Ratio Stratification
Sale Price
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
SPRec LT $25K
44
18.7%
$25K to $50K
86
36.6%
$50K to $100K
51
21.7%
$100K to $150K
22
9.4%
$150K to $200K
10
4.3%
$200K to $300K
6
2.6%
$300K to $500K
8
3.4%
$500K to $750K
4
1.7%
$750K to $1,000K
1
.4%
Over $1,000K
3
1.3%
Overall
235
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
235
Ratio Statistics for CURRLND (WASP
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Centered
LT $25K
1.020
1.023
.242
40.5%
$25K to $50K
1.000
1.006
.163
27.0%
$50K to $100K
1.000
1.010
.142
25.2%
$100K to $150K
.947
.992
.119
15.7%
$150K to $200K
.997
1.002
.122
17.2%
$200Kto $300K
.919
1.001
.093
14.5%
$300Kto $500K
.994
1.001
.055
9.1%
$500K to $750K
.989
.999
.016
2.2%
$750K to $1 ,000K
1.000
1.000
.000
.%
Over $1,000K
.967
1.001
.012
2.4%
Overall
1.000
1.067
.160
27.8%
1
2013 Statistical Report: W11.1) COUNTY Page SO
Subclass
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
ABSTRLND 100
98
41.7%
200
14
6.0%
300
5
2.1%
400
5
2.1%
520
1
.4%
600
1
4%
1112
99
42.1%
2112
6
2.6%
2120
1
.4%
2130
3
1.3%
2135
1
.4%
3115
1
.4%
Overall
235
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
235
Ratio Statistics for CURRLND / WASP
{ ;r=.i,l;
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient of
Variation
Median
Centered
100
1.017
1.093
.205
34.2%
200
.999
.979
.094
13.8%
300
.944
.964
.132
20.4%
400
1.000
1.026
.174
28.5%
520
1.377
1.000
.000
%
600
1.000
1.000
.000
.%
1112
.987
1.041
.135
22.9%
2112
1.000
1.012
.021
4.1%
2120
.786
1.000
.000
.%
2130
.997
1.014
.011
2 2%%-
2135
.967
1.000
.000
.%
3115
.929
1.000
.000
.%
Overall
1.000
1.067
.160
27.8%
2013 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 51
Hello