HomeMy WebLinkAbout200925001
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
2009
WELD COUNTY
PROPERTY ASSESSMENT
STUDY
WILDIcSE
`I'IX \I- \I I�� �NII�N 11111
Audit Division
/{Gt-Act --)1/44
-)1/44l04-
Ci'1 —>j or(
cc : �s
2009-2500
WILDI SE
I.,i,
Audit Division
September 15, 2009
Mr. Mike Maucr
Director of Research
Colorado Legislative Council
Room 029, State Capitol Building
Denver, Colorado 80203
RE: Final Report for the 2009 Colorado Property Assessment Study
Dear Mr. Mauer:
Wildrosc Appraisal Inc. -Audit Division is pleased to submit the Final Reports for the 2009 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, Lorimer, 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.
Harry J. Fuller
Project Manager
Wildrose Appraisal Inc. Audit Division
w
t
1
1
WILDROSE
V91,1"‘I ,..,<, .1,
Audit Division
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 3
Regional/Historical Sketch of Weld County 4
Ratio Analysis 6
Random Deed Analysis 7
Time Trending Verification 8
Sold/Unsold Analysis 9
Agricultural Land Study 11
Agricultural Land 11
Agricultural Outbuildings 13
Sales Verification 14
Economic Area Review and Evaluation 1 5
Natural Resources 16
Earth and Stone Products 16
Producing Oil and Gas Procedures 16
Vacant Land 17
Possessory Interest Properties 18
Personal Property Audit 19
Wildrose Auditor Staff 21
Appendices 22
'00`3 \Alt Id Count% Prop ttv Ssso,smunt Stunk Pain 7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
w
WILDICSE
%EPEE \I 1,1 IFFIrOV‘il
Audit Division
INTRODUCTION
I
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.
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
discounting procedures. Valuation
methodology for vacant land, improved
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.
Statistical analysis is performed on vacant land,
residential properties, commercial industrial
properties, agricultural land, and personal
property. The statistical study results arc
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 2009 and is pleased to
report its findings for Weld County in the
following report.
1
2009 Weld Count. Proyertc.A: scsssmcnt Stud%
1
WILDROSE
.VP111I+11OKIa1INI11,
Audit Division
REGIONAL/ HISTORICAL SKETCH OF
WELD COUNTY
Regional I nfor Ina tion
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,
1)cnvcr, Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Larimer,
Pueblo, and Weld counties.
1
2009 WL•ld County Property A;scssmrnt Study Paw 4
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
WILDROSE
Audit Division
Historical Information
Weld County has a population of
approximately 236,857 people with 45.3
people per square mile, according to the U.S.
Census Bureau's 2006 estimated population
data.
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 I I. 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 who 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 orchestras 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. erg)
2111)) Weld County Property A,,sessnx'nt Study Pam �
1
I
1
1
1
1
WILDROSE
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 2007 and June 2008.
Counties with less than 30 sales typically
extended the sale period hack up to 5 years
prior to June 30, 2008 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
Commercial/Industrial
Condominium
Single Family
Vacant I.and
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
I
2009 Weld C
ounty Proper -us Assessment Studv Pale 6
1
1
1
1
1
WILDROSE
%PIS:\Pa 'KI 5K 5111'
Audit Division
The results for Weld County arc:
Property Class
Commercial /Industrial
Condominium
Single Family
Vacant Land
Weld County Ratio Grid
Number ol
Qualified
Sales
204
N/A
7,023
310
Unweighted
Median
Ratio
0.979
N/A
0.979
0.977
Price Coefficient
Related
Differential
1.025
N/A
1.021
1.017
ol
Dispersion
7.8
N/A
10.7
12.7
Time Trend
Analysis
Compliant
N/A
Compliant
Compliant
Ratio Statistics for cur riot • taSp
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
.00
979
1 014
.097
2.00
.901
1 016
.092
3.00
975
1.012
083
4 00
980
1.036
.132
5 00
978
1.020
149
6 00
.983
1.033
.148
7 00
977
1.020
132
8.00
.987
1.030
.140
9 00
.974
1.017
.110
Overall
.979
1.021
.107
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
Random Deed Analysis
An additional analysis was performed as part of
the Ratio Analysis. Ten randomly selected
deeds with documentary fees were obtained
from the Clerk and Recorder. These deeds
were for sales that occurred from January 1,
2007 through June 30, 2008. These sales
were then checked for inclusion on the
Assessor's qualified or unqualified database.
Conclusions
After comparing the list of randomly selected
deeds with the Assessor's database, Weld
County has accurately transferred sales data
from the recorded deeds to the qualified or
unqualified database.
Recommendations
None
2009 Weld County Property Assessment Study Pate 7
I
t
1
1
WILDROSE
9,11.1_„ h,,,...,�,,,�,
Audit Division
TIME TRENDING VERIFICATION
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 he 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
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
I
2009 Weld County Property a,ssH,unent Study Page S
t
1
1
WILDROSE
Audit Division
SOLD / UNSO
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 2008 and 2009 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
LD ANALYSIS
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 he 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 he
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.
2009 Weld County Propert,
scasnicnt Stn{ly Pa,rc 9
1
1
1
WILDROSE
'I,..�_„ �.,,..,„x.n,.
Audit Division
Sold/Unsold Results
Property Class
Commercial/Industrial
Condominium
Single Family
Vacant Land
Results
Compliant
N/A
Compliant
Compliant
Conclusions
After applying the above described
methodologies, it is concluded that Weld
County is reasonably treating its sold and
unsold properties in the same manner.
Recommendations
None
2009 Weld Counlc Prop -rt Assessment Sluch Pane 10
1
1
1
1
I
1
WILDROSE
Audit Division
AGRICULTURAL LAND STUDY
Acres By Subclass
40.000,000
35 000,000
30,000.000
25000 000
20,000,000
15,000,000
10000.000
5.000,000
0
'Mug 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 arc 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 S.)
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. County yields compared
favorably to those published by Colorado
Agricultural Statistics. 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:
2009 Well LIMO!. Propr'it: Asst,,nu'ut Stuck Pay I I
op
1
1
I
WILDROSE
I.
Audit Division
Weld County Agricultural Land Ratio Grid
Number County County WRA
Abstract Of Value Assessed Total
Code Land Class Acres Pcr Acre Total Value Value Ratio
4107 Sprinkler 96,558 89.85 8,675,848 8,834,098 0.98
4117 Flood 251,735 137.65 34,650,507 34,550,108 1.00
4127 Div Farm 562,036 10.47 5,882,016 6,322,951 0.93
4137 Meadow llav 15,193 42.38 643,829 643,829 1.00
4147 Grazing 964,769 5.03 4,856,811 4,856,811 1.00
4167 Waste 80,948 1.62 130,737 130,737 1.00
Total/Avg 1,971,239 27.82 54,839,749 55,338,535 0.99
Recommendations
None
7009 \ticld Countv Property Vorouncnt study Pact• 17
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
WILDROSE
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
1
?0U9 Wrld County Proper tt Ascs,mcnt >Iuck page
1
1
1
1
1
I
WILDROSE
Audit Division
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 reflect 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 393-
102, 39-3-103, and 39-3-119 to 39-3-122 shall
not be included in any such sample.
(h) 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 reflect the selling price of the real
property only or which have been adjusted on an
individual basis to reflect 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
procedures and practices for
the county's
verifying sales
WRA reviewed the sales verification
procedures in 2009 for Weld County. This
study was conducted by checking selected sales
from the master sales list for the Jan 1, 2007 -
June 30, 2008 valuation period. Specifically
WRA selected 45 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 documentation.
Conclusions
Weld County appears to he doing a good job of
verifying their sales. There are no
recommendations.
Recommendations
None
)009 Weld County Propert' As.cstncnt 'tu(Iv
1
t
1
I
1
t
1
WILDROSE
Audit Division
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
tow) Weld County Prop.:Hy A,ssr"ment Studv Paac I;
oti
I
t
WILDRC SE
Audit Division
NATURAL RESOURCES
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
Procedures
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.
Actual value determined - when.
(2) The valuation for assessment of leaseholds
and lands producing oil or gas shall he
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
2009 \Veld County Property t Asscs,.m ni Si dy I'd` 16
1
1
1
1
1
WILDROSE
Audit Division
VACANT LAND
Subdivision Discounting
Subdivisions were reviewed in 2009 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 lot values for
qualifying subdivisions.
Recommendations
None
2009 Weld Con'
I 'it putitudy
1
1
WILDROSE
Audit Division
POSSESSORY INTERES
Posscssory 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 39-1-
103 (17)(a) (II) C.R.S. Possessory Interest is
defined by the Property Tax Administrator's
Publication ARL Volume 3, Section 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
T PROPERTIES
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
)009 Wcld Count Propcib Assn ssmcnt Stud: Page 18
1
1
I
t
1
WILDROSE
Audit Division
PERSONAL PROPE
Weld County was studied for its procedural
compliance with the personal property
assessment outlined in the Assessor's Reference
Library (ARL) Volume S, and in the State
Board of Equalization (S13OE) 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 he 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 he 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, EI Paso, Jefferson, Lorimer, Mesa,
Pueblo, and Weld. All other counties received
a procedural study.
RTY AUDIT
Weld County is compliant with the guidelines
set forth in ARL Volume S 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 to 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, depreciation
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 2009 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
• Accounts with greater than 10%
change
• Incomplete or inconsistent declarations
• Accounts with omitted property
• Same business type or use
21109 Weld Count. Propcm Avu s:;mc nt Stttdc P:e?c
1
1
1
1
1
w
WILDROSE
Audit Division
• Businesses with no deletions or
additions for 2 or more years
• Non -filing Accounts - Best Information
Available
• Accounts close to the 54,000 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
statistical compliance with SBOE requirements.
Recommendations
None
?009 Weld County Prop(r t' nt Study
w
1
1
t
t
1
I
1
1
1
WILDROSE
Audit Division
WILDROSE AUDITOR STAFF
Harry J. Fuller, Audit Project Manager
Suzanne Howard, Audit Administrative Manager
Steve Kane, Audit Statistician/Field Analyst
Carl W. Ross, Agricultural/Natural Resource Analyst
Andy Rodriguez, Field Analyst
2009 Weld County Proju t' nt Stud% Pyr ? I
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
its
WILDROSE
Audit Division
APPENDICES
20(N VVeld CoLintV Prnpcity A,s:< stimcnt Study Pu u 22
1
I
t
1
1
1
WIL?RaiE
Audit Division
STATISTICAL COMPLIANCE REPORT
FOR WELD COUNTY
2009
L OVERVIEW
Weld County is an urban county located along Colorado's Front Range. The county has a total of
122,027 real property parcels, according to data submitted by the county assessor's office in 2009. The
following provides a breakdown of property classes for this county:
80,000-
60,000—
c
U 40,000-
20,000-
0
Real Property Class Distribution
170,421
17,675
I 14,3641
(9,567
I I I I
Vacant Land Res Imp Comm/Ind Imp Other
The vacant land class of properties was dominated by residential land. Residential lots (coded 100 and
11 12) accounted for 86% of all vacant land parcels.
For residential improved properties, single family properties accounted for 92% of all residential
properties.
Commercial and industrial properties represented a much smaller proportion of property classes in
comparison. Commercial/industrial properties accounted for 4% of all such properties in this county.
2009 Statistical Report: W 1:LU COLT NIY Page 23
1
1
I
1
\i'1LDROSIE
Audit Division
II. DATA FILES
The following sales analyses were based on the requirements of the 2009 Colorado Property
Assessment Study. Information was provided by the Weld Assessor's Office on June 18, 2009. The
data included all S property record files as specified by the Auditor.
III. RESIDENTIAL SALES RESULTS
The following steps were taken to analyze the residential sales:
1. All sales
2. Qualified sales
3. Improved sales
4. Select residential sales only
The sales ratio analysis results were as follows:
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
econarea .00
680
10.3%
2.00
1866
28.1%
3.00
1854
28.0%
4.00
561
8.5%
5.00
80
1.2%
6.00
1355
20.4%
7.00
32
.5%
8.00
27
.4%
9.00
178
2.7%
Overall
6633
100.0%
Excluded
390
Total
7023
12,072
7,745
7,326
7,023
20(19 Statistical Report: WELD COL1N lY
Page 24
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
WILUROSE
Audit Division
Ratio Statistics for currtot / tasp
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
.00
.979
1.014
.097
2.00
.981
1.016
.092
3.00
.975
1.012
.083
4.00
.980
1.036
.132
5.00
.978
1.020
.149
6.00
.983
1.033
.148
7.00
.977
1.020
.132
8.00
.987
1.030
.140
9.00
.974
1.017
.110
Overall
.979
1.021
.107
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 =0.9924
Std. Dev. =0.14881
N =7,023
2 O0
salesratio
2009 Statistical Report: Will) COUNTY Page 25
WILINQ:
Audit Division
Residential Sale Price by Sales Ratio
3.00
° 2.00
1.00
0.00
•
•
•
•
•
• • •
• •
••
•
I I
$0
$1,000,000
I I
$2,000,000 $3,000,000
tap
I I
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
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 hrokeo down by economic area, as follows:
2009 Statistical Report
PLD COUNTY Page 26
S
1
1
1
NI/11,1)1O6E
Audit Division
Coefficients'
econarea
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
B
Std. Error
Beta
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
1.007
-.003
.011
.001
-.158
92.747
-3.155
.000
.002
.00
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
1.007
-.002
.009
.001
-.074
106.715
-1.936
.000
.053
2.00
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
1.007
-.002
.006
.001
-.078
181.021
-3.388
.000
.001
3.00
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.983
.000
.005
.000
-.017
199.104
-.743
.000
.458
4.00
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
1.034
-.004
.017
.002
-.090
61.213
-2.133
.000
.033
5.00
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
1.047
-.008
.041
.004
-.207
25.421
-1.873
.000
.065
6.00
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
1.024
-.001
.011
.001
-.027
91.867
-.998
.000
.318
7.00
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
1.018
-.001
.076
.007
-.029
13.426
-.159
.000
.875
8.00
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
.878
.012
.107
.010
.223
8.233
1.145
.000
.263
9.00
1
(Constant)
SalePeriod
1.022
-.004
.022
.002
-.126
47.050
-1.683
.000
.094
a. Dependent Variable: salesratio
There was no residual market trending present in the sale ratio data for any of the economic areas.
While three 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 2009 between each group. The data was analyzed both as a
whole and broken down by economic area, as follows:
Group
N
Median
Mean
Unsold
62,788
$108
$109
Sold
7,006
$113
$118
1
2009 Statistical Report: WELT) COUNTY
Page 27
lipfryVlI1)ROSE
Audit Division
ECONAREA
Group
N
Median
Mean
0
Unsold
4,638
$114
5116
Sold
680
$110
$113
2
Unsold
16,950
$124
$127
Sold
1,866
$130
$135
3
Unsold
11,439
5115
5121
Sold
1,853
S118
S125
4
Unsold
5,086
$86
$90
Sold
561
$94
$95
S
Unsold
1,191
$87
$93
Sold
80
$88
$94
6
Unsold
16,850
595
S93
Sold
1,352
S99
$96
7
Unsold
648
$64
$72
Sold
31
$71
$69
8
Unsold
568
$77
$79
Sold
27
$92
587
9
Unsold
2,118
5116
5113
Sold
177
$124
$121
The abo re results indicate that sold and unsold residential properties were valued in a consistent
manner.
IV. COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL SALE RESULTS
1
1
I. All sales
2. Qualified sales
3. Improved sales
4. Select commercial/industrial sales only
The sales ratio analysis results were as follows:
Median
0.979
Price Related Differential
1.025
Coefficient of Dispersion
.078
12,072
7,745
7,326
204
The above table ind cates that the Weld County commercial/indus rial sale ratios were in compliance
with the SBOE standards. The following histogram and scatter plot describe the sales ratio distribution
further:
2009 Statistic al Report: WILD COUNTY
Page 28
se
1
1
1
1
1
ILy1 3s i
Audit Division
salesratio
Mean =0.9744
Sid Dev. =0.14377
N =204
2009 Statistical Report: WEI. I) COUNTY Page 29
1
1
t
1
1
1
1
0
WILDROSE
Audit Division
2-
1.5-
0
In
in
To
N t
0.5—
I 1
$0
Commercial Sale Price by Sales Ratio
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
tap
Commercial/ Industrial Market Trend Analysis
$6,000,000
I i
$8,000,000
The assessor did apply market trend adjustments to the commercial/industrial dataset. The 204 sales
were analyzed, examining the sale ratios across the 18 month sale period with the following results:
Coefficient&
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
B
Std. Error
Beta
1 (Constant)
SalePeriod
.968
.001
.021
.002
.025
46.652
.359
.000
.720
a. Dependent Variable: salesratio
1
2009 Statistical Report: WELD COl1NIY Page 10
1
1
t
1
I
aWII.DIO E
Audit Division
Commercial Market Trend Analysis
2-
1.5—
O
N
W
es
N
0.5 -
+
fttrithletsittlettet* +++ *+
++ + + +$
+ +
++ +
+
0
S
10
SalePeriod
15
20
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.
Sold/Unsold Analysis
We compared the median change in actual value between 2008 and 2009 for commercial/industrial
properties to determine if sold and unsold properties were valued consistently, as follows:
Group
N
Median
Mean
Unsold
3.987
S44
$61
Sold
203
$36
554
The above results indicated that sold and unsold commercial/industrial properties were valued
consistently.
2009 Statistical Report: WTT.D COUNTY
Page 31
0
1
1
WILDROSE
Audit Division
V. VACANT LAND SALE RESULTS
The following steps were taken to analyze the vacant land sales:
1. All sales
2. Qualified sales
3. Vacant land sales
4. Residential & commercial/ind vacant land sales
The sales ratio analysis results were as follows:
Median
0.977
Price Related Differential
1.018
Coefficient of Dispersion
.127
12,072
7,745
322
310
The above ratio statistics were in compliance overall with the . tandards set forth by the Colorado State
Board of Equalization (SBOE) for the overall vacant land sales. The following graphs describe further
the sales ratio distribution for all of these properties:
80-
60—
T
Y
C
Cr 40—
d
20 —
04
0.6
0.8
1 .2
Salesratio
14
16
8
Mean =0.967
Sid. Dev. =0.17776
N =310
2009 Statistical Report: W F1.1) C(HiN IY
Page 12
S. \'ILDI2OSE
Audit Division
Vacant Land Sale Price by Sales Ratio
1.8
1.6
t
1
t
1.4
1.2
A 1
N
0$
0.6
0.4
a
>
I f
x
x
I f I I I
$0 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,000
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
We next analyzed the vacant land dataset using the 18 -month sale period, with the following results:
Coefficient&
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
Model
B
Std. Error
Beta
t
Sig.
1 (Constant)
.988
.023
42.867
.000
VSalePeriod
-.002
.002
-.056
-.988
.324
a. Dependent Variable: Salesratio
2009 Statistical Report: VELD COUNTY
Page 33
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
WII,DRO≥L
Audit Division
0
I-
n
CO
Vacant Land Sales Market Trend Analysis
1.8-
6-
14-
1.2-
1-•
0.8-
06-
+
+
+ * + +
+ + + + + + +
+ + ▪ !oh + + + * + + +
.. ++
* + + + + + * + T * Ty * * i♦
+ • * T + * + ♦+ T + + T
+
+ + +
j+ + + + + + +
*
04-
0
t I
5
10
VSalePeriod
15
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 2008 and 2009 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
15,827
1.00
0.93
Sold
285
1.00
1.03
Overall, we concluded that the county assessor valued sold and unsol I vacant properties consistently.
2009 Statistical Report: WLLD COUNTY Page i4
1
1
1
1
w
W11.DROSE
Audit Division
V. AGRICULTURAL IMPROVEMENTS ANALYSIS
The final statistical verification concerned the assigned actual values for agricultural residential
improvements. We compared the 2009 median improved value per square foot for this group and
compared it to the 2009 median improved value per square foot for residential single family
improvements in Weld County.
The following indicates that both groups were valued in essentially the same manner:
Descr iptives
abstrimp
Statistic
!. tdd Error
ImpVaISF
1212
Mean
$201.41
115 246
95% Confidence
Lower Bound
$171.53
Interval for Mean
Upper Bound
$231.29
5% Trimmed Mean
Median
$82.3
Variance
15055646'938
Sid Deviation
$3,880.161
Minimum
$0
Maximum
$288,750
Range
$288,750
Interquartile Range
$34
Skewness
39.215
010
Kurtosis
1814.081
019
4277
Mean
$876.33
$306 515
95% Confidence
Lower Bound
$274.98
Interval for Mean
Upper Bound
$1,477.67
5% Trimmed Mean
Median
0.8+.
D
$88 05
Variance
11640586 6
Std. Deviation
$10,789 155
Minimum
$0
Maximum
$261,869
Range
$261,869
Interquartile Range
$55
Skewness
16.942
.070
Kurtosis
334.525
.139
VI. CONCLUSIONS
Based on this 2009 audit statistical analysis, residential and vacant land properties were found to he in
compliance with state guidelines.
2009 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY
Page 35
0
1
1
1
WILDROSE
Audit Division
Residential
STATISTICAL ABSTRACT
Ratio Statistics for currtot / tasp
Mean
95% Confidence Interval
for Mean
Median
95% Confidence Interval
for Median
Weighted Mean
95% Confidence Interval
for Weighted Mean
Price Related Differential
Coefficient of Dispersion
Coefficient of Variation
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Actual Coverage
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Mean Centered
.992
989
996
.978
.975
.980
95.2%
.973
.969
.976
1.020
.104
15.0%
The confidence interval for the median is constructed without any
distribution assumptions. The actual coverage level may be
greater than the specified level. Other confidence intervals are
constructed by assuming a Normal distribution for the ratios.
Commercial Land
Ratio Statistics for currtot / tasp
Mean
95% Confidence Interval
for Mean
Median
95% Confidence Interval
for Median
Weighted Mean
95% Confidence Interval
for Weighted Mean
Price Related Differential
Coefficient of Dispersion
Coefficient of Variation
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Actual Coverage
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Mean Centered
.974
.955
.994
.979
.970
.988
95.8%
.960
.915
1.006
1.015
.078
14.8%
The confidence interval for the median is constructed without any
distribution assumptions. The actual coverage level may be
greater than the specified level. Other confidence intervals are
constructed by assuming a Normal distribution for the ratios.
2009 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 36
t. WI I,IaROSE
Audit Division
1
1
1
1
1
Vacant Land
Ratio Statistics for currind / Vtasp
Mean
95% Confidence Interval
for Mean
Median
95% Confidence Interval
for Median
Weighted Mean
95% Confidence Interval
for Weighted Mean
Price Related Differential
Coefficient of Dispersion
Coefficient of Variation
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Actual Coverage
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Mean Centered
.967
.947
.987
.977
.967
1.000
95.3%
.950
.927
.974
1.018
.127
18.4%
The confidence interval for the median is constructed without any
distribution assumptions. The actual coverage level may be
greater than the specified level. Other confidence intervals are
constructed by assuming a Normal distribution for the ratios.
Residential Median Ratio Stratification
Sale Price
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
SPRec LT $25K
14
.2%
$25K to $50K
91
1.3%
$50K to $100K
684
9.7%
$100K to $150K
1607
22.9%
$150K to $200K
1688
24.0%
$200K to $300K
1796
25.6%
$300K to $500K
930
13.2%
$500K to $750K
170
2.4%
$750K to $1,000K
25
.4%
Over $1,000K
18
.3%
Overall
7023
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
7023
2009 Statistical Report: WIiLD COUNTY Page 37
1
1
1
1
I
1
I
WILDROSIi
Audit Division
Ratio Statistics for currtot / tasp
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient
of
Variation
Median
Centered
LT $25K
.999
.882
.114
28.3%
$25K to $50K
1.193
1.007
.246
34.4%
$50K to $100K
1.099
1.011
.147
20.2%
$100K to $150K
.980
1.001
.107
14.2%
$150K to $200K
.978
1.000
.084
11.4%
$200K to $300K
.974
1.001
.077
10.6%
$300K to $500K
.947
1.000
.089
11.9%
$500K to $750K
.913
.999
.112
15.1%
$750K to $1,000K
.925
.997
.123
15.4%
Over$1,000K
.889
.976
.112
13.4%
Overall
.978
1.020
.104
15.3%
Subclass
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
Preduse 1212
6518
92.8%
1215
88
1.3%
1220
31
.4%
1225
6
.1%
1230
380
5.4%
Overall
7023
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
7023
Ratio Statistics for currtot / tasp
Price Related
Coefficient of
Coefficient
of
Variation
Median
Group
Median
Differential
Dispersion
Centered
1212
.978
1.020
.105
14.9%
1215
1.054
1.057
.200
35.0%
1220
.998
1.055
.163
27.2%
1225
.998
1.006
.031
4.8%
1230
.969
1.006
.057
10.0%
Overall
.978
1.020
.104
15.3%
2009 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 18
0
1
i
WILDROSE
Audit Division
Age
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
AgeRec Over 100
126
1.8%
75 to 100
231
3.3%
50 to 75
310
4.4%
25 to 50
922
13.1%
5 to 25
2627
37.4%
5 or Newer
2807
40.0%
Overall
7023
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
7023
Ratio Statistics for currtot / tasp
Price Related
Coefficient of
Coefficient
of
Variation
Median
Group
Median
Differential
Dispersion
Centered
Over 100
.958
1.046
.228
35.2%
75 to 100
.959
1.052
.196
30.3%
50 to 75
.992
1.045
.171
24.2%
25 to 50
.982
1.025
.135
18.2%
5 to 25
.980
1.014
.099
13.6%
5 or Newer
.973
1.013
.078
10.5%
Overall
.978
1.020
.104
15.3%
Improved Area
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
ImpSFRec LE 500 sf
16
.2%
500 to 1,000 sf
637
9.1%
1,000 to 1,500 sf
2555
36.4%
1,500 to 2,000 sf
1954
27.8%
2,000 to 3,000 sf
1419
20.2%
3,000 sf or Higher
442
6.3%
Overall
7023
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
7023
1
2009 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 39
1
1
0
WILDIC6
Audit Division
Ratio Statistics for currtot / tasp
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient
of
Variation
Median
Centered
LE 500 sf
.999
.983
.121
21.4%
500 to 1,000 sf
.972
1.044
.168
24.2%
1,000 to 1,500 sf
.978
1.018
.105
15.2%
1,500 to 2,000 sf
.980
1.015
.091
13.5%
2,000 to 3,000 sf
.974
1.014
.090
12.3%
3,000 sf or Higher
.970
1.018
.107
15.8%
Overall
.978
1.020
.104
15.3%
2009 Statistical Report: WELL) COUNTY Page 40
aWILDROSE
Audit Division
Quality
Case Processing Summary
1
1
1
1
1
Count
Percent
qual 1
108
1.5%
1
1
.0%
1
1
.0%
1
6
.1%
1
10
.1%
2
37
.5%
2
2
.0%
2
10
.1%
2
4
.1%
2
1
.0%
2
2065
29.4%
2
1
.0%
2
5
.1%
2
1
.0%
3
29
.4%
3
1
.0%
3
6
.1%
3
1
.0%
3
1
.0%
3
4052
57.7%
3
1
.0%
3
2
.0%
4
11
.2%
4
578
8.2%
5
73
1.0%
6
16
.2%
Overall
7023
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
7023
1
2009 Statistical Report: WILD COUNTY Page 41
1
1
1
WILINCSE
Audit Division
Ratio Statistics for currtot / tasp
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient
of
Variation
Median
Centered
1
.973
1.073
.231
35.2%
1
1.049
1.000
.000
1
1.172
1.000
.000
1
1.002
1.055
.123
16.7%
1
.968
1.025
.112
16.5%
2
.964
1.026
.155
22.4%
2
.796
.945
.158
22.3%
2
.978
1.027
.119
19.3%
2
1.014
.994
.033
6.5%
2
.904
1.000
.000
2
.980
1.029
.141
20.3%
2
.734
1.000
.000
2
.906
.985
.047
8.7%
2
.996
1.000
.000
3
.946
1.044
.164
27.3%
3
.991
1.000
.000
3
.880
1.023
.155
21.4%
3
1.283
1.000
.000
3
.950
1.000
.000
3
.977
1.011
.082
10.9%
3
1.264
1.000
.000
3
.960
1.013
.062
8.8%
4
1.018
.995
.114
16.3%
4
.977
1.019
.097
13.2%
5
.978
1.026
.102
13.9%
6
.973
1.017
.126
20.9%
Overall
.978
1.020
.104
15.3%
2009 Stalisl ical Report: wLLD CO11NIY Paw.. 4-2
0
1
1
1
1
WILDROSE
Audit Division
Commercial Median Ratio Stratification
Sale Price
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
SPRec LT $25K
1
.5%
$25K to $50K
4
2.0%
$50K to $100K
54
26.5%
$100K to $150K
31
15.2%
$150K to $200K
28
13.7%
$200K to $300K
19
9.3%
$300K to $500K
24
11.8%
$500K to $750K
11
5.4%
$750K to $1,000K
8
3.9%
Over $1,000K
24
11.8%
Overall
204
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
204
Ratio Statistics for currtot / tasp
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient
of
Variation
Median
Centered
LT $25K
.952
1.000
.000
$25K to $50K
1.000
.999
.028
5.0%
$50K to $100K
.990
.996
.046
8.4%
$100K to $150K
.960
.996
.076
12.9%
$150K to $200K
.970
.999
.102
22.1%
$200K to $300K
.990
.999
.075
14.7%
$300K to $500K
.960
1.001
.082
14.4%
$500K to $750K
.969
.996
.088
13.9%
$750K to $1,000K
.975
.991
.186
28.7%
Over $1,000K
.979
.990
.078
15.5%
Overall
.979
1.015
.078
14.7%
2009 Statistical Report: WLLU COUNTY Page 43
1
1
1
1
t
1
1
S
WILMOT
Audit Division
Subclass
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
Preduse 2212
23
11.3%
2215
4
2.0%
2220
34
16.7%
2230
26
12.7%
2235
97
47.5%
3212
13
6.4%
3215
7
3.4%
Overall
204
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
204
Ratio Statistics for currtot / tasp
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient
of
Variation
Median
Centered
2212
.923
1.124
.118
17.7%
2 215
1.000
1.004
.008
1.5%
2220
.976
.982
.089
14.7%
2230
.980
1.009
.121
21.4%
2235
.985
.999
.056
12.2%
3212
.982
1.008
.042
5.7%
3215
1.000
.942
.098
19.2%
Overall
.979
1.015
.078
14.7%
1
2009 Statistical Report: WELD COHIN'IY Page 44
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
WILDIcSL
Audit Division
Vacant Land Median Ratio Stratification
Case Processing Summary
Count
Percent
VPreduse 0100
212
68.4%
0200
40
12.9%
0300
15
4.8%
0400
11
3.5%
0520
1
.3%
0550
2
.6%
0600
1
.3%
1112
22
7.1%
1135
3
1.0%
2112
1
.3%
2130
1
.3%
3115
1
.3%
Overall
310
100.0%
Excluded
0
Total
310
Ratio Statistics for currind / Vtasp
Group
Median
Price Related
Differential
Coefficient of
Dispersion
Coefficient
of
Variation
Median
Centered
0100
.979
1.007
.129
19.1%
0200
.947
1.015
.096
12.7%
0300
1.000
1.122
.182
22.3%
0400
1.000
.957
.090
14.1%
0520
1.016
1.000
.000
0550
1.109
1.144
.128
18.2%
0600
.781
1.000
.000
1112
1.000
.994
.110
15.4%
1135
.714
.965
.206
32.3%
2112
.746
1.000
.000
2130
.971
1.000
.000
3115
.968
1.000
.000
Overall
.977
1.018
.127
18.2%
2009 Statistical Report: Will) COUNTY Y Page 45
Hello