HomeMy WebLinkAbout20073093 3
i!IIPC/ ,
2007
WELD COUNTY
PROPERTY ASSESSMENT
STUDY
..,rl
S
.y--�_
•
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
mi 4s-
A_GE/von_
apiseNt-
09 _9&-0 7 2007-3093
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS Ilt September 15, 2007
Mr. Kirk Mlinek
Director of Research
Colorado Legislative Council
Room 029,State Capitol Building
Denver, Colorado 80203
RE: Final Report for the 2007 Colorado Property Assessment Study
for Colorado's sixty four counties
Dear Mr. Mlinek:
Rocky Mountain Valuation Specialists LLC is pleased to submit the Final Reports for the 2007
Colorado Property Assessment Study for all sixty four counties that make up the State of
Colorado.
These reports represent the result of a two-part analysis and audit for each county: A procedural
analysis and a statistical analysis.
The procedural analysis, for each county, included all classes of property and specifically looked
at how the assessor developed economic areas, confirmed and qualified their sales, developed
their time adjustments, and performed their periodic physical property inspections. The audit
also reviewed the procedures for discovering, classifying and valuing agricultural outbuildings,
discovering subdivision build-out and subdivision discounting procedures. Valuation
methodology for residential properties and commercial properties was examined. Procedures
for producing mines, oil and gas leaseholds and lands producing, producing coalmines,
producing earth and stone products, severed mineral interests, and non-producing patented
mining claims were also reviewed. Starting in 2007, procedural analyses of agricultural
outbuildings were performed for each county.
•
POCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Statistical analysis was also performed, for each county, on vacant land, residential properties,
commercial/industrial properties, and agricultural land. A statistical analysis was performed to
check for personal property compliance on the top 11 counties: Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder,
L. Denver, Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Latimer, Mesa, Pueblo, and Weld. All other counties
received a procedural study.
Throughout this project RMVS has remained committed to its belief that for an ad valorem
system to be successful, values must be equitable and market-driven in all parts of Colorado.
Only then is the taxpayer assured of a fair property tax.
RMVS appreciates the opportunity to be of service to the State of Colorado.
drik 1"/".
Mark R. Linne MAI, CAE,ASA, CRE,FRICS
Managing Director
Rocky Mountain Valuation Specialists LLC
t
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 3
Regional/Historical Sketch of Weld County 5
Ratio Analysis 7
Time Trending Verification 9
Sold/Unsold Analysis 10
Agricultural Land Study 12
Agricultural Land 12
Agricultural Outbuildings 13
Sales Verification 17
Economic Area Review and Evaluation 18
Natural Resources 19
Vacant Land 20
Subdivision Discounting 20
Possessory Interest Properties 21
Personal Property Audit 22
RMVS Auditor Staff 24
Appendices 25
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 2
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
INTRODUCTION
do not reflect the proper valuation period
ee �lorado level of value.
The C.R.S. 394-104 (16)(a)(b) and (c) outlined
Colorado Constitution directs that each
how this was to be accomplished
property tax levy shall be uniform upon all ye stating
real and personal property not exempt from hat during each property tax year, the
director of research of the legislative council
taxation. The constitution goes on to direct shall contract with a private person for a
that the actual value of all applicable real valuation for assessment study to be
and personal property shall be determined conducted as set forth in this subsection
under general laws, which shall prescribe (16). The study shall be conducted in all
such methods and regulations as shall secure counties of the state to determine whether
just and equalized valuations (Colo. Const., or not the assessor of each county has, in
Art. X, Sec. 3 (1)(a)). fact, used all manuals, formulas, and other
r directives required by law to arrive at the
In order to check that all applicable
valuation for assessment of each and every
property has been valued with just and
class of real and personal property in the
equalized valuations, the Constitution states county. The person conducting the study
that commencing in 1983 the general shall sample each class of property in a
assembly shall cause a valuation for
statistically valid manner, and the aggregate
assessment study to be conducted. Such of such sampling shall equal at least one
study shall determine whether or not the percent of all properties in each county of
assessor of each county has complied with the state. The sampling shall show that the
th property tax provisions of this4 various areas, ages of buildings, economic
constitution and of the statutes in valuing conditions,and uses of properties have been
property and has determined the actual sampled. Such study shall be completed,
value and valuation for assessment of each and a final report of the findings and
and every class of taxable real and personal conclusions thereof shall be submitted to
property consistent with such provisions. the state board of equalization, by
Such study shall sample at least one percent September 15 of the year in which the study
of each and every class of taxable real and is conducted.
personal property in the county (Colo.
Const.,Art. X, Sec. 3 (2)(a)). The legislative council sets forth two criteria
The that are the focus of the audit group:
State Board of Equalization (SBOE)
reviews assessments for conformance to the To determine whether each county assessor
Constitution. The SBON will order is applying correctly the constitutional and
revaluations for counties whose valuations
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 3
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
statutory provisions, compliance out and subdivision discounting procedures.
requirements of the State Board of Valuation methodology for vacant land,
Equalization, and the manuals published by improved residential properties and
the State Property Tax Administrator to commercial properties is examined.
arrive at the actual value of each class of Procedures for producing mines, oil and gas
property. leaseholds and lands producing, producing
coal mines, producing earth and stone
To determine if each assessor is applying products, severed mineral interests and non-
correctly the provisions of law to the actual producing patented mining claims are also
values when arriving at valuations for reviewed.
assessment of all locally valued properties
subject to the property tax. Statistical analysis is performed on vacant
land, residential properties, commercial
The property assessment audit conducts a industrial properties, agricultural land, and
two-part analysis: A procedural analysis and personal property. The statistical study
a statistical analysis. results are compared with State Board of
Equalization compliance requirements and
The procedural analysis includes all classes the manuals published by the State Property
of property and specifically looks at how the Tax Administrator.
assessor develops economic areas, confirms
and qualifies sales, and develops time RMVS has completed the Property
adjustments. The audit also examines the Assessment Study for 2007 and is pleased to
procedures for adequately discovering, report its findings for Weld County in the
classifying and valuing agricultural following report.
outbuildings, discovering subdivision build-
4
4
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 4
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
REGIONAL / HISTORICAL SKETCH
OF WELD COUNTY
Regional Information South Platte and Arkansas rivers on the east
side of the Rockies.
Weld County is located in the Front Range
region of Colorado. The Colorado Front The Front Range includes Adams,
Range is a colloquial geographic term for Arapahoe, Boulder, Broomfield, Denver,
the populated areas of the State of Colorado Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Latimer,
which are just east of the foothills of the Pueblo, and Weld counties. The Colorado
Front Range, from which the region takes Front Range communities include (in a
its name. The region contains the largest roughly north-to-south order): Fort Collins,
cities and the majority of the population of Greeley, Loveland, Longmont, Boulder,
Colorado, aligned in a north-south Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area, Castle
configuration on the western edge of the Rock,Colorado Springs, Pueblo.
Great Plains, where they meet the Rockies.
Geologically, the region lies mostly within
the Colorado Piedmont, in the valley of the
121 Naw
y„N n'^'
W
MYOe
NA1n
tl
WASHINGTON
Eastern Plains
..NW
4 gji
YR wJON
aNtlN�^�r
s
NM 'UMW
{ tl
—N
Mc'
1 ,
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 5
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Historical Information
Weld County has a population of The county seat is Greeley, named for
approximately 228,943 people with 45.3 Horace Greeley of the New York Tribune,
people per square mile, according to the whose agricultural editor, Nathan C.
U.S. Census Bureau's 2005 estimated Meeker, was so impressed with the
population data. agricultural potential of the area that he
began a publicity campaign in the paper to
Weld County, one of the original seventeen found a colony. This group, known as The
territorial counties, was established in 1861 Union Colony, bought a town site and
with an area of 4,002 square miles. The named it in Greeley's honor. (William
county was named for Lewis Ledyard Weld, Bright, Colorado Place Names, 3rd Edition,
the first secretary of Colorado Territory. Johnson Books,2004,p.184 and 78)
e
T
JUMJboy
Walden allitrICK
LOGAN
St
A
adaywa
MOffAT r RUVTT IACKSON � WLLD Seethe* FIIILUPS
M .ray 6{ 21
)S U ��
at L
to
•
Staamb;as Wye •
Oft** MOIGAN *7
CRAIID •OULO Fat'Momma I
MO RIANCO Opy a ,gyp YUMA
Eagle 'Soli.
au" Gore M ADAM WASHINGTONU
M •
G GAR fNVfR S
.. Caster Poe kl ow /
F A s; • • DOUG ELRERT Hugo
_ • 11I 1=UUSON r
:.L
. •. MU* LINCOLN cay.aa.
.. �� w ie
• ....-+- — .. :' ECpl, ELWO f
. .....................
/ N «� ` ° eu• ..RRs�wR t 1, II
__S/.s. -. } dr. Gnan CN liroAb CROWLfl
l II YYII .. t�}, - ) • I:}c t scree 1)Qs usAiwus
w :... J ,: PUElLO wax
�. CUSTER
/
1, `.'.Ll I 71 N [a Junta •
WENT
Dc ' s;.j.+ . OTERO R PROW IRS '�
• ,, !- -5Y-s•J• .' . . . 4 P ! NUERFANO 4 W 7
i .c.y., i< 3t • Sione61,04
y sr•t
MO +, .�. 'n+'. • Y T _ •_ r. _ _ 7ST1lLA 7iuwaa (AS ANIMAS EACH
W� ... .- ..- .. t7 h b l
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study— Page 6
Ail . — --- . - N
410
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
RATIO ANALYSIS
Methodology failed by these latter measures, but were
All significant classes of properties were counseled if there were anomalies noted
analyzed. Sales were collected for each during our analysis. Qualified sales were
property class over the appropriate sale based on the qualification code used by each
period, which was typically defined as the county, which were typically coded as either
18-month period between January 2005 and Q,> or "C." The ratio analysis included all
June 2006. Counties with less than 30 sales sales. The data was trimmed for counties
typically extended the sale period back up to with obvious outliers using IAAO standards
5 years prior to June 30, 2006 in 6-month for data analysis. In every case, we
increments. If there were still fewer than 30 examined the loss in data from trimming to
insure that only true outliers were excluded.
sales, supplemental appraisals were
performed and treated as proxy sales. Any county with a significant portion of
Residential sales for all counties using this sales excluded by this trimming method
method totaled at least 30 per county. For were examined further. No county was
commercial sales, the total number analyzed allowed to pass the audit if more than 5% of
was allowed, in some cases, to fall below 30. the sales were "lost because of trimming.
There were no sale quantity issues for For the largest 11 counties, the residential
counties requiring vacant land analysis or ratio statistics were broken down by
condominium analysis. Although it was economic area as well.
required that we examine the median and Conclusions
coefficient of dispersion for all counties, we For this final analysis report, the minimum
also calculated the weighted mean and price- acceptable statistical standards allowed by
related differential for each class of the State Board of Equalization are:
property. Counties were not passed or
ALLOWABLE STANDARDS RATIO GRID
Unweighted Coefficient of
4 Property Class Median Ratio Dispersion
Commercial/Industrial Between.95-1.05 Less than 20.99
Condominium Between .95-1.05 Less than 15.99
Single Family Between.95-1.05 Less than 15.99
Vacant Land Between .95-1.05 Less than 20.99
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 7
410
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
The results for Weld County are:
Weld County Ratio Grid
Number of Unweighted Price Coefficient
Qualified Median Related of Time Trend
Property Class Sales Ratio Differential Dispersion Analysis
Commercial/Industrial 137 0.976 1.029 10.3 Compliant
Condominium N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Single Family 10,015 0.971 1.007 7.8 Compliant
Vacant Land 663 1.000 1.010 9.4 Compliant
Econ Number Price Related Coefficient of
Me
Area of Sales dian Differential Dispersion
0 973 .971 1.006 .062
2 2649 .968 1.007 .078
3 2591 .978 1.007 .071
4 632 .966 1.009 .090
5 114 .972 1.006 .117
6 1960 .969 1.012 .094
7 51 .977 1.024 .138
8 51 .952 1.009 .136
9 277 .973 1.007 .087
Excl 717
Overall 10,015 .971 1.008 .080
After applying the above described compliance with SBOE, DPT, and
methodologies, it is concluded from the Colorado State Statute valuation guidelines.
4 sales ratios that Weld County is in Recommendations
None
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 8
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
TIME TRENDING VERIFICATION
Methodology and a further examination is warranted.
This validation methodology also considers
While we recommend that counties use the the number of sales and the length of the
inverted ratio regression analysis method to sale period. Counties with few sales across
account for market (time) trending, some the sale period were carefully examined to
counties have used other IAAO-approved determine if the statistical results were valid.
methods, such as the weighted monthly
median approach. We are not auditing the Conclusions
methods used, but rather the results of the After verification and analysis, it has been
methods used. Given this range of determined that Weld County has complied
methodologies used to account for market with the statutory requirements to analyze
trending, we concluded that the best the effects of time on value in their county.
validation method was to examine the sale Weld County has also satisfactorily applied
ratios for each class across the appropriate the results of their time trending analysis to
sale period. To be specific, if a county has arrive at the time adjusted sales price
considered and adjusted correctly for (TASP).
market trending, then the sale ratios should Recommendations
remain stable (i.e. flat) across the sale
period. If a residual market trend is None
detected, than the county may or may not
have addressed market trending adequately,
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 9
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
SOLD / UNSOLD ANALYSIS
Methodology unsold sample. This sample was at least 1%
of the total population of unsold properties
Weld County was tested for the equal and excluded any sale properties. The
treatment of sold and unsold properties to unsold sample was filtered based on the
insure that"sales chasing" has not occurred. attributes of the sold dataset to closely
The auditors employed a multi-step process correlate both groups. The ratio analysis
to determine if sold and unsold properties was then performed on the unsold
were valued in a consistent manner. properties and stratified. The median and
mean ratio distribution was then compared
All qualified residential and commercial between the sold and unsold group. A non-
class properties were examined using the parametric test such as the Mann-Whitney
unit value method, where the actual value test for differences between independent
per square foot was compared between sold samples was undertaken to determine
and unsold properties. A class was whether any observed differential was
considered qualified if it met the criteria for significant. If this test determined that the
the ratio analysis. The median value per unsold properties were treated in a manner
square foot for both groups was compared similar to the sold properties, it was
from an appraisal and statistical perspective. concluded that no further testing was
If no significant difference was indicated, warranted and that the county was in
then we concluded that no further testing compliance.
was warranted and that the county was in
compliance in terms of sold/unsold If a class or sub-class of property was
consistency. determined to be significantly different by
this method, the final step was to perform a
If either residential or commercial multi-variate mass appraisal model that
differences were significant using the unit developed ratio statistics from the sold
value method, or if data limitations made properties that were then applied to the
the comparison invalid, then the next step unsold sample. This test compared the
was to perform a ratio analysis comparing measures of central tendency and
the 2006 and 2007 actual values for each confidence intervals for the sold properties
qualified class of property. All qualified with the unsold property sample. If this
vacant land classes were tested using this comparison was also determined to be
method. The sale property ratios were significantly different, then the conclusion
arrayed using a range of 0.8 to 1.5, which was that the county had treated the unsold
theoretically excluded changes between properties in a different manner than sold
years that were due to other unrelated properties.
changes in the property. These ratios were
also stratified at the appropriate level of These tests were supported by both tabular
analysis. Once the percent change was and chart presentations, along with saved
determined for each appropriate class and sold and unsold sample files.
sub-class, the next step was to select the
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 10
1
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Sold/Unsold Results
Property Class Results
Commercial/Industrial Compliant
Condominium N/A
Single Family Compliant
Vacant Land 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.
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 11
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
AGRICULTURAL LAND STUDY
Acres By Subclass Value By Subclass
Sprinkler
waste 4% 35000000
it4lzd 30,000,000
a% 25,000,000
'w.. ',
15000000
I Dry Farm 10,000 000
28%
I #r 5,000,000
4. 0
sox ' Sprinkler Flood Dry Farm Meadow Grazing Waste
`Meadow Hey Hay
1%
Agricultural Land
County records were reviewed to determine checked to ensure that the commodity
major land categories such as irrigated farm, prices and expenses, furnished by the
dry farm, meadow hay, grazing and other Property Tax Administrator (VIA), were
lands. In addition, county records were applied properly. (See Assessor Reference
reviewed in order to determine if: Aerial Library Volume 3 Chapter 5.)
photographs are available and are being Conclusions
used; soil conservation guidelines have been
used to classify lands based on productivity; An analysis of the agricultural land data
crop rotations have been documented; indicates an acceptable appraisal of this
typical commodities and yields have been property type. Directives, commodity
determined; orchard lands have been prices and expenses provided by the PTA
properly classified and valued; expenses were properly applied. County yields
reflect a ten year average and are typical compared favorably to those published by
landlord expenses; grazing lands have been Colorado Agricultural Statistics. Expenses
properly classified and valued; the number used by the county were allowable expenses
of acres in each class and subclass have and were in an acceptable range. Grazing
been determined; the capitalization rate was lands carrying capacities were in an
properly applied. Also, documentation was acceptable range. The data analyzed
required for the valuation methods used and resulted in the following ratios:
any locally developed yields, carrying
capacities, and expenses. Records were also
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 12
lit
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Weld County Agricultural Land Ratio Grid
Number County County RMVS
Abstract O1 Value Assessed Total
Code Land Class Acres Per Acre Total Value Value Ratio
4107 Sprinkler 85,365 68.91 5,882,413 6,081,926 0.97
4117 Flood 259,440 120.67 31,306,599 32,606,900 0.96
4127 Dry Farm 558,312 12.77 7,129,930 7,721,884 0.92
4137 Meadow Hay 15,558 40.41 628,708 628,708 1.00
4147 Grazing 964,546 4.82 4,646,035 4,646,035 1.00
4167 Waste 81,006 1.63 132,277 132,277 1.00
Total/Avg 1,964,227 25.32 49,725,961 51,817,729 0.96
Recommendations
None
Agricultural Outbuildings
Methodology
A sample of various use types of agricultural Following are the Sections of the ARL
outbuildings with varying ages were considered in the agricultural outbuilding
reviewed to see if the guidelines found in study, the results of the audit and any
the Assessor's Reference Library (ARL) recommendations:
Volume 3, pages 5.73 through 5.78 were
being followed.
Physical Inventory Issues:
The Assessors Reference Library Volume 3 1. Describing, classing and identifying the
page 5.73 states: physical location of the improvements, and
All characteristics that are found at the site are to 2. Identifying the quality and condition of property
be listed regardless of whether or not they contribute components that contribute to value.
to value. Data collection activities performed during
the physical inventory of the agricultural structures Photographs of the subject properly are useful
found on a firm or ranch include the following documentation, in addition to the listed information,
and are especially effective where subjective valuation
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 13
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
fudgment is applied. However, photographs are The county is not currently in compliance in
optional, at the discretion of the assessor. their inspection cycle.
The Division recommends a jiiveyear gcle of Recommendations for Physical
agricultural structures physical inspections. All Inventory Compliance:
agricultural structures located in the county should The auditor recommends that the county
be physically inspected at least every five years. have a compliant inspection plan in place
for the 2008 audit cycle and present this in
Conclusions for Physical Inventory writing to the auditor during the 2008 audit.
Compliance:
Cost Service Used,Height Multiplier and Area/Perimeter Multiplier Issues
The following ARL Volume 3 page 5.74 8. It provides refinements in cost to the general
addresses Cost Service Used Issues, Height descriptions for various building components.
multiplier Issues, and area/perimeter 9. Costs are inclusive of direct and indirect cost,
multiplier issues: i.e. materials, labor, contractor's overhead and
profit, design fees, and permits, etc.
The Assessors Reference Iibray Volume 3 page
5.74 states: Counties may develop and use their own cost tables
if they are well documented, supportable, and
The Division recommends counties use the Marshall consistent with or similar to those used by the
d� .Swift Valuation Service for the fallowing surrounding counties to ensure equalization of
reasons: values.
1. Use of a single cost service promotes uniformity Whenever local cost tables are used and they differ
of agricultural structures valuations among from surrounding counties, supporting
counties. documentation must be submitted.
2. Statewide equalization will result from
uniform valuations. Conclusions for Cost Service Used
3. Marshall & Swift is recognized as an Compliance:
authoritative source within the appraisal The county is currently in compliance in
profession. the use of an approved cost resource.
4. It provides for diferent types of construction
(classesA-B-C-D-S). Recommendations for Cost Service
5. It provides uniform definitions of quality Used Compliance:
(excellent-good-average-low cost). None
6. It provides height multipliers. If height
multipliers are not utilized, the county must Conclusions for Height Multiplier Used
document the reason. Compliance:
7. It provides area/perimeter multipliers. If area The county is currently in compliance in the
perimeter multipliers are not utilized, the use of an approved height multiplier.
county must document the reason.
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 14
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Recommendations for Height Multiplier The county is currently in compliance in the
Used Compliance: use of an approved area/perimeter
None multiplier.
Conclusions for Area/Perimeter Recommendations for Area/Perimeter
Multiplier Used Compliance: Multiplier Used Compliance:
None
Local Multiplier Compliance Issues:
The Assessors Reference library Volume 3 Marshall & .Swift-developed multipliers, weighted
page 5.75 states: labor and material costs and all local sales taxes
have been included.
Local multipliers are applied to agricultural
structure costs that are derived from Marshall & The use of out-ofstate multipliers is not
.Swift to adjust these costs to reflect local cost recommended. Documentation must be available jbr
conditions. any cost multipliers used other than those provided
by the Division or directly by Marshall & Swift.
The Division provides cost multipliers to be applied However, local multipliers are unnecessary if costs
to Marshall &Swift cost values, depending on the are locally developed
location of each county, at each change in level of
value. These multipliers are then used for the Conclusions for Local Multiplier
following intervening year, as well The current local Compliance:
multipliers may be found in Addendum 5-C, Rural The county is currently in compliance in
Structures Local Multipliers. their use of the local multiplier.
Counties are to use the Division published cost Recommendations for Local Multiplier
multipliers unless specific county cost multipliers Compliance:
have been purchased from Marshall & Swift or None
locally researched and developed When using
Depreciation Compliance Issues:
The Assessors Reference Library Volume 3 following methods as defined in The Dictionary of
page 5.76 states: Real Estate Appraisal, Third Edition, Appraisal
Institute, 1993, may be used to measure accrued
Adjustments for depreciation should be in depreciation:
accordance with Marshall & Swift Valuation
Service valuation procedures, unless locally developed 1. Observed Condition: The condition of a
economic lives and depreciation schedules are well property ascertained from a detailed inspection,
supported and have been validated through field physical condition. The observed condition
inspection. method requires both a physical inspection and
sound appraiserjudgment.
Supporting documentation should be available for
all locally developed depredation schedules. The
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 15
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
2. Economic Age-Life Method (Straight Iine):
A method of estimating accrued depreciation in Conclusions for Proper Depreciation
which the ratio between the effective age of a Schedule Compliance:
building and its total economic life is applied to The county is currently in compliance in
the current cost of the improvements to obtain their use of a proper depreciation schedule.
a lump-sum deduction.
Recommendations for Proper
Thir is the method employed fry Marshall&Swift Depreciation Schedule Compliance:
The Division recommends the use of Marshall & None
Swift depreciation tables.
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 16
i
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
SALES VERIFICATION
According to Colorado Revised Statutes:
The assessor is required to use sales of real
A representative body of sales is required property only in the valuation process.
when considering the market approach to
appraisal. (8)(O Such true and typical sales shall
include only those sales which have been
(8) In any case in which sales prices of determined on an individual basis to reflect
comparable properties within any class or the selling price of the real property only or
subclass are utilized when considering the which have been adjusted on an individual
market approach to appraisal in the basis to reflect the selling price of the real
determination of actual value of any taxable property only. (39-1-103, C.R.S.)
property, the following limitations and
conditions shall apply: Part of the Property Assessment Study is
the sales verification analysis. RMVS has
(a)(1) Use of the market approach shall used the above-cited statutes as a guide in
require a representative body of sales, our study of the county's procedures and
including sales by a lender or government, practices for verifying sales.
sufficient to set a pattern, and appraisals
shall reflect due consideration of the degree RMVS has conducted a study of the sales
of comparability of sales, including the verification procedures in 2007 for Weld
extent of similarities and dissimilarities County. This study was performed by
among properties that are compared for checking selected sales listed as verified by
assessment purposes. In order to obtain a the county for the 2007-2008 valuation
reasonable sample and to reduce sudden period. Specifically, RMVS selected 45 sales
price changes or fluctuations, all sales shall listed as verified but unqualified. Of the 45
be included in the sample that reasonably sales checked, 44 gave reasons that were
reflect a true or typical sales price during the clear and supportable. The remaining 1 sale
period specified in section 39-1-104 (10.2). had insufficient documentation.
Sales of personal property exempt pursuant Conclusions
to the provisions of sections 39-3-102, 39-3-
103, and 39-3-119 to 39-3-122 shall not be Weld County appears to be doing an
included in any such sample. adequate job of verifying their sales. There
are no recommendations or suggestions.
(b) Each such sale included in the sample Recommendations
shall be coded to indicate a typical, None
negotiated sale, as screened and verified by
the assessor. (39-1-103, C.R.S.)
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 17
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
ECONOMIC AREA REVIEW AND
EVALUATION
Methodology adequately identified homogeneous
Weld County has submitted a written economic areas comprised of smaller
narrative describing the economic areas that neighborhoods. Each economic area
make up the county's market areas. Weld defined is equally subject to a set of
County has also submitted a map illustrating economic forces that impact the value of
these areas. Each of these narratives have the properties within that geographic area
and this has been adequately addressed.
been read and analyzed for logic and
appraisal sensibility. The maps were also Each economic area defined adequately
compared to the narrative for consistency delineates an area that will give "similar
between the written description and the values for similar properties in similar
map. areas."
Conclusions Recommendations
After review and analysis, it has been None
determined that Weld County has
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 18
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
NATURAL RESOURCES
Earth and Stone Products Producing Oil and Gas Procedures
Methodology Methodology
Under the guidelines of the Assessor's The Colorado Revised Statues (CRS) in
Reference Library (ARL), Volume 3, Article 39, Section 7, and the Assessor's
Natural Resource Valuation Procedures, the Reference Library (ARL), Volume 3 were
income approach was the primary method the basis for valuing the production of gas
applied to find value for production of earth property. For gas, the gross volume of
and stone products. The number of tons thousand cubic feet (MCI) sold was
was multiplied by an economic location multiplied by the current average field price
factor that represented the landlord's per unit sold. For Oil, the gross volume of
royalty. The landlord's share was multiplied barrels sold was multiplied by the current
by a recommended FIoskold factor to average field price per unit sold. Any
determine the actual value. The Hoskold federal, state or local government ownership
factor was determined by the life of the (royalty) was deducted from the gross value
reserves, or the lease. The value was sold to arrive at actual value.
primarily based on two variables: life and
Conclusions
tonnage. The operator determines these
since there is no other means to obtain County valued oil and gas production using
production data through any state or private acceptable appraisal procedures.
agency. Recommendations:
Conclusions None
County has applied the correct formulas and
state guidelines to earth and stone
production.
Recommendations
None
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 19
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
VACANT LAND
Subdivision Discounting
In 2007 subdivisions were reviewed. The summation method. Subdivision land with
review showed that subdivisions were structures was appraised at full market
discounted pursuant to the Colorado value.
Revised Statutes in Article 39-1-103 (14). Conclusions
Discounting procedures were applied to all
subdivisions where less than 80 percent of Weld County has implemented proper
all sites were sold, using the present worth procedures to adequately estimate
absorption periods, discount rates, and lot
method. The market approach was applied
values for qualifying subdivisions.
where more than 80 percent of the
subdivision sites were sold. An absorption Recommendations
period was estimated for each subdivision None
that was discounted. An appropriate
discount rate was developed, using the
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 20
140
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
POSSESSORY INTEREST
PROPERTIES
Possessory interest property discovery and county under audit has also been queried as
valuation is described in the Assessor's to their confidence that the possessory
Reference Library EARL) Volume 3 section interest properties have been discovered and
7 pages 71 through 104 in accordance with placed on the tax rolls.
the requirements of 39-1-103 (17)(a) (II) Conclusions
C.R.S. Possessory Interest is defined by the
Weld County has implemented an adequate
Property Tax Administrator's Publication
ARL Volume 3, Section 7.79: A private discovery process to place possessory
interest properties on the roll. Weld County
property interest in government-owned
property or the right to the occupancy and also is correctly and consistently applying
use of any benefit in government-owned the correct procedures and valuation
methods in the valuation of possessory
property that has been granted under lease,
interest properties.
permit, license, concession, contract, or
other agreement. This county under audit Recommendations
has been reviewed for their procedures and None
adherence to guidelines when assessing and
valuing possessory interest properties. The
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 21
440 •
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
PERSONAL PROPERTY AUDIT
Weld County was studied for its procedural counties to be included in this study are
compliance with the personal property Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Denver,
assessment outlined in the Assessor's Douglas, El Paso,Jefferson, Latimer, Mesa,
Reference Library (ARL) Volume 5, and in Pueblo, and Weld. All other counties
the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) received a procedural study.
requirements for the assessment of personal
property. The SBOE requirements are Weld County is compliant with the
outlined as follows: guidelines set forth in ARL Volume 5
regarding discovery procedures, using the
Use ARL Volume 5 including current following methods to discover personal
discovery, classification, and documentation property accounts in the county:
procedures, and including current economic
lives table, cost factor tables, depreciation • Public Record Documents
table, and level of value adjustment factor • MLS Listing and/or Sold Books
table. • Chamber of Commerce/Economic
Development Contacts
The personal property audit standards • Local Telephone Directories,
narrative must be in place and current. A
Newspapers or Other Local
listing of businesses that have been audited
Publications
by the assessor within the twelve-month
period reflected in the plan is given to the • Personal Observation or Word of
auditor. The audited businesses must be in Mouth
conformity with those described in the plan. • Questionnaires, Letters and/or
Phone Calls to Buyer, Seller and/or
Aggregate ratio will be determined solely Realtor
from the personal property accounts that
have been physically inspected. The The county uses the Division of Property
minimum assessment sample is one percent Taxation (DPT) recommended classification
or ten schedules, whichever is greater, and and documentation procedures. The DPT's
the maximum assessment audit sample is recommended cost factor tables,
100 schedules. depreciation tables and level of value
adjustment factor tables are also used.
For the counties having over 100,000
population, RMVS selected a sample of all Weld County submitted their personal
personal property schedules to determine property written audit plan and was current
whether the assessor is correctly applying for the 2007 valuation period. The number
the provisions of law and manuals of the and listing of businesses audited was also
Property Tax Administrator in arriving at submitted and was in conformance with the
the assessment levels of such property. This written audit plan. The following audit
sample was selected from the personal triggers were used by the county to select
property schedules audited by the assessor. accounts to be audited:
In no event was the sample selected by the
contractor less than 30 schedules. The
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 22
♦
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
• Businesses in a selected area
• Accounts with obvious Weld County's median ratio is 1.00. This is
discrepancies in compliance with the State Board of
• New businesses filing for the first Equalization (SBOE) compliance
time requirements which range from .90 to 1.10
• Accounts with greater than 100 with no COD requirements.
change
• Incomplete or inconsistent Conclusions
declarations Weld County has employed adequate
• Accounts with omitted property discovery, classification, documentation,
• Businesses with no deletions or valuation, and auditing procedures for their
additions for 2 or more years personal property assessment and is in
• Non-filing Accounts - Best statistical compliance with SBOE
Information Available requirements.
• Accounts close to the $2,500 actual Recommendations
value exemption status
• Accounts protested with substantial None
disagreement
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 23
r, __._._.. ...
a
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
RMVS AUDITOR STAFF
Mark Linn,MAI, CRE, CAE,ASA, FRICS, Corporate Managing Director of RMVS
Stephen M. Snyder, CAE, SRA, RMVS, Director of Audit
Suzanne J. Howard,Audit Administrative Manager for RMV.S
M. Steven Kane, ChiefStatistician for RMT/.S,Audit Division
James Gresham,Audit Chief Data Analyst for RMVS
Garth Thimgan, CAE, General Audit Support and Consultant for'MI AS'
Helen D. Powszukiewicz, General Audit Support Administrative Assistant
Carl W. Ross,Agricultural Coordinator and Supervisor for RMV.S
Cathie E. Ross, Genera/Audit Support Administrative Assistant
Katie Linn,Administrative Assistant
•
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 24
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
APPENDICES
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 25
4111*
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR WELD COUNTY
2007
I. OVERVIEW
Weld County is located in northeastern Colorado. The county has a total of 115,540 parcels,
according to data submitted by the county assessor's office in 2007. The following graph
provides a breakdown of property classes covered in this preliminary analysis:
Property Class Distribution
70,000—
60,000—
50,000—
40,000-
30,000-
20,000—
10,000—
0 4,028
Vacant Land Residential Commllnd Other
The vacant land class of properties was dominated by residential land. Residential lots (coded
100) accounted for 77.8% of all parcels. No other subclass accounted for more than 20% of the
total.
For residential improved properties, single family properties accounted for 92% of all residential
properties. No sub-class breakdowns were indicated.
Commercial and industrial properties represented a smaller proportion of property classes in
comparison.
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 26
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
II. SALES FILE
The following sale analyses were based on the requirements of the 2007 Property Assessment
Study, based on information provided by the Weld County Assessor's Office. There were
19,710 sales in the file. Of these, 10,746 were qualified sales by the county. Further data
reductions will be described in each property class section.
III. RESIDENTIAL SALES RESULTS
The following steps were taken to analyze the appropriate residential sale dataset for Weld
County:
Steps Results
1. Selected sales coded as "Q" 10,746 Sales
2. Selected improved sales (Status = "I") 10,251 Sales
3. Selected sale with subclass codes 1212 to 1230 10,015 Sales
The 10,015 sales were analyzed using the required measurements for the level of assessment, as
well as for the quality of the assessment,as follows:
OVERALL Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT/TASP
Median .971
Price Related Differential 1.007
Coefficient of Dispersion .078
Econ Number Price Related Coefficient of
Area of Sales Median Differential Dispersion
0 973 .971 1.006 .062
2 2649 .968 1.007 .078
3 2591 .978 1.007 .071
4 632 .966 1.009 .090
5 114 .972 1.006 .117
6 1960 .969 1.012 .094
7 51 .977 1.024 .138
8 51 .952 1.009 .136
9 277 .973 1.007 .087
Excl 717
Overall 10,015 .971 1.008 .080
The above ratios are in compliance with the standards set forth by the Colorado State Board of
Equalization (SBOE) for overall sales. The following graphical exhibits describe further the
sales ratio distribution for all of these properties:
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 27
MONOREERIMERSERP
4110
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
RESIDENTIAL SALE RATIO ANALYSIS
2,500—
2,000-
1,500-
1
Y
Cr
e
1,000—
500—
Mean=0.9746
Std.Dev.=0.10934
N=10,015
0
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
SaleRatio
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 28
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Sale Ratio by Sale Price- Residential Properties
2.50
•
2.00 •
•
•
•
0 1.50
A
•
• • •
1.00
•
. r •
•
• • •
0.50 •
••1•
0.00 •
0.00 500000.00 1000000.00 1500000.00 2000000.00 2500000.00
Tap
•
The above graphs indicate that the distribution of the sale ratios was within state mandated
limits,and that there were no significant price-related differential issues.
Residential Market Trend Analysis
To determine if market trending was adequately accounted for by the assessor when analyzing
the residential dataset, we regressed the sale ratios across the 18-month sale period. The
following analysis, broken down by economic area, indicates that there were no significant
market trend factors present in the sale ratios:
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 29
L
410
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Coefficient
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
EconArea Model B Std. Error Beta t Siq.
1 (Constant) .983 .007 147.612 .000
saleperiod -.002 .001 -.100 -2.682 .007
0 1 (Constant) .979 .005 197.718 .000
saleperiod -.001 .001 -.051 -1.576 .115
2 1 (Constant) .960 .004 243.667 .000
saleperiod .001 .000 .061 3.133 .002
3 1 (Constant) .981 .004 269.069 .000
saleperiod .000 .000 -.006 -.292 .770
4 1 (Constant) .967 .009 107.556 .000
saleperiod .000 .001 -.014 -.348 .728
5 1 (Constant) 1.018 .029 34.737 .000
saleperiod -.004 .003 -.144 -1.539 .127
6 1 (Constant) .999 .006 173.271 .000
saleperiod -.002 .001 -.094 -4.180 .000
7 1 (Constant) .989 .042 23.390 .000
saleperiod -.001 .004 -.042 -.295 .769
8 1 (Constant) 1.010 .050 20.216 .000
saleperiod -.005 .005 -.156 -1.103 .275
9 1 (Constant) .967 .013 75.951 .000
saleperiod .002 .001 .102 1.707 .089
a. Dependent Variable: SaleRatio
Please note that Economic Areas 2 and 6 had statistically significant trends indicated, but the
actual magnitude of each adjustment was not practically significant.
Sold/Unsold Analysis
In terms of the consistent treatment of residential sold and unsold properties, we compared the
median actual value per square foot for both groups. The following indicates that overall, Weld
County has valued sold and unsold residential properties in a consistent manner:
Group No. of Median
Props Act Val/SF
Unsold 53,545 $127
Sold 9,153 $131
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 30
411
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
IV. COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL SALES RESULTS
The following steps were taken to analyze the appropriate commercial and industrial sale dataset
for Weld County:
Steps Results
1. Selected sales coded as "Q" 10,746 Sales
2. Selected improved sales (Status = "1") 10,251 Sales
3. Selected sale with subclass codes 2000 to 3999 137 Sales
137 sales were analyzed using the required measurements for the level of assessment, as well as
for the quality of the assessment.
Median .976
Price Related Differential. 1.1129
Coefficient of Dispersion .103
The above ratios are in compliance with the standards set forth by the Colorado State Board of
Equalization (SBOE) for the overall sales. The following graphical exhibits describe further the
sales ratio distribution for all of these properties:
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 31
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
COMMERCIAL SALE RATIO ANALYSIS
70-
80-
60-
a
II 10-
1
c
Q
LL
30-
20-
10—
Mean=09479
Std.Dev. 014662
N-197
0
0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 140 190
SaleRafio
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 32
411)
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Sale Ratio by Sale Price- Commercial Properties
•
1.40 ,
•
1.20 t
JN
o •t ' "
1.00 •
0.80 •
• •
0.60 •
•
♦
$0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000
Tasp
Commercial Market Trend Analysis
The assessor did not apply a market trend factor to the commercial sales, based on our analysis
of the commercial and industrial sale data. Our sale ratio analysis verified this conclusion, as
follows:
Coefficient?
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .940 .018 51.046 .000
saleperiod .001 .002 .036 .507 .612
a. Dependent Variable: SaleRatio
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 33
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Commercial Market Trend Analysis
•
140-
•
20- _ • • •
• • •
• • • • • • •
• • • • i • •
ion- : • i i • I : i i • _
• a • a
• •
• f� + • • • • $ •
• •
080- • • • • •• • It • a
• •
• • • • •
• • • • •
• •
080 •-
• • •
1 I I
0 s ID 15 20
sal•p•riod
Sold/Unsold Analysis
In terms of the consistent treatment of commercial/industrial sold and unsold properties, we
used the same comparison methodology used for residential properties. The following indicates
that commercial and industrial sold and unsold properties were valued consistently, based on the
mean and median value per square foot:
iitelitAgtt t
`- n.1, MaX
I440. X/ _ , f
Unsold 3,187 $47 $65 $10 $496
Sold 151 $55 $68 $10 $316
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 34
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
V.VACANT LAND SALE RESULTS
Ste s Results
1. Selected sales coded as "Q" 10,746 Sales
2. Selected improved sales (Status = "V") 1,130 Sales
3. Selected sales with abstract codes less than 4000 1,022 Sales
4. Selected sales with Previous Improvement Value = 0 663 Sales
The 663 vacant land sales were analyzed using the required measurements for the level of
assessment, as well as for the quality of the assessment. The following ratio analysis indicates the
results:
Ratio Statistics for NEWCURTO/TASP
Median 1.000
Price Related Differential 1.010
Coefficient of Dispersion .094
The above table indicates that the vacant land ratios are in compliance with the standards set
forth by the Colorado State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for the overall sales. The following
histogram and scatter plot describe the sales ratio distribution for all of these properties:
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 35
41,
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
VACANT LAND SALE RATIO ANALYSIS
200—
150—
u
C
e
7
V 100—
L.
50—
Mean=0.9947
Std.Dev.=0.15109
N=663
0
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
VSaleRatio
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 36
440
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Sale Ratio by Sale Price-Vacant Land Properties
2.00-
•
•
1.50- ••s •
ul• S
• •
• •
h •
•
Ts 4 '41 • • •
is• • •
s • •
44 a
• • •
0.50-
•
0.00-, •
I I I I I l I
$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000
VTasp
Vacant Land Market Trend Analysis
To verify that market trending was not present in the vacant land sale data, we again relied on
the sale ratio regression model. The following indicates that overall there was no significant
market trend factor:
Coefficients'
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Siq.
1 (Constant) .994 .010 95.833 .000
Vsaleperiod 6.55E-005 .001 .002 .057 .955
a. Dependent Variable:VSaleRatio
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 37
We
Ill
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Vacant Land Market Trend Analysis
200—
• •
' '
ISO— • •
• • •
• •
• • • • •
• • • • •
• • • • : a • • • _
re• 1m till !
• ilI � II ! ' ' ! !l
• •i ;
. �• •
• • • .
om- • '
• 15 S•unesr-l9NE-S
•
000- •
I I I I
0 10 15 20
Vsal•period
Sold/Unsold Analysis
In terms of the consistent treatment of vacant land sold and unsold properties, we examined the
median and mean change in value between 2006 and 2007 for vacant land property values
between these two groups by economic area, as follows:
EconArea Group N Median Mean Minimum Maximum
0 UNSOLD 1597 1.0000 1.0327 .57 1.89
SOLD 41 1.0750 1.1215 .92 1.88
Total 1638 1.0000 1.0349 .57 1.89
2 UNSOLD 2966 1.0095 1.1032 .60 1.94
SOLD 337 1.1500 1.2277 .63 1.94
Total 3303 1.0275 1.1159 .60 1.94
3 UNSOLD 2510 1.0000 1.0966 .54 2.00
SOLD 114 1.1429 1.2031 1.00 1.88
Total 2624 1.0000 1.1012 .54 2.00
4 UNSOLD 3112 1.0000 1.0528 .52 2.00
SOLD 26 1.0833 1.1038 1.00 1.73
Total 3138 1.0000 1.0532 .52 2.00
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 38
5.
II
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
6 UNSOLD 1611 1.0000 1.0662 .54 1.88
SOLD 30 1.0667 1.1633 .59 1.80
Total 1641 1.0000 1.0680 .54 1.88
8 UNSOLD 181 1.0000 1.0679 .67 1.50
SOLD 3 1.0000 1.0238 1.00 1.07
Total 184 1.0000 1.0672 .67 1.50
9 UNSOLD 478 1.0000 1.1087 .60 1.93
SOLD 32 1.0000 1.1714 .95 1.66
Total 510 1.0000 1.1126 .60 1.93
Total UNSOLD 13054 1.0000 1.0735 .52 2.00
SOLD 587 1.1000 1.2032 .59 1.94
Total 13641 1.0000 1.0791 .52 2.00
Based on the above analysis, we concluded that the Weld County Assessor has valued sold and
unsold vacant land properties in a consistent manner.
VI. AGRICULTURAL IMPROVEMENTS ANALYSIS
The final statistical verification concerned the assigned actual values for agricultural residential
improvements. We compared the median improved value per square foot for this group and
compared it to the 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:
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 39
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
VALUATION SPECIALISTS
Descriptives
Abstrimp Statistic Std. Error
ImpVaISF SFR Mean $573 33.54425
95%Confidence Lower Bound $508
Interval for Mean Upper Bound
$639
5%Trimmed Mean $97
Median $97
Variance $70,548,822
Std. Deviation $8,399
Minimum $0
Maximum $324,626
Range $324,626
a Interquartile Range $30
Skewness $20 .010
Kurtosis $471 .020
Ag Res Mean $153 46.63072
95%Confidence Lower Bound $61
Interval for Mean Upper Bound
$244
5%Trimmed Mean $99
Median 97
Variance $2,685,414
Std. Deviation $1,639
Minimum $1
Maximum $57,608
Range $57,607
Interquartile Range $52
Skewness $35 .070
Kurtosis $1,228 .139
VII. CONCLUSIONS
Based on this 2007 audit statistical analysis, residential, commercial/industrial, vacant land and
agricultural residential properties were in compliance with state guidelines. This included sale
ratio compliance, time trend validation, and agricultural residential valuation consistency.
2007 Weld County Property Assessment Study—Page 40
Hello