HomeMy WebLinkAbout20194161.tiff 2 0 1 9
W E L D C O U N T Y
P R O P E R T Y A S S E S S M E N T
S T U D Y
= _ _
�s .I - y r Nepoie
-
fe _�.,,
' •x
f
_ � `� . l •
k St
1s r r
.
1, ^ _
..-. I _ - v•; • ti �.w r
. . x iii - .
Ili
!Cs. 1 1 • a ' ' - if ——..-
11)
• a. . {#-
y ) : �,
I X
ol
a,
..,
S t .ril... .
•
It
l
7164 . • , ..
•
)44..." , opolossesesiseles. .. 7 .
I e , - eik, \ , . 01
•
Os . ' . •. *
1 I kr . .%
#0. '"'
4 O
0
.....• -•••••• _ { Wit,
issoliktia
e . / .
11- �
V \'GILD ' �;
. .\i 'I',-.. v- ai 1\4 01u fixIP \ t i ►
Audit Division
2019-4161
• G� a nS cc : C2SR ( DK )
o /03 r t 9 O9 / 9
WILD • ' E
APPRkI- 11 ? I I )
•
Audit Division
September 15 , 2019
Ms . Natalie Mullis
Director of Research
Colorado Legislative Council
Room 029 , State Capitol Building
Denver , Colorado 80203
RE: Final Report for the 2019 Colorado Property Assessment Study
Dear Ms . Mullis :
Wildrose Appraisal Inc . -Audit Division is pleased to submit the Final Reports for the 2019 Colorado
Property Assessment Study.
These reports are the result of two analyses : A procedural audit and a statistical audit .
The procedural audit examines all classes of property. It specifically looks at how the assessor develops
economic areas , confirms and qualifies sales , develops time adjustments and performs periodic physical
property inspections . The audit reviews the procedures for determining subdivision absorption and
subdivision discounting . Valuation methodology is examined for residential properties and commercial
properties . Procedures are reviewed for producing mines , oil and gas leaseholds and lands producing ,
producing coal mines , producing earth and stone products , severed mineral interests , and non -
producing patented mining claims .
Statistical audits are performed on vacant land , residential properties , commercial / industrial properties
and agricultural land . A statistical analysis is performed for personal property compliance on the eleven
largest counties : Adams , Arapahoe , Boulder , Denver , Douglas , El Paso , Jefferson , Larimer , Mesa ,
Pueblo and Weld . The remaining counties receive a personal property procedural study .
Wildrose Appraisal Inc . — Audit Division appreciates the opportunity to be of service to the State of
Colorado . Please contact us with any questions or concerns .
1111 °ar
Harry J . Fuller
Project Manager
Wildrose Appraisal Inc . — Audit Division
GILD ' E
Ilk :1I'I'klL la I\( 4 IK}^c•1}t 1/4: E
} I
Audit Division
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 3
Regional / Historical Sketch of Weld County 4
Ratio Analysis 6
Time Trending Verification 8
Sold / Unsold Analysis 9
Agricultural Land Study 11
Agricultural Land 11
Agricultural Outbuildings 12
Agricultural Land Under Improvements 13
Sales Verification 14
Economic Area Review and Evaluation 16
Natural Resources 17
Earth and Stone Products 17
Producing Oil and Gas 17
Vacant Land 18
Possessory Interest Properties 19
Personal Property Audit 20
Wildrose Auditor Staff 2 2
STATISTICAL APPENDIX 2 3
201 6 Weld County Property Assessment Study Page 2
WI LI) I • L' �J
Audit Division
INTRODUCTION
cobrado The procedural analysis includes all classes of
property and specifically looks at how the
assessor develops economic areas , confirms and
The State Board of E ualization (SBOE) qualifies sales , and develops time adjustments .
qThe audit also examines the procedures for
reviews assessments for conformance to the
adequately discovering , classifying and valuing
Constitution . The SBOE will order
agricultural outbuildings , discovering
revaluations for counties whose valuations do
subdivision build- out and subdivision
not reflect the proper valuation period level of discounting procedures . Valuation
value .
methodology for vacant land , improved
residential properties and commercial
The statutory basis for the audit is found in
C . R. S . 39 - 1 - 104 16� �a b and c properties is examined . Procedures for
� � � � � producing mines , oil and gas leaseholds and
lands producing , producing coal mines ,
The legislative council sets forth two criteria
producing earth and stone products , severed
that are the focus of the audit group :
mineral interests and non -producing patented
mining claims are also reviewed .
To determine whether each county assessor is
applying correctly the constitutional and
Statistical analysis is performed on vacant land ,
statutory provisions , compliance requirements
residential properties , commercial industrial
of the State Board of Equalization , and the
properties , agricultural land , and personal
manuals published by the State Property Tax
property . The statistical study results are
Administrator to arrive at the actual value of
compared with State Board of Equalization
each class of property. compliance requirements and the manuals
P
published by the State Property Tax
To determine if each assessor is applying
Administrator .
pr
ovisions the of law to the actual
values when arriving at valuations for
Wildrose Audit has completed the Property
assessment of all locally valued properties
Assessment Study for 2019 and is pleased to
subject to the property tax . report its findings for Weld County in the
following report.
The property assessment audit conducts a two -
part analysis : A procedural analysis and a
statistical analysis .
2019 Weld County Property Assessment Study Pau
WILD • -' E
4,r :\1'1'2 11- NI I\( (JPI'% R ' I I I ti
Audit Division
REGIONAL / HISTORICAL SKETCH OF
WELD COUNTY
ReaionalInformation Adams , Arapahoe , Boulder , Broomfield ,
Denver , Douglas , El Paso , Jefferson , Larimer ,
Weld County is located in the Front Range Pueblo , and Weld counties .
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
Jul85rxeg
Malden SE 1N ICK
• LOG AN ,5
• 38 Holyoke
ArsOFFAT RO L TT LARIMER 48
Cray • S 64 JACKSON 35 • WELD Sterling PHILLIPS
•
41 62
Ft Collins•
---
Steamboat Spgs — •
Greeley MORGAN Akron
Meeker 7 qr; •
Wray
• GRAND ) BOULDER Fort Morgan •
RIO BLANCO 25 0 YUMA
52r-r I Not Sulphur Bo;der
, j�+ ■ ■ UHEEIC80 ADAMS 63
I Eagle springs 4N 1 WASHINGTON
Jr.
�� • cci'9etow • 61
cLEARGREEK DENVER 3 EAGLE 1O 16 ARAPAHOE
-
GARFIELD • SUMMI APPEI50N • .
23 Glenwood Spgs 19 59 •Br: enridge
Castle Rock h;owa •
�-' r • 2• 20 Burlington
Le vine. DOUGLAS E LBER T Hugo
g
Grand Junction PIT KIN • • Fairplay 18 • KIT CARSON
49 Aspen LAKE
• 33 PARK - 32
47 TELLER LINCOLN Cheyenne
M ESA b E LTA Colorado Spgs 37
39 15 CHEYENNE •ells
• Delta Grippie EL PASO
GUN N 'SON CHAFFEE Greek 21
i
Montrose 25 8
• Salida ads
• Gunnison • •
MG NT ROSE FREMONT• KIOWA
43 22 Canon City Pueblo 31
CROWLEY _
•
OU RAY WestcQ ffe 13 Qrdwa Las Animas
48 SAG U ACH E PUEBLO —‘....„ Lamar
• 66 Seyueche CUSTER 51 • 0
SAN MIGUEL oaray HINSDALE 14 La Junta •
• ity
57 Telluride Lake
C
BENT PROW ERS
Dove Creek —hr OTERO
Creede 6
• DOLORES ih �ton 45 50
17 sAN JUAN MINERAL
40 Del Norte• H U MAN O
Cortez J RIO GRAN DE A LAMOSA Wa/senburg Springfield
53 2
• A/arnosa •
• Durango
MONTEZUMA LA PLATA Pagosa Spgs
CO5TILEA
42 T`'n'dad LAS ANIMAS GAGA
34
L ARCH U LETA CON WS • 36 5
4 11
•Cone�os San Luis a ri
) 0l 9 Weld County Pr ' )perty . \ ss�' `-nment Study Pace -.
y WILD • ' I;
�1•1•k4C \l 1\4 op}' 1k \11 I >
✓ I
Audit Division
Historical Information
Weld County had an estimated population of The county seat is Greeley which began as the
approximately 294 , 932 people with 74 . 0 Union Colony , which was founded in 1869 as
people per square mile , according to the U . S . an experimental utopian community of " high
Census Bureau ' s 2016 estimated census data . moral standards " by Nathan C . Meeker , a
This represents a 16 . 7 percent change from newspaper reporter from New York City.
April 1 , 2010 to July 1 , 2016 . Meeker purchased a site at the confluence of
the Cache la Poudre and South Platte Rivers
Weld County covers an area of 4 , 004 square (that included the area of Latham , an Overland
miles in north central Colorado . It is bordered Trail station) , halfway between Cheyenne and
on the north by Wyoming and Nebraska and on Denver along the tracks of the Denver Pacific
the south by the Denver metropolitan area . Railroad formerly known as the " Island Grove
The third largest county in Colorado , Weld Ranch . " The name Union Colony was later
County has an area greater than that of Rhode changed to Greeley in honor of Horace
Island , Delaware and the District of Columbia Greeley, who was Meeker' s editor at the New
combined . York Tribune , and popularized the phrase " Go
West, young man . "
Major Stephen H . Long made an expedition to
the area now known as Weld County in 1821 . Weld County' s cultural assets include
In 1835 a government expedition came through Centennial Village , an authentic recreation of
the general area; the next year a member of pioneer life on the Colorado plains . The
that party , Lt. Lancaster Lupton , returned to Meeker Museum in Greeley is a national
establish a trading post located just north of the historic site . Fort Vasquez in southern Weld
present town of Fort Lupton . In 1837 Colonel County has an exciting history as an early
Ceran St. Vrain established Fort St. Vrain ; Fort Colorado trading post. The Greeley
Vasquez was built south of Platteville about Philharmonic Orchestra is one of the oldest
1840 . The latter was rebuilt in the 1930's by symphony orchestra west of the Mississippi .
the State Historical Society . The University of Northern Colorado' s Little
Theatre of the Rockies is one of America's
premier college dramatic organizations .
(warm co. weld. co. us, 111413". gillpedia. org)
201 9 Weld County Property Assessment Study Pau 3
m yk WILD ' • ' E
.g 1i,► . - alt_ I\( URNlUkill )
Audit Division
RATIO ANALYSIS
[Vie d-10( 101 too v every case , we examined the loss in data from
All significant classes of prop erty were trimming to ensure that only true outliers were
p ' excluded . Any county with a significant
analyzed . Sales were collected for each
portion of sales excluded by this trimming
property class over the eighteen month period -
from January 1 , 2017 through June 30 , 2018 . method was examined further . No county was
g allowed to ass the audit if more than 5 % of
Property classes with less than thirty sales had pass
the sales period extended in six month the sales were "lost" because of trimming .
increments up to an additional forty- two
months . If this extended salesperiod did not All sixty-four counties were examined for
compliance on the economic area level . Where
produce the minimum thirty qualified sales , the p
Audit performed supplemental appraisals to
there were sufficient sales data , the
reach the minimum . neighborhood and subdivision levels were
tested for compliance . Although counties are
Althou h it was re uired that we examine the determined to be in or out of compliance at the
g q class level , non -compliant economic areas ,
median and coefficient of dispersion for all 1
counties , we also calculated the weighted mean neighborhoods and subdivisions (where
g applicable) were discussed with the Assessor .
and price -related differential for each class of pp
property. Counties were not passed or failed
Data on the individual economic areas,
by these latter measures , but were counseled if
neighborhoods and subdivisions are
there were anomalies noted during our found in the STATISTICAL APPENDIX .
analysis . Qualified sales were based on the
qualification code used by each county , which Conclusions
were typically coded as either " Q" or " C . " The For this final analysis report , the minimum
ratio analysis included all sales . The data was acceptable statistical standards allowed by the
trimmed for counties with obvious outliers State Board of Equalization are :
using IAA () standards for data analysis . In
ALLOWABLE STANDARDS RATIO GRID
Unweighted Coefficient of
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 1 and Between .95 - 1 . 05 Less than 20 . 99
2019 Weld County Property Assessment Study Page 6
WILD ' O. E
APPR.%ISM_ I\niP ix IRM [l
Audit Division
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 291 1 . 000 1 .024 6 . 6 Compliant
Condominium N / A N / A N / A N /A N /A
Single Family 10 ,943 0 . 972 1 .006 5 . 7 Compliant
Vacant Land 356 0 . 988 1 .016 12 . 7 Compliant
After applying the above described SBOE , DPT , and Colorado State Statute
methodologies , it is concluded from the sales valuation guidelines .
ratios that Weld County is in compliance with
Recommendations
None
2019 Weld County Property Assessment Study Page 7
WI LD ' • ' E
A1'}'K \bkl I`t"Uk}t )Lt if I '
Audit Division
TIME TRENDING VERIFICATION
1 E•rh od oloov trending adequately, and a further examination
�' is warranted . This validation method also
While we recommend that counties use the considers the number of sales and the length of
inverted ratio regression analysis method to g
the 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 -a d P y
pProve determine if the statistical results were valid .
methods , such as the weighted monthly median approach . We are not auditing the methods Conclusions
PP
used , but rather the results of the methods After verification and analysis , it has been
used . Given this range of methodologies used determined that Weld County has complied
to account for market trending , we concluded with the statutory requirements to analyze the
that the best validation method was to examine effects of time on value in their county. Weld
the sale ratios for each class across the County has also satisfactorily applied the results
appropriate sale period . To be specific , if a of their time trending analysis to arrive at the
county has considered and adjusted correctly time adjusted sales price (TASP) .
for market trending , then the sale ratios should Recommendations
remain stable (i . e . flat) across the sale period .
If a residual market trend is detected , then the None
county may or may not have addressed market
J / I
2019 Weld County Property Asscssiiienl Stud' RILL( '
`' 1 IVI LDI • ' E
IT 1
Audit Division
SOLD ! UNSOLD ANALYSIS
M eth od of ou v or if there are other explanations for the
b./ observed difference .
Weld County was tested for the equal
treatment of sold and unsold properties to If the unsold have a hi her median
ensure that "sales chasin " has not occurred . properties
value per square foot than the sold properties ,
The auditors employed a multi- step process to or if the median change in value is greater for
determine if sold and unsold properties were the unsold properties than the sold properties ,
valued in a consistent manner . P P P P '
the analysis is stopped and the county is
concluded to be in compliance with sold and
We test the hypothesis that the assessor has unsold guidelines . All sold and unsold
valued unsold properties consistent with what
properties in a given class are first tested ,
is observed with the sold properties based on although properties with extreme unit values
several units of comparison and tests . The g
or percent changes can be trimmed to stabilize
units of comparison include the actual value per the analysis . The median is the primary
square foot and the change in value from the y P y
g comparison metric , although the mean can also
previous base year period to the current base be used as a comparison metric if the
year . The first test compares the actual value P
distribution supports that type of measure of
per square foot between sold and unsold central tendency.
properties by class . The median and mean y
value per square foot is compared and tested The first test (unit value method) is applied to
for any significant difference . This is tested both residential and commercial / industrial sold
using non-parametric methods , such as the and unsold The second test is
Mann - Whitney test for differences in the properties .
applied to sold and unsold vacant land
distributions or medians between sold and properties . The test (change e in value
unsold groups . It is also examinedgraphically Pro P second g
method) is also applied to residential or
and from an appraisal perspective . Data can be
commercial sold and unsold properties if the
stratified based on location and subclass . The first test results in a significant difference
second test compares the difference in the g
P observed and / or tested between sold and
median change in value from the previous base unsold The third test valuation
ear to the current base between sold and properties .
y year modeling) is used in instances where the results
unsold properties by class . The same from the first two tests indicate a significant
combination of non-parametric and appraisal
difference between sold and unsold properties .
testing is used as with the first test. A third test It can also be used when the number of sold
employing a valuation model testing a and unsold is so lar e that the non -
sold / unsold binary variable while controllin properties g
g parametric testing is indicating a false rejection
for property attributes such as location , size , of the hypothesis that there is no difference
age and other attributes . The model
between the sold and unsold property values .
determines if the sold / unsold variable is
statistically and empirically significant . If all These tests were supported by both tabular and
three tests indicate a significant difference PP
graphics presentations , along with written
between sold and unsold properties for a given documentation explaining the
class , the Auditor may meet with the county to P g methodology
used .
determine if sale chasing is actually occurring ,
_' c ) 19 Weld County Property . \ � ,( ' �Hllc11l tudv 1)*(,Lt . c )
WILD • E
At'1'R.u'u. IM uRI'ORATU.C'
Audit Division
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 .
S
2019 Weld County Property Assessment Study Page 10
'�'.._ WILD ' • E
al
1 Audit Division
:LaoAGRICULTURAL LAND STUDY
Acres By Subclass Value By Subclass
Waste Spri ngl er
t 22 % ` 50 %
S.
j • Flood 60.000 000
t ' r i
10 . 1e. %
' 50 .000.000
v..- _,tart. i'
r• • 40.000 000
.4'4 •. ,..k...iat. ..4r+. • qi4 ' .
• i 30.000 000
t
j' , i . P • 20 000 000 ' .
ek r } 4• 10.000.000 11' 0 I ' , - - - T -T'
t l I ,�.
Grszin _ ! `. 4: It
Cw Farm / �' if C' �d
49.71 %.
, a 28 r % cg. 9
ydy
\ hieado's' Key
0 .e,3%
Agricultural Land
County records were reviewed to determine ( See Assessor Reference Library Volume 3
r
major land categories such as irrigated farm , Chapter 5 . )
dry farm , meadow hay, grazing and other •
Conclusions
lands . In addition , county records were
An analysis of the agricultural land data
reviewed in order to determine if: Aerial -
are available and are being d ; indicates an acceptable appraisal of this
photographs use" t e . '
soil conservation guidelines have been used to property yp Directives , commodity prices
classify lands based on productivity ; crop
and expenses provided by the PTA were
rotations have been documented ; typical
properly applied . County yields compared
commodities and yields have been determined ; favorably to those published by Colorado
and
Agricultural Statistics . Expenses used by the
orchard lands have been properly classified
valued ; expenses reflect a ten year average and county were allowable expenses and were in an
P g acceptable range .. Grazing lands carrying
are typical landlord expenses ; grazing lands P g
have been properly classified and valued ; the capacities were in an acceptable range . The
number of acres in each class and subclass have data analyzed resulted in the following ratios :
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 .
019 Weld County Property Assessment Study Page 11
`•I1 1
WILD " • � E
k\ i APPR_USAL INC t)RPCIRATEI s
.' \ Audit Division
Weld County Agricultural Land Ratio Grid
Number County County WRA
Abstract Of Value Assessed Total
Code Land Class Acres Per Acre Total Value Value Ratio
4107 Sprinkler 126 ,457 204.68 25 , 883 ,669 25 , 590, 164 1 . 01
4117 Flood 197 ,686 262 . 74 51 ,939 ,915 51 ,996 , 530 1 . 00
4127 Dry Farm 559 ,765 36 . 97 20,695 ,400 20,470,463 1 . 01
4137 Meadow Hay 12 , 167 45 . 50 553 ,654 553 , 654 1 . 00
4147 Grazing 967 , 149 6 . 95 6 ,723 , 365 6 ,723 , 365 1 . 00
4167 Waste 82 , 397 2 . 39 196, 583 196, 583 1 . 00
Total/Avg 1 ,945,621 54.48 105,992,587 105,5 30,759 1 .00
Recommendations
None
Agricultural Outbuildings
Methodology Conclusions
Data was collected and reviewed to determine Weld County has substantially complied with
if the guidelines found in the Assessor ' s the procedures provided by the Division of
Reference Library (ARL) Volume 3 , pages 5 . 74 Property Taxation for the valuation of
through 5 . 77 were being followed. agricultural outbuildings .
Recommendations
None
2019 Weld County Property Assessment Study Page 12
CANt \VILDI • ' PT
IM'ORPOR\TF I
Audit Division
Agricultural Land Under Improvements
Method of oav improvement that is determined to be not
integral under 39 - 1 - 102 , C . R . S . :
Data was collected and reviewed to determine
if the guidelines found in the Assessor ' s
Reference Library (ARL) Volume 3 , pages 5 . 19
• Property Record Card Analysis
and 5 . 20 were being followed . • Field Inspections
• Phone Interviews
CCoConclusions • In- Person Interviews with
Owners / Tenants
Weld County has used the following methods
• Written Correspondence other than
to discover land under a residential
improvement on a farm or ranch that is Questionnaire
determined to be not integral under 39 - 1 - 102 , • Personal Knowledge of Occupants at
C . R . S . : Assessment Date
• Aerial Photography/ Pictometry
• Questionnaires
• Field Inspections Weld County has substantially complied with
r
the procedures provided by the Division of
• Phone Interviews Property ert Taxation for the valuation of land
• In - Person Interviews with under residential improvements that may y or
Owners / Tenants may not be integral to an agricultural
• Written Correspondence other than operation .
Questionnaire
Recommendations
• Personal Knowledge of Occupants at
None
Assessment Date
Weld County has used the following methods
to discover the land area under a residential
2019 Weld County Property Assessment Study Page 13
L
ti
y' ILDI E
i \r�►s.ui x.l ...in)
I \ Audit Division
SALES VERIFICATION
According to Colorado Revised Statutes :
Part of the Property Assessment Study is the
r J
A representative body of sales is required when sales verification analysis . WRA has used the
J
considering the market approach to appraisal. above -cited statutes as a guide in our study of
J
the county ' s procedures and practices for
(8) In any case in which sales prices of comparable verifying sales .
properties within an )- class or subclass are utilized
when considering the market approach to appraisal in WRA reviewed the sales verification
the determination of actual value of any taxable procedures in 2019 for Weld County. This
J
property, the following limitations and conditions study was conducted by checking selected sales
shall apply: from the master sales list for the current
valuation period . Specifically WRA selected 60
(a)(1) Use of the market approach shall require a sales listed as unqualified .
representative body of sales, including sales by a
lender or government, sufficient to set a pattern, and All of the sales in the unqualified sales sample
appraisals shall reflect due consideration of the had reasons that were clear and supportable .
degree of comparability of sales, including the extent
of similarities and dissimilarities among properties For residential , commercial , and vacant land
that are compared for assessment purposes. In order sales with considerations over $ 100 , 000 , the
to obtain a reasonable sample and to reduce sudden contractor has examined and reported the ratio
price changes or fluctuations, all sales shall be of qualified sales to total sales by class and
J
included in the sample that reasonably reflect a true performed the following analyses of unqualified
or typical sales price during the period spec f ed in sales :
section 39- 1 - 104 ( 10 . 2) . Sales of personal property
exempt pursuant to the provisions of sections 39- 3- The contractor has examined the
102, 39- 3- 103, and 39- 3- 119 to 39- 3- 122 shall manner in which sales have been
not be included in an V such sample. classified as qualified or unqualified ,
including a listing of each step in the
(b) Each such sale included in the sample shall be sales verification process , any
coded to indicate a typical, negotiated sale, as adjustment procedures , and the county
screened and verified kv the assessor. (39- 1 - 103, official responsible for making the final
C. R . S .) decision on qualification .
The assessor is required to use sales of real property When less than 50 percent of sales are
only in the valuation process. qualified in any of the three property
classes (residential , commercial , and
(8)(f) Such true and typical sales shall include only vacant land) , the contractor analyzed
those sales which have been determined on an the reasons for disqualifying sales in
individual basis to reflect the selling price of the real any subclass that constitutes at least 20
property only or which have been adjusted on an percent of the class , either by number
individual basis to reflect the selling price of the real of properties or by value , from the
property only. (39 - 1 - 103, C. R . S . ) prior year . The contractor has
_2 ( ) 1 () \\ uld C4 ) linty Property Assessment Study I 'd (, ( - 14
likWILD • E
A1'1'R.\1s. It I\t-i ► trokHID
Audit Division
reviewed with the assessor any analysis unqualified sales , excluding sales that
indicating that sales data are were disqualified for obvious reasons .
inadequate , fail to reflect typical
properties , or have been disqualified Weld County did not qualify for in-
for insufficient cause . In addition , the depth subclass analysis .
contractor has reviewed the
disqualified sales by assigned code . If Conclusions
there appears to be any inconsistency
in the codin g the contractor has Weld County appears to be doing a good job of
verifying their sales . WRA agreed with the
conducted further analysis to y g
determine if the sales included in that county' s reason for disqualifying each of the
code have been assi ned a ro riatel sales selected in the sample . There are no
g pp p y recommendations or suggestions .
If 5O percent or more of the sales are Recommendations
qualified , the contractor has reviewed a None
statistically significant sample of
2019 Weld Count' Property Assessment Study Page 15
IlikWILD • E
ANT kl- UU I\d ukrtOR M)
Audit Division
ECONOMIC AREA REVIEW AND
EVALUATION
Meth od of ogz• identified homogeneous economic areas
ad
Weld County has submitted a written narrative comprised of smaller neighborhoods . Each
economic area defined is equally subject to a set
describing the economic areas that make up the q y
count ' s market areas . Weld County has also of economic forces that impact the value of the
y ro properties within that geographic area and this
submitted a map illustrating these areas . Each p p
of these narratives have been read and anal zed has been adequately addressed. Each economic
y area defined adequately delineates an area that
for logic and appraisal sensibility. The maps q
were also compared to the narrative for will give "similar values for similar properties
P
consistency between the written description
in similar areas . "
p
and the map . Recommendations
Conclusions None
After review and analysis , it has been
determined that Weld County has adequately
20 19 Weld County Property Assessment Study Page 16
WILD ` • E
I.4 4:16O12l1 n
Audit Division
NATURAL RESOURCES
Actual value determined - when.
Earth a ii d Stone Products ( 2) The valuation for assessment of leaseholds
and lands producing oil or gas shall be
� �� determined as provided in article 7 of this title .
Methodology § 39- 1 - 103 , C.R.S.
Under the guidelines of the Assessor ' s Article 7 covers the listing , valuation , and
Reference Library (ARL) , Volume 3 , Natural assessment of producing oil and gas leaseholds
Resource Valuation Procedures , the income and lands .
approach was applied to determine value for
production of earth and stone products . The Valuation:
number of tons was multiplied by an economic Valuation for assessment.
royalty rate determined by the Division of ( 1 ) Except as provided in subsection ( 2 ) of this
Property Taxation to determine income . The section , on the basis of the information
income was multiplied by a recommended contained in such statement, the assessor shall
Hoskold factor to determine the actual value . value such oil and gas leaseholds and lands for
The Hoskold factor is determined by the life of assessment, as real property, at an amount
the reserves or the lease . Value is based on two equal to eighty- seven and one -half percent of:
g
variables : life and tonnage . The operator (a) The selling price of the oil or gas sold there
determines these since there is no other means from during the preceding calendar year , after
to obtain production data through any state or excluding the selling price of all oil or gas
private agency . delivered to the United States government or
Conclusions any agency thereof, the state of Colorado or
The Count has a lied the correct formulas any agency thereof, or any political subdivision
y PP of the state as royalty during the din
and state guidelines to earth and stone preceding
calendar year ;
production .
(b) The selling price of oil or gas sold in the
Recommendations
same field area for oil or gas transported from
None the premises which is not sold during the
preceding calendar year , after excluding the
selling price of all oil or gas delivered to the
Producing Oil and Gas United States government or any agency
thereof, the state of Colorado or any agency
thereof, or any political subdivision of the state
Methodology as royalty during the preceding calendar year .
Assessors Reference Library (ARL) Volume 3 , § 39-7402, C.R. S.
Chapter 6 : Valuation of Natural Resources Conclusions
STATUTORY REFERENCES The county applied approved appraisal
procedures in the valuation of oil and gas .
Section § 39 - 1 - 103 , C . R . S . , specifies that
producing oil or gas leaseholds and lands are
Recommendations
valued according to article 7 of title 39 , C . R . S . None
2019 Weld County Property .-\ ccsluent Stuck Page 17
F
IlkWILD • E
:\)'PRV- \I 1 `., ( ii;i^c11' 1NI )
Audit Division
VACANT LAND
subdivision Discountin "
Subdivisions were reviewed in 2019 in Weld
Conclusions
County . The review showed that subdivisions
were discounted pursuant to the Colorado
Weld County has implemented proper
Revised Statutes in Article 39 - 1 - 103 ( 14) and procedures to adequately estimate absorption
by a 1 in the recommended methodolo in periods , discount rates , and lot values for
PP y gy qualifying subdivisions .
ARL Vol 3 , Chap 4 . Subdivision Discounting in
the intervening year can be accomplished by Recommendations
reducing the absorption period by one year . None
i
i
i
I
2019 \VClcl Comm' Property Assessment Study Page 18
;—) WILD ' • E
4 , 1 ' 4 , tRPc,RII , „
Audit Division
POSSESSORY INTEREST PROPERTIES
Possessory Interest
Possessory interest property discovery and commercial possessory interest properties .
valuation is described in the Assessor ' s The county has also been queried as to their
Reference Library (ARL) Volume 3 section 7 confidence that the possessory interest
in accordance with the requirements of properties have been discovered and placed on
Chapter 39 - 1 - 103 ( 17)(a) (II) C . R . S . the tax rolls .
Possessory Interest is defined by the Property Conclusions
Tax Administrator ' s Publication ARL Volume
3 , Cha ter 7 : A rivate ro erty interest in Weld County has implemented a discovery
p P P P process toplace possessory interest properties
government-owned property or the right to the -
occu anc and use of any benefit on the roll . They have also correctly and
P y
consistently applied the correct procedures and
government-owned property that has been
under lease , permit , license , valuation methods in the valuation of
granted possessory interest properties .
concession , contract , or other agreement.
Recommendations
Weld County has been reviewed for their None
procedures and adherence to guidelines when
assessing and valuing agricultural and
2019 Weld ( 'ounty Property Assessment Study Page 19
8 WILD • E
y 1 � �:Et 1\.0 ORIc)RA1E.f)
Audit Division
PERSONAL PROPERTY AUDIT
Weld County was studied for its procedural
compliance with the personal property Weld County is compliant with the guidelines
assessment outlined in the Assessor ' s Reference set forth in ARL Volume 5 regarding discovery
Library (ARL) Volume 5 , and in the State procedures , using the following methods to
Board of Equalization (SBOE) requirements for discover personal property accounts in the
the assessment of personal property . The county :
SBOE requires that counties use ARL Volume
5 , including current discovery, classification , • Public Record Documents
documentation procedures , current economic • MLS Listing and / or Sold Books
lives table , cost factor tables , depreciation • Chamber of Commerce / Economic
table , and level of value adjustment factor
Development Contacts
table .
• Local Telephone Directories ,
The Personal property audit standards narrative Newspapers or Other Local
P r
must be in place and current . A listing of Publications
businesses that have been audited by the • Personal Observation , Physical
assessor within the twelve -month period Canvassing or Word of Mouth
reflected in the plan is given to the auditor . • Questionnaires , Letters and / or Phone
The audited businesses must be in conformity Calls to Buyer , Seller and / or Realtor
r
with those described in the plan .
The county uses the Division of Property
r r
Aggregate ratio will be determined solely from "Taxation ( DPT) recommended classification
the personal property accounts that have been and documentation procedures . The DPT ' s
physically inspected . The minimum assessment recommended cost factor tables , depreciation
sample is one percent or ten schedules , tables and level of value adjustment factor
whichever is greater , and the maximum tables are also used .
assessment audit sample is 100 schedules .
Weld County submitted their personal
For the counties having over 100 , 000 property written audit plan and was current for
population , WRA selected a sample of all the 2019 valuation period . The number and
personal property schedules to determine listing of businesses audited was also submitted
whether the assessor is correctly applying the and was in conformance with the written audit
provisions of law and manuals of the Property plan . The following audit triggers were used
Tax Administrator in arriving at the assessment by the county to select accounts to be audited :
levels of such property . This sample was
selected from the personal property schedules • Businesses in a selected area
audited by the assessor . In no event was the • Accounts with obvious discrepancies
sample selected by the contractor less than 30 • New businesses filing for the first time
schedules . The counties to be included in this • Accounts with greater than 10%
study are Adams , Arapahoe , Boulder , Denver , change
Douglas , El Paso , Jefferson , Larimer Mesa , , ,
• Incomplete or inconsistent declarations
Pueblo , and Weld . All other counties received • Accounts with omitted
a procedural study . property
• Same business type or use
2019 \Veld Count' Property Assessment Study Page 20
'WILD ' • E
�` 4 'f'PP kIS INrORPt1R l ? I 1
Audit Division
• Businesses with no deletions or which range from . 90 to 1 . 10 with no COD
additions for 2 or more years requirements .
• Non-filing Accounts - Best Information
Available Conclusions
• Accounts close to the $ 7 , 700 actual Weld County has employed adequate
value exemption status
P discovery , classification , documentation ,
• Accounts protested with substantial valuation , and auditing p rocedures for their
disagreement personal property assessment and is in
statistical compliance with SBOE requirements .
Weld County' s median ratio is 1 . 00 . This is
in compliance with the State Board of
Recommendations
Equalization (SBOE) compliance requirements None
2019 Weld County Property Assessment Study Page 21
WILD ' S E
ki et
\ Audit Division
WILDROSE AUDITOR STAFF
Harry J. Fuller, Audit Project Manager
Suzanne Howard , Audit Administrative Manager
Steve Kane , Audit Statistician
Carl W. Ross, Agricultural / Natural Resource Analyst
J . Andrew Rodriguez, Field Analyst
2019 \ Weld County Property Assessment Study Page. ? ?
N. > WILD ' • E
Audit Division
STATISTICAL APPENDIX
019 Weld ( 'aunty Property Assessment Stuck Page ? 3
W1LD
1111 �,. .,. ,i. i ' , 1.,
Audit Division
STATISTICAL COMPLIANCE REPORT
FOR WELD COUNTY
2019
I . OVERVIEW
Weld County is an urban county located along Colorado ' s Front Range . The county has a total of
137 , 118 real property parcels , according to data submitted by the county assessor ' s office in 2019 . The
following provides a breakdown of property classes for this county:
X00,000
Real Property Class Distribution
80,000
4'
60,000
C
3
O
V r
86735
40,000
20,000
32046
13083
5254 _
0 Vacant Land Res Imp Comm/Ind Imp Other
type
The vacant land class of properties was dominated by residential land . Residential lots (coded 100 and
1112) accounted for 82 . 1 % of all vacant land parcels .
For residential improved properties , single family properties accounted for 92 . 7% of all residential
properties .
Commercial and industrial properties represented a much smaller proportion of property classes in
comparison . Commercial / industrial properties accounted for 3 . 8% of all such properties in this
county .
Based on the Audit questionnaire filled out by the assessor (see below) , the following geographic levels
were used by the assessor to value residential , commercial and vacant land properties :
2019 Statistical Report : WELD COUNTY Page ?4
WILDROSE
Audit Division
Geo Area Residential Comm/Ind Vacant Land
Economic Area V V V
Neighborhood V N V
Subdivision V N V
Codes
V= Vnlid Geographic Level - used for modeling
N = Not used as Geographic Level for modeling
II . DATA FILES
The following sales analyses were based on the requirements of the 2019 Colorado Property
Assessment Study . Information was provided by the Weld Assessor ' s Office in May 2019 . The data
included all 5 property record files as specified by the Auditor .
III . RESIDENTIAL SALES RESULTS
There were 10 , 943 qualified residential sales that occurred in the 18 -month sale period ending June 30 ,
2018 . The sales ratio analysis results were as follows :
Median 0.972
Price Related Differential 1 .006
Coefficient of Dispersion 5 . 7
We next stratified the sale ratio analysis by economic area and neighborhood . The minimum count for
the neighborhood stratification is 20 sales . The following are the results of this stratification analysis :
Economic Area
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
ECONAREA . 00 1032 9. 5%
2 . 00 3455 31 . 7%
3.00 2708 24 . 8%
4. 00 779 7 . 1 %
5 . 00 136 1 . 2%
6. 00 1778 16. 3%
7 . 00 47 0.4%
8.00 55 0. 5%
9 .00 372 3 .4%
99.00 544 5 . 0%
Overall 10906 100.0%
Excluded 0
Total 10906
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 25
WILD ' O:E
•\hPk 'I 1"i * 11R1'f1•
\, Audit Division
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Price Related Coefficient of
Group Median Differential Dispersion
. 00 . 974 1 . 001 . 048
2 . 00 .973 _1 .005 . 050
3 . 00 .969 1 . 004 . 051
4 . 00 .979 1 .005 .053
5 . 00 . 964 1 . 013 _ . 107
6 . 00 . 971 1 . 011 . 083
7 . 00 . 970 1 . 001 . 123
8 . 00 .952 1 . 012 . 085
9 . 00 .975 1 . 007 .060
99 . 00 . 968 . 999 .042
Overall .972 1 . 006 .057
NOTE: Econ Area 99 = Condominiums
Neighborhoods with at least 20 sales
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Price Related Coefficient of
Group Median Differential Dispersion
71 _ . 976 1 .001 .040
72 . 968 1 .001 .031
75 . 989 . 998 . 113
77 .972 1 .004 .056
78 . 979 1 . 000 .029
79 .986 1 .004 .040
81 .970 1 .000 . 034
83 .974 1 . 000 . 037
99 .968 .999 .042
171 . 966 1 . 002 .049
173 .991 1 .004 .062
174 .980 1 . 001 .039
177 .967 1 . 004 .072
261 .970 . 989 . 112
2001 .984 1 .003 .073
2002 .973 1 .002 .037
2003 .968 1 .008 .080
2005 .974 1 .001 .050
2006 .969 1 .003 .037
2007 .963 1 .002 .074
2011 .978 _ 1 . 016 . 072
2013_ .973 1 . 005 . 047
2016 .979 1 .002 .037
2018 . 970 1 . 010 .061
2019 .973 1 .008 . 049
2020 . 982 1 . 003 . 029
2060 .975 1 .006 . 064
2061 . 970 1 . 001 . 042
2100 .965 1 . 003 . 048
2101 .984 1 . 003 .048
2102 . 961 1 . 003 . 051
2103 .965 1 .000 .041
2104 . 965 1 . 014 . 086
2105 .964 1 . 005 . 068
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 26
a WILDIO ' IJ
Pitt 1rrk u '
Audit Division
2106 .968 1 .002 .039
2107 . 992 1 . 003 . 044
2108 . 964 1 . 002 . 041
2110 .973 1 .005 .050
2111 . 958 1 . 002 . 053
2112 .967 1 .004 .063
2115 . 972 _ 1 . 004 .036
2117 .966 1 .001 .034
2118 . 974 1 .000 .032
2120 .978 1 .007 .051
2121 .958 1 .007 .069
2124 .980 1 .001 .034
2125 .967 1 .002 .042
2151 . 969 1 .003 . 043
2152 .981 1 .000 _.018
2201 . 973 1 . 005 . 088
2252 .977 1 .006 .076
2657 .976 1 .002 .030
3000 . 977 1 . 003 . 046
3001 .981 1 .008 .066
3003 . 967 .999 .037
3004 .977 1 .001 .029
3008 . 965 1 . 009 .055
3009 .968 1 .003 . 101
3010 .968 1 .000 .038
3012 .972 1 . 001 . 040
3013 .971 1 .008 .064
3014 . 969 - 1 . 000 . 046
3016 .959 1 .000 .043
3017 . 951 1 . 011 . 062
3021 .958 .998 .065
3024 .961 1 .001 .030
3025 . 979 1 .001 . 049
3026 .966 1 .001 .048
3027 _. 963 1 . 002 . 042
3030 . 973 1 .001 .040
3031 . 958 .995 .077
3032 • .977 1 .001 .045
3033 .976 1 .002 .047
3034 . 969 1 .004 .050
3037 .974 1 .000 .039
3038 . 961 1 . 000 .045
3042 .974 1 .002 .052
3052 . 952 1 . 006 . 046
3055 .965 . 998 .054
3057 .976 1 .000 .022
3058 . 965 1 . 006 .047
3122 .965 _ 1 .000 .032
3664 . 952 - - - 1 . 002 _ 034
4000 .978 1 .000 .026
4002 . 975 1 .001 .030
4004 .984 1 .000 .033
4102 .975 1 .000 .042
4103 . 972 1 . 003 .055
4104 .993 1 .001 .057
4105 . 981 1 .025 . 131
4107 .981 1 .006 .079
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 27
WILD
�TM'R .I- HII)K% It.
Audit Division
4121 . 971 . 996 . 110
4123 . 973 1 . 009 . 049
5001 . 975 1 . 011 . 095
5007 . 993 1 . 029 . 200
5009 . 961 1 . 006 . 089
6003 .969 1 .011 __ . 096
6021 .966 1 .001 . 059
6023 .976 1 .015 . 099
6025 . 966 1 . 014 . 100
6027 . 971 1 . 015 . 068
6029 .976 1 . 005 . 069
6030 .970 1 .003 . 080
6031 .966 1 .002 .050
6032 . 963 1 . 027 . 090
6033 1 .008 1 .030 . 135
6034 .971 1 . 006 .083
6035 .968 1 .005 .059
6037 . 969 1 .015 . 122
6038 .974 1 .002 .078
6045 .952 1 .070 . 130
6050 . 968 1 . 018 . 086
6051 .984 _1 .002 . 028
6055 . 953 1 . 035 . 105
6062 .974 1 .002 .050
6207 .971 .989 . 137
7004 .995 .997 . 161
9007 . 976 1 . 008 . 052
9008 . 978 1 . 001 . 047
9009 .968 1 .027 . 112
9010 .971 1 . 005 _ . 049
9014 .983 1 .004 .036
9046 .954 .998 .073
Overall .972 1 .006 .055
NOTE: NBHD 99 = Condominiums
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 :
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 28
W1LDROSE
Audit Division
2,500
2,000
1 ,500
c
a,
a-
S
L
1 ,000
500
Mean = .97
10, Std. Dev. _ .082
N = 9,964
0 0.50 1 .00 1 .50 2.00
salesratio
Residential Sale Price by Sales Ratio
•
2.00 •
•l
t •
• •
• •
lie •
1.50 •o ••
'4744 • • •
• - 4,4. ..
•
111 ` •• •
i •• • ••
_ •
• •
•
1 .00
• t r • • • •
•• • •
4igk •
•
40• • • • •
• • •
0.50 •
M NM a la la T a ' �i► Na ' M
a N 671 a a a a N
O O O C13; O UI O
O O O O O O O O
0 08
0 O O O O 8
TASP 8 8 8 a
NOTE: Sales over $2,000,000 excluded for graphic clarity
The above graphs indicate that the distribution of the sale ratios was within state mandated limits .
Residential Market Trend Analysis
We next analyzed the residential dataset using the 18 -month sale period for any residual market
trending and broken down by economic area , as follows :
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 29
a \\ 'ILp C
Pakw Audit Division
Coefficient?
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
ECONAREA Model B Std . Error Beta t Sig .
. 00 1 (Constant) . 982 . 004 254. 830 . 000
SalePeriod -. 001 . 000 -. 049 - 1 . 505 . 133
2 .00 1 (Constant) . 969 . 002 453 . 507 . 000
SalePeriod . 000 . 000 . 015 . 829 .407
3.00 1 (Constant) . 968 . 002 389 . 913 . 000
SalePeriod . 000 . 000 . 009 .469 . 639
4 .00 1 (Constant) . 985 . 006 165 .408 . 000
SalePeriod -. 001 . 001 -. 037 -. 965 . 335
5.00 1 (Constant) . 969 . 031 31 . 566 . 000
SalePeriod . 004 . 003 . 105 1 . 075 . 285
6.00 1 (Constant) . 995 . 006 180 . 679 . 000
SalePeriod -. 001 . 001 -. 034 - 1 .409 . 159
7 . 00 1 (Constant) . 918 . 077 11 . 947 . 000
SalePeriod . 009 . 007 . 263 1 . 390 . 176
9.00 1 (Constant) . 993 . 009 107 .406 . 000
SalePeriod -. 002 . 001 -. 105 - 1 . 825 . 069
99.00 1 (Constant) . 973 . 005 184 . 800 . 000
SalePeriod -. 001 . 001 -. 041 -. 951 . 342
a . Dependent Variable: salesratio
There was no residual market trending present in the sale ratio data for any of the economic areas ; 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
J
median actual value per square foot for 2019 between each group . The data was analyzed both as a
J
whole and broken down by economic area , as follows :
Report
VALSF
sold N Median Mean
UNSOLD 75125 $ 199 $ 197
SOLD 10906 $202 $204
Report
VALSF
ECONAREA sold N Median Mean
. 00 UNSOLD 6034 $210 $208
SOLD 1032 $210 $209
2.00 UNSOLD 21086 $204 $203
SOLD 3455 $205 $205
3.00 UNSOLD 15991 $ 197 $201
SOLD 2708 $ 198 $205
2019 Statistical Report : WIELD COUNTY 1'atc� 3 ( I
WILD ' O: E
nir Audit Division
4.00 UNSOLD 6110 $ 185 $186
SOLD 779 $ 188 $ 193
5 . 00 UNSOLD 1259 $ 163 $ 167
SOLD 136 $200 $ 195
6 . 00 UNSOLD 16917 $207 $200
SOLD 1778 $212 $208
7 . 00 UNSOLD 791 $94 $ 105
SOLD 47 $131 $ 130
8 . 00 UNSOLD 705 $ 152 $151
SOLD 55 $ 168 $ 166
9 . 00 UNSOLD 2494 $206 $197
SOLD 372 $214 $205
99 . 00 UNSOLD 3466 $ 174 $165
SOLD 544 $ 176 $ 180
We also stratified this analysis by residential neighborhoods with at least 20 sales, as follows:
Report
VALSF
NBHD sold N Median Mean
71 UNSOLD _ 585 $226 $223
SOLD _ 114 $218 $217
72 UNSOLD 321 $208 $208
SOLD 56 $206 $207
75 UNSOLD 400 $257 $250
SOLD 34 $250 $256
77 UNSOLD 323 $234 $228
SOLD 42 $234 $224
78 UNSOLD 240 $200 $203
SOLD 40 $ 196 $ 197
79 UNSOLD 328 $ 168 $176
SOLD 45 $173 $179
81 UNSOLD 331 $207 $204
SOLD 51 $204 $202
83 UNSOLD 629 $ 164 _ _$ 170
SOLD 97 $170 $ 172
171 UNSOLD 822 _ $228 $224
SOLD 110 $235 $228
173 UNSOLD 192 $231 $228
SOLD 26 $232 $229
174 UNSOLD 574 $202 $199
SOLD 279 $210 $205
177 UNSOLD 260 $233 $225
SOLD 31 $251 $239
261 UNSOLD 166 $207 $204
SOLD 24 $254 $250
2001 UNSOLD 273 $248 $241
SOLD _ 23 $271 $265
2002 UNSOLD 615 _ $225 $223
SOLD 38 $214 $216
2003 UNSOLD 412 $248 $244
SOLD 35 $227 $246
2005 UNSOLD 823 $243 $236
SOLD 85 $246 $239
2006 UNSOLD 362 $210 $213
SOLD 50 $211 $214
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 31
`'VILD O;E
Pr Audit Division
2007 UNSOLD 648 $230 $229
SOLD 56 $235 $238
2011 UNSOLD 483 $205 $214
SOLD 143 $ 199 $209
2013 UNSOLD 616 $200 $205
SOLD 190 $214 $211
2016 UNSOLD 360 $ 170 $ 170
SOLD 163 $ 172 $ 172
2018 UNSOLD 29 $204 i�$204
SOLD 134 $ 192 $ 192
2019 UNSOLD 131 $220 $214
SOLD 199 $207 $213
2020 UNSOLD 189 $186 $ 186
SOLD 221 $ 184 $ 186
2060 UNSOLD 502 $223 $215
SOLD 66 $228 $223
2061 UNSOLD 293 $215 $206
SOLD 96 $218 $212
2100 UNSOLD 699 $ 193 $ 192
SOLD 67 $198 $201
2101 UNSOLD 383 $220 $217
SOLD 46 $224 $219
2102 UNSOLD 527 _ _ $211 $209
SOLD 85 $211 $206
2103 UNSOLD 504 $ 177 $ 182
SOLD 61 $ 183 $ 185
2104 UNSOLD 217 $ 180 $ 179
SOLD 23 $ 189 $ 190
2105 UNSOLD 500 $ 193 $ 196
SOLD 51 $205 $210
2106 UNSOLD 203 $ 198 $201
SOLD 74 $210 $207
2107 UNSOLD 667 $ 199 $200
SOLD 134 _ $ 197 $200
2108 UNSOLD 308 $ 193 $ 199
SOLD 38 $208 $201
2110 UNSOLD 1001 $210 $210
SOLD 116 $213 $211
2111 UNSOLD 2331 $205 $205
SOLD 212 $215 i $210
2112 UNSOLD 908 $180 $ 182
SOLD 78 $ 179 $ 184
2115 UNSOLD 211 $214 _ $214
SOLD 31 $216 $213
2117 UNSOLD 138 $ 178 $ 181
SOLD 48 $ 189 $ 190
2118 UNSOLD 457 $213 $212
SOLD 69 $211 $207
2120 UNSOLD 488 $200 $ 198
SOLD 93 __ _ $206 $204
2121 UNSOLD___ _ 288 $229 $230
SOLD 52 $237 $237
2124 UNSOLD 100 $ 196 $ 198
SOLD 43 $ 187 $ 195
2125 UNSOLD 204 $209 $206
SOLD 31 $218 $211
2151 UNSOLD 587 -$220 $216
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNT\ Page 32
Wi .,ILD E
y
Plikir Audit Division
SOLD 89 $221 $219
2152 UNSOLD 146 $222 $204
SOLD 112 $ 184 $ 198
2201 UNSOLD 205 $209 $205
SOLD 21 $252 $240
2252 UNSOLD 311 $246 $244
SOLD 26 $259 $253
2657 _UNSOLD 160 $210 $212
SOLD 54 $212 $214
3000 UNSOLD 246 $ 179 $ 183
SOLD 98 $201 $191
3001 UNSOLD 245 $265 $249
SOLD 29 $249 $248
3003 UNSOLD 284 $ 194 $ 193
SOLD 96 $ 195 $196
3004 UNSOLD 65 $ 189 $ 190
SOLD 35 $186 $ 186
3008 UNSOLD 398 $ 184 $ 190
SOLD 256 $ 184 $190
3009 UNSOLD 409 $277 $281
SOLD 30 $288 $292
3010 UNSOLD 220 $188 $191
SOLD 27 $ 198 $197
3012 UNSOLD }583 $ 195 $202
SOLD 56 $198 $201
3013 UNSOLD 1273 $ 195 $203
SOLD 175 $203 $210
3014 UNSOLD 330 $163 $ 175
SOLD 26 $169 $ 177
3016 UNSOLD 100 $273 $260
SOLD 24 $287 $258
3017 UNSOLD 227 $196 $193
SOLD 132 $ 197 $ 196
3021 UNSOLD 262 $239 $240
SOLD 21 $223 $238
3024UNSOLD 257 $ 189 $195
SOLD 47 $ 184 $192
3025 UNSOLD 551 $233 $230
SOLD 189 $207 $221
3026 UNSOLD 1342 $200 $204
SOLD 163 $200 $203
3027 _UNSOLD 325 $209 $209
SOLD 60 $215 $213
3030 UNSOLD 432 $ 180 $187
SOLD 160 $ 182 $ 190
3031 UNSOLD 583 _$250 $244
SOLD 54 $255 $248
3032 UNSOLD 312 $204 $212
SOLD 43 $204 $214
3033 UNSOLD 993 $182 $ 188
SOLD 194 $ 189 $ 194
3034 UNSOLD 92 $ 197 $204
SOLD 84 $ 198 $213
3037 UNSOLD 6.35 $ 188 $ 193
SOLD 128 $200 $203
3038 UNSOLD 956 $ 193 $ 195
SOLD 117 $ 189 $ 194
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNT 1 Page 33
WILD O: E
L �1N'k\Ld\t I\t ,1NP)Rt'/1.
..r
\ Audit Division
3042 UNSOLD 336 $201 $216
SOLD 28 $206 $225
3052 UNSOLD 167 $229 $221 _
SOLD 20 $228 $227
3055 UNSOLD 337 $ 196 $203
SOLD 62 $ 190 $ 198
_
3057 UNSOLD 204 $ 197 $206
SOLD 33 $ 197 $206
3058 UNSOLD 186 $ 182 $ 189
SOLD 30 $ 189 $ 196
3122 UNSOLD 284 $205 $211
SOLD �. -. . 68 $211 $215
3664 UNSOLD 141 $222 $222
SOLD 31 $218 $222
4000 UNSOLD 370 $ 181 $ 187
SOLD 166 $ 172 $ 169
4002 UNSOLD 413 $ 189 $ 191
SOLD 88 $ 189 $ 191
4004 UNSOLD 484 $ 170 $ 180
SOLD 177 $ 181 $ 183
4102 UNSOLD 177 $ 187 $ 189
SOLD 48 $ 176 $ 179
4103 UNSOLD 603 $234 $235
SOLD 48 $241 $241
4104 UNSOLD 84 $226 $221
SOLD 42 $227 $225
4105 UNSOLD 781 $223 $216
SOLD 55 $232 $225
4107 UNSOLD 310 $199 $ 196
SOLD 22 $208 $207
4121 UNSOLD 347 $213 $209
SOLD 22 $221 $211
4123 UNSOLD 286 $211 $208
SOLD 27 $207 $206
5001 UNSOLD 387 $ 169 $ 176
SOLD 55 $206 $198
5007 UNSOLD 254 $ 185 $ 186
SOLD 21 $ 190 $218
5009 UNSOLD 90 $212 $216
-- --- ----SOLD 29 $219 $219
6003 UNSOLD_ 367 $221 $214
SOLD v 41 $219 $216
6021 UNSOLD 727 $225 $220
SOLD 71 $225 $219
6023 UNSOLD 303 $185 $187
SOLD 29 $ 189 $ 192
6025 UNSOLD 814 $201 $202
SOLD 77 $ 198 $206
6027 UNSOLD 334 $225 $221
SOLD 46 $226 $223
6029 UNSOLD 943 $230 $224
SOLD 119 $240 $234
6030 UNSOLD 768 $ 195 $197
SOLD 7.8 $209 $208
6031 UNSOLD 1720 $208 $203
SOLD 150 $204 $203
6032 UNSOLD 320 $210 $207
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY 1 e _
IS WILD ' O. ,
:
1.7 Audit Division
SOLD 25 $221 $217
6033 UNSOLD 735 $ 189 $ 186
SOLD 72 $ 198 $ 191
6034 UNSOLD 1431 $223 $217
SOLD 158 $228 $224
6035 UNSOLD 1285 $213 $206
SOLD 142 $ 197 $201
6037 UNSOLD 1307 $192 $190
SOLD 137 $ 194 $ 195
6038 UNSOLD 1250 $215 $203
SOLD 125 $229 $223
6045 UNSOLD 767 $217 $212
SOLD 81 $226 $218 _
6050 UNSOLD 587 $219 $209
SOLD 41 $219 $216
6051 UNSOLD 142 $202 $204
SOLD 52 $ 199 $ 198
6055 UNSOLD 329 $207 $203
SOLD 24 $218 $211
6062 UNSOLD 836 $224 $220
SOLD 172 $223 _ $222
6207 UNSOLD 615 $ 139 $ 149
SOLD 36 $ 132 $ 143
7004 _UNSOLD 452 $117 $124
SOLD 28 $ 140 $ 137
9007 UNSOLD /9-7 $223 $222
SOLD 27 $228 $229
9008 UNSOLD 177 $233 $226
SOLD 36 $215 $211
9009 UNSOLD 396 $202 $200
SOLD 37 $204 $200
9010 UNSOLD 539 _$209 $206
SOLD 87 $214 $209
9014 UNSOLD 47 $210 $ 195
SOLD 81 $211 $ 199
9046 UNSOLD 284 $ 197 $196
_ SOLD 30 $220 $202
9999 UNSOLD 3466 $ 174 $ 165
SOLD 544 $ 177 $ 181
We also examined the overall median and mean change in actual value for taxable years 2018 and 2019
J
for residential sold and unsold properties, as follows:
Report
DIFF
sold N Median Mean
UNSOLD 67 , 126 1 .26 1 .29
SOLD 9,896 1 .27 1 . 28
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 3S
WILDL
Audit Division
Hypothesis Test Summary
Null Hypothesis Test Sig . Decision
Independent-
The distribution of DIFF is the sam jmples Retain the
1 acro� cate �aries �atsold . 1 � nn- .��� null
� h itn ey U hypothesis.
Test
.Asymptotic significances are displayed . The significance level is .05 .
The above results indicate that sold and unsold residential properties were valued in a consistent
manner .
IV. COMMERCIAL / INDUSTRIAL SALE RESULTS
There were 291 qualified residential sales that occurred in the 18 month sale period ending June 30 ,
2018 . The sales ratio analysis results were as follows :
Median 1 .000
Price Related Differential 1 .024
Coefficient of Dispersion 6.6
The above table indicates that the Weld County vacant land sale ratios were in compliance with the
SBOE standards . The following histogram and scatter plot describe the sales ratio distribution further :
100
80
v 60
d ;
3
Cr -
•
41 s
I-
LL
40
t,
20
Mean = 1 .02
Std. Dev. _ .118
N = 291
0 Emop
0.75 1 .00 1 .25 1 .50 1 .75
salesratio
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 36
\'W'I LI) C
opp
Audit Division
1.75 Commercial Sale Price by Sales Ratio
x
x
it x
150
- x x
xx x
'43125x
xx
v
A a .xx ::: x x x x
*
1.00 - 44 . , xx xx x
w sill x ,. N Sc $t
-
‘tA .xx 0 x,k I ii x
It x
0.75
r
SO 52,000,000 ' $4,000,000 56,000,000 1 58,000,000 ' $10,000,000
TASP
Commercial / Industrial Market Trend Analysis
The commercial / industrial sales were next analyzed , examining the sale ratios across the 18 -month sale
period with the following results :
Coefficients'
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std . Error Beta t Sig .
1 (Constant) 1 . 004 . 013 76. 929 .000
SalePeriod .003 . 001 . 108 1 . 848 .066
a . Dependent Variable: salesratio
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 37
WILD
o:E
\ •II I Iu 1kH k t'}1
Audit Division
,5 Commercial Market Trend Analysis
1 . + +
1 .50
+ + + + +
o + + +
A 1 .25 + + +
i+ + + +
♦ + +
-
1 .00istette 14144 oto egos seis tat
0.75
a _ 10 15 20
SalePerlod
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 actual value per square foot for 2019 between sold and unsold groups to
determine if sold and unsold properties were valued consistently. Based on the amount of subclasses
for commercial and industrial properties , we chose only major subclasses with at least 10 sales for this
analysis : i . e . those with improved abstract codes of 2212 , 2220 , 2230 , 2235 , 2245 , and 3215 . The
following analysis was then performed :
Report
VALSF
ABSTRIMP sold N Median Mean
2212 UNSOLD 638 $70 $97
SOLD 34 $ 105 $ 120
2220 UNSOLD 386 $98 $ 114
SOLD 16 $ 120 $ 124
2230 UNSOLD 791 $78 $ 115
SOLD 35 $ 126 $ 147
2235 UNSOLD 892 $43 $51
SOLD 23 $69 $67
2245 UNSOLD 823 $87 $91
SOLD 61 $89 $97
3215 UNSOLD 237 $55 $57
SOLD 8 $80 $79
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Pao(' iS
WILD ; E
Audit Division
Given that there was a statistically significant difference using the non-parametric Mann Whitney U
test, we next compared the percent change in actual value between taxable years 2018 and 2019 for
sold and unsold commercial properties in Weld County , as follows :
Report
DIFF
ABSTRIMP sold N Median Mean
2212.00 UNSOLD 660 1 . 32 1 .48
SOLD 36 1 . 50 1 .64
2215.00 UNSOLD 32 1 . 10 1 . 22
SOLD 4 1 . 30 1 . 50
2220.00 UNSOLD 354 1 . 18 1 . 25
SOLD 32 1 .40 1 .45
2221 .00 UNSOLD 25 1 .41 1 . 50
SOLD 1 1 .49 1 .49
2225 . 00 UNSOLD 49 1 . 14 2 . 10
SOLD 2 1 .79 1 .79
2227 . 50 UNSOLD 40 1 . 18 1 . 30
SOLD 1 1 . 55 1 . 55
2230. 00 UNSOLD 740 1 . 19 1 . 25
SOLD 40 1 . 57 1 . 63
2232. 50 UNSOLD 40 1 . 39 1 . 90
SOLD 2 1 .07 1 . 07
3215.00 UNSOLD 218 1 . 26 1 .63
SOLD 8 1 .41 1 . 51
Given that both of these comparisons indicated a statistical difference between sold and unsold
commercial / industrial properties , we next developed an econometric model that used the assessor ' s
actual value as the predicted variable . A total of 3 , 621 commercial / industrial properties were analyzed .
Commercial / industrial property subclasses included the following :
ABSTRIMP
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 2212 642 17 .7 17 . 7 17 . 7
2220 361 10. 0 10 . 0 27 .7
2230 769 21 .2 21 . 2 48. 9
2235 764 21 . 1 21 . 1 70 . 0
2245 856 23 . 6 23 . 6 93 . 7
3215 229 6. 3 6. 3 100. 0
Total 3621 100 . 0 100. 0
We developed a stepwise regression model to test whether sold and unsold properties were valued
differently by the assessor .
To do this , we included a binary variable for sold / unsold status . For the model , sold properties were
coded " 1 " and unsold properties were coded "0 . " Other variables tested included improved area , age ,
economic area , and commercial / industrial subclass . The dependent variable is the 2019 current value .
The stepwise regression analysis adds variables to the model based on their contributory strength, as
measured by their t or p values (depending on the test) . Due to the number of sales , we used a p value
2019 Statistical Report : WELD COUNTY Page 39
d'S 1' i�'11-?.‘1C
E
,i• _1
Audit Division
of 0 . 02 as the tolerance threshold . At each step , a variable is added , and variables already in the model
are re -evaluated to determine if they should remain in the model . After it is determined that adding
additional variables will not improve the model ' s predicative or explanatory power , the process stops .
Variables not included at this point are determined to not be significant . In this analysis , our primary
focus was the sold / unsold variable previously described .
After 5 iterations , the following results were generated by the model :
Model Summary
Adjusted R Std . Error of the
Model R R Square Square Estimate
1 . 685a .469 .469 2257010 . 897
2 . 691D .478 .478 2238687 . 542
3 . 698 .487 .486 2220314 . 914
4 . 699b .488 .488 2217592 . 730
5 . 699e .489 .488 2216235 . 603
6 . 699' .489 .489 2215321 . 114
7 . 700g .490 .489 2214466. 202
8 . 700h .490 .489 2214215 .863
a . Predictors: (Constant) , LIVEAREA
b. Predictors: (Constant) , LIVEAREA, EA2
c. Predictors: (Constant) , LIVEAREA, EA2 , EA3
d . Predictors: (Constant) , LIVEAREA, EA2 , EA3 , v2235
e. Predictors: (Constant) , LIVEAREA, EA2 , EA3 , v2235 , v2215
f. Predictors: (Constant) , LIVEAREA, EA2 , EA3, v2235 , v2215 , age
g . Predictors: (Constant) , LIVEAREA, EA2 , EA3 , v2235 , v2215 , age,
v2212
h . Predictors: (Constant) , LIVEAREA, EA2 , EA3 , v2235 , v2215 , age,
v2212 , EA6
The following coefficients were included in the model at Step 8 :
8 (Constant) 157813. 872 52257 . 774 3 . 020 . 003
LIVEAREA 51 . 120 . 792 . 668 64 . 543 . 000
EA2 999854. 431 102732 . 607 . 106 9 . 733 . 000
EA3 927356. 789 103951 . 966 .097 8 . 921 . 000
v2235 - 266505. 797 83349 . 905 - .034 - 3 . 197 . 001
v2215 975520. 257 372146 . 798 .027 2 . 621 . 009
age - 944. 006 391 . 846 - .025 - 2 . 409 . 016
v2212 177442. 659 94331 . 478 .020 1 . 881 . 060
EA6 11215 7. 791 7744 7 . 999 . 016 1 . 448 . 148
The model at Step 8 did not include the Sold / Unsold variable , indicating that it did not make a
significant difference in the model whether the properties were sold or unsold . Based on this finding ,
we concluded that the assessor valued sold and unsold commercial properties consistently in 2019 .
2019 Statistical Report : WELD COUNTY Pao(' 40
\vILDICSE
Audit Division
V. VACANT LAND SALE RESULTS
There were 356 qualified residential sales that occurred in the 18 -month sale period ending June 30 ,
2018 . The sales ratio analysis results were as follows :
Median 0. 988
Price Related Differential 1 . 016
Coefficient of Dispersion 12. 7
The above ratio statistics were in compliance overall with the standards set forth by the Colorado State
Board of Equalization (SBOE) for the overall vacant land sales . The following graphs describe further
the sales ratio distribution for all of these properties :
100
80
v 60
c
40
•
20
agaillia6
Mean = .97
- Std. Dev. _ .191
N = 356
0 0.0 0.5 1 .0 1 .5 2.0
salesratio
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 41
ilkWILD L'
\ .it .t I i . ., . l �
Audit Division
2.0 Vacant Land Sale Price by Sales Ratio
x
x
x
15 x �
x x
* iSCx X
• x x x x
p • 4. xx• x
x x
in 1.0 gr x ~ x '�c « lx % tele a w Aa
A K. It x x x x x
x x
x 0 x x
x
x' c x x get
x x
x
x
0.0
$0 I $500,000 1 $1,000,000 I $1,500,000 $2,000,000
TASP
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?
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std . Error Beta t Sig .
1 (Constant) . 976 . 017 56. 753 . 000
SalePeriod -. 001 . 002 -. 028 -. 520 . 604
a . Dependent Variable: salesratio
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page' 42
WILv L
Audit Division
20
Vacant Land Sales Market Trend Analysis
+ +
1 .s '} +
+ + ♦ ♦ + $
+ 'f' * $ + + * +
o 4' + + ♦ .� + + t
N 1 . •• •• • tit
• • • • • •• •f ■■ • • • •• i•t "r + I, + +
R � T
+ $ 4. : +
o ..
0.0
0 5 1U 15 20
SalePeriod
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 actual value for taxable years 2018 and 2019 between each group . We stratified the
vacant land properties by subdivision and found overall consistency. The following results present the
overall comparison results :
Report
DIFF
sold N Median Mean
UNSOLD 5462 1 . 11 1 . 10
SOLD 291 1 . 18 1 . 20
We also compared sold and unsold changes in value by subdivision with at least 6 sales , as follows :
Report
DIFF
SUBNO sold N Median Mean
2528 UNSOLD 29 . 92 . 91
SOLD 15 .95 .93
2925 UNSOLD 37 1 . 11 1 . 08
SOLD 8 1 . 11 1 . 11
3062 UNSOLD 4 1 . 25 1 . 18
SOW 9 1 . 25 1 . 25
3372 UNSOLD 9 1 . 30 1 . 30
SOLD 9 1 . 30 1 . 30
4396 UNSOLD 10 1 . 00 1 . 11
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 43
da wILDICSL
Audit Division
SOLD 11 1 . 08 1 . 15
4584 UNSOLD 7 1 . 29 1 . 26
SOLD 7 1 . 29 1 . 29
5192 UNSOLD 24 1 .40 1 . 28
SOLD 9 1 .40 1 .40
6460 UNSOLD 8 1 . 11 1 . 11
SOLD 6 1 . 11 1 . 11
6659 UNSOLD 5 1 . 36 1 . 29
SOLD 6 1 . 36 1 . 36
6663 UNSOLD 80 1 . 30 1 . 28
SOLD 8 1 . 30 1 .47
Total UNSOLD 213 1 . 25 1 . 18
SOLD 103 1 . 25 1 . 21
Total 316 1 . 25 1 . 19
Overall , we concluded that the county assessor valued sold and unsold vacant properties consistently .
V. CONCLUSIONS
Based on this 2019 audit statistical analysis , residential , commercial / industrial and vacant land
properties were found to be in compliance with state guidelines .
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 44
\VII ,I) D I;
Audit Division
STATISTICAL ABSTRACT
Residential
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
35% confidence Interval tot 95% Confidence Interval for Coefficient of
Mean 95% Confidence Interval for Median Weighted Mean Variation
Actual Weighted Price Related Coefficient of Mean
EA Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Median Lower Bound Upper Bound Coverage Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Differential Dispersion Centered
.00 977 973 .981 .974 970 979 95 6% 976 .971 .981 1 .001 .046 6.6%
2 00 .971 968 973 .973 971 .975 95 4% 966 .963 .969 1 .005 048 6.9%
3.00 .969 966 971 .969 966 971 95 2% 965 962 .967 1 .004 049 6.7%
4.00 980 974 986 .979 974 982 95 2% .977 972 982 1 003 047 8 3%
5.00 996 .962 1 .031 973 927 993 96 9% .980 .952 1 .009 1 016 115 17.7%
6.00 .988 982 994 .971 966 .975 95.2% .976 .968 .984 1 .012 .081 12 2%
7.00 1 013 938 1 088 995 884 1 128 96 4% 1 016 .924 1 108 997 161 19 0%
9.00 979 969 989 976 968 983 95 8% 971 963 979 1 008 056 9 3%
99.00 968 963 974 968 965 972 95 6% 969 965 974 999 042 6 6%
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
95% Confidence Interval for 95% Confidence Interval for Coefficient of
Mean 95% Confidence Interval for Median Weighted Mean Vanation
Actual Weighted Price Related Coefficient of Mean
Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Median Lower Bound Upper Bound Coverage Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Differential Dispersion Centered
1 .025 1 011 1 .038 1 .000 .997 1 .000 95 4% 1 .001 985 1 .017 1 .024 066 11 .5%
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.
Vacant Land
Ratio Statistics for CURRLND 1 TASP
95% Confidence Interval for 95% Confidence Interval for Coefficient of
Mean 95% Confidence Interval for Median Weighted Mean Variation
Actual Weighted Price Related Coefficient of Mean
Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Median Lower Bound Upper Bound Coverage Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Differential Dispersion Centered
969 .949 989 .988 973 .998 95.0% .954 .917 990 1 016 .127 19.7%
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
2019 Statistical Report: W [=L [) COUNTY Page 45
WILD • E
�w1 \PPK \lS \l 1".tr►Kr ( IK \ lr1
Audit Division
Residential Median Ratio Stratification
Sale Price
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
SPRec LT $25K 7 0 . 1 %
$25K to $50K _ 2 0 . 0 %
$50K to $ 100K -10 0 . 1 %
$ 100K to $ 150K 67 0 . 7 %
$ 150K to $200K 300 3.0%
$200K to $300K 2441 24 . 5%
$300K to $500K 6185 62 . 1 %
$500K to $750K 850 8 . 5%
$750K to $ 1 . 000K 80 0 . 8%
Over $ 1 . 000K 22 0.2%
Overall 9964 100 . 0%
Excluded 0
Total 9964
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
LT $25K . 836 1 . 023 . 180 24.5% _
$25K to $50K 1 . 382 . 959 . 216 30 . 6%
$50K to $ 100K 1 .064 1 .003 . 165 _ _ 24.7 %
$ 100K to $ 150K 1 . 155 1 .004 .200 26 . 1 %
$ 150K to $200K 1 . 019 1 . 002 . 104 _ 14 . 3%
$200K to $300K . 971 1 .001 .061 8.9%
$300K to _$500K .974 1 . 000 . 043 5 . 9%
$500K to $750K . 942 1 .001 . 070 9.5%
$750K to $ 1 , 000K . 942 1 . 001 . 085 10 . 8%
Over $1 ,000K .967 1 .002 . 115 14.8%
Overall . 972 1 . 006 . 055 8 . 4%
Subclass
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
ABSTRIMP 1212 . 00 9256 92 . 9%
1213.50 2 0.0%
1214.00 2 0 . 0%
1215 . 00 110 1 . 1 %
1216.00 1 0.0%
1217 . 50 2 0.0%
1220.00 36 0.4%
1223 . 75 1 _ 0 . 0%
1224.44 1 _0 . 0 %
1225.00 _ 7 0. 1 %
1230 . 00 544 5 . 5 %
9250.00 1 0 . 0 %
2019 Weld C 'ounit V Property Assessment Study Page 46
di s'VILD • .' L'
Ollikt Audit Division
9270 . 00 1 0.0%
Overall 9964 100.0°/0
Excluded 0
Total 9964
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
1212 . 00 .972 1 .006 . 055 8.4%
1213 . 50 1 . 105 1 .025 .213 30 . 1 %
1214 . 00 1 .021 . 997 . 029 4 . 0%
1215 . 00 .958 1 .017 . 109 16.3%
1216 . 00 _.798 1 .000 . 000
1217. 50 .981 1 .000 .023 3.3%
122_0 . 00 . 992 . 994 _ . 099 14. 1 %
1223 . 75 1 .037 1 .000 .000
-1224 . 44 .904 1 .000 .000
1225 . 00 1 .002 1 . 016 . 052 7.5%
1230 . 00 . 968 _.999 .042 6.6%
9250 . 00 . 947 1 .000 . 000
9270.00 .595 1 .000 .000
Overall . 972 1 .006 . 055 8.4%
Age
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
AgeRec Over 100 223 2 . 2%
75 to 100 227 2.3%
50 to 75 603 6 . 1 %
25 to 50 986 9.9%
5 to 25 3900 39. 1 %
5 or Newer 4025 40 .4%
Overall 9964 100.0% _
Excluded 0
Total 9964
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
Over 100 .977 1 . 029 . 128 18.4%
75 to 100 .959 1 .023 . 119 17.6%
50 to 75 .965 1 . 008 . 090 13 . 0%
25 16-50 .966 1 .003 . 070 10.8%
5 to 25 _ .968 1 .002 . 049 7.4%
5 or Newer . 979 _ 1 . 007 .043 6.0%
Overall .972 1 . 006 .055 8 .4%
2019 Statistical Report : WLLD COUNTY Page 47
V iLDI C E
Audit Division
Improved Area
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
ImpSFRec LE 500 sf 12 0 . 1 %
500 to 1 . 000 sf 697 7 . 0 %
1 . 000 to 1 , 500 sf 3122 31 . 3%
1 , 500 to 2 , 000 sf T _ 3209 32.2%
2 , 000 to 3 , 000 sf _2433 24.4%
3 , 000 sf or Higher 491 4 . 9%
Overall 9964 100 . 0 %
Excluded ---6
-
Total 9964
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
LE 500 sf . 854 .935 . 185 23.3%
500 to 1 . 000 sf . 952 1 . 016 . 089 14 . 9%
1 , 000 to 1 , 500 sf . 971 1 .005 . 054 8 . 5 %
1 , 500 to 2 , 000 sf . 973 1 .005 .048 7 . 1 %
2 . 000 to 3 , 000 sf .979 1 . 005 .049 7 . 0%
3 , 000 sf or Higher . .967 1 .010 .075 10.8%
Overall .972 1 .006 . 055 8.4%
Improvement Quality
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
QUALITY 1 92 0 . 9%
2 2022 20 . 3%
3 7302 73.3%
4 493 4. 9%
5 52 0.5%
6 3 0 . 0%
Overall 9964 100.0%
Excluded 0
Total 9964
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
1 . 959 1 . 036 . 147 21 . 6%
2 . 967 1 . 008 . 080 12. 5%
3 . 973 1 .004 . 046 6.5%
4 . 978 1 . 008 . 068 9 . 1 %
5 .984 1 .013 .087 13.7%
6 .984 . 997 .058 8 . 8%
Overall .972 1 .006 . 055 8.4%
2019 Statistic aI Report : WELD COUNTY Page 48
WILD ROSE
Audit Division
Improvement Condition
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
CONDITION 1 6 0 . 1 %
2 23 0 . 2%
3 9917 99.5%
4 18 0 . 2%
Overall 9964 100 . 0%
Excluded 0
Total 9964
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
1 1 . 079 1 . 141 . 277 38 . 2 %
2 . 843 1 . 032 . 192 22. 5 %
3 .972 1 . 006 .054 8.3%
4 1 .009 1 . 022 .075 10.7%
Overall .972 1 . 006 .055 8 .4%
Commercial Median Ratio Stratification
Sale Price
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
SPRec LT $25K 6 2 . 1 %
$25K to $50K 4 1 .4%
$50K to $ 100K _ 23 7 . 9%
$100K to $150K 58 19.9%
$ 150K to $200K 31 10 . 7%
$200K to $300K 33 11 . 3%
$300K to $500K 33 11 .3%
$500K to $750K 25 8 . 6%
$750K to $1 ,000K 24 8 . 2 %
Over $ 1 . 000K 54 18.6%
Overall 291 100.0%
Excluded 0
Total 291
2019 Statistic a I Report: \\ LW COUNTY Page 49
ra DieL
Audit Division
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
LT $25K 1 . 018 . 984 . 132 25 . 7%
$25K to $50K 1 . 057 . 988 . 220 33 .4%
$50K to $ 100K 1 . 001 1 .007 . 105 16.8%
$ 100K to $ 150K 1 . 000 1 .001 .063 10 . 9%
$ 150K to $200K _1 . 002 1 . 001 . 058 _ _ 11 . 8% _
$200K to $300K ��. 994 .998 .061 10.0%
$300K to $500K . 997 . 998 . 079 14 . 8%
$500K to $750K 1 .000 .997 _ .062 10.6%
$750K to $ 1 , 000K 1 . 000 1 . 000 . 032 5 . 2%
Over $ 1 ,000K .994 1 .000 . 049 7 .9%
Overall 1 . 000 1 . 024 . 066 12 . 0%
Subclass
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
ABSTRIMP . 00 1 0 . 3%
1225 . 00 1 0 . 3%
2212 . 00 36 1Z4%
2215 . 00 4 1 .4%
2220.00 32 11 .0%
2221 . 00 1 0 . 3%
2223.50 2 0 . 7 % y_
2225 . 00 2 0.7%
2227 . 50 1 a3%
2230 . 00 43 14.8%
2232 . 50 2 0 . 7 %
2235.00 37 12.7%
2245 . 00 112 38 . 5 %
2932.86 1 0.3%
3212 . 00 _ 2 0 . 7%
3215 . 00 8 2 . 7 %
9249.00 2 0.7%
9259 . 00 3 1 . 0 %
9279.00 1 0.3%
Overall 291 100 . 0%
Excluded 0
Total 291
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 50
WILD • 'l. E
Audit Division
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
. 00 . 972 1 .000 .000
1225 . 00 1 . 130 1 .000 .000
2212 . 00 1 . 000 . 999 . 037 6 . 8%
2215 . 00 .999 1 .017 . 046 _ 6.5%
2220 . 00 __ 1 . 000 1 .006 . 053 12 .4%
2221 . 00 .987 1 .000 .000 .
2223 . 50 1 .215 1 .078 . 102 14 .4%
2225. 00 .987 . 994 . 013 1 . 9%
2227 . 50 1 .000 1 .000 _ .000
2230 . 00 . 995 1 .019 . 065 10 . 3%
2232 . 50 1 .033 .982 .041 5.8%
2235 . 00 1 . 000 1 .060 . 089 16 .4%
2245.00 1 .000 1 .014 .072 12.3%
2932 . 86 . 993 1 .000 . 000
_
3212. 00 1 .256 1 . 151 . 215 30 .4 %
3215 . 00 . 996 .999 . 026 4.0%
9249 . 00 . 955 .999 . 008 1 . 1 %
9259.00 1 . 108 1 .047 .045 7.2%
9279 . 00 .999 1 .000 . 000 .
Overall 1 .000 1 .024 .066 12.0%
Age
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
AgeRec 0 1 0.3%
Over 100 15 5 . 2%
7.75 to 100 20 6. 9%
50 to 75 22 7 .6%
25 to 50 52 17 . 9%
5 to 25 102 35. 1 %
-5-or Newer 79 27 . 1 %
Overall 291 100.0%
Excluded 0
Total 291
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
0 . 9. 72 1 . 000 .000 .
Over 100 1 .000 1 .015 .064 10.6%
75 to 100 .995 1 . 002 . 048 6.4%
50 to 75 1 . 000 1 . 009 .035 5 . 3%
25 to 50 1 .000 1 .032 .070 13. 1 %
-a- to 25 1 . 000 1 . 031 .073 14 . 1 %
5 or Newer 1 .000 1 .020 .069 11 .4%
Overall 1 . 000 1 . 024 . 066 12 . 0%
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page S1
\VILIDI D S11
Audit Division
Improved Area
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
ImpSFRec 0 1 0 . 3 %
LE500sf 12 4 . 1 %
500 to 1 , 000 sf 42 14 .4%
1 , 000 to 1 , 500 sf 44 15 . 1 %
1 ,500 to 2 , 000 sf 31 10 . 7 %
2 , 000 to 3 , 0. 00 sf - 31 10 . 7 %
3 , 000 sf or Higher 130 44.7%
Overall 291 100 . 0 %
Excluded 0
Total 291
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
0 . 972 1 . 000 . 000
LE 500 sf 1 . 073 . 936 . 127 17 . 5%
500 to 1 ,000 sf .997 1 .000 .056 9. 8%
1 , 000 to 1 ,500 sf .999 1 .033 . 077 16 . 3%
1 , 500 to 2 ,000 sf .994 1 .018 . 078 10 . 9%
2 , 000 to 3,000 sf 1 .005 1 .009 .071 13. 1 %
3 , 000 sf or Higher . 999 1 . 016 . 055 9 . 8`)/0
Overall 1 . 000 1 . 024 . 066 12 . 0%
Improvement Quality
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
QUALITY 2 0 . 7 %
1 20 6.9%
2 17 5 . 8%
3 196 67 .4%
4 56 19.2%
Overall 291 100 . 0%
Excluded 0
Total 291
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
1 . 109 1 . 076 . 123 17 . 4 %
1 � 997 ---- --1 . 080 - - . 082 - - - - 14.8%
2 1 . 012 1 . 023 . 049 7 . 3%
3 . 997 1 .020 . 068 _ 12.8%
4 1 . 000 1 . 021 . 055 9 . 2 %
Overall 1 . 000 1 . 024 . 066 12 . 0%
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page 52
WILDI • SE
lcq v i.
Audit Division
Improvement Condition
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
CONDITION 1 0 . 3%
1 1 0 . 3%
2 6 2 . 1 %
3 283 97.3%
Overall 291 100 . 0%
Excluded 0
Total 291
Ratio Statistics for CURRTOT / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
. 972 1 . 000 . 000
1 1 . 168 1 .000 .000
2 . 989 . 985 .099 16.4%
3 1 : 000 1 .025 .065 12.0%
Overall 1 . 000 1 . 024 .066 12.0%
Vacant Land Median Ratio Stratification
Sale Price
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
SPRec LT $25K 16 4.5%
$25K to $50K 23 6.5%
$50K to $ 100K _ 162 45.5%
$ 100K to $ 150K 49 13.8%
$ 150K to $200K 29 8. 1 % _
$200K to $300K 19 5.3%
$300K to $500K 25 7.0%
$500K to $750K 11 3. 1 %
$750K to $ 1 , 000K 14 3 . 9%
Over $1 ,000K 8 2.2%
Overall _ 356 100 . 0%
Excluded 0
Total 356
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page S3
WILDROSE
, Audit Division
Ratio Statistics for CURRLND / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
LT $25K 1 . 004 .997 . 180 28 . 1 %
$25K to $50K 1 . 020 1 . 000 . 097 14 .4%
$50K to $ 100K 1 .000_ _ 1 .002 . 082 12.9%
$ 100K to $ 150K . 981 1 . 000 . 174 24 . 0%
$ 150K to $200K . 945 . 998 . 167 22.4%
$200K to $300K . 920 1 . 010 . 165 26 . 9°/0
$300K to $500K .878 1 . 002 . 218 31 .6%
$500K to $750K .971 .995 . 084 13 . 0%
$750K to $ 1 , 000K . 952 .994 . 190 31 . 2%
Over $ 1 ,000K .990 1 .017 .077 12. 1 % _
Overall . 988 1 . 016 .127 19 .4%
Subclass
Case Processing Summary
Count Percent
ABSTRLND 100 . 00 99 27 . 8%
200.00 25 7 . 0%
300 . 00 4 _ 1 . 1 %
520.00 2 0.6%
540 . 00 1 0 . 3%
550.00 2 0 . 6%
1112 .00 186 52.2%
11- 15 .00 3 0.8% -
1120 .00 1 0.3%
1125 .00 1 0.3%
211Z00 6 1 .7%
2120 .00 5 _1 .4%
2130.00 9 2. 5%
2135.00 11 3. 1 %
3115 . 00 1 0.3%
Overall 356 _ 100.0% _ _ _
Excluded 0
Total 356
2019 Statistical Report: WEED COUNTY Page 54
a WILD ROSE
PITIr Audit Division
Ratio Statistics for CURRLND / TASP
Coefficient of
Price Related Coefficient of Variation
Group Median Differential Dispersion Median Centered
100 . 00 .979 1 .030 . 151 22.0%
200 . 00 . 982 1 .010 . 209 30 . 5%
300.00 . 961 .987 . 103 17.8%
520 . 00 .978 1 .092 . 171 24 . 1 %
540 . 00 . 824 1 .000 . 000 .
550 . 00 . 819 1 .006 .075 10.7%
1112 . 00 .993 1 .035 . 101 16.7%
1115 . 00 .719 .951 . 182 34.6%
1120 . 00 .611 1 .000 . 000 .
1125.00 .882 1 .000 .000
2112 . 00 . 982 _ . 988 . 083 12 . 5%
2120 . 00 .982 1 . 111 . 136 26.5%
2130 . 00 .902 1 .037 .087 13.6%
2135 . 00 '1000 . 981 . 105 16 . 4%
3115. 00 1 .229 1 .000 .000
Overall .988 1 .016 . 127 19 .4%
2019 Statistical Report: WELD COUNTY Page SS
Hello