Department of Revenue outlines how Wyoming's CAMA system produces property values

Ken Gill, administrator of the Property Tax Division at the Wyoming Department of Revenue, told the Revenue Committee the CAMA (computer-assisted mass appraisal) system used in Wyoming is a tool for assessors, not a "black box." "PAMA is not PAMA is not some black box sitting in a backroom just making up a value," Gill said, explaining the system holds land and improvement characteristics, photos, sketches, sales records and an income-and-expense module.

The presentation described four core CAMA functions: data management, valuation, performance analysis and administration. Gill said the system supports the three appraisal approaches used in practice: cost (replacement cost new less depreciation using Marshall & Swift cost tables), market (sales analysis) and income (income and expense data), and that the system has modules for real property, personal property, oil-and-gas equipment and state-assessed property.

Why it matters: The CAMA system and the data it contains determine the valuation inputs that county assessors use to prepare tax rolls, notices of value and appeals materials. Gill emphasized the state's effort to keep the CAMA configuration uniform across all counties.

Gill detailed how the cost approach is built from Marshall & Swift (CoreLogic) cost manuals integrated into the vendor software (Harris Govern). He walked the committee through an example house valuation: starting at a base cost per square foot ($127 in his example), applying a regional cost multiplier (1.07), a local multiplier (0.96), and component adjustments (energy, flooring, HVAC, ceiling height) to arrive at a replacement-cost-new, then subtracting depreciation and applying a neighborhood market adjustment derived from sales.

Committee members pressed on who performs the local grouping and stratification used in analysis. "It would be the county assessor," Gill said, explaining assessors define homogeneous groupings (neighborhoods for improvements and LEAs or land economic areas for land) because they know local markets best. He noted that smaller counties may treat an entire county as one group; larger counties may stratify by subdivision or neighborhood.

Members asked about comparables and time windows. Gill said the time-frame for comparables "varies by community" and depends on sales volume; some counties may have only a few dozen sales a year while others have thousands, and assessors must time-adjust older sales. He also said fee appraiser reports or individual appraisals can be obtained by owners but do not automatically become the assessor's value.

Gill described the CAMA reporting features assessors and owners can pull: uniform property reports, cost breakdowns, sales modules and comp reports. He said the system can produce a cost-breakdown report that shows the replacement-cost calculations and component adjustments for every improvement, and that such reports are available in all 23 counties.

On data uniformity and maintenance, Gill said the department's technical services group vets cost tables and control tables and monitors the 23 county systems daily to ensure consistent versions and data. He offered a live remote demo of the system for the committee; the committee accepted and scheduled a recorded virtual demonstration.

Committee members also questioned how the CAMA system handles nonresidential and industrial property, and Gill said the system stores commercial and industrial characteristics but that appraisal approaches and availability of comparable sales vary widely by market and property type.

Ending: Gill closed by pointing the committee to the array of reports available through the CAMA system and offered to provide additional materials and the promised demo so members could see the system's outputs directly.