Department of Revenue briefs committee on county appraisal process and statewide CAMBA system

Bob Kent of the Kansas Department of Revenue provided the Senate Assessment and Taxation Committee with an overview of the state’s property valuation process, the statewide Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMBA) system and county appraiser responsibilities.

Kent said the CAMBA system (Assessment and Tax Pro, written by Tyler Technologies) is installed in all 105 Kansas counties and incorporates the Marshall & Swift cost program used for cost-estimation in the cost-approach to value. He told the committee county appraisers are appointed by the board of county commissioners to four-year terms and must have at least three years of mass-appraisal experience and be qualified by the director of property valuation per K.S.A. eligibility rules.

Kent explained the Division of Property Valuation performs both procedural compliance reviews and statistical ratio studies. The division evaluates a county’s median sales ratio — the ratio of appraised value to sale price — and measures compliance against a target range of 90 to 110. Kent said the coefficient of dispersion, a measure of uniformity, is also used and that values less than 20 are deemed in compliance for that metric.

He described key dates and mechanics for the annual appraisal cycle: appraised values are measured as of Jan. 1; property owners receive a notice of valuation and appeal rights (CVN) with a March 1 deadline for informal appeals; counties certify final appraisal rolls to the county clerk by June 1. Kent also described the three traditional approaches to value used in mass appraisal: the cost approach (using Marshall & Swift data), the sales-comparison approach (statistical regression techniques in the Grama system), and the income approach for income-producing properties.

Kent noted that land devoted to agricultural use is assessed on a use-value basis. Committee members corrected an earlier typo in his packet: agricultural land is assessed at 30 percent of its use value, not 25 percent. He said county appraisers generally reinspect each parcel at least once in a six-year cycle and maintain ownership records, maps, photographs and comparable sales data.

Senators asked whether the Division of Property Valuation directs counties to raise values. Kent said the division does not “go out and tell counties you have to raise your values” but that many counties remain below the statutory median ratio targets; he said roughly 60 counties had median ratios under 90 percent in the 2023 ratio study. Committee members also raised concerns about the effect of tear-downs and new construction on neighboring valuations; Kent said new, larger homes can influence neighborhood values over time, but appraisers should compare like-for-like properties when selecting comparables.

The committee ran out of time and requested that Kent return for a fuller session to answer additional technical questions, including why appraisal results differ across counties using the same underlying software.