Davis County assessor seeks RFP for valuation modeling, aims to shift most work in‑house by 2028

Davis County Assessor Andy Hansen told the Budget Committee that the office will issue a request for proposals this week to replace its external valuation/modeling services and aims to bring most modeling work in‑house by 2028.

Hansen said the office has relied on outside modelers for years and that last year’s contract ran about $90,000. “We are putting it out to RFP this year,” he said, adding that the county will require any winning vendor to help train internal staff. “Our goal is by 2028,” Hansen said, referring to the transition to using in‑house data analysts and modelers.

Why it matters: valuation models determine how commercial and income‑producing properties are assessed and can materially affect tax bills. Hansen told the committee the county plans to expand modeling beyond apartments and storage to retail, office and industrial sectors to reduce sudden valuation changes that draw taxpayer complaints.

Hansen said the budget includes a contingency in case the new contract costs more than prior years; he noted a roughly $20,000 buffer has been added “just in case” so the office would not need to return mid‑year for more funds if the RFP yields higher bids. He also described a modest increase in continuing education costs because licensed or certified appraisers must take a professional update every two years.

A committee member clarified budgeting figures: the office currently has $9,700 budgeted for training and is requesting an additional $2,300, bringing the training total to $12,000, Hansen confirmed. “So it’s just 2,300,” he said when a member asked whether the office was asking for an extra $12,000 or an additional $2,300.

Hansen highlighted an IT change that has already reduced costs: the office’s recent conversion to Puma saved about $65,000 in software fees and enabled automated value pushes to the county’s CoreTax system, he said. Staff are testing the Puma→CoreTax workflow with county IT and tax administration to ensure values flow correctly for rate calculations.

On personnel, Hansen said the office is testing a reorganization after losing a certified residential appraiser to the tax commission. He described a proposal to combine two positions; earlier estimates showed a $16,000 ongoing increase, but revised calculations reduced that to roughly $2,500. Hansen said the office will coordinate final calculations with HR and the county’s budget analyst before formally requesting the change for 2026.

Hansen also described a long‑running appeal involving an entity identified in the discussion as “Lagoon.” The county ordered its own appraisal and, because the opposing attorney recommended skipping a local Board of Equalization, the case will go to a state hearing. Hansen said the county’s appraisal is “pretty solid and very sound” and that the appellant paid taxes in protest; if the county prevails at the state hearing, no additional refunds are required, but if the county loses it may need to reimburse taxpayers.

Next steps: Hansen told the committee he expects to post the RFP by the end of the week and asked for the committee’s questions and support as staff finalize training and personnel requests. No formal motion or vote on budget lines occurred during the discussion.

Ending: The committee asked for clarifications on several line items and Hansen said staff would follow up with final numbers for the requested training increase and the proposed position combination before formal adoption of the budget.