Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appraisal Appeals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SB 329 would require county appraisers to present single-property appraisals at tax appeal hearings, witnesses say
Summary
Supporters of SB 329 told the Senate Assessment and Taxation Committee the bill would require county appraisers to submit single-property appraisal reports at appeal hearings before the State Board of Tax Appeals, a change proponents said could require elevating licensure or contracting and would materially affect how commercial property appeals are handled.
Senate Bill 329, introduced to the Assessment and Taxation Committee, would require county appraisers to submit a single-property appraisal report at any appeal hearing before the regular division of the State Board of Tax Appeals that relates to determination of value for taxation purposes.
Amelia (staff) opened the SB 329 overview and said the bill would require the county appraiser to present a single-property appraisal report at appeal hearings. Linda, an attorney who testified in favor of the bill, said the change is short in language but potentially "one of the most significant" improvements to the system because it would force presentation of single-property appraisal methodology rather than a mass-appraisal (CAMA) approach.
Linda explained differences to the committee: mass appraisal (often done by counties as a "necessary evil" to value many parcels) applies uniform data and assumptions across categories, while a licensed single-property appraisal typically develops multiple approaches to value (cost, income, sales) and reconciles them under USPAP. She said commercial taxpayers more often retain licensed appraisers and that mass appraisal often treats dissimilar properties as comparable, which can produce inconsistent outcomes. Linda also raised licensure concerns: county appraisers typically hold registered mass-appraiser designations (RMA) rather than state real-estate appraiser licensure required for single-property appraisals, so counties might need to upgrade staff qualifications or contract for appraisals to meet the bill's requirement. She said Missouri excludes mass appraisal evidence in appeals and cited unknown fiscal impacts in that state's experience.
Committee members asked cost and implementation questions; Linda said she did not have a Kansas fiscal estimate and suggested staff follow up. The committee received one written opponent (Steve Shirley of the Kansas County Appraisers Association), and after testimony the committee concluded its time and planned to continue related budget and statutory discussions at future meetings.
