Thursday, April 12, 2012

George Hartzman recieved Guilofd County Real Estate Revaluation Data on Friday Afternoon, April 6, 2012: Last Day for appeals is Monday, April 9, 2012

Less than $100,000

Count - 47,549

Share of Homes - 34.8%

Average Property Value Change -6.5% or -$4,581
Between $100,000-$199,999

Count - 56,637

Share of Homes - 41.5%

Average Property Value Change + 1.3% or $1,866

Count - 32,422

Share of Homes - 23.7%

Average Property Value Change +2.6% or $8,443

This doesn't seem to make much sense.

The highest priced homes took the biggest hit after 2007,
yet they went up in value more than homes worth less than $100,000?

Were forclosures taken into account for the bottom
but not the top?

If anyone would like to play with the data,
let us know.

This outcome seems to contradict what many thought occured
after 2007.

I have spoken to more than several
about how the assessed value Guilford County came up with,
is not close to what some homes could be sold for.

Guilford County said:

"In regards to your requests for 1) data broken down by neighborhoods
and 2) properties not included in the revaluation
that were not between an willing and financially able buyer and willing seller,
the county does not currently have use for the referenced data
structured in the requested fashion
and your request would necessitate extensive programming and/or cost to the county
in order to retrieve the information.

As a result, the County is not able to provide these records at this time."

Guilford County Attorney's Office

"Page 3 of the Guilford County “Schedule of Values,”
which covers data behind this year’s real-estate tax revaluation,
cites a statute that says market value is defined as
“the price estimated in terms of money at which the property would sell
between a willing and financially able buyer and a willing seller,
neither being under any compulsion to buy or to sell.”

But on page 7, under “Distressed and Forced Sales,” it says,
“Both foreclosure and short sales have been largely responsible
for a 20 percent decline in the average selling price of existing homes
over the last three years.”

And “staff appraisers will consider all sales that have occurred
in each appraisal neighborhood over the last several years
but a greater weight will be given to comparable sales
that have happened without duress.”

If computer model-based “mass appraisals” were the main tool,
how did the county know which sales were distressed or forced?

If these two sets of measures contradict each other,
how can anyone know what actually happened to whom in the revaluation
if Guilford County won't release the data?

George Hartzman

No comments: