Appraisal Institute Last-minute Shakeup

[Non Sequitur]

They're so biased the AI elected Smedmore Bernard, Jr., MAI as 2026 Vice President.
Smedmore Bernard

So that excuses how Byron was treated? Or Dr. Chance?

 

[Francois K. Gregoire]

So that excuses how Byron was treated? Or Dr. Chance?

my post mentioned "bias" and did not mention "excuse". Two syllable words, each. Two different meanings.

 

[Non Sequitur]

my post mentioned "bias" and did not mention "excuse". Two syllable words, each. Two different meanings.

Appointing Mr. Bernard does not remove the stain of what happened to Byron. And for those who are familiar with how the insta-toot nominates designated members for positions that pay above 6 figures yearly for multi-year seat sliding, Byron didn't just throw his into the ring or fall out of the sky. Rejecting Byron (the nominating committee's recommendation) in secrecy, was unprecedented.

Your post tried to connect the two, so that's on you not me. I have no opinion about Mr. Bernard other than I hope he can at least get an accurate counting of members and stop the secrecy.

 

[djd09]

Written Testimony of Craig Steinley, MAI, SRA, AI-GRS, AI-RRS2023 President of the Appraisal InstituteBefore the Appraisal Subcommittee Public Hearing on Appraisal BiasJanuary 24, 2023

Chair Martinez and Members of the Board of the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC), thank you for theopportunity to testify at today’s public hearing on appraisal bias. On behalf of the largest professionalassociation of real estate appraisers, the Appraisal Institute (AI) welcomes the opportunity to discuss thisimportant issue and share the impactful actions already taken by the profession, as well as offersuggestions for the agencies and the broader ecosystem including the regulatory and enforcementcommunities and the real estate and mortgage finance sectors.

The appraisal profession is moving to enhance education requirements on valuation bias and fair housing.The Appraisal Institute has been quick to issue guidance to the public on this topic, adopt enhancementsto our Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Valuation Practice, and advance and encourage similaraction and alignment through the Appraiser Qualifications Board (AQB) and Appraisal Standards Board(ASB) of the Appraisal Foundation. An exposure draft is currently out for comment relating to proposed newEthics Rule changes to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), and we areanticipating an additional exposure draft relating to national education requirements on valuation bias andfair housing that we hope will position appraisers with the most rigorous bias and fair housing trainingrequirements of any profession subject to fair housing requirements.

Bias in real estate appraisal can be unintentional. To mitigate bias, appraisers should be aware of thepotential for bias and base opinions on rigorous analysis and research. Best practice relies on multiple datasources and techniques to enhance credibility of the opinion of value.

As we look for solutions, education and awareness on valuation bias and fair housing by appraisers,appraisal reviewers and those interacting with appraisals is universally accepted as the most direct way toconfront and address the challenges of valuation bias.We have a range of additional suggestions for the member agencies of the ASC and the ASC itself, asoutlined below.

Project Team Members

Jillian White, SRA, ChairAkia Smith, MAIAyako Marsh, SRABarry Diskin, MAI, AI-GRS, P.h.DJacinto Munoz, MAI, SRA, AI-GRS, AI-RRSMarlon Day, MAI, SRAMatthew George, SRARobinson Wilson, SRA, RASharon Harbin, MAI, SRA, AI-GRSSmedmore Bernard, MAI, SR/WA

https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_appraisal-hearing_craig-steinley-testimony_2023-01-24.pdf

...read and weep

 

[RCA]

We currently have Uber drivers and other various types of individuals walking off the street and being given appraisal licenses. AQB is about to eliminate any degree requirement qualification altogether because their pay masters told them to. I think we’re a pretty long way off from needing a masters degree in computer science to appraise real estate like RCA seems to suggest.

You’d think there would be a middle ground somewhere out there?

I think there are three major tiers, and they are basically birds of a different feather:

1. Basic "verify existence" appraiser inspectors. Only HS and some basic training required. They need to be smart enough to keep themselves from being manipulated and/or fooled. Average Intelligence. IQ 90-115+.

2. MAI/SRA level appraisers who can do difficult residential and commercial, where little to no statistics or programming is required. But they must be proficient in Excel and other MS Office or Libre software. And also I would add proficient at finance mathematics, e.g. income related calculations. Above Average Intelligence: IQ 115-125. Top 15% of appraisers

3. Valuation Engineers - who can do MAI/SRA level appraisal and may have designations, but can handle upper division to graduate level statistics and are proficient software developers in at least R, Python and, I would argue Prolog. Mensa level intelligence. Top 1-2% of appraisers.

But don't take IQ or top % too seriously. Some people have special skills, have been through a rigorous education at a young age, and have the "right" experience. For example, people who grew up programming computers at a young age, turn out to be the best software developers as adults. - Proven fact. You can be genius level, but if you start programming only after the age of 30 - you are pretty much screwed: Oh you will be able to program, but you will most likely never be an Ace and will probably find sitting behind a desk for hours on end debugging programs extremely distasteful.

 

[Non Sequitur]

Holy cow. During a closed meeting earlier this month the insta-toot's board of directors adopted a policy demanding loyalty or you will be punished. Dissent will not be tolerated! Salute the flag!

"Duty of Loyalty: Directors and Officers owe a fiduciary duty of loyalty to the Appraisal Institute and must act in the best interests of the Appraisal Institute. Regardless of individual votes or views expressed during deliberations, all National Leaders are expected to support the final actions taken by the Board. Public criticism that undermines Board decisions erodes institutional credibility and trust. National Leaders must adhere to the Executive Session Policy and not disclose or imply confidential votes or Executive Session deliberations."

What if the best interests is exposing what goes on in the secret meetings of a non-profit membership based organization? Why not duty of loyalty to the MEMBERS and acting in the best interests of the MEMBERS!?!

Attached: Media & Digital Policy adopted by the board February 5, 2026. Of course the meeting was closed and agenda items were not available to membership "less thans".

 

[Non Sequitur]

Is something positive is brewing at the insta-toot? The first step in addiction treatment is acknowledging the problem and deciding to get help.

For years "leadership" has refused to release accurate designated membership numbers. They gaslighted anyone who reported that numbers have fallen well below 10K and that Chicago was counting thousands of members who stopped paying dues. Today our new President released a summary of the 1Q board of directors meeting. Finally someone learned how to count in Chicago, and the members who were gaslighted were spot on: As of 1Q 2026 the insta-toot counts 8,635 designated members (assuming that number isn't juiced). And yes, 2,400 "retired" designated members were finally removed. They were offered an opportunity to remain with the insta-toot for a $50 annual fee, 2,000 declined or didn't respond.

Designated numbers were broken down by status: 7,300+ practicing, 440+ practicing semi-retired, 150+ non practicing under 60, 690 non practicing retired. Of those practicing, 6,327 are general (MAI, SRPA, AI-GRS) and 1,467 are residential (SRA, RM, AI-RRS). Non practicing designated members, 721 general, 130 residential.

There's no way Chicago can continue the money burn at the reported membership levels. It's just math. So moving forward, will those who are collecting 6 figures plus a year while sliding through leadership seats do something other than have closed meetings? Will there ever be financial transparency? I don't believe so, but I didn't believe they would ever release membership numbers and stop counting ghosts.

There's a push to grow membership, but still no effort to grab the low hanging fruit and reach out to former members or address membership concerns to stop the bleeding. I don't expect any effort to reach out to former members, there's an arrogant attitude toward those who left, and a blank-you attitude toward those who question leadership.

 

[Surf Cat]

 

[Non Sequitur]

Another example of the politics and insider dealing that has all but destroyed the insta-toot. Below is a message sent to a member who developed his own artificial intelligence seminars/coursework. His sin: He's not an insider and didn't kiss any rings. And BTW, the AI on AI seminar series is terrible, don't waste your money like I did. And it's terrible because the insta-toot insiders are only worried about who will make $$ off of the course and have no clue that you can't take months to develop a course for technology that is literally changing in real time. Heck, while OpenClaw was the rage they were talking about using a.i. to make songs and cartoons. Anyway, see below:

 

[Non Sequitur]

The membership collapse continues (from LinkedIn):

"At some point, paying rent on something you already own stops making sense.

In response to Heidi H. Ford, CFA, SRA, AI-RRS's recent post on the AI's VP election process, and a continuation of my comments there — if you haven't read it, it deserves a wider audience.

I have been involved with the Appraisal Institute for nearly 25 years, receiving my MAI designation in 2014. In that time, I served as Region Rep for the Chicago Chapter, Chapter Board, rose through the officer ranks, and was Chapter President in 2023. I have attended more region and national meetings than I can count and have been recognized multiple times for my service and leadership at both the chapter and national level.

I say all of that not to build a resume, but to be clear about where I am standing — and why I am no longer standing quietly.

I did not get here by being a critic from the sidelines. I got here by believing in this organization and spending 25 years trying to make it better from the inside. I pushed back on overreach and tried to hold National accountable. I advocated — loudly and repeatedly — for an education mission that actually served members and protected market share.

We lost that fight. Commercial providers have captured market share that the AI has not recovered. I watched it happen firsthand in Chapter leadership — classes that used to fill consistently began to dwindle. The AI no longer commands the automatic preference it once did, and the product has not evolved fast enough to change that.

And now this — an election process stripped of transparency, member voices filtered through in-house counsel before they reach the people making decisions, and a National Nominating Committee whose members you can no longer even identify. That's not administration. That's control.

Here is the cruelest part. We earned those letters. They represent real work, real hours, real expertise. But I am no longer able to pretend that writing the check every year is a neutral act. Dues aren't just a membership fee — they are the mechanism by which members fund governance they no longer trust. At some point that stops being loyalty and starts being complicity.

That's why I think the profession needs a fMAI designation. Not a consolation prize — a recognition. A way for former members to say: I did the work. I met the standard. I chose to stop subsidizing an institution that stopped earning my trust.

The chapters are where the value lives. The chapter leaders who show up every day — running education, building community, doing the actual work of supporting the profession — they are not the problem. The problem starts where the politics do, at the national board level, where accountability seems to stop and control seems to start.

To AI leadership: the talent is leaving. The credibility is eroding. The members who remain are not disengaged — they are exhausted and watching.

Fix the governance. Or keep collecting rent on a building nobody wants to live in anymore."