PAREA: Darn the torpedoes / 3 Sheets to the Wind

[George Hatch]

View attachment 61838

WRT their revenues, the number of licensees doubled between 2000 (11536) to 2007 (20268) . Revenues would logically increase at the commensurate level during the time frame. The variable overhead would increase but the fixed overhead would remain the same. You remember how that works, right?

Then the number of licensees decreased from 2008 to present (9368). Revenues would decrease. The state TOLD us they had accumulated excess revenues so they reduced our licensing fees for several years and then having spent the excess, are now back to the regular fees.

None of which made Mr Baggott's eagle-eyed reportage, of course. Crime fighter extraordinaire.

As for travel and meetings and training, those expenses just don't strike me as being that excessive. Either TAF comes to them for the 4-person training session or they go to TAF for the 30-person session. Whichever groups are traveling to a meeting, none of it is free; not the travel, not the accomodations and *especially* not the meeting room at a hotel. Just the coffee is $200. They charge you for the number of chairs and tables and the linens - everything. The break-even for recovering the costs of renting a meeting room at a professional level hotel or convention center is ~12-15 heads. Ask me how I know.

But, I seem to hold the minority view.

 

[Highlander416]

If only the most complex, rural assignments remain, what work do they see a PAREA grad doing in the coming years? It would seem they are creating a training program for assignments that will no longer exists.

 

[chad hampton]

AI was always going to be the education provider. That’s why they’ve been flooding appraisal boards all over the country with letters demanding that parea is approved as is. Most of their members are clueless I guess.

 

[Mejappz]

WRT their revenues, the number of licensees doubled between 2000 (11536) to 2007 (20268) . Revenues would logically increase at the commensurate level during the time frame. The variable overhead would increase but the fixed overhead would remain the same. You remember how that works, right?

Then the number of licensees decreased from 2008 to present (9368). Revenues would decrease. The state TOLD us they had accumulated excess revenues so they reduced our licensing fees for several years and then having spent the excess, are now back to the regular fees.

None of which made Mr Baggott's eagle-eyed reportage, of course. Crime fighter extraordinaire.

As for travel and meetings and training, those expenses just don't strike me as being that excessive. Either TAF comes to them for the 4-person training session or they go to TAF for the 30-person session. Whichever groups are traveling to a meeting, none of it is free; not the travel, not the accomodations and *especially* not the meeting room at a hotel. Just the coffee is $200. They charge you for the number of chairs and tables and the linens - everything. The break-even for recovering the costs of renting a meeting room at a professional level hotel or convention center is ~12-15 heads. Ask me how I know.

But, I seem to hold the minority view.

I just forwarded the message to Ms. Hackert. If there is nothing to hide, let's see the records and make them public. As the saying goes, sunlight is the best disinfectant.

 

[George Hatch]

Knock yourselves out. If some public officials have been embezzling or misusing state assets it wouldn't be the first time. They get what they get. But to Baggott's primary complaint, anyone who thinks these various functions can be performed for free of for cheap is delusional. The appraiser licensing program is adjunct to a heavily regulated sector of commerce. Lawyers are involved. This means the hand of govt is always going to weigh heavily.

What different does anyone actually expect?

 

[Mejappz]

Ethics they say.

Creating a clear benefit for the publisher, known as the Appraisal Foundation, Muteff, in his capacity as staff attorney to the agency, then failed to submit any known version of the copyrighted “Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice” to a required notice-and-comment rulemaking pursuant to California’s Administrative Procedure Act (Government Code § 11340 et seq.). Yet, his agency enforced the fluid standards on licensees during this time. Under Muteff’s legal counsel, the agency also violated 1 CCR § 20, which requires documents incorporated by reference into a state regulation “be incorporated by title and date of publication or issuance.”

 

[Mejappz]

I think someone needs to take some ethics classes, and it sure isn't appraisers.

 

[George Hatch]

#whocares

 

[Mejappz]

#whocares

#Ms. Hacket and other appraisers who have e-mailed her.

 

[George Hatch]

Like I said, knock yourselves out. But I'm going to be really annoyed with you guys if your efforts result in an increase in the fees I pay here in Calif. We don't have an appraisal board with political employees and our agency doesn't get funded out of the General Fund. We have a full-fledged state agency - with full time state employees - which is required to be self-funding off of licensure and other fees. So any increases in their operating costs that you geniuses manage to impose upon them are going to get passed directly onto the licensees.

And newsflash, the state will still be required to adopt USPAP in its entirety anyway lest the licensing program get decertified by the ASC. At most, all you guys can do is make things worse for the licensees.