Regulator wins TAF CEO position

[Elliott]

"Kelly Davids
President, The Appraisal Foundation
Ms. Davids leads The Appraisal Foundation in fulfilling its mission to uphold public trust
in the appraisal profession. She was previously the Foundation’s Senior Vice President
and has been with the organization for over a decade. Prior to joining the Foundation,
Davids was Superintendent of the Ohio Division of Real Estate & Professional
Licensing, the chief regulator for Ohio’s appraisers. Her experience includes working in
senior-level positions for two Ohio Governors and serving multiple terms in elected
office. Davids holds a Master’s degree in Public Policy and Management from The Ohio
State University. "



Maybe someday TAF will be headed by somebody who's actually written an appraisal report.

 

[Mejappz]

"Kelly Davids
President, The Appraisal Foundation
Ms. Davids leads The Appraisal Foundation in fulfilling its mission to uphold public trust
in the appraisal profession. She was previously the Foundation’s Senior Vice President
and has been with the organization for over a decade. Prior to joining the Foundation,
Davids was Superintendent of the Ohio Division of Real Estate & Professional
Licensing, the chief regulator for Ohio’s appraisers. Her experience includes working in
senior-level positions for two Ohio Governors and serving multiple terms in elected
office. Davids holds a Master’s degree in Public Policy and Management from The Ohio
State University. "



Maybe someday TAF will be headed by somebody who's actually written an appraisal report.

Oh my, it's even worse than I anticipated. Like we predicted a Bunton minion, but what's even worse is she's made a living going after and persecuting practicing real Estate agents and appraisers! Talk about a rigged closed-door process.

 

[djd09]

II. Issues Identified During the Hearings​

There are severe deficiencies with The Appraisal Foundation’s conflict of interest policies that raise questions about its regulatory decisions​

During the hearings, The Appraisal Foundation’s representatives said that The Appraisal Foundation has “similar” conflict of interest policies as Federal agencies. In fact, their policies cover much less and lack critical safeguards.

Federal conflict of interest policies are much broader and more specific than The Appraisal Foundation’s. The Standards of Ethical Conduct applicable to Executive Branch employees are 77 pages. The Appraisal Foundation’s conflict of interest policies are each under two pages. The Code of Conduct is four. Unsurprisingly, there are substantial differences in the policies. To give just a few examples, Federal employees generally may not use their Federal office to endorse a product, service, or enterprise. Federal employees may not use their Federal office for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, which includes nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or member. Federal employees must not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual, including any person or organization with which the employee has or seeks employment or business relations. Federal employees may not participate in particular matters that have a direct and predictable effect on the financial interests of the employee’s spouse, minor child, or general partner. Absent a regulatory exception, a Federal employee must not solicit or accept any gift given because of the employee’s official position or from a prohibited source, which includes, among others, any person or organization that does business or seeks to do business with the employee’s agency.

The Appraisal Foundation’s conflict of interest policies do not describe similar limitations. The ASB Chair volunteered during a hearing that her husband works for a vendor doing business in the field. At a later hearing, the ASC learned that a member of AQB works for this same education vendor. The Appraisal Foundation President felt this was not an issue because that individual could recuse themselves from matters related to the education curriculum. The AQB’s conflict of interest policy does not reference recusals but does prohibit members from engaging in employment that would “create either the appearance of or an actual conflict of interest with the duty and responsibility a member owes to the Board.”

The Appraisal Foundation’s governance structure is insular and favors private interests​

Before the end of last year, The Appraisal Foundation’s governance structure featured a pay-to-play mechanism whereby paying Sponsors selected around half of the BOT members. The remainder were elected by that same Board, and many of these elected trustees were members of Sponsors. Although the BOT supposedly changed its structure, the latest hearing brought to light that in practice, the new structure works a lot like Sponsorship by another name.

Submission of CFPB Director Rohit Chopra to the Appraisal Subcommittee Regarding Oversight of the Appraisal Foundation | Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

On March 8, 2024, CFPB Director Rohit Chopra submitted a comment to the Appraisal Subcommittee regarding oversight of The Appraisal Foundation.

www.consumerfinance.gov

how can the appraiser be independent, when they are not

 

[Mejappz]

II. Issues Identified During the Hearings​

There are severe deficiencies with The Appraisal Foundation’s conflict of interest policies that raise questions about its regulatory decisions​

During the hearings, The Appraisal Foundation’s representatives said that The Appraisal Foundation has “similar” conflict of interest policies as Federal agencies. In fact, their policies cover much less and lack critical safeguards.

Federal conflict of interest policies are much broader and more specific than The Appraisal Foundation’s. The Standards of Ethical Conduct applicable to Executive Branch employees are 77 pages. The Appraisal Foundation’s conflict of interest policies are each under two pages. The Code of Conduct is four. Unsurprisingly, there are substantial differences in the policies. To give just a few examples, Federal employees generally may not use their Federal office to endorse a product, service, or enterprise. Federal employees may not use their Federal office for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, which includes nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or member. Federal employees must not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual, including any person or organization with which the employee has or seeks employment or business relations. Federal employees may not participate in particular matters that have a direct and predictable effect on the financial interests of the employee’s spouse, minor child, or general partner. Absent a regulatory exception, a Federal employee must not solicit or accept any gift given because of the employee’s official position or from a prohibited source, which includes, among others, any person or organization that does business or seeks to do business with the employee’s agency.

The Appraisal Foundation’s conflict of interest policies do not describe similar limitations. The ASB Chair volunteered during a hearing that her husband works for a vendor doing business in the field. At a later hearing, the ASC learned that a member of AQB works for this same education vendor. The Appraisal Foundation President felt this was not an issue because that individual could recuse themselves from matters related to the education curriculum. The AQB’s conflict of interest policy does not reference recusals but does prohibit members from engaging in employment that would “create either the appearance of or an actual conflict of interest with the duty and responsibility a member owes to the Board.”

The Appraisal Foundation’s governance structure is insular and favors private interests​

Before the end of last year, The Appraisal Foundation’s governance structure featured a pay-to-play mechanism whereby paying Sponsors selected around half of the BOT members. The remainder were elected by that same Board, and many of these elected trustees were members of Sponsors. Although the BOT supposedly changed its structure, the latest hearing brought to light that in practice, the new structure works a lot like Sponsorship by another name.

Submission of CFPB Director Rohit Chopra to the Appraisal Subcommittee Regarding Oversight of the Appraisal Foundation | Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

On March 8, 2024, CFPB Director Rohit Chopra submitted a comment to the Appraisal Subcommittee regarding oversight of The Appraisal Foundation.

www.consumerfinance.gov

how can the appraiser be independent, when they are not

Time to put your investigative hat and do a deep dive on Davids;’ she’s from Ohio.

 

[djd09]

Time to put your investigative hat and do a deep dive on Davids;’ she’s from Ohio.

i cant find much on her...is she even an appraiser?

but i did find this

**Disciplinary Action Reversal**
Raymond Dayle Peters – State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser License
Number 398623 – Smithville, Ohio - The Wayne County Court of Common Pleas
reversed the decision of the Division of Real Estate and Professional Licensing in a
disciplinary action arising out of three appraisals completed by Raymond Dayle Peters of
Smithville. The court found that a decision by the Ohio Real Estate Appraiser Board that
the appraiser had rendered appraisal services in a careless and negligent manner was
contrary to law. Regarding a second violation, that the appraiser had failed to exercise
reasonable diligence in preparing an appraisal report, the court found that the Appraiser
Board’s decision was not supported by substantial, reliable and probative evidence.
Additionally, in considering a third violation charged against the appraiser, that he had
committed a substantial error in documenting a comparable property, the court found that
the Appraiser Board’s decision was not supported by substantial, reliable and probative
evidence, and was contrary to law. Accordingly, the disciplinary action reported against
the appraiser in the Summer 2004 Real Estate and Professional Licensing Newsletter is
reversed, and the penalties reported there will not be imposed.

https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/com.ohio.gov/documents/real_2005Spring_000.pdf

 

[Mejappz]

i cant find much on her...is she even an appraiser?

but i did find this

**Disciplinary Action Reversal**
Raymond Dayle Peters – State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser License
Number 398623 – Smithville, Ohio - The Wayne County Court of Common Pleas
reversed the decision of the Division of Real Estate and Professional Licensing in a
disciplinary action arising out of three appraisals completed by Raymond Dayle Peters of
Smithville. The court found that a decision by the Ohio Real Estate Appraiser Board that
the appraiser had rendered appraisal services in a careless and negligent manner was
contrary to law. Regarding a second violation, that the appraiser had failed to exercise
reasonable diligence in preparing an appraisal report, the court found that the Appraiser
Board’s decision was not supported by substantial, reliable and probative evidence.
Additionally, in considering a third violation charged against the appraiser, that he had
committed a substantial error in documenting a comparable property, the court found that
the Appraiser Board’s decision was not supported by substantial, reliable and probative
evidence, and was contrary to law. Accordingly, the disciplinary action reported against
the appraiser in the Summer 2004 Real Estate and Professional Licensing Newsletter is
reversed, and the penalties reported there will not be imposed.

https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/com.ohio.gov/documents/real_2005Spring_000.pdf

She doesn’t even understand USPAP and now she’s the president of TAF. You can't make this stuff up.

 

[djd09]

Revenue

$4,780,600



Expenses

$5,101,592

Net Income

-$320,992

Appraisal Foundation - Nonprofit Explorer - ProPublica

Since 2013, the IRS has released data culled from millions of nonprofit tax filings. Use this database to find organizations and see details like their executive compensation, revenue and expenses, as well as download tax filings going back as far as 2001.

projects.propublica.org

Compensation​

Key Employees and Officers	Compensation	Related	Other
David S Bunton (President)	$393,924	$0	$108,224
Kelly Davids (Senior Vice President)	$254,980	$0	$2,903

 

[Mejappz]

Revenue

$4,780,600



Expenses

$5,101,592

Net Income

-$320,992

Appraisal Foundation - Nonprofit Explorer - ProPublica

Since 2013, the IRS has released data culled from millions of nonprofit tax filings. Use this database to find organizations and see details like their executive compensation, revenue and expenses, as well as download tax filings going back as far as 2001.

projects.propublica.org

Compensation​

Key Employees and Officers	Compensation	Related	Other
David S Bunton (President)	$393,924	$0	$108,224
Kelly Davids (Senior Vice President)	$254,980	$0	$2,903

How in the World is the public going to have trust in the Appraisal profession when you have someone like Bunton who has failed at his job get to pick his hand-chosen successor? The level of cronyism is off the charts.

 

[djd09]

She doesn’t even understand USPAP and now she’s the president of TAF. You can't make this stuff up.

Appraiserville​

Lyin’ Dave (“LD”) Calls Me A Liar While Lying​

Before I start, I wanted to give a personal shout-out to Dave and Kelly, who will read this newsletter for damage control. For the uninitiated, The Appraisal Foundation (TAF) has been run by Dave Bunton, the only leader of the organization since its inception, and assisted by his hand-picked replacement, Kelly Davids who essentially runs it now. As a reminder, TAF is the organization that wrote the bat-**** crazy letter, the chicken**** letter and is the subject of an active investigation by HUD on whether USPAP promotes a lack of diversity in the appraisal profession (400th out of 400 occupations, according to BLS in 2021).


In the fourth public hearing on appraisal bias on Tuesday, February 13th, Chicago residential appraiser Maureen Sweeney kicked @$$. She hammered the AMC model and the lack of transparency on the cost of appraisal vs AMC’s, which are lumped together in settlement statements as “Appraisal Fee.”


And the three+ decade president of The Appraisal Foundation Dave Bunton was grilled about his succession plans by several individuals on the Appraisal Subcommittee since he had already announced retirement. Their concern was primarily because TAF policy is the crucial reason the appraisal industry is so bad at diversity and is losing the public trust.


NEWSFLASH: Dave Bunton called me a liar in a public meeting this week as he lied about his replacement process when he retires. I’m impressed he had the nerve to slander me after what Fortune Magazine recently said about me (I’ve been waiting for the right moment to humblebrag this..ha).

Jonathan Miller may be the most respected man in New York City real estate, if not the greatest “appraiser” on the nationwide housing market
Fortune Magazine, January 3, 2024

Dave was bobbing and weaving to the series of questions thrown at him from ASC, begging off with the tired answer, I’m “not involved” in the process. That response is a lie. Even though he ironically called me a liar in this public hearing and said that I have a problem with the truth, everyone in the D.C. appraisal world knows TAF is a monarchy, and he is the king. Every board member in TAF is ultimately personally approved by Dave. I’ve had personal experience with this. Sadly, many people in the industry are more than qualified than some of the people he recycles to maintain absolute control over all boards at TAF (more on that further down).


I now dub Dave Bunton “Lyin’ Dave” (or “LD” when the mood strikes) in perpetuity and will think of “Lyin’ Eyes” everytime I write it.


For years, the TAF rumor mill has maintained that LD selected his long-time deputy, Kelly, to take over when he retires. The ASC board members at the hearing peppered him with his successor plans because they didn’t want a continuation of the status quo such as the extreme lack of diversity in the appraisal profession TAF fosters. All his bobbing and weaving to the ASC questions at the hearing made this fact more than evident as he gave non-answers on the topic of succession. It was such an embarrassing performance that I felt sorry that LD didn’t know better. One may ask why he cares about his successor so much, so it sure sounds like he has a financial incentive. I can only assume that he has a consulting deal with TAF post-retirement, so he keeps his toe in the pool of the appraisal industry for personal relevancy and draws a nice fee for doing nothing simultaneously. After all, he makes over $500,000 a year for managing a 13-person entity (excellent work if you can get it). Remember that TAF has no real “oversight,” technically as they figured out a work around to avoid taking ASC grants which were designed to provide ASC with oversight powers.


Let’s review some hard-working appraisers’ feedback on LD’s (not sworn under oath) testimony at the Tuesday hearing. Appraisers across the U.S. shared with their reactions to LD’s performance. Here are some examples.

Post-Super Bowl Housing Market Taylored For Swifter Conditions - Housing Notes

Hello to my Housing Notes subscribers... ...lots of fresh housing market information and good reads awaiting discovery by you... Jonathan Miller

housingnotes.com

look bro...we made it on J. Miller's blog

 

[Dublin ohio]

i cant find much on her...is she even an appraiser?

but i did find this

**Disciplinary Action Reversal**
Raymond Dayle Peters – State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser License
Number 398623 – Smithville, Ohio - The Wayne County Court of Common Pleas
reversed the decision of the Division of Real Estate and Professional Licensing in a
disciplinary action arising out of three appraisals completed by Raymond Dayle Peters of
Smithville. The court found that a decision by the Ohio Real Estate Appraiser Board that
the appraiser had rendered appraisal services in a careless and negligent manner was
contrary to law. Regarding a second violation, that the appraiser had failed to exercise
reasonable diligence in preparing an appraisal report, the court found that the Appraiser
Board’s decision was not supported by substantial, reliable and probative evidence.
Additionally, in considering a third violation charged against the appraiser, that he had
committed a substantial error in documenting a comparable property, the court found that
the Appraiser Board’s decision was not supported by substantial, reliable and probative
evidence, and was contrary to law. Accordingly, the disciplinary action reported against
the appraiser in the Summer 2004 Real Estate and Professional Licensing Newsletter is
reversed, and the penalties reported there will not be imposed.

https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/com.ohio.gov/documents/real_2005Spring_000.pdf

So what. The original action took place before she was even superintendent and appears to have also been settled before she took the position