If that is the case it would be on the economic basis. Which brings into question whether the previous requirements criteria that did require the 4yr degree was an act of advocacy for your economic interests? Because if so that advocacy for your economic interests would have been every bit as immoral and unethical as advocating for the banks. So if you think TAF has been engaging in advocacy then I'd ask you whether their latest move was a correction of a previous sin of appraiser advocacy or a new sin banker advocacy?
TAF was never constituted to protect your fee. That's not their job and they SHOULDN'T be getting involved in manipulating the market one way or the other. The property mode of control for managing your herd is exactly the same mode the commercial appraisers have always done - self restraint by the appraisers. Not via manipulation of the market by instilling arbitrary and unnecessary barriers to entry.
You know my view - I try to compartmentalize between my individual interests vs the profession's interests as much as I can.
I have no economic interests in favoring alternatives to the 4yr degree. I just think it was the fair thing to do. I always thought the college degree was excessive and unnecessary and had a disparate impact on the poor and minorities that lacked those opportunities. I don't feel that way about the experience requirements. I think TAF should have left those alone.
First of all, let's get rid of the accusation, to any of us, that including our own economic interest as part of our viewpoint discredits the viewpoint as it applies to other aspects, such as the appraisal profession and public trust. A person can hold several views at the same time and they do not in validate each other. Furthermore, a number of us signed petitions and spoke out against lender pressure when it was not in our economic interest to do so. That was about concern for the profession. So stop accusing each other about economic interests because it derails the discussion. We each have some form of economic interest unless we are retired , and it does not invalidate other concerns .
Second of all, GSE lender work is highly regulated, impacted by govt and regulatory policies that are not present in private order/non GSE whether commercial or residential. To say the GSE lender market is a free market is a red herring to make it into a free market debate, when it is not a free market due to govt and regulatory policies intertwined with it.
George, your ideas about the college degree are your opinion, we each had one. But to claim it was out of concern for the poor and minorities -there never was a college degree requirement till very recently, yet "the poor" did not flock to appraising, and minorities were under represented so a college degree barrier was not the reason. It is also is borderline insulting, since many minorities graduate college . In addition, there are scholarships for poor students to attend college, along with military grants among other paths . .
Well, a bunch of debates, then a comment period. Now the 4 year degree requirement is gone and riding on it other lowering standards. When a segment of appraisers said a degree was unnecessary were they aware their opinion about it would be used to result in other changes such as dropping the AA degree, lowering training and experience hours. They did not anticipate that .
Driving the sudden interest in geo competence is the possible expansion of bifurcated appraisals /other into fannie/ origination work. The concern about geo competence is not about private assignments, or the occasional high paid lender select assignment out of area , which some appraisers seem to base their answers on. Yeah, nearly all of us could competently do a fat fee assignment with plenty of time, complete data access and visiting the area. Does anybody think that has anything to do with the typical GSE appraisal ordering?
This is about mass level appraisal work which is why the example was used of a typical SFR property. Approval by Fannie of bifurcated would mean a change, but if that change also includes a a departure into a wide and far expansion of coverage area for the desktop part will mean a sea change, imo with an adverse impact whether that applies to economic interests of appraisers or the public trust or the profession in general.
What the **** you smoking George?
