Participants identified a number of areas where ORPS could change its business rules and processes to aid the further development and implementation of the annual reassessment program. Standardizing rules, offering additional training programs, providing technical tools, and improving communication all fell under the changes called for by participants.

Define and standardize program rules, regulations, and guidelines. Participants said they were uncertain about the rules, regulations, and guidelines of the new program. They wanted to know what “problem” the program was supposed to “solve,” what their roles and responsibilities would be, and who was going to provide them with the information needed to conduct annual reassessments. Participants said they were frustrated that the rules, regulations and guidelines had not been defined prior to the program’s launch. They expressed concern that their issues would not be taken into consideration as the program was being developed.

April 2000 was the deadline ORPS was working with for a final implementation plan for the new program. In order to qualify for the increased maintenance aid in 2001, the first year of the program, guidelines needed to be in place and communicated to county directors and assessors as soon as possible. As a result, many parallel processes were in place. Participants were being asked to consider the resources they might need to participate in the new program without having a full understanding of the rules that would govern that program. ORPS was developing guidelines for participation while they were announcing and trying to raise interest in the program. Further, assessors and country directors were being asked to commit to applying for the new maintenance aid program, under incomplete or inconsistent information about the application process. They were therefore reticent to commit to a program that did not have clear guidelines.

Increase attention to training of assessors, directors, and ORPS’s central and regional staff. Participants consistently identified training as a key issue. They said additional training should be required for all participants involved in the assessment process in order to be prepared to implement continuous reassessments. An “educational seminar on the basics of annual reassessment” would help make sure that all parties share a similar understanding of the new program, participants said. Then, training classes on the technical aspects of the program, such as doing computer assisted mass analysis (CAMA) and other trending and valuation techniques should be provided to local assessors and county directors as an alternate means to achieve annual reassessments. Some suggested the need for more comprehensive field training in order to do reappraisals.

Participants said that training on Real Property Services (RPS) software, data collection, data entry and clerical duties would help a number of assessors, directors and their staffs to implement the new program.

Participants stated that ORPS’s staff at the regional and central levels should be better trained themselves before attempting to deploy the program. Many said they felt ORPS did not understand the day-to-day responsibilities of assessors and directors who have direct interaction with taxpayers and local officials, and suggested ORPS would gain a better understanding if “they walked in our shoes for a time.” Local workshop attendees also expressed concern that state appraisers need to be better trained and qualified to do advisories as in the case of complex property appraisals.

Provide more adequate technical tools and equipment. Participants called for user-friendly software to assist them in annually updating the rolls. Updated RPS software, statistical software, CAMA programs, and ratio analysis programs were listed by participants as tools that they would need to conduct annual reassessments. Participants also said technical resources were needed to blend fieldwork with identifiable databases. Any acquisition of new software should be guided by state requirements for maintenance aid.

Participants, in some cases, said their computer systems were so outdated that they could not adequately run the sophisticated programs available today. Many did not have Internet access or the capability to obtain it in their localities. Therefore the transition to annual reassessment supported by the use of computer-based or web-based statistical tools seemed impossible to these participants.

Improve channels of communication. Throughout each workshop there was a call for consistent communication of guidelines and rules. Local assessors and county directors said they were receiving information from a myriad of sources, including the assessors’ association, the directors’ association, ORPS’s regional staff, ORPS’s central staff and the ORPS’s web site. Despite many presentations made by ORPS of at various association meetings and the mailing of various printed material, many participants did not have a full or clear understanding of the program and the options available to them in implementing the program or the benefits they might expect to gain.