2008 DENVER COUNTY PROPERTY ASSESSMENT STUDY
September 15, 2008 Mr. Mike Mauer Director of Research Colorado Legislative Council Room 029, State Capitol Building Denver, Colorado 80203 RE:
Final Report for the 2008 Colorado Property Assessment Study for Colorado’s sixty four counties
Dear Mr. Mauer: Rocky Mountain Valuation Specialists LLC is pleased to submit the Final Reports for the 2008 Colorado Property Assessment Study for all sixty four counties that make up the State of Colorado. These reports represent the result of a two-part analysis and audit for each county: A procedural analysis and a statistical analysis. The procedural analysis, for each county, included all classes of property and specifically looked at how the assessor developed economic areas, confirmed and qualified their sales, developed their time adjustments, and performed their periodic physical property inspections. The audit also reviewed the procedures for discovering, classifying and valuing agricultural outbuildings, discovering subdivision build-out and subdivision discounting procedures. Valuation methodology for residential properties and commercial properties was examined. Procedures for producing mines, oil and gas leaseholds and lands producing, producing coalmines, producing earth and stone products, severed mineral interests, and non-producing patented mining claims were also reviewed. Starting in 2007, procedural analyses of agricultural outbuildings were performed for each county.
Statistical analysis was also performed, for each county, on vacant land, residential properties, commercial/industrial properties, and agricultural land. A statistical analysis was performed to check for personal property compliance on the top 11 counties: Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Denver, Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Larimer, Mesa, Pueblo, and Weld. All other counties received a procedural study. Throughout this project RMVS has remained committed to its belief that for an ad valorem system to be successful, values must be equitable and market-driven in all parts of Colorado. Only then is the taxpayer assured of a fair property tax. RMVS appreciates the opportunity to be of service to the State of Colorado.
Mark R. Linné MAI, CAE, ASA, CRE, FRICS Managing Director
Rocky Mountain Valuation Specialists LLC
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
Introduction..........................................................................................................................3 Regional/Historical Sketch of Denver County...............................................................5 Ratio Analysis .......................................................................................................................7 Time Trending Verification ............................................................................................ 10 Sold/Unsold Analysis ...................................................................................................... 11 Agricultural Land Study................................................................................................... 13 Agricultural Land ............................................................................................................. 13 Agricultural Outbuildings .................................................................................................. 14 Sales Verification .............................................................................................................. 15 Economic Area Review and Evaluation ....................................................................... 16 Natural Resources............................................................................................................. 17 Vacant Land....................................................................................................................... 18 Subdivision Discounting ..................................................................................................... 18 Possessory Interest Properties........................................................................................ 19 Personal Property Audit .................................................................................................. 20 RMVS Auditor Staff......................................................................................................... 22 Appendices ........................................................................................................................ 23
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 2
INTRODUCTION
do not reflect the proper valuation period level of value. The Colorado Constitution directs that each property tax levy shall be uniform upon all real and personal property not exempt from taxation. The constitution goes on to direct that the actual value of all applicable real and personal property shall be determined under general laws, which shall prescribe such methods and regulations as shall secure just and equalized valuations (Colo. Const., Art. X, Sec. 3 (1)(a)). In order to check that all applicable property has been valued with just and equalized valuations, the Constitution states that commencing in 1983 the general assembly shall cause a valuation for assessment study to be conducted. Such study shall determine whether or not the assessor of each county has complied with the property tax provisions of this constitution and of the statutes in valuing property and has determined the actual value and valuation for assessment of each and every class of taxable real and personal property consistent with such provisions. Such study shall sample at least one percent of each and every class of taxable real and personal property in the county (Colo. Const., Art. X, Sec. 3 (2)(a)). The State Board of Equalization (SBOE) reviews assessments for conformance to the Constitution. The SBOE will order revaluations for counties whose valuations
C.R.S. 39-1-104 (16)(a)(b) and (c) outlined how this was to be accomplished by stating that during each property tax year, the director of research of the legislative council shall contract with a private person for a valuation for assessment study to be conducted as set forth in this subsection (16). The study shall be conducted in all counties of the state to determine whether or not the assessor of each county has, in fact, used all manuals, formulas, and other directives required by law to arrive at the valuation for assessment of each and every class of real and personal property in the county. The person conducting the study shall sample each class of property in a statistically valid manner, and the aggregate of such sampling shall equal at least one percent of all properties in each county of the state. The sampling shall show that the various areas, ages of buildings, economic conditions, and uses of properties have been sampled. Such study shall be completed, and a final report of the findings and conclusions thereof shall be submitted to the state board of equalization, by September 15 of the year in which the study is conducted. The legislative council sets forth two criteria that are the focus of the audit group: To determine whether each county assessor is applying correctly the constitutional and
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 3
statutory provisions, compliance requirements of the State Board of Equalization, and the manuals published by the State Property Tax Administrator to arrive at the actual value of each class of property. To determine if each assessor is applying correctly the provisions of law to the actual values when arriving at valuations for assessment of all locally valued properties subject to the property tax. The property assessment audit conducts a two-part analysis: A procedural analysis and a statistical analysis. The procedural analysis includes all classes of property and specifically looks at how the assessor develops economic areas, confirms and qualifies sales, and develops time adjustments. The audit also examines the procedures for adequately discovering, classifying and valuing agricultural outbuildings, discovering subdivision build-
out and subdivision discounting procedures. Valuation methodology for vacant land, improved residential properties and commercial properties is examined. Procedures for producing mines, oil and gas leaseholds and lands producing, producing coal mines, producing earth and stone products, severed mineral interests and nonproducing patented mining claims are also reviewed. Statistical analysis is performed on vacant land, residential properties, commercial industrial properties, agricultural land, and personal property. The statistical study results are compared with State Board of Equalization compliance requirements and the manuals published by the State Property Tax Administrator. RMVS has completed the Property Assessment Study for 2008 and is pleased to report its findings for Denver County in the following report.
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 4
REGIONAL/HISTORICAL SKETCH OF DENVER COUNTY Regional Information Denver County is located in the Front Range region of Colorado. The Colorado Front Range is a colloquial geographic term for the populated areas of the State of Colorado which are just east of the foothills of the Front Range, from which the region takes its name. The region contains the largest cities and the majority of the population of Colorado, aligned in a northsouth configuration on the western edge of the Great Plains, where they meet the Rockies. Geologically, the region lies mostly within the Colorado Piedmont, in the valley
of the South Platte and Arkansas rivers on the east side of the Rockies. The Front Range includes Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Broomfield, Denver, Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Larimer, Pueblo, and Weld counties. The Colorado Front Range communities include (in a roughly north-to-south order): Fort Collins, Greeley, Loveland, Longmont, Boulder, Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area, Castle Rock, Colorado Springs, Pueblo.
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 5
Historical Information Denver County has a population of approximately 566,974 people with 3,616.8 people per square mile, according to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2006 estimated population data. The County, established in 1857, has 95 square miles in area and, until the establishment of the City and County of Broomfield, was the only city-county in the state. Denver is the State capital of Colorado. The area’s first settlement followed the discovery of gold at Auraria on the west side
of Cherry Creek. Another party, lead by General William Larimer of Leavenworth, Kansas, settled on the opposite side of the stream and formed the Denver City Company, named for James W. Denver, Governor of Kansas Territory. Rivalry between the two towns was ended when they consolidated into the municipality of Denver in 1860. Until 1902, when it became a separate Denver County, the city of Denver was county seat of Arapahoe County. (William Bright, Colorado Place Names, 3rd Edition, Johnson Books, 2004, p.51)
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 6
RATIO ANALYSIS Methodology All significant classes of properties were analyzed. Sales were collected for each property class over the appropriate sale period, which was typically defined as the 18-month period between January 2005 and June 2006. Counties with less than 30 sales typically extended the sale period back up to 5 years prior to June 30, 2006 in 6-month increments. If there were still fewer than 30 sales, supplemental appraisals were performed and treated as proxy sales. Residential sales for all counties using this method totaled at least 30 per county. For commercial sales, the total number analyzed was allowed, in some cases, to fall below 30. There were no sale quantity issues for counties requiring vacant land analysis or condominium analysis. Although it was required that we examine the median and coefficient of dispersion for all counties, we also calculated the weighted mean and pricerelated differential for each class of property. Counties were not passed or
failed by these latter measures, but were counseled if there were anomalies noted during our analysis. Qualified sales were based on the qualification code used by each county, which were typically coded as either “Q” or “C.” The ratio analysis included all sales. The data was trimmed for counties with obvious outliers using IAAO standards for data analysis. In every case, we examined the loss in data from trimming to insure that only true outliers were excluded. Any county with a significant portion of sales excluded by this trimming method were examined further. No county was allowed to pass the audit if more than 5% of the sales were “lost” because of trimming. For the largest 11 counties, the residential ratio statistics were broken down by economic area as well.
Conclusions For this final analysis report, the minimum acceptable statistical standards allowed by the State Board of Equalization are:
ALLOWABLE STANDARDS RATIO GRID Unweighted Median Ratio
Coefficient of Dispersion
Commercial/Industrial
Between .95-1.05
Less than 20.99
Condominium
Between .95-1.05
Less than 15.99
Single Family
Between .95-1.05
Less than 15.99
Vacant Land
Between .95-1.05
Less than 20.99
Property Class
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 7
The results for Denver County are: Denver County Ratio Grid Property Class
Number of Unweighted Qualified Median Sales Ratio
Price Related Differential
Coefficient of Time Trend Dispersion Analysis 12.5 Compliant
336
0.974
1.041
Condominium
6,087
1.000
1.007
3.4
Compliant
Single Family
13,872
1.000
1.003
5.1
Compliant
Vacant Land
31
0.998
1.055
11
Compliant
Commercial/Industrial
Ratio Statistics: Residential subclass 1112 ECON AREA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 44 MISSI NG Overall
SALE COUNT 550 702 335 393 529 789 452 384 248 224 450 295 451 490 311 258 346 200 439 199 239 820 394 408 296 297 361 202 198 172 252 1 14 11,699
Median 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.002 .999 1.002 1.000 1.001 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.002 1.002 1.000 1.001 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.002 1.000 1.003 1.000 .997 1.000 .998 1.000 1.234 1.001 1.000
Weighted Mean .999 1.000 1.011 1.021 1.002 .999 1.005 1.006 1.002 1.000 1.000 1.011 1.018 1.021 1.043 .999 1.009 1.016 1.007 .999 1.001 1.008 1.004 .999 1.003 1.024 1.028 1.007 1.009 .997 1.004 1.234 .995 1.011
Price Related Differential 1.002 1.002 1.003 1.003 1.005 1.002 1.003 1.002 1.004 1.004 1.004 1.003 1.006 1.005 1.016 1.002 1.009 1.013 1.003 1.000 1.002 1.002 1.003 1.003 1.002 1.004 1.002 1.003 1.003 1.004 1.004 1.000 1.001 1.001
Coefficient of Dispersion .035 .037 .057 .056 .049 .034 .051 .047 .045 .044 .051 .055 .055 .080 .101 .035 .050 .062 .045 .033 .034 .039 .039 .032 .032 .065 .064 .048 .044 .052 .048 .000 .028 .048
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 8
After applying the above described methodologies, it is concluded from the sales ratios that Denver County is in
compliance with SBOE, DPT, and Colorado State Statute valuation guidelines.
Recommendations None
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 9
TIME TRENDING VERIFICATION Methodology While we recommend that counties use the inverted ratio regression analysis method to account for market (time) trending, some counties have used other IAAO-approved methods, such as the weighted monthly median approach. We are not auditing the methods used, but rather the results of the methods used. Given this range of methodologies used to account for market trending, we concluded that the best validation method was to examine the sale ratios for each class across the appropriate sale period. To be specific, if a county has considered and adjusted correctly for market trending, then the sale ratios should remain stable (i.e. flat) across the sale period. If a residual market trend is detected, then the county may or may not have addressed market trending adequately,
and a further examination is warranted. This validation methodology also considers the number of sales and the length of the sale period. Counties with few sales across the sale period were carefully examined to determine if the statistical results were valid.
Conclusions After verification and analysis, it has been determined that Denver County has complied with the statutory requirements to analyze the effects of time on value in their county. Denver County has also satisfactorily applied the results of their time trending analysis to arrive at the time adjusted sales price (TASP).
Recommendations None
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 10
SOLD/UNSOLD ANALYSIS Methodology Denver County was tested for the equal treatment of sold and unsold properties to insure that “sales chasing” has not occurred. The auditors employed a multi-step process to determine if sold and unsold properties were valued in a consistent manner. All qualified residential and commercial class properties were examined using the unit value method, where the actual value per square foot was compared between sold and unsold properties. A class was considered qualified if it met the criteria for the ratio analysis. The median value per square foot for both groups was compared from an appraisal and statistical perspective. If no significant difference was indicated, then we concluded that no further testing was warranted and that the county was in compliance in terms of sold/unsold consistency. If either residential or commercial differences were significant using the unit value method, or if data limitations made the comparison invalid, then the next step was to perform a ratio analysis comparing the 2006 and 2008 actual values for each qualified class of property. All qualified vacant land classes were tested using this method. The sale property ratios were arrayed using a range of 0.8 to 1.5, which theoretically excluded changes between years that were due to other unrelated changes in the property. These ratios were also stratified at the appropriate level of analysis. Once the percent change was determined for each appropriate class and sub-class, the next step was to select the
unsold sample. This sample was at least 1% of the total population of unsold properties and excluded any sale properties. The unsold sample was filtered based on the attributes of the sold dataset to closely correlate both groups. The ratio analysis was then performed on the unsold properties and stratified. The median and mean ratio distribution was then compared between the sold and unsold group. A nonparametric test such as the Mann-Whitney test for differences between independent samples was undertaken to determine whether any observed differential was significant. If this test determined that the unsold properties were treated in a manner similar to the sold properties, it was concluded that no further testing was warranted and that the county was in compliance. If a class or sub-class of property was determined to be significantly different by this method, the final step was to perform a multi-variate mass appraisal model that developed ratio statistics from the sold properties that were then applied to the unsold sample. This test compared the measures of central tendency and confidence intervals for the sold properties with the unsold property sample. If this comparison was also determined to be significantly different, then the conclusion was that the county had treated the unsold properties in a different manner than sold properties. These tests were supported by both tabular and chart presentations, along with saved sold and unsold sample files.
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 11
Sold/Unsold Results Property Class Commercial/Industrial
Results Compliant
Condominium
Compliant
Single Family
Compliant
Vacant Land
Compliant
Conclusions
Recommendations
After applying the above described methodologies, it is concluded that Denver County is reasonably treating its sold and unsold properties in the same manner.
None
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 12
AGRICULTURAL LAND STUDY Acres By Subclass
Value By Subclass
Agricultural Land
County records were reviewed to determine major land categories such as irrigated farm, dry farm, meadow hay, grazing and other lands. In addition, county records were reviewed in order to determine if: Aerial photographs are available and are being used; soil conservation guidelines have been used to classify lands based on productivity; crop rotations have been documented; typical commodities and yields have been determined; orchard lands have been properly classified and valued; expenses reflect a ten year average and are typical landlord expenses; grazing lands have been properly classified and valued; the number of acres in each class and subclass have been determined; the capitalization rate was properly applied. Also, documentation was required for the valuation methods used and any locally developed yields, carrying
capacities, and expenses. Records were also checked to ensure that the commodity prices and expenses, furnished by the Property Tax Administrator (PTA), were applied properly. (See Assessor Reference Library Volume 3 Chapter 5.)
Conclusions An analysis of the agricultural land data indicates an acceptable appraisal of this property type. Directives, commodity prices and expenses provided by the PTA were properly applied. County yields compared favorably to those published by Colorado Agricultural Statistics. Expenses used by the county were allowable expenses and were in an acceptable range. Grazing lands carrying capacities were in an acceptable range. The data analyzed resulted in the following ratios:
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 13
Denver County Agricultural Land Ratio Grid Abstract Code 4127
Land Class Dry Farm
Total/Avg
Number Of Acres 1,652
County Value Per Acre 23.49
County Assessed Total Value 38,805
RMVS Total Value 38,805
Ratio 1.00
1,652
23.49
38,805
38,805
1.00
Recommendations None
Agricultural Outbuildings
Methodology
Conclusions
A sample of various use types of agricultural outbuildings with varying ages was reviewed to see if the guidelines found in the Assessor’s Reference Library (ARL) Volume 3, pages 5.73 through 5.78 were being followed.
Denver County has complied with all of the recommended procedures provided by the Division of Property Taxation for the valuation of agricultural outbuildings.
Recommendations None
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 14
SALES VERIFICATION According to Colorado Revised Statutes: A representative body of sales is required when considering the market approach to appraisal. (8) In any case in which sales prices of comparable properties within any class or subclass are utilized when considering the market approach to appraisal in the determination of actual value of any taxable property, the following limitations and conditions shall apply: (a)(I) Use of the market approach shall require a representative body of sales, including sales by a lender or government, sufficient to set a pattern, and appraisals shall reflect due consideration of the degree of comparability of sales, including the extent of similarities and dissimilarities among properties that are compared for assessment purposes. In order to obtain a reasonable sample and to reduce sudden price changes or fluctuations, all sales shall be included in the sample that reasonably reflect a true or typical sales price during the period specified in section 39-1-104 (10.2). Sales of personal property exempt pursuant to the provisions of sections 39-3102, 39-3-103, and 39-3-119 to 39-3-122 shall not be included in any such sample. (b) Each such sale included in the sample shall be coded to indicate a typical, negotiated sale, as screened and verified by the assessor. (39-1-103, C.R.S.)
The assessor is required to use sales of real property only in the valuation process. (8)(f) Such true and typical sales shall include only those sales which have been determined on an individual basis to reflect the selling price of the real property only or which have been adjusted on an individual basis to reflect the selling price of the real property only. (39-1-103, C.R.S.) Part of the Property Assessment Study is the sales verification analysis. RMVS has used the above-cited statutes as a guide in our study of the county’s procedures and practices for verifying sales. RMVS reviewed the sales verification procedures in 2008 for Denver County. This study was conducted by checking selected sales from the master sales list for the valuation period. Specifically RMVS selected 45 sales listed as unqualified. All but three of the sales selected in the sample gave reasons that were clear and supportable. Three sales had insufficient documentation.
Conclusions Denver County appears to be doing a good job of verifying their sales. There are no recommendations.
Recommendations None.
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 15
ECONOMIC AREA REVIEW EVALUATION Methodology Denver County has submitted a written narrative describing the economic areas that make up the county’s market areas. Denver County has also submitted a map illustrating these areas. Each of these narratives have been read and analyzed for logic and appraisal sensibility. The maps were also compared to the narrative for consistency between the written description and the map.
Conclusions After review and analysis, it has been determined that Denver County has
AND
adequately identified homogeneous economic areas comprised of smaller neighborhoods. Each economic area defined is equally subject to a set of economic forces that impact the value of the properties within that geographic area and this has been adequately addressed. Each economic area defined adequately delineates an area that will give “similar values for similar properties in similar areas.”
Recommendations None
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 16
NATURAL RESOURCES Producing Oil and Gas Procedures Methodology The Colorado Revised Statues (CRS) in Article 39, Section 7, and the Assessor's Reference Library (ARL), Volume 3 were the basis for valuing the production of gas property. For gas, the gross volume of thousand cubic feet (MCF) sold was multiplied by the current average field price per unit sold. For Oil, the gross volume of barrels sold was multiplied by the current average field price per unit sold. Any
federal, state or local government ownership (royalty) was deducted from the gross value sold to arrive at actual value.
Conclusions County valued oil and gas production using acceptable appraisal procedures.
Recommendations: None
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 17
VACANT LAND Subdivision Discounting
In 2008 subdivisions were reviewed in Denver County. The review showed that subdivisions were discounted pursuant to the Colorado Revised Statutes in Article 391-103 (14) and by applying the recommended methodology in ARL Vol 3, Chap 4. Subdivision Discounting in the intervening year was accomlished by reducing the absorption period by one year. In instances where the number of sales within an approved plat was less than the absorption rate per year calculated for the
plat, the absorption unchanged.
period
was
left
Conclusions Denver County has implemented proper procedures to adequately estimate absorption periods, discount rates, and lot values for qualifying subdivisions.
Recommendations None
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 18
POSSESSORY INTEREST PROPERTIES
Possessory interest property discovery and valuation is described in the Assessor’s Reference Library (ARL) Volume 3 section 7 in accordance with the requirements of 39-1-103 (17)(a) (II) C.R.S. Possessory Interest is defined by the Property Tax Administrator’s Publication ARL Volume 3, Section 7: A private property interest in government-owned property or the right to the occupancy and use of any benefit in government-owned property that has been granted under lease, permit, license, concession, contract, or other agreement.
interest properties. The county has also been queried as to their confidence that the possessory interest properties have been discovered and placed on the tax rolls.
Denver County has been reviewed for their procedures and adherence to guidelines when assessing and valuing possessory
None
Conclusions Denver County has implemented a discovery process to place possessory interest properties on the roll. They have also correctly and consistently applied the correct procedures and valuation methods in the valuation of possessory interest properties.
Recommendations
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 19
PERSONAL PROPERTY AUDIT Denver County was studied for its procedural compliance with the personal property assessment outlined in the Assessor’s Reference Library (ARL) Volume 5, and in the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) requirements for the assessment of personal property. The SBOE requirements are outlined as follows: Use ARL Volume 5 including current discovery, classification, and documentation procedures, and including current economic lives table, cost factor tables, depreciation table, and level of value adjustment factor table. The personal property audit standards narrative must be in place and current. A listing of businesses that have been audited by the assessor within the twelve-month period reflected in the plan is given to the auditor. The audited businesses must be in conformity with those described in the plan. Aggregate ratio will be determined solely from the personal property accounts that have been physically inspected. The minimum assessment sample is one percent or ten schedules, whichever is greater, and the maximum assessment audit sample is 100 schedules. For the counties having over 100,000 population, RMVS selected a sample of all personal property schedules to determine whether the assessor is correctly applying the provisions of law and manuals of the Property Tax Administrator in arriving at the assessment levels of such property. This sample was selected from the personal property schedules audited by the assessor. In no event was the sample selected by the contractor less than 30 schedules. The
counties to be included in this study are Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Denver, Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Larimer, Mesa, Pueblo, and Weld. All other counties received a procedural study. Denver County is compliant with the guidelines set forth in ARL Volume 5 regarding discovery procedures, using the following methods to discover personal property accounts in the county: • • • •
Public Record Documents Local Telephone Directories, Newspapers or Other Local Publications Personal Observation, Physical Canvassing or Word of Mouth Questionnaires, Letters and/or Phone Calls to Buyer, Seller and/or Realtor
The county uses the Division of Property Taxation (DPT) recommended classification and documentation procedures. The DPT’s recommended cost factor tables, depreciation tables and level of value adjustment factor tables are also used. Denver County submitted their personal property written audit plan and was current for the 2008 valuation period. The number and listing of businesses audited was also submitted and was in conformance with the written audit plan. The following audit triggers were used by the county to select accounts to be audited: • •
Businesses in a selected area Accounts with obvious discrepancies
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 20
• • • • • • •
Accounts with greater than 10% change Incomplete or inconsistent declarations Accounts with omitted property Same business type or use Businesses with no deletions or additions for 2 or more years Non-filing Accounts - Best Information Available Accounts protested with substantial disagreement
Equalization (SBOE) compliance requirements which range from .90 to 1.10 with no COD requirements.
Conclusions Denver County has employed adequate discovery, classification, documentation, valuation, and auditing procedures for their personal property assessment and is in statistical compliance with SBOE requirements.
Recommendations None
Denver County’s median ratio is 1.00. This is in compliance with the State Board of
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 21
RMVS AUDITOR STAFF Mark Linné, MAI, CRE, CAE, ASA, FRICS, Corporate Managing Director of RMVS Suzanne J. Howard, Audit Manager for RMVS Uwe Hohoff, Chief Statistician for RMVS, Audit Division James Gresham, Audit Chief Data Analyst for RMVS Garth Thimgan, CAE, General Audit Support and Consultant for RMVS Helen D. Powszukiewicz, General Audit Support Administrative Assistant Carl W. Ross, Agricultural Coordinator and Supervisor for RMVS Cathie E. Ross, General Audit Support Administrative Assistant Katie Linné, Administrative Assistant
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 22
APPENDICES
2008 Denver County Property Assessment Study – Page 23
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS DENVER COUNTY 2008 I. OVERVIEW Denver County is the largest county in terms of population in Colorado. The County has a total of 215,666 parcels based on the data submitted by the County Assessor’s office in 2008. The breakdown by property type is listed in the table below.
PROPERTY TYPE VACANT LAND RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL OTHER Total
Frequency 5,292 190,206 9,768 319 10,081 215,666
Percent 2.5 88.2 4.5 .1 4.7 100.0
Vacant Land The vacant land class of properties has a total of 5,292 parcels. The majority (70%) of these parcels have a residential use. The remaining vacant parcels are a mix of commercial/industrial and PUD, or have a subclass code that is delineated by the acreage of the parcel.
SUBCLASS CODE 10 Vacant Land - Possessory Int 100 Residential Lots 101 Residential Lots 200 Commercial Lots 300 Industrial Lots 400 PUD Lots 510 Less Than 1.0 ACRES Total
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Frequency 8 2,818 908 660 630 179 89 5,292
Percent .2 53.3 17.2 12.5 11.9 3.4 1.7 100.0
Page 24
Residential The residential subclass category has a total of 190,206 parcels. Over 72% of the parcels have a single-family residential (1112,1114) subclass code. Condominiums (1130) represent a total of 24% of the total residential inventory. The remaining parcels in this category are multi-unit and mobile home properties. SUBCLASS CODE 1112 1114 1115 1120 1125 1130 1135 1140 1150 Total
Single Family Residence Single Family Residence Duplexes-Triplexes Multi-Units (4-8) Multi-Units (9 & Up) Condominiums Manuf Housing (Mobile Homes) Manuf Housing (Land, Park, Etc.) Partially Exempt (Taxable Part)
Frequency 127,337 9,907 3,989 956 1,166 46,471 366 6 8 190,206
Percent 66.9 5.2 2.1 .5 .6 24.4 .2 .0 .0 100.0
Commercial/Industrial The commercial/industrial subclass category has a total of 10,087 properties. This category represents 4.6% of the total property inventory. The breakdown by subclass code is listed below. SUBCLASS CODE 2020 2022 2023 2112 2115 2120 2125 2130 2135 2140 2150 2230 3115 Total
Airport Possessory Interest Recreation Possessory Interest Other Commercial Possessory Int Merchandising Lodging Offices Recreation Special Purpose WareHouse/Strg Multi-Use (3+) Partially Exempt (Taxable Part) Special Purpose Manuf/Processing
Frequency 242 1 2 1,392 76 1,505 151 3,491 2,035 2 12 859 319 10,087
Percent 2.4 .0 .0 13.8 .8 14.9 1.5 34.6 20.2 .0 .1 8.5 3.2 100.0
Other The majority of the remaining parcels have a subclass code describing exempt property. 2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 25
II. SALES FILE The sale file provided by the Denver County Assessor’s Office contained 31,579 sales between the dates of January 2005 and June 2006. The breakdown of sales activity by sale month and year is as follows: Count
SALE MONTH
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Total
SALE YEAR 2005 2006 1,141 1,260 1,404 1,232 1,761 1,647 1,767 1,884 1,930 1,949 2,157 1,961 1,741 0 2,320 0 1,939 0 1,615 0 1,546 0 2,325 0 21,646 9,933
Total 2,401 2,636 3,408 3,651 3,879 4,118 1,741 2,320 1,939 1,615 1,546 2,325 31,579
*Note: sales without current assessed values were excluded from the analysis. Once the sales were edited to keep the most recent sale, transactions that were coded as unqualified by the County were excluded from the analysis. The following table provides a breakdown of the qualified and unqualified sales.
SALE INVESTIGATION CODE QUALIFIED UNQUALIFIED Total
Frequency 20,381 8,307 28,688
Percent 71.0 29.0 100.0
There were 20,381 sales that were classified as qualified. The breakdown of the sales by current property type is listed below.
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 26
SALE TYPE Frequency 31 20,010 336 4 20,381
VACANT RESIDENTIAL COMM/IND OTHER Total
Percent .2 98.2 1.6 .0 100.0
III. RESIDENTIAL SALES RESULTS For the residential analysis, 20,010 sales between the dates January 2005 and June 2006 were analyzed. A breakdown of the sales by subclass is listed below. SUBCLASS CODE 1112 1114 1115 1120 1125 1130 Total
Single Family Residence Townhouse Duplexes-Triplexes Multi-Units (4-8) Multi-Units (9 & Up) Condominiums
Frequency 11,762 1,788 229 75 61 6,095 20,010
Percent 58.8 8.9 1.1 .4 .3 30.5 100.0
These sales were used to perform a sales ratio analysis to determine whether the statutory guidelines for the level and quality of the assessments have been satisfied. In order to perform a sales ratio analysis all sales must reflect market conditions as of June 30, 2006. Based on an examination of the sales file, the County applied time adjustments to the sales during this time period. The following graph illustrates the various time adjustment factors applied to the residential sales.
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 27
DENVER COUNTY RESIDENTIAL TIME ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
RATE
1.10
1.05
1.00
0.00
3.00
6.00
9.00
12.00
15.00
18.00
21.00
MONTHS FROM JUNE 2006 (1=JUNE 2006, 18 = JANUARY 2005)
The following table outlines the sales ratio statistics for all residential properties in Denver County. Ratio Statistics: All Residential Mean Median Weighted Mean Price Related Differential Coefficient of Dispersion
1.005 1.000 1.003 1.003 .045
RATIO = CURRENT ASMT / TASP
*Note: An outlier trim removed 24 sales that were outside a sale ratio range of .30-2.50.
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 28
The following section provides the ratio statistics for each residential subtype in Denver County. Ratio Statistics: Residential subclass 1112 ECON AREA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 44 MISSI NG Overall
SALE COUNT 550 702 335 393 529 789 452 384 248 224 450 295 451 490 311 258 346 200 439 199 239 820 394 408 296 297 361 202 198 172 252 1 14 11,699
Median 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.002 .999 1.002 1.000 1.001 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.002 1.002 1.000 1.001 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.002 1.000 1.003 1.000 .997 1.000 .998 1.000 1.234 1.001 1.000
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Weighted Mean .999 1.000 1.011 1.021 1.002 .999 1.005 1.006 1.002 1.000 1.000 1.011 1.018 1.021 1.043 .999 1.009 1.016 1.007 .999 1.001 1.008 1.004 .999 1.003 1.024 1.028 1.007 1.009 .997 1.004 1.234 .995 1.011
Price Related Differential 1.002 1.002 1.003 1.003 1.005 1.002 1.003 1.002 1.004 1.004 1.004 1.003 1.006 1.005 1.016 1.002 1.009 1.013 1.003 1.000 1.002 1.002 1.003 1.003 1.002 1.004 1.002 1.003 1.003 1.004 1.004 1.000 1.001 1.001
Coefficient of Dispersion .035 .037 .057 .056 .049 .034 .051 .047 .045 .044 .051 .055 .055 .080 .101 .035 .050 .062 .045 .033 .034 .039 .039 .032 .032 .065 .064 .048 .044 .052 .048 .000 .028 .048
Page 29
Ratio Statistics: Townhomes/Rowhomes Group 31* 51 53 54 55 999* Overall
SALE COUNT 2 136 404 763 478 1 1,784
Median .733 .982 1.000 .998 1.000 .919 .997
Weighted Mean .733 .971 .992 .995 .982 .919 .985
Price Related Differential 1.000 1.005 1.004 1.009 1.008 1.000 1.010
Coefficient of Dispersion .000 .044 .040 .068 .056 .000 .057
*Note: nominal sale counts in each area (<=2). Ratio Statistics: Condominiums Group 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 Overall
Mean 327 199 670 745 795 700 948 200 370 492 230 411 6,087
Median 1.000 1.000 .996 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 .998 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Weighted Mean .988 .991 .973 1.002 .994 .992 .993 .995 .974 .998 .990 .989 .988
Price Related Differential 1.005 1.002 1.013 1.004 1.002 1.003 1.003 1.004 1.003 1.003 1.003 1.004 1.007
Coefficient of Dispersion .032 .031 .051 .040 .026 .028 .030 .029 .044 .024 .041 .029 .034
Ratio Statistics SUBCLASS 1115 Duplexes-Triplexes Land 1120 Multi-Units (4-8) Land 1125 Multi-Units (9 & Up) Land
SALE COUNT 229 75 61
Median 1.005 1.021 .990
Weighted Mean .993 1.011 .952
Price Related Differential 1.017 1.014 1.034
Coefficient of Dispersion .099 .098 .082
The ratio statistics for each residential subclass are in compliance with the standards set forth by the Colorado State Board of Equalization (SBOE). The following histogram indicates the overall ratio distribution for residential properties in Denver County:
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 30
6,000
5,000
Frequency
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000 Mean =1.01 Std. Dev. =0.091 N =19,959 0 0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
RATIO
Residential Market Trend Analysis We verified that market trending was accounted for in the residential valuations by analyzing the sale ratios over the 18 month time period. The following graph illustrates that there is no trend in sale ratios during this time period when evaluated on a county-wide basis.
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 31
Sale Ratio by Months 2.50
2.00
RATIO
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00 0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
MONTHS FROM JANUARY 2005
Time trends were next analyzed for each property type by economic area. The results are as follows:
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 32
a RESIDENTIAL TIME TREND SIGNIFICANCE TEST BY ECONOMIC AREA
EconArea 1
Model 1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
8
1
9
1
10
1
11
1
12
1
13
1
14
1
15
1
16
1
17
1
18
1
19
1
20
1
21
1
22
1
23
1
24
1
25
1
26
1
27
1
28
1
29
1
30
1
31
1
999
1
(Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS
Unstandardized Coefficients B Std. Error -.004 .004 .000 .000 -.004 .004 .001 .000 .010 .010 -6.3E-006 .001 .027 .011 -.001 .001 -.003 .006 .001 .001 .001 .003 .000 .000 .004 .007 8.81E-005 .001 .008 .008 .000 .001 .014 .009 -.001 .001 .005 .009 .000 .001 .006 .007 .000 .001 .005 .011 .000 .001 .017 .012 .001 .001 .035 .013 -.002 .001 .039 .021 .001 .002 -.002 .006 .000 .001 .005 .013 .002 .001 .002 .017 .002 .002 .004 .007 .000 .001 -.010 .014 .000 .001 .015 .007 -.001 .001 .014 .004 -.001 .000 -.012 .006 .002 .001 .014 .006 -.001 .001 -.004 .005 .001 .001 .017 .015 .001 .001 .010 .013 .001 .001 .018 .013 -.001 .001 .022 .011 -.001 .001 .005 .011 -.001 .001 .003 .009 .000 .001 -.011 .024 .001 .003
Standardized Coefficients Beta .047 .063 .000 -.057 .059 -.015 .006 -.019 -.079 -.024 -.030 .024 .022 -.067 .017 .014 .076 .078 .021 .024 -.138 -.052 .170 -.119 .093 .025 .060 -.077 -.101 -.050 .029 .082
t -1.044 1.105 -1.009 1.675 .962 -.007 2.547 -1.125 -.452 1.346 .233 -.432 .562 .129 1.004 -.381 1.572 -1.243 .566 -.351 .783 -.637 .435 .417 1.480 .468 2.710 -1.495 1.899 .303 -.318 .220 .407 1.431 .137 1.104 .550 .440 -.732 .334 2.128 -2.138 3.288 -1.488 -2.070 3.409 2.307 -2.422 -.669 1.598 1.124 .432 .775 1.140 1.372 -1.094 2.003 -1.427 .457 -.658 .297 .460 -.473 .284
Sig. .297 .269 .313 .094 .337 .995 .011 .261 .652 .179 .816 .666 .575 .898 .316 .703 .117 .215 .572 .726 .434 .524 .664 .677 .140 .640 .007 .135 .058 .762 .751 .826 .684 .153 .891 .271 .583 .660 .465 .738 .034 .034 .001 .137 .039 .001 .022 .016 .504 .111 .262 .666 .439 .255 .172 .275 .047 .155 .648 .511 .766 .646 .645 .781
a. Dependent Variable: LNRATIO
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 33
TOWNHOMES/ROWHOMESa
EconArea 51
Model 1
53
1
54
1
55
1
Unstandardized Coefficients B Std. Error -.066 .012 .004 .001 .003 .006 -.001 .001 .003 .008 .000 .001 -.007 .009 -.001 .001
(Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS
Standardized Coefficients Beta .291 -.078 -.021 -.037
t -5.372 3.518 .468 -1.565 .349 -.588 -.823 -.814
Sig. .000 .001 .640 .118 .728 .557 .411 .416
a. Dependent Variable: LNRATIO
CONDOMINIUMa
EconArea 38
Model 1
39
1
40
1
41
1
42
1
43
1
44
1
45
1
46
1
47
1
48
1
49
1
(Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS
Unstandardized Coefficients B Std. Error -.010 .008 3.50E-005 .001 -.005 .007 .000 .001 -.010 .007 -.001 .001 -.004 .005 .001 .000 -.003 .003 .000 .000 -.010 .003 .000 .000 -.006 .003 8.63E-005 .000 .005 .007 -.001 .001 -.012 .009 -.001 .001 .012 .006 -.001 .000 -.014 .008 .001 .001 -.010 .004 .000 .000
Standardized Coefficients Beta .003 -.034 -.041 .065 -.025 .048 .009 -.080 -.090 -.102 .050 .025
t -1.155 .046 -.703 -.473 -1.478 -1.065 -.727 1.775 -.857 -.716 -2.888 1.258 -1.727 .285 .668 -1.136 -1.342 -1.736 2.102 -2.265 -1.706 .750 -2.522 .506
Sig. .249 .964 .483 .637 .140 .287 .468 .076 .392 .474 .004 .209 .084 .776 .505 .257 .180 .083 .036 .024 .089 .454 .012 .613
a. Dependent Variable: LNRATIO
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 34
MULTI-UNITa
SUBCLASS CODE 1115 Duplexes-Triplexes
Model 1
1120 Multi-Units (4-8)
1
1125 Multi-Units (9 & Up)
1
(Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS (Constant) MONTHS
Unstandardized Coefficients B Std. Error .002 .018 .000 .002 .028 .035 -.002 .003 -.044 .028 .003 .003
Standardized Coefficients Beta
t .126 -.082 .816 -.457 -1.578 .946
-.005 -.053 .122
Sig. .900 .935 .417 .649 .120 .348
a. Dependent Variable: LNRATIO
The time trend significance test by residential subclass identified four areas with a significant time trend at a 95% confidence level. The magnitudes of these trends were quite small in three out of the four subtypes and suggested nominal time adjustments. The following graphs outline the sales ratio trend in each of these areas.
SFR ECONOMIC AREA 21 AND 22 EconArea
1.40
21 23 21 23 1.30
RATIO
1.20
1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90
0.80 0.00
3.00
6.00
9.00
12.00
15.00
18.00
21.00
MONTHS FROM JANUARY 2005
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 35
TOWNHOME ECONOMIC AREA 51 1.30
1.20
1.10
RATIO
1.05
1.00 0.95
0.90
0.80
0.70
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
MONTHS FROM JANUARY 2005
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 36
CONDOMINIUM ECONOMIC AREA 47 1.30
1.20
RATIO
1.10
1.05
1.00
0.95
0.90
0.80
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
MONTHS FROM JANUARY 2005
Since the target level of .95-1.05 is maintained throughout the entire study period in each of the above residential subclass types and economic areas, no further analysis is necessary. Sold/Unsold Analysis For the 2007 revaluation year audit, an analysis was performed that confirmed that the median assessed value per square foot for sold and unsold residential property was similar. Since tax year 2008 is the intervening year, this relationship should not change. If there is no change in either category, the conclusions from the 2007 audit would also be applicable to the current year.
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 37
2007 - 2008 PERCENT CHANGE CHANGE CATEGORY SOLD UNSOLD
Median .0000 .0000
N 20,000 169,352
The above median percent change table of sold and unsold residential properties indicates that there is no change. Therefore, we can conclude that the analysis performed for the 2007 audit is also applicable for the 2008 tax year. IV. COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL SALES RESULTS For the commercial/industrial analysis, 336 sales between the dates of January 2005 and June 2006 were analyzed. A breakdown of the sales by subclass is as follows: SUBCLASS CODE 2112 2115 2120 2125 2130 2135 2230 3115 Total
Merchandising Lodging Offices Recreation Special Purpose WareHouse/Strg Special Purpose Manuf/Processing
Frequency 52 3 88 2 43 93 47 8 336
Percent 15.5 .9 26.2 .6 12.8 27.7 14.0 2.4 100.0
In order to perform a sales ratio analysis all commercial/industrial sales must reflect market conditions as of June 30, 2006. Based on an examination of the sales file, the majority of commercial sales did not receive a time adjustment during this time period. The following table outlines sales ratio statistics for commercial and industrial properties in Denver County.
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 38
Ratio Statistics Mean Median Weighted Mean Price Related Differential Coefficient of Dispersion
.956 .974 .918 1.041 .125
RATIO = CURRENT ASMT / TASP
The above ratios are in compliance with the standards set forth by the Colorado State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for the overall sales. The following graphical exhibits describe further the sales ratio distribution for all of these properties:
100
Frequency
80
60
40
20 Mean =0.96 Std. Dev. =0.178 N =336 0 0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
RATIO
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 39
2.00
RATIO
1.50
1.00
0.50
$0
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
TIME ADJUSTED SALE PRICE
*Note: For interpretation purposes, 8 sales > $5,000,000 were excluded from the above graph Commercial Market Trend Analysis We verified that market trending was accounted for in the commercial valuations by analyzing the sale ratios over the 18 month time period. The following graph illustrates a horizontal pattern in sales ratios indicating that there is no significant trend during this time period.
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 40
Sale Ratio by Months
2.00
RATIO
1.50
1.00
0.50
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
MONTHS FROM JANUARY 2005
Sold/Unsold Analysis For the 2007 revaluation year audit, an analysis was performed that confirmed that the median change in value between sold and unsold commercial/industrial property was consistent. Since tax year 2008 is the intervening year, this relationship should not change. If there is no change in either category, the conclusions from the 2007 audit would also be applicable for the current year.
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 41
2007 - 2008 PERCENT CHANGE CHANGE CATEGORY SOLD UNSOLD
Median .0000 .0000
N 336 9,635
The median percent change table of sold and unsold commercial/industrial property indicates that there is no change in either category. Therefore, we can conclude that the analysis performed for the 2007 audit is also applicable for the 2008 tax year. V. VACANT LAND SALE RESULTS For the vacant land analysis, 31 sales between the dates of January 2005 and June 2006 were analyzed. A breakdown of the sales by vacant land subclass code is listed below. SUBCLASS CODE 100 Residential Lots 101 Residential Lots 200 Commercial Lots 300 Industrial Lots 510 Less Than 1.0 ACRES Total
Frequency 14 4 5 6 2 31
Percent 45.2 12.9 16.1 19.4 6.5 100.0
In order to perform a sales ratio analysis all vacant land sales must reflect market conditions as of June 30, 2006. Based on an examination of the sales file, the majority of the vacant land sales did not receive a time adjustment during this time period. The following table outlines the sales ratio statistics for vacant land in Denver County.
Ratio Statistics Mean Median Weighted Mean Price Related Differential Coefficient of Dispersion
1.018 .998 .964 1.055 .110
RATIO = CURRENT ASMT / TASP
The sales ratios are in compliance with the standards set forth by the Colorado State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for the overall sales. The following graphical exhibits describe further the sales ratio distribution for all of these properties: 2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 42
10
Frequency
8
6
4
2 Mean =1.02 Std. Dev. =0.15 N =31 0 0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
RATIO
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 43
1.40
RATIO
1.20
1.00
0.80
$0
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
TIME ADJUSTED SALE PRICE
Vacant Land Market Trend Analysis The “Sales Ratio by Months” graph describes the vacant land sale ratios over the 18 month time period. The following graph illustrates a consistent pattern in sale ratios during this time period.
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 44
Sale Ratio by Months 1.40
RATIO
1.20
1.00
0.80
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
MONTHS FROM JANUARY 2005
Sold/Unsold Analysis For the 2007 revaluation year audit, an analysis was performed that confirmed that the median change in value between sold and unsold land was consistent. Since tax year 2008 is the intervening year, this relationship should not change. If there is no change in either category, the conclusions from the 2007 audit would also be applicable for the current year. 2007 - 2008 PERCENT CHANGE CHANGE CATEGORY SOLD UNSOLD
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Median .0000 .0000
N 31 4,961
Page 45
VI. CONCLUSIONS Based on this statistical analysis, there are no intervening year compliance issues concluded for Denver County.
2008 Statistical Report: DENVER COUNTY
Page 46
