(1) The assessment rolls of each county shall be subject to review by the Department of Revenue.
(2) The department shall conduct, no less frequently than once every 2 years, an in-depth review of the real property assessment roll of each county. The department need not individually study every use-class of property set forth in s. 195.073, but shall at a minimum study the level of assessment in relation to just value of each classification specified in subsection (3). Such in-depth review may include proceedings of the value adjustment board and the audit or review of procedures used by the counties to appraise property.
(a) The department shall, at least 30 days prior to the beginning of an in-depth review in any county, notify the property appraiser in the county of the pending review. At the request of the property appraiser, the department shall consult with the property appraiser regarding the classifications and strata to be studied, in order that the review will be useful to the property appraiser in evaluating his or her procedures.
(b) Every property appraiser whose upcoming roll is subject to an in-depth review shall, if requested by the department on or before January 1, deliver upon completion of the assessment roll a list of the parcel numbers of all parcels that did not appear on the assessment roll of the previous year, indicating the parcel number of the parent parcel from which each new parcel was created or “cut out.”
(c) In conducting assessment ratio studies, the department must use all practicable steps, including stratified statistical and analytical reviews and sale-qualification studies, to maximize the representativeness or statistical reliability of samples of properties in tests of each classification, stratum, or roll made the subject of a ratio study published by it. The department shall document and retain records of the measures of representativeness of the properties studied in compliance with this section. Such documentation must include a record of findings used as the basis for the approval or disapproval of the tax roll in each county pursuant to s. 193.1142. In addition, to the greatest extent practicable, the department shall study assessment roll strata by subclassifications such as value groups and market areas for each classification or stratum to be studied, to maximize the representativeness of ratio study samples. For purposes of this section, the department shall rely primarily on an assessment-to-sales-ratio study in conducting assessment ratio studies in those classifications of property specified in subsection (3) for which there are adequate market sales. The department shall compute the median and the value-weighted mean for each classification or subclassification studied and for the roll as a whole.
(d) In the conduct of these reviews, the department shall adhere to all standards to which the property appraisers are required to adhere.
(e) The department and each property appraiser shall cooperate in the conduct of these reviews, and each shall make available to the other all matters and records bearing on the preparation and computation of the reviews. The property appraisers shall provide any and all data requested by the department in the conduct of the studies, including electronic data processing tapes. Any and all data and samples developed or obtained by the department in the conduct of the studies shall be confidential and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1) until a presentation of the findings of the study is made to the property appraiser. After the presentation of the findings, the department shall provide any and all data requested by a property appraiser developed or obtained in the conduct of the studies, including tapes. Direct reimbursable costs of providing the data shall be borne by the party who requested it. Copies of existing data or records, whether maintained or required pursuant to law or rule, or data or records otherwise maintained, shall be submitted within 30 days from the date requested, in the case of written or printed information, and within 14 days from the date requested, in the case of computerized information.
(f) Within 120 days after receipt of a county assessment roll by the executive director of the department pursuant to s. 193.1142(1), or within 10 days after approval of the assessment roll, whichever is later, the department shall complete the review for that county and publish the department’s findings. The findings must include measures as may be appropriate for each classification or subclassification studied and related statistical and analytical details. The measures in the findings must be based on:
1. A 95-percent level of confidence; or
2. Ratio study standards that are generally accepted by professional appraisal organizations in developing a statistically valid sampling plan if a 95-percent level of confidence is not attainable.
(g) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, in one or more assessment years following a natural disaster in counties for which a state of emergency was declared by executive order or proclamation of the Governor pursuant to chapter 252, if the department determines that the natural disaster creates difficulties in its statistical and analytical reviews of the assessment rolls in affected counties, the department shall take all practicable steps to maximize the representativeness and reliability of its statistical and analytical reviews and may use the best information available to estimate the levels of assessment. This paragraph first applies to the 2019 assessment roll and operates retroactively to January 1, 2019.
(3)(a) Upon completion of review pursuant to paragraph (2)(f), the department shall publish the results of reviews conducted under this section. The results must include all statistical and analytical measures computed under this section for the real property assessment roll and independently for the following real property classes if the classes constituted 5 percent or more of the total assessed value of real property in a county on the previous tax roll:
1. Residential property that consists of one primary living unit, including, but not limited to, single-family residences, condominiums, cooperatives, and mobile homes.
2. Residential property that consists of two to nine primary living units.
3. Agricultural, high-water recharge, historic property used for commercial or certain nonprofit purposes, and other use-valued property.
4. Vacant lots.
5. Nonagricultural acreage and other undeveloped parcels.
6. Improved commercial and industrial property, including apartments with more than nine units.
7. Taxable institutional or governmental, utility, locally assessed railroad, oil, gas and mineral land, subsurface rights, and other real property.
If one of the above classes constituted less than 5 percent of the total assessed value of all real property in a county on the previous assessment roll, the department may combine it with one or more other classes of real property for purposes of assessment ratio studies or use the weighted average of the other classes for purposes of calculating the level of assessment for all real property in a county. The department shall also publish such results for any subclassifications of the classes or assessment roll it may have chosen to study.
(b) If necessary for compliance with s. 1011.62, and for those counties not being studied in the current year, the department shall project value-weighted mean levels of assessment for each county. The department shall make its projection based upon the best information available, using professionally accepted methodology, and shall separately allocate changes in total assessed value to:
1. New construction, additions, and deletions.
2. Changes in the value of the dollar.
3. Changes in the market value of property other than those attributable to changes in the value of the dollar.
4. Changes in the level of assessment.
In lieu of the statistical and analytical measures published pursuant to paragraph (a), the department shall publish details concerning the computation of estimated assessment levels and the allocation of changes in assessed value for those counties not subject to an in-depth review.
(c) Upon publication of data and findings as required by this subsection, the department shall notify the committees of the Senate and of the House of Representatives having oversight responsibility for taxation, the appropriate property appraiser, and the county commission chair or corresponding official under a consolidated charter. Copies of the data and findings shall be provided upon request.
(4) It is declared to be the legislative intent that approval of the rolls by the department pursuant to s. 193.1142 and certification by the value adjustment board pursuant to s. 193.122(1) shall not be deemed to impugn the use of postcertification reviews to require adjustments in the preparation of succeeding assessment rolls to ensure that such succeeding assessment rolls do meet the constitutional mandates of just value.
(5) It is the legislative intent that the department utilize to the fullest extent practicable objective measures of market value in the conduct of reviews pursuant to this section.
(6) Reviews conducted under this section must include an evaluation of whether nonhomestead exempt values determined by the appraiser under applicable provisions of chapter 196 are correct and whether agricultural and high-water recharge classifications and classifications of historic property used for commercial and certain nonprofit purposes were granted in accordance with law.
(7) When a roll is prepared as an interim roll pursuant to s. 193.1145, the department shall compute assessment levels for both the interim roll and the final approved roll.
Cited 8 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1988 WL 31717
...Gen., Tallahassee, for appellees. NIMMONS, Judge. Jones appeals from a final judgment upholding the methodology employed by the Department of Revenue (DOR) in determining its estimated level of assessment for Escambia County for the tax year 1984, pursuant to Section 195.096(3)(b), Florida Statutes. We affirm. Pursuant to Florida law, DOR performs a biennial in-depth review of the ad valorem assessment rolls in each county in the state to determine the level of assessment in such county under Section 195.096(2), Florida Statutes. In those years when the county is not subject to in-depth review, DOR estimates the level of assessment for each county. Section 195.096(3)(b), Florida Statutes. The significance of these levels of assessment is that they affect the amount a district is required to provide annually toward the cost of education. See Section 236.081(4), Florida Statutes. Section 195.096(3)(b), Florida Statutes, provides as follows: When necessary for compliance with s....
...its economist, Mrs. Adina Simmons. From the evidence, the trial court found that DOR utilized professionally-accepted methodology based upon the best information available in estimating the 1984 level of assessment for Escambia County as required by Section 195.096(3)(b), Florida *1213 Statutes. The trial court further found that, contrary to Jones' assertions, Section 195.096(3)(b) did not constitute an improper delegation of legislative authority....
...Three issues have been presented for our review: (1) whether the methodology employed by the Department of Revenue in projecting its level of assessment for the non-in-depth study year was unlawful; (2) whether appellant, as a property appraiser, had standing to challenge the constitutionality of Section 195.096(3)(b); and (3) whether Section 195.096(3)(b) constitutes an unlawful delegation of legislative authority. Appellant asserts that Section 195.096(3)(b) requires DOR to employ a quantitative or objective methodology in projecting levels of assessment for non-in-depth study years....
...Simmons employed a qualitative methodology by which she exercised her professional judgment as to what data to consider and what weight to ascribe to such data. According to appellant, the use of this subjective methodology was unlawful. We disagree. Section 195.096(3)(b) requires DOR to make its projection of the levels of assessment for each county based upon "the best information available, utilizing professionally accepted methodology......
...Simmons was the best data available and the methodology she employed, while qualitative in nature, was professionally accepted. The expert testimony of Dr. Fishkind, an economist who testified for DOR, supports the trial court's finding. Dr. Fishkind expressed his professional opinion that, after reading Section 195.096(3)(b) and reviewing what DOR did in the 1984 non-in-depth study year for Escambia County, the best information available and professionally accepted methodology were utilized as required by the statute....
...Although other professionally accepted methodologies were available to DOR in arriving at the estimated level of assessment in 1984 for Escambia County, the availability of other methodologies does not mean that the methodology used by DOR was less than a "professionally accepted methodology" as required by Section 195.096(3)(b). Furthermore, contrary to appellant's assertions, Section 195.096(3)(b) does not contemplate the use of a solely objective or quantitative methodology....
...The very nature of this statute calls for a certain amount of subjectivity. This statute requires the projection of assessment levels during non-in-depth study years, unlike the objective calculations involved in the review of in-depth study years. Moreover, the last paragraph in Section 195.096(3)(b) provides that " [i]n lieu of the statistical and analytical measures published pursuant to paragraph (a), the department shall publish details concerning the computation of estimated assessment levels......
...." (e.s.) Any projection or estimation involves a certain amount of subjectivity. Thus, the very language of this statute establishes the propriety of a qualitative method in projecting levels of assessment. Appellant also challenges the constitutionality of Section 195.096(3)(b), Florida *1214 Statutes. He alleged in his complaint that Section 195.096(3)(b) violates article II, section 3 and article III, section I of the Florida Constitution in that it constitutes an improper delegation of legislative authority....
...Lewis, 416 So.2d 455 (Fla. 1982). Appellant mounted such a constitutional attack in this case and therefore had standing in his individual capacity to challenge the statute. Addressing the merits of appellant's constitutional challenge, we find that Section 195.096(3)(b) does not constitute an unlawful delegation of legislative authority....
...ble. Griffin, 239 So.2d at 581. The statute at issue in this case concerns the field of economics, a highly complex discipline which requires the expertise and flexibility of the agency to deal with "complex and fluid" conditions. The legislature in Section 195.096(3)(b) has not delegated power to DOR to make the law, but rather authority as to its execution....
...e organizations, etc., be "established by the fund on an actuarial basis," not unconstitutional as an unlawful delegation of power, because such term is recognized as an established, meaningful standard within the industry). The critical language of Section 195.096(3)(b), authorizing DOR to utilize "professionally accepted methodology," denotes and incorporates professional standards within the appropriate field economics in this case....
Cited 5 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...I have carefully perused the record and am unable to say he is in error, so, I, therefore, respectfully dissent. ADKINS, J., concurs. NOTES [1] The trial court's order reads in relevant part: "It is not necessary to consider the constitutionality of Section 195.096(4), Florida Statutes, 1973....
...The petition for writ of mandamus is granted with directions to the Department of Revenue to file the probable cause review with the agency clerk within 30 days of issuance of mandate in this case. BENTON, VAN NORTWICK, and THOMAS, JJ., concur. . See e.g., § 195.096(8) (DOR’s review of property appraisers’ annual assessment rolls), § 195.097(6) (DOR’s postaudit notification of defects in assessment rolls), § 195.0995(3) (DOR's review of appraisers’ use of sales ■ transactions data), § 193...
...Rolls that deviate from just value risk Department disapproval. Id.; id. § 195.002. In addition, the Department periodically conducts in-depth statistical studies to determine whether particular county appraisers persist in departing from the requirement of appraisal at just value. Id. § 195.096....
law and the constitution. (Emphasis added.) Section 195.096 subjects the assessment rolls of each county
This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.
