Filetype Excel XLSX | Posted on 10 Aug 2022 | 3 years ago
Authentication
digital resources
427x Filetype XLSX File size 0.04 MB Source: www.revenue.wi.gov
Sheet 1: Instr
| I. Providing Stratified Analysis of Annual Economic Activity | ||
| Instructions and Initial Entry | ||
| This is a simplified form for local assessors to provide greater detail when they feel that the sales activity (or lack thereof) | ||
| may not provide a valid indicator of the economic activity within any one class of property, or has credible information of activity | ||
| of specific strata within a class. You are encouraged to review the handout titled "Guidelines for Assessors Stratifying Local Base", | ||
| or Chapter 14 of the WPAM. | ||
| The attached 6 worksheets are meant to deal with stratifying one class. The areas highlighited in yellow are data entry areas. | ||
| To be considered, this material should be provided no later than mid-May to the district Equalization office. | ||
| Date: | 6/4/2004 | |
| Community Name: | T Waterford | |
| Projecting for Assessment Year: | 2004 | |
| Class being Stratified: | Residential | |
| Prior Year Class SOA Value: | $416,586,850 | Note: This comes from the Statement of Assessment |
| Prior Year Class State Value: | $491,068,300 | Note: This does not include 70.57 corrections |
| Calendar year of SOA Value: | 2003 | |
| Sales: Total number in Class: | 93 | Note: The sales reported should tie in with the number and values |
| Sales: Total Assessed Values: | $16,735,300 | of sales activity in the current year's Assm't to Sales analysis |
| Sales: Total Sales Price: | $21,733,850 | provided by DOR. If not, please explain differences. |
| Calendar year of Sales Used: | 2003 | |
| It is always helpful for the assessor to email the district office the file of sales which they are using in their analysis, including any statistical | ||
| calculations they consider relevant. The assessment to sales analysis DOR has is on the mainframe, and does not provide easy access | ||
| for further calculations a PC based worksheet would provide. |
| II. Stratification of Total Assessed Value of Class From Roll | ||||
| Date: | 6/4/2004 | SOA Year of Assessed Value: | 2003 | |
| Community: | T Waterford | |||
| Property Class: | Residential | Reported Totals: | $416,586,850 | |
| Calculated (below) Totals: | $416,589,850 | 100.00% | ||
| Stratum | Stratum | Stratum | Value on Roll | Strata as |
| Name | Code | Description | % of Class | |
| Off-Water | $137,476,661 | 33.00% | ||
| On-Water | $279,113,189 | 67.00% | ||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| 0.00% | ||||
| STRATUM NAME: Whatever convienient short reference the assessor uses for the specific grouping of similar properties | ||||
| STRATUM CODE: Not necessary, however this is a handy reference if the assessor maintains a code on the roll. | ||||
| STRATUM DESCRIPTION: Not necessary, however allows for further explaination if the 'name' isn't fully descriptive. | ||||
| REPORTED v. CALCULATED TOTALS: Compare the numbers on page 1 to the sum of the detail on this page. They should match. | ||||
| NOTE: In instances where there is a large % of the class value associated with one entity, it would be helpful to treat that entity as | ||||
| a separate stratum. Examples might be smaller communities with landfill sites, golf courses, regional shopping malls, | ||||
| or large valued headquarter office complexes. |
| III. Sales Ratio Analysis by Stratum | |||||||
| Date: | 6/4/2004 | ||||||
| Community: | T Waterford | ||||||
| Reported Totals: | 93 | $16,735,300 | $21,733,850 | ||||
| Calculated (below) Totals: | 93 | $16,735,300 | $21,733,850 | 77.00% | |||
| Stratum | Stratum | # of | # Adequate? | Assessed | Sale | Aggregate | Useable |
| Name | Code | Sales | No=1 | Value | Price | Ratio | Agg Ratio |
| Off-Water | 0 | 65 | $11,202,300 | $13,734,600 | 81.56% | 81.56% | |
| On-Water | 0 | 28 | $5,533,000 | $7,999,250 | 69.17% | 69.17% | |
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| 0 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% | ||||
| This page allows for the assessor to summarize assessed value totals, sales value totals and number of sales by each of their stratum. | |||||||
| # ADEQUATE?, NO=1, In this column the assessor should report their judgement of whether the number of sales is adequate | |||||||
| to reflect the assessment level of that specific stratum. | |||||||
| NOTE: For the formulas to work, if there are any sales in the stratum, and the number is not adequate, | |||||||
| the entry in this column MUST BE THE NUMBER '1'. | |||||||
| REPORTED v. CALCULATED TOTALS: Compare the numbers on page 1 to the sum of the detail on this page. They should match. | |||||||
| AGGREGATE RATIO: The aggregate ratio is the relationship between all the reported assessments and sales. | |||||||
| USEABLE RATIO: The ratios only reflect those strata In which the assessor felt there was an adequate quantity of sales. |
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.
