Project Report for Pilot Form

Project Report for Pilot Form:

How Your Property Tax Bill Is Calculated

In accordance with House Bill No. 1005

Prepared for: House Bill Author, Scott Reske and

Senate Sponsor, Howard ‘Luke’ Kenley

Project prototype completed tax year 2003 payable in year 2004

Prepared by: Z. Tuley

Vanderburgh County Treasurer

June 22, 2004

Z. Tuley

Vanderburgh County Treasurer

Room 210 Civic Center Complex

1 N.W. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.

Evansville, Indiana 47708

June 15, 2004

Indiana General Assembly

Department of Local Government Finance

Indiana County Treasurers Association

Association of Indiana Counties

Re: Project Report for Pilot Form: How Your Property Tax Bill Is Calculated

The enclosed report provides you with a comprehensive analysis of how the Pilot Form was created and can benefit the County Assessor, the County Auditor, the County Treasurer as well as the taxpayer. This report was created in an effort to show the process followed to create this form in compliance with HB 1005. This report contains an outline of the Technical demands this procedure required. The report will reveal the time documented to accomplish this task from start to finish. This document will reveal details of the costs involved versus public sentiment. I believe that this report will provide important information for Counties to comply with the state wide mandate by the year 2007.

You will find a sample form in Appendix A.

Sincerely,

Z. Tuley

Vanderburgh County Treasurer

i

Table of Contents

Letter of Transmittal i

Executive Summary iii

Resources 1

Production Breakdown 2

Time and Costs 3

Conclusions and Recommendations 5

Appendices

Appendix A: Pilot Form

Appendix B: Rates as provided by County Auditor

Appendix C: Reclassified Rates

Appendix D: Township Rates

Appendix E: Tax Bill Calculation

Executive Summary

This Form is the result of an effort by the Indiana General Assembly to inform taxpayers of their total tax liability compared on a year to year basis while including all liability of each distributable taxing unit including special assessment when applicable.

HB1005 requires the form to contain the following:

(1) A breakdown showing the total property tax and special assessment liability and the amount of the taxpayer's liability that will be distributed to each taxing unit in the county.
(2) A comparison showing any change in the assessed valuation for the property as compared to the previous year.
(3) A comparison showing any change in the property tax and special assessment liability for the property as compared to the previous year. The information required under this subdivision must identify:
(A) the amount of the taxpayer's liability distributable to each taxing unit in which the property is located in the current year and in the previous year; and
(B) the percentage change, if any, in the amount of the taxpayer's liability distributable to each taxing unit in which the property is located from the previous year to the current year.
(4) An explanation of the following:
(A) The homestead credit and all property tax deductions.
(B) The procedure and deadline for filing for the homestead credit and each deduction.
(C) The procedure that a taxpayer must follow to:
(i) appeal a current assessment; or
(ii) petition for the correction of an error related to the taxpayer's property tax and special assessment liability.
(D) The forms that must be filed for an appeal or petition described in clause (C).
The department of local government finance shall provide the explanation required by this subdivision to each county treasurer.
(5) A checklist that shows:
(A) the homestead credit and all property tax deductions; and
(B) whether the homestead credit and each property tax deduction applies in the current statement for the property transmitted under subsection IC 6-1.1-22-8(a)(1) or (a)(2).
(f) The information required to be mailed under subsection (e) must be simply and clearly presented and understandable to the average individual.

Regardless of whether a county treasurer transmits a statement of current and delinquent taxes and special assessments to a person liable for the taxes under subsection IC 6-1.1-22-8(a)(1) or to a mortgagee under subsection IC 6-1.1-22-8 (a)(2), the county treasurer shall mail the following information to the last known address of each person liable for the property taxes or special assessments or to the last known address of the most recent owner shown in the transfer book. The county treasurer shall mail the information not later than the date the county treasurer transmits a statement for the property under subsection IC 6-1.1-22-8 (a)(1) or (a)(2). The county treasurer, county auditor, and county assessor shall cooperate to generate the information to be included on the form.

The following report will demonstrate that Vanderburgh County complied with all sections.

iii

Resources

Personnel

Affiliated Computer Services (ACS In-House IT staff)

Joe Anslinger, Project Support Manager

Teresa Ray, Systems Consultant Analyst

Menzie Strickland, Systems Development Principal

Wayne Seifert, B.S. in Accounting from the University of Evansville, ACS consultant – Programmer with The Lieberman Group

McCarter & Associates, Inc.

Kathy McCarter, B.A. University of Maryland, Soviet Area Studies, with an

emphasis in Business Information Systems,

Webster University, Computer Resource Management

*Received the Schoen-Noble Award for Academic Excellence

Vanderburgh County

Z. Tuley, County Treasurer

Jason Perry, Chief Deputy Treasurer, attending The University of Southern

Indiana toward a degree in Computer Information Systems

Treasurer’s Office Staff

Cheryl Musgrave, County Assessor

Bill Fluty, County Auditor

Equipment

Main Frame (Vax) tax database

Personal Computer

Microsoft Access

Microsoft Excel

Broadband Internet Connection

CD-RW Drive and CD Roms

File Transfer Protocol (FTP) Software

Network or Desktop Printer

Calculator

Fax Machine

Telephone

1

Production Breakdown

Affiliated Computer Services (In-House IT staff)

Kathy McCarter of McCarter & Associates, Inc. (Programmer)

Source link (Print Specialist)

Two years worth of assessment and tax data, in our case payable in 2002 and 2003, was exported by ACS in a series of comma delimited text files. These years were chosen for proof and verification of accuracy. These text files were then brought into an Access data base by the programmer. This data was then used to populate the form that was pre-designed by the County Assessor, the County Treasurer, and the programmer. We worked through five drafts before achieving a readable ‘flow’ of this form design.

A redesign of the rate table, provided by the County Auditor, was established to separate and reclassify taxing units more appropriately. You will find a sample of each in Appendix B and C. Along with these established rates we provided the programmer with the township rates, as supplied by the County Auditor, and a detailed instruction for tax bill calculation. You will find a sample of each in Appendix D and E.

A test group comprised of each category (Real Estate, Oil, Personal Property, Mobile Home, and State Assessed) in each Township was then proofed for accuracy. We found a good test group is a minimum of three tax codes of each category in each township, when applicable. Original proofing was performed manually.

Once current rates were approved by the DLGF and entered into our tax system the programmer moved the 2003 data, on the form, into the previous year and ACS provided a set of 2004 files to the programmer. Proofing the new figures in the test group began again. Manual proofing proved slow and inaccurate due to human error. Time constraints made it necessary to duplicate calculations on the form. Tables in Excel were created to duplicate these calculations. These tables were created in-house by the Vanderburgh County Chief Deputy Treasurer who is proficient in Excel. The entire staff then had access to these tables, via our network share, and was able to assist us in the proofing process.

The programmer provided the print specialist with the access database established. This particular print shop found this access database was not compatible with their program so an alternative method was used to transfer the information from the Access database. The test group of “live” samples was faxed to our office and was also delivered to the office via Fed-Ex overnight. As “bugs” were worked out with the print shop the corrected test group continued to be faxed for proof.

This information is available on-line in conjunction with the tax roll and the assessment data base. You may access this form by going to www.vanderburghtreasurer.org or at http://assessor.evansville.net/cgi-bin/tax_search.cgi.

2

Time and Costs

Affiliated Computer Services (ACS In-House IT staff)

Joe Anslinger, Project Support Manager (approximately 40 hours) worked to coordinate and interface with the Treasurer’s office and the ACS operations staff. His hours included coordinating the following: the transfer and confirmation of the 2004 Vax data to the McCarter FTP server, generation of CD’s with all current year files and copies of last year’s files, backup plan for a problem with the format of field names.

Teresa Ray, Systems Consultant Analyst (approximately 60 hours) assisted in scheduling procedural events while offering alternative approaches for modifications to problem solving.

Wayne Seifert, ACS consultant – Programmer with The Lieberman Group (approximately 100+ hours) Menzie Strickland, Systems Development Principal (approximately 5 hours), facilitated the creation and exportation of tax information from the previous years and current year, once duplicate totals were verified, into a format for importing data into an Access database for the programmer. The programs were executed from start to finish in the tax billing process. This process was essential to obtain Pilot form information, as well, and includes the following: Coded special assessments, dumped all taxing categories, processing time, duplicate bill totals, duplicate Auditor’s adjustments totals, processed backup data, performed rollover, entered special assessment information into a format for programmer, generated escrow lists, generated CD’s with all current year and previous year billing files, devised all back up plans for trouble shooting and project failure.

**It is difficult, if not impossible, to separate the hours contributed by ACS between Tax Bills and Pilot form. Most processes were necessary for both.

McCarter & Associates, Inc.

Kathy McCarter, programmer (approximately 462.5 hours) tax bill database conversion, state Pilot form generation required populating each and every cell with a complex formula linked to tables and queries, tax bill and Pilot form design and development, bill calculations and analysis, file generation, transmission, and consultations for program conversions with Sourcelink.

Vanderburgh County

Z. Tuley, County Treasurer (approximately 257 hours) design, layout, wording and proofing of Pilot form.

Jason Perry, Chief Deputy Treasurer (approximately 250 hours) creation of duplicate calculations in Excel for proofing and proofing of Pilot form.

Treasurer’s Office Staff (approximately 336 hours) proofing of Pilot form.

Cheryl Musgrave, County Assessor (approximately 45 hours) design, layout and wording of Pilot form.

3

Bill Fluty, County Auditor (approximately 5 hours) wording of Pilot form.

I am unable to report the number of telephone conversations that took place during this process, however I was able to track the number of e-mails, as follows:

83 e-mails between myself or Jason and programmer

16 e-mails between myself or Jason and ACS

13 e-mails between myself or Jason and Sourcelink

20 e-mails between myself and the DLGF and the AIC

A couple of e-mails were sent to Rep. Scott Reske’s office.

Summary of Costs

4

Conclusions and Recommendations

This job takes a team. It takes a team with dedication, high energy, determination and most importantly high technical skills to successfully complete this task. I am not aware of any Treasurer, Auditor, or Assessor in this State with the degree of computer skills to accomplish this task. Even hiring excellent computer personnel, as we did, there is the need for a particular skill level in the Treasurers’ office in order to accurately proof the documents in a timely fashion.

Proofing for accuracy was found to be the most time consuming task of the entire process. Having received rates from the DLGF on March 31st and bill mailing requirements by April 23rd resulted in 13, 12 hour days in a row for the Chief Deputy Treasurer and me. This overtime was not all, we had 2 other 12 hour days before completing the proof/corrections stage. We also had some other staff members in over a weekend. I recommend that if HB 1005 remains in the law that the rates be approved/set earlier in the year.

Vanderburgh County separated 6 different taxing units on our bills prior to HB 1005, as did most Counties. Even with very positive news media coverage, out of 97,840 tax bills mailed in Vanderburgh County (noting all Pilot forms stated “We are interested in your comments”) only 31 taxpayers responded, at all. 18 out of those 31 taxpayers felt this form was a “good” idea. Of those 18 positive responses exactly half were still confused and asked for additional explanation. This is a very disappointing response rate when compared to the amount of time and overall cost. Of the others responding, they seemed mostly concerned about continued increases in the amount that they owed and not which taxing unit(s) may have caused their increase. However, having put this form on the internet has made it an easy quick reference tool for other offices to assist taxpayers with questions.

It is the opinion of this Treasurer, based on the test group, that the percentage difference needs to be removed in its entirety, especially in regards to personal property. The percentage difference is completely distorted by the annual variations in assessed values. In these cases, the percentage difference reveals a totally distorted figure of the actual tax increase or decrease. Percentage differences are also distorted in real estate on all new construction. Given the lack of response, coupled with varying AV’s versus cost, if the task of providing this additional information remains in the law, I strongly recommend that it be required for real estate and mobile home properties only.