Just to make sure everyone knows, the Senate DID pass the AMC bill out of the Labor/Commerce Committee and on to the Senate Ways & Means Committee yesterday afternoon…. we keep moving forward… Ways & Means Committee members for the Senate are shown below. Contact them, please, and ask that they support this bill and pass it on to Rules.
So far, I do know that Sens. Karen Keiser and Jeanne Kohl-Welles are solidly in support of our bill, as I also believe that Phil Rockefeller and Debbie Regala are, too. Regala is my Senator, and I have been in touch with her about the bill. If I recall correctly, Barry indicated that the Committee Chair, Margarita Prentice, is in his District. Rodney Tom is usually supportive of our efforts, and TK has a good rapport with him. Sen. Kline is on the Labor/Commerce Committee, which just passed the bill out to W&M. D’s outnumber R’s by 14 – 8 on this committee, so I think we are good for this to continue to Rules.
Feedback I have received from national sources indicates that our bill is receiving very positive reviews! Many feel it represents a very good model to work from….it should, we have certainly put enough time and effort into it thus far!
Thanks to everyone for continuing efforts to get this bill passed! Just a few more steps to go…. From W&Ms to Rules, then to Senate floor vote, then back to the House for reconsideration as amended (remember, it passed the House first time 98 – 0!), and THEN, finally, to the Governor! ...whew!!!
Stan Sidor
President, ACOW
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
Rainier Pacific goes down
"Rainier Pacific Bank, Tacoma, Washington, was closed today by the Washington Department of Financial Institutions, which appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as receiver. To protect the depositors, the FDIC entered into a purchase and assumption agreement with Umpqua Bank, Roseburg, Oregon, to assume all of the deposits of Rainier Pacific Bank.
"The 14 branches of Rainier Pacific Bank will reopen during normal business hours as branches of Umpqua Bank. Depositors of Rainier Pacific Bank will automatically become depositors of Umpqua Bank. Deposits will continue to be insured by the FDIC, so there is no need for customers to change their banking relationship to retain their deposit insurance coverage. Customers should continue to use their former Rainier Pacific Bank branch until they receive notice from Umpqua Bank that it has completed systems changes to allow other Umpqua Bank branches to process their accounts as well.
"This evening and over the weekend, depositors of Rainier Pacific Bank can access their money by writing checks or using ATM or debit cards. Checks drawn on the bank will continue to be processed. Loan customers should continue to make their payments as usual.
"As of December 31, 2009, Rainier Pacific Bank had approximately $717.8 million in total assets and $446.2 million in total deposits. Umpqua Bank will pay the FDIC a premium of 1.04 percent to assume all of the deposits of Rainier Pacific Bank. In addition to assuming all of the deposits, Umpqua Bank agreed to purchase approximately $670.1 million of the failed bank's assets. The FDIC will retain the remaining assets for later disposition.
"The FDIC and Umpqua Bank entered into a loss-share transaction on $578.1 million of Rainier Pacific Bank's assets. Umpqua Bank will share in the losses on the asset pools covered under the loss-share agreement. The loss-share transaction is projected to maximize returns on the assets covered by keeping them in the private sector. The transaction also is expected to minimize disruptions for loan customers."
-
"The 14 branches of Rainier Pacific Bank will reopen during normal business hours as branches of Umpqua Bank. Depositors of Rainier Pacific Bank will automatically become depositors of Umpqua Bank. Deposits will continue to be insured by the FDIC, so there is no need for customers to change their banking relationship to retain their deposit insurance coverage. Customers should continue to use their former Rainier Pacific Bank branch until they receive notice from Umpqua Bank that it has completed systems changes to allow other Umpqua Bank branches to process their accounts as well.
"This evening and over the weekend, depositors of Rainier Pacific Bank can access their money by writing checks or using ATM or debit cards. Checks drawn on the bank will continue to be processed. Loan customers should continue to make their payments as usual.
"As of December 31, 2009, Rainier Pacific Bank had approximately $717.8 million in total assets and $446.2 million in total deposits. Umpqua Bank will pay the FDIC a premium of 1.04 percent to assume all of the deposits of Rainier Pacific Bank. In addition to assuming all of the deposits, Umpqua Bank agreed to purchase approximately $670.1 million of the failed bank's assets. The FDIC will retain the remaining assets for later disposition.
"The FDIC and Umpqua Bank entered into a loss-share transaction on $578.1 million of Rainier Pacific Bank's assets. Umpqua Bank will share in the losses on the asset pools covered under the loss-share agreement. The loss-share transaction is projected to maximize returns on the assets covered by keeping them in the private sector. The transaction also is expected to minimize disruptions for loan customers."
-
WA Senate Ways & Means Committee
Committee Members
| Senator | Room | Phone |
| Prentice, Margarita (D) Chair | JAC 303 | (360) 786-7616 |
| Fraser, Karen (D) Vice Chair, Capital Budget Chair | LEG 404 | (360) 786-7642 |
| Tom, Rodney (D) Vice Chair, Operating Budget | JAC 220 | (360) 786-7694 |
| Zarelli, Joseph (R) * | INB 204 | (360) 786-7634 |
| Brandland, Dale (R) | INB 203 | (360) 786-7682 |
| Carrell, Mike (R) | INB 102 | (360) 786-7654 |
| Fairley, Darlene (D) | JAC 227 | (360) 786-7662 |
| Hewitt, Mike (R) | LEG 314 | (360) 786-7630 |
| Hobbs, Steve (D) | JAC 213 | (360) 786-7686 |
| Honeyford, Jim (R) | INB 107 | (360) 786-7684 |
| Keiser, Karen (D) | JAC 224 | (360) 786-7664 |
| Kline, Adam (D) | JAC 223 | (360) 786-7688 |
| JAC 219 | (360) 786-7670 | |
| McDermott, Joe (D) | JAC 230 | (360) 786-7667 |
| Murray, Ed (D) | JAC 215 | (360) 786-7628 |
| Oemig, Eric (D) | LEG 416 | (360) 786-7672 |
| LEG 316 | (360) 786-7622 | |
| Pflug, Cheryl (R) | LEG 415 | (360) 786-7608 |
| Pridemore, Craig (D) | JAC 212 | (360) 786-7696 |
| Regala, Debbie (D) | JAC 233 | (360) 786-7652 |
| JAC 218 | (360) 786-7644 | |
| Schoesler, Mark (R) | INB 110 | (360) 786-7620 |
*Ranking Minority Member
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Regarding Desktop Appraisal Orders
North Carolina Board Guidance Concerning Desktop Appraisal Orders
A new desktop appraisal product was released in February 2010. The Appraisal Board has received numerous telephone calls and emails about this product and others that are similar. Although the Board does not approve or prohibit specific forms or software used to deliver appraisal results, the Board does have several concerns about this type of assignment.
An assignment is an agreement between an appraiser and a client for a valuation service. Once an appraiser accepts an assignment, USPAP applies to the appraiser’s actions. Even if an appraiser ends up not completing the assignment or does not get paid, the appraiser must still comply with USPAP. If an appraisal report is created and sent to the client, a workfile must be produced and maintained. USPAP requires that the work file must contain enough information to produce a summary appraisal report from the workfile contents.
This is a valuation service regarding the subject property that would have to be disclosed under the 2010 change to the Conduct Section of the Ethics Rule of USPAP, even if no report was transmitted and/or no payment was received. According to the instructions for this product, if an appraiser accepts an assignment to do this type of appraisal but subsequently discovers that the subject property does not meet minimum requirements, the appraiser will not get paid. This is referred to as a “no-hit”. Since an assignment that results in a “no-hit” may not be tracked in invoicing software, the assignment would have to be entered into some other type of tracking software to make sure one complied with the new disclosure requirement in USPAP.
The Scope of Work Rule of USPAP states that the appraiser, not the client, must determine the scope of work necessary to develop credible assignment results. In addition, the Scope of Work rule states that “An appraiser must not allow assignment conditions to limit the scope of work to such a degree that the assignment results are not credible in the context of the intended use.” There are several assignment conditions in this product that are referred to as “appraisal report minimum requirements”. Some may be unacceptable.
This product requires appraisers to use MLS as the primary data source. In many areas of our state, MLS is not available or is unreliable. A better source of data might be the county tax office or a private data collection system. The product also requires that appraisers must use a minimum of three closed comparable sales and a comparable listing and/or pending sale. At least two of the comparable sales must be less than 120 days old, and at least two must be located within one mile of the subject. The GLA of the comparable sales must be within 20% of the GLA of the subject. Appraisals of condominiums with more than 15 units must include at least two comparable sales from the development within the last 12 months and at least one comparable listing and/or pending sale from the development. Condominiums with 15 units or less must include at least one comparable sale from the development within the past 12 months and, when available, a comparable listing or pending sale from the development. This product does not allow the appraiser to use the best data available and may well limit the amount of work performed to such an extent as to violate the Scope of Work Rule.
Of major concern is the assignment condition that the appraiser will not receive a fee if the appraiser cannot meet all the product requirements. As noted above, this is referred to as a “no hit”. “No-hits” are produced when the appraiser cannot produce a credible value due to insufficient subject data, the subject is an ineligible property type, the appraiser cannot meet all of the minimum report requirements, the subject is zoned commercial/industrial, or the subject is not at its highest and best use.
It appears that the assignment conditions may violate the Management Section of the Ethics Rule. For example, if the appraiser searches for comps but discovers there have been none within the last 120 days, the appraiser will not get paid. If the subject is located in a transitional area and the highest and best use would be as an interim or commercial use, it is a “no-hit” and there is no fee. The fee for the assignment is contingent on a predetermined result - the reporting of comps that meet certain criteria, or a finding that the subject meets the product requirements. This type of assignment may result in the loss of objectivity. An appraiser may be tempted to use sales that he or she would not otherwise use, or to simply concur that the current use is the highest and best use, in order to receive a fee. The fact that an appraisal may not be completed (a “no-hit”) is irrelevant. The Ethics Rule prohibits accepting such an assignment.
There are appraisal products on the market now that allow or even require the appraiser to choose comparable sales from a database maintained by the software vender or client. Most of the comps in those systems are datamined from other appraisal reports. These services are not connected directly to a local MLS system. Sometimes an employee of the software company may contact local real estate brokers to obtain comparable sales. If an appraiser uses this database for sales, the database must be listed as the source for comparable sales, with MLS or another source used for verification of those sales. In addition, if the appraiser is given comparable sales by the client or vendor, the appraiser must disclose that he or she received significant assistance in choosing comparable sales.
Some of these products give an appraiser a discount if the appraiser voluntarily “contributes” appraisal reports to the software database so that subject and comparable information can be mined. Keep in mind that doing so is a violation of the Confidentiality Section of the Ethics Rule of USPAP, as assignment results are also communicated to the database.
A final note – the low fee paid for this assignment does not in any way lessen the appraiser’s legal requirement to comply with USPAP.
Stan Sidor
President, ACOW
A new desktop appraisal product was released in February 2010. The Appraisal Board has received numerous telephone calls and emails about this product and others that are similar. Although the Board does not approve or prohibit specific forms or software used to deliver appraisal results, the Board does have several concerns about this type of assignment.
An assignment is an agreement between an appraiser and a client for a valuation service. Once an appraiser accepts an assignment, USPAP applies to the appraiser’s actions. Even if an appraiser ends up not completing the assignment or does not get paid, the appraiser must still comply with USPAP. If an appraisal report is created and sent to the client, a workfile must be produced and maintained. USPAP requires that the work file must contain enough information to produce a summary appraisal report from the workfile contents.
This is a valuation service regarding the subject property that would have to be disclosed under the 2010 change to the Conduct Section of the Ethics Rule of USPAP, even if no report was transmitted and/or no payment was received. According to the instructions for this product, if an appraiser accepts an assignment to do this type of appraisal but subsequently discovers that the subject property does not meet minimum requirements, the appraiser will not get paid. This is referred to as a “no-hit”. Since an assignment that results in a “no-hit” may not be tracked in invoicing software, the assignment would have to be entered into some other type of tracking software to make sure one complied with the new disclosure requirement in USPAP.
The Scope of Work Rule of USPAP states that the appraiser, not the client, must determine the scope of work necessary to develop credible assignment results. In addition, the Scope of Work rule states that “An appraiser must not allow assignment conditions to limit the scope of work to such a degree that the assignment results are not credible in the context of the intended use.” There are several assignment conditions in this product that are referred to as “appraisal report minimum requirements”. Some may be unacceptable.
This product requires appraisers to use MLS as the primary data source. In many areas of our state, MLS is not available or is unreliable. A better source of data might be the county tax office or a private data collection system. The product also requires that appraisers must use a minimum of three closed comparable sales and a comparable listing and/or pending sale. At least two of the comparable sales must be less than 120 days old, and at least two must be located within one mile of the subject. The GLA of the comparable sales must be within 20% of the GLA of the subject. Appraisals of condominiums with more than 15 units must include at least two comparable sales from the development within the last 12 months and at least one comparable listing and/or pending sale from the development. Condominiums with 15 units or less must include at least one comparable sale from the development within the past 12 months and, when available, a comparable listing or pending sale from the development. This product does not allow the appraiser to use the best data available and may well limit the amount of work performed to such an extent as to violate the Scope of Work Rule.
Of major concern is the assignment condition that the appraiser will not receive a fee if the appraiser cannot meet all the product requirements. As noted above, this is referred to as a “no hit”. “No-hits” are produced when the appraiser cannot produce a credible value due to insufficient subject data, the subject is an ineligible property type, the appraiser cannot meet all of the minimum report requirements, the subject is zoned commercial/industrial, or the subject is not at its highest and best use.
It appears that the assignment conditions may violate the Management Section of the Ethics Rule. For example, if the appraiser searches for comps but discovers there have been none within the last 120 days, the appraiser will not get paid. If the subject is located in a transitional area and the highest and best use would be as an interim or commercial use, it is a “no-hit” and there is no fee. The fee for the assignment is contingent on a predetermined result - the reporting of comps that meet certain criteria, or a finding that the subject meets the product requirements. This type of assignment may result in the loss of objectivity. An appraiser may be tempted to use sales that he or she would not otherwise use, or to simply concur that the current use is the highest and best use, in order to receive a fee. The fact that an appraisal may not be completed (a “no-hit”) is irrelevant. The Ethics Rule prohibits accepting such an assignment.
There are appraisal products on the market now that allow or even require the appraiser to choose comparable sales from a database maintained by the software vender or client. Most of the comps in those systems are datamined from other appraisal reports. These services are not connected directly to a local MLS system. Sometimes an employee of the software company may contact local real estate brokers to obtain comparable sales. If an appraiser uses this database for sales, the database must be listed as the source for comparable sales, with MLS or another source used for verification of those sales. In addition, if the appraiser is given comparable sales by the client or vendor, the appraiser must disclose that he or she received significant assistance in choosing comparable sales.
Some of these products give an appraiser a discount if the appraiser voluntarily “contributes” appraisal reports to the software database so that subject and comparable information can be mined. Keep in mind that doing so is a violation of the Confidentiality Section of the Ethics Rule of USPAP, as assignment results are also communicated to the database.
A final note – the low fee paid for this assignment does not in any way lessen the appraiser’s legal requirement to comply with USPAP.
Stan Sidor
President, ACOW
Update on status of WA AMC Bill (ESHB 3040)
Hello all.
Thought I would give you a thumbnail update of the AMC legislation continuing to make its way through the WA legislature:
This bill (ESHB 3040) was heard by the Senate Committee on Labor, Commerce, and Consumer Protection on TU afternoon. There was no opposition. The bill seemed to be well-received, in particular by the chair (Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles and especially by Sen. Karen Kaiser, who met with me afterwards and voiced her strong support for the bill!).
Now, if they adopt the further, minor amendments and pass it today (there is an Exec Session by the committee this afternoon on the bill), this bill will then go to Senate Ways & Means, and will have to pass before next Monday. If it passes Senate Ways & Means, it will then be referred to the Senate Rules Committee (SRC). SRC will have to vote to put it on the Senate Floor Calendar for a floor vote. If it passes the Senate it has to go back to the House Floor for concurrence on the Senate amendments. All of this will likely occur within about the next WEEK! ….whew!
Most of recent amendments suggested have not come from either me (ACOW) or the AMCs, but rather predominantly from House and Senate legal staff, DOL, and/or the AG’s office, who have read and re-read the bill drafts, and it seems each time someone looks it over they either find a meaningless element (such as a definition that no longer fits after original Section 15 was removed), a confusing one (does not make sense or they do not know how to interpret or potentially enforce), one that conflicts with another section or another law, or one where some further element (timing, cycle period for renewals, and such) was needed, so we have had to admit that ‘yeah, this needs some more tweaking’…. That has been the problem with trying to rush to put a bill together and get it out without sufficient time to really vet it to everyone who may be able to provide perspective on language, provisions, etc.
Overall, I think it is a good bill, and it appears that it has a very good chance of being adopted into law …. No apparent major obstacles at this point. Will continue to monitor (TK Bentler, our lobbyist, is keeping me apprised with regular updates), and will let you know.
ONE MORE APPEAL TO APPRAISERS IN WA STATE: Call and/or email your Senator, at this time, and ask that he/she support ESHB 3040 as amended!
Thank you.
Stan Sidor
President ACOW - Appraiser's Coalition of Washington
Thought I would give you a thumbnail update of the AMC legislation continuing to make its way through the WA legislature:
This bill (ESHB 3040) was heard by the Senate Committee on Labor, Commerce, and Consumer Protection on TU afternoon. There was no opposition. The bill seemed to be well-received, in particular by the chair (Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles and especially by Sen. Karen Kaiser, who met with me afterwards and voiced her strong support for the bill!).
Now, if they adopt the further, minor amendments and pass it today (there is an Exec Session by the committee this afternoon on the bill), this bill will then go to Senate Ways & Means, and will have to pass before next Monday. If it passes Senate Ways & Means, it will then be referred to the Senate Rules Committee (SRC). SRC will have to vote to put it on the Senate Floor Calendar for a floor vote. If it passes the Senate it has to go back to the House Floor for concurrence on the Senate amendments. All of this will likely occur within about the next WEEK! ….whew!
Most of recent amendments suggested have not come from either me (ACOW) or the AMCs, but rather predominantly from House and Senate legal staff, DOL, and/or the AG’s office, who have read and re-read the bill drafts, and it seems each time someone looks it over they either find a meaningless element (such as a definition that no longer fits after original Section 15 was removed), a confusing one (does not make sense or they do not know how to interpret or potentially enforce), one that conflicts with another section or another law, or one where some further element (timing, cycle period for renewals, and such) was needed, so we have had to admit that ‘yeah, this needs some more tweaking’…. That has been the problem with trying to rush to put a bill together and get it out without sufficient time to really vet it to everyone who may be able to provide perspective on language, provisions, etc.
Overall, I think it is a good bill, and it appears that it has a very good chance of being adopted into law …. No apparent major obstacles at this point. Will continue to monitor (TK Bentler, our lobbyist, is keeping me apprised with regular updates), and will let you know.
ONE MORE APPEAL TO APPRAISERS IN WA STATE: Call and/or email your Senator, at this time, and ask that he/she support ESHB 3040 as amended!
Thank you.
Stan Sidor
President ACOW - Appraiser's Coalition of Washington
ACOW Board Meeting - 3/10
Based on feedback from most board members, it now appears that the next best date to have an ACOW Board meeting would be Wed, March 10. Please put it on your calendars, and plan for it. I will get an agenda out soon, but we need to think about at least the following and be prepared for some discussion:
- ACOW At The Summit: when (August 20 – 21?), where (same place as usual, at the Snoqualmie Summit, or….?), and topics (assuming our AMC bill passes in this legislature, we could spend at least an entire day going over it, and making sure appraisers understand what it WILL do for them, and what it WON’T do….)
- Budget for 2010, and how do we reach out to more unaffiliated appraisers and get them to join?
- Do we take a position on (support for or not) the Exposure Draft on Consistent Disciplinary Action as promulgated by the Appraisal Foundation
If you have any other items you want to make sure are on the agenda, please advise.
Thx.
Stan Sidor
- ACOW At The Summit: when (August 20 – 21?), where (same place as usual, at the Snoqualmie Summit, or….?), and topics (assuming our AMC bill passes in this legislature, we could spend at least an entire day going over it, and making sure appraisers understand what it WILL do for them, and what it WON’T do….)
- Budget for 2010, and how do we reach out to more unaffiliated appraisers and get them to join?
- Do we take a position on (support for or not) the Exposure Draft on Consistent Disciplinary Action as promulgated by the Appraisal Foundation
If you have any other items you want to make sure are on the agenda, please advise.
Thx.
Stan Sidor
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
ACOW Board Meeting - 3/3, 3/10?
While the agenda will not come out until later this week, I wanted to just put out a reminder to everyone now to plan on an ACOW Board Meeting next week. If you have any items you want to ensure are on the agenda, please let me know.
I have been “reminded” that some board members have conflicts right now for Thursday eves, and thus this may not be the best night for a board meeting. Also, on TU eves I have a prior commitment all through mid-June.
Would a Wed eve work ok for everyone? If so, which would be better: 3-3, or 3-10? Let me know.
Thx.
Stan Sidor
I have been “reminded” that some board members have conflicts right now for Thursday eves, and thus this may not be the best night for a board meeting. Also, on TU eves I have a prior commitment all through mid-June.
Would a Wed eve work ok for everyone? If so, which would be better: 3-3, or 3-10? Let me know.
Thx.
Stan Sidor
Saturday, February 20, 2010
To All FHA Roster Appraisers
It is important for FHA Roster Appraisers to monitor the FHA Roster Appraiser web page periodically, at http://www.hud.gov/appraisers.cfm:
Implementation of Mortgagee Letters 2009-28 and 2009-51:
Enactment of ML 2009-28 Appraiser Independence and ML 2009-51 Adoption of the Appraisal Update and/or Completion Report was effective February 15, 2010. You may read these and all other FHA Mortgagee Letters online at: http://www.hud.gov/hudclips/.
(From Ralph Birkedahl)
- For appraisal policy updates
- Find answers via FAQs and FHA’s Knowledge Base
- Update contact information
- At license/certification renewal time
- Check roster status
- To access Mortgagee Letters and handbooks
Implementation of Mortgagee Letters 2009-28 and 2009-51:
Enactment of ML 2009-28 Appraiser Independence and ML 2009-51 Adoption of the Appraisal Update and/or Completion Report was effective February 15, 2010. You may read these and all other FHA Mortgagee Letters online at: http://www.hud.gov/hudclips/.
(From Ralph Birkedahl)
Thursday, February 18, 2010
AMC Bill Senate Hearing Set!
The AMC Bill is now scheduled to be heard by the Senate Committee next TU, 2-23 – the hearing begins at 1:30 pm. I will be attending, and will speak in favor of the bill on behalf of WA appraisers as Pres. of ACOW. There is not a Senate Bill No. for this bill, as it was not originally introduced in the Senate. The bill is identified as ESHB 3040 (or Engrossed Substitute House Bill, for those who would like to know what these initials mean….).
While we will eventually (assuming the bill passes from this committee) want ALL appraisers to contact their state Senators and ask them to vote in favor of this bill, what we really MUST focus on right now is getting it THROUGH this committee…. So, PLEASE FORWARD TO YOUR MEMBERSHIP, and ask appraisers to check and see if any the senate committee members shown below is THEIR Senator, and IF SO to then ask that they contact their Senator and ask for his/her “support for this bill, and to move it out of committee.” They may want to note/mention that “this is a bipartisan bill, and passed the House by a vote of 98-0.”
Here is some additional information about each Senator – his/her District, and the approximate areas included in each District (click on their name in the box below should take you to their legislative website, and you can also then pull up a map of each District and their EMAIL):
Kohl-Welles – 36th, includes Queen Anne/Magnolia areas
Keiser – 33rd, includes areas of Kent, Des Moines, Normandy Park, and SeaTac
Holmquist – 13th, areas include Ellensburg, Moses Lake, and parts north of Yakima
Franklin – 29th, includes parts of So. Tacoma, Lakewood, and Parkland
Honeyford – 15th, includes parts of SW WA including Goldendale, Sunnyside, and area south of Yakima
King – 14th, includes Yakima and areas to the west of
Kline – 37th, includes Beacon Hill area of Seattle, portions of So. Seattle and towards Renton
Thanks to everyone who has been diligently working on this effort! I am sorry that this process requires so many email reminders and requests for appraisers to contact their reps, but this is what it takes to get a bill through the legislature.
The effort to ultimately get this bill passed into law still has a few more hurdles to overcome … more committee hearings (Senate), and then a full vote by the Senate. We will also be asking the Governor for her support.
Thank you.
Stan Sidor
President ACOW
While we will eventually (assuming the bill passes from this committee) want ALL appraisers to contact their state Senators and ask them to vote in favor of this bill, what we really MUST focus on right now is getting it THROUGH this committee…. So, PLEASE FORWARD TO YOUR MEMBERSHIP, and ask appraisers to check and see if any the senate committee members shown below is THEIR Senator, and IF SO to then ask that they contact their Senator and ask for his/her “support for this bill, and to move it out of committee.” They may want to note/mention that “this is a bipartisan bill, and passed the House by a vote of 98-0.”
Here is some additional information about each Senator – his/her District, and the approximate areas included in each District (click on their name in the box below should take you to their legislative website, and you can also then pull up a map of each District and their EMAIL):
Kohl-Welles – 36th, includes Queen Anne/Magnolia areas
Keiser – 33rd, includes areas of Kent, Des Moines, Normandy Park, and SeaTac
Holmquist – 13th, areas include Ellensburg, Moses Lake, and parts north of Yakima
Franklin – 29th, includes parts of So. Tacoma, Lakewood, and Parkland
Honeyford – 15th, includes parts of SW WA including Goldendale, Sunnyside, and area south of Yakima
King – 14th, includes Yakima and areas to the west of
Kline – 37th, includes Beacon Hill area of Seattle, portions of So. Seattle and towards Renton
Thanks to everyone who has been diligently working on this effort! I am sorry that this process requires so many email reminders and requests for appraisers to contact their reps, but this is what it takes to get a bill through the legislature.
The effort to ultimately get this bill passed into law still has a few more hurdles to overcome … more committee hearings (Senate), and then a full vote by the Senate. We will also be asking the Governor for her support.
Thank you.
Stan Sidor
President ACOW
ESHB 3040 Committee Members
Senate Labor, Commerce & Consumer Protection Committee
| Senator |
| Phone |
| Kohl-Welles, Jeanne (D) Chair |
| (360) 786-7670 |
| Keiser, Karen (D) Vice Chair |
| (360) 786-7664 |
| Holmquist, Janéa (R) * |
| (360) 786-7624 |
| Franklin, Rosa (D) |
| (360) 786-7656 |
| Honeyford, Jim (R) |
| (360) 786-7684 |
| King, Curtis (R) |
| (360) 786-7626 |
| Kline, Adam (D) |
| (360) 786-7688 |
*Ranking Minority Member
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Nominees Sought for 2011 AI Leadership Positions
The nominations and elections process is underway for 2011. There are open positions for Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer, two Directors, two Regional Representatives, and general and residential Associate Member Liaisons. Members (except for Temporarily Non Practicing Designated, and Non Practicing Associate Members, Affiliate Members, and Honorary Members) are strongly encouraged to nominate themselves for positions for which they are qualified.
All potential candidates must be members in good standing, current in the Appraisal Institute’s continuing education requirements (for Designated Members), have not been subject to a publishable disciplinary action by the Appraisal Institute within the five (5) years prior to the election. Branch chapter members can run for any office.
Vice President (one-year term) may be a Designated or Associate Member of the Appraisal Institute, preferably one who has previously served as a director, secretary, or treasurer, and has a history of service to the Chapter. The Vice President will also act as president-elect and will automatically become President in the following year, provided he or she is a Designated Member at that time.
Secretary and Treasurer (each one-year term) may be a Designated or Associate Member, preferably one who has prior service as a Chapter officer, director, or committee chair.
Director (Three-year term) May be a Designated or Associate Member. Prior service as a committee chair or committee member, and a history of service to the Chapter is preferred. No member can serve consecutive terms for this position.
Regional Representative (two-year term) may be a Designated or Associate Member It is desirable for Regional Representatives to have prior service as a Chapter committee chair or board member. No member can serve more than two terms as Regional Representative.
General and Residential Associate Member Liaisons (one-year term) must be Associate Members, preferably ones who actively participate in Chapter events and wish to represent the Associate Member viewpoint to the Board of Directors. Associate Member Liaisons must have been in good standing with the Chapter for at least one year, and have taken the Standards of Professional Practice course and passed the corresponding examination. No member can serve more than two consecutive terms as an Associate Member Liaison.
Your 2010 Nominating Committee Chair is Mel Morgan Jr., MAI. The Nominating Committee is currently searching for candidates. If you are interested in serving the chapter in one of these positions, or have any other questions about the process or positions, please contact Mel as soon as possible at (206) 382-0825 or by email at mel.morgan@wcmadvisors.com.
Thank you!
Seattle Chapter, Appraisal Institute
6351 Seaview Ave NW
Seattle, WA 98107-2664
ph: 206.622.8425
fx: 206-623-4474
www.ai-seattle.org
All potential candidates must be members in good standing, current in the Appraisal Institute’s continuing education requirements (for Designated Members), have not been subject to a publishable disciplinary action by the Appraisal Institute within the five (5) years prior to the election. Branch chapter members can run for any office.
Vice President (one-year term) may be a Designated or Associate Member of the Appraisal Institute, preferably one who has previously served as a director, secretary, or treasurer, and has a history of service to the Chapter. The Vice President will also act as president-elect and will automatically become President in the following year, provided he or she is a Designated Member at that time.
Secretary and Treasurer (each one-year term) may be a Designated or Associate Member, preferably one who has prior service as a Chapter officer, director, or committee chair.
Director (Three-year term) May be a Designated or Associate Member. Prior service as a committee chair or committee member, and a history of service to the Chapter is preferred. No member can serve consecutive terms for this position.
Regional Representative (two-year term) may be a Designated or Associate Member It is desirable for Regional Representatives to have prior service as a Chapter committee chair or board member. No member can serve more than two terms as Regional Representative.
General and Residential Associate Member Liaisons (one-year term) must be Associate Members, preferably ones who actively participate in Chapter events and wish to represent the Associate Member viewpoint to the Board of Directors. Associate Member Liaisons must have been in good standing with the Chapter for at least one year, and have taken the Standards of Professional Practice course and passed the corresponding examination. No member can serve more than two consecutive terms as an Associate Member Liaison.
Your 2010 Nominating Committee Chair is Mel Morgan Jr., MAI. The Nominating Committee is currently searching for candidates. If you are interested in serving the chapter in one of these positions, or have any other questions about the process or positions, please contact Mel as soon as possible at (206) 382-0825 or by email at mel.morgan@wcmadvisors.com.
Thank you!
Seattle Chapter, Appraisal Institute
6351 Seaview Ave NW
Seattle, WA 98107-2664
ph: 206.622.8425
fx: 206-623-4474
www.ai-seattle.org
Thanks to Our Reps!
Appraisers:
It would be a very good idea to thank the co-sponsors of HB-3040 - the AMC Registration Bill, and the subsequent ESHB-3040.
Here are clickable links to the HB-3040 co-sponsors from TK Bentler. You can send them an e-mail, or call their offices:
Representatives Conway, Wood, Appleton, Rolfes, Sells, Sullivan, Finn
Thank you!
It would be a very good idea to thank the co-sponsors of HB-3040 - the AMC Registration Bill, and the subsequent ESHB-3040.
Here are clickable links to the HB-3040 co-sponsors from TK Bentler. You can send them an e-mail, or call their offices:
Representatives Conway, Wood, Appleton, Rolfes, Sells, Sullivan, Finn
Thank you!
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
HB 3040 Passed the House of Representatives,,,
98-0! Great news!
Now, we need to continue our work to get it passed in the senate. Information will be posted as it becomes available!
Re: SHB 3040, the Amended AMC Registration Bill
All appraisers,
When you contact your Representative, please ask for support of the "Conway & Condotta Striking Amendment". This will be voted on today in the House.
To view the striker click 3040-S AMH CONW H5228.1
Thanks for your continued assistance!
When you contact your Representative, please ask for support of the "Conway & Condotta Striking Amendment". This will be voted on today in the House.
To view the striker click 3040-S AMH CONW H5228.1
Thanks for your continued assistance!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
