7 7 South High Street

2 0 th Floor Columbus, Ohio 4 3 2 1 5

- 6 1 3 3 U.S.A.

An Equal Opportunity Employer and Service Provider 614 | 4 6 6 41 0 0
Fax 6 1 4 | 6 4 4 0 5 8 4 TTY/TDD 8 0 0 | 7 5 0 0 7 5 0 w w w .com.ohio.gov November 26, 2012

James R. Park Executive Director, Appraisal Subcommittee
1401 H Street, NW

Suite 760 Washington, DC 20005

RE: Public Comment on proposed revisions to ASC Policy Statements

Dear Mr. Park:

On behalf of the Ohio Division of Real Estate & Professional Licensing, thank you for the opportunity to share our comments on the proposed revisions to the ASC Policy Statements
with the Subcommittee

. The following are commen ts we wish the ASC to consider before adopting the Policy Statements as published in the Federal Register:

Policy Statement #1 . I

– ASC Staff Attendance at State Board Meetings In policy statement 1, we agree with the proposal that ASC staff should not attend State board deliberations for quasi

- judicial proceedings. However, we request that the proposal be expanded to also exclude ASC staff attendance any time the Board is authorized by state law to go into closed or private session. Permitting ASC staff to be present in a private session when the Board is receivin g legal advice from its counsel would compromise its attorney

- client privilege. Similarly , discussing personnel matters that do not have bearing on the operation of the State’s program and other issues privileged under Ohio’s Open Meetings Act with ASC staff in attendance would cause compliance problems for the Board regarding our public meetings regulation.

Poli cy Statement # 7. B

– ASC Staff Attendance at State Board Meetings In policy statement 7.B. 1 , we encourage the ASC to consider the complexity of the appraisal that is the subject of a complaint in determining the length of time permitted for
administrative disposition of a case. Specifically, as jurisdictions begin to receive more complaints on commercial/industrial appraisals the time involved in adequately investigating and adjudicating the case is more likely to be past the twelve (12) months currently a llowed. Our recommendation would be that with proper documentation substantiating the need, commercial/industrial cases be set for 18 months to final disposition.Page 3

– ASC Preliminary Review of Ohio’s Appraiser Regulatory Program

With regard to statement 7.B.2, the Division would object to any statement which eliminates the use of any statute of limitation for dismissing complaints. Statute s of limitation are well
established in law ; are permitted in criminal and civil cases; and serve a legitimate

purpose. Administrative law is no different

- witnesses become more d if ficult to find, memories fade, and data becomes more limited. Appraisers have a record keeping requirement in USPAP and that requirement has been incorporated into Ohio
law. Appraisers regularly rely on these provisions. There would be serious due proce ss issues for the jurisdictions if they are required to prosecute an appraiser who has properly destroyed a workfile in accordance with USPAP and state law.

Policy Statement # 8. B

– ASC Staff Attendance at State Board Meetings In policy statement 8.B, we object to the statement regarding the removal of a State licensed or certified appraiser from the National Registry on an interim basis. Ultimately, this provision is confusing: does the possible interim sanction result only fr om a jurisdiction’s “Poor” rating, or, as it currently reads, may the ASC impose an interim sanction on an individual appraiser for that credential holder’s own actions?

The statement does not address the method by or for what reasons an appraiser may be removed from the National Registry. The statement also fails to take into account what effect this action may have on the State’s ability to issue its sanctions permitted under state
law. Arguably, the appraiser in question could be sanctioned at two dif ferent points in time
for the same action. As a result, any State action may be diminished or eliminated based upon the argument that the appraiser has already been sanctioned for the same
misconduct. Lastly, the statement does not address when the remov al of the State licensed or certified appraiser from the National Registry can occur. This raises significan t due

process issues for the appraiser as the State has the burden of proof to show there is
sufficient evidence of a violation license law which m ay only then trigger, among other sanctions, a suspension.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide our comments on the proposed changes to the Policy Statements and for the continued cooperative spirit employed by the ASC and its staff.

Sincerely

,

A nne M. Petit Superintendent

Cc: David Goodman, Director, Ohio Department of Commerce Richard Hoffman, Chairman, Ohio Real Estate Appraiser Board