New rules are in effect as of Oct. 6th, 2015. Primarily, changes were made to the approval of education for course providers and AMCs.
Please see the complete version of revisions in our website under Legal Resources - Current Statutes and Rules https://boa.az.gov/resources/current-statutes-rules
In addition to making changes identified as needed in a five-year-review report approved by the Council on March 4, 2014, the Superintendent made the rules consistent with recent statutory changes and changes in the real property appraiser qualification criteria issued by the Appraisal Foundation for implementation on January 1, 2015.
The Superintendent made the rules required under A.R.S. § 32-3680 regarding Appraisal Management Companies and aligned the rules regarding appraiser courses with the standards provided by the Appraiser Qualifications Board.
As a result of the Superintendent making the rules regarding courses for appraisers (See Article 5) consistent with standards from the Appraiser Qualifications Board, there may be some economic impact on course owners and secondary providers. There will also be economic impact on the Department because the Superintendent determined it did not have authority to charge a fee for changing the instructor of an approved course. The Superintendent extended the time of a course approval to two years from one year and to assist the Superintendent in protecting the public, is establishing a program of volunteer auditors of approved courses.
The rules in Article 4 regarding Appraisal Management Companies are new but have minimal economic impact. The Superintendent has been regulating AMCs relying on statute.
An exemption from Executive Order 2015-01 was provided to the Department by Ted Vogt, Chief of Operations in the Governor’s office, in an e-mail dated June 5, 2015. The exemption indicated it extended to making the rules consistent with changes in state law, conforming appraiser qualifications to national standards, creating rules for AMCs, and making technical changes recommended by the Governor’s Regulatory Review Council. The Department believes this rulemaking is consistent with the provision in subsection (A)(1) of A.R.S. §41-1038 because the rulemaking is a comprehensive effort to avoid the regulatory burden associated with inconsistent federal and state laws and the provision in subsection (A)(2) because the rulemaking is necessary to implement recent statutory changes (See Laws 2013, Chapter 184; Laws 2014, Chapter 135; Laws 2015, Chapter 19).