NCAI Government Relations Committee Chair Shepherd Overton, MAI, attended the North Carolina Appraisal Board meeting on April 22, 2025.

The highlight of the meeting was a presentation by John Russell and Peter Fontana representing the Appraisal Foundation. The theme of their presentation was alternative experience, and the ways the Appraisal Qualification Board was exploring to allow for experience outside of the traditional appraisal writing route. The main thrust was the experience assessors have around the country, the classes they must take, and what their output looks like, i.e., a mass appraisal. The presenters spoke about a possible path for these types of alternative valuation professionals and how their experience, plus appropriate state testing, could be a pathway toward appraisal licensing. They noted some discussion is underway regarding whether assessors who might qualify for their experience would be required to submit sample reports to state boards prior to licensure. The presenters addressed how this aligns with the current problems facing the traditional path and finding supervisors.

Mr. Russell and Mr. Fontana briefly noted how other states operate as far as their relationship with the AQB, the current state of PAREA among the other states and territories, and the need for new appraisers to enter the ranks to keep up with the demand of Freddie, Fannie, and the bank customers.

The Appraisal Foundation has set aside $1.22 million over three years to support full tuition scholarships for qualifying PAREA program participants. The scholarships will be administered by the Appraisal Institute who is currently operating the only approved PAREA program in the country.

NCAB staff reported that twelve (12) new requests for investigation were received in March. Staff are working on 44 pending inquiries and three (3) pending hearings. NCAB staff reported that 44 new appraisers registered in February, and 17 registered in March. Exam results in February and March were reported as follows:

Licensed Residential Exam

• Among first time candidates taking the exam, two (2) took the exam and both passed, representing a 100% pass rate.
• Four (4) repeat candidates also took the Licensed Residential exam and all four failed, representing a 100% fail rate.

Certified Residential Exam

• Five (5) first time candidates took the test, and only one passed, representing an 80% fail rate.
• Two (2) repeat candidates attempted the exam and both failed, representing a 100% fail rate.

Certified General Exam

• Among the three (3) first time candidates taking the exam, one passed and two failed, representing a 67% fail rate.
• There were no candidates retaking the Certified General exam.