~'
~f-Ed ~; ~~~ R~+l~'
t ,{'r~ 4
Shirley M. Rackley P.O. Box 291909
Ray A. Rackley Kerrville, Texas 78029-1909
September 26, 2005
Commissioners Court, et al
It is deplorable that anyone in Coates' position should be permitted to write
a libelous letter of this magnitude. Could it be that the reason that no action
was taken by David Montoya's office, the Professional Tax Examiners
Office, because Montoya believed this libelous letter?
This is how the Chief Appraiser, Pollard Hickman Coates, IV reacts and
treats the taxpayers of Ken County when they have the need and nerve to
protest against his minions breaking and entering private property and
deliberately falsifying the square footage of a residence.
The date of the breaking and entering was on the same date that the
photograph was taken, which was August 7, 2002. We have proof that
Kevin Kurz was here on August 7, 2002 because Kurz took a picture on that
date. If Kurz didn't break and enter then how did Kurz get in to take the
picture? Did Kurz fly over the fence? No one was here. It was after six (6)
p.m. and it was after normal business hours. The gate was locked. The barn
was locked. Kurz got the dimensions of barn correct. Kurz left boot prints in
the loose dirt that surrounded the recently erected barn.
It took us from February 6, 2004 to September 1, 2005 to get the square
footage on the house corrected from 2,610 square feet to 2, 304 square feet
and the porches corrected from 696 square to 576 for the front porch and
360 square feet for the back porch, however, since it was corrected so late in
2005 the corrections will not be effective unti12006. We still disagree on
the assessed value per square foot of the house.
Since/re~Yy, .
r
Shirley M. Rackley
Enclosure(s) two (2): # 1. Copy of Coates letter to David Montoya.
#2. Copy of my original complaint.
KERB CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT ''~
,: P.O. BOX 294387 * 1836 JUNCTION FIWY..
KERRVII~LE, TEXAS 78029 '
February 3, 2005
Dave Montoya, Executive Director,
Board~ofTax Professional Examiners
W'" 1'. Bobby Building
333 Cruadalupe, .Tower II, Suite 52.0
Austin~T3~787Q)i,,,_.,,« , ,,.. ,.
Re: Response to BTPE complaint
,,~. „ .
~; ,
,~

Dear Mr.. Montoya: ~ ~
. .. a ,
In your letter dated January.l2, 2005 you requested I submrt`a response~to the complaint
filed by Mr. and Ms. Beckley.. Various members of Kerr C.A.D: staff have spent"an'extensiVe
amount of time trying to, help and work with the Rackleys, but they, seem „more interested in
simply being ,disagreeable, than in trying to discuss the proper valuation of their property., ';,.... .
In response to the Rackleys accusations of, wrongdoing in their, letter, to you dated
October 6, 2004, I would respectfully offer.tlie following responses:, ~ ~ '
1. I would represent to you that•in person the Rackleys are exceedingly, disagreeable
and it has proved to be virtually impossible,to have civil discussions with ,them about the `~•
valuation of their property, Mrs. Raokley in particular seems jo, prefer becoming enraged and
ar~t»ng rather than engaging in helpful constructive conversation, In a recent ineetiug with staff
at the District (I`was not there at the ,trine) Mrs. ,Racktey became agitated and apparently began
swearing in the ,main'lobby. It is very difficult to discuss anything with the Rackleysi and all'
conversations seem to involve random and false accusations of District misconduct that my staff.
denies. The Rackleys apparently engaged in ahnost exactly the same type of conduct m Kendall
CAD~some years ago, and they apparently'made alpios't exactly the same alle`g'atioris;iigainst that
appraisal district. In nearly four years as chief appraiser of Kea C , I have not heard these
sorts of allegations from any other property owners, and I.cannot hel~but believe,-- especially
considering the demeanor consistegtly; exhibited by the Rackleys -- t these allegations are
exaggerated, mistaken, or even simply,untrue. :~ ~ '
~~
2 , .: 'The Rec141eys have repeatediy stated that the District has "falsified" various public
records. I am not awarc.that.,any documents in the, possession :of Kerr~CAb have been'
"falsified", aad I sin fairly confident that the term "falsified" is a deliberately chosen exaggerated
word that argumentatively refers fo~the fact that the Rackleys,do pot agree with the District's
valuation oftheir property. The dispute has arisen because the Rackleys have refused,Kerc CAD
employees all access to the subject property. The District has therefore estimated\the size of the
,, ..
1 RECEIVED
FEB 7 - 2005-
BTPE
improvements to the property, and presumably this is what the Rackleys claim constitutes
"falsified" public records. This can be remedied by the simple expedient of allowing District
appraisers to measure the property, but the Rackleys have pointedly and repeatedly refused to
allow this. For what it is worth, the Kerr County deed records, Volume 1144, Page 780, reflect
that the Rackleys purchased the raw land from Joe V. Dozier for a reported sales price of
$33,501; the effective date of the sale was September 20, 2001 and it was appraised for $22,188.
An improvement valued at $20,877 was added to the tax roll in 2003 and the land was appraised
for $31,950 where it remains as of this date.
3. Regazding the Rackleys' 2002 allegations, the District's records reflect only that
Mt. Kurz inspected the subject property. We have no record of a Mazch 2, 2002 "unidentified
appraiser being on the property. Appazently the accusation of `unidentified appraisers"
repeatedly appearing on the Rackleys' property was also emphasized in their Kendall CAD
complaint. Mr. Kevin Kurz is no longer employed by Kerr CAD, however the District files do
contain a photograph of the Rackleys barn taken by Mr. Kurz on August 7, 2002. Appraisers
for Kerr CAD have specific instructions not to enter a property without an owner's permission if
agate is locked. This information has been conveyed to the Rackleys. I have no personal
knowledge of whether the Rackleys' lock was broken or of who broke it or if it were broken at
all. I doubt that the Rackleys do either.
4. Regazding the Rackleys' 2003 allegations, the Rackleys disagreed with the
District's determination of appraised value, protested to and appeazed before the ARB, and
received a reduction in the value of the subject property. Thus, the system worked. As
previously noted, the barn was valued at $20,877 by the ARB based on the cost data provided by
the Rackleys; however, the District believed, based on equalized Kerr CAD schedules, that the
bazn was worth substantially more than the raw cost figures. Thus, for the year 2003, based on
the District's schedules, the bazn was valued at $29,400, which the District believes is a
reasonable estimate of the property's market value. The dispute was set for an ARB heazing. I
have no idea how long the Rackleys had to wait to be heazd by the ARB. Property owners who
protest to the ARB aze heazd on a first-come, first-served basis. The ARB did disagree with the
District azid lowered the value of the property to the cost figure, a decision with which the
District vehemently disagreed. The ARB did not find that the appraisal was arbitrary, and the
District is adamant that it was not. Regarding the July 10, 2003 Open Records and Certification
paragraph, I have no idea what the Rackleys are tallcing about.
5. Regarding the complaints For 2004, the allegation, that Mr. Mann "wore and
exhibited what appeazed to be a fake Texas Ranger belt buckle and~a~fake Texas Ranger badge
clipped to his belt" appeazs to me to be a pathological, desperate, and cl8kberate false statement.
It is very likely, however, that Mr. Mann would have carried, not "armed with", a camera,
clipboard, and tape measure in order to do his job. Mr. Mann should have identified himself
without being asked, but I do not know whether he did or did not since I was not present. I have
never had a complaint from any other taxpayer about Mr. Mann. Several taxpayers have told me
how friendly and courteous he is. I have provided the Rackleys with a copy of Mr. Mann's
identification card in response to their public information request of December 30, 2004. I will
note that the Rackleys' own letter states why the District was engaging in arulual inspections --
2
the property was continually being improved, and the District was simply checking to see what
improvements were being made to the property. Kerr CAD does not have, and in the years that I
have been chief appraiser has never had, azi appraiser named Michael Combs. My Senior
Appraiser, Mike Comer did speak with the Rackleys when they came in the District office, and
according to Mr. Comer, Mrs. Rackley insisted at least three different times while she was in lus
office that her house be placed on the tax roll for 2004. I have no idea what they are talking
about when they claun that they were assured that the house would not be placed on the appraisal
roll for 2004. In addition, the District has no records of the Rackleys' claimed four notices of
change of address. They want Mr. Comer to use the drawung they provided, but it is District
polio to measure each house even if we have blueprints or a drawing provided by the taxpayer
of tht; improvement. In my experience blueprints and drawings provided are not always the final
plans and do not always state the correct dimensions of an improvement. In addition, I believe it
is sowed technique for the District's appraiser to ascertain the correct dunensions of a property
we have responsibility for appraising. Mr. Comer does not accept changes of addresses because
that is not part of his assigned duties, and Mr. Comer stated to me that the Rackleys did not
discuss their address change with him. When Michael Mann went to the Rackleys' property to
measure the new improvement, the Rackleys directed Ivm to leave the prenuses and he did so
immediately. Since he was not allowed to measure the new improvement, he estimated the
dimensions of the structure, and that estimate was used to determine an appraised value for 2004.
The suggestion that Mr. Mann was unable to correctly measure the improvement with his tape
measure incorrectly assumes that Mr. Mami was allowed to measure the properly. As previously
noted, Mr. Mann was directed to leave the premises and was no measurement was made.
6. Regarding the protest information for the year 2004, the Rackleys appeared before
the Kerr County ARB on January 26, 2005, and the ARB refused to rule on the protest until the
Rackleys allowed the District to measure their property. We are in the process of attempting to
agree on a mutually acceptable date to conduct the measurement. If the Rackleys agree to an
inspection, I plan to have a peace officer present on the property due to the unpredictable and
borderline violent behavior of the Rackleys.
Summary and Conclusion
I respectfully submit to BTPE that I have no idea how to satisfy the Rackleys without
violating Texas law and arbitrarily reducing the value of anything they own to whatever value
satisfies their tax reduction needs. I believe there are a number of argumentative, inconclusive,
and even false accusations drected at the District, and this dispute could have been easily
resolved by allowing the District to measure the subject property ''like virtually all property
owners within Kerr CAD do without a second thought. ,
g;ely rs
P.H.\"Fourth" Coates, IV
Chief Appraiser
3
Shirley M. Rackley P. O. Box 291909
Ray A. Rackley Kerrville, Texas 78029-1909
October 6, 2004
David E. Montoya, Executive Director
State of Texas, Board of Tax Professional Examiners
333 Guadalupe Street, Tower 2, Suite #520
,Austin, Texas 78701-3942
Re: Turtle Creek Ranches, Lot 302-B, 17.75 Acres.
Dear Mr. Montoya:
The Kerr Central Appraisal District deliberately falsified public records,
thus falsifying our real estate appraisal.
August 23, 2001 we purchased the aforementioned property.
March 2, 2002, an unidentified appraiser, took the first picture of the
barn. The barn was incomplete.
August 7, 2002, a second appraiser, Kevin Kurz, broke the lock on the
gate to take a second picture of our bam. A copy of that photograph is
attached. This second appraiser and appraisal was unnecessary because we
had provided the Kerr Central Appraisal District with invoices (cost
$20,877.00) of the barn, however, KCAD denied this fact. Note: We were
forced to attend an Appraisal Review Board hearing to obtain a correction.
May 16, 2003, the barn was arbitrarily~assessed at $29,400.00.
May 27, 2003, subject Rackley filed a protest.
June 3, 2003, KCAD responded with a date set for an ARB hearing,
which was 19 JiJN 2003 at 9:00 a.m.
June 6, 2003 (Friday), I requested that KCAD furnish me with the
documentation that was going to be used in the hearing. Obviously, KCAD
refused because I never received any material.
June 19, 2003. Even though my appointment was at 9:00 a.m. I was kept
waiting approximately three (3) hours. At that time there was no house, the
barn was the only improvement made to the property.
July 1; 2003, the ARB decided that the arbitrary assessment; "the appraisal
records are incorrect and should be changed."
July 10, 2003, having to use the Open Records Act Request Pursuant to
Government Code 552.221 (a) and referencing Chapter 15-Property
-1-
Taxation Professional Certification, Article 8885. Property Certification
Act, Section 12 and using Certified Mail;
July 21, 2003 I was able to obtain the SECOND photograph taken of the
barn along with a copy of one of the Appraiser's identification (Jesse Boyd
Scott) and an untruthful note written by Mr. Scott explaining how he
accessed the property. Mr. Scott claimed that he had accessed the property
on July 7, 2003, which would have been three (3) weeks after the hearing.
Mr. Scott had actually illegally gained access to the property on March 2,
2002. On his second trip here, Mr. Scott threatened to appraise the barn at
$69,000.00!
July 29, 2003, a second letter was sent to P.H. Coates, IV, Chief Appraiser,
requesting, in detail, how Mr. Scott accessed our property multiple times to
take multiple photographs regarding a property that is fenced, the gate is
kept padlocked and the gate displays a NO TRESPASS sign at all time
during our absences from the property.
August 7, 2003, Mr. Coates admitted that Mr. Scott had used an incorrect
date.
February 6, 2004, enter Michael Mann, the fourth (4~`) Kerr Central
Appraisal District appraiser that has been on the property in less than nine
(9) months. Mr. Mann wore and exhibited what appeared to be a fake Texas
Ranger belt buckle and a fake Texas Ranger badge clipped to his belt. Mr.
Mann was also armed with a camera, clip board and had a tape measure (a
large reel) dangling from his belt loops. Mr. Mann refused to identify
himself, so I tape recorded hirn. Mr. Mann found the tape recorder to be
intimidating. Mr. Mann was asked repeatedly for his credentials and he
refused. After approximately five (5) minutes Mr. Mann did provide a
business card, however, he said nothing regarding his credentials.
Mr. Coates was asked, "Does he, meaning Mr. Mann, have any?" So far
Mr. Coates has not responded.
Apri123, 2004 10:00 a.m. I kept an appointment, made a week earlier,
with Appraiser Michael Combs. Appraiser Combs was provided with the
fourth change of address, an itemized list of the construction cost of the
house, the square footage of the house (2,304) and porches, (front porch
576) (back porch 360), and a plot plan. Copy attached. Mr. Combs
ASSURED me that since the house WAS NOT framed-in by January lst
(2004) and that we WOiJLD NOT be assessed in this tax year.
INSTEAD, we were taxed on a falsified square footage and an arbitrary
-2-
dollar amount. Then KCAD made certain that we received the appraised
value too late to protest.
We were stunned when we received our notice of assessment on June 30,
2004, which had been sent to our previous address. As a result, it took weeks
to go through the mails and reach us. We were falsely assessed; the square
footage for the house was assessed at 2,610 square feet, the front porch was
assessed at 696 square feet and the back porch was assessed at 696 square
feet. Mr. Mann with his tape measure WAS UNABLE to take correct
measurements?
On July 1, 2004, I filed a protest. Copy attached. The deadline for filing a
protest was June 24, 2004 and the hearings began June 28, 2004. Even
though we received the "Notice" on June 30, 2004 the Kerr Central
Appraisal District DENIED us the privilege of a hearing and has REFUSED
to make any corrections to their falsification of public records.
August 11`t' (2004). The livable completion date. We commenced
moving in on August 12"' (2004). We have not finished our move.
We would like the State of Texas to intercede on our behalf and
accomplish five (5) things; (#1) Get Mr. Coats to follow the State of Texas
Property Tax Codes, (#2) Request that Mr. Coats to have his Gestapo
Appraisers adhere to Sec. 22.07. Inspection of Property instead of breaking
locks on gates, (#3) Sec. 23.011. Cost Method of Appraisal. Have Mr.
Coats stop discriminating against.us by assessing on incomplete construction
(we know of other properties that were completed and occupied on May 1,
2004 and they were not assessed for 2004), (#4) Have our property assessed
equal to neighboring properties for the 2004, (#5) Correct the falsification of
public records and apply the cost per Section 23.011.
Sincerely,
Shirley M. Rackley
Enclosures: Property Tax -Notice of Protest as filed on July 1, 2004,
• which included a copy of envelope with the incorrect address,
copy of Improvement History and a copy of the plot plan.
-3-
~_ --°
.01,, ~` 50-137 (Rev. 2-9813)
,YQ ~ (Nµ(17J89)RUle 9.801)
PROPERTY TAX -NOTICE OF PROTEST
Please Note: Appraisal was mailed to the wrong
address. I have sent two (•2) faxes
and appeared in person twice for
KERR CENTRAL APPRAI C
P.O. BOX 294387 Copy attached!
1836 JUNCTION HIGHWAY '.
KERRVILLE, TEXAS 78029.4387
(830) 895.5223 '~
INSTRUCTIONS: _.If you.vrant Ihe.appralsal review board to hear and decide your case..you must file a written notice of protest with me appraisal
review board (ARB) for the appraisal dlstnel that look the aUion you want to prolesl. If you are leasing the property subject to the
prolesl, you must have a Cnnt2cl requiting ybu (o pay the property taxes on the property.
I
FILING DEADLINES: The usual deadllna for filing your notice (having it postmarked i1 you mail ir) is midnight, May 31.
A diNerent deadllna will apply to you if: '
• your notice of appraised value was daflvered to you after May 2;
• your protest concerns a change In the use of agricultural, open space or timber land;
• the ARB made a change {o the appraisal records that adversely a8ects you and you received notice of the change;
• the eppralsal dlsVlet or the ARB was required by law to sentl you notice about a property and did not; or
• you had good eeuae for missing lha Mey 31 prolesl tiling deadline.
i
Contact the appraisal disldct for your speclfie prolesl filing deadllna. The ARB will tletermine if good cause exists for missing a deadline. Good cause means tna~ ~
something beyond your wntrol, such es a medleal emergency, prevented you from meeting the deadllna. ',I
WEEKENDS, HOLIDAYS: If your deadline fells on a Saturday, Sunday or other legal holiday, it is postponed until midnight or the next working day I
Step 1:	Owner's wlasaea's first name and Inll(al ~	Last name
Owner's		
or lessee's	DwnaY90r Bba6e'apfa38n111181IIngaddt9si numberandsrreer) i
name and	455 Pikes P k d S V
address	Clty, town or pwt office, state, ZIP code	a (area code and )
	Kerrville T x	
Step 2:	Give street address and city if diNerent from above, or legal description if no street addre 6tJ ,/~~	r
Describe	O
Turtle Creek Ranche Lot 302- A 1 7 Y ?004	
property	Less: Easement of 1.5 Acres rovi~ded to K Count
under	Road De t. in Januar of 2003
protest	
~,
	Appralsm dlstdct account number (optunap _ w i„
	Mobile homes: (G/ve make, model and Idenr/lkaflon numoerJ
i
Step 3:	X
l
~ V
Check	a
ue is over market value. ^ Exemption was denied
modified or cancelled

reasons	,
.
a Value is unequal compared with other
for your	properties. ~ Change in use of land appraised as ag-use, open-space or
protest	^ Property should not be faxed in limber land.
	Ag-use, open-space or other special appraisal was denied,
	(name o(laxing unit) modltletl or cancelled.
	
^ Owner's name is incorrect.
Failure to send required notice.
	^ Property description is incorrect.
	(type]
	® Other: CO118trUCtlOn iS ~ Property should not be taxed in this appraisal district or in one or
	more lazing units.
Step 4:	-
Givefactsthat
h
l	Appraisal is based on falsified square footage.
may
p
e	
resolve your
~ case	Appraisal is falsifying public records.
	
(continue an	Appraisal violates the Texas Property TAx Code. AND ~
additional	.
page tf	~.$~,~t~$~d~~nihQyou~b~eny~JiQs~~tti'jc~tpt~Orl~f?n § 56, 51 4.68
Based~on the COMPLETION
needed)	,
Step 5:	I went the ARB to send me a copy of its hearing procedures. Michael Comer On ApT i 1 2 3 r
Check to	
receive ARB	^ Yes ^ No•
hearing	If your protest goes to a hearing, you will automatically receive a copy of the ARB's hearing procedures.
procedures	
Step 6:	Signature	Date
i Sign the
application	9
hiere~ ~• ~",~~~_"	6-~-2004
Kerr Central Appraisal District			F ~ c `;		~
P
'
T
		
~	
~ ~
~		,_
.
K
tiG. ~
v.5.
P.O. Box 294387		~	`
~~ ~+.		
1836 Junction Highway		_,	~ c '.. _ : _	`~ ~ ~=-	`; ,,
~ ~~ ?
			~' ~~~	~'	.

Kerrville, Texas 7 802 913 8 7		
~			'~
			~/~	N Fi E'EF ~ '-i-~
ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED					
KAC:KLEY, RAY A & ... --					
SHIRLEY M	Pn				
' PO BOX 1378	TU				
BOERNE TX 78006-7 3 78					
	RACK37A		760062012 1{04		04
5
2
I Ilu~lluhllu~llunl~uu!Ilull~~u~l~u~~~u~ll
l
l
I
I				FORM	3
$47
n
n
~
~
..	
RACKLEY				
°-~~ ,-	39 CORLEY	RD		
' ~	BOERNE	TX	7A006-0603		,
..... 4 .. _ C t"'					

R3 9468 Improvement History
R39468 , Improvement History .
^ Datasheet
Assessment V^ar
History ID Typ. Class Araa Built Act- Vaiua
Bff
^ Land
Information 1 I • Mlsc. Slate Category: E3
.Improvements Improvement
^ Improvement 1,1 MA • Maln OB - Building/barn zo0o zooz - 3zo,a77
5 ketch Area 2002
^ Location Map
320,877
Kerr 2 R - State Category: Al
^ COUnty Info Residential cY.iO~
• ACCOUnt Search 2.1 MA - Maln FS -Frame Class 5 2610 2004 - 359,289
^ Owner Search Area 2ooa
^ Address Search 2.2 OP -Open FS -Frame Class 5 696 2004 - $3,162
. Property ID Porch ~. 2ooa
Search 2.3 OP -Open F5 -Frame Class 5 696 2004 • 33,162
Porch 2004
Search '
. New County 565,613
Assistance
^ FAQs
^ Links
. Forms
-owceco ~T
CODYrIQht O 200< Thc SoMwan Group. /~L ~ph4 mmb. Fn irJWni
pnd^n WN YW Wb sIY, pluN ~nuY N~ W ebmaslLL.
Page 1 of 1
r_.~ ~,_----. ...__.._...,,.,.., .......i:..,.._,,.._..._...~ „~..~r~,,,..,..,-1zz,e.n..,.,P.r.,Tn~AZOdFSZ ~nnm<
0