Dear Appraisal Institute Members and Colleagues,

I'm writing to provide an update on several important matters as we approach the 2nd Quarter National Board of Directors meeting.

Board Meeting Transparency

Despite President Konikoff's LinkedIn statement that the Board would decide at the 1st Quarter meeting whether to resume open meetings, no announcement has been made. This will mark the seventh quarterly National BOD meeting in the Appraisal Institute's history that remains closed to member attendance, either in-person or virtually. Given our organization's current challenges, restoring transparency through open session attendance is essential to rebuilding member trust.

Joint Region Meeting Concerns

At the recent Joint Region meeting in Clearwater, I observed several concerning instances of potentially misleading information from our executive committee:

1. Pending Litigation: President Konikoff addressed the lawsuit filed on March 28, 2025, by a former employee, focusing on denying fraud allegations. However, the central question remains unanswered: Is there truth to claims that the Appraisal Institute misreported USPAP exam scores to states, potentially enabling unqualified candidates to obtain state licensing? This allegation strikes at our educational foundation—a vital income stream and the basis of our designations' value.

2. Membership Reporting: The membership figures presented at the Clearwater meeting raise serious concerns about data integrity and transparency. According to AI's website (click on AI’s Website), our organization has consistently reported approximately 16,000 members since 2021 on our 990 tax returns. When questioned about this unchanging figure, we received the troubling explanation that this number includes approximately 2,500 deceased members—an accounting practice that artificially inflates our membership by nearly 20%. The reported designation counts are as follows:

This revelation becomes more concerning when examining designation counts. With designated members reportedly comprising 70% of our membership and the reported figures suggesting over 19,400 total members, we face a significant discrepancy. Further investigation revealed that these numbers count designations rather than individual members, meaning colleagues with multiple designations are counted multiple times.

Two critical questions remain unanswered: What is the actual count of designated individuals (not designations)? And more fundamentally, how many dues-paying members does the organization actually have? Without accurate membership data, we cannot effectively plan for the Institute's future or assess its financial health.

Call to Action

I believe our membership not only deserves but has the right to accurate information and transparent governance. This is precisely why it's imperative to restore open board meetings, allowing these and other critical matters to be addressed directly with our leadership. As stakeholders in this organization, we must advocate for the accountability and openness that will ensure the Appraisal Institute's continued relevance and integrity.

Respectfully,

Jennifer Marshall, SRA, AI-RRS

RD5335

813-957-3230