What findings did CAMAudit surface in the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors case?

CAMAudit flagged 1 finding with an apparent overcharge of $0. Each finding cites the specific detection rule, dollar amount, and the lease provision that grounds the dispute.

Can my firm reproduce these findings on a live client engagement?

Yes. CAMAudit applies the same CAM forensic detection rules to any lease and reconciliation your firm uploads. Partner firms receive findings in under 15 minutes and white-label branded report delivery for each completed audit.

Is Office a common property type for CAM audit engagements?

CAMAudit handles all commercial property types: retail, office, industrial, mixed-use, and specialty. The detection rules apply wherever a tenant pays CAM or operating expenses under a lease with specific definitions, caps, or exclusion lists.

What is a correction package and does CAMAudit generate one?

A correction draft is a factual starting point that specifies each overcharge by rule, dollar amount, and lease provision. CAMAudit generates a draft grounded in the specific audit findings for advisor and counsel review.

Public-record case study

Maricopa County AZ: property tax overallocation advisory case study

Name: Maricopa County AZ: property tax overallocation advisory case study structured case-study facts
Creator: CAMAudit
Published: 2026-03-19

A public-record office lease case study with Rule 10 advisory finding on a $148,600 property tax line item requiring cross-check against assessor records.

Maricopa County Board of Supervisors2022 statementNNN leaseOffice

Property Tax (County Assessor) billed at $148,600.

Rule 10 advisory: verification against assessor records required.

What happened

Maricopa County's lease specifies that property taxes must be allocated based on the assessor's assessed value for the tenant's specific premises. The 2022 reconciliation includes a $148,600 property tax line item. Rule 10 flags this for verification against Maricopa County Assessor public records to confirm the correct pro-rata allocation was used.

Findings from the pipeline

Rule 10: Tax Overallocation

medium confidence

Property tax line item detected with property_tax_provisions in lease. Cross-check against assessor records required to verify allocation.

Lease evidence

Property taxes shall be allocated per the Maricopa County Assessor's assessed value for the Premises only. Section 9.1.

Section 9.1, page 14

Math proof

item_confidence=0.92, weight=1.0, score=0.736, threshold=0.70

Statement references

Property Tax: County Assessor

Lease evidence

Property taxes allocated per Maricopa County Assessor assessed value (Section 9.1).
Tenant pro-rata share: 6.00%.

Why this matters for your firm

Property tax provisions in government leases are frequently audited because public assessment records make verification straightforward. Overallocations occur when landlords use a blanket pro-rata share rather than the assessed value allocated to the specific premises.

Correction package excerpt

Request for Cooperative Review of Certain Line Items. The automated review flagged the property tax allocation for cross-check against Maricopa County Assessor records.

Detection guide

Property tax overallocation guide

Frequently Asked Questions

Run these same detection rules on your client engagements

Upload a client lease and reconciliation. CAMAudit applies the same rule set used in this case study and delivers findings in under 15 minutes, with white-label report delivery under your firm brand.

Apply for partner access

Public-record note

This page summarizes public-record documents and CAMAudit output for educational and marketing purposes. It does not imply endorsement by Maricopa County Board of Supervisors or any third party. Readers should review the underlying lease, statement, and dispute timeline for their own facts.