Investigation of County Treasurers' Tax-Sale Registration Fees, June 2007
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On January 2, 2007, the Ombudsman received a complaint regarding the fee that county \ntreasurers charge registrants at annual tax sales. The complainant said generally that \nmany of the state’s counties, especially larger ones, appeared to be charging higher fees \nthan was thought to be allowed by law. \nInvestigation \nThe investigation was conducted by Assistant Ombudsman Bert Dalmer. For purposes of \nthis report, all investigative actions are ascribed to the Ombudsman. \nIn early 2007, the Ombudsman surveyed tax-sale registration fees in 10 of the state’s 99 \ncounties. Interviews of 10 county treasurers and/or some of their deputies were \nconducted. In addition, the Ombudsman researched the Iowa Code and relevant case law. \nThe Ombudsman also consulted with the Iowa State Auditor and the president of the \nIowa State County Treasurers Association.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".