close

Not happy with property assessment? Appeals heading to court phase

6 min read
article image -

Washington County Chief Assessor Bradley Boni looked out a window in the reception room of the Chapman Building when property reassessment appeals began Aug. 10. Across Jefferson Avenue, he could see the leaves of a deep-green sycamore tree soaking up the summer sun.

Green has mostly faded to gold and brown, and Boni said Friday the intervening months have been, for him, “a blur,” and as soon as the hearings wrap up, he’ll be working on certifying the tax roll so various governments can prepare their 2017 budgets. Because of this pressing matter, Boni said he did not have information on the total number of appeals, dollar amounts of reductions, or other assessment-related facts.

By mere coincidence, the last day for Washington County property owners to appear before the board of assessment appeals is Halloween.

So if members of the three-person appeals panel hand out something other than a treat, what’s a property owner to do?

The step after Washington County Board of Tax Assessment Appeals is Common Pleas Court.

Blane Black, solicitor for the Washington County Tax Claim Bureau, notes that property owners who missed a deadline this year do not have a right to appeal. Additionally, if someone appealed to the board but chose not to attend the scheduled hearing, the appeal is deemed to have been “abandoned” and there is no right to appeal.

However, property owners can take an assessment case directly to court.

Appeals from the board of assessment must be filed with the court within 30 days of the board’s decision.

Each case will be assigned to a judge, and the judge has the discretion to refer it to what is known as a “master,” a kind of quasi-judge.

After advertising for their services, President Judge Katherine B. Emery signed an administrative order Oct. 12 appointing six masters in tax assessment appeals, all lawyers, who will be paid $500 per day including all work to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law.

They are: Brett A. Clancy, William A. Congelio, L. Dawn Haber, Robert L. Johnson, Thomas A. Lonich and Joseph M. Zupancic. They will hear testimony about the value of the property in question.

In its Washington County budget request for 2017, the court requested $200,000 to pay for the property assessment appeals process, a figure based on “maximum volume,” according to Patrick Grimm, Washington County court adminstrator.

Most of the hearings scheduled before a master will take place in the Family Court Center, 29 W. Cherry Ave., between the courthouse and Courthouse Square office building.

The masters in assessment appeals also are to serve as conciliators who will try to settle the cases. “If no one takes an exception, the master’s ruling becomes the final order of the court,” Grimm said. If the parties do not agree on the property’s value, each side has the opportunity to take exceptions, and the case will be argued before a judge.

“A judge will not hear testimony,” Grimm said. He expects Emery to assign judges, including the two senior judges, to specific school districts.

“I think some appeals will still be ongoing in the following year, especially in the commercial realm,” Grimm said of 2018. “Some portion of the work will continue past the calendar year” of 2017.

Information about petitioning the court in tax assessment matters can be found at http://www.washingtoncourts.us/pages/taxAssessmentAppeal.aspx

Taped to the wall at the Chapman Building is a list of commercial property owners heading directly to court, divided by school district. It includes Walmart, various Markwest Liberty Midstream and Resources locations, Southpointe Golf Club, Meadows Real Estate Inc., Washington County Ballpark Holdings, HCB Foundry LLC/Hobby Lobby and Lowe’s, to name just a few.

Property owners who receive school district tax bills in the summer of 2017 will likely trigger another round of appeals because the school district’s millage is higher than those of the county or the municipality. “We’re wondering what happens in the next year of the appeal period,” Grimm said.

A Washington resident who was profiled in an August story in the Observer-Reporter was unsuccessful in an attempt to roll back his assessment, but he said recently he does not plan to take his case to court.

Jim Conkle, who owns a rental property on Duncan Avenue in Washington, said he felt the preliminary value of $107,700 placed on the duplex last spring was fair.

But in early July, a letter from the county noted the assessment for Conkle’s property had risen to $120,500.

Conkle assumed he was the victim of a typographical error, and he made some phone calls to find out more. Getting no answers, he filed an assessment appeal to, he hoped, straighten it out. But when he received another letter from the county, he was informed there would be no change in the property’s value and that the board would not reconsider its decision.

He was chagrined because the figure was not reduced, and also because the assessment appeals board “didn’t answer my question. I was basically dissatisfied in the response I got.”

His notification from the assessment appeals board said the panel would not reconsider the matter. Hearing nothing more, Conkle enlisted the aid of Diana Irey Vaughan, vice chairman of the Washington County board of commissioners, and he then saw her at the Senior Expo at Washington Crown Center this past fall.

“Diana was johnny-on-the-spot,” Conkle said. “We sent emails back and forth.”

The commissioner received a response from Boni that Conkle’s first rental property assessment included the duplex building, but not the value of the land.

“Looking at 120,000 parcels, you run edits,” Boni said Friday. “There are going to be checks that you run,” or, as he wrote in his email to the commissioner, “There was a subtle tweak to (Conkle’s) records during the cleanup which was minimally impactful to his overall value.”

He had finally received his answer.

“If you want to call that a minimal impact to my taxes, I don’t know,” Conkle said. He’s hoping that, using the multiplier of 10.31 that the county has published for the City of Washington, that his taxes will decrease. “I don’t like to pull a string like that, but I’ve known Diana since she first ran.”

Conkle does not, at this time, plan further appeal.

On the Washington County website (www.co.washington.pa.us), the multiplier, or factor, for each municipality and school district is listed under “News and announcements.” Those visiting the site should click on “What will my new taxes be?” or “Value chart.” The numbers apply to communities and school districts at large, not individual properties.

CUSTOMER LOGIN

If you have an account and are registered for online access, sign in with your email address and password below.

NEW CUSTOMERS/UNREGISTERED ACCOUNTS

Never been a subscriber and want to subscribe, click the Subscribe button below.

Starting at $3.75/week.

Subscribe Today