Allegheny County severs ties with property assessment official
Allegheny County on Friday fired its manager of property assessments, the latest move in Executive Rich Fitzgerald's shakeup of county government.
Assessments Manager Michael J. Suley, 63, became at least the 11th high-ranking county official to be let go since Fitzgerald took office in January.
“There was a desire to see a change in the leadership and direction of that office,” county spokeswoman Amie Downs said. “As we have said numerous times in the past, there is a top-to-bottom review of the county departments and offices.”
Suley could not be reached. Downs wouldn't say why Fitzgerald sought new leadership in the assessments office.
Suley became the second high-ranking county official to be fired in 10 days. Fitzgerald fired Public Works Director Joe Olczak on Oct. 31, replacing him with Deputy Director Phil LaMay.
Although the controversial countywide reassessment has been a high-profile issue, Suley kept a low profile. He rarely spoke or asked questions during reassessment status conferences before Common Pleas Senior Judge R. Stanton Wettick. The conferences played a critical role in plotting out the reassessment process, which was completed this year.
The county awarded a $9.3 million contract to a Texas firm to perform the reassessment. Appeals still are being accepted.
Downs said Suley handled the office's administrative duties, from scheduling assessment appeal hearings to overseeing the public information phone line.
Suley worked two tours with the county, first as a member of the assessment board from July 1997 to December 2000. He had been manager of the assessments office since April 2006. He made $85,000 a year, Downs said.
Tom Fontaine is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7847 or email@example.com.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.