State Supreme Court ends Washington County's attempt to avoid reassessments
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Tuesday, April 9, 2013, 5:39 p.m.
Washington County officials lost their last chance to avoid reassessing the county's property values when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected their appeal.
County supervisors in March began seeking request for proposals from companies interested in performing the reassessment. Bids are due May 17.
The Washington and McGuffey school districts in 2008 sued to force a reassessment for tax purposes, which the county last conducted in 1981.
Common Pleas Judge Debbie O'Dell Seneca in 2011 ordered county officials to abide by a consent decree they agreed to which said the reassessment process would start. The state Superior Court in December rejected an appeal by the county, which then appealed to the Supreme Court.
A status conference in the lawsuit is scheduled June 4 before O'Dell Seneca.
Show commenting policy
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 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.
- Starkey: Steelers know when to say goodbye
- Analysis: Kesler remains on Penguins’ radar as Shero looks bring back ‘Big 3’ formula
- Pirates’ big risk with pitch-heavy draft focus might soon pay off
- Ex-Colts executive Polian: Approach free agency with caution
- With so many needs, Steelers can ill afford to miss in draft
- Ukrainians steel to resist Russian aggression
- Obama losing close adviser to end 9 years of service
- Penguins GM Shero’s deadline deals: Addition by subtraction
- IUP students have raucous early St. Patrick’s Day celebration
- Greensburg bishop’s time at helm draws to a close
- Pitt rallies in final seconds of regulation en route to OT win at Clemson