Fitzgerald, Catena spar over vetoed Allegheny County property assessment bill

Two of Allegheny County’s top elected officials are trading barbs over a bill that sought to address the county’s property tax assessment role.

Allegheny County Council passed a bill by a 9-6 vote early this month to establish a new chief assessment officer appointed by council that would render calculations each year of the county’s property tax ratios. The chief assessment officer is currently appointed by the Allegheny County Executive.

The bill came after Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Alan Hertzberg’s ruling that said the county “failed to administer the property tax assessment appeal system in a just and impartial manner,” and some property owners were given second chances on their property tax appeals.

Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald vetoed that bill on July 20. In his veto message, Fitzgerald wrote the bill “contravenes numerous provisions” of the county’s Home Rule Charter and attempts to give council power over the executive branch in an arena it should not.

Allegheny County Council President Pat Catena, D-Carnegie, responded last week in a statement saying that he introduced the legislation because he believed Fitzgerald’s appointed chief assessment officer wasn’t qualified and was responsible for the “fiasco” that led to the court intervening in the county’s property tax situation.

School districts and municipalities filed several thousand property assessment appeals in Allegheny County this year, resulting in owners of those properties seeing higher assessed values and, in turn, higher property tax bills.

During the appeal process, Allegheny County was using a common level ratio of 81.1% — meaning that a property seeing an appeal would have its assessment changed to about 81% of its fair market value.

The judge’s ruling in September reduced the common level ratio from 81.1% to 63.5%, which should reduce the property tax bills on appealed properties.

Catena said Hertzberg’s ruling said that the county “cooked the books,” and his bill was an attempt to ensure the “intentional miscalculation” of the common level ratio doesn’t happen again.

He said he was disappointed in Fitzgerald’s veto and criticized him for having a continued “quest for unilateral authority” among county government matters.

“I had hoped that the chief executive would recognize that the (common level ratio) manipulation looks more and more like a coordinated effort at the highest level of his administration with each additional revelation, and that his veto of this ordinance would reek of a cover up on top of that,” Catena said.

It’s unclear if Catena will attempt to override Fitzgerald’s veto. To override a veto on Allegheny County Council, 10 or more votes are necessary. That means Catena and his allies would need to flip one council member to their side if a veto override vote were to occur.

Fitzgerald’s spokeswoman Amie Downs said Catena’s comments are “inappropriate and beneath him as a county official.” She said the bill was vetoed because it would take authority to the legislative branch that is not provided in the Home Rule Charter and circumvents voters.

She said Fitzgerald sponsored town halls to assist taxpayers during their appeals, and he approved legislation to extend appeals.

“This administration has gone 12 years with no tax increase to county taxpayers,” Downs said. “In that same time, property values have increased 2.5 times over what they were in 2012. The county executive fought the last court reassessment because he understood the impact it would have on taxpayers.”