Colin McNickle: Allegheny Co.’s ‘charitable purposes’ review falls short |
Featured Commentary

Colin McNickle: Allegheny Co.’s ‘charitable purposes’ review falls short


In 2007, Allegheny County Council passed an ordinance mandating a review every three years of properties claiming exemption from property taxes under the Purely Public Charity Act.

But 12 years after the fact, only one review has commenced — in 2013, six years after the fact and still ongoing — and there’s no clear indication if those charged with the process ever will comply with the letter of the law, conclude scholars at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy.

“It’s unclear as to the intent or plan for the county to follow the 2007 ordinance,” say Elizabeth Miller, a research associate at the Pittsburgh think tank, and Eric Montarti, the research director.

Of Allegheny County’s 26,000 tax-exempt parcels, 2,800 are classified as purely public charities. Yet even after a dozen years, 708 parcels are awaiting legal review.

Per the law, reviews should have been conducted in 2010, 2013, 2016, 2019 and so forth. The county solicitor, Andrew Szefi, told the Tribune-Review “the time and level of expertise that is needed to complete this review” is responsible for the delay.

He also noted continuing efforts to reach agreements for some organizations to make payments in lieu of taxes. Many of those property reviews still pending involve hospital/health care property with an assessed value of about $5.5 billion, the Trib reports.

Among those properties that have been reviewed — again, those whose owners say they are purely public charities — 61 percent have maintained their tax-exempt status.

But 289 parcels did move from tax-exempt to taxable. The move, however, hardly represents a windfall the county, municipalities or school districts as predicted in studies from several years ago.

“The parcels that were denied and are now taxable have a total assessed value of $89 million,” Miller and Montarti say. “At the current county millage rate of 4.73 mills, they contribute $421,229 in county taxes. Total local tax revenues amount to $2.9 million based on average rates for municipalities (6 mills) and school districts (22 mills) in the county.”

One difficulty in determining the effectiveness of the review is that 188 of the 289 parcels have changed hands since 2013, when the first review notices were mailed.

“If a property being used for purely public charitable purposes was sold to a new owner for a use other than that it is hard to see how the review would have had an impact on making the parcel taxable since it was more likely a change in use would have put it on the taxable rolls,” the researchers remind.

Conversely, with 86 properties that last sold prior to 2013, there is some possibility that the review revealed a property might have been claiming an unwarranted tax exemption. With a total assessed value of $7.9 million, those properties would generate $261,000 in local property taxes.

With 708 parcels pending legal review, it begs the question whether Allegheny County’s chief assessment officer will ever comply with the 2007 ordinance requiring triennial reviews.

“Given the lack of updated reassessments it is all very problematic since these reviews are now dealing with only a small part of the inequities the county has with property assessments,” Miller and Montarti conclude.

Colin McNickle is communications and marketing director at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy and can be reached via email.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.