Sen. Fontana Proposes Alternatives to Reassessment System

It has often been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. That statement perfectly explains the ongoing, court-ordered, reassessment fiasco taking place in Allegheny County. The current process is unworkable, burdensome, expensive and inaccurate.

Earlier this week, I wrote Judge R. Stanton Wettick, Jr. and asked him to delay the implementation of the 2012 reassessed property values until the General Assembly can craft a statewide solution.  On Tuesday afternoon, Judge Wettick announced he would rule on Thursday, Jan. 12, whether or not to delay using the new property values by one year. I am hopeful the delay is granted, but regardless of which property values are used this year, I will be writing legislation that would change Pennsylvania’s flawed reassessment system to one that is uniform, fair and predictable.

Requiring court-ordered reassessments in Allegheny County, while other counties across the Commonwealth have gone decades without a reassessment, is unfair to Allegheny County property owners. Once this reassessment is over, what is the next step? The court has not indicated what will happen next year or anytime in the near future. It is time for the General Assembly to end this ‘Groundhog Day’ scenario and fix the reassessment system in Pennsylvania.

As I have mentioned before, I have introduced legislation, Senate Bill 1280 (SB 1280), which would place a moratorium on all court-ordered property reassessments until the legislature can overhaul the current system or implement an alternative method for local governments and school districts to generate revenue. When the General Assembly reconvenes I will again be calling on leadership to move this bill forward.

In addition to a moratorium, I propose three alternatives to the current property assessment system. Of course, the details of any of these options need to be discussed and debated, but any of these are more uniform, predictable and certainly fairer than the current court-ordered reassessment taking place in Allegheny County.

• The first would simply adjust the current assessment process to allow local governments to continue to use a base year system and adjust their base year on a defined time schedule. For example, a 2002 base year could be adjusted one year every three years beginning in 2012. Price indicators for each neighborhood and municipality could be used to adjust real estate values. The appeals process would remain in place to address any inequities.

• The second alternative would eliminate homeowner property taxes and allow counties, municipalities and school districts to shift to a sales and/or income tax. This option would require a change in Pennsylvania’s constitution. The concept of tax shifting has been debated in Harrisburg for many years and is worthy of serious consideration.

• The third option would prohibit the use of assessed values in taxing real estate and instead use a model that taxes the property based on square footage. Under this system, each taxing body would determine the total square footage of all taxable property within its jurisdiction and divide that number into total real estate tax collections for the previous year to establish a rate per square foot. The amount of taxes per property owner would be determined by the combined size of the lot and home or building. There would be no assessment process necessary.

I would like to hear your thoughts on these three alternatives and I welcome your comments. You can email me at fontana@pasenate.com or visit my website at www.senatorfontana.com and click on the Contact Me tab to offer your opinions on these three proposals.