LAWRENCE COUNTY Judge mulls request to delay activating reassessment 1 year

A hearing will likely be scheduled before June 25.
By LAURE CIOFFI
VINDICATOR NEW CASTLE BUREAU
NEW CASTLE, Pa. -- A Lawrence County judge was expected to decide today if county commissioners can take their arguments about countywide reassessment to court.
Common Pleas Court Judge Ralph D. Pratt heard motions Tuesday from the county's attorney, Samuel Kamin of Pittsburgh. Kamin asked for a hearing date so the judge can consider the county's request to delay implementing reassessment for one year.
City Solicitor James Manolis opposed any delay and asked the judge to find the county in contempt of court for not following a consent decree they signed in 1998.
The city and county agreed in 1998 that the county would finish reassessment this year. City officials have threatened a lawsuit because they think city residents are paying an unfair share of county taxes.
What's in question
Kamin contends the methods used by Sabre Systems of Miamisburg, Ohio, to compile the reassessment figures are flawed and there will likely be a large number of property assessment appeals this fall.
In his motion asking for the reassessment delay, Kamin notes the assessment appeals board won't be able to handle the large number of appeals and most won't be resolved before municipalities and the county must set 2003 budgets.
Kamin contends most municipalities will suffer budget shortfalls.
City officials say there is no need for a delay.
Manolis' motion proposes that the court force the county to appoint four assessment appeals boards and four Certified Pennsylvania Evaluators to sit on the boards.
Those boards would meet from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday from July 10 until reassessment is completed.
The city also contends that in opposing the delay, county commissioners, particularly Roger DeCarbo and Ed Fosnaught, have tried to thwart reassessment for "political reasons, unrelated to reassessment."
Commissioner Brian Burick voted against delaying reassessment.
Complaints listed
The city's motion lists a host of complaints against the commissioners, including allegations that they hindered the city from obtaining information about reassessment, the county withheld payment to Sabre Systems and hired a consultant and directed the consultant to "compile data, statistics and information to unfairly portray Sabre's work as substandard and inconsistent."
The city's motion also states commissioners forbid the county solicitor from meeting with the city solicitor to determine the progress of reassessment and failed to direct county employees to cooperate with Sabre to ensure reassessment would be completed.
The city estimates that a reassessment delay will cost city residents $600,000 in overpaid county taxes. The city is asking that the county pay that amount to the city, plus all legal fees.
Kamin argued that county officials have more than New Castle to look at.
"The city of New Castle seems to forget that there are other municipalities and school districts in the borders of Lawrence County who are impacted. Everybody is involved," he said.
Judge Pratt said if a hearing is conducted, it will be before June 25.
If the county is unsuccessful in getting a delay, the new property values set by Sabre Systems must be sent to property owners by July 1.
cioffi@vindy.com