News Release

Contact: Scott Ott, vice chairman Lehigh County Board of Commissioners

610-810-1688

Lehigh County Commissioners Vote 8-0 to Restore Fairness to Property Assessments

----- Process Begun in 2010 Will Go Forward

(January 26, 2011) -- Lehigh County Commissioners last night unanimously voted to go ahead with restoring fairness and uniformity to real estate assessments, after two weeks of considering the County Executive's request to delay indenitely the reassessment that he initiated in 2010. The measure, sponsored by ve commissioners and passed on an 8-0 vote, will not change revenue to the county, school districts, townships or boroughs. It will shift some of the burden from taxpayers who have been overpaying relative to the value of their properties. About 58 percent of taxpayers should see their tax bills go down in 2013, the other 42 percent, should increase. About 78 percent of changes to county taxes will fall within a range of plus or minus $100 annually. Changes to school and other municipal taxes vary by district, township and borough, but all must be 'revenue neutral' to the taxing body.

Pennsylvania's Constitution requires uniformity in taxation. With property taxes, the only way to maintain that fairness is periodic reassessments. But the county has not performed a reassessment since 1991, and by 2010 only 18 percent of properties were accurately valued, resulting in widespread inequity in the tax burden. As a result, the number of assessment appeals led by property owners more than tripled in a single year to more than 700 in 2010. Successful appeals reduced revenue to the county and other taxing bodies, costing the County more than a million dollars per year, and schools millions more. According to one estimate, the loss from appeals to all governing bodies in the county since 2007 may exceed $50 million. However, that doesn't reduce

government spending, since school boards, the county and others can, and did, raise taxes to make up the loss.

"The reality is that reassessment is already happening," said Commissioner Vice Chairman Scott Ott, "but only for the few that have the knowledge and resources to challenge their assessments, mostly businesses. That further skews the tax burden, placing more on the private homeowners, many of whom have been paying inequitably higher taxes for years. Before the Commissioners' January 11 meeting, Executive Don Cunningham had attempted to remove the reassessment bill from their agenda, claiming 'market volatility' made it difcult to establish accurate property values. However, Cunningham's administration provided no data to justify interrupting a process that had already consumed $305,000 in taxpayer money, and offered no date when the process could restart. That night, Ott revived the bill for a rst reading, in the interest of transparency, to induce the administration to make its case for delay with actual data. The Commissioners also strengthened the language of the bill to 'direct' rather than merely 'authorize' the Executive to carry out the assessment, due to the administration's reluctance.

Last night, the County's Director of Administration, Tom Muller, made what several commissioners said was an excellent, even-handed presentation, full of relevant data. During public comment time, a certied appraiser with decades of local experience told the board that Muller had effectively, if perhaps unintentionally, made the case to go forward with the reassessment, since the three key measures of reliability were all well within acceptable ranges, and one of them was 'perfect'.

Ott said the unanimous vote by the Board indicates that the decision was made based on the actual data to restore fairness, rather than political considerations. "It's a serious issue and tough decision," said Ott. "We're legally, Constitutionally obligated to keep this tax fair and uniform. The Board demonstrated courage, and appropriate independence of the Executive, by doing the right thing." Notices of the new assessed values will go out in February, and taxpayers will have until August 1 to appeal if they think the new value is inaccurate. An appeal starts informally -- a visit to the county assessment ofce. If the taxpayer still feels the assessment is inaccurate, he goes to an appeals board, and ultimately can appeal that ruling to the court. As a result of the overall increase in property values in the county, and a calculation change made last year that applies the tax to 100 percent of the assessed value, rather than 50 percent, the tax rate percentage (millage) is projected drop from 11.9 to 3.83 in 2013. Again, these changes will not change the amount of revenue that taxing bodies collect.

While County Executive Cunningham has threatened to veto the bill, the Commissioners require only six votes to override a veto, so such a move would fail, and would serve only to delay the distribution of assessment notices, and to cut short the time that taxpayers have to appeal.

"The County Executive made a solid case in 2010 for the necessity and urgency of reassessment to restore fairness," said Ott. "Last night his administration showed us data that supported moving forward. The commissioners have acted courageously with full knowledge of the implications. We're hopeful that the Executive will fulll his role under the Home Rule Charter and carry out the policy established by the unanimous, bipartisan vote of the Board."

-- 30 --