posted by Mike Madison at 12:35 PM /
In response to this post about possible conflicts between the Mt. Lebanon School Board and the Mt. Lebanon Commission, I received private email suggesting that the members do talk and work together on projects for the town.
Assuming that's true (and if it's true, then great!), then the burden is on the members of both boards to share the good news with the community. A lot of the anonymous comments on this blog reflect little more than neighborhood gossip, some of which is well-founded, some of it not. But small towns like Mt. Lebanon are full of gossip, and the only way to get rid of the inaccurate material is to drive it out with the truth.
Assuming that's true (and if it's true, then great!), then the burden is on the members of both boards to share the good news with the community. A lot of the anonymous comments on this blog reflect little more than neighborhood gossip, some of which is well-founded, some of it not. But small towns like Mt. Lebanon are full of gossip, and the only way to get rid of the inaccurate material is to drive it out with the truth.
24 Comments:
Does the private e-mail refute the fact that not a single School Board member spoke to the Commissioners before breaking a 25+ year agreement in September 2006? Has there been any discussion between the School Board and the Commissioners since mid September? It is my understanding that no communication has taken place. The last person I spoke with was a Mt. Lebanon Commissioner.
The "Joint Steering Committee" is not the only forum for communication. I'm sure all School Board members have access to computers and phones like the rest of us. The next Joint Steering Committee meeting is next week and it is not a public meeting. I wish it were. I would love to see this great communication in action!
Please encourage your "source" to respond to the questions. I am just a concerned taxpayer. Many families are trying to determine if they can afford to live in Mt. Lebanon when the taxes go up every year. With plans for a new pool and new high school in the works, it should be a big concern for every taxpayer.
I think the School Board is much more secretive than the municipality.
The assessment issue is a huge deal that affects every home owner in Mt Lebanon. They should address the questions asked, and address why they are not going along with Dan Onoratos plan like the rest of Allegheny County.
I agree 100% that the Mt. Lebanon School Board is far more secretive than the Commissioners with EVERYTHING!! (Have we forgotten about the Margery Sable buyout?)
The Dr. Pulkowski Scandal is a perfect example. I am not familiar with her work, but from what I hear, Dr. Pulkowski has been an excellent addition to the School District staff. I encourage all residents to watch the School Board meeting on channel 19 to see how Dr. Pulkowski was treated at their meeting on Monday. Very few School Board members even made eye contact with her. When one resident expressed his concerns, the Vice President of the School Board laughed during his comments. This will definitely end up in litigation.
What a waste of our tax dollars! How difficult would it be to extend Dr. Pulkowski's contract for one year and allow the new Superintendent to evaluate her work. Obtaining over $1 million in grants for Mt. Lebanon School District in two years is a fairly impressive addition to any resume. Dr. Pulkowski is also very loved by the Turkish residents that have moved to Mt. Lebanon. Her work with the ESL population has been described as fantastic. Not many school employees have a member of the clergy speak at a public board meeting begging the board to reconsider her firing.
Very few School Board members have respect for the residents they represent and I believe they show very little respect for the Mt. Lebanon Commissioners. Could it be because the Municipality has a very small budget compared to the HUGE School District budget?
One final thought: At least the School Board took a month to research Dr. Pulkowski's concerns. Too bad they did not have the same respect for the 1000 new homeowners they believe should pay a greater share of taxes than everyone else. All it would have taken was a phone call to understand the Commissioners concerns regarding the 2006 appeals by new homeowners.
The "agreement" never anticipated that the Commissioners would ignore the fiscal bombshell dropped by Mr. Onorato. There is no free lunch. Either the school district, which has to deal with ten times the expenditures of the city commission, appeals the assesments or it raises the millage level. Unless we expect the School Board to budget on the hope that manna from heaven will drop from the sky to fill the coffers, we have to face reality. If someone has a plan that can fund both the school district and the community, without raising money from the only source available, real estate taxes, please speak up. Oh, that's right! The casinos will fix the problem. Sorry!
I agree there is no free lunch. I moved here within the past 5 years and am now paying $10 for my lunch while everyone else is paying $5. That money really adds up, especially when you don't even have children using the schools.
To the group of residents that purchased homes within the past 5 years and was discussing a class action lawsuit against the school district and town last year:
GO FOR IT!!
Maybe people in this town may care when $3 million has to be refunded. Dan Onorato has already offered to testify on behalf of new homeowners suing their town/school.
There are many things to be thankful for in Mt. Lebanon, the School Board is just not one of them.
Mike, you mention the many anonymous comments on the blog, and the fact that many (most?) reflect neighborhood gossip. I agree completely, and would add that those of us reading these comments have no way of knowing if the anonymous posts are from people who have their own agenda, ie; employed by the school district or the municipality, or elected officials. That said, what credence should we place in "private" correspondence you receive (why doesn't the sender want to be identified?) claiming that representatives of these two taxing bodies do cooperate with each other? Their behavior indicates otherwise.
On another matter, a short time ago an anonymous comment was posted praising the commissioners for not proposing a tax increase in 2007. I hope that person, and others read the front page article in this weeks Almanac!
I can’t handle all this WHINING. People buying homes in the last few years, knowing the assessed value was less than what they were paying for their house are FURIOUS that their tax bill now represents the true market value. They think it is fair that their tax bill be what it was in 2002 – NOT even what it should have been in 2002.
They think it is fair for the rest of the township to pay taxes based on an assessment which closely approximates the market value of their house. Remember, Mt. Lebanon only appealed houses assessed at less than 85% of the sales price (I Think or was it 60%?). But there are buckets of homes sold where there was no appeal because the assessed value was already close to the sales price!
The WHINERS think it is fair for a substantial portion of the township to have their millage raised so their assessed value is artificially low – all because Dan Onoroto chose to perpetuate a broken system rather than fix it.
The Big “O” was right that schools and local governments were using assessments for back door tax hikes – but instead of fixing a flat tire he just took all the wheels off – so the car won’t move.
The right solution is a legislative one where any increases in assessed values would be revenue neutral to the schools and townships. This way the assessed values could incrementally get better over time, but our taxes would not automatically increase just because the assessment went up. Instead, now we are just all gummed up.
And it is not the school board or commission’s fault – it is Danny O’s.
In response to the last anonymous comment: Why don't you run for Allegheny County Executive?
Perhaps you and Mr. Rodella could run together since you both have all the answers to fix the County assessment problems. (Read the PG and Almanac articles in October and November to read about Mr. Rodella's opinions.)
19 Pennsylvania counties use the base year plan and it has worked for them. Have you ever wondered why so many people are moving to Beaver and Butler County? They have used a base year plan for years.
This should not be a political issue. Many towns and school districts did not use a back-door tax to increase revenue over the past 5 years. Mt. Lebanon did and now we will all pay the price.
The Mt. Lebanon Commissioners and School Board need to take responsibility for their actions and admit they have made mistakes.
Perhaps school board members have some hidden agendas - that's the problem with hidden agendas- no one really knows ;-)
In defense of the school board, however, these people are not paid a cent for all the hundreds of hours of time they put in. Personally, I think it's a thankless job (as evidenced by the avalanche of criticism on this blog and elsewhere). Despite any of their foibles, on this Thanksgiving, I am thankful to have people in our community willing to freely give so much of their time.
Look at the house sales in this week's almanac. 10 sales - one was new construction still not on the tax rolls - so 9 good sales of random houses. Average sale price to assessed value ratio = 87.4%. High 139%, Low 56%.
If the houses greaater than 100% are appealed back to the sales price the new average is 80%. With 80% as the "adjusted" average, the 4 homes below 80% are subsidized by the 6 homes over 80%. Now look at the sales price of these homes. The subsidized homes have an average value of $328,000 and the subsidizing homes average $157,462.
This is fair? It would take more analysis - but it looks like the millage could be reduced for all properties if the assessed value equaled sales price, the way the system was designed. Instead, we are stuck in 2002 for political reasons and the homeowners most benefitting from the ongoing inequity scream it is only fair to keep their subsidy. The school board is serving the community well - the commission took the easy way out like Dan Onorato.
The new homeowners have subsidized all Lebo homeowners by OVERPAYING more than $3 million in taxes. Do you think we should keep having to pay more just because we bought a house in Lebo in the past five years?
One important thing that you are missing is that all those new sales printed in the newspaper are assessed at the 2002 level. You are only screwed in Lebo if you bought a home from 2002-2005. New homes purchased in 2006 are now assessed at the 2002 level. Check out the disparity in taxes on Hoodridge Drive. Make sure that you look at the building info. so you can check the square footage and see how big homes are paying much less in taxes than smaller homes simply because they haven't changed hands.
I realize that Lebo did not file appeals on homes that were within 15% of their sales price. But are you aware that they missed many, many homes that fell within the defined criteria and called it a computer glitch. The municipality is well aware of the problems with the appeal process.
Lebo has also NEVER appealed new construction homes or huge additions. They just pass those stats on to the County and it takes years for them to catch up with these homeowners. Drive around and look at new construction homes. Some of them were completed 1-2 years ago and are still paying taxes on a lot #.
Look up homes with big additions on the County website and see what their assessed value is. 4000 square foot homes have been re-assessed at $200,000 by the county and good old Lebo doesn't bat an eye.
Have you ever wondered why people leave building permits in their windows 1 - 2 years after an addition is complete. It is because they are delaying the certification of their Occupancy Permit. Once that is certified then it is passed on to the County. I know a family that put on a huge addition in 1 year but had that building permit in their window for three years. That is why you are only screwed in Lebo if you bought a home from 2002-2005!
Have you ever thought about what the Commissioners and School Board did with the EXTRA $3 million +.
- Brand new Safety Center
- Renovated Municipal Building (Check out the lighting fixtures in the Commission Room. They alone had to cost $10,000). I've heard there are granite counters in the Municipal offices -this is not a fact, but I wonder if it is true.)
- A ridiculously espensive "Clearview Commons". Look closely at the expensive stonework. I think that little parklet cost $1.5 MILLION. It is a cute town square, but it is impossible to sit there in the summer because there is little shade. Could we have done without this town square? Maybe yes, Maybe no.
- An Early Bird Teacher Contract that went up some 20% with little notice to the public
- I forgot the BIG ONE - THE DR. SABLE BUYOUT. Why do you think the School Board was so confident and smug. It was because they had all this extra $ to play around with.
So, the next time that someone complains about the new homeowners "whining", just remember that collectively they paid over $3 million more than you over the past five years. How would you like your taxes to go up $3,000 to $10,000 in one year just because you bought a second home in Good Old Lebo. Or think about the elderly residents that downsized and saw a tax increase. That happened to many retirees.
My taxes went up $500 a month. You would think I live in Virginia Manor, but I do not. I know most of the non-new homeowners don't care. But ask yourself: Is it really fair to discriminate against one group and force them to pay more in taxes than everyone else. I literally now pay twice as much in taxes as all my "Comparable Properties" and my realtor tells me it will be hard for me to sell my house today with my taxes so high. The County Assessment office has its' flaws, but Mt. Lebanon only made the flaws worse by using a back-door tax.
I think many of you do not understand why Dan Onorato moved to the base year plan. Some are talking about this years sales prices, etc.
Before the 2002 base year plan was put in, Allegheny County did their reassessment. They found that on average taxes would have increased FOR ALL HOMEOWNERS an average of 20%. 20%!!!!!!
So when people talk about those purchasing homes in the past 4 years having to pay sales price, they are totally missing the boat. The people should be paying what the house was (or should have been) assessed at in 2002.
It's not "let's do the base year except for ......."
Most homes in Lebo went up in value since 2002. I am willing to bet that Lebo would be over the 20% average.
So for those who do not like Dan Onoratos plan, do any of you have have an extra $100-300 a month to send to the School Board? You would have been paying that right now if they didn't switch to the base year plan.
The base year plan makes sure that if the school board wants to raise taxes, everybody knows about it (instead of being able to increase government without asking the tax payers)
As for the comment about being anonymous, I must do this because I believe I would be reassessed for talking like this.
Everybody knows the assessment system is broken and was broken when it was frozen in place. It's kind of a dumb way to tax anyway. For a long time it was accepted when homes sold shortly thereafter they were re-assessed at about 90% of their sales price. That left a margin for error and really nothing to argue about. Yeah the old homeowner got a break but no system is perfect. Now new homeowners want to keep that break, in fact for two comparable houses, the one with the lower tax bill commands a higher price. Now that makes a lot of sense. And if it was not enough that the old homeowner got a break. Now he/she capitalizes on it by getting more for the house. You can't mess with market forces.
Of course the 2002-2005 new homeowners complaining about the system think is is OK for the pre-2002 home buyers to live with their assessment or anyone else whose home is assessed anywhere near the market value - except them. The problem is downtown in the County building not with local officials.
I never knew there were so many REPUBLICAN BLOGGERS in Mt. Lebanon. What a hoot!
"I never knew there were so many REPUBLICAN BLOGGERS in Mt. Lebanon. What a hoot!"
We are anonymous because of fear of being reassessed...
The wierd thing is, Dan Onorato is a Democrat. He has actually hurt the teachers union more than any Republican has ever tried. I love it.
The base year plan works, especially in a place like Mt Lebanon. The only problem is figuring out which homes were over or underassesed in 2002.
What are we talking about here? Are the new homeowners wanting to have their assessment based on a 2002 market value or the assessed value of the property in 2002? These could be very different? What is the school board trying to accomplish, just the 2002 market value? Can we just take five percent off each year since 2002 when the house sold. Somebody said values went up twenty percent in these four yeras. And didn't the new homeowners expect their assessed value to go up as has ususlly been the case after a sale when we had annual assessments? It is not unusual for homes that have not been sold for years to be 50-60 percent off the market value. If the new homeowners are set back to this 50-60 percent level we are all going to subsidize them and all our taxes will go up to make up the lost taxes.
Easy solution to a complicated problem:
The Mt. Lebanon School Board should appeal all 2006 new purchases. While they are doing that, they then should appeal every house on a street where a new purchase occured.
So if a house that used to be assessed at $110,000 sold for $200,000 then it should be assessed at $200,000.
Given that same reasoning, if their assessed value goes up, then the assessed value of all their comps should go up and the assessed value of all their neighbors on the street should go up. Then slowly Mt. Lebanon would be more fairly assessed. Then the millage should be lowered and the School Board would look great!
The Mt. Lebanon School Board should have the courage to do what the Commissioners did not. When one house is appealed, then all on a street should be appealed.
Any takers?
Bigger Question: Why were the School District employees not aware of the Commissioner's decision? Apparently there were news articles about this in the PG. If they were not aware of the Commissioners actions, then why not?
Who has the responsibility of keeping the School Board informed?
Any thoughts or ideas?
Would anonymous, who said that Onorato "has actually hurt the teachers union more than any Republican", please explain that to me. If it means that you think that taxes will be held down because of the 2002 assessment levels, therefore slowing the ever increasing salaries and benefits the teachers get, you've got to be kidding. Boards will continue to spend more, and tax us to pay for it.
"Would anonymous, who said that Onorato "has actually hurt the teachers union more than any Republican", please explain that to me."
Explanation: Prior to the base year, the school board was able to get huge boosts in tax revenue from new homeowners being assessed at purchase price. Now they do not get that backdoor revenue, and have to take their tax hike to the whole community each year. Before it was automatic. Now, they have to ask.
Huge Power shift. Plum Burough had to do this. They asked for a increase of 4 mills and ended up getting half of that because of community outrage. The backdoor money wasn't there anymore. The teachers couldn't do whatever they wanted without public approval.
I have a question for...somebody.
I have a 2.5 half bath home according to the Allegheny County website. My issue is that one of the full baths is in the basement, and is basically so small nobody could even fit in it.
My question is, am I being taxed on this as if I had a nice master bathroom suite?
Thanks.
Maybe it was Dr. Pulkowski's job to keep the Board informed.
I doubt it!
Anonymous 12:10 pm makes an interesting suggestion. Although not really practical, because if we keep going forward with new values - we will get way out in front of the rest of the County and pay a disproportionate share of County taxes.
But the suggestion really gets to the heart of the problem - if all our property values were accurate either at a point in time, like the base year system or with regular re-assessments - we would all be taxed for the right share of our community's expenses.
But it's not so we aren't.
How do we live with the base year (2002) but make our relative values accurate?
Anonymous asked: "How do we live with the base year (2002) but make our relative values accurate?"
Excellent question. Dan Onorato has already said it will never be perfect. It is possible that there would be another base year in the future. Butler County has been using 1969 since, well, 1969.
I guess if it were up to me, it would be some type of formula. The worst house in Allegheny County would be a "1" and the best would be a "100". Location would be 0-60 points of it. Then the remaining points would go by square footage, bathrooms, rooms, lot, etc. The only thing that would ever change is the location points (unless you did an addition)
Mr. Matthews:
I am Anonymous 12:10. Thanks for the compliment. The reason I made the suggestion to "appeal one new house and then appeal the comps and all homes on the street" is because the Commissioners were given this option 5 years ago. Apparently when Mr. Bovard, owner of The Property Company, made a presentation to the Commissioners, he suggested this plan. Of course, all of those appeals would have helped his business, but it would also have made things more equitable.
I would be the first to admit that my house was under-assessed when I bought it four years ago. I have no problem with my taxes going up, as long as the bigger houses with new kitchens on my street have their taxes go up as well.
We purchased our home from an older couple and have had to do a great deal of work. When I stop in to visit my neighbors and walk into their enormous house with a brand new kitchen and realize that I pay $4,000 more in taxes a year than them and I have 1970's linoleum in my kitchen and shag carpeting, I get upset.
The Commissioners really dropped the ball on this one. If they wanted to make things "fair", then when one house was appealed then all on the street should have been appealed.
I wonder why they didn't take Mr. Bovard's suggestion? Could it be because they would have to schedule the Commission meetings in the high school stadium because of the huge protests.
The biggest winner of the Mt. Lebanon appeals has been Mr. Bovard and Mr. Gambino. Laura Pace wrote an interesting article about Mr. Bovard a few years ago.
I think Mr. Bovard and Mr. Gambino must have joined forces and now own a company called Diversified Municipal Services. Both men have challenged Mt. Lebanon new homeowners over the past 2 months. The former Deputy County Manager is also employed by this company.
Mr. Gambino was in charge of all the county assessments under Jim Roddey. He certified all the 2002 properties and is now challenging the Mt. Lebanon properties. He essentially says that he was wrong in 2002 and that the Mt. Lebanon residents should be assessed higher than they were in 2002! (The reason his firm has used properties outside of specific neighborhoods is because they can't find any comparable sale within the same neighborhood. Why? Because nobody in their right mind would have paid what I paid for my house in my neighborhood in 2000 or 2001. Maybe in Virginia Manor, but not in my neighborhood!
Anyway, the Mt. Lebanon residents are caught in the middle of a political battle between former Roddey employees and Onorato employees. According to the PG article last month, Mr. Gambino is an outspoken critic of Mr. Onorato.
On another note:
Mr. Matthews:
If you would run for School Board, you would have my full support. I do not attend the School Board meetings, but I watch them on t.v. and agree with most of your comments!
Post a Comment
<< Home