Property Reassessment

Reassessment challenge Company files paperwork for mediation

May 9, 2009

21st Century wants in on property case

By Jennifer Learn-Andes jandes@timesleader.com
Luzerne County Reporter
Jennifer Learn-Andes on Facebook   |   @TLJenLearnAndes on Twitter

Luzerne County’s reassessment company filed court paperwork Friday attempting to intervene in Hanover Township resident Vic Kopko’s county court challenge of his property assessment.

The reassessment company – 21st Century Appraisals Inc. – is asking the court to order that the company “manage and defend” the Kopko challenge.

21st Century has argued that its contract required the county to pay the company to defend court-level challenges, which would include the mediation step added by judges last year. Kopko’s challenge is in mediation because he is contesting the county assessment appeal board’s valuation of his property.

County officials have opted to keep 21st Century out of mediation and assigned the task to staff solicitor David Schwager. The county has maintained that the mediation level added by judges last year isn’t technically a court-level challenge that requires 21st Century’s involvement.

Kopko and his wife, Diane, have a court hearing Monday on their request to gather documents and other evidence as part of their mediation. The Kopkos say discovery is necessary to prove their assessment is “unlawful” and violates state Constitution uniformity requirements.

Their attorney, William Abraham, said he will argue Monday that his discovery motion should be granted now, rather than waiting until 21st Century’s motion to intervene is heard in on Aug. 3. 21st Century argues that everything should be put on hold until the August hearing.

21st Century blasts the county appeals board in the court paperwork and challenges the court’s authority to add the mediation step. The company said the appeal board’s actions are putting the county at risk of a breach-of-contract lawsuit from the company.

The paperwork filed by Attorney Michael D. Yelen says:

21st Century’s contract with the county says the company “shall assume statutory responsibilities” for conducting the reassessment and “shall be completely responsible for management, policies and implementation of the reassessment process.”

The contract also says the county shall pay 21st Century to defend values to the Court of Common Pleas.

Instead, county appeals board members told 21st Century that “they and their solicitor alone, without Century, intend to supervise, manage and defend all appeals to the court.”

The company says mediation has resulted in “compromised” values on properties without “proper factual support” and with an “inadequate record” of the mediation proceedings.

21st Century said the court didn’t have statutory authority to create the mediation step because the court is obligated to “pass upon and to determine the correctness of the property assessment as a whole.”

The mediation procedure is leading or may lead to “unconstitutional systematic undervaluation.”

21st Century is an “independent and unbiased third party,” and the continuation of mediation without the company’s review and defense of values will result in “inaccurate property values,” the company maintains.

Schwager said he will review 21st Century’s filing with other county solicitors and submit a response to the court.

“There were no new allegations. They were all issues that have been raised and discussed and dealt with in the county’s view previously,” Schwager said.

Schwager said he and other county officials believe mediation is successful and expedites the processing of challenges for property owners who would have had to wait longer for a hearing before a judge.

“The court established a process that tried to cater to the taxpayers, and it seems to be working. It certainly is preferable to what could be a significant outlay of funds to do it in an alternative manner,” Schwager said.

The Kopkos are seeking the dates and times that all county assessment appeals were filed, heard and decided. They argued that the information is necessary to determine whether all decisions were rendered on or before the last day of October “as required” by state law.

Reassessment critics have questioned the legality of missing the Oct. 31 deadline, but the Kopkos are the first to raise the issue in court.

County officials have maintained that their interpretation of the law allowed appeals to continue beyond Oct. 31, as long as the appeals were wrapped up before 2009 tax bills were issued.

In his opposition brief, Schwager cites a section of the law that says appeal boards “shall continue” to meet to hear appeals “from time to time until all appeals have been heard and acted upon.”

Vic Kopko started exploring the possibility of a suit when his two-story, four-bedroom house on 0.81 acre along Countrywood Drive was valued at $392,300 by 21st Century.

The value was reduced to $333,700 after an informal review and to $285,200 at a formal appeal. Kopko said the value is still higher than his certified appraisal.

Jennifer Learn-Andes, a Times Leader staff writer, may be reached at 831-7333.

Tweet	Follow @TLnews

Send Question or Remark to the Publisher