No Luzerne County tax hike proposed for 2022

Luzerne County Acting Manager Romilda Crocamo did not seek a real estate tax increase in the proposed 2022 budget she presented to county council Tuesday night.

The administration’s proposed budget initially drafted required a 5% tax increase, but the administration knew that was not “workable in these times.”

After further review, it whittled down the increase to 2.75%.

Realizing most council members were not receptive to any real estate tax hike this year, Crocamo said she saw the “reality” and regrouped again to propose no increase.

However, she repeated this assertion twice: “The county cannot sustain itself with another zero tax increase in 2023.”

As one example why, Crocamo pointed to deteriorating county-owned roads, which would cost an estimated $50 million to repair based on current cost estimates.

The county’s fund to cover capital needs is nearly drained and “needs life support,” she said.

A new chiller and updated electrical equipment are needed at the courthouse, and other work is necessary to “sustain our aging structures,” she said.

Services that county government provides to residents are “increasing and becoming more complex,” and security needs are rising for technology, elections and government offices, she said.

She urged council to meet the administration “halfway” in confronting needs, including members “who harbor animosity towards the administration.”

Some proposed budget highlights, according to the document and the budget/finance division:

• The structurally balanced proposed budget is $157.77 million, which is a 2% increase from this year’s budget.

• Revenue from real estate taxes is budgeted at $118.5 million next year, or approximately $1.8 million more. This growth primarily stems from a nationwide increase in home prices since June.

• Debt repayments will be approximately $300,000 more next year, bringing the total to $26.5 million.

• Based on actuarial projections, the county’s employee pension fund subsidy will remain at $14.2 million next year, which includes $10.8 million from the general fund operating budget.

• Crocamo included varied merit raises for non-union employees under her supervision. The administration based the request on performance reviews that were recently completed, which addresses a past council complaint that individual amounts were not spelled out in advance as part of the budget, she said.

The non-union raises would cost a total $258,996 from the general fund and $76,000 from other revenue sources. In comparison, union workers are slated to collectively receive $528,000 in increases next year under collective bargaining agreements.

• Several new positions were requested due to rising workloads — three in the information technology department, two in the election bureau, one in the law division, one in budget/finance and two in the prothonotary’s office — one paid by the courts and a part-time clerk.

Crocamo said managers are prepared to fully detail all requests at upcoming public council budget work sessions.

County real estate taxes are currently 6.1696 mills, which equates to a payment of $616.96 on a $100,000 property. A mill is $1 tax for every $1,000 in assessed value.

Council is set to adopt a budget on Dec. 14, which is the day before the deadline under the county’s home rule charter.

DA litigation

A council majority voted to ratify a council executive session decision to appeal court denial of a preliminary injunction that would have removed the county DA’s race from the Nov. 2 ballot.

The appeal already was filed. County Assistant Solicitor Vito DeLuca was not involved in the closed-door session and said it was a Sunshine Act violation because decisions must be made in public. Subsequent ratification is the only way to remediate by officially recording how council wants to proceed, he said.

Councilwoman Linda McClosky Houck reiterated she does not support the underlying litigation in the first place because two county entities — council and the DA — are suing a third, the county Election Board.

This litigation focuses on differing interpretations of new state law governing DA vacancies triggered when DA Sam Sanguedolce was appointed to fill Stefanie Salavantis’ seat earlier this year.

Council Chairman Tim McGinley said he was unable to attend the executive session but said it is an unfortunate situation that three county entities are now separately paying outside attorneys. Directing an attorney to proceed with an appeal without a public vote “tramples on transparency,” he said.

Councilman Stephen J. Urban abstained from voting, and all other council members approved the ratification except McClosky Houck and McGinley.

Rebate decision delayed

A council majority again postponed a vote on Councilman Harry Haas’ proposal to use $47.5 million of the county’s nearly $113 million American Rescue Plan earmark from the federal government to provide a $600 rebate to approximately 77,000 owner-occupied residences.

Several council members repeated their concern about voting before the federal government issues final regulations on how the funding may be spent. These final rules were originally expected in September but now may not be ready until later this year, the county’s budget/finance division said.

In addition to Haas, three council members voted against the postponement: McClosky Houck, Urban and Walter Griffith.

Chamber taxes

Nine of the 11 council members granted a request from the Greater Wilkes-Barre Chamber of Commerce to correct a discrepancy overstating what the chamber owes for delinquent taxes incurred by the prior owner of the former Poseidon Pools property in Wright Township.

The chamber spent more than $2 million cleaning up environmental damage and is ready to sell the property.

Urban abstained, and Griffith voted no.