My New Blog

February 8th, 2012 4:06 PM
Appeals aid approved for city homeowners
Wednesday, February 08, 2012

Pittsburgh homeowners may begin calling 311, the city's service line, to get the city's help fighting new property assessments.

City council gave final approval Tuesday to a package of assistance that will be available to Pittsburgh homeowners 65 and older and to other city homeowners whose 2011 assessments totaled $150,000 or less.

The help will include a cut-rate appraisal, one-on-one help formulating an assessment appeal and even someone to argue the homeowner's case at an appeal hearing.

Some homeowners panicked after new, higher assessments started showing up in the mail late last year. In an unusual display of cooperation, Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, council members and Controller Michael Lamb joined forces to even the playing field for homeowners.

The new assessments won't be used for tax purposes until 2013 while appeals are held this year for property owners who think their assessment is too high.

"Our top priority is to help residents navigate their way through this confusing process and ensure that they receive fair and accurate property assessments," Mr. Ravenstahl said in a statement after the council vote. "The way the court-ordered reassessments have been handled has left many frustrated, but it is encouraging to see city officials come together on behalf of Pittsburgh's residents in a way that we don't see too often."

Common Pleas Court Senior Judge R. Stanton Wettick Jr. ordered new assessments for all Allegheny County properties, but owners in Pittsburgh, Mount Oliver and the eastern suburbs were the first to see the new numbers. Homeowners face an April 2 deadline for filing formal appeals.

The city's package of help is similar to that offered Pittsburgh homeowners after the last round of assessments about a decade ago.

The city will put a number of local appraisers under contract at reduced rates and pay half of each eligible homeowner's appraisal fee. Appraisal firms must submit proposals to the city by 4 p.m. today.

Mr. Ravenstahl proposed the subsidized appraisals Jan. 27. Three days later, Mr. Lamb and Councilmen Corey O'Connor and Bill Peduto proposed other support, including free analysis of comparable properties with lower values.

City officials will meet Thursday to finalize details on how and where services will be provided.

Officials already have said services will be provided by city employees, including lawyers in Mr. Lamb's office, and community groups. House calls will be made to shut-ins.

Joe Smydo: jsmydo@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1548.

First published on February 8, 2012 at 12:00 am


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/12039/1208761-53.stm#ixzz1lpJZ45sE

Posted by Jonathan Nordquist on February 8th, 2012 4:06 PMPost a Comment (0)

Subscribe to this blog
January 27th, 2012 2:13 PM
Controller to look into assessments
Friday, January 27, 2012

Allegheny County Controller Chelsa Wagner wants to hear from property owners who think their new assessments are out of line.

Ms. Wagner announced today that her office will evaluate the county's $8 million in reassessment contracts with Tyler Technologies. Tyler's Cole Layer Trumble unit has provided staff, computer programs and expertise to assist the county with its efforts to revalue almost 600,000 real estate parcels.

More than 6,000 property owners in Pittsburgh and Mount Oliver already have challenged their new assessments.

Common Pleas Court Senior Judge R. Stanton Wettick Jr., who is overseeing the project, ordered the county to complete the city and Mount Oliver first. Those properties represent about one-fourth of the county total.

"With even more reassessed values being released to property owners today, Allegheny County taxpayers are still in the dark about what went right, what went wrong and what needs to change in this process," Ms. Wagner said in the statement.

The county began mailing new assessments to property owners in suburbs east of Pittsburgh today.

The last of the new property values are to be sent out by March 2.

Judge Wettick has ruled that the new assessment numbers will not be used this year to calculate county, municipal or school district taxes. That delay will give property owners time to contest a property valuation they believe to be inaccurate.

Tax bills for 2012 will continue to use the 2002 base year numbers for one more year.

Property owners with concerns about questionable assessments can call the controller's office hotline at 412-350-7618 or send an e-mail to controller@alleghenycounty.us.

Len Barcousky: lbarcousky@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1159.

First published on January 27, 2012 at 1:07 pm


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/12027/1206397-100.stm?cmpid=latest.xml#ixzz1kggWF9cf

Posted by Jonathan Nordquist on January 27th, 2012 2:13 PMPost a Comment (0)

Subscribe to this blog
Fitzgerald tosses reassessments; county will use 2002 data
Thursday, January 05, 2012

New Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald announced this afternoon he will not use new court-ordered property assessment numbers.

That means Pittsburgh property owners can ignore the new assessment notices they received last month, Mr. Fitzgerald said at a news conference this afternoon.

The county instead has certified the use of the 2002 values for this year, Mr. Fitzgerald said, and will continue to push for a statewide assessment system that he thinks would be more fair.

His action appears to defy a court order from Judge R. Stanton Wettick Jr., who ordered the reassessment. In all previous meetings to discuss assessment, the judge has been adamant about using the new numbers this year to set property tax rates for the city, the county and all other municipalities and school districts.


County assessments

Asked if he was worried about going to jail for defying a court order, Mr. Fitzgerald said he believes he is following state law.

"What I'm worried about is taxpayers losing their homes," he said.

Mr. Fitzgerald was surrounded by two dozen Pittsburgh, county and state leaders -- Democrats and Republicans -- when he made the announcement.

Like his predecessor, Dan Onorato, Mr. Fitzgerald said it is unfair that counties surrounding Allegheny haven't reassessed property in decades.

Mr. Fitzgerald said his action would meet the state requirement that the county certify and send out to taxing bodies all assessment numbers by Jan. 15. Because the assessment has not yet been completed -- only Pittsburgh and Mount Oliver residents have received certified numbers thus far -- he concluded that the 2002 numbers should continue to be used.

PG VIDEO

All informal hearings on new assessment numbers are ending, he said. People who are scheduled for hearings on their new assessment numbers need not show up for those hearings, he said.

Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl was among those appearing with Mr. Fitzgerald and backing his decision to continue using 2002 assessment numbers.

But Mr. Ravenstahl said he was continuing to recommend that city residents file formal appeals of their new assessments in case Judge Wettick and appeals courts rule against Mr. Fitzgerald's efforts.

Mr. Fitzgerald said new letters using the old assessment numbers are being sent today.

He said he was pleased that Judge Wettick was considering a proposal from the city school district to put off using the new numbers until 2013, but he wants to end the whole process immediately.

Judge Wettick said earlier today that he will rule on the district's request at a status conference set for 2 p.m. Tuesday.

Lawyer Paul N. Lalley, representing the city public schools, wrote in a letter delivered today that using the just-released 2012 property values would make it difficult for the school board to set an accurate millage rate for this year.

Too many successful appeals could dramatically reduce the total tax base -- which is used to determine millage rates and tax bills -- and leave the already financially strapped district short of funds, Mr. Lalley said.

"This does seem to be a serious problem," Judge Wettick said. "We may have to move [application of the new assessments] to the following year."

That delay until January 2013 would give all residents time to request both informal hearings and make formal appeals of their new property values.

Judge Wettick made the comment at a status conference to review progress on the $11 million reassessment project.

Len Barcousky: lbarcousky@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1159.



Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/12005/1201526-100.stm#ixzz1id8aiBtj

Posted by Jonathan Nordquist on January 5th, 2012 6:43 PMPost a Comment (0)

Subscribe to this blog
Judge may delay use of reassessment numbers until 2013
Thursday, January 05, 2012

The judge overseeing Allegheny County's controversial reassessment today said he will consider delaying implementation of the new property values until 2013.

Common Pleas Judge R. Stanton Wettick Jr. made the remark after a formal request from Pittsburgh Public Schools to delay using the new numbers. He will rule on the district's request at a status conference set for 2 p.m. Tuesday.

Lawyer Paul N. Lalley, representing the city public schools, wrote in a letter delivered today that using the just-released 2012 property values would make it difficult for the school board to set an accurate millage rate for this year.

Too many successful appeals could dramatically reduce the total tax base -- which is used to determine millage rates and tax bills -- and leave the already financially strapped district short of funds, Mr. Lalley said.

"This does seem to be a serious problem," Judge Wettick said. "We may have to move [application of the new assessments] to the following year."

That delay until January 2013 would give all residents time to request both informal hearings and make formal appeals of their new property values.

Judge Wettick made the comment at a status conference to review progress on the $11 million reassessment project. In all previous meetings to discuss assessment, the judge has been adamant about using the new numbers this year to set property tax rates for the city, the county and all other municipalities and school districts.

Most political leaders, including county Executive Rich Fitzgerald, have opposed reassessment completely, arguing that it unfairly targeted Allegheny County, because other counties continue to use much older numbers. A spokesman for Mr. Fitzgerald said he had no immediate comment on the judge's remarks.

Mr. Fitzgerald, who took office Tuesday, has scheduled a 2 p.m. news conference talk to discuss assessments.

Len Barcousky: lbarcousky@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1159.

First published on January 5, 2012 at 11:38 am


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/12005/1201526-100.stm#ixzz1ibSzNVlF

Posted by Jonathan Nordquist on January 5th, 2012 11:50 AMPost a Comment (0)

Subscribe to this blog
October 31st, 2011 10:04 PM

Home Prices Heading for Triple-Dip

by Les Christie
Monday, October 31, 2011

provided by
cnnmoney-logo-yahoo.jpg

The besieged housing market has even further to fall before home prices really hit rock bottom.

According to Fiserv (FISV - News), a financial analytics company, home values are expected to fall another 3.6% by next June, pushing them to a new low of 35% below the peak reached in early 2006 and marking a triple dip in prices.

More from CNNMoney.com:

Buying Is Cheaper Than Renting in Most Cities

I Bought My Dream Retirement Home—Cheap!

Where Homes Are Affordable

Several factors will be working against the housing market in the upcoming months, including an increase in foreclosure activity and sustained high unemployment, explained David Stiff, Fiserv's chief economist.

Should home values meet Fiserv's expectations, it would make it the third (and lowest) trough for home prices since the housing bubble burst.

The first post-bubble bottom was hit in 2009, when prices fell to 31% below peak. The First-Time Homebuyer Credit helped perk prices up by mid-2010, but by the time the credit expired, prices fell again.

In the second dip, which was reached last winter, prices were down 33%before staging a mild rally that was artificially spurred as banks slowed the processing of foreclosures following the robo-signing scandal, which found that loan servicers were rapidly signing foreclosures without properly vetting them.

Now that the scandal is mostly resolved, lenders are speeding more cases through the foreclosure pipeline and back onto the market, weighing on home prices even further.

[Click here to check home loan rates in your area.]

Earlier this month, RealtyTrac reported the first quarterly increase in foreclosure filings in three quarters. Even more discouraging: new default notices were up 14%.

There's also a "shadow inventory" of homes in foreclosure that have yet to go back onto the market.

The specter that those foreclosed homes could flood the market at any time and drive prices significantly lower is a huge concern, said Mark Dotzour, an economist for Texas A&M University. "That's the elephant in the room," he said, noting that there are 6 million home currently in shadow inventory.

Biggest Losers

Many of the regions that will be hardest hit were already beaten up during the previous two dips.

Naples, Fla., for example, is expected to take the biggest hit of any metro area, a price drop of another 18.9% by the end of next June, according to Fiserv. Home prices in the area have already fallen 61% from the peak.

Other cities expected to be hit hard include the not-so-lucky Las Vegas, which is expected to see home prices fall another 15.9% for a total loss of 66%; Riverside, Calif., is projected to fall another 14.8% (for a total decline of 61%); Miami is expected to decline by 13.2% (total loss: 57%), and Salinas, Calif. could drop by another 13% (for a total loss of 66%).

There will be some winners, however, led by Madera, Calif. and Carson City, Nev., which will each gain 15.5%. That's some consolation for hard-hit residents: The average home in each of these metro areas has lost more than half its value.

Other metro areas Fiserv expects to recover nicely are Yuma, Ariz. (up 9.5%), Yuba City, Calif. (9.2%) and Farmington, N.M. (8.3%).

Slow Recovery Ahead

Even after the housing market begins its comeback in mid-2012, the recovery is predicted to be modest at best. Nationwide, Fiserv is projecting that home prices will climb just 2.4% between June 2012 and June 2013.

A few individual metro areas will do better, with 31 of the 385 markets Fiserv monitors expected to pile up double-digit gains. Another 71 markets are expected to post increases of 5% or better.

[Click here to buy or sell a home.]

Many of the markets that will record the biggest increases are vacation or retirement communities that had taken some of the biggest hits during the bust.

The biggest "winner" will be Ocala, Fla., with a 22.4% spike for the 12 months ending June 30, 2013. Ocala was one of the hardest hit communities in the U.S. over the past several years, with home prices falling some 50%.

Others anticipated gainers will be Napa, Calif., which Fiserv projects will improve by 20.9% over that same period; Panama City, Fla. (an estimated 18.2% jump) and Bremerton, Wash. and Carson City, Nev. (both expected to see home prices climb 17.9%).

Some cities will continue to fade, however. Fort Lauderdale, Fla.'s forecast is for a 9.2% drop through next June and another 6.7% the 12 months after that. Its neighbor, Miami, will endure 13.5% and 5.2% declines, respectively.


Posted by Jonathan Nordquist on October 31st, 2011 10:04 PMPost a Comment (0)

Subscribe to this blog
October 24th, 2011 11:50 AM

Home Lending Revamp Planned

by Nick Timiraos
Monday, October 24, 2011

provided by
wsjlogo.gif

New Rules Aim to Speed Refinancing

Federal regulators on Monday plan to unveil a major overhaul of an under-used mortgage-refinance program designed to help millions of Americans whose home values have tumbled.

The plan is the latest White House effort to deal with one of the most critical impediments to economic recovery—a stagnant housing market caused in part by a surfeit of homeowners who are unable to refinance.

P1-BD092_REFI_NS_20111023174803.jpg

The overhaul will, among other things, let borrowers refinance regardless of how far their homes have fallen in value, eliminating previous limits. That could open up refinancing to legions of borrowers in Nevada, Arizona, Florida, California and elsewhere who are paying high interest rates and are deeply "underwater," owing more than their houses are worth. President Barack Obama is expected to tout the program in Las Vegas on Monday.

[More from WSJ.com: Twelve Questions on Obama's Refi Plan]

The plan will streamline the refinance process by eliminating appraisals and extensive underwriting requirements for most borrowers, as long as homeowners are current on their mortgage payments, according to administration officials and an official at the Federal Housing Finance Agency. Fannie and Freddie have also agreed to waive some fees that made refinancing less attractive for some.

The revamp is aimed at homeowners like Christine and Hector Penunuri of Gilbert, Ariz., who have never missed a mortgage payment and who both have jobs and good credit. Yet their application to refinance their five-bedroom home, which has fallen in value, was denied earlier this year because their tax returns showed a $1,000 loss in start-up costs from Mr. Penunuri's business, which isn't even his day job.

It's "absurd," says their mortgage broker, Steve Walsh of Scottsdale, because the loan is already guaranteed by government-backed mortgage company Freddie Mac.

The Penunuris could save $350 a month by refinancing to a 4% rate from their current 5.75%. They would use that money to put their two sons into junior sports, take a family vacation and pay off other debts, says Ms. Penunuri, 41 years old. "It's a win-win situation."

Freddie Mac declined to comment on the rejection of the Penunuris' earlier refinancing. Freddie Mac and sister company Fannie Mae together guarantee roughly half of the nation's $10.4 trillion in home loans outstanding.

[More from WSJ.com: Farmers Sense End of Big Boom]

Regulators are revamping a program rolled out two years ago, the Home Affordable Refinance Program, or HARP, which lets borrowers with less than 20% in equity refinance if their loans are backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. President Obama announced HARP roughly one month into his presidency. So far, only 894,000 borrowers have used it, of which just 70,000 are significantly underwater.

"It hasn't worked," said James Parrott, a White House economic adviser, in a speech last month.

Officials at the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which regulates Fannie and Freddie, estimate that between 800,000 and one million more borrowers should be able to refinance. "It's in our interest to have these borrowers refinance into lower rates and continue to pay," said an FHFA official.

Monday's refinance announcement is separate from a recent push by state attorneys general to extract concessions from banks to refinance underwater mortgages. That effort, part of the months-long negotiations to settle alleged foreclosure-processing abuses, would apply only to loans held on the books of five of the nation's largest banks, a much smaller subset of loans.

In past downturns, lower interest rates engineered by the Federal Reserve were a powerful antidote for a sluggish economy. Falling mortgage rates triggered a refinancing wave that lowered homeowners' mortgage payments, freeing up cash for other things. That, in turn, helped to stimulate spending that boosted economic growth.

This time around, falling mortgage rates—now averaging just 4.11% for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, according to a Freddie Mac survey—haven't packed the usual oomph. The reason: Many homeowners haven't been able to refinance.

[More from WSJ.com: Apple Posts Video of Steve Jobs Celebration]

510wsj1024.jpg

CoreLogic, a company that tracks 85% of all mortgages, estimates that 20 million borrowers with equity in their homes could cut the interest rates on their loans by more than one percentage point if they could refinance. That's about a quarter of all the homeowners in the country.

Because a refinanced mortgage is treated like a brand new loan, refinancing is nearly impossible for another eight million borrowers whose homes are worth less than their mortgages, unless they qualify for HARP.

But what about those who still have equity in their homes? Some have blemishes on their credit and employment histories or don't have enough income to qualify under today's tougher lending standards. Some find refinancing isn't worthwhile after factoring in new fees imposed by Fannie and Freddie or other closing costs. Still others can't get a refinancing application through a clogged mortgage-processing system.

That's a big obstacle to a stronger economy. Goldman Sachs economists estimate that if current borrowers with a 30-year fixed-rate loan backed by Fannie or Freddie were to refinance, they would save $24 billion annually. Researchers at Columbia Business School estimate that the benefits would accrue primarily to working- and middle-class borrowers with mortgages below $200,000.

[Click here to check home loan rates in your area.]

The changes should help borrowers like Carol Gesior, who has two underwater mortgages, backed by Freddie Mac, on suburban Chicago properties she bought for siblings. She says she tried to refinance but her bank, Citigroup Inc., told her she couldn't without equity. She was unaware of HARP. If she could refinance both properties, she says she would replace her 1995 Ford Crown Victoria.

"I made a commitment. I signed an agreement to pay. But I didn't do anything to cause the values of these homes to decrease," says Ms. Gesior, 52, an office manager at an investment management firm. "Any logical person would have walked away already."

A Citi spokesman says the company is "happy to work with this client to explore refinancing options that may be available to her."

One problem is that bankers or other mortgage originators shy away from refinancing all but the safest borrowers because Fannie and Freddie can force a lender to buy back a loan if underwriting flaws emerge. In response, lenders are asking for extra documentation of incomes and scrutinizing appraisals, steps that raise costs and lead to more denials.

WSJchart1025.jpg

Another obstacle is new fees that Fannie and Freddie charge borrowers with less-than-perfect credit, even if the borrower's existing mortgage is guaranteed by Fannie or Freddie.

The changes being prepared by federal officials should boost refinancing because they will let banks avoid the risk of any "buy-back" on a HARP mortgage as long as borrowers have made their last six mortgage payments and they prove that they have a job or another source of passive income. They are also set to reduce loan fees that Fannie and Freddie charge. The fees will be waived on borrowers that refinance into loans with shorter terms, such as a 15-year mortgage.

Pricing details won't be published until mid-November, and lenders could begin refinancing loans under the retooled program as soon as Dec. 1, according to federal officials. Loans that exceed the current limit of 125% of the property's value won't be able to participate until early next year. The program's expiration date, originally next June, will be extended through 2013. HARP is only open to loans that Fannie and Freddie guaranteed as of June 2009.

Mr. Walsh, the Scottsdale broker, says such changes could lead him to hire "a ton" of new loan officers. "I have a line out the door of people who want to refinance under that program and can't," he says.

Refinancing can't fix the biggest problems eating at the housing market. Tight lending standards and high volumes of foreclosed-property sales are putting pressure on home prices at a time when demand is weak, potentially creating more underwater borrowers.

But refinancing could help those borrowers repair their balance sheets and guard against future defaults. If lenders and regulators successfully execute the changes, they could be "amazingly powerful," said mortgage-market pioneer Lewis Ranieri. "It'll start to create the confidence which is largely what's keeping the system from going forward."

The changes could spur an additional 1.6 million refinanced loans by the end of 2013, assuming interest rates don't rise sharply, according to Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics.

For the very safest homeowners, falling mortgage rates have been a bonanza. Some have become serial refinancers. Jim Wozniak locked in a 3.88% rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages for his primary residence in Brookfield, Wis., and his lakefront home in nearby Hartland late last month. Replacing 4.25% loans, he will save $2,700 annually.

"This is probably my third time in three years," says Mr. Wozniak, a 54-year-old investment adviser who says he has an excellent credit score and lots of equity in both properties.

For others, the hurdles are insurmountable. Appraisals are a big one. When an appraisal shows that a property has too little equity, lenders sometimes order a second appraisal. "You get into these appraisal wars, often at the borrowers' expense," says Marietta Rodriguez, the national director for home-ownership and lending at NeighborWorks America, a nonprofit housing group.

Steven Eisner, a 59-year-old attorney in Haddonfield, N.J., says he expected to sail through the process when he tried to refinance last month because he has good credit and strong income. Instead, he was startled to find that the appraisal on his vacation condo in Bonita Springs, Fla., came in so low he would have needed to ante up $52,000.

He put 25% down when he bought it four years ago. But, because of sagging home prices, his equity has declined to just 10% of the property's value. Refinancing "is simply not worth the trouble," says Mr. Eisner, whose mortgage is guaranteed by Fannie.

Not everyone benefits from encouraging more refinancing, of course. Banks and investors in mortgage-backed securities—including Fannie and Freddie and the Federal Reserve—stand to lose billions if performing loans pay off, leaving investors with cash to reinvest at today's lower rates.

"Somebody's going to get hit. This isn't a free good," says Anthony Sanders, a real-estate finance professor at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va.

That doesn't faze Mr. Eisner. "We've certainly done enough to prop the banks up," he says. "These are loans that everyone knew could prepay."

The success of any refinance push rests not only on whether policy makers can untangle a Gordian knot of technical hurdles, but also on whether they can get buy-in from private-sector players. One major obstacle to refinancing is that the mortgage industry has shrunk. Four big banks now control more than 60% of the mortgage market. Many originators, including the biggest banks, have cut staff or shifted loan underwriters into units working through piles of delinquent mortgages.

New rules designed to prevent independent mortgage brokers—who originate loans on behalf of a bank or other lender—from fleecing consumers have made it harder for them to compete with bigger lenders that aren't subject to the same rules. For example, new compensation rules make it less attractive for brokers to originate smaller or more complicated loans.

The reduced competition has led to longer processing times and higher prices for consumers. When their borrowing costs fall, banks aren't necessarily reducing the rates they charge borrowers by the same amount. Banks with big market share "know they can get away with it," says Thomas Lawler, an independent housing economist in Leesburg, Va. "The market's just not as competitive as it once was."

Industry executives dispute the notion that the market isn't competitive but concede that the industry wasn't ready to handle a surge in applications after rates dropped two months ago.

"Capacity constraints" will be temporary because lenders are hiring more staff, but "in the short run, there's no question that's a challenge," says David Stevens, the chief executive of the Mortgage Bankers Association. Lenders are going "through a lot more checks and balances simply to get a loan approved safely and soundly."

Some spurned borrowers aren't giving up. Barb Skaer, 70, of Appleton, Wis., and her husband wanted to refinance a $402,000 mortgage on a second home that appraised at $547,000 two years ago. She says they have strong credit scores and own part of a manufacturing business that makes bobby pins and hair clips.

Ms. Skaer says their bank, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., quoted a 4% rate. But she says her loan officer told her she and her husband wouldn't qualify for a new loan because their income from their factory business declined the past two years. A J.P. Morgan spokesman declined to comment.

Ms. Skaer says they are appealing the decision at their bank and may go elsewhere if that doesn't work.

"Our theory is that if we can afford [the current payment of] $2,189 per month, we should be able to afford $200 less by refinancing," says Ms. Skaer. "This makes absolutely no sense to us, and we are not taking 'no' for an answer."


Posted by Jonathan Nordquist on October 24th, 2011 11:50 AMPost a Comment (0)

Subscribe to this blog

Allegheny County assessors have fallen behind in assessing commercial properties, according to a supervisor with the firm overseeing the county's reassessment program.

Two assessors resigned and two others were fired, Wesley Graham said during a meeting Tuesday to update Common Pleas Judge R. Stanton Wettick on the progress of the program. Graham said he hopes to have the remaining 15,085 assessments completed in November.

Wettick previously ordered the reassessment staff to devote nearly all its resources to Pittsburgh assessments so that the city and school district won't have to borrow money. Some municipalities and school districts are concerned they won't have proper information in time to set their 2012 tax bills



Read more: Staffing woes hurt Allegheny County assessment effort - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_759054.html#ixzz1ahk8SeO4

Posted by Jonathan Nordquist on October 13th, 2011 6:44 PMPost a Comment (0)

Subscribe to this blog
County hopefuls support statewide assessment
Court-ordered plan to place new values nears completion
Saturday, October 01, 2011

Both candidates for Allegheny County executive threw their support behind statewide standards for property assessment and backed alternatives to real estate taxes.

Democrat Rich Fitzgerald and Republican D. Raja made their remarks during a panel discussion Friday before members of the Realtors Association of Metropolitan Pittsburgh.

The organization invited the two hopefuls as well as state Sen. Wayne Fontana, D-Brookline, and county Councilman Vince Gastgeb, R-Bethel Park, to discuss the controversial court-ordered reassessment plan.

That two-year effort to place new values on the almost 600,000 commercial and residential properties in Allegheny County is nearly complete.

Mr. Fitzgerald, a former president of county council, has been a long-time critic of the project. He said again that if he were elected county executive, he would refuse to send out the new certified assessment numbers early next year unless the Legislature adopted statewide standards for valuing properties.

Mr. Fitzgerald said he understood that might put him on a collision course with Common Pleas Court Judge R. Stanton Wettick Jr., who is overseeing the effort.

Certified property assessments are used to calculate real-estate tax bills. Mr. Fitzgerald said property owners should have an opportunity to appeal their new values before they have to pay taxes based on them. County officials should delay at least a year before using the new numbers, he said.

Mr. Raja, a businessman and Mt. Lebanon commissioner, said politicians had too long avoided dealing with the issue of consistent reassessment. He pledged to work with Gov. Tom Corbett and members of both houses of the Legislature to craft a plan covering all counties in the state.

Mr. Fontana warned that might not be easy. On Friday he reintroduced a bill that would impose a moratorium on court-ordered reassessment. His legislation has seven co-sponsors, he said, but it is unlikely to get many more votes in the 50-member state Senate.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11274/1179027-455.stm#ixzz1ZZzceJig

"The rest don't want to touch it," because they fear their home counties then would be required to revalue all their properties, he said.

When it was considering the question of whether Allegheny County needed to update its property values, the state Supreme Court had a chance to order all counties to reassess on a regular basis, Mr. Fontana said. It failed to do so, and most state legislators want to avoid taking any action on the issue, he said.

Mr. Gastgeb agreed the Legislature had to act. He pointed to what he said was the unfairness of Allegheny County residents being singled out for reassessment. "The fundamental problem is that the judiciary is making this decision for us," he said.

By far the largest portion of property tax revenues goes to school districts. Panel members suggested several alternatives to relying so heavily on real estate levies.

Mr. Fontana said he would prefer to see a shift to income and sales taxes to support public schools.

Mr. Raja described the real estate tax as "regressive," meaning it placed a heavier burden on people less able to afford it.

Mr. Fitzgerald said he favored an extraction tax on the natural gas recovered from Marcellus Shale to help support education. He pointed to the county's poured-drink tax as a measure that saved county property owners from an increase in the county millage rate.

One question submitted by an audience member asked about the disparity between the $250 million sales price for the U.S. Steel Tower, the tallest skyscraper in Downtown Pittsburgh, and its $175 million assessment.

All four speakers agreed that commercial properties should be valued according to the same standards as residential real estate. If the assessments on commercial buildings were made more accurate, "there would be no problem for Grandma's house in Brookline," Mr. Fontana said.

Len Barcousky: lbarcousky@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1159.



Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11274/1179027-455-2.stm#ixzz1ZZz3PogF

Posted by Jonathan Nordquist on October 1st, 2011 8:26 PMPost a Comment (0)

Subscribe to this blog
County assessments of identical Collier homes show big difference
Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Identical condominium units in the same Collier neighborhood have been assessed at widely different values, an Allegheny County councilman has found.

Councilman Michael Finnerty said property values in the Summit Ridge housing project appear to depend on what kind of assessment method was used to calculate their worth.

The county, for example, has assessed a three-bedroom home at 1806 Benson Blvd. at $190,000. Following a 2009 appeal, the adjoining unit at 1808 Benson -- originally valued by the county at the same amount -- was revalued at $107,600. Both condo units were built in 2005, are 1,844 square feet and have 21/2 baths and central air conditioning.

Similar yawning differences in value appear among many other similar-appearing units in Summit Ridge.

Those gaps are reduced slightly thanks to the county's $15,000 homestead exemption that cuts the assessed value on owner-occupied homes by that amount.

"Inequities like this show the assessment system in a really bad light," Mr. Finnerty said. The policies followed to value homes in the same neighborhood should be consistent, he said.

Martin "Bud" Piper, who lives at 1806 Benson Blvd., agreed. "It seems unfair that I should be paying so much more in taxes," he said. "I'm 68, and I have to watch my money."

Mr. Finnerty and two of his colleagues have introduced an amendment to the county code that would require all properties in a housing development be assessed in the same way.

Members of council's economic development and housing committee last week discussed the proposal and recommended approval to full council. The amendment will be on the agenda when council meets Tuesday.

The sponsors, in addition to Mr. Finnerty, D-Scott, are Bob Macey, D-West Mifflin, and Charles Martoni, D-Swissvale.

Mr. Finnerty and his colleagues are proposing their change in development valuation rules at the same time as a controversial countywide reassessment is under way. When it is completed early next year, it will result in new values being assigned for all commercial and residential properties in the county.

Mr. Finnerty said his proposal should not affect the reassessment work currently under way, but it would make the appeals process fairer in the future.

The county office of property assessments can look to three main methods to value properties: the cost approach, the sales approach and the income approach. The proposed amendment would require that each unit within a housing development be assessed using the same standard. The new rule could cover any project built by a company or group of companies constructed on five or more adjoining properties.

The huge difference in values assigned to similar neighboring properties at Summit Ridge appears to have resulted from county assessors basing their original property values more on comparable sales. Those assessed values range from about $182,000 to as much as $240,000.

When developers Richard A. and Susan Nernberg appealed the assessments on several dozen unsold properties in the neighborhood, those units were revalued downward by hearing officers from the Allegheny County's Property Assessment Appeals and Review Board by as much as 55 percent. The appeals board is separate from the assessment office.

The appeals board relied heavily on property appraisals for the unsold units submitted by the developer, solicitor David Montgomery told council members.

That appraisal appears to have rested, at least in part, on the income, or development, model for assessing real estate. That method values properties based on how much rental income they could generate.

The third method for valuing real estate, the cost method, relies primarily on the value of land and improvements.

The appeals board's decision to lower the Nernbergs' assessments has, in turn, been appealed by the Chartiers Valley School District, which includes Collier, to the Allegheny Court of Common Pleas. The municipality has joined that suit.

The court then appointed a board of viewers special master -- a lawyer familiar with real estate assessment law. The master held a hearing March 4 on the appeal, but no decision has been announced.

Mr. Finnerty said that when one of his constituents, who lives in Summit Ridge, sought to have her assessment lowered, based on the decision in the Nernberg case, she was turned down. There was no appreciable difference between her home and the nearby condo units that were assessed at $100,000 less, he said.

Such decisions fly in the face of common sense and fairness, he said.

"This is the kind of situation that makes people think that politicians are all crooks," said Councilman John DeFazio, D-Shaler.

County assessors originally had valued all the condo units in Summit Ridge similarly, he said.

It was the appeals board that lowered the assessments on the unsold rented units but kept them unchanged on identical owner-occupied homes.

The proposed change in valuation rules would eliminate that practice, Mr. Finnerty said. "If you are going to assess on the income method for some units, you have to assess that way for anyone else who appeals," he said.



Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11257/1174481-57-0.stm#ixzz1XwnZlOII

Posted by Jonathan Nordquist on September 14th, 2011 1:07 PMPost a Comment (0)

Subscribe to this blog
Allegheny County expects 70,000 informal assessment appeals
Wednesday, September 07, 2011

As many as 70,000 Allegheny County property owners will get their 15 minutes of fame when they make informal appeals of their new assessments, the judge overseeing the project was advised today.

Wesley Graham, the county's chief property assessment officer, told Common Pleas Court Judge R. Stanton Wettick Jr. that the county would hire or assign 71 hearing officers to handle those expected appeals. Mr. Graham estimated the average proceeding would take about 15 minutes.

Mr. Graham made his prediction during a status conference to review progress on the county's court-ordered property reassessment.

The county was to have preliminary assessment numbers ready by July, but that date has been pushed back until the end of January. Certified numbers would not be released until April.

The delay is causing budget headaches for municipal governments, school districts and the county itself as officials prepare their next spending plans. Lacking access to new assessment numbers, they will have to estimate what millage rates will be needed in 2012 to balance their budgets.

Allegheny County, Pittsburgh, the city school district and all other municipalities must approve their budgets by Dec. 31, which is three months before the date when final assessment numbers will be available. While the county's other school districts don't have to pass their spending plans for the 2012-13 fiscal year until June 30, state law requires that they take their first planning steps in January.

Informal appeals will take about two months, delaying the release of final assessment numbers by that amount of time. When Judge Wettick asked Mr. Graham how important that step was to the reassessment process, he said it should not be skipped.

Judge Wettick scheduled his next update on reassessment for 10:30 a.m. Sept. 15. He may rule then on an alternate plan to have new assessment numbers released for Pittsburgh and the small borough of Mount Oliver first. While that plan would aid Pittsburgh city and school officials prepare their spending plans, it would mean further delay in releasing certified numbers for the rest of the county until the middle of May.



Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11250/1172794-100.stm#ixzz1XKDQXaUv

Posted by Jonathan Nordquist on September 7th, 2011 10:45 PMPost a Comment (0)

Subscribe to this blog
Recent Posts:

Archive:

My Favorite Blogs:

Sites That Link to This Blog:

APPRAISAL FORM


Nordquist Appraisal 1601 Morningside Ave Pittsburgh, PA 15206
Cell: Fax:

Contact Us | Pittsburgh-Allegheny County | Fees | CVRCollateralValuationReport | Allegheny Assessemt Info | Order an Appraisal | For Buyers | News | P.M.I. Removal | Home-Nordquist Appraisal | 15 vs 30 Year Mtg Calc | Faster Appraisals | Western PA Coverage Area | For FSBO's | Property Tax Assessment Appeal | Date of Death Valuations | Pay By Credit Card | Daily Rate Lock Advisory | PGH R.E. Blog | Pittsburgh Experts | FHA Approved & Rostered | Mercury Network-Pittsburgh | What Is The HVCC

Copyright © 2012 Nordquist Appraisal
Portions Copyright © 2012 a la mode, inc.
Another XSite by a la mode, inc. | Admin LoginTerms of UseSite Map



 
State:
County:
City:
Zip: