Philadelphia tax revamp is still a mess
Philadelphia's new and supposedly improved property values, heralded as the solution to a broken tax system, are so filled with errors that it may take up to two years to get them right, according to the city budget director.
Despite a $7 million computer system, payments to experts, and years of staff time, the proposed new assessments are nowhere near ready to go out on tax bills, said Stephen Agostini, who has been leading a review of the new numbers.
Speaking at yesterday's City Council hearing on revamping Philadelphia's troubled Board of Revision of Taxes, Agostini could not say how much had been spent so far to fix the property-tax system.
"I wish I did. I don't know the answer," he said.
His grim report came at a hearing on how to fix the BRT. Members of City Council, the Nutter administration, and the public spent hours debating the details, but generally agreed on one thing: It's time to kill the agency.
The growing consensus on change comes five months after The Inquirer launched a series detailing the BRT's mismanagement, cronyism, and deeply flawed tax assessments.
A measure before Council would wipe out the BRT and place property assessments under the Finance Department. A newly created board would hear appeals. The plan would have to be approved by voters.
The BRT has not put up an argument - and none of the six board members showed up yesterday.
"It's pathetic," said Councilman Bill Green, author of the bill to revamp the tax system. "I'm not sure why we continue to pay them."
The agency's chairwoman, Charlesretta Meade, and other BRT officials did not respond to requests for comment.
In a letter to Council, Meade said that the board had "recognized the need" for reform and that the new values for commercial properties would be ready "in the very near future." She said the mayor and Council should not be involved in choosing the members of the appeals board.
Even if the BRT goes away, city officials say, it will leave a big mess behind.
With a project called the Actual Value Initiative, the BRT is attempting to fix its notoriously confusing and inequitable property values. Under AVI, each property is supposed to be assessed at its real worth in the marketplace.
Board members promised the new numbers would be completed by spring. Recently, they said they would be finished no later than November.
But the administration is now supervising the process, under a temporary deal struck with the BRT this month. And Agostini says the AVI numbers are nowhere near ready.
The agency's mathematical models need to be fixed, he said. But it probably will take at least a year and a half, maybe longer, he said, to correct all the errors in property descriptions - mistakes that dramatically skewed some of the AVI values, particularly for big commercial properties.
"Could we do it sooner than that? It's possible," Agostini said. "It would be difficult."
That would mean further delays in correcting the unfairness of the current system, which penalizes residents of poor neighborhoods. It also would delay the agony of a reassessment for politicians.
The BRT, created in the 19th century, is run by seven members appointed by city judges; they supervise the assessors and handle appeals. Historically, the seats have been handed out to the politically wired.
City Finance Director Rob Dubow said the administration supported the bill, but asked for some changes. The appeals board members should be paid by the day, not given a salary, he said. Board members now make about $70,000 a year for part-time work.
Dubow said the mayor should make appointments, with Council confirming them. He said that would be less "cumbersome" than the Council proposal, which has the mayor choosing from names submitted by a nominating panel.
"We're not going to do that," said Green, though he said he was open to the other suggestions.
The only person defending the BRT was one of the agency's assessors, William Kilroy, who said putting the agency under City Hall would inevitably mean higher taxes.
"I suggest we think long and hard before opening Pandora's box," he said.
Much of the four-hour hearing was spent discussing the fate of about 80 BRT workers who are paid by the school board - jobs set aside for party workers and controlled by the city's Democratic and Republican organizations. Keeping them on the school payroll allows them to continue working on campaigns, as city workers are barred from participating in politics.
The state board that runs city schools wants to end that system, even as it continues to pay about $4 million a year to support it.
Nutter also thinks all BRT workers should be on the city payroll, and he has asked the BRT workers paid by the School District to describe what they do.
Council members are balking. Some are ward leaders themselves, and they say it would be wrong to scapegoat patronage workers for the agency's troubles. For that matter, some think all city workers should have the right to participate in politics.
"It's not all guys with cigars in back rooms making deals," said Councilman James F. Kenney, asserting that many party activists were "problem solvers" for residents.
Even if the BRT workers are shifted onto the city payroll, Dubow said, the district would continue to pay the $4 million to the city as a way to share costs.
School activists vowed to end that, saying it would be unconscionable for the district to keep paying the BRT workers at a time when school programs were being cut to close a $180 million budget gap.
"Their presence on the School District payroll is an anachronistic reminder of the city that you, the mayor, and voters have expressed a desire to leave behind," said Sheila Simmons of Public Citizens for Children and Youth.
Contact staff writer Joseph Tanfani at 215-854-2684 or jtanfani@phillynews.com.
Staff writer Mark Fazlollah contributed to this article.




