Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
share
email
print
reprint
font size
options
 
READER FEEDBACK
Post a comment
RELATED STORIES
 
A Phila. effort to counter the departed Dad Vail
 
CityCenter raises stakes on the Vegas Strip
 
Killer of Officer Chuck Cassidy sentenced to die
 
Court: District can ban Christmas carols
 
N.J. suspends flu-shot mandate for tots
 
Get started collecting your family stories
 
Tragic mystery: How did John Lewis become a killer?
 
Nepal begins a ritual in blood
 
Claims against VA up to $58 million
 
Boxer's death ruled accidental
 
Obama asks Penn pres. to lead panel
 
Body of missing N.J. fisherman found in N.C.
 
Your life, by personal historians
 
Comcast's holiday show is a breakout in 3-D
 
School mourns crash victims
 
Beach repairs at risk in some towns
 
Wyeths' work up for auction
 
Sports talker opening comedy club
 
Fallen boxer's organs will give life to others
 
Sports Authority, Ninendo team up to sell Wii Fit as fitness equipment
 
Holiday train shows take Obama homes on board
 
Coma victim's caregivers called manipulative
 
Boat owner's body found
 
John Lewis was unlike many killers, but in prison he'll slip into a familiar pattern
 
Officer Cassidy's killer sentenced to die; defendant asks forgiveness, is rebuffed by widow
 
Parade taking a new route
 
Boxer dies in Philly bout
 
Camden again ranks worst on crime list
 
Brinkley renews NFL quest
 
Shooter cop was investigated for multiple complaints


BRT decision to end assessments violated state law

The Board of Revision of Taxes' long tradition of ignoring the state Sunshine Act continued with its decision last month to put itself out of business, the city solicitor has concluded.

Solicitor Shelley R. Smith, in a memo last week, wrote that the board's decision to turn its most important function over to the city with Finance Director Rob Dubow as its executive director "clearly" violated state law.

All six board sitting board members voted unanimously at an Oct. 7 meeting to sign an agreement with the city to appoint Dubow and to shift the job of determining city property values to the Finance Department, Smith noted. The meeting was not advertised and no members of the public were present, she noted.

"Under these facts, a violation of the [Sunshine] Act clearly occurred," Smith wrote in her legal opinion, written at the request of City Councilman Bill Green.

That means the landmark agreement between the Nutter administration and the BRT could be invalidated if challenged in court, Smith wrote. Mayor Nutter originally defended the process behind the deal, which put Dubow in charge until a permanent director is hired.

That agreement came five months after an Inquirer series documented a history of political cronyism and mismanagement that has left the city with an unreliable property valuation system, according to administration officials. The series also laid out the BRT's penchant for taking action behind closed doors in violation of the Sunshine Act.

How can the BRT validate its deal with Nutter? The agency need only advertise and conduct a public meeting to formally take action, Smith wrote.

In a letter sent to the BRT yesterday, Green asked BRT chairwoman Charlesretta Meade to do that.

While calling the memorandum of understanding reached with the city "a productive first step in addressing some of the significant problems with the BRT's performance of its assessment function," Green said the board must publicly validate its action with a public meeting.

"The purpose of sending the letter to Charlesretta Meade is to get them to have a meeting so anyone who wants can come there and have input in the process," Green said last night.

Meade did not return a message left at her office yesterday.

At the time of the announcement Oct. 7, Green and others questioned how it came about. Smith wrote in her opinion that the board members held another closed-door meeting on Aug. 25, but since any action at the subsequent meeting would have superseded previous actions, she did not address that. Only three of the six sitting board members signed the agreement with the city.

"I did think it was an odd way of doing it, and I guess the city solicitor agrees," Councilman James F. Kenney said last night.

Nutter, otherwise a champion of transparency, shrugged off questions about the BRT's secretive process at the time. He told reporters on Oct. 7 that two government entities - the BRT is an independent board whose seven members are currently appointed by the city's Board of Judges - were permitted to enter into such an agreement in private.

He apparently changed his mind when confronted with his lawyer's opinion.

"The mayor acknowledges the procedural misstep, and encourages the correction to be made so we can get on with the business of reforming the BRT," the mayor's spokesman, Doug Oliver, said yesterday.

"There was no bad intention on their part but, of course, legal steps and procedures should be followed, and we expect the BRT will likely correct the mistake," Oliver said. "But it does not derail the intent of the [memorandum of understanding] and the goal remains the same - to clean up and professionalize the BRT."

Council is considering a bill to abolish the BRT, and hearings are being scheduled. The bill would establish a board responsible only for hearing appeals of the assessments set by the city, and take appointments away from the Board of Judges and put them in the hands of the mayor and Council.

 


Contact staff writer Jeff Shields at 215-854-4565 or jshields@phillynews.com.

Staff writer Joseph Tanfani contributed to this article.

 

Comments   
Posted 08:42 AM, 11/03/2009
anti-tax
Has the City Solicitor written an opinion as to whether the "memo of understanding" itself is illegal? Maybe she should before the BRT has an open meeting. The embarrassment will continue if the BRT has an open meeting and then finds the agreement is illegal. According to state law, only City Council with voter approval can change the BRT. The BRT and the Mayor can't!
Posted 01:13 PM, 11/03/2009
Dadair1
I knew the deal was to good to be true! Another back door deal out in the open, that need public approvial, thouht they could pull one over on us! SHAMEFULL...........
Posted 02:05 PM, 11/03/2009
CleanupPhilly
Given the truly anti-Democratic practices in the BRT, to fire itself and turn the duties over the mayor while reform occurs, but without satisfying the mechanism for public comment is and odd bone to stick in the Ink's craw. The BRT violates the Sunshine Act all the time. The City Controller, Butkovitz, violates the legal requirement to audit every city department every year with nary a meek press protest, even garnering an endorsement from one of the two local papers. Public hearings should be performed, but the result will be predictable -- blow up the BRT is the consensus. It's corrupt, patronage, outdated, and unable to give anything resembling normal public service. There are BRT employees on the Public School budget, sapping $4 million from Philly public schools that could be used now. Those employees are all at the polls, violating the civil service regs that they should rightly fall under. That is really egregious. But it's true that Philly has to figure out what the Sunshine Act says and means.
Posted 02:08 PM, 11/03/2009
CleanupPhilly
What Shelly Smith needs to investigate at my request is how the BRT will be allowed to not implement AVI in violation of the state law that requires all property tax assessments to be based on some objective criteria. That violates my pocket book, my direct need for the rule of law. Bill Green is trying to delay reforms using any means necessary, and Brett Mandel should sue the BRT for not implementing AVI to satisfy state law. Green is trying to preserve the machine, instead of fixing the basics. Shields needs to be savvy about this.
Posted 03:53 PM, 11/03/2009
joseph shay stivala
I agree with anti-tax. City Council only - has the authority to act in this matter. Councilman Green told the Solicitor in City Council hearings that the document only had three signatures. Holding a hearing on this with input for all sounds like a circus conundrum. CleanupPhilly makes a request of the Solicitor - how? He or she hogs up the comment space, but has no human name for the request? Does he want to bring Brett back? He/she should request if the assessmwent move is a power grab, instead.
Posted 03:54 PM, 11/03/2009
joseph shay stivala
I agree with anti-tax. City Council only - has the authority to act in this matter. Councilman Green told the Solicitor in City Council hearings that the document only had three signatures. Holding a hearing on this with input for all sounds like a circus conundrum. CleanupPhilly makes a request of the Solicitor - how? He or she hogs up the comment space, but has no human name for the request? Does he want to bring Brett back? He/she should request if the assessmwent move is a power grab, instead.
Posted 08:17 PM, 11/03/2009
John Gualt
Green's just playing politics. His game is to pretend to reform, delay the entire process, this will garner favor with the Democratic machine, and the machine will back him in his race for mayor against Mr. Potato Head.
7 comments
  • Jobs
  • Cars
  • Real Estate
  • Rentals
 
SEARCH JOBS
Spotlight Deal
Rittenhouse Square 19103
Spotlight Deal
South Philadelphia 19145
SEARCH REAL ESTATE
Spotlight Deal
Norristown 19401
Spotlight Deal
East Falls 19129
SEARCH RENTALS