Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOMM - Meeting Minutes - 206 - 12-9-1961 - COMMISSIONERMINUTE BOOK , 241 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA FRANcis E. PETTIT, J. BLATCH CUMMINS, JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS L7 0 F Board of County Commissioners, sitting as the Board of County Elections, met at 3:30 p.m., for the purpose of rendering a decision on the petition of Edward J. Harris., as to whether his votes for the Office of School Director for the City of Washington., Washington County, Pennsyl vania, could be cumulated. Those present at this meeting being: Commissioners Pettit, Cummins, Mazza, Acting Solicitor Hormell., Attorney Paul Simmons., Chairman of the Return Board and Director of the Election Bureau, Louis I. Quail. The following citations were given by Acting Solicitor Hormell in support of the by the Return Board that the votes should not be cumulated. (a) 1937 June 3., P.L. 1333., Article XIV 1406. "No candidate for public office at any November election whose name., for any reason, printed more than once for the same office on any ballot at any general, municipal or special eleqtion shall be entitled to have cumulated, either by the election officers, by the county board, or by court, the votes cast after such different names." (b) 62 D !',, C 688 - Upper Chichester Township Election. Motion by Mr. Cummins, seconded by Mr. Pettit., that the prayer of the petition of the candidate, Mr. Edward J. Harris, to the Election Board to cumulate his votes for City of Washing- ton School Director be refused. This action was taken upon the advice and ruling of Attorney Simmons, who was in charge of the Return Board and whose duty is to function as a return board and interpret to the Board of Elections the legal procedure to follow. He has ruled that these votes could not be cumulated due to the fact that the Election Code specifically forbids the cumulation in this instance by either the Election Officers, the County Board,, or any Court. Simmons. And further, the Acting Solicitor Oliver Hormell concurs with the opinion of Attorney Following additional uses being cited by Attorney Simmons: 1. Krull vs. the City and County of Philadelphia, 382 Pennsylvania, Page 1,, where section of the Election Code was held to be constitutional by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. 2. Petition of Urik., 100 Pittsburgh Legal Journal 123. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Mr. Cummins,, seconded by Mr. Mazza, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. THE FOREGOING MINUTE READ AIM APPHOVED: December 22, 1961 ATTEST: / CHIEF No. 206 Office of the County Commissioners Washington, Pa., December 9, 1961 Board of County Commissioners met in special session with members of Charleroi Counc and School Directors in regard to the assessments in Charleroi Borough. Those present at the mee- being: Commissioners Pettit, Cummins, Mazza, Acting Solicitor Hormell, Attorney Troutman of the ' Assessment Office, Chief Assessor E. 11. Lheureau, Jr., Mr. Jules Fine of the Western Pennsylvania .Research Company, Councilman James W. McGurie - Pete Tihansky, Jr... School Directors Joseph Valov s 3 MINUTE BOOK BARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WASHIN[3TON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA FRANcis E. PETTIT, J. BLATCH CUMMINS, JOHN MAZZA, COMMISSIONERS Henry Young, Theodore H. Brewer, Louis N. Usher, Glenn E. Porter, and Secretary of the Tax Office, iDolores Bartolozzi. Mr. Pettit called the meeting to order which was conducted on an informal basis. Mr. Tihansky, Chairman of the Finance Committee reported on "Out of Line" Re -Asses i lments in Charleroi Borough. A copy of this report is on file in the Office of the Chief Clerk I the Tax Assessment Office. Report was prepared by the Charleroi Borough Tax Office. Yrs. Bartolozzi reported on the commercial buildings citing various properties that had been reduced in assessed valuation and various ones that had been increased in assessed valua A report was also given on home comparisons. This report is also on file in the Office of the (Clerk and the Tax Assessment Office. I The question was asked on how the valuation was determined on properties located ,town and Mr. Fine replied that the valuation is based on market value, income and location is a imajor factor. Mr. Pettit read the real estate evalu;btions-for the Borough of Charleroi, which shows an increase for the residential area of 49Report on file in the Office of the Chief Clerk and %. 'the Tax Assessment Office. The reduction in taxes that Corning Glass Works received was discussed and the Comm- issioners explained that Corning was going to move out of Charleroi if something was not done con :cerning their assessment. Both Mr. Mazza and Mr. Cummins stated that industry must remain in Washington County There is a good possibility that production at Corning will soon increase thus ,employment to increase. The School Directors explained that one of their large problems was setting up their budget. It was e--Tplained that they lose money before they start to work on their budget because !the tax figures are not the same when they receive the tax duplicate from the Tax Assessment Office. �The duplicate is late in arriving and they haves already started to work on the budget. There are !certain set figures that they have each year, such as salaries of teachers. Re -appraisal work was done by Western Pennsylvania Research Company. Local real-e :men were engaged to assess the properties. Mr. Lheureau told the members of council and school board that their local secretary could keep a running total on all assdssments. Mr. Mazza suggested that the members of council and school board prepare a list of a -Ill i the properties that they feel are not equalized and adopt a resolution at their meeting urging th, I ':Board of County Commissioners to re -assess and re -investigate said properties in the Borough of Charleroi. Mr. Pettit expressed the Commissioners' thanks for the members attending this meetin and told them the Commissioners had respect for their School Board and Council members as they do ;for all districts. Urged that all School Boards and Councils work with the Board of Commissioner �since they have so many sip-dlar problems. The delegation left with the understanding that as soon as they have a complete list !of unequalized properties they will have a resolution adopted by their respective board urging th Commissioners to re -assess and re -investigate these properties. C�