Judge dismisses Pittsburgh Public Schools lawsuit aimed at forcing countywide reassessment

A judge on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit that Pittsburgh Public Schools had brought against Allegheny County in hopes of forcing a countywide property reassessment.

The district filed the suit in April 2024 seeking to have the court retain jurisdiction throughout a reassessment process and to set a realistic timetable for its implementation.

A countywide reassessment has not been done since 2012. In the suit, the district argued plummeting property values spurred a financial crisis for the school district.

But specially presiding Judge Kenneth Valasek ruled the district did not have legal standing for the case.

In a 26-page opinion, Valasek said the district could have avoided the financial harm it alleged by simply raising its millage rate.

The district increased its tax rate by .41 mills from 2018-25, an increase of just over 4%. The judge pointed out that adding even one mill more in 2025 would have generated about $19 million in extra revenue for the school system.

The school board for its 2025 budget instead chose to rely on the district’s financial reserves to avoid a tax hike.

“The School District was not helpless at any relevant point in time to prevent this ‘harm’ from happening,” Valasek wrote.

Ira Weiss, the school district’s solicitor, said he respected the court’s decision but disagreed with Valasek’s conclusions.

“All the discussion about budgets and tax increases is irrelevant to the issue that this system in Allegheny County, as recognized with everyone who has knowledge of it, is nonuniform and illegal,” Weiss told TribLive on Friday morning.

The district, he said, is considering its next steps.

A spokeswoman for the county declined to comment.

Valasek said his decision does not pass judgment on the county’s current assessments.

“The dismissal of the lawsuit brought by the School District should not be interpreted to mean that Allegheny County’s current assessments are constitutionally permissible,” he wrote. “This issue has not been decided by the Court.”