From Joseph Bentivegna from Dr. Joe Bentivegna's Views <[email protected]>
Subject My Brother's Kafkaesque Battle with the Corrupt Pittsburgh Tax Assessors
Date January 27, 2025 5:34 PM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
View this post on the web at [link removed]

EBENSBURG, PA. When Nicholas Bentivegna and his wife, Teresa, purchased a fixer-upper cabin in Hampton Township, Allegheny County, in October 2020, they had no idea they would find themselves in the middle of a controversy that has roiled Pittsburgh politics for decades.
Shortly after their purchase, the Bentivegnas were hit with a lawsuit from the Hampton Township School District, seeking to increase the tax assessment on the cabin. Mr. Bentivegna, a lawyer in Cambria County, has been a municipal solicitor for some 30 years. "I had never heard of such a law," he muses. "So, I looked it up on my phone." His immediate reaction? "It's unconstitutional. Most definitely."
The Bentivegnas soon learned that their case was one of hundreds filed by the Hampton School District over the years, and thousands routinely filed by other districts within Allegheny County. "It's a pretty well-oiled machine," Mr. Bentivegna explains. "School district assessment appeals are initially heard by the Board of Property Assessment Appeals and Review, or BPAAR, an agency of Allegheny County. The BPAAR hearings were originally designed as an informal process, to be used by taxpayers seeking a reduction in their assessment, if their property had declined in value." He continues, "There was no need to hire a lawyer or an appraiser, or to follow formal rules of evidence. You simply went in and told your story."
Mr. Bentivegna feels the process is being abused by the school districts. "They use specialized legal counsel, funded by tax dollars, who essentially act as criminal prosecutors. "Unlike real criminals though," Mr. Bentivegna says, "you are guilty until proven innocent. The lawyers pull a few comps off the internet, nobody testifies, and the BPAAR rubber-stamps the tax increase. My hearing took eight minutes, over the phone. The retroactive tax increase came in the mail a few days later."
The next level in the appeals process is the "Board of Viewers," a creation of the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas. The Bentivegnas promptly filed an appeal, but with a twist: They added a count asserting that the enabling statute was unconstitutional. "The Board's rules place an emphasis on conciliation, so I thought I might get a better deal," Mr. Bentivegna says.
It didn't quite work out that way. "You either accept what the school district offers you or you don't," Mr. Bentivegna observes. "The Board of Viewers delays action on your case until you accept the school district's terms. They stalled for over a year, and never did schedule an actual hearing. In the final analysis, the Board of Viewers is kind of like the Sasquatch. There may be some grainy photos, but there is no real proof that it actually exists."
The Bentivegnas' next filed a Motion in the Court of Common Pleas, seeking to proceed directly on the constitutional issue. This was heard before the Honorable Alan Hertzberg. "Judge Hertzberg turned out to be very fair-minded," Mr. Bentivegna says. "He was willing to allow me to present my case, which is all I asked for." "Look," he continues, "I get that filing a constitutional challenge to a tax law is a good way to get labeled as some sort of a nut case. But it doesn't mean I'm wrong."
According to Mr. Bentivegna, the enabling statute for the tax assessment lawsuit fails on three constitutional grounds. It extends reciprocal constitutional rights to the government that are reserved to citizens alone. It violates due process, particularly in terms of "vagueness," in that citizens do not know what the law expects of them. And, it violates equal protection, in that it forces selected citizens to have their property assessments set through litigation, as opposed to a regular administrative process. "The individual lawsuits set the property values as of the date of the hearing, where the last countywide assessment on neighboring properties was performed in 2012," Mr. Bentivegna explains. "Because outdated assessments are artificially low, municipalities compensate by setting millage rates that are artificially high. So, when school districts file these lawsuits, they basically double dip. For the individual property owner, the tax increase is massive."
"But really," Mr. Bentivegna observes, "It's just a matter of common sense. Our country has what I would call a constitutional culture. People instinctively know when their rights are being violated. No one who is hit with one of these lawsuits feels he or she is being treated fairly." "Moreover," he contends, "the current system doesn't benefit anyone but the lawyers. They're like a pack of wolves." Mr. Bentivegna feels that a properly designed property tax collection system, that is, with regular countywide assessments, would ultimately secure enhanced revenue for the public schools, at a lower aggregate cost to the taxpayers. "You'd simply cut out all the middlemen," he says, "Hey, it works pretty well in 49 other states."
As it turned out, the Bentivegnas' opportunity to present their case in court was rather short-lived. The Hampton attorneys were infuriated by Judge Hertzberg's decision, and immediately filed an interlocutory appeal with the Commonwealth Court, a court whose jurisdiction is limited to cases where the government is a party. Mr. Bentivegna says. "At that point, things definitely took a turn for the worse. The Commonwealth Court simply buried the case. No hearing. No argument. No decision. No nothing."
Now sensing he was a man on a mission, Mr. Bentivegna next filed an Application for Extraordinary Relief with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. "Neither the School District, Allegheny County, nor the Pennsylvania Attorney General even bothered to respond," he says. "The Supreme Court simply denied the application without comment."
Mr. Bentivegna notes that all judges, lawyers, and public officials in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, including school board directors, are supposedly required to take an oath to "support, obey, and defend" our federal and state constitutions. While he is clearly disillusioned with the way things turned out, he nevertheless feels strangely vindicated. "The case is now four years old," he states. "No one- not the school district, the county, nor the attorney general- has ever attempted to actually defend of the constitutionality of the statute. Were they to do so, they would only be making fools of themselves. Censoring me is their only option."
Last week, the Bentivegnas filed a Civil Rights action with the United States District Court, against the Hampton Township School District, Hampton Township, Allegheny County, and the BPAAR. Also individually named are eleven of the Hampton Township School District Board Members: Jill Hamlin, Denise Balason, Matthew Jarrell, Joy Midgley, Robert Shages, Gregory Stein, Larry Vasko, Trisha Webb, Jenny Kennedy, Bryant Wesley, and Maureen Perkins. "The Hampton School Board welcomes newcomers into their community by filing lawsuits against them. Their policy is to target and freeze concentrated tax increases on a relatively small group of their most vulnerable citizens. They really ought to be ashamed of themselves," Mr. Bentivegna says.
The Federal District Court has assigned the case to Senior Judge Joy Flowers Conti. The Bentivegnas are being represented by Attorneys George R. Farneth II and Nicholas A. Miller, both of Pittsburgh.
Respond to Dr. Bentivegna: [email protected]
Follow Dr. Bentivegna on Twitter(X) @joebentivegnamd

Unsubscribe [link removed]?
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis

  • Sender: n/a
  • Political Party: n/a
  • Country: n/a
  • State/Locality: n/a
  • Office: n/a