At town hall, Chermak calls for county to pause reassessment process
SCRANTON — Republican Lackawanna County Commissioner Chris Chermak again called for the county to pump the brakes on and pause its property reassessment project that's been ongoing since 2022 and nears completion — a proposal Democratic Commissioner Bill Gaughan rejected as disingenuous, untenable and impractical.
At a Monday town hall meeting he hosted on the ongoing reassessment, Chermak acknowledged the need to update property assessments countywide for the first time since 1968 and restore fairness to a system that's become wildly skewed over the past 57 years. But he also reiterated calls to pause the reassessment for a year to make sure tentative assessed values thousands of property owners have questioned or disputed are correct, a pause Gaughan doesn't support and won't entertain.
'Why don't we wait and take a look at these numbers, see what the values are (and) make the proper corrections,' Chermak told the audience of about 100 gathered Monday in the Peoples Security Bank Theater at Lackawanna College. 'My thought was what's the hurry? … Rushing through it doesn't do it for me. It doesn't do it for me. I think there's things that need to be looked at.'
A county resident attending Commissioner Chris Chermak's reassessment town hall Monday looks toward the stage in the Peoples Security Bank Auditorium in Angeli Hall on Lackawanna College's campus in Scranton. (SEAN MCKEAG / STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER)
Tyler Technologies, the firm conducting the reassessment, mailed in March tentative new property values that property owners have an opportunity to appeal before new assessments take effect next year. The tentative values should reflect a property's fair market value, or the amount the property should fetch if sold.
More than 8,600 property owners who disagree with or question their tentative assessments booked appointments to raise concerns during an informal review process that continues through Friday, a precursor to a formal appeals window that will open this summer. Tyler had met with property owners to discuss questions relative to 13,602 properties as of Monday morning, information provided by county assessment Director Patrick Tobin shows.
Against that backdrop, Gaughan rejected the premise that the reassessment process isn't working and should be paused. Reacting Tuesday to Chermak's call for such a pause, Gaughan noted the process of rectifying issues with the tentative values is happening now via the informal reviews and will continue with formal appeals.
'The assertion he's making that we can halt or slow down the reassessment is extremely misleading and in my opinion it's untenable and completely impractical,' Gaughan said. 'It's not a discretionary initiative. If we were to stop it, or to slow it down, we would be just wasting everybody's time. We are at the finish line here and the goal is to stop perpetuating the existing inequities that the reassessment seeks to eliminate.'
Neither Chermak nor Gaughan voted to initiate the reassessment, which a prior board of commissioners approved over Chermak's objections before Gaughan was in office. But Gaughan and other reassessment proponents maintain that a judge likely would have compelled the county to reassess anyway had the county failed to act.
As part of finalizing the deal with Tyler in 2022, the prior board of commissioners ratified an agreement postponing further action in a lawsuit filed by three taxpayers seeking to compel a reassessment on the basis of tax fairness. Those litigants specifically alleged the county's 1968 assessments had resulted in disparate taxes on similar properties, with some property owners paying more than their fair share and others paying less.
Among other terms, the stipulated order postponing the litigation states that the county 'shall fully complete the Reassessment and implement the final new assessed values for use in all real property taxation in Lackawanna County no later than January 1, 2026.'
Lackawanna County Commissioner Chris Chermak, far left, hosts a town hall meeting to discuss the county's reassessment project. Seated next to Chermak, from left, are attorneys Anthony Lomma, Jim Mulligan and Kevin Walsh and professional property appraiser J. Conrad Bosley. The town hall was held Monday, May 12, 2025, in the Peoples Security Bank Auditorium in Angeli Hall on Lackawanna College's campus in Scranton. (SEAN MCKEAG / STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER)
The question of whether the process can or should be paused notwithstanding, much of Chermak's town hall featured input from a panel of experts who explained the reassessment and appeals processes and answered audience questions. The panel included attorneys Tony Lomma and Jim Mulligan, who discussed residential assessment appeals, attorney Kevin Walsh, who spoke to the commercial side, and professional real estate appraiser J. Conrad Bosley.
They all advised property owners who disagree with their tentative assessments to challenge them through the available channels, including the informal review and formal appeals processes. Property owners still unsatisfied after exhausting those options can challenge their assessments in county court.
The panelists also recommended property owners considering appeals, be they residential or commercial, get an appraisal done to bolster their cases. A number of audience members voiced frustration Monday over inaccuracies they believe resulted in exceedingly high tentative assessments, issues the review and appeals processes are designed to address.
On Tuesday, Tobin said informal reviews will continue through Friday and that Tyler can take walk-in appointments when appropriate at the county 911 Center, 30 Valley View Drive, Jessup. New final assessments reflecting potential adjustments made following informal reviews will be mailed by June 20, giving homeowners at least 40 days to file formal appeals by the Aug. 1 deadline.
Property owners who didn't participate in the informal review process can still file formal appeals.
Formal appeal hearings will be held from Aug. 1 through October, and officials anticipate a lot of them. Lomma said Monday he thinks there could be as many as 20,000 formal appeals filed countywide, though Tobin said Tuesday he anticipates 10,000 at most.
'I base it on the informal appeals,' Tobin said. 'Presumably a lot of those people will be satisfied with the result when they receive their final assessed value.'
Assuming the process continues as planned, the new assessment roll taxing bodies will use to generate 2026 property tax bills will be certified Nov. 14.
Full video of Chermak's reassessment town hall, including the audience question and answer portion, is available online via ECTV's YouTube channel.
Lackawanna County Commissioner Chris Chermak hosts a town hall to discuss the county's reassessment project in the Peoples Security Bank Auditorium in Angeli Hall on Lackawanna College campus in Scranton on Monday, May 12, 2025. (SEAN MCKEAG / STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER)
County residents attend a reassessment town hall meeting Monday in the Peoples Security Bank Auditorium in Angeli Hall on Lackawanna College's campus in Scranton. (SEAN MCKEAG / STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump's palace coup leaves NASA in limbo
When President-elect Donald Trump nominated Jared Isaacman to become NASA administrator, it seemed like a brilliant choice. Business entrepreneur, private astronaut, Isaacman was just the man to revamp NASA and make it into a catalyst for taking humanity to the moon, Mars and beyond. Isaacman sailed through the confirmation process in the Senate Commerce Committee, chaired by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), by a vote of 19 to 9. He was poised to be confirmed by the full Senate when something so bizarre happened that it beggars the imagination. The White House suddenly and with no clear reason why, pulled Isaacman's nomination. After months of a confirmation process, NASA was back to square one for getting a new leader. Ars Technica's Eric Berger offered an explanation as to why. 'One mark against Isaacman is that he had recently donated money to Democrats,' he wrote. 'He also indicated opposition to some of the White House's proposed cuts to NASA's science budget.' But these facts were well known even before Trump nominated Isaacman. Trump himself, before he ran for president as a Republican, donated to Democrats and was close friends with Bill and Hillary Clinton. Berger goes on to say that a source told the publication that, 'with Musk's exit, his opponents within the administration sought to punish him by killing Isaacman's nomination.' The idea that Isaacman's nomination is being deep-sixed because of Musk runs contrary to the public praise that the president has given the billionaire rocket and electric car entrepreneur. Trump was uncharacteristically terse in his own social media post. 'After a thorough review of prior associations, I am hereby withdrawing the nomination of Jared Isaacman to head NASA,' he wrote. 'I will soon announce a new nominee who will be mission aligned, and put America First in Space. Thank you for your attention to this matter!' CNN reports that Isaacman's ouster was the result of a palace coup, noting that a source said, 'Musk's exit left room for a faction of people in Trump's inner circle, particularly Sergio Gor, the longtime Trump supporter and director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office, to advocate for installing a different nominee.' The motive seems to be discontent about the outsized influence that Musk has had on the White House and a desire to take him down a peg or two. Isaacman was profoundly gracious, stating in part, 'I am incredibly grateful to President Trump @POTUS, the Senate and all those who supported me throughout this journey. The past six months have been enlightening and, honestly, a bit thrilling. I have gained a much deeper appreciation for the complexities of government and the weight our political leaders carry.' The idea that a man like Isaacman, well respected by the aerospace community, who was predicted to sail through a confirmation vote in the full Senate, could be taken down by an obscure bureaucrat in White House intrigue, motivated by petty spite, is mind boggling. Even Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), who has not been fond of Trump's space policy, was appalled. He posted on his X account that Isaacman 'ran into the kind of politics that is damaging our country.' 'Republicans and Democrats supported him as the right guy at the right time for the top job at NASA, but it wasn't enough.' NASA is in for months more of turmoil and uncertainty as the nomination process gets reset and starts grinding its way through the Senate. The draconian, truncated budget proposal is certainly not helpful, either. Congress, which had been supportive of Trump's space policy, is not likely to be pleased by the president's high-handed shivving of his own nominee. Whoever Trump chooses to replace Isaacman as NASA administrator nominee, no matter how qualified, should face some very direct questioning. Trump's NASA budget proposal should be dead on arrival, which, considering the cuts in science and technology, is not necessarily a bad thing. China must be looking at the spectacle of NASA being mired in political wrangling, a leadership vacuum and budget uncertainty with glee. Beijing has its own space ambitions, with a planned crewed lunar landing by 2030. It's possible that the Chinese will steal a march on NASA, with all the damage that will do to America's standing in the world. It didn't have to be this way. Isaacman could be settling in as NASA administrator, deploying his business acumen and vision to lead the space agency to its greatest achievements. Instead, America's space effort has received a self-inflicted blow from which it will be long in recovering, Mark R. Whittington, who writes frequently about space policy, has published a political study of space exploration entitled 'Why is It So Hard to Go Back to the Moon?' as well as 'The Moon, Mars and Beyond,' and, most recently, 'Why is America Going Back to the Moon?' He blogs at Curmudgeons Corner.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Ken Martin privately expressed doubt about ability to lead DNC, blaming David Hogg
Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin told party leaders in a recent private conversation that he's unsure about his ability to lead the party because of infighting created by Vice Chair David Hogg. 'I'll be very honest with you, for the first time in my 100 days on this job … the other night I said to myself for the first time, I don't know if I wanna do this anymore,' he said in a May 15 Zoom meeting of DNC officers, according to a recording obtained by POLITICO. In the recording, an emotional Martin describes being deeply frustrated by the fallout over Hogg, who has ignited a firestorm in the party by vowing to spend $20 million in safe-blue primaries to oust incumbent Democrats he believes are ineffective. Martin paused twice while appearing to choke up. The intraparty feud, Martin said on the recording, is making it more difficult for the party to do its work — and had ruined his ability to demonstrate leadership. 'No one knows who the hell I am, right? I'm trying to get my sea legs underneath of me and actually develop any amount of credibility so I can go out there and raise the money and do the job I need to to put ourselves in a position to win,' Martin said, addressing Hogg. 'And again, I don't think you intended this, but you essentially destroyed any chance I have to show the leadership that I need to. So it's really frustrating.' It was an extraordinary admission from the chair of the Democratic Party, just a few months after being elected to lead the party through its post-2024 crisis. The nearly two-minute clip does not include the entire conversation, including how Hogg and others may have responded to Martin. Asked for an interview, Martin, 51, sent a statement through a spokesperson. In it, he said, 'I'm not going anywhere.' 'I took this job to fight Republicans, not Democrats,' he added. 'As I said when I was elected, our fight is not within the Democratic Party, our fight is and has to be solely focused on Donald Trump and the disastrous Republican agenda. That's the work that I will continue to do every day.' Hogg, 25, did not respond to a request for comment. The Zoom meeting took place a few days after a DNC panel recommended holding new elections for the seats held by Hogg and another vice chair, Malcolm Kenyatta, on procedural grounds. DNC members will decide whether to do so in a vote set to begin on Monday. Roughly 10 people attended the May 15 Zoom meeting, including DNC officers and staff, according to two people familiar with the call who were granted anonymity to describe the private conversation. Asked for comment, party leaders rallied behind Martin, expressing confidence in his leadership. In a statement, DNC Associate Chair Shasti Conrad, who attended the Zoom meeting and was briefly mentioned on it, said Martin 'showed vulnerability in a private conversation' and 'stood up' for the Democratic Party. 'He shows up with authenticity. Always,' she said. 'That's what you'll hear on the tape.' Jane Kleeb, president of the Association of State Democratic Committees, was on the call and said she was 'proud of' Martin and the work the party is doing. Kenyatta, who was also at the meeting, similarly stood by Martin: 'Breaking news: a human being had a frustrating day at work. That's all Ken expressed on that call.' After POLITICO reached out to Martin and the DNC, three party officers who were on the call but not contacted by POLITICO sent statements of support for Martin: DNC Associate Chair Stuart Appelbaum, DNC Secretary Jason Rae and Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio), a DNC associate chair and former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus. Martin, who won a contested election to be DNC chair in February, formerly led the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party for about 14 years. He was also previously president of the Association of State Democratic Committees. When Martin campaigned for the DNC post, he called for a 'massive narrative and branding project' to boost the party's image. As chair, he has traveled the country for canvassing, fundraisers and other events to rally Democrats, including on Saturday in New Jersey. But that work has been overshadowed in recent months by the intraparty dispute that Hogg and Martin have been locked in. Many Democrats said party officers shouldn't take sides in primaries, and Martin proposed requiring party leaders to remain neutral in them. Hogg had pitched a compromise, suggesting an internal 'firewall' that would bar him from access to sensitive information in primaries his group, Leaders We Deserve, were involved with. But Martin rejected that deal. 'Party officers have one job: to be fair stewards of a process that invites every Democrat to the table — regardless of personal views or allegiances,' Martin said, urging Hogg to stay neutral. As the controversy played out, Hogg's position in the party was separately challenged by Oklahoma DNC member Kalyn Free, who filed a complaint in February that Hogg's and Kenyatta's election in February didn't follow DNC rules and made it harder for a woman to be elected vice chair. After the DNC panel's vote in support of another election, Hogg said in a statement that it is 'impossible to ignore the broader context of my work to reform the party which loomed large over this vote' and that the 'DNC has pledged to remove me, and this vote has provided an avenue to fast-track that effort.' The tension within the DNC comes as Democrats grapple with the best way to regroup after devastating electoral losses in November. Hogg, a survivor of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida, frames his efforts as a way to reinvigorate the party. Hogg previously told POLITICO 'we have a culture of seniority politics that has created a litmus test of who deserves to be here' and 'we need people, regardless of their age, that are here to fight.' He has won some influential supporters, including longtime Democratic strategist James Carville and radio host Charlamagne tha God. But an intense backlash from other Democrats has accused Hogg of hurting, not helping, the party. Several of the Democratic Party officers leveled that criticism at Hogg in their statements supporting Martin. 'Instead of helping to rebuild the party he's supposed to serve, he's attacking it for personal gain,' said Kleeb. 'That might boost his PAC's fundraising, but it erodes trust in the very institution we're trying to reform and strengthen.' Others emphasized that Hogg is an outlier among party officials, and both Appelbaum and Beatty used the word 'distraction' in their statements. 'The stakes are so high right now that we can't afford distractions like the ones that David is creating,' Appelbaum said. In the Zoom meeting, Martin appeared to acknowledge complaints some had with how the party had operated, but told Hogg the 'fight' was getting in the way. 'It has plenty of warts, and we're all trying to change those, for sure, but the longer we continue this fight, the harder it is for us to actually do what we all want to do, which is make a difference in this country again,' he said in the recording. 'I deeply respect you, David. I, too, was looking forward to working with you, but this has created a situation.'
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Letters to the Editor: Don't get distracted by the President Trump-Elon Musk breakup circus
To the editor: Really, Los Angeles Times? Why would you put an argument between President Trump and Elon Musk, who are behaving like 8-year-olds, on the front page when these two men don't give a hoot about the American people (''Have a nice day, DJT!': Trump's breakup with Musk devolves into a war of insults,' June 5)? Outside of this feud, there's the unnecessary deportations of men, women and children; the destruction of USAID and the resulting starvations; and the unnecessary firing of thousands of federal employees with the excuse of cleaning up fraud and abuse (but actually accomplishing very little). I could go on and on. But personally, I think this argument is just another tactic by Trump and Musk to distract us from the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' and the looming loss of medical insurance for millions of Americans. Sheryl Kinne, Van Nuys .. To the editor: While the feud between Musk and Trump has a train wreck-like appeal, we forget that the world is also watching. This high school showdown is foolish and irresponsible, but the blame lies directly with the Republican Party. They kissed the ring of this clown and allowed the White House to become the laughingstock of the entire world, not to mention the destruction that has occurred at home: a drop in stock prices, costly tariffs and mass deportations — sometimes of innocent people. Every Republican who has been part of these antics needs to go. It is time for America to get smart and say to the Republican Party the only two words that have me in agreement with Trump: 'You're fired!' Paula Petrotta, Rancho Palos Verdes .. To the editor: Gee, Trump is heading for his third divorce, this time with Musk. I wonder who will get custody of the chainsaw. Bob Canning, Petaluma, Calif.
