Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Southmoreland board approves tax-appeal settlement on parcel amid dispute over disclosure
Summary
After debate over whether settlement details should be discussed publicly, the board voted to approve a tax-assessment appeal settlement for parcel 47-11-000073; members were told the settlement will become public via court filings or Right-to-Know requests once finalized.
The Southmoreland School District board approved a real-estate tax-assessment appeal settlement for parcel 47-11-000073 after rejecting a motion to table the matter.
During the finance portion of the March 17 meeting, one board member moved to table the settlement so the public could have more time to review it. The solicitor and other board officials responded that the matter had been discussed in executive session and that litigation strategy and settlement posture are commonly handled in closed session under the Sunshine Act. The solicitor said discussing litigation strategy publicly "would weaken you significantly" and described the executive-session exception under the Sunshine Act.
A roll-call vote on whether to table the item failed, after which the board proceeded to vote on approving the settlement. The roll call on approval recorded a majority in favor: Mr. Graia, Mrs. Moore, Mr. Olsen, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Alexander and Mr. Yutsy recorded votes in favor; Dr. Fe and Mr. Aciper voted no; Mrs. Guyer was absent. Board members who supported approval said the litigation had already been publicly filed and that the settlement, once finalized, becomes a public record available through court dockets or Right-to-Know requests.
Discussion referenced the parcel in question in connection with a large retail property; one speaker identified it as relating to Walmart. The solicitor cautioned members about publicly disclosing negotiation details prior to finalization.
Board members seeking more public transparency argued the finance item should be discussed in the public portion of the agenda so taxpayers know how district money is being used, while proponents of approval said the legal exception for litigation discussion justified the handling and timing of information sharing. The board did not provide settlement figures at the meeting; officials said members of the public may obtain the settlement amount by searching the court docket or submitting a Right-to-Know request once the settlement is finalized and filed.
