After decades of controversy and court battles, three members of Allegheny County Council say it’s time for the county to establish a regular schedule for reassessing property values.

And if that effort to touch the third rail of county politics doesn’t shorten some political careers, another bill proposed Tuesday night — to allow voters to institute term limits for all elected county officials — just might.

Council Dan Grzybek and two cosponsors introduced a bill Tuesday night that calls for a full reassessment in 2028, followed by regular reassessments every three years. New values would take effect the following year.

If approved, the change would bring the county in line with nationwide best practices. And while Pennsylvania is currently the only state that does not mandate regular reassessments, Grzybek told WESA prior to Tuesday’s meeting that the county would benefit from a broader perspective.

“If you talk to friends and family members that live in Massachusetts or Oregon or anywhere across the country, you’ll ask them, ‘Have you got reassessed recently?’ They won’t have any idea what you’re talking about because as long as you are doing these on a regular basis, it’s not even something that people see in their year-to-year tax payments,” he said. “That’s the future that I’m really striving to reach: one where we don’t even think about reassessments.”

Property tax bills are based on the values set by the county, but over time those valuations have become less and less reliable. Allegheny County’s last reassessment took place in 2012, after a court ordered the reevaluation. And a rising chorus of lawsuits has argued that the values are at least as far out of whack as they were before that ruling.

Large property owners, particularly in Downtown Pittsburgh have successfully appealed their valuations in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, causing fiscal headaches for public officials. And efforts by state leaders such as state Senator Wayne Fontana have been unable to institute a reassessment schedule at the state level.

Grzybek said under the current approach, taxpayers get whipsawed by valuations that drift for years and then are suddenly, and sometimes painfully, brought back into alignment by court order, until the process begins again.

“The only reason that a lot of people are scared of or worried about reassessments is because we have allowed numbers to get … so far away from what the true values of properties are,” he said. And he pointed out that state law includes anti-windfall provisions that limit the amount of revenue that a new reassessment can generate: Large spikes in property valuations must be offset by reductions in tax rates. Between that and tax exemptions for homeowners, he said, fears of catastrophic hikes for property owners typically prove overblown.

Assessments-watchers praised the legislation, calling it “long overdue.”

Tax inequities get “magnified” when counties wait decades between reassessments, said Eric Montarti, research director for the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy.

“If this is just a more regular, reoccurring process” the difference between the assessment and market price will be more consistent, making it easier for government officials and property owners alike to anticipate the impact, Montarti said.

“This would probably be a real welcome change as opposed to what the status quo has been,” he said.

Council has tried to overhaul assessments before, but has often balked at following through.

Councilor Bethany Hallam introduced a bill requiring regular reassessments in 2024, but it died in committee. Late last year, Council President Pat Catena withdrew a motion authorizing the county solicitor to “pursue a legal remedy” challenging the uniformity of Pennsylvania’s reassessment system. And council recently passed protections aimed at easing the tax burden for longtime homeowners in sought-after neighborhoods like Lawrenceville, where tax values could skyrocket after a reassessment.

The bill introduced Tuesday was referred to council’s committee on assessment practice for further review.

Separately, Council took up a bill that would allow voters to determine whether the county charter should impose term limits on county elected officials.

Council previously considered a ballot initiative to clarify term limits for the county executive, who is limited by the home rule charter to three consecutive four-year terms. Originally, council sought to ask voters to weigh in on a small change: Should the charter be amended to forbid an executive from serving more than three terms, even if they weren’t consecutive?

But when council members revisited the proposal Tuesday, they sought to broaden the question, so that it would ask voters this fall if the three-term limit should also apply to the county controller, district attorney, sheriff, treasurer, and members of County Council themselves

“I think the disenchantment with politicians in general right now, and the displeasure in various levels of government is pretty palpable, and I think this particular piece of legislation addresses that,” said Grzybek, who was elected to Council in 2023 and is also a cosponsor of the term-limit measure. It “gives the power to our constituents” to choose whether or not elected officials should be subject to term limits, he added.

The amendment did face some pushback.

“A couple of us lifers like … myself have been here quite some time, and when I’m ready to leave, I’m sure I will, or the people will vote me out,” said Council member Nick Futules, also a Democrat. Futules was first elected in 2007. “That’s a term limit. When the people of this county decide they don’t want you anymore, that’s a term limit.”

Suzanne Filiaggi, council’s lone Republican and the amendment’s other cosponsor, reminded her colleagues that council had weighed similar ballot questions in 2023 and 2025 without putting them before the voters.

Three terms are “the sweet spot between the institutional knowledge and then the motivation, innovation and energy that younger, newer people can provide any of these offices,” Filiaggi said. She was appointed to Council in 2022 and won the seat in 2023.

The amended bill was sent back to a council committee on government reform, which could meet as soon as next week for discussion.