Oct 23, 2002 By Paul Sunyak 6 min read

The Fayette County commissioners voiced support for chief assessor James A. Hercik at Tuesday’s agenda meeting, on the eve of a state-level disciplinary hearing where his assessor’s license is at stake. The commissioners’ comments came in the wake of a recent letter by state Rep. Larry Roberts, (D-South Union Twp.), to head county solicitor Joseph E. Ferens Jr. In that correspondence, Roberts offered his legal views regarding composition of the county tax assessment appeals board. He also suggested that Hercik doesn’t know who his bosses are and alleged that he has near-dictatorial powers in the current reassessment.

“This bothers me tremendously … it appears we have a county employee in a significant position, overseeing and controlling the reassessment, who does not even know who he works for,” wrote Roberts. “I wonder who it is that supervises him? Is anyone really overseeing his work or is he on a free run to do whatever he wants?”

Roberts is one of several property owners behind the move to cripple Hercik professionally by having the state revoke his assessor’s license. Roberts and his appraiser Mark Ackerman are expected to testify against Hercik in a disciplinary hearing scheduled for Thursday and Friday before the state Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs in Harrisburg.

“Mr. Hercik’s been pushed to the brink by a state representative … He’s had Larry Roberts breathing down his back, trying to take his license away,” said Commissioner Sean M. Cavanagh, who commended Hercik for the professionalism he’s demonstrated since Cavanagh became a commissioner in 1996.

Cavanagh said that Hercik is a “good human being” and hopes he’ll be vindicated at this week’s hearing. He added that Roberts should not make Hercik the fall guy for prior commission administrations that sanctioned and condoned an outdated and broken tax assessment system for decades.

On Monday, Cavanagh said that Roberts’ letter to Ferens demonstrates Roberts’ continued pattern of conducting a “search-and-destroy” mission against county government. This time, said Cavanagh, Roberts has enlisted the help of state lawyers in his obsession with Hercik.

“Maybe the only way Larry Roberts will be happy with Jim Hercik is if he sticks him in a meat grinder,” said Cavanagh. “And even then he’ll maybe complain that he’s not ground chuck, he’s just ground Jim.

“I wish Larry Roberts was laser-beam focused on economic development, bringing jobs to our county and bringing about tax reform,” continued Cavanagh. “Instead, he uses the lawyers of the state to interfere in and undermine county government. He creates problems. I see clearly through Larry Roberts. Power in the wrong hands is not good.”

At Tuesday’s meeting, Commission Chairman Vincent A. Vicites praised Hercik as one of the county’s best department heads. “You work hard and for long hours,” said Vicites, referring to the current six-day-a-week schedule and what Hercik termed a typical 13-hour workday.

Afterward, Vicites said he hasn’t given much weight to Roberts’ letter, which hypothesized that the commissioners remain the official board of appeals, even though state law permits them to appoint a board that can “hear and determine appeals,” and “adopt rules of procedure with respect to determination of appeals.”

Vicites said the commissioners have scrupulously followed the legal advice of assistant county solicitor John Cupp. Since he is comfortable with the outcome, Vicites said he is unmoved over Roberts’ latest missive.

“We did our homework and I’m not concerned about it,” said Vicites. “I think we need to stay positive … By public officials attacking public officials, I don’t think that’s a good thing. I refuse to get negative on anything. I just don’t think it’s good for the county. I’m going to stay positive and focus on my priorities.”

Commissioner Ronald M. Nehls said that the three-year reassessment program set for implementation Jan. 1 has gone far smoother than anyone expected. Although the Cole Layer Trumble mass appraisal firm performed the work, Nehls said that Hercik’s dedication and knowledge boosted the program’s success.

“This was an enormous task, a controversial task … and here we are a week away (from the appeal decision deadline),” said Nehls. “I think it’s time to say, ‘Yea!’ and raise the banner.” Nehls told Hercik “you did a wonderful job.”

In his letter to Ferens, Roberts maintained that under his legal interpretation, the commissioners “remain the official board of assessment appeals” even when they create auxiliary boards to assist with appeals. Roberts also took Hercik to task for publicly criticizing his contention that the commissioners cannot delegate that official capacity.

“A few weeks ago, I was publicly criticized by Jim Hercik for suggesting (that) the commissioners continue to serve as the Assessment Board of Appeals,” wrote Roberts. “Hercik indicated I did not know what I was talking about and insisted the commissioners no longer continue serving in that capacity.”

In his own letter to Ferens dated Oct. 21, Hercik wrote that he attended a public forum held by Roberts regarding the reassessment project. At this meeting, where he was only an observer, Hercik said that Roberts made several untrue or inaccurate statements – including that the commissioners were still in fact the board of appeals and that Cavanagh was that board’s chairman.

“It was said in a tone of voice as to scare the taxpayers that they would not receive a fair appeal as the commissioners were dictating the final values,” wrote Hercik. “This is totally false and I spoke to this issue at a previous agenda meeting (of the commissioners).”

When Vicites, Cavanagh and Nehls voted to appoint an independent appeals board in 2000, they cited their desire to remove elected officials – and thus real or perceived political influence — from the decision-making process. In addition to the regular board comprised of Jim Killinger, Joe Dorazio and Lloyd Moser, the commissioners have temporarily appointed four auxiliary boards to help with the 10,100 appeals filed this year.

Killinger, the main board’s chairman, has stated repeatedly that he’s made no secret of his position that at the first hint of outside interference in any decision of any appeals board, he intends to contact the media.

Hercik wrote that Roberts is “misleading” the public by reciting his belief that the commissioners have the final say in assessments. “This is not true,” wrote Hercik. “The commissioners have played no role in establishing values for the initial (reassessment) process or that of the appeal process.”