Homeowners need a "residential property taxpayer bill of rights," an Allegheny County councilman says.

Chuck McCullough, R-Upper St. Clair, has introduced a legislative package he says will provide residents protection from some of the worst effects of a court-ordered reassessment.

Its six elements include raising the homestead exemption from the current $15,000 and requiring municipalities and school districts to pay a $50-per-property filing fee if they want to appeal any new assessments. Mr. McCullough said the fee requirement will protect homeowners from "sale chasing," the name given to mass appeals brought by taxing bodies of any assessments that do not mirror recent sale prices.

Mr. McCullough said Monday he was trying "to take some of the sting out of another reassessment disaster."

Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge R. Stanton Wettick Jr. has ordered and is overseeing a countywide property reassessment. It is on schedule to be completed by the third quarter of 2011, with preliminary notices of new property values to be sent out between July and October. The new assessments are to go into effect in January 2012.

While political leaders from both parties have complained that Judge Wettick's order is unfair to county residents -- some neighboring counties have not reassessed properties for decades -- officials in the administration of Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato have said they have no choice but to comply with it.

Mr. McCullough introduced his "bill of rights" at council's Dec. 20 meeting. It was sent to council's government reform committee for review and recommendation. Council President Rich Fitzgerald, who chairs that committee, said he would schedule a session to study Mr. McCullough's proposals early in 2011.

Mr. McCullough said he wanted yes-or-no votes on each of the proposals, which he said would provide a variety of protections:

• Require municipalities and school districts to pay a $50 fee for each property appeal they make. Those fees would help cover the county's costs for the proceedings and would encourage taxing bodies "to make sure they have a legitimate basis for an appeal," he said.

• Raise the homestead exclusion, which is currently $15,000 for an owner-occupied property, by a percentage equal to the overall increase in the value of properties after the reassessment is completed. If the total value of assessed property increases 20 percent, each homeowner would see a 20 percent increase, equal to $3,000, in the value of their property shielded from county taxes.

• Exempt taxpayers from paying taxes based on a higher assessment rate until their appeals had been heard.

• Refund to taxpayers the cost of an appraisal up to $150 if their appeal hearing results in an assessment reduction of 15 percent or more.

• Require on-site verification by a county appraiser of any assessment questioned by a homeowner.

• Head off "sticker shock" resulting from any double-digit assessment increases by having them phased in over several years. Mr. McCullough said that his proposal was based on rules adopted by California. A 30 percent increase in assessment value, for example, would be imposed with a maximum 9 percent jump in 2012, another 9 percent in 2013 and the final 12 percent in 2014, he said.

Colleen Elms, a spokeswoman for Mr. Onorato, said that several county offices are taking a look at Mr. McCullough's legislation but the administration has not formed a position.

Mr. Fitzgerald said he was concerned that Mr. McCullough's proposal would increase the county's reassessment costs.

Any additional expenses resulting from the proposed "bill of rights" should be included in the costs for the reassessment and funded through the county's capital budget, Mr. McCullough said. The capital budget is used to pay for equipment and projects that provide benefits for multiple years.

Mr. Fitzgerald said he was skeptical that Mr. McCullough's proposals would provide much relief to taxpayers facing assessment increases. "This court-ordered reassessment will be devastating to the county," he said. "It will harm people and property values and chase people out of the county."

Mr. McCullough said he, too, feared that reassessment would be a disaster for residents. "But that doesn't mean we shouldn't put out more lifeboats," he said. "If Rich has concerns, I hope he'll come up with something better."