Su P reme CouJ7rF3-Men ns y lvania ../Ziiirgts For Prnlhonotary Use Only,

Docket N01 ,1 M\6\NLk_\ or .ROEi . County _ ( \/ f- _

7_ E1 sq

The information collected on this form is used solely for court administration purposes. forlii JOELSHUI supplement or rep/ace the filing and service of pleadings 01- other papers as required by law 0-421-ll/kS30fC0uft.

it--in Commencement of Actionz ff. Lu -5- Q E Complaint U Writ ofSummons Petition I if.-3 El Transfer from Another Jurisdiction El Declaration ol-Taking ,-2 U E12 )- Lcad PlaintifFs Namcz Lead Defendantis Nainet I ii -if-F T 20-H-lOt11t/2 Stroudsburg Area School District Monroe County Board of AssessrZientBeviiJn Q A. Amount Rcquestedz Elwithin arbitration limits N0 Dollar Are money damages requested7 Yes El (check one) outside arbitration limits

N0 ls this a Class Action Suifl El Yes N0 Is this an MDJ/tppealii E Yes El

A Name ofPlaintiff/Appellantis Attomeyz Aaron J. Fteiwald/Mark K. AllBfT105e

U Check here if you have no attorney (are a Self-Represented lPro Sel Litigant)

HXH Nature of the Cases Place an to the left of the ONE case category that most accurately describes your PRIMARY CASE. If you are making more than one type of claim, check the one that you consider most important. APPEALS TORT (do Il(lI include Mun-.r Tort) CONTRACT (tln not include Judgmantr) CIVIL El intentional El Buyer Plaintiff Administrative Agencies El Malicious Prosecution El Debt Collectioni Credit Card Board ofAssessment El Motor Vehicle E Debt Collections Other El Board of Elections El Nuisance El Dept. ofTransportation Appealz Other El Premises Liability El Statutory D Product Liability (does not include El Employment Disputez mass Iurl) Discrimination El Slander/Libel/ Defamation Employment Disputez Other El Zoning Board El Otherz llj U Otheri

201-H-10mm

E Otherz MASS TORT El Asbestos El Tobacco El Toxic Tort - DES E Toxic Tort - lmplant REAL PROPERTY MISCELLANEOUS Toxic Waste El El Ejectment El Common Law/Statutory Arbitration Others B E1 El Eminent Domain/Condemnation El Declaratory Judgment El Ground Rent U Mandamus E1 Landlord/Tenant Dispute U Non-Domestic Relations El Mortgage Foreclosurer Residential Restraining Order PROFESSIONAL LIABLITY El Mortgage Foreclosurez Commercial El Quo Warranto

El Dental IE1 Partition U Replevin Legal llj Quiet Title El Others U Medical El Others D Other Professionalt

Updated 1/1/2 01 I COHEN, FEELEY, ALTEMOSE 8c RAMBO Byz Mark K. Altemose, Esquire ma1tem0se(Qcohenfee1ey.com Attomey ID No.2 58939 2851 Baglyos Circle Bethlehem, PA 18020 (610) 625-2100

FREIWALD LAW, P.C.

Byz Aaron J. Freiwald, Esquire ajfQfreiwald1aw.com Attomey ID No.2 78028 1500 Walnut Street, 18th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 6875-8000 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONROE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION - LAW STROUDSBURG AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT COURT OF COMMON PLEAS E 123 Linden Street MONROE COUNTY Stroudsburg, PA 18360 Appellant NO.

V.

MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVISION One Quaker Plaza, Room 102 Stroudsburg, PA 18360 ,\, and 5 ca C-3 ST. LUKEIS HOSPITAL - MONROE .-1 Ll) . Kw I3 -0- CAMPUS J. I 2 801 Ostrum Street DJ (D H.111 Bethlehem, PA 18015 53 tiff) and T) -__.I -A4 ST. LUKEIS HEALTH NETWORK, INC. m -/vi 801 Ostrum Street ..-1 U) gr, Bethlehem, PA 18015 Z Agpellees NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS

Appellant Stroudsburg Area School District, by and through its undersigned counsel,

respectfully appeals, pursuant to 53 Pa. C.S.A. 5 8854, and other applicable provisions of the

Commonwealth of Pemisylvania tax assessment laws, from the decision of the Monroe County

Board of Assessment Revision, dated October 31, 2018, and in support of this appeal states as

followsz

1. Appellant is Stroudsburg Area School District (uSchool Districtn), having offices

located at I23 Linden Street, Stroudsburg, PA 18360.

2. Appellee Monroe County Board of Assessment Revision (tithe Boardn) is a board

of assessment and revision of taxes within the general assessment law of Pennsylvania and is

located at One Quaker Plaza, Room 102, Stroudsburg, PA 18360.

3. Appellee St. Lukeis Hospital - Monroe Campus (uProperty Ownern) is the owner

of the premises located at l00 St. Lukeis Lane, Stroudsburg, PA 18360. The subject property is

identified as Tax Parcel l7-l7-1-53 (uPropertyn). The Property is located within the boundaries of Monroe County, Stroud Township, and the Stroudsburg Area School District.

4. Appellee St. Lukeis Health Network, Inc. (HSLHNP) is the parent of Property

Owner. The Property Owner is a wholly-owned subsidiary of SLHN.

5. For the purposes of the 2018 tax year, the Board granted the Property Owner a property tax exemption for the Property.

6. Appellant filed a Commercial Appeal with the Board on July 31, 2018 challenging the parcells property tax exemption. A true and correct copy of this Commercial

Appeal is attached as Exhibit A.

.2- 7. The Board allowed the parties a brief argument as to their positions regarding the challenge to the Property Ownerts tax exemption. The argument was held on October 23, 2018.

8. Appellant incorporates by reference the record of the proceedings below before

the Board as if set forth in full here.

9. In order to enjoy the privilege of tax exemption, the Property Owner must be a upurely public charity), Pa. Const. Art. VIII 52(a)(v).

l0. The Permsylvania Supreme Court has set forth live criteria for determining

whether an entity claiming tax exemption is a purely public charity. See Hospital Utilization

the Project v. Commonwealth, 507 Pa. l, 487 A.2d I306 (I985). To satisfy the HUP factors,

Property Owner claiming exemption must (l) advance a charitable purpose, (2) donate or render gratuitously a substantial portion of its servicesg (3) benefit a substantial and indefinite class of persons who are legitimate subjects of charityg (4) relieve the govemment of some of its burdeng and (5) operate entirely free from profit motive. See HUP, 487 A2d at l3 I7.to Appellant did not

receive a response to its subpoenas for documents and witnesses directed to the Hospital.

l 1. The entity claiming tax exemption has the burden of showing that it satisfies each and every one of the five HUP factors. Sch. Dist. of Erie ofHamoI Medical Ctr, 602 A.2d 407

(Pa. Commw. 1992).

I2. Since the Property Owner here had the burden of demonstrating that it donated a

substantial portion of its sen/ices to charity and that it operated entirely free from profit motive

and that it met the other HUP factors as well, the School District sent a Request for Production of

Documents to the Property Owner in advance of the argument before the Board.

13. The Property Owner declined to provide any documents responsive to the School

Districtls requests.

.3. I4. The School District also requested in advance that the Property Owner make witnesses available to testify before the Board and to be subjected to cross-examination on issues related to the five HUP factors.

15. The Property Owner declined to identify or make available any wimesses at the argument before the Board.

16. Based only upon brief arguments of counsel and with no factual record established, the Board decided on October 31, 2018 to uphold the Hospitalis property tax exemption. A tme and correct copy of the Boardis decision is attached as Exhibit B.

l7. The decision of the Board is contrary to the facts and contrary to law.

l8. Appellant alleges that the Boardis decision is improper, unsatisfactory, and unlawful for one or more of the following reasonsz

a. Appellee Hospital has not met its burden of proving by a preponderance of

the evidence that it is entitled to a property tax exemption,

b. Appellee Hospital is not a purely public charity under Article VIII, Section 2(a)(v) of the Pennsylvania Constitutiong

c. Appellee Hospital does not satisfy all five (5) requirements of the HUP Test, as set forth by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Hospital

Utilization Project v. Commonwealth, 507 Pa. 1, 487 A.2d 1306 (l985)g

c. Appellee Hospital does not meet the requirements for property tax exemption of the Institutions of Purely Public Charity Act, 10 P.S. 55 371- 385 (uAct 55ii)g

d. Appellee Hospital does not meet the requirements for property tax exemption of the Consolidated County Assessment Law, 53 Pa.C.S. 5 88123

e. The Board did not consider evidence regarding Lehigh Valley Health Network, the Hospitalis sole corporate memberg and

f. The Boardis decision was arbitrary.

.4- -- 19. The Boardls decision, extending lax exemption to Appellec St. Lukels lnlospltal

ll Monroe Campus, was wrong and should he reversed.

20. The Board should also have entertained a re-assessment of the value ol-the subject

the subject properly is significantly undervalued for purposes oftax t property. Appellant believes

ZISSCSSIHCHI.

a 1/0 nmw hearing before this Court. at 2 l. Appellant requests

l 22. Appellant requests a trial byjury. t

Z3. Appellant reserves the right to supplement these grounds for appeal prior to trial.

.

. WHEREFORE, Appellant believes that the Property is not entitled to property tax .

. otlthe l. exemption and brings this Appeal in accordance with the Acts ot_Assembly

l

l vi to declare the t it Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. respectfully asking this Honorable Court

Property subject to property taxation at the current assessed value, and for such other and further .1 .

rcliefas this Honorable Court shall deem equitable and as the cireutnstanees olithe ease may

require.

Respectfully submitted.

t

COHEN, FEELEY, /\l_.Tl-Zt\/IOSF. 81 RAMBO

l

BYZ Mark K. Altemose. lssquire ATTORNEYS FOR /\PPlZl.L/\NT

FR F Y Ll) LAW. P.C.

H reiwald, Esqttire ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT Datedz November 29. 2018

.5. 1i U

X.

ll

il

1

- VERIFICATION lu- z

of Appellant Stroudsburg Area School District anus-Q-vvv-A4-is I, Cosmas C. Curly, Superintendent

Appeal are true and correct to the best of hereby verify that the facts set forth in this Notice of

be understand that false statements made here may my knowledge, information and belief. I

authorities .uIIQ.-1- 4904 relating to unswom falsification to subject to the penalties of 18 Pa C.S. Section

was

I

E . . . 2 Cosmas C. Curry

Datedz /I/Vi/(J)

-in-_-..-..l.b1.__..._._..-_-...-Q...--._,-...___,.,i,

.

__

4------_-_-ii-.

6

.6- EV 03 7 -A _r

MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVISION ADMINISTRATION CENTER ONE QUAKER PLAZA, ROOM 102 STROUDSBURG, PA 18360

F/W (570) 517-3854 mouse (svo) 517-3133

October 31, 2018

St Lukels Hospital -Monroe Campus Stroudsburg Area School District 801 Ostrum Street C/O Loren Szczesny, Esquire Bethlehem, PA 18015 Fox Rothschild LP PO Box 3001

Blue Bell, PA 19422

R21 APPEALON CODESz 11/17/1/54,17/17/1/ss and 11/17/1/as

The Board of Assessment Revision in an open meeting determined that the existing exemptions for the above referenced properties are in order. The appeals filed by the Stroudsburg Area School District challenging the tax exemptions previously granted to St Lukeis Hospital- Monroe Campus were denied.

You have the right to appeal this decision to the Monroe County Court of Common Pleas within 30 days of the date hereof.

Cindy L. Treible Secretary to the Board

Ccz Marie McConnell, Esquire Aaron Freiwald, Esquire RECEIV ED NOV O5 ma Mark Altemose, Esquire Stroud Township . /ds