Commonwealth Court dismisses second Wilkinsburg annexation attempt

Commonwealth Court ruled Thursday that a 1903 law relied upon by a petition to potentially annex Wilkinsburg to Pittsburgh was indeed repealed last year, affirming the decision of a lower court and dealing another blow to the yearslong campaign.

The confusing question of whether the 1903 law was active, unconstitutional or repealed stood at the core of whether the petition to annex Wilkinsburg — a borough just to the east of Pittsburgh and home to about 14,000 residents — to Pittsburgh could proceed. The two municipalities already share some services, such as fire response, trash collection and schools for grades 7-12.

Hundreds of Wilkinsburg residents filed the annexation petition last fall. A previous petition effort was blocked last year by Pittsburgh City Council; it would have otherwise proceeded as an up-or-down ballot referendum for Wilkinsburg voters.

Various legal questions were at work in the case. A constitutional amendment from 1968 required the Legislature to pass within two years a uniform law on changing municipal boundaries. It didn’t do so until 1994, approving a law that specifically excluded Pittsburgh and Philadelphia from its procedures — a practice that is common because the needs of Pennsylvania’s two largest cities are often slightly different than the rest of the state. The Legislature then voted last year to repeal the old 1903 annexation law that established the petition process.

Joseph James, a senior judge on the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, ruled last fall that previous annexation laws on the books were effectively repealed after the 1968 constitutional amendment’s two-year deadline came and went to establish a new uniform law. Therefore, the petition was invalid and needed to be dismissed.

Commonwealth Court heard the appeal of the James ruling, with seven judges sitting in what is known as an expanded “en banc” panel. In a 17-page opinion, Judge Michael Wojcik affirmed the James ruling, meaning a merger could now only take place if a majority of voters in both Wilkinsburg and Pittsburgh approve a ballot referendum to merge.

Tracey Evans, an annexation advocate who leads the Wilkinsburg Community Development Corp., told the Union Progress that she hasn’t reviewed the latest ruling yet nor decided whether to appeal to the state Supreme Court. She added that a potential ballot referendum would only merge the city and borough, not accounting for other entities such as the borough school district.

Evans said she continues to push for a merger because Wilkinsburg residents could share in the resources and services available through the city, which has more than 20 times as many residents.

“We do continue to have very high property tax rates, which have prohibited growth,” she said. “Our market value is not rising the way it is in all the neighborhoods all around us. And some people, I guess, think that’s a good thing, but it really prohibits redevelopment of … buildings that have gone vacant, the business district or residential apartments.”

WCDC has provided almost all of the nearly $270,000 raised by the Wilkinsburg Action Committee, a political pro-annexation committee registered with the county. The committee’s largest expense has been $150,000 for legal services. It has also paid $35,500 to Premo Consultants, a public relations firm headed by Joanna Doven, who lost a campaign earlier this year for the Democratic at-large seat on Allegheny County Council.

Not all borough residents are onboard, and voters last November approved creating a commission to study the current government and consider other models. It is currently contracting with the Pennsylvania Economy League as part of that process.