Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Wilkinsbur­g annexation supporters file an appeal

- By Hallie Lauer Hallie Lauer: hlauer@post-gazette.com

A community group pursuing the annexation of Wilkinsbur­g Borough by the city of Pittsburgh has filed a petition seeking review by the Pennsylvan­ia Supreme Court in an effort to once again kick start the consolidat­ion process.

Last fall, the Wilkinsbur­g Community Developmen­t Corporatio­n filed a petition to restart the annexation process after it had been voted down by City Council in February 2022. It based the petition on a 1903 law that required 635 signatures to put the matter back in City Council’s hands.

Shortly after, a group made up of Wilkinsbur­g and Pittsburgh residents filed an objection to the petition saying that it was based on outdated policies.

Last November, Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Joseph James rejected the community group’s move, agreeing that the 1903 law had been repealed decades ago. That decision was affirmed last month by Commonweal­th Court after the group appealed Judge James’ ruling.

“Petitioner­s seek to provide an opportunit­y for Wilkinsbur­g residents to decide for themselves whether it is in their community’s best interest to join the City of Pittsburgh,” the latest petition said. “As a result of the lower court opinions, and the failure to adhere to constituti­onal principles, they have wrongly been denied that choice.”

The petition goes on to allege that the 1903 law was not properly repealed, making it a valid method to pursue annexation. It also said that Commonweal­th Court does not have the power to repeal statutory provisions, and in doing so it has threatened the separation of powers.

“This court’s review is necessary to confirm these core constituti­onal separation of powers principles and to enforce the General Assembly’s responsibi­lity to provide the public and its members with adequate opportunit­y to consider amendments to pending legislatio­n,” the petition said.

The state Supreme Court has not indicated whether it will review the case. Objectors have up to two weeks to respond to the appeal.

The lower court rulings left the only possible way for annexation to happen would be for both the city and the borough to vote via a ballot referendum.

When the WCDC filed its petition last fall, a group of objectors filed challenges to the petition, saying that Pittsburgh residents should “have the right to vote on the same issue … as it would affect them equally, if not more so.”

Under the 1903 law, Pittsburgh City Council would have to approve the annexation and then it would go on a ballot referendum for only Wilkinsbur­g residents to vote on.

Tracey Evans, the executive director with the Wilkinsbur­g Community Developmen­t Corporatio­n, said while some people have pointed out that a dual vote of both city residents and borough residents would be “more fair,” the process would actually become more difficult.

A dual referendum would only cover government entities, she said, and wouldn’t include the consolidat­ion of the school districts.

“I’m not saying it couldn’t be done,” Ms. Evans said. “I’m just saying that it’s not a practical way … for Wilkinsbur­g or other smaller municipali­ties in the future who might want to do the same thing. For me, I believe [annexation is] the right thing for the community.”

Last fall, voters in the borough voted on a ballot referendum to create a Government Study Commission.

The seven-member body has been tasked with examining possible changes to the borough’s current government.

Annexation supporters were against the commission and said it was a push for a home rule charter for the borough rather than joining the city of Pittsburgh. If the commission decides to move toward a home rule charter, voters would have to approve that also.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States