Appeals from the Orders of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, in the case of Penn Hills School District v. The Municipality of Penn Hills, No. GD 87-10774 and in the case of In Re: Appeal of Domenic D'Achille, Cyrus K. Fox, Jr., Edward L. Dunn, George Whitaker, Thomas E. Planinsek, Robert Fulilenger, Sandra L. Debreczeni, John C. Deal, Jr., Beryl Verish, Paul Orlando, Rosemarie Orlando, Dean DeLuca, J. Ross Thibault, Richard A. Pruge, Linda M. Bryan, Lori Cerrone, William A. Kernick, Jr., Martha V. Gray, Joe Viglione, James R. Simmers, William Hess, Clint Rohibruilinh, Jim Bassett, Elsie Kahler, Norman P. Burger and Harvey D. Kart, from the enactment of a Business Privilege Tax and Mercantile License Tax by the School District of Penn Hills, No. SA 1371-87.
John M. Tighe, for appellant.
Wayne DeLuca, with him, August C. Damian, Damian & DeLuca, for appellee, The Municipality of Penn Hills.
Ira Weiss, for appellees, Domenic D'Achille, et al.
Judges Colins and Smith, and Senior Judge Kalish, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Smith. Judge MacPhail did not participate in the decision in this case.
[ 124 Pa. Commw. Page 114]
Penn Hills School District (District) appeals from two orders of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny
[ 124 Pa. Commw. Page 115]
County entered on February 17, 1988 which were consolidated for review by this Court. The trial court, at No. 650 C.D. 1988 (Taxpayers' appeal), declared that the District's mercantile and license tax (mercantile tax) enacted by resolution adopted June 16, 1987, shall not take effect until January 1, 1988 because of lack of notice or waiver pursuant to The Local Tax Enabling Act (LTEA)*fn1 and that the District is subject to the rate limitations and halving provisions of the LTEA. Furthermore, the trial court, at No. 649 C.D. 1988 (District's appeal), dismissed the District's complaint in equity and sustained Penn Hills Municipality's (Municipality) preliminary objections. The trial court is reversed in part and affirmed in part.
The District raises three issues for review: whether the trial court erred in concluding that the District and the Municipality imposed a mercantile tax under the authority of the LTEA; whether the trial court erred in concluding that only the District was subject to the halving provisions of Section 8 of the LTEA, 53 P.S. § 6908; and whether the trial court erred in concluding that the District was bound by the notice provisions of Section 8 of the LTEA.
The District, under the authority of the LTEA, enacted by resolution a business privilege tax and a mercantile tax for the 1987-1988 school year effective July 1, 1987 through June 30, 1988.*fn2 The District levied the mercantile tax at the LTEA maximum allowable rate of one mill on wholesale vendors and one and one-half mills on retail vendors. The District shares coterminous boundaries with the Municipality which is a duly constituted home
[ 124 Pa. Commw. Page 116]
rule community pursuant to the Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans ...