§ 2962. Limitation on municipal powers.
(a) Powers granted by statute.--With respect to the following subjects, the home rule charter shall not give any power
or authority to the municipality contrary to or in limitation or enlargement of powers
granted by statutes which are applicable to a class or classes of municipalities:
(1) The filing and collection of municipal tax claims or liens and the sale of real or
personal property in satisfaction of them.
(2) The procedures in the exercise of the powers of eminent domain and the assessment
of damages and benefits for property taken, injured or destroyed.
(3) Boundary changes.
(4) Regulation of public schools.
(5) The registration of electors and the conduct of elections.
(6) The fixing of subjects of taxation.
(7) The fixing of the rates of nonproperty or personal taxes levied upon nonresidents.
(8) The assessment of real or personal property and persons for taxation purposes.
(9) Defining or providing for the punishment of any felony or misdemeanor.
(10) Municipal planning under the act of July 31, 1968 (P.L.805, No.247), known as the
Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code.
(11) The procedure for the filling of vacancies in the office of district attorney.
(b) Taxing power.--Unless prohibited by the Constitution of Pennsylvania, the provisions of this subpart
or any other statute or its home rule charter, a municipality which has adopted a
home rule charter shall have the power and authority to enact and enforce local tax
ordinances upon any subject of taxation granted by statute to the class of municipality
of which it would be a member but for the adoption of a home rule charter at any rate
of taxation determined by the governing body. No home rule municipality shall establish
or levy a rate of taxation upon nonresidents which is greater than the rate which
a municipality would have been authorized to levy on nonresidents but for the adoption
of a home rule charter. The governing body shall not be subject to any limitation
on the rates of taxation imposed upon residents.
(c) Prohibited powers.--A municipality shall not:
(1) Engage in any proprietary or private business except as authorized by statute.
(2) Exercise powers contrary to or in limitation or enlargement of powers granted by statutes
which are applicable in every part of this Commonwealth.
(3) Be authorized to diminish the rights or privileges of any former municipal employee
entitled to benefits or any present municipal employee in his pension or retirement
system.
(4) Enact or promulgate any ordinance or regulation with respect to definitions, sanitation,
safety, health, standards of identity or labeling pertaining to the manufacture, processing,
storage, distribution and sale of any foods, goods or services subject to any Commonwealth
statutes and regulations unless the municipal ordinance or regulation is uniform in
all respects with the Commonwealth statutes and regulations thereunder. This paragraph
does not affect the power of any municipality to enact and enforce ordinances relating
to building codes or any other safety, sanitation or health regulation pertaining
thereto.
(5) Enact any provision inconsistent with any statute heretofore enacted prior to April
13, 1972, affecting the rights, benefits or working conditions of any employee of
a political subdivision of this Commonwealth.
(d) Reduction of police force.--Notwithstanding any provision of this subpart or any other statute to the contrary,
any municipality that is or was a city of the second class A may reduce its police
force or its firefighting force for economic reasons, as determined by ordinance.
(e) Statutes of general application.--Statutes that are uniform and applicable in every part of this Commonwealth shall
remain in effect and shall not be changed or modified by this subpart. Statutes shall
supersede any municipal ordinance or resolution on the same subject.
(f) Regulation of business and employment.--A municipality which adopts a home rule charter shall not determine duties, responsibilities
or requirements placed upon businesses, occupations and employers, including the duty
to withhold, remit or report taxes or penalties levied or imposed upon them or upon
persons in their employment, except as expressly provided by statutes which are applicable
in every part of this Commonwealth or which are applicable to all municipalities or
to a class or classes of municipalities. This subsection shall not be construed as
a limitation in fixing rates of taxation on permissible subjects of taxation.
(g) Regulation of firearms.--A municipality shall not enact any ordinance or take any other action dealing with
the regulation of the transfer, ownership, transportation or possession of firearms.
(h) Levying taxes.--This section does not limit or take away any right of a municipality which adopts
a home rule charter from levying any tax which it had the power to levy had it not
adopted a home rule charter.
(i) Establishment of rates of taxation.--No provision of this subpart or any other statute shall limit a municipality which
adopts a home rule charter from establishing its own rates of taxation upon all authorized
subjects of taxation except those specified in subsection (a)(7).
(j) Retroactive fee increase prohibited.--A municipality which adopts a home rule charter may not retroactively increase any
fee or charge for any municipal service which has been provided.
(Mar. 23, 2021, P.L.35, No.9, eff. imd.)
2021 Amendment. Act 9 added subsec. (a)(11). Section 2 of Act 9 provided that the addition of subsec.
(a)(11) is intended to preempt and supersede any contrary provision in a county home
rule charter, ordinance or local administrative code.
Notes of Decisions
Bldg. Owners & Managers Ass'n v. City of Pittsburgh, 985 A.2d 711 (Pa. 2009).
· cites it 9× “For the reasons that follow, we hold that the City of Pittsburgh exceeded its power and violated the Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans Law, 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(f). We affirm the order of the Commonwealth Court.”
In Re Condemnation by City of Coatesville, 898 A.2d 1186 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2006).
· cites it 8× “[13] The only restriction contained in the Home Rule Law regarding eminent domain is contained at 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(a)(2), which only precludes home rule municipalities from enacting contrary legislation regarding the procedure to take, but places no restriction on the power of…”
In Re Appointment of Dist. Attorney, 756 A.2d 711 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2000).
· cites it 10× “The "powers denied" at issue here are those contained in subsection (c)(2) that prohibit a home rule community from exercising "powers contrary to or in limitation .”
Hartman v. City of Allentown, 880 A.2d 737 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2005).
· cites it 3× “” 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(f). The trial court found that the Ordinance places duties and responsibilities on businesses, occupations and employers and that there is no statute, including the PHRA, which expressly authorizes municipal legislation dealing with discrimination on the…”
City of Pittsburgh v. Fraternal Order of Police, 938 A.2d 225 (Pa. 2007).
· cites it 3× “Specifically, the FOP asserted that via the 2003-04 retiree premium cap, the award violated the Contract Clauses of the United States and Pennsylvania Constitutions 3 as it worked an unconstitutional retroactive reduction in re *51 tirement benefits.”
In Re Voter Referendum Petition Filed August 5, 2008, 981 A.2d 163 (Pa. 2009).
· cites it 9× “” 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962. Appellant asserts that the distinction between residents and nonresidents was intended to protect nonresidents who could not voice their opposition to unreasonable tax rates, as could residents, by voting the governing body out of office.”
Bldg. Owners & Managers Ass'n v. City of Pittsburgh, 929 A.2d 267 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007).
· cites it 6× “In this case, we consider whether the Ordinance was ultra vires by reason of Section 2962(f) of the Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans Law, 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(f). On November 30, 2004, Pittsburgh City Council enacted The Protection of Displaced Contract Workers Ordinance…”
Mun. of Monroeville v. Monroeville Police Dep't Wage Policy Comm., 767 A.2d 596 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2001).
· cites it 2× “The Police also argue that even if the arbitrators had ruled that the police pension benefits were illegal, the award would have been vacated on the basis that it diminished the police pension benefits in violation of Section 2962(c)(3), 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(c)(3), of the Home Rule…”
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(3) — 2 cases
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(a) — 7 cases
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(a)(1) — 1 case
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(a)(11) — 1 case
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(a)(2) — 2 cases
In Re Condemnation by City of Coatesville, 898 A.2d 1186 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2006).
“[13] The only restriction contained in the Home Rule Law regarding eminent domain is contained at 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(a)(2), which only precludes home rule municipalities from enacting contrary legislation regarding the procedure to take, but places no restriction on the power of…”
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(a)(5) — 3 cases
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(a)(6) — 1 case
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(a)(8) — 1 case
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(b) — 5 cases
In Re Voter Referendum Petition Filed August 5, 2008, 981 A.2d 163 (Pa. 2009).
“” 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962. Appellant asserts that the distinction between residents and nonresidents was intended to protect nonresidents who could not voice their opposition to unreasonable tax rates, as could residents, by voting the governing body out of office.”
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(c) — 3 cases
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(c)(1) — 1 case
In Re Condemnation by City of Coatesville, 898 A.2d 1186 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2006).
“[13] The only restriction contained in the Home Rule Law regarding eminent domain is contained at 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(a)(2), which only precludes home rule municipalities from enacting contrary legislation regarding the procedure to take, but places no restriction on the power of…”
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(c)(2) — 13 cases
In Re Appointment of Dist. Attorney, 756 A.2d 711 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2000).
“The "powers denied" at issue here are those contained in subsection (c)(2) that prohibit a home rule community from exercising "powers contrary to or in limitation .”
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(c)(3) — 10 cases
City of Pittsburgh v. Fraternal Order of Police, 938 A.2d 225 (Pa. 2007).
“Specifically, the FOP asserted that via the 2003-04 retiree premium cap, the award violated the Contract Clauses of the United States and Pennsylvania Constitutions 3 as it worked an unconstitutional retroactive reduction in re *51 tirement benefits.”
Mun. of Monroeville v. Monroeville Police Dep't Wage Policy Comm., 767 A.2d 596 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2001).
“The Police also argue that even if the arbitrators had ruled that the police pension benefits were illegal, the award would have been vacated on the basis that it diminished the police pension benefits in violation of Section 2962(c)(3), 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(c)(3), of the Home Rule…”
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(c)(4) — 11 cases
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(c)(5) — 7 cases
In Re Appointment of Dist. Attorney, 756 A.2d 711 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2000).
“The "powers denied" at issue here are those contained in subsection (c)(2) that prohibit a home rule community from exercising "powers contrary to or in limitation .”
Mun. of Monroeville v. Monroeville Police Dep't Wage Policy Comm., 767 A.2d 596 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2001).
“The Police also argue that even if the arbitrators had ruled that the police pension benefits were illegal, the award would have been vacated on the basis that it diminished the police pension benefits in violation of Section 2962(c)(3), 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(c)(3), of the Home Rule…”
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(d) — 1 case
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(e) — 10 cases
In Re Appointment of Dist. Attorney, 756 A.2d 711 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2000).
“The "powers denied" at issue here are those contained in subsection (c)(2) that prohibit a home rule community from exercising "powers contrary to or in limitation .”
In Re Condemnation by City of Coatesville, 898 A.2d 1186 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2006).
“[13] The only restriction contained in the Home Rule Law regarding eminent domain is contained at 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(a)(2), which only precludes home rule municipalities from enacting contrary legislation regarding the procedure to take, but places no restriction on the power of…”
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(e)(5) — 1 case
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(f) — 27 cases
Bldg. Owners & Managers Ass'n v. City of Pittsburgh, 985 A.2d 711 (Pa. 2009).
“For the reasons that follow, we hold that the City of Pittsburgh exceeded its power and violated the Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans Law, 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(f). We affirm the order of the Commonwealth Court.”
Hartman v. City of Allentown, 880 A.2d 737 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2005).
“” 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(f). The trial court found that the Ordinance places duties and responsibilities on businesses, occupations and employers and that there is no statute, including the PHRA, which expressly authorizes municipal legislation dealing with discrimination on the…”
Bldg. Owners & Managers Ass'n v. City of Pittsburgh, 929 A.2d 267 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007).
“In this case, we consider whether the Ordinance was ultra vires by reason of Section 2962(f) of the Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans Law, 53 Pa.C.S. § 2962(f). On November 30, 2004, Pittsburgh City Council enacted The Protection of Displaced Contract Workers Ordinance…”
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(g) — 4 cases
— 53 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2962(h) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.