Benedictine Sisters of Pittsburgh v. Fayette County Board of Assessment Appeals
844 A.2d 86
Pa. Commw. Ct.
2004
Check Treatment

*1 Law, it does Megan’s while Regarding Police authorize the State specifically information, nothing releasing the Police prohibits the State

Megan’s Law the infor- the Auditor General giving prohibi- Again,

mation it seeks. absent

tion, to be the list not have while like all information

given public, audit, it must perform needed to to the Auditor General so

be turned over fulfill responsibilities.3 can his

that he stated rea-

Accordingly, for the above

sons, I dissent.

Judges McGINLEY and SMITH- join dissenting opinion. in this

RIB NER OF

BENEDICTINE SISTERS

PITTSBURGH, PA,

FAYETTE COUNTY BOARD OF APPEALS

ASSESSMENT

Fayette County, Appellants. Pennsylvania.

Commonwealth Court 2, 2004.

Argued Feb. 8, 2004.

Decided March ameliorating privacy raised thereby concerns already has that the Auditor General I note list, by the State Police. agreed would not release that he *2 23, 2003, Jr., Uniontown, Cupp, appel- January John S. the Board denied lants. ap- The Benedictine Sisters application. court, pealed the decision to the trial which Jarrell, Pittsburgh,

Matt A. for appellee. evidentiary hearing. conducted an PELLEGRINI, J., BEFORE: court, hearing At the trial before LEAVITT, J., JIULIANTE, Senior a Farabaugh, Sister Michelle member Judge. the Benedictine described a re- BY Judge OPINION LEAVITT. primarily treat a time of re- as Fayette (County) appeals very busy.. newal. Our lives are .so we from an order of the Court of Common recognize people the absolute need for (trial court) Fayette County Pleas of to step take some time back and have the granting a real estate tax Repro- leisure of and reflection. (Bene- Benedictine of Pittsburgh Sisters (R.R.-). duced Record 217a While Sisters) dictine for property used for retreat, pray, we read. Sometimes [w]e religious retreats. The trial court held we are on retreat alone and sometimes a place was used as group, were with a and when were with a and, as group togeth- then we will have discussion such, from taxation. topics. er about of spiritual various kinds question at is located may tapes, videotapes We listen to watch Road, 168 Bottom Mill Springfield Run in of various conference talks that have been Township Fayette County (Property). given in places. R.R. 207a. We do It consists of approximately four acres of occasionally. have We don’t have [mass] improved by land a standard three-bed- anyone regular on a who would come basis room, house, ranch-style a swimming pool or to prayer, celebrate mass lead but 22, and a garage. detached On October say several times a that does 2001, the ap- Benedictine Sisters filed an happen part program. as of the retreat plication Fayette County Board of R.R. 218a. Assessment, Property Appeals and Review She testified that the 77 Benedictine

(Board) for a tax exemption,1 which required to make an annual Sisters are right asserted the to an days. lasts three to seven purely public charity.2 The Board denied Property is used for these application untimely years as year; retreats nine months out of the it but notified the Benedictine No unoccupied. rest of the time Sisters that it the applica- would consider ie., permanent year, tion for the next tax A Sister uses the 2003. residence; hearing at a permanently was held October and on all reside education; (3) filing application, 1. ad- Prior to the of this ment and paid (4) Benedictine Sisters had taxes on the religion; prevention and vancement of 2000, however, Property. injury, including treatment of disease or $98,300, have was assessed disorders; (5) mental retardation and mental triggering been the event their tax (6) government municipal purposes; ac- application. recognized complishment purpose as im- portant beneficial purely public charity 2. An institution of is an social, physical ob- which advances moral pur- institution which advances charitable jectives. Act of November pose, defined statute as one or more (2) following: poverty; advance- relief of following forth the standard Pittsburgh. Occa- monastery outside :for from taxation. sionally use the tions the Sisters relaxation, purposes, opposed to retreat (a)The be ex- following property shall most, or three that occurs at two *3 county, city, bor- empt from all year. weeks out of the road, town, poor township, ough, and school to wit: hearing, At the conclusion of the reversed the Board and trial court (1)A11 churches, meeting-houses, or exemption the Benedictine Sisters actual of other taxes, reasoning Prop- that the real estate religious worship, with regu- erty was used as an thereto annexed ground It declined to larly worship. scheduled necessary occupancy for the address the issue of whether same; enjoyment and charity, purely public as a County moot. The deeming question * * * appealed then to this Court. (3) universities, colleges, hospitals, All County raises appeal,3

On academies, seminaries, associa- First, trial it contends that the two issues. learning, and institutions of tions concluding Proper court erred benevolence, charity, including sched ty qualifies stations, and rescue fire Second, County con uled nec- thereto annexed and grounds is not entitled to tends that the en- essary occupancy and taxes as a from real estate founded, same, en- joyment of the charity because the purely public dowed, by public and maintained home,” a “vacation which is is used as Provided, That charity: private object exemption. tax proper for the by revenue the entire derived applied support same be au efficiency and and to increase pass to thorizes the General thereof, repair facilities general exempting laws certain necessary grounds increase be taxation. It makes distinction thereof, and for no buildings “actual tween purpose. “institutions of religious worship” and claiming entitlement taxpayer charity.” Pursuant to this public purely 204(a)(1) proof. the burden bears authority, Section County Law,5 sets Church Assessment Mifflin scope of review in tax assess- 3. This Court's charity, (v) purely a determination of appeal is limited to Institutions discretion, abused its any whether the trial court tax case of real but in the findings made an error of law or committed proper- portion of real evidence. Hahn unsupported substantial actually and ty which is of such institution County Board Assessment Home v. York purposes of the insti- for the (Pa.Cmwlth.2001). Appeals, 778 A.2d 755 tution. Const, VIII, 2(a)(i) (v). art. provides, (a) may by law The General amended, 22,May 5.Act empt from taxation: (3). 5020-204(a)(l) §§ (i) regularly stated reli- Actual gious worship; Board Assessment Mount Zion stands for the Appeals, 815 (Pa.Cmwlth.2003). principle that a need not be used worship leading case this area of law Fur qualify exemption. order to for an continues be Mount Zion New Life ther, gave reading Mount Zion a broad Center v. Board Assessment and Revi- worship, which includes and teach Appeals, Taxes and 94 Pa.Cmwlth. e., at a re ing, predominant activity i. 439, 503 A.2d 1065 At issue in treat center. Mount 503 A.2d at Mount Zion was whether Christian re- equate 1071. Mount Zion did not treat center was entitled to an specific type ceremony with a of formal *4 place regularly actual stated reli- involving building a church-type gious worship.6 The retreat center con- congregants gather. sisted of 104 acres land and several understanding regularly This stated buildings, including building, the main a worship expressed was also hall, house, meeting a faith and a manor Church, 815 A.2d at 1174. In that house. This Court determined that case, was for a resi- retreat center exemp- was entitled to an place dence on the basis that it a tion, noting that regularity and con- In religious worship. stated stancy of the conduct of worship, virtually Church, Evangel Baptist appellants weekly basis, on a brings the primary ap- day-to- testified that the house was not the plication and part use of at least of the day minister; residence of the church’s premises clearly within concept of be- rather, it Sunday was used for School religious stated monthly classes and for fellowship meet- worship. Id. at 1069. The Court also held ings. Although the house was used to that an actual place visitors, occasionally house we concluded religious worship is not required to be that this incidental use did not alter the used primary purpose A conclusion that the religious purposes. house was for tax is authorized where the pri- mary purpose of property worship, is However, County argues that be- and other are merely activities incidental. pursue cause the is used to Having established principles, these religious and monastic life of Benedic- ,the Court building examined use of each tine It place worship. it is not the Mount Zion Center and its surround- mass, worship requires contends that ing acreage. buildings Some were found Prop- which occurs on occasion at the exempt erty. and others were not.7 urges adopt us to the narrow principal 6. The issue in Mount Zion was within the faith house was taxable. The two whether building pray- the main rooms within used taking place light at the retreat center in taxation, teaching er and were identity of the fact that the of the individual parts building but all other of the main worshippers and their affiliation house, As to the manor the Court taxable. changed from week to week. This Court that, although groups concluded small occa- taxpayers found in favor of the on this issue. living sionally of the house for used room worship teaching, primarily and the house meeting 7. The Court held that the hall was served as the home of the administrator and entirely exempt primarily because it was family. his The manor house was found teaching. portion exemption. entitled to an worship teaching faith house used for exempt, lodging space was found

90 Church, reading of worship Pennsylva- Evangel Baptist concept advanced worship nia is not to a formal the Pentecostal Holiness limited ser- Conference of engage Church Mercer Board Assess- vice. The Benedictine Sisters Review, (1982), discussions; prayer, 25 D.C.3d spiritual readings and provided wherein trial court very are the found to these activities Evangel Bap- in Mount Zion adoration, [wjorship offerings, connotes tist Church. As Mount the iden- prayers thanksgiving meditation and tity changes of Sisters retreat petition. strictly is Education week, week to but the use party thereof. is constant. addition,

In County argues that a agree In the trial court ranch-style house is not an that the Benedictine satisfied their Sisters worship.8 support, upon relies showing Property’s burden of pri- holding in Second Church Christ Scien- mary purpose is tist Philadelphia, 398 worship.10 No other conclusion is (1959), holding appropriate precedent under the of Mount tion of church property constitutionally *5 Zion and Church. place worship. restricted the actual of In the County asks that deter- Accordingly, trial we affirm the court. that the mine is vacation home ORDER place

and not stated wor- ship.9 NOW, March, 2004, day AND this 8th the

Here, order of the Court of Common Pleas of the Benedictine Sisters use the Fayette County in adoration, July dated prayer and medita- tion; hereby above-captioned matter is affirmed. this constitutes as defined case, by Pennsylvania any Conference. Judge BY DISSENTING OPINION Pennsylvania Conference, which is not PELLEGRINI. precedent, binding placed must be in the I binding precedent respectfully majori- context in Mount dissent from the ty’s Zion and Evangel Baptist Church. Under decision because neither ranch- style that land upon Mount the fact some education house nor the four acres of taking Fayette County at the that is place property does which it sits primary by not mean that Pittsburgh education is use the Benedictine Sisters of (Benedictine Sisters) Zion property. Under both Mount constitutes “actual County purpose argues primary that the that 8. The house establishes adjacent to a build- church purpose; house is for other use and there is no church on merely is occasional. However, issue here. there was church no building at the retreat center Mount Zion. 10.However, we note that the jurisprudence Our to the use a build- looks place property used as a sched- ing, appearance. its not restricted, worship more uled is extended light ingress egress beyond air. testimony There was 9. established See Second Church Christ Scientist Phila- retreat was used at most two three times City Philadelphia, 398 delphia v. year by County's for relaxation. The sisters However, County 157 A.2d 54 did retreat is used a vaca- conclusion that the issue; this not raised not raise issues by supported home is tion substantial are and cannot be raised testimony lower court waived that is evidence. The the retreat year appeal. time on Pa. R.A.P. used nine out of the for retreats for the first months worship” Appeals, es and 94 Pa.Cmwlth. 2(a) VIII, mandated Article Section Evangel Baptist A.2d 1065 Pennsylvania Constitution in order County Church v. Board Assess- Mifflin to be exempt from real estate taxation. (Pa.Cmwlth. Appeals, 815 A.2d 1174 2003), concluding that because the Bene- The Benedictine applica- Sisters filed an adoration, dictine Sisters use Fayette tion with the County Board of mediation, Property Assessment used as Appeals and Review (Board) for a tax exemption for tax dis- 2003 for agree use as a majority because a retreat retreat. The property consists of four house is not what the drafters Article acres of land with a three-bedroom ranch 2(a)(i) VIII, Section house, a swimming pool and a detached Constitution envisioned exempt- when garage. hearing After a was held before ed an “actual Board, the application was denied. worship” from taxation. appealed Benedictine Sisters Before adoption of the 1874 Consti- Court of Fayette Common Pleas of tution, there was no power limitation on (trial court) which also held a hearing. At grant exemptions from taxation. Because that hearing, one of the Sisters testified granting that the 77 Benedictine who five emptions capriciously, the of that drafters a monastery Pittsburgh, outside of 1874 Constitution included a required to make annual retreat placed limits on of the General lasted three to days. seven *6 levy as to how it could taxes as spiritual was used as a well as to whom it grant exemp- and reflection could nine year months of the purpose, adopted electorate, this tions.1 As Arti- sometimes the retreats IX, were groups 1,§ with they where cle read: “All discussed taxes shall be uni- various topics, form, tapes listened to upon subjects, the same class watched videotapes. remaining The three within the territorial authority limits of the months of unoccupied. levying the and shall be levied and She also stated that was used laws; general collected under but the Gen- for relaxation two or year. three weeks a laws, Assembly may, by general eral ex- The trial court reversed the Board and empt from taxation property used a real estate tax for public purposes, places of reli- exemption because it being anas gious worship, places of burial not used or actual place of regularly scheduled wor- held for private corporate profit, ship. The County Fayette (County) purely public charity.” institutions of filed appeal. this Constitution, 1968 Amendments to the majority among rely things, affirms the trial court renumbered Article IX, VIII, on Mount §§ Zion New as the current Center Article Life Board Assessment and Revision splitting uniformity provision of Tax- where, Donohugh’s Appeal, 1. See strictly 86 Pa. 309-10 and is therefore be to con- (1878) ("[I]t legislature is conceded that the derogation people's right. strued inas of the go cannot outside the class of cases in which contrary, upon On the it is a restriction permits exemption the constitution from taxa- legislative power which would be otherwise tion, but it is to be remembered that unquestionable. tying unlimited and It is a grant of the constitution is not a ...”). up legislative hand legislature, belongs else- islature, desire correc- provi- people provisions. however, think, tion of that evil. I dealing exemptions with religious simply VIII, having will be satisfied now numbered Article Section exempted, 2(a)(i) places their Constitution, Pennsylvania not be if the would satisfied specifying the extent to which General parsonages. to were be extended Assembly grant can to provides and the rele- churches like. to Debates of the Amend the Convention part: vant may by suggested [not The General it was inclusion be] When withdrawn, five acres law taxation: could Mr. change Broomall stated that such alone (i) places Actual help the desired achieve result. religious worship ... Cochran, delegate, explained: Another Mr. parso- The drafters the 1874 Constitution able to build congregations “If are quite explicit in their when pay were debates are to the taxes on nages, able circumscribing the type of neither the Ultimately, them.” Id. addi- exempt from acreage parsonages could taxa- tional nor by limiting religious purposes language tion for included in the of the Constitu- religious exemption allowing to an “actual tional amendment for “actual religious worship” rather of real estate taxation worship.”2 religious religious than a which was used for At the took activities. debates which The drafters of the 1874 Constitution at the 1872 Convention to Amend Con- wanted “actual enactment, to prior Article IX’s stitution religious worship,” delegates expand attempted certain formation or education proposed language, which is similar how Notwithstanding the place. took restric- today, Legislature it reads “the uses, language tive that the Constitution *7 of reli- empt from taxation actual have summer exempted ...,” parso- to also include gious fellowship camps, Mount halls exceeding and land not five acres. nages and Bible studies take where social events ultimately expan- disallowing such This Church. is far place, delegate, and buildings, of land one church, temple sanctuary, afield from Broomall, stated: Mr. than 1874 and more the drafters exempt. Because privilege from taxation Constitution desired very only provides the Constitution Leg- has much abused been following only per- property shall 2. “The town, borough, county, city, all town- legislature within certain mits the to do so road, poor ship, school wit: Rock G.D.L. v. Council School limits.” Plaza (a) churches, meeting-houses, All or oth- 1173, District, 515 Pa. regular places worship, er (1987), quoting Donohugh’s Appeal. The necessary ground thereto annexed Assembly, 204 of the in Section Gen- General same; occupancy enjoyment of Code, 22,May Act of Assessment eral amended, II, Art. Sec. challenged has that this No one 5020-204, provided: beyond the conferred on Assemblyby the Constitution. and reverse the Evangel Baptist Church tion for actual trial court. provide and does not houses, any additional I Accordingly, dissent.

swimming pools, acreage or for place, classes take

overrule our decisions Mount Zion