Whether state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe succeeds in blocking Seneca Valley School District’s desire to raise its property tax beyond what is permitted under state law will play out in coming days or weeks.

His initial attempt to have Gov. Tom Corbett reject the district’s application for an exception to its permitted 2012-13 tax-increase limit was unsuccessful. The state Department of Education contends that the governor has no role in determining or influencing the exception application of Seneca Valley or any other school district.

Seneca Valley’s inflationary index set by the state — the rate by which it is allowed to raise taxes, effective July 1 of this year — is 2 percent, or 2.11 mills.

Despite the initial rejection, Metcalfe has persisted, again requesting that the governor use his executive authority to sideline Seneca Valley’s and other districts’ attempts to increase their property taxes beyond their respective indexes without a taxpayer referendum.

Act 1 of 2006 requires districts to put their above-index tax-hike proposals before the voters, but the law also contains waiver provisions that districts have used to circumvent the referendum process, such as pension fund payments and increased special education costs.

The bottom line is that the waivers have allowed districts to skirt the spirit of Act 1, which was indended to give taxpayers a voice regarding sizable tax increases.

Metcalfe is right in pressing the point that, if taxpayers are supposed to be given a voice, they should have it — at least in such tax-increase proposals. If the law is going to be consistently stripped of any effectiveness, it should be repealed.

Just as important, districts should not be saddled with busywork to meet conditions of a law that isn’t really doing what it is intended to do — especially from the taxpayers’ perspective.

In his second letter to Corbett, Metcalfe said his initial letter “incited quite a public outcry, not only from taxpayers in the Seneca Valley School District but also from cash-strapped residents across the commonwealth.”

Metcalfe said it appeared Corbett was not evaluating the full scope of the process by which school districts can apply for an Act 1 waiver, and he might be right.

“It’s important the governor utilize the law to ensure taxpayers are not taken advantage of,” Metcalfe said.

Education Department bureaucrats are unlikely to change their opinion about Corbett’s lack of authority in the waiver process, but taxpayers will be interested in how Corbett reacts to Metcalfe’s second correspondence.

Many of the commonwealth’s school systems are in a financial bind due to the 2011-12 state subsidy levels and those proposed for 2012-13. Seneca Valley faces a projected $4.8 million budget deficit that it must resolve by June 30.

But many taxpayers, still feeling the effects of the recession, job losses or employee concessions, have seen their ability to endure substantial tax increases eroded.

And, like it or not, Seneca Valley and many other school districts would not be in the dire straits they are in if they had worked harder to cut costs — including taking a hard line against sweetheart employee contracts — before the state’s fiscal mess turned into commonwealth school subsidy austerity.

For the taxpayers, Act 1 was envisioned as a tool to help control education costs, especially those tied to overly generous teacher and administration contracts.

Metcalfe wants Corbett to establish a written policy and an administrative hearing process to ensure school districts are not writing their budgets to bypass taxpayers’ rights.

Corbett should accept that recommendation, if the taxpayers’ best interests truly are among his top priorities.