Commonwealth Court memorandum denies objections in education funding lawsuit

A state appellate court has overruled preliminary objections brought in the education funding lawsuit led by the William Penn School District.

A memorandum opinion by Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson issued Monday afternoon shot down objections brought by the defendants concerning the constitutional rights at issue and the level of judicial scrutiny to be applied in the landmark suit alleging that the state is not upholding its constitutional duty to adequately and equitably fund public education. However, the court would allow discovery to continue on the aforementioned issues though these objections will eventually be overruled outright.

The court overruled objections brought by respondents from the state in regard to sovereign immunity and a separation of powers doctrine. The latter point, brought by the Pennsylvania Department of Education, was an issue that was settled by the state Supreme Court in September 2017 where it reversed the Commonwealth Court’s decision that the case was nonjusticiable. The Supreme Court’s decision there remanded the cast back down to Commonwealth Court to start the trial.

“We are persuaded by our Supreme Court’s reasoning and conclude that the doctrine of separation of powers does not bar petitioners’ claims,” read Simpson’s memo opinion on the objection of justiciability.

Finally, the court deferred action on an objection by state House Speaker Mike Turzai regarding the case pending further arguments.

Turzai spokesman Neal Lesher said his office was still reviewing the order late Monday but is prepared to proceed.

“While we agree with the original (April 2015) unanimous opinion of the Commonwealth Court that the lawsuit was ‘non-justiciable,’ the new formula really makes the lawsuit moot,” Lesher wrote in an email.

The objection is in regard to the Act 35 of 2016 fair funding formula signed into law which supersedes Act 61 of 2008, the studentweighted funding formula being contested when the suit was filed in 2014. State Senate President Pro-Tempore Sen. Joseph Scarnati said Act 35 changed the statutory scheme for funding Pennsylvania’s schools which now takes into account more factors about a school district to more fairly distribute basic education subsidies.

However, only about 7 percent of the $6 billion basic education fund is apportioned by the fair funding formulae. Scarnati contends this change is significant and the challenge to Act 61 is moot “in light of this intervening change in the law.”

“Unfortunately,” reads Simpson’s opinion, “neither the petition for review nor the record affords this court a basis to determine the possible impact of Act 35 on the causes of action currently pled by petitioners. In addition, we are mindful of our Supreme Court’s comments on mootness in William Penn II. Accordingly, at this juncture we cannot say as a matter of law that the abrogation of the statutory fund

LAWSUIT » PAGE 8