School District of Philadelphia v. Department of Education
41 A.3d 222
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2012Background
- Charter School of Philadelphia and Charter School requested funding disputes from the Department after withholding of funds due to enrollment above the cap in the 2007-2008 to 2009-2010 school years.
- 2005 charter renewal imposed a 675-student enrollment cap for K-8; the cap was incorporated into the charter.
- Act 61 (effective July 1, 2008) introduced new requirements for caps and provided for prospective application.
- Patently, the Department withheld $1,678,579.18 from the District’s subsidy under CSL §1725-A(a)(5) and District challenged the deduction.
- Secretary determined the 2005 cap bound the Charter School for 2007-2008, but invalid for 2008-2009 and 2009-2010; ordered disbursement accordingly.
- District and Charter School appealed the Secretary’s decision,
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Department has jurisdiction to decide the funding dispute | District argues CSL provides exclusive remedy via common pleas. | Charter School argues Department hearing under CSL §1725-A(a)(5)-(a)(6) governs funding disputes. | Yes; Department had jurisdiction under CSL. |
| Whether the enrollment cap was valid for 2007-2008 | District contends cap valid under pre-Act 61 | Charter School argues Act 61 not retroactive; cap binding by signed charter | Cap valid for 2007-2008. |
| Whether the enrollment cap was invalid for 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 | Act 61 requires new agreement to cap; unilateral precludes validity | Act 61 applies; cap unenforceable absent Charter School agreement | Cap invalid for 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. |
| Whether Charter School could appeal or challenge the charter conditions | Charter School may appeal administrative actions under AAL | CSL does not provide an appeal for grant of charter with conditions | Agreeing with majority that there is a pathway to challenge under AAL; but court upholds denial of new appeal pathway for post-Act 61 regime. |
Key Cases Cited
- Phillips v. State Tax Equalization Bd., 948 A.2d 889 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (exclusive remedy for CSL-based funding disputes)
- Chester Cmty. Charter Sch. v. Dep't of Educ., 996 A.2d 68 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2010) (CSL §1725-A hearing covers accuracy of Department’s deduction)
- Foreman v. Chester-Upland School District, 941 A.2d 108 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (charter is like a regulatory permit; terms binding)
- Mosaica Academy Charter School v. Department of Education, 572 Pa. 191, 813 A.2d 813 (2002) (charter grant appeals not allowed; context discussed)
- Moser v. Commonwealth, 999 A.2d 602 (Pa. Super. 2010) (statutory/administrative review context cited)
- Curl v. Solanco School Dist., 936 A.2d 183 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007) (standard of review for secretary decisions)