Introduction
Thomas Jefferson famously espoused that “an enlightened citizenry is indispensable for the proper functioning of a republic.” He believed that the survival of our Republic was critically dependent upon the education of all citizens. The necessity of public education remains a core belief that is axiomatic for most Americans today.
Although the right to an education is not explicitly contained within the United States Constitution, it is deeply rooted in Pennsylvania Constitutional history, dating as far back as William Penn’s 1681 Frame of Government, the Commonwealth’s first charter. Penn believed that no cost should be spared in providing for education, and this principle has been carried through to subsequent iterations of the Pennsylvania Constitution in 1790, 1838, and 1874. The current Education Clause, voted on in 1967, provides: “The General Assembly shall provide for the maintenance and support of a thorough and efficient system of public education to serve the needs of the Commonwealth.” Pa. Const. art. III, § 14.
In order to effectuate this constitutional mandate, a system of public education has evolved which serves more than 1.7 million K-12 students and includes 500 school districts, over 160 brick-and-mortar charter schools, 14 cyber charter schools, 29 Intermediate Units, and 84 career and technical education centers. Ideally, this conglomeration of resources should be sufficient to deliver quality education to all Pennsylvania students, however, irrefutable data suggests access to quality education is not evenly distributed in the Commonwealth. Disparities in the allocation of educational resources have led to an historic challenge of the constitutionality of public education funding in the case William Penn School District v. Pennsylvania Department of Education.
Who brought the suit and what is the issue?
In 2014, six Pennsylvania school districts, several parents, the Pennsylvania Association of Rural and Small Schools (PARSS) and the NAACP Pennsylvania State Conference filed a lawsuit in the Commonwealth Court against the Governor, various state education officials, and the legislature, alleging a systemic failure to uphold the state constitutional mandate of providing a “thorough and efficient system” of education to all Pennsylvania students. According to the suit, Pennsylvania’s then-used education funding model relied so heavily on local property taxes to fund school districts that it excessively and unconstitutionally disadvantaged low-wealth districts.
Although school districts across the United States are funded by some combination of federal, state, and local dollars, the plaintiffs in this suit alleged that Pennsylvania was overly reliant on local money and was underfunded at the state level, thereby creating an unconstitutional disparity in funding based on local demographics.
Debra Gordon Klehr, Executive Director of the Education Law Center, and attorney for the plaintiffs, has explained, “[W]hen we filed the case, Pennsylvania was paying about 36 percent of the funds to school districts – about 10 percentage points lower than most other states. And that had a huge impact on our schools and inequity because districts then had to rely on local wealth to raise money they weren’t getting from the state.” Demographically diverse, the six petitioner school districts were selected because each had a high tax effort but low tax capacity, were efficient with what they had, but were still unable to provide for their students’ needs because of lack of state support.
The Trial
Before trial, this case toggled its way up and down the Pennsylvania appellate court system, ultimately landing in the Commonwealth Court for a trial on the issue of fairness and equity in funding. The trial was held before President Judge Renee Cohn Jubelirer and took place over four months in 2021. The individual plaintiffs shared distressing stories of the failure of the public school system to educate their children. They also presented data and expert testimony that demonstrated how Pennsylvania’s two-tiered funding system denied students in low wealth and low-income school districts a quality education.
The evidence adduced at trial demonstrated that all students in the Commonwealth need more funding, but students in the poorest school districts need significantly more funding than students in the wealthiest districts. Students in the poorest quintile of districts need 38% more funding and the wealthiest quintile students need 11% more funding than they currently receive. In order to meet proficiency goals in state assessments, school districts need an additional $4.6 billion in funding, with low-wealth districts being the most severely underfunded. Their adequacy shortfall is 11 times that in the wealthiest quintile.[1]
The Court’s Ruling
On February 7, 2023, Judge Cohn Jubilerer issued a 768-page decision that recognized that “all children can learn and succeed when given the tools.” She noted that education is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Pennsylvania Constitution, and that a “thorough and efficient” system of education includes such components as:
A sufficient, qualified, and effective staff
Safe and adequate school facilities
An adequate, modern curriculum
Modern instrumentalities of learning including technology and books
Ultimately, Judge Cohn Jubilerer held that Pennsylvania’s funding model failed to provide these critical components in an equitable manner. The Judge was persuaded by data demonstrating that students residing in school districts with low property values and incomes were deprived of opportunities and resources available to students residing in high property value and high-income districts. The Judge concluded that this disparity is not justified by any compelling government interest, nor is it rationally related to any legitimate government objective. Therefore, the resultant disparities deprive students of equal protection under the law. In order to correct this injustice, the Court ordered state officials to change the way public schools are funded. The ruling set the stage for a comprehensive overhaul of Pennsylvania’s public education funding formula; a task that would prove to be easier said than done.
Where do we stand now?
The Court did not provide specific guidance on how to achieve constitutionality in public education funding; it would be up to the legislature and state education officials to develop a strategy to do this. The work began with the creation of a bipartisan panel of legislators and Pennsylvania education officials dubbed the Basic Education Funding Commission. Throughout the fall of 2023, the Commission held public hearings and entertained public comments. In January 2024, the Commission adopted a plan that, if implemented, would make fundamental changes to the funding formula to not only increase spending across the board, but to address current inequities in spending.
On August 9, 2024, Governor Josh Shapiro signed into law the new funding formula which included a new funding formula and additional educational funds totaling $1.1 billion.
Where do we go from here?
While this is a good start, education advocates believe it is not good enough. Lancaster School District Assistant Superintendent Matt Przywara is quoted as saying, “the increase doesn’t go far enough to answer the landmark 2023 court ruling that concluded Pennsylvania’s school funding formula was unconstitutional because it short-shrifted poorer school districts.” He has accused Governor Shapiro and other state officials of not finishing the job. Many agree with him.
But it is a start. As citizens, we need to stay informed about this issue and hold our elected officials accountable to the Court’s 2023 decision and ultimately, the Pennsylvania Constitution. How can an ordinary Pennsylvania citizen stay informed? Here is a list of things you can do:
1. Attend your local school board meetings. Ask questions of your elected officials!
2. Study your local school board’s annual.
3. Monitor your district’s performance on annual assessments.
4. Stay informed about public school funding statewide at the following sources:
The Public Interest Law Center
As Thomas Jefferson would remind us – we must remain educated so can ensure a proper education for future generations.
[1] Case Spotlight: William Penn School District et al. v. Pennsylvania Department of Education Summary
Written by attorney Kathleen Mahoney at Abdnour Weiker, LLP