Facts of the Case

The Pennsylvania Schools Boards Association, Inc., Cameron County School District, Butler Area School District, Mars Area School District and the Pocono Mountain Area School District petitioned against Charles Zogby, the Secretary of Education, Pennsylvania Department of Education, Western PA Cyber Charter School, Commonwealth Cyber Charter School, T.E.A.C.H. Charter School and the PA Virtual Charter School. The school districts filed the petition after the Department of Education sent letters to them stating it would withhold state education subsidies from those districts that refused to pay tuition bills submitted by cyber charter schools. The Secretary eventually withheld money from numerous districts after cyber charter schools submitted unpaid invoices. The school districts challenged the withholdings because they questioned the legality of "cyber" charter schools under the Charter School Law.

In Count I, the districts asked the Commonwealth Court to declare cyber schools to be illegal; therefore, they would not be subject to deductions from state subsidies by the Secretary to pay cyber schools. As an alternative, the districts asked to order that the Secretary and Department of Education provide notice to the districts and an opportunity for the districts to be heard as to whether the cyber schools were acting in accordance with the Charter School Law. In Count II, the districts asked that the court to force the Secretary and Department of Education to cease from withholding funds to pay cyber schools. As an alternative, the districts asked that they receive notice and have the opportunity to be heard before the funds were withheld. In Count III, the districts asked that the court force the Secretary and Department of Education to make all state subsidy payments to the districts, without any withholdings for cyber school payments. In Count IV, the districts asked the court to review and overturn the decision of the Secretary and Department of Education to withhold subsidies from the districts. Counts I, II and III were addressed to Commonwealth Court's original jurisdiction while Count IV was addressed to Commonwealth Court's appellate jurisdiction.

Decision of the Court

On 13 March 2002, The Commonwealth Court, No. 213 M.D., dismissed Counts I, II, and III. On Count IV, the Secretary's decision to withhold funds was canceled by the court and the decision was sent back to the Pennsylvania Department of Education to allow the districts an opportunity to challenge the deductions. The court declared that cyber schools were legal under the Charter School Law and that the districts could not challenge the legality of cyber charter schools. Also, the Pennsylvania Department of Education lacked the authority to rule on a challenge of the legality of cyber charter schools.

Basis for the Decision

In Boyertown Area School District v. Department of Education, A.2d Pa. Cmwlth., Nos. 2286, 2287, 2640, 2699, 2863, 2864, 2865, 2866, 2883, 2892, 2914, 2915, C.D. 2001 & No. 150 C.D. 2002, the court ruled that the Department of Education may not withhold subsidies without providing an opportunity for a hearing. The Secretary must also determine whether the Charter School is operating in compliance with the Charter School Law.

Counts I, II and III were dismissed because the districts could not have their case heard by the Commonwealth Court in both its appellate and original jurisdictions. Since the court ruled that the Secretary would have to hear the district's objections in Boyertown, it dismissed these counts.

The court ruled that the districts lacked standing to challenge the legality of cyber charter schools because the only parties that can challenge this are the chartering school district and the State Charter School Appeal Board. This was decided in West Chester Area School District v. Collegium Charter School, 760 A. 2d 452 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2000) when Commonwealth Court ruled that those not involved in the statutory process did not have the standing to challenge.

The court also ruled that Charter School Law does not prohibit cyber schools because they meet the criterion for location, school site, school premises, and allow for compulsory attendance laws to be followed.

Prepared by Cheryl Sottolano, July 2002.