Tired of ads? Subscribers enjoy a distraction-free reading experience.
Click here to subscribe today or Login.

On the one hand, it was absolutely huge news that seemed to get short shrift. On the other, it had zero impact on anything, and likely will continue that way for a good while.

Commonwealth Court Judge Renée Cohn Jubelirer, a Republican, sided with the plaintiffs in a truly historic lawsuit contending that the state’s funding of K-12 education is so woefully inadequate it violates the state Constitution.

“Students who reside in school districts with low property values and incomes are deprived of the same opportunities and resources as students who reside in school districts with high property values and incomes,” she wrote in Tuesday’s ruling. “As a result of these disparities, petitioners and students attending low-wealth districts are being deprived of equal protection of law.”

The ruling is not only unprecedented in this state, it overturns precedent. Two similar suits were filed in the past, both rejected as non-judicial matters belonging in the legislature’s wheelhouse. Those judges decided there were no clear state requirements schools had to meet, and thus no way for a court to determine if the state was providing enough money.

But that changed with the passage of the No Child Left Behind law in 2001, which required states to set steadily increasing targets in standardized reading and math test results, with everybody scoring proficient or better by 2014. NCLB failed under it’s own weight — the goal was unrealistically simple to begin with — and the law was revamped during the administration of President Barack Obama. But 2014 coincidentally was the year the lawsuit Jubelirer just ruled on was filed by advocacy groups teamed with six school districts (including Wilkes-Barre Area) and some individuals (including local mom Tracy Hughes).

Part of their argument: The state now had clear goals for schools to meet. Moreover, the state had done a “costing out” study to determine how much money each district needs to meet those goals. The legislature even adopted a new “fair funding formula” intended to get rid of the wide discrepancies in school funding created by heavy reliance on local property taxes. The formula, theoretically, would get a bigger share of state dollars to the neediest districts.

But in a textbook example of not putting your money where your mouth is, the legislature only applied the new formula to “new money.” If the state increased the amount provided from the previous year, the added dollars were doled out through the new formula. The bulk of the money continued to be allotted the old-fashioned, grossly inequitable way.

All of which gave those who filed the suit powerful arguments backing their claim, evidence that didn’t exist when similar suits were filed decades ago. In the end it is hard to picture Jubelirer not coming to the conclusion she made. So yeah, it is “historic” and “monumental” as two Wilkes-Barre Area School District officials said shortly after the ruling hit the headlines.

But being ordered to change things and actually seeing the change happen in Harrisburg can be two starkly different things. For starters, odds of an appeal are high. There’s also the fact that, as Jubelirer admitted frankly, the ruling puts the state in uncharted territory. Even if the majority of legislators agreed to change the system, how they get that done is a mystery.

So don’t expect big changes anytime soon, to school property taxes or to schools. The ruling, as correct as it is, won’t be the change, but it can be the catalyst for change. Harrisburg denizens need to see it that way. Forget appeals, accept the ruling as settled case law, and start working in earnest to figure whatever compromises are necessary to end education funding inequity.

Jubelirer’s 786-page ruling can be boiled down to this:

You’ve danced around the problem for decades. Roll up your sleeves and fix it.

– Times Leader