A deeply divided appeals court on Wednesday reversed course from a decision made last year, stating that charter schools are eligible for a tax break that Palm Beach County’s 2018 voters approved for more traditional public schools.
The 4th District Court of Appeal’s 7-4 ruling said the wording violated state law in a referendum banning charter schools from receiving a share of increased property tax revenues. The decision overturned a 2-1 ruling by a judicial committee in April.
By 43 pages In the majority of the unanimous and dissenting opinions on Wednesday, the judges fought over the issues, with a dissent describing parts of the majority opinion as “judicial hocus-pocus” and “bait and switch”.
The 2018 referendum called on voters to approve an increase in property tax on issues such as school safety and teacher salaries. The money is “intended for the operational needs of non-charter district schools”. Charter schools are public schools that are usually run by private institutions.
After voters approved the election, two charter schools, the Academy for Positive Learning and the Palm Beach Maritime Academy, and two parents filed a lawsuit against the Palm Beach County School Board arguing that charter schools were eligible for part of the Have money.
After the panel’s decision against the charter schools in April, the matter was heard by the appeals court in what is known as “en banc” proceedings. The majority opinion on Wednesday said that due to part of state law that charter students should be funded “as if they were in a basic or special program, just like students, were not electoral approved Funding could be excluded from enrolled in other public schools in the school district. “
The statement also stated that the wording in the electoral measure that prevented charter schools from receiving money was “severable” – which essentially means it can be ignored – and that the remainder of the referendum was in “full.” Power and Effect ”could remain.
“By lifting and lifting the non-charter restriction from the 2018 referendum, it still achieves the intent of the 2018 referendum to generate additional revenue to fund school safety equipment, hire additional school police and mental health workers, arts, music, sports and career finance and election program teachers, and improve teacher salaries. ‘The only difference is that some of this funding has to be shared with charter schools,’ said the Chief Judge’s 17-page majority opinion Spencer Levine and judges Dorian Damoorgian, Burton Conner, Alan Forest, Mark Klingensmith, Jeffrey Kuntz and Edward art.
But dissenting judges berated the majority for ruling that the referendum could stay in place and for choosing to take the case en banc.
They argued, in part, that allowing the referendum to be allowed was against the will of voters, who believed they would vote on a measure that would preclude funding for charter schools. Judge Robert Gross described it as an act of “judicial hocus-pocus”
“Instead of taking this principled approach and recognizing that the referendum invalidation is the only correct means, the majority have instead rewritten the referendum and attracted Palm Beach County’s voters,” wrote Gross in a dissent that judges followed Martha Warner and Melanie Can. “By court order, the majority has levied a tax in favor of charter schools that voters never approved” by local referendum or general election “as required (under a section of state law).”
In a separate dissent, judge Cory cycle noted the majority “to ignore the will of 528,089 Palm Beach County voters who voted in a statewide election. Neither this court nor the school board or the charter schools can legally agree to remove the non-charter restriction from the 2018 referendum and remove as if the sanctity of voting intent is not an issue and can be thrown aside as nothing but frivolous minor annoyance. “
But Klingensmith wrote, in a majority-agreeing opinion, that the Palm Beach County School Board had clarified that the controversial charter school portion of the referendum could be severed.
“I share the concerns of my dissenting colleagues about the revision of voter referenda by judges and acknowledge their condemnation of the court-sanctioned disenfranchisement of voters,” wrote Klingensmith. “It should be emphasized, however, that the drafters of the elective language in question – the elected representatives of the Palm Beach County School District – specifically advised this court that it was their intent (and separability) and was that that court correct any legal deficiencies inherent to the language and do so without crushing the entire referendum. Seldom is presented to this court such a clear and indisputable expression of a draftsman’s intent as in this case. “
Funding for charter schools has long fueled the legislative debate. In the midst of the Palm Beach County litigation, Republican lawmakers passed a measure in 2019 that would allow charter schools to receive a fair amount of those property tax dollars for business purposes. However, the 2019 change was not retroactive, and Wednesday’s decision focused on state law as amended in 2018.
_____
Reprinted with permission from the News Service of Florida.
Post Views:
38