Parkland School Board violated Sunshine Act, appeals judge rules in Sen. Coleman lawsuit

• Jarrett Coleman had accused the Parkland School Board of a lack of transparency
• Coleman, a former school board member who is now a state senator, filed the lawsuit in 2021
• The issue centered around consideration of a new teachers contract without advance public notice

HARRISBURG, Pa. - Sen. Jarrett Coleman has prevailed in his appeal of a 2021 transparency lawsuit against the Parkland School Board.
Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge Ann Covey ruled that the board violated the state’s open meetings law when it signed off on a teachers’ contract without giving the public advance notice of the vote.

“Today’s decision is a huge victory for government transparency,” said Coleman, R-Lehigh/Bucks. “What this decision means is that the public has a right to have advance notice of actions its government will consider taking before every meeting.”

The Parkland School Board added the teachers union's collective bargaining agreement to its agenda at its board meeting on Oct. 26, 2021. The contract, effective Sept. 1, 2022 through Aug. 31, 2025, included a 2.9% salary increase for 680 of its members. Board member Lisa Roth explained at the time that the lack of 24 hours’ notice was due to the union voting on it that day.

Coleman filed the lawsuit before he ended up serving on the school board in 2021-2022. He maintained the school board violated the state Sunshine Act and called for the new teachers' contract to be invalidated. He filed a second open meetings lawsuit days later against the district, which he later dropped.

A Lehigh County judge in November 2022 dismissed the first case, saying Coleman had misread the statute. Coleman appealed the ruling last December.

The state’s open meetings law requires school districts to post board agendas publicly at least 24 hours in advance, with a list of all items it will officially discuss or take action upon.

Legislation passed in 2021 further prohibited action on items not advertised a day in advance. Exceptions include emergencies, minor issues that don't involve spending taxpayer funds, or issues brought up during a meeting by a member of the public.

However, that measure also allowed the majority of an agency to add an item to the agenda at a meeting.

But Covey ruled that lawmakers’ intent in passing that legislation was to ensure that items were only added to the meeting agenda without 24 hours' notice when it was an emergency, did not include spending significant taxpayer dollars, and minor matters raised by a taxpayer during a meeting that does not involve spending money or creating a contract.

She said allowing a school board to allow anything to be added to an agenda at the last minute defeated the purpose of the Sunshine Act.

"There would be no reason for the General Assembly to have included subsections (b), (c), and (d) in Section 712.1 of the Sunshine Act; they would be mere surplusage," Covey wrote. "Moreover, such a result would be absurd in light of the specificity the General Assembly included ... and the General Assembly’s clear intention to generally prohibit last-minute agenda changes so that the public has proper advance notice and the opportunity to attend meetings where decisions on fund expenditures and/or contracts are made."

The Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association filed court paperwork as part of Coleman’s appeal to Commonwealth Court, supporting his argument.

Melissa Melewsky, the association's media law counsel, hailed the appellate court ruling.

"It is a significant win for transparency and public access rights in Pennsylvania," she said. "It has an implication for every agency that is subject to the Sunshine Act across the state."

Melewsky said the ruling will provide the public the prior notice it deserves to view and decide if members wish to comment on before an item is voted upon.

"Until this decision came down, agencies were interpreting the law to allow them to add anything to an agenda at the last minute," she said. "But the court has said squarely that that is not the way the law was intended. And that is not the way it can be applied."

The judge also ruled that because the Parkland School Board members came back in a subsequent meeting to approve the union contract, the trial court was correct in not invalidating it. That means the teacher pay raises remain in effect.

Coleman, who ran for state Senate last year and is in his first term, also was not awarded attorney fees and costs.

School board President Carol Facchiano did not immediately return a call for comment.

This report is developing and will be updated.