Lawsuit seeks to have Youngstown Plan declared unconstitutional

By Denise Dick

denise_dick@vindy.com

YOUNGSTOWN

The city school board is going to court to have the Youngstown Plan declared unconstitutional.

The complaint for declaratory judgment and preliminary injunction was filed Friday in Franklin County Common Pleas Court.

The Ohio Education Association, Youngstown Education Association, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, and Jane Haggerty, a city schoolteacher and district resident, joined the school board in the action.

It lists the state; Richard Ross, state superintendent of public instruction; and the Ohio Department of Education as defendants and seeks a preliminary injunction to stop provisions of the law from taking effect, said Atty. Ted Roberts, who represents the school board by contract. The law is set to become effective beginning in October.

City Law Director Martin Hume, who is the school district’s counsel by statute, expects a hearing on that injunction to be set within the next couple of weeks.

Roberts said the complaint also seeks to have a judge determine the law unconstitutional and invalid.

Kim Norris, an ODE spokeswoman, said the department hasn’t seen the lawsuit, but Ross issued a statement regarding the Youngstown schools:

“Having been in education for more than 40 years, there is nothing worse than seeing our boys and girls trapped in failing schools without the opportunity to achieve their dreams,” Ross said in the statement. “I had the pleasure of working with the community leadership in Youngstown who wanted to trigger change in their school system before another generation of students was lost. I look forward to our continued work together to give students in Youngstown the best opportunity for success.”

The plan, approved in late June by both houses of the state Legislature and signed by Gov. John Kasich in early July, would dissolve the Youngstown City School District Academic Distress Commission established in 2010. In its place, a new commission would be created with three members appointed by the state superintendent of public instruction, one by the mayor and a teacher appointed by the city school board.

That commission would appoint a chief executive officer to manage and operate the school district. The CEO would be paid by the state and have broad authority including the power to hire and fire administrators, reopen contracts, bring in outside operators to run failing schools and close schools.

Hume said the complaint seeks the ruling of unconstitutionality based on three arguments.

The first argues that a provision of the law was violated that requires that every bill be considered on three separate days by both state houses. The Youngstown Plan was introduced and passed by both houses all on the same day.

Secondly, it allows for complete elimination of a city school district without “consent, debate or input from the voters in the city school district,” the lawsuit said.

Lastly, it eliminates from district residents the fundamental right to vote, it said.

The law takes the power of the elected school board and transfers it to an academic distress commission.

District voters in the last school board election voted “without knowledge that the power conferred on the elected school board would be eliminated ...,” the lawsuit said.

The law “treats voters in the Youngstown City School District differently than voters in other school districts in violation of the Equal Protection Clauses” of the state and U.S. Constitutions, it says.

The school board approved a resolution at a special meeting Thursday to move forward with the action. The measure was approved 6-0 with Marcia Haire-Ellis absent. The resolution authorizes the attorneys to prosecute the matter to its conclusion.

Brenda Kimble, school board president, couldn’t estimate how much the action would cost nor answer whether the unions would contribute for legal expenses. “We don’t have an expected amount at this point,” she said.

Kimble said the district’s finances are stable.

The district twice has been in state-declared fiscal emergency, released most recently in 2011.

Treasurer James Reinhard said his understanding of the financial aspects of this type of legal action doesn’t concern him.

“The benefits should exceed the cost,” he said. “If it looks like they don’t, I’m sure we’ll discuss how far to take it.”

Roberts said each of the parties to the lawsuit is responsible to pay its attorneys.

“I think it’s significant that the parties here have joined together, and we have the benefit of several teams of lawyers looking at this and believe it is the appropriate step to take,” Roberts said.

Kimble said the Youngstown Plan “destroys public education.”

“It has nothing to do with making the education of students better,” she said. “It has nothing to do with enhancing education. It’s about closing buildings and giving out vouchers. It takes away the voice of the people. It takes away local control.”

Paula Valentini, a spokeswoman for YEA, the teachers union, said the union opted to join the lawsuit in an effort to give educators a voice.

“We don’t want to be shut out of the effort to improve Youngstown City Schools,” she said. “I think that was the plan” of those who devised the Youngstown Plan. “I believe that parents want teachers at the table when decisions are made that affect the education of their children.”

The Youngstown Plan was developed by a group that met over several months. Thomas Humphries, president and CEO of the Youngstown/Warren Regional Chamber; Connie Hathorn, former city schools superintendent; Bishop George V. Murry of the Diocese of Youngstown; Jim Tressel, president of Youngstown State University; Laura Meeks, former president of Eastern Gateway Community College; Herb Washington, president of HLW Fast Track; retired Judge Robert Douglas of Youngstown Municipal Court; and Nick Santucci of the chamber were members of that group.

Other state and local officials attended at least some of the meetings, including Ross.

Humphries, who has been the spokesman for the plan, declined to comment through a chamber spokesman, because the chamber isn’t a party to the suit.