Opinion

Program Administration Services, Inc. v. Dauphin County General Authority

  • 874 A.2d 722
  • 2005 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 280
Court
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
May 19, 2005
Status
Published
Author
Pellegrini
On the bench
Colins, Smith-Ribner, Pellegrini, Friedman, Leadbetter, Jubelirer, Simpson
Cited by
7 cases
Authority
More cited than 8.7%

concluding that 53 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 5607(d)(12) conferred upon an authority the power to lend money to school districts for financing and that such an act was proprietary in nature and therefore bound successor boards because it was an activity *587 not required by statute, it is one that is carried on by private lenders, and it was designed to raise revenue for the authority

How later courts described this case

  • concluding that 53 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 5607(d)(12) conferred upon an authority the power to lend money to school districts for financing and that such an act was proprietary in nature and therefore bound successor boards because it was an activity *587 not required by statute, it is one that is carried on by private lenders, and it was designed to raise revenue for the authority
  • authority that provided a school district with financing akin to a private bank is specifically exempted from limiting provision

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

DISSENTING OPINION BY

Judge PELLEGRINI.

I join with Judge Cohn Jubelirer’s excellent dissent but write separately to note that this court, by allowing a 40 year contract to be entered into by a public body, essentially allows public authorities to be captured by and serve private interests rather than be controlled by and serve public interests. As we recently stated in County of Venango v. Housing Authority of County of Venango, 868 A.2d 646 (2005):

Authorities are public bodies entrusted with public funds and they carry out public responsibilities. While the General Assembly wanted authorities insulated from day-to-day politics, by making the “appointing power” elected officials, it recognized a principle at the core of a representative democracy — elections should make a difference and the public bodies should be answerable to the electorate. If the electorate is dissatisfied with how an authority’s board is carrying out its public responsibilities, then it can vote out of office the elected officials that appointed the members of the board. (Footnote omitted.)

*731 Now, through the device of a long term contract, whether it be 40 or 100 years, a “captured” authority cannot be recaptured and the wishes of the electorate can be ignored.

Judge COHN JUBELIRER joins this dissent.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.