U. files brief vs. lawsuit

City Council testimony from 1977 indicates that the controversial Mayor's Scholarships agreement calls for 125 awards, not the 500 that a local law center is demanding, court documents filed by the University this month show. The University quoted the testimony in a brief filed in common pleas court, detailing its request that the class action suit against the University over the scholarship agreement be thrown out of court. The brief quotes Harold Manley, then the University's treasurer, as testifying before City Council that the University's total commitment for the 1978 scholarships would be "slightly in excess of a half million dollars." That figure is roughly equal to the University's 1977-78 tuition multiplied by 125, and about $1.5 million less than the cost of tuition times 500, which the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia's reading of the ordinance suggests the figure should have been. The brief argues that PILCOP's lawsuit, filed in October, should be dismissed in light of Manley's testimony, as well as because it ignores the historical context of the scholarship agreement and does not make financial sense. Michael Churchill, PILCOP's chief counsel, did not return phone calls placed at his office yesterday. PILCOP's suit alleges that the University does not provide enough needy Philadelphia high school students with Mayor's Scholarships, which were established by a series of agreements with the city in exchange for nearly 47 acres of land. The suit demands that the University adhere to the 1977 ordinance, which consolidated two earlier agreements and calls on the University "to establish and forever maintain at least 125 four-year full tuition scholarships or their equivalent . . . to be awarded annually." At issue is whether the 1977 ordinance requires the University to provide a total of 125 scholarships in any one year, as the University maintains, or 125 new scholarships each year for a total of 500 in any one year, as PILCOP claims. Prior to 1977, two separate ordinances required the University to offer a total of 125 scholarships. The University's brief admits that the wording of the agreement itself is vague, but points to the ordinance's preamble, which requires the University only to provide "a total of 125 full tuition scholarships." The brief adds that PILCOP's argument that the ordinance requires the University to quadruple the number of Mayor's Scholarships it provides each year does not match the history of the agreements. It also says it would have been "economic folly" for the University knowingly to quadruple the number or value of the scholarships. General Counsel Shelley Green said last semester that the purpose of the 1977 ordinance was to lift certain deed restrictions on land that the University wanted to mortgage -- not to increase the number of scholarships from 125 to 500. If the University agreed to spend an extra $1.5 million a year in 1977 in order to obtain $12 million of financing, the brief says, it "would have effectively added an extra 12.5 percent to the interest of 9.25 percent it was already paying." The University also argues that many of the parties named as plaintiffs in the suit, including labor unions and nonprofit corporations, have failed to show how they have been injured by the University's actions. These plaintiffs filed the suit "on behalf of Philadelphia school children." The University asks the court to dismiss the case because the scholarship agreement is between the University and the city, and other parties do not have the right "to enforce the Ordinance." As a result, they argue, the plaintiffs have no right to sue. Finally, the brief objects to the lawsuit for criticizing the University's nationwide recruiting effort, for pointing out that the University's operating budget and endowment are substantial and for suggesting how high the University's rent would be on the 47 acres if it were not for the scholarship agreement. The University claims these points are "impertinent and irrelevant." PILCOP has until the middle of February to respond to the University's brief.