FILE COPY IN THE CHANCERY COURT FOR DAVIDSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE. THE METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT OF NASHVILLE AND DAVIDSON COUNTY, METROPOLITAN NASHVILLE BOARD OF PUBLIC EDUCATION, and SHELBY COUNTY GOVERNMENT, Plaintiffs, TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, PENNY SCHWINN, in her official capacity as Education Commissioner for the Tennessee Department of Education, and BILL LEE, in his official capacity as Governor for the State of Tennessee, Defendants. COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, The Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County (“Metropolitan Government”), the Metropolitan Nashville Board of Public Education, and the Shelby County Government seek declaratory judgment and injunctive relief from the “Tennessee Education Savings Account Pilot Program,” Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 49-6-2601, et seg. (“ESA Act”), which the Tennessee General Assembly passed and the Governor signed during the 2019 legislative session, This controversial legislation transfers critical state and local funding from struggling public schools to private schools. It was so unpopular that it gamered a bare majority of support in the General Assembly only by exempting from its scope every county in the state but ‘two, Davidson and Shelby, which alone bear the bill’s financial burdens. ‘roomie‘The Tennessee Constitution prohibits the General Assembly from unilaterally and arbitrarily placing such an unfair burden on individual counties. The “Home Rule” Amendment in Article XI, Section 9 mandates that any General Assembly act “local in form or effect” and “applicable to a particular county” is “void and of no effect” unless the act, by its terms, requires approval by a two-thirds vote of the county’s legislative body or a majority of the county’s voters. The General Assembly cannot impose its will on only two counties without their approval. If the legislature believes that education savings accounts are good policy, it may pass a bill of general application so that all counties share the purported benefits of the program. If the legislature prefers to limit the bill’s application to two counties, it must include a local-approval option and hope the program’s merits will convince the affected counties to choose to participate. ‘The ESA Act does neither and is the very model of such prohibited legislation, The Home Rule Amendment violation is not the only constitutional defect in the ESA Act. Its disparate and arbitrary treatment of Davidson and Shelby counties is not rationally related to any legitimate governmental interest and therefore violates the Tennessee Constitution’s equal protection guarantees in Article I, Section 8, and Article XI, Section 8. Furthermore, by imposing aheavy financial burden solely on the Davidson and Shelby County school districts, the legislation violates the constitutional requirements of Article XI, Section 12, which requires the State to “provide for the maintenance, support and eligibility standards of a system of free public schools.” For these reasons, the Court should declare the ESA Act unconstitutional and enjoin its enforcement. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Tenn. Code. Ann. § 16-11-102. ora 22. This Court has the power to enter a declaratory judgment and issue injunctive relief pursuant to Tenn, Code Ann, § 1-3-121, Tenn, Code Ann. § 29-1-101, Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 29-14- 102 and -103, and Tenn, R. Civ. P. 65. 3. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann, §§ 20-2-222 and -223. 4, Venue is proper in this judicial distriet pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann, §§ 4-4-104 and 20-4-101 (a), as this cause of action arose in Davidson County, Tennessee. 5. Plaintiff Metropolitan Board of Public Education cannot be barred from filing this complaint by the ESA Act, Tenn, Code Ann. § 49-6-2611(d). By attempting to render the constitutionality of its actions unreviewable, the legislative branch impermissibly usurped the role of the judiciary. See State v. Mallard, 40 8,W.3d 473, 480-482 (Tenn, 2001) (“Only the Supreme Court has the inherent power to promulgate rules governing the practice and procedure of the courts in this state.”). PARTIES 6. Plaintiff Metropolitan Government is a consolidated city and county government formed by the City of Nashville and Davidson County and incorporated pursuant to Tenn, Code Ann. §§ 7-1-101, ef seq. The Metropolitan Government is responsible for adopting a budget for its public schools and administering the schools through its Metropolitan Board of Public Education, Metropolitan Charter §§ 9.01, 9.03, 7. Plaintiff Metropolitan Board of Public Education administers and controls the Metropolitan Government's system of public schools established by the Metropolitan Charter. Metropolitan Charter § 9.01; see also Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 49-2-201, et seg, The Metropolitan Government's school system is commonly referred to as Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools (’MNPS”) oosasias) 38. Plaintiff Shelby County Government is a home charter local govemment in ‘Tennessee. Shelby County Government is responsible for adopting a budget for its public schools and administering Shelby County Schools (“SCS”) through the Shelby County School Board. 9. Defendant ‘Tennessee Department of Education (“TDOE”) is the State of Tennessee's education agency. The TDOE is responsible for the enforcement and administration of the ESA Act. The TDOE is located at 710 James Robertson Parkway, Nashville, Tennessee 37243. 10, Defendant Dr. Penny Schwinn is the Education Commissioner for the TDOE. Dr. Schwinn is sued in her official capacity and has an office at 710 James Robertson Parkway, Nashville, Tennessee 37243. 11. Defendant Bill Lee is the Governor of the State of Tennessee. The Tennessee Constitution vests the Governor with “the supreme executive power of this state.” TENN. CONST., art. IIL, § 1. As the Chief Executive for the State of Tennessee, Governor Lee has a constitutional obligation to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” /d. As the Chief Executive, Governor Lee has the obligation to ensure that laws be executed consistent with the mandates of the Tennessee Constitution. Governor Lee is sued in his official capacity and has an office at State Capitol, Ist Floor, 600 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., Nashville, Tennessee 37243. FACTS I. Tue ESA AcrIs A Lecisnative ACt THAT Is LOCAL IN FORM AND EFFECT BECAUSE I APPLIES ONLY TO DAVIDSON AND SHELBY COUNTIES AND Has No PROVISION FOR LOCAL APPROVAL. 12. In May 2019, the Tennessee General Assembly passed the ESA Act, Public Chapter 506, establishing the “Tennessee Education Savings Account Pilot Program.” Tenn, Code Ann. §§ 49-6-2601, ef seg. remiss) 413, Under the ESA Act, a participating student will receive an education savings account to pay tuition, fees, and other expenses related to attending a participating private school. The student's account is funded by diverting funds from the student’s public-school district in an amount equal to the distriet’s per-pupil state and local funding required by the state’s Basic Education Program (“BEP”) or the combined (state and local) statewide average of BEP funding, whichever is lower. Tenn, Code Ann. §§ 49-6-2603(a)(4), -2605(a), -2607(a). 14, TDOE plans to launch the program for the 2020-2021 academic year in Davidson and Shelby counties. TDOE, Education Savings Account (ESA) — Program, https://www.tn gov/edueation/schoo!-options/esa-program.htm| 15, TDOBis soliciting “Intent to Participate” forms from interested private schools. At least 57 private schools submitted Intent to Participate forms as of January 21, 2020, with 26 schools in the Nashville area, 30 schools in the Memphis area, and one in Knoxville. Marta W. Aldrich, These 57 private schools want in on Tennessee's new voucher program, CHALKBEAT, Jan. 21, 2020, https://chalkbeat.org/posts/tn/2020/01/21 /here-are-the-57-private-schools-wanting-1o- participate-in-tennessees-new-voucher-program/. 16. The Tennessee Code refers to public-school systems as “local edu tion agencies or “LEAs.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-1-103(2). The definition of LEA includes but is not limited to a “metropolitan school system” and a “county school system.” MNPS is a metropolitan school system. SCS is a county school system. 17. The ESA Act strictly limits the pool of public-school students eligible to receive MNPS and SCS. education savings accounts to two LE, ssa) 5