Officer, township don't want you to see lawsuit settlement, but here's why you might get to

Falls Township has settled a lawsuit alleging discrimination and retaliation against a township police officer, but neither side wants the public to know the details of the deal, including how much was paid.

In a motion filed last month in Bucks County Court, an attorney representing Detective Catherine Coffman requested a judge seal the settlement, claiming both parties consider it a “confidential settlement.”

“All parties have unique personal and business reasons for confidentiality,” Coffman’s attorney Erica Domingo wrote in the Nov. 17 motion, which is pending before Bucks County Common Pleas Judge Raymond McHugh.

Facade of Falls Administrative Complex at 188 Lincoln Highway. Falls supervisors rejected all bids for the renovation of the building in May, pushing back the start of construction. Administration to temporarily relocate.
Facade of Falls Administrative Complex at 188 Lincoln Highway. Falls supervisors rejected all bids for the renovation of the building in May, pushing back the start of construction. Administration to temporarily relocate.

More Falls political news Bucks GOP picks candidate to run in Dem stronghold. Why it could matter to PA politics

Legal experts, though, say such a request violates the Pennsylvania Right to Know Law since public agencies and money are involved, and the request also interferes with the public’s constitutional right to access courts and court documents.

Coffman, a 26-year police veteran, in 2019 sued the Falls Police Department alleging she was subjected to sex discrimination.

Petition says settlement agreement reached earlier this year; where is it?

While the petition seeking the seal states that a settlement was reached in August, there is no evidence the supervisors have approved the agreement at a publicly advertised meeting, as required under the Pennsylvania Right to Know Law.

A review of Falls meeting minutes and agendas since August found no mention of a settlement involving Coffman.

Falls Township denied a Right to Know request seeking a copy of the document claiming it does not exist.

Domingo also did not respond to an email sent Dec. 20 requesting a copy of the settlement.

In the court motion, Domingo stated that an unresolved dispute over proposed language in the final agreement exists and that Falls Township Police Department has not agreed to a solution proposed in October, “nor paid the settlement proceedings.”

Why Falls and Catherine Coffman believe the public has no right to see settlement

Domingo argued in her motion that Pennsylvania law provides that “the public may be excluded from court proceedings or records to protect private as well as public interest,” according to the petition.

Coffman wants to keep the agreement confidential “to avoid public knowledge of the settlement to protect her and her family from unnecessary and invasive intrusion by third parties,” according to the motion.

Falls Township wants the terms kept secret “as a compromise of a disputed claim and for other business reasons,” the motion said.

Legal experts argue when settlement involves public money it equals public access

But two legal experts counter that settlements involving public agencies — and the payment of public money — are indisputably public records, under the Right to Know Law.

“It is absolutely imperative that settlement agreements involving public employees and government agencies remain easily accessible,” said Joy Ramsingh, a Harrisburg attorney whose practice focuses on transparent government issues “These agreements are an important metric by which the public can assess government conduct and performance.”

Paula Knudsen Burke, the Pennsylvania staff attorney for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, added a Pennsylvania court ruling earlier this year affirmed that settlements with public agencies are subject to access under the Right to Know law.

Separate from the Right to Know Law, the public also has a constitutional right to access court documents, unless they are sealed for “good cause,” according to Knudsen-Burke, and Ramsingh.

The courts can only seal records for “good cause,” which Pennsylvania courts have explained only exists where sealing is necessary to prevent a “clearly defined and serious injury” to the person seeking closure, Ramsingh said.

“Agency embarrassment does not qualify as ‘good cause,’” she added.

Falls police union sues supervisors Falls police union filed criminal complaint against supervisors, solicitor. What we know.

More Falls crime news Pennsbury teacher on leave after arrest on felony child porn charges. What we know

This article originally appeared on Bucks County Courier Times: Falls Township settled with police detective, but the terms are secret