Opinion ID: 2312018
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Public School Code Supports The Department

Text: Whether the Department may calculate a district's subsidy by taking into account strike-related reductions in instructional days is not expressly addressed by any provision of the Public School Code. Indeed, the factor the Department employs to correct such reductions, average daily membership, is not specifically defined in the Code. [5] Nor does the answer to this question expressly appear anywhere in the statutes authorizing teachers' strikes. See Public Employe Relations Act, Act of July 23, 1970, P.L. 563, § 101 et seq., 43 P.S. § 1101.101 et seq. (Supp. 1979). Read in its entirety, however, the Code, both as enacted and as recently amended, strongly supports the position of the Department that instructional days lost as a result of a strike must be taken into account. First there is express Code provision for subsidy payments in cases of Schools Closed on account of contagious disease, etc. Section 2523 of the Code provides: When any board of school directors or county board of school directors with respect to area technical schools is compelled to close any school or schools on account of any contagious disease, the destruction or damage of a school building by fire or otherwise, and therefor is unable to keep such school or schools open for the minimum term required by this act, the Superintendent of Public Instruction may pay to such school district or board any or all of its share of the annual State appropriation as he deems proper. Public School Code of 1949, § 2523, as amended, 24 P.S. § 25-2523 (1962). See Act of May 18, 1911, P.L. 309, § 2311 (source of § 2523); see also Act of January 14, 1970, P.L. (1969) 468, § 80. By mandate of the Statutory Construction Act, [e]xceptions expressed in a statute shall be construed to exclude all others. 1 Pa.C.S. § 1924. As the Secretary concluded here: [t]he clear implication of this subsection is that when the school year is less than the statutory minimum for any reason other than destruction or damage of school buildings or contagious disease, the School Code forbids the Secretary from paying all the subsidy the school district would have otherwise received. Also there are three supplements to section 1501 of the Code decreasing the state-mandated minimum days of instruction from 180 to accommodate weather emergencies of 1977 and 1978 and the nuclear emergency of 1979. Act 1977-4, which decreased to 177 the minimum days of instruction (and alternatively permitted reduction of hours of instruction), expressly provides: No public or approved private kindergarten, elementary or secondary school, vocational-technical school, or intermediate unit program of instruction which was closed because of the Weather Emergency and which makes a good faith effort as determined by the Secretary of Education to keep open for at least one hundred seventy-seven (177) days or the optional hourly basis of instruction for pupils shall receive less subsidy payments or reimbursements than it would otherwise be entitled to receive on account of the school year 1976-77. Act of June 1, 1977, P.L. 4, § 1501.1, formerly 24 P.S. § 15-1501.1. Act 1978-50, which excused districts from changing graduation schedules or from requiring graduating students to return to school after graduation, similarly provides: No district which makes a bona fide effort as determined by the Secretary of Education to provide one hundred eighty (180) days of instruction for graduating students shall receive less subsidy payments or reimbursements than it would otherwise be entitled to receive on account of the school year 1977-78 because of the provisions of this act. Act of April 28, 1978, P.L. 121, § 1501.2, formerly 24 P.S. § 15-1501.2. Act 1979-7, which depending upon a district's distance from the Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant reduced to 174 or 178 the minimum days of instruction (and optionally permitted reduction on an hourly basis), also provides: No public or approved private kindergarten, elementary or secondary school, vocational-technical school, or intermediate unit program of instruction which was closed because of the Nuclear Emergency and which makes a good faith effort as determined by the Secretary of Education to keep open for at least one hundred seventy-four (174) days and one hundred seventy-eight (178) days as provided above or the optional hourly basis of instruction for pupils shall receive less subsidy payments or reimbursements than it would otherwise be entitled to receive on account of the school year 1978-79. Act of May 11, 1979, P.L. 21, § 1501.4. These express supplements to section 1501 carry the same implications as found in section 2523 that, except for the prescribed exigency, the School Code forbids the Secretary from paying all the subsidy the school district would have otherwise received. Additionally, in making these reimbursement exceptions part of section 1501 of the Code, the Legislature makes clear that a direct relationship exists between the established 180 day requirement contained in section 1501 and the subsidy formula contained in section 2502(d). Equally important is the overriding, statutorily-mandated presumption [t]hat the General Assembly does not intend a result that is . . . unreasonable. 1 Pa.C.S. § 1922(1). It is not and, indeed, cannot be disputed that, as a strike causes days of instruction to decrease, there is a proportional decrease in actual instruction expenses. [6] On appellee district's reading of the Code, however, the Department would be obliged to pay strike-affected appellee district furnishing less than 180 instructional days the same subsidy it pays districts providing a full 180 instructional days and spending more than appellee district. [7] We are satisfied that the Legislature did not intend to favor a strike-affected district with a full subsidy where it provides fewer days of instruction than the number required by state law. There is not the slightest trace of legislative intent to give the same subsidy for less instruction, let alone even a suggestion of intent to afford an incentive to provide less instructional days. Indeed, there is clear legislative intent to the contrary. Only in the specific enumerated exceptions previously discussed does the Legislature permit a school district to receive a full subsidy where less than 180 days have been provided. Strike-related reductions in instructional days are not included among the named exceptions. These legislative provisions persuade us that appellee district's reading of the Code must be rejected. By contrast, the Department's determination is in harmony with the legislative judgment. The Department's determination assures that districts providing less than a full 180 days of instruction as a result of a strike are not favored, thus achieving the Legislature's goal of fair subsidy allocation in relation to days of instruction provided. Hence we vacate the order of the Commonwealth Court and we reinstate the order of the Secretary of Education. [8] Order of the Commonwealth Court vacated and order of the Secretary of Education reinstated. LARSEN, J., files a dissenting opinion in which KAUFFMAN, J., joins.