Coal Township School District v. Coal Township Taxpayers Ass'n

59 Pa. D. & C. 665, 1947 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 201
CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Northumberland County
DecidedJune 4, 1947
Docketno. 72
StatusPublished

This text of 59 Pa. D. & C. 665 (Coal Township School District v. Coal Township Taxpayers Ass'n) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Northumberland County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Coal Township School District v. Coal Township Taxpayers Ass'n, 59 Pa. D. & C. 665, 1947 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 201 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1947).

Opinion

Fortney, P. J.,

Petitioner, the School District of the Township of Coal, presented its [666]*666petition for a decree construing section 563 of the School Code of 1911, P. L. 309, as amended, with respect to emergencies, and asked to have determined in particular whether the members of the board of school directors of petitioner have the legal right to create an increased debt in excess of the budget, to meet the demands of the teachers in the district for an increase in salary.

The admitted facts show that the board of directors of the School District of the Township of Coal, a school district of the third class, regularly convened June 5, 1946, and unanimously adopted a budget for the school year 1946-47. This budget provided for the appropriation of certain sums of money for salary of its teachers. During the latter part of October and the early part of November 1946 discontent and dissatisfaction over salaries paid the teachers, occasioned by the increased cost of living, came to the attention of the board. On November 4, 1946, the teachers of petitioner, 90 in number, presented a written request to the board for an increase in salary for the school year 1946-47 amounting to $300 for each teacher. Subsequent negotiations between the board, its teachers, and the Department of Public Instruction of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania failed to produce any satisfactory agreement, as a result of which the teachers actually went on strike as of November 28, 1946, and remained away from their place of employment until January 6, 1947.

On January 2, 1947, a general mass meeting was held, at which time there were present citizens, taxpayers, teachers, and members of the board of directors of petitioner. At this meeting a public demand was made to meet the request of the teachers of your petitioners, and upon the failure of petitioner to meet this demand the threat was made of a general and protracted strike by the teachers, which would undoubt[667]*667edly have resulted in a general paralysis of the entire school system.

On January 6, 194J, the board of directors of petitioner, at a special session, acceded to the demands of the teachers, and the teachers then returned to their places of employment, resumed their duties, and have continued in the performance of these duties since that time.

The School Teachers Association of the Township of Coal, Local No. 695, United Public Workers of America, join in the prayer of this petition for a declaratory judgment. The Coal Township Taxpayers Association of Northumberland County, Pa., filed its answer admitting the statements of fact contained in the petition, but denied the conclusions purporting to show the urgency for the granting of the prayer of the petition, and aver that they oppose the action of the board of school directors for the reason that the same is illegal.

The financial condition of the school district is such that there are no present funds available to meet the increase in salaries to the extent agreed upon for each teacher. There is no unencumbered balance which can be transferred from any other fund to the fund allocated to pay the salary of the teachers. To make the payment of the increased amount for each teacher will require the sum of $27,000, which will cause petitioner to exceed the budget in the item therein set out as salary for its teachers, as well as the entire budget totals.

The prayer of the petition is that the court answer four questions, viz.: ■ ■

1. Was the action of the board of school directors of your petitioner, on January 6, 1947, granting each professional employe a bonus of $100 when he or she returned to duty, an additional sum of $100 to each at the close of the present school term, and a further amount, not to exceed $100, to each at the close of the [668]*668school term if the finances of the district warranted such expenditure, legal, binding on the present board of school directors, and enforceable by those who stand to benefit thereby?

2. Could the contracts of the professional employes of your petitioner be legally altered to reflect the specified increase as of September 3, 1946?

3. Did the members of the board of school directors of your petitioner, under the facts stated, have the legal right to create an increased debt which was in excess of the budget in the amount of $27,000?

4. In the event the court determines that petitioner has no right to increase the said salaries retroactive as of September 3,1946, does it have the right to proportionately increase said salaries as of January 6, 1947, the date of the resolution granting the increase, and continuing to the end of the present school term?

The School Code of May 18, 1911, P. L. 309, as amended, 24 PS §610, provides:

“The board of School Directors of each school district of the second, third or fourth class, shall, annually, at least thirty days prior to the adoption of the annual budget, prepare a proposed budget of the amount of funds that will be required by the school district in its several departments for the following fiscal year . . .

“The board of school directors may, during any fiscal year, make additional appropriations or increase existing appropriations to meet emergencies, such as epidemics, floods, fire, or other catastrophies, the funds therefor to be provided from unexpended balances in existing appropriations, from unappropriated revenue, if any, or from temporary loans.”

The principal question here presented in this petition for declaratory judgment is whether or not the actual striking of the school teachers of the Township of Coal, which caused them to remain away from their [669]*669place of employment for more than four weeks, and necessitated the closing of all public schools, threatening a general paralysis of the entire school system, constituted an emergency within the meaning of the act of assembly.

The statute refers to emergencies such as epidemics, floods, fires or other catastrophies. Here we have enumerated physical disasters which might impair the usefulness of school buildings, and of epidemics which would endanger the health of a community. We do not believe the legislature intended to limit the general term “emergencies” to emergencies of a physical nature. If this had been the intention of the legislature it could easily have said so. It deliberately inserted the broad term “emergencies” to provide for any emergencies brought about by an act of God or man, which imperiled school operations. It is a well known fact that Coal Township is in a distressed financial condition. Due to its inability to collect taxes the school district of the township has been the recipient of State aid for a number of years, amounting to more than three quarters of a million dollars. In our interpretation of the phrase “other catastrophies” we note the Supreme Court in Commonwealth ex rel. Fortney (for use) v. Bartol et al'., 342 Pa. 172, in its opinion making reference to the distressed financial condition of this same township, indicated that the failure to collect taxes was due to the catastrophic situation in the coal mining industry. The situation here is somewhat different from one where a strike was merely threatened, or where qualified teaching personnel might be attracted to more remunerative positions in private industry, thereby causing a possible loss to the school district by the uncertainty of replacing such teaching personnel.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State Ex Rel. McHose v. District Court
26 P.2d 345 (Montana Supreme Court, 1933)
Jacobs v. Wilkes-Barre Township School District
50 A.2d 354 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1946)
Commonwealth Ex Rel. Fortney v. Bartol
20 A.2d 313 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1941)
Elliott v. Lindquist
52 A.2d 180 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1947)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 Pa. D. & C. 665, 1947 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 201, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coal-township-school-district-v-coal-township-taxpayers-assn-pactcomplnorthu-1947.