Civil Division-Kent County (739-7641)
The Honorable Valerie A. Woodruff
Acting Secretary
Department of Education
P.O. Box 1402
Dover, DE 19903
Dear Acting Secretary Woodruff:
On June 17, 1999, then Secretary of Education, Iris T. Metts, Ed.D.,
requested a formal Opinion of the Attorney General. Specifically, Dr. Metts
asked whether a member of the Christina School Board is eligible to retain
his or her board seat if he or she moves from the nominating district from
which they were elected to another nominating district within the school
district? We apologize for the delay in responding to your request, but
there are some peculiarities in the law about which we wished to be certain.
For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that a member of the Christina
School District Board of Education does not forfeit his or her seat by
moving from one nominating district to another.
Candidates for election to the Christina School District Board of Education
are nominated from seven nominating districts, but elected at large by
all of the voters in the school district. Fourteen Del.C. Sec.1066(e)(5)
provides that a nominee for election "must be a resident of the nominating
district in which his or her predecessor resides." The General Assembly
also specifically addressed the forfeiture of a school board member's seat
as a result of a change in residence. Fourteen Del.C. Sec.1054(a)
requires that "[i]f any school board member ceases to be a resident of
the reorganized school district, he shall cease to be a member of its school
board."
Accordingly, the existing statutory scheme provides a system where a
candidate runs from a nominating district, but forfeits his/her seat only
upon a change of residence from one reorganized school district to another.
The statutory reference to "reorganized school district" is defined by
14
Del.C. Sec. 1002(2) to mean "a school district which is constituted
and established in accordance with this chapter ...." Further, it is settled
Delaware law that one cannot engage in the interpretation of a statute
that is clear and unambiguous. Matter of Surcharge Classification 0133
By Delaware Compensation Rating Bureau, Inc., Del. Super., 655 A.2d
295 (1994), affirmed, Del. Supr. 655 A.2d 309 (1995); Williams v. Dyer,
Del. Super., C.A. No. 91C-11-010, Graves, J. (Aug. 12, 1992); Hutton
v. Phillips, Del. Super., 70 A.2d 15 (1949). Where the meanings of
the statute is clear, one is limited to the application of the literal
meaning of the words. Matter of Surcharge Classification, supra
at p. 303 (quoting Coastal Barge Corp. v. Coastal Zone Indus. Control
Board, Del. Supr., 492 A.2d 1242, 1246 (1985). There is no ambiguity
in 14 Del.C. Sec. 1054(a). Finally, in another subsection of Section
1066, the legislature specifically provided that "[a]ny vacancy on a board
of education shall be filled according to Section 1054 of this title."
14 Del.C. Section 1066(e)(8). Accordingly, it is difficult to argue
that the legislature was unaware of the provisions of Sec. 1054(a). While
the result is an anomaly, the statutes do not require that a school board
member elected from one nominating district forfeit his/her seat upon moving
to another nominating district within the same school district. It can
be argued that this peculiar result is unintended since district voters
are not permitted to "vote for more than 1 person who resides in each nominating
district." 14 Del.C. Sec. 1066(e)(7). Nevertheless, we cannot speculate
as to the intent of the legislature given the clear and unambiguous provisions
of Sec. 1054(a).
It should be noted that Section 1066(e) has been repealed effective
January 1, 2002. 71 Del. Laws, c. 491. Thereafter, district board elections
in the Christina School District will be controlled by 14 Del.C.
Sec. 1066A. That section provides that "a nominee must be a resident of
the nominating district for the seat he or she seeks," but is silent on
the issue of forfeiture. 14 Del.C. Sec. 1066A(a)(4). Therefore,
absent legislative action, Sec. 1054(a) will continue to govern the issue
of forfeiture.
Because members of the legislature have inquired about this issue, we
have copied some members of the General Assembly on this matter.
Very truly yours,
John B. Hindman
Deputy Attorney General
Approved:
Michael J. Rich
State Solicitor
cc: Hon. Steven H. Amick
Hon. David P. Sokola
Hon. Bruce C. Reynolds
Hon. Stephanie A. Ulbrich
Mr. Philip G. Johnson