Judges: Jim Smith, Attorney General Prepared by: Joslyn Wilson, Assistant Attorney General
Filed Date: 8/19/1980
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
James H. Siesky Attorney for Collier County District School Board Naples
QUESTION:
May the Collier County District School Board make salary payments to its employees prior to services being rendered or before determining that such services have, in fact, been performed?
SUMMARY:
Until judicially or legislatively determined to the contrary, no salary payments may be made to the personnel of a school district which is participating in the state appropriations for the Florida Education Finance Program before the services for which such compensation is being received have been rendered. Toward that end, a district school board should adopt administrative policies or rules in order to ensure that the payment of salary in advance of services being rendered will not be made.
Section 230.23(5)(c), F. S., as amended by s. 4, ch. 80-295, Laws of Florida, authorizes the district school boards to adopt salary schedules and to fix and authorize the compensation of their school employees on the basis of such schedules. See also s. 230.23(5)(d), as amended by s. 4, ch. 80-295, which provides that all contracts with the instructional staff shall be in accordance with the salary schedules adopted by the school board and shall be in writing for definite amounts and for definite terms of service and shall specify the number of monthly payments to be made. In addition, s. 236.02(3), F. S., as amended by s. 10, ch. 80-295, requires that each school district participating in state appropriations for the Florida Education Finance Program meet certain requirements which include, inter alia:
(b) All personnel shall be paid in accordance with payroll period schedules adopted by the school board and included in the official salary schedule.
(c) No salary payment shall be paid to any employee in advance of service being rendered. (Emphasis supplied.)
Cf. 236.02(4), authorizing such school boards to extend funds for salaries in accordance with the salary schedules adopted by the boards in accordance with the provisions of law and the regulations of the State Board of Education, and Rule 6A-1.51(5), F.A.C.
In Weiss v. Leonardy,
The present statute is clear: for those school districts participating in the Florida Education Finance Program, no salary payments may be made to district personnel before the services for which compensation is being received have been performed. I am not aware of any judicial decision which has directly considered this statutory provision, nor has any such decision been brought to the attention of this office. It is, however, a rule of statutory construction that words in a statute should be given their plain and obvious meaning unless a technical meaning is clearly intended or a different connotation expressed in or necessarily implied from the context in which they appear. See Graham v. State,
This office has previously recognized that district school boards, albeit constitutionally created, have no inherent powers but rather possess only such powers as the Legislature has conferred on them. See, e.g., AGO's 076-154 and 076-63; see also Buck v. McLean, 115 Instruction v. State ex rel. Allen,
Furthermore, this office has consistently recognized and stated that claims or vouchers for payment of public funds, whether state, district, or county, submitted to a public agency or body for payment should contain sufficient information for the public body, or its preauditors, to determine whether the requested payment is authorized by law; failing in which, the paying agency is justified in turning down the request for payment or requesting clarification or further proof of such statements or claims against the public agency or body. See, e.g., AGO's 079-48, 077-58, 075-299, and 068-12. Cf. AGO 079-94, wherein this office stated that, even assuming that the appropriation of county funds had been authorized by statute or home rule ordinance, there must be some type of preaudit review of the disbursement to make sure that the funds will not be used for other than the county purpose for which the appropriation was made. The district school boards should therefore consider the development of administrative policies or rules in which the board may determine the amount of compensation a district employee is entitled to receive. Cf. s. 231.40(2)(b), F. S., which provides in part that any member of the instructional staff shall, before claiming and receiving sick leave compensation for the time absent from his or her duties as prescribed in s. 231.40, make and file with the superintendent of the district by the end of the school month following his return from such absence a written certificate which sets forth the days absent; that the absence was necessary; and whether he is entitled to receive pay for such absence. See also s. 231.45, F. S. Under such policies or rules, the board, or its preauditor, should be able to determine whether the employee is entitled to such compensation under the statutes.
Prepared by: Joslyn Wilson, Assistant Attorney General
Graham v. State , 362 So. 2d 924 ( 1978 )
State v. Egan , 287 So. 2d 1 ( 1973 )
Board of Public Instruction v. State Ex Rel. Allen , 219 So. 2d 430 ( 1969 )
Reino v. State , 352 So. 2d 853 ( 1977 )
Gaulden v. Kirk , 47 So. 2d 567 ( 1950 )
Weiss v. Leonardy , 160 Fla. 570 ( 1948 )
Fixel v. Clevenger , 285 So. 2d 687 ( 1973 )
Alsop v. Pierce , 155 Fla. 185 ( 1944 )
Weinberger v. Board of Public Instruction , 93 Fla. 470 ( 1927 )