Newport School Committee v. Rhode Island Department of Education; Cumberland School Committee v. Rhode Island Council on Elementary and Secondary Education

Syllabus

In these consolidated administrative appeals, the defendant, the Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF), filed petitions for writ of certiorari seeking review of a Superior Court judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, Newport School Committee (Newport) and Cumberland School Committee (Cumberland). The Superior Court reviewed two decisions of the Council on Elementary and Secondary Education (Council) that required each municipality to pay the per-pupil special-education rate to DCYF for the cost of educational services provided to students who were placed by DCYF in residential treatment programs but who were not receiving special-education services. The Council upheld a decision of the Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education that determined that the municipalities were required to pay the per-pupil special-education rate pursuant to the unambiguous language of G.L. 1956 §§ 16-64-1.1 and 16-64-1.2. The Superior Court disagreed, granting Newport and Cumberland's appeal and finding that the clear and unambiguous language of § 16-64-1.1(c) required the designated city or town to pay no more than \its share of the cost of educational services to DCYF\ which in these cases, was the per-pupil general-education rate. The matter was previously before the Supreme Court, and reviewing the statute de novo the Court determined that §§ 16-64-1.1 and 16-64-1.2 are devoid of language requiring municipalities to reimburse DCYF at the per-pupil special-education rate when the child in question is not actually receiving special-education services. The Supreme Court reasoned, however, that supplemental briefing was necessary to determine what reimbursements, if any, DCYF should receive for the educational cost of non-special-education students placed in residential treatment programs that include the delivery of educational services. Therefore, the Supreme Court directed the parties to file supplemental briefs to resolve this issue. After supplemental briefing and