Unconstitutional to Charge for School Activities

By John de Beck, Bay Park

E-MAIL STORY

Friday, Oct. 30, 2009 | The state constitution does not permit charges for public education activities.

That is not debateable.

When charges are requested for student participation in a school-sponsored activity or class, the case law supports the constitution and any attorney that says otherwise is wiggling away from legal precedent.

The excuse that a child whose family can't afford the charge will be taken care of by the school (through donors, or by school funds) is just that: an excuse! The constitution does not have a means test. It doesn't say it public education is free for the poor, but not free for the others!

As a board member, I and others elected to office are sworn to support the constitution. The issue of whether or not parents choose to attend private schools because we make public schools free (or stop requiring payments for activities) is irrelevant and should not color our judgment.

School folks have tried to justify the process of charging by asking parents to go to vendors directly for uniform or other requirements. In addition, they have made requirements for periodic "donations" as installment payments of the charges they require for student participation. They also deposit donations into the ASB (Student Body) accounts and then use the accounts to actually pay district employees for work they do after hours for district sponsored activities.

There is an official pay schedule for extra-curricular activities and every principal manages it from their high school budget.

If they want other activities and can't pay for them, charging parents seems like an easy way out. But it is unconstitutional -- not a gray area.

If, as many courts have held, that these practices are unconstitutional, then those who want the worthwhile activities to continue should figure out the constitutional way to support them. Donations are always welcome for public school activities, but requiring them to be paid so your child can participate in a public school activity is wrong. The end does not justify the means.

3 Comments so far on this story...

Charged with the education of 132,000 students, Trustee DeBeck is speaking out for the disenfranchised as well as the middle class and the wealthy that are entitled to a free public education. He recognizes that nearly 61% of the 132,000 students are living at the poverty level and are the children of people who have no voice or power. Thank you, Trustee DeBeck , for exemplifying the honored values of the United State of America.

Posted by Sally Smith | reply to this comment
October 30, 2009 12:52 pm

Free public education should be just that - free of fees for anything. That said, I think that since those entrusted with the public school kids, should handle public money for just that: public school education. There shouldn't be a need for a public school to ask (or demand) for donations in the form of money or supplies. This money has been provided to them, courtesy of taxpayers, myself included. That money should cover Everything the students need, be it paper, bandaids, playground equipment. If a kid wants to participate in an activity, then the school should pay, regardless of the financial status of that student's parents. No kid should be excluded.

Posted by Kelly Donivan | reply to this comment
October 30, 2009 6:35 pm

Strange how the school board can be such a strong advocate for all students having an opportunity to participate in school functions yet deny the same opportunity to local citizens wanting to build / fix the schools. Instead of allowing fair and open competition for the 2 billion dollar school renovation bond the school board voted to limit construction opportunities to 15% of the construction work force (union contractors). John, these back room deals not only deny tax paying citizens the right to have their hard earned tax dollars buy the best product for the best price they are also inherently discriminatory. I'm happy to see you talk the talk but maybe it's time to walk the walk. What would you say to these same children years from now if they choose to work non union construction and are denied the opportunity to build / fix these schools?

Posted by PMP | reply to this comment
November 2, 2009 11:39 am

Reader feedback

Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.