Judges: MARK PRYOR, Attorney General
Filed Date: 9/11/2000
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
The Honorable Jay Bradford State Senator P.O. Box 8367 Pine Bluff, AR 71611-8367
Dear Senator Bradford:
I am writing in response to your request for my opinion on the following questions:
1. Is it a violation of the State Constitution for a public school to require students to purchase a calculator or other equipment or supplies to take a class that is not considered an extra-curricula[r] program?
2. Is it a violation of the State Constitution for a public school to require parents to purchase supplies for students in kindergarten — any grade level?
3. What does the constitutional mandate of free public schools mean?
In support of your request, you have included a letter from a constituent/educator expressing concern that the poor are burdened by regularly having to buy "a multitude of supplies" for their children, even in districts "with one or two million dollar balances year after year." Your constituent further reports that "[t]here are school districts, probably many, that charge students to take certain classes; that require students to buy calculators; that charge `lab fees.'" In some instances, he suggests, the cost of required calculators exceeds $100, effectively precluding indigent students from enrolling and resulting in classes of "a half dozen students."
RESPONSE
In response to your first question, the Arkansas Code expressly directs that a school must supply a student with a hand-held calculator when needed unless the student elects to use his own. I do not believe it is unconstitutional to require a student to purchase certain other equipment or supplies, although the financial onus of such purchases on any particular student cannot be so great as to deny him equal access to education. With respect to your second question, I believe parents can be required to provide certain basic supplies such as pencils, pens and paper. By statute, the state is required to provide certain other supplies. Your third question eludes a simple answer. Neither Arkansas nor any other state with a constitutional mandate for "free public schools" has ever held that parents cannot be charged with certain incidental expenses of education. The difficulty perhaps consists in determining what expenses are clearly "public," and hence nonchargeable to parents, in the sense of promoting "a general, suitable and efficient system" of education. Beyond declaring that public schools may not charge tuition for regular terms, the Arkansas Supreme Court has not yet found occasion to define the exact scope of "free" public education.
Question 1: Is it a violation of the State Constitution for a publicschool to require students to purchase a calculator or other equipment orsupplies to take a class that is not considered an extra-curricula[r]program?
Your question concerns the scope of Ark. Const. art.
Intelligence and virtue being the safeguards of liberty and the bulwark of a free and good government, the State shall ever maintain a general, suitable and efficient system of free public schools and shall adopt all suitable means to secure to the people the advantages and opportunities of education. . . .
At issue is what is meant by the term "free public schools." Historically, neither school administrators nor any legislature in the country, including those with a constitutional mandate for "free public schools," has ever interpreted this term to mean that citizens must be spared any and all expenses incidental to public school attendance. Seegenerally, Annot., 41 A.L.R. 3d 752, at § 6 (1972) (reviewing which "incidental" expenses have been deemed chargeable to parents in various jurisdictions). The Arkansas Supreme Court has on various occasions addressed the constitutional propriety of certain educational charges.See, e.g., Special School District No. 65 of Logan County v. Bangs,
In addressing these questions, it should be helpful to review past and current legislation.3 Over the years, the General Assembly has taken various positions on the issue of what supplies the school districts must provide for students. In
As used in this subchapter, unless the context otherwise requires," instructional materials" includes: traditional books and trade books in printed and bound form; activity-oriented programs that may include manipulatives, hand-held calculators, or other hands-on materials; and technology-based materials that require the use of electronic equipment in order to be used in the learning process. Technology-based materials do not include the equipment required to make use of these materials.
A.C.A. §
This most recent legislation, like any, is presumed to be constitutional until it is challenged and stricken down by a court. Ford v. Keith,
Question 2: Is it a violation of the State Constitution for a publicschool to require parents to purchase supplies for students inkindergarten — any grade level?
As suggested in my response to your previous question, answering this question may be impossible without considering precisely what "school supplies" are at issue. As previously noted, I have not found a single case in any jurisdiction declaring that a school district must supply students with all items normally thought of as "school supplies." To be sure, in a case cited with approval in Ark. Op. Att'y Gen. No.
"Textbooks are necessary elements of any school's activity. They represent a fixed expense peculiar to education, the benefits from which inure to every student in equal proportion (ignoring differences in ability and motivation) solely as a function of his being a student. Unlike pencils and paper, the student has no choice in the quality or quantity of textbooks he will use if he is to earn his education. He will use exactly the books, prescribed by the school authorities, that his classmates use; and no voluntary act of his can obviate the need for books nor lessen their expense. School books are, thus, indistinguishable from other fixed educational expense items such as school building maintenance or teachers' salaries. The appellants may not charge students for such items because the common schools are to be `free' as our constitution requires."
Id. at 487, quoting Paulson v. Minidoka County School District No. 331,
To summarize, I cannot answer your question with a definitive yes or no, beyond opining that it is constitutionally permissible to charge parents with the cost of certain supplies but forbidden by statute to compel a student to supply his own hand-held calculator. Unfortunately, it is difficult to say more than that the legislature has historically acknowledged that certain types of supplies, including but not necessarily limited to pens, pencils and paper, need not be provided by school districts. It remains for the courts to determine on a case-by-case basis whether the constitution requires that the state provide supplies in addition to those listed in A.C.A. §
Question 3: What does the constitutional mandate of free public schoolsmean?
As discussed in my response to your previous questions, the constitutional mandate clearly prohibits charging parents fees or tuition for their children's education. However certain charges for certain types of supplies are clearly permissible. I can only opine that the state cannot impose on parents fees and costs that have the practical effect of denying their children equal access to education. See Dupree, supra. As has been the case in other jurisdictions, the Supreme Court may find occasion in the future to articulate a standard that school administrators can apply in determining what expenses to charge to parents.
Assistant Attorney General Jack Druff prepared the foregoing opinion, which I hereby approve.
Sincerely,
MARK PRYOR Attorney General
MP/JHD:cyh
Enclosures
[E]ven without deciding whether the right to a public education is fundamental, we can find no constitutional basis for the present system, as it has no rational bearing on the educational needs of the district.
We come to this conclusion in part because we believe the right to equal educational opportunity is basic to our society. "It is the very essence and foundation of a civilized culture; it is the cohesive element that binds the fabric of our society together." Horton [v. Meskill,
376 A.2d 359 (Conn. 1976)] at 377, Bogdanski, J.[,] conc. Education becomes the essential prerequisite that allows our citizens to be able to appreciate, claim and effectively realize their established rights.
Dupree v. Alma School District No. 30,
Ford v. Keith , 338 Ark. 487 ( 1999 )
DuPree v. Alma School District No. 30 , 279 Ark. 340 ( 1983 )
Paulson v. MINIDOKA CTY. SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 331 , 93 Idaho 469 ( 1970 )
Cardiff v. Bismarck Public School District , 263 N.W.2d 105 ( 1978 )
Bond v. Ann Arbor School District , 383 Mich. 693 ( 1970 )
Mears v. Hall , 263 Ark. 827 ( 1978 )