Title: GRANGER v CASCADE CO SCH DIST
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 12169
State: Montana
Issuer: Montana Supreme Court
Date: July 20, 1972

No. 12169 I N T H E S U P R E M E C O U R T O F THE STATE O F MONTANA GEORGE GRANGER, MARJORY BROWN, et a1 . , P l a i n t i f f s and Appellants, C A S C A D E COUNTY S C H O O L DISTRICT NO. 1, Defendant and Respondent. Appeal from: District Court of the Eighth Judicial District, Honorable Paul G. Hatfield, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellants : Robert B. Gillan argued, Great F a l l s , Montana. For Respondent: Hon. Robert L. Woodahl, Attorney General, Helena, Montana. J. Fred Bourdeau, County Attorney, Great F a l l s , Montana. Michael T. Greely, Deputy County Attorney, argued, Great Falls, Montana. Submitted: April 17, 1972 Decided: JUL2 0 1 9 7 2 Filed : JUL 2 0 1 9 a Mr. Justice Frank I. Haswell delivered the Opinion of the Court. Several parents whose children attend elementary and secondary schools operated by defendant school district filed a class action against the district seeking a declaratory judgment and injunction against certain school fees and charges. The district court of Cascade County, the Hon. Paul G. Hatfield, district judge, granted a judgment awarding in part the relief sought by plaintiffs and denying it in part. Plaintiffs appeal from the final judgment. The facts in the case are undisputed. All are contained in admis- sions in the pleadings, answers to interrogatories, and exhibits attached to the answers to the interrogatories. Neither oral testimony nor depositions were offered in evidence. In July 1970, a complaint was filed in the district court seeking (1) a declaratory judgment that certain fees and charges for educational materials furnished by defendant school district to pupils attending the elementary and secondary schools therein were illegal, and (2) a permanent injunction (a) prohibiting collection of such fees and charges, and (b) en- joining the school district from requiring that parents furnish at their own expense items and materials used in school courses. The complaint was filed as a class action by three plaintiffs who had children attending various public elementary schools, junior high schools and high schools in Great Falls, Montana. Defendant was Cascade County School District No. 1, which operates such pub1 ic schools. The fees and charges alleged to be illegal were "fees of any nature in respect of any classes offered by schools within said school district and in respect of any facilities or equipment employed in said classes", includ- ing fees for the use by pupils of "laboratory, musical, home economics, trade training and commercial equipment" and "fees for the purchase and use of athletic equipment, school suppl ies and work books". According to the complaint, the various elementary and secondary schools within the defendant school district intends to impose such fees and charges during the 1970-1971 school year unless restrained by the district court. On August 27, 1970, because of the imminence of the school year, the district court granted an injunction pendente 1 i t e restraining defend- ant school district from imposing specified fees on children supported by federal , state, or local welfare and pub1 i c assistance programs or whose parents could otherwise establ ish economic hardship. Defendant's answer can be characterized as a general denial. Forty-eight interrogatories by plaintiffs to defendant school dis- t r i c t were filed which the school district answered in a comprehensive docu- ment of twenty-seven pages including two exhibits. These answers furnish most of the factual data involved in this action. The case was submitted to the district court on this basis with briefs. On August 30, 1971, the district court entered i t s findings of fact, conclusions of law, and judgment set forth in full as follows: "FINDINGS OF FACT "That during all the times herein pertinent plaintiffs and others similarly situated have been required to pay certain fees and furnish certain materials and supplies. "That certain of these fees were required to be paid and certain of these materials were required to be furnished for courses or projects that are required by the defend- ant School District. "That certain of these fees were required to be paid and these materials were required to be furnished for courses and projects which are not required or for activities which are optional or extra curricular. "IV. "The items referred to in paragraph I1 include, but are not restricted to, work books, towel usage fees for man- datory physical education, field trip fees if the field trip is part of a regular class project, current event magazines . "Items referred t o in paragraph 111. include, b u t are not limited t o , school pictures of all varieties, activity tickets, year books, breakage fees, musical instrument rental, summer school fees, driver education fees, athletic health and accident insurance, assessments for loft or damaged school books. "VI . " M i t h regard to general use paper, pencils and notebooks, i t i s the finding of the Court that their usage varies greatly from individual t o individual and that their con- sumption is not directly related to required courses. "Upon these findings of fact, the Court n o w makes the following: " C O N C L U S I O N S OF LAW "All those items referred t o in paragraph 11. are necessary as a part of a free, public education. "It i s not necessary for a free, public education that the defendant furnish the items mentioned in paragraph 111. of the Findings of Fact. " N o w the Court being fully advised as t o the facts of the matter and the applicable law, and having made i t s findings of fact and conclusions of 1 a w herein. "IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, A D J U D G E D AND DECREED that those items mentioned in paragraph 11. of the Findings of Fact be fur- nished by the defendant School Board t o all students with- out charge. A1 1 other articles will be the responsibility of the individual students. " Thereafter plaintiffs filed exceptions and proposed additions t o these findings which were not granted. Plaintiffs n o w appeal from the final judgment to the extent i t does not grant them full re1 ief. The single issue presented for review is whether defendant school district can lawfully impose, directly or indirectly, fees or charges of any kind i n respect to courses and activities within i t s control. Plaintiff's basic position is twofold: (1 ) that the legislature has not granted school boards the power to impose such fees and charges and without such statutory power school boards have no authority to do so; (2) the Montana Constitution, Art. XI, Sec. 1 requires the legislature t o establish and maintain a "general , uniform and thorough system of publ ic, free, common schools" which precludes a school board from imposing fees or charges of any kind for school courses and activities. The thrust of defendant school d i s t r i c t ' s contention, on the other hand, i s that school boards are granted broad authority by statute which encompasses the power to impose the fees and charges here involved. That constitutionally, a free publ i c education simply means "tuition free" as f a r as required courses are concerned, and does not prohibit fees and charges for optional, extra curricular, or elective courses and activities. The school d i s t r i c t also points out that no pupil i s denied attendance or par- ticipation by reason of nonpayment of fees, and that waiver of payment is granted i n cases of economic hardship. Finally, the school d i s t r i c t contends that the fees charged enable i t to provide a higher quality education than would otherwise be possible. Before proceeding to a discussion of the legal principles involved, a more thorough understanding of the fees and charges imposed by the school d i s t r i c t i s necessary. From kindergarten through grade three fees from $2 t o $5.50 per year are imposed for reading materials and workbooks, and charges of 20 to 25 cents are imposed for field trips. In grades four through six fees of $3.25 per year are charged for reading materials and workbooks; fees from 20 to 35 cents are imposed for most field trips w i t h $1.90 i n the f i f t h grade and $6.50 i n the sixth grade being charged for conservation field trips; a musical instrument rental fee of 50 cents per month is imposed, and a $5.00 summer music tuition fee is charged. In grades seven, eight and nine the following fees are imposed: $1 .OO per year for a current events paper i n Social Studies; $1 -00 i n English for a spelling book; $2.00 f o r materials i n Shop; 50 cents per month f o r rental of musical instruments; and $5.00 f o r summer music tuition. In grade nine a charge i n Shop for the actual costs of materials used supplants the f l a t $2.00 charge, and a summer school tuition fee of $10.00 is charged. In grades ten, eleven and twelve the fees and charges vary somewhat depending on which of the two public high schools the pupil attends. In grade ten a t Great Falls High School the following fees are imposed: Basic Business workbooks $3.30; Personal Record Keeping workbooks $3.30. A t Russel 1 High School the fees are: Physical Education $1 .OO towel fee and $3.00 suit fee; Personal Record Keeping workbooks $1 $25; French workbooks $1.00. In both high schools there is a musical instrument rental fee of 50 cents per month; a $10.00 fee f o r driver education; a $5.00 tuition fee for summer music; and a $10.00 tuition fee f o r summer school. In grade eleven a t Great Falls High School the following fees are imposed: Personal typing workbooks $1.50; Bookkeeping workbooks $5.50; Busi- ness Data Processing workbook $3.50. A t Russell High School the fees are: Bookkeeping workbooks $4.55; Chemistry notebook $1.25; French workbook $3 -00; Sheet Metal & Power Mechanics materials $3.00; Electronics Technician $2.00. In both high schools there is a 50 cents per month charge f o r musical instru- ment rental, a $5.00 tuition fee f o r sumer music, and a $10.00 tuition fee f o r summer school. A t Great Falls High School i n grade twelve there is a $3.50 charge for Office Machines workbook and 80 cent charge f o r an Office Education work- book. A t Russell High School the following fees are imposed: Typing work- book $2.00; Office Machines workbook $2.25; Shorthand workbook $1.60; and $2.00 f o r Drafting or Electronics Technician. In both high schools there is a $3.00 charge f o r Shop; 50 cents per month for musical instrument rental; $5.00 tuition for summer music; and $10.00 tuition f o r summer school. In a l l grades pupils furnish their own pencils, paper, erasers, note- books, ballpoint or fountain pens, glue, crayons and similar materials and supplies. In Junior High School both boys and g i r l s furnish their own gym clothing and towels, and there i s a $1.00 activity fee. In Senior High School there is a charge of $6.00 for an activity ticket; $7.00 for a Year- book; and $9.00 i n athletic fees for equipment and insurance. The interrogatories and answers do not disclose which courses are required for graduation and which are optional or elective. However, i t is clear that the pupil has a considerable freedom of choice i n the courses he pursues i n high school, subject only to a total credit requirement for grad- uation i n addition to certain required individual courses. All courses i n elementary and junior high school carry credit toward graduation, while i n senior high school all courses carry credit toward graduation except Driver Education. The various fees and charges involved i n the instant case can be roughly classified i n the fol 1 owing categories: (1 ) personal school suppl ies such as pencils, pens, erasers, crayons, glue and similar supplies required to be furnished by the student and his parents; (2) charges for workbooks and materials used i n specific courses; (3) charges for athletic equipment and towel usage in mandatory physical education courses; (4) athletic equip- ment, towel usage and insurance charges for interscholastic athletics; (5) musical instrument rental fees for band and orchestra classes; (6) t u i t i o n fees for summer school and summer music; (7) Driver's Education charges; (8) miscel 1 aneous charges for extracurricular activities such as activity tickets, yearbooks, pictures and the 1 i ke. Plaintiffs' argument is that the school cannot impose fees or charges for anything, whether required or elective, that is encompassed i n the con- stitutional requirement of a "thorough system of pub1 ic, f e e , common school s". According to plaintiffs, this would encompass a l l categories referred to i n the foregoing paragraph and would prohibit the school d i s t r i c t from collecting or attempting to collect any such fees or charges, and from requiring or attempting t o require students or their parents to furnish any supplies, equipment, or materials necessary to take part in any courses or activities w i t h i n the scope of the authority of the school district. A s a corollary proposition, plaintiffs contend that i n addition to constitutional prohibi- tions, there i s no statutory authority granted to school districts to impose any such fees or charges. Defendant School District, on the other hand, contends that the free, public education required by the Montana Constitution means "tuition free" mandatory courses and does not apply to incidental fees and charges for elec- tive or optional courses or extracurricular activities. The school d i s t r i c t contends that the Constitution was not intended to prohibit i t from furnish- ing better educational opportunities and training than minimum standards would require which i s possible only through imposition of nominal fees for optional, extracurricular, and nonrequired courses and activities. The school d i s t r i c t asks us to construe the constitutional requirement accordingly. A t the outset w e find i t necessary to decide this case on the basis of Montana Constitutional requirements and not upon statutory grounds. The school year involved i n the instant case is the 1970-1971 school year. Midway i n that school year, the Montana legislature repealed and recodified state school laws effective January 26, 1971 . (Ch. 5, 1971 Session Laws) Accord- ingly, two different and to some extent contradictory sets of statutes apply to different parts of the school year furnishing no definitive answer t o the issue the parties have raised herein. Accordingly, w e must look to Montana Consti tutional requirements. Article XI, Sec. 1 of the Montana Constitution contains the pertinent constitutional requirement: " I t shall be the duty of the legislative assembly of Montana t o establish and maintain a general, uniform and thorough system of pub1 ic, free, common schools. " The meaning of a "thorough system" of public schools has been interpreted by this Court i n McNair v. School District No. 1 , 87 Mont. 423, 288 P. 188. In holding that school trustees had the authority to sell bonds for the construction of a gymnasium and outdoor athletic field a t Great Falls High School, this Court stated i n relevant part: "What, then, constitutes a 'thorough' system of education i n our public schools? B y i t s voluntary act, the state has assumed the function of education primarily resting upon the parents, and by laws on compulsory education has decreed that the custody of children be yielded t o the state during the major portion of their waking hours for five days i n the week, and, usually, nine months i n the year. In doing so, the state is not actuated by motives of philanthropy or charity, but for the good of the state, and, for what i t expends on education, i t expects substan- t i a l returns i n good citizenship. With this fact in mind, i t is clear that the solemn mandate of the Constitution is not discharged by the mere training of the mind; mentality without physical we1 1 -being does not make for good citizen- ship--the good citizen, the man or woman who is of the greatest value to the state, i s the one whose every faculty i s developed and a1 e r t . "Education may be particularly directed to either mental, moral or physical powers or faculties, b u t i n i t s broadest and best sense i t embraces them a l l . (Mount Hermon Boys ' School v. Gill, 145 Mass. 139, 13 N.E. 354.) To educate is to 'lead forth, bring up * * * to develop physically,' and education is 'the totality of the qua1 i t i e s acquired through individual instruction and social training, which further happiness, efficiency and capacity for social service of the educated." And again McNai r continues : " * * * The common schools are doorways opening into chambers of science, a r t , and the 1 earned professions, as well as i n t o fields of industrial and commercial ac- tivities." The recent Cal ifornia case, Serrano v. Priest, 96 Cal .Rptr. 601, 487 P.2d 1241, 1248, is persuasive concerning the meaning o f a general and uniform system of public, free, common schools as used i n Art. XI, Sec. 1 , of our Constitution. This case has national significance i n the entire area of school financing. I t challenged the method of financing schools by local property taxes where 1 egis1 ative classifications discriminate on the basis of wealth. In that case, the court rejected the argument that the constitutional requirement for a "system of (free) common schools" compels uniform education expenditures. The court said: "Ue have held that the word 'system,' as used in article IX, section 5, implies a 'unity of purpose, as well as an entirety of operation; and the direction to the legislature to provide "a" system of common schools means - one system, which shall be applicable to a l l the common school s w i t h i n the state ' . (Citing case. ) However, w e have never interpreted the constitutional provision to require equal school spending; w e have ruled only that the educational system must be uniform i n terms of the prescribed course of study and education progression from grade to grade. (Piper v. Big Pine School District. (1 924) 193 Cal . 664, 669, 673, 226 P. 926). " See also Rodriguez v. San Antonio Independent School District (W.D. Texas) 337 Fed.Supp. 280. This language i n Serrano goes to the crux of the problem in the instant case. Any definition of a "thorough system of publ i c , free, common schoo1s"'must take into consideration the wide diversity of spending through- out Montana's school districts. Certain course: and activity opportunities in Cascade County School District No. 1 are not available i n other Montana dis- t r i c t s . A s long as the individual student i s not deprived of equal access to educational courses and activities reasonably re1 ated t o recognized academic and educational goals of the particular school system, the constitutional man- date i s not violated. Idaho has construed i t s constitutional requirement of free publ i c schools to extend to the "necessavy elements of any school 's activity". Paulson v. Minidoka County School District No. 331, 93 Idaho 469, 463 P.2d 935. Mich- igan has construed i t s constitutional requirement to mean that free schools means "without cost or charge" and extends to any school activity or function constituting an "integral fundamental part of the eJementary and secondary education" in the publ i c schools. Bond v. Pub1 i c Schools of Ann Arbor, 383 Mich. 693, 178 N.W.2d 484. In conformity with these holdings, the d i s t r i c t court has construed our constitutional provision to mean that mandatory school courses and activi - t i e s must be furnished free of charge as part of the constitutional requirement of a free, public education. Conversely, the d i s t r i c t court held that school courses and projects which are optional or activities that are optional or extra curricular are not covered by the constitutional requirement and that fees and charges may be assessed for these. Thus the d i s t r i c t court s e t up what may be termed a "required course or activity" test. While w e consider that the d i s t r i c t court was on the right track i n i t s approach, i t s choice of language i n its findings of fact and conclusions of law i s not correct. The fundamental difficulty w i t h the d i s t r i c t court's 1 anguage 1 ies i n the use of the phrase "courses or projects that are required by the defendant School District" for which fees may not be charged, on the one hand, and "courses and projects which are not required or for activities which are optional or extracurricular" for which fees may be charged on the other hand. Just what is meant by a "required course or activity" as distin- guished from an "optional or extracurricular course or activity"? For example, a t the high school level certain specific courses are required for graduation and no difficulty i s presented i n finding that these fall i n the "required course" category. B u t what about the large number of courses offered, no one of which i s specifically required for graduation, b u t from which the student must amass a given number of credits i n order to satisfy the total educational requirement for graduation? Courses fa1 1 ing in this category are required in the sense that a given number must be taken in order to satisfy the total educational requirements for graduation, but they are optional i n the sense that the student may elect which specific courses to take i n order to satisfy such total education requirements. W e believe that the controlling principle or t e s t should be stated in this manner: Is a given course or activity reasonably related to a recog- nized academic and educational goal of the particular school system? If i t i s , i t constitutes part of the free, public school system commanded by Art. XI, Sec. 1 of the Montana Constitution and additional fees or charges cannot be levied, directly or indirectly, against the student or his parents. If i t i s not, reasonable fees or charges may be imposed. In this manner a degree of flexibility is insured. The school dis- t r i c t may thus define its own academic and educational goals and the courses and activities that will carry credit toward graduation w i t h i n the limits provided by law. A t the same time, the individual student has a freedom of choice, w i t h i n the limits of the educational framework so established, to pursue a course of study directed toward business, a trade, college prepara- tory, commercial, secretarial, or some other goal without regard to his financial ability to pay additional fees or charges. In applying the foregoing principle or t e s t , w e wish to make i t clear that i t applies only to courses and activities offered by the school d i s t r i c t during the regular academic year as a part of normal school func- tions. I t has no application to supplementary instruction offered by the school d i s t r i c t on a private basis during the summer recess or a t special times. The l a t t e r are both historically and logically not included i n the free pub1 i c school system required by our Constitution. Accordingly, reason- able fees and charges may be imposed therefor. Finally the school d i s t r i c t argues that its system of waiver of fees and charges for welfare recipients and i n other cases of economic hardship satifies the constitutional requirement, and allows i t t o offer a higher qua1 i ty of education by offering additional courses and activities beyond the minimum required which would otherwise be financially impossible. W e observe that the defense of waiver has nothing to do w i t h the constitutional issue. Constitutional requirements are a matter of right and cannot be satis- fied by their denial i n the f i r s t instance and subsequent waiver of the effects of such denial. The waiver system may well furnish a financial answer, but clearly is not legally justifiable. T h i s may appear t o some t o be an insig- nificant matter unworthy of serious discussion, but to a child or his parents financially unable to pay the additional fees and charges imposed by a free, public school system any waiver procedure is a degrading experience. While we do not disturb the specific findings of the district court, we do by this opinion modify the 1 anguage as heretofore set forth. We recognize that the findings are not specific as to each fee discussed in answers to interrogatories, but hold that the specifics are better left to administrative determination under the guide1 ines set forth. Accord- ingly, we affirm the judgment as modified herein. Associate Justice