Court Opinion

ID: 9729832
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 14:49:43.40279+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:01.445589
License: Public Domain

Hennessey, C.J.
(dissenting). I dissent. The statute, G. L. c. 76, § 1, provides in substance that, if a town through its school committee decides to provide transportation to public school pupils at public expense, then comparable privileges shall be given to private'school pupils. The majority opinion holds that if no public school students are transported beyond town or district lines, then private school pupils in comparable programs are not entitled to such transportation. The statute says nothing about town or district lines, and I think that making them determinative factors is not consistent with the legislative intent to give comparable privileges to all. I agree with the trial judges in these cases that the basic factors to be considered, on a case-by-case basis, are distance and safety and relative cost per pupil. A town or district boundary line is an artificial and irrelevant fac*44tor, which is inconsistent with the legislative intent to equalize privileges among all pupils.