Brandon

Nichols
Ed. 631
Dr. Bradbury
January 15, 2017
Chapter 2 Brief

Citation: Hartzell v. Connell 35 Cal. 3d 899, 201 Cal. Rptr. 601, 679 P. 2d 35. Case heard
in Supreme Court of California, In Bank, 1984.

Topic: May a public high school district charge fees for educational programs simply
because they have denominated extracurricular?

Relief Sought: Hartzell and the Coalition Opposing Student Fees filed taxpayers action
against the school distract for Damages under Cal. Const., Art. IX, section 5.

Issues: (1) Do extracurricular activities fall within the free education guaranteed by Cal.
Const., Art. IX section 5?

Facts: Santa Barbara High School district cut its budget by $1.1 million in the spring of
1980. The board considered two plans for adapting the programs. The first plan
included a major cut to athletic competitions and programs. Under this plan, all
programs would remain free of charge. The second plan included less of a cut for
athletic programs but included a charged fee for students participating in dramatic
productions, musical performances, and athletic competition. The board chose the
second option requiring students to pay fees for inclusion in extra curricular programs.
Hartzell and the Coalition Opposing Student Fees filed this taxpayers action against the
District under violation of Cal. Const. Art. IX section 5.

Finding of the Supreme Court: For plaintiff

Reasoning: The ultimate decision was made by, first, examining the role played by
education in the overall constitutional scheme. According to the free school guarantee
enacted at the Constitutional Convention of 1878-1879, article IX section 1 states that a
general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence [is] essential to the preservation of the
rights and liberties of the people.. While the free education guaranteed in California
contained insignificant information in regards to a school boards decision on whether
or not extracurricular activities offer formal, academic credit, the basis of the courts
decision was upon the educational character provided by the activities in question. It
was found that extracurricular activities constitute an integral component of public
education towards making good citizens physical, mentally, and morally and, therefore,
fell under the stipulations of Art. IX section 5.

Significance: The case is significant as it deals primarily with what experiences and
programs a school offers, aside from traditional for-credit classes, that fall under the
umbrella of the free education guaranteed in California. The case goes to the root of
our educational system by begging the question, If students are entitled to a free
education, what factors (i.e. textbooks and course materials, extra-curricular activities,
etc.) are deemed required and which are deemed optional to educate our students?