00-0102
Summary Information Not Available
Cite as La. Att'y Gen. Op. No. 00-0102
May 23, 2000
OPINION NO. 00-102
The Honorable Cecil J. Picard
Louisiana State Superintendent
of Education
P. O. Box 94064
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804-9064
Dear Mr. Picard:
I am in receipt of your request for an Attorney General=s opinion concerning the
administration fee for the attendance of some students at the LEAP 21 summer
remediation. You state the following facts:
The State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (SBESE), at its
January 1999 meeting, adopted a High Stakes Testing Policy. This policy is
in reference to state rules regarding pupil progression based on LEAP 21,
the state=s new criterion-referenced testing program. This policy states that,
ΑA student may not be promoted to the 5th or 9th grade until he or she has
scored at or above the Approaching Basic level in English and Mathematics
on the 4th or 8th grade LEAP 21.≅ In part, the policy further states that,
ΑLocal education agencies shall offer summer school and retest
opportunities at no cost to students who score at the Unsatisfactory
achievement level.≅
At the December 1999 meeting, SBESE changed the student transfer policy
contained in Bulletin 741, The Louisiana Handbook for School
Administrators, as it pertains to nonpublic and home schooling students. The
revised policy states:
ΑEffective with the 2000-2001 school year, students in grades
5 and 9 transferring to the public school system from any in-
state nonpublic school (state approved and unapproved), any
home schooling program or any Louisiana resident transferring
from any out-of-state school shall be required to pass the
English language arts and Mathematics portions of the state-
Article VIII, Section 3(A) of the Louisiana
Constitution of 1974
Article 1, Section 3 of the Louisiana
Constitution of 1974
LSA-R.S. 17:6A(15)
The parents of 4th and 8th grade nonpublic school
students, home schooling students or out-of-state public
school students transferring to a Louisiana public school
who score at the unsatisfactory achievement level on the
spring administration LEAP 21 can be required to pay for
attendance at the LEAP 21 summer remediation
program offered by the local school system.
The Honorable Cecil J. Picard
OPINION NO. 00-102
Page - 2 -
developed LEAP 21 placement test.≅
After much discussion, SBESE adopted the actual LEAP 21 test given to
public school students as the LEAP 21 placement test. Guidelines, which
are awaiting advertisement, were adopted by SBESE to allow these students
to participate in both the regular Spring (March) and Summer (July)
administrations of LEAP 21. Nonpublic and home schooling students who
wish to enter after the LEAP 21 summer retest has been administered will be
given a form of The Iowa Tests. Students who wish to enter after February
15 will not be required to take a test to be placed in the 5th or 9th grade. The
Guidelines are attached.
One part of the Nonpublic Guidelines states: ΑLocal school systems shall
offer LEAP 21 summer remediation to nonpublic/home schooling 4th and 8th
grade students who score at the Unsatisfactory achievement level.≅ This
policy parallels the policy regarding public school students. As stated above
there is no charge for public school students to attend this summer
remediation program. Neither public nor nonpublic students are required to
attend summer school in order to participate in the summer LEAP 21 retest.
However, attendance at the summer remediation program is required for
both groups to be considered for an override of the high-stakes promotion
policy or the appeals process. For each of these policies, certain rules apply,
with the final recommendation being made by the School Building Level
Committee (SBLC).
You indicate that at the February 24, 2000 SBESE meeting, the question of charging a fee
to nonpublic and home schooling students for the attendance at the LEAP 21 summer
remediation was discussed. BESE adopted a policy that a fee not to exceed $100 could
be charged to nonpublic school students, home schooling students, or out-of-state
students for the attendance of the LEAP 21 summer remediation pending the release of
this opinion. In the event that the student enrolls in the public school system in the
subsequent fall semester, BESE=s policy allows the fee to be refunded. Specifically, the
BESE seeks an opinion concerning the following:
Can the parents of 4th and 8th grade nonpublic school students, home
schooling students or Louisiana residents transferring from out-of-state
schools who score at the Unsatisfactory achievement level on the spring
administration of LEAP 21 be required to pay for attendance at the LEAP 21
summer remediation program offered by the local school system?
Article VIII, Section 3(A) of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974 provides:
The Honorable Cecil J. Picard
OPINION NO. 00-102
Page - 3 -
. . . The State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education is created as a body
corporate. It shall supervise and control the public elementary and secondary schools and
special schools under its jurisdiction and shall have budgetary responsibility for all funds
appropriated or allocated by the state for those schools, all as provided by law. The board
shall have other powers, duties, and responsibilities as provided by this constitution or by
law, but shall have no control over the business affairs of a parish or city school board or
the selection or removal of its officers and employees.
The Louisiana Supreme Court in Aquillard v. Treen, 440 So.2d 704, 708 (La. 1983)
concluded that this constitutional provision is not self-executing. The Louisiana Supreme
Court opined that BESE=S supervision and control of public elementary and secondary
education is not unfettered, but is subject to the laws passed by the legislature.
The legislature set forth the general powers of BESE in LSA-R.S. 17:6. This statute
contains numerous grants or specific powers as well as the following general provision:
A. In the exercise of its supervision and control over the public elementary and
secondary schools, vocational-technical and postsecondary vocational-technical schools
and programs except in colleges and universities, and special schools under its jurisdiction,
and in the exercise of its budgetary responsibility for all funds appropriated or allocated by
the state for public elementary and secondary schools, vocational-technical and
postsecondary vocational-technical programs and schools except colleges and universities,
and special schools placed under its jurisdiction, the board shall have authority to:
(15) Perform such other functions as are necessary to the supervision and
control of those phases of education under its supervision and control.
As discussed in Attorney General Opinion No. 93-224, public school students may be
charged a number of different fees. Certain fees are statutorily authorized. See LSA-R.S.
17:192(B) concerning breakfasts; LSA-R.S. 17:195 concerning lunches; LSA-R.S. 17:221.1
concerning drivers education. Certain fees have been found to have been permissible
under LSA-R.S. 17:81, a statute describing the general powers of local school boards. See
e.g. Attorney General Opinion No. 92-449 concerning methods to obtain payment of
unpaid fees; Attorney General Opinion No. 81-1213 concerning transportation fees for
extracurricular activities. See also Attorney General Opinion No. 95-365.
No statute specifically authorizes BESE to allow local districts to charge a fee to nonpublic
and home schooling students for the attendance at the LEAP 21 summer remediation.
However, this office has been unable to locate a statutory, regulatory or constitutional
The Honorable Cecil J. Picard
OPINION NO. 00-102
Page - 4 -
provision that would bar BESE from authorizing local districts to assess such a fee to
students attending the LEAP 21 summer remediation program. It would appear that LSA-
R. S. 17:6(15) could be interpreted to permit such BESE action, especially as local boards
already possess the inherent power to assess such a fee under LSA-R. S. 17:81.
The Louisiana Constitution of 1974, Article 1, Section 3 provides the following concerning
the right to individual dignity. It states:
No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws. No law shall
discriminate against a person because of race or religious ideas, beliefs, or
affiliations. No law shall arbitrarily, capriciously, or unreasonably discriminate
against a person because of birth, age, sex, culture, physical condition, or
political ideas or affiliations. Slavery and involuntary servitude are prohibited,
except in the latter case as punishment for crime.
Our Courts have held that Article I, Section 3 contains an equal protection or Αindividual
dignity≅ clause, unlike that of any other state=s constitution or the United States
Constitution. Sibley v. Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University, 477 So.2d 1094
(La. 1985). Therein the Court recognized language which evidenced an intent to expand
the scope of protection provided by the guarantee of equal protection under our
constitution beyond that provided by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution.
This office has opined that the state and its political subdivisions are accorded wide latitude
in the regulation of their local economies under their police powers. City of New Orleans v.
Dukes, 427 U.S. 297 (1976) and Attorney General Opinion No. 92-287. However, the
application of this regulatory power must be balanced against, and limited by, the broad
protective provisions of Article I, Section 3.
As stated in Sibley v. Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University, supra:
. . . Article I, Section 3 commands the courts to decline enforcement of a
legislative classification of individuals in three different situations: (1) When
the law classifies individuals by race or religious beliefs, it shall be repudiated
completely; (2) When the statute classifies persons on the basis of birth,
age, sex, culture, physical condition, or political ideas or affiliations, its
enforcement shall be refused unless the state or other advocate of the
classification shows that the classification has a reasonable basis; (3) When
the law classifies individuals on any other basis, it shall be rejected whenever
a member of a disadvantaged class shows that it does not suitably further
any appropriate state interest. With the adoption of these guarantees
Louisiana moved form a position of having no equal protection clause to that
The Honorable Cecil J. Picard
OPINION NO. 00-102
Page - 5 -
of having three provisions going beyond the decisional law construing the
Fourteenth Amendment.
In Attorney General Opinion No. 93-456, our office concluded that students may be
charged reasonable fees from school to school and from classroom to classroom to cover
the costs related to educational activities in furtherance of the goals of a particular course.
Our office opined the following in regard to the constitutionality of such fees:
With regard to the issue you raise as to the constitutionality of such fees, it is
doubtful that some variation in the amount of fees from classroom to
classroom and school to school would be found in and of itself violative of
the educational guaranties of the state constitution or the equal protection
guaranties of the state and federal constitutions. The United States
Supreme Court has declared that education is not a Αfundamental right≅ for
purposes of constitutional analysis and, therefore, educational programs are
subject only to a Αmere rationality≅ test. San Antonio Independent School
District v. Rodriquez, 93 S.Ct. 1278, 411 U.S. 1, 36 L.Ed.2d 16 (1973). In
other words, there need only be a rational relationship between the
questioned action and any legitimate state purpose. Pierre v. Administrator,
Louisiana Office of Employment Security, 553 So. 2d 442 (La. 1989).
Therefore, the imposition of fees on students enrolled in certain courses
should bear a rational relationship to the purposes of the state in educating
its children in certain academic areas. . . .
In response to your request, the classification of individuals that is affected is nonpublic
school students (in state and out-of-state), home schooling students, and out-of-state
public school students transferring to a Louisiana public school for the attendance of the
LEAP 21 summer remediation program. Applying the analysis of Article 1, Section 3 in
Sibley, supra, to the present situation, the third classification of individuals must be
examined which requires repudiation whenever a member of a disadvantaged class shows
that it does not suitably further any appropriate state interest. The Leap 21 placement test
is directly linked to the curriculum taught in the public school system. The purpose for this
test is the proper placement of non-public school students in the public school system.
Non-public school students are not required to take this test unless they desire to transfer
to the public school system. The assessment of this fee to attend the LEAP 21 summer
remediation program assists in defraying the cost of the program. Therefore, there is a
rational basis for assessing a fee to participate in the LEAP 21 summer remediation
program to students transferring to the public school system. As indicated in your policy, in
the event that the student enrolls in the public school system in the subsequent fall
semester, BESE=s policy allows the fee to be refunded.
The Honorable Cecil J. Picard
OPINION NO. 00-102
Page - 6 -
Therefore, the parents of 4th and 8th grade nonpublic school students, home schooling
students or out-of-state public school students transferring to a Louisiana public school
who score at the unsatisfactory achievement level on the spring administration LEAP 21
placement test can be required to pay for attendance at the LEAP 21 summer remediation
program offered by the local school system.
I hope this opinion sufficiently addresses your concerns. If I can be of further assistance,
please let me know.
Very truly yours,
RICHARD P. IEYOUB
ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY:_______________________________
BETH CONRAD LANGSTON
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
RPI/BCL/sc
a:\00-102.op
OPINION NO. 00-102
Article VIII, Section 3(A) of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974
Article 1, Section 3 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974
LSA-R.S. 17:6A(15)
The parents of 4th and 8th grade nonpublic school students, home schooling students or
out-of-state public school students transferring to a Louisiana public school who score at
the unsatisfactory achievement level on the spring administration LEAP 21 can be
required to pay for attendance at the LEAP 21 summer remediation program offered by the
local school system.
The Honorable Cecil J. Picard
Louisiana State Superintendent of Education
P. O. Box 94064
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804-9064
DATE RECEIVED: 03/09/00BR DATE RECEIVED: 03/13/00
DATE RELEASED: May 23, 2000
BETH CONRAD LANGSTON
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL