Band fees in Southern California made illegal

[jpaul]

The bands should do something called "fair share." Everybody pays their fair share into the program, but they aren't required to pay it. Therefore it's not a fee.

That's exactly what many already do.

Oh dear, poor Southern California. Now they will have to start band booster programs like the rest of the country has for the past 20-30 years.

Start? Where have you been? So Cal bands have been predominantly parent funded for decades.

[soccerguy315]

There are not valid points on the ACLU side.

This is like saying that because some people can't afford a house (an extracurricular activity), no one should be able to have a house (an extracurricular activity).

[corpsband]

There are not valid points on the ACLU side.

This is like saying that because some people can't afford a house (an extracurricular activity), no one should be able to have a house (an extracurricular activity).

Green plus for you !

I fully understand the "sentiment" behind the ACLU's actions. Everyone wishes that activities were cost free. But the real-world consequences of the lawsuit are that instead of most students being able to participate in music, no students will participate.

Funding for education is obviously a big mess. But I think policy makers need to be more like doctors (primum non nocere). Bringing a lawsuit that has the end effect of denying access to all students seems -- to me at least -- misguided.

Edited May 25, 2011 by corpsband

[AlexL]

There are not valid points on the ACLU side.

This is like saying that because some people can't afford a house (an extracurricular activity), no one should be able to have a house (an extracurricular activity).

But the school isnt providing houses. By law, what it does provide is supposed to be provided free of additional cost.

I might make the law differently but that is the law, so the ACLU is correct here.

[fsubone]

I think this could cause problems for DCI, because I know if not for marching band, I wouldn't have gotten into DCI. If the kids down south can't get into marching band programs, this will have a negative effect on DCI recruitment, since the kids won't get into marching, and there won't be the talent pool for the corps to draw from. This could be a huge hit for corps like PC, Gold, City Sound, all of the ones actually in SoCal, since I know some are connected with high school programs, and draw heavily from them.

[corpsband]

But the school isnt providing houses. By law, what it does provide is supposed to be provided free of additional cost.

I might make the law differently but that is the law, so the ACLU is correct here.

Clearly the law was not being enforced. So effectively an accommodation was being made where activities could continue to exist *without* school funding. Why? Clearly allowing those activities to continue was considered the "greater good".

Now -- with the issue being forced by the lawsuit -- the only real "losers" are kids whose access to all those fee-based activities is cut-off. I wonder how many band programs were actually turning away kids with financial hardship? Did those kids really lose access or (as I suspect) did those activities find a way for those kids to participate as well?

[Captncontra]

So does this mean that football programs are going to be closed as well? Tennis? I had to provide my own practice clothes and cleats to play. I took a bowling class for zero period and had to supply my own ball/rent one. Do debate teams have to stop debating and cheer squads have top stop cheering because they do fund raising/pay for their own travel expenses? How about academic tutors? Is it illegal for well-off but stupid kids to buy extra instruction and get a leg up? How about the SAT's? Those cost money to take, is it fair that students that can afford $47 registration fees get to take them when poor families can't?

[TallAZEuph]

A couple thoughts. First of all, of course "drum corps folk" should be concerned with the health of public school music programs. That's where nearly everyone gets their start in music, and is introduced to the marching activity. California is, and has been, a hotbed for talent for decades. There are many large, very successful programs throughout the state that will be at risk in the coming years. Southern California was just the first region to be hit.

Also, many of the leaders in the drum corps activity spend their fall honing their craft with high school marching band programs. If there aren't any bands to teach or design for, where do they go? That's obviously a doomsday scenario.

Also, suggesting that California band programs don't have band boosters already is asinine. No band program can succeed without strong boosters. I sat through a booster budget meeting last night for my program. Without the support of these amazing parents, well our program wouldn't be thriving the way it is now. However, if students no longer have to pay fees and we lose that source of income, then the size and scope of our program is going to do a complete 180 and we won't be able to create the same experiences we do now.

[Barifonium]

Oh dear, poor Southern California. Now they will have to start band booster programs like the rest of the country has for the past 20-30 years.

We already have boosters.

[soccerguy315]

But the school isnt providing houses. By law, what it does provide is supposed to be provided free of additional cost.

I might make the law differently but that is the law, so the ACLU is correct here.

like free and reduced price lunch vs. full price lunch?

Is it better to have a band that some people can participate in? Or a band that no people can participate in?

Anyone with even an ounce of intelligence would realize that there is only one answer to this question (I know you said you would make the law differently, so I am not saying you do not have intelligence).

Edited May 26, 2011 by soccerguy315