STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES
CHANCELLOR’S OFFICE
1102 Q STREET
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-6511
(916) 445-8752
HTTP://WWW .CCCCO.EDU
September 18, 2003
Teresa Scott
Vice Chancellor, Fiscal Services
Yosemite Community College District
P.O. Box 4065
Modesto, CA 95352
Re:
Field Trip Expenses
Legal Opinion L 03-22
Dear Vice Chancellor Scott:
You have asked whether the Yosemite Community College District (District) may pay student
expenses for students participating in its field trips and excursions. The question concerning
whether District funds may be used to pay student field trip or excursion expenses arises from
the text of California Code of Regulations, title 5, section 55450 that provides in pertinent part:
“No student shall be prevented from making the field trip or excursion because of
lack of sufficient funds. To this end the governing board shall coordinate efforts
of community service groups to supply funds for students in need of them.
No group shall be authorized to take a field trip or excursion authorized by this
section if any student who is a member of such an identifiable group will be
excluded from participation in the field trip or excursion because of lack of
sufficient funds.
No expenses of students participating in a field trip or excursion to any other
state, the District of Columbia, or a foreign country authorized by this section
shall be paid with district funds. Expenses of instructors, chaperons, and other
personnel participating in a field trip or excursion authorized by this section may
be paid from district funds, and the district may pay from district funds all
incidental expenses for the use of district equipment during a field trip or
excursion authorized by this section.”
The foregoing language expressly precludes the use of District funds to pay for student expenses
for field trips or excursions to other states, the District of Columbia, and other countries. It does
L 03-22
Theresa Scott
2
September 18, 2003
not expressly prohibit the use of District funds to pay for student expenses for field trips and
excursions that occur in California.
It would appear to be unnecessary to expressly prevent the use of District funds for student
expenses for field trips or excursions that take students outside of California if the District is
already precluded from paying for such expenses regardless of where the field trip or excursion
occurs. Thus, the express restriction for out-of-state trips might suggest a different result for instate trips.
On the other hand, if the District is permitted to pay for all expenses, there would be no need for
the same paragraph to allow the District to pay the expenses of instructors, chaperons, and other
personnel who are participating in the field trip or excursion or to pay for incidental expenses
related to the use of District equipment used during a field trip or excursion. Another section of
title 5, section 55451, that permits the use of District funds for insurance for students
participating in field trips, would also be unnecessary if the District could pay all expenses.
Similarly, if the District could pay for all student expenses, the mandatory language that requires
the District to coordinate efforts of community service groups to supply funds for students would
be unnecessary.
As suggested by the foregoing, the language is ambiguous. Therefore, it is useful to look to the
history of the language to ascertain what the Legislature intended in this area. Title 5, section
55450 previously appeared in the Education Code as section 72640, and legislative history is
available.
Former Education Code section 72640, which applied to community college districts and section
35330 which applies to school districts, evolved along similar lines and had nearly identical
language until 1991 when section 72640 was repealed and its text adopted by the Board of
Governors as section 55450 of title 5. Thus, Education Code section 35330 includes essentially
the same language quoted above from section 55450. Given the common history and language,
analyses of Education Code section 35330 are pertinent to interpreting title 5, section 55450.
Section 35330 has been interpreted by the courts with some frequency in connection with
liability suits brought by pupils against school districts when students are injured while
participating in field trips or excursions. A fairly recent lawsuit of this type bears indirectly on
the issue of whether District funds can be used to pay student expenses.
In Casterson v. Superior Court, a student who nearly drowned while participating in a school
district sponsored field trip sued the teacher who was in charge of the trip. The student claimed
that section 35330 specifically states that school districts cannot be held liable for student
injuries, but because it does not mention school district employees, individual employees can be
held liable for student injuries. (Casterson v. Superior Court (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 177.)
The Court noted that if a school district employee were found to be liable, the employer school
district would generally be required to pay any resultant judgment. In such a case, a student
could recover indirectly against a school district when section 35330 prohibits school district
L 03-22
Theresa Scott
3
September 18, 2003
liability. The Court reviewed the legislative history of section 35330 and its predecessor, section
1081.5, in connection with this liability issue.
The Court noted that the Legislative Counsel’s Digest concerning the meaning of section 1081.5
indicated that all expenses must be paid either by the student or by the P.T.A. or a similar
organization. (The requirement for student payment predated the ability of districts to claim
apportionment for field trips and excursions.) The language required students to waive all claims
against a district. A bill memorandum from the Senate’s legislative secretary included a
handwritten note “No tax payers [sic] expense.” Thus, the Court found that “the Legislature was
concerned that the financial costs of field trips not burden school districts.” (Id., at p. 188.)
The Court continued: “From these legislative history materials, we discern that one aspect of the
Legislature’s intent in enacting former section 1081.5 in 1967 was to authorize school field trips
upon the condition that no public funds be expended for the trips.” (Ibid., emphasis added.)
The context of the Court’s analysis was school district expenses arising from liability for pupil
injuries. However, it is logical to assume that the expectation that no public funds would be used
for field trips holds true for other expenses associated with field trips, i.e., that public money
should not be used unless expressly indicated. Moreover, the analysis is consistent with the
mandatory language that requires districts to seek funds from community service groups to cover
expenses for students who cannot pay. If districts could pay student expenses from public funds,
no mandatory efforts would be necessary.
It is also true that the language has undergone change since it was encompassed in former section
1081.5. Nevertheless, as of 2002, the Sixth District Court of Appeal felt the legislative history of
section 1081.5 was sufficiently related to the current text of Education Code section 35330
(which tracks the pertinent text of title 5, section 55450) to embrace it in analyzing legislative
intent concerning the use of district funds to cover costs of field trips/excursions.
Although some ambiguities exist in section 55450, its language and legislative history suggest
that District funds should not be used to pay for student expenses associated with field trips and
excursions.
We hope this information is useful to you.
Sincerely,
Virginia Riegel
Staff Counsel
VAR:sj
L 03-22
L 03-22