CANCELLOR OF JUSTICE AS OMBUDSMAN FOR CHILDREN PART III PART II PART I 1. Compensation of a kindergarten place in Uuesalu kindergarten in Kiili rural municipality Based on a petition from individuals, the Chancellor verified whether it is possible to ask an additional fee from parents of children in Rae rural municipality who attend a kindergarten in Kiili rural municipality, if Rae municipality does not compensate to Kiili municipality the full extent of the cost of the kindergarten place for these children (Compensation of the cost of a kindergarten place in Uuesalu kindergarten of Kiili rural municipality, case No 7-5/100748). The Chancellor reached the conclusion that Kiili municipality cannot demand a higher fee from parents of children residing in Rae municipality and attending Uuesalu branch of Kiili kindergarten than the fee taken from parents of children residing in Kiili municipality, i.e. a higher fee than prescribed by Kiili rural municipality administration regulation adopted under § 27(7) of the Pre-school Child Care Institutions Act (“The rate and procedure for the payment of the fee paid by a parent in Kiili Kindergarten”). Thus, Kiili rural municipality cannot demand that the petitioners should pay the difference between the cost of the kindergarten place established by Kiili rural municipality administration and the cost compensated in practice by Rae rural municipality. In addition, the Chancellor concluded that Rae rural municipality, in turn, is obliged under § 27(6) of the Pre-school Child Care Institutions Act to compensate to Kiili rural municipality the cost of the kindergarten place of children from Rae municipality who attend Uuesalu kindergarten (management costs, staff remuneration and social tax, and the cost of teaching aids). As a result of the proceedings, the Chancellor recommended to Rae rural municipality administration to pay to Kiili rural municipality, under §  27(6) of the Pre-school Child Care Institutions Act, the proportional share of the maintenance costs, staff remuneration and social tax and the cost of teaching aids for the children of Rae municipality attending Uuesalu kindergarten. The Chancellor also recommended to Kiili rural municipality administration not to request from parents of children of Rae municipality attending Uuesalu kindergarten the payment of the difference between the cost of the kindergarten place established by Kiili rural municipality administration and the cost compensated in practice by Rae rural municipality. In response to the Chancellor’s recommendation, Rae rural municipality replied that the dispute has been resolved and Rae municipality would pay to Kiili municipality the kindergarten fee for children attending Uuesalu kindergarten as required under §  27(3) and (7) of the Pre-school Child Care Institutions Act. 2. Compensation of costs of transportation to school in Türi rural municipality Based on a petition from an individual, the Chancellor verified whether Türi rural municipality council regulation No 21 of 29 August 2012 “The procedure for issuing of transportation cards to pupils of Türi rural municipality and compensating the cost of transportation to school from the budget of Türi rural municipality” violates the principle of equal treatment of persons (Compensation of transportation costs in Türi rural municipality, case No 6-4/121665). The petitioner found that Türi rural municipality should compensate transportation costs in connection with the school attendance of the petitioner’s children on the territory of another local authority (municipal school of another local authority), while according to the above procedure only the transportation costs in connection with attending municipal schools in Türi rural municipality are compensated. 18 As a result of the proceedings, the Chancellor reached the conclusion that the procedure established by Türi rural municipality, to the extent as regards the issue raised in the petition,