This transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.
Arkansas Museum of Aviation History OUR DREAMS TAKE FLIGHT. Arkansas Museum of Aviation History OUR DREAMS TAKE FLIGHT. ITS A STORY ABOUT ARKANSAS FIRST. Her people. Her times and the events that made Arkansas what it is today. That's the story of Arkansas aviation. But it is a tale rarely told and seldom heard, yet one filled with vitality, excitement and power in its ability to inspire and educate. This is the need which will be fulfi lled by The Arkansas Museum of '--~!,"f~C::~ Aviation Histo,y. For this ..... ""'~""'_
, is histo1y in the making. The project has progressed quietly for over almost a decade since the state newspapers heralded the arrival of the first exhibit planes in the early 1980's. But much was to be done in order to achieve the quality facility desired by the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society. And today the Arkansas Museum of Aviation Histo,y is ready to become a reality-a gift to all Arkansans and Arkansas vis itors. The Arkansas Museum of Aviation Histo1y w ill give Arkansas an attraction wonhy of national attention. Unique to this part of America, its exhibits w ill rank with many of those at the Smithsonian's Air and Space Museum and the Experimental Aircraft Museum in Oshkosh, Wisconsin. Even more impo!tant is the impact it will have on aviation-lovers of all ages. One sight of the aircraft and the senses will be gripped. And one immersion in the stories of the men and women who made aviation history in Arkansas and the spirits will soar. It has been shaped and will continue to be shaped by the aviation enthusiasts of Arkansas to become and remain a unique po1trayal of the history of the men and women of aviation. Its guiding lights have included such leaders as Charles Taylor, Nathan Gordon, Leighton Collins, Cass Hough and Ray Ellis. The story of aviation is the story of what went on at the human level-those who designed, built and flew the craft. At the Arkansas Museum of Aviation History, visitors will experience aviation from this unique perspective. As a result, not only Arkansas but also the times and events of the different eras can be taken in a context that will become a source of pride and inspiration for Arkansans young and old, for those to whom aviation is a second nature and for those who have only dreamed of flying. l J Inside, the museum follows the stream of time from the Wright Brothers though the shuttle age. Displays are Times of pride, power and prowess. arranged as a series of pods, grouped by time, with areas dedicated to a person associated with a paiticular aircraft, plus memorabilia and a1tifacts associated with that personality. Automobiles, antiques, uniforms, actual film footage, whatever is needed to best tell the story of the specific personality will be incorporated into the story. Eve,y aspect of aviation is to be included--design, engineering, testing, military tactics, bamsto1111ing, racing, THE LEGENDS. Here is just a sampling of the pennanent exhibits to be included in the Arkansas Museum of Aviation History: Field Kindley-Arkansas participation in world \Var I will be represented by this ace and an authentic Sopwith Camel. Pierce McKennon- Visitors will join Arkansas' Ace of Aces in a P-51 strafing run. John Howell-Delta Air Line's first pilot brings commercial aviation to the ma~s in Arkansas. Louise TI1aden-The Arkansab aviatrix flew rings around Amelia Earhan and won the Bendix Trophy. Included in Lhis exhibit would be a Beech Staggerwing and the Travel Aire 4000 which she took to record heights. Earl T. Ricks & Wimpy WilsonArkansas sent two commanders to the U.S. Air National Guard as this exhibit explains the importance of the home force commercial flight and Lranspottation. The unique emphasis of the Arkansas Museum of Aviation I Iisto,y is instantly visible. The craft are there, of course, but the story as ponrayed in the audio/visual programs, a,tifacts and photographs shifts the emphasis back Lo the people who made aviation possible-back to the heros of Arkansas flight. Exhibits have been designed by Maritz Communications of Chicago, whose work has included the Experimental Aircraft Museum in Oshkosh and interpretive displays for the famous Spruce Goose built by I Toward Hughes. in events such as the devastating flood of 1927. James McDonnell-the story of the founder of McDonnell-Douglas Corporation will center around a Phantom jct. Robert Snowden and Albert Vollmecke-----TI1e creation of an aircraft from design through production will be told in thh saga of the Command-Aire manufactured in Little Rock during the 1930's. A special .section of the Museum will be set aside to honor the members of the Arkansas I !all of Fame A colorful portrait gallery wil l enable us to salute those who continue to make aviation history in Arkan .., ,,_,~. A theater is alM> plann<.:.'CI for the sho\-ving of an orientation film to visitors and which can aho he w,<:d to prc.',(.'nt other noteworthy mimion film.\. The interior will allo,, <.:hanging exhibit.:,, ~uch a~ tho~c avai lable for loan through the Lnitcd State Air Force: Mu.\eum and the Smilhsonian. l3ecau!-iC of the time-line organization, tomorrow's cmft can find a space 10 be dramatically displayed. AN ENCOMPASSING FACILITY. The Museum will rest on land et aside by the Little Rock Airport Commis ion on the east side of the Little Rock Airport complex. The main building will house featured exhibits and will also include the Arkansa Aviation Hall of Fame, a restoration work-area, plus an outdoor di play site. The main exhibit will be visible through the glass front of the building. From inside, the glas wall will offer a clear view of the runways and taxiways of the adjacent airport. Designed by athaniel Curtis-Riddick-Heiple Architects, the main building upon it completion will be include more usable area than buildings of imilar size, due to its unique multi-level di play space. Upwards of 80,000 quare feet of display space will enable as many a 40 aircraft and personality displays to function at any one time. CAMPAIGN GOALS. The total amount needed to build the initial phase of the Arkansas Museum of Aviation History is 4.5 million. Many of the craft to be included in the museum now sit in hang r within taxi distance of the project site. All exhibit designs are complete and ready to begin acquisition and construction. m Parking A MESSAGE FROM THE CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN Dear fellow aviation enthusiast: The contributions of Arkansas people to American aviation should be a source of pride for us all. We have given our country great pilots, inventors, aviation _ ~ authors, aces and leaders of the largest - ~'== aeronautical enterprises. As a result, flying has progressed from an incredible fantasy to a factor of - - every-day life. The Arkansas Museum of Aviation History finally provides a way to chronicle and display the legacy of those Arkansans who have achieved so much by their fascinating endeavors. As we accomplish our goals with your help, I believe you will see that the we are giving Arkansas more than just a museum. The Arkansas Museum of Aviation History will become a channel of constant esteem and respect, a place to enthusiastically share with visitors from out-of-state and a permanent presentation of the unique Arkansas spirit. Our vision is to become a positive force for aviation in Arkansas by preserving the best of its past. I encourage you to join with me and make our dreams take flight. Together, we can make aviation history happen today. Sincerely, Richard N. Holbert Campaign Chairman 111 - - - Arkansas Museum of Aviation History PO. BOX 3511 UTil.E RCX.K, ARKA. "SAS 72203 (501> 3753245 MCASCHCL ,-, ,:-11f10AY, PA 8 . S . CL,a.RK R 08CRT V. LIGHT, PA. WILLIAM M. SUTTON, PA, GCOROE . Pl KC. J R ., PA. ..J4MCS W . MOOR:C BYRON M , EISEMAN, .JR., P 4 .JOE: 0 . BELL, PA. M ICH AC L 0 . THOMPSON , p A .J0'"'N C. ECHOLS, P 4 JAM CS A . BUTTR:Y, 119 A. FRCOCAICK S . URSERY, p A . H . T LARZCLCRC, PA. OSCAR: . 04VIS, .JR . JAM CS C . CLARK, JR .,
, 4. THOMAS P LCGGETT, PA. .JOP"IN OCWCY W4TSON, PA LEWIS M4T .... IS, PA. PAUL 9 . 1!1NHAM 111, PA. LARPYW. 9URK5. P.A. A , WYCKL1,:-,:- NISBET, .JFL, PA. JAMES COWARO MARRIS, PA. .J, P._.ILL, ._, MALCO""' PA. .JAMCS M , St,..FSON. PA MCREOITH P CATLETT, PA .JAM 5 M. SAXTON, ,> A . .J, SMCPHERO RUSSEL~ Ill OONA LO H , BACON, P ,.l,. , WILLI A,.,. THOMAS 8AX.TCR. P ,.l,. WALT CR A. PAULSON II, PA HAND DELIVERED FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK A PARTNERSHIP OF" INOIVIOUALS ANO PROF'ESSIONALASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT I.AW 2000 F'lRST COMMERCIAL BUILOING 400 WEST CAPITOL I.ITTI.E ROCK, ARKANSAS 722013493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 January 16, 1991 Honorable Susan Webber Wright United States District Judge U.S. Post Office & Courthouse 600 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Aerospace Technology Magnet Program Dear Judge Wright: !IARlltY . CO?LIN, PA. RICMARO 0. TAYLOR. PA JOSCP,_. 8 . MURST", Jl=l . . PA CLIZABCTM J. ROBl!!IC N, P ,.i. CHJ:IISTOPMCR ""CLLCR PA LAURA r1CNSLEY SM I - .,., P,.. ROBCR: T S. SHAFE:R, ~ A WILLIAM M , GRl,,-,,-IN Ill, PA THOMAS N. R:OSC , PA. M ICH AELS. MOORE CIA.NC S. MAC KC"' WALTCR: M . 1[9!.. Ill, P t(CVIN A. CRASS WILLIAM A. WA00L_, ..,R. ~ ~ CLYOC TAB" TURN? CALVIN J. HALL SCOTTJ. l.ANCASTE~ J Ci:tR Y L. ,_.ALONE M . GAYLE CORLV POIIC"'T 1!1 . l!IICACM , .JR S . RANOO LP'"' LOON C Y .J . LC 9ROWN .JAMES C. 8At(R , .JI'!' H C'"'A RLC:S GSCl-1WEN0 , J=! MARRY A. LIQH - SCOTT 1-1 TUCKER MARYL. WISC .... AN GUY ALTON WAOI[ PlltlCl. C 0Allt0NIC"'TH0MAS ,:- MEEKS J. ,.uci....AEL PtCKc.-...s COUNSl:1,. WILLIAM J. S,.,.ITM WILLI A,_...._ , LORE00 JP.
, ~ WIL.LIAM L. TE
:H:tY WILLIAM L. PAfTON. ~ R PA TELCOP1ER t50H 376-2tJ.7 TCLECOPICR 15011 3?8 -8369 370-1506 The Little Rock School District has filed with the U. s. Department of Education a grant application for funds to establish an Aerospace Technology Magnet Program within the Little Rock School District. A copy of Volume I of the grant application is enclosed. Volume II of the grant application is the LRSD Desegregation Plan which you already have. An Aerospace Technology Magnet located in the Little Rock School District is a component of the Tri-District Desegregation Plan found at page 13 of the section on Interdistrict Magnet Schools and Programs. LRSD believes that the Aerospace Technology Magnet, although not required by the Settlement Plans, would compliment those plans and advance the voluntary desegregation efforts contemplated by those plans. We hope to present to the court within the next week a stipulation of the parties in support of the Aerospace Technology Magnet. I thought it best to provide you a copy of the grant application now, however, because the application will remain viable only if the Aerospace Technology Magnet becomes a court approved component of the LRSD Desegregation Plan before February 4, 1991. Yours very truly ~~ Christopher eller CJH/k cc: Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Enc. Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 400 West Capitol Little Rock, ~..R 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell MITCHELL & ROACHELL, P.A. 1014 West Third Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Sharon Streett Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall Little Rock, AR 72205 Ms. Ann Brown Ms. Arma Hart Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR72201 -- - . IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER REGARDING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY MAGNET SCHOOL The undersigned parties stipulate and agree that the Little Rock School District (LRSD) desegregation plan should be amended to include an Aerospace Technology Magnet School as described in Exhibit "A" to this stipulation as modified below to address the concerns expressed by the Court and some of the parties. The parties further stipulate and agree that the Little Rock School District Aerospace Technology Magnet School can only be constructed and operated if the Little Rock School District receives approval of first-year funding of the Magnet Schools Assistance Program grant, for which Exhibit "A" is its application, in a total amount of Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000.00) for 1991-92 and 1992-93: and if the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society contributes at least Four Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($4,500,000.00) as its share of the construction costs of the Aerospace Education Center which will house both the Aerospace Technology Magnet School and the Aerospace Museum. -- The purpose of this stipulation between the Joshua Intervenors and the Little Rock School District is to insure by specific outcome expectations that black youth will be at least as well served in educational outcomes, process, treatment, retention, promotion, rewards, awards and opportunities as white youth in the proposed Aerospace Magnet School. The underlying premise of Joshua is that students from higher socio-economic backgrounds, based upon past and present treatment by Little Rock School District, are being and will be well served by the district. The outcome expectations shall be measured . by objective, education related criteria. The results will be subject to further analysis by the Districtwide Biracial Committee and the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. The Aerospace Technology Magnet School is being integrated into and engrafted upon the Settlement Desegregation Plans of the parties ("the Settlement Plans"). The parties stipulate that the Aerospace Technology Magnet School Plans shall be consistent with the objectives of the Settlement Plans. The school shall be planned, opened and hereafter operate on a fully and thoroughly integrated basis in all aspects of its operations and outreach. The district shall accomplish this racially inclusive educational environment by whatever means necessary within federal law and by appropriate state law as well so long as state law does not diminish the remedial and desegregation objectives of the Settlement Plan. The district commits that it will maintain this facility on a racially integrated basis into perpetuity. 2 The Aerospace Magnet School shall effectively be a joint venture between the school district and the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society in certain operational and financing respects. The school district, however, shall have full and final authority for all decisions and conduct of the school including but not limited to its staff, students, programs and activities. The local aerospace community consists of those aerospace technical business enterprises which are located around the Little Rock Regional Airport. it includes the Little Rock Airport Commission, a public enterprise, which operates the Little Rock Regional Airport. The Little Rock Airport Commission and the following private aerospace technical business enterprises hereby make the commitments contained in the statement of support attached to this page and the reasonable inferences which flow therefrom regarding the level and duration of said support. A. Companies 1. Central Flying Service 2. Falcon Jet Corporation 3. Arkansas Modification Center 4. Midcoast Aviation 5. Air Transport International 6. Little Rock Regional Airport B. General Commitment (see attachment to this page) The Co~rt shall be provided affidavits of support from representatives of the local aerospace community, not later than February 19, 1991. These affidavits of support will describe each 3 --- - Statement in Support of the Aerospace Education CenLer As executives of Little Rock's aviation industries and the-Little Rock Airport C'.ornmission, we endorse and lend our c:ommitment to the planned Aerospace Education Center, combining an Aerospace Magnet lligh School with the Arkansas Museum of Aviation History at Adams Field. The Aerospace Magnet High School will provide the educutionul base in math and science that our companies are looking for in new employees, making it possible for these studcnt_s to pursue careers here in Central Arkansas in our companies as well as other high technology finus. Our companies are willing to provide adjunct faculty to both the high school and to the museum's educational outreach program, and will provide guest ins1rnc1ors, as needed, to enhun~:e curriculum offerings. In addition, we will sponsor and encourage our employees to participate in a mentor progrum, working with students who wish to specialize in specific areas of expertise. While we anticipate the school's graduates becoming a source of our pennanent employees, we also plan to consider, whenever possible, opponunities for purt-time and summer employment of students in aviation-related jobs. We wholeheanedly endorse Governor Clinton's initiative to tlevelop industry apprenticeship progrnms, and pledge our cooperation to affect such a program in our industry here in Little Rock where it mny apply. We feel that apprenticeship programs in aviation-related skills, developed through what will be the excellent facilities of the Aerospace Education Center, could eventually become a significant source of skilled workers for our companies. Little Rock's Aerospace Magnet High School wilt provide new opportunities for disadvantaged 1md minority students, many of whom would have few other opportunities to gain the requisite skills to enrer aerospace or other technology careers. We pledge co recruit disadvantaged and minority graduates from the Aerospace Magnet High School, in conjunction with our companies' respective uffinnative nction pluns. The aviation industries of Central Arkansas have enjoyed phenomenal growth over the pust several years, offering economic benefits for not only our employees, but for the entire community. for this positive trend to continue, we must work together with our schools to provide the skilled people needed for our industry. Therefore, we offer our unqualified endorsement of the Aerospul'e Education Center and pledge the support of our respective companies to ensure its success. fc. Taylor Brown Senior Vice President Falcon Jet Corporation Dennis D. Davis President Arkansas Modification Center O'.V~J1 - A/I~ ~~-~ ~ ~ary DAggers n Richard N. Holbc Senior Vice President and General Manager President Midcoast Aviation - Little Rock Central Flying Service James R. Rodgers M.a nager ~ - President ---- company's present commitments and future voluntary efforts in the following areas: (a) specific employment, hiring and promotion commitments for each of the employers and affect all future employment opportunities
(b) summer training and employment opportunities for the black pupils who will attend the Aerospace Magnet Technology School
(c) programs for black pupils year round mentoring and support at the school
(d) preferential consideration upon graduation for training or apprenticeship programs and employment within these enterprises
(e) creation of racially inclusive, nondiscriminatory work environments
and (f) broad based racial and gender representation on appropriate advisory and governing boards of each of the business enterprises. In the event that it is necessary to modify these commitments, notice shall be provided to the parties and efforts will be made to continue the spirit of these commitments. EDUCATIONAL INITIATIVES 1. Student Education Plans (SEP's) shall be developed for each pupil who elects to attend the Aerospace Technology Magnet School. The plans shall be developed and then implemented in such a way as to insure that all pupils therein shall be "mainstreamed" into regular classes. If additional, out of class work is required in order to promote remediation to pupils to meet classroom work, the district shall offer it as needed at district expense either after school or on Saturdays. A principal objective of the SEP's is to allow the progress of each pupil to be measured periodically. It will also assist in determining individual teacher performance 4 -- for evaluation purposes. 2. The school shall employ a sufficient number of teacher assistants to insure that the serious teaching and learning objectives of the Aerospace Magnet School shall be achieved. 3. It is expected that all pupils who enroll in this school shall be promoted each year and graduate from high school on time and with appropriate educational credentials for further study and/or entry into college type programs. The only possible exceptions to this expectation are those pupils who, by objective standards, considered after sufficient time has expired for the SEP's to work, demonstrate that they do not have either the capacity or interest for the required school work. 4. There shall be no "tracking" in the Aerospace Magnet School. Those teachers or other staff who either allow or engage in the practice shall be subject to formal discipline. Any discipline of teachers shall be in accordance with the Professional Negotiations Agreement (PNA). 5. The racial balance of the student body of the Aerospace Magnet School shall bear a reasonable relationship to the racial balance of the other high schools. It initially shall be sixty percent (60%) bl:"ack and forty percent (40%) white. The racial balance goal of the faculty shall be in reverse ratio due to the acknowledged shortage of black staff members. The district is committed, however, through the Settlement Plans, to increasing black staff by aggressive recruitment and by financial support for teacher aides who commit to obtain college training while on the 5 --- job and a period of employment thereafter for the district. 6. The Aerospace Technology Magnet School shall be operated and supported by the district in those ways which do not diminish the status, faculty or student bodies of the other high schools. 7. All students at the Aerospace Technology Magnet School shall be privileged to participate in all school activities at all times provided their school work is first addressed to the level of their respective capacities and is otherwise acceptable. By agreement and stipulation of the parties, Exhibit "A" is modified as follows: PAGE AMENDMENTS Page 19 (Substitute first paragraph under caption "HISTORY OF DESEGREGATION AND MAGNET SCHOOLS") In 1986, the Federal District Court approved an interdistrict plan of desegregation between the Little Rock, North Little Rock and Pulaski County School Districts. That . plan provided interdistrict remedies of magnet schools and majority to minority transfers. The percentage of black students in North Little Rock is approximately forty-six (46) and in Pulaski County is approximately thirty (30). Page 26 During the period of construction of the Aerospace Technology Magnet School, it will be sited at the Metropolitan Vocational School located near Interstate Highway Thirty (30) in Southwest 6 --- Little Rock. Architectural Plans are being developed and it is hoped that the school will be opened in the fall of 1992 or soon thereafter. ( As a footnote, the architects who are working on these plans have cornmi tted to make a biracial effort of their further work on this project.) Page 23 SIBLING PREFERENCE There is and shall be no sibling preference for Magnet School assignment. Thus item six (6) on Page 23 is deleted. Page 27 Program Objective II (substituted) The District plan to open the Aerospace Technology Magnet School at Metropolitan High School on September, 1991, provided this grant application is timely approved, with the further expectancy that in September, 1992 or sooner thereafter the new school will be opened. The racial balance of the school shall be a range of black students within fifty-five to sixty-five percent and a range of white students between thirty-five and forty-five percent. Those '"figures are comparable to the other senior high school enrollments. Page 29 (Last sentence on the page) Central High School has been successful in attracting white students from the Pulaski County and North Little Rock School 7 Districts. -- - Page 32 (Supplement) Other standardized tests confirm the above disparities in test results between at least black and white students. The district is committed to fully addressing and remedying these disparities. To this end outcome objectives shall be formulated and implemented for students at all grade levels. In this way, students may be expected to have their remedial and other learning needs met prior to the 9th and 10th grade transition into the Aerospace program. If those are not met, however, the Aerospace Magnet programs will be designed and implemented in a way to accomplish that objective. Page 36 (substitute) The Aerospace Technology Program will require students to have a firm grasp of basic skills. Those skills will be effectively taught to all students so that they will meet the high school standards in the areas of Algebra, Physical Science and Earth Science. The District will provide special support to underachieving pupils in order that those students may be equally successful in their classwork as the more advanced pupils. Page 52 (New paragraph 2) 8 --- The planning process was not successful in including black citizens to the extent that it included white citizens as set out in paragraph one, supra. Nor did it include the LRSD Biracial Committee in the process. These unintentional omissions will be corrected forthwith and will not be repeated. The Biracial Committee and Joshua shall be fully represented in the Magnet School Planning Committee described in the next paragraph and shall otherwise be utilized to insure that this school meets its goals and expectations. Paga 58 (a new last sentence on the page) This summer program, which will be at school district expense, shall not be used to defer, delay or withhold ongoing remediation and supplemental assistance to achievement. This is intended to supplement the opportunities students have for maximizing their abilities within the school. Paga 59 (supplementary language) A program of teacher developed incentives will be put into place to assist with the motivation of students at the Aerospace Magnet. Paga 60 (supplementary language to paragraph two) 9 --- - outreach programs will be provided for all parents to inform them of the content of the aerospace program, opportunities for their students, and programmatic expectations for students' achievement. Special outreach efforts shall be made to parents of black and socio-economically deprived students to introduce these patrons to the program. Page 70 (new last paragraph) The foregoing staff is disproportionately white. The district is sensitive to this fact and shall work to insure that it, too, will be fully desegregated and integrated. Page 77 (supplemental language to paragraph two) The theme and focus shall permeate the entire program. Even courses such as physical education and physiology shall include concepts from math and science such as velocity, vectors, and kinesthetics. Page 91 (new first paragraph} Student Education Plans (SEP' s) will be developed for all students. These SEP' s will vary according to past student achievement. Appropriate intensive counseling will provide assistance and direction to students to insure that their 10 --- potentialities are developed to the fullest possible extent by virtue of their involvement in this program. Special efforts will be made to insure that black and socio-economically deprived students shall have no less opportunity for academic success than other students. Page 106 (last paragraph added) The District will work with the business community in general and specifically with the aerospace/aviation industry to insre summer jobs, part-time employment, mentorships, apprenticeships, and employment after graduation for those students who seek it. Page 108 (addition regarding adjunct teachers) Adjunct staff will include mentors, role models, and guest speakers for students. Seminars will also be held to allow students to interact with minority and female individuals who have careers in science, math, and fields related to the Aerospace Magnet program. Page 111 (addition to end of second paragraph) The figure $278 which is included in the discussion of Magnet program costs refers to the eventual cost of Magnet components only and is to be considered in addition to the per pupil cost which the 11 --- district expends, which is $2,165 on average at non-magnet, nonincentive schools. Page 116 (supplement to paragraph one) Success shall further be determined by analysis of statistics related to: number of program graduates employed in Arkansas aviation industry by race and gender number of program graduates entering post-secondary education especially fields related to math, science, and aerospace technology by race and gender decrease in dropout rate as compared to other high schools such that the number of black students in the graduating class will be equivalent to the percentage of black students enrolled in the program Page 119 (final paragraph) The evaluatOr(s) will work closely with the school staff and be both sensitive and responsive to inquiries raised by the Joshua Intervenors, the district and/or school biracial committee(s) and the Office of Desegregation Monitor(ing). Page 146 (new paragraph three) 12 -- There shall be a collaborative effort between the school district, Henderson State University and the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff. Arrangements will be sought with these colleges for college credit to be given for certain work completed at the Aerospace Magnet School and for the institutions to assist the magnet graduates with educational career planning. The undersigned parties stipulate and agree that a modification of the Little Rock School District desegregation plan to include the Aerospace Technology Magnet School described in Exhibit "A" as modified above, subject to the contingencies described above, would largely complement their settlement plans and advance the voluntary desegregation efforts contemplated by those plans, although the parties understand that this program might have a negative impact upon the further desegregation of Fuller Jr. High and Mills High School. It is therefore ordered that the Little Rock School District's desegregation plan is modified to include the Aerospace Technology Magnet School described in Exhibit "A", as modified by this Stipulation and Consent Order, subject to the following contingencies: 1. The Little Rock School District must receive the Magnet Schools Assistance Program grant, for which Exhibit "A" is its application, in a total amount of Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000.00) for 1991-92 and 1992-93
and 2. The Arkansas Aviation Historical Society must contribute 13 --- at least Four Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($4,500,000.00) as its share of the construction costs of the Aerospace Education Center which will house both the Aerospace Technology Magnet School and the Aerospace Museum. If either of these contingencies does not happen, the Little Rock School District will have no obligation to build the school or implement the Aerospace Technology program described in Exhibit "A". JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 BY:Qu.~ ~ WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 MIT L & ROACHELL, P.A. 1014 West Third :::cr::_~1 Richard Roachell FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 ~ BY:~ Christophe? H~ JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 BY~tJ~ -{A__ SO ORDERED THIS ~ DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1~91. n . ~ '/ )1/ '4 / // &h,. , /~, ii~ , ~ 1, r= SUSAN WEBBER T GHI' = / I , ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUCGE F R I DAY, ELDRE DGE & CL ARK HERSCHEL H . FRIDA Y, P. A . 9 . S . CLARK ROBERT V. LIGHT, P. A . WILLIAM H . SUTTON, P. A. GEORGE E . Fl'IKE , .JR . , P. A . .JAM ES W. MOO RC A PARTN ERSHIP OF INDIVI DUALS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS A T TORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL YRON M . E ISEMAN, .JR ., P. A . .JOE 0 . ELL , P. A . MICHAEL G . THOMPSON, Fl'. A . .JOHN C. ECHOLS, P. A . .JAMES A . BUTTRY, Fl'. A . FREDERICKS. URSERY, P. A . H T LARZELERE, Fl'.A . L I T T LE ROCK, AR KANSAS 7 220 1-3493 TLPHONE 501-376- 2011 OSCAR E . DAVIS , .JR . .JAMES C . CLARK, .JR., P. A . THOMAS Fl'. LEGGETT, l='. A . .JOHN DEWEY WATSON , P. A LEWIS MATHIS1 P.A . PAUL 8 . BENHAM Ill, P. A . LARRY W. BURK5 1 P . A . February 19, 1991 A. WYCKLIFF NIS8ET, JR., Ft. A . .JAMES EOWARO HARRI S , P. A . .J PH IL L I FI' MALCOM, Fl' A . JAMES M . S I MFl'SON, Ft A . MEREDITH P. CATLETT, P. A . .JAMES M . SAXTON, P. A . .J. SHE PH ERO RUSSELL Ill OONALO H . BACON, P. A . WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER , P. A . WALTER A . PAULSON II, P. A . Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg . 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell MITCHELL & ROACHELL, P.A. 1014 West Third Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Affidavit of Dick Holbert Dear Counsel: BARRY E . COPL.IN, P. A . RIC HARO O. TAYl.OR, P. A .JOSEPM 9 . HURST, JR., PA. El.lZABETH .J . RO B BEN, PA. CHRISTOPHER MELL.ER, P. A l.AURA HENSL.EY SMITH, PA ROl!SERT S . SHAFER, P. A . Wll.l.lAM M . GRll'"FIN Ill, P. A THOMAS N . ROSE, P. A . MICHAEL. S . MOORE DIANE S . MACKEY WALTER M . EBEL 111, P. A KEVIN A. CRASS Wll.LIAM A . WA00El.l., .JR., PA CLYDE "TAB" TURNER CALVIN .J . HALL SCOTT.J.LANCASTER .JERRY L. MALONE M . GAYLE CORLEY ROBERT B . BEACH, JR. S RANDOL.PH LOONEY .J. LE BROWN .JAM CS C. BAKER, JR. H . CHARL.ES GSCHWEND, .JR HARRY A . LIGHT SCOTT H . TUCKER JOHN Cl.AYTON RANDOLPH MARY L. WISE MAN GUY ALTON WADE PRICE. C. GARONER THOMAS F' MEEKS J M ICHA EL. PICKENS CCUNSl:t.. WILLIAM J. SM ITH WILLIAM A . El.ORE OGE , JR., Fl' A WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON, JR. Fl'.A, TELECOPIER (501> 37621'7 TEL.ECO PIER ( 501 ) 3788369 Willl lTt:illl'S ouu:cr NO. 370-1506 Please find enclosed a copy of an Affidavit filed today in this case by Dick Holbert. Very truly yo ~~ ristoph r CJH/k Enc. cc: Dr. Ruth Steele Office of Desegregation Monitoring FILED US. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR.I' FASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FEB 191991 LITI'LE RCX:K SCHOOL DISTRICT V. PULASKI CXXJNl'Y SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSffiJA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL WFSTERN DIVISION LR'-C-82-866 AFFIDAVIT CARL R. 8Rl::NTS, CLERK By: ___ ~---- PIAINI'0i1. CLERK DEFENDANT'S INTERVENORS INI'ERVEOORS I, Richard N. Holbert, after being duly sworn, state under oath: I am the President of Central Flying Service, Inc. Central Flying Service, Inc. is an equal opportunity employer. Central FJ,.ying Service, Inc. does presently offer sunrrer training and arployrrent opportunity on a very limited basis. Central Flying Service, Inc.'s surrmer training and employment opportunities will be made available to black and white pupils who attend the Aerospace Technology Magnet School on an equitable basis. An unrestricted number of employees of the canpany will be available to provide mentoring and support programs on a periodic and voluntary basis for black and white pupils of the Aerospace Technology Magnet School perhaps through programs inaugurated by the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society. Because of the course of study to be offered at the Aerospace Technology Magnet School, and the familiarity with the school's students and teachers that the canpany expects to have, graduates of the Aerospace Technology magnet School should receive preferential consideration upon graduation for training or apprenticeship programs and errployment with the canpany if such programs or jobs are available at the ti.Ire. The ~rk envirornnent at the ccrnpany is and will remain non-discriminatory and the canpany has not and will not establish a racially exclusive ~rk envirornnent. The canpany does not have a governing board or advisory ooard. I, Richard N. Holbert, the undersigned herein, state that the foregoing Affidavit is true and correct to the best of my information, knowledge & belief. Dated this 19th day of February, 1991. ~fj~ Richard N. Holbert SUBSCRIBED AND smRN to before me a Notary Public in and for the Coun~y of Pulaski, State of Arkansas on this Jqtb day of February, 1991. My Ccmnission Expires: cmce JMJ 4 19Jj of OE.segregation Mo::i:orir.g UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTER~ DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, vs. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL., MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL .. MRS. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL., 0 R D E R CARL
.:?_
:. ,.!::.~ ~-:
. CLERK By: '/,
\-,1 :71:'.'-:k~ -~ ueP. CL I( PLAINTIFF, DEFENDANTS I INTERVENORS I INTERVENORS . Following telephone notice to counsel, a hearing is hereby scheduled for 9:30 a.m. on Monday, January 25, 1993. One issue to be addressed at the hearing is the Little Rock School District's aerospace magnet school grant application. This Court's Order of May 1, 1992 rejected an earlier proposal to modify the settlement plan to eliminate language concerning the possible construction of a new junior high in the district. The Court, in that order, directed that the "parties conduct a careful review of junior high capacity and its immediate and long term impact on programmatic needs and/or intradistrict and M-to-M needs." Because of its interrelatedness to the aerospace magnet application, the second issue to be addressed at the hearing is the results of the study conducted pursuant to that Order. The parties are directed to provide the Court and the Federal Monitor 1-:i th copies of the proposed grant application and the results o f the jun i or high school study, together with copies of ~$.-~~~?'~
.. other proposed exhibits for the hearing and any briefs they feel are necessary, on or before 12:00 noon on Friday, January 15, 1993. It is so ordered this ',x/b. day of December, 1992. United States Dist ict Judge THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET iN ':OMPUANCE WITH RULE 58 AND/OR ?~a) ~CP ON t] / 3{
I 012z: BY _ _._._: ____ r,>1 t l Magnet Review Committee 1900 North Main Street Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 V JAN 2 2 W~5 Olfic, of Desegei:i:'.icn Monitoring Donna Grady Creer Executive Director RESOLUTION Regarding Proposed Aerospace Magnet School (501) 758-0156 WHEREAS, the Magnet Review Committee, a body established by the 8th Circuit of Appeals at St. Louis to oversee the operation of the six interdistrict magnet schools and to make findings concerning the number, location, staffing, racial ratios and themes of magnet schools and to have the furtherance of effective desegregation as its primary objective
and WHEREAS, the interdistrict magnet schools' host district, the Little Rock School District, has notified the Magnet Review Committee of a projected deficit budget amount of $5,500,000 for the next fiscal year
and WHEREAS, this projected deficit budget amount will cause the Little Rock School District to be forced to make drastic cuts which may adversely impact existing programs designed to reduce racial academic disparity and promote desegregation
and WHEREAS, the Magnet Review Committee believes that the total community (parents, students, business, industry, higher education, etc.) should have documented input in the selection and implementation of the theme for a proposed magnet school
BE IT RESOLVED that the Magnet Review Committee, by formal motion and vote (5 FOR
1 AGAINST - Little Rock School District cast the dissenting vote) opposes the implementation of an aerospace magnet school at this time. SUBMITTED this 22nd day of January, in the year 1993. ~ Bobby tom, Ed.D., Chairperson Magnet Review Committee gnet Revi F~LED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS 'JAN - 7 1993 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CARL K EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS By: WESTERN DIVISION --
.. ...... ~u...,~~J.'.,0-- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, vs. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL,, MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL., MRS. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL,, 0 R D E R PLAINTIFF, DEFENDANTS , INTERVENORS , INTERVENORS . A hearing was previously scheduled in this case for Monday, January 25, 1993. Pursuant to the telephone request of the Little Rock School District for additional time to prepare for the hearing, the hearing is hereby rescheduled for Monday, February 1, 1993. Counsel for the Joshua Intervenor has indicated that this change is satisfactory to him. Counsel should be present no later than 9:00 a.m. The Court's Order of December 30, 1992 remains in full force and is modified only to the extent that the documents to be provided to the Court and to the Monitor shall be delivered on or before noon on Friday, January 22, 1992. It is so ordered this t:,-1!-:- day of January, 1993. Q
~~tJudge THIS DOCUll.11::~1T i::.~'.TERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN GOMPUANCE fir: l RUL::: Ea AND/OR 79(a) FRCP 8N 1- 1- 1:3 sv Ir rJAN 2 2 \993 .... , , t2! Dcsege~~~on ,ori',ffl1gTHE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ~ EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS v--' ,..J WESTERN DIVISION --- ,_, .... LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. OBSERVATIONS. QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS OF THE PCSSD REGARDING THE PROPOSED LRSD AEROSPACE MAGNET SCHOOL Preliminary Statement The PCSSD has sought to independently evaluate and analyze the continued wisdom and vitality of constructing and operating an aerospace magnet program in LRSD, including in particular the construction of a new high school. The PCSSD has identified at least four areas of major question and concern which it will discuss in this submission. The present areas of concern, inquiry and question of the PCSSD are: I. Whether or not the seemingly accelerating decline in the aerospace industry as a whole, and in particular regarding job opportunities for technicians, vitiates the vitality of this project. II. Whether or not the student transfer projections proposed by the grant document are too ambitious and are not likely to be attained. III. Whether or not LRSD needs additional high school space. IV. Whether or not the LRSD can reasonably fund the maintenance and operation of an aerospace high school, particularly beyond the grant period. The PCSSD will, to the extent feasible, address these issues seriatim. I. Whether or not the seemingly accelerating decline in the aerospace industry as a whole, and in particular regarding job opportunities for technicians, vitiates the vitality of this project. Spurred by local anecdotal and media reports of a "decline" in aerospace sales, employment and production, including facilities located in central Arkansas, the PCSSD sought to independently assess, as best it can, the current status of this industry. With research assistance from congressional offices, the PCSSD has obtained certain published information which fortifies its concern in this regard. Attached as Exhibit A is a publication of the Aerospace Industries' Association which contains both the 1992 Year End Review and Forecast as well as the "Outlook for 1993 11 1 Portions of the summary indicate that during 1992: 1. Aerospace industry sales fell four percent
2. Department of Defense (DoD) purchases of aerospace products and services fell seven percent
lExhibit A appears to be a precursor to an about-to-be published book from this organization which, in its last publication, was entitled Aerospace, Fact & Figures 91-92. (Counsel for PCSSD possesses this volume and is informed that the 92-93 edition will be available "in a couple of weeks".) 2 3. Sales of military aircraft and parts fell nine percent
4. Aerospace profits are at their lowest level since 1982
5. New aerospace orders were down 23 percent
6. The backlog of unfilled orders for all aerospace products and services should fall 11 percent
7. Employment during 1992 fell an additional 10 percent
8. Company forecasts indicate that the aerospace work force will shrink an additional four percent during 1993. The outlook for 1993 includes a projection for another year of industry sales declines of approximately six percent. An additional decline in aerospace employment of four percent is forecast with the employment of technicians and production workers forecast to fall more than five percent. 2 The Aerospace Technology Program (the draft grant application) states at page 11, paragaraph 5: "The aerospace employment need for a skilled work force is well known in Arkansas." The PCSSD was unable to locate any documentation 2rn Aerospace Facts and Figures 91-92, supra, note 1, the Association reported that new orders declined for the first time since 1986 (page 6), that DoD aerospace sales will drop by 1995 to a level 25 percent below the 1990 level, that overall sales will decline seriously but not catastrophically during the next decade (page 7), that industry employment fell by 19,000 in 1990 marking the first reduction since 1983, (page 11), that aerospace industry company-funded research and development in 1991 was expected to drop by more than $117,000,000, (page 102). 3 for this bald statement anywhere in the draft grant application. The accuracy of this statement must at least be questioned given the employment declines described in Exhibit A. The PCSSD is concerned that in light of the Exhibit A projections, the establishment of this school, while it might very well produce an accomplished core of graduates, might yet be targeting an employment market that is shrinking and which cannot absorb those so educated. The only direct projection the PCSSD found in the draft grant application is an expression of intent at page 27 regarding the creation of more than 300 jobs at Arkansas Aerospace. While recognizing that central Arkansas would not likely be the only employment opportunity for such graduates, the statistical fact remains that the one time creation of 300 jobs will do little to satisfy the employment needs of more than 300 graduates per year. PCSSD believes that LRSD has not adequately documented the job market and job opportunities for the school graduates. II. Whether or not the student transfer projections proposed by the draft grant document are too ambitious and are not likely to be attained. As nearly as the PCSSD can determine, the draft grant application contemplates the interdistrict transfer of 325 junior high white students from outside of LRSD and ultimately some 270 white senior high students from without the LRSD. Given the present and projected racial composition of the NLRSD, it seems reasonable to conclude, absent significant 4 transfers from outside the three Pulaski County districts, that the PCSSD is projected to supply almost all of these transferring students. Several historical indicators give the PCSSD pause in endorsing these projections. First, the establishment of specialized programs at Dunbar Junior High and Central High School have proved relatively unattractive to prospective transferring PCSSD students. Conversely, PCSSD has been able to attract relatively and absolutely more black LRSD students to Robinson and Sylvan Hills junior high schools, even absent the presence of a specialty program. The same is true at Robinson High School and Sylvan Hills High School. Additionally, the PCSSD recently completed a survey of all students at Crystal Hill Elementary School, emphasizing in particular the outcomes at grades 5 and 6, and learned that the overwhelming majority of those students expressed both the desire and intent to transfer to a Crystal Hill junior high school if one could be built in the future. Accordingly, based upon the historical information to date, it appears that racial overrepresentation and isolation in the secondary schools in LRSD would m~st likely be ameliorated and reduced by the establishment of additional programs in PCSSD for transferring 5 black LRSD students than efforts to induce large scale transfers of white PCSSD secondary students to programs in LRSD. 3 Further, while program conflict is likely inevitable as additional specialty schools are considered, PCSSD would reiterate its concern, first expressed approximately two years ago in open court, that establishment of the Aerospace Magnet School would likely negatively impact its own efforts to recruit PCSSD white students to Fuller Junior High and Mills High School for the specialty programs presently operated and projected for those schools. III. Whether or not LRSD needs additional high school space. LRSD has consistently reported the need for additional junior high space over the past several years. However, the PCSSD recalls no assertion that it was in need of additional high school space for space's sake. The PCSSD found no analysis of the need for additional senior high space within the four corners of the draft grant application, nor did it 3This should not be interpreted to mean that PCSSD would not work resolutely and diligently to help in attracting students to an aerospace high school. However, PCSSD does not believe it would serve the overall goals and requirements of the desegregation plans to ignore history and projections in this regard. 6 find any analysis of the impact this school would have on the residual enrollments of other present LRSD high schools. Further, PCSSD recalls that for this school year, LRSD experienced an actual enrollment decline, a factor which should be evaluated before this school is finally authorized. IV. Whether or not the LRSD can reasonably fund the maintenance and operation of an aerospace high school, particularly beyond the grant period. At page 2 the draft grant application does identify a source of funds for a portion of the costs to construct the aerospace magnet high school. However, the PCSSD did not locate any source of funding to equip such a highly technical and specialized school nor a source of funds with which to operate the school into the future. It seems reasonable to require that LRSD identify fund sources for the continuous operation of this school into the future and such should be done before it is approved. This Court has recently addressed budget cuts in the LRSD budget and has reluctantly and temporarily approved most or all of them. Upon information and belief, the LRSD will submit additional new budget cuts to this Court during this year for the Court's consideration and approval. If in fact the LRSD does not need additional high school space, it seems anomalous to propose the construction of an expensive new high school when, at the same time, the LRSD has not identified a funding 7 source for the continuous operation of this school and has recently and will likely again ask this Court to approve additional budget cuts. Finally, this high school was not a part of the desegregation settlement plans both approved and then mandated by the Court of Appeals. As such, its establishment should remain squarely within the rubric of analysis laid down by the United States Supreme Court in Rufo v. Inmates of the Suffolk County Jail, which case has previously been briefed to this Court. 4 See, PCSSD brief filed February 6, 1992. The PCSSD would submit that if indeed the concerns it has expressed in this submission are legitimate and if the answers to the various inquiries set forth herein militate against construction of this school, that this Court should not approve it, at least under present circumstances. Respectfully submitted, WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501} 371-0808 ~- 0 (,, I J'ru-,,.,~- _..,.._ _ M. Samu J nes III #76060 Atto~ eys fr Pulaski
County Sp~_ed .. al School Dis1tr,i'.ct I / 4This assumes the school remains a requirement even though conditions specified by the previous stipulation were not realized or fulfilled. 8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On January :
l..:J. 1993, the foregoing was served by mailing a copy thereof, first class postage prepaid, to: 54041 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge & Clark 2000 First Commercial Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen Jones Jack, Lyon & Jones 3400 Capitol Tower Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm #15 Hickory Creek Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72212 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Heritage West Building 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT vs. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, et al. NOTICE OF FILING RECEIVED JAN 2 2 1993 Office of Desegregation Monitoring PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Little Rock School District (LRSD} hereby gives notice of the filing of the attached grant application for an Aerospace Technology Magnet Program. The attached grant application is the most recent document prepared by a grant writer engaged by the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society to work as a consultant to the Little Rock School District. LRSD has begun the process of preparing a revised and corrected grant application which will be hand delivered to the Court, the parties and the Office of Desegregation Monitoring no later than Monday, January 25, 1993. Also attached are: ( l} A Resolution in Support of the Aerospace Technology Magnet Program which was adopted by the LRSD Board of Directors on November 24, 1992
( 2) Proposed exhibits which summarize projected Little Rock School District revenues and budgets both with and without an Aerospace Technology Magnet Program
and (3) Proposed exhibits which present budgets for an Aerospace Education Center using various assumptions regarding the number of majority to minority transfer students. Respectfully submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Street Little Rock, AR 72201 B~~--- Christoph Bar No. 8108 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing Notice of Filing has been served on the following by depositing copy of same in the United States mail on this 22nd day of January, 1993: Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 -2- l \ Mr. Richard Roachell 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 BY0~z ~ ' Christopher Rel.Yer / -3- RECEIVED JAN 2 2 19'15 Office of Desegrngation Moilitoring R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, the Little Rock School District Board of Directors has considered the proposal to build a senior high aerospace magnet school and to offer aerospace technology courses in one or more junior high schools
and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors is very excited about the potential for unparalleled educational opportunities that such a school and museum partnership could provide the students of the Little Rock School District as well as surrounding school districts
and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors commends the business community for its vision and progressive spirit
and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors is committed to issue second lien bonds in an amount not to exceed $10 million to construct a high school aerospace magnet school on a pre-selected site near the Little Rock Regional Airport adjacent to the proposed Aerospace Museum and to use existing debt service mills to retire the bonds
and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors is committed to use existing central office administrators and support staff to plan and implement the school subject to the following conditions: 1. that the District receives from the Magnet School Assistance Fund grant a minimum of $8 million covering a two-year term
2. that seventy percent ( 70%) of the aerospace school's capacity will be initially reserved for Little Rock School District students while the remaining seats may be filled by majority to minority transfer students from outside the Little Rock School District, and that funds to defray the cost of operating the school will be obtained from public and/or private sources
that these funds for the school's operation are available for a period of five (5) years beginning with the date the school opens
that construction will begin when the five (5) year commitment of operating funds are identified
and 3. that the District can demonstrate to the U.S. District Court that the school will complement its desegregation plan and receives approval from the Court to modify its plan to include the construction and implementation of the aerospace school. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Little Rock School District enthusiastically approves the Aerospace Technology School in concept subject to the conditions listed above. ADOPTED this 24th day of November, 1992. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 0. G. JACOVELLI, PRESIDENT PAT GEE, SECRETARY LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT JAN 2 2 1995 1993-97 REVENUE PROJECTION AND BUDGET SUMMARY (WITH AEROSPACE SCHOOL REVENUE/EXPENSE) Office of Desegregation Monitoring 01-22-93 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 REVENUE-LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 39,088,120 40,793,227 39,416,117 40,786,512 42,206,276 DELINQUENT TAXES 4,250,186 4,600,000 4,700,000 4,800,000 4,900,000 40% PULLBACK 21,694,578 21,633,744 22,396,645 23,166,307 23,918,335 EXCESS TREASURER'S FEE 140,000 141,400 142,814 144,242 145,685 DEPOSITORY INTEREST 300,000 368,650 372,337 376,060 379,820 REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES 224,667 227,250 229,183 231,818 234,136 MISCELLANEOUS AND RENTS 461,000 484,050 508,253 533,665 560,348 INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS 300,000 309,000 318,270 327,818 337,653 ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 100,857 100,000 100,000 100,000 92,007 TOTAL 66,559,408 68,657,321 68,183,619 70,466,422 72,774,260 REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL 73,419 73,419 73,419 73,419 73,419 SEVERANCE TAX 11,000 11,000 11,000 11,000 11,000 TOTAL 84,419 84,419 84,419 84,419 84,419 REVENUE - STATE SOURCES MFPA 27,042,713 27,503,386 28,394,849 30,102,462 30,862,449 SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS 8,926,606 8,094,112 6,042,591 3,829,942 683,125 SETTLEMENT LOAN 1,500,000 APPORTIONMENT 73,419 73,419 73,419 73,419 73,419 VOCATIONAL 1,341,887 1,400,000 1,450,000 1,500,000 1,550,000 HANDICAPPED CHILDREN 821,449 850,000 875,000 900,000 950,000 ORPHAN CHILDREN 3,000 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 EARLY CHILDHOOD 229,403 229,403 229,403 229,403 229,403 TRANSPORTATION 2,692,563 3,300,000 3,615,840 3,805,107 4,017,516 INCENTIVE FUNDS - M TO M 2,490,900 3,248,910 4,206,664 5,046,346 5,843,040 ADULT EDUCATION 697,589 697,589 697,589 697,589 697,589 COMPENSATORY EDUCATION 548,034 565,000 575,000 585,000 595,000 TOTAL 46,367,563 45,965,319 46,163,855 46,772,768 45,505,041 REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES PUBLIC LAW 874 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 TRANSFER FROM FED. GRANTS 262,000 265,000 265,000 265,000 265,000 TRANSFER FROM BOND ACCT 600,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 TOTAL 902,000 700,000 595,000 490,000 385,000 TOTAL REVENUE OPERATING 113,913,390 115,407,059 115,026,893 117,813,609 118,748,720 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1993-97 REVENUE PROJECTION AND BUDGET SUMMARY (WITH AEROSPACE SCHOOL REVENUE/EXPENSE) 01-22-93 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 REVENUE-FEDERALGRANTS CHAPTER I 4,446,152 4,563,774 4,655,049 CHAPTER II 215,020 219,320 223,707 TITLEVI B 569,986 581,386 593,014 OTHER 1,770,603 1,806,015 1,842,135 TOTAL 7,001,761 7,170,495 7,313,905 REVENUE - MAGNET SCHOOLS 14,278,796 14,447,947 14,736,906 TOTAL REVENUE 135,193,947 137,025,501 137,077,704 EXPENSES- OPERATING SALARIES 65,063,011 68,365,037 69,169,638 BENEFITS 9,162,732 9,202,509 9,120,588 DESEGREGATION 17,013,029 19,148,407 22,515,161 PUA SER,SUPPLIES,EQUIP 14,636,674 14,672,774 14,696,830 DEBT SERVICE 9,597,115 9,797,473 9,552,598 CONTINGENCY 500,000 600,000 700,000 TOTAL- OPERATING 115,972,561 121,786,200 125,754,815 EXPENSES-FEDERAL GRANTS 7,001,761 7,170,495 7,313,905 EXPENSES - MAGNET SCHOOLS 14,278,796 14,447,947 14,736,906 EXPENSES - AEROSPACE 1,452,615 TOTAL EXPENSES 137,253,118 143,404,642 149,258,241 EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES (2,059,171) (6,379,141) (12,180,537) - Budget reductions to comply with State law are not reflected. 1995-96 1996-97 4,748,150 4,843,113 228,181 232,745 604,874 616,971 1,878,978 1,916,557 7,460,183 7,609,386 15,031,644 15,332,277 140,305,436 141,690,383 70,892,807 73,443,940 9,166,861 9,213,366 23,246,037 23,732,324 14,725,036 14,755,937 9,120,671 8,901,668 800,000 900,000 127,951,412 130,947,235 7,460,183 7,609,386 15,031,644 15,332,277 2,949,249 4,401,864 153,392,488 158,290,762 (13,087,052) (16,600,379) ~ RE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT JAN c -J JY9.5 1993-97 REVENUE PROJECTION AND BUDGET SUMMARY (WITHOUT AEROSPACE SCHOOL) Office of Deseg,1 - 1on fllont 01-22-93 "<-'"'' , 1 onng 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 REVENUE-LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 39,088,120 40,793,227 39,416,117 40,786,512 42,206,276 DELINQUENT TAXES 4,250,186 4,600,000 4,700,000 4,800,000 4,900,000 40% PULLBACK 21,694,578 21,633,744 22,396,645 23,166,307 23,918,335 EXCESS TREASURER'S FEE 140,000 141,400 142,814 144,242 145,685 DEPOSITORY INTEREST 300,000 368,650 372,337 376,060 379,820 REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES 224,667 227,250 229,183 231,818 234,136 MISCELLANEOUS AND RENTS 461,000 484,050 508,253 533,665 560,348 INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS 300,000 309,000 318,270 327,818 337,653 ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 100,857 100,000 100,000 100,000 92,007 TOTAL 66,559,408 68,657,321 68,183,619 70,466,422 72,TT4,260 REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL 73,419 73,419 73,419 73,419 73,419 SEVERANCE TAX 11,000 11,000 11,000 11,000 11,000 TOTAL 84,419 84,419 84,419 84,419 84,419 REVENUE - STATE SOURCES MFPA 27,042,713 27,503,386 28,394,849 30,102,462 30,862,449 SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS 8,926,606 8,094,112 6,042,591 3,829,942 683,125 SETTLEMENT LOAN 1,500,000 APPORTIONMENT 73,419 73,419 73,419 73,419 73,419 VOCATIONAL 1,341,887 1,400,000 1,450,000 1,500,000 1,550,000 HANDICAPPED CHILDREN 821,449 850,000 875,000 900,000 950,000 ORPHAN CHILDREN 3,000 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 EARLY CHILDHOOD 229,403 229,403 229,403 229,403 229,403 TRANSPORTATION 2,692,563 3,300,000 3,615,840 3,805,107 4,017,516 INCENTIVE FUNDS - M TO M 2,490,900 3,248,910 3,760,540 4,140,580 4,491,150 ADULT EDUCATION 697,589 697,589 697,589 697,589 697,589 COMPENSATORY EDUCATION 548,034 565,000 575,000 585,000 595,000 TOTAL 46,367,563 45,965,319 45,717,731 45,867,002 44,153,151 REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES PUBLIC LAW 874 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 TRANSFER FROM FED. GRANTS 262,000 265,000 265,000 265,000 265,000 TRANSFER FROM BOND ACCT 600,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 TOTAL 902,000 700,000 595,000 490,000 385,000 TOTAL REVENUE OPERATING 113,913,390 115,407,059 114,580,769 116,907,843 117,396,830 LITTI.E ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1993-97 REVENUE PROJECTION AND BUDGET SUMMARY (WffilOUT AEROSPACE SCHOOL) 01-22-93 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 REVENUE-FEDERALGRANTS CHAPTER I 4,446,152 4,563,774 4,655,049 CHAPTER II 215,020 219,320 223,707 mLEVIB 569,986 581,386 593,014 OTHER 1,770,603 1,806,015 1,842,135 TOTAL 7,001,761 7,170,495 7,313,905 REVENUE - MAGNET SCHOOLS 14,278,796 14,447,947 14,736,906 TOTAL REVENUE 135,193,947 137,025,501 136,631,580 EXPENSES - OPERATING SALARIES 65,063,011 68,365,037 69,169,638 BENEFITS 9,162,732 9,202,509 9,120,588 DESEGREGATION 17,013,029 19,148,407 22,515,161 PUA SER,SUPPLIES,EQUIP 14,636,674 14,672,774 14,696,830 DEBT SERVICE 9,597,115 9,090,123 8,845,248 CONTINGENCY 500,000 600,000 700,000 TOTAL - OPERATING 115,972,561 121,078,850 125,047,465 EXPENSES - FEDERAL GRANTS 7,001,761 7,170,495 7,313,905 EXPENSES - MAGNET SCHOOLS 14,278,796 14,447,947 14,736,906 TOTAL EXPENSES 137,253,118 142,697,292 147,098,276 EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES * (2,059,171) (5,671,791) (10,466,696) - Budget reductions to comply with State law are not reflected. 1995-96 1996-97 4,748,150 4,843,113 228,181 232,745 604,874 616,971 1,878,978 1,916,557 7,460,183 7,609,386 15,031,644 15,332,277 139,399,670 140,338,493 70,892,807 73,443,940 9,166,861 9,213,366 23,246,037 23,732,324 14,725,036 14,755,937 8,258,921 8,041,468 800,000 900,000 127,089,662 130,087,035 7,460,183 7,609,386 15,031,644 15,332,277 149,581,489 153,028,698 (10,181,819) (12,690,205) :lsl~T1:
\1o1,!!:ts:p
.i:'@X:-cw.
.:
@J-:.:.gL
Fillfilji&ill]fill CERTIFIED Principal 1.0 $53 232 1.0 $62,274 STAFF Asst. Prin. 3.0 $116 160 3.0 $135 891 SUPPORT STAFF PURCHASED SERVICES (30) MATERIALS, SUPPLIES (40) CAPITAL OUTLAY (SO) OTHER (60) Project Director 1.0 $39 460 1.0 $46163 Curriculum Specialists 5.0 $202 820 5.0 $237 271 Counselors 3.0 $95,622 3.0 $111,864 Media 1.0 $30,334 1.0 $35,486 Aerospace Tech Teachers 15.0 $443,475 15.0 $518,803 Foreiqn Lanquaqe Teachers 6.0 $159 030 6.0 $186 043 Enqlish Teachers 9.0 $238 545 9.0 $279 064 Math Teachers 9.0 $238 545 9.0 $279 064 Science Teachers 9.0 $238 545 9.0 $279 064 Social Studies Teachers 6.0 $159 030 6.0 $186 043 Fine Arts Teachers 2.0 $53 010 2.0 $62 014 Vocal Music Teacher 1.0 $26 505 1.0 $31 007 Orchestra/Instrumental Teacher 1.0 $26 505 1.0 $31 007 Phvsical Education/Life Sports 3.0 $79 515 3.0 $93 021 Special Education Teachers 4.0 $106 020 4.0 $124 028 lanquaqe Arts Teachers 4.0 $106 020 4.0 $124 028 Mathematics Remediation Teachers 4.0 $106 020 4.0 $124 028 Substitutes $0 $0 Fringe Benefrts(20) .......... , ,. $318,000 .,,,'.-:s-:s-:-:. $412,000 TOTAL CERT SALARY & BENEFITS 87.0 $2,836,393 87.0 $3,358,164 Reaistrar 1.0 $15943 1.0 $18651 Princioal's Secretarv 1.0 $14 803 1.0 $17 317 General Office Secretarv 1.0 $14 234 1.0 $16 652 Bookkeeoer 1.0 $12 040 1.0 $14 085 Attendance Secretarv 1.0 $12,040 1.0 $14 085 Counselor Secretary 1.0 $12,040 1.0 $14,085 Media Clerks 2.0 $21 946 2.0 . $25 674 Nurse 1.0 $22 607 1.0 $26 447 Buildinq Enqineer 1.0 $23 000 1.0 $26 907 Custodians 7.0 $83 300 7.0 $97 449 Camous Securitv Officers 2.0 $23 878 2.0 $27 934 Resource Officer 1.0 $18 591 1.0 $21 749 Project Director's Secretarv 1.0 $12 040 1.0 $14 085 Instructional Aides 10.0 $97 130 10.0 $113 628 Frinqe Benefits(20) ,.,.,,_.,.,.,.,,:-,-,,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,., $72,000 ,,,.,.,-:,,,.--,-:-,,, . ,,..w.,, $90,100 TOTAL N/C SALARY & BENEFITS 31 .0 $455,592 31.0 $538,848 TOTAL (10 20) N.''H' :. $3 291 985
~ $3 897 012 Utilities Travel Maintenance Aqreements Other TOTAL (30) Princioal's Office Reaular Classroom Media Other TOTAL (40) Equipment Building Repair etc. Other TOTAL (50) Dues and Fees Other flight lessons TOTAL (60) TOT AL (30 60) TOT AL (10-60) TOTAL LINE ITEMS SECOND PAGE GRAND TOTAL $210 000 .,,, ... ,,,.,,,.,.,.'' $245 670 $0 ' $0 $0 ., $0 $48 700 ......, ..., .. ..... ,,. . -:.,:,....... $56 972 $258 700 .... , '. ' ,. $302 642 $0 :, $0 $1 00 850 -:-:-- ,,:.:,:-:-:-:::-:-:,:-:-:-. $117 980 $17 000 . .,ww.: $19 888 $0 $0 $117 850 $137 868 $0. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ' $0 $0 :, $0 $50 000 $58 493 $50 000 $58 493 $426 550 $499 003 118.0 $3 718 535 118.0 $4 396 015 $5 000 :,rn,: .,.,.,.... ........ $5 849 $3 723 535 -.. ... ',/' $4 401 864 RECEIVE JAN 2 2 199j Office of Desegregation Monitoring- :::,,,,hi?t:rnw::t'Ii.:tWWM+rrn::::::::,une11emoa,11f.,rr:i::.,.=:::::,:.= 1992-93 1996-97 Stipends Other Objects Indirect Costs Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs Plant Services $5,000 $5,849 Reading Science English Special Education i,::--
.:,rmar.un1Jtims\'w:\i" :>~~/t"::--rw::sasdoo STUDENT ENROLLMENT 900.0 900.0 Total Costs $0 $4,401,864 fflPu1:m:eost::\faf!tt:rn::nrnt::mmW mm:,,:='=ttJlYJ@NM:=:t:MJO, ,ftttM%1iM@1,
.eg1: LESS: M TOM PERCENTAGE 0% 0.00 M TO M REIMBURSEMENT $0 NET OPERATING COST $3 723 535 SALARIES: SELECTED THE MIDPOINT FOR EACH SALARY RANGE. INCREMENTED SALARIES BY 4% PER YEAR FOR 4 YEARS. BENEFITS: 0.00 $0 $4 401 864 CALCULATED AS A PERCENTAGE OF SALARIES AND ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION. PURCHASED SERVICES: BASED ON CURRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW HIGH SCHOOL AND ADJUSTED 4% FOR 4 YEARS. MATERIALS & SUPPLIES: BASED ON CURRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW HIGH SCHOOL AND ADJUSTED 4% FOR 4 YEARS. CAPITAL OUTLAY: ASSUMED THAT THESE COSTS WOULD BE PART OF GRANT AND/OR STARTUP COSTS. OTHER: BASED ON CURRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW HIGH SCHOOL. M TOM ASSUMPTIONS: CALCULATED AT 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% !lllllfd ~rntti?k@H CERTIFIED Principal 1.0 $53,232 1.0 $62,274 STAFF Asst. Prin. 3.0 $116160 3.0 $135,891 SUPPORT STAFF PURCHASED SERVICES (30) MATERIALS, SUPPLIES (40) CAPITAL OUTLAY (50) OTHER (60) Proiect Director 1.0 $39 460 1.0 $46 163 Curriculum Specialists 5.0 $202 820 5.0 $237,271 Counselors 3.0 $95,622 3.0 $111,864 Media 1.0 $30,334 1.0 $35,486 Aerospace Tech Teachers 15.0 $443,475 15.0 $518,803 Foreian Lanauaae Teachers 6.0 $159 030 6.0 $186,043 Enalish Teachers 9.0 $238 545 9.0 $279 064 Math Teachers 9.0 $238 545 9.0 $279,064 Science Teachers 9.0 $238 545 9.0 $279 064 Social Studies Teachers 6.0 $159 030 6.0 $186,043 Fine Arts Teachers 2.0 $53,010 2.0 $62,014 Vocal Music Teacher 1.0 $26 505 1.0 $31,007 Orchestra/Instrumental Teacher 1.0 $26,505 1.0 $31,007 Physical Education/Life Sports 3.0 $79 515 3.0 $93 021 Special Education Teachers 4.0 $106,020 4.0 $124,028 Lanauaae Arts Teachers 4.0 $106 020 4.0 $124 028 Mathematics Remediation Teachers 4.0 $106,020 4.0 $124 028 Substitutes $0 $0 Frinae Benefits(20) ' $318,000 , , .... ..... $412,000 TOTAL CERT SALARY & BENEFITS 87.0 $2,836,393 87.0 $3,358,164 Reaistrar 1.0 $15 943 1.0 $18,651 Principal'sSecretary 1.0 $14,803 1.0 $17317 General Office Secretary 1.0 $14 234 1.0 $16 652 Bookkeeoer 1.0 $12,040 1.0 $14,085 Attendance Secretary 1.0 $12,040 1.0 $14 085 Counselor Secretary 1.0 $12,040 1.0 $14,085 Media Clerks 2.0 $21,946 2.0 $25,674 Nurse 1.0 $22,607 1.0 $26,447 Building Engineer 1.0 $23 000 1.0 $26 907 Custodians 7.0 $83 300 7.0 $97 449 Campus Securitv Officers 2.0 $23 878 2.0 $27,934 Resource Officer 1.0 $18 591 1.0 $21 749 Proiect Director's Secretarv 1.0 $12 040 1.0 $14 085 Instructional Aides 10.0 $97,130 10.0 $113 628 Fringe Benefrts(20) .,.,.,,.,., .. , . ,.,,,.,,.,........ $72,000 :::::''',':'''',':''',':'''',: $90,100 TOTAL N/C SALARY & BENEFITS 31.0 $455,592 31.0 $538,848 TOTAL (10 20) .......... , $3,291,985 :~ $3,897,012 UlilltO,s $210,000 $245,670 ~
~~~nance Ai:ireements :' ... $ 48 ,Jg ..... , $ 56,J~ TOTAL (30) $258,700 '> . . $302 642 ~~~~i~~1i1a~:~~:m ''' ,,, $100,8:~IIII, $117 9:~ Media .,,., $17,000 ,,, ....... $19,888 Other $0 .. $0 Eauipment Buildina Repair etc. Other TOTAL (50) Dues and Fees Other fliaht lessons TOTAL (60) TOTAL/30 60) TOTAL (10-60) TOTAL LINE ITEMS SECOND PAGE GRAND TOTAL - w w ---- w w .,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,., .,.,,,,,,,,:,:,:,:,. $50 000 $58 493 ................ ,:x,,,,,y $50 000 $58 493 $426 550 .. $499 003 118.0 $3 718 535 118.0 $4,396,015 $5 000 :!::::::::-:-:-:.:::::-:::::: $5,849 $3 723 535 -:-:-:-:-:,:,:,
,:,:-:,:.,::::::,-: $4,401,864 :r"'s <t .. LinetmC.ftt> Le<:
> 1992-93 1996-97 Stipends Other Obiects Indirect Costs Vocational Athletics Gifted Proqrams Plant Services $5,000 $5,849 Readinq Science Enqlish Special Education ]tef Pub.ii:OtiL . c::.:.x L+< .,}.c.., 1992-93 1996-91 STUDENT ENROLLMENT 900.0 900.0 Total Costs $3,723,535 $4 401,864 :eei
}~(ipij
.ob.M=ikfi:fobitdi\ki@kA ifaifoiiJ$4dl1l .~=a.a* LESS: M TOM PERCENTAGE 10% 0.10 0.10 M TO M REIMBURSEMENT $385 200 $450 630 NET OPERATING COST $3 338 335 $3,951 234 SALARIES: SELECTED THE MIDPOINT FOR EACH SALARY RANGE. INCREMENTED SALARIES BY 4% PER YEAR FOR 4 YEARS. BENEFITS: CALCULATED AS A PERCENTAGE OF SALARIES AND ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION. PURCHASED SERVICES: BASED ON CURRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW HIGH SCHOOL AND ADJUSTED 4% FOR 4 YEARS. MATERIALS & SUPPLIES: BASED ON CURRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW HIGH SCHOOL AND ADJUSTED 4% FOR 4 YEARS. CAPITAL OUTLAY: ASSUMED THAT THESE COSTS WOULD BE PART OF GRANT AND/OR STARTUP COSTS. OTHER: BASED ON CURRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW HIGH SCHOOL. M TOM ASSUMPTIONS: CALCULATED AT 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% :ts~11=:~11=~dij~irM,1lm:11]
~:
:i
:
:~]
~:
:
~::1::~
:::::i:~
:m~
:
:1~:: :
'
:::
:
:
::
::~
:- ,,, CERTIFIED Principal 1.0 $53,232 1.0 $62,274 STAFF Asst. Prin. 3.0 $116 160 3.0 $135,891 SUPPORT STAFF PURCHASED SERVICES (30) MATERIALS, SUPPLIES (40) Proiect Director 1.0 $39 460 1.0 $46,163 Curriculum Specialists 5.0 $202 820 5.0 $237,271 Counselors 3.0 $95,622 3.0 $111,864 Media 1.0 $30,334 1.0 $35,486 Aerospace Tech Teachers 15.0 $443,475 15.0 $518,803 Foreian Lanauaae Teachers 6.0 $159 030 6.0 $186,043 Enalish Teachers 9.0 $238,545 9.0 $279 064 Math Teachers 9.0 $238 545 9.0 $279,064 Science Teachers 9.0 $238,545 9.0 $279,064 Social Studies Teachers 6.0 $159 030 6.0 $186,043 Fine Arts Teachers 2.0 $53,010 2.0 $62,014 Vocal Music Teacher 1.0 $26,505 1.0 $31 007 Orchestra/Instrumental Teacher 1.0 $26 505 1.0 $31 007 Phvsical Education/life Sports 3.0 $79 515 3.0 $93,021 Special Education Teachers 4.0 $106 020 4.0 $124 028 Lanauaae Arts Teachers 4.0 $106 020 4.0 $124 028 Mathematics Remediation Teachers 4.0 $106 020 4.0 $124 028 Substitutes $0 $0 Frinae Benefits(20) ,.,.,.,,,,,~'. $318,000 .,,.,,,, ,,.,.,.,. , ,- - $412,000 TOTAL CERT SALARY & BENEFITS 87.0 $2,836,393 87.0 $3,358,164 Reaistrar 1.0 $15 943 1.0 $18,651 Principal'sSecretarv 1.0 $14,803 1.0 $17317 General Office Secretary 1.0 $14 234 1.0 $16 652 Bookkeeoer 1.0 $12040 1.0 $14,085 AttendanceSecretarv 1.0 $12,040 1.0 $14085 Counselor Secretarv 1.0 $12,040 1.0 $14 085 Media Clerks 2.0 $21,946 2.0 $25 674 Nurse 1.0 $22 607 1.0 $26 447 Buildina Enaineer 1.0 $23 000 1.0 $26,907 Custodians 7.0 $83,300 7.0 $97 449 Campus Security Officers 2.0 $23,878 2.0 $27 934 Resource Officer 1.0 $18,591 1.0 $21 749 Proiect Director's Secretarv 1.0 $12 040 1.0 $14,085 Instructional Aides 10.0 $97 130 10.0 $113,628 Frinae Benefits/20) $72,000 . $90,100 TOTAL N/C SALARY & BENEFITS 31 .0 $455,592 31.0 $538,848 TOTAL/10 20) ...... , $3,291,985 :~ :: $3,897,012 Utilities Travel Maintenance Aareements Other TOTAL /30) Principal's Office Reaular Classroom Media Other TOTAL /40) $48 700 '''.' '' '": '"' :"' '"' $56 972 $258 700 . . $302,642 $0 $0 $100,850 ' $117,980 $17,000 ,,,,,,:,:,,,:,:,,,:,:,,:-,-,,,.,.,.,.,,,. $19,888 TOTAL /30 60) ,.,., $426 550 $499,003 TOTAL/10-60) 118.0 $3,718,535 118.0 $4396,015 TOTAL LINE ITEMS SECOND PAGE GRAND TOTAL $5,000 $5 849 $3,723,535 $4 401 864 . ......: : .. ....: ..... ...:
.: ... . )WiUne]tem:costs
::tJlJM.tt:.f/.(.::,::"': SALARIES: Stipends Other Objects Indirect Costs Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs Plant Services Reading Science English Special Education t.:: :}:\.LLTbtaUJne..lt~mis ... STUDENT ENROLLMENT Total Costs f.m.reui1tc.b.$txL\>}>>>t</t LESS: M TOM PERCENTAGE 20% M TO M REIMBURSEMENT NET OPERATING COST 1992-93 1996-97 $5,000 $5,849 1992-93 1996-97 900.0 900.0 $3 723 535 $4 401 864 ~r,:tnf 2G:C/'.GUfU]:: 0.20 0.20 $770 400 $901 260 $2 953135 $3 500 604 SELECTED THE MIDPOINT FOR EACH SALARY RANGE. INCREMENTED SALARIES BY 4% PER YEAR FOR 4 YEARS. BENEFITS: CALCULATED AS A PERCENTAGE OF SALARIES AND ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION. PURCHASED SERVICES: BASED ON CURRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW HIGH SCHOOL AND ADJUSTED 4% FOR 4 YEARS. MATERIALS & SUPPLIES: BASED ON CURRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW HIGH SCHOOL AND ADJUSTED 4% FOR 4 YEARS. CAPITAL OUTLAY: ASSUMED THAT THESE COSTS WOULD BE PART OF GRANT AND/OR STARTUP COSTS. OTHER: BASED ON CURRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW HIGH SCHOOL. M TO M ASSUMPTIONS: CALCULATED AT 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% CERTIFIED STAFF SUPPORT STAFF PURCHASED SERVICES (30) MATERIALS, SUPPLIES (40) CAPITAL OUTLAY (SO} OTHER (60) Princioal 1.0 Asst. Prin. 3.0 Proiect Director 1.0 Curriculum Soecialists 5.0 Counselors 3.0 Media 1.0 Aerospace Tech Teachers 15.0 Foreign Lanauaae Teachers 6.0 EnQlish Teachers 9.0 Math Teachers 9.0 Science Teachers 9.0 Social Studies Teachers 6.0 Fine Arts Teachers 2.0 Vocal Music Teacher 1.0 Orchestra/Instrumental Teacher 1.0 Phvsical Education/life Soorts 3.0 Soecial Education Teachers 4.0 LanauaQe Arts Teachers 4.0 Mathematics Remediation Teachers 4.0 Substitutes TOTAL CERT SALARY & BENEFITS 87.0 ReQistrar 1.0 Principal's Secretary 1.0 General Office Secretary 1.0 Bookkeeoer 1.0 Attendance Secretary 1.0 Counselor Secretary 1.0 Media Clerks 2.0 Nurse 1.0 Buildina Enaineer 1.0 Custodians 7.0 Camous Security Officers 2.0 Resource Officer 1.0 Proiect Director's Secretary 1.0 Instructional Aides 10.0 TOTAL N/C SALARY & BENEFITS 31.0 TOTAL (10 20) ....... , Utilities Travel Maintenance Aareements Other TOTAL (30) Princioal's Office ReQular Classroom Media Other TOTAL (40) $53 232 1.0 $62,274 $116160 3.0 $135 891 $39 460 1.0 $46 163 $202 820 5.0 $237,271 $95,622 3.0 $111,864 $30,334 1.0 $35,486 $443,475 15.0 $518,803 $159 030 6.0 $186,043 $238,545 9.0 $279 064 $238 545 9.0 $279,064 $238,545 9.0 $279,064 $159 030 6.0 $186,043 $53 010 2.0 $62,014 $26 505 1.0 $31 007 $26 505 1.0 $31,007 $79 515 3.0 $93 021 $106 020 4.0 $124 028 $106,020 4.0 $124,028 $106020 4.0 $124028 $0 $0 $318,000 $412,000 $2,836,393 87.0 $3,358,164 $15,943 1.0 $18,651 $14,803 1.0 $17,317 $14234 1.0 $16652 $12040 1.0 $14085 $12,040 1.0 $14,085 $12,040 1.0 $14 085 $21,946 2.0 $25,674 $22,607 1.0 $26 447 $23 000 1.0 $26,907 $83,300 7.0 $97 449 $23,878 2.0 $27,934 $18,591 1.0 $21 749 $12 040 1.0 $14,085 $97,130 10.0 $113,628 $72,000. $90,100 $455,592 31.0 $538,848 $3 291,98s :~mt $3 897 012 $258 700 . :: ' $302 642 $0 $0 $100,850 :: $117,980 $17 000 $19,888 $0 _- $0 $117 850 : w $137 868 Eauipment $0 - $0 BuildinQ Repair, etc. ffiffim: $0 $0 >-0-th_e_r~~-~------~3- f-----7$0~- --- - -----~$0_, TOT AL (SO} $0 :=== .,.,.,.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,.,.- $0 Dues and Fees -- $0 $0 1-:0:-:-t:---he_r_ __ f'="=li-ah:--:t-,-le_s_s_on_s_ ____- f?i_~. -- $50,000 $58 493 TOTAL (60) $50,000 ' $58 493 TOTALC30 60) $426,550 . - $499 003 TOTALC10-60) 118.0 $3,718 535 118.0 $4,396,015 TOTAL LINE ITEMS SECOND PAGE $5,000 $5,849 GRAND TOTAL "'1 $3 723 535 ' $4 401 864 -> ..., ,. ..m .. > <tM<t@ ... :.:.wt ..1 :w:mrcr:-..-cun,ntafu costs Jr\:(": : ,:: r ,.'f:"::". r 1992-93 1996-97 Stipends Other Objects Indirect Costs Vocational Athletics Gifted Proarams Plant Services $5,000 $5,849 Readina Science Enalish Soecial Education <. ................ ....Ttital .. LlneJtems ........, ... ...........................t ,. .................. ..... .. ,-.......... /$6.ID.OO ..............: .. .............. . .. .. ... .. )$5..M9 .. STUDENT ENROLLMENT 900.0 Total Costs $3,723 535 Nt.P,
i#II.Co.iUO\ ... L .. :.J.:J/V.. J .::: .::. . / ... M.i-\..Ut .. J$4.43.1. LESS: M TOM PERCENTAGE 30% 30% M TO M REIMBURSEMENT $1 155 600 NET OPERATING COST $2 567,935 1996-97 900.0 $4 401,864 :~'Ht 30% $1 351 890 $3,049,974 .... :: ..'. . . _::::u..1. .. ,.::..::: ..... :. >. . ::: ... '.'':.:., ' :
.::: ::wssuMet10.N1r=.). ,.. .. ).-........: .. .. '.'''u -''''._,_: ... ,.._,. '' SALARIES: SELECTED THE MIDPOINT FOR EACH SALARY RANGE. INCREMENTED SALARIES BY 4% PER YEAR FOR 4 YEARS. BENEFITS: CALCULATED AS A PERCENTAGE OF SALARIES AND ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION. PURCHASED SERVICES: BASED ON CURRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW H.S. AND ADJUSTED 4% FOR 4 YEARS. MATERIALS & SUPPLIES: BASED ON CUSRRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW H.S. AND ADJUSTED 4% FOR 4 YEARS. CAPITAL OUTLAY: ASSUMED THAT THESE COSTS WOULD BE PART OF GRANT AND/OR STARTUP COSTS. OTHER: BASED ON CURRENT COSTS OF PARKVIEW H.S. M TO M ASSUMPTIONS: CALCULATED AT 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% Little Rock School District January 22, 1993 Ms. Sylvia Wright Chief, Magnet Schools and Desegregation Branch U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Avenue, SW Room 2059 Washington, DC 20202-6246 Dear Ms. Wright: RECEIVED JAN 2 2 1993 Office of Dasegregation Monitoring On behalf of the Board of Education of the Little Rock School District, I request your consideration of the enclosed Aerospace Grant Application. The Grant was developed by a writer employed through the funding of a consortium of Arkansas businessmen and has the strong support of the Aerospace Industry in Arkansas. This support has resulted in a close and cooperative relationship with a vitally important segment of the business community. They have pledged their determination to provide financial and in-kind support which will be vital in the continued operation of the school. With this backing from the business community, the Board of Education looks forward to the potential which this magnet program offers to our students and the community. After visiting an existing Aerospace Magnet School in Long Beach, California, I am excited about the opportunity to acquaint our students with the Aerospace curriculum. Through the use of computer simulations, they will learn the Aerospace curriculum, practice what they have learned, and use those concepts in situations that approach real life. The application of knowledge to real-world situations is something that has been sorely missing in public education. I believe that this void has contributed greatly to failure in school, lack of student motivation, and a high dropout rate among poor and minority children. One of the most important goals of this exciting project is to change these unacceptable conditions. Please give this grant your most careful consideration, because it portents a bright future for our school district and for public education in this country. Sincerely, C - "'"::::?:- t,K_AA._0~ C.M. Bernd Superintendent of Schools 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501).324-2000 ' ,..,.\,0'0 ~e~.,. <:
)'<,cf:~\ a,,,e,e o\ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT .,c:
-,t-~ EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS \C"1 ' WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. 0 RD ER FILED U.S. DISTRleTCOUFH" -:Asri:c'-.1 l"\1c::rn1r.T AAKANSAS JAN 2 5 1993 CA~~BRE,SaRK By. '1/"'a DEP. CLERK PLAINTIFF DEFEN.uANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Court has received a request from Mr. Richard N. Holbert, vice chairman of the Aerospace Education Center, to be present and present to the Court the Center's position on and involvement in the proposed establishment of an aerospace magnet school in conjunction with the Aerospace Education Center. attached.) (Letter Because the Court anticipates that such testimony might be informative, it is inclined to grant Mr. Holbert's request. The Court, however, desires th~ benefit of t~e pa~ties ' responses to the request. The parties, therefore, are directed to respond to the request no later than noon on Thursday, January 28, 1993. If necessary, the parties may file this response only by facsimile. ,. :{k. DATED this
1-5~day of January, 1993. UNITED STATES DISTRCT JUDGE National Advisory Board Dr. Eddie Anderson Col Walter J. Boyne LL Gen. Benjamin 0. Davis Gen. Alfred G. Hansen Phillip S. Woodruff Honorary Chairmen Herschel H. Friday Mayor Sharon M. Priest Winthrop P. Rockefeller Jackson T. Stephens Little Rock School District Dr. Cloyde McKinley Bernd Superintendent Campaign Leadership William H. Bowen Chairman Richard N. Holbert Vic, Chairman Marion B. Burton President J. Dan Baker J. W. "Buddy" Benafield 0. Wayne Bennett William C. Bracas Henry A Broach Rep. Inna Hunter Brown F. Taylor Brown David M. Clark Fred K. Darragh, Jr. Dennis D. D.-is Lee Frazier Charles H. Harper Sen. Jerry Jewell E. Ray Kemp John Lewellen Donna K. Mel.arty Sandy S. McMath Frederick J. Menz Edward M. Penick. Sr. Ruth Remmel Edgar K. Riddick, Jr. James R Rodgers Lucien M. Taillac Charles M. Taylor Jim Guy Tucker State Advisory Board Dr. Gerald P. Carr Na than Gordon Robert A Gordon Col. Albert Hart Dr. William R Pogue Louis L Ramsay Major General James A Ryan M. M. "Twig" Satterlield, Jr. Col. Charles J. Wax Development Counsel 375-7:i,v .5 7 ~- 0 9 '\ 0 uFortune favors the prepared mind. n UCATION(ENTER January 22, 1993 P 0. Box 7332 Unle Rock. Arlwisas 72217 501. 371. 0331 Honorable Susan Webber Wright United States District Court 600 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Judge Wright: As you know, the Arkansas Aviation Historical Society was approached in 1989 by the late Eugene Reville to consider adding a magnet school to our plan for an Arkansas Museum of Aviation History, to be located at the Little Rock Regional Airport. Mr. Reville sowed many seeds as he sought to rebuild community support for education. Some other partnership school ideas were floated, but the suitable partners failed to develop. However, despite an initial skepticism, and even bewilderment, we became the fertile ground upon which his idea germinated. Later, as we put plans for our museum on hold to allow for the creation of this new institution, we became its greatest proponents, and often the keeper of the flame. As we have spoken with people throughout our community, state, and even the entire nation, we have become convinced that this project represents even more than an exceptional school for the Little Rock School District, our community, and Arkansas. The Aerospace Education Center, as we have come to call the synthesis of the Magnet School and Museum, represents the best opportunity our community has to solve three distinct, yet interrelated, problems: * * * Providing better educational opportunities for our students, especially black and disadvantaged students who have had few opportunities to enter technology fields in past
Providing a source of skilled workers in technology disciplines, and thus allowing the expansion of our existing aerospace or other technology companies here in Arkansas, and helping to attract new ones to provide future jobs. We call the educational plans which will meet these first two needs "Relevant Education
" and finally Restoring the faith and trust (and therefore, support) of the entire community of central Arkansas in our system of public education. Honorable Susan Webber Wright January 22, 1993 Page Two While the diverse group of concerned citizens who have given of their time, money, and prestige to make this dream a reality are not parties to the case before your -Court, we feel that their voices should be represented when the hearing is held on February 1, 1993, seeking your approval for the District to submit an application to the U. S. Department of Education for an $8 million Federal Magnet School Grant, which would fund the operations of Little Rock's aerospace magnet program for the first two years. Therefore, we ask for an opportunity to be present at the hearing, to briefly present to the Court our position on these issues, and to be available to clarify our involvement in this project which, we feel, is crucial to bringing about excellent and equitable educational opportunities for all of our children. Thank you for the opportunity to present you with this request. RNH/mj Respectfully yours, Richard N. Holbert Vice Chairman Aerospace Education Center FACSIMILE gVER SHEET DATE: /-~ 53 TDIE: '-f: IS em TO:
c..h,vJ. ec,c.ke..\\ -3"1S- bl8b S ,,., - 3, I, ~q lf.4 1- <
.te..pka."' ~ne.: - 3-,s
-10
.7 1--a~ .. 1/o.u ist - 317b2.ir.2-- FAX NUMBER FROM: CLERK, UNITED STATES DISTRI U.S. POST OFFICE AND COUR 600 WEST CAPITOL, ROOM 402 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 (501) 324-5351 \ - ~1,'I_:. \ \- r \ \ _1-'--__ PAGE(S)
ILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTF~N n1~ro11'T ACl<ANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JAN 2 6 1993 WESTERN DIVISION CARL R. BRENTS, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT By:---.........,._.,_..._,,,,,.,.. PLA:ifflt>+f.!fERr v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, NO. 1 1 ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS JOSHUA'S RESPONSE TO ORDER OF JANUARY 25, 1993 The Court directed the parties to respond to the request of Mr. Dick Holbert to give testimony in the hearing regarding the Aerospace Education Center by January 28, 1993. The Joshua Intervenors submit as their response the position that Mr. Holbert' s pa rticipation in the project has been substantial and that he is a pertinent witness in the hearing. Joshua, therefore, favors his participation. Respectfully submitted, JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 (501) 374-3758 ~Ohh w. Walker, Bar #64046 ',/ REC VEO JAN 2 7 1993 Office of Desegregation Mon::0, ,ng CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been mailed, postage prepaid to the counsel of record listed below on this day of January, 1993. Larry Vault, Esq. Pulaski County Attorney 201 So. Broadway, Suite 400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Steve Jones, Esq. Jack, Lyon & Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller, Esq. Friday, Eldredge & Clark 2000 First Commercial Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Sam Jones, Esq. Wright, Lindsey & Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell, Esq. #15 Hickory Creek Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Ann Brown, Monitor Office of Desegregation 210 East Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 c:lrsd.mot Monitoring EDWARD L . WRIGHT ( 1903-1977) ROBERT S LINDSEY 11913-1991) RONALD A MAY ISAAC A SCOTT. JR. JAM ES M MOODY JOHN G . LILE GORDON S RATHER. JR. TERRY L. MATHEWS DAVID M POWELL ROGER A. GLASGOW C DOUGLAS BUFORD, JR. PATRICK J GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS, JR JOHN R TISDALE KATHLYN GRAVES M SAMUEL JONES 111 JOHN WILLIAM SPIVEY 111 BRUCE R LINDSEY LEE J MULDROW WENDELL L. GRIFFEN N M NORTON, JR. EDGAR J . TYLER CHARLES C . PRICE CHARLES T. COLEMAN JIMMY W MITCHELL JAMES J GLOVER WRIGHT, LINDSEY 8: JENNINGS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2200 WORTHEN BANK BUILDING 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX 1!501 J 376-9442 OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS GEORGE E. LUSK. JR EDWIN L LOWTHER. JR BEVERLY BASSETT SCHAFFER January 27, 1993 Re: LRSD v. USDC No. The Honorable U.S. District U.S. District Little Rock, PCSSD 82-866 Susan Webber Wright Court Judge Courthouse Arkansas 72201 Dear Judge Wright: CHARLES L . SCHLUMBERGER SAMMY L. TAYLOR WALTER E. MAY ANNA HIRAI GIBSON GREGORY T JONES H KEITH MORRISON THOMAS C COURTWAY BETTINA E BROWNSTEIN WALTER MCSPADDEN ROGER D ROWE NANCY BELLHOUSE MAY NATE COULTER JOHN D DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY KIMBERLY WOOD TUCKER MARK L PRYOR RAY F COX. JR HARRY S HURST JR TROY A PRICE PATRICIA SIEVERS LEWALLEN JAMES M MOODY. JR KATHRYN A PRYOR J_ MARK DAVIS TAMMERA RANKIN HARRELSON KEVIN W. KENNEDY KAREN J GARNETT M TODD WOOD R. GREGORY ACLIN FRED M PERKINS 111 WILLIAM STUART JACKSON JAN 2 8 \993 omce of Desegregation tv101\1VJ<1ng This letter addresses Mr. Holbert's request to be heard at the aerospace magnet hearing and the Court's order respecting same. The Pulaski County Special School District has no objection to an appearance by Mr. Holbert pursuant to whatever guidelines or restrictions, if any, the Court believes to be reasonable and appropriate. MSJ:drl cc: Mr. Christopher Heller Mr. Stephen Jones 54161 Mr. John W. Walker Mr. Richard Roachell Office of Desegregation Cordially yours, WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS ~e:::rr Monitoring JACK, LYO & JONES, JP.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3400 TCBY TOWER 425 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3472 (501)375-1122 TELECOPIER(501l 375-1027 January 26, 1993 Honorable Susan Webber Wright United States District Judge United States District Court 600 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Aerospace Magnet Dear Judge Wright: Nashville Office #11 Music Circle Sou!h Nash\11lle, Tennessee 37203 (615) 259-4664 Telecoper (615) 2594668 In response to your Order of January 25, the North Little Rock School District does not object to Mr. Richard N. Holbert making a presentation to the Court regarding the proposed Aerospace Education Center. While the District is opposing the construction of this school absent clear evidence of the LRSD's ability to afford it without compromising its desegregation obligations, we also think that community involvement in this process is important. Therefore, we would encourage the Court to grant Mr. Holbert's request. SWJ/tr cc: All Ms. Mr. Counsel Of Recora"" Ann Brown, ODM James Smith, NLRSD Very truly yours, ~ti~~~ JAN 2 7 1993 Office of Desegregation Mor111oring ' ROACHELL and STREETT Attorneys at Law First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 375-5550 Telefax: (501) 375-6186 January 26, 1992 Honorable Susa eber Wright VIA FAX #324-6096 District Judge HARD COPY TO FOLLOW Eastern D' trict of Arkansas 302 u .. Post Office & Courthouse 600 pitol Avenue P Office Box 3316 72203 Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, et al.
United States District Court No. LR-C-82-866 Dear Judge Wright: This letter will acknoweldge receipt of your facsimile transmission dated January 25, 1993. The Knight, et al. Intervenors have no objection to Mr. Holbert of the Aerospace Education Center being present and presenting the center's position on and involvment in the proposed establishment of an aerospace magnet school in conjuction with the Aerospace Education Center at the hearing currently set for February 1, 1993. By: RWR: jxb Sincerely yours, ROACHELL LAW FIRM Richard W. Roachell cc: Christopher J. Heller, Esq. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. Little Rock, AR 72201 Samuel Jones, Esq. WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 200 West Capitol Avenue 2200 Worthen Bank Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Holbert Attorney at Law 1501 Bond Street Little Rock, AR 72202 Larry D. Vaught Attorney at Law 201 South Broadway, Room #400 Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker, Esq. JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Ann Brown/ OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING 201 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Stephen Jones Attorney at Law 425 West Capitol,.Ste 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 JAN-25-93 MON 17: 13 SUSt1N W WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL, MRS, LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL, KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL, 0 RD ER P. 02 JAN 2 5 1993 CA~~BRE!~sa~K Sy. '1/::'a / DEP, CLEAT< PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The court has received a request from Mr. Richard N. Holbert, vice chairman of the Aerospace Education Center, to be present and present to the Court the Center's position on and involvement in the proposed establishment of an aerospace magnet school in conjunction with the Aerospace Education Center. (Letter attached,) Because the Court anticipates that such testimony might be informative, it is inclined to grant Mr. Holbert's request. The Court, however, desires the benefit of the parties' responses to the request. The parties, therefore, are directed to respond to the request no later than noon on Thursday, January 28, 1993, If necessary, the parties may file this response only by facsimile . . - -c
.-{h. DATED this -
...__
day of January, 1993. UNITED STATES DISTR CT JUDGE JAN-25-93 MON J~:~- SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NL. :: \3246576 P. 02 -~livnal A(hisory 8oard Vr. t dtlie Amlerwu Col. Walter J. Boyne LI. Gt:n. B~r:j:imiu O. navi~ Gen .. .\Jn-..d r,. Han,en Ph,l\
p 5 Weodnuf Honorary Choirmen Her.<chd H. Friday ~foyur 3harou M. Pri~sl V..,11rhm11 P. Rnckiilr Jac'.Gon T. Stephens IJttle Rock School Disttict Dr. Clorde MdGnley Berne! Sup.:riHt.:Jt.dr:N.I (\nupr,i).!,l T .eader~hitl William H. lluwen Chcin.a Rich,,....J ~. lfollJerl ~'ka Chafrma" ~f
,ril'm R. RurtOJ\ Pmidt11I J. Dan Baker J. W. "Duddy" Benalidd 0. ",V:.yne Benr,c=-tt Willi.1m C. Braca: llenr
A. Broach Rep. !rm Hunter !Jrown I'. T:1ylor Bruwu David '.',1. Clark Fre<l K. [).
,ragh, Jr. Denni: D, D:ivis lee Frazier Churbs H. l:fal'Der Sen. Jerry Jewell E. R.i K<tr,p John Lewt'llen D c)\11'1 :t K. ~kLa.rty Suudy $. ,k,folh Frederick J. Menz Euwsinl M. Peuirk, Sr. R1.U1 Rsmtnel Ed
:,ir K. Ri<hli,:k, Jr. James R Rodger:a J_.1u':i r':1l M. T
iilLic Ch
irles M. Tilylor Jim Guy Tucker Stitc i\dvisory Board Dr. Gerald P. C.irr Nath.a.n Gordon Rul:o r! :\ .. Gonion Col. Albo1 Ha11 Dr. v.r,!
::im R Pogue Liub L. Rau:s~y :vlljor General J.a.n,cs A l<yJn \,!. \f. '!'wig' Sorterudd.Jr. c,,1. Cl,.
rl~d. W:i.x ~Fortune favors the prepared muid. ~-- UCATION(ENTER January 22, 1993 Ho::orable Susan Webber Wright Uni-ed States District Court 600 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Judge Wright: As you know, the Arkansas Aviaticn Historical Society was app~oached in 1989 by chelate Eugene Keville to consider adding a ~agnet school to our plan for an Arkansas Museum of Aviation H:story, to be located at the Little Rock Regional Airport. Mr. Reville sowed many seeds as he sought to rebuild co~munity support for education. Some other partnership school ideas were floated, but the suitable partners failed to develop. However, despite an in~tial skepticism, and even bewilderment, we became the fertile ground upon which his idea germinated. Later, as we put plans for our museum on hold to allow for the creation o: ~his new institution, we became its greatest proponents, and of~en the keeper of the flame. As we have spoken with people throughout our community, state, and even the entire nation, we ~ave become convinced that th:s project represents even more than an exceptional school for the Little Rock Schoo_ District, our ccmmunity, and Arkansas. Tte Aerospace Education Center, as we have come to call the sy~thesis of the Magnet School and Museum, represents the best opportunity our community has to solve three distinct, yet ir.terrelated, problems: * Providing betcer educational 09portunities for our students, especially black a~j disadvantaged students who have had few opportunities to enter technology fields in past
Providing a source of skilled workers in technology disciplines, and thus allowir.g the expansion of our existing aerospace or other technology companies here in Arkansas, and helping to attract new ones to provide future jobs. We call the educational plans which will meet these f:rst two needs "Relevant Education
" and fi~ally Restoring the faith and trus~ (and therefore, support) of the entire cc~~unicy of central Arkansas in our system of pu~lic education. JAN-25-93 MON J~:~- SUSAN W WRIGHT Honorable s~san Webber Wright January 22, 1993 Page Two FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 03 While the diverse group of concerned citizens who have given of their time, ~oney, and prestige to make this dream a reality are not parties to t~e case before your Court, we feel that their voices should be represented when the hearing is held on February 1, 1993, seeking yo~r approval for the District to submit an application to the u. s. Department of Education for an $8 million Federal Magnet School Grant, which would fund the operations of Little Rock's aerospace magnet program for the first two years. Th~reft=e, we ask for an opportuni~y to be present at the hearing, to briefly present to the Court our position on these issues, and to be available to clarify our involvement in this project wh~ci, we feel, is crucial to bringing about excellent and equitable educational opportunities for all of our children. Thank you for the opportunity to present you with this request. fu'JH / mj Respectfully yours, Richard N. Holbert Vice Chairman J1_erospace Education Center R CEIV D IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JAN 2 5 W~J J/.D -.:65 Office of Desegregation Monitoring LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF vs. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, et al. DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS NOTICE OF FILING The Little Rock School District hereby gives notice of the filing of a revised and corrected volume titled Aerospace Technology Magnet Program together with a comparison document which shows the differences between the document filed today and the document filed Friday, January 22, 1993. Respectfully submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Street Little Rock, AR 72201 / / _/ BY:~:::
:::
~~~~~~~~~ Bar No. 81083 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing Notice of Filing has been served on the following by HAND DELIVERY on this 25th day of January, 1993: Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 -2- EDWARD L WRIGHT ( 1903-1977) ROBERT S LINDSEY WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS ATTORNEY S AT LAW CHARLES L SCHLUMBERGER SAMMYE L TAYLOR WALTER E MAY (1 913-19911 RONALD A MAY IS.A.AC A SCOTT. JR JAMES M MOODY JOHN G LILE 2200 WORTHEN BANK BUILDING 2 0 0 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3699 ANNA HIRAI GIBSON GREGORY T JONES H KEITH MORRISON THOMAS C COURTWAY BETTINA E BROWNSTEIN GORDON S RATHER. JR. TERRY L MATHEWS DAVID M POWELL ROGER A GLASGOW C DOUGLAS BUFORD. J R. PATRICK J GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS JR JOHN R TISDALE KATHLYN GRAVES M SAMUEL JONES 111 JOHN WILLIAM SPIVEY 111 BRUCE R LINDSEY LEE J MULDROW WENDELL L GRIFFEN N M NORTON. JR EDGAR J. TYLER CHARLES C PRICE CHARLES T COLEMAN JIMMY W MITCHELL JAMES J . GLOVER EDWIN L LOWTHER, JR BEVERLY BASSETT SCHAFFER Clerk of Court United States District Court Federal Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge & Clark 2000 First Commercial Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen Jones Jack, Lyon & Jones 3400 Capitol Tower Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501l 371-0808 FAX (5011 376-9442 OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS GEORGE E LUSK. JR R JAN 2 o 1993 ALTER MCSPADDEN OGER D ROWE ANCY BELLHOUSE MAY NATE COULTER JOHN C DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY KIM BERLY WOOD TUCKER MARK L PRYOR RAY F COX JR HARRY S HURST. JR TROY A PRICE Office of Desegregation January 25, 1993 PATRICIA SIEVERS LEWALLEN . J.AMES M MOODY JR MonitOf~iilRvN A PRvoR J 'M1RK DAVIS Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway TAMMERA RANKIN HARRELSON KEVIN W KENNEDY KAREN J GARNETT M TODD WOOD R GREGORY ACLIN FRED M PERKINS 111 WILLIAM STUART JACKSON Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Mr. Richard Roache II Roachell Law Firm #15 Hickory Creek Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72212 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Heritage West Building 210 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: LRSD v. PCSSD No. 1, et al, Mrs. Lorene Joshua, et al and Katherine Knight, et al
U.S.D.C. No. LR-C-82-866 Ladies and Gentlemen: Please find enclosed Exhibit A to the Observations, Questions and Concerns of the PCSSD Regarding the Proposed LRSD Aerospace Magnet School filed on January 22, 1993, which was advertantly left off by my office on that date. Please accept my apologies for any inconvenience this may have caused. Sincerely, WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS Enclosure Aerospace Industries Association Contact: David H. Napier (202) 371-8563 1992 YEAR-END REVIEW AND FORECAST - AN ANALYSIS - SUMMARY In 1992, aerospace industry sales fell 4 percent to $134 billion, from last year's record of $139 billion, according to Aerospace Industries Association (AJA) estimates. Purchases of aerospace products and services by the Department of Defense fell $4 billion (or 7 percent) to $52 billion causing much of the decline. Sales of military aircraft and parts were down 9 percent (or $3.6 billion) to $35 billion. On a more positive note, the industry's sales to NASA and other federal agencies increased slightly-from $11.7 billion to $12 billion. Several areas of industry activity are projected to increase in current dollar terms only. Sales of civil aircraft and parts reached $37.9 billion-down after inflation. Sales of space-related products and services rose to $29 billion from $28. 7 billion, another decline in constant dollars. Both of these sectors experienced strong growth over the last decade or so. Their growth, at least for the near-term, has slowed. Aerospace industry net profits are expected to rise marginally-up $69 million to $2.6 billion in 1992. Nevertheless, profits in the last two years have been lower than at any time since 1982. Profits as a percentage of sales, assets, and equity improved for the aerospace industry as they did for all manufacturing industries combined. However, the industry's profitability as measured by these ratios indicates that aerospace companies continue to under perform the overall manufacturing averages. Aerospace industry investment in new plant and equipment should grow 10 percent to $4.8 billion by yearend 1992. In contrast, new plant and equipment expenditures are expected to fall 2.5 percent for durable goods manufacturers and 2.9 percent for all manufacturing industries combined. New aerospace orders were down 23 percent or $30 billion to $97 billion. The backlog of commercial jet transport aircraft fell $8 billion to $101 billion in the first nine months of 1992. A fall-off in orders from domestic customers accounted for $5 billion of the decline. For the year, the backlog of unfilled orders for all aerospace products and services is expected to fall $25 billion (or 11 percent) to $210 billion. The industry's net trade surplus is projected to grow slightly to $31 billion. Exports topped $44 billion. Both are up in current dollarterms only. Imports grew in real terms to exceed $13 billion. Employment fell by 117,000 in 1992 to 1,063,000-a 10 percent decline. None of the industry sectors added jobs in 1992. Employment had the largest percentage drop ( down 12 percent or 31 ,000) in the missiles and space sector. In terms of the actual number of jobs, civil aircraft-related employment declined the mostdown 38,000. An additional 26,000 workers lost jobs in 1992 in the military aircraft sector following a year in which 45,000 positions had been cut. Aerospace Industries Association of America, Inc. 1250 Eye Street. NW Washington, DC 20005 (202) 371-8400 (continued next page) SUMMARY continued Outlook for 1993 AIA projects sales will decline further, to $126 billion, in 1993. Aircraft and parts sales are expected to account for 90 percent of 1993 's sales decline
military sales should fall $3 billion and civil sales, $3.6 billion. Although failing to keep pace with inflation, space-related sales should increase to $29 billion in 1993. The number of civil aircraft produced is expected to rise due to higher projected helicopter shipments, but the value of shipments will fall nearly $3 billion (9 percent from 1992 's record) to $27 billion. Production of commercial jet transports is projected to decline by 103 aircraft with sales declining 10 percent to $25 billion. Current company forecasts indicate the aerospace work force will shrink an additional 4 percent or 47,000 to 1,016,000 next year. As in 1992, employment in each industry sector, and in all occupational classifications, is expected to decline. GOVERNMENT PURCHASES AIA forecasts show that sales of aerospace products and services to the U.S. government fell significantly in 1992. Government purchases fell due to a 7 percent or $4 billion decline in sales to the Department of Defense (DoD). Accounting for the majority of DoD's decline in purchases to $51.8 billion, military aircraft sales fell 9 percent in 1992 or $3.6 billion to $34.9 billion. Missile sales also fell in 1992, but only by 1 percent to $10.8 billion after plummeting 23 percent in 1991. Aerospace sales to NASA and other civil agencies rose slightly (up 3 percent) in 1992 to a record $12 billion. Total sales of space-related products and services rose $0.3 billion to $29 billion. Although DoD space purchases (which include RDT&E expenditures) declined in magnitude, space-related products and services represented a larger share of DoD outlays. CIVIL AIRCRAFT SALES Civil aircraft worth $29.7 billion were shipped in 1992-up from $29 billion. Commercial jet transports accounted for $28 billion, or 94 percent of total shipments value. Transport sales rose $1 billion to $27 .8 billion despite 31 fewer deliveries than in 1991. The general aviation and civil helicopter sectors did not perform as well. General aviation billings fell nearly $0.2 billion (or 10 percent) to $1.8 billion. In 1991, general aviation production fell to a post-World War II low of 1,021 aircraft. In 1992, production dropped again-to 880-as the industry continues to be affected by poor economic conditions, high taxes, and the high cost of product liability insurance. Sales of U.S. -manufactured civil helicopters fell to $146 million, the lowest level since 1973. Production dropped by 234 to 337 in 1992. While the weak economy hurt shipments in all three civil aircraft sectors, it manifested itself most significantly in lower net new orders. SHIPMENTS, ORDERS, AND BACKLOG Industry shipments are expected to fall $8.2 billion (or 6 percent) to $121.5 billion in 1992. New orders for aerospace products and services also declined-down 23 percent or $29.5 billion to $96.7 billion. The backlog of work for manufacturers fell nearly $25 billion to $210 billion. Air carriers continued to struggle with financial losses this year and, consequently, they have delayed orders for new aircraft and cancelled some existing firm orders. Figures through the third quarter of 1992 show the backlog of unfilled transport orders fell $7.9 billion to $101 billion. The backlog of unfilled orders placed by U.S. customers fell 14 percent during this period. Transports on back order for eventual delivery to foreign customers also fell during 1992, but at a slower rate. The foreign component of the total commercial transport backlog rose in terms of number of aircraft (60 percent) and value (69 percent). Foreign orders worth $70 billion accounted for 922 (of the total 1,535) aircraft on order. 2 FOREIGN TRADE Exports continue to be a bright spot for the industry but growth slowed in 1992. Aerospace exports outpaced imports in 1992 by $31 billion
yet total exports rose only $0.7 billion to $44.5 billiort The net surplus was also up just $0.7 billien. Imports grew in real terms, up $0.6 billion to $13.6 billion. Civil aerospace exports increased $0.5 billion to $36 billion, with complete aircraft exports rising 5 percent and accounting for more than $23 billion of the total. Aircraft and engine parts exports, however, fell 4 percent to $10.5 billion. Military aerospace exports rose slightly (2 percent) to $8.4 billion. Overseas shipments in the largest military export sector, aircraft and engine parts, fell $0.5 billion
but gains in complete aircraft, missiles, and engine exports pushed total military exports higher. In l 9'J2, imports of civil aircraft grew $0.3 billion to $3.8 billion-both commercial transport and general aviation imports topped $1.5 billion. Imports of aircraft engines (military and civil combined) grew to $2.6 billion from $2.4 billion. Parts imports increased from $7.1 billion to $7.2 billion. EMPLOYMENT Aerospace employment fell by 117,000 to 1,063,000 in 1992 after declining 90,000 the previous year. From 1989 when industry employment peaked, to year-end 1992, employment declined by 268,000 jobs, or 20 percent In l 9'J2, no sector of the industry was spared from employment cuts. 11le civil aircraft sector experienced the largest reduction, cutting its work force by 38,000 (or 11 percent) to 296,000
the previous year manufacturers added 13,000 workers. Employment in the military aircraft sector fell 26,000 to 299,000 in 1992 following a 45,000 cut in the work force in 1991. Missiles and space employment was down 31,000 to 220,000 in 1992
employment in "other related" products declined 22,000 to 248,000. Employment fell 11 percent for both production and "other" workers (administrative personnel). There were 344,000 (or 42,000 fewer) production workers by year-end 1992-the most sizable decline of any occupational category. Administrative employment fell 24,000 to 204,000. Since total aerospace employment peaked in 1989, employment of production workers has fallen 22 percent and administrative employment has declined 29 percent. The number of scientists and engineers employed in the industry fell by 16,000 in 1992
but employment has fallen least for these highly skilled workers on a percentage basis-8 percent in 1992 and 5 percent since 1989. (Employment of !icientists and engineers increased in 1990). Jobs for technicians (down 19 percent since 1989) declined by 5,000 to 55,000 in 1992. PROFITS Net profit for aerospa,ce companies grew $69 million to $2.6 billion or 2 percent of sales in 1992. However, net profit in both 1991 and 19'J2 were significantly reduced compared to prior years because of extraordinarily large non-operating expenses. The two primary causes are restructuring charges related to defense downsizing, and initial implementation of a Financial Accounting Standards Board requirement to account for costs of employee post-retirement benefits other than pensions. All U.S. corporations are potentially affected by FAS 106, which has manifested itself as a balance sheet adjustment by increasing liabilities and reducing equity
it has affected income statements by lowering net profits. Aerospace industry profits as a percent of sales (2 percent) are low relative to the average for all U.S. manufacturing industries (4 percent). Return on assets for all manufacturing industries grew to 4.2 percent compared to 2.1 percent for aerospace. Return on equity for all U.S. manufacturing was also higher at 10.3 percent compared to 6.4 percent for aerospace. 3 PLANT AND EQUIPMENT EXPENDITURES Invesnnent in new plant and equipment by aerospace corporations is forecast to grow by $0.7 billion to $4.8 billion in 1992, according to the Bureau of the Census. This figure may be misleading, however, since it measures new invesunenh- but fails to include disinvesnnent such as plant closings and divestitures. The aerospace industry is continuing invesnnent, but it is-focused on efficient operations in a period of declining sales. For comparison, expenditures on new plant and equipment by durable goods manufacturers fell $1.9 billion to $76 billion in 1992 and all manufacturing industries combined expect to reduce new plant and equipment expenditures from $183 billion to $177.4 billion. OUTLOOK FOR 1993 AIA projects industry sales will decline in 1993 for the second year in a row. Sales will fall $7.5 billion or 6 percent to $126.5 billion. As in 1992, NASA and other civil government agencies are expected to be the industry's steadiest customers
their purchases from aerospace companies will increase $0.4 billion to $12.4 billion. Sales to the DoD are expected to decline 10 percent or $5 billion to $46 billion in 1993. Missile sales (which include apportioned RDT&E) will fall $0.7 billion to $10.1 billion. The greater share (90 percent) of the overall sales decline will result from a fall-off in aircraft and parts sales-off 9 percent to $66 billion. Military aircraft and parts sales are projected to fall $3 billion to $32 billion while civil aircraft and parts sales will decline $4 billion to $34 billion next year. Commercial transport manufacturers expect to deliver 103 fewer aircraft in 1993. Transport shipments are projected at 455 aircraft worth $25 billion-a 10 percent decline in value from 1992. Helicopter manufacturers report plans to produce 501 U.S.-made helicopters (up 164 from 1992) worth $164 million. Aerospace companies currently project employment will fall 4 percent in 1993 to 1,016,000--<lown 47,000. Although no industry sector nor employment classification will grow, the civil aircraft sector will experience the fewest and the smallest share of job cuts (2 percent or 5,000 employees) to 291,000. "Related" employment (which also includes non-aerospace workers) is currently projected to fall 7 percent (or 18,000) to 230,000. The military aircraft sector is expected to lose an additional 14,000 jobs in 1993. Employment of technicians and production workers is forecast to fall more than 5 percent to 52,000 (down 3,000) and 325,000 (down 19,000), respectively. Employment of scientists and engineers should decline at a slower rate (3 percent), but still 6,000 positions will be cut. Employment of other workers (administrative personnel) will decline to 197,000 (down 3 percent) by year-end 1993. 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FJilL2,-) EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS u.s.o1
,rn,crcL~,l WESTERN DIVISION EASTERNO,SIBIC,A~~, .. ~a- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS ' ' ' I ,-, -, vn,\,..
...., 1 .......... ..J DEFENDANTS JAN 2 6 199.s Office Of Do- ~.,e9ri:gation ,\fa , ~ . POSITION STATEMENT OF THE NLRSD REGARDING n,t,.,ri,,9 =-c==.=a.===-="'-'=-====c.=...-=c......=~==~-==~=~= PROPOSED LRSD AEROSPACE MAGNET SCHOOL To avoid redundancy, the North Little Rock School District has reviewed the Observations, Questions and Concerns of the PCSSD Regarding the Proposed LRSD Aerospace Magnet School and wishes to state that it shares those same concerns. A special concern to the NLRSD is the question of whether the LRSD can reasonably fund the maintenance and operations of an aerospace magnet school, particularly beyond any grant that might be awarded. The NLRSD remains committed to the desegregation plans negotiated among the parties and adopted by the Court. The District firmly believes, as does the Court, that these plans are a blueprint for the achievement of unitary status by the NLRSD and the other districts. It is the long-established position of the NLRSD that it will take all steps necessary to comply with its obligations under the plans. By the same token, it will oppose any actions which would potentially undermine full compliance with those plans. In the present case, the Court approved desegregation plans do not call for an aerospace magnet school in the LRSD nor do they call for an additional high school magnet. Thus, while the plans do not prohibit such a magnet school, its creation does not further compliance with those plans. On the other hand, the fiscal integrity of the LRSD is essential to the implementation of its obligations under the desegregation plans. If the LRSD lacks adequate funding, then its ability to implement the numerous obligations it has assumed will be compromised. For instance, the LRSD has accepted a responsibility to "double fund" the incentive schools even after the cessation of payments from the State under the settlement. And this is only one of many commitments the LRSD has made which will require substantial resources to satisfy. With respect to the proposed aerospace magnet, it has been repeatedly observed that the LRSD lacks the funds necessary to build, operate and maintain such a school over time. If it were nonetheless to assume this responsibility in addition to those which it has under the desegregation plans, it would raise a serious question regarding the LRSD's capacity to honor its obligations under the plans, such as "double funding" of incentive schools. Frankly, for the LRSD to put itself in such a position would border on the reckless and might be viewed in hindsight as an intentional act undermining its desegregation 2 obligations. In light of the uncertainty regarding the LRSD's ability to fund an aerospace magnet school, the NLRSD must oppose the creation of such a school until it can be clearly and convincingly established that the LRSD has, first, the funds necessary to satisfy all its obligations under the desegregation plans and, second, the additional funds necessary to build, operate and maintain an aerospace magnet without undermining its desegregation obligations under the plans. January 25, 1993 Respectfully Submitted, JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 375-1122 By: ~~u.~ st'epnw. Jones 8083 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Stephen W. Jones, hereby certify that I have this 25th day of January, 1993, sent one copy of the foregoing, via United States mail, postage pre-paid, to the following: Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring JENNINGS Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street 72201 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 John W. Walker, Esq. JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 72201 Christopher Heller, Esq. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK 2000 First Commercial Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 P:\DOC\SWJ\NLRSD\DESEGREG\P-0001-2.229 M. Samuel Jones, Esq. WRIGHT, LINDSEY & 2000 Worthen Bank Bldg. Little Rock, Arkansas Richard W. Roachell, Esq. ROACHELL LAW FIRM First Federal Plaza 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas FILED -A U.S. DISTRICT COURT - STEr:
~J DISTRICT A"ll<.4NS.o\~ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION ,,\:Jn ~ .on
\otl ij JAN 2 9 1993 CARL)j . b~(
U=RK Sy:fi~&./'~ DEP. Clf:AK I oeso
(e()"- Q\\ice 0 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. 0 RD ER PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS Even though the Little Rock School District Board of Directors voted not to seek approval of a federal grant for the establishment of an aerospace magnet school, the Court intends to hold the hearing scheduled for Monday, February 1, in order to address other issues of concern to the Court. The Court will discuss the LRSD's "Special Study, Junior High Capacities and Projections, January, 1993" which the district filed on January 22, 1993 in response to the Court's Orders of May 1, 1992, and December 30, 1992. The Court also expects the parties to be present to respond to questions about the LRSD's progress in changing its budgeting process according to commitments made in its 1992-93 Operating Budget, dated July 23, 1992, and the "LRSD Projected Revenue and Expense 1992/93 - 1996/97," dated July 30, 1992. The Court woul
This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.