Deposition taken at Wright, Lindsey and Jennings, Little Rock, Arkansas
Little Rock School District, plaintiff vs. Pulaski County Special School District, defendant
This transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.
Case No.: LR-C-82-866 * LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * et al. * Plaintiffs * vs. * PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. * UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT * * EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS Defendants * * WESTERN DIVISION MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. * Intervenors * * KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al. * Intervenors * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * THE ORAL DEPOSITION OF GENE GOSS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * APPEARANCES: MR. SAMUEL JONES, III, Esq., Wright, Lindsey & Jennings, 2000 Worthen Bank Building, 200 West Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 *** For the Plaintiffs*** MESSRS. JOHN w. WALKER & MARK BURNETTE, Esqs., 1723 Broadway, Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 *** For the Joshua Intervenors *** ALSO PRESENT: MR. BOBBY LESTER, Superintendent * * * * * * * BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. 201 East Sixth Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 (501) 372-5115 2 THE ORAL DEPOSITION OF GENE GOSS, a witness produced at the request of the Intervenors, taken in the above-styled and numbered cause on the 25th day of June, 1992, before Jeff Bennett, CCR, LS #19, a Notary Public in and for White County, Arkansas, at Wright, Lindsey & Jennings, 2000 Worthen Bank Building, Little Rock, Arkansas, at 1:20 p.m. pursuant to the agreement hereinafter set forth. * * * * * * * * * * STIPULATIONS IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties through their respective counsel that the deposition of GENE GOSS may be taken at the time and place for the purposes of discovery, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and that all formalities with regard to the taking of said deposition are hereby waived including presentation, reading, subscription by the witness, notice of filing, filing, etc.
and that all objections as to relevancy, materiality, and competency are expressly reserved, except as to form of questions, and may be raised if and when said deposition, or any part thereof, is so offered at the trial of this case. * * * * * * * * * * GENE GOSS the witness hereinbefore named, being first duly cautioned and sworn, or affirmed, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, testified as follows: BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. 201 East Sixth Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 MR. JONES: Before we start, I need to ask the reporter to make the same notations that I made in Mr. Doyan Matthews' deposition a part of this deposition. MR. WALKER: We'll for all the depositions note that Mr. Roachell and Mr. Heller alleged that they were not given notice, and reserve certain rights to object, if necessary. MR. JONES: Okay. EXAMINATION BY MR. WALKER: Q. A. Q. Mr. Goss, how long have you been on the School Board? Two years. Did you initiate the effort to reduce the budget that has been approved by the Board recently? MR. JONES: That's an awfully broad question, John. MR. WALKER: Just object, if you will. A. I think that all Board members, among other people, were involved in initiating the budget cuts. Q. (BY MR. WALKER) Let me just ask that question differently. There was a recommendation for budget cuts in March of 1992 that was submitted to the Board by the superintendent of Schools. Can you tell me before that recommendation was submitted to the Board, if there had been a vote by the Board directing Mr. Lester to make such recommendations to the Board, would there BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 have been a formal vote before then? A. I think so. Q. You think so? 4 A. I know back even before I first came on the Board there was a Budget Cut Committee that went to great extremes in determining items to be cut. Q. Is it your recollection that there was a formal vote taken sometime shortly before March 17, 1992, which mandated that Mr. Lester submit what you may call budget reduction considerations to the Board for approval at a meeting on March 17, 1992? A. I assume we did. I don't recall exactly what day we may have told him, but I know in the period of time we did make suggestions. MR. WALKER: I would like to request, Mr. Jones, that we have access to the Board minutes for this year. MR. JONES: That's fine. Q. (BY MR. WALKER) I've taken Mr. Matthews' deposition, and he indicates that he was basically opposed to the administrative reorganization reductions, but he voted for them after certain assurances that the cabinet did not have any strong objection to them. He also indicated that you may have been a more active proponent of budget reduction considerations than himself and perhaps other Board members. would that be a fair characterization of your role? A. I guess I was probably one of the ones that felt that from BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 the reaction from the public in talking to people, that they felt that a cut in top administration be necessary before we would be able to approve a millage increase. Many of the people I talked to would vote for it. They felt this was something that needed to be done. Q. Did you ever seek to initiate a motion or Board resolution to require the reduction of top administrative salaries? A. I had suggested to Mr. Lester that we take a look at top administration and decide -- Q. I'm asking about a Board. Did you ever submit anything to the Board which you caused to be put to a vote, either in the form of a motion or resolution on that matter? A. On that particular matter I don't recall a resolution from the Board, no. Q. Okay. Now, did you keep minutes of your conversations or notes of your conversations with Mr. Lester regarding this matter? A. I don't have notes, no. Q. Do you know the dates on which you met with Mr. Lester regarding this matter? MR. JONES: When you say, "this matter," on the administrative reorganization? Q. Administrative cost, cutting administrative salaries. Do you recall the dates on which you met with Mr. Lester? A. I don't recall the dates. Over a period of time though. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. Did any other Board member ever visit with you and Mr. Lester at the same time regarding this matter? A. Q. In executive session. Other than in executive session? 6 A. I don't recall any meetings between other members and Mr. Lester, no. Q. Now, in executive session before this budget reduction consideration which is Exhibit 1, which you have before you, was developed, you did have occasion to discuss the millage and what it took to pass the millage? A. Q. A. Q. Yes. You did. This was in executive session? I'm sure we discussed it in executive session, yes. Now, did anybody else have as much of an interest in this matter as you did on the board? A. I'm sure they did, yes. Q. Did anybody seem to be as vocal about it in executive session, since there are no minutes of those meetings, as you did with respect to administrative salary reductions? A. Q. A. Q. Yes. Who were the other persons who were just as vocal? I would say Mr. Burgett probably was, yes. would it be fair to say that you two were the most active in this respect? A. Probably so. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - Q. Did you have occasion to discuss this on more than one occasion during executive sessions? A. Yes. 7 Q. How frequently would this be a matter of discussion or a subject of discussion during executive sessions before March 17, 1992? A. I don't recall, Mr. Walker. I'm sure any time we talk about budget cuts or financing, in some of those sessions I'm sure this aspect of it was discussed, yes. Q. When you were bringing the matter of budget cuts up for consideration in executive sessions, were you bringing them up in connection with any other subjects? A. In connection with any other subjects? Q. Any other subjects, yes, sir. Or was this a separate subject by itself? A. I think it was in connection with total budget cuts. Q. So you all had executive sessions to discuss total budget cuts? A. To discuss personnel, yes. Q. But you talked about personnel in a general way rather than a specific way
isn't that correct, in the executive session? A. we did not talk about specific names. Q. Well, you never talked about specific names, did you, of the mechanic helpers, for instance, in executive sessions, but you considered the budget cut items regarding mechanic helpers BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 8 positions? A. Positions, yes. Q. Okay. And the same holds true for the laborers or for the supplemental contracts, you had full discussions of the budget cuts in executive session? A. I don't know whether I would say full discussion of the budget cuts. we talked about the need. Q. I see. Is it your understanding that you can have this kind of a discussion in executive session? A. About personnel, yes. Q. Well, is it your impression that you can talk about personnel in a general way in executive session, rather than with respect to particular individuals being affected? A. Yes, I think we can talk about the general personnel positions and the needs for those positions. Q. And you also feel that you can talk about administrative reorganization in executive session
is that correct? A. I felt we could suggest to the superintendent that reorganization or that cuts in top administration needed to be made. Q. And did you all meet as a Board in executive session to talk about cutting administration or reorganizing the administration? A. Not for that specific purpose, no. Q. Maybe not for the specific purpose. But you all did BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - discuss that subject in executive session? A. I think we discussed it, yes. Q. was Mr. Lester present? A. Yes. 9 Q. What was Mr. Lester doing during the executive session if he's not a member of the Board? A. We were suggesting to him that this is one of the things we felt needed to be cut. Q. Did you all routinely meet in executive sessions to make recommendations to him as a Board about his administration and the way it ought to be operated? A. Not regularly, no. we do listen to his suggestions on adminstration though. Q. I see. In executive sessions? A. Yes. Q. I see. So it's your notion that you all can have general discussions of reorganization and any number of other things under the name of discussion of personnel matters in executive session? A. Dealing with personnel, yes. Q. So anything to which you attach a label of personnel you can go into executive session on it? A. Not anything, no. Q. But this you could? A. Matters regarding personnel, yes. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. Why couldn't these discussions have taken place in the public? A. They did. 10 Q. Why could not they have taken place in the public before March 17, 1992? A. They do take place in public before that time. Starting back when we started the first cuts back two years ago when we had the committees, this was in public. Q. Are you saying that the discussions that took place in the executive committees or the executive sessions were different from the ones took place before the public? A. No. All these matters were discussed before the public, the budget cut committees and all down through the line for the last two or three years. Q. Tell me, since you were able to discuss them in the public, why was it necessary to have private meetings on them? A. It was not necessary. Q. It wasn't. But you had those meetings anyway, didn't you? A. Those were executive session meetings, and we did mention this. Q. All right. Now, is there any particular reason that you all don't keep minutes of your executive committee meetings? A. That I don't know. Q. I'd like for you to look at Exhibit 1, which you have before you, and ask if in your executive committee meetings or BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - 11 in your public meeting you discussed the desegregation impact of the proposed item number l? A. No. Q. You did not. Did you discuss the desegregation impact of proposed item number 2? A. I think we discussed the desegregation impact and the reaction, in. thinking of all these items as to how they would affect our desegregation plan. They were in the scope of this. And if there would be any adverse reaction from them. Q. would your answer be the same for all 27 items, that you discussed all of them from a desegregation perspective? A. I don't think we discussed each item item-by-item in relation to the desegregation plan, no. Q. You did discuss each item item-by-item with respect to other considerations, did you not? A. Financial. Q. When you discussed, for instance, the reduction in -- I take it you discussed the question of reduction in alpha positions
is that correct, number 10? MR. JONES: I'll have to object to the form of the question. I don't think there were any positions reduced. Q. I'll just go ahead and change it. With respect to the alpha positions, what was being proposed there, to your knowledge? A. Regarding the alpha positions, I'm not sure we discussed BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 12 those in executive session particularly. Q. Well, what was supposed to happen with respect to the alpha positions, what does this mean? MR. JONES: By approving that what was going to be different? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. be? A. Q. A. Q. I 1m not sure. You 1re not sure? No. By approving item 1 what was going to be different? By approving item 1 what was going to be different? Yes. We 1d cut two mechanics helpers. Did you know what the race of the mechanic helpers would No. Did you ever consider it? I didn 1 t consider that, no. How did you determine that it would be two mechanics helpers? A. This is a recommendation of the administration. We asked them to submit to us a list of budget cuts. There 1 s also a committee that made a list of budget cuts over the last two years, suggestions. Q. I understand the process. I 1m just asking you to answer my question. With respect to the supplemental contracts, what was BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 13 supposed to happen in order to effectuate an estimated savings of $184,735? A. All the Junior High supplemental contracts for the Junior High athletics and so forth would be cut. Q. A. And what is a supplemental contract? That's a supplemental contract for the coaches, the cheerleaders and all those various people. Q. A. Did you consider the desegregation impact of that? Well, since it affects all students of both races, I didn't see where there would be any discrimination involved in that. Q. Do you know whether the desegregation plan commits to having a full range of programs and activities, and also a commitment to promote inter-racial cooperation and activities between black and white students? A. Q. I'm sure it does. By cutting out the supplemental contracts, do you not reduce the amount of non-class interaction between students? MR. JONES: John, I guess you can ask this question, but they didn't cut it. Q. A. Q. But that was the proposal, wasn't it? It was a proposal, yes. Now, with respect to the alpha positions, five day student load, what was proposed there? Q. MR. JONES: You just asked him that. (BY MR. WALKER) I'm sorry. was item number 7 approved as BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 a budget cut? A. Q. A. It was, but has since been rescinded. When was that rescinded? In our last meeting. When was the last meeting? June the 11th. 14 Q. A. Q. So since we filed our objection in this case, you all have changed item 7? A. We did that primarily for safety reasons. Q. I didn't ask the reasons. I'm just asking now whether you changed that? A. Q. Yes, we did. Now, how much of a cost did it take you to -- how much of a cost would it be to put that back in? A. Q. A. Q. I assume the $100,000 it shows on this list. Was that on the recommendation of the superintendent? Superintendent and Board members, yes. Well, I'm asking who initiated this recommendation at the Board meeting on June 11th? A. I had heard it mentioned by other Board members as well. I don't know which one mentioned it first. I do not know. Q. A. Q. was there a vote taken on it? Yes, it was. What was meant with respect to maintenance employees under number 8, what does that mean? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 15 A. Those are maintenance employees we felt we could get along without. Q. A. Q. A. Q. How many of them were there? Five. And what was the race of those persons? I do not know. Did you ask the superintendent what the desegregation impact of this proposal would be? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. No. And it was done, right? Yes. Wait a minute. Number 8, no, those were not cut. Not cut? No. So what was cut was number 5, coordinator, special education and education examiners? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Yes, sir. How many persons were cut? Two. Do you know the race of those persons? No, I don't. You never asked the question either? I don't recall asking that question, no. What was the role of the coordinator of special education and education examiner in the desegregation plan, as far as you recall? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 A. I don't recall. Q. But whatever it was you didn't consider it in voting to approve this particular provision, did you? A. We considered it, yes. I'm sure we considered all of them. Q. How could you consider it if you didn't know what the desegregation impact of this would be? A. we considered the desegregation impact of the total budget cuts, all these cuts that we had to make. Q. You considered each one of these items separately in your meeting of March 17, did you not? A. We voted on each one of them separately. Q. Now, did you consider each one from a desegregation perspective separately? A. We didn't discuss those from a desegregation standpoint at that point, no. Q. It's true that at your meeting on March 17 you didn't discuss these from a desegregation perspective at all, did you? A. Not specifically, as far as I recall. Q. Is there any particular reason why before you all rushed to vote on this matter you did not seek the advice of counsel? MR. JONES: I'm going to object to the form of the question, "rushed to vote on." I don't think anybody was eager to do this. Q. I'll change the question. Did you discuss these budget considerations with your lawyer, Mr. Jones, before March 17, BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1992? A. Q. I did not specifically, no. Did the Board ask his opinion or his office's opinion regarding these budget considerations in light of the desegregation case that is pending? Well, we had been -Did you? Over a period of time -- 17 A. Q. A. Q. I'm asking about these specific ones now, Mr. Goss. Did you all consult him about these particular budget reduction considerations? A. Not as far as I know. Q. I see. Did you all consult the Joshua Intervenors before voting on these budget considerations on March 17, 1992? A. Q. A. Q. No. Is there any particular reason you did not do so? No. Are you aware that your plan calls upon you all, if you're going to be modifying the desegregation plan in any way, to discuss it with us first, are you aware of that? A. Q. I'm aware of that. Now, if you change or propose to change the administrative operation of the Office of Desegregation and the shift personnel, does not that have at least the appearance of having a desegregation impact? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. 1(501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Q. Not necessarily. If you change the person who has had the primary 18 responsibility for desegregation for the last three years and reorder his job duties, is not that a change in the desegregation plan, especially since the job duties had been previously approved by the court? MR. JONES: John, you've mixed a couple of concepts. Could you break them out? Q. Are you aware that the job definition of the Office of Desegregation had already been submitted to and approved by the court? A. Q. Right, yes. Did you all understand that by changing the responsibilities and titles of the persons associated with the Office of Desegregation, you were modifying the submission that had been submitted to the court regarding the Office of Desegregation? A. Not necessarily. As long as the job is being done, I think that's the primary thing, not the title or the person in the position. I think the responsibility can still be handled by a different title perhaps. Q. Did you understand that you were in effect effectuating a personnel change when you did this? A, Q. A personnel change? Yes. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - 19 A. We're effecting a title change, yes, sir. Q. All that you intended was a title change: is that correct? A. A title change with a reduction in salary. Q. Okay. Now, are you aware that the plan of desegregation says that the assistant superintendent for desegregation is responsible for planning, directing, controlling and monitoring the overall desegregation plan of the district? A. Yes. Q. Is the assistant superintendent of the same standing in the hierarchy of the administration of the district as a director? A. No. Q. So by affecting a change from assistant superintendent to director, have you not effectively diminished the status of the office? MR. JONES: I object to the form of that question. There's still going to be an assistant superintendent for desegregation. A. very true. A different person. Q. Well, I had asked you earlier if you had not affected a personnel change by that action, and you indicated that you had not, you had just downgraded the position and reduced the salary: that's what I understood? A. Well, we redesignated positions and titles. Q. so you've added more responsibility to Mr. Collins? A. Probably, yes. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. 1(501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. A. Q. And you've taken responsibility from Mr. Bowles? I'm not sure we have, no. 20 Well, did you all consider that in a public Board meeting? First of all, did you have a discussion of that matter in a public Board meeting? A. I don't recall a specific discussion of those. We may have. Q. What is the experience of Mr. Eddie Collins in the capacity of the Office of Desegregation? A. I'm not familiar with that. We relied on the recommendation of the superintendent. Based on his personnel file of these two individuals in making this recommendation to us, we approved it. Q. Did you consider the fact that you were in effect combining two departments, the only two departments which were headed by black persons into one? A. Well, we still have those two positions. Q. My question is did you consider that in effect by reducing the number of departments you had, you took the two black persons who were the assistant superintendents and put them into the same department? A. Q. We also made another superintendent director, Did you all do that consciously, or were you just following the recommendations of Mr. Lester? A. Well, we asked him to make recommendations to us to make BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 reductions in the top administration. And after he made those recommendations we accepted them and approved them. Q. Did you suggest to him at any time that he combine, you personally, suggest to Mr. Lester that he combine the Office of Pupil Personnel and the Office of Desegregation? A. No. Q. Did you ever suggest to him that Mr. Bowles should be reduced in status? A. Never. Q. Now, before you sought to combine those two departments, did you read the desegregation plan with respect to the Office of Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation? A. I read it, yes. Q. Did you do it right before you -A. Not immediately, no. Q. When you say that the Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation will continue to work closely with division and department heads in developing and meeting realistic goals and objectives representing the district's desegregation plan, do you not mean, do you not contemplate by that that you are referring to Mr. Bowles? MR. JONES: I'm going to object to the form of the question. The whole premise goes against the record previously made in this case. They shouldn't consider personalities. There are jobs and descriptions. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. 1(501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 22 MR. WALKER: Just state your objection. MR. JONES: That's not sufficient. I'm entitled to explain my objection on the record. MR. WALKER: Well, you may do so if you wish. I'm just asking that you simply object, because you will have the right to object before the judge if the question is raised, and you can state it for the record there. MR. JONES: Well, for all I know you may seek to introduce these depositions. Therefore I want my objection explained. Q. {BY MR. WALKER) When you say the Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation will continue, you're saying that the position will continue to work closely with the division and department heads in developing and meeting realistic goals? A. Yes, and we still have that position. Q. It is true that Mr. Eddie Collins will have to be trained in order to perform some of the duties that Mr. Bowles had already been performing
isn't that correct? A. That's possible he may need some additional training. Q. Now, you had Mr. Bowles and his office attend workshops and other training programs over the years at great cost, have you not? A. I assume he has, yes. Q. Would you say that that training had some beneficial effect upon their ability to function in the jobs that they had? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 23 A. I would assume. Otherwise there would be no point in sending him. Q. Why would you then adopt a new plan which is going to require that Mr. Collins now go and get the same kind of training that Mr. Bowles already has, and what would be the cost of it? A. I don't know. The changes are made primarily for financial reasons Q. It was for financial reasons? A. Right. Q. If it was for financial reasons, the workshops and the other training would be costly, won't it? A. Q. A. Q. I assume so, yes. Do you know how much those costs are? No, I don't. Can you show me where in the budget cuts you're dealing with the concept of -- well, you deal with the concept of out of district travel, do you not? A. Yes, we do. Q. Which means that if some of this training is going to occur out of the district, the travel budget has been reduced substantially, so that the capacity for this man to get the training is reduced, isn't it? A. Out of district it has, yes. MR. JONES: This all assumes he needs any BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 training, right? Q. would you not assume that a new person taking over this function would have to have at least the same kind of orientation and training experience as a person who formerly occupied it? A. I assume they worked in the office together for a period of years. I would assume he's competent to handle that job or he wouldn't be in it. Q. I'm not going to question it. But do you recall when we were in court, maybe you weren't there, but we were in court and we looked at the contribution to the desegregation plan of Mr. Collins, and it was a copy of something from another district, and no individual original work product? MR. JONES: Wait a minute. You're isolating -MR. WALKER: I'm just asking him if he remembers that. He can answer yes or no. Whether it's relevant -- MR. JONES: I recall one component of it. A. I don't recall that particular incident, no, I don't. Q. All right. Incidently, you cut Mr. Ed Hogan too, did you not, in salary? A. Right. Q. Were you told that the reason for that cut was that Mr. Hogan was not certified? A. Q. No. What was the reason for the cut? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 A. The fact he was not certified probably was mentioned. We asked for some cuts to be made in administration, based on public reaction and need to pass a millage, and these were recommended to us and we accepted them. Q. So that the cut of Mr. Hogan was not due to his lack of certification? A. Not necessarily, as far as I know. It had no relation to these other two people. Q. Did he have lack of certification? A. I've been told he's not certified, yes. Q. Who told you that? A. Mr. Lester, I believe. Q. He did? A. Yes. Q. Is it not true that you know yourself that he is certified as an administrator? A. I've not seen his personnel record, no. Q. I see. Were you one person who recommended the significant reduction of Mr. Hogan's salary? MR. JONES: I've got to object to the form of the question, John, because positions were changed and carry a different salary. I think that's two different things. I don't think anybody set out to reduce anybody's salary. Q. Did you have a salary before you at the time you considered these reductions, did you have a proposal which set forth the BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - 26 amount of money for each position at the administrative level? A. The amount of money at each position. We knew what all the administrators made, yes. Q. You knew what they made. My question is, did you have a document which purported to be salary by position? A. Under the new administration? Q. Under the reorganization. A. I don't recall the salary. I know the line of new reorganization, the structure of it, and the fact that the director would be a director, yes. Q. You know you had a salary schedule before March 17, 1992? A. Right. Q. Now, Mr. Hogan was paid pursuant to that salary schedule, wasn't he? A. True. Q. Did you all develop a new salary schedule before the decision was made to reduce Mr. Hogan? A. Not as far as I know. I think the determination given to us on the salary was at a later time. Q. I see. Now, I draw your attention to the four day week. I take it that you all did not approve that? A. No. As I understand it it's illegal in the State of Arkansas. Q. Who told you that? A. Gosh, I've been hearing that. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. 1(501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 Q. You didn't ask Mr. Jones for a legal opinion on that, did you? A. No. I think when the committee started two years ago this was mentioned, and it was said at that time it was not legal in the State of Arkansas. Q. I understand that you may hear that it's not legal, but you have never asked for a formal opinion from your counsel? A. Q. A. Q. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A, Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. I haven't personally, no. And the Board hasn't while you've been on the Board? No, not as far as I know. Now, according to my notes the four day week was approved? MR. JONES: That's not right. Was item 1 approved? Item 1, no. Item 2, was it approved? No. 3? Yes. 4? No. 5? Yes. 6? Yes. 7? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 A. 2 Q, 3 A. 4 Q. 5 A. 6 Q. 7 A. 8 Q. 9 A. 10 Q. 11 A. 12 Q. 13 A. 14 Q. 15 A. 16 Q. 17 A. 18 Q. 19 A. 20 Q. 21 A. 22 Q. 23 A. 24 Q. 25 A. Yes, 8? No. 9? Yes. 10? Yes. 11? Yes. 12? No. 13? No. 14? Yes. 15? Yes. 16? No. 17? Yes. 18? Yes. 19? Yes. but later Well, 12, rescinded. yes. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. A, Q. A. 207 No. 217 No. 227 29 Q. A. I think originally voted to close 5 days early, but later rescinded that. Q. 237 A. No. Q. 247 A. No. Q. 257 A. Yes. Q. 267 A. Yes. Q. 277 A. Yes. MR. JONES: Wait a minute. Let's go back to 26 and 27. MR. WALKER: I'm asking for his answers, not corrected answers by Mr. Lester or you. MR. JONES: If you just want to play a game about it, John. It's a real confusing process. MR. WALKER: I want to show the court that there is confusion, and that these Board members don't really know BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ]4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 what happened. You can clear it up, Mr. Jones, when you have a chance. MR. JONES: If you want to wait I'll clear it up then. MR. WALKER: I'd rather wait. I'd like for the record to show that there are some problems. Q. 1(BY MR. WALKER) Going down by category. Specialty Fuller, was that approved, number 9? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. No. Futures Program, Fuller? No. Tag? Yes. Special ed coordinator? Yes. Athletic coordinator? Yes. Four course preps? Yes. Special ed learning strategy? Yes. Band? Yes. Did anybody have a specific discussion about the desegregation impact of special ed learning strategies? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Special ea learning strategies? Q. Yes. 31 A. I don't recall specific discussion of that particular one in relation to desegregation. Q. Did you discuss TAG, various schools? A. we discuss TAG, various schools, yes. Q. From a desegregation perspective? A. Yes. Q. Does this mean that TAG was continued in certain schools and cut out in others? A. I'm not sure. MR. JONES: John, this has to do with allocating and reallocating periods, not eliminating things. MR. WALKER: Sam, let me continue. Q. (BY MR. WALKER) And if a cost is involved of savings, that means that something is being changed, doesn't it? A. Yes. Q. Does this mean that you are changing -- what are you changing, tell me what you're changing, in TAG what was changed? A. I can't tell you that, no. Q. What was changed at Fuller Futures Program? A. We decided to retain that program. Q. What was being proposed? A. It was on the cut list. Q. So everything down here is on the cut list, isn't it? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 32 A. Everything on this, plus a number of other items were on the cut list originally. Q. So these are cut list items. That's fine. What do you mean by cut list items? A. Q. A. Q. These are items we considered cutting. You were going to cut 15 periods of TAG, right? No. Yes. That was on consideration, yes. And you were going to cut 8 special ed coordinators
is that right? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Yes. Could you cut 8 special coordinators for a cost of $24,000? I assume. Or is that 8 periods of -- 8 periods. All right. What does that mean, does that mean that you're cutting the pay of the coordinators, or does it mean -- what does that mean? A. Q. A. Q. I don't know. Fine. 8 periods. If you don't know that's fine, Mr. Goss. I want you to say that. If you're going to cut 6 periods of athletic coordinators at various schools, what does that mean? Q. MR. JONES: I object to the form of the question. Do you know what that means? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 33 A. I know we cut 6 periods of athletic coordinators. I don't know which ones or where. Q. A. Q. Does that mean that those persons had their salaries cut? Yes. Does that mean their extra pay was cut, or their basic pay, or what does it mean, do you know? A. I would assume it means that there were some cuts in their hours and in their duties. Q. A. Q. Which meant in their pay? In their pay. With respect to the pay decrease that Mr. Lester agreed to take, what is your understanding of his 8 percent pay reduction, how did that work? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. 8 percent points of his increase. Of the increase? Of the increase. Now, you all increased his salary by 13 percent? 13.4, I believe. And when you increased his salary, did you get the court's approval? A. Q. A. Q. No. Is there any reason you didn't ask for court approval? No. Did you consult us, the Joshua Intervenors, in the matter or any other party? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 34 A. No. Q. Have you all as a Board this year taken any other actions that had desegregative or may have had desegregative impact during the course of the year? I don't mean 1992-93, which is to come, but during 1991-92 did you all take any Board actions that may have had some impact upon the desegregation plan? MR. JONES: I object to the question. It's too broad and unfair to ask a witness have you ever at any time during the year. Q. During the year did the Board direct the administrators to ever initiate any conversation with the Joshua Intervenors on any subject? A. Did we direct the administration? Q. Yes. A. Not specifically, as far as I know. Q. Now, it is true that a number of persons have been cut from their positions, I think that at least at the administrative level there are at least 12
is that correct? A. I think so, yes. Q. How many of those persons are of the black race? A. I don't know. Q. So you all never considered the racial impact of those cuts? A. We did not consider race in making the cuts, no. Q. My question is, after you made the cuts did you consider BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 35 the racial impact of them? A. No. Q. I see. Mr. Goss, I'm concerned. Did all people in the district this year at the administrative level or at the specialty level take pay cuts? A. Q. All people at -- All persons at the administrative level or at the specialty level at the administration take pay cuts? MR. JONES: Are we talking voluntary or involuntary? A. Q. A. MR. WALKER: Either or both. The top seven took a voluntary cut, yes. Just the top seven? I believe that's true. The top seven took a voluntary pay cut, yes. Q. A. Q. Was that on the request of Mr. Lester or the Board? It was voluntary. I understand. Are you sure it was just limited to seven people? A. Q. As far as I know it was. You say it was seven. Are there not more than seven people in the cabinet? A. Q. Not in top administration, as far as I'm concerned. Tell me, which persons were the ones that were requested by Mr. Lester to take pay cuts in the cabinet of the top seven? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. 1(501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 36 MR. JONES: He never said Mr. Lester requested. Q. A. Q. Did you all request anybody to take those cuts? No, they were voluntary. I understand they were voluntary. But somebody had to initiated it. Do you know who initiated it, Mr. Goss? A. Q. No, I don't know who initiated it. Didn't you suggest to the people that they ought to take voluntary cuts? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. No, sir. Do you know anybody who did? No, sir, I don't. What are the seven positions of the persons? superintendent and six assistant superintendents. Is it your position that none of the directors were requested or took the 8 percent pay cuts? A. Q. No. So that anybody who is not an assistant superintendent would not be obliged to undertake or undergo the pay cut? A. Q. I assume, yes. Now, what is the position that your wife holds in the district? A. Q. A. Q. She's facilitator of health services. Is that an administrative position? It's a school nurse. Does she operate out of the central office? BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. ( 501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Yes, she does. Q. Whom does she report to? A. Eddie Collins. Q. Has her title been affected in any way by the reorganization? 37 A. It was affected four years ago when she took that position. Q. Listen to my question. We're talking about this proposed reorganization now. For this year was her position affec~ed in any way by the reorganization? A. No. The reorganization was top administration. Q. Well, you had coordinators who were cut, did you not? A. That's not what I call reorganization. The reorganization I'm thinking of is the six assistant superintendents. This is the reorganization I thought we were discussing. Q. we're discussing budget reductions. Now, you had at least six or seven coordinators reduced in status, didn't you, that you changed, you removed six or seven coordinators, right? A. Right. Q. Now, was your wife reduced in status? A. No. Q. Were there any other nurses of comparable status to your wife in the district? A. There are two other nurses, well, three actually. One is a relatively new special position. Q. Were any of those nurses adversely affected in any way by BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. ( 501) 3 72-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 38 the reorganization? A. No. Q. Did any of those nurses in effect this year get a pay increase? A. They all got a pay increase, yes. Q. During the time that you were saying that you wanted to have budget cuts? A. No. The pay increase was 5 percent. All support staff got that pay increase. Q. Did any of those four nurses get a pay increase greater than the 5 percent? A. Q. A. Q. No. Did your wife not get a greater one? No. Is it not true that your wife filed a grievance which was denied by Mr. Lester several years ago? MR. JONES: I'm going to object for the record. I don't see what the relevancy is of that. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Not several years ago. When was that denied? She filed a grievance within the last year. Did Mr. Lester deny that grievance? That's right. Did that please you? That's not my -- I don't think this is something that I BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 39 need to discuss. MR. JONES: I'm going to object. MR. WALKER: You may object. But I'm saying I'm still entitled to ask that question, because it goes to the question that may be A. I would like to explain. Her title changed four years ago. There were additional responsibilities at that time. Q. (BY MR. WALKER) I'm not asking about that at all. A. I'm explaining that to you though. Q. I understand that there was a history. But I'm saying now, as of this year there was action taken by Mr. Lester in the early part of the year on a grievance. He denied the grievance? A. That's right. Q. And it went to the Board for action. And you recused yourself from consideration? A. That's true. Q. And at that time the Board did not reverse Mr. Lester, did it? A. No. Q. Now, did your wife file a subsequent grievance? A. Yes, because they upgraded her position but did not give her a subsequent increase in salary because of the financial status. Q. Who upgraded her position? A. The Board voted to upgrade her position. BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. A. Q. A. Q. was that on recommendation of Mr. Lester? I don't think so. 40 So the Board took it on itself to upgrade her position? Right. And then the Board took it on itself to give her a pay increase
is that correct? A. we did, yes. MR. WALKER: I have no more questions. EXAMINATION BY MR. JONES: Q. I need to clear up some things. Go back to Exhibit 1. Go back with me to items 26 and 27. What action did the Board take on 26 and 27? A. Q. A. We did not approve those. Did I say we approved them? Yes, you did. I wanted to clear that up. No, we did not approve 26 and 27. MR. JONES: That's all I have. RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. WALKER: Q. Can you tell me how much money was actually saved or would actually be saved, to your knowledge, by the budget cuts which were approved? A. Q. A. By the budget cuts which were approved? How much will be saved? I don't remember the exact amount. Somewhere around BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. ( 501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 41 $3,000,000 though. Q. Do you have a listing of the ones which were approved and the anticipated savings? A. I don't have those with me, no. Q. Is there a listing somewhere? A. Yes, there's a listing. Q. And you have seen it, you've seen that listing? A. The listing of all the budget cuts we made? Q. Which were approved, and the savings that will be expected? A. Anticipated savings, yes. MR. WALKER: Mr. Jones, I'd like to have a copy of that. MR. JONES: I'll have to get one. Q. what is the intended direct use of the savings, to your knowledge at this time? A. To allow the district to continue to operate for the next year or two. Q. So it will go into the general budget? I'm asking specifically. A. Yes. Q. How much of this do you plan specifically to devote to desegregation of the $3,000,000? A. Specifically? MR. JONES: John, he just explained to you -- A. It's all part of the total plan of saving the district, to BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 42 have a school district that white children and black children can attend. Q. My question is, have you in terms of budget allocations for the savings you're talking about, determined that it will go to administrative cost, or will it go to teachers salaries, or will it go for programs associated for desegregation, or will it go for transportation
have you seen a breakdown, is my question, of where the savings will be applied? MR. JONES: John, I've got to object to the form of the question, because it assumes there's going to be any money to apply anywhere. MR. WALKER: Well, he said that there would be a savings of $3,000,000. Q. ,(BY MR. WALKER) And my question is, where will that money go now that you expect these savings? A. It will be in the operating budget, total operating budget at the school. Q. But it won't be allocated by way of budget line items to any particular items? A. Oh, we'll have a budget for next year, and the total amount of money we have available will be designated for that. Q. A. Q. A. So ya'll don't have a budget yet for next year? For next year? Yes. I very well may have. I don't know. I don't know at this BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. '(501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 43 point. Q. Well, if you have one for next year, can you tell me where you put the anticipated $3,000,000 in savings? A. Q. A. Q. A. In that budget. Where? In the total operating budget. So you cannot indicate where it will be? I cannot give you a specific amount of each item on that budget, Mr. Walker. Q. Did any Board member ask this question before that Board member voted upon the budget reorganization? A. Ask which question? Q. The one that I just asked, where will the money be applied specifically, where will the savings be applied? A. The savings will allow us to operate next year. Otherwise we would not have a school district next year. Q. As I understand it, if you save a dollar, in terms of a budget, you over here gain a dollar, and you expect to spend a dollar over here, you got to put it somewhere. Did you all make a judgment of where those $3,000,000 would be applied on the right hand? A. Q. No. We didn't apply each item to a specific point, no. So you cannot say now that for the $3,000,000 that you are saving, that any of it in any particular amount will be devoted to, for instance, remediation of achievement disparities between BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 44 black and white students? A. I think you'd say that a certain portion of it would go to transportation, to administration, teachers salaries, for all these things in the school district. But specifically for an item I don't think we have that. Q. Can you tell me what document I can look at to see where these savings are going to be applied? A. Q. A. I can't tell you that, no. Have you ever seen that document? A document showing each item the $3,000,000 savings will be applied to? Q. A. Yes. No. MR. WALKER: Thank you. 1(WHEREUPON, the above-entitled deposition was concluded at 2:10 p.m.) * * * * * * * * * * * * BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. (501) 372-5115 STATE OF ARKANSAS} }ss. COUNTY OF WHITE } C E R T I F I C A T E RE: THE ORAL DEPOSITION OF GENE GOSS: I, JEFF BENNETT, CCR, LS #19, a Notary Public in and 45 for White County, Arkansas do hereby certify that the facts stated by me in the caption of the foregoing deposition are true
and that the foregoing deposition was transcribed by me, or under my supervision, on the Cimarron III Computerized Transcription System from my machine shorthand notes taken at the time and place set out on the caption hereto, the witness being first duly cautioned and sworn, or affirmed, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this deposition was taken
and further, that I am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto, nor financially interested, or otherwise, in the outcome of this action. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE day of June, 1992. JEFF BENNETT, CCR, #19, Notary Public County, Arkansas My commission expires 11-29-2000 BUSHMAN COURT REPORTING, INC. 201 East Sixth Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 (501) 372-5115 0th
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 Resources.

<dcterms_creator>Bushman Court Reporting</dcterms_creator>