The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  IN THE UNITED STATES COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. NO. LR-C-82-866 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS AUG 2 7 1997 JAMES W McCORMACK, CLERK PLAINTIFF PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. RECEIVED DEFENDANTS :MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. AUG 2 8 1997 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITOR/NG INTERVENORS MOTION TO HA VE SOUTHWEST JR. IDGH SCHOOL PLACED IN RECEIVERSIDP AND FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL ADMINISTRATOR The Joshua lntervenors respectfully request that the Court convene a hearing involving the Little Rock School District, the Office of Desegregation Monitoring and the Joshua Intervenors in order to review the circumstances that exist at Southwest Junior High School including many violations of the LRSD and Interdistrict Plans adversely affecting the education of black students, and upon appropriate findings determine that it is necessary to have the school placed in receivership, or in the hands of a specially designated authority other than the present principal of the school. For cause, the Joshua Intervenors respectfully show the court that: 1. Chaotic conditions exist at the schoo~ including but not limited to, numerous students having been kept out of classes for the first five days of school by the principal because they have no schedules through no fault of their own and through the misfeasance or malfeasance of the princip~ Dr. Walter Marchalek and the failure of the leadership of the LRSD to respond appropriat_e,l,y,- to the 1 situation; 2. Numerous students have been misassigned to classes by Principal Marshalek with the result being that some students who were lasi year assigned to special education and/or resource classes are now assigned to gifted and talented classes and vice versa; 3. Many students are retained or have been retained in the same grade for one or more years without the school developing an individualized remedial plan for the student; 4. Many students are retained or have been retained in the same grade for two years or more without their parents receiving interim reports prior to their retention; 5. Discipline in the school is frequently arbitrary or in some cases non-existent. Some students are left unsupervised in classes without teachers thereby increasing the probability of difficult student relationships. In one of the unsupervised classrooms, at least one student has been injured - due, in large part, to the absence of supervisor personnel; 6. Students are not being taught due to the delay in making schedules for them. For these students, the school has no plan for providing remediation type work. These students will necessarily be disadvantaged in mee~ing the educational expectations of the school, with many being unable to make up the time or work lost, due to the administrator misfeasance or malfeasance; 7. The teaching staff is fractionated and substantially leaderless. Education on an organized, systematic and educationally acceptable basis is simply not occurring at Southwest Junior High school; 8. The school district is aware of these problems. It has been aware of these problems since the assignment of the present principal to the school. The school district has not devised a plan to correct the problems identified above and others of a similar nature. The problems impact black 2 students almost exclusively, with black males being disproportionately affected by the adverse conditions at the school. Moreover, the school administration has difficulty in treating this group of students fairly, as a general matter, 9. The equal educational opportunities promised by the desegregation plan are not occurring at Southwestern Junior High School; the facts cited in this motion establish violations of the LRSD Plan, 4/92, at [pp. 2-3 (Leadership), pp. 28-29 (School Operations), and 33-35], and the Interdistrict Plan, 4/92, at [p. 21 (School Operations)]. 10. Joshua has previously served notice of the administrative malfeasance which has occurred at the school upon Little Rock's acting administrative superintendent Don Roberts and upon Ms. Ann Brown. See Attachment A These efforts did not yield improvements at Southwest. Black students are thus in a position where their educational opportunity is being severely curtailed, and in - some cases denied in violation of the desegregation plan. This action for relief is therefore appropriate and necessary. An early hearing is essential if relief is to be meaningful. WHEREFORE, the Joshua Intervenors respectfully pray that the Court a) give this matter urgent and immediate attention; b) require the District to prepare within two days a report showing the actual school climate and the extent to which students have been assigned or misassigned to class; c) require the District to report to extend to which black males have been adversely affected by late assignment or scheduling practices and to describe the remediation plans that the District has provided or plans to provide for make-up work, and other corrective actions; d) require the District to establish the extent to which students have been retained in specific grades for more than one year; and to explain by clear and convincing proof all other conditions that demonstrate racial disparity. The Court is further called upon to enjoin the District from allowing the present principal to continue 3 his assignment at Southwest Junior High School and to have placed in his stead someone responsible to the Court who will establish the school as an efficient, nondiscriminatory educational institution. The Intervenors further pray that the Court require the ODM to develop a comprehensive monitoring report on the present educational and interpersonal conditions which exist at Southwest Junior High School, the extent to which there is racial division in the school, and the extent to which the principal has led and now leads the institution. Joshua finally prays, as a last resort, for the school to be placed into receivership. Respectfully submitted, JOHNW. WALKER,P.A 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 374-3758 By: -j_ Jo CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing pleading has been served upon all counsel of record, by placing a copy of the same in the United States Mail with sufficient postage prepaid, on this -2:3_ day of August, 1997. 4 .JOHN W. WALKER ~.ALPH WASHINGTON \L.\RK BURNETTE . .\USTIN PORTER, JR. JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. AITOR!-IEY AT I.Aw 1723 BROADWAY LIITLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 Via Facsimile - 324-2146 August 12, 1997 Dr. Don Roberts Interim Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Roberts: During the last school year, we had myriad complaints of a racial nature from students, parents and staff regarding the-  .  . administration of Dr. Walter Marshaleck at Southwest Junior High. School. I advised him that there appeared to be a number of  problems and suggested that he may wish to address them before  the beginning of this school year. The school year is at hand Aand my office has already received at least three complaints from wblack staff members which we construe to have racial overtones. I believe that it would be appropriate for you to address this matter at once to determine whether the indications we have received are symptoms of a more endemic problem. We will cooperate with you in addressing the issue at your request. Back to the Southwest Junior High School matter, Ms. Springer and I spoke with Dr. Marshaleck today and we will no doubt have different opinions about our conversation. From our perspective, he seeks to run the school and to interact with people as if he is still a military officer. This approach is contrary to the spirit and promises of the desegregation plan. The plan seeks and promises cooperation rather than dictatorial approaches to interpersonal and interprofessional situations. Your counsel and wisdom are earnestly sought regarding this matter. r:eri.2~ 5;t!1:. Walker ~ JWW: js ecc: Ms. Ann Brown Mr. Walter Marshaleck I  ; ~,::II(, : . ,:_ _.. ... 1=-.-: . ~~: ~;, it' :. ",t:.: . FILED U.S. DISTRICT C8t.JRT IN Tiffi UNITED STATES couftrESN DISTRICT .l~ i{ ~'IJSAS EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS AUG 2 7 1997 WESTERN DMSION JAMES W McCORMACK. CLERK By: ---------,=-=--=-:-:=-=-e UTILE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Di:?. K~IFF VS. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. RECEIVED AUG 2 8 1997 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORJNG DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS MEMORANDUM OF THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO HA VE SOUTHWEST JR. IDGH SCHOOL PLACED IN RECEIVERSHIP AND FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL ADMINISTRATOR Joshua Intervenors' motion concerning Southwest Junior High School shows a total breakdown in the educational program at the school, violative of the rights of class members as set forth in the LRSD and Interdistrict Plans. See Motion, para. 9. The relief requested in the motion, as strong as it is, is tailored to address the situation at the school. It is in accordance with relevant precedent. This motion cannot be dismissed as "an individual personal matter." It shows a failure by the LRSD leadership to fulfill the promises voluntarily undertaken in the plan. Intervenors rely on the following points and authorities. a) Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District. 921 F.2d 1371. 1394 (8th Cir. 1990), ("The District Court is instructed to monitor closely the compliance of the parties with the settlement plans and the settlement agreement, to take whatever action is appropriate, in its discretion, to ensure compliance with the plans and the agreement, and otherwise to proceed as the law and the facts require.") b) Morgan v. McDonoutp1, 540 F.2d 527 (1st Cir. 1976). C:rl. denied, 429 U.S. 1042 (1977) (one Boston high school placed in receivership during the course of Boston school desegregation case as a result of breakdown in implementation of desegregation plan there, lack of leadership by the principal, hostility by school's staff: and overall pattern of resistance by school board; initial receiver was area superintendent of Boston system in which the school was located; thereafter, the district's superintendent was designated the receiver; the receiver's duties included the replacement of the school's administrative staff and a review of"all faculty and ~ucational personnel" to select a staff "fit for the purpose of desegregation"; the receiver reported directly to the district court). c) The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has twice cited with approval the opinion in Morgan v. Mc[)onou<p1. supra. in which the creation of a receivership to operate a high school was approved. See Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District. 839 F2d 1296, 1319 (8th Cir. 1988) cited in support of authority of district court to create a citizen monitoring committee); Omaha Indemnity Co. v. Winin~. 949 F.2d 235,239 (8th Cir. 1991) (cited in upholding district court's creation of a receivership in a business case). d) Turner v. Goolsby. 225 FSupp. 724 (S.D. Ga 1966) (3-judge court) (after a small majority black school system agreed to implement a desegregation plan, its officials assisted its white pupils to attend schools in neighboring district, including providing of bus transportation and then closed the one fonnerly white school as unneeded; this left the 87 black pupils who had chosen to attend the school without a desegregated option; the court placed the system in receivership, 2 designated the Georgia State Superintendent of Schools as receiver "operate the schools ... , " and charged him with the obligation "to submit a plan ... , whereunder the illegal expenditure of funds will be discontinued and the right of the 87 applicants for transfer will be accorded" (at 730); thereafter, the receiver arranged for the interested black pupils to attend the schools of the adjoining counties; and investigated why some black pupils were not accorded their first choices of schools, whether black pupils were subject to in-school segregation, and the need for remedial instruction; the receiver was discharged when the initial systems agreed to operate in a desegregated manner in 1966- 67). e) Perez v. Boston Housing:Authority. 400 N.E 2d. 1331 (Mass. 1980) (case involving unsanitary and otherwise unsatisfactory conditions in public housing; court placed the Boston Housing Authority in receivership; the orders appointing the receiver stated that he/she "shall have - the authority to administer, manage, and operate the BHA; he/she shall have the powers of the Board of the BHA (including control of funds and revenues) and any additional powers that may be necessary or appropriate; upon his/her appointment, the Board's powers shall be superseded" [at 1245].). f) United States v. City of Parma. Ohio. 504 F.Supp. 913. 921-22 (N.D. Ohio 1980), affirmed. 661 F.2d. 562. 577 (6th Cir. 1981) (after concluding that Parma officials had followed racially exclusionary policies and practices and had a reputation and image of being the Cleveland suburb most hostile to blacks, the district court entered a comprehensive order including in part the establishment of a "Fair Housing Committee" 'within [the] city government"; this FHC was "to operate as a primary governmental agency in Parma responsible for developing a remedial plan ... [and] to ensure that the provisions of [the] order [were] fully complied with .. .' "[membership on 3 the FHC] shall consist of Panna citizens who are collectively knowledgeable in the fields of fair housing programs and other citizens who are sincerely interested in working to promote the purpose of [the] Order"; the membership was to be court-approved, after comment by the United States; specific functions to be fulfilled by the FHC included: developing advertising and educational programs, drafting a fuir housing resolution, developing an outreach program, establishing within the city government a Housing Infonnation and Referral Service, developing a program designed to foster and interest among housing developers in bringing low-income housing to Parma, and conducting a survey of vacant land suitable for low-income housing development). Conclusion As the foregoing case summaries show, the court has more than ample authority to enter the relief sought by the Joshua Intervenors. By: Respectfully submitted, JOHNW. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) -3758 John 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing pleading ha:s been served upon all counsel of record, by placing a copy of the same in the United States Mail with sufficient postage prepaid, on this~ day of August, 1997. Jo 5  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.