Margie Powell From: Date: To: "Magnet Review" <magnet@magnetschool.com> Friday, November 16, 2012 12:20 PM <Sadie.Mitchell@lrsd.org>
<acklinbo@nlrsd.org>
<rclowers@pcssd.org>
<Oliver.Dillingham@Arkansas.gov>
<Danny.Reed@Arkansas.gov> Page 1 of 4 Cc: <jspringer@gabrielmail.com>
<mqpowell@odmemail.com>
"Donna Creer" <donnacreer@magnetschool.com> Subject: FW: 11/16 MRC meeting As promised in our meeting this morning, November 16th, here is the e-mail from Joy Springer regarding research questions for the Stipulation Magnet Schools Evaluation Report for your review. This item will be on our agenda for our meeting scheduled for December 11, 2012, at 8:30 a.m., in the MRC Office. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Thanks, Sandy From: Donna Creer Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 12:14 PM To: Magnet Review Subject: FW: 11/16 MRC meeting From: Joy Springer Qspringer@gabrielmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 8:51 AM To: 'Mitchell, Sadie' Cc: Donna Creer Subject: RE: 11/16 MRC meeting Good morning ... Will not be able to make the committee meeting this morning are the research questions that I believe need to be addressed(the first question is a standard part of the Board approved evaluation research questions: 1) Have magnet school been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement 11/19/2012 Page 2 of 4 of African American students
2) What is the level of implementation of the magnet school programs? 3) What are the perceptions of teachers, staff, parents students regarding the magnet school program and the implementation of the magnet school program by its staff? Also their perceptions of the program strengths and weaknesses 4) What are the perceptions of parents who have withdrawn their students from magnet schools? 5) What are the reasons for the decline of white student enrollment in magnet schools and the increase of non-white students in magnet schools? 6) What is the reason for the higher achievement of African American students who attend magnet schools as compared to African American students who attend area elementary schools? 7) What is the reason for the decline of participation by the NLRSD and PCSSD in LRSD magnet schools? Please let me know if you have questions. Please forward the agenda for today's meeting by return email. Have a good meeting. Thank you. Joy Springer, Joshua Representative -----Original Message----- From: Mitchell, Sadie [mailto:Sadie.Mitchell@lrsd.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 8:36 AM To: Joy Springer Cc: Donna Creer Subject: Re: 10/2 MRC meeting Thanks Joy. We appreciate your insight and for drafting the research questions. Sadie Mitchell, Ed.D, Associate Superintendent Little Rock School District Elementary Schools On Oct 3, 2012, at 8:01 AM, "Joy Springer" < jspringer@gabrielmail.com <mailto:jspringer@gabrielmai I.com>> wrote: 11/19/2012 Page 3 of 4 Good morning .. I had a personal emergency on yesterday and apologize that I was not able to attend the meeting. Dr. Dreyfus' report indicates a decline in white student enrollment and an increase in the nonwhite enrollment in the magnet schools. For the magnet schools, the percentage is reported as % black and % nonblack. There has been a decline in white student enrollment and an increase in "other" minority enrollment in the magnet schools. The question is why? believe on the call you or Sadie indicated that there is form that parents can complete to give the reasons why. We need to know why? This data needs to be collected and analyzed. If the magnet schools are going to be majority minority in the days to come, I do not see that they are serving their purpose - to attract white students into the district schools. So why have them? Now that I thought about it some more. The magnet elementary schools', probably with the except of Booker and maybe Carver in one area, achievement gap is not 20 points, high double digit teens or more like in the secondary magnet schools. Why is this? What is going on in the magnet schools that can be transferred to the other elementary schools in the district to address African American student achievement? We need to know why African American students are performing better in magnet schools than they are in the regular elementary schools. If all schools are doing the same thing, there would not be a dispute about getting into a magnet school. I guess I am saying that all of the schools should be magnet schools. I guess than the achievement gap would eventually go away. Isn't that what we are striving to do? I will try to write out the research questions and bring them to our next meeting. Hopefully, these comments will help you understand my concerns. Thanks, Joy Springer, Joshua From: Donna Creer [mailto:donnacreer@magnetschool.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2012 9:55 AM To: jspringer@gabrielmail.com<mailto:jspringer@gabrielmail.com> Subject: 10/2 MRC meeting We missed you at the meeting today. We approved the stipulation magnet schools budget, the purchase of a much needed light board at Parkview and the 2010-11 stipulation magnet schools evaluation. 11/19/2012 Page 4 of 4 Sadie, Bobby and I tried to articulate most of the questions you mentioned during our conference call( with Dr Dreyfus) , however, we would prefer if you would take a moment to forward them via email and/or bring them to our November meeting, scheduled for FRIDAY, November 16th , 8:30 am at the MRC office. We asked all MRC members to contribute any research question they would like to see addressed in the next evaluation. I will bring your packet by your office later this week. Thanks for everything. 11/19/2012 MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA NOVEMBER 16, 2012 i. Call to Order- Roll Call II. Reading of the Minutes of October 2, 2012 Ill. Executive Director's Report A. Correspondence B. Financial Transactions C. Newspaper Articles D. Recruitment Update E. LRSD Original Magnet Schools Personnel - Vacancies and New Hires IV. Business and/or Action Items A. Discussion of Court Orders Related to MRC's Submission of Budget to the Court B. Stipulation Magnet Schools Evaluation Report - Discussion of Research Questions for New Report C. Report on Tracking of Stipulation Magnet School Students Upon Withdrawal D. Appeal - Withdrawal of Student from Gibbs Magnet E. Set Next Meeting Date V. Adjournment MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 2012 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Magnet Review Committee was held in the Magnet Review Committee Office, 1920 North Main Street, Suite 101, North Little Rock, Arkansas, on Tuesday, October 2, 2012. Members Present: Dr. Sadie Mitchell, Chairperson - LRSD Bobby Acklin, NLRSD Dr. Robert Clowers, PCSSD Oliver Dillingham, ADE Danny Reed, ADE Absent: Joy Springer, Joshua lntervenors Guests: Kelsey Bailey, Chief Financial Officer - LRSD Margie Powell, Federal Monitor- ODM The meeting was called to order at 8:35 a.m. by Chairperson Dr. Sadie Mitchell. She immediately called for a reading of the minutes of June 7, 2012. A motion was made by Oliver Dillingham and seconded by Danny Reed to accept the minutes as presented. The motion carried unanimously. A motion was made by Oliver Dillingham and seconded by Dr. Robert Clowers to change the order of the Agenda so Kelsey Bailey, Chief Financial Officer at Little Rock School District, could come forward and present the Stipulation Magnet Schools Budget information for presentation to the Court. The motion was unanimously approved. Mr. Bailey informed the MRC that the ADM was down by about 88 students from the previous ADM. Mr. Bailey also reported that the approved budget for the 2011-12 school year had been set at $29,449,577.00. The final expenditures for this same time period came in at $29,400,397.00 and included a one percent salary increase and additional benefits. The proposed budget for 2012-13 is up about $200,000.00 and was submitted at $29,655,558.00. This figure included calculating athletic expenses a little bit differently. This amount is in the same vicinity as it was for three years now, so Little Rock School District is looking good for this year. It is LRSD's plan to stay within their budget this year. Mr. Bailey also noted that Mann's addition is going up at a cost of about $4.3 million, and a security guard has been added to Carver Magnet and Booker Magnet. With regard to Parkview's request for a new lighting board, Mr. Bailey said that will be paid for at the end of the year. A motion was made by Danny Reed to approve the new lighting board at Parkview and Bobby Acklin seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. A motion was then made by Danny Reed to approve the proposed Stipulation Magnet Schools budget for 2012-13, and Bobby Acklin seconded it. The motion carried unanimously. A motion was made to approve the actual expenditures for 2011-12 for the Stipulation Magnet Schools budget by Bobby Acklin. Danny Reed seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously. Dr. Mitchell thanked Mr. Bailey for his presentation to the MRC, as well as the MRC members for their votes. -2- Donna Grady Creer provided the Executive Director's report. She called the Committee's attention to items in correspondence. The first items were good news articles from Carver Magnet and Booker Magnet about recent awards for their schools. Copies of the e-mails were given to MRC members for their information, but no action was required. An e-mail was received from Williams Magnet Principal, Lori Brown, congratulating her staff about Williams being recognized as a 2012 NCEA Higher Performing School. Again, copies were given to MRC members, but no action was required by the MRC. Copies of Gibbs' newsletter, Le Mundo, were given to MRC members for their perusal. The newsletter is distributed each week. Bills in the amount of $1,425.95 were presented for payment. Bobby Acklin made a motion to pay the bills, and Danny Reed seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Copies of newspaper articles since the previous MRC meeting were given to MRC members for their information. Ms. Creer provided a brief overview. Due to the high number of articles that were in the packet, Oliver Dillingham asked if there was some way these articles could be e-mailed to MRC members. The MRC Office will set up some kind of system to make sure that members receive these articles by e-mail and keep a master copy in the MRC Office. Ms. Creer reported that during the Swap Meet, held on July 19, 2012, a discussion was held with regard to ways to become more cost efficient with regard to our application forms and withdrawal forms. The MRC Office is working with the three districts to determine if the number of copies for each form that is submitted could be reduced to lower the price for the cost of forms. Ms. Creer also reported that the number of vacancies for most grade levels and theme areas in the Stipulation magnet schools has been reduced to single digits. The few vacancies that are available will probably be filled at semester. -3- 1'71e' :
' - f<h - With regard to New Hires and Vacancies in the Stipulation magnet schools, there are none to report at this time. On September 26, 2012, a conference call was held with Dr. Jeanne Dreyfus, Magnet Evaluation Report Consultant, Bobby Acklin, Dr. Sadie Mitchell, Joy Springer, and Donna Creer. They talked in terms of overall theme for the next evaluation report and what research questions might be considered for the report. Dr. Mitchell reported that one of the things the conference call participants discussed was the method of how students were selected for the programs, particularly African-American students. This really was not a research question. It was determined that the MRC needs to get the research questions done up front. Dr. Dreyfus agreed with this statement. Dr. Mitchell said that recruitment starts next month (private schools mainly) and students are beginning to make their choices. Ms. Springer wanted to know why LRSD is losing white students to charter schools. Dr. Mitchell said LRSD is training with clerical staff at magnets to learn about why students are leaving magnet schools and to determine where they are going. Ms. Springer asked who is leaving- students who are proficient, advanced, or below average? Oliver Dillingham asked if students are leaving because of discipline referral, or what. He also asked if there was a way that all three districts in Pulaski County could track students by an electronic transfer process. Dr. Mitchell said that LRSD has nothing in their system that would allow electronic transfer methods to follow students and ascertain their reason for leaving. Margie Powell, ODM Monitor, asked if there was a way to put a code on a student when they got to a new school to get the information about why they left. Dr. Mitchell said that for the six Stipulation magnet schools, LRSD is planning to tag the students in the warehouse and get the information as to why they leave. She said for Donna Creer to get with Dr. DeJarnette to get this handled - by race. -4- The big question is: What is happening to the white students who withdraw-where are they going? Oliver Dillingham made a motion to approve the 2010-11 Stipulation Magnet Schools Evaluation Report. Bobby Acklin seconded it, and the motion was unanimously approved. The Committee was questioned as to how Dr. Dreyfus should be paid for the upcoming report. A suggestion was made that MRC may be able to share some of the cost with LRSD, but that $10,000 should be allocated in the MRC budget. It was approved by consensus that the next MRC meeting will be held on Friday, November 16, 2012, at 8:30 a.m., in the MRC Office. When no further business was brought before the Committee, Oliver Dillingham made a motion to adjourn the meeting, and Dr. Robert Clowers seconded it. The motion carried unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 a.m. -5- Sandy Luehrs From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Donna Creer [donnacreer@magnetschool.com] Wednesday, October 03, 2012 4:37 PM Joy Springer 'Mitchell, Sadie' Re: 10/2 MRC meeting Thanks Joy. Thanks for the return email and stating that you will write out the research questions. We want to get started as soon as possible with the upcoming stipulation magnet school evaluation and determining all the research questions will help to that end. The WITHDRAWAL FORM is the form that collects info on students who withdraw from Magnet Schools. At our meeting yesterday we discussed 1) reviewing the form with the office personnel at magnet schools and at each districts student registration office 2) Oliver and Bobby discussed ways that information is obtained statewide from students who withdraw from ANY school and go to another ARKANSAS public school 3) Sadie said that she would talk with Dr DeJarnette as to how this info is warehoused and how we may access it . I hope that your personal emergency worked itself out in your FAVOR Thanks again. From: Joy Springer Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 8:00 AM To: 'Donna Creer' Cc: 'Mitchell. Sadie' Subject: RE: 10/2 MRC meeting Good morning .. I had a personal emergency on yesterday and apologize that I was not able to attend the meeting. Dr. Dreyfus' report indicates a decline in white student enrollment and an increase in the nonwhite enrollment in the magnet schools. For the magnet schools, the percentage is reported as% black and% nonblack. There has been a decline in white student enrollment and an increase in "other" minority enrollment in the magnet schools. The question is why? I believe on the call you or Sadie indicated that there is form that parents can complete to give the reasons why. We need to know why? This data needs to be collected and analyzed. If the magnet schools are going to be majority minority in the days to come, I do not see that they are serving their purpose - to attract white students into the district schools. So why have them? Now that I thought about it some more. The magnet elementary schools', probably with the except of Booker and maybe Carver in one area, achievement gap is not 20 points, high double digit teens or more like in the secondary magnet schools. Why is this? What is going on in the magnet schools that can be transferred to the other elementary schools in the district to address African American student achievement? We need to know why African American students are performing better in magnet schools than they are in the regular elementary schools. If all schools are doing the same thing, there would not be a dispute about getting into a magnet school. I guess I am saying that all of the schools should be magnet schools. I guess than the achievement gap would eventually go away. Isn't that what we are striving to do? I will try to write out the research questions and bring them to our next meeting. Hopefully, these comments will help you understand my concerns. Thanks, Joy Springer, Joshua From: Donna Creer (mailto:donnacreer@magnetschool.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2012 9:55 AM To: jspringer@gabrielmail.com Subject: 10/2 MRC meeting We missed you at the meeting today. We approved the stipulation magnet schools budget , the purchase of a much needed light board at Parkview and the 2010-11 stipulation magnet schools evaluation. Sadie, Bobby and I tried to articulate most of the questions you mentioned during our conference call( with Dr Dreyfus), however, we would prefer if you would take a moment to forward them via email and/or bring them to our November meeting , scheduled for FRIDAY, November 16th, 8:30 am at the MRC office. We asked all MRC members to contribute any research question they would like to see addressed in the next evaluation. I will bring your packet by your office later this week. Thanks for everything. 2 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE BILLS TO BE PAID November 16, 2012 Mass Enthusiasm (Final Payment to Create and Host MRC's Website) Aire Ark, Inc. (Four Months Billing to Host MRC's Website and E-Mail) American Home Life (MRC's Office Rent for November, 2012) American Home Life (MRC's Communications Expense for October, 2012) Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Advertising in "Where We Live") Capital Business Machines (Monthly Billing for MRC's Copier Maintenance Agreement) Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Subscription Renewal for Three Months) TOTAL BILLS TO BE PAID 866.67 131.80 825.00 172.50 495.00 70.20 60.00 $2,621.17 10/8/2012 10/16/2012 10/24/2012 10/26/2012 10/27/2012 11/1/2012 11/1/2012 11/2/2012 11/2/2012 11/2/2012 11/7/2012 11/8/2012 11/9/2012 11/9/2012 11/1-2/2012 11/14/2012 11/15/2012 NEWS ARTICLES The Dead Come to Life at Mount Holly Cemetery's Tales of the Crypt Education Notebook District Staff Union Votes No Confidence in Leaders LRSD District Pupils Fewer Again, by 454 $875,000 Payment Sought for Intervenors in Desegregation Case Judge: School Workers Can't Sue State Over Unions' Dismissal Education Notebook State Board Approves Three New Charter Schools Little Rock Debaters Ride Out Storm in New York City Little Rock School Board's Peterson Dies at 63 County District Files Court Bid for Partial Unitary Status Obituary for Michael Peterson Little Rock Schools Hire Finn to Coach Instructors Alternative Schools to Share a Campus Education Notebook Optimism Rises on New District Little Rock Schools' Pay-Raise Plan Heads to Board Several of these articles have been sent to you via e-mail. If you wish a copy of any other article, please contact our office. To: VIPS Reading Day Volunteers in Magnet Schools From: Donna Creer, Executive Director Magnet Review Committee Date: November 13, 2012 Subject: Thank You and Magnet School Recruitment Thank you for visiting Williams Magnet School to read to students. We appreciate you spending your valuable time with our spectacular boys and girls. As you may know, magnet schools recruit students from Little Rock, North Little Rock and Pulaski County Special School Districts so, under certain guidelines, all students who live anywhere in Pulaski County, Arkansas may apply for a magnet school seat. Please feel free to share these upcoming dates with potential magnet school parents or students: CHECK US OUT: (school day visit to the campus of your choice) November 13-15: Each Magnet School - 9:00a.m. - 1 :30 p.m. 2013 MAGNET SCHOOL FAIR: Saturday, January 26, 2013 McCain Mall - 10:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. EARLY ENROLLMENT PERIOD for 2013-14 School Year: January 28 - February 8, 2013 For more information on magnet schools and programs, please visit our website www.magnetschool.com. Thanks again! Magnet Review Committee 1920 North Main Street, Suite 1 01 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 (501) 758-0156 {Phone} (501) 758-5366 {Fax} magnet@magnetschool.com {E-mail} October 3, 2012 The Honorable D.P. Marshall, Jr. Judge, U. S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 501 West Capitol Room B-149 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Marshall: On October 2, 2012, Mr. Kelsey Bailey, Chief Financial Officer, Little Rock School District, provided the Magnet Review Committee with the budget figures delineating the actual expenditures for the Stipulation original magnet school budgets for 2011-2012, as well as the proposed budget for the 2012-2013 school year. The information is contained in the attachment and was presented to MRC members for their review and vote on that same date. The Magnet Review Committee, by formal motion and vote of 5-0 via actual attendance at the MRC meeting on October 2, 2012, approved the final budget (actual expenditures) for the 2011-2012 school year. The proposed budget for the 2012-2013 school year also was approved with a 5-0 vote during the same meeting. Listed below is a recap of the budget information which is now being presented to the Court for approval: 1. FINAL 2011-2012 STIPULATED ORIGINAL MAGNET SCHOOLS BUDGET The total amount originally budgeted, $29,449,577, was based on a per-pupil expenditure of $8,214.00, calculated from a projected third quarter average enrollment of 3,585.10 students. Once the actual attendance (3,497.20) and expenditure ($29,400,397) numbers were determined, the final per pupil amount was calculated to be $8,407.00, which was $193.00 more than originally budgeted. A Funding By Source schedule is shown on Page 2 of the attachment representing the costs allocated to each of the four (4) parties. "Pursue the Possibilities of Magnet School Enrollment" The Honorable D.P. Marshall -2- October 3, 2012 2. PROPOSED 2012-2013 STIPULATED ORIGINAL MAGNET SCHOOLS BUDGET The total proposed budget for the 2012-2013 school year is $29,655,558.00, based on a proposed third quarter Average Daily Membership of 3,497.20, which results in a per-pupil expenditure of $8,480.00 and an increase of $73 .00 per pupil from the 2011-2012 actual rate. Final negotiations including revisiting the salary schedule during the 2012-13 school year are not complete at this time. Included in the Funding by Source Summary portion of the attached report are the cost breakdowns for each school district and the State. The Magnet Review Committee respectfully requests the Court's review and approval of both the 2011-2012 finalized actual expenditures in the amount of$29,400,397.00, with a per pupil expenditure of $8,407.00, as well as the proposed 2012-2013 budget, attached herewith. The Magnet Review Committee is committed to maintaining the quality of the Stipulation magnet schools. We will continue to work with the host district as we exercise stringent oversight of the magnet schools' budget in an effort to achieve and ensure efficient management and cost containment to the greatest extent possible. Sinc.er ely, , Sadi son Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sl Attachment: Final 2011-2012 Stipulation Magnet Schools Budget Actual Expenditures Proposed 2012-2013 Stipulation Magnet Schools Budget cc: Office of Desegregation Monitoring Magnet Review Committee COURT ORDER COURT ORDER Magnet Review Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 10:21 AM To: Sadie.Mitchell@lrsd.orga
cklinbo@nlrsd.org
r clowers@pcssd.org
O liver.Dillingham@Arkansas.gov
Danny.Reed@Arkansas.gojvs
p ringer@gabrielmail.com Cc: mqpowell@odmemail.comK
elsey.Bailey@lrsd.org Importance: High Attachments: Court Order Approving 2011~1.pdf (16 KB) Good Morning, everyone, Page 1 of 1 Attached is the Court Order approving the Interdistrict Magnet Schools' final 2011-12 budget and proposed 2012- 13 budget in response to MRC's submission in September, 2012. As you can see, if any party has an objection, it has to be filed by October 29, 2012. We are now awaiting the final Court Order from the judge after all parties have approved. Have a great day. Sandy 1 ()/"1'1 /0/\1,., - Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4781 Filed 10/17/12 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITILEROCKSCHOOLDIBTRICL etaL v. No. 4:82-cv-866-DPM PLAINTIFFS NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, et aL LORENE JOSHUA, et aL DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS ORDER The Magnet Review Committee has asked the Court to approve the interdistrict magnet schools' final 2011-12 budget and proposed 2012-13 budget. That request is attached to this Order. Any party having an objection should file it by 29 October 2012. So Ordered. D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge Rx Date/Time OCT-30-2012(TU0E7):1 2 OCT/30/2012/0T9U:0E0 A M FAXN o. Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4784 Filed 10/29/12 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION P.001 P. 001 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. 4:82-cv-866 DPM PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al. KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al. DEFEND.A.l~TS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS RESPONSE TO MAGNET SCHOOL BUDGET ORDER (DE 4781) The Arkansas Department of Education (ADE), by and through its attorneys, Attorney General Dustin McDaniel and Assistant Attorney General Scott P. Richardson, state for their Response to the Court's Magnet School Budget Order: 1. The State of Arkansas has requested release from the 1989 Settlement Agreement including the requirement to fund the six stipulation magnet schools. Docket Entry (DE) 4723, 4724. All of the parties have responded to this motion, except the Knight Intervenors. DE 4736, 4739 (NLRSD), 4737, 4738 (PCSSD), 4743, 4744 (LRSD), 4748, 4749 (Joshua)
See also DE 4753 (ADE Response to LRSD), 4757 (ADE Reply to Responses to Motion for Release). 2. The State's formal motion for release was filed on March 26, 2012. On June 29, 2012, the ADE asked the Court to enter a scheduling order setting the State's motion for hearing and allowing a short discovery period on the Motion. DE 4767, 4768. PCSSD (DE 4771) and LRSD (DE 4772) responded to this motion. No other party filed a response. 3. The 1989 Settlement Agreement requires the State to pay the Pulaski County school districts, on average, about $5,500,000 each month. To date, the State has paid over $1.1 Rx Date/Time OCT-30-2012(TU0E7): 12 OCT/3-0/20120/T9:U0E0A M FAXN o. P.0 02 Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4784 Filed 10/29/12 Page 2 of 4 billion
one billion dollars more than this settlement agreement was anticipated to cost the State in 1989. 4. In addition to the Motion for Release, the State has filed a number of other requests that the Court take up the propriety, indeed the constitutionality, of the consent decree which forces the State to continue to pay millions of dollars to the Pulaski County school districts, including magnet school fimding. DE 4557 (ADE Response to Court's Order Requesting Briefing on the M to M Program Funding), DE 4631 (Response to Order (DE 4608) Soliciting Views on Periodic Review of 1989 S_ettlemenAt greement). 5. "The legal justification for displacement of local authority by an injunctive decree in a school desegregation case is a violation of the Constitution by the local authorities." Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools v. Dowell, 498 U.S. 237, 248, .111 S.Ct. 630, 637 (1991). "[C]ourts must remain attentive to the fact that 'federal-court decrees exceed appropriate limits if they are aimed at eliminating a condition that does not violate federal law or does not flow from such a.violation."' Horne v. Flores, 557 U.S. 433, 450, 129 S.Ct. 2579, 2595 (2009) quoting Milliken v. Bradley, 433 U.S. 267, 282, 97 S.Ct. 2749 (1977). 6. The stipulation magnet schools have served desegregation purposes for many years in this case. As explained by ADE on each of the above noted occasions, the interdistrict nature of the magnet schools no longer serves to "desegregate" the school districts. LRSD and NLRSD are fully unitary. PCSSD is unitary in how it assigns students to schools. As such, the legal justification for a federal court mandate of continued State funding has abated. While the stipulation magnet schools may continue to provide benefits to LRSD students and to education in the County, how to support those schools should be for the State and the Districts to decide on their own now. 2 P. 002 Rx Date/Time OCT-30-2012(TU0E7): 12 0CT/}0/2012/T09U:0E0 A M P. 003 FAX No. P. 003 Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4784 Filed 10/29/t2 Page 3 of 4 7. Accordingly, the State requests that decisions regarding State funding of the magnet schools be released from federal court jurisdiction. WHEREFORE, the ADE requests that the Court release the State from any and all federal obligations to fund the stipulation magnet schools, that the Court set a hearing on the State's Motion for Release, and for all other relief to which it is entitled. Respectfully submitted, DUSTIN McDANIEL Attorney General BY: Isl Scott P. Richardson SCOTT P. RICHARDSON, Bar No. 01208 Assistant Attorneys General 323 Center Street, Suite 1100 Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 (501) 682-1019 direct (501) 682-2591 facsimile Email: scott.richardson@arkansasag.gov ATTORNEYS FOR STATE OF ARKANSAS AND ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 hereby certify that on October 29, 2012, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which shall send notification of such filing to the following: Mr. Clayton R. Blackstock cblackstock@mbbwi.com Mr. Mark Terry Burnette mbumette@mbbwi.com Mr. John Clayburn Fendley, Jr clayfendley@comcast.net Mr. Christopher J. Heller heller@fec.net Mr. John W. Walker . iohnwalkeratty@aol.com Mr. Stephen W. Jones sjones@jlj.com Ms. Deborah Linton dlinton@jacknelsonjones.com Ms. Mika Shadid Tucker mika.tucker@jacknelsonjones.com 3 Rx Date/Time OCT-30-2012(TU0E7): 12 OCT/3{)/20120/9T:U01EA M FAXN o. Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4784 Filed 10/29/12 Page 4 of 4 Mr. M. Samuel Jones , III sj.ones@mwsgw.com Mr. Jess L. Askew, III iaskew@williamsanderson.com Marie Bernarede Miller mmiller@williamsanderson.com Office of Desegregation Monitor Mr. Allen P. Roberts . allen@aprobertslaw.com Mr. Jamie Fugitt ifugitt@williamsanderson.com mqpowell@odmemail.com
lfbryant@odmemail.com, paramer@odmernail.com P. 004 I, Scott P. Richardson, Assist.ant Attorney General, do hereby certify that l have served the foregoing and a copy of the Notice of Electronic Filing by depositing a copy in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, on October 29, 2012, to the following non-CM/ECF participants: Mr. Robert Pressman 22 Locust A venue Lexington, Mass. 021 73 . Mr. Michael K. Wilson Attorney at Law 602 Main St. Jacksonville, AR 72076 Isl Scott P. Richardson SCOTT P. RICHARDSON 4 P. 004 Kx ua1e111me NUV-~(-2~12(WE1D4): 50 N0V/07/2012/0W4:E3D9P M FAXN o. P.0 03 Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4794 Filed 11/06/12 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCJIOOL DISTRICT v. NO. 4:82CV00866DPM PULASKI COUN1Y SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. I, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS KATHERIN.E.K.NIGRT,.ET..A..L -------- ------------.IN.TERVEN.ORS PCSSD'S REPLY TO RESPONSE TO MAGNET SCHOOL BUDGET ORDER (DE 4781) The Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) for its reply to response States: l. On October 2, 2012, the magnet review committee by fonnal motion and a vote of five to zero from those in attendan9e approved the final budget for the magnet schools for the 2011-2012 school year. 2. At the same meeting, the proposed magnet school budget for the 2012-2013 school year was also approved by a five to zero vote. 3. This Court after being fwnis.hed with a copy of a letter dated October 3, 2012, recounting the particulars of the budget and the votes thereon entered an Order dated October l 7, 2012 allowing objections if made by October 29, 2012. 4. The members of the magnet review committee attending and voting unanimously to approve these budgets constituted the representative from the PCSSD, the representative from the NLRSD, the representative of the LRSD, and the two representatives of the Arkansas Department of Education. P. 003 Rx Date/Time NOV-07-2012(W1E4D:5) 1 N0V/07/20!2/W04E:4D0P M FAXN o. P. 002 P. 002/002 Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4794 Filed 11/06/12 Page 2 of 4 5. On October 29, 2012, the Arkansas Department of Education, by and through the attorney general's office, moved the court to "let the court release the State from any and all federal obligations to fund the stipulation magnet schools" and set a hearing and grant all further - ----reli"ef-Thptrse suttrnblyr epresentst he-A.DE's obJe-cti\'.>tHob1uiideg ets
- -- ----.. - ----- ------- 6. In paragraph 7 of its "response" the State also "requests that decisions regarding state funding of the magnet schools be released from federal court jurisdiction." 7. By way of reply
the PCSSD incorporates by reference the ''PCSSD's response to S.t~te.).m oJion_fo.rre k~~-from. 1. 9-.8.9..se!tlemenat.g reement
~. filed .._ ApriL3 0, .201.2. (Document. 4737). 8. It is not clear exactly what the State means in paragraph 7 of its response. Perhaps some amplification is supplied in the last sentence of paragraph 6 of its response, where the State notes that: ''While the stipulation magnet schools may continue to provide benefits to LRSD students and to education in the county, how to support those schooJs should be for the State and the district to decide on their own now
' 9. The PCSSD disagrees. Absent a settlement to sub1J1it to the court, the court should be involved in any decision as to how, if, or when the magnet schools should be modified both m terms of the rules which regulate them as well as how they are funded and, just as importantly, who would bear their expense if state funding is withdrawn. l 0. The State in its Motion for Release completely ignored the expense side of the issue, as the PCSSD pointed out in Document 4737 at Paragraph 22, which it likewise incorporates by reference. 2 I
1- l Rx Date/Time NOV-07-2012(W1E4D:5) 1 NOY/07/20120/W4:4E0DP M FAXN o. Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4794 Filed 11/06/12 Page 3 of 4 P. 001 P. 001/002 11. The PCSSD once again states that it is fiscally irresponsible to propose withdrawal of revenue without addressing how the concomitant expenses would be eliminated, abated, or somehow responsibly shifted to other funding sburces. funding issues by settlement rather than fiat. However, responsible resolution cannot be accomplished by simply withdrawing funding
the expense side of the equation has to be acknowledged and addressed. The State should propose a responsible resolution of the expense issue. _Tq__g_.iatt he as not,.d9.nes o, ... ------.. . __ ---- ------ ----....... ------- ..: .............................. . 13. Accordingly, the-PCSSD opposes the State's "Response" to magnet school budget order. WHEREFORE, the PCSSD prays for an order of this Court denying the ADE's response dated October 29, 2012 and for all proper relief. Respectfully submitted, MITCHELL, WILLIAMS, SELIG, GATES & WOODYARD, P.L.L.C. 425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 1800 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Telephone: (501) 688.-8800 Facsimile: (501) 688-8807 E-mail: s1ones@mwI:iiw.com Isl M Samuel Jones, III M. Samuel Jones III (76060) Allen P. Roberts 325 Jefferson Street, Southwest Camden, AR 71701 (870) 836-5310 FAX: (870) 836-9662 Attorneys for Pulaski County Special School District 3 Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4797 Filed 11/13/12 Page 1 of 3 TN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLATNTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. I, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERTNE KNIGHT, ET AL DEFENDANTS TNTERVENORS INTER VENO RS LRSD'S REPLY TO ADE'S RESPONSE TO MAGNET SCHOOL BUDGET ORDER For its Reply, the Little Rock School District (LRSD) states: 1. On October 2, 2012, the Magnet Review Committee (MRC) unanimously approved the final magnet school budget for the 2011-2012 school year and the proposed magnet school budget for the 2012-2013 school year. The two MRC members appointed by the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) voted in favor of both budgets. 2. On October 17, 2012, the Court submitted the budgets approved by the M RC to the parties and established a period of time within which objections to those budgets could be filed. The time period has expired and no party has made any objection to any of the specific components of the proposed magnet school budgets. 3. On October 29, 2012, the Arkansas Department of Education filed a "Response" to the Court's October 17, 2012 Order, not an "Objection" to the magnet school budgets. ADE's "Response" simply reiterates the State's general objections, which have been made and answered elsewhere, to continued enforcement of the 1989 Settlement Agreement. ADE did not present 1999191 1-BRENDAK Page I of3 Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4797 Filed 11/13/12 Page 2 of 3 any specific objections to the magnet school budgets. Since the State continues to be obligated to fund its share of the interdistrict magnet schools, and since it has made no specific objections to the budgets proposed by the Magnet Review Committee, the Court should approve the budgets as submitted. WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above, LRSD prays for an Order approving the interdistrict magnet schools' final 2011-2012 and proposed 2012-2013 budget, and for all other relief to which it may be entitled. Respectfully submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Friday, Eldredge & Clark Christopher Heller (#81083) 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 370-1506 heller@fridayfirm.com Isl Christopher Heller Clay Fendley (#92182) John C. Fendley, Jr., P.A. Attorney at Law 51 Wingate Drive Little Rock, AR 72205 (501) 907-9797 clayfendley@comcast.net CERTrFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on November I 3, 2012, I have electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which shall send notification of such filing to the parties of record. Isl Christopher Heller 1999191 1-BRENDAK Page2of3 Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 4797 Filed 11/13/12 Page 3 of 3 1999191 1-BRE DAK Page 3 of3
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.

<dcterms_creator>Arkansas. Department of Education</dcterms_creator>