Court filings regarding Joshua intervenors' witness list, notice for substitution of counsel, two Office of Desegregation Management reports, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool, Joshua intervenors' response to motion for contempt and motion for disqualification.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<items type="array"> <item>

<dcterms_description type="array">

<dcterms_description>Court filings: District Court, Joshua intervenors' witness list; District Court, notice for substitution of counsel; District Court, entry of appearance; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Management report, ''2006-07 Enrollment and Racial Composition of the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)''; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Management report, ''Update on the Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) Implementation of the Staffing Provisions of Plan 2000''; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool; District Court, Joshua intervenors' response to motion for contempt and motion for disqualification This transcript was create using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors. &gt; I :e I Ut.C. 8.2006 1:43PM JOHN W WALKER PA N0.273 JOHN W. WALKERJ P.A. Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Lirrle Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (50/) 374--3758 Fa.~ (501) J7-l--1187 FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET P.1/12 YOU SHOULD RECEIVE [ _ (including cover sheet)] PAGE(S). INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL "&lt;{SOI) 374-3758&gt;" The information contuned in th is facsimile message is attorney privileged and confidenti!l,l information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader oftl,is message is not the intended recipient, or the einployee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intctlded recipient. you are hereby notified that any di$semination, diSll'ibution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have receive4 this communication in error, please immediate notify us by telephone, ~d return the oriiinal message to us at the above address via the U.S. PoStal Service. Thank you. DEC. 8 .2006 1: 43PM JOHN W WALKER PA JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. AT'I'ORNEY AT LAW . 1'723 BROADWAY LlT'rL.8 Rocx, ARKANSAS 7.2.206 TELEPHONE (501) 374--3768 FAX(501)374:-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Email: johnwalkeratty@aol.eoui Honorable Judge William R Wtlson United States District Court Judge 6-00 West Capitol. Suite 423 Little Rocle, Arkansas 72201 Via Facsimile - 604--5149 December 8. 2006 N0.273 P.2/12 OFCOUNSEI., ROBERT M.eBENEY. P.A. DONNA J. Mu!ENRY 8210 Hi:NDER8oN ROAD Lrrru; Roa. ARKAN8A4 1l2lO 'PHONE: (501) 3'7l-34.25 FtJ. (501) 3'123428 Email: mcbamyd@swbell.net Re: Little Rock School District, et al. v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. Case No. 4:82CV0866WRW/JTR ' Dear Judge Wtlson: Per the Court letter Order ofDecembet" 6, 2006, Joshua Intervenors submit the following: - A. Witnesses: Mr. Charles Armstrong [25 minutesJ He will testify that he has not been informed by Dr. Roy Brooks of the Court's requirements, of the district's activities regarding program evaluation and assessment; that it appears that the district does not focus its attention upon achievement of African Amerioan students and that he has no indication that program evaluation is embedded in the district's cuniculum and instructional programs. He wm. testify that it appears that the efforts of the district are devoted to creating an environment attractive to white students and their parents. He will also testify that when he and other board members sought information regarding program evaluation, the director was removed from her position; and that district counsel has not provided information to him regarding the process and the status of the 1 . - -------------------------- JJt.C. B.2006 1:43PM JOHN W WALKER P A N0.273 P.3/ 12 district, s compliance, Dr. Victoria Bemb.ardt [ 45 minutes] She bas expertise in the preparation and I manipulation of school data bases, facilitating the assessment and evaluation of educational programs for effectiveness in buil~ student achievement. She provided training to PRE staff regarding such sY~~. She identified an existing "data warehouse" methodology designed for use in school systems; to facilitate their assessment and evaluation of programs for effectiveness in building student achievement. While presentations regarding this system were made to LRSD, it was not adopted. This system could have been operative in the LRSD by mid October, 2006 had it been adopted. MJ. Lisa Black (30 minutes] She will testify that she bas significant evaluation and assessment obligations for the LRSD and that her activities are unknown to PRE or ODM She will also testify that she bas refused to provide information to Joshua regarding the evaluation - and assessments undertaking that she performs for the LRSD, as a private contractor on the public payroll. Mr. Tom Brode [ 20 minutes] See description of Mr. Tony Rose's testimony below. Dr. Roy Brooks [30 minutes] His lack of knowledge about the court's requirements and PRE compliance efforts and his affirmative actions designed to dirlnish the supplying of imormation to ODM and Joshua regarding the status of compliance with the 2004 remedy. Ms. Diane Curry [ 25 minutes] Her testimony will be similar to that of newly elected fellow board member Charles Armstrong. Dr. Michael Daugherty [25 minutes] His testimony will be similar to that of fellow board members Cbarles Armstrong and Di~e Cuny, He VJill also testify that he is unaware of 2 JVHN W WHLK~~ ~ H N0.273 P.4/ 12 any spcci:.fic programs which have worked to sigoifiC3lltly improve the academic achievement of African American students in the LRSD. Dr. Karen DeJamette (2 hours] [l] The LRSD has not at all relevant times provided the staff in its PRE department required by the 2004 Compliance Remedy. [2] The LRSD assigned additional duties to PRE staff; a filctor which played a role in l..RSD's failure to complete tasks required by the 2004 Compliance Remedy and necessary to embed the comprehensive program assessment process as a permanent part of the LR.SD' cuni.culwn and instruction program. Thus: [aJ In the preparation of the 8 "formal step 2" evaluatio11$, ''PRE staff have not been involved in observing programs, fonnulating the content of questionnaires, or writing the evaluation reports. Building the abilities of the PRE staff to conduct program evaluations without the assistance of PRE staff to conduct program evaluations without the assistanceof outside evaluators ( or to supplement the efforts of outside evaluators) was necessary to embed the program assessment process in the operations ofLRSD. [b] LR.SD has failed to make feasible and adequate progress - .in the creation of computer data bases needed to embed the comprehensive program assessment process in the district's instructional programs. It is and has been feasi'ble for LRSD to create one or more computer data bases allowing compilation and manipulation of many forms of data and variables. Such data and variables could be manipulated to prepare assessments/evaluations. For example, one could compare test outcomes for similar elementary students from two schools exposed to two different r~ programs, taking account as well as student and teacher absences in the relevant period. [3] LR.SD' s "quarterly written updates" show work on "school'' and "district"" "portfolios" - compilations of data like that listed in paragraph (2-b] [E.g., updates of9-1-0S at 3; 12-1-05 at 3; 6-1-03 at 3] [a] Although L.RSD first mentioned "school 3 JOHN W WALKER PA N0.273 P.S/ 12 portfolios" in its quarterly report of 9-1-05 at 3, corrections in the "Little Rock: School District's Revised Compliance Report" of October 25, 2006," early in the 2006-07 school year," show that "LR.SD expects to ~ the creation of school portfolios during the 2007-0S school year." [ At 7, para. 14; emphasis added] [b] The quarterly update dated 12-1 05 states: '--"Data to be included in the district portfolio was designed. As new data becomes available, PRE staff members add them to the portfolio." [At 3] One can not determined the state of completeness of the "district portfolio," compared to what needs to be accomplished from the LllSD' s Revised Compliance Report," 10-25-06 at 6-7]. [4] The quarterly update of12-1..05 states (at 3): "PRE is slso investigating the costs and benefits of an internet-based data warehouse system that would store all data collected by the district within one database, support its tabulation and analysis, and enable its electronic access at any time. The data warehouse would advance the district portfolio that PRE staff members are - . currently developing." The (lllarterly updm:e of3-l--06 states (at 3): "To suppon the portfolio's expansion, frequent updates, and future utility, PRE is designing a 'data warehouse' which LRSD staff and others can consult on a 'real-time' basis." PRE identified a data warehouse system which could have been finlctioning as one of the LRSD's recent submission of its compliance reports. See "Compliance History" prepared by PRE at page 2, para., 3 (a)J. Upper level LRSD administrator rejected this proposal. One consequence of this action is that facts about students and teachers participating in panieular programs continue to be difficult to retrieve. [ls!.. at para. 3 (c)] No data warehouse system is in place. [5] Additional work is necessary to insure the accuracy ofLRSD data needed for assessments and evaluations. [Id., para. 2; para. 4 (PRE Compliance History") [ 6] Some LRSD representatives censored the eighth update, prepared by 4 - -- -- - - ----------- - - - ------ - - - --- JOHN W WALKER PA N0 . 273 P.6/ 12 PRE stat: to minimize the notice of some compliance probletQS noted in this document. See "Compliance History" prepared by PRE at page 2. para., 4. PJ The LRSD superintendent interfered with the flow of information to ODM and the Joshua Intervenors. See Compliance History" prepared by PRE at 3, para. 7(a) (The superintendent threatened . . . (the dismissal (of PRE' s Director] if she shared information with ODM or Joshua."). [8] The LRSD reorganization in 2005 created a conflict situation for PRE staff and the school system regarding the content of assessments/evaluations. PRE previously reported directly to the Superintendent. A$ a result of the reorganization, PRE now reports to the Asrociate Superintendent in charge of instructional programs. [9] The work of PRE staff bas been frustrated by the failure of senior administrators and counsel to communicate and provide direction regarding how to proceed in meeting commitments in the Compliance Remedy. See paragraph 7 of the PRE. "Compliance History . " [10] Upon her hiring as PRE Director and her reading of the 2004 Compliance Remedy, she - understood that she had major responsibilities flowing from the court's 2004 remedy. She sought to fulfill these responsioilities in a diligent manner, to provide information to ODM and Joshua Intervenors consistent with their responsibilities under the remedy, and to be frank and honest in reporting on the status of compliance. She perceives that she has been suspended and faces termination for her efforu. Ms. Ethel Dunb~ [15 mim.ltes] She is the principal ofFranklinElementary school, a racially identifiable elementary school. She has not received training on how she can use district and school portfolios to assess the effectiveness of educational programs in her schools designed to improve African American achievement. She has not been illfonned that such portfolios are available for her use, or been provided assessments for programs at her school based upon the 5 JUHN W WHLK~~ PA N0.273 P .7/12 use of such materials by oth~ persons. Mr. Freddie Fields ( 15 minutes) He is the principal of Cloverdale Middle SchooL a racially identifiable middle school. He has not received the training on how be can use district and school portfolios to assess the effectiveness of educational programs in bis school designed to improve Afiican American achievement. He has not been informed that such portfolios are available for his use, or been provided assessments of programs at hls school based on the use of such material by other persons. He is also not familiar with the SMART/THRIVE programs which the district has identmed as one of the programs that has been deeply imbedded with ongoing assessments. Ms. Mebnie Fox (25 minutes] Her testimony will be similar to that _of Mr. Armstrong and Ms. C\lil'Y. She will also testify that she bas been integrally involved with district activities for three (3) years. Ms. Beverly Griffen [IO minutes] She will discuss her involvement regarding the posting of the gltl Quarterly Update for the Board review and comments. Mr. Gene Jones (45 minutes] He will discuss his monitoring efforts, ODM 's attempts to assist the district with the compliance requirements, his interaction '\Jlith PRE staff, his awareness of the dilectory requests by district counsel for extensions for extensions of time, promises made for followup work by district counsel which were unmet, LRSD' s failure to embed the an effective evaluation ai:t&lt;I assessment pr-ocess into the LRSD's curriculum and instructional programs, his awareness of upper level district officials unhappiness with Dr. DeJamette and their circumvention of her through use of Dr. Ed Williams in a way which 6 JOHN W WALKER PA N0.273 P.8/ 12 undermined and otherwise divided the PRE staff. He will discuss other failing'S of the district with respect to the court's order. Mr. Chris Heller [30 minutes] He will discuss: a) directions to PRE not to cooperate except through him with ODM and Joshua; b) his unavailability and unresponsiveness to PRE for assistance subsequent to the last hearing before the court; c) promises made to provide information to Joshua and ODM in August, 2006 which were not kept; d) his refusal to make timely requests for extensions of time in violation of the court's November 29, 2005 order; e) his rewriting the gill Quarterly report .so as to mislead the court and to distort the status of compliance as represented by PRE st.aft; his advice to senior administrators nt to cooperate with PRE, Joshua and ODM; and t) his recommendation to Dr. Brooks to terminate Dr. DeJarnette. Dr. Katherine M"rtc:hell [30 minutes] She will address the same issues as the other board members and she will opine that the senior administration did not intend to fully comply ~h the - court's ordei-. Ms. Margie Powell [ 25 miuutes] -Her areas willoverlap those ofMr. Gene Jones. She ~ also ~lain how the district's failure to timely comply and to otherwise obstruct compliance worked to prevent the embedding of an effective evaluation and assessment process. She will also discuss Mr. Heller's editing the 81b Quanerly Update so as to delete pages 2-6 of the draft therefrom. Mr. Tony Rose [20 mimrtesJ He is a former member of the LR.SD Board who directed the administration to be negative to the cooperation of ODM and Joshua with respect to the Compliance Remedy. He will also testify that he never became aware of the progress of PRE activities after 2004 and that he requested no reports of PRE regarding compliance before 7 JOHN W WALKER PA N0.273 P.9/ 12 September, 2006. Joshua ~ill seek to establish that it was Mr. Rose's guidance to Dr. Brooks and senior administrators which helped to create a lack of diligent, good faith compliance with the 2004 compliance remedy by upper level administration. Moreover, he did not agree with the court's compliance remedy. Dr. Steven Rou (30 mimrtes] He and bis colleagues received full cooperation from Dr. DeJarnette and other members of the PRE staff: Upper level administrators exhibited disinterest in the evaluation process. In the course of completing the evaluations problems regarding inaccurate data arose. He will be asked about the descriptions of programs in the four 2005-2006 evaluations. He is unfamiliar regarding the activities undertaken by LRSD with respect to embedding the comprehensive assessment process. Mr. John Ruffin [15 minutes] He is the Director of Information Technology. He will testify that is unaware of any process that is complete or substantially complete which has - embedded the evaluation process into the district curriculum. He will also testify that bis office had only become involved in the process in the last 6 months and that he had no earthly idea of what the court bas required. Ms. Joy Spl'll;lgtr [l hour] She will testify in a manner consistent with b.er affidavit filed on June 28, 2006. Ms. Springer will provide testimony regarding her monitoring activities. She will also provide examples of information requests made on behalf of the Joshua Intervenors which LRSD did not respond. Mr. James Wohlleb [ 45 minutes] He will testify regarding PRE work activities, cooperation or lack thereof from the administration, failure of support by the administration, the importance of the process and how it is integral for raising the achievement level of the majority N0.273 P.10/ 12 of the students in the district. He will also address the administration's efforts to undcmune the leadership ofDr. DeJarnette. B. Exhibiq,_ The numbers indicated below may not be the order presented at the hearing. 1. Court's Order of June 30, 2004 2. Court's Order ofNpvember 29, 2005 3. LRSD' s Programs Interventions and Models in LRSD Schools 4. Guidelines for Completing Program Evaluations by Steven M. Ross, PhD 5. LRSD Comprehensive Program Assessment Process NEPN Code: IL-R 6. LRSD Program Evaluation Agenda NEPN Code: IL-R posted on website . 7. Letter to Dr. DeJarnette dated March 17, 2005 8. Letter to Dr. DeJarnette dated May 24, 2005 9. Letter to Dr. DeJamette dated December I, 2005 10. Letter to Chris Heller dated October 3, 2006 11. Letter to Chris Heller dated Aui:,aust 17, 2 006 12. LRSD's Quarterly Update filed September 1, 2006 13. LRSD's draft Quanerly Update for September 1, 2006 14. LRSD's Compliance Report :filed October 16, 2006 15. Joshua Intervenors Objections to Compliance Report 16. Letter to Dr. Katherine Mitchell dated 11/3/06 from Dr. DeJarnette w/atta.chments 17. Pre -K Literacy Evaluation pages 180, 192, 234 . 18. Magnet Schools and Magnet Programs Evaluation Report (2005-2006) page 9 I -I N0 .273 P.11/12 19. Emails dated 7/14/06 between DeJamette and Griffen regarding status on compliance report with attachment 20. Cover Pages of the eight (8) Step 2 Evaluations 21. PRE Comments on 10-16-06 Compliance Report filed by Chris Heller 22. LRSD's Eight (8) Quarterly Report Updates 23. LRSD'sReorganization Audit dated March, 2005 24. LRSD Guiding Principles 25. Miscellaneous emails between PRE, district administration, district counsel and Joshua. 26. Joslwa reserves the right to introduce rebuttal exhibits regarding witnesses testimony. In addition, Joshua reserves the right to supplement this list based upon documents provided by LRSD counsel that was requested several weeks ago. - C. Matters regarding the Subject 9f Media Reports Dr. Roy Brooks has displaced Dr. Karen DeJarnette as Director of PRE, has placed Dr. Ed Williams in het position and has advertised Dr. Williams' position as a vacancy. He did so after the Board requested that she appear before it. Consequently Mr. Chris Heller and Dr. Brooks hired the Quattlebaum law firm to investigate a grievance that had been filed by Dr. DeJarnette. The matter became public when presented by Mr. Heller and Mr. Quattlebaum in a public meeting to the school board. Her grievance still pends. Joshua believes that appropriate grounds e&gt;dst for the Court's intervention in that it appears that the Court's order is being flaunted by the adverse action which followed her response to the Board as requested by the Board and as required by the Court's order. Joshua reserves the right to address this matter 10 I I - Ut.l.... ts. C:~lab 1 : 4 f t-'M JOHN W WALKER P A N0.273 P. 12/ 12 subsequently in order that the Court's supremacy with respect to its orders be duly respected by those charged to implement it. Joshua notes that the Court pointedly directed counsel to be frugal and cost conscious in their representation of the LRSD. LRSD claims that economics required it to reduce PRE st.at: yet LR.SD appears to have given unlimited access to the district check book to the law firms involved for the purpose of undermining Dr. DeJarnette and PRE. D. Mr. Burnett and Mr; Ouattleb&amp;wn It is not ne~ary for either of these gentlemen or their firms to be involved in this proceeding. Mr. Quattlebaum has absolutcly nothing to contribute to this endeavor. :Mt. Burnette is representing Dr. DeJamette individually. Her matter is not presently before the Court in that she has not exhausted her internal remedies as set forth by Arkansas state law. Undersigned counsel does not purport to represent her interests. All references to her interests - are made because of the proposition that those who do the work of the court, as a matter of public policy, cannot and should not be subject to retaliation or reprisal. JWW:js cc: Mr. Chris Heller Honorable Judge Thomas Ray . 11 THE ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF ARKANSAS MIKE BEEBE Scott P. Richardson Assistant Attorney General Direct dial: (501) 682-1019 E-mail: scott. richardson@arkansasag.gov December 11 , 2006 Mr. Norman J. Chachklin NAACP Legal Defense &amp; Educational Find, Inc. New York 99 Hudson Street, Suite 1600 New York, NY 10013 Office of Desegregation Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. William P. Thompson Mr. James M. Llewellyn, Jr. Thompson &amp; Llewellyn, P.A. Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818 Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. USDC No. LR-C-82-866 Dear .Gentlemen: Please find enclosed a copy of the Motion for Substitution of Counsel and Entry of Appearance that were filed in the above referenced matter. Please contact me at (501) 682-1019 if you have any questions or need additional information. SPR/pjd Sincerely, k~ Scott P. Richardson Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street Suite 1100 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501 ) 682-2007 FAX (5 01 ) 682-2591 Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW Document 4073 Filed 12/11/2006 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. MOTION FOR SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL BNIHO!INOW NOl!Y93H93S30 ~03~,~~o 900Z SI J30 C3Al303~ PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS Separate Defendant Arkansas Department of Education (ADE), by and through its attorney, Assistant Attorney General Scott P. Richardson, and for its Motion for Substitution of Counsel, states: 1. Assistant Attorney General Mark Hagemeier has recently changed responsibilities in the Attorney General's Office. 2. Assistant Attorney General Scott P. Richardson has been given responsibility as lead attorney for this case. WHEREFORE, Separate Defendant Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) requests that Assistant Attorney General Mark Hagemeier be withdrawn from this case and that Assistant Attorney General Scott P. Richardson be substituted in his stead and for all other just and proper relief to which they may be entitled. Respectfully submitted, MIKE BEEBE Attorney General BY: Isl Scott P. Richardson RECEIVED DEC 1 3 2006 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING SCOTTP. RICHARDSON, BarNo. 01208 Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW Document 4073 Filed 12/11/2006 Page 2 of 3 Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 1100 Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 (501) 682-1019 direct (501) 682-2591 facsimile Emai I: scott.richardson@arkansasag.gov ATTORNEYS FOR SEPARATE DEFENDANT ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on December 11, 2006, 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 mburnette@mbbwi.com Mr. John Clayburn Fendley , Jr clayfendley@comcast.net Mr. Mark Arnold Hagemeier mark.hagemeier(a),arkansasag.gov Mr. Christopher J. Heller heller@fec.net Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III sjones@mwsgw.com Mr. Stephen W. Jones sjones@jlj .com Mr. Philip E. Kaplan pkaplan@k! bmlaw.net Ms. Sharon Carden Streett scstreett@comcast.net Mr. John W. Walker johnwalkerattv@aol.com 2 I --- - Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW Document 4073 Filed 12/11/2006 Page 3 of 3 I, Scott P. Richardson, Assistant Attorney General, do hereby certify that I have served the foregoing by depositing a copy in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, on December 11 , 2006, to the following non-CM/ECF participants: Mr. Norman J. Chachkin NAACP Legal Defense &amp; Educational Fund, Inc. - New York 99 Hudson Street Suite 1600 New York, NY 10013 Mr. William P. Thompson Mr. James M. Llewellyn , Jr Thompson &amp; Llewellyn, P.A. Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818 Office of Desegregation Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 7220 l Isl Scott P. Richardson SCOTT P. RICHARDSON 3 Page 1 of2 Patsy Dooley From: ecf_support@ared.uscourts.gov Sent: Monday, December 11 , 2006 10:34 AM To: ared_ecf@ared.uscourts.gov Subject: Activity in Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al "Motion to Substitute Attorney" ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** You may view the filed documents once without charge. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was received from Richardson, Scott Paris entered on 12/11/2006 at 10:33 AM CST and filed on 12/ 11 /2006 Case Name: Case Number: Filer: Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al 4:82-cv-866 Arkansas, State of Arkansas Department of Education WARNING: CASE CLOSED on 01/26/1998 Docume,nt Number: 4073 Docket Text: MOTION to Substitute Attorney by Arkansas Department of Education, Arkansas, State of. (Richardson, Scott) The following docurnent(s) are associated with this transaction: Document description:Main Document Original filename:n/a Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP dcecfStamp_ID=l095794525 [Date=l2/l l /2006] [FileNumber=799638-0 ] [13349957099b9f6d33537ed0032adf7a072d99abel28b653605d3b4ef5512956dbc fl dd4a4a350dfbf4 70dcdl b 1 beaefl 0dafe587da7725403debb l 3bal 80884]] 4:82-cv-866 Notice will be electronically mailed to: Clayton R. Blackstock cblackstock@mbbwi.com Mark Terry Burnette mburnette@mbbwi.com John Clayburn Fendley , Jr clayfendley@comcast.net, yeldnef@yahoo.com Mark Arnold Hagemeier mark.hagemeier@arkansasag.gov, angela.dover@arkansasag.gov; 12/1 1/2006 , ' .. agcivil@arkansasag.gov ,. Christopher J. Heller heller@fec .net, brendak@fec.net; tmiller@fec .net M. Samuel Jones , III sjones@mwsgw.com, aoverton@mwsgw.com Stephen W. Jones sjones@jlj .com, kate.jones@jlj .com; linda.calloway@jlj.com Philip E. Kaplan pkaplan@k! bmlaw.net, nrnoler@kbmlaw.net Scott Paris Richardson scott.richardson@arkansasag.gov, patsy.dooley@arkansasag.gov; agcivil@arkansasag.gov Sharon Carden Streett scstreett@comcast.net, scstreett@yahoo.com Page 2 of2 John W. Walker johnwalkeratty@aol.com, lorap72297@aol.com; jspringer@gabrielmail.com 4:82-cv-866 Notice will be delivered by other means to: Norman J. Chachkin NAACP Legal Defense &amp; Educational Fund, Inc. - New York 99 Hudson Street Suite 1600 New York, NY 10013 Timothy Gerard Gauger Arkansas Attorney General's Office Catlett-Prien Tower Building 323 Center Street Suite 200 Little R;ock, AR 7220 i-2610 James M. Llewellyn , Jr Thompson &amp; Llewellyn, P.A. Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818 Office of Desegregation Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 William P. Thompson Thompson &amp; Llewellyn, P.A. Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818 12/11/2006 Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW Document 4072 Filed 1211112006 Page 1 of 3 UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS ENTRY OF APPEARANCE Assistant Attorney General Scott P. Richardson, who is admitted to practice in the Eastern District of Arkansas, hereby enters his appearance ih this case as counsel for Defendant Arkansas Department of Education. Respectfu11y submitted, MIKE BEEBE ATTORNEY GENERAL By: Isl Scott P. Richardson RECEIVED DEC 1 3 2006 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING SCOTT P. RICHARDSON, Bar No. 01208 Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 1100 Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 (501) 682-1019 direct (501) 682-2591 facsimile Email: scott.richardson@arkansasag.goy COUNSEL FOR SEPARATE DEFENDANT ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on December 11 , 2006, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CMIECF system, which sha11 send notification of such filing to the following: .-- Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW Document 4072 Filed 12/11/2006 Page, 2 of 3 Mr. Clayton R. Blackstock cblackstock@mbbwi.com Mr. Mark Terry Burnette mburnette@mbbwi.com Mr. John Clayburn Fendley, Jr clayfendley@comcast.net Mr. Mark Arnold Hagemeier mark.hagemeier@arkansasag.gov Mr. Christopher J. Heller heller@fec.net Mr. M. Samuel Jones , III sjones@mwsgw.com Mr. Stephen W. Jones sjones@jlj.com Mr. Philip E. Kaplan . pkaplan@k!bmlaw.net Ms. Sharon Carden Streett scstreett@comcast.riet Mr. John W. Walker johnwalkeratty(@ao l.com I, Scott P. Richardson, Assistant Attorney General, do hereby certify that I have served the foregoing by depositing a copy in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, on December 11, 2006, to the following non-CM/ECF participants: Mr. Norman J. Chachkin NAACP Legal Defense &amp; Educational Fund, Inc. - New York 99 Hudson Street Suite 1600 New York, NY 10013 Mr. William P. Thompson Mr. James M. Llewellyn , Jr Thompson &amp; Llewellyn, P.A. Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818 2 Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW Document 4072 Filed )2/11 /2006 .Page 3 of 3 Office of Desegregation Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 . ( /s/ Scott P. Richardson SCOTT P. RICHARDSON 3 Page 1 of2 Patsy Dooley From: / ecf_support@ared.uscourts.gov \ Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 1 0: 31 AM To: ared_ecf@ared.uscourts.gov Subject: Activity in Case 4:82-cv-00866-WRW Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al "Notice of Appearance" ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** You may view the filed documents once without charge. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was received from Richardson, Scott Paris entered on 12/ 11 /2006 at 10:31 AM CST and filed on 12/11/2006 Case Name: Case Number: Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al 4:82-cv-866 Filer: Arkansas,. State of Arkansas Department of Education WARNING: CASE CLOSED on 01/26/1998 Document Number: 4072 ' -- Docket Text: NOTICE of Appearance by Scott Paris Richardson on behalf of Arkansas Department of Education, Arkansas, State of (Richardson, Scott) The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: Document description:Main Document Original filename:n/a Electronic document Stamp: , [STAMP dcecfStamp_ID=l095794525 [Date=l2/ l l /2006] [FileNurnber=799633-0 ] [9e40375cd08dc8 l ae09cDfe0866 l aabff78 l 613add66602 l 6dfb0el 85bf55c8ae5 d2ef8fe0de33306f01J787el4dl8ecf4e456ad8dab9d2cd2a7864e4cc5022]] 4:82-cv-866 Notice will be electronically mailed to: Clayton R. Blackstock cblackstock@mbbwi.com Mark Terry Burnette mbumette@mbbwi.com '- John Clayburn Fendley , Jr clayfendley@comcast.net, yeldnef@yahoo.com Mark Arnold Hagemeier mark.hagemeier@arkansasag.gov, angela.dover@arkansasag.gov; 12/11/2006 agci vil@arkansasag.gov - Christopher J. Heller heller@fec.net, brendak@fec.net; tmiller@fec.net M. Samuel Jones, III sjones@mwsgw.com, aoverton@mwsgw.com Stephen W. Jones sjones@jlj.com, kate.jones@jlj.com; linda.calloway@jlj.com Philip E. Kaplan pkaplan@k! brnlaw.net, nmoler@kbmlaw.net Scott Paris Richardson scott.richardson@arkansasag.gov, patsy.dociley@arkansasag.gov; agcivil@arkansasag.gov Sharon Carden Streett scstreett@comcast.net, scstreett@yahoo.com Page 2 of 2 John W. Walker johnwalkeratty@aol.com, lorap72297@aol.com; jspringer@gabrielmail.com 4:82-cv-866 Notice will be delivered by other means to: Norman J. Chachkin NAACP Legal Defense &amp; Educational Fund, Inc. - New York 99 Hudson Street Suite 1600 New York, NY 10013 Timothy Gerard Gauger Arkansas Attorney General's Office Catlett-Prien Tower Building 323 Center Street Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 James M. Llewellyn , Jr Thompson &amp; Llewellyn, P.A. Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818 Office of Desegregation Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 William P. Thompson Thompson &amp; Llewellyn, P.A. Post Office Box 818 Fort Smith, AR 72902-0818 12/ 11 /2006 II II I I I I I I - I I I I I I "I I rr J:ILED f ., u.l. DISTRICT couRr EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS DEC 12 2006 JAMES W. McCORMACK CLERK By I 2006-07 ENROLLMENT AND RACIAL COMPOSITION OF THE DEP CLERK PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Horace R. Smith Monitor December 12, 2006 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Little Rock, Arkansas Polly Ramer Office Manager ' ' --- - ' ' -- .. -- I I I 1 - -- - UPDATE ON THE PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT'S IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STAFFING PROVISIONS OF PLAN 2000 . Margie L. Powell Monitor December 15, 2006 Office of Desegregation Monitoring U.S. District Court Little Rock, Arkansas Horace R. Smith Monitor : ~- IA8T~f J~ill~~SA8 DEC 15 2000 JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK By--------=o=EP=-c::-LERK= Gene Jones Monitor ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF Dr. T. Kenneth James, Commissioner .Educatilfn 4 State Capitol Mall Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 (501) 682-4475 http://ArkansasEd.org December 20, 2006 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge &amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers &amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Office of Desegregation Monitoring One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 RECEIVED Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon &amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. M. Samuel Jones III JAN - 3 200j OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates &amp; Woodyard 425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 1800 Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. U.S. District Court No. 4:82-CV-866 WRW Dear Gentlemen: .fer an agreement with the Attorney General's Office, I am filing the Arkansas Department of Education's Project Management Tool for the month of December 2006 in the above-referenced case. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. General Counsel Arkansas Department of Education SS:law cc: Mark Hagemeier STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION: Chair: Diane Tatum, Pine Bluff Vice Chair: Randy Lawson, Bentonville Members: Sherry Burrow, Jonesboro Dr. Calvin King, Marianna Dr. Tim Knight, Arkadelphia Dr .. Ben Mays, Clinton Mary Jane Rebick, Little Rock Dr. Naccaman Williams, Springdale An Equal Opportunity Employer UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. LR-C-82-866 WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of the ADE's Project Management Tool for November 2006. Respectfully Submitted, Scott Smith, ar # 922 1 General Counsel Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 404-A Little Rock, AR 72201 501-682-4227 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Scott Smith, certify that on December 20, 2006, I caused the foregoing document to be served by depositing a copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to each of the following: Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge &amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 . Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes Wagoner, Ivers &amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Office of Desegregation Monitoring One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon &amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr.M. SamuelJones,ll Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates &amp; Woodyard 425 West Capitol, Suite 1800 Little Rock, AR 72201 kit~ Scott Smith IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of1Eiecember 31, 2006 .m:.9iiJ5eJJoto1~uwiEia6lm&amp;fi@aviiii6efaa12oaa~era@1aiwm State1Eouriaaticm$iindjrdlfllll:1~I&lt;fflEoi'eittcf6etio8ijfagfflsJMUI B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. RECEIVED JAN - 3 2006 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OFFICE OF EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DESEGREGATION MONITORING WESTERJ.'-T DMSION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CASE NO. 4:82CV866WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, NO. 1 ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTER VEN ORS JOSHUA INTERVNORS' RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR CONTEMPT AND MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION On June 30, 2004, the court instructed the parties to cooperate in addressing their concerns with respect to implementation of the Court's directive regarding assessing programs designed to improve the academic achievement of African American students. The District appealed. The Court entered a separate Order to the effect that without or without an appeal the Court expected its Order to be implemented pendente lite. Rather than participate directly in the implementation process, Mr. Heller placed all of his eggs in one basket expecting the court's remedy to be overturned. Mr. Heller raised no questions regarding Joshua's continuing participation in the local PRE work until after the Court of Appeals affirmed this Court's Order. Ivfr. Heller and undersigned counsel had continuing disagreements regarding what information Joshua was to receive from PRE. Joshua, on the other hand, received its information in the same manner as it had previously done through October, 2006. Before that time, Mr. Heller did not 1 present to the Court any concerns that Joshua exceeded its bounds with respect to monitoring. Indeed, no motion to that effect has ever been filed. The instant proceeding is before the Court because :tvfr. Heller now has to regard the . interests of African American children and to provide more respect to the African American school board members than he did before. Before 2004, when the Court's remedy was set forth, Mr. Heller disregarded the two African American board members, Dr. Katherine Mitchell and Mr. Michael Daugherty. During the fall, Nfr. Heller opposed relief being sought by Nfr. Charles Armstrong and Ms. Dianne Curry with respect to their school board election campaigns. He continued to oppose those two board members until December 15, 2006 when an Order was entered dismissing their case intervention. He was in the unenviable position of opposing them in one action and representing them in another action. This appears to be a violation of ethics rules as well but is not being presented for the Court's present decision. Despite Nfr. Heller's antagonism to Nfr. Armstrong and Ms. Curry, they won school board seats. As of October, 2006, they joined Nfr. Daugherty and Dr. Mitchell to form a majority Africci American school board. It was only after this event that Nfr. Heller raised the issue of improper contact with his "clients" before the Court. The further background of this matter involves Dr. DeJarnette. Between June, 2006 and November, 2006, she made frequent complaints that she was being obstructed by the administration and not aided by Nfr. Heller in the PRE's efforts to comply with the Court 's order. The PRE's September draft report for the Court expressed PRE's concerns about noncompliance. The draft September report had initially been presented to the school administration in mid August, 2006. The response of:tvfr. Heller was to exclude from the Court 's 2 September final report the concerns which the PRE eA1Jressed in the draft report. When Mr. Heller learned that the September draft report had been shared with Joshua and ODM, he found no fault with that. (In the past, some draft reports had been shared with ODM and Joshua.) On August 4, 2006, Mr. Heller met with Joshua and ODM for more than an hour regarding concerns raised by Joshua to the effect that there were compliance issues outstanding. The meeting concluded upon l\tfr. Heller's promise _that he would obtain further information regarding the issues raised by Joshua and ODM and that he would promptly get back ODM and Joshua. The meeting between Joshua and Heller was directed by the Court and coordinated by ODM in the manner contemplated by the Court. Despite his commitment, ]\,fr. Heiler never met again with Joshua and ODM to further address the concerns presented at that c_ourt directed meeting. The Court subsequently inquired whether Joshua and LRSD were still at "loggerheads" to which Joshua replied in the affirmative. Mr. Heller's first acknowledgment of subsequent availability for the followup meeting came on November 1, 2006. See Exhibits 1 and 2. This was after newly elected Board President Dr. Katherine Mitchell requested that Dr. DeJarnette address the status of compliance with the Court's order and after the Board majority had shifted. At that point, Mr. Heller had been identified as an obstructor of the Court's Order and an accomplice of the school administration in seeking to retaliate against Dr. DeJarnette for sharing . her concerns with the Court, ODM, Joshua and the Board. What is before the Court are Joshua's objections to court release of the district because it has not complied with the letter and spirit of the Court's Order regarding program assessments. The sub-issues involve the following in Joshua's belief: 1) whether Mr. Heller deliberately delayed requesting an extension of time in which to comply with the Court's Order after Dr. 3 DeJ arnette made it known that the additional time was needed; 2) whether Dr. DeJ arnette' s proposed termination was retaliatory, i.e., undertaken for either or both punitive reasons and/or to discredit her when she testifies before the Court; and 3) whether the Joshua counsel and monitor acted outside the letter and the spirit of this Court's Order directing cooperation.1 The Court is being called upon to exclude the African American school board members and Dr. DeJamette as witnesses: "that the Joshua Intervenors be prohibited from calling as witnesses at the January 20, 2007 hearing LRSD officials and personnel with whom Walker or Springer have had ex-parte communications related to LRSD's implementation of the Court's 2004 Compliance Remedy." page 9 (7) Joshua contends that this pleading is an effort to preclude Joshua's calling :tvrr. Heller as a witness in the forthcoming proceeding. For the disqualification of IV.Ir. Walker would effectively moot the issue of whether Mr. Heller complied with the Court's order to cooperate with and support PRE in its implementation efforts. In the supplemental pleading before the Court, facts are urged by :tvrr. Heller which cannot be e~tablished without an evidentiary hearing because they are disputed. Much of the objection regarding attorney client privilege between Heller and DeJarnette has to be more carefully considered. At some point, Dr. Brooks became adversary to Dr. DeJarnette or at least she contends that. Did :tvrr. Heller continue to represent both of them during that adversariness. Mr. Heller also became adversary to Dr. DeJarnette because she 1 . The Order referred to by Judge Wright was entered during the midst of compliance hearings before her which had begun in July, 2001. She was concerned that while the matter was being heard by her there would not be any communication between Joshua counsel and school officials except by informing counsel in advance. That situation ended when those hearings ended. Her proposition as a general rule is understood and has been respected by counsel and Ms. Springer. 4 informed him that the district, in her opinion, was non compliant with the Court's orders. Dr. DeJamette then obtained her own counsel because she apparently was being threatened by Dr. Brooks for setting forth her honest views regarding the status of compliance in her discussions before the school administration and with ODM , Joshua and the Board. She then filed a grievance allegmg that the administration and 1'fr. Heller had taken adverse action against her due to her PRE responsibility to the Court. Undersigned counsel also came to represent Ms. Yvette Dillingham, a member of PRE, who was adversely affected by the school district's reorganization plan which took place in 2005. Did 1ifr. Heller represent her or did 1ifr. Walker represent her? Clearly, the question is not so easily to be determined. At most, it is to be said that N.fr. Heller represented Dr. Brooks and that Dr. Brooks and the Board were directly accountable to the Court. Dr. DeJamette became directly accountable to the Court because of the specific orders of the Court. Indeed, 1ifr. Heller was also obliged to respect the Court's orders. The only "party" including counsel prior to the election of the two African American board members who sought to respect the orders of the Court was Dr. DeJamette. The others sought to obstruct it. . Joshua counsel should not be disqualified for bringing matters to the attention of the Court which are established by papers, public discussion, and exchanges of correspondence. Seldom is the public's legitimate business known only to a limited number of people. This is one of those cases. Clearly, the old Board was not concerned by its actions about effectively addressing the underachievement of African American students nor was LRSD counsel. Nor did LRSD counsel inform either Board of his private actions which involved his previous client, Dr. Ken James, former LRSD Superintendent of Schools and now Commissioner of Education for 5 - Arkansas, regarding negotiations to end magnet school and M to M transfer funding. - - The motion for contempt and to disqualify and its supplement to disqualify Joshua counsel should be dismissed because thereis no evidentiary basis to support either. If it is to be considered on the merits by the Court, an evidentiary hearing is respectfully requested. Isl John W. Walker John W. Walker 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 501-374-3758 501-374-4187 (facsimile) Respectfully submitted, Isl Robert Pressman Robert Pressman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, JVIA 02421 781-862-1955 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on the 29th day of December, 2006, 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 all counsel of record and mailed to the following persons: Mr. Gene Jones ODM 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Clayton Blackstock Mr. Mark Burnett 1010 West Third Street Little Rocle, AR 72201 Judge J. Thomas Ray U.S . District Courthouse 600 West Capitol, Suite 149 Little Rock, AR 72201 Isl John W. Walker 6 ;ent 01 / 11 / 2006 at 16:54:14 - from to 5013744187 p3/3 ~ SCHEL H. F1UDr\i" {19?:. ; 994) ..'1 N M . .ElSEMAfl, JR., :I.A, A .. 8UITR~. P.A. .,iRICK S. t.~ SRY, P .. \. J~ C. CL\RK, JR.. P.,.i,. T HOMAS?. LEGG'ETT, P.A. JOHN OEWY WA.'t:mN, P .. -\. PAUL B. S'ENHJ\M 111. P.A. t r\RRY \V. BURKS,? .. '\. ,-\ , WYCKLlFF NTS'BET, fR., P .. a\.. JAMES EOW t\RD H.'\RRts, P .. \. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON, P.A. J. SHPR'EJU) aussnr. Ill, P.A. OON . .UO H. BACON, [I.,\. WILLIAM THOMAS 8AXTt:lt. ?,A. JOS"E.i'H 8 . HURST. JR .. P.A. ELlZABETR ROBBEN MURRAY, P-~ CHRlSTOPRER HELLER. P.A. LAUlL-\ ITENSt."EY SMini, P.A. ROBt::RTS. SHAF!l\. P .. s\, Wllt.lM,( ~l. GRl l-''FIS UI, P,A ~ICHAH S. ~ C ORE. P.i. WALTER M. on m. ?- " 'K!Vl N' A. CR.ASS, P.A. WlLUAM A. WA.DDiLL.JR., P.A. SCOTT ). L,NCASTE.R. ?_'\.. R08ERT 'B. 3EACH, JlL. P. A. J. UE 'BROWN, P.A. ).UIES C. BAKER. JR.. P.A. HARR'! A- U GHT. P .. '\. SCOTT H. TUCKER, ? . .-\ .. Gl1Y ALTON WADE, ?.A. PRtCE C. OAR'DNER. P .. \ . TONl,\ P. JOl-Jts, I' . .\, OAVtO D. WtLSON, P.A. JEFFltEY H. MOORE, P.A. OAVTO }.(. G'RA.f, Jl .. \ . CARL..\ CUNN'tts SJIAlNHOU'R, P.A. JON.\NN C. CHlLES , P.A. R. CHRlSTOPHER L.\WSON, P,A. BITTY ). DEMORY. P . .\. Ll'l'f-OA M. JOHNSON, P.A. JtUO:S W. S&gt;.(tTH, P .. \. CLIFFORD VI , Pt.UNKlITT, P .. '\.. DANIEL 1... HEJ\RlNGTON, P.A.. Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 South Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 - FRIDAY ELDREDGE &amp; CLARK ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LJMJTED LIA.BIL!TY PARTNERSHIP www.frldayflrm .com 400 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE, SUITE 2000 LJTTL.E ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3522 TELEPHONE 50.13762011 FAX 501,JH-2147 1 15 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE, .SUIT'S" 103 F.l.YETTEVILLE.. ARKAM!5.AS 72703 .. -'111 TELEPMONE 471~eos.2011 FAX 7 t-H5-Z 147 November 1, 2006 J. MICH.UL rlICJ.'..l:NS, P.A. .MAR VlN L CHlLDERS X. COLEM."i.N WESTBROOK, JR., P.A. ALUSON ). CORNWEil.. P.A. '-. nl.'EN OWENS SMITH, P.A. JASON'!. HENDREN, P.A. :SRUC? B. TIDW'El.L. P.A. JOSEPH P. MC-~AY. P . .\. ,\UXANOR..._ .-\. lFRhK, :P .A. JAY T. TAY!.OR. P .. , . MARTIN.\.. K.-\.n!N, P.A. BRYAN W. DUKE JOSEPH G. ~'lCHOLS 'if.OBERT T. SMm-t R. YAN A .. BOWM..-\.N TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MlC'HE'LU .\TOR. ?.A, JC-'..R.EN S. RAL11'ERT SAKAH b-l. COTTON \."'RtSTEN S. ROWL\.NOS .\LAN G. BRYAN UNUSE.\' MITCH..'\M LORENCE. KHAY~AM M. :EDDlNGs_ VIA FACSILE and REGULAR lVIAIL Re: Meet and Confer Dear John: JOHN F. Pb15ER1C:1 AM.A'NOA CAPPS ROSE STI.VEN L BROOKS H. WAYNE YOUNC, JR. JAMtE HUFFMAN JONE5 iCIMBIRLY l), r o UNG JASON N, BR.o\.MLEIT BRlAN C. SMlt'H O. b-UCH.An ~,tOYE'RS S'Ent M. HAIN'ES CRI N!.. CULLUM KRlSTOl&gt;HIR B. KNOX l&lt;.\.'I'HRYN A, 11'. RKPAT'RlC..: J. ADAM W!U.S U ,U'RA J, .\SBUl\Y 0 1 C:OVNSlL WlLLlhM H, SUTTO N, !',.\ , \l.'lll..1.1\M \.. TERRY WtLLMM l.. P,'\TTO~. JR. H.T. LARn.LER.E. ?.A. OSCAR E. DA\-7 S , JR. . .?.A. CRR.lSTOPHER H.t LLER 1.lrrL'E ROCK nL rn 1.Ji'O-U06 FAX S 0 1 ,l -!5H bcllu ci;(c,;.nct You now have our Compliance Report and have participated in the evaluation team meetings regarding Read 180, 21st Century and A+. You also have other information and documents from PRE concerning our compliance. I will be happy to meet with you at any time to discuss any compliance concerns you may have. It will be more difficult to anange a meeting and, I believe, beyond the scope of what the Court has required of us, if you continue to insist that LRSD Board Members and PRE staff be present. Please give me a call at your converuence. CJH/bk cc: Dr. Roy Brooks Dr. Karen DeJarnette Margie Power Gene Jones Christopher Heller I PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT I -.. JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS :tvir. Chris Heller FRIDAY ELDREDGE &amp; CLARK 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Meet and Confer Dear Chris: - JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. ATTORNEY AT LAw 1723 BROADWAY LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FA,'{ (501) 374-4187 Email: jphnwalkeratty@aol.com November 1, 2006 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, P.A. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 HENDERSON ROAD 1rrTLE ROCIC, ARl0u'ISAS 72210 PHONE: (501) 372-3425 FAX (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd@swbell.net PRE staff has been accessible in the past when you have not been. why don't you try to arrange a time wheri they are available and share that time with ODM. We will try to accommodate it. It would be better in the late afternoon. I am not available on the following dates: November 3, 8, 13-17, 2006. JWW:js cc: Mr. Gene Jones Ms. Margie Powell Sincerely, ls/John W: Walker PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT ;7. 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_description>

</dcterms_description>

</item>
</items>