Mitchell PTA Meeting January 21,1999 6:00 p.111. Mitchell Incentive School 2410 Battery Little Rock, AR (Plans for the new Stephens School will be available) RECEIVE FEB 2 t OFRCEOF i:Si3.aGATiGN.M0SlT0Rj!^ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT REGISTRATION OFFICE 501 SHERMAN LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 February 16, 1999 Mrs. Narcissus Tyler 1922 Battery Street Little Rock, AR 72202 Dear Ms. Tyler
This letter is being provided to follow-up on your communication and to avail information regard in g pre liminary plans that the LRSD wishes to consider toward the inclusion of Mitchell School. on 2/4/99. The following projects were listed for LJon review ofy^r letter being noted within the cabinet, an initial meeting of designated administrative staff persons took place - -------  k vi uesignaiea possible consideration
1. 2. Archive for the LRSD It was agreed on that designated space could be established for Mitchell History Early Childhood Education Site School 3, 4. This option is being considered to be housed within established structures outside the mam building (program housing guidelines prohibits use of the main building) Relocation for the LRSD Annex Building The Annex presently houses LRSD Exceptional Children It may be possible for other department Charter School program areas in Care, Student Services and areas to be relocated This option is possible
however, more information must be sought. just entering initial stages of planning options being considered for the 2000 school year. Funding toward building modification does abilities upon recommendation of our , , - ---- exist, however, our designer findings, will dicute options f3oDr1 c foacnilsitiidese srtautdiy< a
n
d
^ cfo^ntracSte:d.Z arLch?itec:t /\ necessary to access a number of possibilities, i.e. light, heat water, spmaoced iufitcilaitziaotnios n)(It is Item 3.6 - Revised Desegregation Education Plan "fVhen a school identified in Section 5.S will be closed, L/iSD shall exercise its best efforts to find a community or educational use for the property , Please be reminded of LRSDs intent to comply and ensure that all operations are coherent with the provisions of our plan. Areas listed in this letter by no means, precludes others that may warrant future consideration. We appreciate and commend efforts of you and the advisory committee. It is our full intent to keep you abreast, while seeking input throughout this process toward Mitchell School and its inclusion. Junious Babbs Sincerely, I Associate Superintendent 5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 443 P02/O2 JUL 07 99 '15:27 I i ! John w. Walker, EA. attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 Fax (501) 374-4187 JOHN W, walker Ralph Washington MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER, JR I Via Fax I July?, 1999 I I Hon. Susan Webber Wright 600 W. Capitol Ste. 302 i Little Rojik, AR 72201-3325 ! Dear Judge Wright: I Ms. Springer and I are in the midst of a monitoring visit which brings us to the former Ish _ ** **& TIIAAVAX vHUgiJ Uw kW UtXv Xwl hlementaiy School. It is now the Instructional Resource Center for the district. One of e reasons advanced by the district for closing Ish was the difficulty and cost of maintenance. I am impressed that unde,r the able leadership of Mr. Doug Eaton, the facility is now well air conditioned, newly roofed and well maintained and all of the faults previously identified have been corrected. I brino this to the courts attention because a school in the area which has not received the courts approval tor closing, we believe, has been deliberately poorly maintained by the Little Rock School District in order to justify its closing. That school is Mitchell Elementary School. I ask you to independently monitor or direct the monitoring of that-anticipated event because under the purported neighborhood school plan, schools were promised to the black community which were neighborhood as well as to e Ia a <9 f   A  X. A - -- 2 * 9k the white,community. Maintenance is a reason being proffered for the closing of Mitchell, I Thtink you for your attention to this matter I i Sincerely, V I / W. Walker i jwwilp
cc
All Counsel Ms. Ann Brown Dr. Les Gamine iOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 July 16, 1999 Mr. John Walker 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Bv Fax Dear John: On behalf of Judge Wright, I am acknowledging receipt of your letter dated July 7, 1999, in which you expressed concerns about the maintenance of Mitchell Elementary School in the Little Rock School District. Your letter has been placed in the Judges correspondence file. I have directed one of my associates to look into the maintenance status of Mitchell Elementary. .After I have received her report, I will share the findings with you and Judge Wright. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown cc: Judge Susan Webber Wright BUILDING INFORMATION Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name fcklC 11 Street Address bCLKtrci Of received Surveyor Date Site Size acres AUG 2 1939 Permanent Buildings Building Identification Orioj'ng 1 Building Identification Firsl Ad/j iHlDn Building Identification Building Identification Building Identification Building Identification 3 dlOi.'ytroofyj C er i d. OFHCEOF desegregation MONlTOWme Gross Square Footage Gross Square Footagei Gross Square Footage Gross Square Footage Gross Square Footage Gross Square Footage Year Constructed 1*^ 0^ Year Constructed Year Constructed Year Constructed 1^5 :i Portable Buildings 'o+ccl Year Constructed Year Constructed Building Id. Building Id. Building Id. Building Id. Building Id. Building Id. Building Id. Building Id. UI Gross Square Footage Gross Square Footage Gross Square Footage Gross Square Footage Gross Square Footage Gross Square Footage Gross Square Footage Gross Square Footage ^0 Year Constructed Year Constructed Year Constructed Year Constructed Year Constructed Year Constructed Year Constructed Year Constructed Condition Codes: X - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, 1 - dead Number of Rooms Number of Rooms Number of Rooms Number of Rooms Number of Rooms Number of Rooms Number of Rooms Number of Rooms Condition Condition Condition Condition Condition Condition Condition ConditionROOM CONDITIONS Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study Scliool Name M Surveyor Date Room Overall Condition Comments Typical Classroom Laboratory Classroom 3 A/16^ Cafeteria/Cafetorium 2^ Gymnasium Locker Rooms ^r.iou5 izjgsr Library Kitchen Toilet Rooms Corridors 2. 2 Offices /<fAJD<&<eDg/J -I 4 Condition Codes: d - good, 3 -fair, 2 - poor, t - dead01 - SITE V^ONDITIONS ! INFRASTRUCTURE Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name . Surveyor Date Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty 01 Roadways 02 Parking Lots 03 Sidewalks 04 Curbs & Gutters 05 Striping 06 Fencing 07 Retaining Walls 08 Site Grounds Priority 09 Playgrounds 10 Tennis Courts 11 Athletic Fields 12 Running Tracks 13 Site Lighting 14 15 Comments: Condition Codes: f Qgo sf sf If If sf If If ac ea ea ea ea ea d - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, I - dead s J Z. I repair / replace _________ repair / replace__________ repaiKZ^pI^^J2aA^ repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair /(replace^ *^00 repair / replace Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... settling / uplifting .......... cracks/holes .......... inadequate drainage /slope .......... inadequate number parking spaces .......... loading / unloading problems inadequate site drainage erosion repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace add Priority Ratings: inappropriate base material damaged equipment inadequate at parking lots inadequate around building inadequate around site I-year I (critical), 2-year 2, 3-years3-S, 4 - years 5-1002 - EXTExUOR WALL Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name I LL- Building IO 1 Surveyor M Date 4221:7s Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority 01 Brick Veneer 02 Cone. Masonry Unit 03 Wood 04 Stucco 05 EIFS 06 Metal sf sf sf sf sf sf repair / replace Z. repair ! replace fep^Iip/ replace repair! replace '' ' repair / replace Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... settlement / movement damage 'moisture pene (ration 2. ^fepa^ replace 07 Paint 08 Caulking 09 Moisture Protection 10 Insulation spalling cracks tightness / fasteners corrosion stains rotting 11 Cur 12 CgAJCg.^T^ 13 pBb cKrr TAin ^7<2 Comments: sf sf sf sf 2^ repair / replace repair! replace repair / replace repair / replace AS5LgfD (SuriFA.5 UUVy l^.lo' c2f c,c/n-tA- ______________ M67^ Strf-f-ir' Ar ^''^r laerr' fhAZltr. Condition Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, 1 - dead ..........................(.P^./Ar, IB Priority Ratings 1-year I (critical), 2-year 2. 3-years 3-5, years S-IO02 - EXTE.uOR WALL Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name Building ID 2 Surveyor Date '4 - Z/ Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority 01 Brick Veneer 02 Cone. Masonry 03 Wood 04 Stucco 05 EIFS 06 Metal Unit /(:> ^0 7^ sf sf sf sf sf 3. repair ! replace repair ! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... seitlemeiil / movement .......... damage .......... moisture penetration .......... spalling .......... cracks .......... tightness/fasteners .......... corrosion .......... stains .......... rotting 07 Paint 08 Caulking 09 Moisture Protection 10 Insulation sf sf sf sf repair / replace repair / replace repair! replace repair / replace II 12 13 Cuninients: Condition Codes: d - good, 3 -fair, 2 - poor, I - dead Priority Ratings: I - year i (crillcal), 2 - year 2, 3-years 3-5, t- years 5-1003 - EXTEkUOR windows Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name Building ID ) Surveyor Date ^'2.1 Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority 01 Aluminum 02 Steel 03 Wood 04 Single Glaze 05 Double Glaze 06 Operable sf sf sf sf sf sf a (^j^yTeplgsfi. repair / ,i|pn^ repair! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace D^ciency Checklist (enter item numbers) A z Z- 07 Paint frame poorly fitting damagedframe caulking poor broken/cracked glass moisture penetration corrosion/decay cleanliness poor inoperable sf repair / replace 08 09 10 Comments: fc K/4ok.3Lt7X3FAAAf:. Condition Codes: 4 - good, 3 -fair, 2 - poor, I - dead Priority Ratings: i-year I (crilical), 2-year2, 3-years3-5, 4-years5-IO03 - EXTc jOR windows Little Rock School District - Facilities Mask, Plan Study School Name I L- Building ID Surveyor Date - 9 S Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority 01 Aluminum 02 Steel  03 Wood 04 Single Glaze 05 Double Glaze 06 Operable sf sf sf sf sf sf j-2. repair / replace repair ! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair! replace 07 Paint Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... frame poorly filling .......... damaged frame .......... caulking poor .......... broken/cracked glass .......... moislure penelralion .......... corrosion/decay .......... cleanliness poor .......... inoperable sf repair ! replace 08 09 10 Comments: Condition Codes: 4 - good, 3 -/air, 2 - poor, i - dead Priority Ratings: I - year i (critical), 2-year 2, 3 - years 3-S, 4-years 5-1004 - EXTEm JOR DOORS Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name Building ID Surveyor ^/<JM Date Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority 01 Glass Swing ea pr 02 Metal Swing ea pr 03 Wood Swing ea pr 04 Overhead 05 Sliding 06 Revolving 07 Paint 08 Hardware 09 Closers 10 Panic Devices ea ea ea 11 12 _____________ 13 M- 14_ iz JQ. -4-. ea ea ea ea z 3 repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace f^aif/ replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace add 2. Comments: Pfttr /l) '7~ Condition Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, ! - dead Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... door/frame poorly fitting poor finish damaged door/frame corrosion/decay moisfure penetration poor operation Priority Ratings: 1 - year I (critical), 2 - year 2, 3 - years 3-5, 4 - years 5-1004 - EXTL.oOR DOORS Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name Building ID Z Surveyor Date 4-2^-76' Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority 01 Glass Swing ea Pr 02 Metal Swing ea Pr 1 03 Wood Swing ea pr 04 Overhead 05 Sliding 06 Revolving 07 Paint 08 Hardware 09 Closers 10 Panic Devices 5. 11 12 13 Comments: Condition Codes: ea ea ea ea ea ea ea 3 repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair ! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair ! replace repair / replace repair / replace add Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... door/frame poorly filiing .......... poor finish .......... damaged door/frame .......... corrosion/decay .......... moisture penetration .......... poor operation 4 - good, 3 -/air, 2 - poor, I - dead Priority Ratings: I - year I (crillcal), 2 - year 2, 3 - years 3-5, 4 - years 5-1005 - FOU^*/ATION Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name . Building ID Surveyor Date Item 01 Cone. Pier & Beam 02 Slab on Grade 03 Load Bearing Mason. Approx. Quantity _____________ sf _______________ sf _______ sf Condition Action Action Qty Priority 04 05 06 Comments: SSL Pc4x/j floe- rc ^&eo/ir E>y Condition Codes: repair / replace repair! replace repair / replace Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... seillemenl .......... deflection .......... cracks .......... exposed reinforcing .......... corrosion .......... decay/rol .......... spalling .......... stains flbXCfC'-y / aJ iVcb// /V/'TV a/a 4 - good, 3 -fair, 2 - poor, 1 - dead Priority Ratings: 1 -year I (crilical), 2 -year 2, 3 - years 3-5, 4 - years 5-1005 - FOUN. il ION Little Rock School District - Facilities Mastei M^lan Study School Name MiraHecL ecM, Building ID a Surveyor Date 4'?/-75 Item 01 Cone. Pier Sc Beam 02 Slab oil Grade 03 Load Bearing Mason. Approx. Quantity Condition _______________sf ________ _______________sf ________ __________ sf Action Action Qty Priority 04 05 06 Comments: Condition Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, I - dead repair ! replace repair! replace repair / replace Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... selllemenl .......... deflection .......... cracks .......... exposed reinforcing .......... corrosion .......... decay/rol .......... spalling .......... stains Priority Ratings: I-year I (critical), 2-year 2, 3 - years 3-S, 4 - years S-1006 - STRL . i URE Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name r Building ID i Surveyor Date *4' 2.1 Item 01 Concrete Columns 02 Structural Steel 03 Structural Timber 04 Load Bearing Mason. 05 Light Steel Framing 06 Concrete Walls Approx. Quantity Condition _______________sf _________ _______________sf _________ _______________sf _________ _______________sf ________ _______________sf _______________sf Action Action Qty Priority 07 08 09 Comments: Condition Codes: repair / replace repair ! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... settlement .......... deflection .......... cracks .......... exposed reinforcing .......... corrosion .......... decay/rot .......... spalling .......... stains ic> PcaaJ 4 - good, 3 - /air, 2 - poor, I - dead Priority Ratings: I - year I (critical), 2 - year 2, 3 - years 3-5, 4 - years 5-10 a06 - STRL - . URE Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name Building ID Surveyor Date Item 01 Concrete Columns 02 Structural Steel 03 Structural Timber 04 Load Bearing Mason. 05 Light Steel Framing 06 Concrete Walls Approx. Quantity _______________sf ___________ sf ________________sf _______________sf _______________sf . sf Condition Action Action Qty Priority 07 08 09 Commenls: Condition Codes: d - good, 3 -fair, 2 - poor, I - dead repair ! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair t replace Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... selllemenl .......... deflection .......... cracks .......... exposed reinforcing .......... corrosion .......... decay/rot .......... spalling .......... stains Priority Ratings: 1 - year I (crillcal), 2-year 2, 3-years 3-5, 4-years 5-1007 - interior walls Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name I ' Building ID i Surveyor Date Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority 01 Masonry / Concrete 02 Gypsum Board 03 Plaster 04 Wood 05 Light Steel Framing 06 Concrete Walls 07 _______________ 08 Io % % % % % % % % A 09 Paint lb Wall Covering 11 Tile 12 ____________ 13 31 % % % repair! replace repair! replace repair / replace repair ! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair! replace repaint repair / replace repair! replace % % % % % % % % % % Comments: % Approximate Quantity -%of total walls in building Condition Codes: d - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, I - dead DeFiciency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... evidence of moisture .......... damage .......... cracks .......... rips/tears .......... discoloration .......... broken/loose pieces .......... spalling .......... unstable ........ caulking damaged/missing % Action Quantity - % of that type of wall needing repair/replacement Priority Ratings: 1 - year 1 (crilical), 2 - year 2. 3 - years 3-5, d - years 5-10)7 - INTEm.iOR walls Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study kliool Name MiTC-dtLL Building ID Surveyor Date Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority  1 Masonry / Concrete 12 Gypsum Board 13 Plaster 4 Wood 5 Light Steel Framing 6 Concrete Walls 7 _______________ '8 % % % % % % % % 3 9 Paint 0 Wall Covering 1 Tile 2 ____________ 3 % % % repair / replace repair! replace repair! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair! replace repair / replace repaint repair! replace repair / replace % % % % % % % % % % % Comments: . Approximate Quantity - % of total walls In building ondition Codes: 4 - good, 3  fair, 2  poor, I - dead Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... evidence of moisture .......... damage .......... cracks .......... rips/lears .......... discoloration .......... broken/loose pieces .......... spalling .......... unstable caulking dantaged/missing Action Quantity - %of that type of wall needing repair/replacenienl Priority Ratings: I -year I (critical). 2-year 2, 3-years 3-S, 4 - years S-IO08 - INTEiviOR DOORS Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name M / pS 1/  C- > Building ID L Surveyor Date 4'^/'75 Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority ) 1 Metal Frame )2 Aluminum Frame )3 Wood Frame % % % 3 )4 Metal Door )5 Wood Door )6 Metal w/ Glass Inset )7 Wood w/ Glass Inset 5 G5 30 % % % % 3. 3 )8 Paint/Finish )9 Hardware 10 Closers 1 Panic Devices 100 100 17- % % ea ea i 5 3 3 repair / replace repair / replace repair! replace repair ! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair ! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace add % % % % % % % % % 1 3 4 Zomments: > ApproMmate Quantity -%of total doors in building 'ondition Codes: 4 - good, J - fair, 2 - poor, 1 - dead Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... unstable .......... damaged .......... inoperable .......... code violation .......... less than 36" wide % Action Quantity - % of that type of door needing repair/replacement Priority Ratings: I - year I (critical), 2 - year 2, 3 - years 3-5, 4 - years 5-108 - INTEk oR doors Little Rock School District - Facilities Maste. Flan Study cliool Name Building ID 2 Surveyor Date ' z / -75 Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority 1 Metal Frame 2 Aluminum Frame 3 Wood Frame % % % 3 4 Metal Door 5 Wood Door 5 Metal w/ Glass Inset 7 Wood w/ Glass Inset /<pg> % % % % 3 8 Paint/Finish 9 Hardware 0 Closers 1 Panic Devices 100 100 % % ea ea 3 repair / replace repair / replace repair! replace repair! replace repair I replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace add % % % Va % % % % % 2 3 4 omments: Approximate Quantity -%of total doors In building onditiort Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2  poor, I - dead Detlciency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... unstable .......... damaged .......... inoperable .......... code violation .......... less than 36" wide Action Quantity -%of that type of door needing repair/replacemenl Priority Ratings: I -year I (critical), 2-year 2, 3 -years 3-5, 4 -years 5-1009 - LM E.-.OK FLOORING Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name Building ID L Surveyor Date Item 31 Resilient (tile/sheet) 32 Carpet (tile/sheet) 33 Ceramic/Quarry Tile 34 Masonry/Stone Paver 35 Terrazzo 36 Wood 37 Subfloor Approx. Quantity 357c Condition Action 38 gO/<>C.. 39 10 11 6A<v Coa>C' 25% Comments: Condition Codes: 3 a (Tepaii^/ replace re^ir! replace repair ! replace repair! replace repair / replace repair! replace Action Qtv Priority Deficienc __3-^^__ ... ........ 52^ 1 1
y Checklist (enter item numbers) evidence of moisture irregular surface tripping hazards accessibility hazards deteriorationAvear holes/tears slains/discoloration broken/loose pieces shrinkage warping cracking [tJcx:>C>eA/ 5(2FiFLClD/^ HAS r>cE, 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, i - dead Priority Ratings: 1 - year I (crilical), 2 - year 2, 3 - years 3-S, 4 -years 5-109 - INTEm.mOR flooring Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study chool Name Building ID a Surveyor ^Jc)M Date -^'71' 7 Item 1 Resilient (lile/sheet) 2 Carpet (tile/sheet) 3 Ceramic/Quarry Tile 4 Masonry/Stone Paver 5 Terrazzo 6 Wood 7 Subfloor Approx. Quantity S57^ Condition Action Action Qty Priority 5^ 3 repair! replace repair! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair! replace repair / replace Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... evidence of moisture .......... irregular surface .......... tripping hazards .......... accessibility hazards .......... deteriorationAvear .......... holes/tears .......... stains/discoloration .......... broken/loose pieces .......... shrinkage .......... warping .......... cracking 9 D 1 'omments: ondition Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2  poor, i - dead Priority Ratings: 1 - year I (critical), 2-year 2, 3-years 3-5, 4-years 5-1010 - INTEmuOR ceiling Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name fV\! rC-^f Building ID I Surveyor Ai Date 4-^/-75' Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty 01 Lay-in Acoustical Tile 02 Gypsum Board 03 Plaster 04 Wood / Fiber Board 05 Direct Glue Ac. Tile 06 Exposed Structure \2. (repairjfreplace. Priority Deficiency Checklist (enter Item numbers) replace repair / replace 37 38 COTTPAJ '39 (qSIo \Olo [Comments: Condition Codex: repair ! replace repair / replace repair! replace l/e^'/ tyeici/JC'jS zpc^r 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, t - dead sagging cracks/deterioration evidence of moislure stains/discoloraiion missing elemenis/units acoustic quality poor attachment loose misalignment Priority Ratings: 1 - year 1 (crilical), 2-year 2, 3-years 3-5, 4-years 5-10 O-INTE...0R CEILING Little Rock School District - Facilities Mastei Plan Study cliool Name Building ID 2 Surveyor Date 4-^/-7S Hem Approx. Quantity 1 Lay-in Acoustical Tile 2 Gypsum Board 3 Plaster 4 Wood! Fiber Board 5 Direct Glue Ac. Tile 6 Exposed Structure Condition _______ Action Action Qty Priority 7 S 9 'omments: >ndition Codes: d - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, I - dead repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair ! replace repair / replace Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... sagging .......... cracks/delerioralion .......... evidence of moisture .......... stains/discoloralion .......... missing elements/unils .......... acoustic quality poor .......... attachment loose .......... misaligtiment Priority Ratings: i - year I (critical), 2-year 2, 3 - years 3-5, d-years 5-1011 - SPECiriLTIES Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name Building ID i Surveyor Date Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) DI Toilet Accessories D2 Toilet Partitions D3 Lockers D4 Signage D5 Window Coverings D6 Chalk/Tack Boards D7 Projection Screens D8 Millwork/Casework D9 Laboratory Equip. 10 Kitchen Equip. Il _______________ 12________________ 13 _______________ 14 rm sf kit. Comments: JondUion Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, 1 - dead 2. Z 2. S 2> S repair /(replay repair Xjeplace^ repair ] replace repair / replace repair! replace repair / replace repair! replace repair / replace repair! replace repair / replace tF- rm rm % % % rm rm If rm % appearance vandalism inoperable unsuitable missing components poor attachment code compliance Priority Hatings: I - year I (crilical), 2-year2, 3-years3-5, 4-yearsS-IO1 - SPEC lTIES Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study cliool Name MircHecL Building ID Surveyor Date item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) 1 Toilet Accessories 2 Toilet Partitions } Lockers t Signage 5 Window Coverings 5 Chalk/Tack Boards 7 Projection Screens i Millwork/Casework i Laboratory Equip. ) Kitchen Equip. nn sf kit. S 3 JI repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair! replace repair / replace rm rm % % % rm rm If rm % appearance vandalism inoperable unsuilable missing components poor atlachment code compliance I 2 1 omments: indition Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, 1 - dead Priority Ratings: I - year i (crilical), 2-year 2, 3-years 3-5, 4-years 5-10IZ-STAL /MY EXIT SYSTEM Little Rock School District - Facilities Masici Plan Study School Name Building ID L Surveyor Date 4 -2/ - 7^ Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) 31 Open 32 Enclosed 33 Restricted Access A ea ea ea 3 )4 Stair Nosings )5 Handrails )6 Floor Finish )7 Firewalls I (52o7e> ioc>7f repair / replace repair ! replace repair / replace repair /(fepla^ fepairV i^ace ................................ repair / replace repair! replace )8 )9 10 Comments: 'ondition Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, I - dead Priority Ratings: I - year I (crilical), 2-year 2, 3-years 3-5, 4-years 5-102-STA1kiVAY exit system Little Rock School District - Facilities MastCf Plan Study iciiool Name Building. ID Surveyor Date Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) 1 Open 2 Enclosed 3 Restricted Access ea ea ea 4 Stair Nosings 5 Handrails 6 Floor Finish 7 Fire Walls repair / replace repair ! replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair t replace 8 9 0 'omments: audition Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, I - dead Prlorily Ratings: I - year I (critical), 2 - year 2, 3 - years 3-3, 4 - years 5-1013 - hand.cap accessibility Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name Building ID \ Surveyor Date Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) 01 Adequate Parking 02 Exterior Ramps 03 Curb Cuts 04 Thresholds 05 Elevators 06 Corridor Widths 07 36 Door Widths 08 Interior Ramps 09 Drinking Fountains 10 Toilet Access/Fixt. 11 Visual/Audible Alarm 12 Braille Signage 13 Adequate Seating 14 Door Hardware repair / add repair / add repair! add repair ! add repair / add repair! add repair / add repair! add repair / add repair / add repair / add repair / add repair / add repair / add 15 16 17 site Accessibility building Accessibility Comments: A^CC.i55$/>L.E Ar fon t r OJJC-f 'ondiiton Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, I - dead Priority Ratings: 1 - year I (crilical), 2 - year 2, 3 - years 3-5, 4 - years 5-! 0 213 -HAh>>iCAP ACCESSIBILITY Litde Rock School District - Facilities Masief Plan Study School Name BuildiiigID Surveyor Date Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) 1 01 Adequate Parking 02 Exterior Ramps 03 Curb Cuts 04 Thresholds 05 Elevators 06 Corridor Widths 07 36 Door Widths 08 Interior Ramps 09 Drinking Fountains 10 Toilet Access/Fixt. 11 Visual/Audible Alarm 12 Braille Signage 13 Adequate Seating 14 Door Hardware 41 repair / add repair / add repair / add repair / add repair ! add repair / add repair! add repair / add repair! add repair / add repair / add repair / add repair / add repair ! add 15 16 17 Site Accessibility Building Accessibility 2- A Comments: Condition Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, I - dead Ptioriiy Ratings: I - year I (crilical), 2-year 2, 3-years 3-5, 4-years 5-104-PLUM. Little Rock School District - Facilities Master i lan Study cliool Name E-L&m, Building ID 34 Surveyor Dale ^4/^4/H-^6 llem Approi. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty I Supply Piping 2 Sanitary Piping 1 Storm Piping 1 Gas Lines 5 Pumps 5 Waler Heaters L. - ea ea repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace Priority 2 2 2 2 Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) I I I Toilets S Lavatories ) Drinking Fountains ) Classroom Sinks I Sprinkler System 2 Fire Hose Cabinets 1 Fire Pumps t Jp-iHA-L^________ 5 5 Ic? ea ea ea ea (fepak)) replace / add SZZ ommen^s: inrfitlon Codes: Z z fV. MA a af ea ea 1*7 repair / replace / add repair Zfleplacey add / (p Cf^S^^place/ addiT^'rf.i repair! replace ! add _________ repair! replace / add _________ repair / replace / add ,^-fepajf7 replace / add repair / replace Z add repair Z replace! add i^ir ^j\) I pc/ 4 - good, 3 -fair, 3  poor, I - dead z Z 2 z I I biadeqiiale pressure Inadequate drainage rusling leaks odors galvanized lead Inadequate quantity none handictqf accessible leaks damage Priority Katings: I - year I (crilical), 3-year 3, 3-years3-S, 4-years 3105 - llEATi. J, VENTILATING, COOLING Little Rock School District - Facilities Mastei * laii Study cliool Name M iit-U e:U., Building ID Surveyor k.a.M. Dale Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority 1 Chilled Water 2 Direct Expansion 3 Heat Pump 4 Evaporative Cooler 5 Window Unit 5 Central Heat 7 Radiant Heat sf sf sf sf ea sf sf 'Z repair i^eplace) ,2^22^ repair / repine ________ repair ! replace Z repair ! replace ________ repaii^Tl'e^Iac^ repair replace J Pneumatic Controls ? Electric Controls 3 Chiller 1 Pumps 2 Boiler 1 Piping 4 Ductwork ) Air Handlers 5 1 ) _____________________ ) ' omments: z. IZ. (b sf sf ea ea ea sf sf ea 3 i >n Jition CoJes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, I - dead repair! replace repair ! replace repair / replace repair! replace repair / replace repair! replace repair / replace repair ! replace repair / replace 5^ 3 3 3 Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) ........ lemperalure problems ........ humid .......... noisy .......... drafty .......... unreliable .......... leaking pipes .......... swealing Priority Ratings: 1 - year I (critical), 2 - year 2, 3 - years 3-5, 4 - years 5-10ELECTIh<.AL Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study lol Name M n e-'a Building ID Surveyor .G Dale 4- - 2 4- lent Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority 4ain Distiibulion iecondary Distrib. tinergency Generator 'onduit Viring 'anelboards Iwitchgear luorescent Lights ncandescent Lights ire Detection/Alarm iinergency Lighting 4anual Pull Stations ^inoke Detectors I Me M Q P bsf ea bsf bsf ea ea __________________ incuts: bsf bsf z. \ bsf 1 tJ o M  6 O. e. PfcvJ KA'E-c-M 'Q-oat^ bsf ea bsf Uhiw- repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace repair / replace / add repair / replace repair / replace / add repair / replace / add repair / replace / add repair / replace repair / replace / add ihAfcg- 'AoafeS, O'ff'ic-e,>> MO' a<ioM f 2.M0 Pvoo<l\ Viftc Po^ep- <?,. A t-S O-r ' I. f. hA\S^' Mi- t5P. Vflo '' p. F (JdrfeOS FodMO OM V  >.) K h , 31H y-a g, c. tion Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, I - dead i Deficiency Checklist (enter item numbers) .......... inadeqiiale cajKicily ....S.'t?.. safety violations code violalions <^>V-DC, o.^s-n>c'KM  OAUS< ^T/Jy > Ptlorliy Ratings: I - year I (crillcalj, 2 - year 2, 3- years 3-S, 4 - years S-IO17-LIFE SAFETY Little Rock School District - Facilities Master Plan Study School Name Building ID Surveyor Date Item Approx. Quantity Condition Action Action Qty Priority Deficiency )1 Fire Exits )2 Sprinkler System )3 Fire Hose Cabinets )4 Fire Extinguishers )5 Fire Detection/Alarm )6 Emergency Lighting )7 Fire Pumps )8 Manual Pull Stations )9 Smoke Detectors ea sf ea sf sf repair! replace ! add ________ _____ repair / replace ! add ________ _____ repair / replace! add ________ _____ repair / replace ! add repair! replace / repair! replace repair / replace! add _____ repair / replace ! add repair / replace ! add 10 II 2 3 4 Comments: 'ondition Codes: 4 - good, 3 - fair, 2 - poor, I - dead Priority Ratings: I - year ! (crilical), 2 - year 2, 3 - years 3-5, 4 - years 5-10URVEY NuTES Little Rock School District- Facilities Master Plan Study iwolNanM MircHCCC- Sotveyor /g /a-I M Date l^fCexKX. lx vT C- t -!> <=c4> 8^ A. 5b>5rt^zcrC.* 'f-V/- CtAS^Aci^ /p /pce>^ cn^O-^ 06 P'^'fPC r/\PBCt^ : ?Npr SP<-IT3 6 1 6 i ''Pf> in 6 r./'^ ' I' i J i I F I u rMay 03, School Name Mitchell Elem. CROV AR CHI 1995 Bldg.ID 034 surveyor K.A.H. Date 04/24/1995 Notes: #1. Old school building (1908) Plumbing in fair shape. tf2. The addition (1912) is in similar condition. #3. The HVAC systems have been renovated and look to be in good shape.I 1! -.'t'( r'"' I (d-tpl (/ i I &. t !A,7-r' rMA,A.f ,^^-r i'-if i-A L -i t/ 7. i'
}_ I ,<<- 5rd7. T 1 < - - STAAt r.u ^ig| BA-jeME-MT LztsweR level - S L c^a=^-F  ,< I t CK. ' EBL < ^E-L|-a3------ VWl <>R. J5? <. JM I 'WI1^ nrmn CR X rYl kir.  5WB3 S. H M a t] 1< -1. BA.6CME:Mr FbcTtJ^R, E CR. r'i g fg^ r-cR. CR. (  ? _ E- - (Ia^ - o. CR. "
s. f.'^ K^ER. nilTiH',> MlTcHeUL- EL&M, C-l< li^ ,J'- R^> s P 1^2-1 M V ) g
. E A Kmi WHHI > 9t 7 P1R6T FL<
?<2K ^X7"r"Az<'A:.. //JACC Ll&l jfit. ^E<Sz?^l> FL(<?6^ 1 y crv ij.' 1 bp Ht-' n /C..., w P ' fAt'l <rf- I If Pl j() i C ^r<3. T < - <- , --v H- /.ii
6-f>'^ i:ia.iAT 1- f/>'i pa<u'q 1(11, /-''H.--^-^ 5 srAAe. T.U 53^ 2 eR.*=^T= r< .| oi U^WER LEVEL o <^ET<?raUM e-R. Ig^ VWl < f CR. rm-n ^i. /\ CR 7M^t? ntin CR Ea X r'! BI rY\ i= kir. JAN 5PSB3 li iW M M r<? BA.5EMgMr FL.CC^k. afe 1} b V.- b cii Ffe#YEJ<, riza 
2>I2.| Rz> S I' HRST MlTCHeUb Le.M. CR rg^ T~v I iinL-?~AA ''^?r [i CR < eR M V r IV I eg. 7 LIB A Km .cry. ^EeSzPND FL(f7<:'Fe I fy' 1 '-V 4' C,' ! ( I t i 17, s A I. 1/1 ' \ L Z' ' /' 'I-f^ lS 4'^ './If' <: ?V 'r 7 1 vI '44 - I (V I' J 4 I ..I 'J' ** i' ,-  . <r iTff. T 1 f >'''-'
z,iP ' vr < - - <- - BA5eMG.MT UaweR LEVELi I,> SlXAt fj .) < ct. '^Ti, ?-- I 2 noun. CR X .< H r i . Ic r r z4 i--' I  I 't 4 bi-? 5<
. r.u J I ' '. i' -V <^ewiUM ITgTH VWIm ?r kir. V> I C, J*M <.A Cr-ii 9^- ?x C>R. Tggir A CR fg^V S'A CR. yML-y\ ---------- 5PtO w V\ 3: ----1 iT<? M X >>ri - FL<?62R, MlTCHL-L. CR. fe^ xs / cMi.  CR. S''<- R^ER R4> if HRST FL<J?(2R. .S< rill
j>'> L hnlLT CR, Eli A'A 4' CR M V S' pr JV^ 4<- - I^ LIB 4t wKtfwlill t> B ___ D e. 7 ^E^Sz2ND FL<f7<^R 54 11 S'b ' crv 7?- } p'&.p ,j.a! It'-i.. I^.f>ye i lUAl /U [,.3  r.u J L T <Tfe>< r-^ < - - 5WA6. pi <* L. 5?^* //. ri i/'''- 'Mif-i BA$eMG.MT UawGR LEVEL 024 ?'! (A- w B p-z- I < nrnt L CR 'ip X -2-- <^ET<fWUr -------- $PSB3 i c CR 4- I / c-i^. n p-5 C - I, kir. <. JAW !'(fik. I, t-TT-M 3 Ilf M 1< L ij-^ rX'-A B>-k6EMeMr FLCdJ^R^ b* '-1J MITCHGUL- ELE-M. 2 [6^ iP' fg^ V CR ga BH7 c-R 11^3 7.. _ P'5 R:^r.ER/.V' niiliJ..i>- inillT fn^ M.A_ I (O. CR Kmi WHHH f=HRST FL(
?(2K M V I^r T Ll&l CR tnsa FL<f7C^R I'/z: ci z^y? - I-- 3 r.! L J rii I L-J L... j f  1 i i i 5 c. (t'tJso C</b k? L 5r>. T 1 < - <- BA^eMG-MT Lz?weR LEVEL CR. 7W 2uW: -atiBL h .,k p CR '
,!,'ky7-4'<'' 0 -^i' I'.! 1' 'F-i) (lA-'O I SrTif k. BJ'^ fi A -p. :>R
51XA6.> <:Af6T(5WUM Eim ee VMet C^R. iggir 5^ of CR g >l ' 2A Fl'I? 7^_L_r\ JCC ?-. m !?r kir. J'S" J f .< I f/<. JUM 5rotO 6 Stv I M X V Gfe-iTo M B>A.6EM^Mr Fb676?R, MlTcH^UL. _E ^^6 ..%A k c CR CR >& 'C 5 s'" ?sldlj _ Fk*yEJ?. N Plk^T FL<^?(2f< P-. -(S inilL^  0^ M V (.X A\ r A ca n'SdX A-,' u r>-r Ll&l X /\\ CR. Kmi WWII n rL<^C?R inS2i B r'i 4^4 IV '''"'' 1 cf 1'7 JTT < - - \\VV <- _ STAAt Z' . J  BA5eMe.M T U?^A/ef^ LEVEL n'-^ .^rC-'R ^. 1W 2u -lp> - 7\V If-1'*' ,J < riK-' 1^ FS* -5 HbHI W1 ?k- >--i = .7, V  < I ^VA
(/<' *'>.c vk 1 J. C^R. pir F kir. L-CZR, ' -, lO Wfl? nnnn gR Sr I 7 _ fg^ I 7<> t y. M '1 M 5rc B>A.5EMeMr FL.<
6?r< 'jii- -. gg. fi^ ?.#'- hrst MITCHEUL. E.L.6M. 1^4/- I 44, c IS' T.U Z t I i I i I I L.- T  5 I 4 (K f WL (4^)'3 gzxf<^.z f ..>e <5 P P5H' il'-J- .. -1a^ ly"! P> gR. m 1:^ t x/3a0 ^4 V R  f^'n.3 C\T Rs^-ER. Cl^ - ri1l
il's 11111?? E !f>'" P.4! ^VA fi 4- M V ,'[  r w I f Lw'l f^-i ^.ZC OR > 7 9t Pc Lll A FL^7<2R ^4^414//4':^ Kmi WtWI .cry insa tj   (I .IV f - l!''<i>  ^ < ', H-'^ I ^ii p.P f >1 VfV, / 'Z! Sr- -t/ 7. < - I 1,1 I 1 . <-  BA^EMG.MT Utvzer level V\ \ ! t'A-rv' !,,',iA r-Ai ?-' .-1 . V- STAAt.-lr  y I  I-' (IgTZl WJ <>R. C-? hr- u . .i-> Vir. Wr-4z ? I'OOT' IV'l '>/s /v -AI-- w--'? < nnnn CR i I i 5PW 41 '.C M  5  W r?^4rc M X B>A.5EMeMr FL:67R., MlTCH^UL. VP (Z Si/-? JZ L-r\ \iC''^ C'^ fi fo ^^wnifBir NiuilllH
'z' |C'3 'T'<^r. C'
/r-3 I  R^.ER, VP2-, pirsT FL<5>d?K co. V CR. C-3 I TtjTEjH .>  I Illi c-<^}- - 5r a. CR. Iml T 5 iG^ Sv' J M V I / J r6 f iof I^Lo/::::f^7/yC7 A UBEAJ 71 70 [iie&j ^ECZ?ND FU<f?CR -rif^ SV-5 'V'i Ab r^Azw ' (A-sf 5' wKwniil z. CR inszi . ) SUMMIT Mirc-MLL J 6n?. T 1 < - <-  BA5eME.w r Utwer level 5TAAe. [igTil <^R. 0 wi < P-' E J 7 CH le Kir, u Pun. CR  5PtW C F l-<- M 2 I R^r.ER. M X CR. Iiz^zl G>A.5E:ME
Mr Fl-<7C7l< f=1RST MlTCHEUL. ELE-M, T.U ^3g| > a 8 I CR fg^ V jo: CR, -A E CR. nilEii's BnO" CR. B^> r M V LI5 7 Kmi WWH .CPs $EtSz?ND FL6C>fe t iTa. T I STKAt. <- - BA^eM&WT U^A/ER LEVEL CR EEZ^ < cAFEr(?Rll it < nntiiL. CR ?: J5Pbs.a X Ml lar. <. JAM H 2 OR. CM. Ursre M X BA.6eMBMr FLC6:7R, MITCHEL-L. ELE-M. OIL cf > T.l. 2 L 5 -I et OR. fg^ ET CR I S R^> r (Sa M V <, 5>^B4 CR. i. E A @r FL<f7^R Kmi wtwi Cf\ 1IJB71 HkST FL<2<2f< pbcJ/J OAT/o/J 5r,. T 1 < - -  BA^eM&M T U^A/ER LEVEL cn Ttc uW: nnnn. CR SIXAt < X t(6^1J c:-R. ET F VM ryt Si Kir, laSol C4AM $PSM u H a 2 eg. fg^ nd tro M X BA.6EMgMr FL.<?C7F< MiTcueui- E-LE-m, f.U CR. T~V I P1RST FL(?<?K M V CR F'l^ iiJ A CR 71 ja A LI5 T Cf\ Kmi WtWI ^EeSz^ND MEMORANDUM 4/24/95 TO: FROM
Re: Joe Johnson, Cromwell Joe Hilliard, Cromwell LRSD Masterplan - Structural Items Cromwell Project
95-022 Joe, I visited the schools listed below to follow up on the latest structural items reported to me fitjm the field surveys for the schools. The following is my report
Mitchell Elementary Site visit: Thursday, April 20 Bob McClains notes - cracks in brick at west side due to foundation settlement and expansion/coniraction Structural notes: The original main building was buHt around 1908 with additions added in 1912 and 1952. The building appears to be constructed with masonry bearing walls and wood floor and roof framing. The building was built without control joints in e masonry. Cracks have developed in several placed due to foundation settlement, expansion and contraction of the brick, and moisture infiltration. The wood in the attic has some water damage due to previous leaks. Structural concerns
The following 3 areas noted below and indicated on the attached sheet are e primary structural concerns: A B / The exterior brick has a vertical crack approximately 3/8 in width running from the top of the cafeteria window to the foundation. The masonry piers in the cafeteria between the windows have deflected to the south and have cracks up to 1/4 on the north side of the pier. These cracks are due to the expansion of the brick masonry. The brick wall south of the window has moved approximately 3/8 to the south. This is due to the lack of control joints in the masonry. The only concern at this time is the water intrusion which may damage the wait The crack should be sealed with a flexible sealant. In addition, the crack should be monitored for further movement. If sufficient additional movement occurs, the masonry piers between the windows could fail due to high compressive forces on one end of the pier. An approximately 1/4 horizontal crack has developed at the base of the wall. It appears that this crack is due to foundation settlement or expansion of the brick above. This crack is not a major concern at this time. It should be filled with sealant to avoid moisture intrusion. CROMWELL ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS ONE SPRING STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 (501) 372-2900c The decorative veneer on the south side of the downspout approximately 8 above the floor in the second floor classroom at the northwest comer appears to have shifted outward. The plaster on the inside of the wall has bowed out approximately 1 from the brick backup. It appears that this movement is related to possible water leaks from the downspout. The structural concern is that the decorative veneer and the piaster are no longer adequately attached to the building and could thus frdl and possibly injure children in the area. The downspout should be removed and repaired. The veneer checked and reanchored if required. The plaster in the classroom should be removed and replaced. Mitchell summary. The structural items noted with the exception of the decorative veneer on the exterior and the plaster on the Interior appear to not be urgent concerns, but the school district should plan repairs and minor maintenance work to those items so they wont become long term problems. Note that in addition to the problems noted above, the classroom on the second floor at the northwest comer has a strong odor of bird droppings. This could be a health hazard. I If A * I t SIAM. ij T.U mg BA^eMfeMT t CR U^A/BR LEVEL cR ?- tSHl WpM fA' >1^ Mipwi- < mu JS 1w nntin. e 11 lar. C J>M M M i-<-1. B>A.6EMEMr FLCC^R, MiTcHeUL- Ue.M. U CR. iggir a CR, r>nillUE' UII CR ri CR tS < cr Bl rwER Ro PIRST FL(^6K Rxj/J r>s<r?<^/J S' > > I 3E Mti ar Sv CR. ilSflI 7 ^EC^PNP FLf?C?R in Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 August 9, 1999 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright U.S. District Court 600 West Capitol, Suite 522 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: As you know, last month Joshua raised concerns about the maintenance of Mitchell Elementary School in the Little Rock School District. As a result, I dispatched one of my associates to visit the school and assess the status of its facility. Her comments, in the form of a memo, are attached. By copy of this letter and memo, I am informing Dr. Les Gamine and Mr. John Walker of our findings. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown cc: Les Carnine John Walker Memo To: Ann Brown From: Melissa Guldin Subject: Mitchell Date: July 28, 1999 Despite numerous calls back and forth to Doug Eatons office, I have not yet been able to talk to him, but I was finally able to visit Mitchell school at 8:00 a.m. on July 26, 1999. Overall, the school looked OK. The building was neat and clean. Below is a list of problems I noted at the school. Nearly all of these problems are water related.  Room 103 has serious water damage to the southwest comer of the room.  Room 204, which is directly above 103, also has water damage on its south wall.  The math room, which is in the addition attached to the main building, has water damaged walls and a terrible musty smell.  Serious water damage is evident in the stairwell at the north end of the building. A large section of plaster has fallen away, revealing the underlying brick. The surrounding area also shows signs of water damage: paint peeling back to bare wood, eroding plaster, and wood rot.  The library, which has had a history of leaks and damage, has had its ceiling repaired, but one wall has a large water stain.  The hall ceiling above the library office area is marred by a large metal plate that has been attached to cover, rather than correct, some ceiling problem.  While the hall paint is still serviceable, it is starting to look worn in spots.  Several classrooms had paint peeling from their ceilings.  Although the hall carpet is relatively new, the carpet at the top of the stairs was frayed and loose.  In the four-year-old classroom and some rooms in the K-1 building, the carpet is stained, worn, and unsightly.  The cafeteria ceiling has a large section where ceiling texture material had fallen off.Ann Page 2 July 28, 1999  The principal reported that the computer lab could not be used due to fluctuating electrical levels in the classroom. He was planning to send an immediate notice to the Facilities Services Department.  Many of the flourescent light fixtures lacked covers.  The plumbing problems associated with the bathrooms located on the second floor landing continue. The ceiling directly below the bathroom had lost all paint and the musty odor of urine filled the area around and below the bathroom. One of the custodians indicated that district workers had been trying to correct the problem, but he did not know if they had finished work.  It appeared that the second storey gutters were clogged and overflowing water was damaging the roof overhang and decorative brackets.  The covered walkway between the main building and the four-year-old classroom had a damaged roof. The roofing shingles were missing, and the exposed decking was rotted in some spots.  The exterior door to the storage area under the K-1 building had a broken lock and could not be secured.SEP 1 ^^39 Little Rock School District OitiCE O'f DESBGRESATOHMOmORIMG September 15, 1999 Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Brown: 1 am in receipt of your August 9, 1999, correspondence to Judge Wright regarding the maintenance of Mitchell School and the attachment from Ms. Guldin. I have also reviewed the August 11, 1999, Report on the LRSDs Preparations for Implementation of its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. In the section on Incentive Schools, pp. 17-99, you refer to the state of repair of Mitchell School. I concur with your assessment on p. 18 of the degree of cleanliness at Mitchell, but need for repair, and with your statements on page 19 where you conclude, As in many areas of school operations, the quantity and quality of help available to schools is restricted by the school districts allocation of its funds. Given the age of most of the incentive schools, facility maintenance and repair will be an ongoing issue for these schools. It is certainly true that Mitchell School, as one of the districts oldest, has several maintenance needs. The district has identified a number of costly repairs that need to be made on this building. One of those is to waterproof the exterior. While this would not solve all the water-related issues you raise in the monitoring report, it would eliminate several of them. The cost to waterproof this structure is beyond the reach of the budgeted repairs that are currently scheduled for Mitchell at this time. Following receipt of your correspondence, I met with Mr. Doug Eaton, Director of Facilities Services, and directed that repairs be made to the Mitchell building addressing the areas identified in Ms. Guldins observation. Mr. Eaton surveyed the building and has provided me with a report on eleven different types of repairs that will be made. These include: plaster repair
cleaning and repainting of several areas
carpet repairs
ceiling repair
replacement of light fixture covers
checking and repairing the electrical levels in the computer lab
cleaning gutters
trimming trees
shingle repair
air conditioner service and repair
and general maintenance. 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor September 15, 1999 Page 2 In addition to this discussion, I reviewed the work order history on the building for the period September 1998-August 1999. The data revealed that 132 work orders were scheduled and completed at Mitchell School during that period. A review of open work orders for the same period yielded 15, of those only three were for conditions cited in Ms. Guldins report. The District will continue to process routine work orders for repair and maintenance at the school during the 1999-2000 and 2000-01 school year. Mitchell School was originally constructed in 1908, with additions in 1912 and 1952. It was renovated in 1979. In the 3DI study conducted in 1995, comments about the structure are as follows: This fine old structure is an example of a building that has outlived its useful life as a school and should be considered for restoration and alternate use. Surveyors found this school to be so far below acceptable standards that it was ranked last, 35* out of the 35 elementary schools surveyed. Needed renovations and repair include substantial replacements of every building system, which when completed would still render the building inadequate for an elementary school of the 90s. ... Based on the age and condition of the facility, closure and alternate use of the facility is suggested. The Little Rock School District has begun the work to create a new school building for the children and families of the Mitchell School attendance zone with the construction of the Stephens school. The district is committed to maintain the existing Mitchell building to a standard of maintenance and repair that is equitable to that of other buildings in the district. During the period of time that the Mitchell School continues to operate, pending the opening of the Stephens School, the Little Rock School District will honor its commitment to equitably repair and maintain the building. Following the opening of the Stephens School, the district will exercise its best efforts to find a community or educational use for the building. The District is in the process of working with groups in the Mitchell School community to determine an acceptable alternate use for the building following the opening of the Stephens School. Sincerely, Victor Anderson Associate Superintendent, Operations c: Leslie V. Gamine Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Brady Gadberry Doug EatonTuesttav, Scpieiiiotr 28, i>99 RECEIVED To
Superintendent Leslie Caminc From
Mable Sealer Park Street Neighborhood .Issociaticn Dear Sunenntendent (amine. OCT 4 1999 OffiCEOr DESEGREGATIOM MONITORING Please fnd enclosed .i copy of the letter sent to Attorney John Wallccr regarumg his resnonsiminies lo the Afro-Ameruan Commumties, LRSD ano to me The purpose of sending you this couy is to make die District aware of the fact-s in requesting immediate attention to e fallowing cancams. This letter that E addressed to John Walker mentions that the 1RSB suspends the agreemt made wiih "..hn V/aiker to do nliaiever the School Huard is pay ing him io do. As you wm note in the letter to 'Walker, this request E due to c fact that hE sen-iccs has The purpose presenieri no oeneiiis lo me Airo-Amencan Comniuiuiy. Since it appears that the ilfro-American Community is without proper legal represenlaiiun, it has become necessary for parents in me community la bruig m me DEtricts and the Courts attention of our concerns of possible non-compliances bj represenuiiun, the District in the LRSD and Joshua Court Agreement. Since we do not posses the legal knowledge in the legal procedures in bringin
forth this matter, we must rely solely on the layperson understanding of the , agreement that states written notiHcation must first be submitted to the DEtnct s Superintendent or his designee. 1 his letter addressed to you is for this intention. As composer of this letter, I shall submit a following letter outlining the reasons for the concern of possible non-compliances by the Distnet However the letter will follow only after the DEtrict recognize thE association hi our community. Your staff has reftiscd to personally address thE association, lids is beyond our rea.saning since we are the neighborhood of parents and students that this agreement directly and personally affects. "We feel that all matters coaccrahig the closing of Mitchell Academy should be first directly to the Park St Nei^borhood and Central High Neighborhood Associations. Not only because our neigliborhood school, xVliihced  ........... . L-----=a us the sohiMoa to regaining E the heart of our community, but this school has neiohborhood mvolvement, neighborhood concern, and neighborhood pride. MiuheU E ihe only school in tlie LRSD where the oeiglihors are the higiiesl pay oig property taxes in the Afro-American Communities. Our families have owned these small mansion homes for over twenty-five years, and under no circumstances are wi property owners going to agree to die plan of closmg ^LlcIleli as an Cxcmcnlarj school in which the results would be devastating to our community's closeness and we XixvOo, ,E Kthe tremendous loss of property vaiue. No further correspondence will be issued until a reply from the District's agreeing to communicate directly with the Park Street Neigiiborhoud Association. In case you are unaware, the 1999-2000 rezoning has affected only our neighborhood thus far. Last year, students north of Wright Ave., were zoned to Mitchell, (his year we are zoned to King but there are students right next door are zoned to .Mitchell. 1 ast year our children could walk to school, and the majority were involved in after school activites. One of tiiose activities was a program I sponsored wiiii a grant from the city. 1 his year our children have no transportation to school. I here is no way lor Them to walk. Even thougit die mileage is approxiaiely one and a iiah mile, they would have to cross five major streets. I have had to almost beg Laidlaw to response, no hick even after suomitting many safeiv form requests from the parents, (fur nniy solution is to form cur pools and those who do not cutch a ride don't go to school Chci ic attendance at Kin" of this nei"hborhond. But what has hurt the students the nwst is to' to the after school invoivemenu These students can not participate in after school actitities because they would not have a way home. This leaves our children with too much idle time after school and the results are becoming very destructive. 1 hasc personally voiced these concerns ss^th almost all of your department neads. h ram Sadie Mitchell when she was quoted in the Democrat last year of me certain closing of Mitchell due (o low turnouts of parents w hen she first infuriued tlie community of the plan to close our school, to my lastest September 1999 letter to .1. Babus of our committment to stop this plan, and Sue Ellen Vance by informing her of the procedure we parents of Mitchells students considered the respectful method in giving notice of meeting to discuss the closing. I suggested to her to use the same melliod used by (lie District in getting information about (lie district to the parents. Milling the notices of meetings to discuss the closing. This is more important to us than the District's newletters. I he method that she was using by sending flyers home with the students, may or may not get in cur bands. Some students used tlicm tu make paper airplanes, and thats what they should have done with them. However one consistent behavior tiiat your staff never deviated from and that was giving different versions and explanations of why the District plan on closing MitcheU. None of the explanations were acceptable. 1 have probably spoken with all of your dcsigecs and I do not wish to be further patronized with yet another personal explanation of the necessity to close Mitchell, tlicrefore T trust you will personally respond to (Ids letter by first acknowledging this neighborhood. We are at a disadvantage in following the legal requirements in addressing possibly non-compliances, therefore we will submit a letter to Judge Webber to approve our request to employ other counsel Wallccr may be able to convince the District and the Board of his labor in satisfying his salary, but it is much to lute for Iiim to even attempt to uuult our imelligencc with a hope of any reason for him to remain the Afro-American legal counsel I have sent copies of the court agreement to several outionully known civil rights attorneys around the country They all seem to believe that our best interest is not included in this ai>reenietii and they have offered their assistance in any way possible. Regardless of any decEioos recently made about our school closing, I lurst I will hear from you at your earliest convenience. I can be reached at 1815 S. Park, Little Kock, Arkansas 72202,376-1733. cc, .luda^Vebber LRSB Members RECEIVED OCT 1999 4 Attorney John Walker 1723 S. Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas QrriG 2F Dear Juiu Waiker, 7 here are now two issues that are still not resolved due to your unwillingness to respond to them in a honorable manner. The first issue you refused to address is the matter of my financial .physical and business losses in the personal injury cases you claimed representation for, yet refused to service. As 1 was preparing to file a court claim of these losses, I became aware of another matter more scroius than my personal losses where once again you claimed representation yet refused to service. 1 hi.s of course is the mailer of LRSD and die Afro-American Neigiiborhuod. As you are well aware of, the LKSD is planning on closing Michell Academv. I conuc'ted you regarding tliis approximately one year ago and your advice to me was to write a letter to Judge Webber objecting to this plan and reasons. After beginning composing this letter, 1 decided not to continue becau.se 1 tell tn is was vour responsibility since you arc the one who has received an exuberant amount of legal fees for it However, I began to correspond with several District's department heads to become informed of the facts. These people included Sadie Alitchell, Julius Babbs, Sue Ellen Vance, and Lillian SculL Even though I had several conversations with these people, I have yet to receive any results. Therefore I decided to wait until this year to see if the District was going to continue with this plan. At the beginning of the year's school year, the District is still planning on closing Mitchell as an elementary school So I began stepping up my efforts to prevent this. 'Ihese efforts now include meetings with neighbors in my community. I have constantly informed the District's of the existance of Park St Neighborhood dissociation where I am the spokesperson, designated to perform this task by over 100 signatures of parents in my community. Still we are yet to be recognized. In fruslratioo, I contacted Melissa Goulden of tlie office of desegregation monitoring. She immediately sent me a copy of the court agreement behveen the District and Joshua, ( Afro-American Community). This is the agreement that you approved for the commiuuty. After examining it, I noticed a section in it that required tire District to make available, procedures to communicate with the Afro-American Communities. Believing the District had not, I contacted Kaiherine Miicheii, uur school board representative. She informed me that the LRS3 has a court order to pay you to service the community in protecting our rights and for the parties to adhere to the agreement. I tlien contacted aH different groups opposing lire closing of 5ktchcll, aslving if you had been in contact with them. They all said no, including John Lewellen's grouo. I asked Mrs. Goulden if this was a court order for the District to pay you, she said no. This Ls an agreement made between you and the School Board. I then contacted Mr. Bradley, the school board president. He agreed with Mrs. (Tilden. Your S40,9CO.OO salary had been issued io you since die a^reeuient was signed and still had some time to go on it Juhn Wadicr, after contacting many residents in the Afro-A merimn Communities, inchiding the Wright Ave Neighborhood Ass., Central High Neighborhood Ass. and Mitchell's PTA, ail have staled that thev have never had your involvement, ackaowkdgcmcnt, assistances, or attendance ny meeting to  intorm them of the District's plans, ^or any knowledgement that vou are receiving this lee tu help us. All of tiiese groups including die Park St. Neigliboriiood Ass. iiave personal expenses for supplies used in providing information to the Afro-American l.ornmunilies. 1 sent you a letter of my personal SJud.urt expenses where 1 requested *o be reimbursed. Y ou ignored me and I went to Judge Vaughts small claims court The Court suggested a mediator contact you before I file my complaint This oiediaiur did and was mid by you that you were not interested in discussing this with me or him. You refuse to meet, discuss, explain or have any business involvement with me. Smcc I am the Park St Neighborhood Ass. representative in opposing the LRSD community, this refusal not only hurts me as a oareni with a second grader in the District, but hurts all parents whom I speak for. Because of (his, I have no other alternative but to notify the Superintendent of LRSD, School Board Members, Judge W ebber and her office, and ail groups in my community, to began a formal investigation into this matter, including suspending your contract until you can provide proof of your service to the commimtiy after the agreement was signed. Also because (he money used to pay your salary ni (his arrangement is public funds money, I feel it is my responsibility to my community and my state that the Attorney <eneral's Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation also be requested to began an investigation into this matter. Sil Mabl^Bealcr cc. Supertendent of LRSD School Board Members Judge Webber Attorney General Office FBIreceived TO: Superintendent Carine: Melissa Gouldcn: Dr. Vic Anderson: OCT 4 1999 QFHCEOf From: Mable Bcalcr Park Street Neighborhood Association: .-cren m Um ,eree the iCS. the was done so with ic^sh^a ^ant for ^^re foUowed. Since consents ,f fte majority .f Wiohh^ "Tt*""  pnkesnersnn for the Park Street Association. Tins organization had to be formed because of the Districts reiuctants to recognize our existance. We iac XrSTn'"  T*' rea whose chtldt^en to Xing Magnet for the i999-^o, m^tZ, I?""Shbors are not being personally informed p trying to close our neighborhood school It i Babbs, do we receive are the parents and propertj were zoned out of the 1999-2000 school year. of the District's . , . ----------is only by my insLstins to Mr regarding this matterani even then, only a copy of the letter addressed to Mrs TyleHs^J^to me At rT  with a child .udh,8 Jnuhcil, mrd iL.. udl "'' address her about our children and not us. 's coniiiiue to contact AtL Walker about the I have ^rsonally tried numerous times to contact AtL Walker about th/. oZ:&Th.*s:::T^  s^.,her ____1*** personally contacted all persons that Mr. Babbs informed regarding AEthchefl and all Alithchefl and aU states that Att Walker has never Sin Att Walker has not performed this responsibility that Is required in biBing the District for this service, this action. A action rt^is'on^e community has agreed to aUow me to take up Airo-^Vmcican Community and the LRSD. Since yive hn^e no information to (lie compliances of the LRSD to the agreement, we believe there may be a possibility th.a^hS-v1
m n complamce with the following sections. If prove of these sections are in :ct IS m ncn-1. 2.1. Please identify the person retained to work with the LRSD in Lhc development of the programs. Also please state the process used bv the Afro- AniPru'un fr> *.inrkM>7.<v __ American to approve tliis persuiL 2. 2.3. Please identify the policies to desegrate all schools in the district and Communities. Also please state r easons why u District plans on erratrng not only a seg-egnted school in the Afro-.American CoDimumty but a school that will create a dangerous leaniing enviornment reasons why the for Afro-zVmerican students. 3. 2.^.3 Piease identify the meliiod of approval by Uie Afro-American t.ommunity which alowcd the Distrii
c' t to C-ttend the dc-odUnc of the agreement in putting in place the "ombudsman" from the 1997-98 school  J'"- "< available for our use until the 1999-2WOb school year.  par:
c:p.:-on b, Afncan-Amencan m eTtranimcular activities. In the Park Neighborhood ourelemenury students urc prevented from participating in after school  extracumeuJar activities. 2I huge change from last year. 5. 2.6.3. riease identity the program to provide transportation for ut pruviue transporuiUon for our elementeiy students for after school Because there is no transportation available for our elementary students, U,ev cannot participate in these activities. 2.8. Plea^ identify the programs to promote and encourage parents and  Afro-American .Ncishborhoods in tht operation of the I .K I Maaw _ J....__A.? _ . * LRSD and our children education. 7. 2.9.1. Please identify this section documentations approval to the Court with our J 2.12.1. PlMse identify this traning program in the Afro-American Community that will reduce prejudice and cultural sensitivity. '*"^1 programs that ensure LRSD substantial^ complies with Its obligations under this revised plan. This program should list reimbursements for personal funds used to pay expenses in informing the Afro-Amencan Communities of this condition of compliances of the LRSD. 10. 2.13.1. 1 he documentation of the approval from the superintendent of InPti* rnnvnlioM.ww * these compliances. 11 3.1.3. Please identify the entire plans and procedures of this section. 12. 3.2.3. Please identify the Magnet elementary schools in the majorityWhite Communilies. 13. 3.6. Please identify the exact reason for the District's plan for dosing Mitchell Academy. Our neighborhood has been advised it is due to the poor maintenance. Also identify what the "same general area is to the District". Closing our neighbortiood school will foixc our children to attend tlic closest available school which will be almost 3 miles away from our neighborhood. To us, this new school is not being built in the same general area. 14. 3.7 Please identify the District's modification standard that is already occuring with the approval of the Afro-Anicrican and the procedure in receiving this approval. 15. 3.8. Please identify why the District's plans arc to only to provide racially balance schools in the Afro-American community and not the White cum in unity. 16, 3.9. Please identify this promotion of the I .RSD in desegregating housing patterns. 17. 4.6. Please identify the plan that allows a minority students in the Pulaski County District to tal%c the seat of a minority students at a neighborhood Magnet School. 18. 5.2. letter L. Please identify' the plans allowing our students in the Afro- American communities to exhibit their academic training in a public setting. 19. 5.5. Please identify the remaining and refocusing of flte incentive schools. All incentives schools are located in the Afro-American communities. 20. 5.7. Please identify the Districts linkage system to the Afro-American parents and communities. The only one in operation that is of any benefit to us is the one that I have provided. 21. Please identify the Distict's plans for the entire Section 6. 22. To the office of ODM, please identify the procedures the Afro-^Vtnerican can use to employ the services of another legal representation to monitor the District's compliances in this agreement 23. To the office of ODM, please submit the higher court decision on the fairness of this agreement According to the agreement, the District has fifteen (15) days to respond to the opposing party who submits a non-complaincc. This is our written notice and therefore please respond to the Park Street Neighborhood in care of, .Mable Bealcr,1815 S. Park, Little Rock, Arkansas 72202, Thank You. cc. Wrihr Ave. Neighborhood Ass. Ccnirai Nei^iboriiuud Ass. .MtchcU 1^'A Board Members of the LRSD Judge Webber 2. Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: October 7, 1999 To: Vic Anderson From: Ann Brown^'^j^^y__ Re: Maintenance of Mitchell School Thanks for your letter of September 15, 1999 about the maintenance of Mitchell elementary. It was good of you to write, and I apologize for not having acknowledged your correspondence until now. As youll see by the attachments, were continuing to follow-up on conditions at Mitchell. We understand the difficulties and expenses inherent in keeping this old building up and running so that it can effectively serve those who use it. Nevertheless, some of the problems we still see can be solved without huge expenditures and need immediate attention. For example, having to dodge bats in the building and inhale the foul odor of their excrement and dead bodies would drive anyone to distraction. I particularly worry because bats are potential carriers of rabies, so rousting them from Mitchell is likely an ounce of prevention that could be worth an untold amount of cure. I don t have to tell you that parents of Mitchell students and neighborhood residents have serious concerns about the future of the building that many see as not only a symbol, but also a citadel for a multitude of reasons. Earning and keeping the trust of those folks is a tough job, but one I hope the district takes seriously. I understand a forum for the neighborhood is the offing, which is a good thing to do. But if Mitchell isnt adequately maintained for the use of its students, staff, and parents, no amount of words or promises will speak louder than actionor lack of it.Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Octobers, 1999 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright U.S. District Court 600 West Capitol, Suite 522 Little Rock, AR 7220 Dear Judge Wright: In the course of monitoring the condition of school facilities, we have continued to follow up on the maintenance of Mitchell Elementary School in the LRSD. As youre aware, the issue of this schools upkeep has been of particular concern to Joshua and to Mitchells patrons. Since our July 1999 visit to Mitchell, when we listed the observations we made at that time and shared them with you. Les Carnine, and John Walker, we have made two return trips to the school, once on September 2 and again on October 7. Attached is a copy of the observations we made on those two occasions. Also attached is a letter to me from Dr. Vic Anderson, who is the LRSD associate superintendent responsible for facilities upkeep. As you can see, this mid-September letter reiterates the districts commitment to equitably repair and maintain Mitchell while it continues to operate, pending the opening of Stephens School, which is presently scheduled for November 2000 at the earliest. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown Enc. cc: Les Carnine Vic Anderson John WalkerMemo To: Ann Brown From: Melissa Guldin Subject: Follow-up Visit to Mitchell Date: October 7, 1999 Yesterday I stopped by Mitchell to see whether or not any improvements or repairs had been made since we last visited the school in early September. Very few of the areas noted as needing attention had received any. One of the most serious problems, the bat infestation, had not been dealt with, and staff members reported seeing bats inside the building. Even simple items, such as removal of the fallen tree limb, had not been attended to. Workers had patched the damaged plaster wall in the stairwell, and the principal said that painters were coming to repaint the wall, which was still very unsightly. The odor found in the main hall had lessened, but the principal indicated that is had been much worse earlier in the week when some plumbing backed up. During our conversation, the principal told me that the district was hosting a meeting at the school on October 26 to discuss both Vlitchell and the new Stephens Elementary. I am planning to attend the meeting, which is scheduled for 6:45 p.m..ODM Observations Mitchell Elementary School September 2,1999 We were pleased to note that: The campus was free of litter, and district workers were repairing a damaged section of the chain link fence that borders Roosevelt Road. An easel in the foyer displayed a group portrait of the school staff. Attractive bulletin boards, flags, and banners brightened the entryway. Floors were clean, waxed, and shiny, and the carpeting throughout the.building was generally clean and in good condition. The principal indicated that the director, as well as workers from the LRSD Facility Services Department, had been to the school to evaluate the buildings problems. According to the principal, new covers were being ordered for the flourescent light fixtures. Students evacuated the building in an orderly fashion during a fire drill. The media center was well lit and attractively decorated with various book displays. A single computer station provided access to the Internet for staff or student research. A bulletin board outside the cafeteria recognized all student birthdays for the month of August. We also noted some areas needing attention: No flags were flying from the school flagpole. A very strong, unpleasant odor permeated the area where an addition adjoined the original structure. The principal said that district workers had called an exterminator to deal with an infestation of bats in the attic, which presumably was causing the strong smell. The exterminator was expected to eliminate the bat population and remove any carcases. Overflowing water, apparently from clogged gutters, had damaged the roof overhang and decorative brackets. The covered walkway between the main building and the four-year-old classroom had a damaged roof. The roofing shingles were missing, and the exposed decking was rotten in some spots. A large tree limb had fallen to the ground near the K-1 building. The air conditioning in a portion of the building was not working
only four of six upstairs rooms were cooled. Paint was peeling from the ceilings in passageways throughout the building, and several classrooms had paint peeling from their ceilings. Room 103 had serious water damage to the southwest comer of the room. Room 204, which is directly above 103, had water damage on its south wall. The math room, which is in the addition attached to the main building, had water damaged walls. Pronounced water damage was evident in the stairwell at the north end of the building. A large section of plaster had fallen away, revealing the underlying brick. The surrounding area also showed signs of water damage: paint peeling back to bare wood, eroding plaster, and wood rot.Mitchell Elementary School Page 2 The hall carpet at the top of the stairs was frayed and loose. In the four-year-old classroom and some rooms in the K-1 building, the carpet was stained, worn, and unsightly. The hall paint was worn in spots. The hall ceiling above the library office area was marred by a large metal plate that had been attached to cover, rather than correct, some ceiling problems. The media center, though clean and attractive, was extremely small and crowded. Carpet near the windows was tom and the ceiling showed residual stains from leaks. The cafeteria floor near the waste barrels was wet with milk from breakfast. The textured ceiling in the cafeteria was in a deplorable state with areas where the textured material was entirely missing and others where the material hung perilously over the tables. The girls restroom on the second floor landing lacked soap, was not accessible to the handicapped, had one sink with very low water pressure, and the toilet paper rolls were simply propped up rather than being placed on the roller. The boys restroom on the second floor landing still had an odor problem, which has been chronic.as" 'KCBfig SEP 1 O(tiC 0i dsegoh monitoring Little Rock School District September 15, 1999 Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitorin
201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, .AR 72201 Dear Ms. Brown: I am in receipt of your August 9, 1999, correspondence to Judge Wnght regarding the maintenance of Mitchell School and the attachment from Ms. Guldin. I have also reviewed the August 11, 1999, Report on the LRSDs Preparations for Implementation of its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. In the section Incentive Schools, pp. 17-99, you refer to the state of repair of Mitchell on incentive icnoois, pp. i/-??, vuu iwu uu  School. I concur with your assessment on p. 18 of the degree of cleanliness at Mitchell, but need for repair, and with your statements on page 19 where you conclude, As in many areas of school operations, the quantity and quali^ of help available to schools is restricted by the school districts allocation of its funds. Given the aae of most of the incentive schools, facility maintenance and repair will be an ongoing issue for these schools. It is certainly true that Mitchell School, as one~of the districts oldest, has several maintenance needs. The district has identified a number of costly repairs that need to be made on this building. One of those is to waterproof the exterior. While this would not solve all the water-related issues you raise in the monitoring report, it would eliminate several of them. The cost to waterproof this structure is beyond the reach of the budgeted repairs that are currently scheduled for Mitchell at this time. Following receipt of your correspondence, I met with Mr. Doug Eaton, Director of Facilities Services, and directed that repairs be made to the Mitchell buildin,r addressing the areas identifred in Ms. Guidins observation. Mr. Eaton surveyed the building and has provided me with a report on eleven different types of repairs that will be made. These include: plaster repair
cleaning and repainting of several areas
carpet repairs
ceiling repair
replacement of light fixture covers
checking and repairing the electrical levels in the computer lab
cleaning gutters
trimming trees
shingle repair
air conditioner service and repair
and general maintenance. Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor September 15, 1999 Page 2 o In addition to this discussion, I reviewed the work order history on the building for the period September 1998-August 1999. The data revealed that 132 work orders were scheduled and completed at Mitchell School during that period. A review of open work orders for the same period yielded 15, of those only three were for conditions cited in Ms. Guldins report. The District will continue to process routine work orders for repair and maintenance at the school during the 1999-2000 and 2000-01 school year. Mitchell School was originally constructed in 1908, with additions in 1912 and 1952. It was renovated in 1979. In the 3DI smdy conducted in 1995, comments about the strucmre are as follows
This fine old structure is an example of a building that has outlived its useful life as a school and should be considered for restoration and alternate use. Surveyors found this school to be so far below acceptable standards that it was ranked last, 35* out of the 35 elementary schools surveyed. Needed renovations and repair include substantial replacements of every building system, which when completed would still render the building inadequate for an elementary school of the 90s. .. Based on the aae and condition of the facility', closure and alternate use of the facility is suggested. The Little Rock School District has begun the work to create a new school building for the children and families of the Mitchell School attendance zone with the construction of the Stephens school. The district is committed to maintain the existing Mitchell building to a standard of maintenance and repair that is equitable to that of other buildings in the district. During the period of time that the Mitchell School continues to operate, pending the opening of the Stephens School, the Little Rock School District will honor its commitment to equitably repair and maintain the building. Following the opening of the Stephens School, the district will exercise its best efforts to find a community or educational use for the building. The District is in the process of working with groups in the Mitchell School community to determine an acceptable alternate use for the building following the opening of the Stephens School. Sincerely, Victor Anderson Associate Superintendent, Operations c: Leslie V. Carnine Junious Babbs Sadie Mitchell Brady Gadberry Doug Eaton5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 545 P02 DEC 07 99 17:51 I I I H h JOHN W, WALKER RALPH Washington MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER, JR. John w. Walker, P.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Littu Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (5O1) 374-3758 Fax (501) 374-4187 1 I Via Facsimile - 324-2146 December 7, 1999 I Dr. Leslie Gamine Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 I J Dear Dr. Gamine: On November 10, 1999, a copy of the attached letter to Ms. Anri Brown was faxed to your office. I understand that Ms. Brown has been out of her office due to personal circumstances, however, I have not heard from you. I In order that there will be no misunderstanding regarding our intentions, this is to once again advise you that the action that is being contemplated by the District with respect to MitcheU school, we believe, is a violation of the revised plan. In accordance with page 21 of the revised plan, please be advised of the foUowing in response to items a through e: I a) Sections 2.2
2,8
2.9
2.10
2.12
2.13.2
3.1.2
3.6
3.7
5,4
5.5
and 5.7. Joshua hereby reserves the right to supplement these provisions
b) students of Mitchell school, students who live in the Mitchell attendance zone but have been assigned to schools other than Mitchell based upon a student registration form and students in the MitcheU school attendance zone and surrounding zone. Joshua hereby reserves the right to supplement the students involved
I c) Dr. Leslie Gamine, Doug Eaton, Dr. Victor Anderson, Junious Babbs, Sadie Mitchell, Bobby Jones, Mike Martello, Julie Wiedower, and d) please refer to attached information sheets released by the District dated November 8, 1999 and November 22, 1999 respectively, the information submitted by the District to parents of Mitchell school regarding the new Stephens school and the presentations by Little Rock School District officials at the Mitchell/Stephens on October 26,1999
and I I e) see response to item d. Joshua reserves the right to submit additional k5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 545 P03 DEC 07 99 17:51 documentation as it is received. Sincerelj^? 'Joim W Walker <7 JWW
js Attachments cc
Ms. Ann Brown Mr. Chris Heller Mr. Junious Babbs Ms. Sadie Mitchell Dr, Victor Anderson 1 t t 5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 545 P04 DEC 07 99 17:52 ... W, TALKER, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, .Arkansas 72206 Telepkcne (501) 374-3758 Fax (501) 374-4187 JOHN W W.^LKEH Ralph Washington MASK 3URNETTE AUSTIN PORTER, JR. Via Facsimile  371-0100 November 10. 1999 Ms. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 LirJe Rock, Ar 72201 Dear NIs. Brown
The attached correspondence, we believe, reflects the District's bad feith with respect to neighborhood schools. Schools in black neighborhoods are not to be closed under the revised plan. This demonstrates the Districts bad faith. I request that you urgently bring this matter to the attention of the court with a notation that we believe that this is a plan violation. I also respectfully request that your office intervene and schedule a meeting with the relevant parties from e school district. I would like for the matter to be dealt with so that it can be brought to the attention of the court before the so-called survey is undertaken by the District. There is a parent meeting at 6:00 p.m. this evening in the boardroom. I also request that you or someone from your staff be present at this meeting. Sincerely, 1 JohnW. Walker JWW-.js Attachment - Letter to NCtchell School Parents dated November 8, 1999 cc
Mr. Chris Heller Dr. Les Camine Ms. Sadie Mitchell Mr. Junious Babbs Mr. Gus Taylor I 5013744137 WALKER LAW FIRM 545 P09 DEC 07 99 13:10 URIGHT five fiLS?T CTR. Fax:L-501-37424l5 Nev LO '99 9:33 P.OoxS final draft final draft FINAL draft MITCHELL SCHOOL IH FORMATION SHEET 11/08/99 I 1. 3. 4, 6. I LRSD plans to continue to operate Mitchell as an elementary school as long Mitchell attracts enough students to make it feasible to maintain Itself. as It will require a minimum of one class (18 students) per grade level fa order for LRSD to continue to operate Mitchell as an elementary school Students will enroll for the 2000'2001 school year during the regular LRSD enrollment period, beginning on January 24 and ending on February 4'. Students who reside in the Mitchell school attendance zone will be provided a choice to remain at Mitchell, attend the new Stephens Elementary or seek other school options available to LRSD students. LRSD will maintain an educational presence within the Mitchell community. If there is not sufficient enrollment to justify continuing its operation as an elementary school, the district plans to expand the Pre-K program. Other plans for the building include a parent center, an archive for the history of Mitchell School, and LRSD administrative offices.  , LRSD will provide the maintenance and upkeep necessary to preserve the comparable physical equality of this building to other school buildings of the District, whether or not the Mitchell building is used as an elementary school or for the alternative purposes described above. t I k I 01/10/2000 13:19 501-324-2281 LRSD SRO PAGE 02 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Junious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent Phone
(501)324-2272 ---------- E-Mail: ichabbs@stuasn.lrsd.kl2.ar January 7, 2000 Dear Parent: 0^ 2000-2001 class space for this fall! Your child is scheduled to attend Mitchell Elementary School. A choice is available for him/her to enroll at Stephens Elementary. If you wish to take advantage of this option, you must complete and return the attached card. Please note that this is not a survey! Your response will be considered reserve your childs space at the selected school this fall. a commitmeiit and will If your adless is outside the one-mile walk zone, bus sendee will be provided. Keep in mind ho wever, that this assignment status is tied to your current address. If you move to a new address, your child wUl be reassigned to a school based on the new address. Hease find school mformation attached to assist you with questions that you may have. Information regarding other choice options has also been included.  CHECK US OUT-January 18* and 19*'-9.00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.  OPEN HOUSE-January 10* -6:30 p.m. -8:30 p.ra.  2000-2001 REGISTRAUON - January 24* - February 4 I th If y ou have a child who will be starting school this year, please enroll during the registration n^rtnn lanttanF '/A a -i.  . .. . _ .  penod, January 24 - February 4, at the Student Registration Office, 501 Sherman. utuj, - rc^uiuaiy ar me siuaent Kegistration Office, 501 Sherman. Also if your address is listed incorrectly, contact your school immediately with proof of address to update this iniormation. Please complete the enclosed card and return it by January 19* If you do not return the card, t*fL**?^* n Elementary School. If you have questior^, Sa o Registration Office at 324-2272 or the Parent Recruiters at 324-2147 or 324-2438 for assistance. Thank you for aUowing us to serve your familys educational needs next year. Sincerely, labbs01/10/2000 13:19 501-324-2281 LRSD SRO PAGE 03 Mitchell Creative Dramatic Academy 2410 Battery Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Creative Dramatics encourages self-expression through writing, speaking, performances and other student presentations. Activities enhance learning by personalizing the dramatic experiences. Students develop a respect toward all individuals and an appreciation for their uniqueness. Creative Dramatics Instruction  Puppetry, movement and music  Costuming and makeup  Story adaptation  Improvisations  Creative scene work  Oral reading and story telling  Designing sets and backdrop paintmg MITCHELL BRAGS ABOUT:  Small Classes  Pre-K Class  Success for all Reading Program  Before and After school CARE  Voyager Expanded Learning Program  Full-time Counselor and Nurse  Gifted and Talented Program  Computers in each Classroom  Parent Center-provides materials for parenting skills  Full-time Math, and Reading Specialist  Full-time PE, Music, and Art teachers  Student Uniforms  Incentive Scholarships For Information Contact: Darian Smith, Principal Essie Middleton, Parent Recruiter Becky Rather, Parent Recruiter 324-2415 324-2438 324-2417 Thursday. June 22. 2000 4 04 PM To Ms Ann Brown From: Dr George T Blevins, Jr, 374-8183 Page 2 of 4 P. 0- (AR 72206 (P) SD1 (F) 501 Ha*. Wm. June 22, 2000 Dr. Leslie Carnine, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock. .AR 72201 Dear Dr. Carnine. It is our belief that very shortly, national attention w ill be focused on Mitchell School due to its historical significance. I have been authorized to convey the concerns of parents and community members w ith regard to .Mitchell Elementary School, one of the anchors of our community, such that the national exposure will be as positive as possible. -As you are aware, the Wright .Avenue Neighborhood .Association. Save Our School Committee worked with Little Rock School District .Administrators and Board of Directors to save .Mitchell from closing. In view of recent events, the decision wa.s made that the Save Our School Committee would continue to meet on a regular basis. We believe the district must be careful to ensure that no decisions are made that will undercut or eliminate enrichment activities that are so important for the enhancement of academic achievement. The effort to maintain Mitchell as a viable school hinged on the parents, of students attending Mitchell School, demonstrating a desire to keep the school open by enrolling our students there. We overwhelmingly demonstrated that we did want to keep Mitchell Elementar\ as a functional part of our community'. One of the primaiy pieces of literature used to convey to parents the positive environment of Mitchell Elementary is attached. This literature, produced by the Little Rock School District, was taken as a promise of what was to be offered should the school remain open. We now find that a number of the items on the brag list have been eliminated. .Additionally, the positions of the Creative Dramatics Specialist and the PE teacher have also been eliminated, without offering these verr experienced teachers other options for remaining at .Ahtchell School. We believe that without a Creative Dramatics Specialist. it will be virtually impossible to successfully maintain the theme. The other teachers are already overloaded and just do not have the time to incorporate creative dramatics into their teaching to antwhere near the extent that a Creative Dramatics Specialist can. We believe that it is unfair to both teachers and studcnt.s to ask them to do so.Thureday. June 22. 2000 4 04 PM To Ms Ann Brown From Dr George T Blevins Jr. 374-8183 Page 3 of 4 Prior to the millage election, the level of mistrust parents had for the school district had begun to decrease, probably reaching its lowest levels in many years. During that lime, the District promised time and time again that Mitchell would receive additional resources which would be used to enhance the educational experience of our children over and above any previously allocated. Since the passage of the millage, there has been no further mention of these resources. The press conference held at Mitchell to get the message out and gamer support for the millage increase gave Mitchell parents and the community an increased level of confidence and trust in the school district. .A number of pa rents have voiced the sentiment that perhap.s the District only wanted our support during the millage election and that there are still those who wish and will attempt to close Mitchell Elementary , we hope that this is not the case. The occurrences outlined above appear to be broken promises, resurrecting the issue of mistrust by parents and community members who believe that they may have been deceived again. This mistrust is not only at Mitchell Elementary School, but is district wide. It is our understanding that the Little Rock School District desires to increase parental involvement in the educational process. In particular, the Creative Dramatics Specialist, Mrs. Dade, has been the single most important individual able to get parents involved at Mitchell School. This was exhibited by the poor attendance (3 parents) at the PT.A meeting that she was not asked to participate in organizing. This was supposed to have been the meeting at which officers were elected. For years. Mrs. Dade has been the adhesive, which held the Mitchell School together, making it more than just a school, but also a community. Her vast talents and experiences can make an immeasurable contribution to the recovery of our school. In her absence, this will be very difficult. Moreover. Mrs. Dade's service on the Save Our School Committee was instrumental in carrying forth its efforts. The question has also arisen as to whether this might be retribution for her service on this committee. We are also concerned about plans to replace the PE teacher Mr. Gonterman. who has also been at Mitchell for a number of years, with an uncertified individual. AVill this have any impact on accreditation considering the recent legislative mandate requiring certified teachers? In addition, one of the primary determining factors for enhancing student achievement is the utilization of experienced teachers. How many seasoned, experienced teachers will be leaving Mitchell School? Are they being transferred, and will they be replaced with teachers of equivalent experience? We'd hoped that this would be the end of this problem (closing of Mitchell), allowing us to work with the faculty and staff to make .Mitchell the successful elementary school that it once was and that we believe it will be again. However, the occurrence of the events mentioned above does raise the specter of a building devoid of children. It might be said that the Campus Leadership Team sanctioned these actions. But, it must be taken into account that this is the same Campus Leadership Team that was in place during the time that the school was to be closed. Air. Smith has asked me (Dr. Blevins) and I have agreed to serve on the Campus Leadership Team
however, under the new conditions, we believe that the formation of an entirely new Campus Leadership Team should be considered. .Additionally, we are formallv requesting a list of the members of the Campus Leadership Team, who sanctioned the above changes, as we believe that it was done without the input of Mitchell parents. We do not think that the Campus Leadership Team was designed to be a body that rubber-stamps the wishes of District administration and hope that this has not been the case. We would also like to suggest that the Campus Leadership team hold regular monthly- meetings with advance notification of the members, rather than holding impromptu meetings. Moreover, all parents should have advance notification such that they may plan attend and present any concerns andThursday. June 22. 2000 4 04 PM To
Ms Ann Brown From Dr George T Blevins. Jr. 374-8183 Page
4 of 4 parents should also be sent copies of the minutes of the meetings. Are there written guidelines governing the Campus I.eadership Teams? We would like to request a copy of those guidelines. We are also requesting an outline of how the Creative Dramatics Theme will be maintained and incorporated into the curriculum without a theme specialist. We recognized that the school report card that will be so important for assessing overall academic achievement will necessitate the intensification of teacher's efforts to enhance academic achievement. rhe already overworked circumstances of teachers will not allow them tlie leeway to adequate!) infuse creative dramatics. Therefore, we believe that it will be esTremely difficult to maintain this theme without a theme specialist. In view of the fact that much of what has occurred may indicate a problem with communication between the district and parents and community, we would also like to know the plans for enhancing communication with parents and community, and enhancing parental and community participation at Mitchell School. We believe that the Study Circle that has been initiated has potential. However, we would like to have information on just what types of schools has this approach been successful in and whether there are schools in which it has not. Into which of these categories of schools does Mitchell fall? It was indicated to us that the Mitchell School Zone was added back to the school zone map. However, when we go to the school district School Zone web page (http://www.lrsd.kl2.ar.us/Zones/Zones.asp), there is no link for Mitchell School and upon downloading the zone map in Adobe Acrobat, the Mitchell School Zone is not there. This page last updated Tuesday, .Xpril 25, 2000 8:18:24 .AM. We would like to request that this be corrected. was It is our understanding that parents of students eligible for the college scholarships were to be notified. We are requesting a timeline for notification of parents that their students are eligible for these scholarships. The former plans to close Mitchell school were devised without adequate consultation with parents and community- members, which turned out to be a mistake. These events appear to follow the same pattern. We hope that these actions will be reconsidered. Sincerely George T. Blevins. Jr., Ph.D. President cc: Mrs. Frances Cawthon-Jones Principal Darien Smith Senator John .A, Riggs, r\' Bishop Steven .\1. .Arnold Ms. Sue Strickland Dr. Katherine Mitchell Mr. H. Baker Kurrus Ms. Judy Magness Mr. .Michael Daugherty- Mr. Larry Berkley- Mr. .Mike Kumpuris Joshua Intervenors c o John Walker. Esq. Ms. .Atm BrownOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: July 14, 2000 To: Junious Babbs From: Ann Br< Re: Attendance Zone Changes Since the LRSD has decided that Mitchell will remain open, Td like to have some information as to how the district may have subsequently realigned the attendance zones to accommodate Mitchells continued functioning as an elementary school. Id appreciate a written description of any zone changes and corresponding maps. Id also like to know the building capacities and projected enrollments, by grade, of all schools that are affected by the zone changes. Please give me a call if you have any questions. Thanks very much. t WtZn-y*-- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 RECEIVED Division of School Services TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: DATE: JUL 1 4 2000 OfflCEOf DESmAnON MONITORING Dr. George T. Blevins, Jr., President Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association Frances Cawthon Jonesj^^ssistant Superintendent-Elementary die V. Carnine, Superintendent of Schools Response to Letter of June 22, 2000 June 26, 2000 The Mitchell community has a number of accomplishments that occurred during the past school year of which I am sure they are proud. Among those are the successful ' .1 _________lx_____*.Uz^ r\
*-4-'lr+ i-rv ronn\/afa rhp effort to have Mitchell remain open, the commitment by the District to renovate the building, specific plans to improve technology and their successful request to r^ain an enthusiastic, dedicated young man as the principal and instructional leader of the school. I will attempt to address each of the concerns stated in your letter of June 22, 2000. 1. Additional resources that will be provided from the millage increase. Because we are still in the planning and designing phase of expenditures of these revenues, no school has seen any improvements at this time. We have just begun the design work on the largest capital projects. It will be several months before we are able to begin the construction work on these projects. Dr Anderson has directed that several projects be completed this summer at Mitchell in advance of other capital projects work. He has reserved funds from the second lien projects for Mitchell that will allow for water proofing and the painting of the exteriors of the building. Other projects that are to be completed this summer include the cleaning of the exteriorDr. George T. Blevins letters June 26, 2000 Page 2 SSSSSlKlSS-!^^ attached list of improvements specific to Mitchell Academy. 2. Plans to close Mitchell. There are no current discussions or plans that would support the closing of Mitchell list and amount of money dedicated to remain a viable, operating school. 3 .. ftimniie I pndershio Team's role in the decision and particularly the principal's copy of the school's Improvement Plan, which was developed by the Included is a c-,, . school staff. You will note that the 3 priorities are. 1) improvement of achievement in reading 2) improvement in mathematics 3) improvement in the overall climate of the school You can see that there are specific actions in each of these areas that address the concerns involvement. of the handbook for the implementation of the Campus pleased that you school year. have agreed to serve as a representative on Also included is a copy of last year's Campus Leadership Team. 4. How the Creative Dramatics Theme will be incorporated in the curriculum.  I w.  ------------------- deal with the tremendous social, emotional increased as they work collaboratively.Dr. George T. Blevins letter June 26, 2000 Page 3 How will this be achieved? This will be accomplished through the implementation of the Great Expectations of Arkansas Methodology. The Great Expectations Teaching Model is an eclectic approach to teaching that encompasses the very best of what is known about teaching today. Drawing from many learning theories, teachers do whatever it takes to teach the students. Through an integrated, holistic curriculum, students become self-directed productive citizens, effective communicators, critical thinkers, and cooperative learners, -------- - , , .. contributors to the classroom as well as society. Students will be provided daily ODDortunities to recite, demonstrate ability to speak in complete sentences, affirm the school creed and accept the challenge to function at a level of excellence which enhances their feelings of self-worth. Building self-esteem of students is the key to helping the children believe that they are capable of learning and motivating them to try. Students must perceive that there are high expectations of them and when they see those expectations, they will respond to reach upward to those expectations. With all of this said, our ultimate goal at Mitchell Academy is student achievement. 5. Mitchell attendance zone has not been updated on the web page. According to Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services, necessary corrections are in progress through the City of Little Rock Public Works of the Mitchell School Zone warranted necessary realignment that is Office. Retention c. --------------------------- initiated through their office. It is expected that this process will be completed very soon. 6. Notification of college scholarships to eligible students. According to Dr. Marian Lacey, chairperson of that committee, parents of students eligible for the college scholarship will be notified during the beginning of the first guarter of the 2000-01 school year. Thank you for your continued interest in and support of Mitchell Academy. Although   -... . _____J
.in m IK niefri students at Mitchell have had some of the lowest achievement indicators in our District, it is our belief that improvements will continue and Mitchell students will make great gains. More importantly, Mitchell has a principal who believes in those students, is attempting to build a staff who believes and who has developed specific goals. He also has a vision of how to achieve those goals and needs the support of you and the community to implement them. Please contact me if you need further information. Attachments (5)MITCHELL ACADEMY RECESVEO 2000-2001 JUL 1 9 2000 3ICEQF SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN SUBMITTED BY DARIAN L. SMITHIntervention: Great Expectations of Arkansas .O'T.lU'F'--, f. .1  J SrlttliTiSWfiif*!.' ' 1 ' J S. ffnr* I -*i1p  -^*1'- -*-> - Staff will attend the Great Expectations Summer Institute Principal Staff Jlc * * * til" jHr't.'.k.ijnh Parent Workshop/Conferences for students having behavioral difficulties The Family Support Team will meet weekly to identify students that need additional assistance. Principal Counselor Institute a Friday Club Day to involve students in extra-curricular activities __________ Implement the Getting Along piece of Success For All Staff will have a quarterly retreat/celebration gathering Family Support Team Success For All Facilitator Principal Counselor Principal SFA Facilitator Principal Program Committee .............LiLo 'I ' ' ' -' X  .* J . 4'-  -'.i*  '^L . I V '' '' \ ' July 2000 On-going On-going Bi-monthly August 2000 On-going J 1 If sain- y. Great Expectations Handbook GE Offices Parenting videos Speakers Success For All materials Staff SFA materials iSchool: Mitchell Academy School Improvement Plan Year: 2000-2001 Priority 3: Improve the overall climate of the school. Supporting Data: School Climate Survey Goal(s): Reduce the number of send homes and out-of-school suspensions to 5 /o. Build better staff cohesiveness. One-Year Benchmark(s): In 1998-99 Mitchell Academy had a send home and out-of-school suspension rate of 8.1%. We shall reduce our suspension rate to 5%.Intervention: Hiring a Curriculum Specialist ill 1! it* l s.  r ..tote . -....................... J, Develop a series of parent workshops to teach parents how to assist their children with school work. Provide students opportunities to respond to open-ended questions. Implement the use of a daily math problem. Design schoolwide incentives for improvement. Monitor and make adjustments in the plan as necessary to ensure improvement before the April Benchmark examinations Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation, make adjustments for following year. Curriculum Specialist Counselor Family Support Team Classroom teachers Classroom teacher Campus Leadership Team Principal Curriculum Specialist Classroom teachers Campus Leadership Team September 2000 February 2001 April 2001 IRC Staff Current Research Videos $500 August 2000 - June 2001 September 2000 - May 2001 August 2000 Ongoing June 2001 TERC materials IRC Staff ACTAAP released items IRC Staff Workbook $500School: Mitchell Academy School Improvement Plan Year: 2000-2001 Priority 2: Improve Student Achievement in Mathematics Supporting Data: 83% of the fourth grade students scored at the below basic level on the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. 13% of the fourth grade students scored at the basic level on the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. 7% of the fifth grade students scored at or above the 50th percentile on the SAT9. Sontf the students will perform at or above the prof'cient level on the grade 4 Benehmark Exam. 90% of the students will perform at or above the proficient level in Mathematics each semester on 65% of the students will perform at or above the 50th percentile in Mathematics on the SAT9. the District adopted CRTs. One-Year Benchmark(s): In 1999-2000 Mitchell Academy shall improve 10 points so or above the proficient level on required improvement = 14%) at rvQVIirCQ JIIiLllVVdllvliu r having 1 students out of a possible 43 students score at or above the proficient level. that at least 14% of the students (4% - 1998-99 performance + 10% - the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. This Benchmark will be achieved by ,.0.00IMi.ebellAeadem.sHa 14% of the students (7%- 2000-2001 performance + 7% - required improvement = 14%) at or of a possible 46 students score at or above the 50th percentile on the SAT9.Benchmark examinations. Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation, make adjustments for following year. Campus Leadership Team June 2001Intervention: Success For All 7-:27 lOil : 5i' tl Assign tutors to the bottom 30% of first grade students. Principal SFA facilitator SFA tutor September 2000 - June 2001 SFA placement exam data Provide tutoring for an additional 100 students. Principal SFA facilitator Classroom teachers October 2000 - May 2001 VIPs Young Lawyers Association Develop a series of parent workshops to teach parents how to assist their children with schoolwork. Implement cooperative learning strategies to encourage a linkage between teacher-directed instruction and child-centered learning. Enhance the implementation of the Success For All reading program through staff development. Provide students opportunities to be assessed on a bi-weekly basis using open-ended questions. Design schoolwide incentives for improvement Monitor and make adjustments in the plan as necessary to ensure improvement before the April Counselor Family Support Team SFA facilitator September 2000 February 2000 April 2000 IRC Staff Videos SFA Assessment $500 Principal SFA facilitator Principal SFA facilitator Classroom teachers Campus Leadership Team Principal Classroom teachers August 2000 - June 2001 SFA Assessment Early Learning Manual Self-Assessment Checklist Ongoing IRC Staff Title 1 August 2000 - June 2001 August 2000 Ongoing ACTAAP released items $500School: Mitchell Academy School Improvement Plan Year: 2000-2001 Priority 1: Improve Student Achievement in Reading Supporting Data. hpinw bAsic level on the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. 52% of the fourth grade students scored at the below basic levei on me giau 35% of the fourth grade students scored at the basic level on the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. 4% of the nilh grade studcnl.s scored at or above the 5()tli pcrccnlilc on the SAT9. 100% of the students will perform at or above the proficient level on the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. 90% of the students will perform at or above the proficient level in reading each semester on the District adopted CRTs. 65% of the students will perform at or above the 50th percentile in reading on the SAT9. One-Year Benclimark(s): ctndents fl3% - 1998 -99 performance + 9% - having 10 students out of a possible 43 students score at or above the proficient level. ..000.00,MnAeaae.,,.^ least 14% of the students (4% - 1999-2000 performance + 10% - required improvement - 14%) at or of a possible 46 students score at or above the 50th percentile. RECBVEO JUL 1 9 2000 OFHCEOF OfSFGnEG.ATfON LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Campus Leadership Institute 2000 Sessions I & II, July 24-28, 2000 *List of Participants School: MITCHELL Name of Participant Address (include city/zip) Phone Number Position (Principal, Teacher, Parent, Broker, Business Partner, etc.) Mr. Darian Smith Ms. Alice Bradberry Ms. Patricia Brooks Ms. Kimberly Potter Ms. Veta Flanagan Mr. Rickey Jackson Ms. Connie Whitfield Ms. Sue Walls 3909 Cobb Little Rock, Ar 72204 2106 Raintree, Bryant Ar. 72022 1701 Westpark Dr. Apt 21 Little Rock, Ar 72204_______________________________ 15 Lendl Loop Little Rock, 72207 6305 Longwood Rd., Little Rock, 72207 3434 S. Battery Little Rock, 72206 3023 S. Battery, Little Rock, 72206 3300 Foxcroft Little Rock, 72227 *Maximum number on team including principal - 8 565-3961 847-6018 663-2431 614-6656 614-6656 374-2130 372-0693 224-7266 Principal Teacher Counselor Teacher Teacher Parent Community Broker 407/20/2000 08:13 501-324-2281 LRSD SRO PAGE 01/0: n LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 SHERMAN STREET little rock, ar 72202 OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Junious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent TO: Ann Brown, Feder^ Monitor
der^ FROM: Junious Babbs SUBJECT: DATE: Phone: (501)324-2272 " E-Mail: jcbabbs^stuasn.lrsd.kl2.ar.us Attendance Zone Changes (Response to 7-14-00 Memo) July 20, 2000 RECEIVED JUL 2 0 2000 UR-ICE Of DESEGREGATION MONITORING In response to your July 14*^ request regarding realigned attendance zones to accommodate Mitchell s continued function as an elementary school, the following information is provided.  The original Mitchell School Attendance Zone has been adjusted to include what was the old Otter Creek satellite zone.  Upon review of proximity and '99-00 realigned school zones, a northern section of the Mitchell zone wns removed and absorbed in Martin Luther King.  To date (7-18-00), projected school enrollments for each grade at these schools reflect: School I (CapacitsO , T K 1 2 3 4 5 t : Mitchell (298) Otter Creek (351) King 18 18 61 36 58 41 77 41 61 49 44 517 47 52 (728) I Stephens (692) j 37 98 97 52 104 39 105 I 44A 101 42 71 46 ! 37 ' I 1 1  Copies of updated elementary, middle and high school attendance zone maps have been provided to your attention.  Further review (September  October) of student attendance zones to address enrollment, building composition and plan compliance within the 2000-2001 Work Plan for LRSD Priorities is being addressed. If questions come up or additional information is needed, please feel free to give me a call.rOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 October 7, 1999 Ms. Mable Dealer 1815 South Park Street Little Rock, AR 72202 Dear Mable: I am responding to your letter which we received on October 4, 1999. The letter, which was addressed to Dr. Carnine, Dr. Anderson, and myself, indicated that a carbon copy had been mailed to Judge Susan Webber Wright. Although she is sensitive to the concerns community members have about desegregation and other educational issues, as a matter of policy, Judge Wright does not correspond directly with citizens. Instead she relies on us in her Office of Desegregation Monitoring to discuss school matters with individuals and organizations. In reading your letter and recalling our earlier phone conversations, I understand your sincere dedication to keeping Mitchell open as a neighborhood school. As you know, our office is not charged with making that decision. The Little Rock School District Board of Directors will have to decide the future of the school. When visiting Mitchell yesterday, I learned that the district will host a meeting on October 26, 1999, at 6:45 p.m. to discuss both Mitchell and the new Stephens School. Perhaps this meeting will give you an opportunity to voice your concerns and to have district personnel answer your questions. As we have discussed before, you also have some other options for making your position known. I know you have been speaking individually to many of the Board members. You also have the right to address the Board at a public meeting during the time period set aside for citizens comments. The Board meets at 6:00 p.m. on the fourth Thursday of every month (except November and December, when they meet on the third Thursday to avoid holidays). Individuals wishing to speak must sign up in advance. The superintendents executive assistant, Beverly Griffin, can provide any additional information you might need regarding the standard procedures. Her phone number is 324-2012. Several other individuals who are also concerned about Mitchell school have addressed the Board in recent months. In one of our phone conversations, I also explained that you may petition the Board to hold a special meeting devoted exclusively to Mitchell, if you present a petition signed by 50 registered voters.Mable Bealer page? Item 22 of your letter asks ODM to "identify the procedure the Afro-American can use to employ the services of another legal representative to monitor the Districts compliance in this agreement. While any individual or group of individuals is free to retain legal counsel for the purpose of offering advice or pursuing litigation, any dissatisfaction you may have regarding the current counsel for the Joshua Intervenors is not within the purview of our office. In item 23 you request that ODM please submit the higher court decision on the fairness of this agreement. By this agreement I assume you mean the LRSD Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. In response to this request, I am enclosing a copy of the April 10, 1998 District Court Order approving the revised plan. I hope the information I have provided is of some help to you. Please feel free to call if you have any additional questions. Sincerely, Melissa Guldin enc. cc: Les Carnine Vic Anderson* J Z jzw: '.TX -m-'  T?.: 'ft rt * i\ 4 1998 filed CFiCE Uf DEScGHEWTlGfi MONITORING IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION OISTRIcTaRXAnS^s 0 1993 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs.   * Cy: w McCO, '^CK. CLERK 0 CLERK No. LR-C-82-866 PUTLASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al.. Defendants, MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al.. Intervenors, KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al.. Intervenors.       MEMQRANDUNf QPINTON AND ORDER Before the Court are the initial joint motion and e renewed joint motion filed by the Little Rock School District (LRSD") and the Joshua Intervenors (Joshua) requesting that this Court approve the LRSDs proposed Revised Desegregation and Education Plan dated January 16, 1998 (LRSD Proposed Revised Plan" or proposed Plan").' L Approval of the Proposed Plan After evaluating the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan, this Court hereby grants the joint motions filed by the LRSD and Joshua and hereby approves the proposed Plan.  Docket Nos. 3107 and 3136. 1 A. In 1990, the Eighth Circuit Coun of Appeals approved the current version of LRSD Desegregation and Education Plan or the 1990 Plan. In 1996, after the LRSD had operated under the 1990 Plan for six (6) years, this Coun scheduled a series of hearings to gather evidence upon which to evaluate the success of the 1990 Plan, along with the settlement plans of the other districts, and the desegregation remedies endorsed therein." At that time, even though the Coun had withdrawn supervision over cenain aspects of the 1990 Plan, there remained ponions of that Plan which were of concern to the Coun. Therefore, the Coun called expen witnesses to testify. and invited the parties to call other expert witnesses to testify, regarding desegregation remedies in general in an attempt to aid the Court and the parties in evaluating the effectiveness of the 1990 3 Plan. Those evidentiary hearings were held in May of 1996. At those hearings and on several other occasions, the Court has noted that the parties themselves must develop and present for Court approval any proposed modifications to the desegregation and education plans under which they operate. In December of 1996, the LRSD requested and this Court approved a plan development period in which the LRSD could concentrate its efforts on developing such modifications to the 1990 Plan, in an attempt to 2 Docket No. 2631.  The following expert witnesses testified: (1) Herbert J. Walberg, Ph.D., then a Professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago. See Docket No. 2692. (2) David J. Armor, Ph.D., then a Research Professor at George Mason University in the Institute of Public Policy. See Docket Nos. 2693, 2694. (3) Gary Orfield, Ph.D., then a Professor of Education and Social Policy at Harvard University and the Director of The Harvard Project on School Desegregation. See Docket No. 2768. 2improve education and desegregation within the district/ Some time during this period, the LRSD commenced negotiations with Joshua regarding modifications to the 1990 Plan. As a result of those negotiations, the LRSD and Joshua agreed upon the provisions included in the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan currently before the Coun. B. The LRSD and Joshua have agreed that, if approved, the proposed Plan
shall supersede and extinguish all prior agreements and orders in the Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, U.S.D C. No. LR-C-82-866, and all consolidated cases related to the desegregation of the Little Rock School District (LRSD) with the following exceptions: a. The Pulaski County School Desegregation Case Senlement Agreement as revised on September 28, 1989 (Settlement Agreement)
b. c. d. The Magnet School Stipulation dated February 1987
Order dated September 3, 1986, pertaining to the Magnet Review Committee
The M-to-M Stipulation dated .August 26, 1986
and. e. Orders of the district court and court of appeals interpreting and enforcing sections a. through d. above to the extent not inconsistent with this Revised Plan. Based upon this provision, this Court considers the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan an entirely new consent decree or settlement agreement between the LRSD and Joshua. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that because the law strongly favors settlements, courts should hospitably receive them, especially in cases such as this in which the parties have engaged in protracted, highly divisive litigation and in which any lasting solution necessarily depends up
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.