{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1339","title":"Proceedings: ''Hearing''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1995-07-06"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Pulaski County Special School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational planning","Education--Finance","School enrollment","School improvement programs","School management and organization","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Hearing''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1339"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["198 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1620","title":"Court filings concerning desegregation plan modifications, school districts' budget plans,Arkansas Department of Education semiannual desegregation monitoring report, and project management tools","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1995-07"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Arkansas. Department of Education","North Little Rock School District","Pulaski County Special School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School integration","School districts","School employees"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning desegregation plan modifications, school districts' budget plans,Arkansas Department of Education semiannual desegregation monitoring report, and project management tools"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1620"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["59 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1619","title":"Court filings: Court of Appeals, brief of appellees and cross appellants, Little Rock School District (LRSD), Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD), and Joshua intervenors","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit"],"dc_date":["1995-06-30"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Pulaski County Special School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School integration","Employee rights","School enrollment","Transportation","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: Court of Appeals, brief of appellees and cross appellants, Little Rock School District (LRSD), Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD), and Joshua intervenors"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1619"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["55 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1621","title":"Court filings: District Court, memorandum brief in support of Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) motion for modification of desegregation plan","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1995-06-30"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Education--Standards","Educational statistics","School enrollment","School management and organization","School integration","Maps--20th Century--Little Rock (Ark.)","School districts","School facilities"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, memorandum brief in support of Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) motion for modification of desegregation plan"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1621"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["94 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1614","title":"Court filings: Supreme Court of Connecticut, decision, Milo Sheff at al. v. William A. O'Neill et al.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Connecticut, 41.66704, -72.66648"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1995-06-27"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["United States--History--20th century","Education","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Finance","Education--Evaluation","Education and state","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs","Court records","Law","School integration","School employees"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: Supreme Court of Connecticut, decision, Milo Sheff at al. v. William A. O'Neill et al."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1614"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["69 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1593","title":"Court filings: Court of Appeals, ruling, Missouri et al. v. Kalima Jenkins et al.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Missouri, 38.25031, -92.50046"],"dcterms_creator":["United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit"],"dc_date":["1995-06-12"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Finance","Education--Evaluation","Education and state","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs","Court records","Law","School integration","School employees","United States--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: Court of Appeals, ruling, Missouri et al. v. Kalima Jenkins et al."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1593"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["52 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1626","title":"Court filings: Court of Appeals, rulings on African American voters appeal the District Court' s order dismissing their claim under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, against LRSD, and the Joshua Intervenors appeal the District Court's August 10, 1994, order granting LRSD's motion to close Ish Incentive School.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit"],"dc_date":["1995-06-05"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Pulaski County Special School District","Ish Elementary School (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Education, Elementary","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School board members","School boards","School management and organization","School integration","School facilities"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: Court of Appeals, rulings on African American voters appeal the District Court' s order dismissing their claim under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, against LRSD, and the Joshua Intervenors appeal the District Court's August 10, 1994, order granting LRSD's motion to close Ish Incentive School."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1626"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["27 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT CONFIDENTIAL -- NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Nos. 93-3469EA, 93-3594EA No. 93-3469EA Little Rock School District, Plaintiff/Appellee, * * * * ** * * * ** Anne Mitchell; Bob Moore; Pat * Gee; Pat Rayburn; Mary J. * Gage; North Little Rock * Classroom Teachers Association; * Pulaski Association of * Classroom Teachers; Little Rock* Classroom Teachers Association; * Alexa Armstrong; Karlos * Armstrong; Ed Bullington; * Khayyam Davis; Janice Dent; * John Harrison; Alvin Hudson; * Tatia Hudson; and Milton * Jackson, * Appellants, * * * * Lorene Joshua; Leslie Joshua; * Stacy Joshua; and Wayne Joshua, * * Intervenors/Appellants, * * * Katherine Knight; Sara * Matthews; Becky McKinney; * Derrick Miles; Janice Miles; * John M. Miles; NAACP; Joyce * Person; Brian Taylor; Hilton * Taylor; Parsha Taylor; Robert * Willingham; and Tonya * Willingham, * * Intervenors, * JUN 1 5 1995 Office of Desegreg;,.tion Monitoring On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. * v. * * Pulaski County Special School * District, #1; North Little Rock* School District; Leon Barnes; * Sheryl Dunn; Mac Faulkner; * Richard A. Giddings; Marianne * Gosser; Don Hindman; Shirley * Lowery; Bob Lyon; George A. * Mccrary; Bob Moore; Steve * Morley; Buddy Raines; David * Sain; Dale Ward; John Ward; * Judy Wear; and Grainger * Williams, * Defendants, * * * * * Philip E. Kaplan; Janet * Pulliam; and John Bilheimer, * Movants, Office of Desegregation Monitor; Claimant, * * * * * * * * * * Parent's Plan; Horace A. * Walker; P.A. Hollingsworth; and* Kenneth G. Torrence, * Movants, * * * * Dale Charles; Robert L. * Brown, Sr.; Gwen Hevey Jackson; * Diane Davis; and Raymond * Frazier; * * Plaintiffs/Appellants, * Pulaski County Board of Education; Defendant/Appellee, * * * * * * * -2- O.G. Jacovelli, Individually * and as President of the Board * of Education of the Little * Rock School District; Patricia * Gee, Individually and in her * Official Capacity as a Member * of the Board of Education of * the Little Rock School * District, a Public Body; * Dr. George Cannon, Individually* and in his Official Capacity as* a Member of the Board of * Education of the Little Rock * School District, a Public Body; * John Moore, Individually and in* his Official Capacity as a * Member of the Board of * Education of the Little Rock * School District, a Public Body; * Dorsey Jackson, Individually * and in his Official Capacity as* a Member of the Board of * Education of the Little Rock * School District, a Public Body; * Dr. Katherine Mitchell, * Individually and in her * Official Capacity as a * Member of the Board of * Education of the Little Rock * School District, a Public Body; * W.D. Hamilton, Individually and* in his Official Capacity as a * Member of the Board of * Education of the Little Rock * School District, a Public Body; * Cecil Bailey, Individually and * in his Official Capacity as a * Member of the Pulaski County * Board of Education, a * Public Corporate; Thomas * Broughton, Individually and in * his Official Capacity as a * Member of the Pulaski County * Board of Education, a Public * Corporate; and Dr. Martin * Zoldessy, Individually and in * his Official Capacity as a * Member of the Pulaski County * Board of Education, a Public * Corporate, * Defendants. * * -3- No. 93-3594EA * * * * * * Little Rock School District, * Plaintiff/Appellee, * * * * Anne Mitchell; Bob Moore; Pat * Gee; Pat Rayburn; Mary J. Gage; * North Little Rock Classroom * Teachers Association; Pulaski * Association of Classroom * Teachers; Little Rock Classroom* Teachers Association; Alexa * Armstrong; Karlos Armstrong; * Ed Bullington; Khayyam Davis; * Janice Dent; John Harrison; * Alvin Hudson; Tatia Hudson; * and Milton Jackson, * * On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District Intervenors, * of Arkansas. * * Lorene Joshua; Leslie Joshua; * Stacy Joshua; and Wayne Joshua, * * Intervenors/Appellants, * * * Katherine Knight; Sara * Matthews; Becky McKinney; * Derrick Miles; Janice Miles; * John M. Miles; NAACP; Joyce * Person; Brian Taylor; Hilton * Taylor; Parsha Hilton; Robert * Willingham; and Tonya * Willingham, * Intervenors, v. * * * * * * Pulaski County Special School * District, #1; and North Little * Rock School District, * Defendants/Appellees, * * -4- * * Leon Barnes; Sheryl Dunn; Mac * Faulkner; Richard A. Giddings; * Marianne Gosser; Don Hindman; * Shirley Lowery; Bob Lyon; * George A. Mccrary; Bob Moore; * Steve Morley; Buddy Raines; * David Sain; Dale Ward; John * Ward; Judy Wear; and Grainger * Williams, * Defendants, * * * * * * Philip E. Kaplan; Janet * Pulliam; and John Bilheimer, * Movants, Office of Desegregation Monitor, Claimant, * * * * * * * * * * Parent's Plan; Horace A. * Walker; P.A. Hollingsworth; and* Kenneth G. Torrence, * Movants, * * * * Dale Charles; Robert L. * Brown, Sr.; Gwen Hevey Jackson; * Diane Davis; and Raymond * Frazier, * Plaintiffs, Pulaski County Board of Education, Defendant, * * * * * * * * * * O.G. Jacovelli, Individually * and as President of the Board * -5- of Education of the Little Rock* School District; Patricia Gee, * Individually and in her * Official Capacity as a Member * of the Board of Education of * the Little Rock School * District, a Public Body; * Dr. George Cannon, Individually* and in his Official Capacity * as a Member of the Board of * Education of the Little Rock * School District, a Public Body; * John Moore, Individually and * in his Official Capacity as * a Member of the Board of * Education of the Little Rock * School District, a Public Body; * Dorsey Jackson, Individually * and in his Official Capacity as* a Member of the Board of * Education of the Little Rock * School District, a Public Body; * Dr. Katherine Mitchell, * Individually and in her * Official Capacity as a Member * of the Board of Education of * the Little Rock School * District, a Public Body; * W.D. Hamilton, Individually and* in his Official Capacity as a * Member of the Board of * Education of the Little Rock * School District, a Public Body; * Cecil Bailey, Individually and * in his Official Capacity as a * Member of the Pulaski County * Board of Education, a Public * Corporate; Thomas Broughton, * Individually and in his * Official Capacity as a Member * of the Pulaski County Board of * Education, a Public Corporate; * and Dr. Martin Zoldessy, * Individually and in his * Official Capacity as a Member * of the Pulaski County Board of * Education, a Public Corporate, * * Defendants. * -6- Submitted: January 10, 1995 Filed: June 5, 1995 Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Chief Judge, HEANEY, Senior Circuit Judge, and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge. RICHARDS. ARNOLD, Chief Judge. Two appeals' involving the Little Rock School District (LRSD) are consolidated for our review. In the first case, AfricanAmerican voters2 appeal the District Court' s 3 order dismissing their claim under the Voting Rights Act of 1965,  2, as amended, 42 U.S.C.  1973, against LRSD. In the second case, the Joshua Intervenors appeal the District Court's August 10, 1994, order granting LRSD's motion to close Ish Incentive School. We affirm in both cases. I. We review first Charles's claim that the LRSD's election-zone plan adopted by the Pulaski County Board of Education (PCBE) and 1Initially, three appeals were consolidated. In the third case, the Joshua Intervenors appealed the District Court's order of September 27, 1994, rejecting the present site of Stephens School as a possible location of the new Stephens Interdistrict School. That appeal has been dismissed by agreement of the parties. Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1., No. 93-3592 (8th Cir. Jan. 19, 1995) (per curiam). 2Plaintiffs Dale Charles, Robert L. Brown, Sr., Gwen Hervey Jackson, Diane Davis, and Raymond Frazier, are African-American residents of Little Rock who live within the Little Rock School District. We shall refer to these parties as \"Charles.\" 3The Hon. Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas. -7- - approved by the District Court violates the Voting Rights Act. He alleges that the approved plan denies African-American voters within the LRSD equal opportunity to participate in the electoral process and to elect representatives of their choice. More specifically, he insists that the plan dilutes the vote of AfricanAmerican residents of the LRSD because those residents are numerous and compact enough to justify the creation of three single-member zones in which they would be in the majority, 4 instead of the two zones provided for in the adopted plan. 5 In 1986, a plan was adopted containing seven single-member zones for election of members of the LRSD school board. Two of the zones were majority-minority zones. 6 In July of 1992, Charles filed this complaint alleging that the 1986 plan should be revised on the basis of the 1990 census. Four rezoning plans were prepared 4Charles proposes the following plan: Total Pop. Per cent. Minority Zone 1 23,704 64.70% African-American Zone 2 24,870 64.00% African-American Zone 3 24,230 5.30% African-American Zone 4 25,380 5.10% African-American Zone 5 23,839 8.70% African-American Zone 6 25,635 61. 70% African-American Zone 7 26,016 25.80% African-American 5Maps of the parties' plans are contained in an appendix to this opinion. 6The following plan was approved in 1986: Total Pop. Per cent. Minority Zone 1 25,399 81. 50% African-American Zone 2 25,295 68.90% African-American Zone 3 25,210 7.83% African-American Zone 4 24,844 2.96% African-American Zone 5 25,016 18.30% African-American Zone 6 25,107 17.30% African-American Zone 7 25,043 14.10% African-American -8- - and presented at a public meeting. The Pulaski County Board of Education (PCBE), the responsible body under Arkansas law, selected alternative four. 7 Under alternative four, Zone Two is a majorityminority zone, and Zone One is a supermajority zone (65% or more minority population). On February 16, 1993, PCBE submitted the plan to the District Court for approval. Charles filed objections alleging that the plan violated 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Following a trial, the District Court approved the plan adopted by the PCBE and dismissed Charles's complaint. The Charles plaintiffs bring this appeal. On several occasions we have reviewed challenges brought under the Voting Rights Act to Arkansas's electoral practices. On each of these occasions we have set forth the requirements for establishing a violation of  2 of the Voting Rights Act, and proceeded mindful of the fact that \"equal political opportunity [is] the focus of the enquiry.\" Johnson v. De Grandy, 114 S. Ct. 2647, 2658 (1994). We do so once again in this case. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended in 1982, provides: by (a) No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision 7The following plan the District Court: Total Pop. Zone 1 25,533 Zone 2 25,764 Zone 3 24,578 Zone 4 24,216 Zone 5 24,456 Zone 6 24,663 Zone 7 24,464 was selected by the PCBE and later approved Per cent. 79.82% 59.39% 4.52% 5.12% 19.14% 35.55% 28.45% -9- Minority African-American African-American African-American African-American African-American African-American African-American in a manner which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color, or in contravention of the guarantees set forth in section 1973b(f) (2) of this title, as provided in subsection (b) of this section. (b) A violation of subsection (a) of this section is established if, based on the totality of the circumstances, it is shown that the political processes leading to nomination or election in the State or political subdivision are not equally open to participation by members of a class of citizens protected by subsection (a) of this section in that its members have less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice. The extent to which members of a protected class have been elected to office in the State or political subdivision is one circumstance which may be considered: Provided, That nothing in this section establishes a right to have members of a protected class elected in numbers equal to their proportion in the population. 42 U.S.C.  1973. The leading case interpreting the statute is Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986). In Gingles, the Supreme Court identified three necessary preconditions which must be established to maintain an action under  2: ( 1) the minority group is sufficiently large and geographically compact to constitute a majority in one or more single-member districts; (2) the minority group is politically cohesive; and (3) the majority votes sufficiently as a block to enable it usually to defeat the minority's preferred candidate. Id. at 50-51. Once the plaintiff has established the three preconditions, a court must look to \"the totality of the circumstances\" to determine whether minority voters have less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice. Seven additional factors should be considered at this stage of the case: 1. the extent of any history of official discrimination in the state or political subdivision that touched the -10- right of the members of the minority group to register, to vote, or otherwise to participate in the democratic process; 2. the extent to which voting in the elections of the state or political subdivision is racially polarized; 3. the extent to which the state or political subdivision has used unusually large election districts, majority vote requirements, anti-single shot provisions, or other voting practices or procedures that may enhance the opportunity for discrimination against the minority group; 4. if there is a candidate slating process, whether the members of the minority group have been denied access to that process; 5. the extent to which members of the minority group in the state or political subdivision bear the effects of discrimination in such areas as education, employment and health, which hinder their ability to participate effectively in the political process; 6. whether political campaigns have been characterized by overt or subtle racial appeals; 7. the extent to which members of the minority group have been elected to public office in the jurisdiction. S. Rep. No. 417, 97th Cong., 2d Sess. 30 (1982), reprinted in 1982 U.S. Code Cong. and Admin. News 177, 206-07. Additional factors that in some cases have had probative value as a part of the plaintiffs' evidence are: 1. whether there is a significant lack of responsiveness on the part of elected officials to the particularized needs of the members of the minority group; 2. whether the policy underlying the state or political subdivision's use of such voting qualification, prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice or procedure is tenuous. Ibid. This list is not comprehensive or exclusive. Gingles, 478 -11- U.S. at 45. The District Court began by holding that the relevant comparison is between the plan adopted by the PCBE and the 1986 plan, the one in effect right before the adoption of the challenged plan. With respect, we think this was not the correct standard. The statute asks whether minority voters have less political opportunity than other voters. The inquiry is whether minority opportunity is less under the challenged plan than what it would be under some other arrangement, one that would comply with  2. Under the District Court's approach, plaintiffs could never prevail unless the plan in suit was less favorable to them than whatever plan preceded it. They would have to prove 11 retrogression. 11 A majority of the Supreme Court has rejected that theory. 11Retrogression is not the inquiry in 2 dilution cases. 11 Holder v. Hall, 114 s. Ct. 2581, 2587 (1994) (opinion of Kennedy, J., joined by Rehnquist, C.J.); id. at 2589 (O'Connor, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment) (the comparison must be with 11an objectively reasonable alternative practice as a benchmark  11 ); id. at 2622 (Blackmun, J., dissenting, joined by Stevens, Souter, and Ginsburg, JJ.) ( 11minority voters' potential 'in the absence of' the allegedly dilutive mechanism must be measured against the benchmark of an alternative structure or practice that is reasonable and workable under the facts of the specific case.\") (footnote omitted); accord, Jeffers v~ Tucker, 847 F. Supp. 655, 658 (E.D. Ark. 1994) (three-judge court). In the present case, the best approach is to treat the plan proposed by the plaintiffs as a prima facie reasonable alternative for purposes of this case. We shall use this approach as a sort of working hypothesis. This is the framework used in Jeffers v. Tucker, supra. It makes sense because the plaintiffs' plan is a way of making concrete their contention that the Gingles preconditions are met. Their plan shows, for example, in their - view at least, that it is possible to create one more reasonably -12- compact and contiguous district in which African-Americans will have a majority. Two more preliminary points are in order. First, Charles claims that 2 requires the LRSD to maximize African-American representation. A similar claim was considered and rejected in Jeffers v. Tucker, supra. In the context of a challenge to state legislative districts in the same county where LRSD is located, the Jeffers v. Tucker Court concluded that 2 did not require maximization of minority-group representation. See Jeffers, 84 7 F. Supp. at 657. 8 After Jeffers v. Tucker was decided, the Supreme Court spoke dispositively to this issue: \"Failure to maximize cannot be the measure of 2. 11 De Grandy, 114 S. Ct. at 2660 (1994). Just as we reject Charles's maximization claim, we must also reject LRSD's claim that proportional representation precludes a finding of vote dilution under  2. In De Grandy, supra, the Supreme Court considered the state of Florida's argument that \"no dilution occurs whenever the percentage of single-member districts in which minority voters form an effective majority mirrors the minority voters' percentage of the relevant population.\" Ibid. In rejecting this argument, the Court stated: \"Proportionality. would thus be a safe harbor for any districting scheme. The safety would be in derogation of the statutory text and its considered 8The Court said: \"The Voting Rights Act does not require, invariably and in every instance, that districts be drawn so as to maximize minority political power. Such a result would be akin to a requirement of proportional representation, which the Voting Rights Act itself rejects.\" Jeffers, 847 F. Supp. at 657, quoting West v. Clinton, 786 F. Supp. 803, 806 (W.D. Ark. 1992) (three-judge court). -13- purpose, however, and of the ideal that the Voting Rights Act attempts to foster.\" Ibid. Consequently, even if the LRSD can show proportional representation, the inquiry must not end there, but must encompass all factors relevant to the plaintiffs' claim. We assume for purposes of this appeal the three Gingles preconditions: that numerous and geographically compact to that plaintiffs have met they are sufficiently form a third majority- African-American district; 9 that voting in LRSD is racially polarized; and that white voters usually vote in sufficient numbers to defeat candidates preferred by African-Americans. See De Grandy, supra, 114 S. Ct. at 2656 (assuming without deciding that first condition has been satisfied). We proceed directly to analyze \"the totality of the circumstances,\" including the three Gingles preconditions, the \"Senate factors,\" and other relevant facts. We turn first to the first two Senate factors, the ones said to be most important in Gingles, supra, 478 U.S. at 48-49 n.15. First, African-American candidates have enjoyed a reasonably good measure of success in Little Rock elections in general. The record contains evidence of two LRSD elections, one at large (conducted before state law was changed to require zone elections in districts of a certain size) and one in a zone. In both elections an African-American candidate defeated a white candidate. 10 The 9In describing the racial makeup of the various actual and proposed election zones, the District Court and the parties have used total population figures. We think voting-age population is a better criterion, but we must deal with the case as the parties present it. Cf. De Grandy, 114 S. Ct. at 2655-56 (accepting arguendo voting-age-population statistics, despite a contention that at least half of the Hispanic voting-age residents of the region are non-citizens ineligible to vote). 10LRSD has moved to supplement the record to show the results of recent school elections. Plaintiffs oppose the motion. Because we are holding for defendants on the basis of the record as it now exists, this motion is denied as moot. -14- - District Court also considered 33 \"exogenous\" elections -- races in Little Rock but not for the school board. African-American candidates won most of these races. Many of these victories can be explained by special circumstances, however (for example, an African-American running as an incumbent, or running in a plurality race against several white candidates). The second Senate factor, racially polarized voting, is without doubt present to a degree, as plaintiffs' statistical proof has shown. There is a .high correlation between the number of voters in a precinct and the number of votes cast for African-American candidates. On the other hand, there has been some decisive cross-over voting of whites for African-American candidates. See, g__,__g_,_, Jeffers v. Clinton, 730 F. Supp. 196, 216 (E.D. Ark. 1989) (three-judge court), aff'd mem., 498 U.S. 1019 (1991) (subsequent history omitted). We discuss briefly the other factors. Certainly there is a history of official discrimination in Arkansas, though its present effects are less pronounced in Pulaski County than in some other parts of the State. There are no discriminatory voting practices now in use in the LRSD. There is a majority-vote requirement, but in elections by zone this practice actually works to the advantage of African-American voters in zones where they have a majority. We do not think that the majority-vote requirement cuts strongly either way in this case. The socioeconomic status of AfricanAmericans is lower than that of whites in the LRSD, and this condition is partly due to the effects of past racial discrimination. This factor cuts in favor of Charles, though, again, not so strongly as it would in the Delta region. The remaining factor - unresponsiveness to the concerns of minority citizens - has not been proved. The evidence on this subject is equivocal at best. On the whole, we think these factors, when considered on the assumption that the three preconditions have been met, do not make - a strong enough case in Charles's favor. The judgment we have to -15- make is necessarily imprecise. It is even, in some sense and to some degree, subjective. But our experience with these cases, especially Jeffers v. Tucker, supra, holding that  2 does not require the creation of an additional majority-African-American State Senate district in Pulaski County, leads us to conclude that a violation of law has not been proved here. We find two aspects of the case especially persuasive. First, although the plaintiffs' proposed zone boundaries are nowhere nearly so bizarre as the ones held presumptively unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Shaw, they are markedly less regular and compact than those in LRSD's adopted plan. And second, African-Americans have consistently achieved proportional representation on the LRSD board. Since 1983, they have continuously held two out of seven seats (28.6%). They make up 29% of LRSD's voting-age population. This fact, while by no means an absolute defense, has recently been given special importance by the Supreme Court. See De Grandy, supra. Nor are we persuaded that this state of affairs is likely to change in the foreseeable future. On balance, we agree with the District Court that plaintiffs have not proved a violation of 2 of the Voting Rights Act. II. Our second case involves the desegregation of Pulaski County schools. The Joshua Intervenors, representatives of the AfricanAmerican students in Pulaski County, challenge the closing of Ish Incentive School. They maintain that it was an abuse of discretion for the District Court to close Ish without a hearing; that the closing of Ish is precluded by the settlement agreement; and that the Little Rock School District (LRSD} should be estopped to close Ish because it has failed to satisfy the settlement agreement's recruitment requirements. below. Each of these arguments is considered -16- A. In 1989, the parties to the desegregation case -- the LRSD, the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) , the North Little Rock School District (NLRSD), and the Joshua Intervenors, along with the McKnight Intervenors -- entered into a settlement agreement. The agreement was approved by this Court in 1990. Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 921 F.2d 1371 (8th Cir. 1990) (subsequent history omitted) . This agreement put in place the framework for a concerted effort to end racial segregation in Pulaski County schools. The District Court has the onerous task of exercising jurisdiction over the implementation of the settlement agreement. Under the agreement, four desegregation plans, one for each school district and an Interdistrict Plan, were formed. The LRSD and Interdistrict plans are the focus of this case. Under the LRSD Plan, the district was to establish eight incentive schools. These incentive schools would initially be all or virtually all AfricanAmerican, with future projections of 50 to 62 per cent. AfricanAmerican. The incentive schools would sponsor special compensatory-education programs and receive twice as much money per pupil as other elementary schools. Attendance at an incentive school would be open to African-American students living within the particular school's attendance zone. In the Interdistrict Plan, provisions were made for the establishment of six interdistrict magnet schools in addition to the six interdistrict schools in existence when the plan was approved. These interdistrict schools were to emphasize distinct educational themes. African-American students from the LRSD and white students from the PCSSD were expected to attend the interdistrict schools. Preparations are now under way for the building of King -17- - Interdistrict School. King's future location was designated in the Interdistrict Plan to be \"in downtown Little Rock . in the general area along I-630 between I-JO and University Avenue.\" LRSD Plan, at 139. The District Court approved the specific site for King on March 17, 1992. Leonard Thalmueller was hired to design King's attendance zone. Dr. Thalmueller prepared three plans for review by the Office of Desegregation, which presented the plans to the LRSD. In the plan adopted by LRSD, the King attendance zones included Ish Incentive School's attendance zones. On May 5, 1993, LRSD moved for approval of King's attendance zones. Over the Joshua Intervenors' objections, the District Court gave conditional approval to the King attendance zones on June 11, 1993. The District Court's approval was conditioned on Ish's remaining open unless the LRSD established that fewer than 100 students wanted to attend Ish during the 1993-94 academic year. During the 1992-93 academic year, 229 students lived in Ish's attendance zones. Ish had an enrollment of 183 students. Ninetythree were from within the Ish attendance zone, while the other 90 resided outside its attendance zone. The conditional approval required that LRSD survey students within the Ish attendance zone, including those not attending Ish currently, and all students attending Ish, including students from outside the Ish attendance zone. On June 11, 1993, the District Court entered an order requiring LRSD to submit the proposed survey, along with a plan for executing the survey and implementing the survey results, within ten days. The court gave Joshua five days to file responses and objections to the proposed survey and plan. No objections were filed. In compliance with the District Court's order, LRSD filed its proposed survey and its plan for implementing the survey on June 21, 1993. The district proposed sending form letters, King and Ish fact sheets, and a School Selection Form to parents of potential students. Accordingly, the District Court approved the -18- - survey and implementation plan on June 30, 1993. The survey was then conducted. LRSD mailed 260 survey forms, and 173 of the forms were returned. Of the 173 forms returned, 82 students requested Ish. Based on the survey results, LRSD moved the District Court to close Ish. Joshua filed a response to the motion to close Ish expressing opposition, challenging the survey process, and requesting a hearing. On August 2, 1993, the Court denied Joshua's objections as untimely, and granted LRSD's motion to close Ish. B. First, we address Joshua's claim that remand for a hearing is required. While we recognize the possible validity of some of the objections raised by Joshua, we cannot say that the District Court acted arbitrarily by refusing to hold a hearing. In its order dated June 11, 1993, the Court specifically requested that objections to the survey be submitted within five days after LRSD filed the proposed survey and implementation plan. LRSD's proposed survey and plan were filed on June 21, 1993. Joshua made no objections to the survey format or the implementation plan until the survey was completed, more than a month later. Most of the objections Joshua makes now could have been made prior to the survey. It was important for the matter to be decided quickly. The District Court's decision to expedite its ruling concerning Ish's future by providing a timeline for pleadings was not arbitrary. The Court did not abuse its discretion. C. Turning to the heart of this appeal, we now consider the substance of the decision to modify the settlement agreement and approve the closing of Ish Incentive School. The District Court gave two reasons for its decision. First, the survey results -19- - indicated that fewer than 100 students wanted to attend Ish during the 1993-94 academic year. Second, the District Court cited the opening of King Interdistrict School as a desegregated alternative to Ish. A party seeking modification of a consent decree \"must establish that a significant change in facts or law warrants revision of the decree.\" Rufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail, 502 U.S. 367, 393 (1992). If the moving party meets this burden, the District Court must then determine \"whether the proposed modification is suitably tailored to the changed circumstance.\" Id. at 391. The modification \"must not create or perpetuate a constitutional violation,\" nor \"strive to rewrite a consent decree so that it conforms to the constitutional floor.\" Ibid. In this case, Joshua insists that the settlement agreement requires that the district maintain incentive schools and provide double funding for them. Closing Ish, she maintains, is in direct conflict with the settlement agreement. In addition, she asserts that the reasons espoused by the Court for closing Ish do not provide a proper basis for a major modification of the settlement agreement. But nothing in the settlement agreement requires the district to maintain a particular incentive school for an indefinite period of time. What the agreement requires is that the district maintain a number of .incentive schools \"sufficient to accommodate that number of black students who, by attending those schools, make it possible to achieve a student population in the remaining Little Rock Schools of 55 percent black and 45 percent white with a variance of 5 percent.\" Interdistrict Plan, April 29, 1992, at 4. At the outset the parties contemplated that \"[a]s new Interdistrict Schools are established those seats attributable to LRSD will be available for those students who otherwise would or could have been assigned to an incentive school.\" Ibid. -20- Se "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1618","title":"Court filings concerning Interdistrict Achievement Disparity, budget proposals, and facility replacement","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1995-06"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Pulaski County Special School District","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Education--Standards","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","School management and organization","School facilities"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning Interdistrict Achievement Disparity, budget proposals, and facility replacement"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1618"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["41 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1642","title":"Court filings concerning Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1994-95 Incentive School Monitoring Report, Little Rock School District third quarter status report, and ODM 'Monitoring Report 1994-95 Four-Year-Old Program in the LRSD","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1995-05"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs","Education, Primary"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1994-95 Incentive School Monitoring Report, Little Rock School District third quarter status report, and ODM 'Monitoring Report 1994-95 Four-Year-Old Program in the LRSD"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1642"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["37 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, order; Court of Appeals, order denying motion for stay; District Court, two orders; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Monitoring report, ''1994-95 Incentive School Monitoring Report''; District Court, notice of filing, Little Rock School District (LRSD) third quarter status report; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Monitoring, ''Monitoring Report: 1994-95 Four-Year-Old Program in the Little Rock School District (LRSD)''; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool; District Court, notice of filing, Little Rock School District (LRSD) project management tool  The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FILED~ U.S. DISTRICT COUAT EASTERN DISTRICT AR~~$}.$ ' 1995 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JAMEo/ W.J,1cCUHMACK, CLERK WESTERN DIVISION By: , . -~hJ '; .', ,;- ,iJ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. NO, LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. 0 R D E R  '  ' oe.:--ruRI( . PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENOR$ INTERVENORS Through an earlier Order, the Court has scheduled hearings ta begin at 9:00 a.m. on June 8 and 9, 1995. The purpose of these hearings is to review the progress of the Little Rack School District (LRSD) in relation to its 1995-96 budget, and to determine the extent to which the district has fulfilled certain orders of the Court. By 5:00 p.m. on Friday, May 26, 1995 the district must submit to the Court, the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, and the parties all documents, budget material, business cases, and any other information which the district expects to introduce as subject matter far the hearing. As at the last budget hearings, these submissions must include at least: the district's tentative budget, as defined in the LRSD Program Planning and Budgeting Manual of Augu~t 1994; and any new or revised business cases for programmatic or position additions, deletions, or modifications that are reflected in the budget. The district must also identify any major adjustments it has made in the budget since suPmi~ting its 1995-96 proposed budget document to the ('ourt last month, including projected revenue increases, I\" ojccted revenue reductions, projected expenses, and proposed deficit reduction measures. Each new or revised deficit reductic111 strategy must be accompanied by a rationale for the assumptions underlying it, as well as the steps and tiroelines the distri1L will follow in implementing the strategy. Additionally, the district is required to 1,rcGcnt evidence to demonstrate how it has met all the requirement ,, specif i ed in the Court's October 24, 1994 order, which addressed 111 ,,ny aspects of the LRSD's budgeting process. SO ORDERED this 1st day of May 1995. -2- EDWARD L . WRIGHT I 1903-1977) ROBERT S. LINDSEY ( 1913-19911 RONALD A. MAY ISAAC A. SCOTT. JR. JAMES M. MOODY JOHN G. LILE GORDON S. RATHER. JR. TERRY L. MATHEWS DAVID M. POWELL ROGER A. GLASGOW C. DOUGLAS BUFORD, JR. PATRICK J . GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS. JR. JOHN R. TISDALE KATHLYN GRAVES M. SAMUEL JONES Ill JOHN WILLIAM SPIVEY 111 LEE J, MULDROW WENDELL L . GRIFFEN N. M. NORTON. JR. EDGAR J. TYLER CHARLES C. PRICE CHARLES T. COLEMAN JAMES J. GLOVER EDWIN L . LOWTHER. JR. BEVERLY BASSETT SCHAFFER CHARLES L. SCHLUMBERGER SAMMYE L . TAYLOR WALTER E. MAY ANNA HtRAI GIBSON Dr. Donald Stewart WRIGHT, LINDSEY 8: JENNINGS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE SUITE 2200 LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX 1501 I 376-9442 OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS GEORGE E. LUSK. JR. May 4, 1995 Pulaski County Special School District P. o. Box 8601 Little Rock, Arkansas 72216 GREGORY T JONES 1-4. KEITH MORRISON BETTINA E. BROWNSTEIN WALTER MCSPADDEN ROGER D. ROWE NANCY BELLHOUSE MAY JOHN D. DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY KIMBERLY WOOD TUCKER MARK L. PRYOR RAY F. COX, JR. HARRY S. HURST. JR. TROY A. PRICE PATRICIA SIEVERS LEWALLEN JAMES M. MOODY. JR. KATHRYN A. PRYOR J. MARK DAVIS CLAIRE SHOWS HANCOCK KEVIN W. KENNEDY MARK A. ROGERS JERRY J. SALLINGS M. TOCO WOOD R. GREGORY ACLIN FRED M. PERKINS Ill WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL 0 . BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER FRED ANDREW WOOD JUDY M. ROBINSON BETSY MEACHAM AINSLEY H. LANG Re: LRSD v. State of Arkansas, Eighth Circuit Appeal Dear Don: Enclosed for your records is a copy of the Court of Appeals' order denying the State's motion for a stay. By copy of this letter to Ann Brown, I am likewise sending her a copy for her files. MSJ/jhs .Enclosure / \\ cc: Ann Brown (w/encl.)- Cordially yours, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 1-, '--- -~ M. S muel Jones, III MAY 5 1995 Office of Desegregation Moniioring UNITED ST ATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT \u0026 CUSTOM HOUSE MICHAEL E. GANS Clerk of Court Mr . Timothy Gauger ATfORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE 200 Tower Building 323 Center Street Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 1114 MARKET STREET ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 63101 April 28, 1995 TELEPHONE (314) 539-3600 Re: 95-1481EALR Little Rock School District vs. State of AR (Special Panel Referral - MAY1995) Dear counsel : Enclosed is a copy of an order entered today in the above case at the direction of the court. lmt Enclos~re) cc: chard Wilson Roachell . Samuel Jones III John w. walker William Henry Trice III Samuel Arnold Perroni Christopher John Heller Jim McCormack ~.:L; . ,M..,.,~ T. Michael E. Gans Clerk of court District Court/Agency Case Number(s): 82-CV-866 District Court/Agency Case Number(s): 82-CV-866 ' United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTII CIRCUIT MAY J 1995 omce cf Des~c;regauon Mo::i on119 No. 95-1481EA, 95-1482EA No. 95-1481EA * * * * * * Little Rock School District; * * Plaintiff-Appellee, * * Anne Mitchell; Bob Moore; Pat * Gee; Pat Rayburn; Mary J. Gage; * * Intervenors-Appellees, * * North Little Rock Classroom * Teachers Association; Pulaski * Association of Classroom * Teachers; Little Rock Classroom* Teachers Association; * Intervenors, * * * Alexa Armstrong; Karlos * Armstrong; Ed Bullington; * Khayyam Davis; Janice Dent; * John Harrison; Alvin Hudson; * Tatia Hudson; Milton Jackson; *  Lorene Joshua; Leslie Joshua; * Stacy Joshua; Wayne Joshua; * Katherine Knight; Sara * Matthews; Becky McKinney; * Derrick Miles; Janice Miles; * John M. Miles; NAACP; Joyce * Person; Brian Taylor; Hilton * Taylor; Parsha Taylor; Robert * Willingham; Tonya Willingham; * v. * Intervenors-Appellees, * * On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Pulaski county Special School * District, #1; North Little Rock* School District; Leo~ Barnes; * Sheryl Dunn; Mac Faulkner; * Richard A. Giddings; Marianne * Gosser; Don Hindman; Shirley * Lowery; Bob Lyon; George A. * Mccrary; Bob Moore; Steve * Morley; Buddy Raines; David * Sain; Bob Stender; Dale Ward; * John Ward; Judy Wear; * Grainger Williams; * * Defendants-Appellees, * * The Arkansas State Board of * Education; State of Arkansas; * * Defendants-Appellants, * Office of Desegregation Monitor, Claimant. * * * * * * * * No. 95-1482EA * * * * Little Rock School District; * * Plaintiff-Appellant, * * Anne Mitchell; Bob Moore; Pat * Gee; Pat Rayburn; Mary J. Gage; * * Intervenors-Appellants, * * North Little Rock Classroom * Teachers Association; Pulaski * Association of Classroom * Teachers; Little Rock Classroom* Teachers Association; * Intervenors, Alexa Armstrong; Karlos Armstrong; Ed Bullington; * * * * * -2- Khayyam Davis; Janice Dent; * John Harrison; Alvin Hudson; * Tatia Hudson; Milton Jackson; * Lorene Joshua; Leslie Joshua; * Stacy Joshua; Wayne joshua; * * Intervenors-Appellants, * * Katherine Knight; Sara * Matthews; Becky McKinney; * Derrick Miles; Janice Miles; * John M. Miles; NAACP; Joyce * Person; Brian Taylor; Hilton * Taylor; Parsha Taylor; Robert * Willingham; Tonya Willingham; * Intervenors, v. * * * * * * Pulaski County Special School * District, #1; * * Defendant-Appel lee, * * North Little Rock School * District; Leon Barnes; * Sheryl Dunn; Mac Faulkner; * Richard A. Giddings; Marianne * Gosser; Don Hindman; Shirley * Lowery; Bob Lyon; George A. * Mccrary; Bob Moore; Steve * Morley; Buddy Raines; David * Sain; Bob Stender; Dale Ward; * John Ward; Judy Wear; * Grainger Williams; * * Defendants, * * The Arkansas State Board of * Education; State of Arkansas; * * Defendants-Appellees, * Office of Desegregation Monitor, Claimant. * * * * * -3- Filed: April 28, 1995 Before RICHARD s. ARNOLD, Chief Judge, HEANEY, Senior Circuit Judge, and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge. ORDER The motion of appellants State of Arkansas and Arkansas Department of Education for stay of the order of the District Court is denied. Appellants are instructed to make the payment required by the District Court's order forthwith. We agree with the reasons given by the District Court for denying the stay. It is so ordered. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -4- IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. 0 R D E R FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS MAY 1 2 1995 JAMES Wj ~~AMACK, Cl.ERK By: \\ ,dl/v~\\J.JL DEP CWU( PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INT ERVEN ORS INT ERVEN ORS Before the Court is the renewed motion of the Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\") for permission to replace portable buildings with permanent school construction at certain PCSSD junior high schools. The Court has reviewed the updated information provided by the PCSSD and finds that the motion should be granted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion of the PCSSD for permission to replace certain portable buildings (docket entry# 2390) is granted . ~ DATED this j_2:.._ day of May 1995. 11-US DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHE!:T IN COYP~flT~E 58 ANDn::?(a} A'\\CP ON J,- 1 BY 1 -=- 2410 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MAY 1 2 1995 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JAMES W McC~RMACK CLERK WESTERN DIVISION By \\j : ' ~  , C? \\,l/1 \",,\\ L '\"'--DEP ClERI\u003c LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. 0 R D E R PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INT ERVEN ORS Before the Court is the Joshua Intervenors' motion for a hearing to consider their motions to hold the Little Rock School District in contempt of court and for injunctive and other relief. See docket entries# 2361 \u0026 # 2405. The motion (docket entry # 2403) is granted. The Court hereby schedules a hearing on July 6, 1995, at 9:30 a.m., to consider the motions. The parties are directed to exchange the names of all witnesses no later than June 2, 1995. All discovery shall be completed by June 23, 1995. The parties may conduct discovery beyond this date if all parties are in agreement to do so; however, the Court will not be available to resolve any disputes which arise during the course of this extended discovery. Counsel shall mark and exchange all exhibits prior to the hearing, stipulating to as many as possible. The exhibits are to be listed on the attached sheet. Note stipulations and objections on the exhibit list. If there is an objection to an exhibit, - attach a statement setting out the basis for both the offer and the 2 4 1 1 - objection. The list is to be delivered/mailed to Sandy Carpenter no later than June 30, 1995. SO ORDERED this /;;}_~ay of May 1995. ,..,,v 10 , , new . Jj O I I CA .. IU I\\ lltnittb ~atts ilintrirt \u003c!rourt _____________Ea _s'---'-te~r~n'-'---- DISTRICT OF ---=A=-r.:.:.k=-an:.:.s=.:a=-s=----------- - v. -EXHIBIT _ LISJ CASE NUMBER: PRESIDING JUDGE PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY OEFENOANT'S ATTORNEY TRIAL. DATE(S) COURT REPORTER COVRTROOM DEPUTY PL.F. DEF. CATE ~- Rec'd DESCRIPTION OF EXHIBITS NO. NO. OFFERED . . - . - .  1nc1ue1e  notation as 10 tne locat ion of any exhibit not nelel wltn IIM cue Ill or not available t,euuM~. Melissa R. Guldin Associate Monitor Horace R. Smith Associate Monitor 1994-95 INCENTIVE SCHOOLS MONITORING REPORT May 17, 1995 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Little Rock, Arkansas Ann S. Brown Federal Monitor MAY 1 7 199S JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK By: -------- OEP Cl.ERK Margie L. Powell Associate Monitor Polly Ra,mer Office Manager HERSC\u003eH.L H . FRIOAY 11922 1 994 1 ROBERT V L ICHT . PA . - LLIAM H SUTTON . P . A . MES 'N MOORE RON M . :ISEMAN , JR .. P . A . JOE 0 . 3ELL . PA. JOHN C. ECHOI.S.? A , JAMES ,I, . auTTRY , ? A . FREDERICKS . URSERY , ? . A . M. T . L ARZELERE . PA . OSCAR E. OAV I S, JR .. P. A . JAMES C. CLARK , J R., ? A . THOMAS P \\. EGGETT . P . A . JOHN OEWEY WATSON, P . A . PAUL 3 . SENHAM Ill . P . A . LARRY W aURKS, PA . A . WYCX.L 1FF NISBET . JR . PA . JAMES EDWARD H ARRIS , PA . J . PHILLIP MAL COM . P . A . JAMES M . SI MPSON . PA. MEREDITH P CATLE T T , PA , J AMES M . SAXTON , P A . J. SHEPHERD RUSSEL L I ll , P. A. DONALD H i:IACON . ? .A WILLIAM iHOMAS aAXTER , P .A WALTER A . PAU L SON II.PA . BARRY !: . C OP LI N .P A . RICHARD 0 . TAY L O R. P A . J OSEPH a. ''UR S T . J R , PA . EL I ZABETH ROBBEN MURRA Y.PA, CHRISiOP~ER MEL L ER. ? . A . LAURA HENSLE Y SMI T H . P. A . ROBERTS . SHAFER . P A . WILL IAM M . GRIFFIN Ill , PA . THOMAS N . ROSE . PA. MICHAEL S. \\400RE , ? . A . DIANE S. MA CX. EY, o .A WALTER M . EBEL 111, P A . FRIDAY. ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS ANO PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERC IAV8UILOING 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501 -376-2011 FAX NO . 501 - 376 - 2147 May 19, 1995 Office ct Hand-Delivered Mr. John W. Mrs. Ann Brown ICEVIN A. CRASS , P . A . WILLIAM A . WADDELL . J R , P A CLYOE \"TA8'\" TURNER , P A . CALVIN J . HALL. l' . A SCOTT J . LANCASTER . P A . JERRY L. MALONE. P A . M . GAYLE CORLEY. l' . A. ROBERT a. BEACH , J R .. PA . J. LE BROWN. l' . A . JAMES C . BAKER. JR .. PA . H . CHARLES GSCHWEND. JR .. i' .lo HARRY A. LIGHT . P. A . SCOTT H. TUCltER . P. A . JOHN CLAYTON RANOOLPH . P .:. GUY ALTON WADE. P. A . PRICE C . GARDNER . P . A . J . MICHAEL ?ICICENS TONIA I' . JONES DAVID O. WILSON JEFFREY H. MOORE ANO REW T . TURNER DAVIO M . CiRAF CARLA G . SPAINHOUR JOHN C . FENDLEY . JR . ALLISON GRAVES JOHANN C. ROOSEVEL T R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY D . TAYLOR TONY L. WILCOX FRAN C . HICKMAN 8ETiY J . !\u003eEMORY COUHSl!L WILLIAM J. SMITH WILL IAM A . El.OREOGC. J R. , ? A S . S. 0::LAAIC WILLIAM L . TERRY , ? A . WILLIAM L. PATTON . J R. , P ;. WIUTUt ~ OIIUCT 140 . 1501) 370- 1553 Walker John Walker , P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR He.?:'itage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street 72206 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Mr. Richard Roachell Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2200 Worc~en Bank Building 200 West Capitol First Federal Plaza, Suite 504 401 Wesc Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Little Rock, AR 72201 Capicol \u0026 Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Third Quarter Status Report Gentlemen and Mrs. Brown: Enc~osed please find the LRSD's Third Quarter Status for the 1994-95 school year filed pursuant to the Order Court. Thank you for your attention to this matter. ~nc~~y, p ~ z ~ L_~ Jerry L. Maloned::.=-~ LRSD Attorney diana'PC,S-Sd\\swus .l tr Report of the Gentlemen and Mrs. Brown May 19 , 1995 Page 2 JLM/ dtw Enclosure cc (w/ enc ) : diana\\4)CSSd\\sllW1.IU' Dr. Henry P. Williams Mrs. Estelle Matthis ::'.AS'i'S~'l' DIS~:ZICT Or. -~KANSAS '.'1ESTE~'l' DIVISION :::..::;::'TLE ROCK SCECCL ;:::sT:z:cT vs. ?ULASKI COUNTY S?EC:X.. SCHOOL ~:STRICT NO. :, ::'.T ~=- ~~ ~ ~~~~ \"':'--~ !f='~ . .. \"1 .. -  - u ---  ~ 1~IA; / 9 !995 ?I.A.:NTI?:' '.JEFENDANTS :)TTERVENORS :\u003c.A.THERINE KNIGnT, ET AL ~~TE~VENORS LRSD's 1994-95 THIRD QUARTER STATUS REPORT . \"LRSD\" or - \"Disr.rict\") , for its Stac:us Reporr. :or the t:hi:?:\"d quarr.er of the 1994-95 school year, st.ates: 1. Attached herer.o as Exhibit 1 (Volumes I and r:) is a true and accurac:e copy of t:he District's Third Quarr.er Star.us Reporr. of Desegregation Programs generated through the courr.-:nandated program planning and budger.ing process. 2. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and accurate copy of the Disr.ricr.' s Thi:?:\"d Cuarr.e:?:\" Status Report: ~f :-on-desegregar.ion Programs generaced c~rough the court-mandaced program planning and budgeting process. WHEREFORE, the :::..~ttle Rock School Jisr.r~ct: submits its Desegregation and Non-desegregacion Star.us Reporcs fer the third d11111\\pCS.I.Ql.saw\u0026.Jrd -1- daata\\pcud\\staU.lrd sc:-.oc:.. :_;ear ?~IDAY, ~~JREDGE \u0026 c:....~2-~ Att:orneys at: Law 2000 Fi:-st: Commers~~~ 3uiliing 400 West: Capicol 'i:....:..ccle Rock, _;;.rkansas 1501) 376-2011 \"'2201-3493 .c..':'~ORNEYS ?OR ?I.A:::,-:::? ~ITT~E ~oc~ SC~OOL JIS~RIC~ ----. __,,,-;-'1'1 --~~-c.;--:--:~~-\\-- --~- ----=- -- . -=--===---- ---------- _____ _...., ._ .,.-~==...;=~=-_,1.;,....:/;_-:...'~:....--__ ___-_ __ _:;===--~ ,/ _, ..-, er:-y ;;_.;.-.. . \\.J f. aJ- .one / ~ar :. J. ~o. 3509S -2- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE :crry _. Y!alone, do :1ereoy cerc.:...:, -::-.at: a copy of the .:orego:..~g LRSD's ~~ird Quar-::er S:acus Recor-: =~r -=~e :994-~= school year i:as :::een hand-del:..vered on May Jf', :995, ..:.oon c::e f:::llowing: dw,a\\p:::ud\\SWUI.Jrd Y!r. John W. Walker -70H.L\"\\T ~'1 . ,-IALKER, ? . _:;_. Atcor~eys at: ~aw : 723 3roadway ~icc~e Rock, ~R 72206 Y!r. Samuel M . ..=-ones, :::::: NRIGn7, ~I)IDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS ~ttcr~eys at: ~aw 2200 Worchen Bank 3u:..~c:..:i.g 200 West: Capit:ol ~ictle Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. Att:orneys at: Law 3400 Capit:ol Towers Capitol \u0026 Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell ROACHELL \u0026 STREETT Attorneys at: Law Firsc Federal Plaza, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Y!rs . .lVln Brown Attor:i.ey at: Law Jericage West Building, Suice 520 201 Ease Markham Street: Sittle Rock, AR 72201 ~--::::::;:::::=::;:::::::::::::,__..______ '/ C ~~--- -__/,/'J, ~ - . ;---,n. / / . -~-----=::::::. s ..:-erry L. Malor.e -3 - Melissa R. Guldin Associate Monitor MONITORING REPORT: FILED U.S. OISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS 1994-95 FOUR-YEAR-OLD PROGRJ\\M6.MES W. McCORMACK, CLERK IN THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DIST~'\"\"-t-------oEP Cl.fRK May 26, 1995 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Little Rock, Arkansas Ann S. Brown Monitor I Polly Ramer Office Manager Atkansas DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION M 31 IA.STATE CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 ay , ~~::, GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division John W. Walker, Esq. John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206-1220 M. Samuel Jones III, Esq. Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3699 Richard W. Roachell, Esq. Roachell \u0026 Streett First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol A venue Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Counsel of Record: Christopher J. Heller, Esq. Friday, Eldredge, \u0026 Clark First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Avenue Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3407 Ann Brown, Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Stephen W. Jones, Esq. Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones, P.A. TCBYTower 425 West Capitol Avenue Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Please find enclosed a copy of the Arkansas Department of Education's Project Management Tool for the month of May. If you need any additional information, please let me know. Sincerely, i~ Elizabeth Boyter Enclosure cc: EB/say Alice Holcomb Sara Fairbanks Suzanne Griscom Tony Minicozzi Mark Hudson Kem Treat HERSCHEL H . FRIDAY ! 1922 -1 994) ROBERT V . LIGHT , P .A . WILLIAM H . SUTTON , P . A . JAMES W . MOORE - NM . EISEMAN , JR., P . A . . BELL . P .A . C . ECHOLS . P. A . J SA . BUTTRY , P . A . FREDERICKS . URSERY , P.A . H , T . LARZELERE , P.A . OSCAR E. DAVIS , JR . , P .A . JAMES C. CLARK , JR ., P. A . THOMAS P. LEGGETT , P . A . JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P. A . PAUL B. BENHAM Ill , P . A . LARRY W . BURKS , P .A . A . WYCKLIFF NISBET , JR ., P .A . JAMES EDWARD HARRIS , P .A . J . PHILLIP MALCOM , P. A . JAMES M . SIMPSON , P. A . MEREDITH P. CATLETT . P. A . JAMES M . SAXTON , P .A . J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL Ill , P .A . DONALD H . BACON , P. A . WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER , P . A . WALTER A . PAULSON 11 , P. A . BARRY E. COPLIN , P. A . RICHARD 0. TAYLOR , P .A . JOSEPH 8 . HURST , JR .. P. A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY , P. A . CHRISTOPHER HELLER . P. A . LAURA HENSLE Y SMITH, P . A . ROBERTS . SHAFER , P . A . WILLIAM M . GRIFFIN 111 , P. A . THOMAS N . ROSE . P .A . MICHAELS . MOORE . P .A . DIANE S . MACKEY . P .A . WALTER M . EBEL Ill , P .A. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 .CLARK A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 - 3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX NO. 501-376-2147 May 31, 1995 Mrs. Ann Brown Attorney at Law CC: fJ; II KEVIN A . CRASS, P .A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL. JR ., P. A . CLYDE TAB TURNER. P. A . CALVIN J. HALL, P. A . SCOTT J. LANCASTER. P. A . JERRY l. MALONE, P. A . M . GAYLE CORLEY . P. A . ROBERT B. BEACH , JR .. P .A . J . LEE BROWN. P.A . JAMES C. BAKER, JR ., P . A . H . CHARLES GSCHWEND. JR ., P.A . HARRY A . LIGHT , P. A . SCOTT H . TUCKER , P . A . JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH , P. A . GUY ALTON WADE , P. A . PRICE C . GARONER . P.A. J . MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P . JONES DAVID 0. WILSON JEFFREY H . MOORE ANDREW T . TURNER DAVID M. GRAF CARLA G. SPAINHOUR JOHN C. FENDLEY , JR . ALLISON GRAVES JONANN C . ROOSEVELT A. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY 0 . TAYLOR TONY L . WILCOX FRANC . HICKMAN BETTY J. DEMORY COUNSEL WILLIAM J. SMITH WILLIAM A. ELDREDGE. JR ., P.A . 0 . 5 . CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY , P . A . WILLIAM L. PATTON , JR ., P.A. (501) 370-1553 Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. Attorneys at Law 1723 Broadway Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS Attorneys at Law 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol \u0026 Broadway Streets Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell ROACHELL \u0026 STREETT Attorneys at Law First Federal Plaza, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: LRSD v . PCSSD/Proj ect Management Tool l r:,1,.J ,(,.,. il,\"'\"'J) I Gentlemen and Mrs. Brown: Enclosed please find the LRSD's 1995-96 Budget/May Project Management Tool filed pursuant to the Order of the Court. By agreement, three copies are being delivered to Mrs. Brown and two copies are being delivered to Mr. Walker. diana\\pcssd\\tool-may. Jtr Gentlemen and Mrs. Brown May 31, 1995 Page 2 Thank you for your attention to this matter. JLM/dtw Enclosures cc (w/enc) : tl1ana\\pcssd\\toolmay.lu Sincerely, Dr. Henry P. Williams Dr. Russell Mayo Dr. Robert Clowers IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT vs. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MAY 3 1 1995 PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL Office of Desegreg:i. 1 Mei to, ir. NTERVENORS LRSD's 1995-96 BUDGET/MAY PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"), for its 1995-96 Budget/May Project Management Tool, states: 1. Pursuant to the Order of this Court, the LRSD does hereby submit its Project Management Tool for the month ending May 31, 1995, relating to its 1995-96 budget. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its Project Management Tool for the month ending May 31, 1995, relating to its 1995-96 budget. diana\\pcssd\\budge1.may Respectfully submitted, FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK Attorneys at Law 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF _Ll'.I'.TLE____OCK SCHOOL DISTRICT \u003c ---- d ~ / /-Z~ ~ :-~77 ~-~ ~ _ - -- Jerry L. MaJ.:: -- Bar No. I. D. 85096 -1- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing LRSD's 1995-96 Budget/May Project Management Tool has been served by U. S. Mail, postage prepaid, except as otherwise indicated, on May 31, 1995, upon the following: c.J1ana\\pessd\\budget. may Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. Attorneys at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Samuel M. Jones, III WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS Attorneys at Law 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. Attorneys at Law 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol \u0026 Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell ROACHELL \u0026 STREETT Attorneys at Law First Federal Plaza, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown (Hand-delivered as per Order by the Court) Attorney at Law Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 7220_1 -~ ~ -=--- Jerry L. Malone -2-  This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources. "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1249","title":"Proceedings: ''Budget Hearing''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1995-04-10"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Pulaski County Special School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Budget Hearing''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1249"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["48 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1588","title":"Court filings concerning Incentive school and program management, incentive school staffing, project management tools, and Little Rock School district in contempt of court","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1995-04"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational planning","Educational law and legislation","School management and organization","School employees","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning Incentive school and program management, incentive school staffing, project management tools, and Little Rock School district in contempt of court"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1588"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["120 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1247","title":"Proceedings: ''Budget Hearing''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1995-03-24"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Pulaski County Special School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Budget Hearing''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1247"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["filing"],"dcterms_extent":["197 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":29,"next_page":30,"prev_page":28,"total_pages":46,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":336,"total_count":544,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":544}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)","hits":313},{"value":"United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit","hits":35},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":14},{"value":"Bushman Court Reporting","hits":11},{"value":"Walker, John W.","hits":6},{"value":"Pulaski County Special School District","hits":3},{"value":"Springer, Joy C.","hits":3},{"value":"Arkansas. Department of Education","hits":2},{"value":"Cobb Court Reporting","hits":2},{"value":"Joshua Intervenors","hits":2},{"value":"Chancery Court of Pulaski County, Arkansas, Sixth Division","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"Education--Arkansas","hits":439},{"value":"Educational law and legislation","hits":396},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":378},{"value":"Pulaski County Special School District","hits":354},{"value":"Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","hits":329},{"value":"School integration","hits":317},{"value":"Educational planning","hits":295},{"value":"Education--Evaluation","hits":268},{"value":"School management and organization","hits":249},{"value":"Education--Finance","hits":223},{"value":"Court records","hits":206}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Springer, Joy C.","hits":6},{"value":"Walker, John W.","hits":3},{"value":"Heller, Christopher","hits":2},{"value":"Wright, Susan Webber, 1948-","hits":2},{"value":"Armor, David","hits":1},{"value":"Eddington, Ramsey","hits":1},{"value":"Jones, Sam","hits":1},{"value":"Jones, Stephen W.","hits":1},{"value":"Joshua, Lorene","hits":1},{"value":"Lester, Bobby","hits":1},{"value":"Porter, Austin, Jr.","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":2}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":544},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":537},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":535},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":472},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Maumelle, 34.86676, -92.40432","hits":4},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, North Little Rock, 34.76954, -92.26709","hits":2},{"value":"United States, Kansas, 38.50029, -98.50063","hits":2},{"value":"United States, Missouri, 38.25031, -92.50046","hits":2},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Phillips County, 34.42829, -90.84802","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Jacksonville, 34.8662, -92.11015","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Scott County, Waldron, 34.89843, -94.09076","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Arkansas","hits":537},{"value":"Kansas","hits":2},{"value":"Missouri","hits":2},{"value":"Connecticut","hits":1},{"value":"Illinois","hits":1},{"value":"Massachusetts","hits":1},{"value":"Oklahoma","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1994","hits":50},{"value":"1995","hits":44},{"value":"1992","hits":41},{"value":"1996","hits":40},{"value":"1993","hits":38},{"value":"2001","hits":32},{"value":"2011","hits":31},{"value":"1997","hits":28},{"value":"2002","hits":24},{"value":"1991","hits":23},{"value":"1998","hits":22},{"value":"2012","hits":20},{"value":"2010","hits":16},{"value":"1999","hits":15},{"value":"2003","hits":15},{"value":"1989","hits":12},{"value":"2000","hits":12},{"value":"2004","hits":12},{"value":"2013","hits":12},{"value":"2007","hits":11},{"value":"2005","hits":10},{"value":"2006","hits":10},{"value":"2009","hits":8},{"value":"1988","hits":7},{"value":"1990","hits":7},{"value":"1984","hits":6},{"value":"2008","hits":6},{"value":"1986","hits":4},{"value":"1985","hits":3},{"value":"1987","hits":2},{"value":"1954","hits":1},{"value":"1983","hits":1},{"value":"2017","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"1954","max":"2017","count":564,"missing":0},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"filing","hits":544}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":544}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Office of Desegregation Management","hits":544}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":544}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":544}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":544}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}