{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"hbcula_becu_24","title":"Voice of the Wildcats Newsletter, April 15, 2004","collection_id":"hbcula_becu","collection_title":"Bethune-Cookman University Digital Collection","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Florida, Volusia County, Panama Beach, 28.86832, -81.22778"],"dcterms_creator":["Bethune-Cookman University"],"dc_date":["2004-04-15"],"dcterms_description":["The student newsletter of Bethune-Cookman College, now Bethune-Cookman University, highlighting student voices, campus and community activities, and current events."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American universities and colleges","African American students","Campus life","College student newspapers and periodicals","Civil rights movements"],"dcterms_title":["Voice of the Wildcats Newsletter, April 15, 2004"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) Library Alliance"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://hbcudigitallibrary.auctr.edu/digital/collection/becu/id/24"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["All rights to images are held by the respective holding institution. This image is posted publicly for non-profit educational uses, excluding printed publication. For permission to reproduce images and/or for copyright information contact University Archives, Bethune-Cookman University, Daytona Beach, FL 32114 (386) 481-2186. https://www.cookman.edu/library/index.html"],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"geh_vhpohr_614","title":"Oral history interview of Reginald Hobert Kemp","collection_id":"geh_vhpohr","collection_title":"Veterans History Project: Oral History Interviews","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["Japan, 35.68536, 139.75309","Korea, 37.663998, 127.978458","United States, Georgia, Cobb County, Marietta, 33.9526, -84.54993","United States, South Carolina, Richland County, Fort Jackson, 34.04757, -80.83335","United States, Virginia, Fairfax County, Fort Belvoir, 38.7119, -77.14589"],"dcterms_creator":["Wallace, Fredrick C.","Kemp, Reginald Hobert, 1931-"],"dc_date":["2004-04-08","2014"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["video/quicktime"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Veterans History Project oral history recordings"],"dcterms_subject":["Korean War, 1950-1953--Personal narratives, American","Race discrimination--United States","United States. Army. Engineer Combat Regiment, 40th","Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Company. Georgia Division"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview of Reginald Hobert Kemp"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta History Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://album.atlantahistorycenter.com/cdm/ref/collection/VHPohr/id/614"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material is protected by copyright law. (Title 17, U.S. Code) Permission for use must be cleared through the Kenan Research Center at the Atlanta History Center. Licensing agreement may be required."],"dcterms_medium":["streaming video"],"dcterms_extent":["51:25"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Rankin, Christopher"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"ere_c18_51307","title":"Ruth Mann oral history interview, April 8, 2004","collection_id":"ere_c18","collection_title":"African American History","dcterms_contributor":["Cartwright, Barbara"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, 35.50069, -80.00032"],"dcterms_creator":["Mann, Ruth, 1938-2020"],"dc_date":["2004-04-08"],"dcterms_description":["Oral history interview of African American educator Ruth Mann, in Bath, NC. The interview covers all aspects of Mann's life including: her upbringing in a Pantego, NC family of teachers and farmers, education, segregation, integration, marriage, children, and move to New York City, NY, and education at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, in Greensboro, NC (1960-1964), her first degree in finance, her second degree in education from East Carolina University, her teaching career as an African American teacher in Beaufort County, NC in the Pantego Elementary School, Northside High School, and church activities. Other topics of interest include: the civil rights movement, Jesse Jackson, and Martin Luther King. Interviewer: Barbara Cartwright."],"dc_format":["audio/mpeg","text/html"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Education--North Carolina","African American teachers--North Carolina--Beaufort County","Civil rights movements--United States--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Ruth Mann oral history interview, April 8, 2004"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["J.Y. Joyner Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://digital.lib.ecu.edu/51307"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This item has been made available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Researchers are responsible for using these materials in accordance with Title 17 of the United States Code and any other applicable statutes. If you are the creator or copyright holder of this item and would like it removed, please contact us at als_digitalcollections@ecu.edu."],"dcterms_medium":["oral histories (literary genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Mann, Ruth, 1938-2020"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1770","title":"Court filings regarding motion of the Little Rock School District (LRSD) to be released from further supervision and monitoring of its desegregation efforts, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) response to Court's order, Joshua intervenors' and LRSD's exhibit and witness list, and Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool.","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":["2004-04"],"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":["Education--Arkansas","Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st century","School districts","Little Rock School District","Arkansas. Department of Education","Project management","Joshua intervenors","African Americans--Education","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Evaluation","School integration","School improvement programs","Education--Standards"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings regarding motion of the Little Rock School District (LRSD) to be released from further supervision and monitoring of its desegregation efforts, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) response to Court's order, Joshua intervenors' and LRSD's exhibit and witness list, and Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool."],"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/1770"],"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":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["18 page scan, typed"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\u003c?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"utf-8\"?\u003e\n\u003citems type=\"array\"\u003e  \u003citem\u003e   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_description type=\"array\"\u003e   \n\n\u003cdcterms_description\u003eCourt filings: District Court, the Joshua intervenors' opposition to the motion of the Little Rock School District (LRSD) to be released from further supervision and monitoring of its desegregation efforts; District Court, the Joshua intervenors' memorandum in support of their opposition to the motion of the Little Rock School District (LRSD) to be released from further supervision and monitoring of its desegregation efforts; District Court, order; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) response to Court's order of April 19, 2004; District Court, the Joshua intervenors' exhibit list and witness list; District Court, Little Rock School District (LRSD) witness list and exhibit list; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool    This transcript was create using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.    . ., . C,\\ t,(A,~ - t: JWR... APR 15 200, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAAMES W. McCORMACK. CLERK WESTSRN DIVISION By~ 5Epc(]Al( LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. LR-C-82-866 RECEIVED . APR 1 9 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Joshua Intervenors' Opposition to the Motion of the LRSD to Be Released from Further Supervision and Mon'i taring of Its Desegregation Efforts The \"LRSD has [not] substantially complied with [Plan] Section 2. 7 .1, as specified in [the court's] Compliance Remedy.\" [Mem. Opiri., September 13, 2002, at 172] Therefore, the LRSD must continue to be subject to further supervision and monitoring of its implementation of the court-ordered remedy, until it demonstrates substantial compliance with that remedy. The LRSD motion should be denied apd supervision and monitoring should continue for a minimum of two additional years. 1 The Int.ervenors' Opposition is based upon record in the case, the accompanying memorandum, and evidence (including expert 1This two year period of time will afford the LRSD the minimum time it needs to achieve compliance with tne remedy; and, as well, give the Joshua Intervenors and the ODM the time to determine whether compliance is not merely transitory. 1 I i I l . i I I i l i testimony) and arguments to be submitted at the hearing scheduled - by the court. iRenvsr ~ ... Ro ert Pressman . 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 781-862-1955 Mass, 405900 Elaine R. Jones President \u0026amp; Director-Counsel Norman Chachkin Theodore Shaw NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. 99 Hudson Street New York, NY ,. 10013-28 97 212-965-2200 2 o Walker 'ckey Hicks ohn W. Walker, P.A . 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 501-374-3758 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby state that a copy of the foregoing has been served on all counsel of record on this 15th day of April, 2004 by placing a copy of same in the United States mail postage prepaid. 3 (J ' tr ~ - FILED  ' c.ao-Jl;!_.,DISTRICT COURT ~ -. ..,..., s::rv11 DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT APR 15 2004 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK By . DEPCLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. PULASKI COUN~Y SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. LR-C-82-866 RECEIVED APR 1 9 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Joshua Intervenors' Memorandum in Support of Their Opposition to the Motion of the LRSD to Be Released from Further Supervision and Monitorina of Its Deseareaation Effo~ts The \"LRSD has [not] substantially complied with [Plan] Section 2. 7. 1, as specified in [the court's] Compliance Remedy\" [Memorandum Opinion, September 13,2002,at 172, para. F]. Therefore, the LRSD must continue to be subject to further supervision and monitoring of its implementation of the court-ordered remedy, until it demonstrates substantial compliance with that remedy. The retention of jurisdiction should be for a new period of two school years. This court's September, 2002 opinion identified the purpose of Section 2.7.1, the importance of substantial compliance with its terms, and the capacity which the LRSD must demonstrate as one element of its burden to justify the termination of the court's 1 / ,.. supervision. This court wrote: I find that the purpose of 2.7.1 was to make sure that the programs under 2. 7 actually worked to improve the academic achievement of African-American students. I further find that LRSD's substantial compliance with 2.7.1 was crucial to its commitment to improve the academic achievement of African American students; for, without performing a rigorous annual assessment of each of the many dozens of programs implemented under 2. 7, it would be impossible to determine which programs were working and should be continued and which programs were not working and should be discontinued, modified, or replaced with new programs [at 150; emphasis in original] . I conclude that the court should continue supervision and monitoring of LRSD's compliance with this crucially important section of the Revised Plan in order to ensure that LRSD has in place an effective assessment program that will allow it to identify and improve those programs that are most effective in rernediating the academic achievement of African American students. [at 168] These elements of the court's opinion help to frame the issues presented by the Joshua Intervenors' opposition to the LRSD motion. A. The Lack of the Capacity of the LRSD to Perform the Requisite Assessments and Evaluations (1.) For the reasons set forth in paragraphs 2 . through 14, the LRSD has failed to \"[demonstrate] that a program assessment procedure is in place that can accurately measure the effectiveness of each program implemented under Section 2. 7 in improving the academic achievement of African-American students: . [ \"Compliance Remedy,\" Mem. Opin., at 170; see also id. at 168) (2.) In its ruling of September 13, 2002, the court cited the recognition of the school board and upper echelon administrators that the LRSD had been without the capacity to . prepare what the court termed \"in-depth and analytic program evaluations.\" [Mem. 2 / ,J' , 1'  ' Opin. at 156; see id. at 153 (Dr. Lesley ) ; at 156-57 (school - board); at 157 (Superintendent Carnine)]; at 159 (Dr. Lesley)]. (3.) Subsequent to the court's entry of the Compliance Remedy, the LRSD has continued to have an inadequately staffed evaluation/assessment unit. [ODM report, March 30, 2004 at 2, 16] (4.) In its opinion of September 13, 2002, the court found that the LRSD had identified \"many dozens of programs [as] implemented under Section 2. 7 [of the agreed upon Plan] II [Mem. Opin. at 150] The Compliance Remedy provides in part as follows: A. For the entire 2002-03 school year and the first semester of the 2003-04 school year, through December 31, 2003, LRSD must continue to assess each of the programs implemented under Section 2.7 to improve the academic achievement of AfricanAmerican students. [Mem. Opin. at 170; emphasis added] Nevertheless, despite inquiries from ODM , the LRSD has not even - identified, with clarity, the programs which it deems to be subject to this mandate (much less provided evidence of the assessment or evaluation of each program). [ODM report, March 30, 2004 at 23.] (5.) In the light of the court's opinion [Mem . Opin. at 151- 152; 153; 156-158], the LRSD properly concluded that it must each year, among other things, complete several compreh~nsive evaluations of key parts of the curriculum \"designed to improve and remediate the academic achievement of African-American students . \" [Plan Section 2. 7] 1 (6. ) On October 10, 2002, the LRSD school board adopted Regulation IL-Rl titled \"Program Evaluation Agenda.\". The regulation 1 . LRSD Compliance Plan, filed March 14, 2003, at 7. 3 / sets forth standards and procedures for program evaluations in the - LRSD. [See LRSD Submission of March 14, 2003, Appendix l] It provides in part (at 5) that \"the first meetings [of the committee responsible for evaluating a particular program] will be devoted to the following tasks . D. Agree on any necessary research questions that need to be established in addition to the question, 'Has this curriculum\\instruction program been effective i .n improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students?' (See Policy IL, 2.7.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, and Judge Wilson's Compliance Remedy.)\" (7.) The LRSD offers as one comprehensive evaluation the \"Little Rock School District Literacy Program Evaluation\" authored by Dr. Steven M. Ross and others of the Center for Research in Educational Policy, University of Memphis. The LRSD approved a list of research questions for this study not including the auestion quoted in para. 6 1 identified by the LRSD as a necessary element of any evaluation to be a part of the effort to satisfy the court's Compliance Remedy. 2 Indeed,the Literacy Evaluation states (at 4): \"The primary purpose of research focus was to examine the achievement of Africa:n American students in reading and language arts in the Little Rock School District.\" (8.) Dr. Ross prepared for the LRSD a document regarding the \"Page 148\" evaluations. It is titled \"Guidelines for Completing Eight Progr~m Evaluations in Little Rock School District.\",[filed by LRSD on March 14~ 2003] The document articulates, among others, 2 See Literacy Evaluation at 1 (research questions), at 4 (indicating that question most relevant to the Compliance Remedy was given lesser emphasis). 4 the following premise [Plaintiffs' Notice ... , March 14, 2003, at - 1]: Program evaluations that focus predominately on student achievement outcomes while lacking sufficient implementation data have reduced value due to inability to determine the nature of the 'treatment.' The study will also fail to inform policymakers about the practicality of the program, now it was used and reacted to by stakeholders, or whether and\\or how it needs to be improved to impact at-risk learners. (9 .) In 2000, Dr. Ross met with the LRSD Compliance Committee. A part of the discussion is described in the ODM report, March 30, 2004, as follows (at 3): (10.) . [Dr. Ross] also describ.ed the program evaluation process, which included a classroom observation plan developed at the University of Memphis. The observations were to ensure that programs were being consistently implemented in the classrooms throughout the district .. Respectfully, the O TTr'\\-\"':\\ 1 1 V \"-.\u0026amp;..._.,..I.. ..L. text of the Literacy Evaluation shows, consistent with its stated purpose, that it \"focused] predominately on student achievement outcomes while lacking sufficient implementation data .\" The description of programs is exceedingly terse and, at grade levels 10-12, almost non-existent. [Literacy Evaluatton at 10-11] It reflects no observation of classrooms by outside observers to assess ~ctual program implementation. This is the case because the funding which the LRSD provided to Dr. Ross and his Center was not sufficient to pay for classroom observation. This study can provide little help to answer the question \"whether and\\or how [the literacy program] needs to be improved to impact at-risk learners.\" ,In this regard, it is noteworthy that LRSD Regulation IL-Rl includes, as one 5 / i -l criterion for identifying evaluation topics, the following question - [at 4] : \"Can the results of the evaluation influence decisions about the prograrn?\"3 ( 11.) Other elements of LRSD policy IL-Rl, as well as the professional standards on which the LRSD standards drew, buttress Joshua Intervenors' contention that the Literacy Evaluation falls short of the mark when judged in the light of the objectives of the court's Compliance Remedy (i.e., conducting PROGRAM evaluations for a particular purpose.) (a.) LRSD policy IL-Rl contains the following content: Program Documentation. The program being evaluated should be described and documented clearly and accurately so that it is identified clearly. [at 3) \"Program Evaluation Procedures\" G:C:  Write a clear description .. of the curriculum\\ in3truction program that is to be evaluated, with information about the schedule of its implementation. [at 4-5) (b.) LRSD Policy IL (\"Evaluation of Instructional Programs\") provides that \"all program evaluations will follow standards established by the National Joint Cammi ttee on Standards for Education Evaluation.\" Policy IL-Rl further identifies these standards; they are The Program Evaluation Standards, 2nd Edition: How to Assess Evaluations of Educational Programs (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications) . These standards include the following content in the section on \"accuracy standards\" [at 127-28): 3 The Literacy Evaluation does inform the LR,SD that it must determine whther it has a literacy program at grades 6-12 and, as well, assess the need to communicate the content of the program to teachers. See Evaluation at 43 (first paragraph}. 6 / STANDARD The program being evaluated should be described and documented clearly and accurately, so that the program is clearly defined. Overview It is necessary for the evaluator to gain a solid understanding of the program being evaluated, including both the way it was intended to be and the way it actually was implemented, and to convey this description to others. Failure to gain such understanding will lead to an evaluation that, when completed, is likely to be of questionable use. A valid characterization of a program as it actually was implemented will describe its unique features and component parts in order to facilitate comparisons of the program with similar programs. A good description of the program will also facilitate attempts to associate components of the program with its effects. * GUIDELINES A. Ask the client and the other stakeholders to describe orally, and, if possible, in wri ting--the intended and actual program with reference to such characteristics .as personnel, cost, procedures, location, facilities, setting, activities, objectives, natrire of participation, and potential side effects ... C. Engage independ~nt observers to describe the program if time and budget permit. D. Set aside time at the beginning of the evaluation to observe the program and the staff and participants who are involved ... (1 2 .) The LRSD provides as one comprehensive evaluation \"An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to 2003\" (December 2003 ) . The dos:;ument provides only a brief general description of the math and science programs evaluated. [at 9-10] It notes the phasing in of the program in the period 1998-1999 to 2002-03 [at 7-~], with grades 10-12 reached in the school year 200 ?. -03. [i3t. 9] The evaluation recognizes the importance of actual implemen~ation in the classroom. [at 11, 106, 107] It identifies three methods utilized 7 / to secure data on this matter, but does not report any results. [at - 11] With regard to the description of the program evaluated and its implementation, this evaluation falls short of the LRSD and professional standards cited above. Consequently, one can not determine whether the program or any component of it is responsible for any of the outcomes cited in the report. ( 13.) The weakness of the \"Page 148\" evaluations also evidences the lack of capacity of the LRSD to fulfill paragraphs (a) and (A) of the Compliance Remedy. [Mem. Opin. at 170-171] See infra, para. 15 and (14.) The ODM Report of March 30, 2no4, states: \"Contrary to the spirit of the regulation for program evaluation, the [LRSD] literacy evaluation team's involvement was limited to tacit approval of . the evaluation  plan and assisting with data - collection . \" [at 16] This is a negative factor in terms of the system's developing internal capacity for conducting evaluations and assessments . B. The Preparation of the Page 148 Evaluations (15.) The LRSD did not comply in substance with the requirement of the court-ordered remedy that it [prepare] the program evaluations identified on page 148 of the Final Compliance Report . [Compliance Remedy, Mem. Opin. at 170] The evaluations filed by the LRSD on March 14, 2003 do not satisfy the sLandards for evaluations set forth in Regulation ~LRl, o~ the professional standards on which they are ~ased. See \"The Joshua Intervenors' Comments on the Submission of Page 148 8 'Evaluations,'\" filed April 14, 2003; ODM Report, March 30, 2004, - at 21 (citing views of Dr. Ross \"that, for the most part, the evaluations of the subject programs 'were worthless'\" and \"that the evaluations were of little or no use to the district.\") C. The Use of Evaluation and Assessment Results (16.) The LRSD provides no discussion of any use made of the results of evaluation/assessment in the science area . [ODM report, March 30, 2004 at 15] (17.) The LRSD did not use the \"page 148 [evaluations]\" \"as part of the program assessment process, to determine the effectiveness of those programs in improving African American achievement and whether, based on the evaluations, any changes or modifications should be made in those programs.\" [Compliance Remedy, Mem.Opin . . Qt 171-7-2] Th:e1.-e is no suggestion of such use in either the March 14, 2003 submission or the March 12, 2004 submission of the LRSD; see also ODM report, March 30, 2004 at 22. D. The Failure of the LRSD to Provide Information ( 18.) Subsequent to the court's entry of the Compliance Remedy, the LRSD has acted in a manner to limit the availability of information about its compliance activities . (a) LRSD Policy IL-Rl (\"Program Evaluation Agenda\") adopted by the LRSD on October 10, 2002, provides in part (at 5) that the \"team leader\" for each evaluation shall G. Plan wa vs to Provide reaular oroaress reports {e.g., dissemination of meeting minutes, written progress reports, oral reoorts to the Superintendent's Cabinet an.d\\or Compliance team) to stakeholders, including the Associate ' Superintendent for Instruction, the Superintendent of Schools, _the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (until Unitary Status is achieved), 9 / and the Joshua Intervenors (until Unitary Status is achieved). - Thereafter , the LRSD did not implement this provision . (b) On April 8, 2003, as part of the Section 8 process, counsel for the Joshua Intervenors directed a letter to the LRSD concerning the plan for carrying out evaluations and the provision to Joshua of information on observation of the educational program within several schools . The LRSD ignored this letter, Attachment A hereto. (c) The Joshua also discussed their concerns regarding the LRSD's implementation of the Compliance Remedy in a letter to Ms. Ann Marshall, ODM on March 10, 2004, a copy of which was provided to counsel for the school district. hereto. E . Other Factors This letter is Attachment B LRSD submissions subsequent to the court's entry of the Compliance Remedy do not show that in that period the district worked with the Arkansas Department of Education to remediate the racial academic achievement disparities which continue to exist in the LRSD. See, for example, the test data in the math-science evaluation. The LRSD did not comply with the requirements of the Pulaski . County School District Desegregation Case Settlement Agreement, March 1989 (as Revised September 28 , 1989), Section IIIF( a,c), III-G . CONCLUSTON The LRSD has neither completed adequately the products which this court required, nor demonstrated the capacity to carry on 10 adequately in the evaluation/assessment sphere without court - supervision and monitoring. Therefore, the LRSD motion should be denied and supervision and monitoring should continue for a minimum of two additional school years. Respectfully submitted, ~-tG 1\"2-~~v- Robert Pressman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 781-862-1955 Mass Bar 405900 Elaine R. Jones President \u0026amp; Director-Counsel Norman Chachkin Theodore Shaw NAACP Legal . Defense- and- . Educational Fund, Inc. 99 Hudson Street New York, NY 10013-2897 212-965-2200 11 J hn W. Walk:er (./Rickey Hicks John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 501-374-3758 Ark. 64046 / I on all a copy CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE do hereby state that a copy of the foregoing has been served counsel of record on this 15th day of April, 2004 by placing of same in the United States mail postage prepaid. f}L7l2 l\u0026lt;)vJiw-, LI- 12 / JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. ATTORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY LITn.E ROCK, AB.KANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER OF COUNSEL. SHAWNCIDLDS ROBERT McHENRY. PA DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 HENDERSON ROAD Lrrru RocK, ARKANSAS 12210 PHONE: 1501) 372-3425  F.4.X (501) 372-3428 EMAIL: mchenryd@swbellnec Mr. Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge.\u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: LRSD Dear Clay: April 8, 2003 This letter is a follow up to the issues raised by Joshua Intervenors regarding implementation of the evaluation remedy. As you will recall, Ann Marshall has chaired two meetings on this matter. Joshua lntervenors requested that the LRSD a.dd to the matters to be the subject of full evaluation the providing of interventions for students failing to meet standards. We took the position that this area is of particular importance to the class which. we represent. We also requested that the evaluation standards be.modified to guarantee that the outside -consultant is in charge of the evaluation product for the area for which he or she is hired. We have had no respoo:')e as to whether the LRSD school board has adopted our two suggestions. Please inform us of the school board's decision on each of these matters and the date of action by the Board. At each of the meeting chaired by Ms. Marshall, we were informed by Dr Lesley about detailed reviews of teaching practices and other factors within several schools. We were.twice told that we would receive copies of the reports for these schools. We have yet to receive the reports and ask that they be provided promptly. At the second meeting, Dr. Lesley indicated that she had in mind ex~erts to recommend to work on each of the comprehensive evaluations. However, she declined at that time to identify those persons. Please inform us of the experts who have been selected to work on each of the evaluations and provide us with a copy of the curriculum vitae if we have not already been provided a copy. ff the schedule for producing the comprehensive evaluations has been changed, please provide us a copy of the revised schedule. As we are in need of deciding whether to raise any of these matters before the court, . we / Attachment A Page 2 - Letter dated April 8, 2003 would appreciate a prompt response to this letter. Sincerely, Robert Pressman cc: Ms. Ann Marshall / JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. JOHNW. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS lvis. Ann S. 1:vfarshaJl, Monitor Office ofDesegregati.on monitoring 124 West Capital, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 A.\"'l'ORNEY .Af! LAW 1723 BROADWAY 1rrrLE RoCK, .ARKANsAs 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 Via Facsimile - 371-0100 March 10, 2004 Re: Little Rock School District Dear Ms. Marshall: OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHEN-:RY, P.A.: DONNAJ. McHENRY  8210 liF.NDERSON RaAJl   L1Trr.E ROCK, AElw!SAS 72210 PHONE: (501) 372-3425  F.AX (501) 372-3428 EMAIL: mchenryd@swbell.net . Now that we have the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals decision, it is very clear that the ~ourt  is c.011ceri-1ed, a s ;;,.re are, about impr.uving the acadernic .achit:vement OI ...~ _Jiica!I~l...m.erica:r1 students. o.ur belief is th.at ~11 of the components oftheJ?lan were intended to work :hand in glove' to that end. When we last met with your office after having invoked the .process set forth in the Plan regarding compliance issues, there were numerous areas of disagreement with respect to the D_i.strict's obligations. Those areas have not been resolved. Moreover, we did not reach agreements on whether all pro grams as set forth in the March 15, 2001 Compliance Rep0rt were to be evaluated or which ones indeed were to be evaluated. Little Rock took the position that it would only evaluate literacy and math. We resisted that position then and we do so now because such limitation does not address the very pur_poses of the evaluations in the first place. Dr. Bonnie Lesley and Chris Heller were the District's representatives at the conference with you. Joy Springer, Bob Pressman and I (for a short while) represented Joshua. Since Dr. Lesley has left the District we have had no :further contact with anyone from the District for the purpose offollowup discussions regarding the subject. On or about January 15, 2004, I received two lengthy reports from the District entitled: 1) Little Rock Literacy Prow.am Evaluation; and 2) An Evaluation.of Mathematics \u0026amp; Science Programs in the Little Rock Sahool District from 1998 to 2003. They were sent without explanation or an invitation for discussion. 1:vJr. Heller was aware that we had invoked the process o.utlined in the Plan and that apparently your office was awaiting more responses from LRSD before having more followup meeting between Joshua and Lit'-J.e Rock. We have received the updates you have sent the parties as, you have monitored LRSD's program evaluation. 1 1 / Attachment B We have now completed our initial review and discussion regarding those evaluations and find not only do they fail to address all of the programs that.we negotiated to be evaluated but, that inter alia, the evaluations are keyed to \"No Child Left Behind\" mandates or State  accountability mandates. They appear to be less keyed to the explicrt outcome objectives of the plan or to the evaluation processes the district adopted in its cqmpliance plan and regulations. While Mr. Heller has contended that there are no outcome requirements of the plan, it was certainly a promised expectation that programswould be altered, modified, and improved upon their inadequacies and then nonworking programs which failed to remediate achievement disparity would be eliminated and replaced. The objective we expect is that achievement of black school children will be not less than 90% of the achievement of white school children. I believe that the program evaluations that have been presented miss their mark on many counts, some of which I now bring to your,attention as the process facilitator with a notation that these comments are also being delivered to Mr. Heller for the District's :use. These evaluations address only literacy, math and science which certainly are not all the programs that are related to improving and remediati.ng the academic achievement of African American students. I call your attention to the Court's Order of September 13, 2002, pag~ 168. I am also informing Judge Wilson of our serious concerns regarding the deficiencies of the program evaluations. Our list is not comprehensive because we need to 1) thoroughly review the evaluations, 2) have discussions via the process and the study itself and 3) have more information regarding the District's intentions. 1) Joshua remains concerned about the lack of achievement for African American students at virtually all grade levels. 2) The literacy report does not identify any significant relationship or  correlation between the literacy programs implemented by LRSD and the achievement of Afiican American students. 3) Neither the literacy report nor the math/science report addressed African American student achievement by grade level, achievement by school or specific remediation mastery by student, grade level or school. None of the curricular programs in the study had a significant impact on student achievement in 5th grade, for exampie. 4) The literacy report (page 45) makes the 'surprising' notation that substantial differences exist in the overall achievement of African American students and other students in the Little Rock School District. This conclusion ii; in large part, what this action is intended to correct. Joshua interprets that notation to mean that the programs that have been utilized have :o.ot successfully addressed African American  student achievement nor have they been modified or replaced by others which promise greater success. It surely cannot mean that the objective is impossiqle to attain. 2 / I 5) The control groups utilized for the literacy report raise another concern. In this report, a significant number of the students, almost half of them, in the District appear to be eliminated from the study. 6) The literacy report contains formative information through a few teacher focus groups, however, this data is not inclusive of the total teacher population responsible for remediation of African American student achievement. Therefore, Joshua must conclude that such information is skewed at best. 7) Joshua recalls the representations of Dr. Bonnie Lesley during her court testimony that the achievement gap in grades K-2 had been eliminated according to her DRA assessments during the 2001-2002 school year. The 2003 literacy evaluation submitted by the District now contradicts her :findings in that approximately half of the African American students during 2002-2003 in 4th. grade were performing Below Basic. Those second grade students would appear to be the 4th. graders now performing below basic. Surely there are sufficient data to prepare an evaluation of literacy in these grades (K-2) and for the District to be able to track their individual performances through Dr. Lesley's data. I read that the Court's Order, Page i 70, paragraph A , contemplates the use of this data, i.e., \"LRSD now has over three years of testing data ..... \" 8) Joshua remains concerned regarding the District's ability to accurately record, collect, retain and retrieve student achievement data. 9) There is no discussion regarding-the participation .of African.American students in Pre-AP and AP courses :which were allegedly instituted to address African American achievement. Nor is there any evaluation of the District's tutoring programs or other pro grams aimed at improving African American performance. 10) The report indicates that African American students had substantially lower absolute performance than did other students. The academic gains on literary tests were lower for African American students than for other students. The evaluations do not compare the achievement ofBencbmark exams of 4th or 8th grade students for 2001 or 2002 scoring Below Basic .in successive years. Moreover, the SAT 9 test results for higher grade students reflect a need for more information. 11) The District was inconsistent in providing the necessary support for teachers to attend necessary literacy training (Reading Recovery, Effective Literary and ELLA). . -~ 12) The evaluation reports discussed prnfessional development in literacy and mathematics while ignoring the three major professional development commitments in the March 15, 2001 compliance report. .., .J The foregoing list is merely suggestive; it is not exhaustive. Because ofyqur designated role, I am requesting that Judge Wtlson involve your office in preparing a comprehensive monitoring report of the District's compliance with its student achievement commitments by use of the evaluation process. That I believe was a role envisioned for OD.M by both the Court Of Appeals and by the District Court as well. I will be filing the necessary papers to that end, but in the meantime would you kindly advise me as to the status of our having already invoked the process set forth by the plan. TWW:js cc: Honorable Judge William R. Wilson N.fr. Chris Reller Nk Robert Pressman All Other Counsel 4 / IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JAM FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS K LITTLE ROCK DIVISION Br,.:-t-,:......!.,J.,:.....-L.l,,.~:::::..=:~::::-== LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. RECEIVED DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. APR 21 2004 INTERVENORS OFFICE OF INTERVENORS DESEGREGATION MONITORING ORDER Please file a list of your expected witnesses and exhibits by noon, day after tomorrow, April 21, 2004. For each witness you expect to call, please set forth the amount of time you expect to spend on direct examination. If you want a conference call regarding the presentation of evidence at the hearing next week please call Ms. Mary Johnson at 501-604-5144 forthwith. IT IS SO ORDERED this / f;{ty of April, 2004. WM. R. WILSON, JR. 8 5 8 THE ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF ARKANSAS MIKE BEEBE RECEIVED APR 21 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Mark A Hagemeier Assistant Attorney General Direct dial: (501) 682-3643 E-mail: mark.hagemeier@ag.state.ar.us M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Attorney at Law 1010 W. 3rd Little Rock, AR 72201 April 20, 2004 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Marshall Office of Desegregation Monitoring I Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. USDC No. LR-C-82-866 Dear Counselors and Ms. Marshall: Please find enclosed ADE's Response to the Court's Order of April 19, 2004 that we filed today. 323 Center Street Suite 200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007  FAX (501) 682-2591 Internet Website  http://www.ag.state.ar.us/ Page 2 of2 April 20, 2004 MAH Enclosure cc: Scott Smith (w/enclosure) Very truly yours, ~r Assistant Attorney General IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN OISTRICi ARKANSAS EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JAMi:....n11.__, K LITTLE ROCK DIVISION .B-,~~~w.:::..c....=~~= LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. No. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. RECEIVED APR 1 g 2004 D OFF/Cf OF ESEGREGAT/ON MONITORING ORDER DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS Please file a list of your expected witnesses and exhibits by nrnn, day after tomorrow, April 21, 2004. For each witness you expect to call, please set forth the amount of time you expect to spend on direct examination. If you want a conference call regarding the presentation of evidence at the hearing next week please call Ms. Mary Johnson at 501-604-5144 forthwith. ~tf IT IS SO ORDERED this Jj!_ day of April, 2004. DNlHOllNOW NOllVD3HD3S3a ~033~~0 eAs,kG(4,~D s,R,c, xouR, RKANsAs ~DOZ 8 Z ~dV APR 2 f 1AnL JAMts ,uu, By: W. MccoRMA C3Al3~3H IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRJCT C  CK, CLE Rk EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. CASE NO. 4:82CV866WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1. ET AL . .  MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS' EXIIlBIT LIST PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT INTER VEN ORS INTER VEN ORS The )6shua\u0026lt;Interverio:rs rriay use tliefoliowing exmbits~dunng the hearing scheduled for ,. ':. :: ~- ...... .:.~!' ; .. :,, : - -:- ~-;::~.i.;~1: -.~::~;. ,',!-~ . . ;1~~ : . . ~:...:::, :1 r ... r  . . : April 26 and 27, 2004: ,.!. : 1   1) LR.Sb Policy IL (\"Evaluati\u0026lt;?n of Instructional Programs,,J; CX 575   - 2) LRSD :Regulation IL-Rl (\"Program Evaluation Agenda)  3) Text of Plan, Sections 2.7 and 2.7.1 4) Review of Ye~ Two Evaluations, Steven M. Ross, Ph.D. (Provided to Intervenors by Counsel for the LRSD, October 25, 2002) 5) Memoranda from Superintendent James to LRSD Board of Education (Prepared by Assoicate Superintendent for Instruction Bonnie A. Lesley): a) Approval of the Charter School Program Evaluation, October 24, 2002 b) Approval ofthe SEDL's Program Evaluation for the Collaborative Action Team Project, November 21, 2002 : i\".,f)] ; ; ,ri : c) Approval of Program Evaluation for Southwest Middle School's Partnership with Southwest Edtic\"atiori'D'evelopment Lab (SEDL\\ November 21, 2002 - -  \"  d) Campus Leadership Team Program Evaluation, February 13, 2003 e) HIPPY Program Evaluation, February 13, 2002 f) Onward to Excellence Program Evaluation, February 13, 2003 g) Campus Leadership Team Program Evaluation, February 13, 2003 h) Vital Link program Evaluation, February 13, 2003 i) Middle School Transition Program Evaluation, February 27, 2003 j) Lyceum Scholars Program Evaluation, February 27, 2003 k) Extended Year Education (EYE) Program Evaluation, February 27, 2003 1) Elementary Summer School Program Evaluation, February 27, 2003 6) Guidelines for Completing Eights Program Evaluations in LRSD, Steven M. Ross, Ph.D. (Filed by LRSD March 14, 2003) 7) Letter from Chris Heller to Ann Marshall and John W. Walker, October 27, 2003 8) Letter from Chris Heller to John W. Walker, January 12, 2004 9). LRSD Literacy Program Evaluation 10) An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to 2003 11) The LRSD's Implementation of the Court's Compliance Remedy, March 30, 2004 12) Resume, Walter M. Haney, Ed.D. (Professor, Lynch School of Education, Seriior Research Associate, Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation and Educational Policy, Boston College) 13) Grade .to Grade Progression Data for LRSD and Arkansas, By Race 14) Vita, Richard C. Hunter, Ed. D. (Professor of Educational Administration and Head of the Educational Organizatien and Leadership Organization and Leadership Department. Joshua reserves the right to utilize the exhibits as listed by the defendants. Respectfully submitted, 0J 9 I 0 (kv~ t/~ f 1~ ,i1}rYVJfi'\"' .. ; . , Robert Pressman i hA 22 Locust Avenue g(v  Lexington , MA 02421 781 - 862 - 1955 Mass Bar 405900 Elaine R. Jones President \u0026amp; Director-Counsel Norman Chachk.in Theodore Shaw NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc . 99 Hudson Str eet New York, NY 10013-2897 212 - 965-2200 ~n w( Walker /~ickey Hicks / John W. Walker, 1723 Broadway Little Rock , AR 501-374-3758 Ark . 64046 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE P .A. 72206 I do hereby state that a copy of the foregoing has been served on all counsel of record on this 21st day of April, 2004 by placing a copy of same in the United States mail postage ' ,') I' / prepaid . .,, ~ ,, , ti~ :;f utb r,, RECEIVED uflLEO EASTERN \\s\\tfwcr COURT ICT ARKANSAS - APR 2 8 2004 APR 2 12004 '\\MfSW OFRCEOF :  McCORMACK CL DESEGREGATION MON!i0RlNG --- , ERK IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRJCT COURT EASTERN DISTRJCT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRJCT V. CASE NO. 4:82CV866WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1. ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERJNE KNIGHT, ET AL. THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS' WITNESS LIST DEPCLERK - PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT INTERVENORS INTER VEN ORS The Joshua Intervenors may call thefollowing persons as witnesses du.....:...ng the hearing scheduled for April 26 and 27, 2004: 1. Gene Jones, Office of Desegregation Monitoring - 1 hour 2. Walt Haney, Ed. D., Expert - 1 1/4 hours 3. Richard Hunter, Ed. D., Expert - 45 minutes 4. Margie Powell, Office of Desegregation Monitoring - 1 hour 5. Dennis Glasgow, Little Rock School District - 20 minutes 6. Ann Marshall, Office of Desegregation Monitoring - 20 minutes 7. Willie Morris, Arkansas Department of Education - 20 minutes 8. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent, Little Rock School District - 1/4 hour 9. Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent, Little Rock School District - 15 minutes 10. Ethel Dunbar, Principal at Franklin Elementary School, L~SD - 10 minutes 11. David Smith, Principal at Southwest Middle School, LRSD - 10 minutes 12. Cassandra Norman, Principal at McClellan High School, LRSD - 10 minutes 13. Karl Brown, Assistant Superintendent, PCS SD - 5 minutes 14. Bobby Acklin, Assistant Superintendent, NLRSD - 5 minutes Joshua reserves the right to call witnesses listed by the Little Rock School District. Respectfully submitted, Pr ssman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 781-862-1955  [/Rickey Hicks Mass Bar 405900 Elaine R. Jones   -      .....  President \u0026amp; Director-Counsel Norman Chachkin Theodore Shaw NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. 99 Hudson Street New York, NY 10013-2897 212-965-2200 John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 501-374-3758 Ark. 64046 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby state that a copy of the foregoing has been served on all counsel of record on this 21st day of April, 2004 by placing a copy of saG in the United 1hStates mail postage prepaid. _ j ~ \\ I i r\\l._ 1 1 \\ / /\\ . \\.. /, (V ,V\\./\\J ~ ( V ; fl/jlJ ( ( t l~V . IOIO\u0026lt;I t--'. 4 As,}!kt,('m,f D Ots-,-Rtc-,- COI.Jttr AR~'-'Si\\s . APR 2 1 ,n,.L JA.MEs c.w, Sy: w. MccoRMA. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT C Cl(, CLER}( EASTERN DISTRJCT OF ARKANSAS Dt:pC(ERK WESTERN DMSION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. CASE NO. 4:82CV866WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1. ET AL. MRS. LORENE J,?SHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS' EXHIBIT LIST DEFENDANT INTER VEN ORS Thl'TERVENORS Toe Joshua Intervenors may use the following exhibits during the hearing scheduled for April 26 and 27, 2004: 1) LRSD Policy IL (\"Evaluation of Instructional Programs\"), CX 575 2) LR.SD Regulation IL-Rl (''Program Evaluation Agenda) 3) Text of Plan, Sections 2.7 and 2.7.1 4) Review of Year Two Evaluations, Steven M. Ross, Ph.D. (Provided to Imervenors by Counsel for the LRSD, October 25. 2002) 5) Memoranda from Superintendent James to LRSD Board of Education (Prepared by Assoicate Superintendent for Instruction Bom:rie A. Lesley): v~ i 1 a) Approval of the Charter School Program Evaluation, October 24, 2002  V,1 ~=-b) Approval oft:he SEDL's Program Evaluation for the Collaborative Action Team Project, November 21 , 2002  v ~ /  ., c) Approval of Program Evaluation for Southwest Middle School's Partnership with Southwest Education Development Lab (SEDL), November 21, 2002 '- ,/ VtJ l. m d) Campus Leadership Team Program Evaluation, February 13, 2003 .,, ;9 v ~, 1. t:: e) HIPPY Program Evaluation, February 13, 2002   v~I-!!1- ) Onward to E.'Ccellence Program Evaluation, February 13, 2003 v g) Campus Leadership Team Program Evaluation, February 13, 2003 l s ~ e ,. / ) \\/4 1.-u:r h) Vital Link program Evaluation. February 13, 2003 / Vo . IY- i) Middle School Transition Program Evaluation, February 27, 2003   I-fV j) Lyceum Scholars Program Evaluation, February 27, 2003  --- \\/4,/ ~ k) Extended Year Education (EYE) Program Evaluation, February 27, 2003 / Vt} l. fY 1) Elementary Summer School Program Evaluation, February 27, 2003 / 6) Guidelines for Completing Eights Program Evaluations in LRSD, Steven M. Ross, Ph.D. (Filed by LRSD March 14, 2003)  7) Letter from Chris Heller to Aon Marshall and John W. Walker, October 27, 2003 / 8) Letter from Chris Heller to John W. Walker, January 12, 2004 / 9) LRSD Literacy Program Evaluation C. 1~ 6,, ,_, 10) An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to 2003 ( i: ,., D   11) Toe LRSD's Implementation of the Court's Compliance Remedy, March 30, 2004 f .t\\D~l~\"f) 12) Resume, Walter M. Haney, Ed.D. (Professor, Lynch School of Education, Senior ~ Research Associate, Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation and Educational Policy, Boston College) 13) Grade to Grade Progression Data for LRSD and Arkansas, By Race .' 14) Vita. Richard C. Hunter, Ed. D. (Professor of Educational Administration and Head of the Educational Organization and Leadership Organization and Leadership Department. ? Joshua reserves the right to utilize the exhibits as listed by the defendants. Respectfully submitted, l ! , ! ~ST#~G'sstfo . '\"''er OIJF(r ;\\.q ~S,\\,s APR 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT ~~W. I /$f EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAs\u0026gt;'~  Mccol?M-4cK. WESTERN DMSION ' CLf:Rk DepCWfRK LITI'LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 4:82CV866WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1. ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSffiJA. ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. THE .JOSHUA INTERVENORS' WITNESS LIST DEFENDANT INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Joshua Intervenors may call the following persons as v.:itncsscs d~...ng the henring scheduled for April 26 and 27, 2004: 1. Gene Jones, Office of Desegregation Monitoring - l hour 2. Walt Haney, Ed. D., Expert - 11/4 hours 3. Richard Hunter, Ed. D., Expert - 45 minutes 4. Margie Powell, Office of Desegregation Monitoring - I hour 5. Dennis Glasgow, Little Rock School District - 20 minutes 6. Ann Marshall, Office of Desegregation Monitoring - 20 minutes 7. Willie Morris, Arkansas Department of Education - 20 minutes 8. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent, Little Rock School District - 1/4 hour 9. Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent, Little Rock School District - 15 minutes 10. Ethel Dunbar, Principal at Franklin Elementary School, LRSD - 10 minmes 11. David Smith, Principal at Southwest Middle School, lRSD - 1 0 minutes 12. Cassandra Norman, Principal at McClellan High School, LRSD - 10 minutes 13. Karl Brown, Assistant Superintendent, PCS SD - 5 minutes 14. Bobby Acklin, Assistant Superintendent, NLRSD - 5 minutes Joshua reserves the right to call witnesses listed by the Little Rocle School District. f . J [} . ~-J;, f\u0026amp;~,J . irs rt ressman ry}ri\"n 22 Locust. Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 781-862-1955 Mass Bar 405900 Elaine R. Jones     President \u0026amp; Directer-Counsel Norman Chachkin Theodore Shaw NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. 99 Hudson Street New York, NY 10013-2897 212-965-2200 Respectfully submitted, '.__ - c:1Lrh - ;1-  ohn W. Walker ~' ickey Hicks John W. Walker, P.A . 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 501-374-3758 Ark. 64046 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby state that a copy cf the foregoing has been served on all counsel of record on this 21 st day of April, 2004 ;~e~!f~ing a copy of 5T\\ int Ut;f:~; mail postage \\ I . 1 t . r+ 0 ,__,. .-. '..!.-1 \\., \\..,,I) t ' V d V ;,., - - - - - - -------- ---------- THE ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF ARKANSAS MIKE BEEBE RECEIVED APR 21 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Mark A. Hagemeier Assistant Attorney General Direct dial: (501) 682-3643 E-mail: mark.hagemeier@ag.state.ar.us M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Attorney at Law 1010 W. 3rd Little Rock, AR 72201 April 20, 2004 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Marshall Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. USDC No. LR-C-82-866 Dear Counselors and Ms. Marshall: Please find enclosed ADE's Response to the Court's Order of April 19, 2004 that we filed today. 323 Center Street Suite 200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007  FAX (501) 682-2591 Internet Website http://www.ag.state.ar.us/ Page 2 of2 April20, 2004 MAH Enclosure cc: Scott Smith (w/enclosure) Very truly yours, ~T Assistant Attorney General FIL IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICTE.\u0026amp;s~sTR1~'2RT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS N DISTRICT ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION APR 2 f 20()/f LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ~~MES W. McCORMACK, CLERK -----~=,:JP~J~AilluNT~F DEPCU::RK V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKJ COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL RECEIVED DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL APR 2 ,' 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITOfflNG LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT WITNESS LIST AND EXHIBIT LIST The Little Rock School District expects to call the following witnesses and present the following exhibits at the hearing scheduled to being on April 26, 2004, except Dr. Lesley, whose testimony will be presented by deposition. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. WITNESS LIST Dr. Steven M. Ross, Director, Center for Research in Education Policy, University of Memphis - expected direct examination time - 1 hour; Dr. Bonnie Lesley, former LRSD Associate Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction - expected direct examination time - 1 hour; Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction - expected direct examination time - 1 hour; Dr. Ed Williams, LRSD Research Specialist - expected direct examination time -30 minutes; Krista Underwood, Director of Early Childhood and Elementary Literacy - expected direct examination time - 30 minutes; Page 1 of 4 6. 7. Suzi Davis, Director of Secondary English - expected direct examination time - 30 minutes; Vanessa Cleaver, Director of National Science Foundation Grant - expected direct examination time - 30 minutes. EXHIBIT LIST 1. Program Evaluations and Accompanying Memoranda submitted to the LRSD Board of Directors for approval on October 24, 2002, November 21 , 2002, December 19, 2002, February 13, 2003 and February 27, 2003 (These were attached to our Notice of Filing on March 14, 2003 in Volumes I - IV); 2. September 26, 2002 Program Evaluation Agenda, 2002-03; 3. October 4, 2002 letter from Clay Fendley transmitting Compliance Plan to counsel and Ms. Marshall; 4. October 10, 2002 memo to Dr. Ken James from Ann Marshall re LRSD 's Compliance Plan 5. October 10, 2002 Memo to LRSD Board from Dr. Bonnie Lesley; 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. October 11 , 2002 letter from Clay Fendley to Counsel and Ann Marshall regarding Compliance Remedy; October 17, 2002 Request for Qualifications of Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Program Evaluation Consultant; October 25, 2002 letter from Clay Fendley to Counsel and Ann Marshall; November 4, 2002 letter to John Walker and Ann Marshall from Bonnie Lesley; Guidelines for Completing Eight Program Evaluations in LRSD prepared by Dr. Ross; December 3, 2002 letter to Ann Marshall from Bonnie Lesley; December 3, 2002 letter to John Walker from Bonnie Lesley; January 27, 2003 Memo to Dr. Ken James from Dr. Bonnie Lesley regarding contracted Services - Dr.Ross; February 13, 2003 Memo to LRSD Board from Dr. Lesley regarding Information on Completion of Eight Program Evaluations for Submission to Federal Court Page 2 of 4 15. April 8, 2003 letter from John Walker to Clay Fendley; 16. Response to ODM and Joshua Objections, by Dr. Steven M. Ross; 17. Changes in Science Curriculum, by Dennis Glasgow; Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK Christopher Heller (#81083) 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376~~9.lL- ---- -~::~~:-. -....... , -----.. \u0026gt; B ~,,.,---q..=:\u0026amp;4,1~2J~~:_;_f,,,c:..4+~........,,.,... Page 3 of 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people by depositing a copy of same in the United States mail on April 21, 2004: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Nations Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Judge J. Thomas Ray U. S. District Courthouse 600 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Attorney at Law 1010 W. 3rd Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark A. Hagemeier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Page 4 of 4 TOM COURTWAY Interim Director State Board of Education JoNell Caldwell, Chair Lillie Rock Shelby Hillman, Vice Chair Carlisle Sherry Burrow Jonesboro Luke Gordy Van Buren Calvin King Marianna Randy Lawson B-ille MaryJane Rf.\"bick Lillie Rock Diane Tatum Pine Bluff Jeanna Westmoreland Arkadelphia Arkansas April 30, 2004 OFFICE Of DESEGREGATION MONITORING Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. US. District Court No. 4:82-CV-866 . Dear Gentlemen and Ms. Marshall: Per an agreement with the Attorney General's Office, I am filing the Arkansas Department of Education's Project Management Tool for the month of April 2004 in the above-referenced case. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, :ti- m1t General Counsel Arkansas Department of Education SS:law cc: Mark Hagemeier - - ------ ---------- --- UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of the ADE's Project Management Tool for April 2004. Respectfully Submitted, Scott Smith, Attorney, Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 404-A Little Rock, AR 72201 501-682-4227 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Scott Smith, certify that on April 30, 2004, I caused the foregoing document to be served by depositing a copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to each of the following: Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. - IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of April 30, 2004 Based on the information available at March 31, 2004, the ADE calculated the Equalization Funding for FY 03/04, subject to periodic adjustments. B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June.    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.\u003c/dcterms_description\u003e\n   \n\n\u003c/dcterms_description\u003e   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\u003c/item\u003e\n\u003c/items\u003e"},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1041","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","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":["2004-04"],"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--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"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/1041"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nDNIHOllNOW N011~93H93S30 :!0331:l:JO ~ooz I z ~dv 03A 03~ Agenda RECEIVED OFFICE OF DESEGREGATIO ONITORING Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting / APR 2 2 04 ci:FICE OF DESEGREGATI ITO. I G I\n.,. April 2004 n-.. .,\u0026gt;. .. \",m..'. ,... - .... :I: Oz o\u0026gt; \"C'-\"\u0026lt;' m-..\n,:,c: -z\n,:,n o,...\" i\"5' r-z nm \u0026gt; F .., \"0 ' n :em me ,... C: on,.~.. ffiJ :l m ill !X\u0026gt; i n \"\"'' ,... \"..,' \"n'\"o' - 3: \u0026gt;n :::. p::\nzm \"' \u0026lt;\n,c \u0026gt;,,.  ~ c:,\n,c o \u0026gt; I! \"c' c... 31:3: ml!: 31: c c:,\nz rn r \".,,'\"_ c\nz Cl I. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS REGULAR MEETING April 22, 2004 5:30 p.m. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A. Call to Order B. Roll Call II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS A. Welcome to Guests 111. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations B. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) C. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association IV. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A. Remarks from Board Members B. Student Assignment Report C. Budget Update D. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects E. Internal Auditors Report F. Technology Update G. Update: OCR Compliance Review - Final Report V. APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Minutes B. Personnel Changes VI. SCHOOL SERVICES: A. 2004 Summer Educational Programs n -c ,\u0026gt;.. .. .,\nm.o.. ,.... _ _, 3C Oz o\u0026gt; ~~ m..,\no C: -z\non 0 _, ,.... c5 r-z \u0026gt;n \"' F :a:, \u0026gt;m i:nc3 C~: _:a,:, 111 n\no :::\nm ,.n :::!8 Oz Z:::\n\"'o z \"' !X' i n. ::\no,,: U) r- ..,\no\no no _, 3C \u0026gt;n :::\n,::\nm z U) Regular Board Meeting April 22, 2004 Page2 VII. BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION: A. Regulation: GBEA-R - Conflict of Interest B. Dedication of Right of Way: Parkview Magnet High School C. Donations of Property D. Financial Report VIII. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions IX. EMPLOYEE HEARINGS X. ADJOURNMENT (\")\"D .\u0026gt;\nJmtl ,- rr...-.. :-1: Oz o\u0026gt; ~~ m..,\nJ0 C: -z\n,oC\"\u0026gt; 0 ..... ,- c5 r-z (\")U\u0026gt; \u0026gt; F \"D g :m1:mo ,- C: (\") $! 0,- ,i\n~ ::1 m\nJ0 \"'\nJ0 \u0026gt;m  \"D cno C:\nJ0 ~ ..... -1!! (\")\nJO =q:q ~8 Oz z =l \"'\n\"' ?'\nJ0 m ~ (\")\nJO .\n,c ,- .\".',\nJtl\n,o C\"\u0026gt;O .... !I: \u0026gt;n =\u0026lt; p:\n~ \"' I. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS/ WELCOME Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS C. LRCTA IV . Kt.l'\\JKll\u0026gt;/\\.UNIN\\UN~AIIUN:\u0026gt; A. BOARD MEMBERS '54.n Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge\" DATE: TO: FROM: PREPARED BY: SUBJECT: April 22, 2004 Board of Directors (il ~ Donald M. Stewart, Chief Financial Off~ Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Bill Goodman~ April 2004 Construction Report - Bond Projects The construction projects at Mabel vale Magnet Middle, Mann Magnet Middle and Williams Magnet Elementary have been completed and the staff and students have moved into the additions and remodeled rooms. However, some work is ongoing mainly to address construction deficiencies (\"punch lists\" items) that are a part of all construction projects. I hope you have an opportunity to visit all or some of these schools. You will be pleased with the results. An architectural firm has been selected for the remodeling of the original buildings at Forest Heights Middle School that were constructed in 1956. One objective is to improve the appearance of the school from Evergreen Street. As this project develops, I will keep you informed of the details of this objective. Please call me at 447-1146 if you have any questions. 810 W Markham  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  www.lrsd.k12.ar.us 501 -324-2000  fax: 501-324-2032 .!J,:,I m\n,\n, ~ zz ,m-n ~z Cl m rn !\" \u0026gt; C C :::. 0\n,\n, rn i!ll c3 ~ .:.\". Pl :c C\ng ~ m CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD APRIL 22, 2004 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION Facilitv Name Project Description I Est. Comple11on Cost Date Baseline Renovation $953,520 , Jul-04 Brady Addition/renovation I $973,621 7 Aug-04 Central Renovation - Interior I $10,200,2661 Aug-05 Dunbar Renovation/addition I $6,149,0237 Dec-04 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music ' J. A. Fair jroom a dd1\".ll on $ 3,155,640 May-04 McClellan Classroom Addition I $2,155,622 , Jul-04 Parkview Addition $2,121,226 I Jun-04 Pulaski Hgts. Elem Renovation $1,193,259 ' Aug-04 Pulaski Hgts. MS Renovation $3,755,041 Aug-04 Southwest Addition $2,000,000 I Aug-04 Tech Ctr/ Metro Renovation Addition/Renovation - Phase II $3,679,000 Jun-04 Wakefield Rebuild $5,300,000 ' Jul-04 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - SPRING/ SUMMER 2004 I Est. compTel1on Facilitv Name Proiect Descriotion Cost Date Booker Roof $48,525 Aug-04 Booker ADA Rest rooms TBD _ Aug-04 Central Reflecting Pond $50,000 Aug-04 Central HVAC Renovation - Band Area I $225,000\nAug-04 Chicot Drainage I $64,700 1 Aug-04 Chicot Sound Attenuation \u0026amp; Fire Alarm $53,919 1 Aug-04 Geyer Springs Roof Repair : $161,752 Aug-04 Henderson Lockers $80,876 A~ Mitchell Building Remediation $165,000 May-04 Mitchell ______ !Renovation I $2,212,493 Aug-05 VVestern Hills ADA Rest rooms $15,000 ~4 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED Facility Name Proiect Descriotion 1---c,B_o_o.,k...er_ ______- +E~lec~tric_a_l_U,pgrad_e_ ____ Booker Roof Booker ADA Rest rooms Carver Media Center Expansion Chicot Electrical Upgrade Chicot Sound Attenuation \u0026amp; Fire Alarm Cloverdale Ecl.e.::.:m..c:.ce:.:n..c.t.:a.=1.:r.Ly.__ __,..cA...:.d:::cd:.:i..tci.o.:'-n_ ______ Dodd Fire Alarm Upgrade Fair Park !Addition Forest Heights Remodel I I I -r I I l Garland _-=_-=_-=_-=__- Remodel ---------- Geyer Springs Roof Repair Gibbs Addition Henderson Mablevale McDermott Meadowcliff Pulaski Hgts. MS Rightsell Washington Western Hills Western H-ills- -- Western Hills Woodruff --COC-kers Fire Alarm Upgrade Fire Aiarmupgrade Addition Energy monitoring system installation Renovation Fire Alarm Upgrade Electrical Upgrade \u0026amp; HVAC Fire Alarm Upgrade ADA Rest rooms Parkino addition Cost I Est. Completion Date Unknown $48,525 TBD Unknown Unknown $53,919 Unknown TBD Unknown ' $1,400,000 Unknown $161,752 Unknown $80,876 TBD TBD Unknown Unkn~ $2,494,000 TBD $640-:000-- TBD TBD $193 ,777 Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Aug-06 Unknown . Aug-05 Unknown Unknown Unknown .!.\",' m\n-, z~ z ,m.. n :c \u0026gt;z C) m u, rn \u0026gt; C 0 ::::\n0\n-, u, .~., 0 ~ :\"' ..... m n :c C ~ ~ m CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD APRIL 22, 2004 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Project Description Cost I t::st. c.\nomple11on Date Administration I Asbestos abatement $380,495 I Mar-03 Administration I Fresh air system I $55,ooo I Aug-03 Administration I Fire alarm I $32,350 Aug-03 Administration Annex Energy monitoring system installation I Mav-02 Alternative Learning Ctr. I Energy monitoring system installation I $15,160 I Oct-01 Alternative Learning Ctr. I Energy efficient lighting $82,000 Dec-01 Badgett Partial asbestos abatement $237,237 I Jul-01 Badgett Fire alarm $18,250 Aug-02 Bale i Classroom addition/renovation $2,244,524 Dec-02 Bale I Energy monitoring system I Mar-02 Bale I Partial roof replacement I $269,587 Dec-01 Bale HVAC $664,587 l Aug-01 Booker Energy efficient lighting $170,295 Apr-01 Booker I Energy monitoring system installation $23,710 Oct-01 Booker Asbestos abatement $10,900 Feb-02 Booker Fire alarm $34,501 Mar-02 Brady  Energy efficient lighting $80,593 Sep-02 Brady I Asbestos abatement I $345,072  Aug-02 Carver Energy monitoring system installation $14,480 I Mav-01 Carver Parking lot $111 ,742 Aug-03 Central Parking I Student parking $174.000. I Aug-03 Central/Quigley \\Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair $265,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 I Aug-03 Central/Quigley I Irrigation System $14,500 Aug~03 Central Purchase land for school I Unknown Dec-02 --- r- $2,000,000 - Central Roof \u0026amp; exterior renovations Dec-02 --- Central Ceiling and wall repair I $24,000 ---- -Oc-t-0-1 Central Fire Alarm System Design/Installation I $80,876 Aug-Q_1_ -- --rront landing tile repair --- Central - $22,470 __ Aug-01 ~ rgy efficient lighting -- Cloverdale Elem. $132,678 Jul-01 -- ---- Energy efficient ligh~ --- -- $189,743 -- Cloverdale MS Jul-01 --- --- - --- Cloverdale MS Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $1 ,393,822 Nov-02 Dodd -- Energy efficient lighting -r - - $90,665 __ Aug.:Q_1_ Dodd Asbestos abatement-ceiling tile __ $156,299 Jul-01 Dodd ~ lace roof top HVAC T $215,570 --Aug-02 Facilities Service Interior renovation --- - I $84,672 Mar-01 Facility Services _ Fire alarm -- $12,000 __ Aug-03 HVAC renovation/fire alarm - Fair Park - $315,956 Apr-02 Fair Park -- - Energy efficient lighting $90,162 Aug-01 Fair Park Asbestos abatement-ceiling -- - $59,310 Aug-01 J. A. Fair ----- ~ rgy efficient lighting -- - $277,594 Apr-01 J. A. Fair - Press box -- - $10J84 Nov-00 - ~ urity cameras - J. A. Fair - - $12,500 Jun-01 ~ hletic Field Improvement $38,000 - J. A. Fair Jul-03 J. A. Fair Irrigation System - $14,000 Jul-03 J. A. Fair Roof repairs - $39(871 Aug-03 Forest Park R eplace window units w/central HVAC $485,258 Nov-03 Forest Park Diagonal parking - $111 ,742 Aug-03 Forest Park E- nergy efficient lighting - $119,788 May-01 Fulbright Energy efficient lighting $134,463 Jun-01 Fulbright Energy monitoring system installation $11 ,950 Aug-01 - - Fulbright Replace roof top HVAC units $107,835 Aug-02 Fulbright - - ~ king lot -- ~ $140,000 Sep-02 Fulbright ~ of repairs $200,000 Oct-02 Franklin Renovation $2,511 ,736 Mar-03 Gibbs - Energy efficient lighting - $76,447 Apr-01 -+- Gibbs Energy monitorina svstem installation $11 ,770 Jul-01 2 .fD., m\n,\n, is zz ,m- (\") ~ C) m U\u0026gt; !\"' \u0026gt; C: C =i 0\n,\n, U\u0026gt; ~ ~ ~ :\" --\u0026lt; m (\") :i:: C: ~ ?. m CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD APRIL 22, 2004 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I I Est. Completion Project Description Cost Date Hall Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $8,637,709 Sep-03 Hall Asbestos abatement , $168,222 i Aug-01 Hall Energy efficient lighting I $42,931 Jul-01 Hall Energy efficient lighting I $296,707 I Apr-01 Hall Infrastructure improvements I $93,657 Aug-01 Hall I Intercom I I Feb-01 Hall Security cameras ! $10,600 ' Jun-01 Henderson Energy efficient lighting : $193,679 i Jul-01 Henderson Roof replacement gym I $107,835 May-01 Henderson Asbestos abatement Phase I $500,000 I Aug-01 Henderson  Asbestos abatement Phase 2 $250,000 1 Aug-02 IRC Energy efficient lighting $109,136 Jul-02 Jefferson Asbestos abatement $43,639 Oct-01 Jefferson I Renovation \u0026amp; fire- al~a-rm_ __ -- ~ $1,630,000 Nov-02 Laidlaw Parking lot ------~$26_9~,58_8 _____ J_u_l--o--'1 Mabelvale Elem. Energy monitoring system installation $12,150 Aug-0t Mabelvale Elem. Replace HVAC units $300,000 Aug-02 Mabelvale Elem. Asbestos Abatement $107,000 Aug-02 Mabelvale Elem. Energy efficient lighting $106,598 1 Dec-02 Mabelvale MS ,Renovate bleachers $134,793 . Aug-01 Mabelvale MS Renovation $6,851,621 ' Mar-04 Mann Partial Replacement $11,500,000 Apr-04 1-M_a_n_n_ _______.\n..A._sc.p1._hal_t w_alks _________- 1 The total $1 _8 million I Dec-01 ,--M_a_n_n_ _______- --,W_a_lk_w_a~1y_c_a_n_op~iies_ _______ __, is what has been ,__ __D_e c_-_0_,1 Mann Boiler replacement used so far on the Oct-01 Mann ~F_e_n_c_in~g ___________ -\u0026lt; projects listed I----- Sep-01 Mann Partial demolition/portable classrooms completed for Mann. Aug-01 McClellan Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Jul-03 McClellan I Irrigation System $14,750 Jul-03 McClellan Security cameras $36,300 McClellan Energy efficient lighting $303,614 McClellan I Stadium stands repair $235,000 McClellan Intercom $46,000 McDermott I Energy efficient lighting $79,411 McDermott Replace roof top HVAC units $476,000 Meadowcliff Fire alarm ------ $16,175 Meadowcliff Meadowcliff Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Mitchell Mitchell Mitchell Oakhurst Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Parkview Parkview Parkview Parkview Parkview Parkview --------- Asbestos abatement _ $253,412 Engergy efficient lighting ___ ~ _ $88,297 Replace cooling tower $37,203 Replace shop vent system - $20,000 - Energy monitoring s stem installation $17,145 ~ efficient lighting -- : $103,642 Energy monitoring system installation . $16,695 Asbestos abatement $13,000 - HVAC renovation Energy monitoring system installation Energy efficient lighting Asbestos abatement Parking lot 6 classroom addition Parking Improvements ~controls -- Roof replacement Exterior lights HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls Locker replacement Enerav efficient liahtina $237,237 $10,695 $81,828 $10,000 $138,029 $888,778 $142,541 $210,000 _ $273,877 $10,784 $301,938 $120,000 $315,000 Jun-01 Ma -01 Aug-01 Feb-02 Feb-01 Aug-02 Jul-01 Aug-02 Dec-02 Dec-00 May-01 Aug-01 Apr-01 Jul-01 Jul-01 Aug-01 May-01 Apr-01 Aug-02 Aug-02 Oct-02 Aug-03 Jun-02 Sep-01 Nov-00 Aug-01 Aug-01 Jun-01 3 !XI ~ m\n:c ~ zz ,m... C') :c \u0026gt;z G) m (/) !\" \u0026gt; C: 0 =. 0\n:c (/) ~ ~ 0 :!l CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD APRIL 22, 2004 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name Proiect Description Cost I Est. Completion Date Procurement Enen:iy monitoring system installation $5,290 Jun-02 Procurement Fire alarm $25,ooo l Aug-03 Pulaski Hgts. Elem Move playground I $17,ooo I Dec-02 Rightsell Energy efficient lighting $84,898 Apr-01 Rockefeller Energy efficient lighting I $137,004 Mar-01 Rockefeller Replace rooftop HVAC I $539,1751 Aua-01 Rockefeller Parking addition $111,742 I Aug-02 Romine Asbestos abatement $10,000 Apr-02 Romine Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $3,534,675 I Mar-03 Security/Transportation Bus cameras $22,500 I Jun-01 Southwest Asbestos abatement $28,138 I Aua-00 Southwest New roof I $690,000 I Oct-03 Southwest Energy efficient lighting $168,719 Jan-02 Southwest I Drainage I street widening I $250,000 I Aug-03 Student Assignment Energy monitoring system installation I $4,830 T Aug-02 Student Assignment Fire alarm $9,000 Aua-03 Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation $275,000 I Dec-01 Technology Upgrade Upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data Nov-02 Terry Energy efficient lighting $73,850 Feb-01 Terry Driveway \u0026amp; Parking $83,484 Aug-02 Terry . Media Center addition $704,932 ---Seo-02 Wakefield Security cameras $a,ooo I Jun-01 Wakefield I Energy efficient lighting $74,776 T Feb-01 Wakefield Demolition/Asbestos Abatement $200,000 Nov-02 Washington 1Security cameras $7,900 I Jun-01 Washington Energy efficient lighting $165,281 Apr-01 Watson Energy monitoring system installation $8,530 - Jul-01 Watson Asbestos abatement $182,241 Aug-01 Watson Energy efficient lighting $106,868  Aug-01 Watson 1Asbestos abatement $10,000 Aug-02 Watson Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $800,000 Aug-02 Western Hills 1Asbestos abatement $191,946 Aug-02 Western Hills Intercom $7,100 Dec-01 Western Hills Energy efficient lighting $106,000 Jul-01 Williams Renovation $2,106,492 Mar-04 - Williams Parking expansions $183,717 Dec-03 Williams Energy efficient lighting --- $122,719 - Jun-01 Wilson IR enovation/expansion $1 ,263,876 Feb-04 Wilson Parking Expansion $110,000 ~ I - Woodruff Renovation $246,419 Aua-02 4 .!J.,I m :a:, fS z z m rn ! C) m u, !\" \u0026gt; C: 0 =l 0 :a:, u, ~ c3 :!!l Date: April 22, 2004 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS To: Board of Directors From: @sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Re: Audit Report - April This is the fifty-fourth communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with one high school, two middle schools and one elementary school to resolve financial issues in their activity funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Working with the new Activities Advisory Board to develop plans for the new school year and beyond. b) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. c) Working with the Activities Advisory Board to provide ways to assist the different Booster groups in our schools. Board Policy and Regulation a) Coordinating development of payroll guidelines with Financial Services as part of Financial Services Section of the District Operations Manual. Technology a) Monitoring technology plans and technology meetings to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. b) Facilitating technology upgrade in cooperation with the English Department for Yearbook and ewspaper production staff in LRSD high schools to improve access to tools needed for students and staff. .!J,,I m\no ~z z .m... (\") z~ Cl m rn :n .... ~ :c C.. , 0 ?!\nm Audit Report - April 2004 Page 2 of2 Training a) Served as a trainer for financial portion of Nuts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. c) Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. d) Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. e) Working with Information Services on streamlining of data processes regarding SIS reporting. f) Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. g) Monitoring combined payroll and human resources issues for compliance with board direction and internal controls. h) Reviewing leave accountability system. a) Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. b) Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. c) Served as District coordinator of United Way's Day of Caring (April 17, 2004). Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise.  Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-44 7-1115 . My e-mail is sandy.becker@lrsd.org. .!D., m\n,:, is zz ,m- C'l :z: \u0026gt;z c\n, m u, :n .... m C'l :z: C ~ ~ m LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 Date: April 22, 2004 TO: Little Rock School District Board of Directors FROM: Lucy Neal, Director Technology and Media Services John Ruffins, Director Computer Information Services THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Title/Subject Summary Objectives Expected Outcomes Population/Location Budget Amount Managers Duration Long Range/Continuation Technology Report  May 3, 2004 is a District sponsored professional development day. All sessions on this day will be centered on technology training for teachers. The primary focus will be integrating technology into the curriculum. A few sessions of basic training will be provided for those teachers who need it.  LRSD Technology Center will be completed this summer. Staff from Instructional Technology and from Computer Information Services will be moving out to the new center which is located on the campus of Metropolitan Career and Technical Center. Technology training rooms and a distance learning center will be available for LRSD teachers. To provide an update to the Board of Directors on the status of technology projects To continue to implement the approved technology plan NIA IA Lucy Neal - Instructional John Ruffins - Technical March 26 - April 22, 2004 Technology Plan is approved from 2003-2006. .~., m\no ~z z .m.... (\") ~z C) m U\u0026gt; Date: To: From: Through: Subject: April 5, 2004 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS Board of Education Karen E. Broadnax, ESL Supervisor Morris L. Holmes, Ed.D. Interim Superintendent Update on the final report on Compliance Review 06995008 conducted by the Office for Civil Rights. Summary: A review of the district's progress reports was submitted to the Little Rock School District on March 18, 2004. The review addressed specific actions taken by the Little Rock School District to ensure the provision of equal educational opportunities and services to national origin language-minority students, who are limited English proficient. The report received by the district provided specific details in each on of the compliance areas that OCR has determined that the Little Rock School District has satisfactorily fulfilled the terms specified in the Commitment to Resolve. Objective: To provide an update on the progress to date that the Little Rock School District has made in meeting the terms of the Commitment to Resolve - Compliance Review 06995008. Expected Outcomes: NIA Population: National origin language-minority students, who are limited English proficient. :\u0026lt;:\n,o \u0026gt;0  C: 1-::z::! Zm ~I: en~ m\n,o en !JI \"0 m\n,o ~ z z m rn ::c z\u0026gt; C\u0026gt; m en ESL Report to Board April 22, 2004 Page 2 Budget A.mount/Budget Source: ESL Department Manager: Karen E. Broadnax, Supervisor, ESL Department Long range: Continuation of the Little Rock School District ESL Program Other Agencies Involved: NIA Expectations of District: Continuation of the services provided to_national origin language-minority students, who are limited English proficient, to ensure compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C.  2000d, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504), 29 U.S.C.  794, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Title II), 42 U.S.C.  12131-12161, and their implementing regulations. Needed Staff: NIA Comments: None Recommendation: We request that the Board of Education accept this report. !JI \"0 m\n,c ~ zz ,m- C') ~ z C) rn\n,,\n:\n\"'~ C: C') 31::,: ~8\n,c ,- \"0\"' jg m C)\n,c ~~ 31:m en\"' UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS SOUTHERN DIVISION , DALLAS OFFICE MAR 1 8 2004 Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Dr. Holmes: Ref: 06995008 The U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR), Southern Division, Dallas Office, has completed a review of the progress reports, which were submitted to OCR by the Little Rock School District (LRSD), Little Rock, Arkansas, to address the specific actions taken by the LRSD to ensure the provision of equal educational opportunities and services to national origin language-minority students who are limited English proficient (LEP). The LRSD voluntarily submitted a Commitment to Resolve (CTR), which was accepted by OCR on September 30, 1999, to ensure compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C.  2000d, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504), 29 U.S.C.  794, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Title II), 42 U.S.C.  12131- 12161, and their implementing regulations. In the progress reports, the LRSD provided OCR with documentation pertinent to the implementation of the CTR. Based on a review of the progress reports and additional information gathered during the on-site monitoring visits conducted by OCR on December 10- 11, 2002, and March 11-13, 2003, OCR has determined that the LRSD has satisfactorily fulfilled the terms specified in the CTR. Provided below, by commitment provision, is an explanation of how OCR reached this determination: Identification of Students With a Primary Home Language Other Than English The progress reports revealed that, at the beginning of the 1999-2000 school year, the LRSD administered a Home Language Survey (HLS) to all students to identify those students who have a primary (first-learned) or home language (language influence) that is other than English (PHLOTE). In addition, the information revealed that the LRSD directed staff (i.e., principals, counselors, registrars, and secretaries) at every school site and at the Student Assignment Center to secure a completed HLS for all students upon initial emollment. Further, the LRSD developed a procedure that allows for other methods of identifying 1999 BRYAN STREET. SUITE 2600, DALLAS, TEXAS 75201 -6810 www.cd.gov Our nusswn IS to ensure equal access to educanon and to promote educarwnal exceUeru:e throughout the nanon. !JI \"D m\n,:, ~ z zm,.. . n ~ z Gl m \u0026lt;J\u0026gt; Page 2 - Dr. Morris Holmes. Interim Superintendent PHLOTE students based on teacher referral, counselor recommendation, and interviews with parents. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR and complied with the OCR reporting requirements. Assessment of PHLOTE Students A review of the progress reports revealed that the LRSD developed and implemented procedures for assessing PHLOTE students in all four English language proficiency areas (i.e., speaking, reading, writing, and comprehension) to determine which students are LEP. The information reviewed revealed that the LRSD assessed and/or reassessed all PHLOTE students by administering an assessment instrument (i.e., Language Assessment Scales). The information further revealed that the LRSD provided training to all LRSD staff responsible for administering the assessment instrument to ensure proper test administration and interpretation of test scores. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR and complied with the OCR reporting requirements. Placement of LEP Students and Ensuring Appropriate Services The progress reports revealed that the LRSD developed and implemented a policy requiring the district to provide alternative language program (ALP) services to LEP students through a research-based English-as-a-Second Language (ESL) program. Information reviewed revealed that PHLOTE students who score at a level 1, 2, and 3 on the Language Assessment Scales (LAS) are identified as LEP and are placed in the ESL program after obtaining consent from the parent/guardian of the student. The information showed that PHLOTE students who score at a level 4, and 5 on the LAS are considered fluent in the English language and are identified as non-LEP and, as a result, are placed in the regular education program. A review of information revealed that the Language Proficiency Assessment Committee (LPAC), which is comprised of at least one or more ESL teachers, a counselor, and a campus administrator, is responsible for making placement decisions. The information revealed that the LRSD provided training to LP AC members as follows: 1) OCR, state, and LRSD laws, policies, and regulations governing LEP programs and services\n2) interpretation of language proficiency assessments\n3) laws and rules governing confidentiality of records\nand 4) procedures for identification, placement, and exiting students from the ALP. The LPAC is responsible for ensuring that the parents of LEP students placed in the ALP receive an explanation of the benefits of the ALP in a language they can understand. The information indicated that the LRSD ensures the delivery of language support services to LEP students whose parents have refused placement in the ALP by providing training to regular education teachers in ESL methodologies and instructional strategies, parental involvement, tutoring, summer school, and by monitoring the academic progress of such students. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR and complied with the OCR reporting requirements. .!I.,I m ~ zz ,m.. n ::c \u0026gt;z G) m U\u0026gt; Page 3 - Dr. Morris Holmes. Interim Superintendent Selected Alternative Language Services Model The progress reports revealed that the LRSD selected a research-based English-as-a-SecondLanguage (ESL) program to address the affective, linguistic, and cognitive needs of LEP students at all grade levels. The information showed that the goal of the ESL program is to enable LEP students to master English language skills (i.e., reading, writing, speaking, and listening) and content area concepts and skills so that students are able to participate meaningfully in the regular education program. A review of the progress reports revealed that the LRSD established the same curriculum standards and grade-level/course benchmarks for all students, including LEP students. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR and complied with the OCR reporting requirements. Staffing and Staff Development The progress reports revealed that the LRSD developed procedures to ensure that the district has appropriate staff to implement the ALP. The information in the progress reports showed that the LRSD made significant progress with respect to the number of teachers who obtained an ESL endorsement through the Arkansas Department of Education's \"ESL Endorsement Program.\" In addition, the information revealed that the LRSD has developed an \"ESL Training Program\" to provide continuous training opportunities for all personnel (e.g., principals, regular education, special education, gifted and talented, etc.) responsible for delivering instruction to LEP students. Specifically, the LRSD provides training to staff on how to adapt the instructional strategies, materials, pacing, and assessments for the delivery of instruction to LEP students. Further, the progress reports revealed that the LRSD designed an appraisal instrument to assess the performance of teachers who deliver ALP services to LEP students. OCR reviewed documentation pertaining to the training provided to administrators on the use of the evaluation instrument and on observation techniques to enable them to identify ESL methodologies. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR and complied with the OCR reporting requirements. Materials The LRSD developed procedures to ensure that materials and equipment are appropriate for the implementation of the ALP. The progress report revealed that the LRSD surveyed ALP staff to determine whether there was a need for additional materials and equipment. The information showed that the LRSD provided teachers with materials and equipment, which are appropriate to the curriculum, and comparable in quality, availability, and grade level to the materials provided for the instruction of non-LEP students. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR and complied with the OCR reporting requirements. .!D., m ~\"' z z ,m.... 0 $: z C) m \"' Page 4 - Dr. Morris Holmes. Interim Superintendent Reclassification and Exit The progress reports revealed that the LRSD established and implemented procedures for the exiting, monitoring, and reclassification of LEP students. The information indicated that the criteria employed by the LRSD is based on objective criteria using the LAS test scores in reading, writing, speaking, and comprehension plus other criteria to determine whether students will be able to participate meaningfully in the regular education program. A review of the information showed that a LEP student must score a \"3/4\" or a \"3/5\" or at the Fully English Proficient Level on the LAS post-test prior to exiting the ALP. The information revealed that the LPAC monitors the academic progress of LEP students who exit the ALP for a period of two years to ensure academic success in the regular education program. Specifically, the LPAC ensures that exited students are successfully participating in the regular education program by reviewing the following: I) grades in all core subject areas\n2) teacher observations\n3) counselor comments\nand 4) assessment results. When the LPAC determines that a student needs to re-enter the ESL program, the student is placed back into the ALP after obtaining approval from the parent of the student. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR and complied with the OCR reporting requirements. Parental Notice The LRSD developed procedures for providing notice to the parents of PHLOTE students of school activities in a language they can understand. The progress reports revealed that the schools maintain a list of all PHLOTE students whose parents are limited English proficient and require communication in another language. OCR reviewed the documents which have been translated by the LRSD, to include but not limited to the following: Home Language Survey, Notice of School Placement, Notice of ESL Program Services, Notice of Testing Exemption, Exit Letter to Parents, K-8 Curriculum Standards and Grade-Level/Course Benchmarks, Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbooks, Summer School Applications, Parent Involvement Conference Notices, and the LRSD's Parent/Student Handbook. In addition, the information showed that bilingual staff at the schools translated newsletters, notices, letters, and flyers into other languages. Further, the LRSD advertises information in local publications in Spanish. The information showed that the LRSD disseminated a list of translators/interpreters to the school sites. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR and complied with the OCR reporting requirements. Special Education The progress reports showed that the LRSD revised its policies and procedures pertaining to the process for referring, identifying, evaluating, and placing LEP students with disabilities. The progress reports revealed that ALP staff and Special Education Department staff share information to ensurethat LEP students with disabilities receive special education and alternative language services concurrently. A review of the progress reports revealed that the !J' \"D m :\u0026lt;I ~ zz ,m... C') $: z C) m UJ ?\"~ UJ C: UJ !ICC') iml::g:c :\u0026lt;1,\" D UJ ~~ C) \u0026lt; ~ r\n~rn Page 5 - Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent LRSD provided training to special education staff (i.e., speech pathologists, resource teachers, and psychological examiners) in ESL methodologies to ensure the proper delivery of both ALP and special education services. Further, the progress reports revealed that the LRSD provides information to parents in a language they can understand pertaining to their rights and procedural safeguards by utilizing an interpreter or by providing information that has been translated into a language they can understand. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR and complied with the OCR reporting requirements. Special Opportunity Programs The progress reports revealed that the LRSD implemented procedures to ensure that LEP students are afforded an equal opportunity to participate in the Gifted and Talented (GT) program at the elementary level and in Pre-Advanced Placement and Advanced Placement courses at the secondary level. The information reviewed revealed that the LRSD provided information about the GT program to parents in their native language. In addition, the progress reports revealed that the LRSD staff administered a nonverbal assessment instrument (i.e., Torrance Thinking Creatively) to test LEP students who had been referred for placement in the GT program. The progress reports further revealed that the LRSD provided cultural sensitivity training, training in identifying the characteristics of language minority gifted students, and ESL instructional strategies to LRSD staff. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR and complied with the OCR reporting requirements. Program Evaluation and Modification A review of the progress reports revealed that the LRD has adopted procedures to conduct an annual longitudinal performance evaluation of the ALP and make modifications to the ALP based on the results as required by the results of the program evaluation. The information showed that the LRSD evaluated its ALP on an annual basis in which it reviewed the following: 1) curriculum service delivery\n2) materials and resources\n3) staffing and staff development\n4) student academic progress\n5) longitudinal data comparing LEP students to non-LEP students. and LEP students in the program to LEP students not in the program wiL'li respect to academic achievement, attendance, drop-out rate, graduation rate, retention rate, gifted and talented program placement, and special education program placement of LEP, and students who have exited the ALP, and LEP students not served in the ALP. The information showed that the LRSD made the necessary program modifications and improvements as required by the results of each program evaluation. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR and complied with the OCR reporting requirements. Maintenance of Records for LEP Students The progress reports revealed that the LRSD apprised all staff of the importance of maintaining accurate records regarding the implementation of the ALP and documenting actions pertaining to students participating and exiting the ALP. A review of student records .~., m\n,o fS z z ,m... (\") z~ C) m u, Page 6- Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent Maintenance of Records for LEP Students The progress reports revealed that the LRSD apprised all staff of the importance of maintaining accurate records regarding the implementation of the ALP and documenting actions pertaining to students participating and exiting the ALP. A review of student records revealed that the LRSD maintains, at a minimum, the following documentation in student cumulative folders: Home Language Survey, LAS assessment data\ncommunications with parents in a language they can understand\nplacement decisions\nreport cards\nmodifications\ndecisions to exit student\nand decisions for students to reenter the ALP. Based on a review of the information, OCR has determined that the LRSD has fulfilled the terms under this provision of the CTR andcomplied with the OCR reporting requirements. After analyzing the above information provided by the LRSD, OCR has determined that the LRSD has met all oft..'ic commitn1ents as specified in the CTR. Therefore, OCR is closing this compliance review contingent upon the LRSD's continued implementation of the terms delineated in the September 30, 1999. While no further progress reports are required, OCR understands that the LRSD will continue to conduct qualitative and quantitative program evaluations in accordance with its civil rights responsibilities. OCR is available to provide technical assistance to the LRSD and will work with you and LRSD staff to ensure continued compliance with the regulatory requirements under Title VI, Section 504, and Title IL Under the Freedom of Information Act, it may be necessary to release this document and related correspondence and records upon request. In the event that OCR receives such a request, it will seek to protect, to the extent provided by law, personally identifiable information which, if released, could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. We appreciate your cooperation and that of your staff, especially the assistance provided by Ms. Karen Broadnax, ESL Supervisor. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Mr. John F. Stephens at 214/880-2464 or Ms. Maria H. Gonzalez at 214/880-4918. Sincerely, n / tr_(1, r_ / Tayl~ugust, b~ Office for Civil Rights Southern Division, Dallas Office C: Ms. Karen E. Broadnax, ESL Supervisor .~., m :,0 ~z z ,m... (\") ~ C\u0026gt; m (/) DATE: TO: FROM: THROUGH: Re: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR.KANSAS April 22, 2004 Board of Education ~everly Williams, Director, Human Resources Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools Personnel Changes It is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with AC.A 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) years. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 18, 2003 are considered intern teachers. p g z ~ c5 z U\u0026gt; Personnel Changes Page 2 April 22, 2004 NAME Coleman, Lucy Reason: Leaving City Hill, Peggy Reason: None Given Jones, Gregory Reason: Accepted Another Position Moore, Kenneth Reason: Terminated Bledsoe, Fred Johnson, Marcus POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS Resignationsrf erminations Certified Employees Speech Pathology 9-18-00 62-08 FOREST HGTS. 4-1-04 SPE925 Elem IV 8-1-02 1-04 STEPHENS 3-17-04 TCH925 ElemV 8-13-98 4-07 FOREST PARK 3-26-04 TCH925 Asst. Principal 7-22-96 66-15 HALL 4-8-04 ADC105 New Certified Employees Art 1-20-04 1-01 MCCLELLAN TCH925 Band 4-2-04 1-01 MANN TCH925 ANNUAL SALARY 41088.00 29409.00 36683.00 57060.00 27309.00 annual 5831.61 prorated 27309.00 annual 5831.61 prorated f) C 0 z ~ cz5 u, ~ .., z )\u0026gt; z n ,\u0026gt;- u,\ns,,~ u, CU\u0026gt; 1:n 1:::C mg\n,o ,- ~u, elm G)\n,o ~~ 1:m u, u, .)\u0026gt; :\u0026lt;: G) C\" a, er ~~\n', o,%,- mer G) Cf Ccr ~~ or z: IT \" ?'\n,o 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ m ::E Personnel Changes Page 3 April 22, 2004 NAME Oshea, Christine Tell, Hatem Williams, Norma NONE NONE POSITION SCHOOL Tutor WAKEFIELD Business Ed. FAIR Alt. Skills FOREST HGTS. START DATE END DATE 3-25-04 2-23-04 9-29-94 Certified Promotion Certified Transfer SALARY CLASS 4-01 TCH925 1-01 TCH950 6-16 ANNUAL SALARY 31431.00 annual 7694.05 prorated 27309.00 annual 9387.47 prorated 48998.00 TCH925 r\u0026gt; g z ?\ncz5 en !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z C') ,\u0026gt;.... en\ni,,~ en C en :i:n :i:::C mg\no,.... .,, en i3 !B C) \u0026lt; ~\u0026lt;'5 :i:m en en ,. ,t\n == C),... CJl ct ~. ~ ~ ~~ Cl Cl CCI E~ oz'\"r' rr \" Personnel Changes Page 4 April 22, 2004 NAME POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS Resignations/Terminations Non-Certified Employees Akins, William Custodian 4-5-02 1-02 Reason: Personal MCDERMOTT 3-19-04 CUS928 Beard, Roberta Instr. Aide 1-20-04 1-10 Reason: Accepted Another FAIR.PARK 4-5-04 INA925 Position Booth, Jesse Security Officer 8-11-03 36-16 Reason: None Given FAIR 3-12-04 SOFR9 Brown, Robert Custodian 12-7-00 1-04 Reason: None Given STEPHENS 3-12-04 CUS12 Clegg, Earslean Care 4-1-02 1-08 Reason: None Given CARE 3-31-04 CARE Hawkins, Dawna Instr. Aide 8-31-99 1-07 Reason: Accepted Another OTTERCREEK 3-19-04 INA925 Position Hawkins, Derrick lnstr. Aide 1-26-04 1-10 Reason: one Given KING 3-11-04 INA925 Jackson, Brenda Child utrition 2-22-99 1-01 Reason: None Given CHILD NUTRITION 3-3-04 FSMEAL Jenkins, Clebum Custodian 3-24-03 54-05 Reason: None Given FACILITY SERV. 3-19-04 AD 12 ANNUAL SALARY 11046.00 14472.00 16802.00 15526.00 7.32 13492.00 14472.00 10527.00 29580.00 r, 8 z ?\ncz5 \"' !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z (\"') .\u0026gt;.... \"'\n,-\n \"'\n,, C: (\"') :l::c ~8 .\n.o, ..,..,..\ngo\nmo ~~\ni::m \"'\"' ,. \u0026lt;\n, f' 1%1 ct ~~  % ~~ Gl Cl C: Cl ~~ oz \"r' rT Cl !\"' ~ 0 .~., ~ I Personnel Changes Page 5 April 22, 2004 NAME Johnson, Tammy Reason: Accepted Another Position POSITION SCHOOL Child Nutrition WATSON START DATE END DATE 11-30-03 4-2-04 Moore, Pamela Care 3-10-98 Reason: Returning To School CARE 2-27-04 Reed, Audrey Reason: None Given Tidwell, Darrell Reason: None Given Bus Driver TRANS. 10-13-03 3-1-04 Child Nutrition 2-2-04 CHILD NUTRITION 2-18-04 SALARY CLASS 3-01 FSH550 1-05 CARE 3-02 BUSDRV 1-01 FSH4 New Non-Certified Emplovees Brown, Suzanne 4YROLD Aide 3-22-04 BALE Clark, Phyllis Child Nutrition 3-10-04 CHILD NUTRITION Davis, Calvin Custodian 3-8-04 CLOVERDALE MID. 1-10 INA925 3-01 FSH550 1-01 CUS925 ANNUAL SALARY 8364.00 6.88 10409.00 4314.00 14472.00 annual 3754.90 prorated 8364.00 annual 2330.95 prorated 5313.00 annual 1530.37 prorated r\u0026gt; 8 z ?\niz5 U\u0026gt; !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z C') ,\u0026gt;.... U\u0026gt;\nii,~ U\u0026gt; C: U\u0026gt; :1:n ,1:% mg\n,c,,.... .,, U\u0026gt;\n,om O\n,c, C) \u0026lt; ~(\"\n:1:m U\u0026gt; U\u0026gt; \u0026gt;\u0026lt; C\u0026gt; 1=' ID ct ~ ~ 2 ~~ C) Cl C: Cl ~~ o\" z'r IT \" !X'\n,c, 6 ,.~,., \"~' ~ Personnel Changes Page 6 April 22, 2004 NAME Dokes, Joann Ekeanyanwu, Jennifer Garcia, Maria Johnson,Ricky Kiefer, Eugene Lyons, Bernard McCoy-Robinson, Sandra POSITION SCHOOL Child Nutrition MCDERMOTT Instr. Aide DODD ESL CURR./LEARNING Security Officer HALL Custodian JEFFERSO Custodian TERRY Child utrition CE TRAL START DATE END DATE 3-10-04 3-8-04 3-22-04 3-30-04 3-17-04 3-2-04 2-23-04 SALARY CLASS 3-01 FSH550 1-10 INA925 1-07 INA12 36-11 SOFR9 1-02 CUS12 1-01 CUS12 3-01 FSH550 ANNUAL SALARY 8364.00 annual 2330.95 prorated 14472.00 annual 4146.03 prorated 17418.00 annual 5114.22 prorated 14473.00 annual 3260.40 prorated 14355.00 annual 4337.04 prorated 13784.00 annual 4809.74 prorated 8364.00 annual 2879.41 prorated ~ g z .\u0026gt;... ~ z u, !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z n ,... u,\n,,,~ u, Cu,\ni:: n 31:::C ,m, ,g... .., u, ~lB G)\u0026lt; ~ \u0026lt;\"I 31:m u, u, \u0026gt;~\n, ?' a,ct r-\n~~ ~,,. gi (J ~~ oz\"\",r,'. (J ,!X,' 6 .~., \u0026gt;,, ~ m ::E Personnel Changes Page 7 April 22, 2004 NAME McNeary, Alma Mercado, Maria Scott, Frank Smith, Jimmy Watson, Stacie Young, Ilisa POSITION SCHOOL Nurses TERRY Instr. Aide BRADY Custodian DUNBAR Instr. Aide ALC Instr. Aide DODD Child utrition BALE START DATE END DATE 3-3-04 4-01-04 3-22-04 4-7-04 3-8-04 3-8-04 SALARY CLASS 1-07 NURSES 1-10 INA925 1-01 CUS925 1-10 INA925 1-02 INA925 3-01 FSH550 ANNUAL SALARY 16280.00 annual 4917.92 prorated 14472.00 annual 3129.08 prorated 5313.00 annual 1386.00 prorated 14472.00 annual 2816.27 prorated 11425.00 annual 3273.11 prorated 8364.00 annual 2422.36 prorated fl g z ?\ncz5 \"' !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z C') ,\u0026gt;- \"'\n,,,~ \"C': \"' ll: C') ll: :i:: mg\no ,- .,,\"' ::Om 8::o ~ri ll:m en\"'\n\u0026gt;\n,\"~' a, 0: ~-~~ ~If g~ ti s~ o\" %~ ti ?' 6 .~,, )\u0026gt;\nD ~ ~ Personnel Changes Page 8 April 22, 2004 NAME NONE NONE POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE Non-Certified Promotion Non-Certified Transfer SALARY CLASS ANNUAL SALARY !\"\u0026gt; g z ~ cz5 U\u0026gt; TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 April 22, 2004 Board of Directors FROM: Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent Dr. Marian Lacey, Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Schools THROUGH: Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent SUBJECT: Summer Educational Programs Short Summary-The Board is asked to approve three categories of summer educational programs for our students. These three are summer enrichment opportunities for children (grades pre-K-12), credit recovery summer school, and the compilation and advertisement of a menu of educational opportunities for children in the Greater Little Rock area for summer 2004. Objectives-To provide greater opportunities for students to participate in educational programs during the summer that provide experiences that will:  increase students' academic knowledge, skills, and confidence.  build on prior student learning and give students a head start for the Fall 2004 school term,  provide enrichment opportunities (for all students) or credit recovery (secondary students). Expected Outcomes-Student will have access to a variety of challenging educational programs during the summer. Our school facilities will be utilized more effectively during the summer months for the benefit of students. Population-All Little Rock School District students have the potential to participate in a summer educational program. Budget Amount/Source of Budget-The budget projections for the programs are as follows:  The budget for Summer Enrichment Programs will be determined based on the number of quality proposals submitted to us at our request or in response to an RFP\nhowever, a ceiling of $150,000 is requested to fund approximately 12,000 student-days of summer enrichment.  The budget for the Credit Recovery Summer School for secondary students is $293,060 for approximately 760 students.  The cost of advertising a menu of summer programs in the city that might interest our . students and their families will be nominal. f\u0026gt; g z .\u0026gt;.. \u0026lt;5 z U\u0026gt; !.=,,' z \u0026gt;z (\") ~ U\u0026gt; Manager-Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent for Instruction and Dr. Marian Lacey, Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Schools Duration-The current proposal is for June, July, and August, 2004. Long Range/Continuation-Greater coordination and scale-up of summer programs and after school programs will occur in the near future. A staff position will be established or reassigned to provide direction to the identification, development, coordination and oversight of all after school and summer enrichment programs. Staff members have been participating in discussions with the City of Little Rock around the issue of afterschool initiatives. Mr. W. J. Monagle with the City has been spearheading this effort. Other Agencies Involved-Hopefully, the entire community will be involved. Certainly, many city agencies, institutions of higher education, museums, art and music centers, churches, and existing organizations for boys and girls will be involved in this effort. Expectations of Staff-A staff person will be assigned primary responsibility for this effort. Many staff members are already involved in portions of summer and after school programs\nhowever, the effort is fragmented. We plan to pull all the existing programs as well as new programs under one \"umbrella.\" Expanding educational opportunities for students is an ongoing commitment for our staff. Needed Staff-One new staff position, working in Pupil Services, has been requested for the 2004-05 budget year. Many other existing staff positions have a stake in this effort and will be involved. Teachers will be hired to teach credit recovery summer school courses based on the student enrollment. Comments-We cannot afford for our students to lose significant ground in the summer. Involving students in educational summertime activities can help improve students' achievement during the traditional school year. Recommendations-We recommend approval of the three initiatives for summer educational programs. Detailed budgets will be developed as more information becomes available. Three initiatives are proposed for summertime and/or after school implementation:  Summer Enrichment Programs  Credit Recovery Summer School for Secondary Students  Menu of summer educational opportunities for students and families Summer Enrichment Programs The district solicited proposals for summer enrichment opportunities for students from Philander Smith College and The Princeton Review. Also, the district issued an RFP for summer enrichment programs that is open to the public as well as to schools and teachers. r\u0026gt; C 0 z ~ ~z en ?\u0026lt; :c ~s\no= z~ C'\u0026gt;,\"' 0 ?\u0026lt; ~ \u0026gt;C'\u0026gt; c\n,o '-m g~ ~\"'~\"' m z... . RFP-Following is the \"teaser\" for the RFP for Summer Enrichment Programs. This was emailed to all schools for posting and was advertised in the newspaper. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) RFP24-019 SUMMER ENRICHMENT PROGRAMS The Little Rock School District (LRSD) is requesting proposals from qualified individuals/companies who wish to provide high quality summer instruction for students in our schools. The providers must be external educational entities\nhowever, this does not preclude schools and/or teachers from individually or collaboratively acting as informal external educational entities for this summer enrichment initiative. LRSD requires that these services be provided by individuals or groups that can demonstrate high-quality, performance based instruction founded on a research-based program of studies and successful instructional strategies supported by data. Summer Enrichment Program providers must complete an application based on this request for proposals. It is expected that proposed programs will include underserved students as a high priority and that instruction will concentrate on expanding, enriching, extending, and/or strengthening students' academic skills, knowledge, and confidence. Although the proposed programs are not limited to the areas of reading and math, reinforcement and application of reading and/or math skills should be incorporated into the programs in order to help students achieve Arkansas' standards, as demonstrated by improved performance on the Benchmark and end of course exams. Copies of the RFP and Application are available from Darral Paradis, at Darral.Paradis@lrsd.org or phone number (501) 447-2262. Proposals must be received no later than 2:00 p.m., Thursday, April 22, 2004 at the LRSD Procurement Office, 1800 East Sixth Street, Little Rock, AR 72202. The District reserves the right to reject any or all responses and waive any irregularities or formalities in proposals received. The District reserves the right to negotiate with the apparent acceptable Offerers. Awards will be based on those considerations that are in the best interest of the District and will be made to the responsive, responsible offerer whose proposal is judged to be the most effective and economical for the purpose intended, according to the requirements stated in the Request for Proposal. BY: Darral Paradis CPPB, C.P.M. I Director of Procurement The amount of funding for Summer Enrichment Programs will be contingent on the number of quality proposals\nhowever, an amount of $150,000 is requested as a ceiling. This amount could ~ C 0 z ~ cz5 u, ~ .., z \u0026gt;z n\ne u, fund up to 12,000 student days of summer enrichment experiences. A tuition charge will be considered to defray part of the cost. Credit Recovery Summer School for Secondary Students In compliance with Arkansas Statute 6-16-702, districts offering summer school for the purpose of remediating student failures must provide the program free of charge to enrolled students who are eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. The majority of our students would be eligible for full tuition. For the 2003-04 school year, the LRSD had 5,243 students on the free lunch program and 753 on the reduced-price lunch program. Our legal advisers have examined the law and consulted with ADE, seeking clarity and any possible consideration for leniency. They found no relief for the district. A committee of administrators was formed to discuss the options for the district- to discontinue summer school or to have summer school. Issues in Favor of Continuing Summer School  Parents expect the district to provide some option for grade recovery. Historically, we have provided summer school for students who have failed courses, allowing them the opportunity to retake failed courses in order to advance to the next grade and/or to graduate.  The majority of students enrolled in summer school receive free or reduced-price lunch and would be denied another opportunity to recover skills.  Without summer school, there would be an increased number of students retained in the regular classrooms, adding to an already-crowded situation. Concern Cost to district for tuition-free summer school for identified students, estimated at $288,060 for staff salaries and $5,000 for transportation for middle school students (stops throughout the city). Detailed costs will be available later. Recommendation Because of the compelling need to continue to remove barriers for our low-performing students, we recommend that the district explore and allocate funds for summer school. f\u0026gt; 0 0 z ~ cz5 U\u0026gt; ~ .., z \u0026gt;z 0 \u0026gt;,.... U\u0026gt; Menu of Summer Progams in the City for Students and Families The following is a survey that is being used to compile a menu of surrimer educational programs around the city for summer 2004. The menu will be made widely available to parents and students SUMMER ENRICHMENT PROGRAM SURVEY The Little Rock School District (LRSD) recognizes the great value of children of school age having educational summertime activities. The district would like to assist parents and their children in finding appropriate enrichment activities during the summer. - If your organization is having a program for children this summer, please complete the survey. If you know of individuals or people who we might contact to get information about possible summer programs, please let us know who they are. LRSD will compile a list of summer programs and make that information available to parents and children. Thank you very much. Organization Summer Activity Times/Dates Age Children Served Contact/Phone I know ofperson(s)/organization who may be offering a summer program for school-age children. The name of someone to contact about this is: Name Phone Number e-mai I address My name and phone number are: My Name My Phone Number e-mail address RETURN THIS INFORMATION TO: Dr. Mona Briggs Little Rock School District Garland Building 3615 West 25th Street Little Rock, AR 72204 Phone: 447-2070 mona.bnggs@lrsd.org Many parents/guardians are interested in summer activities for their children. The compiled_ list will be available on the LRSD Website and also in a printed format available to hand or mail to interested parents. ~ 0 0 z ~ cz5 (I\u0026gt; !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z n ~ (I\u0026gt; Memorandum Date: April 22, 2004 To: Little Rock School District Board of Education Through: _ ~~- Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools ~~:\u0026gt;~~~!~~}t Stewart, Chief Financial Officer ~73/Williarns, Director of Human Resources Prepared By:~arral Paradis, Director of Procurement \u0026amp; Materials Management Subject District Regulation GBEA-R. Reference AR statute 6-24-101:119 (Act 1599 of 2001). Board Policy GBEA and the corresponding Administrative Directive dated May 1, 2004 are attached for your reference. Summary: The statute above precludes a school District employee from contracting with the public educational entity employing him or her if the employee has knowledge that he or she is directly interested in the contract. The Administration believes it necessary to have a Regulation in place to summarize the statute and to guide the Board and Administration in possible exceptions. Manager(s): Beverly Williams, Director, Human Resources Darral Paradis, Director, Procurement and Materials Management Recommendation We request the Board of Education review and approve Regulation GBEA-R as attached. f\u0026gt; g z ?. cz5 (J) !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z (\") ~ (J) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: GBEA - R CONFLICT OF INTEREST - Employees selling to the District The LRSD contracts for goods and services in confonnance with statutory ethics laws and, in addition, in a manner that will avoid any conflict of interest or the appearance thereof. Accordingly, the Board will approve employees as District vendors under the statutory exception provisions only when it is clearly in the best interest of the District. General Prohibitions and Guidelines for Statutory Exceptions: In general, except as provided below, it is a breach of statutory ethical standards for an employee to contract with the District if the employee has knowledge that he or she is directly interested in the contract. The Board by exception may under unusual and limited circumstances approve an employee's business as a District vendor if the Board determines that the potential vendor relationship is in the best interest of the District. In such cases, the Board will document the approval by written resolution after fully disclosing the reasons justifying the potential vendor relationship in an open meeting in confonnance with AR law. Following are the guidelines for these exceptions: I. No exceptions will be allowed for District Administrators (defined as Director-level and above) who are directly or indirectly interested in a contract since these individuals are in District-wide decision making positions. In addition, any employee on a District Administrative salary schedule is prohibited from conducting business with family members. 2. District Administrator's family members who have a financial interest in a business as defined by AR law may contract with the District only after appearing before the Board of Directors explaining why their particular vendor circumstance should be considered unusual and limited. In the event the Board by resolution approves the business as a District vendor, the District may contract with the family member's company for transactions of any amount for a fiscal year provided the services/commodities are procured on a competitive basis and where the family member company's offer is the lowest received. However, the ADE must first have approved the District resolution before any contract will be valid or enforceable. 3. Under no circumstances will it be authorized for the District to do business with an employee when the employee regardless of their salary schedule placement or position has the ability to set the specifications for purchase and choose and/or recommend the vendor. 4. Non-Administrative employees (defined as any employee below Director-level) who are directly interested in a contract may conduct business with the District only after appearing before the Board of Directors explaining why their particular vendor circumstance should be considered unusual and limited. In the event the Board by resolution approves the employee as a District vendor, the District may contract with the employee's company: Adopted: a. for transactions totaling up to $5,000 for a fiscal year provided the services/commodities are procured on a competitive basis and where the employee company's offer is the lowest received or\nb. for transactions expected to exceed $5,000 for a fiscal year provided the services/commodities are procured on a competitive basis and where the employee company's offer is the lowest received. However, the ADE must first have approved the District resolution before any contract will be valid or enforceable or\nc. where competitive quoting/bidding is not practical regardless of dollar amount due to the nature of the service or commodity (sole source) provided the ADE has first approved the District resolution in those cases expected to exceed $5,000. Legal Reference: A.CA 6-24-101:119 Attachments: Conflict of Interest General Disclosure Statements for Board Members, Administrators, and Non-Administrators f\u0026gt; g z ?\ncz5 (/) .!,=.,' z \u0026gt;z (\") ~ (/) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: GBEA STAFF ETHICS/CONFLICT OF INTEREST Employees of the Board will not engage in any activity that conflicts, or raises a reasonable question of conflict, with their duties in the District. Staff Gifts and Solicitations No employee of the Little Rock School District will accept any gratuity or favor from any supplier, contractor, or person performing personal services for the Little Rock School District. Further, the same policy will apply to any person, partnership, company or any other entity which may be expected to perform such services, or offer bids or prices for any supplies, construction, or maintenance work to be performed for the District. Advertising of Products or Services by District Employees No employee of the Little Rock School District will use District facilities, school time, or the school or District name for any form of private advertising for products or services. ~Jepotism In order that there is no conflict of interest in the supervision and evaluation of employees, at no time may any administrator directly be responsible for the supervision and/or evaluation of any employee directly related to him or her. Adopted: November 18, 1999 Cross Reference: Board of Education Policy BCB f\u0026gt; 8 z ?\nc5 z en LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: Effective: May 1, 2004 CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE (AR Code 6-24-101:119) All District employees will be required to complete and have a current \"Conflict of Interest\" disclosure form (see attached: form for Administrators - any employee on an administrative salary schedule and Non-Administrators - any employee not on an administrative salary schedule) on file with the District's Human Resources Department. Forms are available from the Human Resources Department. New employees to the District will be required to complete the appropriate form and forward to Human Resources before beginning work with the District. The Human Resources Department will be responsible for coordinating its completion for all new employees. Existing employees who have not previously completed the form or who have had a change in disclosure status will be required to request a form and complete/return it to the Human Resources Department. The Procurement Department will maintain and publish an annual list of employees and their affiliated companies with whom the District may not conduct business resulting from an analysis/review of the submitted disclosure forms and in keeping with Arkansas Law. Disclosure (form attached) required by law from Board Members will be coordinated by the Superintendent's Office. f\u0026gt; g z ?\ni5 z U\u0026gt; CONFLICT OF INTEREST GENERAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT (FOR BOARD MEMBERS) All LRSD Board Members have an affirmative obligation under AR statute 6-24-101: 119 to disclose relationships they may have with vendors before the District enters into a potential contract or before services are performed. Disclosure must be made by completing the form below. The form must be completed and submitted to the Superintendent's Office. Ignoring this requirement or knowingly failing to comply with the provisions of this statute could result in the filing of criminal felony charges. GENERAL DISCLOSURE Board Member Name: ___________________________ _ Personal Mailing Address: City: ______________ State: __ _ Zip: ___ _ Phone: Please check either YES or NO below: I am declaring a Vendor Conflict of Interest Relationship _ YES or NO If you checked YES above, please complete the following: Company Name: Mailing Address: City: ______________ State: __ _ Zip: ___ _ Work Telephone: Complete below and check all that apply: __ I OR a family member own more than five (5) percent of the company above. __ I OR a family member hold a position as an officer, director, trustee, partner, or other top level management with the company above\nor __ I OR a family member am an employee, agent, independent contractor, or other arrangement where my compensation is based in whole or in part on transactions with the  LRSD. Board Member Printed Name Board Member Signature Date Submitted .!=.,' z \u0026gt;z 0 ,\u0026gt;- \"' Dear Board Member: CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION LETTER Board Member Except as noted below (See Exceptions) a school District is prohibited from entering into a contract with a Board Member who has a direct OR indirect interest in the contract. Arkansas Law 6-24-101: I I 9 requires full open disclosure before a Board Member may sell, lease, provide services or enter into a .Q!l!@! with the District where he/she is a Board Member if the Board Member has knowledge that he or she is directlv OR indirectlv interested in the contract. \"Contract\" means any transaction or agreement for the purchase, lease, transfer, or use of real property or personal property and personal or professional services, including but not limited to, motor vehicles, equipment, commodities, materials, services, computers or other electronics, construction, capital improvements, deposits and investments. \"Directly Interested\" means receiving compensation or other benefits personally or to a business or other entity in which the individual has a financial interest. \"Indirectly Interested\" means receiving compensation or other benefits personally, for a family member, or for a business or other entity in which the individual or a familv member has a financial interest. \"Family Member\" means an individual's spouse\nchildren of the individual or spouse\na child's spouse\nparents of the individual or spouse\nbrothers and sisters of the individual\nanyone living or residing in the same residence with the individual or spouse\nor anyone acting or serving as an agent of the individual \"Financial Interest\" in a business or other entity means: (i) Ownership of more than a five percent (5%) interest\n(ii) Holding a position as an officer, director, trustee, partner, or other top level management\nor (iii) Being an employee, agent, independent contractor, or other arrangement where the individual's compensation is based in whole or in part on transactions with the public educational entity. Financial interest does not include the ownership of stock or other equity holdings in any publicly held company. THEREFORE, all LRSD Board Members have an affirmative obligation under this statute to disclose relationships with vendors before the District enters into a potential contract or before services are performed. The form on the back allows for this disclosure. All Board Members are to complete this form and forward to the Superintendent's Office. Failure to fully disclose could result in criminal felony charges being brought against the Board Member. The entire AR Code including this law may be viewed at www.arkle!!.state.ar.us under research resources. EXCEPTJONS: I. A Board Member or his/her family member, after proper disclosure, may be allowed to conduct business with the District employing him/her if the transaction is approved at an open board meeting. Any Board Member direct]) or indirectly interested in the proposed contract shall leave the meeting until the voting on the issue is concluded. and the absent member shall not be counted as having voted. In some cases apprornl by the Director of the AR Depanment of Education may also be required . ., This statute does not appl) to most ordinar) employment contracts. including contracts of extra duties such as bus dri,er. club sponsorships. and officiating ball games. , 'either does it apply to reimbursements paid for proper work-related expenses. 0~ BACK CONFLICT OF INTEREST GENERAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT (FOR ADMINISTRATORS) All LRSD employees have an affirmative obligation under AR statute 6-24-101: 119 to disclose relationships they may have with vendors before the District enters into a potential contract or before services are performed. Disclosure must be made by completing the form below. The form must be completed and submitted to the Human Resources Department. Ignoring this requirement or knowingly failing to comply with the provisions of this statute could result in the filing of criminal felony charges. GENERAL DISCLOSURE Employee Name: Personal Mailing Address: City: _____________ State: Zip: ___ _ LRSD Location: _____________ LRSD Phone: ____ _ Please check either YES or NO below: I am declaring a Vendor Conflict of Interest Relationship _ YES or NO If you checked YES above, please complete the following: Company Name: Mailing Address: City: _____________ State: __ _ Zip: ___ _ Work Telephone: Complete below and check all that apply: __ I OR a family member own more than five (5) percent of the company above. __ I OR a family member hold a position as an officer, director, trustee, partner, or other top level management with the company above\nor __ I OR a family member am an employee, agent, independent contractor, or other arrangement where my compensation is based in whole or in part on transactions with the LRSD. Employee Printed Tame Employee Signature Date Submitted r\u0026gt; g z ~ iz5 en ~..,, z )\u0026gt; z C') \u0026gt;,- en Dear Employee: EMPLOYEE CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION LETTER Administrator (Any Employee on an Administrative Salary Schedule) Except as noted below (See Exceptions) a school District is prohibited from entering into a contract with administrator employees who have a direct OR indirect interest in the contract. Arkansas Law 6-24-101: 119 requires full open disclosure before a school District administrator employee may sell, lease, provide services or enter into a~ with the school District where he/she is employed if the employee has knowledge that he or she is directlv OR indirectlv interested in the contract. \"Contract\" means any transaction or agreement for the purchase, lease, transfer, or use of real property or personal property and personal or professional services, including but not limited to, motor vehicles, equipment, commodities, materials, services, computers or other electronics, construction, capital improvements, deposits and investments. \"Directly Interested\" means receiving compensation or other benefits personally or to a business or other entity in which the individual has a financial interest. \"Indirectly Interested\" means receiving compensation or other benefits personally, for a family member, or for a business or other entity in which the individual or a farnilv member has a financial interest. \"Family Member\" means an individual's spouse\nchildren of the individual or spouse\na child's spouse\nparents of the individual or spouse\nbrothers and sisters of the individual\nanyone living or residing in the same residence with the individual or spouse\nor anyone acting or serving as an agent of the individual \"Financial Interest\" in a business or other entity means: (i) Ownership of more than a five percent (5%) interest\n(ii) Holding a position as an officer, director, trustee, partner, or other top level management\nor (iii) Being an employee, agent, independent contractor, or other arrangement where the individual's compensation is based in whole or in part on transactions with the public educational entity. Financial interest does not include the ownership of stock or other equity holdings in any publicly held company. THEREFORE, all LRSD administrator employees have an affirmative obligation under this statute to disclose relationships with vendors before the District enters into a potential contract or before services are performed. The form on the back allows for this disclosure. All administrator employees are to complete this form and forward to the Human Resources Department. Failure to fully disclose could result in criminal felony charges being brought against the employee. The entire AR Code including this law may be viewed at www.arkleg.state.ar.us under research resources EXCEPTIO 'S: I. A District employee or his/her famil~ member. after proper disclosure. ma) be allowed to conduct business with the District employing him/her if the transaction is approved at an open board meeting. In some cases approval b~ the Director of the AR Department of Education may also be required. 2. This statute does not appl) to most ordinal') employment conrracts. including contracts of extra duties such as bus driver, club sponsorships. and officiating ball games. either does it apply to re1mburst111ents paid for proper \\\\Ork-related expenses. OJ\\ BACK ~ 8 z .\u0026gt;.. i5 z \"' .~., z \u0026gt;z (\") ,\u0026gt;- \"' CONFLICT OF INTEREST GENERAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT (FOR NON-ADMINISTRATOR EMPLOYEES) All LRSD employees have an affirmative obligation under AR statute 6-24-101: 119 to disclose relationships they may have with vendors before the District enters into a potential contract or before services are perfom1ed. Disclosure must be made by completing the form below. The form must be completed and submitted to the Human Resources Department. Ignoring this requirement or knowingly failing to comply with the provisions of this statute could result in the filing of criminal felony charges. GENERAL DISCLOSURE Employee Name: Personal Mailing Address: City: ______________ State: __ _ Zip: ___ _ LRSD Location: -------------- LRSD Phone: ------ Please check either YES or NO below: I am declaring a Vendor Conflict of Interest Relationship_ YES or NO If you checked YES above, please complete the following: Company ame: Mailing Address: City: ______________ State: __ _ Zip: ___ _ Work Telephone: Complete below and check all that apply: __ I own more than five (5) percent of the company above. __ I hold a position as an officer, director, trustee, partner, or other top level management with the company above\nor __ I am an employee, agent, independent contractor, or other arrangement where my compensation is based in whole or in part on transactions with the LRSD. Employee Printed Name Employee Signature Date Submitted r\u0026gt; 8 z ~ cz5 Cl\u0026gt; Dear Employee: EMPLOYEE CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION LETTER Non-Administr-.i-tor (All employees NOT on an Administrative Pay Schdule) Except as noted below (See Exceptions) a school District is prohibited from entering into a contract with non-administrator employees who have a direct interest in the contract. Arkansas Law 6-24-101 : 119 requires full open disclosure before a school District nonadministrator employee may sell, lease, provide services or enter into a contract with the school District where he/she is employed if the employee has knowledge that he or she is directly interested in the contract. \"Contract\" means any transaction or agreement for the purchase, lease, transfer, or use of real property or personal property and personal or professional services, including but not limited to, motor vehicles, equipment, commodities, materials, services, computers or other electronics, construction , capital improvements, deposits and investments. \"Directly Interested\" means receiving compensation or other benefits personally or to a business or other entity in which the individual has a financial interest. \"Financial Interest\" in a business or other entity means: (i) Ownership of more than a five percent (5%) interest\n(ii) Holding a position as an officer, director, trustee, partner, or other top level management\nor (iii) Being an employee, agent, independent contractor, or other arrangement where the individual's compensation is based in whole or in part on transactions with the public educational entity. Financial interest does not include the ownership of stock or other equity holdings in any publicly held company. THEREFORE, all LRSD non-administrator employees have an affirmative obligation under this statute to disclose relationships with vendors before the District enters into a potential contract or before services are performed. The form on the back allows for this disclosure. All nonadministrator employees are to complete this form and forward to the Human Resources Department. Failure to fully disclose could result in criminal felony charges being brought against the employee. The entire AR Code including this law may be viewed at www.arkleg.state.ar.us under research resources. EXCEPTIONS: 1. A District employee, after proper disclosure, may be allowed to conduct business with the District employing him/her if the transaction is approved at an open board meeting . In some cases approval by the Director of the AR Department of Education may also be requ ired . 2. Thi s statute does not apply to most ordinary employment contracts, including contracts of extra duties such as bus driver, club sponsorships , and officiating ball games. Neither does it apply to reimbursements paid for proper work-related expenses. ON BACK '54n Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge\" April 22, TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: Short Summary: Objectives: Expected Outcome: Population/Location: ittle Rock School District Board of Directors ~torofFacilityServices ~ ~  . Donald M. Stewart, Chief Financial 0~ Dr. Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools Request for Dedication of Right of Way: Parkview High School Request to dedicate to the City of Little Rock rightof- way on 26th Street near Parkview High School To fulfill the requirement of a Conditional Use Permit To go forward with construction at Parkview High School Budget Amount/Source of Budget: Parkview High School, Barrow Road and 26th St. area NIA Manager: Duration: Long Range/Continuation: Other Agencies Involved : Expectations of District: Needed Staff: Comments: F-.ecommendations: Director of Facility Services Permanent NIA City of Little Rock Fulfillment of the requirements of a conditional use permit. NIA See Below Approval by Board The Conditional Use Permit that allows the Little Rock School District to go forward with the planned construction at Parkview High School, requires that the District deed to the City of Little Rock the right of way on 26th Street, which borders the east side of our campus. This right-of-way dedication will not detract from the operation of the school and will eventually improve the streets in the neighborhood. It is recommended that the Administration be allowed to proceed with this right-of-wa) dedication. DE:cg 810 \\\\ '. i\\Iarkham  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  www.lrsd.org 501-44\"\"-1000  fax: 501-447-1001 r\u0026gt; C 0 z ?\nc5 z Cl) !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z C\"\u0026gt; ~ Cl) DEDICATION DEED KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That (Company or Partnership Name), an Arkansas (Type of Corporation or Partnership!, GRANTOR, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other valuable considerations to it in hand paid by the CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, GRANTEE, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby dedicate, grant and convey, without warranty whatsoever, unto the said GRANTEE, for the purposes of the installing, operating and maintaining public roadways, public utilities, storm drainage and for other public purposes, all its right, title , interest and estate in and to the following-described land shown on the \"Right-of-Way Dedication Exhibit\" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the said GRANTEE, and unto its successors and assigns forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTOR has caused this Deed to be executed on this __ day of ________ , 2004. ST A TE OF ARKANSAS ) ) ss. COUNTY OF PULASKI ) By: (Authorized Signature) (Printed Name \u0026amp; Title) (Name of Corporation or Partnership) Acknowledgment On this day personally appeared before the undersigned, a Notary Public within and for the County and State aforesaid, duly qualified, commissioned and acting, the within named (Authorized Signature), to me personally well known , who stated that he was the (Title) of (Name of Company or Partnership). an Arkansas (Type of Corporation or Partnership), and stated and acknowledged that he was duly authorized in that capacity to execute the foregoing instrument for and in the name and behalf of said (Name of Company) and further sated and acknowledged that he had so signed executed and delivered said foregoing instrument for the consideration and purposes therein mentioned and set forth . IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal this __ day of ______ , 2004. Notary Public My Commission Expires: (SE AL) H:\\Public\\RMB\\Fonns\\ROWdeed.doc f\u0026gt; 0 0 z ~ \u0026lt;z5 u, RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION EXHIBIT 3/16/04 BARROW ROAD 19 w---- 11 \"{__ N 53'26'55\" W I 5  : 52.31 ' I 20 : I I Right-of-Way Dedication Description Port of the SW SI'/, Section 11, T-1-N, R-13-W, City Of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a point that is 50 foot west and 25 foot north of the NE corner of Lot 1, Sondon Addition as filed for record in plot book 4, page 295\nthence N 88\"26'31\" W along the existing right-of-way line of 26th Street, a distance of 593.22 feet\nthence N 53'26'55\" W along said existing right-of-way line, a distance of 52.31 feet\nthence S 88'23'31\" E, a distance of 636.13 feet\nthence S 01'40'03\" W, a distance of 30.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, containing 0.423 Acres (18,440 sq. ft.) more or less. 200 - --+' ,JJ \\!\u0026gt; I w I W1 I: III ~~i=, ,,,,l I I I z J_ _JI ,I ~ --- -- i ~ LONGCOY STREET ~ 1\nz ----T-- ~I ~ Cl) 19 I I 20 - -~+-'.: \",\n,_., U) N lo co z I I ___ l_ __ ! I I I I I /w r\"\n_ l\"1 I~ ' \u0026lt;O I I Vl TATUM STRE~. I I --------=t-25 -~S 014003 W I 30.00' I II P.0.8. 100 0 100 GRAPHIC SCALE 1 ,, 1 oo 200 .!'.::,\u0026gt;, z,.. z C\"\u0026gt; ~ \"' ....... LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: April 22, 2004 Board of Education FROM: ~al Paradis, Director of Procurement and Materials Mgmt. THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donations of Property Attached are requests to donate property to the Little Rock School District as follows: School/Department Central High School Central High School Cloverdale Magnet Middle School Cloverdale Magnet Middle School $848.00 check for bus expenses for 9th grade students to attend the production of Romeo and Juliet The novel, \"Bleachers\" by John Grisham, to each member of the Tiger Football Team. The total value of donation is $1,603.49. Burger coupons, valued approximately $500.00, to be used as student incentives Donor Leslie Golden and Susan Nichols of Arkansas Repertory Theatre Kevin Crass of Friday, Eldredge and Clark Law Firm McDonald's RC Enterprise, Inc. A framed oil painting Mr. Carey Hilburn of Cloverdale Magnet Middle School, valued at approximately $350.00, to be hung in front office of school Board of Education April 22, 2004 Page 2 School/Department Mabelvale Magnet Middle School Little Rock School District Little Rock School District Seven (7) \"teaching computer tables\" and a portable AV computer station for the technology center of new library. The total value of donation is $1,400.00. Assorted office furniture and a Canon typewriter, valued at approximately $100.00, to be used where needed Two (2) Mark 100 AT Metal/Weapon Detection Systems with an extra control module, valued at approximately $7,500.00 Donor Fidelity Information Services, Inc. through Ms. Becky Bowling Mr. Mark Ross of Ross \u0026amp; Ross, PA Little Rock National Airport It is recommended that these donation requests be approved in accordance with the policies of the Board. ittCe 'Rock Centra{ J-{ifJfi Scfioo{ 1500 Soutli 'Park Street Litt{e 'Rock, .Jlrkansas 72202 'Pfione 501-447-1400 :fax 501-447-1401 DATE: FEBRUARY 24, 2003 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT FROM: NANCY ROUSSEAU, PRINCIPAL~ SUBJECT: DONATION Leslie Golden and Susan Nichols of the Arkansas Repertory Theatre at 601 Main Street, P. 0. Box 110, Little Rock, AR 72203 very generously donated a check in the amount of $848.00 to Little Rock Central High School. The donation covered bus expenses for our 9th grade students to attend the production of Romeo \u0026amp; Juliet. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted m accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. Littfe 'Roci Centra{ JffeFi Scfioo{ 1500 Soutli Park Street Litt{e 'Rock, .Jlrkansas 72202 'Pfione 501-447-1400 :fax 501-447-1401 DATE: FEBRUARY 24, 2003 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT FROM: NANCY ROUSSEAU, PRINCIPAL ~ ~~ SUBJECT: DONATION Kevin Crass of Friday, Eldredge, \u0026amp; Clark, 400 West Capitol Avenue Suite 2000, Little Rock, AR 72201, very generously donated the novel, \"Bleachers\" by John Grisham to each member of the Tiger Football Team. The total gift amount was $1,603.49. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted m accordance \\.vitl1 tl1e policies of the Little Rock School District . .. - . 0 \\,.  ._ t I ..... CLOVERDALE MAGNET MIDDLE SCHOOL To: Mr. Darral Paradis Director of Procurement From: Angela Munns, Principal Date: March 22, 2004 RE: Donation Please accept the following donations to Cloverdale Magnet Middle School to be used as student incentives. Business McDonalds RCN Enterprise, Inc. 17200 Chenal Parkway, Ste 300 Little Rock, AR 72223 Donation/Approximate Value $500.00 (burger coupons) Also, please accept the donation of 1 Framed Oil Painting of Cloverdale Magnet Middle School, painted and donation by Mr. Carey Hilburn. The painting will be hung in the front office of the school. Mr. Carey Hilburn 1103 West Main Street Atkins, AR 72823 Donation/Approximate Value $350.00 Framed Oil Painting To: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement From~nn Blaylock, Principal Date: February 24, 2004 Re: Donation Please accept the donation of seven \"teaching computer tables\" and a portable AV computer station valued at a total of $1,400.00 from Fidelity Information Services, Inc. These tables were donated to our Media Center and our computer lab through Ms. Becky Bowling. It is recommended that this donation request be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. PROCUREMENT \u0026amp; MATERIALS MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 1800 East 6th Street  Little Rock, AR 72202  (501) 447-2260  Fax: (501) 447-2261 DATE: April 1, 2004 TO: Board of Education FROM: ~arral Paradis, Director, Procurement and Materials Management THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donation Mr. Mark Ross, Ross \u0026amp; Ross, PA, P. 0. Box 538, LR, AR 72203 donated assorted office furniture and equipment to the Little Rock School District to be used where needed. Items donated include a computer table, round table, typewriter stand and a Canon S-68S typewriter. The donor estimates the total value of the donated items at approximately $100.00. It is recommended that this donation request be approved in accordance with the policies of the Board of Education of the Little Rock School District. Thank you . PROCUREMENT \u0026amp; MATERIALS MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 1800 East 6th Street  Little Rock, AR 72202  (501) 447-2260  Fax: (501) 447-2261 DATE: April 1, 2004 TO: Board of Education FROM: ~al Paradis, Director, Procurement and Materials Management THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donation The Little Rock National Airport donated two (2) Mark 100 AT Metal/Weapon Detection Systems with control modules, valued at approximately $3,000.00 each, and one (1) extra control module, valued at approximately $1,500.00, to the Little Rock School District. The total estimated value of this donation is $7,500.00. . Donor's mailing address is: Little Rock National Airport, Attn: Mr. Joseph Sargent, Electronics Manager, Adams Field, One Airport Drive, LR, AR 72202-4489. It is recommended that this donation request be approved in accordance with the policies of the Board of Education of the Little Rock School District. Thank you . Little Rock School District Financial Services 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 447-1086 Fax: (501) 447-1158 DATE: April 22, 2004 TO: Little Rock School District Board of Directors THROUGH: Donald M. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent PREPARED BY: 4'1ark D. Milhollen, Manager, Financial Services  Subject  Summary  Objectives  Expected Outcomes Financial Reports District funds are reported for the period ending March 31 , 2004. To report the District's financial status monthly to the Board of Directors. The Board members will be informed of the District's current financial condition. - ----------  Population/Location N/ A  Budget Amount/Source N/ A  Manager Mark Milhollen, Manager of Financial Services  Duration NIA  Long Range/Continuation Financial reports will be submitted monthly to the Board.  Other Agencies Involved None ---------- --------  Expectations of District N/ A  Needed Staff N/ A  Comments None  Recommendation Approval of the March 2004 financial reports. We recommend that the Board approve the financial reports as submitted. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2003 AND 2004 APPROVED RECEIPTS % APPROVED RECEIPTS % 2002/03 03/31/03 COLLECTED 2003/04 03/31/04 COLLECTED REVENUE-LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 58,550,000 57,147,781 97.61% 57,547,800 55,681,497 96.76% DELINQUENT TAXES 8,000,000 8,936,338 111.70% 10,100,000 10,644,676 105.39% 40% PULLBACK 29,400,000 29,600,000 EXCESS TREASURER'S FEE 187,000 205,072 109.66% 210,000 199,031 94.78% DEPOSITORY INTEREST 385,000 174,515 45.33% 180,000 135,184 75.10% REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES 135,000 337,232 249.80% 150,000 206,062 137.37% MISCELLANEOUS AND RENTS 340,000 287,973 84.70% 380,000 254,808 67.05% INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS 275,000 150,103 54.58% 200,000 155,316 77.66% ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 160,000 183,777 114.86% 240,000 189,155 78.81% TOTAL 97,432,000 67,422,790 69.20% 98,607,800 67,465,729 68.42% REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL 24,000 17,215 71 .73% 21,000 11,594 55.21% TOTAL 24,000 17,215 71.73% 21,000 11,594 55.21% REVENUE - STATE SOURCES EQUALIZATION FUNDING 54,867,630 40,257,1 19 73.37% 53,226,139 39,125,356 73.51% REIMBURSEMENT STRS/HEAL TH 7,590,000 5,241,465 69.06% 8,300,000 4,723,348 56.91% VOCATIONAL 1,340,000 903,646 67.44% 1,400,000 993,438 70.96% HANDICAPPED CHILDREN 1,700,000 757,851 44.58% 1,675,000 969,461 57.88% EARLY CHILDHOOD 273,358 205,407 75.14% 273,358 202,301 74.01% TRANSPORTATION 3,685,226 2,453,084 66.57% 3,875,562 2,487,683 64.19% INCENTIVE FUNDS - M TO M 3,265,000 2,212,482 67.76% 3,900,000 2,312,167 59.29% ADULT EDUCATION 1,006,014 583,296 57.98% 920,337 548,023 59.55% POVERTY INDEX FUNDS 658,607 658,607 100.00% 560,545 534,979 95.44% EARLY LITERACY LEARNING 120,000 TAP PROGRAM 285,271 285,271 100.00% 285,245 285,245 100.00% AT RISK FUNDING 650,000 84,923 13.07% 360,000 236,541 65.71% TOTAL 75,441,106 53,643,152 71.11% 74,776,187 52,418,542 70.10% REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES TRANSFER FROM CAP PROJ FUND 620,000 770,000 TRANSFER FROM OTHER FUNDS 1,126,233 200,754 17.83% 1,350,000 180,868 13.40% TRANSFER FROM MAGNET FUND 1,664,438 554,813 33.33% 1,632,430 544,143 33.33% TOTAL 3,410,671 755,567 22.15% 3,752,430 725,012 19.32% TOTAL REVENUE OPERATING 176,307,777 121,838,724 69.11% 177,157,418 120,620,877 68.09% REVENUE - OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 25,152,981 11,634,200 46.25% 24,075,790 15,366,005 63.82% DEDICATED M\u0026amp; 0 3,980,000 2,082,476 52.32% 4,000,000 2,449,984 61.25% MAGNET SCHOOLS 25,065,942 11,601,757 46.28% 24,689,351 11,600,006 46.98% TOTAL 54,198,923 25,318,433 46.71% 52,765,141 29,415,996 55.75% TOTAL REVENUE 230,506,700 147,157,156 63.84% 229,922,559 150,036,873 65.26% LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2003 AND 2004 APPROVED EXPENDED % APPROVED EXPENDED % 2002/03 03/31/03 EXPENDED 2003/04 03/31/04 EXPENDED EXPENSES SALARIES 100,865,586 64,090,483 63.54% 100,684,982 63,436,899 63.01% BENEFITS 24,838,361 16,098,491 64.81% 26,483,772 16,510,443 62.34% PURCHASED SERVICES 19,795,774 13,340,573 67.39% 19,719,297 13,466,132 68.29% MATERIALS \u0026amp; SUPPLIES 8,347,098 5,434,989 65.11% 8,185,459 6,610,040 80.75% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,616,991 927,565 57.36% 1,575,580 805,976 51.15% OTHER OBJECTS 8,508,680 2,932,072 34.46% 8,384,567 2,991 ,574 35.68% DEBT SERVICE 12,217,048 12,213,572 99.97% 12,098,342 12,191 ,763 100.77% TOTAL EXPENSES OPERATING 176, 189,538 115,037,745 65.29% 177,131,999 116,012,827 65.50% EXPENSES-OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 26,148,726 11,442,759 43.76% 26,056,193 12,143,681 46.61% DEDICATED M\u0026amp; 0 3,980,000 2,113,349 53.10% 4,000,000 2,771 ,767 69.29% MAGNET SCHOOLS 25,065,942 14,296,955 57.04% 24,689,351 14,261,356 57.76% TOTAL 55,194,668 27,853,063 50.46% 54,745,544 29,176,804 53.30% TOTAL EXPENSES 231,384,206 142,890,808 61 .75% 231,877,543 145,189,631 62.61% INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE (877,506) 4,266,347 (1 ,954,984) 4,847,240 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; OED M\u0026amp; 0 1,645,440 1,645,440 3,558,580 3,558,580 OPERATING 8,557,652 8,557,652 9,026,855 9,026,855 ENDING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; OED M\u0026amp; 0 649,695 (889,191) 1,578,177 3,797,771 OPERATING 8,675,891 15,358,630 9,052,274 13,634,905 TOTAL 9,325,586 14,469,439 10,630,451 17,432,676 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2004 PROJECT BEG BALANCE INCOME TRANSFERS EXPENDITURES ENCUMBRANCES END BALANCE 07-01-03 2003-04 2003-04 2003-04 2003-04 03-31-04 $6,200,000 BOND ISSUE FAIR 33,282.90 33,282.90 MCCLELLAN 77,219.02 77,219.02 CONTINGENCY 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL 110,501.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 110,501.92 $136,268,560 BOND ISSUES ADMINISTRATION 32,802.37 87,000.00 76,602.53 43,199.84 NEW WORK PROJECTS 18,614,545.40 1,551,750.15 12,158,026.39 5,255,441 .36 2,752,827.80 SECURITY PROJECTS 42,273.97 2,732.72 25,000.00 14,541.25 LIGHTING PROJECTS 29,869.56 8,679.00 21 ,190.56 MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 2,768,579.81 5,000,218.33 2,466,563.49 135,978.32 5, 166,256.33 RENOVATION PROJECTS 31,306,506.59 158,459.00 14,368,511.04 7,659,055.84 9,437,398.71 TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES 2,335,019.24 934,239.80 224,051.20 1,176,728.24 SUBTOTAL 55,129,596.94 0.00 6,797,427.48 30,015,354.97 13,299,526.72 18,612,142.73 REVENUES PROCEEDS-PROPERTY SALE 444,618.31 1,000.00 445,618.31 DUNBAR PROJECT 5,266.71 5,266.71 PROCEEDS-BOND SALES 22,074,599.23 (3,335,868.48) 18,738,730.75 PROCEEDS-QZAB SALE 1,293,820.97 1,293,820.97 INTEREST 7,288,776.89 997,581 .12 (3,461,559.00) 4,824,799.01 SUBTOTAL 31,107,082.11 998,581 .12 (6,797,427.48) 0.00 0.00 25,308,235.75 GRAND TOTAL  a~z Jg l!Z ~~a ~Ul l~ 12.lW Jg gJ:i J:i~ l!Z Ja\nm:i:.iH:.i ~ gag ag ~g PROJECT CATEGORIES ADMINISTRATION NEW WORK PROJECTS SECURITY PROJECTS LIGHTING PROJECTS MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR RENOVATION PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES UNALLOCATED PROCEEDS TOTAL PROJECT ALLOCATIONS THRU 03-31-04 673,846.55 36,870,810.95 265,814.17 4,883,405.13 16,233,828.84 51,647,866.04 I 11,735,611.78 20,032,551.72 142,343,735.18 I I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ISSUE PROJECT HISTORY THRU THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2004 EXPENSE EXPENSE EXPENSE EXPENSE ENCUMBERED I THRU 03-31-04 1 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 THRU 03-31-04 1 SUBTOTAL (485,325.77) 1 I l I I 889,772.32 149,597.63 I 76,602.53 I o.oo I 630,646.71 443,467.00 4,589,606.29 11 ,671,442.11 12,158,026.39 5,255,441 .36 I 34,117,983.15 I 113,930.47 109,609.73 I 2,732.72 25,000.00 251,272.92 2,641,482.13 1,832,392.06 379,661.38 I 8,679.00 0.00 I 4,862,214.57 791,385.63 4,218,294.40 I 3.455,350.67 I 2,466,563.49 1 135,978.32 11,067,572.51 397,615.34 I 4,119,045.21 I 15,666,239.90 14,368,511 .04 7,659,055.84 42,210,467.33 575,016.53 4,325,201.40 I 4.500.374.61 I 934,239.00 I 224,051.20 j 10,558,883.54 I 5,852,669.42 18,708,823.32 35,822,666.30 30,015,354.97\nI 13,299,526.72 I 103,699,040.73 I I I ENDING ALLOCATION 03-31-04 43,199.84 2,752,827.80 14,541 .25 21,190.56 5,166,256.33 9,437,398.71 1,176,728.24 20,032,551.72 38,644,694.45 Operating Operating Operating Food Service Activity Fund Fund Total Total Bond Account Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund ~apital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Total Deseg Plan Scholarship Total Rockefeller Scholarship Total Risk Management Loss Fund Purchase Date 03-31-04 ofo1-04 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS BY FUND F_9R THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2004 Maturity Date TFN 04-01-04 Institution Interest Rate =-Type - __ Principal - - --- Bank of America 0.890% Repo - - Twin City ~an~ 1 -~~0% _ _ -CD 10,000,000.00 4,600,000.00 03-15-04 04-15-04 Twin City Ba~ 1.350% CD - - 7,500,000.00 22,100,000.00 03-16-04 TFN Bank of America 6.790% _ :._ RepO- 1,000:00o_ _oo . 03-16-04 03/08/04 01-16-04 01-16-04 01-30-04 11-18-03 05-15-03 - 01-16-04 05-15-03 12-01-03 03-15-04 - 03/29/04 12-05-03 01-15-04 03-16-04 _ J_,000,000.00 TFN Bank of America o.Tiio\n~ - 1,200,000.00 09-06-04 - Regions - --~ 1.050% CD - - 400,000.00 07-14-04 Metropolitan 1.930% CD 1,000,934~1 07-16-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.400% CD - 5,231,3~~}f 01-31-05 _ Bancorp South ----1.850/o __ .=--co _ __b!QQ_,2j4.72 - 04-15-04 BankoftheOzarks - 1.300% CD - 6,000,000.00 08-16::04 USBANK 1.420% --CD - 11,000,000.00 06-10-04 sank of Ameri~~ o.910% -~Treasury Bills 5,365,126.36 05-14-04 Bank of the Ozarks - 1.360% CD 9,000,000.00 -_ 05-03-04~-=_1- Bank or the Ozarks 1:_?~%- _ --co- 3.060,648.33 0g: 15-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.400% CD--- 10,293,800.80 TFN- Bank otAmerica ~30% -- Repo - 4,420,000.00 -\u0026gt;- --- - --- _ -- --- ---~.872,14~\"G3- 06-15-04 --- Bank of America --1-.0-20/~ _T-r-e-as_u_ry Bills _,_ _66_ 8~,_32_5_.2_8___, -___ 66~,325.28 06-10-04 1-- -- TFN Bank of America 0.250% 400,000.00 400,000.00\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"nge_ngen_national-association-for-the-advancement-of-colored-people-naacp","title":"National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)","collection_id":"nge_ngen","collection_title":"New Georgia Encyclopedia","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018"],"dcterms_creator":["Rolinson, Mary G."],"dc_date":["2004-03-30"],"dcterms_description":["Encyclopedia article about the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) which has had an unbroken presence in Georgia since 1917. The NAACP State Conference maintains a network of branches throughout Georgia, from cities to small rural counties. The state branches have been the most effective and consistent advocates for African American civil rights in twentieth-century Georgia. Since the late 1950s Atlanta has hosted the Southeast regional headquarters of this national civil rights organization. Youth branches of the NAACP in Georgia have nurtured many future leaders of various major civil rights organizations, and the state has provided many native sons and daughters to the national leadership over the NAACP's long history.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dcterms_subject":["National Association for the Advancement of Colored People","Civil rights movements--United States","United States--Race relations--History","Racism--United States--History","African Americans--Politics and government","African Americans--Civil rights--History"],"dcterms_title":["National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["New Georgia Encyclopedia (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/history-archaeology/national-association-for-the-advancement-of-colored-people-naacp/"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["If you wish to use content from the NGE site for commercial use, publication, or any purpose other than fair use as defined by law, you must request and receive written permission from the NGE. Such requests may be directed to: Permissions/NGE, University of Georgia Press, 330 Research Drive, Athens, GA 30602."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Cite as: \"National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP),\" New Georgia Encyclopedia. Retrieved [date]: http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org."],"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["articles"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1441","title":"Report: ''The Little Rock School District's Implementation of the Court's Compliance Remedy,'' Office of Desegregation and Monitoring","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":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["2004-03-30"],"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--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","School districts","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''The Little Rock School District's Implementation of the Court's Compliance Remedy,'' Office of Desegregation and Monitoring"],"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/1441"],"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":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["96 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"nge_ngen_charlayne-hunter-gault-b-1942","title":"Charlayne Hunter-Gault (b. 1942)","collection_id":"nge_ngen","collection_title":"New Georgia Encyclopedia","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Clarke County, Athens, 33.96095, -83.37794"],"dcterms_creator":["Nash, Amanda"],"dc_date":["2004-03-29"],"dcterms_description":["Encyclopedia article about Charlayne Hunter-Gault who was one of the first two African American students admitted to the University of Georgia. She is also known for her career as a journalist on television and in print. Before attending the University of Georgia, Hunter-Gault attended Turner High School in Atlanta and Wayne State University in Detriot, Michigan.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata.","GSE identifier: SS8H11"],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dcterms_subject":["College integration--Georgia--Athens","African American women journalists","University of Georgia"],"dcterms_title":["Charlayne Hunter-Gault (b. 1942)"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["New Georgia Encyclopedia (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/people/charlayne-hunter-gault-b-1942/"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["If you wish to use content from the NGE site for commercial use, publication, or any purpose other than fair use as defined by law, you must request and receive written permission from the NGE. Such requests may be directed to: Permissions/NGE, University of Georgia Press, 330 Research Drive, Athens, GA 30602."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Cite as: \"Charlayne Hunter-Gault (b. 1942),\" New Georgia Encyclopedia. Retrieved [date]: http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org."],"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["articles"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Hunter-Gault, Charlayne"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tnn_npldl_vhpcarlewj2bclip2","title":"Oral history interview with James Carlew, 2004 March 25, excerpt 07","collection_id":"tnn_npldl","collection_title":"Nashville Public Library Digital Collections Portal: Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":["Patterson, Larry, 1944-"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Tennessee, Davidson County, Nashville, 36.16589, -86.78444"],"dcterms_creator":["Carlew, James, 1927-"],"dc_date":["2004-03-25"],"dcterms_description":["An excerpt from an oral history interview with Nashville veteran James Carlew, conducted on 25 March 2004 by Larry Patterson as part of the Nashville Public Library's Veterans History Project.  Carlew, who served in the Navy during World War II and in the Army in the Korean War, discusses the differences in his service during two wars, serving in two branches of the military, during times of both racial segregation and integration.  He also compares the food in the two conflicts.  The complete interview, as well as an index, is available in the repository."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["Excerpt from:  VHPCarlewJ audio cassette recording converted to mp3 format in 2006.","Veterans History Project, Special Collections Division, Nashville Public Library."],"dc_relation":["Forms part of online collection: Veterans History Project collection, World War II and Korean War series."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Veterans History Project (U.S.)","United States. Navy--Military life","United States. Army--Military life","Veterans--Tennessee--Interviews","World War, 1939-1945--Participation, African American","World War, 1939-1945--Personal narratives, American","Korean War, 1950-1953--Veterans--Tennessee--Interviews","Korean War, 1950-1953--Participation, African American","Korean War, 1950-1953--Personal narratives, American","African Americans--Segregation--United States","Operational rations (Military supplies)","United States--Race relations","Carlew, James, 1927- --Interviews"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with James Carlew, 2004 March 25, excerpt 07"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Nashville Public Library (Tenn.). Special Collections Division"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://digital.library.nashville.org/u?/nr,639"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["U.S. and international copyright laws protect this digital content, which is provided for educational purposes only and may not be downloaded, reproduced, or distributed for any other purpose without written permission. Please contact the Special Collections Division of the Nashville Public Library, 615 Church Street, Nashville, Tennessee, 37219. Telephone (615) 862-5782."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["audio/mp3 (2 min., 02 sec. )"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Carlew, James, 1927-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"hbcula_becu_28","title":"Voice of the Wildcats Newsletter, March 25, 2004","collection_id":"hbcula_becu","collection_title":"Bethune-Cookman University Digital Collection","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Florida, Volusia County, Panama Beach, 28.86832, -81.22778"],"dcterms_creator":["Bethune-Cookman University"],"dc_date":["2004-03-25"],"dcterms_description":["The student newsletter of Bethune-Cookman College, now Bethune-Cookman University, highlighting student voices, campus and community activities, and current events."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American universities and colleges","African American students","Campus life","College student newspapers and periodicals","Civil rights movements"],"dcterms_title":["Voice of the Wildcats Newsletter, March 25, 2004"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) Library Alliance"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://hbcudigitallibrary.auctr.edu/digital/collection/becu/id/28"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["All rights to images are held by the respective holding institution. This image is posted publicly for non-profit educational uses, excluding printed publication. For permission to reproduce images and/or for copyright information contact University Archives, Bethune-Cookman University, Daytona Beach, FL 32114 (386) 481-2186. https://www.cookman.edu/library/index.html"],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1759","title":"Court filings regarding scheduling letter, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE), Joshua intervenors', Knight intervenors', and Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) responses to court order, Office of Desegregation Management (ODM) report, and ADE project management tool.","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":["2004-03-17/2004-03-31"],"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--21st century","Education--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","School districts","Joshua intervenors","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Project management","Lawyers"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings regarding scheduling letter, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE), Joshua intervenors', Knight intervenors', and Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) responses to court order, Office of Desegregation Management (ODM) report, and ADE project management tool."],"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/1759"],"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":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["83 page scan, typed"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\u003c?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"utf-8\"?\u003e\n\u003citems type=\"array\"\u003e  \u003citem\u003e   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_description type=\"array\"\u003e   \n\n\u003cdcterms_description\u003eCourt filings: District Court, three orders; Court of Appeals scheduling letter; District Court, response to court order by separate defendant Arkansas Department of Education (ADE); District Court, response to court order by Knight intervenors; District Court, Joshua intervenors' response to the Court's March 17, 2004, order; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) response to order; District Court, supplement to response to Court order by separate defendant Arkansas Department of Education (ADE); District Court, NLRSD response to Court's March 17, 2004, order; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Management report, ''The Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) implementation of the Court's compliance remedy''; District Court, order; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool    This transcript was create using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.    \\ \\ RECE i ~ED FILED tUt AR J. \" l'!fv1.lQ 4, U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS OFF!::: '.' '.' DESEGREr.mr IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS ~AME MAR 1 ?. 2004 LITTLE ROCK DIVISION y: ___ \"=~v.u~~~~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. DNIHOllNOW NOllV~31:W3S30 :lO 33H:l0 DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. ~OOl 8 I ~vw ORDER Lawyers for the parties will please provide the following information: 1. Do you or any member of your firm represent anyone who is now or has been employed by the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (\"employee\" is to be construed broadly regardless of job description)? 2. The dates of any such attorney-client relationship. 3. Whether you deem it proper for a lawyer representing a party in this case to represent an employee of the ODM. 4. If you deem it proper, please explain your position in exact and plenary detail, with citations of authority. 5. If you deem it improper, please explain your position in exact and plenary detail, with citations of authority. \"Attorney-client,\" \"representation,\" and \"consultation\" are to be construed broadly. As an example, a telephone conversation during which the employee seeks to employ a lawyer, or seeks - legal advice of any nature, whether or not it is related to an ODM matter ( even on a one-time - basis) is \"representation.\" A would-be client who talks with a lawyer falls within the definitions above. \"[W]ould-be clients are virtually indistinguishable from 'actual ' clients during the period in which a relationship is under consideration ... \"1 If, for example, a person calls a lawyer, describes a car wreck, and asks, \"has the statute of limitations run\" and the lawyer answers with a definitive, monosyllabic, \"yes,\" this is sufficient to establish an attorney-client relationship for that brief period of time. Generally, see also the Law of Lawyering, Volume 1,  1.6: I 03 and 1.6: 105. Your response to this order must be filed by noon on Friday, March 26, 2004. IT IS SO ORDERED this _/2Tlt,arch, 2004. d,, UN' ~J/r!;;UDGE WM. R. WILSON, JR. 1Law of Lawyering, Volume 1,  1.6:115 at 168.17. ~srRl5!4,~ D o1srR1cr couRr IN THE UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT MAR f B AR!vws,4,s EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JAMt:s VV 2004 LITTLE ROCK DIVISION .By;  MccoRMAc K, CLt:Rk LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. No. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. ORDER I. In response to an Order, entered yesterday (March 17, 2004) Mr. John W. Walker, one of Joshua Intervenor' s lawyers, has fax ed a letter to me today, a copy of which is attached to this Order as Exhibit A. 2. Among several other things Mr. Walker states, \"we do not represent any member of the ODM staff present or past as far as we know. I add the 'as far as we know caveat' (sic) because we may not know all of the employees present and past of ODM.\" 3. Let's take a look at the record. On October 15, 2002, Joshua Intervenors' lawyers filed a pleading entitled \"The Joshua Intervenors ' Motion for Relief Concerning the ODM Budget\" (Doc. No. 3686). The first paragraph of this pleading reads as follows: It has come to the attention of the Joshua Intervenors that this court is in the process of reducing the ODM staff and budget. A member of the ODM staff affected by staff and budget reductions planned by the court has contacted counsel for these intervenors with regard to her legal rights (emphasis added). 841 4. Then, ten days later (on October 25, 2002), Joshua Intervenors' lawyers filed yet another pleading entitled \"The Joshua Intervenors' Motion to Stay Reduction of ODM Staff' (Doc. No. 3691), with the following first paragraph: On or about October 14, 2002, Intervenors' counsel learned from an African American staff member of ODM, Ms. Linda Bryant, that she had been given notice of termination as an ODM staff member effective on or about October 15, 2001 . Ms. Bryant conveyed to counsel her understanding that her termination was attributable to a directive or requirement of this court. ( emphasis added) 5. The quotes in the two paragraphs above appear to establish beyond peradventure that Joshua Intervenors' lawyers represented an employee of the ODM in October of 2002 . Furthermore, the Order entered yesterday makes it clear that this is exactly the type of information to be disclosed. 6. The March 18, 2004 letter asserts that Joshua Intervenors ' lawyers do not know the identity of past or present ODM employees. I do not want to practice law for any party, but I believe that, if I were in this situation as a lawyer, I would call or write the ODM and get a complete list of these employees. 7. I have reviewed the Order entered yesterday again -- after receiving the fax letter from Joshua Intervenors' lawyers today -- and I must immodestly admit that I believe it is a model of clarity. It can be faulted, if it is to be faulted at all, for redundancy; but I intentionally made it longer than I normally would so that it would not be misunderstood. 8. Joshua Intervenors' lawyers should carefully check their memories and records to determine if they represent, or have represented, any other employees of the ODM ( other than Ms. Bryant). Likewise, counsel for the other parties should do the same. Once this is done, 2 counsel for each party should proceed to prepare a pleading which will comply with the remainder of yesterday's Order. r--1-f IT IS SO ORDERED t~is Ji day of March, 2004. 3 !))~ fl_UuJ,v_ UNifED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE WM. R. W ILSON, JR. MAR.18.2004 10:19AM JOHN W WALKER PA JOHN W WALKER SHAWN CHILDS JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. ATroRNEY AT LAW 1723 BRoADWAY 1rrrLE RoCK, ARKANSAS 72206 TELE!\u0026gt;SONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 874-4187 March 18, 2004 The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr. 423 U.S. Post Office \u0026amp; Courthouse 600 W. Capitol Ave. Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: LRSD v. PCSSD Dear Judge Wilson: NO.498 OF COUNSEL ROBERT MclIENRY, P.A. . DONNA J. McP.ENR'f 8210 HE!IDERSON RoAO L1'rrLE RoCK, .AJlxt.NS . .'J! 72210 P!!ONll: (601) 372-342/i  F,IA (501) 372-3428 EMAIL: =-hinuyd@swbell.uet RECEIVED MAR 1 8 2004 (j'm . R : Wilson, Jr E i- District Judge   of Arkansas I am writing to provide the Court a preliminary report in reply to the Order herein dated March 17, 2004. The Order appears to invite, if not require, a responsive pleading. By this letter I am requesting further instruction as to the form the expected final response should take.  With respect to question one (1 ), I have spoken with the other attorneys associated with me, including those not in my firm as such, and inform the Court that the answer we provide is that we do not represent any me!!).j:i_~r of the ODM staff present or past~ far as we k.now. I add the \"as fu as we know cave ~t\" because we may not know all of the employees present and past of ODM. There was 9. period when I believe ODM employed certain e;,,,.-perts and there may have been some part-time or temporary employees hired from time to time by ODM. With respect to the other questions I do not believe them to applicable in view of the answer to proffered question number one, Moreover, questions three through five invite, if not direct, responses to any imaginary hypothetical situation. I therefore cannot provide an answer to a question which I do not fully comprehend and which is not before me in an actual case. I do wish and intend to reply to the Court, however. Accordingly, I request clarification regarding me last three questions. In making the above report I recall that Judge Susan Webber Wright observed that ODM was not represented by counsel at which point she invited me to begin the questioning of ODM. The position that we took at the hearing on behalf of Joshua was consistent with OD M's and contrary to LRSD's. The hearing about which I speak involve extensive inquiries into LRSD's budgeting process and th.at occurred some seven or eight years ago. I deemed it proper men., as I do now, to reply to the Court. Our position was that LRSD was not meeting its budgeting obligations, ODM staff presented expert testimony to that point which I generally elicii:ed and LRSD opposed it. MAR.18.2004 10=19AM Page Two March 18, 2004 JOHN W WALKER PA N0.498 This is our best understanding of how to reply to the Courr' s Order but if our understanding is incomplete, I respectfully request further guidance from the Court for the Joshua counsel. JWW:lp cc: All Other Counsel (fax only) The Honorable J. Thomas Ray R~spectli;llY su)imitte'7, ;~~ 1-rD/ ~'7l t/i John W. Walker \"Li TO: DATE: FAXCOVERSHEET - UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS Telephone: 501-604-5140 Fax Number; 501-604 5149 Chris Heller 376-2147 Sam Jones 376-9442 Steve Jones 375-1027 John Walker 374-4187 Robert Pressman 781 -862-1955 Timothy Gauger 682-2591 . Mark Hagemeier 682-2591 Ann Marshall 371-0100 Mark Burnette 375-1940 \"3. / B- O'f c~ e,u~~./, ~ .:~ ;;-~ There are__ pages, including this Cover Sheet, being sent by this facsimile transmission. MESSAGE SENT BY: ~/--- ?Z-rrr-- Office of Judge Wm. R. Wi on, Jr .. U.S. District Court 600 West Capitol, Room 423 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Matt Morgan, LRSD Law Clerk 501-604-5141 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MAR 1 8 2004 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS LITTLE ROCK DIVISION JAMES W. McCORMACK CLER' By: ' I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. No. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. MAR 1 9 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING ORDER PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS Pending is separate Defendant Arkansas Department of Education's Motion to Withdraw Counsel and For Substitution of Counsel (Doc. No. 3839). Separate Defendant Arkansas Department of Education requests that Mr. Dennis Hansen be withdrawn as counsel since he is no longer actively participating in the day-to-day litigation at the Attorney General's Office. Defendant requests that Mr. Mark Hagemeier be substituted as counsel of record. For good cause shown, separate Defendant Arkansas Department of Education's Motion to Withdraw Counsel and For Substitution of Counsel is GRANTED.  (7--r;,::. IT IS SO ORDERED this / 0 day of March, 2004. 842 DEP CLER: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT - rlAEL E. GANS Clerk of Court Mr. Will Bond BOND \u0026amp; O'BRIEN 602 W. Main Street Jacksonville, AR 72076 THOMAS F. EAGLETON COURT HOUSE ROOM 24.329 111 S. 10TH STREET ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 63102 March 18, 2004 VOICE 1314) 244-2400 FAX (314) 244-2780 www.ca8 .uscourts.gov RECEuVED MAR 2 ;- 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Re: 03-3088 Re: 03-3404 Greg Bollen vs. Lorene Joshua Pulaski Cty . School vs. Greg Bollen Dear Counsel: The court has decided that they will hear this appeal via telephone conference sometime in May. The exact date will be determined at a later time . If you have any conflicts during the month of May, please bring them to our attention at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me. tab cc : John W. Walker Rickey H. Hicks Robert Pressman Clayton Roy Blackstock Mark Burnett M. Samuel Jones III Sam Jones Scott Smith Christopher JoH~ellne . Stephen w. Jones Ann Marshall Timothy Gauger Sincerel Trish Calendar Coordinator District Court/Agency Case Number(s) : 4:82-CV-866 WRW RECEIVED MAR 2 3 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Mark A. Hagemeier Assistant Attorney General M. SamuelJones,III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Attorney at Law 1010 W. 3rd Little Rock, AR 72201 THE ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF ARKANSAS MIKE BEEBE March 22, 2004 Direct dial: (501) 682-3643 E-mail: mark.hagemeier@ag.state.ar.us Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Marshall Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. USDC No. LR-C-82-866 Dear Counselors and Ms. Marshall: Please find enclosed the Response to Court Order by Separate Defendant Arkansas Department of Education which we filed today. 323 Center Street Suite 200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007  FAX (501) 682-2591 Internet Website http://www.ag.state.ar.us/ Page 2 of2 March 22, 2004 MAH Enclosures Very truly yours, ~ ~~y Assistant Attorney General 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. RESPONSE TO COURT ORDER BY SEPARATE DEFENDANT ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS Separate Defendant Arkansas Department of Education, by and through its attorneys, Attorney General Mike Beebe and Assistant Attorney Mark A. Hagemeier, for its Response to Court Order dated March 17, 2004, state: 1. Ms. Ann Marshall of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (\"ODM\") - supplied the Office of the Attorney General with a list of past and present employees. 2. Undersigned has circulated this list of past and present ODM employees to attorneys within the Office of the Attorney General who have worked on this matter. 3. Tim Gauger, Dennis Hansen, and Mark Hagemeier have never represented a past or present employee of ODM. By: Respectfully Submitted, MIKE BEEBE Attorney General MARK A. HAG IER, #9 Assistant Atto:; en:l 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 (501) 682-3643 ---- ----- -------------------- - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Mark A. Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, do hereby certify that I have served the foregoing by depositing a copy in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, this ;}-;). day of March 2004, addressed to: Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings LLP 200 W. Capitol, Suite 2300 Little Rock, AR 72201-3699 Ann Brown Marshall ODM One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1 723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Attorney at Law 1010 W. 3rd Little Rock, AR 72201 Mark A. Hageer 2 Rec Er 67ED MITCHELL, BLACKSTOCK, BARNES, WAGONER, IVERS AND SNEDDON, PLLC MA\\ 2 ~1 2004 Dr:S'\" OFFICE OF EUGENE R. WARREN (1909-1980) MICHAEL W. MITCHELL* CLAYTON R. BLACKSTOCK** MARCIA BARNES JACK WAGONER III DAVID IVERS EMILY SNEDDON MARK BURNETTE OLIVER HAHN Mr. SamuelJones,III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. l 723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 7220 l ATIORNEYS 1010 WEST THIRD STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 (501) 378-7870 www .mbbwi.com Writer's e-mail: mburnette@mbbwi.com March 25, 2004 1: i:Gl1EG11T:O:, ?.lDi'fTDR!W~ MAILING ADDRESS P.O . BOX 1510 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72203-1510 TELEFAX 501-375-1940 *CERTIFIED IN CIVIL TRIAL ADVOCACY BY NATIONAL BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCACY ** ALSO LICENSED IN TEXAS Mark Arnold Hagemeier Arkansas Attorney General's Office Catlett-Prien Tower Building 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldrege \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Ste. 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 W. Capitol, Ste. 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Little Rock School District v. PCSSD, et. al. U.S.D.C. No. 4:82CV00866WRW Ms. Marshail and Gentlemen: I enclose herein a file-marked copy of a Response to Court Order by Knight Intervenors. MTB/dm Encl. Very truly yours, Mark T. Burnette IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. 4:82CV00866WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. MS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. FILED U.S. o:::~;:_ ICT COURT EASTER:, C,::;:,:..1..:-;- K-;.KANSAS MAR 2 5 2004 JAMES W. McCOri.:.,,.\\SK, CLERK By:.---------;:;-=-;~;-;; C:::? CLERK PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT INTER VEN ORS INTER VEN ORS RESPONSE TO COURT ORDER BY KNIGHT INTERVENORS Come the Knight Intervenors, by and through their undersigned counsel, and for their response to the Court's Order of March 17, 2004, state: 1. Undersigned counsel obtained a roster of ODM employees and distributed the roster to all current attorneys in this firm. 2. No attorney client relationship has existed between any of the listed employees of ODM and an attorney in this firm. It may also be worth noting that Emily Sneddon, a partner in this firm, was employed as a law clerk in the office of the Honorable Susan Webber Wright during a period when Judge Wright presided over this case. Ms. Sneddon does not participate in the case in her current position. Respectfully submitted, Clayton Blackstock Mark Burnette MITCHELL,BLACKSTOCK, BARNES WAGONER, IVERS \u0026amp; SNEDDON, PLLC 1010 West Third P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 (501) 378-7870 By: 72:lMfl~/1/Yldtv Mark Burnette N # 88078 Certificate of Service A true and accurate copy of the foregoing has been mailed to the following by U.S. Mail, postage paid, on this.24\"\" day of March, 2004: ,;f.at?I Mr. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1 723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mark Arnold Hagemeier Arkansas Attorney General's Office Catlett-Prien Tower Building 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 W. Capitol , Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 By: 2?kJ,/3trA21d/ Mirk Burnette BAR NO. 88078 R.ECEjVED MAR 2 9 2004 OFFICE OF - ESEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FILED U.S. DI STRICT COURT EASTERN  : STRICT ARKANSAS MAR 2 6 2004 WESTERN DIVISION JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT By: ________ __,= PLAINTIFF DEP CLERK V. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS JOSHUA INTERVENORS' RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S MARCH 17, 2004 ORDER Mrs. Lorene Joshua, et al. (\"Joshua\"), Intervenors herein, by their undersigned attorneys, submit this JOSHUA INTERVENORS' RESPONSE To THE COURT'S MARCH 17, 2004 ORDER and state the following: FACTS On October 15, 2002, Joshua filed a pleading entitled \"The Joshua Intervenors ' Motion for Relief Concerning the ODM1 Budget.\" Paragraph 1 of that pleading stated, \"It has come to the attention of the Joshua Intervenors that this court (sic) is in the process of reducing the ODM staff and budget. A member of the ODM staff affected by staff and budget reductions planned by the court (sic) has contacted counsel for these intervenors with regard to her legal rights.\" Oct. I 5, 2002 Mot. for Relief Concerning the ODM Budget, 1. The \"member of the ODM staff' referred to in that pleading is Linda Bryant (\"Ms. Bryant\"). Joshua did not file its pleading to seek individual relief for Ms. Bryant. Joshua' s sole purpose for filing the pleading was to gain access to documents and other materials so that 1 ODM is the Office of Desegregation Monitoring created by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in 1990. Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist. o. 1, 921 F.2d 1371 , 1388 (8th Cir. 1990). Joshua could \"make recommendations concerning or objections regarding the ODM budget and elements thereof, prior to their implementation.\" Oct. 15, 2002 Mot. for Relief Concerning the ODM Budget ~~ 5(a), 5(b); see also Oct. 15, 2002 Mem. Concerning the ODM Budget. On October 16, 2002, the Court denied Joshua's motion without prejudice, holding it was premature. Oct. 16, 2002 Order. On October 25, 2002, Joshua filed a pleading entitled, \"The Joshua Intervenor's (sic) Motion to Stay Reduction of ODM Staff.\" Paragraph 1 of that pleading stated, \"On or about October 14, 2002, Intervenors' counsel learned from an African American staff member of ODM, Ms. Linda Bryant, that she had been given notice of termination as an ODM staff member effective on or about October 15, 2002. Ms. Bryant conveyed to counsel her understanding that her termination was attributable to a directive or requirement of this Court.\" Oct. 25, 2002 Mot. to Stay Reduction of ODM Staff~ 1. Again, the purpose of this particular pleading was not to seek individual relief for Ms. Bryant, rather, Joshua simply wanted the opportunity to provide its input into the budget of the ODM prior to the Court ordering a reduction of its budget. Oct. 25, 2002 Mot. to Stay Reduction of ODM Staff at 2. Holding that the motion for a stay was moot, the Court denied Joshua's motion the same day Joshua filed it. Oct. 25, 2002 Order. On March 17, 2004, the Court entered an order requesting each party's attorneys to answer the following questions: (1) Do you or any member of your firm represent anyone who is now or has been employed by the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (\"employee is to be construed broadly regardless of job description)?\"; (2) The Dates of any such attorney-client relationship; (3) Whether you deem it proper for a lawyer representing a party in this case to represent an employee of the ODM; (4) If you deem it proper, please explain your position in 2 exact and plenary detail, with citations of authority; (5) If you deem it improper, please explain your position in exact and plenary detail, with citations of authority.\" Mar. 17, 2004 Order. APPLICABLE LAW Before answering the Court's inquiries, a discussion of the applicable law is appropriate. On May 1, 1980, the United States District Court for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas adopted the Model Federal Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement, codified at the Appendix to the Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas. Rule IV.B of the Model Federal Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement provides in relevant part, \" .. . The Code of Professional Responsibility or Rules of Professional Conduct adopted by this Court is the Code of Professional Responsibility or Rules of Professional Conduct adopted by the highest court of the state in which this Court sits, as amended from time to time by that state court, except as otherwise provided by specific Rule of this Court after consideration of comments by representatives of bar associations within the state.\" In 1985, the Supreme Court of Arkansas adopted the American Bar Association 's Model Rules of Professional Conduct as the State of Arkansas's code of professional responsibility. Jones v. Clinton, 36 F. Supp.2d 1119, 1132 n.19 (E.D. Ark. 1999) (citing In re Arkansas Bar Ass ' n, 287 Ark. 495, 702 S.W.2d 326 (1985)). Thus, the Arkansas Model Rules of Professional Conduct is the starting point for analyzing the ethical duties of lawyers practicing before this Court. Model Fed. R. of Disciplinary Enforcement IV.B . In order to determine a lawyer's authority and responsibility, principles of substantive lav.r external to the .. 1odel Rules of Professional Conduct determine whether a client-la,.vyer relationship exists. Scope, Model R. of Profl Conduct~ 3. Most of the duties flowing from the client-lawyer relationship attach only after the client has requested the lawyer to render legal ,., .) - services and the lawyer has agreed to do so. See id. (emphasis added). But there are some duties, such as that of confidentiality under Rule 1.62 , that may attach when the lawyer agrees to consider whether a client-lawyer relationship shall be established. See id. Whether a clientlawyer relationship exists for any specific purpose can depend on the circumstances and may be a question of fact. See id; see also Cortinez v. Supreme Ct. Comm. on Profl Conduct, 332 Ark. 455, 464, 966 S.W.2d 251 (1998). The attorney-client relationship is not simply the casual assistance of a member of the bar, but is an intimate process of consultation and planning which culminates in a state of trust and confidence between the client and his attorney. Clements v. State, 306 Ark. 596, 607, 608, 817 S.W.2d 194 (1991) (citing Smith v. Superior Ct. of Los Angeles, 440 P.2d 65 (Cal. 1968); McKinnon v. State, 526 P.2d 18 (Ak. 1974); People v. Davis, 449 N.E2d 237 (Ill. App. Ct. 1983); In re Welfare of M.R.S., 400 N.W.2d 147 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987)). 2 The text of Rule 1.6 provides: Rule 1.6. Confidentiality of information. (a) A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to representation of a client unless the client consents after consultation, except for disclosures that are impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation, and except as stated in paragraph (b ). (b) A lawyer may reveal such information to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary: ( 1) to prevent the client from committing a criminal act; or (2) to establish a claim or defense on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy between the lawyer and the client, to establish a defense to a criminal charge or civil claim against the !a,.,,yer based upon conduct in which the client was involved, or to respond to allegations in any proceeding concerning the lawyer's representation of the client. (c) Neither this Rule nor Rule 1.8(b) nor Rule l.16(d) prevents the lawyer from giving notice of the fact of withdrawal, and the lawyer may also withdraw or disaffirm any opinion, document, affirmation or the like. 4 The relationship is not dependent only an express agreement, it may be implied on the part of an attorney who acts in behalf of his client in pursuance of a request by the latter. Sexton v. Supreme Ct. Comm. on Profl Conduct, 295 Ark. 141 , 147 (747 S.W.2d 94 (1988) (Hays \u0026amp; Glaze, JJ., dissenting) (citing Hirsch Bros. \u0026amp; Co. v. R.E. Kennington Co., 124 So. 344 (Miss. 1929); 88 A.LR. 1; 7A C.J.S.  169). Although the Model Rules are silent on the subject, the Supreme Com1 of Arkansas has stated that attorneys remain obligated to avoid any \"appearance of impropriety.\" Arkansas Att'y Gen. Op. No. 2002-347 (citing Saline Mem'l Hosp. v. Berry, 321 Ark. 588, 906 S.W.2d 297 (1995); Burnette v. Moman, 303 Ark. 150, 794 S.W.2d _145 (1990)). Joshua will now turn to answering the Court's questions. I. JOSHUA'S ATTORNEY'S \"REPRESENTATION\" OF MS. BRYANT On or about October 14, 2002, Ms. Bryant informed Joshua's attorney that her employment with the ODM was about to be terminated and sought counsel regarding her legal rights. Oct. 15, 2002 Mot. for Relief Concerning the ODM Budget 1 1; Oct. 25 , 2002 Mot. to Stay Reduction of ODM Staff 1 1. When Ms. Bryant communicated her desire to have Joshua's attorney explain her legal rights to her, at that specific moment the duty of confidentiality codified in Model R. of Pro fl Conduct 1.6 was triggered. Scope, Model R. of Prof 1 Conduct 1 3. Upon learning where Ms. Bryant worked and what relief she was seeking, Joshua's attorney told her in unambiguous terms that he could not represent her and that she needed to look elsewhere Lu ublain representation. Joshua's attorney did not rendef any substantive advice, such as informing her of the statute of limitations or the remedies available to her or what administrative measures she had to take prior to obtaining judicial relief. 5 In fact, Joshua's attorney strictly followed Model R. of Profl Conduct 4.33 and gave Ms. Bryant no advice other than to find another attorney. Model R. of Profs Conduct 4.3 cmt. (comparing Rule 4.3 to American Bar Association rule DR 7-104(A)(2) and stating that a lawyer shall not give advice to a person who is not represented by a lawyer, other than the advice to secure counsel). Because Joshua's attorney declined to represent Ms. Bryant and offered no substantive legal advice in the course of declining the representation, most of the other duties flowing from the client-lawyer relationship did not attach. Scope, Model R. of Prof! Conduct ,r 3 (stating \"most of the duties flowing from the client-lawyer relationship attach only after the client has requested the lawyer to render legal services and the lawyer has agreed to do so\") (emphasis added). Had Ms. Bryant communicated information to Joshua's attorney that was materially adverse to another party in this case (which she most certainly did not), it is arguable that Joshua's attorney would be barred from using that information by Model Rules 1.6 and l.7(b). Rule 1.7(b) provides, \"A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client or to a third person, or by the lawyer's own interests.\" In the instant case, nothing Ms. Bryant told Joshua's attorney could be reasonably construed to be adverse to the Joshua Intervenors or perhaps more importantly, to the ODM. The ODM is not a party to this case. In fact, Joshua and ODM's interests and efforts are often congruent in that Joshua and the ODM have a duty to monitor the 3 The text of Rule 4.3 provides: Rule 4.3. Dealing with unrepresented person. In dealing on behalf of a client with a person who is not represented by counsel, a lawyer shall not state or imply that the lawyer is disinterested. When the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the unrepresented person misunderstands the lawyer's role in the matter, the lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to correct the misunderstanding. 6 - school districts ' compliance with their desegregation obligations. Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist. o. 1. 921 F.2d 1371 , 1388 (8th Cir. 1990) (holding, \"As indicated above, this does not mean that the parties will be free of supervision or monitoring. Quite the contrary: a necessary condition of our holding that the plans are not facially unconstitutional is that the parties' compliance with them will be carefully monitored. As we shall make clear at the conclusion of this opinion, when we set out the directions to be followed by the District Comi on remand, the office previously known as the Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor will be reconstituted as the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, to be headed by a Monitor appointed by the District Court, with such additional personnel as the District Court shall deem appropriate\"). In 1978 or 1979, Joshua's attorney was plaintiffs' counsel  in a federal class action discrimination lawsuit against First National Bank in a case styled Raymond Smith v. First Nat'! Bank. Ms. Bryant was a member of the plaintiffs' class, but was not a named plaintiff or class representative. This representation lasted approximately two years and terminated prior to the filing of the instant case and nearly a decade prior to the OD M's creation. Thus, in answer to the Court's first query, Joshua's attorney owes a Rule 1.6 duty of confidentiality to Ms. Bryant stemming from her seeking his legal advice and his declining to give it in connection with her employment with the ODM, because an attorney-client relationship between Ms. Bryant and Joshua's attorney formed for the period in which Ms. Bryant sought legal advice from Joshua's attorney. Scope, Model R. of Profl Conduct~ 3. That relationship, however, terminated when Joshua's attorney declined to represent Ms. Bryant, and that termination relieved Joshua's attorney of most of the duties that typically flow from an attorney-client relationship. See id. Joshua's attorney also owes a duty of confidentiality to Ms. 7 Bryant based on her membership in the class of plaintiffs in the Ravmond Smith case. That attorney-client relationship terminated over twenty years ago and preceded the filing of this case and the creation of the ODM. II. THE DATES OF JOSHUA'S ATTORNEY'S \"ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP\" Joshua's attorney's representation of Ms. Bryant in the Raymond Smith lasted from 1978 or 1979 until 1980 or 1981. Ms. Bryant's fleeting attorney-client relationship with Joshua's attorney in connection with her employment with the ODM occurred on or about October 14. 2002. The relationship terminated on that same date. III. THE PROPRIETY OF REPRESENTING AN EMPLOYEE OF THE ODM This question is difficult to answer given the hypothetical nature in which it is posed. In essence, the Court is seeking an advisory opinion from the attorneys in this case. While the Court has the discretion to do this, exercising that discretion raises the same issues for the attorneys as the Court itself would face were the attorneys to seek an advisory opinion from the Court. An advisory opinion is one rendered when no justiciable case or controversy exists. Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 93, 95 (1968). Under Article III, courts are required to \"avoid issuing advisory opinions based upon hypothetical situations.\" Briggs v. Ohio Elections Comm'n 61 F.3d 487, 493 (6th Cir. 1995). A court's judgment \"must resolve a real and substantial controversy admitting of specific relief through a decree of a conclusive character, as distinguished from an opinion advising what th .. 1\"'\\\" \\\"O\"lrl ho \"pen,, h\" pothetic\u0026lt;\u0026gt;l cet of .::ark\" prPicer 'I l\\Te,,,lrirlr 4')') TT Q io.;; LI.QI (107\u0026lt;;) \\. J.J. ..... J.'-4'1' 'I' 1,,t.J.'-6. V .._,\\A. J.\\A.J.J J..1.1,..1.\\A.._, 1;...,.,._,. J..._,.1.-.14 .4, ',f' .1.\".1..1.J.\"-I ,;,..,,;,.., .._.,  ._,,_,_,,_,, I \\ /I _,, Determining whether an opinion would be advisory is interrelated with the question of whether there exists a case or controversy. State of Ohio ex rel. Celebrezze v. United States Dep't of 8 Transp. 766 F.2d 228, 232 (6th Cir. 1985). The requirements of standing, ripeness, and mootness guard against the issuing of advisory opinions. See id. With that said, Joshua will answer the question based on the factual predicate set forth in Sections I and II of this pleading. Because Joshua's attorney declined to represent Ms. Bryant in connection with her employment with the ODM and in so doing fastidiously avoided rendering any substantive legal advice, the ephemeral attorney-client relationship created and terminated on October 14, 2002 does not conflict with any duties Joshua's attorney owes to any party in this case, another client, or Joshua's attorney's own interests. Model R. Profl Conduct l.7(b). This is so because the brief encounter between Ms. Bryant and Joshua's attorney contained none of the elements that attend the conventional, substantive attorney-client relationship. Clements v. State. 306 Ark. 596, 607, 608, 817 S.W.2d 194 (1991). Thus, under this particular set of facts, there was and is nothing improper vis-a-vis the instant case about Joshua's counsel meeting with Ms. Bryant on October 14, 2002, listening to her request for representation, and declining to provide that representation. Likewise, Ms. Bryant's status a class member in the Raymond Smith does nothing to compromise Joshua's attorney's duties to any party in this case, another client, or Joshua's attorney's own interests. Model R. Profl Conduct l.7(b). This is so because that representation started and ended prior to the filing of the instant case and prior to the ODM's creation. Moreover, that representation did not involve any of the parties or issues in this case. Therefore, that former representation in light of this case was also proper. There are countless scenarios under which an attorney for a pa1iy in this case could be approached by an employee of the ODM seeking representation in myriad areas of the law, therefore, Joshua cannot opine on the propriety of representing an employee of the ODM in 9 representation and did not offer Ms. Bryant any substantive legal advice. Declining the - representation terminated the attorney-client relationship, thereby eliminating any potential conflict Joshua's attorney might have with another client, a third party, or any party to this case. Model R. ofProf'l Conduct l.16(a)(l), l.7(b).  Joshua's attorney's representation of Ms. Bryant in the Raymond Smith does not create a conflict because it started and ended prior to this case being filed. Joshua hopes it has answered the questions put to it by the Court in a satisfactory manner. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~ ,tp- ToM LU. John W. Walker Ark. Sup. Ct. Reg. No. 64046 John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72206-1250 Telephone (501) 374-3758 Facsimile(501)374-4187 Robert Pressman Mass. Bar No. 405900 Attorney at Law 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, Massachusetts 02421-5817 Telephone (781) 862-1955 not only that associate, but with the entire firm at least until the associate declines to answer the question or declines the representation. Scope, Model R. of Pro fl Conduct 13 . 11 every conceivable context different from the specific facts involving Ms. Bryant and Joshua's attomey4. Those are the only facts before the attorneys in this case per the plain language of the Court's March 18, 2004 Order. Mar. 18, 2004 Order 11 3-5. Given that, Joshua is inclined to follow the pattern of federal appellate courts and decline to answer anything more than the specific question put before it. Joshua's misgivings notwithstanding, in order to comply as fully as possible with the Cami's directives of March 17 and 18, 2004, Joshua can say that as a general matter, if a current ODM employee sought representation from Joshua's counsel, it would probably be prudent to decline that representation so as not to raise the specter of conflict with the intervenors. Model R. of Profl Conduct 1.7(b). On the other hand, if a former employee of the ODM sought representation for a matter unrelated to that person's employment with the ODM and unconnected from that facts and paiiies in this case, that representation probably could be undertaken. CONCLUSION An abbreviated attorney-client relationship between Ms. Bryant and Joshua's attorney began and ended on or about October 14, 2002 only because Ms. Bryant sought legal advice from Joshua's attorney. Scope, Model R. of Profl Conduct 1 3. Joshua's attorney declined the representation and did not offer Ms. Bryant any substantive legal advice. Declining the representation terminated the attorney-client relationship, thereby eliminating any potential 4 For example, Messrs. Jones and Mr. Heller work for large, full-service law firms with numerous partners, associates, and support staff. Presumably, any of their partners or associates could be approached by an employee of the ODM seeking advice on anything from domestic relations, tax, probate, or any other legal issue. Theoretically, that employee could approach a newly hired associate in a social setting, ask the associate for an opinion about something completely unrelated to the ODM or this case, and establish an attorney-client relationship with not only that associate, but with the entire firm at least until the associate declines to answer the question or declines the representation. Scope, Model R. of Profl Conduct 13. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE We, the undersigned attorneys for l'virs. Lorene Joshua et al., Intervenors herein, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoinfi JOSHUA INTERVENORS' RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S MARCH 17, 2004 has been served this 261 1 day of March, 2004, by mailing a copy by First Class United States Mail to : Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 Stephen W Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. 425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 3400 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3472 M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2300 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon 1010 West Third Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-2039 Ann Marshall Office of Desegregation Monitoring One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3714 Dennis R Hansen Chief Deputy Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-2610 J,9tuYW. Walker  Ko-bert Pressman 12 P.3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE We, the undersigned attorneys for Mrs. Lorene Joshua et al., Intervenors herein, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregointf JOSHUA INTERVENORS' RESPONSE To THE COURT'S MARCH 17, 2004 has been served this 26 day of March, 2004, by mailing a copy by First Class United States Mail to: Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock. Arkansas 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. 425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 3400 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3472 M.SamuelJones,m Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2300 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon 1010 West Third Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-2039 Ann Marshall Office of Desegregation Monitoring One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3714 Dennis R Hansen Chief Deputy Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-2610 John W. Walker Robert Pressman 12 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Christopher Heller JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. ATIORNEY AT LAW 1 723 BROADWAY LITILE R OCK, ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 March 26, 2004 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 RECEIVED MAR 2 9 2004 OFFICE /JF DESEGREGATiOU MO~{lf Cfi/NG OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, P.A. . DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 HENDERSON RO . .\\D LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72210 PHONE: (501) 372-3425  FAX (501) 372-3428 E~WL: mchenryd@swbell.net RE: Little Rock Sch. Dist v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist. No. 1, et al. In The United States District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Western Division Case Number 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR Dear Mr. Heller: Enclosed please find a file marked copy of JOSHlJA TNTERVENORS' RESPONSE To TI-lE COURT'S MARCI-I 17, 2004 ORDER. Please telephone me if you have any questions, comments, or concerns. Thank you for your attention to this matter. TC Enclosures (1 ) Cc Robert Pressman Mark Burnett Stephen W. Jones M. Samuel Jones, III Dennis R. Hansen Ann Marshall IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. 4:82CV00866WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. PCSSD'S RESPONSE TO ORDER RECEIVED MAR 2 9 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATIOrJ f:10 NITORING PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The PCSSD, by counsel, will address the five numbered paragraphs in the Court's Order of March 17, 2004, seriatim. 1. No. However, in approximately 1987, Gene Jones was the assistant superintendent for instruction in the PCSSD and the District's representative on the Magnet Review Committee which was then in its nascent stage. Mr. Gene Jones recalls that undersigned counsel helped prepare him for testimony on one occasion concerning Magnet Review Committee issues during that time period. 2. While undersigned counsel does not believe that the foregoing described episode arose to an attorney-client relationship, even as broadly construed, the episode occurred some time during 1987. Of course, this event predated the formation of the ODM by several years and predates Mr. Gene Jones' employment with the ODM by many years . 3. No. 487697-v1 4. Not applicable. 5. The ODM is an \"arm of the court\" and plays a special role in this institutional reform litigation. Accordingly, and especially if school counsel made a conscious decision to represent an employee of the ODM, then other parties could make a cogent argument that the school counsel is disqualified from further representation in the school case because he or she has effectively chosen to represent an employee of an entity directly connected to and originally created by this Court. (See generally Model Rule 1.7). From time to time in the past, one or more of the parties have sought to utilize either the reports of the ODM or testimony from ODM employees to make a point or further their position in these proceedings. Particularly under these unique circumstances, such representation as described in the Court's order should be avoided. Because the monitoring or recommendations made by the ODM can in fact influence the practices of a school district, or could have an affect upon the practices, presentations or positions of any party to this case, then discretion would seem to behoove that such representation be eschewed. Stated another way, if an employee of the ODM was represented by counsel to one of the parties in this case, and particularly if that employee was in a position to influence monitoring outcomes or recommendations to be made by the ODM, and if that counsel had an interest in either the monitoring outcomes or recommendations, then the representation of that ODM employee could present the appearance of impropriety. Particularly since the ODM occupies a high profile position, and presuming that the ODM desires to foster and maintain the trust of the public, any doubt about the representation should be resolved against accepting it. 487697-v1 2 This reasoning seems consistent with certain principles the Arkansas Supreme Court reaffirmed in First American Carriers, Inc. vs. Kroger Company, 302 Ark. 86, 787 S.W.2d 1669 (1990) . In that case, the Court reminded the legal profession that avoiding the \"appearance of impropriety\" was still part of the rules governing attorneys as established by prior decisions of the Supreme Court even though the previous ABA Code of Professional Responsibility had, by then, been replaced by the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. As the Court explained: While Canon 9 is not expressly adopted by the Model Rules, the principle applies because its meaning pervades the Rules and embodies their spirit. It is included in what the preamble to the Rules refers to as \"moral and ethical considerations\" that should guide lawyers who have \"special responsibility for the quality of justice\". Another difficulty could arise as respects the budget of the ODM. The Court routinely refers the proposed annual budget to counsel for all of the parties for comment. If one of the lawyers in this case was representing one of the employees of the ODM, then there would be at least a tension between that representation and certain budget issues, including the proposed compensation for that employee or, particularly as this case \"winds down\", issues such as a reduction in force for the ODM or a curtailment of duties and responsibilities. While such developments might be to the financial interest of one or more of the parties to this case, those issues would likely conflict with the employees' own self interest. Another potential issue presents itself as respects the attorney-client privilege. (Please see the Law of Lawyering, Volume 1,  1.6: 103 @ page 137). It is conceivable that an attorney representing an employee of the ODM could acquire information useful to his \"school 487697-v1 3 client\" in this case. However, even if that information might have otherwise been discoverable through routine means, the fact that the attorney acquired it from his or her ODM client would likely (if not certainly) cause the privilege to attach thereby likely precluding the attorney from using the information that would otherwise be useful to his school client. The problem presented in this example is palpable. Id.@ 1.6:115@ 168.16 Another potential example suggests itself in these circumstances. For instance, the ODM client might confide to the attorney something like \"School District Xis fudging on the numbers it is reporting to the ODM, but don't tell anybody.\" While the attorney might very well have ultimately figured out such a circumstance, and used it to his or her advantage in this case, the fact that he or she initially received the information in an obviously privileged communication is at best problematic. Since the information confided likely does not rise to - the level of a \"crime\" or \"fraud\" as discussed in the Code, (assuming the fudging is a product of sloppiness rather than intent) then more likely than not the attorney cannot use the information to the advantage of his school case client presumably to that client's detriment. See, for instance, the Law of Lawyering,  1.6: 105@ 148.2. As discussed generally in the Law of Lawyering, Id. @ 1. 6: 115 @ 168 .17, the examples given above could arise even in the context of a \"one shot\" consultation to which the privilege would attach, however briefly. Accordingly, it would appear to be clearly prudent to even avoid the potential circumstance of establishing an attorney-client relationship, however fleeting, by simply declining to discuss with any ODM employee any issue that could lead to the formation of the relationship. 487697-v1 4 Respectfully submitted, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2300 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 By~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On March 26, 2004, a copy of the foregoing was served via facsimile and U.S . mail on each of the following : Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Marshall ODM One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 487697-v1 5 Mr. Mark A. Hagemeier Assistant Attorney General Arkansas Attorney General's Office 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Clayton Blackstock Mr. Mark Burnett 1010 W. Third Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Judge J. Thomas Ray U.S. District Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 149 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 487697-v1 Mr. Robert Pressman 22 Locust A venue Lexington, Massachusetts 02173 6 EDWARD L. WRIGHT (1903 - 1977) ROBERT S. LINDSEY (1913-1991 ) ALSTON JENNJNGS WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW (1917 -2004 ) ISAAC A. SCOTT , JR . JOHN G. LILE GORDON S. RATHER, JR. MARTIN G. GILBERT 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 Ill LEE J, MULDROW N.M. NORTON CHARLES C. PRICE CHARLEST. COLEMAN JAMES J. GLOVER EDWIN L. LOWTHER, JR . WALTER E. MAY GREGORY T. JONES BETTINA E. BROWNSTEIN WALTER McSPADOEN JOHN O. DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY VIA HAND DELIVERY The Honorable Wm. R. Wilson, Jr. U.S. District Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 423 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 200 WEST CAPITOL A VENUE SUITE 2300 LITTLE ROCK , ARKANSAS 72201 - 3699 (501) 371 -0808 FAX (501) 376-9442 www . wlj .com OF COUNSEL RONALD A. MAY BRUCE R. LINDSEY JAMES R. VAN DOVER GREGORY S. MUZINGO .. Writer ' s Direct Dial No . S0l -212 - 1273 mjones@wlj .com March 26, 2004 KIMBERLY WOOD TUCKER RAY F. COX. JR . TROY A. PRICE PATRICIA SIEVERS HARRIS KATHRYN A. PRYOR J. MARK DAVI S CLAIRE SHOWS HANCOCK KEVIN W. KENNEDY JERRY J. SALLINGS WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL 0 . BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER JUDY ROBINSON WILBER KYLER . WILSON C. TAD BOHANNON KRISTI M. MOODY J. CHARLES DOUGHERTY M. SEAN HATCH J. ANDREW VINES JUSTIN T. ALLEN MICHELLE M. KAEMMERLING SCOTT ANDREW IRBY PATRICK D, WILSON REGINA A. SPAULDING MARY ELIZABETH ELDRIDGE BLAKES . RUTHERFORD PAUL D. MORRIS  LicaJ.Wtnpncticeb!JiJrrtMUnitiedSutes Patent UJd Tndi:rwrk Offic.e 0 J..icauf tn pnctk:e in M\",cbipn only MAR 2 ~l 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREt:rnTIOM MONITOR!N0 Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District; et al. USDC Docket No.: 4:82CV00866WRW Dear Judge Wilson: Enclosed is a courtesy copy of the PCSSD response to the Court's order of March 17, 2004. Because of the Court's impending deadline, copies of being faxed to all counsel in this case as well. MSJ:ao Encls. cc/w/encls.: 488399-vl Cordially yours, WRIGHT, 6 Honorable J. Thomas Ray (via hand delivery) Mr. Robert Pressman (via facsimile and U.S. Mail) All Counsel of Record (via facsimile and U.S. Mail) THE ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF ARKANSAS MIKE BEEBE , MAR Z : 2004 Mark A. Hagemeier Assistant Attorney General Direct dial: (501) 682-3643 E-mail: mark.hagemeier@ag.state.ar.us M. SamuelJones,III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Attorney at Law 1010 W. 3rd Little Rock, AR 72201 March 26, 2004 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Marshall Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. USDC No. LR-C-82-866 Dear Counselors and Ms. Marshall: Please find enclosed AD E's Supplemental Response to the Court's Order of March 17, 2004 that we filed today. 323 Center Street  Suite 200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007  FAX (501) 682-2591 Internet Website  http://www.ag.state.ar.us/ Page 2 of 2 March 26, 2004 MAH Enclosure Very truly yours, Y1~-~ ~ MARK.A. HAGEr Assistant Attorney General 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. MAP 1- r 2004 PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS SUPPLEMENT TO RESPONSE TO COURT ORDER BY SEP ARA TE DEFENDANT ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Comes now Separate Defendant Arkansas Department of Education (\"ADE\"), by and through its attorneys, Attorney General Mike Beebe and Assistant Attorney Mark A. Hagemeier, and for its supplement to its Response to Court Order dated March 17, 2004, states: ADE is and was unable to respond definitively to questions 3, 4, and 5 of the Court's Order dated March 17, 2004. ADE believes it lacks sufficient specific facts regarding any particular attorney-client relationship to respond definitively to these three questions. It appears from the Court's questions that the principal concern is that, if there was an attorney-client relationship between an attorney in the case and an employee of ODM, could confidential information have been divulged by that employee to that attorney. If during the attorney-client relationship the ODM employee divulged information to the attorney concerning ODM's or the Court's opinion or contemplated course of action on a subject relevant to this desegregation litigation, then ADE would certainly contend this was improper or, at the very least, created an appearance of impropriety. However, if the attorney-client relationship had nothing to do with this desegregation litigation and if no confidential information was disclosed, then ADE might conclude the relationship was proper. It appears to ADE that there could be circumstances where an attorney-client relationship between an employee of ODM, which is an arm of the Court, and a lawyer or a member of lawyer's firm representing a party in this case could be appropriate. For example, if an ODM employee requested services for an adoption, a will, or a criminal matter from one of these lawyers or their firm, ADE would not think this attorney-client relationship improper. ADE can also imagine, however, various situations that would run the gamut between these two extremes that might create an appearance of impropriety that the Court would want the ODM and its employees to avoid. In conclusion, separate defendant would want to know many more facts before it could opine on whether any particular relationship between an employee of ODM and an attorney in this case was improper or not. By: Respectfully Submitted, MIKE BEEBE Attorney General R, #94127 Assistant Attorney Ge ral 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 (501) 682-3643 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Mark A. Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, do hereby certify that I have served the foregoing by depositing a copy in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, this ;;)b day of March 2004, addressed to : Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings LLP 200 W. Capitol, Suite 2300 Little Rock, AR 72201 -3699 Ann Brown Marshall ODM One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Attorney at Law 1010 W. 3rd Little Rock, AR 72201 MarkA. ~eier 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF vs. NO. LR-C-82-866 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS LORENE JOSHUA, et al. KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al. INTERVENORS INTERVENORS RESPONSE TO COURT'S MARCH 17, 2004 ORDER Comes the law firm of Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. , counsel for the North Little Rock School District (\"NLRSD\") and in response to the Court's Order of March 17, 2004 states as follows: 1. The law fi rm of Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. has co nducted a conflicts search regarding its representation of those individuals listed by Ms. Ann Marshall as having worked for the Office of Desegreation Monitoring in the email of March 19, 2004 from Ms. Ann Marshall , copy attached as Exhibit 1. 2. Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. has not represented any of the individuals listed in Exhibit 1. 3. Mr. Gene Jones was previously the Assistant Superintendent for Instruction for the NLRSD during the pendency of this litigation and while Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones , P.A. was representing the NLRSD. However, Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. has never represented Mr. Jones individually. 4. In addition , all attorneys at Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. have been asked if they have any memory of any conversation with one of the listed individuals regarding any legal matter regardless of how casual the discussion. No attorney has any present memory of any such discussion occurring . By: 2 Respectfully Submitted , pN \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. --- NW. JONES, #7 -083 425 West Capitol Avenu Suite 3400 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 375-1122 \"Ann Marshall\" \u0026lt;asbrown@aristotle.ne t\u0026gt; 03/19/2004 11 : 19 AM To: \u0026lt;sjones@jlj .com\u0026gt; cc: Subject: FW: judge wilson's order Hello , Steve. Below are the e-mail exchanges I ' ve had with Chris and Sam re Judge Wilson ' s most recen o rders . I don ' t want to leave you out . At the very bottom is the list of those individuals who have worked for ODM, to the best of our knowledge. Als o , as I pointed out , all of us have at one time worked for ADE, LRSD, NLRSD , or PCSSD . Please let me know if you need any further information, and I ' l l be glad to do what I can. Ann -----Original Message----- From: Ann Marshall [m3ilt o :asbrown@aristotle . net} Sent : Friday , March 19, 20 0 4 10:47 AM To: Chris Heller Cc: mjones@wlj . com Subject : RE : judge wilson ' s order Sam , below is the lis t I sent Chris yesterday. For both of yo u , Chris and Sam , the complete name o f t he person whose last name I couldn ' t recall is Theresa Bradley, who wo rked as a receptionist in the Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor . The name in the list below that reads \"Jackie Bates \" is actually \"Ja c kie Banks , \" who was also a receptionist and is deceased . In reply to your que s tion this morning , Sam, about Gene Jon es ' previous position: he was re ti red when I hired him in 1995. He had mos t recently been assis ta n t supe rin t endent for instruction in the NLRSD. Befor e that , he was dire c t o r o f secondary education and assistant superintende n t for instruction in PCSSD. He was also an associate director for instru c t ion at ADE and once director of t he Metropolitan Education Servi ces Center As a matter of fa c , every employee of t his o ffice , including me, at one time worked for ei t her ADE , PCSSD, LRSD, or NLRSD . Hope this info helps . I f you need more, just holler . Ann -----Original Me s sage -- - -- From: Chris Hel l e r [mailt~ : HELLER@fec .net] Sent : Thursday, March Jo , L004 6 :42 PM To: Alan Bryan; Ale;,:andra l r rah ; Amanda Ros e ; Angelia Chamberlin; Donald Ba con; J.C . Bake r; Darin 8a1.ron ; Tom Baxt e r; Bryan Duke; Robert Beac h ; Joe Bell; Paul Benha m; Bra ndon Ha rrison ; Lee Brown ; Bruce Tidwell ; Larry Bur~s ; Jim Buttry; Carol1n Wall a ce; Jim Clark; Allison Cornwell; Kevin Cra s s ; Coleman Wes:brou~ ; Qsrar Davis; Betty Demory; Walter Ebel; John Echol s ; Byron Ei sema n; r~: -~ Sardne r; Greg Mc Kee; Dave Graf; Will Gri f f in ; Jame s Ha rr is ; C~r:s H~l ler; Jason Hendren ; Dan Herrington; Fra n Hic ~man ; J o seph Hurst ; ~i-- ~ Hut chison; Jonann Con iglio ; Jamie J ones ; Joseph McKay; Jeff Moo r e ; Joey Nichols ; John Peiserich ; jpmsec ; James Smith ; Jay Taylor ; Kimber l y Dickerson ; Khayyam Eddings ; Karen Halbert; Kristen Rowlands; ScotL ~a~~~ste r ; H. T . Larzelere ; Chris Lawson ; Tom Leg ge tt ; Harry Li ght ; ' .. y:, ~\"' .\"o:!nson; Lindsey Mit c ham; Lois Dundee; Diane Mackey ; Phil Ma l c om; Mar - ~~ s~it h; Michelle At or; Marvin Childers; EXHIBIT ii Martin Kasten ; Mike Moore; Michael Moyers; Elizabeth Murray; Wyck Nisbet; Jane Oberste; Ellen Owens ; William PATTON ; Cliff Plunkett ; Ryan Bowman; Robert Smith; Shep RUSSELL ; James Saxton; Steven Brooks; Sarah Cotton; Robert Shafer ; James Simpson; Sam Macheak ; Laura Smith ; Carla Spainhour ; William Sutton; Tim Ezell; Tonia Jones; Scott Tucker ; Fred URSERY; William Waddell ; Guy Wade ; Dewey Watson ; David Wilson ; Wayne Young Cc: fendleyl@alltel . net ; asbrown@aristotle . net Subject : judge wilson ' s order lawyers - judge wilson has required that all lawyers in the pulaski county school desegregation case answer , among others , the fo l lowing question : \"do you or any member of your firm represent anyone who is now or has been employed by the office of desegregation monitoring ( ' employee ' is to be construed broadly regardless of job description ' )? \" the current and forrmer odm employees i ' ve identified so far are : ann marshall (formerly ann brown) , gene jones, horace smith , polly ramer , margie powell , linda ~ryant, connie hickman, bob morgan , bill mooney , skip marshall , melissa gulden , arma hart , jackie bates and prentice dupins . in o r der to properly respond to j. wilson ' s order, i need to know about any communication with any of these people regarding any legal matter , whether or not you believe it amounted to \"representation \" . thanks . ch CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Stephen W. Jones, doe hereby certify that I have served the foregoing by depositing a copy in the United States Mail, postage prepaid , this 26th day of March, 2004, addressed to the following : Mark A. Hagmemeier Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201 -2610 John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Brown Marshall ODM One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol , Suite 1895 3 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 -3493 M. Samuel Jones, Ill Wright, Lindsey, \u0026amp; Jennings 200 W. Capitol , Suite 2300 Little Rock, AR 72201 -3493 Mark Burnette Attorney at Law 1010 W. 3rd Little Rock, AR 72201 JACK, L YoN\u0026amp; JoNEs,P.A. HiECEi~VfED Offices I n: Conway, Arkansas Nashville, Tennessee Mark A. Hagmemeier Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Brown Marshall ODM One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3400 TCBY TOWER 425 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 (501) 375- 1122 Telecopier (501) 375-1 027 March 26, 2004 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 M. Samuel Jones, Ill Wright, Lindsey, \u0026amp; Jennings 200 W. Capitol , Suite 2300 Little Rock, AR 72201 -3493 Mark Burnette Attorney at Law 1010 W. 3rd Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. U.S.D.C. No. LR-C-82-866 Gentlemen and Ms. Marshall: MAR 2 f: 2004 Enclosed please find North Little Rock School District's Response to the March 17, 2004 Court Order which is being filed with the Court today. SWJ:tl Enclosure Sincerely, ~9~ MAR 3 0 2004 JAMES W. l\\.!ic:COf~L :.\\CK, CLERK By- -------,=--- DEP CLER!( THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT'S IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COURT'S COMPLIANCE REMEDY Ann S. Marshall Federal Monitor March 30, 2004 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Little Rock, Arkansas Gene Jones Associate Monitor UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRlCT OF ARKAl'fSAS JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK WESTERN DIVISION By: OEP CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRlCT NO. 1, et aL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et aL KATHERINE K.i~GHT, et aL 4:82CV00866 RECEIVED MAR 01 2004 . OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING ORDER PLAINTIFF DEFENDAl~S INTERVENORS INTERVENORS On March 17, 2004 I entered an order directing the lawyers to provide information and give me opinions with respect to representation, or potential representation, of members of the ODM by lawyers representing a party in this lawsuit. It appears that each party agrees that it would be improper, in almost all instances, for a party to represent a member of the ODM Accordingly, the parties and their lawyers are directed to notify the Court immediately if a lawyer for a party undertakes to represent a member of the ODM briefly or for the long haul. \"Representation\" is to be construed broadly as is set forth in the order ofMarch 17, 2004. Incidentally, judges are prohibited from rendering \"advisory\" opinions; on th~ other hand lawyers probably spend ninety percent of their time rendering advisory opinions to their clients and courts.  r_lr IT IS SO ORDERED this ti day of March, 2004. United States District Judge 852 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of the ADE's Project Management Tool for March 2004. Respectfully Submitted, cottSmith, #92251 Attorney, Arkansas Department of 'Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 404-A Little Rock, AR 72201 501-682-422 7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Scott Smith, certify that on March 31, 2004, I caused the foregoing document to be served by depositing a copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to each of the following: Mr. M. SamuelJones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1 723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 TOM COURTWAY Interim Director State Board of Education JoNell Caldwell, Chair Little Rock Shelby Hillman, Vice Chair Carlisle Sherry Burrow Jonesboro Luke Gordy Van Buren Calvin King Marianna A Lawson s'Ponvi ii e MaryJane Rebick Lillie Rock Diane Tatum Pine Bluff Jeanna Westmoreland 4.rkadelphia Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 501-682-4475 March 31, 2004 Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0 . Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 http:/ /arkedu.state.ar.us RECEIVED APR - 1 2004 . OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. US. District Court No. 4:82-CV-866 Dear Gentlemen and Ms. Marshall: Per an agreement with the Attorney General's Office, I am filing the Arkansas Department of Education's Project Management Tool for the month of March 2004 in the above-referenced case. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. General Counsel Arkansas Department of Education SS:law cc: Mark Hagemeier UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of the ADE's Project Management Tool for March 2004. Respectfully Submitted, , - ( ~ ( ' I M4\u0026lt; Jt,;j-t,_ cottSmith, #92251 Attorney, Arkansas Department of :Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 404-A Little Rock, AR 72201 501-682-4227 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - I, Scott Smith, certify that on March 31, 2004, I caused the foregoing document to be served by depositing a copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to each of the following: Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0 . Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 ------------ ---------------~ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. - IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1 . Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2004 Based on the information available at February 29, 2004, the ADE calculated the Equalization Funding for FY 03/04, subject to periodic adjustments. B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1 . Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June.    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.\u003c/dcterms_description\u003e\n   \n\n\u003c/dcterms_description\u003e   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n   \n\n\u003c/item\u003e\n\u003c/items\u003e"},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1476","title":"Report: ''The Redesign of Harris Elementary School in the Pulaski County Special School District,'' Office of Desegregation and Monitoring","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":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["2004-03-15"],"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--21st Century","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational planning","School buildings","School improvement programs","School management and organization","Harris Elementary School (North Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''The Redesign of Harris Elementary School in the Pulaski County Special School District,'' Office of Desegregation and Monitoring"],"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/1476"],"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":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["178 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":320,"next_page":321,"prev_page":319,"total_pages":6766,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":3828,"total_count":81191,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"educator_resource_mediums_sms","items":[{"value":"lesson plans","hits":319},{"value":"teaching guides","hits":53},{"value":"timelines (chronologies)","hits":43},{"value":"online exhibitions","hits":38},{"value":"bibliographies","hits":15},{"value":"study guides","hits":11},{"value":"annotated bibliographies","hits":9},{"value":"learning modules","hits":6},{"value":"worksheets","hits":6},{"value":"slide shows","hits":4},{"value":"quizzes","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":40200},{"value":"StillImage","hits":35114},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":4552},{"value":"Sound","hits":3248},{"value":"Collection","hits":41},{"value":"InteractiveResource","hits":25}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"Peppler, Jim","hits":4965},{"value":"Phay, John E.","hits":4712},{"value":"University of Mississippi. Bureau of Educational Research","hits":4707},{"value":"Baldowski, Clifford H., 1917-1999","hits":2599},{"value":"Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission","hits":2255},{"value":"Thurmond, Strom, 1902-2003","hits":2077},{"value":"WSB-TV (Television station : Atlanta, Ga.)","hits":1475},{"value":"Newman, I. DeQuincey (Isaiah DeQuincey), 1911-1985","hits":1003},{"value":"The State Media Company (Columbia, S.C.)","hits":926},{"value":"Atlanta Journal-Constitution","hits":844},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":778}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"African Americans--Civil rights","hits":9441},{"value":"Civil rights","hits":8347},{"value":"African Americans","hits":5895},{"value":"Mississippi--Race relations","hits":5750},{"value":"Race relations","hits":5607},{"value":"Education, Secondary","hits":5083},{"value":"Education, Elementary","hits":4729},{"value":"Segregation in education--Mississippi","hits":4727},{"value":"Education--Pictorial works","hits":4707},{"value":"Civil rights demonstrations","hits":4436},{"value":"Civil rights workers","hits":3530}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966--Correspondence","hits":1888},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1809},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1709},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1312},{"value":"Baker, Augusta, 1911-1998","hits":1282},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1071},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":858},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":814},{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":719},{"value":"Mizell, M. Hayes","hits":674},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":626}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"name_authoritative_sms","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":2598},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1909},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1704},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1331},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1070},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":856},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":806},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":625},{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":605},{"value":"Snelling, Paula","hits":580},{"value":"Williams, Hosea, 1926-2000","hits":431}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Prize","hits":1763},{"value":"Ole Miss Integration","hits":1670},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":965},{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":704},{"value":"Memphis Sanitation Workers Strike","hits":366},{"value":"Selma-Montgomery March","hits":337},{"value":"Freedom Summer","hits":306},{"value":"Freedom Rides","hits":214},{"value":"Poor People's Campaign","hits":180},{"value":"University of Georgia Integration","hits":173},{"value":"University of Alabama Integration","hits":140}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":17820},{"value":"United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798","hits":5428},{"value":"United States, Alabama, Montgomery County, Montgomery, 32.36681, -86.29997","hits":5151},{"value":"United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018","hits":4862},{"value":"United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009","hits":4610},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":4177},{"value":"United States, Alabama, 32.75041, -86.75026","hits":3943},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036","hits":2910},{"value":"United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898","hits":2579},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":2430},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":2387}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Georgia","hits":12843},{"value":"Alabama","hits":11307},{"value":"Mississippi","hits":10219},{"value":"South Carolina","hits":8503},{"value":"Arkansas","hits":4583},{"value":"Texas","hits":4399},{"value":"Tennessee","hits":3770},{"value":"Florida","hits":2601},{"value":"Ohio","hits":2391},{"value":"North Carolina","hits":1893},{"value":"New York","hits":1667}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1966","hits":10514},{"value":"1963","hits":10193},{"value":"1965","hits":10119},{"value":"1956","hits":9832},{"value":"1955","hits":9611},{"value":"1964","hits":9268},{"value":"1968","hits":9243},{"value":"1962","hits":9152},{"value":"1967","hits":8771},{"value":"1957","hits":8460},{"value":"1958","hits":8242},{"value":"1961","hits":8241},{"value":"1959","hits":8046},{"value":"1960","hits":7940},{"value":"1954","hits":7239},{"value":"1969","hits":7235},{"value":"1950","hits":7117},{"value":"1953","hits":6968},{"value":"1970","hits":6743},{"value":"1971","hits":6337},{"value":"1977","hits":6280},{"value":"1952","hits":6161},{"value":"1972","hits":6144},{"value":"1951","hits":6045},{"value":"1975","hits":5806},{"value":"1976","hits":5771},{"value":"1974","hits":5729},{"value":"1973","hits":5591},{"value":"1979","hits":5329},{"value":"1978","hits":5318},{"value":"1980","hits":5279},{"value":"1995","hits":4829},{"value":"1981","hits":4724},{"value":"1994","hits":4654},{"value":"1948","hits":4596},{"value":"1949","hits":4571},{"value":"1996","hits":4486},{"value":"1982","hits":4330},{"value":"1947","hits":4316},{"value":"1985","hits":4226},{"value":"1998","hits":4225},{"value":"1997","hits":4202},{"value":"1983","hits":4174},{"value":"1984","hits":4065},{"value":"1946","hits":4046},{"value":"1999","hits":4018},{"value":"1945","hits":4017},{"value":"1990","hits":3937},{"value":"1986","hits":3919},{"value":"1943","hits":3899},{"value":"1944","hits":3895},{"value":"1942","hits":3867},{"value":"2000","hits":3808},{"value":"2001","hits":3790},{"value":"1940","hits":3764},{"value":"1941","hits":3757},{"value":"1987","hits":3657},{"value":"2002","hits":3538},{"value":"1991","hits":3507},{"value":"1936","hits":3506},{"value":"1939","hits":3500},{"value":"1938","hits":3465},{"value":"1937","hits":3449},{"value":"1992","hits":3444},{"value":"1993","hits":3422},{"value":"2003","hits":3403},{"value":"1930","hits":3377},{"value":"1989","hits":3355},{"value":"1935","hits":3306},{"value":"1933","hits":3270},{"value":"1934","hits":3270},{"value":"1988","hits":3269},{"value":"1932","hits":3254},{"value":"1931","hits":3239},{"value":"2005","hits":3057},{"value":"2004","hits":2909},{"value":"1929","hits":2789},{"value":"2006","hits":2774},{"value":"1928","hits":2271},{"value":"1921","hits":2123},{"value":"1925","hits":2039},{"value":"1927","hits":2025},{"value":"1924","hits":2011},{"value":"1926","hits":2009},{"value":"1920","hits":1975},{"value":"1923","hits":1954},{"value":"1922","hits":1928},{"value":"2016","hits":1925},{"value":"2007","hits":1629},{"value":"2008","hits":1578},{"value":"2011","hits":1575},{"value":"2019","hits":1537},{"value":"1919","hits":1532},{"value":"2009","hits":1532},{"value":"1918","hits":1530},{"value":"2015","hits":1527},{"value":"2013","hits":1518},{"value":"2010","hits":1515},{"value":"2014","hits":1481},{"value":"2012","hits":1467}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"0193","max":"2035","count":500952,"missing":56},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"photographs","hits":10708},{"value":"correspondence","hits":9437},{"value":"black-and-white photographs","hits":7678},{"value":"negatives (photographs)","hits":7513},{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":4462},{"value":"letters (correspondence)","hits":3623},{"value":"oral histories (literary works)","hits":3607},{"value":"black-and-white negatives","hits":2740},{"value":"editorial cartoons","hits":2620},{"value":"newspapers","hits":1955},{"value":"manuscripts (documents)","hits":1692}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/","hits":41178},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":17554},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/","hits":8828},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/","hits":6864},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/","hits":2186},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/","hits":1778},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-CR/1.0/","hits":1115},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/","hits":197},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/","hits":60},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-RUU/1.0/","hits":51},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/","hits":27}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Jim Peppler Southern Courier Photograph Collection","hits":4956},{"value":"John E. Phay Collection ","hits":4706},{"value":"John J. Herrera Papers","hits":3288},{"value":"Baldy Editorial Cartoons, 1946-1982, 1997: Clifford H. Baldowski Editorial Cartoons at the Richard B. Russell Library.","hits":2607},{"value":"Sovereignty Commission Online","hits":2335},{"value":"Strom Thurmond Collection, Mss 100","hits":2068},{"value":"Alabama Media Group Collection","hits":2067},{"value":"Black Trailblazers, Leaders, Activists, and Intellectuals in Cleveland","hits":2033},{"value":"Rosa Parks Papers","hits":1948},{"value":"Isaiah DeQuincey Newman, (1911-1985), Papers, 1929-2003","hits":1904},{"value":"Lillian Eugenia Smith Papers (circa 1920-1980)","hits":1887}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"John Davis Williams Library. Department of Archives and Special Collections","hits":8885},{"value":"Alabama. Department of Archives and History","hits":8146},{"value":"Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library","hits":4102},{"value":"South Caroliniana Library","hits":4024},{"value":"University of North Texas. Libraries","hits":3854},{"value":"Hargrett Library","hits":3292},{"value":"University of South Carolina. Libraries","hits":3212},{"value":"Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies","hits":2874},{"value":"Mississippi. Department of Archives and History","hits":2825},{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":2633},{"value":"Rhodes College","hits":2264}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":80736},{"value":"Collection","hits":455}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":80994},{"value":"true","hits":197}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}