{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1172","title":"Magnet Review Committee: Budget","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":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1994/1995"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Finance","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","Magnet schools"],"dcterms_title":["Magnet Review Committee: Budget"],"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/1172"],"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\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nMagnet Review Committee Donna Grady Creer Executive Director June 1, 1994 1900 North Main Street Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U. S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas U. S. Post Office and Courthouse P.O. Box 3316 Little Rock, AR 72203 Dear Judge Wright: (501) 758-0156 JUN 2 9 1994 The Magnet Review Committee has revised its letter transmitting the 1994-95 interdistrict magnet schools budget, due to the inclusion of additonal information which is necessary to explain changes in the budget. At its May 24, 1994 meeting, the Magnet Review Committee, by formal motion and unanimous 6-0 vote, approved the interdistrict magnet schools budget for the six original magnet schools for the 1994-95 school year (Draft 2). The total amount budgeted, $14,952,534, is based on a per pupil expenditure of $3,901 per student and a projected third-quarter enrollment of 3,833 students. In addition, a basic step or incremental increase in staff salaries and associated fringe benefits, as well as the effects of early retirement incentives, were factored in. On May 17, 1994, Mark Milhollen, Manager of Support Services, Little Rock School District, came before the Magnet Review Committee with a presentation of Draft 1 of the interdistrict magnet schools budget for the 1994-95 school year. He explained the cost calculations to the Magnet Review Committee, and made any corrections that were deemed necessary. At this same meeting, each of the interdistrict magnet school principals (with the exception of the Gibbs principal) provided information with regard to their school's proposed budget and answered questions from the Magnet Review Committee members. After this meeting, the Magnet Review Committee representatives presented the proposed budget information to their parties in order to be prepared to vote on it at the May 24, 1994 Magnet Review Committee meeting. As noted above, the Magnet Review Committee did approve the budget at the meeting of May 24, 1994 (Draft 2 which contained any The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- June 1, 1994 corrections from Draft 1). This approved budget represents an increase of 2.04%, or $78.00 per student. Factors which may require a further adjustment in the interdistrict magnet school program budget for the 1994-95 school year include the following: 1) The Professional Negotiated Agreement (PNA) between Little Rock School District CTA and the Little Rock School District Board is in the renegotiation process, which may impact projected salary figures\n2) The State's contribution to employees' health insurance funding is not yet determined. When this information is forthcoming, revisionsmay be necessary to the figures represented in this budget. It is the intention of the Magnet Review Committee, therefore, to submit this budget with the recognition that some flexibility may be necessary. A comparison of the approved magnet school budget for the 1993-94 school year, and the 1994-95 budget, indicates revised FTE numbers for personnel in the 1993-94 school year. LRSD's Support Services Office counted bodies for the 1993-94 school year, rather than actual FTE's. Careful study was given to the 1994-95 budget submission to accurately delineate the FTE's for each staff area, which include Media Specialists, Special Education, Gifted, Classroom, Secretaries, Nurses, Custodians and Other-Aides. Also, a line item cost for Stipends at Williams Magnet merits further explanation. An addendum to explain this change is attached. The Magnet Review Committee respectfully requests the Court's review and approval of the 1994-95 interdistrict magnet schools budget attached herewith. The Magnet Review Committee is committed to maintaining the existing quality of the interdistrict magnet schools .. We will continue to work with the host district as we exercise stringent oversight of the magnet schools budget in an The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -3- June 1, 1994 effort to achieve and ensure efficient management and cost containment to the greatest extent possible. Sincerely, fr~4b\nf~, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee BA/DGC:sl Attachments: 1994-95 Interdistrict Magnet School Budget (Approved Draft 2) Staff In-Service Plan, Williams Magnet cc: Attorneys of Record Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation Monitoring Bobby Lester, Pulaski County Special School District James Smith, North Little Rock School District Gene Wilhoit, Arkansas Department of Education Dr. Henry Williams, Little Rock School District Magnet Review Committee STAFF IN-Sl-:H.V!Cl!: PLAN WILLIAJ\\1S MAGNET SCHOOL 1994-95 Five in-service sessions have been planned for the William's Magnet School StafT for the 1994-95 school year. Two of these sessions center around the effective and efficient use of the computers that have been purchased for use within the school\ntwo sessions emphasize the propcr use of the newly adoplcd rc:iding se1ics\nand one session focuses on the analysis of Slanfor\u0026lt;l-8 lc.\nsl\nand the formulation of proper goals addressing areas of concern. A tentative plan for the in-service hours and the objectives to be reached is summarized bdow: FIRST SEMESTER IN-SERVICE: 1. Basic Computer Literacy: Objective: This in-service will be a practical work session to train a.II certilied staff on the proper use of the lBM Computers. (Six IBM Computers have been purchased ,for the 1994-9 5 school year, three were purchased for the 1993-94 school year, and three were purchased for the 1992-93 school year.) Staff members will !cam the basic DOS commands, how to format and copy disks, basic troubleshooting techniques, appropriate use of the printers,and will preview appropriate software for their particular grade level. Fall of 1994 In-service hours required: 3-6 40 participants@ $54.03/person Total cost: $2,161.20 2. Reading Te::\\.i.book In-Service: Objective: The staff will become familiar with the Harcourt-Brace-Jovanovich Reading Series that has been adopted for the 1994-95 school year. Sample lessons will be demonstrated featuring whole group and small group techniques. Teachers will be presented a model lesson plan designed specifically for the new reading series and will be given the opportunity to construct model pl.ans for each grade level (This was done for the previous reading series and was a specific request for any new adoption.) Fall of 1994 In-service hours required: 3-6 40 participants@ $54.03/pcrson Total cost: $2,161.20 3 . .Standardized Testing: Objective: Staff will review standardized test results for 1993-94. Results will be analyzed and graphed outlining areas of concern. Individual plans will be developed to address any weak areas. Goal sheets will be developed during this session. Fall of 1994 SECOND SEMESTER I -SERVICE: In-service hours required: 3-6 25 persons@ $54.03/pcrson Total Cost: S 1,350.75 4. Additional Computer Training A. An Introduction to Computer Networking: Objective: Cuniculum specialists will present to staff members the research regarding computer networking within the classroom. An overview of the networking will be presented along with effective nel\\-vorking techniques within the classroom. A long-range plan for networking will also be d.iscus!\ned. -. In-service hours required: 1.5-3.0 B. Introduction to the Computerized Card Catalogue System: Objective: Staff will become proficient in using the newly purchased computer and card catalogue system for the media center. The media director will explain the correct and proper use of the system so that classroom teachers may use the system to assist in procuring teaching materials and will explain ways to assist students in the use of the new equipment. In-service hours required: 1.5-3.0 Total hours required: 3-G 40 participants@ $54.03,person Total Cost: $2,161.20 5. Reading Basal In-Service II: Objective: Particip:mts will review the appropriate use of using the basal reader. In addition, strategies for teaching remedial and enriched classes will be discussed. Teachers ,vill also be asked to identify important Stanford-8 skills taught in the basal reading program. Total Cost: $9,995.55 In-service hours rcq uircd: 3-6 40 participants@ $54.03/pcrson Total Cost: $2,161.20 TO: FROM: THROUGH: RE: _Little Rock School District E May 23, 1994 MAY 2 5 1994 Office of Deseg,ogat1or. o,utor:ng Donna Creer, Executive Director, Magnet Review Committee ~ark D. Milhollen, Manager, Sup_port Services ~s, .~ Proposed 1994-95 Attached for your review is draft 2 of the proposed budget for the 1994-95 school year for the six origi~al magnet schools. This document incorporates information known through May 23, 1994, including adjustments for fourteen (14) teachers who have applied for the early retirement incentive. The Draft 2 Budget is based on a projected three-quarter average ADM of 3,833 and a new contribution rate of $3,901.00 per ADM. The new rate represents a per pupil increase of $78.00 or 2.04%. I will be available for discussion at the May 24, 1994, regular meeting. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock. Arkansas 72201  (501)3743361 1~94-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) 1991-9: 1992-9' 1993-9~ 1994-9 SUMMARY FOR MAGNET SCHOOLS F.T,E, Actual F.T.E . . Actual F.T.E. Budget F.T.E Budget CERTIFIED 01 Principal 6.0 $346,537 6.0 $357,193 6.0 $367,176 6.0 $370,669 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 10.0 $456,057 10.0 $438,462 10.0 $479,729 10.0 $478,891 03 Specialists 37.4 $1,274,519 37.2 $1,078,799 39.2 $1,207,341 39.2 $1,290,162 04 Counselors 12.4 $444,641 10.4 $356,314 12.4 $431,093 12.4 $457,554 05 Media Spec. 6.5 $218,210 6.5 $222,455 6.5 $233,751 6.5 $238.592 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 so 0.0 $0 I 07 Music 0.0 _ _.::.::...J $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 so 08 Foreign Lang. 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 so . 09 Vocational 14.0 $507,273 12.6 $489,335 12.6 $492,420 12.6 $483,414 10 Special Education 7.8 $248,275 7.8 $245,166 7.7 $276,790 7.7 $285,726 11 Gifted 5.0 $163,550 5.0 $159,822 5.4 $174,623 5.4 $191,740 12 Classroom 181.4 $5,308,868 177.6 $5,354,901 175.9 $5,689,340 175.9 S5,816,001 13 Substitutes 0.0 $153.813 0.0 $147,417 0.0 $154,925 0.0 $154,925 14 Other-Kindergarten 14.0 $407,561 14.0 $426,571 14.0 $448,634 14.0 $457,467 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 294.5 $9,529,304 287.1 $9,276,435 289.7 $9,955,822 289.7\n$10,225, 141 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 18.0 $301,141 19.0 $355,081 19.0 $353,310 19.0 S335,238  STAFF 16 Nurses 5.4 $148,859 5.4 $148,996 5.4 $154,424 5.4 S159,150 17 Custocians 28.5 $346,330 28.5 $335,694 28.5 $372,625 28.5 S375,432 --- 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 so 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 5.0 $108,103 6.0 $143,913 6.0  $157,639 6.0 S139,163 20 Other-Aides 39.5 $316,035 39.5 $256,806 37.0' $311,683 37.0 $292.027 21 Fringe Benefits(20) xxxxxx:x. $1,254,324 xxxxxx:x. $1,366,607 .lOOOOOO( $1,342,873 XXXlOOO( S1 ,383,030 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 96.4 $2,474,792 98.4 $2,607,097 95.9 $2,692,554 95.9 S2,684 ,040 TOTAL (10-20) XlOOOOOC $12,004,096 XlOOOOOC $11,883,532 XlOOOOOC $12,648,376 XXlOOOOC S12,9Q9,181 1 PURCHASED 22 Utilities xxxxxxx: $601,780 XXlOOOO{ $507,373 XXJOOOO{ $598,926 xxxxxxx S619,066 SERVICES 23 Travel xx:xxxxx XXlOOOO{ $33,980 XlOOOOO( $36,215 xx:xxxxx $33,907 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements lOOOOOOC lOOOOOOC lOOOOOOC xxxxxxx 25 Other lOOOOOOC $166,508 JOOOOOO: $92,772 lOOOOOO( $94,428 xxxxxxx $74,250 TOTAL (30) )000000( $768,288 )000000( $634,125 lOOOOOO( $729,569 xxxxxxx S727,223 MATERIALS, 26 Principal's Office XJOOOCXX XXlOOOOC XJOOOCXX .xxxxxxx SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom XXlOOOOC $343,433 XlOOOOOC $309,128 XJOOOCXX $315,284 XlOOOOO( s202,337 I (40) 28 Media XXlOOOOC $56,509 XlOOOOOC $53,842 XlOOOOO( $54,884 XXlOOOO{ $57,242 I 29 Other XXlOOOO( xxxxxxx: $11,647 XXJOOOO{ $11,856 XXXXlOO( $19,510 TOTAL (40) XXlOOOO{ $399,942 XXJOOOO{ $374,617 XXJOOOO{ $382,024 XXXXlOO( $379,089 I CAPITAL 30 Equipment lOOOOOOC $111,824 lOOOOOOC $106,283 lOOOOOOC $104,215 lOOOOO()( $93,646 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair. etc. JOOOOOO: JOOOOOO: :ooooocx xxxxxxx (50) 32 Other )000000( XXXlOOO(. lOOOOOO( XXXXJOO( TOTAL (50) .lOOOOOO( $111,824 XlOOOOOC $106,283 XlOOOOO( $104,215 XXXXJOO( $93,646 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees XlOOOOO( $8,358 XlOOOOOC $12,416 )000000( $12,665 xxxxxxx $15,655 (60) 34 Other XlOOOOOC )()00000( xxxxxxx xxxxxxx TOTAL (60) xxxxxxx $8,358 XXlOOOO{ $12,416 xxxxxxx $12,665 xx:xxxxx $15,655 TOTAL (30-60) XXlOOOO{ $1,288,412 XlOOOOO( $1,127,441 XXJOOOO{ $1,228,473 xxxxx:xx S1,215,613 TOTAL (10-60) 390.9 $13,292,508 385.5 $13,010,969 385.6 $13,876,849 385.6 lS14,124,794 I TOTAL LINE ITE\nMS - (SECOND PAGE) JOOOOOO: $595,333 JOOOOOO: $537,465 lOOOOOO( $677,821 xxxxxxx ~927,741 GRANDTOTAL lOOOOOOC $13,887,841 lOOOOOOC $13,548,434 x:x:xxxxx $14,554,670 lOOOOOOC $14,952,534 Line ltem _Costs ::= .,. . ., . /  ., ... ./\" ''\"'\"\"'\"' 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $19,871 $20,739 $29,125 Other Objects Indirect Costs $503,365 $458,905 $574,582 $716,116 Vocational $30,837 $29,864 $32,000 $32,000 Athletics $31,231 $27,741 $29,000 $29,000 Gifted Programs $51 $500 $500 Plant Services $18,271 $1,009 $15,000 $15,000 Reading $5,334 $500 $500 Science English $2,368 ($2,058) $1,500 $1,500 Special Education $3,927 $2,082 $4,000 $4,000 xxxxxx )()()()0()( xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $595,333 $537,465 $677,821 $827,741 Per PupH.Cast 1991-92 1992-93 '1993-94 '1994-95 3rd Otr. ADM or Proj. 3771.8 3679.6 3807.0 3833.0 Total Costs $13,887,841 $13,548,434 $14,554,670 $14,952,534 Per Pupil Cost $3,662 ,,,,, \\, .t. $3,662 $3,826 $3,901 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draf\\ 2) 1991-9 Actual 1992-9~ Actual 1993-9 Budgeted 1994-9 Budgeted BOOker Magnet School F.T.E. Salaries F.T,E. Salaries f.T.E. Salarles F.T.E. Salades CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $47,031 1.0 $52,699 1.0 $54,600 1.0 $55,764 STAFF 02 Asst. Pnn. 1.0 $54,526 1.0 $51,060 1.0 $52,003 1.0 $52,103 03 Specialists 6.0 $350,341 7.0 $239,870 7.0 $243,791 7.0 $254,900 04 Counselors 2.0 $64,859 1.4 $35,997 2.0 $57,602 2.0 S:35,200 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $34,336 1.0 $35,134 1.0 $37,012 1.0 $37,836 061 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Classroom 31.2 $751,321 30.2 $926,604 30.2 $937,841 30.2 jJ,879 1 O Special Education 1.3 $48,425 1.3 $49,377 1.3 $51,124 1.3 $64,015 11 Gifted 1.0 $33,463 1.0 $34,242 1.0 $36,073 1.0 $36,876 121 Chapter 1 13 Substitutes $22,649 $17,757 $20,000 $20,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 4.0 $109,481 4.0 $110,916 4.0 $120,022 4.0 $123,234 I TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 48.5 $1,516,432 47.9 $1,553,656 48.5 $1,610,068 48.5 $1,673,807 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 2.0 $30,738 2.0 $30,341 2.0 $31,441 2.0 U1,932 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $24,976 1.0 $25,725 1.0 $27,035 1.0 $28,104 17 Custodians 4.0 $44,176 4.0 $42,176 4.0 $47,081 4.0 $52,400 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 8.0 $72,860 8.0 $64,657 7.0 $75,718 7.0 : j2,731 21 Fringe Benefits(20) xxxxxxx $201,247 xxxxxxx $225,867 xxxxxxx $215,438 )0()0()00( $222,697 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 15.0 $373,998 15.0 $388,766 14.0 $396,712 14.0 $397,864 TOTAL (10-20) :ooooocx $1,890,430 :ooooocx $1,942,422 :ooooocx $2,006,780 :ooooocx $2,071,671 PURCHASED 22 Utilities XJOOOOC( $81,637 .lOOOOOO( $71,492 .lOOOOOO( $87,854 xxxxxxx $84,115 SERVICES 23 Travel XJOOOOOC XJOOOOOC $4,654 JOOOOOCX $5,000 xxxxxxx. $5,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements XXlOOOOC XXlOOOOC XXlOOOOC :x:xxxxxx 25 Other lOOOOOOC $27,963 XXlOOOO{ $4,895 lOOOOOOC $4,800 lOOOOOOC ~ TOTAL (30) xxxxxxx $109,600 JOOOOOOC $81,041 xxxxxxx $97,654 xx:xxxxx: S.il8,615 MATERIALS, 26 Principal's Office xxxxxxx )OOQ()(X){ xxxxxxx xxxxxxx SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom lOOOO()()( $53,613 lOOOO()()( $37,774 lOOOO()()( $38,500 :ooooocx $34,900 (40) 28 Media :ooooocx $4,698 :ooooocx $4,743 lOOOOuO( $4,800 lOOOOOO( $4,800 29 Other .lOOOOOCX JOOOOOCX $1,255 .lOOOOOCX $1,255 lOOOOOO( $1,255 TOTAL (40) .lOOOOOO( $58,311 XlOOOOOC $43,772 xx:xxxxx $44,555 JOOOOOCX .Z40,955 CAPITAL 30, Equipment XXlOOOO( $6,377 XXlOOOO( $10,090 XXlOOOO( $6,100 XlOOOOOC $6,000 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. XlOOOOO( XlOOOOO( xxxxxxx lOOOOOOC (50) 32 Other )OOQ()(X){ JOOOOOOC xxxxxxx xxxxxxx TOTAL (50) xxxxxxx $6,377 xxxxxxx $10,090 )000000( $6,100 xxxxxxx $6,000 OTHER 331 Dues and Fees :ooooocx lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( xxxxxxx (60) 341Other lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( xxxxxxx xxxxxxx TOTAL (60) lOOOOOO( JOOOOOCX JOOOOOCX lOOOOOO( - TOTAL (30-60) lOOOOOO( $174,288 JOOOOOCX $134,903 lOOOOOO( $148,309 XlOOOCXX $145,570 TOTAL (10-60) 63.5 $2,064,717 62.9 $2,077,325 62.5 $2,155,089 , 62.5  $2,217,241 TOTAL LINE lllEMS- (SECOND PAGE) lOOOOOOC $88,028 xxxxxxx $75,446 xxxxxxx $99,518\nXXXXXXX $122,300 GRAND TOTAL XlOOOOO( $2,152,746 XlOOOOO( $2,152,771 xxxxxxx $2,254,707 XXlClOOOC $2,339,540 Una Item Costs ..' (/ .,,.. -,... \"' !!: 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends Other Objects Indirect Costs $83,087 $75,260 $95,955 $118,637 Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs $16 $155 $155 Plant Services $3,016 $166 $2,505 $2,505 Reading $883 $84 $84 Science English $394 ($337) $251 $251 Special Education $648 $341 $668 $668 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $88,028 $75,446 $99,618 $122,300 Par Pupil Cost 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 629.1 604.4 635.0 635.0 Total Costs $2,152,746 $2,152,771 $2,254,707 $2,339,540 Per Pupil Cost $3,422 . $3,562  $3,55'1 $3,684 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) 1991-9, Actual 1992-92 Actual 1993-94 Budgeted 1994-9 Budgeted Carver Magnet School F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $56,292 1.0 $57,676 1.0 $59,423 1.0 $60,587 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 1.0 $31,328 1.0 $32,092 1.0 S42,422 I 1.0 $43,417 03 Specialisls 7.0 $218,361 7.0 $212,014 8.0 $236,265 8.0 $251,547 04 Counselors 2.0 $55,232 1.6 $50,547 2.0 $60,101 2.0 $62.791 05 Media Spec. 1.5 $42,474 1.5 $43,532 1.5 $46,074 1.5 S4J,443 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Classroom 24.0 $600,670 23.0 $572,789 24.3 $690,189 24.3 S674,007 10 Special Education 1.0 $27,907 1.0 $30,734 1.0 I $32,460 , 1.0 2 ::\n, 305 11 Gifted 1.0 $31,689 1.0 $32,469 1.4 S34,246 I 1.4 $48,954 12 Chapter 1 13 Substitutes $22,695 $16,814 S17,150 S17,150 14 Other-Kindergarten 4.0 $96,411 4.0 $116,101 4.0 $117,132 4.0 $120,344 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 42.5 S1 ,183,059 41.1 $1,164,768 44.2 S1 ,335,462 44.2, S1 ,361,045 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 3.0 $51,207 3.0 $65,657 3.0 $67,824 3.0 $54,572 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $28,927 1.0 $29,857 1.0 $31,250 1.0 $32,359 17 Custodians 4.0 $41,338 4.0 $34,361 4.0 $42,645 4.0 $42,467 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other I 20 Other-Aides 11.0 $81,337 11.0 $71,921 11.0  $76,016 I 11.0 $91,426 - 21 Fringe Benefits(20) XlOOOOO( $167,825 xxxxx:xx $190,533 'JOOOOOO(' $192,561 xxxxxxx S.:.~J, 173 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 19.0 $370,634 19.0 $392,329 19.0 $410,297 I 19.0 i $423,997 TOTAL (10-20) xxxxxxx $1,553,693 xxxxxxx S1 ,557,097 xxxx:xxx $1,745,758 xxxxxxx S1 .785,042 PURCHASEC 22! Utilities xxxxxxx $68,924 'xxxxxxx $53,586 .xxxxxxx $69,730 1xxxxxxx S75,965 SERVICES 23 Travel xxxxxxx: XlOOOOO( $12,253 .lOOOOOO( $12,500 )OOO(JQ(){ S9,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements .xxxxxxx XXXXlCXX xxxxxxxl xxxxxxx 25 Other xxxxxxx $22,843 xxxxxxx $9,911 xxxxxxx $10,100 xxxxxxx $10,700 TOTAL (30) xxxxxxx $91,767 )0000()0( $75,750 xxxxxxx $92,330 :xxxxxxx S95,665 MATERIALS, 26 Principal's Office xxxxxxx XlOOOOO( 'XXXXXXX :xxxxxxx SUPPLIES 271 Regular Classroom :000000: SSS,638 XXXlOOO( $52,759 xxxxxxx S53,814 1XXXXXXX $63,330 (40) 28 Media xxxxxxx $11,410 lOOOOOO( $13,271 xxxxx:xx $13,536 xxxxxxx S11,500 29 Other lOOOOOC( lOOOOOC( $2,593 xxxxxxx $2,645 lxxxxxxx $3,500 TOTAL (40) .lOOOOOO( $67,048 .lOOOOOO( $68,623 ,.xxxxxxx $69,995 .xxxxxxx S7c.l. 330 -- CAPITAL 30 Equipment XXXXlCXX $22,128 IXXXXXXX $27,894 xxxxxxx $28,450 xxxxx:xx ~ .:l,000 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. xxxxxxx lxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx (50) 32IOther xxxxxxx xxxxxxx 'JOOOOOO( IXXXXXXX TOTAL (SO) 'JOOOOOO( $22,128 'JOOOOOO( $27,894 'JOOOOOO( $28,450 xxxxxxx S19,000 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees ' lOOOOOO( $2,857 XXXlOOO( $3,908 lOOOOOO( $3,985 lOOOOOOC $3,000 (60) 34 Other xxxxxxx lOOOOOO( xx:xxxxx 'XXXXXXX TOTAL (60) 'xxxxxxx $2,857 xx.xxxxx. $3,908 1XX:XXXXX $3,985 :xxxxxxx $3,000 TOTAL (30-60) xxxxxxx $183,800 XXXlOOO( S176,174 lxxxxxxx S194,760 xxxxxxx $195,995 TOTAL (10-60) 61.5 $1,737,493 60.1 $1,733,271 63.2 $1,940,518 63.2 $1,981~ TOTAL LINE lliEMS - (SECOND PAGE) xx:xxxxx $84,978 xxxxxxx: $86,058 xxxxxxx $107,945 iXXXXXXX S131,114 I GRAND TOTAL XlOOOOCX $1,822,471 XlOOOOCX $1,819,329 XlOOOOCX $2,048,463 xxxxxxx $2,112,151 Stipends $12,453 $13,100 $13,100 Other Objects Indirect Costs $80,209 $73,425 $91,358 $114,527 Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs $15 $145 $145 Plant Services $2,912 $162 $2,385 $2,385 Reading $852 $82 $82 Science English $380 (S329) $239 $239 Special Education $625 $333 $636 $636 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $84,978 $86,058 $107,945 $131,114 Per PupiLCost  :::: 199-1-92  1992-93  1993~94 1994-95 3rd Otr. ADM or Proj. 600.4 588.3 605.0 613.0 Total Costs $1,822,471 $1,819,329 $2,048,463 $2,112,151 Per Pupil Cost ~- .\n,. !.. .,  $3,036 $3,092 $3,386- $3\n446'. 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Dralt 2) 1991-9~ Actual 1992-!r.: Actual 11993-94 Budgeted 1994-9 Budgeted Gibbs Magnet School / :\n:\n: F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E . . Salaries IF.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. .,. Salaries ,., CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $55,462 1.0 ss6,s1s I 1.0 $59,234 1.0 $59,234 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 1.0 $39,856 1.0 $55,922 I 1.0 $45,000 1.0 $39,965 03 Specialists 5.8 $160,327 5.8 s160,752 I 5.8 $158,107 5.8 $162,699 04 Counselors 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $39,485 I 1.0 $40,670 . 1.0 $40,670 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $35,695 1.0 $36,471 I 1.0 $38,433 1.0 $:i9,257 06 Art-Perf./Prod. I 07 Music I I 08 Foreign Lang. I 09 Classroom 17.0 $476,468 17.0 $482,159 I 15.0 $507,851 I 15.0 $466,921 10 Special Education 1.5 $47,975 1.5 $53,235 1.5 $52,530 I 1.5 - ::5,896 11 Gifted 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $35,493 1.0 $33,443 1.0 $34,246 12 Chapter 1 I 13 Substitutes $10,081 $13,666 $14,000 $14,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 2.0 $56,577 2.0 $52,144 2.0 $57,974 2.0 $59,580 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 31.3 $961,411 31.3 $985,841 29.3 $1,007,242 29.3 $972,468 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 1.0 $12,498 2.0 $27,701 1.4 $21,942 1.4 $2~ STAFF 16 Nurses 0.8 $14,585 0.8 s11,304 I 0.8 $11,530 , 0.8 $\n2,446 171 Custodians 3.0 $41,043 3.0 $33.776 I 3.0 $39,012 I 3.0, $39,803 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 I I 19 Paraprofessionals-Other I 20 Other-Aides 6.0 $45,537 6.0 $26,782 5.6 $37,697 5.6 $33,799 21 Fringe Benefits(20) XlOOOO(X $129,439 xxxxxxx $141,032 xxxxxxx $136,618 XlOCOOO( s ..:4,836 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 10.8 $243,102 11.8 $240,594 10.8 $246,798 10.8 $243,497 TOTAL (10-20) xxxxxxx $1,204,513 IXXXXXX:X $1,226,435 XlOOOOOC $1,254,041 xxxxxxx $1,215,965 PURCHASE[ 22 Utilities .lOOOOOO( $35,102 XlOOOOOC $26,879 i.lOOOOOO( $38,531 'XXXXXXX $41,385 SERVICES 23 Travel xxxxxxx: xxxxxxx $2,066 'XXXXXXX $3,407 xxxxxxx $3,407 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements xxxxxxx xxxxxxx XXXXXXX !xxxxxxx 25 Other XXlOOOO( $11,464 xxxxxxx $7,309 xxxxxxx $7,455 xxxxxxx $4,000 TOTAL (30) xxxxxxx $46,566 xxxxxxx $36,254 ixxxxxxx $49,393 xxxxxxx $48,792 1 MATERIALS, 26 Pnnc,pal's Office xxxxxxx xxxxxxx IXXXXXXX ' JOOOOOO( SUPPLIES 27 1 Regular Classroom )0000()()( $25,426 XlOOOOO\u0026lt; S23,54  l:ooooooc $24,012 xxxxxxx $25,068\" (40) 28 Media xxxxxxx $6,241 xxxxxx:x $6,489 i)CX:XXXXX $6,620 xxxxxxx $6,600 29/Other xxxxxxx: xxxxxx:x $1,0' 6 'XXXXXXX. $1,036 lxxxxxx:x S2,455 TOTAL (40) xxxxxxx: $31,667 IXXXXXXX $31,046 xxxxxxx $31,668 :xxx:xxxx $31\\ 123 -- CAPITAL 30 Equipment xxxxx:xx $3,968 xxxxxxx $2,594 . xxxxxxx $2,646 )OOOOCXX -2,646 OUTLAY 31 i Building Repair, etc. xxxxxxx x:xxxxxx . xxxxxxx IXXXXXXX (50) 32 Other xx:xxxxx XlOOOOO( ,XXXXXXX xx:xxxxx TOTAL (SO) xxxxxxx $3,968 xxxxxxx $2,594 XXXXXXX $2,646 ixxxxxxx S2,646 OTHER i331 Dues and Fees )0000()()( XlOOOOO\u0026lt; $1,132 ,xxxxxxx $1 , 155 lOOOOOCX s1,15s I (60) 34 Other xxxxxxx xxxxxxx txxxxxx:x IXXXXXXX TOTAL (60) xxxxxx:x $0 xxxxxx:x $1,132 !xxxxxxx $1,155 xxxxxx:x $1,155 TOTAL (30-60) XJOOOOO( $82,202 x:xxxxxx $71,025 lxxxxxxx $84,862 XXXXXXX $\"6-,716 TOT AL (10-60) 42.1 $1,286,715 43.1 $1,297,460 I 40.1 $1,338,903 40.1 $1,302,681 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) xxxxxxx $48,935 xxxxxx:x $41 ,553 xx:xxxxx 551,892 lxx:xxxxx $63,184 GRAND TOTAL XlOOOOO( $1,335,649 XlOOOOO( $1,339,013 IXXXXXXX $1,390,795 xxxxxxx $1,365,865 iHf\nl! r~~~ ,. ... ,,,: .. }\\.\\L.  \"'''' lo-\u0026lt; \u0026gt; ., , .. \\.,. ..... \u0026lt; (} 1991-92 1992-93 I 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $150 Other Objects Indirect Costs $46,189 $41,301 $49,988 $61,280 Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs $8 $80 $80 Plant Services $1,676 $91 $1,305 $1,305 Reading $491 $42 $42 Science English $219 ($185) $129 $129 Special Education $360 $187 $348 $348 )0()()()()( )0()()()()( )0()()()()( xxxxxx Total Line Items $48,935 $41,553 $51,892 $63,184 Per Pupil Cost 199i,-92 1992-93- 1993-94 1994-95 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 339.6 329.0 330.0 328.0 Total Costs $1,335,649 $1,339,013 $1,390,795 $1,365,865 PerPupH Cost _::,. $3,933 $4,070 $4,21 .4 $4,164 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2)\" 1991-9 Actual 1992-9' Actual 1993-94 Budgeted 1994-9 Budgeted MANN Magnet School F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries F,T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $62,204 1.0 $63,612 1.0 $64,256 1.0 $64,256 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 3.0 $144,375 3.0 $143,289 3.0 $148,979 3.0 $150,013 03 Specialists 3.8 $104,450 3.6 $102,810 3.6 $109,707 3.6 $129,650 04 Counselors 3.0 $113,003 2.0 $71,228 3.0 s109,509 I 3.0 $111,241 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $38,916 1.0 $39,713 1.0 $41,729 1.0 $41,729 06 Art-Pert./Prod. 07 Music I 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Vocational 6.o I $197,824 5.6 $186,730 5.6 I S208,475 I 5.6 $214,772 10 Special Education 1.3 I $45,481 1.3 $46,551 1.3 $49,016 1.3 I $49,958 I 11 Gifted 12 Classroom 47.0 $1,443,046 46.8 $1,370,771 46.8 $1,510,430 46.8 $1,514,011 13 Substitutes $45,577 $34,413 $36,135 $36,135 14 Other - TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 66.1 $2,194,876 64.3 $2,059,117 65.3 $2,278,237 : 65.3 $2,311,765 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 3.0 $49,774 4.0 $65,214 4.0\n$67,206 4.0 $67,206 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $30,687 1.0 $31,416 1.0 $32,045 1.0 $32,359 17 Custodians 6.0 $67,050 6.0 $68,427 , 6.0 $71,195 6.0 S69,490 I 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 I I 19, Paraprofessionals-Other 1.0 $30,787 1.0 S21,650 1.0 S22,947 1.0 i $25,656 20 Other-Aides 3.5 $48,626 3.5 $46,693 2.4 $37,142 2.4: $35,982 21 Fringe Benefits(20) xxxxxxx $275,853 xxxxxxx $292,062 .lOOOOO(X S296,293 xxxxxxx $298,108 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 14.5 $502,777 15.5 $525,462 14.4 $526,829 14.4 $528,801 TOTAL (10-20) xxxxxxx $2,697,653 xxxxxxx $2,584,578 XlOOOOO( S2,805,067 xxxxx:xx $2,840,566 PURCHASED 22: Utilities xxxxxxx $164,666 XlOOCOOC $137,280 XlOOOCJO( $168,667 XXlOOOOC $177,221 SERVICES 23 Travel XlOOOOO( xxxxxxx: $11,214 xxxxxx:x $11,438 JOOOOOO( S10,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements lOOOOOCX lOOOOOO( lOOOOOCX xxxxxxx 25 Other xxxxxxx $48,887 x:xxxxxx $35,464 xxxxxxx $36,175 xxxxxxx $27,300 TOTAL (30) xx:xxxxx $213,554 xx:xxxxx $183,959 .lOOOOOCX. S216,280 xx:xxxxx $214,521 MATERIALS, 261Principal's Office xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx lxxxxxxx SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom XXlOOCXX $76,512 xxxxxxx $63,984 XXlOOOO( $65,265 XXlOOOOC $49,168 (40) 28 Media XXXXlOOC $10,301 xxxxxxx $9,352 xxxxxxx $9,540 lxxxxxxx .$15,700 291Other XXlOOOOC xxxxxxx: $2,172 XJOOOOO( $2,215 XXlOOOOC $4,000 TOTAL (40) XlOOOOO( $86,813 )000000( $75,508 XlOOOOO( $77,020 IXlOOCXXX $68,868 CAPITAL 30 Equipment I lOOOOOCX $26,417 lOOCOOO( $17,579 lOOCOOO( $17,930 IXXXXXXX $27,300 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. lxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx lOOOOCXX (50) 321Other xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx. xxxxxxx TOTAL (50) l.xxxxxxx $26,417 xxxxxxx $17,579 xxxxxxx $17,930 xxxxxxx $27,300 OTHER 331 Dues and Fees JOOOOOO( $1,470 XXXXlOO( $1,377 XXXXlOO( $1,405 xxxxxxx $4,500 (60) 34 Other :xxxxxxx xxxxxxx: xxxxxxx xxxxxxx TOTAL (60) :xxxxxxx $1,470 XlOOOOO( $1,377 XlOOOOCX $1,405 XXXXlOO( $4,500 TOTAL (30-60) XlOOOOCX $328,253 XlOOOOO( $278,422 xxxxxxx $312,635 xxxxxxx $315,189 TOTAL (10-60) 80.6 $3,025,906 79.8 $2,863,000 79.7 $3,117,702 79.7 $3,155,755 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) lOOOOCXX $143,218 x:xxxxxx $137,573 lOOOOCXX S172,083 xxxxxxx $205,272 GRANDTOTAL xxxxxxx. $3,169,124 xxxxxxx $3,000,573 xxxxxxx $3,289,785 xx:xxxx:x. $3,361,027 Una ltem ,Costs  . ?t ){\\:\n::-:-:-\n-\n-::::: .. :_.::::\n:: .. ::-:.:   ... .\n:\n....... [ \\,:. ....... ii.  ~:-\n://\\[ \\:\n? . ))\\:\n::: i??:::- .  1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $4,378 $4,600 $4,600 Other Objects Indirect Costs $114,098 $104,172 $132,153 $165,342 Vocational $13,141 $14,932 $16,000 $16,000 Athletics $9,202 $13,857 $14,500 $14,500 Gifted Programs Plant Services $4,141 $229 $3,450 $3,450 Reading $1,209 $115 $115 Science English $537 ($467) $345 $345 Special Education $890 $473 $920 $920 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $143,218 $137,573 $172,083 $205,272 Per Pupil Cost 1991-92 :- 1992:-S{L 1993-94/ 1994-95 3rd Otr. ADM or Proj. 858.0 836.3 875.0 885.0 Total Costs $3,169,124 $3,000,573 $3,289,785 $3,361,027 Per PupH Cost  $3,694 .. $3,588 $3~760 $3,798 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) 1991-9, Actual 1992-9c Actual 1993-94 Budgeted 1994-9: Budgeted Parl\u0026lt;Vlew Magnet School F.T.E, Salaries F.T.E. Salaries F,T,E. Salaries F.T,E. Salartes CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 S61,371 1.0 $62,517 1.0 $64,582 1.0 SSS,747 STAFF 02 Asst. Pnn. 3.0 $150,132 3.0 $119,256 3.0 $152,394 3.0 S153,428 03 Specialists 9.8 $276,600 9.8 $221,882 9.8 $283,232 9.8 $311,985 04 Counselors 3.0 $132,577 3.0 $118.446 3.0 I S123,123 3.0. S129,966 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $33,037 1.0 $33,013 1.0 $34,026 1.0 $34,026 06 Art-Pert./Prod. 07 Music I 08 Foreign Lang. I 09 Vocational 8.0 $309,449 7.0 $302,605 7.0 S283,945 7.0 $268,642 10 Special Education 1.2 $46,596 1.2 $51,899 1.5 $63,868 ! 1.5 S53,457 11 Gifted 12 Classroom 41.2 $1,398,826 39.6 $1,370,962 39.6 $1,393,800 39.6 $1,529,341 13 Substitutes $42,409 $49,179 $51,640 $51,640 14 Other-Kindergarten 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $40,670 1.0 ~40,670 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 69.2 $2,490,483 66.6 $2,369,244 66.9 $2,491,279 66.9 $2,638,902 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 7.0 $125,888 6.0 $123,490 6.0 s126,650 I 6.0 S128,807 STAFF 16 Nurses 0.6 $18,560 0.6 $18,790 0.6 $19,227 0.6 $19,415 17 Custodians 8.0 $104,587 8.0 $113.791 8.0 $119,039 8.0 $~ '9,819 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 4.0 $77,316 5.0 $122,263 5.0 $134,692 5.0 $113,507 20 Other-Aides I 2.0 $23,127 2.0 $14,005 2.0 S30,125 2.0 $22,493 21 Fringe Benefits(20) XJOOOOO( $321,375 IXXXXXXX $346,012 lOOOOOCX $335,564 xxxxxxx: $347,835 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 21.6 $670,853 21.6 S738,351 I 21.6 $765,297 ' 21.6 $751,876 TOTAL (10-20) :xxxxxxx $3,161,336 XXXXlOOC $3,107,595 xxxxxxx $3,256,576 XXXJOOOC $3,390,778 PURCHASED 22 Utilities xxxxxxx $208,483 )000000( $179,513 xxxxxx:x: $185,462 xxxxxxx $183,100 SERVICES 231Travel xxxxxxx XXXXlOO( xxxxxx:x: xxxxxxx $1,500 (30) 24 Ma:ntenance Agreements lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( xxxxxxx xxxxxx:x 25 Other lOOOOOO( $39,092 xxxxxxx $18,792 lOOOOOO( $19,170 xxxxxxx $14,750 TOTAL (30) xxxxxxx $247,575 xxxxxxx $198,305 lOOOOOCX $204,632 xxxxxxx S199,350 MATERIALS, 261 Principal's Office lOOOOOCX IXXXXXXX lxxxxxxx lxx:xxxxx SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom xxxxxxx $87,767 xxxxxxx $92,439 jXlOOOOOC $94,288 xxxxxxx 0 33, 173 (40) 28 Media !xxxxxxx $16,883 xxxxxxx $13,753 XlOOOCXX $14,028 xxxxxxx $7,642 29 Other xxxxxxx: xxxxxxx $3,136 xxxxxxx $3,200 xxxxxxx S6,100 I TOTAL (40) XXlOOCXX $104,650 xxxxxxx $109,327 xxxxxxx $111,516 xxxxxxx $111,915 CAPITAL 301 Equipment xxxxxxx $37,950 lQOOOOO( $23,092 lQOOOOO( $23,554 lOOOOOOC $16,000 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx llOOOOOCX (50) 321Other xxxxxxx xxxxxxx lOCXXXXX lxxxxxxx I TOTAL (50) XJOOOOO( $37,950 xxxxxxx $23,092 !XlOOOOCX $23,554 xx:xxxxx. $16,000 OTHER 331 Dues and Fees :xxxxxxx $3,496 XXJOOOO( S5.809 booooooc $5,925 xxxxxxx S5,000 (60) 34 Other XXXXlOOC xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx TOTAL (60) xxxxxxx $3,496 xxxxxxx SS,809 xxxxxxx $5,925 xxxxxxx $5,000 TOTAL (30-60) xxxxxxx $393,671 xxxxxxx $336,534 xxxxxxx $345,627 xxxxxxx $332,265 TOTAL (10-60) 90.8 53,555,007 88.2 $3,444,128 88.5 53,602,203 I 88.5 $3,723,043 TOTAL LINE lliEMS - (SECOND PAGE) xxxxxxx $158,509 xxxxxxx $135.955 lOOOOOO( $167,720 lxxxxxxx s::J1 ,123 I GRANDTOTAL lOOOOOO( $3,713.516 xx:xx:xxx $3,580,083 lOOOOOO( $3,769,923 x:xxxxxx $3,924,166 Line ltle?}y~tt_,ff [i/}\n\u0026gt;    ct\"'\"'\"' -- --- C\u0026lt; t 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $1,353 $1,425 $1,425 Other Objects Indirect Costs $112,135 $105,548 $131,007 $164,410 Vocational $17,696 $14,932 $16,000 $16,000 Athletics $22,029 $13,884 $14,500 $14,500 Gifted Programs Plant SeNices $4,071 $232 $3,420 $3,420 Reading $1,182 $114 $114 Science English $520 ($473) $342 $342 Special Education $876 $479 $912 $912 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $158,509 $135,955 $167,720 $201,123 PerPupH Cost 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 3rd Otr. ADM or Proj. 837.6 848.3 870.0 880.0 Total Costs $3,713,516 $3,580,083 $3,769,923 $3,924,166 Per Pupil Cost   ... :--:e $4,434 $4,220 $4,333 $4,459 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) 1991-9, Actual 1992-9: Actual 1993-94 Budgeted 1994-9 Budgeted Willfams Magnet School ,,,. F.T.E. Salaries F,T,E. Salaries F,T.E. Salaries F,T.E. Salaries CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $64,177 1.0 $64,174 1.0 $65,081 1.0 $65,081 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 1.0 $35,840 1.0 $36,843 1.0 $38,931 1.0 $39,965 03 Specialists 5.0 $164,440 4.0 $141,471 5.0 $176,239 5.0 $179,381 04 Counselors 1.4 $39,485 1.4 $40,611 1.4 $40,088 1.4 $47,686 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $33,752 1.0 $34,592 1.0 $36,477 1.0 $37,301 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Classroom 21.0 $638,535 , 21.0 $631,616 20.0 $649,229 20.0 $667,841 10 Spacial Education 1.5 $31,891 1.5 $13,370 1.1 $27,792 I 1.1 $28,595 11 Gifted 2.0 $58,913 2.0 $57,618 2.0 $70,861 2.0 $71,664 12 Chapter 1 I 13 Substitutes $10,402 $15,588 $16,000 $16,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 3.0 $105,607 3.0 $107,925 3.0 $112,836 3.0 $113,639 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALAR 36.9 $1,183,042 I 35.9 $1,143,808 35.5 $1,233,533 i 35.5 $1,267,153 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 2.0 $31,036 2.0 $42,678 2.6 $38,247 2.6 $30,108 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $31,124 1.0 $31,904 1.0 $33,337 1.0 $34,467 17 Custodians 3.5 $48,136 3.5 $43,163 3.5 $53,653 3.5 $51,453 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 I 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 9.0 $44,548 9.0 $32,748 9.0 $54,985 9.0 $45,596 21 Fringe Benefits(20) xx:xxxxx $158,584 xx:xxxxx: $171,101 XlOOOOO( $166,399 XlOOOOO( $176,381 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 15.5 $313,428 15.5 $321,594 16.1 $346,621 16.1 I $338,005 TOTAL (10-20) xxxxxxx $1,496,470 xxxxxxx $1,465,402 xxxxxxx $1,580,155 xxxxxxx $1,605,158 PURCHASED 22 Utilities XlOOOOO{ $42,968 xxxxxxx $38,623 XlOOOOOC S48. 682 ,xxxxxxx $57,280 SERVICES 23 Travel xxxxxx:x )000000( $3,793 JOOOOOO( $3,870 XlOOOOCX $5,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements lOOCOOO( j)O()()QOO( lOOCOOO( lOOOOOO\u0026lt; 25 Other lOOOOO()C $16,259 XX:XXXXX $16,400 xxxxxx:x $16,728 xxxxxxx $8,000 TOTAL (30) xxxxxxx ss9,227 !xxxxxxx $58,816 lOOOOOO( $69,280 lxxxxxxx S70,280 MATERIALS, 26 Principal's Office xxxxxxx: !XXXXXXX xx:xxxxx I xxxxxxx SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom XXlOOOOC $44, 4 77 I XXXXJ00C $38,631 lxxxxxxx S39,405 lxxxxxxx $31,698 (40) 281Media )000000( $6,976\nXXXXXXX $6,234 IXXXXXXX $6,360 xxxxxxx $11,000 29 Other xxxxxxx xxxxxxx $1,475 xxxxxxx s1 ,505 lxxxxxxx $2,200 TOTAL (40) . xxxxxxx $51,454 XlOOOOCX $46,341 JOOOOOO( $47,270 lxxxxxxx $44,898 CAPITAL 30 Equipment lOOOOOO( $14,984 lxxxxxxx $25,034 lOOOOOO( $25,535 xxxxx:xx $22,700 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. lOOCOOO( lxx:xxxxx lOOCOOO( xxxxxxx (50) 32 Other lOOOOOO( fJOOOOOO( lxxxxxxx lxxxxxxx I TOTAL (50) lOOOOOO( $14,984 lxxxxxxx $25,034 XlOOOOO( $25,535 xxxxxxx $22.700 OTHER 331Dues and Fees lxxxxxxx $535 xxxxxxx $190 XXlOOCXX $195 XlOOOOO( $2.000 (60) 34 Other xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx TOTAL (60) xxxxx:xx $535 xxxxxxx $190 xxxxx:xx s 195 lxxxxxx:x $2,000 -- TOTAL (30-60) xxxxxx:x $126,200 xxxxxxx $130,381 xxxxxx:x $142,280 XX)(J()OO( $139,878 TOTAL (10-60) 52.4 s1 ,622,669 I 51.4 $1,595,783 51.6 s1 ,722,435 I 51.6 $1,745,036 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) xxxxx:xx $ 71 , 665 I )0()00()0( $60,881 xxxxxxx $78,563 lxxxxxxx $104,748 GRAND TOTAL lOOOOOO( $1,694,335 x:x:x:xxxx $1,656,664 lOOOOCXX $1,800,998 xxxxxxx $1,849,784  .. ..:,,:,_,:.\n-:-.-:-::-:,:-:-:-:-::::- 1,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,i,i ...   ,, )(}{(}\\ 1,?:,:xrt :tt ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,:,,,i,,,,,,,,,,,,,:-,,,,:,:,:,,, ri@rnrn At ,t t\ni:-:.. .. ..., -:-:-:.\n.:\n:\n:,\n:\n:\n: -:-:-::\n1991-92 1992-93 1993 94 1994-95 Stipends $1,537 $1 ,614 $10,000 Other Objects Indirect Costs $67,647 $59,199 $74,121 $91,920 Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs $12 $120 $120 Plant Services $2,455 $130 $1,935 $1,935 Reading $717 $63 $63 Science English $318 ($265) $194 $194 Special Education $528 $269 $516 $516 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $71,665 $60,881 $78,563 $104,748 P~d B@ff .~tt tr %$.$:1S~ittI : J $$.~A/$ll \\ %$.$$..${  1$$.{@~m 3rd Otr. ADM or Proj. 506.8 473.3 492.0 492.0 Total Costs $1 ,694,335 $1,656,664 $1 ,800,998 $1,849,784 iii.$#P0Pff\\:zj :9 t,rn.:nt lHlt {~M  $.:$\n$0.PH : :}J$.M$'t $$)1Pi' .  Received from Mc::rk J LRSD 10/4/94 t 1,~1,1\n!di u- ... '\"'\"'\"'\" m@1ijg1~.z\nr:: J],:(992~)] HW1e9$,494I:rn t1I:1~$~ifb' :m:@1194fe$% W) ~MA'.GNSt::$.18P.Ot\n$@lNff:m\n: JtA-mW::r:::: IJJ:AWfflIIt lMW$tU'~t:n1r :::t@!Atfflftt 1ttiii.Wie-t@it CERTIFIED 01 Principal $346,537 $357,193 $367,176 $375,279 $370,669 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. $456,057 $438,462 $479,729 $433,972 $478,891 03 Specialists $1,274,519 $1,078,799 $1,207,341 $1,211,895 $1,290,162 04 Counselors $444,641 $356,314 $431,093 $405,435 $457,554 05 Media Spec. $218,210 $222,455 $233,751 $224,104 $238,592 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Vocational $507,273 $489,335 $492,420 $483,977 $483,414 10 Special Education $248,275 $245,166 $276,790 $282,681 $285,726 11 Gifted $163,550 $159,822 $174,623 $158,016 $191,740 12 Classroom $5,308,868 $5,354,901 $5,689,340 $5,377,867 $5,816,001 13 Substitutes $153,813 $147,417 $154,925 $182,975 $154,925 14 Other-Kindergarten $407,561 $426,571 $448,634 $448,552 $457,467 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY $9,529,304 $9,276,435 $9,955,822 $9,584,753 $10,225,141 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries $301,141 $355,081 $353,310 $360,333 $335,238 STAFF 16 Nurses $148,859 $148,996 $154,424 $156,152 $159,150 17 Custodians $346,330 $335,694 $372,625 $360,957 $375,432 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other $108,103 $143,913 $157,639 $122,210 $139,163 20 Other-Aides $316,035 $256,806 $311,683 $237,662 $292,027 21 Fringe Benefits(20) $1,254,324 $1,366,607 $1,342,873 $1,213,301 $1,383,030 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY $2,474,792 $2,607,097 $2,692,554 $2,450,615 $2,684,040 TOT AL (10-20) $12,004,096 $11,883,532 $12,648,376 $12,035,368 $12,909,181 PURCHASE 22 Utilities $601,780 $507,373 $598,926 $598,876 $619,066 SERVICES 23 Travel $33,980 $31,215 $20,580 $33,907 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other $166,508 $92,n2 $99,428 $119,669 $74,250 TOTAL (30) $768,288 $634,125 $729,569 $739,125 $727,223 MATERIALS 26 Principal's Office SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom $343,433 $309,128 $315,284 $328,856 $302,337 (40) 28 Media $56,509 $53,842 $54,884 $34,2n $57,242 29 Other $11,647 $11,856 $18,873 $19,510 TOTAL(40) $399,942 $374,617 $382,024 $382,006 $379,0~9 CAPITAL ~o Equipment $111,824 $106,283 $104,215 $67,029 $93,646 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. (50) ~2 Other TOTAL (50) $111,824 $106,283 $104,215 $67,029 $93,646 OTHER 133 Dues and Fees $8,358 $12,416 $12,665 $13,017 $15,655 (60) 134 Other TOTAL (60) $8,358 $12,416 $12,665 $13,017 $15,655 TOT AL (30-60) $1,288,412 $1,127,441 $1,228,473 $1,201,1n $1,215,613 TOT AL (10-60) $13,292,508 $13,010,969 $13,876,849 $13,236,545 $14,124,794 TOTAL LINE I rEMS - (SECOND PAGE) $595,333 $537,465 $677,821 $413,629 $827,741 GRAND TOTAL $13,887,841 $13,548,434 $14,554,670 $13,650,174 $14,952,535 \"' 1881+92  1992,.,,93'J \". 1$3~  :::: :/ 1~+\u0026lt;  1(X\u0026gt;4\"'95 ' Actual Actual Budget Actual Budget Stipends $19,871 $20,739 $16,269 $29,125 Other Objects Indirect Costs $503,365 $458,905 $574,582 $348,726 $716,116 Vocational $30,837 $29,864 $32,000 $17,222 $32,000 Athletics $31,231 $27,741 $29,000 $28,627 $29,000 Gifted Programs $51 $500 $500 Plant Services $18,271 $1,009 $15,000 $15,000 Reading $5,334 $500 $500 Science English $2,368 {$2,058) $1,500 $1 ,500 Special Education $3,927 $2,082 $4,000 $2,785 $4,000 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $595,333 $537,465 $6TT,821 $413,629 $827,741 Per PuOil cost , ., 1991~ ./1992~ I\u0026lt; 1993-94 ., 19$3--94 1$94\n.95 3rd Otr. ADM or ProJ. 3TT1 .8 3679.6 3807.0 3570.5 3833 Total Costs $13,887,841 $13,548,434 $14,554,670 $13,650,174 $14,952,535 P Puon Cost  $3,682. $3,882 \u0026gt; $3,823 .....\n$3,823 $3,901 lOOt495.IBu ldl tifQtitt iirnmn\nm\n:wmn:rnnrnm:J@t: ::trn:1~nf~r:t tikil~4.8.$:\n\n @t:1~$4~\\?I\nw1\n~1 JMl~448'\u0026amp;\u0026lt; !UIIIR!f ~P. a::MA.G.NSW:!$.CBP.PCSmrtrnm- tWWWMttti ttfrAWffl.ilJFI ltWS.Ua?.ffi.tIJ t rn:@Aijrointrn rmtatr CERTIFIED C Principal $346,537 $357,193 $367,176 $375,279 $370,669  STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. $456,057 $438,462 $479,729 $433,972 $478,891 03 Specialists $1,274,519 $1,078,799 $1,207,341 $1,211,895 $1,290,162 04 Counselors $444,641 $356,314 $431,093 $405,435 $457,554 05 Media Spec. $218,210 $222,455 $233,751 $224,104 $238,592 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Vocational $507,273 $489,335 $492,420 $483,977 $483,414 10 Special Education $248,275 $245,166 $276,790 $282,681 $285,726 11 Gifted $163,550 $159,822 $174,623 $158,016 $191,740 12 Classroom $5,308,868 $5,354,901 $5,689,340 $5,377,867 $5,816,001 13 Substitutes $153,813 $147,417 $154,925 $182,975 $154,925 14 Other-Kindergarten $407,561 $426,571 $448,634 $448,552 $457,467 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY $9,529,304 $9,276,435 $9,955,822 $9,584,753 $10,225,141 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries $301,141 $355,081 $353,310 $360,333 $335,238 STAFF 16 Nurses $148,859 $148,996 $154,424 $156,152 $159,150 17 Custodians $346,330 $335,694 $372,625 $360,957 $375,432 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other $108,103 $143,913 $157,639 $122,210 $139,163 20 Other-Aides $316,035 $256,806 $311,683 $237,662 $292,027 21 Fringe Benefits(20) $1,254,324 $1,366,607 $1,342,873 $1,213,301 $1,383,030 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY $2,474,792 $2,607,097 $2,692,554 $2,450,615 $2,684,040 TOT AL (10-20) $12,004,096 $11,883,532 $12,648,376 $12,035,368 $12,909,181 ~URCHASE 22 Utilities $601,780 $507,373 $598,926 $598,876 $619,066 SERVICES 23 Travel $33,980 $31,215 $20,580 $33,907 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other $166,508 $92,772 $99,428 $119,669 $74,250 TOTAL (30) $768,288 $634,125 $729,569 $739,125 $727,223 MATERIALS 26 Principal's Office SUPPLIES 27 Reaular Classroom $343,433 $309,128 $315,284 $328,856 $302,337 (40) 28 Media $56,509 $53,842 $54,884 $34,277 $57,242 29 Other $11,647 $11 ,856 $18,873 $19,510 TOTAL(40) $399,942 $374,617 $382,024 $382,006 $379,089 CAPITAL 30 Equipment $111,824 $106,283 $104,215 $67,029 $93,646 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. (50) 32 Other TOTAL(SO) $111,824 $106,283 $104,215 $67,029 $93,646 OTHER 133 Dues and Fees $8,358 $12,416 $12,665 $13,017 $15,655 (60) 34 Other TOTAL(60) $8,358 $12,416 $12,665 $13,017 $15,655 TOT AL (30-60) $1,288,412 $1,127,441 $1,228,473 $1,201,177 $1,215,613 TOT AL (10-60) $13,292,508 $13,010,969 $13,876,849 $13,236,545 $14,124,794 TOTAL LINE I .. EMS - (SECOND PAGE) $595,333 $537,465 $677,821 $413,629 $827,741 GRAND TOTAL $13,887,841 $13,548,434 $14,554,670 $13,650,174 $14,952,535 MfMllt!ill1iiil:l:1 :1111\n!i:11::!:1:i:::Wrt ih~ \u0026lt; .\nAqt~at., ... $.2-:~ ,.?. Actu~n:. ~~ ::Bwg~t~\\ \u0026lt;,AcN\nnp\n:: .$4 .. ~ J3\\tdg~t$\u0026lt;i . fl\n1\\E . Sa.tart\" F,:f.E. $a.larles  tt\nt.E t$alarles.   \u0026gt; .sa11rtest f/f,E  sa1arles CERTIFIED 01 Prlnclpal 1.0 $47,031 1.0 $52,699 1.0 $54,600 $54,600 1.0 $55,764 STAFF 2 Asst. Prln. 1.0 $54,526 1.0 $51,060 1.0 $52,003 $52,028 1.0 $52,103 03 Speclallsts 6.0 $350,341 7.0 $239,870 7.0 $243,791 $253,810 7.0 $254,900 04 Counselors 2.0 $64,859 1.4 $35,997 2.0 $57,602 $79,221 2.0 $65,200 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $34,336 1.0 $35,134 1.0 $37,012 $37,012 1.0 $37,836 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 7 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Classroom 31.2 $751,321 30.2 $926,604 30.2 $937,841 $907,324 30.2 $963,879 10 Special Education 1.3 $48,425 1.3 $49,377 1.3 $51,124 $51,124 1.3 $64,015 11 Gifted 1.0 $33,463 1.0 $34,242 1.0 $36,073 $36,073 1.0 $36,876 12 Chapter 1 13 Substitutes $22,649 $17,757 $20,000 $24,191 $20,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 4.0 $109,481 4.0 $110,916 4.0 $120,022 $120,022 4.0 $123,234 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 48.5 $1,516,432 47.9 $1,553,656 48.5 $1,610,068 $1,615,405 48.5 $1,673,807 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 2.0 $30,738 2.0 $30,341 2.0 $31,441 $46,344 2.0 $31,932 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $24,976 1.0 $25,725 1.0 $27,035 $27,301 1.0 $28,104 17 Custodians 4.0 $44,176 4.0 $42,176 4.0 $47,081 $44,290 4.0 $52,400 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 8.0 $72,860 8.0 $64,657 7.0 $75,718 $37,000 7.0 $62,731 21 Fringe Benefits(20) XlOOOI $201,247 )()O()(i $225,867 x:xxxx $215,438 $198,345 lOOOOt $222,697 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 15.0 $373,998 15.0 $388,766 14.0 $396,712 $353,280 14.0 $397,864 TOTAL (10-20) )(X)()(X $1,890,430 'XXXlOI $1,942,422 lOOOOI $2,006,780 $1,968,685 XXXlOI $2,071,671 PURCHASEC 22 Utilities lOOOa $81,637 XXXXll $71,492 xxxxx $87,854 $75,676 xxxxx $84,115 SERVICES 23 Travel lOOOOC lOOOOI $4,654 ~ $5,000 $4,939 )0000( $5,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements XXX\u0026gt;O\u0026lt; XXlOO( X)OO()( \u0026gt;OOOOC 25 Other ~ $27,963 .XXX)O( $4,895 XXlOOI $4,800 $13,548 )0000( $9,500 TOTAL(30) X,000 $109,600 )OOO()C $81,041 ,)O(JO(X $97,654 $94,163 xioooc $98,615 MATERIALS, l2tl Prlnclpal's Office lOO(l0I XlOOOi )()Q00C llOOQ()I SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom ll(X)(I()( $53,613 XXlOO( $37,774 xxxxx $38,500 $44,436 XXlOO( $34,900 (40) 28 Media XXXIOi $4,698 ~ $4,743 ~ $4,800 $5,380 )000()( $4,800 2S Other JOOCO( XXXlOI $1,255 XlOQ0 $1,255 $2,624 ~ $1,255 TOTAL(40) l)'.)Q()OC $58,311 ilOOl'.X)( $43,772 )CQ(X)I $44,555 $52,440 .X)O(l,() $40,955 CAPITAL 30 Equipment l\u0026gt;OOOOC $6,377 iiOOOO( $10,090 llOOOQI $6,100 $12,832 !XXlOO\u0026lt; $6,000 OlJTI.AY 31 Building Repair, etc. )l)(l(IO( iXXiOO\u0026lt; ~ llOOOOC (Su) 32 Other xxxoc llOOOOC ~ !xxiooc TOTAL(50) llOOC cc $6,377 IX:XXXX $10,090 XXXl(X $6,100 $12,832 Xl000( $6,000 OTHER 133 Dues and Fees XX\u0026gt;00C XXXXll XXXICX )0()0()( (60) 134 Other lOOOOI booooc )OOO(X )(X)QOi TOTAL(60) IXXXlCC XlOOOC !XlOO(ii )0000( TOTAL (30-60) llOOOOC $174,288 i)QOOO( $134,903 lOOOO( $148,309 $159,435 llOOOOC $145,570 TOTAL (10-60) 63.5 $2,064,717 62.9 $2,077,325 62.5 $2,155,089 $2,i28,120 62.5 $2,217,241 TOTAL LINEn EMS- (SECOND PAGE) XlOOOC $88,028 XXlOOC $75,446 IXXlOOI $99,618 $59,394 llOOOOC $122,300 GRANDTOTAL Xl000C '2,152,746 lxxm $2.152.771 XXl00( ~.707 $2.187.$14 Xl000C 42,339,54() . ,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,. ,.,.,., . .,., .:\n:r:,m:1~\\irl?=hi f:::,\n,,,,,,i'i:C,:\u0026lt;\u0026lt;.\n::::c?'''' 1993-94 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $1,500 Other Objects Indirect Costs $83,087 $75,260 $95,955 $57,435 $118,637 Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs $16 $155 $155 Plant Services $3,016 $166 $2,505 $2,505 Reading $883 $84 $84 Science English $394 ($337) $251 $251 Special Education $648 $341 $668 $459 $668 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $88,028 $75,446 $99,618 $59,394 $122,300 3rd atr. ADM or Proj. 629.1 604.4 635.0 588.0 635.0 Total Costs $2,152,746 $2,152,TT1 $2,254,707 $2,187,514 $2,339,540 ~!~~r~,-~:1\n1~:!~\niiilll!l::::::::::\ntc::i .n:::.gi :t!,ct:ua1 :::t i.a\n.~ ,r tictuaJ-'\u0026lt;l: 93:-~ .. J,wQoetedJ . \" AWa.l Ji $4~ f Pg~.  fi'r,E $alal't:G$' f/~1\\E Saladtw'=' fl't'.E $alal't8$ .Satlftes. F.T.e }Salarres. CERTIFIED 01 Prlnclpal 1.0 $56,292 1.0 $57,676 1.0 $59,423 $67,263 1.0 $60,587 STAFF 02 Asst. Prln. 1.0 $31,328 1.0 $32,092 1.0 $42,422 $41,640 1.0 $43,417 03 Speclallsts 7.0 $218,361 7.0 $212,014 8.0 $236,265 $245,103 8.0 $251,547 04 Counselors 2.0 $55,232 1.6 $50,547 2.0 $60,101 $45,473 2.0 $62,791 05 Media Spec. 1.5 $42,474 1.5 $43,532 1.5 $46,074 $47,207 1.5 $48,443 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Classroom 24.0 $600,670 23.0 $572,789 24.3 $690,189 $581,394 24.3 $674,007 10 Special Education 1.0 $27,907 1.0 $30,734 1.0 $32,460 $33,001 1.0 $33,805 11 Gifted 1.0 $31,689 1.0 $32,469 1.4 $34,246 $47,830 1.4 $48,954 12 Chapter 1 13 Substitutes $22,695 $16,814 $17,150 $12,271 $17,150 14 Other-Kindergarten 4.0 $96,411 4.0 $116,101 4.0 $117,132 $117,112 4.0 $120,344 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 42.5 $1,183,059 41.1 $1,164,768 44.2 $1,335,462 $1,238,294 44.2 $1,361,045 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 3.0 $51,207 3.0 $65,657 3.0 $67,824 $60,742 3.0 $54,572 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $28,927 1.0 $29,857 1.0 $31,250 $31,556 1.0 $32,359 17 Custodians 4.0 $41,338 4.0 $34,361 4.0 $42,645 $43,531 4.0 $42,467 18 Paraprofesslonals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 11.0 $81,337 11.0 $71,921 11.0 $76,016 $75,921 11.0 $91,426 21 Fringe Benefits(20) xxxri $167,825 iXXXlOC $190,533 IXXXXll $192,561 $171,444 XlOOOC $203,173 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 19.0 $370,634 19.0 $392,329 19.0 $410,297 $383,194 19.0 $423,997 TOTAL (10-20) xxxxx $1,553,693 xxxxx $1,557,097 xxxxx $1,745,758 $1,621,488 xxxxx $1,785,042 r\u0026gt;URCHASED 22 Utllltles iooocx $68,924 i'ICXJO(X $53,586 lOOOOC $69,730 $66,973 XXiooc $75,965 SERVICES 23 Travel i)OOOO( l\u0026gt;OOOOC $12,253 lOOQOj $12,500 $8,464 xxxri $9,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements !XiOOoc XXlOO( IXXl00C )(X)()O( 25 Other I~ $22,843 ~ nx $9,911 lxxiooc $10,100 $13,840 )(XXl()( $10,700 TOTAL(30) llOOcol $91,767 IXlC iOO( $75,750 IXXlOOC $92,330 $89,2n xxxxx $95,665 MATERIALS, 26 Prlnclpal's Office XXlOOC IXX)O()( lOOOO IXXXlOC SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classl'oom XXXIO! $55,638 IXXX\u0026gt;O! $52,759 )(X)()(X $53,814 $54,466 i)O(l()()C $63,330 (40) 28 Media XXXl0( $11,410 XXXiCX $13,271 xxxn $13,536 $5,356 lxxxxic $11,500 29 Other IXXXlD IOOOOC $2,593 xxm $2,645 $3,498 IXXlOOC $3,500 TOTAL(40) lioc:iooc $67,048 l0000 $68,623 ~xxxx $69,995 t63,320 xxxxx $78,330 CAPITAL 30 Equipment llOOOO $22,128 0000 $27,894 ~~ $28,450 $19,490 XXXl0I $19,000 OlJnAY 31 Building Repair, etc. IXXx\u0026gt;Oi ooo6c x\u0026gt;006c )(XXl0I (50) 32 Other llOOOOC 0000 XXlCCII xiOOO( TOTAL(50) IXlOOOC $22,128 XlOOOI $27,894 IOOOOI $28,450 $19,490 xioooi $19,000 OTHER 133 Dues and Fees XXXl0I $2,857 :m:iol $3,908 )(XXl0 $3,985 $5,643 l0000( $3,000 (60) 134 Other \u0026gt;CXXla. iOOoo iooo6 lOOOOC TOTAL(60) XlOOOC $2,857 l0000 $3,908 iXXXxX $3,985 $5,643 ~ $3,000 TOTAL (30-60) l0000C $183,800 Xl000C $176,174 00000( $194,760 s1n,130 moo $195,995 TOT AL (10-60) 61.5 $1,737,493 60.1 $1,733,271 63.2 $1,940,518 $1,799,218 63.2 $1,981,037 TOTAL LINEn EMS - (SECOND PAGE) :xxxx,c $84,978 ~ $86,058 IXXX)QI $107,945 $64,923 xxm $131,114 GAANOTOTAL XXlOCX $1,822.71 XXlOCX $1 819.329 xxxxx S2.. 048.\"6.1 $1,864,1 1 lQXXX $2.112.151 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, =\\.=}\\,,.{ .. ,.,.,. '''\"-\"',,,,,,,,,,,, 1992-93 1993-94 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $12,453 $13,100 $6,044 $13,100 Other Objects Indirect Costs $80,209 $73,425 $91,358 $58,412 $114,527 Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs $15 $145 $145 Plant Services $2,912 $162 $2,385 $2,385 Reading $852 $82 $82 Science English $380 ($329) $239 $239 Special Education $625 $333 $636 $467 $636 xxxxxx lOOOOO( xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $84,978 $86,058 $107,945 $64,923 $131,114 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 600.4 588.3 605.0 597.9 613.0 Total Costs $1,822,471 $1,819,329 $2,048,463 $1 ,864,141 $2,112,151 ~l~~t~lliiili!111i!lllllr'Ii tJ1~ A.ct:uar \u0026lt; t,~\n.~ /.Actt1~Ui tJ3 .. 9\u0026lt;1 8uqg~t$(j) :~a1::\u0026lt; $t-i! 8udgei\nI  -rl't.E Satarres fl'\n,t,E Satarfes . .fl'/f,E \\'Salaffiw., Satarteis: t .r:.r.a :aa1artes: CERTIFIED 1 Principal 1.0 $55,462 1.0 $56,515 1.0 $59,234 $59,233 1.0 $59,234 STAFF 02 Asst. Prln. 1.0 $39,856 1.0 $55,922 1.0 $45,000 1.0 $39,965 03 Specialists 5.8 $160,327 5.8 $160,752 5.8 $158,107 $127,098 5.8 $162,699 04 Counselors 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $40,670 $40,670 1.0 $40,670 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $35,695 1.0 $36,471 1.0 $38,433 $38,684 1.0 $39,257 06 Art-Perl./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Classroom 17.0 $476,468 17.0 $482,159 15.0 $507,851 $462,587 15.0 $466,921 10 Special Education 1.5 $47,975 1.5 $53,235 1.5 $52,530 $70,319 1.5 $55,896 11 Gifted 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $35,493 1.0 $33,443 $33,443 1.0 $34,246 12 Chapter 1 13 Substitutes $10,081 $13,666 $14,000 $11,733 $14,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 2.0 $56,577 2.0 $52,144 2.0 $57,974 $57,912 2.0 $59,580 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 31.3 $961,411 31.3 $985,841 29.3 $1,007,242 $901,679 29.3 $972,468 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 1.0 $12,498 2.0 $27,701 1.4 $21,942 $15,692 1.4 $22,613 STAFF 16 Nurses 0.8 $14,585 0.8 $11,304 0.8 $11,530 $11,856 0.8 $12,446 17 Custodians 3.0 $41,043 3.0 $33,776 3.0 $39,012 $39,012 3.0 $39,803 18 Paraprofesslonals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 6.0 $45,537 6.0 $26,782 5.6 $37,697 $33,307 5.6 $33,799 21 Fringe Beneflts(20) xxxicx $129,439 \u0026gt;000CX $141,032 XXXlCX $136,618 $114,688 lOOOOI $134,836 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 10.8 $243,102 11.8 $240,594 10.8 $246,798 $21-4,555 10.8 $243,497 TOTAL (10-20) i'xx)6(l $1,204,513 )(x,()O( $1,226,435 )OOO(X $1,254,041 $1,116,234 XXlOOI $1,215,965 PURCHASED 22 Utilities XioOc' $35,102 xx,ooc $26,879 XlOOO $38,531 $35,582 xxiooi $41,385 SERVICES 23 Travel X)OOO \u0026gt;0000( $2,066 )0000 $3,-407 XXXlOC $3,407 (30) 124 Maintenance Agreements X)(X)O( XXX)0( )O(l()Q XXX\u0026gt;CX 125 Other )CXlClOC $11,-464 XXxiOc $7,309 )ll(l(:)()I $7,455 $6,591 xxxxx $4,000 TOTAL(30) )OOOOc $46,566 XXXX)I $36,254 XJCl\u0026amp;)i $49,393 $42,173 )(XiOo( $48,792 MATERIALS, 26 Prlnclpal's Ofllce 'xioool XXlOO( )000()( .)0000! SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom m:ri: $25,426 l0000( $23,5-41 )(X)O(X $24,012 $20,882 .XXlOO( $25,068 (40) 28 Media )(X)00 $6,2-41 ~ $6,-489 )(X)OQ $6,620 $3,934 .X)OOO( $6,600 29 Other l0000I )0000( $1,016 lOOOO( $1,036 $1,397 X).:xx)( $2,455 TOTAL(-40) xxxx,c $31,667 1,POOOI $31,046 oooooc $31,668 $26,213 lOOOOI $34,123 CAPITAL 30 Equipment XXlQO( $3,968 l,oooQC $2,594 )!)()()I) $2,646 $1,312 ~ $2,646 Olffi.AY 31 Building Repair, etc. )()000 IXXlOQI cI C))( XXXiOi (50) 32 Other lOOcc iOOOOI )OC )OOI XlOOOI TOTAL(50) l(l0(lC $3,968 )OO(l0I $2,594 xxxxx $2,646 $1,312 XlOOOC $2,646 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees )(X)(l()( )(X)(l()( $1,132 iXXXl()I $1,155 $215 .X)(l()QC $1,155 (60) 134 Other :i(XXl(X )(X)()(l( )al()(): iooo( TOTAL(60) XXlOOc $0 l0000( $1,132 ilOcXioi $1,155 $215 i)()OOO\n$1,155 TOTAL (30-60) !lOOOOC $82,202 l)(l000( $71,025 ilOOOOC $84,862 $69,913 !)Q000C $86,716 TOTAL (10-60) 42.1 $1,286,715 -43.1 $1,297,-460 40.1 $1,338,903 $1,186,147 40.1 $1,302,681 TOTAL LINE r rEMS - (SECOND PAGE) XXXlOI $48,935 I~ $41,553 l0000C $51,892 $29,105 XXXl0I $63,184 ,,., GRANDTOTAL .Xl6ooc $1,335,649 l0000C $1,339,013 X)OO(X $1,390,795 11,215,252 l0000( $1,365,865 1993-94 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $150 Other Objects Indirect Costs $46,189 $41,301 $49,988 $28,874 $61 ,280 Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs $8 $80 $80 Plant Services $1,676 $91 $1 ,305 $1,305 Reading $491 $42 $42 Science English $219 ($185) $129 $129 Speclal Education $360 $187 $348 $231 $348 lOOOOCX lOOOOCX lOOOOCX lOOOOCX Total Line Items $48,935 $41,553 $51 ,892 $29,105 $63,184 P.tf ~IU1.t1MM!ht@lM J$i1'{$.Z@lf@ J~~t::mt J~ttif Jfflil@ifaf@. J~,t?ti 3rd atr. ADM or Proj. 339.6 329.0 330.0 295.7 328.0 Total Costs $1,335,649 $1,339,013 $1,390,795 $1,215,252 $1,365,865 fi(fflffilt.~tiiM@WlMf M%Wt:D.mmr mmwMtJt()(: ,\n@Mtlliliit: iMM~ iMI\\' t#i@tlU1t9.f f fflij!fff ~~ t JM1.tlft!i@ t $.i!/Ul~tl f\\T~i : f@~l.it:l~ J CERTIFIED 01 Principal $65,081 1.0 $65,081 STAFF ~0-::12--:--Ass-t.--::P-,ri_n_------+---,--+-----,--,-+---+--:-:--:--:-+--,-+-----+---$3_8_,9_3_1-+---1.-0+--$-39~,9-65------1 1.0 $64,177 1.0 $64,174 1.0 $65,081 1.0 $35,840 1.0 $36,843 1.0 $38,931 03 Specialists 5.0 $164,440 4.0 $141,471 5.0 $176,239 $173,230 5.0 $179,381 1.4 $39,485 1.4 $40,611 1.4 $40,088 $45,279 1.4 $47,686 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $33,752 1.0 $34,592 1.0 $36,477 $25,446 1.0 $37,301 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Classroom 21.0 $638,535 21 .0 $631,616 20.0 $649,229 $630,446 20.0 $667,841 1 O Special Education 1.5 $31,891 1.5 $13,370 1.1 $27,792 $25,764 1. 1 $28,595 11 Gifted 2.0 $58,913 2.0 $57,618 2.0 $70,861 $40,670 2.0 $71,664 12 Chapter 1 13 Substitutes $10,402 $15,588 $16,000 $17,314 $16,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 3.0 $105,607 3.0 $107,925 3.0 $112,836 $112,836 3.0 $113,639 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALAR 36.9 $1,183,042 35.9 $1 ,143,808 35.5 $1 ,233,533 $1 ,174,997 35.5 $1 ,267,153 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 2.0 $31,036 2.0 $42,678 2.6 $38,247 $27,786 2.6 $30,108 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $31,124 1.0 $31,904 1.0 $33,337 $33,664 1.0 $34,467 17 Custodians 3.5 $48,136 3.5 $43,163 3.5 $53,653 $44,866 3.5 $51,453 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 9.0 $44,548 9.0 $32,748 9.0 $54,985 $37,175 9.0 $45,596 21 Fringe Benefits(20) XlOOOC $158,584 ~ $171,101 ~ $166,399 $147,956 ~  $176,381 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 15.5 $313,428 15.5 $321,594 16.1 $346,621 $291 ,447 16.1 $338,005 TOTAL (10-20) ~ $1,496,470 \u0026lt;: :li)( $1,465,402 kX ~ $1,580,155 $1,M\u0026gt;6,4 ~ $1,605,158 bURCHASEC 22 Utllltles X,000 $42,968 )00 :,di $38,623 )IX iCo( $48,682 $44,468 :XlQQ $57,280 SERVICES 23 Travel x,o\u0026amp; xxj # $3,793 IOt IOOI $3,870 $4,601 0000 $5,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements i~ ~ )OOOOt' :xi\u0026amp; ~ Other ~ $16,259 )OOOOI $16,400 )aiO $16,728 $9,938 ~ $8,000 TOTAL(30) xlOo6c $59,227 ~ $58,816 IO(XU $69,280 $59,007 10000 $70,280 MATERIALS,~ Prlnclpal's Office i\u0026gt;OCXl!) ,ooooc lOOO ~ XX)QO SUPPLIES ~7 Regular Classroom ii l(X) $44,477 XXM $38,631 ~ $39,405 $55,228 moOI $31,698 (40) 28 Media )C I()() $6,976 X)( 00( $6,234 ~ $6,360 $4,645 n)6Q $11,000 29 Other ic IOO ~ 00 $1,475 i6ooo $1,505 $2,095 !0000. $2,200 TOTAL(40) lOCXla $51 ,454 )(lj 00 $46,341 lOOOO $47,270 $61,968 lOOOO $44,898 CAPITAL l30 Equipment am $14,984 d 00 $25,034 )(X)O() $25,535 $6,799 ('co $22,700 OUTLAY 31 Bulldlng Repair, etc. XX)O(li ici\u0026gt;ooi ~ iiXn) (50) 132 Other lOOOO( XXXlO( \u0026gt;0000 X,000 TOTAL(50) ICl(l0C) $14,984 lO(l0t) $25,034 XXlOO $25,535 $6,799 XXXl() $22,700 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees IIXX $535 IIXX $190 ioooo $195 $720 ~ $2,000 (60) 34 Other io\u0026lt;l\u0026lt; XXXlO )l)(X)O )(XX)() TOTAL(60) [\u0026gt;0000 $535 IO(lOO $190 .XXJQCii $195 $720 )0000 $2,000 TOTAL (30-60)\nJ(lOQO $126,200 IOOOO( $130,381 XXXXll $142,280 $128,494 ~ $139,878 TOTAL (10-60) 52.4 $1,622,669 51.4 $1,595,783 51.6 $1,722,435 $1,594,938 51.6 $1,745,036 TOTAL LINE r \"EMS - (SECOND PAGE) )OOOOI $71,665 )00()( $60,881 ~ $78,563 $49,480 )O(l00( $104,748 c'H J GRAND'TOTAL\\.\"' )QOO(X $1~.335 xxxxx $1.~6.664 XXXiO\u0026lt;. ti.800.998' U,644,418 Xl(lOOj .$1,B\"S,784 =:@:,:ti(Jt@,f t=::it,\nt 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $1,537 $1 ,614 $1,676 $10,000 Other Objects Indirect Costs $67,647 $59,199 $74,121 $47,427 $91,920 Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs $12 $120 $120 Plant Services $2,455 $130 $1,935 $1,935 Reading $717 $63 $63 Science English $318 ($265) $194 $194 Special Education $528 $269 $516 $3TT $516 lOOOOO( lOOOOO( lOOOOO( lOOOOO( Total Line Items $71 ,665 $60,881 $78,563 $49,480 $104,748 f?i(fM)IP- \", .,.,  ,,., }'? tWH~ / 'J$.2~ U\\ J993\n.$4  \u0026lt; 19932$4 / \u0026lt; 1~:.\n.915 \u0026gt; 3rd Qtr. ADM or Pro]. 506.8 473.3 492.0 485.8 492.0 Total Costs $1,694,335 $1,656,664 $1,800,998 $1.~.418 $1,849,784 1994~~ 8uqget( P(QP()~{Qf~ ~  :~ , , \" $'t .. f~ Actual  . 9,2 .. ~  AcWal 9a .. 94 ewgQtao . Actual 94~ , aw0et~F MMlN Marmtt~Q01 . . . -\n:::~:: ::::-: ::\"!~ . F.t.E Salaries F.t.E Salartes r:.t.e Satartes Sll.larl8$ f,'t.E sa1arl8$ CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $62,204 1.0 $63,612 1.0 $64,256 $64,520 1.0 $64,256 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 3.0 $144,375 3.0 $143,289 3.0 $148,979 $148,979 3.0 $150,013 03 Specialists 3.8 $104,450 3.6 $102,810 3.6 $109,707 $111,283 3.6 $129,650 04 Counselors 3.0 $113,003 2.0 $71,228 3.0 $109,509 $69,852 3.0 $111,241 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $38,916 1.0 $39,713 1.0 $41,729 $41,729 1.0 $41,729 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Vocational 6.0 $197,824 5.6 $186,730 5.6 $208,475 $207,954 5.6 $214,772 10 Special Education 1.3 $45,481 1.3 $46,551 1.3 $49,016 $49,016 1.3 $49,958 11 Gifted 12 Classroom 47.0 $1,443,046 46.8 $1,370,771 46.8 $1,510,430 $1,424,850 46.8 $1,514,011 13 Substitutes $45,577 $34,413 $36,135 $71,832 $36,135 14 Other TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 66.1 $2,194,876 64.3 $2,059,117 65.3 $2,278,237 $2,190,015 65.3 $2,311,765 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 3.0 $49,774 4.0 $65,214 4.0 $67,206 $66,063 4.0 $67,206 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $30,687 1.0 $31,416 1.0 $32,045 $32,359 1.0 $32,359 17 Custodians 6.0 $67,050 6.0 $68,427 6.0 $71,195 $68,890 6.0 $69,490 18 Paraprofesslonals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 1.0 $30,787 1.0 $21,650 1.0 $22,947 $24,845 1.0 $25,656 20 Other-Aides 3.5 $48,626 3.5 $46,693 2.4 $37,142 $42,951 2.4 $35,982 21 Fringe Beneflts(20) xx,ooc $275,853 iXXXXJC $292,062 XXJOOC $296,293 $266,922 lOOOOC $298,108 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 14.5 $502,777 15.5 $525,462 14.4 $526,829 $502,030 14.4 $528,801 TOTAL (10-20) [XXXit.\"! $2,697,653 )()000( $2,584,578 [~ $2,805,067 $2,692,045 )OO(l()c $2,840,566 PURCHASED ~ Utilities XXJOOi $164,666 !lOOC\u0026gt;O! $137,280 XXiOOI $168,6e7 $162,874 lOOOOC $177,221 SERVICES 23 Travel )(X)OQC iOOoo $11,214 xxxxx $11,438 $1,266 lOOCXX $10,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements XXXla )(X)()(X XX)Q(X XXlOOC ~ Other ~ $48,887 lC:ioocx $35,-464 l(X)0(X $36,175 $34,819 )l)CX)OC $27,300 TOTAL(30) IXXlOOC $213,554 booooc $183,959 l0000c $216,280 $198,959 XXlOOI $214,521 MATERIALS, ~ Prlnclpal's Office )0000 Xl000C IX)(lOO( lOOOOI SUPPLIES 127 Regular Classroom IXXlOOC $76,512 IX\u0026gt;OOOC $63,984 !)0000( $65,265 $79,331 loooo $49,168 (40) 128 Media l0000I $10,301 )0000( $9,352 XXX)() $9,540 $9,547 )(XXlOI $15,700 ~ Other XXlOoc lxxxxx $2,172 XXiOO $2,215 $2,923 iOOOO( $4,000 TOTAL(40) IXiOocc $86,813 IXXlOOC $75,508 \u0026gt;000CC $77,020 $91,801 ,ooooc $68,868 CAPITAL 00 Equipment 1)()()()0 $26,417 i)(X)OOI $17,579 XXXl0I $17,930 $15,510 ~ $27,300 OlJTt.AY ~1 Building Repair, etc. )0000( XX)OQ )(XlO(X )l)000( (50) 32 Other llOOOOc )00,cJoc !XXlOOC IOOOOC TOTAL(50) IXXXXll $26,417 )Q000C $17,579 !XXJCOC $17,930 $15,510 .)000()( $27,300 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees X)(X)OI $1,'70 KXlC)0C $1,377 llOOCOC $1,405 $1,764 ,ooc\n,o: $4,500 (60) 134 Olh81' lllXX\u0026gt;OC XXlOO IXXlOOC l0tXlOt TOTAL(60) IXXXlOC $1,470 XXXlOI $1,377 IXXXXX $1,405 $1,764 lOOOOC $4,500 TOTAL (30-60) IXlOOOC $328,253 lCDOO( $278,422 xxxxx $312,635 $308,034 lOOOOC $315,189 TOTAL(10-60) 80.6 $3,025,906 79.8 $2,863,000 79.7 $3,117,702 $3,000,079 79.7 $3,155,755 TOTAL LINE IT :MS - (SECOND PAGE) xxxxx $143,218 xxxxx $137,573 lOOOOC $172,083 $109,678 liooooc $205,272 GRA\"NOTOTAL xxxxx 13169.124 XDDDI $3,000.,573 lOOOOC SS.289/185 .:J.109.757 xxxxx $3,361,027 1994-95 Stipends $4,378 $4,600 $4,530 $4,600 Other Objects Indirect Costs $114,098 $104,172 $132,153 $80,835 $165,342 Vocational $13,141 $14,932 $16,000 $8,890 $16,000 Athletics $9,202 $13,857 $14,500 $14,777 $14,500 Gifted Programs Plant Services $4,141 $229 $3,450 $3,450 Reading $1,209 $115 $115 Science English $537 ($467) $345 $345 Special Education $890 $473 $920 $646 $920 lOOOOO( lOOOOO( lOOOOO( lOOOOO( Total Line Items $143,218 $137,573 $172,083 $109,678 $205,272 3rd Qtr. ADM or Prcj. 858.0 836.3 875.0 827.8 885.0 Total Costs $3,169,124 $3,000,573 $3,289,785 $3,109,757 $3,361,027 re-t-IM\u0026gt;U ,,VW V  AiJ8.Jm.C. .  $:,,$If '\"'\"\"l~,'7 .,  , $3,?Sr  iJ~.~ i~~~U:~~,tgtfiflli!Ili!!~1IiFt::\" $'btJ1 /Ac.wal. 92 .... ~  Ai.Wal: $$~~  f3tJQg~tad ' \u0026lt; Aal./ (M.,,\nm ::r3woet1K1 F.T.e Salaries F.T.e Salaries r.T.E  Salaries\"'  satarl8$ ~it.ft? $alar1es: CERTIFIED 01 Prlnclpal 1.0 $61,371 1.0 $62,517 1.0 $64,582 $64,582 1.0 $65,747 STAFF 02 Asst. Prln. 3.0 $150,132 3.0 $119,256 3.0 $152,394 $152,394 3.0 $153,428 03 Speclallsts 9.8 $276,600 9.8 $221,882 9.8 $283,232 $301,371 9.8 $311,985 04 Counselors 3.0 $132,577 3.0 $118,446 3.0 $123,123 $124,940 3.0 $129,966 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $33,037 1.0 $33,013 1.0 $34,026 $34,026 1.0 $34,026 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Vocational 8.0 $309,449 7.0 $302,605 7.0 $283,945 $276,023 7.0 $268,642 10 Special Education 1.2 $46,596 1.2 $51,899 1.5 $63,868 $53,457 1.5 $53,457 11 Gifted 12 Classroom 41.2 $1,398,826 39.6 $1,370,962 39.6 $1,393,800 $1,371,266 39.6 $1,529,341 13 Substitutes $42,409 $49,179 $51,640 $45,634 $51,640 14 Other-Klndergarten 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $40,670 $40,670 1.0 $40,670 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 69.2 $2,490,483 66.6 $2,369,244 66.9 $2,491,279 $2,464,363 66.9 $2,638,902 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 7.0 $125,888 6.0 $123,490 6.0 $126,650 $143,706 6.0 $128,807 STAFF 16 Nurses 0.6 $18,560 0.6 $18,790 0.6 $19,227 $19,416 0.6 $19,415 17 Custodians 8.0 $104,587 8.0 $113,791 8.0 $119,039 $120,368 8.0 $119,819 18 Paraprofesslonals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofesslonals-Other 4.0 $77,316 5.0 $122,263 5.0 $134,692 $97,365 5.0 $113,507 20 Other-Aides 2.0 $23,127 2.0 $14,005 2.0 $30,125 $11,308 2.0 $22,493 21 Fringe Beneflts(20) 1)0()00( $321,375 llOOOCX $346,012 )0000( $335,564 $313,946 l\u0026gt;OOOCX $347,835 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 21.6 $670,853 21.6 $738,351 21.6 $765,297 $706,109 21.6 $751,876 TOTAL (10-20) :ooooc $3,161,336 XXlOO( $3,107,595 XXlOOC $3,256,576 $3,170,472 ,cx)()OI $3,390,778 PURCHASED 22 Utilities ,ooooc $208,483 XXlOOI $179,513 xxiooc $185,462 $213,303 xiOci\u0026lt;X $183,100 SERVICES 23 Travel l0000I X)OOO(' i)(l()(l()C $1,310 )OOOOC $1,500 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements XXXJOc IOOOOI :,ooocx XXXX)j 25 Other XX)Q0 $39,092 l)(lOOCX $18,792 0000 $19,170 $40,933 XXioo( $14,750 TOTAL(30) xxxxx $247,575 i6oooi $198,305 ccm $204,632 $255,546 XXiooi $199,350 MATERIALS, 26 Prlnclpal's Office )()()00( .lOCXlOi [)IIOO( XlOOOI SUPPLIES ~ Regular Classroom )000()( $87,767 \u0026gt;0000( $92,439 ocooc $94,288 $74,513 !0000 $98,173 (40) ~8 Media )0000( $16,883 .)()()00( $13,753 lOOOO( $14,028 $5,415 IOOOOI $7,642 129 Other :0000 !XXJOOI $3,136 ooocxx $3,200 $6,336 )OO(lQ $6,100 TOTAL(40) XlOOOI $104,650 ixiooo: $109,327 lioooo $111,516 $86,264 l0000C $111,915 CAPITAL l30 E.Quipment )(X)00I $37,950 il000CI $23,092 IOOOC $23,554 $11,086 )(Xl00C $16,000 OUTLAY ~1 Building Repair, etc. )(l()(iQ l(X)O()( ioooc )0000( (50) ~ Other lOOOCX iXlOOOC oooooc ~ TOTAL(50) l000CI $37,950 iXlOOOC $23,092 llOOOOC $23,554 $11,086 lOOOO( $16,000 OTHER 133 Dues and Fees )OOOQI $3,496 ilOOOOC $5,809 IXXXX- $5,925 $4,675 ~ $5,000 (60) 134 Other 1)0000( :ax'iOc XXlOO( ilcx\u0026gt;ooi TOTAL(60) !)C)QC)Q $3,496 lxxx'loc $5,809 llOOC()( $5,925 S-.,675 XXXXlC $5,000 TOTAL (30-60) i\u0026gt;OQCOC $393,671 l)(X)QOC $336,534 ix\nxxxx $345,627 $357,571 llOOOO( $332,265 TOTAL (10-60) 90.8 $3,555,007 88.2 $3,444,128 88.5 $3,602,203 $3,528,043 88.5 $3,723,043 TOTALLINEn EMS - (SECOND PAGE) XX\u0026gt;OO( $158,509 )00()()( $135,955 XX\u0026gt;OO( $167,720 $101,049 .XXX\u0026gt;O( $201,123 GRANO TOTAL  XXXlO( 13,713,516 l0000( 13.580.083 l0000( 13,769,923 43.629,092 Xl00cX ~924,166 l1il1ru1~1ll::~ill!l::\n~ll!lll:llli!II! ~==\n~=~\n=,,,, ,,,,,,\n~=\n::\n=== ~=:\n::=,,.,,,,.,,  ~=\n:~  ~=\n::=: Stipends $1,353 $1,425 $2,519 $1,425 Other Objects Indirect Costs $112,135 $105,548 $131,007 $75,743 $164,410 Vocational $17,696 $14,932 $16,000 $8,332 $16,000 Athletics $22,029 $13,884 $14,500 $13,850 $14,500 Gifted Programs Plant Services $4,071 $232 $3,420 $3,420 Reading $1,182 $114 $114 Science English $520 ($473) $342 $342 Special Education $876 $479 $912 $605 $912 xxxxxx lOOOOO( xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $158,509 $135,955 $167,720 $101,049 $201 ,123 3rd atr. ADM or Proj. 837.6 848.3 870.0 ns.3 880.0 Total Costs $3,713,516 $3,580,083 $3,769,923 $3,629,092 $3,924,166 Donna Grady Creer Executive Director October 24, 1994 Magnet Review Committee 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 Ms. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Brown: (501) 758-0156 or.r 2 t1 1994 As a part of the agenda for its October 11, 1994 meeting, the Magnet Review Committee {MRC) re-examined the 1994-95 budget submitted to the Court on June 1, 1994. This budget issue was placed on the agenda in light of recent enrollment developments in the interdistrict magnet schools program. A calculation of the number of students enrolled as of October 1, 1994, and the number of students projected for 1994-95, shows a discrepancy of approximately 300 students. This fact may determine changes in the 1994-95 budget submission. At the MRC' s October 11, 1994 meeting, Mark Milhollen, LRSD Controller, told the MRC that he is requesting a printout of all 1994-95 FTE positions in each interdistrict magnet school. He will plug this information into the budget and present this updated information to the MRC at a special-called meeting to be announced. (The MRC intended to address this at their October 25, 1994 meeting. Due to the recent fire at Chicot and attendant insurance and school plant-related activities, Mr. Milhollen has been unable to complete this information.) This presentation by Mr. Milhollen may underscore the need for additional Per Pupil Expenditure due to a lower enrollment than was projected in the initial budget. We will apprise you. of the information we receive and the outcome of our discussion as soon as possible. If you have questions, comments or concerns, please contact our office. BA/DGC:sl . . . Magnet Review Committee 1900 orth Main Street Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 Donna Grady Creer Executive Director (50 1) 756 0156 June 1, 1994 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U. S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas U. S. Post Office and Courthouse P.O. Box 3316 Little Rock, AR 72203 Dear Judge Wright: JUN 6 1994 Ollice of De greg \\ion Morntoi 1ng At its May 24, 1994 meeting, the Magnet Review Committee, by formal motion and unanimous 6-0 vote, approved the interdistrict magnet schools budget for the six original magnet schools for the 1994-95 school year (Draft 2). The total amount budgeted, $14,952,534, is based on a per pupil expenditure of $3,901 per student and a projected third-quarter enrollment of 3,833 students. In addition, a basic step or incremental increase in staff salaries and associated fringe benefits, as well as the effects of early retirement incentives, were factored in. On May 17, 1994, Mark Milhollen, Manager of Support Services, Little Rock School District, came before the Magnet Review Committee with a presentation of Draft 1 of the interdistrict magnet schools budget for the 1994-95 school year. He explained the cost calculations to the Magnet Review Committee, and made any corrections that were deemed necessary. At this same meeting, each of the interdistrict magnet school principals (with the exception of the Gibbs principal) provided information with regard to their school's proposed budget and answered questions from the Magnet Review Committee members. After this meeting, the Magnet Review Committee representatives presented the proposed budget information to their parties in order to be prepared to vote on it at the May 24, 1994 Magnet Review Committee meeting. As noted above, the Magnet Review Committee did approve the budget at the meeting of May 24, 1994 (Draft 2 which contained any corrections from Draft 1). This approved budget represents an increase of 2.04%, or $78.00 per student. The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- June 1, 1994 Factors which may require a further adjustment in the interdistrict magnet school program budget for the 1994-95 school year include the following: 1) The Professional Negotiated Agreement (PNA) between Little Rock School District CTA and the Little Rock School District Board is in the renegotiation process, which may impact projected salary figures\n2) The State's contribution to employees' health insurance funding is not yet determined. When this information is forthcoming, revisions may be necessary to the figures represented in this budget. It is the intention of the Magnet Review Committee, therefore, to submit this budget with the recognition that some flexibility may be necessary. The Magnet Review Committee respectfully requests the Court's review and approval of the 1994-95 interdistrict magnet schools budget attached herewith. The Magnet Review Committee is committed to maintaining the existing quality of the interdistrict magnet schools. We will continue to work with the host district as we exercise stringent oversight of the magnet schools budget in an effort to achieve and ensure efficient management and cost containment to the greatest extent possible. Sincerely, ~J/:t~f:m, ~hairperson Magnet Review Committee BA/DGC:sl Attnchment: 1994-95 Interdistrict Magnet School Budget (Approved Draft 2) The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -3- June 1, 1994 cc: Attorneys of Record Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation Monitoring Bobby Lester, Pulaski County Special School District James Smith, North Little Rock School District Gene Wilhoit, Arkansas Department of Education Dr. Henry Williams, Little Rock School District Magnet Review Committee 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) 1991-9 1992-9: 1993-94 1994-9: SUMMARY FOR MAGNE:T SCHOOLS F.T.S. Actual F.T,S, Actual F.T.S. Budget F.T.E. Budget CERTIFIED 01 Principal 6.0 $346,537 6.0 $357,193 6.0 $367,176 6.0 $370,669 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 10.0 $456,057 10.0 $438,462 10.0 $479,729 10.0 $478,891 03 Specialists 37.4 $1,274,519 37.2 $1,078,799 39.2 $1,207,341 39.2 $1,290,162 04 Counselors 12.4 $444,641 10.4 $356,314 12.4 $431,093 12.4 \"'is7,554 05 Media Spec. 6.5 $218,210 6.5 $222,455 6.5 $233,751 6.5 $238,592 06 Art-Perl.IP rod. 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 07 Music 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang. 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 14.0 $507,273 12.6 $489,335 12.6 $492,420 12.6 $483,414 10 Special Education 7.8 $248,275 7.8 $245,166 7.7 $276,790 7.7 $285,726 11 Gifted 5.0 $163,550 5.0 $159,822 5.4 $174,623 5.4 $191,740 12 Classroom 181 .4 $5,308,868 177.6 $5,354,901 175.9 $5,689,340 175.9 $5 316,001 13 Substitutes 0.0 $153,813 0.0 $147,417 0.0 $154,925 0.0 $154,925 14 Other-Kindergarten 14.0 $407,561 14.0 $426,571 14.0 $448,634 14.0 $457,467 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 294.5 $9,529,304 287.1 $9,276,435 289.7 $9,955,822 289.7 $10,225,141 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 18.0 $301,141 19.0 $355,081 19.0 $353,310 19.0  335,238 STAFF 16 Nurses 5.4 $148,859 5.4 $148,996 5.4 $154 ,424 5.4 $159,150 17 Custodians 28.5 $346,330 28.5 $335,694 28.5 $372,625 28.5 $375,432 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 5.0 $108,1 03 6.0 $143,913 6.0 $157,639 6.0 $139,163 20 Other-Aides 39.5 $316,035 39.5 $256,806 37.0 $311,683 37.0 $292,027 21 Fringe Benefits(20) XXXXlCXX $1,254,324 xxxxxxx $1,366,607 )()Q()()()()\u0026lt;. $1,342,873 xxxxxxx $1,383,030 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 96.4 $2,474,792 98.4 $2,607,097 95.9 $2,692,554 95.9 $2,684,040 TOTAL (10-20) )OOC)(JOO( $12,004,096 XlOOOOO( $11,883,532 XlOOOOO( $12,648,376 xxxxxxx $12 909,181 PURCHASED 22 Utilities xxxxxxx $601,780 xxxxxxx $507,373 xxxxxxx $598,926 XXXXlOO(' $619,066 SERVICES 23 Travel XlOOOOO( XXXJOOO(' $33,980 XXXJOOO(' $36,215 xxxxxxx $33,907 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements lOOOOOCX lOOOOOO( lOOOOOCX lOOOOOCX 25 Other X)()OO()(X $166,508 X)()OO()(X $92,772 lOOOOOO( $94,428 xxxxxxx -$74,-250 TOTAL (30) xxxxxxx $768,288 .lOOOOOO( $634,125 lOOOOOO( $729,569 lOOOOOO( : 727,223 MATERIALS, 26 Principal's Office XXlOOCXX XXlOOCXX lOOOOOO( xxxxxxx SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom XlOOOOO( $343,433 xxxxxxx $309,128 XlOOOOO( $315 ,284 xxxxxxx $302,337 (40) 28 Media  XlOOOOO( $56,509 XlOOOOO( $53,842 XlOOOOO( $54,884 xxxxxxx $57,242 29 Other XXXXlOOC XXXXlOO( $11,647 XXXXlOO( $11 ,856 XXXXlOO(' $19,510 TOTAL (40) XXXXlOOC $399,942 X\u0026gt;0000CX $374,617 XXXXlOO( $382,024 XlOOOOO( $379,089 CAPITAL 30 Equipment lOOOOOCX $111,824 lOOOOOCX $106,283 lOOOOOCX $104 ,215 lOOOOO(X $93,646 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( xxxxxxx (50) 32 Other .lOOOOOO( .lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( TOTAL(50) xxxxxxx $111,824 XXlOOCXX $106,283 XXlOOCXX $104,215 lOOOOCXX $93,646 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees )O()()(X)()( $8,358 XlOOOOO( $12,416 XXXXlOO( $12,665 xxxxxxx $15,655 (60) 34.Other XlOOOOO( xxxxxxx xxxxxxx )()0()000( TOTAL(60) xxxxxxx $8,358 xxxxxxx $12,416 xxxxxxx $12,665 xxxxxxx $15,655 - TOTAL (30-60) xxxxxxx $1 ,288,412 X\u0026gt;0000CX $1,127,441 XlOOOOO( $1,228,473 XlOOOOO(' Sl ,215,613 TOTAL (10-60) 390.9 $13,292,508 385.5 $13,010,969 385.6 S 13,876,849 385.6 $14,124,794 TOTAL LINE ITE\nMS - (SECOND PAGE) xxxxxxx $595,333 xxxxxxx $537,465 lOOOOOO( $677,821 xxxxxxx $827,741 GRANDTOTAL lOOOOCXX $13,887,841 lOOOOCXX $13,548,434 lOOOOCXX $14,554 ,670 lOOOOCXX $14,952,534 Line ltemCosts - /' \u0026lt; \"'' 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $19,871 $20,739 $29,125 Other Objects Indirect Costs $503,365 $458,905 $574,582 $716,116 Vocational $30,837 $29,864 $32,000 $32,000 Athletics $31,231 $27,741 $29,000 $29,000 Gifted Programs $51 $500 $500 Plant Services $18,271 $1,009 $15,000 $15,000 Reading $5,334 $500 $500 Science English $2,368 ($2,058) $1,500 $1,500 Special Education $3,927 $2,082 $4,000 $4,000 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $595,333 $537,465 $677,821 $827,741 Per Pupil Cost 1991-92 1992-93 '1993-94 1994-95 3rd Otr. ADM or Proj. 3771.8 3679.6 3807.0 3833.0 Tota l Costs $13,887,841 $13,548,434 $14,554,670 $14,952,534 Par Pupil Cost $3,682 $3,682 $3,823 $3,901 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) 1991-9 Actual 1992-9~ Actual 1993-9~ Budgeted 1994-9 Budgeted Booker Magnet School F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salarles F.T.E. Salarles F.T.E. Salaries CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $47,031 1.0 $52,699 1.0 $54,600 1.0 $55,764 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 1.0 $54,526 1.0 $51,060 1.0 $52,003 1.0 $52,103 03 Specialists 6.0 $350,341 7.0 $239,870 7.0 $243,791 7.0 $254,900 04 Counselors 2.0 $64,859 1.4 $35,997 2.0 $57,602 2.0 $65,200 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $34,336 1.0 $35,134 1.0 $37,012 1.0 $'17,836 - 06 Art-Pert ./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Classroom 31 .2 $751,321 30.2 $926,604 30.2 $937,841 30.2 $963,879 1 O Special Education 1.3 $48,425 1.3 $49,377 1.3 $51,124 1.3 $64,015 11 Gifted 1.0 $33,463 1.0 $34,242 1.0 $36,073 1.0 $36,876 12 Chapter 1 13 Substitutes $22,649 $17,757 $20,000 [20,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 4.0 $109,481 4.0 $110,916 4.0 $120,022 4.0 $1~ TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 48.5 $1,516,432 47,9 $1,553,656 48.5 $1,610,068 48.5 $1,673,807 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 2.0 $30,738 2.0 $30,341 2.0 $31,441 2.0 $31,932 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $24,976 1.0 $25,725 1.0 $27,035 1.0 $211,104 - 17 Custodians 4.0 $44,176 4.0 $42,176 4.0 $47,081 4.0 S52,400 18 Paraprolessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 8.0 $72,860 8.0 $64,657 7.0 $75,718 7.0 $62,731 21 Fringe Benefits(20) XlOOOOCX $201,247 )000000( $225,867 XlOOOOCX $215,438 JOOOOOO( $222,697 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 15.0 $373,998 15.0 $388,766 14.0 $396,712 14.0 $397,864 TOTAL (10-20) xxxxxxx $1,890,430 )()()0000( $1,942,422 lOOOOOO( $2,006,780 )()()OO(XX $2,071,671 PURCHASED 22 Utilities xxxxxxx $81,637 JOOOOCXX $71,492 JOOOOCXX $87,854 JOOOOCXX ~34.115 SERVICES 23 Travel XlOOOOO( .lOOOOOO( $4,654 JOOOOCXX $5,000 xxxxx:x:x. $5,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements XlOOOOO( )0()0000( )0()0000( xxxxxxx 25 Other )0000()()( $27,963 XXlOOOO( $4,895 xxxxxxx $4,800 xxxxxxx $9,500 TOTAL (30) JOOOOOO(' $109,600 JOOOOOO(' $81,041 JOOOOOO(' $97,654 xxxxxxx $98,615 ' MATERIALS, 26 Principal's Office JOOOOOO(' JOOOOOO(' xxxxxxx )00()()()()( SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom lOOCOOO( $53,613 lOOCOOO( $37,774 lOOCOOO( $38,500 lOOOOOQ( S34,900 I (40) 28 Media lOOOOOO( $4,698 lOOOOOO( $4,743 lOOOOOO( $4,800 xxx:x:xxx $4,800 29 Other .lOOOOOO( JOOOOCXX $1,255 JOOOOCXX $1,255 xxx:x:xxx $1,255 TOTAL (40) XXXlOOO( $58,311 XXXlOOO( $43,772 XXXlOOO( $44,555 xxxxxxx $40,955 CAPITAL 30 Equipment XXXXlOOC $6,377 xxxxxxx $10,090 XXXXlOOC $6,100 lOOOOOO( $6,000 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. XXlOOOO( XXlOOOO( XlOOOOO( XXlOOOO( (50) 32 Other XlOOOOOC JOOOOOO(' JOOOOOO(' lOOOOOO( TOTAL (50) JOOOOOO(' $6,377 JOOOOOO(' $10,090 JOOOOOO(' $6,100 lOOOOOO( $6,000 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees lOOOOOO( lOOOOOCX lOOOOOCX lOOOOOO( (60) 34 Other lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( TOTAL(60) JOOOOCXX JOOOOCXX JOOOOCXX xxxxxxx TOTAL (30-60) .lOOOOOO( $174,288 XXXlOOO( $134,903 .lOOOOOO( $148,309 .lOOOOOO( $145,570 TOTAL (10-60) 63.5 $2,064,717 62.9 $2,077,325 62.5 $2,155,089 62.5 $2 2-, ',241 TOTAL LINE ltEMS- (SECOND PAGE) xxxxxxx $88,028 xxxxxxx $75,446 xxxxxxx $99,618 xxxxxxx $122,300 GRAND TOTAL JOOOOOO(' $2,152,746 XlOOOOCX $2,152.771 xxxxxxx $2,254,707 xxxxxxx $2,339,540 Une Item Costs - .. 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends Other Objects Indirect Costs $83,087 $75,260 $95,955 $118,637 Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs $16 $155 $155 Plant Services $3,016 $166 $2,505 $2,505 Reading $883 $84 $84 Science English $394 ($337) $251 $251 Special Education $648 $341 $668 $668 xxxxxx )()()0()()( xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $88,028 $75,446 $99,618 $122,300 Par Pupll Cost 1991-92 i992-93 1993-94 1994-95 3rd Otr. ADM or Proj. 629.1 604.4 635.0 635.0 Total Costs $2,152,746 $2,152,771 $2,254,707 $2,339,540 Per Pupil Cost $3,422 $3,562 $3.,551 $3,684 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) 1991-9: Actual 1992-0C Actual 1993-94 Budgeted 1994-9:: Budgeted Carver Magnet School F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $56,292 1.0 $57,676 1.0 $59,423 1.0 $60,587 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 1.0 $31,328 1.0 $32,092 1.0 $42,422 1.0 $43,417 03 Specialists 7.0 $218,361 7.0 $212,014 8.0 $236,265 8.0 $251,547 04 Counselors 2.0 $55,232 1.6 $50,547 2.0 $60,101 2.0 SL2,i91 05 Media Spec. 1.5 $42,474 1.5 $43,532 1.5 $46,074 1.5 $48,443 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Classroom 24.0 $600,670 23.0 $572,789 24.3 $690,189 24.3 $674,007 1 O Special Education 1.0 $27,907 1.0 $30,734 1.0 $32,460 1.0 $33,805 11 Gifted 1.0 $31,689 1.0 $32,469 1.4 $34,246 1.4 $48-,954 12 Chapter 1 13 Substitutes $22,695 $16,814 $17,150 $17,150 14 Other-Kindergarten 4.0 $96,411 4.0 $116,101 4.0 $117,132 4.0 $120,344 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 42.5 $1,183,059 41.1 $1,164,768 44.2 $1,335,462 44.2 $1,161,045 -- SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 3.0 $51,207 3.0 $65,657 3.0 $67,824 3.0 S:,4,572 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $28,927 1.0 $29,857 1.0 $31,250 1.0 $32,359 17 Custodians 4.0 $41,338 4.0 $34,361 4.0 $42,645 4.0 $42,467 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 11.0 $81,337 11.0 $71,921 11.0  $76,016 11.0 $91,426 21 Fringe Benefits(20) JOOOOOO( $167,825 xx:xxx:xx $190,533 XlOOOOO( $192,561 XlOOOOO( $203,173 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 19.0 $370,634 19.0 $392,329 19.0 $410,297 19.0 $421-,997 TOTAL (10-20) lOOOOOO( $1,553,693 XJOOOO()( $1,557,097 lOOOOOO( $1,745,758 xxxxxxx $1,785,042 PURCHASEC 22 Utilities xxxxxx:x $68,924 xxxxxxx $53,586 xxxxxxx $69,730 XJOOOCXX $75,965 SERVICES 23 Travel XlOOOOO(. XlOOOCXX $12,253 XlOOOOO( $12,500 XXXXJO()( $9,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements .lOOOOOO( .lOOOOOO( xxxxx:xx xxxxxxx 25 Other :xxxxxxx $22,843 :xxxxxxx $9,911 xxxxxxx $10,100 xxxxxxx  1 1\\ 700 -- TOTAL (30) xxxxxxx $91,767 xxxxxxx $75,750 )000000( $92,330 xxxxxxx S95,665 MATERIALS, 26 Principal's Office JOOOOOO( JOOOOOCX xxxxxxx xxxxxxx SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom xxxxxxx $55,638 x:xxxxxx $52,759 lOOOOOCX $53,814 lOOOOOO( $63,330 (40) 28 Media xxxxxxx $11,410 lOOOOOO( $13,271 xxxxxxx $13,536 xx.xxxxx $11,500 29 Other xxxxxxx lOOOOCXX $2,593 lOOOOCXX $2,645 xx:xxxxx $3,500 TOTAL (40) xxxxxxx $67,048 xxxxxxx $68,623 lOOOOCXX $69,995 XXXXJO()( $78,330 CAPITAL 30 Equipment xxxxxxx $22,128 xxxxxxx $27,894 XXXXlOO( $28,450 lOOOOOO( $19,000 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx - (50) 32 Other xxxxxxx xxxxxxx XJOOOOO( XJOOOOO( TOTAL (50) 1000000( $22,128 1000000( $27,894 1000000( $28,450 xxxxxxx $19,000 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees lOOOOOO( $2,857 lOOOOOO( $3,908 xxxxxxx $3,985 lOOOOOO( $3,000 (60) 34 Other XlOOOO()( xxxxxxx lOOOOQO( xxxxxxx TOTAL (60) xxxxxxx $2,857 lOOOCXXX $3,908 lOOOOOO( $3,985 xxxxxxx ~1-.)0-0 TOTAL (30-60) xxxxxxx $183,800 lOOOOCXX $176,174 xxxxxxx $194,760 xxxxxxx $195,995 TOTAL (10-60) 61 .5 $1,737,493 60.1 $1 ,733,271 63.2 $1,940,518 63.2 $1,981,037 TOTAL LINE 11 EMS - (SECOND PAGE) xxxxxxx $84,978 xxxxxxx $86,058 xxxxxxx $107,945 xxxxxxx $131,114 GRAND TOTAL xxxxxxx $1,822,471 xxxxxxx $1,819,329 XlOOOOO( $2,048,463 XlOOOOO( $2,112,151 Upe lte~n Costs-. )  ...........   ......................... \u0026gt; )  1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $12,453 $13,100 $13,100 Other Objects Indirect Costs $80,209 $73,425 $91,358 $114,527 Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs $15 $145 $145 Plant Services $2,912 $162 $2,385 $2,385 Reading $852 $82 $82 Science English $380 ($329) $239 $239 Special Education $625 $333 $636 $636 xxxxxx xxxxxx )0()()()()( xxxxxx Total Line Items $84,978 $86,058 $107,945 $131,114 Per PupH Cost 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 3rd Otr. ADM or Proj. 600.4 588.3 605.0 613.0 Total Costs $1,822,471 $1,819,329 $2,048,463 $2,112,151 Per Pupil cost $3,036 $3,092 $3,386 $3,446 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) 1991-9 Actual 1992-9'. Actual 1993-~ Budgeted 1994-9~ Budgeted Gibbs Magnet School F.T.E. Salaries F,T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $55,462 1.0 $56,515 1.0 $59,234 1.0 $59,234 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 1.0 $39,856 1.0 $55,922 1.0 $45,000 1.0 $39.9-65 03 Specialists 5.8 $160,327 5.8 $160,752 5.8 $158,107 5.8 $ 2,699 04 Counselors 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $40,670 1.0 $40,670 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $35,695 1.0 $36,471 1.0 $38,433 1.0 $39,257 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Classroom 17.0 $476,468 17.0 $482,159 15.0 $507,851 15.0 $466,921 10 Special Education 1.5 $47,975 1.5 $53,235 1.5 $52,530 1.5 $'\u0026gt;~ 11 Gifted 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $35 ,493 1.0 $33,443 1.0 $J4,246 12 Chapter 1 13 Substitutes $10,081 $13,666 $14,000 $14,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 2.0 $56,577 2.0 $52,144 2.0 $57,974 2.0 $59,580 -- TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 31 .3 $961,411 31 .3 $985,841 29.3 $1 ,007,242 29.3 $, 2,468 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 1.0 $12,498 2.0 $27,701 1.4 $21,942 1.4 $22,613 STAFF 16 Nurses 0.8 $14,585 0.8 $11,304 0.8 $11,530 0.8 $12,446 17 Custodians 3.0 $41,043 3.0 $33,776 3.0 $39,012 3.0 $39,803 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 6.0 $45,537 6.0 $26,782 5.6 $37,697 5.6 $33,799 21 Fringe Benetits(20) XX)()(lOO( $129,439 XlOOOOO( $141,032 XXXXlOO( $136,618 xxxxxxx $1'l4-,836 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 10.8 $243,102 11 .8 $240,594 10.8 $246,798 10.8 $243,497 TOTAL {10-20) xxxxxxx $1,204,513 lOOOOOO( $1,226,435 lOOOOOO( $1,254,041 xxxxxxx $1,215,965 PURCHASED 22 Utilities XJOOOOO( $35,102 xxxxxxx $26,879 xxxxxxx $38,531 )()()(XX)()( $41,385 SERVICES 23 Travel XJOOOOO( XJOOOOO( $2,066 xxxxxxx $3,407 )()()(XX)()( $3,407 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements xxxxxxx XXlOOOO( xx:xxxxx xxxxxxx 25 Other xxxxxxx $11,464 xxxxxxx $7,309 xxxxxxx: $7,455 xxxxxxx '-14,000 TOTAL (30) XlOOOOO( $46,566 XlOOOOO( $36,254 XlOOOOO( $49,393 XXXXlOO( $48,792 MATERIALS, 26 Principal's Oflice JOOOOOO( XlOOOOO( xxxxxxx xxxxxxx SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom xxxxxxx $25,426 lOOOOOO( $23,541 )00()(}()0( $24,012 xxxxxxx $25,068 {40) 28 Media xxxxxxx $6,241 lOQOOOO( $6,489 xxxxxxx $6,620 iXXXXXXX $6,600 29 Other lOO(XX)()( xxxxxxx $1,016 xxxxxxx $1,036 xxxxxxx $2,455 TOTAL(40) lOOOOOO( $31,667 XJOOOOO( $31,046 XJOOOOO( $31,668 XJOOOOO( $34,123 CAPITAL 30 Equipment xxxxxxx $3,968 xxxxx:xx $2,594 .xxxxxxx $2,646 xxxxxxx 2-,646 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx (50) 32 Other XlOOOOO( XlOOOOO( xxxxxxx xxxxxxx TOTAL (50) xx:xxxxx $3,968 XlOOOOO( $2,594 xxxxxxx $2,646 XlOOOOO( $2,646 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees JOOOOO()( lOOOOOO( $1,132 xxxxxxx $1,155 )O(X)()O()( $1 ,155 (60) 34 Other lOOOOOO( lOQOOOO( lOOOOOO( xxxxxxx - TOTAL (60) lOOOOOO( $0 XXXlOOCX $1,132 XJOOOOO( $1,155 'xxxxxxx S1, 155 TOTAL (30-60) XJOOOOO( $82,202 XJOOOOC( $71 ,025 XJOOOOO( $84,862 XJOOOOO( $86,716 TOTAL (10-60) 42.1 $1,286,715 43.1 $1 ,297,460 40.1 $1,338,903 40.1 $1,302,681 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) xxxxxxx $48,935 xxxxxxx $41 ,553 xxxxxxx $51,892 XXlOOOO( $63,184 GRAND TOTAL xxxxxxx $1,335,649 xxxxxxx $1,339,013 xxxxxxx $1,390,795 xx:xxxxx $1,365,865 Line Item .Costs .. - \"' . ,,.,:}::/\\ .-\n-:-:-:-.. .-:\n-\n, ,\n:\n-_._. .?\\}\\ '\"\"' / \"'\"'? ., 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $150 Other Objects Indirect Costs $46,189 $41,301 $49,988 $61,280 Vocational Athletics Gifted Programs $8 $80 $80 Plant Services $1,676 $91 $1,305 $1,305 Reading $491 $42 $42 Science English $219 ($185) $129 $129 Special Education $360 $187 $348 $348 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $48,935 $41,553 $51,892 $63,184 Per Pupif Cost 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 3rd Otr. ADM or Proj. 339.6 329.0 330.0 328.0 Total Costs $1,335,649 $1,339,013 $1,390,795 $1 ,365,865 Per Pupil Cost  ,. $3,933 $4,070 $4,214 $4,164 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) 1991-9~ Actual 1992-9' Actual 1993-94 Budgeted 1994-95 Budgeted MANN Magnet Schoel F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $62,204 1.0 $63,612 1.0 $64,256 1.0 $6t,256 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 3.0 $144,375 3.0 - $143,289 3.0 $148,979 3.0 S 150,013 03 Specialists 3.8 $104,450 3.6 $102,810 3.6 $109,707 3.6 $129,650 04 Counselors 3.0 $113,003 2.0 $71,228 3.0 $109,509 3.0 $111,241 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $38,916 1.0 $39,713 1.0 $41 ,729 1.0 $41,729 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Vocational 6.0 $197,824 5.6 $186,730 5.6 $208,475 5.6 $:'1 4,772 10 Special Education 1.3 $45,481 1.3 $46,551 1.3 $49,016 1.3 $49,958 11 Gifted 12 Classroom 47.0 $1,443,046 46.8 $1,370,771 46.8 $1,510,430 46.8 $1,514,011 13 Substitutes $45,577 $34,413 $36,135 $36,135 14 Other -- TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 66.1 $2,194,876 64.3 $2,059,117 65.3 $2,278,237 65.3 $2,311,765 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 3.0 $49,774 4.0 $65,214 4.0 $67,206 4.0 $67,206 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $30,687 1.0 $31,416 1.0 $32,045 1.0 $32,359 17 Custodians 6.0 $67,050 6.0 $68,427 6.0 $71,195 6.0 $69,490 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 1.0 $30,787 1.0 $21,650 1.0 $22,947 1.0 $25,656 20 Other-Aides 3.5 $48,626 3.5 $46,693 2.4- $37,142 2.4 , 35,982 21 Fringe Benefits(20) XlOOOOO{ $275,853 lOOOOOCX $292,062 xx:x:xxxx $296,293 XlOOOOO{ $298,108 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 14.5 $502,777 15.5 $525,462 14.4 $526,829 14.4 $528,801 TOTAL (10-20) )000000( $2,697,653 )()00000( $2,584,578 xxxxxxx $2,805,067 xxxxxxx S2,840,566 PURCHASED 22 Utilities XlOOQOO( $164,666 XlOOQOO( $137,280 xxxxxx:x: $168,667 xxxxxxx $177,221 SERVICES 23 Travel xx:xxxxx XlOOQOO( $11,214 xx:xxxxx $11,438 xx:xxxxx  1 J,000 - (30) 24 Ma,ntenance Agreements lOOOOOOC lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( 25 Other xxxxxxx $48,887 xxxxxxx $35,464 xxxxxxx S36,175 xx:xxxxx $27,300 TOTAL (30) x:xxxxxx $213,554 lOOOOOCX $183,959 XXXlOOO( $216,280 lOOOOOCX $214,521 MATERIALS, 26 Principal's Office xxxxx:x:x lOOOOOCX xxxxx:x:x XJOOOOO( SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom x:xxxxxx $76,512 )000000( $63,984 XXXXJOO( S65,265 xxxxxxx $49,168 (40) 28 Media xxxxxxx $10,301 xxxxxxx $9,352 xxxxx:xx $9,540 xxxxxxx $15,700 29 Other xxxxxxx xxxxxxx $2,172 xxxxxx:x: $2,215 XlOOQOO( $4,000 TOTAL (40) xxxxxxx $86,813 xxxxxxx $75,508 xxxxxxx $77,020 xx:xx:x:xx :C68,868 CAPITAL 30 Equipment lCXXXXXX $26,417 lOOOOOO( $17,579 xxxxxxx S.17,930 lOOOOOO( $27,300 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. lOOOOOCX xxxxxxx lOOOOOCX x:xxxxxx (50) 32 Other lOOOOOCX lOOOOOCX lOOOOOCX xxxxxxx TOTAL (50) xxxxxxx $26,417 XlOOOOO( $17,579 XJOOOOO( $17,930 XlOOOOO( $27,300 -- OTHER 33 Dues and Fees )()()()000( $1,470 xxxxxxx $1,377 xxxxx:xx $1,405 XXlOOOO( -i,soo (60) 34 Other XXlOOOO( XXlOOOO( xxxxxxx xxxxxxx TOTAL (60) xxxxxxx $1,470 XlOOQOO( $1,377 XXX)()O()( $1,405 xx:xxxxx $4,500 TOTAL (30-60) XlOOQOO( $328,253 XlOOQOO( $278,422 xx:xxxxx $312,635 JOOOOO()( $315,189 TOTAL (10-60) 80.6 $3,025,906 79.8 $2,863,000 79.7 $3,117,702 79.7 $3,155,755 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) xxxxxxx $143,218 xxxxxxx $137,573 xxxxxxx $172,083 xxxxxxx $205,272 GRAND TOTAL lOOOOOCX $3,169,124 lOOOOOCX $3,000,573 lOOOOOCX $3,289,785 x:xxxxxx $3,361,027 Une Item Cost,i :c ..)\\.-:-: .  . ) . -:-: .,. :- ,. \u0026gt; ::.:)\"':_. -\"' :,/\" :\n:\n.:,:/:\\:\n./ ... i':,::::\n:\n::/,\\/ :::: }':\\ \\)' 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $4,378 $4,600 $4,600 Other Objects Indirect Costs $114,098 $104,172 $132,153 $165,342 Vocational $13,141 $14,932 $16,000 $16,000 Athletics $9,202 $13,857 $14,500 $14,500 Gifted Programs Plant Services $4,141 $229 $3,450 $3,450 Reading $1,209 $115 $115 Science English $537 ($467) $345 $345 Special Education $890 $473 $920 $920 )()()()()0( )()()()()0( xxxxxx )()()()()0( Total Line Items $143,218 $137,573 $172,083 $205,272 Per Pupil Cost 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 858.0 836.3 875.0 885.0 Total Costs $3,169,124 $3,000,573 $3,289,785 $3,361 ,027 Per Pupil Cost  $3,694 $3,588 $3,760 $3,798 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) 1991-9~ Actual 1992-9j Actual 1993-9~ Budgeted 1994-95 B \" J,ted Parkvlew Magnet School F.T.E. Salaries F.T.E:. Salaries F,T.E. Salaries F.T.E:. Salaries CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $61,371 1.0 $62,517 1.0 $64,582 1.0 $65,747 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 3.0 $150,132 3.0 $119,256 3.0 S152,394 3.0 $153.428 03 Specialists 9.8 $276,600 9.8 $221,882 9.8 $283,232 9.8 $311,985 04 Counselors 3.0 $132,577 3.0 $118,446 3.0 $123,123 3.0 $129,966 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $33,037 1.0 $33,013 1.0 $34,026 1.0 $34,026 06 Art- Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Vocation al 8.0 $309,449 7.0 $302,605 7.0 $283,945 7.0 $268,642 10 Special Education 1.2 $46,596 1.2 $51,899 1.5 $63,868 1.5 $53,457 11 Gifted 12 Classroom 41.2 $1,398,826 39.6 $1,370,962 39.6 $1,393,800 39.6 $ 2J,341 - 13 Substitutes $42,409 $49,179 $51,640 $51,640 14 Other-Kindergarten 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $39,485 1.0 $40,670 1.0 $40,670 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 69.2 $2,490,483 66.6 $2,369,244 66.9 $2,491,279 66.9 $2,638,902 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 7.0 $125,888 6.0 $123,490 6.0 $126,650 6.0 $128,807 STAFF 16 Nurses 0.6 $18,560 0.6 $18,790 0.6 $19,227 0.6 $19,415 17 Custodians 8.0 $104,587 8.0 $113,791 8.0 $119,039 8.0 $1-19,819 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 4.0 $77,316 5.0 $122,263 5.0 $134,692 5.0 $113,507 20 Other-Aides 2.0 $23,127 2.0 $14,005 2.0 $30,125 2.0 $22,493 21 Fringe Benefits(20) XlOOOOO( $321,375 xxxxxxx $346,012 XlOOOOO( $335,564 lOOOOOO( $347,835 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 21.6 $670,853 21.6 $738,351 21.6 $765,297 21.6 $751-,876 TOTAL (10-20) xxxxxxx $3,161,336 xxxxxxx $3,107,595 xxxxxxx $3,256,576 xxxxxxx S~ J),778 - PURCHASED 22 Utilities xxxxxxx $208,483 XlOOOOO( $179,513 xxxxxxx $185,462 xxxxxxx $183,100 SERVICES 23 Travel XlOOOOCX XlOOOOO( xxxxxxx )()()()()(JO( $1,500 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements XlOOOOO( lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( )()()()()()0( 25 Other xxxxxxx $39,092 xxxxxxx $18,792 xxxxxxx $19,170 xxxxxxx $14,750 TOTAL (30) xxxx.xxx. $247,575 lOOOOOCX $198,305 xxxx.xxx. $204,632 xxxxxxx. $199,350 MATERIALS, 26 Principal's Office lOOOCXXX XlOOOOO( lOOOCXXX xxxxxxx SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom XlOOOCXX $87,767 xxxxxxx $92,439 )000000( $94,288 xxxxxxx $98,173 (40) 128 Media xxxxxxx $16,883 xxxxxxx $13,753 XXXXXlOC $14,028 xxxxxxx $7,642 29 Other xxxxxxx xxxxxxx $3,136 xxxxxxx $3,200 xxxxxxx $6,100 TOTAL (40) xxxxxxx $104,650 XlOOOOO( $109,327 XlOOOOO( $111,516 xxxxxxx $111,915 CAPITAL 30 Equipment xxxxxxx $37,950 lOOOOO()( $23,092 lOOOOO()( $23,554 xxxxxxx $16,000 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. xxxxxxx xxx:xxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx - (50) 32 Other lOOOOOCX XJOOOO(X lOOOOOCX xxxxxxx TOTAL (50) XlOOOOO( $37,950 XJOOOO(X $23,092 lOOOOOCX $23,554 lOOOOOCX $16,000 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees xxxxxxx $3,496 XXXXJOOC $5,809 xxxxxxx $5,925 XXXXlCXX $5,000 (60) 34 Other xxxxxxx xxxxxxx XXXXJOO( xxxxxxx TOTAL (60) XlOOOOO( $3,496 XlOOOOO( $5,809 XXXJOOCX $5,925 XlOOOOO( $5,000 TOTAL (30-60) XlOOOOO( $393,671 xxxxxxx $336,534 lOOOOO(X $345,627 lOOOOO(X $332,265 TOTAL (10-60) 90.8 $3,555,007 88.2 $3,444,128 88.5 $3,602,203 88.5 $3,723,043 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) xxxxxxx $158,509 lOOOOOO( $135,955 xxxxxxx $167,720 xxxxxxx $2~1,123 GRANO TOTAL lOOOOOCX $3,713,516 xx:xxxxx $3,580,083 lOOOOOCX $3,769,923 lOOOOOCX $3,~24,166 L)ri:ifh_efu\\C\u0026amp;\n,.,,:,,ii:ii,it:::::::::\ni\n::::: Ii,,-- ,:,:,,,,,,,,,,':'\\i'''''''''\"''''' 1:::::::::=:::::::::::::::::::,,-:,,:,:-:::::::::: \"''''''\"  .,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, \"'''''\"' \"''\"''''''\"''\"'\"\n:\n::::,:.:.:,,:,::-:,\n,:,:-:,\n,,:.:,:,:,:   1991-92 1992 93 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $1,353 $1,425 $1,425 Other Objects Indirect Costs $112,135 $105,548 $131,007 $164,410 Vocational $17,696 $14,932 $16,000 $16,000 Athletics $22,029 $13,884 $14,500 $14,500 Gifted Programs Plant Services $4,071 $232 $3,420 $3,420 Reading $1,182 $114 $114 Science English $520 ($473) $342 $342 Special Education $876 $479 $912 $912 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $158,509 $135,955 $167,720 $201,123 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 837.6 848.3 870.0 880.0 Total Costs $3,713,516 $3,580,083 $3,769,923 $3,924,166 \"Raf PUpiLC6sG:\\ : \u0026gt; :$4~49\np : l $4/420{ t :,~ ~ ~a~at : : $4A59} 1994-95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) 1991-9 Actual 1992-9~ Actual 1993-9 Budgeted 1994-9~ Budg\u0026lt;:ted Willlams Magnet School F.T.E. Salaries F,T.E. Salaries F,T,E. Salaries F.T.E. Salaries CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $64,177 1.0 $64,174 1.0 $65,081 1.0 $65,081 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 1.0 $35,840 1.0 $36,843 1.0 $38,931 1.0 $39,965 03 Specialists 5.0 $164,440 4.0 $141,471 5.0 $176,239 5.0 $179,381 04 Counselors 1.4 $39,485 1.4 $40,611 1.4 $40,088 1.4 $47,686 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $33,752 1.0 $34,592 1.0 $36,477 1.0 $37,301 06 Art-Perf./Prod. - 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Classroom 21.0 $638,535 21.0 $631,616 20.0 $649,229 20.0 $667,841 1 O Special Education 1.5 $31,891 1.5 $13,370 1. 1 $27,792 1.1 $28,595 11 Gifted 2.0 $58,913 2.0 $57,618 2.0 $70,861 2.0 s-'1 C64 -- 12 Chapter 1 13 Substitutes $10,402 $15,588 $16,000 $16,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 3.0 $105,607 3.0 $107,925 3.0 $112,836 3.0 $113,639 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALAR 36.9 $1,183,042 35.9 $1,143,808 35.5 $1,233,533 35.5 $1,267,153 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 2.0 $31,036 2.0 $42,678 2.6 $38,247 2.6 $30,108 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $31,124 1.0 $31,904 1.0 $33,337 1.0 $34,467 17 Custodians 3.5 $48,136 3.5 $43,163 3.5 $53,653 3.5 s5 453 - 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 9.0 $44,548 9.0 $32,748 9.0 $54,985 9.0 $45,596 21 Fringe Benefits(20) .lOOOOOO( $158,584 xxxxxxx $171,101 .lOOOOOO( $166,399 XJOOOOO( $176,381 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 15.5 $313,428 15.5 $321,594 16.1 $346,621 16.1 $31 n.co5 - TOTAL (10-20) xxxxxxx $1,496,470 xxxxxxx $1,465,402 xxxxxxx $1,580,155 xxxxxxx $1,605,158 PURCHASEC 22 Utilities XXlOOOCX $42,968 xxxxxxx $38,623 xxxx:xxx $48,682 xxxxxxx $57,280 SERVICES 23 Travel XXXXlOO( XlOOOOO( $3,793 JOOOOOO( $3,870 JOOOCXXX $5,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements lOOOOOCX )00()()00( )00()()00( lOOOOOCX 25 Other lOOOOOCX $16,259 lOOOOOO( $16,400 xxxxxxx $16,728 xxxxxxx $8,000 TOTAL(30) XlOOOOCX $59,227 XlOOOOCX $58,816 xxxxxxx $69,280 XlOOOOO( $70,280 MATERIALS, 26 Principal's Office xxxxxxx XlOOOOO( XlOOOOO( i lOOOOOO( - SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom xxxxxxx $44,477 XXlOOOO( $38,631 lOOOOOO( $39,405 XXXXlOO( $3\" ,698 (40) 28 Media xxxxxxx $6,976 xxxxxxx $6,234 XXlOOOO( $6,360 xxxxxxx $11,000 29 Other xxxx:xxx XXlOOOCX $1,475 xxxx:xxx $1,505 xxxxxxx $2,200 TOTAL (40) xxxx:xxx $51,454 JOOOOOO( $46,341 JOOOOOO( $47,270 XXXXXlO( $44,898 CAPITAL 30 Equipment xxxxxxx $14,984 )00()()00( $25,034 )00()()00( $25,535 xxxxxxx $22,7-00 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. :000000: :000000: :000000: xxxxxxx - (50) 32 Other XlOOOOCX lOOOOOO( xxxxxxx xx:xxxxx TOTAL (50) xxx:xx:xx $14,984 lOOOOOO( $25,034 xxxxxxx S25,535 lxxxxxxx $22,700 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees xxxxxxx $535 XXXXlOO( $190 xxxxxxx $195 xxxxxxx $2,000 (60) 34 Other xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx TOTAL (60) xxxx:xxx $535 XXlOOOCX $190 xxxx:xxx $195 lOOOOOCX' $2,000 TOTAL (30-60) XXlOOOCX $126,200 XXlOOOCX $130,381 xxxx:xxx $142,280 lOOOOOO( $139,878 TOTAL (10-60) 52.4 $1,622,669 51.4 $1,595,783 51.6 $1,722,435 51.6 $1,745,036 TOTAL LINE I EMS - (SECOND PAGE) :000000: $71,665 :000000: $60,881 :000000: $78,563 xxxxxxx $10,:.,748 GRAND TOTAL lOOOOOCX $1,694,335 lOOOOOCX $1,656,664 XlOOOOCX $1,800,998 XXXlOOO( $1,849,784 Line Item Costs - Ji .,. .:c .:::::::-::::::: I ,.,ec.,.,.,., ... ,.ce,, /,:, ..  1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Stipends $1,537 $1,614 $10,000 Other Objects Indirect Costs $67,647 $59,199 $74,121 $91,920 Vocation al Athletics Gifted Programs $12 $120 $120 Plant Services $2,455 $130 $1,935 $1,935 Reading $717 $63 $63 Science English $318 ($265) $194 $194 Special Education $528 $269 $516 $516 xxxxxx xxxxxx )()()(JOO( xxxxxx Total Line Items $71,665 $60,881 $78,563 $104,748 Per PupH Cost 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 3rd Otr. ADM or Proj. 506.8 473.3 492.0 492.0 Total Costs $1,694,335 $1,656,664 $1,800,998 $1,849,784 Per Pupil Cost $3,343 $3,500 $3,661 $3,760 TAKE ONE TEL No .1-501-37 4- 37 12 Jun 2 ,94 16 : 07 No. 008 P. 03 STAFF lN-St~RVICE PLAN WILLIAMS MAGNET SCHOOL 1994-95 Five in-service sessions have been planned for the William's Magnet School Staff for the 1994-9.5 school year. Two of these sessions center around the effective and efficient use of the computers that have been purchased for use within the school\ntwo sessions emphasize the proper use of the newly adopted reading series\nand one session focuses on the analysis of Stanford-8 tests and the formulation of proper goals addressing areas of concern. A tentative plan for the in-service hours and the objectives to be reached i'\u0026gt; summarized below: ElRST SEMESTER IN-SERVICE: 1. Basic Computer Literacy: Objective: This in-service will be a practical work session to tram all certified staff on the proper use of the IBM Computers. (Six IBM Computers have been purchased for the 1994-95 school year, three were purchased for the 1993-94 school year, and three were purchased for the 1992-93 school year.) Staff members will learn the basfo DOS commands, how to format and copy disks, basic troubleshooting techniques, appropriate use of the printers.and will preview appropriate software for their particular grade level. Fall of 1994 In-service hours required: 3-6 40 participants@ $54.03/person Total cost: $2,161.20 2. Reading Tertbook In-Service: OJ:tj5\u0026lt;ctive: The staff will become familiar with the Harcourt-Drace-Jovanovich Reading Series that has been adopted for the 1994-95 school year. Sample lessons will be demonstrated featuring whole group and small group techniques. Teachers will be presented a model lesson pl.an designed specifically for the new reading seri~ and will be givm the opportunity to construct model plans for each grade l~l (This was done for the previous reading series and was a specific r~uest for any new adoption.) Fall of 1994 In-service hours required: 3-6 40 participants $54.03/person Total cost: $2,161.20 TAKE ONE fi TEL No.1-501-374-3712 Jun 2,94 16:07 No.00B P.02 Magnet Review Comm.ittee 1900 North Main Stl'C'ct  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 Donna Grady Cre6r Ex .. cutlve Director TO: FROM: THRU: SUBJ: DATE: Bob Morgan Office of Desegregation Monitoring Donna Grady Cree~ Magnet Review Committee Dr. Bobby Altom, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee Response to Questions Regarding the 1994-95 Interdistrict Magnet Schools Budget June 1, 1994 (501) 758-0156 By this memo, I am forwarding the responses to your questions regarding the interdistrict magnet schools 1994-95 budget as per our recent telephone conversation. 1. What is the indirect cost rate for each school? The indirect cost rate is calculated by the Arkansas Department of Education, Administrative Services Federal Finance Division, L. J. Wesley, Coordinator. According to Mark Milhollen, Manager of Support Services, LRSD, the indirect cost rate is the same for each school in the district. As indicated on the budget, the indirect cost rate for the 1994-95 school year is 5.03%, 2, Why the change in the FTB's from 1993-94 to 1994-95? LRSD's Support Services Office counted bodies for the 1993-94 school year, rather than actual FTE's. Careful study was given to this year's submission to accurately delineate the FTE's for each staff area. 3. Explain the change in Williams Magnet stipend line item. See attached. DGC:sl Attachment I i I 1989-1990 Projected ADM 4123 Actual ADM 3757 Difference ADM -366 Budgeted Per Pupil $ 3,100.00 Actual Per Pupil $ 3,099.68 Total Budget $12,781 ,300.00 Total Reimbursement $11 ,645,491 .00 Difference $ (1 ,135,809.00) Actual Expenditure ITrue Per Pupil??? $ 3,402.00 Magnet School Budgets and Per Pupil Expenditure 1991-1992 1992-1993 1993-1994 3741 .29 3878 3807 3771.8 3679.6 3570.54 30.51 -198.4 -236.46 $3,682.00 $3,682.00 $3,823.00 $ 3,682.02 $ 3,682.04 $ 3,823 .00 $13,775,416.00 $14,278,796.00 $14,554,670.00 $13,887,841 .00 $13,548,434.00 $13,650,174.00 $ 112,425.00 $ (730,362.00) $ (904,496.00) $ 3,652.21 $ 3,880.53 $ 4,076.32 MAG9495.XLS 1994-1995 3833 3529 -304 $3,901.00 $14,952,534.00 $13,766,629.00 $ (1,185,905.00) $ 4,237.05 I ~equested -- Asof9/6 u, ... :.u: :n.tn*:u  ttt , * * * n,*::tt. ** * ***** *n:u:.:\n,::i *-** * U]n:i:t:~ :u:. *** nu :u .. ru::t ******* * * P.01 *  TRANSACTION REPORT DATE START c::\n~,r 'R ..., ..... IL r_ RX TIME PAGES OCT-28-94 FRI 15:03 TfPt NOTE * * * .t ---------------------------------------- * '( n(T-?8 14:58 so. -~ I 24cG J' tp\" 6 RE ~EI',~ ,._,.., L. I I J. . - 'JK t +. i~ i ' 0 . .n.tp:fHh\"! 1Hd t' '.f- 10 28 : 9-! 15:02 '5'501 iil 2420 .U!ERIC HO)!E LIFE CI\\Y. i 5Ul/771-2 '1 J.0 @001 $71- 0/CJO COMPANY Nl\\..'lli: ___ 0 ..,2) /Y7 _ _ FROM: DATE: -~ ~ d_Lr~r-~ .C~~ d~ .\n2..,\n/9'9 _~ -------------- / ------------- --- --- - ~------------------ ---- ----- ---- ---- -- 10 : 28 , 9-1 15:03 '5'501 iil 2-120 AMER IC HO)!E LI FE Magnet Review Committee 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 f4]002 Donna Crady Creer Execulive Director 1.so1 l 1se-01 se. October 2B, 1994 Ms. Ann Brown, Feceral Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. ~arkham. Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. B:rown: This letter comes to apprise you of information received from Mr. Mark Milhollen, Manager of Support Services, Little Rock School District, at an October 28, 1994 special-called meeting of the Magnet Review Committee. The meeting was held for the specific purpose of receiving this information from Little Rock School District (reference my letter to you dated October 24, 1994). A copy of the revised budget infor.mation (draft 3) is attached, as well as a copy of the budget which has been submitted to the Court for approval (draft 2). At this time, each representative will discuss the information received at this meeting with their party and the impact of the proposed changes to the budget. The Magnet Review Committee plans to vote on this issue at its ne~t meeting scheduled for November 14, 1994. If you have questions, comments or concerns, please contact our office. Sincerely, ffi#-\n~/~ Dr. Bobby Altom, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee BA/DGC:sl Attachments 10 .' 28 ,, 9\"1 15 : 03 '6'501 i71 2-!20 A)!ERIC H0)IE LIFE 141003 ll~1.~JWi,1glifM~E\u0026amp;~if.f'.g}i~ ~ t~:imii'iat-t~:l,,, ~-M$~WiJN.% ~~~,:~ ~i. ~~~\u0026amp;~ ~.Tif$i ffSiifa~(is~t-: FitJ\n\\ ~2~~r1M:\u0026lt;0 -=F sEiaiiiiifilL CERTIFIED 01 Principal 6.0 $346,537 6.0 $357,193 6.0 $367,176 $375,279 6.0 $34-0,086 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 10.0 $456,057 10.0 $438,462 10.0 $479,729 $433,972 10.0 $473,907 03 Specialists 37.4 $1,274,519 37.2 $1,078,799 39.2 $1,207,341 $1,211,895 39.2 $1,224,208 04 Counselors 12.4 $444,641 10.4 $356,314 12.4 $431,093 $405,435 12.4 $452,360 OS Media Spec. 6.5 $218,210 6.5 $222,455 6.5 $233,751 $224,104 6.5 S230,137 06 Art-Per1./Prod. 0.0 SO 0.0 $0 0,0 $0 $0 0.0 SO 07 MUSIC 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang. o.o so o.o so o.o $0 so o.o so 09 Vocational 14.0 SS07,273 12.6 $489,335 , 12.6 $492,420 $483,977 12.6 $404,921 10 Special Education 7.B $248,275 7.B $245,166 7.7 $276,790 $282,681 7.7 $263,527 11 Gifted 5.0 $163,550 5.0 $159,822 5.4 $174,623 $158,016 5.4 $189,153 12 Classroom 1B1 .4 SS,308,868 1n.s SS,354,901 175.9 SS,689,340 $5,377,867 175.9 $5,582,275 13 Substitutes 0.0 S153,B13 o.o S147.417 o.o $154,925 $182,975 0.0 $154,925 14 Other-Klndargarten 14.0 $407,561 14.0 $426,571 14.0 S44a,634 $448,552 14.0 $459,595 TOTAL CERTIFIED $Al.AR 294.S $9,529,304 287.1 $9,276,435 289. 7 $9,955,822 $9,584,753 289.7 $9,775,094 SUPPORT 15 Sacretarias 18.0 $301,141 19.0 f,355,081 19.0 $353,310 $360,333 19.0 $323,508 STAFF 16 Nurses 5.4 $148,659 5.4 $148,996 5.4 $154,424 $156,152 5 . .( $155,272 17 Custodians 28.5 $346,330 28.5 $335,694 28.5 $372,625 $360,957 28.5 $355,219 18 Paraproles.slonals-Chptr 1 0.0 SO 0.0 $0 0.0 SO 0.0 $0 19 Paraprofesslonals- Other 5.0 $108,103 6.0 $143,913 6.0 $157,639 $122,210 6.0 $13.2,853 20 Other-Aldas 39.S $316,035 39.5 $256,806 37.0 $311,683 $237,662 37.0 $270,749 .21 Fringe Benerits(20) ~ $1,254,324 ~ $1,366,607 hiocd $1,342,873 $1,213,301 ~ $1,282,054 TOTAL SUPPORT SALAA'I' 96.4 '2,474,792 98 . .( $2,607,097 95.9 $2,692,554 $2,450,615 95.9 $2,519,655 TOTAL (10-20) ~ $12,004,096 ~ S11,883,53.2 ~$12,648,376 $12,035,368 ~ $12,294,749 PURCHASE22 Utilities ~ $601 ,780 umi S.507,373 ~ $598,926 $598,876 ~- $619,066 SERVICES 23 Travel ~ - ~ , $33,980 ~ $31,215 $20,580 ~ $33,907 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements f~ !(Odcl' ~ ~ 25 Other ~ $166,508 ~ $92,772 ~ $99,428 $119,669 ~ - $74,250 ----.L..-.jr-~=\n-\n---\n:.-=:-- -...,.,.,.-+:,,.\n..\n.,--:::=~:-:--f....,.,.\n,\nr-~~-=-~~T\"-==='==:+~=~::--F~~--\"'.==\"=-~ TOTAL(30) mcioc( $768,288 ~ - $634,125 ~ $729,569 $739,125 XlClOboc $727,223 MATERIALS 26 Prlnclpal's Olllce i~ ~ ~ Xliooabc' SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom mime $343,433 ~ $309,128 ,oocido $315,284 $328,856 ~ (40) 28 Media )ClOObb( $56.509 ~ $53,842 mM $54,884 S34,2n ~ - 29 Other ~ iXXlOOdi $11,6\"7 lCixm $11,656 $18,873 l0Ctibi:li TOTAL (40) ~ $399,942 XlCDOOI $374,617 ~ $382,024 \u0026amp;382,006 ~ CAPITAL 30 Equipment ~ $111,624 ~ $106,263 -~ $104,215 $67,029 xxXl!Xi OUTLAY 31BulldlngRepalr, etc. ~ i~ ~ ~ (50) 32 Other ~ xnicoc ~ !~ $302,337 $57,242 $19,510 $379,089 TOTAL(S0) ~ $111,824 l00000I. $106,283 Xl0i:fu $104,215 $67,029 ~ S93,64S OTHER 33 Dues and Fees diem $8,358 ~ - $12,416 !xicn $12,665 $13,017 ~ $15,655 (60) 34 Other I~ ~ ~ ~ TOTAL (60) ~ $8,358 i~ $12,416 -ICliOOCOC $12,665 $13,017 ~ $15,655 TOTAL(30-60) iOOOOat $1 ,288,412 ~ $1 ,127,441 ~ $1,228,473 $1,201,177 l00000t: $1,215,613 TOT!.L(10-60) 390.9 $13,292,508 385.5 $13,010,969 385.6 $13,876,849 $13,236,545 385.6 $13,510,362 TOTAL LINE_ TEMS - (SECOND PAGE) llbCXa: S595,333 Xl0r.l00\u0026lt; $537,465 l0000CX $677,821 $413,629 ~ $796,728 E~n\\fGRAN01'0'.fAC~f=i~\u0026gt; :mm iJUST~S.11 113..548~' ~ $'iA~,610~ Stl!,$0/114t ,oooocx ~1~.W.09Qi 10 128 19-1 15 : 05 '5'501 771 2-120 1\\JIERIC HOME LIFE @00-1 '. . 1\n11:2110 :mt,1'8!'~~:~i J@~~-'s:\nl ~@. ~.\" :~~~( ~tit!JHNf.ff,~i!t - Actual Actual Budget Actual Budget Stipends $19,671 $20,739 S16,269 $29,125 Other Objects Indirect Costs $503,365 $458,905 $574,582 $348,726 $685,103 Vocational $30,837 $29,864 $32,000 $17,222 $32,000 Athletics $31,231 $27,741 $29,000 $28,627 $29,000 Gifted Programs $51 $500 $500 Plant Sel'\\licas $18,271 $1.009 $15,000 $15,000 Reading $5,334 $500 $500 Science Engllsh $2,368 ($2,058) $1,500 $1,500 Special Educallon $3,9V $2,082 $4,000 $2,785 $4,000 l00000( XXl000( xxxxxx. J00000( Total Line Items $595,333 $537,465 $877,821 $413,629 $796,728 10! 28 19-1 15:05 'fi'501 iil 2-120 A~!ERIC H(l)!E LIFE 1 si~~~~~!to~:,\n!~~~::$Qt{OOis\ne{'\ntif:T::\n:~~ ,/:~~1\n6 ~~~/ ~T::~\u0026lt;t \u0026lt;,i:~~~:93 SF, 6_0 $\n~r~~ f~'l\\!'.6' ,, -!=~:.~~~-,:1 ' S1AFF 102-Asst. Prin. I ,o.o $456 057 10.D $438,462 10.0 1 $479,729 10.0 $478,891 l03 Specialists I 37.4 1 $1,274.519 37.2 $1,078,799 39.2 $1,207,341 39.2 $1,290,162 1041Counselors 12.4 $444,641 10.4 $356,314 12.4 $431 ,093 12.4 , $457,554 1 05 Media Spec. 6.5 s2,a,210 6.5 $222,455 6.5 S233,751 6.5 $238,592 l06 Art-Perf./Prod. , o.o i so 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 \\ $0 ' '071Music I o.o so 1 0.0 SO 0.0 so o.o $0 I I08'Foreign Lar.g. 1 o.O / $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0  o.o $0 09,Vocational 14.0 $507,273 12.6 $489,335 12.6 . $492,420\n12.6 $483,414 I 10 Special Edvcat:on I 7.8 1 $248,275 7.8 $245,166 7.7 $276,790 I 7.7 $285,726 i 111 Gifted 5.0 $163,550 s.o $159,822 5.4 $174,623 5.4 $191,740 I 112 Classroom 181 .4 $5,308,868 177.6 $5,354,901 175.9 $5,689,340 175.9 $5,616,001 1 13 Substit,.,tas ' o.o $153,813 o o $147,417 0.0 $154,925 0.0 $154,925 114 Other-Kin1ergarten 14.0 $407,561 14.0 $426,571 14.0 $448,634 14.0 $457,467 I I I I TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 294.S $9,529,304 267.1 I $9,276,435 289. 7 $9,955,822 289.7 $10,225,141 I SUPPORT 115 Secretaries 18.0 $301,141 19.0 $355,081 19.0 $353,310 19.0 $335,238 STAFF i1 51Nvrses 5.4 $148,659 5,4 $148,996 5.4 $154,424 5.4 $159,150 , , 117 Custodians 28.S $346.330 i 28.5 $335,694 28 5 $372.625 28.S $375,432 I 118 Paraprofessiorals-Chptr 1 0.0 SO 0.0 SO 0.0 $0 I 0.0 $0 I 119 Paraprofessionals-Other 5.0 $108,103 6.0 $143,913 6.D $157,639 6.0 $139,163 1 120 Other-Aides 39.5 $316,035 39.5 $256,806 37.0 $311,683 37.0 S292,027 :21 Fringe Benetlts(20) ~ $1,254,324 ~I $1,366,607 ~- $1,342,873 ~ $1,383,030 I TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 96.4 $2,474,792 98.4 $2,607,097 95.9 $2,692,554 95.9 $2,664,040 I TOTAL (10-20) __ $12,004,096 '   $11,883,532 ~ S12,648,376 ~ $12,909,181 I PURCHASEDl221Utilities ~I $60~ .780 ~ $507,373 ~ $538,926 -~ $619,066 ! SERVICES 123 Travel :JOOOOOQ( ~ $33,980 ~ $36,215 'lOOOOCXX' $33,907 (30) 124 Maintenance Agreements ,~ :lOOCXXl()( ~. ~ I ,25 Other ~ $166,508 .~ $92,n2 ~ - S94,426 .ix\u0026gt;boool: $74,250 r----:-----c--,------TOTA\\_ (30) :lCX'OOOCX, $768 .268 -~ $634,125 JQDOOOb( $729,569 lOOOOOCX. $727,223 ! MATERIAL$, 126 Principal s Otlice OOOOOOO{j ~ ~ f}(X)OOOO(: I I I SUPPLIES l2?1 RegularCl\n,s.sroorr xx:xxxxxl 5343.433 $309,128 ~I $315,284 $302,337 j $57,242 $19,510 (40) 28 M6d:a ~ $56,509 $53,842 XlOO(lO(X $54,664 ~ CAPITAL OUTLAY (50) OTHER (60) 29 Other ~ ~ $11,647 :ipooocix $11,856 ~- TOTAL (40) ~menc j31 Building Aepalr, etc: ~ $399,942 XlOaXlOI' $374,617 ~ $382,024 XlOOOOCX -1-------'--'----f..XXXlOOCX..._.- ,\n-.--.-~. ,-.\n..c$1:.:1..:.1. :..:,8....c24 ' $~ 06,283 )ooaxx'x $104,215 'XXXX)()O! XlOOOOCX. l00CXXlOI ~ ~ 132 Other lQOOOPa' JOOQ000(. XlOOQOOC :ixxxxxx T01AL (SO) ~-- $111,824  $106,283 ' $104,215 133 Dues ancl Fees X)(X)CQQ( $8,358 ~ S 12.416 ~ $12,665 XXXXXlC( '34 Otrier xxxxxx,c xixxmc ~ XXXXXXX $379,089 $93,646 $93,646 $15,655 I t----c-T_O_T_A_L~(_60~) __lO O_!c _ o_CQC__,\nf-- $8,358 xxJixxxx S12,4'6 :JQOOOOO(: $12,665 $15,655 , ___T O_T_A_L_,_(3_0_-_60'-'-) __ ._,oo o-o-=o'-'o.,c_:~:...$1_2.:..:8:..::a.:..:.4..\n.1~ 2lO OQQOO $1,127,441 ~ $1,228,473 ')(XX)ClXX $1 ,215,613 TOTAL (1 0-60) 390.9 1S13,292.508 I. 3B5 5 $13,010,969 385.6 1$13,876,849 365.6 jS14,124,794 I TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) J000()()0( $595,333 X)OOOOO(' $537,465 )()0()0()0( / $677,821 .lOOOOQQCI $627,741 I_ G__ R _AN_D_T_O_'r_A_l _l, _lOOOOOOC___:\n.c...=C'-$-'-,1..:\n.3-'-',,~7.84, X'.X:IOCXXX $13,548,.:34 l000000( ~14~55 ,670 J)OcXlO(l(l( $14,952.534 I 15: 06 '5'501 7il 2-120 ,\\JIERIC HO)!E LIFE 141006 Line Hem Costs - I iSU~e~d$ .... , .. :11991-92 1992-93 11993-94 1994-95 I $19,871 $20,739 $29,125 ---  I0 tner Ob,ects I l l~d irsct Costs $503,365 ' $458,905 $574,582 $716,116 Voc.:atio11aI : $30.837 $29.a64 $32,000 $32,000 ~cs I $31 ,231 $27,741 $29,000 $29,000 IGi'ted Programs I ~5 1 $500 $500 Plant Servcos $18,271 $1,G09 i $15,000 $15,000 ~f::~\nn_g _ _ I $5,334 $500 $500 . !En\\,, Si\"\\ I $2,3681 ($2,058)1 $1,500 s, ,500 I Special Ecucat,ol' I s2,oe2 I $4,000 $4,000 I )0()000( - .,_,,, I I r XXlOCXX I I I - ---- XlCXXXX I I ~ta Lire Items ' I I I l ss9s 333 I ss37,t.55 I $677,821 t $827,741 I Pe( Pupiteost \n, '  . -l199l-92- :/  1992~.93 .jJ99.:-:SE /,:. }:S~8S, ,'.,\n-?! 3rd O:r. ADM or Pro1. I 3TT1 .8 3679 6 I 3807.0 3833.0 I Total Costs $13,887,841 $13,548.434 I $14,554,670 $14,952,534 I 1.Par Pupi l Cost '\" / l i . \" $3:\n682 ,.,:\n:\n::., . $S\n682J,~- .,. ,,\n:~ 1823 .\n\"''~:filSS,SQ~'l Magnet Review Committee 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 Donna Grady Creer Executive Director (501) 758-0156 October 28, 1994 Ms. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Brown: This letter comes to apprise you of information received from Mr. Mark Milhollen, Manager of Support Services, Little Rock School District, at an October 28, 1994 special-called meeting of the Magnet Review Committee. The meeting was held for the specific purpose of receiving this information from Little Rock School District (reference my letter to you dated October 24, 1994). A copy of the revised budget information (draft 3) is attached, as well as a copy of the budget which has been submitted to the Court for approval (draft 2). At this time, each representative will discuss the information received at this meeting with their party and the impact of the proposed changes to the budget. The Magnet Review Committee plans to vote on this issue at its next meeting scheduled for November 14, 1994. If you have questions, comments or concerns, please contact our office. Sincerely, ~ ~/,ot Dr. Bobby Altom, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee BA/DGC: sl Attachments - r, 'I CERTIFIED 01 Principal STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 03 Specialists 04 Counselors 05 Media Spec. 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Vocational 10 Special Education 11 Gifted 12 Classroom 13 Substitutes 14 Other-Kindergarten 6.0 $346,537 6.0 $357,193 6.0 $367,176 $375,279 6.0 $340,086 10.0 $456,057 10.0 $438,462 10.0 $479,729 $433,972 10.0 $473,907 37.4 $1,274,519 37.2 $1,078,799 39.2 $1,207,341 $1,211,895 39.2 $1,224,208 12.4 $444,641 10.4 $356,314 12.4 $431,093 $405,435 12.4 $452,360 6.5 $218,210 6.5 $222,455 6.5 $233,751 $224,104 6.5 $230,137 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 14.0 $507,273 12.6 $489,335 12.6 $492,420 $483,977 12.6 $404,921 7.8 $248,275 7.8 $245,166 7.7 $276,790 $282,681 7.7 $263,527 5.0 $163,550 5.0 $159,822 5.4 $174,623 $158,016 5.4 $189,153 181.4 $5,308,868 1TT.6 $5,354,901 175.9 $5,689,340 $5,377,867 175.9 , $5,582,275 0.0 $153,813 0.0 $147,417 0.0 $154,925 $182,975 0.0 $154,925 14.0 $407,561 14.0 $426,571 14.0 $448,634 $448,552 14.0 $459,595 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALAR 294.5 $9,529,304 287.1 $9,276,435 289.7 $9,955,822 $9,584,753 289.7 $9,TT5,094 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 18.0 $301,141 STAFF 16 Nurses 5.4 $148,859 17 Custodians 28.5 $346,330 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 o.o SO 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 5.0 $108,103 20 Other-Aides 39.5 $316,035 21 Fringe Benelits(20) ,xioclai $1,254,324 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 96.4 $2,474,792 TOTAL (10-20) ~ $12,004,096 PURCHASE 22 Utilities :~ $601,780 SERVICES 23 Travel ~ - (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements ~ 19.0 5.4 28.5 0.0 $355,081 $148,996 $335,694 $0 19.0 $353,310 5.4 $154,424 28.5 $372,625 0.0 6.0 $143,913 6.0 $157,639 39.5 $256,806 37.0 $311,683 lOOOOCX $1,366,607 lOOOOO(' $1,342,873 98.4 $2,607,097 95.9 $2,692,554 ~ -$11,883,532 ~ -$12,648,376 ~ $507,373 ~- $598,926 ~ $33,980 ~ $31,215 ~ - )t)(X)O(X 250ther ~ - $166,508 ~ $92,772 ~ - $99,428 TOTAL (30) xxiooa $768,288 xxioc:loc' $634,125 liXlCOOC $729,569 $360,333 $156,152 $360,957 $0 $122,210 $237,662 $1,213,301 $2,450,615 $12,035,368 $598,876 $20,580 19.0 $323,508 5.4 $155,272 28.5 $355,219 0.0 $0 6.0 $132,853 37.0 $270,749 )()()000(. $1,282,054 95.9 $2,519,655 ~ $12,294,749 ~ - $619,066 ~ $33,907 ~ - $119,669 ~ - $74,250 $739,125 xxiooa. $727,223 MATERIALS 26 Principal' s Office SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom -~ ~ i~ ~ ~ - $343,433 ~ . $309,128 !xxiX) $315,284 $328,856 ~ $302,337 (40) 28 Media ~ - $56,509 ~ - $53,842 i(x)()Oc)( $54,884 $34,277 ~ $57,242 29 Other ~ l(Xl00CX $11,647 XlOC00C $11,856 $18,873 :XX\u0026gt;OOOC $19,510 TOTAL (40) lOOOOa' $399,942 xiooooc $374,617 llOOOOCX $382,024 $382,006 l0000CX $379,089 CAPITAL 30 Equipment ~ $111,824 ~ $106,283 X)(X)O(X $104,215 $67,029 X)Cl0Q(X $93,646 OUTLAY c3~1~B~ui~ld~in-g~R~e-p-ai~r.-e~tc-.--r~0~~1~~,~r----T-!(X)OCO\u0026lt;--.,.......t----~~~~-oo-9~~t---'---t----'---t-a\u0026lt;x.~----,------'----, (50) 32 Other TOTAL(50) OTHER 33 Dues and Fees (60) 34 Other TOTAL(60) TOTAL (30-60) TOTAL (10-60) TOTAL LINE rrEMS - (SECOND PAGE) ........ ,.  GRANO. TOTAL.'\\/? XlOClCD $111,824 XXiCOa $106,283 liOOOOOC $104,215 $67,029 Xl!tXlOO{ $93,646 ~ $8,358 ~ $12,416 l(XlOOO( $12,665 $13,017 i)(X)OOO( $15,655 )a)OOO( ~ XX)00C)C iWOOcX, lOOOOOC $8,358 ,ooooa $12,416 lOOOCOC $12,665 $13,017 lOOOOOC $15,655 ~ - $1,288,412 Xl0000C $1,127,441 ~ $1,228,473 $1,201,177 lOOCCCX $1,215,613 390.9 $13,292,508 385.5 $13,010,969 385.6 $13,876,849 $13,236,545 385.6 $13,510,362 X)OOQ(X. $595,333 !XXX\u0026gt;.OO\u0026lt; $537,465 XXX)Oa $677,821 $413,629 )OO()O(X $796,728 \u0026gt;OOOOOC $1 UB7~Mf xxxxxx S13$.4B,434 XXlOOO( $14,554,670 S13,650, 174 lOOOOCX $14\n307,090 t!ntJJijrtf~~smmrnmrn :it:1~\naitt. mm+asnn Mfflf \u0026amp;Jttf rntiifflflltt rtiifflf 9$'Wi :fa:t\n:\nj\n\nt'.t:\n?ff}{ft:ff\n\\F Actual Actual Budget Actual Budget Stipends $19,871 $20,739 $16,269 $29,125 Other Objects Indirect Costs $503,365 $458,905 $574,582 $348,726 $685,103 Vocational $30,837 $29,864 $32,000 $17,222 $32,000 Athletics $31,231 $27,741 $29,000 $28,627 $29,000 Gifted Programs $51 $500 $500 Plant Services $18,271 $1,009 $15,000 $15,000 Reading $5,334 $500 $500 Science English $2,368 ($2,058) $1,500 $1,500 Special Education $3,927 $2,082 $4,000 $2,785 $4,000 )0()()()()( )0()()()()( )0()()()()( )0()()()()( Total Line Items $595,333 $537,465 $6TT,821 $413,629 $796,728 t~em1tC($trtmmtti. t19Qlf ~ar mm +$$itt rt1~+~ m::: 1m1~~+ mr1~ 9'-Mt 3rd Ctr. ADM or Proj. 3TT1 .8 3679.6 3807.0 3570.5 3530 Total Costs $13,887,841 $13,548,434 $14,554,670 $13,650,174 $14,307,090 ~ ~M~tJtMifMtm. itMlIJ\ntt$2/ lltit@f$3t  IltltW i~ m %MlN/$3t~ { rmrnrn~t~ i 19947 95 Budget Proposal (Draft 2) __ 1991-9, 1992-9~ 1993-9~ 1994-9~ SUMr,1AAY FOR MAGNETSCHOOLS )? F.T.E?/ . Actual - FaT:E\n/ \\?\u0026gt;Actual \"\"''-''' - F.TE . .. ,:: \\\n:\n,. Budget F,T.E. . ,,_ Budget I CERTIFIED 01 Principal 6.0 $346,537 6.0 $357,193 6.0 $367,176 6.0 $370,669 I I STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 10.0 $456,057 10.0 $438,462 10.0 $479,729 10.0 $478,891 I 03 Specialists 37.4 $1,274 ,519 37.2 $1,078,799 39.2 $1,207,341 39.2 $1,290,162 I 04 Counselors 12.4 $444,G41 10.4 $356,314 12.4 $431,093 12.4 $457,554 I I 05 Media Spec. 6.5 $21 8,210 6.5 $222,455 6.5 $233,751 6.5 $238,592 I 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0  $0 I I 07 Music 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang. 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0,0 $0  0.0 $0 09 Vocational 14.0 $507,273 12.6 $489,335 12.6 _ $492,420 12.6 $483,414 I 1 O Special Education 7.8 $248,275 7.8 $245,166 7.7 $276,790 7.7 $285,726 I 11 Gifted 5.0 $163,550 5.0 $159,822 5.4 $174,623 5.4 $191,740 I 12 Classroom 181 .4 $5,308,868 177.6 $5,354,901 175.9 $5,689,340 175.9 $5,816,001\n13 Substitutes 0.0 $153,813 0.0 $147,417 0.0 $154,925 0.0 $154,925 I 14 Other-Kindergarten 14.0 $407,561 14.0 $426,571 14.0 $448,634 14.0 $457,467 I TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 294.5 $9,529,304 287.1 $9,276,435 289.7 $9,955,822 289.7 $10,225,141 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 18.0 $30 1, 141 19.0 $355,081 19.0 $353,310 19,0 $335,238 STAFF 16 Nurses 5.4 $148,859 5.4 $148,996 5.4 $154,424 5.4 $159,150 ' 17 Custodians 28.5 $346, 330 28.5 $335,694 28.5 $372,625 28.5 $375,432 18 Paraprofessionals-Chptr 1 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 I 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 5.0 $108,1 03 6.0 $143,913 6.0 $157,639 6.0 $139,163 20 Other-Aides 39.5 $31 6,035 39.5 $256,806 37.0 $311,683 37.0 $292,027 I 21 Fringe Benefits(20) XXXXlOQ(: $1,254 ,324 XlOOOOO{ $1,366,607 .xx:xxxxx $1,342,873 xxxxxxx $1,383,030 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 96.4 $2,474,792 98.4 $2,607,097 95.9 $2,692,554 95.9 $2,684,040 I TOTAL (10-20) XXXXXl\u0026lt;X $12,004,096 xxxxxxx $11,883,532 xxxxxxx $12,648,376 XXlOOOCX $12,909,181 I PURCHASED 22 Utilities xxxxxxx $601,780 XlCXXXXX $507,373 xxxxxxx $598,926 xxxxxxx $619,066 SERVICES 23 Travel xx:xxxxx xxx:x:xxx $33,980 ')()00000( $36,215 ')0()0000(' $33,907 I (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements lOOOOOO( lOOOOOO( l()OOOOO( xxxxxxx I 25 Other l0000\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 Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\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_creator\u003eLittle Rock School District\u003c/dcterms_creator\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 "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1179","title":"Magnet Review Committee: Magnet school principal positions","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":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1994"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","School principals","School management and organization","Magnet schools","Parents' and teachers' associations"],"dcterms_title":["Magnet Review Committee: Magnet school principal positions"],"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/1179"],"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\nCorrespondence from Bobby Altom, chairman of the Magnet Review Committee to Ann S. Brown, federal monitor (July 21, 1994) with supportive material on how the Little Rock School District fills interdistict magnet school principal positions\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nMagnet Review Committee 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114  Donna Grady Creer Executive Director (501) 758-0156  July 21, 1994 Ms. Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: RECE. I~ JUL 2 2 1994 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Thank you for requesting information needed to address questions that have arisen regarding the Magnet Review Committee's role in the process Little Rock School District used to fill interdistrict magnet school principal positions for the 1994-95 school year. We have responded to each point to the best of our ability. The necessary documentation is attached and enumerated for easy reference. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. Sincerely, !3drty~ Dr. Bobby Altom, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee BA/DGC:sl Attachments 1. The date(s) the MRC reviewed the procedures the LRSD used in recommending staffing assignments for magnet school principal vacancies. (Ref: June 27, 1994 letter to the Court) The Magnet Review Committee held a special-called meeting on Thursday, May 12, 1994, for the purpose of discussing Little Rock School District's procedures used to recommend staff assignments for magnet school principal vacancies. 2. A list of the MRC members who participated in each review session. 3. All MRC members were present at the May 12, 1994 meeting: Dr. Bobby Altom, PCSSD - Chairperson Dana Chadwick, NLRSD Oliver Dillingham, ADE Marcia Harding, ADE Evelyn Jackson, Joshua lntervenors Estelle Matthis, LRSD Dana Chadwick, NLRSD, was absent from the June 27, 1994 meeting\nMarcia Harding, ADE, and Oliver Dillingham, ADE, were unavailable for the July 18, 1994 meeting. The minutes of all review sessions. The minutes of the meetings which addressed items mentioned in number 1 . above are attached as a part of this information packet. These meetings took place on May 12, 1 994, June 27, 1994 and July 18, 1994. 4. A copy of the procedures which were \"previously presented to the MRC with reference to original magnet school principal positions\n\" indicate the date the MRC received these procedures\nindicate the date they were disseminated to each Committee member. (Ref: June 27, 1994 letter to the Court) The procedures were discussed as a part of the May 12, 1994 and June 27, 1994 meetings. The written copy of these procedures was disseminated at MRC's July 18, 1 994 meeting and are attached as a part of this information packet. 5. 6. 7. The date(s) and names of MRC members who participated in identifying the \"appropriate action\" the MRC has determined it will take to ensure that the LRSD administration fulfills its obligation to follow the Court's Order for future staffing changes in the original magnet schools. Provide minutes of that meeting. (Ref: June 27, 1994 letter to the Court) The MRC held a special-called meeting on July 18, 1994 to discuss and formulate language which will guide the Little Rock School District and the Magnet Review Committee discussions regarding consultations on original magnet school vacancies. Members present at the July 18, 1994 meeting were: Dr. Bobby Altom, PCSSD - Chairperson Dana Chadwick, NLRSD Evelyn Jackson, Joshua lntervenors Estelle Matthis, LRSD The minutes from all other MRC meetings in which the principal selection process was considered in any way. Indicate those who were present at those meetings. The minutes are included as a part of this packet. The list of members present is a part of the minutes. The date(s) and copies of correspondence through which the MRC learned of each impending principal vacancy in a magnet school for the 1994-95 school year. The Little Rock School District customarily informs the Magnet Review Committee of magnet vacancies via job announcements placed in the MRC school mailbox at LRSD's Central Office. Copies of the job descriptions are attached. 8. For each of the following, a copy of the written information, the date that information was committed to writing, and the date it was disseminated to all Committee members: a. The written procedures that guide the MRC in relation to selection of principals of the magnet schools. copy attached - Interim Order Enforcing Mandate of Court of Appeals Date Committed to Writing: March 4, 1987 Date Disseminated: March 4, 1987 b. The written MRC policy or guidelines about using interview committees in selecting magnet school principals. copy attached - Interview Protocol and Selection of Applicants, School Principals Date Committed to Writing: June, 1994 Date Disseminated: July 18, 1994 c. The written annual timeline the MRC follows in relation to principal selections. No specific written timeline is followed\nhowever, notification of staff vacancies is noted at the annual review sessions for the interdistrict magnet schools budgets, which begin in March before each school year. d. Any written guidelines, suggestions, or criteria the MRC may have established regarding principal qualifications, characteristics, experience, or other criteria, especially as it relates to the individual theme, programmatic emphasis, or other unique aspects of the individual magnet school community at each of the magnet schools. copy attached - Court Order \"Stipulation for Proposed Order Concerning Magnet Review Committee\" Date Committed to Writing: September 3, 1986 Date Disseminated: September, 1986 copy attached - Court Order Regarding the Role of the Magnet Review Committee Date Committed to Writing: Date Disseminated: July 2, 1987 July, 1987 copy attached - Court Order Regarding MRC's Request to Court on Staffing Date Committed to Writing: November 5, 1992 Date Disseminated: November, 1992 9. Copies of any patron or staff letters the MRC has received regarding the most recent principal selection process. Patron/staff letters received by the MRC are attached and separated by school. MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES May 12, 1994 A spe~ial-called meeting of the Magnet Review Committee was held in the Magnet Review Committee Office, 1920 North Main Street, North Little Rock, Arkansas on Thursday May 12, 1994. 1 Members Present: Dr. Bobby Altom, PCSSD - Chairperson Dana Chadwick, NLRSD Oliver Dillingham, ADE Marcia Harding, ADE Evelyn Jackson, Joshua Intervenors Estelle Matthis, LRSD Dr. Altom opened the meeting at 8:40 a.m. by th~nking all MRC members for coming to this special-called meeting. He then provided a basis for requesting this meeting. Dr. Altom reminded the Committee that when it became public that LRSD was making a change in principalship, he began to review the Court Order because he was afraid the Court would admonish the MRC regarding the staffing changes. In looking through the Court Order of November 5, 1992, Dr. Altom's understanding was that the MRC had an expanded role from years past. Because of that, Dr. Altom polled each of the MRC members to see if they thought that MRC's role had been expanded and the consensus was \"yes, they did . \" Dr. Altom then contacted Dr. Williams unofficially to share this information with him. They had a very cordial meeting. Dr. Altom noted that about two years ago, with regard to budget cuts, the MRC became concerned about the themes of the magnets . The Court had admonished the MRC for not taking a more active role. It now seemed appropriate that the MRC would come together to make an official statement about the items in the Court Order, page 12. It should be pointed out that the following terms should be reviewed: 1) consult 2) staff (who it includes) 3) staffing changes (what does this mean) The MRC will need to write a letter to the Court saying that \"as a body, this is what we believe and if this is not so , please tell us if you see it differently.\" STAFFING Does it mean to give the MRC the authority to overturn? The language says the Court decides. MRC merely states what the appropriate action should be. STAFF When staffing changes are made, does it mean teachers, administrators, or support staff as well? This needs to be clarified because MRC needs to determine who the critical people are with regard to the theme. Does a magnet principal being assigned to another magnet consist of a staffing change? Estelle Matthis then asked for an executive session to address the personnel issue. Ms. Matthis said the Superintendent has every intention of working by the Court Order and the MRC. Dr. Williams wants to assur_e you that the district will advertise positions, etc. and will follow the procedure as in the past - interview, make recommendation to the MRC, the Board approves, etc. He does plan to abide by the Court Order. Ms . Harding noted that in defining terms, the term \"prior to\" should be clarified. Things should not come as a surprise to this body. Ms . Harding said that some of the Court filings of some time ago were filed with regard to RIF's. Since then, this has come into play, and the MRC had asked the Court to have a hearing with regard to staffing. This was not tied to budget. It does not appear to be tied to only to the budgeting process . Ms . Matthis said LRSD understands that issues are related to budget. Their Program Budget Guide governs daily activities . Dr. Altom said he called Dr. Williams' attention to RIF and that MRC feels very strongly about it. He told him the MRC may ask the Court for a speedy resolution. Ms. Matthis said that Judge Wright understands the agreement . The 8th Circuit says that unless the re-assignment has an impact on desegregation, the assignment will go on. -2- Dr. Altom reminded the Committee that Donna Grady Creer, Marcia Harding and Oliver Dillingham will be meeting with Gene Wilhoit on May 23, 1994 with regard to the State's role in monitoring. CONSULT Ms. Matthis said the critical item will be the timing in terms of when we consult. Does LRSD come to the MRC first, and .when? We have to get the timing down on this. Dr. Altom noted the definition of \"consult\" is \"to ask the advice or opinion of.\" This does not say you have decision-making authority, but your thoughts are considered. A combined definition would be, \"consider by asking the advice or opinion of.\" STAFF Ms. Harding noted that, from earlier on, when staff came up in Judge Woods' court, it encompassed all certificated personnel. MRC was asked to make recommendations on these personnel. The MRC reviewed information that LRSD used prior to that time for hiring purposes. MRC made recommendations and changes with regard to thematic parts. Ms. Matthis said LRSD is basically of the same feeling. She also noted that LRSD says staffing is certificated positions. STAFFING CHANGE 1) The hiring of a person to come into a building and be either a teacher, administrator, or support individual. 2) The oth~r has to do with the possibility of transfers. This would mean thc\nit the term \"prior to\" needs to be defined for both of these. What does \"prior to\" mean with regard to posting a position? With regard to a transfer, what does \"prior to\" mean? Ms. Harding said that under any condition, the MRC notified as soon as possible when LRSD is thinking reassigning or making a transfer of an individual. representation should report any staffing changes, the regularly-scheduled meeting of the MRC. -3- should be of The LRSD etc. at PROCEDURE Ms. Matthis said that she does not believe it would be problem to report at the MRC meeting every two weeks. LRSD representation could give a status report when something is happening. a The Ms. Creer noted that, just as a normal procedure, when a vacancy is posted, a copy could be given to the MRC immediately. Ms. Harding said clarification is needed about looking at non-certificated people also with regard to the budget. It was agreed that the MRC Office would screen job postings and place these postings on the agenda for every MRC meeting with regard to staffing in magnet schools. HIRING VS. TRANSFER Any staffing change means either hiring or transferring. Question: MRC has always been comfortable with the selection process of hiring. That is acceptabl~. \"LRSD will consult with MRC before making change.\" What does \"consult with\" mean? Ms. Matthis said the procedure is: Post the position publicly\nApplicants apply to Human Resources\nThe applications are checked by Assistant superintendents\nSelection Committee reviews\nInterview is scheduled\nTop three candidates go to Superintendent for consideration/possible interview\nsuperintendent makes recommendation to the Board or refers it back to the Selection Committee and the job is re-advertised. With regard to a transfer, the MRC will be looking at the same situation. Does this person meet the qualifications, etc.? Discussions will be held in Executive Session. The MRC should then report to the Court. Ms. Harding has a concern as this relates to transfers. Dr. Williams says change for change sake would not be made. Where transfers are concerned, when they are involuntary, that information needs to be presented to us (particularly if it has disruptive effects). -4- The Committee took a five-minute break. After the break, Estelle Matthis made a motion for the MRC to go into Executive Session to discuss peronnel changes at the original magnet schools. Marcia Harding seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously. After Executive Session, Estelle Matthis made a motion to return to Open Session, and Marcia Harding seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Dr. Altom reported that no action was taken that needs to be affirmed in Open Session. In summary, a letter will go to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, indicating that the MRC has reached consensus on the language in the sentence on Page 12, of the Court Order dated November 5, 1992. A copy will be sent to all MRC members. The MRC does approve the LRSD selection process for the selection of principals. In order to be more pro-active in the future, MRC will have on its regular agenda .~n item on the staffing of magnet schools to address these issues in a more timely manner. When no more business was brought to the table, Evelyn Jackson made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Estelle Matthis seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 a.m. The next MRC meeting will be on Tuesday, May 17, 1994 and will encompass discussion of the interdistrict magnet schools budget. -5- MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES June 27, 1994 A special-called meeting of the Magnet Review Committee was held in the Magnet Review Committee Office, 1920 North Main Street, North Little Rock, Arkansas on Monday, June 27, 1994. Members Present: Dr. Bobby Altom, PCSSD - Chairperson Oliver Dillingham, ADE Marcia Harding, ADE Evelyn Jackson, Joshua Intervenors Estelle Matthis, LRSD Absent: Dana Chadwick, NLRSD Guests: Margaret Gremillion, Assistant Superintendent - LRSD Horace Smith, Associate Monitor - ODM The meeting was called to order at 1:05 p.m. by Chairperson Dr. Bobby Altom. He explained the meeting was called to examine the process used in the recent selection of magnet school principals and because the MRC had agreed in its May 12, 1994 meeting to send a letter to the Court telling the Court of MRC's opinion regarding its role in staff selection in magnet schools. Dr. Altom noted that two items will be discussed: 1) The unapproved minutes of the May 12, 1994 MRC meeting\n2) The May 18, 1994 letter to the Court outlining what the MRC had delineated in its May 12, 1994 meeting in its interpretation of the language used in Judge Wright's November 5, 1992 Court Order describing MRC's input in original magnet staffings. Dr. Altom called for a reading of the minutes of the May 12, 1994 meeting. After discussion, and a few corrections, Oliver Dillingham made a motion to approve the minutes and Estelle Matthis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Matthis opened the discussion by outlining the process LRSD uses in selection of principals. She noted that LRSD asks PTA presidents for the names of three parents to serve on the principal's interview team, and LRSD looks at these submissions with regard to race and gender. Two teachers are selected for the committee, one black and one white, and one curriculum person. Central Office administrators are represented by two Assistant Superintendents. These people make up the selection committee for elementary schools. Secondary schools follow the same procedure as noted above, but incentive schools have staffing committees, including a representative of the Joshua Intervenors. Once all the people for the selection committee are identified, letters are sent to them notifying them to serve on the committee. Ms. Matthis noted that there was some question as to the number of parents to be included. Gibbs wanted five parents and five teachers. Ms. Matthis explained how the process worked, and she also oted that parents could ask questions if they wanted when they get to the interview process. However, parents were requested to ask the same questions of all applicants. Most applicants had no school preference. If an applicant were an assistant principal, they were automatically given an audience. She noted that three assistant principals, one principal and one specialist applied for the Gibbs job. Once the applicants had been identified, dates and times were given for the interviews. Letters were sent to the participants telling them of the dates and times. The procedure for the interviews went as follows: The interview team is brought in and a folder is given to them. A listing of all the people serving on the team was included in this folder. A list of questions was provided and participants were told that \"if you want to ask applicants a question, that's fine\nhowever, you must ask that same question to all candidates.\" A rating sheet was included in the folder also, and it was explained to committee participants. The rating sheet is process. Committee applicants by their one part of the whole evaluation members were asked to rank first choice, etc., and the -2- committee tries to come to a consensus. After that, there will be questions from the interview team. Ms. Harding asked what happens if there is a situation where the committee cannot reach a consensus. Ms. Matthis said the committee reports back to the Superintendent and notifies him that no consensus has been reached. At that point , the job will be re-advertised. Ms. Matthis noted that State law gives the Superintendent responsibility to re-assign or transfer personnel. Ms . Harding asked Ms. Matthis and Ms. Gremillion why there are such large numbers in movement. They noted that options for staff to take the early retirement incentives have created a lot of the open positions. At this point, Ms. Matthis requested that the Magnet Review Committee go into Executive Session to discuss personnel for the interdistrict magnet schools. Ms. Harding made a motion to go into Executive Session, and Ms. Matthis seconded the motion. The motion car~ied unanimously. When Executive Session was completed, Ms. Harding made a motion to re-convene the MRC meeting and Estelle Matthis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Dr. Altom reported the results of the Executive Session. He said the MRC will go on record in a letter to the Court stating that the MRC does not believe that LRSD has followed the Court Order of Judge Wright when it says that \"in the future, the LRSD must consult the MRC and must seek Court permission prior to making any staffing changes in the magnet schools.\" The MRC does not believe that that consultation was made. Dr. Altom also said that the MRC will go on record that MRC believes that the interview, recommendation and selection process does have integrity. Also, in the letter, the MRC will ask Dr. Henry Williams to work with the MRC to make sure the Court Order is followed for future original magnet staffing changes. When no further business was brought before the Committee, Evelyn Jackson made a motion to adjourn the meeting and Oliver Dillingham seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 2:40 p.m. -3- MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES July 18, 1994 A special-called meeting of the Magnet Review Committee was held in the Magnet Review Committee Office, 1920 North Main Street, North Little Rock, Arkansas on Monday, July 18 1994. ' Members Present: Bobby Altom, PCSSD - Chairperson Dana Chadwick, NLRSD Evelyn Jackson, Joshua Intervenors Estelle Matthis, LRSD Absent: Oliver Dillingham, ADE Marcia Harding, ADE Dr. Bobby Altom, Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 2:05 p.m. He informed the Magnet Review Committee the meeting was being called to discuss Little Rock School District's recommendation for the principalship at Carver Elementary Magnet School. Dr. Altom asked for a motion to go into Executive Session, and Estelle Matthis provided the motion. Dana Chadwick seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously. When Executive Session ended, Ms. Matthis made a motion to return to the general meeting, and Evelyn Jackson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously to return to a general session. Dana Chadwick made a motion that, after hearing the Little Rock School District's representative regarding the principal selection process and the protocol, MRC accept the recommendation of the LRSD for the principalship of Carver Elementary Magnet School. Estelle Matthis seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously. Dr. Altom recapped the events of the Executive Session. He said the Magnet Review Committee will submit, by way of formal letter to the Court through the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, the action taken during this meeting. As a part of the letter, a statement will be made that the Magnet Review Committee does not believe that the process has been done in as timely a fashion as what the MRC would like. But, the late date, the fact principals are already under contract and the belief that magnet school parents are anxious to meet and support that individual, the Magnet Review Committee does support the selection. The Little Rock School District did provide a more in-depth discussion of rationale for selection of the CarveI principal. By consensus, the Magnet Review Committee agreed to send a letter to Dr. Williams asking him to work with the MRC on procedures or policies affecting staffing of the original magnet schools. The MRC will ask him to work with the MRC regarding the following items: timely notification of vacancies arising\nthe procedures for recruitment of candidates\nscreening procedures for candidates\nmake-up selection of the interview committee\nthe development of the interview itself\nwritten criteria or factors considered for the selection of the final principal selection\nreassignment and/or removal of magnet school principals. The MRC will ask him to help look into any changes that might be appropriate for principal job descriptions in the magnet schools. When no further business was brought before the Committee, Estelle Matthis made a motion to adjourn the meeting and Dana Chadwick seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 3:05 p.m. -2- 5. Verbal Communication/Instruction to Interview Teams INTER VIEW PROTOCOL Prior to the consideration and selection of Interview Committees for the 1994-95 principalships at various schools in the district, a meeting was held on May 31, 1994, to discuss the interview protocol to be used. It was agreed between the participants that although there was no written procedure or policy, there has been a well-known long-standing past practice of interview protocol. The above-mentioned interview protocol was to be used for selection of the 1994-95 principalships. It was further agreed that this protocol would be documented and incorporated into the Personnel section of the Policy and Procedures Manual. Attending the meeting were Mrs. Estelle Matthis, Deputy Superintendent\nMr. Brady Gadberry, Director of Labor Relations\nand Dr. Richard Hurley, Director of Hu~an Resources.   LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EPS CODE: GCAB SELECTION OF APPLICANTS SCHOOL PRINCIPALS 1. Persons desiring employment as a School Principal shall file an application in writing (Reswne, letter of intent, or vitae are acceptable for the initial contact. District application forms will then be provided for applicants not currently employed with Little Rock School District.) 2. District administration officials will screen the applicants 3. for acceptability. Taken into consideration are certification, experience, education, performance reviews, and references. The Deputy Superintendent and/or the Assistant SuperiDtendent(s) will prepare a list of interview questions to be used in the interview process. 4. The Human Resources Director will review the questions for appropriateness regarding legal issues (ie: E.E.O., Affirmative Action, Americans with Disability Act, etc.) 5. An interview committee will be selected/appointed, as follows: Three Two Three (3) Parents/Patrons (2) Teachers (3) Administration Representatives Note:1 Note:2 Note:3 1. The Parent/Patrons representatives will be selected by a process: designated by the PTA president of the of the affected school. 2. The teacher(s) representatives shall be from the affected school and appointed by the Administration. 3. The Deputy Superintendent (in consultation with appropriate staff - Assistant superintendents, Supervisors, and Principals) may designate the Administration representatives. *NOTE: The committee's composition shall be balanced, as nearly as possible, by race and gender. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EPS CODE: GCAB 6. The interview committee shall meet to interview and recommend candidates. The interview committee will be provided folders containing the following: 1) An interview schedule 2) The approved interview questions 3) An approved candidate rating form 4) The applicant's application materials 7. The interview committee shall interview the applicants and complete the ratings sheet. The committee, through consensus, will agree upon and submit a recommendation of the top three (3) candidates to the Superintendent. ~ (Note: Although the applicants are rated, the ratings are only for use in reaching consensus and need not be the sole basis for selecting the recommended candidates.) 8. The Superintendent shall review the recommendations of the Interview Committee and select the applicant to be submitted for Board approval. The Superintendent may at his/her option, reject each of the three (3) applicants and require that the committee reconvene to determine new recommendations. 9. Once the Superintendent has selected an acceptable applicant, he/she will submit that individual's name to the Board of Directors for approval. If the applicant is currently serving as a Principal, the Superintendent may reassign the Principal and advise the Board of the lateral transfer. 10. When approved, the candidate shall receive a contract which details his salary, pay grade, and other pertinent information. ,, . . PLEASE POST PLEASE POST LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL OISRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 May 10, 1994 The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following positions for the 1994-95 school year: POSITIONS: Principals - Six (6) Positions - (1) Williams Magnet (1) Gibbs Magnet (1) carver Magnet (1) Mitchell Incentive (1) Franklin Incentive (1) Rightsell Incentive QUALIFICATIONS: At least five (5) years experience as a teacher and/ or administrator. 1. 2. A master ' s degree or higher, with eligibility for Arkansas certification as an elementary principal. __ 3. 4. Evidence of strong organizational skills. Knowledge of curriculum development and successful teach5. 6. 7. 8. ing methods . Demonstrates the conviction that all students can learn and will learn in the Little Rock School District. Evidence of strong experience in dealing with student problems. Evidence of successful experience with parent and staff involvement. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality desegregated education. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INITIAL SCREENING INTERVIEW. BASIC PERFORMANCE RESPONSIBILITIES: 1. Assumes responsibility for the management and monitoring of his/her school, and serves as a chief advisor to the appropiiate assigned Associate/Assistant superintendent on matters pertaining to administration, budget, and program implementation in his/her school. 2. works with staff and patrons to determine educational program priorities and goals for his/her school . Principals BASIC PERFORMANCE RESPONSIBILITIES: (Continued) 3. Implements the process whereby school-level educational programs needs are identified. Informs the appropriate Associate/Assistant Superintendent regarding needed logistical and consultative support in order to accomplish this task. 4. Serves on such advisory groups and task forces as assigned by the appropriate Associate/Assistant superintendent. 5. oversees the development of educational programs and the plan for implementing them on the school level. 6. Works with supervisory and building staff to make the necessary program changes. 7. Assumes responsibility for conducting the performance evaluation of all personnel assigned to his/her building. 8. Assumes responsibility for all record keeping and other administrative tasks. EVALUATION: Performance of this job will be evaluated annually in accordance with the provisions of the Board's policy on Evaluation of Administrative Personnel. ORGANIZATIONAL RELATIONSHIP: Reports to the Deputy superintendent. SALARY AND TERMS: 37-0003 Salary Schedule - An Eleven (11) Month Contract plus Educational stipend, car Allowance, and Benefits APPLICATION DEADLINE: May 19, 1994, or any time later until satisfactory applicants are recommended and approved. SEND WRITTEN LETTERS OF INOUITY TO: or. Richard E. Hurley Director of ~an Resources Little Rock school District 810 west Markham street Little Rock, AR 72201 Principals NOTE: INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS. THEREFORE BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITION DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. The Little Rock School District is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Equity concerns may be addressed to the Associate superintendent for Desegregation. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District not to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, color, religion, national origin, or disability in its educational programs, activities or employment practices. .P. r LITILE ROCK SCH. DIST. v. PULASKI CO. SP. SCH. DIST. Cite u 659 F.Supp. 363 (E.D.Ark. 1987) 363 LITILE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, v. Faulkner\nBob Moore\nDon Hindman\nShirley Lowery\nSheryl Dunn\nDavid Sain\nBob Stender\nGrainger Williams Richard A. Giddings\nGeorge A: McCrary\nBuddy Raines\nand Dale Ward, Uefcndants, Katherine Knight, Individually and as President of The Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association (LRCTA)\nLRCA\nEd Bullington, Individually nnd us President of The Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT)\nPACT\nJohn Harrison, Individually and as President of The North Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association (NLRCTA)\nNLRCTA\nand Milton Jackson, Individually and as a NonCertified Educational Support Employee of the Little Rock0.School District, Lorene Joshua, as next friend of mi nors Leslie Joshua, Stacy Joshua and Wayne Joshua\nRev. Robert Willing ham\nSara Matthews, as next friend of Khayyam Davis, Alexa Armstrong and Karlos Armstrong\nl\\lrs. Alvin Hudson, as next friend of Talia Hudson\nl\\lrs. Hilton Taylor, as next friend of Parshu Taylor, Hilton Taylor, Jr. and Brian Taylor\nRev. John r,t. Miles, as next friend of Janice Miles and Dcreck Miles\nRev. Robert Willingham on be half of and as President of the Little Rock Branch of the NAACP\nLorene Joshua on behalf of and as President of the North Little Rock Branch of NAACP, Intervenors. No. L~C-82-866. United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, W.D. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1\nNorth Little Rock School District\nArkansas State Board of Education\nWayne Hartsfield\nWalter Turnbow\nHarry A. Haines\nJim Dupree\nDr. Harry P. McDonald\nRobert L. Newton\nAlice L. Preston\nJeff Starling\nEarle Love\nBob Lyon\nJohn Ward\nJudy Wear\nLeon Barnes\nMa rianna Gosser\nSteve Morley\nMac Feb. 27, 1987. Order March 4, 1987. School desegregation plans were sub milted. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, 597 F.Supp. 1220, held that countywide inter [1059] , 364 659 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT district remedy had to be utilized to correct countywide interdistrict violations. Appeals were taken. The Court of Appeals, Heaney, Circuit Jude, 778 F.2d 404, held that violations could be remedied by less intrusive measures and remanded. On remand, the District Court, Henry Woods, J., held that: (1) stipulations between State Iloard of Education and defendant school districts, whereby districts proposed to desegregate schools, inter alia, by allowing black and white students who were in racial majority to transfer to other schools within any participating district, would be approved in its entirety\n(2) plan for desegregation of school district, whereby district agreed to develop numerical goals and timetables for recruitment and promotion of blacks to administrative positions within school system, to provide early childhood program to identify and provide special assistance to black children who continued to suffer trickle-down effects of past segregation, and to improve participation of blacks in gifted and talented programs by using racially neutral screening tests, would be approved in all respects\nand (3) that portion of school district's plan for desegregation, which proposed to correct overrepresentation of blacks in special education classes through use of culturally unbiased screening and subsequent monitoring, and to assure black student participation and extracurricular activities by affirmative recruitment plan, would also be approved. So ordered. See also, 805 F.2d 815. 1. Schools e:\u0026gt;13(14) Magnet review committee report and related stipulations, whereby defendant in school desegregation case agreed to use 50-50 black to white ratio for magnet program enrollment while allowing students presently enrolled at existing magnet schools to continue in those schools as appropriate, would be approved in their entirety. 2. Schools e:\u0026gt;13(14) In school desegregation case, students who were presently enrolled at magnet (1060) schools would be allowed to finish their education at such schools, where evidence was presented that involved parents had contributed greatly to schools' success. 3. Schools e:\u0026gt;!3(1~) Stipulations between Slate Ooard of Education and defendant school districts, whereby districts proposed to desegregate schools, inter alia, by allowing black and white students who were in ratio majority at their respective schools to transfer to other schools within any participating district, would be approved in their entirety. 4. Schools e:\u0026gt;13(6) Plan for desegregation of school district, whereby distn'ct agreed to develop numerical goals and timetables for recruitment and promotion of blacks to administrative positions within school system, to provide early childhood programs to identify and provide special assistance to black children who continued to suffer trickledown effects of past segregation, and to improve participation of blacks in gifted and talented programs by using racially neutral screening tests, reflected solid and workable approach to end segregation in district and would be approved in all respects. Order 5. Schools e:\u0026gt;!3(6) That portion of school district's plan for desegregation, which proposed to correct overrepresentation of blacks in special education  classes through use of culturally unbiased screening and subsequent monitoring, and to assure black student participation in extracurricular activities by affirmative recruitment plan, would be approved. P.A. Hollingsworth, Philip E. Kaplan, Janet L. Pulliam, John M. Bilheimer, Little Rock, Ark., for plaintiff. r C I I LITTLE ROCK SCH. DIST. v. PULASKI CO. SP. SCH. DIST. 365 Cite u 659 F.Supp. 363 (E.D.Ark. 1987)  Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings, Little Rock, tion of the magnet school plans of the Ark., Neal, G:rber \u0026amp; Eise~berg, Chicago, other parties and a critique of the plan of Ill., for Pulaski County Special School Dist., the Magnet Review Committee. At the No. 1, Mac _Faulkner, Bob Moore, Don close of the testimony on January 30, r Hindman,_ Shirley Lowery, Sheryl Dunn, suggested that the parties again confer and David Sain and Bob Stender. attempt to reach an agreement on the mag- C.R. McNair, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., Shar- net school portion of the Eighth Circuit on Streett, Dept. of Educ., Little Rock, mandate. (R. 568-69). Ark., for Arkansas State Bd. of Educ., Wayne Hartsfield, Walter Turnbow, Harry A. Haines, Jim Dupree, Dr. Harry P. McDonald, Robert L. Newton, Alice L. Preston, Jeff Starling and Earle Love. Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, Little Rock, Ark., for North Little Rock School Dist., Bob Lyon, John Ward, Judy Wear, Leon Barnes, Marianna Gosser and Steve Morley. . Stephen L. Curry, Little Rock, Ark., for Graing:er Williams, Richard A. Giddings, George A. McCrary, Buddy Raines and Dale Ward. Theodore Shaw, New York City, John W. Walker, Little Rock, Ark., for intervenors Joshua, et al. Richard Roachell, Cearley, Mitchell \u0026amp; Roachell, Little Rock, Ark., for interven\u0026lt;irs Knight, et al. INTERIM ORDER ENFORCING MANDATE OF COURT OF APPEALS HENRY WOODS, District Judge. In conformity with the opinion of the Court of Appeals dated November 7, 1985, 778 F.2d 404 (8th Cir.), and the ensuing mandate, a hearing was held on January 29-30, 1987, to consider the recommendation of the Magnet Review Committee concerning the locations, themes, dates, operation, transportation, seat allocations, targeted ratios, and administration of the magnet schools in this county. January 29th and 30th were devoted to testimony adduced by the Magnet Review Committee on behalf of its plan. The hearing was adjourned to continue the week of February 17, 1987-a presenta- [1] On February 17, 1987, the hearing was resumed to take up not only t,l1e magnet school issues but also the student assignment plans submitted by the Pulaski County Special School District (hereafter PCSD), the North Little Rock School District (hereafter NLRSD), and the Little Rock School District (h.ereafter LRSD). The three districts and the State Department of Education then advised the court that they had agreed by stipulation to a magnet school plan for the County which had been submitted to the Magnet Review Committee and approved by the latter. (R. 577). In open court the Joshua intervenors advised that they had no objections to the stipulation and were in general agreement with its terms. Since the Knight intervenors had not been party to the negotiations leading to the stipulation, they declined to approve the plan but interposed no objection thereto. I have examined the stipulation in detail. In my opinion it is an excellent compromise of the many complex issues involved in magnet schools. The stipulated settlement is in all respects approved. A copy of the stipulation is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is incorporated by reference in this order. All of the parties except the Joshua and Knight intervenors have also stated in open court that the provisions of the Magnet Review Committee Report dated January 22, 1987 (MRC) not superseded by Exhibit A were stipulated as binding on the tl,1ree districts and the State Board of Education. (R. 582-21). The Magnet Review Committee Report is attached her.etc as Exhibit B The stipulation and agreement as aforesaid are approved in all respects. On behalf of all the parties, the attorney for the Little Rock District dictated into the record some minor supplemental under[ 1061] I 366 659 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT standings in connection with Exhibit A. (R. 577). These understandings have been reduced to letter form and have been marked as Exhibit C to this order and are incorporated herein by reference. These understandings are approved as supplemental to Exhibit A. [2] One issue remains with reference to the magnet schools presently in existence. That is the question of whether the students presently at the three magnet schools should remain and finish at the schools which they have been attending. Based on the evidence presented, I am convinced that the past success of these schools is the best argument for continuing the present student body as much as possible. Involved parents, black and white, of children attending these schools have contributed greatly to their success and have invested a huge amount of time and energy in making these schools outstanding. It would be a mistake in my opinion to dump these students and start anew. There will of course be attrition and new seats available through graduation, but the students presently enrolled in Booker, Mann and Williams shall have a right to continue in these schools. , - The responsibilities of the Magnet Review Committee, as agreed by the three districts and the State Board of Education, appear at pages 1 and 2 of Exhibit B hereto. The Committee shall be financed as agreed by the parties with a budget of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000) with Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,- 000) or half to be paid by the State and Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000) by each of the three districts. The MRC will necessarily work closely with the three districts and the State in order to have the six magnet schools ready for the 1987-88 school year. The MRC should report to the court on May 1, 1987, on July l, 1987 and again on September l, 1987 to inform the court of progress made in implementing the magnet schools. While the reports need not be lengthy, so as to be burdenlome to the MRC, certainly the MRC reports should keep the court abreast of the status of critical aspects of (1062) implementation of the magnets including: renovations, teacher recruitment, staff training and development, community input 1 and involvement, and student recruitmt:~~_i The Joshua intervenors and the Knight intervenors have both asked for representation on the Magnet Review Committee by a voting membership. I am unable to comply with this request. The Court of Appeals set forth in clear and unequivocal terms the makeup of the Magnet Review Committee. At the request of all the parties, I did give the Joshua intervenors a non-voting member of the Committee. This was a modification agreed upon by all the parties that did not affect the basic structure of the Magnet R!!\"vicw Committee. The request of the Joshua intervenors and the Knight intervenors for a voting representation on the Magnet Review Committee is hereby denied. The financing of the magnet school plan has been stipulated\nit is approved as covered in the stipulation (Exhibit A) and in the opinion of the Court of Appeals. In addition to the financing relating to magnet schools and to majority-to-minority transfers, there is only one other reference to state financing in the Court of Appeals decision, Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 778 F.2d 404, 435 (8th Cir.1985): If the four all- or nearly all-black elementary schools as conditionally allowed by this Court in Clark v. Board of Education of Little Rock, 705 F.2d 265 (8th Cir.1983), are retained in LRSD, compensatory and remedial programs of the type that we required for the nonintegrated schools in St. Louis shall be put into effect for the four schools. See Liddell v. State of Missouri, 731 F.2d [1294) at 1312-18 [8th Cir.1984). The additional cost of these programs shall be paid for by the State of Arkansas. Since there are no all-black schools in the LRSD student assignment plan, the conditions are not present which would trigger state financing of compensatory education, as is obvious from the above language. The Little Rock District has requested other funding from the State. None of the Ll'ITLE ROCK SCH. DIST. v. PULASKI CO. SP. SCH. DIST. Cltr a.. 659 F.Supp. J6J (E.O.Ark. 1987} funding _is required by the Court of Ap- principalships and coaching positions\n(b) peals ruling. The State's share of the mag- concentrated whites in schools north of and net school funding will be considerable. It blacks in schoo:s south of Interstate 40\n(c) will strain the already meager resources of assigned students to special education clasthe State at a time when the State has sifications on a discriminatory basis and {d) committed itself to new standards for all failed to apportion the burdens of transporArkansas public schools. Although the tation equally on black and white students. blacks in Little Rock have suffered from LitUe Rock School Distn'ct v. Pulaski the ravages of segregation, so have the County, 584 F.Supp. 328, 353 (E.D.Ark. blacks in every section and every county of 1984). These findings were affirmed by the State. Significantly the new state stan- the Court of Appeals. Little Rock School dards provide for compensatory education District v. Pulaski County Special School for all students whe~e performance is sub- District, 778 F.2d 404, 422 (8th Cir.1985). standard. (State Exhibit MX 25). In March, 1986, the NLRSD submitted 367 [3) The parties have agreed upon a sys- an implementation plan designed to remedy tern for handling majority-to-minority the interdistrict effects of its constitutional transfers. The stipulation setting forth violations. (March plan). Subsequently, in this agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit October of 1986, the NLRSD submitted a D, is approved and is incorporated herein supplement to its implementation plan (supby reference. The three districts and the plement plan) which addressed remediation Joshua intervenors have also agreed upon of intradistrict impact of its prior segrea Pulaski County Education Cooperative gative acts. for staff development, distribution of audio The NLRSD student assignment plan, visual resources, \"teacher center\" activi- the \"Storm Plan,\" has been in effect for a ties, purchasing and other cooperative ef- number of years. When properly impleforts of mutual benefit. The stipulation mented, the Storm Plan provides for a conestablishing the cooperative venture, at- stitutional student assignment system and tached hereto as Exhibit E, is approved. for equitable busing burdens between After carefully considering the student assignment plan submitted by the PCSD, I have decided that it must be rejected for the reasons set forth in the record at pages 61\u0026amp;-17. The district was given two weeks to submit an alternative plan. At the time the County's student assignment plan is considered, the court will deal with the other criticisms set forth by the Court of Appeals. The broad outline of the student assignment plan submitted by the LRSD is hereby approved. Detailed assignments have been awaiting the resolution of the magnet school issues. The Little Rock District is hereby .authorized to proceed with its student assignment plan as submitted to the court in March, 1986. [41 The North Littlir Rock School District was found to have purposefully committed a number of segregative acts, including the following which had an interdistrict effect: (a) failed to assign blacks to its central administration or to high school blacks and whites. According to its March plan, all NLRSD schools are currently desegregated and deficiencies found by this court have been corrected. This evidence was uncontradicted at the June, 1986 hearing. The NLRSD plan includes a detailed staff recruitment component which, if implemented, should result in substantial gains in the area of recruitment and promotion of blacks to positions where they are currently underrepresented. Supplementally the NLRSD has agreed to develop numerical goals and timetables for increasing the number of blacks to these positions. (Supplement plan 2.1). Remediation of the unconstitutional overrepresentation of blacks in \"special education\" classes consumes most of the NLRSD's March implementation plan. As with the rest of its plan, if put into effect as proposed, the imbalance caused by the categorization of inordinate numbers of black st-udents as \"retarded\" would be eliminated. NLRSD has suggested several .:::::=--- (1063] 368 659 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT important monitoring procedures to insure compliance. (Supplement plan, 3.1). The NLRSD supplement plan also addresses remedies for intradistrict segregative acts. In the area of compensatory education for black children who continue to suffer the trickle-down effects of past segregation, the NLRSD plan proposes an early childhood program. The program includes a testing process so that educationally disadvantaged children, both black and white, can be identified and targeted for help at an early age. For the early grades, that help will be provided through teacher aides who will provide one-to-one tutoring, through supplementary reading instruction, and through implementation of the State Minimum Performance Tests. Reading remediation will also be provided at the junior high school level, as will computer assisted instruction in basic skills with individualized programs. The NLRSD supplement plan includes a number of programs aimed at the problem of students who leave school prematurely or \"drop out.\" The excessively high dropout rate of blacks in the NLRSD is one of the most pressing problems for the blacks in that district. Proposed programs such as the WIN (We Intervene Now) and SAC (Student Assignment Class-which serves students who are suspended from their regular classes) are sound and should prove beneficial. The violation relating to the disproportionate numbers of black students who are suspended or expelled for disciplinary reasons has largely been eliminated. For example, in the 1985-86 school year, 48o/o of the suspended students were black. While this percentage is somewhat higher than the actual percentage of black students enrolled (40%), the deviation is not so great as to indicate a continuing problem at this time. Expulsions are now infrequent (only 20 over the last three years) and are now made only by the board of education, after a hearing. The NLRSD has made strides in improving the participation of black students in its Gifted and Talented program. The LRSD supplement plan includes a number of safeguards to insure identification of (1064] black children who are gifted/talented but culturally disadvantaged. In addition to the screening tests which recognize cultural differences (i.e. System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment), the NLRSD now uses an identification process which involves nominations and r.?commendations based on multiple criteria from a number of people. The ultimate placement of a child in the program is a group dec1s1on. (Supplement plan 8.1-8.4). In sum, the NLRSD has made great progress in each area where it was found to have been deficient. The NLRSD's March 1986 plan, as supplemented in October 1986, reflects a solid and workable ap proach, if implemented, to end segregation in that school district. The NLRSD plan is hereby approved in all respects.' ORDER (5] The Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) was found purposefully to have committed a number of segregative acts with an interdistrict effect: (a) failed to comply with a 1968 desegregation court order (Zinnamon v. Board of Education of the Pulaski County Arkansas Special School District, No. LR-CR-C-154)\n(b) constructed schools in locations which ensured that they would become racially identifiable\n(c) failed to allocate the burden of busing equitably between black and white students\n(d) failed to hire and promote black teachers and staff\n(e) refused to allow deannexation to or consolidation with the N.\u0026gt;rth Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and the Little Rock School Dis trict (LRSD)\n(0 failed to assign students to schools in such a way as to maximize desegregation\n(g) assigned students to special education classifications and gifted programs on a discriminatory basis\n(h) assigned black principals to schools with high black enrollments\n(i) created and maintained a racial imbalance in almost half its schools\n(j) closed and downgraded schools in black neighborhoods and failed to build new schools there. Little Rock School District v. Pulaski Co. Special School District, 584 F.Supp. 328, 353 (E.D. Ark.1984). These findings were affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Little Rock t-i LITTLE ROCK SCH. DIST. v. PULASKI CO. SP. SCH. DIST 369 . . Clle u 659 F.Supp. J6J (E.D.Ark. 1987) 0 School Dis/net v. Pulaski County Special into sites for proposed  Scch ool District, 778 F.2d 404, 418 (8th While no schools have nbeew construction. 198-) . en construred 1r.\n:,  during the pendency of this case, two , w Many of the violations have already been elementary schools are now proposc.:d. The cured-ither by court order or by affirma- sites chosen conform to the board's new tive actions of the PCSSD. The deannexa- policy and are approved. In that same tion/consolidation violation has been cured vein, progress has been made recen' 'v\n, by the redrawing of boundary lines which improving the physical plants in sc , s separate the districts. The failure to com- such as Harris and Scott which were rac::1lply with Zinnamon includes the failure to ly identifiably black. appoint black members to the PCSSD The PCSSD has made continuous board. By order of this court dated De- progress in hiring and promoting black faccember 1, 1986, the PCSSD will now elect ulty. An affirmat1,e action pbn was board members from zones. According to adopted by the PCSSD board in 1984 the plan submitted and approved, one of which has apparently been successful. A~ the zones will be majority black and anoth- of November, 1985, 22.Go/o of the PC 30 er will be 40% black, 58% white and 2% teachers w,.ere black as compared wit ,1 a other. This remedy supercedes that por- 23.6% black student population. PCSSD tion of Zinnamon dealing with black Plan Appendix I. Further, the district has school board members. The ceding of the a goal to have black teachers maln 1\n, Granite Mountain area from LRSD to 20-30% of the faculty in each school  e PCSSD includes the transfer of public district. PCSSD Plan, Appendix I. housing areas to PCSSD. Moreover, there Similarly, the affirmative action plan for are apparently other public housing devel- administrative staff appears to have been opments in the PCSSD. PCSSD Exhibits successful, although there remains under- 18 and 20 in June, 1986 hearing. PCSSD representation in two specific categories: has created a new position in the superin- coordinators and directors. In spite of tendent's office, the Coordinator of Hous- these specific areas which should be careing and Integration. This staff person will, fully monitored, the percentage of l ick among other duties, relate to realtors, de- administrators (24.7%) is good and indicates velopers and planning agencies. PCSSD a positive step toward curing this deficien- Exhibit R-2, p. 4. The PCSSD student cy. assignment plan will soon be submitted and The overrepresentation of blacks s e-at that time the issues of desegregation in cial education classes can perhaps t :ie student assignments and equitable alloca remedied through the use of culturally untion of busing burdens will be addressed. biased screening and subsequent rr.onitor- School site selection involves two sepa- ing. The PCSSD plan includes both of rate violations. First, the construction of these,elements. The result of the plan has new schools where they are likely to be been a marked drop in the percentage of racially identifiable and second, the closing blacks classified as requiring special eduor downgrading of schools closest to cen- cation. PCSSD Plan, Appendix G. While ters of black population. Since this lawsuit the percentage of blacks design:1 te for was filed, the PCSSD board has adopted a special education is 4.2% higher than the policy making desegregation and equal ac- percentage of white children so designated, cess to school primary goals in decisions to that deviation is within an acceptable build, renovate, or discontinue use of a range. school. PCSSD Implementation Plan, The PCSSD plan includes a comr  1nt March 1986 (hereafter PCSSD Plan) Appen- to assure black student participation 111 ex dix B. The Coordinator of Housing and tracurricular activities. Notably, in the Integration obviously should have input 1985-86 school year, black students (1c0o6m5] I 370 659 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT EXHIBIT A STIPULATION FOR RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING MAGNET SCHOOL.s prised 28% of the membership in extracurricular activities. PCSSD plan, Appendix G. An affirmative recruitment plan will be implemented to remedy underrepresentation in activities where it occurs. PCSSD Plan, Appendix H. The foregoing proposals of the PCSSD desegregation plan represent not only a turn in the right direction, but also significant progress toward achieving a unitary school district. While much remains to be done, much has been accomplished. Accordingly, this portion of the PCSSD deseg regation plan is hereby approved. The undersigned parties have agreed to make the following describi!d recommendation to the Magnet Review Committee for its consideration in formulating its recommendation regarding magnet schools. School \u0026amp; Program Carver-Basic Skills Math-Science Williams-Basic Skills Booker-Arts Gibbs-Foreign Language/ International Studies Mann-Math-Sciences/ Arts Parkview-Arts-Per!orming Arts Total The curriculum at magnet schools will emphasize the magnet theme and all magnet students must fully participate in mag net courses. As well as the magnet theme, all magnet schools will have strong aca demically-oriented curricula. New magnets or expansion of magnets already existing may be provided for in subsequent school years beginning 1988-89 under the provisions of the Order of September 3, 1986. Any party may present applications for a magnet school or pro gram not later than the beginning of each school year preceeding the proposed year of implementation. The Committee's decision and recommendation shall be sub mitted to the parties no later than November 15. The MRC shall make its recom mendation to the Court not later than December 15. IMPLEMENTATION The parties propose that the District Court order the implementation of the six (6) aforementioned magnet schools for the 1987-1988 school year. The host district shall provide to the MRC and to the parties (1066] LOCATIONS AND THEMES The parties have agreed to recommend the following magnet school locations and programs: ~ K-6 K-6 K-6 K-6 7-9 10-12 Target Enrollment  475 530 720 348 975 1150 4198 its implementation timetable at the time a magnet proposal is submitted to the Court. FINANCING The parties agree to the financing formulas proposed by the Magnet Review Committee at the hearing held on January 29 and 30, 1987. These formulas require the State to pay one-half(} of the actual costs of the construction or renovation of magnet schools as well as the customary state aid and one-half (} the cost of educating the magnet students attending those schools. It is understood that any district which does not provide a student to fill an allocated seat, and said seat is not occupied by any other student, will be required to pay to the host district as its full liability for said unfilled seat the per child cost of the host district's debt service payment, both principal and interest, for the construction or renovation of the schools in the magnet program. The host district will provide separate accounting and budgeting information regarding the magnet program lo the Magnet Review Committee for review. LITTLE ROCK SCH. DIST. v. PULASKI CO. SP. SCH. DIST. Cllc u 6,9 F.Supp. J6J (E.D.Ark. 1987) 371 INTERDISTRICT TRANSPORTATION PLAN The State Board of Education remains committed to underwriting the entire actual cost of transporting magnet and M-to-M transfer students, which includes the cost of transporting these students for extracurricular activities. The districts agree that transportation of magnet/M-to-M students should be performed utilizing measures which are most cost efficient. The interdistrict transportation plan shall not be used as a means to seek compensation for additional transportation vehicles unless such vehicles are directly necessary because of the interdistrict transportation plan. New full-sized school buses purchased in order to transport magnet/Mto- M students will be added to the total transportation fleet costs and applied on a pro rata basis to the transportation of magnet/ M-to-M students. The cost of any other vehicles purchased to transport isolated magnet/.M-to-M students will be prorated according to their actual use in transporting magnet/M-to-M students. Each district agrees to separately account for the costs of transporting magnet/M-to-M students and to make those records fully available to representatives of the State Department of Education at any reasonable time. The parties agree that the Interdistrict Transportation Plan for both magnet schools and M-to-M transfers will be administered by an Interdistrict Transportation Authority (ITA). The ITA shall be composed of the Transportation Director or other designee of each district and a representative of the State. The parties agree that any conflict may be determined by a U.S. ~agistrate acting as a Special Master for the District Court. SEAT ALLOCATION All magnet schools shall have a student population which is fifty percent (50%) black and fifty percent (50%) non-black. The parties agree that for the 1987-88 school year the magnet school seats shall be allocated according to the following for-  mula: Twenty-five per centum (25%) of the capacity of a magnet school shall be re-served for the shadow area in the host district. The remaining seventy-five per centum (75%) of the seats shall be allocated to each of the three districts in proportio~ to that district's percentage of county-wide students at each school level (elementay, junior high, or senior high). At the elementary level each district shall allocate its seats in proportion to the racial ratio present in such district at the elementary level. At the secondary level, each district shall allocate all its seats on the basis of 50% black, 50% non-black. However, the total number of seats assigned to the North Little Rock School District shall n'.:t exceed 475 seats with no more than 100 seats being allocated to the North Little Rock School District from Parkview. It is understood that seat allocations will not be made by district to a particular school, but only by elementary, junior high and senior high level. Therefore, a particular district will be permitted to use its allocated seats in accordance with the desires of its students subject to space limitations in particular magnet schools and the maintenance of a 50-50 racial balance. If there is oversubscription among the districts by race, grade or school each district may make a recommendation to the MRC for its approval regarding actual distribution of seats. The three districts agree that each district will establish an open enrollment policy for magnet schools and will be permitted to determine how children will be selected for the magnet seats allocated to each district pursuant to that policy. This provision shall not prohibit the establishment of geographic preference areas where appropriate. In the event there are unused seats by any district then persons on waiting lists to attend from the other districts shall be permitted to attend before any seat is left vacant. No student attending a magnet school will be considered as an M-to-M transfer student for incentive payment purposes. TARGETED RATIOS The parties have previously submitted to the Court a proposed stipulation for M-to-M (1067] 1 372 659 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT transfers which in part recognizes that if :-!-to-:-f transfers occur, ratios targeted by any of the districts for particular schools might be affected depending upon the locations from which M-to-M transfers occur. The parties in that stipulation agreed that the first priority should be a successful :'11-to-\n\\I transfer program and that if it did affect targeted ratios, such departures wou Id not be regarded or urged as cons titu tional violations or departures from desegregation plans. The parties further recognize that a successful operation of the magnet school program could potentially ha ,e the same or similar effects upon targeted ratios. The parties therefore recommend that any magnet transfers not be counted as a departure from a desegregation plan or urged as a constitutional violation. LITTLE ROCK MAGNET GRANT The parties agree and recommend that, should the Little Rock District now or in the future prove successful in obtaining grants for the operation of magnet schools, any such monies shall be applied off the top to the obligations of all parties. The parties further agree and recommend to the Court that they cooperate in the development of an application for any future magnet grants. ADMINISTRATION The daily administration and operation of the magnet schools shall be the responsibility of the host district. The host district shall designate a person who shall have principal responsibility for overseeing the de,elopment and implementation of its magnet program. STUDENT RECRUITMENT The parties agree that the Magnet Review Committee shall establish a Magnetl M-to-M Educational Team (MET). The major responsibilities of the MET shall include community education and information dissemination of educational opportunities in the magnet programs and recruitment for both magnets and M to M transfers. It shall report to the MRC. The MET shall [1068] be composed of the person from each school district and the State responsible for desegregation !Jlanning, and two additional persons selected by each of the following parties: Joshua Intcrvenors Little Rock School District North Little Rock School District Pulaski County Special School District State of Arkansas These additional representatives of the MET shall not be employees or officials of any of the districts or the State. February 16, 1987 PCSSD Administrative Offices The Magnet Review Committee (MRC) endorses the foregoing stipulations. Pulaski County Special School District Isl _____G _e_n_e_J_o_n_es _____ North Little Rock School District I I James R. Smith s --------------- Little Rock School District Isl ____ J_e_ss_e_L_. R_a_nc_i!_e_r ___ _ Arkansas Department of Education Isl ____M_ a_rc_ia\n__A:..:...:H:..:.a:..:.r:..:.d:..:.in,::g_ ____ Arkansas Department of Education Isl ____r. _i_orr_is_F_._H_o_lm_e_s_ ____ r EXHIBIT B MAGNET REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT TO THE COURT January 22, 1987 The Honorable Henry Woods U.S. Federal District Court Eastern District of Arkansas P.O. Box 3683 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 Dear Judge Woods: The Magnet Review Committee submits for your consideration the attached report including nine separate recommendations concerning magnet schools in Pulaski County. ,I. 5. Verbal Communication/Instruction to Interview Teams I1 TERVIEW PROTOCOL Prior to the consideration and selection of Interview Committees for the 199-t-95 principalships at various schools in the district, a meeting was held on May 31, 199-t, to discuss the interview protocol to be used. It was agreed between the participants that although there was no written procedure or pol.icy, there bas been a well-known long-standing past practice of interview protocol. Toe above-mentioned interview protocol was to be used for selection of the 1994-95 principalships. It was further agreed that this protocol would be documented and incorporated into the Personnel section of the Policv and Procedures Manual. Attending the meeting were Mrs. Estelle Matthis, Deputy Superintendent\nMr. B~ady Gadberry, Director of Labor Relations\nand Dr. Richard Hurley, Direstor of Human Resources. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EPS CODE: GCAE3 SELECTION OF APPLICANTS SCHOOL PRINCIPALS 1. Persons desiring employment as a School Principal shall file an application in writing (Resume, letter of intent, or vitae are acceptable for the initial contact. District application forms will then be provided for applicants not currently employed with Little Rock School District.) 2. District administration officials will screen the applicants for acceptability. Taken into consideration are 3 . certification, experience, education, performance reviews, and references. The Deputy Superintendent and/or the Assistant Superintendent(s) will prepare a list of interview questions to be used in the interview process. 4. The Human Resources Director will review the questions for appropriateness regarding legal issues (ie: E.E.O., Affirmative Action, Americans with Disability Act, etc.) 5. An interview committee will be selected/appointed, as follows: Note:l Note:2 Note:3 Three Two Three ( 3) ( 2) ( 3) Parents/Patrons Teachers Administration Representatives 1. The Parent/Patrons representatives will be selected by a process: designated by the PTA president of the of the affected school. 2. The teacher(s) representatives shall be from the affected school and appointed by the Administration. 3. The Deputy Superintendent ( in consultation with appropriate staff - Assistant superintendents, Supervisors, and Principals) may designate the Administration representatives. *NOTE: The committee's composition shall be balanced, as nearly as possible, by race and gender.  LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EPS CODE: GCAB 6. The interview committee shall meet to interview and recommend candidates. The interview committee will be provided folders containing the following: 1) An interview schedule 2) The approved interview questions 3) An approved candidate rating form 4) The applicant's application materials 7. The interview committee shall interview the applicants and complete the ratings sheet. The committee, through consensus, will agree upon and submit a recommendation of the top three (3) candidates to the Superintendent. (Note: Although the applicants are rated, tne ratings are only for use in reaching consensus and need not be the sole basis for selecting the recommended candidates.) 8. The Superintendent shall review the recommendations of the Interview Committee and select the applicant to be submitted for Board approval. The Superintendent may at his/her option, reject each of the three (3) applicants and require that the committee reconvene to determine new recommendations. 9. Once the Superintendent has selected an acceptable applicant, he/she will submit that individual's name to the Board of Directors for approval. If the applicant is currently serving as a Principal, the Superintendent may reassign the Principal and advise the Board of the lateral transfer. 10. When approved, the candidate shall receive a contract which details his salary, pay grade, and other pertinent information. I --:J'---.   - , . IN' TIJE mHTED ST,\\7ES DISTilICT COURT EASTEIU: DI STl1 JCT O!' ARJCANSAS WESTERN DIVIS ION FKLED U.5. OI STlllCT COURT EASTU)N n1s,q1cr \"~K/\\\"'SAS SE\n) 1 1985 CARL R. B~ENTS, Ci...En/ 8y: -------- 1 ITTLE ROCJ( SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINT I ff.::.\".cLtr\u0026lt;I\u0026lt; V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULAS!\u0026lt;I COillffY SPECIAL SCIJOOL DISTRICT, ct al DEFENDANTS rvm.s. Lon.ENE JOSHUA, ns l-ieXt F1iend of Minors LESLIE JOSliU/,, ct al onDE}l INTERVENORS Pursuant to the o.grccmcnt entitled 11 Stipulc.tion for Proposed Ordi:!r Conce,ning Magnet Review Corrmittee\" filed by the three rarty school districts a~d the Arkansas State Board of Education,: the following Order is hereby eritered: The subject of this stipulation wa5 addressed by the Court 6f Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in its opinion of.November 7, 1985, styled as above and reported at 778 F,2d 404, 436 (8th Cir. ,,. 1985). 1, Plaintiff end each of the defendant school districts will appoint a member of the Magnet Review Comnittee (MRC) and rep or t th~ name of t 11 at person to the Co u r t w i th in ten ( 10 ) days of the entry of this Order. The defendants State Department of Education will appoint two members of the ~me and report the names of those persons to the Court within ten (10) days. The Joshua i n t er v en or 5 w i 11 appoint a person to the MRG to 6 er v c, SEP -8 1986 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF '.4RKANSAS .. (  C e):-off icic, und report the nurnes of that rerson to the Court within t en (1 0 ) days. Plaintiff and defendants will confer wi U1in t he ten-d uj period conccrninG those to be nomed in on attempt to insur12 that the l\\iRC l:ns at lee.st two blac1\u0026lt; me:rr.'.)e rs, excl:.idinz the cx-offieio member. 2 . W i th i n t w c n t y - one ( 2 1 )  days f r om th c en t r y o f th i s Order, the MRC she.11 rr:'!et to beg-in plannine an intcrdistrict ms. g n ct school pro g- run. The MRC sh al l d c v el op a t i me tab 1 e for planning and irnplcmentin~ tbe mag11et school program. During the p l a n n i n g p r O CC S S , t h e r-.mc S h a l l : A. Consider plans and proposals for mogn~t schools by the p,rrties\nB. Heur evidence presented by the parties\nc. Submit, for comnent and evaluation, interim pro[)osnls to the rarties fo1 their corrment ond/ot criticism\nD. Evaluate both the segregative and 1escgregative efJects of any l_)roposnls advanced for magnet schools. E. Make findings concerning the number, location, staffing, racial rntios, and themes of the magnet schools . In determining the number and location .of magnet schools, the MRC shnll have as its [)rimary objective the furtherance Consistent with this objective, of effective desegregation. magnets ordinarily shall be established in school facilities located in or proximate to black residential areas. The MRC may make cxce[)tions to this general rule\nfor example, Williams School may be retained as a magnet. 2 - ~fy ~ ~ .. C C 3 . Th c l\\1RC sh u 1 1 r c po r t i ts f ind i n is to the Co u r t , toge th c r w i th such rec 01m1e n d at ions as mn y be n e cc s s n r y to th c cf f i c i en t operation nnd ndministrotion of the muanet schools. Any member of th c l\\IR.C mo. y f i 1 e con~ u t r i n g or d i s sent in g rep or t s  Th c MRC report and recomncndatio11s, and nny concurring or dissenting reports, must be submitted to the Court on or before December 15, 1986, which de:~dlinc may be ext.ended by the Court fur good cause shown. The parties will seek a prompt hearing and determination by t !1 e Co u r t on the MRC rec onmc n d at ions  .' 4. Upor in:plementntion of the magnet school program, the l\\filC will continue to monitor, evaluate, nnd reconrncnd changes in the actual operation of the ma1,\n11et schools. The MRC w i 1 1 f i 1 e an an nu a 1 r e [) o r t w i t h t h i s Co u r t  In performing its functions under this paragraph, :he t\\lRC shall follow the guidelines and procedures outlinec in the precedini paragraphs. 5. The 'ffiC may retain a consultant to assist in the rnagr.et planning process, and the parties may retvin other experts and consultants to make presentations or assist in the process. G. The representative of the Joshua intervenors on the lvIR.C shall be nonvoting, but shall otherwise be entitled to pa r t i c i pc. t e f U 1 1 y i n . a l 1 as p e c t s o f the de 1 i b e r a t i on s o f t h e MRC. 7. Any party, at any time, may move the Court for a hearing JULo61987 ru.1.0.fill  y G EJ:i~ OF, f..RM~l'jAl IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUL 2 \\337 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI CX)lJNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al DEFENDANTS ORDER A f t er hear in g fr om a number of w i t n es s es , i n c 1 u d i n g magnet school principals and curricula specialists, and upon reviewing the Magnet Review Comnittee (IvIBC) reports, I remain steadfastly o p t i m i s t i c t h a t s i x q u a 1 i t y i n t e r d i s t r i c t ma g n e t s c h o o 1 s c a n a n \u0026lt;  will be ready by fall. This will, of course, require the full cooperation of everyone involved. The principals are most impressive and will provide selected. ex c e 1 1 en t 1 ea de r sh i p , in s p i t e of the manner i n w  i ch they we r e Proper procedures have now been instituted for stnff~ selection. The at tor~ys ___ .~~~:_ _.:_:~~ed _ a comprorni se on the budget fo . ~e 1987-88 school year of $3100 \u0026gt;er magnet ~tudcnt. This f i gu r c is hereby approved. A 1 1 par t i es agree that the r o 1 e of the MRC mus t be c la r i f, i e d so th a t the i n t e rd i s t r i c t mag n e t s ch o o l s can be e f f i c i en t 1 y an c successfully implemented and operated. Divergent opinions in a corrmittee such as the MRC are not only inevitable but are helpfL . in thoroughly examining options. The current problem with the l\\IB.C is not that members differ in perspectives and opinions, but ..'\\ that any vote which is less than unanimous is viewed by the parties as a stalemate to be resolved by the attorneys. At first blush it is tempting to allow the par~ies to compromise and reach agreement however they choos~, whether through their attorneys or th r o ugh the rviRC. i t r u n s c o u n t e r t o t h e c 1 e a r i n t e n t o f t h e E i g h t h C i r c u i t Co u r t That is not a realistic long-term solution a~d of Appeals in ordering the rviRC to \"administer\" the magnets. A' _\n, Gene cal lY educ a ti ona 1 decisions should be made by educators, not by lawyers. with For the most part, the rviRC is composed of members excellent credentials and abilities in the field of education. The recent opinion in the St. Louis desegregation case shed s light on what the court of Appeals intended the role of the MRC in our comnunitY to be.\n:,iddell, et al v. Board of Education, et ~ No. 86-1511, slip 01- (8th Cir. June 8, 1987). 1 n i t i al 1 y it is c 1 ear that the MRC i s a de c i s ion -making, ~ rather than merely an advisory, body. Rock/North Little Rock and Metropolitan coordinating Comnitt .:.c (MCC) in St. Louis were charged with the task of administering specialty schools. (\"Liddell Both the rviRC in Li t t le authority to administer the interdistrict vocational schools just In St. Louis, the MCC was formed and given as the\n-\nIB.C was formed in this case to administer the ma%n c t schools. In the St. Louis case, by agreement, the da y-to-day opecation of the schools rested not with the MCC but with bo s d of education of the reserved to the boards host districts. The responsibiliti e s included \"the operation of the respective t. - 2 - . . \\ programs, emolovment of staff, development of personnel and eo.ch district's needs.\" appropriation of fund.s to meet Subsequent to the agreement, the district court ordered two v o c a t i on a 1 s ch o o 1 s c l o s e d and f u r t h e r o r d c r e d t h c I\\ CC t o d c v e 1 op a staffing plan to accorrmodo.te the reduced and re assigned stnff members in those closing schools, argued on appeal that empowering the MCC to develop a restaffin g The City Board of Educatio plan infr.inged on the powers reserved to the boards of education. The~~_D of appeals held: .we find little merit in this contention. It is clear ~ that the MCC mus t be g i v en add i t i on al au tho r i t y and  must be permitted to act with more independence and objectivity than it has in the past if the  schools are to be integrated. Even with its pow tR enhanced, the MCC must have the close cooperation o: the school districts if [the] plan is to succeed. - Liddell X at 27. Similarly the parties to this case have agreed that the host district of a magnet school should make the day-to-day decision s regarding the operation of the school. This agreement cannot and ~ w i 1 1 not be cons trued to r el e gate the MRC to the s ta tu s o f an unused appendage. The court in unequivocal language directed t .,'-' MCC in St. Louis to make independent investigations, evaluations and decisions: There is no evidence that [the MCC] thoroughly revi~wed the matter, or made an independent decision wi~ respect to it. As the district court indicated, th is practice cannot be permitted to continue. The l\\1CC must be permitted to exercise the responsibility given to it by the district court and this Court. Liddell X at 22. According 1 y, the r o 1 e of the MRC is to make rec orrrne n de d - 3 - po 1 i c L_~_L.Q.!}__S~g a rd ~g _ ____!_!:_E:_ . o p_e r_a,. _t ion .. of _the mag n e t sch o o 1 s  Those decisions should tben be corrrnunicated, in a written report, to the court for approval. The report should reflect the process used to reach decisions and should reflect independent fact-finding. Objections to MRC reports should be filed with the court within 20 days, after which the court will approve, modify or reject the MRC's recorrrnendations. The court has neither the time nor the inclination to provide a laundry list of \"policy\" decisions as distinguished By way of example, in selecting f r om \" day - t O - day II de C i S i On S  s t a f f , t he MRC sh o u 1 d s e t the c r i t e r i a to be u s e.d o r p r o c e s s by which teachers are selected for magnet schools\nthe host district would implement that policy by appropriately selecting th  teachers. W i th r e s p e c t _ t o s ea t .. a l l o ca t i on , t h e MRC s ho u l d e s t ab l i s h a po l_i_\u0026lt;:.)'__f_E_r_ 2 ~-at _ al loca ti on __ _wj_j_h_ i..!!.__t~ _ p_o_~!_li_s __ ~ ~__0e st i pu 1 at ion which will maximize participation in the magnet schools from all ------  --- - ---- ---- - -------- ------ three districts. Each district should set its criteria for selection of its students for magnet schools to enhance it - --------------------------- --- ----------  -- For ___ ~he 1987_-_S~ __ school year, the parties desegregation efforts. have agreed, and it is hereby approved 1 that all North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and Pulaski County Special Schpol District (PCSSD) students who applied for magnet schools as of May 22, 1987 may attend the magnet schools they have chosen. As agreed by the parties, the -n--u-mb-e r- ---of seats allocated to NLRSD and PCSSD ar-e -t-o- b-e- -br-o-ken --do-wn- - -o-n- --a-n- -o--rga n-iz-at- io n-a-l- -l-e-v - 4 - IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER FILED U S DISTRICT COURT EASTERN 0ISTR!~T ARKANSAS NOV O 5 1992 CARL R. BRE1\\J TS, CL\n:?.i\u0026lt; By: /1 , -!kJ1 \u0026lt;'kl J/\\. / DEP. C' ERi\u0026lt; PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS I\"NT ERVENORS On May 26, 1992, the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") submitted to the Court for review and approval a budget for the 1992-93 - school year for the six original magnet schools. (Document #1609.) On July 31, 1992, the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") filed a Special Status Report setting forth its operating budget for 1992-  93. (Document #1649.) At a hearing on August 3, 1992, the Court heard tes~imony on budget reduction proposals by the LRSD in its 1992-93 operating budget. Some of those cutbacks resulted in staff reductions at the magnet schools. The Court, with some exceptions, approved the LRSD's proposed reductions in an order filed on August 4, 1992. On September 28, 1992, the MRC wrote the Court, expressing its concern about certain LRSD budget cuts. It also addressed staffing changes at two of the magnet schools which resulted in a white principal and assistant principal at Gibbs International Studies Magnet Elementary School and a black principal and assistant principal '=t Wr.1shington Basic Skills/Math-Science Magnet Elementary - - / School. (Document #1693.) The MRC complains that the LRSD failed in its obligation to work with the MRC prior to implementing reorganization or budget reduction plans that would affect the programming or staff at the magnet schools. The LRSD filed a response to the MRC' s letter, basically arguing that the role of the MRC has changed since the establishment of the magnet schools during a period of the \"controlled choice desegregation plan. 11 It contends that the MRC' s role now is to recommend policy decisions which must be communicated in writing to the parties and approved by the court. In addition, the LRSD contends there are no numerical goals or quotas in the parties' desegregation plans and the-MRc' s position that the new assistant principal at Gibbs should be removed from her job because of her race is in conflict with the law and the parties' plans. The Pulaski County Special School District ( \"PCSSD\") and the North Little Rock School District ( \"NLRSD\") responded that they support the LRSD's views. 1 Background of the Magnet Review Committee. In a November 1985 opinion, the Eighth Circuit found constitutional violations on the part of the state of Arkansas, the PCS SD, and the NLRSD and included in the remedy the establishment of magnet schools. \"The district court may require a limited number of magnet or specialty 1The Court al.so =ivcd a JC(ler dated September 23, 1992, from the attorney for the Joshua Intervenors, expressing concern about the effect of the LRSD budget cut, on the magnet schools and the assignment of a white vice-principal lO Gibbs . See Exhibit A. -2- schools or programs to be established at locations to be determined initially by a Magnet Review Committee and approved by the district court after a hearing.\" Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 778 F.2d 404, 436 (1985). The parties subsequently agreed upon the responsibilities of the MRC, which included oversight of staffing. Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 659 F. Supp. 363, 373 (E.D.Ark. 1987). Furthermore, on May 13, 1987, Judge Henry Woods stated that \" ( s) taffing of the magnets shall be made in close consultation with the principal and the MRC.\" Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 660 F. Supp. 637, 644-45 (E.D.Ark. 1987). Judge Woods further 'noted that the Eighth circuit stated that the magnet schools were to be adnlinistered by the MRC and that he considered staffing an important aspect of adnlinistration. Id. at 645. In orders entered later in May 1987, Judge Woods established the procedure for MRC review of staffing decisions: 8. Tentative selections shall be promptly submitted to the MRC for its review and comment. Any reservation or question raised by the MRC shall be promptly addressed by the LRSD. The MRC may, if it deems appropriate, address unresolved concerns to the Court before any actual assignments are made by LRSD. Order filed May 26, 1987, Document #843. See also Document #833. That the MRC was more than an advisory body was made clear in Judge Woods' Order of July 2, 1987: All parties agree that the role of the MRC must be clarified so that the interdistrict magnet schools can be efficiently and successfully implemented and operate~  . . . At first blush it is tempting to allow the parties -3- to compromise and reach agreement however they choose whether through their attorneys or through the MRC. That is not a realistic long-tenn solution and it runs counter to the clear intent of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in ordering the MRC to 'administer' the magnets. Initially it is clear that the MRC is a decision-making rather than merely an advisory body. [T]he parties to this case have agreed that the host district of a magnet school should make the day-to-day decisions regarding the operation of the school This agreement cannot and will not be construed to relegate the MRC to the status of an unused appendage. Accordingly, the role of the MRC is to make recommended policy decisions regarding the operation of the magnet schools. Those decisions should then be communicated, in a written report, to the court for approval. The report should reflect the process used to reach decisions and should reflect independent factfinding. Objections to MRC reports should be filed with the court within 20 days, after which the court will approve, modify, or reject the MR.C's recommendations. By way of example, in selecting staff, the MRC should set the criteria to be used or process by which teachers are selected for magnet schools\nthe host district would implement that policy by appropriately selecting the teachers. Little Rock School District v. PUlaski County Special School District, 663 F. Supp. 1554, 1555-56 (E.D.Ark. 1987). In Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 839 F.2d 1296 (8th Cir. 1988), the Court addressed the argument that the MRC's authority with respect to the assignment of teachers was too broad. The Eighth Circuit stated: In our view, the District court order outlining the -4- duties and responsibilities of the Magnet Review ~ommit~ee _was well conceived. It recognizes the interdistrict character of the magnet school program and carefully allocates responsibilities between the Magnet Review Committee and the host district .. we specifically agree with the court's order with respect to the procedures to be followed in recruiting and hiring faculty for the magnet schools and the part that the Magnet Review Committee is to play in staffing operation. We do, however, make it clear that the collective bargaining agreements between host school districts and the classroom teachers associations remain applicable to the extent that such agreements are not inconsistent with the responsibilities heretofore given to the Magnet Review Committee or with orders of the District Court with respect to the staffing of magnet schools. 2 Little Rock School District v. Pulaski county Special School District, 839 F.2d 1296, 1314 (8th cir. 1988). The Reductions in Staff. The LRSD Board of Directors approved budget reductions proposed by the LRSD administration on July 23, 1992. The LRSD proposed to reduce magnet positions by 14.9 full time equivalent (FTE) positions. The MRC says it learned of the reductions through the newspaper and called a special meeting for the LRSD to present its budget. During that meeting the LRSD proposed to reduce staffing in the magnet schools by 11. J FTE rather than 14.9 FTE. More meetings followed during which the MRC discussed personnel cuts with magnet school principals and LRSD central office administrators. On August 28, the MRC voted on the proposed personnel cuts and approved the reduction of 7. 4 FTE positions and asked for reinstatement of the other 3.9 FTE 2m a footnote, the Eighth Circuit quoted from Judge Woods' July 2 order in which he stated that the role of the MRC is to make recommended policy decisions, which would be communicated to the court for approval. Su LRSD v. PCSSD , 663 F. Supp. 1554, 1556 (E.D .Arie. l 9S7). -5- positions. According to the MRC, the LRSD verbally agreed to reinstate the positions but declined to reinstate the people who had occupied the positions. The MRC now asks the Court to affirm the decision to reinstate 3.9 FTE positions cut from the original magnet programs by the LRSD and to reinstate to those positions the individuals who held them prior to the cuts. In response, the LRSD contends that following the implementation of the magnet schools programs, the MRC' s role changed from that of administering to evaluating and monitoring the magnet schools. It asserts that the MRC failed to act in accordance with a properly established policy, citing language from Judge Woods' Order of July 2, 1987. LRSD v. PCSSD, supra, 663 F. Supp. at 1556. In addition, the LRSD contends that it has no authority under the Professional Negotiations Agreement (\"PNA\") to reinstate the individuals to the 3.9 FTE positions because those individuals have been reassigned according to the PNA. It states that the 3.9 FTE positions must be filled in conformity with the PNA. (Exhibit B to Doc. #1693.) The LRSD' s position concerning the role of the MRC is not well-taken. The MRC's administrative oversight responsibility was not rejected along with the LRSD' s \"controlled choice\" student assignment plan as the LRSD suggests. The MRC's responsibilities continue and include staffing decisions. The MRC continues on an annual basis to submit to the court for approval a proposed budget for the six original magnet schools. The budgets proposed by the MRC represent its efforts to assure that the magnet schools -6- continue to provide those special programs that attract and retain pupils, thereby assisting in the desegregation effort. The MRC is made up of representatives of the parties and the State of Arkansas, a former party to the action, and the LRSD has been a member of the MRC since its inception. Dr. Mac Bernd, the new Superintendent of the LRSD, acknowledged the role of the MRC when he presented Proposal No. 14 to the LRSD Board of Directors. That proposal is titled \"A Recommendation to the Magnet Review Committee\" and suggests the reduction of 14.9 FTE positions at the magnet schools. In the proposal, Dr. Bernd states: \"It is our position that any reductions of personnel in the area schools should also be made in the magnet schools monitored by the Magnet Review Committee. Therefore, it is recommended that you authorize the administration to propose a reduction of magnet positions to the Magnet Review Committee \" (Doc. #1649.) In a July 28, 1992 memorandum to the MRC, Dr. Bernd relates that the LRSD Board of Directors authorized him to propose a reduction in positions at the magnet schools. He states: \"Because the reduction in positions would create a total reduction in costs, we recommend that the per pupil rate be reduced from $3,682.00 to $3,585.17. 11 (Exhibit A to Doc. #1693.) The court is dismayed and somewhat confused about the LRSD's actions. The LRSD did not consult with the MRC prior to gaining approval from its Board for the recommended staff reductions even though the district has a representative on the MRC and was aware that the MRC was in the process of preparing a budget for the -7- magnet schools. Furthermore, the LRSD, after presenting the proposal to the MRC, failed to heed the MRC's recoIDIDendation that the same individuals be returned to the positions the LRSD had cut before securing the MRC' s permission to do so. The LRSD now attempts to dismiss the MR.C's administrative role and chastises it for not following through on court directives to establish policies and criteria for staffing decisions. If the MRC has been remiss in failing to come up with such policies and criteria, the LRSD, as a full-fledged member of the MRC, must share the blame. It appears that the LRSD wishes to recognize the MRC's authority to administer the magnet schools only when it agrees with MRC decisions. The court also has considered the arguments concerning the effect of the PNA on the staffing reductions. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has said \"that the authority of a federal court to alter or modify collective bargaining contracts in school desegregation cases must be based on a finding that the alteration or modification is necessary to further the effort to integrate the schools in question.\" Little Rock School District v. Pulaski county special School District, 839 F.2d 1296, 1316 (8th cir. 1988). The LRSD claims that the PNA does not allow it to reinstate the particular individuals who were transferred from the 3.9 FTE positions in compliance with the PNA. The Court believes, however, that by reinstating those individuals who were moved out of their jobs as a result of an action the Court finds was in violation of directives in this case, it is not setting aside the PNA. The magnet schools were designed to guarantee substantial -8- integration and important educational choices and they have proven successful in fulfilling this intended purpose. The court has stated on a number of occasions the importance of maintaining excellence in the magnet schools. \"Magnet schools . will be distinguished by the features that have made them successful in other cities: individualized teaching, a low pupil-teacher ratio, specialized programs tailored to students' interests, enriched resources and active recruitment.\" Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 839 F.2d 1296, 1309 (8th cir. 1988). The magnet schools are racially balanced as a result of efforts to make sure that they are \"recognized throughout the county as truly high quality schools, with excellent teaching staffs and unique programs of interest to suburban and city students alike . \" Id. at 1312. The success of these magnet schools is critical to desegregation, and tampering with a prover success could undermine public confidence in the magnets and the school district as a whole. The Court recognizes that some authorities oppose magnet schools as tools for desegregation but it cannot question the concept because the parties agreed to the magnet schools and they are working. When it approved the parties' settlement plans, the Eighth Circuit stressed the need for a period of stability. While the court does not wish to become involved in individual hiring decisions, the Court must see that court directives are being followed. The LRSD must cooperate with the MRC as it fulfills its responsibility to administer the magnet schools. As has been -9- stated, administration includes decisions concerning staffing levels adequate to effectively deliver the magnet programs. While it does appear that the MRC has failed to develop criteria for staff selection and the Court believes that actual selection of personnel is the responsibility of the host district, the MRC's role in determining staffing requirements is not to be undermined. The Court, therefore, affirms the MR.C's decision to reinstate the 3.9 FTE positions cut from the original magnet schools' programs and orders the LRSD to reinstate the individuals who previously held the following positions: 1) the 1. O FTE music teacher at Gibbs International studies Magnet Elementary School\n2) the 1.0 FTE counselor at Parkview Arts/Science Magnet High School\n3) the .4 FTE counselor position at Williams Basic Skills Magnet Elementary School\nand 4) three ( 3) . 5 FTE Gifted and Talented positions, one each at Booker, Gibbs, and Williams Magnet Schools. Ass i stant Principal at Gibbs International studies Magnet School. The MRC also asks the Court to vacate the assistant principal position at Gibbs and allow the LRSD to advertise and the principal to select a black assistant principal from among qualified candidates. The LRSD disputes that there is a requirement that magnet school staff positions be racially balanced and contends that the MRC's position violates the parties' desegregation plans and the law. The MRC does not contend that there is a requirement that LRSD label certain magnet school staff positions as \"black\" or \"white.\" -10- It does state that there is a goal of equal representation for blacks and whites both for administrators and teachers. The goal of equitable staffing appears throughout the LRSD settlement plan, and the Court notes that the Eighth Circuit has admonished the NLRSD and the PCSSD for not hiring blacks. See Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 778 F.2d 404, 422 (1985)\n778 F.2d. at 440 (Arnold, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). The court finds that this goal of equal representation is an admirable one and should be attempted at every opportunity. Additionally, there does not seem to be a problem here with the availability of a pool of qualified applicants because the LRSD recently hired a black as the assistant principal at Washington to serve with that school's black principal. The LRSD appears to have made an unwise personnel placement decision in its selection of the assistant principals for the two magnet schools. The Court, however, will not require the LRSD to remove the assistant principal at Gibbs. It does expect the LRSD to select staff not only at the magnet schools but at all its schools consistent with the staffing goals of the desegregation plans and the law of this case. Conclusion. Although a superintendent and his board ought to have the right to run their schools in ordinary day-to-day matters, this is no ordinary matter. order and court oversight The LRSD must function under court in a lawsuit the district itself -11- initiated ten years ago this month. The districts have agreed to abide by both the spirit and letter of their own desegregation plans and they would do well to act in good faith in fulfilling the commitments made in their plans. In Freeman v. Pitts, U.S. __ , 112 s.ct. 1430, 118 L.Ed.2d 108 (1992), the Supreme court held that in the course of supervising desegregation plans, federal courts have the authority to relinquish supervision and control in incremental stages, before full compliance is achieved in every area of school operations. Aillong the factors to be considered in ordering incremental withdrawal is whether the school district has demonstrated, to the public and to the parents and students of the once disfavored race, its good faith commitment to the whole of the court's decree and to those provisions of the law and the constitution that were the predicate for judicial intervention in the first instance  . . . A school system is better positioned to demonstrate its good-faith commitment to a constitutional course of action when its policies form a consistent pattern of lawful conduct directed to eliminating earlier violations. U.S. at 112 s.ct. at 1446, 118 L.Ed.2d at 135. In summary, the LRSD is directed to reinstate to their former positions those individuals listed on page 10 of this order. It is further directed to consider racial balance in selecting staff for the magnet schools. In the future, the LRSD must consult the MRC and must seek court permission prior to making any staffing changes in the magnet schools. Any changes in the magnet schools contemplated for the 1993-94 school year shall be presented prior -12- to preschool registration in the early spring of 1993 . .f ( . ,I- SO ORDERED this~ day of November, 1992. (U (1'\"' }Jr.\n~ ),~t) UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -13- .JOH:-J W \\\\'..\\LKER R.-\\LPH \\\\'.-\\SHINC\nTON ~!.-\\RK BCRNETTF: \"WILEY.-\\. BR.\\:-,.\nTO\\ .. JR . . -\\1..iSTIN PORTER. JR.  Also adm1a.ed to Pract 1C'I! ,n G..-o r:z 1a \u0026amp; l.~ D1stnct o( f'ulum01a JOHN W. WALKER. P.A. :\\'!TOR\\EY AT LAW 1723 BROADIV A Y L!TILE Ron\n, ARK..\\:-JSAS i~206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) :37-1-4187 September 23, 1992 Honorable Susan Webber Wright United States District Judge United States District Court U.S. Post Office \u0026amp; Courthouse Little Rock, AR 72203 Re: LRSD v. PCSSD Dear Judge Wright: I have several requests outstanding before the Court regarding the Little Rock School District. I wish to add to that list concerns which have been raised within the Magnet Review Committee regarding the budget cuts proposed by the Little Rock School District. The District proposes to cut approximately 15 teaching positions in the Magnet school. See copy of letter to Magnet Review Committee from Dr. Mac Bernd dated July 28, 1992. I am concerned because in the budget cut proposals, the District has taken at least one action that makes absolutely no sense. It has removed the assistant principal at Gibbs Elementary School who had a salary of approximately $34,000.00 and replaced her with an administrator in the District who has a salary of $60,000 or more. I just don't understand this. Moreover, the removed assistant principal at Gibbs was African American\nthe replacement for her is Caucasian. The further irony of this whole matter is that the African American principal was placed at Washington with another African American principal while Gibbs now has two Caucasiar. principals. Exhibit A U. S. D:STR!CT JUDGE Page Two Honorable Susan Webber Wright September 23, 1992 The entire matter is suspect, we believe. requesting that Ms. Ann Brown's office inquire prior to any scheduled (hopefully) hearing or with the Court. JWW:lp cc: Ms. Ann Brown All Counsel Ms. Donna Creer Ms. Evelyn Jackson We are, therefore, into these matters meeting before or TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKIIAM STREET LITTT,E ROCK, An 72201 July 28, 1992 Magnet Review Committee FROM: Dr. Mac Bernd, superintendent of Schools C... l.  l3 SUBJECT: Budget Reduction Recommendation As a result of the Little Rock School District Board approving the 1992-93 Operating Budget, it is our position that any reductions of personnel in the area schools should also be made in the magnet schools monitored by the Magnet Review Committee. Therefore, the Board has authorized the administration to propose a reduction of magnet positions as follows: Gifted \u0026amp; Talented - Elementary Counseling - Elementary Counseling - Secondary Music Teachers - Elementary (Except i3ooker) Teaching Vc1cancies - secondary 1. 5 1. 4 2. 0 3.0 Because the the reduction in positions would create a total reduction in costs, we recommend that the per pupil rate be reduced from $3,682.00 to $3,585.17. Zach Polen if 501-376-2423 ~6/17194 \\518.02AM GIBBS ELEMENTARY PARENT ASSOCIATION MEMORANDUM 6/4/94 TO: Dr. Henry Williams, LRSD Superintendent FROM: Ms. Estelle Matthis, LRSO Deputy Superintendent Easter Tucker Willie Jones Zach Polett Dodie Angulo Ann Cashion Gibbs Parent Association Members on Gibbs Principal Selection Committee RE: Preparation for Gibbs Principal Selection Committee Meeting By this memorandum, we are again requesting the list of names of applicants currently scheduled for interview by our committee. Please deliver a copy to Gibbs Elementary, attention Easter Tucker and fax a copy to 376-2423. Attached are the following materials: 1) A list of questions we intend to ask all applicants at Tuesday's interviews. 2) A brief list of procedures we propose to help facilitate the interview process. 3) A list of applicants that we request the LRSD administration schedule for interview by the Gibbs Committee on Tuesday, June 7, in case any of these are not already scheduled. Thank you for your assistance with these matters. Attachments [j2/5 Znch Polett l:f 501-316-2423 Qll 6/1 /194 Partial List of Questions for Gibbs Principal Selection Committee \\YtJ.WAM 1) Briefly describe a lesson you have taught or observed recently that you believe was very successful. Explain why this lesson worked well. 2) Do the same for a lesson or activity that you taught or obsserved which did not succeed. Why did this lesson fail, in your opinion? 3) When you informally observe classroom instruction what are the 3 most important things you look for, or hope to see? 4) How would you encourage appreciation of and proficiency in reading and writing among staff and students (and parents)? S) As principal, what can you offer Gibbs? 6) What are your goals for Gibbs? 7) In what ways do you see yourself supporting the staff in disciplinary matters? 8) In regards to non-academic programs, what ideas or philosophies would you initiate? 9) What do you see the balance to be between the basic instructional needs of reading, science, math, etc. with the international studies theme of the school? 1 O) What do you think about using the school as a resource for the community as a whole, including after 5 p.m.? 11) What would be your strategies for removing the achievement disparity between at-risk minority and/ or lower income children and majority and/or higher income children? JJ/o Zach Polett it 501-3/6-2-423 QlJ6/17/94 \\!\nd:04AM Partial List of Applicants We Would I ike to Interview on Tuesday, June Z Diane Barksdale Sharon Brooks Deborah Mitchell Cassandra Norman-Mason Stan Strauss Zach Polett V' 501-376-2423 12l16117/94 ~ 8:0SAM Proposed Procedures for Interview Process 1) We believe that we will not be prepared to make recommendations at the completion of the Tuesday morning interviews, so would like it understood from the beginning that there will be a follow-up committee meeting at a later date for the committee to evaluate the applicants and make its recommendations. 2) We understand from discussion with Estelle Matthis on Friday, May 27 that the application process was being kept open. If after the Tuesday morning interviews we do not believe we have seen the next principal of Gibbs, then we hope and expect that the District will continue to seek additional applicants and schedule further interviews. 3) We look forward to working dosely and cooperatively with the administration and Gibbs staff members of the committee to come up with the best possible principal for Gibbs Elementary. C)S/5 TO: GIBBS ELEMENTARY PARENT - TEACHER ASSOCIATION MEMORANDUM 6/15/94 FRO~: Dr. Henry Wi II iams, LRSD Superintendent Easter Tuc~er WI I I le Jones Zach Polett Dodie Angulo Ann Cashion Gibbs Parent Association Members on Gibbs Principal Selection Committee Wilhelmina Lewellen Vickie Gonterman Gibbs Staff Members on Gibbs Principal Selection Committee RE: F o 11 ow Up to Our Memorandum of June 4, 1 994 As members of the LRSD's Gibbs Principal Selection Committee. we again respectfully request to interview the fol lowing people for the prlnclpalshlp of Gibbs at the earl lest convenience: Sharon Davis Sharon Brooks Deborah Mitchel I Diane Barksdale Katherine Tweedle Please ask your staff to schedule these interviews as soon as it is feaslble. Thank. you in advance for your assistance in this matter. GIBBS ELEMENTARY PARENT - TEACHER ASSOCIATION June 17, 1994 Dr. Henry P. Williams superintendent Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 HAND DELIVERED RE: Principal Selection Process for Gibbs Magnet School Dear Dr. Williams: Again, on behalf of the Committee, I would like to thank you for your time in discussing the selection process with us. I think we can all agree that an important component to this successful functioning of not only an individual school such as Gibbs but of the entire school district is the meaningful and significant involvement of parents and teachers in the decision-making process. As parents and teachers, we observe, on a daily basis, how our schools operate and, therefore, can offer relevant input in the selection of a principal for our school. At the conclusion of our meeting, you indicated that you would review the process and procedures which have taken place to date. You agreed to advise the committee whether or not you would permit us to interview additional candidates for the principal's position. Recognizing that you will be involved in other activities through the end of this week, we ask that you notify us by 2:00 p.m., Monday, June 20, 1994. Although I believe we made it quite apparent during the course of our meeting, I would like to reiterate that our primary concern is with the validity of the procedure by which the next principal of Gibbs is to be determined. Although it has been stated by the administration that this particular procedure had \"worked\" in prior applications, it has been our experience that the process in this instance is inherently and fatally flawed. Dr. Henry P. Williams June 17, 1994 Page Two When we initially learned that there would be a vacancy, the Gibbs PTA met and determined that we would like to be involved in the selection process. Subsequently, we undertook efforts to determine what the process would be and what we, the parents and faculty of Gibbs, needed to do in order to become a part of the process. At no time were we ever given specific or accurate information regarding the process and procedures to be employed in the selection of a new principal nor were we told what our role would be. Upon the recommendation of Deputy Superintendent Estelle Matthis, we met and selected a committee to represent Gibbs and drafted communications to the school district requesting involvement in the process. we also requested information regarding the names of applicants for the position but were not provided that information until third party filed a freedom of information request. Upon obtaining this information, the committee met and on June 4, 1994, submitted a list of names of candidates that we wished to interview, a list of questions to be posed to the applicants, and after learning by word of mouth some aspects of the selection procedure, a list of proposed procedures that we wished to be included. This letter was hand delivered to both your office and that of Estelle Matthis, Deputy Superintendent by a member of the Gibbs Committee. However, it is apparent that neither you nor any administration representative on the selection committee ever saw this communique prior to the June 7, 1994 interview session. On June 7, 1994, the parents and faculty of Gibbs posed several questions to the administrative representatives on the selection committee. We asked how the five interviewees were selected and were told that all five had been selected based on their expressed interest in the Gibbs position. We are now told by you that that was misinformation. It was not until the interview session that we were informed as to what the procedure for selection of the principal would be. Both before the interview process and at the conclusion of the interviews, we inquired of the administrative representatives whether, in the event that we were not satisfied with any of the applicants interviewed, could we interview additional applicants. In response to our inquiries, we were told that the answer to our inquiry was unknown but were later told that, yes, if we could not come to a consensus on the applicants to be recommended to you, the process would remain open and we would be able to Dr. Henry P. Williams June 17, 1994 Page Three interview additional candidates. During the course of our meeting of June 15, you indicated that your representatives were misinformed. The parent and faculty members of the selection committee also expressed serious reservations about the utilization of the evaluation forms. Our concerns were the lack of prior input into the questions to be posed to the applicants as well as the use the forms would serve in the selection process. We were assured that it would not simply be a matter of tabulating the scores and then selecting the top three candidates based on simple mathematics. There was substantial reluctance on the part of the faculty and parent members of the committee to fill out the forms until we gained assurances from the administration that those forms would not be used as set forth above. At the conclusion of the interview process, the consensus was that we had not interviewed a candidate that we -could recommend to the administration for the Gibbs principal position. After lengthy discussions, the group agreed not to submit any names to the administration and that we would request the opportunity to interview additional candidates. Administration representatives insisted that the forms be filled out and that was done only after again receiving assurances that the forms not be used and the scores tabulated to arrive at three candidates based on the highest scores obtained. We were told that the only reason to fill out those forms was to document the fact that the committee had interviewed the five applicants. Additionally, several members of the committee expressly stated that any recommendation to the administration would not be based solely on the evaluation forms as those forms did not accurately reflect an individual's choices. As a general matter, it is difficult to understand how a principal can be selected based solely on a thirty minute interview. Dr. Williams, based on the foregoing, we simply ask that you provide us with an opportunity to interview additional candidates and complete what we believe is an incomplete process. I am, under separate cover, sending a copy of this letter to the individual members of the Little Rock School Board as well as to Judge Susan Webber Wright and Donna Creer of the Magnet Review Committee. Dr. Henry P. Williams June 17, 1994 Page Four We look forward to your response. AFAjr/jc cc: Dr. Katherine Mitchell Shorter College 604 Locust Street North Little Rock, AR 72114 T. Kevin O'Malley Ark. Board of Review Tower Building, Suite 700 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dorsey Jackson 1400 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John A. Riggs, IV J. A. Riggs Tractor Co. P.O. Box 1399 Little Rock, AR 72203 Sincerely, Gibbs Parent-Teacher Principal Selection Committee Easter Tucker Willie Jones Zach Polett Dodie Angulo Ann Cashion Wilhelmina Lewellen Vicki Gonterman Linda Pondexter Fuller Jr. High P.O. Box 8601 Little Rock, AR 72216 Patricia Gee 8409 Dowan Drive Little Rock, AR 72209 Oma Jacovelli 6622 Gold court Little Rock, AR 72209 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright U.S. District Judge P.O. Box 3316 Little Rock, AR 72203 \\.,/2onna Creer Magnet Review Committee 1920 N. Main North Little Rock, AR 72114 3860d GIBBS ELEMENTARY PARENT - TEACHER ASSOCIATION Dr. Katherine Mitchell T. Kevin O'Malley Dorsey Jackson John A. Riggs, IV Linda Pondexter Patricia Gee Oma Jacovelli June 17, 1994 RE: Principal Selection Process for Gibbs Magnet School Dear Members of the Little Rock School Board: Enclosed please find a copy of a letter sent to Dr. Henry Williams following our committee's meeting with him on June 15, 1994. This letter is being provided to each of you so that you will be aware of our concerns regarding the selection process and procedures employed by the district administration which was designed to result in the superintendent's recommendation to you of a new principal for Gibbs Magnet School. we believe that it is important for each of you to know that the parent-teacher members of the committee unanimously believe that the process was inherently and fatally flawed, if for no other reason than it substantially eliminated any significant and meaningful input by the parents and faculty at Gibbs. Additionally, the selection committee did not recommend any names to Dr. Williams for consideration for the principal position at Gibbs. Members of Little Rock School Board June 17, 1994 Page Two As you can see, we have simply asked Dr. Williams to allow us the opportunity to interview additional candidates for the position of Gibbs' principal. AFAjr/jc Enclosure 3861d Sincerely, Gibbs Parent-Teacher Principal Selection Committee Easter Tucker Willie Jones Zach Polett Dodie Angulo Ann Cashion Wilhelmina Lewellen Vicki Gonterman BY,,\u0026amp;g~\u0026amp;b I MAY-04-1994 15:38 FR0'1 J.B. tJAN HJ0\u0026lt; RE~ TY, !NC TO May4, 1994 Dr. Remy P. Williams. Supcrint.e:lld=i Little Rock. School District 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Wi.Iliam8: 7712420 P .01 We, the faculty and trupport staff ofWilmms Magnet School, wish to express our deep concern over the possible reasssgomem of our principal, Dr. Edwin S. Jackson. Dr. Jackson, through bis effective administralive stylo and leadership. bas \u0026amp;uided Willi.ams Magnet School to a kvel of superior acbievemcot. OUr school's high-performance record spew for itself We highly recommend that Dr. Ja.cbon's transfer be reooosidc:rcd. Also. attached you will find a list of :actors that ~ hope you will consi.d before you make yout final decision. These are j ust a fr\nw of the numerous accomplishmeats that Dr. Jackson bas helped achieve during his tenure at Williams Magnet School. He bu truly helped to make our school a choice for ex\u0026lt;ielleooc.\" As we close this 1993-94 academic year, -we want to thank you for taking the time to consider our concerns about the future of our school. Re8pCCtfuily yours, Williams Magnet School Faculty/Staff I t1AY-04-1'394 15:39 FRO\"l J. B. ~ 1-o:J\u0026lt; RER..TY, I t\u0026lt;: ... Strong leadernup ... Staff commiument ... Parental support and tru\u0026amp;t ... Extensive leadership experience ... Low staff tum--over ... Pupil committment to K-6 ... 100%P.T.A. membership ... C.O.E. leader ... Staff support ... C...ontinuity in support of Magnet prubophy md goals ... High expectations TO ... firm, fair and coomtcnt with studcMI, staff and ~15 ... Knowledgeable o.f Magnet Review Committee Federal standards ... Good relationship with the ~ world ... ChOSM to serve on the 1oint Interim CommiUcc oo Education ... Scan~ ta.t scores aro ~ high ... Conceived idea of new building design and construction ... Profession.al in all aspects of his podtion ... National Association ofElcmenary Principals member ... Ovenight and Directions Cormniuc:e repm\nemativc ... Attends annual Intemational Magnet School Convention ... Fc:da.11 Legislative Chairman for Arlcamas Elc:mentaty Principals 7712420 P.02 TOTR.. P.02 45 Huntington Road Little Rock, AR 72207 May 3, 1994 Dr. Henry P. Williams Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Williams: -- C!ofy -- Thank you so much for visiting with me this morning by telephone t o discuss my strong support for Dr. Ed Jackson, Principal at Williams Magnet Elementary School. As an active member of our PTA, I've seen how dedicated a r i concerned Dr. Jackson is in promoting the goals of our magne t school. He is uniquely qualified in temperment and background to help us achieve our goals. My daughter is in the fifth grade and my son is a kindergarten student at Williams Magnet. My main concern is that our school continue to have the stablility that I feel Dr. Jackson affords us. He has worked hard and under his leadership all the children at our school have benefited as evidenced by consistently high test scores each year. Dr. Jackson has high expectations for the classroom teachers and ensures that the philosophy of academic achievement and discipline are consistently followed throughout the school at every level. Our PTA is looking forward to a much needed expansion in our school building scheduled to get underway this summer. Dr. Jackson has been involved in the planning and development of this project and, because of his familiarity, would be a great asset in seeing the construction to its end. My husband and I support the public school system and are eager to see it strengthened. Please hear our concerns in this matter and know that our need for stability and consistency in our school system is essential. Again, thank you for carefully considering this situation and fa , allowing me to share my feelings that Dr. Jackson should remain a s the Principal of Williams Magnet Elementary School. //\",,,- '-fV! .,J) /--0r-- tl-' (!_ IL.UU,j bee Magnet Review Committee Sincerely, Dorothy Dt- (Mrs. Paul B. Young, Jr.) Dr. Henry Williams Superintendent little Rock School District 810 West Markham little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Williams: 16 Huntington Road little Rock, AR 72207 May 3, 1994 It has come to my attention that you are considering the transfer of Dr. Ed Jackson, the principal of Williams Magnet School. As the parent of a fifth grade student at Williams, I would respectfully ask that you reconsider this action. I believe that Dr. Jackson has done an excellent job of promoting the ideals of our school, basic skills, and has helped Williams to consistently lead the little Rock School District in test scores. His support of the classroom teachers and our strong discipline policy have created a learning environment where Williams Magnet truly is \"a choice for excellence.\" Williams has achieved and maintained excellence through a partnership of an excellent teachins staff, a strong principal, an involved PTA, and students who are interested in learning. Our school is very successful and I see no need for a change in this partnership. I was educated in the little Rock Public Schools and have served on the PTA Board of Williams Magnet School in various capacities for the past five years. I strongly believe that if the little Rock Public School System is to survive and flourish, a sense of stability must be established. With all the changes in the top administrative positions in the past several years, I woul\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 Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\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_creator\u003eLittle Rock School District\u003c/dcterms_creator\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 "},{"id":"mus_sovcom_9-10-0","title":"Mailing List of Negro Schools and Principals","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","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":["from Mailing List of Negro Schools and Principals, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Mailing List of Negro Schools and Principals"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=717%7C9%7C10%7C%7C0"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":["Text"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_10-106-0","title":"Major General Edwin A. Walker","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","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":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Major General Edwin A. Walker, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Major General Edwin A. Walker"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=951%7C10%7C106%7C%7C0"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_1-65-0","title":"Marcell Gordon","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","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":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Marcell Gordon, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Marcell Gordon"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=87%7C1%7C65%7C%7C0"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_97-84-0","title":"Marie Rayfield","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","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":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Marie Rayfield, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Marie Rayfield"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=1350%7C97%7C84%7C%7C0"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_2-31-0","title":"Marion County, Miss.","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","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":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Marion County, Miss., Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Marion County, Miss."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=121%7C2%7C31%7C%7C0"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_13-47-0","title":"Mario Savio","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","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":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Mario Savio, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Mario Savio"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=986%7C13%7C47%7C%7C0"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_2-20-2","title":"Marshall County","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","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":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Marshall County, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Marshall County"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=93%7C2%7C20%7C%7C2"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_2-20-1","title":"Marshall County","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","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":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Marshall County, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Marshall County"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=92%7C2%7C20%7C%7C1"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_1-85-0","title":"Martin Luther King","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","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":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Martin Luther King, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Martin Luther King"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=134%7C1%7C85%7C%7C0"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_13-29-0","title":"Martin Popper","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","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":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Martin Popper, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Martin Popper"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=963%7C13%7C29%7C%7C0"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":582,"next_page":583,"prev_page":581,"total_pages":6766,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":6972,"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}}]}}