Little Rock Schools: Arkansas Blog, Arkansas Times

Shooter hits Parkview bus with airgun pellets; one injured

Leslie Newell Peacock — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 22:23:49 -0500

The Little Rock School District informed Parkview High School parents tonight that a female Parkview student was grazed on her cheek by an airgun pellet fired at her bus. Two bus windows were shattered, but there were no other injuries. The shooter was described as wearing a black shirt, red shoes and a red jacket. The bus was fired on at Burnell Street, in Southwest Little Rock south of Baseline Road. Here's the letter to parents:

Good Evening, Parents:

I’m sending you this email on behalf of Parkview Principal, Dr. Dexter Booth. At approximately 4:30 p.m. today, the driver of First Student Bus #050 was carrying Parkview students home, when an unknown individual shot at the bus several times with an air gun at Burnell Street. The driver stopped the bus at 7725 Burnell and immediately contacted the Little Rock Police Department and Little Rock School District Safety and Security officials.

During the investigation, it was determined that a 9th grade female student had been injured on her left cheek when she was apparently grazed by a pellet. Two bus windows were also shattered. A LRSD Safety and Security Officer transported the student home where he met with her mother, who subsequently took the student to the hospital for treatment. No other injuries were reported.

As of this time, there has been no apprehension of the individual who committed the act. The District takes this matter very seriously and is committed to working with LRPD to fully investigate and catch the person responsible.

LRSD will have Safety and Security units out in the morning and afternoon to patrol the area near the scene of the incident. The suspect was wearing a black shirt, red shoes, and red jacket. If anyone has information on the incident or the alleged suspect, they are urged to contact LRPD or school officials immediately.

Thank you and have a good evening.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Little Rock School Board names Dexter Suggs new superintendent

Lindsey Millar — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 19:58:00 -0600

Tonight, the LRSD Board voted 6-1 to hire Dr. Dexter Suggs Sr., currently chief of staff for Indianapolis public schools, as its next superintendent.

Leslie Peacock sends along this report from the meeting:

A small crowd let up great big cheer tonight as the School Board voted 6-1 to hire Dr. Dexter Suggs as the district's new superintendent. Suggs was the favorite of the parents, teachers and other advisory groups, board member Jody Carreiro, who made the motion to hire Suggs, said afterward, and he said the concensus on the choice bode well for success.

Michael Nellums cast the only nay vote. He and Dr. Walter Milton, another candidate whose choice as a finalist was controversial, are friends.

After the vote, the board made remarks, all thanking board president Dianne Curry for her work. Curry praised Suggs and said the district "can't go anywhere but up." Board member Greg Adams added that, "We are ready for a new day. We're going to go with it and we're going to do great."

Waiting for the board to come back from executive session was a small group of parents from Roberts Elementary School who want the district to build a new middle school in West Little Rock. Jennifer Stephens, one of the Roberts parents, said "we feel like this board has made a step toward the community" with the hire, "and the community has moved toward the board."

Cathy Koehler, the president of the Little Rock Education Association, was thrilled at the selection, calling it a "great day." She said Suggs was by far the best among the candidates, one who had "come up through the ranks" as a teacher, principal and chief of staff for the Indianapolis School District. He is a Milken National Educator Award winner. Suggs holds a doctorate of education in organizational leadership from Indiana Wesleyan University, a master's degree in education administration supervision from Indiana University-Purdue University, a master's degree in education in curriculum and instruction from Wesleyan and a bachelor of science degree from Southern Illinois University.

Curry said she'd called Suggs on the phone and he'd accepted the job. She said they haven't figured out when Suggs will start, but she said she had invited him to come to Little Rock on March 14 for the district's facilities meeting. Carreiro said he expects Suggs will visit regularly and that an interim superintendent will have to be named in the meantime. A committee would be formed to oversee the process.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

LRSD "meet and greet" with Milton

Leslie Newell Peacock — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 09:34:00 -0600

Little Rock School District superintendent candidate Dr. Walter Milton will take part in a "meet and greet" at 12:30 p.m. today in the district administration building at 810 W. Markham St. Milton is the fourth and final candidate the LRSD is interviewing for the job. After meeting with the public, Milton will meet for an hour with parents and PTA representatives, and following that he will have an hour with teachers and teachers' union reps.

While on paper the strongest, Milton is also the most controversial. He withdrew his application for a job with the Madison, Wis., school district after the school board there considered information about his background — including an audit that said he had been overpaid as superintendent at a New York school district — and announced he was "not a good fit." Members of the board here have also had some qualms.

UPDATE:
Dr. Jim Ross, a professor of history at UALR, forwarded to the LRSD board on Sunday a petition asking it to remove Milton's name from consideration and to terminate the contract with the consulting firm that put his name forward.

Previous contact with the board has drawn no response, Ross writes. But board member Dr. Michael Nellums did respond:

Mr. Ross:

I was raised in the African-American church and one of our core beliefs is "keeping the Sabbath Day holy."
Perhaps you didn't know that most African-American church people believe in that principle. I'm forwarding you an inspirational quote from Maya Angelou. I hope it resonates within your spirit. If you require additional reading, I would recommend 2 Corinthians 12, 7-10. Try the King James Version.

Dr. Michael Nellums

Ross' response begins:

I am extremely proud to have heard from you today. Thank you so much for the quote from Maya Angelou. I have spent the last 20 years reading her brilliant work and teaching it to my classes. I of course knew that today was the sabbath, and that Christians of all races respected it. I suspected that those who kept it would get to their emails tomorrow, but as I said I am glad you and I can speak today.

Meanwhile, the State Journal Register of Springfield, Ill., where Milton was superintendent of schools until his resignation a few weeks ago, reports that Milton has made thousands of dollars in independent contracts with other school districts through his company, From the Heart International.

Milton's contract with the Pulaski County Special School District has been reported; it's worth $90,000. The story says he's made eight visits to the district since Jan. 1 as part of his contract, all on Thursdays and Fridays; Milton says he used vacation time to make the trips. He also has a contract with the Youngstown, Ohio, district, where Connie Hathorn, another candidate for the LRSD job, is superintendent.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

More on Milton and the LRSD

Leslie Newell Peacock — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:50:14 -0600

Jim Ross, who created the Facebook page that addresses the records of the Little Rock School District superintendent candidates and a petition to remove Dr. Walter Milton from the finalists, has notified the School Board that candidate Milton wants to talk to him:

Dear LRSD Board:

On Monday February 25, 2013 I was approached by Marci Manley a reporter from KARK and given a piece of paper with Dr. Milton's personal phone number on it. I was a little shocked at this, and was further shocked when she told me that he wanted me to call him.

I have not called him and nor will I. I am deeply concerned about this contact outside the normal means of the interview process.

I am responsible for the Facebook page that is looking at all the candidates' public records, and I am responsible for the petition asking you all to remove him from the interview process.

I am not sure why he was contacting me. Did he mean to intimidate me? Did he want to persuade me to remove my opposition to his interview? More importantly has he been contacting others in our city? This whole experience has convinced me that he does not have the ethical wisdom it takes to be a strong leader. Is it ethically proper to contact someone in this city about this job? Are we going to be open and transparent in this process.

I hope each of you will honestly look at the other three candidates that the search firm has selected for us. Each of them have weaknesses, but they each appear to be very strong and visionary leaders who would serve our city well.

Thanks for your service. I was reminded today that you all are not paid for this work. I know it is a sacrifice. I really mean it when I say I am thankful for the sacrifice each one of you make.

Jim Ross

Board member Leslie Fisken replied to Ross' email, thanking him for his appreciation of their work.

Thank you for your appreciation Mr. Ross. Our board is working together as a team during this superintendent search and adding:

I have not had any communications with Dr. Milton or any of the superintendent candidates outside of the interview process. I plan to strictly follow the interview schedule as provided to us by McPherson & Jacobson. That schedule is posted on the LRSD website www.lrsd.org.

I appreciate your support of our district.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

School board members question selection of Milton

Leslie Newell Peacock — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:15:00 -0600

Emails exchanged last week between members of the Little Rock School Board and the consultants it hired to find a superintendent, McPherson and Jacobson, indicate that at least a couple of board members were unhappy that the search firm had suggested Dr. Walter Milton.

Milton’s career, as has been pointed out here, has not been without controversy (including his decision as superintendent of Fallsburg Central School District, N.Y., to hire a former business partner who had been convicted on child molestation charges (Milton said he didn’t know about the charges), an audit that found he was overpaid by the New York school district, a foreclosure action on his New York house, and the fact that he resigned his current job as superintendent of schools in Springfield, Ill., after an extension of his contract was denied).

On Feb. 20, board member Jody Carreiro complained to Bald Knob School District Superintendent Kieth Williams, a consultant for McPherson and Jacobson, that Milton was “proving to be a giant distraction.” From that email:

“I continue to tell people that I am focused on 3 very high quality candidates that we are interviewing. But after being lectured a bit on the difference between vetting and googling, I am growing more concerned about how much vetting was done. Dr. Milton provided the same 3 pieces of paper to the Dem-Gaz, based on today’s article, that were shown to us by Loe as proof positive that everything about Dr. Milton was false or exaggerated. This would lead one to conclude that the only vetting done was asking Dr. Milton for his explanation instead of independent verification. … I am starting to get lots of email questioning why we are even interviewing him. I hope this does not distract from the 3 good candidates.

I have two different groups that are telling me the overturned conviction of Dr. Milton’s friend was just a prelude to a conviction and that he is serving time now. If either of these provide independent documentation it will be very embarrassing to the board and to McPherson and Jacobson.

Milton provided the Democrat-Gazette a document showing his friend, Julius B. Anthony, had been acquitted of the child molestation charge. But Anthony has since been jailed on charges of sexual battery, in June 2008, according to the website mugshots.com.

In response to Carreiro, McPherson consultant Loe Dunn sent an email that hotly defended Milton and the firm’s vetting of him, writing “Yes, there is a difference between “vetting” and “googling.”

On Feb. 21, board member Leslie Plowman Fisken emailed Dunn about her response to Carriero, which was copied to the board as a whole:

Ms. Dunn,
I appreciate your efforts in our superintendent search. I, as a new board member, am still confused as to why an applicant like Dr. Milton, with a questionable background, would be recommended to us as someone that could lead the Little Rock School District. Regardless of work history, success and media scrutiny, Dr. Milton has a history whereby he has made questionable decisions and judgment calls that, at a minimum, cast a shadow of doubt upon his honesty and ethics. These traits are a must in any candidate that will lead this district. I find his application a distraction and an insult to the applications of Drs. [Stefanie] Phillips, [Dexter] Suggs and [Connie] Hathorn.

Milton, who will be interviewed for the job on Monday and meet with the public at 12:30 p.m. that day, and Dunn have a defender on the board, Norma Johnson. On Feb. 22, Johnson sent an email to Dunn, who is the campus director for the Louisiana Delta Community College Campus Sites in Bastrop, La., according to the McPherson and Jacobson website, praising her for her work in the superintendent search.

Ms Dunn, you have done a great with your search superintendent search. My fellow board members, please understand that we all had the opportunity to voice our opinion before we considered who to interview. Ms Dunn has done her part, so please leave her alone, it is time for us to do our part. If you are not pleased with a candidate, then don’t vote for him/her but don’t keep attacking Ms Dunn. My goodness, what is wrong with you guys. I hope I daon’t have any grammatical eroors, they wil lnail me to the cross.

Johnson also wrote board member Greg Adams:

Greg, I have a questions, Anti-Bullying Advisory Board Chair, does any of this border on ‘Bullying”? I am almost sure there is a better and more respectful way of conducting business, why this, I am not sure. We were off to a good start and now I smell some crapp.

In reply, Adams wrote Johnson, "This looks more to me like strongly felt and sometimes strongly expressed disagreements — assertively but not aggressively expressed. … Will be a good discussion for us.”

McPherson and Jacobson have a contract for $21,500 plus expenses with the district.

The school district provided the emails to the Times in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Little Rock School Board sics lawyer on Facebook page

Max Brantley — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:23:46 -0600

Blog commenters have mentioned creation of a Facebook page to follow the search for a new school superintendent. The page incorporates the School District logo, shown here, in its design, but it is unrelated to the district.

Items have provided links to news articles about various candidates, including several on Walter Milton Jr., the Springfield superintendent to whom Little Rock School Board member Michael Nellums reportedly reached out the last time Little Rock had an opening.

The Facebook page has gotten the attention of School Board President Dianne Curry, who's already been quoted as being dismissive of newspaper articles (there are lots of them) about Milton's controversies at his current and former job. He's being pushed out the door before the end of this school year with a $178,000 buyout, the local newspaper has revealed. The new Facebook page includes an unverified report that Milton had sought a consulting contract with Little Rock last year.

Curry has sent an e-mail to the district's private lawyers about the Facebook page. It said:

Please address this issue and concern for us. I do not want this to be misleading to any one that this is districts process. We do not want this to indicate that this is the district. I am asking for this to be removed as a connection to the LRSD.

Nellums also commmented in an e-mail to board members:

Who gave them permission to use the LRSD trademark symbol?

The founder of the group contends the logo is not trademarked. He sees the comeback from the board as intimidation by board members backing Milton.

Is LRSD heading to another leadership disaster?

Interesting contrast: Madison, Wisc. school board members asked Milton to withdraw from seeking their superintendent opening after learning about some controversy in his background. They had heard his defense that news articles were inaccurate. Here, Milton made the finalist list despite that knowledge and the Board president has acted forcefully in his behalf since. These facts won't be unnoticed by other candidates.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Little Rock School Board meets Monday to pick superintendent finalists

Max Brantley — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 07:14:33 -0600

The Little Rock School Board meets Monday afternoon to narrow applicants for the school superintendent's job to to finalists.

I'm interested particularly in one applicant, Walter Milton Jr., currently superintendent in Springfield, Ill., and a finalist the last time Little Rock filled this job. I've talked with him and he insists questions raised about his tenure in Springfield and elsewhere during his quest for a job in Wisconsin are just the sorts of things long-term superintendents inevitably face. Bosses don't make everybody happy, after all, and they can't be held responsible for the occasional mistakes in hiring of subordinates. But, my, what a lot of smoke.

There's this; and then there's this; and then there's this; and then there's this; and then there's this; and then there's this; and then there's this; and then there's this.

And that's just a sample.

Forget the single applicant.The larger question is whether any of the applicants offer hope for departure from status quo, change-at-the-margins leadership. Leadership is lacking on the School Board itself, though that's something of a product of racial factionalism. The superintendent selection process was delayed far too long and is occurring now at a bad time during the school year. The process was outsourced to a consultant firm that hasn't produced stunning choices before. Race of the superintendent choice seems likely to be a disproportionate factor in the selection process.

It's far too late for me to make this suggestion, but I'll make it again anyway. Little Rock could have sought a waiver from state law to bring in an independent local businessman without political baggage to evaluate, even ruthlessly, the old order of things. Heck, they could look next door or elsewhere in Arkansas for somebody like Jerry Guess, who's used a powerful portfolio as state-appointed leader of a district in receivership to right the Pulaski County Special School District. He, incidentially, had a noteworthy career at a Camden school district well-versed in coping with desegregation and flight issues.

Why can't the district recruit a shining star rather than fall back on the usual sorts of choices that inevitably include candidates fleeing difficult circumstances?

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Poor vetting of school candidate: Has LRSD noticed?

Max Brantley — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 09:36:50 -0600

I linked yesterday to a Wisconsin news article about the withdrawal of an Illinois school superintendent, Walter Milton Jr., from a search for a new leader in Madison. The angle is that the same man had applied previously to be superintendent in Little Rock and is again on this year's list of ~~finalists~~ applicants.

Here's further reporting today in which the Madison newspaper says that city's consultant concedes some problems in its background check.

Gary Ray, president of Ray and Associates, did not return calls Wednesday and earlier this week seeking comment. He told The Capital Times on Wednesday the board was "well aware" of Milton's work record.

[Board member Mary] Burke said Milton provided documents explaining a New York financial audit that found he had been overpaid and the hiring in Michigan of a former business partner who had been convicted of child molestation. Burke said Tuesday after learning more about Milton that the board had not been given a "full accounting."

Ray has not responded to a State Journal request for the documents provided to the board.

This naturally raises the question about the background check by a different consulting firm working in Little Rock and what its materials say about this particular candidate. I've asked School Board President Dianne Curry if she's aware of the Wisconsin situation and whether it's had any impact on Milton's position as a contender for Little Rock's job. Milton has been unavailable for comment in Wisconsin, as he was when I tried to reach him a couple of years ago about Little Rock School Board member Michael Nellums' activities related to his candidacy. Board member Jody Carreiro said he was aware of the issue. He said the LRSD's search firm was still in the vetting process and board members hadn't been provided with materials about the candidates yet.

UPDATE: I heard from Milton this afternoon. He said his record was an open book, including a "stellar" record during his six years in Springfield. He said the items brought up about him were inaccurate and old. He said he wouldn't have been hired in Springfield had there been anything to the reports. He said he'd acted quickly when he learned that a man he'd hired as a curriculum director at a Michigan district faced a court accusation and that the man resigned rather than being fired. But Milton also said the man was ultimately acquitted of wrongdoing. He said the audit questions similarly were inaccurate and produced in an audit after he left the school district, a move that left some people unhappy with him. He said a credit card for general use by several employees bore his name but that his own expenditures were all within business guidelines. He said he'd be happy to go into detail on any and all issues. "I'm all about transparency," he said. As for Nellums: He said he'd met him once at an educational conference some years ago, but had no deeper association.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

LR superintendent candidate withdraws from Wisconsin job search

Max Brantley — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 08:52:17 -0600

Walter Milton Jr., school superintendent in Springfield, Ill., and one of the finalists disclosed yesterday in the search for a new Little Rock School District superintendent, has withdrawn from a job search in Madison, Wisc.

Report from the Wisconsin State Journal:

Walter Milton Jr. pulled his name from consideration for the Madison School District's superintendent job Tuesday evening, according to a statement the Madison School Board provided to the State Journal.
The decision comes amid questions about parts of Milton's background and how much the board knew about them before naming him Sunday as one of two finalists for the job.

At previous jobs he hired without conducting a background check a former business partner who had been convicted of child molestation, according to news reports. Milton also faced questions about submitting inaccurate resumes when applying for jobs.

Also, a 2007 New York state comptroller's audit found Milton had been overpaid while superintendent at a school district there from 2003 to 2005 and used a district credit card for personal expenses that he had not paid back.

Milton applied for the Little Rock job in 2011. At the time, we revealed some unusual maneuvers by School Board member Michael Nellums in Milton's behalf.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Backpack notes: OK with guns?

Max Brantley — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 08:45:21 -0600

Little Rock School District parents were surprised in a few cases yesterday at notes that came home in elementary student backpacks.

They were asked about their feelings on armed security guards in elementary schools.

Superintendent Morris Holmes talked to the School Board recently about adding armed security guards — not police officers, but regular security offices who've been through firearms training — at all school campuses.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

UPDATE: McClellan faculty protest principal's transfer

Cheree Franco — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 16:34:00 -0600

Teachers and faculty from McClellan Magnet High School are planning a protest outside a special Little Rock School Board meeting this evening.

On the agenda tonight is a personnel discussion that's thought to concern the imminent transfer of McClellan interim principal Clausey Myton to Hamilton Learning Academy. On Tuesday, district superintendent Morris Holmes informed Myton of the transfer, and Myton announced it to the teachers at a staff meeting. Myton said he was told he was being moved because teachers, parents and board members are unhappy with his performance.

Multiple McClellan faculty members contacted the Times, but they're not willing to give their names for fear of losing their jobs. Teachers are angry about not being consulted in the decision, particularly because, in the past decade, McClellan has had high principal turnover. At least one principal and two interims have stayed less than two years. Some faculty believe Myton is being transferred because he recommended the school’s long-time secretary, Deborah Brown, for termination after she signed his signature on a letter that went out to all McClellan seniors. The letter solicited their participation in a credit recovery program that, according to McClellan faculty, Myton didn’t think made good use of fiscal resources. At least two witnesses heard him tell Brown that he wasn’t going to sign or send it.

According to McClellan staff, the district decided not to terminate Brown. Some faculty think this is because she is friendly with several members of the school board. We've got a call in to the LRSD to verify Brown's employment status, but according to a McClellan staff member, Brown was kept on paid administrative leave from May until December and suspended for 10 days without pay in December. She has not returned to work at McClellan.

More than one McClellan faculty member told the Times that Myton is a rarity because he does things “by the book,” meaning he follows both state code and that of the LRSD handbook. Sure enough, when reached via phone, he refused comment and referred us to Pamela Smith, Communications Officer at LRSD.

UPDATE: About two dozen teachers showed up with handmade signs in support of Myton, despite having already been informed that public remarks are only taken on the fourth Thursday of the month. "We thought we'd come anyway, let them know that we're paying attention and we want Mr. Myton to stay where he is...he was told not to tell faculty [about the transfer], but because of the kind of principal he is, he told them he was going to tell his staff himself...they were going to carry this whole thing out with a closed vote, without letting the faculty in on it, without giving us a chance for public comment," said Sandra Nichols, who has taught at McClellan for twelve years.

During the meeting, Holmes reminded the public that he was recommending the transfer to the board, and that he could have legally made the transfer without the board's input. He chose to bring the matter before the board in the interest of transparency. Jody Carreiro made a motion to discuss the matter in a closed session, but legal counsel said that a closed session was inappropriate to discuss a transfer under the same terms of employment. Under the Freedom of Information Act, a closed session is only permissible to discuss firings, hiring, demotions and resignations.

There was a brief discussion about the impact a mid-year transfer might have on student achievement and if a leadership change would affect a federal social improvement grant (SIG) McClellan is currently receiving. Carreiro asked if Holmes had discussed the matter with the SIG coordinator, and Holmes said he had not and would not discuss staff changes with anyone outside of the board. "So I guess I just have to assume that you feel it would be a better fit to effectuate our SIG grant with this particular line-up," said Carreiro.

Greg Adams made the motion to approve the transfer, and Diane Curry seconded the motion. The motion failed, three to two. Adams and Curry voted yes, Norma Jean Johnson, Tommy Branch and Michael Nellums voted no. Leslie Fisken and Carreiro refrained from voting.

ALSO: The School Board also began a discussion of whether to place at least one armed police officer in every school, rather than just select campuses. More on that here from Channel 4.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

LR School Board member Michael Peterson dies

Leslie Newell Peacock — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 12:07:42 -0500

Michael Peterson, who was elected to the Little Rock School Board in September, was found dead today at his home today, the Little Rock School District has confirmed, but no other details are available right now. The Little Rock Police spokesman couldn't immediately be reached, and the district is not releasing other information. (The LRPD later released an incident report that said they were called to a report of a dead body at the Peterson home at 10 a.m. this morning. There is no indication of foul play.)

District spokesman Pam Smith said district policy is to let the school board members elect a replacement in the case of a vacancy, but that the district was still studying the issue. (Later today, Smith said the process is that the board will have to declare a vacancy, advertise for the position and select someone for the seat within 30 days.)

Peterson defeated Laveta Wills-Hale for the Zone 6 position.

We'll post more information when we can get it.

Update: Peterson, 63, worked 38 years in the district, retiring in 2010 as principal of Metropolitan Career Technical Center.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Three more candidates have filed for LR School Board

Max Brantley — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 11:29:53 -0500

The Pulaski clerk's office reports that three more candidates submitted petitions this morning to file for Little Rock School Board, including Zone 7 incumbent Dianne Curry. Frances Johnson of 6510 Mabelvale Cutoff also filed for Zone 7. They join Tanya Dixon, who filed yesterday.

The clerk said Tranett Walker-Brooks of 8609 Essex Drive filed successfully for Zone 6 (her petitions were still being checked when I first posted). Michael Peterson and Laveta Wills-Hale filed yesterday for Zone 6, currently represented by Charles Armstrong. Armstrong isn't running because he's been elected to the Arkansas House. Peterson mentioned, by the way, in a chat with me yesterday that he expected state Rep. John Walker, a lawyer and powerful figure in LR school affairs, to support Wills-Hale. "That's fine," Peterson said. "I'm independent." He's a retired 38-year district employee, his last 17 as principal at Metropolitian High, which specializes in vocational training. PS: If you're keeping score, Attorney Walker has had differences with Board member Curry and is expected to throw his support to Tanya Dixon.

Leslie Plowman Fisken remained unopposed for Zone 3 to succeed Melanie Fox, who didn't seek another term.

No new candidates from yesterday in North Little Rock. No contested races emerged.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

School board filing deadline draws near

Max Brantley — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 11:14:10 -0500

The deadline is noon Tuesday for filing for school board seats and two are still wide open in the Little Rock School District. UPDATE: Not now. Candidates have filed for all seats.

At 9:40 a.m., this morning, the county clerk had received a filing for the Little Rock Zone 3 seat from Leslie Plowman Fisken. Melanie Fox isn't running again for that seat. Nobody has filed yet for Zones 6, currently held by Charles Armstrong, who's headed to the state legislature, and Zone 7, now held by Dianne Curry, who's expected to seek re-election.

The Little Rock Regional Chamber of Commerce put out an e-mail call for candidates this morning for these seats. If past experience is a guide, the chamber will keep mum if it finds a candidate it favors for one of the seats.

In North Little Rock, Scott Miller in Zone 2 and Darrell Montgomery in Zone 3 have filed for re-election. Richard Luke King has filed for the Zone 7 seat currently held by John Riley, who has not filed.

UPDATE: At 4:55 p.m., the county clerk's office said three more candidates had filed:

* Little Rock Zone 6: Michael Peterson of 8801 Nancy Place (a former principal in the district) and Laveta Wills-Hale of 7922 Lassie Lane. I believe she coordinates a program that works to provide educational programs for kids in out-of-school times.

* Little Rock Zone 7: Tanya Dixon of 6109 Senate Drive.

A clerk's office spokesman said other activity by people picking up petitions indicated more filings may be coming Tuesday.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Holmes: Little Rock principal reassignments to stand

Max Brantley — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 06:40:43 -0500

I'm seeking to confirm, but a teacher who's been following the reassignment of Little Rock School District principals said Superintendent Morris Holmes sent a memo to the School Board yesterday saying the reassignments would occur as originally annnounced.

Parents at two elementary schools — Western Hills and Williams Magnet — petitioned for special School Board meetings recently to protest the reassignment of their popular principals. Holmes has said the reassignments were part of a plan to "refresh" all the schools.

UPDATE: It's confirmed. Superintendent Holmes' memo follows in full, but it says little beyond reaffirming his original decision. He doesn't respond specifically to complaints from parents at schools that have been reporting good results. Following his note is a report to the Williams PTA Board from its leader.

Seventeen schools have newly assigned Principals for the 2012-13 school year, and all but one were accomplished by transfers. The transfers were administratively recommended, Board approved, and announced at a Special Board meeting on June 14, 2012.

No position in the Little Rock School District compares to the functioning of the Principalship. District leadership is charged with the responsibility to recruit, select, assign, remove, transfer and place individuals in forty-nine school
campuses. While it is an arduous process matching skill sets with the needs of each campus, these decisions are made with the best interest of our students in mind.

Each Principal transferred and/or assigned to a school is an experienced classroom teacher and administrator with several years of working with curriculum, programs, parents, teachers, students, and the school community. The expectations are that each school’s accomplishments are sustained; needs for growth are strategically identified; partnership with parents is solidified and welcomed; and teachers and Principals have collaboratively focused goals to ensure that students are prepared academically to achieve proficiency, advancement, and be prepared to negotiate paths leading into the intellectual and demanding rigor that is required for success in college, work, and American citizenship.

Both the Superintendency and the Principalship must shoulder disproportionately high levels of responsibilities. Why else would one want to be either a Superintendent or Principal? Parent groups, Principals, community volunteers and leaders from four schools, with two schools demonstratively surfacing their requests, have petitioned me and the School Board through public meetings, by e-mails, telephone calls, and meetings requesting that some or all Principals’ transfers be rescinded.

Again, I want to express my appreciation and sincere concerns for all opinions, thoughts, suggestions, diligence, and no-letting-up pursuits. I certainly understand the affection that a community has for its school and principal; however, as Superintendent, I have to focus on the entire District.

After thorough consideration, it is my decision that the recommendations and approvals made related to all Principal transfers and assignments on June 14, 2012 stand. It is my hope that parents, teachers, administrators and all stakeholders would remain firmly involved in our schools with the same enthusiasm they have recently demonstrated for the sake of all of our children.

Morris Holmes

NOTE TO WILLIAMS PTA BOARD

Dear WMS PTA Board,

Attached, please find the official and final word from Dr. Holmes re: the principal transfer. In essence, he has listened to and appreciates the concerns expressed from the parents at WMS (and other schools), however, he is sticking with his decision on all principal transfers.

Mrs. Register has done many wonderful things for WMS and it is hard to see her go. However, we must now stick together and show our support for Ms. Brown. I know that our excellent staff, parents and students at WMS will continue to make ours the best school in the LRSD.

I plan on sending an e-mail to the entire student body sometime tonight. I also plan on sitting down with Ms. Brown in the very near future to welcome her to WMS and to lend her our help in transferring to our school. I pray that you will all join me in rallying around our new principal.

Thanks!

Lisa Leggett

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Little Rock's principal shuffle hard to undo

Max Brantley — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 06:28:36 -0500

Coverage — here by Channel 4 — of parents unhappy over the mass shuffle of Little Rock School District principals by Superintendent Morris Holmes only increases the mystification.

No doubt there are principals in need of removal. No doubt there are some principals better than others. But the interlocking shuffle of 13 principals ends up making it appear as if all are equal. Swapping a principal with a proven record at one school for a principal with less-obvious gifts at another school is somehow going to improve both schools? Holmes has not explained that case well nor did the School Board press him sufficiently on it in ratifying his choices.

Parents at Williams Magnet and Western Hills made the case to keep popular principals at those elementary schools during special school board hearings last night. Holmes said he intended to give consideration to what he'd heard, but he added, "it's not an easy chore to move over 13 principals."

Will a school superintendent reverse himself on one or two changes when that would set off the necessity of at least several more changes? It would be contrary to the nature of the superintendent beast. And the School Board, though some members might harbor doubts about aspects of Holmes' plan, will be reluctant to meddle with his selection of school-level leaders, a matter in which the chief administrator is generally given great deference.

I'll be surprised if this bell is unrung. And somewhat more surprised if the district is a net winner from it all.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Latino group to challenge new LR School Board zones

Max Brantley — Wed, 23 May 2012 06:56:48 -0500

The League of United Latin American Citizens has decided to challenge the Little Rock School Board's recent redrawing of school board zone boundaries. The map diminished the influence of the district's growing Latino population to the advantage of three of the four black members of the Board, who voted together for the map 4-3.

An e-mail from the local LULAC leader, Terry Trevino-Richard, explains:

Dear LULACers and friends of the Latino community - we have decided to legally challenge the LRSD School Board map approved by the LRSD this past week.

There are several reasons to challenge the vote taken but the key to this legal action is that we will be stuck with this map for TEN years. Those who voted for this map on the School Board failed to look at the burgeoning Latino population in SWLR and did not take into consideration the disproportionate number of Latino children in the schools located in that section of town. In fact they carved up this district and diluted the power of Latinos in the primary zone that Latinos made up a significant minority - Zone 6.

For this reason - we need to take action for the benefit of the children and the parents. Angie Schnuerle is our lawyer and is deliberating which actions will serve our community best. In order to pay for these legal services - I am asking all of our members to sacrifice $50 to be placed in an account to serve as the retainer for Angie to file the legal papers. If you can contribute more than $50 - that will be held in case the legal process becomes more involved. If we are able to move to mediation or a friendlier decision - any extra monies will go into LULAC 750 Inc. for scholarships.

Please heed this call - make a check for $50 or more to LULAC 750 with a note at the bottom listing LRSD Legal expenses. The address is LULAC 750 P O Box 55103 LR AR 72215

This is a time to take action... no more crying about injustices - this is the moment for LULAC to stand tall and confront these issues.

Too often we have complained then backed away - this is an issue that will haunt us for ten years if we let this stand.

Si se puede - para nuestra comunidad! And take heart - there were strong voices on that school board who heard our voice but were simply ignored.

Terry

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

LULAC objects to Little Rock School Board rezoning

Max Brantley — Mon, 14 May 2012 12:35:31 -0500

The League of United Latin American Citizens has appealed the new Little Rock School District school board zones to the Pulaski County Election Commission, a three-member group comprising two Democrats and one Republican.

UPDATE: However, the Election Commission says that the Little Rock and North Little Rock school districts are exempted by state law from review of zone boundaries by the county election commission and so it will not be considering new zones in either district.

LULAC, in a message from Terry Trevino-Richard, said the boundaries adopted by a racially divided School Board last week (the black majority favored the new map) didn't follow a rational reasoning but seemed designed primarily to address the personal desires of school board members, particularly Michael Nellums, whose boundary proposal was adopted. LULAC called the map an "arbitrary and covert attempt to minimize the represenation of Latino students and parents." It suggests it might take legal action if the new map is put in place.

LULAC had favored a plan that concentrated more of the district's growing Latino population in a single school board zone. The plan approved divided that population between two zones. It's unlikely a map could currently be drawn with majority Latino population, much less majority Latino voters, but a solid voting group could be influential in school board races, where turnout is often quite small.

Trevino-Richard's letter to county election officials follows. He told me later that he was talking with LULAC officials about the possibility of legal action, but no firm decision had been made.

Please accept this email as an appeal on behalf of the Latino children in the Little Rock School District to table the approval of the rezoning map submitted by the LRSD Board. LULAC would like to appeal the decision as an arbitrary and covert attempt to minimize the representation of Latino students and parents in the LRSD representative zones and was adopted under personal rather than representative guidelines. I am attaching the emails forwarded to all the board members on behalf of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) requesting that the growing number of Latino students and parents by recognized in any rezoning map. Additionally LULAC identifies the following criteria which emerged in the last meeting as additional critical variables that necessitate a review and rejection of the approved map 7. LULAC asks that the Election Committee remand the approved map back to the board for further discussion.

Problematic Variables:

* Once again the vote by board members reflects a racial divide which continues to have a negative impact to many of the decisions made by board members. In this case it is the African-American members of the board who have ignored the repeated requests of Latinos to have their voices heard in adopting new zones. This type of "racial politics" is a contributor to the loss of confidence among many parents with children as regards their sense of fairness existing within the LRSD.

* Comments made by Mr. Nellums about the rationale of introducing Map 7 was based on his opposing his original zone boundary that was two blocks from his house and wanting to connect preferred neighborhoods based on areas he wanted to place in his zone. This seems to be a personal rather than any rational or “required” reason for redrawing the zones.

* Also during the board discussions, Mr. Armstrong made the rather prejudicial statement about the number of Latino parents who were "illegals" as if considering the make-up and representation within the zones did not need to consider Latinos because of their residential status. This despite the fact that 85% of the children of Latinos are American citizens who deserve to be represented.

* A main reason the Election Commission should not approve Map 7 is the obvious gerrymandering of the boundaries which is plainly visible in the unorthodox extension of Zone 1 which absorbs an almost disconnected area from zone 7 (heavily Latino) into zone 1. This is exactly the type of gerrymandering which was identified to the board members as why LULAC and Latinos were opposed to any map other than Map 5. (see email attachments)

* Finally – Map 7 which was approved by the board members was NOT one of the requested maps drawn by Metroplan for the explicit purpose of meeting critical factors in redrawing the zone boundaries. In fact Metroplan made it a point to note that Maps 6 + 7 were drawn by board members to suit their own interests and was not a part of the Metroplan options.

LULAC is asking the Election Commission to note the opposition of many of the Latino children and parents in the LRSD to challenge the approval of this map. The Election Commission should note these irregularities and basic trampling of the interests of Latino parents and children to be fairly represented. The approval of this map risks an injunction based on the capricious nature of those who drew this map and demonstrates a form of institutional discrimination against Latinos in the LRSD. Should the Election Commission wish to have representatives of the Latino community address the members - please email me or phone

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

A Latino voice speaks up in Little Rock School District

Max Brantley — Wed, 09 May 2012 10:11:15 -0500

The Little Rock School Board has been dickering for weeks over new maps for school board zones following the census. A prime concern of some board members has been preserving existing zones as much as possible for existing board members and not putting any two members in the same zone.

A new issue has arisen on account of the growing Latino population, particularly in Southwest Little Rock. That community is interested in maximizing its influence and has objected to a map favored by a couple of incumbents.

An e-mail on the subject from Terry Trevino-Richard, who's active in the League of United Latin American Citizens, has gone to board members about the concerns. It follows. It was addressed originally to Michael Nellums and Norma Johnson, but has since been copied to all Board members.

UPDATE: The zones are likely to be approved at a special board meeting Thursday night.

Mr. Nellums and Ms. Johnson :

Please accept this email as a kindly push by the Latino community to have our voices heard by two of our admired LRSD Board Members. Over the last two weeks there have been several meetings of Latino parents with children in the LRSD to discuss the proposed mapping process presently being debated. Our community is concerned that the present redrawing of district zones for the LRSD Board members will have the effect of marginalizing the ability of Latinos to have their voices heard via elections for the school board. The growth of the Latino population both in students and parents continues to be the most dynamic element occurring in the LRSD and this is particularly evident in zones 6 and 7.

Our community asks you to please vote for Map 5 which does the least harm in diluting the ability of Latinos to have some leverage on school district board members. Two weeks ago an email was forwarded to point out what could be perceived as flaws in map 6 designed by Diane Curry and Charles Armstrong. Over the weekend I had a very productive meeting with Ms. Curry and I feel certain that the intent of the Curry/Armstrong map was to broach important factors which would ensure that the new zones would be both legal and not dramatically alter the board members voter connections. However as is often the case – not all variables were included in the remapping and as some issues are resolved – others emerged.

In this case as a representative of the Latino community – the Curry/Armstrong map was viewed as creating a problem in redistributing the Latino population in a way that minimized their impact on electing or at least influencing board member elections. This concern was voiced to Ms. Curry and an additional email was forwarded to Mr. Armstrong to let him know that although our community felt no overt discrimination from their rezoning effort we wanted to share the reasons why we opposed that map. This was primarily because of the significant lowering of the Latino population with Map 6 (Curry/Armstrong )– our preference is for map 5. The proposed map 5 would provide the best opportunity for Latino parents/voters to have an impact on board elections.

Please note that the preference of the League of United Latin American Citizens as regards zone boundaries was a new “out of the box” appeal to think in terms of drawing a new map which would rezone zones 6 and 7 in a way to increase one of those zones to contain at least a 30% Latino component in one zone. We hope that all of the board members will consider this at the next rezoning discussions.

As I had mentioned in the email that was sent two weeks ago, what is disturbing about the new rezoning maps is that for decades – African Americans were gerrymandered into districts that diluted their ability to have their voices heard. We have lived through a civil rights movement in which Blacks struggled mightily to overcome the unjust boundaries imposed by an entrenched White community. Mr. Nellums and Ms. Johnson - we call on you to heed the call of another minority in need of a voice. We need your help as LRSD Board Members to demonstrate that this struggle for justice was not waged to create new perks for African Americans only but for a cause that impacts ALL persons in our society, our state and our school district - the basic right that all groups can be fairly represented. Although we do not perceive Map 5 as the best map to give greater weight to Latinos – the Latinos in the LRSD do see this as the best alternative. Please help us in our struggle to be heard. We remain “a sus ordenes”.

Dr. Terry Trevino-Richard

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

State to pick up attorneys' fees

Leslie Newell Peacock — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:18:49 -0500

A three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Court of Appeals ruled this morning that the state must pay $69,972.66 to Little Rock School District lawyers and $149,417.50 to the lawyers for the Joshua Intervenors in appeals of lower court rulings in the long-running desegregation case.

Lawyers for the Joshua Intervenors were opposing the Pulaski County Special School District's appeal of the district court's partial denial for a declaration of unity status. LRSD lawyers were appealing the termination of state funding.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

LR Schools ask summary judgment against state

Max Brantley — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 18:20:12 -0600

The Little Rock School District filed its motion today in federal court for a summary judgment that the state of Arkansas had broken the 1989 desegregation agrement by:

* Approving open enrollment charter schools in Pulaski County without court review.
* By failing to identify programs to deal with racial disparity in student performance.
* By abandoning monitoring responsibilities.
* By adopting a state transportation aid formula that penalizes Pulaski County.
* By retailiating in transportation formula, failure to pay attorney fees and by impossing accounting standards on the district it hasn't applied to others.

Here's the motion.

Here's the brief in support.

Here's a statement of undisputed facts.

The state will respond by March 12 and Judge Price Marshall will hear arguments March 29.

This ought to be good for some legislative fulmination.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Charter schools allowed to intervene in deseg case

Max Brantley — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 09:12:51 -0600

Some legal normalcy is returning to the Pulaski County school desegregation case. First, it was the 8th Circuit's decision to nullify Judge Brian Miller's out-of-the-blue order ending state desegregation aid to the three Pulaski County school districts. This issue will require formal hearings.

Yesterday came a measured ruling from Judge D. Price Marshall, who has inherited the aging legal dinosaur. He has allowed Pulaski charter schools to intervene, on narrow grounds, in the Little Rock School District's pleading that the state of Arkansas has broken its 1989 desegregation commitment by insufficient attention to segregation caused by creation of open enrollment charter schools in the county. The charters have been particularly damaging to the magnet and interdistrict transfer programs the state agreed to finance and encourage in settling the case in 1989.

Judge Marshall recognized the charters' obvious relevance. But he's not going to allow the charter schools to attempt to relitigate the 1989 desegregation settlement 22 years later. He will not allow them to attempt to undo racial enrollment goals established before the Republican-led Supreme Court decided the United States had become color-blind and race no longer was a permissible factor to consider in school assignment. Opening this litigation foray would have added years and years to the case. I'm sure the anti-LRSD crowd would have missed the irony of a huge increase in litigation prompted by people who love to complain about the federal lawsuit.

Here's Judge Marshall's ruling.

As I've said before, the Little Rock School District has much merit in its argument, particularly in the early days of charter school approval in Pulaski County. But this issue isn't all about race and I think a settlement could address money, school boundaries and charter concerns — with some give and take by all parties. Read on if you're a school wonk:

The Huckabee-era state Board of Education was so beholden to the big money behind charter school creation that it approved them without a thought to their demonstration that they would supply unprovided education (a requirement of state law) and without a followup thought to whether they had met the promises they made in their establishment. New state board members have tightened state oversight of charters significantly.

Little Rock might, however, have waited too long to bring this challenge. Some of the worst offenses were in the very beginning. For example, the majority ~~white~~ non-black LISA Academy was set up in upscale western Little Rock. Its organizers created a majority white, majority middle class school seemingly intended — based on comments by some school organizers at the time — in part to avoid what they saw as an undesirable element in the Little Rock schools. LISA certainly couldn't prove they provided math and science instruction unavailable in the Little Rock District, with its historically high-achieving science and math offerings.

It was the same with the Academics Plus school in Maumelle, nominally designed to reach disadvantaged and minority children. They never met that target and became, first, a neighborhood school option for Maumelle residents who didn't much like the Pulaski County School District — this was before construction of two new schools there in recent years.

eStem, the Walton- and Hussman-backed charter school is making most of the noise about the Little Rock School District. This is the outfit that hired the failed Little Rock Superintendent Roy Brooks to serve as a bloody shirt for the anti-LRSD forces to wave, then sacked him after he'd served his PR purpose. To its credit, it has attempted to bring minority students into its mix on its downtown campus, but the overall numbers tell the diversity story that persists as a community-wide education issue.

The Little Rock School District is 67 percent black and 71 percent of its students qualify, on account of family poverty, for free or reduced-price lunches. Academics Plus is 19 percent black and 33 percent school lunch; LISA is 37 percent black and 35 percent free lunch; eStem is 47 percent black and 32 percent free lunch. In short, Little Rock is much blacker and much poorer than these paragon charters. A number of minority black charters have been established. They've been fraught with problems and generally replicate the Little Rock, state and national experience — poor students have a hard time closing the achievement gap. All these charters had shortcomings this year in meeting annual yearly progress as measured by the rising standards on standardized tests.

So, while the charter schools desperately want to take race off the table in Pulaski County to preserve the strong white enrollments that make the schools attractive to some parents, the elephant in the room is the low-income student. Poverty is the great determinant on education performance. The fewer poor students the charters — or any schools — have, the more likely they are to succeed. Again, take a look at the No Child Left Behind figures for the charters in Arkansas. Where they fail to meet targets — just as many public school districts fail — it is most often with poor and minority students. Compare apples to apples and you have a hard time finding outliers in school performance anywhere in the country.

But let's have these arguments in court by all means. And let's take a long look at what "success" means in the charter schools to the big-shot legal mouthpieces intent on tearing down every fiber of the Little Rock School District, despite its many bright spots amid the acknowledged failures. Does it mean they've succeeded in educating well-off white students? Big deal.

Even if the law dictates the state can't be hindered by racial considerations in pouring public tax money into creating duplicative administrative school units in Pulaski County, let's do consider income in the state's obligations. Let's have the judge consider whether it's a fair game to let schools with unforgiving standards — students and parents must meet homework, classwork and attendance contracts, plus extended school days, or they can be thrown out — be given the advantage of disproportionate enrollments of advantaged kids. Give me a big enough head start and I can win a 100-yard-dash race, too.

Opening the charter school door to intervention might not be a happy day for the state, by the way. It and the charter schools have been fighting release of charter school data (particularly about where students have come from) under specious privacy grounds. A thoughtful federal judge, which Judge Marshall clearly is, can figure out a way for full access to ALL public school data — charter and conventional — without compromising an individual student's privacy.

All of that said: I still think it's time for a settlement although parties with widely divergent aims would have to make significant compromises. The three Pulaski school districts and the state can work a phase-out of payments. But it probably should include some, if not unlimited, continuing financial commitment to magnet schools. This workout might include a restructuring of school district lines to eradicate the Pulaski district and create a Jacksonville school district. This is a hot political potato, but it neatly solves a huge problem. The Pulaski district, a misshapen oddity of history and disaparate constituencies, is currently under state trusteeship and far short of reaching desegregated status. Let's disappear it.

A settlement might also include some commitments by the state to be sensitive to improper aims in charter school creation — particularly creation of havens of privilege that guarantee the worst possible student makeup of schools left behind. In the future, the Supreme Court perhaps has made racial considerations impossible. But it has not made it impossible to consider students' economic background. That's the groundbreaking approach taken in Wake County, North Carolina, and it has merit here. Let's not allow some the benefit of exposure to all economic classes, while segregating have-nots in education ghettos.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Little Rock School Twitter hit by hacker?

Max Brantley — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 07:01:06 -0600

Sorry I didn't take a screen shot.

I was alerted last night to a post on the Little Rock School District Twitter account that suggested a Bible reading for the day — from Revelation, maybe? — and a link to a religious website. Sorry I didn't take a screen shot. I sent notes to Little Rock School District offices and to the Twitter account asking about the religious message — amid School Board notices and the like — and didn't get a response.

However, I notice this morning that the post has been removed. I'll try to follow up today on what school officials know about use of the account for proselytizing. Sounds like a hacker.

If anybody preserved a screen shot, I'd appreciate a copy.

UPDATE: School Board member Melanie Fox said she'd talked to Superintendent Morris Holmes about the episode. The preliminary thinking is that the system was hacked or someone simply obtained the password. "The first order of business is to shore up the system to make sure it doesn't happen again," she said.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

8th Circuit orders state desegregation aid to continue

Max Brantley — Wed, 28 Dec 2011 10:58:36 -0600

It had tipped its hand clearly earlier with a stay of the order, but the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals finished the job today of undoing Judge Brian Miller's unexpected and peremptory order ending state desegregation funding to the Little Rock School District.

Here's the opinion.

The attorney general's office earlier was obliterated in oral arguments on the case.

State legislators hungering after the money — some $70 million a year — to shore up a pinched state budget will have to wait a bit longer. The payments have been made since a historic court-approved agreement between the state and school districts in 1989. The state is paying for years of fostering segregation in Pulaski County.

The appeals court noted that Judge Miller had ordered funding to halt even though the state had not requested it and the judge made no findings of fact to support the decision. It also said it had some sympathy for Miller's view that districts had an incentive not to comply if it meant continued state money. But it wrote: "Nevertheless, notice and a formal hearing are required before the court terminates a constitutional violator’s desegregation obligations."

If the state wants to end funding, there must be a formal hearing, the court emphasized. "We express no opinion on what the outcome of such a hearing should be. In the absence of these procedures, the portion of the district court’s order terminating the State’s funding obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreement is vacated."

Might I add, again, that it is time for the state and school district to work out a phased-out end to the spending, perhaps with some state promises to follow the law and constitution and not directly encourage segregation within Pulaski County through charter schools that encourage racial and economic division. Said Attorney General Dustin McDaniel:

The State continues to move positively toward ending this litigation and taking the courts out of the classrooms of Pulaski County.

With the Little Rock and North Little Rock school districts now fully unitary, today’s decision reminds us that taxpayer-funded desegregation payments are not perpetual, nor should they be seen as such. Today, I renew a call to the parties in this case to come together for a meaningful discussion about what is best for the children of these school districts and the taxpayers of this State.

Gov. Mike Beebe's office said there was nothing surprising in the decision, though they were pleased at the speed with which it was delivered. "It will allow the state to proceed more quickly on the issues remanded back to district court," Matt DeCample said.

UPDATE: See the jump for a comment by Chris Heller, attorney for the Little Rock School District, who believes the opinion makes clear that the state will face a significant burden of proof in arguing for an end to magnet school and other interdistrict remedies for its wrongs.

Politics will get fierce. For example, the state could get out from under running the failing Pulaski school district by by busting it up between Little Rock and North Little Rock, with a separate Jacksonville district created as local people have long wanted.

Today's order was significant on two other fronts. It upholds denial of unitary status — or a finding of full desegregation — for the Pulaski County School District and reversed denial of unitary status for North Little Rock. NLR now joins Little Rock as fully desegregated in the eyes of the federal courts. (The Little Rock argument continues on whether the state has a lasting commitment to interdistrict magnet and transfer programs regardless.)

North Little Rock had been found in compliance in all but keeping adequate records of effort to recruit minority teachers and administrators. The 8th Circuit said Judge Miller had abused discretion in adding additional record-keeping requirements for two years and said North Little Rock had made a good faith effort to recruit minority staff, even if the percentages had declined over the years.

That leaves only Pulaski County — currently in trusteeship operation by the state — as lacking unitary status among the three Pulaski school districts. It has a long way to go. The 8th Circuit upheld a finding of lack of unitary status in nine separate areas: (1) student assignment, (2) advanced placement, gifted and talented, and honors programs, (3) discipline, (4) school facilities, (5) scholarships, (6) special education, (7) staff, (8) student achievement, and (9) monitoring.

Comment in memo to School Board from Chris Heller:

The Eighth Circuit decision I sent you this morning not only vacated the the order which ended magnet funding, but also set the course for any future issues that might come before the district court. As the Eighth Circuit noted, the State has never filed a motion seeking to modify or terminate its obligations under the 1989 Settlement Agreement. If it does file such a motion in the future, the district court will be required to conduct a "formal evidentiary hearing...followed by comprehensive and detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law". This is so because "notice and a formal hearing are required before the court terminates a constitutional violator's desegregation obligations."

The Eighth Circuit also made clear what proof the State, or any other constitutional violator, would have to present at such a hearing: "A constitutional violator seeking relief from a desegregation plan adopted as a consent decree must show both that it "complied in good faith with the desegregation decree since it was entered" and that "the vestiges of past discrimination have been eliminated to the extent practicable."

The State has argued that magnet school funding and other desegregation funding should end when all three Pulaski County districts are unitary, even though no such limitation on funding is found anywhere in the Settlement Agreement. The Eighth Circuit decision contains helpful language that should guide the district court in evaluating the State's argument ("We discern the parties' intent from the unambiguous terms of the written consent decree, read as a whole."; "A court should interpret a consent decree as written and should not impose terms when the parties did not agree to those terms."; "A court may not replace the terms of a consent decree with its own....").

The Eighth Circuit opinion also helps with regard to two other issues concerning the State. First, it distinguishes between the "intradistrict" issues which were the subject of the NLRSD and PCSSD unitary status hearings, and the "interdistrict remedy" for which the State is responsible. Second, the language in the Eighth Circuit's opinion concernig PCSSD's failure to "design, select and implement specific intervention programs" to decrease the achievement disparity could be applied to the State's efforts as well.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Heavy absentee vote in LR school election UPDATE

Max Brantley — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:54:56 -0500

School elections. First, from this afternoon:

Note this: There's an extraordinary number of absentee ballots filed in Little Rock School District Zone 1, where Norma Johnson is the only candidate on the ballot, but a write-in candidate, Loretta Hendrix, also is running.

As of 5 p.m., 570 absentee ballots had been accepted by the county clerk for the entire county, 110 of them from Little Rock Zone 1. By contrast, in North Little Rock, where voters have a contested race in Zone 5, only 10 absentee ballots were cast.

The Election Commission said 144 people voted early in the county, 28 of them from Zone 1. In North Little Rock Zone 5, there were 25 early votes.

When the votes are counted, we'll know if an organized effort was afoot on absentees. But, in a race with a light vote, as I mentioned in a column recently, 100 absentee ballots could really make a difference. Hendrix is the daughter of City Director Erma Hendrix, so she might be expected to have some political acumen.

Actual voting continues until 7:30 p.m.

UPDATE: Norma Johnson won the Zone 1 LRSD early balloting 21-5. Still waiting for that absentee vote.

FWIW: All the early vote went FOR existing school tax millages. No increases were on the balllot and they don't change regardless.

UPDATE II: Looks like both sides got absentees out. With 10 of 14 precincts reporting, Johnson is leading Hendrix 68-43. Of that total, the absentees split 47-48 Johnson v. Hendrix.

In North Little Rock, incumbent Scott Teague is swamping Jimmy Ard, 124-24.

UPDATE III: I don't know why it is taking so long to count so few votes, but I'm calling it a night. The latest returns show incumbent Scott Teague running away with the NLR contested election and Norma Johnson, the only candidate on the ballot in Little Rock, winning 254-162 over write-in Loretta Hendrix, with an even split on absentee votes. The absentees accounted for about a quarter of the votes in the race, a high percentage, but turned out not to be determinative. Johnson got a 72-16 edge, or more than half of her margin, in Precinct 118, roughly between I-30 and Broadway south of I-630.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]