624 F.Supp. 1276 (S.D.N.Y. 1985), 80 Civ. 6761, United States v. Yonkers Bd. of Educ.

CourtUnited States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
Citation624 F.Supp. 1276
Docket Number80 Civ. 6761 (LBS).
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, and Yonkers Branch-National Association For the Advancement of Colored People, et al., Plaintiffs-Intervenors, v. YONKERS BOARD OF EDUCATION; City of Yonkers; and Yonkers Community Development Agency, Defendants.
Date20 November 1985

Page 1276

624 F.Supp. 1276 (S.D.N.Y. 1985)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,

and

Yonkers Branch-National Association For the Advancement of Colored People, et al., Plaintiffs-Intervenors,

v.

YONKERS BOARD OF EDUCATION; City of Yonkers; and Yonkers Community Development Agency, Defendants.

No. 80 Civ. 6761 (LBS).

United States District Court, S.D. New York.

Nov. 20, 1985

Page 1277

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1278

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1279

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1280

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1281

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1282

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1283

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1284

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1285

U.S. Dept. of Justice, Civ. Div., Joshua P. Bogin, Kenneth Barnes, Michael L. Barrett, Sarah Vanderwicken, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff U.S.

Michael H. Sussman, Brooklyn, N.Y., for plaintiffs-intervenors N.A.A.C.P.

Vedder, Price, Kaufman, Kammholz & Day, Michael W. Sculnick, Gerald S. Hartman, Nicholas J. D'Ambrosio, Jr., New York City, for defendants City of Yonkers and Yonkers Community Development Agency.

Butzel, Long, Gust, Klein & Van Zile, John B. Weaver, John H. Dudley, Mark T. Nelson, Detroit, Mich., Hall, Dickler, Lawler, Kent & Howley, Paul Whitby, New York City, for defendant Yonkers Bd. of Educ.

U.S. Dept. of Justice, Civ. Div., Raymond M. Larizza, Calvin E. Davis, Kirk Victor, John W. Herold, Office of Litigation, U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Renewal, Washington, D.C., for third-party defendant Dept. of Housing & Urban Development.

OPINION

SAND, District Judge.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

-----------------

INTRODUCTION HOUSING:

-------

I. BACKGROUND ......................................................... 1289
II. STATEMENT OF CLAIMS AND LEGAL STANDARDS ............................ 1291
III. THE CITY'S EARLY ACTIVITIES UNDER THE NATIONAL HOUSING
ACT OF 1949 ........................................................ 1294
A. The Procedure for the Selection and Approval of Sites for
Public Housing ................................................. 1294
B. Site Selection for the City's 1949 Allocation of Public Housing
Units .......................................................... 1295
C. Site Selection for Senior Citizen Housing ....................... 1300
D. The City's Campaign to Produce Sites for Relocation Housing ..... 1302
E. The Nature and Effect of the Recurring Pattern of Public
Opposition ..................................................... 1306
IV. THE RIVERVIEW PERIOD ............................................... 1313
A. Overview of Projects Approved ................................... 1313
B. The Continuing Opposition to Subsidized Housing in the City's
Heavily White Neighborhoods .................................... 1314
C. The Pattern of Opposition and Apparent Acquiescence ............. 1316
1. The City's Campaign to Produce Privately Sponsored
Projects ................................................... 1316
2. The Candeub & Fleissig Survey and the City's 1970
Memorandum of Understanding with the UDC ................... 1317
3. The Glenwood/Ridge Avenue Project and Rockledge Heights ..... 1320
4. Seven Pines ................................................. 1322
5. Parkledge ................................................... 1323
D. The City's Explanations for its Confinement of Subsidized
Housing to the Southwest ....................................... 1327
1. Reliance on HUD's Express Directions ........................ 1328
2. The Absence of Private Developer Proposals In the East ...... 1330
3. Support for the Projects Among the Minority Community ....... 1331
4. The Unsuitability of East Side Sites ........................ 1333
5. The Pursuit of a Legitimate Planning Strategy to Use
Subsidized Housing to Rebuild the Southwest ................ 1337
V. THE CITY'S ACTIVITIES UNDER THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 ............................................ 1342
A. Subsidized Housing Under the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1974 ........................................ 1342
B. The Section 8 Existing Program .................................. 1342
C. Section 8 New Construction Housing for Senior Citizens .......... 1348
1. The City's Actions .......................................... 1348
2. The Effect of the City's Actions ............................ 1351
D. Subsidized Housing for Families Under the HAPs for Years I
through IV ..................................................... 1352
E. The Palmer Road Site ............................................ 1353
F. Actions Subsequent to the 1980 Contract Conditions .............. 1356
1. Salisbury Gardens ........................................... 1356
2. The Neustadter Site ......................................... 1358
3. School 4 .................................................... 1358
VI. THE EFFECT OF THE CITY'S ACTIONS ON THE RACIAL CONFIGURATION OF YONKERS .........................................................
1358
VII. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ................................................. 1369

SCHOOLS: -------

I. THE CLAIMS OF UNLAWFUL SCHOOL SEGREGATION .......................... 1376
II. LEGAL STANDARDS .................................................... 1378
III. THE YONKERS PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM ................................... 1382
IV. THE BOARD OF EDUCATION ............................................. 1388
A. School Openings, Closings, and Attendance Zone Changes .......... 1388
1. Introduction ................................................ 1388
2. School Openings ............................................. 1395
a. Martin Luther King, Jr. Elemtary School ................. 1395
b. School 10 ............................................... 1403
c. Commerce Middle School .................................. 1410
3. School Closings ............................................. 1410
a. School 1 ................................................ 1410
b. 1976 School Closings .................................... 1413
c. Longfellow Middle School ................................ 1422
4. Attendance Zone Changes ..................................... 1428
a. Schools 16 and 25 ....................................... 1428
B. Equal Educational Opportunity ................................... 1430
1. Physical Characteristics .................................... 1431
2. Staff ....................................................... 1433
3. Students .................................................... 1437
4. Educational Programs and Resources .......................... 1439
5. Integration and Educational Opportunity ..................... 1443
C. Vocational Education: Steering and Screening of Minority Students ....................................................... 1444
D. Special Education ............................................... 1453
E. Teacher and Administrative Staff Assignments .................... 1462
F. Refusal to Implement Desegregative Reorganization Plans ......... 1467
1. Introduction ................................................ 1467
2. NYU Report .................................................. 1469
3. Phase II .................................................... 1483
V. THE CITY ........................................................... 1500
A. Interrelationships Between Housing Practices and School Segregation .................................................... 1500
B. Budgetary Control ............................................... 1503
C. Mayoral Appointment of School Board Members ..................... 1506
D. School Site Selection ........................................... 1513
1. Yonkers High School ......................................... 1513
2. Saunders Trades and Technical High School ................... 1514
E. Other City Involvement in School Affairs ........................ 1516
1. Attendance Zone Changes ..................................... 1516
2. City Council Resolutions .................................... 1517
3. School 4 .................................................... 1518
VI. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ................................................. 1521
A. Jurisdiction .................................................... 1521
1. The Board of Education ...................................... 1522
2. The City .................................................... 1522
B. Liability ....................................................... 1526
1. The Board of Education ...................................... 1526
a. Independant Conduct of School Authorities ............... 1526
b. Denial of Equal Educational Opportunity ................. 1530
c. Subsidized Housing Discrimination ....................... 1531
2. The City ................................................... 1537
VII. CONCLUSION ......................................................... 1545

Page 1288 INTRODUCTION After nearly one hundred days of trial, during which eighty-four witnesses testified and thirty-eight depositions, as well as thousands of exhibits, were received in evidence, this Court is called upon to decide whether the City of Yonkers and the Yonkers Board of Education have intentionally created or maintained racial segregation in the City's housing and schools. Before embarking on that task, we pause to make clear why that is the issue, and why it falls upon this Court to resolve it. First, the primary issue in this case is...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • EFFECTIVE SCHOOL-INTEGRATION MOBILIZATION: THE CASE FOR NON-LITIGATION ADVOCACY AND IMPACT.
    • United States
    • Fordham Urban Law Journal Vol. 48 Nbr. 2, February 2021
    • February 1, 2021
    ...schools and implementation of an assignment program and requiring a court-appointed monitor); United States v. Yonkers Bd. of Educ, 624 F. Supp. 1276, 1281 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) (holding that Yonkers illegally and intentionally segregated the city's public schools and public housing along racial ......
  • Segregation
    • United States
    • West's Encyclopedia of American Law Sar–Ten
    • January 1, 2005
    ...defendants had in fact segregated the city's housing and schools based on racial identity. United States v. Yonkers Board of Education 624 F.Supp. 1276 (S.D.N.Y. 1985). The city was ordered to designate sites for public housing by November 1986, but the city refused to comply during the app......
  • DISABLING LANGUAGE: THE OVERREPRESENTATION OF EMERGENT BILINGUAL STUDENTS IN SPECIAL EDUCATION IN NEW YORK AND ARIZONA.
    • United States
    • Fordham Urban Law Journal Vol. 48 Nbr. 2, February 2021
    • February 1, 2021
    ...in "Educable Mentally Retarded" classes had a discriminatory impact on Black students); United States v. Yonkers Bd. of Educ, 624 F. Supp. 1276, 1460, 1460-61 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) (reasoning that Yonkers's practice of placing self-contained special education classrooms comprised primar......
3 books & journal articles
  • EFFECTIVE SCHOOL-INTEGRATION MOBILIZATION: THE CASE FOR NON-LITIGATION ADVOCACY AND IMPACT.
    • United States
    • Fordham Urban Law Journal Vol. 48 Nbr. 2, February 2021
    • February 1, 2021
    ...schools and implementation of an assignment program and requiring a court-appointed monitor); United States v. Yonkers Bd. of Educ, 624 F. Supp. 1276, 1281 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) (holding that Yonkers illegally and intentionally segregated the city's public schools and public housing along racial ......
  • Segregation
    • United States
    • West's Encyclopedia of American Law Sar–Ten
    • January 1, 2005
    ...defendants had in fact segregated the city's housing and schools based on racial identity. United States v. Yonkers Board of Education 624 F.Supp. 1276 (S.D.N.Y. 1985). The city was ordered to designate sites for public housing by November 1986, but the city refused to comply during the app......
  • DISABLING LANGUAGE: THE OVERREPRESENTATION OF EMERGENT BILINGUAL STUDENTS IN SPECIAL EDUCATION IN NEW YORK AND ARIZONA.
    • United States
    • Fordham Urban Law Journal Vol. 48 Nbr. 2, February 2021
    • February 1, 2021
    ...in "Educable Mentally Retarded" classes had a discriminatory impact on Black students); United States v. Yonkers Bd. of Educ, 624 F. Supp. 1276, 1460, 1460-61 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) (reasoning that Yonkers's practice of placing self-contained special education classrooms comprised primar......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT