Little Rock School Dist. v. Pulaski County Special School Dist. No. 1
| Decision Date | 03 August 1992 |
| Docket Number | 91-3840,Nos. 91-3317,91-3833,s. 91-3317 |
| Citation | 971 F.2d 160 |
| Parties | 76 Ed. Law Rep. 743 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant, Anne Mitchell; Bob Moore; Pat Gee; Pat Rayburn; Mary J. Gage; North Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association; Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers; Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association; Alexa Armstrong; Karlos Armstrong; Ed Bullington; Khayyam Davis; Janice Dent; John Harrison; Alvin Hudson; Tatia Hudson; Milton Jackson; Lorene Joshua; Leslie Joshua; Stacy Joshua; Wayne Joshua; Katherine Knight; Sara Matthews; Becky McKinney; Derrick Miles; Janice Miles; John M. Miles; NAACP; Joyce Person; Brian Taylor; Hilton Taylor; Parsha Taylor; Robert Willingham; Tonya Willingham, Intervenors, v. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT # 1, Appellant, North Little Rock School District; Leon Barnes; Sheryl Dunn; Mac Faulkner; Richard A. Giddings; Marianne Gosser; Don Hindman; Shirley Lowery; Bob Lyon; George A. McCrary; Bob Moore; Steve Morley; Buddy Raines; David Sain; Bob Stender; Dale Ward; John Ward; Judy Wear; Grainger Williams, Philip E. Kaplan; Janet Pulliam; John Bilheimer, Movants. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT; Anne Mitchell; Bob Moore; Pat Gee; Pat Rayburn; Mary J. Gage; North Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association; Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers; Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association; Intervenors, Alexa Armstrong; Karlos Armstrong, Appellants, Ed Bullington, Intervenor, Khayyam Davis, Appellant, Janice Dent; John Harrison, Intervenors, Alvin Hudson; Tatia Hudson, Appellants, Milton Jackson, Intervenor, Lorene Joshua; Leslie Joshua; Stacy Joshua; Wayne Joshua, Appellants, Katherine Knight, Intervenor, Sara Matthews, Appellant, Becky McKinney, Intervenor, Derrick Miles; Janice Miles; John M. Miles; NAACP, Appellants, Joyce Person, Intervenor, Brian Taylor; Hilton Taylor; Parsha Taylor; Robert Willingham; Tonya Willingham, Appellants, v. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT # 1, Appellant, North Little Rock School District; Leon Barnes; Sheryl Dunn; Mac Faulkner; Richard A. Giddi |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Norman J. Chachkin, New York City, argued (John W. Walker, Alston Jennings, M. Samuel Jones, III, and Christopher Heller, Little Rock, Ark., on the brief), for appellant.
There were no appellees in this appeal.
Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Chief Judge, HEANEY, Senior Circuit Judge, and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge.
Two questions are at issue in this appeal. First, did the district court err in refusing to extend certain millages designed to assist in funding desegregation measures in the three school districts in Pulaski County, Arkansas? Second, should the district court have permitted the parties to review, analyze, question and object to the proposed budget for the Office of Desegregation Monitoring? We answer both questions in the affirmative, and therefore reverse and remand.
Three Arkansas school districts--Little Rock School District No. 1 (LRSD), Pulaski County Special School District No. 1 (PCSSD), and North Little Rock School District (NLRSD)--are currently operating under a desegregation settlement agreement that the district court approved as written on January 18, 1991. Item M of the settlement agreement provides:
The court ordered on December 29, 1986 (reinstated Jan. 7, 1987) the rededication of certain millages of the Districts. It was the intent of the Districts and the court that all millages due to expire before the year 2007 be rededicated. The motion seeking the extension, however, failed to list all of the millages and consequently not all of the millages sought to be rededicated have actually been rededicated. The parties agree that the court's order of December 29, 1986 (reinstated January 7, 1987) should be corrected to include all millages of the Districts which would otherwise expire before or during the year 2007. Pursuant to this settlement, a corrected order has been submitted to the court for approval following final approval of the settlement. Upon approval, the order will be delivered to the responsible county officials.
On July 24, 1991, the parties to the settlement agreement submitted a proposed order to the district court, the effect of which would have been to implement Item M. On November 15, 1991, the district court issued an order declining to extend the millages. 778 F.Supp. 1013 (E.D.Ark.1991). LRSD, PCSSD, and a group of intervenors representing the injured class of African-American schoolchildren and citizens ("the Joshua intervenors") appeal.
A brief review of the more recent desegregation litigation involving the parties to this appeal will be helpful in understanding the omitted millages issue. In April 1984, the district court found that PCSSD PCSSD, NLRSD, and the State Board appealed to this court. The Joshua intervenors filed a brief in support of the district court's judgment, and the United States filed an amicus curiae brief in general support of appellants. We agreed with the district court that interdistrict violations had occurred, but held that those violations could be remedied by less intrusive measures than consolidation. These included limited adjustments to boundaries, correction of segregative practices within each district, improving the quality of nonintegrated schools in LRSD, providing compensatory and remedial programs for black children in all three school districts, establishing a limited number of magnet schools, and requiring the State Board to participate in developing and funding these programs. Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist., 778 F.2d 404 (8th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1186, 106 S.Ct. 2926, 91 L.Ed.2d 554 (1985).
NLRSD, and the Board of Education of the State of Arkansas (State Board) had contributed to the continuing segregation of the Little Rock schools and ordered the consolidation of LRSD, PCSSD, and NLRSD. Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist., 584 F.Supp. 328, 351-52 (E.D.Ark.1984). Several months later, following hearings on the remedial aspects of the case, the district court ordered the implementation of a consolidation plan that included the establishment of a uniform millage rate for the consolidated district. Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist., 597 F.Supp. 1220, 1226 (E.D.Ark.1984)
On December 24, 1986, at the suggestion of the district court, a motion to extend certain millages for the three school districts was filed. The millages were reduced to reflect the operation of Amendment 59 of the Arkansas Constitution. As reduced, the millages were extended as follows:
LRSD
1987"88 1.64
1989"90 .55
1993"94 .55
----
Total 2.74
PCSSD
1986"87 3.53
1993"94 6.46
----
Total 9.99
NLRSD
1987"88 3.14
1989"90 .79
1995"96 4.98
----
The motion stated that continuation of these millages would not constitute an increase in the amount or the rate of the tax. The motion further stated that
On December 29, 1986, the district court, stating that the desegregation plans would require extraordinary expenditures in each of the school districts, issued an order extending the millages listed above. The order provided that the millages could be converted at any time prior to 2007 upon notice to tax or collection authorities and to the court. 1 Meanwhile, the parties negotiated a comprehensive settlement agreement, including Item M, which they submitted to the district court on March 31, 1989. 2 On May 10, 1989, the Special Master appointed by the district court recommended that the district court approve the settlement agreement subject to certain conditions, one of which was that
[t]he parties' Agreement to petition for rededication of millages erroneously omitted from the petitions of December, 1986, and January, 1987, should be granted only on condition that this court's ordered [sic] regarding desegregation requirements be accepted and implementation commenced no later than July 1, 1989. Without such conditions the court will place the public in a position of having millages rededicated without assurance that the money raised will be used to comply with orders of the court.
Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist., 716 F.Supp. 1162, 1188 (E.D.Ark.1989).
On June 27, 1989, the district court disapproved the settlement...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski Cty. Spec. Sch.
...also entered several important decisions that: (1) extended school district millages under the 1990 Settlement Agreement, LRSD v. PCSSD, 971 F.2d 160 (8th Cir.1992); (2) upheld the new zoning plan for electing school board members for LRSD and PCSSD, LRSD v. PCSSD, 56 F.3d 904 (8th Cir.1995......
-
Uhl v. Swanstrom
...Co., 918 F.2d at 738; Little Earth, 807 F.2d at 1433, or if the facts have changed since the earlier decision. Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski, 971 F.2d 160, 165 (8th Cir.1992); Little Earth, 807 F.2d at 1433. The doctrine only applies to issues decided on final judgments. Peterson v. Gen......
-
Robertson Oil Co., Inc. v. Phillips Petroleum Co.
...injustice." Id. at 905. Or, if the facts have changed since the earlier appeal, the doctrine is not followed. Little Rock School Dist. v. Pulaski, 971 F.2d 160, 165 (8th Cir.1992). I believe we are faced with some change in the facts due to the evidence adduced at the trial level and also w......
-
Black Hills Institute of Geological Research v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, s. 92-2252
...the case. See Arizona v. California, 460 U.S. 605, 618, 103 S.Ct. 1382, 1391, 75 L.Ed.2d 318 (1983); Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist., 971 F.2d 160 (8th Cir.1992). IV. In summary, we: 1) affirm the district court's custody order in Black Hills II; 2) dismiss with ......