Armstrong v. O'CONNELL, Civ. A. No. 65-C-173.
| Decision Date | 17 March 1977 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 65-C-173. |
| Parties | Kevin ARMSTRONG et al., Plaintiffs, v. Donald J. O'CONNELL et al., Defendants, Milwaukee Teachers' Education Association, Undesignated Intervenor. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Wisconsin |
Lloyd A. Barbee, Milwaukee, Wis., for named plaintiffs.
Irvin B. Charne, Milwaukee, Wis., for the absent members of plaintiff classes.
L. C. Hammond, Jr., Ross R. Kinney and Patrick W. Schmidt, Milwaukee, Wis., for defendants.
Curry First, Milwaukee, Wis., for Milwaukee Teachers' Ed. Ass'n, undesignated intervenor.
On March 11, 1977, a hearing was held in the above-captioned action for the purpose of obtaining the oral views of counsel of record and the Special Master with respect to the question of the adoption of a final and comprehensive plan for the desegregation of the public schools of the City of Milwaukee, and to consider defendants' December 22, 1976, motion to reconsider desegregation guidelines and defendants' January 3, 1977, motion to approve the Milwaukee-Austin Plan, modify the guidelines referred to in the Court's order of June 11, 1976, and dissolve the injunction regarding the construction of Vincent High School.
At the outset of the hearing, the Court denied the defendants' motion to change desegregation guidelines and defendants' motion to approve the "Milwaukee Board of School Directors' Milwaukee-Austin Plan for the Desegregation of Court Determined Identifiable Constitutional Violations with Present Segregative Effects" ("Milwaukee-Austin Plan") for the reasons stated on the record in open court. The Court also advised the parties that it had independently assessed the record which has been compiled to date in this action and had concluded that the "Memorandum in Response to Court Order Requiring Defendants to Devise and Submit a Plan for Desegregating the Milwaukee Public School System by September 30, 1978" ("Blue Plan") does not constitute a meaningful response to the Court's orders. Accordingly, the Court rejected the Blue Plan. The Court further concluded that the Special Master's remedial recommendations would successfully accomplish the desegregation of the Milwaukee Public School System through means that were most appropriate to the circumstances of this particular action.
The Court thereafter solicited the oral views of counsel with respect to the various aspects of the Special Master's remedial recommendations. The Court has carefully considered those views and has determined that although it will adopt in large part the remedial recommendations of the Special Master, it is necessary that those recommendations be modified in certain respects.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
1. Denial of Certain Motions
The defendants' motion of December 22, 1976, seeking reconsideration of desegregation guidelines and the portions of the defendants' motion of January 3, 1977, requesting approval of the "Milwaukee-Austin Plan" and modification of the guidelines referred to in the Court's order of June 11, 1976, are denied.
2. Rejection of Defendants' Remedial Plans
The Court has found that the remedial actions set forth in the "Milwaukee Board of School Directors' Milwaukee-Austin Plan for the Desegregation of Court Determined Identifiable Constitutional Violations with Present Segregative Effects" and the "Memorandum in Response to Court Order Requiring Defendants to Devise and Submit a Plan for Desegregating the Milwaukee Public School System by September 30, 1978" will not effectively remedy the unlawful segregation which the Court has found to exist in the public schools of the City of Milwaukee. As the Court finds that these remedial plans are constitutionally inadequate, they are hereby rejected.
3. Student Desegregation
(a) Defendants shall immediately implement the policies and procedures relating to student assignment which are described in the appendix attached to this order, which appendix emanates from a document entitled "Comprehensive Plan for Increasing Educational Opportunities and Improving Racial Balance in the Milwaukee Public Schools." These policies and procedures (hereinafter referred to as "student assignment system") consist of a student assignment process and pupil transfer policy which are to be implemented in the context of a planning base which includes the identification of attendance areas for all students, the reorganization of grade level structures, the affiliation of schools into elementary school leagues and junior and senior high school associations, and the establishment of a feeder pattern system.
(b) Defendants shall administer the student assignment system with the goal of achieving results which are consistent with the requirements set forth in paragraphs 3(c) and 3(d) hereof.
(c) By September 30, 1978, and until this order shall expire as set forth in paragraph 7 below, at least two-thirds ( 2/3 ) of the schools in the Milwaukee Public School System should have student body populations that are between twenty-five and fifty percent (25-50%) black. Of the schools that remain, at least one-half (½) should have student body populations that are between twenty and sixty-five percent (20-65%) black, and the balance should have student body populations that are between fifteen and seventy-five percent (15-75%) black.
(d) In order to insure significant progress towards the requirement contained in paragraph 3(c) by September 30, 1977, at least two-thirds ( 2/3 ) of the schools in the Milwaukee Public School System should have student body populations that are between twenty-five and fifty percent (25-50%) black.
(e) If a "school within a school" is established, both the school as a whole and the "school within a school" shall be required to conform to the requirements of paragraphs 3(c) and 3(d).
(f) In calculating the racial composition of schools for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of paragraphs 3(c) and 3(d), defendants shall exclude kindergarten and pre-kindergarten students, students in self-contained classrooms for the severely handicapped (also known as low incidence handicapped), and during the 1977-78 and 1978-79 school years only, students enrolled in their senior year of high school.
(g) For purposes of paragraphs 3(c) and 3(d), self-contained schools for the severely handicapped will be omitted from the numerical base of the total number of schools within the system, and such schools shall not be subject to the requirements set forth herein.
(h) For purposes of paragraph 3(d), schools which will be closed during either the 1977-78 or 1978-79 school years as a consequence of final action of the defendants taken prior to May 1, 1977, will be excluded from the numerical base of the total number of schools within the system, and such schools shall not be subject to the requirements set forth herein.
(i) For purposes of paragraph 3(c), schools which will be closed during the 1978-79 school year as a consequence of final action of the defendants taken prior to May 1, 1978, will be excluded from the numerical base of the total number of schools within the system, and such schools shall not be subject to the requirements set forth therein.
(j) Nothing in this order is intended to prevent defendants from designating Hispanic students, native Americans, and other minority students as separate minority populations and according them priority over other non-black students in assignment to schools with programs designed to meet their special needs. Moreover, nothing in this order is intended to prevent the defendants from affording any student priority of assignment over other students of the same racial category (i. e., black or nonblack) for reasons of educational needs or administrative convenience so long as that assignment is not inconsistent with this order.
(k) A status conference will be held on November 18, 1977, for the purpose of receiving reports from the Special Master and counsel of record as to the progress which has been achieved with respect to the implementation of, and compliance with, the student desegregation requirements set forth herein. At that time, the Court will consider whether it is necessary or desirable to modify or otherwise alter any of its outstanding orders in light of the results which have been experienced during the 1977-78 phase of the student desegregation process.
4. Faculty Desegregation
(a) Paragraph 1 of the Court's order of June 11, 1976, is hereby rescinded. Henceforth, all teacher vacancies will be filled in accordance with contractual provisions unless a transfer or new placement would not help to promote in the school in which the vacancy exists a racial percentage within five percentage points of the percentage of black teachers within the entire system. If excessing occurs, excessed teachers will be placed in accordance with the foregoing procedure. If the racial composition of excessed teachers, teachers returning from leave, or new teachers precludes adherence to the foregoing procedure, then they shall be placed in accordance with contractual provisions.
(b) For purposes of paragraph 4(a), the term "teacher" shall include any person contained in the teachers' bargaining unit which is recognized in the collective bargaining contract between the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee and the undesignated intervenor, and who is assigned full time to one school.
(c) By September 30, 1978, at least two-thirds ( 2/3 ) of the schools in the Milwaukee Public School System should have teacher populations that are between eleven and twenty-one percent (11-21%) black. The remaining schools in the system should have teacher populations that are between six and twenty-six percent (6-26%) black as of that same date.
(d) In order to insure significant progress towards the requirement contained in paragraph 4(c) by September 30, 1977, at least one-half (½) of the schools in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Armstrong v. Board of School Directors of City of Milwaukee
...district court issued its final desegregation order, which encompassed both faculty and student body desegregation. Armstrong v. O'Connell, 427 F.Supp. 1377 (E.D.Wis.1977). The defendants appealed from this order, but also began to act in compliance with it. The Supreme Court granted defend......
-
Booker v. Special Sch. Dist. No. 1, Minneapolis, 4-71-Civ. 382.
...assignments were consistent with other requirements of the order, apparently including racial balance requirements, Armstrong v. O'Connell, 427 F.Supp. 1377 (E.D.Wis.1977), the district returned Indian children to the four schools. That is obviously quite a different situation than requesti......