With Apologies to the President and My 7th Grade English Teacher, Change We Can Learn In

Think the dysfunction of our public schools rests solely with the local school board? However poorly, board members are only playing the cards they are dealt by the legislature.

So, every legislator who complains about Little Rock has the power to do something about it.

In the last session, with the leadership of Representative Barry Hyde, we tried to 1) change the date of school elections to the primary; 2) empower the people, not incumbent school boards, to determine how they will be represented in zoned districts - five zones, seven zones, five zones and two at-large; and 3) provide for recall of school board members.

Nos. one and two were unanimously sent to interim study by the Education Committee, and No. 3 couldn't even get a hearing. By the way, it's the interim; where's the study?

If the legislature truly wants to provide excellent education for all students, it can pass and send to the governor for his signature these fifteen reforms:

1. Through individual portability of state per-pupil spending, empower total school choice (public, charter, private) among Pre K – 12 schools;
2.  Change date of school elections to general election;
3. After each census, a nonpartisan demographer shall redraw the zone map equalizing the populations, minimizing the splitting of neighborhoods and voting precincts, and using landmarks and census blocks to define zone boundaries;
4. Through local initiated act, people choose how they will be represented in zoned school districts – five zones, seven zones, five zones – two at-large;
5. Following redrawing of the zones, all board seats shall stand for election;
6. Directly elect school board presidents at-large, and in zoned districts, raise number of board positions to six, eight and six and two-at large, respectively;
7. Provide for recall of school board members;
8. If student is not grade-level proficient in math and literacy by the end of third grade, he/she will attend summer school. If still not proficient, will repeat grade;
9. Require everyone under 18 to be in school, graduate or receive GED; if over 18, require high school graduation or GED to receive public assistance;
10. Strengthen truancy officer/court system to ensure all eligible students are in school;
11. Like other economic development incentives, reform state-sponsored scholarships to performance-based – 50% at enrollment, 50% upon passing grades at semester;
12.  Graduating schools share with colleges and universities 50% of cost of first-year post secondary remediation;
13. Equalize opportunity to join or quit a public service union;
14.  Require public service unions to collect own dues; and
15. Prohibit school districts from paying salaries of employees not performing contracted services for district.

Or not. And not. And not.

Zone 4 Parent Demands Middle School Action from her School Board

The letter which follows is from Kellyann Thornton, Zone 4 parent, to Jody Carreiro (Zone 5), president of the Little Rock School Board. May she persist and prompt others like her to emerge and make their voices heard.

The nearest middle school to West Little Rock is EAST of University.

Zone 4 (Greg Adams), Zone 5 (Jody Carreiro), and Zone 6 (Charles Armstrong) have zero middle schools in their Zones. Nada. That's Spanish for "nothing," Ms. Curry.

Zone 3 (Melanie Fox) has two - less than two miles apart, Zone 1 (Norma Johnson) has two, and Zone 7 (Dianne Curry) has two.

Zone 2 (Michael Nellums) has one.

West Little Rock is not even asking for parity. It's simply asking the board to at least pretend it cares about the people west of I-430 by investing their tax dollars in building a middle school proximate to their neighborhoods instead of having their children bussed or driven eight miles via Cantrell or 11.5 miles via I-630 (from Don Roberts Elementary to Forrest Heights Middle).

The board moves zones to include its members' homes (see map below). One would think it, or at least Messrs. Adams and Carreiro, would move heaven and earth to keep Roberts and Fulbright parents like Kellyann Thornton in the district.

View New Little Rock School Board Zone Map
Note location of homes of board members, which obviously was a top priority. Also, note the disembodied portion of Zone 1, Little Rock's own version of the infamous "Fayetteville Finger." But in this case, it's more like a thumb in the eye of Hispanic voters, who had their neighborhoods divided into thirds, effectively diffusing any voting power. Or, will it actually serve to motivate the electorate to roll out support for a students-first candidate(s)?

Little Rock School District School Board

Mr. Jodi Carreiro, President

Via Email

June 4, 2012

Dear Mr. Carreiro,

The LRSD school budget is $350 million dollars, twice the budget of the City of Little Rock . There are budget planning meetings clearly stating part of the purpose is current and future facility needs; so, where is the line item for funds to buy land in the western side of the city?  Why, after years and years of Board meetings with members making motions, such as “..to direct and instruct the administration to begin the search for property for the construction of a middle school in West Little Rock ..” (that motion carried unanimously), do we still not have any movement in this direction years later?  You are well aware of this history, so I will not repeat the numerous citations to all these empty promises. Why does the Board continue to turn a blind eye towards the West?  Even Dr. Holmes, at a board meeting in February of 2011 during his “interim” time of service, noted that the board had agreed to look for land in the western part of the city for a middle school several years ago.

Apparently, the LRSD School Board continues to rely on the premise that they do not need to accommodate over 50,000 tax paying citizens (2010 Census) with any form of secondary schools in their neighborhoods or community.  This continues to be completely socially irresponsible. Some have surmised it is in the name of “diversity” at select magnet schools.  Punishing and stigmatizing what is perceived to be an “affluent white community” based on decades-old protest identity struggles is not poetic justice; it is just a different enabler of racism, an embodiment that wields the power to contaminate by mere association.  There is no progress in this, for any of our children.

As my own child enters the 5^th grade this August, it is clear to me that the LRSD and the LRSD School Board continue to ignore the children in the western sections of LRSD School Zone 4 and Zone 5, once they are ready to enter secondary education.  My child is a high achiever; participates in the Gifted and Talented program, is a DUKE TIP participant scoring in the 95^th percentile in the country in math and science, won his 4^th grade class science fair, and yet has no secondary school to attend in the section of Little Rock where we live.

We truly value a good public education.  We are actively involved not only in the education of our child at home, but in our school community as well.  I was recently awarded a LRSD ViPs award for my contributions at Don R. Roberts Elementary School .  As a parent volunteer, I have worked tirelessly to bring positive influences into the school.  I personally lead a philanthropic campaign benefiting the LR Zoo, which in turn brought an educational enrichment assembly for all our children to our campus.  I spearheaded a Red Cross Blood Drive on our campus for our parents to give back to our community, in turn the Red Cross provided an educational enrichment assembly to our upper grades.  I facilitated a fundraiser for our school activity fund by collaborating with a local restaurant for a “Parents Date Night”.  I have by myself organized and executed two events for teachers to participate in and enjoy as a show of my appreciation for what they do for our children, with a third event planned for this August.  I also volunteer in the classroom.  As a PTA Board member, I personally raised thousands of dollars for our PTA by going out into our local business community and encouraging business membership in our PTA .

So I must ask myself, are we not exactly who the LRSD want to retain, both a student and his family, within the district?  Why is this District indifferent to losing our child as a student?  Why is this District indifferent to losing parents who are committed and vital volunteers to the public schools?  By this time next year, we will be preparing to enter a private school located in our neighborhood.  My family will make great sacrifices, to the detriment of other aspects of our lives, to allow us to do this for our child.  We will be frustrated and bitter at the injustice that the neglect of this District forces us to pay twice – through high property taxes as well as private school tuition - to assure for our child a quality education in a safe school, located in our own community.  We are not alone in harboring these feelings, hundreds of other families in this area express this same sentiment.

So as I sit and read about your budget workshop, I can’t help feeling that this District never had any real intention to keep the promises, the motions, the amendments, etc., to build what is so terribly needed for the children who happen to live on this side of the 430 Freeway, no matter how much more in per-capita, per-student proportion we parents pay in taxes to support this District.  This District and this School Board are failing my child and all of the other children who reside in this section of Little Rock .  What do you, as President of the LRSD School Board, intend to do about this continued crises of students fleeing this District as they enter their secondary education, due to the lack of a secondary school in their neighborhood?

Sincerely,

Kellyann Thornton.

cc:  Dr. Morris Holmes, Superintendent, LRSD

      Dr. Daniel Whitehorn, Associate Superintendent of Secondary Education, LRSD

      Tom Kimbrill, Commissioner, Arkansas Department of Education

      The Honorable Allen Kerr, Arkansas State Legislator, District 32

      The Honorable Arne Duncan, U.S. Secretary of Education

Enough Already! Run for School Board

Three-sevenths of the Little Rock School Board - Zones 3, 6 and 7 - are up for election on September 18th. Considering that all Zones had to be redrawn based on the 2010 census, all seats should be up, but that's what you get for allowing your legislature to let incumbent school board members determine how you will be represented.

While Zone 3's incumbent, Melanie Fox, will not seek re-election, a highly promising candidate, Leslie Fisken, is running for the position.

Zone 6's incumbent Charles Armstrong is running for state representative. Because school elections are nonpartisan, and therefore aren't affected by Tuesday's primary, Mr. Armstrong has not said whether or not he will also seek re-election to the school board.

Zone 7's incumbent Dianne Curry has not said if she will seek re-election. Considering how she and board members Armstrong, Nellums and Johnson so blatantly attempted to disenfranchise our Hispanic citizens by dividing their neighborhoods among three zones, don't be surprised if one or more students-first Hispanic and/or Hispanic-friendly candidates emerge to challenge the gerrymanderers' artificial majority with purity of purpose and voter turnout.

The important thing to keep in mind is that no incumbent or announced candidate has any more right to the offices than anyone else. Board positions belong to the people. Candidates should run for the position, not against anyone.

With a $340 million annual budget, the Little Rock School District is the largest local government entity in Arkansas, almost doubling the City of Little Rock. And yet, its elections are unconscionably held on a date with no other elections (again, thanks Legislature) and decided by tens at the least and hundreds at the most.

I have yet to meet one person who is satisfied with the Little Rock School District. But still, incumbents regularly breeze to re-election without credible opposition - a challenger or challengers who force a legitimate debate on how to best educate our 25,000 students.

So every year, the people are given a chance to elect two or three leaders who will put students first. Nothing is more important to the future of our community than the delivery of excellent public education.

Please - if you truly will put students first ahead of self-interested adult agendas - Run People Run! Here's how (thanks to the Arkansas School Board Association):

• Visit the county clerk's office to get a packet of material about running for office.

• June 10th is the first day candidates may circulate a petition (available from the Secretary of State's Office). Candidates need 20 signatures of qualified registered voters from his/her district on petition.

• July 3rd is the first day a candidate may file a petition of candidacy (available from the Secretary of State's Office), the political practice pledge, and the affidavit of eligibility with the county clerk.

• July 10th at noon is the deadline for a candidate to file a petition of candidacy, the political practice pledge, and the affidavit of eligibility with the county clerk.

• The election is Tuesday, September 18th.

• If needed, runoff will be held three weeks later.

To run for school board, candidates must:

• be a qualified elector of the school district served whose name has been filed and certified by the county clerk of the county in which the school district is domiciled for administrative purposes;
• be a U.S. citizen;
• be an Arkansas resident;
• be a resident of the district and respective electoral zone if elected from zones;
• not be an employee of the district served;
• not claim the right to vote in another county or state;
• not presently be adjudged mentally incompetent by a court of competent jurisdiction;
• never have been convicted of embezzlement of public money, bribery, forgery, or other infamous crime.

So stop being a critic, and get in the arena. Lives, families, and the present and future of your City desperately hunger for your students-first leadership.


Resources
www.arsba.org
www.sos.arkansas.gov/elections
www.votepulaski.net

Gerrymander Rigged

Last night, the Little Rock School Board got busy with one 4 - 3 vote, which:

1. gerrymandered to ensure majority African-American zones even though the district is only 44% black;
2. divided neighborhoods among three zones (1, 6 and 7) to deny Hispanics the opportunity for meaningful representation so zealously guarded by African-Americans; and
3. abandoned its responsibility to balance by population by creating zones as far apart as 2,252 citizens, a difference of 8.5%.

After months of border battles and with just 20 days until deadline, the board voted for the seventh version of a map, originally drawn by the nonpartisan regional planning authority - Metroplan, but bastardized by self-interested board members and their lawyers.

If the races were reversed, and minority whites were preserving majority zones, this would clearly constitute a voting rights issue. Let me rephrase: The issue is exists; but its advocates are frozen in silence.

In another outstanding report by the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette's Cynthia Howell, Zone 7 Board Member Dianne Curry, whose term expires this year, claimed to have talked to Hispanic residents about the boundary-line revisions.

"They understand it was not based on looking at [ethnicity] at all, but strictly by the census numbers, and we didn't even know who was in a particular area."

Disingenuous or disengaged? Either way, disturbing.

According to Ms. Howell's article, Metroplan was asked late last year to draft election-zone plans using specific parameters:

1. equalizing the populations (fair);
2. minimizing changes from the current School Board election zones (self-serving);
3. minimizing the splitting of neighborhoods and voting precincts (fair);
4. using landmarks and census blocks to define zone boundaries (fair); and
5. if possible, avoiding the placement of two incumbent board members in the same election zone to avoid making any board member ineligible to run for re-election (self-serving)

No. 5 clearly took priority.

Charles Armstrong (Zone 6), whose term also expires this year, is also running for State Representative. But with the September school election coming after May's primary, he has not ruled out running for both. According to Ms. Howell, Mr. Armstrong said "Alternative 6 and 7 plans enabled him to keep within his zone some of the neighborhoods with which he is familiar." No. 2? Check.

"The only community that has asked the whole board, 'do not separate us, please,' is the one that we are separating," said Zone 4 Board Member Greg Adams, referring to the division of Hispanic neighborhoods. "What is the compelling reason that trumps that request?"

There is none. The irony is that it took a white man giving voice to Hispanics to challenge the unacceptable hold one race has on the board and district. What he didn't say was the black community knew they didn't have to ask, while the white community gave up its voice in the district years ago, either through apathy, fear of being called racist, or overcompensation for past wrongs.

Lest you think three of our seven board members to be altruistic champions of fairness, the vote was 7 - 0 to deny thousands of citizens the basic right to vote for their representative. Even though Arkansas Code Annotated 6-13-631 calls for the election of all board seats after zone boundaries are redrawn, Attorney Chris Heller advised board members that the district "shall be exempt" because it meets the requirements of the federal Voting Rights Act.

Somebody help me understand. To comply with the Voting Rights Act, zoned districts are required for all districts with minority populations ten percent and above. All districts' zones are required to be redrawn following the decennial census. The law states that all seats should be open for election after zone boundaries are redrawn. According to Mr. Heller's theory, are zoned districts which comply with the law and hold all new elections actually in violation of the law if the district meets the requirements of the federal Voting Rights Act?

What ever happened to doing what's right instead of hiding behind what's potentially exempt. I guess it depends on what the meaning of "shall" shall be.

Once again, the agendas of seven board members and their enabling attorney took priority over the rights of 178,391 citizens (as of 2010).

School Boards should govern public school districts as representatives of the people. They should not, however, tell the people how they will be represented. At the legislature, the people, not incumbent school boards, should should finally be empowered to determine zones and when their representatives "shall" stand for election.

And while we're at it, we have a Mayor, County Judge, Governor and President. It's time we had a directly elected School Board President to represent and be accountable to all the people in the governance of their public school districts.

Meanwhile, a promising candidate, Leslie Fisken, has emerged to replace Melanie Fox (Zone 3). Charles Armstrong (Zone 6) hasn't said if he's running for one office or two. And Dianne Curry (Zone 7) just read in the Democrat-Gazette that she has Hispanics in her district.

May electable candidates emerge, incumbent or not, who will finally put the needs of students above their own.

Perhaps one or more were among the Tiger Tailgate gathering tonight at War Memorial Stadium. With the leadership of Muskie Harris and Leotis Harris, Jr., Little Rock Central High football alumni are organizing to return the Tigers, and by extension the entire school and neighborhood, to its tradition rich place among the state and nation's elite. Go Tigers!

Little Rock School District Demographics: The Majority Myth

Total Population - 178,391

White Population - 84,513 (47%)

Black Population - 78,724 (44%)

Hispanic Population - 12,551 (7%)

Other Population - 2,603 (1.5%)

U.S. News & World Report Names KIPP's 96% Minority High School Arkansas' Second Best

Good news, bad news.

Out of 22,000 high schools evaluated in 49 states, U.S. News & World Report has ranked Helena's KIPP Delta Collegiate High School, an open enrollment public charter, Arkansas' second best.

According to the report, KIPP "students have the opportunity to take Advanced Placement coursework and exams. The AP participation rate at KIPP Delta Collegiate High School is 91 percent. The student body makeup is 41 percent male and 59 percent female, and the total minority enrollment is 96 percent."

Arkansas's best high school - Farmington's Haas Hall Academy, also a charter - is America's 353rd best (top 1.6% in country). KIPP was 404th (top 1.8%).

Bentonville High School was third in Arkansas and 731st in America (top 3.3%).

For perspective, the 23rd best high school in Arkansas (the last ranked by U.S. News) - West Fork High School - came in at No. 2,003 in the nation (top 9.1%).

No Little Rock, North Little Rock or Pulaski County Special School District high schools or Pulaski County public charters were ranked or recognized.

What's not written is that a large percentage of KIPP's 16 teachers (10:1 student ratio) are from Teach for America.

They, their fellow teachers, students, parents, guardians, the community, Executive Director Scott Shirey, and the KIPP leadership are to be congratulated...and emulated.

By federal definition, Pulaski County is in the Delta. KIPP anyone? At the very least, we should be throwing open our school doors to Teach for America.

Hidden Public School Tuition

Lest home or private school parents think that the performance of the public schools is not their issue, consider the following.

From property taxes on $100,000 assessed valuation, $928.06 (65.82%) goes to the Little Rock School District. That means every $300,000 home is paying $2,784.18 annually in property taxes to the district.

From personal property taxes on $1,000 assessed valuation, $46.72 (65.82%) goes to the Little Rock School District. That means every $300,000 home is paying approximately $116 annually in personal property taxes to the district.

That's $2,900.18 every year for a combined $142,699,808 from local sources. And that doesn't include your contributions from the state's sales and income taxes which total $115,221,936 annually. While we're at it, don't forget your federal income taxes, which provide $80,757,150 a year.

Even if your kids weren't, aren't or won't be in the Little Rock School District, as a citizen, property owner and taxpayer, you have a responsibility to hold our elected officials accountable for their performance (or lack thereof) in the governance and results of the $340,000,000 public school district.

By the way, that equates to $13,600 per student, far higher than most any private school Pre-K through 12 tuition in the region. But in the case of the Little Rock School District, you don't get what you pay for.

Dynasty No More...But Could be Again

Academics and extra-curricular involvement are not an either/or proposition. They are inextricably linked in the education of the whole person.

Just ask Dr. Fitz Hill about the role of athletics in Arkansas Baptist College's miracle turnaround of its school and community.

Think back to your own experience. It was the students who were engaged in sports, band, spirit groups, drama, choir, yearbook, student government, newspaper, clubs and/or any number of out-of-class activities who performed best in school. They were accountable - to their coaches, directors and sponsors and to each other.

Now think to your present. If you want something done, ask a busy person.

Apparently, the Little Rock School District still has athletics - that fundamental source of school and community spirit and support. But the elected and administrative leadership seems loathe to even nominally support it.

It took Dr. Drake Hawkins, Verizon Wireless and the private sector to put a new surface on the home field of the most famous high school in America. And yet, athletes can't even use Quigley Stadium's locker rooms because of mold and abominable disrepair.

Understand, this is the field of the vaunted Central High Tigers and their 32 state championships from 1907 to 2004. Even though it's been eight years since their last one, they're still 11 ahead of second place Pine Bluff and 24 above third place Barton. While recent years have been lean, the Tigers still hold the Arkansas record for most victories with 756 through 2010.

What does it say about priorities when the Little Rock Convention & Visitors Bureau and Arkansas Department of Parks & Tourism spend big bucks to market Central High National Historic Site as a major global destination, while its school's students can't even use its facilities?

And if that weren't bad enough, every single game the most storied team in state history from the richest public school district in Arkansas plays outside of Little Rock is at superior facilities.

I was always told, "If you're going to do something, do it well or don't do it at all." The Little Rock School District should decide if it's going to be competitive athletically. If not, admit it, and get out of the business. If so, get in it to win it. They can't blame the charters for this one.

What goes largely unsaid during the constant sports talk radio lament that Arkansas is not producing enough D-1 talent in football is that the state's largest and deepest pool of talent is being squandered by its school district's indifference. As we celebrate Little Rock's private school products Jake Bequette and Joe Adams, where are the public's Keith Jacksons and Marcus Elliotts? They're there. They're just being denied the opportunity.

This is a simple fix. No studies, no consultants, no strategic plan required. All it takes is will, and a little Friday Night Lights competitive spirit from the board and administration. So if you're reading, here are my top ten plays to return Little Rock - Central, J.A. Fair, Hall, McClellan and Parkview - to athletic glory, and thereby engender support and pride among students, parents and the community.

1. Allow athletics, including off-season training, as a class-time elective with PE credit;
2. Convert grades 6 - 8 middle schools to 7 - 9 junior highs;
3. Synch high school athletic programs with feeder middle school/junior high programs;
4. Empower head high school coaches to assemble staffs, including middle school/junior high assistant head coaches, and hold them accountable for performance;
5. Return coaches to the role of campus disciplinarians - in the halls, in the lunch room, on the grounds
6. Partner with City of Little Rock to share, enhance athletic facilities;
7. Seek district-wide uniform sponsor, with consistent design - Little Rock above number, school name below;
8. Host city-wide Homecoming, with all-school parade through downtown Little Rock and Battle of the Bands in War Memorial Stadium;
9. Establish Little Rock Booster Club to raise private sponsorships to provide matching grants to school-specific parent/fan booster clubs; and
10. Create, enhance spirit groups (e.g. marching band, cheerleaders, pom/dance squad, mascot, student booster club), then produce pep rallies before every home football game.

Instead of that next district-financed junket to the latest urban school district du jour, board members should get on a school bus and travel to the location of every Tigers away game outside of Pulaski County scheduled for 2012.  When they get home, they should get in a huddle and raise their seven hands to give their players the tools they need to succeed on the field and in life.

3/8 Planning, 5/8 Instruction and Veto Power

On its surface, I favor the proposed middle school change from block scheduling to eight periods. However, the process for this change begs closer scrutiny.

At the Monday, February 20th meeting at Forest Heights, it was stated by district leadership that in order to move from block to periods, the change must be approved by the Little Rock Education Association (LREA) (teachers' union) then the board.

When asked what happens if the teachers union doesn't approve, LREA President Cathy Koehler answered by saying that she felt that 80% of the teachers supported the change.

That's all good, but it didn't answer the question. The answer is: LREA has the power to effectively veto the will of parents and a policy decision by their elected school board.

A public employee union should represent its members in regard to wages, benefits and work environment. It should not be allowed to dictate the policy decisions of a public body.

Further, of the eight periods, one will be reserved for classroom preparation, one for subject collaboration, and one for grade collaboration. That's 3/8 of the day that teachers will not be instructing, but preparing to instruct.

I strongly agree with the need for dedicated time to prepare and collaborate, but couldn't the latter be consolidated into one period - say three days for grade collaboration and two for subject?

When I asked how the collaboration meetings would be conducted, we were told that there would essentially be a chairman, an agenda and minutes.

Every day?!

2/8 (or 1/4) of each day not in the classroom should be more than enough. One wonders if Ms. Koehler's 80% would be supportive of that change. Until they address the larger issue of the union setting district policy, all parents and their board need is one over 50%.

FOI You Too

I'm not a public official. I've got only nine followers on this blog. But evidently, full-time Joshua intervener and part-time state representative John Walker considers my windmill tilting worthy of his bully time.

I was recently on the receiving end of one of his fabled speaker phone calls, as he peppered me with questions about my alleged support for adding at-large zones to the Little Rock School District. Had he just been the tenth follower of my blog, he could have read for himself what my position is (and has been), instead of making one up and trying to tie me to it.

Here's the truth: School districts with 10% or more minority population must either be: 1) seven zones, 2) five zones, or 3) five zones and two at-large. Currently, incumbent school boards decide how the people will be represented. With Representative Barry Hyde, I proposed at the legislature that the people, not incumbent school board members, should be empowered to determine how their district will be governed.

Little Rock School District Attorney Chris Heller, evidently with carte blanche board authorization to speak for or against any issue he chooses, signed up to speak against it. Representative Walker actually did, and the Education Committee, despite some members' personal assurances of support, unanimously voted to send the issue to the legislative equivalent of Siberia - interim study. By the way, after a year of interim, where's the study?

Anyway, following my repeated clarifications to the speakerfied representative, the call ended. I immediately followed with an email asking him who else was in the room listening to the call, as I like to know my audience, even if after the fact. I received no response.

Later that day, I was told that Representative Walker - a public official - had submitted an FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request to all members of the Little Rock School Board for any correspondence from or with me. Understand, he can't FOIA me. I'm not a public official. So he backdoored it. And man, do some of those school board members jump when he says "Howdy."

I found the entire experience amusing until I considered the larger issue. If a state representative, 30-year intervener in the Little Rock School District federal case, and de-facto leader of the district chooses to use FOIA against a citizen parent communicating with his/her board members, imagine the chilling effect on citizen/parent involvement in the governance of their schools.

For the record, anything I write to an elected official I expect to be in the public record. Further, almost all of my exchanges with board members and Representative Walker are posted on this blog. To be fair, I never post private messages, but when a public official, including Mr. Walker, chooses to cc, I consider their communications public.

It does, however, beg the question: Why hasn't a reporter or reporters sent an FOIA request to Representative Walker and members of the board for release of all their communications over the past three decades? At the very least, I would like to see the one he submitted regarding me. I'm sure I'm not alone.

He's a smart and clever man, so I doubt a paper or digital trail exists on his end. Members of the board, however, could be a different story.

Sweet and Bitter Ironies

On the day North Little Rock voters chose to compete by overwhelmingly approving a game-changing, over quarter billion dollar capital investment in their 9,000-student public school district, the true leaders of the Little Rock School District (Attorneys Heller, Fendley and Walker) chose not to compete, but instead, blame others for their abject failure.

Because even they must know that the chances of passing a comparable (or any) millage in Little Rock is nil, don't be surprised if Little Rock's tricky trial triumvirate next target the will of the North Little Rock people as an unfair, discriminatory advantage. Excellence be damned, when it stands in the way of sameness.

In addition to ending new charter schools, Little Rock's attorneys seek to ban forensic audits of the district's books and consolidating, annexing or reconstituting the three Pulaski County districts.

What the Phils (Kaplan and Lyon)?! Didn't this lawsuit begin in the early '80s with Little Rock's suing North Little Rock and Pulaski County for consolidation?

And show of hands - How many Little Rock School Board members even read the 1,000+ pages before they were filed with District Judge Marshall?

In another outstanding report, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette's Cynthia Howell wrote about Little Rock's attorneys:

"They also said that the attorney general and 'other state actors' including the University of Arkansas departments in Fayetteville and 'private persons and entities have engaged in an orchestrated public relations campaign designed to discredit desegregation efforts in Pulaski County generally and LRSD specifically that has created something like the 'hysterical political atmosphere' surrounding desegregation reminiscent of the 1960s'."

To quote Seth and Amy, "Really?!"

So, while Little Rock attorneys supplant elected leaders, foment their conspiracy theories, and chase their latest Boo Radley, North Little Rock went to work.

If they think charters, the attorney general, state actors, our flagship university, private persons and entities, forensic audits, and potential consolidation are causing students to flee the district, wait 'til they get a load of what those shiny new North Little Rock public schools pull from the south.

While my money's in Little Rock, if I were a betting man, it would be on the North shore.

To borrow from Ross Perot, there are about to be two giant sucking sounds in Central Arkansas. One from North Little Rock pulling students, parents and citizens into their district. And the other, well, you know.

Until Citizens, Parents, Teachers Unite for Excellence...

Until all citizens and parents residing in the Little Rock School District take responsibility for the governance of their district, regardless of where their children attend (or attended) school - public, private, charter or home - the district will not become excellent.

Until teachers are afforded a level playing field when it comes to quitting the union (currently they only have an annual two week window to resign in writing by certified mail), the district will not become excellent.

Until principals are empowered to run their schools, then held accountable for their results, the district will not become excellent.

Until athletics, music and extra curricular activities are valued in the total education of students, the district will not become excellent.

Until the district becomes student-centered instead of employee-centered, the district will not become excellent.

Until community support is generated through neighborhood schools, the district will not become excellent.

Until all children, regardless of familial support, zip code, and/or financial means, are expected to learn, the district will not become excellent.

Until the anachronistic dogma of PINOs (Progressives in Name Only) and adult agendas of special self-interests are replaced by what's best for students, the district will not become excellent.

Until excellence is valued more than sameness, the district will be...the same.

Until. Until.. Until...

Rerun: Consolidate, Close, Construct

In light of the Little Rock School District's 14 Reform Strategies to fix its middle schools, I'm rerunning a post I made last year regarding middle schools.

Note that one of the two zones which grew in population over the past ten years (4) has no middle school. In fact, there is no middle school west of I-430.

Three of the seven middle schools are located in zones which lost population (1 and 2), two are in a zone which stayed flat (3), and two are in a zone which gained population (7).

Lest anyone wonder why West Little Rock parents are fleeing the district in droves when their children transition from elementary to middle schools, it's because the district has demonstrated, by its inaction, that it does not value neighborhood middle schools where its population is growing.

As their redrawn zones are pushed from the east and squeezed up against the western border, board member Adams (4), Secretary Armstrong (6), and President Carreiro (5) should be moving heaven and earth to find that fourth vote to build a new middle school to better serve their constituencies.

Consolidate, Close, Construct

A new West Little Rock middle school is just one piece of a larger goal to close, consolidate and construct schools and facilities to equitably serve the population. Consider what decades of apathetic or deliberate inattention have wrought:

1) All seven Little Rock School District middle schools are within 3.6 miles of another middle school.

2) Five of seven middle schools (Pulaski Heights, Forest Heights, Henderson, Dunbar and Mann) are within 7.8 miles of each other.

3) Two middle schools - Pulaski Heights and Forest Heights are only 1.6 miles from each other, while Dunn and Mann are only 2.1 miles apart.

4) Three board members have two middle schools in their zones (Johnson, Zone 1 - Mann, Dunbar; Fox, Zone 3 - Forest Heights, Pulaski Heights; and Curry, Zone 7 - Mablevale, Cloverdale).

5) One board member has one middle school in his zone (Nellums, Zone 2 - Henderson).

6) Three board members have zero middle schools in their zones (Adams, Zone 4; Carreiro, Zone 5; Armstrong, Zone 6).

7) Current middle schools extend from: North - Forest Heights (5901 Evergreen), South - Cloverdale (6300 Hinkson),  East - Mann (1000 East Roosevelt), West - Henderson (401 Barrow) and Southwest - Mablevale (10811 Mablevale), with Pulaski Heights (401 North Pine) in Hillcrest and Dunbar (1100 Wright Avenue) in Central.

8) Of the seven middle schools, three are magnets - Mablevale, Mann and Henderson, one is a charter - Cloverdale, and two are zoned enrollment - Pulaski Heights and Forest Heights.

9) Roberts Elementary was the first Little Rock School District school to be built west of I-430 since 1978 (33 years).

10) There are 32 elementary schools in the Little Rock School District and five high schools.

The More Things Don't Change: Court release raises School Board zones issue; by Cynthia Howell, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (June 15, 2007)

In the aftermath of release from federal court monitoring and in the midst of a divisive battle over a superintendent, a state mandate has the potential to force some changes in the Little Rock School Board’s threeyear membership terms and board-member election zones.

Arkansas Code Annotated 6-13-631 requires school districts that are released from operating under federal court desegregation orders to comply with state and federal laws on school board elections.

Specifically the state law calls for five-year staggered terms of office for school board members and requires that within 180 days of a district’s release from court supervision that the district create school board election zones using the most recent decennial census data.

The Little Rock School District, which already has election zones based on the 2000 Census data, was released from decades of federal court supervision on Feb. 23. That court release is being appealed to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Should the district have to adjust its election zones, the 180-day deadline would be Aug. 22. However, another provision in the same law says any adjustment to zones must be completed 90 days before the regular school election. That would make the deadline June 20, before this year’s Sept. 18 election.

June 20 is also the first day that people interested in run- ning for the School Board this year can file as candidates in the Pulaski County clerk’s office.

Failure to comply with all aspects of the state law could cost the state’s largest school district 20 percent of its state funding, the statute says. That penalty could be as much as $14 million in a district that received $70 million in state funding this fiscal year.

School Board member Baker Kurrus recently brought the state law to the public forefront and asked for legal advice on how the election zones and School Board term provisions might apply.

“I’m hopeful that we don’t have a problem,” said Kurrus, whose board term expires in September, as does that of board member Mike Daugherty. “But with that kind of penalty attached to it, you have to get it up on the radar screen.”

State Rep. Daniel Greenberg, R-Little Rock, late last month asked for an attorney general’s opinion on the district’s behalf.

Attorney General Dustin Mc-Daniel responded Wednesday in a letter in which he declined to give an opinion on the application of the statute to the Little Rock district. He said his office has a long-standing policy against opining on matters that are the subject of pending litigation, and he noted the pending appeal of the school district’s release from federal court supervision.

“At this time, that appeal has not been resolved,” the letter said. “Over the long course of the desegregation litigation, issues involving the electoral zones of the District have been within its ambit.”

The attorney general further said that the district’s questions about the applicability of the law “may involve determinations of fact and/or review of prior court orders or settlement agreements that can only be properly undertaken by the District with the aid of its counsel, or resolved in an adversary proceeding before the judicial branch. I do not serve as legal counsel for the LRSD and am thus not the proper official to provide the requested “guidance” to the District on this issue.”

Attorney general opinions, though lacking the authority of a court ruling, are generally given much weight by state and local officials who request them or by anyone who looks for legal guidance absent a court opinion on a particular subject. State law even directs state officials in some instances to seek the attorney general’s opinion and requires him to give it.

Changes in the Little Rock district’s election zone boundaries or in the length of School Board members’ terms could materially change the composition of the board that is now racially and bitterly split over the district’s leadership.

The School Board voted 4-3 on May 24 to buy out the remaining two years of Superintendent Roy Brooks’ contract, after weeks of debate on whether to keep, suspend, fire or buy him out.

Brooks is scheduled to leave in mid-August before the September School Board election. The board has neither discussed who replaces Brooks nor set a timeline for picking a successor.

The state statute requires school districts that have 10 percent or greater minority-group populations as recorded in the latest decennial census to elect their school board members from single-member election zones, or from a combination of single-member zones and atlarge zones.

The zones must be formed in compliance with the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, the law says. The Little Rock district has seven single-member election zones.

The law also requires fiveyear terms for School Board members in contrast to Little Rock’s current three-year terms. More specifically, the law says that after zones are established, an election must be held and then members of the new board must determine their initial terms by drawing lots so that one or two board member terms expire and are filled each year. In other words, one or more board members may draw initial one-year terms; others may draw two-, three-, four- or five-year terms.

Some of the questions yet to be answered regarding the application of the statute in the Little Rock district include:

Do Little Rock’s existing election zones — last modified in 2001 — comply with the federal Voting Rights Act? And, if they don’t, can they be made compliant before the Sept. 18 school election?

Do Little Rock School Board terms need to be extended from the current three years to five years and, if so, how?

Do all seven School Board seats need to be opened to election this September?

Do Little Rock’s current election zones — four majority-black and three majority-white in a district in which the overall population is majority white — comply with previous court orders?

Is the district, in fact, really released from federal court supervision while its unitary status is being appealed to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court?

The Joshua intervenors, who represent the class of all black students in the 24-year-old school desegregation lawsuit, are appealing the Feb. 23 unitary-status ruling to the 8th Circuit. If the appeal is successful and the declaration of unitary status is overturned, the district could be returned to court supervision.

But Tracey George, a law professor at Vanderbilt University at Nashville, Tenn., who has expertise in federal court procedures, said an appeal of the court order does not necessarily stop the court order from going into effect or triggering the requirements of the state law.

“A federal court order takes effect when the order is entered on the federal court docket sheet — unless there is a second order by a judge suspending the first order until one or more appeals to higher courts are completed,” George said in a telephone interview.

“Based on the federal rules of procedure, and here we are talking about the federal rules of appellate procedure, orders take effect absent a decision by either the district court or the Court of Appeals to stay the order pending appeal. If no such stay has been requested or granted in this case, then there is no reason to believe they have extra time” to comply with state requirements, she said about the school district.

As to whether the Little Rock School District’s existing School Board election zones comply with the federal Voting Rights Act, which is a requirement of the state statute, Tim Humphries, legal counsel in the Arkansas secretary of state’s elections division, said district leaders and their attorneys must make that initial determination.

“If the district’s view is disputed, the issue could wind up in court,” Humphries added.

Section 2 of the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act is the basis of single-member election zones as a way to help blacks and other racial or ethnic minority groups elect their preferred candidates.

“No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision in a manner which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color,” the section reads in part.

A violation occurs, the act continues, if members of a class protected by the law have less opportunity than others in the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice. However, “nothing in this section establishes a right to have members of a protected class elected in numbers equal to their proportion in the population.”

Jim McKenzie, executive director of Metroplan, a council of local governments and the agency that prepared election zone maps for the Little Rock district in 2001, said the district’s current zones were drawn in compliance with the federal law.

“It would be pretty silly to not do it in accordance with the Voting Rights Act,” McKenzie said of the work done by a staff demographer.

“We basically took the existing [election zones] and then played around the margins of the existing [zones] so you weren’t gerrymandering anyone out of a seat,” McKenzie recalled. “We made the changes incremental rather than radical at the direction of the superintendent. We then presented the three alternatives to the School Board for their consideration.”

The current zones — as adopted by the School Board in 2001 — resulted in four majority-black zones and three majority-white zones in a city in which the population in 2000 was 55.1 percent majority white and 40.4 percent black, according to U.S. Census Bureau figures.

The school district is slightly smaller in area than the city. The school district population was 54.5 percent white and 41 percent black, according to a Metroplan analysis of the 2000 Census figures.

In contrast, the Little Rock district student enrollment was then and is now 68 percent black and 32 white and other, according to enrollment figures tracked by the federal Office of Desegregation Monitoring.

The Little Rock district was first divided into single-member election zones in 1986 when the district, in response to a court order, absorbed southwest Little Rock from the neighboring Pulaski County Special School District.

The original seven zones — two with majority-black populations — were approved by the federal court. When the zones were adjusted in 1993, on the basis of the 1990 Census, they were challenged, and again they were approved by the federal district court and the appeals court as meeting the federal Voting Rights Act requirements.

The zones were adjusted in 2001 to accommodate population shifts reflected in the 2000 Census. Those 2001 changes weren’t challenged in court.

McKenzie said the change in the number of majority-black School Board election zones from two in 1993 to four in 2001 was not planned.

“We didn’t try to make black districts or white districts,” McKenzie said.

Humphries declined to speculate on whether the four majority-black School Board election zones now in place put the Little Rock district out of compliance with earlier federal court orders that approved just two majorityblack zones. But, in general, he said, that would not be the case.

“Taken by itself, without the context of any facts that might be developed either prior to or during litigation ... it is not unlawful to have a majority of majority-black population zones in a district with a mostly white population,” Humphries said.

“Many legitimate factors such as keeping neighborhoods intact, incumbent protection, mindfulness of political and natural boundaries, and undoubtedly others ... could have been considered by the board in adopting such a plan,” he said.

Laughlin McDonald of Atlanta, who as a lawyer and director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Project, has testified in Congress and written three books about voting rights, agreed.

“There is nothing that says that whites always have to have the majority of the districts if they have the majority of the population,” McDonald said.

“There is nothing to prevent having a majority of minority districts. I think it depends on what the demographics are. There are all kinds of things that go into drawing districts — keeping communities and precincts and other jurisdictional subdivisions intact. You can have a jurisdiction with a slight majority-black population, and the majority of the districts that you draw could conceivably be majority-white.”

McDonald also said he doubted that a 1990s court order approving two majority-black zones would be binding on a school district into the future.

“I think these things aren’t written in stone — when a court enters a remedial plan, it is based on the demographics that exist at the time that it acts,” he said. “If demographics change, I think the jurisdiction would not only be free to alter the composition but have an obligation to do so.”

John Walker, a Little Rock civil-rights lawyer who represents the Joshua intervenors in the 24-year-old desegregation lawsuit, argued that the state law on school board elections does not apply “in any case” to the Little Rock district because the Little Rock district’s involvement in the federal desegregation case — which includes the 1986 and 1993 litigation over school board election zones and the Voting Rights Act — takes precedence over the state law.

The litigation on election zones was part of the desegregation lawsuit. And, while the school district has been released from court supervision in that case, the case still exists. The Little Rock district remains the plaintiff until the Pulaski County Special and North Little Rock school districts are also released from court monitoring.
 
The statute does list scenarios in which a school district is exempt from its provisions. Those include:
 
A school district that is operating under a federal court order enforcing school desegregation or the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended.
 
A school district that has a zoned board meeting the requirements of the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended.
 
A school district that a federal court has ruled is not in violation of the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, so long as the court order is in effect.
 
Chris Heller, an attorney for the school district, also pointed to the exception in the law for districts that are in compliance with the Voting Rights Act and said there is an argument that Little Rock is still subject to the exception.
 
“I thought that was what the attorney general would advise us,” Heller said in response to the attorney general’s decision not to issue an opinion. “It is possible that the district still comes within an exception, and it is possible some part of the state law might apply to the district. There is a significant financial question that depends on getting the answer right,” he added about the potential $14 million penalty for noncompliance.

 “Maybe we can ask the Arkansas Department of Education to agree that we aren’t subject to any reduction in our state aid,” Heller said.
 
Former state Rep. Dean Elliott of Maumelle was the author in 2001 of the legislative language requiring districts that are newly released from federal court monitoring to comply with the federal Voting Rights Act and state law in regard to school board election zones.
 
Elliott said he was focusing not on Little Rock but on the Pulaski County Special School District and the desire of Maumelle residents at the time to have a School Board member living in that community.
 
Kurrus, the Little Rock board member, said he hopes the law won’t force immediate changes in the district — particularly in the lengths of board member terms. Still, he believes that some answers are necessary.
 
“If it didn’t have such a draconian penalty in there, you could say, ‘Golly, just wait and see what happens.’ If somebody objects, we would deal with it,” he said.

Exemption or Not, Little Rock School District Should Hold All New Elections to Ensure 'One Person, One Vote'

Just because the Little Rock School District may have an exemption from holding all new board elections in 2012, doesn't mean it should exercise it. Those starved for open, democratic governance of our public schools should insist that the unitary Little Rock School District follow state law and put all of its board positions on the September 2012 ballot.

Every zone in the Little Rock School District must be redrawn because the two zones which lost population are buffered from the two that grew by three that remained flat. If Little Rock does not hold all new elections, thousands of people will be represented by a board member for whom they did not have the opportunity to vote until 2014. How's that for "one person one vote?"

Unfortunately, because of inaction by the legislature, the decision on whether or not to hold all new elections rests in the hands, not of the people, but of the very incumbent board members whose seats are at stake. One can only hope that the sunshine of public opinion will move them to represent the people instead of their own self interests.

Takeaways from Town Hall: Parental Choice in Public Schools

"New segregationists." Plantation/slavery imagery. "Choice means escape." Analogies to war with those who challenge effectiveness of public schools. Ongoing obsession, however incorrect,  with Waiting for "Superman" imagery. Colorful, but inconsistent and contradictory language. Out-of-the-gate and repeated demonizing of motivations behind free public forum which attracted 413 pre-registrants. Control conspiracy theories regarding motivation of those of means who seek to educate all children, regardless of race, zip code or financial circumstances.

I left the beautiful and relevant campus of Philander Smith College the evening of October 25th not surprised by the arguments of those opposed to choice in public schools - reasonable minds may disagree - but stunned by the beginning-to-end incendiary and filibustering rhetoric of some of the panelists. It was as if they were playing to a small but fervent audience of applauders. Their truth, however, left this father, and most others with whom I visited, cold and incredulous at their defensive, anachronistic take on the current state of Little Rock's public schools.

Sunshine is at once a wonderful and terrible thing. But, better to deal with those you know.

May our citizens and parents, not Superman, save our children and the Little Rock School District. Because without effective public education for all students, our community is doomed.

Free to Choose? Eh, Not So Much: Notes from Little Rock School Choice Forum

Free to Choose? Eh, Not So Much: Notes from Little Rock School Choice Forum

God Speed, Norma Johnson

254 to 162. In the only contested school board race in the Little Rock School District, Norma Johnson defeated write-in candidate Loretta Hendrix in Zone 1.

According to the 2010 census, there are at least 17,596 voting age adults in Zone 1. That means only two percent of those eighteen and over voted for their representative to help lead the largest local government entity in Arkansas.

By contrast, in the preceding week's special election to increase the City sales tax by a penny, city-wide turnout was around 16% of those eighteen and over. For perspective, the Little Rock School District's $350 million annual budget is over twice the size of the City of Little Rock's.

The real winner in this election are those statewide special interests which continue to lobby against any change which would threaten their low-turnout domain - school district central administrators, incumbent school board members, and teachers unions. Those are the groups which lobbied against my proposed legislation to change school elections to the primary to ensure greater public participation. The House Education Committee voted unanimously to send the proposal to interim study, the legislative equivalent of Siberia.

Legislators outside of Little Rock can complain about state spending in Pulaski County's public schools all they want, but the reality is they have perpetuated a system which continues to reap exactly what they continue to sow. When the people are deliberately disengaged from governance of their public schools, a district's decisions will reflect the will of those truly in charge (see list above).

I pray that Ms. Johnson will take her 254 votes as a mandate to immediately lead her Zone and District in putting students first over the agendas of self-serving adults.

Lyin' or Pickups and Guns...Oh My

The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette's Cynthia Howell, in her July 23rd article, '1 school board race in county draws 2,' quoted 23-year Little Rock School District Board Member Dr. Katherine Mitchell as follows:

“People were upset with me when I was trying to help get us a superintendent who would be responsive to the total community. That’s when it happened,” she said. “I got a lot of threats. People don’t know what I went through in that period. People driving by my house making sure I lived there and they were in pickup trucks with guns in the back. It wasn’t an easy time for me but I just didn’t say anything.”

Yes she did - to Ms. Howell - who reported it in her article. But not before? When it was allegedly happening? Why not?


Why would the president of the largest local governmental entity in the state not report such threats at the time? Why no police report? Terroristic threatening is not only a felony, but a federal crime. Plus, Dr. Mitchell is a public official. Why wasn't the FBI notified?


I can think of only three reasonable explanations: 1) she was misquoted; 2) she was negligent in her duty as a public official; or 3) she's not telling the truth.


If one, she should seek a correction and issue an accurate public statement.


If two, she should immediately report the incident(s) to the proper authorities and cooperate fully with any investigation.


If three, she should really work on her storytelling. "People...in pickup trucks with guns in the back?" I get the not so veiled stereotypical implication. Throw in a banjo and a washboard, and it reads like the Darlings have come to Mayberry to exact a little hillbilly justice. What next? West Little Rock soccer moms in SUVs with overscheduled kids in the back.


Are we really to believe that in a District where folks don't even go to the polls in school elections, "people," not a single person, but "people" rolled past Dr. Mitchell's house in one or more pick-up trucks with guns in the back. Back window (gun rack) or back of truck? Were there people with guns in the back or just guns? If just guns, were they so big or plentiful that Dr. Mitchell could see them rise above the sides of the truck bed?


I'm not so naive to believe that threats don't occur. My dad was a high school principal in the 60s and 70s. One night, a rock was thrown through my bedroom window. Another night, while I was playing basketball in our driveway, a carload of high school boys stopped in front of our house, called me over, then handed me an obscene note/cartoon to give to my dad. When I read it, I tried to hit them with a rock as they sped away (I was better at basketball). I remember trick-or-treating on Halloween, while Dad sat in the open garage guarding the house. And that's just what I knew about. So yes, threats and other bad things do happen.


If left unchallenged, Dr. Mitchell's story will cast a continued pall over our community and discourage leaders from taking tough positions and/or citizens from seeking leadership roles for fear of their and/or their families' personal safety. The proper authorities should investigate Dr. Mitchell's allegations fully and immediately.

All Must Be Fine - Little Rock School Board Races Go Uncontested

The public school board filing deadline (July 22nd) has come and gone, and the two Little Rock School District zones up for election in the fall both have uncontested races, incumbent Jody Carreiro in Zone 5 and Norma Johnson in Zone 1. Katherine Mitchell, the 23-year Zone 1 incumbent, did not file for re-election. The election will be held Tuesday, September 20th.

All adults of influence with the district should ask themselves - "Is the Little Rock School District better off today than when I started?" May their honest answers determine all their futures.

Meanwhile, citizens, particularly parents, should step up and lead to save this community. Nothing's going to change if the leadership is never challenged.

A start would be insisting that, once all zones are redrawn based on the 2010 census, new elections be held in 2012 for all seven seats. Otherwise, it will be 2014, halfway through the decade, before all citizens of the Little Rock School District will be represented by someone for whom they had the opportunity to vote.

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2011/jul/23/1-school-board-race-county-draws-2-20110723

Wake Up Little Rock!

In 1957, nine courageous students risked their lives to enter the Little Rock School District. Fifty-four years later, 10,000 students annually risk their futures because they can't get out.

The continued failure of public education in Pulaski County, and specifically Little Rock, is our community's greatest emergency. It is destroying the City of Little Rock's resident middle class, leaving a city of largely trapped poor, those with means for private education, a shrinking percentage of parents with the initiative to make the best of a dysfunctional system, and refugees in a limited number of charter schools.

We cannot keep, attract or grow business when its workers' children are not being educated.

We cannot keep and grow the tax base when working families' students cannot receive a quality education.

We cannot sustain the economic viability and competitiveness of the community when it fails 10,000 students a year.

Whether or not you have or had children in Little Rock public schools, this is no longer just a "public school" issue. If you live and/or work in Little Rock, it's your issue. If you live and/or work in a community that benefits from proximity to Little Rock, it's your issue. And that issue is the very survival of our community and our state's capital.

Amidst all the haranguing, handwringing and hopelessness, there are actions we could/should immediately take as a community to accept no less than excellence from our public schools.

• In every action, the Little Rock School District should be mission-focused on the world-class education of all students.
• The Little Rock School District's annual budget is more than twice that of the City of Little Rock. At $350 million, that's approximately $14,000 per student. Even if state desegregation funding were immediately ended, money would not an issue; it's how it's spent.
• In 2010-11, 39% of tested students were not proficient in math. 37% were not proficient in literacy, and 74% were not proficient in science. Further, five of five tested grades performed worse in math than they did the year before, while two of five tested worse in literacy. By the time students reached the eighth grade, 58% were not proficient in math. The pattern is clear: the more years a student spends in the Little Rock School District, the more likely he/she will become not proficient in math and/or literacy.

• Implement the strategic plan.
• In March 2010, after nearly a year of intensive work, a 14-member commission released a Strategic Plan for the Little Rock School District identifying actions that "must be taken" in six important areas: 1) Ambitious, eye-popping goals; 2) Research proven strategies for attaining our goals; 3) Adequate and effective funding for our schools; 4) Recruitment and retention of a high quality staff; 5) Data and Accountability; and 6) Effective, performance driven leadership. A year-and-a-half later, even with a third-party consultant being paid tens of thousands of dollars to implement, the plan remains largely shelved. Now, only three-and-a-half years remain to achieve the five-year goals outlined in the Plan.

• Reform central administration to make most effective and efficient use of taxpayers' investment.

• Empower principals to run their schools, then hold them accountable for performance and achievement.

• Reward, retain and recruit exceptional teachers and immediately remove ineffective ones. 
• Starting Little Rock School District teachers who are members of the Little Rock Education Association rank 92nd in Arkansas (when factoring in annual dues), while non-union teachers rank 78th. Little Rock starting teachers should rank first in Arkansas and favorably compare to our competitor regions so we may attract the best and brightest from around the country, where "last in, first out" policies are laying off innovative and effective young teachers by the thousands.
• With 1,426 members out of 2,222 total teachers (as of January 2010), union members pay $1,026,720 million collectively in annual dues. And yet, the Little Rock School District pays the union president a full annual salary, not to be in the classroom, but to lead the union. The union can afford to pay its own president.
• The Little Rock School District collects union dues through payroll deduction then sends the funds to the union. It's the union's money. It should be independently responsible for the cost and labor to collect it. 
• In the spirit of Arkansas's constitutional right to work law, any Little Rock School District teacher should be allowed to join or quit the union at any time. Currently, a teacher may join when they want, but there is a narrow two-to-three week window in June to quit. If missed, teachers are stuck with another year in dues. 
• Tenure should be eliminated. With origins in colleges and universities, where tenure is still earned, it has been bastardized in the public schools and given to anyone who lasts three years, regardless of performance.

• Close, consolidate and construct schools and facilities to equitably serve the population.
• Currently, all seven Little Rock School District middle schools are within 3.6 miles of another middle school. Five of seven middle schools are within 7.8 miles of each other, and two middle schools are only 1.6 miles apart.
• The two zones with the least population (1 and 2) have three of the seven middle schools.
  
• The most densely populated and fastest growing zone in the district (4) has no middle school. Neither does one with stable population (5).
• Schools - elementary, middle, high - should be clustered in logical, proximate communities of interest to foster parental and community involvement and support.

• Offer, support and celebrate competitive extra-curricular activities and achievement in the arts, athletics, communications, governance, professional development and public service.
• The cover of Arkansas Sports 360 Annual Football Preview featured two Razorbacks, both of whom were from Central Arkansas - Jake Bequette and Joe Adams. Neither were products of our public schools. Little Rock's proud football tradition has been decimated from inattention. Behind Drake Hawkins' leadership and Verizon Wireless' and others' generosity, there is now new, year-round turf at Central High's storied Quigley Stadium, but the locker rooms have been so neglected for so long, players can't even shower there. Sports and extracurricular activities foster school and community spirit and support and provide a fitting incentive for academic achievement and accountability. They are complementary to academics, not contradictory. It's the model upon which Dr. Fitz Hill is transforming Arkansas Baptist College and its neighborhood.

• Communicate clearly, consistently and completely with the public regarding the district's successes, opportunities and deficiencies.
• The Little Rock School District spent tens of thousands of dollars on a search firm, engaged the community in a months-long process, and yet, only brought in one superintendent "finalist" in to interview. With no reasonable explanation, the entire process was thwarted when the district ignored its consultants' recommendation and the consensus of the larger community, and instead, hired the interim superintendent, who did not go through any of the formal application process.

• Compete for students within and without the district without litigating.
• Attorneys for the Little Rock School District should take no action unless directed by a majority public vote of the board.

• After redrawing zones based on the 2010 census, hold new elections for all board members in 2012 and draw for terms.
• Because of population changes in the 2010 census, all seven zones of the Little Rock School District will have to be redrawn. This means that, without new elections, over 5,000 citizens will be represented by someone for whom they did not have the opportunity to vote.
• Follow the 'STEPS FOR CURRENTLY ZONED SCHOOL DISTRICTS,' as issued in the February 8, 2011 memorandum from the Arkansas School Board Association (ASBA) and developed from talks with the Governor's office, Attorney General's office, Secretary of State's office, Arkansas Association (AAEA), and the Arkansas Department of Education and hold new elections.

And here's what can be done at the state level:

• Change school board elections from September to the General Election to assure maximum citizen participation.

• In accordance with A.C.A. 6-13-631, in compliance with the Voting Rights Act, give the people, not the incumbent school board, the power by election to determine how they will be represented: 1) five zones, 2) seven zones or 3) five zones and two at-large.

The Little Rock School District is like a crawdad - it moves backward, attacks anything that tries to stop it, and is oblivious when it's being boiled alive.

In 2011, courageous citizens and parents can save Little Rock by taking back their public schools from the entrenched, self-serving special interests of adults, and get about the business of immediately educating all students, no matter their means or family circumstances. Anything less, and students will get what they don't deserve, while the citizens who fiddled or slept will get exactly what their actions (or inactions) have wrought - the end of Little Rock.



I believe that those parents and citizens and leaders willing to endure the inevitable slings and arrows from those with the most to lose can still prevail. But only if we stand up and trumpet  the truth at every opportunity, even if that means being voted down six to one or five to two or four to three at board meetings.