Appendix — Dayton Board of Education v. Brinkman
Supreme Court brief1977
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
or
ve Su, 2 Coutt, U. S
ki LED
MAR 15 jg7T
a
APPENDIX
Volume II — Exhibits | MICHAEL RODAK, JR., CLERK J
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
OCTOBER TERM, 1976
No. 76-539
DAYTON BOARD OF EDUCATION,
WILLIAM E. GOODWIN,
JOSEPHINE GROFF and
JAMES D. HART,
Petitioners,
v.
MALEK BRINKMAN,
PATTY BRINKMAN, and
PHILLIP BRINKMAN,
By Their Mother and Next Friend,
Donna Brinkman, et al.,
Respondents.
se ere ee
On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals
For The Sixth Circuit
Petition For Certiorari Filed October 18, 1976
Certiorari Granted January 17, 1977
._ ea
ee ss errs .
Pls.
Pls.
Pls.
. ISA
APPENDIX — VOLUME II
EXHIBITS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
One Race Schools and Classrooms .... 311
Racial Overview 1951-52 ............ 312
Racial Overview 1963-64 ............ 313
Racial Overview 1971-72 ............ 314
School Segregation Overview ........ 315
Building Racial Identifiability ........ 316-317
Black Teacher Employment Placement 319
Racial Pattern Faculty Assignment .... 320
Three Resolutions of December 8,
OS ee 321-330
Minutes of January 8, 1972 Board
SS aS 330-353
Report of the Committee of 75 ...... 354-369
Desegregation Study by Dr. Foster,
ee ta kdeakhensswreenens 370-414
H.E.W. Letter of Mar. 17, 1969 to
a ee a eee eee e he 415-416
H.E.W. Letter of Oct. 14, 1970 to
i , ee 6 eee eebedeies oe 416-418
Greer Letter of June 7, 1971 to Dr.
Carle and Recommendations of State
Board of Education ................. 419-455
Tate Letter to President of Dayton
REET ay ee eee 456-457
Pls.
Pls.
13B
13N
15A
1I5Al
. I5B1
. 16B
. 16C
Pls.
. 16D
Pls.
unmkd.
16F
S &
eas 8
~l
uw
100A
Page
French Letter of Oct. 19, 1965 to Board 458
NAACP Letter of Nov. 15, 1954 to
EA ae a ae me 459-461
Roosevelt-Colonel White Optional
i TD ook cconcduscbsve 462-463
Roosevelt-Colonel White Optional
Area Enrollment: 1959-1960 to 1970-
ERE ee eR ee em ee es 464
Colonel White-Kiser Optional Area
EE reer rs err 465
Freedom of Enrollment Guidelines;
SE wacttsudisdovanaabsncs -. . 466-467
Goff Letter of Feb. 28, 1972 to Stover . . 467-468
Listing of Students and Letters ...... 469-477
1972-73 Freedom Enrollment Transfers 478
1972-73 Other Student Transfers ...... 479-480
Policy Regarding Integration ........ 481
1954 Facts and Figures Regarding
BE swcdccnctesnsocseceacane 482-483
Staff Integration Report .............. 484-485
Clerical Placement by School ......... 486
Greer Letter of Mar. 20, 1972 to Carle . . 487-488
Touche Ross & Co. Report ........... 489-498
Estimated Enrollment for West Side
PS i vattcneknwehsesucedss 499-501
Black Student Enrollment and Faculty
| RS heey e Sai ones 502
Pls. 100B
Pls. 100C
Pils. 100D
Pls. LOOE
Pls. 130B
Pls. 130C
Pls. 130D
Pls. 143B
Pls. 143]
Pls. 1501
Pls. 157C
Pls. 157D
Pls. 161A
Pls. 161B
Pls. 162
Def. B
Def. D
Def. E
It.
Page
Black Student Enrollment and Faculty
Pins coctandeGetwassedcecnes 503
Black Student Enrollment and Faculty
DT ch nkchedneekeanees ess eaedees 504
Black Student Enrollment and Faculty
Dt inusske baduadareseadaewkeut< 505
Black Student Enrollment and Faculty
sd. ees el aah i sendaneeentn’s 506
Black Student Enrollment and Faculty
DE cv bekbeet anes obeerensekheens 507
Black Student Enrollment and Faculty
Je tiapeuuctbntectscenedeenves 508
Black Student Enrollment and Faculty
RR reer ee TT TTT TTT TT Te 509
TET OCTET TT TS 510-512
DMHA Leases and Letters .......... 513-523
Racial Composition Garfield, Wogaman,
Dunbar and Willard ................ 524
Deposition of Dr. Wayne Carle ...... 525-536
Deposition of Martin W. Essex ...... 537-538
1933 Resolution Relating to Dunbar .. 539
1942 Resolution Relating to Student
Ree i io cccsd ctasendocess 540
Bowers Letters of Nov. 1972 to
I Fo ondsantdsukenesssusksc scan
School Enrollment 1960-76 .......... 543
School Transportation Policy ......... 545-547
Def.
Def.
. AO
. CI(2)
CN
CO
IV.
Page
NAACP Withdrawal of Objections to
Location of Dunbar ................. 549
Freedom of Enrollment Policy ....... 550-552
Staff and Pupil Racial Data ......... 553-554
Summary of Staff and Pupil Racial Data = 555
Racia! Composition of Certified
POE ce cevuctsccdisveseeeteenaen
Racial Composition of Administrative
MT 4.55. acute ku bao benbevebeeeeenen
4
557
Summary of Racial Composition of Staff 558
Percentage of Black Staff ............ 559-562
Counselor Assignment ............... 563
Composition of Coaching Staff ....... 564
Schoolday Publication ............... 565
Percentage of Black Pupil Enrollment .. 566
567
568
Synopsis of Percentage of Minority
Pe TRE «ov oe ccccsccsveveess
Student Racial Composition by Year . .
Efforts Towards Integration .......... 569-576
1940, 1950, 1960, 1970 Census Tracts . .577-580
Senior Classes: Colonel White-Roose-
velt Optional Zone .................: 581
Racial Composition: Non-Teaching
IE ins kta bekeed caipaeeneenes 582-583
Transfer Request: 1952-53 .......... 584-585
V.A. Students Attending Residence
DUE. cnecccsdcceceadcaeeniaeees 586
Def. CP
Def. CU
Joint I
v.
Page
V.A. Students Attending Jackson ...... 587
Black Enrollment by School ........ .588-589
Wayne Carle Statement of August,
Di ndibesadgbebeuvenk wees seaese ss 591-596
Attorney General Opinion No. 6810,
i hcekdcbsbise cabekesobese 597-606
311
PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT 2A
ONE RACE SCHOOLS AND CLASSROOMS
fm OND RACE SCHOOLS, 1972-73
SCHOOLS
Total Schools
Schools with pupil racial composition 90% or more Black
Schools with pupil racial composition 99% or more White
-
68
22
25
Schoois with pupil racial composition 90% or more Biack or White 47
CLASSROOMS
Total Classrooms
Classrooms in schools with pupil racial compositions
90% or more Black
Classrooms in schools with pupil racial composition
909 or mere White
Lesoreens in schools with pupil racial composition
90% or more Black or white
464
- 647
1,110
% of Toia)
100%
33.4
46.6
80.9
Source: D. P. S. Enrollment Data and Division of Research Compilations
312
PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT 2B
° 19$1-S2 OVERVIEW
Number Schools 47
Enrollment 34,948
Black Pupils 6,428
% Black Pupils 19.0
White Pupils 28,320
% White Pupils 61.0
ONE RACE SCHOOLS
Number 90* Black Schools 4 90+ White Schools
No. of Black Students 3,602
8 of Black Students $4.3
No. of White Students 0
8 of White Students 0
.
_ Total Schools 38
Total Students 27,116
@ of Total Students 77.6
Source: D. P. S. Enrollment Data
es
313
PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT 2C
1963-64 OVERVIEW
based on Ohio Civil Rights Survey. (School Data)*
Number Schools - 64
Enrollment $7,361
Black Pupils 13,987
% Black Pupils _ 27.8
White Pupils 41,374
% White Pupils 68.9
(66)
(59,091)
(18,377)
(31.1)
(40,714)
(68.9)
ONE RACE SCHOOLS
Number 90+ Black Schools 13
No. of Black Students 12,665
8 of Black Students 79.2
No. of White Students 391
% of White Students 0.9
Source:
“«
Total Schools
Total Students
% of Total Students
+
Ohio Civil Rights Survey
90* White Schools
$7
$0,961
88.8
43
361
2.2
37,544
90.7
314
PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT 2D
1971-1972 OVERVICW
(Including Pre school Enrollment, as of October 1971)
Number Schools
Enrollment
Black Pupils
% Black Pupils
White Pupils
* White Pupils
69
$$,142 (Actual Enrollment - $3,336)
23,544 ; i Pe ’
42.7
31,598
$7.3
ONE RACE SCHOOLS
Number 90+ Black Schools 21 90¢ white Schools 28
No. of Black Students 17,871 789
% of Black Students 75.9 3.2
No. of White Students * 287 . 22,171
% of White Students 0.9 . 70.2
Total Schools 49
, Total Students * 41,088
t of Total Students 74.5
—_-
Source: D. P. S. Enrollment Data
315
PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT 2E
SCHOOL SEGREGATION OVCRVICW
_ Black Schools
Of the 4 schools 90% or more black in 1951-52, all continue *
90% or more black in 1972-75.
Of the 13 schools 901 or more black in 1965-64, all remain
90% or more black in 1972-753.
Of the 21 schools 90% or more black in 1971-72, all remain
90% or more black in 1972-75.
White Schools
Of the 25 schools 90% or more white in 1972-73 all opened 90%
or more white and, if open, were 90% or more white in
1971-1972, 1963-64, and 1951-$2.
“. ¢ °
* Im 1962 the Dunbar High School Building was converted to
the McFarlane Elementary School, a new Dunbar High School
opened, and the Willard and Carfield schools were closed
and theirpupils assigned to the McFarlane School. McFarlane
Hogs opened with an all black student body and faculty; Dunbar
opened with a virtually all black staff and pupil popula-
tion and in 1963-64 enrolled a pupil population 99.6% black.
Source: D. P. S$. Enrollment Data, Ohio Civil Rights Survey,
D. P. S$. Research Division Compilations.
316
PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT 4 317
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 4
1950 to Date: RACIALLY IDENTIFIABLE CLASSROOMS OPFNED (NEW SCHOOLS
OR ADDITIONS) WHICHE REMAIN PREDOMINANTLY BLACK OR
PREDOMINANTLY SHITE IN PUPIL RACIAL COMPOSITION*
Year AT OPENING AT OPENING
School Opened §_White Pupils \_ White Faculty
1
Black Dunbar 1962 less than 10 ¢ .3in 1963) $
Carlson 1988 5 0
1967 0.9 16 oe
Edison 1971 1.2 62
Greene 1969 2.5 20 =
geazece Sete ooo 3 = Year AT OPENING AT OPENING
(1962) 0.9 4 School Opened § White Pupils 4% White Faculty
McNary 1964 0.0 35
Miami Chapel seas a - Lincoln 1987 100 100
Residence Pk Prim 1966 (80 in 1967) 34.5 nace + os 160 98.3
Troy 937 0.9 7. 1967 = a =
958 ° , 0.06 ? Horace Mann 19S4 100 100
Weaver 950 30 100 1957 100 100
1954 less than 30 . mostly Meadowdale El 19S7 100 100
1969 0.0 z3 1962 100 100
- ve amon 335 ° 0.0 ) 1966 100 100
White Belsont aoe aoe eo Patterson 1954 100 100
. 1970 100 100
~-~ = “Meadowdale H.S. eee ee : = , " Ruskin 19SS 100 100
Patterson Co-op 1954 100 100 Shiloh 1983 — —_— on et
1967 $7.2 . 96.5 1960 100 100
Stivers 1966 99 95 ° 1969 94 . 96
Wilbur Wright 19$3 mostly 100 ° ; Shoup Mill 1988 100 100
Orville Wright 1982 108" 100 aibeuee ise io ies
1038 ; see 100 ster 1968 100 100
1966 100 100
Allen Prim 1969 100 90
Belle Haven oes = oo. ® The schools and classrooms which opened as racially identifiable
1988 , 100 100 black schools contain pupil populations over 95% black in the 1971-1972
1906 100 ‘ 160 School year. The schools and classrooms which opened as racially
oie soae . 180 100 identifiable white schools contain 90% or more white pupil populations
Br 1933 +4 100 | Rg oe ys oe eadent > enaeoeies of Patterson Co-op (69.0%
vers . white), Valenmie (36.5% white), Cettysdur
Cleveland 1956 100 100 (85.5% white), and Belle Haven (89.7% white). , —
1967 100 100 °
Eastmont 1955 100 100
1958 100 100
1967 100 97
Fairview 1950 100 100
see = re Source: ».0.8. Poveanaes Seperses Guaptiotion of the D.P.S. Division of
esearch an -P.S. ice of Cqual Educational Opportunity; and
Fort McKinley 19S5 100 100 ’
ore oe ptt cos 100 the D.P.S. Building Schedule.
1°67 100 97
Gettysburg 1950 100 100
1952 100° : 100
Grant 19$2 100 100
1955 100 100
Huffman 1907 98.5 $3
Kemp 195 100 100 e
1954 100 100
1987 100 100
Lewton 19$1 100 100
1954 100 100
1957 100 100 e
319
PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT 5A
1963-64 New Black Teacher Employments/ Placements
' 46
43 Full-time assignments
40 To schools with pupils racial composition 80% or more
black
1964-65 New Black Teacher Employments, Placements
73
68 Full-time assignments
57 To schools with pupil racial composition 80% or more
black
1968-69 Assignments of New and Transfer Teachers
Schools with Schools with
Predominantly Predominantly
White Enrollment Negro Enrollment Total
Negro Teachers 40 95 135
White Teachers 223 64 287
Source: D.P.S. Personnel Reports; D.P.S. Superintendent's
Compilations
Year
1950-51
1963-64
1963-69
Source:
320
PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT 5D
RACIAL PATTERN IN THE ALLOCATION OF PUPILS AilD FACULTY
Faculty Faculty
Allocated Allocated
To Pupil To Pupil
Populations Populations
No. Black Teachers No. Vhite Teachers 90% + Dlactk
00% + white
4
” 1616
- 1847
Ohio Civil Rights Survey.
All Black No Biack
tlo white All \"ite
304 (74.5%) 51 (12.7%)
151 ( 7.3%) 1280 (79.2%)
633 (84.8%) 172 ( 9.35)
172 ( 9.3%) 1299 (70.3%)
D.P.S. Personnel Reports and Division of Research Compilations,
321
PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT 7
THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY SCHOOL
DISTRICT OF DAYTON, OHIO
WEDNESDAY — DECEMBER §8, 1971 —
REGULAR MEETING
The following Resolution was introduced for adoption by
Mr. Lucas, seconded by Mrs. Sterzer:
RESOLUTION SEEKING JOINT ACTION TO END
SEGREGATION IN EDUCATION, HOUSING AND
EMPLOYMENT IN THE METROPOLITAN
DAYTON AREA
WHEREAS, the Committee of 75, in reporting to this Board,
has called renewed attention to the widespread racial and
economic isolation of pupils in the Dayton Public Schools
and in schools of the metropolitan Dayton area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of
Education of the City School District of Dayton:
1. That this Board hereby recognizes and admits that
racial and economic segregation exists in the Dayton
schools because of the actions and inactions of this and
predecessor boards in the establishment of attendance
districts, the location and expansion of school buildings,
pupils assignment practices, design of curriculum suit-
able to urban needs, the assignment of teachers and
other staff, and the conduct of student activity programs;
the past actions or inactions of the Ohio General As-
sembly, the State Board of Education, and other agen-
cies of Federal, state, and local government in con-
tributing to the development and continuation of segre-
gated housing, education, and employment in the Day-
322
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 7
ton metropolitan area and other parts of Ohio; and
the actions in inactions of lending agencies, real estate
interests, employers, unions, private schools, colleges,
churches, and other organizations that have reinforced
segregation.
That this Board recognizes that past actions or inac-
tions of the Board of Education and residential racial
segregation are interdependent phenomena.
That this Board recognizes that the black minority popu-
lation of the Dayton metropolitan area, as illustrated
by the existence of schools of opposite racial composition
in districts with contiguous district lines, essentially is
contained within the central city of Dayton, as a result
of discriminatory practices. Such containment works
against a viable integrated school system within the
city, and the Board asserts that a truly effective solu-
tion is possible only through a metropolitan approach.
That this Board of Education recognizes that racial and
economic integration of student bodies in each school
is imperative to providing equal educational opportuni-
ty, a broad curriculum capable of serving the individual
needs of pupils, and a democratic environment in which
future citizens can be prepared to live in America’s
multi-ethnic society.
That this Board views the racial and ethnic mix of the
Dayton City School District and of the metropolitan
area as assets; that this population, if reflected in each
school, could itself contribute to people’s learning from
each other; and that, as a whole, the metropolitan area
represents a nearly ideal cross section of the nation that
could permit schools here to become a model of Ameri-
can democracy in action.
That this Board hereby invites and urges agencies of the
federal, state, and local governments and organizations
—~I
323
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 7
of religious, business, labor, education, communications,
civic service, and real estate to assist the Board in de-
segregation of Dayton schools and to pledge publicly
their accelerated efforts to bring about desegregation in
housing, education and employment throughout the Day-
ton metropolitan area.
That the Clerk of The Board be and hereby is directed
to forward a true copy of this resolution to the following:
Governor of the State of Ohio
President of the State Board of Education
Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives
President of the Ohio Senate
Montgomery County Members of the Ohio General
Assembly and United States Congress
Montgomery County Commissioners
Dayton City Commissioners
Montgomery County Council of Governments
City Plan Board
Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission
Miami Valley Regional Transit Authority
Metropolitan Housing Authority
Apartment Owners Association
Area Progress Council
Assembly of Area Councils
Chairmen of Democratic and Republican Organiza-
tions
Community Affairs Committee
Congress of Representatives East Dayton Organiza-
tions
Dayton Advisory Council on Education
Dayton Area Board of Realtors
Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce
Dayton Area Junior Chamber of Commerce
Dayton Building Trades Council
Dayton Classroom Teachers Association
324
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 7
Dayton-Miami Valley AFL-CIO
Dayton Model Cities Planning Council, Inc.
Dayton Public Service Union
Dayton Urban League
Deans of Area Colleges of Education
Elementary Principals Association
Metropolitan Churches United
Miami Valley Consortium of Colleges and Universities
Montgomery County Community Action Agency
Montgomery County Council of PTAs
National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People
Ohio Association of Public School Employees
Presidents Club
Secondary Principals Association
Southern Christian Leadership Conference
After introduction of the motion to adopt the Resolution,
Mrs. Groff asked that the following statement be made a part
of the Minutes:
“I feel that this resolution is beyond the jurisdiction of this
Board because first of all it doesn’t require a vote because
it is in violation of this Board’s present policy. Even though
you sent out and stated that the policy we have on record
referred to the election back in November 10, 1970, I would
like to refute that because I have here a newspaper clipping
quoting Dr. Carrell. It was when we were about to sub-
mit the policy on middle schools. On the question of middle
schools, and I'd like to quote, “It has been alledged that
there are 9 middle schools already chosen but not revealed
by the Board. That they will be implemented over a week-
end.” Answer: “On both counts the answer is “no”. First, I
have not heard of any such proposal for 9 middle schools. |
have no idea whether there will be 9 or 3 or 18. There is
no proposal before the Board at this moment for any one of
those figures. The Board adopted a policy some time ago
325
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 7
which said there would be 4 month’s notice given to the
public prior to the adoption of any significant policy decision.
I feel that we still feel bound by that.” Now, this is a new
policy decision. This is the first time it has been before the
Board. I feel this resolution is out of order. It’s invalid because
you are violating the Board's policy.”
Upon completion of further discussion, it was moved by Mr.
Ridenour, seconded by Mr. Hart, that action on the Resolu-
tion be tabled until the next regular meeting. Roll Call on the
motion to table:
YEAS: Groff, Hart, Ridenour — 3
NAYS: Carrell, Seaman, Sterzer, and Lucas — 4
The motion to table was declared defeated.
Roll Call on original motion to adopt the Resolution:
YEAS: Carrell, Hart, Seaman, Sterzer, and Lucas — 5
NAYS: Groff, Ridenour — 2
The Resolution was declared adopted.
The following Resolution was introduced for adoption by
Mr. Lucas, seconded by Mrs. Sterzer:
RESOLUTION ASKING FOR STATE ASSISTANCE
TO DESEGREGATE PUBLIC SCHOOLS
WHEREAS, The Committee of 75 has recommended school
integration on a metropolitan basis, and
WHEREAS, the State of Ohio has responsibility and authority
for the operation of public schools, and the State Board
of Education has the duty to administer the laws relating
generally to the operation of the schools, and
WHEREAS, the Ohio Attorney General has ruled that the
State Board of Education has the authority to restrict fiund-
326
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 7
ing in any school district in which said Board finds as a
matter of fact that racial segregation exists,
NOW. ‘THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of
Education of the City School District of Dayton:
1. That this Board hereby petitions the State of Ohio and
the State Board of Education (a) to obtain from Ohio
Civil Rights Commission, U. S. Office of Education and
such other sources as it may deem useful, data on racial
isolation of faculty, staffs and pupils within and among
the several school districts as presently constituted in
the metropolitan Dayton area; (b) to develop guide-
lines and criteria as may be necessary to assure an
educationally and socially viable mix of pupils, within
the socio-economic characteristics of the metropolitan
area as a whole; (c) to require said districts to cooperate
in preparing and implementing a plan for assignment
of faculty, staffs and pupils in accordance with said
guidelines and criteria, and (d) to assure adequate
funding from state and district sources to continue the
operation of the schools and the implementation of said
plans throughout the period of transition and thereafter.
to
That said plans be developed by September 1, 1972
and fully implemented not later than September 1,
1973.
3. That the Clerk of the Board forward a true copy of this
resolution to the Governor of the State of Ohio, the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President
of the Ohio Senate and the President of the State Board
of Education.
After introduction of the motion to adopt the Resolution,
Mrs. Groff asked that the following statement be made a part
of the Minutes:
“Yes, I object to this resolution because it is also invalid
and in violation of this Board’s policy too. Also this is the
327
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 7
responsibility of the State Board of Education and the State
Legislature and not this Board of Education to make these
kinds of laws.”
It was moved by Mr. Rinenour, seconded by Mr. Hart, that
action on the Resolution be tabled. Roll Call on the motion
to table:
YEAS: Groff, Hart, and Ridenour — 3
NAYS: Carrell, Seaman, Sterzer, and Lucas — 4
The motion to table was declared defeated.
Roll Call on original motion to adopt the Resolution:
YEAS: Carrell, Hart, Seaman, Sterzer, and Lucas 5
NAYS: Groff and Ridenour — 2
The Resolution was declared adopted.
[PROPOSAL TO SUBMIT RESOUTION ASKING FOR
STATE ASSISTANCE TO DESEGREGATE PUBLIC
SCHOOLS TO THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION |
It was moved by Mrs. Sterzer, seconded by Mr. Seaman, that
the Resolution asking for State Assistance to Desegregate Pub-
lic Schools be carried by a committee representative of the
school district to the next State Board of Education meeting
and presented at their public hearing. Roll Call:
YEAS: Carrell, Hart, Seaman, Sterzer, and Lucas — 5
NAYS: Groff and Ridenour — 2
The motion was declared approved.
328
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 7
The following Resolution was introduced for adoption by
Mr. Lucas, seconded by Mrs. Sterzer:
RESOLUTION ORDERING THE RACIAL AND
ECONOMIC INTEGRATION OF PUPILS IN
THE DAYTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS
WHEREAS, the Board of Education of the Dayton City
School District recognizes a moral and legal duty to provide
quality non-segregated education for all students in the
district, and,
WHEREAS, integrated education is vital to the achievement
of quality education for all pupils, black and white, rich
and poor, and,
WHEREAS, the Fourteenth amendment to the United States
Constitution and the mandate of the United States Supreme
Court in Brown v. Board of Education decision and sub-
sequent court decisions place an affirmative duty to dis-
establish the segregated attendance patterns which result
in whole or in part from its actions and inactions in order
to equalize educational opportunity, and,
WHEREAS, segregated educational opportunity and unequal
educational opportunities for minority and poor students
now exist in the Dayton Public Schools, and
WHEREAS, this inequality exists as a result of the acts and
omissions of this Board and preceding Boards in their de-
cisions concerning the site selection of school buildings,
size of school buildings, changes and adoption of school
attendance boundaries, pupil assignment practices, faculty
and staff hiring and assignment practices and,
WHEREAS, this Board has requested and received reports of
findings and recommendations from the State Department
of Education and the Committee of 75,
329
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 7
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of
Education of the City School District of Dayton that it is
the policy of this Board that each school shall enroll pupils
in a manner which substantially reflects the racial and eco-
nomic characteristics of the district as a whole. The Board
recognizes that implementation of this policy requires de-
parture from past practices and requires special planning
to assure a smooth transition. The Board therefore directs:
1. That the superintendent in consultation with professional
staff and the representatives of employee organizations,
design and implement a mandatory program of in-service
education involving all staff members to prepare staff
for changes in enrollments and to develop an individu-
alized, multi-ethnic curriculum in each school.
2. That Dayton Advisory Council on Education be re-
quested to organize a Community Involvement Advisory
Committee and a Lay Citizens Financial Review Com-
mittee to advise the superintendent during the course
of planning and implementing integration programs, as
recommended by the Committee of 75.
3. That the superintendent be and hereby is directed to
develop and implement plans for the racial and eco-
nomic integration of pupils using the following guide-
lines and criteria:
a. Attendance districts as presently constituted are re-
scinded effective September 1, 1972.
b. No building shall have a racial composition and
family incuise characteristics substantially dispropor-
tionate to the district as a whole.
c. After determination of building capacities and racial
and economic characteristics of attendance areas,
pupils will be assigned to a school in which such
assignment would contribute to a mix as in b. above.
330
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 7
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 8
d. Freedom of Enrollment policy with the exception
of transfers for course enrollment shall be eliminated
by September 1, 1972.
e. Desegregation is to be completed by September,
1972.
f. Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the es-
tablishment of magnet, demonstration, specialized or
other education complexes, provided that the sites
for instruction meet the criteria in c. above.
g. Transportation shall be held to a minimum, but is
specifically included as one means of implementing
this policy.
PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT 8
THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY SCHOOL
DISTRICT OF DAYTON, OHIO
MONDAY — JANUARY 3, 1972 —
REGULAR MEETING
[RESOLUTION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO
ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR PURCHASE
OF SCHOOL BUSSES]
It was moved by Mr. Lucas, seconded by Mr. Lawson, that
the following Resolution be adopted:
RESOLUTION ON SCHOOL BUS PURCHASING
WHEREAS, it has been determined that it is necessary to
purchase one hundred and thirty, sixty-six passenger con-
ventional or seventy-three passenger transit type buses, and,
331
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 8
WHEREAS, it is recommended that school buses be purchased
and operated by the Board of Education, and,
WHEREAS, plans and specifications have been prepared by
the Business Department,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Clerk-
Treasurer be and hereby is authorized to advertise for bids
to be opened and read publicly in accordance with the
provisions of Section 3313.46, Revised Code and that they
he tabulated and reported to the Board at its carliest meet-
ing after the bid opening.
YEAS: Lawson, Lucas, and Sterzer — 3
NAYS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, and Hart — 4
The Resolution was declared defeated.
[RESOLUTION REGARDING PREPARATION
OF BUDGET]
It was moved by Mr. Goodwin, seconded by Mr. Ridenour,
that in the preparation of the 1972 budget the Superintendent
be directed by the Board to maintain line items in the same
categories in order to give Board members direct comparison
across the line, to maintain cost comparison from one year
to another and with monthly reports to be made to the Board.
YEAS: Goodwin, Groff, Lawson, Ridenour, and Hart ~— 5
NAYS: Laicas — 1
ABSTENTION: Sterzer — |
The motion was declared approved.
332
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
[RESOLUTION FOR AUDIT]
It was moved by Mr. Goodwin, seconded by Mrs. Groff,
that the Clerk-Treasurer be authorized to seek bids immediate-
ately for a complete audit of 1970 and 1971 income and ex-
penditures of the Board of Education in each category rela-
tive to all items listed in the Appropriation Budget and amend-
ed budgets with the audit to be made according to the use
of State and Federal guidelines.
Mr. Lucas stated that boards of education do not have
statutory authority to employ independent auditors to audit
their records.
The chair then requested that the motion be tabled and
a ruling sought as to whether or not the action indicated
in the motion could be legally carried out.
It was moved by Mr. Lucas, seconded by Mr. Lawson, that
the matter be tabled in accordance with the request of Presi-
dent Hart.
YEAS: Goodwin, Groff, Lawson, Lucas, Ridenour, Stetzer,
and Hart — 7
NAYS: None
The motion to table was declared approved.
[CONSIDERATION OF THREE RESOLUTIONS
DRAFTED DECEMBER §8, 1971]
Mrs. Groff asked the Chair whether the motion to recon-
sider the three resolutions on integration could be brought
up at this time. President Hart called up the motion on the
vote to reconsider at the request of Mrs. Groff and then
read the following statement:
“On December 8, 1971, there was presented to this hoard
three resolutions by Mr. Lucas, to-wit:
333
Plaintifts’ Exhibit 8
1. Resolution Seeking Joint Action to End Segregation in
Education, Housing and Employment in the Metropolitan
Dayton Area.
2. Resolution Asking For State Assistance to Desegregate
Public Schools.
3. Resolution Ordering The Racial and Econcinic Integration
of Pupils in The Dayton Public Schools.
The motion was seconded and passed.
Thereafter Mr. Hart moved, seconded by Mrs. Groff, that
the above resolutions offered by Mr. Lucas, (titles being read)
be taken up at the next meeting, that the questions be re-
considered and entered upon the minutes of the December
8, 1971, meeting.
Mr. Lucas ruled that the motion to reconsider was out of
order.
Later Mr. Lucas, publicly, withdrew this ruling. The chair
concurs that Mr. Lucas’ ruling was in itself out of order for
the reason that — whether a point of order is raised or not,
all actions in violation of the by-laws are null and void auto-
matically. Our by-laws provides for reconsideration and for
the use of Robert’s Rules of Order which also provides for
motions to reconsider and enter.
The December 8, 1971 meeting then by unanimous vote was
recessed to a definite date and never reconvened.
On December 30, 1971, an assemblage of various board
members was held and a purported vote taken on the re-
consideration heretofore entered on the minutes of the De-
cember 8, 1971 meeting. This was NOT convened as a spe-
cial meeting as the notice did not indicate that the call was for
a special meeting and did not list reconsideration or any
agenda which under our rules of order must be done. Sec-
ondly, it was not signed by members calling the meeting.
334
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
Thirdly, the notice merely recited action taken at a previous
assemblage of December 16, 1971.
We must not examine the proceedings of the December 16,
1971, meeting. The December 16, 1971 meeting was a special
meeting called at the instance and under the signature of two
board members. Under the statutes and under our own rules
and regulations it must be served on each member at least
two days prior to the date of the called meeting. One mem-
ber, Mr. Hart, did not receive the notice within the required
time. A copy of that notice and the envelope within which
it was sent shows that the special delivery department of
the posal service did not receive this notice until 15 De-
cember 1971, which made it physically impossible to serve
the notice at least two days prior to the meeting of December
16, 1971.
The attorney general has held and courts have decided that
the proceedings of a school board are invalid where the re-
quired notice is not given and the member not receiving
notice is absent.
The chair therefore rules that:
1. The ruling of Mr. Lucas ruling the motion to reconsider
and enter made at the December 8, 1971 meeting to be
out of order was itself out of order.
2. The proceedings of the December 16, 1971 meeting are
invalid and this includes all votes taken at this meeting
including the vote to reconsider and the vote setting
a regular meeting for December 30, 1971.
3. That you cannot set a legal meeting at an illegal meeting.
4. Since the last legal meeting was recessed until January
3, 1972 the only meeting that could be called after re-
cess was a special meeting.
5. That the December 30, 1971 meeting was invalid since
it was convened as a regular meeting at a special mect-
335
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
ing which itself was invalid and no call of a special meet-
ing was made in accordance with the statutes governing
special meetings.
6. That proceedings and votes taken at the December 30,
1971 meeting are invalid because of the illegality of the
December 30, 1971 meeting.
7. That the Clerk of this board should confer with the pres-
ident of this board to determine which actions this board
would deem it necessary to confirm or ratify.
8. That the motion to reconsider, having never been acted
upon, is now before this board under the category of
new business and the question to reconsider may now
be called up.”
1 call up the motion on the vote to reconsider the three
resolutions which has been pending before this Board since
the December 8, 1971 Regular Board Meeting.”
Mr. Lucas asked that the record show that the action of the
Chair at the January 3, 1972 meeting is invalid because the
Board that dealt with this matter as a parliamentary procedure
had adjourned sine die and this Board has no jurisdiction
whatsoever.
It was moved by Mrs. Groff, seconded by Mr. Ridenour, that
the motion to reconsider the three resolutions of December
8, 1971 on integration be brought before the Board for vote.
YEAS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, and Hart — 4
NAYS: Lucas — 1
PASS: Lawson and Sterzer — 2
The motion to reconsider the three resolutions was
declared approved.
336 -
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 8 eiieiiecuiemas
[RECONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION SEEKING ; :
the existence of schools of opposite racial composition
in districts with contiguous district lines, essentially is
contained within the central city of Dayton, as a result
of discriminatory practices. Such containment works
against a viable integrated school system within the city,
and the Board asserts that a truly effective solution is
possible only through a metropolitan approach.
JOINT ACTION TO END SEGREGATION IN EDUCA-
TION, HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT IN THE
METROPOLITAN DAYTON AREA}
The Clerk read the Resolution at the request of the Chair:
WHEREAS, the Committee of 75, in reporting to this Board,
has called renewed attention to the widespread racial and 4
economic isolation of pupils in the Dayton Public Schools
and in schools of the metropolitan Dayton area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of
Education of the City School District of Dayton:
. That this Board of Education recognizes that racial and
economic integration of student bodies in each school
is imperative to providing equal educational opportuni-
ty, a broad curriculum capable of serving the individual
needs of pupils, and a democratic environment in which
, future citizens can be prepared to live i ica’s i-
1. That this Board hereby recognizes and admits that prepared to live in America’s multi
racial and economic segregation exists in the Dayton
schools because of the actions and inactions of this and
predecessor boards in the establishment of attendance
districts, the location and expansion of school buildings,
pupil assignment practices, design of curriculum suit-
able to urban needs, the assignment of teachers and other
staff, and the conduct of student activity programs; the
past actions or inactions of the Ohio General Assembly,
the State Board of Education, and other agencies of
Federal, state, and local government in contributing to
the development and continuation of segregated housing,
education, and employment in the Dayton metropolitan
area and other parts of Ohio; and the actions and in-
actions of lending agencies, real estate interests, em-
ployers, unions, private schools, colleges, churches, and
other organizations that have reinforced segregation.
That this Board recognizes that past actions or inactions
of the Board of Education and residential racial segrega-
tion are interdependent phenomena.
That this Board recognizes that the black minority popu-
lation of the Dayton metropolitan area, as illustrated by
ethnic society.
. That this Board views the racial and ethnic mix of the
Dayton City School District and of the metropolitan
area as assets; that this population, if reflected in each
school, could itself contribute to people’s learning from
each other; and that, as a whole, the metropolitan area
represents a nearly ideal cross section of the nation that
could permit schools here to become a model of Ameri-
can democracy in action.
That this Board hereby invites and urges agencies of the
federal, state, and local governments and organizations
of religious, business, labor, education, communications,
civic service, and real estate to assist the Board in de-
segregation of Dayton schools and to pledge publicly
their accelerated efforts to bring about desegregation in
housing, education and employment throughout the Day-
ton metropolitan area.
The the Clerk of the Board be and hereby is directed to
forward a true copy of this resolution to the following:
Area Board of Education Presidents
Governor of the State of Ohio
335
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
President of the State Board of Education
Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives
President of the Ohio Senate
Montgomery County Members of the Ohio General
Assembly and United States Congress
Montgomery County Commissioners
Dayton City Commissioners
Montgomery County Council of Governments
City Plan Board
Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission
Miami Valley Regional Transit Authority
Metropolitan Housing Authority
Apartment Owners Association
Area Progress Council
Assembly of Area Councils
Chairmen of Democratic and Republican Organiza-
tions
Community Affairs Committee
Congress of Representative East Dayton Organiza-
tions
Dayton Advisory Council on Education
Dayton Area Board of Realtors
Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce
Dayton Area Junior Chamber of Commerce
Dayton Building Trades Council
Dayton Classroom Teachers Association
Dayton-Miami Valley AFL-CIO
Dayton Model Cities Planning Council, Inc.
Dayton Public Service Union
Dayton Urban League
Deans of Area Colleges of Education
Elementary Principals Association
Metropolitan Churches United
Miami Valley Consortium of Colleges and Universi-
ties
Montgomery County Community Action Agency
339
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
Montgomery County Council of PTAs
National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People
Ohio Association of Public School Employees
Presidents Club
Secondary Principals Association
Southern Christian Leadership Conference
Jewish Community Council
Prior to voting on the Resolution the Chair announced that
a “Yes” vote would support the Resolution and a “Nay” vote
would be one to defeat the Resolution.
YEAS: Lawson, Lucas, and Sterzer — 3
NAYS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, and Hart — 4
The Resolution was declared defeated.
Mr. Lucas left the meeting at this point.
|RECONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION ASKING
STATE ASSISTANCE TO DESEGREGATE
PUBLIC SCHOOLS |
The Clerk read the Resolution at the request of the Chair:
RESOLUTION ASKING FOR STATE ASSISTANCE
TO DESEGREGATE PUBLIC SCHOOLS
WHEREAS, The Committee of 75 has recommended school
integration on a metropolitan basis, and
WHEREAS, the State of Ohio has responsibility and authori-
ty for the operation of public schools, and the State Board
of Education has the duty to administer the laws relating
generally to the operation of the schools, and
WHEREAS, the Ohio Attorney General has ruled that the
State Board of Education has the authority to restrict fund-
ing in any school district in which said Board finds as a
matter of fact that racial segregation exists,
340
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of
Education of the City School District of Dayton:
1. That this Board hereby petitions the State of Ohio and
the State Board of Education (a) to obtain from Ohio
Civil Rights Commission, U. S. Office of Education and
such other sources as it may deem useful, data on racial
isolation of faculty, staffs and pupils within and among
the several school districts as presently constituted in the
metropolitan Dayton area; (b) to develop guidelines and
criteria as may be necessary to assure an educationally
and socially viable mix of pupils, within the socio-eco-
nomic characteristics of the metropolitan area as a whole;
(c) to require said districts to cooperate in preparing
and implementing a plan for assignment of faculty, staffs
and pupils in accordance with said guidelines and cri-
teria, and (d) to assure adequate funding from state
and district sources to continue the operation of the
schools and the implementation of said plans throughout
the period of transition and thereafter.
2. That said plans be developed by September 1, 1972 and
fully implemented no later than September 1, 1973.
3. That the Clerk of the Board forward a true copy of this
resolution to the Governor of the State of Ohio, the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President
of the Ohio Senate and the President of the State Board
of Education.
Prior to voting on the Resolution the Chair announced that a
“Yes” vote would support the Resolution and a “No” vote
would be one to defeat the Resolution.
YEAS: Lawson and Sterzer
NAYS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, and Hart
The Resolution was declared defeated.
341
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
{RECONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION ORDERING
THE RACIAL AND ECONOMIC INTEGRATION OF
PUPILS IN THE DAYTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS]
The Clerk read the Resolution at the request of the Chair:
RESOLUTION ORDERING THE RACIAL AND
ECONOMIC INTEGRATION OF PUPILS IN THE
DAYTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS
WHEREAS, the Board of Education of the Dayton City School
District recognizes a moral and legal duty to provide quali-
ty non-segregated education for all students in the district,
and,
WHEREAS, integrated education is vital to the achievement
of quality education for all pupils, black and white, rich
and poor, and,
WHEREAS, the Fourteenth amendment to the United States
Constitution and the mandate of the United States Supreme
Court in Brown v. Board of Education decision and subse-
quent court decisions place an affirmative duty to dis-
establish the segregated attendance patterns which result
in whole or in part from its actions and inactions in order
to equalize educat'onal opportunity, and,
WHEREAS, segregated educational opportunity and unequal
educational opportunities for minority and poor students
now exist in the Dayton Public Schools, and
WHEREAS, this inequality exists as a result of the acts and
omissions of this Board and preceding Boards in their de-
cisions concerning the site selection of school buildings,
size of school buildings, changes and adoption of school
attendance boundaries, pupil assignment practices, faculty
and staff hiring and assignment practices and,
WHEREAS, this Board has requested and received reports
of findings and recommendations from the State Department
of Education and the Committee of 75,
342
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of
Education of the City School District of Dayton that it is
the policy of this Board that each school shall enroll pupils
in a manner which substantially reflects the racial and eco-
nomic characteristics of the district as a whole. The Board
recognizes that implementation of this policy requires de-
parture from past practices and requires special planning
to assure a smooth transition. The Board therefore directs:
1. That the superintendent in consultation with professional
staff and the representatives of employee organizations,
design and implement a mandatory program of in-service
education involving all staff members to prepare staff
for changes in enrollments and to develop an_ indi-
vidualized, multi-ethnic curriculum in each school.
2. That Dayton Advisory Council on Education be request-
ed to organize a Community Involvement Advisory Com-
mittee and a Lay Citizens Financial Review Committee
to advice the superintendent during the course of plan-
ning and implementing integration programs, as recom-
mended by the Committee of 75.
3. That the superintendent be and hereby is directed to
develop and implement plans for the racial and economic
integration of pupils using the following guidelines and
criteria:
a. Attendance districts as presently constituted are re-
scinded effective September 1, 1972.
343
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
d. Freedom of Enrollment policy with the exception of
transfers for course enrollment shall be eliminated
by September 1, 1972.
e. Desegregation is to be completed by September,
1972.
f. Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the estab-
lishment of magnet, demonstration, specialized or
other education complexes, provided that the sites
for instruction meet the criteria in c. above.
g. Transportation shall be held to a minimum, but is
specifically included as one means of implementing
this policy.
That to the maximum feasible extent consistent with this
policy statement, recommendations of the Committee of
75, are hereby adopted and may be used in planning
and implementing school integration.
. That the superintendent report on progress and prob-
lems concerning implementation of this policy at least
every sixty days and that a program for continuous
evaluation throughout the phases of implementation be
developed by July 31, 1972.
That the superintendent prepare applications for sup-
plementary financial assistance from state, federal and
other sources that may become available to improve
the quality of education and achieve the goals of the
Committee of 75 repvit.
b. No building shall have a racial composition and fam- Prior to voting on the Resolution the Chair announced that
ily income characteristics substantially disproportion- a “Yes” vote would support the Resolution and a “No” vote
ate to the district as a whole. would be one to defeat the Resolution.
ce. After determination of building capacities and racial YEAS: Lawson and Sterzer — 2
and economic characteristics of attendance areas, ; ; NAYS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, and Hart — 4
pupils will be assigned to a school in which such as- The Resolution was declared defeated.
signment would contribute to a mix as in b. above. . .
344
Plaintifts’ Exhibit 8
[STATEMENT AND RULING OF THE CHAIR]
At this time President Hart made the following statement
and ruling:
“Gentlemen, since this board has voted to reconsider these
questions and has defeated them, the Chair now rules that
under the form to reconsider and enter upon the minutes,
that this is all that must be done to stop execution upon mo-
tions or actions of this Board because that to permit otherwise
would deprive the board of its right to reconsider.
Since it is possible that there may have been a premature
execution of these questions, the chair further rules:
1. That the superintendent under his signature communi-
cate with all persons and agencies named in said motions ad-
vising them of the premature execution thereof, requesting
a withdrawal of said premature communications and counter-
manding the communications that were premature where the
premature communication cannot be withdrawn; and _ that
communications upon said motions that were made prior to
this date are premature and invalid.”
Mr. Lucas returned to the meeting at this point.
[STATEMENT OF MRS. GROFF]
The Chair recognized Mrs. Groff who made the following
statement:
Mr. President, Members of the Board, and Citizens:
Quoting from THE CREATIVE SOCIETY by Ronald
Reagan, “We have the privilege of living on the only island of
freedom that is left in the whole world.” There is no other
place in the world to go. We stand together and defend free-
dom here or it is gone. We must work together and take a
345
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
stand. If we fail, I think we face telling our children and
our grandchildren what it was we found more precious, or more
important than freedom.
“Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one
generation away from extinction. It comes only once to a
people. Those who have had it and lost it have never known
it again.”
The Dayton Schools are the people's business, and every man,
woman and child becomes a shareholder with the first penny
of tax paid. The most meaningful words of the Constitution
are the first three, “We the people.”
Therefore, the time has come for the Board to recognize
that the schools belong to the people and that the people
have a right to know all the facts about their schools.
The time has come for the Board to decide whether we can
afford everything we think of simply because we think of it.
The time has come to run a check to see if all the services
we have taken away from the people or the innovations we
have provided are just goodies dreamed up for their supposed
betterment. The time has come to balance outgo to income,
instead of always doing it the other way around.
What we need is a system of an objective evaluation be-
fore changes are implemented. The people should have the
opportunity to give their opinion on supposed changes and
the Board act on the decisions of the people.
Supporting and implementing the basic principles that have
made America great is not turning back the clock but it is
taking the dream that has made this country progress, updating
it, and making it practical for the 20th century. A High Quality
Education which will insure that every child in the Dayton
School System can reach his full potential so that he can be-
come a responsible contributing member of society is the
goal of this Board of Education.
7 346
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
With these thoughts in mind I would like to present the
following three resolutions.”
The following Resolution was introduced by Mrs. Groff,
seconded by Mr. Ridenour:
RESOLUTION ORDERING DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS
THAT ARE WITHIN THE FINANCIAL ABILITY OF THE
CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT OF DAYTON FOR IMPROVE-
MENT OF QUALITY OF EDUCATION.
WHEREAS, the present enrollment patterns of the Dayton
Public Schools are not related to the policies or decisions
of the Board of Education;
WHEREAS, the racial and economic imbalance that exists in
the Dayton Public Schools is not a result of any act of
discrimination on the part of the Dayton Board of Educa-
tion;
WHEREAS, the Constitution of the United States does not
require a Board of Education to balance racial concentra-
tions in schools where such racial concentrations are not the
result of any act of the Board of Education;
WHEREAS, the Dayton City Schools have been found to be
in compliance with HEW rules and regulations as evi-
denced by the statement of Mr. James Mancini, a compli-
ance review attorney in the Civil Rights Division of HEW;
WHEREAS, no massive movement of pupils back and forth
across the City or County could be accomplished without
an expenditure of thousands and thousands of dollars;
WHEREAS, the reasons given by the administrators of the
Dayton School System for the 10.5 mill additional levy
did not include an expenditure for bussing and for other
transportation of pupils for the purpose of eliminating eco-
347
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
nomic and/or racial segregation of pupils, nor do the ad-
ditional State appropriations require this;
WHEREAS, this Board of Education has consistently sup-
ported the concept of neighborhood schools;
WHEREAS, the Freedom of Enrollment policy of the Dayton
City School District has been considered a successful ven-
ture;
WHEREAS, this Board of Education is concerned about all
the children of the Dayton City School District and is con-
sistently searching for ways and means to improve the
auality of education offered to them and;
WHEREAS, this Board of Education has adopted various plans
and approaches toward improvement of the quality of the
education offered to the children of Dayton;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of
Education of the City School District of Dayton that the
Superintendent and his staff submit to this Board by the
end of the 1971-72 school term a feasibility report and plan
that is within the financial ability of the City School Dis-
trict of Dayton, Ohio, providing for improvement in the
quality of education offered at each of the schools within
this district.
It was moved by Mr. Lucas, seconded by Mrs. Sterzer, that
action on the Resolution be tabled.
Roll Call on the Motion to Table:
YEAS: Lawson, Lucas, and Sterzer — 3
NAYS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, and Hart — 4
The motion to table action on the Resolution was
declared defeated.
348
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 8
Roll Call on the Resolution:
YEAS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, and Hart — 4
NAYS: Lawson, Lucas, and Sterzer — 3
The Resolution was declared adopted.
The following Resolution was introduced by Mrs. Groff,
seconded by Mr. Goodwin:
RESOLUTION ORDERING DEVELOPMENT OF FEASI-
BILITY REPORTS AND PLANS FOR PROVIDING FREE
TRANSPORTATION OF STUDENTS PARTICIPATING IN
THE FREEDOM OF ENROLLMENT PROGRAM IN THE
DAYTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS
WHEREAS, the present enrollment patterns of the Dayton
Public Schools are not related to the policies or decisions
of the Board of Education;
WHEREAS, the racial and economic imbalance that exists in
the Dayton Public Schools is not a result of any act of
discrimination on the part of the Dayton Board of Education;
WHEREAS, the Constitution of the United States does not re-
quire a Board of Education to balance racial concentrations
in schools where such racial concentrations are not the re-
sult of any act of the Board of Education;
WHEREAS, the Dayton City Schools have been found to be
in compliance with HEW rules and regulations as evidenced
by the statement of Mrs. James Mancini, a compliance re-
view attorney in the Civil Rights Division of HEW;
WHEREAS, no massive movement of pupils back and forth
across the City or County could be accomplished without
an expenditure of thousands and thousands of dollars;
349
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
WHEREAS, the reasons given by the administrators of the
Dayton School System for the 10.5 mill additional levy
did not include an expenditure for bussing and for other
transportation of pupils for the purpose of eliminating eco-
nomic and/or racial segregation of pupils, nor do the ad-
ditional State appropriations require this;
WHEREAS, this Board of Education has consistently sup-
ported the concept of neighborhood schools;
WHEREAS, the Freedom of Enrollment policy of the Dayton
School District has been considered a successful venture;
WHEREAS, this Board of Education is concerned about all
the children of the Dayton City School Distrigt and is
consistently searching for ways and means to improve the
quality of education offered to them and;
WHEREAS, this Board of Education has adopted various
plans and approaches toward improvement of the quality
of the education offered to the children of Dayton;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of
Education of the City School District of Dayton that the
Freedom of Enrollment policy of the Dayton Public Schools
shall be continued with the exception that the Superinten-
dent and his staff be, and hereby are, directed to develop
and submit to this Board of Education before the start of the
second semester of the 1971-72 school year a feasibility
report and plan providing for the free transportation of the
students participating in such program.
It was moved by Mr. Lucas, seconded by Mr. Lawson,
that the action on the Resolution be tabled.
Roll Call on the Motion to Table:
YEAS: Lawson, Lucas, and Sterzer — 3
NAYS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, and Hart — 4
The motion to table was declared defeated.
350
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
Roll Call on the Resolution:
YEAS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, and Hart — 4
NAYS: Lawson, Lucas, and Sterzer — 3
The Resolution was declared adopted.
The following Resolution was introduced by Mrs. Groff,
seconded by Mr. Goodwin.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ARRANGEMENT OF STU-
DENT TRANSFERS BETWEEN DAYTON CITY SCHOOL
DISTRICTS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITHIN THE
DAYTON METROPOLITAN AREA.
WHEREAS, the present enrollment patterns of the Dayton
Public Schools are not related on the policies or decisions
of the Board of Education;
WHEREAS, the racial and economic imbalance that exists
in the Dayton Public Schools is not a result of any act of
discrimination on the part of the Dayton Board of Education;
WHEREAS, the Constitution of the United States does not
require a Board of Education to balance racial concentra-
tions in schools where such racial concentrations are not
the result of any act of the Board of Education;
WHEREAS, the Dayton City Schools have been found to be
in compliance with HEW rules and regulations as evi-
denced by the statement of Mr. James Mancini, a com-
pliance review attorney in the Civil Rights Division of
HEW;
WHEREAS, no massive movement of pupils back and forth
across the City or County could be accomplished without an
expenditure of thousands and thousands of dollars;
WHEREAS, the reasons given by the administrators of the
Dayton School System for the 10.5 mill additional levy did
351
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
not include an expenditure for bussing and for other trans-
portation of pupils for the purpose of eliminating economic
and/or racial segregation of pupils, nor do the additional
State appropriations require this;
WHEREAS, this Board of Education has consistently sup-
ported the concept of neighborhood schools;
WHEREAS, the Freedom of Enrollment policy of the Dayton
City School District has been considered a successful venture;
WHEREAS, this Board of Education is concerned about all
the children of the Dayton City School District and is con-
sistently searching for ways and means to improve the
quality of education offered to them and;
WHEREAS, this Board of Education has adopted various
plans and approaches toward improvement of the quality
of the education offered to the children of Dayton;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,
1. That with the concurrence of one or more of the school
districts within the Dayton Metropolitan area and fol-
lowing the Freedom of Enrollment guidelines as amended
of the Dayton City School District, the Superintendent
is authorized to arrange for the payment of tuition for
students requesting tuition-paid transfers to schools out-
side of the Dayton City School District providing, how-
ever, (a) that the transfers are arranged during the sum-
mer for the succeeding school year, (b) that the entire
sum for all such tuition payments paid by the Dayton
Board of Education shall not exceed the amount of tu-
ition received by the Board from other school districts
during the preceding calendar year and (c) that such
transfer shall improve the racial balance of the public
schools of the Dayton City School District. It is further
suggested that this policy be implemented for 1972-73
school year.
352
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 8
2. That with the concurrence of one or more of the school
districts within the Dayton metropolitan area and fol-
lowing the Freedom of Enrollment guidelines as amend-
ed of the Dayton City School District the Superintendent,
upon mutual exchange of students or upon payment of
tuition, is authorized to accept any student from an out-
lying school district within this District provided that
the acceptance of such student at a school within this
district shall improve the racial balance of such school.
It was moved by Mr. Lucas, seconded by Mr. Lawson, that
action on the Resolution be tabled.
Roll Call on the Motion to Table:
YEAS: Lawson and Lucas — 2
NAYS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, Sterzer, and Hart — 5
The motion to table was declared defeated.
° ° ° °
Roll Call on the Resolution:
YEAS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, and Hart — 4
NAYS: Lawson and Lucas — 2
ABSTENTION: Sterzer — 1
Mrs. Sterzer indicated that she abstained from voting be-
cause she felt Mrs. Groff resolution was not valid since it fell
outside the jurisdiction of the Board.
The Resolution was declared adopted.
~- oo. eee Oe =. = eee
353
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 8
[INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK AND SUPERINTENDENT
OF SCHOOLS]
The following motion was introduced by Mrs. Groff, second-
ed by Mr. Ridenour:
Mr. President:
1 move that the Clerk of the Board be and hereby is di-
rected to forward true copies of the three Resolutions to all
persons and agencies who received copies of the tentative
package of three Resolutions on Racial and Economic Ra-
tions, of the December 8, 1971 Board meeting. He shall
inform them by separate letter of the three new resolutions,
namely: on IMPROVEMENT OF QUALITY OF EDUCA-
TION, on DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS FOR PROVIDING
FREE TRANSPORTATION OF STUDENTS PARTICIPAT-
ING IN THE FREEDOM OF ENROLLMENT PROGRAM
iN THE DAYTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS, and on AUTHORIZ-
ING ARRANGEMENT OF STUDENT TRANSFERS BE-
TWEEN THE DAYTON SCHOOL DISTRICT AND
SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITHIN THE DAYTON METRO-
POLITAN AREA. He shall inform them by separate letter of
the three resolutions as adopted, and forward a copy of the
letter to all members of the Board of Education.
I move also, that the Superintendent is directed to publish
in the next issue of SCHOOL DAY Mrs. Groff’s introductory
remarks and the three resolutions as adopted by the Dayton
Board of Education on January 3, 1972.
YEAS: Goodwin, Groff, Ridenour, and Lucas — 4
NAYS: Lawson, Lucas, and Sterzer — 3
The motion was declared approved.
354
PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT 9
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF 75
Advisory Committee To The Board of Education
To Reduce Racial Isolation and Improve
Educational Opportunities
Dayton Board of Education @ 1971
THE COMMITTEE:
ITS ORIGIN AND ACTIVITIES
The Committee of 75 was organized to advise the Dayton
Board of Education how best to deal with racial and economic
isolation in the public schools and improve the quality of
education therein.
Origin
It originated in a resolution adopted by the Dayton Board
of Education on April 29, 1971.
Resolution to Seek Assistance To Reduce Racial
Isolation and Improve Educational Opportunities
WHEREAS, THE Dayton Board of Education recognizes
that unequal educational opportunities for minority
students now exist, and
WHEREAS. current resources available to the Board have
been fully used to extend learning opportunities and
are now stretched to their limit, and
WHEREAS, the Congress is considering the Emergency
School Assistance Program that may supplement
other funds for improving education and reducing
racial and economic isolation,
355
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 9
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the super-
intendent of schools be authorized and directed to
request the assistance of the State Department of
Education, Office of Equal Educational Opportuni-
ties, to provide technical assistance for the develop-
ment and submission to the Board of alternative
plans for reducing racial and economic isolation of
pupils and improving educational opportunities in
the Dayton Public Schools and for developing pro-
posals for outside funding to implement the same,
subject to the approval of the Board.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the President of the
Board, in consultation with the Board, appoint a
broadly representative committee to evaluate and
advise the Board on plans that are developed pur-
suant to this resolution; and to communicate with
and seek the cooperation of civic, governmental,
higher educational, religious, communications, labor,
business and other segments of the community in
the Dayton area regarding such plans.
Meeting first on August 30, 1971, at Frigidaire’s Moraine
plant auditorium on Springboro Pike, the committee received
the following charge from Leo A. Lucas, Board President:
The Charge To
The Advisory Committee of the Board of Education
To Reduce Racial Isolation and Improve
Educational Opportunities
We, the members of the Dayton Board of Education,
are deeply grateful for the presence of each of you here
this evening. This is an historical event — one that is
even more historical than the decision of the Dayton
Board of Education of the 1930's to construct the original
Dunbar High School.
356
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 9
We recognize, and the statistical data substantiates, the
fact that unequal educational opportunities for the poor
and black students now exist in the Dayton School Dis-
trict. The Board of Education has gone on record by
setting quality integrated education as its goal. We have
admitted that the district is guilty of procedures which
have led to the racial isolation of school children.
It is this committee’s responsibility to establish the
evaluation elements to be applied to a developed plan
or plans and advise the Dayton Board of Education
accordingly. We do hope that you would set up guide-
lines and/or methods by which the community will
become meaningfully involved.
You are an arm of the Dayton Board of Education with
the task of supplying input to the Board. It remains
the responsibility of the Board of Education to make
official approval of your input. We feel very strongly
that the establishment of this committee is not an attempt
to abdicate its responsibility or delegate its authority,
but rather an attempt to utilize the enrichment of citizen
participation. It is hoped that the school councils, and
organized groups of school-oriented citizens of the school
district, will be an avenue you may use for additional
participation.
If there be a fear that you are here to architect a
master plan for “busing” — “t’ain’t true.” You are here
in an attempt to supply your input of the ingredients for
extellency to any plan that the administration and/or
consultants may recommend. It is our sincere hope that
when a plan is set for implementation, it should be that
one or the one that embraces the wishes of the citizens
of the Dayton School District and not one imposed by
federal, state or court mandate.
Again, we are happy to have your view joined with us
to place our input on what may be called The Dayton
357
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
Peoples Plan for the elimination of racial and economic
isolation among the pupils of the Dayton School District.
Now acting by the authority invested in me as President
of the Dayton Board of Education, I hereby officially
appoint this committee and also name Dr. Irvin W. Bat-
dorf as Chairman, and request that the termination date
be set at December 1, 1971.
At this meeting an address was brought by Dr. William
Self, Superintendent of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg school
system in North Carolina, setting forth the process of integra-
tion accomplished there under order of the courts. Mrs.
Virginia McNeal was elected vice-chairman of the Committee
and Dr. Irvin W. Batdorf appointed as chairman. To address
the problem of racial and economic isolation in each of the
areas considered as integral to the operation of the public
schools the committee was divided into nine subcommittees,
the names of whose personnel appear on pages ii, iii, iv of
this report. As listed there the committees include not only
the original 75 members but also eleven students who were
added to the committee later at the invitation of President
Leo Lucas of the Board, in response to growing feeling that
more student input was needed.
As a basic document to spark deliberations, each subcom-
mittee member was given a copy of the publication, Recom-
mendations of the State Denartment of Education to the
Dayton Board of Education (2). This paper had been sent
to each member of the Dayton Board of Education on June
7, 1971, and a copy is filed at the Board offices where the
records of the committee of 75 are kept. Pages 13-16 of this
paper list ten alternate responses to racial imbalance in the
Dayton schools which the State Department did not consider
adequate. On pages 16-30, the State Department recom-
mented an eleventh proposal, on the basis of which the sub-
committees began their deliberations. This latter recommenda-
tion included the substance of a paper by Dr. Charles Glatt
358
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
entitled “Parameters and the Future,” which was printed in
a report made to the Dayton Board of Education on December
15, 1970 bearing the title School Integration (14). This report
also was made available to each member of the committee
together with whatever materials each subcommittee found
pertinent to its work. Members also profited much from the
advice and wisdom of the schools central office staff through
consultants assigned to each subcommittee.
PRIORITIES FOR THE PRESENT
What We Felt
Nothing can replace the experiences we had working with
each other because the problem we had tackled forced us to
put ourselves on the line. There was literally no place to
hide. That's the way it is when you take integration seriously.
And that’s why something must be said about what we felt,
painful and embarrassing as that is.
As we moved ahead, week after week and month after
month, short as our time was together, the level of our
encounters deepened until, at the end, without our knowing
what lay below the surface or expecting what finally did
happen, the depth of our relationship to each other suddenly
stood revealed. We knew who we were once and for all,
and each of us knew what he in particular had to do. I as
a white man had to explain to other white men what it’s like.
The blacks had done their part long since and now it was my
turn.
Through the words and the endless explanations came the
fear of our black brethren that they were being sold down
the river once again. For all of them — without exception —
this was an old, old story. As one of them said, “Before I came
to Ohio my oldest children were doing all right, but here in
Dayton the younger ones are being crippled by segregation.
I'm determined to change all that one way or another. We've
. suffered too long.”
359
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
When we could not believe we were hearing rightly another’
black man pounded the nail one more time. “You know,” he
asked, “what the unemployment rate is for Dayton? — 6 per
cent for everyone else and 20 per cent for ghetto blacks. You
know how many more blacks you'll find at the Lebanon
Correctional Facility? — 4 out of 5. And education — segrega-
ted education — is largely to blame.”
So it was whitey’s turn to be angy, frustrated, utterly down!
“Suppose,” said one, “we demand integration now. Our report
won't have a chance! Better half a loaf than none at all.
I can predict just what will happen. They'll never give us
a hearing. Better to be Machiavelli than go tilting at windmills
with Don Quixote.”
So we were honest and shocked by turns until one white
man said, “I’m not sure what will happen politically but so
long as one black life is being snuffed out T'll go along with
pressing for integration now. Hereafter ['m not going to
simply listen to what everyone says, I'm ready to take a stand
and be a leader, to do what I feel compelled to do and to
say what I think ought to happen!”
So some of us switched roles and we all went off to lick
our wounds and make what reaccommodations we could with
ourselves — with “intellectual honesty” and “practicality” and
“confrontation” and “gut feeling.” But ever thereafter we all
knew — both black and white — that we could not explain to
our fellow Daytonians what integration and segregation are
all about apart from this embarrassing reference to the deep
valley we had walked together.
What We Must Do
Having been “through the mill” of confrontation with each
other we accept these priorities for ourselves, and recommend
their adoption by the Board and the citizenry of Dayton.
1. Segregated education, because it perpetuates and
condones economic and racial isolation, is both
illegal and inferior.
10.
360
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
The school children of Dayton have suffered far too
long under the crippling handicaps imposed by racial
and economic isolation.
We must resolve now as a total community to end
inferior segregated education once for all.
Time is running out. Unless we act now the divi-
sions generated by segregation will destroy us. Un-
less we act now court orders may impose upon us
what all of us will regret.
Initiative in the struggle against segregated educa-
tion belongs to the Dayton Board of Education.
We cannot wait for housing and job patterns to
change while we defy the law of the land.
To lift the plague of segregated education in Dayton
immediate appeal must be addressed to the school
systems surrounding Dayton as well as to the appro-
priate state and national agencies involved.
Desegregation is not enough. To end racial and
economic isolation we must not rest until we have
achieved true integration, until the differing ethnic
and racial groups among us are able to live side by
side in mutual respect.
The personal cost of achieving such true integration
will be high because to achieve such integration we
must persist in dialogue until the differences that
divide us have been resolved. We can no longer
allow the fear of busing stifle such dialogue.
The financial cost of true integration will also be
high. At least 1 per cent of the current budget,
exclusive of federal and state grants, should be allo-
cated to this sector.
Integrated quality education requires constant vigi-
lance. We must not only develop support systems
to undergird every group involved in the changes
proposed but we must nurture these groups by con-
361
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
tinuing attention to curricula, buildings, and_in-
service training.
What Is Involved
To Impose Racial Isolation on Public Education is IHlegal
The 14th amendment to the Constitution of the United
States guarantees “equal protection” under law to every citizen,
and the Supreme Court has interpreted this provision to mean
that “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal”
(“Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka” in Race and Place
A Legal History of the Neighborhood School, by Meyer Wein-
berg pp. 4, 14, 31, 55, 76, 92, 96) (8). In this 1954 decision
the Supreme Court said of black children:
To separate them from others of similar age and qualifica-
tions solely because of their race generates a feeling of
inferiority as to their status in the community that may
affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be
undone.
Statement of The United States Commission on Civil Rights
concerning the “Statement by the President on Elementary
and Secondary School Desegregation”, May 15, 1970, page 9
(7) is the source of the above statement.
Quality Education
In the spirit of this declaration and in the light of Title
VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which put the executive and
legislative branches of government solidly behind the judiciary,
we as a committee go one step further. We believe that to
impose racial and economic isolation on public education is
not only illegal but detrimental to the quality of that education,
for both white and black, for both advantaged and disad-
vantaged.
Where such isolation breeds alienation, quality must suffer.
The twin concerns that created our committee are inseparable.
362
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
Quality education cannot thrive where racial and economic
isolation of whatever sort divides the children and citizens
of one community from those of another.
The reason for this is plain. The quality of any educational
system depends upon how well it prepares today’s children for
tomorrow's world. Tomorrow’s world will be integrated and
any child who has not been educationally prepared to deal
with this world will be severely handicapped. He will receive
a distorted view of a multi-racial society that will leave him
incapable of dealing with the world as it is. Therefore we
believe segregated education to be inherently inferior for ALL
children, whether white or black, advantaged or disadvantaged.
Urgency of Action
Since it is clear that segregated education is both illegal
and inferior, it is also clear that the Dayton Board of Education
must address itself to this problem since latest reports indicate
that 75 per cent of our school children attend schools that are
90 per cent racially isolated. The Board has already indicated
its intention to do so through the resolution that created our
committee of 75, and through many statements and actions
leading up to that resolution of April 29, 1971.
We now recommend that the Board should not wait for
this problem to be solved otherwise, as by a change in attitudes
toward public housing patterns or by a non-compliance finding
from H.E.W. Without waiting for other cities to take the
lead, we recommend that our Board strengthen the impetus
initiated by the appointment of our committee to solve this
problem by all means within its power now.
The urgency of such action is made clear both by the poor
record of Dayton in dealing with racial and economic isolation
and by the court actions already taken to force school integra-
tion in cities other than Dayton.
Poor record. Where segregated education is concerned the
City of Dayton has not been quick to act. In 1926 the State
363
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
Supreme Court acted to require the Dayton Ohio School Board
to cease forcing Negro children to occupy one part of the
school building with their own entrances and exists (Race and
Place, page 38) (8). The situation was equally stringent in
1966 when the Mayor’s Ad Hoc Riot Study devoted two pages
of its Preliminary Report to a detailed description of the
deterioration then being suffered by Dayton’s west side schools
in buildings, services, equipment, teaching and morale (pages
7-8). It is little wonder then that in 1967 the education task
force committee, working under the Dayton Committee on
Civil Rights in cooperation with the Ohio State Advisory
Committee to the U. S. Commission on Civil Rights took as
the focus of its concern “the education of the deprived ghet-
toized child” and particularly “his inability to learn the required
and necessary tasks through the traditional methods practiced
by our institutions” (page 2 of Dayton’s Call To Action.
Recommendations for the Solution of Human Problems in the
Community) (16). While there was some progress then and
the spirit of the community was aroused, our findings five years
later indicate that there is still much to be done. One measure
of this is a report issued just recently, (November 1971) by
the Dayton Public Opinion Center, entitled How Dayton Views
the Public Schools (4). The last paragraph on page 3 reads
as follows:
Racial conflicts in public schools have been the subject
of much newspaper and television coverage in the past
few years. Yet even with this type of adverse publicity,
more people in the Dayton School District felt that school
integration has improved relations between blacks and
whites than believed that it has hindered them. A total
of 48 per cent believed it was improved and 39 per cent
felt that it has worked against interracial relations.
In this attitude there is perhaps some ray of hope. On the
other hand the last part of this same paragraph continues:
People were about evenly divided about whether school
364
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
integration has improved the quality of education re-
ceived by black students (45 per cent saying it has and
43 per cent saying it has not). Over one-half, however,
felt that integration has not improved white students’
education. Only 35 per cent responded that it has. (See
Table 7).
One can see from this last quotation that we in Dayton still
have a long way to go.
Integration in Other Cities
Beyond Dayton we may quote from a recent paper, referred
to before in this report, Statement of the United States Com-
mission on@#il Rights (7) concerning the “Statement by the
President on Wlementary and Secondary School Desegregation,”
issued on May 15, 1970; On page 3 we read:
The school systems of New Rochelle, New York; South
Holland, Illinois; Pasadena and Los Angeles, California;
and Pontiac, Michigan, are among those which have been
found by the court to have practiced deliberate school
segregation in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
There is no doubt that there are many more instances of
school segregation resulting from conscious decisions of
school officials than the relative handful that have come
to the attention of the courts.
We may now add to this list the school situations in Detroit
and Indianapolis. In the former case
U. S. District Court Judge Stephan J. Roth declared that
what appears to be de facto segregation in the Detroit
School System is actually de jure and must be abolished.
(Time, October 11, 1971, page 23).
In the Pontiac case the U. S. Supreme Court recently refused
to “tamper with this city’s court-ordered school busing pro-
gram” (Journal-Herald, Wednesday, October 27, 1971).
365
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
We in Dayton should note that court orders have hit cities
both larger than ours (Los Angeles and San Francisco) and
smaller (New Rochelle, Pontiac, Pasadena and South Holland ).
We should also note from the report quoted that there may be
other cities in non-compliance not yet confronted by the courts.
Of particular interest is a letter written by superintendent
of schools for the San Francisco Unified School District, Dr.
Thomas A. Shaheen, on the eve of the desegregation of that
city’s elementary schools. Although not under court order
San Francisco met the same problems that face all segregated
school systems in the process of complying with the law.
These will not be easy days| What happens to us, not
only in the next few weeks, but throughout the year, is
tremendously important for San Francisco. I who have
a deep commitment, as you know, to the value of de-
segregation do have many concerns, many uncertainties,
about what the year holds. I am sure that there are many
of you who have the same deep commitment to desegre-
gation as I do.
I am sure, also, that there are some of you who are still
searching in your own minds the extent to which you
have a commitment to desegregation.
Yes, I know that some of you do not believe that desegre-
gation is in the best interest of the schools of San Fran-
cisco, nor in the best interest of America. I feel that
you have reached this position after very careful study of
the issues, of the values, of this country, and your profes-
sional obligations to the children.
I respect your convictions. Whatever your personal feel-
ings, and mine, we have the obligation to show our
students and our community the importance and value of
compliance with the law. We can be models at this
time of what it means to live in a democracy.
The stakes and the issues which lie before us are high.
It goes, I think, to the very heart of whether public school
education can continue in this country of ours... . (11)
366
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
In the light of these facts, both at home and abroad, we
believe that the Dayton School Board should address itself
to the racial imbalance of segregated education not simply to
insure respect for law and order and provide quality education
but also to secure that justice and human understanding with-
out which law and order are meaningless. We ask how we
can urge law and order on our children and defy the supreme
law of the land as interpreted by the Supreme Court. Not
long ago the Kerner report was brought up to date by a
Federal Commission appointed by President Nixon. It de-
clared that the division of our nation into two armed camps,
which was noted two years ago, still exists, only with greater
impact now than then. In 1966 over 95 per cent of our nation’s
black people lived in the North and the majority of these in
the city. Now that percentage is greater than ever with whites
fleeing to the suburbs and the inner city left black and bank-
rupt. Under these conditions the “peaceful co-existence”
spoken of in the Kerner Report will be increasingly impossible
unless strong action is taken. Our time is short! The opposite
of integration is disintegration.
Responsibility Beyond Dayton
Since quality integrated education should be available to all,
equality of opportunity should be accessible to all children of
the Dayton Metropolitan area as also to all children of the
State of Ohio. The time is upon us when the old boundary
lines are disappearing and there will be no place to run from
the changes that must be made. Therefore, the Dayton Board
of Education should begin immediately to:
1. Initiate action with the Boards of Education of subur-
ban communities surrounding Dayton, looking toward
possible consolidation.
2. Initiate action with the State Board of Education
looking toward possible consolidation.
te ee
367
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
3. Initiate action to insure that dollars expended per
student be equalized on a statewide basis. This would
require the development of state-established minimal
standards and some form of state evaluation.
4. Begin the necessary political action in the state legis-
'eture for the above changes to take place through the
rule of law.
5. Check with the United States Office of Education
concerning possible forms of assistance in pursuing
this endeavor.
6. Begin preparing the people of Dayton educationally
for the changes which are surely to come.
Attacking Isolation
Racial and economic isolation may be attacked broadly and
basically on two fronts: The reassignment of students and the
preparation of these students to work, share, learn, and live
with each other in a productive way.
Concerning the reassignment of students. Various methods
should be analyzed, evaluated and tabulated in order from
least traumatic to most. We recognize that under present
conditions of racial and economic isolation in Dayton some
form of busing would be necessary either to implement or
supplement whatever other methods are employed to effect
school desegregation.
In no case should we be content with piecemeal desegrega-
tion since this procedure tends to focus tensions, fears and
hostilities upon specific schools and this in turn creates prob-
lems that militate against true integration. At the same time
careful attention must be given to the fears arising from dis-
tance, safety and busing “out” of the “neighborhood” area.
Preserving the human being. Whatever combination of
methods is used, the Board must not allow people to be de-
368
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
humanized in the process, i.e., to be treated simply and solely
as bodies to be pushed around. Let it be noted that our
committee is concerned with true integration not simple de-
segregation. There is a vast difference between desegregation
and integration. Desegregation breaks apart old patterns of
isolation and division but integration aims to bring people
together in mutual respect rather than mere mutual proximity.
We must emphasize, however, that integration is not in-
tended to erase all identifiable ethnic and racial characteristics
nor to homogenize them toward bland conformity. The result-
ing loss of spiritual and cultural heritage would be immense.
Integration does not require that we all copy one another;
only that we respect one another, learn from one another
and move together toward fruitful achievement contributing
to the common good. Individual rights must be protected and
expanded but no one can justly claim for himself what he will
deny to others.
_Continuous curriculum change. Reassignment will be in-
effective unless curricula are periodically reshaped, the teach-
ing staff held to strict accountability for productive pertor-
mance and the facilities used continually reassessed in the light
of changing needs. Only so can quality education be made
available to all children on an equal basis.
The detailed reports of each subcommittee in the chapters
that follow should make this abundantly clear.
Concerning the preparation of people. All the people in-
volved in reassignment should be given some part in the
decision-making process by which it unfolds. People excluded
from the social processes that affect them are thereby de-
humanized and alienated, whether black or white, rich or
poor, teacher, students or community residents.
Support systems. All the people involved in reassignment
should be undergirded by well thought out support systems
to make the readjustments called for, whether those affected
369
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 9
be students, teachers, parents, custodians, paraprofessionals,
central office staff, clerical staff or community residents.
Funding. The magnitude of such preparation should be
acknowledged by the provision of adequate funds. Ideals
wither without the resources to implement them in a realistic
way. At the same time we must remember that while action
may be costly, inaction may ultimately be more costly.
Planned immediate action. We recognize that time for
change in Dayton has run out! We must act now. But the
action we take must be well planned to give the persons in-
volved a true opportunity to adjust themselves to the demands
placed upon them.
Evaluation. Whatever the process, it must be evaluated
periodically by a representative group reflecting the entire
community to make certain that no segments are given priority
at the expense of others.
Summary. The presence and magnitude of the problem
before us needs to be recognized by all the citizens of Dayton.
Quality integrated education can help stop the flight to the
suburbs, break the cycle of poor education, and the lack of
job skills which handicap the minorities. The cost of this type
of education will be small in relation to the total benefits
society will reap.
370
PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT No. 10
DESEGREGATION STUDY
DAYTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS
By Doctor Gordon Foster
January 3, 1972
For several years the Dayton School Board, the Dayton
Superintendent of Schools, professional school associations, var-
ious citizens advisory groups representing the Dayton com-
munity, and cooperating governmental agencies have been
formulating policies and initiating efforts to equalize oppor-
tunities for education in the Dayton schools and improve the
learning experience for all children who attend the Dayton
system. The elimination of racial imbalance in the schools,
the impartial employment and assignment of all staff personnel,
a more relevant curriculum, broader community involvement,
and an end to racial isolation and discrimination were the major
goals to which these groups expressed commitment.
In August of 1967 the Board issued a “Statement of Intent”
establishing directions and policies to effectuate these major
goals. A “Freedom of Enrollment” policy was initiated in
September of 1969. The Dayton Advisory Council on Edu-
cation was established to advise the superintendent on plan-
ning and implementing desegregation efforts. In 1971 the
“Committee of 75” was organized as an advisory body to deal
with racial isolation in the schools. Outside assistance was
arranged through such agencies as the Ohio State Department
of Education, the Equal Educational Opportunities Office of
the U.S. Office of Education, and the Office of Civil Rights.
The Dayton Classroom Teachers Association and the Dayton
Principals Association lent support.
371
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
All of these activities came to “a head” in a sense on
December 8, 1971 when the Dayton Board adopted a series
of resolutions committing itself to an integrated system in
the fall of 1972. Specifically, it directed the superintendent
to develop and implement plans for the racial and economic
integration of pupils — by September 1, 1972.
This study is a direct result of the resolutions by the Board
on December 8, 1971. Data for the study were furnished by
the superintendent and his staff for the most part. The con-
sultant team spent a total of 11 days on site and expedited
the completion of the study to the maximum extent possible
for two reasons: the study team has commitments beginning
in January, 1972, for desegregation studies in other major
cities; and the Dayton system will need to proced with its
planning for desegregation in the fall of 1972 as quickly as
it can.
It should be noted that adequate pupil locater maps were
not available by race or grade level so that recommended
changes in pupil assignments had to be estimated on the
basis of present elementary attendance areas. Since estimates
for September, 1972 assignments also have to be made on the
basis of 1971-72 figures, a margin of error must be allowed.
It should also be noted that in most desegregation studies the
local school administrative staff is by far the most knowledge-
able body in terms of finalizing pupil assignments and de-
veloping transportation arrangements. The job of the out-
side expert is primarily to demonstrate possibilities and fa-
cilitate ideas and policies for a framework within which the
local staff can complete the task.
In developing the Dayton plan an attempt was made to
follow these general guidelines:
(1) Equitable treatment of both majority and minority
pupils
(2) A plan that would meet constitutional requirements
(Brown v. Topeka and Swann v. Charlotte-Meck-
lenburg)
372
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
(3) Economic feasibility: transportation would be kept
to a minimum in getting the schools desegregated
(4) Safety factors would be observed
(5) The concept of schools as “community centers”
would be maintained where possible
(6) Available classroom space and building facilities
would be used to best advantage
In summary, the Dayton Board of Education and the Day-
ton Superintendent are to be commended for their leadership
and wisdom in deciding to meet constructively the problems
of racial and economic isolation in the Dayton schools. It is
hoped that this study will provide the impetus to achieve their
goals in September, 1972.
CURRENT STATUS OF DESEGREGATION IN DAYTON
The Dayton system has made considerable headway in cer-
tain aspects of school desegregation, not so much in others.
A summary review will be given here of the current status
of desegregation efforts with regard to the school faculties,
classified personnel, administrative personnel, pupil assign-
ment, and community and staff involvement.
SCHOOL FACULTIES
Desegregation of school faculties in Dayton has been ac-
complished under an agreement reached with the Office of
Civil Rights (HEW) in 1971. The pattern of assignment has
followed basically the court’s ruling in Montgomery vy. Carr
which indicated that facultics should be assigned to each
school in substantially the same racial proportion currently
in effect at the elementary and secondary levels in the total
system. Thus, 31 per cent of the faculty at X high school
would be black if there were approximately 31 per cent blacks
employed by the total system as secondary faculty personnel.
According to available data, district assignment and recruit-
373
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
ment practices were seeking to maintain this pattern and,
at the same time, attempting to improve faculty racial balance
in employing new staff.
CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL
“Classified personnel,” also known as “noncertificated per-
sonnel,” for the purposes of this report refers to clerical,
custodial, and food service job classifications in the Dayton
Public Schools. Information released by the Superintendent's
Office states the degree of desegregation of classified person-
nel as of mid-1971.
(1) While 33 per cent of the clerical personnel within
the school system are black, 665 of them are work-
ing in predominantly black schools.
(2) While 47 per cent of the custodial personnel within
the school system are black, 82 per cent of them
are employed in predominantly black schools.
(3) While 39 per cent of the food service personnel with-
in the total school system are black, 83 per cent
of them are located in predominantly black schools.
It would appear that blacks hold the lesser-ranked and lower-
paying jobs among classified personnel positions. The tenden-
cy to find blacks in classified posts stationed in predominantly
black schools is common to urban schools; typically, people
prefer to work close to home.
ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL
The black-white ratio for administrative personnel as of
1970-71 is portrayed by the following table.
374
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
Administrative Posts: Racial Balance, 1970-1971
Position White Black % Black
Central Office 73 29 27.1
Building Principals 51 18 26.1
Assistant Principals 25 17 40.5
(Principals & Assts. ) (76) (35) (31.5)
Total Administrative’ 176 72 29.0
‘) Data taken from Dayton Public Schools “School Inte-
gration,” a report dated December, 1970, Table 2, p.
17. Under “Central Office” this table excludes person-
nel classified as “resource teacher,” “psychologist,” or
“child accountant” although including them would not
affect the proportion.
>) All administrators, including those excluded under the
“Central Office” category were included.
The 1971-72 comparable data were not available at the time
this report was being prepared. It is understood, however, that
the proportion of blacks in administrative posts has increased
somewhat in the past year.
PUPIL ASSIGNMENT, 1971-72
Pupil assignment data are given in Table I for grades K-5,
in Table 2 for grades 6-8, and in Table 3 for grades 9-12. There
were 51 school buildings housing regular elementary (K-5)
programs; eight of these were really double buildings occu-
pying the same site so that there were only 47 elementary
attendance zones. A total of 26,380 pupils were assigned at
this level with a racial pattern of 44.4 per cent black.
There were five middle schools and 34 additional elementary
375
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 10
buildings housing grades 6-8. Pupils in these grades totalled
12,298, and 44.9 per cent of them were black.
There were 11 high schools. Patterson Co-op drew pupils
from the entire system so that there were only 10 high school
attendance zones. Grades 9-12 included 16,464 students, 38.3
per cent of whom were black.
A summary of student enrollment by race in 1971-72 is
given in Table 4A, and a summary of attendance areas in
Table 4B.
These data indicate the existence of severe racial isolation
in pupi) assignment patterns. If the criterion of “90 per
cent or more pupils being of one race” is used to define a
racially identifiable or racially segregated school then 40
of the elementary schools were segregated insofar as pupils
in grades K-5 were concerned. Three middle schools and 7
high schools were also segregated under this criterion.
If the criterion of “more than 15 percent above or below
the average racial distribution” is used to define a segregated
school — a guideline that has been used in some cities and
states — only five Dayton schools would be nonsegregated:
Fairport, Hawthorne, McGuffey, Colonel White, and Patterson
Co-op.
The characteristics of economic isolation, or a concentration
of pupils in schools by similar family income levels, are equal-
ly clear although the data are not as readily available. Using
Title 1 (ESEA) eligibility as an indicator of income levels
(Table 4C), it is apparent that a high concentration of low-
income families is assigned to schools in the southern and
central parts of the district.
COMMUNITY AND STAFF INVOLVEMENT
On August 30, 1971, at its first meeting, the Committee of
75 heard the president of the Board comment that data showed
“unequal educational opportunities for the poor and black
students now exist in the Dayton School District . . ./and/that
376
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
the district is guilty of procedures which have led to the
racial isolation of school children.”
Community involvement to correct this situation was en-
couraged by the Committee of 75's recognition of the fact
that desegregation — the physical mix of races in enrollment
patterns — was not enough; that integration — living and
working “side by side in mutual respect” was the necessary
goal for the Dayton school community.
Other examples of good communications existing between
the schools and the community are the passage of school mill-
age funds, the activities of the Dayton Advisory Council on
Education (DACE), the various programs with the Office of
Economic Opportunity and other community agencies, plus
the large amount of coverage given schools in the news
media.
Communication has also occurred with employee groups
through involvement of faculty and staff on committees, in
interracial workshops, and in various eflorts to complete facul-
ty and staff desegregation successfully. The program of Equal
Educational Opportunities in the Dayton Schools is to be
commended for its efforts in this regard in working with staff,
with students, and with the community.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESEGREGATION
OF PUPILS
The Board in its December 8 resolutions rescinded attend-
ance zones as presently constituted, effective September 1,
1971 and asked for pupil assignment to schools by race and
family income characteristics substantially proportionate to
the total system pattern.
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
The first step in fulfilling this resolution would logically be
the completion of the middle school program already stated.
377
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
Recommendation 1, — All pupils in grades 6-8 should be as-
signed to middle schools in September, 1972.
This will require establishing LO present clementary build-
ings as middle schools. Based on data obtained from = the
administrative staff, on data in the recent Ohio State Educa-
tional Vacilities Evaluation, and on team site visits and dis-
cussion the following schools were recommended as new
middle schools:
Jane Addams Lincoln
Belmont Elementary Meadowdale
Brown Webster
Gettysburg Westwood
Grant Wogaman
These schools are located around the district in such a way
as to complement the five existing middle schools. Even though
the buildings cannot be prepared as proper middle school fa-
filitics for several years, the change should be made immedi-
ately.
Dayton’s adoption of the “middle school” concept is educa-
tionally sound and, coordinated with the direction toward a
unitary school system, can achieve two goals. One, education
for pre-adolescents and early adolescents can be improved.
Two, the resultant rezoning of attendance areas around middle
schools can aid desegregation.
The middle school as a concept is in many ways comparable
to junior high schools. They are intended to provide an or-
derly transition in learning experiences from the homeroom,
one-teacher organization of the elementary school to the pla-
toon system of the high school with the student’s being ex-
pected to exert more self-direction. Many “middle schools”
originated because a junior high school had to take in the
sixth grade (or possibly the fifth and sixth) to relieve crowded
conditions in elementary schools. Sometimes this caused a re-
view of the curriculum.
‘ .
~e
a Table 1
Student Enroliment by Schoul and Race
Pre Kind orgarten and Graces K-5
Dayton Public Schools, 1971-72
Pre-Kdq. Kdg Gr. 15 So. Ed. Total Total et
3 w UW a ae ——
Jane Addams 33 5 41 4 214 6? 10 2 203 82 3e0 78%
Alien 0 i) 0 58 3 wm vi) fr) 3 6435 432 07
Belle Haven fr) 0 7 wi » 473 ti) ti) 4 «664 620 >
Belmont Elementary 0 rt) ° 72 o 80287 ) 0 o 80389 359 oo
Brown 0 fr) o 129 2 882 t) 0 2 om 713 03
Carlson 0 0 $1 ! 333 ! o ° 344 2 386 295
Clevetand ) 0 o 162 1 725 rt) ) 1 677 878 G1
Drexel 0 0 ’ 74 23.0~=Cé«338 1 ? 260s 4416 441 57
Eastmont 0 Q i) 63 o 33 t) ty) o 31% 376 “*
Euison 89 0 103 1 436 1 16 f) 643 2 645 997
Emerson 6 57 8 68 22«4 0 15 3% 0S 58) 61
Fau port 0 f) 58 2s «102 244 0 =—s «388 2 7 3344 0=—s 807 B11 9?
Faw view 0 0 6 65 19 «=. 382 0 4 2% 86451 476 53
Fi. tacKinley 0 0 0 50 5 247° 0 0 6 297 302 7
Franktin e. 4 0 es) 0 663% 0 8. 0 8632 632 oo
Gardendate 32 5 43 19 211 e6 0 0 2350—Ctis«éat0 393 72.2
Gettysburg 0 0 6 47 29 «(24 t) ft) 45 321 106 123
Grant 0 0 0 89 3 #348 0 0 3 «(447 450 0.7
Greene 4? ' 42 1 463 18 ? C) 659 20 579 965
Havathorne 23 13 18 ai 61 176 0 t) so WwW 329 30!
Hickorydate 0 0) 10 4? 34 194 ° 8 “4 86249 293 150
Highview 40 (1) 73 0 449 10 16 Cy) 47? 10 48? 97.9
Huffman 0 40 0 n 1 805 ti) o 1 625 626 02
sing 78 ' 102 0 576 3 20 0 176 4 780 995
duck son Elementary, 0 0 0 t) 291 10 t) v1 > 302 927
SLE
OL HGINX2 SHUMIEId
Table 1
Student Enroliment by School and Race
Pre-Kindergarten and Grades K-5
Dayton Public Schools, 1971-72
Pre-Kdg. K Gr. 15 So. Ed. Total Total % 8.
i aw a "ss a = =
Jackson Primary 138 0 136 0 397 5 0 0 671 6 67? 991
Jetterson Elementary 0 0 0 ry) 20s 23 0 25 0—Cti«*S 660 913
Jetterson Primary ry 0 100s “30—CtiS 0 0 633s 86 719 330
Kemp 0 0 s | (444 0 4 4. «627 583 2
Lewton o 0 o)| O&M 1 262 0 ? 1 33 314 93
Lincoin ry 0 1 3 2 «516 2 . Ss 637 632 03
Loos 0 0 4 6 27 233 ' 4 32-386 418 7
Horace Mann 0 0 0 % o 154 0 0 o 189 189 0.0
nicGulfey 2 OH an) 151315 0 ? 2250415 640 Sad
thcNary 40 0 69 0 316 0 + 0 433 0 423 109.0
Merdowdale ry 0 o «4 2 256 0 0 2 28 300 67
Miami Chapel 127 0 0 0 354 rt) ry 0 481 0 481 100 0
Patterson Elementary o 3 o 8 |(6 1 34 0 o 1 430 431 02
Residence Park Elementary 0 0 e o 286 ' 4 0 294 ' 295 097
Residence Park Primory o* 0 102 0 46 ' 0 0 448 ' 449 998
Ruskin . ©¢ 0 436 o 6s 0 S65 565 00
Shiloh 0 o o 66 5 204 0 0 5 35 370 14
Shoup Milt 0 0 o 862 1 16 0 0 1 136 137 0.7
Louise Troy 0 0 143 0 447 2 0 0 590 2 $92 99.7
Valerie ry ry 6 #4 2 406 0 3 32? 218 14.2
Van Cleve " 23 Ss «113 ay st 0 o 130647 760 149
Washington 6 6 an) $9 0451 ' 9 92 842 634 145
Weaver 129 0 14 0 734 3 2 rt) 998 3 1001 99.7
Webster t) 0 o oo 1 273 o «4 1 37 338 0.3
Westwood 64 o 107 o 526 s 7 0 764 5 769 993
OL HqI4x2 SHNUICd
6LE
Table 1
6
Student Enrotimant by School and Race
Pro-Kindergarton and Grades K-5
Dayton Public Schools, 1971-72
Pre-Kdo. K Gr. 15 Soe. Ed. Total Total % BI.
G a an rw a —_ —
Viogaman 43 0 67 0 499 ! 14 0 643 1 644 994
Gorman 12 e9 12 89 101 We¢d
Kennedy 24 129 24 129 153 15.7?
TOTAL BLACK 945 1597 8966 211 11719
TOTAL WHITE 271 2296 11755 339 14661
TOTAL ENROLLMENT 1216 3893 20721 650 26380 26380 444
aegi
OL Hq!4X3 SHHUICId
Table 2
Student Enroliment by School and Race
Grades 6 8
Dayton Public Schools, 1971-72
Jane Addams
Cornett Hgts 4S.
Orenel
Eastmont
Emerson
Fairview
Ft. tAcKinley
Gardendale
Gettysburg
Grant
Hickorydate
Highview
Gr. 6-8
Ss wW
167 23
’ 180
ss 0638
0 183
9 5
187 '
3 365
667.27
14 142
o 27
1 = o20
30 233
2 1?
14 43
“42 190
1 198
23.—Coé«#Ns2
209 5
i) 268
40? 2
1 162
5 314
485 325
6 205
2 93
eeZeeteaonveenadeeeeeeeeeeee «
k
one weeaecoceoocscoeonewecaeacocoeceesecs «=
Total
TM
404
1 190
56318
o 86183
9 M5
187 ’
3 365
667217
4 (146
o 2
10 219
30-235
2 147
4043
42-190
1 198
236
218 5
o 273
42) 3
1° 186
5 39
909 08-329
6 207
2 «93
723
126
161
16.5
978
OL HGIGXZ SHNUIEId
I8t
8 °
Student Enrotiment by School and Race
Dayton Public Schools, 1971-72
Gr. 68 Sp. Ed. Total Total % Bt.
rm a Ww s ww —_ —
Back arlane M.S. 858 5 58 C) 016 5 921 995
AicGuifey 4?) s 189 0 4 4?)0= 63 210 22.4
Meadowdale 41a 0 t) 4) 188. 222 185
Patterson Elementary ! 18) 0 0 1 187 183 05
Residence Para Elementary 393 ’ rn 406 ' 407 998
Ruskin 1 260 @ s 1 268 269 04
Shiloh 0 86180 0 0 o 180 180 co
Shoup Mitt 2 68 0 0 2 68 70 29
Valerie 15 830 108 ti) ’ 16 ©6109 124 12.1
Webster 1 152 0 2 + 164 155 06
Westwood 638 ' 10 0 548 ’ 549 998
Whittier B.S. 729 4 23 0 744 4 748 995
Wogaman 335 1 8 0 x43 ! 4 99.7
Or. Viright M.S, 5? = 877 8 21 656 40898 963 67
TOTAL BLACK * 625) 174 $525
TOTAL WHITE 695 n 6773,
TOTAL ENROLLMENT 12047 251 12298 12298 449
OL HOINXE SBHUIPId
o8t
Colonel Vénite
Wilbur Virigit
Continuing Education
Home Teaching
TOTAL BLACK
TOTAL WHITE
TOTAL ENROLLMENT
Gr. 9-12
Ww
$4 1923
1284 0
272, «1154
45 «G5?
82 1639
S460 «1218
1877 '
1080 38
471014
1570918
68 1230
5912
2842
15754
16464
38.3
OL HqI4xXT ,SHHUIeld
] = a = ae - -
' ° —
os ’ . ’
384
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
TABLE 4A
STUDENT ENROLLMENT BY RACE: SUMMARY TABLE 4C
DAYTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS, 1971-72
TITLE 1 ELIGIGLE SCHOOLS, 1971-72
Numbers of Children Resid ng in Attendane: Areas 1971-72
- Renan hee tmen Estimated Numter of Children
rom w incone eticiaave i ;
Black White _—‘ Total %Black Public Non Not + wenaecions Phe to oy
a School Public Enrotict Schools Bclow °
Pre-Kg and Grades K-5 11,719 14,661 26,380 44.4 Grace Enroll Enrol Droo
Grades 6-8 5,525 6.773 12.298 44.9 NARIE OF SCHOOL Sean ment ment Outs Total Number Percent Pumice Non Public . Total
Grades 9-12 6,300 10,164 16,464 38.3 A Ti Cc D € F G H r J K
TOTALS 23,544 31,598 5,142 42.7 ° Edison K-5 §79 20 599 296 49.4 120 120
MacFarlane Mid. 6-8 993 31 1,029 489 47.9 a}
Weaver K-5 959 25 457 47.5 120 120
Irving K-5 612 33 645 265 44.0 80 80
Grace A. Greene K-5 551 25 576 243 42.2 40 40
McGutfey K-8 781 82 863 343 39.6 80 80
Jackson K-8 1,294 ‘as 1,294 498 38.5 120 120
Miami Chapel-Troy K-5 969 33 Tr 1,002 333 38.2 120 120
Roosevelt H.S. 9.12 1,582 222 575 2,379 714 30.0
Wogaman K-8 954 30 Sas 984 288 29.3 40 40
TABLE 46 Dunbar H.S. 9-12 1,222 73 195 1,490 430 28.9
: Highview K-8 715 30 i 745 211 28.8 40 40
ATTENDANCE ARGAS: SUMMARY Whittier Middle 68 807 33 840 202 24.1
Emerson K-8 872 204 1,076 227 21.1 80 80
‘ Gardendale K-8 526 ro 526 106 20.2 40 40
Stivers H.S. 9-12 1,062 250 225 1,537 293 19.1
Huffman K-8 837 53 ber 945 174 18.4 40 40
Jefferson K-5 1,593 104 1,702 303 17.8 80 80
47 elementary attertance areas: = Map| Longfellow Mid. 6-8 941 305 TT 1,24G 210 16.9
(primary and elementary units on same site are counted as one attendance area) Kiser H.S. 9-12 6234 193 278 1,105 78. 15.8
Jane Addams K-8 579 eee 579 91 15.7 40 ‘ 40
Ruskin K-8 813 98 nae 911 132 14.5 40 40
5 middle school attendance areas: Overlay | Colone! White H.S. 9-12 1,676 340 130 2,14G 204 14.1
- Patterson K-8 563 53 — 616 87 14.1 a) 40
10 high school attendance areas: Map II Van Cleve K-5 778 350 1,128 157 14.0 40 40
(Patterson Co on. not cn attendance arca) Westwood K-8 1,322 20 1 34 2 188 14.0 40 40
Washington K-8 622 70 7 692 97 14.0 40 40
Roth H.S. 9-12 1,143 50 118 1,311 120 13.7
McNary K-5 417 26 ans 443 60 13.5 40 40
10
Belmont Elementary
Fort McKinley
Brown
Lewton
Fairview: Elementary
Kemp
295
Van Cleve K-5 14.0
Westwood K-8 14.0
Washington K-8 TT 14.0
Roth H.S. 9-12 118 13.7
McNary K-5 _ 13.5
Carlson ne K-8 11.7
Lincoln K-8 7.7
Cornell Hats. Mid. 6.8 7.4
Residence Park K-8 7.1
Franklin K-5 5.7
Orville Wright Mid. 68 5.5
Allen K-8 5.1
Webster K-58 Jos 5.0
Wilbur Wright HS. 9-12 324 4.3
Orexcl K-8 fea 3.4
Fairport K-5 3.1
Cleveland K-8 1.9
Hickoryciale - K-8 ee 1.6
Fairview $1.5. 9-12 194 1.5
Gettysbura K-8 1.4
Belmont HS. 9-12 1.4
K 1.4
K 1.3
K. 1.2
K 1.1
K 0.7
K 0.7
K 0.6
Loos
S2OoeOnDDN@
OL 4!4X2 SBUMIEId
Numbers of Chilhhon Resding in Attomlance Areas
° ’
Picdoter Non Not
School Porstotec Tneotiont
Grade Cmott Enso Drop
NAME OF SCHOOL SHan merit ment Outs
A 0 ae ra) i ee
Grant K-8 651 217 waite
Mea lovidale H.S. 9-12 1,650 220 15f
Valerie K-8 A23 63 vr
Shiloh K8 637? 489
MeadowdaleElementary| K-8 5/5 252
Belle Haven K-8 1,028 253
Eastmont K-8 659 180
Horace Mann K-8 323 207
Shoup hill K-8 284 20
Patterson Co-op H:S. 9-12 1,710 47
Gorman (Spec) 105
Kennedy (Spec) 165
Others in School (Spec) 126 1
TOTAL 54,240 8,858 2,550
From tow Income
1971-72
Estimated Numtirer of Chittiren
Who Véill Participate in Tite t
Activities from the Eligible
F amvities Schools Briow
Total Nurnber Peorcem Prstotic Non Public Total
ee _— " ' 4 K
868 4 0.5 sak is
2,058 10 05 ohare
ABG 2 0.4 hs ae
1,124 3 0.3 ae
827 2 0.3 a ea
1,281 2 02 rit
839 0 0.0 :
530 0 0.0
304 0 0.0 ne
1,757 | 235 13.4°
105.) 14 13.4"
165 22 13.4° vs
137 18 13.4" ; :;
65,648 8,788 13.4
*District-.vide Schools
June, 1971
OL HOGS SHNMICId
dl
387
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
[PHOTO OMITTED]
School organization of grades has, historically, been de-
termined not always by educational research but often by
state legislation or by physical facilities. The middle school
can be an administrative aid in solving some problem such
as racial isolation, but research indicates that it should be,
if properly handled, a way to improved education.
The Dayton middle schools should offer eventually such
things as differentiated staffing and team teaching, modular
scheduling, short exploratory courses, a wide range of elec-
tives and activities, increased emphasis upon student govern-
ment, and greater concern about and communication with
the community.
The middle school, beginning with grade 5 or 6 and ending
with grade 8 is for that “between-ager” or transitional period
covering early adolescence. Grades 6 to 8 cover this 11 to 13
year-old age span and constitute the most common middle
school grouping. It cannot follow either an elementary or
secondary model in content or process; it must focus upon the
problems of puberty and understand the needs of the learners
at this age. Research indicates that youngsters are reaching
physical and social maturity earlier.
The middle school should not be established merely as
an aid to desegregation. While it might permit children to
get out of segregated neighborhood schools at an earlier age,
high quality education will not result without careful pre-
planning of the instructional program. This “planning” can
he simultaneous with the preliminary work which is necessary
to develop an effective, integrated school system.
CLOSING SCHOOLS e
The Dayton system does have some extra space available in
some of its schools, and the student population projection in-
dicates a declining number of students over the next five
years. Some of the older, less-suitable buildings could there-
fore be abandoned.
3858
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 10
Recommendation 2. — Hawthorne Elementary, Washington
Elementary, Ft. McKinley Elementary, and Roosevelt: High
School should be closed as regular classroom facilities by Sep-
tember, 1972.
Hawthorne was originally constructed in 1887 with an
addition in 1909. It is in a poor location hemmed in by an
interstate highway and has an inadequate site of 0.8 acres.
Washington was originally constructed in 1898 with additions
in 1926 and 1969. It is on an inadequate site of 2.3 acres.
Ft. McKinley is a newer building (1924) but is rated as in-
adequate for an instructional facility. Its site is only 2.7
acres. Roosevelt High is generally considered to be the least
adequate Dayton high school facility with a poor site of 5.2
acTes.
ELEMENTARY ASSIGNMENTS, 1972-73
Elementary attendance zones for 1971-72 are illustrated on
Map 1 and middle school zones on Overlay 1. If two ele-
mentary schools discontinued (leaving Ft. McKinley as op-
erational for the moment) and 10 elementary schools are
changed to middle schools, a total of 35 elementary attendance
zones would remain (Overlay 2). Estimated enrollment fig-
ures are given for these (Table 5) and for the 15 middle
school zones that would be hypothetically created (Table 6
and Overlay 3). Without considering prekindergarten chil-
dren as part of the basic K-5 pattern, it is possible to de-
segregate these clementary schools by leaving four of them
as they are and by joining the remaining schools in 11 clus-
ters (Table 7).
Recommendation 3. — The following assignment of K-5
pupils to elementary attendance zones be made September,
1972.
Fairport: same as 1971-72
McGuffey: same as 1971-72
Drexel:
Cardendale:
Cluster A:
Cluster B:
Cluster C:
Cluster D:
Cluster F:
Cluster F:
Cluster CG;
Cluster H:
Cluster 1:
Cluster ]:
389
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 10
same as 1971-72 plus Jane Addams zone
same as 1971-72 plus 2/3 of
Gettysburg zone
Irving (Ky-1)
imerson (Gr. 2-5)
Patterson (Gr. 2-5)
Kastmont (Kg-2)
Lewton (Kg-2)
MC-LT (Gr. 3-5)
Cleveland (Kg-2)
Highview (Gr. 3-5)
Mann (Kg-2)
Carlson (Kg-1)
Huffman (Gr. 2-5)
Ruskin (Gr. 2-5)
Van Cleve (Ky-1)
Kdison (Gr. 2-5)
Jefferson (Kg-2)
Fairview (Gr. 3-5)
Valerie (Gr, 3-5)
Belle Haven (Kg-2)
Jackson (Gr. 3-5)
Ft. McKinley (out)
Allen (Kg-2)
Kemp (Kg-2)
Res. Pk. (Gr. 3-5)
Hickorydale (Ky-2)
Loos (Kg-2)
Weaver (Gr. 3-5)
lranklin (Kg-2)
Greene (Gr. 3-5)
209) TABLE 6 «
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 10 ESTIMATED ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL AND RACE
REVISED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ZONES
Cluster K \lceNarw | Ky 9 ) PRE KINDERGARTEN AND GRADES K 6
DAYTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Shoup Mill (Gr. 3-5) — Ne ee SS
Shiloh (Gr. 3-5) Oe ee ee Se ed ee et a ns DBs tsa ei
Pre Kdo. _Kdg Ge 1 5 Se td Total Total % BI
8 Ww y Ww 6--CCMW — 4 Ww s =~ hWW 0
The redistribution would leave all elementary schools with- iin P P - — - . — _ a
in a range of 27.6 per cent black to 54.5 per cent black with Belle Haven 0 > vw 39 86473 0 0 “6 (64 629 r4
most of the schools hovering closely to the 44.9 overall average. Cortson 21 0 0 ' 582 2 } 104 3 707 09 6
» ; Cc ' | 0 0 ? 2
An effort was also made to cluster schools by economic levels levetans o 8616 + 621 0 , 997 993 01
Drexel 33 § 42 62 2737 402 A) 323 498 821 93
= 6 wes phy TE ae west. (Rew a | -
Table 7A illustrates the percentage of Title | (ESEA) fami cae . . . = — . . — om an .
lies in each assigned cluster. Edison Hie 13 118 42 49? 77 16 0 142 232 974 2 >.
. all tinerwn ob 5) is) 68 22 4ii 0 16 Mw 551 687 61 2 eo)
lt should be noted that il total ol 34 elementary (K-5) at Fawport 0 0 58 102 274 398 2 ? 134 60? p14 oJ m ©
tendance areas would be left with Ft. McKinlev not used Peuvien 0 0 6 130 2 23««673 0 4 7% wo 833 7 z
The clustered Fones are based on the revised ZONVICS and not Ft McKinley 0 0 0 50 5 24) 0 0 5 297 302 1? =
Frankha ) 4 3 123 1) 760 0 12 46 903 919 4a -
. — (j” aod ® | . wee . oOo
the current 1971-72 attendance areas atte - es “ mn non . . -— we pa a
rr . Gor ows 4) 4 1 ] % 2 6 ‘ uy 5
Recommendation 4 The assignment of pupils to carry out , 7 : . _ - : : om ans
2 ; , bhechow yodole 0 0 1 63 4) 2763 0 fn 54 9 13 41
Recommendation 3 should be made in each of the clusters teen = 5 ms " -= « a " -—= ate ose
by the principals affected in cooperation with the central office Huffman 0 40 ) 101 ’ 642 ny) ih 1 194 196 01
staff. Pupils moved should in all cases be the farthest located : te veeny 8 ' 102 0 576 3 20 0 116 ‘ 740 99S
. ] . . lLuckson 1348 0 136 i?) 6&4 7 10 0/2 7 9/9 99 3
from their present school assignment where a choice has to
Jetterson 0 0 100 35 12705 126 23 0 1418 161 18/9 698
he made Kemp 4 4 4 192 64 669 1 4 8) 798 BUS 08
Lewun 0 0 0 84 2 ws 0 2 62 4u4 04
; . we —_ —_—_ - - Loos 0 0 a 129 28 608 1 4 33 741 7,34 43
MIDDLE SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS. 1972-73
18
Estimated enrollment for the 15 revised but hypothetical
— middle school zones is shown in Table 6. These are all
contiguous zones made up merely as a paper operation to es
tablish an intermediate base for final recommendations for the
middle schools. Estimated enrollment figures for the recom-
mended desegregation plan for middle schools are given in
Table 8 and zones are shown on Overlav 5. The school zones
listed are 1971-72 assignment areas. Thus, Jane Addams
Middle School would be assigned pupils from the current
Jane Addams Elementary zone. the Drexel zone. and the
Shoup Mill zone
393
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 10
16 TAGLE G
TABLE 6 ESTIMATED ENNOL' ACNT GY SCHOOL AflD RACE
REVISCD MIDOLE SCHOOL ZONES, GRADESGA
ac
ESTIMATED ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL AND RACE BASED ON MEVI“TID ELCMCNTARY ATTESOANCE ZOFIES
REVISED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ZONES '
PRE-KINDERGAHTEN AND GRADES K5 DAYTOS PUBLIC SCIIOOLS
DAYTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Pre Kde Kulg Gr. 16 Sp. Ed Tota Tous * BI
a a Ww a s)6hCtw 8 w
tHiorace Mann 0 0 QO 83 0 345 0 0 0 428 429 00
Ay wit e f, ‘ : ‘ ‘ A 5
Gulley 39 j4 35 59 15! 316 0 ; 226 415 640 352 : 2 Gr. 6-8 & So. Ed
\cNery 63 0 96 7) 462 1 12 0 623 ’ 624 99 9 =
yi Total 1.
me -4T 127 0 143 0 80) 2 0 ry 1071 2 1073 998 FS p kh — %6)_
Patterson Elementary i) A) ' 106 2 $99 ' 4 4 748 762 05 - as Jane Aridams 0.1.$
Resuience Park a 0 182 v 1072 6 21 0 1316 6 1327 a0 5 | e © Drexel 188 170 8
zx
) Rustin 0 37 0 134 ’ 694 ! 19 2 884 Cae c? gs 128 170 388 525
~ Shiluh fy) 0 ) 6! 5 we ty) te) 6 365 370 14 vt
sh coeazy Matt 0 0 0 20 ' 116 0 0 ' 136 17 0 S Belmont M!.5.
Valerie 0 0 6 “0 270422 0 3 ee 618 6: , Morey 2 215 217
Von Cleve TT 23 16 3 87 611 r) ) 193 64) 260 149 Cleveland 3 426 429
eaves 129 0 14 rt) 734 3 21 0 993 3 1001 oj) 5 641 646 0.8
Gorman 12 80 12 i | wo me
Brown, MS
Keoowrnly 24 129 24 179 15) 5% » ———
TOTAL BLACK 945 1597 866 201 719 Fairview 34 408 442
TOTAL WHITE 271 220 11756 339 144.61 Loos we 379 390
L)t-s J 2 be
= . ——- = Shoup Mill 2 68 70
TOTAL ENROLLMENT 12716 393 270721 650 26 540 26 380 144 4? 855 902 $2
Cornel! Hats. MSs
F airport 199 208 407
Jefferson 667 24 691
866 232 1098 78.9
Gettyshurg MS
Fr NicKinley 2 147 149
Gardendale 145 18° 330
Hickorydale 34 163 198
181 496 677 26.7
Grant his
Eastmont 1 363 364%
Lewton 1 222 223
° 2 £85 §87 0.3
Lincoln MS
Huftinan 0 350 350
’
Ruskin a 427 431
4 777 781 0.5
. 7 ‘ ’
e .
i
394
TAGLE 7
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 10
ESTIMATED ENROLLMENT BY SCHOOL AND RACE
GRADES (K 6) & SP. ED.
RECOMMENDED ELCAMENTARY ZONES, 1972-73
TADLI & (Cont'd)
DAYTON PUSLIC SCHOOLS
Gr.G-8% Sn. Ed _5p. Ed __ vow!
8 Ww 8 w 8 WW 6 W Total Cap *. 8)
5S Ww Tota! %.B1 - = = - = - - - = ——— _
Longiciiow (1.5 i(Mamtain 1971-72 Attendance Zones)
Greene 235 4 229 Kg. Gr. 1-5
Van Clove 56 238 294 Fospon $80 s«0? 274 398 2 ? 334 0«=— 807 Bat 98! 397
291 242 533 546 McGulley 35 59 161 315 ) ? 186 381 667 981 28
MecFarlane (15. (Maintain Revised Attendance Zone;) Py
pm Mt nn Re a , 3
Edison 349 74 423 me a8 FS
Weaver 394 2 396 Orvexel 42 62 237 402 " 9 200 493 783 919 370 “ w
743 76 819 90.7 Gardendale 48 65 24) 291 0 29 «| 46 635 702 455 m oC
>
(Cluster A) co
PAcaclowdale (1S x , Gr.25 e-
¢-
Belle Haven 56 318 374 me! =
Shilon 0 180 180 Emerson °°. o@ 254 326 21 19 275 345 620 1399 444
Valerie 56 290 346 ving 217 300 i) 0 0 fy) 217 380 697 1059 36.3
112 788 900 12.4 Patterson 0 0 240 48) 0 ve) 240 46! 721 879 333
Orville Wright M.S. Kg 1 in teving remain Gr. 2 6 im Patterson remain
Franklin 4? 416 462 Kg — 1 in Emerson and Patterson to Irving Gr. 2 ~ 5 in teving: 245 to Emerson; 236 to Patterson
Gr.2 —5 in Emerson remain
Kemp 18 482 500
65 898 963 87 (Ciuster 8)
Kqg-2 Gr. 36
Webster 0.1.5
— Eastmont 224 334 0 0 0 0 724 334 558 1130 401
— 2 267 269 , ? 2262284 479 684 470
McGulfey 4? 163 210 Lewiton 225 247 oO 0 0 7
epee MC -LT 0 ) 499 650 0 0 499 550 1049 1747 476
43 430 479 10.2
19
Westvrood {1.S.
Jackson 421 3 424
PAcNary 229 1 230
Res. Park 817 2 819
1467 6 1473 99.6
Whittier ALS.
Emerson 10 219 229
Irving 311 ? 313
Patterson 3 7 350
324 568 892 36.3
Vioqaman [4.S.
Highwiew 390 6 396
Carlson 358 1 389
MC-LT 433 2? 435
1181 2 1190 99.2
TOTALS 5525 6773 12298 449
18
20
TASLE 7 (Cont'd)
So. Ed. Tetal
u i 8 w 8 LY) Total Cap. % Bt.
Kg —2 in Eastront and Le-vton remain Gr. 3-5 in MC — LT remain
Kg -2 in MC — LT: 226 to Eustmont; 224 to Lewton Gr. 3 — 5 in Eastmont and Lewton to MC — LT
(Ctuster C)
Kq-2 Gr.35
Cieveland 242 632 0 CY) i) 0 242 632 774 1412 333
Hghview 0 ) 357 675 22 0 379 675 1054 1191 33.0
Mann 3 223 i) 0 t) 0 118 228 46 646 Ki
Kg —2 remain in Cleveland and Mann Gr. 3 — 5 remain in Highview
Kq -—2 trom Highwew: 245 to Cievetand; 119 to Mann Gr. 3 —5 trom Cleveland and Mann to Highview
(Cluster O)
Kq- 1 Gr.2-5
Cartsan 2c; #53 0 0 i) 0 208 453 661 927 5
Mullan ty) 0 236 618 ty) 0 236 618 854 1225 276
Ruskin 0 t) 234 605 8 28 242 633 775 1170 31.2
Kg — 1 remain in Cartson Gr. 2 = & remain in Hultman and Ruskin
Kg —1 from Huffman and Austin to Carson Gr. 2-5 trom Cartson: 236 to Ruskin; 233 to Huffman
(Cluster E)
Kyg-1 Gr. 2-5
Van Cleve 231 336 0 0 15 0 246 336 682 713 42.3
Edlison 0 0 486 607 t+) t) 486 607 993 1130 48.9
Kg — 1 in Van Cleve remain Gr. 2 —% in Edison remain
Kg - 1 from Edison to Van Cleve Gr. 2 —§ trom Van Cleve: 346 to Edison
(Cluster F)
Kq-2 Gr. 35
Jelferson 689 714 0 0 23 7? 712 721 1433 1447 49.7
OL HqIYX2 Syuuielg
96¢
s ° ‘ ’
TABLE 7 (Cont'd)
Sp. Ed. Total
8 Ww 4 w 8 vi 8 w Total Cap. % BI.
Fowview 0 0 416 44a) 0 ) 416 441 £5? 653 485
Valerie 0 0 m9 291 0 0 349 791 640 765 545
Kg -—2 in Jefferson remain Gr. 3 —& in Valerie and Fairview remain
Kg —2 from Fairview ard Vulerie to Jefferson Gr. 3 —5 trom Jeflerson: 446 to Fairview, 366 to Valerie
(Cluster G)
Kg -2 Gr. 38
Belle Haven 423 448 ty) 0 0 0 423 “48 871 1263 486
Jackson 0 0 452 430 10 0 462 430 8692 1747 512
Ft. McKinley 0 oO 0 0 0 t) 0 0 0 $42
Kg — 2 in Belle Haven remain Gr. 3 — 56 in Jackson remain
Kg —2 from Ft. Mc<intey and Jackson to Belle Haven Gr. 3 —5 trom Ft. McKinley and Belle Haven to Jackson
Make other use of Ft. tAcKinley School.
(Cluster H)
Kq-2 Gr. 35
Allen 236 305 0 0 0 0 266 305 591 671 484
Kemp 327 412 0 0 0 0 327 412 739 638 442
Res. Pk. 0 0 723 671 22 "1 745 682 , 1427 1589 $2.2
Kg —2 in Allen and Kemp remain Gr. 3 — 5 in Residence Park remain
Kg —2 from Residence Park: 284 to Allen; 283 to Kemp Gr. 3 — § from Allen and Kemp to Residence Park
(Cluster 1)
Kg -2 Gr. 3-6
Hickorydale 150 165 0 0 0 iY) 150 165 315 716 476
Loos 306 405 0 0 0 i) 306 405 7 68) 430
Weaver 0 0 4768 491 22 12 500 603 1003 1241 499
OL HqI4XT Spuuield
L6E
TABLE 7 (Cont'd)
22
—
8 w 8 w
Kg — 2 in Hickorydale and Loos remain
‘Kg —2 trom Weaver: 290 to Luos; 120 to Hickorydale
(Cluster J)
Kg-2 Gr. 35
Franklin 227 451 0 i)
Greene 0 t) 316 451
Kg — 2. in Franklin remain
Kg —2 trom Greene to Franklin
(Cluster K)
Kg-2 Gr. 35
ticNary 271 254 0 0
Shoup Mill 0 0 80 65
Shiloh 0 i) 213 163
Kg -2 in McNary remain
Kg —2 from Shoup Mill end Shiloh to McNary
— 5 in Weaver remain
- 5 from Hickorydale and Loos to Weaver
Gr. 3 —5 in Geeene remain
Gr. 3 —5 trom Franklin to Greene
Total
767
in Shoup “sii and Shiloh remain
from McNary: 79 to Shoup Mill and 210 to Shiloh
I?
% BI.
33.6
412
$2.7
55.2
$3.8
OL HqIyxa SHUUIEId
86E
399
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
TANLE 7A
PORCENTAGE OF TITLE I ICSCA) FATILIES
BY RECOMMENDED ELEMCNTANY ZOE CLUSTERS
DAYTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Cluster A:
Cluster 6:
Cluster C:
Cluster 0:
Custer E:
Cluster F;
Custer G:
Cluster H:
Cluster |:
Cluster J:
Cluster K:
Valerie
Bell- Haven
Jackson
Ft. McKinley
Allen
Franklin
Greene
McMary
Shoup Mill
Shiloh
Percentage of children in low
income families
40]
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
Recommendation 5. — The following assignment of Grade
6-8 pupils to 15 middle school attendance zones be made
September 1, 1972:
Jane Addams Middle School: Jane Addams Elementary,
Drexel and Shoup Mill
Belmont Middle School: Belmont Elementary, Eastmont,
and Edison
Brown Middle School: Brown Elementary, Jefferson
(3/4), and Loos
Cornell Hgts. Middle School: Fairport, Fort McKinley,
and Jefferson (1/4)
Gettysburg Middle School: Gettysburg Elementary, Gar-
dendale, Hickorydale, and Res. Pk. (1/4)
es. Grant Middle School: Grant Elementary, Highview, and
| Lewton
. Lincoln Middle School: Lincoln Elementary, MC-LT,
and Ruskin
Longfellow Middle School: Greene, Hawthorne, Van
Cleve, and Allen
MacFarlane Middle School: Fairview, Bell Haven, and
Weaver
Meadowdale Middle School: Jackson, Meadowdale Ele-
mentary, Shiloh, and Valerie
Orville Wright Middle School: Carlson, Kemp, and Mc-
Nary
Webster Middle School: Huffman, Res. Park (3/4), and
Webster Elementary
Westwood Middle School: Franklin, Washington, West-
wood Elementary, and McGuffey
Whittier Middle School: Emerson, Irving, and Patterson
Wogaman Middle School: Cleveland, Wogaman, and
H. Mann
402
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
The desegregation plan for middle schools effectively re-
moves racial identifiability of schools as they would then range
from 38.0 per cent black to 50.5 per cent black and would
approach racial balance closely. A good mix of economic
)
levels is also indicated as shown in the Table 8 assignments.
HIGH SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS, 1972-73
Current high school assignment zones are shown on Map
2. Using the recommended middle school zones as a base
(Table 8, Overlay 5), it would not be difficult to feed these
zones directly into the nine high schools (Table 9, Overlay
6 — phasing out Roosevelt and leaving Patterson Co-op as a
city-wide school). Since pupil locater maps are not available,
estimated enrollment figures for the 1972-73 recommended
high school attendance areas had to be extrapolated from es-
timated enrollments by race for the middle schools. Index
figures of 103.1 for blacks and 131.4 for whites were used.
Recommendation 6. — The following assignment of grade
9-12 pupils to high school attendance zones be made Septem-
~ ber, 1972: (Middle school zones are the recommended 1972-
73 zones and elementary zones are 1971-72. )
Belmont High: Belmont M.S. and Grant M.S. plus
Mann FI.
Dunbar: Lincoln M.S. and Wogaman M.S. minus
Mann El.
Fairview: McFarlane M.S. plus Webster El. and
Res. Park El. (1/4)
Kiser: Longfellow M.S.
Meadowdale: Cornell Hgts. M.S. and Meadowdale
M.S. plus Shoup Mill El.
Roth: ]. Addams M.S. and Gettysburg M.S.
Stivers: Webster M.S. and Whittier M.S. minus
Webster El. and Res, Pk. El. (1/4)
403
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
Col. White: Brown M.S. plus McNary El. and Me-
Guffey El.
Wright High: = Or. Wright M.S. and Westwood M.S.
minus McNary El. and McGuffey El.
The redistribution of high school students would leave the
9 schools within a range of 44.3 per cent black to 32.3 per
cent black.
It should be remembered that the above figures for all 3
levels of school organization are rough estimates based upon
the best data immediately available. It is anticipated that
many revisions and refinements in such a plan for desegrega-
tion of pupils would be made after careful review by the local
staff.
404
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10 : 405
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
TAULE 3 TABLE 8 (Cont'd)
ESTIMAICN CUROLLMCNT AY SCIICOL ANO RACE
RECOMMENDED NOU E SCHOOL ZONCS, GRAOCS 9%, 1972.73 ome «
CASO ON CURRENT CLUMENTAIY ATTENDANCE ZONES — —
OAYTON I'UGLIC SCIIOOLS ; oot 4 a a i -
4 ’ : itle t
Greene 235 4 239 42
'
GrGRESo.Ed. Total : oe = B. jn 23
s w Tr Can. +l. %Titte | Alten 1 190 91 s
—* Elementary yo b+ — ’ ;, MacFatiene 04.S.
¥
Fauwew 30 235 265 2
Shoup Mull 2 68 70 ) Betle Haven 56 8 8 374 0
190 238 428 &50 444 Weaver - JOA 2 396 48
480 $55 1035 1292 464
Belmont AYS.
Beimmoni Elementary is) 183 183 1 Meadowdele (1.5.
Exfison 203 _ 49 Meactowdale Giementary 4) «181~—s«22 0
303 415 718 819 42.2 Shiich Qe 0 180 3=—s«180 0
@
Valene ik} 109124 0
Brown M.S. ° 477 473-950 980 $0.2
Grown Elementary S 345 354 1
Jefferson (3/4) $00 18 518 18 Orville Wright 04.S.
Loos —& 22 ~~ 213 ' 2 Carlson 187 1 188 12
$15 §70 1085 =«._:«1208 _ 475 Kemp 0 378 278 1
| Mctlury 184 2 106 14
Cornett Higts f5.S. 3 381 752 971 493
Fawnort 199 208 407 3
Ft. McKinley 2 147 149 ' Webster 01S.
Jefferson (1/4) 167 6 173 18 Huffman 0 273. «273 18
368 36! 729 «WO 6S Res, Park (3/4) 304 1 305 ?
sel ain : Webster Elementary 1 154185 5
Gettysburg f1-S_ 205 40 4428—Ss«733 766 41.6 ’
G..ttysburg Elementary 42 190 232 1
dend 4 4 187
oem od "2 he ed * Westwood (4.5.
Res. Park (1/4) 102 0 102 ? rant - 2 oe z
44. lashington
261 #9 630 ost ad Westwoou Elementary 456 0 456 14
— MeGulley 47 163 210 , 40
thone @t ape ' ton 199 . 1 563 683 1251 1§32 45.4
Highview 218 5 223 29 Whittier M.S. ‘
Lewton ' 156 187 ' Emerson 10 219 «229
Linertn 14.5 Patterson 1 107 1F1 14
Lincoln Elementary 5 319 324 B 372 408 730 1005 44.1
MmcLT 433 2 435 Viog man tt
Rustin an 2s 2 bd ° Clevel = 3 3S 268 29
439 $89 1023 1175 42.7 - x3 > See 4
H.tann 2 OF _s 0
> MB 459 807 1157 43.1
TOTALS 5525 6773 12299 449
25
26
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
ESTIMATCO CHROLI TIENT BY SCHOOL AND NACE
RECOMMENDED HIGH SCHOOL ZONCS, GRADES 912, 1972.73
BASED ON CURNCNT CIOMACNTARY ATTENDANCE ZONES
DAYTON PUBLIC SCIIOOLS
Gr. 9.12 & So. Ed.
G. Ww.
Belmont _ —_
Beimoant MS. 312 $45
(Beirmont - Eastmont -
Edison)
Grant MS.
(Grant - Highview -
Lewton)
(+) Mann El
Ourbw
Lincoln M S.
(Lincoln - MC - LT -
Ruskin)
Wogaman M S.
(Cleveland - Mann
Wogaman)
Fairview
MacFarlane MS.
(Fairview - Ucile
Haven - Weaver)
(+) Webster El
(+) Res Park 1/4
Kiser
Long'ctlow MS.
(Allen - Greene -
Hawthorne - \'an Cleve)
348
774
1227
1012"
2618
2453
1845
1245
%8I.
32.2
39.2
na
27
407
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
TABLE 9 (Cont'd)
Gr. 9-17 & So Ed.
5. wi. Total Cao.
Maadovidalr
Cornel! His A1S 379 474 as}
(Famrport - Fe Mekinley - e
Jetterson 1/4)
Meatlowsdlale 11S 493 622 1995
(Jackson . Me xtowelale -
Shiloh - Valerie)
872 1096 1963
(+) Shoup Att El a _89 _o
674 861185 2089 2950
Rein
J. Adidas MS 1906 313 $09
(J. Addarms - Orexel -
Shove Mil!)
Gettysburg fA S. 290 4$9 749
(Gardendale - Gettysburg .
Hickorydale - Res. Park
1/4) — —_— waa
486 772 1258
( =) Shoup ft EI = _89 2!
4u4 683 1167 1856
Stovers °
Wetster MS 314 $62 876
(Huffman - Res Park
V4 - Webster)
Whittier M.S. 332 $36 8638
(Crnerson - Irving:
Patterson) — —
64 1098 1744
(=) Webster E! 1 202 203
(~) Res. Park 1/4 104 —2? 104
SAI 896 1437 1$30
Brown (AS $3) 749 1280
(Brown « Jetfersuon 3/4 -
Loos)
(+) tAeNary El 190 3 193
(4) MeGuilfey E! 48 214 262
769 966 1735 2288
374
443
Wi, Virvgivt
Or. Wright 11S
(Carlson - Kemp -
MeNary)
Westwood 61S
- (Franklin « MeGuttey -
Wastungion - Wesiwvcod)
(-) McNary EI
(-) MeGulley Et
Sub- Totals
(4) Patterson Co-op
(+) Ungraded
(+) Home Teacinag
TOTAL HS.
408
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
TANLE 9 (Contd)
Gr. 912 f Sv Cd
6. we Tot Cap. “BI.
383 $0! 8384
$86 897 1483
190 3 193
48 214 262
73) «1161 1912 2075 38.2
5699 6900 14999 390
51601218 1764 2337 31.0
35 20 $5
20 26 46
6300 10164 16464 38.3
409
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
TRANSPORTATION OF PUPILS
It is obvious that pupil transportation will be increased
if genuine desegregation occurs. A rough estimate of in-
creased transportation needs is included as an attachment
to the report along with an explanation of how the cost
of such transportation might be met. Under new Ohio leg-
islation for local district reimbursement for pupil transporta-
tion expenses it would appear that transportation costs for
the desegregation plan can be met wholly or in large part
out of state funds with no increase in local budget.
[PHOTO OMITTED|
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
DESEGREGATION
In Part I of this report, the current status of the desegre-
gation effort in the Dayton City Schols was reviewed. That
analysis was based upon current information provided by the
Superintendent.
Part II gave specific recommendations for ending the racial
imbalance in enrollments for the various schools at different
grade levels.
This section gives some general comments and recommen-
dations which may assist school and community leaders in
their affirmative action toward an integrated school system.
An annual review of faculty assignments by school and
teaching field should be made to determine to what extent
race should be a consideration in recruitment, employment, and
assignment activities. The need for racial balance should
be a reality to be considered not only in school policy but
in negotiating master contracts.
Inservice education for integration needs to be relevant,
required, rewarded, and continuous. A planning committee
should involve teachers, administrators, students, community
advisers, and representatives of area institutions of higher edu-
410
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
cation. The greater use of teacher aides providing biracial
teams should be made where feasible.
While the ratio of blacks and whites is fairly reasonable for
administrative staff in Dayton, the following general recom-
mendations are made.
1. Until full integration is achieved district-wide, the
tendency to put black administrators in schools having
a high proportion of black pupils or which are located
in black communities should be avoided. Biracial
administrative teams should be assigned where there
is more than one building administrator.
2. Black administrators should be given an equal oppor-
tunity to work in line as well as staff positions in the
administrative structure.
When the desegregation plan becomes reality the transfer
policy for pupils should be rewritten to discontinue all op-
tional zones or free enrollment. Transfers only for health
or pertinent educational or administrative reasons should be al-
lowed. Policing of pupil addresses will need to be made.
In order to facilitate up-to-date pupil assignment operations
it is recommended that for the immediate situation pupil lo-
cater information and a set of good zone maps be developed.
After this it is recommended that a computer-based pupil data
system be effected. The Miami Desegregation Center is cur-
rently publishing a computerized operational plan for desegre-
gation of pupils which can be used very easily in a system
such as Dayton once the pupil data base is established.
The following general recommendations are given for com-
munity and school representatives.
1. School representatives should meet regularly with their
counterparts from all Dayton Standard Metropolitan
Service Area (SMSA) agencies and institutions to com-
municate about respective programs and to achieve
maximum coordination of and impact from various
All
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
service efforts. Such problems as housing patterns,
metropolitan government, and cooperative educational
efforts should be explored.
2. The Dayton Advisory Council on Education (DACE)
should be continued with a provision for annual re-
view by DACE and the District as to the representa-
tiveness and activities of the Council. Established
to advise the Superintendent on such matters as de-
sgregation, its need will increase as desegregation be-
comes integration.
3. While mass media are valuable, they do not replace
small discussion groups in the total public informa-
tion program. These groups should be continued at
the local school level and involve principals, teachers,
and other employees who previously have become
cognizant of the goals of an integrated school system
through the inservice programs discussed above.
A continued and improved analysis should be made of socio-
economic patterns of students so that this factor can become
a more effective input to the student assignment process.
If not already part of the program, curriculum units con-
cerning human relations, minority group cultures, urban gov-
ernment and ecology, and family finance should be included
at each instructional level.
The entire grading, reporting, counseling, and testing pro-
grams should be reviewed in light of desegregated schools
compared to traditional schools. Grouping practices for in-
struction are particularly vulnerable.
Many parents and other citizens enjoy their schools as
community centers, too. They may see desegregation as a
threat to this activity. The Board should insure, by policy
statement, that any desegregation plan will protect the com-
munity use of school facilities in a secure fashion and, if
necessary, provide transportation so the community center
412
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
concept will be implemented. Desegreyation in extracurricular
activities is an essential component of any unitary plan.
The Board should in January, 1972, place bids for additional
buses for September delivery so that economies in group
bidding can be effected. Simultaneously, local transit com-
panies might be invited to submit a comparative cost estimate.
Security of buildings and children is a concern especially
where desegregation has been suddently imposed upon a school
system. At the secondary level it is strongly recommended
that student biracial advisory committees become a_ part of
the school’s operation. Urban secondary school principals can
make effective use of such committees in affirmative action
to prevent student unrest.
Districts which are segregated typically are operating sub-
standard programs in some schools, and desegregation usually
forces an upgrading of the instructional program. It is as-
sumed that Dayton is no different than other major cities and
that additional financial aid will be necessary. All federal
and state sources should be investigated including the new
Emergency School Assistance Program should it become law;
Title IV, P.L. 88-352 monies, and funding under the new Edu-
cational Renewal Centers concept (USOE).
The recommended plan attempts to desegregate schools in
such a manner that they will not be racially identifiable: not
black schools, nor white schools — just schools. If such a plan
is to work effectively the entire metropolitan Dayton area
should be involved and not just the city. It is recommended
that the Board continue its effort to involve the metro com-
munity. Particular attention should be given to the current
lawsuits in Indianapolis, Richmond (Virginia), and Detroit. .
The prekindergarten pupils were not included in the de-
segregation plan. It is recommended that they be sent to their
nearest elementary school location and where capacity does
not permit their being housed, transportation be provided
to the next building with space available.
[PHOTO OMITTED}
—_
413
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 10
APPLNDIX I
Estimation of transportation carts, reimtursements und financed. ssumna 40™. of current enrollments being transported
Students
$3,400 public students « 49"
Plus non-public students now horny tramsportod
Total Students
Trips
$0 high-schoo! pupils per bus - 17.000 40% = 6.809 oF 136 weps
70 elementary pupils per bus — 36.400 « 40% = 14.5600r 208 *
60 non-public pupils par bus 10000 17
Total Trips 36)
Capital Outlay — Vehicles
2.75 trios per bus * 131 buses * 13 spares = 144 total sehicics
Less vehictes already Board owned 24
Net Additional Buses Needed 130
Estimated State vid price $9,006 « 130 vehicles « $1,170,000
Estimated Sizte resmbursemment | 27% * 315.900
Net Local Purchase Cost $ 854,100
Capital Outlay — Faclities
Land — 5 acres with proper acesss $ 100.000
New building with 8 velucic hays 300,009
Asphalt paving, fencing, lighting 35,000
Equipment 1§,000
Estimated Busiding Cost $ 450.000
Enimated State Reimbursement for Operstions
Board owned veticies — $14 per stucient + $22 per mile
22,360 « $14 = $313.04G + 50.000 mules « $22 + $176,000
Total $489 040
A Contract vehicles — $16 per student + 529 per mile
22,360 « $16 © $357,760 + 60,090 miles « $29 = $232,000
Total $509,760
21,360
1,000
22.360
414
j Plaintifts’ Exhibit 10 415
i : PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT LIA
Estimated Operating Cost
Secmmsen = ee eae [LETTERHEAD OF DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,
EDUCATION AND WELFARE,
ee aimee onan WASHINGTON D.C. 20201]
Caimened comeing —- — OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Net Operating Cost $ 628,960 $ 908,360 : Dear Dr. Carle:
Super aes Representatives of the Office for Civil Rights conducted a
If savings were applied to capital investment of $1,304,100 ivetucies and busiding). payback would Titke Vi Compliance Review of the Dayton Public Schools
eae nea during the period November 12-22, 1968. We have com-
FINANCING THE LOCAL COST pleted our analysis of the information gathered during the
1972 Annual review and have made the determination that your district is
Newt secs opmating cn pene + one not complying with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
; Local capital outlay aa = te An analysis of the data obtained during the review establishes
aataeanen — pore that your district pursues a policy of racially motivated as-
Souress a se signment of teachers and other professional staff. Thus, all
r seamed at ones “nee Negro principals are assigned to predominantly Negro schools,
Tete! Aveiteble $1,555,684 as are Ll of the 14 Negro assistant principals; 156 out of 181
| Negro high school teachers are assigned to schools where
“Principally from the new Municipal Overburden fund. The district will receive $20 per punil, oF appronimately Negroes constitute 92 percent of the total enrollment. Over
$1,060,000 « year, trom that part of the newly enacted State program. 85 percent of the Negro elementary teachers instruct in schools
98 GOWERNUENT PRISTINE OF FICK YOM T1507 198-78ED-10 having a preponderance of Negro pupils, and only 14 percent
of teachers of the white race are in schools where Negroes
are in the majority. The assignment of counsellors and coaches
follows a similar pattern.
) The existence in your district of a substantial duality in terms
of race or color with respect to distribution of pupils in
the various schools, is a matter of concern to us. The fact
appears to be that of a total of 5,627 Negro high school pupils,
vo approximately 85 percent are concentrated in 3 high schools
. ~ » * in which the percentage of Negro attendance ranges from 92.3
percent to 100 percent. Similarly, 15,479 (approximately 85
= percent) Negro elementary pupils attend 20 out of the 53
|
416
Plaintifis’ Exhibit 11A
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 11F
elementary schools in your district. It is noteworthy that in
17 of these 20 schools, Negroes constitutes 90-100 percent of
the total enrollment.
Our review also indicates that students at Roosevelt High
School are not afforded the same educational opportunity as
other students in your system.
PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 11F
[LETTERHEAD OF DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,
EDUCATION AND WELFARE, OFFICE OF
THE SECRETARY, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20201]
October 14, 1970
Dr. Wayne Carle
Superintendent of Schools
The Dayton Public Schools
348 West First Street
Dayton, Ohio 45402
Dear Dr. Carle:
I am responding to your night telegram of October 8, 1970
to Dr. Henderson which has been referred to me for reply.
In this telegram you request our interpretation of the under-
lined [italicized] portion of the following stipulation contained
in the DHEW Office for Civil Rights/Dayton Board of Educa-
tion Agreement on faculty desegregation.
“It is the intention of this Board that each school staff through-
out the district will have a racial composition that reflects the
total staff of the district as a whole.”
During the 1969-70 school year when the agreement to de-
segregate the Dayton faculty and staff was negotiated and
accepted by the DHEW Office for Civil Rights and the Day-
ton Board of Education, the racial composition of the total
417
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 11F
Dayton professional staff was 70 percent white and 30 percent
black. Consequently, we would expect that by September
1971, the professional staff at each elementary and secondary
school subject to the jurisdiction of the Dayton Board of
Education would reflect a racial composition of approximately
70 percent white and 30 percent black. With less than a year
to go until the September 1971 deadline perhaps it would be
useful to restate the legal basis on which the Dayton Board
of Education is obligated to desegregate its teaching faculty.
In Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education, 396 U. S.
19 (1969), the Supreme Court unanimously agreed that school
districts must end segregation “at once” and operate integrated
systems “now and hereafter.” See also Northcross v. Board of
Education of Memphis, 397 U. S. 232 (1970); Carter v. West
Feliciana Parish School Board, 396 U. S. 290 (1960). This
obligation to desegregate encompasses all facets of the opera-
tion of an elementary and secondary school system, including
the hiring and assignment of faculty, Green v. County School
Board of New Kent County, 391 U.S, 433 (1968).
The Supreme Court in United States v. Montgomery County
Board of Education, 395 U. S. 225 (1969), reasserted the duty
of a school district to desegregate totally its faculty and ap-
proved an Alabama district court order which required sub-
stantially the same ratio of Negro to white faculty in each
school as the ratio of Negro to white faculty in the entire
system. In Singleton vy. Jackson Municipal Separate School
District, 419 F.2d 1211, 1217-18 (5th Cir. 1969), reversed on
other grounds, 396 U. S. 290 (1970), the United States Court
of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit required school districts to
meet these same faculty ratio requirements.
President Nixon in his March 24, 1970, Statement on De-
segregation of America’s Elementary and Secondary Schools
affirmed that segregation of teachers must be eliminated and
asserted that “each school system in this Nation, North and
South, East and West, must move immediately, as the Supreme
415
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 11F
Court has ruled, toward a goal under which ‘in each school
the ratio of white to Negro faculty members is substantially
the same as it is throughout the system.” A copy of the Presi-
dent’s Statement is enclosed. Consequently, the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, in its enforcement of Title
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, has adopted the same
faculty ratio requirement which the Fifth Circuit mandated
in Singleton, which the Supreme Court mandated in Mont-
gomery, and which the President applied nationwide in his
March 24, 1970 Statement.
Finally, during 1969 the Dayton Board of Education concluded
a voluntary but legally binding agreement with the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare’s Office for Civil Rights
to desegregate its faculty and staff by September 1971. In
agreeing to desegregate voluntarily, the Board waived its op-
portunity for an administrative hearing on this Office’s finding
of probable noncompliance. In return for the Dayton Boerd
of Education’s agreeing to a negotiated settlement and fore-
going a lengthy and costly administrative hearing, this Office,
instead of requiring Dayton to transfer immediately many
of its professional personnel, permitted a two year period for
Dayton to desegregate gradually its faculty and staff and did
not require as a condition of settlement that the Dayton
School Board admit to the veracity of our March 1969 findings
of noncompliance.
If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely yours,
‘s/ FREDERICK T. CIOFFI
Frederick T. Cioffi, Coordinator
Northern and Western States
Education Division
Enclosure Office for Civil Rights
ce: Chief State School Officer
Regional Civil Rights Director
419
PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 12
| LETTERHEAD OF STATE OF OHLO, DEPARTMENT
OF EDUCATION, COLUMBUS 43215}
June 7, 1971
Dr. Wayne Carle
Superintendent
Dayton Public Schools
348 West Fifth Street
Dayton, Ohio 45402
Dear Dr. Carle:
I am enclosing with this letter a report which has resulted
from your earlier request that the Ohio State Department
of Education prepare alternatives asked for by the Dayton
Board of Education in its resolution of April 29, 1971. As
you know, we had previously met with representatives from
the Ohio State Department of Development, the Ohio State
Department of Urban Affairs, the Ohio Education Association,
the Ohio Civil Rights Commission, the Division of Equal
Educational Opportunities, the Department of Justice, the
Ohio State University, and other organizations, agencies, and
individuals to discuss ways of providing such assistance to
school systems in Ohio.
Under dateline March 12, 1971, a report was forwarded con-
cerning your earlier request for demographic development of
Dayton City Schools enrollment projections for reorganized
schools. A team of counsultants and specialists was formed |
and financed through our Office of Equal Educational Op-
portunity to assemble data and make recommendations.
Following your most recent request, this team effort was
enlarged to include representativs from the Program for Equal
Educational Opportunity at the University of Michigan and
other university centers. During the weekend of May 7-9,
420
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 12
1971, you, as Superintendent of Dayton’s public schools, mem-
bers of your staff, and experts on school integration from
Alabama, North Carolina, Virginia, Washington, D.C., Ohio,
and Michigan met to discuss the Dayton schools’ problems, to
pian strategies for change, and to outline suggestions for
achieving the resolution’s goals. As the conference proceded,
lengthy telephone conversations were held with other experts
in Arizona, New Mexico, New York, [linois, Indiana, Penn-
sylvania, Wisconsin, and North Carolina. The attached docu-
ment is one product of that conference and these conversa-
tions.
Persons selected for participation in the development of these
recommendations were chosen by three criteria in their order of
importance: (1) their credentials and backgrounds are im-
pecable; (2) they are personally and professionally committed
to quality integrated education; and (3) they are experts in
such fields as school administration, curriculum, educational
change, jurisprudence, educational planning and cevelopment,
and human relations. Each person came at his or her own
expense, and no reimbursement was either requested or offered.
Many alternatives were suggested. Their range is indicated
in this report. Numerous strategies, methodologies, techniques,
and possibilities were discussed and catalogued. The team of ex-
perts concluded that the resolution passed by the Board on
April 29, 1971, was not one which could be dealt with ef-
fectively in detail until the Dayton Board commits itself to
one of the alternative policies suggested in this report — or to
some other which may have heen considered, but rejected, as
a reasonable action that the Board could take.
As the report suggests, in view of prevailing legal and
moral circumstances (the realities referred to on pages 13 and
14), only the one alternative policy is deemed logical and
feasible. Therefore, it is the one to which the team of ex-
perts devoted their most serious attention.
421
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 12
I recommend, therefore, the following:
1. That the attached document be transmitted as official
recommendations from the Ohio State Department of
Education to the Dayton Board of Education through
their Superintendent;
2. That the Dayton Board of Education be urged to fulfill
their collective duty to adopt the recommended policy
immediately for correcting “the conditions that offend
the Constitution;”
3. That the Dayton Board of Education be informed that
if the recommended policy is adopted and ordered im-
plemented — or an alternative policy that would achieve
similar results — they can expect to receive continuing
assistance from the Ohio State Department of Education
and the consortium of other agencies, organizations,
groups and individuals referred to above for com-
pleting development of strategies, methodologies, and
ways of achieving the goals stated in the April 29
resolution; and
4. That upon adoption of the policy by the Dayton Board
of Education, the consortium of consultative services
which helped to formulate this report be made available
to assist the Superintendent and his staff in development
of those administrative strategies, methodologies, and
techniques essential for implementation of the policy.
Once these have been developed formally, the “broadly
representative committee” referred to in the Board’s reso-
lution would be utilized to evaluate and to advise the
Board on such plans.
The request received from Dayton was twofold. I can re-
port also to you that proposals for financial assistance are be-
ing developed in accord with the Board's request. A meeting
was held today to follow progress of The Emergency School
422
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 12
Assistance funds. Eligibility factors are still cloudy, but one
certainly is a definite need for resolutions to be converted into
policy statements!
Since Dayton is the first of Ohio’s major urban school systems
to take this important step toward fulfillment of some of the
most basic of American ideals, I personally pledge my con-
tinuing support to you and to the school children in Dayton
for that fulfillment. | have also been asked to make that
pledge for the entire team of persons who have contributed
to the preparation of this report.
Dr. Charles Glatt, who gave major direction to these two
efforts, has just received official notice that a contract has been
signed between the Ohio State University’s Research Founda-
tion and the U.S. Office of Education for establishment of The
Midwest Institute for Equal Educational Opportunities. As
its Director, he also extends that pledge from The Midwest
Institute.
Sincerely,
‘s/ ROBERT O. GREER
Assistant Superintendent
Urban Education
ROG:mh
cc: Members, Dayton Board of Education
Administrative Staff
[ATTACHED DOCUMENT]
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT
OF EDUCATION TO THE DAYTON BOARD
OF EDUCATION
School integration is a complex and difficult task; to
suggest otherwise would be naive. But it can be achieved
by persons with courage, com
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.