Appendix — Dade County School Board v. Pate

Bae ee a ae ae

2B NBS OAT ONS IS eS ain erg

SUPREME COURT, U. S.

in the NOV 5 1970

Supreme Cours. ox

of the

Ginited States

October Term, 1970

7

No. 936 s

DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, et al.,

Petitioner,

v8.

HERBERT PATE, et al.,

Plaintif f-Respondent.

APPENDIX TO

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO

THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

GEORGE C. BOLLES

BOLLES, GOODWIN,

RYSKAMP & WARE

1410 N. E. Second Avenue

Miami, Florida 33132

Attorneys for Petitioner

MIAMI REVIEW — 371-4853 — 877-372]

in the

Supreme Court

of the

Gnited States

October Term, 1970

No.

DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, et al.

Petitioner,

v8.

HERBERT PATE, et al.,

Plaintiff-Respondent.

APPENDIX TO

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO

THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

App. 1

APPENDIX

RELEVANT DOCKET ENTRIES

Dated

Mandate of Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.... Aug. 12, 1970

Attached as Exhibit A

Memorandum Opinion Approving De-

Segregation Plan for Dade County

Public Schools With Modifications

and Final Judgment... June 26, 1970

Attached as Exhibit B

Supplemental Order Approving De-

Segregation Plan for Dade County

Public Schools, as Modified, and

Amended Final Judgment... July 24, 1970

Remand to District Court ......___ June 5, 1970

Order Arr ointing Bi-Racial Committee ___ Aug. 10, 1970

Dade County School Board’s Desegregatiun

Plan ...... (Sscaisadipisttiseeitilenntictalll Mar. 31, 1970

Department of Health, Education and Wel-

fare Plan submitted to Court May 15, 1970

Order Approving Interim Desegregation

Plan for Dade County Public Schools... Aug. 29, 1970

Order Approving Teacher Integration Plan

and Denying Motion by Intervenors for

Immediate Pupil Integration .....__ Jan. 26, 1970

App. 2

RELEVANT DOCKET ENTRIES (cont.)

Dated

Certificates of City of Miami, City of Coral

Gables, City of Miami Beach and Board

of County Commissioners submitted at

February 3, 1970 hearing as Defend-

ant’s Exhibit 10 Feb. 2-3, 1970

Testimony 2/2/70 re History of Desegrega-

tion in Dade County Feb. 2, 1970

Oral Findings of Fact of hearing on Feb-

ruary 8, 1970 Feb. 3, 1970

ON Sia ee Apr. 16, 1970

School Board’s Reply to Memorandum Opin-

ion and Motion for Rehearing of ............ July 6, 1970

Order Requesting Supplemental Report ........ July 10, 1970

Reply to Order Requesting Supplemental

Report July 20, 1970

Amendment to Reply To Order Requesting

Supplemental Report (Amending Ex-

hibit <) July 21, 1970

Order on Motion of Dade County School

Board for Rehearing and Reconsidera-

tion July 31, 1970

Order Sept. 4, 1970

App. 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF

APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Nos. 29,039 and 29,179

HERBERT PATE, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v8.

DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees,

v8.

CORAL REEF CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC., et al.,

| Intervenors-A ppellants,

HERBERT PA‘E, et al.,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v8.

DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees-Cross Appellants,

v8.

ALICE LOVE, CARSWELL WASHINGTON, et al.,

Intervenors-Appellants-Cross Appellees,

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

(August 12, 1970)

App. 4

Before BROWN, Chief Judge, MORGAN and INGRA-

HAM, Circuit Judges. MORGAN, Circuit Judge:

The question in this school desegregation case is

whether the Dade County school system has been converted

from a dual to a unitary school system, as defined in

Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education, 396 U.S.

19 (1969), under tne district court’s orders and memor-

andum opinions dated June 26, 1970, and July 24, 1970.

Following the approach of Ellis v. The Board of Pub-

lic Instruction of Orange County, Florida, 5 Cir., 1970,

423 F.2d 203; Mannings v. The Board of Public Instruc-

tion of Hillsi. ough County, Florida, 5 Cir., 1970, —__—

F.2d____ [No. 28,648, May 11, 1970]; Davis v. Board of

School Commissioners of Mobile County, 5 Cir., 1970,

F.2d. [No. 29,332, June 8, 1970]; and Bradley v.

Board of Public Instruction of Pinellas County, Florida,

5 Cir., 1970, F.2d [No. 28,639, July 1, 1970],

we herein review all of the six criteria of Green v. County

School Board of New Kent County, 391 U.S. 480 (1968),

in determining whether Dade County has been effectively

converted into a unitary school system.

FACULTY AND STAFF

In its final desegregation plan filed on March 31,

1970, the board states that:

The staffs of elementary schools have been

reorganized so that in each elementary school

the proportion of black and white teachers ap-

proximates the 24% black— 76% white ratio

existing among all elementary teachers in the

school system.

App. 5

The staffs of junior high schools have been

reorganized so that in each junior high school the

proportion of the black and white teachers ap-

proximates the 21% black—79% white ratio

existing among all junior high teachers in the

school system.

The staffs of senior high schools have been re-

organized so that in each senior high school the

proportion of black and white teachers approxi-

mates the 12.2% black — 87.8% white ratio exist-

ing among all senior high teachers in the school

system.

Likewise, administrative personnel, teacher aides and

other staff personnel have been reorganized so as to ac-

complish desegregation. Effectuation of this portion of the

board’s plan, which the district court assumed to have

already been effectuated as per its February 1, 1970,

deadline, must be continued for the 1970-1971 school year.

TRANSPORTATION, FACILITIES,

AND EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

The board’s plan also effectively desegregates the

transportation, the facilities, and the extracurricular ac-

tivities of the Dade County school system. It calls for the

continuation of its practice of making accessible to school

children of both races these three elements of the school

system devoid of racial discrimination.

There being no objection to these elements, the dis-,

trict court properly found that they have been effectively

desegregated by the board’s plan.

App. 6

The record also indicates that there has been in exist-

ence in Dade County a majority-to-minority transfer

policy. In addition to the continuation of this feature of

the school system’s operation, the board is commended to

establish a bi-racial committee similar in function to that

established in Ellis, supra, and as described in the district

court’s opinion in this case (see Appendix “A’’, p. 27).

STUDENT ASSIGNMENT

The Dade County school board (hereinafter board)

submitted its final desegregation plan as to student bedy

desegregation on March 31, 1970. The Department of

Health, Education and Welfare (hereinafter HEW) sub-

mitted its desegregation plan on May 15, 1970. Hearings

on these plans were conducted by the district court on

May 22 and June 12, 1970. That court’s findings of facts

and final judgment with reference to pupil assignments

were entered June 26, 1970, and are contained in its

Memorandum Opinion Approving Desegregation Plan for

Dade County Public Schools with Modifications and Final

Judgment attached as Appendix “A”. In response to the

district court’s orders to show cause contained in that

memorandum opinion, the board submitted two reports

to the district court on July 6 and July 20, 1970, which

answered with specific detail why certair schools in the

system could not be paired, grouped or rezoned so as to

effectively disestablish the dual school system. These re-

ports form the basis of the district court’s modifications

of its June 26 opinion, which modifications are embodied

in its Supplemental Order Approving Desegregation Plan

for Dade County Public Schools, as Modified, and Amended

Final Judgment, attached as Appendix “B”. Together,

Appendices “A” and “B” make up the district court’s final

Pteseen Peele tee

App. 7

order approving a desegregation plan for the Dade County

public school system.

The board will operate 218 schools in the Dade County

school system for the 1970-71 school year (161 elementary,

40 junior high, and 17 senior high schools). There wil.

be 244,000 students in the system, of whom 57,900 or 23%

will be Negro. The school system will be served by 187

buses, which, as of June 1970, transported some 30,376

students throughout the system. Forty additional buses

have been ordered by the board and should be available

for the 1970-71 school year.

The district court approved of the board’s plan but sub-

stantially modified it by adopting some of the reeommenda-

tions made by HEW, the Dade County Classroom Teachers

Association (C.T.A.). intervening parents and neighbor-

hood groups, and by making some modifications of its own

initiative. As seen in Appendix “C”, the board’s plan leaves

36 schools all—or virtually all-Negro, housing 37,672 Negro

students or 64% of the Negro student population. The

modifications contained in both the district court’s opin-

ions (Appendix “A” and Appendix “B”) reduce these

figures substantially, but still leave 22 schools all—or vir-

tually all-Negro, housing 25,595 or 44% of the Negro stu-

dent population. Though great diligence has been taken

by the district court in reducing this percentage, we find

that many of the reasons given for not achieving a greater

degree of desegregation and the final results accomplished

are unacceptable. In keeping with Hillis, supra, Maimings,

supra, Davis, supra, and Bradley, supra, we have studied

the maps, the various plans, and the many details covered

by the district court’s thorough opinions, and have on our

own initiative made the modifications which hereinafter

App. 8

comprise the body of this opinion. The purported obstacles

to pairing, grouping or rezoning, which are meticulously

covered in the district court’s opinions in Appendices “A”

and “B”, have been given careful consideration. These

obstacles including traffic hazards, school capacities, in-

dividual school programs, format and curricula, walking

distances, natural barriers, and grade levels in each school

— all of which are given substantive merit in the district

cuurt’s opinion in Appendix “B”’. Of particular importance,

in this case is the recurring problem of the Spanish-speak-

ing students in the school system who number 50,500 and

comprise 21% of the entire Dade County student popula-

tion. These are the children of the more than 300,000 Cuban

refugees who have settled in Miami. Many of the schools

in which these Spanish-speaking students are predominant

are situated adjacent to many of the all—or virtually all-

Negro schools in the central portion of the City of Miami.

However real all of these obstacles may be, the man-

dates of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 349

U.S. 294(1954), Alexander, supra; and Adams v. Mathews,

5 Cir., 1968, 403 F.2d 181, leave little room for exception.

The obstacles presented by the board admittedly make

difficult the modifications needed to desegregate many of

Dade County’s schools. But these problems

“cannot be accepted if the [board] plan’s imple-

mentation fails to result in substantial desegre-

gation . . . Certainly, each of these [problems]

is a relevant consideration for any plan which

the board may hereafter adopt. However, none

of these factors or even all combined are of over-

riding importance of the one factor the Indianola

School Board did not consider: effective promo-

tion of desegregation.”

App. 9

United States v. Indianola Municipal Separate School Dist.,

5 Cir., 1969, 410 F.2d 626, 628.

The following modifications reduce the number of

Negro students attending all—or virtually all-Negro schools

from 44% to 24% of the entire Negro student popula-

tion. Implementation of these modifications effectively

desegregate the Dade County School system. However,

the district court is not precluded hereby from approving

any plan submitted by the board which will achieve sub-

stantially the same results as achieved by our modifica-

tions or an even greater degree of desegregation. Such a

plan must, of course, be approved by the district court

and must be implemented as of the beginning of the

1970-71 school year. If no such plan is submitted, the

district court is directed to implement the following

modifications:

ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

IT IS ORDERED that Lewis (582 Negroes, 18 whites)

be paired with Cooper (108 Negroes, 507 whites) as per

the district court’s order.

IT IS ORDERED that West Homestead (680 Negroes,

110 whites) be paired with Florida City (50 Negroes, 400

Whites) as per the district court’s order.

Moton (formerly 98% Negro) has been desegregated

by grouping it with Bel-Aire and Perrine, both formerly

predominantly white schools. Such a grouping has re-

sulted in a percentage of Negroes in each school of 42%,

46% and 36% respectively. The district court properly

denied the board’s request for a rehearing on this group-

ing.

App. 10

Pine Villa (759 Negroes, 66 whites) must remain

virtually all-Negro due to its isolation in the southern area

of the district. HEW made no recommendations as to

this school.

Martin (1,025 Negroes, 0 whites) is left all-Negro

by the district court’s orders. The board, in its recent re-

port, interjected that a pairing of Martin with Colonial

Drive (194 Negroes, 520 whites) would disrupt the “pod

type” teaching technique and facility at Colonial Drive.

As pointed out in Jndianola, supra, such an objection can-

not be permitted to impede the desegregation of a dual

school system. It is therefore ORDERED that:

(i) Martin be paired with Colonial Drive, or

(2) Martin be paired with Vineland (41

Negroes, 1009 whites) which is more distant but

still adjacent to the Martin attendance zone.

IT IS ORDERED that Bunche Park (840 Negroes,

0 white) be grouped with Parkview (10 Negroes, 505

whites) and Scott Lake (9 Negroes, 841 whites) as recom-

mended by the HEW plan and as approved by the district

court.

North County is left 88% Negro by the district court’s

order, and, since it is isolated in the northern portion of

the school system, it must remain as such. HEW made no

recommendation as to this school.

Rainbow Park (formerly 100% Negro) and Opa-locka

(formerly 2% Negro) were ordered rezoned in the district

court’s first opinion (Appendix “A”, pp. 9-10) as per HEW

App. 11

recommendations, resulting in a racial composition of 419

Negroes, 551 whites, attending Opa-locka, and 290 Negroes,

400 whites attending Rainbow Park. There being no valid

objections to this pairing, it is ORDERED that they be

paired.

IT IS ORDERED that Young (433 Negroes, 77

whites) likewise be paired with Westview (0 Negro, 685

whites), there being no valid objections to this pairing.

In the north-central district of the school system, there

are 11 all—or virtually all-Negro schools tightly clustered

in the central area of the City of Miami. Of these schools,

the district court’s opinions leave nine all—or virtually all-

Negro. As to six of these schools — Drew, Evans, Liberty

City, Olinda, Orchard Villa, and Poinciana Park — there

appears to be no feasible method of desegregating these

schools. The attendance zones of all six of these schools

are bordered by attendance zones of schools which are

either already paired with outlying substantially white

schools or are all-Negro themselves.

However, as to the remaining five all—or virtually

all-Negro schools, West Little River (formerly 92% Negro)

has been paired with Broadmoor (formerly 1% Negro)

as recommended by the HEW plan, and as approved by

the district court (Appendix “A”, p. 11).

IT IS ORDERED that Arcola Lake (740 Negroes,

100 whites) be paired with Blanton (101 Negroes, 674

whites). There are no valid objections to this pairing

raised in the district court’s opinion (Appendix “B”, p. 12),

and further investigation would only result in delay in

desegregating this school.

eS te

App. 12

Holmes Complex (1575 Negroes, 0 whites) houses its

large all-Negro student body in three buildings, situatec

three or four blocks from each other. Close to this com-

plex are Little River (385 Negroes, 715 whites) and Edison

Park (470 Negroes, 415 whites). There being no valid

objections to this grouping presented by the board or in

the district court’s opinion (Appendix “B”, pp. 13-14), it

is ORDERED that these three schools be grouped. The

capacities of the schools in this grouping could best be

utilized by housing the Headstart programs and grades

one and two from all three schools, plus grade three of

Holmes Complex in Holmes Complex, thus leaving intact

the primary facilities there. Grades three and four from

all three schools (except grade three of Holmes Complex)

could be housed in Edison Park, using portables at that.

site; and grades five and six from all three schools (ex-

cept Edison Park which has no sixth grade) could be housed

in Little River. However, the ultimate allocation of grades

and student enrollment to the three schools in this group-

ing is left to the discretion of the board. While the result-

ing racial composition of such a grouping is 2,480 Negroes,

1,180 whites, many of whom are Spanish-speaking, it is

possible that the board may devise a more desirable plan

to desegregate Holmes Complex before the commencement

of the 1970-71 school year.

IT IS ORDERED that Gladeview (622 Negroes, 13

whites) be paired with Hialeah (0 Negro, 895 whites).

The schools are under two miles apart and there are many

crossings of the Seaboard Airline Railroad available in

between the paired schools. Capacities and language pro-

grams do not prevent this pairing, and the resulting racial

composition is 622 Negroes, and 908 whites.

RE LINN ALE IE ROTA ELIS ANP RATERS Ae URL ae ORE NLL TRAINS OLE AIRY RE AEE, SRE «oo an entice t sae etelaats

MAY ARTS RMR ae eae + peregremems

App. 13

IT IS ORDERED that Lorah Park (740 Negroes, 0

white) be paired with Curtiss (0 Negro, 570 whites). None

of the purported obstacles to this pairing raised by the

board (Appendix “B”, p. 14) is to preclude the desegrega-

tion of Lorah Park.

IT IS ORDERED that Allapattah (1160 Negroes,

10 whites) be paired with Santa Clara (174 Negroes, 521

whites). Again, the objections to such a pairing based on

the language problem at Santa Clara, the traffic condi-

tions, and the lack of a sixth grade at Allapattah (Appendix

“B”, pp. 4-5) cannot be fixed as obstacles to the desegrega-

tion of the Allapattah school. However, since the racial

composition resulting from such a pairing is 1832 Negroes

and 532 whites, it is possible that the board may devise

a more desirable method of desegregating the Allapattah

school before the commencement of the 1970-71 school year.

Douglas (1372 Negroes, 28 whites) is bordered on the

south by two predominantly white schools — Riverside (20

Negroes, 1825 whites) and Southside (7 Negroes, 343

whites). Both of these schools being no more than two

miles distant from Douglas, it is ORDERED that Douglas:

(1) be paired with Riverside, again discard-

ing the board’s objections as to such pairing (Ap-

pendix “B”, pp. 5-6), or

(2) be grouped with Riverside and Southside,

with grade allocation and student enrollments in

the grouped schools to be determined by the board.

Under either alternative, a desirable racial composition is

to result.

App. 14

Bethune (formerly 97% Negro) has been paired with

Melrose (formerly 3% Negro) as recommended by HEW

and as approved by the district court.

As to the desegregation of Dunbar (944 Negro, 71

whites and Wheatley (1005 Negroes, 0 white), we adopt

the language of the district court used in its opinion in

Appendix “B”, pp. 7-8, except as it applies to Douglas.

The district court is directed to insure that the plan

eventually devised by the board effectively desegregates

these two all—or virtually all-Negro schools and is imple-

mented for the 1970-71 school year.

IT IS ORDERED that Pharr (850 Negroes, 0 white)

be paired with Comstock (15 Negroes, 1435 whites) as

recommended by HEW. Again, the board’s objections to

such a pairing (Appendix “B’’, p. 7 cannot be recognized

as valid reasons for not desegregating the Pharr school.

The allocations of grade levels (which may require the

use of portables) and students in these paired schools is

left to the discretion of the board.

Earlington Heights (902 Negroes, 18 whites) and

Floral Heights (835 Negroes, 0 white) are left all—or

virtually all-Negro by the district court’s opinions. HEW

has made no recommendation. These two schools are within

the same concentrated area of the six Negro schools in

the north-central district that were left all-Negro, supra.

There does not appear to be any feasible method of de-

segregating these two schools.

As to the Carver school (593 Negroes, 0 white) the

district court had adopted the HEW rezoning plan, adding

such modifications (see Appendix “B”, pp. 9-10) which

PREP Seo ELLE IS NILE ILI NIE SR ERO NL IE DOA IE ANREP PERTH A. RRL OEE

App. 15

we deem appropriate in that under either of the district

couit’s alternatives, Carver is effectively desegregated.

The district court is directed to insure that the board

acts promptly in carrying out its modified HEW rezon-

ing plan, so that Carver opens the 1970-71 school year on

a desegregated basis.

Tucker (712 Negroes, 0 white) is left all-Negro un-

der the district court’s opinions. The reasons for not de-

segregating this school (Appendix “B”, pp. 10-11) cannot

be recognized as valid objections to the pairing of Tucker

and Dade (5 Negroes, 660 whites). Therefore, it is

ORDERED that Tucker:

(1) be paired with Dade, or

(2) be grouped with Dade and Coconut Grove,

the farthese distance among them being only one

mile, such grouping resulting in a more desirable

racial composition.

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS

There are four junior high schools which remain all—

or virtually all-Negro under the district court’s opinions

(see Appendix “C”). Our modifications, hereinafter dis-

cussed, apply only to these four junior high schools.

Drew Junior High (1550 Negroes, 0 white) is situated

in the northern part of that concentration of the Negro

elementary schools in the center of the City of Miami

discussed above, and is also over three miles from the

nearest predominantly white junior high school. HEW

made no recommendation as to the desegregation of the

ae RO AL SRNR LDH SLND PLT IIS SE ARE IED EOF SG TOY EIR Pere ™ oe >

App. 16

school. The district court properly rejected the C.T.A.

plan (Appendix “A”, p. 20). We, therefore, find that

there is no feasible method of desegregating this school.

However, many of its students will have attended elemen-

tary schools which are desegregated under the modifica-

tions heretofore set forth.

B. T. Washington Junior High (1646 Negroes, 224

whites) is bordered on the south by two 100%-white junior

high schools — Citrus Grove (1679 whites) and Merrittt

(1005 whites). The three schools are only two miles dis-

tant at the farthest point. Many students who live closer

to Citrus Grove and Merritt are zoned into the Washington

zone. It is therefore ORDERED that Washington be de-

segregated :

(1) by pairing it with Citrus Grove, or

(2) by grouping it with Citrus Grove and

Merritt.

Under either alternative, the resulting racial composition

is desirable. The allocation of grade levels and students

among the three schools is to be determined by the board.

Again, those objections to grouping or pairing raised by

the board and given recognition in the district court’s

opinion (Appendix “B”, pp. 15-17) cannot stand as valid

reasons for not desegregating the B. T. Washington Junior

High School.

Allapattah Junior High School (1480 Negroes, 0

white) is located in the center of that concentration of the

Negro elementary schools discussed above. However, to

the east and south, and contiguous thereto are Miami

App. 17

Edison (745 Negroes, 500 whites, grades six through eight)

and Lee (105 Negroees, 1095 whites, grades seven through

nine) both of which are within two miles of Allapattah.

It is ORDERED that these three schools be grouped.

Again, the board’s objections to this grouping (Appendix

“B”, pp. 17-19) cannot be recognized here. However, since

the grade levels attending these three schools vary, the

difficult problem of student allocation within the three

schools’ capacities is left to the expertise of the board.

It is also possible that, with approval of the district court,

the board may devise a rezoning plan involving these three

schools, or some other plan that effectively desegrates the

Allapattah school prior to the commencement of the 1970-

71 school year. The district court is directed to implement

the grouping plan discussed above for the 1970-71 school

year if an alternative plan from the board which effec-

tively desegregates Allapattah is not forthcoming.

The fourth and final all—or virtually all-Negro junior

high school in Dade County is Brownsville (1440 Negroes,

0 white) on the western portion of the concentration of

Negro schools in central Miami. To the west and con-

tiguous thereto is Miami Springs (282 Negroes, 1283

whites). On the basis of reasons which have heretofore

been rejected, the district court concluded that the Browns-

ville school could not be desegregated (Appendix “B”, pp.

19-20). However, these reasons, being unacceptable to

this court, do not prevent the desegregation of the Browns-

ville school by either of the two following methods:

(1) by pairing Brownsville with Miami

Springs, being two and one-half miles apart, or

(2) rezone both zones so that the Miami

Springs zone is extended into the Brownsville

App. 18

zone, taking one-half of Brownsville’s Negro stu-

dents (approximately 720 students) and placing

them in the Miami Springs zone. Likewise, the

Brownsville zone lines are to be extended into the

northeastern area of the Miami Springs zone so

as to take into the Brownsville zone approximately

720 white students. This rezoning would involve

only a small amount of additional traveling for

the students affected thereby.

Carver Junior High School has been effectively de-

segregated by the board’s pairing plan, approved by the

district court (Appendix “A”, pp. 21-23).

Senior High Schools

There are only two senior high schools in the Dade

County system which remain all—or virtually all-Negro

under the board’s plan.

Miami-Jackson (2193 Negroes, 387 whites) has been

effectively desegregated under the district court’s direc-

tion that attendance zones of Miami-Jackson and Miami

Senicz High be strictly adhered to (Appendix “A”, pp.

24-25). The HEW report reveals that if these two attend-

ance zones were made firm, approximately 1,000 more

white students would be attending Miami-Jackson. The

district court is therefore dirccted i» insure that the school

board’s policy which allows transfers under an “affidavit

of attendance” be halted, that the attendance zones be

strictly adhered to, and that only those transfers be al-

lowed which follow the majority-to-minority policy as set

forth in the district’s opinion (Appendix “A”, pp. 26-27).

App. 19

Miami-Northwestern (2690 Negroes, 0 white) is the

remaining all-Negro senior high school. The district court’s

rejection of the C.T.A.’s campus grouping plan is supported

by substantial evidence that such a plan would call for

extensive additional bussing. HEW made no recommenda-

tion as to this high school. We find that there is no feas-

ible method of desegregating this high school. It is a large

school in the center of the Negro school portion of central

Miami. Of the four surrounding senior high schools, three

are desegregated and the other is over five miles away.

However, many of its students will have attended either

a desegregated elementary or junior high school. The dis-

trict court is directed to insure that the board make the

majority-to-minority transfer policy known and readily

available to the students attending this school.

DEFICIENCIES TO BE REMEDIED

In conclusion, one of the six criteria which go to make

up a unitary school system has been left unsatisfied. The

district court is directed to implement the above modifica-

tions in Dade County for the 1970-71 school year, sup-

planted only by modifications submitted by the board

within sufficient time to be effectuated by the commence-

ment of the 1970-71 school year which achieve the same

or a higher degree of desegregation as achieved by the

above modifications. It is not intended by this opinion that

the district court be deprived of its discretion to adjust

our modifications and any subsequently submitted by the

board. Its discretion is limited, however, to the extent that

no adjustments may diminish the degree of desegregation

required by this court. Of course, the school board and the

district court are under a continuing duty to appraise the

system in the light of actual conditions and experience and,

App. 20

within the limits we have just indicated, make whatever

changes as are required to assure the maintenance of a

unitary system.

The mandate herein shall issue immediately and no

stay will be granted for filing Petition for Rehearing or

Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

This cause is remanded to the district court for pro-

ceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part with di-

rections.

[TITLE OMITTED]

MEMORANDUM OPINION APPROVING

DESEGREGATION PLAN FOR DADE COUNTY

PUBLIC SCHOOLS WITH MODIFICATIONS

AND FINAL JUDGMENT

This school desegregation case presents the issue of

whether the Dade County School System is now unitary

within the meaning of Supreme Court decisions in Alex-

ander v. Holmes County Board of Education, 396 U.S. 19,

90 S.Ct. 29, 24 L.Ed.2d 19 (1969) ; Green v. County School

Board of New Kent County, 391 U.S. 430, 88 S.Ct. 1689,

20 L.Ed.2d 716 (1968) and the decision of the United

States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Single-

ton v. Jackson Municipal Separate School District, 419

F.2d 1211 (5th Cir. 1969).

The case sub judice had its genesis on August 25,

1969 when the Dade County School Board (hereinafter

App. 21

the Board) removed to this Court a civil action filed in the

Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit In and For

Dade County, Florida, which attacked, on state grounds,

an Interim Desegregation Plan adopted by the Board. That

plan was approved by an order which I entered on August

29, 1969.

On December 10, 1969, pursuant to the mandate of

Singleton, supra, I entered an order which, inter alia, di-

rected the Board to take steps, not later than February 1,

1970, to comply with the provisions of that decision re-

lating to the Desegregation of Faculty and Other Staff,

Majority to Minority Transf_r Policy, Transportation,

School Construction and Site Selection and Attendance Out-

side System of Residence.

In its Final Desegregation Plan filed March 31, 1970,

the Board specifically delineated its compliance with the

above requirements of Singleton, supra, and with Green,

supra, with respect to extracurricular activities and facil-

ities. There has been no complaint regarding any of these

particular elements which go to disestablishing a dual

school system by any of the many objectors. Accordingly,

the Court must assume there has been compliance in these

areas. Thus, there remains only a determination of whether

the composition of student bodies meets the necessary tests.

Hearings were held on January 23, May 22 and June

12, 1970 on the proposed plan and objections.

Findings of Fact made in the Order entered January

26, 1970 are incorporated herein by reference.

App. 22

The Board urged at the hearing on May 22 that its

plan came within the purview of a true “neighborhood

system” as defined by Ellis v. The Board of Public In-

struction of Orange County, Florida, ___F.2d____., (5th

Cir., 1970) (Slip Opinion No. 29,124 dated Feb. 17, 1970).

I find otherwise. Because of the criteria demanded in

Ellis, as further delineated in James Andrews, et al. v.

City of Monroe, et al., ___F.2d___, (5th Cir. 1970) (Slip

Opinion No 29,358 dated April 23, 1970), such a plan is

infeasible in Dade County. Clearly, the inflexible Ellis

standards are not present in the system proposed by the

Board.

The criteria used in reviewing, and modifying where

indicated, the Board’s plan were: (1) degree of desegre-

gation, (2) proximity of students to schools serving their

grade level; (3) capacity of such schools; (4) manmade

and natural boundaries such as thoroughfares, railroad

tracks, etc. and (5) avoidance of cross-bussing.

The Board will operate in the school year 1970-71 an

urban school system of 218 schoo's and 244,000 students

in the southeast corner of the Florida peninsula. Of this

number, 57,900 or 23% will be Black. There are some 26

communities in the County, all of which project westerly

from the Atlantic Ocean which forms the eastern boundary.

The plan filed by the Board on March 31, 1970 re-

flects a substantial effort, made in good faith, to create

a unitary school system. However, under the guidelines

laid down for this Court by recent decisions of the Fifth

Circuit, the plan as it exists must be held to be ineffective

in disestablishing the dual school system.

App. 23

By an order entered April 16, 1970 the Florida School

Desegregation Consulting Center, School of Education, Uni-

versity of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida, was requested

to review the Board’s plan and all objections filed to it.

The Center was asked to report its recommendations to the

Court with the stated objective of meeting the constitu-

tional standard of a unitary system. The report from the

Center was filed by the Department of Health, Educa-

tion and Welfare (hereinafter HEW).

The HEW plan limits its recommendations, except in

one particular, to the elementary schools. That one excep-

tion concerns Miami Jackson High School which will be

85% black under the Board’s plan.

Leave to intervene was granted to some persons who

objected to portions of the plan. The Dade County Class-

room Teachers’ Association (hereinafter CTA), represent-

ing approximately 75% of the teachers in the system

actively participated as an intervenor. It urged, in gen-

eral, a much more substantial increase in the mixing of

the races, particularly at the junior and senior high school

levels. The American Civil Liberties Union proposes that

the Court require a fixed ratio in every school in the

County. The law does not require such drastic action to

achieve a unitary system. The objections filed by other

intervenors will be considered below.

The Court is indebted to intervenors Honorable

Claude R. Kirk, Governor of Florida, and Honorable Wil-

liam C. Cramer, a Member of Congress from Florida, for

submitting briefs on the subject of bussing as it relates to

integration.

App. 24

Wide publicity was given the HEW report. This has

resulted in a plethora of letters, telegrams, pictures, maps

and petitions being sent to the Court from parents of

children who, presumably, would be affected by the HEW

changes. Virtually all of these expressed no opposition

to integration per se but adjured the Court not to require

their children to cross highways, waik past nearby schools

to attend one farther away, or enter so-called “ghetto”

areas to attend school. I have given careful consideration

to these objections vis a vis my duty to effect a unitary

school system in Dade County. They have been very help-

ful in understanding the problems of each school.

PUPIL ASSIGNMENTS

The plan submitted by the Board allows 20 schools to

remain with 100% Black enrollments. Additionally, there

will be 16 schools with various percentages of Black en-

rollments ranging from 99% down to 85%. There would

be 53 schools with all White enrollments and 40 schools

with percentages ranging from 99% to 85%.

The plan submitted by HEW would bring below 85%

Black enrollment five 100% Black schools and seven 85%

to 99% Black schools. At the same time three 100% White

schools and ten 85% to 99% White schools would be

brought below 85% White enrollments.

The HEW plan makes no recommendation for chang-

ing the Board plan on the junior high and senior high

levels. Hence, fifteen 100% Black schools (11 elementary,

3 junior high and 1 senior high) and nine 85% to 99%

Black schools (7 elementary, 1 junior high and 1 senior

high) will remain under the HEW plan.

App. 25

With the modifications to be described below the

School Board plan does effectively disestablish the dual

school system which exists in Dade County. For the sake

of convenience the Court will discuss the modifications it

feels are necessary by reviewing the HEW plan in the

same order as evidence was presented at the May 22, 7970

meeting.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEVEL SOUTH DISTRICT

Group #1

The Board plan proposes what must be described as

Square zones with a school somewhere near the middle of

the zone. The HEW plan completely rezones the group of

schools creating elongated zones. The HEW plan would re-

quire additional transportation of 32 pupils to the Lewis

School and 20 pupils to the Redondo School. Students liv-

ing in the north section of the Lewis zone pass within 4

mile of two schools. Students living across the street from

the West Homestead school will walk nearly two miles to

the Redondo school. The HEW plan is unacceptable de-

spite its effectiveness in disestablishing the dual school

system in this District.

The Court is at a disadvantage in making modifica-

tions in the Board plan because it does not have the sta-

tistical data necessary for informative decisions. The testi-

mony reveals that the Cooper school is 113 pupils under

capacity (2-4 classrooms) and the West Homestead school

is 85 pupils over capacity. Page seven of the HEW plan

shows Lewis to be exactly at capacity and Florida City to

be over capacity by 90 students. It appears to the Court

that the over capacity could be eliminated while encourag-

ing desegregation of the Cooper and West Homestead

App. 26

Schools by slight changes in the boundary lines of these

four schools. The East-West boundary between Lewis and

Florida City could be moved to the South by 90 students.

The East-West boundary between Lewis and Cooper could

be moved to the South and the North-South boundary be-

tween West Homestead and Cooper could be moved to the

West so as to equalize the capacities of those three schools.

The School Board shall show cause within ten days of

the date hereof why such a modification will not promote

desegregation and is not administratively, economically or

educationally feasible.

Group #2

Again the School Board plan offers a zoning plan. The

HEW plan would pair these three schools thus eliminating

one predominantly White school. No additional transporta-

tion would be required. The Bel-Aire School would he ap-

proximately 30 students over capacity. However, the

Administration feels this is a feasible alternative. The

Court i aware that there are hazards along the line of

travel t. the Moton School but feels that with a minimum

of effort by the appropriate governmental agencies these

hazards could be reduced. Nevertheless these hazards

should not impede what is otherwise an effective plan.

The School Board is directed to adopt this modifica-

tion.

Group #3

The Court agrees that there is no feasible method to

desegregate the Pine Villa School.

|

|

|

|

|

I PT Pe errs

App. 27

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEVEL — SOUTHWEST

DISTRICT

The Board plan leaves the Martin School with a 100%

Black enrollment. It phases out the Lee School which prior

to the 1969-70 school year was an all-Black School but

which was as of June, 1970 a school with 72% Black en-

rollment. The HEW plan offers no solution to the Martin

problem and defers to the Court on the wisdom of phasing

out the Lee School.

Again the Court is without sufficient statistical] data.

The record shows that as a school housing grades 1 to 5,

Martin will have an enrollment of 1,025 students. The

sixth grade is housed at the Richmond Heights Junior

High School. There are seven portables at the Martin

School. The Colonial Drive School houses grades 1 thru 6

with a projected enrollment of 720 students, 27% of whom

are Black. The Court notes what appear to be large un-

developed areas between the two schools on the south side

of Coral Reef Drive.

The Board shall show cause within ten days of the

date hereof why the Martin and Colonial Drive Schools

cannot be paired. Emphasis should be directed at encour-

agement of desegregation, administrative inconvenience,

relative capacities and additional transportation required.

Since the May 22, 1970 hearing the Court has granted

intervenors Corbett and Ellis a rehearing so that they

might offer testimony on the phasing out of the Lee School.

Testimony was taken on June 12, 1970.

2 Aa Pa RN ES Nl a sO IN EES cig ES

idle URE RRL SS AIDS BS ty BH

App. 28

The School Board has made the determination that the

pairing of Lee and Ludlum in the 1969-70 school year was

a failure. The Court agrees, it appears to be useless to at-

tempt a pairing of Lee with any of the other neighboring

schools. The Board plan eliminates the Lee zone and in

effect drives wedges into the Black residential area sur-

rounding the Lee School from each of four surrounding

predominantly White schools. The percentages of Black

students will now vary from 8% to 38% instead of 1%

to 64% at the end of the 1969-70 school year. Nor does it

appear that the phasing out of one of the four neighboring

schools would encourage desegregation as well. Without

pairing or massive cross-walking of virtually entire student

bodies Lee could not continue to operate effectively as a

desegregated school.

It should be added that the Lee facility will be used to

house various programs all of which have been seeking a

permanent home for some time. It was the Board’s decision

to convert the use of the Lee facility and the Court will not

interfere with that decision since it promotes the establish-

ment of a unitary school system.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEVEL—

NORTHWEST DISTRICT

Group #1

The School Board plan again offers square zones. The

HEW plan proposes a grouping. Since the three schools

tend to be at opposite ends of their zones, approximately

274 additional students will have to be bussed over two

miles. The grouping plan would create a substantial un-

dercapacity at the Bunche Park School while it creates an

App. 29

over capacity at the Parkview School requiring at least

two portables. It should be noted that the Board plan does

not require crossing of either Northwest 167th Street or

Northwest 17th Avenue.

The Court finds the HEW plan to be unreasonable.

Being unable to find another method to desegregate the

Bunche Park School, the Court reluctantly embraces the

Board plan.

Group #2

The Court agrees that desegregation of the North

County Schoo! cannot be accomplished without extensive

use of transportation.

Group #3

The Board plan suggests two zones with boundaries

determined by natural barriers. The North-South boundary

between the zones is eliminated by the HEW plan. Instead,

the HEW plan would make the Rainbow Park zone a long

thin zone running East and West. The net effect is to put

some of the Opa Locka School’s White students in ‘the

Rainbow Park School and some of the Rainbow Park Black

students in the Opa Locka School. This plan requires ap-

proximately 35 additional students to be bussed and many

students to travel across Northwest 27th Avenue.

The HEW plan effectively disestablishes the dual

school system in this area. The Board is directed to adopt

this modification.

App. 30

Group #4

The Board plan zones these two school according to

natural boundaries. The. HEW plan would pair them by

eliminating the boundary between them at Opa Locka

Boulevard. The pairing requires an additional 19 students

to be bussed and most students to cross Opa I ocka Boule-

vard. Both schools were already well within their ca-

pacities.

It should be noted that the Young School is projected

to have an enrollment of 85% Black students. The Court

is hopeful that under the majority to minority transfer

policy to be described below, many white students will

seek to attend the Young School from the Opa Locka

School and vice versa. Therefore no further modification

of the Board plan is required to create a unitary school

system in this District.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEVEL—

NORTH CENTRAL DISTRICT

There are ten schools in this District clustered to-

gether in the heart of an all-Black residential community.

Eight of the schools (Drew, Evans, Holmes, Liberty City,

Lorah Park, Olinda, Orchard Villa and Poincianna Park)

have 100% Black student bodies. Two others (Arcola Lake

and Gladeview) have predominantly Black student bodies.

The only method by which these schools could be effectively

desegregated is by cross-bussing with predominantly white

schools in the Northeast District. The law does not compel

this Court to require the School Board to desegregate

these schools in that manner. The School Board plan is,

therefore, adopted without change as to these ten schools.

App. 31

The School Board plan would allow the West Little

River School to remain with a 92% Black student body.

The HEW plan suggests a pairing with the Broadmoor

School (1% Black). This alternative would require that

approximately 55 students would be transported to the

West Little River School. Others would have to travel

across Northwest 27th Avenue. Under either plan, both

schools are projected to be slightly over capacity.

The Board is directed to adopt this modification. The

Court notes that the attendance zones of both Broadmoor

and Miami Park are varied under the HEW plan. The

Court leaves to the discretion of the Board the decision

of whether such a variance should be made or, if made in

another manner, whether it might reduce the number of

students transported to the West Little River School. The

Board is limited to the extent that no substantial change

shall be made in the racial compositions of the two schools.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEVEL—

SOUTH CENTRAL DISTRICT

The Board plan allows to remain 5 all-Black schools

(Carver, Floral Heights, Pharr, Tucker and Wheatley)

and 5 predominantly Black schools ( Allapattah, Bethune,

Douglas, Dunbar and Karlington Heights). As discussed

below, the HEW pian would affect several of these schools.

HEW concedes that Allapattzh, Earlington Heights, Floral

Heights, Wheatley and Douglas cannot be desegregated

without substantial transportation. The Court is unwill-

ing to make that concession without further evidence.

The statistics the Court has reveal that the Allapattah

School houses 1170 pupils in grades 1 thru 5. The Buena

Ps TORRE

App. 32

Vista School houses 695 pupils in grades 1 thru 6. It

appears that these two schools could be paired. The Board

shall show cause within ten days of the date hereof why

such a modification will not promote desegregation and

is not administratively, economically or educationally

feasible.

Likewise the statistics in the Board plan reveal that

the Douglas School houses 1400 pupils in grades 1 thru 6.

The Riverside School houses 850 pupils in grades 1 thru

6. It appears that these two schools could be paired. The

Board shall, in a like manner, show cause why this pair-

ing cannot be accomplished.

The Board plan proposes two separate zones for the

Bethune and Melrose Schools. The HEW plan suggests a

pairing of the two schools. The testimony reveals that

the pairing would not present any problems with capac-

ities nor would it require additional transportation. The

sole objection is that the East-West Expressway is elimi-

nated as a natural barrier between the two schools. Con-

sidering that the Expressway is elevated and that many

Melrose students are required, under the Board plan, to

traverse Northwest 36th Street and Northwest 27th there

is no reason why these schools cannot be paired.

The Board is directed to adopt this modification.

At this point, for the sake of better understanding

the Court will depart from the pattern of presentation of

the HEW plan. The Court notes a concentration of schools

between Biscayne Boulevard and the North-South Express-

way on the east and west, respectively, and 14th Street

and 36th Street on the south and north, respectively.

aii

eae.

App. 33

There are five schools in this area; Dunbar (93% Black),

West Dunbar (15% Black); Wheatley (100% Black),

Miramar (20% Black) and Buena Vista (7% Black).

The Board proposes to do nothing to desegregate

these schools. The HEW plan would group the Dunbar,

Miramar and Buena Vista Schools. The Board offers the

sole objection that grouping destroys their neighborhood

plan. The Court feels that the grouping should be accom-

plished.

In this regard, the Court notes that the capacities of

the remaining two schools in the area are such that by a

modification of the HEW grouping plan substantially

more desegregation could be accomplished. For instance,

if the Wheatley school was rezoned and used in the group-

ing suggested by the HEW, Dunbar could be paired with

the West Dunbar School. Alternatively, it might be feasible

to pair Miramar with Wheatley and to pair Dunbar with

West Dunbar. Again, Buena Vista could be substituted

for West Dunbar in that pairing.

The Board shall show cause within ten days of the

date hereof why they cannot involve all five of these schools

in a plan to disestablish the dual school system in this

area. The same criteria as ordered above shall be con-

sidered. Should the Board show good cause why additional

desegregation cannot be accomplished it is the Order of

this Court the grouping plan presented by the HEW plan

be adopted by the Board.

The Board plan provides separate zones for the Kelsey

Pharr and Comstock Schools with the boundary between

them falling on the East-West Expressway. The HEW

App. 34

plan pairs these two schools. The evidence reveals that the

Kelsey Pharr School has a strict capacity of 840 students

without portables. The Comstock School presently has a

capacity of 1200 with portables. The Board plan properly

balances these capacities. The pairing plan would require

the transportation of approximately 123 students to the

Kelsey Pharr School.

It appears to the Court that the capacity problem

could be solved in one of two ways. Either portables could

be moved from the Comstock School to the Kelsey Pharr

School or the Kelsey Pharr School be designed to house only

grades 5 and 6 within present capacities or with the addi-

tion of but a few portables.

The Board is directed in a like manner as above to

show cause why the HEW pairing plan cannot be accom-

plished with the modifications suggested above.

In the Coral Gables area the Board offers a strict

zone plan for five schools: Sunset (8% Black), Carver

(100% Black), Coral Gables (0% Black), Tucker (100%

Black), and Dade (1% Black). The HEW plan would

rezone the first three schools and pair the last two. All five

will be considered together because the rezoning and pair-

ing plan are closely interrelated.

In rezoning Carver, Sunset and Coral Gables, the

HEW plan puts 400 White students into the Carver zone

from the Sunset and Coral Gables zones and puts 400

Black students in the Coral Gables zone from the Carver

zone. This plan creates an over capacity of over 100 stu-

dents at Coral Gables which might force that school to

begin double sessions because there is no room for portables

ROMS SGD Neo ee Nina La

hed to eG it

App. 35

on the site. Approximately 57 students will require trans-

portation. Many students wili be required to cross South

Dixie Highway. Many students will be required to walk

greater distances.

The Court is mindful that the Sunset school is pro-

posed to absorb students who formerly attended the Lee

School. Also it appears that the HEW plan rezones many

students from the Dade School zone into the Coral Gables

school zone. The net effect of the HEW plan is to take

150 students out of the Sunset school and place them in

the Coral Gables School. It would seem that by returning

100 students to Sunset from Carver and returning 100

students to Carver from Coral Gables the capacities of

the three schools will be equalized. If White students and

Black students are returned to Sunset and Carver, re-

spectively, no additional transportation will be required

and both Carver and Coral Gables will remain as desegre-

gated schools.

The Court favors the HEW plan of rezoning but is

concerned with equalizing capacities. The Board shall in-

vestigate the above suggestions and investigate rezoning in

connection with the pairing of the Dade and Tucker

Schools and show cause, in a like manner as above, why

the HEW rezoning plan cannot be accomplished. In the

alternative, if it is found that a rezoning plan is nof

feasible, the Board shall show cause why a ten-hour day

or some alternative scheduling technique cannot be utilized.

The HEW plan would pair the Tucker and Dade

Schools. Mr. Little testified that the proposed pairing plan

would create an overcapacity of about 100 students at both

schools. Apparently this is caused by increasing the stu-

App. 36

dent population by an amount equal to the number of 5th

and 6th graders who are not now allowed to attend Tucker,

However, it does not appear that Mr. Little considered two

factors. First, the figure used by the HEW plan for en-

rollment at the Tucker School is overstated by 200 stu-

dents, thus distorting the HEW plan figures. Second, the

HEW’ rezoning plan discussed immediately above rezones

many students out of the Dade attendance zone.

Mr. Little also testified that there is no space at

Tucker for portables but there may be space at Dade.

The pairing plan would require many students to cross

South Dixie Highway and travel routes which are pres-

ently undergoing sewer construction.

The Court favors the HEW pairing plan and feels

that the School Board can fashion a plan utilizing rezon-

ing techniques, portables and modified school days which

will effectively disestablish the dual school system with-

out sacrificing traditional values. It might be possible to

have the Dade and Tucker schools house grades 1 thru 5

in a paired situation and place grade 6 in Carver Junior

High School.

The Board shall, in a like manner, show cause why

this pairing cannot be accomplished.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEVEL

NORTHEAST DISTRICT

The Northeast District encompasses the area east

of the North-South Expressway and the Sunshine State

Parkway and North of 110th Street. Within its boun-

daries are the municipalities of Miami Beach, North

App. 87

Miami Beach and North Miami. There are 22 elementary

schools with only 216 Black students.

There is no method by which the schools in this

District can be effectively desegregated other than by

massive cross-bussing with the predominantly Black resi-

dential areas of the North Central District and the South

Central District. The Court, therefore, adopts the plan

of the Board as it pertains to the Northeast District.

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL

The Board proposes a zoning plan designed to allow

every student to attend the closest school to his home that

has the capacity to house him. The guidelines used by

the Board are many faceted: (1) proximity to schools;

(2) capacity of schools; (3) natural barriers; (4) safety

and welfare of the children. All of the optional zones

which were present in the Interim Plan adopted by this

Court on August 29, 1970 have been eliminated.

The HEW plan makes no recommendation to change

the Board plan with one exception. The HEW plan takes

the attitude that since most of the students who formerly

attended Dorsey will be bussed to other schools all these

students should be bussed to predominantly white schools.

This suggestion is unacceptable for two reasons. First,

it ignores the relative capacities of the other junior high

schools in this part of the County. It is unlikely that the

_ predominantly White schools could handle all of the

former Dorsey students without severe overcrowding.

Second, many former Dorsey students can walk to nearby

schools. For both reasons the Court rejects the sugges-

tion of the HEW plan.

NRE DD Pe OS IE PAGING TOES OED

App. 38

Utilizing the Board plan at this level without modi-

fication there will be remaining three all-Black schools,

one predominantly Black school, six all-white schools and

twelve predominantly White schools. The remaining sev-

enteen schools all have a substantial racial mixture.

The Court will discuss the objections to the Board

plan in the same order as it discussed the elementary

level schools. |

SOUTH DISTRICT

The only objection to the Board plan in this District

centers around the Richmond Heights School. The al-

ternative is popularly called the Roberts Plan. The HEW

plan attests to the educational soundness of this plan.

The Board has also conceded to its educational soundness.

The Roberts Plan would rezone the boundaries of

the Richmond Heights, Palmetto and Cutler Ridge Schools.

It is similar to Recommendation 41 of the report ren-

dered July 23, 1969 by the Florida School Desegregation

Consulting Center. The apparent sole goal of the plan is

to distribute the Black students at the Richmond Heights

School between the Palmetto and Cutler Ridge Schools

so that they will all have similar mixes of the races.

The Board offers several reasons for its decision not

to implement the Roberts Plan. It creates a non-contigu-

ous zone whereby students would be transported past

the Richmond Heights School. The Palmetto School is

already 150 students over capacity even though it uti-

lizes a triple shift. The Richmond Heights School is sev-

eral hundred students under capacity solely because it

App. 39

is projected to be on a ten-hour day. The Richmond

Heights School houses the Martin Elementary School

sixth grade because the Martin School does not have the

capacity even though it is utilizing seven portables. The

Roberts Plan requires the sixth grade to return to the

Martin School from which other students will be trans-

ported out to other elementary schools. The Board puts

emphasis upon their decision that it is at the lesser of

two evils to have students on a triple shift at Palmetto.

The Board has made an administrative decision that

should not be interfered with by the Court. The schools

in this District are presently substantially desegregated.

The Court orders no change in the plan offered by the

Board.

SOUTHWEST DISTRICT

The only school in this District which is the subject

of an objection is the Richmond Heights School discussed

in the South District section. The Court orders no change

in the Board plan.

NORTHWEST DISTRICT

The plan proposed by the CTA would involve three

Schools in this District. ( Filer, North Dade and Park-

way). Since only the Palm Springs School does not have

members of the minority race, the HEW plan offers no

recommendation. The CTA Suggestion concerning the

Filer School will be discussed below in the South Central

District section.

App. 40

The CTA plan is designed solely for the purpose of

creating a racial mix of 40% Black students in both

schools. North Dade is 68% Black and Parkway is 20%

Black. The plan would pair the two. In response to the

argument that this would force students to cross the

Palmetto By-pass, the CTA points out that the Board

plan requires students in the Carol City attendance zone

to cross the same highway. The plan also would require

some additional transportation.

The most significant objection to the CTA plan is

that since there are three grades and but two schools

either the Board will have to put one and one-half grades

in each school or split the students between the two

schogs by some method such as the first and last thirteen

letters of the alphabet. This is clearly educationally un-

sound. Since both schools exist as desegregated schools

there is no reason to destroy the traditional organiza-

“tion of the junior high school. For this reason the Court

rejects the CTA plan and adopts the Board plan.

NORTH CENTRAL DISTRICT

Other than the plan offered by the CTA involving the

Drew, Madison, Mann and Edison Schools no objection is

lodged against the Board plan. These schools will be dis-

cussed below in the South Central District section. The

HEW plan recognizes that the only school in this District

that does not have a substantial racial mixture is Drew.

The HEW plan asserts that the only method by which the

Drew school could be desegregated is by utilizing massive

cross-bussing of students between non-contiguous zones.

Again you have the recurring problem of violating the tra-

ditional concept of a three-grade junior high school. The

Court adopts the Board plan.

App. 41

SOUTH CENTRAL DISTRICT

There are two schools ( Allapattah and Brownsville)

in this District which remain all-Black schools and one

school (Washington) which remains a predominantly Black

school. The HEW plan asserts that it would require cross-

bussing between non-contiguous zones to effectively de-

segregate these schools. The CTA plan is the only objec-

tion to the Board plan.

The CTA plan recognizes that the Ada Merritt School

is an all-White school. The plan would pair the Ada Mer-

ritt School with the Washington School. To the objection

that pairing would require students to eross the Miami

River, the CTA replies that the Board has designed the

Miami Springs attendance zone to require students to cross

the Little River. However, there is a crossing immediatly

adjacent to the Miami Springs School. The Board further

objects to the basis that the present boundaries effectively

utilize the capacities of the two schools. The Court feels

there is no compelling reason to pair these schools since

Washington is projected to have an enrollment of 88%

Black students. Therefore, the Court rejects the CTA plan.

The CTA plan also attempts to desegregate the Alla-

pattah, Brownsville and Drew Schools by cross-bussing

students with the predominantly White schools to the west

(Filer and Miami Springs). Also included as potential

cross-bussing routes are three desegregated schools in the

North Central District (Madison, Mann and Miami Edi-

son) and two non-contiguous schools in the Northeast Dis-

trict which are within a six mile radius of this area and

which are already receiving transported students from the

Drew School (Nautilus and Fisher). The Court com-

App. 42

mends the CTA for its inventiveness but feels that the

law does not require this type of massive cross-bussing

to create a unitary school system. The plan offered by the

CTA is rejected and the plan of the Board is adopted.

The Board has adopted a pairing plan involving the

Ponce de Leon and Carver Schools whereby the seventh

grade would be housed at the Carver School and the eighth

and ninth grades would be housed at the Ponce de Leon

School. The Carver School will have a 24% Black enroll-

ment while the Ponce de Leon School will have a 26% Black

enrollment. This plan is adamently supported by the inter-

venors Jane L. Mack and others. The HEW plan makes

no reference to this segment of the Board plan.

The pairing plan is strenuously opposed by two groups

of intervenors (Donald J. Murray and others and The Con-

cerned Parents of the Riviera Section). Both groups offer

a zoning plan commonly referred to as the Ring-Horwich

Plan. The intended purpose of this plan is to desegregate

one additional school (Shenandoah) while keeping both

the Ponce de Leon and Carver Schools as traditional three-

grade junior high schools. By redrafting the boundary

lines between these two schools and the Shenandoah School

(1% Black) the Black student enrollment at the Shenan-

doah School will be increased. After this rezoning Shenan-

doah will be 12% Black, Carver will be 19% Black and

Ponce de Leon will be 16% Black, thus equalizing the per-

centages of Black students at the three schools.

The rezoning plan would require more than minimal

additional transportation. Since the Shenandoah School is

three miles from the Carver School many students within

walking distance of Carver will need to be transported to

App. 48

Shenandoah. Other siudents living close to the Carver

School will require transportation to the Ponce de Leon

School.

The supporters of the Ring-Horwich Plan have at-

tempted to show that it is best educationally to utilize the

traditional three-grade junior high school at all three of

these schools. The School Board would concede this as a

genera! principle. However, the Board has decided that

because of the lack of full facilities (library, shops, labora-

tories, etc.) at the Carver School it is best to house all of

_ this area’s eighth and ninth graders in the Ponce de Leon

School. Seventh graders do not require a full range of

school facilities whereas eighth and ninth graders do re-

quire them. Under the Ring-Horwich Plan the eighth and

ninth graders at the Carver School would be disadvantaged

by the lack of facilities. The facilities that do exist at the

Carver School, if used solely by seventh graders, would

enhance their educational experience.

It therefore appears that the Board has made its de-

cision based upon educational and administrative reasons.

To interfere with the Board’s decision solely to desegregate

one more predominantly Black School when a unitary school

system presently exists appears to the Court to be unrea-

sonable. The majority to minority transfer plan to be

discussed below should aid in the further desegregation

of the Shenandoah School.

Accordingly, the Court adopts the Board pairing

plan.

App. 44

NORTHEAST DISTRICT

There are no predominantly Black schools in the

Northeast District. All six schools have some pupils of the

minority race under the Board plan. The only objection

raised, other than the CTA plan discussed above, is pre-

sented by Michael A. Frank who, through his father as

next friend, has filed his own lawsuit which has been con-

solidated into this case.

The objection, simply stated, is that it is a violation of

Plaintiff’s constitutional rights to require him to attend

a school (Fisher) further from his home while other stu-

dents are transported to his former school (Nautilus) from

distances up to 12 miles past several other schools. Addi-

tionally, Black students are transported from non-con-

tiguous zones into both schools. The Board asserts that the

primary, in fact the sole, reason for this arrangement is to

equalize the capacities of the various schools involved.

Since the Board made its recent decision to close down

the Dorsey School at least ten schools are being used to

house the students that attended Dorsey. Drew has been

severely over capacity for years. Fisher and Nautilus were

the only schools within a reasonable distance which could

house this overflow. Likewise the students living in the

northern part of Miami Beach were transported to Fisher

because it was the nearest school with available facilities.

The Court feels that no constitutional issue is pre-

sented by the Frank objection. The objection is simply an

attack upon an administrative decision of the Board and

nothing more. The Frank objection is rejected and the

Board plan is adopted.

App. 45

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL

The Board plan proposes a system of zoning whereby

each student attends a full three-year high school. Dis-

tances and capacities are the primary consideration. There

would be remaining one all-White school, nine predomi-

nantly White schools, one all-Black school and one pre-

dominantly Black school.

The HEW plan suggests that if the boundary between

the Miami Jackson School (85% Black) and the Miami

Senior High School was made firm and the two attendance

zones were strictly adhered to there would be approximately

1000 more White students attending Miami Jackson. The

Board estimates that this figure would be closer to 700

students. In previous years between 200 and 300 students

in the Miami Jackson attendance zone have been attend-

ing Miami Senior High by use of a procedure called “affi-

davit of attendance.” The evidence is somewhat conflicting

on whether or not the Board plan proposes to strictly ad-

here to the attendance zones.

The CTA plan proposes a pairing of these two schools.

The evidence reveals that a pairing plan is prohibitively

expensive by virtue of the extensive bussing required.

There are presently 100 students being transported to the

Miami Jackson School. Pairing would require transporta-

tion for 1500 students to the Miami Jackson School. A

similar situation would be created at Miami Senior High

School. This transportation would require an aggregate

outlay of $330,000 the first year with recurring expenses

of $100,000 annually. On page 4 of the transcript of the

February 2, 1970 hearing this Court found that the “Board

is utilizing its allowable full tax millage, has an annual

App. 46

budget of 70 to 75 million dollars and is urgently in need

of more funds.”

The pairing plan is rejected and the plan of the Board

is accepted with the direction that the attendance zones of

these two schools be strictly adhered to, modified only by

the majority to minority transfer policy to be discussed

below. |

The plan offered by the CTA points out that there are

over 5000 Black students attending Miami Northwestern

(100% Black) and Miami Jackson (85% Black). This

means that approximately 55% of all Black high school

students attend one of these two schools. The CTA plan

seeks to desegregate the Miami Northwestern School by

offering alternative grouping plans.

°°

First, the CTA plan would establish a grouping or

campus by combining the attendance zones of Miami North-

western, Miami Edison (27% Black) and Miami Central

(30% Black). The campus concept would create a ratio

of White to Black students of approximately 47% to 53%.

The Miami Edison School is one mile east of the Miami

Northwestern School and the Miami Northwestern School

is less than two and one-half miles south from the Miami

Central School. The geographic area is comparable to that

of the Coral Gables Senior High School attendance zone.

Second, the CTA proposes a campus grouping of Mi-

ami Northwestern, Hialeah (1% Black) and Miami Springs

(9% Black). Evidence relating to these schools was taken

at a prior hearing.

UY as

App. 47

The Board offered no objections on the administra-

tive and educational level although the Court feels assured

that the same problems exist here as discussed above in the

grouping of junior high schools in the Northwest District.

The evidence does reveal, however, that the campus group-

ing plan would be detrimental to the normal high school

experience. Students would be hampered in participating

in extra-curricular activities (debate, athletics, band, etc.)

from which activities many students receive college scholar-

ships.

The evidence establishes that in the grouping situation

there would be increased transportation problems. At least

1000 additional students will require transportation. Only

100 are presently being transported. Approximately $330,-

000 would be required in the first year to implement the

grouping plan.

The grouping plan is rejected and the plan of the

Board is adopted.

NO CROSS-BUSSING

Neither the Board’s plan, as modified herein, nor the

HEW plan involve “cross-bussing”. As provided by Florida

law, students living more than two miles from the school

they attend are entitled to transportation.

PUPIL REASSIGNMENT

The Board plan is also to be amended to provide as

follows:

App. 48

1. Any pupil, with parental consent, shall have

the right to transfer from a school at which

his race is in the majority to attend a school

at which his race is in the minority, regard-

less of the availability of space at the latter

school, and the Board shall furnish free trans-

portation provided the distance involved

meets state transportation statutes.

2. All parents in the system are to be notified

of this provision.

BI-RACIAL COMMITTEE

A Bi-Racial Committee composed of 12 members, six

white and six black, will be appointed by the Court to

review the operation of the majority to minority pupil

transfer rule, the transportation system, selection of school

sites, and such other special assignments as the Court may

direct. The Committee is authorized to hold hearings and

make recommendations to the Board in connection with

these activities. The chairmanship shall alternate annually

between a white chairman and a black chairman. Within

ten days, the Board and CTA shall each submit to the Court

two names and each of the intervenors one name of

nominees for the Committee.

REPORT BY THE BOARD AND BI-RACIAL

COMMITTEE

Within sixty days after the opening of the Fall term

of the 1970-71 school year, the Board and Bi-Racial Com-

mittee are directed to file reports with the Court as to

their findings and recommendations with respect to the

operation of the plan as implemented by the Board.

App. 49

MAYS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL EXPERIENCE

This suit was begun, as above recited, by Herbert

Pate and others in the State Circuit Court. Its purpose was

to enjoin the Board from assigning students for the schoo!

year 1969-70 to Mays Junior High School, a previously all-

Black school, as part of its plan to desegregate Dade Coun-

ty Schools. With the approval of the Interim Desegregation

Plan, such assignments were effectuated. The Court is

now informed by means of the news media that integra-

tion at Mays has been successful. Accordingly, the Bi-

Racial Committee shall, promptly following its appoint-

ment, study the practices and procedures utilized at that

school and submit a report within thirty days to the

Court, together with its recommendations for possible

utilization of such practices and procedures by the Board

at other integrated schools in the system.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The plan submitted by the Board, as modified here-

in, and subject to the revisions to be accomplished as

above directed, constitutes a unitary system of public

education for the Dade County, Florida school district.

FINAL JUDGMENT

It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

1. The Board of Public Instruction of Dade County,

Florida, and Edward L. Whigham, as Superintendent of

Public Instruction, and his successors in office, are per-

manently enjoined from operating a dual system of public

education segregated by race, and shall henceforth oper-

ate a unitary system as described above.

App. 50

2. The transfer of students shall be made effective

August 1, 1970 and thereafter.

3. The separate petitions of the several intervenors

are hereby denied, except as the relief therein sought

may be included in the over-all plans herein approved.

The separate suits by Michael A. Frank (Case No. 69-1025-

Civ-CA) and Joseph Pardo (Case No. 69-1041-Civ-CA)

which were consolidated with this suit involve attacks

upon administrative decisions by the Board. No constitu-

tional issue is presented. Accordingly, the relief sought

in both suits is denied and both suits are hereby dismissed

with prejudice.

4, The Court retains jurisdiction of the cause and

the parties for the purpose of insuring that the plan here

adopted and the required amendments are carried out

and the school system operated consistently with the re-

quirements of the United States Constitution.

DONE AND ORDERED at Miami, Florida this 26th

day of June, 1970.

/s/ C. Clyde Atkins,

United States District Judge

cee. George Bolles, Esq.

Tobias Simon, Esq.

Walters Moore & Costanzo

Howell Ferguson, Esq., Legal Services Program

Shutts & Bowen

Rivers Buford, Esq.

Hon. Earl Faircloth

Hon. Claude R. Kirk, Jr.

App. 51

Hon. William C. Cramer

Alan H. Rosenson, Esq.

Paul B. Steinberg, Esq.

Aaron Foosaner, Esq.

Lane & Mitchell

James E. Glass, Esq.

James W. Matthews, Esq.

William A. Frieder, Esq.

Richard Y. Feder, Esq.

Wicker, Smith, et al.

Henry A. Edgar, Jr., Esq.

Robert R. Frank, Esq.

J. E. Ludick, Esq.

William Manker, Esq.

Daniel N. Heller, Esg.

Larry S. Stewart, Esq.

Hillery F. Silverman, Esq.

Ellis Rubin, Esq.

Robert M. Bader, Esq.

[TITLE OMITTED]

SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER APPROVING DESEGRE-

GATION PLAN FOR DADE COUNTY PUBLIC

SCHOOLS, AS MODIFIED, AND AMENDED

FINAL JUDGMENT

The Court has requested the School Board to submit

two reports so that the Court may be fully informed and

there will be an adequate record for appellate review.

These two reports were filed July 6, 1970 and July 20,

1970. After careful study and analysis of these reports,

the Court is prepared to rule informatively.

App. 52

Each school or group of schools which is the subject

of a report will be discussed and ruled upon separately.

The sequence of discussion will substantially follow the

sequence of this Court’s Order of June 26, 1970.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

A. L. Lewis, N. K. Cooper, Florida City,

West Homestead and Redondo Elementary Schools

The Court agrees that a rezoning of these five

schools is impractical. The sole reason is that in an at-

tempt to keep each school within its capacity (some of

which are strictly limited) zone lines will have to be drawn

in such a manner as to put two schools within one zone.

Considering there is a more effective and reasonable plan

available, rezoning is rejected.

The Lewis and Cooper Schools shall be paired. There

are no problems with relative capacities and the safety

factors in eliminating the boundary at Southwest 4th

Street are minimal.

The Florida City and West Homestead Schools shall

be paired by placing grades 1 and 2 at the Florida City

School and grades 3 to 6 at the West Homestead School.

The major objection of the School Board concerns ca-

pacities. However, in showing over-capacities, the School

Board is using the designed capacity figures. By using

the figures showing the capacities with the portables al-

ready on the site the over-capacity at the West Homestead

School is reduced to 60 students. The School Board esti-

mated membership figures show an enrollment of 40 stu-

dents over capacity. The over-capacity at the Florida

App. 58

City School is reduced to and under capacity of 20. In its

July 6, 1970 report, the School Board states that over-ca-

pacities can best be handled at the West Homestead

School. There are no serious safety factors.

F. C. Martin and Colonial Drive Elementary Schools

In pairing these two schools many factors are in-

volved. If grades 1 to 3 were housea at the Martin School

the capacities would be equalized. Pairing requires the

Colonial Drive sixth grade to be moved to Richmond

Heights Junior High School. The junior high school is

presently on a ten-hour day which creates an over-capacity

sufficient to house the Colonial Drive sixth grade. This has

the advantage of desegregating the Martin sixth grade

presently being housed at the junior high school.

As reasonable as this plan seems, the Court must re-

ject it. The Colonial Drive School is a “pod type” school.

Not only is a “pod type” school different in construction

and design but the instructional and educational program

is, of necessity, also unique. A “pod type” school cannot be

used in a traditional manner. Pairing would not in itself

destroy the apparent educational advantage of the “pod

type” school. However, it is the opinion of the principal

of the Colonial Drive School that the adjustment that must

be made by the students in going from one type of school

to the other type is much easier if made from “pod type”

to traditional. With this educational consideration in

mind it is necessary to house grades 1 to 3 at the Colonial

Drive School. Pairing in this manner would necessitate

the use of seven portables thus destroying the educational

effectiveness of the “pod type” school.

App. 54

Additionally, because of the geography of the two

zones, 183 students will require transportation and the

remaining students will be required to walk long distances

through remote, undeveloped land.

Practically every communication the Court has re-

ceived from concerned parents of the Colonial Drive School

(which is presently integrated) has pleaded that the Mar-

tin School be vaired with some other school in the area

(Vineland, Coral Reef Drive, Miami Heights, Howard

Drive, Richmond or South Miami Heights). Because the

Martin School zone is isolated on the north side of the

west end of Coral Reef Drive, the entire Martin School

population would need to be transported to one of these

schools.

The pairing of the Martin School with any other school

is rejected. :

Allapattah, Buena Vista and Santa Clara Elementary

Schools

The pairing of the Allapattah and Buena Vista

Schools is rejected because the Buena Vista School is to

be involved in a grouping to be discussed below.

At the May 22, 1970 hearing the School Board pre-

sented no testimony as to the educational and adminis-

trative problems caused by the continuing influx of

Spanish language origin students in the school system,

arising because of more than 300,000 refugees having

been admitted from Cuba as escapees from the Castro

regime. Not until the July 6, 1970 response was the

Court made aware of this problem. The Court made a

TREE Mt SE LE ge Ne CRE OI ate Fe Ae

App. 55

further request pertaining to this factor on July 10, 1970.

The Court now has an adequate record to evaluate the

significance of specially designed programs for Spanish

language origin students (hereinafter referred to as

Bilingual Education).

The Santa Clara School has a significant Bilingual

Education program. In pairing it with the Allapattah

School a duplication of the program would be required.

In addition, the Santa Clara School is the site of the only

southern component of the Southeastern Educational

Laboratory Project. The Allapattah School does not have

any special programs for the disadvantaged pupils. The

Court considers the duplication of the Bilingual Educa-

tion program and a disruption of the Southeastern Edu-

cational Laboratory Project total impediments to pairing

these two schools.

It appears to the Court that in pairing a predomi-

nantly Black school with a predominantly White school

with 75% Spanish language origin students, the two

schools would be integrated only in total figures. Once

inside the school building those who are involved in the

Bilingual Educational program would proceed to one

classroom while tie remaining students would proceed to

another classroom. Effective integration is thus aborted.

In the case of these two schools, the remaining students

would be about 90% Black.

With the addition of the traffic control equipment

recommended by the Department of Traffic and Trans-

portation the students could safely traverse Northwest

36th Street. However, it does not appear that the students

could safely negotiate around the entrance and exit

App. 56

ramps to the East-West Expressway at Northwest 12th

Avenue. This creates a serious safety hazard.

A further serious problem is created by the lack of

a sixth grade at the Allapattah School. If the Allapattah

sixth grade were brought into the pairing, a severe over-

capacity would be created. If the Santa Clara sixth grade

were removed to the Allapattah Junior High School it

would remain there only one year, returning to Lee

Junior High School for seventh grade. There is no room

at the Lee School to house the Santa Clara sixth grade.

Pairing is not educationally or administratively prac-

tical and, therefore, must be rejected.

Douglas and Riverside Elementary Schools

The pairing of these two schools involves the same

considerations as those discussed above concerning the

Santa Clara School. The Riverside School has a 97.5%

Spanish language origin population. The July 20, 1970

report indicates that the expected additional 100 students

have arrived at the Riverside School. In addition to the

regular Bilingual Education programs the School Board

expects to resume a special program to improve reading

performance. The Douglas School has two programs for

the disadvantaged pupils (PLAD and Head Start). Pair-

ing requires duplication of the Bilingual Education pro-

gram and either the loss of or duplication of the programs

for the disadvantaged.

The duplication of special programs is a sufficient

reason for not requiring the pairing of these two schools.

However, there are additional reasons. Both schools are

dist salen alae Rta cel? Cie ait A ii Sica ch ol gee RN sale Riad Meat eli Rebate ds

App. 57

presently substantially over capacity. Both schools are

presently utilizing the maximum number of portables.

The relative capacities of the schools do not allow

for a pairing without creating a severe over-capacity at

at least one of the schools.

The most logical route of travel for the approxi-

mately 1700 pupils who would be required to cross the

Miami River would be the Fifth Street Bridge. This

bridge is an extremely hazardous crussing for pedes-

trians as four streets converge at that point from the

south and three from the north. It is the focal point for

much of the traffic in the downtown area. The adjacent

and connecting streets are likewise hazardous.

Pairing would require transportation for 225 addi-

tional students.

For all of the above reasons the Court declines to

pair these two schools.

Comstock and Kelsey Pharr Elementary Schools

The Comstock School has an 84% Spanish language

origin pupil population which is expected to increase.

The Kelsey Pharr School has two programs for the dis-

advantaged pupils (PLAD and Mobile Reading Center).

The pairing of these two schools involves the same con-

siderations as those discussed above concerning the River-

side and Douglas Schools. Pairing is, therefore, rejected.

App. 58

Additionally, any pairing plan would leave the Kelsey

Pharr School at an under-capacity while the Comstock

School would be over-capacity even if it were to utilize

the maximum number of portables allowable.

Dunbar, Wheatley, Buena Vista, Miramar, Santa Clara,

West Dunbar and Douglas Elementary Schools

The Court’s order of June 26, 1970 approved the

HEW grouping plan but felt that it was to be considered

only as a minimum. That same order directed the School

Board to show why they could not involve five schools in

a single plan. That report submitted July 6, 1970, totally

failed in responding to the inquiry of the Court. By

Order dated July 10, 1970 the Court again requested

information. The report filed July 20, 1970 adequately

responds to the inquiry but fails to show good cause.

It was not until the July 6, 1970 report that the

School Board raised the problem with the Bilingual Edu-

cation program. At the May 22, 1970 hearing the sole

objection to the HEW grouping plan was that it destroys

the neighborhood school concept. The Court must presume

that in dealing with a group of schools where similar

programs exist at several of the schools there is some

sort of economy of scale involved making it less im-

practical to pair or group.

The Court has rejected the two pairing plans involv-

ing the Santa Clara and Douglas Schools. Therefore, in

a relatively compact area there are three predominantly

Black schools (Dunbar, Wheatley and Douglas) and four

predominantly White schools with substantial Bilingual

Education programs. All of the schools have a PLAD pro-

A STI ERIE TERRES PETE OY: Fa

BaEu OS cae RAD SD I Pe NT IS RAL RL RE OE

Eaaaeerenns

isi

a near eG ee

App. 59

gram except the Santa Clara and West Dunbar Schools.

The Head Start programs, which only involve five-year

olds, exist at the Miramar, Dunbar, West Dunbar and

Douglas Schools. Ihe total capacity of all seven schools

is 7,020 students. The total expected enrollment for all

seven schools is 6,820 students.

The Court feels that by utilizing a series of pairing

plans, a series of grouping plans or a total rezoning of

the area that all three of these predominantly Black

schools can be desegregated without a significant sacrifice

in the special programs. The Court iis aware that this

entire area is a business and commercial district but

feels certain that with the assistance of the Department

of Traffic and Transportation any possible safety hazards

that may exist will be eliminated.

The School Board is directed to use its peculiar

expertise in these matters to design a plan for these

schools which effectively desegregates the three pre-

dominantly Black schools. The Court feels that a pre-

dominantly Black school is desegregated when less than

85% of its enrollment is composed of Black students.

There are 3,761 Black students enrolled in these seven

schools which is approximately 55% of the total enroll-

ment. The School Board is under no direction to create

a 55-45 ratio in each of the seven schools but it should

be a factor to consider.

Carver, Sunset and Coral Gables Elementary Schools

The Court’s Order of June 26, 1970 requested the

School Board to submit a report showing how these

three schools could be rezoned without creating over

App. 60

capacities. Again, the report filed by the School Board

on July 6, 1970 is unresponsive. The Court does recognize

and fully accepts the representation of the School Board

that a conversion to a modified school day should be the

last resort. In returning 100 students from the Coral Ga-

bles School to the Carver School and 100 students from the

Carver School to the Sunset School those closest to the Car-

ver School will be the students who will be affected. The

students surrounding the Carver School are predomi-

nantly Black. The resulting percentages of Black stu-

dents at the three schools would be approximately as

follows: Coral Gables - 40% ; Carver - 58%; and Sunset -

8%. The Court does not consider this to be undesirable.

The HEW rezoning plan does present some safety

hazards in requiring students to cross South Dixie High-

way, LeJeune Road, Bird Road and Ponce de Leon Boule-

vard. However, with the existing traffic control devices

and those that might be recommended by the Department

of Traffic and Transportation these hazards are minimal.

The Carver and Coral Gables Schools could be de-

segregated by a pairing plan but this would require ap-

proximately twice the number of students to cross these

same streets. Pairing would not substantially change the

racial composition of the two schools from that of the

HEW plan as moc‘fied by the Court. The Court does not

reject a pairing plan rather it leaves it to the discretion

of the School Board.

The Court notes that Exhibit 2 to the July 22, 1970

report indicates that 122 students have been transferred

from the Carver School to the Tucker School. These stu-

dents are obviously the fifth and sixth grade students

App. 61

who live in the Tucker attendance zone. Since all of the

122 are Black students, the percentage of Black students

at the Carver School under the HEW plan as modified

by the Court or under a pairing pian would be greatly

reduced. The Court is unable to assess precisely the

significance of this transfer.

The Court approves the HEW rezoning plan with

appropriate modifications to relieve the over capacity at

the Coral Gables School. The School Broad is directed

to implement either a rezoning plan or a pairing plan. It

is possible that a “domino effect” may be created. The-

Court is without the expertise to assess exactly how other

attendance zones will be affected. This knowledge is

peculiarly within the expertise of the School Board. The

Court does find that a “domino effect” is not an im-

pediment to implementation of the rezoning plan.

The zones which might be affected are those of

the Sunset, Tucker, Dade and Coconut Grove Schools. In

changing any of these zone lines the School Board is

directed to promote as far as possible the creation of

substantially equivalent racial ratios in each school. This

is not an absolute directive, rather it is intended to insert

another consideration which may have been overlooked

in the past.

Dade and Tucker Elementary Schools

The Court has found immediately above that the

safety hazards involved in a rezoning of the Carver and

Coral Gables Schools were minimal. The two zones in-

volved here are immediately cast of the rezoned area.

However, the safety hazards are substantially greater in

App. 62

this area. The most logical crossing points for South

Dixie Highway (Bird Road and Douglas Road) are ex-

tremely congested intersections. Approximately 640 stu-

dents would be required to negotiate these crossings.

Once across South Dixie Highway the majority of stu-

dents would walk up or down Douglas Road. The north

side of Douglas Road has sidewalks. However, the south

side has none. Students would be forced to walk eight

to ten blocks on the shoulder of a very busy street. This

section of Douglas Road is lined with business establish-

ments and high density apartment buildings. The photo-

graphs attached to Exhibit 20 of the July 20, 1970 report

demonstrate the nature of the safety hazard caused by

the construction of a new sewer system in this area. This

is a serious impediment to pairing these two schools.

Additionally, the Dade School has a 68% Spanish

language origin pupil population requiring a Bilingual

Education program. The Tucker School has two pro-

grams for the under-privileged pupil (PLAD and Head

Start). Thus the same problems of duplication exist as

discussed above in the pairing of the Santa Clara and

Allapattah Schools.

The School Board attributes a great deal of educa-

tional significance to the difference between a graded

and an ungraded curriculum. The primary emphasis is

upon the difficulty of the students to adjust in converting

from one program to the other. The Court presumes that

this problem will be overcome in the first year. However,

since both schools will need to be on a graded program a

decided educational advantage will be lost to those stu-

dents who now attend, or would attend, the Dade School.

This is a significant consideration.

The Court must reject the HEW pairing plan.

!

App. 638

Arcola Lake and. Van E. Blanton Elementary Schools

The relative capacities of these two schools are con-

ducive to pairing. However, approximately 400 additional

students would require transportation. Without the con-

struction of a bridge at Northwest 12th Avenue at an

estimated cost of $13,000 and a 120-day delay, those stu-

dents who would be required to walk would have to cross

the Little River Canal at either the extreme east end or

the extreme west end of the attendance zone. Those stu-

dents crossing at the westerly end would travel through

residential zones. Those students crossing at the easterly

end would be required either to travel along Northwest

7th Avenue or take a substantially longer and less direct

route through the residential areas. The danger to the

students presented by crossing at either of the two

bridges and the danger of walking many blocks up heavily

travelled Northwest 7th Avenue or over busy Northwest

95th Street is substantial. Even if a bridge were con-

structed, those students who would use it would be re-

quired to walk many blocks north and south along North-

west 12th Avenue and to cross Northwest 95th Street

twice a day. The distances and the dangers related there-

to make it unsafe to require the pairing of these two

schools at this time. By separate order the Court will

instruct the Bi-racial Committee to make a further

investigation of the possibility of pairing these schools.

The Court also is concerned that by pairing the

“pod type” Arcola Lake School with the traditional

Blanton School that a great deal of the educational

superiority of the “pod type” school will be lost. The

capacity problem that exists in the pairing of the Colo-

nial Drive and Martin Schools is not present here but the

App. 64

students will be required to make the adjustment which

does have significant educational implications.

Holmes Complex, Little River and Edison Elementary

Schools

The Little River School has a significant enrollment

of Spanish language origin pupils as well as a Head Start

program, as well as the only Follow Through Program

in the school system. The Holmes Complex School has

four programs for the disadvantaged pupils (PLAD,

Mobile Reading Center, Talent Development and Head

Start). Since the Head Start programs work with five-

year-olds this factor is discounted but is still a considera-

tion. The duplication of efforts involved here, considering

that the Edison Park School has no special programs,

makes grouping of these schools educationally and ad-

ministratively impractical.

The relative capacities of the schools also make

grouping impossible. All of the schools are presently over

capacity. The Edison Park School which houses only

five grades has no space for portables. The Holmes Com-

plex School has room for only five portables which ap-

pear to be needed to house the over-capacity of 135

students. If the Edison Park sixth grade were returned

to the grouping, the over-capacities would be even

greater. The expected enrollments cannot be split be-

tween these schools in any other fashion.

Likewise it is impossible to pair the Holmes Complex

School with the Little River School. By splitting the

grades 1 to 3 and 4 to 6, the Little River School would

require five portables to house the over-capacity. By

baer

App. 65

splitting the grades 1 to 4 and 5 to 6 the Holmes Con-

plex School would exceed its maximum capacity using

portables. It should be noted that the Little River School

is Specially designed as a feeder school for Miami Edison

Middle School.

Although the three schools are rather closely grouped

and the Department of Traffic and Transportation could

create safe crossings of the major streets in the area, the

Court feels a concern for safety simply because of the

sheer numbers of students which will be required to walk

to school.

Lorah Park, Gladeview, Hialeah and Curtiss Elementary

Schools

The existence of the Seaboard Coastline Railroad

tracks and the surrounding industrial and commercial

area is a total impediment to either pairing, grouping, or

rezoning these schools, There are three available ;east-

west streets which cross this area, none of which could

be made reasonably safe because of the nature of the

traffic in the area. Since the schools are substantial

distances apart, all walking students will be requir

to walk much greater distances of up to two miles.

Pairing or rezoning would require transportation for an

additional 475 to 525 students.

The capacities of the schools would permit a pair-

ing of the Hialeah and Lorah Park Schools but the

pairing of the Hialeah and Gladeview Schools is fore-

closed.

App. 66

The Lorah Park School has two programs for the

disadvantaged pupils (PLAD and Head Start) while the

Gladeview School has three (PLAD, Mobile Reading

Center and Head Start). The Hialeah School has a Bi-

lingual Education program for its 60% Spanish language

origin students and while the Curtiss School does not as

yet heve a Bilingual Education program, it is expected

that it will soon require one as the percentage of Spanish

language origin students increases above 44%. As dis-

cussed above, a pairing or rezoning plan would require

a duplication or loss of all these programs thus con-

stituting a further impediment to desegregating these

schools. |

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS

B. T. Washington, Citrus Grove and Ada Merritt Junior

High Schools

The Court reluctantly but emphatically finds that the

grouping of these schools is impossible under every con-

sideration.

The Merritt School is expected to be at least 200 stu-

dents over capacity and there is no room for portables.

The Citrus Grove School is expected to be at least 50 stu-

dents over capacity even though it is utilizing a 10-hour

day schedule and there is no room for portables. Con-

sidering the limited capacities of these schools it is im-

possible to house an entire grade level of students from

all three schools at either of these two schools.

If the Merritt and Washington Schools were paired

an even greater over-capacity would be created at the

App. 67

Merritt School while a substantial under capacity would

be created at the Washington School. In a like manner,

by housing the combined eighth and ninth grades at the

Washington School, the Citrus Grove and Washington

Schools could be paired. However, Citrus Grove has ca-

pacity for the combined seventh grades only if it remains

on the 10-hour day. This is totally impractical, particular-

ly when the size and location of the two zones is con-

sidered.

In addition to the 10-hour day at the Citrus Grove

School there is a Bilingual Education program for the

schools’ predominantly Spanish language origin popula-

tion. The Merritt School is in an identical situation. The

Washington School is specially designed both education-

ally and in physical plant to provide an experimental

pilot and research program for disadvantaged youth,

all of whom are Black. Any pairing, grouping or rezon-

ing plan would effectively disrupt these special educa-

tion programs. The Court notes that both the Washing-

ton and Merritt Junior High Schools have two programs

in common for the disadvantaged pupil (Curriculum

Guidance Project and Neighborhood Youth Corps).

Because these three schools have a high concentra-

tion of pupils immediately surrounding the school there

are only two bridges that could be used to cross the

Miami River, (Northwest 12th Avenue and Northwest

5th Street), because most walking students will take the

most direct route. There are well over 4500 students in

these three attendance zones. If the schools are grouped,

approximately one-third will require transportation. Ap-

proximately the same number would be required to cross

the Miami River. As discussed above in connection with

App. 68

the Riverside School, the Northwest 5th Street Bridge

is a seriously dangerous bridge. The safety hazards in-

volved in the number of students crossing the Miami

River twice a day is substantial.

The Court finds that there is no practical method

by which these schools can be desegregated.

Allapattah, R. E. Lee Junior High Schools and Miami

Edison Middle School | }

The grouping of these three schools is foreclosed

by the capacities. The Miami Edison Middle School is, as

its name implies, a true middle school which means that

the educational program is uniquely designed for a spe-

cific purpose. All of the elementary feeder schools have

educatioral programs specially designed to prepare the

students for the middle school. A middle school houses

only grades 6 to 8. The Court feels that the middle school

concept should be kept intact. The Allapattah Junior High

School houses the sixth grade from the Allapattah Ele-

mentary School. The Lee Junior High School is a tradi-

tional school with grades seven through nine. With two

sixth grades, three seventh grades, three eighth grades,

and two ninth grades, the only way to group these

schools is to house the two sixth grades with the two

ninth grades. The Lee Junior High School has no space

for additional portables. The Miami Edison Middle School

has space for only four additional portables. The Alla-

pattah Junior High School has space for many additional

portables. Although space could be made available at the

Allapattah Junior High School there is not sufficient

space either to bring in the 453 students in the ninth

grade at the Miami Edison Senior High School or to drop

f

App. 69

out the sixth grades at the Miami Edison Middle and

Allapattah Junior High Schools.

Grouping creates a rambling zone which would re-

quire almost every student to cross one of three heavily

travelled streets (Northwest 7th Avenue, Northwest 36th

Street and Northwest 54th Street) and traverse one of

two heavily used North-South Expressway interchanges

(Northwest 36th Street and Northwest 54th Street).

With approximately 1000 students walking through this

area each day a safety hazard is created.

The Lee Junior High School has a 58% Spanish

language origin population requiring a substantial Bilin-

gual Education program. Grouping would require a three-

way duplication of programs. This is unreasonable.

The School Board has not submitted figures estimat-

ing the number of additional students who will require

transportation. Considering the rambling zone created

within a grouping plan, it is obvious that extensive trans-

portation will be required.

The pairing of the Lee Junior High and Allapattah

Junior High Schools is also impractical because there is

no place to put the Allapattah sixth grade.

The three schools could be rezoned only by severely

gerrymandering the zone lines so that each school would

have a similar ratio of white to black students. Of all the

seventh, eighth and ninth grade students in the combined

attendance zone (including the ninth grade at the Miami

Edison Senior High School), approximately 60% are

Black students. Simply stated, a rezoning would require

App. 70

the majority of students to cross the same streets in the

same manner as discussed above. Rezoning would prob-

ably require even more additional transportation than

under a grouping plan.

The Court finds that there is no practical method

by which the Allapattah Junior High School can be de-

segregated.

Brownsville and Miami Springs Junior High Schools.

The capacities of these two schools effectively pre-

vent their pairing. The Miami Springs Junior High

School houses only seventh and eighth grades while the

Brownsville Junior High School has the traditional three

grades, If the 705 ninth grade students now being housed

at the Miami Springs Senior High School were brought

back into the pairing, the two schools would be over

capacity by 710 students. The only way these two schools

could be paired within their capacities is to put the com-

bined seventh grade at the Brownsville Junior High

School and the combined eighth grades and the one ninth

grade at the Miami Springs Junior High School. This

results in most students spending only one year at each

of two schools before going to a third school. This would

completely disrupt the traditional concept of a junior

high school and is totally unreasonable.

Under either a pairing or rezoning plan approxi-

mately 600 additional students would require transporta-

tion. Those not being transported would be required to

cross the same industrial zone surrounding the Seaboard

Coastline Railroad tracks that has been found above to

present a serious safety hazard. The northern extension

App. 71

of the Miami River does not present a serious safety

hazard because many of the Miami Springs Junior High

School students are presently crossing it safely.

' Additionally there exists the recurring problem of a

Bilingual Education program at one school and a pro-

gram for the disadvantaged pupils at the other school.

Both schools have the Neighborhood Youth Corps pro-

gram. The Brownsville Junior High School has a Work-

Experience Program which, for obvious proximity rea-

sons, can function effectively only in the Brownsville

Community. This program is, itself, a sufficient im-

pediment to pairing or rezoning.

There is no practical method by which the Browns-

ville Junior High School can be desegregated.

In addition to the above, the Court’s Order dated

July 10, 1970 requested information concerning safety

factors at schools which the Court ordered paired or

grouped in its Order dated June 26, 1970. The School

Board has responded in relation to two recommendations

made by the HEW plan and adopted by the Court.

With the addition of the traffic control devices rec-

ommended by the Department of Traffic and Trans-

portation the Court finds that the safety hazards in pair-

ing the Rainbow Park and Opa Locka Elementary Schools

are not substantial.

tet iS, le RADU ah Ne VRE a 18 fae.

In regard to the grouping cf the Moton, Perrine and

Bel-Aire Elementary Schools the Court remains concerned

about the safety hazards that exist in 665 students cross-

ing one of the most heavily travelled thoroughfares in Dade

—

e —

lf EG: ae . Pi ENT EET IO LT TTT IEC IIR

App. 72

County (U.S. Highway +1). However, with the addition

of the traffic control devices recommended by the Depart-

ment of Traffic and Transportation and the coordinated

efforts of other appropriate governmental agencies the

safety hazards will not be substantial. Accordingly, the

School Board’s alternative request for a rehearing is denied.

The School Board failed to submit information on

safety factors concerning the HEW grouping plan re-

jected by the Court for the Bunche Park, Parkview and

Scott Lake Schools. In reviewing the statistics on ca-

pacity the Court finds that the HEW grouping plan is

feasible. Using the HEW plan as submitted 850 students

would attend the Scott Lake School. However, the most

recent statistics show that this would create an over-

capacity of only 40 students. The School Board itself

intends to house 850 students there in the Fall.

In the alternative, the School Board could house the

fifth and sixth grades at the Bunche Park School. This

would necessitate splitting the Black students who reside

in the Bunche Park attendance zone between the remain-

ing two schools, according to their capacities. It appears

that this plan might necessitate additional transportation

and increased walking distances

The safety factors appear to be minimal. Therefore,

the Court directs the School Board to implement either the

HEW grouping plan or, in its discretion, some more de-

sirable alternative.

No information was submitted on safety factors con-

cerning the rejected HEW plan of pairing the Young and

Westview Schools. The Court, however, reaffirms its prior

7 EO RE AO LER RAT ENT ) AE OE IPE Se oe LOR RE Os é ee eT ee ee » a

App. 73

finding that since there is but one crossing for Opa Locka

Boulevard, <n arterial thoroughfare, there is a substantial

safety factor presented. Also the Court remains hopeful

that the majority-minority transfer policy adopted below

will encourage many white students in the Opa Locka

School zone to transfer to the Young School which has

available capacity.

The Court has reconsidered, on its own initiative, the

safety factors involved in the modifications of the School

Board plan already adopted and remains of the opinion

that they are not substantial. It is presumed that the

School Board will seek to enlist the coordinated efforts of

all affected governmental agencies to further minimize

the safety factors.

The School Board has requested that the Florida High

School Athletic Association be impleaded in this lawsuit

for the purpose of determining whether students who take

advantage of the Majority-Minority transfer policy will

become ineligible for athletic purposes. The issue has not

as yet arisen and may not. Therefore, without indicating

any disposition on the merits, the request is denied. At

the ‘time, if at all, a serious problem does arise the School

Board will be allowed to take appropriate legal measures.

So that there will be no confusion, the Court wishes

to point out to all parties and intervenors that the Fifth

Circuit has limited the appeal time in school desegregation

cases. The following is the pertinent quotation from Single-

ton v. Jackson Municipal Separate School District, 419

F.2d 1211, 1222 (5th Cir. 1969) :

“In the event of an appeal or appeals to this

court from an order entered as aforesaid in the

district courts, such appeal shall be on the origi-

nal record and the parties are encouraged to

a mw aes492 AQIS RNa PR FA PES ERE OG “De RINSE PE Na .

Peat Ape,

BAS vith fee

SALES th NM LTE ONE EG. Wot

App. 74

appeal on an agreed statement as is provided

for in Rule 10(d), Federal Rules of Appellate

Procedure (FRAP). Pursuant to Rule 2, FRAP,

the provisions of Rule 4(a) as to the time for

filing notice of appeal are suspended and it is

ordered that any notice of appeal be filed within

fifteen days of the date of entry of the order

appealed from and notices of cross-appeal within

five days thereafter. The provisions of Rule 11

are suspended and it is ordered that the record

be transmitted to this court within fifteen days

after filing of the notice of appeal. The provisions

of Rule 31 are suspended to the extent that the

brief of the appellant shall be filed within fifteen

days after the date on which the record is filed

and the brief of the appellee shall be filed within

ten days after the date on which the brief of ap-

pellant is filed. No reply brief shall be filed ex-

cept upon order of the court. The times set herein

may be enlarged by the court upon godd cause

shown.”

Amendment of the Majority to Minority Transfer

policy as proposed by the Board in its Reply filed July 6,

1970, is hereby approved.

AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT

Except as herein modified, the Memorandum Opinion

and Final Judgment entered June 26, 1970 are in all

respects ratified and affirmed.

DONE AND ORDERED at Miami, Florida this 24th

day of July, 1970.

/s/ C. Clyde Atkins

United States District Judge

Board’s

Plan

Number of schools left

all- or virtually

all-Negro under —

Elementary 30

Junior High 4

Senior High 2

86

Number of Negro students

attending all- or

virtually all-Negro

schools under —

Elementary 23,403

Junior High 6,116

Senior High 5,158

37,672

Percentage of Negroes

attending all- or

virtually all-Negro

schools 64%

App. 76

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

NOS. 29039 and 29179

HERBERT PATE, et al.,

Plaintiffs

vs.

DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees

vs.

CORAL REEF CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC., et al.,

Intervenors-Appellants

HERBERT PATH, et al.,

Plaintiffs-Appellees

vs.

DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees-Cross Appellants

Vs.

ALICE LOVE, CARSWELL WASHINGTON, et al.,

Intervenors-Appellants-Cross Appellees

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

(June 5, 1970)

App. 77

Before BROWN, Chief Judge, MORGAN and_IN-

GRAHAM, Circuit Judges. :

BY THE COURT:

It appearing to this court that the District Court for

the Southern District of Florida held additional hearings

on May 22, 1970, on the adoption of a plan to establish a

unitary school system in Dade County, Florida. It is

HEREBY ORDERED the above-named appeals be re-

manded to the District Court for the Southern District of

Florida pending the approval by said district court of any

new orders or plans, and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED

that any new plans, together with any Findings of Fact

and Conclusions of Law thereon, shall be filed with this

court within 20 days from the date hereof. Jurisdiction of

these appeals is retained in this court during the limited

remand for the purposes above stated.

REMANDED for further proceedings consistent here-

with.

[TITLE OMITTED]

ORDER APPOINTING BI-RACIAL COMMITTEE

The following are hereby appointed as a Bi-Racial

Committee in this cause for the purposes hereinafter re-

cited:

Member

NEAL ADAMS

DR. ROBERT M.

ALLEN

CARLOS J.

ARBOLEYA

REV. JOHN A.

FERGUSON

MRS. CHARLES A

FINKELSTEIN

MRS. THEODORE

GIBSON

FRANK J.

MAGRATH

MRS. CARRIE P.

MEEK

MRS. STANLEY F.

MILLEDGE

A. D. MOORE

ROBERT H. SIMMS

EDWIN W. TUCKER

App. 78

Business Address

and Phone

4825 N. W. 27th Ave-

nue, Miami, Florida

634-4965

Division of Continuing

Education

University of Miami

Coral Gables, Florida

Fidelity National Bank

of South Miami

5880 Bird Road

South Miami, Florida

Second Baptist Church

11111 Pinkston Drive

Miami, Florida

233-4154

National Conference of

Christians & Jews

409 Dupont Plaza

Center, Miami, Florida

373-7658

Office of Community

Services

Miami rad Junior

Colleg

11380 N “w. 27th Ave.

Miami, Florida 33167

685-4441

Channel 7

a N. cf Causeway

N. Bay Vi

751-6692

c/o Model Cities

6207 N. W. 127th Ave.

691-0120

Community Relations

Board

age, Fla.

377-5241

Office ot Community

ae

6180 N. E. 4th Court

Miami, Florida

757-6241

Home Address

and Phone

2956 N. W. 48 St.

Miami, Florida

634-6679

6510 S. W. 65 St.

South Miami, Fla.

661-6316

1941 S. W. 23rd St.

Miami, Fla.

446-0730

11525 S. W. 136 Ter.

815 Catalonia Ave.

Coral Gables, Fla.

443-5433

3401 William Ave.

Miami, Florida

445-2224

7730 S. W. 134th St.

Miami, Fla.

235-1216

6830 N. W. 28th Ave.

3535 Hiawatha Ave.

Miami, Florida

448-0278

549 N. W. 50th St.

Miami, Fla.

758-2893

4125 N. W. 10th Ave.

Miami, Florida

759-6143

10650 N. E. 10th Ct.

Miami Shores, Fla.

757-6968

App. 79

This Committee shall have the responsibility (1) to

recommend to the Dade County School Board and the

Court ways to maintain a unitary system, (2) to review

the operation of the majority to minority transfer rule

and the transportation system, (3) to assist the Dade

County School Board in presenting to the Court any prob-

lem encountered by the Board in the operation of its Je-

segregation plan heretofore or hereafter modified and

approved by this Court or the Court of Appeals for the

Fifth Circuit, (4) to consider the selection of school sites,

and such other special assignments as the Court may

direct. The Committee is authorized to hold hearings and

make recommendations to the Scho~l Board and the

Court in connection with these activities. The chairman-

ship shall alternate annually between a white chairman

and a black chairman. Dr. Robert Ailen is appointed in-

terim chairman with the duty to see that a meeting and

election of a chairman takes place within 10 days.

The following special assignments are given to the

Committee:

Wihin sixty days after opening of the Fall term of

the 1970-71 school year, the Committee is directed to file

a report with the Court and the School Board as to (1)

its findings and recommendations with respect to the

over-all operation of the Desegregation Plan, as imple-

mented by the Board; (2) the practices and procedures

utilized at Mays Junior High School, in effecting the in-

tegration of that facility during the 1969-70 school term,

for possible utilization thereof by the Board at other

integrated schools in the system; and (3) the possibility

of pairing Arcola Lake and Van E. Blanton Elementary

Schools and to determine whether such pairing, in its

App. 80

opinion, is economically, educationally and administra-

tively sound.

ENTERED at Miami, Florida this 10th day of Au-

gust, 1970.

C. CLYDE ATKINS

United States District Judge

ce. All Counsel of Record

All Members of the Committee

A PLAN FOR DESEGREGATION

OF THE DADE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

1970 - 1971

The Dade County School Board recognizes its affirma-

tive responsibility to provide a desegregated, unitary and

non-racial school system within which no person is to be

effectively excluded from any school because of race or

color, and it recognizes its responsibility to assign teachers

without regard to race so that the schools throughout the

system are not racially identifiable by their faculties.

THEREFORE the following plan for desegregation

is presented:

I, STUDENT ASSIGNMENT

A. ATTENDANCE — The 2oard has adopted color-

blind residential zones of attendance for each of the school

centers in Dade County and has eliminated all dual or

optional attendance zones. Under this attendance zone

App. 81

policy, each student must attend the school serving his

attendance zone, absent compelling, non-racial reasons for

transfer.

B. PAIRING OF SCHOOLS — The Board has rec-

ommended pairing for the following schools:

TO BE PAIRED

Ponce de Leon Junior High School and George

Washington Carver Junior High School, the 8th

and 9th grades to attend Ponce de Leon, the 7th

grade to attend Carver. These schools are located

less than-two miles apart.

PAIRED NOW

J.R.E. Lee Elementary School and Ludlam Ele-

mentary School. The plan calls for kindergarten

and grades 5 and 6 at Lee, and kindergarten and

grades 1 through 4 at Ludlam. These elementary

schools are located less than two miles apart.

Commencing in September, 1970, J.R.E. Lee is to

be converted to a special center and desegregated.

C. PHASE-OUT OF FACILITIES — The Board has

phased out the following schools: Mays Senior High School,

George Washington Carver, Booker T. Washington and

North Dade. All of these buildings were reused for other

purposes and are desegregated.

D. MAJORITY TO MINORITY TRANSFER — In

addition to the above, the Dade County School Board has

adopted a majority to minority transfer policy.

The attendance zones are attached hereto as Ap-

pendix A.

App. 82

As a result of the steps taken by the School Board, the

following will result:

It is estimated that of the 250,000 students expected

to enroll in Dade County schools in September 1970, there

will be 60,000 black and 190,000 white; that in excess of

36,000 black students will be involved in bi-racial or in-

tegrated situations; that approximately 116,500 white

students will be involved in bi-racial or integrated situa-

tions. T?~.°s will remain 21 schools which will be all black,

or more than 95% black. There will be approximately 51

schools which will be all white, or in excess of 95% white;

and there will be 147 regular schools which will be desegre-

gated. In addition, there will be 8 special schools which

are special schools serving the entire county for exceptional

children, which will be desegregated, making a total of 155

schools of 227 which will be desegregated, or approxi-

mately 70%.

II. FACULTY AND STAFF ASSIGNMENTS

1. To achieve an equitable distribution of black ad-

ministrators assigned to schools from among the admin-

istrative staff available, the number to be assigned to any

school will be determined by the following guidelines:

a. Not more than one black administrator in any

elementary school.

b. Not more than two black administrators in

any junior or senior high school.

Future appointments of administrative personnel in

schools will be made in accordance with policies and regula-

tions of the School Board.

App. 83

2. At least one black staff member will be assigned

to counselling duties at each junior and senior high school.

3. The staffs of elementary schools will be reor-

ganized so that in each elementary school the proportion

of black and white teachers will approximate the 24%

black — 76% white ratio existing among all elementary

teachers in the school system.

4. The staffs of junior high schools will be reor-

ganized so that in each junior higi: school the proportion of

black and white teachers will approximate the 21% black

— 79% white ratio existing among all junior high teachers

in the school system.

5. The staffs of senior high schools will be reor-

ganized so that in each senior high school the proportion

of black and white teachers will aproximate the 12.2%

black — 87.8% white ratio existing among all senior high

teachers in the school system.

6. Teacher aides serving general instructional pro-

grams at the elementary and secondary school levels will

be reassigned to achieve an approximation of equal racial

distribution of aides in each school, with the reservation

that Cuban aides, senior citizens aides, and others serving

special programs will not be shifted to schools not having

programs which require the use of such specialized aides.

7. A procedure based on seniority for transfer of

teachers among schools to secure the required racial balance

will be established by the school system. Voluntary requests

from teachers seeking to be reassigned will be honored

when possible.

App. 84

Staff members required to be transferred under this

desegregation plan will be directed to accept the new as-

signments as a condition of continued employment, in

acc rdance with the December 10, 1969 order of the Court.

8. Teachers who have been notified they may not be

reemployed in 1970-71, teachers on annual contract for

the third year and beyond who will be continued on annual

contract in 1970-71 and teachers who will be continued on

annual contract in 1970-71 and teachers retiring at the

end of the 1969-70 school year will not be transferred

under this plan. Also annual contract teachers in their

first year of teaching in Dade County who have not had

prior teaching experience will not be transferred involun-

tarily uader this plan.

9. School centers established to serve special educa-

tional purposes will not be included in the staff reorganiza-

tion plan in accordance with the report of the Florida

School Desegregation Consulting Center (Appendix D) in-

dicating that the level of staff desegregation in those

centers is satisfactory. The Pre-School Migrant Centers

will be add« to the list. Staff members assigned to the

special teacher education project known as the Triple-T

Program, operated in cooperation with the University of

Miami, will not be transferred until completion of the

project.

10. To effect to extensive reorganization of school

staffs required by this plan and to provide for an intensive

period of inservice education as recommended by the School

Desegregation Consulting Center, schools will be closed

for pupils for a four-day period (in addition to a teacher’s

work day already scheduled in the school system calendar).

App. 85

11. As recommended by the Florida School Desegre-

gation Consulting Center, the inservice education programs

attached to this plan as Appendix C will be offered during

the period of final school desegregation to the extent that

financing can be provided.

Implementation of the inservice progiam calls for

the release of approximately twenty well qualified black '

teachers to provide staff support services to teachers trans-

ferred to new schools. This reduction in black teachers

available for transfer to predominatly white schools will

be made up by appointments to vacancies in those schools

as qualified black teachers become available. The black

teachers assigned to staff support responsibilities during

the desegregation period will be returned to classroom

assignments in appropriate positions when the special staff

support program is completed.

12. In the future, the school system will continue

to include in its programmed recruitment of new staff

members efforts to secure the services of additional black

staff; however, reorganization of staffs during the 1969-70

school year in each school to achieve the racial ratio cited

above for elementary, junior high, and senior high schools

will constitute the basis of final elimination of the dual

school structure in regard to staffing.

Appendix B contains a listing by schools of the num-

ber of staff members to be transferred under this plan.

(Appendix B atteched to teacher desegregation plan and

labeled Appendix A).

Since the school system budget for the 1969-70 fiscal

year cannot provide funds for inservice education on the

App. 86

scale indicated in the inservice component (see Appendix

C, Appendix B in staff desegregation plan) of this staff

desegregation plan, the school system will seek funds from

the federal government to finance the additional inservice

activities.

Il. CONSTRUCTION AND SITE ACQUISITION

The Board has long prior to the adoption of this plan

had a policy by which new school sites are acquired and

construction of new buildings in the school system is ac-

complished only after study of a special staff committee

to determine whether or not said new site or new building

construction tends to hamper the continued progress of

desegregation in the Dade County Schools.

It is believed that the Dade County schools ave in

compliance with the constitutional requirements with

regard to construction and site acquisition.

IV. TRANSPORTATION

For a long period of time prior to the adoption of this

plan, the Board has had a policy of transportation of

school children based upon economy, efficiency, and totally

devoid of racial discrimination for the transporting of

children to the Dade County schools. The Dade County

schools will continue this policy in the future.

It is believed that the Dade County schools are in

complaince with the constitutional requirements with

regard to transportation.

App. 87

V. EXTRA-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES AND SPORTS

Dade County schools have had in effect for several

years policies by which there is to be no discrimination as

to students participating in extra-curricular activities such

as band, cheer leaders, marching groups, school interest

clubs, as well as sports, so that no student is effectively

barred from participation in any of these activities be-

cause of race or color.

DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE

OFFICE OF EDUCATION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20202

May 15, 1970

Honorable C. Clyde Atkins

United States District Court

Southern District of Florida

Miami Division

Miami, Florida

Re: Dade County Public Schools

Dear Sir:

Pursv2nt to the Order of the Court, we are delivering

herewith forty (40) copies of the plan of desegregation

formulated and recommended by the U. S. Office of Edu-

cation, Department of Health, Education and Welfare.

Sincerely,

/s/ Ernest E. Bunch

for: Jerry Brader, Director

Division of Equal Educational

Opportunities

U. S. Office of Education

Encl. (40)

Berner mite tiettsecen es nese miami

App. 88

DESEGREGATION REPORT

DADE COUNTY SCHOOLS

May 15, 1970

The following is the report to the United States

District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami,

Division, concerning the Dade County Public Schools’ plan

for school desegregation, pursuant to the order of the

Court. This report has been prepared by the Division of

Equal Educational Opportunities, Office of Education,

United States Department of Health, Education, and

Welfare.

Throughout the preparation of the report, the Dade

schools which were considered “target” schools for study

were those whose black student populations exceeded 85

per cent. It should be understood that this was not in-

tended to imply a definitive description of what might be

considered an effectively desegregated school. It provided

the guidelines, however, for in-depth studies of these

schools.

The report is organized into six sections, each section

dealing with one of the six administrative sub-districts

of the school system.

SOUTH DISTRICT

Elementary Schools

According to the Dade County plan it is estimated

that there would be four elementary schools in the South

District enrolling more than 85 per cent black student

bodies: A. L. Lewis, R. R. Moton, Pine Villa, and West

Homestead. They are considered in three groups.

WAT it GR aka SEGISEA SERRE oh nS

App. 89

Group #1. A. L. Lewis and West Homestead Ele-

mentary Schools. These two schools can be effectively

desegregated by rezoning them and Redondo, Neva King

Cooper, and Florida City Elementary Schools. All five

would have approximately the same proportion of black

and white children, and there would be no change in tran-

sportation requirements. There would have to be a slight

change in the Avocado Elementary School attendance zone

but this would have no effect upon the racial composition

of its student body. Maps which illustrate how the bound-

aries for these attendance zones might be drawn along

with pupil data on the redrawn zones follow. It should be

pointed out that neither these zone boundaries, nor pupil

data are absolute, but should be considered estimates with

the School Board using them as models for further re-

finement.

Group #2. R.R. Moton Elementary School should be

grouped with the Perrine and Bel-Aire Elementary Schools.

Grades 1 through 4 should be assigned to Perrine and

Bel-Aire Schools with grades 5 and 6 attending R. R.

Moton. U. 8. Highway +1 (South Dixie Highway), a

heavily traveled route, separates Moton from Perrine and

Bel-Aire but there is a traffic signal which would provide

the children safe crossing between the schools. This would

result in each of the three schools having approximately a

40 per cent black student body. Data on this recommenda-

tion follow.

Group #3. The Pine Villa Elementary School cannot

be further desegregated without the use of transportation.

No recommendation is made.

&

%

2

J --— + 4 N VEE | wy y ' ' |

tes ees ewes

; —— N fA EE Ae

; a | } Rk Inset ¢

ae 2} « ee} * 4 a. & aN | bp eneey- eas -.. 2

AU aaethinaer red) i LSE LR Bteeeaing Cooper st)

: « * se Woe ob ee] —s or, @ ee oe

Svat vi | ' 3s BS :

Brts.t. N.. me) Pe eer ees Se Fe

° Her Mss! RA Sag ee] ea 8 se (he

. cuss - vi vu i {| os ard

— -. Proeast a q es — Z

: sw y : wf tvs of Mowe Or 7,

-.e =aamee @. @ cmc ee a b om O0@ Cuma choae eo cams 4S. ©

t4 N | I asl a ace ES .

: Ry pTUSae* of Be Periye*

e LD ee “0 Bits Gor : yy, eG . -

i ‘t euateettisl a 4 4 NX:

s vot ae ae

x Cy ieee rahe Jas 4 epee - , : .

. >! SM Nis a a Lay

. os Mews Ste “ot ;

ee —< a N thy i" = oe al

et tee BBS f ee: !

; f:. { Aisa ee AR wae ee & a tier se

-_— ‘ * AILLEDL aS Ae reN “wey R-4-0-gdo ed meg wet AANA _-

' NES a ED peed Stl, :

aoe 2 ; 1 a e oe

. ‘ \ tics » : ( . | --f

eo : Las regret Gc aes

Cg _ me =f > e

sii r Na fess: get

é: . : ~ a? em e

forang hee LS DA Ho.

: | oe Hy A Edverds i Sone

. - ee, Pony : ;

= . _BActaut Vining vey) bry! stew Ga : ‘

raed ; EO og rca VST ISLES LTP LIT LY +: os

J : me emt N , :

phuws | ss \ ‘

° re . >> a Maem 2 $j

“h 7 o \ , <

; i= a a ‘

j : ° Pi 3Ter ay 4 | _florido City 3 ; =

; . 3S! ws St % tee <f 3

| ¢ ‘ aE fe LF) RN f

} = ? a Na? se f Et - \ ts zi

= ye +) en a x:

| 3 N Lis 1 z ‘ts Cotes 7" ev é

St. Gwore fre sor, [¢ dosh Ge] tie col ane S :

aa | Mer gee i

. > a

' a) é 2 S1 p ? St q

AL, Lic 2 eae \ a .

ia 9 ) ee “ > °

: ° e Sy a. 2% $9 \ >

i 1. @M", if < NN <| «- 4 5 ‘ iI ¥

> - 4 &

” NY }- = 5 St a!

GREP wat, F iar s WW 38 ¢

‘ / $ 2} .*)" oy ’ * Ff °

26 Sw $32 $¢ - ase & en il , i. ee e 4 ' - A o°c¢coes$ses

Sr 353 aa Q * *

254] st . ¥ ° :

ts 4355] cy a e i °- : N

: , —s; 355 | se e* &. ‘c K

‘ “T3562 $e ae ‘ ° + 4

“ @Pee> fae | a

: ete ase aS

Bx tp N

pS | ne \ tee te

r —o | OMATALECL IL ALE CALTESPISLEIL LOA suman? we

. i Pe * 7 fC, 7 i

echt et

\ 87 .

cs >

N t nah ;- a ; ere

|

!

?

!

‘

i

|

'

App. 92

pote | ‘- [J rope A} E

¢*

. ;

4

of Us-ers * 27? 2 +> _

eT er nN th Se ee A VSALDSAIS AISA CLEUAPLAPLAS LTT PLE LEL LOL RTE LET LETC ERP LES

| _*.* Ps rie a

SS bod 3 : e .

ae ae

‘ ¥ em o a ser s. «eR “Ty

’ <n Pe |-—

X a f. 276 |. & was

. : ¢; | a ii ip ! 3 x ‘EB

z : 2 : ~a8 ‘i Iveteie | gt of = MES £0

actese te a sae ‘ I 1- Se

4 PS - \ ;

< 202 se »

Seuth Ocde

/

(

l

oo

f

|

VAT PLES LEA 4

: eS

cn

“Na ee

ae Bi ’

'¥

uws>

es

|

.

a

at

S

Ss

Bisecyae Or.

4 * }- j 208 at

2 n iH y |

. - y YW . i

re ee ee N

‘ 2 fee Nc ePeomenete i) $ °

Hy < i ae pi eee ) Ck ‘

. . e » a

= FY five Sees — eeu £

Zile tert tess” 2 R . ‘i

i ia ew an » oecce z > }

= I sg rates : ne LP end

N a 4 gars

+ : ‘7,

° ; 2h-z ; EG ty %

pee FE Gre tee : = 2%

ohn. s .- 3 % ie

. why Byres ‘ aif We.”

. ; ees “Xs \

. ] I aN’ as re thee ‘ug $$$ > El.tet. t—v «! 1

i - MABE CET BB i ame #

eit TN & _ oe

- Gil §, 3 $ : 3c t tae seed

N + is pas. Cee Soe ne eto ?

2 oe Oy . ere.

ee ae te ander Ye re |

et SN See pPmCeT es» c . Ge

—| a St arn “2972 coan i seeeii tune ae ee wtiarss te

on Ee acon —_ - N43 te a IE P - ¢ : — Sieg

310 ¥ * AN we? @ Les fon 5 Z. ry is; zs < mie 2 F) aose.,

eee Se ye le hee, Bo Yo -T- 2D aS

zee P ged , iy Bm et § Rate) j E 1342 e.

1 are: Sess sasNcsone ete -£ prt —ns sy — soe 15 neste nner LAP AAEAETAL

‘i ee ie A oe 3 P

243 PSR Saree : . i

eh rd oe er ben t — > |

a a fe ole “yy eee pm 2 -

oe Ree pe Bae RS PETS y

trr \ “34 nt oe tah 4 oo mann ga ee mow

—- clk: $ 3H! re 2 = 2 7 A Vp, ey a : | : =

aR el ated | —

.e soo 40 x : : 33) 36 2 C0227 Af . as i. 4 «Mees OF . oo

PE sc Has be Kes sa 8-3

Ree Ke AREoger |

a Wes es ee aaa Ai ISS P i

. 2%.’ ‘9 . ' *, . 7

; 34 fos S 4 a | | “8. 4 evan Uerecrany

ee er F -: ae an i cere Lif res ie . ? oe - erapeeee 28

'~m @y. fb one ~o ew ery ee | e

. S , Pe oe . * tae red oe 2

ae | t Lf o,..$0)5,07-3. 5 290-79 sores, Lites

ad . -e tN ° B 4 - .

“, obs 4 eH ae! SS. . Luer, s pee Pe es, Tea

‘ ‘ Raemetedis’ . ‘ t “a ag ee : Fae hE G. “ro vice crams bdle eS sig

fc. +9 ae fatty ny |e:

<<) oe Bee VN paemwovA Tali + ij

» i he. Yi rigetsd ft a ere bis ‘. 088

'

ee . e

ah % Sitists:

2 <: Q SZ estece i

. x Sey ceeeee :

e *. : *% N te ts Ro ey a | .

- . 7

“ weer toys vie |

° . ‘

id }.. 3 ‘| db

7 . oe oan 0

y | ¥ ; “ ‘| ‘et

” ' ’ 3 2

A’ ——_ ~ a Lay 2) bg

%. eyt:on ms | . $ i 5 S)

NY fr ; 2 (leis

a) : “39 74

2) eevee ay . ee ne

\ ‘ohh &

N is |S

| : beast dS

iss | a

\ ee 23!

=N ee s=-% 33

r N Po: - 5

“ ee *. 5-Lpngng oy-0-4 ai f° betas

% ONT TT oe { .

: 2 |

A se 7 bs .

“ eae | " t

eave

efae .

338 2 . | RI mn €

Sotse ~ \ o 333

eee oa 22) ‘

Nw \- 7 2o3

“OX fst: CN a .

SEN = — bee i. 4 A ,.. a. 4.» oy oe

. :

» .

>

| g

| . be

j Slay snasieieianmeiiig tr

| e ae 9° ee 9 OSB ote 0

OB ‘ “| sin sem wee

H i 2S) S54 stat rp So. 22%)

‘ Sv aes x © my. Nah ff 3S sant) ) a 72 .

| oi ac kf [ice ei peer STF Bd Oa

| ue . 9 e< = bd as . " aoe a od

| bol P slsizcletide “iy Dg 4 Qi “4 Noa Ted pres

i RR Per rt are CPLA Pera q wae “s a7 a os pe Wet b

. Cece Bay ie 5 °6’ siti =. ae P otis — SiS

° Se y nae ar hae SR Ra q.. nr ps" feted ~Qi mors es 4X

A 54 oA ;:.8¢ fe perms core. $ “t. wt —_—— \--4 tame Your eel on eae ase -<

§ EE . 8s 3 | } Carn eel & 3

4 \ j awk * : : ‘ O-8 wr} ee ey | > is

a :. 2h im 3 ~“S | | ge —4-- rm ses —! f 3 ai perry a

a r4 =j~- Veaerrrn once ery eae sii, rig : a if pros fns- 2g : uel be 6 ae

A ma ooo} HP ts ~ Ao ¢ 7 fs: hi

i ae: ay. ia See, af B mgd , .

—_ ° iis — Shes SG ee rw rae Sik

3 :| Peco y ete | ~t. al ta og iD soe eal ss

i pn af . | ot: a “ 7 > 2

a ee ke, : is = yen a k i Lith

“Tee — ‘2 a a .” a> Ps at hag. eee os or +.

‘ 2? ( 5] | 3 eS P Bee aa fa de |

: orang sh a ae Bye AS a ‘ “CSE iz

e & 1 7 € sf =e | ’ ;

: a. ae APS a S2A= Lac — See ecorerereen ale ~onenl Lop o-—

vee hg oe <i ai wats | .

—3 | i lstas:s EE i Cn oe

. 3 Wr Nears * ¥ ..° Ne epee Fcaee

q Ld ee. —— é . o-*, . ?

N | 7 N ~ J ij > douneastn* 4 : Ee

é oY ., 5 5 oe ns ql ie Pee ety ~L jl $4!

. : : ee z ; Py tnt OQ ce 2

$ ae 33 ' | eae. i See

: © 4. OV scT - 4 a } ~o <y

a : aN ° . ° * . Ss

= . Ss 6 = 7 Loin —

ey a ee ae ee “ay ~: _ ca _— oo - © P

+ aS OLE ~ e <7 4° ve S38 ‘ 089

Pa ee aS - ” et see . .

<. ‘ie sola ‘ bs ims cheat gamed si i a -s-

oS AT Oy aa

le

‘ P

. "}——- *-————— - —— : ¢: “hee ie ~&

ae ! be ta

Ketein fe Ae i ne! Pall ; ST AAT LA IL

CRIVALSIL SIP OR ISLES LIS ODS LIS AIO ETS o aS Nea SMIL ADS thn eiattinier’ Vpuniaes — "SMES tee ;

& ,

e . | N a ‘

ee N {

Re ' J

e a = x } ee

. a

a { N >» g

. <

- : +203 St ©; .

a

Rescoyne Or

Veseseness f ri 1

‘

—

| E 4 : Redortle j[Rve p'‘Promenoce ;

ii

Lea

‘

°

.

-_—_—--—

.

——

es ,

>

2

SALA IALA

.

a

i] "Ste we ’ -

Vewecar em st 0° came ap eum «-

; 123925 5...

‘fest Lele 49

. .

1@? Ave

Pus Sean $ gite

Country tud @e

e

ar)

a“

, + Weep) re sy ‘ hiss liteces 2 ‘

e | ; : ‘i ae 1. wpe af *

Avocede ot Wt 3 Fob BP = 3 t: neem MOLLE LLTILTE

i : ‘ js "4 BY e“¥ N : Z-

ge—ns,R ie

; . e ve iw eine \ <> 3

Q oat ~C—seonnesd me R22 E

P wi pay Was i oP

- vs x ste 3 a =e —— ee ee Qn:

: e . i * “ 7: N boris

zeit! ° A RS a

Hout 9 aN i,

r 3 , ve \ e ayes N q 2 =

any 100? Wer, SeQseni 2 ° RQ rcinge no sata: we Le 2 229%:

ms @ pe RS ae try

-° ies a rt :

e $ 2822.3: Nes .

i Ae st bral ESAs -.

fr. RF ¥ ‘ 6) all or

. SIs : é >, eace Soe «

; (Vesu ut on as AD ES . — w.

‘g d Eo.) ost | > ¢ y

THonesltselyy ff} 7 4+ . OM ¢ 2 ee

= 3; ° Ds a” o %) to” A

=~ - 4 ? e eorethes.! XN

eh. Comobett ee) t. a. Comptett Or ee tek. BF sak —annmne

A elles sfetetes fro

. ee. 5 ar . 2 - - 2 Ne son Bs 4 = \: ad <<

. . ‘ "

4 < N Pa} a, © are N enews

; a DIO St Pocinetto Torr KS #N : - wneh me pe 0 eyes +

ee 'S ' Theme eo. 2

st s A B'S S$? tt pp Ly + ne

‘ a1er KN ie a. * wiih.

Ulery © © ep Ries: N Q A oleh bs ‘dacs

Syporniansniteny & | £ : ~ £1.17) 220 st. Ye ee Envy enjeeabavese::

| : iy ‘ a See

mee e: gy ee oe t = Ae. mE yh as tee

4 » EJ tii ao SNH X41 : “s

gairss ape ey Wo tel

. H ° . ee ec? saat MAG a os ee ass --=f «

10/4 4. }---a—e—-0--& — Hee mr © a 7 : eee Va

; ‘ : a z P + iio & AS ae

j miele it gs |ipme . 2 Fe fn W|I

pice pee ee ae ee ‘owe a Fs

° : ! “ of, Se. es eae re iy Oo.

. wore goosemeciavcce-" mer 0 BILL PLL PLL ILLS EN te or | 2 ¥. - . f i

. rs ; Oe SO OS ESD ven Pie a oe ee

‘ 3 1 West Neeisst on.3 ‘ “a

. . ‘. “. i oy) . ae beat Gwe “erg ail 2! ; t ‘

OY ia | pa ich F ss ix

t . hii > agi si :

DATE A Oe tp i

amen

App. 95

1970-71 BOARD PLAN

School Grade W B T %B Capacity

Lewis. A. L. ......... 16 18 582 600 97 600

Fla. City... 146 400 50 450 11 360

W. Homestead ........ 1-6 111 679 790 86 600

Cooper, N. K. .......... 1-6 567 108 675 16 690

Redondo ................. 1-6 400 0 400 0 360

TOTALS ....... 1496-1419 2915 49 2610

1970-71 RECOMMENDED PLAN

School Grade W B T %B Capacity

Lewin A. iy a... 1-6 377 358 785 49 600

Pe Ree 1-6 235 223 458 49 360

W. Homestead ........ 1-6 352 333 685 49 600

Cooper, N. K. .......... 1-6 296 281 577 49 690

WO shane 1-6 236 224 460 49 360

MUIR 1496 1419 2915 49 2610

Junior High Schools

There are no junior high schools in the South District

projected to enroll more than 85 per cent black students.

Several residents have proposed a plan — the Roberts plan

— to change the boundaries of Richmond Heights Junior

High School (Southwest District), involving a correspond-

ing boundary change for Cutler Ridge and Palmetto Junior

High Schools (South District). Inasmuch as Richmond

Heights Junior High School is projected to be 61 per cent

ee a en on Owns Sree ag

(aM en arnt tesa cient NR a WI hal, tk Rts «ts iy ee AO eo a ke

App. 96

black, Cutler Ridge to be 20 per cent black, and Palmetto

Junior High School to be 1 per cent black, no reeommenda-

tion is made concerning these schools. The Roberts plan is

carefully developed, however, and appears to have educa-

tional merit; the school board may find it desirable to

adjust the boundaries so that a greater degree of desegre-

gation can be effected.

1970-71 BOARD PLAN

School Grade W B y

motes, Be. B, .... 16 18 642 ~~ #655

TS pee 1-6 396 4 400

Bel-Aire _.................. 1-6 525 0 525

sy iy VF. See ae 934 646 1580

1970-71 RECOMMENDED PLAN

School Grade W B z

mon, KR. _........ 5-6 312 216 528

oe 1-4 249 172 £421

SS enna 1-4 378 258 631

sy (* een 934 646 1580

Senior High Schools

The two senior high schools in the South District will

%B Capacity

98 810

1 420

0 600

41 1830

%B Capacity

41 810

41 420

41 600

41 1830

both be desegregated according to the Dade County plan,

and no recommendation is made.

Toad ag

App. 97

SOUTHWEST DISTRICT

Elementary Schools

The Frank C. Martin School is the only elementary

school which has a black enrollment of more than 85 per

cent. Since there is no access across the canal to the north,

it will not be possible to desegregate this school unless

transportation is used. No recommendation is made.

The school system’s plan to discontinue J. R. E. Lee

School as an elementary center and distribute the children

among four neighboring schools has been objected to. The

wisdom of phasing Lee out as an elementary center was

questioned by intervenors when adjoining schools are

using approximately 10 portables or when one of the ad-

joining schools might be more appropriate than Lee for

change. The question of whether discriminatory action

was involved in the board’s plan for Lec -an be answered

only by the Court, and this report is not concerned with

the wisdom of board action except as it affects the de-

segregation of schools. A desegregated situation would

result in either event.

Junior High Schools

The only junior high school concerning which ques-

tions have been raised is Richmond Heights. This was dis-

cussed supra in the South District section.

Senior High Schools

‘., Miami Killian and Miami Southwest Senior High

Schools are both proposed to be desegregated schools

App. 98

under the Dade County plan. There are no black students

living within a reasonable distance of Miami Coral Park

Senior High School. No recommendations are made con-

cerning the senior high schools in the Southwest District.

NORTHWEST DISTRICT

Elementary Schools

There are 27 elementary schools in the Northwest

District with a projected enrollment of 20,030 pupils, 3,798

or 19 per cent of whom are black. Nine of the schools are

projected to be all-white. There are four elementary

schools which would be enrolling more than 85 per cent

black students under the school board’s plan: Bunche

Park, North County, Rainbow Park, and Nathan Young.

Bunche Park. This school can be effectively deseg-

regated by grouping it with Parkview and Scott Lake

Elementary Schools. Fifth and sixth grades could be as-

signed to Bunch Park and grades 1-4 assigned to Scott

Lake and Parkview in line with their capacities. No trans-

portation would be involved, and all three schools would

be effectively desegregated. Data reflecting this recom-

mendation follows.

North County. North County School cannot be fur-

ther desegregated without the use of transportation. No

recommendations are made.

Rainbow Park. Opa Locka and Rainbow Park Ele-

mentary Schools can be rezoned and effectively desegra-

gated. No additional transportation would be involved. A

map which illustrates how the boundaries for these attend-

App. 99

ance zones might be drawn, along with pupil data on the

redrawn zones follow. These data and zone boundaries

should not be considered absolutes, but be used by the

school board as models for further refinement.

1970-71 BOARD PLAN

School Grade W B b %B Capacity

Bunche Park ........__. 1-6 0 840 840 100 990

SOOCE EO ann scncnnccece 1-6 841 9 850 1 780

a 1-6 505 10 515 2 570

UE. iconic: 1346 859 2205 39 2340

1970-71 RECOMMENDED

School Grade W B T %B Capacity

Bunche Park ............ 5-6 448 287 735 39 £990

Scott Lake ................ 1-4 519 331 850 39 #780

Parkview ................ 1-4 379 241 620 39 #4570

WORE, Scctncrene 1346 859 2205 39 2340

App. 101

. ; ee ‘

P . ‘ . a

—e

eves

ot ; ee A a

Vt "his rare eoroed {2 b= ‘ oz eet’ 63 at

'

{

‘

|

’

|

‘

|

'

m—e ! ‘.

RT POS

‘e ad te : asersees l ° 04

3? re ey ° Sega] wre; 3 (XQ

ee fe eles » RULMGTS VNWie vO - ee

fe. 7 * : | Tors .¢ .. o i.

: SA: ah —I ‘ ie >; anny

ale ms P ie oats

er ea | iy L¢ 4, . i Cr

a ae es tsk ry ~— NN aR POE TUTTI Sex aod BERL OT re ap iP as areatdamrarnie ‘e3

mga Sd RA | [3 7: F_ 7 oor 3 } Pe: Fam

S 4%, sas aca ¢ ee \° reer < ° a i oF ie

aged SS ae TD jb aah : : 3:

ee — eee te ( eA : ° we 7

S ob pin Sat’ ja . —- TT at P = | } at P . ‘he

dees < Ry por’ Docs he, 2 ‘ 4 ie Sag "7'0° : e 2 ° “4

i a —y, aT “ ee “4 ae! Aiba {Ne 4 » ] : nN

<- giename ta eee kee teeseed 3 | babe gE See, ». ’ rc) 5 y

= a iris, sonaerws eee { *s =o5-. N . ao 7 4

oe ota ate? G9 CS C.F S'3 ; = .' ‘« .

ky — oOo; _ |: : \ Y = aa p

se iT’ Fane OX wus £ a a ° « 4 —— es ase ane ‘t

ee cate lla» | a NS AX teees

e . .@ ,t i Rae ete f.. .

cod ae Tete at on) ‘ N

eg oe jibe ce Pi Give) § *

OMe Sees’ SPS oe ri. ee .U 34 A, ‘v'* i

-$ sR gt if pete Ne Q

o'} oe cee ee ee | Lob wives ¢ 2° - é ’

ce SOLVOd fee ot ae > ee

wf pt} Cnt). ge S\4

e 2 ry etas® RO AE - ioe . a

et ttle fe. Ca og 6 ee nN °

SO PB Let na bet el

Pons F 4 . “oY “ ONE AA 9 an moomoo ° ‘

” Ps 7.” ra _@ ale a. “\ »: x

i VAS r ” ech Me Re MY) may

e . ‘ : es 8 . :

. 4 7 ° i. a viek® N e

ne TEP OR ER RE I Ee ee :

. Ams, ned cha eS. Ter aes esas ey, wv

Jars oo POO EEA ==\, <

wh? 2: oe . heey eae of oh s \

¥ ae . t e best FR) ae re 13 Sag . SN

fevers SaaS MTL gts ate ceili occa met, was is acacia a ae ea “an LLL LETTE LBL a CUTOUT nb S, ~-3- 8 @ “|

eee 4

areas

!

i

’ S$ ic “18,9 53 femmes ae Vv.

Tita ili

Po? LINE I NI ee ete S rie) Sad imine * oe

Hb meee when « *

App. 108

1970-71 BOARD PLAN

~

School Grade W B Zz %B Capacity

Opa Locka ................ 1-6 951 19 970 2 990

Rainbow Park ........ 1-6 0 690 690 100 810

TOTALS ............. 951 709 1660 43 1800

1970-71 RECOMMENDED PLAN

School Grade W B T %B Capacity

Opa Locka ................ 16 551 419 970 48 990

Rainbow Park __.... 1-6 400 290 690 48 810

TOTALS ............ 951 709 1660 48 1800

Nathan Young. Nathan Young and Westview Ele-

mentary Schools (North Central District) can be paired

with grades 1-3 assigned to one of the schools and grades

4-6 to the other. Both schools would have approximately

36 per cent black students under this arrangement. Data

reflecting this recommendation follows.

Junior High Schools

There are six junior high schools in the Northwest

District with a projected enrollment of 10,560 pupils, 2,069

or 19.6 per cent of whom are blacks. All schools except

Palm Springs will have members of the minority race,

ranging from 5 to 68 per cent black. No recommendation

is made.

App. 104

Senior High Schools

There are two senior high schools in the Northwest

District with a projected enrollment of 7,460 pupils, 681

of whom are black. All but a few of these will be as-

signed to Miami Carol City. No recommendation is made.

1970-71 BOARD PLAN

School Grade W. B T %B Capacity

Westview 1-6 685 0 68 0. 810

Nathan Young __.__. 1-6 76 484 510 85 600

TOTALS 761 434 1195 36 1410

1970-71 RECOMMENDED PLAN

School Grade W B T %B Capacity

Westview ___. 1-3,or4-6 381 217 598 36 810

Nathan Young 1-3, or 4-6 380 217 597 36 600

TwOTAIS 761 434 1195 36 1410

NORTH CENTRAL DISTRICT

Elementary Schools

The North Central District contains eleven elementary

schools whose black student enrollments exceed 85 per cent:

Arcola Lake, Drew, L. C. Evans, Gladeview, Holmes Com-

plex, Liberty City, Lorah Park, Olinda, Orchard Villa,

Poinciana Park, and West Little River.

App. 105

Arcola Lake, Drew, L. C. Evans, Gladeview, Holmes,

Liberty City, Lorah Park, Olinda, Orchard Villa, and Poin-

ciana. These schools are situated in such a manner that

to desegregate them effectively would require cross busing

of students between noncontiguous attendance areas. No

recommendations on these schools are made.

West Little River. It is recommended that the at-

tendance areas of West Little River and Broadmoor be

combined. One of the schools might become a primary (1-3)

school and the other an intermediate school (4-6). Prior

to this pairing approximately 100 white students should

be zoned out of the northwest extension of the Broadmoor

attendance area to the Miami Park area and an equal

number of whites zoned out of the Miami Park attendance

area to the Broadmoor zone. A map which illustrates how

the boundaries for this recommendation, along with pupil

data, follows. These zone boundaries and pupil data should

not be considered absolutes, but estimates which the School

Board might use as a model for further refinement.

Junior High Schools

Drew Junior High School is projected under the board

plan to be an all-black school. It would be impossible to

desegregate Drew effectively without cross busing of

students between noncontiguous areas. No recommenda-

tion is made.

Senior High Schools

Miami Northwestern Senior High School under the

board plan will continue to be an all-black school. The only

way in which Northwestern could be effectively desegre-

gated would be to use transportation. No recommendation

is made.

aM PLE IN EO FERRED

App. 107

| | i oe a ; c- oe é “ : ° “fe ooh. = ie -

ret "ae 7 Be le. iain, i a’

* a fs ‘ +: > \

tes a oc ss 1s a AAod oS 6‘.

sauce © am * rs eaerceee = Satie T oe re ae 4

i . .

bs < a tee 110 $1 St 33 - } a .

— Ar, es 2 < . < ©

Sk. PRew:00n ELEIuTARY ; _- 2 zis

$ + - 2 he

§ rm

les 1o7 $e ) € = lier | ee

Le aN cre a . MESS aan aes,” 5 oF

ME Se RD SO EE adh fa elniriserrcenein ne. ther a0 i ae yrt——

“ae Tra ' } “i | ] oe | . H at | ‘ Pe Oe z|> e 7 ! tVe =" ‘ a ae | «

Spam GTN et nr yet's ober sish ave hae tat isles Glalulal sel oe. Fo 8 Fe

Gey epN aye bepse ne jana] apc ralop ag} elofafel a era] ; H 4

“Twi | 2 ae ee oe eS “t & wl-f-fofel sale | etal ii ie “- § a! ee +

wae! re. Gy Siafe. cr. feeb. s pes «cd e-P Otisataw Pm mp mite lL NiNw & Ss be £ agro

Je REFER EL Per PEEP RELL Gee tae

7 LE teE fe ee oe, en ae 2 | i ae a eS cat og

jel | Sakae ae ratte = Cae a ee ] See ee for 7% SS RR pte Bye 2 pe agg -

q an a Ni ml 4 te < tlie) yes << ‘wid? aac \ te) Q ‘ “%% —o - > = j oa a

2 +4 4< “t gasecere ” ° a *, ' eo ° aw ee

q(t Seneca 1 | bel dela 0 spe

ye se Pe 3 oar.

g 1 ]8 VI stead uae Veloess 5 2 Ls # ny i “To? 1 Ss =

L ns ae 7 pas ee 4-38 areret™

cQ - —\ “5 ' Terr ze eS.

e Ly Memes pate Be yee ORE ee te i-

AY a 6 ale (ae eae oe

a 23 2. Terr | | a

« i

AN . -

i

wile] & nT:

q :

QQ 7 :

ck j d

NY

“4

: aN | eon

1 a _— ast:

iy & \ ee

$ icS.2| ,o5 -

: Ney 1H2e° 3:

: cp of 2 dad

silted ss

Vem) iiss

N cl ¢ RNS aq

a p 7

\ el baa rT

| 2 rs aa Se 80 252%: eee sat ‘ rrr ° “een vi or

\~< he sae gag Py vie

1.

2 7

' RY ee

> ee 5

wm aneegne aE eee eae : i -

Is a ee fe Bao ha fees es Crs | a oa fe 5 | f..

———}..L 6 — eects emcees lh. A << ed, ae ee oe

, 3] ~ rr Te Nha gegen apni eek : a voemeemnel |

ta i cnt a sie n 4 Ra all ea ae Tae 7 3 St + Fah 1 0 4 caer j aha t

oe 0} | 723 | ileal; e Sees = AM Iei

—— 4... oe ov ain bd ad ‘ 0 7 Ls a | : le. '

i peneteenee Oo 5 paneer 3 OG cc a fa an ee a og hn eeaeeedea te oa

5 . . emeeensemenes a OEE OES MII AL TAP SITE RIE BONAR NE Br

App. 109

1970-71 BOARD PLAN

School Grade W B T %B Capacity

W. Little River ___ 1-6 79 911 990 92 930

Broadmoor ______ 1-6 975 10 985 1 960

OTA 1054 921 1975 47 1890

1970-71 RECOMMENDED PLAN

’ School Grade W B T %B Capacity

W. Little

River 1-30r4-6 527 461 988 47 930

Broadmoor __1-30r4-6 527 460 987 47 960

TOTALS ____.... 1054 921 1975 47 1890

SOUTH CENTRAL DISTRICT

Elementary Schools

The South Central District contains ten elementary

schools whose black student enrollments exceed 85 per

cent. These schools are: Allapattah, Bethune, Carver,

Dougias, Dunbar, Earlington Heights, Floral Heights,

Kelsey Pharr, F. S. Tucker, and Wheatley.

Allapattah, Earlington Heights, Floral Heights,

Wheatley and Douglas. The Allapattah, Earlington

Heights, Floral Heights, Wheatley, and Douglas Schools

are situated in such a manner as to make effective deseg-

regation impossible without transportation. No recom-

mendation is made in regard to these 5 schools.

App. 110

Bethune. It is recommended that the attendance

areas of Bethune and Melrose Elementary Schools be

combined. One of the schools might become a primary

(1-3) school and the other become an intermediate (4-6)

school. Data which reflect this recommendation follow.

Carver. Carver Elementary can be effectively de-

segregated by rezoning Carver, Sunset, and Coral Gables

elementary school zones. It is estimated that approxi-

mately 150 white students from Sunset would be reas-

signed to Carver, approximately 250 white students from

Coral Gables.to Carver, and approximately 400 black stu-

dents from Carver to Coral Gables. A map which illus-

strates how the boundaries for this attendance zone might

be drawn, along with pupil data on the redrawn zones

follow. These zone boundaries and pupil data should not

be considered absolutes, but estimates which the school

board might use as models for further refinement.

1970-71 BOARD PLAN

School Grade W B T %B Capacity -

Bethune .................... 1-6 28 897 925 97 900

Melrose ..........---.-- 1-6 926 29 955 3 840

wets 954 926 1880 49 1740

1970-71 RECOMMENDED PLAN

School Grade W B T %B Capacity

Bethune ........ 1-3 or 4-6 477 463 940 49 900

Melrose .......... 1-3 or 4-6 477 463 940 49 840

TOTALS 954 926 1880 49 1740

a a BA a

TTSSTSR LET oes SPM

SS Reteetied aetied

1 “ea s 2.#}se:.°

tsepet pts Ns Ie

y ieee en o-osy iy

_———— ” © e+e “~

+

-

’

. -

' :

— ams! ‘goer 6 a4. -

an eth Bat tes 64 amhas

a | PPE TY

~ {3eoU& fam aul

an bom mye lt og .

aac ites

SaOS.

ad

i

.

A

FFESNE: vase

sc Lit |

|

+t

il

ATE.

tr?

—,

>

=

pee a lal’

whe

s\

Lad

vnita c

al

7 = een

a, 9 : °

\< LECT CITLOT RIO TAL Hae SEIS EX

y t 2 Ape

” * e - *6 :

. ear -~s

mer a ey ~a See, **. --—

. . “FAULIA Sout “ww - L

Me oe on 728 tae De. “: /,

Ey. ae

rn = pom el

oie Fe oe es oe r Stet. an

Ls Seth tele rf 2

wb Fh. 5 40949400

n : yep k i

OW ree a PER reer

S282, aj s<js ts

Oe a |

at z ios J

ee” Os,

mary crs se

4 9 - oD,

*: 2 ot Come,

=

! were

* = 3+ > = =| fe 7 reeee fee -

See, alae ater ee cz CPLLILIOS rvs

BY cor couase

y :

FLAS,

i

4 ~~

mie

NS Ty4

ag ae | . Oe

-~*1 ce &

eee al Se ok < PS Suter *

—=— 4

FE S;

r N

1’ a te , > : 4:

. A y. ¢ ck

eu 4 248 f

= &. >=:

aes fs

” SONG

Ce a ere

ro? he “sesh Seer Ge

pay ®: AY Ci — o<ty ? CEPTS and.

ys acm eee

SNS ‘ Se

ca tu St APA. tat “ume

\ z = "ees sae J DS. Z n¢

SS ee ee Pe ¥3 >.

SF ‘ Soi bs =Z tend ot pas mc 7

H S°__cozes oe styii a" Xe ne: x

ae be << “SS

LX 7 od * '- ric FH re | trate ‘Nae ioe: <I % ne

A

7. gt

/ fe .

—fod, Be 7 paals : he

mn VU isssse | 2 & .& C. Py 46 sreeq- e+ . ¢“s.°

; s eres S ie NY . Aue “Aose ates ,.: = : + 4 pers] 2s § “.

F550 OSes | hicreret an Se (Ss

"en aot ee DM te oe bs FAT) eee £2023 . | i < rs

elim No” AI PRS a F

t. 3 Sene- 2 a” - hae) » — - . Z

Fees ier epee * LOO RLSETLRI OES TRTLEPLEOCLPP RT PO omen: 7

PR EE ee ros Vessoee . paatoar ;

eo =i ae, O 23ases = ~ 1 O3 *®

: ec et ee Lae

® *euee ie messeee tere Se a

rg WK thee ‘<2 32 -

~_— 2 oo =

4 mi pte tet: ts: 44 yee .

—

oS whol os bint oes

; . y a .

aoe 66244608 Ne feat GS

App. 113

1970-71 BOARD PLAN

School Grade Ww B T %B Capacity

Carver ................... 1-6 0 715 715 100 660

Coral Gables ........... 1-6 705 0 ‘705 0 750

We a 1-6 851 7

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.