Education notebook

— Hearing nears on choice-act appeal

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis will hear an appeal Jan. 16 of a lower court’s decision to declare the Arkansas Public School Choice Act unconstitutional.

Judges James Loken, Diana Murphy and Steven Colloton will hear the arguments, according to an order released Thursday.

A group of parents - who originally sued under claims that a racial restriction in the school-transfer law violated their children’s constitutional rights - and the Arkansas Board of Education, a defendant in the case, have both filed appeals.

The law permits students to transfer out of their resident school districts unless the percentage of enrollment for the students’ race in the receiving districts exceeds that percentage in the original districts.

Siding with the parents, U.S. District Judge Robert Dawson in a June ruling called the racial restriction unconstitutional. Citing a U.S. Supreme Court decision related to race-based assignment plans in Seattle schools, Dawson said the clause used race too broadly as a factor.

Against the parents’ wishes, Dawson threw out the entire law after he ruled that the race restriction could not be “severed” from the Public School Choice Act because the surrounding language in the law made clear that Arkansas legislators “seriously considered the prospect that unlimited choice would defeat integration and create liability on the part of the state.”

In their appeals briefs, attorneys for the parents argued that the choice act should berestored, and that only the offending clause should be stricken.

The Arkansas attorney general’s office, arguing on behalf of the state, has said that the racial restriction does not violate the constitution and that the entire law should remain in force.

Under a stay issued by Dawson, the law remains in effect while the higher court decides appeals.

Board member’s

eligibility upheld

An unsuccessful applicant for the Little Rock School Board raised questions about the eligibility of Tommy Branch Jr. to represent the district’s Zone 6 on the board since he admits he’s not living at the address listed on his application .

Laveta Wills-Hale, who applied for the vacant board seat last month but was not selected to fill it, wrote a letter to district leaders asking for clarity on the residential requirements.

Khayyam Eddings, an attorney for the district, responded Friday, saying district officials verified the address provided on Branch’s application with voter-registration records and found no conflict, and that Branch is eligible to hold the board seat.

“Even assuming that Mr. Branch is later determined to be ineligible to represent Zone 6, the lack of eligibility for a position probably does not create an automatic vacancy in the office,” Eddings wrote. “Rather, the individual no longer eligible to hold office may remain in office as a ‘de facto officer’ ... unless there is a statutory provision creating an automatic vacancy.”

Arkansas law provides for the removal of school board members only in cases where the member is convicted of a felony or fails to participate in board meetings becauseof absences,” Eddings concluded.

Branch has said his house at 3719 Ludwig St., in the John Barrow addition of Little Rock, is undergoing renovations.

LR district to talk settlement with 8

An attorney for the Little Rock School District received an OK last week from the School Board to negotiate payments to teachers who were previously assigned to teach multiple courses in a single class period at the now-closed Felder Alternative School.

The eight teachers filed a grievance over the concurrent assignments and won a preliminary favorable ruling from an arbitrator, Ellen Smith, an attorney for the district, told the Little Rock School Board last week.

The arbitrator concluded that the teachers are entitled to damages but did not set the amount , Smith said. The request for damages approaches $500,000 for the five-year period in which the concurrent teaching assignments were made.

The district has the option of asking the arbitrator to modify the initial decision, Smith said, but she advised that the district enter into negotiations with the teachers who are seeking a quick resolution.

The teachers had argued that the practice of assigning teachers to teach multiple courses, such as sixth-, seventh- and eighth-grade English, to a grade-level mix of students within a single class period was a violation of the teachers’ contract.

Arkansas, Pages 18 on 12/16/2012

Upcoming Events