State justices pause hearing on LR district

The Arkansas Supreme Court on Thursday stopped in midstream a Pulaski County Circuit Court hearing in a lawsuit to reverse the state Board of Education's Jan. 28 takeover of the Little Rock School District and dismissal of its elected School Board.

The high court's hold on the Circuit Court proceedings resulted in a 2 p.m. adjournment of the hearing that had been underway for a day and a half before Pulaski County Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen. Little Rock's interim Superintendent Dexter Suggs was on the stand at the time.

Attorneys for the state defendants in the lawsuit had asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday for the delay of the hearing pending a decision from the same court on the state's motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

They want it dismissed on the grounds that the Arkansas Constitution prohibits lawsuits against the state and its agencies, which is the concept of sovereign immunity.

If the Supreme Court grants the motion to dismiss, the case will end. If the high court rejects the motion, the hearing on a preliminary injunction before Griffen would resume.

"We'll wait for the Supreme Court decision," Griffen said in announcing the stay.

Attorneys said the process before the Supreme Court will take several weeks. Parties will have to submit written arguments to the high court, and responses to each other's arguments. Also, there could be oral arguments before the justices.

Earlier in the week, Griffen had turned down the state's similar request to him for a delay in the hearing.

After the Arkansas Education Board's 5-4 vote in January to take control of the Little Rock district, three of the district's seven displaced School Board members and two voters in the district sued the state Education Board, the Arkansas Education commissioner and the state Department of Education challenging the takeover.

The plaintiffs -- Dianne Curry, C.E. McAdoo and Jim Ross along with voters Barclay Key and Doris Pendleton -- argued in the lawsuit that the state defendants had exceeded their legal authority by taking control of the entire 48-school district based on the identification of six schools being in academic distress.

Schools in academic distress are those in which fewer than 49.5 percent of students scored at proficient levels on state math and literacy exams over a three-year period. The six schools -- Baseline Elementary; Cloverdale and Henderson middle schools; and J.A. Fair, Hall and McClellan high schools -- fell below that threshold in 2011-13 and again in 2012-14.

Receipt of the Supreme Court stay, the abrupt adjournment of the Circuit Court hearing and the resulting delay on any possible preliminary injunction generated some frustration for plaintiffs' attorney Marion Humphrey.

At the adjournment, Humphrey confronted state Board of Education members who were standing in the courtroom's gallery.

"You need to rescind your vote," Humphrey told them. "The people of Little Rock deserve better than this. They get out and vote, and we play by the rules. It's not right."

In a later interview, Humphrey elaborated, saying that there were alternatives to dissolving the Little Rock School Board and taking over a district that is neither in fiscal nor academic distress.

"Some of these people are from Northwest Arkansas," he said. "I think they have a plan to turn these schools into charter schools and turn those schools to private parties -- publicly funded schools being turned over to private concerns."

He said there is more at the heart of recent events than the six schools in academic distress.

"There are six schools that have problems," he said. "This School Board was honestly and diligently trying to fix that problem.

"I'm going to tell you what I really think: I think there are some people in this district who thought John Walker was going to be in charge of this school district, and they decided to get their friends on the state Board of Education to do something about it. That's what I believe."

Walker, a member of the Arkansas House of Representatives, is also the longtime lead attorney for the black students in all three Pulaski County school districts in a 32-year-old federal school desegregation lawsuit. Walker, D-Little Rock, regularly addressed the Little Rock School Board on issues of concern to him, represented employees in their grievance and termination hearings against the district, and has long been active in School Board races.

Voters elected his legal assistant of 24 years, Joy Springer, to the School Board in September.

"You have individuals who just think John Walker has been too involved in the school district here and who thought he might have influence over the majority of board members who have been elected," Humphrey said.

State Education Board member Jay Barth of Little Rock said in an interview shortly after the hearing that Humphrey is an advocate for racial equity in the city and that his comments reflect the deep division in the Little Rock community.

"It's probably deepened since the Jan. 28 vote," said Barth, who voted against the takeover. "Those of us on the board from Little Rock knew how divisive this decision would be."

State Education Board member Vicki Saviers of Little Rock, who voted for the state takeover, said she agreed with Barth.

"But I can't help but continue to stay focused on the kids who have for decades now been in schools in academic distress," Saviers said. "My focus remains on them. I hope we can all pull together and do what is best for students in those schools."

When the hearing adjourned, the plaintiffs were in day two of presenting their case against the state takeover of the district. The state defendants had not presented their defense of the state action although Education Department attorney Jeremy Lasiter did cross-examine the plaintiffs' witnesses.

Suggs, hired by the Little Rock School Board to be superintendent in July 2013, is now the district's interim superintendent as a result of the Education Board vote. He reports to the Arkansas education commissioner, Tony Wood.

In response to questions from plaintiffs' attorney Rickey Hicks, Suggs said that that his interactions with the Little Rock School Board were respectful and professional but very intense. He said the board met his proposed initiatives with resistance and delay tactics, but the initiatives would win approval by votes divided along racial lines.

"It was always an extensive fight to do what was in the best interest of students," Suggs said.

He also said that plans for improving the schools in academic distress were incomplete because they only dealt with curriculum and instruction. Missing pieces were financing, staffing and governance -- all of which required some School Board involvement.

Besides Suggs, others called by the plaintiffs' attorneys to testify Thursday were displaced School Board members Curry and Ross; Ray Simon, the former state Education Department director; and Daniel Whitehorn, the Little Rock School District associate superintendent for middle schools.

Griffen asked Whitehorn, a 30-year district employee, how the public could learn about school improvement efforts without school board meetings.

"I don't know how they will know," said Whitehorn, who had testified earlier that he did not believe the state takeover was necessary. He said that the School Board and Suggs were serious and passionate in their efforts to raise achievement in the academically distressed schools and schools systemwide.

"How was the public informed before Jan. 28?" the judge asked.

Whitehorn said board meetings were open to the public and broadcast on the district's cable television station, and that the board members could report to their different constituencies.

Lasiter cross-examined Curry about the contents of the district's 2010 five-year strategic plan for improvement that states that student performance in the district was "below par" and that the academic achievement gaps between students of different races "are large and growing."

The plan's "eye-popping goals" called for 85 percent to 90 percent of students to reach proficient levels on state tests and 50 percent of minority-group students to score at advanced levels.

"Have those goals been met?" Lasiter asked Curry.

She responded that they were not met at the academically distressed schools.

Lasiter said the plan also called for effective, performance-driven leadership and for the School Board to be an example of the change needed for improvement in the district.

Simon, who is also a former U.S. deputy secretary of education, was called to the stand to testify about the state Education Department's efforts to improve student achievement in the former Elaine and Altheimer school districts when he was director of the Arkansas Education Department from 1997 to 2003.

He said the department, operating under a different academic-distress state law, formed "partnerships" with the districts, assigning academic officers to the districts, but allowing the superintendents to remain. In Altheimer, the School Board was allowed to remain as an "observer" board. An administrative panel appointed by the state had the duties of the School Board, he said.

Metro on 03/20/2015