State panel backs 5 county districts but notes hurdles

A state committee studying Pulaski County school district boundary lines voted Wednesday to recommend that the Arkansas Board of Education create one school district south of the Arkansas River and four north of the river.

But the Education Board committee members emphasized that the recommendations -- which could in effect eliminate the doughnut-shaped Pulaski County Special School District -- are proposals and not mandates, and they are unlikely to happen soon. That's because the Pulaski County Special School District must be released from federal court supervision of its desegregation efforts before its boundary lines can be modified.

Committee members also urged that equity of financial resources and student diversity be used as measures to evaluate any reconfiguration of what are now four school districts in Pulaski County: Little Rock, North Little Rock, Pulaski County Special and the new Jacksonville/North Pulaski district that has not yet detached from Pulaski County Special.

"I agree wholeheartedly that this will not happen anytime in the near future," Jay Barth of Little Rock, a member of the state Education Board and author of the draft recommendations, said before the committee's unanimous vote.

The proposal going to the full Education Board in June calls for combining the Little Rock School District with most of the Pulaski County Special district that is south of the Arkansas River. Portions of the Pulaski County district that are in Saline County, including a portion of Shannon Hills, however, would be attached to the Bryant School District.

Additionally, the proposal envisions four districts north of the Arkansas River. That would include the formation of Maumelle and Sherwood districts carved from the Pulaski County Special District in accordance with state law, in addition to the existing North Little Rock and Jacksonville/North Pulaski school districts.

Negotiations among North Little Rock, Maumelle and Sherwood would be necessary to ascertain the most appropriate division of the Pulaski County Special district that is north of the river, the 2 1/2-page proposal states.

The committee's proposal also suggests an eastern portion of the Pulaski County Special district be assigned to the England School District in Lonoke County "to maintain that community of interest while also reducing travel time for students."

"The committee asks that the [state Board of Education] accept this report and endorse this approach to school district boundary lines within Pulaski County at the point if and when the [Education Board's] powers over district lines in Pulaski County are restored," the proposal concludes.

Jerry Guess, the state-appointed superintendent of the state-controlled Pulaski County Special district, on Tuesday cautioned the committee about the complexity and contentiousness of making school district boundary changes and urged that there be a period of calm in Pulaski County.

He said the Pulaski County Special district -- formed in the first half of the 20th century when multiple small rural districts banded together when they may have been rejected by metropolitan school systems -- has been "shaken" in the weeks since the boundary committee formulated its proposal.

Tears have been shed, he said, and people who have worked very hard to improve service to the district's 17,000 students now see the district's future as bleak.

Guess said he's reminded the employees that the boundary lines cannot be changed right away because provisions in different settlements in a 32-year-old desegregation lawsuit protect the district's boundaries until the district meets its desegregation requirements, is declared unitary and is released from federal court supervision.

Guess urged the Education Board committee to allow the Pulaski County districts to operate peacefully in the aftermath of more than 30 years of litigation. That won't happen if there is a reconfiguration of the districts, he said.

"We need to have as much peace and quiet as possible for as long as possible," Guess said. "Let the districts -- both of them, this one and Little Rock -- run like other districts in Arkansas do.

"Division of the districts -- because of the detachment of the Jacksonville/North Pulaski district -- I've concluded is a very, very complex problem," Guess continued. "That doesn't mean it can't be done, but as my daddy would have said it may be too much sugar for the nickel. It may not be the most desirable thing to do, given all the challenges that are faced."

Barth asked whether the detachment of the Jacksonville/North Pulaski district creates a precedent for forming new districts regardless of the difficulties. The recent complexities in the Jacksonville detachment -- which won't be completed before July 1, 2016 -- center on the division of employees, assets and debt.

Guess said the formation of the Jacksonville/North Pulaski district is unique in that it qualifies the new district for state construction aid for school buildings. That funding would otherwise be unavailable to the Pulaski County Special district. Anticipated improvements to the Jacksonville-area schools help the Pulaski County Special district in meeting its desegregation obligation to eliminate disparities in the condition of school buildings.

Sam Ledbetter of Little Rock, chairman of the Education Board and a member of the boundary committee, said school district boundaries in Pulaski County have been impediments to success in the districts and schools. Little Rock and Pulaski County Special are now state-controlled, one for academic distress and the other for fiscal distress.

Pulaski County Special will likely go back to having an elected School Board within a year, Ledbetter added. The state can operate a district for no more than five years before either returning it to local control or merging it with another district.

"I think some of the same head winds the district has faced will still be present," Ledbetter said. That goes back to "the issue of communities of interest" and the fact that the district is a collection of communities, he said.

"I think the report to the board and the board's ultimate action should emphasize that these are proposals or concepts that we think should be looked at at the appropriate time and that they are not a mandate to do things a certain way," Ledbetter said.

He said he struggles with the fact that property taxes are a big part of school district funding. Those varying property values among districts result in winners and losers. He said he doesn't want to do anything that will exacerbate funding differences among the districts in Pulaski County.

Ledbetter also advocated for racial diversity in Pulaski County districts, and that "diverse communities should have diverse schools."

"These are recommendations and they are not hard and fast, but they should include additional ways to evaluate or assess," Ledbetter continued about the boundary change proposals. "If the state board goes down this road, it should do it in such a way that it is mindful of those issues."

The draft proposal written by Barth included a provision calling for Pulaski County districts to be served by an education service cooperative as a way to create some cost and service efficiencies, such as in transportation and staff training.

Diane Zook of Melbourne, both an Education Board and committee member, asked whether one or more of the state's 15 existing cooperatives could be used for that rather than creating a 16th cooperative. The North Little Rock district on its own joined with the Arch Ford Education Cooperative last year.

Zook also said she is concerned about keeping students in public schools, giving parents choices, and providing equitable resources for students' educations.

"I'm not overly concerned ... about the newness of buildings," she said. "My parents went to one-room schools and learned Latin. I went to a many-roomed school and we didn't have a Latin teacher. I know you can get a good education if it is warm, safe and dry."

"Sometimes schools in order to be able to attract families to stay in them in addition to high quality education offering have to be sort of like a lava lamp and shift and move with society," she said. "Please understand that I am trying to make sure that the public schools of Arkansas are the most attractive choice for the parents."

A Section on 05/28/2015

Upcoming Events