Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

i PAGE 12 —Dec. I, 1954 — SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS Oklahoma OKLAHOMA CITY, Okla. JNTENTION to comply fully with the U.S. Supreme Court’s desegre gation directives is implicit in a brief filed before the high court by Mac Q. Williamson, Oklahoma attorney gen eral. But the 15-page brief describes a unique financial tangle and sets forth a need for more time to enact the corrective legislation now being charted. Williamson filed the pleading as a friend of the court, since Oklahoma had no litigants in the appeal cases leading to the May 17 edict. The brief’s first paragraph plunges into the problem state educators have been pondering since May 17: The state of Oklahoma is one of the states requiring segregation in public education: and principally because of both constitutional and legislative re strictions as to the financing of seDarate educational facilities for white and Negro children, it is probably more immediately concerned than some, if not all, of the other states having segregation in public education in whether this court directs that existing segregated systems be stopped immediately, or adjusted grad ually to a procedure not based upon color distinctions. At the outset, it may be noted that Oklahoma’s dual system of tax-gathering is unique and different from most other ‘segregation’ states. TAX SYSTEM OUTLINED The brief outlines the present mandatory and complex system, un der which district schools are main tained for majority race children (usually white) while minority schools (nearly all Negro) are sup ported on a county wide basis. As was detailed in the September issue of Southern School News, countywide levies yield three operating mills and one building bond fund mill annually for minority schools. District and ad- valorem revenue may reach a max imum of 20 operating mills and five building fund mills annually for ma jority schools. Budgets must be planned and financed with absolutely no relation to each other. And, Williamson notes: The income and revenues allocated for both systems are (usually) barely suffi cient to provide auoropriate and desirable educational facilities, separately func tioning, for all children (of both the white and colored races). So that if the method of financing and allocating revenues for the education of one race must now be used for the educa tion of both races (which apparently will be the case, since the doctrine of ‘seo- arate but equal’ has been determined bv the court to have no place in the field of education), then our entire fiscal pro gram with its ‘two-pronged’ methods of raising and dividing tax moneys ... must needs be recast by constitutional change, and by our next legislature (which meets in regular session January 3, 1955). Pointing out the Supreme Court’s decision apparently means that Okla homa’s minority schools and their separate finances are illegal under the Fourteenth Amendment, the attorney general further pleads: ... All budgets for both majoritv and separate schools for the current Oklaho ma fiscal year (1954-55) have long since been officially anproved and tax levies made and extended UDon the tax rolls of each of our 77 counties; and such taxes are now payable, and in process of col lection—the first half of all said taxes actually becoming delinquent on Decem ber 31, 1954. Thus the fiscal program for all schools on the traditional and divided basis is so far along that it would be a clear impossibility to try at this time to ’unscramble’ the set purpose and destina tion of tax moneys of our 77 counties for this year, when and as collected. Another point to consider is the fact that hundreds of thousands of dollars are being collected—under state constitution al authority—for separate school district —as the taxing unit; and if the decision should be—under the Court’s Question 4 —’integration forthwith,’ then every dol lar so collected (and being held by the various county treasurers) would remain 'locked up’ and entirely unavailable for any school purposes until new and differ ent constitutional and statutory remedied could be provided; this, for the reason that Sec. 19, Article 10, Oklahoma Con stitution, forbids the diverting of any tax moneys away from the original purposes of the levy. ASKS FOR TIME Williamson argues it will “reason ably” take until at least June 30,1955, to provide remedial legislation, and tells the court such legislation “doubtless” will be accomplished, in dicating changes “probably will con sist largely of new acts consolidating revenues formerly allocated for both district and separate schools.” The brief is bolstered by citations from the Oklahoma constitution spelling out organization and finan cing of completely divorced, but im partial facilities for white and col ored children. (Only those of African descent are legally colored in Okla homa.) Summing up the budget headache, Williamson tells the court: While children of both races may be integrated into the school district system, as distinguished from the county separate school system, in the state of Oklahoma, the aforementioned limitations as to fi nancing must be faced and solved, pri marily by the people, and as well, by the legislature . . . since the principal source of revenue for schools is an ad valorem tax levy, which has a definite limitation by the terms of the Constitu tion, as aforementioned. This means, of course, that appropriate or adequate facilities for public education cannot be given to both white and colored children under a newly-created and re quired system of non-racial education until a plan for removing or raising the constitutional limitation on ad valorem tax levies has been devised and sub mitted to the electorate of the state of Oklahoma. In this connection, it might be pointed out that the state Legislative Council in Oklahoma (which consist of the entire current membership of both Houses, and which functions between regular legis lative sessions) has been making a study of this question and is in the process of submitting its recommendations to the Oklahoma legislature when it convenes in regular session in January 1955. Probably the recommendations so made will require, and certainly will be en titled to, debate in both houses of the Oklahoma legislature; it being necessary to formulate a permanent solution, by way of constitutional amendment, of the future financing of a single system of public education which will include and integrate both white and colored chil dren. Such proposed constitutional amend ments will be by the legislature sub mitted to the voting citizens of the state. Likewise, it will be necessary for the Oklahoma Legislature, itself, to formulate a system to supplement, by excise taxes, etc., revenues that will be made avail able from ad valorem tax levies, for the newly arranged school program. In conclusion, Williamson cites general and specific references re minding the Supreme Court of its duty as a court of equity to follow the cases through to “entire justice” for all affected parties, and asks that the court “consider the financial problems of a State—such as ours— in determining when and how there shall be an affirmance from this court respecting the time for the ultimate cessation of segregation.” STAND WAS ANTICIPATED Release of the brief caused no stir in Oklahoma, since it followed expec tations and expressed desires of all affected agencies. In what Oklahoma City Supt. J. Chester Swanson calls “a unanimity of opinion on school needs this state has never seen before,” the numeri- cally-powerful Oklahoma Education Association, the state public educa tion office, the state Congress of Par ents and Teachers and the state legis lative council have endorsed pro posed amendments dovetailing with Williamson’s statements. Specifically, the groups want a new countywide five mill levy to be dis tributed to all schools as replace ment for the presumably illegal four mill minority school support now in force. Allied proposals would increase the present bonded indebtedness ceil ing from 5 to 10 per cent of district assessed valuation; permit use of building levy funds for maintenance, and virtually remove any limits on the number of operating mills district voters could impose upon themselves. These measures, it is argued, would assure a sound, all-around improve ment in education for all children. The Oklahoma Association of Negro Teachers also has approved the five mill levy plan. Leaders first recom mended early in 1954 that the money follow Negro children into mixed schools on a definite per capita basis. However, the OANT integration com mittee’s final platform, ratified at a state membership meeting October 28-29 in Oklahoma City, conforms to the standard plan. The OANT pro posal now reads, “The proceeds de rived from said five mill levy shall be apportioned among all school dis tricts of the county upon the basis of their average daily attendance for the previous year.” Committee proposals had been MAC Q. WILLIAMSON Oklahoma Attorney General threshed out in a series of six district workshops designed to draw “grass roots” ideas reflecting Negro teachers’ opinions in all sections and in schools of all sizes. District workshops produced some concrete suggestions for successful integration. One such idea was an appeal for creation of a bi-racial hu man relations body to serve through out the transition period. The OANT business council au thorized H. C. Whitlow Jr., Booker T. Washington high school principal of Tulsa and integration committee chairman, to send a request to Gov. Johnston Murray for appointment of such a committee. Whitlow said lead ers hope an interracial group will be put to work as soon as possible. How ever, a formal request has not yet been sent to the capitol, and it was indicated Whitlow now intends to wait until Gov.-elect Raymond Gary takes office Jan. 10 and direct the re quest to him. Democrat Gary, following his elec tion on Nov. 2, predicted a special election will be necessary, and ac knowledged the legislature could submit amendments early in the ses sion and continue to work on other legislation in the pre-election in terim. Gary indicated he will have some proposals of his own on school finance, involving replacement of any tax millage lost in the change-over. His campaign platform commits him to a program that will not increase taxes. Tennessee NASHVILLE, Term. QN Nov. 19, Gov. Frank G. Clem ent explained why Tennessee is not filing a brief before the Supreme Court in the desegregation cases. His explanation ended months of official silence as to what course Ten nessee would follow. Original indica tions from Gov. Clement and mem bers of his administration pointed to Tennessee’s participation in the hearings. However, this gave way to an official “wait-and-see” policy which reached its fulfillment with the governor’s statement. He said: All the suggestions that could have been made (to solve the problem) have been made or will be made without Ten nessee putting in an official appearance before the United States Supreme Court. He added: We were not a party to the suits, but the fact that we were not doesn’t mean that we are not interested in the matter or that we are not studying or conferring on it. Our course of action has been in line with what we conceive to be the best interests of Tennessee and Tennesseans. When the decision was handed down last May, Gov. Clement said: As Governor and elected representa tive of more than three and a quarter million Tennesseans, I must point out that it is a decision handed down by the judicial body which we, the American people, under our Constitution and law recognize as supreme in matters of inter preting the law of the land. This is no time for snap judgment, quick decision or demagogic indictment. The problems presented by the Supreme Court’s decision must be solved only after careful study, deliberation and judicious appraisal. The Nashville Tennessean, which has opposed Clement’s two success ful bids for governor, termed the an nouncement “far from satisfactory.” The Tennessean 9 s editorial, in part, said: In other words, Mr. Clement is satis fied to let other states speak for Tennes see. For two reasons, that is extremely poor policy: First, it implies that the state of Ten nessee has nothing constructive to con tribute to the deliberations on an issue to which it is a very real party in fact even though not in legal status. For our part, we are unwilling to accept any such ad mission of intellectual bankruptcy. And those who do accept it must concede that it is a sad commentary indeed on a state which likes to think of itself as a leader in the New South. Second, it assumes that Tennessee’s problem is no different from that in any other states. Such an assumption is sim ply contrary to fact. One of the reasons the Supreme Court invited all the South ern states to submit briefs was what it recognized as ‘the great variety of local conditions.” As early as Sept. 1, The Nashville Banner, which has twice supported Clement’s bid for office, urged that all affected states, including Tennes see, file a brief with the high court. Said The Banner: The 17 reqiuiring it (segregation) cer. tainly should be represented in the Fall hearing, on the basis of which the defi nitive action as eventually decided will be handed down by the court. ... It is important not only that the attorneys general present the case—the point of view immediately and primarily concerned—but that they emphasize by such participation the fact that the states do have a proprietary interest in, and duty to, their schools. There is the further consideration that out of this further judicial review will come whatever legal rulings or restraints the court may attach by decree. And if the states are to adjust their own laws or constitutions to fit these rulings, it can best be done by the com petent advice of state authorities who have sat in on the deliberations and are thoroughly acquainted with the decrees as handed down ... While the state legislature does not meet until Jan. 3, 1955, some legisla tors are planning to introduce, or are willing to consider, legislation to re tain segregated public schools in Tennessee. TO INTRODUCE BILL Sen.-elect Charles A. Stainback of Somerville said he will introduce a school segregation bill early in the next session of the General Assembly. Stainback, who comes from Fay ette county in southwest Tennessee, said his bill will not follow the “Georgia plan” of abolishing the public school system. “I don’t think it’s necessary to abolish the public schools,” he said. “The present conditions can be main tained by giving the school board of each county authority to designate which school each pupil shall at tend. “This can be done under the police power of the state,” Stainback con tinued, “to preserve peace, tran quility, and public health. There is no question of its constitutionality.” Another new senator, James M. Jones Jr. of Lewisburg said he “would like to see separate schools main tained, but I can see all kinds of dif ficulties in such a move.” State Representative Eugene Col lins of Chattanooga and Robert Lee Littleton of Dickson, expressed in terest in such a move in the House, but declared they were doubtful if such a measure could be drafted to accomplish the purpose effectively. Workshops Study Merger Plans OKLAHOMA CITY, Okla. “School Merger Plans Talked” would have been a useful standing headline for Oklahoma newspapers in the past month. In the most wide spread attention noted since the U. S. Supreme Court segregation ruling last May, integration topped a meeting agenda somewhere in Oklahoma almost daily. Having accepted the principle of desegregation without public debate, Oklahoma will make no official move until Supreme Court decrees are is sued after the new hearings. But in the interim, school and community leaders are urging affected groups to talk as much as possible about the pending change, on a cooperative, interracial plane of mutual inquiry and foresighted planning. Two solid days of such talk were programmed in Oklahoma City and Tulsa for school, church, civic, public and allied group representatives at tending institutes on human relations. The annual institutes, sponsored by the National Conference of Chris tians and Jews, this year followed the theme, “Integration is Everybody’s Business.” Attendance tallied 250 at Okla homa City and about 200 at Tulsa. Both meetings featured keynote speeches and workshop studies from the three viewpoints of church, school and community. In essense, all three groups at both workshops emerged with recommendations for more and wider interracial contacts at all levels before the actual merger is accomp lished. Oklahoma City workshoppers’ rec ommendations were summarized as follows: Education: “1. That the schools provide all possible opportunities for the asso ciation of all races at every level, stu dent-student, teacher-teacher, par ent-teacher and parent-parent. “2. That the pupils in all schools begin at once to do whatever they can to condition themselves for all of the social situations which may arise. “3. That an evaluation be made to find what experiences are produc ing the best results. “4. That all other community groups provide many opportunities for more association of the races. Public and Private Agencies: “1. That groups and individuals work harder to develop more and better ways of communication and contacting each other across the many artificial barriers of race, “2. That an immediate study and evaluation be made of the Oklahoma statutes concerning segregation of the races, for the purpose of initiating changes or elimination of those de signed to separate the races, “3. That more definite individual and group action be taken to bring about the worth of the individual; that a fair appraisal and use be made of the Negro’s skill and training in employment. “4. That every organized commun ity group working on this and other common problems be encouraged to utilize every opportunity to work to gether. Further, we urge “that such groups and their committees truly represent the total community. Religion: “1. Every church should hang out a sign, ‘Everyone is welcome.’ “2. Youth groups and church rep resentatives should visit across racial lines. “3. Change Oklahoma laws. “4. Negro and white churches should support each other’s revivals. Tulsa workshop groups advanced similar proposals, with equal em phasis on pleas for increased inter racial activities in schools and churches. Main general recoffi- mendation was a formal motion that Tulsa’s mayor be asked to appoint a citywide human relations committee. No appointments were announc ed by month’s end. TEEN-AGERS MEET About 60 teen-agers representing all high schools and religious deno minations sat in on the Oklahoma City meeting, with full participation status. First immediate response to the “more meeting” plea was ar rangement of an all-youth integra tion workshop. With school administrators’ ap proval, the NCCJ, Urban League and other agencies set up the workshop for about 150 high school students- Six workshop groups were to take a youth’s eye view of such questions as: “What about extra-curricular activities in mixed schools?” meeting was scheduled at Douglas® (Negro) high school with a Douglas® student as co-chairman.