Newspaper Page Text
/
7
Factual
Souther
VOL II, NO. 11
M CruAOT
2 090 £ y 9
SN0 I S I A I 0 SNofuJ^iy
News
Objective
^ . S3 1 8yyg | -j
V Io y 0 3 o JO Al
MAY, 1965
HEW Calls for Fun jLrcscgA ^gation by 1967
VIRGINIA
Free-Choice
Plan Upheld
By U.S. Court
RICHMOND
S chool boards are not required
to take affirmative action to
put Negroes and whites in the
same schools, the United States
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals
ruled here on April 7.
The court:
• Upheld Richmond’s “freedom-of-
choice” plan whereby children are per
mitted to attend any schools anywhere
in the city. (Bradley v. School Board
of the City of Richmond.)
• Upheld Hopewell’s plan whereby
children are assigned to schools in
their neighborhoods. (Gilliam v. School
Board of the City of Hopewell.)
In the Richmond case, the plaintiffs
contended that many Negro parents
wish their children to attend schools
populated entirely, or predominantly,
hy Negroes and that this results in a
continuance of some schools attended
only by Negroes.
“To that extent,” said the court,
“they (the plaintiffs) say that, under
any freedom of choice system, the state
‘permits’ segregation if it does not de
prive Negro parents of a right of
choice.”
‘Again and Again’
“It has been held again and again,
however, that the Fourteenth Amend
ment prohibition is not against segre
gation as such. The proscription is
against discrimination. Everyone of
every race has a right to be free of
discrimination by the state by reason
of his race. There is nothing in the
constitution which prevents his vol
untary association with others of his
race or which would strike down any
state law which permits such associa
tion. The present suggestion that a
Negro’s right to be free from dis
crimination requires that the state de
prive him of his volition is incongru
ous.”
The court said the only factors in
the Richmond plan limiting complete
freedom of choice are, first, that ap
plications for assignments must be sub
mitted by June 1 to be effective for
the following school year, and, second,
that a child may not be admitted to a
school if it is already filled to capacity.
But no child in Richmond has been
turned down because of a lack of ca
pacity at a particular school, said the
court. If it develops later that the ca
ducity limitation is being used to pre
serve segregation, then that fact can
he considered by the court at that time,
*he opinion said.
As to the plaintiffs’ contention that
Richmond teachers were not being as-
ugned on a nondiscriminatory basis, the
•ourt said there had been no showing
hat discrimination did exist. It also
^d that it is proper for a federal dis-
(See FOURTH, Page 10)
Jn This Issue
Monthly Reports
, Alabama
Arkansas -p
Florida 6
Georgia 3
' Louisiana 5
Mississippi 7
North Carolina 4
, South Carolina 14
Tennessee 1
Texas 9
Virginia 1
1 Washington 1
Special Articles
: The Region 1
Training Institutes 1
Wt
MEW Guidelines g
Public School Districts
TYPES OF COMPLIANCE SUBMITTED AND ACCEPTED
Total No.
of Districts
H EW-441
Submtd Accptd
Voluntary Plan
Submtd Accptd
Court-Ordered Plan
Submtd Accptd
Total
Submtd Accptd
Ala.
118
102
0
9
0
4
1
115
1
Ark.
411
190
172
67
12
3
2
260
186
Fla.
67
2
0
52
1
13
8
67
9
Ga.
196
172
3
19
0
5
3
196
6
La.
67
1
0
3
0
1
0
5
0
Miss.
150
2
0
41
0
2
0
45
1
N.C.
171
22
0
108
1
1
0
131
10
S.C.
108
2
0
88
0
5
0
95
0
Tenn.
152
136
10
8
0
8
0
152
10
Tex.
1,380
1,076
692
166
0
16
8
1,258
700
Va.
130
103
3
13
1
14
1
130
5
Totals
2,950
1,808
880
574
15
72
23
2,454
918
TENNESSEE
State Official Proposes
12-Grade Desegregation
NASHVILLE
tate Education Commissioner
J. Howard Warf urged Ten
nessee’s 152 public-school dis
tricts on April 30 to desegregate
all 12 grades this fall.
Warf made the recommendation in
a letter distributed to school officials
of the districts, all of which had
signed Assurances of Compliance or
had submitted plans or copies of court
orders under the Civil Rights Act of
1964.
Accompanying the letter was a copy
of new federal guidelines, issued by
the U.S. Office of Education on April
29, requiring at least four grades de
segregated by this fall with the re
mainder to be placed on a biracial
basis by the fall of 1967.
Because desegregation is inevitable,
Warf said, school systems should go
ahead and desegregate all 12 grades
this fall although they may delay the
transition in some grades for two
years
“Educational Suicide’
Earliei •' - commissioner said the
refusa o. j.j local school system to
comply with the 1967 target date would
be “educational suicide” but he added:
“In view of the money involved, it
is my opinion that almost all school
systems will comply.”
An estimated $60 million in federal
funds will be available to Tennessee
public schools next year, depending
upon their compliance with the federal
requirements.
Warf said some districts receive
about $100,000 while others are allo
cated as much as $3.5 million.
Some school officials noted that the
Assurances of Compliance and volun
tary plans had been signed by the
local boards of education well in ad
vance of the new federal guidelines
which were contained in a “general
statement of policies.”
Earlier Letter
Warf, however, on April 23 had sent
another letter to all systems which
said:
“It should be understood that any
plan or explanation submitted must
show that substantial desegregation
will occur in any
school system not
later than the be
ginning of the fall
term of 1965, if
said school dis
trict is to con
tinue to receive
federal funds.”
Warf had asked
for additional in
formation from
the local boards
by May 4, but ex
tended this deadline to May 11 in view
of the announcement by the Office of
Education.
While the commissioner said “some
states are letting every system fight
for itself,” he asked that local boards
of education channel their proposed
plans through his office.
Warf said on April 30 he had received
no notification from federal officials
that any of Tennessee’s Assurance of
Compliance pledges or desegregation
plans had been rejected, although he
said he doubted that some would meet
the new guidelines.
The Office of Education, however,
(See COMMISSIONER, Page 2)
U.S. Backs Training
WASHINGTON
he U.S. Office of Education
has agreed to support 28
training institutes to be held at
colleges and universities in the
Southern and border states this
summer to help prepare school
officials and instruction person
nel to cope with problems arising
from desegregation.
The institutes are among programs
to be undertaken under Title IV of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, which author
izes federal financial and technical as
sistance to desegregating districts.
Six institutes under Title IV have
also been approved for universities in
the Northeast and Far West, where
school districts have expressed an in
terest in training for personnel dealing
with biracial school situations.
In addition, the Office of Education
is reviewing grant applications from
local school districts which want to es
tablish in-service training programs on
desegregation. Approval has been given
to the first three of these grants. They
were requested by Fairfax County, Va.
($53,000); Atlanta, Ga. ($22,000); and
Chattanooga, Tenn. ($51,000). Other
proposals are pending and approval is
expected shortly.
Some 20 such programs should be
under way in the school year starting
next fall, according to Dr. Morton J.
Sobel, who heads the training branch
in the Office of Education’s new Equal
Educational Opportunity Program.
Congress appropriated $8 million last
fall for implementation of Title IV.
About $1 million will be used to finance
a two-year study of desegregation by
the Office of Education, Sobel said, and
another $1 million will cover admin
istrative costs. The remaining $6 mil
lion will be divided among summer
institutes at colleges and universities
and grants to school systems.
The institutes approved so far range
in length from three days to ten weeks
and will enroll teachers, principals,
guidance counselors, school administra
tors and school board members. They
will deal with such matters as teachers’
attitudes toward minority groups,
WASHINGTON REPORT
‘Substantial Start’ Must
Be Made This September
WASHINGTON
P ublic school systems must plan to eliminate all racial segregation
by the fall of 1967 and must make a “substantial good faith start”
toward desegregation this September in order to continue to receive
federal financial assistance, the U.S. Office of Education announced
April 29.
Commissioner of Education Francis Keppel issued the new “General
Statement of Policies” for enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 at a news conference.
Keppel said June 30 could be considered a practical deadline for
submission of desegregation plans by local school districts to the Office
of Education. Funds for the new fiscal year will be allocated by that
date, he said.
The 3,000-word poliev statement was the first specific guideline
issued by the Office of Education for compliance with Title VI, which
bars racial discrimination in federallv assisted programs and activities.
The Office of Education said it had received “hundreds of requests”
for further information and guidance on how the law would he applied.
Copies of the statement were mailed to school svstems which have
submitted unacceptable desegregation plans to the Office of Education.
Local Responsibility
In a letter accompanying the guide
line, Kennel told school authorities that
resnonsibility for carrying out deseg
regation plans “must inevitably rest
with local officials. The enclosed stand
ards. however, should help school of
ficials develop desegregation plans that
are adequate for the purpose of Title
VI.”
Keppel said he was aware of the
great difficulty involved in adopting
desegregation plans.
“Nevertheless,” he added, “the law
and the regulations require school au
thorities to take the necessary action
to end the dual system of schools for
white and Negro students as quickly as
possible if the district is to participate
in federally assisted programs. The plan
must be sufficient to achieve this re
sult.”
Regulations for enforcement of Title
VI issued last January by the Depart
ment of Health, Education and Welfare
specified three methods by which school
districts could comply with the law.
They could:
• Execute an assurance of compli
ance (HEW Form 441) certifying that
they were no longer operating on a
segregated basis;
• Submit a court-ordered desegre
gation plan, or
• Submit a voluntary plan for de
segregation.
The new memorandum spells out
criteria for all three methods, though
it was designed primarily to clarify
widespread confusion about the course
of action that would be required under
voluntary plans.
With respect to assurances of com
pliance, the policy statement declares
(See HEW PROVIDES, Page 9)
Institutes
special learning problems, administra
tive difficulties connected with desegre
gation and development of extra-cur
ricular activities in newly desegre
gated schools. Participants will be paid
stipends of up to $75 a week.
Several institutes have already been
held for school superintendents in the
South to help them prepare and carry
out desegregation programs. The first
was at the University of Miami, for
Florida and South Georgia educators,
and two others have been held under
auspices of the University of Tennessee
for administrators from Tennessee,
northern Mississippi, eastern Arkansas
and southern Missouri.
Sobel said the Office of Education
“intends to keep in very close touch”
with Title IV programs and intends to
send staff members for periodic evalu
ation. All applications for grants as well
as for institute projects are screened
by panels of outside evaluators as well
as Office of Education staff members to
ascertain that they will be genuinely
useful to desegregating districts, Sobel
said.
THE REGION
Third of Plans
From South
Get Approval
F ederal officials have accepted
one-third of the compliance
plans proposed by local school
boards and have notified six state
school hoards they had qualified
to continue to receive federal aid
to education.
Reports from the U.S. Department of
Health, Education and Welfare and
from the 11 Southern states show that
more than 2,400 school districts have
agreed to comply with the nondiscrim
ination regulations required by the
Civil Rights Act of 1964. Fewer than
500 districts have failed to notify the
federal agency whether they would
comply.
Through the first week of May, the
department announced it had approved
the compliance plans of 918 districts.
The “Statements of Assurance” sub
mitted by Arkansas, Florida, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee
and Texas state boards were approved
by the federal agency.
Georgia and Virginia state boards
have signed the formal statement but
have not been notified of acceptance.
State board officials in Alabama, Lou
isiana and Mississippi submitted their
own versions of compliance statements
and these have not been ruled offi
cially valid or invalid.
Official Guidelines
On April 29, Commissioner of Educa
tion Francis Keppel announced the
first official guidelines and deadlines
for compliance with the new rights
act’s Title VI. Southern schoolmen and
government officials had criticised
HEW’s Office of Education for a lack
of specific guidance on how to qualify
to continue to receive federal funds
for education. (SSN, April).
The commissioner’s “General State-
(See ONE-THIRD, Page 9)
Colleges
Public
Private
No. of
Agree to
No. of
Agree to
Schools
Comply
Schools
Comply
Ala.
12
12
18
13
Ark.
8
8
13
12
Fla.
34
34
18
13
Ga.
21
21
27
18
La.
13
12
13
6
Miss.
-25.
19
20
10
N.C.
BWVWStfUfr strMt
33
S.C.
7
7
25
12
Tenn.
Tex.
’652
31
34
Va.
23
, 38 35
19
Totals
~221
209
298
201