Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

/ 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