... the lav set forth in Booker v. tlainfield.

At rages Ten and Heven of their brief, th intervening plain^

tiff* cite certain CUM in connection with the Doctrine of *b*tention. This defendant will not answer the** caae* as this defendant

is not asking this Court to abstain.

AS_ TBR to ronra ix. or tu INTBRVENZHQ ruatrnprs' BRIBT

defendant respectfully subaits that the plaintiffs are not entitled to recover on the substantive point involved and repeats and nakes a part hereof all of the facts and all of the aryunenta set forth in its answer to Point I. This defendant

respectfully submits that the Court, in its original decision, was correct in dismissing the Complaint. This defendant respect-

folly. submit* as a matter of law that the plaintiff* complaint uld Again be dismissed. h At Page Thirteen of their brief, the plaintiffs again refer to the Wanner case. Due to the reason* set forth in the answer to Joint I , this defendant respectfully submits that the Wanner case . does not effect the inetant case in any shape, manner or form. At Page Fourteen of their brief, the plaintiff* cite Bradley v. School Board offthe City of Richmond, Virginia, 345 F2d 310 ( 9 5 Fourth circuit). 16, In the Bradley case, at rages 315 and 316

the Court stated a* follows t

The leg.ro plaintiffs do not question the present existence of en unrestricted freedom of choice in selection of schoels. Their position oa appeal is that freedom of ohe-iee is not an appropriate means for elimination of segregation, attracting a phrase

wt arattimg aaofc AJLaeviAiaatioa, * tb* plai feU4xa ta atta* aafcaola foUUil aati* IMP MattMaa to -iwwX% in fcaa CMI^IJDMMW of

*yata, tba atat *yMlt it 4MM t dc^civ* itegxo yar^aui 4 a fitfkk of

*Zt
to IM Ap*t Of is

. that a of
by of

o*
W J ^ |

AAV

xt ia tilftapaflwai **s*at4htHy awiMfcittad tivat tb* &raL*y and taa iaatant aasa avo alaariy <tat,Uf<ilhMa. At vaaa fiftaao and lUt*a of thai* Wiaf. tha plaintiff* aita aavtain aaaaa aa4 taan 90 oo to atafca ia affoot Uxat taa ctata aaaottiatioa of tb* raoaa thsowgfc ita aoaiaiva pooara of

It ii
ara M t aai>IHng a *ao t at ton
of

to tka lta%ifa y>aUio ia Coxth ia MMeaan v. tUr 42 M.J. 217 (Maw Ja*ay , at paoaa 241 and 144, ta court atatatf

orart, 19*4). 2n that

aa

al4 ( daeiioa tbtftoartf ada ita daeiaiaa to ia not undar attack bara) it waa duty bomd to ralaoata C&anfial4*a pvila ia a Maaaax <ionaUtaat with aooad atfmaatioaal 90A lgal pxineipla*. Divtdiag tfaaa a^aaUy Itatwaau Oaor^a

* (1) therefore, we hold, section 1201 of the Ouc*tion ! in no way violated by this plan, nor waa there any other legal Impediment to its adoption." la reply to the statements aade at tafe 16 of the plaintiff* briaf. this Oafandant rapotfully avtoodta that thara is no whita v. colored conflict in tha i&ataat case and thx i* no intermixing of race* under tha guisa of educating than. All that ia involved in the instant caaa ia equal educational opportunity for all. The atatenents oa Page 16 of the plaintiff* briaf aa to Italian, Oenaaa and Jewish neighborbooda, haa oothing whatsoever to do with the inatant cuwe. Zt ia alao reapectfttlly submitted that there ia no bai in fact evr ia law for the tatenenta Made in the laat seven lines of the plaintiffs briaf.

Respectfully eubmitted

vanna

Attorney for the Board of Kducatioa of the City of

tOJCEE FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF TOE MANUSCRIPT DIVISION, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

GERTRUDE P. FULLER, et al.. Plaintiffs, vs. AUSTIN A. VOLK, et al., constituting the Board of School Estimate of the City of Englewood; the CITY OF ENGLEWOOD; and JOHN H. PERRY, et al., constituting the Board of Education of the City of Englewood,

Defendants.
JERRY VOLPE, et al.,

Intervening Plaintiffs, and

FREDERICK M. RAUBINGER, Commissioner of Education of the State of New Jersey, and KENNETH ANCRUM, et al., and DEBORAH SPRUILL, Intervening Defendants. Civil Action No. 847-63 OPINION ON REMAND FULLER, et al.. No. 15043 and VOL->E, et al.. No. 15044.

ANTHONY T. AUGELLI United States District Judge FILED: FEBRUARY 3, 1966.

REPRODUCED FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT DIVISION, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

DNITKD STATUS DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT or not ratsn

r. nun, t ai.,
Plaintiff* ABSTI* A. VQUC. t !.

munr votw, t i.,

XatervMiafj Plaintiffs Md FUDHUCK M. RAUBIBOBK, Cci loner of Mucation of tba 8tat of Wew

and
KKHMETH ANC&OM, t al.,

and BOMRMt

CIVIL ACTIOB MO. 847-63 HOTICJ Or MDTIOS XHP MOTTOH TO

snrut FORM ev JQMMBMT

Attonwy for D*fadnt. Board of education of the City of Bnglmood 16 Mist Pliad Avnu Englwood, Haw Jry

REPRODUCED FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT DIVISION, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

BUTBZCT or HEW JERSEY

GKUTRUDI f. rOUUtt* et i..

ttaiatiff*
V*. AD8TIS1 A. VOIJC, et ei..

t *i.
Intervening i>llntiff
and

rtumsitzcx H. RAHMMOBS, coiionr of Education of th Stat* of Nw Jray, and

DUSORAil SPKUIU.,

Intervening iierendaiitu
CIVI1, ACTIOH NO. 847-63 OKDER AKC JUDGMEOT

Attorney fox th Board of education of the City of ngiewood 16 HMt PaliMd* Avenue Sew Jerey

REPRODUCE) FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT DIVISION, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

OYB> T*TKS DZ8TKICT COOHT

t ai.

Bitnucv or nw omr i
* *

M0TXM A. VOUC *t *L. oooatJ lag tb* MMU> Of Maocc. KSTxaKM or -aus. cm or xmuanoDt tat cm or JOM H. nuor. t

n
Civil Action

at wot cm or

HP. 847~3
ORDEH WOJ JUDBMEJfT

VOtfKt

ft

1.

of Motion of tb stat* of

on to b hMXd ty tto Court an ramd EMB the Court of lvp**X Ml tb* Court t tb* baurlng. bri tit* rfVNwnt* of OOOMM! gpd tbfi Court fearing aoMi<ter*d
th notion COT SHMUUCy JOdj^Hlt -*! by th d*t*odant. th

Education o* tb* City of nglMPo4, *bich Motion for in by th* dfndnt and intrvtti tb* Court lnwiay found tbcfe tbr xit oa genain* iwm* tutorial fact to to* trid and that the d*fndot and in ax ntitiad to * ^aagiMnfe a * wittr of iav. it i*

REPRODUCED FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT DIVISION, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

OMMEUB. ADJUMSD MB IWBOTP that tha coaylaint filed ia tfaia eaaaa by OKKTUUDC t, nftuou MWDnr L,. taauaat, tBOMM . OCTTlfftA and JOSSfUiiOB CACCiot*, aa diaaiaaad for Xacdc of jur dicUoa. CMEUD. it ! uo> of

th

vot*a,

VOU.

LOUIS PTOACIl. KSKTHZCK KKACB. MUUI UUWKR. JUDITH LRSSES.

iLZO D- Auassio, MMUB cf ALZSSIO. SOL BAiouuEa. UUOAII

BOOEKB F. CUWKBTS. HUUCMtXE CLSMUXS, b* Oi*miM^ bcUM of ttJMM, ad it i furthor

OBDOm that ths d*<HMUt, th Board of Mneatie* of city ef gXflMQedl** otic* tor MMaxy jua*nt M agaiMt int*rvaaiag plinUff. 8DNM ROBIJ. CBUHUA HUBBUBS, U0X8 IMAMO aad BIAMCU MUMB. b tba MM ia b*rby rntd. od it ia (wrtiiar onDKWB). AOJDDGH) MB PBCMKP that tha coaytatnt of tba p\*inti a aad ef tha iatarvaaia? gXaiatiKa aaraia toa aad I tha awa aa* baxaby di.aia<l aad that taa daaodaata aad itrainq daCaadanta raoovar tkaix eeata.
DATED!

. 19**.

REPRODUCED FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT DIVISICN, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

t966

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY GERTRUDE P. FULLER, et al., Plaintiffs,

vs.
AUSTIN A. VOLK, et al., constituting the BOARD OF SCHOOL ESTIMATE OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD; the CITY OF ENGLEWOOD; and JOHN H. PERRY, et al., constituting the BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, Defendants. Civil Action No. 847-63 OPINION ON REMAND FULLER, et _al._, No. 15043 and VOLPE. et al., No. 15044

JERRY VOLPE, et al., Intervening Plaintiffs,

) and
FREDERICK M, RAUBINGER, Commissioner of Education of the State of New Jersey,)

and
KENNETH ANCRUM, et al.,

)
)

and
DEBORAH SPRUILL, Intervening Defendants.

)
) )

Appearances: Breslin & Breslin, Attorneys for defendants Austin A. Vork, et al., constituting the Board of School Estimate of the City of Englewood, and the City of Englewood, By: John J. Breslin, Jr.? Sidney Dincin, Attorney for defendants John H. Perry, et al., constituting the Board of Education of the City of Englewood; Major & Major, Attorneys for intervening plaintiffs Jerry Volpe, et al., Bys James A. Major; Arthur J. Sills, Attorney General of New Jersey, Attorney for intervening defendant Frederick M. Raubinger, By: Joseph A. Hoffman, Deputy Attorney General;

REPRODUCED FROM TOE COLLECTIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT DIVISION, LIBRARY

OF CONGRESS

Barbara A. Morris, Attorney for intervening defendants Kenneth Ancrum, et al.; Morton Stavia, Attorney for intervening defendant Deborah Spruill.

A U G E L L I . District Judge:

This matter is before the Court on remand from the Court of Appeals. See 351 F.2d 323 ( 9 5 . 16)

In Fuller v. Volk. 230 P.Supp, 25, this Court upheld the validity of the action taken by the Board of Education of the City of Englewood pursuant to a plan that had been promulgated by the JJoard and approved by the Commissioner of Education of the
J

State of Sew Jersey.

The plan provided for the establishment of

a city-wide, sixth-grade school (Engle Street School) , and required attendance thereat of all sixth grade pupils in the Englewood public schools. ^f

The constitutionality of the plan, in its application and operation, was attacked by two groups of plaintiffs, the Fullers and the Volpes. The Fuller group initiated the action by O complaint filed on October 11, 1963. The Volpe group intervened on November 15, 1963. The Fuller group claimed standing to sue as

taxpayers to enjoin the expenditure of public funds for an unconstitutional purpose. The Volpe group claimed standing to sue as For the

parents of children in the Englewood public schools.

reasons stated in the opinion of the Court of Appeals, the complaint filed in this Court by the Fuller group will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. With the Fullers eliminated, considera-

tion will now be given to the mandate of the Court of Appeals as it relates to the Volpe group.

2.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

This Court is satisfied that the Volpe intervenors, independent of the Fullers, alleged a separate basis for jurisdiction with respect to their cause of action. But the open question

is whether any members of this group possess the requisite locus standi to maintain the action. When the matter was before this

Court, no proof was adduced that any member of the Volpe group had any child or children in the Engle Street School. This lack

of proof was noted by the Court of Appeals, and one of the directions of the mandate is for this Court to ascertain the facts in this regard. Other matters to be considered by this Court on the remand are the following: assuming the existence of jurisdiction

and standing, does the doctrine of exhaustion of state administrative remedies have any relevancy in light of Booker v. Board o_f Education. Plainfield. 45 N.J. 161 (1965)t also, should this Court apply to the facts of this case, the doc*rine of federal absten>tion in accordance with the principles laid down in Harman v. Forsaenius. 380 U.S. 52B ( 9 5 ; and, finally, has the original 16) decision of this Court on the constitutional issue, been materially altered by the decision of the New Jersey Supreme Court in Booker. Upon the coming down of the mandate, this Court fixed January 7, 1966, as the date for hearing argument on the issues posed by the Court of Appeals, and counsel were directed to brief the questions involved, and to advise the Court as to the need for additional proofs. At the hearing, the only testimony adduced related to the issue of standing. In this connection it was stipulated that

among the members of the Volpe group, Edward Robbins and Gloria Robbins, his wife, had one child, Andrea Robbins, in the fifth grade in the Roosevelt School, and Lloyd Pollard and Blanche

3.

V.

Pollard, his wife, had one child, Blanche Pollard, in the fifth grade in the Quarles School. None of the other members of the

Volpe group have any child or children in grades one through six, inclusive, in any of the Englewood public schools. On this aspect

of the case the Court of Appeals said., "[t]he complaint and petition for intervention alleges only that the children are students in the Englewood public school system, but does not allege the grades that they are in. Some may now be past the sixth grade, Some may be only at the

thereby rendering their action moot.

first or second grade level, thereby rendering their action premature." All parties at the hearing of January 7, urged this Court to accord standing to the parents of the Robbins and Pollard children. It may fairly be inferred from the language used in the

Court of Appeals opinion, that the parents of children in the fifth grade in the Englewood public schools would have standing to maintain the action. These parents of fifth-graders, wh'^se child-

ren will soon be required to attend the Engle Street School, should be permitted to challenge now, in advance of the happening of that event, the right of the Englewood Board of Education to compel attendance at that school. To hold otherwise would require

that locus standi be denied to a parent until such time as he has a child actually in the sixth grade and that, in order to avoid mootness, the child remain there until the litigation has run its course. This Court does not believe such an absurd situation was Under the circumstances, it is concluded that the

ever intended.

parents of the Robbins and Pollard children have standing to sue. See Rule 23 (a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; 39 Am. Jur. Parties, 52. The action will be dismissed as to all other members of the Volpe group because of mootness.

REPRODUCED FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT DIVISION, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Before passing on to the other questions submitted to this Court for consideration on the remand, it might be well to emphasize that the Court, in Fuller v. Volk. supra. was not called upon to decide whether the Englewood Board of Education was under an affirmative duty under the Fourteenth Amendment to take any action with respect to de facto segregation in the Englewood public schools. The Court was presented with a fait

accompli, a plan in operation that had been formulated by the Board and approved by the Commissioner. The intervening plain-

tiffs sought to have the plan, and action taken thereunder by the Board, set aside as being violative of their constitutional rights. The narrow issue for decision was whether the Board was

constitutionally prohibited from acting as it did in the premises. This Court held that the federal constitution does not preclude a local board of education from taking appropriate steps to reduce or eliminate de facto segregation in the public' schools, where such action is taken in furtherance of, and pursuant to, state law and state educational policies. Hence, the Court found,

in effect, that the plan under attack was constitutional. All parties before the Court on this matter asked for an early determination of the case on its merits. All counsel,

except the Attorney * General, argued that the facts of the case did not warrant application of the doctrine of federal abstention, and that the intervening plaintiffs should not be required to exhaust state administrative remedies. The Attorney General is

in agreement with this position if the issue before this Court remains as framed by the pleadings, namely, whether the plan under attack, in light of Booker v. Board, of Education, supra, is or is not constitutional. If this is the issue on remand, the Attorney

General urges the Court to retain jurisdiction and decide the 5.

specific question, in which event there would be no need to apply the doctrine of federal abstention or require an exhaustion of state administrative remedies. On the other hand, says the

Attorney General, if this Court construes the Court of Appeals opinion as requiring determination of a new issue, namely, whether, in light of Booker, the challenged plan goes far enough, then this Court should abstain and require the- parties to exhaust the available state administrative remedies. The impact of Booker on the case at bar has been carefully considered. It is true that the "Sixth Grade Plan" in

Booker is quite similar to the plan approved by the Commissioner in this case. The New Jersey Supreme Court has made it clear in

Backer that the Commissioner is vested with broad powers to deal with racial discrimination and segregation in the public schools. Viewed in light of Booker. it may well be that the Englewood plan did not go far enough. But that issue is not before this Court, f* and it is not believed that the Court of Appeals intended to inject that issue into the case. Moreover, the facts of the

instant ca e would not warrant a consideration of any such issue. Unlike the petitioners in Booker, the intervening defendants here, parents of Negro children attending the Englewood public schools, are not-complaining that the Englewood plan is invalid under state law because it does not go far enough. They are satisfied with it. If, and when, such parents become In the case

dissatisfied, Booker points the way to relief.

before this Court, it is only the parents of white children who attack the plan on constitutional grounds. The basis for that

attack is that the plan goes too far and infringes upon their rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. That issue was decided

against them when the matter was first before this Court for decision. 6.

REPRODUCED FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT DIVISION, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Except for the stipulation regarding the Bobbins and Pollard children, the record now before the Court is the same as when the case was first decided. gants remain the same. The contentions of the liti-

The intervening plaintiffs sought, and

still seek, to have the Englewood plan declared unconstitutional. The defendants, and intervening defendants sought, and still seek, to have the plan upheld againat that attack. Notwithstand-

ing the principles laid down in Booker, this Court does not believe, in the absence of any contention by any party that the Englewood plan does not go far enough, that there is any justification for invoking the federal doctrine of abstention or requiring the parties to exhaust state administrative remedies.

The cases cited by able counsel for the intervening plaintiffs, particularly Wanner v. County School Board, 245 F.Supp. 132 (E.D. Va. 1965) and Springfield School Committee v. Barksdale, 348 P.2d 261 (1 Cir. 1965) have all been examined, but they do not persuade this Court that the original determination made in this case should be altered. Under the circumstances,

and for the reasons expressed herein, as well as those set forth in this Court's opinion filed June 3, 1964, the motion for summary judgment made by counsel on behalf of the Englewood Board of Education, and joined in by defendants and intervening defendants, will be granted. Counsel for defendant Englewood Board of

Education, on notice to all counsel, unless consent as to form is obtained, will please submit an appropriate order in accordance with the views herein stated.

1.

STATH4ENT MADS BY THE BOARD OF JDUCATIOM OBSERVER TO THE PTA ON FEBRUARY 9, 1?66

Fully four years ago, the Stearns' report, commissioned by the Board of Education, stated: "The present IX ?8 Kegro enrollment at Lincoln School and the rapid growth to 63% in the Liberty School constitute the statistics of the problem which the city must face." We know that after two years of turmoil, the city did face the problem at Lincoln and acted. As for Liberty, the Board of Education only issued a statement of intent, making no reference to racial imbalance or associated problems. The statement mowely referred to the physical condition of the Liberty school building and said it should not be used on a long-range basis. Since then many Liberty parents and PTA organizations have for years called attention to the intensifying problems of racial imbalance or de facto segregation, and have pleaded for action. This year even the whole PTA council, representing all Englewood schools, emphasized the urgent need to do something. It said in its report to the Bd. of Ed.: "Children at Liberty should not be subjected to another year of this harmful condition. The correction of racial imbalance should not be delayed an additional year by being dependent on long-range school construction plans." The most recent request to the Board of Education was voted on by the membership of this PTA at its last meeting, December 8, 1965* The Secretary presented this request to the Board of Education at its agffififfy December 13 meeting. That statement read: "There is no reason why our children should be subjected to this harmful situation even one additional year. We specifically call on the Board of Education to plan and adopt a Budget for the 1966-6? school year that includes whatever expenses for classroom alterations, etc., that will be needed to carry out the adjustments necessary to correct racial imbalance by September, 1966. We will not tolerate having racial imbalance remain unconnected while long-range school construction plans slowly consume additional years of our children*' education."

Many other parents attended this Board of Education meeting, several giving
statements and one giving an extensive interim plan. The Board made no specific answers to statements in general, and accepted a copy of Jim parent's interim plan if with the comment that it did not believe in the advisability of interim plans. A

a,

direct question was asked whether the Board intended to request funds in its 1966-6? Budget to implement any plan. The Board answered that they had no plan, so could
not request funds either specified or reserved* Upon further questioning it was
. i .!

brought out from the Board that not even a long-range plan had been fully formulated. .. \, th

singfc cent reserved for the expenses that would go for the correction of racial imbalance at Liberty. At the meeting of the Board of Education on February ?, Mr. Archie Crouch, representing the Urban League for Bergen County, expressed the League's concern with the problems confronting the Liberty school. He said " ... we of the executive

committee of the Urban League are very much concerned about the racial imbalance and the contingent problems at Liberty School. We acknowledge the fact that improvements in the City's public education have required implementation of specific steps on the basis of priority. However, the problem at Liberty School has been clearly obvious for several years* We believe that a solution must be placed at the top of the list of priorities for future action. Since the Board of Education has stated and reaffirmed its intent to eliminate racial imbalance at Liberty School, we believe the time has arrived for immediate action*" The response of the Board of Education was totally unsatisfactory. They have no plan, no timetable for implementing a plan, not even a timetable for developing a plan. let nearly a year ago the Hew Jersey Supreme Court ika clearly established that educational authorities do have a direct responsibility to correct racial imbalance in schools having situations like Liberty's. The time for sitting back and patiently wating is exhausted. I should like to say here that the Executive Board is in complete accord about the next step necessary in the effort to eliminate racial imbalance at Liberty by September, 1966 - contrary to implications attempted in the local press* Vie welcome, as always, new parents to attend the Executive Board meetings and we urge your participation.

The PTA Executive Board hereby makes the following serious suggestion, which was unanimously adopted by every voting parent present at the Executive Board meeting: "The Liberty School Executive Board suggests that legal action filed with Commissioner Raubinger's office is now needed in the effort to eliminate racial imbalance at Liberty School by September, 1966. We suggest that legal action will help in making the Englewood Sleraentary school system consistent with the precedent established in the Plainfield decision of the New Jersey Supreme Court, We suggest that It is time for parents to take action in behalf of the rights of n their children. These suggestions were made after only the most grave consideration and deliberation of the PTA Executive Board and are respectfully brought to you, the PTA members, for your consideration and careful deliberation.

Miss Barbara A. Morris 20 West UOth Street New York, New York

February 18, 1 6 ?6

Following is a list and description of items submitted as per your request. I hope they are satisfactory. Please let me know if you need additional material. This material will need to be returned when you have finished using it. I. 25 Authorization forms signed by UP parents representing UP children. Todd Gregory was represented in the Petition filed with Commissioner Raubinger which was the basis of his July 1, 1963 Lincoln School decision. Derrik Wilson and Adrienne Williams lived in the Lincoln School district during the 1962-63 school year and attended Lincoln Kindergarten the first term. The second term they joined the boycott in protest to de facto segregation and joined in the study-in in Cleveland School. II. Statistics on Racial Imbalance A. PTA letter requesting 1 6 - 6 statistics 956 B* Englewood public school census and covering letter from Dr. Shedd C. Newspaper article 11-11-65 (somewhat innacurate) D. Statistical charts prepared by PTA and used in presentation to membership**! December 8, 1965 and to the Board of Education on December 13, 1965 E. See Harvard Study, page 15U, for detailed statistics of 196U-65 school year F. See New Jersey State Report on Englewood, page 17 for detailed statistics of'62-63. III. School District Lines These lines have been changed since November, 1963 when Lincoln was redistricted. Stamping September 196U the Lincoln Kindergarten was eliminated (following intensive negotiations). This naturally created changes in the kindergarten zones. At the same time there was a minor adjustment between the Quarles and Cleveland zones which affected William Street. This was supposed to have been done to reduce possible overcrowding at Cleveland and to create a more natural district. It also must have reduced or limited the Negro percentage at Cleveland (where there was great concern among many white parents). (My guess is that this change involved 30-ItO children, possibly reducing the total number of Negroes in Cleveland by 12$ to 1$% and reducing the Negro percentage of the whole school population by about U$-6$.) A. Map li Kindergarten School District *V;-V \<\L1 - Jj.nr (<?*>*> B. Map 2 Kindergarten September 196U~Present C. Map 3: School District Zones Grades 1-5 ^'' f<?2 - fv***ift D. Map it: Rough map providing data upon which other maps above are based (prepared in conference February 17, 1966 between Assistant Superintendent of Schools Francis Garrity and Byron Baer). IV. Data on Dispersal of Negro Population A. Englewood N.J. City Block Housing Census report (a) with map showing the number of Negro families in each block

Miss Barbara Morris - 2

2-18-66

B. Englewood N.J. City Block Housing Census report (b) with map shaded to show general view of Negro concentration in each block C. Report prepared analysing sane of the data from the Englewood City Block Housing Census NOTE: All the above census information is very dated, as the racial composition in the Liberty School area has greatly changed since I 6 . 90 ?. Official Studies, Reports or Statements Relating to Racial Jjnbalance

iX"A. "Englewood, Its People and Its Schools", February 1962 (Steann's Report) (Note especially pages 11, 1 1 113, Uli and 115) 0, i^-B. "Proposal For A Central Intermediate School1*, July, 1962, Board of Education C. Board of Education News release on ( ) July 12, 1962 9, D. "A Study of Racial Distribution in the Englewood Public Schools", October 5,1962 New Jersey State Committee (Little reference to Liberty) E. Board of Education News release, September 10, 1962 F. Board of Education Minutes, October Ik, 1963 ^Statement of Intent(s page 2) Q. Board of Education Newsletter, October, 1963 (see page h "Board Plans") H Board of Education Request to Mayor and City Council on action on long-range planz ,', Detailed Proposal of Long Range Program, September^ 196J4. Version for Board's ! use, never released. J. Detailed Proposal of Long-Range Program, September, 1961| Version released lateKto public. K. Superintendent of Schools Press release on Long-Range Plan (undated) L. Superintendent of Schools Press release on Long-Range Plan (undated) M. Board of Education Newsletter, January, 1 6 (see page 6, column 2) 95 N. "Englewood 's Schools", May 1965 (Harvard Report) 0. "Summary of Englewood Report", May, 1 6 (probably by Board of Ed. or Superin95 tendent of Schools) P. Superintendent of School Press Release on High School Expansion (undated) Q. Board of Education Newsletter on HighSchool Expansion (undated) R, Board of Education 1966-6? Proposed Budget for July 1, 1966 to June 30, 196? S. Public Notice on $ , 3 , 0 High School Appropriation. 23800 VI, Requests to Public Officials Regarding Change of Racial Imbalance in Englewood This material is incomplete and undoubtedly additional material can be gathered if necessary.

A. Invitation, (Sept. lU, 1 6 ) notes, (Sept. 25, 1 6 ) and report (Sept. 27, 1961) 9l, 91, showing the problem at Liberty School was also highlighted along with Lincoln * At the very first meeting *4. the Board of Education before the start of the Lincoln school fight. ^"^ B. Liberty PTA Executive Committee letter to Board of School Estimate, January 3, 1962, asking for funds in the 62-63 Budget for an integrated plan for "our school" G. News article on (b) D. Embarassing PTA Statement (February U, 1962) following strong local demonstrations E. PTA Council Statement (February 5, 1962

Miss Barbara Morris - 3

2-18-66

F. PTA Executive Committee letter to Board of Education (April 30, 1962) asking that Liberty be included in correction of racial imbalance. G. Same as ( ) to Press Journal (April 30, 1962 f H. PTA Council letter to Board of Education (May 1, 1962) asking that racial imbalance be eliminated in all schools I. News article on (H) J. Liberty PTA forms and letter to Board of Education (May 9, 1962) endorsing Executive Board position (tt) K. News article (May 17, 1962) on Liberty PTA meeting ( ) J L, Liberty PTA letter to Board of Education (May 16, 1962) requesting correction of existing racial imbalance in the elementary "schools" M. Press story on (L) (May 18, 1962) ~N. Liberty PTA minutes (July 11, 1963)showing letter to Board of Education pushing long-range program. 0. Liberty PTA Executive Committee letter (July 12, 1963) requesting action on Englewood Public Schools and accenting Liberty P. News article (date?) on IdFerty PTA request on racial imbalance at Liberty Q. Excerpts of minutes of PTA Council meeting (August lU, 1963) referring to resolution which refers to racial imbalance at Liberty R. PTA Council Hesolution (August l, 1963) favoring steps to correct imbalance at Liberty and covering letter to Common Council (August 15, 1 6 ) Copy probably 93. sent to Board of Education* S. REPLY by Superintendent of Schools (June 26, 1 6 ; to letter of PTA Secretary 91) (June 26, 196U-missing) on racial imbalance at Liberty T. Liberty PTA Executive Committee letter (July 30, 196U) to Board ofEducation, Superintendent of Schools, and Councilman- At-Large requesting action on Creche property as means of eliminating Liberty school with rapidly mounting racial imbalance U. Widely distributed Liberty PTA fact sheet (possibly to Board of Education) relating Liberty PTA's stand on Creche property to de facto segregation at Liberty V. Liberty PTA letter (September 2k, 196U) to Board of Education and CouncilmanAt-Large backing up action of Executive Committee (t) W. Liberty PTA Executive Committee minutes (October 7, 196U) with text of telegram to Board of Education urging action on Creche property as necessary for longrange school development plans X. Liberty PTA letter (October 15, 196U) to Mayor and Board of School Estimate urging action on Creche property as necessary for long-range school development plan 1 PTA Council Report to Board of Education (late 6U-possibly Nov. or Dec.) urging . attention to de facto segregation at Liberty School (page U) Z. Liberty PTA Executive Board letter (October 12, 196U) to Board of Education INQUIRING ABOUT HARVARD STUDY HEARINGS (never held - letter never answered) AA. PTA Council Educational Needs Beport (November 22, 1965) to Board of Education with strong recommendation on eliminating racial imbalance at Liberty (page 2) and attached Liberty School PTA Educational Needs Committee report to Board of Education, (page &) PTA Council Educational Needs Committee Chairman Statement (Nw2, 1965) to Board of Education very strong on eliminating racial imbalance at Liberty Englewood PTA Council Building Needs Committee Report (November 21, 1965) to Board of Education with strong recommendation on eliminating racial imbalance at Liberty and attached Liberty School PTA Building Needs Committee Report (November 21, 1965) to Board of Education, also very strong News article (date?) on (AA,BB,CC) Minutes of PTA Council meeting (January 3, 1966) with report on response of Board of Education to PTA Council recommendation on racial imbalance

BB. CC.

DD. EE.

Miss Barbara Morris - U

2-18-66

FF, Liberty PTA resolution on racial imbalance (December 8, 1965) presented to the Board of Education on December 13, 1965 GG. McPherson statement on racial imbalance presented at Board of Education meeting December 13, 1965 (many parents spoke but few had prepared statements) HH. Liberty PTA President's statement on racial imbalance delivered at Board of Education meeting December 13, 1965 II. Liberty PTA statistical material and charts presented to Board of Education December 13, 1965 JJ. News article (December 111, 1965) showing Board's response at December 13 meeting KK. Dr. Clarke's telegram (January 10, 1966) requesting Board's position on racial imbalance LL. Dr. Clarke's telegram draft (February 6, 1966) requesting Board's position on racial imbalance MM. Mrs. Gregory's letter (February 6, 1966) to Board of Education requesting Board's position on racial imbalance NN. Superintendent of School's Reply (February 9, 1966) to Dr. Clarke 00. " ii it n n ^rs. Gregory (copy of Dr. Clarke PP. " Mrs. Townsend( ' . QQ. n n H M n iiMr. McPherson ( " " " received but not included here RR. Liberty PTA Executive Board Letter (February 7, 1966) to Board of Education on racial imbalance SS. Superintendent of School's REply (February lU, 1966) to (HE) TT. Liberty PTA Officers statement (February lU, 1966) to Board of School Estimate on racial imbalance. Mrs. Townsend's statement at that meeting. UU. Report of Liberty PTA Observer fo the Board of Education to the PTA meeting of February 9, including the Board's response to parents at their December 13 meeting VII. Possible Plans to Correct Racial Imbalance in Liberty by September, 1966. VIII. Liberty PTA Minutes and Exiecutive Board Meeting Minutes, leaflets, newsletters^ and Newspaper Articles, reflecting intense concern about racial imbalance"! all of which the Board of Education and Liberty School Principal were aware. IX. Members of Board of Education s " John H. Perry ' Miss Milton Heir ' ' Mrs. Donald Gordon *- Bernard Chazen : Warren Lewis 2k7 Epps Avenue, Englewood 382 Windsor Rd., Englewood 225 Davison PI., Englewood 331 Starling Rd.,Englewood 178 W. Demarest Ave., Englewood

OF CONGRESS

CTMXS DISTRICT

F. nuot,

vamaxx or ww

MJBTSN A. twjM

*t . !

nromni or tu

*
I

jNMI H. H B t . U l

or tux cirt
*

CXVX1> ACTIOS BO. S'J7-63

vats*. t

OF

tb tt Of

da
DBWMH SHMttU..

t 1

:ndnt

I
TOt VOR8AHQSK d MUHPBOf, SSOS. AttWtMy* tor PiJjti.

P. rull*c, et !.,

syt AMU t. MWHaar, ttQ t oatb tor MCMdaata. Mwtia A. vlk, *t !., omwtitutliB 9 1M ftoE ef School EUM%* f U City of 4 th City of B^lMAod fcy. aobn JT. r^.lB. Jr.. Bq. 41 Main StUHit, B6kwM3fc, VW Jurmy uuoa * HAJQ*.

Cor

Jwrty volp, J*ry

241 Main 8tc**t. a>dri

AKMOX J. XXLUt* ESQ.

wMMral o* Mw Jy, Attonwy toe r r *drick M. A. s tt HOHM Mw ary

REPRODUCED FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT DIVISION, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

aXHURT B. XMS o4 UMMA A. MODUS. EOS. iat *t 1 Cow* OKKW 3TAVH Mttf NZUUUt N. JWCRUH, OOS, Attocaay* tor iatwnmiB* dMdMt. Mbezab Bpruill 744 nad 8txt, wanes UMUI fcb* tmdwr*ia<M> wtU wv thi
CetiCt *t th

8tt W.trtct Cexurt. Couzt BOUM< rdwrX

at

for MttlMit of tit* fe of

.0A Day of Joy and Achievement] ..A Day for Thinking about the Future! . .A Day for Planning Ab.ead.1

But for many of us as Uegro parents... .A Day of Concern, Defeat and. Despair!

WEI DO WE AS PARENTS OF NEGRO YOUNGSTERS DESPAIR ....

.because only 1% of Negro seniors are in the top quarter of their class.* .because 4 cut of 5 Negro seniors are in the bottom half of their class.* .because too many of our Negro youngsters finish school with a second rate education that will not qualify them to enter a good college or get a good job. .because we believe the greatest cause of these problems is defacto segregation.

*based on school statistics 1/28/66

BUT HASN'T DEFACTO SEGREGATION OR RACIAL IMBALANCE BEEN CORRECTED ?.

Ve reject the explanation that our youngsters are separated into these lover or less challenging sections based on "ability". Negro youngsters have the same ability as youngsters of any other race.

Ve reject the explanation that handicaps are responsible for Negro youngsters greatly outnumbering vhites in the bottom or less challenging sections. According to the U.S. census, white low-income families greatly outnumber Negro low-income families in Englevood.

U.S. CENSUS, FAMILY INCOME - ENGLEWOOD I960

-<> 6

less than 100 ,0

less than 3 300 ,0

5 , 0 to 300

$ . 0 to 700

over 1,0 000

We protest that this situation remains uncorrected despite the fact that the State of N. J. reported back in 1962 that Englawood had this problem.

WIGHT MORRQV HIGH SCHOOL

JR. HIGH

"TOP" JICTIOMJ HISTORY

"TOPSECTIONS

92* Negro

"BOTTOrt" 5FCTI01JS HISTORY

SSCTIONS

"BOTTOM" SECTIONS

H. J. STATE REPORT Off RACIAL DISTRIBUTION IN THE ENGLEWOCD PUBLIC SCHOOLS, OCT. 1962
(ex

What do we u/ant ?

EDITORIAL REPRINTED FROM:

SATURDAY. JUNE 18,' 1968 sinn have been made new complaints racial jn,tmr rUss ,t Dwight Morrow High segregation ra the schools of Englewood. Last, ^^ , ofTTml ,y , year ability groupings were inaugurated in |.was to ,h, , ^ ltmfnt n( th, cl,M An. English, foreign language, mathematics and, othw ,4 vrTr m ,, ttemA ,u,rter, and 41 It's too early tn attempt a definitive 1udg- science classes in the City s high school and | m th, ]a5t _lrtw ! ment on ability grouping of public school ptl- junior high. School Superintendent Mark i jf jj ,); that color'of skin i ptls. There are education experts who favor Shedd said the change was made to group' has no direct relationship with ability to learn il. who sav putting bright pupils in one Has* students into easily teachable classes. but that family background has a greit deal i and slow children m another helps both But the I eronps The reasoning is that in a traditional Parents Dr Beniamin Clarke, chairman of rel- to do with it. In the case of Englewood. how heterogeneous class I he more intelligent stli- atively Committee of Englewood. reports in- ever, with its substantial middle-class Negro few Negro students have been population, it would be reasonable to suppose i dent becomes bored and dissatisfied when I material is reviewed over and over again for eluded in high-ability classes and relatively that ability groupings and graduate rankings few whites have been placed in classes for! would be less stratified racially than they (he les-s ciftrd pupils. On the nlher hand, the slow learners The criteria on which the dais ^ seem to be. poor studenl. daily forced to recngni7e the Wo evidence b* been adduced to show! superiority of his classmates, conceives a feel- assignments vere made were not so objective; ing of inadequacy, of resentful defensiveneis as they should have been, he says: they de-|th>t the present mnditions are the result of j pend too much on subjective judgments of I anr conscious pnrnose Bather, thev would I that will do him no good in later life. guidance counselors and on past school [ teem a heritage nf th year* of neglect rvmThai's one theory. achievement. i bnlized bv the old l.mcoln School But Dr. I Another, in defense of heterogeneous It would be easy to dismiss the objection Clarke's larger point is valid: the City's! crnuoinc. proposes that the slow learner ,out of hand: after all. what better standard is school system should not rest content-with needs to he challenged, that isolating him in I there for evaluating future classroom per- slon-lv outliving that heritage Progress may special classes with other children hk him I formanci than part performance? But the ei- j require some modification of the ability inspires a collective inferiority complex Nfor | pmence of the last few years in Englewood ! groopua principle perhaps more: crossis it an especially wholesome idea tn estab- i suggests a more temperate, more deliberate ooffinitxm of students m wrae dasset. perlish hrizht students as an elite as early in life ; rMxinse. Statistics compiled bv the United ! hant greater attention to slow groups. In any as. say. the eighth grade: so this theory holds [Clubs nf Negro Women of Bergen Countytevent rt' one more thing for Englewood In the context of this continuing riiscus- show, for instaore. that among the IMS erad-1 school officials la worry about..

Can Integrated Classes Still Be Exclusive?

UNDATED MATERIALS

"FACTS AND INFORMATION REGARDING THE LIBERTY SCHOOL AND THE EDGEWATER-CRECHE ESTATE ISSUES" 1. Board of Education's Long-Range Plan; a. Addition of classrooms to-4>wight Morrow Senior High School for a 4-year, 9th-through42thgrade program. b. Clo sing -Central (6th-grade) School and including its program in a 6th-through-8th.rade Junior High School c. Additional classrooms to Cleveland, Quarles and Roosevelt Schools and eventual closing of Liberty School 1. Reasons for closing Liberty School: a) De Facto segregation b) Obsolete school plant, according to EXHIBIT C , Building Survey, Liberty and Lincoln Schools Prepared for the Board of Education, Englewood July 8, 1963, by Lawrence C. Light, AIA Mr. Light's closing statement... "In my opinion, the use of these two schools should not be considered in any longrange program. This is in the interest of the ;health, safety and comfort of the pupils. In addition, the high cost of maintenance and repairs should be an important factor. " 2. First Step Toward Long-Range Program; "sC All enrollment figures and projections brought up to date b. All available areas surveyed for school expansion Although there are several areas available for new homes, principally in the most outlying corners of the 1st and 2nd Y/ards, there is only one remaining site, physically and economically available for school use in regard to the expansion of Roosevelt School. This property, known as the Edgewater-Creche Estate, has been requested by the Board of Ed. Roosevelt School complex would then consist of the entire 3 1/2 acres now in use and the additional 6 acres provided by the new site. An eventual enrollment of 700 is realistically projected within the next 5 years, and, according to the State formula of an initial 5 acres plus one acre for each 100 students, this new complex would closely meet the need, 3 Support of Long-Range Plan by Liberty School P-TAy a. Letter to William Ticknor, Jr., Councilman-At-Large, copies to the City Council, urging condemnation of the Edgewater-Creche Estate , for private developement. Since it has been bought by a prospective home builder, the letter urged subsequent purchase by the city for the Englewood Board of Education. (Dated 7-30-64) b. Support by Cleveland School - letter dated August, 1964 c. Requests by P. T.O. that the Board of Education submit and publicly announce plans for the school expansion program.

->

OUTLINE FOR TELEVISION TALK ON THE SEGREGATION EROBLEM IN ENGLEWOOD

~ (/

1. Responsible officials on the State and community level recognize that there is a real de facto segregation problem in Englewood. (Explain de facto.) 2. 3. The people of Englewood are genuinely interested in arriving at an equitable solution to the problem. This problem did not arise overnight, and we must remember that it will no* resolve$pvernight.

4. Statement of your policy:

5'

a.

Re-state the principle that_under the lawvof New Jersey and the United States ^every citizen has a right to equal education opportunities .

b. Refer to the Supreme Court decision which stated that there can be detrimental aaeie effects on those attending segregated schools . 'x v c. Emphasize your belief in a neighborhood school system flexible enough to be adapted to solve problems such as the one in Englewood. 5 . Mention the meeting with Mayor Volk and point out that you under. scored the policy of the State concerning segregation. 6. Explain your conviction that discrimination in private housing con-^T, tributes to some degree to the segregation problem. Mention the bill which has been passed by the Democratic Assembly and is being held up by the Republican Senate. 7. Mention that, from your meetings with all parties concerned, you have come to the conclusion that there is an anxiety to know what solution will be decided upon. The interest in a decision appears at this time to be equally as important as the timing of the implementation of the decision.

. i 8. Express the hope that a decision will be forthcoming before school! gets underway in September. Also state that you would like to see this decision implemented as soon as possible. .'

10.

In closing, emphasize your confidence that the people of Englewood will solve their problem in keeping with the Constitution and laws of New Jersey and in a manner which will bring credit to Englewood and to the entire State.

(JDn YOU kndw tlm unowortfl)

probiq,) lii^ho ISh-lcwooU jnanjmtar^ SohooliT
-

haa WO
Lincoln - - - - 'J.7# Negro

-' ;

r m - .. ' \.
.

t _, .->

f also hu TOO rnolalJy Irtpal.nncod acfioolai

If thrt oolntj 'Ti to

The I>i.-)rd of mucitionnponfc '^000 to hnvo throo orn-.Ttn .'
fc'iin

wn tJiolr
3IJC posniblo .lolutionn wore; .'Ivan. Tlio nxportn nncoM'Tondocl

of thorn aa h.ivin.,' tho ;;raitont li^J-j oduc.^ti onal and nqr.il volun.

IKWB I
h

(ltd tho" do?

t

Thn Doarvl pi1" "nod .->. Oononntntlon Scl *'/h it rill Win iJnmnn n fcrn tlon acl KIOJ. iio? Tlio Hn-ird m-.m It hnpofl Wif) DorionMtrition nnhool i-dll ronvlrico tlvi FoJonl Courto of I ti " , od intention a"* *Whatcin'.; of a jJouonotratio'.j Ib w i l l oonh 41^0,000 Tor th.T ('llin Iln.iru i'tin'ci It <vn ''ot nni in rnr in i.'i'or:i /i /' "nIt tdJl. Jwvo 1^0 rtfcuc'an^n, .Jiout 50 will bo Mo ;ro (Total numbor or jlomont'iry .'ichTol nhlldrnn 2,^oB .... 1,3/^2 wiiito, C67 No .TO) IHoy dont Itiow whor i Umy'll find tho t<:.ic!ioro, (If t'tO' dn /Mnd tlio bo/ichorn, th9>' olmuld hnvn npnolnl t r i l n l u , ; , Hio'.' pl.in"~to -;1vrt .-\c uof't.i on irnn thin nun'or fur t-'rln |nir, .in<i)
^ "HH

i l.i the prohlnn in tho E r>v

.- 1 ITl.rnont'^ry School o 7

will ntJll liv/r'j IVO^.-yrorntod schoolni , Clovolnnd - - - 1 Hn,rro, Lincoln - - - 531 Hrtf;ro, /7 whito jM 7 whlto pupilfl

vrill a till hvo WO raclnll;' tib-ilincod Qunrlnn .. - - -17 Nocro, Hnosnvnlt - - -U3 N<rrro, ^ t.ho iTottnl of Thoy n*-o nakinr;i What aro y u '>Jrt-; to do to correct tho n and 'tlio -raoJ.il imbalance in our olanontary aohoola, h.'in tho D^nni nn.iwerod? Tho 'loAnl hnfl n.ild HOTirUJd. Tlio" ;,lvn no J53 whltd J2U whlfcij

**"!-

- y

THIS quootlnn,'

SIX posaiblo rtolutlona wuro ;?lvon, Hie oxportfl r.ioroMmndoii t->ir"o Of thorn na hnvin,; tho 'jrontoab LJ^I!^ odun.-', H.onnl and norol valuo. f-;;- -ft thoag_ aolu tlon a did thio iloard uae?
1/W8 1

do?

JTio DoaAl n Omuon.'tf,r'ih1.nn ' >.v. will ttio Ucmon-itrrttlon Do-frtJ savg lb Jinpon t!io DononotrTtion rjohool wil L oonvlnco tlie FodurU. Courbo of it.i " , od intantiong". i Vfi-iiMcinu of a Uouojiatnjdpi/ ochool^wlli^tjilaj^
Ib will en fit 4L60,000 "or tho FLJ3T, Y3.JI. ("flu; Ho.xrii Miiu'cn J t O-MI "ntt nonrt n'. ; io ' fror.i h T ui'I'if^nn) Ib idJ.l h.ivo 1^0 .itiuloritn. J ) - > i i t ?0 w M l '/.j Uo ;j-o (Total nunnox1 "{' -ilmmmt-ir-,- (lOnTTol rli.l'J.ilron --- :',.'nn ... 1,3^2 'ill A to, T,67 tl.i'ro) TScy donh ICTIOW whor,) Um-/-'] J. f.tnd bho t<3,icliorn, (If t!iO' do I'ind tho boaclirjrn, t.'io" should h.ivn noocj.l.'il tr'iin in,'; 'nio'r pi. in to "!vn ;i rjlx w,t'c.n en ir.io thj.r; rn.u,i nr JV>r tJrin pur, or 0 W o '-:HH*

J2rlirwood vd.ll still hv/o 1WO .i Clovolnnd - - - 1 ffo^ro, Lincoln - - - ?31 M"f;ro, will Btill havo 'PVO

schooln: white 7 whtto

r lr.ib.il .-

Ounrlofl - - - -17 Nocroj 3^3 whitx) pupllfl Roogovolt - - -U3 Nor:ro, 32U white pupilo arai oitiaotfa 'ITio',' ni*n aflkiiv;! What aru y u .AJn ; to do to oorroct Wio no ;ro/;,itl'-'n and tlm rnc.1.nl dj.ilialanco in our olononttrv aohoola* h-io tho DoanJ onoworod?
Donri hnn said MOTlffilO. no mwwor. Tlio.y i \n y<M do?

YOU can Join with others In protant dononstratlona. jfOU c.in to tho Door<l of BJucation, tho Hayo,tho City Council. TOU can mako nuro your neighbors protoat boo] Sorcon County COIIE

WHAT /J?K THE MEW PL/J^n TO fJI'Rri HI- HOtJS ING AND :rg..n County CORE, FAIR HOUSING COMMITTEE, NAACP, nnd CENTR/J, iJNITAfHA.'I ' )CLiL ACTION COMMITTEE nre working out n comprehensive /ippronch to r.-ombnf "Imln/itlon I n hou.ilng nnd /ipnrtTnenti. Thlr. w i l l Include l ^ f r n l i t > r > - ' , 'I' r -j ' .
olcnt /ictlon nnd fienonn I /iii I >t.in<:<'. '

in CAN nr:i.r riy rTnnv.CTffiG ur;

* 1 f you know of ^ny cn.ne.q of dt.^crimination In gpoTtrr"nt r'-n^n1" '^~

''If

you

or

'loiricorf look

you

lourw th<-

I '. l o o l ' l n y I iif l i K l l Hf/ h.-ii I': of

for

/in n j ' / i r t ' v < - n I

or

li>u-" . i ' i

'

wl I I 1 n;r f o

I n riiiy nr<-n t

L l i o - i ' I >r

f l " - > . !

I t i / v r r r - ' r : I / > / . (_o yo'U on

l V lf

r.-.ici: . . - . . . . . . . . . . - - - . - - -

you know of npnrtnx'nt.i or houi<?i In l.irp.<-Iy w h i r (>' w i l l i n g tv> r-'r>*-or 'u-11 t o rto^ro' - L ........

<--^r-,.>!

("/M.I. MKr'CKr r-f)MfrrY r< )i-:. ijt>.7; TV. .

11:1.1. 'I'lii-'n /.c.fnrr i i

ur l:lir.-<- orj-nn I r.n ttonrj w i l l do th' rc.-it- We w i l l opi-n u|> h ' ) u - i I nj/ / u f ! np"i"" a areas previously restricted. We will help bring together tenant.---, nnr' r. - . jme buyers nnd homo r.eller.'}. But we need tho nppllcnnr^.<; nnr! ve nf;<:! r h < - i-->" WK I R not o n l y I ntercfit' 1 '! In h o u n l n g t! Iner linl n;>tlon I n ri'tif/i'i .T"l i>u/-!i/i-' '< M!O n t u d y l n g p o n - i l h l i - 'I I nrr 1ml n/if ory f ! n / m - 1 ny., .---uliiK v u l . m . . - - , r,-. ( ! /irtl <":<!, nnrl tlic nr<-n oC url>/n r-ni-w/il. tSCRIMIMATIOT^ IS T.U.EC/JL IN NE W JERSEY
l V ln

/tpnrtmr-nt IIOUT-.T w i t h Cnur OT more npo3Hrtn*''n t:-. . -. . -

^ln ni'w ho>i.ir>n I n df Vflopfni'nr.i of t''ii OT rnore un I I :. ~ . - . - *Ln nil homrT.mortinged w i t h public fundr,, .^uch /5S FH/\r -T ~ V - T

nncnrcATFD rrErci/Roritoon r^ or'E nr THR__^AT. rr ^'^^^^L^L^iL1.!:1.''.'I'J_1'2..OK 01 ;:cn i M i M/\r j on

o you wnnt to receive i ro^ulnr RiirRcn CORK n'w.ilr>ttcr? III., i , | . I u.- f o r i 1 / | . - i y..., ,,|,our | > ; i r M . l | . / i M n In otir n- f I " 1 I 1 .. ,' ...

''' i f '... .Y '- r

Jny n p c r - l f l c .activity?

Ire you considering joining the FREEDOM RIDERS? j)i.it would you nwst like CORE to accrrmpl tsh?____

^ __

I,..

Telephone

ia TO MRS. PATRICIA HAINEY, 122 ncLMom- ST., ENGLEWOOD, NEW JERSEY

MRS. PAUL B. ZUBER 1530 BONITON ROAD TROY, NY 12180 "LEAST WE FORGET1 PERHAPS BUT ONCE IN ONE'S LIFETIME OF DESPERATION SOMEONE WILL COME ALONG TO KINDLE THE FLAME OF HOPE AND LEND NEW MEANINGS it TO THE LONELINESS OF DESPAIR SUCH A MAN WAS PAUL ZUBER. WHO GAVE SO MUCH TO OTHERS THAT HE ACTUALLY LOST TRACT OF TIME TO DO FOR HIMSELF AND HIS FAMILY A MAN WHOM SUCCESSIFULLY REPRESENTED A CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT IN THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, COUNTY OF BERGEN THAT BROUGHT FOCUS ON THE NORTH FROM THE ENTIRE NATION A MAN WHO DEALT SUCH A DEVESTATING BLOW TO DEFACTO SEGREGATION IN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, THAT THOSE WHOM REMEMBER SHALL NEVER FORGET. WE THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS GROUPS KNOWN AS THE ENGLEWOOD MOVEMENT THE BERGEN COUNTY CONGRESS OF RACIAL EQUALITY AND THE N.A.A.C.P. OF BERGEN COUNTY WERE THE BENEFACTORS OF HIS WISDOM AND GUIDANCE AND SHALL NOW BE THE INHERITORS THAT WILL KEEP HIS DREAMS ALIVE. MRS. ZUBER, WE MOURN WITH YOU AND YOURS, HOMEGOING OF TIME, ; OUR GREAT LOST

AND WE REJOICE WITH YOU IN WHAT WE KNOW WILL BE A JOYFUL BUT MOST OF ALL, WE GIVE THANKS TO THE ALMIGHTY "PAUL B. ZUBER, ATTORNEY AT LAW AND GUARDIAN OF MERCY" GOD THAT HE SAW FIT TO LEND TO ALL OF US BUT FOR A SHORT PERIOD

LOUIS BENJAMIN, SR ROBERT JOHNSON MARY JOHNSON

tr 30 03 02:Olp

Ruben
ID

2O3
5670303

938 2831
PAGE

p. 2
1/G

AR-20-03 I 7.S3 FROM=ENGLEWOOD BQE

Office of School Operations Phone: (201)862-6212 Fax: (201) 567-0903

Englewood Public Schools

TO:
Paxs

Greg Rubin
203-938-2831 (609)986-8390

From:

Richard Segafl
-. G

3/28/2003
CC:

Re

Data requested
O Far Review

D Urgwnt

O Please Comment

D Please Reply

D Moats* Recycle

Attached are four pages from 9ie NJ Department of Education "Fall survey Report for School Year 2002-03* submitted by ttie Engtewood PubBc Schools on 12/12/2002. Hopefuly. this wit be enough Irtformatkxi for your citation. The first page gives the district summary. At the high school level students may be in a program in district and one out of district concurrently. In those instances a student is counted as 0.5. As a result, ftere is a decimal point for all of the numbers. in the other scftoois. the students are a* full time (=1) so I have given you the sheets without the decimal points for caster reading.

[ can be readied at irsegaH@veazon.net if you have a question. I will relum to my office a week from Monday.

Cover Page

1
3 01 1

PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENT BY GRADE, RACE. AND S3* (A* oE October 15, 2002} / PUL1*-TIMB Students Report / County: 03-BBRGEN District: 1370-ENGU?WOOD CIT* School: 060-CLEVELAND American Indian/ ALasXan Native Male Female

Page:

o
D M

ide 11-Day Pre-Kind. U-Day Pre-Kind. Li-Day Kindergarten ' L f - O a y Kindergarten

ude 1 !ade 2 lade 3 j ade 4 " ade 5 _ lade 6 &de 7 ade 6 ade 9 ade 10 ade 11 ade 12 st-Graduate gnitive-Kild gnitive Moderate arn and/or Lang Dia. iiavioral Disabilities Itiple Disabilities ditory Impairments /chiatric sual Jmpairtnenta 11-Day Preschool Die. if-Day Preschool Dig. tism gnitive-Severe tal
n

White Male Female

Black. Male Female

Hispanic Male Female

Asian/ Pacific Isl Male Female

All Students

Male

?ewale

Toi

b 2 0 3 1 t. N

u 0 1 1 0 /

22 34 2S 25 29

21 21 27 24 30

9 19 12 12 29

10 11 7 17

0 0 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 3 0 2

1 1 0 3 2

36 55 45 40 61

33

61
SI

.71 C

-is
33 45 41

8! 101

0 0 0

0 0 0

2 2 0

1 0

1
4

1 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

1
0

c
0

3 7 0

2 0 1

ro o u
CO

0 11

0 2

1
144

0 127

0 66

0 I

0
7

) 248

0
191

43;

'-J

a
IN K

"*JPH
3

at
PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENT BV GRADE, RACE, AND SEX [Aa of October IS, 2002) PULL-TIME Students Report County: 03-BEROEM District; 1370-EMGLEWOOD CITY School: 085-LINCOLN EARLY SCHOOL Pag*: 1

T CO

o
CO

ade 11-Day Pre-Kind, If-Day Pre-Kind, 11-Day Kindergarten i If-Day Kindergarten

ade ade 3 ade 4 ade 5 de 6 ade 7 ade 8 ade 9 ade 10 ada 11 ade 3 2 st-Graduate gnitive-Mild gnitive-Moderate arn and/or Lang Dis. havioral Disabilities Uiple Disabilities diuory Impairments /chiatric sual Impair inert ts 11-Day Preschool Dis. 1C-Day Preschool Dis. t iam gnitive-Severe tal

White Male Female

Black Male Female

Hispanic Kale Female

American Indian/ Alaskan Native Wale Female

Asian/ Pacific Isl Male Female

o ro

All students Male Female Tott

0 2 0 0

31

21 24 33

29 23 32 26

14 10 16 26

15 21 21

19

0 0 0 0

45 34 40 59

c tr D
3

73

o i
0

0 0 0

2 3 4

1 J 0

2 5 1

0 0 0

0 0 0

2 5 6

3 8 1

5 14 7

o u
GD U CO

ro
03

118

114

70

84

192

201

393

T3 U

PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENT BY GRADE, RACE, AND SEX (As of October IS, 2002) FULL-TIME Students Report County: C3-BBSQEN Districtj 1370-BMGLEWOOD CITY School: 070-DONALD A. QUARLES American Indian/ Hispanic Alaskan Native Female Male Female 33 20 0 0 Asian/ Pacific lal Male Female S 0

Page;

U o o U o r\

ade il-Day Pre-Kind. If-Day Pre-Kind. 11-Day Kindergarten IE-Day Kindergarten dde 1 ade 2 ade 2 ade 4 ade 5 ade 6 ade 7 ade 8 ade 9 ade 10 ade 11 ude 12 >st-Graduat6 gnitive-Mild jgnitive-Moderate :arn and/or Lang Die, :haviotr<al Dlsabilitiee .Itiple Disabilities :ditory Impairments ;ychiatrie aual Impairmenta ill-Day Preschool Die. ;l-Day Preschool Dis. o .tism U U. jgnitive-Severe
05 w-

White Male Female 3 2

Black Male Female 24 36

S4 43 66 31

Male 65

All Students Female Tota 58 123

46
27

32 26

0 0

106 73
/O C 3"

0
0

1
0

c0

0 0

0
0

0 0

1 3

ro o
CJ

11

30

:o
0) 0)

ru

134

135

116

78

274

226

500

n
3

Ct

13 Jl

U 0

(As o October IS, 2002)

School , 076-J.E'. 3ISKUSMIDDW

Page:

o Cd

ade 11-Day If -Day 11 -Day i IE -Day ^ade 1 Jade 2

VJhite Male Female Pre-Kind. Pre-Kind. Kindergarten Kindergarten

Black Male Female

American Indian/ Hispanic Alaskan Mative Male Female Male Female

Asian/ Pacific lal Male Female

Male

All Students Female Tote

ro

V n>
3

D dde 3 - " ade 4 5

, ade 6 7 8

69 58

'/O

19 26 41

0 43 29
0 0

0 0 0

1 4
1

3 1.
5

90
31 98

ad 9 ade 10 ade 11 ade 12 st -Graduate gnitive -Mild u gnitive-Moderate gam and/or Lang Dia. havioral DLsabilitifte oltiple Disabilities ditory Impairmerita 2 ychiatric u suai Impairtnenta U 11 -Day Preachool Dis. S IE-Day Preschool Dis. t ism * gnitive-Severe 8 tal
8

0 0 27 1 5 6 0 3 0 0 0
0

o
0

0 0

0 C 0

ru o
CD U 33 A3
2)

322
216

323

645

204

103

aw:*,;; i

ffv>

*^ww#^>l

'*jr ** '.:>?
1 u o
0

.'..

-"

PUBLIC

SCHOOL 3NROLLMENT

BY GRAPE, RACE District:

AND SEX (As of October 15, 2002) 1370-BNOLEWOOD CITV Asian/ pacific Isl Male Female
5.0
2.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 2. & 1.0 4 .0 1 .0 15.0 4.0 1 0 1.0 O.C

Page i

Councy;; White Male Female ill-Day 0 f-Day ill-Day jlf-Oay rade 1

:ade 2

03-BBRGEN Black Male Female

24.0 54 .0 65.0 65.0 50.0 49.0 62.0 69.0 58.0 54 -0 48.0 44.0 36.0
44 , 5 4 .0

Pr-Kind. Pre-Kind. :en Kindergarten t-.eri Kindergarten

3.0

2.0
3.0

36.0 66.0 52.0 52.0 50.0 56. C 56 0 62.0 70.0 63-0 56.0 52. S 41.0 Sl.O
1.0

American Indian/ Hispanic Alaekar Native Male Female Male Petrale 33.0 20.0 0.0 0.0
46.0 36.0 33.0 22.0 28.0 SS.O 19.0 26 .0 41.0 36.5 35.0 21.5 17.0
0.0
fs,o

0.0
3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 4.0 20 3.0 1.0 5. a 11.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 0 .0

All Students Tot. Male Female 123 65.0 56.0

TJ

o ro o ro

4
7 .0 2.9 2.0 3,0 1 .0 1 .0 3.0 2.0 13-0 2 .0

32.0 36.0 26.0 26.0 38.0 28.0 23.0 43.0 29.0 34.0 34.0 19.Q 20.0 2.0

0.0 1.0 0.0 1-0 0.0 0-0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

00 0.0 0.0 0-0 O.C 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0-0 1.0 0-0 0.0

106.0
103.0 100 , 0 79.0 80.0 120.0 90.0 91.0 96.0 112.5 85 .0 60 .5 62.5 4 0
91. S 15. C 22.5

104 .0 92.0 80 0 79.0 99.0 87 .0 97.0 V15.0 99.0 119.0 89. S 65.0 73.0 3.0 39.0 1.0 2.5

210
73

2.0
1.0 1.0 1,0 1.0 4.0 1.0 2.0

^ade 3 fade 4 rade 5 fade 6 cade 7 cade 8 trade 9 cade 10 cade 11 cads 12 sst-Graduate jgnitive-Mild :gnitive-Moderate :arn and/or I-ang Dis. Dis Lities havioral Disabilities :ies -Hiple Disabilities i h It jditory Impairments sychiatric ts isual impairments L Dis. jll-Day Preschool Dis. I Dis. alf-Day Preschool Dis. utietn :>gn.itive~ Severe Dtal
r.
S I

e.o
1.0

201 190 153 179 207 187 206 197 231 174 125

a
ro
3

2 .0 0.0
0-0

1.0
0.0 0.0 00 0,0 0,0

135
7 130 16 25

,1-0 1.0 1.0

75.5 fi .0 16.5

29.0 1.0
1.0

5.0 js'
ji

10,0 o.o
1.5

o.o o.o
0.0

o.o o.o
0.0

o.o
1.0 0,0

0.0 0.0

c.o

ro o u

6-0 0.0
54.0

2 .0

11.0
1,0
638.5

2.0
i

9.0

A n 0.0

A A v .Q

t\ v .u

0 .0
0.0

0.0

26,0

4.0 0. 0
- i ft. e n

30

tfi LU
CO 00 PO CO OJ

0.0
30.0

0.0
807.5

0.0
4S3.0

o.o
42B.5

o.o
2.o

o.o

0.0

1.0

1
1f>A

o ex
I U
X

T3 J