Saturday, November 18, 2006
Of course, it would be in Dallas.
Read THIS and then convince me racism is dead in this country....really find a way to convince me that in 2006, this group of White Sheeters in disguise are not doing exactly what the Jim Crow laws did. That they do not think exactly the same way Trent Lott expressed in the comment that cost HIM his majority position.
Oh and BTW tell the kids in this school why they had to attend separate but supposedly equal classes, and idea tossed aside in 1954 by the Supreme court.
Ruling: Classes divided by race
At Preston Hollow, principal tried to appease affluent parents, halt white flight, judge says
For years, it was an open secret at North Dallas' Preston Hollow Elementary School: Even though the school was overwhelmingly Hispanic and black, white parents could get their children into all-white classes. And once placed, the students would have little interaction with the rest of the students.
The result, a federal judge has ruled, was that principal Teresa Parker "was, in effect, operating, at taxpayer's expense, a private school for Anglo children within a public school that was predominantly minority."
Judge Sam Lindsay's opinion paints an unflattering picture of the elementary school and a principal who was so desperate to appease the school's affluent white parents that she turned back the clock on school desegregation 50 years.
In April, Hispanic parents sued, claiming illegal segregation. The three-week trial concluded in late August. On Thursday, Judge Lindsay declared that the school's principal violated the rights of minority children by assigning them to classrooms based on race.
The judge ordered Mrs. Parker to pay $20,200 to Lucrecia Mayorga Santamaría, the lone named plaintiff, who sued on behalf of her three children.
Although the judge did not find the Dallas school district liable for Mrs. Parker's actions, he strongly criticized DISD administrators for being "asleep at the wheel."
"The court is convinced that several of the area superintendents knew, or should have known, about the illegal segregation at Preston Hollow," the judge wrote in his 108-page ruling.
Also Online
WFAA-TV's Jeff Brady reports
En español
Read Judge Sam Lindsay's opinion
The district has until Jan. 17 to remedy the segregation at the school. Mrs. Parker did not return messages left at her home and school Friday.
District spokesman Celso Martinez said Mrs. Parker would remain the school's principal "until further notice."
Mr. Martinez said the school has undertaken steps to comply with the court order, namely relying on student language scores to place students.
"The truth is we have initiated quite a few changes at the school already," he said. "We need to compare those changes with the court order. We may well be in total compliance."
However, when asked if there are still classes at Preston Hollow containing only white students, Mr. Martinez replied: "That's a good question. I don't know the answer to that."
Desegregation plan
In 2003, a federal judge released the district from its court-ordered desegregation plan. That plan, however, focused on the allocation of resources and treatment of black students. In the 30 years the district operated under the order, whites fled and Hispanics have grown to become the majority. Blacks make up less than a third of the district; whites about 6 percent.
Preston Hollow's unwritten policy of clustering whites together was known for years among parents and teachers, according to testimony. In fact, Mrs. Parker's subordinates – including teachers and her assistant principal – raised concerns about it multiple times. One even wrote a letter to Superintendent Michael Hinojosa about it. Those complaints fell on deaf ears, the judge wrote.
"I began to see something very strange," Ms. Santamaría said in Spanish. "The difference was that the Anglo students would go to lunch together while the Latinos went with the Asians and the African-Americans." That, she said, raised a question in her mind "because the children don't know what segregation is."
Once the Hispanic families sued, Mrs. Parker tried to cover her tracks, according to testimony. For example, on the day an investigator was to observe classes at the school, Mrs. Parker "reshuffled" the student's classroom assignments, according to assistant principal Robert McElroy.
Mrs. Parker also asked members of her staff to sign confidentiality agreements about how students were assigned to their classes, and paperwork detailing the classroom assignments was destroyed under mysterious circumstances, according to the judge's ruling.
Principal uncooperative
The judge also took exception to Mrs. Parker's apparent unwillingness to cooperate with the court. At one point during the trial, the judge noted, Mrs. Parker testified that she didn't know whether Preston Hollow is a predominantly white neighborhood.
"The court finds it astounding that Principal Parker, who has served at Preston Hollow for five years, would testify that she knows nothing about the ethnic makeup of the immediate neighborhood surrounding her school."
The school's attendance zone is mostly north of Northwest Highway, east of Preston Road, south of Royal Lane, and just east of North Central Expressway. It includes affluent, mostly white single-family homes, as well as middle-class homes and apartments that are predominantly minority.
The judge also had sharp words for the district's attorneys, who argued that segregation would cause no harm to the minority students because their teachers used the same curriculum as those teaching white students.
"The court is baffled that in this day and age, that [DISD relied] on what is, essentially, a 'separate but equal' argument," the judge wrote.
Mr. Martinez, the district spokesman, said the district doesn't believe Mrs. Parker was segregating students, but he acknowledged that classrooms at the school need to be better integrated.
"It's our opinion that we were not segregating students at all," Mr. Martinez said. "In fact the judge found that we were not violating the constitutional rights of anybody. Do we need to integrate the classrooms? Yes, and we're doing precisely that."
Although the judge ruled against the school's principal in her personal capacity, he did not find the district, its trustees or Mrs. Parker liable in their "official capacities."
David Hinojosa, the parents' attorney from the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said he apparently didn't convince the judge that the district knew the segregation was happening.
"You just have a certain legal standard you have to meet, and unfortunately, the court didn't find that," he said. "We might appeal the issue if need be ... but we got the ultimate relief we wanted. The parents wanted to stop the segregation that was going on there."
PTA chief criticized
Judge Lindsay also criticized Meg Bittner, the school's PTA president, who wanted to lure more affluent white families out of private schools and back to Preston Hollow.
More white families would result in a healthier PTA, she testified, bigger fundraisers and, ultimately, more money for the school. The best way to lure back white families, teachers and others testified, was to put white children together in the same classrooms.
Teacher Janet Leon told the court that "neighborhood classes" were predominantly made up of white students because "the people who live in the Preston Hollow neighborhood, who are the majority being white, would want their children grouped together."
To aid in the recruitment of more affluent whites, the school's PTA created a brochure for parents that featured almost all white students. Hispanic parents had shown up at the school the day photos were being taken for the brochure, but the principal blocked their entry into the classroom where the photos were being taken, the judge's ruling states.
Additionally, the PTA, in conjunction with the school, held separate open houses and kindergarten recruitments for white parents. And when PTA members gave prospective parents tours of the school, they were never taken down the "Hispanic halls" where the minority classes were housed, teachers testified.
Mrs. Bittner and other PTA officers did not respond to phone messages seeking comment.
An open secret. which MEANS many people KNEW she was breaking the law, and DID nothing.
Yes this country can be very great, but it fails so much of the time, because of people like this school principle.
Oh and BTW tell the kids in this school why they had to attend separate but supposedly equal classes, and idea tossed aside in 1954 by the Supreme court.
Ruling: Classes divided by race
At Preston Hollow, principal tried to appease affluent parents, halt white flight, judge says
For years, it was an open secret at North Dallas' Preston Hollow Elementary School: Even though the school was overwhelmingly Hispanic and black, white parents could get their children into all-white classes. And once placed, the students would have little interaction with the rest of the students.
The result, a federal judge has ruled, was that principal Teresa Parker "was, in effect, operating, at taxpayer's expense, a private school for Anglo children within a public school that was predominantly minority."
Judge Sam Lindsay's opinion paints an unflattering picture of the elementary school and a principal who was so desperate to appease the school's affluent white parents that she turned back the clock on school desegregation 50 years.
In April, Hispanic parents sued, claiming illegal segregation. The three-week trial concluded in late August. On Thursday, Judge Lindsay declared that the school's principal violated the rights of minority children by assigning them to classrooms based on race.
The judge ordered Mrs. Parker to pay $20,200 to Lucrecia Mayorga Santamaría, the lone named plaintiff, who sued on behalf of her three children.
Although the judge did not find the Dallas school district liable for Mrs. Parker's actions, he strongly criticized DISD administrators for being "asleep at the wheel."
"The court is convinced that several of the area superintendents knew, or should have known, about the illegal segregation at Preston Hollow," the judge wrote in his 108-page ruling.
Also Online
WFAA-TV's Jeff Brady reports
En español
Read Judge Sam Lindsay's opinion
The district has until Jan. 17 to remedy the segregation at the school. Mrs. Parker did not return messages left at her home and school Friday.
District spokesman Celso Martinez said Mrs. Parker would remain the school's principal "until further notice."
Mr. Martinez said the school has undertaken steps to comply with the court order, namely relying on student language scores to place students.
"The truth is we have initiated quite a few changes at the school already," he said. "We need to compare those changes with the court order. We may well be in total compliance."
However, when asked if there are still classes at Preston Hollow containing only white students, Mr. Martinez replied: "That's a good question. I don't know the answer to that."
Desegregation plan
In 2003, a federal judge released the district from its court-ordered desegregation plan. That plan, however, focused on the allocation of resources and treatment of black students. In the 30 years the district operated under the order, whites fled and Hispanics have grown to become the majority. Blacks make up less than a third of the district; whites about 6 percent.
Preston Hollow's unwritten policy of clustering whites together was known for years among parents and teachers, according to testimony. In fact, Mrs. Parker's subordinates – including teachers and her assistant principal – raised concerns about it multiple times. One even wrote a letter to Superintendent Michael Hinojosa about it. Those complaints fell on deaf ears, the judge wrote.
"I began to see something very strange," Ms. Santamaría said in Spanish. "The difference was that the Anglo students would go to lunch together while the Latinos went with the Asians and the African-Americans." That, she said, raised a question in her mind "because the children don't know what segregation is."
Once the Hispanic families sued, Mrs. Parker tried to cover her tracks, according to testimony. For example, on the day an investigator was to observe classes at the school, Mrs. Parker "reshuffled" the student's classroom assignments, according to assistant principal Robert McElroy.
Mrs. Parker also asked members of her staff to sign confidentiality agreements about how students were assigned to their classes, and paperwork detailing the classroom assignments was destroyed under mysterious circumstances, according to the judge's ruling.
Principal uncooperative
The judge also took exception to Mrs. Parker's apparent unwillingness to cooperate with the court. At one point during the trial, the judge noted, Mrs. Parker testified that she didn't know whether Preston Hollow is a predominantly white neighborhood.
"The court finds it astounding that Principal Parker, who has served at Preston Hollow for five years, would testify that she knows nothing about the ethnic makeup of the immediate neighborhood surrounding her school."
The school's attendance zone is mostly north of Northwest Highway, east of Preston Road, south of Royal Lane, and just east of North Central Expressway. It includes affluent, mostly white single-family homes, as well as middle-class homes and apartments that are predominantly minority.
The judge also had sharp words for the district's attorneys, who argued that segregation would cause no harm to the minority students because their teachers used the same curriculum as those teaching white students.
"The court is baffled that in this day and age, that [DISD relied] on what is, essentially, a 'separate but equal' argument," the judge wrote.
Mr. Martinez, the district spokesman, said the district doesn't believe Mrs. Parker was segregating students, but he acknowledged that classrooms at the school need to be better integrated.
"It's our opinion that we were not segregating students at all," Mr. Martinez said. "In fact the judge found that we were not violating the constitutional rights of anybody. Do we need to integrate the classrooms? Yes, and we're doing precisely that."
Although the judge ruled against the school's principal in her personal capacity, he did not find the district, its trustees or Mrs. Parker liable in their "official capacities."
David Hinojosa, the parents' attorney from the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said he apparently didn't convince the judge that the district knew the segregation was happening.
"You just have a certain legal standard you have to meet, and unfortunately, the court didn't find that," he said. "We might appeal the issue if need be ... but we got the ultimate relief we wanted. The parents wanted to stop the segregation that was going on there."
PTA chief criticized
Judge Lindsay also criticized Meg Bittner, the school's PTA president, who wanted to lure more affluent white families out of private schools and back to Preston Hollow.
More white families would result in a healthier PTA, she testified, bigger fundraisers and, ultimately, more money for the school. The best way to lure back white families, teachers and others testified, was to put white children together in the same classrooms.
Teacher Janet Leon told the court that "neighborhood classes" were predominantly made up of white students because "the people who live in the Preston Hollow neighborhood, who are the majority being white, would want their children grouped together."
To aid in the recruitment of more affluent whites, the school's PTA created a brochure for parents that featured almost all white students. Hispanic parents had shown up at the school the day photos were being taken for the brochure, but the principal blocked their entry into the classroom where the photos were being taken, the judge's ruling states.
Additionally, the PTA, in conjunction with the school, held separate open houses and kindergarten recruitments for white parents. And when PTA members gave prospective parents tours of the school, they were never taken down the "Hispanic halls" where the minority classes were housed, teachers testified.
Mrs. Bittner and other PTA officers did not respond to phone messages seeking comment.
An open secret. which MEANS many people KNEW she was breaking the law, and DID nothing.
Yes this country can be very great, but it fails so much of the time, because of people like this school principle.
Comments:
<< Home
It seems that the South in particular exudes such practices that should have been left in ancient times.
The Republican party has particularly advocated such bigotry in subtle ways.
Isn't it telling that this particular case comes from George W Bush's favorite state?
The Republican party has particularly advocated such bigotry in subtle ways.
Isn't it telling that this particular case comes from George W Bush's favorite state?
yeah.. the south still has problems.
i think we should have just let them leave the union back in 1861.
except maybe florida, that state is cool.
racism isnt a very big problem up here in maine of course seeing as how maine is 97.81% white. lol
i think we should have just let them leave the union back in 1861.
except maybe florida, that state is cool.
racism isnt a very big problem up here in maine of course seeing as how maine is 97.81% white. lol
# posted by 
: 11/18/2006 11:48:00 PM
: 11/18/2006 11:48:00 PM
Well, this explains why Barbara Bush said that living in a stadium was working out well for 'those coloreds'! I guess she was thinking they weren't all crammed in a classroom away from the white elites.
I despise racism, and yes Chris, here in Maine we don't have as much racism as they do down south, but it is here. The Somalians have literally taken a beating in the Lewiston/Auburn area and it makes me so mad. One good thing that gives me hope when shit like this happens is that the whites in the community come forth to stand up for them! That's the way it freaking should be!!!
We're all the same on the inside and it's our skin color that is different. Why some people in this country can't accept that is beyond my thinking!! It's so ridiculous, child-like, and regressive.
I despise racism, and yes Chris, here in Maine we don't have as much racism as they do down south, but it is here. The Somalians have literally taken a beating in the Lewiston/Auburn area and it makes me so mad. One good thing that gives me hope when shit like this happens is that the whites in the community come forth to stand up for them! That's the way it freaking should be!!!
We're all the same on the inside and it's our skin color that is different. Why some people in this country can't accept that is beyond my thinking!! It's so ridiculous, child-like, and regressive.
What will happen next?
DISD will be forced to retire the principal, Teresa Parker.
The original plaintiffs and their legal counsel MALDEF will rebuff any and all changes made to the classroom makeup at Preston Hollow. Why you ask? Simple, Judge Lindsay did not find DISD guilty. Judge Lindsay only awarded actual and punitive damages to plaintiff Santamaria. OFE and its President, Ana Gonzalez recieved no monetary compensation. MALDEF did not get their fees paid by the loser as customary in federal cases. Each side is liable for their own cost of litigation. Guess what? MALDEF is pissed off. No big pay day. MALDEF and the plaintiffs will be back, no doubt claiming that Teresa Parker and DISD are in violation of Judge Lindsay's order on January 18th, the day after the deadline. This time MALDEF will argue for additional sanctions, monetary damages, and attorney fees. So the court room battle for Preston Hollow will continue.
And who are the real winners and losers? There are no winners, only the kids are the losers. None, not the Latinos, Blacks, Asians, and Anglos.
DISD will be forced to retire the principal, Teresa Parker.
The original plaintiffs and their legal counsel MALDEF will rebuff any and all changes made to the classroom makeup at Preston Hollow. Why you ask? Simple, Judge Lindsay did not find DISD guilty. Judge Lindsay only awarded actual and punitive damages to plaintiff Santamaria. OFE and its President, Ana Gonzalez recieved no monetary compensation. MALDEF did not get their fees paid by the loser as customary in federal cases. Each side is liable for their own cost of litigation. Guess what? MALDEF is pissed off. No big pay day. MALDEF and the plaintiffs will be back, no doubt claiming that Teresa Parker and DISD are in violation of Judge Lindsay's order on January 18th, the day after the deadline. This time MALDEF will argue for additional sanctions, monetary damages, and attorney fees. So the court room battle for Preston Hollow will continue.
And who are the real winners and losers? There are no winners, only the kids are the losers. None, not the Latinos, Blacks, Asians, and Anglos.
# posted by : 11/22/2006 09:15:00 AM
: 11/22/2006 09:15:00 AM
MALDEF ask for $596,475.55
Santamaria et al v. DISD et al
Federal District Court for Northern Texas
The Honorable Sam A. Lindsay, Presiding
This is not normal procedure for MALDEF in the case of Santamaria et al v. DISD et al, a filing that is timely. Well on the other hand MALDEF wants to get paid. Anyway, as promised here it is: $596,475.55 in total.
The breakdown is as follows:
Nina Perales 77.4 Hrs @ $400 = $30,960.00
David Hinojsa 882.80 Hrs @ $300 = $264,840.00
David Urias 264.20 Hrs @ $270 = $71,334.00
Marisol Perez 89.0 Hrs @ $280 = $24,920.00
Diego Bernal 287.75 Hrs @ $200 = $57,202.50
Yolanda Reyes (Paralegal) 111.6 Hrs @ $130 = $14,508
Carmen Leija (Paralegal) 24 Hrs @ $130 = $3,120
MALDEF Personnel Total: $494,434.50
Other Cost: $102,041.05
Santamaria et al v. DISD et al
Federal District Court for Northern Texas
The Honorable Sam A. Lindsay, Presiding
This is not normal procedure for MALDEF in the case of Santamaria et al v. DISD et al, a filing that is timely. Well on the other hand MALDEF wants to get paid. Anyway, as promised here it is: $596,475.55 in total.
The breakdown is as follows:
Nina Perales 77.4 Hrs @ $400 = $30,960.00
David Hinojsa 882.80 Hrs @ $300 = $264,840.00
David Urias 264.20 Hrs @ $270 = $71,334.00
Marisol Perez 89.0 Hrs @ $280 = $24,920.00
Diego Bernal 287.75 Hrs @ $200 = $57,202.50
Yolanda Reyes (Paralegal) 111.6 Hrs @ $130 = $14,508
Carmen Leija (Paralegal) 24 Hrs @ $130 = $3,120
MALDEF Personnel Total: $494,434.50
Other Cost: $102,041.05
# posted by : 12/17/2006 09:34:00 AM
: 12/17/2006 09:34:00 AM
Honorable Sam A. Lindsay Has Erred
In
Santamaria, et al
v.
Dallas Independent School District, et al
Federal District Court for North Texas
Case# 3:06-cv-00692
In filings with the Federal District Court of the Northern District of Texas, the legal team defending DISD and Principal Teresa Parker have stated in
Court Document 203:
“….the Court committed a clear abuse of discretion in including conclusions of law not supported by the evidence or even its own judgment.”
Erroneous Findings of Fact
FED.R.Civ.P.52 (b): The central “purpose of motions to amend is to correct manifest errors of law or fact.”
Erroneous Conclusions of Law
After ultimately concluding that neither the Dallas Independent School District, the Board of Trustees, Superintendent…………violated U.S.C. 1983 or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964……the court concluded the Defendants’ motives were nefarious, and attributed legal arguments to the Defendants that they did not make.
7. Much discretion is afforded a trial court in consideration of a case. However, “such discretionary choices are not left to a courts’ inclination, but to its judgment; and its judgment is to be guided by sound legal principles’” See Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, U.S. 405, 416 (1975). Moreover a district court abuses its discretion if it: (1) relies on clearly erroneous factual findings; (2) relies on erroneous conclusions of law; or (3) misapplies its factual or legal conclusions. Alcatel USA, Inc. V. DGI Techs., Inc., 166 F.3d 772, 790 (5th Cir. 1999).
8. Here, the Court’s discussion of Plessy and Sweatt is misplaced and not supported by the record. Not once did the Defendants ever utter or embrace the “separate but equal” argument. Nevertheless, the Court appears to attribute this arcane argument to them. The statements in the Court’s Conclusions of Law under the heading of Defendants’ ‘Separate But Equal’ Argument” are plainly erroneous conclusions of law.
Judge Lindsay claims the Defendants relied on a “separate but equal” argument. The Defendants never made this a claim. No evidence or documents were filed with the Court making this claim. The Plaintiff’s attorneys never made this argument, for there is no reference to Plessy v. Fergson, 163U.S. 537 in the Proposed Findings of Fact presented to the Court by both Plaintiffs and Defendants on 1 September 2006.
As stated in the filing, “….the Court committed a clear abuse of discretion…”
Post a Comment
In
Santamaria, et al
v.
Dallas Independent School District, et al
Federal District Court for North Texas
Case# 3:06-cv-00692
In filings with the Federal District Court of the Northern District of Texas, the legal team defending DISD and Principal Teresa Parker have stated in
Court Document 203:
“….the Court committed a clear abuse of discretion in including conclusions of law not supported by the evidence or even its own judgment.”
Erroneous Findings of Fact
FED.R.Civ.P.52 (b): The central “purpose of motions to amend is to correct manifest errors of law or fact.”
Erroneous Conclusions of Law
After ultimately concluding that neither the Dallas Independent School District, the Board of Trustees, Superintendent…………violated U.S.C. 1983 or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964……the court concluded the Defendants’ motives were nefarious, and attributed legal arguments to the Defendants that they did not make.
7. Much discretion is afforded a trial court in consideration of a case. However, “such discretionary choices are not left to a courts’ inclination, but to its judgment; and its judgment is to be guided by sound legal principles’” See Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, U.S. 405, 416 (1975). Moreover a district court abuses its discretion if it: (1) relies on clearly erroneous factual findings; (2) relies on erroneous conclusions of law; or (3) misapplies its factual or legal conclusions. Alcatel USA, Inc. V. DGI Techs., Inc., 166 F.3d 772, 790 (5th Cir. 1999).
8. Here, the Court’s discussion of Plessy and Sweatt is misplaced and not supported by the record. Not once did the Defendants ever utter or embrace the “separate but equal” argument. Nevertheless, the Court appears to attribute this arcane argument to them. The statements in the Court’s Conclusions of Law under the heading of Defendants’ ‘Separate But Equal’ Argument” are plainly erroneous conclusions of law.
Judge Lindsay claims the Defendants relied on a “separate but equal” argument. The Defendants never made this a claim. No evidence or documents were filed with the Court making this claim. The Plaintiff’s attorneys never made this argument, for there is no reference to Plessy v. Fergson, 163U.S. 537 in the Proposed Findings of Fact presented to the Court by both Plaintiffs and Defendants on 1 September 2006.
As stated in the filing, “….the Court committed a clear abuse of discretion…”
# posted by : 12/17/2006 09:35:00 AM
: 12/17/2006 09:35:00 AM Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]