Little Rock School et al v. Pulaski Cty School et al
Filing
5804
ORDER approving joint report 5797 . Facilities plan 5798 approved as specified. The Court looks forward to PCSSD's December report. To regularize monitoring-related fees, the Court directs Intervenors to prepare and submit to PCSSD by 1/31/20 23 their bill (and supporting documentation) for work since the last award through the end of 2022. The Court directs the parties to confer in person about that submission. Then, by 3/31/2023 the Intervenors should move for these monitoring fees, either in an agreed amount or with notice that the motion is opposed. Signed by Chief Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 11/7/2022. (jak)
Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 5804 Filed 11/07/22 Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
CENTRAL DIVISION
LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al.
PLAINTIFFS
No. 4:82-cv-866-DPM
PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL
DISTRICT, JACKSONVILLE/NORTH
PULASKI SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al.
EMILY McCLENDON, TAMARA EACKLES,
VALERIE ST ALLIN GS, TIFFANY ELLIS,
and LINDA MORGAN
DEFENDANTS
INTERVEN ORS
ORDER
The Court appreciates the Jacksonville North Pulaski School
District's July 2022 facilities report.
No one has objected to it.
Understandably so - the report reflects JNPSD' s sprint toward
completing an almost-total rebuild of the District's facilities.
State funding has been, and continues to be, an essential ingredient.
The Court applauds this ongoing partnership.
Report, Doc. 5797,
approved.
As directed, the Pulaski County Special School District has
firmed up its plan for Mills University Studies High School. It tracks,
in the main, the proposal outlined before.
And it continues to
Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 5804 Filed 11/07/22 Page 2 of 3
represent substantial improvements to this already fine facility. The
timetable meets the Court's expectations.
Intervenors make two points in response. They request more
details about two large spaces in the arena. And, more importantly,
they' re concerned about the change - candidly highlighted by
PCSSD - from ten new walled classrooms to six such spaces and
several open-concept academic spaces.
Depending on how one
counts, six to eight smaller areas are planned. PCSSD emphasizes that
these academic spaces will be full of technological capacity, versatile,
and adaptable - akin to a university setting. The Court endorses both
this innovation and the Intervenors' long-standing concern about
capacity. Making sure that these useful new spaces, as well as the
new traditional classrooms, meet students' and teachers' needs should
be one focus of the District's planning and the ongoing community
meetings.
Of course the growing and salutary DRIVEN program
should be accommodated in all of this. The as-yet unallocated arena
spaces should likewise be firmed up with input from the District's
many constituents. Overall, PCSSD' s plan complies with the Court's
direction to equalize the Mills facility with the Robinson facility,
adjusting for the different needs at a high school.
The Court appreciates the PCSSD's note about new projects at
other campuses. Of course the District's facility needs continue to
-2-
Case 4:82-cv-00866-DPM Document 5804 Filed 11/07/22 Page 3 of 3
change and no stand-still order exists. The Court's directive is simply
to keep prioritizing the Mills projects, as the District has done.
Facilities plan, Doc. 5798, approved as specified. Everyone must
press on with this good work. The Court looks forward to PCSSD' s
December report.
To
regularize
monitoring-related fees,
the
Court
directs
Intervenors to prepare and submit to PCSSD by 31 January 2023 their
bill (and supporting documentation) for work since the last award
through the end of 2022. The Court directs the parties to confer in
person about that submission. Then, by 31 March 2023, Intervenors
should move for these monitoring fees, either in an agreed amount or
with notice that the motion is opposed.
So Ordered.
D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge
-3-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?