Case 3:65-cv-11297-RGJ Document 172 Filed 10/12/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 3176

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
MONROE DIVISION
)
JIMMY ANDREWS, et al.,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
)
)
Plaintiff-Intervenor, )
)
v.
)
)
MONROE CITY SCHOOL BOARD, et al., )
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

Civil Action No. 65-11297

JUDGE ROBERT G. JAMES

STIPULATION
1.

Plaintiff-Intervenor United States of America (United States),

Defendant Monroe City School Board (the District or Board), and Defendant
Brent Vidrine, the Superintendent of the Monroe City School District (the
Superintendent), respectfully stipulate to the authenticity of the following
documents, which are attached as exhibits and should be added to the record in this
case. While the Superintendent does not stipulate the truth of the factual
assertions herein or in the exhibits, the United States and the District agree to the
facts enumerated in the paragraphs herein:
2.

On June 24, 2016, the United States moved the Court to issue an

Order to Show Cause why the Board, its individual members, and the
Superintendent (collectively, Defendants) should not be held in contempt for
1

Case 3:65-cv-11297-RGJ Document 172 Filed 10/12/16 Page 2 of 10 PageID #: 3177

failure to comply with this Courts December 11, 2015 Consent Decree, as amended.

See ECF No. 144.

3.

On July 6, 2016, after the first hearing related to the United States

motion, the Court issued the following order: On 8/19/2016, the Board and Dr.
Vidrine will provide a report to the Court and the Department of Justice of the
assignment of teachers and administration (including Deans of Students) as of
August 15, 2016. ECF No. 154.
4.

The first day of the 2016-2017 school year for the Districts students

was August 12, 2016.

5.

On August 15, 2016, the Districts counsel emailed the United States

attaching a letter from the Districts counsel, a faculty roster as of August 12, 2016,
a report on the racial demographics and credentials of administrators, and a chart
summarizing the racial composition of teachers at individual schools as detailed
more fully in the faculty roster. A true and correct copy of that email and its
attachments is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
6.

On August 29, 2016, the Districts counsel sent the United States a

letter via email asking whether the United States would continue to prosecute its
contempt motion in light of the information the District produced on August 15,
2016 (Exhibit 1). A true and correct copy of that letter is attached hereto as Exhibit
2.
7.

On September 1, 2016, the United States sent two letters to the

District in response. In one letter, the United States explained that the District had

Case 3:65-cv-11297-RGJ Document 172 Filed 10/12/16 Page 3 of 10 PageID #: 3178

yet to comply with the faculty desegregation provisions of the Consent Decree. A
true and correct copy of that letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 3. In the second
letter, the United States noted that the information provided on August 15, 2016 (in
Exhibit 1) was incomplete and contained serious errors that called into question the
reliability and accuracy of the Monroe City School Districts personnel records. In
that letter, the United States asked the District to have its faculty members
complete a survey wherein each faculty member could report their race and
credentials. A true and correct copy of the second letter is attached hereto as
Exhibit 4.
8.

On September 6, 2016, the Districts counsel replied to the United

States via a letter sent by email. In the letter, the Districts counsel wrote: the
School District acknowledges obvious errors in the staffing data/credentials that
were identified in your second letter of September 1, 2016 {10 pp.}. Attached is a
spreadsheet received from the School District on this morning that provides the
correct data and credentials for staff. A true and correct copy of the Districts
counsels September 6, 2016 letter and its attachment are attached hereto as
Exhibit 5.
9.

On September 7, 2016, the Districts counsel sent the United States a

letter via email explaining that the District disagreed with the United States
conclusion that the District had yet to cure its noncompliance with the faculty
desegregation provisions of the Consent Decree. A true and correct copy of that
letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 6.

Case 3:65-cv-11297-RGJ Document 172 Filed 10/12/16 Page 4 of 10 PageID #: 3179

10.

Because the corrected faculty roster the District provided on

September 6, 2016 (Exhibit 5) did not contain the race of several long-term
substitute teachers including those assigned to Carver Elementary; Berg Jones
Elementary; and Lincoln Elementary on September 7, 2016 the Districts counsel
emailed the United States (at its request) additional information about the race and
credentials of several of the Districts long-term substitute teachers. The email also
contained information about the Districts principals. A true and correct copy of the
Districts counsels email is attached hereto as Exhibit 7.
11.

On September 8, 2016, the Districts counsel emailed the United States

attaching an updated list of long-term substitute teachers. A true and correct copy
of that email is attached hereto as Exhibit 8.
12.

On September 9, 2016, the District provided the United States with

survey responses from some of its faculty members. Thirteen of the teachers selfidentified as a race different from the race the District reported for them in its
September 6, 2016 corrected faculty roster (Exhibit 5). Those thirteen teacher
surveys are attached hereto as Exhibit 9. Two additional teacher surveys are also
attached.
13.

Also on September 9, 2016, the Districts counsel emailed the United

States attaching a list of faculty assignments made by the District subsequent to

the July 6, 2016 hearing.

A true and correct copy of the District counsels email,

including the list of faculty assignments, is attached hereto as Exhibit 10.

Case 3:65-cv-11297-RGJ Document 172 Filed 10/12/16 Page 5 of 10 PageID #: 3180

14.

On September 12, 2016, in response to follow-up questions from the

United States, the Districts counsel emailed the United States an updated list of
faculty assignments made by the District subsequent to the July 6, 2016 hearing. A
true and correct copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit 11.
15.

On September 16, 2016, the Districts counsel emailed the United

States attaching a letter from the Superintendent regarding personnel changes, a

document summarizing additional proposed personnel changes, and a document
regarding selection criteria for faculty serving at J.S. Clark Magnet Elementary
School. A true and correct copy of this letter and the related attachments is
attached hereto as Exhibit 12.
16.

On September 19, 2016, the parties appeared in Court for a hearing

related to the United States contempt motion.

17.

The hearing was continued to October 12, 2016. ECF No. 165.

18.

On September 20, 2016, the District reassigned some of its teachers

and principals.
19.

On October 3, 2016, the Districts counsel emailed the United States

attaching a September 22, 2016 information request letter from the United States
and the information requested therein, including confirmation of which personnel
changes were made after the September 19, 2016 evidentiary hearing and missing
faculty survey responses. The list of personnel changes provided contains material
inaccuracies. A true and correct copy of the October 3, 2016 email is attached
hereto as Exhibit 13.

Case 3:65-cv-11297-RGJ Document 172 Filed 10/12/16 Page 6 of 10 PageID #: 3181

20.

On October 4, 2016, the Districts counsel emailed the United States

attaching an email from the Superintendent confirming that the list of personnel
changes identified in Exhibit 13 were made on September 20, 2016. A true and
correct copy of that email is attached hereto as Exhibit 14.
21.

On October 5, 2016, the Districts counsel emailed the United States

attaching all 2016-2017 school year contracts between the District and the
administrators the District reassigned on September 20, 2016. A true and correct
copy of that email is attached hereto as Exhibit 15.
22.

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 1006, the United States offers

the following exhibits to summarize the facts that can be deduced from an
examination of the above-mentioned exhibits, which are voluminous. The
Superintendent and the District stipulate to the authenticity of the summaries.
Accordingly, the following exhibits may be added to the record in this case:
a. Exhibit 16 is a chart showing, by school, the racial makeup of the
Districts teachers as of September 19, 2016 (the date of the last evidentiary hearing
related to the United States motion).
b. Exhibit 17 is a chart showing, by school, the current racial makeup of
the Districts teachers.
c. Exhibit 18 contains two charts showing the racial makeup of the
Districts principals from August 12, 2016 (the first day of the 2016-17 school year)
until September 18, 2016.

Case 3:65-cv-11297-RGJ Document 172 Filed 10/12/16 Page 7 of 10 PageID #: 3182

d. The District had assigned new principals to six of its schools by August
12, 2016 (the first day of the 2016-17 school year). Exhibit 19 is a chart showing the
race of each of these newly-appointed principals and his or her immediate
predecessor.
23.

While the District and the Superintendent do not stipulate to the

following facts, the United States offers the following facts as a further summary of
the voluminous exhibits mentioned above:
a. Between the July 6, 2016 evidentiary hearing and the September 19,
2016 evidentiary hearing, the District hired at least six new teachers
of whom three white teachers were assigned to schools serving
disproportionately white student enrollments and three black teachers
were assigned to schools serving disproportionately black student
enrollments.
b. Between the July 6, 2016 evidentiary hearing and the September 19,
2016 evidentiary hearing, the District hired six new principals and
assigned a white principal to a school serving a disproportionately
white student body and assigned a black principal to a school serving a
disproportionately black student enrollment.
c. The District employs 12 long-term substitute teachers. Two of those
long-term substitute teachers are white and ten are black. Ten of the long-term
substitute teachers do not have a valid Louisiana teaching certificate.

Case 3:65-cv-11297-RGJ Document 172 Filed 10/12/16 Page 8 of 10 PageID #: 3183

d. The District has assigned 11 of the 12 long-term substitute teachers to

schools whose student populations are approximately 100% black.
e. At least two of the long-term substitute teachers do not have a college
degree. The District has assigned both of these long-term substitute teachers to
schools whose student populations are approximately 100% black.

Dated: October 12, 2016

Respectfully submitted,

For Plaintiff-Intervenor United States of

America:

VANITA GUPTA
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney
General
/s/ Michaele N. Turnage Young
FRANZ MARSHALL
MICHAELE N. TURNAGE YOUNG (CA
Bar# 247796)
KELLY D. GARDNER (NY Bar#
4494142)
Educational Opportunities Section
U.S. Dept. of Justice, Civil Rights Div.
950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, PHB 4300
Washington, D.C. 20530
Tel: (202) 305-4282
STEPHANIE A. FINLEY
United States Attorney
/s/ Katherine W. Vincent
KATHERINE W. VINCENT (LA #18717)
Assistant United States Attorney
800 Lafayette Street, Suite 2200
Lafayette, LA 70501-6832
Tel: (337) 262-6618

Case 3:65-cv-11297-RGJ Document 172 Filed 10/12/16 Page 9 of 10 PageID #: 3184

For Defendant Monroe City School

Board:
/s/ L. Douglas Lawrence
L. DOUGLAS LAWRENCE (LA #18636)
The Lawrence Law Firm, LLC
1900 North 18th Street, Suite 207
Monroe, Louisiana 71201

For Defendant Superintendent Brent

Vidrine:
_/s/ P. Scott Wolleson__________________
P. SCOTT WOLLESON (LA#22691)
Breithaupt, Dunn, DuBos, Shafto &
Wolleson, LLC
1811 Tower Drive, Suite D
Monroe, Louisiana 71201

Case 3:65-cv-11297-RGJ Document 172 Filed 10/12/16 Page 10 of 10 PageID #: 3185

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that, on this 12th day of October 2016, I served a copy of the
foregoing Stipulation via CM/ECF on all counsel of record so registered.
/s/ Michaele N. Turnage Young
MICHAELE N. TURNAGE YOUNG

10