Hartford Metro Area Expenditure Analysis Correlations Between Aid/Expenditures and Indicators of Poverty

    * * 5 

v. x i. 
* 
2A 

 



    

  

ROV-BY MOLLER HORTON ®" 9-24-92 : 3:21PM ; CCITT his CONNECTICUT: # 3 

A CLASSIFICATION OF STATES BY STATE DESEGREGATION FUNDING ~~ » 
2 

VOLUNTARY COURT ORDERED ~~ NO 
SPENDING SPENDING _ SPENDING 

  
  

  
  

  

  

  

States that States that Spend States that 
Voluntarily State Funds on Spend No State 
Spend State Funds Desegregation Per Funds on 
on Desegregation Court Order Desegregation 

    
  

California Arkansas Alabama 
Connecticut | Delaware Alaska 
Massachusetts Michigan Arizona 
Minnesota Missouri Colorado 
New York Ohio Florida 

Washington Georgia 
Wisconsin Hawaii 

Idaho 

llinois 
indiana 

iowa 
Kansas 

Kentucky 
Louisiana 

Maine 
Maryland 
Mississippi 
Montana 

Nebraska 
Nevada 

New Hampshire 
New Jersey 
New Mexico 
North Carolina 

North Dakota 
Oklahoma 

Oregen 
Pennsylvania 
Rhode Island 
South Carolina 
South Dakota 
Tennessee 

Texas 

Utah 
Vermont 
Virginia 
West Virginia 
Wyoming 

  

  

 



   

RCV BY : MOLLER HORTON @ 9-2 ~92 : 3: 22PM ; CCITT Sal CONNECT ICU I':'# 4 

A CLASSIFICATION OF STATES BY STATE LEGISLATION, REGULATION ~~ 
OR BOARD POLICY STATEMENTS ENCOURAGING OR REQUIRING oo 

SCHOOL DESEGREGATION OR SCHOOL RACIAL BALANCE 

    
  |     

  

States with Specific States with 
Desegregation Non -S8pecific States with 
Goals Policies No Policies 

  
      

    
  

  

| Connecticut | Arkansas Alabama 
Michigan llinois Alaska 
Washington lowa Arizona 

Massachusetts California* 
Minnesota Colorado 

Nevada Delaware 

New Jersey Florida 
New York Georgia 
Ohio Hawaii 

Pennsylvania |daho 
Rhode Island Indiana 
Virginia Kansas 
Wisconsin Kentucky 

Louisiana 
Maine 
Maryland 
Mississippi 
Missouri 
Montana 

Nebraska 
New Hampshire 
New Mexico 

North Carolina 
North Dakota 

Oklahoma 
Oregon 
South Carolina 
South Dakota 

Tennessee 
Texas 

Utah 
Vermont 

Virginia 
West Virginia 
Wyoming 

  

* California continues to fund school desegregation plans out of the state budget although 
the law regulating school desegregation expired. 

 



  

. 
=
~
 

N
O
L
A
O
H
 

A
A
T
I
O
N
:
 

WHITE NO-SHOW RATES AT MINORITY SCHOOLS 

IN SMALL* AND LARGE* AREA SCHOOL DISTRICTS 
1971, 1975, 1977, 1978, 1981 
  100% 

60% 56% 

  

% 
W
H
I
T
E
 
E
N
R
O
L
L
M
E
N
T
 
LO
SS
 

                   

  

  
  

45% 

40% + 

20% | 

0% CAR SEEN > 

46Sq.M. 56SqM. 455SqM. 459SqM. 710Sq.M. 

  

Boston {/] Stockton [i] Sav-Chatham {J Baton Rouge fl] L.A. 
* Boston, 1975; Stockton, CA, 1977. 

* Chatham Co, GA, 1971; 

Los Angeles, CA, 1978; Baton Rouge, LA, 1981. a
.
)
 

—
 

— 
2
 

H
T
T
 

a 
d=
mi
™ 

1 
4
9
d
 

43
 

: D
A
H
Y
A
N
T
 

A 

& 
3 

- 
a 

O 
— 

+ 
fdas 
oy 
~ 

gy 
& 
ho) 
oO 

0 
C 
Z 
Z 
py] 
a 
ry 

% 

3k 

Jl 

A
 

A
D
 

80% |- gs 

 



  

% OF WHITE PARENTS WHO WOULD DEFINITELY OR 

PROBABLY WITHDRAW CHILD FROM PUBLIC SCHOOL IF 

REASSIGNED TO MINORITY SCHOOL V. ACTUAL % LOSS 
  

  

  

  

  

  

  
  

              

100% 

80% |- LOS ANGELES 
(710 SQ.M.) 

HARTFORD METRO 
tw (568 Sq.M.) 
3 60% 
t 51% 

4 40% | 
a. 

0 

20% | S 7 7 

= %    
  

BX SURVEY % [° ESTIMATED LOSS [|] SURVEY % || ACTUAL LOSS 

A
Y
 

a
a
 

I 
W
Y
 

— 
—
 

(hy
 

Lat
 

L
A
O
H
 

YH
A 
T
I
O
N
:
 

Ad
 

i
L
 

EE 
ae
 

| 
TO

RR
E 

1 
1S 
Y
S
 

G
B
-
¥
G
-
6
 

D
A
H
U
A
N
I
T
A
 

NO
. 

a 
r 

~ 

T 
® 
x 
1 
om) 
>= 

x 

x 
C 

0 
® Zz 
= 

- I 
.G 
ie 
rQ 
rs 

FH: 

¢ 
N
A
B
T
 

 



REY BY MoLrbr HomoN @ DIPLO Bia CCITT ta CONNECTICUT : # 
i 56: 1a LJ [NS RN 1 I v1 7 db 

mm, AN hy 
| =f 

¥ 

PERCENTAGE OF WHITE FARENTS WHO RESPOND 

THEY WOULD DEFINITELY OR PROBABLY 
SEND CHILD TO PRIVATE SCHOOL OR MOVE AWAY 

IF MANDATORILY REASSIGNED TO MINORITY SCHOOL 

ACTUAL 
NO-SHOW 

HARTFORD RATE--LOS 
METRO ANGELES 

YEAR 1991 1978 

SQ.MILES 568 710 

      

  
  

  

% OF PARENTS | 51%) | 56% | 
  

  
  

  

PERCENTAGE OF PARENTS OF EACH RACE 
OPPOSING MANDATORY REASSIGNMENT OF STUDENTS 
FOR PURPOSES OF IMPROVING SCHOOL INTEGRATION 

ACTUAL 
NO-SHOW 

HARTFORD LOS RATE-LOS 
SMSA ANGELES ANGELES 

    

  

WHITE 71% 86% 36% 

NONWHITE 33% 31%  



  

TOTAL % CHANGE IN WHITE ENROLLMENT 

FROM TWO YEARS BEFORE IMPLEMENTATION TO T+11 

IN LARGE AND SMALL AREA DISTRICTS < 35% MINORITY 
TOTAL % WHITE ENROLLMENT CHANGE 

0% 

-10% 

-20% 

20% 0 

-50% 

  

  

    44% 

  

nga 

  
BR 
  

      

    
      

    
  

(438 Sq.M)) 
I Small-Mand.Reass. [X] Large-Mand.Reass. || No Deseg. Plans 

(70Sq.M) 

0% 

-10% 

-20% 

| 30% 

-40% 

-50% 

d
y
 

y
e
 

N
O
.
L
J
O
H
 

JH
 
T
I
O
N
:
 Ad
 

A
D
H
 

FL 
a 
d
m
™
 

—
-
—
 

Ew 
4
0
 I
RE

 

D
A
Y
A
N
A
 

J
L
I
D
D
 

NO
D 

J
O
A
 
L
I
A
V
H
-
N
I
A
 

— 

z 
-I 
20 

Q 
¥ 

BS 

© 

 



tA
" 

AD
A 

=
 

TOTAL % CHANGE IN WHITE ENROLLMENT 

FROM TWO YEARS BEFORE IMPLEMENTATION TO T+11 

IN LARGE AND SMALL AREA DISTRICTS > 35% MINORITY 
TOTAL % WHITE ENROLLMENT CHANGE 

0% 0% 

I 
I
T
)
 

a 
d
e
i
™
 

—
 

P
a
 

| 

N
O
.
L
J
O
H
 

J
H
 
T
I
O
N
 

6 
O
M
H
A
N
T
 

    

  10% intend A 0% 

20% [———— , CT 

    
-30%   

    -40% 
    -50%   

    -60%       
  -70% 

i
 

MN
 BE Small-Mand.Reass. Large-Mand.Reass. No Deseg. Plans 

(42 SQ.M.) (701 Sq.M.) 

8 
#: 

LD
 
1L

AN
NO

D 
Y
O
A
L
A
V
H
N
O
T
 

LL
Id

D 

 



  

WHITE ENROLLMENT CHANGE AS % OF T-4 ENROLLMENT 

IN LARGE AND SMALL DISTRICTS < 35% MINORITY 
WHITE ENROLLMENT CHANGE AS % OF T-4 ENROLLMENT 

120% 

110% 

100% 

90% 

80% 

70% 

60% 

50% 

  

  
  

  

  

    
  

    

      

  

      

    

>= 

Sse of! TS > pirentle,. 3 med 330% 
i 

—— hs | RRL HE IL Se ren mpg mene ienel A AYO0L 

—— Trea 
been Hon ih 

_ 

ea ee ie Sopa Leos enn RE Ys Sl WTAE: 90% 

i 1 80% 

A A : 70% 
ME aR a i BLE el TELE ER NER NET GR Te ML - 

ree RE: aT Th AA ig SE + 60% 
i rs 

a I | i | it | 1 | i L | 50% 
  

372 4 0 + +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7 +8 +9 +10 +11 
YEARS BEFORE AND AFTER DESEG. IMPLEMENTATION 

  

(70 Sq.M.) (439 Sq.M) 

y
e
 

d
n
 

l
n
 

AH
 

AD
DY

 
H
T
D
 

a 
de
l™
2 

| 
38
 

i 
TN
 

(
D
A
A
L
I
N
 TA
 
N
O
L
M
O
H
 

M
A
T
I
O
N
:
 

! 
N
d
9
G
:
 

6 

0 
3 

pa] 
gs 

oO Ni 

= 
L 
lanl 

>= 

= 

A o 
pl 
=) 

SS 
No’ 

Z 
Zz 

~-0 
- C; 

Ct ~ 0 
bo 
ils 
. 

= 

 



  

WHITE ENROLLMENT CHANGE AS % OF T-4 ENROLLMENT 

IN LARGE AND SMALL DISTRICTS > 35% MINORITY 
WHITE ENROLLMENT CHANGE AS % OF T4 ENROLLMENT 

  

  

  

  
    

    

          
  

» 120% | - 120% 

100% 100% 

80% |— | 80% 

60% | 60% 

40% 40% 

20% l <>< ; l | | i | | | } } l 20%, 

3 2 1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7 +8 +9 +10 +11 
YEARS BEFORE AND AFTER DESEG. IMPLEMENTATION 

(42 SQM) {701 Sq.M.) 

  

  

Ton
y 

fo 
I
 

T
L
 

N
O
L
A
O
H
 
d
T
T
I
O
N
:
 Ad
 

AD
DY
 

T
e
 
I
P
 

N 
25
 
OL
 

b
l
 
P
u
 

BE
 

2
T
R
I
M
Y
 
L
N
 

st
 

0 
i 

! 
N
d
9
G
 

a
 
T
Y
E
 

LT
#:

 
L
N
3
1
L
D
A
N
N
O
D
 

Q
H
O
A
L
A
V
H
-
I
D
A
 

L
L
I
D
 

ha 
| 

2-
68

 
D
R
A
 

: 
G
6
-
1
G
 

6
 

J



    

WH
IT

E 
E
N
R
O
L
L
M
E
N
T
 

(T
ho

us
an

ds
) 

  

WHITE ENROLLMENT TRENDS IN SAVANNAH 
  

  

  

  

            

B— 

Phase lI 

Mandatory Plan 

yy 
3 

Actual % White 

5 LW Py An - wf Vol. Plan: 40% 

c "er he Impiem. of Vol. Plan 
o 4 
2 - EY AA 
s -—— 
= gi gic its STR 
0) a 

Predicted % White 

wf Mand. Plan: 33% 

Shale fo edd : I 5 
1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1986 1988 1990 

YEARS 

om
 

[m
d 

AA
 
T
I
O
N
:
 

Ad
 

A
D
H
 

L 
-—

y 

:
D
F
H
H
A
N
 

TA
 

N
O
L
J
O
H
 

F
E
E
 

B
E
)
 

e
d
i
™
 

L
s
 

: 
6
6
-
¥
G
-
6
 

ad
 

LON] 
I
 

LS
 
h
a
 | 

: 
N
d
9
G
 

GL
H:
 
L
N
O
T
L
O
A
N
N
O
D
 

GH
OA
LI
VH
AW
OH
 

LL
IO

D 
4 

 



  
ANNUAL % WHITE ENROLLMENT CHANGE 

IN NEW CASTLE CO., DELAWARE 

  

   

  

        
         

(429 Sq.M.) 
ANNUAL % WHITE ENROLLMENT CHANGE 

15% 

} C S * : OURT SUIT FILED ; gop Lo SR SL 8 2 
(/)) 
wl Bar : 

’ VIOLATION RULING 
0% y 

5% or 

10% om 

A I De TELS en A Ta, aR rE a NE       
  

15% 

10% 

5% 

0% 

-5% 

-10% 

-15% 

 



WHITE ENROLLMENT TRENDS 

T-2 

SCHOOL DIST DESEG % MIN. T-4 T-3 1-2 T-1 T+0 T+1 T+2 T+4 T+5 T+6 T+7 T+8 T+9 T+10 

SMALL DISTRICTS <35% MIN. --MAND.REASS. 
ST. PAUL, MN 1973 11.1 43432 44378 44130 42476 40234 35313 35369 29702 26814 25673 27514 22453 21251 20850 

DES MOINES, IA 1977 11.9 37546 36306 34872 33435 31823 30305 29756 26623 25968 25287 25080 25061 24919 24901 

AMARILLO, TX 1972 14.2 26083 25361 24683 23915 22890 23094 22876 21891 21433 20975 20431 19886 19867 19848 

TULSA, OK 1971 17.1 66413 66413 65943 64077 61390 56859 53312 49071 45909 43301 40141 37080 34314 33060 

RACINE, WI 1975 18.7 26160 25586 24902 24279 22678 21802 19901 18112 17219 16444 16033 15563 15098 14848 

SPRINGFIELD, MA 1974 32.4 22501 21547 20631 19220 17946 17327 16559 14494 13601 12428 11718 10911 10464 10316 

WACO, TX 1971 32.5 13178 12842 12506 12027 11435 10802 9591 8258 T7742 T7394 T7046 6674 6301 5997 

AVERAGE 1973 19.7 33616 33205 32524 31347 29771 27929 26766 24022 22669 21643 21138 19661 18888 18546 

LARGE DISTRICTS <35% MIN. --MAND.REASS. 
MONTGOMERY CO, MD 1976 11.3 113795 112990 110299 106900 97575 93278 88040 77386 72838 68855 66496 65410 63211 

FAYETTE CO., KY 1972 17.7 28836 29429 29814 29599 29100 28703 28538 26868 26609 25933 25257 23763 

JEFFERSON CO., KY 1975 20.5 117613 115934 112443 105538 93263 88782 84902 75399 70686 65973 65426 64331 

NEW CASTLE CO., DE 1978 23.5 64679 61843 57070 53162 47008 42307 38980 33316 33429 33836 34225 34807 

NASHVILLE, TN 1971 24.3 69515 71039 72563 71603 64114 61402 59322 53665 51843 50021 47547 43805 

MECKLENBURG CO. ,NC 1970 29.5 57079 57079 58623 59530 56819 54926 53629 50742 50656 49244 47831 44795 

AVERAGE 1974 21.1 75253 74719 73469 T1055 64647 61566 58902 52138 50346 48584 47616 45785 

<35% MIN. NO DESEG. PLANS 
AVERAGE 5.8 25603 25865 26126 25994 25861 26906 27950 25793 25688 25851 26014 24326 

SMALL DISTRICTS >35% MINORITY-MANDATORY REASSIGNMENT PLANS 

BOSTON, MA 1974 40.4 62014 59390 57405 53593 44937 37479 32477 24254 23681 19479 17391 16602 

STOCKTON, CA 1975 43.2 18568 17970 17036 16163 13920 12426 11545 8522 8396 7845 7945 7752 

DAYTON, OH 1976 47.9 28698 26111 24502 23065 19039 17897 16398 13897 13243 = 12528 11695 11703 

AVERAGE 1975 43.8 36427 34490 32981 30940 25965 22601 20140 15558 15107 13284 12344 12019 

LARGE DISTRICTS >35% MINORITY-MANDATORY REASSIGNMENT PLANS 
E.BATON ROUGE, LA 1981 40.4 641376 39649 39379 35945 32974 27920 27779 25910 25566 25222 26045 26619 

DALLAS, TX 1971 40.6 97888 97888 96480 94393 85782 78214 72688 52925 48454 45050 42030 35406 

CHATHAM CO., GA 1970 41.1 25367 25167 24967 24767 22782 19370 16894 14947 15199 14308 13960 13220 

MOBILE CO.,AL 1970 41.7 44542 44542 44023 42620 38677 35548 35943 34896 36326 36996 36783 36235 

CADDO PARISH, LA 1970 43.9 31117 32513 33909 31989 27298 26677 26044 23678 23299 22506 21713 20087 

MONTGOMERY CO., AL 1976 48.1 19823 19217 18325 18491 18656 17555 17458 16104 14839 14752 15209 15115 

LOS ANGELES, CA 1978 63.5 252446 240787 219775 194808 165315 146535 128387 120729 113964 111184 107216 104260 94161 

AVERAGE 1974 45.6 73223 71395 68123 63288 55926 50260 46456 43593 40346 39267 38007 37143 34406 

>35% MIN. - NO DESEG. PLANS 
AVERAGE 1974 60.4 34990 31806 33061 32033 30105 29506 28906 27135 24304 23244 22367 21490 19736 

T+11 

20506 
24204 
19525 
32158 
14602 
10108 
5692 

18114 

63639 
23531 
63783 
34816 
42538 
43634 
45323 

22817 

15640 
7604 

11185 
11476 

26500 
33470 
13142 
36508 
20165 
14750 
89136 
33382 

19046 

 



  

% WHITE ENROLLMENT CHANGE TRENDS T+11-T-2 
T-2 sq. % WH.ENR.Lg. 

SCHOOL DIST DESEG X MIN. M. T-3 T-2 T-1 T+0 T+#1 T+2 T+3 T+4 T+5 T+6 T+7 T+8 T+9  T+10 T+11 CHANGE SIZE 

SMALL DISTRICTS <35% MIN. --MAND.REASS. 
ST. PAUL, MN 1973 11.1 105 102.2% 101.6% 97.8% 92.6% 81.3% 81.4% 73.3% 68.4% 61.7% 59.1% 63.3% 51.7% 48.9% 48.0% 47.2% -53.5% 0 
DES MOINES, IA 1977 11.9 63 96.7% 92.9% 89.1% 84.8% 80.7% 79.3% 73.4% 70.9% 69.2% 67.3% 66.8% 66.7% 66.4% 66.3% 64.5% -30.6% 0 
AMARILLO, TX 1972 14.2 61 97.2% 94.6% 91.7% 87.8% 88.5% 87.7% 85.8% 83.9% 82.2% 80.4% 78.3% 76.2% 76.2% 76.1% 74.9% -20.9% 0 
TULSA, OK 1971 17.1 49 100.0% 99.3% 96.5% 92.4% 85.6% 80.3% 76.0% 73.9% 69.1% 65.2% 60.4% 55.8% 51.7% 49.8% 48.4% -51.2% 0 
RACINE, WI 1975 18.7 75 97.8% 95.2% 92.8% 86.7% 83.3% 76.1% 73.5% 69.2% 65.8% 62.9% 61.3% 59.5% 57.7% 56.8% 55.8% -41.4% 0 

» SPRINGFIELD, MA 1974 32.4 75 95.8% 91.7% 85.4% 79.8% 77.0% 73.6% 70.4% 64.4% 60.4% 55.2% 52.1% 48.5% 46.5% 45.8% 44.9% -51.0% 0 
WACO, TX 1971 32.5 59 97.5% 94.9% 91.3% 86.8% 82.0% 72.8% 66.6% 62.7% 58.7% 56.1% 53.5% 50.6% 47.8% 45.5% 43.2% -54.5% 0 
AVERAGE 1973 19.7 70 98.2% 95.7% 92.1% 87.3% 82.6% 78.7% 74.1% 70.5% 66.7% 63.8% 62.3% 58.4% 56.5% 55.5% 54.1% -44.3% 

LARGE DISTRICTS <35% MIN. --MAND.REASS. 
MONTGOMERY CO, MD 1976 11.3 495 99.3% 96.9% 93.9% 85.7% 82.0% 77.4% 72.5% 68.0% 64.0% 60.5% 58.4% 57.5% 57.1% 55.5% 55.9% -42.3% 1 
FAYETTE CO., KY 1972 17.7 280 102.1% 103.4% 102.6% 100.9% 99.5% 99.0% 96.5% 94.1% 93.2% 92.3% 89.9% 87.6% 85.0% 82.4% 81.6% -21.1% 1 
JEFFERSON CO., KY 1975 20.5 375 98.6% 95.6% 89.7% 79.3% 75.5% 72.2% 68.9% 66.5% 64.1% 60.1% 56.1% 55.6% 55.2% 54.7% 54.2% -43.3% 1 
NEW CASTLE CO., DE1978 23.5 429 95.6% 88.2% 82.2% 72.7% 65.4% 60.3% 55.3% 52.7% 51.5% 51.7% 52.3% 52.9% 53.6% 53.8% 53.8% -39.0% 1 
NASHVILLE, TN 1971 24.3 527 102.2% 104.4% 103.0% 92.2% 88.3% 85.3% 82.9% 80.1% 77.2% 74.6% 72.0% 68.4% 64.8% 63.0% 61.2% -41.4% 1 
MECKLENBURG CO.,NC1970 29.5 530 100.0% 102.7% 104.3% 99.5% 96.2% 94.0% 91.0% 89.0% 88.9% 88.7% 86.3% 83.8% 81.1% 78.5% 76.4% -25.6% 1 
AVERAGE 1974 21.1 439 99.6% 98.5% 96.0% 88.4% 84.5% 81.3% 77.8% 75.1% 73.1% 71.3% 69.2% 67.6% 66.1% 64.7% 63.9% -38.3% 

<35% MIN. NO DESEG. PLANS 
AVERAGE 5.8 101.0% 102.0% 101.5% 101.0% 105.1% 109.2% 105.2% 101.2% 100.7% 100.3% 101.0% 101.6% 98.3% 95.0% 89.1% -12.7% 

SMALL DISTRICTS >35% MINORITY-MANDATORY REASSIGNMENT PLANS 
BOSTON, MA 1974 40.4 46 95.8% 92.6% 86.4% 72.5% 60.4% 52.4% 49.3% 45.5% 39.1% 38.2% 31.4% 28.0% 27.4% 26.8% 25.2% -72.8% 0 
STOCKTON, CA 1975 43.2 46 96.8% 91.7% 87.0% 75.0% 66.9% 62.2% 54.2% 51.1% 45.9% 45.2% 42.3% 42.8% 40.9% 41.7% 41.0% -55.4% 0 
DAYTON, OH 1976 47.9 34 91.0% 85.4% 80.4% 66.3% 62.4% 57.1% 53.5% 50.3% 48.4% 46.1% 43.7% 40.8% 41.9% 40.8% 39.0% -54.4% 0 
AVERAGE 1975 43.8 42 94.5% 89.9% 84.6% 71.3% 63.2% 57.2% 52.3% 49.0% 44.5% 43.2% 39.1% 37.2% 36.7% 36.4% 35.0% -65.2% 

LARGE DISTRICTS >35% MINORITY-MANDATORY REASSIGNMENT PLANS 
E.BATON ROUGE, LA 1981 40.4 459 95.8% 95.2% 86.9% 79.7% 67.5% 67.1% 62.2% 66.2% 62.6% 61.8% 61.04 62.9% 64.6% 64.3% 64.0% -32.7% 
DALLAS, TX 1971 40.6 351 100.0% 98.6% 96.4% 87.6% 79.9% 74.3% 68.0% 60.9% 54.1% 49.5% 46.0% 42.9% 39.8% 36.2% 34.24 -65.3% 
CHATHAM CO., GA 1970 41.1 455 99.2% 98.4% 97.6% 89.8% 76.4% 66.6% 62.2% 60.1% 58.9% 59.9% 56.4% 55.0% 54.4% 52.1% 51.8% -47.4% 
MOBILE CO. ,AL 1970 41.7 1240 100.0% 98.8% 95.7% 86.8% 79.8% 80.7% 79.1% 78.4% 78.3% 81.6% 83.1% 82.6% 81.1% 81.4% 82.0% -17.1% 
CADDO PARISH, LA 1970 43.9 899 104.5% 109.0% 102.8% 87.7% 85.7% 83.7% 77.4% 77.3% 76.1% 74.9% 72.3% 69.8% 67.2% 64.6% 64.8% -40.5% 
MONTGOMERY CO., AL1976 48.1 790 96.9% 92.4% 93.3% 94.1% 88.6% 88.1% 86.0% 81.4% 81.2% 74.9% 74.4% 76.Tk 76.5% 76.2% 74.4% -19.5% 
LOS ANGELES, CA 1978 63.5 710 95.4% 87.1% 77.2% 65.5% 58.0% 50.9% 47.8% 47.4% 45.1% 44.0% 42.5% 41.3% 39.4% 37.3% 35.3% -59.4% 
AVERAGE 1974 45.6 701 98.8% 97.1% 92.8% 84.5% 76.6% 73.0% 69.0% 67.4% 65.2% 63.8% 62.2% 61.6% 60.4% 58.9% 58.1% -51.0% 

-
—
 

e
d
 

w
d
 

a
m
d
 

w
b
 

c
m
d
 
—
 

>35% MIN. - NO DESEG. PLANS 
w AVERAGE "1974 60.4 90.9% 94.5% 91.5% 86.0% 84.3% 82.6% 77.6% 72.5% 69.5% 66.4% 63.9% 61.4% 58.9% 56.4% 54.4% -42.4%