Brief of Appellees

     [||c946d3c7-d4e3-49b0-ba81-4b87df97fa93||] IN THE 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

  

No. 73-2048 
  

JAMES E. SWANN, et al., 

Appellees, 

Ve 

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG 
BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., 

Appellants. 

  

On Appeal from the United States District Court for 
the Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division 

  

BRIEF OF APPELLEES 

  

J. LE VONNE CHAMBERS 

Chambers, Stein, Ferguson & Lanning 
951 South Independence Boulevard 
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 

JACK GREENBERG 

JAMES M. NABRIT III 

NORMAN CHACHKIN - 

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York 10019 

Attorneys for Appellees.  



Preliminary Statement... 

Issues Presented... ee.es 

. Statement of the Case... 

Statement of the Facts... 

AXQUINEIIE , ev vs ss sessssnsrsvesstssscissinsssine 

I. The District Court Properly Directed 
Modifications of the Board's.Plan 
In Order to Insure Desegregation 
of the School SYSEeMe sites srsvesssnssnssene 

The District Court Properly Directed the 
Board to Involve the Total School System 
in its Desegregation Plan in Order to 
Eliminate Patent Inequities and to Prevent 
Resegregation Of the SchOOlS.esesnesssnsnce 

CO IC UC i OI ene ois «nisin vio nein oiniein sin satel glnin ne vinla nln n ann vin 

Exhibits: 

Board's Report to September 20, 1973.. 

Board's Report to of October i18,.1973. 

Board's Report to of October 111,:1973.. 

Board's Report to of November 21, 1973. 

 



CITATIONS 

Cases 

Alexander ve. Hillman, 296 U.8. 222,230 (1935) cevensscnes 

Bell v. West Point Municipal Separate School 
District, 446 P.26 3%2 (5th Cir el971) ceesnccecrosins 

Brice v. Landis, 314 FP.Supp., 974 (N.D. Cal. 1969) cesses 

Brown Vv. Board of Pducation, 402 U.S. at 31=32. ccc eve 

Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U.S. 299-301, 

99 1..E4&. 1105-1106 © ® ¢e 9 5 0 0 0 8 6 80 8 0 ese 0 0 0 0 Ce seeeninn 

Eaton v. New Hanover County Board of Education, 
459 F.2d 684 (4th Cir. 1972), affirming 

330 F.Supp. 78 {E.D., N.C. 1971) cceinn ee eo ® 0 0 0 ¢ oe 0 0 0 0 

Green v. County School Board of New Kent County 

331 U.S. 430 (1068) ous ®e 80 0 6 0 © © © 0 0 © 00 0 0 0 00 00 ee oe 

Reyes v. School District No. 1, Denver, Colo. yr. D8, 
37 LeEQe2q 548 (1973) cinco vvtnncenises Cem sas enews .n 

Medley v. School Board of City of Danville, 
428 P.20 1061 (4th Cir. 1973) svensnnssnnrvsssnennne 

Raney v. Board of Education of Gould School 

District, 391 U.S. 443,449 E1068) sett tne nnnnonense 

Smith v. St. Tammany Parish School Board, 

302 P.Supp. 106,108 (B.D. LA.,1269) verse nncenennse 

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 
431 P.24 138 (41th Civ. 1970) ane siassssncensneces . 
402 U.S. 1 (1971) .0nseevinnnens Sernvenn tssv reine 
403 U,8, 912 11971)..s.c. Sev censnc isn tes eresieene 
453 F.28 1377 (4th Cire 1972) sess ee cenenes vanvane 
311 P.Supp. 265,267 [(WeD.N.C. 1370) see vvsa.. iE an 
402 US, Ly, 24-05, cs etnnennntssasssasiovns taverns 
328 F.Supp. 1346 (H.DsW.Cs 1271) cecnnnes chvn anes 
334 F.Supp, 623 (WDC: 1971)c tenes teess esse 

ii 

Page 

19 

19 

19 

14 

15 

19 

15,19 

1s 

18 

 



iii 

Page 

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, | 
328 P.Supp. 1349-50, 1352-33,,...... Wesenrensnn en 4 
333 F.Supp. 629-63 lecscor ses crv Sa ensnesunnnn sen 4 | 
328 F.Supp, 1353 (WD. NiCo 197] ven vennossnnsnees 13 
402 U.S. Bt 28.4044 SAS yrs ci isanvrane Soon 12 
402 U.S, 8L l15¢vsnvnenis hei. sav sates sees ann 19 
402 U.S. BL 16s reasvssnensnssrsninessnss Cast nnns 20 

 



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

  

No. 73-2043 
  

JAMES E. SWANN, et al., 

Appellees, 

Ve 

mits TT MM MTT TN IR TIDY THE CHARILOTTE-MIECKLENBURG 

BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., 

Appellants. 

  

On Appeal from the United States District Court for 
the Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division 

  

BRIEF OF APPELLEES 

  

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 

This is the third appeall/ by The Charlotte-Mecklenburg 

Board of Education in this matter within the past three years, 

raising again questions previously decided by this Court?’ and 

by the United States Supreme Court.3/ The appellants again 

  

l/ See Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 

431 ‘P..24 138 ‘(4th Cir /1970), aff'd, 402° 0.8.71 (1971); 403 U.S. 
912 (1271); 453 ¥.24 1377 (4th Cir.1972). 

  

2/ Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 453 
F.28 1377 (4th Cir.1972); 431 F.2d 138° (1970), 
  

3/ Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 
  

402 Js. yy X57) 

 



contend that the school system was racially unitary during 

1971-72 and 1972-73;%/ that alternatively, it would have been 

unitary under modifications proposed by the Board for 1973-74 

which were rejected by the Court; or that the Court may not 

reject a Board plan which projects racial mixing of students 

in each school although the plan may shortly lead to re- 

segregation of the schools and may unfairly affect black 

students and certain areas of the school system. We respect- 

fully submit that each of the contentions advanced by the 

Board has previously been rejected by this Court; that they 

should similarly be rejected here; and that the order of the 

District Court should be affirmed and the Board directed to 

proceed with development of a complete plan of desegregation, 

as directed by the District Court, for implementation at the 

beginning of the 1974-75 school year. 

ISSUES PRESENTED 

l. Where a Board's plan of desegregation fails to 

eliminate all vestiges of past racially discriminatory practices 

and various schools in the system are resegregated, may a 

District Court direct further modifications of the plan 

in order to effect a racially unitary school system? 

  

4/ See Argument I of brief of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
Board of Education filed in this Court in No. 71-1811 and ; 
the decision of this Court reported in 453 P.2d4 1377 {4th 
Cir,.1972). 

i 
! 
f 

f 

 



2. May a District Court, in approving a plan of 

desegregation, direct modifications in order to prevent re- 

segregation of the schools and to eliminate the plan's 

unfair features? 

STATEMENT OF ‘THE CASE 

Throughout this proceeding the courts have noted 

the reluctance or the refusal of the Board of Education to 

adopt or implement a plan of desegregation which would comply 

with its constitutional obligation.3/ The District Court, in 

  

5/ See, e.g., Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board 
Bducation, 31] P.Suvp. 265,267 (W.D.N.C. 1070): 
    

  

"The order which follows is not based upon any 
requirement of 'racial balance.' The school .board, 
after four opportunities and nearly ten months of 
time, has failed to submit a lawful plan (one which 
desedgregates all the schools). This default on 
their part leaves the court in the position of being 

: forced to prepare or choose a lawful plan." 

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 
402 U.S. 1, 24-25:   

"[Tlhe school board ... totally defaulted in its 
acknowledged duty to come forward with an acceptable 
Plan of its own, notwithstanding the patient efforts 
Of the District Judge who, on at least three 
occasions, urged the board to submit plans. 
[footnote omitted] ... It was because of this total 
failure of the school board that the District Court 
was obliged to turn to other qualified sources, and 
Dr. Finger was designated to assist the District 
Court to do what the board should have done." 

on
 
a
g
e
 

oe
 

re 
a
o
   

Fy 

§ 
| 

| 4 

i 

i 

 



the numerous hearings in this matter, has been required to 

seek assistance from an outside consultant or to direct 

modifications of Board proposals which simply would resegregate 

the school system or would impose or perpetuate patent unfair- 

ness.%/ 

in 1970, the District Court had forappointtascon= 

sultant to assist in devising a plan. 

In 1971, «after affirmance by the ‘Supreme Courtiof 

the District Court approved plan, the Board proposed a new 

plan purportedly to provide some predictability for parents 

and students but which in fact increased the unfair burden 

borne by black students and others in selected areas of the 

school system. The District Court, noting the unfair features 

of the plan and the fact that the plan would probably lead to 

resegregation of the schools, nevertheless approved the Board's 

plan but sought to eliminate its unfair provisions and to pre- 

vent resegregation of the schools by directing continued Board 

control over student assignments../ 

The Board again defaulted. It failed to assign 

students to the various schools as proposed in its plan and 

approved by the Court; it granted transfers to students which 

  

6/ Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 
328 F.Supp.1346 (W.D,.N,.C. 1971), Bf 'd 253 F.0d 1377 [4th cir. 
1972); see 8150,. 334 F.8upD.623 (FH D.n.T.. 1871). 

1/ Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 
328 F.Supp. at 1349-50, 1352-53; "333 F.Supp. at 6 9-691. 

  

  

  
  

   



increased the concentration of blacks in certain schools and 

whites in others; it failed to assign the number of black 

and white students to various schools as proposed; it 

encouraged transfers by continuing to identify schools as 

black or white with the black schools underpopulated and unable 

to provide curricula comparable to that afforded at the pre- 

viously white schools; it failed to provide extracurricular 

activity at the previously black schools as provided in pre- 

viously white schools; and it rejected the District Court's 

orders to maintain control over student assignments in order 

tO prevent resegregation of the various schools. (340a-363a) 

The schools did in fact become resegregated and their 

racial identities have been perpetuated. The Board projected 

that for the 1973-74 school year more than four schools (326a- 

332a) would be in violation of the District Court's order which 

prohibited majority black schools unless further steps were 

taken, The 1973-74 reports in fact show that more than the 

four schools are again segregated and more are becoming 

segregated. (See Board's report to the Court September 20, 

1973; report to the Court of October 13, 1973; report to the 

Court on Lakeview School on October 11, 1573; and report to 

the Court of November 21, 1973, all of which are attached 

hereto as exhibits to Appellees’ Brief.) 

The plaintiffs, by motion filed in November, 1972, 

sought further relief against the Board's practices in student 

  

   



assignments and failure to eliminate the remaining segregated 

schools. (299a-301la) The District Court delayed any immediate 

hearing in an effort to encourage the Board voluntarily to 

make adjustments in its plan. (347a-350a) The Board again 

refused to take any remedial steps without further orders of 

the Court. The Court, nevertheless, rejected any further 

hearings until May, 1973, when it was clear that unless ordered, 

no changes would be made for the 1973-74 school year. The Court 

scheduled a hearing for May 8, 1973, and ordered that the Board 

present proposed modifications at the hearing. (325a) The 

Board simply proposed to assign a few more white students to 

West Charlotte and Harding High Schools. It proposed some minor 

modifications in the junior high and elementary schools (326a- 

332a) , but proposed no definite plan for the Hidden Valley 

Elementary School, projected to be more than 58% black. 

The District Court conducted hearings on May 8, 9 

and 15, 1973. The evidence demonstrated that the proposed 

modifications would continue underpopulating the previously black 

schools and that this would prevent them from offering comparable 

educational and extracurricular programs. The evidence further 

demonstrated that if the students were assigned to West Char- 

lotte from the northwestern and northeastern areas as proposed, 

this school would shortly become majority if not all black 

again. The Board proposed to assign only students from these 

areas to West Charlotte rather than involve the white students 

- 

  

 



in the southeastern area of the system. The Court had previously 

noted that the areas the Board proposed to involve were racially 

changing neighborhoods and that this situation would be accelerated 

because of the exclusion of southeast Charlotte from any cross- 

assignment of students. Only students residing in the north- 

eastern and northwestern parts of the school system would be 

required to spend a portion of their school years in formerly 

black schools. Students in the southeast remained there in 

practically every instance all of their 12 years of elementary 

and secondary education. In order to desegregate the south- 

eastern schools, black students were satellited out with no 

cross—-assignments. 

Following the hearing, the District Court directed 

that the Board increase the student enrollments at West Charlotte 

and Harding High School, another northwestern school. The 

Court further ordered the Board to devise a more equitable 

plan for the assignment of students to these schools which 

would involve all residential areas of the school system rather 

than just the northeastern and northwestern areas as proposed 

by the Board. The Court found that unless all areas were 

involved or some control over assignments and transfers was 

maintained by the Board, the Board's plan would not provide - 

any stable desegregation. The Court further directed that for 

the 1974-75 and subsequent school years, the Board devise an 

equitable plan which would provide some stability and would 

not have the built-in ineguities of the present "feeder" system, 

(334a-365a) Pursuant +o the District Court's order the Board 

-7-  



ne the student enrollment at West Charlotte and Harding 

High Schools and assigned white students tc West Charlotte 

from all areas of the school system by lottery. This procedure 

was approved by the Court for the 1973-74 school year (see 

order: of August 16, 1973, 49%91a-456a), 

The Board has appealed and again contends (1) that 

the school system was racially unitary after implementation 

of its "feeder plan in the beginning of the 1971-72 school year; 

(2) that the school system became racially unitary during either 

the 1971-72 or 1972-73 school year; (3) that the plan proposed 

+o the Court during the May, 1973, hearings would have effected 

a racially unitary system or (4) that the District Court could 

not require a different method for assigning students to the 

West Charlotte High School than that proposed by the Board 

notwithstanding the unfairness of the plan or the fact that 

the plan might lead to resegregation of West Charlotte High 

School, 

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS 

After the April, 1971, decision of the. Supreme Court 

in this matter, affirming the plan approved by the District 

Court, the Board proposed a new "feeder plan for student 

assignment. The new plan removed the substantial portion 

of schools and residential areas of the southeast, basically 

all white, from any cross-assignment of students to the 

 



previously black schools. Black students were assigned to 

the southeastern schools from satellite districts. In order 

to desegregate the formerly black schools, the Board assigned 

white students from the northwestern and northeastern areas 

of the school system. These areas were already changing from 

white to black and the "feeder plan" accelerated this change 

because of the preference accorded to residents in the south- 

eastern part of the city. 

Additionally, the Board encouraged resegregation by 

failing to assign or account for all students at previously 

black schools and freely granting transfers with little concern 

with the affect such transfers would have on the racial 

compositions of the schools. (92a-102a; 1ll2a-1l1l6a; l1l24a-127a; 

compare 40a, projected and assigned students for 1971-72, 230a, 

December 20,:1971, Board Report, 268a, projected enrollment 

for 1972-73,:277a, November 1,:1972, Board Report and 323s, 

February 65,1973 Interim Report) Thus the.District Court found 

in its October 21,: 1971, orders: 

"[S]everal highly specific official actions 
Of the school board itself since the April, 
1971, decision of the Supreme Court have 
added new official pressures which tend to 
restore segregation in certain schools. 
These are the construction programs (use 
and location of mobile units); the under- 
population and proposed closing of formerly 
black schools; and several recent decisions 
about pupil assignment and transfers. The 
current plan contemplates use of 232 mobile 

units. These units, in the main, are located 
or scheduled for location at suburban schools 
remote from the black community. Simultaneously, 
the formerly black schools, with few exceptions, 

are being operated at considerably less than 

a 

 



capacity. The assignment of mostly low- and 
middle-income white children to formerly 

black schools, and the removal of wealthier 
whites, of which the intervenors complain, 
is a major element of such recent board 
action. Another is a series of recent 
decisions by the board which have allowed 
numbers of white children to abandon and 
black students to return to formerly black 
schools, in violation of ‘existing court 
orders. 

'With that history in view, it is necessary 
to inquire into the board's present plan or 
program for dealing with foreseeable problems 
of re-segregation in response to the presence 
which have been mentioned in this order. If 
the board has a program or policy to deal with 
the results of these pressures, the schools 
can nevertheless be operated in compliance with 
the law. If it has no plan, many of the schools 
are likely to resegregate. 

"There is no such plan and no such ‘program. 

"According to the evidence, the board and school 
staff assume that various formerly black schools 
and other schools will turn black under the 
feeder plan. In the face of that assumption, 
the board formally voted not to adopt a resolu- 
tion to restrict pupil transfers which would 
adversely affect the racial make-up of any 
school. They have made and allowed transfers 
which, coupled with changes of residence, have 
increased the proportions of black pupils at 
West Charlotte from the 23% proposed in June 
to 48% on September 15, similar though lesser 
changes have been allowed in other schools. 
There is, according to the evidence, no board 
policy even to consider race in pupil transfers 
unless a particular transfer or enrollment will 

result in making a school more than 50% black. - 
(What they would do even in that event is not 
clear.) There is no policy to restrict transfers 
which have the cumulative effect of substantially 
increasing segregation; no policy to learn what 
children move from one attendance zone to another 

-10- 

 



during the summer, and to take these inevitable 

changes of residence into account in planning 
full pupil assignments; no central method of 
keeping track of changes of residence during 
the school year; and no policy to check on 
"changes of residence" to determine whether 
such changes are bona fide or not. There is 
also no admitted practice of doing any of these 
things to comply with the orders of court 
(although it might be inferred from the current 
statistics thaty without admitting «to a policy, 
the staff are being allowed or expected in fact 
to keep ‘all schools dess than 50% black) 

  

  

rr 
——
——
——
_—
 
S
A
A
S
 

7 
S
A
T
 

The Court noted in its June 19,1973, Order that these dis~ 

E
S
H
A
 

A
m
e
r
o
 
s
m
 

criminatory practices ‘are still active in 1973-74. (See 347a~ 

350a "WHAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE OCTOBER, 1971" and 350a-36la | 

"SIGNS OF CONTINUING DISCRIMINATION.") | 

Several white families residing in the northeast 

and northwest intervened in August, 1971, seeking to eliminate 

the inequities in the Board's plan. (la-8a) The plaintiffs 

also challenged the plan particularly since the Board rejected 

any control over monitoring student assignments in order to 

prevent resegregation. 

TheiDigtrict Courtiiniits October -21, 1971, Order 

refused to order any further modifications in the Board's plan, 

again seeking to encourage the Board to take such steps as 

were necessary to prevent resegregation. 

Utilization of the northeastern and northwestern = 

parts of the city to desegregate formerly black schools with- 

out any control by the Board over student assignments immediately 

caused problems. The Board was able to avoid majority black 

schools during 1971 and 1972-73 only by staff manipulation of 

student assignments and finally a complete ban on any further 

-11- 

 



transfers. (274a-298a) The previously black schools simply 

could not be effectively desegregated without involving the 

total school system. The Board proposed for 1973-74, however, 

to continue assigning students from northeast and northwest to 

these schools, while conceding that the schools would shortly 

resegregate. In order to desegregate West Charlotte, the 

Board proposed assigning students from Devonshire in the north- 

east and Statesville Avenue in the northwest. Devonshire was 

already in transition and had similar problems as the Board 

had experienced in Hidden Valley. Statesville Avenue was 

equally unstable being adjacent to the heavily concentrated 

black residential areas of northwest Charlotte. These two 

areas, assigned to West Charlotte, would simply add to the 

already heavy concentrations of blacks and changing residential 

areas in the West Charlotte attendance district while again 

excluding the southeast. It was this condition that the District 

Court sought to correct in its order of June 19, 1973, by re- 

quiring the Board to involve all areas of the school system in 

its desegregation efforts and in further directing the Board 

to devise a permanent plan for the 1974-75 and subsequent school 

yearg. The District Court simply rejected any further "loaded 

game board.” See 402 U.S. at 283, 

ly de 

 



ARGUMENT 

  4 

The District Court Properly Directed | 
Modifications of the Board's Plan : 
In Order to Insure Desegregation 
of the School System. { 

Hd 

i 
A. The Board contends that its school system was 

racially unitary during 1971-72 or 1972-73 and that the 

District Court, therefore, lacked jurisdiction to order any 

further modifications of the Board's plan. This assertion 

made in the face of the clear holdings of the District Court 

and of this Court demonstrates the lack of any merit in this 

appeal.8’ The Board alleges that the racial compositions of 

the schools during these two school years reflected a majority 

white student enrollment in each school and a fortiori the 
    schools are unitary. This argument, however, completely ignores 

the facts of what was happening in the system, 

From its inception, the Board's "feeder plan" was 

U
P
 

PT
S 

O
T
T
 

A 
W
E
S
 

V
I
N
C
I
 

YN 
OR 

Ap
 

patently defective. With the high concentration of black 

students in the attendance areas of previously black schools, 

the Board anticipated resegregation of the schools. The Board, 

however, did not stop with these zones; it failed to assign 

  students as projected, misrepresented the students to be 

  

8/ See Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 
328 F.Supp. 1353 (W.D.N.C., 1971), arti Mec per Curiam 253 22d 
1377 (4th Cir.1972); 334 F.Supp.62F (W.D.N.C. 1971), rejecting 
this same contention made during the 1971-72 school year. 

  

  

-]13- 

 



assigned or granted Bo EL to permit escape of white 

students from and black students into these schools. Nor 

did it stop with that; it underpopulated the previously black 

schools, limited the programs offered by these schools and 

projected their closing while at the same time creating a 

haven for white students in the southeast with no cross- 

assignments into or from this area into the black northwest. 

No one anticipated success of the plan, particularly without 

Board control over transfers to prevent reser raynting which 

the Board rejected. Thus, contrary to the Board contention 

that the feeder plan provided stable desegregation, the Board's 

practices had already dictated resegregation of the schools. 

We were not dealing with the problem, as alleged by the Board, 

of people simply moving, but with active present Board practices 

of planning for and encouraging a return to segregated schools. 

Clearly, this is.not the situation envisaged by the Supreme 

Court of passive Board conduct with subsequent movement by 

students and parents which affect the racial composition of 

integrated schools. The Supreme Court anticipated continuing 

discrimininatory practices which would warrant retention of 

jurisdiction by district courts and supplemental or additional 

orders to achieve the constitutional mandate of Brown. 402 

U.S. at 31-32. Here, the active forces of Board practices 

demanded further supervision by the district court and further 

orders requiring modifications of the Board's plan. 

-l4-  



B. As further argued below, we are not dealing 

here with a finding of no active state involvement in the 

creation and perpetuation of a segregated system. The 

decisions of the District Court, this Court and the Supreme 

Court clearly establish that the Charlotte-Mecklenburg school 

system has been segregated and maintained by active involvement 

of the state. Rather, the proceedings subsequent to the 

Supreme Court's decision in April, 1971, have been undertaken 

to insure that the racially segregated system is eliminated 

"root and branch." Green v. County School Board of New Kent 
  

County, 391 U.S. 430 (1968); Raney v. Board of Education of 
  

  

Gould School District, 391 U.S. 443, 449 (1968): 

"Finally, we hold that in the circumstances 
of this case, the District Court's dismissal 
of the complaint was an improper exercise of 
discretion. Dismissal will ordinarily be in- 
consistent with the responsibility imposed on 
the district courts by Brown IT, 349 Us, at 
299-301, 99 L. Bd at, 1105, T1838. ..In light of 
the complexities inhering in the disestablish- 
ment of state-established segregated school 
systems, Brown II contemplated that the better 
course would be to retain jurisdiction until 
it is clear that disestablishment has been 
achieved. We agree with the observation of 
another panel of judges of the Court of Appeals 
for the Eighth Circuit in another case that 
the district courts "should retain juris- 
diction in school segregation cases to insure 
(1) that a constitutionally acceptable plan 
is adopted, and (2) that it is operated in a 
constitutionally permissible fashion so that 
the goal of a desegregated, non-racially 
operated school system is rapidly and finally 
achieved,’ «... 

  

  

-~15- 

E
I
.
 

   



The Board's new "feeder plan" proposed after 

affirmance of the plan directed by the District Court in 

February, 1970, warranted further supervision by the District 

Court. The anticipated steps to be taken by the Board to 

insure an effective plan simply were not forthcoming. 

Recognizing that the Board would take no further steps to 

improve its plan absent further orders, the District Court 

was clearly warranted and acted within its discretionary 

authority in ordering the modifications required by the 

June 19, 1973, Order. | 

C.ivNeither the 1971-72 or 1972-73 "feeder: plan" 

nor the modifications proposed by the Board in May, 1973, 

would effect a racially unitary school system.®: The Board's 

proposals were simply illusory. On paper they projected 

dosegtogation of all the schools in the system. The pro- 

mised results, however, were never obtained and could not be 

under the Board's practices. No stable or effective plan 

could be implemented with only the involvement of the north- 

eastern and northwestern areas of the system and the total 

exclusion of the southeast. More crippling, however, were 

the free transfers and lack of control in student assignments 

which permitted blacks to return to and whites to flee the 

previously black schools as well as the limited utilization 

-16- 

S
E
 

  
A
 

YA
 
T
E
A
 

FC
 

L
C
E
 
S
P
 

   



and curriculum offerings provided in these schools. 

While the May 14, 1973, (333a) resolution of the 

Board proposed to increase the enrollment in West Charlotte, 

it would do so only by assigning more students from the 

northwest and northeast, simply compounding the existing 

problems. 

Additionally, the Board proposed n ocontrol over 

student transfers to prevent resegregation although anti- 

cipating that without some control this result would occur. 

The District Court acted within its discretionary authority 

in rejecting the May, 1973, Board proposals and directing 

modifications which would provide stability, PRL IRGEs and 

more effective desegregation for 1973-74. Moreover, the 

District Court properly directed the Board to devise a new 

plan for the 1974-75 and subsequent school years. The Board's 

staff and committee studies as well as the experience under 

ha "rastal plan" had shown that further steps were warranted. 

See "Pupil Assignment Study, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools," 

March 6, 1373, in the original record on appeal. 

-17- 

 



IT J 

The District Court Properly Directed the | 
Board to Involve the Total School System 
in its Desegregation Plan in Order to | 
Eliminate Patent Inequities and to Prevent 
Resegregation of the Schools. 

The Board contends that the: District: Court had no 

authority to reject its proposed assignment of students from 

the Devonshire and Statesville areas to West Charlotte. This | 

proposal was made by the Board after the Court had ordered 

assignment of students to West Charlotte to accommodate its 

capacity in order that the school could offer a comparable 

educational program. The Court had found that by under- 

utilizing West Charlotte, its educational and extracurricular 

programs had suffered and that this contributed to resegregation 

Of the school.: The Court. hadralso found that no effective de- 

segregation plan could be maintained by assigning any students 

residing in the northeast and northwest to this school, 

particularly since the Board had rejected control over student 

transfers and reassignments. 

In rejecting the Board's proposed assignment of more 

students from the transitional areas of the northwest and 

northeast to West Charlotte and in ordering the Board to in- 

volve all areas of the community, the Court was simply trying 

to establish an effective desegregation plan, one that would 

finally achieve a racially unitary school system. Cf. Raney 

V., Board of Education of Gould: School District, supra; Medley 
  

V. School Board of City of Danville, 428 r.24 1061. (44h Cir.1973); 
  

-18~-    



Eaton Vv, New Hanover County Board of YXducation, 459 F.24 634 
  

{4th Cir. 1972), affirming 330 F.Supp. 73 (E.D.N.C. 1971). 
  

In its brief, however, the Board seeks to construct a straw 

man. It argues. that it is not a violation of egual protection 

t0o assign some students to a school rather than others. The 

problem here is that the Court is dealing with a remedy and 

not seeking to find a constitutional violation. That the 

Board has operated its schools in violation of the Constitution 

has already been clearly established. Swann v. Charlotte- 
  

Mecklenburg Beodrd of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1971). 'The objective 
  

now is to establish a plan for the elimination of the constitutional 

violation and the District Court has broad discretion in trying 

to achieve this result, Swann, supra; 453 F.2d 1377 (4th Cir, 
  

1972): Reyes Vv, School Digtrict No. 1, Denver, Colo., U.S. 
  

+ 37 L.Ed;24 548 (1973): Green vy. County Echool Board of 
  

New Rent County, 391 U.S. 430 (1968). The District Court also 
  

actedwithin its discretionary authority in seeking to devise a 

plan which would insure fairness and equity. Cf. Brice v. Landis, 
  

314 F.Supp. 974 (®.D. Cal,l969); Smith v. St. Tammany Parish 
  

School Board, 302 .P.8upp..106,108: {F.D...La.1869)3:.Bell v. West 
  

  

Point Municipal Separate School District, 446 F.2d 392 (5th Cir. 
  

1971); Alexander. .v. Hillman,.296 U.S. 222,.239:{1935): Swann, 
  

402 -U.8. at 15,   
The District Court.opinion.is:clear.. The : Court was 

-19-  



faced, as it has been throughout these proceedings, with a 

recalcitrant school board which would not adopt or implement 

an effective desegregation plan. The Board proposed "a 'bare 

minimum' or 'get-by' group of changes ...[which] would have 

done little to involve the east and south portions of the 

county in 'bussing’', and little 0 stabilize the fluctuating 

populations of the schools." (348a) When these proposals were 

rejected, the Board simply submitted additional patchwork, 

again involving only the northeast and northwest and excluding 

the southeast. The unfairness of the Board's plan was a major 

contributing factor to the.:instability of desegregation in the 

school system. And since the Board had again defaulted in 

proffering an acceptable remedy, the District Court had "broad 

power to fashion a remedy that... [would] assure a unitary school 

system." Swann, 402 U.S. at 16. 

5 The Board concedes the unfairness of its plan and 

seeks to construct: a. rational basis for the inequities. The 

District Court found no support for the distinctions made by 

the Board: 

"The most significant flaw, however, in 
the reasons given for the discrimination in 
favor of the south and east is the apparent 
assumption that the people who live in south 
and east Mecklenburg are more self-centered 
or racially intolerant than the people who 
are already experiencing 'bussing.' 

"I cannot and will not make such a gloomy 
and defeatist and uncomplimentary presumption 
about such a large number of progressive 
citizens, It seems to me that to .the extent 
required by fairness, south and east Meck- 
lenburgers will be as tolerant of measures 

-20- 

A
I
A
N
 

oA
 

i 

  
 



r
e
r
 

necessary to desegregate public schools as 
others have been. The excellent response 
which people from those areas have made to 
the limited assignments of their children 
to First Ward, Bruns Avenue and Billingsville 
(and now to Piedmont Junior High) is, I 
consider, a more reliable token than the 
fears of the doomsayers and the threats of 
a few intolerants. 

"Even though perfect fairness in de- 
segregating schools may still be impossible, 
fairness is still the prime guide of a court 
of equity; and gross unfairness, such as 
still exists in the current situation, is 

the legitimate target of a court of equity 
which was originally called to act because 
of the unfairness (lack of equal protection 

of laws) in the operation of the schools." 

{(362a~363a) 

We submit that the Court acted properly and within 

its discretionary authority in ordering the Board to involve 

the total school system in desegregation in order to assure 

fairness and a stable racially unitary school system. 

CONCLUSION 
  

For the foregoing reasons, we submit that the District 

Court order should be affirmed. 

Respectfully submitted, 

  

rT VOJNE CHAMBERS 
hambers, Stein, Ferguson & 
Lanning 

951 South Independence Boulevard 
Charlotte, North Carolina 23202 

JACK GREENBERG 

JAMES M. NABRIT IIT 

NORMAN CHACHKIN 

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York 10019 

Attorneys for Appellees. 

-21- 

 



CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that he has this 

day served a copy of the foregoing Brief of Appellees, on 

counsel for appellants by depositing a copy of same in 

the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to: 

a 
ak

a 
a
 

P
E
E
 

William 4. Sturges, Esa. 
Weinstein, Sturges, Odom, Bigger & Jonas 
810 Baxter Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 

This {8k cay of December, 1973. 

FLY 
  

[teensy for Appellees. 

  
  
 



EXHIBITS 

 



  

AIS, 5 

    
         

LEP big nd DIS RICT C 

FOR THE WESTERN D 

314 5 LARS CHAR 
$5es 

JAMES EF. SWANN, et al., 

Plaintiffis, 

) 
) 

) REPORT TO THE COURT PURSUANT TO 

Vv. ) 
) THE ORDER DATED AuGcUsT 16, 1973 

THE CHARLOTTE-~-MECKLENBURG ) 

ROARD OF EDUCATION, et al. ) 

Defendants. ) 

The defendants, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Ecducat tion, 

et al,, pursuant toc Paragraph 6 of the Court's Order dated August 15, 

1973, submits herewith marked Exhibit "A" the membership statistics 

for all schools in the Charlotie-Mecklenburg School System for the 

period August 28, 1973 to Septewber.1l, 1973. 

This 20th day of September, 1973, 

Respectfully submitted, 
~ / >: : her 

Zr / ARR Zo / 
7 To Pid 2 - 

2” Lis = mre da 

alan vi. STurges 2 oe 
“WEINSTEIN, Ig ODOIl,” BIGGER, 

& JON AS, 1 f 

810 Baxter at Sf 

-+ 

I 

D 

ETL ED 
CHARLOTTE, N. C. 

SEP 20 1973 

U. S. DISTRICT COURT 

W. DIST. OF N. C. 

1974 

ir UNITED STA TES 

NORTH CAROLINA ITY 
IL 

IVISION 

Civil Action No. 

  

  

Charlotte, North Carolina 

Phone: 704/333-0511 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT 
CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG BOARD 

OF EDUCATION    



STATE OF 

COUNTY OF 

the 

duly served upon Counsel for 

copy Of 

addressed 

Court 

the same in the United States Mail, 

  

NORTH CAROLINA 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

MECKLENBURG 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Report to 

Pursuant to the Order Dated August 16, 

i
 he plaintiffs by de 

as-follows: 

Mr. Julius Chambers 
Attorney at lay 

East Independence Plaza 
9051 South Independence Boulevard 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 

1873 has bee 

positing a 

postage prepaid, 

This 20th day of September, 1873. 

7 Pl 

/ 7 Lane 

ra 
ed 7 / 7 de i al 

pr 4 Si A “ 

  

Streat 

Charlotte, North Carolina 

Phone: 704/333-0511 

ATTORNEYS POR DIFE NDANT 

CHARLOTTE-MPCKLENBURG BO: ARD OF 

28202 

EDUCATION 

l
B
 

BE
 

r
r
 

   



P——————— . I TNT BR Ea) 

Hr 23% 

  
    

  

    
      
  

  

  

        
    
    
  

    

  

    
  

  

    

  

  

    
  

  

  

    

      
  

        
  

  

    
  

  

  
  

  

  

  

  

  

        
  

    
    
  

  

  

  

  

  
  

    

  

  

  

                                                
    

ECKLER URG SCHOOLS MEMBFRSHIP STATISTICS FOR 10-day MONTH August28, 1973 70 September 11, 1973 

SP. : POTAL | DYACK rn bi 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 | =n. WHITE Bacg Lo {ios KINDG, ES 

Wiig | 15! 1181 130 wo 1 = ~ 
RD, ELE! 56 gl - a0" 42 1 78 

the Tver t vl 1m ay 30.50 
W, 223 210 203 4 oho Jo 

gn. 32.8 LEER LIRR geil Ty ae | 
T 348 1339 {36h | 26 ! 1077 | Lo 38 

¥ ize 120 bh 1 wn | 
JR. B oh wiz 3h 29k : 

z 37 3517 1336 | tug 1100 26.20 | 

Wilf 56 58 62 66 1 i = 290 : | 

g B | 28 Ci GTS 43 26 o 182 

Tiong iio 1 2 i | L72 38.59 

i 137 38 33 LT Lh Lh 240 
RK Bi 30 31 43 40 39 27 21.0 : | 

Plat OO 76 oT 03 Ti 450 46.66 

Wan 7.1 10: J 8 1139 vay Ty 
B23 08 25 28 5 {25 147 

Thy 1299 | 145 | 163 157 162 864 16.62 i 

W | 26 = 26 ETH 279 > I. >» 
B31 23 9 ol 16 62 165 21 1375 

{97 5h 35 50 5h 100 Lll 37416 oh 1448 

W139 1 35 51 05 5% 42 7 268 22 | S01 

Bjaf 21 25 35 26 31 156 oly {150 

T {a7 Tn. TT 73 rg : Lok 36.79 57. | 481 

Wao 81 {10g , 08 L51 

ODS Bl a7 27! 3 52 { 43 213 
T 1139 Ya | 1°o4 7 161 |. 1056 664 35. (V7 

W129 40 ul 34 | 2 3h 17 gel 15 242 

ILE Bio 7 ay 20 ae 1h 14 : 141 oli 1168 

Ti tai y = 1 on 7 BY 3 a : 60 1 353 33 ior 
Wah VEE FO - 373 ; | 
B | 29 B01 B5 1 °7 | 161 

"EL T0001 im 534 sf 30. en 

W chris > 310 | 
4 B TH 5) 160 i 

T 228 [252 bro ' 3L.okh - 

Vi 103 ior oo 890 
A B ii 2 I Be 320 

Ch 019 389 [F02 1210 ob Lh Fa] 

  

     



  

  

PAGE 2 
  

  
  

  
  

  

    
    

  

      
  

  

      

  

          

  
  

  
  

    

  
  

  
  

  
    

  

  

  

  
  

  
  

  
      
    

  

      

  

  
  
  

  

  
  

        

    

    
  

          

  
    
  

  

  
  

  

      

  

  

  

  

( SP. TOTAL | Brack ; — 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 vo | WHE BLACK |, pro Are Juma. ig oy 
W 38 29 ho { 42 35 Ll 208 : 22 {250 Bl 28 23 30 5 30 1% 138 io 157 sl on Rion ' 25 770 57 65 56 266 37.70 71 They 38.57 Wart nT TTY 248 34 282 TK Bi 4 8 4 110 7 11 LL J =~ : de HE HG TTT] Suu 92 15.05 Od 5.31 vy | 340 {324 {348 | 3 Vm | JR. B | 130 1.61 Lion {37 372 
ii I70 125 1452 | 42 1389 ou.7s r ¥ihh 33 LO 5h | 56 66 303 

OD B{o7 oy tn 26 Lg 38 204 
iin 67 81 80 1104 {10h 507 40.23 WilLl Lb 80.1 61 oF 1 BH .308 41 i3ko Bli6 21 oly 51 30 1 03 132 256 (158 T157 TY TTT 75 Te) 30.00 = 31.16 Wilks 17 LO 70 58 bl 39 : : B {26 ty 30 37 25 179 
Ti% 78 70 1 100 85 86 500 } 35.56 W 7h 6 [158 3 Lo5 IR, B 35 Tos {Inn 1h 338 | T 292 266 {250 i; 833 NE. W137 29 25 23 31 jan 149 i i B{ 3 26 19 Ba SS 23 116 
T4295 55 LL 55g Ir 265 43.39 
v Taos 1775 329 

'S # | 104 92 196 1 T | } 207 267 524 37.40 0 wich ! 37 93 30 1 5 89 ia 54], = BiLho 1 =h L5 7 1 40 Ih 6 258 | Thad Tho | io TIT TIS EK 12 J99. | 32.29 BI VAkT is uy 3 584 aa | B {67 561 on oo 8 255 fe — TP VET 19 TOT iy 939 7 36.95 Be 
Hiss 7 WM ITE Ts ol 05] .. 20 En Blo 2h} wn oR 1 p2 36 15 178 i 25 l203 : Bd Bt | S557 657 27 1 69 80 39 ge 5h 48s Lo op wi 150 {0% 364 : io: S B 50 of : 337 i =} a T 200 301 

291 27-341 RE | 

  

    

        
    

  
    

  
      

                                        

  

  

  

     



  
  

ma es tm 90 SA MAE 5 4-3 SAIN 1 AN me 1 0 5 0. smi 10 

53 

    

      

                      
      
        
  
      

                
            
  

  

              
  
  

    
  
  

    
  

        
      
              
  

        

  

  

  
          

  

  
            

    

  
  

  
  

      

  
  

  

  
    

    

PAGE 3 
SP, TOTAL BLACK With BLACK 

} 1 2 3 4 5 6 T 8 9 10 1 2 mal BLACK fire pATIO EINE. RATIO 

Ww ; o8 109 2q7 

s 2] | 571 52 100 
Tr? ] 155 161 316 CU 

¥, ! =7%_} an 580 1656 | 

gyn L | i AEE OY 5 } 
7 3 v TAA 705 724 21.97 R42 : 

Will 37 Ll L2 54 L6 23 284 | 

Bol 25: ol wl 7% Lk 6 180 

T|65 al oh) Tor oF 79 29. LOY Ti 

W | 290 BLO 7201 : 860 : 7 

B 1471 1k 119 Los 

I I 431 34 LOO 1265 99.01 | 

B23 1 7 Zi] 371 + 22 176 Y/ {os 

Bill 23 33 LT Sk 1.96 B55 £21 

T! 64 60 60 oF. 1 11 5 : 372 52,68 hs in 53.3 

Rizo 3 i ade pl 2 1 97 153, Va 

RK 315 8d poh oan Vo op 67 14 

TiuLs 39 Ll 58 yy 5h 134 374 48,39 

W In | o0h 2393 : 

| B aly a1 155 

th . 281 297 573 323200 

Ww 3 508 | h6Q 469 71 1heh | 

16H Bi : 261 | 186 62 ian 620 

T Ek 789 | 646 69) 107 2093. 30.05 | 

W : 150 74 1213 4 541, 

B { | 85 SEL 2k 3 28 

T : 235 P57 1292 28 g22 34.18 

W ; i 256 255 352 {O 67k 

B r ; TL | ox 3 17 Lo? 

T 1 430 367 253 26 1076 37.36 

W 355 l105 178 29 Sol. > o 

JR. 'B 127 1125. 1156, 28 395 

T 215 (a2. pon | 51 927 30.0 

Ww 1is9 51 656 66 5 317 

OVE B| 20 ZT] ug 17 162 SoG ns 

7 [C8 79 {100 | 100 | 102 Vim" am fl 

NE 79 98 58 90 25 485 : 

ivy pn l{7 BL AE 66 | : 1408 : 

tT f% T1t771157 102 [175 "1150 
S03 1 oo py CA Sar Le                                                           

    

 



  

6A 

  

      
        
  

        
    
    

    

  

    

          

          

  

        
    

  

    

      
  

  

  

  

  

  

  
  

  

      

  

  

  

  
  

  

  
  

  

  
        

  

  

  

    

    
  

PAGE 4 : 
SP. TOTAL | BLACK With BLACK 3 i» 3 1 5 ah 3 19 110 1 12 | | WHLIE BLACK lems. | mario || 0G EA RATIO 

W. o7 2 331 414 os 30 207 26 (233 = 
Bl og ool ool ‘201 =u 34 17h 20 {19% 
27 2 5051 O71 Do 59 ok 381 he 65 Le 1427 5.43 
Ui! oy rr ny oT 7 Lio 41 1453 - 
Bf 27 7 56-1 21 19 137 ir oa 
T [56 B 75 oD | IO? 93 : Hig PL. 55 cE 30.0% 

Wigs 55F 70) mag ah i: 1 L&T. sg [3519 
g blo» S0f ot ur] L5 192 . 25 1217 

T{ 90 85 A] SCT 659 29,13 7.1736 Bo. ha 
WI 75 1 66] 65] Do 200. | : z PARSE 1.32 {23 £9 | «3% 122 { 
tlio 89 ok | 120 410 23.75 @ Sn 
W {140 133 143 { 150 576 ( 
Bl 20 75 93 | 100 348 : 
Pio20 2083 1 236 | 260 aol 37.66 ; 
W 5G | oan 490 1 Yafs 1 

® wr B 190 178 142 oy 531 
| 221% ie 7.5 632 | 25 2116 05.09 [ 

Vi T13 IT n 228 i 
B 50 50 9 115 i - 
: 103 107 33 343 33.52 | 
W i 206 BT 1157 8 550 i 
B ! 79 109 6 20 73 
7 205 2753 1901 28 812 33.49 
Wi ol 26 27 33 37 3D 176 r i656 Oop 
pr HES 37 CONSE 228 177 20 oop 
? {58 63 ok U6 Wh SOM 58 33 50,14 45 1308 8Y 75 
Wldo I 727 wi 5] 3k | go. [x01 
B | 29 og | af ws | 137 ! oh 163 
T1929 05 | 135 | HO 478 | of 664 ah lsd 28.64 

W 128 132 a 2R0 
ETS B 88 | 100 188 

7 216 232 ern Sa Th a 
wis 77 68 83 8h £3 L73 i 
B | 5k 52 57 101 1 bY 5 3h Ss 
T A230 2G | 125 TI T1517 [14% £20 42 U5 ei 

aon a0] IL (Lo 1T70 {0% 823 
5 {25 23 19 26 oT 55 z : 2130. : 
THD toatl rIor to oto ah Mb py                                           
        
 



rT TE EE EE A = le —- a EBL L RIN 

    

  
  

    
        
  

    
  

  

  

  

  

        
  

  

  

      

        
  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

    
  

  

  
        

  
  

  
    

  

  

  

  
                                                      

  

    

PAGE 5 
i] 

SP. : TOTAL | BLACK oy Ith BLACK 

: 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | 10 1 ee £0 ue BLACK |yprs. | mario | P= |kind. | Ratio 

Wi 326 |{ispo7 | 360 1015 z 
wn. B 124 303 | 113 340 

T | B50 { 430 I 475 335 25.09 

Mie l=! ei an 1 an 290 | 
Bil Ty ow hey SE — 
Ti {> Lic J oH B 497 xe 

Wi 35 L6 51 55 : 13 200 

BIST IJ 26129 10 102 = 
Tia Y ast wml Bh 3. 302 33.77 
Wie 1 a7 =» wv 5 = 433 i 
Bi 18 Ie) 38 51 38 Ll 26] { 

Tob onl 1111 306 732 + iy Aol 37.60 | 
WW! o7 Lo 01 9 ho | bh i poy i 

FLFM. Bl 25 gh} as 1 :=091 30 34 187 
Tl 52 6h 7h 70 70 73 LOR 5.33 

9 wz Tate TY em 1435 1 
Erey B 160 162 335 Teen | 

T 662 | 624 633 1919 28.22 | 
Wine. 1021 133 | 19% Lag 58 1586 x 

D Bl 55 61. L5 67 i 208 “1 Ir 
Piyse | 1844 3701 208 : 726 2340 135 155% 93.93 
Wi7s yn 63 1 81 88 has : 

Biro nh 37 38 30 3 171 iL 

T1933 9281 oo 1%199 2311 {iso 632 28.00 | 
W : 199 505 1150 588 

R. B 27 30 36 23 
T : 226 233 {222 681. 13.65 

W : : i Lio 386 290 42 1130 
HIGE B i v 217 179 176 6 578 

T 629 565 466 ha : 1708 33.84 

W 127 55 1155 8 61 : 

B. 8B WP 7) 4 27 et A : 
mn 201 199 [193 35 aon 1. 122.5) -— 
Wi 7 55 69 iii p71. | 
Bi 33 26 BY 1 13 159 - 

Be anima; ke. 1 36.07 11. 
Vir 1 miro r oo 59 3671 BE 
B | 27 Bo) BI Z31 5 25 : 150 + e . 

Ca TY cori on A Tamm ber - 

 



i aS RS S38 AH AR CS I tc nt I br er AO A 

  

      
  

  

        
          
  

            
  

        
  

  

  

          
            
  

  

      
  

  
  

  

    

  

  

  
  

  

    

    
  

          
  

      
  

  

    

  
    

  

  

  

  
  

  
    

  

  

  

      

  

    
  

        
  

                                                        

: PAGE 6 

riz! 31 stl 7 +. 83 19 } 10 11 2 | 20 we eno mnie Loe Br ig 

W 124 212 336 : 

Bl BOY 12 175 refers ai 

TL | RS 320 506 20 

W | 390 1-38 312 3 1032 
q B { 194 % io | 22 421 ee 

T aos) ny hey 1.05 tis 1 BR 07 % 

Wioo | aol oof 2h 1 85 ! 408 i 
yey = Blas 1 wy mY hg) 222 | 

PERh TEI TY 630 35.23. L 
Wir 1 oi Let ey : 215 us 1260 
B| 53 i Ne L6 170 37. toon : 
T {104 90) B13] 385 4h, 215 go _lue7 Lh. 32 
Xi 75 ‘fh 7 310 { 
Bl 4d Lg 45 50 ] 192 

r{IZ. | 728 | oT 511 37:27 

¥Yio2 59 76 co 288 | 

Bi 3n 20 28 23 101 

Phos | 701007 108 389 25. 04, i 
Y 127 Ty, tof {- : 6 388 | 

8 3 -— 95 ZTa 16 __290 : 

T ele 1235 (199 a2 A785 Lax77 | 

W188 + gel UV oh oh 15 13 1186 53.1239 
Bip Wel ny om 20 128 oy | 

TL 80 BB | Lo 4 lio 13 61k 20.84 75 {686 23 Ho 

vier nl orn 308 hg 1354 
El TY ESY TT y 108 5g 12% 
oN {Trio ad. 1.30.3 Bg i591 0 10 

Wl Lo 43 43 5 07 27h 25 1303 

gir TIE 177 301207 
COR LR 80 ; aL | za 59 1540 L0.5¢ 

W ji 205 31h {280 6 805 i . 

pwr, Bl 155 Jig Res 43 430 : - 

a CE YT 49 1323.1 32.4% 
Wlo: | 100 | 571s 157 : 4 op 55k : 

Bis LI ETI} 123 ph {149 3 

? $30 Ya | 106 1153 CRO oy. on 123 1703 g3.319 

£ SOL Ta 719 nN i | 
R. B 95 77 | 2 | . 

T ey ym) Yo Tm tr     
 



    
    
  

        
      
      

    
      

  

        
        

    
        
    

  
    

                      
    

      
  

        
  

      
        

  

      
  

    

  

  
            

  
          

  
          
                    

          
  

  
  
                

      
  
  
          

      
    
    
  

          
  

      
                    

  

  

  

        

                        
          

  
  

  

                                            

  

  
  

    

  
  

  

  

                      
        

        

    

    

  

      

  
  

      
  

            
    

  

    

            
    

    

  
        

  

    
  

    

  

              
    

      

                  

  
  

    
        

      
  

    

  
    

  

  
  

          
            

        

      

          
    
    

            
      

  

  

  
    

  

        

    

    

  

  

    

  

  

  
      

    
  

  
  

  

                    
  

      
          
  

  
    

          
            

  

  
                    

      
  

  
    

          
      

  

  

  

      

  

        
  

  

  

    

  

  

        

  

    

  

    

      

    
  

        
  

    
    
    

  

    
  

  
    

    

    

  
          

    

    
  

  

                  

  

        

          
    

                

  
  

    

    

          

EF 
: SP. TOY, | BLACK "|i gxIve0, [WITH BLACK 

2 1 g | 3 . 4 2 6 i 8 2 15 I ar ED. Jagat BLACK MBRS. RATIO Z seelsd toy RATIO 

W! | 1% {97 1175 561 
: 

R. i § 9 F 230 1127 
06 SpE = 

= Ir | 381 327 | 302 
XT 1.90 2 ; 

¥. 3 x i] 21 951 
306 

: 

noone Bla) rma) a 27 
210 

=e 

: Ti 80 BV 521 5 
\ 

516 0.69 $B 

Wi 
AL 1013 j2u0 } 10 679 

| 

GD JR, Bd 3 {ogi 20 = 
gi 

2r7 
yi 506 129 1 30 1014 33.03 

Wi27 28 LO 2 60 63 i 
260 

| : 

B{18 EE a ae eR : 
156 

; 

reel my 1 wo 
416 oe 1 9 

i585 ZT ny cf ee i | 293 
: 

K GARDENS B {20 52Y ol myo 
165 3 

vp UL! bla oa ! 
[ 158 36.02 

a a a MS 221 — 

B {26 23 28 27 ol 
HELE 

| 

T | 69 LO eH OTE 
388 22.7% 1} 

W 
rt a Vo OR a oo 5 A603 

R. B 
11h 75 poo Im ET 

i 

Tz = 7 pr OT os] %1 30.40 

i i Hy prog Ege a RE Lc 
Z 

CK HIGH B 
71 ih ov 1 m7 | 

7 
632 546 | 60k 128 

1810 Po.2k 0 | % 

YZ iL 5 ob; 
312 

NT. Blu 25} 91 i 
77 

Pliin 110] 18 | 
so yoo 1 35.97 i 

W Y : 7% 0 ia 1 smn 

JR. B i 70 {ir BOT | ol 372 > | : 

Z 
339 TE v7 Ena 959 38.95 

WlT3 Bl Zorn T6 
ER a me 

XII PD. B25 50 46 35 Ir7 55 
| 248 J > B29 

r '98 I ey TO BEE PEC J 
| 9 t an.83 L0G {703 39 

TR it a Toe fo i ge pT | : 

CREEK si 28 | 5 22 i 
| 172 oe ; . 

rr rT rT go | gag 1 w1.% — 

W157 ET TT 55 
337 ] aa] — 

iG pg | 32 ou pe vol NE (CY 31 
5 y Lefer 

pif Treglia 83 86 
- 532 Sat tee                                                                                                 

  
  
  
  

 



  

10A 

  
  

    
  

        
      
  

          
  

        
      

    
    
                
          
  

  

  
  

  
      

  

          
        
  
  
    
          
  
  

  
    

  
  

  

  
        

  
  

  
          

  
    

  
  

    

          

  
      

  

  

  
                            

  
              

  
  
      

  

      

  
    

  
  

        
  
  

  

  
    
  

  

  
  

          
  

  

  

PAGE 8 

SP. TOTAL BLACK - WHE ACK 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 31 ¥2 oh WHITE BLACK { re. te KINRGs. ny 

EO I Lae 133 
R 0 03 56 us 06 oI oh ly ool 3 

I30 Ea 
757 LO. LL 

Ww, 14 oT 5 IT 30 20 
152 

'q 223 13 1 rs 13 16 
103 3 

21 37 ol mr ro 36 1 255 L0.3C 7 4 

Wi Ug 76 68 62 PE 90 x 419 

IE BY 381 == PEt 37 21 re 209 

PI 0 UE A 177 
G28 29 ol 1 

eR 190 | 275 L7h [ 

FARE Bl = 127 Y og 33k i 

326 L482 
208 ln an 5 

¥ 197 1 #33 Tey L550 | 

$HTS B 101 137 
238 | 

300 390 
£90 34.49 

W 
537 359 154 Ly 1054 

LOTTE HIGH 
238 202 180 19 (39 : 

T 775 561. 33 | og 1693 97 qi 

1.38 NL RL 
ob 

fiz B25 ood 26) oo 0% 35 
13k 

{A a Sl ahi 72 7 65 380 29.26 

y J : Rin am 31.0 Q27 a 

wey I 1 171 bes foamy 517 | 

: 1 13s 468 4o1 lbh 35 80 

W . 163 iht; bins 9 463 : | 

JR. B | iy 9G 1 59 16 312. 

T r 27h oh? | 234 85 775 10,25 | 

HW) 17 ag a L156 wT 17 1.90 

BY 17 23 20 281 20 hl I 145 

or EET ni 37 1} | IT ne 21 : 335 43.28 

Wy % 210 00 | 190 11 Gey . 3 

: B TO5 en RA 20 313 

T 75 {oon {zo 21 gk 34.24 

Wiaoy (Hy m1 Yo % L29 k 

ARK Bi 40 press 56 63” 
207 | | 

J ann TU EE RE EL 
Ge | 32.54 4 _ 

Yin 88 86 | 108 
1 35h ana 

i» oie tor Y 7 213 - 
Faz T1374 331) 160 E: 567. .i37.55.1 domme ef re                                                                                               

    

 



a Hoa A A BAT ARB 0 A AAR SAA bn. is 
  

[=
 

[=
 

hi
 

  

    

        
  

                        
  

  

    
          
                  
            

Page O : . : y : p | : "0 SP. : J TCTAL | BLACK [KINDG{WITH | BLACK 2 ] 5 & 7 1) 12 {pp | ITE BLACK lars. | mario || fimo. | mario 

vl 3789 [3875 rhobh LL62 | Lhio 4393 4707 14597 Whoop ; hbio Loo3 3762 ! 318 51334 | 810 |s213h 
Y. GRALES | 2 Bl 2101 {1991 {221k oath 2252 P38 2200 1705 205% 11997 1605 {aheo Va3y 25300 : 574 wns | 7 | ir Tj 5890 .5866 16278 | 6831 \ 666L B71 | 6988 (6702. sis 6507 5600 {5191 '} 902 76684 32.99 Ih38y {78068 133.14 

W 24,995 32.0% 12.275 R55 poopy of em 810 f5p10h 
B 13,245 64439 5,032 584 ee 25300" . 574 te 

T 38,240 : 20,235 17,307 902 = on | 384 75658 33.1% 

TOTAL MEMBERSHIP 9/19/72 78,823 

TOTAL MEMBERSHIP 9/11/73 =~ 78,068 (INCLUDING KINDERGARTEN)   

® 

755 

 



12A 

EE
 

TN THC DISTRICT COURT OF THE -UNITED STATES 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA 

CHARLOTTE DIVISION 

JAMES E. SWANN, et al., 

Civil Action No. 1974 

Plaintiffs,   
Vv. REPORT ON SEPTEMBER, 1973 

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS 

BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., 
: 

Defendants. 

Attached hereto marked Exhibit A is the print-out 

showing the membership statistics for all the Charlotte- 

Mecklenburg Schools for the period August 28, 1973 to 

September 25, 1973. 

The statistics for Enderly Park Elementary School 

show 188 white and 181 black students for a black-white ratio 

of 49 per cent. This situation is under study by the school 

staff and will be brought to the Board's attention at its 

October 23, 1973 meeting. 

Respectfully submitted, 

  

  

es his ny TF te) 

ce william HW. Sturges - 

WEINSTEIN, STURGES, ODOM, BIGGER 

$ JONAS, P.A. - 

810 Baxter Streetl 

Charlotte, North Carlina 25202 

Phone: 704/333-0511 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT CHARLOTTE 

MECKLENBURG BOARD OF EDUCATION 

 



137 

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 
CERTIFICATE OF SFRVILE 
  

MECKLENBURG COUNTY 

I am secretary to William W. Sturges, attorney for 

defendant Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, and I hereby 

certify that a copy of the foregoing Report on September, 1973 

Membership Statistics has been duly served upon Counsel for 

the plaintiff by depositing a copy of the same in the United 

States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: 

Mr. Julius IL. Chambers 
Chambers, Stein, Ferguson & Lanning 
Attorneys at Law 
East Independence Plaza 
951 South Independence Boulevard 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 

This 18th day of October, 1973. 

7 EF i 
/ =; : : : z : a 

Peggy Jd. Cope 

Secretary to William W. Sturges 

  

WEINSTEIN, STURGES, ODOM; BIGGER, 

& JONAS, P.A. 

810 Baxter Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 
Phone:: 704/333-0511 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT 

CEARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG BOARD OF EDUCA 
n 

{ =
 O =]
 

i 

 



EXHIBIT naw 

  

CHARLOTTF=MECKLENGHRG SCHJUNOLS AL AGERSHIP STATISTICS FUR FIRST 4) 4TH AUGHST 28, 1973 T) SEPTEMHER 25, 1973 

SCHOOLS [ 1 2 3 4 008 7 8 9 10 i 12 SP WHITF HLACK TOTAL BLACK ADA 
} En MEMBERS RATIO 

: R| 

SEVERSVII LE Ni 26Y rH 
T 269 269 1.00 

W 127 175. %Yi19 130 502 

MARLF QD ELEM NW 26 49 57 6a 217 
T Ind 166 "176 "194 : Y 719 «30 

” ) 222 210 204 a 640 
CALSEMARLF RD JR IR] 124 130 159 2? 43% 

T 345 340 363% 2A 1,075 «40 

293% 270 9250 is 842A 

ALFXANDER NW 95 30 87 34 296 

r 38. 350 337 49 1,124 «26 

W 49 57 SA 61 66 291 

ALLENBRONK TE] 37 12 42 43 26h 180 
} T 06 49 100 104 vy? 471 «3A 

. W 37 jo 33 47 43 44 240 

ASHLFY PARK NY 30 3) 43 39 39 27 208 
{ 67 fh) 76 45 le 71 443 bb 

W yA 101 ¥23 140 140) 139 v4 

freer 'E 23 24 24 2 10 > 146 
T Yer 329 a7 467 C459 104 687 o16 

He 24 33 2D 0 yy 325 730 

BARRINGER AE il 23 9 24 16 62 : 176 

T 23 55 94 34 Sa ba 199 466 «34 

w V4 34 44) 51 he “8 40 5 300 

SBERRYHIL I TE] 24 14 21 26 33 24 27 7 180 

T8096 BY 97 009 "10 oF 12 480 +38 

W Bau 81 83 108 97 4513 

BEVERLY wWUIDS NA jo 33 42 22 44 212 

T 123 114 125 160 143 665 «32 

15 29 40 31 34 42 34 17 247 

BILLINGSVILLE LL] 24 273 it 20 nh 19 14 14 166 
1 47 5? 21 5.1 95 651 nA 3} 408 ob 

2 $3 4 109 5A 164 

HRIARWNIIOD NA 29 14 43 V4 154 
[ 1:32 124 152 13) 522 i 

“ 194 157 $1) . 
ARIING Ay we f 4 q/ 161 

r 2.2! 244 : a7 «34  



  

  

  

CHARLOTTF=4ECKLENBURG SC4JILS AE AJERS EY STAVISTIICS Fu £IwS]T AINTH S55 28, 1973 1) SEPIFMBER 2S, 1972) 

SCHONLS Ly 1 ? 3 4 9 6 7 2) Q 10 13 12 SP WHITE  MLACK TUTAL BLACK ADA 

Fn MEMBERS RATT) 

W uh © 2803 Dye 885 

CARMEL NW 110 100 104 316 

T 416 3383 40? 1,201 26 

W 22 34 3 37 47 Ja he 24h 

CHANTILLY : NH iy 30 23 3 16 3) {2 161 

T a1 64 54 LA Yh 64H 56 ’ 407 040 

H 34 3h 41 33 a7 43 45 279 

CLEAP CRFEK Ni / 4 8 4 10 7 ih 51 

1 41 40 49 37 57 50 56 ’ 330 19 

W 340 373 346 [J 1.01% 

COCHRANE wa 131 100 10% 37 374 

T 473 apd 492 43 1,389 27 

La “es 40 S54 56 AS 304 

COLLINSWNO0D NW 27 “3 41 27 46 38 ; ; 202 

Tr 4 68 81 J 192 103 506 «40 

Wl 43 40 ub 49 60 61 49 349 

CORNELIUS NW 25 17 21 24 17 29 23 158 

r 68 57 a7 73 77 90 74 ’ 506 031 

vi 45 4H 40 70 ST A2 322 

COTSWOLD) NA Jb 3 30 3 27 26 181 

2 ol 79 70: 1U} Ha AH 503 36 

Rl 178 1b% 1959 3 49% 

ClHrliul Op Nd SrA U0 14 134 

T BIG 267 IN 17 BIS. ed] 

w 17 2 25 234 3 24 149 

DAVISON NA A 26 iy 27 1 x 23 116 

29 35 44 45 4y 47 26% oid 

W 2 154 175 3/y 

MAR. 1avls NA 102 a1 - 193 

T 256 2606 522 *37 

v7 as ya 78 87 9J & S37 

DERITA NW 4? 36 45 47 40 hy 6 260 

T 139 324 139 12S 127 13% 12 197 «13 

W 156 143 134 345 S74 

DEVONSHIRE NW 66 59 65 60 250 

T 222 202 199 205 ‘ 828 «30 

W 31 41 34 32 35 42 43 24 2B? 

DILWORTH NW 23 21 25 35 24 6 37 15 206 

r 54 v2? 59 67 5 08 10 ja 488 eA?  



7 FS SP EOP 
  

EES —— PTR So A 3 
  

  

. 
Lore 3 

CHARLUTTF=MECKLENAI®Y SCHUNLS MEME <9MIP STATISTICS Fue FIRST AONTY AUG IST 2H, 1973 TO SEPTEMBER 25, 1973 

SCHONLS [S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4 9 10 11 12 $8 5 wHilr gl AacHK TOTAL BLACK ADA 
tn MEMBERS RATIN 

W. 152 294 164 
00MBLE OAKS NW 50 ar 137 

Y 202 3p 503 «27 

W 98 109 207 
DRUID HILLS NH 57 52 109 

T 1955 iat ? 316 034 

W Y48 S34 53) 5S 15690 
‘ST MFCXLENBURG NH IT 162 139 35 9519 

T Tu! 696 71722 40 ' 2,205 023 

U] 41 37 41 ] 54 46 23 Rg 
EASTNVFR NY 23 26 28 34 in 33 A 180 

T Gy 53 69 76 Ry 79 29 Lia6n «39 

Ww ' : IBS IAT. PTY 5 859 
EASTWAY NW 117 130 104 4A 399 > T 405 - 417 383 93 1,258 32 

W 17 23 36 27 33 34 22 192 
ELIZABFTH . NW 25 4? 23 33 33 37 32 229 

5 82 65 59 60 6h 71 54 417 +54 

W 30 20 19 21 31 67 188 
ENNERLY PARK NW 15 19 25 35 27 65 181 

; T 45 39 44 96 93 $32 369 oh9 

= ; W 198 208 406 
77/7. 5T WARD NH a4 91 175 

T 282 "299 581 «30 

520 4%3 470 8 1,454 
GARINGFR NW 260. 184 {64 21 629 

¥ 780 642 0634 29 2,085 «30 

I ? 151 175. 77 4 547 
~-tXANNDER GRAHAM NW B5 94 78 24 amy 

4 236 769 29s 28 828 «34 

W ! 260 257 154 5 680 
HARDING NW 174 110 95 23 402 

T 434 367 753 28 1,082 «37 

188 198 180 3? 598 
HAW THORNF IL] 1259 ‘128 116 26 395 

T 313 3726 294 SR 993 040 

wW 60 50 66 66 75 317 
HICKNRY GROVE NW 39 29 3) ly 26 161 

1 y9 79 99 “100° 10% 478 «34  



     A ek Tt AERA NAEP OA 5 berm re 

Pace h 

CHARLUTTF=MECKLENBURG SCHUOLDS MEMBERSHIP STATISTICR FOR FIRST MANTH AJuiST 28, 1973 Ti) SEPTEMBER 25%» 1073 

SCHOQLS K 1 2 3 q 5 6 7 H 9 10 33 12 SP WHITE HLACK TOTAL BRLACK ADA 

Fn MEMBERS RATIN 

wW 79 79 94 55 94 75 48) 

HINDEN VALLEY NW 2) 53 1? 64 83 70 419 

T $49 132 170 {10 377 145 898 047 

26 27 i5 39 Y0 25 29 20 

HIGHLAND NW 2V 26 22 27 29 33 = 33 ‘ 190 

: ; T 46 93 57 66 79 SAH 62 421 AS 

W S54 68 59 Ta 8A V4 wo : N21 

‘TERSVILLE NW 26 21 30 19 42 1% 45 218 

Y gv 89 AS 93 30 129 135 . Tal 029 

fa 66 65 82 287 

HUNTINGTNWNE FARMS ww 29 25 30 39 121} 

T 10? 91 95 123% 410 +30 

\ 

W 139: 13 145 159 577 

J0LEWILD NW 85 T2 9b 97 340 

T 22%. 206 24% 9256 927 38 

W 5546 531% 486 4 3.591 

INDEPENDFNCE tin 193 171 144 18 526 

7 749 706 630 2? 2,107 e295 

W 42 68 62 60 63 81 78 454 

IRWIN NPTIONAL NW 68 27 26 16 27 21 19 200 

T 110 95 88 76 90 107 97 658 e131 

a 117 113 4 229 

STAY JAMES NW 52 58 7 117 

T 164 17% 31 346 «34 

| 297 187 1564 3 548 

KENNEDY NW 82 98 70 3 253 

 § 289 D280 226 [2] 801 «32 

H 16 20 26 26 33 37 31 1809 

LAKEVIFwW NH 29 31 38 25 ” 37 29 207 

3 49 51 64 51 60 69 56 396 52 

60 6H 76 v9 98 : 401 

LANSDOWNF NW 24 29 30 35 42 160 

T 84 97 306 134 140 561 «?9 

W 28 139 25% 

LINCOLN HEIGHTS NW 9% in? : 193 

1 219. 232 451 ol} 

W 76 77 63 82 Ba A 3 471 

LONG CRFEFK NW HY 52 57 07 AR 58 3st 

T 130.0129 125 445% 192 14] 822 43 

     



  

CHARLUTTF=MECKLEND RG 

SCHOOLS 

MATTHEWS NW 

T 

W 

MCCLINTOCK NW 
T 

MERRY 0NAXS NH 
14 

MINWAOD NW 

T 

W 

NONTCLA IRE NW 

; T 

MYFRS PARK ELEM NN 
T 

MYFRS PARK SR NW 
T 

A477 INS FORD NW 
T 

wW 

NEWELL NW 
¥ 

JRTHEAST NW 
T 

W 

NORTH MECKLENBURG NW 

T 

W 

NORTHWEST NW 
T 

OAXDALF NW 

SCHUQLS 

yu 104 

4y 55 

139 159 

1? 

2? 
Ya 

7? 

39 

111 

4b 
23 
7% 

4r 

20 
67 

48 

43 

91 

40 

24 

64 

121 

62 

183 

74 

25 

99 

53 

268 

79 

Af MBERSHLIP 

69 

42 

111 

51 

26 

77 

73 

38 
111 

39 

35 
74 

135 

42 

177 

68 

35 

103 

68 

51 

119 

144 

66 

26 

92 

54 

31 
85 

74 

21 
125 

3 

39 
70 

75 

40 

119 

STATISTIUS FUP FIKST 

5 

191 

a7 

38 

9s 

91 

36 

27 

40 

29 

69 

82 

10 

$313 

6 7 

146 

24 
170 

324 

127 

451 

K7 

42 

129 

44 
34 
78 

86 
37 

123 

196 

25 

273 

120 

81 

201 

[¢] 

327 

101 
428 

126 
74 

200 

161 

114 

47s 

184 

in 

214 

MONTH 

10 

487 

192 

679 

h12 
219 

631 

11 

469 

160 

629 

352 
161 
563 

AJHUST 28, 

12 SP 

EN 

13 

10 

23 

512 

125 

637 

A 

11 

17 

310 6 

153 43 

463 49 

A 

29 

37 

1973 

WHITF 

R17 

1,012 

287 

199 

429 

221 

1,468 

454 

591 

1,110 

354 

268 

T) SEPTEMBER 25» 

BLACK 

159 

107 

7258 

186 

a77 

215 

169 

93 

160 

19713 

TOTAL BLACK 

MEMBERS RATIO 

955 

1,354 

442 

306 

687 

1,945 

866 

664 

1,706 

428 

«1d 

«25 

039 

«38 

*32 

«29 

o14 

35 

37 

ADA 

Pare 5 

       



PSEA NEN ABA LI A AR ATE SH Hy Sor mI Eh td Wor 

    
SCHONLS 

1
9
A
 

OAKHURST NY 

DAXLAAN NA 

OLYMPIC NW 

NE PROVIDENCE NW 

PARK ROAD NW 

PAW CRFFX NW 

PANTUCKET WW 

2, cOMONT NW 

PINEVILLF NH 

PINEWOOD NA 

PLAZA RQAD NW 

QUAIL HOLLNNW NW 

RAMA RNAD NW 

53 

iy 

72 

46 

37 

33 

2Y 

2Y 
5d 

98 

26 

CHARLOTTF=YMECKLENY'IRG SCHJIOLS 

80 

34 

114 

97 

35 

1u7 

{7 

48 
120 

73 
30 

103 

69 

21 

y 0) 

64 

50 
114 

38 

25 
63 

97 

35 
132 

bn 

45 

113 

42 

FAV) 

92 

74 

48 

122 

58 

20 

78 

67 

23 
90 

71 

43 

114 

43 

27 
70 

101 

26 
127 

MF4dERSHIP STATISTIC] FOR FIRST 

25 
69 

87 

42 

129 

47 

41 

88 

73 

44 

117 

76 

29 

105 

76 

18 

v4 

64 

59 
127 

49 

31 
80 

136 

29 
165 

] 

84 

4A 

132 

56 

4s 

101 

97 

49 
146 

81 

23 
104 

B4 

25 
109 

98 

48 
146 

52 

32 
84 

120 

33 
153 

5 

89 

51 
140 

94 

2? 
116 

45 
28 
73 

6 

21? 

111 
323 

R? 

20 

102 

46 

33 
79 

MUNTH 

7 A 9 10 

4ne 

194 

9596 

124 146 112 

100 88 89 

224 234 200 

294 307 281 

135 124 125 

42v 431 406 

AUGUST 28, 

17 SP 

En 

312 3 

109 25 
421 28 

1973 

WHITF 

364 

1,033 

409 

262 

lh 

288 

388 

533 

347 

30? 

887 

$52 

0 SEPTFMHFR 25), 

BLACK 

1973 

TOTAL BLACK 

MEMBERS RATION 

195) 
515 

170 

S04 

424 

12457 

221 

630 

207 
469 

189 

505 

102 

390 

296 
684 

148 

686 

237 
S84 

209 

S07 

431 

1,318 

149 
701 

«29 

+34 

«29 

e395 

«44 

«37 

«26 

23 

027? 

ed. 

«G0 

+33 

e221 

ADA 

Page 6 

  
   



Pape 7    
FT ARLOT IE =AECRLENINS SCHJILS MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS FUR FIXST MONTH AJ53457 28, 1973 TO SEPTEMBER 25, 1973 

oO 
aS CHONLS A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 SP WALIE BLACK TOTAL BLACK AUA 

£n MEMBFRS RATIO 

Ww 24S 239 234 718 . 

RANDOLPH WW 92 79 75 246 

T 137 318 309 964 «26 

W 188 208 i187 574 

RANSON NW 149 116 129 390 

T 337 324 307 968 80 

W 35 48 48 51 Sy 64 300 

STNGEFIELD ELEM NW 45 40 14 42 42 27 210 

T 80 88 62 93 v6 91 530 . +41 

W 214.209 24% Q 677 

_NGFFIFLOD UR NW 114+ 119 89 20 338 

1 328 324 334 : 29 1,015 33 

W 27 29 40 42 6? 63 263 

‘SELWYN NW 18 14 33 26 28 36 155 

T 45 43 73 68 90 99 418 037 

W 54 69 54 56 63 296 

SHAMROCK GARDENS NW 27 35 31 4s 29 167 

. T 83 104 85 10% 92 463 +36 

W 43 45 52 58 59 257 

SHARON NW 26 23 28 28 27 132 

T 69 68 80 36 86 389 «34 

W 997 2919 913 5 664 

PITH NW 114 80 80 20 294 

; : 341 299 293 25 958 +1 

Ww 457 395 494 1,347 

SOUTH MECKLENBURG Nw 147 153 1106 24 450 

T 624 549 600 24 1,797 +25 

; W 2718 +189 169 9 589 

SPAUGH NW . 124 11S Y04 2R 370 

T 339 304 275 37 95% «39 

vl 76 17 64 96 313 : 

STARMOUNT NW 41 38 50 48 $177 

 § 117 115 114 14a 490 «36 

W 5) 75 63 75 59 67 79 471 

STATESVILLE RUAD NW 52 25 39 45 35 47 54 297 

YT 105 100 ‘102 120 94 14a 133 768 «39 

: 50 57 52 84 49 Xd 379 

STEELE CREER NW 26 34 22 3s 25 33 175 

T [6 91 74 119 7a 120 554 «32 

   



    

lare 8 

CHARLUTTF=YECKLENBUKG SCHUNLS AEASERSHIP STATISTICS FOR #1uSY tm (oN Td AyGausSy 28, 1974 YN SEPTEMBER 25, 1973 
<< 
i 
AN SCHuUOLS A { Pd 3 4 5 6 7 H 9 10 ii 12 Sp WL TE BLACK TOTAL BLACK ADA 

gn MEMBERS RATIN 

is W 9H 53 57 692 53 54 337 . 

STFRLING NY 31 28 4 33 29 32 : 194 

T 89 41 9A 95 KR? R6 3 531 037 

W 72 65 74 70 80 a0 441 

THAMASRBRNRO NW 60 45 58 49 48 41 301 

T 132 110 132 139 i128 1°24 T42 oat 

W 15 22 33 33 30 20 151% 

TRYON HILLS NW 25 18 14 19 13 16 105 

T 40 40 47 3, 43 16 258 oa 

W 49 77 68 62 73 R8 417 

JCKASEEGEE NW 38 32 27 36 36 37 . 206 

 § 87 109 95 98 109 1295 623 «33 

Ww 195 284 483 

"UNIVERSITY PARK NW 130 196 326 

T 325 484 809 «40 

W 1938 248 446 

VILLA HEIGHTS NW ton 1a} 241 

T 298 349 687 «35 

W 537 359 152 q 1,052 

REST CHARLOTTE NH 234 206 179 18 637 

T 773 565 331 22 1,689 «38 

W 33 34 28 48 50 50 243 

LUOSTERLY HIRLS NW 28 27 27 26 24 1.7 149 

T 61 61 59 74 74 67 392 038 

316 301 308 925 

WEST MECKLENBURG NW 172 187 13) 520 

T 4838 468 489 1,445 +36 

H 1647 148 1Yu7 467 

WILLIAMS NW 119 109 95 323 

T 286 25.7 242 785 41 

17 20 37 23 26 71 17 189 

WILMORF NW 19 23 20 20 21 41 4 148 

T 36 43 37 41 87: 3312 24 337 04 

| 211 198 103 15 617 

HILSON NW 106 88 9? 16 302 

T 37 286 285 31 919 «33 

W 103 115 96 109 4713 

WINDSOR PARK NW 39 48 57 63 50.7 

1 tay. 163 153 177 630 33 

   



AT VRSCA RRL AF FS A 

   Pare 9 

CHARLOTTF=4ECKLENSNRG SCHJULS MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS FOR FIRST wONTH AUGiIST 28, 1973 TU SEPTEMBER 25, 1973 

< 

NN gCHUNLS [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 1} 12 SP WHITE BLACK TOTAL BLACK ADA 

oN £0 MEMBERS RATIO 

71 37 a7 110 
2 357 

WINTERFIELD NA Sé 49 44 $6 
RA 2413 

T 127 136 13% 166 

   



     
CHARLUTTIF=MECKLENSYRG 

scans 
NN 

. w 

TOTAL RY GRADES NW 
7 

W 

NW 

 § 
3   

SCHJUNLS 

K 1 ? 

82v 3762 3373 

sez 2123 1998 

  

AFMBERSHIP STATISTICS FNa FIRST ADNTH AUGUST 2B, 

3 4 5 61 1 8 9 io 1) $2 |} SP 

| £9 

. 
| 

. 

40€7 4450 4403 8397 1a703 4606 4506 [4515 hoor 3785 1295 

2714 23/7 2288 73162764 2084 2033 {1984 1500 1195 "684 

1662 S905 5871 6281 65827 6651 71316967 6690 6539]6499 5597 5180 ‘979 

25,702 } 13,815 12,307 1295 

14,118 i 6,381 bh, 069. 684 

39,910 | 200196 17+276 9749 

Membership as of 10/3/72 78,801 

Menberzuip as of 9/25/73 - 78,36) 

L40 

1973 TO SEPTEMBER 25» 1971 

WHITE BLACK TOTAL BLACK AA 

MEMBERS RATIO 

52,200 
26,152 

785361 «33 

52,209 
26,152 

78,361 ¢33 

Pape 10 

  
   



  
  

5 24N 

FILED 
CHARLOTTE, N. C. 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 0CT 101973 
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA 

CHARLOTTE DIVISION U. S. DISTRICT COURT 
W.DIST. OF N.C! 

JAMES E. SWANN, et al., 
Civil Action No, 1974 

Plaintiffs, 

V. REPCRT TO THE COURT ON LAKEVIEW 

THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG AND ELIZABETH ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 

BOARD OF. EDUCATION, et all, 

Defendants. 

Attached hereto as Exhibit A are the recommendations of 

the staff to the Board of Education in respect to stabilizing 

and reducing the percentage of blacks at the Lakeview and Elizabeth 

Elementary Schools. 

The Board of Education passed a resolution adopting the 

recommendations under I and II appearing on Pages 2 and 3 of 

Exhibit A. ’ 

Under the resolution passed by the Board, the staff will 

make similar kinds of recommendations for other schools when the 

staff determines that a particular school may become predominantly 

black before the end of the school year. 

The staff intends to monitor closely those schools 

approaching or having a black ratio of forty-five per cent (45%) 

so that it can make appropriate and timely recommendations to the 

Board of Education. 

The twenty-seven (27) days attendance figures show two 

Hundred, Twenty-Six (226) black and One Hundred, Eighty-Seven 

(187) white students at Elizabeth School. If the procedure adopted 

by the Board had been in effect for the seventeen (17) day period  



  
  

since the ten (10) report, 

assigned to Elizabeth. 

The twenty-seven 

Hundred, Five (205) black 

students at lakeview. If 

been in effect during the 

ten (10) day report, four 

to Lakeview. 

This 10th day ‘of 

258A 

seven (7) less blacks would now be 

(27) day attendance figures show Two 

and One Hundred, Ninety (190) white 

the procedure adopted by the Board had 

seventeen (17) day period since the 

(4) less blacks would now be assigned 

October, 1973. 

Respectfully submitted, 
’ / 

~ 

j 
; 

. 4 

Te i 2 
PL el 

Wildtiam W. Sturgeg™ << 
  

WEINSTEIN, STURGES, oa 

& JONAS, P. A, 

810 Baxter Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 

Phone: 704/333-0511 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT 
CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG BOARD OF EDUCATION 

 



. 26A 

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA   
| CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

| 

  

COUNTY OF MECKLENBURG 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Report 

to the Court on Lakeview and Elizabeth Elementary Schools has 

been duly served upon Counsel for the plaintiffs by depositing 

a copy of the same in the United States Mall, postage prepaid, 

addressed as follows: 

Mr. Julius L. Chambers 
Chambers, Stein, Ferguson & Lanning 
Attorneys at Law 
East Independence Plaza 
951 South Independence Boulevard 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 

’ ! ! 
: 

This // * day ‘of ‘October, 1973. 

/ - . 4 aa AEA 

ZL a : £L, 22 ; £7 a = 
7 i. A #l Bg I fo ol = An LA or 
  

Witliam W. Sturges.” 

WEINSTEIN, STURGES, ODOM, BIGGER, Hl 

& JONAS, P.A, hel 
‘810 Baxter Street 
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 
Phone: 704/333-0511   ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT CHARLOTTE- 

MECKLENBURG BOARD OF EDUCATION 

bdr
    



  

  

L / 

227A 
ober 4, 1973 

| AN ALTERNATE APPROACH TO THE 

| ELIZABETH AND LAKEVIEW 

PUPIL ASSIGNMENT PROBLEMS 

At the meeting of September 25, 1973 The Board considered 
lone immediate approach to each of these problems. Here is a 
summary of these two situations as presented at that time. 

Ls. Lakeview as of 10th day report 192W  206B 398% . 51.8% 

Possible adjustment - Re-assign 5 white and 51 black students 

  
  

in the northeastern portion of Lakeview area to Barringer. The 
results would be as follows: 

Lakeview 187wW 1558 342T 45% 

' Barringer 297W 227B 5247 43% 

New transportation would be required. 

iI. ‘Elizabeth as of 10th'day report 193W 4221B 4147 33.4% 

Possible adjustment - Re-assign 53 black students in the 
Elizabeth satellite to Oakhurst with the following results: 

Elizabeth 193w 1688 3617 47% 

Oakhurst 367W 203B 570T 36% 

No new transportation would be required. 

The Board deferred action on these two matters and instructed 
the staff to report back at the next action meeting on the possi- 
bilities for a more gradual approach. A gradual approach would sug- 

gest that The Board alter assignment procedures in such way that 
newcomers to selected areas may be assigned at The Board's discretion. 
If The Board wishes to consider this approach with Lakeview and : 

Elizabeth, we have some specific suggestions for Board consideration.  



282A 

11. Lakeview 

| Beginning on .a specified date, assicn to Barringer all black 
students moving into the northern-eastern *portion of the Lakeview | 
attendance area. A study of turn-over at Lakeview from the eleventh | 
‘through the twenty-seventh day of school reveals a net loss of two 
white students (3 in and 5 out) and .a net loss of one black student | 
{2 in and 5 out). Tf the provision described above had been in effect | 
during the seventeen, interval, Lakeview would now be at. | 

¢ 
190w 201B 3917 51.4%, 

which is a slight improvement over the ratio as of the ten day report. 

Iz. Elizabeth 

| Since a kindergarten program has now been established at | 
|0akhurst, The Board could, in similar manner, assign to Oakhurst 
‘those black students moving into that portion of the Elizabeth 
attendance area that is north of Independence Boulevard after a 
specified date. The residence turn-over at Elizabeth, during the 
seventeen day interval described above, produced a net loss of six 
white gtudents (none in, 6 out) and a net gain of three Dlack 
students (5 in, 2 out). If the provision described above had been 
in effect during this seventeen day interval, 

Elizabeth would now have 187w 2198 4087 53 

This ratio is slightly more than it was at the end of ten days. 
It appears, then, that the assigning of new black students to 
|0akhurst may not be sufficient to stabilize Elizabeth. The prospects 
(for stability, and possible reversal, could be improved by assigning | 
some new white students to Elizabeth. Rama Road is over-crowded and 
jas oa black ratio of 21.19%, far balow the elementary average of 35%. 
Birst Ward is at 32%, below the system-wide elementary average. The 
3oard could direct the staff to assign to Elizabeth all white students ] 
E-6 moving into some portion{s) of the Rama Road area after = certain 
fdate. The three apartment complexes, East Lake Village, East Forest, 
and Lemon Tree are all on, or near, Monroe Road. They could tmns 
Provide population concentrations and simplify transportation sche- 
duling. During the seventeen day interval already described, Rama 
Road has received no new white students from these areas comp ined, 
gnd neither has First Ward. It should be noted, however, that while 
turn-over seems to go on all year in the Lakeview and Elizabet 
areas, turn-over in these apartment areas seems to be more concen- 
trated in the summer and again in the interval from Thanksgiving 
‘through the first of the year. Elizabeth should, therefore, get 

| 

— 

% 
  

A fuller description will be given at the meeting on October 9, 
11 of the Lakeview area lying 

e through the campus. 

RT a=) 

Put we arc essentially referring to a 
orth of an imaginary east-west lin 

  
 



29A 

gon: now students from these complexes bofors the year is over, 
if The Board chooses this approach. 

With respect to transportation, the Lakeview situation would 

reciiire new transportation under either the immediate or gradual 
approach. Elizabeth would also require new transportation under 
the gradual approach. : 

 



30A 

  

| 
1 THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES | 

FOR THE WESTERM DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA | 

CHARLOTTE DIVISION 

JAMES E. SWANN, et al., ) J 

; ; ) Civil Action No. 1974 | 

- Plaintiffs, ) 

y 
v; ) REPORT ON OCTOBER, 1973 | 

® ) | | 

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG ) MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS | 

BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., ) 
| 

) 

Defendants. ) 
| 

Attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A", is the print-out 

showing the membership statistics for all the Charlotte—-Mecklenburg 

Schools for the period from September 26, 1973 to October 24, 1973. 

The statistics for Enderly Park Elementary School show 

187 white and 188 black stodents for a black~white ratio of 50 per | 

cent. A further report on this development will be made to the | 

Court. 

This 21st day of November, 1973. | 

Respectfully submitted, : | 

hy Sl en % Cd 
William Ww. Sturges 
  

WEINSTEIN, STURGES, ODOM, BIGGER 

& JONAS, P.A. 

810 Baxter Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 

Phone: 704/333-0511 

ATTORNEYS FOR ALL DEFENDANTS 

 



31A 

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
  

MECKLENBURG COUNTY 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Report 

on October, 1973 Membership Statistics has been duly served 

upon Counsel for the plaintiffs by depositing a copy of the same 

in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: 

Mr. Julius L. Chambers 

Attorney at Law 

Chambers, Stein, Ferguson & Lannin 

East Independence Plaza 

951 South Independence Boulevard 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 

This 21st day of November, 1973. 

ivi tos A PIT rien 
william W. Sturges Pa 
  

WEINSTEIN, STURGES, ODOM, BIGGER, | 

$ JONAS, P.A. | 

B10 Baxter Street 
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 

Phone: 704/333-0511 

ATTORNEYS FOR ALL DEFENDANTS 

 



  EE Ee a i a Sas lB SE sv    

  

EXHIBIT "A" 
CHARLOTTE~MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS FOR SECOND MONTH SEPTEMBER 26) 1973.70 UCTQOBER 24, 1973 

SCHOOLS K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12. SP. wHlTE BLACK TOTAL BLACK ADA 
: ED MEMBERS RATIO 

~ H 
™M SEVERSYILLE NW 281 ne 281 

‘ 7: 2a} 284, 1,00 260 

SL = W 127 125 120 327 : 500 
ALBEMARLE RD ELEM NW Sq: 4b 571° 2 213 

| 181" 3166 3177? 189 713 +30 678 

Ete ey W 221 209 201 4 635 
ALBEMARLE RD JR NW ; 12% 3131 158 : 24. 435 

1 346 340 359 25 1,070 141 996 

W 29% 273 25% 15 832 
— ALEXANDER NK 92%. 77: B71" 34 290 

T 387 348 338 49 1122 26 15032 

= ey W 51 57 58 62 65 293 
ALLENBROOK NW ig 13 43 437 26 183 

T 89 90 10) 105° 91% 4764 +38 451 

a "Ww 33 38 31 49 40 a4 240 
ASHLEY PARK NH 32 30 41 40° 40° 28 -~ 211 

—— ——— - 1 70 68 72 89 80 72 451 a7 428 

, 93 100 3123 143 181 149 745 
BAIN oo NN 23 28 24 24 21 27 147 

T 123% 128°C 147 3067 3152 167 892 16 855 

Cae a a W 16 24 33 24 34 39 12% 292 
BARRINGER NW 11 31 23 11 25 17 62 180 

TH 27 85 sg 35 56 56. 137 472 +38 419 

SERS i W312 37 37 51. 4% ad - 49 5 295 
BERRYMILL NW 24 18° 21 24 313" 24 2! 8 179 

dS Me TY 56 55 58 75 78 72 67 : 13 ara «38 391 

W 35. 80 84 3109 95 : 453 
___ pDEVERLY NODDS NM 38 33 42 52 45 210 

1 123 433 125 361 140 663 032 640 

Sm aa 17 28. 40 29 33... 4% 35 17 240 
BILLINGSVILLE NX 03. 24° 29% ava ap 19 15 : 14 166 

T 40 352 4&9 51 53 80 sv : at 406 va 343 

TE 82 8% 10a 8s : ; 361 
BRIARWOOD : NW 33 38 42 44 ; 135 

el Said bil a T 113127 150" 130 516 +30, 49) 

W 153 154 ; 311 
CU ARUNS AVE... NH a 73 85 158 

T 226 243 ; ; 469 «34 . bag  



  

    

    
SCHOOLS 

'3
3A
 

CARMEL NH 

© CHANTILLY NW 

CLEAR CREEK NW 
aie as dal 

—. COCHRANE ree. NH 

T cOLLINSWOOD NW 

CORNELIUS NA 

———-LOISHOLD. eee NW. 

a fre ae H 

COULWDOD NH 

DAVIDSON NW 
ee ibm shy 2 

W 

w—BARIE DAVIS... NW. 

ea ER 

DERITA NH 
  

DEVONSHIRE NN 

—. DILWORTH aii NW 

  

X 

42 

66 . 

158 
69 

227 

30 
23 
53 

CHARLOTTE=MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 

17 29 
26 
35 

MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS FNR SECOND 

3 

25 

45 

93 
46 

141 

147 
60 

207 

31 
35 
66 

4 

23 

43 

35 
24 
59 

5 

3} 
19 
50 

151 
102 
253 

$0 
39 

129 

43 
26 

: 69 

6 

43 

37 
8v 

7 

416 

343 
133 

LU76 

171 
119 
290 

8 

382 

323 
100 
423 

{60 
107 
267 

9 

296 
104 
400 

342 
104 
446 

156 
101 
257 

MONTH 

10. 1} 12 SP 
ED 

15 
18 

25 
15 
40 

ne ARES ON Bl a SF a Si Spo 

WHITE 

882 

241 

279 

$5014 

305 

348 

320 

490 

148 

325% 

576 

280 

BLACK 

316 . 

161 

49 

37% 

201 

156 

183 

342 

194 

232 

250 

206 

  

SEPTEMBER 26» 1973 10 OCTOBER 24» 1973 

TOTAL BLACK 
MEMBERS RATIO 

15198 

402 

328 

1,345 

506 

504 

303 

832 

26% 

519 

798 

826 

486 

026 

«k0 

o 15 

«27 

ok0 

+31 

e386 

‘81 

eo 44 

«37 

v32 

+30 

042 

ADA 

123 

339 

215 

1,280 “7; 

492 

416 

476 

786% 

256 

493 

763 

794 

806  



  

  
a din 

  

  

CHARLOTTE=MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS ©. MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS FOR SECOND MONTH SEPTEMBER 26» 1973 TO UCTOBER 24» 1973 

= SCHOOLS K 1 2 3 4 5 o 7 8 9 10 11 12 SP WHITE BLACK TOTAL BLACK ADA 

[2 
: 

. ED MEMBERS RATIO 

W 158 * 211 362 

. _ DOUBLE OAKS NW S15 85 : 136 . 

T 202 296 he 498 «27 473 

T° ! W ; 97% 111 208 

ORUID HILLS NW sg 52 110 

T 1555 163 - : 318. 35 302 

W 
559 529 S71 4 1s663 

EAST MECKLENBURG NW : 177 157 134 28 496 : 

o a % § 
; 736 686 705 32 2,159 023 1,966 

" af] 38% 41h 52% Ba 46 : 23 285 

SEASTOVER NW 23% 28% 270 339 29 32 : 8 174 | 

y £4) 530 68° 74% 83 V8 : 29 559 38 436 

= W 233 287 279 ‘ a 852, 

EASTHAY NW 113 ‘124 105 ; £3 > 398 

T 398 411 384 : ‘57 1,287 232 14832 

= wl 1p 28 Tan 27-33 35 22 sey | 190 

ELIZABETH Nn' 27 a2 24 33 33 3 Mn , : 226 

ane 3 43 67 57 60 65 7: 53 ; 416 54 346 

W 29 20 20 21 31 66 : 187. 

ENDERLY PARK. _. Nu 15% 19 26% 38 230 a7 | 188 . 

1 380 39 46 859° S54 133 | : 3178 50 352 

iY um 
196 206 : 402 | 

FIRST WARD NW 84 90 174 : 

T 280 296 
S76 +30 546 

i CW an 501 450 461 8 1,420 : 

GARINGER NK : 23a 17a 163 19 600 

EL Bhi no 1 745 526 . 624 27 2,020 +30 1,802 

W | | 150 178 219 4 551 

ALEXANDER GRAHAM Ni 30 9% 18 27 280 : 

1 230 273 297 : 31 831 34 786 

AL yy 
| 252 250 157 5 664 : 

HARDING NW ; 171 109 94 22 ang 

: 1 : 42% 359 23% of 1,060" +27 926 

Tia. aud. W 183 199 180 31 593 

HAWTHORNE ~ NY 128 31310 14S Ll 27 400 

1 . 313 329 295 : 58 993 +40 854 

W 62 50 66 65° 77 : 321 

iL HICKORY GROVE .. NH rot 0.37 30 33 34 25 
159 

T 99 80 99 100 102 : 480 33 459  



        
tage i      

CHARLDTTE=MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS FOR SECUND MONTH SEPTEMBER 26» 1973 TU UCTOBER 24s 1973 

SCHOOLS X 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 {610 111 12 SP WHITE BLACK | TOTAL BLACK AD A 
= : : ED MEMBERS RATIO 

v J 
0 W 77. 4:80:35: 9085.55.31 89:52:73 2 468 

_ __ HIDDEN VALLEY NW 78 C54 (78 2267 4:86 5472 831 
T 155... 934.168. .122:2175::149 : 899  4AB 853 

a W 28 28 34 36 49 25 33 5 232 
HIGHLAND NA 20 26 2% 28° 28 30 33 i. : 186 

T 48 S54 S55 "68 17 55  ‘o% ‘ : i 818  . 44 352 

No B83 71 .:56 5:75 7.89 evs 9% | 530 
HUNTERSVILLE NW "26 0.22 ..30 18 4.43 32x35. 45 219 

: j : 79 “93 "TBs. 94 L132 i129 §3e : | 749 "3,29 629 

W 73 66 66 83 288 
... _HUNTINGTOKNE FARMS NW 28. 2-24 5.30 3:39 Av 2 

T 101 90 96 122 Le 409 «30 39r wm 

~ W 141 .134 145 380 581 
IDLEWILD NW 84 70 94 96 : ; 344 

225 204 240 256 : ; : 925% «37 ges 

’ TT 553 533 485 8 $,575 
INDEPENDENCE NN 186 168 143 18 515 : 

uy nh Rueh Thy : 230 70% 628 22 25080 42s 19913 

HN 48 62 83 ‘59 63 B82 19 ; ; 456 
— RNIN OPTIONAL... NW sR 3m. a5 14 27 26 iv 199 

Y 08 94 BB 15. %0 102 98 655 430 622 

Sa ae a nN 114 3186 4 234 
AMAY JAMES NH 53 60 7 120 

T . 187 316 11 354 «34 328 

ow bE 205 174 160 3 341 
KENNEDY NW 35 100 70 3 258 

i" - T 289 274 230 6 799 Laz 742 

W. 16 20 286. 34 33 35 30 184 
_ LAKEVIEW. Nw ey 38 36. 34. 27 3) 25 200 

Y 43 50°. 61 48 80 87 5% : 5384 52 325 

bani hte Ct SE aS tT Le Te ST el ; 393 . 
LANSDOWNE NW 2% ..3) 28 -33 43 159 

T ‘ay. 98 99 3131 ii : : 533 ¢,29 447 

" : 128 3113 ; 260 
LINCOLN HEIGHTS NW 92 302 194 

T : 220 234 58 413 430 

W 75 77 67 p53 8% 85 471 
LONG CREEK NH CL TE Ca EY Te TR YT 353 

1 3129 129 3125 3347 15% 143 : : : 824 «43 788  



  

  
Ta — NA A AA SA Ach se.  ——_— - SEY 
     

CHARLOTTE=MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS FOR SECOND MONTH SEPTEMHER 26s 1973 TO UCTOBER 24» 19713 

  

SCHOOLS K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1! 12 SP  wHITE BLACK TOTAL BLACK ADA 

= 
ED MEMBERS RATIO 

™ 
. 

: W 134 428 121 120 AT3 143 817 

. KATTHEKS NW 25 23 19 26 2 29 139 

1 189 151 140 $45 192 ten ; 956 «15 926 

ee ’ 32% 320 363 15010 

MCCLINTOCK NN 324° 310%. 11 340 

T 449 &27 474 
15350 «25 10244 

ae Tee W sn “47 7% 71 56 295 

MERRY OAKS NW 27 25 42 26 38 
158 

i ley 1 77 72 1113 97 94 
453 +35 422 

HW 37 48 53 56 14 208 

MIDNO0O0D NH 18 22 26 31 10 107 

T 55 70 79 87 24 315 «34 291 

W 56 49 71 72 88 86 422 

MONTCLAIRE NW 86 a4 40 51 37 44 262 

102 93 31% 13923 125 13130 
684 «38 656 

a or W BY Tho Tag B31 39 4a 220 

MYERS PARK ELEM NN 24 24 34 41 29 34 186 

a ea 1 51 64 73 72 68 70 
406 ‘86 386 

KW 
478 468 S02 jo4b8 

MYERS PARK SR NH 
$37 154 125 466 : 

T 66% 622 827 15914 28 JaT4} 

ae na 43 fox 322 130 1)? 
585 

NATIONS FORD NN 50 57 63 43 67 
280 

T 183 160 185 173. 204 
865 «32 681 

- W 74 75 ‘es Sys Gig2 Lay 463 

NEWELL NH 23 27 35 41 30 38 194 

aaa 1 99 103 1400 316 112 327 
657 . «30 628 

W 199 208 184 5 596 : 

___NDRTHEAST _.. NW 25 27 30 12 94 

T 224 235 234 17 690 114 646 

a am al RW 4 402 37%. 307 S 1,085 

NORTH MECKLENBURG NW 
21s 178 153 43 590 

; T 
618 S49 460 48 15678 e35 1,405 

: N 120 (325 105° 7 357 ; 

NORTHHEST NW a2 75 90 29 276 

: : T 202 + 200 1:395 36 633 wy 566 

W 71 50 68 74 263 

OAKQALE NH ‘40 26 52 44 
162 

: 3 511 75001201118 
425 +38 410 

   



  

     

  

   

a Ae 

SCHOOLS 

_. OAKHURST 

" OAKLAKN 

OLYMPIC 

ww. QLOE PROVIDENCE... 

PARK ROAD 

PAH CREEK 

—  PANTUCKET 

PIEDMONT 

PINEVILLE 

o LL PTINEWODD. i 

I Tetanaizone 

QUAIL HOLLOW . 

RAMA ROAD 

A NS TRA 0 SA Fh ADI TEAR i VER SA 90 

49 

84 

98 
25 

123 

CHARLOTTE~MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 

96 
+ 35 

33% 

23 
78 

103 
24 

127 

MEMBERSHIP 

3 4 

43 76 

27 23 
70 99 

88 87 
41 49 

129 136 

45 56 
41 45 

84 10} 

74 97 
44 49 

118 146 

76 80 

29 24 

105 104 

74 85 
18 25 
92 110 

72 99 

59 48 

13% 147 

48 52 
30 3) 
78 83 

139 3122 
29 34 

168 156 

a i 

STATISTICS FOR SECOND 

5 

94 
22 

116 

47 

29 
76 

    

6 

232 

319 

al 
34 
gi 

7 

123 
102 
225 

297 

132 
429 

MONTH 

8 9 10 1} 12 SP 

: £D 

390 309 312 2 

190 95 109 25 

S80 404 421 27 

i 

2 

3 

a 

144 10S Zz 

86 91 19 

230 19% 26 

12 

12 

306 285 S 

3120 126 : 48 

426 411 53 

WHITE 

393 

336 

1,013 

412 

204 

317 

289 

379 

544 

359 

304 

893 

558 

BLACK 

157 

161 

224 

204 

190 

103 

298 

141 

238 

203 

426 

147 

SEPTEMBER 26» 1973 T0 OCTOBER 24» 1973 

~ TOTAL BLACK 
MEMBERS RATIO 

250 

497 

1,432 

636 

468 

507 

392 

677 

685 

597 

507 

1,319 

70s 

29 

«29 

+35 

+44 

«37 

026 

e448 

021 

«40 

«40 

032 

021 

ADA 

486 

461 

12,306 

604 

367 

480 

376 

611 

573 

Lg2 

421 

151848 

556  



  

  

© CHARLOTTE=MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 

    

SCHOOLS 

RANDOLPH 

“RANSON 

SEDGEFIELD ELEM 

..SEOGEFIELD JR 

TSELAYN 

SHAMROCK GARDENS 

SHARON oll 

-SOUTH MECKLENBURG 

(SPAYGNM  - .o . 

TSTARMOUNT 

STATESVILLE ROAD 

STEELE CREEK 

K 1 

33 

4 

15 
42 

117 

87 rr 
53 26 

130 103 

49 

«= 25 
74 

49 
42 
91 

30 
16 
4s 

69 
34 

103 

44 
23 
67 

74 

41 

1195 

63 
40 

103 

57 

32 
89 

MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS FOR 

3 

49 

61 

66 
49 

135 

76 
45 

121 

93 
23 
76 

4 

49 
42 
91 

96 
47 

143 

59 
35 
94 

84 
34 

118 

  

S 

59? 
41 
98 

6 

62 
26 
84 

64 
37 

101 

80 

S54 

134 

89 

33 
122 

7 

209 

223 
115 
338 

221 
128 
349 

a 
  

SECOND 

8 9 

236 235 
82 73 

318 308 

212 184 
114 125 
326 309 

209 243 
115 89 
324 332 

2186 212 
78 78 

296 290 

186 167 
312 106 
298 273 

MONTH 

10 

45% 
169 
625 

11 

394 
15} 
545 

12 

488 
104 
592 

SEPTEMBER 26» 

SP 
ED 

WHITE 

116 

584 

299 

266 

298 

257 

15338 

S586 

480 

382 

BLACK 

247 

388 

206 

160 

163 

33} 

au? 

76 

. 379 

300 

3.72 

1973 TU OCTOBER 24» 1973 

TOTAL BLACK 
MEMBERS RATIO 

963 

972 

50% 

1,01} 

426 

461 

36s 

949 

1,705 

962 

490 

760 

554 

26 

«40 

old 

033 

038 

«35 

«34 

+31 

625 

+39 

é37 

«38 

031 

ES   

Page 7 

ADA 

889 

899 

uss 

938 

404 

433 

375 

890 

1,618 

841 

463 

635 

527  



  ls AME i 

  
are 5,     

CHARLOTTE=MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS MEWS Raw ,@ S428" 08 $0 SECOND MONTH SEPTEMBER 26» 1973 TO UCTOBER 24» 1973 

SCHOOLS K 1 2 3 . 5 ° r 8 9 30 11 312 -3sP WHITE BLACK 707A BLACK © ADA 
sires ED MEMBERS RATIO 

W 0. 54. 50 66 B89 5) 352 
_ SICRLING - NK 29 29 a} 32° 30" 32 1393 

T 39 R3 319% 93 a9 as 24% 35 515 . 

eit las - MW 71 65 72 69 79 a2 438 

THOMASBORD NW 61 45 58 48 43 41 301 

1 132 410 130 117 327 323 : 739 48 689 

ro : X 17 23 34 “21 at 20 | : 156 
TRYON HILLS NW 23. 1a 18 18 33 1s : 102 
ei Ly, 39 4) 49 49 a4 3 258 +40 244 

N 8% 77 71 4% 7% 8Y 428 
 JUCKASEFGEE... ..... NH 34. 31 26 36 36 36 199 

T 88 (08 © 97 97 11% 135 828 +32 595 

Se Low 202 2711 473 

UNIVERSITY PARK NY 128 208 : 336 
7 330 479 i 809  .a2  T74 

: i 200 258 458 
VILLA HEIGHTS NW 93 11} 229 
mal 298 38Y 487 3) 844 

W 527 353 151 4 15035 
L WESY CHARLOTYE NW. | 232 204 177 7? 630 

T 759 ©57 a3 2} 1;688  ,38 1,372 

ae a 33° 3Y 27 43 59 80 242 
WESTERLY HILLS NW 98 2s 27 25 92 iS 143 

7 82 89 Sa. 13. 72 85 388,37 366 

he H a 313 292 307 912 
KEST MECKLENBURG NW 170° 16% 177 0 aye 

a i T 483 457 404 1,824 «36 10293 

W 167 150 148 465 

Co wpiLlaMs CL. NW : 12% 137 48 3136 
T 288 2867 246 30% | .42 724 

aaa ad i€ v7 317 ap 217 14 18 188 ° 
HILMORE NW 20 24 20.3% 22 u2 3 153 

: T 38 4%: 37 al 49 41s 22 331 445 324 

> Ea " 212 197 194 11 614 
WILSON ; NW 105 86 93 : 21 306 

Rial a ia T : 318 283 2387 32 920 +33 839 

W 104 115 95 10s 420 
. __ WINDSOR PARK NW *38 4s. 56 6} 200 

T 142. 160 1S1 1467 : 620 «32 595  



      
CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS 

SCHOOLS K y 

W 78 
WINTERFIELD NN 56 

t 134 

  

  
  

MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS FOR SECOND MONTH 

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 

88 88 11} 
49 45 55 

337 133 166 

Page 9 

SEPTEMBER 26» 1973 TO OCTOBER 24s 1973 

31v. 12 SP. ALTE BLACK .- TOTAL BLACK ADA 
£0 MEMBERS RATIO 

36% 
9 214 | 

9 579 +37 S46 

 



  

  

Page 10 

    ~ CHARLOTTE=MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS MEMBERSHIP STATISTICS FOR SECOND MONTH SEPTEMBER 26» 1973 TO OCTOBER 24s 1973 
[o) 

SCHOOLS K { 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 13 12 SP WHITE BLACK TOTAL BLACK ADA 
3 : : ED . MEMBERS RATIO ne 

N 1034 3793 3859 4078 4307 4418 4395 4679 4599 4509 4431 3949 3741 292 52,084 

  

TOTAL 8Y GRADES NW 921 2099 2001 2208 2310 2242 2321 2275 2078 2032 1942 1555 1379 692 264055 
T 1955 5892 5860 6286 6617 6660 6716 6954 6677 6541 6373 5504 5120 984 78,439 433 70.278 

W 25,884 13,787 12,121 7 292 524084 
NW 14,102 6385 4s876 692 262053 

T 39,986 200172 165997 984 78,139 433 704278 

. Sra . ' : al 3? rr »” 

satis Membership as of 10/31/73 78,551 Li 

SHEE ie Membership as of 10/24/73  - _78,139 

h12 [||c946d3c7-d4e3-49b0-ba81-4b87df97fa93||]