SAINT PAUL NAACP
Roy Wilkins Memorial Branch
270 North Kent Street St. Paul, MN 55102 NAACP MINNESOTA - DAKOTAS
STATE CONFERENCE
January 15, 2016
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
Office of Administrative Hearings
600 North Robert Street
P.O. Box 64620
St. Paul, MN 55164-0620
By email: [email protected] s
Dear Judge O'Reilly:
Re: OAH 65-1300-32227 I Reviser R-4309 Proposed Permanent Rules Relating to Achievement and Integration The St. Paul NAACP and the NAACP Minnesota - Dakotas State Conference raise the following
objections to the proposed Achievement and Integration Rule (Docket# 65-1300-32227):
1. The proposed rule puts too much discretion in the hand s of school districts that have already shown no willingness or ability to address segregation in their schools. 2. The proposed rule is arbitrary and capricious beca use there is no "reasoned determination" or rational basis for key provisions of the rule. 3. The proposed rule does not effectuate the explicit mandate from the legislature to "pursue racial and economic integration." 4. The proposed rule fail s to follow the clear instructions of the Integration Statutes.
5. The proposed rule contrad icts the Integration Statutes concerning evalu ation of district plans.
6. Th e proposed rule is unconstitutionally vague.
7. The proposed rule relies on a faulty and unsound SONAR.
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Two
Overview
The NAACP is the nation's oldest, largest, and most widely recognized grassroots-based civil
rights organization. Its more than half-million members and supporters throughout the United
States and the world are dedicated advocates for civil rights in their communities through
organizing and litigation. The St. Paul Branch of the NAACP was founded over 100 years ago,
and is one of 2,400 branches of the NAACP across the country. The NAACP Minnesota ­
Dakotas State Conference is the regional association of NAACP branches located in Minnesota
and North and South Dakota. The Minnesota branches are located in St. Paul, Minneapolis,
Duluth, Rochester, and St. Cloud and meet quarterly.
After decades of fighting the terroristic practice of lynching, the NAACP turned its attention to
another principal instrument of racial hierarchy, racial segregation.' That struggle reached a
high point in 1954 in the unanimous decision by the United States Supreme Court in Brown v.
Board of Education and saw many other victories against racial segregation in the years that
followed. But the past two decades have witnessed substantial reversals in those hard-fought
wins. Indeed, as one major recent study found, "[w]hile meaningful integration efforts
increased between the [Brown] decision and 1972, at present the proportion of Black students
in majority white schools has decreased, to a level lower than any year since 1968." 2 As
described below, Minnesota has seen a similar trend toward more segregation in its schools.
The St. Paul School District (as an example) is Deeply Segregated and Is Getting Worse.
Despite their shameful past, segregated schools are still a reality in our state. Our local schools
in St. Paul are instructive. Over the past several years, the Minnesota Department of Education
("MDE") has done nothing to prevent the St. Paul Schools from becoming increasingly
segregated, even standing by idly while the district implemented a new community schools
plan in 2011. 3
1
See RICHARD KLUGER, SIMPLE JUSTICE: THE HISTORY OF BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION AND BLACK AMERICA'S
STRUGGLE FOR EQUALITY (1975) (recounting the history of racial segregation and the NAACP litigation
strategy); see generally LANGSTON HUGHES, FIGHT FOR FREEDOM: THE STORY OF THE NAACP (1962) (detailing
the history and work of the NAACP over the first half century of the 1900s).
2
GARY 0RFIELD & ERICA FRANKENBERG, BROWN AT 60: GREAT PROGRESS, A LONG RETREAT AND AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE
10, Table 3 (2014).
3
The new community schools plan is called "Strong Schools, Strong Communities." See infra notes 11­
14 and accompanying text.
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Three
The increased segregation in the St. Paul Schools over one generation of schoolchildren is
alarming. Since the school year 2000-01, the number of elementary schools with 90+%
students of color grew from 0 to 18,4 while the overall percentage of students of color in the
district rose only from approximately 70% to 76%. Eleven elementary schools in St. Paul are
already 95+% students of color. 5
Similarly with respect to low-income students, the number of elementary schools with 90+%
low-income students (defined as free and reduced price lunch status) went from 2 to 17 in that
same time period, with a similarly small increase in the total number of low-income students in
the district. 6
As kindergarteners from the class of 2000-2001 graduated high school (and we know, of course,
too few of them actually graduated), new kindergartners entered a much different and much
more segregated school system. 7 In the past fifteen years, St. Paul has become one of the more
segregated school systems in the country.
Segregation Negatively Affects Student Achievement.
As scholars have noted in other districts, many government officials and even civil rights leaders
"have come to believe that integrating schools is less important than providing adequate
resources and setting high standards for all students and schools. This latter strategy is
premised on the belief that student composition is less important than, and unrelated to,
school resources and learning opportunities in producing high student achievement." 8 Yet
perhaps the only positive development from decades of failed efforts to address segregation is
the mounting evidence about the impact of segregation on learning. As the research has
4
Department of Research, Evaluation, and Assessment, St. Paul Public Schools, "Student Characteristics
by School or Program, Saint Paul Public Schools, October 1, 2014" 6/1/2015, p.1 (Attachment A).
5
Id.
6
Id.
7
Importantly, this dramatic increase is not due primarily to an increase in the number of students of
color or low-income students, since those increases were relatively quite small.
8
Russell W. Rumberger & Gregory J. Palardy, Does Segregation Still Matter? The Impact of Student
Composition on Academic Achievement in Southern High Schools, 107 TEACHERS COLLEGE RECORD 1999,
2000 (2005).
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Four
shown time and time again, "[t]he social composition of the student body is more highly related
to achievement, independent of the student's own social background, than is any school
factor." 9
Educational results in segregated education have long demonstrated the relationship between
segregation and poor educational achievement. It is no different in St. Paul. Achievement,
particularly for students of color, at St. Paul's most segregated schools is far lower than
achievement at its less segregated schools. As the graph below depicts, math and reading test
scores for African American students at highly segregated schools are lower than test scores for
African American students at less segregated schools, just as one brief example:
!70%
2013 Math and Reading Proficiency for African American Students
at the 5 Highest and 5 Lowest Poverty Schools
'60%
50%
l*
!40%
% of African
American Students
Proficient in Math
at Highest Poverty
Schools
i30%
'20%
lfi:i
!10%
0%
% of African
American Students
Proficient in
Reading at Highest
Poverty Schools
[Source: Minnesota Department of Education]
9
James Coleman et al., U.S. Dep't of Health, Education, & Welfare, Equality of Educational Opportunity,
325 (1966); Rumberger & Palardy, supra note 8, at 1999; see also john powell, Segregation and
Educational Inadequacy in Twin Cities Public Schools, 17 Hamline J. PUB. L. & PoL'v 337, 347 (1996);
Douglas Ready & Megan Silander, School Racial and Ethnic Composition and Young Children's Cognitive
Development: Isolating Family, Neighborhood and School Influences, 91-113, in Frankenberg & DeBray
(Eds.), INTEGRATING SCHOOLS IN A(HANGING SOCIETY: NEW POLICIES AND LEGAL OPTIONS FOR A MULTI-RACIAL
GENERATION (The University of North Carolina Press 2011).
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Five
Segregation Dramatically Increases Suspension Rates.
Suspension rates at racially segregated elementary schools are substantially higher than at less
segregated schools in St. Paul. For example, in the most recent data provided, the percentage
of students suspended was 9.2% at Maxfield and 7.9% at Obama, compared to 0.2% at
Groveland and 0.3% at Horace Mann. As the grid below shows, both of those latter, majority
white schools each had only one single student suspended during the entire school year. By
contrast, Maxfield had 58 total suspensions, and Obama had 98 total suspensions. 10
'•i;lementary
i<••···.. ·.·• ·• ·• School
j .•. .····ii ····<·········.•< Stufleht~i; ~gw····.·.· ~ <i••·..·•.· • • <••······ ·~·st~del"lts %Students
. . .••··••·· of(:plQr > ll"lc.ome S.ospensip.n~ Su5pe1"1c:led S~~p~fl<ie~
i
Benjamin E. Mayes
Bruce F. Vento
Maxfield
Obama
.
Horace Mann
Groveland ·
Randolph Heights
St. Anthony Park
·.
.
91%
96%
96%
96%
24%
41%
20%
32%
86%
97%
98%
94%
20%
36%
23%
24%
.
·•
.
165
98
58
98
1
1
5
2
·.
74
49
42
50
1
1
2
2 .·
9.80%
8.30%
9.20%
7.90%
0.30%
0.20%
.. 0040%
0.30%
[Sources: St. Paul Public Schools 2012-2013 Schools Suspension Summary, Department of Research, Evaluation & Assessment,
Office of Accountability, September 12, 2013; St. Paul Public Schools Report: Student Characteristics by School or Program,
Department of Research, Evaluation & Assessment, Office of Accountability, October 1, 2014; Minnesota Department of Education]
Overview Summary
This overview provides important context for the rulemaking here. MDE is proposing a rule to address racial segregation in our schools, and the St. Paul NAACP and the NAACP Minnesota ­
Dakotas State Conference jointly object to this proposed rule as being contrary to law and invalid. The proposed rule will do nothing to improve the levels of segregation in St. Paul and could even make things worse. As explained in more detail below, the proposed rule is contrary to law (and common sense) in numerous respects: 10
Department of Research, Evaluation, and Assessment, St. Paul Public Schools, Office of Accountability "St. Paul Public Schools 2012-2013 Suspension Summary," September 2013, p.3 (Attachment B). The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Six
Objection #1: The proposed rule puts too much discretion in the hands of school districts that
have already shown no willingness or ability to address segregation in their schools.
When St. Paul Schools adopted its community schools plan ("Strong Schools, Strong
Communities"), the district claimed it did not intend for this community schools plan to
exacerbate racial or socioeconomic segregation in its schools. In fact, the district stated that
through the new plan the district would be "working toward racial and economic diversity." 11
In response to unsurprising skepticism and other concerns from numerous community
organizations and parents who pointed out that community schools plans across the country
(and next door in Minneapolis) led to increased segregation, not less segregation, the district
went further and denied that its plan would increase segregation in the schools. In a letter
dated April 29, 2011, the district purported the following:
Based on the scenarios reviewed the School District is fairly confident that if the
projected enrollment patterns hold the School District will not create greater
segregation across the system. While the demographic composition of some schools
will likely change, in most instances the level of diversity at the individual sites will
increase, not decrease.
(emphasis added). 12 Attached to that correspondence were projections of racial demographics
at St. Paul elementary schools showing predictions of modest reductions in racial segregation in
the schools over the coming years. 13
Despite these claims, now some four years into the Strong Schools, Strong Communities plan,
the St. Paul Schools are as segregated as ever, if not more so. As noted above, segregation in
St. Paul Schools continues to increase, and at last count, there were eleven elementary schools
with 95+% students of color. 14
11
"Strong Schools, Strong Communities: Report to the Community January 2014," p.4 (Attachment C).
12
Letter from Michelle Walker, Chief of Accountability, Planning & Policy, St. Paul Public Schools to Jeffry
Martin, President of the St. Paul NAACP, dated April 29, 2011, p.1 (Attachment D).
13
One particular projection stands out. In the spreadsheet that was attached to the letter, the district
predicted that by 2014-15 Webster Elementary, subsequently renamed Obama Service Learning, would
become 44.6% white. id. at p.13. Obama is currently 97% students of color. See Attachment A, p.1 (infra,
note 5).
14
See Attachment A, p.1 (infra, note 5).
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Seven
In response to growing concerns from community members and parents about racial
segregation and the community schools plan, St. Paul Schools created a very modest
integration program ("Reflecting St. Paul"), but it is miniscule and only impacts a small
geographic part of the district. The plan demonstrates the difficulty the district faces in trying
to desegregate, both because of its lack of willingness and because of the demographic realities
of the district, absent inter-district options.
A few years ago, the district designated about one-third of the city's residential blocks in a new
program ("Reflecting St. Paul") using low test scores, low family income, and high numbers of
non-English speakers (see map below). Under the Reflecting St. Paul program, children living in
those neighborhoods (shaded in the map) have priority for getting into the district's 11 lowest­
poverty elementary schools (red squares in the map). 1s
Reflecting St. Paul: integrating the city's schools
At the 11 lowest-poverty elementary schools in St. Paul,, 25 percent of the seats are reserved for
students llvlng in neighborhoods with high numbers of English language learnersk those receiving
lunch subsidies and children with low math and reading scores.
[iiJii]
• l'Etollo du Nord
l.ower{K·ll
•St. Anthony l'Brk
JleMlog
Mandarin•
\94)
..
·;.,
., J.J. Hlll M...-l
Sumf¥lii. Avio.
Groveland
Park• St. (J,'.1fr Av12.
,. Randolph Holghts
~·
--­
(,'~(\
\~~..-'
Horace Mann•
Highland • ,~Auc1tns.11 /i..'"i:.
Park Eleltll!ntary
•
1b
All schools are low-poverty
'fl:_.
High-need are-<ls
Attendance zone boundaries
.
N
Source: St. Paul Public Schools
15
'\.-e:
1 MtLE
~
PIONEER PRESS
Josh Verges, Is St. Paul school-desegregation plan reaching target? St. Paul Pioneer Press, May 2, 2015.
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Eight
Unfortunately, the program will have little district-wide impact on segregation. First, the
program is too small - last fall only about 250 students were able to utilize the program out of
over 38,000 total students. 16 Second, the program only impacts a small geographic region.
With the exception of the French language immersion school, all of the district's eligible 11
lowest poverty schools are in the western third of the district. As depicted in the map above,17
the only schools available to students living in Sections A-D (or two-thirds of the district) are
French language immersion schools. There are two district-wide options, but both of those
options present significant barriers: 1) Capitol Hill requires that students first pass a "Gifted
and Talented" entrance exam and then get past a lengthy waitlist; and 2) Jie Ming Mandarin
Immersion Academy is a Chinese language immersion school.
Given St. Paul's demographics (more than 3/4 of its students are students of color, and that
number is increasing), and the shrinking number of schools not already segregated, the options
for St. Paul are quite limited. Exacerbating the problem, St. Paul Schools is intent on leaving in
place a community schools plan that will lock in segregation, not reduce it. Leaving the
integration of the St. Paul schools to the district, as the proposed rule provides, guarantees
continued segregation in St. Paul.
Objection #2: The proposed rule is arbitrary and capricious because there is no "reasoned
determination" by MOE or rational basis for key provisions of the rule.
The review of an agency's proposed rule is not merely a rubber stamp exercise. Rather, "in
determining if the agency acted arbitrarily and capriciously the court must make a 'searching
and careful' inquiry of the record to ensure that the agency action has a rational basis."
Manufactured Housing Institute v. Pettersen, 347 N.W.2d 238, 244 (Minn. 1984) (citation
omitted); see also Minnesota Rules 1400.2100 ("A rule must be disapproved by the judge or
chief judge if the rule: ... B. is not rationally related to the agency's objective or the record
does not demonstrate the need for or reasonableness of the rule."
Importantly, "(T]his requirement that the agency explain its determination is not some idle
exercise in judicial officiousness," instead, "(t]he purpose of 'articulated standards and
reflective findings' is to ensure 'furtherance of even-handed application of law, rather than
impermissible whim, improper influence, or misplaced zeal."' at 244, n.4 (quoting Reserve
Mining Co. v. Herbst, 256 N.W.2d 808, 825 (Minn. 1977)).
t6
Id.
17
The map was first produced by the St. Paul Pioneer Press. See id.
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Nine
For example, in Manufactured Housing Institute, the Minnesota Supreme Court invalidated a
rule setting a maximum indoor air level of formaldehyde in newly constructed housing of 0.5
parts per million (ppm). The Court held that this level was unreasonable because the agency
could not explain why it had set the level at 0.5 ppm instead of other levels that were
considered during the rulemaking process (0.4 ppm or 0.8 ppm had also been considered). As
the Court explained:
We hold, therefore, that the Commissioner of Health's determination, as articulated by
him, that a maximum ambient formaldehyde level of 0.5 ppm in new housing units is
reasonably necessary to protect public health, is arbitrary and capricious and violates
substantive due process. In so holding, we do not substitute our judgment for that of
the Department of Health. We do not purport to evaluate the merits of the conflicting
scientific evidence nor to supply our own "legislative facts" to arrive at an appropriate
public health policy. We say only that having made a "careful and close" scrutiny of the
Commissioner's action, we find that there is no explanation of how the conflicts and
ambiguities in the evidence are resolved, no explanation of any assumptions made or
the suppositions underlying such assumptions, and no articulation of the policy
judgments. In short, there has been no reasoned determination of why a level of 0.5
ppm was selected .... We do not say 0.5 ppm is wrong; we only say we cannot tell if it
is within the bounds of what is right.
Manufactured Housing Institute, 347 N.W.2d at 246.
The same analysis applies here. As explained in more detail below, there is no evidence
whatsoever of a "reasoned determination" as to why MDE constructed the proposed rule in the
manner it did. The very brief proposed rule, which is less than five full pages (compared to the
previous rule, which was nearly twenty pages), requires almost nothing and provides little or no
guidance on what is required. Under the proposed rule, school districts are required to do two
things: generate their own plan and then meet that plan, with no assessment mechanism of the
quality of the plan or how much the plan must actually accomplish (i.e. how much integration is
required?). See Proposed Rule 3535.0040(A) ("An eligible district or charter school is required
to submit a plan under Minnesota Statutes, section 1240.861, and must implement its plan for
the duration of the three-year period.") Nothing more. 18 The referenced statutes (hereafter,
18
In its testimony at the hearing of January 6, MDE staff offered four additional criteria that it purported
would be used in assessing district plans, but these four criteria are nowhere in the proposed rule or the
SONAR. Districts are not likely to try to track down the transcript of the hearing in order to figure out
additional criteria to guide their plan-making under the rule. In any case, MDE cannot rely on testimony
in the hearing alone to justify its skimpy approach to addressing such a weighty issue.
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Ten
"Integration Statutes") do not provide any further guidance; instead, they merely require that
the "school board of each eligible district must formally develop and implement a long-term
plan under this section." Minn. Stat. § 1240.861, subd. 2(a).
Despite the magnitude of this issue and what is at stake for the tens of thousands of
schoolchildren in St. Paul, not to mention the 800,000 more public school students throughout
the State of Minnesota, MOE does not bother to explain how exclusive reliance on the districts
can possibly work. On this record, future courts will not be able to tell if MDE's rulemaking "is
within the bounds of what is right." Manufactured Housing Institute, 347 N.W.2d at 246. As a
consequence, the proposed rule is invalid.
Objection #3: The proposed rule does not effectuate the explicit mandate from the
legislature to "pursue racial and economic integration."
As if the title of the legislation was not sufficient, the legislature was very clear in the first line
of the Integration Statutes: "The 'Achievement and Integration for Minnesota' program is
established to pursue racial and economic integration ...." Minn. Stat. § 1240.861, subd. l(a)
(emphasis added). Yet the proposed rule abdicates its responsibility to promote racial and
economic integration, instead creating a program that adds nothing to the statutory
requirements and raises more questions than it answers. The proposed rule fails to effectuate
the clear mandate and is invalid as a result. See Minnesota Rules 1400.2100(0) (requiring
disapproval of the proposed rule when it "conflicts with, does not comply with ... its enabling
statute").
As discussed above, districts could easily satisfy the requirements of the proposed rule without
making any meaningful change in the levels of integration in their schools, which is contrary to
the clear legislative intent. What has happened in St. Paul over the past several years is
instructive. Already school districts do virtually nothing to integrate their schools, and they
enact policies, like the St. Paul Schools' community schools plan, that increase segregation and
likely make integration harder.
In this context, MDE's proposed rule has no reasonable expectation of changing any of that.
There is no rational relationship between requiring nothing more than some sort of unspecified
plan and "pursu[ing] racial and economic integration." Minn. Stat.§ 1240.861, subd. l(a). The
proposed rule is therefore invalid because it is "not rationally related to the objective sought to
be achieved." Jacka v. Coca-Co/a Bottling Co., 580 N.W.2d 27, 35 (Minn. 1998).
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Eleven
Furthermore, MDE offered nothing in its testimony or in its SONAR 19 to explain how such a
flimsy requirement would promote integration. On the contrary, MDE took the position that it
needed to do nothing more than remove portions of the old rule that did not comport with the
Integration Statutes. See SONAR at 20 ("The primary objective of this rulemaking is to align
Minnesota's integration rules with the new achievement and integration statutes passed in
2013."). Under Minnesota law, the agency "must explain what evidence it relied on and how
that evidence is rationally related to the rule involved." Minn. Chamber of Commerce v. Minn.
Pollution Control Agency, 469 N.W.2d 100, 103 (Minn. App. 1991), review denied (Minn. July 24,
1991). MDE did the opposite here. It stated a different objective and ignored the clear
mandate from the legislature.
The proposed rule is so far out of whack with what the legislature intended that the principal
author of the bill, Representative Carlos Mariani, 20 took the highly unusual step of personally
testifying at the rulemaking hearing on January 6 and expressing his dismay of how different
the rule was than what was intended by the legislature.
Objection #4: The proposed rule fails to follow the clear instructions of the Integration
Statutes.
The proposed rule is also inconsistent with the Integration Statutes in that it does not comply with the clear instructions set out by the legislature in the Integration Statutes to define "racial balance." In the Integration Statutes, the legislature clearly directed the commissioner to define "racial balance." See Minn. Stat.§ 124D.896(b) ("In adopting a rule related to school desegregation/integration, the commissioner shall address the need for ... racial balance as defined by the commissioner.") (emphasis added). The department failed to do so. There is no definition of "racial balance" (or even any mention of it) in the proposed rule. As with the terms "integrated" and "integrated learning environment," the term "racial balance" is certainly open to many different interpretations, and no single common use definition is available. The legislature undoubtedly directed the commissioner and the MDE to define this term. MINN. DEP'T OF EDUCATION, STATEMENT OF NEED AND REASONABLENESS, PROPOSED RULES GOVERNING ACHIEVEMENT AND INTEGRATION (2015) [hereafter SONAR]. 19
20
See generally, DFLers press revamp of school integration plan, Minn Post, March 12, 2013 (https ://www. min npost. com/learning-cu rve/2013 /03/dfl ers-pre ss-reva mp-schoo 1-integ ratio n-p la n); Minnesota State Legislature, Status of HF 247 available at https://www.revisor.mn .gov/bills/bill .ph p?b= House&f= HF247&ssn=O&y=2013. The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Twelve
The failure to follow the explicit instructions renders the rule unlawful, as it is inconsistent with
the statutory authority to which it is promulgated. See Stasny v. Minn. Dep't af Commerce, 474
N.W.2d 195, 198 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991) ("An administrative regulation is valid only to the extent
it is consistent with the statutory authority pursuant to which it is promulgated."); Minnesota
Rules 1400.2100(0) (requiring disapproval of the proposed rule when it "conflicts with, does
not comply with ... its enabling statute"). As Minnesota courts have made clear, "[i]f a
regulation is not consistent with the statute, it is ineffective and does not have the force and
effect of law." Vang v. Commissioner of Pub. Safety, 432 N.W.2d 203, 206 (Minn. App. 1988),
pet. for rev. denied (Minn. Dec. 30, 1988) (citations omitted). Failure by MDE to follow the
explicit instructions laid out in the Integration Statutes to define "racial balance" renders the
rule invalid.
Objection #5: The proposed rule contradicts the Integration Statutes concerning evaluation
of district plans.
The Integration Statutes clearly require MDE to effectively evaluate the quality of district plans.
See Minn. Stat. § 1240.861, subd. 5 ("The commissioner must evaluate the efficacy of district
plans ... in realizing racial and economic integration."). Instead, the proposed rule merely states
"in evaluating the efficacy of [district] plans ... [the commissioner shall] determine ifthe [district]
has met its goals in both achievement and integration ...."). Proposed Rules 3535.0060. The
only "efficacy" in the proposed rules is whether or not districts have met the goals that the district
established, not goals articulated by MOE or the proposed rule. The legislature clearly wanted
more than this. Additionally, the rules do not bother to define "racial and economic integration"
so that there is no possible measure for evaluating any progress toward that clear legislative goal.
Objection #6: The proposed rule is unconstitutionally vague.
Another missing definition is for the key phrase "integrated learning environment," which is
referenced but not defined in multiple provisions of the Integration Statutes. See, e.g., Minn.
Stat. § 124D.861(c) ("Eligible districts must use the revenue under section 1240.862 to pursue
academic achievement and racial and economic integration through: (1) integrated learning
environments that prepare all students to be effective citizens and enhance social cohesion; (2)
policies and curricula ... to support integrated learning environments . .. ; (3) ... integrated
learning environments to increase student achievement ....") (emphasis added).
Obviously, this is a critical term in the Integration Statutes, but without definition, there is no
way to understand or predict how this term is to be applied. The word "integrated" alone is
capable of many different definitions (technical and political) without any specific direction. It
goes without saying that the term "integrated learning environment" is not sufficiently definite
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Thirteen
on its own without a proper definition, and the proposed rule does not provide one.
"Statutes and rules must meet due process standards of definiteness under the United States
and Minnesota Constitutions." Minn. Chamber of Commerce v. Minn. Pollution Control Agency,
469 N.W.2d 100, 107 (Minn. App. 1991). A statute is void due to vagueness if it is so indefinite
that people "must guess at its meaning." Humenansky v. Minnesota Bd. of Md. Exam'rs, 525
N.W.2d 559, 564 (Minn. App. 1994) (citations omitted), review denied (Minn. Feb. 14, 1995).
Simply put, Minnesota law require that a rule "be definite." Ruzic v. Commissioner of Pub.
Safety, 455 N.W.2d 89, 91 (Minn. App. 1990), review denied (Minn. June 26, 1990).
Here MDE has failed to define one of the core provisional terms, and therefore the rule is not
valid because the rule lacks key definitions and therefore "proscribes no comprehensible course
of conduct at all." State v. Normandale Properties, Inc., 420 N.W.2d 259, 262 (Minn. App. 1988),
pet. for rev. denied (Minn. May 4, 1988).
Objection #7: The proposed rule relies on a faulty and unsound SONAR.
In a rulemaking process concerning school integration, the St. Paul NAACP and the NAACP
Minnesota - Dakotas State Conference (and presumably others) expected some reasoned
discussion on the legal and policy issues surrounding racial and economic segregation and
integration. Surprisingly, MDE makes only an off-hand reference to the justifications
concerning the integration policy in the rule in a single paragraph in the SONAR, which relies on
the legal and policy justifications of the SONAR from the 1999 integration rulemaking, 21 written
more than fifteen years ago.
Remarkably, the SONAR suggests that the legal and policy issues concerning school integration
were settled by the time of the previous rulemaking in 1999. See SONAR at p.6 ("When the
current integration rules were created, significant case law existed around the concepts of
'segregation' and achieving 'racial balance."'). While the statement is certainly true, the
implication that no significant legal decisions have taken place since, a fair reading of this
passage since no further discussion on new case law is offered in the SONAR, is simply
incorrect. The United States Supreme Court issued a rather important decision in 2007, just to
offer one example. 22
21
MINN. DEP'T OF CHILDREN, FAMILIES, & LEARNING, STATEMENT OF NEED AND REASONABLENESS IN THE MATIER OF
PROPOSED RULES RELATING TO DESEGREGATION (1999), available at
http://www.leg.mn/archive/sonar/SONAR-02791.pdf [hereinafter 1999 SONAR].
22
Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, 551 U.S. 701 (2007).
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Fourteen
More to the point, the legal analysis in the 1999 SONAR is faulty, even at the time of its writing.
The suggestion by the 1999 SONAR, by way of one example of many, that the harms of
segregation identified in Brown v. Board of Education stemmed entirely from intentional
segregation is wrong. See 1999 SONAR at p.6 ("It is important to understand that in Brown, the
Supreme Court found that government-mandated segregation was harmful.") (emphasis in
original). Despite the faulty legal analysis of the 1999 SONAR, MDE adopted its reasoning in the
current SONAR and relies on it in this rulemaking. See SONAR at p.6 ("Many courts tackled the
issue of segregation from the 1950s through the 1970s and in many cases the courts developed
and imposed remedies.") (citing pp. 4-9 of the 1999 SONAR).
Contrary to the message in the 1999 SONAR, which has been adopted by reference in the current
SONAR, the Supreme Court in Brown was very explicit in its holding that:
Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental
effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction
of the law; for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as
denoting the inferiority of the Negro group. A sense of inferiority affects the
motivation of a child to learn.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 482, 494 (1954) (emphasis added). Although the United
States Supreme Court indicated that the harms imposed on students in segregated school
environments were greater when segregation had the authority of the law behind it
(presumably in response to the facts before it), the Court never indicated that the harms that
resulted from receiving education in segregated schools were exclusively inflicted upon children
attending schools that were segregated by clear government mandate and identified as such by
federal judges in courts of law.
The reliance on faulty legal reasoning renders a rule invalid. The SONAR is an integral part of
the rulemaking process, because it is critical to providing an interpretation of the rule. See
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce v. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 469 N.W.2d 100, 104
(Minn. App. 1991), review denied (Minn. July 24, 1991) (agreeing with the ALJ's determination
that agency's SONAR commenting on the proposed rule's impact supported conclusion on
whether or not decision was arbitrary or capricious).
MDE should naturally anticipate that a SONAR will be given weight in interpreting and applying
rules, and it must construct the SONAR appropriately to support the reasons for any proposed
rule. Indeed, the Minnesota Supreme Court has relied on SONARs as extrinsic sources to
determine legislative intent. See, e.g., Troyer v. Vertlu Management Co., 806 N.W.2d 17, 27
(Minn. 2011) citing Citizens Advocating Responsible Dev. v. Kandiyohi Cnty. Bd. of Comm'rs, 713
The Honorable Ann O'Reilly
January 15, 2016
Page Fifteen
N.W.2d 817, 830 (Minn. 2006). Instead, MDE bases its proposed rule on a faulty SONAR, and for this additional reason, the proposed rule is invalid. For the reasons discussed above, the proposed rule is unlawful and invalid. Thank you for your time, consideration, and deliberation on these important matters. Respectfully Submitted, Jeffry Martin
President
St. Paul NAACP
William C. Jordan
President
NAACP Minnesota - Dakotas State Conference
ATTACHMENT A STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS BY SCHOOL OR PROGRAM SAINT PAUL PUBLIC SCHOOLS OCTOBER 1, 2014 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
GRADE
LEVEL
HK-5
HK-8
HK-5
1-8
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-1
2-5
HK-5
HK-4
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-8
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-2
HK-5
HK-3
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
HK-5
ADAMS SPANISH IMMERSION
AMERICAN INDIAN MAGNET
BATTLE CREEK ELEMENTARY
CAPITOL HILL
CHELSEA HEIGHTS
CHEROKEE HEIGHTS
COMO PARK ELEMENTARY
CROSSROADS MONTESSORI
CROSSROADS SCIENCE
DAYTON'S BLUFF
EASTERN HEIGHTS
L'ETOILE DU NORD LOWER
L'ETOILE DU NORD UPPER
EXPO
FARNSWORTH LOWER
FOUR SEASONS
FROST LAKE
GAL TIER
GROVELAND PARK
HAM LINE
HAZEL PARK PREP, ACADEMY
THE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY
HIGHLAND PARK ELEMENTARY
HIGHWOOD HILLS
J,J, HILL MONTESSORI
JACKSON
JIE MING MANDARIN IMMERSION
JOHN A. JOHNSON
LINWOOD MONROE LOWER
HORACE MANN
MAXFIELD
BENJAMINE. MAYS
MISSISSIPPI
NOKOMIS MONTESSORI NORTH
NOKOMIS MONTESSORI SOUTH
OBAMA SERVICE LEARNING
PHALEN LAKE HMONG STUDIES
RANDOLPH HEIGHTS
RIVERVIEW
ST, ANTHONY PARK
ST. PAUL MUSIC ACADEMY
BRUCE F. VENTO
PAUL & SHEILA WELLSTONE
I
SUBTOTAL
I
TOTAL
STUDENTS
714
634
438
1,270
443
298
492
318
367
374
362
234
388
674
506
432
525
182
459
285
741
557
407
306
392
415
109
375
293
384
346
475
467
319
204
479
685
475
336
519
564
539
601
I
19,383
STUDENTS
OF COLOR
LOW
INCOME
74o/o
56%i
94o/o
80°/o
45'%
50o/o
92o/o
87o/o
92o/o
90o/o
58o/o
53o/o
86o/o
91%
72°/o
87°/o
91 Ofo
86°/o
46°/o
43°/o
85%.
40o/o
29°/o
32o/o
82o/o
81 o/o
88o/o
92o/o
88o/o
81 o/o
90o/o
95o/o
42%
89°/o
85o/o
57o/o
96o/o
35o/o
92o/o
35o/o
97%
64%
21°/o
94%
92°/o
95°/o
61%
52o/o
96%
91 o/o
26%
93%
26%
94%
96%
93%
63°/o
97o/o
45°/o
95°/o
71 O/o
89°/o
65°/o
30%
95%
95°/o
97%
71%
74%
97°/o
98%
29%
96%
33%
91%
96%
96°/o
76%
I
12%
23°/o
72%
35o/o
12°/o
47%;
5o/o
19o/o
72°/o
72°/o
72°/o
19o/o
72o/o
32o/o
72o/o
72o/o
52%
I
72o/o
72o/o
72°/o
72°/o
72°/.:i
72°/o
72°/o
72°/o
33°/o
41 o/o
20o/o
12o/o
14o/o
62o/o
14%.
39o/o
16%
?o/o
56o/o
27o/o
14o/o
30o/o
11%
72o/o
27°/o
37°/o
14°/o
14°/o
15°/o
5°/o
15o/o
8°/o
10%
3%
18%
16%
8%
17°/o
16°/o
13°/o
9°/o
13°/o
12°/o
8°/o
6°/o
11°/o
5°/o
13°/o
11°/o
15o/o
93o/o
90%
84%
DISTRICT AVG
LOW INCOME
6o/o
8°/o
38o/o
85o/o
E.L.L.
18%
1Oo/o
16o/o
17o/o
8o/o
10o/o
14o/o
17o/o
3o/o
3o/o
11 o/o
9o/o
60%
82%
93%
38o/o
I
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
I
38o/o
40%
22%
58%
72o/o
72°/o
72°/o
72o/o
72o/o
72o/o
72o/o
72°/o
16°/c,
61 Ofo
31%
37%
37%
8°/o
14%
24°/o
64%
49°/o
39o/o
12%
86%
8%
57%
1?o/o
57%
55%
70°/o
72o/o
72%
72%
72%
72°/o
72%
72%
72°/o
72°/o
72°/o
72°/o
72°/o
72%
72°/o
72°/o
72%
72°/o
72°/o
72°/o
36%
I
NOTE: Above figures do not include Pre-Kindergarten (four-year-old) students who are not in Early Childhood Special Education.
UNAUDITED COUNT - FINAL NUMBERS MAY VARY
Page 1
Department of Research, Evaluation. and Assessment
61112015
STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS BY SCHOOL OR PROGRAM SAINT PAUL PUBLIC SCHOOLS OCTOBER 1, 2014 ELEMENTARY SPECIAL
SITES
CHILDREN"S HOSPITAL I RIVERSIDE)
BRIDGE VIEW
[
I
SUBTOTAL
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
ECSE
[--
GRADE
LEVEL
EC-12
HK-12
EARLY SPECIAL
EDUCATION
BIRTH TO 3
BATTLE CREEK
BRIDGE VIEW
COMO PARK
DAYTON"S BLUFF
FOUR SEASONS
GAL TIER
THE HEIGHTS
INCLUSION
JOHN A. JOHNSON
BENJAMINE. MAYS
MISSISSIPPI
MONROE
OBAMA
PHALEN LAKE
RIVERVIEW
ST PAUL MUSIC ACADEMY
GRADE
LEVEL
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
EC
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
SECONDARY SCHOOLS
[
SUBTOTAL
UNAUDITED COUNT ­ FINAL NUMBERS MAY VARY
H
==i
784
4,626
3,985
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
E.L.L.
DISTRICT AVG
LOW INCOME
22°/o
78°/o
100%i
44o/o
100o/o
11 O/o
43°/o
72o/o
73°/o
84°/o
71%
I
I
O'Yo
E.L.L.
71°/o
0°/o
53o/o
71 o/o
88°/ci
100o/o
1000/o
1OOo/o
100%
100%
0°/o
0°/o
0°/o
0°/o
100°/o
QO/o
100°/o
1QQO/o
100°/o
1OOo/o
1QQ 0/o
100°/o
100o/o
100o/o
100o/o
100o/o
100o/o
Oo/o
0'%
Oo/o
Oo/o
Oo/o
O°ki
0%
0°/o
Oo/o
1OOo/o
100°/o
57o/o
1OOo/o
78°/o
40°/o
100%1
62°/o
1OOo/o
83o/o
100°/o
Oo/o
1OOo/o
100°/o
100%
0%1
67%
60o/o
100°/c,
703
I
STUDENTS
OF COLOR
74%
61%
I
50°/o
66o/o
58°/o
75°/o
67o/o
69%
QO/o
0°/o
I
I
173
0%
I
DISTRICT AVG
LOW INCOME
E.L.L.
17o/o
18o/o
12o/o
21o/o
16o/o
24o/o
15%
80%1
I
100%
I
Oo/o
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
FREE/RED.
LUNCH
90%
91°/o
89°/o
58°/o
69°/o
60°/o
77°/o
71°/o
74o/o
73o/o
74o/o
73o/o
74o/o
74%
74%
50°/o
47°/o
29°/o
29o/o
20%1
31°/o
23%
I
33%
I
DISTRICT AVG
LOW INCOME
FREE/RED.
LUNCH
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
78%
78%
21%
23%
73%
94%
51%
95%
93%
50%
91°/o
18%
20%
15°/o
50°/o
19°/o
50%
73°/o
73°/o
73%
STUDENTS
OF COLOR
I
100%
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
83o/o
0°/o
I
I
FREE/RED.
LUNCH
82°/o
I
95%
STUDENTS
OF COLOR
86o/o
71o/o
TOTAL
STUDENTS
406
1, 141
361
2,077
[
FREE/RED.
LUNCH
43o/o
67o/o
78o/o
Oo/o
TOTAL
STUDENTS
801
667
790
522
687
484
675
I
STUDENTS
OF COLOR
63o/o
7
388
11
12
3
5
3
5
4
6
GRADE
LEVEL
6-12
6-12
6-12
6-12
CREATIVE ARTS SECONDARY
HUMBOLDT SECONDARY
OPEN WORLD LEARNING
WASHINGTON TECHNOLOGY
I
5
I
I
SUBTOTAL
138
TOTAL
STUDENTS
304
7
8
7
6
9
GRADE
LEVEL
6-8
5-8
6-8
4-8
6-8
6-8
6-8
BATTLE CREEK MIDDLE
FARNSWORTH UPPER
HIGHLAND PARK MIDDLE
LINWOOD MONROE UPPER
MURRAY MIDDLE
PARKWAY MONTESSORI
RAMSEY MIDDLE
I
[-
-==i
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL
STUDENTS
9
129
89%
PaQe 2
I
87%
I
173
E.L.L.
I
44%
I
Department of Research, Evaluation. and Assessment
61112015
STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS BY SCHOOL OR PROGRAM SAINT PAUL PUBLIC SCHOOLS OCTOBER 1, 2014 SENIOR HIGH
SCHOOLS
CENTRAL SR. HIGH
COMO PARK SR. HIGH
HARDING SR. HIGH
HIGHLAND PARK SR. HIGH
JOHNSON SR. HIGH
[
SUBTOTAL
I
OTHER SECONDARY
SITES
SUBTOTAC
I
AREA LEARNING
CENTERS
EVENING HIGH
GATEWAY TO COLLEGE
GORDON PARKS
INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY/LEAP
[
SUBTOTAL
I
GRADE
LEVEL
6-12
6-12
6-12
6-12
9-12
7-12
6-12
HK-12
6-12
AGAPE
ANNA WESTIN HOUSE
BRITTANY'S PLACE
BOYS TOTEM TOWN
FOCUS BEYOND
JOURNEYS
JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER
RIVER EAST
UNITED HOSPITAL
[
TOTAL
STUDENTS
1,884
1,365
2,Q4Q
1,218
1,385
GRADE
LEVEL
9-12
9-12
9-12
9-12
9-12
I
TOTAL
STUDENTS
96
7
Q
24
194
85
21
37
13
[
477
I
ss3
FREE/RED.
LUNCH
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
64°/o
77o/o
92o/o
57o/o
88o/o
53o/o
74°/c,
83°/o
45°/o
9o/o
15o/o
15%
12°/o
82o/o
16°/o
77%
I
I
13%
I
LOW INCOME
16°/o
32°/o
40o/o
16o/o
35o/o
73o/o
73°/o
73o/o
73°/o
73o/o
28%
FREE/RED,
LUNCH
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
96°/o
57°/o
97°/o
10°/o
Oo/o
43o/o
QO/o
#DIV/QI
#DIV/Q!
88o/o
#DIV/Q!
58%)
#DIV/Q 1
So/o
69o/o
85o/o
81o/o
97o/o
46°/o
1 QQ 0/o
1QQO/o
43°/o
100o/o
31°/o
16o/o
4o/o
81%
I
STUDENTS
OF COLOR
57°/o
48°/o
#DIV/Q!
88o/o
#DIV/O!
93o/o
I
79%
71%
98°/o
I
83%
74%
DISTRICT AVG
LOW INCOME
73°/o
73o/o
73°/o
73°/o
73o/o
73o/o
73o/o
73o/o
73°/o
Oo/o
Oo/o
0%
15°/o
I
11%
I
DISTRICT AVG
LOW INCOME
E.L.L.
24°/o
73°/o
#DIV/QI
73%
73%
25°/o
98°/o
201o
----r-- 8%
I
E.L.L.
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
So/o
#DIVIO!
1So/o
FREE/RED.
LUNCH
100o/o
I
I
68%
DISTRICT AVG
E.L.L.
STUDENTS
OF COLOR
96o/o
74o/o
74o/o
95%
92%)
62°/o
TOTAL
STUDENTS
21
Q
235
297
GRADE
LEVEL
9-12
9-12
9-12
9-12
I
7,892
STUDENTS
OF COLOR
I
s3°1o
73°/o
I
-------------not including Pre-kindergarten--------------­
TOTAL
STUDENTS
19383
4626
11.877
1,952
DISTRICT SUMMARY
RACIAL/ETHNIC COUNT
ELEMENTARY TOTALS
JUNIOR HIGH TOTALS
SENIOR HIGH TOTALS
MISCELLANEOUS TOTALS
I
GRAND TOTAL
I
[
% OF TOTAL STUDENTS
.]
I
37,838
I
STUDENTS
OF COLOR
FREE/RED.
LUNCH
76o/o
74%
81 o/o
80%
72°/o
69°/o
75°/o
72o/o
78%
I
72%
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
11%
ELL.
36°/o
33°/o
34°/o
25o/o
17°/o
15°/o
67°/o
I
16%
I
34%
I
NOTE: Above figures include only those students who generate foundation aid from the State of Minnesota. They do not include Pre-Kindergarten (four students who are not in Early Childhood Special Education. Miscellaneous Schools/Programs include Early Childhood Special Education, Area Learning Centers, correctional sites, and special programs not local school buildings. Department of Research, Evaluation. and Assessment
UNAUDITED COUNT - FINAL NUMBERS MAY VARY
Paqe 3
61112Q15
ATTACHMENT B Saint Paul Public Schools
2012-2013 Suspension Summary
Prepared by:
Department of Research, Evaluation & Assessment
Office of Accountability
September 2013
2012-13 SPPS Suspensions by Student Group
Students Suspended
Number of students
Percent(%) of students
I
suspended
suspended
B%!iii'
4.7%
1,899
· 48.
Bl@j,j'f.. 6.7°·)"-,---­
··· ······ ··
141
-~!
f.1%
-····-··-- 225
iitF
4.1% _ __
Suspensions
Total
American Indian
Asian American
Hispamc-
---
African American
Caucasian - - - - Low Income
1----
...
1,369...
···· · .................. - 175
.............
1,765 ----
--------------- ··-··----
-----------· --------
EL
Special Ed
Female
.. ~1;;14T
..... ---- wil'1cF
1,22_4____
900_.._
-- . - .
Ma~--···-··---
KG
101_
02
0:3 ......
04
05
06
......................
---!Fi--
---------
-------·-·· ·--·­
···-·-
.
201
81
....
-137------
240
- 721
594
------1;305
44
-===---93­
-----
6'?' 08
--
.-
l~l-~---~~-
1.9%
!lfu'l~~i!Jii!
5.8% ra:c
2.0% -----­
-~1&\WJiii@~(C!Ji'i'.% ---3.1 % 6.3o/;
B:ll[il''!'V
--·-1r· ------1-:-2%____ 126
75 ···--·
163
113
203___ -··- ·- ........
135
411
---·-235·-
·-----­
EC
i'f
IWi-.-·-·
i!lil§i
fl!&ffi%¥ilY
2.7%
1.7%
2.7%
4.0% 4.8% 1l:l':5%- - - ­
.. - RB!!i~l(F;K;
-----265-- ----i1%!/Jl!\ffii9i8% --- --!~-------:::' !15, . . .
------·132-------iffN ___:38% - --­
12
K-6
7-8 --....
9-12
~&!if-
-iil!#J
55
87 - - -
·----······------~----
-!1111!& ~1016%-
-··----
987
602 868
- __
-'-1'-'-1-'-43:;.__ _..1...._ ___;..:..;__ _ _.= t==:==j5~o@o===j~!J=~~·~;==:=
=
Office of Accountability Department of Research, Evaluation and Assessment 9/12/2013
rea.spps.org
2
012-13 Suspensions by
choo!
Students
Suspended
Suspen
#
gape
'Rondo Leaming Center
I
entralSr.High
I
jComo Park Sr. High
I
!Harding Sr. High
I
HighlandParkSr.High
I
Humboldt Secondary
I
ohnson Sr. High
I
Open World Learning
I
ashington Technology I
Battle Creek Middle
I
iFarnsworth South Campusl
!Highland Park Middle
I
!Murray Jr. High
I
!Ramsey Jr. High
J
dams Spanish Immersion!
ohn A. Johnson
I
Battle Creek Elementary I
!Benjamin E. Mays
I
helsea Heights
I
herokee Heights
I
ridge View
I
omo Park Elementary
I
omo Park
pedal/Hartzell
1Day1on's Bluff
I
Expo
I
Bruce F. Vento
I
Eastern Heights
J
IFarnsworth North Campus I
IFour Seasons
:L'Etoile du Nord
I
Frost Lake
rossroads Montessori
I
rossroads Science
I
altier
I
I
I
I
I
5
124
83
120
89
163
153
15
119
61
70
48
109
68
1
8
8
74
2
64
0
19
I
I
I
I
1
29
15
49
21
77
204
93
1
9
9
165
2
112
O
27
J
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
o/o
_ o__
11
171
111
159
113
284
226
19
153
106
131
1
56
22
98
26
5
12
4
18
6
4
14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5
10
4
10
5
4
12
I 25.0%
11
heHeightsCommunity I 11
Hazel.Park Prep. Academy! 52
Highland Park Elementary I 8
.J.HillMontessori
I 5
apitol Hill
I 19
Highwood Hills
I 7
ackson
I 10
inwood-Monroe North
I 0
Horace Mann
I 1
Maxfield
I 58
Mississippi
I 18
Linwood-Monroe South
I 18
Nokomis Montessori
I 0
Phalen Lake
I 4
Randolph Heights
I 5
Riverview
I 11
ellstone
J 17
t. Anthony Park
I 2
t. Paul Music Academy I 4
barn.a Service Learning J 98
merican Indian Magnet I 68
River East
I 37
Focus Beyond
.
I 1
uvenile Detention Center I 0
ourneys
I 44
ordon ParksHigh
I 16
Creative Arts High
I 9
I 6.7%
I 14.8%
I 9.7%
I 6.4%
J 6.5%
I 7.6%
I 10.3%
I 5.7%
I 14.2%
I 11.7%
I 0.1 %
I 2.0%
I 12%
I 9.8%
I 0.4%
I 11.4%
I 0.0%
I 3.4%
1.1 %
I 5.5%
I 1.9%
I 8.3%
I 4.5%
I o.. 9%
International
cademy/LEAP
Boys Totem Town
I 2.2%
I 0.6%
I 1.5%
I 1.2% I 0.9% I 3.6%
.",.~,-~~'""~"·-~=··~--~•-~::o-·o,
9/12,..2013
I
I 5.7%
I 6,0%
I 5,6%
I
Students Suspended #
°lo
Suspen
sions
-""''""'.
I
,..,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
1
0
I
·w •••
8
9
35
3
3
14
6
10
0
1
42
14
10
0
4
2
11
16
2
4
50
46
22
1
0
30
16
7
1
0
Fo
I
1.3%
I 1.. 6%
I 4.4%
I 0.7%
J 0.7%
I 1.3%
I 1.5%
I 1.9%
I 0.0%
I 0.3%
I 9.2%
I 2.2%
I 2.1%
I 0.0%
I 0.5%
I 0.4%
I 3.1 %
I 2.3%
I 0.3%
I 0.6%
I 7.9%
I 6.2%
I 18.8%
I 0.4%
I 0.0%
} 46.9%
I 2.5%
4.8%
J
I
0.2%
I
0.0%
·······~«-••·••""·-
Office of Accountability Depart1nent of Research, Evaluation and Assessment
rea.spps.org
3
2012-13 SPPS Top 5 Disciplinary (Mandatory Resolutions)
9/12/20!3
Defiance of Authority
3,795
Disruptive Behavior
3,256
Fighting
1,883
Physical Contact, No Bodily Harm
673
Physical Aggression, Bodily Harm
610
Office of Accountability
Department of Research, Evaluation and Assess1nent
rea.spps.org
4
ATTACHMENT C Principal as building administrator
Principal as instructional le;:1der
...................................... i Shared leadership and accOuntability
i '.Data :used·thrOughout the year to ·inform and ]Jri'lprOve instructions I in all sch.Ools: academic specialists, nurses, lib~ciries,
' classroom technology, family and mental health
· supports
'"""''"'''-'"'''
Uneven·enrollment and class.sizes
­
!.:En'roUment and class size targets
.,.
Uneve'n·choice system that does n'9t·iii1Proye
achievem·ent
· ·
• '"'1e1ssive busing across the sySte:~
• ~.Collection of magnets with .undefin.ed. crit.eria
Unclear articulation of-learning
K~ 12
'
)·setter choice system that·offers cominunity..and
]·.magnet options
'
• Streamlined, regional transportation .
• 'Magnet schools that 'follow defined criteria
: Adear pathway from elementary to middle to high
'schoq\
We will invest our resour~es in those proven _programs that dearly demonstrate results for students. We will use zero~based budgeting for d,epartment to.ensure equity and efficiency in design. NOTE: This tactic was dropped when i! was d€:ierniined ·it would have a negative effect on providing conSistent school programs district" ~ide.
·
We 111ill centrally allocate instructio.n ·funds to better serve_all_ schoOl5. Strong Schools, Strong Communities 2911-14
ACCOMPLISHMENTS STUDENT PERFORMANCE
Graduation rates up across the board
From 2009 to 2012 (most recent data available), the overall SPPS four-year graduation
rate increased by 7 percentage points (+7), from 59% to 66%, and racial disparities have
narrowed in this area,
2012 four-year graduation rate by race
American Indian
Latino
Asian American
ACT participation and
scores up
• The percentage of 12th grade SPPS
students taking the ACT increased
from 57% in 2010 to 63% in 2013.
• From 2010-11to2012-13, the
percentage of ACT-takers scoring
21 or higher increased from 34o/o
to 37%.
OUTSTANDING
PERFORMANCE
,0...
Megan Olivia Hall,
science teacher at Open
World Learning Community,
was named 2013 Minnesota
Teacher of the Year by
Education Minnesota.
Teresa Vi bar,
principal of Highland
Park Elementary School, received the
2013 Division Leadership Achievement
Award from the Minnesota Elementary
School Principals' Association.
of Washington's
class of 2013,
graduated on time (83 out
84 seniors graduated).
African American
Caucasian
MCA Reading scores up
5 percentage points from 2009-10 to
2011-12.
Multiple Measurement
Ratings (MMR)*
• Out of the 44 SPPS schools rated
under the statewide MMR in
2012 and 2013, 10 (23%) schools
improved their designations this year
• Monroe, Harding and Washington
schools are now MMR "Celebration
Schools"
• Of the 10 schools going up a
designation, Humboldt and Phalen
Lake jumped up two levels
• Only two schools went down in their
MMR designations
• The MMR is based on MCA proficiency and growth results,
with graduation rates also included for high schools.
. . . . . . . . . . . 0' . . . . . . . . . MCA Math scores up
3 percentage points from 2010-11 to
2012-13.
The number of AVID
high school students
getting ready for graduation
and college has risen from
1,042 to 1,384.
OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE 14 I I ' It's now easier
69% of students (up
26% percentage points
since 2009-10) are
participating in the
a
to ride the bus to
school in St. Paul because buses pick up
elementary students as close as 1/2 mile
from their homes.
Breakfast to Go
program that provides
free, healthy breakfast
to all students.
All SPPS buildings are now
open, renovated an·d in use including
four formerly closed buildings.
updated, more
user-friendly school websites.
Families can enjoy
Parent Academy
has graduated 1,980
parents from spring 2011
to 2013, meeting 7.2% of its
graduation goal (2,736) for
spring 2014.
e
e
Partnered with Saint
·--·Paul Federation of
Teachers to launch the
Pare.nt/Teacher Home Visit
~roject,
It's easier for families to
compare classes at different
schools, with the additiOn of some ne·w
courses· and imprOv~d course coding.
AIMING FOR RACIAL EQUITY
We are working toward
- ­
racial and
economic diversity in each
More than 1,200 employees
school through the Reflecting Saint Paul
participated in racial equity workshops.
program; 82% of qualifying students were
placed in schools with
student populations.
higher~income
Suspensions
decreased 38%,
-·· · · · · - iiii~ -·· · · · · ·
resulting in more
• •
ltt-9
To increase equity
for children
everywhere in St.
Paul, school district
working closely with
City of Saint Paul and Ramsey
County leaders on issues of race.
leaders are
students staying in school
(2010-11to2012-13)_
The adoption of a Racial
Equity Policy cements the district's
commitment to the success of children of
ALL races.
PROVIDING EXCELLENT SCHOOL CHOICE Kindergarten enrollment met
projections for the 2013-14 school
year by August.
• •
A
• •
Neighborhoods
now benefit
from students
attending
community schools with children in their
neighborhood due to established school
community pathways.
SPECIALIZED
PROGRAMS
~~
i C%
Students have access
and transportation to 14
specialized programs - such
as language and cultural immersion
programs and aerospace engineering ­
that begin in kindergarten and go all the
way through graduation.
With the addition of
26°/o
more 4-year-olds
will benefit from
Pre-K.
classrooms,
e
c:::J
-
500 students now
keep learning during the
40% of students
More than
attend schools
.
cIoser to t he1r
homes.
summer at the Freedom School,
With the addition
of a new online
enrollment system,
49% of student
applications were
completed
online.
added Parkway, a
Montessori middle school.
SPPS
Chinese
Immersion
program
continues to grow by one grade a
Our
year and now offers K-3.
Como Park Senior High School
opened a finance program in
partnership with its on~site Saint Paul
Federal Credit Union.
nearly 10 times more than three years
ago.
More students
participating in
J.J instrumental
music after
school.
ALIGNING LEARNING AND SERVIGES ACROSS SRBS , ' :,: ,·
''
Language support services
are now more accessible to
students new to the United States,
because Language Academies are now
available in at least one school in every
SPPS Area.
Special Education services
are now more conveniently
available in at least one school in
every SPPS Area.
................. Qe •••
«
"" 0
A!I middle and high schools are now
......
.............. El!§ · · · · · · · · · organized in quarters and
semesters.
Created the
;'*':
~,
1 , ,
SPPS redesigned gifted
recognize talent
·.," ",' development in all
students.
Sixth grade is now part
ft""l
of middle school,
providing three years to
build student and teacher
relationships.
•
Students entering middle
school get support with
the transition through
CAMP 6, a new before­
school-starts adventure.
A
All sixth-grade students
will have access
All elementary schools offer the
intramural
sports teams and
activities.
to
equivalent of 100
minutes
of science instruction
each week.
MAINTAINING STABLE FINANGES SPPS students will experience more
instruction tailoi"ed precisely to their
learning needs as a result of a
$39 million referendum
approved by 62% of Saint Paul
voters, which included $9 million for
personalized learning.
··················@··················
Increased direct funding to
schools by approximately
$25.2 ·million from 2011-12 to
2013-14.
t
', ' '
\ \'
through community partnerships.
Lengthening the
learning day and
summer learning
through stronger city
and out-of-school time
..
services
<>
Office of Early
programs like Sprockets.
The successful Peer
Assistance and
Review (PAR)
program continues to
support the professional
development of our
teachers in SPPS.
programs are offered within regular
classroom settings.
~c:
opportunities for Saint Paul families
class.
More Special Education
::
Learning to expand Pre-K learning
All middle schools have a
seven-period day, plus an advisory
•••
~'
"
The district is partnering with
the University of Minnesota
on a National Science
Foundation grant.
The school district receives some
$6 million in grants annually for
projects and programs to enrich the
student learning experience.
SPPS is in its third
full year without
significant
budget cuts.
e
A new
42% of SPPS leaders
benefitted from
mentoring and
coaching to increase
their leadership skills.
principal evaluation tool
was instituted.
MOVING FORWARD
Strong Schools, Strong Communities
2.o,
2014-2019
Building on the foundation of SSSC, over the next five years Saint Paul Public Schools will accelerate student
achievement by focusing on five key areas tied to our strategic goals. SSSC 2.0 will continue to ensure every
student does well in school so they can graduate on time and go on to succeed in college and a career.
~
11
SU$talnab lllty
achievement
Goal 1: Achievement
Goal 2: Alignment
Goal 3: Sustainability
Focus Areas:
1. Racial Equity Transformation
2. Personalized Learning
3. Ready for College and Career
Focus Area:
4. Excellent PK-12 Programs with
Connected Pathways
Focus Area:
5. Systems that Support a Premier
Education
For more information, visit spps.org/strong_schools
I] "Like" us on Facebook (fb.me/SaintPaulPublicSchools)
'#
Follow us on Twitter @SPPS_News and @SPPS_SuptSilva
BOARD OF EDUCATION: Mary Doran, Chair I Keith Hardy, Vice Chair I John Brodrick, Clerk I
Anne Carrol!, Treasurer I Jean O'Connell, Director I Louise Seeba, Director I Chue Vue, Director
SUPERINTENDENT: Valeria S. Silva
ATTACHMENT D Saint Paul
PllBLll: ~CHOOLS
Independent School District 625
Saint Paul Public Schools
111
360 Co/borne Street~ 5 Floor
Office of Accountability, Plan,ning and Policy
Micf1elfe J. Walker, Chief
Saint Paul, MN 55102-3299
----------··-----------------·
Telephone: (651) 767-8141
Fax: (651) 290-8331
Email:
!DlCl1~tlliLYii!.\ker@§Jlli§&W
April 29, 2011
Jeffrey D. Marlin
Marlin Law Office
500 Laurel Avenue - Lower Suites
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Dear Mr. Martin:
At the Superintendent's request I am replying to your data request. Please find attached one of the
reports that were instrumental in the School District's decision-making process. This report
compares School District 2009/2010 SY school demographics versus 2009 elementary attendance
area demographics. The fast section reports Estimated Median Household Income values by
modeling both the current choice and concepts for organizing neighborhood schools. The last page
of this repurl compares the 2009/20 I 0 elementary schools student demographics by race and
ethnicity to the resulting student demographics if 2009/20 l 0 students were altending the
neighborhood concepts envisioned to be in place in 2013/2014.
The Strong School Strong Communities (SSSC) Plan is built on months of careful review of student
achievement, enrollment, facility utilization, and student demographic data. Our analyses revealed
that the current choice system, while working fo1· some students, is not doing enough to address the
achievement gap. The SSSC Plan offers a comprehensive response to predictable patterns of lower
achievement of students based on income, race and ethnicity. It establishes six geographic Areas that
promote learning close to home and maintains choice within the district. Based on the scenarios
reviewed the School District is fairly confident that if the projected enrollment patterns hold the
School District will not create greater segregation across the system. While the demographic
composition of some schools will likely change, in most instances the level of diversity at the
individual sites will increase, not decrease.
The Superintendent has asked me to once again extend an invitation for you to meet with her staff for
a comprehensive review of this and other data associated with the Plan. She shares you1· concerns
about the success of African American students, and firmly reiterates that the SSSC Plan is expressly
designed to ensure that all students receive the high quality educational experience they deserve.
J:ld-iJL W~-~-Miche\le Walker
Chief of Accountability, Planning & Policy
Encl.
C'c: Valeria Silva, Supcrintendcnl of Schools
Su1.anne Kelly, Chic!' ol' Staff
Jackie 'l'urncr, Executive l)irector of the Office of Fan1ily Engagctncnt &
Jeff Lalla, General Counsel
(~01111nunity
Partnerships
Economic & Racial Diversity Report
This report compares SPPS 2009/2010 SY school demographics versus 2009 elementary attendance area
demographics. The first section reports Estimated Median Household Income values by modeling both
the current choice and concepts for organizing neighborhood schools. The current choice values reflect
where students currently live. The neighborhood concepts reflect values based on the 2009 I 2010 SY
school boundaries. Magnet schools are not seen to be changing and retain the same household inco1ne
values. Median household income data is derived from U.S. Census statistics and projected by ESRI.
Student enrollment data was obtained from Saint Paul Public Schools and is based on 2009/2010
enrollment numbers.
The last page of this report compares the 2009/2010 elementary schools student demographics by race
and ethnicity to the resulting student demographics if 2009/2010 students were attending the
neighborhood concepts envisioned to be in place in 2013/2014. In neighborhood school concepts, the
2009 elementary school boundaries were used, individually or combined, and then the 2009/2010
elementary students in those boundaries were applied with the accompanying race and ethnicity data.
All student data was obtained from Saint Paul Public Schools.
Saint Paul Public Schools Economic & Racial Diversity Comparison of Current Choice and Neighborhood Concept Economic and race data presented here are based on 2000 census data, and ESRI projections for 2009. Current student data was obtained from Saint Paul Public Schools JulyS,:2010
Analysis created for Saint Paul Public Schools by the Insight Services Department at TearnWorks International. Inc. Centerville, MN Team· .11.. ,!I
B B\YOrK.S
;
"' t
.,.
,- n
"
-t I
1>
n
ia
t
0
J
r
Q
ll
·'§ !:
'8
,g ~
~i ~.
L1 Z
.!ii
'O
.E
~
·r:
~"'
ii!
~
~
]"
Current Choice Economic Diversity and
Neighbothood Sc:htlOI Model Econamlc t:>iversity
Saint Paul Public Schools
--::::s;---·------1
,
'---;;:.
I
--.~=-=~
,,,..,.~.?~..,.~/~,.~/I
• •
Museum
~
~
I
~
I
~'
""' ---·"
""
"
----·----100
Capitol Hill Magnet (1-8)
$52,7n.OO
0
I
$44,098.50
-··---­
··-~·------------
------·.--------·--­
/
Cherokee Heights
-----­
----
""""
~.;f
~t
..>".,
~.f
#"ir'1'"#~<Y/
,,.,..."
',, ~,o~-~===1[
z
=s'O::::_ .
·oo
.
;>
----~--~----~·------··-··--··
~'
~~ ;/ ~{"
..,/' /{'
/
'i'"~"#"#"'.
I
I
­
$46,704.00
""
··T's . .
~
~
'_........-..z., __.--- ""'""·-~100
,,,
..,.~
<§"
.i/
~#
,~
"<?'¥
-~
~"
/
fr#
/
.,
Curren;: Choice Eamomic ~tya."!d
Ncizl >boi hood Sc:hoo1 Model Economk; D~
Saint F'aul Public Schools
Crossroads Montessori
$43,658.00
4
/
/
.....
,,.., /?' /?' /?' •/
_-4"'
J<'
#'
$ 3,658.oo
'1: =r-~~-~~
·,
/ ,,.
.,r, ""; "' ·'"
I
: k,_
:£.
•.
..
.
I"
?'. /
...
"4(:>'
.,,
/
Ji>'
~
- --~~2£idjf!f£;{(;j;d;.' 1··"--''''-''-"""if-fi!i5."'--;·-c'''!''..>·::;.;;;:,;_y$if4'i:.''''
l
Dayton's Bluff
I $39,527.00
I
~ ti?S??s =;=-=
$42,709.00
...... , / /f /f
v"'/,//f/f/f /
{>-'
""'
~
op'
~
~
""
>?'
4"
:s----=. II
.f #'?' /
/
l
"'2'
-7--·
Expo
$80,580.00
i $50,809.00
/f/f
1>"#
/>"
,,,.r
4'"#
;f'
/
/
'fr'#
......
2; --.--.---..,,,---..~
_~
/
/?' /?' , , ,,/
+'
fi>"
<?'
>j'•
/
/
·""'
Current Choice E@nomic !>Ncrsity and
Ncigbbomood Sdlool Model EconomU: ~
Farnsworth Upper Magnet (5-8)
s.imt ?ai.:t f>ob!k Schools.
$38,405.00
~ ~!fss::; ~---/
.f
,,
Franklin
_;.f
Ir#
f
_,l
"'
,
.f
$38,405.00
/
/
/
#'{' /{' i'{' ,;t"
-f"
./.>'
~
~
/
,/
/
$39,527.00
:l'
ol ~f ,f .f /
/,,_#'///
""'
""
#'#
$35,844.00
'<fi.Wf}\SJi§',Y>£087fl,;·FJ:'Y°!?.J.8:0'jj(f1 \\~t0Y
.
French Immersion Magnet
~ -F~=:=:==
I
$51,999.00
..,.
ZZ__
S::
0­
-.
--­
/
/
,..f/f-"l/<'
~
,,.
~ ,.#/
-=­ =~-5s.
.<'//. /' /.
.,
""
...........
~
<"/
'{>"#
7 ,,.-....,.
$51,999.00
/
~
~
/
----------­
': / z?C---~.<' _/ /
_,,f
.f
,_#
'"/~11.P-#'J>.-f'{>:#"
1'
. ,.
---
~
~
l
""•.
'ij,<io,,
j
'it-4\.
,,
.....,,,
.... •·
....
",'·
....
....
li "'~~4
I"-'·
'
"•,.,,,.
""· .....
1 ...
! ......
....
....
I
I"'\,
t .....
....,,.
"·
..."'·
.... •
.
§UU
s
•
....
0
"'·
""•.
~
Ji'"'.
N
"""t
~
~
.... ....,,,,
"'·
'".·,.... <q,4-1,
T
"·
•
"·
"·
p
""•-
R
;\!
&
•
!Ti
"·...
,•
...
•
...
"',, '
.....
"":i
§
..
~
lq
N
~
~
!·'
~ ~ M
<It "'""·----­
ID
c
~
" Ii
~j
.,,
:r:
0"
CJ
8
~
l~
wi
~]
" .B
~l
az
~
ID
"' .:!<
:r:
.,
-...,,
"•--..
.........•
•
"· •
....'"'
~
•
0
,·----·-~·-~~
~
"'~
~
ft
:r:
.t
ID
~
0..
~0
~
~
'ii'"
~
~
•
~
I j"'•.
....
11 ..
..
,•
...•
..,.,,,
j "''.,,,,
.
I "'•
....
...
~
'
1l !
IiI I
. ,.,,,•
11
•
......
... •
........'
.
..,
1'­
'\.
"'•·
8.
0.
2.
"'
"'·N
"'•·
0
8.
~
.;
0
"'
;i;
~
"'"'
---------­
"'•.
"'•.
"'•
"•
'....,
\f
);'
ffi
.....
'\
...""•
...'\,
"""·
I <;, "'•
.,,,,
""'· t
'
"'•.
...
if
&'
•
,'
<;,
..'·
f.{
!~
~·
'.£
L­
.
. ...
j ...
.....
.....
%4:1
......
....
<;,
.
'\.""\·
11
...
i
i:
I
,
I
'
....."""·
......
~~~~""
--·--·-··--·---~----·---
8.0
,,,
"'
"1
"'
"'
8.
"'~
~
'.f
"!.!0
.Q,
""
iii
~
,;,­
~
1l
I
-~
"8
1~ JE
$i
gl
~j
oz
~
;i:
]
,\?!>
;i:
:::::
]
;)i
'!l·"
~
~
'4,<\".
•
Ji
I
I
....~
"•
I"·
II
...
Ii '44>..
,.
...•
...
....
....
'"\,,
i"''·~•
"·.,,,,.
"<;,
...
....
~..,
....'"•
.....
... .
.
...,
.. ,., .
...•
....
""•,
. ,.,
~
0
g
!:;
"1.
t
"'
M
"'
'lii4,.
'\,
.
..."•
""'·
"·....
I "·....
l......."...•
,
"·..,,,•
Thi
~
,
.
....
,,....
Fi
[<
B
""'if
........
..
"<;,
!
I
""•'
""•'
!
....
....
?
t
.
~"
Wi
- ...
-----··---~------·-
~
q
"'
~
"'
"'
*
.,.~
M
,,.
~g
.-a.i.l:l
~~
J1
f] "~
lr
vz
:iil
~
:;:
!1ii
1
~
5
:;:
',"'
1..,.,""•
''
l ·"
'·"'.,,.
...
.1 " ' ~
Of
0
j
.....
"\,
•
~
"..
~
-g
~
·"
~
~
'lli<l>,,
lft.4,.
l
'\
...
.,,,.
,,
....
~i"'lq,,
~
....,,,,. I'
§
~ ~ ~
...
<;.
.
........ '";,
"·~
""+,
-
........• ..-·-·--­
0
q
~
....
M
"'
.,."'"'·
":
~
I
""~.
....,,,
.•
•
,
"•
""'·
.......
•
.....,,,
">4
I
I'
'lt.4-,.
I ""•
I "'•
I ' ..,,,,
I"
!"""
0
0
*
l"'...
""'""•
•
I
0
"'
"'
"''°
"'"'
"'
I
·~ ~
~~
wi
~ l.
ii
uz
~
.I
'"i'
i ""'• ff
~~a~~~·
·;;:~
..
"\
0
~I Sw
~
t
0
"'
~
""
">;,, '·'
1 ..,
!
"
I
<;.
•
l '\-,_
I
~
~
.a
~
""4­
c;~
I
~°"*"Rxi>I°""""'"""°
~l>OO<!Sd>ooll"',odd~~
~p,.,ip,,u.,.~
Current and Projected% Ethnicity by School (Grades K-6)
2009~2010 Chob
Ptogl'2!TI .. Ethnk-Makeup-
2014-2015 ~ghborhot)d'Conc.ept. fthrik Makeup•