• Build magnet schools in Hartford suburbs
• Improve existing magnet schools
• Expand openings for Hartford schoolchildren in suburban schools
• Common application for magnet schools
• Improve transportation
• By 2012, at least 80 percent of Hartford students seeking spots in racially integrated schools must be accommodated

The landmark settlement in a school desegregation case against Connecticut survived challenges to its cost and its educational merit as it won final approval in the state
legislature Tuesday.

The House of Representatives voted 87-60 to approve the out-of-court settlement in the Sheff vs. O'Neill case, an agreement that includes plans for eight new integrated
magnet schools in Hartford over the next four years.  Some legislators objected to the estimated $135 million price for the plan, which also calls for expansion of a
suburban school choice program for Hartford children, but the House could not muster enough votes to block the agreement.

"It was a good day," said Philip Tegeler, one of the lawyers for plaintiffs in the 14-year-old case, which sought to reduce racial segregation in Hartford's mostly black and
Hispanic public schools.  Attorney General Richard Blumenthal called the vote "a historic victory for Connecticut's children," saying it would help the state make "significant, solid steps toward diversity and perhaps become a national model."

The Senate could still debate the agreement today, but a vote would be no more than symbolic. Under state law, the settlement automatically takes effect unless both
houses of the legislature reject it by a three-fifths margin no later than today, the final deadline for a vote.  In the House, the most vehement objections came from
lawmakers representing towns outside of Hartford. Their opposition to spending millions on renovating or building new schools in the capital city came against the backdrop
of a deepening state budget crisis.

The legislature is trying to close a $650 million budget gap this year and a projected $1.5 billion gap next year - a crisis that threatens every area of state supported
programs, including public schools. An analysis done for the legislature estimates the settlement would cost $45 million in operating funds and $90 million for construction
over four years.  "The settlement does little but renovate buildings at the expense of every other town in the state," said state Rep. Toni Boucher, R-Wilton.

The agreement calls for at least 30 percent of Hartford's schoolchildren to be integrated into magnet schools or suburban schools by 2007, up from about 10 percent now. Tuesday's vote fell largely along partisan lines, with most Democrats supporting the settlement and most Republicans opposing it.  "We will leave behind 70 percent of the children," said state Rep. Robert W. Heagney, R-Simsbury. "This isn't a solution. It's simply a patch."

State Rep. Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, said the money would be better spent trying to close an academic achievement gap that finds black and Hispanic students
trailing whites in towns such as Norwalk.  "Not one nickel of that money is going to help kids read better or write better or compute better," Cafero said.  He added that the Sheff case could be the first of many coming from other communities where schools are heavily populated by black and Hispanic schoolchildren.  "What's to stop ... parents in towns like Bridgeport or New Haven from bringing the same kind of lawsuit, hoping to achieve the same kind of result?" he said.

The Sheff plaintiffs had gone back to court a year ago, accusing the state of dragging its feet in complying with a 1996 state Supreme Court ruling ordering the state to
desegregate Hartford's schools. Superior Court Judge Julia L. Aurigemma had been scheduled to make a ruling until the two sides reached a settlement last month.

"I think it's a good first step," state Rep. Kenneth P. Green, D-Hartford, said after Tuesday's vote. He said the settlement marks the first time that a plan includes specific provisions for measuring progress toward racial integration.  As for the cost, Green said, "Education is an expensive endeavor. ... If we don't educate our children, what is the cost in prisons? What is the cost in mental health services? In not having a workforce?"

After 14 years of court battles, political maneuvering and heated public debate, the two sides in Connecticut's historic Sheff vs. O'Neill school desegregation case signed a four-year truce Wednesday.  Now comes the hard part.

The agreement between the plaintiffs and the state already is being hailed as a national model for voluntary school integration, but its success or failure will hinge largely on whether Hartford can attract hundreds more white suburban children into the city to attend proposed new magnet schools.  A key provision of the agreement is the creation of eight new magnet schools in or near Hartford over the next four years - something both sides see as essential to changing a stubborn, longstanding pattern of racial segregation in schools in Connecticut's capital city.

Hartford public schools, where more than 90 percent of students are black or Hispanic, remain as segregated today as they were when the Sheff lawsuit was filed in 1989.
Under the proposed settlement, the state for the first time would establish specific goals for increasing the number of Hartford children attending integrated magnet schools
or enrolling in suburban schools under a voluntary transfer program.

The inclusion of specific goals and timetables was a key objective for plaintiffs, but the plan - which depends upon parents making voluntary choices - falls short of the
original vision of the plaintiffs, which included the possible redrawing of boundary lines between city and suburban school districts.  Even if the goals are met, 70 percent of the city's children would remain in mostly segregated schools.

"Is it the vision we started with 14 years ago? No. Is it a giant step forward? Yes," said Elizabeth Horton Sheff, the mother of lead plaintiff Milo Sheff. "It's a good thing. This isn't the end of it. We'll come back and we'll see where we are in four years."

About 10 percent of Hartford's schoolchildren currently attend integrated magnet schools or enroll in suburban schools under a voluntary choice program, but the new
agreement calls for raising that figure to 30 percent - or about 7,000 students - by 2007, a challenging target.

"Implementing this [settlement] ... is probably harder than agreeing to it," state Education Commissioner Theodore S. Sergi said moments before he and other officials
signed the agreement in a room packed with TV cameras, reporters and plaintiffs.  The plan calls for the state to spend an additional $45 million over the next four years to help operate the new magnet schools, and to expand a program, called Open Choice, allowing Hartford parents to enroll their children in predominantly white suburban schools.

The state now spends about $65 million a year on magnet schools and other programs to promote racial integration.  If it wins the approval of the state legislature, the
settlement would resolve at least for four years a case that led to a state Supreme Court ruling in 1996 saying that racial isolation in Hartford schools violated the rights of
schoolchildren to an adequate education.

Following that ruling, the state spent hundreds of millions of dollars on magnet schools and other programs to promote integration, but the Sheff plaintiffs returned to
court last spring, saying those programs were making only minimal progress.  The issue has been before Superior Court Judge Julia L. Aurigemma, who also will have to approve the settlement.

Wednesday's agreement also includes state funding for additional after-school and summer exchange programs for city and suburban schoolchildren.

Gov. John G. Rowland, who announced the agreement Wednesday, predicted the legislature would approve it. "I think there will be almost unanimous support for it," he
said.  The plan could involve the use of existing buildings, renovation of some classrooms or the construction of new school buildings - something Rowland estimated could
cost as much as $200 million in state bond funds over several years.  He called it a good decision, saying the state did not want to leave the matter to the courts.

In addition to doubling the number of city children voluntarily enrolling in suburban schools, the settlement calls for roughly tripling the number in integrated magnet schools by 2007.  "We have a lot of work to do," Sergi, the education commissioner, said. "We have a very good chance of meeting that target, but it will be difficult."

In Hartford, where public schools have struggled to overcome a reputation as being among the worst in the state, skeptics believe magnet schools will be a difficult sell to suburban parents.  Nevertheless, educators point to the popularity of magnet schools such as the Breakthrough Magnet School and Montessori School in Hartford and the Metropolitan Learning Center in Bloomfield.

At the University of Hartford Magnet School, more than 1,000 Hartford children and about 900 suburban children are on waiting lists, said Bruce Douglas, executive director of the Capitol Region Education Council, which runs that school and eight other magnet programs in greater Hartford.  "There is definitely a great demand" for magnet programs, he said.  State officials also cite the success of magnet programs in New Haven, a mostly black and Hispanic school system that draws hundreds of suburban students to city schools.

"There is every reason to believe Hartford can replicate our success," said Edward Linehan, supervisor of New Haven's magnet programs. Parents have choices to enroll in more than 20 of New Haven's 48 public schools. Among those are eight magnet schools and one regional vocational agriculture school drawing about 1,100 students from the suburbs.  To attract parents, "there has to be no question about the quality of instruction in reading, writing, arithmetic," Linehan said. "If it's a high school, you have to have strong electives."

The agreement comes as schools in many states are becoming increasingly segregated. A Harvard University study released this week says that a growing number of black and Latino students nationwide are attending schools consisting mainly of minority groups while white students are increasingly likely to attend schools that have few minorities.

Gary Orfield, a Harvard professor who led the study, said the Sheff agreement is a compromise that "really expands opportunity for some of the kids in Hartford, but leaves
most of them behind."

"It's not the final solution," he said. "The issue will come back."

As officials signed the agreement Wednesday, state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said, "At a time when many are doing less to reduce racial isolation, we will do more."

State Rep. William Dyson, D-New Haven, called the agreement "a noble undertaking" but said many questions remain. The agreement may resolve the Hartford case but does not directly address problems of racial isolation and poverty elsewhere, he said.

"How do you deal with it in the context of all the other towns that have the same problems?" he said. "What do you say to Bridgeport? What about Waterbury?"

In Hartford, however, the families who filed the case in 1989 were clearly pleased even though the matter took more than a decade to reach Wednesday's resolution.  One of the plaintiffs, Neiima Best, was 11 years old when the case was filed. She is 25 now, a college graduate and the mother of three children.  "I knew when I got involved, she probably would not benefit personally," said Denise Best, her mother. Now Denise Best has a granddaughter who is on waiting lists at two different magnet schools in Hartford but has not been selected so far.

"Hopefully, this plan will benefit her," she said.

In 2001-02, 133 out of 166 school districts showed increases in the percent of minority students over the 1996-97 school year, according to the strategic school profiles each district submitted to the state.  Another 30 districts showed declines in their minority population. Three stayed the same.

But in city school systems, where high concentrations of minorities prompted the filing of the landmark Sheff vs. O'Neill desegregation lawsuit 13 years ago, the situation has not improved.  In both Bridgeport and New Haven schools, the minority percentages are higherin 2001-02 than they were five years earlier. Both have populations of racial minorities bordering 90 percent.  In Hartford, the target of the Sheff case, the population of racial minorities has declined marginally, from 95.2 to 94.2 percent.

State education officials are in the process of compiling a report on efforts to reduce racial, ethnic and economic segregation. It is due in January.  Information already provided by districts on strategic profiles, however, suggest an abundance of voluntary interdistrict programs and schools, diversity training and student swapping is going on both in the cities and the suburbs.  But some say the increasing suburban diversity has as much if not more to do with immigration and pursuit of the American dream than efforts taken by the school systems.

"It's a little of both," said Thomas Murphy, a state Department of Education spokesman. "We're seeing more participation in magnet schools as well as housing patterns that reflect some migration of middle class minority families out to the suburbs."  Others caution that a diverse district doesn't ensure diverse schools.

"Students don't attend districts, they attend schools. It's not uncommon to see a rapid increase in suburban segregation if districts aren't careful," said Gary Orfield, a Harvard University professor and desegregation expert who has testified on behalf of the Sheff plaintiffs.  According to Orfield, the whole population of Connecticut, and much of the nation, is being driven by immigration and a growing diversity.

The net result is a swelling minority population in formerly all-white suburbs, while the cities remain segregated because middle-class black and Hispanics leaving the cities are being replaced by poor immigrants or no one at all.

Statewide, school diversity has increased to about 30 percent. Numbers on the strategic profiles show towns adjacent to big cities are seeing the biggest increases in minority students. Stratford's minority student population grew from 25.5 to a reported 32.4 percent in five years. Supt. of Schools Ray O'Connell thinks it's even higher than that this year.

He also challenged Orfield's contention that suburban minorities might be kept segregated.

On the contrary, Stratford has several magnet programs that O'Connell said have helped increase diversity at all schools. Also, the graduates of some elementary schools have been redirected to make sure there is diversity at the middle and high school level in the north end of town.  Where Bunnell High School used to have a 4 percent minority population, more than a quarter of the student body are now minorities.

"Any school that will serve as a microcosm of the broader society is preparing kids for the real world," said O'Connell.  It was a lack of diversity coupled with appalling conditions in Hartford Public Schools that led the state Supreme Court in 1996 to rule that the racial segregation that existed between urban and suburban districts was unconstitutional.

The court ruled segregation was denying urban and suburban students the kind of education to which they were entitled. The court ordered the imbalance corrected but suggested neither a timetable nor blueprint for correcting the situation.  The state has wrestled with the issue ever since, but not as earnestly as the Sheff plaintiffs would
like. Twice plaintiffs have gone back to court to ask the state be pressured to move faster. This time, the two sides have also been meeting privately to negotiate a settlement without benefit of the judge.

This week, Commissioner of Education Theodore S. Sergi said the two sides are still close and still meeting. "I'm still optimistic and hopeful. Other than that, I can't say anything more," he said.  Every year, the state mandates that districts report what they are doing to promote diversity. It requires them to increase their efforts annually.
Some districts are increasing their diversity by accepting city students through the Project Choice open enrollment program. Four of Easton's 55 minority students, for instance, are from Bridgeport.

Many districts list their contribution of students to state-funded charter schools as promoting diversity. However, statistics show some charter schools are as segregated as their host community. Racial minorities make up 96.6 percent of Bridge Academy in Bridgeport. At Amistad Academy in New Haven, 96.4 percent of the students are racial minorities.  Ansonia, which has seen a steady increase in its minority population, said its biggest contribution to diversity thus far has been to open new schools.

"Before this, many students attended schools that lacked libraries, gyms, cafeteria, and technology and were not racially balanced," Ansonia officials point out. Now they are.  Other districts admit diversification remains a challenge.

"There are relatively few minority children who attend the Seymour Public Schools, which prevents intradistrict activities," officials there wrote.  The district reports more inter-district activities than ever, but says increases in enrollment have hindered efforts to participate in Project Choice.  Of 2,874, students, 262, or 9.1 percent of Seymour students were racial minorities in 2001-02. A third of those were Asian.

Asians also account for a large percentage of minority students in Darien, Easton, Orange, and Trumbull. By the state's definition, minority students include black, Hispanic, Asian American and American Indian students.  Orfield, the Harvard professor, said Asians should be excluded from minority counts.

"Asians are not segregated. They're the most integrated population in the country. Putting Asians in there is really very misleading, I think," Orfield said.  Census figures, however, suggest Asians are one of the fastest growing minorities in the state.

The two sides in Connecticut's landmark school desegregation lawsuit could be closing in on a settlement as negotiations reach a critical stage, officials said today.

Parties in the Sheff vs. O'Neill case will meet again next week to try to reach a deal that could lead to a significant expansion of magnet schools and urban-suburban
student transfer programs in the Hartford region.

“We're at a make-or-break point,” Mark Stapleton, the state Department of Education's chief legal officer, said as the state Board of Education held a brief closed meeting Wednesday morning to get an update on negotiations. “We're getting close to a decision on whether a deal is feasible.”

The settlement talks, which began earlier this year, are the first serious out-of-court discussions aimed at resolving the dispute since the case was filed 13 years ago.

Six years ago, the state Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Sheff plaintiffs and ordered the state to reduce racial imbalance in Hartford's mostly black and Hispanic public schools.  However, the plaintiffs returned to court two years ago and again earlier this year to contend that the state legislature has not done enough to comply with that
ruling.

The state has spent millions of dollars in recent years building new racially integrated magnet schools in the Hartford region and throughout Connecticut, but black and Hispanic children continue to make up the overwhelming majority of students in Hartford and other major cities.

Superior Court Judge Julia L. Aurigemma was expected to rule on the case as early as this fall, but the two sides are expected to ask her for another extension of a deadline to file legal briefs while settlement talks continue.  Although neither side will discuss details of the talks publicly, the negotiations are centered around a proposal by plaintiffs to create new integrated magnet schools in Hartford and open additional spots in suburban schools for city children over the next four years.

Aside from the potential cost of building new schools, the two sides are believed to be discussing matters such as deadlines, enrollment goals and transportation arrangements.

“We went into this with a 50-50 shot” of reaching an agreement, state Education Commissioner Theodore S. Sergi said after briefing the state Board of Education on the talks. “I still think there is [an even chance], and we're close.”

While officials remain hopeful, there is no guarantee that the matter will not wind up back in Aurigemma's courtroom.

“If something is going to happen, it's going to happen soon,” said Dennis D. Parker of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, a lawyer for the Sheff plaintiffs. “I'd like to think we can come up with something. We've exchanged a couple of proposals. I'm not going to say there isn't some distance between us because there is.”

The Sheff case surfaced two weeks ago as an issue in the governor’s race when gubernatorial challenger Bill Curry said the dispute could be resolved easily over lunch. Gov. John G. Rowland shot back that Curry’s remark “shows the lack of depth and understanding of the significant problems we're facing in . . .urban education.” 

The CCLU has taken the lead in pulling together like-minded groups.  The next planning date for Sheff v. O'Neill had been set for March 20th,  at 6:00 p.m. at the CCLU Offices, 32 Oak Street.  It is reported on the LWVCT WEBsite that in all likelihood there will be a town hall meeting on Sheff v. O'Neill on April 3rd or 4th and a candlelight vigil on April 15th at the State Capitol the day before Sheff v. O'Neill goes back to court.

The LWVCT WEBsite advises for "...more info you can call Teresa Younger at 247-9823, ext. 219 (Executive Director, CCLU)."

For the first time in the 13-year history of the Sheff vs. O'Neill school desegregation case, lawyers for both sides are holding serious negotiations aimed at settling the landmark case.

The state and the plaintiffs announced Friday that they are seeking an extension of the deadline to file legal briefs until after Labor Day to give them time to negotiate for a
settlement. They said they expect Superior Court Judge Julia L. Aurigemma to grant the extension.  While there is no guarantee the state and the plaintiffs will be able to agree on a way to end the case and the segregation that the state Supreme Court in 1996 ruled is unconstitutional, the announcement said they will take July and August to try to craft a resolution. This twist in the case, now in its third round of hearings, was startling because both sides have been far apart for more than a decade.

Aurigemma, reached at her home Friday, said she had not yet received a motion requesting an extension. "They said it might be coming."

Aurigemma, who ruled three years ago that the state was proceeding as it should and granted more time for it to comply with the state Supreme Court's desegregation
order, had asked both sides for suggestions on how she should rule. She indicated in court that she may not simply go with one side or the other, saying "It may well be
the court doesn't believe the [Sheff] plan is the way to go or adopting the state's plan of leaving things the way they are is the way to go."

The question itself, she said, could be seen as gentle prodding for the two sides to work out a compromise.  "Have I encouraged them?" she said, repeating a question put to her. "I probably did."  Rather, she later clarified, "I didn't encourage them to settle. I just asked for suggestions."  Then she laid out what both sides were facing. "If I
decided I wanted to take a middle ground, I might be out on my own and that wouldn't be a good idea. If the plaintiffs and the state can find a way to live with a resolution, that would be excellent," Aurigemma said. "It would be a good thing for everyone."

There were talks about a settlement before the lawsuit was filed in 1989, said John C. Brittain, who was a principal lawyer for the plaintiffs in the first round of the case but who has shifted to being more of an informed observer since moving to Texas to teach law.  The difference now, Brittain said, is both sides have shown their stamina and fully aired their legal theories, and judges have ruled on those theories.  "The parties have once again seen each other naked, so to speak," Brittain said from Texas.

"The plaintiffs realistically know that the state is not going to do as much as they want no matter how hard they push.  But the state knows the plaintiffs won't go away no matter how slowly they proceed," said Brittain, explaining that settlement discussions began around two weeks ago.  Neither side will say precisely what is being negotiated.
But in the latest hearings on the long-running case, hearings that began in April, the plaintiffs outlined for the first time a remedy to end racial isolation of Hartford
schoolchildren that they could accept.

By this September, six years after th