UMASS/AMHERST * 
 
 ma 4 THE SIX-DISTRICT PLAN 
 
 312066 0362 9058 4 
 
 INTEGRATION OF 
 THE SPRINGFIELD, MASS., ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 
 
 U OF MASSIPEBST UBRARV 
 
 m 
 
 ip p f#^^ 
 
 ^? c 
 
 uSt* 
 
 — A report of the Massachusetts 
 Advisory Committee to the United States 
 Commission on Civil Rights, prepared 
 for the information and consideration 
 of the Commission. This report will 
 be considered by the Commission, and 
 the Commission will make public its 
 reaction. In the meantime, the con- 
 clusions in this report are those 
 of the Massachusetts Advisory Committee 
 to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 
 and, as such, are not attributable to 
 the Commission. 
 
 March 1976 
 
THE SIX-DISTRICT PLAN 
 Integration of the Springfield, Massachusetts, Elementary Schools 
 
 — A report prepared by the Massachusetts 
 Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission 
 on Civil Rights 
 
 ATTRIBUTION : 
 
 The conclusions contained in this report 
 are those of the Massachusetts Advisory 
 Committee to the United States Commission 
 on Civil Rights and, as such, are not 
 attributable to the Commission. 
 
 This report has been prepared by the State 
 Advisory Committee for submission to the 
 Commission, and will be considered by the 
 Commission in formulating its recommenda- 
 tions to the President and the Congress. 
 
 RIGHT OF RESPONSE : 
 
 Prior to the publication of a report, the 
 State Advisory Committee affords to all 
 individuals or organizations that may be 
 defamed, degraded, or incriminated by any 
 material contained in the report an oppor- 
 tunity to respond in writing to such mate- 
 rial . All responses have been incorporated, 
 appended, or otherwise reflected in the 
 publication . 
 
MEMBERSHIP 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE 
 
 TO THE 
 
 UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS 
 
 Julius Bernstein, Chairman 
 Boston 
 
 David B. Goldberg 
 Boston 
 
 Dr. Bradford E. Brown, Vice Chairman 
 East Falmouth 
 
 Dorothy L. Forbes, Secretar y 
 Chestnut Hill 
 
 Sylvia J. "Tracy" Amalfitano 
 South Boston 
 
 Dr. Patricia A. Goler 
 Lexington 
 
 Dr. Argelia M. Hermenet 
 Springfield 
 
 Dorothy S . Jones 
 Boston 
 
 Luis Aponte-Pares 
 Boston 
 
 William Kirby 
 Wakefield 
 
 Dr. Erna Ballantine Bryant 
 Boston 
 
 Margot Lindsay 
 Lincoln 
 
 Nonnie Burnes 
 Boston 
 
 Evelyn D . Morash 
 East Boston 
 
 Rev. Bradford H. Bryant 
 Boston 
 
 Peter K. Chan 
 Arlington 
 
 Caroline J. Chang 
 Mat tap an 
 
 Rev. Paul V. Donovan 
 Boston 
 
 Walter H. Palmer** 
 Lexington 
 
 Maria Reyes Montalvo 
 Boston 
 
 Alexander Rodriguez 
 Boston 
 
 Ilene S . Rudman 
 Watertown 
 
 11 
 
MEMBERSHIP 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE 
 
 T O THE 
 
 UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS 
 
 — Continued 
 
 Raymon W. Eldridge William G. Sal tons tall 
 
 Newton Highlands Marion 
 
 Arthur Eskew Mary Ellen Smith 
 
 Dorchester Belmont 
 
 Ellen B. Feingold David A. Smith 
 
 Wellesley Hills Boston 
 
 Eugenia Fortes Dr. Victoria Schuck* 
 
 Hyannis South Hadley 
 
 Arthur Gartland Dr. Donald W. White 
 
 North Scituate Amherst 
 
 * Dr. Schuck, a professor of political science at Mount Holyoke 
 College, directed the study. 
 
 **With the Advisory Committee at the time of the study, but no 
 longer a member. 
 
 iii 
 
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 
 
 Massachusetts Advisory Committee to the 
 U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 
 March 1976 
 
 MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION 
 Arthur S. Flemming, Chairman 
 Stephen Horn, Vice Chairman 
 Frankie M. Freeman 
 Robert S. Rankin 
 Manuel Ruiz , Jr . 
 Murray Saltzman 
 
 John A. Buggs, Staff Director 
 
 Sirs and Madam: 
 
 The Massachusetts Advisory Committee submits this report on the 
 desegregation of the Springfield, Massachusetts, elementary school 
 system as part of its responsibility to advise the Commission on 
 relevant civil rights problems within the State. 
 
 In the spring of 1975, the Advisory Committee and Commission staff 
 interviewed members of the Springfield School Committee, the school 
 department, other city agencies, and civil rights, civic, and 
 other community groups . The Advisory Committee collected the data 
 in preparation for the Commission's hearing on the Boston school 
 system. The major conclusions were presented at that hearing, 
 which was held June 16-20, 1975, in Boston. 
 
 The study focused on the implementation of the city's Six-District 
 Plan, by which the school department changed the racial composition 
 in five previously imbalanced elementary schools and integrated 
 the elementary school system. Redistricting, the reassignment of 
 students, and the transportation of students were major tools in 
 this plan. 
 
 The Advisory Committee concluded that the plan was implemented 
 without serious difficulty for two major reasons: first, the 
 political leadership took a strong stand in support of compliance 
 
 xv 
 
with the State -ordered plan; and, second, the school department 
 made specific and careful preparations for the implementation of 
 the plan. 
 
 The Advisory Committee is forwarding this report to city officials 
 and members of civil rights, community, and civic groups in Spring- 
 field. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 /s/ 
 
 Julius Bernstein 
 Chairman 
 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 
 
 The Advisory Committee wishes to thank the staff of the Commission's 
 Northeastern Regional Office, New York, N.Y., for its help in the 
 preparation of this report. Research and writing assistance was 
 provided by Linda Dunn and Eleanor Telemaque. Legal assistance 
 was provided by Eugene Bogan, regional attorney. Staff support 
 was provided by Diane Diggs, Yvonne Griffith, and America Ortiz. 
 All worked under the guidance of Jacques E. Wilmore, regional 
 director. 
 
 The Advisory Committee also wishes to acknowledge the valuable 
 contribution of Kristine Haag, who completed a research study of 
 the Springfield school system. 
 
 Final edit and review was conducted in the Commission's Office of 
 Field Operations, Washington, D.C., by editor Laura Chin, assisted 
 by Audree Holton. 
 
 Preparation of all State Advisory Committee reports is supervised 
 by Isaiah T. Creswell, Jr., Assistant Staff Director for Field 
 Operations. 
 
 VI 
 
THE UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS 
 
 The United States Commission on Civil Rights , created by 
 the Civil Rights Act of 1957, is an independent, bipartisan 
 agency of the executive branch of the Federal Government. 
 By the terms of the Act, as amended, the Commission is 
 charged with the following duties pertaining to denials of 
 the equal protection of the laws based on race, color, sex, 
 religion, or national origin: investigation of individual 
 discriminatory denials of the right to vote; study of legal 
 developments with respect to denials of the equal protection 
 of the law; appraisal of the laws and policies of the United 
 States with respect to denials of equal protection of the 
 law; maintenance of a national clearinghouse for information 
 respecting denials of equal protection of the law; and 
 investigation of patterns or practices of fraud or discrim- 
 ination in the conduct of Federal elections . The Commission 
 is also required to submit reports to the President and the 
 Congress at such times as the Commission, the Congress, or 
 the President shall deem desirable. 
 
 THE STATE ADVISORY COMMITTEES 
 
 An Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on 
 Civil Rights has been established in each of the 50 States 
 and the District of Columbia pursuant to section 105(c) of 
 the Civil Rights Act of 1957 as amended. The Advisory 
 Committees are made up of responsible persons who serve 
 without compensation. Their functions under their mandate 
 from the Commission are to: advise the Commission of all 
 relevant information concerning their respective States on 
 matters within the jurisdiction of the Commission; advise 
 the Commission on matters of mutual concern in the prepara- 
 tion of reports of the Commission to the President and the 
 Congress; receive reports, suggestions, and recommendations 
 from individuals, public and private organizations, and 
 public officials upon matters pertinent to inquiries con- 
 ducted by the State Advisory Committee; initiate and forward 
 advice and recommendations to the Commission upon matters in 
 which the Commission shall request the assistance of the 
 State Advisory Committee; and attend, as observers, any open 
 hearing or conference which the Commission may hold within 
 the State. 
 
 vii 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Page 
 
 PREFACE . . . x 
 
 I. BACKGROUND 1 
 
 A. Profile of the Community 1 
 
 B. Profile of the School System 4 
 
 1. Structure 4 
 
 2. School Committee 6 
 
 3. Student Data 7 
 
 4. Staff Data 7 
 
 II. HISTORY 10 
 
 A. Events: 1965-1973 10 
 
 B. Progress Towards Integration: 
 
 1965-1973 13 
 
 C. Six-District Plan 17 
 
 1. Description 17 
 
 2. Analysis 20 
 
 3* Problem of the Spanish Speaking 
 
 Background Students 21 
 
 III. IMPLEMENTATION 23 
 
 A. The School Department 23 
 
 B. The School Committee 26 
 
 C. The Community 29 
 
 D. After the Final Court Order 32 
 
 E. Factors in the Integration Process ... 36 
 
 1. Parent Involvement 36 
 
 2. Bus Monitors 36 
 
 3. Teacher Training 37 
 
 4. Evaluation of the Six-District 
 
 Plan 38 
 
 5. Budget 39 
 
 IV. CONCLUSIONS 43 
 
 viii 
 
TABLES 
 
 Page 
 I. City of Springfield: Population by Race: 
 
 1960 and 1970 2 
 
 II. Springfield School System: Student Popula- 
 tion by Race: 1965 and 1974 8 
 
 III. Springfield School System: Teaching Staff 
 
 by Race: 1968-1974 9 
 
 IV. Springfield School System: Black Students 
 
 in Imbalanced Schools: 1965-1972 15 
 
 V. Springfield School System: Percent of Black 
 Students in Each of the Imbalanced Schools : 
 1965-1972 16 
 
 VI. Springfield School System: Map of the Six- 
 District Plan 18 
 
 VII. Springfield School System: Black Students in 
 
 the Five Imbalanced Schools: 1973 and 1974. . . 19 
 
 VIII. Springfield School System: Funds Related to 
 
 the Implementation of the Six-District Plan 
 1974-1975 41 
 
 APPENDIXES 
 APPENDIX A 
 
 School Department Data: 1964-1974 46 
 
 APPENDIX B 
 
 Letter from Mayor William C. Sullivan to 
 
 Jacques E. Wilmore, Regional Director, 
 
 Dec. 24, 1975 50 
 
 ix 
 
PREFACE 
 
 In March 1975 the Massachusetts Advisory Committee to the U.S. 
 Commission on Civil Rights decided to review the process by which 
 the city of Springfield, Massachusetts, integrated its elementary 
 school system in the fall of 1974 to comply with the State's 
 Racial Imbalance Act. This effort focuses on the implementation 
 of the city's integration program known as the Six-District Plan 
 and covers only the first year of its implementation through 
 June 1975. The Committee did not attempt to evaluate the impact of 
 the plan' on race relations in the school system or in the community as 
 a whole. 
 
 The Advisory Committee undertook this project to provide additional 
 information for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) at its 
 factfinding hearings on the integration of the Boston public schools. 
 During the spring, public officials, school department staff, 
 teachers, parents, and other persons involved in the integration 
 of the Springfield schools were interviewed. Data on the school 
 population and programs were gathered and the Six-District Plan 
 was analyzed. 
 
 It is the Advisory Committee's hope that an analysis of how 
 Springfield peacefully integrated its elementary schools will be 
 useful to the Commissioners in their current study of desegregation 
 in selected school systems across the country. 
 
 x 
 
I . BACKGROUND 
 
 A. Profile of the Community 
 
 According to the 1970 census, the population of Springfield 
 is 163,905. About 13.1 percent are members of racial and ethnic 
 minority groups; of that percentage, 12.6 percent are black and 
 approximately 3.3 percent are of Spanish speaking background.! Spring- 
 field, like many other cities in the United States, is declining in popu- 
 lation. Its population has dropped from 174,463 in 1960 by about 
 6 percent. During that time, the white population has decreased 
 by 11.5 percent while the minority population increased by 60.1 
 percent. 2 As is typical of most cities, many whites have moved 
 to the suburbs and lower income minority groups have come to the 
 city . 3 
 
 1. U.S., Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1970 Census of 
 Population, General Social and Economic Characteristics, Massachusetts , 
 Table 81 (hereafter cited as Social and Economic Characteristics ) . 
 Minority include blacks, Asian Americans, and American Indians; Spanish 
 speaking background persons are classified as white. 
 
 2. U.S., Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1970 Census 
 of Population, General Population Characteristics, Massachusetts . 
 Tables 23 and 24. It is generally conceded that there is an under- 
 count of the Puerto Rican population in the 1970 census. See the U.S. 
 Commission on Civil Rights report, Counting the Forgotten (April 1974). 
 
 3. Hereafter minority refers only to black and Spanish speaking background 
 persons in this report. 
 
TABLE I 
 CITY OF SPRINGFIELD 
 
 Population by Race: 1960 and 1970 
 
 Total Minority % Minority Whitel % White 
 
 1960 174,463 13,363 7.66 161,000 92.37 
 
 1970 163,905 21,387 13.05 142,518 86.95 
 
 Change -10,558 +8,024 -18,582 
 
 % Change -6.05% +60.05% -11.54% 
 
 1 . Spanish speaking background persons are classified as white 
 in this table. 
 
 Source: 1970 Census. 
 
 In 1970 almost one-third of Springfield's population belonged 
 to white ethnic groups, of which almost 9 percent were first-gene- 
 ration and the remainder second-generation. These groups, listed 
 in order of their greatest representation, include French Canadians, 
 Italians, Irish, Polish, and Greeks. 4 
 
 According to several persons interviewed by the Advisory 
 Committee, Springfield prides itself on being a city of great tol- 
 erance for racial minorities. 5 This is due, they say, to the mix 
 of races, especially Irish and blacks, who have lived together in 
 the city for a long time. The black community in Springfield traces 
 its roots to before the Civil War when Springfield was a stop along 
 the underground railroad. In recent years, an increasing number 
 
 4. Social and Economic Characteristics , Table 81. 
 
 5. Several sources, including Maureen M. Wark, member of the school 
 committee, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 15, 1975 (hereafter 
 cited as Wark Interview) % Richard Garvey, editor of the Springfield 
 Daily News, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 1, 1975. 
 
of lower-income blacks and Puerto Ricans have moved into the city. 
 Although there are no accurate census statistics, Spanish speaking 
 background persons are the fastest growing population. 6 
 
 Because of a recent influx of immigrants , Springfield has a 
 high percentage of people who have not had much schooling. Of 
 all persons over the age of 25, only one-half have completed high 
 school and only 7.5 percent have completed 4 years of college or 
 more. 7 Nevertheless, the four colleges in the city of Springfield - 
 American International College, Springfield College, Springfield 
 Technical Community College, and Western New England College - 
 contribute to the quality of life in the community. 
 
 In Springfield the median income for all families in 1969 
 was $9,612, almost $800 below the State average. About 9.6 percent 
 of all families had an income below tne poverty level. Of that 
 percentage, 25.6 percent were black, 10.4 percent were of Spanish 
 speaking background, and the remainder were white. ° 
 
 Although there are no physically-isolated communities in 
 Springfield, there are distinctive neighborhoods characterized by 
 income level and ethnic group. Hungry Hill is the old Irish section 
 located in the Liberty Heights area. Winchester Square, the heart 
 of the black community, is located in the Model Cities or Hill- 
 McKnight area. This old, deteriorating section, a mile west of the 
 central city, has been the residence of blacks for many generations. 
 But in the last 10 years, blacks have moved into other areas of 
 the city and Puerto Ricans have moved into Brightwood, the North 
 End, and western Liberty Heights, all formerly white neighborhoods. 
 
 Urban renewal and highway construction are changing the 
 profile of the oldest sections of the city, including the central 
 business district, Pearl, the North End, and the South End. These 
 
 6 . The growth in the Spanish speaking background school population 
 between 1965 and 1974 is one indication of the growing Puerto Rican 
 population. See Table II in this report. 
 
 7. Social and Economic Characteristics , Table 83. 
 
 8. Ibid., Tables 89, 90, and 101. 
 
are the neighborhoods with greatest decreases in population and 
 the lowest mean income of the city. 9 They are approximately 95 
 percent white. 
 
 By contrast, the fastest growing and one of the highest income 
 areas of the city is Sixteen Acres, which is a predominantly white 
 residential neighborhood at the southeast edge of the city. 10 
 
 B . Profile of the School System 
 
 1. Structure 
 
 Springfield's public school system consists of 47 schools: 
 4 high schools, 6 junior high schools, 36 elementary schools, and 
 1 special services school. H The four high schools are all located 
 in or near the center of the city. Each has a distinctive cur- 
 riculum (technical, commercial, college preparatory, etc.) and 
 has been integrated under a voluntary open enrollment system since 
 the early 1900s. The junior high schools include grades seven to 
 nine. They were integrated in 1968 when a predominantly black 
 ' school was closed and its students assigned to the other facilities 
 in the city. 
 
 Until 1974 the elementary schoolsl2 generally served the 
 neighborhoods in which they were located. Eight elementary schools 
 were built before 1900 and nine more before 1925. As the population 
 expanded, new schools were built in the outlying areas. Consequently, 
 the schools in the old areas of the city, now inhabited by low- 
 income whites, blacks, and Puerto Ricans, tend to be older than those 
 serving predominantly white neighborhoods. Although there is no 
 
 9. Springfield, Mass., Planning Department, Summary of the Neighbor- 
 hood Analysis , City-wide Profile and Individual Neighborhood Profiles 
 (June 1973). 
 
 10 . Ibid . 
 
 11. Springfield, Mass., School Department, Research Office, Data on 
 Springfield Public Schools (hereafter cited as Research Department 
 Data) . Available in U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) , North- 
 eastern Regional Office files. 
 
 12. Ibid. 
 
clear-cut correlation between date of construction and quality 
 of facility, more outlying schools have better facilities than 
 inner-city schools. 13 
 
 Springfield's elementary and secondary school facilities are 
 not in adequate condition. In its 1972 report on the Springfield 
 school system, the Educational Planning Associates concluded that 22 of 
 the city's 36 elementary school facilities were not up to standard, 
 and recommended that 16 of those schools be abandoned. 14 
 
 Although Springfield never operated a dual school system or 
 one with de jure segregation, in 1972, 15 5 of the 36 elementary 
 schools were racially imbalanced. 16 Since the focus of school 
 integration is on these five schools, it is appropriate to include 
 an additional word on their condition. Two schools, Homer Street 
 in district III and Tapley in district V, were constructed before 
 1900; their facilities are old and, according to the Educational 
 Planning Associates study, not in adequate condition. 17 Both lack 
 
 13. Educational Planning Associates, Springfield Schools in the 1970 f s 
 (January 1972), pp. 13-16, 19-23 (hereafter cited as Clinchy Report ) . 
 
 14. Clinchy Report , pp. 112-115. 
 
 15. William C. Sullivan, mayor, letter to Jacques E. Wilmore, regional 
 director, Dec. 24, 1975, in which the mayor responded to a draft of 
 this report. His letter and response are available in USCCR files. 
 
 See also Appendix B of this report. 
 
 16 • Research Department Data . Under the State Racial Imbalance Act, 
 a school is racially imbalanced if its student body is 50 percent or 
 more minority. Throughout this report, the term "segregated" is used 
 to describe schools which are racially imbalanced under the State 
 Racial Imbalance Act, and "integration" is used to describe efforts 
 to achieve racial balance. 
 
 17. Clinchy Report , p. 113. • 
 
gymnasiums and cafeterias. At the Homer Street School, lighting 
 is poor and pipes are not insulated. 18 The school department has 
 been considering closing both schools for at least 5 years. 19 
 
 The Brookings Schools in district I was built in 1925 and has 
 both a gymnasium and a cafeteria. The DeBerry school, which was 
 built in 1950, has a combined gymnasium-cafeteria. 20 The Ells 
 school built in 1960 has a separate gymnasium and cafeteria. 
 
 2. .School Committee 
 
 The Springfield school system is administered by a citywide, 
 elected school committee of seven members. The voting chairperson 
 is, by statute, the mayor. The school committee appoints the 
 superintendent and the assistants. 
 
 According to many persons interviewed, the Springfield school 
 system is a very closely knit group, as are many small-town systems. 
 School department staff maintain a high degree of both horizontal 
 and vertical communication. A large number of employees have been 
 in the school system for a long time. 21 The school committee 
 members are known personally to hundreds of Springfield's residents 
 and have interlocking relationships with other government institu- 
 tions. Wilbur J. Hogan, who is third-generation Irish, has been on 
 the school committee for 12 years and is active in parent-teacher 
 and civic groups. The wife of Francis P. Coughlin, another school 
 committee member, is on the city council. One of the seven members, 
 Dr. Walter H. English, is black. A former teacher in the public 
 school system, he was elected on a pro-busing platform in 1972. 
 Voting records as well as public statements indicate that four of 
 
 18. Constance Tarpey, president of the Glickman School Parent Teachers 
 Association, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 16, 1975 (hereafter 
 cited as Tarpey Interview) . 
 
 19. Dr. John F. Howell, research director, Springfield School Depart- 
 ment, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 16, 1975 (hereafter cited 
 as Howell Interview) . 
 
 20. Clinchy Report , p. 20. 
 
 21. Wark Interview. 
 
the committee members form a solid anti-busing block. Although 
 they say that they are not against integration, per se , they have 
 consistently opposed all plans which include mandatory busing. 
 Two of the remaining three committee members 
 
 have been solidly in favor of integration and busing, if necessary, 
 as a means of achieving it. 
 
 3. Student Data 
 
 The public elementary school enrollment has shown a gradual 
 but steady decline. It has drooped from 18,568 in 1960 to 17,640 
 in 1970, and to 15,560 in 1974.^2 This 14-year decrease of approxi- 
 mately 17 percent reflects the general decline in the city's 
 population. 
 
 On the other hand, between 1965 and 1974 the black enrollment 
 in the public elementary and secondary schools has increased by 
 40.7 percent along with an increase in the city's minority popula- 
 tion. (See Table II) (The first racial census of the Springfield 
 schools was taken in 1964, so it is impossible to measure the in- 
 crease before that year.) In 1965 the public school enrollment was 
 17.4 percent black and approximately 2 percent Puerto Rican. These 
 figures have continued to rise. By 1974, 26.3 percent of the pupils 
 were black, and 11.4 percent were of Spanish speaking background. 
 There was a total minority enrollment of 37.8 percent. 
 
 Table II shows a similar pattern in the elementary school 
 population. The total elementary school population decreased by 
 18 percent between 1965 and 1974 while the black population in- 
 creased by 13.4 percent and the Spanish speaking population by 
 375 percent. 
 
 4. Staff Data 
 
 In 1974 the teaching staff of the Springfield public school 
 system consisted of 1,710 persons. Of that total, 1,552 or 90.8 
 percent were white, 133 or 7.8 percent were black, and 25 or 1.5 
 percent were Spanish surnamed. As indicated by Table III, the 
 school has hired a greater number of minority teachers in recent 
 years. The number of black teachers has grown from 89 to 133 
 since 1968, an increase of 44. The number of Spanish surnamed 
 teachers has grown from 1 to 25.23 
 
 22. Research Department Data (See Appendix A). 
 
 23. Joseph G. Hopkins, personnel director, Springfield School Depart- 
 ment, letter to Linda Dunn, May 21, 1975. Available in U.S. Commission 
 on Civil Rights, Northeastern Regional Office files. 
 
CD 
 
 4-1 
 
 •H 
 
 6-s 
 
 6-« 
 
 6-9 
 
 m 
 
 00 
 
 m 
 
 en 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 o 
 
 cm 
 
 00 
 
 vO 
 
 6-9 
 
 e-9 
 
 00 
 
 <«■ 
 
 00 
 
 VO 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 r^» 
 
 00 
 
 r>. 
 
 m 
 
 M 
 
 
 <r 
 
 
 l*-» 
 
 
 tTi 
 
 
 iH 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 C 
 
 _, 
 
 CO 
 
 H 
 
 m 
 
 H 
 
 vO 
 
 co 
 
 cr> 
 
 :* 
 
 tH 
 
 CO 
 
 
 H-3 
 
 • • 
 
 O 
 
 CD 
 
 o 
 
 CJ 
 
 ffi 
 
 CO 
 
 U 
 
 peS 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 t>> 
 
 P 
 
 43 
 
 i-l 
 
 
 w 
 
 Pi 
 
 H 
 
 O 
 
 P=< 
 
 ■H 
 
 o 
 
 4-» 
 
 S3 
 
 CO 
 
 M 
 
 tH 
 
 rt 
 
 3 
 
 Ph 
 
 ft 
 
 CO 
 
 O 
 
 
 PU 
 
 
 4J 
 
 
 c 
 
 
 CD 
 
 
 T3 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 4J 
 
 
 CO 
 
 cu 
 
 00 
 
 vO 
 
 ■u 
 
 00 
 
 s* 
 
 H 
 
 00 
 
 #1 
 
 #1 
 
 
 <r 
 
 r^» 
 
 
 CM 
 
 tH 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 CO 
 
 *d 
 
 •H 
 
 CO 
 
 a 
 
 e 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 Ok 
 
 C 
 
 CO 
 
 U 
 
 
 3 
 
 6-9 
 
 CO 
 
 * 
 
 -d 
 
 43 
 
 a) 
 
 CO 
 
 6 
 
 •H 
 
 CO 
 
 C 
 CO 
 
 e 
 
 ft 
 
 3 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 4*5 
 o 
 CO 
 
 tH 
 
 PQ 
 8-9 
 
 CJ 
 CO 
 H 
 
 PQ 
 
 CO 
 
 C 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 cu 
 
 CO 
 
 T3 
 C 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 4-> 
 
 C 
 
 i 
 
 at 
 
 .H 
 
 W 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 H 
 
 6-9 
 
 6-S 
 
 tH 
 
 VO 
 
 CTn 
 
 CO 
 
 O 
 
 00 
 
 o> 
 
 vO 
 
 m 
 
 CM 
 
 6-9 
 00 
 en 
 
 • 
 
 m 
 
 en 
 
 6-9 
 vO 
 CM 
 
 • 
 
 vO 
 CM 
 
 o 
 
 en 
 
 I*-. 
 
 m 
 
 en 
 
 m 
 
 a\ 
 
 r^. 
 
 cj\ 
 
 vo 
 
 00 
 
 r» 
 
 a 
 
 A 
 
 o 
 
 00 
 
 en 
 
 CM 
 
 CM 
 
 6-9 
 
 <* 
 
 ex> 
 
 o\ 
 
 00 
 
 A 
 
 • 
 
 vO 
 
 r^ 
 
 1 
 
 CM 
 
 
 1 
 
 00 
 
 6-9 
 
 r> 
 
 O 
 
 VO 
 
 <J\ 
 
 A 
 
 • 
 
 CM 
 
 en 
 
 + 
 
 m 
 
 
 <t 
 
 
 + 
 
 en 
 
 6-9 
 
 00 
 
 m 
 
 iH 
 
 vO 
 
 A 
 
 • 
 
 CM 
 
 o 
 
 + 
 
 St 
 
 
 + 
 
 CM 
 
 en 
 
 CM 
 
 I 
 
 6-9 
 O 
 
 • 
 
 VO 
 
 I 
 
 00 
 
 m 
 
 CM 
 tH 
 
 A 
 
 6-9 
 tH 
 
 m 
 
 CM 
 
 6-9 
 en 
 
 m 
 
 1^. 
 
 <t 
 
 6-9 
 O 
 
 tH 
 vo 
 CM 
 
 A 
 
 CM 
 
 6-S 
 
 en 
 oo 
 
 
 
 VO 
 CM 
 
 00 
 VO 
 
 A 
 
 en 
 
 
 m 
 
 o 
 
 r>» 
 
 vo 
 
 <r> 
 
 m 
 
 00 
 
 m 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 
 
 
 vo 
 
 
 
 
 o> 
 
 <u 
 
 
 
 tH 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 60 U 
 
 CO 
 
 m 
 
 <r 
 
 C CO 
 
 43 
 
 VO 
 
 r» 
 
 CO > 
 
 CJ 
 
 a\ 
 
 CT> 
 
 43 O 
 
 
 tH 
 
 tH 
 
 o 
 
 6-9 
 
 u 
 co 
 
 c 
 
 CD 
 
 6 
 
 CO 
 tH 
 
 W 
 
 m 
 
 <J- 
 
 vO 
 
 r^ 
 
 <y> 
 
 CT\ 
 
 
 6-« 
 
 
 
 
 
 en 
 
 m 
 
 • 
 
 CO- 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 CM 
 
 £3 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 vo 
 
 • 
 
 CO 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 00 
 
 CJ 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 en 
 
 •H 
 
 tH 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 o 
 
 u 
 
 CO 
 
 CU 
 
 43 
 H 
 
 • 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 • 
 
 CJ 
 
 
 
 
 Pm 
 
 T3 
 CO 
 
 •H 
 
 
 
 
 u 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 
 4J 
 
 
 
 
 A 
 
 M 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 
 4»5 
 
 3 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 CJ 
 
 CO 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 Pm 
 
 
 
 
 tH 
 
 43 
 
 
 
 
 
 43 
 
 co 
 •H 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 A 
 
 C 
 
 n 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 CO 
 
 M-l 
 
 
 sr 
 
 6-9 
 
 4-> 
 
 ft 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 m 
 
 •H 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 
 r^ 
 
 o 
 
 43 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 «\ 
 
 • 
 
 & 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 /^N 
 
 tH 
 
 m 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 <tj 
 
 + 
 
 r^. 
 
 CO 
 
 
 -d 
 
 
 
 en 
 
 cO 
 
 T3 
 
 tH 
 
 X 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 •H 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 00 
 
 •H 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 4-1 
 
 C 
 
 H-l 
 
 C 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 CO 
 
 00 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 43 
 
 C 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 CJ 
 
 •H 
 
 9/ 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 U 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 •u 
 
 CO 
 
 P. 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 'd 
 
 
 a 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 co 
 
 fi 
 
 •H 
 
 v^ 
 
 
 
 •H 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 M-l 
 
 •H 
 
 c 
 
 4-1 
 
 
 
 •H 
 
 ■P 
 
 •H 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 00 
 
 ^ 
 
 en 
 
 6-9 
 
 CO 
 
 a 
 
 •H 
 
 g 
 
 <y> 
 
 cr» 
 
 CO 
 
 •H 
 
 M 
 
 4-i 
 
 <* 
 
 en 
 
 tH 
 
 IH 
 
 O 
 
 M 
 
 + 
 
 • 
 
 CJ 
 
 •H 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 en 
 
 
 CO 
 
 X 
 
 ft 
 
 
 tH 
 
 4J 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 
 + 
 
 (3 
 
 CO 
 
 •H 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 tH 
 
 PJ 
 
 
 
 
 e 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 tH 
 
 
 
 *J 
 
 
 CU 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 5-1 
 
 a 
 
 CO 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 cO 
 
 
 Xi 
 
 
 
 Pi 
 
 o 
 
 «H 
 
 CJ 
 
 
 
 a) 
 
 •H 
 
 O 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 T3 
 
 Pd 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 6-9 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 T3 
 
 tH 
 
 00 
 
 tH 
 
 o 
 
 C 
 
 tH 
 
 <t 
 
 tH 
 
 O 
 
 ■p 
 
 O 
 
 CO 
 
 A 
 
 1 
 
 O 
 
 u 
 
 CO 
 
 •H 
 
 en 
 
 
 € 
 
 CO 
 
 n 
 
 U-l 
 
 1 
 
 
 3 
 
 CO 
 
 OO 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 Pm 
 
 cu 
 
 C 
 •H 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 M-l 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 43 43 
 
 o 
 
 O. 
 
 m 
 
 
 4-> 
 
 4J 
 
 
 CO 
 
 vO 
 
 
 
 
 >» 
 
 
 <y» 
 
 CO 
 
 m 
 
 <t 
 
 ■M 
 
 
 tH 
 
 00 
 
 vO 
 
 »^ 
 
 •H 
 
 • • 
 
 CO 
 
 a 
 
 o\ 
 
 o\ 
 
 M 
 
 CO 
 
 00 M 
 
 CO 
 
 tH 
 
 tH 
 
 O 
 
 CJ 
 
 c co 
 
 43 
 
 
 
 in 
 
 u 
 
 5S 
 
 U 
 
 a 
 
 C 
 
 § 
 
 3 
 
 
 H 
 
 H 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 6-9 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 00 
 
TABLE III 
 SPRINGFIELD SCHOOL SYSTEM 
 Teaching Staff by Race: 1968 - 1974 
 
 1968 
 
 Total 
 1,522 
 
 Black 
 89 
 
 % Black 
 5.85% 
 
 Spanish 
 Surnamed 
 1 
 
 % Spanish 
 Surnamed 
 .07% 
 
 1970 
 
 1,526 
 
 112 
 
 7.34% 
 
 6 
 
 .39% 
 
 1972 
 
 1,593 
 
 118 
 
 7.41% 
 
 20 
 
 1.26% 
 
 1974 
 
 1,710 
 
 133 
 
 7.78% 
 
 25 
 
 1.46% 
 
 Source: Springfield School Department 
 
 As indicated by a comparison with Table II, in 1974 the percentage 
 of minority teaching staff was more than 30 percent below the percentage 
 of minority students and 20 percent below the percentage of black 
 students. Black teachers made up 7.8 percent of the teaching staff 
 while black students made up 26.3 percent of the student body. 
 
II. HISTORY 
 
 A. Events: 1965-1973 
 
 In 1965 the Massachusetts Legislature passed the State Racial 
 Imbalance Act. 24 At that time, according to the terms of the act, 
 there were eight imbalanced schools in the city of Springfield. 
 
 The task of integrating these schools has been long and 
 arduous. Because detailed reports covering the period up to 1972 
 have already been written, this section will be limited to a brief 
 outline of events. 25 The Springfield School Committee submitted 
 
 24. Racial Imbalance Act 1965, Mass. Gen. Laws, Ch. 71 §§37 C and 37 D, 
 and Ch. 15 §§ 1I-1K, amended by ST. 1969, C. 643; ST. 1971, C 958 81; 
 ST. 1974, C. 636 (hereafter cited as Racial Imbalance Act.). 
 
 25. Two of the more comprehensive studies are Harold Flannery, and 
 others, A Study of the Massachusetts Racial Imbalance Act (Cambridge, 
 Mass: the Harvard Center for Law and Education, 1972) and State of 
 Massachusetts, Department of Education, Balancing the Public Schools : 
 Desegregation in Boston and Springfield , prepared by the Massachusetts 
 Research Center (1975) (hereafter cited as Mass. Research Center Re- 
 port) . The following summary of the process of integration in Spring- 
 field is based on material from these reports and information from 
 the Springfield School Department. 
 
 10 
 
11 
 
 its first racial imbalance plan to the State board of education 
 in December 1965. The board did not approve this plan because it 
 lacked detail. 
 
 Between 1966 and 1968 the school committee submitted several 
 other plans to the State board which were subsequently approved by 
 the board and enacted by the city school department. Their im- 
 plementation resulted in the closing of Buckingham, the single im- 
 balanced junior high school j Eastern Avenue and Hooker, two predominantly 
 black elementary schools; and the fifth and sixth grades at Homer Street 
 and Tapley schools. Students from these schools were transferred 
 to facilities throughout the city. An open enrollment program, a 
 city-suburban busing program known as METCO, and minor redistricting 
 plans also were approved and put into operation. 26 
 
 The State board accepted as satisfactory Springfield's efforts 
 to develop and implement plans on a short-term basis. However, a 
 dispute arose over long-term plans to ensure the integration of the 
 city T s schools. In 1966 the State board threatened to cut off all 
 State school aid until the city completed such a plan. 27 
 
 In September 1967 the school committee submitted a long-range 
 construction plan proposing integration through busing of inner- 
 city black students into yet-to-be constructed schools in predomi- 
 nantly white neighborhoods .2° The State board subsequently approved 
 this plan. As the city argued over construction sites, the black 
 community began to organize in opposition. Black groups challenged 
 the plan in Federal district court on the grounds that it involved 
 construction of schools only in white neighborhoods and depended 
 largely upon one-way busing of black children. 29 
 
 26. Mass. Research Center Report, Ch. 5.; Wilbur J. Hogan, school 
 committee member, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 19, 1975. 
 
 27. Mass. Research Center Report, Ch. 5. 
 
 28. Springfield, Mass., School Department, Dimensions for a Decade 
 (September 1967) . 
 
 29. Maness v. Springfield School Committee, Civil Action No. 71-143-M, 
 District Court Mass. (1971) (hereafter cited as Maness). 
 
12 
 
 Meanwhile, in 1971 the State board ruled that the 1967 
 construction plan was no longer acceptable and that a new, more 
 comprehensive plan must be submitted. 30 The board withheld funds 
 for the second time. That same year, the U.S. district court denied 
 the suit brought by the black community since the board had already 
 acted on their complaint. 31 
 
 Although the State board voted to restore funds in February 
 1972, it withheld them for the third time in June. The school 
 committee then took the State board to court arguing that the 
 withholding of funds was unjust. 32 More than 1 1/2 years later, 
 the State* Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the board had acted 
 "improperly and prematurely" in withholding State aid and ordered 
 it to work with the school committee to come up 'with a racial balance 
 proposal for enactment in September 1973. " 
 
 Between 1968 and 1971 the school department developed several 
 new plans which involved rearrangement of grades within schools 
 and the grouping of a limited number of predominantly white schools 
 with those predominantly black. 34 Rather than act on these plans, 
 the school committee hired the Educational Planning Associates, an 
 educational consultant firm, to develop a plan acceptable to the 
 committee and the State board. The Clinchy Report, published by 
 the firm in January 1972, was not approved by the school committee, 
 however . 35 
 
 30. Mass. Research Center Report, Ch. 5. 
 
 31. Maness. 
 
 32. Springfield School Committee v. Massachusetts Board of Education, 
 287 N.E. 438, Mass. Adv. Sh. 1543 (1972); Appeal after remand 311 
 
 N.E. 2nd 69 (hereafter cited as Springfield I). 
 
 33. Ibid. 
 
 34. Springfield, Mass., School Department, Ways to Eliminate Racial 
 Imbalance in the Public Schools (Mar. 9, 1971). 
 
 35. Clinchy Report ; Mass. Research Center Report, Ch. 5. 
 
13 
 
 On November 30, 1972, the school department presented what is 
 now known as the Six-District Plan. 36 At the outset, the school 
 committee rejected this plan because it called for the busing of 
 white as well as black students. The committee proposed a more limited plan 
 
 In August 1973 the State board of education held public 
 hearings in Springfield to review several proposals and receive 
 testimony from community groups. In September, Peter Roth, the 
 hearing examiner, recommended the implementation of the Six-District 
 Plan in the fall of 1974.37 The full State board upheld this decision 
 and called for the school committee to develop an implementation 
 schedule. 38 
 
 The school committee challenged the plan in court. However, 
 the plan and the implementation schedule were upheld in a temporary 
 order by a single judge in December and by the full State Supreme 
 Judicial Court in May. 39 
 
 To understand the reasons why the Six-District Plan was adopted, 
 a review of the school department's progress in integrating the 
 schools between 1965 and 1973 is appropriate. 
 
 B . Progress Towards Integration: 1965-1973 
 
 With the closing of the racially imbalanced Eastern Avenue and 
 Hooker elementary schools and Buckingham Junior High School, the 
 school committee was taking significant steps toward integrating 
 the school system. Open enrollment, which had 120 participants, 
 
 36. Springfield, Mass., School Department, Recommendation for 
 Eliminating Racial Imbalance in the Springfield Public Schools 
 (Nov. 30, 1972) (hereafter cited as the Six-District Plan ). 
 
 37. State of Massachusetts, Board of Education, Report and Recommenda- 
 tions , prepared by Peter Roth (Sept. 12, 1973). 
 
 38. State of Massachusetts, Board of Education, Opinion and Order 
 (Oct. 12, 1973). 
 
 39. Springfield School Committee v. Massachusetts Board of Education, 
 311 N.E. 2d 69, Mass. Adv. Sch. 657 (1974) (hereafter cited as 
 Springfield II) . 
 
14 
 
 and METCO, which had 95 participants in 1972, also contributed to 
 the integration process. 40 
 
 Table IV indicates that from 1965 to 1972 the percentage of 
 blacks in imbalanced schools declined. An increasing number of 
 blacks were attending white schools. Superintendent John Deady 
 believed that Springfield was making substantial progress through 
 open enrollment and other piecemeal efforts to integrate the schools 
 and should have been permitted to continue without a major busing 
 plan. 41 However, as Table IV indicates, the greatest progress in 
 integrating the student body was made between 1965 and 1968 be- 
 cause of the closing of the two elementary and one junior high 
 schools. Little progress was made between 1968 and 1972. 
 
 At the elementary and junior high school level, these limited 
 efforts called for the busing of black students into predominantly 
 white schools without imposing a similar burden upon the white 
 community. Except for DeBerry, the imbalanced schools were becoming 
 increasingly black. As indicated in Table V, between 1965 and 1972 
 the percentage of blacks compared with the total student body in 
 the four individual schools increased as the percentage of blacks 
 in the school system grew. 
 
 In summary, a. number of black students were transferred to 
 white schopls, with most of the transfers occurring before 1968. 
 Because of the rising black population in the city, the percentage 
 of blacks in the imbalanced schools continued to increase. Thus, 
 in 1972, the progress in integrating the Springfield elementary 
 schools was limited. The Six-District Plan was developed to correct 
 this situation and to integrate the five racially imbalanced schools. 
 
 40. Dr. John Howell, research director, Springfield School Department, 
 letter to Kristine Haag, June 2, 1975, available in U.S. Commission on 
 Civil Rights, Northeastern Regional Office files. 
 
 41. Dr. John Deady, superintendent of schools, Springfield School 
 Department, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 15, 1975 (hereafter 
 cited as Deady Interview) . 
 
15 
 
 TABLE IV 
 
 SPRINGFIELD SCHOOL SYSTEM 
 
 Black Students in Imbalanced Schools: 1965 - 1972 
 
 1965-66 1968-69 1972-73 
 
 Total Blacks in 
 Imbalanced Elementary 
 Schools 2,891* 2,187 2,310 
 
 Total Black Elementary 
 School Population 3,681 3,990 4,434 
 
 % in Imbalanced 
 Schools 78.5% 54.8% 52.1% 
 
 * Includes Eastern Avenue and Hooker Schools 
 
 Source: Springfield School Department. 
 
16 
 
 TABLE V 
 SPRINGFIELD SCHOOL SYSTEM 
 
 Percent of Black Students in Each of the Imbalanced Schools 1965-1972 
 
 1964-65 1966-67 1968-69 1970-71 1972-73 
 
 Buckingham Jr. High* 63.22% 66.75% — % — % — % 
 
 Brookings 58.69 65.73 71.70 72.29 75.88 
 
 DeBerry 90.76 91.15 91.40 91.38 91.86 
 
 Ells 60.59 71.34 77.75 87.47 93.05 
 
 Homer 47.28 64.99 64.96 73.89 79.56 
 Hooker** 82.51 
 Eastern Avenue** 86.61 
 
 Tapley 75.04 80.31 85.43 86.35 ' 87.39 
 
 % Blacks in 
 Total Elementary 
 Population 21.09 22.41 24.57 26.28 
 
 % Blacks in 
 Total School 
 Population 18.57 19.93 22.49 24.78 
 
 * Closed in 1968. 
 ** Closed in 1966. 
 
 Source: Springfield School Department (Appendix A) 
 
17 
 
 C. The Six-District Plan 
 
 1. Description 
 
 The Six-District Plan groups Springfield's elementary schools 
 into six districts, five of which contain one of the predominantly 
 black imbalanced schools. The schools in district VI, which have 
 a majority Puerto Rican enrollment, are not involved in the plan. 42 
 In each of the five participating districts, black and white students 
 are bused between the 5 racially imbalanced schools and the 25 pre- 
 dominantly white schools to achieve racial balance. Table VI 
 shows a map of the six districts. 
 
 Thirty of Springfields's 36 elementary schools are involved 
 in the plan. These 30 schools formerly went from kindergarten 
 through sixth grade. In September 1974 they were converted to lower 
 elementary schools with grades 1 through 4 or upper elementary 
 schools with grades 5 and 6. Both lower and upper elementary 
 schools retain kindergarten classes. 
 
 In each district, one or two upper elementary schools are 
 established for fifth and sixth graders . The remaining schools 
 are lower elementary schools (grades 1-4) . Kindergarten school 
 children, who are exempt from the plan, attend their neighborhood 
 school . 
 
 In September 1974, 6,461 pupils or slightly more than one-third 
 
 of Springfield's public elementary school students were bused. 
 
 Of those, 2,628 or 40.7 percent were black and 3,833 or 59.3 per- 
 cent were white. 43 
 
 Many students are bused for reasons of safety. In district I, 
 for instance, all pupils live within 1 1/2 miles from the school 
 they attend. According to school department regulations, the 
 department is not required to bus for that distance. However, 
 some parents requested that the city provide transportation for 
 their children to avoid the hazards of walking to school. 44 
 
 42. See discussion pp. 21-22. 
 
 43. Howell Interview. 
 
 44. Ibid. 
 
18 
 
 TABLE VI 
 Map of the Six-District Plan 
 
 ScMooCS 
 
19 
 
 With the integration of the five imbalanced schools in the 
 fall of 1974, the racial composition changed in 30 of the 36 
 elementary schools. The new racial composition of the schools 
 ranged from 13.6 percent black at the School Street School to 44.6 
 percent at the Tapley School. The student body of the majority 
 of the schools fell within the range of 25 to 35 percent black in 
 
 a system ± n which blacks make up 26.8 percent of the elementary school 
 population. The change in the black population at the five im- 
 balanced schools between 1973 and 1974 is shown in Table VII. ^ 
 
 TABLE VII 
 
 SPRINGFIELD SCHOOL SYSTEM 
 
 Black Students in the Five Imbalanced Schools 
 
 1973 and 1974 
 
 1973-74 
 
 Brookings 
 
 DeBerry 
 
 Ells 
 
 Homer 
 
 Tapley 
 
 Number of 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 Blacks 
 
 566 
 
 439 
 
 288 
 
 507 
 
 346 
 
 % Blacks 
 
 71.37% 
 
 89.05% 
 
 94.43% 
 
 86.08% 
 
 88.49% 
 
 1974-75 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Number of 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Blacks 
 
 303 
 
 169 
 
 81 
 
 243 
 
 177 
 
 % Blacks 
 
 38.90% 
 
 41.94% 
 
 44.51% 
 
 43.39% 
 
 44.58% 
 
 Source: Springfield School Department. 
 
 45. Data on the racial balance in all the schools are included in 
 Appendix A. 
 
20 
 
 2. Analysis 
 
 For several reasons the Six-District Plan was more suited to 
 the city of Springfield than the earlier plans. First, the entire 
 city except for the Spanish speaking population was included in 
 the plan in order to help distribute the inconvenience 
 
 of busing equally among all groups in the city. For 
 
 several years the school department research staff 
 
 had recognized that transportation of students 
 was needed to integrate the schools. Because of overcrowding in 
 the inner-city schools, limited busing would necessarily involve 
 more black than white students. The school department, therefore, 
 decided to involve all segments of the city in a busing plan. 
 According to Dr. John R. Howell, the department's research director, 
 the plan was designed to minimize the distance for students but not 
 the number of students to be bused. 46 The longest distance to be 
 traveled by bus would be between 5 and 6 miles. 
 
 Second, the six districts were devised to maintain existing 
 neighborhoods wherever possible. Areas which are geographically 
 accessible to each other were grouped together, and no district 
 included neighborhoods that are substantially cut off from the 
 others by physical barriers. Transfer assignments were made to main- 
 tain a sense of neighborhood. For instance, the school department 
 assigned students in groups according to where they lived so they 
 could continue to attend school with their friends and neighbors. 47 
 
 All former school districts remained intact when they were included in 
 one of the six enlarged districts. Thus, all students living in 
 one of the former districts became part of the same larger district. 
 These districts were small enough to allow for the development of 
 a sense of community in each district. This concept of community 
 within district was emphasized by the assignment of all fifth and 
 sixth grade students to the same one or two schools. 48 
 
 On the other hand, all districts were comprised of neighborhoods 
 that varied in social and economic characteristics. Each im- 
 balanced school was included in a district which encompassed higher 
 income communities at the edge of the city. 
 
 46. Howell Interview. 
 
 47. Ibid. 
 
 48. Ibid. 
 
21 
 
 Third, the exemption of kindergarten children from the integration 
 plan, an innovation with few models elsewhere in the country, had 
 several educational advantages. According to Dr. Howell, the 
 neighborhood kindergarten was designed to make the transition 
 from the home to school easier for the child. Because the ethnic 
 makeup of kindergarten reflects the community, the child's first 
 school experience would be a familiar one. At the same time, the 
 integrated upper grades immediately presented a view of a multi- 
 racial society. The neighborhood kindergarten was also designed 
 to allay parent's fears and enable them to walk their children to 
 school.^" 
 
 Fourth, the division of the schools into facilities with fewer 
 grades was intended to concentrate resources for each grade level 
 and allow for specialization at each level. 50 The grade division 
 also minimized the arbitrariness in transferring students. In 
 many elementary schools, two-thirds, of the first through fourth 
 graders attended their own neighborhood schools. The majority of 
 children attended their neighborhood school for either their lower 
 or upper elementary school years. 
 
 Fifth, the Six-District Plan was designed to be flexible 
 enough to adapt to changes in Springfield's racial composition, 
 therefore eliminating the need for modifications as the city popu- 
 lation changed. 51 Because the entire city, except for the Spanish 
 speaking population was involved in the plan, the busing pool was 
 large enough to absorb major increases in minority students. 
 
 3. Problem of Spanish Speaking Background Students 
 
 Spanish speaking background students are not covered by the 
 Racial Imbalance Act. 52 i n September 1974 the school department 
 decided to meet only the requirements mandated under the State law, 
 i.e., to integrate the black student body and postpone the pro- 
 blem of the Spanish speaking background students. As a result, 
 
 49. Ibid. 
 
 50. Ibid. 
 
 51. Ibid. 
 
 52. Racial Imbalance Act 
 
22 
 
 district VI, which is largely Puerto Rican, was not included in 
 the Six-District Plan. 53 The problem of Spanish speaking back- 
 ground students became a major issue following the implementation 
 of the Six-District Plan. 
 
 As early as October 1973 the State board had issued a long-range 
 order requiring the school committee to develop a plan which would 
 also eliminate the isolation of Spanish speaking students in 
 district VI. 54 i n May 1975 the school committee submitted (without 
 its own approval) long-range recommendations to the State board. 55 
 In June 1975 the State board still continued to press for a full plan 
 approved by the school committee. 56 
 
 Some members of both the Spanish speaking community and the 
 school committee opposed the integration of Spanish speaking back- 
 ground students for several reasons. First, some individuals in 
 both groups argued that the Spanish speaking community wanted to 
 strengthen its cultural identity and did not support integration. 
 Second, other persons believed that the dispersal of the Spanish 
 speaking students would necessitate distributing bilingual resources 
 to a greater number of schools and thereby weaken the 'program. 
 Other groups argued, however, that integrating the Spanish speaking 
 students would not weaken the bilingual program and believed that 
 comprehensive integration should be achieved. 57 
 
 53. Six-District Plan, p. 6. 
 
 54. State of Massachusetts , Board of Education, Opinion and Order , 
 Aug. 18, 1975, p. 1 (hereafter cited as Opinion and Order) . 
 
 55. Springfield, Mass., School Department, Lon g-Range Recommendations 
 for Springfield Public Schools Revised, May 9, 1975. 
 
 ■ *- II IM« IIM I ' ■■ I II I Ml -II I I ■ II ■■ . Ill ■ . .1— .■.!■! I H I m 
 
 56. Opinion and Order , p. 3. 
 
 57. Cornelius Hannigan, director of school community relations, 
 Springfield School Department, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 16, 
 1975 (hereafter cited as Hannigan Interview) . 
 
Ill . IMPLEMENTATION 
 
 In this section, the implementation of the Six-District Plan 
 is described in some detail. An examination of this process indi- 
 cates why the city of Springfield integrated its elementary schools 
 with a minimum of trouble. 
 
 A . The School Department 
 
 The Springfield School Department played a major role in the 
 development and implementation of the Six-District Plan. As in- 
 dicated in the previous section, department staff worked for several 
 years to develop plans that were acceptable to the school committee 
 and the State board of education. Once the Six-District Plan was 
 approved, the staff turned their efforts to planning for the 1974- 
 1975 school year, when the plan was scheduled to go into operation. 
 
 Dr. John E. Deady, superintendent of schools, had a major 
 influence on the entire integration process. From his arrival in 
 Springfield in 1967, he consistently defended the progress made 
 by the city in integrating its schools through minor redistricting 
 and voluntary transfer programs. When faced with the State board 
 order to integrate at a faster and more comprehensive rate, he 
 recognized the need for mandatory transportation of students. 58 
 
 Superintendent Deady personally favored integration and mandatory 
 busing when needed. However, he never took a public stand on either 
 issue. He said that he saw his job as carrying out the mandate 
 of the school committee and the State board of education. 
 
 58. Deady Interview. 
 
 23 
 
24 
 
 In an interview, Dr. Deady said, "I sympathize with the man 
 who wants his neighborhood school. However, I believe that the 
 majority must sacrifice that neighborhood school in order to create 
 the integrated society which in the long run will benefit «s all. 
 In Springfield, busing became unavoidable."^ 
 
 From the beginning, Superintendent Deady emphasized the 
 importance of community involvement in developing a desegregation 
 plan. In 1968 he created an office of school -community relations 
 to disseminate information to the public. The school department 
 held several large public meetings in 1972 (nearly 2,500 persons 
 attended one such meeting) and a series of smaller meetings to 
 discuss integration proposals. 60 The department also issued 
 bulletins on the five racially imbalanced schools to provide posi- 
 tive information on these schools . 
 
 In December 1972, after the Six-District Plan was proposed, 
 the school department again held special public forums to discuss 
 the proposal with community groups and organizations. The groups 
 represented ranged from anti-busing homeowners and taxpayers as- 
 sociations and apprehensive parent-teacher organizations to the 
 strongly pro-integration League of Women Voters and church and 
 civic groups . 61 
 
 After the State board ordered the implementation of the plan, 
 the school department went ahead at an accelerated pace to develop 
 an implementation schedule. In November 1973 Superintendent Deady 
 assembled a team of central department staff — assistant super- 
 intendents, resource specialists, and research staff — to complete 
 the required schedule and plan for the following year. Although 
 staff members spent as much as one-third of their time on the 
 Six-District Plan, no new persons were hired. 62 
 
 59. Ibid. 
 
 60. Hannigan Interview. 
 
 61. Ibid. 
 
 62. Deady Interview. 
 
25 
 
 Dr. Deady said, "I resolved that we were going to do the best 
 possible job, overlooking nothing. The word was woe be it to the 
 principal, the supervisor, or the staff person who talked down 
 the plan. "63 
 
 During January 1974 the staff worked daily on the plan. Early 
 in the month, the superintendent made assignments to develop an 
 implementation schedule. Staff began assembling data on the 
 student population and gathering information on teacher training 
 programs and related issues. Dr. Deady later called the staff 
 together again to set specific implementation timetables . School 
 officials met with a bus company to discuss transportation costs 
 and conferred with teachers and interested parents. On 
 
 January 29, 1974, the department issued its formal implementation 
 guidelines. 64 
 
 Activity of this nature continued during the winter and spring 
 of 1974. The school department held several meetings for elementary 
 school principals and staff to discuss the Six-District Plan and 
 sponsored a workshop in April to review the detailed implementation 
 guidelines. 65 The staff completed a computerized list of students 
 by street, race, and grade, and manually assigned all students to 
 schools. 66 xhe central school department began a more intensive 
 public information campaign, holding a series of community meetings 
 and releasing information to the media on a regular basis. Ap- 
 proximately 600 persons attended a public meeting at Putnam High 
 School at the end of March. 
 
 63. Deady Interview. 
 
 64. Springfield, Mass., School Department, Schedule of Implementation 
 of the Six-District Plan (Jan. 29, 1974) (hereafter cited as Implemen- 
 tation Schedule ) . 
 
 65. Springfield, Mass., School Department, Plans for Carrying out the 
 Six-District Racial Balance Plan (Apr. 17, 1974). 
 
 66. Howell Interview. See also Springfield, Mass., School Department, 
 Pupil Assignments - Districts I, II, III, IV, V (March 1974) . 
 
26 
 
 In addition, each principal held meetings for the parents. 67 
 According to the guidelines distributed at the April workshop, 
 each school was required to hold what were called sending and 
 receiving meetings. The sending meetings were set up for parents 
 of students presently attending the school, and the receiving 
 meetings were for parents of students to be transferred to the 
 school under the new plan. At both meetings, parents met the new 
 staff assigned to their children and discussed issues such as 
 school programs, busing arrangements, and safety precautions. 
 
 Attendance at these meetings varied. However, several 
 principals interviewed said that these meetings were a valuable 
 method for showing parents the best aspects of the schools and 
 successfully changed the attitudes of many parents who were critical 
 of the plan. 68 
 
 B . The School Committee 
 
 During 1973 and 1974, up until the opening of school, the 
 school committee continued to oppose the Six-District Plan and 
 fought the State board order calling for its implementation in a 
 series of court suits. The anti-busing majority remained outspoken 
 critics of mandatory busing and promised residents of Springfield 
 that they would fight it to the end in the courts. 
 
 In November 1973 the school committee began its legal battle 
 against the State board's August ruling and filed suit in county 
 court. £9 xhe school committee ignored the order to develop an 
 implementation schedule and took no action on the grounds that the 
 ruling would be reversed. Although the committee did not instruct 
 the school department to begin planning, it did not interfere with 
 the school department when the first steps were taken. 70 
 
 67. Hannigan Interview, 
 
 68. Interviews with the following principals: Theodore Levin, Homer Street 
 School, May 1; Flemming R. Cocchi, Brookings School, May 1; Raymond F. 
 Lynch, Ells School, May 2; Bruno Marsili, Tapley School, May 2; Mary 
 Walsh, Sixteen Acres School, May 15; Diantha Ferrier, Kensington Avenue 
 School, May 15; Charles O'Leary, Glickman School, May 16; John O'Malley, 
 Lincoln School, May 16, all in Springfield, Mass. 
 
 69. Springfield II. 
 
 70. Hannigan Interview. 
 
27 
 
 In December 1973 a single justice handed down a temporary 
 order requiring the school committee to submit an implementation 
 schedule. 71 The school committee again took no formal action, 
 but the school department continued to develop the implementation 
 schedule. On January 28, 1974, a single justice ordered the 
 school committee to complete its schedule by February 1, 1974.72 
 The following day, Mayor Sullivan announced that the school com- 
 mittee would comply with the court's orders and the school depart- 
 ment released the completed implementation schedule. 73 
 
 At the same time, the school committee appealed the ruling. 
 On May 1, 1974, the Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth of 
 Massachusetts issued its long-awaited decision and unanimously 
 upheld the State board's right to impose the integration plan. 74 
 Again, the school committee took no formal action. 75 The mayor 
 announced that, although he did not like the court ruling, the school 
 committee would abide by the law. On May 15, the court issued an 
 accompanying opinion clearly assigning responsibility for Spring- 
 field's delay in complying with the State law to the school com- 
 mittee. 76 On July 26 the Racial Imbalance Act was amended by Chapter 
 636 which prohibited the State board from requiring busing to achieve 
 racial balance. 77 
 
 On August 1, the school committee voted to open the schools 
 on September 4, with the same grade structure and pupil assignments 
 as the previous year and ordered the school department not to take 
 further action on the Six-District Plan without its specific ap- 
 proval. 78 The committee asked the State Supreme Judicial Court the 
 following day to vacate its May order in light of the amended law. 
 
 71. Springfield I. 
 
 72. Springfield II. 
 
 73. Implementation Schedule . 
 
 74. Springfield II. 
 
 75. Hannigan Interview. 
 
 76. Springfield II. 
 
 77. ST. 1974, C. 636. 
 
 78. Springfield, Mass., School Committee, Resolution (Aug. 1, 1975). 
 
28 
 
 Throughout this period, the city solicitor, William Flanagan, 
 reported to the press several times that the school committee would 
 win its fight to throw out the Six-District Plan. 79 
 
 On August 13, the State board issued an opinion recommending 
 
 that the school committee's most recent challenge be denied. 
 
 On the same day, the school committee reversed its earlier decision 
 
 prohibiting school department action on the plan without committee 
 approval. 80 
 
 With the opening of school approaching, the school committee 
 asked for a temporary restraining order on the implementation of 
 the Six-District Plan. This motion was denied on August 15.81 
 The school committee still delayed action on the implementation of the 
 plan. Its inaction restricted some school department activity, for 
 instance, preventing the department from hiring a bus monitor super- 
 visor for several months. 82 
 
 On August 22, 1974, the State Supreme Judicial Court held hearings 
 on the school committee's suit to void the court's May ruling in 
 light of the amendment to the Racial Imbalance Act. 83 in an order 
 handed down that same day, the court rejected the city's motion 
 and ordered it to proceed with the Six-District Plan. In the accom- 
 panying opinion issued in November, the court ruled that the racial 
 imbalance amendment could not be applied retroactively. 84 
 
 79. Wayne Phaneuh and Robert Hardman, reporters, Springfield Daily News , 
 interviews in Springfield, Mass., May 1, 1975. 
 
 80. Springfield, Mass., School Committee, Resolution (Aug. 13, 1975). 
 
 81. Springfield II. 
 
 82. John F. Maloney, bus monitor supervisor, Springfield School De- 
 partment, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 16, 1975. 
 
 83. Springfield School Committee v. Massachusetts Board of Education, 
 319 N.E. 2nd 427; cert, denied , 95 S. Ct. 1977 (hereafter cited as 
 Springfield III) . 
 
 84. Ibid. 
 
29 
 
 The school committee made one last effort to avoid the Six- 
 District Plan. On the same day as the final court ruling, it 
 voted to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. In April the Supreme 
 Court refused to hear the case. 85 
 
 C. The Community 
 
 During 1973 and 1974 many community organizations joined the 
 fight over integration. A predominantly black pro-integration 
 group called the Quality Integrated Education Committee (QIEC) 
 organized in the spring of 1973 to solicit support for the Six- 
 District Plan. Under the leadership of Carmenceita Jones, QIEC 
 expanded into a citywide coalition including the Council of Churches 
 of Greater Springfield, the Comprehensive Community Development 
 Conference, the League of Women Voters, Model Cities, the NAACP, 
 and other church and civic groups. This biracial coalition stood 
 for better education through integrated schools and maintained that 
 quality education could never be achieved in a segregated society. 86 
 QIEC testified in support of a modified Six-District Plan at the 
 State board hearings. 87 it then filed a brief as interveners in 
 the school committee's suit challenging the board ruling. 88 
 
 QIEC remained active throughout 1974. During the spring, 
 Mrs. Jones and Model Cities staff held a series of meetings with 
 parents and civic groups in homes, churches, and community centers 
 to build support for the plan. 89 i n May QIEC met with the Governor 
 
 85. Ibid. 
 
 86. Carmenceita Jones, director, QIEC, interview in Springfield, Mass., 
 May 2, 1975 (hereafter cited as Jones Interview). 
 
 87. QIEC recommended at the State board hearings in Springfield, Mass. 
 (August 1973) that the Spanish speaking community in district VI be in- 
 cluded in the plan. 
 
 88. Springfield II. 
 
 89. Elaine Rucks, Model Cities coordinator, interview in Springfield, 
 Mass., May 16, 1975 (hereafter cited as Rucks Interview). 
 
30 
 
 and his staff to convey their support of the plan and their opposition 
 to any change in the State's Racial Imbalance Act. Representatives 
 from QIEC testified before joint legislative hearings on the repeal 
 of the State law and again at hearings on the proposed amendment, 
 which was subsequently passed. At the State court hearings in 
 August, the Massachusetts Civil Liberties Union argued for the 
 Six-District Plan on QIEC's behalf. 90 i n the same month, QIEC spon- 
 sored an all-day workshop at Springfield Technical Community College 
 to provide detailed information to the community on the Six-District 
 Plan. The Springfield Chamber of Commerce later reprinted and dis- 
 tributed information prepared for the conference. 91 
 
 Several member groups of QIEC took action on their own. Model 
 Cities held a series of meetings in the black community and sponsored 
 a large public forum at the Winchester Square branch of the public 
 library. 92 The Council of Churches of Greater Springfield, a 
 federation of about 62 Protestant churches, also played a major role. 
 Rev. Ronald Whitney, the director of the council's urban ministry, 
 had issued his first formal statement to the press in favor of school 
 integration in 1971. Through him the council continued to speak out 
 on the school situation and to inform its member churches of events 
 on a regular basis. In the spring of 1974, as a result of his request, 
 several member churches held meetings to solicit support for the 
 Six-District Plan. 93 
 
 Opponents of the Six-District Plan were outspoken during this 
 period. Although they were never organized on a citywide basis, 
 several groups began to take a stand against "forced busing." The 
 most vocal was an ad hoc group of parents from the Freedman School in 
 district III. These parents believed that Freedman, along with four 
 other schools in districts I and IV, should be exempt from the plan 
 since they were integrated and located in integrated communities . 94 
 
 90. Jones Interview. 
 
 91. Rucks Interview. 
 9 2 . Ibid . 
 
 93. Rev. Ronald Whitney, urban ministry director, Council of Churches of 
 Greater Springfield, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 16, 1975 
 (hereafter cited as Whitney Interview) . 
 
 94. Patricia O'Neill, Freedman School parent, telephone interview, 
 June 3, 1975 (hereafter cited as O'Neill Interview). 
 
31 
 
 Another group of parents at the nearby Glickman School also asked 
 for exemption on the grounds that Glickman was already integrated. 95 
 (Since 1967 a group of black students from the Homer Street School 
 had been assigned to Glickman to eliminate overcrowding at Homer.) 
 
 In early 1974 the two parent groups collaborated. Using school 
 department data, they modified the Six-District Plan and presented 
 their proposal to the State board of education. The alliance was 
 short-lived and ended when Freedman School parents presented a 
 separate proposal for exemption that did not include the Glickman 
 School. 96 
 
 During the summer each group continued to pressure the school 
 committee to modify the plan. Both groups argued that the Six- 
 District Plan placed an unfair burden on the Glickman and Freedman 
 schools. Since those two schools were converted into fifth and 
 sixth grade schools, all first through fourth grade students in the 
 neighborhood were required to be bused into the formerly imbalanced 
 Homer Street School. In most other communities, they argued, the 
 majority of lower elementary school students attended their neighbor- 
 hood school. As late as August 26, the Freedman parents requested 
 the school department to convert Freedman into a lower rather than 
 an upper elementary school. 97 
 
 Several other groups opposed the plan. In May 1974 a small 
 group of parents from Warner School in district IV participated in 
 an anti-busing demonstration at city hall. They presented Mayor 
 Sullivan with a petition of 2,000 signatures from parents and grand- 
 parents who threatened to keep their children out of school if the 
 plan went into effect. 98 Cannon Circle parents in Sixteen Acres in 
 district III organized another anti-busing rally shortly before the 
 opening of sehool. On September 9 about 20 parents demonstrated at 
 city hall. 99 A fifth group organized within the East Springfield 
 
 95. Tarpey Interview. 
 
 96. Ibid. 
 
 97. O'Neill Interview. 
 
 98. Springfield Daily News , May 10, 1974, p. 1. 
 
 99. Aime LaCourse, Cannon Circle resident, interview in Springfield, 
 Mass., May 16, 1975. See Springfield Daily News , Sept. 9, 1975. 
 
32 
 
 Homeowners Association. With William Crosby as their spokesperson, 
 the parents argued* that "forced busing" deprived citizens of a funda- 
 mental right to determine where they could send their children to school. 100 
 
 According to both anti- and pro-busing leaders, the anti-busing 
 leaders had the support of a large number of residents in many 
 different communities in the city. 101 The vast majority of those 
 opposing busing were committed to fight integration through peaceful 
 means, they said. Because anti-busing groups never organized into 
 a citywide coalition, they never became an obstacle to integration. 
 
 D . After the Final Court Order 
 
 Following the State court's ruling in August 1974,102 Mayor 
 Sullivan, the school department, and the school committee worked 
 together to put the Six-District Plan into effect. With few ex- 
 ceptions, all parties stressed that the court order must be obeyed 
 and that the safety of the children was at stake. 
 
 The day after the court decision, Mayor Sullivan issued a public 
 statement announcing that the school committee would obey the law 
 and urging that the residents of Springfield do the same. 103 He 
 made a similar statement again in September just before the opening 
 of school. 104 
 
 100. William Crosby, president of the East Springfield Homeowners 
 Association, telephone interview, May 24, 1975 (hereafter cited as 
 Crosby Interview) . 
 
 101. These were the opinions of most of the anti-busing leaders in- 
 terviewed as well as those of school department officials, such as 
 Cornelius Hannigan, director of school-community relations^ and members 
 of the press. 
 
 102. Springfield II. 
 
 103. William Sullivan, mayor, Springfield, Mass., statement, Aug. 23, 
 1974, available in USCCRNERO files. 
 
 104. Mayor William Sullivan, statement, Sept. 13, 1974. 
 
33 
 
 The school committee never formally approved the Six-District 
 Plan, but by early September 1974 most committee members either 
 supported the plan or remained silent. Only one member, Francis 
 Coughlin, opposed the ruling. He was quoted in the press as urging 
 parents not to send their children on the buses. 105 
 
 Within the school department, the mechanisms set in place by 
 Superintendent Deady went into operation. Because he had requested 
 all central staff to take their month's vacation at the beginning 
 of the summer, the entire support structure was ready to operate. 
 College students, hired in July to pack and tag furniture, moved 
 equipment and supplies to the appropriate schools. Department 
 staff completed final arrangements for transportation and confirmed 
 all students and teacher assignments. 106 Individual principals 
 took steps to facilitate the integration process. Most of the 
 principals interviewed had carefully reviewed bus routes . Diantha 
 Ferrier, principal of Kensington Avenue School, changed the routes 
 to insure that no child attending her school would cross a street 
 to meet the bus. After the term started, she sent a handwritten note 
 to each parent with a map showing the child's route. 107 
 
 The school department worked closely with the news media to 
 insure that complete and accurate information on the plan reached 
 the public. Throughout 1974 the Springfield newspapers and radio 
 and television stations provided extensive coverage on the plan 
 and notified the community of meetings and other events . The two 
 daily papers and one of the two local television stations took a 
 strong pro-integration stand and gave editorial support to the 
 Six-District Plan. The second local television station did not take 
 an editorial position on the issue. 108 
 
 105. Springfield Daily News , Aug. 24, 1974. 
 
 106. Howell and Hannigan Interviews. 
 
 107. Diantha Ferrier, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 15, 1975 
 
 (hereafter cited as Ferrier Interview). 
 
 108. Richard Garvey, editor, Springfield Daily News , May 1, 1975; 
 Durham Caldwell, editor, WHYN, May 16, 1975; William Putaam, owner, 
 WWLP, May 16, 1975, all interviews in Springfield, Mass. 
 
34 
 
 In the days preceding the opening of school, media coverage 
 increased. Radio and television stations made public service 
 announcements as often as four times an hour. A variety of persons 
 were taped for these announcements, including principals of the 
 imbalanced schools, church leaders, and former anti-busing leaders 
 who now urged parents to send their children ?' ichool. A panel 
 discussion on safety precautions taken to protect the children and 
 a 2-hour review of integration and the Six-District Plan were broad- 
 cast in early September. The Sunday before the opening of school, 
 school staff discussed on WHYN the danger of affecting children 
 negatively by keeping them out of school. 109 
 
 At the request of the council of churches and the Catholic 
 Diocese, many ministers of all denominations and priests talked 
 about the Six-District Plan and the importance of integration from 
 the pulpit the Sunday before the opening of school and urged their 
 parishioners to obey the law. HO 
 
 Only a small group of Warner School parents urged other parents 
 not to send their children oh the buses. Other anti-busing spokes- 
 persons remained silent or recommended compliance with the law. 
 William Crosby, president of the East Springfield Homeowners Associa- 
 tion, publicly urged parents to sent their children to school. HI 
 
 Because of the implementation of the Six-District Plan, the 
 elementary schools opened 8 days late , on the 16th rather than the 
 4th of September. During that week, each school held orientation 
 sessions for all teachers. Mayor Sullivan, usually accompanied 
 by Dr. Deady, visited all 36 elementary schools and spoke to the 
 staff, asking for their full cooperation and stressing the safety 
 of the children. 112 In a separate meeting with the entire school 
 department, Dr. Deady spoke on a similar theme. "My slogan was that 
 a successful school year was essential for the sake of the young- 
 sters," he said. 113 
 
 109. Hannigan Interview. 
 
 110. Whitney Interview. 
 
 111. Crosby Interview. 
 
 112. William Sullivan, mayor, interview in Springfield, Mass., 
 May 16, 1975 (hereafter cited as Sullivan Interview). 
 
 113. Deady Interview. 
 
35 
 
 Elementary schools opened as planned on September 16. Mayor 
 Sullivan earned the respect of liberals and conservatives by riding 
 a bus to school on that first morning. H4 Dr. Deady supervised from 
 the central school department building, where an emergency communica- 
 tion system had been established with schools throughout the city.H5 
 Many parents monitored the classrooms and the bus stops. Others, 
 apprehensive about the busing plan, accompanied their children to 
 school. Ministers organized by the council of churches informally 
 patrolled bus routes and bus stops. 116 
 
 Police officers on regular assignments handled the traffic 
 buildup as parents followed the buses or drove their children to 
 school. They also patrolled bus stops to give parents a sense of 
 security. An additional 10 motorcycle police officers were put on 
 duty and assigned to follow buses and patrol potential trouble 
 areas. According to police officials, the police department main- 
 tained a "low profile" during the day to avoid creating the appear- 
 ance of a crisis situation. H7 
 
 A minor problem occurred at Cannon Circle where a citizen 
 attempted to stir up parents in opposition to busing. A small 
 crowd of protesting parents gathered but did not cause trouble. 
 The same group dispersed on the second day after a busload of singing 
 children arrived at the bus stop.HS 
 
 No major incidents occurred during the day. One boy, who was 
 reported lost, spent the day at the wrong school. Minor problems 
 such as misplaced equipment and furniture occurred but were easily 
 resolved. The school day ended, buses picked up the children, and 
 the Six-District Plan was in effect. "It was beautiful the way it 
 worked," said Cornelius Hannigan, director of school-community re- 
 lations. H9 
 
 114. Sullivan Interview and interviews with city officials and residents 
 
 115. Deady Interview. 
 
 116. Whitney Interview. 
 
 117. Paul J. Fenton, police chief, interview in Springfield, Mass., 
 May 16, 1975; and Thomas Moriarty, community relations and public 
 information officer, telephone interview, June 6, 1975. 
 
 118. Sullivan Interview. 
 
 119. Hannigan Interview. 
 
36 
 
 E. Factors in the Integration Process 
 
 Although the Advisory Committee did not conduct a comprehensive 
 review of elementary school programs during the fall term, principals 
 at eight schools and central school department staff were inter- 
 viewed on a number of topics. The following is a summary of the 
 information given to the Advisory Committee on several issues re- 
 levant to the integration process. 
 
 1. , Parent Involvement 
 
 Following the opening of school, parent involvement 
 in the schools diminished. Many principals invited parents to come 
 and inspect their school's facilities and programs. Some held send- 
 ing and receiving meetings similar to those in the spring, and others 
 held an open house for the entire community. 
 
 The role of formal parent associations varied from school to 
 school. The Brookings School had no parent group at all. 120 The 
 Glickman School, on the other hand, had a fully-organized parent- 
 teacher association (PTA) when school opened. 121 The PTA . president 
 from the previous year contacted parents during the summer, established 
 an ad hoc group , and appointed officers . Other schools maintained 
 
 contact with the parents through informal meetings and social 
 events. 122 
 
 2. Bus Monitors 
 
 In September 1974 approximately 210 monitors were hired to 
 supervise the buses transporting students under the Six-District 
 Plan. The number of monitors was increased to 244 by April 1975 
 as more schools asked for second monitors on their buses. Approxi- 
 mately 85 percent of the monitors were women; 70 to 75 percent 
 were of minority groups. There were 15 monitors of Spanish speaking 
 
 120. Flemming R. Cocchi, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 1, 1975 
 
 121. Tarpey Interview. 
 
 122. Ferrier Interview. 
 
37 
 
 background. Each monitor was paid $4.50 per run, or $9 a day, 
 
 or $45 a week. The estimated cost of the program was approximately 
 
 $260,000 for the school year. 123 
 
 John F. Maloney, the bus monitor supervisor, stressed the im- 
 portance of hiring competent monitors. He said that many monitors 
 had initial difficulties in maintaining order on the buses. Mr. 
 Maloney said that men were generally more effective than women, 
 and that persons from a background similar to the students were 
 more effective. Seventeen monitors were reassigned from one bus 
 because they were unable to maintain order. After two black college 
 basketball players were hired, no further trouble occurred on that 
 bus. 
 
 All bus monitors were given a 2-day training program including 
 first aid, emergency procedures, and human relations. The training 
 was criticized by both Dr. Deady and Mr. Maloney as ineffective but 
 they said that it would be improved in the 1975-76 school year. la the 
 coming year, all monitors would be made special police officers to give 
 them greater prestige. 124 
 
 3. Teacher Training 
 
 During the summer of 1974, the school department, in cooperation 
 with the University of Hartford, Conn., provided a 2-week 
 workshop for 60 teachers, 2 from each school. In addition, 30 
 federally funded teachers were trained as reading specialists with 
 emphasis on problems in multiracial classrooms. In the spring of 
 1975, 140 teachers participated in 2-and 3-day workshops where they 
 discussed issues related to integration and problems which had 
 occurred during the fall. About 40 elementary school counselors 
 received training 1 day a week for a 3-week period. 125 
 
 123. The information in this section was provided by John F. Maloney, 
 bus monitor supervisor, interview in Springfield, Mass., May 16, 1975. 
 
 124. Ibid. 
 
 125. The information was provided by Dr. John Sullivan, Federal 
 program coordinator, Springfield School Department, telephone in- 
 terview, June 2, 1975. 
 
38 
 
 Although the school department had set aside up to $100,000 
 for staff training, State and Federal funds were used as they be- 
 came available. The 1974 summer program was funded by a $20,000 
 Federal grant to the University of Hartford General Assistance 
 Center and by $8,400 of city money. The spring 1975 program was 
 funded by a $10,000 Federal grant 'to the University of Hartford 
 and $9,000 of Chapter 636 funds. An additional $12,000 of State 
 funds initially allocated for staff training was scheduled to be 
 used for workshops in the summer of 1975.12b 
 
 These new training programs were set up to facilitate the 
 implementation of the Six-District Plan. Human relations training 
 was offered as part of the school system's regular, inservice staff 
 training . 
 
 4. Evaluation of the Six-District Plan 
 
 At the time of the Advisory Committee study, the school 
 department was in the process of evaluating the Six-District Plan 
 through three separate studies. None of the studies had been com- 
 pleted and results were not yet available. *2/ 
 
 Two studies conducted during the 1974-75 school year measure 
 attitudinal changes toward integration in the students and the third 
 will measure achievement levels. In one study, approximately one- 
 half of the students in the sixth grade were rated on the following: 
 social value of education, race and prejudice, black cultural handi- 
 cap, and the value of integration. Of all the indicators, the 
 school department research staff concluded that the measure of 
 race prejudice was the most reliable. Dr. John Howell, the depart- 
 ment's research director, said that initial results indicated that 
 students in an integrated situation have more positive attitudes 
 towards integration than students in segregated situations. The 
 same students will be given the same test in the seventh grade. 
 
 In the second study, approximately 50 classes of third and 
 fourth grade students were evaluated to determine their social 
 preferences at the beginning and at the end of the school" year. 
 Students were asked to identify whom they preferred to invite to 
 their homes and sit beside in class. 
 
 126. Ibid. 
 
 127. Howell Interview. 
 
39 
 
 The third study tests the reading and math levels of all 
 students in the 1974-1975 school year. Because the school depart- 
 ment has no records on achievement levels by race, scores will not 
 be compared by race. However, the department will compare grade 
 averages, measuring levels for 1974-1975 with previous years. 
 
 5. Budget 
 
 Approximately $4,500,000 were spent for the implementation of 
 the Six-District Plan. 128 of that amount, $3,000,000 came from 
 city revenues with the expectation that the funds would be reimbursed 
 by the State. The remaining funds were made available through two 
 special programs, one State and the other Federal, designed to 
 provide assistance to localities integrating their school systems . 
 
 The total school budget for 1974-1975 was approximately 
 $39,200,000, with $34,698,000 coming from city revenues!29 and 
 $4,512,000 from State and Federal programs. 130 
 
 The most expensive single item in the implementation of the 
 Six-District Plan was transportation. Approximately $2,600,000 
 was spent on contracts with two bus companies. Other items related 
 to the plan and funded by city revenues included the bus monitor 
 program, additional staff for the noon supervision program, improved 
 kitchen facilities, and employment of 65 college students for the 
 summer to clean, pack, tag, move furniture, and complete records. 
 At the time of the Massachusetts Advisory Committee review, the 
 school department planned to request reimbursement from the State 
 for all these programs. 131 
 
 128. Leon Thiem, assistant superintendent, Springfield School Department, 
 interview in Springfield, Mass., May 16, 1975 (hereafter cited as 
 
 Thiem Interview) . 
 
 129. Springfield, Mass., 1975-6 School Budget Recommendations , as sub- 
 mitted to the city council (Apr. 7, 1975). 
 
 130. Springfield, Mass., School Department, Approved Federal Projects 
 (1974-1975) , memorandum to Dr. Deady (Mar. 3, 1975). 
 
 131. Thiem Interview. 
 
40 
 
 The school department received special State and Federal 
 allocations t which it would not have received under the segregated 
 system, to facilitate the integration process. Approximately 60 
 staff persons with instructional, counseling, and home liaison 
 duties were hired through a $628,678 grant from the 1972 Federal 
 Emergency School Aid Act (ESAA) .132 a total of 125 professionals 
 and 90 paraprofessionals were hired to work in the integrated 
 schools, and part of the school's inservice training program was 
 funded through a $828,000 grant from the State's Chapter 636 Act. 133 
 
 Table VIII on the following page shows the funds related to 
 the implementation of the Six-District Plan. 
 
 According to Leon Thiem, the assistant superintendent in 
 charge of the city's school budget, the noon supervision and kitchen 
 improvement funds were allocations with a three-fold purpose. 
 School department staff had long recognized the need to improve the 
 breakfast and lunch program and facilities. Mr. Thiem said that 
 the staff took advantage of the integration plan to obtain these 
 needed funds. At the same time, they requested the additional funds 
 as a result of a policy decision to improve programs and facilities 
 to make the schools more attractive. School staff also believed 
 that additional staff for the noon supervision program would reduce 
 disciplinary problems at that time. 134 
 
 Of the ongoing Federal programs, only resources funded under 
 Title I of the 1965 Elementary and Secondary School Act were affected 
 by the Six-District Plan. 135 Since Title I funds are allocated 
 according to a formula based on the number of students from dis- 
 advantaged families at a school, the schools eligible for Title I 
 shifted as the inner-city students were moved out and the students 
 from the outlying districts were bused in. In school year 1973-74, 
 a total of 15 schools, located in the central and northwestern 
 sections of the city, and Indian Orchard in the far northeast corner, 
 received funds. In school year 1974-1975, a total of 20 schools 
 
 132. Emergency School Aid Act, 20 U.S. C. § 1601-1619 
 
 133. St. 1974, C.636. 
 
 134. Thiem Interview. 
 
 135. Sullivan Interview. 
 
41 
 
 TABLE VIII 
 
 SPRINGFIELD SCHOOL SYSTEM 
 
 Funds Related to the Implementation of the Six-District Plan 
 
 1974-1975 
 
 Type of Program and 
 Description 
 
 T ranspor tat ion 
 Busing for the 
 Six-District Plan 
 
 Estimated 
 Cost 
 
 $2,600,000 
 
 Source 
 
 City revenues- 
 Request for State 
 reimbursement 
 
 Bus Monitors 
 Approximately 240 
 persons at $4.50 a run 
 
 Noon Supervision 
 Staff to improve break- 
 fast and lunch programs 
 
 Kitchen Improvement 
 Funds to improve 
 kitchen facilities 
 
 260,000 
 
 50,000 
 
 80,000 
 
 City revenues- 
 Request for State 
 reimbursement 
 
 City revenues- 
 Request for State 
 reimbursement 
 
 City r e venue s- 
 Request for State 
 reimbursement 
 
 Summer Student Employees 
 Approximately 45 college 
 men and 20 college women 
 for custodial and clerical 
 work 
 
 75,000 to 
 100,000 
 
 City revenues- 
 Request for State 
 reimbursement 
 
 Instructional and 
 
 Counseling 
 A total of 60 staff persons- 
 instructional, counseling, 
 and home liaison duties 
 
 628,678 
 
 Federal Emergency 
 School Aid Funds 
 
 Instructional and 
 
 Counseling 
 A total of 125 professionals 
 and 90 paraprofessionals 
 
 807,000 
 
 Chapter 636 Funds 
 
 Inservice Training 
 Staff training provided in 
 cooperation with the Univer- 
 sity of Hartford 
 
 21,000 
 
 Chapter 636 Funds 
 
 Source: Springfield School Department 
 
42 
 
 received Title I funds. Although the five previously imbalanced 
 schools continued to receive Title I funds, other inner-city 
 schools did not. However, additional schools outside of the inner 
 city became eligible. All schools that lost Title I funds received 
 additional assistance through one of the special State or Federal 
 programs. 1^6 integration of the schools did not affect the 
 total amount of money received under Title I. 
 
 136. Sullivan Interview. 
 
IV. CONCLUSIONS 
 
 In September 1974 Springfield's public elementary schools 
 opened peacefully under a comprehensive integration plan. After 
 9 years of struggle, this western Massachusetts city integrated its 
 first through sixth grades with little difficulty, no strong community 
 opposition, and no outbreak of violence. As in Boston, the State 
 board of education and the courts, which took a strong stand in 
 support of the enforcement of the 1965 Racial Imbalance Act, were 
 the impetus for the change. 
 
 In the face of State-ordered integration, the situation in 
 Springfield was very different from that in Boston. Of the many 
 factors which accounted for peaceful integration, the Advisory 
 Committee believes that two have greater significance than the 
 others. One, the school department exhibited unusual management 
 and planning skills in developing and implementing the integration 
 proposal. Two, after the final State court order, the mayor and 
 public officials demonstrated strong and responsible political 
 leadership, suppressing their objections to "forced busing" and 
 urging compliance with the law. The Advisory Committee also be- 
 lieves that credit for the successful implementation of the Six- 
 District Plan must, in the final analysis, go to the entire city — 
 the parents, civic leaders, teachers, school department staff, and 
 students — who, together, enabled the elementary schools to open 
 in September 1974 without major problems. 
 
 No attempt was made by the Advisory Committee to evaluate the 
 extent to which meaningful integration occurred in the classrooms 
 under the Six-District Plan, the extent to which the plan fostered 
 quality education, or the impact of the plan on race relations in 
 the community. Instead, the study focused on the actual implementa- 
 tion of the plan. 
 
 The Advisory Committee notes the following factors which help 
 to explain why the Six-District Plan was implemented peacefully and 
 successfully. 
 
 43 
 
44 
 
 1. Under the leadership of Superintendent John Deady, the 
 Springfield School Department worked tirelessly over several years, 
 often without school committee approval, to develop and implement 
 the Six-District Plan. With no assurance that the program would 
 be implemented, the school department meticulously planned the 
 smallest details — student and staff reassignments , exchange of 
 equipment, bus routes, and curriculum changes — and informed the 
 community about these changes. 
 
 Superintendent Deady' s personal leadership and commitment to 
 implementing the plan was a major factor in its success. Central 
 department staff, principals, and teachers showed initiative and 
 persistence throughout 1974. Because of their positive attitudes, 
 problems such as underrepresentation of minority staff or difficulties 
 in the bus monitoring program had no serious repercussions . 
 
 2. The mayor, as the city's chief executive and chairman of the 
 school committee, made a major contribution to the implementation 
 process. His statements urging compliance with the law and his 
 positive support of the plan provided a model for all city residents 
 and established an atmosphere of cooperation in the city. His 
 initial opposition to busing seems to have worked in favor of the 
 actual implementation of the Six-District Plan. Because he had 
 been the spokesman for the anti-busing forces and initially assured 
 the public that students would not be bused, there was no reason 
 for the anti-busing forces to organize, and it became easier for 
 him to gain their support once the plan went into effect. 
 
 3. Although the Springfield School Committee consistently refused 
 to approve plans calling for mandatory busing, its role ultimately 
 was not a negative one. In general, the committee did not inter- 
 fere with the school department's development and implementation of 
 the Six-District Plan. As in the case of the mayor, their recom- 
 mendation to obey the law after the final State court order lead 
 the anti-busing groups to take the same stand. 
 
 4. The community — both pro-and anti-busing groups — deserve 
 credit. Pro-busing groups, led by the Quality Integrated Education 
 Committee, helped consolidate public support for the Six-District 
 Plan and provided valuable assistance in the fight over the plan 
 
 in court. 
 
 The anti-busing groups, which never organized on a citywide 
 basis, largely used established channels — the school committee and 
 the State board — in their efforts to eliminate or modify the Six- 
 
45 
 
 Tistrict Plan. No one spoke out in favor of violence and the 
 jiti-busing forces never became a serious obstacle to integration. 
 
 5 . The media played a vital role by providing extensive coverage 
 of the Six-District Plan. - By keeping the Springfield residents 
 informed, the media helped establish an atmosphere of reasonableness 
 in the city. The newspapers and the television station which 
 supported the plan in their editorials contributed further to its 
 successful implementation. 
 
 6. Springfield's prior experience in integrating the junior and 
 senior high schools probably facilitated integration of the 
 elementary schools. 
 
 7. The small size of the city may have made it easier to devise 
 a comprehensive plan. Because no one neighborhood is physically 
 isolated from another, there were no enclaves, reinforced by physical 
 barriers, with entrenched opposition to integration. 
 
 8. The design of the Six-District Plan was well-suited to 
 Springfield's elementary schools. First, the plan involved the 
 entire city (with the exception of district VI) Second, the 
 districts were drawn up to maintain existing neighborhoods, and 
 student assignments were made to further a sense of neighborhood 
 identity. Third, the educational components helped improve 
 
 the quality of education provided to all Springfield elementary 
 students. And, fourth, the plan was flexible enough to adapt to 
 the changing racial composition of the city of Springfield, 
 and therefore eliminated the need for modifications as the 
 city population changed. 
 
 The Six-District Plan is not perfect. Black students, who constitute 
 26.8 percent of the elementary school population, make up 40.7 percent 
 of those bused and bear a disproportionate burden of the busing. The 
 plan is still opposed by many Springfield residents who believe that 
 mandatory busing is not the appropriate path to integration. Of much 
 greater seriousness is the unsolved problem of the Puerto Rican students. 
 
46 
 
 APPENDIX A 
 
 SCHOOL DEPARTMENT DATA 
 1964-1974 
 
47 
 
 3*1 
 
 O CJ 
 
 V 
 
 O cJ 
 M W 
 ►J « 
 
 "J* 
 P* 
 
 s c 
 
 (X, O. 
 COCO 
 
 cv 
 
 CO 
 
 8 
 
 co 
 n 
 
 O T3 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 B 
 
 o 
 
 V* 
 
 ** T- 
 S? 
 f> « 
 
 O P 
 T- O 
 O 
 
 O -P 
 
 0> 
 CV 
 
 cv 
 i> 
 
 ON P 
 
 r- C 
 CO 
 
 
 o 
 
 £> • 
 OS -P 
 
 -8 
 
 vD • 
 O -P 
 
 -<3 
 
 to 
 
 sO • 
 O P 
 
 o 
 
 cv 
 o 
 
 O -H 
 
 T- O 
 
 o 
 
 en 
 sO 
 sO 
 O -P 
 
 vO 
 O P 
 
 sf 
 
 sD 
 O 
 
 O^ 
 
 dB 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 a: 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 c- t- o>co 
 
 CM 
 
 t- enen r- 
 
 m C*- cv u> 
 
 toir\o -^ 
 
 cv 
 
 to 
 l to 
 
 c"\ s sf c*i 
 
 I r> t- sf ir\ 
 cv cv cv cv 
 
 C-t*-i- sfT-00»r\vOsf-cv 
 
 1 m-J-COvrvT-T-tOT-C-T-m 
 
 (^dCMnnoKnn ->*cn 
 
 T— T— t> C\ Sf <7* .Sfr 
 
 | ...... ( • 
 
 «T\tO <— 
 ! O OO 
 
 sftotosfcvT-c-tor>»no en c-- o cv o to «a 
 
 ^\Cr\0 00(«\nr-000 I -^rOm>0 I «J> 
 
 CV 
 
 t- r> to v> It- iooooo ir>T-coT-sfenT-sfcr>.c>sf 
 t-c^cvt- cv cvv-t-cv en cv cv cv t- cv £> ro en 
 
 <nmo »r>vO 
 oo-\ CV CV CO 
 
 CVOOC0 n «0 » C>- >Tv f- r-«0 W\O«0 r-(0(^-4\0sD 
 
 Or-OCV I (>\D(MVC\0 I lAC^CVN sf CO CO if\ O (O CO 
 
 t-^ sf r- CO I r-Sfr-vO>CM IvOsfVTisfvntOVATlCOT-CV 
 
 t-O^CVt- CV C\ CV t- t- CV Cn CV CV CV T- T- £> CM^ 
 
 l «"\ sf O W O^vO 
 
 i 
 i 
 
 l en O vn o s> c\ 
 O enev CV £> 
 
 CV 
 
 0\0>A\0 r-COr->>0 UMM^ri-O^r-tOf^m Sf O C- sf- CO l> st 
 
 vr> a* u^ en i iAr- "aco st to i ocrxcvcvooocoencnen t ev cv cv c- st to i en 
 
 . . . . I ......(....•.....•I ...... I • 
 
 COenCOOICVOeVvOsOCO inC0>Ar\<>OstC-C > -r-C s - I CM \0 •* to >^ sf | t- 
 
 C"\ t- t- CV CV CV r- t- x- C*\ t- CV CV C*\ t> OCV O CV CV CV O CV 
 
 C- O CV en r-tOOOtOr- CV^sfCOO^OT-CVtOO O t> v- sf t- O CV 
 
 t-stOCV I CO >t0\0 C>CM rvOtO^TT-COOCVT-NOcntO I sf CO O CO CV CO IvO 
 
 ....| ♦ I I •....•! • 
 
 eo eo sf o i o m o str-- to icnstocoov\cvocoT-cv i t> en *- cv <n en | r- 
 
 CVt-CV CV tnCV t- r- t- CVt-v-t- HC^t- OCV CO CV CV en C- CV 
 
 CV t> st C- vOOW^t-OO OCOO-sfcvmcVC^-savOCV to cv »^ st cv t> st 
 
 sf C*~ sf tn I \Dr->TitOCO sf lOcnOtnOC^-VVtOCVCVC-- IsfOvOtOr-T- I vO 
 
 • •».| • I ••• ...•.»•• i ...... | • 
 
 to vO cv to i vMnoN^io imsfc-vrvcocosteocoevo i o o Ovo en o i m 
 
 (Vrr (Mn«rr r CVt-t-t- tn t> Ot- COCVt-CV vO CV 
 
 »T\ CJs en CV Of\l >A«- n!> r>(>v0>t^00>0> vn O en r- sO vO l> 
 
 m tn O v- I O sT r- CV O r- I -sfsO sfsfvfl mCCM^sfO ID-OCOvOOO ICV 
 
 .... I .....| | . 
 
 j>cvt-to i«r\-^T--tcr»i> lO^vo^o^r-CMnrn ir>\oc^cncv-* I St 
 
 CVt-t- CVCnCVr— t-t- t-t-t- PM> t-Ot— O t— t- CV vO CV 
 
 OrncnT-stCVTvcnO^OvO r-OcncvOOCVVNOsOCO C^mvOOC-NO t- 
 COOOOCOC-»r\sfsfrnO |COCVT-COI>CVC>-£>OT-r<> lOCVcntOsOO |V\ 
 
 I • « I I • 
 
 tOr-cvirvT-cnc^c^-cocvo isfm>to«0\or-vO>r\G(v ist-cvt-i-oo icn 
 
 CVr-T-tOCVCVr- t-t- t-t- C*\nO t-Ot- Or- CV nO CV 
 
 ir\O>Ar-'ACMA«0W^OI Ossfrvn-<f-ir»:>C' r \OOVM r v sfcsOstOO t> 
 O sf if> 0> M^ r- n iA sf r- |sOOtOT-OCVC»-NOC^t-vO I C> sf O »ft St 0> |t- 
 
 • »••• I ...........I ...... I . 
 
 tot>-cvmsoto\ocoocvcn lOT-cor-OT-insftOT-o ir-oosoost io 
 
 T-T-T-vfit-CVr-T- T- stsDr-avT-O nOCV 
 
 OOr-vOr-vOmvOvO CT'-r^vOvOVAfnOCVinsf'sfCOOOCVtOOvOCVtOcVO 
 Or-UACVU^r-sfT-T- I OOt^knsfvOrnvr^C^-T-U^COCVsfOt^OOvDsttOs? 
 
 \0>rv^ O^iCOvOnO I (MnOmriv»;ON«)(\|OO0^(V«)nOrO(000r 
 t-t-t-vOt-CVt- sfvncVOCONO lAsf t- 
 
 COvOtssOCVl>vOC^C- CVv0f r \Or-»nC0OOCVCVv0CVT-OC > -OOOe0T-O 
 
 T-sfsorncvcoiTvcvT- I wrvsocvascocomcv\Osfosc^Ovow^T-ooocv»rvc*> 
 
 \Orl>>nrMMO Ir-mOsfOs* <n Cs CO OCOOO^Ot-O 0«0 C^ CV CO 
 r- nOCVt- CVTV»T\OCO\D sfCOi- 
 
 00 
 •H 
 
 
 •a 
 
 m xi 
 to 
 
 >"3 
 
 -P ►-> X ' 
 CO • m u 
 
 r-\ U CO >-3 
 
 
 o to 
 
 Vi CO C rJ^H 
 
 m ti o -p o 
 
 u to 
 a o 
 
 >J n a JmH W £ ^ -rt O 
 
 C t| 
 
 P t) . 
 
 to w tu; 0) £ o P 
 
 O CJ l^i U C rH t-i 
 
 X\ M 
 
 0) 
 3-P 
 
 CJ c< 
 
 -P 
 
 >>> o to 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 ■p 
 
 . <D 
 
 o 
 u 
 ■p 
 
 CO 
 
 4 
 
 c 
 
 C 3 
 
 OHH 
 
 30c-,-iNnJoticjb 
 
 ^ r^ !>; ^ :>: > ■«: < ai ro 
 
 to 
 
 C flW >> 
 
 .HO PC. 
 
 ,C J«! P > ^i cO CO 
 
 to o c q) co e 
 
 •H O 3 fn « G 
 
 M Ih t. (d <u o , 
 OTCOCQOQOWWCi. 
 
 c 
 B 
 
 P to <y 
 10 rH 0) 
 
 O CO 
 
 > i2 
 
 C o 
 
 a> -h 
 
 -p 
 
 <D 
 
 CD 
 
 h 
 •p 
 CO 
 
 •H u o u 
 U a> x a] 
 
 ^ e o 2 
 o o o 
 
 33 W SC 
 
 ^ 
 
cv 
 
 
 48- 
 
 
 ■> ■ 
 
 O -P 
 
 -8 
 
 N0<*rvt-r-\oe > -C0f\cvc\N0r'-\f r \O iou>Ov\m> 
 .................. ."-^ 
 
 CV CV CV WW(nW(\r-»-(V(n-5T-Nt\l?is; 
 
 
 1973 
 Oct. 1 
 
 U !J V S£^ <V J-OOfM r>^c^CT\0-<fCr.vtCvr>">Cr 
 t— «- . t- -sr cv T-t— to r-t— m 
 
 
 cr 
 cv 
 cv 
 
 rr £J S ^ r- T ~*r £"> ***»-<*■ o cv Ovocr»-crT-T-w-> 
 
 OtOOO/OrVOOU"»CNr-COT-Om^-C v --sJ-T-^J 
 
 
 r- <0 
 CO 
 
 r- t- tvnoj t-(V 60 t- r- -<J 
 
 
 1971 
 Oct. 1 
 
 CV tTNvOU^incOOtOfMU^OCVU^C^CVOOC-C-O 
 
 to cv to co cv to cv stinvOvOnomtfMairjvOr-N 1 
 t— r p>r r-r^ to r- -<r 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 O^ -P 
 
 -8 
 
 O >T\T--^-»tCOCOT-T-CvivOvOC>/CVvO-^0»r\C^C N 
 
 «- r- t- tnov r- t-c\i to t— o> 
 
 
 cr 
 
 N (M O tO O ITt r- sO CV ^ CV WX^COOOmOO 
 
 "•j o -4- 1> cv r-%t\OT-c\j^\oc*<Oi- c^votnr-to 
 
 
 O -P 
 
 -8 
 
 O "TlOr M>n>0\0 0>(\i V\Oi— vrjOACOVWNCO 
 ^* r- tr- C"\ t— v- CV CO »— 
 
 
 to r " 
 
 O -P 
 
 *~8 
 
 ^CVCVCVCVtO^^COCOr'\r>OCr'C*~»CVvO r- r~. 
 •"T- O C"\ t- -JlAC^^1-CnC , "C\|T->t>t(\JvO>C' 
 
 £** 0^0(nO>Ar -4 CO CO^J-»r\T-T-v>.^t>^-«* 
 »- t- t- C"\ r- r- CV CO 
 
 
 1967 
 Oct. 2 
 
 Hr O C'N f> c*\ O CO m iti >t (M^ >t t- OrC\\0 
 t0r-OC^T-CVOr-1»aN">">O\0vQO<>CVCV 
 
 
 C- r- O O vO CO CO -^C v -' v >COC r >t-T-<nOu^O(N 
 
 T-- (\ t- t- Oj CO 
 
 
 1966 
 Oct. 3 
 
 
 
 r- *- CV t- CV CO 
 
 
 1965 
 Oct. 1 
 
 C^Ot>r^ocvc*~s0cv\0r>C0C>u"*<--4'O»n «r\ ->f 
 OT»T-0^OOT-»-O( T \OT-r--«fmOvCr n »W> 
 
 
 >C»00>}N + CMnONNOOr>ONOO 
 
 a 
 
 55 
 
 
 c>cvc^ccr-eor>cnovo<^coo--4-<rotoc>cv 
 
 O n r r- > tV 'J-. r\ O vi3 vC t- O CV O O nWiI 
 
 s 
 
 s ^ 
 
 uac-OO^O^OOt-COOOt-v^Qi-OO 
 
 s 
 
 to 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 . CO 
 TJ « O O 
 U © > +"•+"» 01 .H 
 «jj>< OC00) -P r* 
 
 JC «< O 1) t. ♦ CD i, 
 O C Jh t-t O <D CCOQ) 
 
 <h c o +->j^-p-«3;> ot-tco 
 OO-P , t-i CO <D CO ■=<© -P-P 
 
 n ti£> >> c as: 'tu ' c to >» bcco <—. 
 
 OJ'U-Hf-tO-Cfct'Hi— ((UO4>Oq}a>c0Of-tCp-<-i 
 
 ^Ht-tWoooo^.-P-PO-pqSi-iV^cx-'-'c. 
 
 C 0) CO -H -H ?"> <l> ' Q J> O O t4 p nj «0 ;H a) Cd jC c 
 
 5 
 
 .-4 
 (X, 
 
 o 
 
 p 
 
 «c 
 
 5 
 B 
 
 CO \C «*" 
 c> cr to 
 
 CV 
 
 CV 
 
 <*-> 
 
 cv 
 
 cv 
 ct 
 
 0*1 C\i 
 cv 
 
 o 
 
 1 
 
 cr 
 o 
 
 cv 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 cv 
 
 O 
 
 (V 
 
 cv 
 
 cv 
 
 u^ cv 
 
 cv 
 
 CV 
 
 • ♦ 
 
 C^ xO 
 
 O 
 
 
 CV 
 
 CV 
 
 CO 
 
 cv 
 
 cv 
 
 4T 1 
 
 cv 
 
 cv r$ 
 
 nC 
 
 cv 
 
 c? 
 
 « 
 
 o 
 cv 
 
 cr 
 
 o 
 
 cv 
 o 
 
 w> 
 
 -?1 
 
 O 
 -4< 
 
 C> 
 80) 
 
 ? 
 
 ivi 
 
 J 
 
 toj 
 
 o 
 
 
 to 
 cv 
 
 cv 
 
 cr 
 cv 
 
 tc 
 c 
 
 ^s 
 
 »r 
 
 vC 
 
 cr 
 
 cr 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 en 
 
 vO eo 
 -«* 
 cr 
 
 J> cv 
 f- >o 
 
 J- 
 
 cv 
 •dvrv • 
 
 cv 
 
 Sol 
 
 o 
 
 cv 
 
 cr 
 
 T- NO 
 
 ^ c* 
 
 o o 
 
 CM xC 
 
 r- cr 
 
 CV O 
 
 to vO 
 
 sO vO 
 c»> 
 
 CV r- 
 
 CV C^ 
 
 O 
 
 CV C* 
 
 o- 
 
 r» 
 
 o 
 
 0< -i 
 r~ «*■ «- 
 
 S\C • 
 
 T- ~4 l> 
 
 w so 
 
 oio cv 
 
 i/\ cr 
 cnicv c- 
 
 cr i- 
 
 a- 
 •>* o 
 cv to 
 
 Ct3 
 
 o 
 
 OvC 
 
 " IT 
 CV 
 
 O 00 
 
 O -si 
 CV 
 
 o> cr 
 
 »*> 
 
 cv 
 
 o cr 
 
 cv -n( 
 
 o 
 
 t> cv 
 
 cv 
 
 ocv 
 
 CM 
 
 CV «*> 
 
 o cr 
 
 >o cr 
 
 cro 
 o cv 
 t— • 
 %o cr 
 
 CO «r« 
 vr\co 
 
 O CO 
 
 CO vO 
 
 cv 
 c^t- 
 
 vr\r> 
 o ->; 
 to • 
 cv cr 
 
 eo «r 
 cv r> 
 
 CV vO 
 
 COsg 
 
 -^ ■ 
 
 CV ^J 
 
 »T>sO 
 
 cv cv 
 o • 
 
 x- €*- 
 
 tv 
 
 cv 
 
 
 cr 
 
 w 
 
 *-j» t 
 
 m 
 
 ft. o 
 
 f -0 aj 
 
 Si 
 
49 
 
 APPENDIX B 
 
 Letter from Mayor William C. Sullivan to Jacques E. Wilmore 
 Regional Director, Dec. 24, 1975 
 
50 
 
 I* •: 
 
 DEC. 3O 
 
 .- 
 
 -. . -«- . . .*• - 
 
 lill 
 
 VVIi 
 
 .LI AM C 
 
 SULLIVAN 
 
 
 may 
 
 o<* 
 
 office of the mayor 
 
 CITY OF SPRINGFIELD. 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS. 01103 
 
 . AREA CODE (413) 736 271 1 
 
 December 24-, 1975 
 
 Jacques E. Wilmore, Regional Director 
 
 United States Commission on Civil Rights 
 
 Northeastern Regional Office 
 
 The Federal Building 
 
 26 Federal Plaza, Room 1639 
 
 New York, New York 1000? 
 
 Dear Mr.' Wilmore: 
 
 Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing. the draft 
 report of the Massachusetts Advisory Commission to the 
 United States Comm i ssion on Civil Rights. 
 
 I attach to this letter a list of comments regarding 
 P.P. 5-50 of the draft report. (I have received only 
 p.p. 5-50. ) In addition to these comments, I would 
 like to emphasize that the Springfield School System 
 was never a dual school system or de jure segregated. 
 See Barksdale v. School Committee of Springfield 348 
 F 2d 261 (1965)- The experience covered in your report 
 arose under a state statute, unique among all of our 
 fifty United States, which mandates racial "balancing — 
 the elimination of de facto segregation, which is not 
 required "by the constitution. Thus we had not "been 
 dealing with a constitutional question until the 
 Massachusetts Suoreme Court ' s decision in Springfield 
 III. 
 
 When tne constitutional question arose, many of the 
 
 problems with the implementation of the Six District 
 
 plan vanished, as is evident from your description of 
 
 the implementation of the plan. I believe that these 
 
 legal considerations are fundamental to an 'understanding 
 
 of the relations between the School Committee and the 
 
 State Board of Education which resulted in the implementation 
 
 of the Six District plan. 
 
 Very truly -yours, 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 • : / 
 
 
 v.. - ' 
 
 ■ — -< 
 
 i I . 
 
 * '£? ' 
 
 WI 
 
 hxjJLi 
 
 J-i 
 
 c 
 
 k"i 
 
 ULLI 
 
 VAN, 
 
 Mayor 
 
 Let's Meet in Springfield— Soon! 
 
U. S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS 
 WASHINGTON, D. C. 20425 
 
 POSTAGE AND FEES PAID 
 U. S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS 
 
 OFFICIAL BUSINESS 
 
 PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $300