Vol.59/No.17           May 1, 1995 
 
 
Connecticut Desegregation Suit Dismissed  

BY TIM CRAINE
HARTFORD, Connecticut - An important fight for equal rights was set back here April 12 when Judge Harry Hammer ruled against the plaintiffs in Sheff vs. O'Neill. This lawsuit, initiated six years ago, charged that the government of Connecticut is responsible for racial imbalance resulting in unequal educational opportunities for Black and Hispanic children in Hartford. The suit demanded that schools in Hartford and the surrounding suburbs be integrated.

Hammer ruled that the state could not be held responsible for its grievously segregated school system since it had not specifically taken actions to set it up that way.

Supporters of equal rights reacted quickly to the judge's verdict. On the morning of April 17, nearly 400 students walked out of the city's three high schools to join a protest and prayer vigil at the capitol organized by the Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance. That evening, 200 people attended a rally at Saint Monica's Church. Among the speakers were two organizers of the morning walkout, Chris Wyatt, a student at Hartford Public High School, and Milo Sheff, a student at Weaver High School. Sheff was 10 years old when his mother joined other parents in initiating the Sheff vs. O'Neill suit.

Wyatt and Sheff told the Militant that organizing efforts in the high schools had just begun and next time more students will join the protests. Another rally is planned for April 24.

Long-term struggle
The struggle against segregated schools in Connecticut dates back to the civil rights movement of the 1960s. In 1965 the U.S. Civil Rights Commission issued a report calling on the state's department of education to eliminate segregation between urban and suburban school districts. This report, like many subsequent ones, sat on the shelf and gathered dust.

Hartford is one of 12 urban school districts where the majority of Connecticut's Black and Hispanic children attend school. Most of the remaining 154 districts in the state are predominantly white.

In the case before the court, the plaintiffs cited the following statistics: 94 percent of Hartford students are Black or Hispanic, compared with the state average of 27 percent. Two-thirds of the students live below the poverty level in contrast with a state average of 24 percent. Half come from families where English is not spoken at home, compared with 12 percent statewide. And only 11 percent of students in Hartford passed all three parts of the Connecticut Mastery Test, given to fourth, sixth, and eighth graders. The state average is 48 percent.

In 1989 the Sheff vs. O'Neill lawsuit was filed. It named then governor William O'Neill as a defendant and cited the Connecticut State Constitution, which states that "no person shall be denied the equal protection of the law nor be subjected to discrimination or segregation-because of race, color, ancestry or national origin."

In Hartford, many school buildings are in a state of disrepair, textbooks are outdated, libraries understocked, and computers scarce. In contrast, many suburban schools are equipped with more modern facilities and the latest in educational technology. Although the per-pupil expenditure in Hartford, $8,698, is above the state average of $7,806, many more Hartford students need special education programs.

`Voluntary' plan put in place
Testimony in the case concluded in 1994, and for months supporters of school desegregation awaited the outcome.

In the meantime, in an attempt to avoid a court-ordered desegregation plan, then governor Lowell Weicker asked the state legislature in 1993 to promote integration on a "voluntary" basis. Ineffective as these voluntary efforts to promote "diversity" were, in the fall of 1994, they were voted down in 8 of 11 state regions. At present, in all of Connecticut, just 600 students are enrolled in Project Concern, which makes it possible for inner-city school children to attend better suburban schools.

At the same time conditions in the Hartford schools continued to deteriorate. In 1994, the Hartford Board of Education voted to turn the management of the entire school system over to a private company, Educational Alternatives Inc. (EAI). The company promised to provide more computers to the schools and to raise test scores.

Instead, the initial results of their takeover include the elimination of art, music, and physical education classes for elementary students and the beginning of an attack on the unions of teachers and other school workers.

Republican governor John Rowland was quick to praise Hammer's decision. In language reminiscent of defenders of Jim Crow segregation in the South, he said, "It's a natural occurrence. It's a result of human nature, people's decision to live where they want to live."

Rowland also sent a congratulatory bottle of champagne to Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, who had directed the state's defense team during the trial. The following day, Blumenthal attempted to distance himself from Rowland. Nevertheless, he said that he is prepared to defend the state when the plaintiffs file an appeal with the state supreme court.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home