Former U-46 chief Neale takes stand in bias suit
Former Elgin Area School District U-46 Superintendent Connie Neale took the stand Thursday on day four of the district’s federal desegregation trial.
Neale was superintendent from 2002 to 2007, a period that included the 2004 school boundary changes that led to the class-action discrimination lawsuit.
She left the district in the fall of 2007 for undisclosed medical reasons. Before leaving, Neale, who had already attracted considerable controversy for her generous compensation package, renegotiated her contract so she could stay on the payroll into the new year and receive more than $1 million in retirement benefits. She is retired and now lives in Joplin, Mo.
The lawsuit alleges U-46 discriminated against black and Hispanic students by placing them in older, overcrowded schools; providing inadequate bilingual services; and denying them access to gifted programs.
This week and next week, attorneys examine claims that minorities were sent to inferior schools — particularly after the 2004 boundary changes that returned many students to their neighborhood schools. Later phases of the trial have not been scheduled.
A central theme of the lawsuit is that U-46 took care of its white students first and took care of minorities later.
Plaintiffs’ attorney Stewart Weltman asked Neale if the needs of bilingual students and kids with special needs were considered as part of U-46’s adoption of 2004 school boundaries.
“The boundary lines were drawn for children to have the opportunity to go to their neighborhood schools,” Neale said. “Programs were not a consideration because we were going to service the children no matter where they went to school.”
Plaintiffs’ attorneys tried to show U-46 put mobile classrooms at high-minority schools even though the district experienced no major or unexpected enrollment increases.
Questioning focused on a June 2004 document in which U-46 projected using 24 mobile classrooms at its elementary schools.
“Was that ... due to an unexpected increase in student population?” Weltman asked.
“No,” Neale said.
Weltman pointed out that according to official records, U-46’s enrollment increased by 144 from September 2003 to September 2004 — a drop in the bucket for a school district with more than 40,000 students.
He later asked, “Were you concerned that there was a disproportionate number of mobiles being used at minority schools?”
“I was unaware that there was any concern in that area,” Neale said.
Following the advice of U-46’s attorneys, Neale declined to speak to a reporter after her testimony concluded.
Thursday also saw testimony from the former principal of Illinois Park Elementary School, Cathy Dunphy. Plaintiffs claim U-46’s decision to close Illinois Park had a disproportionate effect on minorities.
U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman asked Dunphy whether she considered mobile classrooms inferior to regular classrooms.
“Yes,” Dunphy said.
She went on to describe safety concerns and issues with supervising students as they walked between mobile units and the main school building.
Dunphy also described an incident in which the brother of one of her students at Illinois Park burned down two of the mobile units in the middle of the night, forcing students who had been housed there into the art area of the main building.
“If anything, I oversupplied the mobiles because I was very, very concerned about it,” Dunphy testified.
Plaintiffs could wrap up their case in the first phase of the trial on Monday, with U-46 expected to begin its case next Tuesday.