Families in U-46 bias suit want schedule pushed back, again

Citing inequities in expert reports, the families accusing Elgin Area School District U-46 of racial bias in a class-action lawsuit on Wednesday requested an extension of the already protracted discovery schedule.

The heated, 40-minute hearing - the longest since last fall - saw the parties clash over what information was accessible to various experts involved in the case.

Filed by a group of Elgin families, the 5-year-old suit was sparked by U-46's 2004 decision to redraw district boundaries. The families charge that the new boundaries violated the constitutional rights of black and Hispanic students by placing them in crowded, older schools; busing them farther and more often than white students; and providing them inferior educational opportunities.

Now a class-action case, more than 17,000 U-46 students would be affected if the plaintiffs prevail.

The suit, which has cost U-46 more than $7.8 million in legal fees, will likely rack up an even bigger tab from the lawyers' frequent disputes.

On Wednesday, Steven Schneck and Alonzo Rivas, who represent the families, asked Magistrate Judge Michael T. Mason to allow their experts in the case to write rebuttal reports in response to recent reports written by the district's own experts.

Schneck argued that more reports were needed because the district's expert reports, submitted to the court in early June, attacked some of the practices and opinions of the plaintiffs' experts. In addition, he said, those reports were based on documents and information the plaintiffs were unable to access.

John Borkowski, who represents U-46, objected to the plaintiffs' request, saying that there was no basis for additional analysis. "They have done it wrong," he said of the disparities.

Borkowski maintained that the age of the case, and the significant amount of time it has taken to complete portions of discovery, has contributed to the problem.

Expert reports are part of the last phase of discovery, the costly pretrial exchange of evidence. Oral discovery, where both sides interviewed a number of key witnesses in the case, ended in mid-October. After nearly three years, the discovery portion dealing with paper and electronic documents formally closed last March.

Mason is expected to rule by written order.

Another hearing before Judge Robert W. Gettleman is scheduled for July 7. Gettleman has warned the parties that he may order them to start preparing for trial.