UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

LINDA STOUT, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Intervenor,

v.

JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OFEDUCATION, et al.,

Defendants.

))))))))))))))

Case No.: 2:65-cv-00396-MHH

JOINT STATUS REPORT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE COURTSMARCH 24, 2015 (DOC. 1010)

On March 24, 2015, counsel for the City of Gardendale Board of Education

(Gardendale), the Jefferson County Board of Education (Jefferson County),

the United States Department of Justice, and the Private Plaintiffs held a

conference to discuss the proposed timeline regarding Gardendales efforts to

petition the Court for permission to operate a municipal school system, as ordered

by the Court on March 24, 2015. (See Doc. 1010). As a result of the conference

and the parties subsequent discussions, the parties have agreed as follows:

(1) On March 30, 2015, Gardendale will circulate, to all of the parties tothis action, its proposal(s) regarding a plan of separation andconstitutional desegregation obligations (which shall include proposed

FILED 2015 Mar-27 AM 11:55U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 2:65-cv-00396-MHH Document 1011 Filed 03/27/15 Page 1 of 4

37512934-1 2

resolutions of the various threshold issues that have been the subjectof its negotiations with Jefferson County to date).

(2) On April 15, 2015, the Plaintiff Parties will respond to Gardendalessubmission. That response may include a request that Gardendaleprovide any additional documentation or information relevant toGardendales plan of separation and its impact upon the Defendantscompliance with the Courts September 8, 1971 Amended Order(Doc. 226).

(3) On April 22, 2015, Gardendale will respond to any requests made inaccordance with Paragraph (2), above.

(4) On May 4, 2015, the parties to this action will meet and discuss thedocumentation and information provided in accordance withParagraphs (1) through (3), above, and address any concerns relevantto the parties compliance with the Courts September 8, 1971Amended Order (Doc. 226).

(5) The parties are unable to agree regarding the confidentiality of thediscussions and transfers of information described in the foregoingParagraphs. Gardendale proposes the following language:

Any and all documentation or information provided asdescribed in the foregoing Paragraphs, as well as anydiscussions described in the foregoing Paragraphs, shall be heldconfidential.

Jefferson County, Private Plaintiffs, and the Department of Justice areamenable to a limited confidentiality provision for purposes ofmediating a resolution, but not if it compromises their ability todevelop appropriate responses to information requests and the plan tobe proposed by Gardendale. As drafted, it is unclear whether theproposed confidentiality provision would result in such a compromiseand, accordingly, Jefferson County, Private Plaintiffs and theDepartment of Justice do not agree to the provision as drafted.

(6) The parties hereby jointly request that this Court designate a UnitedStates Magistrate Judge to preside over any discovery issues that arisein this action.

(7) Gardendale proposes the following language as well:

Case 2:65-cv-00396-MHH Document 1011 Filed 03/27/15 Page 2 of 4

37512934-1 3

At the March 24, 2015 conference, Gardendale and JeffersonCounty could not reach a resolution as to the questions ofAlabama law that were discussed on the record at the March 24,2015 hearing before the Court and that were the subject of theaction filed in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabamaand styled The Board of Education of the City of Gardendale v.The Jefferson County Board of Education, et al., Case NumberCV-15-901091 (which was voluntarily dismissed withoutprejudice on March 24, 2015).

Jefferson County agrees that there has been no resolution of state law(or federal law for that matter) at this point but further asserts that theconference was to establish deadlines and discuss further proceedings,not to attempt to resolve those issues. Jefferson County furtherasserts that state and federal law claims, to the extent they can bedistinguished in this case, are both properly before this Court.

Respectfully submitted on this 27th day of March 2015.

/s/ Russell RutherfordGiles G. PerkinsStephen A. WalshRussell J. RutherfordCounsel for The City of GardendaleBoard of Education

/s/ Whit Colvin (with permission)Whit ColvinCarl JohnsonCounsel for The Jefferson County Boardof Education

/s/ Veronica Percia (with permission)Shaheena A. SimonsNatane SingletonVeronica PerciaUnited States Department of Justice,Civil Rights Division, EducationalOpportunities Section

/s/ Monique Lin-Luse (with permission)Monique Lin-LuseDeuel RossNAACP Legal Defense and EducationalFund, Inc.

Case 2:65-cv-00396-MHH Document 1011 Filed 03/27/15 Page 3 of 4

37512934-1 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I caused the foregoing to be filed using the CM/ECFsystem, which will automatically notify all counsel of record.

/s/ Russell RutherfordOF COUNSEL

Case 2:65-cv-00396-MHH Document 1011 Filed 03/27/15 Page 4 of 4