1954-11-01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

8 GRDINANCE CARRIED OVER: CH. 14, SEC. 1 F.ESOLUTION RE: COMM 1 SS 1 ON ON PUBL. lC EDUCATION - SCHOOL SEGREGATION CASES CLAIM RE: FALL ON FOURTH STREET T OF CHAPTER 31 OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY CODE OF 1945, AS AMENDED," was OFFERED BY t1R. FORGES, SECONDED BY MR. DAVIS, AND CARRIED OVER TO THE NEXT MEETING FUR CONSIDERATION. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND RE-ENACTING SECTION 1 OF CHAPTER 14 OF THE C HARLOTTESVILLE CITY CODE OF 1945", was OFFERED ev h1 R. DAVIS, SEC~~NDED BY MR. MICHIE AND.CARRIED OVER TO THE NEXT MEETING FOR CONS IDf.RAT 1 ON. ON MOTION BY h1R. MICHIE, 5f_CONDED 8Y I`IR. DAVIS, THE FOLLOWING RESOIUTICN WAS UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED: WHEREAS THE COMMISSION ON PUBLIC EDUCATION IS TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE STATE CAPITOL IN RICHMOND ON NOVEMBER 15, 1954 AND HAS ASKED FOP. THE VIEWS OF THE VARIOUS LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES AS TO THE SPECIFIC QUEST{ON "WHAT COURSE SHOULD VIRGINIA FOLLOW IN THE: LIGHT OF THE DECISION OF THE Sl1PREME COURT IN THE SCHOOL SEGREGATION C,ASES~" AND THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE DEEMS IT A9VISABI_E HEREBY TO STATE 175 POSITION FORMALLY AND THE SCHOOL BOARD OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE HAS PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL A STATEMENT OF iT5 POSITION; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. THOUGH WE REGRET THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ON THIS SUBJECT AND FE.E`l THAT ITS IMPLEMENTATION MAY BE FRAUGHT WITH GRIEVOUS CUNSEQUENGES TO THE. CAUSE OF EDUCATION IN THE SOUTH, AT LEAST AT THIS TIME, NEVERTHELESS, AS THE COURT HAS NOT YET IMPI_EMF.NTED ITS DECISION BY THE ENTRY OF SPECIFIC DECREES AND NO ONE KPIOWS JIiST WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DECREES WHEN RENDERED WILL BE, WE DO NOT NOW FEEL IN A POSITION TO MAKE ANY SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO WHAT COURSE SHOULD BE ADOPTED AFTER THOSE DECREES ARE HANDED DOWN; AND FOR THE SAME REASUII WE FEEL THgT TH£ COMMISSIONI ON PUBLIC EDt1CATi0N WOULD BE WELL ADVISED TO REFRAIN FP.OM TAKING ANY DEFINITE POSITIOt! ON THE MATTER UNTIL AFTER SUCH DECREES ARE HANDED DOWN; AND WE WOULD WELCOME AN INVITATION BY THE COMMISSION TO EXPRESS OUP. VIEWS AT A !_ATER MEETING, TO 8E HELD SOMETIME AFTER THE 1000P.T DECREES ARE HANDED DOWN, AT WH1CN TIME WE WOULD HOPE TO SE IN A POSTTION TO MAKE MORE DEFINITE RECOMMEPIGATIONS THAN WE NOW ARE; 2. WE APPROVE THE STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES ADOPTED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD OF THE CITY OF ~+HARLOTTESV RLE, A COPY OF WHICH 15~ ATTACHED HERETO; 3. WF. FEEL THAT THE MORF_ TIME THAT MAV BE GIVEN THE STATES TC MAKE THE NF...CESSARY ADJUSTMENTS TO WHATEVER DECREES THE COURT MAY HAND DOWN, THE MORE LIKEIHOOD THERE IS THAT A GRADUAL AND PEACEFI)L ADJUSTMENT TO THE NECESSITIES OF THE SITUATION MAY BE EFFECTED AND WE THEREFORE URGE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA TU APPEAR BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WHEN THE QUESTION OF THE FORM ITS DECREES AP. F_ TO TAKE IS ARGt1ED AND PRESS UPON THE COUE2T THE REASONS FOR PERMITT{NG THE MAXIMUM POSSIBL.F TIME FOR CONFORMANCE WITH THE COURT S DECREES. A COMMUNICA710N WAS RECEIVED FROM DAVID .1. WOOD WITH REFERENCE TO THE CLAIM OF MAI.INDA t~. GREEN FOR ALLEGED IN,IliR1E5 SUSTAINED IN A FALL ON FOURTH STREET, N, W~ THIS WAS REFERRED TO THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR STUDY AND REPORT. ON MOTION THE MEETING ADJOURNED. ~ n 1