Chapter 3

Intended as an overview of the Vermont public school system and State enforcement of antiharassment laws, this chapter provides State demographic and school enrollment data and a description of three Vermont State agencies charged with monitoring civil rights. A description of the organizational structure of the school system is included in addition to a review of the respective jurisdictional boundaries of the commissioner of the Department of Education and school supervisory unions. This is followed by a brief overview of the State s Equal Educational Opportunity Act (Act 60) and ways it fails to address racial harassment issues. Lastly, the chapter reviews the Vermont Department of Education, Vermont Human Rights Commission, and the Vermont Attorney General s Criminal and Civil Rights Enforcement Units.[1] For each agency listed, the Committee describes the jurisdiction, staffing, and enforcement difficulties stemming from statutory or financial constraints.

According to the 1990 census, Vermont has a total minority population of 10,523, which represents 1.84 percent of the State's total population of 571,334 residents. Of Vermont's 14 counties, Chittenden, Franklin, and Washington Counties account for the largest percentage of minorities in the State. Chittenden, the State's most populous county, has the highest number of African American, Asian American, and Hispanic residents (see table 3.1).

In 1996 Vermont had an estimated population of 588,654, an increase of 4.6 percent from the April 1990 census count of 562,758.[2] Vermont's total population is projected to increase to 617,000 in the year 2000 and 678,000 in 2005.[3] The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that between 1995 and 2005, Vermont will experience one of the largest increases in minority population in the country.[4]

Over the past 20 years, Vermont has seen an increase in public school enrollment. As shown in table 3.2, in fiscal year 1996, there were 2,905 minority students in Vermont's elementary and secondary schools (1,025 Asian Americans, 837 African Americans, 621 Native Americans, and 422 Hispanics).[5] Between 1993 and 1997, the number of Asian American students grew by 9.7 percent per year followed closely by Hispanic enrollments with a rate of 9.2 percent, and 8.5 percent for African Americans.[6] One reason for the dramatic increase in the number of minority students is the large numbers of nonminority parents who adopt children from other races each year.[7]

Like many other States in the Nation, administration and oversight of Vermont s approximately 328 public elementary and secondary schools is divided among several State and local entities. By virtue of Vermont's State and local government structure, three major entities oversee some aspects of school administration: the Vermont State Board of Education, area supervisory union boards, and superintendents of individual supervisory unions.

The State Board of Education, consisting of seven board members appointed by the Governor, has general supervision of all educational entities in the State and regulates the qualifications, licensing, and certification of teachers. The board oversees the Vermont Department of Education, which administers the policies of the State board and State law relating to schools and distributes funds received by the State board from the legislature. The commissioner of the Department of Education identifies the educational goals of the public schools and executes policies of the State Board of Education.[8] In addition, the commissioner accepts, distributes, and accounts for Federal funds for elementary and secondary education received by the State board.[9]

Supervisory unions are approved by the State Board of Education and serve as the administrative, planning, and educational units for school districts in their respective areas.[10] Supervisory unions set curriculum plans, identify educational goals and objectives for each school district in the union, and establish written policies on teacher professional development.[11] The State's 60 supervisory unions manage over 300 school districts.[12] Each supervisory union may hire a person or persons to serve as superintendent of the supervisory union. Superintendents have statutory responsibility in areas of policy administration, educational goal setting, and personnel matters.[13]

The enactment of the Equal Educational Opportunity Act,[14] commonly known as Act 60, constituted a significant change in how the State and its school districts raise funds for education. As debate concerning the act s major provisions continues,[15] the Advisory Committee offers a brief description of its salient portions, while noting the absence of specific provisions relating to the prevention or elimination of racial harassment incidents.[16]

Before 1997, Vermont public schools were generally funded by two means: funds raised by property tax assessments by cities and towns, and funds distributed by the State Board of Education using an aid formula known as the Foundation Plan.[17] Since the State supported approximately 32 percent of public school expenditures, with the remainder generated by individual towns and regions, this system created stark contrasts in the levels of educational funding between rich and poor towns or regions.[18] As a result, many in the State, particularly property owners from tax-poor school districts, felt that the State's school financing scheme rendered some poorer, less-populated school districts unable to raise sufficient funds to provide educational services equal to those afforded students in wealthier school districts.[19]

In February 1997, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled in Brigham v. State that the State has a responsibility to provide all students substantially equal access to similar education revenues regardless of the student's place of residence.[20] The ruling caused the legislature to embark on a 6-month endeavor to address inequitable school finance distribution among school districts resulting in passage of Act 60 in June 1997. Although the State covered only 26.9 percent of the general school expenses, the legislature sought to implement a measure to ensure that all schools would receive State aid through a variety of funding mechanisms.[21] These funds are contingent on schools meeting basic quality and student performance standards and participating in the State's comprehensive assessment program.[22] With the help of parents, teachers, and community members, schools are required to develop a comprehensive action plan to improve student performance and must establish a needs-based professional development program. Schools must annually report to their respective school boards the number of teacher and support staff, student performance rates, and provide an overall assessment of the health and social well-being [23] of children in the district.[24]

In order to ensure that these quality standards are met, the Commissioner of Education is required to conduct assessments of each Vermont school to determine if educational opportunities are substantially equal to those provided in other schools. The commissioner is empowered to take immediate steps if schools fail to meet these standards. The commissioner, for example, may adjust supervisory union boundaries or responsibilities, assume administrative control, or close the school.

Although Act 60 requires school districts to report school performance data and the social well-being of all students, the law does not mandate reporting of efforts to ensure bias and harassment-free learning environments. Therefore, individual school districts are not required to undertake assessments of racial harassment incidents and/or racial tensions within schools, or to improve teacher skills in teaching tolerance and sensitivity to minority concerns[25] (see chapter 4, conclusion 7).

Vermont State Agencies and Their Role in Investigating Racial Harassment Incidents Against Students

This section contains a simplified summary of three State agencies: the Vermont Department of Education, Vermont Human Rights Commission, and the Civil Rights Unit of the Office of the Attorney General. Their roles in investigating racial harassment incidents against students and their jurisdiction, staffing, and civil rights enforcement difficulties are described below.

State school districts receiving Federal funds must provide equal educational opportunity to students in nonhostile learning environments. This responsibility includes protection of all students from discriminatory conduct or actions likely to constitute harassment. To meet this objective, two State agencies, the Vermont Department of Education and Vermont Human Rights Commission, are charged with investigating racial harassment incidents among students in Vermont s public schools. The Vermont Department of Education derives its authority to investigate incidents of racial harassment from its general mandate to ensure compliance with all laws relating to public schools. Pursuant to Vermont s public accommodation statute, the Human Rights Commission has been given sole jurisdiction over racial discrimination complaints against schools.[26]

Although the Civil Rights Unit (CRU) of the Office of the Vermont Attorney General does not handle harassment complaints occurring in the schools, its efforts (along with States attorneys for individual counties) to coordinate with other State agencies are noted here.

Although the Vermont Department of Education retains general jurisdiction over schools, day-to-day operations are left in the hands of local school districts and supervisory union boards. As such, the department routinely refers harassment cases to the Human Rights Commission for investigation and may at times facilitate resolution of the cases. As of May 1997, the Department of Education initiated 10 15 investigations of sexual/racial harassment incidents.[27]

Department representatives identified various factors that make it difficult for the department and schools to effectively investigate and counter acts of discrimination. These factors include (1) staffing shortages, (2) limitations of the Anti-Harassment in Education law,[28] and (3) teachers and administrators lack of experience and skills in dealing with racial harassment.

1. Staffing Shortages. The department does not have staff assigned exclusively to investigate and respond to racial harassment incidents.[29] Currently, two attorneys on a part-time basis respond to reported incidents of harassment while performing their other duties at the department.[30] The department was seeking to establish an investigator position for fiscal year 1998. However, even if this request were granted, only one investigator would be employed who could only devote part of his or her work time to addressing racial harassment issues.[31]

2. Limitations of the State Anti-Harassment in Education Law. Additional limitations on the department's ability to enforce State law arise from the absence of specific provisions in the State Anti-Harassment in Education law. Pursuant to the act, each school district is required to implement and adopt antiharassment policies and procedures. However, the statute neither requires individual school districts to submit harassment policies or procedures for review by State officials, nor offers penalty provisions for failure to adopt or implement antiharassment policies. Given the jurisdictional boundaries previously described, the Vermont Department of Education has only general authority over supervisory unions and does not have direct authority over the maintenance of the harassment policy within schools. This makes it highly difficult for the department to monitor individual school districts for their compliance with the Anti-Harassment in Education law. As of April 1998, the department had not compiled a list of school boards that had adopted the State model policy on harassment. Should a school district fail to implement a model policy or procedures that do not adequately address harassment issues, the State Board of Education and Commissioner of the Department of Education could intervene. However, this is unlikely given the fact that some administrators may report only to their respective school districts or supervisory union boards.

3. Lack of Experience and Skills in Dealing with Racial Harassment. Additional difficulties encountered by the department include (1) administrators and teachers lack of basic knowledge and experience in dealing with other cultures and people of other races, (2) reluctance by minority students and parents to report cases to the department for investigation, (3) a level of ignorance and fear on the part of administrators and teachers surrounding issues of racism, and (4) department staff's lack of skills necessary to assist school districts regarding what steps schools can take to teach greater tolerance.[32]

To remedy some of these difficulties, Department of Education representatives identified potential solutions that could assist in eliminating incidents of discrimination and reduce the number of cases for the department to investigate. These include (1) providing information and training to administrators, teachers, and staff that offer a basic understanding of cultural differences and the needs of minority students and the problems they face, (2) conducting parent community forums in the schools to promote interaction with faculty and students, (3) creating a school culture that fosters zero tolerance for harassment in the school or on school grounds, (4) issuing a statewide mandate for the maintenance of a bias-free curriculum that is evaluated by the department in its standards review process, and (5) establishing mandatory annual training in all Vermont schools that addresses cultural differences and school antiharassment policies.[33] Department representatives suggested that school administrators would be more receptive to implementing training if it were required by the State Board of Education and enough funds were allocated to achieve the goals of the training.[34]

In 1986 the Advisory Committee held a public hearing to review the State's civil rights statutes, agencies, and methods of enforcement.[35] Participants at the hearing cited a range of civil rights difficulties that have persisted in the State for some time.[36] After the Committee presented its findings before key legislators, public awareness of the State's continued problems with racism sparked an effort to revitalize the Vermont Human Rights Commission. In 1987 the Vermont legislature established a new Human Rights Commission, which was authorized to strengthen public education for the importance of civil rights and to examine and evaluate the existence of discrimination in the State. [37]

Currently, the commission consists of five commissioners appointed by the Governor and has jurisdiction over discrimination in housing, public accommodations, workers compensation, and State employment. The commission is authorized to employ an executive director, one compliance officer, one investigator, and one secretary. Currently, the commission employs an executive director, two investigators, and one part-time secretary.[38] To carry out its mission, the commission may file lawsuits asking a court to enforce conciliation agreements and prohibitions against discrimination, issue temporary or permanent injunctive relief, impose civil and punitive penalties, or remit attorney fees.[39]

Under Vermont statute, all persons who believe they have been subjected to unlawful discrimination may file a complaint with the commission.[40] The commission receives a majority of the claims of school-based discrimination through calls to the Montpelier office and referrals from the Vermont Department of Education and school staff.[41]

If the particular grievance falls within its jurisdiction, the commission accepts the charge and begins an investigation. The major steps in the complaint investigation and resolution process are schematically highlighted in figure 3.1. The investigation process includes interviews with the parties and witnesses involved and collection of supporting documentation. After completing the investigation, the investigator writes an investigative report that details the contentions of the parties and relates facts and evidence to applicable law. Before the commissioners reach a final determination in a case, the parties are given the opportunity to comment on the staff's recommended finding in the investigative report and to appear before the commissioners when they review the case presentations.[42] If the commission finds reasonable grounds to support a charge of unlawful discrimination, the parties in the case are granted the opportunity to comment on the written report and may appear before the commission when the case is heard.[43] At the case presentations, the parties may explain their positions before the commissioners determine whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that discrimination occurred in the case.[44]

Throughout this process, the commission attempts to facilitate settlement between the parties. If a settlement cannot be reached, the commission has the authority to seek a court injunction, compensatory and punitive damages, or fines of up to $10,000 per violation and attorney's fees.[45] The majority of incidents of harassment are settled by an agreement, which in many instances includes monetary payments to the parents of harassed students. Recently, the Vermont legislature appropriated funds for the commission to utilize a mediation program that the parties can use at no cost.[46]

Incidents of Racial Harassment Reported to the Vermont Human Rights Commission

The commission tracks the number of charges accepted for investigation based on the alleged basis of discrimination. During fiscal years 1994 1996, the commission accepted 472 charges for investigation, 72 (or 15 percent) of those were allegations of discrimination against public school students.[47] Of those 72, 17 were claims of discrimination on the basis of race.[48] Given the small numbers of minority students in Vermont, commission officials estimated that race-based discrimination charges represent a disproportionately large number of discrimination complaints filed with the commission.[49] The majority of harassment cases involved racial harassment by other students rather than by school employees.[50] In those cases, the commission assesses whether the schools take prompt and appropriate action to prevent and ameliorate the situation.[51]

Commission officials noted that the small staff of investigators hinders their ability to quickly investigate harassment cases and monitor the success of settlement agreements.[52] The average time for commission investigators to issue a report of their investigation is 9 months following the receipt of the initial complaint.[53] The following case study illustrates the length of time one parent experienced when she filed a charge of discrimination involving schools. [54]

Thus a complaint filed at the beginning of the school year may not receive resolution until the following school year. When delays in processing such as this occur, there is a great potential for devastating effects upon a child's educational and emotional development. As each day passes in which a student experiences racial harassment that is not timely investigated and resolved, there is greater risk for long-term effects upon the student's self-esteem, socialization, and school performance.

During and after its investigations, the Human Rights Commission attempts to assist schools and parents who allege that their children have been harassed enter into settlement agreements with particular schools.[57] If the parties reach an agreement the commission finds fair and appropriate, the commission will generally accept the agreement and take no further action on the case except to enforce the terms of the agreement.[58] In many cases, commission staff rely on parents to inform them of continuing problems with the school and compliance with settlement agreements.[59] Although the commission maintains contact with parents who have reached settlement agreements or obtained monetary awards, it has little ability to track the success of these agreements, monitor reoccurring problems, or seek additional remedial actions if necessary. In addition, the commission does not enter into agreements or seek remedial efforts with the parents of the children who were perpetrators of the discrimination.[60] The commission is also unable to regularly monitor efforts that schools take to ensure nondiscrimination or work with schools experiencing high numbers of racial harassment incidents. The current situation is especially troublesome, given the commission staff's observation that some school administrators view Vermont's antiharassment statute as an unnecessary regulatory burden not requiring action by the school district.[61] An administrator's failure to act will compound the time needed to reach a resolution and will contribute to the investigative and enforcement difficulties inherent in the process. The Advisory Committee is concerned that this will cause serious educational and emotional damage to students who must confront harassment on a daily basis. These concerns are addressed in chapter 4, conclusion 8.

State s Attorneys for Individual Counties and the Civil Rights Unit of the Office of the Attorney General

The Vermont Attorney General and State's attorneys for individual counties have jurisdiction over racial assaults and are authorized to pursue criminal prosecution for these acts in the interest of the State. While the State attorney general retains general supervision of criminal prosecution, each State s attorney has broad discretion to prosecute offenses occurring within his or her individual county.[62] In addition to the State's prohibitions against discrimination in commercial transactions,[63] employment,[64] sale and rental of real estate,[65] and public accommodations,[66] Vermont has established criminal sanctions for discriminatory conduct that is racially motivated.[67]

Within the Attorney General's Public Protection Division, a Civil Rights Unit (CRU) has been assigned solely to investigate civil rights complaints. However, the CRU primarily investigates employment discrimination matters that it either litigates or refers to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.[68] The CRU currently consists of one attorney and two investigators. Although the office is able to process all incoming complaints through preliminary telephone inquiries and case referral letters, the office cannot conduct full indepth investigations given its current staffing level.[69] In the event acts of school-based racial harassment occur and are referred to the CRU, the case is immediately forwarded to the Vermont Human Rights Commission (HRC) for investigation.[70] CRU staff estimated that approximately one to two cases per week are referred to the HRC by their office.[71] In comparison, the HRC forwards few cases to the CRU for investigation.[72] HRC and the CRU representatives jointly coordinate so that matters are referred to the State agency with the proper jurisdiction. The CRU has established a civil rights protection committee that is working to revise existing State law to permit the attorney general to pursue injunctive relief, compensatory damages, and other relief in hate crime cases.[73] The committee has drafted legislation that will be introduced in the January 1999 session of the Vermont legislature.[74]

The Advisory Committee has identified two difficulties that hinder law enforcement agencies ability to determine precisely the number of racial harassment incidents that occur in a given school or area: (1) the lack of complete information on the number and frequency of acts of violence against students, and (2) the absence of an information sharing system among State agencies for reporting these acts.

1. Currently, the Vermont Department of Public Safety's Criminal Information Center tracks all calls to police departments that participate in the State data collection system. It is difficult for the center to determine accurately how many racially motivated incidents are reported to police, since not all police departments participate in the system or maintain statistical information on the number and types of hate crimes.[75] For example, it was not until January 15, 1998, that the Burlington Police Department (which has jurisdiction over the State's largest minority community) began submitting hate crime statistics to the Criminal Information Center.[76] Other communities with large minority populations (such as Barre, Brattleboro, and Montpelier) have not begun to submit their hate crime statistics.[77] During 1997 the center recorded 79 assaults involving students in both public schools and Vermont colleges and universities.[78] Criminal Information Center staff estimate that the actual number of racially motivated incidents may be much higher.[79] Staff believe that if parents and student victims of racial incidents attempt to resolve their complaints through the school administration or by filing a complaint with the HRC, many acts will not be reported to the police and thus not recorded under the State's data collection system.[80] An additional difficulty that limits accurate data collection by the center is the fact that many police officers are not trained to recognize certain criminal acts that may be racially motivated.[81] As a result, many of the acts that could be considered as racially motivated crimes may not be reported as race related.

According to the CRU, criminal prosecutions of acts considered racially motivated are handled by State's attorneys, not the attorney general.[82] State's attorneys are alerted of incidents of violence when a report is filed by the police or by investigators working in a State's attorneys office who receive a call from a complainant and choose to investigate the matter. CRU staff noted that complainants frequently do not know which State agency accepts and processes harassment complaints.[83] Most cases of school-based harassment are referred to the HRC since they involve juvenile-to-juvenile conduct. Upon receipt of complaints, HRC staff may urge parents to contact police regarding acts of violence in the schools. However as HRC staff do not report incidents to the police without the consent of the parents, it is probable that many of these acts may never be reported to State s attorneys.[84]

As a result of the above, the Advisory Committee is concerned that State s attorneys and the attorney general may not be fully informed of acts of harassment and violence. Due to the difficulties in determining with any certainty the frequency of incidents, State's attorneys and the attorney general are limited in their ability to assist State agencies, community groups, and victims in remedying the problem.

[1] Agency descriptions, their functions, and enforcement methods were gathered at the community forums from testimony by officials from the Vermont State Department of Education and Vermont Human Rights Commission. Information was also provided by Katherine A. Hayes, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, Vermont Attorney General's Office, and Max Schlueter, Vermont Department of Public Safety, Criminal Information Center in written correspondence and telephone interviews with Eastern Regional Office staff.

[2] Vermont Department of Health, Agency of Human Services, Population and Housing Estimates 1996, p.1, November 1997.

[3] See U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Vermont s Population Projections: 1995 to 2025.

[4] Hispanic growth rate ranks 2nd largest, followed by Asian/Pacific Islander at 14%, American Indian/Eskimo/ Aleut (18th largest), and African Americans ranking 66th largest. See U.S. Census Bureau, Vermont's Population Projections: 1995 to 2025, p. 5. The statistics referenced are for non-Hispanic African Americans, American Indian/Eskimo/Aleut, and Asian Pacific Islanders.

[5] Vermont Department of Education, Vermont Public Education Enrollment Report: Executive Summary 1995 1996, p. ii, May 6, 1996.

[6] Ibid. Vermont experienced a decrease in the number of minority students between fiscal years 1996 and 1997. The Vermont Department of Education attributes this decrease to the reporting of students of mixed ethnic backgrounds as other, a category not included in fiscal year 1997. In 1995 students in this category represented 5% of the total ethnic population, and 14% in 1996. The department attributes this jump to the possible errors in classifying students in particular ethnic groups. Ibid.

[7] Dianne Dexter, state adoption coordinator, Vermont Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services, testimony before the Vermont Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, community forum, Nov. 4, 1997 (hereafter cited as Burlington Transcript), p. 118. See also Tory Rhodin, clinical social worker, Casey Family Services, Post-Adoption Program, Rutland Transcript, p. 181.

[8] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 16, 212 (1997).

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid. 11.

[11] Ibid. 261(a).

[12] Most, but not all of the State's 251 towns constitute a school district. William Reedy, legal counsel, Vermont Department of Education, telephone interview, Oct. 9, 1998. A copy of the interview notes is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[13] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 16, 563 (1997). See also Dr. Marc Hull, commissioner, and John Nelson, project manager, Vermont Department of Education, Draft Working Paper on Public School Governance, July 1998.

[14] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 16, 165 (1997).

[15] See Nancy Remsen, Now for the Good News, Burlington Free Press, Nov. 5, 1997, and Carol Innerst, Court Battles Over School Choice Loom in Wisconsin and Vermont, The Washington Times, Mar. 4, 1998.

[16] See Vermont School Boards Association and the Vermont Superintendents Association, Act 60 Handbook: Implementing Vermont's Equal Educational Opportunity Act, (October 1997) for a description of specific educational funding components or formulas.

[17] Brigham v. State, 692 A.2d 384, 387 88 (1997). Under the Foundation Plan, a formula is generated each year by the legislature by which the State measures per pupil spending and funding to individual school districts. Id. Note also that Vermont public schools receive Federal and State and other sources of finances. William Reedy, legal counsel, Vermont Department of Education, telephone interview, Oct. 9, 1998. A copy of the interview notes is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[18] Vermont School Boards Association and the Vermont Superintendents Association, Act 60 Handbook: Implementing Vermont's Equal Educational Opportunity Act, (October 1997). As an example of the stark level of funding, consider that in fiscal year 1995 the town of Richford's average expenditure per student was $3,743, which was calculated on its property tax base of approximately $140,000. In contrast, the town of Peru spent almost twice the amount per student ($6,476) based on its tax base of $2.2 million. Brigham v. State, 692 A.2d 384, 389 (1997).

[19] Id.

[20] Id. at 397. See also Vermont School Boards Association and the Vermont Superintendents Association, Act 60 Handbook: Implementing Vermont's Equal Educational Opportunity Act, (October 1997), p. 4.

[21] These include grants, property tax disbursements, and local education tax allotments. Ibid.

[22] Ibid.

[23] Since this phrase is used without definition in the statute, it is not clear whether social well-being includes harassment-free learning environments. See VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 16, 165 (1997).

[24] Ibid.

[25] See ibid.

[26] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 9, 4501, 4552(b) (1997). Under the statute, discrimination in schools, restaurants, stores, or other facilities that provide services, facilities, goods, privileges, advantages, benefits, or accommodations to the general public is prohibited. Ibid. See also Katherine A. Hayes, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, Vermont Attorney General's Office, telephone interview, Mar. 23, 1998. A copy of the interview notes is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[27] Karen L. Richards, legal counsel, Vermont Department of Education, statement presented to the Vermont Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, May 13, 1997. A copy of the meeting notes is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[28] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 16, 565 (1997).

[29] Paul Fassler, legal counsel, Vermont Department of Education, Burlington Transcript, p. 85.

[30] Before the passage of the State law 565, the department requested a budget that would have allocated funds for additional investigative staff and/or money for mandatory training programs for school districts. However, that provision was removed during appropriation. Fassler testimony, Burlington Transcript, pp. 86 87.

[31] Fassler and Richards testimony, Burlington Transcript, p. 85.

[32] Fassler testimony, Burlington Transcript, pp. 83 84; Richards testimony, Burlington Transcript, p. 81.

[33] Richards testimony, Burlington Transcript, pp. 71 88 (in general). See also pp. 74, 80.

[34] Ibid. pp. 80 81.

[35] Participants at the hearing included former Governor Madeline Kunin; State Supreme Court Chief Justice Frederick Allen; former State Representative Judy Stephany; and the executive director of the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights, Arthur Green. See Vermont Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Civil Rights Enforcement in Vermont, A Summary Report, 1987.

[36] Ibid. See also R.T. Cassidy, Civil and Human Rights in Vermont, in Vermont State Government Since 1965, ed., Michael Sherwood (Burlington, VT: Snelling Center for Government, University of Vermont, forthcoming,1988). Cassidy discusses a range of civil rights problems that have plagued the State, including racial discrimination in public accommodations.

[37] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 9, 4552 (1997). See also R.T. Cassidy, Civil and Human Rights in Vermont, in Vermont State Government Since 1965, ed., Michael Sherwood (Burlington, VT: Snelling Center for Government, University of Vermont, forthcoming,1988). According to Cassidy, in 1987 the Vermont legislature adopted statutes relating to anti-discrimination in public accommodations and fair housing.

[38] Harvey Golubock, executive director, Vermont Human Rights Commission, Burlington Transcript, p. 47.

[39] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 9, 4553 (a)(6)(A F) (1997).

[40] Id. 4554.

[41] Golubock testimony, Burlington Transcript, p. 48.

[42] Harvey Golubock, executive director, Vermont Human Rights Commission, letter of Oct. 15, 1998, to Marc Pentino, Eastern Regional Office. A copy of the letter is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[43] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 9, 4554 (c) (1997).

[44] Harvey Golubock, executive director, Vermont Human Rights Commission, letter of Oct. 15, 1998, to Marc Pentino, Eastern Regional Office. A copy of the letter is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[45] Vt. STAT. ANN. tit. 9, 4553(a)(6)(A D) (1997).

[46] Ibid.

[47] Golubock testimony, Burlington Transcript, p. 50.

[48] Ibid.

[49] Other categories of discrimination reported to the Commission during this period include sexual harassment (31%), harassment based on disability (21%), and harassment based on sexual orientation (10%). Michael Powers, investigator, Vermont Human Rights Commission, statements made to the Committee at its May 13, 1997, planning meeting. A copy of the minutes to this meeting is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office. See also Golubock testimony, Burlington Transcript, pp. 51 52 and Golubock letter of Oct. 15, 1998, to Marc Pentino, Eastern Regional Office. A copy of the letter is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[50] Golubock testimony, Burlington Transcript, p. 52.

[51] Ibid.

[52] Ibid., pp. 60 61. See also Michael Powers, investigator, Vermont Human Rights Commission, statements made to the Committee at its May 13, 1997 planning meeting. A copy of the minutes to this meeting is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[53] Harvey Golubock, executive director, Vermont Human Rights Commission, telephone interview, Mar. 13, 1998. A copy of the interview notes is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[54] This case study is constructed based on transcript entries and materials furnished by the parent, such as the original complaint, response by the school district, and the Human Rights Commission investigative report. Telephone interviews conducted between November 1997 and July 1998 were also used. These materials are on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office. At the request of the parent, the child and parent's names are omitted.

[55] In reviewing this section, executive director of the Vermont Human Rights Commission stated: This gives the inaccurate impression that when the mother called about the case, the Commission's staff would not discuss it with her and told her to call back. The investigator told me that she always spoke with the mother when the mother called or returned the mother s telephone calls and that she explained the status of the investigation and its progress since the mother's last call. The investigator stated that she told the mother that she was working on a number of investigative reports and that she would complete the mother's as soon as she could. The investigator also stated that she told the mother the date she anticipated finishing the report as soon as she knew it. Harvey Golubock, executive director, Vermont Human Rights Commission, letter of Oct. 15, 1998, to Marc Pentino, Eastern Regional Office. A copy of the letter is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[56] Ibid.

[57] Ibid.

[58] Ibid.

[59] Golubock testimony, Burlington Transcript, pp. 60 62.

[60] Ibid., p. 59.

[61] Michael Powers, investigator, Vermont Human Rights Commission, statements made to the Committee at its May 13, 1997, planning meeting. A copy of the minutes to this meeting is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[62] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 24, 361(a) (1997). See also VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 3, 153 (1997) and State's Attorney v. Attorney General, 409 A.2d 599 (1979).

[63] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 8, 1211 (1997).

[64] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 13, 495(a)(1) (1997).

[65] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 9, 4503 (1997).

[66] Id. 4502.

[67] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 13, 1455 (1997). See also id. 1456. In addition, the attorney general advises elective officials and State agencies on questions of laws and has general supervision of actions instituted by or against State officers. See VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 3, 153(a), 159 (1997).

[68] In fiscal year 1997, the CRU processed 115 cases of employment discrimination, as compared with 118 cases in 1996. In both years, the majority of cases involved charges of discrimination based on sex or disability. In 1997 and 1998, the CRU brought 6 charges of race-based discrimination in employment. Two of the six charges involved allegations of race-based harassment and/or intimidation in employment. One charge was withdrawn with settlement, two were found to be without probable cause, and three were still pending as of Mar. 30, 1998. Katherine A. Hayes, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, letter to Marc Pentino, civil rights analyst, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Eastern Regional Office. See also Hayes, telephone interview, Sept.11, 1998. Copies of the letter and interview notes are on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[69] Ibid.

[70] VT. STAT. ANN. tit. 9, 4552(b) (1997). See Katherine A. Hayes, Assistant Attorney General, Vermont Attorney General s Office, telephone interview, Mar. 23, 1998. A copy of the interview notes is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[71] Katherine A. Hayes, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, telephone interview, July 21, 1998. A copy of the interview notes is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[72] Ibid.

[73] The committee is volunteer and consists of CRU staff, government officials, and community leaders. Ibid.

[74] Ibid. telephone Interview, Nov. 25, 1998.

[75] Max Schlueter, Vermont Department of Public Safety, Criminal Information Center, telephone interview, July 2 and 9, 1998. A copy of the interview notes is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[76] Ibid.

[77] Ibid.

[78] Ibid. Of these 79 cases, the Burlington area accounted for four racially motivated incidents, two of which occurred at the University of Vermont.

[79] Ibid.

[80] Ibid.

[81] Katherine A. Hayes, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, telephone interview, Sept. 11, 1998. A copy of the interview notes is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[82] Ibid. Note, as of September 1998, the Attorney General's Office has not pursued any prosecutions under this provision. Ibid.

[83] Katherine A. Hayes, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, telephone interview, Sept. 11, 1998. A copy of the interview notes is on file at the Commission's Eastern Regional Office.

[84] Information on the number of cases in which parents elected not to contact law enforcement officials is unavailable.

TABLE 3.1 Population Characteristics by County (1990 Census)

County	White	Black	Amer. Ind./ Eskimo/Aleut	Asian/ Pacific Islander	Hispanic	Total minority population	% minority
Addison	32,506	133	77	193	208	611	1.879%
Bennington	35,464	116	54	184	220	574	1.618%
Caledonia	27,607	54	100	70	90	314	1.137%
Chittenden	128,897	819	294	1,466	1,179	3,758	2.915%
Essex	6,356	13	18	11	30	72	1.132%
Franklin	39,201	58	585	99	136	878	2.239%
Grand Isle	5,268	15	23	11	20	69	1.309%
Lamoille	19,557	27	48	71	89	235	1.201%
Orange	25,935	46	67	71	103	287	1.106%
Orleans	23,873	49	56	50	92	247	1.034%
Rutland	61,639	152	70	214	273	709	1.150%
Washington	54,334	177	106	236	663	1,182	2.175%
Windham	41,012	157	74	259	303	793	1.933%
Windsor	53,439	135	124	280	255	794	1.485%
Total	555,088	1,951	1,696	3,215	3,661	10,523	1.841%

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Area and Population, County and City Data Book, Washington, DC. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1994, pp. 578 9.

TABLE 3.2 Vermont Elementary and Secondary Public Schools Ethnic Enrollment, 1985 1997
Year	White	Black	Native Amer./ Alask.	Asian/ Pacific Isl.	Hispanic	Other	Total students	% of white students	Total and % of minority students
85 86	89,047	334	246	422	108	NA	90,157	98.77%	1,110 (1.23%)
86 87	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	91,720	NA	NA
87 88	91,250	428	441	473	163	NA	92,755	98.38%	1,505 (1.62%)
88 89	91,867	398	458	466	192	NA	93,381	98.38%	1,514 (1.62%)
89 90	93,069	461	483	520	246	NA	94,779	98.20%	1,710 (1.80%)
90 91	93,881	464	552	608	257	NA	95,762	98.04%	1,881 (1.96%)
91 92	95,057	544	590	676	257	NA	97,124	97.87%	2,067 (2.13%)
92 93	96,336	605	612	708	297	NA	98,558	97.75%	2,222 (2.25%)
93 94*	100,184	724	634	889	324	NA	102,755	97.50%	2,571 (2.50%)
94 95*	101,796	735	544	961	350	147	104,533	97.38%	2,737 (2.62%)
95 96*	102,271	784	634	1,015	390	471	105,565	96.88%	3,294 (3.12%)
96 97*	103,436	837	621	1,025	422	NA	106,341	97.27%	2,905 (2.73%)
Source: Vermont Department of Education School Finance Operations, Vermont Elementary and Secondary Public Schools Enrollment Report, Feb. 26, 1997. * Includes 5 independent high schools acting as public schools for years 1993 1996.