[E]liminate the use of racial and ethnic considerations in connection with its “classroom balance,” “Voluntary Ethnic Enrollment Program (VEEP),” “Choice” programs, and the establishment of school attendance zones.

The Board’s counsel stated in an article “A Different Approach,” published October 20, 1999 in The San Diego Union-Tribune:

... The district is now proposing changes that would remove a student’s race / ethnicity as a criterion for eligibility to attend schools outside of the student’s area of residence. The changes would encompass a system of choice and selection that avoids race-based consideration while using factors such as geography and residential patterns to continue nurturing integrated schools. The proposal would by no means lessen the district’s commitment to diversity....

In response to the Board’s initial modified proposal circulated to the public, I wrote the Board’s counsel on October 30, 1999 that it did not meet our objections because it was not race-neutral, citing recent federal decisions:

... I respectfully request under Sec.7a, Art.I, of the California Constitution that the present integration plan be modified as applied to the facts that exist at this time under current federal decisions, which are construed as requiring public schools to use race-neutral plans in their efforts to promote diversity.... [Emphasis added]

Nor did a later proposal meet our objections, to which I appeared before the Board on November 30, 1999 prepared to present specific examples to the Board. At the start, the School Superintendent announced their holding of earlier conferences with representatives of the legal community, including the ACLU, to arrive at a consensus as to the integration plan. I was taken aback because the ACLU had provided the counsel for the San Diego Carlin Plaintiffs, the Los Angeles Crawford