August 23, 1999

J. Timothy Brightman ABERNATHY, ROEDER BOYD & JOPLIN, P.C.
1700 Redbud Boulevard, Suite 300
P.O. Box 1210
McKinney, Texas 75070-1210

Dear Mr. Brightman:

     Thank you for your letter of August 16, 1999 in response to my letter of August 2.

     The issues we are discussing, and the potential claims to be made at court, are not "solely" about the textbook. The Connected Math Program and a traditional, conventional math course are substantially different from one another, despite and notwithstanding the textbooks.

Our clients have very serious doubts of the district's sincerity in trying to resolve this situation short of protracted litigation. Your cursory response to our August 2nd letter, and the position taken by the district, does little to alleviate these doubts. We continue to prepare our complaint and it will be filed accordingly.

     Also, as we made clear in our letter of August 2 and presentation before the board on June 15, 1999, our clients are not requesting the district to dismantle its Connected Math Program, but simply to offer parents the right, which they have under Chapter 26, to ask, with the expectation that their request will not be unreasonably denied, the addition of a specific academic class in the course and study or their child. The parents have this right, this right exists in the present case, and our clients are willing to discuss this with a judge and jury if the district forces them to do so.

     I also understand that it has long been the district's mantra that the only difference between Connected Math and a traditional math course is the "methodology" in teaching. Our clients disagree with that position and are prepared to go to trial to litigate that issue, if necessary.

     The proposal of our clients would not "require drafting a complete new curriculum for a math class . . . " In fact, there will not have to be drafted any new curriculum for this traditional math course. Rather, the parents of over 550 students have signed petitions which specifically tell this district the curriculum they wish to be taught, that being the Glencoe/McGraw Hill Division mathematics course. All across this country, teachers in thousands of schools teach their class straight out of the textbook, without an accompanying "curriculum". I understand that an extensive curriculum has had to be designed by Plano ISD in order to teach from the Connected Math textbooks, but that was because the Connected Math textbooks were non-compliant with TEKS. The Glencoe textbook as requested by the parents of over 550 students is 100% compliant with TEKS and thus no "complete new curriculum" would have to be developed.

     Concerning the specific petitions requesting this alternative math class, over 520 of these have already been presented to the district, and are already in the district's possession. These petitions were given to the board on June 15, 1999. To request or ask that we reduplicate these petitions and provide them to you again, is unreasonable and would cause the Texas Justice Foundation and our clients to incur unreasonable and unnecessary expense. Below is the information we promised you, the specific grades and campuses where sufficient interest has been shown:

Armstrong 6th, 7th and 8th grades;
Frankford 6th and 7th grades;
Haggard 7th and 8th grades;
Hendrick 8th grade;
Renner 7th grade;
Rice 6th and 7th grades;
Robinson 6th grade
Schimelpfenig 6th and 7th grades;
Wilson 6th grade

     Because these petitions are already in the possession of the district, additional and duplicate copies will not be provided.

     Since you asked, you do not have our consent to discuss this issue to "determine the extent of the support of your proposal", with the parents that would make up the future class of parents in this litigation. The petitions that have been presented to the board, and are already in the board's possession, speak for themselves. Parents, by signing these petitions, made it very clear to the district that they support the proposal for the addition of an alternative math class to the Connected Math Program.

     It is apparent from your letter that the district has once again looked right passed the parents and what is best for their children, and has focused its attention on what is most convenient for the district.

     Our clients have very serious doubts of the district's sincerity in trying to resolve this situation short of protracted litigation. Your cursory response to our August 2nd letter, and the position taken by the district, does little to alleviate these doubts. We continue to prepare our complaint and it will be filed accordingly. Once filed, a courtesy copy will be forwarded to you.

Very truly yours,

/s/

Thomas W. Stack