mandate the assignment of his children, because of their race, to some school away from their nearest neighborhood public school wherever they might choose to live; and had he known of such he would have exercised every right available to him as an elector and taxpayer in opposition thereto.

4. That his children, one of whom is an intervenor, continuously attended their neighborhood public schools.

5. That he first learned in the spring of 1977 of activities arising in their schools from the Carlin case that his children might be subjected to forced busing.

6. That he also learned of the case of Crawford I and did not believe his interests and those of his children and others similarly situated were represented in the course of the proceedings leading to that decision.

7. That in the summer of 1977, he and other electors and/or parents in the District formed the association "Groundswell."

8. That he and about 300 other members of "Groundswell", gathered the signatures of about 22,300 persons in support of a constitutional amendment which included a provision that "(n)o student shall be compelled to attend public school other than the one nearest his residence."

9. That the aforesaid petitions were called to the attention of his congressman for such action as could be taken.

10. That preceding Nov. 6, 1979, he and other members of "Groundswell" supported the passage of Prop. 1 (commonly called an "anti-busing" amendment to the California Constitution) enacted on that date.

Then followed two of the most important paragraphs of Mr. Lester's declaration, which he was deemed to have testified to by stipulation of the parties and order of the trial judge. This evidence is referred to in my opening statement and elsewhere as pertaining to the