Proposals for big increase in school aid get public hearing

A proposal for a big increase in state aid to schools drew support at a public hearing Tuesday in the Nebraska Legislature. But supporters said any change to increase school funding has to be combined with limits on school property taxes.

The Legislature’s Education Committee hearing considered Gov. Jim Pillen’s proposal to provide $1,500 per student in state aid to schools, and to nearly double state aid for special education students. Budget administrator Lee Will said the changes would relieve schools’ reliance on property taxes.

“This bill represents substantial investment in public K-12 education of nearly $300 million annually. The education formula known as TEEOSA allocates just over $1 billion, meaning this would signify an increase of nearly 30 percent in state support. This will substantially alleviate the local burden of supporting education,” Will said.

Pillen himself said the bill needs to be linked with other proposals that would limit growth in local school tax revenues to 3 percent a year, and would set aside up to $2.5 billion in a trust fund for future educational expenses.

“I can’t reiterate enough that this bill is part of a package…These bills must all move together as a

package,” he said.

Schools have long opposed limiting their taxing authority. But Jessica Shelburn of Americans For Prosperity-Nebraska – a conservative advocacy organization -- said tax caps must be part of the package.

“The idea of shifting some of this funding and taking on more of the liability of education funding by the state, while that is great, the taxpayers, the property taxpayers have to see some relief. This cannot just simply be a windfall for the education community,” Shelburn said.

Steve Hanson of the Nebraska Cattlemen praised the proposed increase in special education funding.

“One special education student can cost a district upwards of $100,000 a year. This can cripple a small district, and add to the burden of the local taxpayer,” Hanson said.

The proposal also drew opposition. Spencer Head of the Omaha Board of Education opposed the $1,500 per student funding, known as “foundation aid.” Head said the current school formula gives aid to districts that don’t have the property tax base to fully fund student needs. He said the proposed change would give aid to districts that don’t need it.

“To be clear, they may want additional state resources, but they don’t need additional state resources because they have sufficient local resources,” Head said.

Pillen has complained that currently, only about one-third of the state’s school districts, mainly larger, urban districts, receive the vast majority of state aid. His proposal would ensure that all districts receive some aid.

Another legislative committees was also considering a proposal involving hundreds of millions of dollars Tuesday. The Transportation and Telecommunications Committee heard a bill that would change which state agency oversees spending to expand broadband in the state.

The Public Service Commission has been handling most of the work until now. But the current proposal would create a state broadband office as part of the state Department of Transportation.

Sen. Wendy DeBoer asked Department of Transportation Director Vicki Kramer about the reasoning for the change. Kramer said the Department of Transportation already has lots of experience dealing with federal infrastructure funds for roads, and future broadband expansion funds come with similar requirements.

Danny DeLong supported the proposal on behalf of AARP Nebraska. DeLong said affordable, reliable broadband service will help older Nebraskans stay in their homes, as long as it is combined providing with digital literacy skills.

“These skills enable proficient use of telemedicine, they fight social isolation through digital connection with family and friends, and they allow access to online shopping and services, and they create remote work opportunities,” DeLong said.

Bruce Rieker, representing the Nebraska Farm Bureau and seven other ag organizations, also supported the proposal.

“We support this because we need to have a deliberate, intentional, focused approach to providing broadband where it needs to go -- not just the lowest- hanging fruit where it’s the easiest profit per customer or things like that,” Rieker said.

Public Service Commissioner Dan Watermeier gave neutral testimony on the bill. He said it was fine with the Commission to move oversight of broadband funding, but the PSC’s role in ranking applications on where to spend the money needs to continue.

No one spoke against the proposal. But Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh raised a concern about moving responsibility from the Public Service Commission, whose members are elected, to the Department of Transportation, which is largely funded by the federal government and state gas taxes.

“Moving something that is under an elected board to a department that has far less oversight than any other state agency, I think you can see where that would cause some pause,” Cavanaugh said.

Kramer responded that the federal infrastructure bill requires public input, and that people would have plenty of chances to comment on how funds should be spent.