Premium ContentClick on Premium Content on the Featured navigation bar for information.
For (37): Adams, Ashford, Avery, Campbell, Carlson, Christensen, Coash, Cornett, Dierks, Dubas, Fischer, Flood, Fulton, Gay, Giese, Gloor, Haar, Hadley, Hansen, Harms, Heidemann, Howard, Janssen, Krist, Langemeier, Lautenbaugh, Louden, McCoy, Nelson, Pahls, Pankonin, Price, Schilz, Stuthman, Sullivan, Utter, Wightman.
Against (11): Conrad, Cook, Council, Karpisek, Lathrop, McGill, Mello, Nordquist, Rogert, Wallman, White.
Not present (1): Pirsch.
LINCOLN — Lawmakers moved forward Friday on cutting back a budgeted increase in state aid to education, while school officials pored over newly released estimates of how the changes could affect individual districts.
State senators gave 37-11 first-round approval to a bill aimed at keeping state aid flat for the 2010-11 school year.
Legislative Bill 5 is a key part of efforts to close a $334 million gap in the state budget for the two years ending June 30, 2011.
The bill would save the state an estimated $32 million, according to calculations by the Nebraska Department of Education. Total state aid would remain at this year's $933 million level.
Lawmakers have been meeting in special session since last week to balance the budget after a sharp drop in revenues and a pessimistic forecast on future revenues.
During Friday's debate, some lawmakers questioned whether the state needs to reduce support of K-12 education to achieve that balance.
They noted that Nebraska has money in its cash reserve that could be used and that there are other places in the budget to find savings. They did not name those places during the debate.
“Let's protect the highest obligation that we have, and that is education,” argued State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln.
Others said school aid, as the largest single item in the state budget, has to be part of the budget solution.
“If I had my personal preference, I would want state aid left alone,” said Sen. Annette Dubas of Fullerton. “On the other hand, I understand reality.”
Budget realities figured prominently in school officials' reactions to LB 5 and the district-by-district estimates of its impact.
“We don't like the cut in aid to education, but the way the Education Committee is doing it is fair,” said John Lindsay, a lobbyist for the Omaha Public Schools.
Steve Rector, superintendent of the South Sioux City school district, said he had expected that state aid would be capped or reduced as part of the budget process.
Rector said he was “concerned but not alarmed” by estimates of the bill's impact on his district. He said the estimates are preliminary and will change before becoming final in February.
The estimates do not take into account growth in property valuation, school enrollment and other factors.
But Brian Maher, Kearney Public Schools superintendent, said he was “really worried” about the estimated loss to his district, which is growing rapidly. He said he will be looking closer to see if the district can manage.
Officials with both the Lincoln and Millard school districts said LB 5 is the right way to make cuts, despite the difficulties involved.
“We're willing to do our part, but it's going to create a hardship because we're a growing district,” noted Angelo Passarelli, a director with the Millard district.
Sen. Greg Adams of York, the Education Committee chairman, said the bill was intended to spread the pain of belt-tightening among all districts.
“We have given you the fairest and I believe, if that word can be used, the simplest way to do it,” he said.
Adams said higher taxes need not be the result of LB 5. It will be up to local school boards to decide whether to raise taxes.
The main portions of the bill would limit the growth in school district spending and change how the state helps schools pay the increased cost of teachers with graduate degrees.
Lawmakers spent part of their morning debating an amendment that would have required districts to make cuts as far from the classroom as possible.
Sen. Amanda McGill of Lincoln said she offered the amendment for discussion only.
She withdrew it, but only after saying that lawmakers need to send a clear message to schools about sparing teaching and learning when making cuts.
Contact the writer:
402-473-9583, martha.stoddard@owh.com
Copyright ©2012 Omaha World-Herald®. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, displayed or redistributed for any purpose without permission from the Omaha World-Herald.
