Nebraska lawmakers approved a Feb. 27 allowing schools to for violent behavior. Schools will be required to provide a plan to parents whose young children are suspended that describes available resources and how the student’s behavior will be handled in the future. Gov. Jim Pillen said he intends to sign the bill into law.

In the rural Nebraska panhandle, elementary teachers at Kimball Public Schools have watched students as young as 5 throw furniture, bite staff and attack classmates. 

Until a few years ago, in- and out-of-school suspensions were one way that Nebraska schools dealt with this type of behavior. But in 2023, state lawmakers for students in prekindergarten through second grade unless they brought a weapon to school. 

It was billed as a move to protect children with disabilities and prevent the disproportionate suspension of students of color. But now, Nebraska lawmakers are trying to reverse the ban. Educators say suspensions are needed to stop severe or violent behavior — which has gotten worse since the pandemic — and to get parents’ attention about how their children are acting in school. 

“We will have a student physically assault another student, or fight staff members. And then it happens repeatedly. The parents’ support is not there. What are we going to do in Kimball, Nebraska?” asked Superintendent Trevor Anderson. “The only solution that we really have is that they’re still in the building and now it’s essentially one of the staff members babysitting all day long, because (the student) is not able to handle being in the regular classroom setting.”

Nebraska is one of a handful of states, including Minnesota and Texas, that have sought to repeal suspension bans in the last year. At least 18 states prohibit suspensions for students in prekindergarten through second or third grade, according to the most recent published in 2020.

A rise in student misbehavior post-COVID, combined with inadequate funding for special education, has left districts struggling with how to address behaviors — sometimes violent — in the classroom. But research that suspensions disproportionately impact students of color and children with disabilities or from marginalized backgrounds, including those in early grades. 

While Black children made up 18% of U.S. preschoolers during the 2021-22 school year, they represented 38% of students who received at least one out-of-school suspension, according to the latest federal . About 23% of U.S. preschoolers received services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) during that time and represented 41% of those who were suspended.

One found that “receiving a suspension serves as a key turning point toward increased odds of incarceration” for students later in life.

“I don’t … think it works to suspend pre-K students (through) second grade‬ students at all. I was‬ ‭suspended at that age and, quite frankly, I don’t believe it helped. I went home and watched cartoons. I don’t think that changed my behavior‬ ‭at all,” said Nebraska state Sen. Terrell McKinney when he in 2023. “I believe it prepares‬ kids — especially kids that look like me — for the juvenile justice system, the child welfare system and then the‬ ‭criminal justice system.”

Discipline that might be appropriate for older students can be harmful for young children’s development, said Luis Rodriguez, a New York University professor who school discipline. 

“Young children are still learning. They probably are still developing social skills — especially when we’re talking about kindergarten, first grade — and it might be the first time that some of these children are around other children and away from home,” he said. “Exclusionary disciplines such as suspensions at that age can interrupt foundational learning.”

Since the pandemic, some policymakers have focused on ways to combat in schools to protect teacher and student safety, while others have tried to reduce disparities in school discipline and ensure children don’t miss out on learning, said Zeke Perez, assistant director of the nonprofit . 

Maryland was one of the first states to for early grades, in 2017. It prohibited the practice for students in prekindergarten through second grade unless there was an “imminent threat” to staff or students.

A published in 2024 found that the law reduced the probability of K-2 suspensions from 1.9% in 2017 to 0.8% in 2018, while rates remained steady around 3% for grades 3 to 5 following the ban. But disparities still remained in suspension rates for students who were Black, low-income or had disabilities.

Paul Lemle, president of the Maryland State Education Association, said the law has been beneficial for schools.

“We’re always trying to avoid removal from school, especially for our youngest students,” he said. “Everywhere there’s challenging behavior. It comes with the territory. This hasn’t made the job more difficult. It’s the right thing to do for these really young kids.”

While Maryland’s law allows suspensions for violent behavior, Nebraska’s only exception is for bringing a weapon to school. Some educators and lawmakers said revisions are needed to expand the exceptions to protect students and teachers.

Nebraska state Sen. Dave Murman, who proposed in January, said he’s heard from school districts that the same students act out repeatedly and can’t be removed from the classroom. 

“I don’t believe this law is working. Suspension should never be the first option, but what happens when a student behaves in a violent manner and students or staff get hurt?” he said at a Jan. 27 . “I’ve heard stories from teachers and administrators about students biting, hitting, throwing desks and chairs, stabbing with pencils and even kicking the stomach of a pregnant teacher. How can children learn in that environment?”

Murman said suspensions might be the only way administrators can get a parent’s attention to address their child’s behavior. He said some schools aren’t able to make contact with families until they have to physically remove their child from school after a suspension.

These challenges have become more common for Kimball Public Schools since the pandemic, said Anderson. The district is located near the Wyoming and Colorado borders and serves nearly 400 students. About half are enrolled in elementary grades.

Anderson said he had never seen the level of aggression and violent behavior from young elementary students in his eight years as an administrator until recently. He said classroom management has been more difficult since the suspension ban went into effect in 2023.

Small, remote districts like Kimball don’t receive the same resources as metropolitan schools that provide , such as behavioral supports or trauma-informed interventions. A licensed mental health practitioner visits the district once a week. Anderson said he recently filled a behavior specialist position that had been open for a year and a half.

Before the ban, Omaha Public Schools used suspensions in kindergarten through second grade on rare occasions to get a behavior plan in place for a struggling student, said Kathy Poehling, president of the Omaha Education Association. 

“We’re not forced to suspend preschoolers or kindergartners. But if that’s what we need to do in order to get people together, to put a plan in place, sometimes you need 24 hours to do that,” she said. “I don’t really support the idea of repealing the entire ban, because I think then we’re not really looking at the situation and saying, ‘What does the child need?’ We don’t want to suspend just to suspend.”

Omaha’s Education Rights Counsel, a legal advocacy nonprofit, supported the ban because children between the ages of 4 and 7 were being sent home multiple times a year, said Director Lauren Micek Vargas. 

Some students might be exhibiting behaviors because of a disability or possible trauma at home, she said. 

“With our most young, vulnerable children, oftentimes that behavior actually is a form of communication of something else,” she said. “If you punish something without trying to figure out what is happening underneath the surface … we’re missing out on an opportunity to really connect with the child and also see other things that are going on.”

But under IDEA, some legal procedures that could help students get access to special education services are triggered only by suspensions, said Robyn Linscott, director of family and education policy at The Arc of the United States.

Under IDEA, schools are required to hold a meeting with specialists, teachers and the family of any student who has been suspended for 10 or more days during a school year. These sessions determine whether the behavior that led to the suspensions is the result of a disability.

“If that is the case, then the school has to make sure that all these other supports are in place before they can be suspended again, before they can be expelled,” Linscott said. “They often look back to functional behavior assessments and their (individualized education program) to see if it was actually being followed. This is a really important protection and procedural point for students with disabilities.”

Even without suspensions, schools can informally remove students with disabilities by asking their parents to take them home. But that doesn’t count toward the federal 10-day limit.

Last year, Minnesota lawmakers initiated bills to reinstate suspensions and other exclusionary discipline only two years after passing a ban. State Sen. Jim Abeler, one of the bill authors, said the suspension ban had been implemented with good intentions, but “it’s been a disaster.”

“There’s no chance to intervene,” he said. “The kids see no consequences and don’t ever get a chance to get on track with a plan. Superintendents came (to the legislature) and begged for a way to work around this.”

A 2017 in Texas was revised last year to expand the reasons for sending a student in prekindergarten through second grade home. Before the change, young students could be suspended only if they brought a gun to school. Now, include repeated or significant disruption to the classroom or a threat to the health and safety of other students.

In Nebraska, lawmakers like state Sen. Ashlei Spivey are working on a that would allow more exceptions, like chronic disruptive behavior or violence. The legislation, which is separate from the bill to repeal the ban and more likely to pass, is in the second debate and voting stage in the legislature. 

Spivey said that while sending students home might be a tool for discipline, alternative interventions are key to preventing disproportionate suspensions and keeping young children in the classroom.

“If you feel like a 7-year-old should not be in a classroom, my thought is that you cannot throw them away, but you ask, ‘What are they navigating? What type of support do they need?’ ” she said. “There also needs to be clearly defined expectations of what escalates to a suspension and how you are defining that, and how it is being applied to all student populations.”

LINCOLN — Nebraska teens, under a 2019 state law, must clear a civics requirement to graduate. Immigrants must pass a test on civics and U.S. history to gain U.S. citizenship.

Now a bipartisan group of Nebraska state senators wants to write into law that new members of the officially nonpartisan Legislature take a 20-question civics test — and publicly post the scores.

A passing grade would not be required, and individual answers would remain confidential. But the “raw scores” would be listed on the Legislature’s official website and also on the lawmaker’s official public biography.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

Results would not affect the ability of any lawmaker to hold or continue to serve in a public role, according to Legislative Bill 1066, which should not “be construed to add to or alter the qualifications for office established in the Constitution of Nebraska.”

The introducer of LB 1066, State Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha, said the effort was inspired by conservative and progressive constituents alike who have questioned the level of understanding and appreciation lawmakers have of U.S. government and responsibility to steward institutions that protect them.

With the country’s 250th birthday approaching, Fredrickson thought it was a good time for the civics test law. The measure is co-sponsored by lawmakers from diverse political backgrounds: State Sens. Stan Clouse of Kearney, Tanya Storer of Whitman and Paul Strommen of Sidney are Republicans; State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha is a progressive independent. Fredrickson is a Democrat.

“We have a very serious job,” Fredrickson said of all 49 state senators. “We create, we amend, and we repeal laws. So ensuring that folks who are in that position are continually educating themselves on our responsibility to uphold the Constitution … felt like an important step to take.”

Fredrickson said he has at times heard colleagues say things like, “Well the governor is the boss.” He recalled a couple of recent situations when the Legislature voted to approve a bill then, following the governor’s veto, certain senators flipped their votes and buried the proposal.

One such occasion came last year when, despite three consecutive bipartisan votes to lift a lifetime ban on public food aid for some Nebraskans with past drug felonies, the . The only change was Gov. Jim Pillen’s veto.

That prompted Fredrickson’s debate remark: “We were elected to lead, not to follow, and certainly not to flinch.”

He reminded colleagues that the Legislature is a separate and coequal branch of government to the executive and judicial arms. Such occasions gave rise to his thought: “How do we refresh our memories of the basic principles of how our country works and how our role as legislators should be exercised.”

Storer said she was encouraged to back a bill she believes should get universal support.

She said that while lawmakers come to the Legislature with different experiences, political backgrounds and home districts that represent rural, urban and suburban neighborhoods, a common ground should be a foundational grasp and appreciation of civics and the country’s road to democracy.

“It’s not a partisan issue. It’s an American issue,” she said. “We don’t know where we’re going if we don’t know where we’ve come from, right?”

Admittedly, not everybody loves test-taking, Storer said. She chuckled and said her palms even got a bit sweaty thinking about the process, though not to the point of doubting its value. She said public posting of raw scores might be a deterrent for some, but underscored that a failed grade won’t get anyone removed from office.

“If anything, it would prompt us all to be more intentional about studying civics and basic principles of government,” Storer said.

Fredrickson said he is unaware of any past efforts to require a civics test of Nebraska lawmakers, and believes the law would be a first for a state. A public hearing will be scheduled for LB 1066.

Exam questions could be pulled from the civics portion of the test administered to naturalization candidates by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security or an equivalent designed by the Nebraska Secretary of State or Nebraska Department of Education.

The Clerk of the Legislature would provide the test, within 90 days of a state senator taking office, that would include 20 randomly selected questions about U.S. history and civics. A lawmaker who doesn’t reach a passing score would be invited, not required, to attend a voluntary civic literacy seminar conducted by the Nebraska State Historical Society or Legislative Research Office.

For Nebraska students, answering questions from the civics portion of the federal citizenship and naturalization test is one of three options Nebraska school boards have to fulfill the state legal requirement aimed at ensuring students are prepared “to be competent and responsible citizens who engage in public debate knowledgeably and in a civil manner.” Other suggested options for students include a project on an important American figure or attendance at a public meeting.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Aaron Sanderford for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com.

Last December, after a year and a half of blind alleys, impenetrable paperwork and bureaucratic stonewalling, it seemed like the complaints Sierra Rios had filed against her fifth-grader’s elementary school were finally getting a proper investigation. A lawyer in the Dallas office of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights was asking hard questions of the school where Rios said her daughter, Nevaeh, was repeatedly denied special education services. 

But then, a few weeks into the probe, the San Antonio mother got a bounce-back email informing her that the attorney working on her case was no longer employed by the agency. As part of its plan to shutter the department, the Trump administration had fired 40% of the civil rights division’s staff and closed half of its regional offices. 

The March email did not say what would happen to Rios’ case. In May, she got a message asking for a form that had somehow not been transferred from Texas to the agency’s office in Kansas City, Missouri. Rios re-sent the document, but it no longer mattered. During the churn, she was told, the complaint had become too old to pursue. 

The saga is a vivid illustration of the awaits families of students with disabilities. For decades, the federal government has been a key avenue of relief for parents unable to get services for their children through complaints filed with their state, mediation, administrative hearings or due process cases. Now, with the department lurching toward closure, state-level officials may increasingly have the final word. And a 74 analysis shows that those systems, intended to help desperate parents like Rios, have never delivered on their promise. 

A ‘parent-friendly’ process that’s anything but simple 

Fifty years ago, under the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act, Congress created three ways parents could appeal to their state education departments if they felt their children were being denied accommodations in school. These mechanisms vary in complexity and effectiveness, but all were supposed to be simple enough for any parent to navigate. 

Families, or school administrators seeking help in resolving a disagreement, can file a complaint with their state in hopes that education officials will intervene if they find a district’s efforts lacking or improper. Parents can also ask the state to appoint a mediator who will try to bring both sides to an agreement. Most complicated, but potentially most effective, families can file a due process complaint, which kicks off a legal process that usually requires an attorney or skilled advocate. The complaint may start with a mediator but can progress to a formal hearing before an administrative law judge. If the dispute isn’t resolved there, the case can turn into a federal lawsuit.   

Some states pursue complaints quickly, with an eye toward resolving issues before they become intensely adversarial and expensive. Others lag or throw up procedural roadblocks, presumably trying to reduce the number of cases filed. 

Complaints can run aground at . The length of time a family has to file after the event they’re disputing differs depending on where they live and which mechanism they’re trying to use. If an email or letter doesn’t get a reply within a certain number of days, the case can be closed. Things must be done in a precise order, spelled out in legalese. 

In Rios’ case, she initially tried to open a state complaint against the principal of Nevaeh’s school in 2023. The Texas Education Agency rejected her request in a letter that she read as saying complaints cannot be filed against individuals, just schools and districts. (The agency says complaints can be filed against individuals.)

Rios assumed her complaint was dead in the water. A year later, with Nevaeh’s situation deteriorating as school staff, Rios says, grew tired of the family’s continued complaints, she did more research and opened a case at the Office for Civil Rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. 

The law that created the state complaint processes, the IDEA, guarantees disabled students’ educational rights. By contrast, the ADA, passed in 1990, outlaws discrimination against people who need accommodations to access public facilities and programs — including schools. 

Families of children denied special education services can assert their rights under either law. When states fail to enforce a student’s educational rights under IDEA, families often file a discrimination complaint via the ADA.

In the 2022-23 school year, more than 54,000 state were filed in the U.S. and its territories, including due process complaints, written state complaints and mediation requests. The Office for Civil Rights had — half of them involving disability discrimination — when its staff was . For fiscal year 2026, which started July 1, the White House’s proposed OCR budget is $91 million, a 35% drop. 

At the same time, the administration wants to move $33 million that currently funds state advocacy clearinghouses into block grants that states — cash-strapped as their federal pandemic funds run out — can use for other things. This means families risk losing a second source of leverage: free assistance from experts.

If enacted, both budget cuts would also exacerbate socioeconomic and racial disparities in the services kids with disabilities receive, says Carrie Gillispie, a senior policy analyst at New America. This is because families in states where there’s little appetite for local enforcement depend on OCR to investigate discrimination.

“Those discrepancies that exist if these budget changes happen,” Gillispie says. “It’s a choice to continue to underinvest.”            

With the federal office a hollow shell of what it was six months ago, advocates say, families are likely to rely more heavily on their states. And how — and how well — each state helps students with disabilities varies widely. 

In fact, our analysis found great geographic disparities in the kinds of appeals families pursue and how far they make it in the multi-step processes. In the few places that have more than a handful of special education lawyers, primarily on the East and West coasts, due process cases often dominate. In the Midwest, where there are few or even no special ed attorneys or advocates, families must go it alone, and public officials frequently put up roadblocks to impede complaints parents file with their states. Here, there are fewer disputes — likely because parents often depend on schools to apprise them of their rights — and complaints are less likely to end in a written agreement. 

Rate of due process complaints per 10,000 children receiving special education services

Rate of due process complaints per 10,000 children receiving special education services for each state from 2014-15 to 2021-22 and how it compares with the national average. Hover over each state to see the year-by-year breakdown. Source: U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs (Eamonn Fitzmaurice)

Information collected by the U.S. Education Department does not record whether outcomes are favorable for students. But attorneys and advocates say that for those who have access to expert help — either for a fee or pro bono, through an advocacy group — a due process complaint can yield a quick settlement from a district looking to end a family’s case and move on. 

Using state data submitted to the department from the 2014-15 academic year through 2022-23, the most recent available, we created the interactive map above showing how many cases are filed in each state and how they compare with the national average. To account for population differences, we have tabulated the rate of due process complaints per 10,000 children identified as qualifying for special education services in each state. 

In addition to national averages, we focused on four localities  — California, Texas, Nebraska and the District of Columbia — that illustrate different approaches to resolving disputes and how far in the process they proceed, and included an interactive chart for each.  

The process was , and to allow parents and schools to start with the least contentious, simplest and most inexpensive options. With some exceptions, a family can begin by filing a written state complaint or by requesting mediation, and, if no agreement is reached, open a due process case later on. If one side disagrees with the decision in a due process hearing, it can file a federal suit. In some circumstances, the losing party will be ordered to reimburse the other side’s attorney fees. 

In our analysis, we have excluded two statistical outliers: New York, where, because of a tangled legal history, two-thirds of recent complaints in the U.S. were filed; and Puerto Rico, where students are protected by federal law but the special education system is unique.

Finally, we look at trends in Texas, where advocates are cautiously optimistic that a decade-old federal intervention has nudged the process closer to Congress’ original vision. Advocates say changes made by Texas officials are getting families what they need faster, and with less red tape, all with an eye to heading off the most contentious options.     

Barring similar efforts by districts and state education officials to help families before disagreements become adversarial, advocates predict the system will become more litigious. By definition, that will make it more expensive for everyone involved, as districts and families are forced to spend money on attorneys and experts instead of the services children need. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision making it easier for families to file federal discrimination suits. 

The upshot, advocates say, could be an even more inequitable playing field, where families with access to attorneys and the ability to pay them have leverage and those who don’t are at the mercy of their states’ willingness to enforce their rights.    

Each process for resolving special education disagreements comes with major trade-offs — which are typically unclear for families trying to figure out where to start. 

A written state complaint is usually the easiest route for a parent going it alone. It’s free. The information needed to start is comparatively straightforward. The law requires states to finish investigations within 60 days, which is months or years faster than the alternatives. 

If, at any point, a parent and district come to an agreement, they can simply stop the process. If the state probe goes forward, a finding is issued. published in 2018 in the Journal of Special Education Leadership, district leaders surveyed the year before said 62% of state investigations that played all the way out concluded that a district was not compliant with the law. 

Caveats abound, however. In many places, state complaints can’t be appealed. A mediator or state investigator can determine that a student is owed compensatory services — academic or therapeutic time to make up for interventions they were improperly denied or money to pay for private services. But in practice, they rarely result in financial compensation for a student’s family. 

Though these agreements are often supposed to be legally binding, they don’t always carry the weight of a legal judgment, so schools can feel little pressure to make meaningful changes.

Finally, in order to get what their child was denied, families often must sign a non-disclosure agreement. This makes it hard for parents to compare notes about what services are available from their school and what they can reasonably ask for.  

In , families told the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates — a network of state and local professionals partly funded by IDEA — that the corrective actions called for in state findings are often inadequate and ignored by schools, with no state follow-up to ensure compliance. Parents also complained that state investigators are sometimes quicker to believe districts’ stories than families’, even in the absence of evidence. Mediators may fail to help parents and schools reach an agreement.      

By contrast, filing a due process complaint is not unlike filing a lawsuit. Indeed, if a disagreement isn’t resolved at a negotiation called a resolution meeting or by a mediator, an administrative law judge takes testimony, considers evidence and issues a ruling. If that does not end the dispute, either party may — provided it has the resources — continue the case in federal court.

But parents often don’t have the money to hire an attorney or advocate to take the case. Some states have just one lawyer who will accept special education cases. In part, this is because a family must win to have just its attorney’s fees covered. In addition, in most instances, plaintiffs can’t hire experts to counter testimony given by district witnesses.   

Until recently, anyway, lodging a complaint with the OCR instead of the state was often parents’ most attractive option.

Families in rural areas rely on state complaints for solutions 

In many rural states, such as Nebraska, families rely on written state complaints when their kids’ needs aren’t being met. Dispute resolution filings are rare because advocates and attorneys are few and far between, and the number of due process cases is low.

State complaints are supposed to be the fast, easy, least costly and least adversarial path to getting kids services without the expenses of hiring an attorney. But outcomes are often poor. 

“They are especially good for clear procedural violations that may impact the student,” says Amy Bonn, an Omaha-area attorney. “It’s basically saying, ‘Here’s where the district did something that did not comport with the actual law.’ ”

When IDEA was created, Congress envisioned the state complaint system to be the “most powerful and accessible option for parents,” but it often falls short in resolving noncompliance issues, according to a from the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates. 

The organization stated in its that the system is “an often ineffective process that lacks transparency, impartiality and accountability by state educational agencies charged with administering the dispute resolution process.”

Once a complaint is filed, the investigation is in the state’s hands — and out of the parents’. Any decisions, including corrective actions, are made by the state within a 60-day timeline, and they usually can’t be appealed. 

“[Families] might get relief or they might not, but there are no judges or a hearing,” says Kathy Zeisel of the Children’s Law Center, an agency that takes cases and connects families with pro bono lawyers to file complaints. “You get systemic change, such as a district having to change policies,” instead of an accommodation to help a particular student.

But debates between families and school districts about special ed services that were not delivered during the COVID pandemic have begun to change the landscape, Bonn says. An increase in the number of parent advocates and lawyers who take special education cases has led to more filings in recent years.

“I think the culture is changing a little bit,” Bonn says. 

Due process comes with steep costs and barriers

With the federal backstop of the Office for Civil Rights disappearing, even more due process complaints are likely. They are expensive for both families and districts but effective — when the process is accessible to parents. 

Here are two examples of how this is playing out in states where the number of these complaints is rising quickly:     

In California, the dispute resolution process is available to financially stable, highly educated families confident enough to speak out about their child’s services, says Cheryl Theis, who worked as a parent advocate in Oakland for 18 years at the Disability Rights Education Defense Fund.

“IDEA is built on one fundamental premise: that every child has a parent who can advocate for them,” Theis says. “But there’s always been some power imbalance around how effectively a parent can participate and how hard they’re willing to push, and that’s been an ongoing problem.”

Over the past several years, California has received roughly the same number of mediations and due process complaints — which make up about 90% of filings, according to data from . The state had nearly 55 due process complaints and 56 mediation requests per 10,000 children in 2022-23.

Excluding the outliers not included in this analysis — New York and Puerto Rico — California’s due process case rate is the second highest in the country. But the number that proceed to the ultimate stage is miniscule. Less than 1% of the 4,401 cases filed in 2022-23 were heard by a judge, while 3,254 were resolved before the hearing stage. 

Advocates say this reflects a trend they expect to play out in other places: With large numbers of private law firms and nonprofits able to file pro bono cases, increasingly school districts are choosing to settle due process complaints quickly. Many California school systems now routinely purchase commercial insurance, which picks up most of the cost. This may seem like an inexpensive way to shorten what can be months of expensive arguments, but attorneys and disability advocates note that the insurance premiums come out of the district’s budget, which could be paying for needed services. 

Some families end up with better agreements for their children than they would using the state complaint process, advocates say. But even when families view a settlement as a win, Theis says, compensatory education often requires the parent to pay upfront for private services and get reimbursed from the district — another barrier for those who are low-income.

In the past two school years, Oakland Unified School District shelled out $579,588 in attorney fees and paid $823,964 to families to cover their legal costs in settlement cases, according to district financial records. The settlements forced the district to spend roughly $3.5 million on student services.

Oakland in previous years for IDEA violations. Systemic problems uncovered by investigations in 2007 and 2013 included staffing shortages, lack of special education curricula, deficient budgets and the placement of students in segregated special ed classrooms, according to Disability Rights California. 

The nonprofit filed a on the behalf of all special education students in the district. 

“If you look at those millions of dollars in settlements, like, how many teachers could you train, how many adaptive tricycles could you buy? What specialized summer programs could you create?” Theis asks. “It’s like this squeaky-wheel system where 10 people might need it, but only one parent is going to have the knowledge, the time and the finances to maybe get an attorney.”

In a statement the district said that since the pandemic, it has expanded its alternative dispute resolution program, which provides a neutral representative who can conduct IEP meetings or resolve issues with families without an attorney or legal fees.

“Additionally, we offer open office hours monthly for any family who wants to speak with a neutral special education attorney about their questions or concerns about their child’s IEP,” the district said.

In 2024-25, 31 cases went through the alternative dispute resolution program, and 29 were resolved with no attorney fees, the district said.

Our second example, Washington, D.C., has one of the highest rates of due process complaints in the nation, behind New York and Puerto Rico. In 2022-23, roughly 151 complaints were filed per 10,000 children. These numbers prompted a federal probe in March to investigate claims that D.C.’s traditional public school system is not meeting the needs of students with disabilities.

Advocates say D.C.’s special education issues are similar to those in the rest of the nation, but an oversaturation of disability lawyers and agencies has educated families about their children’s school services — and taught them to use litigation to get what they are entitled to under federal law. This, they say, contributes to the high filing numbers.

A from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights found that D.C. has the highest rate in the nation of due process complaints resolved without a hearing, which could indicate a “sue and settle approach” — which favors those who can afford attorneys. 

“It’s really a national problem that we are just disregarding kids with disabilities and not putting the resources into them,” says Zeisel, whose Children’s Law Center has roughly 250 cases at any given time, one-third involving families going through due process. “Parents have to sue, and kids lose almost a whole school year to try to get what [they need]. We would love to put ourselves out of a job and not not be litigating this stuff and go do something else.”

While advocates say the number of cases is still too high, D.C.’s filing numbers have plummeted over the last decade. In the 2011-12 school year, 805 due process complaints per 10,000 children were reported. The latest data available shows that D.C. had 151 complaints per 10,000 children in 2022-23.

The credits the drop to D.C. improving its capacity in handling cases and creating a student hearing office.

In 2023, the city paid more than $3.1 million to attorneys as a result of due process complaints against D.C. Public Schools, according to a 2023 inspector general .

Donovan Anderson represented the district in special education cases until he opened his own firm doing the same work more than 25 years ago. 

“Parents will reach out to me because they are searching for answers,” he says. “They are in disbelief with the quality of education that their child is receiving.”

Once Anderson files a on behalf of a family, the district has 15 days to hold a resolution meeting as a way to discuss the issues and potentially resolve them. He says almost all his cases end at this stage because continuing with due process is usually time-consuming and too costly for families. 

If nothing is agreed upon during the resolution meeting and a parent wants to continue to a due process hearing, the timeline can stretch to 75 days before any decision is made. Then there’s also more of a chance that families will lose their case and come out with nothing but debt after a long fight. 

Anderson says resolving a case during the resolution meeting makes the school district pay the family’s attorney fees — usually a few thousand dollars — but parents who lose due process are on the hook for the thousands more spent on lawyers and experts to testify during the hearing.

“If I settle the case in 15 days, the child [and] the parent can see tangible results in 30 to 45 days after meeting me,” he says. “I can make a lot more money if I have to go to a due process hearing, but it doesn’t necessarily benefit the child, because the parent has to wait that much longer to have tangible solutions.”

‘The therapist said it was self-defense’

Even the most cut-and-dried due process case — the kind likely to be resolved quickly and in a student’s  favor — can be prohibitively expensive just to file. Texas parent N.G.’s son, A.G., is autistic, nonverbal and very bright. (Because the family signed a nondisclosure agreement at the conclusion of the case — a common district demand — N.G. asked that they be identified by their initials.) 

A.G. could add and subtract in kindergarten, but his first grade teacher conflated his lack of speech with academic incompetence and gave him a picture of the number 1 to color. Bored, A.G. acted up, his mother says. A few weeks into the year, he wandered off and got lost in the school.

In February, he came home with a hand-shaped bruise on his arm following an occupational therapy session in school. “The therapist said it was self-defense,” N.G. says. “I said, ‘He’s 6 and he has low muscle tone.’ ”

It took her a month to find an attorney, hundreds of miles away. The lawyer charged a flat fee of $6,000 for his first three months of work. The family’s due process complaint was so stark and well-documented — N.G. had logged every interaction on a spreadsheet — that a mediator quickly negotiated a good settlement.      

Had the mediator failed, however, the family would have had to drop the complaint. After 90 days, the attorney would have needed to be paid by the hour — money N.G. would not necessarily have been entitled to recover.

Perhaps the best proof of the value of federal oversight of special education is to be found in Texas, where state officials have spent seven years overhauling how schools are held accountable for serving children with disabilities. Attorneys and advocates now routinely advise families to avoid due process altogether and file state complaints — the route Congress originally envisioned as the quickest path to securing help for kids.    

In 2016, a revealed that for years, the state had improperly denied services to hundreds of thousands of children by capping the number of special ed students districts could serve. In response, the U.S. Education Department ordered state officials to take a series of steps to find and evaluate children with disabilities.  

Since then, the number of special education students has increased by 67%, rising from 463,000 to 775,000. Meeting their needs has stretched Texas schools, which couldn’t simply conjure the staff — or funding — to beef up special education overnight. 

In 2022, Texas lawmakers lengthened the amount of time families have to file due process claims from one year after an episode to a more standard two years.

Conventional wisdom would hold that a tsunami of families seeking support and a longer window to complain when they don’t get it would send caseloads skyrocketing. But due process complaints have instead fallen, from 8 per 10,000 students in 2014-15 to 5.5 in 2021-22.

Meanwhile, the number of state complaints nearly quadrupled between the 2020-21 and 2022-23 academic years, rising from 261 to 979. The number of resulting reports — the documents that say what state investigators found — tripled, from 164 to 549. Also on the rise is the number of complaints withdrawn before the formal process begins — likely as a result of districts resolving disagreements quickly.    

Colleen Potts, supervising attorney for Disability Rights Texas, says the organization’s lawyers now see state complaints as the most effective way to get quick relief for students and families. 

“I’ve been doing this for 19 years, and the last two or three years we are getting consistently good outcomes in non-adversarial ‘meeting of the minds’ meetings, with resolutions that are acceptable to everyone,” she says. 

Indeed, districts often are quick to try to resolve disagreements before the state investigates. Potts encourages the attorneys she works with to list proposed remedies in their complaints even if they aren’t things a state typically requires a lagging district to do. 

In practical terms, this document can serve as a road map to getting a child’s needs met, she explains: “Anything is on the table.” 

In 2018, in response to the U.S. Education Department’s intervention, the Texas Education Agency drew up an for overhauling special education statewide. A key goal was making resources available to families and districts to help them resolve disagreements early. According to Jennifer Alexander, Texas’ deputy commissioner for special populations and student supports, 10% of state complaints are now resolved this way, even if investigators have already begun work on the case.     

As the state officials made the changes outlined in the strategic plan, they examined data on disputes to find out where things go awry, says Alexander: “Where it often breaks down is the family does not know the process and so can’t express to the district what they need.” 

To that end, in 2023 the state began offering to pay for trained facilitators to participate in the initial meetings where families and educators negotiate a child’s individualized education program — the legally required document that spells out how the student’s needs will be met. The cost to the state is $1,500 per negotiation.

Of the 20 facilitated IEP meetings that took place in 2024, 40% resulted in an agreement, Alexander says. During the first half of 2025, there have been 25 meetings, and 56% have resulted in agreements. Two negotiations are pending.

The state also created a parent-friendly special education online portal, , where a relatively simple automatically collects the information that is legally required to make a case pursuable, to head off situations like Rios’. 

When the form is submitted, the district immediately gets a copy. This, Alexander says, often prompts school staff to begin trying to resolve the disagreement. Any agreement is legally binding.     

The changes Texas has made are having an impact for students, advocates agree. And, they say, there is reason to hope that the new strategies for ironing out disagreements before they become heated will show other states that better, quicker communication can head off the costs faced by places like Oakland and Washington, D.C.

But without the possibility that federal officials will compel states to do better, any improvement will be piecemeal, says Robyn Linscott, director of family and education policy at The Arc of the United States.   

“You might have some states that try to step in and create or beef up a state-level backstop, whether it’s a special agency or ombudsman or something they already have in place,” she says. “And then you’ll have other states that are not necessarily going to see the value in trying to provide more stable resources for families to have recourse.

“This will leave us with this state-by-state patchwork.” 

Uncertainty remains for parents who fight for their child’s services

According to documents filed in a court case challenging the Trump administration’s mass firings, the U.S. Education Department said it dismissed more than 3,400 complaints between March 11 and June 27, . That’s more than 28% of the OCR’s caseload.   

Rios has yet to learn whether hers is one of them. After the May email informing her the case had been closed because it was too old, an advocate helped her compile a paper trail showing she had met every deadline. In the past, that has often convinced the agency to make an exception. 

Rios says all she wants is what she’s been fighting for this entire time — accountability from the school and a plan to make it right for Nevaeh. 

“She goes to school and she learns, but then she comes home and I’m reteaching the material,” Rios says. “On top of all of that, I’m now having to file complaints, follow up on complaints, send angry emails, follow up on those angry emails, make phone calls — like, I’m basically my daughter’s teacher, lawyer, advocate, I’m everything. 

“It’s a lot. I feel like there [are] programs and there are laws around these things for a reason.”

Clarification: An earlier version of this story misstated how a complaint against an individual in Texas was handled. Families are allowed to file special education complaints against individuals with the Texas Education Agency.

“Guam doesn’t have a lot of STEM opportunities at all,” Kim said. “Even at the University of Guam, it’s so small that we barely have any basic laboratory [equipment], like what other universities would have.”

When the 17-year-old student learned of a highly competitive U.S. summer science program, she applied. Little did she know that she would not only be accepted, but flown to the small, rural town of Chadron, nestled in the sandhills of western Nebraska.

In June, Kim began the biochemistry program at , a nonprofit that has offered residential summer STEM research opportunities to teenagers since 1959. She and 35 other rising seniors spent five weeks at Chadron State College, conducting research with professors and graduate students to help prevent fungal infection of agricultural crops.

The college is one of 14 universities across the nation that housed 600 students this summer to tackle research projects in fields like astrophysics and cell biology. Chadron State — a school of roughly 2,000 students — joined the organization’s list of partners this year to expand the biochemistry program, which also takes place at Purdue and Indiana universities. 

Rachel Avard, a biology professor at Framingham State University in Massachusetts, worked with SSP International students at Purdue University last year. This summer, she came to Chadron for the same reason: to help aspiring scientists gain key STEM skills, along with personal growth and preparation for college.

“For many of them, this is the first time in their lives that they haven’t been ‘the best’ immediately walking in the door,” she said. “We’re really able to hold their hand through the process of learning how to grow these skills and how to work in a team, how to adjust to failure, how to work through all these challenges.”

The three colleges in SSP International’s biochemistry program are working on the . When the last session ends, students will have designed a molecule that could inhibit enzyme activity and prevent fungal infection of crops. It’s a task that SSP International students have been working on for a few years, Avard said. The organization is collecting participants’ research results that can hopefully be used to help create a drug to protect crops in the future.

“Fungal pathogens are killing sometimes … up to 50% or 60% of crops every year. And we have all these pesticides and fungicides, but they’re all extremely toxic,” she said. “So the goal for this project is to develop a drug that is going to kill fungi.”

The workload includes 60-hour weeks in the college’s science and math wing. Days are filled with in-depth classroom lectures and team discussions before students pull on latex gloves to conduct experiments in the lab.

Everyone gets one-hour breaks for rest or meals, but the students often end up in the lab after sunset or during personal time on weekends. Dinners are always business casual and include professional networking opportunities with guest speakers. Avard and other faculty also take the students on field trips or host games in the evenings to help them work as a team. 

The rigor of the summer science program was a surprise for many, including Kim.

“I didn’t know it’d be this intense. The first three days, I would say, were the most intense of my life — like exam season — but it makes me feel productive, and I think that’s what’s really important,” she said. “And good results are going to come out soon. Science is exciting. You don’t know what’s going to happen. So it keeps us on all of our toes and wanting to do our best.”

Researchers have found that high-quality academic preparation and exposure to STEM is a in high schoolers’ chances of landing a STEM career. In a 2023 , 75% of Gen Z youth said they were interested in STEM occupations but only 29% listed a STEM role as their first career choice.

A 2021 Purdue University study on SSP International’s summer science program found that “engaging in authentic research as a high school student has the ability to in STEM.”

“The thought is not just that we are trying to teach science to some students, but we wanted to give students a transformational experience at a pivotal time in their life,” said Amy Belote, the organization’s vice president of program operations. “When they’re leaving the summer science program, they’re getting ready to start their senior year of high school — thinking about their future, what they envision for themselves. We’re giving them some hands-on experience before they start making all of those plans.”

The program accepts only about 15% of applicants, Belote said, and tries to balance the number of males and females in each cohort. In Chadron, the group consists of 18 girls and 18 boys. 

The program comes with a hefty price tag: $9,800. Nearly half of participants last year received financial aid, and about a third were able to go for free. Students can also receive spending money and $3,000 stipends to replace wages they would have earned during the summer if they were at home.

Avard said these facets of the program allow students of a variety of backgrounds to experience something that can change their life trajectory. Witnessing each student’s personal growth — secluded on a college campus with a small group of people for five weeks, working long hours — is her favorite part.

“On day one, they’re not making eye contact. They’re very shy. They’re all very unsure,” she said. “They’ve never really been alone or without parental supervision all day, every day. And so the growth that we see in just even the first couple weeks is phenomenal.”

This summer was Aiden Fee’s first time visiting the Midwest. A 16-year-old from Baton Rouge, Louisiana, he said he learned to love the open landscape and friendly people in town. He also became more comfortable with meeting new people in unfamiliar settings.

“I’ve learned a lot more about teamwork and asking questions,” Fee said. “A lot of the students here are some of the highest-achieving at their school. Whenever you have so many people like that, it’s about not being a leader, but relying on other people.”

Kim said she’s looking forward to using the organization’s alumni network, which provides group and one-on-one mentoring for recent participants as they transition from high school to college. 

“These [past] weeks will be the most intense and challenging time of my life. But it’s been so eye-opening. I’ve met so many people from different cultures, and I just can’t wait for the future, because we all aspire to be some type of scientist,” she said. “So I can’t wait to see where this program leads us.”

Angela Gleason knew something was wrong with her son’s education by the time he began first grade in Omaha Public Schools. 

The district moved Teddy, who has autism and is nonverbal, from a behavioral skills class to general education. His struggles brought on outbursts of running around the room and disrupting his classmates, leading to near-daily phone calls asking Gleason to come get him.  

Feeling hopeless, Gleason applied for a transfer to Millard Public Schools in 2018. But the nearby district said its special education program had no room for Teddy.

Year after year, Gleason applied to Millard and received the same response, even as the district later accepted two of her other children, who didn’t need special education services. She tried other Omaha-area districts. Westside. Then Bellevue. Both rejected Teddy.

“It’s very disheartening as a parent to try repeatedly to get your child with disabilities accepted into a different school district, and to be told ‘no’ over and over and over again,” she said.

A 35-year-old from one public school district to another under a policy known as option enrollment. 

Today, more than 25,000 students attend schools outside their home district. But for hundreds of kids like Teddy, the program hasn’t lived up to its promise, despite a provision barring districts from considering students’ disabilities as part of their admission standards.

In 2023-24, Bellevue Public Schools and 39 other districts rejected only kids with disabilities while accepting option applications from other students. Several suburban Omaha districts, like Millard, Westside and Papillion La Vista, denied students with disabilities at disproportionate rates.

Across Nebraska, students with individualized education programs (IEPs) made up 38% of the option enrollment rejections despite accounting for 17% of K-12 school kids, according to a data analysis of a .

Disability disparities have also emerged in other states with open enrollment programs. In 2021, Wisconsin districts rejected students with disabilities for open enrollment the rate of other students. This year, technical high schools in Connecticut were accused of after denying enrollment to 42 kids, a state report found. 

Nebraska administrators and education lobbyists say an increasingly dire shortage of special education staff is to blame for the disparity. The law allows districts to reject applications if they lack the ability or space to accommodate more kids.

Nebraska schools reported last year, and that doesn’t include dozens of vacancies districts gave up on filling, said Tim Royers, president of the state teachers union.

Adding more option students to already stretched-thin special ed classrooms would decrease the quality of education while exacerbating faster than schools can replace them, Royers said.

“In an ideal world, we’re not turning anybody away through option enrollment because their child has an IEP,” he said. “We know what we want the system to look like, (but) we don’t have the people to accomplish that goal right now.”

Critics say schools have long ignored state law and manipulated transfer enrollment at the expense of kids with disabilities.

“We got here because of self-interest. [Schools] don’t want to deal with kids who may require a little more work,” said Justin Wayne, a Democrat and former state lawmaker from Omaha who worked on education issues. 

To Democratic state Sen. Danielle Conrad, the high rejection rate for students with disabilities can’t be explained away by staffing troubles: “That’s discrimination, plain and simple.”

She’s part of a bipartisan bloc of lawmakers that tried unsuccessfully in the just-concluded legislative session barring districts from disproportionately rejecting transfers from students with disabilities. 

The proposal failed to advance after heavy pushback from teachers and school administrators, who contended it would have hamstrung their ability to educate the special-needs students they already have. The bill could be considered again when the Legislature reconvenes in January.

It’s “shocking and disappointing” that schools “and their highly paid superintendents” opposed efforts to stem disability discrimination, said Conrad. 

Meanwhile, the toll of rejection continues to weigh heavily on parents like Gleason. It’s more than the feeling of injustice — it’s the weeks, months and years that go by watching their child trying to thrive in the wrong learning environment.

“We tried in a meeting to request more support with a one-on-one paraprofessional, but the school actively advocated against it, telling us no one would apply for the position and that they wouldn’t be able to fill it,” Gleason said. “It was a very stressful time, and we decided to try and enroll in other districts because we had heard other districts do very well at providing services.”

Dividing lines

When the Nebraska Legislature first weighed big questions about interdistrict transfers in 1989, nobody had the answers: A track record didn’t yet exist. 

Minnesota had become to establish an open enrollment program just a year prior. But days before assuming the Oval Office in January, George H.W. Bush gave to public school choice, setting off a wave of legislation in state capitols across the country.

Pitched as a way to boost parental engagement and competition among school districts, Nebraska’s proposal would eventually make it to require districts to take transfers under certain circumstances.The bill passed narrowly over objections from some lawmakers and school administrators who feared the greater freedom to transfer could undermine neighborhood schools. About 370 kids formed the inaugural class of option students.

The program has proven extremely popular: 1 in 13 public schools students opted out of their home district last year.

prohibited schools from creating rejection standards based on “handicapping conditions,” previous academic performance or athletic ability. But the state didn’t require districts to provide data on their rejections.

Spurred by persistent complaints from fed-up parents about because of their IEPs, lawmakers passed a bill in 2023 mandating that districts determine their special education capacity on a case-by-case basis rather than closing their whole program to option students, as had done. 

The bill also required public schools to report the number of option applications they rejected from students with and without disabilities.

The by the Nebraska Department of Education revealed a widespread practice among districts of denying students with IEPs at disproportionate rates. 

Bellevue Public Schools stood out from the pack: All 30 of the district’s denials during the 2023-24 school year were students with IEPs. The district later confirmed that of more than 250 option students it accepted that year, only 10 had active IEPs.

Michele Zephier’s son, Dylan, was among those denied a transfer to Bellevue in 2018 after poor experiences in Omaha and Millard schools.

Dylan, who has Down syndrome and autism, was being secluded up to eight times a day because of his behavior while in third grade in the Millard district, Zephier said. He was often absent because he dreaded coming to school. 

The district declined to comment on individual students but said in a statement that it “works as a team with families to place children in the least restrictive environment possible.”

After being rejected by Bellevue because of its special education capacity, Zephier was desperate for something different. She sold her house and moved to a small apartment inside the Bellevue district boundaries, guaranteeing enrollment.

In a statement, the Bellevue district cited staffing shortages as the reason for the rejections. At the start of the 2023-24 school year, the district was down four special ed teachers and 29 paraprofessionals.

“The decision to deny an application is never made lightly,” the statement said. “We fully recognize the impact these decisions have on families, and we continue actively working to recruit and retain qualified staff to support our students.”

The district denied 36 of the 46 students with IEPs who applied for transfers for the 2024-25 school year, though most of the rejected applications came in after a , said spokeswoman Amanda Oliver. 

During the two years Zephier lived in the Bellevue district, Dylan was often secluded in an adjoining room for behaviors like pushing teachers away and shoving items off his desk, she said. 

She decided to move 60 miles away to the state capital, Lincoln, in 2020 as a last-ditch effort to find something better. She broke her apartment lease, drained her savings and eventually found the right public school for her son there.

“All those bad behaviors disappeared. Now he’s included. He’s in the band. He performed in the state band competition. He’s had solos on the stage,” she said. “There are districts that are known for having a lot of strengths in special education — they’re just really good at it or they built programs that have benefited students who can option into that district.”

Locked out of the suburbs

Option enrollment has long resembled a one-way street out of the Omaha district and into . 

Last year, more than 5,700 kids opted out of Omaha to attend other districts, while just 875 went in the other direction. 

Option enrollment has been a boon for suburban districts like Millard and Westside, allowing them to fill seats and keep their down, said former Republican state Sen. Lou Ann Linehan.

But critics contend that the same districts taking in hundreds of option students won’t give kids with disabilities a fair shake. 

In 2023, Millard Public Schools enrolled the most new option students in the state, but 27 of its 34 denials were for students with IEPs. What the state report didn’t show, said spokeswoman Rebecca Kleeman, is that the district had accepted 60% of the kids with IEPs who applied that year and more than 90% the year prior. 

“We exist to educate children, and we want to accept as many as we can. We also want to be careful not to exceed capacity of any program so that we can serve our students effectively,” Kleeman said in an email.

Westside Community Schools received about 700 option applications, more than any other Nebraska district, and rejected about half. Roughly 25% of the denied students had IEPs. 

The district welcomes option students, “but our first responsibility is to the families who live in our district, so we must ensure we have adequate space, staff and services for all students,” said district spokeswoman Elizabeth Power in a statement.

In Papillion La Vista, students with disabilities made up 14% of accepted option applications but 56% of rejections in the 2023-24 school year. 

The disproportionate rates happened because the school board voted in fall 2022 to close its K-12 special education program to option students for the following year. It just didn’t have enough teachers and staff to take on more students, said Christopher Villarreal, a district spokesman. The district reversed course following the enactment of the 2023 law, but capacity issues remain, he said. 

“It’s program capacity. So if there’s a special ed reason for denial, that special ed reason is going to be because of capacity — but I accepted a bunch (of special ed students) too,” said Tammy Voisin, Papillion La Vista’s director of special services. “So you accept up to a certain point, and then you say, ‘Now I can’t accept any more.’ ”

But Conrad said the “capacity argument just doesn’t hold any water for me,” since districts would have to find a way to provide special ed services to families that move within their boundaries. 

“We can’t just throw up our hands and say ‘capacity’ if I move into the district, but that’s what we’re doing right now for kids and families with special needs who want to utilize option enrollment,” she said at .

Voisin said that when the special ed program is full and a student with disabilities moves into the district, administrators “figure it out” by shifting teachers to different buildings or hiring more staff. But because the school board sets firm staffing numbers each fall for the following year, she said, the district can’t suddenly hire more people if it receives too many option enrollment requests.

Republican state Sen. Dave Murman, who sponsored the bill to ban the disproportionate denial of kids with IEPs, said districts that receive more option students than they lose are typically better staffed in special ed than those like Omaha, where students are trying to transfer out.

Those “option positive” districts should be more easily able to adjust their staffing to take in additional students with disabilities than Omaha, Murman said. 

Omaha Public Schools’ teacher shortage grew so severe in 2023 that the district at three elementary schools a week before the school year started. The district gave about 140 families the option to move their kids to another school or forgo their IEP accommodations. 

Staffing levels have improved from that low point, and special ed programs at the three schools returned last year. But Nebraska’s biggest district still faces gaping personnel holes, including vacancies for 62 special ed teachers, 63 classroom support staffers and 20 speech pathologists. 

Omaha has “a deep commitment to student success” and actively recruits staff year round in a competitive marketplace to meet students’ needs, a statement from the district said. 

Wayne noted that suburban districts can contract with Omaha Public Schools and private businesses to provide specialized services to kids with IEPs. 

Lawmakers also say they’ve recently increased state funding for special ed and for per-pupil payments in districts that take lots of option kids, making it financially viable to accept transfer students with disabilities. 

“Every reason that I’ve heard in the Legislature of why a school district may or may not take a kid in the Omaha area, to me, they’re just flat-out lying,” Wayne said. 

Districts that “pick and choose” which option students to take are shrugging off state law because there’s no penalty, Linehan said. 

“If you get a speeding ticket, you get a fine. If you’re a school and you ignore the rules, so what?” she said.

Royers, the union president, acknowledged that some districts may have taken disability rejections too far — especially for students with slight hearing loss or other minor disabilities that don’t require special accommodations. Those districts should be held accountable, he said.

But in most cases, he said, staffing shortages are the real barrier, and some teachers are already in a situation where it’s “mathematically impossible for them to meet all of the instructional-minute requirements for all of the students on their caseload.”

Rural rejection

The uneven denial of students with disabilities in Omaha-area districts has been playing out on a small scale in small towns. 

In fall 2015, Gary Shada didn’t know that moving his family to a house a mile outside the Pierce Public Schools district in northeast Nebraska would upend his daughter’s education.

Shada, a teacher in the district for more than 30 years, had a son in kindergarten at the time. His daughter Kylee, who has Down syndrome, was enrolled in the district’s preschool. Because his new address fell in the neighboring Plainview district, he had to use option enrollment for his children to continue their education in Pierce for the 2016-17 year.

His son’s application was accepted. But Shada said Pierce Superintendent Kendall Steffensen told him it wouldn’t be possible for Kylee because the elementary school’s special education program was at capacity. 

Shada , but it upheld Pierce’s decision. 

Kylee, who just completed seventh grade, is still enrolled in Plainview Public Schools, while her brother is in Pierce. Last school year, Shada hoped Kylee could try option enrollment again and attend Pierce High School, making transportation easier and ensuring his two children were in the same building. But, he said, Steffensen told him it’s not going to happen and said, “Don’t ever bring it up again.”

Steffensen couldn’t be reached for comment after multiple attempts.

“I just got shot down at every turn. But I’m not saying that Pierce did anything different than any other district would do. That’s why I feel that something has got to change when it comes to option enrollment and kids with special needs,” Shada said. “You can’t just look them in the eye and say, ‘Oh, they have an IEP. We don’t want them.’ ”

Few parents have appealed denials, like Shada, and even fewer have succeeded in changing the outcome. 

Since 2008, the State Board of Education has ruled on 15 appeals of applications rejected for special education capacity shortages, including two that were later withdrawn. The elected panel overturned only two denials.

Stalled out in the Capitol

For Murman, conversations about special education invoke thoughts of Whitney. His adult daughter lives with Rett syndrome and received instruction catered to her needs as a kid.

But when another of his daughters sought to opt out of their home district in the program’s early days, the first question on the application was: “Does your student have an IEP?” 

Murman said he understood that the district needed the information, but it made him wonder how it was being used. 

Three decades later, Murman led the recently thwarted effort to close the disability disparity in option enrollment as the chair of the Legislature’s Education Committee.

His bill would have from most kids with disabilities at rates beyond the statewide percentage of students with IEPs — currently about 17%. 

The proposal, introduced following an , left a carveout for districts to deny applications from students with severe disabilities that require them to spend more than three-fifths of their school day outside the general ed classroom — a nod to special ed staffing difficulties. But it would have provided extra funding to schools that accept those kids. 

School administrators resisted the bill from the start and kept the pressure on their local lawmakers to oppose it, Murman said.

Hastings Public Schools Superintendent Jeff Schneider told Murman’s committee in February that the bill’s passage would force his district to consider taking “a backward step” by closing option enrollment to all students.

The district has capacity in general education, but “we are overloaded in special ed … so, this scares the heck out of us because we are already struggling,” Schneider said. 

Ultimately, the bill never came before the full Legislature. With time winding down in the legislative session and lawmakers reluctant to buck their local superintendents, Murman knew he didn’t have the votes.

The Republican said he plans to work out kinks in the bill with opponents and try again next year. 

Lawmakers also dashed plans to pay if they stay in state after graduation, and to give special ed teachers several paid days to do federally mandated paperwork failed to advance.

The Legislature’s unwillingness to embrace these quality-of-life improvements for special ed teachers is frustrating, Royers said.

Royers maintains that if the bill’s backers would give districts three years before it took effect, education groups could recruit enough former teachers back into the field to resolve the disparity in option rejections.

For Gleason, fighting for Teddy’s education is still a priority, but she doesn’t think she’ll apply to districts again next year, since the bill didn’t pass. She said moving to a different district, as Zephier did, might be the answer.

“Trying to find support outside of [Omaha Public Schools] is nearly impossible,” she said. “Because if you try to opt into another district, you probably aren’t going to get in — not if your child has an IEP.”

Once a month, staffers at Sullivan Middle School in Sullivan, Illinois, pick adjectives to describe their feelings about work as part of an anonymous online survey. 

Principal Nathan Ogle said the short questionnaire, which he implemented in October, has helped transform employee culture at the rural school of 250 students. It’s one of the products offered by , an education technology startup that’s trying to improve teacher well-being across the U.S. 

The company has pulse surveys, downloadable resources and staff care packages that schools and districts can purchase. Since its 2022 launch in Omaha, Nebraska, Alpaca has worked with more than 100 schools and districts in 25 states. It received at the 2025 Future of Education Technology Conference, which features ed tech innovations and businesses.

“It’s been incredibly useful just to get that feedback from my staff on what things they’re feeling and experiencing,” Ogle said. “I’ve been able to respond to that stuff as it’s coming in, more or less in real time.”

During the 2023-24 school year, 48% of public school teachers reported declining mental health that impacted their work, up from 42% the year before, according to . The percentage of teachers who reported their schools offered minimal or no employee wellness programming increased from 68% in 2023 to 72% in 2024.

For Alpaca’s founder, Karen Borchert, the focus is employee engagement and retention: “What does it feel like to go to work when you are a teacher, what is it like and what could make it better?” Borchert went to college to become a high school teacher, but after earning her degree became interested in nonprofits and startups. She decided to create her own company after the pandemic hit and school staff shortages worsened.

She began by selling subscription care packs to teachers and schools. The packs — which inspired the name Alpaca — cost $25 to $35 each and include items like snacks, pens, notepads, markers, tissues, lip balm and a handwritten note. 

Last year, Alpaca launched its online pulse survey along with free like staff activities, teacher appreciation tips and strategies to help administrators make their employees feel valued. Borchert said most of the schools that use Alpaca will have staff complete the survey in monthly meetings. Some use Alpaca’s digital resources to host games and give out the care packages as prizes.

“We love to see them work together as a system or as a platform,” Borchert said. “And then, by the time the principal gets back to their office, all of their survey data is live and ready, and they can see what’s needed.”

Ogle said the monthly pulse surveys are more useful than his district’s annual climate survey, which doesn’t provide results until after the school year is over. When he began implementing the survey last fall, many teachers said they felt stretched thin and wanted time to plan with one another.

In response, he restarted a school tradition of “Working Wednesdays.” Administrators took over supervising students during lunch so teachers could use that time to collaborate with colleagues.

“Since we’ve implemented that, ‘stretched thin’ is no longer a phrase that people are choosing” on the survey, he said. “I have staff members who, if I just went and asked them, ‘Hey, how are you doing?’ They’re going to say, ‘Fine,’ because that’s what they do. But this gives them that opportunity to anonymously let me know how they’re really doing.”

Alpaca’s reach also extends beyond schools and districts. 

High Desert Education Service District, a Bend, Oregon, agency that places thousands of substitute teachers in 10 nearby school districts every year, began . Part of the state’s Department of Education, High Desert uses the pulse survey for the subs to rank how they feel about working in different schools and districts. Substitutes also receive Alpaca packs when they accept a certain number of school assignments.

Borchert said Caddo Parish Public Schools in Shreveport, Louisiana, uses the products in its . And the University of Nebraska-Lincoln uses the pulse survey and care packages for its student teachers. 

Sue Kemp, a professor in the university’s special education department, said the survey results help her decide which schools to place student teachers at to gain practical experience in the classroom. 

“It gives me a better picture about how the students are feeling and doing in their school,” she said. “I get a better snapshot of the support that they’re feeling in the school and in their own skill development, and what they need on top of it.”

The student teachers and the educators who are supervising them in the classroom also receive monthly Alpaca packs as a way to say “good job” or “thank you” for their work, Kemp said. She said the students and the supervisors have reported that the care packages make them feel more positive about their jobs and more connected to the college.

“We are at a moment where I think our educators are going to need so much care, and they’re going to need so many good support systems,” Borchert said. “They’re going to need to be able to say how they’re feeling and what they need while we kind of walk through uncertain or unprecedented times.”

LINCOLN – Soon after beginning her studies at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, McKenzie Murphy, then 19, applied for a part-time job.

She had graduated from high school only a few months earlier, but Murphy’s application also read “graduate, associates degree, Northeast Community College.”

Her interviewer didn’t believe that someone so young could have a two-year college degree.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

“Oh my gosh, when did you graduate?” Murphy was asked.

In May of 2023, Murphy received her diploma from Bancroft-Rosalie High School. But because she had participated in a state dual enrollment program, she also earned a college degree by taking college-level classes while in high school — classes that came with both college and high school credits.

During her last semester of high school, Murphy took 21 credit hours of such dual enrollment classes, completing a lot of general education courses normally taken at colleges or universities, but also learning about investing.

“I like to stay busy,” she said.

A strong head start

This year, more than 20,000 Nebraska high school students at more than 200 schools across the state are taking dual enrollment classes, with hundreds each year, like Murphy, graduating with two diplomas when they finish high school.

Students, including those home-schooled or in private schools, get discounted tuition when taking the classes. In two areas of the state, tuition and books are free, those served by Omaha-based Metropolitan Community College and Norfolk-centered Northeast Community College.

But the future affordability of the program for families statewide is being threatened by a reduction in funding.

The $5 million a year from the federal pandemic-related American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) is going away, leaving only $3 million a year in state funding remaining.

On Thursday, several administrators of community colleges and Nebraska high schools joined a student and a representative of the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce and Industry in testifying in favor of state legislation to keep the program affordable for high school students and their families. It would provide an additional $21 million over the next two years to continue.

Supporters of the additional funding praised the program as jump-starting student higher education, which they said leads to higher rates of college enrollment and earlier graduation. It also gets students into the workforce sooner, in high-need jobs like welding, teaching and health care, and is a proven way to reverse the “brain drain” exodus of educated young people from Nebraska.

“This maybe has been the most successful higher education partnership with K-12 education and business in all my years in education,” said Randy Schmailzl, the long-time president of Metropolitan Community College, which had nearly 9,000 dual enrollment students this year.

Students, schools embrace program

Mark Shepard, the superintendent of Fremont Public Schools, said the program had helped boost a local career and technical education program that has trained 200 student welders over the past nine years. Seventy of those trained are now working in well-paying, high-demand jobs in the state, he said.

“We view these programs as a true game changer for our state,” Shepard said of the technical training offered in Fremont through dual enrollment.

Murphy, whose family lives in Walthill, said she could not have taken the classes she did if she had been required to pay full tuition, which is $108 per credit hour at Northeast Community College.

At her high school, students have taken 790 credit hours of tuition-free dual enrollment classes this year with eight of the 18 members of the senior class on track to graduate with community college associate degrees, according to Jon Cerny, superintendent at Bancroft-Rosalie.

At Millard Public Schools, 2,200 students took dual enrollment classes last year, earning 26,000 credits. Superintendent John Schwartz said that added up to just short of $2 million in tuition that families didn’t have to pay.

The result, the two educators told members of the Legislature’s Appropriations Committee, is that students complete college sooner and with less debt, and are able to graduate earlier and join the Nebraska workforce.

“It’s hard to find a better program that supports young people and our economy,” said Michael Johnson of the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce, who called the state’s shortage of workers “the number-one barrier to economic growth in the state.”

“This program presents a win-win-win opportunity for all of us,” said State Sen. Jason Prokop of Lincoln.

Bill offers replacement funding

His proposal, Legislative Bill 173, would provide $10 million for the dual enrollment program in 2025-26 and $11 million the following year.

Prokop said it exceeds the $5 million a year in ARPA funds that are going away because that money hasn’t covered all costs of the program, which are nearing $20 million a year. He said funding also hasn’t kept up with the 65% increase in students taking the courses.

“This program produces a pipeline of skilled labor that Nebraska employers desperately need,” the senator told the committee.

LB 173 wasn’t included in the preliminary budget recommendations of the Appropriations Committee, which is now taking testimony on its proposed budget. Senators are seeking to close a budget gap, leaving little funding for new spending.

Omaha State Sen. Christy Armendariz, a member of the committee, praised the program. But more than once, she asked whether other funds — rather than state taxpayer money — might be found to finance the dual enrollment program, or whether it could be more focused on families who could not afford to pay the tuition.

An official with Northeast Community College said that institution doesn’t have the funds to continue to offer free tuition on its own, and would have to start charging students. Schmailzl said that when Metro used to offer the classes at 50% of full tuition, it “cut a lot of people out.”

Shepard, the Fremont superintendent, said that 40 some businesses have contributed to the vocational programs in his district, but that ending free tuition, or having students fill out a waiver to get a tuition break, would present barriers.

No immediate action

The Appropriations Committee took no action on the bill after the public hearing on Thursday. It received 70 online comments in support of the bill and no opposition.

Murphy, the UNO student, wasn’t able to attend the public hearing. She’s working three part-time jobs as she pursues her pre-medicine degree in hopes of eventually becoming an ophthalmologist.

Besides saving money and getting a jump start on her university studies, she said dual enrollment and the rigors of college classes forced her to get more organized. She made a daily list of what she needed to get done each day.

It also helped her get hired.

“When you see someone who graduates with an associate degree, they realize that’s a hard-working person, Murphy said.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Aaron Sanderford for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com.

LINCOLN — Voters on Tuesday resoundingly rejected Nebraska’s new school voucher or scholarship program, steering public dollars spent to public schools.

Supporters of using state tax dollars to offset the costs of a private K-12 education have argued that families unhappy with their public schools need more options.

But rural and urban supporters of public schools, the Nebraska State Education Association and private foundations supporting public schools won the day.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, said he was proud to see right- and left-leaning counties agree that vouchers were the wrong choice.

“It confirms what we knew, the majority of Nebraskans don’t want public dollars going to private schools,” Royers said. “What really stood out to me is the consistency.”

Royers hopes state senators move on

Royers said he is hopeful that state senators will follow the will of the voters and move onto other more pressing issues in education that teachers and parents can work on together.

Support Our Schools argued that diverting even small amounts of public money toward private K-12 schools with a scholarship program or vouchers risked long-term support for public education.

They pointed to the experiences in other states with voucher programs, including neighboring Iowa, which has seen the national rankings of its public schools slide since that program began.

They argued that school choice programs typically end up largely benefiting the people already making the choice to send their children to private schools.

And they said such programs risked creating greater concentrations of poverty in some schools by draining them of students who often act as stabilizing force.

Lawmakers plan to keep working for choice

State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Omaha and other lawmakers backing “opportunity scholarships” have already said they plan to keep working for school choice regardless of the outcome of Tuesday’s election.

Linehan, in a statement, said the teachers union and Support Our Schools spent two years and $7 million distorting the truth “in their endless pursuit to keep opportunity away from kids.”

“I am confident Nebraskans and the leaders in this state will continue fighting to keep kids first,” Linehan said.

The first version of Nebraska’s school choice law, passed in 2023, provided a tax credit for those donating to a scholarship fund for private K-12 education. After passage, those opposing the law launched a petition drive to put the issue before voters.

2023 law replaced in 2024

Linehan sidestepped that referendum by replacing the law in the 2024 legislative session.

She and other lawmakers transformed the program into a $10 million annual state appropriation for private school vouchers, to be run through the office of State Treasurer Tom Briese, a Linehan ally.

The Support Our Schools campaign, with support from public school proponents, including Omaha Public Schools supporter Susie Buffett, collected the necessary signatures a second time to challenge the law on the ballot.

Royers, new president of the NSEA, and Jenni Benson of Support Our Schools, the previous NSEA leader, have said Linehan should not have tried to avoid letting voters weigh in on an unpopular program.

Families of some children attending private schools through the precursor program, Opportunity Scholarships, or through the latest version have said they can’t afford private school tuition without such financial help.

State Sen. Justin Wayne of Omaha, a Democrat who supports school choice, has said parents cannot afford to wait for public school systems to improve. They need help for their kids now, he said.

Jeremy Ekeler, executive director of Opportunity Scholarships of Nebraska, said his group and supporters of the program have focused on helping families who couldn’t wait for school districts and systems to change.

“While tonight we did not see the results that we hoped for, those thousands of Nebraska families who finally have access to the right educational fit for their children thanks to LB 1402 will make their voices heard for years to come,” he said.

It remains to be seen whether other lawmakers will offer a similar proposal in 2025. Linehan and Wayne are both term-limited and won’t return to the Legislature next year.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

A third measure in Colorado, appeared headed for defeat. 

Despite the growing popularity of such programs with conservative lawmakers, the results continued the trend of voters, when given the chance, rejecting the idea of allowing public funds to pay for students’ tuition at private schools. 

“These bills are super unpopular, even in rural Trump country,” said Joshua Cowen, a Michigan State University professor and outspoken voucher opponent. 

He was particularly surprised by the results in Kentucky, where voters defeated , 65% to 35% even though former President Donald Trump won the presidential contest there by the same margin. The measure would have allowed state funds to pay for students to attend anything other than a traditional public school. “In an election that seems to be turning on ‘What has the government done for my family?,’ a lot of conservative voters in deep rural parts seem to be asking ‘What would vouchers do for my family?’ ”

In Nebraska, a law, passed last year, that created a private school scholarship program. Support Our Schools Nebraska, a union-backed group, led the campaign to get the referendum on the ballot. In Colorado, a state that would create a right to school choice was failing to reach the 55% threshold to win. Criticized for its vague wording, the initiative could pave the way for voucher legislation in the future. 

Like public school supporters in other states, opponents argue that vouchers drain funding from state budgets and are more likely to serve families who never attended traditional schools. In Colorado, Christian homeschooling families because the initiative also acknowledged the rights of students. They viewed that language as a threat to parental rights.

But school choice advocates say families deserve options outside of the public system. 

“The results from these three states are disappointing and discouraging, especially in light of what other states like Florida have shown school choice can do for students and families over the long haul,” said Ben DeGrow, a senior policy director at ExcelinEd, a nonprofit that advocates for private school choice.

“Opponents have once again shown they can unsettle enough voters with rhetoric that ultimately denies students needed educational opportunities.”

Nevertheless, he doesn’t expect the movement to slow down. In addition to Texas, where Gov. Greg Abbott and wealthy conservative donors worked hard to elect pro-voucher members to the House, DeGrow said Tennessee and Idaho are also likely states to push for private school choice programs next year. 

While choice initiatives drew significant attention this election year, there were also several other contentious ballot measures affecting education. 

Florida

A measure that would have required school board candidates to state their political party, failed to win 60% of the vote — the required threshold for the measure to pass. Backed by the legislature and Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, the measure received just 55%, according to unofficial results. 

“Honestly, I thought more people would vote no,” said Sue Woltanski, a school board member in Monroe County, Florida, who has written about the influence of conservative candidates endorsed by DeSantis and Moms for Liberty. “Where I live, people are so tired of the division in the community and seemed to be turned off by the hyper-politicization of school boards in particular.”

But Tiffany Justice, a co-founder of Moms for Liberty, which has focused on culture war issues, like trans students in girls sports and sexually explicit library books, said she didn’t understand why anyone would be opposed to candidates disclosing their political affiliation.

“People want to say, ‘Well, the school board isn’t political,’ but the teachers unions have politicized school board races for years,” she said. ‘Ninety-nine percent of the that teachers unions give go to Democrats. I just think more information is good for voters.”

Massachusetts

Voters approved a proposal, sponsored by the Massachusetts Teachers Association, to relax high school graduation requirements, with a vote of 59% to 51%. Tenth graders would still have to take state exams in English, science and math, but they wouldn’t have to earn a passing score to receive a diploma.

The measure highlighted the debate between opponents of high-stakes testing and those who argue states have lowered the bar for achievement in the aftermath of the pandemic, leaving students less prepared for college. 

“Now watch inequities grow wider,” Keri Rodrigues, president of the National Parents Union and a Massachusetts resident, , noting how voters in towns known for high-performing schools rejected the measure. “May the odds be ever in your favor, kids.”

California

Voters approved a $10 billion bond issue — $8.5 billion of which will go to school districts for new construction and renovation projects. Some districts are also likely to use the funds for teacher housing as a way to ease shortages, but they’ll have to come up with local matching funds in order to receive the money.

Voters rejected the last statewide bond issue in 2020, meaning some schools have gone without , but opponents argued it didn’t make sense to spend billions on upgrades when student enrollment is declining.

The following are remaining results:

• With almost 90% saying yes, Arkansas voters overwhelmingly approved that would allow students attending vocational and technical schools to be eligible for the Arkansas Scholarship Lottery. 

• With a vote of 54%, approved a on firearms and ammunition to take effect April 1, 2025. The tax is expected to raise roughly $39 million a year, with $1 million going toward a school violence prevention program, staff training and facility upgrades to improve safety. Another $3 million would expand access to youth behavioral health programs.

• New Mexico voters approved a to fund upgrades and materials for school libraries, as well as early childhood education centers at both the state school for the blind and the school for the deaf.

• , voters approved a measure to increase from 4% to 5% the cap on investment earnings the state can transfer from the State School Fund to education. Local school councils of parents and educators decide how to use the funds. 

A affecting education funding was dropped from the ballot because it wasn’t published in a state newspaper 60 days before the election. The initiative that would have removed a state constitutional requirement that all revenue from income taxes and intangible property, like capital gains and royalty payments, be spent on education, children and people with disabilities. 

In , voters will decide whether to preserve or overturn 2023 legislation that created a private school scholarship program. Initiatives in and , if approved, could pave the way for lawmakers to create vouchers or education savings accounts in the future.

Despite past defeats, “school choice is continuing to gain support across the country with every demographic,” said Ben DeGrow, a senior policy director at ExcelinEd, which supports the expansion of private school choice. “We’re only likely to see more states add programs by the end of the decade.”

Over the past two years, several GOP governors and lawmakers have been able to push through education savings accounts, which allow families to use state funds for private school tuition, homeschooling or a combination of programs. Nearly 600,000 students in eight states were enrolled in universal ESA programs in 2023-24, according to , a think tank at Georgetown University. In 2022, only Arizona had a universal program that served about . But it’s unclear if that momentum will continue at the polls in the face of opponents who argue such programs hurt public schools.

11 measures in 9 states

The questions on school choice are among 11 education-related initiatives on the ballot in nine states this November. Other measures likely to drive voters to the polls include a union-led Massachusetts proposal to relax high school graduation requirements and a asking whether school board elections should be officially partisan. A few measures would impact school funding, including a that would provide $8.5 billion to modernize outdated K-12 schools.

But with enrollment in district schools continuing to  decline, the questions about public funds for private schools have attracted the most attention. 

While Colorado offers charter schools, there are few school choice options in Nebraska and Kentucky. Votes in favor of choice in those states would “represent a significant step forward for families in terms of educational opportunity,” DeGrow said.

But all three states have large rural areas, where resistance to vouchers has traditionally . In states like Texas, Republican lawmakers from rural communities have been the fiercest opponents. Some worry ESAs would prompt more families to choose homeschooling and private schools, forcing public schools to close or consolidate. Others argue such programs don’t benefit families in rural areas because there aren’t enough private schools. 

The question is “whether rural voters themselves can be convinced to support vouchers,” said Kevin Welner, director of the National Education Policy Center at the University of Colorado Boulder.  

Well-funded conservative organizations, like in Colorado and the in Nebraska, have tried to make the case that voters need to pass school choice to keep up with neighboring states offering more education options for families.

While have mobilized against private school choice, “I expect that the money battle will be lopsidedly pro-voucher,” Welner said. “It will be interesting to see how much of an effect that money has in shifting popular opinion.”

In Kentucky, Amendment 2 wouldn’t automatically result in a school voucher program, but  asks voters if they want public funds to pay for education outside of what the law calls a “system of common schools.”

Until now, Kentucky courts have had the final say over whether the state joins the 29 others with at least one school choice program. In 2022, the said a 2021 law creating tax credits for “education opportunity accounts” violated the state constitution. A yes vote on the ballot measure would give the Republican-dominated legislature a “safe, legal path” to pass a school choice program, DeGrow said. 

Supporters like Republican Rep. Jared Bauman say it’s time for the state to catch up with neighbors like Indiana and Ohio that offer parents some form of school choice. But , including Democratic , warn that a voucher plan could cost the state as much as $1.19 billion if it reached a scale similar to that of Florida’s universal program. 

The “common schools” wording of the constitution has also held up efforts to fund charters. Kentucky has had a since 2022, but in December a state court it unconstitutional. 

In Nebraska, where lawmakers passed a $10 million private school scholarship program last year, Support Our Schools Nebraska, a union-led advocacy group, gathered enough signatures this summer to put a veto referendum on the ballot. 

Like public school supporters in other states, opponents argue that such programs are a drain on state budgets and mostly serve families who already pay for private school instead of the neediest students. But Republican state Sen. Lou Ann Linehan, who sponsored the school choice legislation, that students shouldn’t have to attend schools that are failing or can’t meet their needs.  

Finally, in Colorado, a ballot question asks voters if they support adding language to the state constitution that would guarantee children a right to the full array of school choice options — traditional district schools, charters, private schools, open enrollment and homeschooling. 

Some the measure could invite more government oversight into homeschooling, while Welner predicted it would prompt legal challenges “because it’s so vague and yet touches on so many issues.” 

Bond issues, graduation requirements 

Beyond debates over school choice, several other ballot measures affect both education policy and funding. Here is a brief rundown:

Arkansas 

Since 2009, the Arkansas Scholarship Lottery has provided over 720,000 college scholarships, totaling $1.2 billion. But students attending vocational and technical schools haven’t been eligible for the awards. The legislature placed on the ballot that would change that. 

California

Almost 40% of California’s public schools fail to meet basic facility standards, according to a from the Public Policy Institute of California. Students often attend schools with unsafe conditions, like gas leaks, faulty electrical systems or structural damage. asks voters to approve a $10 billion bond issue that would provide $8.5 billion for new construction and renovations at district schools, charters and career and technical centers. Local districts would have to provide matching funds. 

After voters rejected a $15 billion bond in 2020, repair projects have piled up, but in addition to renovating schools, districts would also be able to use the funds for . Teachers often can’t afford to live in high-priced parts of the state, like Los Angeles, San Diego and the Bay Area, which creates recruitment and retention challenges for districts in those metro areas. 

An anti-tax organization, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association that  the measure doesn’t make sense at a time when the state is losing enrollment and would likely lead to higher property taxes. 

But Public Advocates, which focuses on the needs of low-income students, is for a different reason. They say the measure should include a sliding scale that allots poorer districts a greater share of the funds. 

Colorado

A proposed on firearms and ammunition would take effect April 1, 2025 and raise roughly $39 million a year. Most of the revenue would fund services for victims of gun violence, but $1 million would go into a school security program for violence prevention in schools as well as staff training and facility upgrades to improve safety. Another $3 million would expand access to youth behavioral health programs. 

Rep. Monica Duran, a Democrat who sponsored legislation to get the measure on the ballot, says the tax doesn’t infringe on gun owners’ Second Amendment rights. But gun lobbyists argue that gun and ammunition purchases are already subject to an 11% federal tax. 

Florida 

School board races have become increasingly partisan, especially since the pandemic, when issues like mask mandates and disputes over curriculum split communities in half. Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis further politicized school board races in 2022 when he endorsed a slate of 30 candidates, 25 of whom won that year in the general election.

Amendment 1, which the legislature placed on the ballot last year, would officially change the Florida constitution to end nonpartisan races and require candidates to state their political party. 

Sixty percent of voters would need to approve the measure for it to pass. If they do, the new provision would apply to elections in 2026. Opponents of the idea argue that education issues have grown overly divisive and that partisan races would who aren’t registered party members. Proponents say the requirement would increase transparency. 

One former Polk County school board member thinks there won’t be enough support for the measure to reach the 60% threshold. 

“I think voters here are actually very tired of the school drama,” said Billy Townsend. “While they tend to vote GOP in state offices, [voters] also tend to prefer non-partisan offices locally. I would bet it falls short of 50%.” 

Massachusetts

Decisions over academic expectations are generally left up to state and local school boards. But in Massachusetts, voters will whether high school students should still have to pass state exams in English, math and science to graduate.

The , the state’s largest teachers union, led the effort to get the referendum on the ballot. The union argues that teachers spend too much class time preparing students for the tests and that the requirement hasn’t achieved the results testing proponents want. Under their alternative, students would have to master state standards to graduate.

Opponents, however, say scrapping the requirement would ultimately hurt students and leave them for college and careers. They’ve launched a $250,000 to convince voters to reject the measure. 

New Mexico

New Mexico voters have a strong track record of for capital improvement projects on education facilities. Since 1995, they’ve approved that have been on the ballot. This year, they’ll vote on a that would fund, among other items, furniture, equipment and materials at school libraries, as well as early childhood education centers at both the state school for the blind and the school for the deaf.

Utah

Utah voters will decide on two school funding measures, both placed on the ballot by the legislature. The asks voters to remove a state constitutional requirement that all revenue from income taxes and intangible property, like capital gains and royalty payments, be spent on education, children and people with disabilities.  If the measure passes, the law would only say that the state must provide a “framework” for funding schools.

The state teachers union was initially neutral on the change, but now opposes it. Lawmakers say revenue is up and this change would make budgeting easier.

The measure asks voters to increase from 4% to 5% the cap on investment earnings the state can transfer from the State School Fund to education. Local of parents and educators decide how to spend the funds for purchases like library books or an extra teaching assistant position. Last year, the state distributed over $100 million from the fund.

LINCOLN — A first-of-its-kind statewide report related to reading and dyslexia for Nebraska K-12 students shows strides in addressing literacy as policymakers see room for improvement.

The Nebraska Department of Education submitted its on Sept. 3 as required under . State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Elkhorn shepherded the legislation through in 2023 as a from that began assessing K-3 students three times a year to get them on individualized reading improvement plans and supports earlier, if needed. In 2017, the Legislature “dyslexia” in state law.

LB 298 requires each public school in the state to report the number of students in the 2023-24 academic year who were:

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

• Tested for a specific learning disability in the area of reading, including tests that identify characteristics of dyslexia and the results of such tests.
• Identified as having a reading issue, including dyslexia, pursuant to assessments under the Nebraska Reading Improvement Act, which Linehan passed in 2018.
• Identified as having a reading issue who have shown growth on the measure used to identify the reporting issue.

“Things only get measured in government if somebody’s watching, and you have to have somebody watching,” Linehan told the Nebraska Examiner of the report.

Breaking down the report

The data indicates that of 10,225 public K-12 students ages 3 to 21 who were tested last year for a specific learning disability in the area of reading, 4,747 students (46.43%) were eligible for special education services.

However, the department cautions that the term “specific learning disability” is broad and consists of various distinct areas in which a child might need additional support to meet state standards: oral expression, written expression, basic reading skills, reading fluency, reading comprehension, mathematics calculation and mathematics problem solving.

“In sum, there is currently not a clean and clear way to fully identify the number of students with a specific learning disability in reading,” the report states.

There is also great variance in what “universal screeners” are used across school districts to assess students in grades K-3, with up to 13 different screeners used across the state’s 244 school districts.

In the 2023-24 academic year, 23,814 students in grades K-3 — more than a quarter of all K-3 students — were on a reading improvement plan. Of those, 22,538 students (94.64%) were reported to improve during the year.

Elizabeth Tegtmeier of North Platte, president of the Nebraska State Board of Education, which oversees the Education Department, said the report to the Legislature had “fallen short” of her expectations. She said she and the board expected a “serious and detailed audit.”

Linehan, who has dyslexia, said until that breakdown was publicly available, “I don’t think you’re going to find out what schools are actually addressing this and which schools still need more help in identifying it.”

District-specific data

The Examiner and Linehan requested data broken down by district, excluding data concealed for federal privacy reasons.

Of 196 districts, for example, more than 50% of K-3 students were on a reading improvement plan in 20 districts. In contrast, fewer than 10% of K-3 students were on a reading plan in eight districts. The median was 28.2% of K-3 students on a reading plan in each district. The department masked data for 48 districts for privacy reasons.

The districts with the highest percentage of students on a reading improvement plan were Umo N Ho N Nation Public Schools (75.93%), Bayard Public Schools (66.23%), Southern School District 1 (59.79%), Maxwell Public Schools (59.62%) and Kimball Public Schools (59.35%).

The districts with the lowest percentage of students on a reading improvement plan were  Norfolk Public Schools (5.45%), Gordon-Rushville Public Schools (6.1%), Johnson County Central Public Schools (7.3%), Tekamah-Herman Community Schools (7.33%) and Seward Public Schools (7.97%).

Six school districts reported a greater than 100% improvement rate, which David Jespersen, a department spokesperson, was likely due to “uncertainty” about the various parameters in the first year of reporting.

The report showed 100 districts reported 100% growth, while no reported growth percentage was shown for 54 districts.

The five school districts with the lowest reported growth percentage were: Ralston Public Schools (23.32%), Madison Public Schools (36.49%), South Sioux City Community Schools (39.22%), East Butler Public Schools (50%) and McCook Public Schools (50.85%).

However, the department cautioned that one growth point on one screener might not equate to the same growth on another assessment.

“It is difficult to interpret the significance of the reported student growth based upon the 2024 data collection,” the report states.

Linehan said that district-specific data is important in part because when she in 2017, with former State Sen. Patty Pansing Brooks of Lincoln, multiple teachers and superintendents said they had never taught a student with dyslexia.

‘Bottom line, it’s a journey’

Linehan said the data can also show that the department understands the state has a problem and needs to prioritize where funds go.

David Jespersen, a spokesperson for the Education Department, said that while the department can’t “fully verify” that all school districts are following the three annual assessment periods, “we have no reason to believe they were not.”

The state-level funding is designed to employ to support teachers who teach children from age 4 to third grade how to read. Linehan passed the appropriation in this year.

Tim Royers, a teacher in Millard Public Schools, and president of the Nebraska State Education Association that represents teachers, agreed the report indicates progress but said it is “certainly not job done.”

He said expanded training opportunities for staff, parents and other stakeholders is needed to provide holistic support to students.

“Bottom line, it’s a journey,” Royers said. “There’s definitely some evidence of progress there but we feel that there’s still work to be done.”

For the 2023-24 academic year, ranged from seven students in McPherson County Schools to 15,411 students in Omaha Public Schools. The median enrollment was 100 K-3 students per district. Total enrollment ranged from 52 to 51,693 students, with a median of 379.

Improving data collection and literacy

In a to Nebraska Education Commissioner Brian Maher, Linehan and State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil, the Legislature’s Education Committee chair, pointed to a report from the .

It stated that third-grade reading proficiency can be a significant indicator of later academic success, including graduation and college-going rates.

Linehan and Murman said the department should also consider doing away with a specific part of the department’s rule on special education services. They pointed to a subjective “environmental, cultural or economic disadvantage” that could be impacting a student’s learning but doesn’t qualify them for a “specific learning disability.”

The Education Department suggested various ways to improve data collection, such as:

• Adding clear language to specify the total number of students evaluated for any form of a specific learning disability, including reevaluation.
• Implementing clear guidelines for categorizing students identified with a specific learning disability, the total number of which is broken down into:
  • Number of students with a primary disability in reading (in two brackets — age 3 to third grade, fourth grade to age 21).
  • Number of students evaluated but not identified as having a disability in reading.
  • Number of students identified with having a disability in another area.

“Without early support, the gap between dyslexic students and their peers can widen, making it harder to catch up later,” the report states.

The report states that policymakers, educators and stakeholders must collaborate to address the identified gaps.

“By refining data collection processes, enhancing instructional strategies and providing adequate resources, we can better support our students and advance literacy outcomes across the state, the department writes.

The future of literacy policy

Linehan has advocated throughout her eight years in the Legislature for students with dyslexia. This is her final year in the Legislature because of term limits.

She and Murman suggested the department offer insight into demographics, performance on reading evaluations, types of evidence-based reading interventions deployed and criteria for student progress.

Royers said “the gift of time” is important for teachers when screening can be time intensive, especially in kindergarten or early grades when students might begin to develop coping mechanisms. For example, a student might memorize sight words or a combination of shapes that could mean “cat” that a teacher might not catch without one-on-one intervention.

“We know what the playbook is, but it takes a lot of investment at a one-on-one level in order to execute the playbook properly,” Royers said of young students.

Royers said giving educators more time, or bringing in support staff, would be most helpful to join the spirit of recent legislation to be proactive.

One of Linehan’s fears is not catching children as early as possible, which she agreed is difficult. Teachers see a range of students, with some already able to read a book, while others haven’t yet learned the alphabet.

Linehan said new funds should be invested in staff, not “the newest curriculum out there.”

The State Board of Education and Legislature should also collaborate for accountability, she said. For example, they should seek more specific information about the use of new teaching coaches: specific goals, such as the number of coaches needed and how many teachers the state should support.

Tegtmeier said the Education Department will continue to , particularly with a to improve third grade reading proficiency to 75% by 2030. For the , were proficient on state assessments.

“Literacy remains a board priority with significant amounts of resources devoted to it,” Tegtmeier said. “It is imperative that guidelines and regulations from NDE accompany the assessment requirement to ensure consistency throughout the state. Our students, parents and taxpayers deserve no less.”

A review of Nebraska’s 244 school districts for offers insights into proficiency in English Language Arts for K-12 students statewide. There were new “cut scores” to define “proficiency” in this subject area  that the Nebraska Department of Education said “better reflect student achievement in Nebraska when compared to students nationally.”

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

LINCOLN — The Nebraska Supreme Court on Friday left voters with the choice about the future of the latest remake of a scholarship or voucher program to help families offset the costs of private K-12 education.

The court unanimously decided, 7-0, that the ballot measure seeking to repeal Legislative Bill 1402 was not an appropriation and therefore is subject to the referendum process under the Nebraska Constitution.

“We see no language in Section 1 of LB 1402 making an appropriation at all,” the court wrote in a joint or per curiam opinion. “It is settled law in Nebraska that there can be no implied appropriation…. Appropriations must be expressly stated or directly necessary for the implementation of a statutory provision.”

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

Attorneys for the mother of a Douglas County student receiving funds under a scholarship program had argued the measure was regular spending by the Legislature and shouldn’t be subject to a vote of the people.

Tom Venzor, an attorney known for his work with the Nebraska Catholic Conference, argued on Tuesday that Article III, Section 3 of the Nebraska Constitution reserves that right for the Legislature.

He argued that the bill and its related appropriations bill were intertwined.

Reasoning telegraphed at hearing

Justices on Tuesday telegraphed the majority’s reasoning, that the ballot measure pushed by Support Our Schools sought only to repeal LB 1402 and not its related-but-separate appropriations bill, LB 1402A.

Local school choice advocates, including LB 1402’s sponsor, State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Omaha, and others who voted for it, including State Sen. Justin Wayne of Omaha, had argued it was an appropriation.

“We applaud Ms. Collar’s bravery in bringing the case forward and representing the thousands of Nebraska parents like her who now have hope for their child’s education thanks to scholarships,” said Jeremy Ekeler of Opportunity Scholarships of Nebraska. “We are confident voters will stand with kids and families this fall.”

Daniel Gutman, an attorney for the public school advocates, argued that the $10 million appropriation in LB 1402A would still exist if voters reject LB 1402, and would eventually revert to the general fund.

He argued that LB 1402, by benefiting private schools, unconstitutionally directed state funds to private institutions, something prohibited by Article VII, Section 11.

The court sidestepped that question, ruling instead on the narrower question of whether a law without its associated appropriations bill could be repealed by public referendum, ruling that it can.

Tim Royers of Support Our Schools, the new president of the Nebraska State Education Association, said his group is “thrilled that the Supreme Court protected one of our most important rights as Nebraskans, and we look forward to repealing LB 1402 in the upcoming election.”

His predecessor at NSEA, Jenni Benson, said people seeking public funds for private schooling have fought letting the voters decide “at every turn.”

“These voucher proponents want to impose their costly private school voucher scheme on Nebraska taxpayers,” she said in a statement. “But public school supporters from all across our state joined together to protect our public schools with two successful petition drives and a winning defense of the petition process in the Nebraska Supreme Court.”

Venzor issued a statement Friday from the Catholic Conference saying the decision “hurts the children and families who need support the most—those facing hardships such as bullying, disabilities, or the unique challenges of military life.”

Nebraska Secretary of State Bob Evnen, the target of the lawsuit, complicated the lawsuit by filing a pledge to force another lawsuit if the court sidestepped the key legal question and instead ruled on a technicality.

The court did not seem pleased with his change in position. Chief Justice Mike Heavican argued that Evnen had already “made a determination that the referendum was valid and sufficient.”

“Once done, I am aware of no process by which the Secretary can change his mind and ‘rescind his legal sufficiency determination and not place the referendum on the ballot,’” Heavican wrote in a concurring opinion, criticizing Evnen’s attempt to reverse his certification decision.

Evnen’s office had no immediate comment on the decision.

Will appropriators gain power?

Linehan said she felt badly for the 2,500 students now attending a private school of their choice whose families will now worry about whether the money that helps them attend will be there.

But she said she is more worried about what the decision’s interpretation might mean for future Legislatures because it seems to increase the power of senators on the Appropriations Committee.

She said it will make Lincoln more like Washington, D.C., where she served as chief of staff for former U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. She said people who want anything done will go through appropriators.

“It’s horrible,” Linehan said. “Not to do with school choice. The real problem is that decision says if it’s not in the budget, if the appropriators don’t like it, everybody else in the Legislature is neutered.”

State Sen. Justin Wayne of Omaha said the decision could impact even judicial salaries because their funding bills come through the Judiciary Committee.

Voters, if they got upset, could cut the salaries, he argued.

“A bills (appropriations bills) were created as a way for the Legislature to keep track of stuff,” he said.

Linehan said any bill with spending that is not ongoing and in the budget will be at risk of being rejected by the voters. She partly blamed the tight timeline the court had to decide the case.

“I think the time crunch probably didn’t give the court enough time to think through thoroughly what they were doing here,” Linehan said. “The governor and the appropriators will now run the place.”

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

LINCOLN — The Nebraska Department of Education has been awarded a $55 million federal grant over the next five years to help improve literacy throughout the state.

State Education Commissioner Brian Maher, in announcing the grant Friday at a State Board of Education meeting in Nebraska City, said it is the largest competitive grant the department has ever received. It is part of the Comprehensive Literacy State Development grant from the U.S. Department of Education. Nebraska is one of 23 recipients across the country.

Maher said he and the department are excited about the “great opportunity” but said it also comes with “great responsibility.”

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

“We cannot just spend the next five years spending $55 million without making sure that there are positive outcomes for students,” Maher said.

The grant program is designed to support state agencies in implementing comprehensive, statewide literacy efforts from birth through grade 12. There is an emphasis on disadvantaged students — those living in poverty, English learners and students with disabilities.

“Literacy skills” include pre-literacy, reading and writing. Award recipients must use funds to support practices, strategies and interventions in response to identified reading gaps. These must be evidence-based and highly effective, such as developing phonemic awareness, decoding words and analyzing word parts, according to the state department.

The department said the grant will focus on a number of “proven strategies,” such as:

• Providing professional development.
• Improving family literacy.
• Providing high quality instructional materials.
• Utilizing tutoring and extended learning outside of school hours.
• Working toward reducing chronic absenteeism.

The grant will supplement existing state initiatives, such as the and the recently passed  Legislative Bill 1284, which appropriated to be used for reading improvement mentorship programs and to employ regional coaches to train K-3 teachers .

“We know that money isn’t everything and certainly can’t solve all of our problems,” Maher said. “But we do believe it can make a huge difference in the scope and the depth of the work that we’re able to do around the state of Nebraska.”

The Nebraska Education Department is also partnering with the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, University of Nebraska at Omaha and the national District Management Group in targeted ways to improve literacy and accountability, Maher said.

The Nebraska State Board of Education is seeking to improve third grade proficiency in English language arts test scores from to 75% by 2030.

As Maher announced the grant, board member Lisa Fricke gave an audible “wow” and later thanked department staff for initiating the process “to make the dream happen.”

Board members Elizabeth Tegtmeier and Deb Neary, board president and vice president, also thanked Maher and department staff for their leadership and taking the literacy goal seriously.

“I want to make sure that kids in Nebraska read a little better tomorrow than they’re reading today. That’s our goal,” Maher said. “If we can do that, we’ll knock that 75% proficiency level out of the park. We have no barriers other than our imagination, our ability to plan and our ability to execute that plan.”

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

LINCOLN — Omaha Public Schools, the largest school district in Nebraska, is less than 50 days from handing over management of its pension fund to the state.

But a new state audit widened the scope of problems Nebraska could inherit from the Omaha School Employees Retirement System, leaders of the state retirement system were told Monday.

It’s not just the OPS pension fund’s $1 billion shortfall after years of bad investment decisions. It’s that local management mistakes made things worse, and it’s not clear how much.

State Auditor Mike Foley found mistakes including overpayments that were not corrected or collected and inaccurate calculations of cash and medical benefits that helped or hurt some retirees.

For instance, some accounts were not credited with the interest they had earned. One lost $23,000. Some records were inaccurate. One person received $53,000 after having already cashed out.

Members of the Nebraska Public Employees Retirement Systems board questioned State Auditor Mike Foley’s team about who will be responsible for fixes after the state takes over Sept. 1.

Foley, responding to emailed questions Monday from the Examiner, said his auditors have “serious concerns regarding the quality of data the state might be inheriting from OSERS.”

“We have written-up OSERS multiple times on these matters and we are skeptical that the corrections will be made prior to the state takeover of the plan,” he said.

Questions about timing and fixes

John Murante, the , asked whether OSERS must correct its errors made before the state takeover and, if not, how many hours it will take state employees to address them.

Murante, the former state treasurer and a former state senator,  said the Legislature might not have agreed to run the system had lawmakers known the level of day-to-day management challenges at the Omaha pension fund.

“It was not the understanding that the state was assuming control of a poorly managed plan,” Murante said in a followup interview. “The understanding was that we’re assuming control of a plan that made bad financial decisions a long time ago.”

He said the state’s process and staffing needs for administering a plan that might need to correct the accounts of 15,000 pension members “is a totally different world.” He said the agency would “do an assessment of how much correction needs to take place.”

The auditor typically samples about 25 fund contributors for each of its tests on retirement funds, one of its auditors explained to the NPERS board.

Audit checks of multiple accounts found excess balances of more than $8 million. The state has not finalized how much it will charge OSERS for administrative costs, Murante said.

“One of the frightening parts of your audit, like every audit, is that it’s just a sample,” Murante said at the meeting. “These dollar amounts are staggering, even with just a sample.”

Investigation found problems

Most of the problems with the OPS retirement fund came to light during an Omaha World-Herald investigation of poor investment decisions made by the local pension fund from 2007-09.

Many centered around sell-offs of stocks during the 2007-08 recession and efforts afterward to move money into less flexible funds and investments as stocks rebounded. OSERS leaders faced questions about how they decided which investments to make.

The World-Herald recently found the gap between projected benefits and payments into the plan from the district and plan participants.

OSERS Administrator Shane Rhian, in a letter responding to the audit, wrote that OPS had not made all the fixes identified in the audit but said it would correct them before the state takes over.

“Mr. Rhian, CFO and OSERS administrator, and our district have committed to addressing all the necessary items ahead of the Sept. 1 transition, in addition to funding the plan for the members it serves,” OPS spokeswoman Bridget Blevins said.

Omaha Education Association President Kathy Poehling said she is pleased to see the state take over day-to-day management of OSERS, including calculating benefits and sending retirees their benefit checks.

She said local pension fund leadership has told the union and its members that the audit issues are being addressed and that “there is no threat to their pension checks now or in the future.”

“The district is making the necessary catch-up payments and the investment returns under state management are good,” Poehling said. “The actuarial projections show the unfunded liability will be reduced over time as these payments continue to be made.”

State retirement board member Jim Schulz said his concern is how many accounts might need correction and who will have to do the correcting. He worries about major miscalculated payments.

Murante said OPS district taxpayers and its retirees will end up having to make the program whole, because the state will keep OSERS separate from the state plan for teacher retirement.

Next steps for plan

He said current and former OPS teachers should know that the state is “100% confident” that it will address and correct any management issues that are identified.

Progress toward the transition to state management was discussed Monday, including the sharing and scanning of nearly 60,000 documents and the sharing of computer data.

Data migration appears to be running up to 12 weeks behind, an IT employee told the board, held up partly by problems OSERS faced during a data conversion in the early 2000s.

But he told the board his team expects the state to get what it needs to handle the transition for current OPS employees and retirees by early September.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

OMAHA — The last petition circulators eyeing Nebraska’s November ballot are still chasing voters, days after last week’s deadline for other groups to submit signatures to the Secretary of State’s Office.

Support Our Schools has two additional weeks to turn in signatures because of when the Legislature changed the school choice law that the group’s previous petition had sought to repeal.

The group has until July 17 to collect 61,000 valid signatures from about 5% of registered voters statewide to force a fall vote on repealing the latest iteration of school choice law.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

Tim Royers of Support Our Schools says the group is confident it will collect enough signatures, as well as the legally required baseline from 5% from voters in at least 38 of Nebraska’s 93 counties.

Royers said one of the group’s challenges is explaining to voters that the petition on the same issue that they signed last year doesn’t count for this one, that they need to sign again.

“That honestly has been one of our largest obstacles this time,” Royers said. “Obviously we know who signed last time…. We’ve reached out to them, and we’ve gotten pushback (that they’ve already signed).”

Revised law spurred new petition effort

Sponsoring State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Omaha has acknowledged that she revised the Opportunity Scholarships Act that lawmakers passed in 2023 partly to sidestep a petition drive against it.

She and other supporters of the 2023 law, including State Sen. Justin Wayne of Omaha, touted the importance of giving parents more options for where to send kids who have struggled in their public schools.

“People aren’t putting themselves in a position of parents who have a child who is not succeeding that is miserable and they have an option here that might work,” Linehan said.

Linehan said the new law addressed many concerns some education advocates raised about Legislative Bill 1402’s predecessor, LB 753. Lawmakers also added new funding for K-12 schools, including $1 billion put toward baseline state aid and special education.

LB 1402 will repeal its predecessor, LB 753, in late October and its $25 million-a-year tax credit for people funding scholarships for needy students attending private K-12 schools.

LB 1402 instead to create and fund the state’s first voucher program for students attending private K-12 schools.

Supporters hope to increase the amount appropriated over time and to increase the number of students eligible.

No ‘Decline to Sign’ campaign

Unlike last time, school choice advocates have not organized a “Decline to Sign” campaign. Some pointed to more than $700,000 that Support Our Schools has spent on this petition effort, after having spent $1.4 million on the 2023 push to oppose LB 753.

Much of that funding came from state and national teachers unions, many of which have participated in similar campaigns in other states in previous years.

Linehan has said it is with teachers unions and Omaha philanthropist Susie Buffett, who oppose LB 1402. The choice laws have had the backing of U.S. Sen. Pete Ricketts, R-Neb., and former U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.

Support Our Schools has said most Nebraskans do not want public dollars spent on private K-12 education. It argues that such programs impact education funding in other states that have created and grown voucher programs.

Voucher program fears

Public school advocates argue that voucher programs in other states started by offering help to kids with limited means and then expanded to cover mainly kids already attending private schools.

Some have described the programs as a way to weaken support for public schools. Others say they are a boon to religious education at a time of declining church attendance.

Karen Kilgarin of the Nebraska State Education Association, which is helping Support Our Schools, said Nebraskans just want an opportunity to let the Legislature know where they stand.

“It shouldn’t be so hard to let people vote, especially when they’ve already made it clear they want to vote on this issue,” she said.

Public interest in program

Linehan said some parents don’t have time to wait for public school systems to improve. They need help now for their kids, she said, and they lack the financial flexibility to send their children to private schools

More than 2,100 students’ families have signed up for the initial program through the state’s largest scholarship-granting organization for the 2024-25 school year.

Lauren Gage of Opportunity Scholarships of Nebraska said her group has received more than $2.15 million in pledges for scholarship funds and calls from parents seeking more information.

“Contributions have been picking up this summer,” Gage said. “And we expect many more taxpayers taking advantage of the tax credit as LB 753 sunsets.”

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

Enrollment opens this week for the University of Nebraska’s new partnership to offer Google Career Certificates in a variety of fields.

Beginning Wednesday, June 19, NU students, alumni and Nebraskans at large can begin to for a variety of self-paced, noncredit courses. Interim NU President Chris Kabourek said that since announcing the in April, with little marketing, more than 1,000 people had already .

Melissa Lee, NU’s chief communication officer, said 1,247 people had registered as of Friday. Of those registrants, 20% are current NU students and 40% are alumni, meaning hundreds of Nebraskans who might have no connections to NU are interested in more education.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

“I just think it solidifies what we thought, that Nebraskans are yearning for more skill sets and more education,” Kabourek told the Nebraska Examiner.

An email last week to pre-registrants the week of June 10 from Ana Lopez Shalla, lead for NU’s microcredentials, offered to completing the minicourses. She wrote that registrants were “helping to drive impact not only in your own career, but in our regional workforce, too.”

The Google Career Certificates will be offered in three cycles in the next year, with 2,500 seats available for each session. They begin in August, December and April. Enrollment will be open through July 31; courses in the first session will begin the next day.

In April, NU announced a special first-year rate of $20 per enrollment.

Kabourek said at the time that the partnership is designed for opportunities, not revenue, and that funds would be used to cover costs and any associated technological needs.

will be offered:

• Cybersecurity
• IT support
• Data analytics
• Digital marketing and e-commerce
• Project management
• User experience (UX) design
• IT automation with python.Advanced data analytics
• Business intelligence.

Kabourek, who will return to his sole role as NU’s chief financial officer come July 1, said one of his priorities as interim president has been to help the university reconnect with Nebraskans, which will include getting out to visit high schools in the fall.

As a rural Nebraskan from David City, Kabourek said, he knows every Nebraskan can find a place within NU.

“We never want your ability to go get your education or develop your skill sets or enhance your resume to be limited by your family situation or your location,” Kabourek said.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

LINCOLN — The state teachers union and other advocates for keeping public funds for public schools say they won’t let supporters of Nebraska’s revamped school choice law sidestep the voters this fall.

They said so while launching a petition drive Tuesday to repeal Legislative Bill 1402, the latest version of a scholarship or voucher program for K-12 students attending private schools. That law turned a tax credit program into a direct state appropriation to nullify a previous ballot initiative.

The Nebraska State Education Association and Support Our Schools Nebraska have argued that those who want to spend public dollars on private education are afraid of facing the voters — and that polling shows they should be.

“LB1402 was passed to silence voters, and their voices need to be heard and respected,” said Jenni Benson, NSEA president and a Support Our Schools Nebraska sponsor. “We were successful last summer, and with everyone’s help we can again gather enough signatures to put this latest voucher scheme on the ballot so Nebraskans are not denied their right to vote.”

Money on both sides of fight

State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan, the sponsor of both school choice efforts, has said it is difficult, even with help from school-choice advocates like U.S. Sen. Pete Ricketts, R-Neb., and former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, to outspend public school supporters like Susie Buffett and national teachers unions.

Linehan, reached Tuesday, said she was not surprised.

“The teachers union always puts the union first, not the kids,” she said. “The teachers union should be doing more to keep young teachers in the profession, fighting to make sure teachers get paid more. The Legislature, we’ve done several bills to address the teacher shortage, and we’ve passed bills to address funding for public schools. But their focus is on this. It’s alarming.”

She and other LB 1402 supporters have argued that advocates for public schools are ignoring low-income families who want more educational options.

“Are they against low-income kids, kids who are bullied, are they against them getting scholarships?” she has said.

Opponents of LB 1402 described the law as a “costly voucher scheme” that “denies Nebraskans their right to vote on the issue of diverting public funds to pay for private schools.”

‘Unprecedented step’

The next president of the NSEA, Tim Royers of Omaha, criticized state senators for taking “the unprecedented step” of passing another bill that denied voters the opportunity to have a say on an issue after advocacy groups organized and fulfilled all legal obligations to give voters that chance.

“We thought we had resolved this question last summer when we turned in 117,000 signatures, that Nebraska voters want to have their say on whether public dollars should go to private schools,” Royers said.

He said the union was seeking a partial repeal of LB 1402, leaving intact the part that repeals the previous school choice program. It would also leave alone the separate appropriations bill. Without a program to fund, lawyers told the Examiner, that would send $10 million a year back to the general fund.

Royers disagreed with Linehan and others arguing that the choice to spend public dollars on private education leads to better educational outcomes. He said he has not seen evidence of that in the experiences of 48 other states with similar programs.

“We don’t want to find ourselves going down a road where there’s a false promise that’s also taking critical resources away from public schools, which makes it harder for us to deliver for the vast majority of Nebraska students that attend public schools.”

Opponents of LB 1402 might also pursue legal action against the law, he said.

Addressing critics’ concerns

Linehan has said the new measure addresses opponents’ concerns about the tax credit provided by last year’s legislation, LB 753.

Critics of the original school choice law said it raided the state treasury of potential revenue from wealthy donors, many of whom might already have given to existing scholarship programs run on behalf of private or religious schools.

Benson said diverting millions of tax dollars to fund vouchers for private schools “will hurt our public schools as well as other essential public services and infrastructure.”

Support Our Schools faces a tight timeline to get the initiative on the ballot. The group has 90 days after the end of the legislative session to collect about 61,000 valid signatures. That would give signature gatherers until about mid-July.

The group plans to turn in the petition language to start gathering signatures at 4 p.m. Tuesday in Lincoln. Organizers say they have started receiving commitments from many of the 1,800 people who helped them with the first petition.

LB 1402 directs a $10 million-a-year appropriation to the State Treasurer’s Office for the scholarship program, down from the $25 million a year tax credit in the original law, an amount that would have increased gradually up to $100 million a year.

Supporters hope to increase the amount appropriated under LB 1402.

State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil, chair of the Legislature’s Education Committee, said it was “shocking and saddening to see these groups attack even the humblest legislation aimed at giving low-income families a choice in their education.”

He, like Linehan, highlighted increased state investment over the past two years in K-12 education, including the seeds of a $1 billion fund to offset local costs of special education and new baseline state aid to K-12 education.

“With these recent investments in our public schools, it is surprising that the $10 million cost of LB 1402, which is about 0.2 percent of our total education funding, is such a concern to the teachers union.”

Students applying for help

More than 1,500 students have applied for scholarships under the existing program, one local school choice advocate said, and organizers expect another 1,000 to apply this spring.

One mother of a program participant, Latasha Collar of Omaha, said her family needed the help to be able to re-enroll her daughter in a private school of her choosing, according to Opportunity Scholarships of Nebraska, a scholarship granting organization.

“I can’t tell you how much it means to see your child excited to go to school again,” she said.

In other states that passed similar programs, state funding starts with help for needy students and expands to cover more students who want to attend private schools, with most of the benefits going to families already attending private schools.

Linehan’s end-of-session push to remake the scholarship program will render moot the first petition drive that Support Our Schools organized against the 2023 tax credit. LB 1402 repeals its predecessor once it becomes law in mid-July.

Nebraska Secretary of State Bob Evnen, the state’s top elections official, who oversees ballot initiatives, has not yet issued a formal opinion booting that first initiative from the ballot. Political observers expect that to happen as soon as this week.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

LINCOLN — Gov. Jim Pillen on Wednesday approved a Nebraska lawmaker’s replacement “school choice” measure as opponents now weigh how they will fight the new law.

“I’m very excited for a bunch of low-income kids who couldn’t access an education that best fits their needs, and now they’ll be able to,” Linehan told the Nebraska Examiner on Wednesday.

While opponents successfully placed last year’s measure on the November 2024 ballot, which would allow voters to decide the fate of the Opportunity Scholarships Act, the status of that referendum remains uncertain because of LB 1402.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

Secretary of State Bob Evnen has not yet announced the fate of that referendum and whether it would remain on the ballot or be removed. A spokesperson said earlier this week the secretary was still consulting with the attorney general.

It would be the first time in state history that a legislative act nullifies an active ballot referendum.

With Pillen’s signature, LB 1402 will take effect mid-July since it passed without an “emergency clause,” which would have allowed the bill to take effect one day after signing.

The previous law appropriated $25 million for one-to-one tax credits with an “escalator” clause that could have ballooned the appropriation to $100 million. Linehan at first sought $25 million for LB 1402 but reduced the price tag and removed the escalator clause to help get the bill over the finish line.

Linehan fought for multiple years to bring school choice to Nebraska and end its status as one of just two states without some form of school choice (the final is North Dakota).

“It’s a civil rights issue because if your family is stuck in a school district that doesn’t work for you with no way out, that is not what America is supposed to be about,” Linehan said earlier this month.

Opponents to devoting any public funds for private education, such as the Nebraska State Education Association, have vowed to act against LB 1402 and described its passage as “a slap in the face to voters.”

“We will fight back against the cowardly and cynical attempt to deny Nebraskans their right to vote,” Jenni Benson, president of the NSEA, said in a weekend statement.

Next steps could include legal action on the bill’s or another referendum, which would require thousands of signatures by this summer.

“Instead of sending public dollars to private schools, which are under no obligation to serve all children, state funds should be used to support the public schools that 9 out of 10 Nebraska students attend,” Benson said.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

LINCOLN — Officials in public schools or other Nebraska political subdivisions could be held liable if they fail to protect children in their care through a proposal inching forward in the Legislature.

, introduced by State Sen. Justin Wayne of Omaha, was the subject of multiple days of debate and negotiations that ultimately resulted in a replacement of Hastings State Sen. Steve Halloran’s on Tuesday to become Wayne’s LB 25. The changes also leaned closer in some provisions involving legal liability to from State Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln.

The amended LB 25 could allow lawsuits — in the case of child abuse or sexual assault of a child — against political subdivisions or their employees who have a duty to protect children against the crimes.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

The harm must be a “proximate result” of the political subdivision’s failure or an employee’s failure to exercise “reasonable care” to care for a child in their care or custody.

“Nothing is going to make these individuals completely whole,” Wayne told the Nebraska Examiner after the votes. “We’re just trying to provide the best remedy we can under the law.”

Wayne offered the amendment, which was adopted . Lawmakers then voted to advance LB 25 on a , with eight lawmakers “present, not voting.”

Opening ‘Pandora’s Box’

State Sen. Carolyn Bosn of Lincoln, a former prosecutor, led opposition to the measure, arguing that if school officials have knowledge of wrongdoing and fail to investigate, which is required under “reasonable care,” they can already be held accountable. She ultimately did not vote on LB 25 or any amendments.

Dungan and Wayne, who are also  lawyers, disagreed that the law Bosn pointed to would be adequate.

Bosn said she negotiated on a possible amendment with State Sens. Ben Hansen of Blair and Mike Jacobson of North Platte, possibly to cap recovery damages at $500,000.

Jacobson said those conversations also included whether to limit the scope of the bill to K-12 schools or add options for victims beyond lawsuits. Bosn said she wanted support on the front end and not after a harm has occurred.

LB 25 could favor attorneys representing families or children who have been harmed, Jacobson argued, as lawyers would be looking for “deep pockets.”

“I’m just saying you’re opening up Pandora’s Box when you go this route,” Jacobson said.

Dungan said there may always be “ambulance chasers” seeking money, but he joined Wayne in stating that lawyers have an ethical duty not to file frivolous lawsuits and noted that judges can throw cases out if they determine the actions are frivolous.

Goals of ‘protecting children’

State Sens. Steve Erdman of Bayard and Julie Slama of Dunbar both criticized opponents to Wayne’s bill who have said they want to protect children but voted against Wayne’s bill.

Erdman, who often is closely aligned with Halloran, defended the effort as targeting schools that aren’t doing everything right. If they are, “they have nothing to fear.”

He said he couldn’t understand why LB 25 was controversial and that when he returns to his district in western Nebraska, he can say he did everything to protect Nebraska’s most vulnerable while some of his colleagues thought protecting the state was more important.

“When you vote, you will clarify to the voters, to the public, where you really stand on protecting children,” Erdman said.

Slama pointed to other bills that were debated this session with a stated goal to protect children from or to based on students’ sex at birth. The introducers of those bills, State Sens. Joni Albrecht of Thurston and Kathleen Kauth of Omaha, opposed Wayne’s amendment and voted against advancing LB 25.

Halloran told the Examiner he was happy there would be some parity to hold public schools accountable when similar lawsuits are already allowed against private schools.

Some opponents argued allowing lawsuits against public schools would increase property taxes.

Slama challenged opponents on that point.

“How many child molesters is your school district employing if it’s going to impact your bottom line?” she asked.

Accountability and recovery

State Sen. Christy Armendariz of Omaha said she supports suing any entity if its employees  commit crimes against children but wanted LB 25 to be more refined, such as more closely targeting criminals.

“We have very little, if any, control over policies, hiring, employee practices within a school building,” Armendariz said. “To reach out to the taxpayer to pay the financial penalty would be extremely ineffective at changing the culture we’re trying to change.”

Armendariz told the Examiner that LB 25 is an opportunity to put everyone on notice that harming a child is “absolutely not acceptable,” but she said the bill “completely misses that point.”

She said holding employees financially accountable could change a culture and suggested that lawmakers should allow victims to go after funds the employee may be connected to, such as employee unions or health care and pension plans.

“That’s outside of the box thinking, but maybe those pension funds need to be held accountable to the offenders that they support,” Armendariz said.

Wayne said once a perpetrator is behind bars, there may be no financial recovery left, but he said a bigger issue is whether schools, cities or counties are aware that harm is possible and that if they don’t act, that should come with some liability.

“I’m proud of this Legislature today, and I think we’re passing a bill that can help kids,” Wayne said.

With three days left in the legislative session, LB 25 will need to return for debate sometime Wednesday. If it advances, the final vote will be taken on the last day of the session: April 18.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

LINCOLN — The University of Nebraska and Google are entering a new partnership designed to further Nebraskans’ education and support state workforce needs.

Interim NU President Chris Kabourek announced Tuesday that the university will soon offer in a variety of fields. is open now on a first-come, first-served basis and will begin with the 2024-25 academic year. Three cycles will be offered — in August, December and April — with 2,500 seats available in each.

Kabourek said “it’s a win” when more education is brought directly to Nebraskans and students.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

“As a native of rural Nebraska myself, I believe strongly that every Nebraskan should have access to quality, affordable educational opportunities no matter where they live or what their personal circumstances are,” Kabourek said in a statement.

The goal of the partnership is to provide opportunity, not make money, Kabourek added in a text. NU will retain all revenue raised through enrollment in the certificates, which will cover administrative costs and any associated technological needs.

Learn at their own pace

Google experts teach the programs, which are vetted by leading employers. NU students, alumni and Nebraska residents can get a special first-year rate of $20 per enrollment.

Students learn at their own pace over three to six months of part-time study in multiple courses:

• Cybersecurity
• IT support
• Data analytics
• Digital marketing and e-commerce
• Project management
• User experience (UX) design

Advanced certifications are also available, tailored for learners with multiple years of experience or as a next step after completing an entry-level certificate:

• IT automation with python
• Advanced data analytics
• Business intelligence

U.S. Rep. Mike Flood, R-Neb., endorsed the partnership as providing affordable access to education and as “yet another pathway for Nebraskans to pursue their dreams and expand their career horizons.” He said he looks forward to seeing the positive impact it will have.

“Developing Nebraskans to take the jobs of the future is one of the cornerstones of growing Nebraska’s economy,” Flood said in a statement.

A 2023 report from the American Association of Colleges and Universities found that employers are generally in strong support of these “microcredentials.” In the report, two-thirds said they would prefer college graduates with microcredentials for entry-level positions.

More than 250,000 people in the United States have earned a Google certificate, 75% of whom had a positive career impact, such as a new job, promotion or raise, according to Google.

“We’re committed to investing in Nebraskans to ensure that they have the tech and other job ready skills to enter the workforce and reach their full economic potential,” said Lisa Gevelber, founder of Grow with Google.

More postsecondary credentials

Kabourek said the new partnership advances a 2022 legislative goal, which NU supported, to increase the percentage of Nebraskans with postsecondary credentials by 2030 to 70%.

State Sen. Lynne Walz of Fremont, who was then chair of the Legislature’s Education Committee, shepherded the 2022 and through the Legislature .

Tim Jares, dean of the University of Nebraska at Kearney’s College of Business and Technology, described the new partnership as “terrific” and said it adds to the work faculty are doing to support students and alumni “amplify their marketability.”

“From our perspective, the more opportunities for education we provide, the better,” Jares said. “I’m proud that the University of Nebraska is playing a leadership role in creating access for Nebraskans and growing a skilled workforce for our state.”

Other leading U.S. institutions already offer career certificates, including Syracuse University, the University of Texas system and two fellow Big Ten members — the University of California-Los Angeles and Rutgers.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

LINCOLN — After an emotional, four-hour debate that extended into Tuesday night, Nebraska lawmakers gave initial approval to a to attend private schools.

The vote was 31-12 to advance Legislative Bill 1402 from first-round debate, which came after the bare minimum, 33 senators, voted to halt a filibuster against the bill.

Two senators, Myron Dorn of Adams and Teresa Ibach of Sumner, voted for cloture but were “present and not voting” on advancing the actual bill.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

While opponents of the bill called it unconstitutional and a way to block a public vote on school choice, advocates said students who struggle in public schools, especially those in low-income families, deserve the option of a private or parochial school through what amounts to a school voucher.

“Every child should have access to a high-quality education, not by chance, not by privilege, but by right,” said State Sen. Justin Wayne of Omaha, a former member of the Omaha Public Schools Board.

The main sponsor of LB 1402, Elkhorn Sen. Lou Ann Linehan, said students from low-income families, who get priority for the Opportunity Scholarships, don’t have the same choice of switching to a private or parochial school as do children in a more affluent family.

“Why is it that we in the Legislature don’t feel that kids should have a choice?” Linehan said, pointing out that the $10 million cost of the bill is a tiny fraction of what’s spent on public schools.

‘Blatantly’ unconstitutional

LB 1402 comes up for second-round debate on Wednesday. If it passes, it is expected to be challenged, either by a referendum to put it on the fall ballot or by a legal challenge that it violates on the “appropriation” of public funds to non-public schools.

Lincoln Sen. George Dungan said LB 1402 is more constitutionally suspect than the Opportunity Scholarship Act passed by the Legislature a year ago.

Last year’s law allowed taxpayers to earmark up to half of their state income tax liability to “scholarship granting organizations” that then handed out grants to children to attend private or parochial schools, thus likely not a direct appropriation.

“This is blatantly a (state) appropriation,” Dungan, an attorney, said of the new bill.

Linehan disputed that, citing a 1984 ruling by the Nebraska Supreme Court that upheld a state program that granted scholarships to students who could then choose to attend a public or private college.

‘Straw man’ argument

“The straw man argument that this is unconstitutional doesn’t hold water,” said Dunbar Sen. Julie Slama, who is also a lawyer.

But Dungan, as well as Omaha Sen. Wendy DeBoer, disagreed, saying the money doled out by LB 1402 — unlike the scholarship funds of 1984 — can only be used for private education.

Passage of LB 1402 would nullify a referendum petition drive led by the state teachers’ union that gathered more than 117,000 signatures to place last year’s bill on this year’s November ballot. Just how passage of this year’s bill would play out — whether it would lead to the removal of the referendum from the ballot, for instance — has not yet been determined.

The head of the Nebraska State Education Association called Tuesday’s vote “a slap in the face” to those who signed the petition so that voters would have the final say on school choice.

“It is deeply troubling that Sen. Lou Ann Linehan and her out-of-state billionaires continue to try to deny Nebraskans’ right to vote on this issue,” said Jenni Benson, president of the NSEA and a leader in Support Our Schools, which organized the referendum.

The petition drive was hotly contested, with competing claims of improper tactics to collect signatures and block people from signing. to collect signatures and employ “blockers” to discourage signers.

A group financially backed by charter school proponent Betsy DeVos, a former official in the Trump administration and member of a billionaire family, was a major funder of the school choice forces.

A year ago, the State Legislature’s passage of the Opportunity Scholarship Act ended Nebraska’s status as one of only two states that didn’t offer some type of school choice. North Dakota is the other state.

1,000 scholarships expected

Under that law, more than 1,000 students are expected to receive Opportunity Scholarships averaging $5,000 each to attend a private or parochial school.

This year, however, Linehan introduced a new version, LB 1402, in large part to avoid an expensive campaign battle over the referendum placed on the November ballot to nullify last year’s law.

The new bill also eliminated the income tax break on donations to scholarship granting organizations, which Linehan said was wrongly portrayed as helping the wealthy.

Under the new bill, the state treasurer would set up a program to provide scholarships to eligible students to attend “qualified” schools. That would eliminate the middle man, the scholarship granting organizations, and aim the money directly to students.

Cost dropped to $10 million a year

On Tuesday, the senator offered more amendments intended to expand support for LB 1402. The fiscal impact of the bill was reduced to $10 million a year, instead of $25 million, and an “escalator” clause was dropped that would have allowed spending on private schooling to rise to $100 million a year.

One supporter of LB 1402, Omaha Sen. Christy Armendariz, argued that with math and reading scores suffering in public schools in her district, something needs to be done.

“We’re tripping over ourselves about what school building they’re in? We should be doing everything we can,” Armendariz said.

But opponents of LB 1402 said there were no guarantees students would do better in private schools or avoid bullying there.

Omaha Sen. Megan Hunt said private and parochial schools can discriminate, unlike public schools, by denying entrance or expelling LGBTQ students.

Bellevue Sen. Carol Blood argued that Nebraskans are asking to decide the issue of school choice at the voting booth, just as they decided the issues of capital punishment and Medicaid expansion.

“Then it’s resolved once and for all,” Blood said.

But Wayne said he considers LB 1402 a “pilot project,” that can be rescinded by future legislatures if it doesn’t work out.

Linehan agreed, adding that in other states, the battle over school choice is a “continual fight.”

“It’s not a one and done deal,” she said.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

LINCOLN — The author of Nebraska’s new Opportunity Scholarships Act says she knows that the state tax credit for funding students attending private K-12 schools risks being rejected by voters in November.

That’s why State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Omaha and other supporters of the school choice law drafted several bills this year to preserve the heart of the program regardless of the election outcome. Each proposal would offset the cost of a private K-12 education with state tax dollars.

Recently, Linehan settled on Legislative Bill 1402 as this session’s vehicle for the changes. She originally designed the bill to shift the scholarship program created by the Opportunity Scholarships Act to the State Treasurer’s Office and away from nonprofit scholarship-granting groups.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

Her latest amendment to LB 1402 — Amendment 3016 — clarifies that school choice supporters intend to directly allocate state funds for private school scholarships instead of steering them to outside scholarship organizations, essentially eliminating the middlemen.

Public school advocates call Linehan’s push an effort to stifle voters’ voices. The advocates contend Nebraskans don’t want public funds spent on private schools, whether through a tax credit or directly. They say the latest amendment would start a voucher program that could cut into state funding for public schools or other priorities even faster than the Opportunity Scholarships Act.

Options for kids or funding grab?

Linehan and other private school advocates say the scholarships give low-income students and their families more options. One of the largest scholarship-granting organizations, Opportunity Scholarships of Nebraska, said Monday it had received 915 applications.

The group said it expects as many as 2,500 applicants by the April 30 deadline. Spokeswoman Lauren Garcia Gage said it had received calls from the families of more than 5,000 interested students, including many from families of students already attending private schools.

Linehan’s 2023 school choice law created a dollar-for-dollar tax credit for donors to scholarship-granting groups that fund tuition help for low-income students to attend private K-12 schools.

Public school advocates, including Stand for Schools Nebraska, have argued the tax credit favors the rich at the cost of the state treasury. Linehan and others say they have worked in recent years to add more funds to state aid to K-12 public schools, adding a new baseline of state aid and proposing additional aid.

Amendment 3016 would create a new program that would stand even if voters reject the original law. It does so by cutting the role of scholarship-granting organizations and donors.

“I’m trying to make sure all parents in Nebraska have school choice,” Linehan said. “Not just wealthy. … Not just those who are lucky enough to have grandparents help them.”

Linehan said she doesn’t have the $10 million she thinks she would need to fight the opposition to the Opportunity Scholarships Act at the ballot box. She pointed to opposition from deep-pocketed donors such as philanthropist Susie Buffett. Linehan said she won’t try to match public school supporters in raising funds.

“I am not going to go around raising $10 million to try and beat that when we’ve got 15 open legislative seats, and if we don’t win, then they’ll come back in and repeal it in the Legislature,” she said.

What the amendment does

Under the amendment, state funds per student would be capped at the cost of education but could not exceed 75% of the statewide average of what the state spends per student in general funds on public K-12 education.

The amendment allocates a baseline of $25 million a year and allows for annual increases of up to 25% a year, based on the total scholarship funding awarded each year, up to an annual cap of $100 million.

Taxpayers would fund the full $25 million from the beginning, at a time when the for other new programs. The Opportunity Scholarships law, by contrast, requires private parties to donate funds in order to receive the state credit.

People familiar with fundraising for scholarship organizations told the Examiner that demand has outstripped donations thus far. Many donors have to be told about the tax credit, organizers said.

Linehan confirmed last week that her amendment would pull private money out of the process and would fund the private school scholarships with an appropriation of public money, like school voucher programs do in other states, including Iowa.

If voters chose to retain the Opportunity Scholarships Act this fall, the state could be on the hook for both programs, the tax credit and a separate allocation of money for scholarships. (A different related bill would sunset the original program if a new version passes.)

Most political observers expect the ballot measure to fail because Nebraskans have rejected voucher programs in the past, and opponents of the new law are planning a campaign that will include heavy rotations of advertising.

Court fight likely

Linehan acknowledged the amendment could make a court fight with Stand for Schools and others more likely. But she said school choice advocates have case law and a conservative U.S. Supreme Court on their side.

Linehan and the school choice advocacy group Keep Kids First have said courts have allowed similar programs in other states that have similar constitutional prohibitions.

Keep Kids First, which advocates for school choice in Nebraska, has ties to the American Federation for Children and Betsy DeVos, a major political donor and former education secretary under then-President Donald Trump.

Anthony Schutz, a University of Nebraska-Lincoln law professor, is one of several legal experts who argued previously that the tax credit program might run afoul of the Nebraska Constitution. He and others said the new amendment might be even more problematic.

“Since last year, we’ve wondered whether or not we have an appropriation to a non-public school,” Schutz said.

Now, he said, “We’ve got a bill that clearly appropriates money.”

Under AM 3016, the State Treasurer’s Office would have the responsibility for overseeing the scholarship program, much like it does with Nebraska’s college savings plans. The office would have the authority under the amendment to hire a private vendor to do so.

The amendment would place the state closer to providing public money to a private school, Schutz said.

‘Shell game’ gone

Dunixi Guereca, a legislative candidate speaking for Stand for Schools, said the legal point of the scholarship-granting organizations was to create a shell game filtering public money to private schools through a third party.

Schutz said courts have thrown out constitutional provisions in other states prohibiting private school funding, ruling that those restrictions encroached on religious freedoms.

Constitutions in those states prohibited state funds from being spent on religious education.

Nebraska’s Constitution, by contrast, prohibits spending on all private schools, he said, including secular schools.

Article VII, Section 11, of the constitution says, “No appropriation or grant of public funds or property shall be made to any educational institution which is not owned and controlled by the state or a governmental subdivision thereof.”

Linehan’s amendment to LB 1402 would allow access to scholarships for families earning up to 300% of the federal poverty level, or up to $93,600 for a family of four.

Families earning less would get first dibs, including families already on means-based scholarships and those earning up to 185% of the poverty level, meaning $57,720 for families of four.

Other students prioritized for scholarships under the amendment include those on individualized education plans (IEPs) and students fleeing bullying or violence in school.

Critics point out that private schools still can refuse to educate students of their choosing, with a handful of exceptions under federal law, including a student’s race or gender.

Stand for Schools, in an internal analysis of the amendment, wrote that tying the measure to this federal law would let private schools discriminate based on a student’s disability or sexual orientation.

Annual reports

AM 3016 would require the Treasurer’s Office to file a report with the governor each  Dec. 1 starting in 2025 that spells out how the scholarships can be pursued.

The report would include the number of students receiving scholarships the previous year, the number of students wait-listed or denied scholarships and the reasons they were denied.

It would also list the demographics of scholarship recipients, including income level, grade level and location.

Observers said that similar reports have been used in other states to justify the expansion of school choice scholarships or voucher programs. It’s a way to gauge demand and popularity.

Stand for Schools says research in school choice states found that more than 70% of those who apply for such scholarships or vouchers already attended private schools or intended to do so.

Linehan and Keep Kids First have argued that means nearly a third of students who accept scholarship funds might not otherwise have been able to attend a private school of their choosing.

The amendment would let the Treasurer’s Office spend up to 7.5% of the appropriated funds on administrative costs, including on internal managers providing oversight to private contractors.

The amendment limits the state’s ability to control or influence the governance of any “qualified” school accepting the money. It cannot force the schools to keep educating scholarship students.

It includes an emergency clause, meaning it would go into effect immediately if passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor.

Who’s applying

Opportunity Scholarships of Nebraska says more than 40% of its early applicants are students of color, more than half are from outside Omaha and Lincoln and 40% are at or below 185% of the poverty level.

Jeremy Ekeler, the group’s executive director, said the new law “is already giving hope to hundreds of students.”

“We hear every day from families who aren’t eligible but wish they were. Nebraskans are recognizing what the rest of the country has already discovered: Once parents have educational opportunity, their desire for options only increases,” he said.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

OMAHA — Three Nebraska K-12 school districts are planting future teachers this spring in a new pilot program the Legislature seeded last year with $1 million.

North Platte Public Schools, Lincoln Public Schools and Westside Community Schools in Omaha are joining with higher education institutions and the state to ease the path from para-educator to teacher.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

Passing Legislative Bill 705 was one of several small steps the Legislature took in 2023 to give local school districts more tools to address an ongoing shortage of classroom teachers.

Once accepted, program participants — the classroom aides or educational assistants — can cut the cost and time it takes to complete a tailored teacher education program.

Credit for classroom work

The program’s higher ed partners at Chadron State College, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Midland University will grant college credits to paras for some of their classroom experience.

Organizers call it the “apprenticeship model.” Paras are paired with mentor teachers in their schools who serve as co-teachers and offer feedback to the paras and college faculty.

State Education Commissioner Brian Maher announced Westside as the state’s third pilot district Wednesday at Westbrook Elementary School, where ed assistant Shelly Sip helps kindergartners with reading.

Sip said she participates in a district-funded precursor to the state program. That program pays for an undergraduate teaching program at Midland at night while she works full-time during the day.

The 15-year ed assistant said she and many other para-educators want to be teachers but could not afford to attend a teacher education program without financial help from the district or the state.

“I wanted to be in the front of the room,” she said. “I wanted to make the lesson plans. And I found out that Westside is doing the program … and the district will pay for my education.”

She said she has benefited from seeing classrooms in her role as an education assistant. She helps lead reading groups, helps with math and walks kids to recess and lunch.

She said she attended the district, sent her kids to the district and now wants to teach there.

“I’m here, and I’ve been here since kindergarten, and I will be here for probably ever,” she said.

Another tool for school hiring

Andrea Haynes, Westside’s assistant superintendent for human resources, said the new program would reduce the time that paras spend outside of the classroom preparing to become teachers.

She called the program a “groundbreaking partnership” that shows the district and the state’s commitment to “nurturing talent and fostering a strong educational community.”

She said it helps address the teacher shortage by “building a sustainable pipeline of amazing educators right from our own classrooms.”

“We believe this innovative model not only accelerates their path to becoming certified teachers, but it also empowers them to elevate their impact,” Haynes said.

Mary Ritzdorf, dean of the Walker School of Education at Midland, said the university and Westside were still working out specifics of how many credits paras could earn while at work.

Traditional students in teaching programs don’t get into classroom settings regularly until their final year of college. In this, officials said, paras have an edge.

The apprenticeship model would likely, among other things, help accepted paras to stay working in their schools through their student teaching, reducing the need for substitutes.

More certified teachers needed

Nancy Christensen, the associate professor of education who runs Midland’s teaching programs for ed assistants and paras, said the goal is getting more qualified teachers certified.

The Westside district alone has 200 or so ed assistants, Haynes said, including many serving as helpers for special education teachers, general ed teachers and as hall monitors.

Using existing para-to-teacher programs, Westside expects to graduate about seven to eight paras this spring and 10-15 a year, she said. Each agrees to work five years in exchange for the aid. The length-of-service commitments vary from district to district.

Districts statewide are exploring higher pay, bonuses and benefits to lure new teachers and retain those they already employ, officials said Wednesday.

Maher said he understands they are “robbing Peter to pay Paul” by finding new teachers among the ranks of also difficult-to-hire paras.

“We need to fill both buckets, quite frankly,” he said.

LB 705 set aside $1 million a year for the program from the Education Future Fund. When asked whether he thought the Legislature might find more funding if the pilot program was successful, Maher said it appears more likely that school districts would fund such programs if they help find and hire teachers.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

LINCOLN — Nebraska student teachers could receive 100% tuition waivers beginning in 2025 through a legislative proposal under consideration this session.

, proposed by State Sen. Kathleen Kauth of Omaha, would support students at the University of Nebraska and Nebraska State College System seeking a degree related to teaching, during the semester or semesters they are student teaching.

“Encouraging and supporting prospective teachers will help us rebuild our teacher population,” Kauth told the Education Committee at a Feb. 13 hearing on the bill.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

Teacher shortage

The program is proposed to run for six school years, through 2030-31, and is to cost about $15 million in lost tuition revenue.

This would be offset by annual appropriations of up to $3 million, which Kristen Hassebrook, a lobbyist for NU, said would ensure the cost is not passed on to other students or programs.

Paul Turman, chancellor of the state college system of Peru, Chadron and Wayne State Colleges, said some school districts, such as Omaha Public Schools, provide stipends to student teachers, but the practice is not widespread and is less likely in rural districts.

“Any type of legislation that begins to address ways to help incentivize student teachers in their final year of experiences is very warranted,” Turman said.

Todd Tripple of Millard Public Schools, which is in Kauth’s district, said student teachers’ final year is “invaluable” yet includes overlooked financial burdens.

‘Teaching is enough’

Winona Mitchell, a low-income, first-generation college student studying secondary education at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, said she works three jobs, similar to other students, but she said this isn’t feasible with student teaching.

“The workload of student teaching adds another layer of stress requiring a pre-service teacher to be thoughtful of their savings to pay their bills,” Mitchell said, testifying on behalf of the Nebraska State Education Association.

Deb Rasmussen of Lincoln, a teacher for 40 years and current president of the Lincoln Education Association, said when she was a student teacher in 1982, schools didn’t worry about finding teaching candidates because everyone wanted to do it.

“As an educator, teaching is enough,” Rasmussen said. “You can’t function with three other jobs because you’re trying to pay tuition.”

‘Part of the solution’

Kauth said that the state will not always be in a “teacher drought” and that state resources must be used sparingly. If LB 953 is still needed in six years, she said, legislators can consider  extending it at that point.

“It’s my hope that this will give prospective teachers a bit of breathing room while they’re completing their education,” Kauth said. “We want to encourage them to stay in the teaching program with the hope that they would be offered jobs once their student teaching is complete.”

Colby Coash, of the Nebraska Association of School Boards, said the Education Committee is looking at more than a dozen bills on teacher shortages but that LB 953 stands out.

“This bill really bubbled up to one of the top that we thought would make a big impact for this issue,” Coash said. “Hopefully this one can be part of the solution, which we all know we need to find.”

No one testified in opposition. The committee took no immediate action.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

LINCOLN — When Millard North High School junior Janae Harris was in second grade, she read to a kindergarten class but kept getting stuck on words.

The teacher continually corrected her, Janae said, and told her she “needed to learn how to read” before she read to another class.

“I was embarrassed, and to this day it is terrifying to read out loud, and I continuously struggle to overcome it,” Janae told the Legislature’s Education Committee on Monday. “This moment will replay in my head forever.”

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

Janae, who is in Millard’s STEM Academy and is captain of her school’s girl’s lacrosse team, among other involvements, has dyslexia. She testified in support of to create a Dyslexia Research Grant Program for new technologies.

“I want to do everything in my power to minimize the struggles of dyslexic students,” Janae said.

‘Proficient, capable communicator’

State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Elkhorn, who introduced the bill, also has dyslexia and has to . The proposed research program would set aside $1 million for Nebraska businesses researching artificial-intelligence-based writing assistance for individuals with dyslexia.

Linehan told the Nebraska Examiner that some educators have long discredited the lifelong disorder or cast it off as having to do with a student’s IQ or intelligence. She herself has struggled with the disorder, recalling how “horrified” she felt before her 1995 interview to work for then-U.S. Senate candidate Chuck Hagel.

She said she worried about whether she could communicate and whether Hagel would understand.

“I finally just told him, and he said, ‘Well, that’s easy. We’ll just get somebody to proof all your stuff,’ which is what we did,” Linehan said. “Then I got to the point where I was proofing things because somebody showed me how to have a tool so that I could become proficient.”

Linehan later served as Hagel’s campaign manager and his chief of staff in the U.S. Senate and said the impact of such research could be “huge.”

“This program could take a student who was afraid to write, afraid to communicate, struggling through college, and turn them into a proficient, capable communicator,” Linehan said.

It’s estimated that as many as 15%-20% of the world’s population has dyslexia, according to the .

‘Fully partake’ in learning

In the past year, a group of University of Nebraska-Lincoln college students working in this field approached Linehan to discuss their fledgling business, Dyslexico, which they started about two years ago in the , based on the experiences of one of its co-founders, Grace Clausen.

Clausen, who has dyslexia, grew up in a school system that didn’t always work for her, according to fellow Dyslexico co-founder Bridget Peterkin of Omaha.

Peterkin said corrective writing tools — from Word or Google Docs to Grammarly — do not always work, and other AI-based models, such as ChatGPT, may add words a writer didn’t intend.

In one example Peterkin showed to the Examiner, a student wrote “wondering” when they meant “wandering.” In another, the student wrote “I say a figure” instead of “saw.”

“It was never going to catch that because it was spelled correctly,” Peterkin, a senior computer science major at UNL, said of other spelling or grammar programs.

Unlike other programs, the Dyslexico software is powered through AI but finds a middle ground in not rewriting sentences, as ChatGPT did to grow with users over time and provide analysis that Peterkin and her team said might be able to help educators.

“We want to have a solution for the schools that helps students have the support to get their spelling and grammar correct while they can maintain their original voice and be able to fully partake in the learning process,” Peterkin said.

Another Nebraska-born startup that got its has grown to international success: , which has  a goal of “building the future of sports” with video and data entry.

Getting into students’ hands

Tristan Curd of Omaha, Dyslexico project manager and a senior computer science major at UNL, said Dyslexico has gotten into the hands of students and successfully launched with a public beta version last year. Dyslexico is also .

In the last year, Dyslexico entered agreements with two schools for test runs, providing developers with some feedback from The Pittsburgh New Church School for Children with Dyslexia and Millard Public Schools.

“There’s always going to be that distinction between us developing it and the actual users using it,” Curd said. “To get that info, it’s big.”

The company is also in talks to partner with Services for Students with Disabilities at UNL. Pablo Rangel, a disability specialist with SSD, testified before the Education Committee Monday in support in his individual capacity.

‘Independence and autonomy’

Rangel, who has dyslexia, said he could have benefited from such a program. He said Dyslexico could better prepare all K-12 students for college.

“The Dyslexico software does for individuals with dyslexia what prosthetics do for people who are missing a part of their body,” Rangel said. “It supports independence and autonomy for a person to move forward where typically they might retreat and give up.”

Colby Coash, on behalf of the Nebraska Association of School Boards and the Educational Service Unit Coordinating Commission, also testified in support of LB 1253.

Nick Lauver of Papillion, a business development associate for Dyslexico and a senior actuarial science and finance double major at UNL, said the company has already heard about some successes from educators, which have been “some of the brightest points” in the software’s development.

‘Redundant and unnecessary’

Megan Pitrat, a 10-year special education teacher in Syracuse, testified in opposition to LB 1253 on behalf of the Nebraska State Education Association. She said that while dyslexia is a problematic disorder, there are already systems in place to help students.

“I believe that allocating funds to research something that is already being serviced within the functioning system is redundant, unnecessary and a waste of precious funds that could instead be used to support teachers and systems that, as always, do the best with what we are given,” Pitrat testified.

State Sens. Lynne Walz of Fremont and Justin Wayne of Omaha tried to draw a distinction between NSEA’s testimony and LB 1253’s intent, which they said is to research and create but not demand the use of such technology. Pitrat said she would probably not use such technology and did not anticipate it being helpful.

“With all due respect, it’s not about you, it’s about the student,” Wayne said.

“OK, but as a practitioner, I’m determining, based on my experiences and my practice, how to deliver special education services to my students,” Pitrat responded.

‘Panacea’ or ‘game changing’

After the hearing, the NSEA referred questions to Tim Royers, president of the Millard Education Association, who clarified that the NSEA’s opposition comes in wanting to raise cautions and warn against framing such technologies as a “panacea.”

“We have concerns about digital, especially AI tools, being put in the driver’s seat to try and work on something that is as challenging to work on as dyslexia,” Royers told the Examiner.

He said the amount of time he’s lost by getting trained on tools that ended up being shelved after “two months tops” was a net loss for his time working with students.

Curd said Dyslexico wants to work with the Nebraska Department of Education on a large-scale research study in schools next year and aims to help an estimated 295,000 Nebraskans with dyslexia.

“If we can get it in the hands of the youngest people possible and make an impact that lasts throughout their lives, that’d be huge,” Curd said.

Janae Harris said she participated independently with Dyslexico and described the software as “game changing.” She said her “fervent hope” is that LB 1253 helps get Dyslexico into the hands of more students.

“Without the ability to read and write, Nebraska youth cannot be productive citizens and reach success,” Janae said. “Who knows what others could achieve with the help of this grant.”

The committee took no immediate action on LB 1253.

Editor’s note: This article has been updated to clarify Janae Harris’ experiences with Dyslexico and the number of Nebraskans the company aims to help.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .