Senator Holcroft seeks to reform Nebraska school bond election process with LB 135

The Nebraska Legislature convened on March 28, 2025, to discuss significant amendments and bills affecting school bond elections. The session highlighted two key legislative proposals: AM 6 53 and LB 135, both aimed at improving voter engagement and streamlining the bond election process for schools.

AM 6 53 was adopted, clarifying that LB 390 pertains specifically to school libraries on school grounds, excluding traditional public libraries. This amendment received unanimous support, indicating a collective agreement on the importance of defining the scope of the legislation.

Senator Holcroft introduced LB 135, which seeks to maximize voter turnout for school bond elections by aligning them with statewide primary and general elections. The bill aims to address the historically low turnout rates observed in special elections, which can drop significantly compared to general elections. For instance, a recent special election in the Millard Public Schools saw only a 29% turnout, starkly contrasting with the 78% turnout during the previous general election.

The proposed legislation would allow school districts to hold bond elections only during established election dates, thereby increasing the likelihood of higher voter participation. Additionally, an amendment to LB 135, AM 7 79, would eliminate the current 10-month waiting period for rescheduling a failed bond election, allowing districts to reconsider within six months.

However, the bill faced opposition from several senators who raised concerns about potential unintended consequences. Critics argued that restricting bond elections to specific dates could lead to logistical challenges for smaller school districts, particularly in rural areas, where competition for contractors may drive up costs. They emphasized that the timing of elections and construction projects must be carefully coordinated to avoid inflated expenses and delays.

Senator Von Gillern expressed fiscal concerns, suggesting that the bill could inadvertently increase costs for taxpayers if multiple districts sought to initiate projects simultaneously. Other senators echoed similar sentiments, highlighting the need for local control and the importance of maintaining flexibility in scheduling elections.

In conclusion, while the Nebraska Legislature's discussions on AM 6 53 and LB 135 reflect a commitment to enhancing voter engagement in school bond elections, the ongoing debate underscores the complexities and potential ramifications of such legislative changes. The next steps will involve further deliberation as lawmakers weigh the benefits of increased voter turnout against the practical implications for school districts across the state.