Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the State Legislation Education topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

OPS board opposes two state bills after committee update; board votes recorded

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Omaha Public Schools Board of Education voted May 5 to change its legislative positions on two state measures after its legislative committee recommended a position change.

The Omaha Public Schools Board of Education voted May 5 to change its legislative positions on two state measures after its legislative committee recommended a position change.

The board voted to oppose LB 645, a bill that as amended would alter the State School Employees Retirement Plan by changing the state contribution calculation and lowering retirement age provisions; board members said amendments that reduce the state contribution or allow earlier retirements could make it harder to retain experienced teachers and could affect the district’s competitiveness for recruits. The board’s legislative committee said the bill’s modifications could reduce the state’s required contribution and lower the retirement age from 60 to 55 for plan members.

The board also voted to oppose LB 653 after committee members said that LB 653 now incorporates language from LB 507, which expands obligations for districts to provide transportation to special‑education students who live outside the district. Administration staff told the board that, under the LB 507 language folded into LB 653, the district could initially face a large outlay to cover transportation costs for roughly 150 students currently served in foster care placements outside district boundaries; the administration’s worst‑case estimate for providing mileage reimbursements to parents was about $2,444,000 in the first year, with the district later eligible for 80% state reimbursement. If the district supplied dedicated bus routes instead of parent reimbursement, administrators estimated a substantially larger cost.

Before the bill‑by‑bill votes, the board agreed to divide the committee recommendation so LB 645 and LB 653 would be considered and voted on separately. All motions described below passed on board roll calls recorded in the meeting minutes.

Votes at a glance - Division of question (split LB 645 from LB 653 for separate votes): motion seconded and approved (roll call recorded as 9 ayes). - Change position to OPPOSE LB 645 (state school retirement plan changes): motion approved (roll call recorded as 9 ayes). - Change position to OPPOSE LB 653 (bill as amended to include LB 507 special‑education transportation language): motion approved (roll call recorded as 9 ayes).

Board members and staff discussed the fiscal implications, the relationship between DHHS and school transportation for foster students, and whether the proposed state changes could shift costs onto local districts. The board’s legislative committee said it will continue weekly monitoring through the remainder of the legislative session.