Board hears legislative briefing as members flag transportation, IEP amendments
Loading...
Summary
The OPS board received a legislative committee update on April 20 that flagged proposed amendments to LB937 and LB1050, including an amendment (formerly LB507) that could expand special-education transportation obligations for Omaha Public Schools and another amendment that would give parents veto authority over IEP changes.
The Omaha Public Schools (OPS) Board of Education received a legislative update April 20 as lawmakers neared the end of the session, and trustees flagged two amendments that could materially affect district operations.
The legislative committee chair told the board that LB937 — scheduled for debate the following day — had been amended to include portions of several other bills. The committee said it opposed an amendment labeled AM2606 (formerly LB507) because the language would require OPS to provide transportation for special-education students to locations anywhere within the metropolitan learning community, potentially increasing costs and logistical complexity for the district.
The chair said the board is working with Senator Megan Hunt’s office to propose language intended to narrow that transportation requirement so it is more affordable and administrable for OPS. District staff told trustees that transportation explicitly required by an individual education plan (IEP) would continue to be provided, but that the broader amendment could force the district to transport students outside of OPS boundaries in ways the district does not currently do.
Trustees also raised concern about AM2965 (formerly LB841), which the district said would grant parents veto authority over proposed changes to a student’s IEP. The chair said inclusion of that amendment in LB937 would change the district’s position on the bill from support to opposition, citing potential conflicts with federal law and increased costs if the amendment were adopted.
The board discussed LB1050, a priority bill that would require retention for third graders not reading on grade level; the chair said statewide education associations and many districts oppose that bill and that its final vote could be close. The chair said several amendments were circulating that would instead require the State Board of Education to develop a model policy for districts to adopt, but the model policy as drafted would still include retention.
The committee chair described the legislative session as entering a stressful final stretch, with multiple amendments still under consideration and active communications between district lobbyists, staff and committee members. No formal board action on the bills was taken at the meeting.
Next steps: trustees said they will continue discussions with senators and monitor amendments as they are filed and debated in the legislature.
