Latest news with #LB31
Yahoo
10-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill to catalog Nebraska school ‘tools of mass surveillance' hits roadblock
State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln. Jan. 8, 2025 (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — A state lawmaker's attempt to publicly catalog 'tools of mass surveillance' in Nebraska public school districts is on pause, at least for now, as she finds an alternate path forward. Legislative Bill 31, from State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, would require all of Nebraska's 245 public school districts to publicly inventory and catalog student surveillance, monitoring and tracking technology tools used by or contracted for use in each district. The bill was debated Feb. 21 and Feb. 24 before not returning to the legislative agenda, at Conrad's request. Conrad has pledged to find a path forward for her bill with some bipartisan support, such as through a different bill or by working with the State Board of Education, the Nebraska Department of Education or specific school districts. The bill faced stiff opposition from some senators who feared the bill could require schools to disclose sensitive information or impose unfunded burdens to compile the necessary information. Conrad, a past executive director of the ACLU of Nebraska, described the bill as a 'simple transparency measure' that wouldn't ban the technology she said was coming from 'big tech.' Instead, she argued that the bill could lead to cost savings over time, possibly leading to increased teacher salaries. Conrad repeatedly marked her bill as a 'true right-left coalition' that she, a pragmatic progressive, had built with students, parents and taxpayers. Some conservatives, in written comments for the bill, noted they've rarely been on the same side as the Lincoln Democrat but identified the bill as a top priority. Supportive testifiers at the hearing for the bill included Sue Greenwald of Kearney, a prominent conservative advocate for parents' rights bills. 'If they don't have information to know what tools of surveillance or data collection or survey are being utilized by their schools, they cannot insert and understand and be empowered to utilize that control,' Conrad said of families during debate. State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil, chair of the Education Committee, which advanced LB 31 with no opposition, said he has put an extra emphasis on parental rights in his three years as chair. He said Conrad's bill advanced those efforts. 'Parents should, and deserve, to be put in the driver's seat of their child's education,' Murman said. 'Senator Conrad has brought a way to give parents some more information and transparency without putting too much of an additional burden on the work that our great schools have to do.' State Board of Education members Lisa Schonhoff of Bennington and Kirk Penner of Aurora have also voiced favor for LB 31. Schonhoff thanked Conrad for 'being on the side of parents.' 'This is a nonpartisan, common sense bill,' she wrote in a Feb. 25 post on X, formerly Twitter. Many senators who ultimately opposed the legislation said they agreed with Conrad's goal that schools should not be collecting data on students and selling it. However, State Sen. Brad von Gillern of the Elkhorn area noted the bill received opposition from major organizations, such as the Nebraska Council of School Administrators, Schools Taking Action for Nebraska Children's Education, Greater Nebraska Schools Association, Nebraska Rural Community Schools Association and the Nebraska State Education Association. 'I believe it's a wolf in sheep's clothing,' von Gillern said. 'It's a Trojan horse to carry things forward that we do not want to advance in our school systems.' LB 31 would require the State Board of Education to draft a model policy around the targeted technology, requiring school districts to disclose certain information about the tools. State Sen. Bob Hallstrom of Syracuse offered an amendment to make the surveillance tool inventory voluntary and not require it to be posted online. He similarly pushed back on a finding in the bill stipulating that schools were using the 'tools of mass surveillance … under the guise of advancing security or efficiency goals.' 'I think it's offensive to suggest that the schools would be doing that under some type of guise,' Hallstrom said. 'They truly do have the best interest in the safety of the students at heart.' Von Gillern repeatedly asked whether the bill could require public disclosure of sensitive security details that someone plotting a 'nefarious act' could use. He said gathering data for the protection of students and staff is a 'worthwhile venture' but that Conrad's bill, portrayed as advancing that goal, could do 'exactly the opposite.' State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward said digital cameras, for example, can help when students offer differing stories after incidents. But she voiced similar concerns as von Gillern that disclosing specific technology vendor names and contact information could be dangerous. Conrad said the plain language of her bill would not require any publication of sensitive information but that she could clarify that intention if needed. Von Gillern said senators also need to consider what isn't in the bill but that many districts had voiced concerns about. 'If we do anything to deteriorate the security of our children in schools then shame on us,' von Gillern said. State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha said that suggesting Conrad's bill could reduce school safety was a 'ridiculous and absurd extrapolation to arrive at.' Hunt said if that was the true concern, she said von Gillern and others should maybe 'lift a finger' on gun safe storage or other safety regulations, or increase mental health support. 'All this does is put on the books that this is our expectation in Nebraska,' Hunt said. 'That our kids are not the product, that we're not selling our kids' information, and that we have transparency around the process.' State Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha said it shouldn't be 'too cumbersome' to tell parents whether their children's data is being sold. State Sen. Kathleen Kauth of the Millard area said she agreed with the aim of the bill and supported it, but she also wanted some guardrails in place, such as possibly exempting physical security information. Lawmakers signaled they might be moving away from Conrad's goals after voting 27-16 against 'stylistic changes' in an amendment she offered, largely focused on small tweaks in the bill that opponents had pointed out. Kauth and Hughes were the only Republicans to support those changes. Lawmakers had not yet gotten to a vote on Hallstrom's amendment or LB 31 overall. Hughes said many school districts have technology vendors sign a student data privacy agreement explicitly saying what will happen with the data. She suggested making such agreements a requirement, to help in the case of data hacks or breaches. State Sen. Terrell McKinney of Omaha agreed with Conrad about the ease of implementing the bill. He said, 'It's always too much work when you should just do the right thing.' 'This should be simple, unless there's like a million surveillance tools they're using, and student surveys they're using, or they, like, got some double oh seven, I Spy, MI6 type of stuff going on,' he said. State Sen. Bob Andersen, whose Sarpy County district includes Gretna Public Schools, read a letter from his superintendent questioning a lack of definitions in the bill, such as 'tracking system' or what tools are of 'legitimate use,' could lead to subjectivity in implementing the bill. Conrad repeatedly pushed back on her colleagues and told them to not use 'straw man' or 'red herring' arguments and not to get 'toiled up in personal battles or misinformation.' She told her colleagues that, if needed, she would step out of the way. 'Friends, if the problem is perhaps me or you don't like my politics, or you're upset about my work on other bills, I understand that, and I will work if need be to find a substitute sponsor for this legislation because I don't care to get the credit,' Conrad said. 'I care that this important issue moves forward.' The name and contact information for each private company, vendor or governmental entity providing such technology. The cost to purchase or maintain each surveillance, monitoring or tracking tool. A description of each tool, including privacy protection measures and data collection or sharing and usage activities. Whether a parent can opt their child out of being subjected to the tool. If and how the collected data will be shared with law enforcement or implicate punitive actions under the state's Student Discipline Act. How such tools ensure proper accommodation for students with disabilities or individualized education programs. How biometric or personally identifiable information is stored, shared or sold with the entity providing such tools. Clearly delineate what remedies are available to students and parents for possible privacy violations related to the tools, including the state's Consumer Protection Act and the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act (to possibly sue schools). SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
07-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Nebraska bills to catalog school ‘mass surveillance' tools, library books advance from Ed Committee
State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln questions State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil during an Education Committee hearing on a trio of resolutions regarding K-12 education that Murman introduced. July 31, 2023. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — A Nebraska legislative committee Thursday advanced multiple legislative bills seeking public catalogs of student surveillance tools, surveys and library books in K-12 schools. Education Committee members voted 7-0, with one member absent, to advance Legislative Bill 31 on student surveillance tools, from State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln. The committee also voted 6-1 to advance LB 390 on libraries, from State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil, the committee chair. State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha opposed the libraries bill. The committee also voted 6-0 to advance a related bill from Murman, LB 428, which requires that parents be able to review non-anonymous surveys before they are given to students and be able to exempt their child from participating. No survey requesting sexual information of a student could be administered in kindergarten through grade six. The bill was amended to require that parents receive notification at least 15 days before any such survey is administered, rather than at least 30 days. On that bill, Hunt was 'present, not voting.' Conrad's LB 31 garnered widespread support across the political spectrum, including from parents and advocates seeking greater access to school materials and criticizing school content that they described as obscene. Some noted in writing that they've never agreed with Conrad, a pragmatic progressive in her 11th year at the Legislature, but that they saw her LB 31 as a top priority. At a public hearing Tuesday, Conrad said the bill doesn't ban such surveillance tools or surveys but seeks to protect student information, including after nationwide data hacks and breaches. 'This is about parental rights. This is about student privacy. And this is about getting it right for taxpayers,' Conrad testified. Conrad said the bill is about creating an inventory of such tools and, by the start of the 2026-2027 school year, requiring districts to have a written policy stipulating what standards and guidelines oversee the purchase and use of 'tools of mass surveillance.' There are 245 public school districts in the state. At a minimum, such policies would require school districts to specifically identify and inventory the type of surveillance tools or student surveys that gather personal information being considered for use or actually used in the school district. The disclosed information would need to include: The name and contact information for each private company, vendor or governmental entity providing such technology. The cost to purchase or maintain each surveillance, monitoring or tracking tool. A description of each tool, including privacy protection measures and data collection or sharing and usage activities. Whether a parent can opt their child out of being subjected to the tool. If and how the collected data will be shared with law enforcement or implicate punitive actions under the state's Student Discipline Act. How such tools ensure proper accommodation for students with disabilities or individualized education programs. How biometric or personally identifiable information is stored, shared or sold with the entity providing such tools. Clearly delineate what remedies are available to students and parents for possible privacy violations related to the tools, including the state's Consumer Protection Act and the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act (to possibly sue schools). Kyle McGowan testified against the bill Tuesday on behalf of multiple organizations, including the Nebraska Council of School Administrators, Schools Taking Action for Nebraska Children's Education, Greater Nebraska Schools Association, Nebraska Rural Community Schools Association and the Nebraska State Education Association. McGowan said federal legislation also already protects student information and data. Types of surveillance identified in the bill include digital hall passes, anti-vape devices, cameras, fingerprint swipes and electronic surveys. In the case of hall passes, McGowan said, they could help identify whether something 'nefarious' is going on that a student's parents should be notified of. This could involve keeping students with 'bad blood' separated or giving clues as to whether a student might have health issues. Chip Kay, superintendent of Columbus Public Schools, said the bill could lead to an unfunded mandate and increase staff duties otherwise needed to ensure safety. He said the tools are used expressly for enhancing student and staff well-being and safety, not 'mass surveillance' as the bill states. Kay said the description is misleading and creates a false narrative for parents. Todd Tripple, an assistant superintendent for Millard Public Schools, wrote that safety and security is a top priority for the district, which works closely with law enforcement agencies. He said the bill could unintentionally reveal areas of vulnerabilities and expose risk. 'Safeguarding security plans is critical to ensuring the safety of our students and staff,' Tripple wrote. Kirk Langer, chief information officer for Lincoln Public Schools, a slice of which Conrad represents and where she has children attending, said contracts for many surveillance tools are already a matter of public record. McGowan said he agreed students are being monitored more than they ever were before, but part of that is because 'schools can be a dangerous place, a deadly place, which is disgusting.' 'It would fall upon us to make sure, as well I think as a community, that we send our students to school, expecting them to come home safe,' McGowan said. 'And that means monitoring what they're doing.' Kathy Faucher, an anti-money laundering officer and financial crimes analyst, testified in favor of the bill as a parent and grandparent, describing it is 'long overdue.' She pointed to surveillance tools as a burdensome cost to education that could actually threaten students' safety or security, including in cyberattacks that could disclose their sensitive information. Conrad told her committee that they shouldn't reflexively start off trusting that every tool being pushed to school boards is good. She testified that sometimes in politics all sides are speaking so loudly that they can't hear each other or identify common ground. She's told schools that if they will work in good faith on technical clarifications or improvements, she is 'all in.' 'If their true motivating intent is to kill this bill, then I'm not interested in those kinds of negotiations,' Conrad said. 'Our kids' privacy, parents' rights and taxpayer interests deserve no less than our full attention in moving forward with this policy directive.' A separate type of cataloging comes in Murman's LB 390, which would require all public school districts to adopt a policy related to the rights of parents to access school library materials. This would require creating a public online or hard-copy catalog of all books in the district's libraries, categorized by school building. Parents also could opt in for automatic email notification, or other electronic notification, when their student checks out a book. The book title, author and due date to return the book also would be included in the notice. Murman said it's an important next step after the Legislature updated parental access to curriculum content and training last year. Hughes, a substitute teacher and former school board member, said a concern was for districts that didn't have online capability. Committee staff said that applies to fewer than 10 districts statewide. Conrad and Hunt said they weren't worried about what their children were checking out from the library, just that they were engaged. Hunt said passing a law was too heavy and that it's up to parents to talk to their children directly or to reach out to the school or librarian. State Sens. Glen Meyer of Pender and Dan Lonowski of Hastings questioned how librarians would juggle individual family requests in those cases. Hunt noted part of her concern was the government reaching into schools where there is already a lot of surveillance. She noted some students are in abusive or controlling households, such as some LGBTQ children who might not feel accepted or who might risk being kicked out of their homes if their parents find out they are LGBTQ. Murman said it was important for parents to have access, though he told Hunt he recognized there are some abusive parents. 'It's not about book burning or anything like that,' Murman told the Examiner. 'It's just about parents knowing what is available in the public school library to their student, their minor children.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
