Latest news with #TimRoyers
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lawmakers unlikely to lower minimum retirement age for Nebraska school employees
Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, center, talks about 2025 priorities for the teachers union. Jan. 28, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — Senators and school administrators expressed hesitation Wednesday in lowering, back to age 55, the minimum retirement age at which Nebraska school employees can step down with full benefits. Currently, eligible school employees face what is known as the 'Rule of 85,' whereby if someone's age plus years of service exceeds 85, that person can retire without any reductions in benefits. Employees who started before July 2018 can retire as young as 55, but employees hired after have to wait until at least age 60. Tim Royers, president of the NSEA, said an amendment to reverse that 'poor decision' would have little financial or staffing impact and could incentivize young educators to look ahead to retirement. 'Our young educators deserve the same flexibility that I and other veteran teachers enjoy when it comes to deciding when we turn off the classroom lights for the last time,' Royers said at a Wednesday hearing on the proposed amendment, which he supported. The Nebraska Council of School Administrators and the Nebraska Association of School Boards opposed the change. Lawmakers advance changes to Nebraska school retirement plan to help close budget hole Royers said it would be in the best interest of a teacher who, at age 55, already has 30 years of service, to step back if they're exhausted rather than being forced to work five more years. State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln, chair of the Legislature's Nebraska Retirement Systems Committee, proposed the change as a deal with the NSEA. In return, the State of Nebraska would agree to withhold annual contributions to the school retirement plan for the next two years before going to a stair-stepped contribution system based on the plan's funding level. The amendment comes to Legislative Bill 645, which was introduced by Ballard on behalf of Gov. Jim Pillen and seeks to change the annual contribution levels for the state, employees and school districts. The school retirement plan for employees statewide outside of Omaha Public Schools (who have a separate pension plan) is currently 99.91% funded. If passed, the current version of LB 645 is expected to save the state about $80 million. With the new amendment, the state would save approximately $20 million more. State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, who has consistently opposed a shaky negotiations process behind LB 645, has repeatedly asked why the school plan had to be changed now. Royers said the original LB 645, which would have offered no reduced contributions to school employees or employers, was a 'poor bill' that he said was brought for the wrong reasons, mainly to help plug the state's nearly half-a-billion-dollar projected budget deficit. However, Royers said it presented a rare chance to 'force' a conversation on the plan, leading to an amended bill that could give the average school teacher more than $1,000 in annual take-home pay because of reduced contributions. Now, he views the amended bill as a way to give hard-working employees a benefit and put them on a more 'equal playing field.' Royers said he has to look for any wins for educators in a political environment where he said the 'political will' makes such victories 'candidly, limited.' Conrad asked Royers what happens if he is wrong about the feasibility of the amended bill, to which Royers responded that he hopes he's not. He pointed to an actuarial study showing that the amended LB 645 and a lower Rule of 85 could be financially feasible. Tim Hruza, appearing on behalf of the school administrators association, said the organization wanted a new actuarial study to fully understand the impact of a modified Rule of 85. But if the changes have to wait another year, Royers said he's OK with that. 'If the end result of this is we've had this conversation, it's on the radar but it's not going to be something we get to until next year,' Royers said, 'I'm perfectly fine with that.' LB 645 will return for the second of three stages of debate on Thursday. Ballard said he is likely to withdraw the amendment that was considered Wednesday. The full state budget will need to advance from the Appropriations Committee by next Tuesday, with debate beginning May 6. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
13-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
‘Not quite there yet': Nebraska teachers union now ‘neutral' on proposed retirement tweaks
Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, leads a news conference highlighting 2025 priorities for teachers statewide. Jan. 28, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — Nebraska's teachers union will no longer oppose a governor-backed bill to tweak the state's school retirement plan, partly due to an amendment that could also benefit teachers. The Nebraska State Education Association formally shifted its stance this week, two months after urging caution and encouraging teachers statewide to speak out against Legislative Bill 645, which was introduced by State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln at Gov. Jim Pillen's request. The bill would create stepped-down contribution levels from the state to the school retirement plan, depending on its actuarial funding level. As of July 1, the plan was 99.9% funded. If passed, LB 645 would drop the state's annual contributions toward the retirement plan based on statewide school employee payroll. Once the plan reaches 100% funding, the state would no longer automatically contribute year over year. A Feb. 13 amendment from Ballard proposes similar changes to teacher and other employee contributions depending on actuarial funding, which could save teachers money each month, helping lead to the changed NSEA position. 'I think this is a win-win,' Ballard said of the amendment. 'In my opinion, this is the teachers' money. It's a real-world take-home pay increase for teachers.' The amendment would also limit the modified state contribution levels to three tiers, instead of six as in the original LB 645. The teachers union had originally said the bill would 'raid' teacher pensions, which director Kenny Zoeller of the governor's Policy Research Office said was a 'flat-out lie' because LB 645 wouldn't touch 'hard-working dollars.' NSEA President Tim Royers, in a Feb. 20 emailed video to NSEA members addressing the Ballard amendment, credited his members for the change. 'We would not be here delivering this good news without you using your voice the way that you did, to help those lawmakers see that we need to build a better version of this bill that puts the educators of the state at the forefront of what it intends to do,' Royers said at the time. He described the amendment as 'version 2.0 of the bill.' The state currently contributes 2% of school employee payroll statewide to the pension plan, while employees contribute 9.77% of their salaries and school districts contribute 9.88% of their employees' salaries. This means that for the current fiscal year, with an estimated $2.5 billion payroll for school employees statewide, the required contributions would be: State of Nebraska (2%): $50.1 million. School employees (9.77%): $244.8 million. School districts (9.88%): $247.6 million. Zoeller said that the changes for the state would free up funds for education investments and are not designed to help plug a projected budget shortfall of $457 million prior to any legislative action. Royers has said it was OK for the state to reduce its contributions but that school employees and the teachers he represents should also be part of the conversation. Under Ballard's amendment, the plan would require different contributions at three levels of funding: less than 96% actuarially funded, between 96% and once the plan is 100% actuarially funded. When the plan is 96% or more funded, but not 100%, school employee contributions would fall to 7.28% of their salaries, and the state would contribute 0.7% of school employees' payroll. Once the plan reaches 100% funded, the state would pull out of funding. Lawmakers would continue to need to add funding in volatile years in which legally set contribution levels aren't enough to keep the plan afloat. Contribution levels would revert to current levels if the plan drops below 96% funded. Laura Strimple, a spokesperson for Pillen, repeated Pillen's firm stance that efficiencies can be found 'in all aspects of state government,' which she said includes the school retirement plan. 'With a nearly fully funded plan, the Legislature should decide how we can save taxpayer money and directly increase teacher pay,' Strimple said. Such changes to state retirement plans require an actuarial study on possible impacts. The study for LB 645 and its amendment was completed late last week, with actuaries writing that the changes would create more volatility and risk. The study does not specify a 'yes' or 'no' to whether the state could afford the changes. The full actuarial study on Legislative Bill 645 and its amendment is available here. Actuaries predicted the school retirement plan, if Ballard's amended bill became law, would be fully funded about 68% of the time, and at least 96% funded nearly three-fourths of the time. However, the actuaries also gave a 43% chance that the retirement plan could drop below 96% funding before 2035, and a 52% chance before 2045. This would return the 2.5% payroll fee to teachers in a given year, which the actuaries wrote could catch some employees off guard. 'Given the probability of such an event, it might be prudent to ensure members are fully aware of the likelihood of such an adjustment occurring to avoid a surprise on the members' behalf,' the study states. Royers said the study didn't provide all the information his union wanted about the proposal's viability and that a new review methodology left him and his team 'not quite sure, candidly, how to parse the data.' 'That's honestly one of the main reasons why we're coming in neutral,' Royers said Wednesday. 'We want to make sure that what we're doing is going to keep the plan sound for the next 10, 20 years, and we just don't feel that what that study said tells us one way or another.' Royers described the study as asking 'how much oil is in the car,' yet the response was about 'how the brakes are doing.' Ballard's bill and amendment would not decrease contribution levels for school districts, but Royers said there is some 'wiggle room' to bring districts to the table while benefiting the state and teachers. Doing so could lead to property tax relief, repurposing those payroll obligations toward teacher salaries or both, Royers said, and could be a win for communities on tax relief or educators on pay increases. Asked whether the bill could pair with a separate NSEA priority, LB 440, to cover 6 weeks of paid family and medical leave for all teachers during or after significant life events, Royers said it's possible. LB 440, the 2025 priority bill of State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha, would impose a 0.35% payroll fee on teachers, which school districts would also match, to cover the group benefit. The current estimated payroll this fiscal year for all school employees (not just teachers as under LB 440) would mean the state's 245 school districts, mostly funded through property taxes or state dollars, would need to cover about $8.8 million. This would be less if limited to teachers. 'Synergy is great when you have multiple bills, but we also recognize a bill could fail,' Royers said of the Spivey and Ballard bills. 'We don't want to build our plan around both bills passing.' Royers said he's confident that the NSEA, Ballard and Pillen can find a path forward on school retirement. 'We think ultimately we'll land on a good bill,' Royers said. 'We're just not quite there yet.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
31-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Nebraskans want and support strong public schools
Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, leads a news conference highlighting 2025 priorities for teachers statewide. Jan. 28, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) In Nebraska, we have a constitutional obligation to provide education for our children in the common (public) schools. It is an obligation we take very seriously. And in that obligation, we recognize that we need to provide a variety of learning environments for our students and that parents should have a say in determining that environment. That is why, for more than 30 years, Nebraska's option enrollment program has enabled tens of thousands of students to choose the public school that best fits their needs, even if that school is not the one right down the street. In fact, in my home community of Omaha, in Millard, roughly one in four students choose to attend a public school that is not their neighborhood school. Proponents of measures that would divert public resources to private schools often claim that public school advocates do not believe in choice. Nothing could be further from the truth. We believe that if a school is funded through public dollars, it should be publicly accountable and should follow the most important belief we hold: that we have the privilege of educating all students who come through our doors. During the debate on the first version of the 'Opportunity Scholarships' voucher bill, an amendment was proposed to ensure that was the case. The amendment simply required that any private school receiving a publicly funded scholarship would be prohibited from discriminating against students based on elements like race, religion, sexual orientation or disability. Supporters of the voucher bill rejected that amendment. We strongly believe that education policies should meet the needs of all students. Voucher supporters do not agree. Across the river, in Iowa, we are watching in real time as that state's school voucher program becomes a massive subsidy for the wealthy. Only 12% of the applicants to Iowa's program had previously attended a public school. The average income of a family applying for a voucher to move from a public school to a private school in Iowa is more than $128,000. Perhaps most concerning is the fact that since Iowa passed its voucher program, private school tuition has increased by 25%. Nebraska needs to heed the warnings from other states. The research has been comprehensive and clear: Large-scale voucher programs do not improve academic outcomes. In fact, in a comprehensive report that was done by Indiana University, after reviewing more than a dozen studies, the report concluded that, 'As programs grew in size, the results turned negative, often to a remarkably large degree virtually unrivaled in education research.' These programs not only fail to improve academic outcomes, they also drain a disproportionate number of resources away from our public schools. The Nebraska Legislative Fiscal Office noted that the voucher programs proposed would not reduce public school expenses. In fact, depending on who takes these vouchers, the proposed programs could result in a loss of millions of dollars of state aid to public schools. Sadly, that isn't a hypothetical. In Arizona, its voucher program has ballooned to nearly $1 billion in its cost to taxpayers — while the Isaac Public School District does not even have enough money to pay its staff. Importantly, the people of Nebraska saw the failings in these other states and reinforced their commitment to a school system that welcomes all students, regardless of their background. In November, hundreds of thousands of Nebraskans voted to support their public schools and to reject vouchers for the fourth time in our state's history. The result was consistent across the state, with a majority in 82 of Nebraska's 93 counties voting to repeal the voucher bill. Our lawmakers in the Legislature should respect the will of the people and acknowledge that Nebraskans do not support using public funds to pay for private schools. While the evidence may be clear that a voucher program will not improve the educational outcomes in Nebraska, that does not mean we are content with the current state of education. We believe we need to and can improve on how we serve our students in our public schools. Yet research, as well as our fundamental belief in public education, leads us to know that voucher schemes are not the solution. We have proposed several measures in this Legislative session that would help address our state's ongoing teacher retention challenges. We are also supporting measures like Sen. Margo Juarez's Legislative Bill 161, which would increase funding for public preschool. States that have demonstrated the greatest progress in improving math and reading outcomes for students are those that have committed to expanding preschool access. We want every child in our state to have the best possible learning environment. The evidence is clear that vouchers are not the answer. The answer is strengthening our Nebraska public schools. Tim Royers, a public school educator and Nebraska's 2016 Teacher of the Year, is president of the Nebraska State Education Association. He taught in the Millard Public Schools. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
29-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
NSEA, lawmakers outline 2025 priorities after survey of nearly 10,000 Nebraska teachers
Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, leads a news conference highlighting 2025 priorities for teachers statewide. Jan. 28, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — The Nebraska State Education Association sought to rally support Tuesday for a package of legislation designed after a survey of nearly 10,000 teachers statewide. Tim Royers, president of the state teacher's union, joined with seven lawmakers to unveil the top 2025 priorities for the NSEA. The proposals generally seek to increase state support for teachers, such as retention bonuses, stipends for student teachers, reimbursements for school supplies and paid family and medical leave. 'One of the things that we know in Nebraska is that without our teachers, Nebraska has no future,' State Sen. Wendy DeBoer of Omaha said at a morning news conference. The eight bills presented Tuesday were introduced by State Sens. Margo Juarez of Omaha, Jason Prokop of Lincoln, George Dungan of Lincoln, Ashlei Spivey of Omaha and Danielle Conrad of Lincoln. All are Democrats in the officially nonpartisan Legislature. Royers said the legislation is part of NSEA's goal to ensure all Nebraska children get to receive a great public education, which he said often depends on highly qualified teachers. In the fall, the NSEA received written comments from thousands of teachers, whose feedback ranged from workplace conditions to compensation and teachers' plans for the future. Royers said only 8% of respondents reported feeling that the Legislature takes them into account when crafting education policy, and about 11% said the state currently incentivizes them to stay in the profession. More than a quarter of educators, Royers continued, are unsure if they want to continue teaching after this school year 'unless something meaningfully changes.' 'Candidly, educators don't really feel like they have folks in their corner right now,' Royers said. One of the 'boldest' 2025 ideas, Royers said, comes from Spivey's Legislative Bill 440. It would establish an additional 0.35% payroll tax on teachers, matched by local school districts, to offer teachers six weeks of paid family and medical leave by funding long-term substitute teachers. For a teacher making $60,000, that would amount to a monthly fee of $17.50. 'For less than $20 a month out of a teacher's paycheck, they would get access to a profound benefit,' Royers said. The focus of the Spivey legislation started on young women in teaching sometimes being forced to leave the profession after taking one or two months of unpaid leave because they had a child early in their career. But the NSEA began to see other needs, too, Royers said, such as teachers who faced cancer diagnoses or teachers who waited seven years to even attempt having kids, trying to save up enough days off 'so they wouldn't take that hit.' 'No person should have to make family decisions based on when their paid leave is sufficient for them to do that,' Royers said. Juarez, a former school board member for Omaha Public Schools and former paraeducator, is seeking to create retention bonuses for paraeducators through LB 524, $1,000 for a para working an average of 28 hours per week, or proportional for a paraeducator working less. Her LB 523 would establish a statewide student teacher stipend program, paying them $4,000 per teaching semester. Juarez said the underpaid and unpaid labor that teachers are expected to offer when training for the job is 'extreme,' which begins with student teaching. Quality educators, she said, are sometimes turned away because the financial burden. Another Juarez bill, LB 161, would increase how much the state pays school districts for full-time early childhood students. The bill does not yet have a cost estimate from the Legislature. Currently, all school districts get about $1,500 in state aid for each K-12 student, but districts receive roughly 60% of that amount, or $900, for each early childhood student. Juarez's bill would raise that to 100% for the foundation aid. 'Education is more likely for early childhood students to earn higher wages later on, live healthier lives and avoid incarceration, raise strong families and contribute to society,' Juarez said. Prokop's LB 282 would similarly seek to support teachers who 'pour their hearts and souls' into their classrooms and students as well as their wallets, with one study indicating teachers annually pay average out-of-pocket costs on school supplies of about $860. His bill would establish up to $300 in reimbursements through the State Board of Education for qualified teaching supplies. If all of Nebraska's approximate 27,000 teachers applied for the reimbursement, the Nebraska Department of Education estimates it would cost $8.1 million annually. The Legislature's fiscal office estimated that 60% of teachers might use the funds, which would also gain $300,000 to $400,000 in additional state revenue through increased teacher income. 'While it's about acknowledging that financial commitment they've made to the students, it's really more about the acknowledgment that they just really care about their kids and the students that they are teaching,' Prokop said. LB 411, from State Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln, would establish baseline retention grants for all teachers, beginning at $2,500 for teachers in years one through six of service and increasing to $4,000 for teachers in their 16th or later. 'One of the things that we know in Nebraska is that without our teachers, Nebraska has no future.' – State Sen. Wendy DeBoer of Omaha Excluding high-need retention grants, Dungan's program could annually cost between $66 million (if all teachers were in their first to sixth year of teaching) and $106 million (if all teachers were in their 16th year of teaching or beyond). If all teachers received one high-need retention grant before 2028, as allowed under the bill for certain subject area endorsements, that would cost an additional $132 million. DeBoer's LB 598 would increase state funding for school districts that provide teachers at least 60 minutes of non-instructional planning time daily. The bill would also allow school districts to apply for additional limited English proficiency program funding, based on need, and get additional funds based on the number of students with disabilities who are on Section 504 support plans. The last bill, LB 589, from State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, would allow school districts to be reimbursed for the costs of substitute teachers who cover special education teachers if they take a 'paperwork day' to complete documentation, reporting and compliance requirements. The bill does not yet have a cost estimate from the Legislature. Four such days could be reimbursed annually. 'Making small changes like that, that don't come with a big price tag to state taxpayers, can make a world of difference for the teachers and the children that they are serving,' Conrad said. Conrad and Royers indicated the proposed legislation is in direct response to legislation that they said would undermine teachers' ability to serve kids. That includes continued efforts to divert state funds for private schools, which Conrad described as a 'slap in the face' to voters. 'Let's be clear: We're not content to just play defense when it comes to standing up for our schools and our kids and our teachers and our incredible public education system,' she said. Royers said the NSEA will also partner with State Sens. Kathleen Kauth and John Fredrickson, both of Omaha, on studies that could inform possible future legislation around alternate certification pathways for high school teachers and for high behavioral needs care facilities. A third planned interim study would examine how to improve higher education compensation. Royers said even with a projected budget shortfall for the state, he and senators are confident they'll find the support for proposals that are 'perfectly in line' with the Education Future Fund that Gov. Jim Pillen carved out in 2023 to ensure continued state support for education. 'Some of these bills that you just heard about today aren't going to get over the finish line this year,' Royers said. 'It might take us a few tries, but I can tell you that by simply introducing all of these proposals, it's already making a difference in how educators feel in this state.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
29-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
NSEA, lawmakers outline 2025 priorities after survey of nearly 10,000 Nebraska teachers
Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, leads a news conference highlighting 2025 priorities for teachers statewide. Jan. 28, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — The Nebraska State Education Association sought to rally support Tuesday for a package of legislation designed after a survey of nearly 10,000 teachers statewide. Tim Royers, president of the state teacher's union, joined with seven lawmakers to unveil the top 2025 priorities for the NSEA. The proposals generally seek to increase state support for teachers, such as retention bonuses, stipends for student teachers, reimbursements for school supplies and paid family and medical leave. 'One of the things that we know in Nebraska is that without our teachers, Nebraska has no future,' State Sen. Wendy DeBoer of Omaha said at a morning news conference. The eight bills presented Tuesday were introduced by State Sens. Margo Juarez of Omaha, Jason Prokop of Lincoln, George Dungan of Lincoln, Ashlei Spivey of Omaha and Danielle Conrad of Lincoln. All are Democrats in the officially nonpartisan Legislature. Royers said the legislation is part of NSEA's goal to ensure all Nebraska children get to receive a great public education, which he said often depends on highly qualified teachers. In the fall, the NSEA received written comments from thousands of teachers, whose feedback ranged from workplace conditions to compensation and teachers' plans for the future. Royers said only 8% of respondents reported feeling that the Legislature takes them into account when crafting education policy, and about 11% said the state currently incentivizes them to stay in the profession. More than a quarter of educators, Royers continued, are unsure if they want to continue teaching after this school year 'unless something meaningfully changes.' 'Candidly, educators don't really feel like they have folks in their corner right now,' Royers said. One of the 'boldest' 2025 ideas, Royers said, comes from Spivey's Legislative Bill 440. It would establish an additional 0.35% payroll tax on teachers, matched by local school districts, to offer teachers six weeks of paid family and medical leave by funding long-term substitute teachers. For a teacher making $60,000, that would amount to a monthly fee of $17.50. 'For less than $20 a month out of a teacher's paycheck, they would get access to a profound benefit,' Royers said. The focus of the Spivey legislation started on young women in teaching sometimes being forced to leave the profession after taking one or two months of unpaid leave because they had a child early in their career. But the NSEA began to see other needs, too, Royers said, such as teachers who faced cancer diagnoses or teachers who waited seven years to even attempt having kids, trying to save up enough days off 'so they wouldn't take that hit.' 'No person should have to make family decisions based on when their paid leave is sufficient for them to do that,' Royers said. Juarez, a former school board member for Omaha Public Schools and former paraeducator, is seeking to create retention bonuses for paraeducators through LB 524, $1,000 for a para working an average of 28 hours per week, or proportional for a paraeducator working less. Her LB 523 would establish a statewide student teacher stipend program, paying them $4,000 per teaching semester. Juarez said the underpaid and unpaid labor that teachers are expected to offer when training for the job is 'extreme,' which begins with student teaching. Quality educators, she said, are sometimes turned away because the financial burden. Another Juarez bill, LB 161, would increase how much the state pays school districts for full-time early childhood students. The bill does not yet have a cost estimate from the Legislature. Currently, all school districts get about $1,500 in state aid for each K-12 student, but districts receive roughly 60% of that amount, or $900, for each early childhood student. Juarez's bill would raise that to 100% for the foundation aid. 'Education is more likely for early childhood students to earn higher wages later on, live healthier lives and avoid incarceration, raise strong families and contribute to society,' Juarez said. Prokop's LB 282 would similarly seek to support teachers who 'pour their hearts and souls' into their classrooms and students as well as their wallets, with one study indicating teachers annually pay average out-of-pocket costs on school supplies of about $860. His bill would establish up to $300 in reimbursements through the State Board of Education for qualified teaching supplies. If all of Nebraska's approximate 27,000 teachers applied for the reimbursement, the Nebraska Department of Education estimates it would cost $8.1 million annually. The Legislature's fiscal office estimated that 60% of teachers might use the funds, which would also gain $300,000 to $400,000 in additional state revenue through increased teacher income. 'While it's about acknowledging that financial commitment they've made to the students, it's really more about the acknowledgment that they just really care about their kids and the students that they are teaching,' Prokop said. LB 411, from State Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln, would establish baseline retention grants for all teachers, beginning at $2,500 for teachers in years one through six of service and increasing to $4,000 for teachers in their 16th or later. 'One of the things that we know in Nebraska is that without our teachers, Nebraska has no future.' – State Sen. Wendy DeBoer of Omaha Excluding high-need retention grants, Dungan's program could annually cost between $66 million (if all teachers were in their first to sixth year of teaching) and $106 million (if all teachers were in their 16th year of teaching or beyond). If all teachers received one high-need retention grant before 2028, as allowed under the bill for certain subject area endorsements, that would cost an additional $132 million. DeBoer's LB 598 would increase state funding for school districts that provide teachers at least 60 minutes of non-instructional planning time daily. The bill would also allow school districts to apply for additional limited English proficiency program funding, based on need, and get additional funds based on the number of students with disabilities who are on Section 504 support plans. The last bill, LB 589, from State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, would allow school districts to be reimbursed for the costs of substitute teachers who cover special education teachers if they take a 'paperwork day' to complete documentation, reporting and compliance requirements. The bill does not yet have a cost estimate from the Legislature. Four such days could be reimbursed annually. 'Making small changes like that, that don't come with a big price tag to state taxpayers, can make a world of difference for the teachers and the children that they are serving,' Conrad said. Conrad and Royers indicated the proposed legislation is in direct response to legislation that they said would undermine teachers' ability to serve kids. That includes continued efforts to divert state funds for private schools, which Conrad described as a 'slap in the face' to voters. 'Let's be clear: We're not content to just play defense when it comes to standing up for our schools and our kids and our teachers and our incredible public education system,' she said. Royers said the NSEA will also partner with State Sens. Kathleen Kauth and John Fredrickson, both of Omaha, on studies that could inform possible future legislation around alternate certification pathways for high school teachers and for high behavioral needs care facilities. A third planned interim study would examine how to improve higher education compensation. Royers said even with a projected budget shortfall for the state, he and senators are confident they'll find the support for proposals that are 'perfectly in line' with the Education Future Fund that Gov. Jim Pillen carved out in 2023 to ensure continued state support for education. 'Some of these bills that you just heard about today aren't going to get over the finish line this year,' Royers said. 'It might take us a few tries, but I can tell you that by simply introducing all of these proposals, it's already making a difference in how educators feel in this state.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
