Repeal of learning community common levy proposed

Members of the Omaha Learning Community would rely on individual levies for funding under a bill heard by the Education Committee Feb. 11.

Currently, the eleven member school districts receive revenue raised from a common 95-cent levy, which is distributed proportionally based upon each district’s formula need minus state aid and other receipts. LB865, introduced by Papillion Sen. Jim Smith, would eliminate the common levy and return each district to an individual levy.

Smith said the current system pits school districts against each other and fails to deliver the funds where they are needed most. He said contrary to some speculation, the bill is not an attempt to abolish the learning community.

“Don’t buy into the thought that to eliminate the common levy, to address the funding deficiencies, that you would have to get rid of the learning community,” he said. “Let the learning community do what it does and let the Legislature find a method to adequately address the learning needs of children living in poverty in the member districts.”

LB865 also would change the calculation of state aid to schools under the Tax Equity and Educational Opportunities Support Act (TEEOSA). Currently, aid for the 11 member districts is calculated collectively. Under the bill, each member district’s aid would be calculated individually.

The current funding formula for the learning community produces $461 million in property taxes. The bill would increase state aid to schools by an estimated $3.8 million. The bill also would repeal the maximum 2-cent special building fund levy, which currently produces $9.7 million in revenue.

Papillion-La Vista School District Superintendent Andrew Rikli testified in support of the bill. He said enrollment and student needs are increasing in his district, while funding has remained stagnant.

“Most of the member districts are already levying and taxing at the max,” he said. “[The common levy] produces less state aid for member districts than if they were funded individually. The distribution formula is sending the dollars in the wrong direction. Some of the districts with the most profound needs are getting some of the least resources.”

Ted Stillwell, chief executive officer of the Omaha Learning Community, opposed the bill, saying another solution is possible.

“There is some commonality among these member districts. There are issues that affect all of them, even though they’re not the same in each district,” he said. “Further examination is well-warranted; it deserves more attention that just looking at it every five or six years.”

The committee took no immediate action on the bill.