2006
Week 15
April 14, 2006

Wow. This week has been the wildest of my six years in the legislature, with conflicting values, a few votes with no winners possible, intense negotiation and unexpected agreement. The Metro Omaha schools situation is dominant and very complex, so I will write only about it this week and leave the ending wrap-up to next week.

Omaha Public Schools (OPS) is the largest district in the state (45,000+) and has a 56% minority and 55% low income student population. A few years ago, under Federal rules, we ended busing for integration and went to neighborhood schools with optional enrollment to other schools when there is room. I was so proud of our diverse district when we passed a quarter of a billion dollar bond issue, with commitment to rebuild the low income neighborhood schools. The board has followed through in grand fashion, with six building projects in my district. My neighborhood grade school is over 90% African ancestry and is being completely rebuilt. Additional resources have been directed to these schools for operations, many have smaller class sizes, and principals have had more than the usual discretion is finding good teachers.

Almost every item in the above paragraph has been denied on the floor of the legislature this week. Distracting beyond words. I have visited with over 20 teachers and principals in low income schools to verify my facts. These educators are the ones who are doing it and they are rightfully proud of their work.

In the past several years OPS has said the district needs financial help and cooperation with other districts to overcome the imbalances. However, in my first five years in the legislature I was not contacted once. Not once, and I am on Appropriations.

Last June OPS announced they would claim over 20 schools in two neighboring districts, under an 1891 law that directs school districts to change with city boundaries. Since they had not used the law for 30 years, and since it would create chaos in two very fine Metro districts, I said on Day One that this would not and could not happen. For example, one district would lose two of its high schools but keep most of its high school students. Outrageous. However, I thought perhaps the threat could get something moving.

Unfortunately, and incomprehensibly, district leadership refused to set aside that club so that the real problems could be discussed. Several other districts formed a coalition and would not talk about anything except the "takeover." It has been maddening chaos. I have attended meetings beyond count where the words were pious and empty -- groups speaking only to themselves. Pastors, senators, mayor, governor, tried to get everyone to the table to talk. Each attempt was a dismal failure.

The legislature is responsible for education, by our Constitution. We assign the task to districts. We do not tell them how to educate, but when these, our "children," get in a fight we are the parent who has to bring order and guidelines. We have authority. Our Education Committee worked for months to develop a plan, which we adopted this week and the governor signed. Simply, it requires the districts to talk about education. The plan has two major statements: it sets up a somewhat complicated education council across two counties, with each district represented, to talk for two years before anything else happens, and it freezes the boundaries so the talk will be on education.

Senator Chambers used the structure to pull a "Gotcha" in the word of one headline. He has tried many ways to force the white community to publicly recognize that there is segregation in housing. ‘Some neighborhoods are different color than others.’ True! Plus, he is furious with the superintendent for enabling the neighborhood schools plan. So he was successful in attaching an amendment which mandated action to divide OPS into three districts along "community of interest" lines. I and others made a concerted attack on the plan, labeling it ‘mandated segregation’ and attaching an amendment that if a court struck it down the entire act came down. Even with that, we could get no more than ten votes, in a series of maneuvers. The senators were so angry with OPS for what they felt to be arrogance that they were determined to spank the leaders.

Two of our leaders were able to get Senator Chambers to remove the "community of interest" language, so that now the amendment is simply a 3-way split, with at least two high schools in each new district. Each district would have a high school with a high majority of a minority race. However, the morning TV news said "The legislature voted this week to divide OPS along racial lines." That is flat out not true. There are many racial lines, but we did not vote to follow them.

I maneuvered to get an amendment considered which would remove the 3-way split, set up a report back structure and continue to freeze the boundaries. Could count no more than 15 votes, so pulled the amendment. I joined with the Gretna senator, who represents a district which had not been involved in the fight, to set up a much simpler task force to report back, remove the 3-way, and freeze the boundaries. He is a true educator-statesman. With tears, he spoke of his commitment to education for low income families, his desire to have simple dialog for two years of cooling off, his passion for a Metro plan that would take us to a better future -- and then pulled his amendment in order to let the more complicated structure have a vote.

That is enough background to understand that I and others are not going to allow OPS to tear up other districts in a supposed cure of its own. Some have accused me of flip flopping when our four attempts to stop the split piece failed and I joined the freeze the boundaries side. Not at all. I have adamantly and consistently been for taking the boundary stick off the table, from Day One, and voted for any plan which forced the districts to quit this nonsense and to talk seriously about improving education in my neighborhood schools.

I was shocked into stubbornness on that point by OPS representatives, who contacted me this week to get my help to continue the stonewall and to sabotage any plan on the floor which would bring them to the table. My help would have made no difference, because by then many senators had figured that out and locked in their votes to take away the offensive boundaries club. I did not sleep much that night, as I realized that OPS leaders (NOT the teachers and principals to whom I talked) were committed to continue political chaos and we might have to go through another year of this madness. While education of our kids is pushed aside. I came back to the floor to fight with everything I had to adopt the committee bill and to force negotiation.

Will OPS be split into three? No, not if they come to the table with an earnest request to the other districts to help them in their educational objectives. I expect them to do that and the superintendent's comments in this morning's paper provide great promise. Amending action cannot come before winter, after the fall election when the small schools will be up for a vote. They will lose that vote and we can move past that emotional issue, and blaming urban senators, to deal with Metro school districts in an even way -- if the districts are planning together at that time. Obviously, these are sensitive matters that we cannot state in the press. However, they are not secret to anyone who knows the legislative process. We passed a statute this week and it will be thoroughly reviewed, with amendments reflecting the discussions of the council of the new "Learning Commuunity," when we meet again in January.

I am very hopeful. It has been a terrible week, with many emotions passionately expressed. Later, I will say more about the curious mix of motivations. I am glad that nothing passed by a close margin. We had 6 to 14 votes to spare on the critical motions. The body has stuck together to stop a fight among our children and to begin serious talk about how to do quality education in a tough setting.

Cheers

Lowen