001web. >> We are beginning that now. >> Thank you. >> The February 27th state board meeting will now come to order. Good afternoon and welcome to the February 27th, 2026 State Board of Education meeting. Board members, please engage your microphones before speaking and turn them off when you are finished speaking. Board members who are joining virtually, please unmute yourself before speaking and mute when you are finished speaking. Please note that board members may be using their cell phones and laptop computers to access the agenda and information related to this meeting. Would the recording secretary please call the role? >> Kristen Christensen here. >> Maggie Douglas >> here. >> Lisa Shonhoff >> here. >> Liz Rener >> here. >> Kirk Penner >> present. Sher Jones >> here. >> Elizabeth Tegmmeer >> here. >> Deborah Ner >>
002here. >> Commissioner Maher >> here. >> All present. >> Quorum is established. Please rise and join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Information regarding the Open Meetings Act is posted as you enter the room from the main entrance doors. The Open Meetings Act is also posted on the State Board of Education's website. Um, I'll pause just a moment to remind all board members that we will use the same procedure we used on Tuesday. Um, if you would like to speak on Zoom, please use the virtual hand raising. And if you are in the meeting room in Lincoln, please address the chair um so that
003you may speak. This is now the um public comment period. As I understand, there are no public comment in person. However, I will read the instructions as we do have some online. Um, this period of the meeting may be available to any person who wishes to address the board on any matter that is on the agenda or within the board's authority to act. Up to 90 minutes will be allowed for the public comment period. A majority of members present in voting may take action to extend the total amount of time allowed for the public comment period. A majority of members present in voting may also take action to allow or terminate public comment at any time during a meeting. If you are not signed in and wish to speak, please sign in at this time.
004Those wishing to speak via Zoom must be signed in via the chat function. Those wishing to speak in person must be signed in at the table outside of the meeting room. Each individual speaking to the board via Zoom will be required to provide the sign-in card information in the chat function for identification of oneself. Individuals are required to include their name, organizations represented, address, city, state, and agenda item or topic that is within the board's authority to act. Each individual speaking to the board in person will be required to complete a sign-in card for identification of oneself. Individuals are required to include on the sign-in card their name, address, name of any organization represented an agenda item or topic that is within the board's authority to act. Individuals may be prohibited to speak in public
005comment if the sign-in card does not include the required information. Persons speaking to the board during public comment should state their name, city, and state at the beginning of their allotted time and may submit printed materials for the board, but may not use any other form of media. Anyone refusing to be identified will be prohibited from speaking. Each person may address the board for up to 5 minutes. A majority of members present in voting may take action to reduce or extend the amount of individual time allotted to all speakers. If at any time persons appearing before the board exceed the time limitations set forth in this policy or on the agenda or become abusive or threatening in language or behavior, it shall be the responsibility of the president to refuse permission to continue to address
006the board. We have no um in-person comments and we have two it looks like online. We will begin with Tracy Baker. Hi, are you able to hear me? >> Yes. >> Okay, thank you. Uh, my name is Tracy Baker. Uh, T R A C E B A K E R. My address is 7806 uh North 157th Street in Bennington, Nebraska. and I'm here to um provide my thoughts on the learning community um plan that we will be discuss you guys will be discussing later today. Um public education cannot continue to demand unlimited funding while refusing measurable accountability. We are being asked to fund a statemandated program without a clear performance metrics, without defined benchmarks, and without a transparent plan to evaluate whether it works. That is not innovation. That is institutional complacency. In the private
007sector, if a department cannot demonstrate results, it does not receive indefinite funding. If goals are not met, leadership restructures, reallocates, or better yet defunds. That is called responsible management. It is how organizations survive. Yet in public education, we are too often told that spending itself is proof of commitment and that questioning results is somehow disloyal to the mission. We are expected to approve spending first and ask questions later or worse never. Let's be clear about the mission. The sole responsibility of public education is to educate children, not to replace parenting, not to compensate for every social failure, not to function as a catch-all solution for poverty, housing instability or family breakdown. Schools cannot and should not be expected to solve every external challenge a child faces. And we we must confront an uncomfortable truth. Increasing
008spending in high poverty schools by itself does not guarantee better educa, excuse me, better educational outcomes. And yet over and over, that is exactly what we are being asked to do. Despite decades of data showing that money without accountability, structure, and measurable goals does not automatically translate into academic success. Funding is a tool, not a strategy. Meanwhile, we are among the highest property tax states in the nation in order to fund our public schools. Families are stretched thin. Seniors are being taxed out of their homes. Working households are sacrificing year after year to sustain the system. With that level of financial burden comes an even greater obligation to ensure that every dollar produces measurable academic results. Good intentions are not outcomes. Mandates are not results. Funding is not proof of effectiveness. If this program cannot
009clearly define what success looks like, how will it be measured? When will it be evaluated? And what will happen if it fails, then approving it is not leadership. It is failing to do your job as responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars. Accountability is not anti-education. It is pro- studentent and pro- taxpayer. And in a state where citizens are already paying a premium to support public schools, we have a duty to demand measurable returns on that investment. Anything less is not stewardship. It is surrender. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Our next speaker is K. Jovin Chambers. Good afternoon. Can you hear me? Okay. Okay. >> Um, not very well. Can we Is there a way to increase his volume? >> How How is that? >> Um, meeting room. Are you guys getting it clearly
010or is it too soft? >> It it is very soft. >> Okay, thank you. Yeah, it's pretty soft. >> Let me try. Okay, how about now? >> That is much better. Thank you. >> All right, Bishop K. Javon Chambers, 5150 Ames Avenue, Omaha, Nebraska 68104. Also on behalf of the interdenominational ministerial alliance of metropolitan Omaha, I gave a statement on the 24th at your meeting and I believe I misspoke. So I'd like to for the record uh restate my position regarding the CAP. Um CAP strengthens early education. Uh it boosts reading. Uh it boosts attendance. It connects families with much needed support uh that they need to succeed. These are not theories. These are results uh built through years of partnership among the school districts, among educators and community organizations. So therefore, a no vote
011will dismantle programs that are working. A yes vote protects progress, protects collaboration, and protects the future of thousands of Nebraskans students. So, I'm calling on this board to stand with children, stand with families and educators by voting yes on the community action plan. I'll land there. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. There are no more public comments. No written public comment has been submitted. Agenda item 3.1. Is there a motion on item 3.1? >> Yes. I move to adopt the revised community achievement plan of the learning community of Douglas and Sarpie counties. >> Second. It has been moved and seconded to adopt the revised cap of the learning community of Douglas and Sarby counties. Is there any discussion on the motion? >> Sherry, please unmute yourself. Yes, I do have a statement I'd
012like to read. Although I stand by my vote of no on the learning community plan, I have since learned that the new plan removed the listing of the partnering organizations. My stated reason for voting as such was because of One World Health being included as an integral part of the plan. I stated four of my specific concerns during the February board meeting which can be found on NDE's website. I stand by these concerns and believe they are justified. According to statute, my reason is outside of the statute requirements. I cannot in good conscience vote yes and I cannot due to the statute requirements vote no. Thank you. Any other discussion? Lisa Sher, can you drop your little Yeah, your little hand on the computer, please. Thank you. >> Um I feel like I've kind of
013gone through things several times in the past few months publicly and um via email as well. Um, and so my vote will stand today as it has. Um, in education, we spend approximately $5 billion in the state of Nebraska. And in Omaha, we spend approximately $19,000 per pupil. Um, as I look through the CAT plan, I see some great things and I see some things that are um that I have serious concerns about. We have Omaha has um continued to be on need support to improve as their category and they have declining graduation rates as well as declining attendance rates. Their ACTs scores show that we have 20% proficient in ELA and 14% proficient in math. ENSCAST has 38% proficient in ELA and 29% proficient in math. So with that being said, um advancing a
014plan that has already proven ineffective, something needs to change in the plan. Many things that we have discussed already. Otherwise, we're just putting students at continued and predictable risk of underperformance. There are a great deal of things that we can do to improve this plan, but by voting yes today, you are reinforcing the very conditions that are holding students back rather than correcting the course of action. meeting our responsibility. To meet our responsibility of kids in Nebraska, we must move away from approaches that have shown to fail in delivering student achievement by the time they're um getting to third and fourth grade and beyond and fix the plan and do what we need to do to work together and improve so that we can meet the needs of all students in Nebraska. Any other comments?
015Um, I just I do have I do have a few thoughts um about this this plan and um I just wanted to look at and talk about accountability. Um, in the Omaha World Herald's article this week, I was accused of calling for penalties on our districts. Accountability is not a penalty. It's actually a feature of responsible oversight. The governing body's duty is to ensure systems deliver results. The Every Student Succeed Act lists four tiers of evidence and CAP is at the lowest level. This tier states it demonstrates a rationale. research formed theory with ongoing evaluation but no direct proof of academic impact. The school districts of the learning community have not provided this board with metrics demonstrating how their current plan has directly impacted academics. Since the proposed plan that we are voting on today
016has no substantive changes from the current one. I do not believe the perspective potential for this plan to impact academic equity is evident and clear. State statute clearly details what this board is required to look for in the cap. It states and I renew u my my thoughts from Tuesday. Um, it states that the plan has a high likelihood in the opinion of the state board based on the evidence presented of improving achievement equity and reducing the barriers reducing the impact of barriers to achievement. This plan falls short. And as I'm always faced with the question personally, if we're not teaching kids how to read, write, and do math, what are we even doing here? Any other comments? Right. Seeing none, I will repeat the motion. It is to adopt the revised cap of the
017learning community of Douglas and Sarpie counties. Would the recording secretary please call the role? Neri. >> Yes. >> Shonhoff. >> No. >> Tegmire. >> No. >> Henner. >> No. >> Christensen. >> Yes. >> Rener. >> Yes. >> Jones. I abstain. Douglas, >> yes. Four yes. Three nos, one abstain. >> The affirmative has it and the motion to adopt the revised cap of the learning community of Douglas and Sarpie County is adopted. Thank you to those who attended in person, who attended via Zoom, and who tuned in to the broadcast. The next meeting of the state board of education are scheduled for March 5th and 6th in 2020 2026 in Lincoln, Nebraska. The February 27th, 2026 state board meeting is now adjourned.