August 2025 State Board of Education Meeting

001The August board meeting will begin in two minutes. If everyone could find a seat, we will begin our board meeting. >> Good morning. How are you? >> I'm good. How are you? >> I'm good. Okay, if everyone could find a seat, we will begin. >> There is. >> Please find a seat. >> I know. I've never used the gaffle. >> Right. The August 8th state board meeting will now come to order. Good morning and welcome to the August 8th, 2025 State Board of Education meeting. Board members, please engage your microphones before speaking and turn them off 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. Live streaming is available through the state board of education

002website with 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 Tegmire >> here. >> Deborah Ner >> here. >> Commissioner Maher >> here. >> All present. >> Quorum is established. Please rise and join me in the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge algiance 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 doors. The Open Meetings Act is also posted on the State Board of Education's website. The next item of business is the

003commissioner's report. Commissioner Maher, please provide your report. items. Thank you. Good morning and welcome back. First, there are zero items that have been identified to be removed from the consent agenda. If board members wish to remove additional items or any items from the consent agenda, please fill out the form at this time. Remember that any items removed from the consent agenda will be taken up under additional business. Well, welcome back board members. had a month off. We all did from board meetings. And welcome back for August. August is such a fun month, not only because you return for this meeting, but because it marks the beginning of school for all of the kids across the state of Nebraska. Not only for school, but for all of fall activities and hopefully for a little bit of

004cooling off of the weather. Although I will take this over snow and ice any day. Um today I want to share a couple of key updates with you as we begin the school year. To begin, I'm excited to share updates with you on the school financing review commission. As you recall, with the passage of LB303, the school financing review commission was created and I or more more correctly the commissioner of education has been designated to chair that commission. The governor governor announced the other members of the commission in July and we will host our first meeting of that commission next Tuesday here at NDE in this room. The meeting is a public meeting so anybody is in is welcome to attend and we intend to broadcast that meeting around the state. So there will be

005no questions in terms of access to that commission. During the time in between appointment and our first meeting, my team and I have been busy meeting with stakeholders and researchers, developing a legislative history and overview of school finance policy in the state of Nebraska, and drafting bylaws for consideration by the commission next week. Since we are a public body, there will there will have to be some formal rules put in place. We are looking forward to the session with with the other members of the commission and looking forward to considering next steps as we leverage the immense expertise of the group over the next several months. And when I say the next several months, that doesn't mean there's an end date. If you remember, the the commission is set up to go on in perpetuity.

006So uh I don't know when it will end exactly but we have we have work to do particularly between now and the beginning of this next legislative s session. The next topic I was delighted to see many of you at NDE day last month. I'm extremely extremely grateful for our communications team led by David Jesperson and the phenomenal work that they do. also appreciative of our partnership with the NCSA for making the day and and really that whole week of administrators a reality for um many of our building and district leaders from around the state. For those of you who couldn't join, my message to the group was really pretty simple, and that is we need to continue to double down on our literacy efforts across this state, and we need to work together and

007collaboratively to create coherence around what can be a real complex topic of improving literacy around our state. I truly believe we have a huge opportunity to make a real difference and to make sure our kids are reading better tomorrow than they're reading today. And I believe we're really beginning to see the very first glimpses of progress um towards our goal. Uh also I want to give a shout out to the NDE staff and partner presenters who shared their expertise through over 60 sessions during administrator day. Thanks to you all. Finally, I would uh ask Deputy Commissioner Holstead to come up. I I could say what I need to say with without you coming up, but I think it's more appropriate that I speak to you and not simply about you. You look excited to be

008here. >> Brian Holstead, always excited to be here. Well, I want to I want to take a minute and send out a special thank you to to uh Deputy Commissioner Holstead, to Brian Holstead. What I have to say will really pale in comparison to what I should say or take the time to say. Um, as you all likely know by now, Brian has worked at the department for 35 years. He's worked in various roles and has performed each role with excellence. His commitment to the Nebraska Department of Education cannot be overstated. His commitment to students of Nebraska cannot be overstated. And his commitment to excellence cannot be overstated. I first worked most closely with Brian when I was a member of the professional practices commission nearly 15 years ago and Brian was um running point

009for the department as legal counsel in in front of the professional practices com commission at that time. I can tell you I was struck by I was struck by his professionalism, struck by his preparation, and struck by his pounding on the desk when he was trying to drive a point home. And I can tell you that hasn't changed. He brings that every day to the office. That's a trait that uh that I hope never goes away, although I would use it judiciously in front of Judy. Uh Brian also, I would say, is is working to the end. He hasn't retired on the job. He is he continues to be a force for us here at the at the department. and uh one of his very uh one of his last and most important roles uh

010of the next few weeks will be in our first school financing review commission. Brian will have a significant part in talking about the his the history behind school financing in the state of Nebraska. There's no rest until he has actually retired and he has uh taken that on with glee quite frankly. The loss to the Nebraska Department of Education once Brian retires will be immense and will be felt for years. Brian, I've had a conversation with President Tegmire. I speak not only for myself but for the board when I say we will miss you. The Department of Education will miss you and the Nebraska educational ecosystem will miss you. Thank you for your 35 years. Thank you to your wife Judy for sharing you with us and uh I hope you feel the love and

011appreciation from the department as you go on to your next journeys. Thank you. [Applause] As part of my commissioner's report, you're welcome to speak. Time for a rebuttal, counselor. Well, first of all, thank you all very much for the opportunity I've been given for the past 35 years to be involved in to be surrounded by people who are committed to ensuring that students in Nebraska can learn everything they need to learn in order to be good citizens of Nebraska or wherever else they may go in the rest of their lives. life. It is um humbling to have people tell you thank you. Sometimes you don't even remember whether you did or didn't talk to them. You assume that it's a reminder of if you take the world as a smooth lake of water with no

012ripples on it and someone calls you and you talk to them, you created a ripple and you have no idea how many ripples you created or whatever happened after that. you only hope that you were able to help them accomplish what they were looking for and doing. Um, I don't talk about myself much and I'm not going to do that here this morning because I I learned long ago how I conduct myself is going to speak louder and longer than any words I might say. So, it has been a privilege. I know you all will continue to do good work because every one of you is here for the same reason. And so long as we all keep focused on that reason, there isn't anything you can't do if you decide to do it with

013your best efforts. So, thank you very much. [Applause] Thank you, Brian. And did anybody notice his points of emphasis there? Okay. Again, thank you, Brian. Uh, I would tell you that item 6.7.8 has been requested to be removed from the consent agenda. >> Thank you. And with that, President Tegmire, my my report is concluded. >> Thank you, Commissioner Doc. >> Uh, Elizabeth, can I ask him quick question? What was the date on that first meeting for the commission? >> That date is uh August 12th, next Tuesday. Next Tuesday. start here at 8 a.m. >> per Yeah, I was going to say per executive committee request, there is an email that includes a link to that live broadcast. So, be sure to share that with any interested constituents as well. >> Yes. And that link that

014link is also on our website. We have also sent it out to a number of statewide entities. We're we're not trying to keep that a secret. We want that out as uh in in the largest way we can get it out there. >> Next item is taken off. Thank you. Okay, the next item. No. NDE staff member David Jpersonson. Please make your way to the front of the room for a brief introduction of Lindseay Wilson, the 2025 Nebraska Teacher of the Year, who is a middle school teacher from Bennington Middle School in Bennington, Nebraska. >> Good morning. David Jesperson, Office of Public Information and Communications. Uh, and I will keep it brief today. Um, for a lot of times, uh, summer can be a slower period for teachers. They can get some muchneeded breaks. For

015the Nebraska Teacher of the Year, the summer seems to be a time where they ramp up uh, their speaking engagements and travel. Uh, our 2025 teacher of the year has traveled both the state, the country, and even further. and she will uh join us to fill us in on her latest report uh with a couple of u guests with her as well. Lindsay, hi everybody. Thanks for having us back. See if we can avoid the tech issues this time. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, once again, thank you for always allowing me to come in and share what's been happening throughout the year. Usually I give you this whirlwind of projects and national opportunities and unexpected adventures and this time is going to be a little bit different. Um when I reflected on the last time

016that we met at the end of the school year there I realized that there was like one thread running through it all and that was collaboration. It's been the quiet constant in all of this chaos throughout the year. Whether it's students teaming up or teachers crossing content lines or me connecting with other teachers from around the state and even the country and now the world. Collaboration has been what's held it together for us the whole time and helped push us forward. So, you may notice that I have two students with me here today. And I know that's not the most traditional thing to do, but because I think it's important and nothing compares to us hearing from the students um and the people living this work that we do every single day. So these two

017have been in my classroom all of last year, sometimes even more than once. Um and so they're not just students, but they are our leaders, our creators, and the future that uh we are preparing for. So I would like to introduce to you the two that are with me from here with me today. Um from the very start these two stood out to me in a way that that they showed up in my classroom as classmates, collaborators, and leaders in our class. They both have this rare mix of patience, determination, and a drive to make things better, especially when it's something that they're passionate about. I've watched you Ulisses, who I call Julie, time and again notice when someone needs a hand and quietly step in. He encourages others and shares what he knows and

018makes sure that nobody feels left out. He understands that when we work together, we all succeed. And he's quick to share his enthusiasm, but just as quick to make sure that everyone else gets their moment to shine. Lucy, she has this natural gift of leadership. She does not wait for anyone else to take the first step. She takes that initiative on her own. She's thoughtful and kind and has a way of speaking that makes people stop and listen. She not only works hard, but she makes everybody around her better. So, it is my honor to introduce to you Ulissiz Hail and Lucy Hunt. They are outstanding students and remarkable leaders in our classroom. and more importantly genuinely good people. Every day they bring curiosity, kindness, and that kind of energy that inspires everybody around them.

019So today, they're going to share their perspectives with you on collaboration because for them, it's not just a word that we use in our classroom, it's how they live and learn. So as you hear from us today, I want you to think about something. Um, and the connections that we make in one classroom don't just stay there. That they grow and they reach and sometimes take us places that we never expected. So, our year starts off with what's in the box. It's a simple but powerful Sorry. This was the activity I did for um my finalist interview with Mr. Penner. and uh he leaned over after it was all over and he goes, "So, what's in the box?" And I still haven't told him, but to be fair, I haven't told them either. So, yeah.

020So, our year started with this simple but powerful activity, what's in the box. And it's where students saw science as fun and teamwork as essential. So, now I'm going to let Julie share why teamwork became such a big deal early on. You got it. Uh, hi, my name is Yui and I was in Mrs. Wilson's science class last year, also the year she won teacher of the year award. And in this year, we did lots of experiments and projects, all of which 95% of which we all collaborated on. Now, one of these projects we did was a project where we had to study tectonic plates and find out how the same two dinosaur fossils were found halfway across the world split between an ocean. And our teacher, Mrs. Wilson put us into groups and assigned

021us different jobs like lead researcher, supervisor, you know, and this helped us show teamwork and cooperation and helped us figure it out that the tectonic plates were closer together at one point, but then split up because that's how tectonic plates work. And another example that I want to give what's in the box was we were shown items, some of which could be in this mystery box, others weren't. We had to weigh each individual item and make an educative guess. Now, this showed teamwork and cooperation because others would examine, others would weigh, others would just hand people things, and it helped us do this more efficiently. It also gave me inspiration in science class to work together with people better and overall just be a better team person. That's all. Thank you. Awesome. See, he doesn't

022know either. As the year went on, our collaboration spread beyond our classroom. We launched Curious Creators Expo where students and families explored hands-on projects and together and students as young as second grade were able to showcase their work. That momentum from this last year is leading to a grant that will extend and expand STEM opportunities in our district for younger students. And Uli, he was very much a part of that. He was right there. You can see him in the middle picture holding the zebra. um and he was showing everyone firsthand that when students lead, the impact is real and powerful. Right after that, we tackled a research project on moon jelly populations and students created their own research questions and presented their findings to their classmates, their families, and community members. This studentled symposium

023proved something powerful that when students are given meaningful challenges and real platforms to share their discoveries that they will rise to the occasion and show how brilliant they can be in a space filled with curiosity and support. Lucy was one of those standout presenters, earning her spot as one of the two groups to share with the entire grade level. Sorry about that. Um, so I'm going to let Lucy share with you her experience on the student led Moon Jelly Symposium. Hi, my name is Lucy Hunt and I have Mrs. Wilson for science and social studies. One of my favorite quotes from Mrs. Wilson is, "I can stand up here and talk all day, but at the end of the day, how much do you remember? You learn better from your peers, the people around you."

024We did. My favorite project this year was the moon jellies project because you and a partner got to pick any question to research about moon jellies. We did all me and a partner chose to research how a change in the population of moon jellies affects the rest of the ecosystem. We did all the research we could on this question and we found our answer. But that wasn't my favorite part. My favorite part was listening to everyone else's questions I researched about. Through this project, I've learned so much that I get to share my knowledge with other people. When we went on vacation in North Carolina, we were lucky enough to go on a behind-the-scenes tour of a local aquarium. We stopped at the moon jellies tank and I was telling our tour guide that if

025the moon jellies population doesn't stay stable, it'll affect the rest of the ecosystem. She asked me to further explain. So, I told her that moon jellies eat zlankton and turtles eat moon jellies. And since the moon jellies population is increasing, that means the turtles population is increasing as well because the more food a species has, the more it reproduces. But since there are more moon jellies, that means the plankton's in higher demand, making their population decrease. I definitely learned a lot more from this project by researching my own question and listening to my peers rather than Mrs. Wilson just covering one topic. This project was really fun and I'm so grateful for it. Thank you, Mrs. Wilson. >> Thank you. So, as you can see, her work didn't just stop in our school, but she

026shared it across state lines and it sparked these conversations and new partnerships. We weren't just following the seventh grade curriculum, but we were redefining what collaboration was and empowering our students to lead. We didn't stop there. Um, this summer I had the incredible honor of taking our ripple of collaboration all the way across the globe. I was invited to present for the Shanghai Teacher Institute in China during a 12-day educational exchange, sharing work that my students like Julie and Lucy and the others and our collaborative projects on an international stage. I recently returned from the U the the Sino US NATO national teacher of the year China talk symposium where I proudly represented Nebraska and the Bennington public schools over 12 days and across five cities. I presented on building a culture of collaboration using

027curiosity to fuel student engagement and empowering learners in the ai. During the trip, I participated in panel discussions, visited schools, and engaged in meaningful conversations about STEM, teacher preparation, educational innovation with educators from all around the world. I also had the privilege of attending a two-day UNESCO principal seminar where we focused on teacher evaluation and preparation. At the end of the 12 days, the experience culminated in a ceremony where it was said, "Friendships and partnerships were formed. Educ sorry, friendships and partnerships were formed. This has reaffirmed that education knows no borders." Those words could not be any truer. This was an unforgettable adventure that truly has completely changed my life and my work. While our education systems may differ, our mission is still the same, and it's to inspire teachers, advocate for our students, and

028help every learner reach their fullest potential. Words cannot fully express how much this experience meant, but one thing is certain that this is what global education looks like, and I was extremely grateful to be a part of it. Just two days later, after returning from China, I headed to space camp. Um, my team designed rovers and built rockets and survived the multiaxis trainer. More importantly, we worked together like a real flight crew. It was collaboration at its best, relying on one another and em embracing together or not at all. Next up, a day later, I presented at admin days to share why collaboration in the classroom is such a gamecher. One of my top requested talks this year has been together we learn building a culture of collaborative learning. This presentation explores collaboration in the

029classroom and how it isn't just taught. It's modeled every day. It means taking risks and stepping outside of our comfort zones and learning alongside of our students. So what began with a simple box in my classroom grew into an incredible opportunity for me to represent the state sparked conversations thousands of miles away and proof that learning and collaboration truly know no borders. Just a small group of curious kids asking what's in the box has become a way of connecting our classrooms, schools, states, countries, and even cultures. So, I want to thank Julie and Lucy for for joining me today and sharing their voices and allowing you to hear from them. Um, they are proof that what happens when students are empowered to lead and this this is the culture that we're building every day in

030Nebraska and in our classroom. Um, and we're proud to be a part of a district like Bennington Public Schools that supports and values this kind of collaborative learning. So, thank you as always for supporting the journey that I've had so far this year um and believing in the power of us learning together. So, as always, stay curious, inspire, and be inspired by those around you. >> Thank you, Lindsay, and thanks for giving up a big part of your summer with your kids to to share and go across the state and the world. And I also want to thank Julie and Lucy. They know it can be very scary, intimidating coming and speaking to grown-ups. You guys did great, too. >> And board members, any comments or questions for our teacher of the year? >> Yeah.

031>> I would like you to teach my kids. >> I would love that. I would love that. >> Sherry. >> Yes. Um, Ulysus and Lucy, I bet you know that you are blessed indeed to have a teacher like Mrs. Wilson. And I don't know if you've ever considered the teaching profession, but I would encourage you to consider that because you get to make a difference just like Mrs. Wilson is doing in your life. And also, Lucy, I've never heard of Moon Jelly, so I'm going to be looking into this. So, you've motivated me to learn something today. And thank you, Lindsay. Um, may you have an awesome year. >> Thank you so much. Thank you guys. See you soon. >> Yes. >> Okay. The next item of business is the president's report. And hold on

032to your socks because I have one today. I know. I thought I'd surprise everyone. Um, so last year when I was elected president of the board, I pledged to make literacy a focus and I could not have done this alone. So I just want to take a few short minutes and it really is a few short minutes to highlight the efforts made by so many to make literacy a central focus of this department. To properly do so, I must go back to the work of two former state senators, uh, Lannahan and Patty Panzing Brooks. They worked across the aisle to research literacy and dyslexia in our state. And they co-authored legislation addressing it as well as being instrumental in the allocation of state funding to address low literacy rates in our state. These efforts have

033been complemented by our staff who had been studying the research and were implementing teacher trainings as funding was available. The big push came under Commissioner Maher's leadership through the creation of the Nebraska Literacy Project and the application for a federal literacy grant, which is bringing $55 million over the next five years into Nebraska to assist teachers and schools in evidencebased reading instruction. Over the summer, our department has hired a literacy director and a new deputy commissioner who has a wealth of literacy instruction experience to help oversee this project. During their summer breaks, many of our teachers statewide have attended trainings and workshops on evidence-based lit literacy instruction, and many others anticipate these trainings in the upcoming years. It's not just those in the field of education who are learning about the direction we are taking

034reading instruction and they are eager to row in the same direction with us. And this includes state senators um who are supportive and they're ready to assist with the additional legislation that we may need. And citizens throughout the state are voicing their support in the importance of this work. And just yesterday, I received a call from the governor's office expressing his support for our efforts and his enthusiasm for the opportunity we have to receive additional financial assistance from a nonprofit organization. This financial assistance will be earmarked for professional development of school administrators to equip them to better support classroom teachers. To everyone who has picked up their ore and chosen to row with us, I say thank you. I brought a request to the commissioner and at our September board meeting, he will be recommending

035one book that will give an overview of the direction we are taking literacy instruction in Nebraska. This will help the board as a unit and any interested staff who maybe their work isn't centered on literacy to better communicate the importance of literacy and the research backing it. Additionally, lawmakers, educators, and citizens of Nebraska can obtain their own copy and gain a deeper understanding of where we will be taking literacy instruction in Nebraska over the next five years. So, that concludes my president's report. Um, I know in the past there's been interest not to have a lengthy discussion, but if any board members would like to comment or anything, I do want to open the floor up. Okay. Right. Well, seeing none, we will now move to our public comment period. This period may be available

036to any person who wishes to address the board on any matter appearing on the agenda. Up to 90 minutes will be allowed for public comment period. A majority of members present in voting may take action to extend the amount of time allowed for 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. Those wishing to speak must be signed in at the table outside the meeting room. Each individual speaking to the board will be required to complete a sign-in card for identification of oneself. Individuals are required to include this on the sign-in card their name, address, and name of any organization represented. Individuals

037may be prohibited to speak in public comment 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 five minutes. A majority of members present and voting may take action to reduce or extend the amount of individual time allotted to 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 responsible of the president to

038refuse permission to continue addressing the board. We have one public comment card submitted. Vice President Neri will announce the name of the speaker. Okay, we have one speaker today. If you want to come forward, loan Eie. Thank you. Hello everyone. My name is Loen Eie and I reside in Pilion, Nebraska. I want to express my concerns regarding agenda item 6.7A which pertains to the approval of school districts requests for exclusions to the budget limitation under the provisions of the tax equity and educational opportunities support acts. My specific concerns are the NDE FOS is recommending a reduction in income for the listed school districts to increase their eligibility for TIOSA funding. Regarding TIOSA, Nebraska revised statute 79-102 subsection 2. The objective is to reduce reliance on property taxes for funding the public school system. In a

039memo from Mr. Bryce Wilson to Dr. Brian Maher. It was noted that the total income exclusion amounts recommended are 121 million2440,452. This indicates that 62 school districts are requesting income exclusions to seek additional state aid. In my analysis of the Nebraska public school districts, I have in my analysis of all public school districts in Nebraska, I have discovered that many school districts are not accounting for all their income. And in some of those districts and some of those districts are the districts requesting income exclusion. The NDE FOS is suggesting that these same districts should not recognize additional revenue, which I believe is inappropriate. On August 1st, I sent an email to all of you regarding my report on Nebraska school district financial reporting. Agenda item 6.7A underscores the critical need for accurate and transparent financial

040information. If you approve the exclusion recommendations, you are agreeing that the 62 school districts are not fully disclosing their income, leading to unwarranted requests for additional state aid. I truly appreciate the dedication each of you brings to the board, and I'm here to support you in any way I can. If you have any questions about my report, please do not hesitate to reach out. I have prepared booklets for each of you, as well as extras. For those interested in diving deeper into the report and examining the supporting data, I invite you to explore my YouTube channel, Loen Eie, and my name is spelled L O A N E B Y where you will find informative videos and links. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. >> Thank you. No written public comment has been

041submitted. Is there a motion to adopt the consent agenda? >> I move to adopt the consent agenda except for item 6.7. Aem 6 uh 7.8 has been requested be removed from the consent agenda. >> Second. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded to adopt the consent agenda. Per board policy, there is no discussion on the motion to adopt the consent agenda. With the recording, secretary, please call the role. >> Shonhof, >> yes. >> Ner, >> yes. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Rener, >> yes. >> Jones, >> yes. >> Douglas, >> yes. >> Penner, >> yes. Tag meer. >> Yes. >> A yes. >> The affirmative has it and the consent agenda is adopted. The next item of business are reports of the standing committees and I will report on the executive committee meeting. The

042executive committee reports on its August 7th, 2025 meeting. Members present were Elizabeth Tigm, Vice President Deb Ner, Sherry Jones, and Liz Rener. The committee reviewed four information items. First, the committee received an update on work related to legislation enacted during the recent legislative session. Inde staff will continue to update the committee on implementation efforts. Second, NDE staff provided the committee with a presentation and an update on the strategic planning process, including next steps for board input and involvement and preparation for a September work session. Next, the committee reviewed board bylaw and policy revisions as recommended by NDE staff and will continue discussion on this topic. Finally, the committee received notification of a vacancy on the Nebraska assisted technology partnership advisory council. This concludes the executive committee report. Elizabeth, chair. Are there any questions on the

043executive committee report? Okay. Okay. Chair Kristen Christensen will report on behalf of the budget and finance committee meeting. The budget and finance committee reports that at its Thursday, August 7th meeting, members present were Kristen Christensen, Maggie Douglas, and Lisa Shonhoff. The committee reviewed five action items. The first item reviewed was a contract for an educator effectiveness specialist to assist with the implementation of the statewide educator effectiveness system. The committee recommends approval of this item. The next action item reviewed was the grant award for the first two years of the comprehensive literacy state development grant. The committee recommends approval of this item. Third, the committee reviewed potential contracts for work being done with the Nebraska improvement grant funds, including the system involved youth data sharing system. The committee recommends approval of this action item. The fourth

044action item reviewed by the committee was the potential acceptance of grant funds for the Nebraska Literacy Leadership Network. The committee recommends approval for this item as well. The last action item reviewed was an a potential increase for the inflation adjusted dollar threshold requiring school districts to advertise for construction, remodeling or repair of building projects. The committee recommends approval of this item too. Additionally, the committee reviewed travel expenses, noting no concerns. And last, the committee reviewed five information items, including an update on the comprehensive literacy state development grant, the upcoming Mckin Vento grant awards, the first draft of the potential 2025-26 deficit budget request, and possible contracts for the Nebraska Career Connections License, and a highquality IEP development project. This concludes the budget and finance committee report. Kristen Christensen, chair. >> Thank you. Are there any

045questions on the budget and finance committee report? Are there any questions on the reports in item 7.2? Is there a motion on item 7.2B? I move to authorize the commissioner to contract with ESU13 for the educator effectiveness specialist position. Second has been moved and seconded to authorize the commissioner to contract with ESU13 for the educator effectiveness specialist position. Is there any discussion on this motion? Okay. The motion is to authorize the commissioner to contract with ESU13 for the educator effectiveness specialist POS position. Would the recording secretary please call the role? >> Douglas, >> yes. >> Shonhof, >> yes. >> Rener, >> yes. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Ner, >> yes. >> Jones, >> yes. >> Penner, >> yes. >> Taggmire, >> yes. >> Eight, yes. The affirmative has it and the motion to authorize the

046commissioner to contract with ESU13 for the educator effectiveness specialist position is adopted. Is there a motion on item 7.2 C? I move to award funding from the CLSD grant to identified subawward grantees. Second. It is moved and seconded to award funding from the CLSD grant to identified subawward grantees. Is there any discussion on the motion? Yes, I um this is a big one for me. Um as you had stated in your opening statements or your presidential report that literacy has been a focus for the NDE and should be. It's imperative that we get every single kid reading at proficient levels in our state. And I think that everyone in this room would agree with that uh sentiment. And so as I look through this one, I do not take it lightly. I think it's probably

047one of the most important pieces on the agenda. There will be 46 recipients if I counted correctly um for this first portion of funding and there are eight allowable activities. I had several questions regarding this. Um Allison Denbstie, thank you. I can't see you but I think you're behind Kirk um for answering all of my questions. One of the things that I see again and again in the allowable activities for these recipients is professional learning. And one of the questions that I always ask is, is this going to be sustainable? And one of the best things that we can do is get our educators and our administrators knowledgeable in strategies that work and is grounded in science and research. and what that means to one person might mean something else to somebody else in the

048field, especially when we're talking about people that have been in the field for decades. And so I um proceeded to ask Allison about the parameters around professional learning and they already have in place a professional learning rubric which I thought was excellent. It was forwardinking. they are on the ball and I can tell that there's been a lot of work that has gone into it. Um, I look forward to future conversations and asking all the tough questions and having the tough conversations with all the stakeholders because this is so important. But I think if there's one thing that is sustainable, I think professional learning is the of utmost importance. and I'm very happy to see that it's listed with almost every single recipient. So, I just wanted to say thank you for the work on

049this and I look forward to future work. Deborah, >> yeah, thanks Lisa. I agree with everything you said and appreciate that you said it. And I, you know, just because we started uh some deep dive conversations yesterday about strategic planning and future and I you touched on a lot of things that I you know this is uh a gold standard project. We have everything uh you know that we need to be successful. you know, a great vision, a great plan, uh, science, research, data behind everything, professionals that, you know, are top-notch. Uh, it it's just and so I lift it up as something that when I'm thinking about our strategic plan, like these are the components that I hope we can be discussing on that topic, you know, things like the evidence. I mean, you

050said specifically you value this because of the evidence that's behind it and and uh the research that's behind it and that it represents excellence and and so I just I don't know just because we are going to be in strategic planning mode for a while. I just these are key things that I hope we can uh lift up as we go through that process too because I think like you said this is an amazing example of uh the gold standard. So, thank you >> Sherry. >> Yes, thank you. Um, this is primarily for the public. I'd like to share some information that was provided to us at the bottom of the list of CLSD granties. So, this is for your information and it states that all applicants serving birth through kindergarten entry and grades 6

051through 12 have been fully funded. The amounts requested in kindergarten through fifth through grade five exceeded the amount available to award and as a result 24 out of 45 applicants were funded for this age band. So if I if my math serves me well that means 21 did not receive funding. Now, for me personally, it's un it's unfortunate that the federal department of education set or dictated to us the allocations for us. Of the 55 million, 15% is allocated for birth through kindergarten entry. 40% of the funding for kindergarten through fifth grade and 40% for 6th grade through 12th grade. In my opinion, kindergarten through fifth grade should have had a much greater allocation for that is the critical time to teach children how to read. But that's my opinion. So this is I believe

052is an example where state and local decisionmaking would have been better in my opinion than the federal government dictating to us how we should use this 55 million. So, I'm sad to see that 21 of our kindergarten through fifth grade were not able to be funded because of the allocation just for the public's information. Thank you. >> I'm not sure if one of the budget and finance committee members can answer my question. When I looked at the document, I see that this funding is for years one and two. So, um so would those re those who did not receive funding, they could reapply? President Tegmire, I think with your permission, maybe I would have Allison Denbi come up. Okay. >> I think I think she would be the one to address that. >> Okay, that

053would be great. >> You're right. Good morning, Allison Denbsty, academic officer. Um, could you repeat the question, please? I'm sorry. >> No, I I just was I all I had was the document before me on on the agenda, and it I believe that it says that it's years one and two that this funding is going out. And so my question is, can the schools who were denied funding for years one and two, can they reapply for funding in the future? >> That is a possibility that we left open. Um, one of the things that is not uncommon with a multi-year grant. Certainly, we saw it with ESSER. There are awards that are made, activities that are planned, and as you move through the life of the grant, sometimes the dollar amount that is actually spent

054ends up being a little bit less than was intended. So there is a pool of funds. Um it is our expectation that perhaps by year three we would be in a position to either award more funding to those who were awarded and are demonstrating results or open it back up again um for another round of competitive applications. So the NDE could do either. >> Okay, great. Thank you for answering that. >> Yeah. >> Any other questions or comments? All right. Okay. Thank you. So the motion is to award funding from the CLSD grant to identified subawward grantees. Would the recording secretary please call the role? >> Rener, >> yes. >> Douglas, >> yes. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Jones, >> yes. >> Tegmire, >> yes. >> Penner, >> yes. >> Ner, >> yes. >> Shonhoff,

055>> yes. A yes. The affirmative has it and the motion to award funding from the CLSD grant to identified subawward grantees is adopted. Is there a motion on item 7.2D? >> I move to approve the Nebraska Improvement Grant Projects. >> Second. It is moved and seconded to approve the Nebraska Improvement Grant Projects. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Must have been a good committee meeting to have no discussion. You guys got it all answered. The motion is to approve the Nebraska Improvement Grant Projects. With the recording secretary, please call the role. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Ner, >> yes. >> Jones, >> yes. >> Rener, >> yes. >> Douglas, >> yes. Shanhoff, >> yes. >> Taggmire, >> yes. >> Penner, >> yes. >> Eight, yes. >> The affirmative has it and the

056motion to approve the Nebraska Improvement Grant Project is adopted. Is there a motion on item 7.2e? I move to accept grant funds for the Nebraska Literacy Leadership Network. Second. It is moved and seconded to accept grant funds for the Nebraska Literacy Leadership Network. Is there any discussion on the motion? >> Deborah. >> Sure. I I just want to say and I I'm sure I speak for most everyone on the board uh with these comments just how deeply grateful we are to the Sherwood Foundation. I mean, for this extraordinary $25 million investment in advancing literacy in Nebraska, this isn't a small uh uh pro project or amount. This this is a really big deal and it is going to be transformational and it underscores the critical role that public and private partnerships play in strengthening our

057education system. uh by working together we can equip school leaders now with the training, the coaching and the support that they need to ensure that every child uh receives high quality reading instruction and building a stronger future for all of Nebraska. So, I just want to give my sincere appreciation to the folks at the Sherwood Foundation for all the work they did uh in partnering with us and to make this opportunity possible. Thank you. I do agree with um you Deborah that it that's a it's a huge amount of money and um it's going to go right to the kids and literacy. Uh I also want to add to that thank you to um Governor Panin for reaching out and realizing that literacy is so important in our state that he reached out and um

058to make to build those partnerships and I think that's excellent. Um, I, as anyone who's been following along, am the only one who voted no originally on the CLSD grant for 55 million. Reason being, strings attached, as um, Sherry had alluded to earlier. And, um, after we take this grant, we will be sitting at $80 million for literacy. And that's no small undertaking for the staff um, at the Nebraska Department of Education. One thing that I always take into consideration when looking at grants is how does this grant create a dependency on tax dollars later on is it sustainable? Um, as the state board of education, we are responsible to our constituents to make sure that we are balancing their budget with taxes in the future as well. So, we have to be forward thinking.

059Um, one of the reasons why I'm really grateful for this 25 million is because there aren't any strings attached. And so what we're doing with it is we're providing professional development focused on school leaders. Well, what better way to spend that money, right? getting our administrators and our school literacy or our school leaders um principles um even NDE administrators knowledgeable in what works in our classrooms. And so sitting at $80 million invested in literacy for kids across our state is a huge huge huge deal. And it is very clear and evident that that we are all taking it very seriously. I think that we need to continue now that we've got this money in front of us to continue asking the tough questions, not going along to get along, but having these really tough conversations

060with each other and holding each other accountable. because if there's not accountability and our kids aren't reading by 2030, then we need to have some serious conversations with each other. And so I appreciate Dr. Maher for really setting that precedent that we do have these goals in place and we're going to be following up throughout the years, the upcoming years to make sure that we are holding each other accountable. So, thank you for your work. Thank you staff for all of your work and let's stay diligent and work together through this process. >> Commissioner Maher, >> I would I would say just a couple of things. There is a lot of money and there are a lot of different people to thank for where we are at the Department of Education. It's not often we

061can say resources aren't our issue. But in addressing this topic, resources aren't our issue. It's the uh how do we use those resources to accomplish our goals that is our issue. And so our our goal is to put together a coherent plan using those resources and never lose sight of what the goal is. And that's to improve student outcomes. That's our fundamental goal. So what are we doing? And u I tell people sometimes, let's make it simple for this kid from Hooper so he can figure this out. And this is this is the simplicity and the complexity of what we're trying to do. Number one, we believe the best way to achieve student outcomes is to have quality teachers in the classroom with kids. That's number one. Without that, really, very little else matters. The

062CLSD grant will help us in large part to accomplish that. The focus that we have around the state will help us accomplish that. That's number one. Number two is we've got to I think we all need coaches, right? We all we all need coaches to help us along. And I'm not talking about the principal that comes in to evaluate to retain or not retain a teacher. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about somebody that can come into a classroom and coach the talent that already exists within the teacher up. And the only way that person can come in, whether it's a principal, assistant principal, a literacy coach, a curriculum director, a whole number of folks that might be in that coaching role, is to make sure that they too understand u the the

063science of reading and and and look fors as they walk into the classroom. the the money that we are receiving from the Sherwood Foundation will help help us accomplish that goal. So the simple hooper in me is let's train teachers and let's train them really well. Let's make sure we have people coaching those teachers. Let's put that let's put that on top of it. And we're getting closer and closer to a sustainable model. But that's the coherence that we're trying to accomplish with these two pots of money. Thanks for an opportunity to explain. >> All right. Any further comments? >> All right. The motion is to accept grant funds for the Nebraska Literacy Leadership Network. Would the recording secretary please call the role? >> Jones, >> yes. >> Ner, >> yes. >> Rener, >> yes.

064>> Douglas, >> yes. >> Henner, >> yes. Christensen, >> yes. >> Shonhoff, >> yes. >> Tegmire, >> yes. >> Eight, yes. >> The affirmative has it and the motion to accept grant funds for the Nebraska Literacy Leadership Network is adopted. Is there a motion on item 7.2F? >> Yep. I move to adjust the dollar amount for school district bid requirements. >> Second. It is moved and seconded to adjust the dollar amount for school district bid requirements. Is there any discussion on The motion is to adjust the dollar amount for school district bid requirements. With the recording secretary, please call the role. Douglas, >> yes. Penner, >> yes. >> Tegmire, yes. Neri, >> yes. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Rener, >> yes. >> Jones, >> yes. >> Shonhoff, >> yes. >> A yes. >> The affirmative

065has it and the motion to adjust the dollar amount for school district bid requirements is adopted. Chair Lisa Shanhoff will report on behalf of the planning and evaluation committee meeting. Okay. Our meeting was yesterday, August 7th, 2025. The planning and evaluation committee reports on their committee meeting on October 7th, 2025. The members pre present were Lisa Shonhoff, Sherry Jones, Deborah Neri, and Kristen Christensen. The committee discussed four action items related to the conditional approval of new non-public school systems, conditional approval of new interim program schools, plans of corrections for school systems and interim program schools and approval of educator preparation programs. The committee recommends board approval on these items. The committee discussed the action item related to the roster for the Nebraska Council on Teacher Education. The committee has no recommendation for this item. The

066committee reviewed discussion items with NDE staff providing summaries and answering questions related to rule 11 teacher waiver requests and a pilot process for clinical practice. The committee reviewed a consent agenda item related to affidavits for instructional hours exception for public, non-public and pre kindergarten programs. The committee also reviewedformational items related to subject area exams and passing scores for temporary certificates, the accountability system process update, and the community achievement plan process and timeline. NDE staff will bring these items to a future meeting for discussion and subsequent approval where appropriate. This concludes the planning and evaluation report. I'm Lisa Shonhoff. Are there any questions on the planning and evaluation committee report? Is there a motion on item 7.3. A >> I move to authorize conditional approval of new non-public school systems. Second. It is moved and seconded

067to authorize conditional approval of new non-public school systems. Is there any discussion on the motion? The motion is to authorize the conditional approval of new non-public school systems. With the recording secretary, please call the role. Rener, >> yes. >> Douglas, >> yes. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Jones, >> yes. >> Tegmire, >> yes. >> Penner, >> yes. >> Ner, >> yes. >> Shonhoff, >> yes. >> Eight, yes. The affirmative has it and the motion to authorize the conditional approval of new non-public school systems is adopted. Is there a motion on item 7.3B? Yes. I move to authorize conditional approval of new interim program schools. Second is moved and seconded to authorize conditional approval of new interim program schools. Is there any discussion on the motion? The motion is to authorize conditional approval of new interim

068program schools. With the recording secretary, please call the role. >> Jones, >> yes. >> Rener Rener, >> yes. >> Penner, >> yes. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Shonhoff, >> yes. >> Douglas, >> yes. Neri, >> yes. >> Tagmire, >> yes. Eight, yes. The affirmative has it and the motion to authorize conditional approval of new interim program schools is adopted. Is there a motion on item 7.3 C? >> Yes, Madame Chair. I move to approve plans of corrections for rule 1014 and 18 school systems and interim program schools. Second. It is moved and seconded to approve plans of correction for rules 10, 14, and 18 school systems and interim program schools. Is there any discussion on the motion? >> Yes, madam chair. I would just like to note some things for the public that of these

069plans of corrections and I believe there were at first there were maybe 12 and there was four added so maybe about 16 plans of correction and of these plans of correction most are for media specialists and guidance counselors. So, I just um asked the question, could the media specialist situation be remedied by rule 24 changes? Um that would be something I would like our um NDE staff to take a look at. And because I think the media specialist shortage affects rural districts very much so. And so I would like us at NDE to take a look at that to see if maybe perhaps some rule changes would be one way that we could address the media specialist shortage. So thank you. Any other comments? The motion is to approve plans of correction for rule 10,

07014, and 18 school systems and interim program schools. Would the recording secretary please call the role? Shonhof, >> yes. >> Douglas, >> yes. >> Tegmire, >> yes. >> Jones, >> yes. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Penner, >> yes. >> Ner, >> yes. >> Rener, >> yes. >> Eight, yes. The affirmative has it and the motion to approve plans of correction for rule 104 and 18 school systems and interim program schools is adopted. Is there a motion on item 7.3D? >> I move to approve educator preparation programs for 2025 2026. >> Second. It is moved and seconded to approve educator preparation programs for 2025 2026. Is there any discussion on the motion? The motion is to approve educator preparation programs for 2025 2026. Would the recording secretary please call the role? >> Tegmire. >> Yes. Neri,

071>> yes. >> Penner, >> yes. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Rener, >> yes. >> Jones, >> yes. >> Shonhoff, >> yes. >> Douglas, >> yes. >> Eight, yes. The affirmative has it and the motion to approve educator preparation programs for 2025 2026 is adopted. Um item 7.3.E. The committee has no recommendation on this item. Is there a motion on item 7.3? >> I have a motion, >> Sherry. I move to approve the higher education and governance sections of the 2025 2026 NCTTE roster. >> So, um, we're not up for discussion yet. We have to have a second. >> Second. >> Okay. It has been moved and seconded to approve the sorry >> the higher education and governance rosters for NCT for 2025 2026 I'd like to speak >> okay Sher >> Can you turn your

072mic on please? I guess I was asking first to speak but okay I >> um the the person who makes the motion I believe according to Robert's rules gets to speak first and then go to you. >> I just have a short statement. I just want to say that I am in support of approving the roster being brought forth to represent higher education and governance. >> Okay Deborah. So I guess I am curious. I mean just in terms of process we as a committee that is not the amendment that we as a committee decided we were going to bring. And so it's I just feel like it's I'm I'm concerned the lack of transparency since we had a discussion about this. we agreed and then you brought forward a different uh motion and during I

073mean it's saddens me greatly too that even though you didn't just say it now in your comments you made it clear that you didn't want to approve the public school teachers that are on the list and that is what it you are exclu ex excluding by your motion so I would like to make an amount an amendment to add to that that we uh approve the entire list as brought to us and was intended by the committee in our motion that we agreed to bring forward yesterday. So that we are voting on the entire list that includes even the public school teachers that you wanted to leave off. >> There is a second may I speak? >> Yes. >> To answer that there is a second motion that's going to be brought forth regarding the

074teacher. >> So are you excluding him in this original motion? >> There's two. >> It'll be it'll be part of the second motion. It'll be part. So >> there's two motions. >> All right. So So this original one is to approve the entire list. The the motion that Sherry made is to and the motion that's currently on the floor is to approve the higher education and governance sections of the 2025 2026 NCTTE roster. >> All right. >> That's the one that's currently on. >> Okay. But what that isn't the motion that we agreed on as a committee because we agreed on the entire roster that also included the teachers. And I understand that you don't want to approve the public school teachers that are on the list, but I would like to make this motion.

075I I'm hoping we uh go back and All right, let's let me just uh I you know I just feel like it's really unfair to your peers to say one thing in committee and have an agreement and then do something else at the board meeting. Uh because I feel like we all agreed that we were going to bring forward the motion to approve the list and then you would take make a motion to take off the public school teachers because you didn't want to approve public school teachers. So I guess I mean I just want to express my disappointment in that. I mean we have committee discussions for a reason. But now that we are at this juncture, I would like to um I I'm disappointed that we're only approving half the list and I

076don't know how to do this. I think we should be reviewing the entire list the way it was brought to us and the way it was brought to the committee. And so I'd like them to make a motion uh to make an amendment that we approve the entire roster that was presented to the committee and presented to the board rather than just leaving off the public school teachers. Do I have a second or Yeah, Dr. For can help. >> Thank you. >> Would you accept that you would be making the amendment to insert teachers so that then if adopted it would read to approve the higher education governance and teachers rosters? >> Yeah, I like that. >> Okay, Elizabeth, you have enough to be able to repeat that back. >> Okay. Yes, I think so.

077So an amendment has been made to insert teachers. So if approved, the motion is I move to approve the higher education governance and teacher sections of the 2025 2026 NCTTE roster. Is there a second on the motion? >> Second. >> Okay. So, it is moved and seconded to amend the original motion by inserting the word teachers. And the motion reads, I move to approve the higher education governance and teacher sections of the 2025 2026 NCT roster. Is there any discussion on the amendment? I just want to be clear that if anyone's voting against this, the only discussion I've heard is they didn't want to approve public school teachers for the committee. And so if you're voting against it for some other reason, I hope you'll clarify for us what that is. I'm really sad that

078that's uh what's happening here when there are plenty of opportunities to bring non-public school teachers forward. But what we are doing uh is saying that uh we don't support those public school teachers and that that feels very uh it just feels uh blanketly um inappropriate. Thank you. Okay, I'll go to Sher and then I'll open the floor to other board members who haven't spoken on this. >> The category is just teachers. It doesn't say public school teachers, Deborah. So, we're just we're looking at the teacher section and so that needs some clarification there. So, it's not as if we're speaking against any group. It says we're looking at the teacher roster just for >> Well, I'm basing this on what you said in committee that it was the public school teachers that you were not

079going to approve. Am I incorrect in that? >> I don't recall. It was the teacher roster. >> So, what is your complaint about approving the teachers then? >> You know, I will give share some of my thoughts after the vote. >> Can we can we hear if I I'm not on the committee. All I know is that I have a committee report that says the committee had no recommendation on this item. I'd love to hear from other I I'm getting nods from people who who aren't on the committee. I'd like to hear from other committee members as well as other board members, >> but that is not appropriate because the committee did agree before we left the committee that we were going to bring this forward and there was no further discussion. >> So, so

080are you saying that? >> Yes, that is exactly what we agree. saying that the minutes for this meeting are incorrect. >> I uh they'd have to be read back to me, but the way the meeting ended was that we agreed we were going to bring the motion that existed already forward and then an amendment could be made to that. So if some if there was a uh if there was conversation after I was off the zoom then that doesn't feel like it should be part of the minutes but when I was in that discussion we were going to bring who else is was in that committee >> that that's what I want to hear from some of the other committee members or or any other board members who have thoughts but I'd really like to

081hear first from other planning and evaluation committee members. Um, so in our committee meeting, uh, Deborah was on Zoom and said multiple times throughout the meeting that she had a hard time hearing and I think there the, uh, electrical was probably not working well. U, what I heard said was that Sherry was going to go talk to our parliamentary expert, Ryan for Thank you for being our expert. Comes in very handy. and talk about some different options for motions because I don't think you knew ex I it didn't appear to me that Sherry completely understood exactly the best way to go about doing an amendment. So I was under the impression that she was going to go with Dr. and work out a way to do the motion in a way that she felt comfortable

082with. It's still my turn I think. Um, and overall I appreciate all the work that you've done on this Sherry. She's it's been in our committee multiple times and we have all had opportunity to to discuss and ask questions and um, now it's time to vote. And so I think we let the vote speak for itself and and move on. Kristen, do you have anything else that you want to add as a committee member? nothing that hasn't really already been spoken to. There was a discussion about um how the best way to if we could divide the roster, bring an amendment to divide the roster because there was no concern about part of it and some concern about another part of it. Um mostly the the teachers that the NSEA is recommending. Um, so my

083impression leaving that meeting was like what Lisa said that Sher was going to go speak to people that had information on how to bring amendments. Um, but I didn't feel like there was a definite this is exactly what we're going to do. This is how we're bringing it forward tomorrow. Um, just that there was concern about the NSEA portion of the roster. Um, and that there an amendment or a change was going to be brought today. >> Great. Any other board members who haven't Okay. So, so I just want to be real clear that what what we're discussing is the amended motion which is to insert the word teachers into this. I just I just want to I just want to I mean it's kind of confusing and things are getting overlapping and so just

084this is the current thing that we're discussing though it's all kind of one giant ball of wax. So, >> oh god. >> Do you still have Nope, you're good. All right. And then I know we have we haven't heard from Maggie or Liz. >> I can I clarify something just >> sure specific just because so after it was suggested that Ryan would be involved then I made the suggestion that I didn't think that was necessary. I felt like we could just use the motion that we have which is appropriate and then changes to that but there wasn't any further discussion after that and I wasn't in the room uh because I was over Zoom so it uh because no one commented on that I guess I did assume that there was agreement that we were

085just going to go with the original motion. I didn't know that it was appropriate to change these motions from the time of the committee to the board meeting. And so I would hope that we'd have some kind of process for that in the future. Like uh you know maybe something would go out ahead of time to people. Uh it just doesn't feel like it's an efficient way for us to be working. Uh that's all. Oh, okay. Yes, Liz. >> I uh my only comment from somebody that wasn't on the committee, but I did have a a good conversation with uh board member Jones. Uh and so I understand her concerns were about the um public teacher versus uh non-public school teacher ratios on the list. My only concern is probably a parliamentary one coming into

086this without that committee knowledge to have to vote on something to say, "Yeah, I approve voting on this." Removing a section and not knowing that that section being removed will also be voted on separately would make me vote that down because I do want to have a a vote on the teachers. Um, so that's my only thing is just from a parliamentary perspective. Um it was a little confusing to me that we wouldn't get to the whole list. >> So I have a there there have been several parliamentary procedural questions um just wonderings people wondering and so so my thought on this at this point would be would we like to hear from our board parliamentarian Dr. for >> does anyone have a question for him? My only question is are we voting on I

087want to either vote on the whole list or I want to be assured that >> I get to vote on all of it and separately but I prefer to vote for it as a whole as it was presented to us by the staff. But just as long as I >> I I have a parliamentary question. I I mean is it if our committee meeting ended with this as the as an as a motion that was already on the table, is it appropriate that it was changed after the meeting and committee members weren't informed? I guess and I guess it's two questions. Is it appropriate through Robert's rules, but is it appropriate just in general just in terms of, you know, working uh efficiently with our board members? >> Okay. Well, we'll have Dr. For take

088the mic. >> Okay. I'm Ryan for I work at the Nebraska Department of Education. I think I've heard the questions and I'm going to try to address Liz Rener and Deborah Ner your questions together. I'm going to back up though to describe my involvement in this process. I was not in attendance at the planning and evaluation committee meeting a at the conclusion of the planning and evaluation committee. I was informed by my supervisor, the commissioner of education, that there was a request to engage my um services, my knowledge in working specifically with Sher Jones on a plan for what to bring forward to the committee. It was represented to me that there was no recommendation from the committee, that there was not agreement from the committee members on the recommendation that was brought forward to

089the committee. And that recommendation was to approve the roster. So that would be all parts of the roster and there was not agreement there. >> Question, >> but there was also no disagreement on the motion that was before us. So shouldn't it be assumed that if there's no disagreement, then that's what's coming forward, not a new motion. There was no agreement on the recommendation which was to approve the roster. And so my charge was to work with board member Jones for a plan to bring forward all of the um aspects of the roster but in a way that would be agreeable for those who didn't agree with the original recommendation. So, uh, one would not make a motion for something that they did not agree with. So, Sherry Jones was willing to bring forward is

090willing to bring forward a motion to approve the higher education and governance sections. So, a motion was prepared to do that and that's the main motion that's on the floor right now. There's an amendment attached to that as well. a second motion was prepared and that was then to approve the teacher roster. So, um could that have been done in a different way? Yes, it could have been done and maybe still could be by having a motion to approve the whole thing and then carving that out somehow. This in my estimation was the most direct and um I'm going to say clean, but I don't like that word approach to this. There was there was agreement by all committee members to approve the higher education and governance rosters or sections of the roster. So that

091was prepared. There was not agreement on the teacher roster. So that was prepared as a second um as a second motion. >> I still come back with this was all done after a meeting and the committee members weren't informed of it. I still don't understand the appropriateness of that at all. Like if a new motion I mean no one disagreed. No one voted to say this isn't the motion we want to bring forward. So, that's the official motion that should have been brought forward to the board meeting. Now, we can all vote down the motion that was made right now and go back to what the committee had and was discussing. But I just don't understand, and this has happened more than once, how things happen in committee and then when we get to the

092board meeting, it's different. I just don't understand how that happens. Uh I know you've explained it, but I hope that we don't keep doing this without at least telling your fellow committee members. And I do hope that we vote down the motion that's before us right now so that we can get back to approving the entire roster. And the reason I am making such a big deal about this is because it is an attack on our public school teachers that they want to leave off these names. Those were the reasons that were given in committee. Those are the reasons that have be given for a year now as we've been discussing the NCTTE commission. There is a way to bring in non public school teachers. They can be appointees to the state board of education,

093but to turn down these four public school teachers just because NSEA brought them forward and because they're public school teachers, it it feels like we're chipping away at something important. And I have to keep reminding myself, I just want to give an example. Like there was if you're in Omaha or saw the news, I mean like there's a battle between our police foundation are uh their union and a state senator in Omaha and it's ugly and it's frankly racist and inappropriate. But I have to keep reminding myself that that's an arm of the police union that's fighting with this state senator. that isn't the police department. And I think that's what gets lost sometimes is the teachers union has a political arm, but the teachers union is a really important organization for lifting up and

094elevating teachers across our state. The majority of teachers in our state are a part of it. And so to target the NSEA and teachers that they represent and teachers that are teaching in public schools just seems really inappropriate to me. Okay. At this time, um, we'll hear I'll we've trying to follow Robert's rules. I don't keep tabs on the time, but I know that for each motion, each board member can speak twice. Sherry, I know you have your light on. I'll let you speak and then I'll open it back up to any board member who hasn't spoken and then we'll vote on this amendment. >> Okay. I just want to note that out of respect for my fellow board members and those that were not part of the planning and evaluation committee, I did mention

095to them my intention of bringing forth amendments today. So those of you that were not, I did hopefully respectfully bring that to your attention. So Deborah, you may not have known about that. So I want to let you know that now. And I also want to note that I was a non-public school. I was a public school teacher for 35 years. And I believe I'm being unfairly accused of something that is not true. um that I am adversarial being to public school teachers. That is far from the truth. My intention of why I'm pro pro um bringing forth what I am will be shared later with the amendment. Thank you. >> Okay. Any other board members who haven't spoken and would like to before we vote on this? Liz, >> mine's quick and it again

096it's just procedural. Um, we did have a conversation and it's simply um, if the motion's going to change and split. Um, it's not on our agenda. I don't have anything in writing. So, it would just be nice to get a piece of paper that says this. I don't care if it happens in the morning before this meeting, but just something that assures me that while this is going to be split apart, you will have the opportunity to vote on both things. So that's the only uh request I would make procedurally. >> Thank you for that. And Maggie, >> thank you. Um I have the second piece of Sherry's amendment and she did pull me yesterday and talk to me and I appreciated that and not being on the committee. don't obviously don't know what's going

097on in there, but this conversation and the tension that comes along with it like makes me concerned that maybe it should go back to committee like and I don't know if that's a time waste or what everyone thinks of that, but it I'm I guess I don't know also enough about the benefits of splitting the original motion into two motions and what the motivation is behind that like I just what we've been talking about today. >> Any other any other board members who haven't spoken? >> Can I ask a procedural question >> of me or Dr. For >> maybe you if you know the answer you might >> uh the the motion that we have right now is the higher ed and governance plus the teachers. It's an amended motion and that is what is

098on the floor right now. >> Okay. So if that is not passed then we go back to Sherry's original half that is the governance and the higher ed. >> Yes, that is correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You got clarified? >> Yep. >> All right. So I want to make another comment. Um unless there's somebody else that hasn't spoken yet. So because I know some of you who have chairs of committees have shared this frustration when you found something that was not the same as the last conversation you had. and talking to other board members that are not part of the committee isn't the same as uh and also when the meeting ended there was not a clear indic I guess since I said the last thing I just assumed and no one said anything

099that that wasn't an appropriate step that it just seemed appropriate that we would bring that motion and I am hoping that if we don't pass this adding teachers that we will vote vote down Sher Jones motion because I feel like it's about precedent. I feel like we should be voting for the entire roster and no matter what talking points you bring forward today. I know what I heard for the last year and yesterday, but we should be voting for the whole roster. I don't like us one breaking with what the committee how the committee ended and changing it in between and I also don't like us breaking up pieces of something that have never in all my years on the board been an issue and unless it is about public school teachers I haven't heard

100anything different so I look forward to having hearing that about that today so that's all I'm asking >> right the motion is to amend the original motion by inserting the word teachers. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> I have one more question >> for someone specific. >> A committee member. Okay. >> What are the impacts of having the original motion split into these two alternative motions? >> So, >> can I mean, does the committee chair want to speak to that? Or maybe Sherry wants to explain why she broke it up. >> But I can tell you why. >> Having it broken into two means that it's basically and I I don't know how the end result is going to exactly happen, but showing basically that the two the first two sections were agreed upon at committee.

101This third section is was not agreed upon at committee. So, it's to be more transparent with the public. >> Okay. >> But in all the years we've approved this list, we've never broke it up. And this is a very specific intention about the public school teachers. And so please keep that in mind because what our board member it looks like wants to do is to vote for part of the committee and not vote for the other part that was recommended. And there's still a fix for it. I mean I'm doing this on principle. I'm not doing this because if we vote him down there's still going to be come forward from the executive committee of NACti. I mean there's it's just nonsensical to even do this vote. But it is about principle and I believe

102that I'm not excited about passing something that wasn't brought forward by a committee. And so I'm not opposed to it going back, but I'm also very happy if we can vote down the motion that was made, not the amended motion, and then go back to the original motion. Kirk, >> I've I've heard from two different committee members that that is not what came forward. There was no agreement that the motion that was given to you was approved. So that assumption is wrong. So your whole argument is wrong. And I heard from two different board uh committee members. So your your assumption is wrong and you're basing your your whole understanding of this is what was brought forward from the board or from the committee. You don't vote in committee. There's nothing binding you to that.

103I've had a committee or a chairman say, "Hey, Kirk, do you agree with us?" Say, "hm, we'll see." So that that's that's the nod that, "Hey, there may be a change." And I had two people on that committee say, "Hey, Sherry was going to go to Dr. Ford and get some clarification." That's why it's split. So your whole assumption that she's bringing something forward that was a that wasn't agreed on and what was agreed on is what you like is not right. >> It isn't about what I like or don't like. We ended the meeting with that motion. There wasn't any changed motion until afterwards. And what I'm saying is for me it's about precedent that we ended with that motion. I assumed that there was not going to be any further motion unless I

104heard about it. I mean as a committee member and uh and so there was only one motion in front of us. So it is right that I would assume that would be the motion that we would have before us today. I, as I point out, this has happened in other committees. I know other board members, my peers have gotten upset when things have been changed between discussions. It isn't appropriate and we don't need I mean, if we didn't have a new uh motion that was even discussed by all the members, I I don't understand why it's even being brought forward. Sorry, I'm rambling now. So, at this time, before I repeat what the motion is, >> okay, >> does any board member have any new information? Because I think we've kind of heard the same

105thing a couple different ways. So, the current amendment that is on the floor is to insert the word teachers. So the motion would read, I move to approve the higher education, governance, and teacher sections of the 2025 2026 NCT roster. Would the recording secretary please call the role? Douglas, >> yes. >> Penner, >> no. >> Teagmier, >> no. Ner, >> yes. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Rener, >> yes. >> Jones, >> no. >> Shonhof, >> no. >> Four, yes. Four, no. >> So, the amendment is not approved. We go back to the original motion. I will read that again. The original motion I move to approve the higher education I'm not moving the motion reads sorry motion reads I move to approve the higher education and governance sections of the 2025 2026 NCTTE roster. Is

106there any discussion on this motion? Liz, this is procedural again. If this motion fails, what happens next? >> Dr. Four, you feel free to Yes, stay right here. >> If this motion fails, I believe that it would be appropriate to introduce any other motion that is not exactly the same motion >> that has that that would have failed. Can you say that in y plain English for everyone? I saw a lot of >> Soapo Iowa. You could uh introduce the original motion that was brought to to the committee. Approve the uh roster. >> Got it. Um, I guess my question might be for the staff mo member that provided the rationale because my concern is if this gets uh voted down or we hit some kind of log jam, where does that leave Nik in

107terms of them being able to conduct their business? >> So, that is a good question. Uh, Brad Dirkson, could you please come forward? And when you get to the table, I will have like right now >> I have had a request for a restroom break. >> Just so you know, the notes were passing. So, what I want to do is what I I what I would really like to do is at least get your question and then I'll I'll whisper to Ryan and figure out a good timing. >> Yes. Um my question is should uh should all the motions fail and we don't approve um any portion of the roster, how does that impact NICD and their ability to uh proceed with their business? >> Um thank you Brad Ericson, administrator, department of education. The

108roster includes uh a variety of new members that have expiration dates or that all the members that are appointed have expiration dates. So if there was no approval of of the roster, there would be a significant number of vacancies especially in the higher education section because they have annual terms. Um so that would there would be a significant portion. There is a piece of the bylaws or the organizational policies section six that notes that interimm uh replacements made after the annual state board of education approval will be approved by ND staff um and formally approved by state board if they continue to serve as an NCT member in the next membership year. So that would be we'd fall in line with section six of the organizational policies. >> You can ask a followup. Yeah, thank

109you for that. So, if I'm understanding correctly, if we don't approve this roster, they they have vacant seats, but they can interim temporary members can be appointed. >> Correct. >> And then this wouldn't this directory wouldn't come back for us uh to vote on as a board for another year. >> Correct. >> Got it. Thank you. I appreciate that. Any other questions for Mr. Dirkson before he steps away? >> Okay, we're good. All right. So, under advisement of the commissioner, we are going to go ahead and try and finish this agenda item before we take a break. >> So, it's going to motivate discussion. >> All right. The motion is to approve the higher education and governance sections of the roster. Is there any discussion on that particular motion? Higher education and governance sections. Maggie.

110>> Okay. Is this the part where if I want to talk about it going back to committee is this now or >> Yes. You could make a motion to refer it to the committee, but the term has already started. And so then, >> can you just mic yourself so I don't have to repeat it? >> I needed your permission. You could refer it back to the committee. The term has already started. And so then in a sense you're going to be in the interim space then where the the organizational policies allow for NDE staff to appoint. So in some ways at this point my guidance would be that that might not make sense for all sections of the roster. If there is agreement, okay, >> on two sections of the roster, it might make sense

111to proceed with that and then deal with the section where there's not agreement. >> Maggie, do you have any followup for Dr. For? >> Okay. >> I Deb, >> yeah, I feel like that's putting your thumb on the scale a little bit. I one of the options that we have Maggie is to defeat this motion and bring forward the original motion. That's everything. And if people want to vote against that entire list, then that's their prerogative. But I really believe strongly that we should be voting for the entire list, not just a portion of it. I think politics doesn't belong in these discussions. What NACG brings forward, what the staff brings forward is for us to either approve or not approve, not break it down into small pieces that uh so that we don't have

112to go on the record about anything. I think we should all be on the record about do we approve all of these positions or not is what I'm hoping that we will do. >> Okay. Anyone who hasn't spoken to this Okay. The motion is to approve the higher education and governance sections of the 2025 2026 NCTTE roster. With the recording secretary, please call the role. >> Shonhoff. >> Yes. Neri, >> no. >> Christensen, no. Rener, >> no. >> Jones, >> yes. >> Douglas, >> no. >> Penner, >> yes. >> Tagmire, yes. Four, yes. Four, no. Okay, the motion fails. >> Can we make a new motion? >> Yes. Ryan says yes. >> I don't have the original motion. >> I do. Can Yep. I move to approve the 2025 20226 Nebraska Council on Teacher Education

113roster. >> Second. >> It has been moved and seconded to approve the 2025 2026 NCTTE roster. Is there any discussion on this motion? >> Yes, Liz. Um, since I'm assuming since the board member Jones motion failed that her upcoming motion will or will not happen. So, I would like to hear you had said you said you had information about that and so maybe now would be a great time for you to have the the opportunity to share that. >> Sure. >> May I? >> If you would like to. Yes. Sure. Okay. Um, Nebraska has 16 higher education institutions with educator preparation programs. These programs train teachers for both public and non-public schools. But yet, non-public school teachers are not represented in the teacher makeup of the Nebraska Council on Teacher Education. nor are there any

114non-union public school teachers. Although I don't have exact numbers because some of this is proprietary. This practice may be excluding nearly 10,000 teachers in Nebraska. To note, the NCT organization was established in the 1940s. And I wonder if there has ever been representation from these two groups. I have nothing personal I have nothing personal against the four teachers being brought forth for approval as I do not know them. I appreciate their willingness to serve on the NCTTE. I am bringing for bringing forth this motion because I want all Nebraska teachers to have the opportunity to be considered to serve on the NCT. And according to the NCTTE's organizational policies, I don't believe there is anything which prohibits the selection of non-public teachers nor teachers not belonging to the union. And some teachers may not belong

115to the union because of financial difficulties. So they would be being excluded as well. Until there are non-public school teachers and non-union public school teachers given a seat at the NCTTE table, I will be voting no >> unless somebody else wants to comment but >> okay. >> Um you asked so yes I will go to you. Okay. Um, thank you. I appreciate that. And that's essentially what um Sherry shared with me yesterday. So, thank you. I am a little bit confused because my understanding, and maybe we can bring Brad Dirkson back up again. I'm so sorry. I know somebody's really uncomfortable right now. Uh but there is a way is there not for non-public school teachers to be appointed to NICD. It's just there's one block of appointments that kind of belongs to NSEA. So

116I I agreed with Sherry that we should have representation from non-public school teachers on NICDI and I would hope that I don't know if NDE is responsible for those appointments or how they come to be if there needs to be better communication with nonUN um non-public school teachers but I too would like to see them just not at the expense of um the existing dynamics uh as they've been created. Um, so if someone could clarify officially >> that do I mean do you trust me to clarify officially >> or would you rather have >> Yes, because I'm sure somebody will tell you if you're not. So there there are uh there are 16 there are 16 teacher positions 14 of which NSEA brings forth names which the remaining two are um brought forth through the

117department under Mr. Dirkson's direction. Does that answer your question? >> Yes. That clarifies to me that non-public school teachers are able to serve on the Nick T council. >> Okay. So we've been having this discussion for a very long time. I'm thankful I only had half a cup of coffee this morning. I want to I was going to open it up to people who haven't um maybe had as much floor time to talk >> question if we're going to vote on this. Does Sher get to bring her motion? >> You you uh >> motion on the floor is to approve the 2025 2026 NCT roster. That is what we are discussing. That is what we will be voting on next. >> Then does this her motion her second motion get to come to the table?

118>> No, because it's already been voted on. >> Okay. >> An amendment could be made to this motion. >> So, I'll I'll speak to it. Sherry brought uh a nice proposal a couple months ago that I really liked that really had a different strategy on where these educators were chosen from. Pretty uh but uh we didn't get very far with that. So, Along with Sherry, I would like to see a more equitable representation that includes non-public educators and educators who are not members of NSEA. And I will vote no until we bring that to the board. >> Okay. Because there's a lot of people that want to talk on this, I'm going to just keep marking down who's spoken. Deb. >> So, I appreciate your comments, Liz, because I too am not opposed to non-public

119school teachers being on this committee. Definitely supported as somebody who's attended non-public schools and sent my children to non-public schools. Uh certainly understand the need for that representation. Not opposed. Uh but I am opposed to uh I mean this was we discussed this as a board at length I don't know was it 6 months ago whenever it's uh and we agreed as a board that we didn't want to change the precedents that have been in place. We voted against making this different because we realized there was already opportunities on here to bring non-public school teachers on to NATI. Those processes are in place. What this feels like today is a backdoor way to force something that the board voted against uh just earlier this year. I would like to see us follow the process that

120the board agreed on and go through the correct channels to bring the correct teachers on. I don't feel like it's appropriate to punish everybody on this list just to make a point. >> Okay. >> Any more? I don't know who has their hand up. Kristen. Um, looking at the roster that's before us, it does look like one of the boardapp appointed member teacher members is coming up in 26. So, that would be an opportunity for a non-public school teacher to be appointed by the board. Um, the second part is a question for Ryan. Can I ask Ryan a question? >> You may. >> Ryan, can I ask you a question? Uh, if this motion doesn't pass, the full roster doesn't pass, then I think what Kirk was asking is then Sherry still can't or whoever

121has the motion to bring the teacher portion forward. Is that not available as an option then? Right. Is that what you were asking, Kirk? Okay. >> Yes. So, I'm going to back up because there was a motion to approve the higher education and governance sections. That motion was lost. That motion cannot be brought again in in that way. Now, the motion is to approve the entire roster. If that motion is lost, another different motion could be brought forward. So the motion to approve the teacher roster could be brought forward but that does not then take care of the other two sections if that makes sense. >> Okay. All right. Thank you Dr. For Sherry. >> Dr. for is there a means for I just lost my for reconsideration being brought forth by a member who

122voted for the last proposal not against but for I believe there's a means in Robert's rules of order. >> Yep. >> And and I want to add after that after you answer I want to add why I'm mentioning that. So on the mot so on the motion that was lost to approve the higher ed and um governance sections. >> Yes. >> That motion was in a sense voted down because of a 44 vote. Right. >> Mhm. >> So to reconsider you would have to be in the affirmative. >> Yes. >> And the affirmative in that would be those who voted no because the outcome was no. Okay, >> thank you for clarifying that. >> Okay. And may I add something to that why I'm mentioning that? >> Yes. Okay. So, to Liz's someone mentioned about

123we are we are we'll be losing all of the 48 members or whatever. That's partially why it it's important to get the governance and the higher education because then you have the 32 which gives a big portion of them that could carry on and there's a means to what would what they would do with the teacher people there. They would still be there some individuals but it would be so we'd still have the new 16 higher ed people who are being brought forth and the governance. So there'd be a solid group. That's that's why I was in support of those two together because Okay. But um I want to say in reality there has never to my knowledge nor when I asked NDE employees a non-public school teacher on that listing. So and if we

124do get Kristen one, we get the one position next year. That's one out of 16. And that ratio is not in line with the percentage of teachers represented. That's my concern. One is just a token. So >> I can I Yep. >> I guess you have said several times that your numbers are not accurate. I would like to see us have some accurate numbers before we start putting percentages to things and and then that would make sense to me. But I don't think a guesstimate is what I want to base policy on. And so let's maybe uh if you can work with whoever to find out exactly how many public school teachers there are versus private school teachers or non-public, then uh I think that's a conversation worth having. Okay. Anybody else? The motion is

125to approve the entire roster. Anyone else have a comment? Okay. The motion is to approve the 2025 2026 NCT roster. Would the recording secretary please call the role? Rener. Yes. Douglas, >> yes. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Jones, >> no. >> Tegmire, >> no. >> Penner, >> no. >> Neri, >> yes. >> Shonhoff, >> no. >> Four. Yes. Four. No. The motion is lost. Are there any further motions on this agenda item? Okay. >> Who would need to make the reconsideration? >> It would have to be somebody who voted against it would have to to reconsider. It would have to be someone who voted against approving higher ed and governance separately. >> Can I make a clarification? >> Dr. Four. And that is correct. But the word I used was not accurate. I said affirmative.

126The word I should have used is or the phrase is prevailing side. So the prevailing side in that was that it was lost. So if you voted no, you would be able to make the motion to reconsider if that makes sense. Now >> and can I just clarify by not taking any further action today, we leave this in the hands of the executive committee of NACDI. No, >> I believe it's in the department >> staff >> the staff >> the >> under Brad Dirkson >> to but what we were what were we told yesterday in committee that if we didn't approve the educators then the executive committee of NACDI >> do we have discuss >> could approve them >> she's asking for a point of information >> I just want I just want to make

127sure we're following Robert's rule I don't want to I don't want to get into a new discussion because we're not there in Robert's rules, but this is a clarifying question. >> Yeah. In the in point to your question from information you received yesterday, you are thinking accurately on what you received. What we did between yesterday and this morning was actually get into the bylaws and realized you got inaccurate information yesterday. So that so the if you if there if there is no further action today the the matter of appointing members to NCTTE falls on NDE staff >> without with or without board approval. [Music] So it's for the next year past that it would take board approval. >> Okay. So for the next year the status quo is maintained. >> Correct. >> If the NDE

128staff decides to do that. Uh okay. [Applause] Okay. The next few items. What do you mean by the status quo? >> I mean the NDE staff can just renew the people that were up for renewal >> for the next year. >> I would tell you that the NDE staff has the authority to appoint. >> Do they have the authority to appoint two or the four that may or may not make it on today? >> I would I would ask Mr. Dirkson if he has the information at hand. If you do, please come forward because if you do, why why do you even need board approval? I mean, if you're going to skirt the board for those >> Brad Dirkson, administrator, um the uh organizational policies um have terms set out for individual members. So, not

129all of the members terms have expired. there would still be a remaining number of members that would be on NCTTE. The question I believe is how are the individuals then replaced if there is no appointment of members and there's a vacancy piece and I think it really speaks to uh section six of the organizational policies which was approved by the board in 2021 uh that the process is outlined in the second paragraph of section six um where it speaks to the executive committee will ask nominating groups uh for an immediate replacement of those positions. And then from those nominating groups and those recommendations that are made, then ND staff will then approve those members to NCT for that one-year term. >> So it comes to the executive committee, correct? >> The executive committee would then

130ask the nominating groups that are outlined in organizational policies. The teacher section of NCTTE is section 4.0. 03 that notes that there are two nominations from the state board of education and there are the remaining are going to be nominated by the Nebraska state education association. So practically there's two coming from the board 14 nominations coming from NSEA. So as the organizational policies are outlined in section six, if there are vacancies that the executive committee of NCTTE would ask for nominations from the nominating group which would be NSEA and then from those nominations staff would then appoint individuals to the organization is how section six is. So, they're just going to appoint two more NSEA members. It's not very inclusive. It's not very equitable. That's sad. >> Okay. Try not to get into discussion. Just

131clarification. >> Okay. Okay. We are going to take a break and we will reconvene at 11:25. The board meeting will resume in it looks like about 2 minutes using the clock at the back of the room. If everyone can find their seat. Okay, the board meeting will resume. >> So if everyone can find their seats, we will begin again. >> Thank you. >> All right, we are on um agenda item 7.3F. This is the pilot process for clinical practice at the University of Nebraska Carney. Board members, are there any questions or discussion on this item? Agenda item 7.3G. This is a rule 11 teacher waiver request from NI. I'm going to say it. I'm going to Omaha Nation Public Schools. Any questions or discussion on this? know that these teacher waiverss came through planning and

132evalu. Rule 11 teacher waiver request from Bloomfield Community School District. Any questions or discussion on this item [Applause] 7.3, Rule 11, teacher waiver request from Stapleton Public Schools. Board members, are there any questions or discussion on this item? >> Lisa? Um, I just would say that uh Melody brought these for early childhood and when asked if there was a plan in place for these waiverss, there definitely is. They're working towards endorsements. They're doing all the things they need doing, >> right? They do bring their their plans in order to to seek approval. Also, um the rules committee is currently working with staff to address the issues within the rule that maybe are problematic and could be changed without compromising quality or safety. So, be looking for that information in the next couple of months from

133the rules committee. I won't get on Maggie's toes too far. Any other discussion on those waiverss? Well, then we will hand the floor over to Chair Maggie Douglas to report on behalf of the rules and regulations committee meeting. Thank you. The rules and regulations committee reports on the August 7th, 2025 meeting of the committee. Members present were chair Maggie Douglas, vice chair Liz Rener, Elizabeth Tegmmeer, and Kirk Penner. Committee members reviewed the rules report and asked about the rules under other rules in the revision process. Staff provided that those rules are currently in the revision process with NDE staff and to expect those rules to come before the committee in the future. NDE staff provided information on the revision of rule 47 regulations for career academy programs established by school district. The committee recommends proceeding

134with the hearing draft. NDE staff provided information following public input on the revision of rule 20 regulations for the approval of educator preparation programs. The committee members agreed with the NDE recommendations in response to the comments received and recommends proceeding with a hearing draft. NDE staff provided information following public input on the revision of rule 11 regulations for the approval of pre kindergarten programs established by schools boards or educational service units and for the issuance of early childhood education grants. NDE staff provided the committee with the comment submissions and staff recommendations. The committee asked to eliminate the reference to toilet training and otherwise agreed with NDE recommendations. The committee recommends proceeding with the hearing draft and was assured they would see the draft before the hearing. This conclude the rules and re rules and regulations

135committee report. Maggie Douglas chairg Thank you Maggie. Are there any questions on the rules and regulations committee report? Okay, we are now moving on to additional business. Is there a motion on item 6.7.8? Yes. I move to approve school district's request for exclusions to the budget limitation in accordance with the provisions of TIOSA. >> Second. It has been moved and seconded to approve school district's request for exclusions to the budget limitation in accordance with the provisions of Teioa Tiosa. Is there any discussion on the motion Lisa? Yeah, go ahead. Sorry. Are you >> No, I thought I heard something, but >> I thought I did, too. It's the room speaking to us. >> Okay, Lisa. >> Um, okay. I uh pulled this one from the consent and the reason being is um while I feel

136like I'm very knowledgeable in the area of literacy and math instruction and learning um one area that I'm really trying to learn a lot about is budget and finance. So I enjoy being on that committee. Um, this one was one that I was looking at and trying to understand more with the exclusions for school districts. I believe there are approximately 62 school districts asking for exclusions. Um, which my math may be off because I took this I didn't do the math myself. Uh, which looks to equal approximately $121 million. And of course that's a large a fairly large number. And if you're following what's happening in the state right now, we do have um some financial issues happening and have been happening in the legislature and in regards to taxes. And so I reached out

137to Bryce Wilson who is um our office of financial and administrative services administrator and I wanted to him to kind of explain how these exclusions work. One of the things that I noticed is um that uh these exclusions will um cause these school districts to qualify for potential special grant funds. And so I wasn't exactly sure what what that meant as far as grant funds and how that could potentially impact taxes and TIOSA and um revenue for our schools. Um, with only 62 school districts asking for these exclusions, it made me wonder why aren't more why aren't all school districts asking for these exclusions and what is the overall impact to our taxpayers in our state. So, um I would love if this would be okay with our president to have, um Bryce come on

138up and give the public a an overall of exactly what these exclusions meant. I gave him a heads up so that he knew. I didn't want to just put him on the spot. Um but I would love to have him kind of answer some of those questions. >> Sure. Bryce, could you come forward? And I don't think that this is abnormal. The budget is huge. It's confusing and we can hear it and learn and glean and remember every time we hear a little bit more. So, thank you for coming forward. >> Bryce Wilson, finance officer, Department of Education. And the good news is I think I can explain school finance in about 3 hours. So, we should be good. >> I'm glad we had our restroom break. >> Yeah. Uh so just want to go

139I think the easiest way to explain this is just a quick reminder that in Nebraska school district spending is um is limited by state statute in three different ways. We have the levy lid, the new property tax authority lid and then the spending authority lid. This item itself is related to the spending authority lid. So it's how much school districts can spend in their general fund. What's important to understand about this additionally is state uh legislature has limited specifically how much Nebraska taxpayer dollars is is the intent of the spending lid. They want to control how much local and state spending um dollars school districts can do. These exclusions to uh the spending lid are for items that are not taxpayer dollars. So, they're going to be things like grants, federal grants, um grants from

140private in industries or companies, donations, um all types of different activities that are not taxpayer funds. So, if we didn't if these exclusions are not allowed, districts would not be able to spend. So just an example is if Walmart gave um a company or even their the a school district's own foundation gives them a donation to spend for a playground or something like that um textbooks any whatever the donation is for a school district up against their spending lid would not be able to take advantage of that donation. So these exclusions are to allow districts to go over their spending lid to spend these additional income sources coming in. Um primarily that's what it's for. the question you asked um about why only 62 districts are applying. This item comes on a regular basis. So,

141it's just dependent somewhat on there'll be more than 62 that ask for the exclusions. They just start doing them in June usually and they'll keep coming in through October, maybe even November um for additional requests if a district needs them. Um if they're not up against their spending lid, they don't have a real reason to ask for those exclusions. they don't need it. They can they can spend the funds that they or the they have enough spending authority that they're not needed for them. >> That's the quick version. >> We appreciate the quick version. Does any board member have any questions? >> Maybe I should also clarify too that there is no no impact. These exclusions do not impact TIOS or state funding in any way. Not only are they um not they they have

142no impact on um the amount of state aid that goes out, but they're excluded from the following year's um spending numbers that are used to calculate TIOSA. So in no way do they impact the amount of funds that the state is required to pay out in TIOS to school districts. >> And then likewise, they they wouldn't have any impact then on local property tax. >> Correct. They're not they're not really impacting local property taxes. Um they don't impact what districts have to report for revenue in any way. The districts are still required to go under their they still have the same audit requirements and the independent auditors check all of the financial information to make sure that it is reported accurately and correctly. >> Any other questions for board me from board members? Okay. Thank

143you, Bryce. Any further discussion on this item? Lisa, >> I'm just trying to make sure I've got all my questions answered. Sorry, I had a whole list and I don't know that's not right here on my paper. Um, no, I think that's really good. I feel like the way that he was explaining it to me uh yesterday was also helpful. I think this is just something I'm going to have to keep probably hearing when it comes up and I'll probably keep asking you questions every time. But I really appreciate um the response and um I'm going to keep trying to learn. So Bryce, get ready for more questions from me. Very good. The motion is to approve school district's request for exclusions to the budget limitation in accordance with the provisions of TIOSA with the

144recording. Secretary, please call the role. >> Christensen, >> yes. >> Ner, >> yes. >> Jones, >> yes. >> Rener, >> yes. >> Douglas, >> yes. >> Shonhoff, >> yes. >> Teagmier, >> yes. >> Penner, >> yes. >> 8, yes. The affirmative has it and the motion to approve school district's request for exclusions to the budget limitation in accordance with the provisions of TIOSA passes. I do have just a real brief. It was not pulled from the consent agenda, but it's an additional business. Yesterday, we had two requests. There were three, but two of them are going to be fulfilled right after this. Um, I had one request about the assessments and just kind of getting an overview chart of when the assessments are given, what are they given over, how often uh, Lane Car has

145compiled a visual. Also, a um request came in yesterday for a listing of all of the rules that we have and sort of a oneliner or a description of what they are. Lane has also prepared that. So, um less than 24 hours and you your requests have been granted. So, don't leave without getting those those papers from him. The next items on the agenda 9.1 through 9.3 are information items and written reports for the board. Agenda item 10, good of the order. This section of the agenda is intended for board members to offer informal observations of the work of the state board. Board members may make brief announcements about attendance at future events for the purpose of informing other board members. No business or motions or suggested actions of the board may be offered at

146this point in the agenda. Nor should board members engage in substantive discussion about other agenda items or introduce new agenda items. Does anyone have anything for the good of the order? Thank you to those who attended in person and who tuned in to the broadcast. The next meetings of the state board of education are scheduled for September 4th and 5th, 2025 in Lincoln, Nebraska. The August 8th, 2025 state board meeting is adjourned.