麻豆精品

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 麻豆精品 Newsletter

Nebraska voters didn鈥檛 get a chance to size up the major candidates to replace Gov. Pete Ricketts on the debate stage this year.

Republican nominee Jim Pillen declined to debate, describing the process as political theater. His Democratic opponent, State Sen. Carol Blood, criticized the move.

So the Nebraska Examiner interviewed both candidates last week about several key issues. We鈥檒l present these in a question-and-answer format over the next few days. Today鈥檚 topics are K-12 education and property taxes. Their answers were edited for brevity and clarity.

Q: What, if anything, needs fixing in Nebraska鈥檚 K-12 education system, and what would you do to fix it? 

Pillen: Nebraskans agree that our future鈥檚 our kids. And we can never, ever, ever give up our kids, whether it鈥檚 a teacher, it鈥檚 a coach, no matter what the circumstances are. It takes a village to raise our kids. We can never give up on a kid. They are our future. And yet, the state of Nebraska has. We鈥檝e quit on the kids in 158 of the 244 school districts (in state aid to education formula funding, which is meant to equalize aid to schools). When Nebraskans understand that, they gasp.

It鈥檚 unacceptable. It鈥檚 not Nebraska. It鈥檚 not fair. That has to be changed. And it has to be done to have the money follow the student. Then it鈥檚 all local. Our schools are locally controlled. Each school district needs to figure out how they adjust or overcome that, or how they have less property taxes because of that change.

Blood: I believe in a PK (pre-kindergarten) through 14 (postsecondary) education. Nebraska can do universal child care. We know that anything prior to kindergarten is really important because we make sure that we give kids a good start in life when it comes to education. It鈥檚 really an opportunity for us to catch red flags, when it comes to things like the cycle of violence, the cycle of poverty. It gives us an opportunity to lift up those families and get them help. We have put tens of millions of dollars into the infrastructure of our community colleges. We can allow all of our high school seniors the opportunity to get up to a two-year degree. 鈥� It can be in the trades. It can be in ag. It can be in insurance. It can be in IT, health care. But what鈥檚 awesome about it is that they can walk out of there with no college debt.

The TEEOSA (state aid to schools formula) is antiquated. It doesn鈥檛 work. We do know that two-thirds of schools don鈥檛 get state aid, and then that means that they depend on the wealthiest landowners in their districts. And that鈥檚 not fair and equitable. So when we go to fix the school aid issue, the first thing we have to know is that we have to fully fund all of our schools, especially if we want to lower property taxes.

Q: How would you fund those changes? 

Pillen: TEEOSA has had so many special interests added on for 35 or 40 years, whatever it鈥檚 been, and it鈥檚 so complicated that you can鈥檛 find anybody who even understands it. So it鈥檚 just got to be bone dry, common-sense simple that Nebraskans can always understand. I鈥檓 not talking about defunding. I鈥檓 talking about changing the funding. So let鈥檚 just keep it simple math. A billion dollars of state funds divided by the number of students, and the funding follows a student to the school district. So it鈥檚 per student funding, not per district funding.

Blood: It鈥檚 not going to be one thing 鈥� it鈥檚 going to be multiple things. I think we really missed an opportunity with Senator (Lynne) Walz鈥檚 bill, a bill that would鈥檝e lowered everybody鈥檚 property taxes, would have fully funded 鈥� all of our schools in Nebraska, and it would鈥檝e been a one penny difference in your sales tax. Nobody likes to be taxed, but when you compare it to the balance of what everybody would have saved property-tax wise 鈥� I think the public would have been in favor of it. I also have been looking at our (state) budget, and we 鈥� have money that we don鈥檛 use wisely that we can shift. Then it鈥檚 going to be a matter of what are we willing to agree upon.

Q: Where do you stand on charter schools and why?

Pillen: I鈥檓 a big-time believer in competition. When you have free market competition, it brings the best out of the human spirit. And I鈥檓 a believer that you shouldn鈥檛 have to be wealthy to be able to go to a school. Public school systems are captive markets. So if you live in a school that is underperforming on achievement and you have no other choice for a child, I believe that鈥檚 wrong. I believe you should have an option, and that鈥檚 why I support charter schools.

Blood: I believe in public dollars for public schools with no exceptions. If you are interested in school choice, the nice thing about Nebraska is that you truly do have school choice. If you don鈥檛 like the school system you鈥檙e in, you have the ability to go to another school system. I think it鈥檚 interesting that some of the same people that are pushing for charter schools and for vouchers are the same ones that are trying to gut our public schools. And I wonder when I see this if they鈥檙e purposely trying to gut our public schools and make our teachers the villains so they can promote their own messaging.

Q: What role, if any, should the governor play in K-12 education in Nebraska, and how does that fit with the traditional roles of the State Board of Education and local school boards?

Pillen: It can be challenging to find the truth. The facts are really simple. If you go look at state statutes, the state 鈥� Board of Education makes recommendations. They have no statutory authority. They may be responsible for distributing some federal funding, but they have no statutory authority. So the authority rests again in local government with our local school boards. I鈥檓 a believer that we need to make sure all of our school boards understand that it is their say if a recommendation comes down that is not appropriate for your local school board. You say, 鈥淪orry, state. We don鈥檛 care what you think. This is what鈥檚 best for our community and our school.鈥�

Blood: I think as a leader in the executive branch as governor, if you want to lead the state, you have to lead by playing a role in education. Now there鈥檚 a difference between playing a role in it and demonizing it. I think the governor has to play a role because we are a very educated state. We have to play a role, but we have to be careful not to demonize when we don鈥檛 agree with something, and I do think it鈥檚 really unfortunate that our executive branch has been trying to take away funds. It says in our State Constitution 鈥� we鈥檙e going to provide education for the children of Nebraska.

Q: What is your plan to address property taxes at the state level? How would people pay for local services like education and public safety that property taxes fund?

Pillen: I think there are a couple or three approaches. One is that we just absolutely have to decrease spending and run government like a business and make sure that a whole lot of initiatives that were put in with a good step forward that doesn鈥檛 work, then we stop doing it if they鈥檙e not creating value. We need to just focus on what Nebraskans need, not things that would be nice. So I think we can make government certainly more efficient. 鈥� And then the other is I believe that our property taxes are too high. 鈥� Property tax has to be solved because it鈥檚 so out of whack. It is affecting every Nebraskan, whether you own property or not, because it鈥檚 on your rent.

It鈥檚 a state issue and it鈥檚 a local issue. We have to make sure local governments behave responsibly and become more efficient, as well. You have to run county government differently. Not every road needs to be gravel. Not everything that we used to do is a service needed. Quit spending money and tighten up in county government so we can have an impact. If our community is growing and we need another school 鈥� our high-performing kids waste their senior year in high school. Let鈥檚 get these kids into college sooner so we don鈥檛 keep spending money on more buildings and start doing business differently.

Lastly would be how property is appraised. It is just totally wrong. Let鈥檚 just pick a county that鈥檚 growing. All of a sudden, somebody鈥檚 farm ground is appraised at $30,000 an acre, which is not farmland value. Then they鈥檙e getting appraised for property tax that 鈥� the land can鈥檛 produce, much less make a living off the investment on that. We need to change that and work hard with the Unicameral on an income-based approach. That, then again, forces all of us to be running government like a business.

Blood: We鈥檝e come up with a lot of legislation to lower property taxes, and ultimately, nobody鈥檚 property taxes are lower. Until we stop unfunded and underfunded (state) mandates and fully fund our schools, we will never have true property tax relief. We know when Ben Nelson was governor, there were two reports done 鈥� one for schools and one for counties. It said the underlying cause of property taxes being high is these mandates, and they need to be stopped.

During the last recession 鈥� they had a bill that took away aid to local government, which is kind of when our property taxes really started to skyrocket. That aid had always balanced the property tax issue, kind of balanced the way things worked, because they knew we were handing down mandates 鈥� we made sure it鈥檚 not a burden. When they took that away, it became a bigger burden. We limit the tools they can use to pay for these things. Look at our smaller counties, like Johnson County. When they have an inmate die in their state prison (at Tecumseh), they have to pay for the autopsy and grand jury investigation. It isn鈥檛 that we don鈥檛 want those services, it鈥檚 that we don鈥檛 get the choice on how we pay for them. I had that constitutional amendment.

I really believe voters should have gotten to choose whether we should be able to pass a bill without showing how we鈥檙e going to pay for it first. That鈥檚 kind of our jobs. We can pass good laws without having to pass down the cost. 鈥� We put the burden on the counties. Eventually, they get to a breaking point where they have to pay for it. They pay for it by raising our property taxes. 鈥� We鈥檝e got to start there, because no matter what legislation we pass, as long as we keep handing down those mandates and we don鈥檛 allow people to vote on whether we should do it, it鈥檚 never going to change.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Cate Folsom for questions: [email protected]. Follow Nebraska Examiner on and .

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 麻豆精品鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.