New statewide test 'may be hard to derail'

A proposed bill that would mandate a statewide model for student assessment testing appears to be moving forward but Sen. Mark Christensen is not fully convinced it's the right direction to take.

LB1157, introduced by Sen. Ron Raikes, advanced in first round approval Tuesday by 30-4 with Christensen casting one of those nay votes. But many senators didn't vote at all, he said this morning at the Chamber Legislative conference call, which leads him to believe it isn't a done deal yet.

Still, the bill "has a lot of momentum and it might be hard to derail," he added.

The bill will change testing at public schools to a statewide assessment instead of testing done by a district by district system. Testing would be done in reading and math for grades three through eighth and in one grade in high school. It would also include a statement of purpose that the system would "comply with federal assessment and accountability requirements."

The bill would give a better analysis of student performance across the state, proponents say.

But Christensen said the testing done in schools in his district has already proven to be very successful, as other schools have begun to use that system as well.

"That tells you how good it is," he said.

Some comments he's heard about the bill include the concern that if the bill passes, it would be the state dictating how to teach students instead of locally elected boards and Christensen admitted his own mixed emotions about the bill.

"Are we teaching toward testing or teaching what students need to know?" he asked.

He said the status of his own priority bill, LB1094, that would use $9 million of state cash reserves to pay irrigators who sold their water to Republican River NRD's, is on the right path.

The language is being reviewed and he's been "working the floor" in support of the bill, he said, and it's "looking good so far."

When the bill advances to the full floor may not be until next week or even later, he said, as several other priority bills are already slated to be heard.

This may include debate on LB 371, introduced by Sen. John Synowiecki, that would create the Nebraska Peace Officer Retirement Plan, a mandated statewide benefit plan for all law enforcement.

McCook City Manager Kurt Fritsch told Christensen that this would cause hardship for smaller towns and villages to take on this cost. Several communities are opposed to the bill, he said, including McCook

Some cities in Nebaska are not prepared to handle the costs financially as in other states who have been doing this all along, Fritsch said."I don't know if they could take the hit."

Christensen agreed but said the bill had several angles to take into consideration. The dilemma is that the benefits would attract and keep the best possible candidates in law enforcement but the costs in paying for it would be detrimental/ in some communities.

"People won't apply if you don't pay enough," he reasoned, adding that he hadn't made up his mind yet on how he would vote.

Other bills up for consideration next week include:

* LB 895, introduced by Sen. Ray Janssen of Nickerson, that adds new qualifications to the Nebraska Advantage Act. LB 895 would add a new tier for projects that pay at least 150 percent of the state average weekly wage or 200 percent of the county average, whichever is larger. Christensen said he is in favor of this bill.

* LB 721, which concerns landscaping of the courtyards within the Nebraska State Capitol Building. The bill is the priority bill of Sen. DiAnna Schmiek and would allow the capitol to own, maintain and restore fountains in the courtyards, half of which had been filled in. The costs of maintaining the fountains are currently the responsibility of the city of Lincoln and Lancaster county. Christensen said he was not sure how he would go on this bill.

* LB 1092, introduced by Sen. John Harms of Scottsbluff, which would require seat belts on all new school buses. Christensen said he's a "great believer in seat belts" but has questions about liability issues if a child did not wear a seat belt but was hurt in an accident.

.