Learning Community Overview
The information in this section highlights facts about the Learning Community (LC) law as it currently stands and the concerns about the LC law from the Papillion-La Vista School District (PLSD). 

Questions/Comments, please let us know.

The History of the Learning Community
Prior to the 2006 legislative session, school districts were, for the most part, in disagreement over school district boundaries.  The city of Omaha annexed the city of Elkhorn; Omaha Public Schools (OPS) attempted to absorb neighboring school districts such as Millard, Ralston, Elkhorn and Westside; and the Bellevue School District attempted to alter school boundaries with the Papillion-La Vista School District (PLSD).  OPS also filed a finance lawsuit against the state of Nebraska.

The 2006 legislative solution to these issues was the passing of LB1024 which created a LC, froze metro area school boundaries, and broke OPS into three districts.  During the 2007 Legislative Session, LB641 was passes; this amended LB1024 and allowed OPS to stay as one district.

What is the Learning Community? 

What is the PLSD’s position on the Learning Community? 
Since the initial legislation regarding the LC was first proposed and that statues were created, the PLSD has been involved and at the table with fellow school districts, the LC coordinating council, the governor and legislators.  The District has consistently voiced concerns over the common levy, the governance structure, and the loss of local control over finances and curriculum.

What are the PLSD concerns about the Learning Community?
Concern = Student Achievement
There is nothing in the LC law that focuses on improving student learning.  The only way this law attempts to address student learning is by moving students from one school district to another.  This concept adds a huge financial burden and logistical nightmare as districts are required to provide transportation for some of the students moving.  The PLSD would also question how moving students improves student learning?

Concern = Finances
The LC law divides the property tax base across two counties that do not have equal property assessment practices.  All 11 school districts in the LC will have a common property tax levy.  The money collected from this levy will go into one pool and be redistributed to the 11 school districts.  All property taxes collected form Papillion-La Vista residents will no longer remain in the PLSD.  After 15 months of existence, the LC has expended approximately $3 million in resources, but none of the expenses have impacted students or achievement.  In that same time frame in compliance with the LC law PLSD taxpayers have lost local resources and state aid to other LC school districts.  The ramifications of these revenue losses will only grow larger as the current funding formula remains in place and our student enrollment and needs increase.

Concern = Governance
The LC law adds another layer of governance and appropriates $1 million annually for the operation of this governing council.  Neither the PLSD nor Sarpy County is guaranteed representation on this council.

At the June 14^th meeting of the Board of Education the Papillion-La Vista Board of Education adopted 12 standing positions on the Learning Community (LC).  These positions will be reflected in the operation of the PLSD and the PLSD interaction with other school districts, agencies and entities.  The positions will assist in shaping legislative strategies.

Papillion-La Vista Board of Education Standing Positions on the Learning Community 

1. Local boards of education are accountable to their community for making decisions regarding the educational program and are in the best position to make decisions on curriculum, management and funding.
2. There is inherent value in cooperative and collaborative approaches to identify and implement best instructional strategies and formats that meet the needs of all learners. The Papillion-La Vista Schools will share our knowledge and skill bases with other districts and will pursue joint educational programming that efficiently and effectively provide increased and improved learning for students and staff.  Rationale: Inter-local and Cooperative agreements have worked between and among districts to effectively meet this goal.
3. The Papillion-La Vista Schools supports legislation that replaces the current governance structure of the Learning Community with locally elected school boards and superintendents working together. Rationale: Locally elected school boards are in the best position to make decisions on tax levies, elementary learning centers, diversity plans, focus schools, and open enrollment.
4. The Papillion-La Vista Schools supports the independence of established Class III school districts.
5. The authority to levy for the general fund should remain with locally elected school boards. Rationale: Locally elected boards are in the position to make decisions on levies and taxes.
6. ESU Local Initiative Funds should be restored to previous levels rather than be diverted for Learning Community Governance expenses. Rationale: School districts should not have to reduce programs and staff to support the governance of the Learning Community Coordinating Council.
7. Locally elected school boards should have the ultimate authority to approve diversity and poverty plans. Rationale: Locally elected boards are more responsive to local needs.
8. State aid decisions should not be reconsidered after the February 1^st certification date. Rationale: School districts need time in order to make proper plans for funding school systems. The rules for state aid should not change after districts have established their budgets and levies.
9. State funding should be sufficient to keep teacher’s salaries regionally competitive.
10. State and local taxpayers share the responsibility for the Pre-K through 12^th grade educational program. The funding should reflect an equitable distribution for state revenue.
11. Federal and state governments should never impose un-funded mandates.
12. Financial decisions on lids and levies are best made at a local level where elected officials are most accountable to the community.