Lawmakers approve agency merger of Nebraska's Natural Resources into Environment and Energy
Gov. Jim Pillen, top right, leads an initial meeting of his new "Water Quality and Quantity Task Force" as he eyes a merger of two Nebraska state departments and seeks to prioritize water resources in state government on March 26, 2025. (Courtesy of Office of Gov. Jim Pillen)
LINCOLN — Nebraska lawmakers gave final approval Thursday to merge two state agencies this summer and create one central department intended to increase the state's focus on water.
Legislative Bill 317, from State Sen. Tom Brandt of Plymouth, passed 34-12 without debate. This July 1, the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources will be folded into the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, creating the Nebraska Department of Water, Energy and Environment.
Gov. Jim Pillen is expected to sign the bill, which Brandt introduced on his behalf. The governor has also created a 'Water Quality and Quantity Task Force.'
A revised fiscal analysis said the merger, which was expected to initially cost the state for rebranding rather than cost savings, could be absorbed. The same statement said efficiency savings could be made and realized in the 2027-29 biennium. No specifics were given.
Jesse Bradley currently serves as the joint interim director of Natural Resources and Environment and Energy. The two agencies already co-locate in the same northwest Lincoln office building.
Natural Resources has a budget of more than $104 million, largely from cash funds ($89.5 million). Environment and Energy has a budget of nearly $99 million, split roughly in half between federal ($48.9 million) and cash funds ($43.2 million).
In addition to a new combined agency director, the state will hire a 'chief water officer' who essentially takes on the role of the director of Natural Resources. While LB 317 is 511 pages, much of that is dedicated to renaming the different departments and division directors across hundreds of state statutes.
The Nebraska Association of Natural Resources Districts (representing the state's 23 NRDs), Nebraska State Irrigation Association, Nebraska Farm Bureau, Nebraska chapter of the Sierra Club and Nebraska Farmers Union opposed the bill at its hearing.
Many opponents expressed concern at a February public hearing for the bill that the merger might divide rather than focus attention on water resources.
Only Pillen, Bradley, a member of the state's budget division and the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (limited to a small section of LB 317) testified in support of the bill.
Brandt said he felt good that the bill passed and that the longer he met with opponents to the bill, the more that initial concerns began to fade. He noted that during the second-round debate, he sought to address concerns from a couple of senators.
'The missions won't change,' Brandt said of the merger. 'It will just become one agency.'
Current: Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy
The Nebraska Department of Environmental Control is established (1971).
The department is renamed the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (1992).
Nebraska Energy Office is folded into the Environmental Quality Department, becoming DEE (2019).
State-delegated environmental health programs from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, housed in the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services, are moved over to DEE (2021).
Current: Nebraska Department of Natural Resources
The State Board of Irrigation is established (1895).
The board is renamed the State Board of Irrigation, Highways and Drainage (1911).
The name changes again to the Department of Public Works, expanded to include the Bureau of Roads and Bridges; Bureau of Irrigation, Water Power and Drainage; and the Motor Vehicle Records Division (1919).
The department is renamed the Nebraska Department of Roads and Irrigation (1933).
The Nebraska Department of Water Resources is established as the prior department is divided into three separate state agencies, alongside the Department of Roads and the Department of Motor Vehicles (1957).
The Natural Resources Commission merges with the Nebraska Department of Water Resources to become the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources (2000).
Future: Nebraska Department of Energy, Water and Environment
Nebraska is the only state with separate natural resources districts, which were created in 1972 as multipurpose, locally elected management bodies. There are currently 23 NRDs statewide.
Water management in the state is largely shared by the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Environment and Energy and NRDs, with specific support from the Nebraska Department of Agriculture and the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indianapolis Star
4 hours ago
- Indianapolis Star
What does the end of the penny mean? Here's what experts are saying
Penny for your thoughts? Or maybe they are worth a nickel now that the Treasury Department is following President Donald Trump's suggestion to stop making pennies. Last month, the Treasury Department placed its last order of blanks – flat metal discs to make pennies – in a move set into motion by President Donald Trump in February. He argues that the coin costs more than 3 cents to produce (actually 3.69 cents, according to the U.S. Mint). Now that we know it's curtains for the coin, many questions arise. What does the demise of the penny mean for consumers and collectors? Could the last pennies be valuable? Here's what we know. MIA Money: $1.7 trillion sits in lost and forgotten 401(k) accounts. Is one of them yours? Doubtful. The U.S. Mint made about 3.2 billion pennies in 2024, according to its annual report, so there will be billions of 2025 pennies available. "There's nothing, statistically, that says they should become valuable," John Feigenbaum, publisher of rare coin price guide Greysheet and executive director of the Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG), a nonprofit organization composed of many of the nation's rare coin experts, told USA TODAY. The coin's legacy could be akin to the 1976 bicentennial quarter, Feigenbaum said. "Everybody, at the time, was hoarding them (and) you couldn't find bicentennial quarters in change. Now people have plastic bags full of them and they're still worth 25 cents," he added. However, the 2025 pennies could have an alternative value as an entry point to collectors. "This would surely spike demand … in other Lincoln pennies, like the ones that go all the way back to 1909," Feigenbaum said, adding that the Lincoln penny, which first featured the 16th president in that year, has had "quite a run." Parents could get a Lincoln penny coin collecting book – options include those from Whitman Publishing, which also publishes Greysheet – and talk to their children about "American history, and who this Lincoln guy is and what would the different designs be all about," Feigenbaum said. Not if you are hoping for them to be valuable. Just as there has been misleading hype about the value of some Lincoln wheat pennies, there may be misinformation about the increased value of 2025 pennies. That's nonsense, Feigenbaum said. They are "not going to be" more valuable, according to Feigenbaum, who said he favored getting rid of the penny. Maybe it's a good time to take all those coins gathering dust in a cup or piggy bank to the bank or a Coinstar machine. The average home has $60-$90 in coins at home, according to the Federal Reserve. Are your old pennies worth millions?: Experts say you shouldn't bank on it Maybe. Not making pennies will nix out the more than $179 million it costs taxpayers to make them, based on figures from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the department formerly connected to Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk. The U.S. Mint estimates that not making pennies will save $56 million in material costs, with additional savings from better and more efficient production, CNBC reported. 'For every penny that the United States government prints, we're actually losing money. So, it's a net cost to the federal government,' said Raymond Robertson, director of the Mosbacher Institute for Trade, Economics and Public Policy at the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University, in a news release. But the lack of pennies likely means more reliance on nickels, which cost even more to produce – 13.78 cents, the U.S. Mint says. If the U.S. Mint makes more nickels, "It actually is going to increase costs for the government,' Robertson said. 'So, it's really not clear how much cost savings the government will realize by eliminating the penny," he added. One of the bills (H.R. 1270) introduced in the House of Representatives (technically, Congress holds the power to eliminate a currency) also proposes getting rid of the nickel, too. There is no time frame for prices to be set in five-cent increments – a move to change all those prices ending in 49 or 99 cents to the nearest five cents due to lack of pennies – but they will likely eventually, said Bill Maurer, dean of the School of Social Sciences at the University of California, Irvine, and director of UCI's Institute for Money, Technology and Financial Inclusion. When there are not enough pennies for stores and other retailers to make change, businesses will need to round up or down, the Treasury Department said, according to The Wall Street Journal. For the time being, merchants can keep prices as they are, but the 18% to 20% of Americans who rely on cash could eventually pay a rounded-up price, based on 5-cent increments. "If someone comes to you with cash, you round up, right? So if you're kind of doubly screwed if you're poorer," Maurer told USA TODAY. Other countries that have eliminated low-denomination coins – Australia, Canada and New Zealand, among them – have resulted in differing outcomes, with some prices rounding up and some down, according to As the move to eliminate coin and paper currency continues, a publicly-accessible digital payment system will be needed so that consumers of all income levels can participate, Maurer said. But the loss of physical currency removes a redundancy in the monetary system that's invaluable during disasters and emergencies, according to Maurer. "The more dependent on cashless methods of payment we become, the more risk we place ourselves when there are emergencies or disasters, because you need a well-functioning cash system," he continued. Contributing: Fernando Cervantes, Daniel de Visé and Melina Khan. Mike Snider is a reporter on USA TODAY's Trending team. You can follow him on Threads, Bluesky, X and email him at mikegsnider & @ & @mikesnider & msnider@
USA Today
5 hours ago
- USA Today
What does the end of the penny mean? Here's what experts are saying
What does the end of the penny mean? Here's what experts are saying Show Caption Hide Caption Penny production in US to end, Treasury Department says After 233 years, the U.S. this month will officially end penny production, according to statements from the Treasury Department. Penny for your thoughts? Or maybe they are worth a nickel now that the Treasury Department is following President Donald Trump's suggestion to stop making pennies. Last month, the Treasury Department placed its last order of blanks – flat metal discs to make pennies – in a move set into motion by President Donald Trump in February. He argues that the coin costs more than 3 cents to produce (actually 3.69 cents, according to the U.S. Mint). Now that we know it's curtains for the coin, many questions arise. What does the demise of the penny mean for consumers and collectors? Could the last pennies be valuable? Here's what we know. MIA Money: $1.7 trillion sits in lost and forgotten 401(k) accounts. Is one of them yours? Will pennies be more valuable if the US stops making them? Doubtful. The U.S. Mint made about 3.2 billion pennies in 2024, according to its annual report, so there will be billions of 2025 pennies available. "There's nothing, statistically, that says they should become valuable," John Feigenbaum, publisher of rare coin price guide Greysheet and executive director of the Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG), a nonprofit organization composed of many of the nation's rare coin experts, told USA TODAY. The coin's legacy could be akin to the 1976 bicentennial quarter, Feigenbaum said. "Everybody, at the time, was hoarding them (and) you couldn't find bicentennial quarters in change. Now people have plastic bags full of them and they're still worth 25 cents," he added. However, the 2025 pennies could have an alternative value as an entry point to collectors. "This would surely spike demand … in other Lincoln pennies, like the ones that go all the way back to 1909," Feigenbaum said, adding that the Lincoln penny, which first featured the 16th president in that year, has had "quite a run." Parents could get a Lincoln penny coin collecting book – options include those from Whitman Publishing, which also publishes Greysheet – and talk to their children about "American history, and who this Lincoln guy is and what would the different designs be all about," Feigenbaum said. Should I horde 2025 pennies? Not if you are hoping for them to be valuable. Just as there has been misleading hype about the value of some Lincoln wheat pennies, there may be misinformation about the increased value of 2025 pennies. That's nonsense, Feigenbaum said. They are "not going to be" more valuable, according to Feigenbaum, who said he favored getting rid of the penny. Maybe it's a good time to take all those coins gathering dust in a cup or piggy bank to the bank or a Coinstar machine. The average home has $60-$90 in coins at home, according to the Federal Reserve. Are your old pennies worth millions?: Experts say you shouldn't bank on it Getting rid of pennies. Will it save the US money? Maybe. Not making pennies will nix out the more than $179 million it costs taxpayers to make them, based on figures from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the department formerly connected to Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk. The U.S. Mint estimates that not making pennies will save $56 million in material costs, with additional savings from better and more efficient production, CNBC reported. 'For every penny that the United States government prints, we're actually losing money. So, it's a net cost to the federal government,' said Raymond Robertson, director of the Mosbacher Institute for Trade, Economics and Public Policy at the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University, in a news release. But the lack of pennies likely means more reliance on nickels, which cost even more to produce – 13.78 cents, the U.S. Mint says. If the U.S. Mint makes more nickels, "It actually is going to increase costs for the government,' Robertson said. 'So, it's really not clear how much cost savings the government will realize by eliminating the penny," he added. One of the bills (H.R. 1270) introduced in the House of Representatives (technically, Congress holds the power to eliminate a currency) also proposes getting rid of the nickel, too. What will the demise of the penny mean to prices? There is no time frame for prices to be set in five-cent increments – a move to change all those prices ending in 49 or 99 cents to the nearest five cents due to lack of pennies – but they will likely eventually, said Bill Maurer, dean of the School of Social Sciences at the University of California, Irvine, and director of UCI's Institute for Money, Technology and Financial Inclusion. When there are not enough pennies for stores and other retailers to make change, businesses will need to round up or down, the Treasury Department said, according to The Wall Street Journal. For the time being, merchants can keep prices as they are, but the 18% to 20% of Americans who rely on cash could eventually pay a rounded-up price, based on 5-cent increments. "If someone comes to you with cash, you round up, right? So if you're kind of doubly screwed if you're poorer," Maurer told USA TODAY. Other countries that have eliminated low-denomination coins – Australia, Canada and New Zealand, among them – have resulted in differing outcomes, with some prices rounding up and some down, according to As the move to eliminate coin and paper currency continues, a publicly-accessible digital payment system will be needed so that consumers of all income levels can participate, Maurer said. But the loss of physical currency removes a redundancy in the monetary system that's invaluable during disasters and emergencies, according to Maurer. "The more dependent on cashless methods of payment we become, the more risk we place ourselves when there are emergencies or disasters, because you need a well-functioning cash system," he continued. Contributing: Fernando Cervantes, Daniel de Visé and Melina Khan. Mike Snider is a reporter on USA TODAY's Trending team. You can follow him on Threads, Bluesky, X and email him at mikegsnider & @ & @mikesnider & msnider@ What's everyone talking about? Sign up for our trending newsletter to get the latest news of the day
Yahoo
20 hours ago
- Yahoo
‘We made a mistake': Pillen accepts responsibility for failed vetoes to Nebraska budget
Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen. Dec. 10, 2024. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen has accepted responsibility for mishandled line-item vetoes to the state's next two-year budget while reiterating that many of the suggested cuts will be reconsidered in 2026. Pillen, speaking with the Nebraska Examiner after the Legislature adjourned for the year, said the veto process includes 'human beings' in his office, the Clerk of the Legislature's Office and the Secretary of State's Office. On May 21, his office delivered Legislative Bill 261 and LB 264 with line-item vetoes to the Secretary of State's Office, which is the right place for the bills to go when the Legislature is out of session, but not to the Clerk of the Legislature's Office on the other side of the Capitol, which is where bills must be returned when senators are in session. The Governor's Office says LB 261 was line-item vetoed at 1:08 p.m. on May 21 and LB 264 at 1:10 p.m. A spokesperson for the Secretary of State's Office said the bills were delivered to that office around 5 p.m. the same day. The Legislature did receive a separate letter from Pillen the night of May 21 detailing the line-item vetoes, as well as a copy of the bills with the inscribed vetoes, but lawmakers contended the next day that a line-item veto is constitutional only with the inscribed vetoes on the actual bills. Those bills remained at the Secretary of State's Office until morning. The Nebraska Constitution requires vetoes to be returned within five days of being presented to the governor, excluding Sundays. The bills passed May 15 and went to Pillen's office at 1:12 p.m., so the deadline was by the end-of-day May 21. Pillen said the mistake on the night of May 21 was 'a miscommunication on where it was supposed to go.' Pillen was in Washington, D.C., the following day, for a 'Make America Healthy Again' event at the White House. 'Bottom line: We made a mistake. I'd have thought, because we all work together, that a flag would have been thrown and said, 'Hey, let's do X,' but there wasn't, and then the glass of milk was spilled the next morning,' Pillen told the Examiner. The intended vetoes targeted $14.5 million to the state's general fund and $18 million in repurposed cash funds for improvements at Lake McConaughy. He sought to save $14.5 million that the Legislature's budget aimed to use from the state's 'rainy day' cash reserve by trimming spending — $152 million from the rainy day fund went to help balance the budget. The Nebraska Supreme Court, which faced about $12 million of Pillen's proposed general fund reductions (83%), has said the loss of those funds could close vital court services. This was Pillen's second two-year budget — he vetoed $38.5 million in general fund spending in 2023 for the 2023-24 and 2024-25 fiscal years. Lawmakers restored about $850,000 of the trims. Pillen, Secretary of State Bob Evnen and Speaker of the Legislature John Arch have pledged to clarify the line-item veto process for the budget ahead of 2026, and they've agreed that the suggested reductions should be considered when the budget is adjusted next year. Arch has said that to his knowledge, nothing like this had happened before. Pillen, whose office now insists the matter is resolved, said, 'As I told our team, we look in the mirror, we accept responsibilities. I've not met a human that doesn't make a mistake yet.' Pillen and his staff have declined to detail exactly what happened the night of May 21. Rani Taborek-Potter, a spokesperson for Evnen, said no one from the Secretary of State's Office delivered the actual LB 261 and LB 264 with the line-item vetoes to the Clerk of the Legislature's Office, 'nor is it our office's responsibility to do so.' 'When bills are vetoed by the Governor, the vetoed bills are delivered directly to the Clerk of the Legislature's Office by the Governor's office, as was the case for LB 319 and LB 287 to the best of our knowledge,' Taborek-Potter told the Examiner, referring to the two other bills vetoed this session related to expanding SNAP benefit eligibility and fighting bedbugs in Omaha. Taborek-Potter confirmed the Governor's Office delivered the budget bills to the administrative assistant in the Secretary of State's Office just before 5 p.m. on May 21. The Examiner on May 23 requested all records and communications regarding the line-item vetoes from when the budget bills passed May 15 to the date of the records request. The request sought texts, emails and digital messages. It also asked for communications within the executive branch and between Pillen's office and the legislative branch, including staff and state senators. Documents provided in response indicated that Pillen's veto letter detailing his objections was ready by 6:05 p.m., when the state budget administrator, Neil Sullivan, sent it to Pillen's staff. Around 6:27 p.m., Kenny Zoeller, director of the governor's Policy Research Office, the main research and lobbying arm for Pillen, confirmed the letter among gubernatorial staff. 'We are handing this off back to the Legislature POST adjournment,' Zoeller wrote of next steps. 'I will text when it's handed off.' Laura Strimple, the governor's primary spokesperson, sent a draft news release regarding the vetoes at 8:21 p.m. to Sullivan. It was sent to reporters around 11:23 p.m. The Legislature adjourned at 9:20 p.m., and a reporter could see legislative staff discussing the veto letter. Through much of the day on May 22, legislative leadership met off the floor, including Arch. Several emerged just before adjournment at 2:37 p.m. when Arch announced the vetoes could not be accepted and that the Legislature had concluded they were constitutionally improper. Some members of the Appropriations Committee hugged, threw fists in the air and smiled after. Pillen's spokesperson, Strimple, sent a statement to reporters at 4:48 p.m. stating it was the governor's position that Pillen 'clearly took the legally required steps to exercise his veto authority by surrendering physical possession and the power to approve or reject the bills.' She said the Governor's Office would consult with the Attorney General's Office and other counsel. The Policy Research Office, executive branch budget staff and other members of the governor's staff met around 5 p.m. on May 22. Strimple sent her statement on the governor's position to all members of the governor's staff at 5:23 p.m., then to lawmakers at 5:53 p.m. On May 27, the next legislative day, Pillen, Arch and Evnen released their joint statement around 2:54 p.m., ending the possible constitutional dispute and returning to their respective corners, with no one taking blame for the situation until Pillen spoke with reporters this week. Pillen's office asserts that it searched texts and digital messages as part of the public records request but found no responsive records, including from Zoeller, who had pledged to text after delivering the veto letter in one of the emails. The Governor's Office provided no records reflecting communications with the legislative branch. None of the records indicate what happened to the bills after being delivered to Evnen's office. Evnen, speaking with the Examiner on Friday, reiterated that the Secretary of State's Office's role with legislation is to file it, and 'when it's brought to our office and we're asked to file it, that's what we do.' 'There's a certain amount of confusion, really between the legislative branch and the Governor's Office, about those line-item vetoes, and I think that what we will do is sit down and talk through together how that will be handled. That's a really good thing to do,' he said. Multiple lawmakers beyond Arch have quietly teased the suggestion with the Examiner, asking how much clearer the process can be. Asked if there was a reason the original bills in the Secretary of State's Office by about 5 p.m. could not be delivered by midnight on May 21, Evnen said: 'You would have to ask the Governor's Office.' Strimple, asked about the remaining timeline on May 21 and May 22, said that with the Arch-Evnen-Pillen joint statement, 'The matter is concluded.' One of the top targets of Gov. Jim Pillen's intended line-item vetoes to the state's budget bills was about $12 million in spending earmarked for the Nebraska Supreme Court. Corey Steel, state court administrator for Nebraska, told lawmakers that the line-item vetoes to the courts could eliminate various services, including three problem-solving courts in Lancaster and Sarpy Counties, a drug court in Gov. Jim Pillen's home of Platte County, transition living reimbursements for certain adults and non-statutory services for juveniles on probation. Pillen told the Examiner that while he has the 'utmost respect' for the separation of powers between Nebraska's branches of government, he believes each one must look at government differently. He said the courts have significantly increased spending and have money sitting around. Steel, as well as Chief Justice Jeffrey Funke, have said that position isn't accurate and that increased spending has been in part due to legislation that came without new funds. The judicial branch leaders have said that the 'money' held in various funds is now exhausted. However, Pillen said he's not backing down and that the reductions will be considered in 2026. 'We have to be fiscally responsible,' Pillen said, 'and that's all we're asking.' — Zach Wendling SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
