Latest news with #LegislativeBill645
Yahoo
05-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Changes to Nebraska State Patrol survivors' retirement benefits ignite legislative fight
Recruits for the Nebraska State Patrol in a 2022 class photo. (Courtesy of the Nebraska State Patrol) LINCOLN — One state lawmaker's continued efforts to boost benefits for Nebraska State Patrol troopers, a largely consensus issue, ignited a rare fight among legislative allies. The fight flared up last week in the Nebraska Legislature after State Sen. Eliot Bostar of Lincoln and his ally, State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln, struck a deal to add a proposal to increase survivors' benefits in the case of a trooper's death from 75% up to 100%. In the case of dependent children without a surviving parent, it would bump benefits up to 100% until the child turns 19 years old. Bostar has said the measure addresses a 'fairly cruel reality' when an officer dies and families are hurt again. He pointed to collegiate research out of Iowa and New York that troopers, because of the line of work, can have shorter life spans than spouses in different fields of work. 'It seems wrong to ask folks to do a job that will reduce their longevity while then punishing their family financially,' Bostar told the Nebraska Examiner last week. Ballard, who chairs the Legislature's Nebraska Retirement Systems Committee, called the measure 'common sense' and said it was 'weird' that public safety officials weren't fully compensated for their work. Ballard said Bostar's measure is a 'piece of that puzzle' to recruitment and retention. The State Trooper Association of Nebraska and multiple retired troopers supported the measure. Bostar's Legislative Bill 76, as introduced, would also have raised maximum annual cost-of-living adjustments for Patrol members' retirement benefits. A narrower version, just related to survivors' benefits, was amended into Ballard's Legislative Bill 645, related to school retirement, on April 24 in a 39-0 vote, without issue. At that time, the increased benefits would have taken effect this July 1. But four days later, Ballard filed an amendment struck with Bostar to kick the benefits bump two years out, moving it out of this already difficult budget cycle. An actuarial study estimated a $3.3 million annual cost, which Bostar has denied is the true amount and is the largest estimate he's ever gotten in pushing similar legislation. Even so, the amendment was adopted 41-0, and LB 645 moved on once again. The flare-up came last Wednesday after Ballard rose on a procedural motion to say that, absent any other legal changes, the provisions of Bostar's measure could not apply retroactively to existing spouses. He cited his committee legal counsel, the legal counsel of the related retirement state agency and the actuarial report. 'Any surviving spouse currently receiving 75% survivors' benefits will continue to receive 75% survivors' benefits,' Ballard said, withdrawing his motion, thus ending debate on LB 645. Without an immediate chance for anyone to respond, LB 645 passed 45-2. Bostar confronted Ballard after the vote, saying it was 'bull—' that an average loss of four troopers a year could lead to such a high price tag. 'How much you think their pensions are? $10 million?' Bostar told Ballard off the side of the floor near a table where reporters regularly sit. 'It doesn't add up.' Bostar told his colleague that it was the legal counsel or actuaries 'lying to your f— face, and it means you lied on the mic, and I'm going to say that.' The Retirement Committee legal counsel, Ballard and Bostar moved a few feet away to a side corner off the legislative floor where a reporter could hear the counsel tell Bostar that the state could be 'f— sued' if Bostar rebuffed Ballard and said his interpretation was the law was retroactive, possibly muddying the waters on the legislative intent if later challenged in court. But Bostar got on the microphone 10 minutes later and told his colleagues that he 'fundamentally' disagreed with the legal interpretation that Ballard cited. 'Because there is no other way for the math to work on the numbers that were handed down by the actuaries, by NPERS [Nebraska Public Employee Retirement Systems], it must apply retroactively,' Bostar said. 'Otherwise, the number wouldn't be $3 million. There is no other mathematical way for this to make sense.' 'While we're putting things on the record,' Bostar continued, he said he believes that all surviving spouses should 'rightfully' have their benefits increased to 100% 'That is what we paid for. That is what the actuaries clearly calculated,' Bostar said. The actuaries wrote that their understanding of legislative intent is that the changes would not apply retroactively, to which Bostar said the math still didn't pan out and that it was 'text on a page.' He said if the law wasn't retroactive, he could have made the change to do so, but that it has always '100%' been his intent and understanding for the change to apply to all families. An average of four troopers will unfortunately die in a year, Bostar said, but at least one won't be married, and another might die after their spouse has already passed. That would require annual retirement benefits for the remaining two troopers to be more than $6 million each year, Bostar said, but they're just 'not that generous.' State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, who has not always seen eye-to-eye with Bostar or Ballard, praised Bostar as debate continued on a different underlying measure. She said she could not express her gratitude 'sufficiently' for Bostar's leadership in helping first responders not only have fair wages but also a 'dignified and appropriate retirement.' Ballard had no immediate comment on the disagreement with Bostar, though both indicated they would continue to work on the measure. 'I'm committed to doing everything that I can to ensure that this gets implemented,' Bostar said. 'It's a wrong that we need to right.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
24-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Former Nebraska lawmaker expresses concern about major changes to school retirement plan
Former State Sen. Mark Kolterman of Seward returns to the Nebraska Legislature for an annual event honoring former state lawmakers. April 16, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — A bill to reduce contributions to a state teachers retirement plan advanced toward final passage on Thursday despite a stern warning from a former Nebraska lawmaker who once guided state retirement plan policies. The measure, Legislative Bill 645, is designed to help close the state's projected $457 million budget deficit over two years by reducing the state's contributions into teacher retirement plans by about $77 million, thus freeing up that money to help close the budget gap. Former State Sen. Mark Kolterman, who headed the Legislature's Retirement Systems Committee for seven years, said that using retirement plan funds to balance the budget doesn't make financial sense, particularly when it's uncertain if investments will garner enough revenue to maintain retirement funds. 'You don't make reductions in contributions when the economy is moving in the wrong direction,' Kolterman said, noting the recent stock 'market tumble.' A member of the Nebraska Public Employees Retirement Systems Board resigned earlier this week after Gov. Jim Pillen rejected the 'best candidate' to head the agency that oversees state and school retirement plans. Allen Simpson of Lincoln, a long-time PERB member, had headed the board's personnel committee, which had recommended the hiring of the current interim director/deputy director of the agency, Tyler Cummings, to fill the vacancy left when former State Treasurer and State Sen. John Murante resigned in December. 'They're not going to get a better candidate than Tyler Cummings,' said Simpson on Thursday. Simpson said he resigned from the board on Monday feeling that if the governor did not agree with his committees' pick, 'you probably shouldn't stay on.' 'I'm trying to say this in the most politically correct way possible,' said Simpson, who, like Pillen, is a Republican. Pillen's office did not respond immediately to a request for comment Thursday afternoon. The search for a new director reportedly has been reopened. The job paid $205,000-a-year. On Thursday, State Sen. Danielle Conrad said that the 'uncertainty' with the director's job and the vacancy on the PERB board has made it more difficult to decide the best policies when it comes to state retirement plans. Advocates of LB 645, including Lincoln Sen. Beau Ballard, the current chair of the Retirement Committee, dismissed the concern, maintaining that the state can safely lower its contributions to the school retirement plan because that plan is currently nearly 100% funded, and is taking in more contributions — from teachers, local school districts and the state — than needed. Ballard has called the bill a 'win' for the state budget and for teachers, because they will see about $1,000 a year in additional take-home pay by reducing their contributions via the proposal. Kolterman commented after the state lawmakers, on a voice vote, advanced LB 645 to the final stage of debate. Prior to Thursday's debate on the bill, the former senator sent a letter — obtained by the Nebraska Examiner — to the members of the Retirement Committee outlining his objections. In the letter, Kolterman said that major changes in the state's retirement plan contributions are usually not made so hastily, because if a pension plan becomes underfunded, the state has to make up the difference. 'Any changes to retirement benefits in any of the retirement plans must be approached with great caution, study, and examination of the actuarially calculated costs,' he wrote. LB 645, he said, was 'kicking the can down the road' and delivering higher costs for taxpayers later. Kolterman pointed out that during the 2008-09 recession, the state's retirements plans lost 28% of its assets — about $2 billion — and that it took years of work to make them healthy again. He cautioned in his letter that Nebraska doesn't want to find itself in the same situation again — forced to increase funds toward pension plans. It doesn't make sense, he argued, to mess with what's working. Despite that, and despite similar warnings during floor debate on Thursday from Lincoln Sen. Danielle Conrad, the bill advanced to final reading. Ballard said that he was 'reassured' that LB 645 would not require additional state funds. He quoted from a projection that even with a 0% increase in state investment income, no additional state contribution would be needed. On Thursday, he withdrew his amendment that would have changed the state's long standing 'Rule of 85' for teachers that now allows educators, of at least 60 years of age, to retire if they have at least 25 years of service, which adds up to 85. Ballard's amendment would have allowed younger teachers, of at least 55 years of age, to retire with 30 years of service. Education groups, during a public hearing on that amendment on Wednesday, had opposed the idea out of concern that its impact — which some feared would increase retirement fund payouts — had not been studied. Conrad also withdrew a proposed amendment to ensure that the state would not be liable for covering any financial shortages in the Omaha Public Schools retirement plan, a plan that the state recently took over to manage. The senator said it was a 'belt and suspenders' amendment to continue the state's current policy of not being liable for shortages in that plan. She agreed to let fellow senators have more time to consider her proposal, and that she will reintroduce it during final round debate on LB 645. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lawmakers unlikely to lower minimum retirement age for Nebraska school employees
Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, center, talks about 2025 priorities for the teachers union. Jan. 28, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — Senators and school administrators expressed hesitation Wednesday in lowering, back to age 55, the minimum retirement age at which Nebraska school employees can step down with full benefits. Currently, eligible school employees face what is known as the 'Rule of 85,' whereby if someone's age plus years of service exceeds 85, that person can retire without any reductions in benefits. Employees who started before July 2018 can retire as young as 55, but employees hired after have to wait until at least age 60. Tim Royers, president of the NSEA, said an amendment to reverse that 'poor decision' would have little financial or staffing impact and could incentivize young educators to look ahead to retirement. 'Our young educators deserve the same flexibility that I and other veteran teachers enjoy when it comes to deciding when we turn off the classroom lights for the last time,' Royers said at a Wednesday hearing on the proposed amendment, which he supported. The Nebraska Council of School Administrators and the Nebraska Association of School Boards opposed the change. Lawmakers advance changes to Nebraska school retirement plan to help close budget hole Royers said it would be in the best interest of a teacher who, at age 55, already has 30 years of service, to step back if they're exhausted rather than being forced to work five more years. State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln, chair of the Legislature's Nebraska Retirement Systems Committee, proposed the change as a deal with the NSEA. In return, the State of Nebraska would agree to withhold annual contributions to the school retirement plan for the next two years before going to a stair-stepped contribution system based on the plan's funding level. The amendment comes to Legislative Bill 645, which was introduced by Ballard on behalf of Gov. Jim Pillen and seeks to change the annual contribution levels for the state, employees and school districts. The school retirement plan for employees statewide outside of Omaha Public Schools (who have a separate pension plan) is currently 99.91% funded. If passed, the current version of LB 645 is expected to save the state about $80 million. With the new amendment, the state would save approximately $20 million more. State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, who has consistently opposed a shaky negotiations process behind LB 645, has repeatedly asked why the school plan had to be changed now. Royers said the original LB 645, which would have offered no reduced contributions to school employees or employers, was a 'poor bill' that he said was brought for the wrong reasons, mainly to help plug the state's nearly half-a-billion-dollar projected budget deficit. However, Royers said it presented a rare chance to 'force' a conversation on the plan, leading to an amended bill that could give the average school teacher more than $1,000 in annual take-home pay because of reduced contributions. Now, he views the amended bill as a way to give hard-working employees a benefit and put them on a more 'equal playing field.' Royers said he has to look for any wins for educators in a political environment where he said the 'political will' makes such victories 'candidly, limited.' Conrad asked Royers what happens if he is wrong about the feasibility of the amended bill, to which Royers responded that he hopes he's not. He pointed to an actuarial study showing that the amended LB 645 and a lower Rule of 85 could be financially feasible. Tim Hruza, appearing on behalf of the school administrators association, said the organization wanted a new actuarial study to fully understand the impact of a modified Rule of 85. But if the changes have to wait another year, Royers said he's OK with that. 'If the end result of this is we've had this conversation, it's on the radar but it's not going to be something we get to until next year,' Royers said, 'I'm perfectly fine with that.' LB 645 will return for the second of three stages of debate on Thursday. Ballard said he is likely to withdraw the amendment that was considered Wednesday. The full state budget will need to advance from the Appropriations Committee by next Tuesday, with debate beginning May 6. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
17-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Lawmakers advance changes to Nebraska school retirement plan to help close budget hole
State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln, center right, talks with Clerk of the Legislature Brandon Metzler, Speaker John Arch of La Vista and State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln. April 17, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — Despite earlier statements that changes to annual school retirement contributions would not be used to balance Nebraska's budget, lawmakers confirmed Thursday that the reductions will go toward that goal. State senators gave 38-0 first-approval Thursday to Legislative Bill 645, from State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln at the request of Gov. Jim Pillen, to lower employer, employee and state contributions to the statewide school retirement plan based on its funding level compared to obligations to members. The plan is currently 99.91% funded. The state retirement plan covers all eligible school employees, notably teachers, outside Omaha Public Schools, which has a separate retirement plan and is not as highly funded. Currently, employees contribute to the group plan 9.78% of monthly payroll and school districts give 9.88% of the payroll paid to covered district employees. The state annually gives 2% of the statewide payroll for covered members. Payroll was about $2.5 billion in the past year. Under Ballard's bill, and an amendment adopted 41-0, contribution rates would change as follows: Less than 96% funded — 9.75% employees, 9.85% employers, 2% state. Between 96% funded and 98% funded — 8.75% employees, 8.84% employers, 0.7% state. Between 98% and 100% funded — 8% employees, 8.08% employers, 0.7% state. 100% funded or more — 7.25% employees, 7.32% employers, 0% state. 'Importantly, these agreed-upon reductions in contributions have built-in protections to ensure the long-term sustainability of the fund,' said Ballard, chair of the Legislature's Nebraska Retirement Systems Committee. The amended LB 645 could save the state at least $80 million in the next two fiscal years, which multiple senators celebrated as helping to close the state's projected budget shortfall of $457 million for the next two years. That is prior to ongoing work by the Appropriations Committee, which has whittled the deficit down to about $100 million with continued negotiations. The budget bills must be presented to the Legislature by the end of the month for debate. Opponents of Ballard's measure, chiefly State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, said 'political games' should not be played with teacher retirements, especially with what she said is 'incredible economic volatility and uncertainty' under President Donald Trump. 'Playing Russian roulette with their retirement is wrong,' Conrad said Thursday. If annual contributions in any year are not enough to keep the plan adequately funded under state law, such as if investment returns come up short or stock market returns are too volatile, the state is on the hook for additional funding outside of annual contributions. That happened in the late 2000s, leading to the current funding contribution levels in 2013 negotiations. State Sen. Rob Clements of Elmwood, chair of the Appropriations Committee and a member of the Retirement Committee, described Ballard's LB 645 as a 'reasonable compromise.' He said opponents blasting the bill as a 'serious threat' to the plan is just 'not true' and that employees would see no benefit reductions. Clements said it's 'the right thing to do at this time.' 'The plan is in good shape, and the state's contribution would go back to a full amount if it's below 96% [funded],' Clements said. State Sens. Mike Moser of Columbus and Jana Hughes of Seward said the contribution rates should have been examined without regard to the state budget, even if there was a surplus. 'If this retirement fund is funded at 100%, we should all raise our hands and say, 'Halleluja,'' Moser said. 'Funding it beyond 100% just does not make sense.' Throughout the 2025 session, LB 645 has faced significant changes since it was first introduced in January. At that time, only the state government would have seen a lowered contribution rate. Then, prior to a March hearing on LB 645, Ballard offered an amendment to change employee contribution rates. Now, employers who opposed the bill would also see lowered contribution rates. School advocates have said the freed-up funds could lead to possibly lower property taxes or increased teacher pay, and many school advocacy groups are now in favor of the bill. Ballard shared data from the Nebraska State Education Association estimating that the average school teacher could receive $1,000 more in take-home pay when the retirement plan is more than 98% funded, under LB 645. If the plan is fully funded, the take-home pay could be $1,500 each year. State Sens. George Dungan of Lincoln, of the Legislature's Revenue Committee, and Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha, on the Appropriations Committee, said the budget deficit is self-inflicted. Dungan described it as an online meme where a young child puts a stick in the spike of his bicycle and flips over, asking, 'Oh my God, who did this?' 'This kind of feels like we've done something to ourselves and now we are operating under this structure where we feel like our hands are tied and we have to do these things,' Dungan said. State Sen. Tony Sorrentino of the Elkhorn area, a member of the Revenue and Retirement Committees, described the situation as paying a bill twice. 'You don't overfund pensions. You don't overpay bills,' Sorrentino said. But you do have to have the wherewithal to make up for that when and if it gets to a certain level of funding.' Conrad blamed 'unsustainable, inequitable, reckless tax cuts,' and Cavanaugh said the Appropriations Committee 'not once' discussed using the freed-up state retirement contributions to invest in education, contrary to earlier statements from the governor's staff that the funds would not be used toward balancing the budget. Kenny Zoeller, director of the governor's policy research office, who made those commitments earlier this year, did not respond to a request for comment on what had changed. Ballard said he would like to balance the budget without raising taxes, such as by limiting spending. State Sen. Myron Dorn of Adams, a seven-year member of the Appropriations Committee, said that as of Wednesday the committee still had $100 million to find to balance the budget. He has often described the budget as a 'giant puzzle,' stating Thursday that retirement contributions is one piece. If his colleagues chose not to adopt the retirement changes, Dorn said that would lead to cuts somewhere else. 'This is just one part of that puzzle,' Dorn said. The Retirement Committee will have a new hearing on an amendment to LB 645 next week that could expand retirement eligibility for employees hired after July 1, 2018. Currently, retirement eligibility is when age plus years of service meets or exceeds 85 years — 'Rule of 85.' Workers hired before July 2018 can retire as early as age 55. Newer employees have to wait until at least age 60. As a trade-off, the state would not provide any annual contributions to the retirement plan in the next two years, potentially saving nearly $20 million more, before contributions are set as now outlined in LB 645. Tim Royers, president of the NSEA, said the organization was happy that LB 645 advanced, and is looking forward to next week's hearing on correcting a 'serious wrong.' 'We have a chance to make them whole, and that's important,' he told the Nebraska Examiner. Ballard said he's unsure how the amendment would be received the Legislature before the hearing. Conrad, the dean of the Legislature who competed against Ballard for chair of the Retirement Committee in January, losing 25-24 after a tied vote, said the amended LB 645 could very well be a 'good deal' for school employees, but she urged caution. 'If indeed we can find a path forward, we shouldn't rush,' Conrad said. 'We shouldn't rush with something this important.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
14-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Changes to school retirement plan advance to full Nebraska Legislature
School employees engaged in the retirement changes process with State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln. (Aaron Sanderford/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — The full Nebraska Legislature appears likely to debate a governor-backed bill to reexamine contributions for school employees' retirement plans, which the sponsor described as a 'win-win-win.' The Nebraska Retirement Systems Committee on Monday morning voted 4-0 to advance Legislative Bill 645 by State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln, the committee chair. State Sens. Brian Hardin of Gering and Danielle Conrad of Lincoln were absent from the vote, but Ballard left the vote open through at least the end of the day for both to weigh in if they choose to. 'This is a win for state tax dollars, a win for teachers and also, I believe, a win for property taxpayers as well,' Ballard told the Nebraska Examiner of his amended bill. The school retirement plan at center stage applies to eligible school employees outside of the Omaha Public Schools, which has a separate retirement plan. Currently, teachers and other eligible school staff contribute 9.78% of their monthly payroll to the pooled retirement plan. School districts match this at 9.88% of the amount they pay their employees, while the state contributes 2% of statewide school employee payroll each year. The estimated payroll for teachers in Nebraska, as of July 1, 2024, was $2.5 billion annually. That means the plan took in $543 million in direct contributions — about $50 million from the state, $245 million from employees and $248 million from school districts in the most recent year. The amended LB 645 is significantly different from when it was introduced in January, which at the time would have reduced state contributions to 0% depending on the plan's actuarial funding status, but left contribution rates for employees and school districts the same. The plan is currently 99.91% funded. If LB 645 moves forward, contribution levels of all three groups would change at four stages based on the actuarially funded level — less than 96% funded, between 96% and 98% funded, between 98% and 100% funded and fully funded. The state would fall to 0.7% of annual contributions at the two intermediate stages, retaining the 2% contribution level when the retirement plan is underfunded and paying zero when the plan is fully funded. State Sen. Rob Clements of Elmwood, chair of the Legislature's Appropriations Committee, and a member of the Retirement Committee, said LB 645 could save the state $77 million over the next biennium. The governor's office maintains that the freed-up funds should not be used to balance the state's projected budget deficit but instead to invest in education. Under the latest version of Ballard's bill, school employees would contribute 9.75% of payroll if the plan is less than 96% funded. This would lower to 8.75% and 8%, respectively, at the intermediate stages. When fully funded, employees would contribute 7.25% of their individual pay to the plan. Employees were brought to the table for negotiations prior to LB 645's public hearing last month. Ballard's staff provided data estimating that the average school teacher could receive $1,000 in more take-home pay if the retirement plan is more than 98% funded, as it is now, because of lower monthly contributions. When the plan is fully funded, take-home pay for the average teacher could rise by up to $1,500 each year. Employers would continue to contribute 101% of what their employees do, which is a first for the continued negotiations. Before, LB 645 would have locked the employer contribution rate at 9.88% of what employees are paid. Ballard said allowing lowered contributions when the retirement plans are flush could lead to reduced property taxes. Lowered contributions at full funding would lower contributions for both employers and employees by 2.5%, potentially freeing up funding for a priority of the Nebraska State Education Association — funding more long-term substitutes so teachers can take paid time off around significant life events. That bill, LB 440 from State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha, is planned to be advanced through the Education Committee's LB 306. An amended version of her bill seeks a 0.35% payroll tax, for both employees and employers, to fund four weeks of long-term substitutes, rather than her original proposal's idea for six weeks. Excess funds collected under the Spivey proposal above what's needed to cover subs would be steered toward teacher retention or recruitment, such as forgivable loans for special education teachers as provided in Lincoln State Sen. George Dungan's LB 408. Before structural changes to state retirement plans can be made, an actuarial study must assess the feasibility. The latest study came back last Thursday indicating the plan would still receive about 0.27% more funds each year than required under state law at full funding. The actuaries said this provides 'little cushion … to absorb adverse experience.' State law currently requires that the state is on the hook for additional funding in any given year if the plan requires more funds outside of annual contributions. The actuaries wrote that part of the 'challenge' in the future will be adjusting to the varied contribution rate, which could eat into state funds, property taxes or employee pay. The study also takes into account a phased-in slightly lower assumed return on investment for the retirement plan. State Sen. Tony Sorrentino of the Elkhorn area, vice chair of the Retirement Committee, said normally contributions would increase in that case. The actuaries agreed this could increase risk to the retirement plan. However, Ballard and Clements noted that one built-in fail-safe is increased contributions if the funding status of the retirement plan lowers. The actuaries predicted the probability that the retirement plan would be fully funded about 56.4% of the time over the next 20 years, while it could be less than 96% funded about 31.5% of the time. Ballard, who introduced LB 645 more than 50 legislative days ago, said he appreciated the feedback that he received from teachers, administrators, school boards, the Governor's Office and more, all of which he said are now on board. Conrad clashed with Ballard at LB 645's public hearing in March in part over the bill's negotiations. She could not immediately be reached for comment Monday on the advanced bill, nor could the NSEA. Ballard said he took the feedback of teachers and other employees with 'high consideration.' 'This is their livelihood, this is their retirement plan,' Ballard said. 'We want to make sure that they are protected because they do so much for our state, and we just really appreciate their feedback.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
