Committee hears agency warnings as LB10 72 proposes transfers from dedicated cash funds to general fund
Loading...
Summary
Agency directors, industry groups and board members warned the Appropriations Committee that proposed transfers in LB10 72 — including $500,000 from the oil and gas conservation fund, $100,000 from the AMC fund, $150,000 from the Abstractors fund, and $578,269 from the NEBASE/distributive fund — would weaken regulatory and service capacity.
Chair Rob Clements convened testimony on mid‑biennium budget recommendations that would move money from dedicated cash funds into the state general fund under provisions associated with LB10 72 and related budget actions.
Agency directors and industry representatives from oil and gas, appraisal oversight, abstractors and libraries told the Appropriations Committee the transfers would reduce their ability to deliver core services. "Diverting these industry‑paid funds away from the intended use would be a serious breach of trust," said Matthew Mandero, an oil and gas producer, urging the committee to reject a proposed $500,000 transfer from the oil and gas conservation fund.
The Real Property Appraiser Board's director, Tyler Coates, told the committee the Appraisal Management Company (AMC) fund is fee‑supported and that moving $100,000 to the general fund (a transfer listed in the budget materials for LB10 72) would leave the board exposed to legal and operational risk. Coates said the board's minimum AMC fund balance policy is $191,898 and reported an account balance of $197,698.40 as of Dec. 31, 2025; he warned that routine investigative and potential litigation costs could exceed the board's small legal‑services line item.
Becky McKittrick Mason, executive director of the Abstractors Board of Examiners, urged rejection of Section 38 of LB10 72, which proposes a $150,000 transfer from the abstractors cash fund. Mason cited statutory language describing the fund's purpose and told senators the board runs on minimal staff and a renewal cycle that leaves revenues cyclical; she said removing reserves could compromise examinations, complaint investigations and enforcement.
Rod Wagner of the Nebraska Library Commission asked the committee to spare the NEBASE/distributive fund, which the commission uses to pay third‑party vendors on behalf of libraries. Wagner said the bill lists a $578,269 transfer but that much of the fund balance reflects payments libraries made for group licenses (for example, the OverDrive consortium of 196 libraries), not state interest earnings.
Industry groups joined agencies in opposition. Dylan Glasser, a registered lobbyist for the Nebraska Petroleum Producers Association, told the committee moving producer‑paid conservation tax dollars to the general fund would undermine confidence and could discourage investment.
Across hearings, agency witnesses framed the transfers as short‑term general fund relief that could create longer‑term costs: reduced inspections, delayed technology modernization, and potential litigation funded by the state if boards exhausted reserves. No final votes or committee actions were recorded at the hearing.
What happens next: The committee concluded hearings for the day; any mid‑biennium transfers remain proposals in the budget materials and would require the committee’s recommendation and further legislative action to take effect.
