Sen. Terrell McKinney pushes transparency bill to speed payments and centralize contract postings

Sen. Terrell McKinney introduced LB1215, the Political Subdivision Contract and Transparency Act, saying it is a process bill that sets consistent baselines for how political subdivisions post contracting opportunities, pay vendors, and provide feedback after awards. McKinney said the bill does not change who government may contract with or alter award discretion; rather, it establishes payment predictability, procurement visibility for contracts over $50,000, and basic post-award debriefs upon request.

Proponents told the committee that three recurring barriers hinder small-business participation: inconsistent posting of opportunities across jurisdictions, limited debrief feedback after losses, and delayed payments. April Hibbler, formerly with the U.S. Small Business Administration, said the bill would require "30 days to prime contractors after receipt of an accepted invoice and 7 days to subcontractors after payment is received for small subcontractors," and that standardized debriefs would help unsuccessful bidders improve future proposals.

David You Akpan, a small-business owner, urged a reasonable payment standard and said delayed payments of "60, 90, sometimes 120 days" have harmed contractors; he described a 37-day payment standard in his testimony as balancing administrative processing with contractor protection.

Opponents included the Nebraska Association of County Officials. Beth Bazyn Ferrell told the committee that counties operate under the County Purchasing Act, where competitive-bid triggers have been adjusted (her testimony noted counties now competitively bid at roughly $70,000), and warned a $50,000 reporting threshold could create misalignment and unintended burdens for smaller counties that lack formal scoring procedures.

Committee members pressed McKinney on the bill's fiscal assumptions. One committee member cited a projected $321,000 cost to create a centralized posting web function and questioned whether that figure reflected implementation assumptions rather than statutory mandates. Another noted a $500,000 combined estimate attributed to DAS and DED in agency materials and said the fiscal office did not fully agree with DED's estimate (including a suggested hire at about $93,000 plus benefits and operating costs). McKinney said he was willing to work on clarifying language and to consult agencies and county officials to reduce perceived fiscal exposure.

The sponsor closed by saying he would collaborate with counties and agencies on language and amendments. No formal vote was recorded in the transcript; committee members asked for follow-up on fiscal details and which agencies would be responsible for checklist development and reporting.