Latest news with #AaronSanderford
Yahoo
28-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Nebraska fireworks sales begin this week after lawmakers increased State Fire Marshal fees
Revelers enjoy the July 4 fireworks in Ralston, Neb., in 2016. (Aaron Sanderford/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — The return of retail fireworks sales this week comes after Nebraska lawmakers increased State Fire Marshal fees this spring, many for the first time in nearly four decades. Retail fireworks sales started Tuesday ahead of Independence Day (July 4), with sales able to continue through July 5 on a July license, according to state law. The same law required such seasonal retail license applications — now $100 per stand, instead of $25 — to be received no later than June 9. Other fireworks aficionados are also paying higher fees this season, such as jobbers at $400 (up from $200) and distributors at $1,000 (up from $500). Anyone wishing to conduct a public exhibition or 'display fireworks' must receive a 'display' permit, now costing $100 per date, up from $10. State Sen. Dave Wordekemper of Fremont, who led the proposed fee increases through Legislative Bill 434 this year at the request of the State Fire Marshal's Office, said this spring that the fees were a 'critical need that has been overlooked for far too long.' Wordekemper said, for instance, that some of the fire marshal's state fees had not been changed since the 1980s or 1990s. The increases, he said, still wouldn't keep up with the actual costs of such services. 'These fee increases are not taken lightly, but they are necessary to ensure the continued operation of vital safety services that protect our communities, schools, hospitals and businesses,' Wordekemper said in April. State Sen. Christy Armendariz of Omaha, vice chair of the Legislature's Appropriations Committee, gave Wordekemper's bill a boost on the floor saying that the alternative would be more funds from the state's main pocketbook, fueled by sales and income taxes. She said the fee increases would not touch family homes. Armendariz noted there is some 'sticker shock' to some of the increases, but she and Wordekemper said that might not have been the case if the fees were more regularly updated. All fees increasing under LB 434: Fireworks display permit — $100 per date (up from $10). Fireworks distributor's license — $1,000 (up from $500). Fireworks jobber's license — $400 (up from $200). Fireworks retailer's license — $100 per stand (up from $25). Fire alarm inspections — Up to $200 (previous cap was $100). State fire code inspections and compliance, late submittal after remodeling or construction — 50% of projected plan review fee (up from $50 flat fee). Fire safety inspections — $50-$300 (up from $25-$150). Plan reviews (beginning Sept. 1) — Up to $5,000 (previous cap was $500) Plan reviews for accessibility standards and specifications — Up to $5,000 (previous cap was $250). Water-based fire protection system contractor certificate (and renewals) — Up to $200 (previous cap was $100). Tank registration for farm or residential (one-time fee) — $10 (up from $5). Tank installation permit — $75 (up from $50). Tank registration permit (annual) — Up to $60 (previous cap was $30). The State Fire Marshal's Office estimates collecting an additional $800,000 in revenue the next fiscal year (beginning July 1) and $1.5 million the following fiscal year, which could be used to reduce or replace 'reliance' on state dollars. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Appellate court upholds decisions favoring Summit over county pipeline ordinances
The Roman L. Hruska Federal Courthouse in Omaha, where the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held its hearing on the pipeline cases on Nov. 20, 2024. (Photo by Aaron Sanderford/Nebraska Examiner) A federal appeals court on Thursday upheld lower court decisions barring counties from imposing safety standards on a pipeline subject to federal safety standards. The cases involved Summit Carbon Solutions, the company proposing to build a carbon sequestration pipeline through the state, and county supervisors from both Story and Shelby Counties. Summit sued the counties in 2022 for enacting ordinances that required county-specific setback requirements and other regulations the company argued were preempted by federal pipeline safety laws. A federal judge ruled in favor of Summit in Dec. 2023 and issued permanent injunctions, stopping the counties from enforcing the regulations, which would have impacted the carbon sequestration pipeline and other pipelines. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE The county supervisors appealed the decision and presented oral arguments in November 2024 to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. The counties argued that local land use and zoning regulations are not 'preempted standards' under the Pipeline Safety Act. Writing for the appeals court, U.S. Circuit Judge Duane Benton wrote held that the county ordinances 'focus' on safety and 'repeatedly' mention safety risks associated with the pipeline, which 'undermines' the Pipeline Safety Act's goal of preempting state regulations on safety. 'This holding does not prohibit local governments from considering safety, nor prevent them from enacting all zoning ordinances, as the counties suggest,' Benton said in the opinion. 'This court emphasizes the distinction between safety standards — which the PSA preempts — and safety considerations — which the PSA does not preempt.' The county ordinances also included emergency response requirements and abandonment provisions which the court ruled were also preempted by federal regulations. Circuit Judge Jane Kelly, however, dissented on those elements and wrote she does not believe that PSA preempts setback and abandonment provisions. Kelly said that while the counties' setback requirements are 'animated in part by safety considerations' they do not have the 'direct and substantial' effect on safety that is reserved for federal regulation. Kelly also wrote that per her understanding, the Pipeline Safety Act 'does not cover pipelines that have been abandoned' and therefore the Shelby County abandonment provision is not 'expressly preempted.' The court affirmed the lower court's decision in both cases, but ordered the federal court for the Southern District of Iowa to reconsider an additional ordinance that's at issue in the Story County case. Jason Craig, the attorney representing the counties, did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the decision. Sabrina Zenor, on behalf of Summit Carbon Solutions, said the ruling 'confirms' pipeline safety regulation set by the federal government and the Iowa Utilities Commission's role in route and permit decisions. 'This supports a consistent, lawful permitting process for critical infrastructure projects like ours,' Zenor said in a statement. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Quest to infuse religion into Nebraska public schools is back from dead
The quest to infuse religion into Nebraska public schools is making one last push this year. (Aaron Sanderford/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — After being rejected by a majority of Nebraska lawmakers this month, a proposal allowing K-12 students to be excused during the school day for off-site religious instruction and coursework is back as a stand-alone amendment to an education bill that once was a vehicle for a now dead package of proposals. The latest revival of Central City's State Sen. Loren Lippincott's release time proposal comes after lawmakers decided to remove it from the education package, a decision that led to the demise of the first deal. An impromptu compromise has come together around the decision to bring back a leaner version of Legislative Bill 306 — mainly some clean-up language sought by State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil to address terms and provisions in state law relating to higher education in the session's final days. The aim: allowing lawmakers to try attaching as standalone amendments their proposals from the failed education package to it individually and let the full Legislature vote on each. The base bill advanced 28-3 to the next round of debate on Tuesday, as lawmakers continue to attach amendments. One previous proposal already amended into LB 306 was introduced by State Sen. Bob Andersen, who represents western Sarpy County. His amendment would require public and private higher education institutions in Nebraska to report funding they receive from foreign adversaries. Two other noticeable proposals are from State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha, which would help schools find more long-term substitutes so teachers can take paid time off around significant life events, and from State Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln, which would provide forgivable loans for special education teachers in the state. Dungan's proposal was combined into Spivey's amendment, as the Legislature's Education Committee had combined the two during previous executive sessions. 'If you're not satisfied with the bill's current form,' Murman said during Tuesday's debate, 'I ask for your green vote on this so that we can continue to work on it. If the bill dies on general file, those chances of adding any additional pieces will die with it.' Four Nebraska bills wth religious overtones proposed this session mirrored a national push by some Republican lawmakers in other states to bring more Christianity into public schools. The push has been emboldened by President Donald Trump and recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions that appear to have altered the legal landscape for such proposals — even though ideas like Lippincott's release time bill have been legal since the 1950s. The latest version of Lippincott's proposal removed the private cause of action, the ability to sue if a school doesn't enforce it, which some Republicans had expressed concerns about. Some legislative Republicans had privately told the Examiner that Lippincott's earlier version went too far for them. The language that allows individuals to sue schools is nearly identical to a model bill provided by LifeWise Academy, a Christian education organization with ties to the populist right. Lippincott has acknowledged that his amendment arose from language put forward by LifeWise Academy. The effort to salvage the proposal could signal that social conservatives in the statehouse have a growing base of lawmakers willing to consider and advance religious-themed bills. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Nebraska Legislature advances proposal to weaken paid sick leave
The Paid Sick Leave for Nebraskans group turned in more than 138,000 signatures from voters last year to reach the ballot. (Aaron Sanderford/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — State lawmakers advanced a proposal Tuesday adding new restrictions to a paid sick leave law Nebraska voters approved last year and which has yet to be implemented, moving the proposed changes to the final round of debate. The way the voter-approved law is written, businesses with fewer than 20 weekly employees would allow those employees to accrue up to five days' worth of paid sick leave a year, or up to seven days a year for larger businesses. An hour of leave could be earned for every 30 hours worked. Employees, under the ballot measure law, can use paid sick leave for themselves or a family member for mental or physical illness, injury or a health condition or for a medical diagnosis or preventive medical care. Paid sick time also could be used during a public health emergency. LB 415 would remove the current law's blanket sick leave requirements, letting employers offer no paid sick leave to young teens, ages 14 and 15, or to temporary, seasonal agricultural workers and workers at the state's smallest businesses, those with 10 or fewer employees. Sponsoring State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln said the proposed legislation intends to clarify and make the ballot measure 'more feasible' and workable for businesses. His bill would clarify that businesses that meet or exceed the new law would not need to change their existing leave policies, including accrual or carryover components. It also would clarify how leave can be requested and when employees could begin to accrue sick leave. Worker advocates and union leaders have spoken out against the proposed changes as attempts to undermine the will of Nebraska voters throughout this session. Tuesday's debate followed an underlying theme of the session in the officially nonpartisan but GOP-dominated statehouse of lawmakers pushing back against a handful of ballot measures passed by Nebraska voters. That push has left Democratic-aligned lawmakers in the role of defending what they call the 'will of the people.' The GOP has built a 33-member supermajority that sometimes makes the filibuster less effective. 'For as long as I can remember,' State Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha said during the debate, 'Nebraska has been doing as well as it has because you had just enough Democrats to save us from ourselves.' Other Republican lawmakers said that they were trying to protect small businesses that could not afford paid sick leave in its voter-approved form. State Sen. Mike Jacobson of North Platte said he had received emails from small business owners in his district about the recent ballot initiatives. 'We do live in a capitalistic society, and we are competing for employees, but there are smaller businesses out there,' Jacobson said. 'In my district, they are being strapped. They can't continue to employ people if we're going to raise the minimum wage, have paid sick leave.' Throughout the debate, lawmakers, some begrudgingly, approved an amendment that would have reduced the carve-outs to businesses with five workers instead of 10 employees, and add back in the ability to sue to enforce provisions requiring paid sick leave. It was viewed as a compromise to get some lawmakers, including State Sen. Dave 'Woody' Wordekemper of Fremont and others, to vote for LB 415. As some Democratic-aligned lawmakers continued their filibuster of the proposal after the amendment's approval, Republicans stopped negotiating, reconsidered the amendment and voted it down. Jacobson led the successful push to reconsider the amendment. 'When we cast votes here, we're not taking away what the voters said they wanted,' Jacobson said. 'We're making it so that it will work for small businesses and for their employers.' Jacobson said during the debate that Republicans are willing to bringLB 415 back to select file to add an amendment that would bring some of the ability to sue back into the bill but that lowering the size of business required to pay sick leave to five is off the table. Democrats speaking in opposition to the changes said more than 30,000 Nebraskans would lose paid sick leave, highlighting the political reality facing the majority. Wordekemper said his continued support for the measure depends on the amendments proposed, if senators decide to bring LB 415 back to select file. Wordekemper voted present on cloture for the bill this round, but the bill advanced with the support of State Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln, a Democrat who voted for the bill and cloture. His vote is unlikely to affect the outcome. Ballard said after the vote that he has enough votes for passage during final reading despite the compromise amendment blowing up. Voters adopted the paid sick leave ballot measure with nearly 75% of the vote in November, including majority support across all 49 legislative districts. The measure was heavily supported by Nebraska labor groups. The voter-approved paid sick leave law is set to go into effect on Oct. 1. State Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln said lawmakers should be ashamed, adding they just 'told 30,000 Nebraskans that they don't get the opportunity for paid sick leave.' 'You didn't like the way that people were talking after that was adopted. It sounds like perhaps you decided to gut it and strip it,' Dungan said. 'That's being vindictive.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Resembling ourselves is critical
The Nebraska Department of Education. (Aaron Sanderford/Nebraska Examiner) Oh, those pesky social studies standards. Nebraska's once vaunted but now diminished rivalry with Oklahoma has come to a shuddering halt. What was born on the gridiron years ago has now expired, as those charged with educating children in the Sooner State have proposed an educational standard with no pedagogical foundation nor semblance of the truth. If adopted, the state's high school students, in their study of the presidential election results from 2020, would be required to 'identify discrepancies' in the process. Except there weren't any. Sure, some insisted the integrity of the election of Joe Biden was tainted. But no tangible, verifiable evidence was found nor exists today to prove that the election had 'discrepancies.' Nor does wishing, hoping, believing or offering debunked conjecture to the contrary make it so. Or worse, make it part of the public school curriculum. If the standard is accepted, Oklahoma students will be learning a lie. Game over. Huskers win. That's because to my knowledge, Nebraska's social study standards entertain no such nonsense. Nevertheless, as we've seen before on other fronts, culture war creep is a thing, a reality that can show up anywhere, including Nebraska's classrooms. See book banning for details. The standard's news was among a spate of happenings from the silly to the serious during the last week connected to social studies, history, economics, whatever social science is to your liking. Oklahoma's potential capitulation, which raises conspiracy theories to the level of actual American history, was only part of the story. A bill introduced in Congress would codify President Trump's notion that the Gulf of Mexico hitherto be known as the Gulf of America. His executive order did as much early in his second term, but EOs do not carry the weight or the permanence of an actual law. As you know, laws are what Congress passes, although you'd be hard pressed to find an example of that with the current confab now meeting in the Capitol. Enter H.R. 276, which would change the name of the Gulf of Mexico permanently and compel all federal agencies to update their maps and documents to reflect such an alteration. I imagine that would also require a rewrite of state social studies or geography standards. The bill's sponsor is U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga. Oy, vey! Where to begin? Let's start (and stop) with this: Why? Yeah, I can't think of anything either. Nebraska U.S. Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., thought the entire episode was rather childish: 'It just seems juvenile. We're the United States of America. We're not Kaiser Wilhelm's Germany or Napoleon's France. … We're better than this. It just sounds like a sophomore thing to do.' Bacon's nay in the name-change vote was a welcome development despite the measure passing the House. Perhaps Republican U.S. Reps. Mike Flood and Adrian Smith have an answer to why. A better idea would have been to let the silliness languish, never to be heard from again. The House — and the rest of us — face more pressing matters, not the least of which is the looming crisis over whether or not we are a democratic republic that honors the principle of due process. Enshrined in two Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, due process is the bedrock on which a nation of laws is built. Here's a quick review of those details, all of which should be the social studies standard for anyone who calls America home: The Fifth Amendment says no one shall be 'deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.' The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, uses the same eleven words, called the Due Process Clause, to describe a legal obligation of the states. Due process gives us legal procedures (processes), so the government cannot infringe on our individual rights. More to the point in the current discussion is this: Due process applies to anyone — citizen or not — being adjudicated in the U.S., too, its language using 'person' rather than citizen. Nevertheless, both the president and his Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, sidestepped the due process question recently. That is, do they believe in it? Trump told NBC's Kristin Welker he 'didn't know' because he isn't an attorney. Noem simply would not answer the question during a congressional hearing. The nation's history, like high school social studies, is replete with stories that essentially reveal who we are as a country, what we value — principles such as due process. They are the nation's standards. But when they get their corners knocked off, when we fail to live up to them, we no longer resemble ourselves. That's a standard too far. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
