Bill advanced to create new legislative oversight division

Lawmakers gave first-round approval May 21 to a bill that would create a new division within the Nebraska Legislature and reorganize the institution’s oversight functions.

Currently, there are five divisions that carry out the institutional and administrative functions of the Nebraska Legislature, including the Office of the Public Counsel. That division exists to promote accountability in government by independently and impartially investigating issues related to state agencies and employees.

The division includes the Office of Inspector General of Nebraska Child Welfare and the Office of Inspector General of the Nebraska Correctional System. The inspectors general work to provide increased accountability, oversight and improvement of the state’s child welfare, juvenile justice and correctional systems by conducting formal investigations and reviews.

Both IG offices were established in response to crises within the child welfare and criminal justice systems. The status of the offices has been in question since the Nebraska attorney general issued an opinion in August 2023 that cast doubt on their constitutionality.

In response, the Department of Correctional Services and the child welfare system — both within the executive branch — ceased allowing the IGs access to records and other data. The Legislature and the executive branch entered into a memorandum of understanding in 2024 to restore limited access to that information, and the Legislature established a special oversight committee to study legislative oversight functions.

Speaker John Arch of La Vista, sponsor of LB298, said the measure was introduced as a result of that special committee’s work. An amendment offered by the Executive Board and adopted 37-3 replaced the bill with a modified proposal. The amended measure would create the Division of Legislative Oversight within the Legislature and move the Legislative Audit Office, OIG for child welfare and OIG for corrections under the new division.

Arch called the bill a “transformational” way to ensure that the Legislature can engage in its oversight function in a “constitutionally sound” way.

“LB298 addresses the issues raised in the AG’s opinion, provides for the necessary access to information while maintaining confidentiality and confirms that the Legislature is a co-equal branch of government [in] which the constitutional duty of oversight is vested,” Arch said.

The amendment also would create the Legislative Oversight Committee, which would replace the existing Performance Audit Committee. Members would consist of the speaker of the Legislature, chairperson of the Executive Board, chairpersons of the Appropriations, Health and Human Services and Judiciary committees and four state senators appointed by the Executive Board.

The division director could be removed only by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. IGs would be appointed to five-year terms by the division director with the approval of the Executive Board, chairperson of the Legislative Oversight Committee and chairperson of the relevant standing committee.

The amendment also would make a number of changes to how the inspectors general obtain information, including:
• updating and clarifying subpoena authority;
• removing mandatory direct computer access for IG staff;
• clarifying that information is to be provided to IGs in the most efficient and timely way;
• providing that any confidential information or records shared with the Division of Legislative Oversight, Ombudsman’s Office or the IGs remain confidential;
• creating a process by which the executive and judicial branches may object to production or disclosure of legally privileged records, reports or documents to the IGs and negotiate terms of production and disclosure.

The amendment also incorporates the provisions of Adams Sen. Myron Dorn’s LB228, which would make several technical changes to the Performance Audit Act.

Finally, LB298 as amended would clarify that law enforcement may provide information to the IGs and that the IGs would suspend an investigation at the request of a law enforcement agency.

Lincoln Sen. Danielle Conrad opposed the measure. She said the Legislature “capitulated” in the face of an “unwarranted and unfounded political attack” from the executive branch in the form of the AG’s opinion and subsequent denial of access to necessary records and data by executive branch agencies subject to inspector general oversight.

Conrad suggested that a better option would have been to challenge those attempts to thwart Legislative oversight in court, especially given that the IG offices were created in the wake of repeated scandals involving harm and death among the state’s most vulnerable populations.

“This has been a political crisis, and it’s the failure of the speaker and the failure of the Executive Board and the failure of this body to stand in their power and protect this branch of government,” she said.

Bennington Sen. Wendy DeBoer also questioned the proposal. She cautioned against using an AG’s opinion as the basis to overturn legislative action such as the original establishment of the inspector general offices.

“An attorney general’s opinion is just an opinion,” DeBoer said, “so it is a bit of a concern that we have been acting as though the attorney general can have a veto on our laws, including past laws.”

Also expressing concerns was Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha. He supported the bill and the amendment, but said a provision that would subject staff to criminal penalties for sharing confidential information could have a “chilling effect” and possibly inhibit the IG’s work.

Arch offered an amendment, adopted 38-0, to remove the Class III misdemeanor penalty for knowingly sharing confidential information and replace it with “grounds for dismissal.” He said the original language was carried over from laws regarding the existing Performance Audit Committee.

Lawmakers then voted 39-3 to advance LB298 to select file.