LINCOLN, Neb. (WOWT) – Lincoln Police have concluded their investigation into the $2.5 million no-bid emergency contract awarded by the state. The auditor said the contract “smacks of favoritism” and questioned the nature of the emergency order put in place by Gov. Jim Pillen.
The case will now be referred to the office of Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers.
The LPD began investigating the case in March 2026.
“The Lincoln Police Department (LPD) completed its investigation into a 2024 no-bid emergency contract requested by the Nebraska Department of Economic Development. The investigation was turned over to the state Attorney General’s Office for review. In March 2026, LPD’s Technical Investigation Unit (TIU) began working diligently on this matter. TIU investigators are experienced and specialize in investigations that require careful and methodical, including the use of court-authorized processes to obtain necessary records and This level of thoroughness is essential to ensure a complete and accurate investigation. From the beginning, the only timetable we favored was that required to conduct a detailed and responsible investigation.
According to the report submitted Jan. 6, the Nebraska Department of Economic Development awarded a one-year, $2.5 million contract to Global Sustainability Developers to help grow the bioeconomy industry in the state. The agreement was reached just a month after the Nebraska Legislature passed a bill on the issue in early April 2024, LB1412, introduced by Speaker John Arch on behalf of Governor Pillen.
GSD fulfilled its contractual obligations, according to Foley’s report; but it raises questions about how that contract was reached as well as why it was fast-tracked — and why it wasn’t reviewed through the state’s regular processes.
“This resulted in an apparent exercise of ‘favoritism,’ preventing a number of qualified candidates from being formally considered,” the report said.
Foley’s report includes a timeline, showing that weeks after the bill passed, contract language described as “already reviewed by (GSD President and CEO Julie Bushell) and the Governor” was sent to the DED legal office. Pillen later acknowledged that his office did indeed recommend GSD for the contract, but said it resulted in a “joint decision” with KC Belitz, then Nebraska’s economic development director.
When Foley’s office asked why typical competitive bidding requirements required by state law were not applicable to this particular contract, Belitz said it was “an emergency contract to comply with the requirements of the bill.” But Foley’s report said the administration never provided an explanation for why the contract should be designated as emergency — and noted that only a small fraction of 1 percent of the more than 8,400 state contracts awarded over two fiscal years had received such a designation, and none of them were no-bid contracts.
“The only vaguely plausible basis for calling the contract ’emergency’ would have been to retain ‘public resources’ – in the form, presumably, of unclaimed federal grants put ‘at risk’ in the absence of immediate action to obtain them,” the auditor’s report said. “The only other admissible reasons for an emergency designation… would have been to address either ‘an urgent or unexpected need’ or a ‘public health and safety’ concern. Clearly, neither of these alternatives were applicable to this situation.”
Foley’s report also points out that the state had more than three months — from when the bill was signed on April 2, 2024, to when it took effect on June 30 of that year — to accept bids and secure a contract.
“Rather than following the law’s well-known competitive bidding provisions, the department declared an ’emergency’ and awarded a highly lucrative $2.5 million contract to a hand-picked ‘winner’ without competitive bidding,” the report said. “There is no doubt that compliance with the legal tendering requirements would have attracted many highly qualified candidates who, in the absence of such measures, did not have the opportunity to compete for the contract. »
Red flags
The auditor’s report notes some concerns in its timeline.
The timeline includes an entry for October 2024, when an amendment was added to the conflict of interest and liability sections of the contract, freeing GSD from any potential liability in the event such allegations arise. He also reported financial problems that GSD was apparently experiencing, particularly the fact that a newly opened account had had a negative balance for over a month.
Foley also raises concerns about DG Fuels, a company for which Bushell continued to provide consulting services after his contract with the state ended in February 2025 – two months earlier than originally planned.
“Although authorized by a contract amendment, such an arrangement could raise concerns about a possible lack of independence, or even undue influence over, GSD in promoting the DG Fuels project – one of the supposed triumphs for which Nebraska paid GSD $203,333.33 per month under the contract,” Foley’s report states.
According to the report, DG Fuels made promises to Phelps County that were not kept. In August 2024, DG Fuels issued a press release announcing plans to build “the first synthetic aviation fuel production facility in the Midwest,” promising the creation of 650 jobs, an influx of water from the Ogallala Aquifer via rail transportation, and an overall boost to the local economy. But more than a year later, the company had provided no details on the facility plans, and this week held its second public meeting on the project.
Foley said in the report that he spoke with former Congressman Collin Peterson of Minnesota about a plant that DG Fuels had been promised there but had not been delivered.
“In my opinion, there is no chance that this thing will be built. DG Fuels issued its press release without any meaningful input from the local community. I worry for those who might make decisions or assumptions based on press releases,” Peterson reportedly told the auditor’s office.
Foley’s report details 10 other projects in as many states that DG Fuels — which had gone through various name changes — had also not completed, dating back to 2002, even as the company’s president and CEO was being sued over garnishment actions, federal tax liens and other debt collection issues.
Proposed solutions
The state auditor’s report included recommendations for how the Nebraska Legislature could ensure the state doesn’t find itself in similar questionable situations in the future.
Foley suggested that any contract deemed “emergency” by the state be approved, potentially on an expedited timeline, by both the auditor’s office and the director of administrative services.
He also recommended that the state ensure it does business with reputable developers, particularly as it seeks to increase Nebraska’s participation in the bioeconomic industry; and called on lawmakers to ensure the state has mechanisms in place to hold these companies accountable for promises made to Nebraska communities.
Read the auditor’s report
Copyright 2026 WOWT. All rights reserved.
Gn headline
