If you own residential or agricultural property in Lancaster County, you’ll soon learn the preliminary value of what you own.

Lancaster County Assessor Norm Agena plans to mail about 96,000 notices Friday. But he stressed the valuations are preliminary.

“That’s not necessarily what the values will be on June 1,” he said.

That’s when the county will send official notices to all property owners, including those who own commercial property.

Agena encouraged people who have questions or find errors in the preliminary notices to contact his office to set up an appointment between Jan. 12 and the end of February. Appointments will be given on a first-come basis.

Preliminary valuations are based on a countywide reappraisal of property, something Agena’s office tries to do every three years. The last was done in 2006.

But Agena hasn’t sent out preliminary notices since 1994. He decided to give owners a heads-up on valuations because of what is happening in the real estate market, especially on the coasts, where values have dropped dramatically.

“What’s happening on the coasts isn’t happening here,” said Rob Ogden, Agena’s chief deputy. “Our concern is that people think property values have dropped.”

He also hopes to reduce the number of protests from taxpayers once official notices come out June 1. Those notices will contain the valuation for the 2009 tax year, payable in 2010.

Agena and Ogden said the real estate market in the Midwest has been fairly stable, despite the poor economy.

But Agena declined to provide a countywide assessment of what property values have done since 2006, saying only: “Some are going up, some are going down and some are staying the same.”

Do you think property values are falling in Lancaster County?

President-elect Barack Obama said Wednesday he'll have to juggle the competing interests of economic stimulus and deficit control, but that restoring general business health must come first.

Obama indeed offered a promise of long-term fiscal discipline at a news conference that he held just a short time after the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office came up with a new _ and unprecedented _ estimate of the deficit expected for the 2009 budget year: roughly $1.19 trillion.

Such a red-ink mark on the federal ledger would dwarf last year's record of $455 billion deficit and represent more than 8 percent of the size of the economy, which is higher than the deficits of the 1980s.

Obama said that concerns about rising deficits prompted him to turn down advice from some economists who called for spending $1 trillion or more to jump-start the economy. Obama's proposal is expected to cost nearly $800 billion over two years.

"We have an economic situation that is dire, and we're going to have to jump start this economy with my economic recovery plan, creating 3 million jobs," he said. "That's going to cost some money. And in the short term, we will actually see, potentially, additions to the deficit."

He also said that by February he expects to have a plan on how to deal with big ticket spending such as Social Security and Medicare, waste in government and other factors, as well as some "specific outlines" on how to control the deficit.

"We're going to be inheriting a $1 trillion-plus deficit. And if we do nothing, then we will continue to see red ink as far as the eye can see," Obama said after introducing Nancy Killefer as his chief performance officer, a White House official who will work with federal agencies to set performance standards and hold agency managers accountable for progress.

But at Obama's transition office and in Congress, the urgent focus continued to be the economic stimulus.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pressed top congressional Democrats on Wednesday to pass a recovery bill by mid-February, and offered her own reassurance that the legislation would be fiscally responsible.

"Many will focus on the cost of it," Pelosi told the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee. "While we are not discussing small sums, the bill is fiscally responsible because it will provide a fiscal dividend by returning 40 percent of the cost to the Treasury _ at least that much in increased revenue."

Noting that the stimulus proposal will include spending on roads and bridges, clean energy technologies, expanded Internet access, and modernizing schools, Pelosi declared: "This is not your grandfather's public works bill."

The congressional panel heard from a handful of economists, including former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, Harvard's Martin Feldstein and Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com and a former informal adviser to Republican presidential candidate John McCain. They all endorsed the need for a big, short-term spending package to jolt the economy out of its downward spiral.

Acknowledging the risk of deficits, however, Feldstein noted: "There should be an exit strategy. The spending should not create a political dynamic that makes it hard to stop."

Pelosi's call for passage by mid-February represents a slight adjustment in the Democrats' anticipated schedule for the legislation. Just on Monday, Obama had said he hoped for passage at the end of January or the first week in February.

Budget-conscious lawmakers have been pressing Obama to embrace deficit-reduction goals, even before the budget office's grim assessment Wednesday.

"Part of the discussion that needs to happen right now is not what we do just right now, but what we look to in the future _ about how we get back to a balanced budget and then start to deal with this horrible, horrible national debt that we have," said Rep. Dennis Moore of Kansas, a member of the congressional Blue Dogs, a coalition of conservative and moderate Democrats.

With Democrats in control of both chambers in Congress, Obama's reassurances to budget hawks from both parties already appear to be making a stimulus package more palatable. Republican leaders sounded a cautionary note, however.

"We cannot borrow and spend our way back to prosperity when were already running an annual deficit of more than one trillion dollars," House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said in a statement. "I was pleased to hear the President-elect say yesterday that we need to stop just talking about our national debt and actively confront it."

Obama has not detailed solutions for vexing problems such as growing demands on Social Security and Medicare. His prescriptions to make government accountable could easily run aground, much like those of predecessors who vowed to tackle government waste, fraud and abuse.

But lawmakers are not short on ideas. Conrad and the Budget Committee's top Republican, New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg, have proposed a bipartisan fiscal task force of lawmakers and administration officials that would create a plan to reduce budget deficits and lower the national debt.

Blue Dog Democrats would like to see legislation that would force Congress to pay for spending proposals with equal spending cuts or with new revenue. House Democrats this week plan to consider legislation that would require all federal agencies to undergo new audits and would call for congressional hearings when agency inspectors general find evidence of waste or fraud.

How big should the Obama stimulus plan be in light of the projected deficits?

Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning used an assault rifle and text of a sexually explicit online conversation as props while unveiling his legislative wish list Tuesday.

Laws aimed at gang violence, Internet sex predators and dating violence — as well as a bill that would increase penalties for gas cheats — will be on the Nebraska Legislature’s plate this year at Bruning’s request.

The attorney general showed reporters an assault weapon stolen earlier this year from a Lincoln sporting goods store, and a submachine gun possessed by a man who killed Omaha police officer Jason “Tye’’ Pratt.

Bruning also showed a sexually explicit 2004 conversation between Dennis Jasa and a State Patrol investigator posing as a 14-year-old girl. Jasa was convicted of online enticement of a child.

The legislative session starts Wednesday, and Bruning’s bills will have plenty of competition.

But Sen. Scott Lautenbaugh of Omaha said these topics are important. Lautenbaugh said he was shocked by the things he found out when Bruning asked him to introduce legislation making it a crime for registered sex offenders to use social-networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace.

Sen. Mike Friend of Omaha will sponsor a bill targeting gang violence, crime and drugs. The proposed law would increase penalties for some gun-related crimes. And prosecutors would be able to charge people with specific crimes for recruiting gang members, applying graffiti and drive-by shootings.

Another of Bruning’s bills targets racketeering and will be introduced by Sen. Kent Rogert of Tekamah. It would make it against the law to use money gained from illegal racketeering activities for a legal enterprise.

The bill also would let prosecutors combine the losses of multiple victims of financial crimes into a single charge. Under current law, Bruning couldn’t charge a western Nebraska gas station owner with a felony for selling gas with ethanol in it at the higher price for regular gas.

For a felony, the total stolen must be at least $1,500, and the amounts stolen from each gas station customer couldn’t be added together to qualify as a felony.

Bruning said changing the law would also help prosecutors go after online scam artists who bilk a small amount from a lot of people.

Rogert’s bill also would create the crime of identity theft. Currently, identity theft cases are prosecuted under criminal impersonation laws.

The fourth bill, which will be introduced by Sen. Gwen Howard of Omaha, would require that schools teach students about dating violence.

It’s based on Rhode Island’s Lindsay Ann Burke Act, named for a 23-year-old woman killed by her ex-boyfriend.

What do you think the Legislature's priority should be this year?

As senators head to Lincoln for the long, 90-day session that begins Wednesday, Omaha Sen. Mike Friend wants to talk about shortening the annual sessions.

He plans to propose a constitutional amendment limiting the number of days to 60 in odd-numbered years and 40 in even-numbered years, or 100 days for the two-year cycle.

“But I’d be open to other suggestions,” Friend said.

Any constitutional change would also require approval by voters statewide.

Why the change?

Here’s Friend’s assessment:

* The Legislature is a “citizen legislature,” meaning senators are expected to have other jobs. Shorter sessions would allow more working Nebraskans to serve.

Serving in the Legislature does “put your career on hold. There’s not a lot of advancement,” when you spend half the year in Lincoln.

* Shortening the session would help reduce the number of bills that pass.

Omaha Sen. Ernie Chambers has served that purpose, slowing down the Legislature, refusing to let some bills get to the finish line. But Chambers, a victim of term limits, will not be back.

* Shortening the session would save money.

“I’m serious about the discussion,” said Friend. “I think there’s a 50/50 chance we could get the votes to put in on the ballot,” he said. “If it got on the ballot, it would probably pass.”

Here’s how others feel about the proposal:

Barry Kennedy, President of the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce and Industry: The state Chamber of Commerce supports reducing the number of legislative days. That endorsement is based on the need for efficiency in government.

“We talk about the good life but then find 800 ways to change it every year.”

Sen. Bill Avery of Lincoln: “I think this is premature. We don’t know the effect of Ernie’s (Sen. Ernie Chambers) departure.

Shortening the session could threaten the current requirement that every bill have a public hearing. That requirement is “one of the very attractive features” of our system.

Should the Legislative session be shorter?

With death penalty opponent Ernie Chambers out of the way, an attempt to change Nebraska’s method of execution to lethal injection seems likely to be successful after the Legislature convenes next week.

Gov. Dave Heineman and Attorney General Jon Bruning, both Republicans, have said they want the issue decided this session. The Nebraska Supreme Court in February declared electrocution — the state’s only means of execution — cruel and unusual punishment, and therefore unconstitutional.

The ruling leaves the state with a death penalty but no way of carrying it out.

In a pre-session survey by The Associated Press, 28 of 49 senators or senators-elect said they supported changing Nebraska’s method of execution from the electric chair to lethal injection. Two said they opposed changing the law, four said they were unsure, three said they opposed the death penalty, three skipped the question and nine didn’t respond to the survey.

Do you support changing the method of execution to lethal injection in Nebraska?