Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The State and Local Government Committee met on March 15, 2022, and took up Senate File 3414, authored by Sen. Dreheim. The bill would prohibit local governments from enacting rent control on private residential property and would apply retroactively to November 1, 2021, effectively nullifying the St. Paul and Minneapolis rent control votes. The chair limited testimony because of time and noted the bill would be sent to general orders, with a vote planned later that morning. Sen. Newman asked about a cited statute in the bill, and Senate Council explained it related to property tax classification code 4D, not the rent-control prohibition itself. Testimony was split sharply. Supporters, including Paul Edgar of the Minnesota Realtors Association and Cecil Smith of the Minnesota Multi-Housing Association, argued rent control would reduce housing investment, discourage new construction and rehabilitation, and worsen housing supply and affordability. They said the St. Paul ordinance had already caused projects to pause or be reconsidered and warned that similar local ballot measures could spread to other cities. Opponents, including renters, housing advocates, and local officials, argued the bill would override the will of voters and strip cities of the ability to respond to housing instability. They said rent stabilization was needed to protect tenants from large rent increases, displacement, and homelessness, and emphasized that thousands of residents in St. Paul and Minneapolis had voted for such measures. Several testifiers described personal experiences with unstable housing, high rent burdens, homelessness, or displacement, and framed the issue as one of democracy and racial and economic equity. A Minneapolis City Council member and representatives from advocacy groups said the state should not preempt local decision-making. The hearing concluded with continued public testimony; no final committee vote is shown in the transcript excerpt.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee approved the March 10 minutes and then took up House File 3861, authored by Representative Bolden, which would expand child care assistance eligibility by raising the income cap from 67 percent to 85 percent of state median income and create a new co-payment category for newly eligible families. The committee adopted the author’s A1 amendment, which made date changes recommended by DHS, and then heard testimony in support from Amanda Schillinger, a child care center director, and Teresa James, a parent and child care worker. Both described families losing or nearly losing child care assistance because of income limits, the difficulty of affording care while working, and the way higher eligibility and lower co-pays could help families stay employed and keep children in care. DHS staff explained the current sliding-scale co-pay structure, the 67 percent eligibility cap for most families at redetermination, and that the bill would be funded through a combination of state general funds and federal child care funds. The bill was laid over for possible inclusion in a committee budget bill. Members raised concerns and questions about the income thresholds, the co-pay structure, and the fiscal implications. Representative Pryor asked DHS to clarify the “cliff” families face when they lose eligibility, and staff explained that families not receiving assistance pay the full child care cost. Representative Jurgens asked about funding, and staff said a fiscal note was pending but the bill would rely on general fund and federal child care block grant dollars. Representative Daniels expressed concern about expanding eligibility to families near six-figure incomes, citing program integrity, fraud, and optics, and suggested more bipartisan discussion; the chair responded that the committee had already spent years addressing program integrity issues and that the broader goal was to address child care costs squeezing families well above the poverty line. The committee then moved to House File 3981, authored by Representative Cagle, and adopted an A2 author’s amendment. Cagle said the bill corrects a statutory oversight so children in both voluntary pre-K and early childhood special education can receive school breakfast and related aid, and so kindergartners with disabilities generate the same average daily membership as their non-disabled peers. Megan Ariola of the Department of Education testified in support, saying the bill would align reimbursement and aid rules, including breakfast aid and English learner aid, for early childhood special education students and clarify the federal citation to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. After discussion, the bill was also laid over for possible inclusion in a budget bill.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 2200, as amended, which would create a local government climate action grant program administered by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Representative Bang explained that the bill would provide grants of up to $50,000, with a match requirement, to help local governments develop climate action plans focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and building resilience. The adopted A22 amendment expanded eligibility to include counties and school districts. Bang and supporting testimony emphasized flexibility for local governments, preference for broad community engagement, and the bill’s connection to existing MPCA assistance programs. Several local officials testified in support, describing how climate planning has helped or is needed in their communities. Council members from St. Louis Park, Moorhead, Red Wing, and Grand Rapids said local governments are already addressing climate-related issues such as energy use, transportation, flooding, drought, stormwater, and infrastructure resilience, but often lack staff time and funding. They pointed to recent climate emergency declarations, local planning efforts, and examples such as solar projects, work plans, and community resilience committees. Kathleen Doran Norton, a township supervisor from Rice County, described repeated flooding damage and said counties should be included because they handle responsibilities like disaster planning, land use, public health, and floodplain protection. Dr. Kate Knuth summarized research showing that only 13 cities in one county and one county have completed stand-alone climate action planning, leaving much of Minnesota without such plans. She noted that cities use different approaches, from shorter-term work plans to broader plans that include equity, adaptation, and emissions reductions, and argued that state support would help local governments connect residents to climate action. The chair thanked the testifiers and noted that the committee would move to questions; no vote on the bill itself was taken in the portion provided, and the bill was laid over for possible inclusion.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee resumed consideration of House File 4165, a bill related to divesting state pension assets from Russian holdings in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The committee re-voted on amendments: the DE1 amendment was adopted, while Representative Quam’s A1 amendment was not adopted. Testimony in support emphasized the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine, the need to avoid financially supporting Russia, and the personal impact on public employees’ pension money. Representative Nash and Representative New Brindley spoke in support of the bill as co-authors. The committee then took up House File 778, Representative Stephenson’s sports betting bill, after previously laying it over. Benita Fitzgerald Mosley testified in support of a provision dedicating 40% of mobile sports betting tax revenue to a youth sports grant fund for areas with high juvenile crime, arguing that youth sports can improve health, school performance, and keep kids away from juvenile justice involvement. Representative Stevenson explained that the bill would exclude horse racing from the athletic events eligible for betting and said the bill was designed to authorize up to 11 operators, partnering with tribes because of their experience and regulatory history. Members debated the bill’s structure and policy effects. Representative Kosnik questioned the exclusion of racetracks and other facilities, argued the bill would expand gambling and target younger men, and raised concerns about problem gambling and charitable gambling impacts. Representative Stevenson responded that the bill would create a competitive market and move existing black-market betting into a regulated system. Representative Mason said the bill was difficult but would vote yes because of the effort to address the black market. Representative Nash asked about impacts on physical and electronic pull-tab operations and requested revenue information, while Stevenson said he did not expect an impact on pull tabs and that sports betting dollars were currently going to offshore sites. The transcript ends while discussion of House File 778 was still ongoing, with no final committee action shown for that bill.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 1742, a bill by Representative Berg to establish and fund student support personnel aid for Minnesota schools. Berg offered and the committee adopted a DE1 author’s amendment with technical changes, including language clarifying “physical health” and “unfilled position,” and increasing the proposed investment to $250 million. Berg said the bill would provide ongoing funding to districts and charter schools, with at least $35,000 or $235 per pupil, to hire school nurses, counselors, social workers, psychologists, and chemical dependency counselors, and would give local districts flexibility to meet their own needs. Testifiers strongly supported the bill. School nurse Didi Savanich described rising student medical complexity, mental health emergencies, and the need for at least one nurse in every building. Liz Zeno, representing the School Nurse Organization of Minnesota, said many schools lack a licensed school nurse and supported making an MDE school nurse position permanent. School psychologist Maureen Hudicek said the bill would help move schools from a “wait-to-fail” model to prevention and better use psychologists’ training. School counselor Kela Coolers emphasized the need for improved counselor-to-student ratios, especially in elementary schools, and school social worker Molly Fox cited trauma, anxiety, and suicidal ideation among students as reasons to invest in school-employed support staff. Adosh Uni of the Minnesota Department of Education also testified in support, saying the bill aligns with the governor’s budget and would address shortages, improve recruitment and retention, and support a workforce pipeline for more diverse student support personnel. He noted Minnesota’s poor counselor-to-student ratio compared with the national average. After closing comments from Berg about the impact of school counseling on his own family, the committee renewed the motion to lay over HF 1742, as amended, for possible inclusion in a future omnibus bill or further consideration later.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Civil Law and Data Practices Policy Committee heard Senate File 724, an agency bill relating to the Minnesota Code of Military Justice and its relationship to federal military law and state data practices. Senator Lang introduced the bill, and testifiers from the Minnesota Department of Military Affairs and National Guard explained that it would clarify jurisdiction, statute-of-limitations issues, appellate procedures, and the ability of out-of-state military attorneys to serve without going through the normal pro hac vice process. The bill also sought authority for the adjutant general to obtain certain law-enforcement data for internal military discipline and investigations, especially in cases involving serious misconduct such as sexual assault. The committee first considered and adopted the A2 amendment, which deleted two data-practices-related sections after concerns were raised by the Newspaper Association and others about privacy and possible conflicts with the Data Practices Act. Testimony from Don Kerr, Lieutenant Colonel David Blomgren, and Rich Newmeister focused on the need to align state law with federal Department of Defense and FOIA-related policies while avoiding legal conflicts. Members also discussed the investigative needs of the Guard, the effect of federal supremacy, and the possibility that some issues would still have to be resolved through litigation. During member questions, the committee reviewed the bill’s statute-of-limitations language, the meaning of the “lesser of” rule for punishment and limitations periods, and a provision making consent unavailable as a defense in certain recruiter-trainee or training-authority relationships. Testifiers explained that the bill was intended to protect military discipline and clarify military-specific offenses, while still giving the accused the benefit of the more favorable limitation or sentencing rule where laws differ. After discussion, Senator Brigham moved that Senate File 724, as amended, be passed and sent to Judiciary; the motion prevailed and the bill was passed.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Transportation Finance and Policy Committee met on March 15, 2022, and announced that all bills on the agenda would be laid over. The first bill heard was SF 3859, Senator Chamberlain’s municipal-consent bill related to the proposed Rush Line/Purple Line guideway from White Bear Lake to St. Paul. Chamberlain and several testifiers argued the project would significantly affect local communities, including business property acquisition, changes to downtown White Bear Lake, and impacts on Robert Street businesses in St. Paul. They said local residents and businesses had not been meaningfully heard and that the bill would require earlier local hearings, community approval before federal funds are sought, and the ability to revoke approval before federal funding applications. A Met Council representative and Metro Transit official responded that the project had already involved extensive public engagement and multiple municipal votes in 2017 and 2020, and said the main concern with the bill was the proposed ability to revoke consent later in the process. Senators Kent and Dibble noted that local engagement had occurred, but also acknowledged frustration from community members. SF 3859 was laid over. The committee then took up SF 3991, Senator Coleman’s transparency bill, and adopted the A1 technical amendment. Coleman said the bill would require the Met Council to publicly post monthly ridership numbers and initial ridership projections for buses and light rail within 60 days after each month, and also to post crime data for buses, light rail, and transit facilities. He said the goal was to increase transparency about ridership performance and crime on transit systems. The transcript ends shortly after Coleman’s opening explanation, with no final vote or further action on the bill shown beyond the amendment adoption and the bill being taken up for discussion.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Mining and Forestry Policy Committee heard Senate File 2797, presented by Senator Bach on behalf of Senator Tomassoni. The bill would improve coordination, transparency, accountability, and timeliness in the environmental review and permitting process for metallic mineral mining projects, modeled in part on the federal FAST-41 framework. Bach said the measure would not change environmental standards, but would create a public dashboard showing project descriptions, required approvals, schedules, hearings, agency actions, and related litigation, arguing that clearer timelines would help attract investment and support domestic critical mineral supply chains. Supportive testimony came from representatives of U.S. Steel, Mining Minnesota, Jobs for Minnesotans, the Range Association of Municipalities and Schools, the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, and the Laurentian Chamber of Commerce. They emphasized that mining supports jobs, tax revenue, schools, and regional economies, and said the current permitting process is often slow, uncertain, and inconsistent. Several witnesses argued that a more predictable process would help Minnesota compete for future mining and industrial investment, while still allowing environmental review to continue. The Department of Natural Resources testified in a more cautious posture. DNR officials said they support transparency and already use planning tools, websites, and coordination meetings, but warned that the bill’s dashboard and deadline requirements could be expensive, difficult to implement, and based on early “best guesses” about permits and timelines. They also said the bill could create extra workload without new funding and might interfere with coordination, tribal consultation, or thorough review. The Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy supported the dashboard concept but raised concerns that the bill could pressure agencies to approve projects on a fixed schedule, weaken protections, and fail to require robust government-to-government tribal consultation. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate State Government Finance and Policy and Elections Committee met on March 16, 2022, with a quorum present and took up two bills. On Senate File 3680, Senator Lang presented a delete-all A4 amendment and explained that the bill was intended to address problems created by strict Real ID-related privacy rules that had led to deputy registrars losing their licenses for certain data lookups, even when done for legitimate business purposes. A representative of the Minnesota Automobile Dealers Association testified in support, saying the bill would allow authorized lookups for legitimate business needs while preserving a log and allowing discipline short of immediate revocation. The committee adopted the A4 amendment and then recommended the bill, as amended, to pass and re-referred it to the Civil Law and Data Practices Committee. The committee then heard Senate File 3065 from Senator Matthews, who offered and had adopted an A2 amendment requiring legislative notice and approval before a state agency could adopt another state's rules. The bill, described as a Consumer Choice of Fuel Act, would prohibit agencies from adopting rules that restrict products sold in Minnesota based on fuel source and would block adoption of California-style vehicle standards affecting items such as generators, lawn equipment, motorcycles, snowmobiles, and watercraft. Senator Matthews argued the measure was needed to prevent agencies from making major policy decisions through rulemaking rather than legislation. Testifiers from NFIB and the Minnesota Automobile Dealers Association supported the bill, criticizing fuel-source mandates and the California cars rule as harmful to small businesses and dealers. An MPCA assistant commissioner testified that the agency’s rule had been found needed and reasonable by an administrative law judge, based on the agency’s SONAR, and said the ruling had not been appealed. Committee members debated the scope of rulemaking, the role of the legislature, and environmental impacts, including questions about lithium mining. The discussion ended with a request for a roll call on the motion to move the bill forward, but the transcript cuts off before the vote result is shown.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 3861, authored by Representative Bolden, and first adopted an author’s amendment (A1) that made a couple of date changes at DHS’s suggestion. The bill would raise child care assistance program (CCAP) income eligibility from 67 percent to 85 percent of state median income and create a copayment structure for newly eligible families, with testimony emphasizing that the change would help families who are working but still cannot afford child care. Bolden described the bill as intended to reduce the “cliff” where families lose assistance as their income rises, and cited a constituent story illustrating difficult tradeoffs between work, education, and child care costs. Testifiers supported the bill. Amanda Schillinger, a child care center director, said many families at her centers struggle to afford care, with some leaving or declining enrollment because of cost, and argued that higher eligibility would help families access affordable, high-quality care. Teresa James, a parent and child care worker, testified that assistance is essential for her to work and that losing it would make her effectively work for free; she also described anxiety over redeterminations and small raises affecting eligibility. Committee members asked DHS to clarify current eligibility and copay rules, including the difference between the 47 percent threshold for basic sliding fee application, the 67 percent redetermination level, and the proposed 85 percent cap, as well as how the sliding copay scale works and the federal 7 percent affordability recommendation. Representative Daniels raised concerns about program integrity, fraud, and the optics of expanding eligibility to families near six-figure incomes, and suggested waiting for more investigation and possibly considering amendments. In response, the chair noted that program integrity reforms have been ongoing for several years and that the committee has seen significant changes. After discussion, the chair laid over House File 3861 for possible inclusion in a committee budget bill.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate debated and passed Senate File 3472, a measure to extend Minnesota’s health care premium security plan, or reinsurance, for another five years. Supporters said the bill is needed to demonstrate to the federal government that Minnesota intends to continue the program so the state can secure the next waiver and maintain stability in the individual insurance market. They argued the program helps keep premiums more affordable for entrepreneurs and others buying coverage on their own. Opponents criticized the bill as a large upfront commitment of taxpayer money, saying it would direct more than a billion dollars in the first year to private insurance companies. They argued insurers set premiums, profits, and executive compensation, and questioned whether the program truly lowers costs for consumers. The Senate approved the bill by a vote of 42 to 24, and the title was agreed to.

Keywords: 1183, house

Keywords: 1183, house

Keywords: 1183, house

Keywords: 1183, house