Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 3244, which was laid over after the author moved that it be laid over as introduced. The bill is part of the Homes for All agenda and would provide a first tranche of $400 million in housing infrastructure bonds, along with $100 million in general obligation bonds for public housing repairs. The author said the proposal would support affordable rental and homeownership projects, supportive and senior housing, manufactured home acquisition, deeper affordability for households at or below 30% AMI, and critical repairs to aging public housing stock. Testimony was strongly supportive. Catholic Charities, Aeon, West Central Minnesota Communities Action, and the Washington County Community Development Agency all described projects made possible by housing infrastructure bonds or public housing funds, including deeply affordable apartments, supportive housing, a community land trust, and rehabilitation of older public housing buildings. Witnesses emphasized that the funding leverages additional local, county, and private dollars, helps preserve existing housing, and addresses severe shortages in both urban and rural areas. Public housing representatives said most units are decades old, capital needs are large, and repairs are needed for health, safety, accessibility, energy efficiency, and security. Members echoed those concerns. Representative Gomez described deferred maintenance in public housing as a life-and-death issue, citing a past fatal fire in public housing and urging a large investment. Representative Briar said the state’s housing investment is too low and stressed the need to maintain existing stock as well as build new homes. Representative Jurgens asked about the bill’s path forward, and the author said it would go to the Capital Investment Committee, where both housing infrastructure bonds and GO bonds are expected to be included in the House capital investment bill. The author also noted that state investment in housing infrastructure bonds was much higher in 2014 than in 2020 and argued that public housing funding needs to be increased again.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 2867 was heard and then laid over, with the motion to refer it to Ways and Means. The bill would expand Minnesota’s public safety soft body armor reimbursement program to include firefighters, EMTs, and paramedics, and the discussion focused on the growing need for ballistic protection for first responders. Representative Hugh Hewitt and several testifiers described recent incidents involving shootings, weapons, violent patients, and active shooter responses, arguing that emergency personnel are increasingly exposed to dangerous scenes and should have access to body armor. Supportive testimony came from John Cunningham of the Minnesota State Fire Chiefs Association, Jeremy Baker of Saint Paul Fire, and Buck McCalpin of the Minnesota Ambulance Association. They said call volumes and violent encounters have increased, that some departments already provide vests while many others cannot afford them, and that funding is the main barrier. Cunningham said Brooklyn Park outfitted all firefighters with fitted vests at significant cost, while Baker noted Saint Paul’s high EMS call volume and rising danger. McCalpin said the bill would help smaller rural ambulance services and create a more financially workable matching program. Members generally expressed support but raised questions about the size and funding of the existing reimbursement account, which was described as nearly depleted. Several members asked whether the current appropriation would be enough if eligibility were expanded; the author and testifiers acknowledged that more funding would likely be needed and that the exact cost was unclear. Some members also asked what had changed to make the bill necessary now, and the response was that the risks have been building over time due to changes in policing, mental health response, gun availability, and broader community conditions. No amendments were adopted, and the bill was laid over for further consideration.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Mining and Forestry Policy Committee met on February 22, 2022, and received a presentation from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency on how mining permits are processed. MPCA staff explained the agency’s role in administering state and federally delegated air and water permits for mining operations, including air emission permits, construction permits, wastewater discharge permits, industrial stormwater permits, construction stormwater permits, and, in some cases, solid waste, hazardous waste, and Section 401 water quality certifications. They described the review process, which typically includes application review, draft permit development, tribal review, a 30-day public comment period, agency responses to comments, EPA review for delegated permits, and a post-issuance challenge period. They also noted that permit timelines vary, often taking 6 to 12 months depending on project complexity, and that expedited air permits are possible only through overtime arrangements, though this has not typically been used for mining permits. Committee members asked about how the public can find permit notices, and MPCA staff said notices are posted on the agency website, in local newspapers, and through public information hearings and email updates. Members also asked about wild rice and sulfate standards, impaired waters, and how the agency handles discharges that could affect those waters. MPCA explained that once a water body is listed as impaired, permit writers must evaluate whether a discharge would cause or contribute to the impairment, and that total maximum daily load studies help set reductions for regulated and unregulated sources. Questions also addressed what happens if a permit is denied or if site conditions change; staff said the permitting process is iterative and applicants can revise proposals, while significant operational changes or stormwater-related changes may require permit updates or new permits. MPCA staff said the facility is responsible for cleanup and mitigation costs when issues arise. Members also asked about litigation affecting mining-related permits. MPCA staff said some water permit issues have been litigated and remanded by the courts, and that the agency is actively working on those matters. The committee did not take any votes or formal action on the presentation. The chair thanked the agency staff, noted that members could follow up with additional questions, and said the committee likely would not meet the following week because of scheduling conflicts, with a mining bill expected to be heard the week after.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: Senate File 2302, which would authorize Minnesota to join the Interstate Nurse Licensure Compact, cleared its first Senate committee hurdle. Supporters said the compact would let registered nurses and licensed practical/vocational nurses hold one multi-state license, improving access to care, supporting telehealth and remote care, helping virtual nursing teams assist hospitals with staffing shortages, and reducing costs while maintaining patient safety. Opponents argued that Minnesota should not join because it could lower standards and undermine nurses who work directly at the bedside. One critic said the state should trust the nurses “saving lives” rather than those “pushing paper,” while another said a vote for the bill would be a “slap in the face” to Minnesota nurses and that the real issue is unsafe working conditions, not a lack of licensed nurses. No final floor action was taken in the excerpt, but the bill advanced from the hearing with support from its sponsor and testimony in favor, despite strong objections from nursing opponents.

Keywords: 1183, house

Keywords: 1183, house

Keywords: 1183, house

Keywords: 1183, house

Keywords: 1183, house

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee heard Senator Coleman present Senate File 2844, which would add a new four-year felony level for fleeing a peace officer in a motor vehicle when the conduct is more dangerous than simple fleeing but does not result in substantial bodily harm. Coleman described the bill as addressing a gap in current law and said it was prompted by a personal experience involving a high-speed police chase near her family. She and supporters argued the bill would better reflect the danger posed by reckless pursuits, including excessive speeds, wrong-way driving, and running red lights. Jeff Potts of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association testified in support, saying police pursuits have increased about 40 percent over three years and that officers are increasingly dealing with reckless driving by fleeing suspects. He said law enforcement often terminates pursuits because of safety concerns, but still faces damage and risk to innocent motorists. Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher also supported the bill as one tool to reduce dangerous chases, said most metro pursuits are terminated, and noted that officers use other tactics such as aircraft, GPS tracking, and coordination with vehicle services to locate suspects and avoid pursuits when possible. Committee members asked about whether higher penalties deter fleeing, how often suspects are later apprehended, and whether the bill’s license revocation provisions and culpable negligence standard were proportional. Potts and Fletcher said they had no research proving deterrence, but believed longer sentences and stronger messaging could help, and Fletcher said most suspects are not immediately caught and may be pursued again later. Staff explained that the bill’s license revocation structure would place the new offense at four years, between existing one- and three-year revocations for lesser fleeing offenses and longer revocations for offenses causing bodily harm or death. The bill was laid over, along with the committee’s other agenda item, for possible later action.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Education Finance and Policy Committee heard Senate File 1525, the education savings account bill, and first adopted the A4 author’s amendment. Senator Chamberlain presented the bill as a school-choice measure that would let state education dollars follow the student to the school chosen by parents, including nonpublic options. He said the bill would help parents find the best fit for their children and argued it was not a reduction in aid but a reallocation tied to student movement. Members then focused heavily on the fiscal note and the bill’s impact on school funding. Ms. Hofer explained that the fiscal note for the amended bill showed a $7.4 million general fund cost in fiscal year 2023, largely from assumptions about temporary public-school enrollment and administrative setup costs, and a $777,000 biennial impact overall. She said the bill would reduce forecasted appropriations because fewer pupils would drive student-based formulas, and that statewide levies would be reduced by $23.9 million in the 2024-25 biennium. She also clarified that reductions in categories such as American Indian education aid, literacy incentive aid, special education, and other programs were tied to the statewide average general education revenue and student counts, not to targeted cuts to those programs. Several senators, including Wieger, Koonish, and Isaacson, challenged the bill on accountability and equity grounds, arguing that it would divert money from already underfunded public-school programs and asking for justification for the specific funding shifts. Chamberlain responded that parents should have choice, that the bill reflected existing pupil-based funding mechanics, and that there was no “defunding” because dollars simply follow students when they leave a district. The committee did not take public testimony, and the bill was discussed further with reference to later consideration in the full Finance Committee.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 3250, which proposes a $10 million general fund appropriation in fiscal year 2023 for the Center for Economic Inclusion. Chair Richardson moved the bill to be laid over for possible inclusion. The bill was presented as a statewide effort to support disadvantaged and chronically underemployed workers, expand access to capital for small businesses, and advance racially inclusive economic growth through the Center’s data-driven work. Testimony from Tawanna Black, the Center’s founder and CEO, described the organization’s current work with employers and government agencies, including workforce development, procurement, and business investment strategies. She said the Center uses a pay-for-performance model for workforce programs and would use the new funding for both nonprofit contracts and direct business investments, including forgivable loans, revenue-based financing, and equity investments for Black, Indigenous, Asian, and Latino-owned businesses. She cited data on Black-owned businesses in Minnesota and argued that closing racial gaps would create jobs and add significant economic value. Members asked about the Center’s budget, how outcomes would be measured, how funds would be split between workforce and business investments, and whether the bill would ensure proper vetting of funded organizations. Black said the Center uses metrics, surveys, focus groups, and milestone-based payments, and Richardson said state contract and RFP requirements would apply. Several members raised concerns about the size of the appropriation, the lack of a beneficiary testifier, and the need for accountability and reporting. Richardson responded that the amount reflects the scale of lost opportunity from systemic racism and said the bill would be subject to standard state procurement and oversight requirements. Members also asked about statewide reach, including greater Minnesota and rural communities; Black said the Center already has engagements across parts of the state and is open to expanding into additional communities, including Worthington and St. Cloud. The discussion ended with the bill laid over for possible inclusion.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: Minnesota House DFL leaders and law enforcement officials announced legislation aimed at addressing police recruitment and retention shortages by creating and expanding pathways into policing. The proposal would screen candidates earlier for community service, character, and related skills, then provide accelerated training and scholarship opportunities for high school graduates and second-career applicants. Speakers said the bill is intended to build a more diverse police workforce that better reflects the communities officers serve. Majority Leader Ryan Winkler, Assistant Commissioner Booker Hodges, Rep. Heather Edelson, Rep. Dan Walgamot, Rep. Khalif El-Amin, and Sen. Carla Bigham all voiced support. Hodges described the shortage as severe, citing vacancy rates of 10 to 15 percent, about 58 agencies seeking personnel, and roughly 1,200 to 1,500 open positions statewide, while noting that Minnesota turns out about 536 officers a year. Several speakers argued that the current education and equipment costs create barriers for first-generation students and people from marginalized communities, and that the bill would help create officers with stronger moral character and cultural competency. Winkler said the bill is based on conversations with police chiefs and sheriffs and is designed to provide agencies with a better pipeline of qualified candidates rather than changing how individual departments hire. He also said the bill is part of a broader public safety package that includes community intervention strategies, violence prevention, youth programming, and other DFL proposals such as carjacking and juvenile electronic home monitoring. During questions, Winkler said the bill would not solve the shortage immediately but would begin moving the state in the right direction. He later outlined funding in the proposal: $2.6 million for scholarships, $13 million for second-career pathways, $800,000 for outreach, and signing bonuses, with the goal of producing about 250 potential candidates annually.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House met, opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, and established a quorum. The journal from the previous day was approved, non-controversial motions and standing committee reports were adopted, and the House took up second readings of several House and Senate files. A new Senate bill, SF 2876, relating to health and human services, was received and given first reading before being referred to Ways and Means. House Files 3599 through 3689 were also introduced and given first reading. Several committee re-referral motions were approved without opposition. HF 2863 was moved from Capital Investment to State Government Finance and Elections; HF 2961 from Capital Investment to Public Safety and Criminal Justice Reform Finance and Policy; HF 3090 from Housing Finance and Policy to Human Services Finance and Policy; and HF 3588 from Taxes to State Government Finance and Elections. In each case, the member moving the bill explained that the original referral did not fit the bill’s subject matter, and the motions prevailed by voice vote. The remainder of the session was largely devoted to memorial remarks. Representatives Davids and Munson spoke in remembrance of Congressman Jim Hagedorn, asking for a moment of silence and describing his service, personal character, and impact on southern Minnesota. Representative Schumacher then honored former Representative Dr. Richard Mulder, noting his service in the House, his focus on rural health and human services, and his authorship of the stay-at-home mom bill. Representative Erdahl also offered remarks for Presidents Day, reflecting on the nation’s presidents and sharing a brief personal anecdote about President Carter. The House then adopted a motion to adjourn until 3:30 p.m. Thursday, February 24, 2022, and adjourned.