Transcript Highlights:

• :02.480> I<00:19:02.600> had<00:19:02.720> a<00:19:02.840> question<00:19
• c><00:19:06.200> a<00:19:06.280> couple<00:19:06.520> different<00:19:06.799>
• uncover<00:19:12.240> chair<00:19:12.559> Nash<00:19:13.039> thank<00:19:13.200>
• ><00:19:26.960> and<00:19:27.200> and<00:19:27.360> harped<00:19:27.720> on
• I<00:19:28.120> was<00:19:28.200> a<00:19:28.320> mayor<00:19:28.960> I

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 3, authored by Chair Nash, which would require the Office of the Legislative Auditor to produce an annual report for fiscal committees showing how well agencies have implemented prior audit recommendations, especially those related to financial practices, internal controls, and management. Nash said the bill is intended to give legislators a clearer, ongoing tool to evaluate agencies before making funding decisions and to help prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. He noted the bill would use existing audit information rather than create a new reporting burden, though he said it would deepen the review of implementation. Legislative Auditor Judy Randall testified that the Office of the Legislative Auditor already tracks implementation to some extent through annual information collected by Minnesota Management and Budget, but that current reporting is based largely on agency self-reporting and is not always independently verified. She said the bill would expand that work and provide the legislature with more useful accountability information. A representative from Americans for Prosperity also supported the bill, calling it a transparency and stewardship measure that would help taxpayers and legislators see whether agencies are following through on recommendations. Several members spoke in favor, describing the bill as a common-sense accountability measure and comparing it to audit practices in local government and private organizations. Nash and Randall also discussed Colorado’s similar process, where audit follow-up information is presented during budget hearings. Members raised concerns about fraud and inefficiency in state government, and Nash said the bill is meant to help lawmakers better protect taxpayer dollars. The committee voted to recommend House File 3 and re-refer it to the Committee on Ways and Means.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're working with House IT on that, but this is really important.
• We're working with House IT on that, but this is really important.
• We're working with House IT on that, but this is really important.
• We're working with House IT on that, but this is really important.
• What are the ballpark costs on House File 3?

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The meeting focused on a package of anti-fraud bills and oversight reforms. House File 3 would direct the Office of Legislative Auditor to compile existing audit and recommendation data into a matrix or numeric score showing how well agencies have implemented past recommendations over a five-year look-back period, with the goal of giving legislators a clearer, more usable accountability tool. Supporters said it would not create new data, only aggregate what already exists, and estimated the bill’s cost at about $240,000. They argued it would help lawmakers identify agencies that repeatedly fail to address waste, fraud, and abuse. House File 2 would require state employees and agencies to immediately report suspected fraud to law enforcement and to legislative committee leaders, require unannounced in-person site visits for grant recipients, and add criminal penalties for failing to carry out those duties. House File 1 would create an independent state Office of Inspector General to investigate fraud in state government, with subpoena power, authority to stop payments, and the ability to share information with other agencies. Speakers said the new office should be independent and nonpartisan, separate from existing agency inspector general functions, and more focused on investigations than the Legislative Auditor. Members also discussed the new fraud and oversight committee, which will meet on Mondays and plans to invite DHS Commissioner Jodi Harpstead to testify. The committee said it will work alongside standing committees, create a whistleblower reporting website, and investigate issues as they arise. In response to questions, Robbins said HF 3 already had a fiscal note and HF 2’s fiscal note was still pending. She also said the committee is considering AI tools to flag irregularities in state programs, and that such tools might have detected problems like those seen in Feeding Our Future.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:19:07.039> yeah<00:19:07.559> we<00:19:07.679> can<00:19:07.840> get<
• > of<00:19:11.280> give<00:19:11.400> us<00:19:11.520> a<00:19:11.640>
• > Mom<00:19:45.240> are<00:19:45.320> you<00:19:45.440> going<00:19:45.520><
• > of<00:19:46.799> the<00:19:46.880> food<00:19:47.159> so<00:19:47.280><
• > food<00:19:57.320> out<00:19:57.440> of<00:19:57.600> our<00:19:57.840>

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Higher Education Finance and Policy Committee met and approved the minutes from the previous meeting. The chair noted that agency overviews from the Office of Higher Education and other state agencies were not available, so the committee proceeded with University of Minnesota presentations instead. The committee also reviewed posted committee rules. University of Minnesota representatives gave an overview of the university’s research enterprise, describing it as a system of five campuses with a possible expansion to St. Cloud, and highlighting research strengths across campuses in agriculture, energy, natural resources, health, and the Twin Cities flagship campus. They said the university has more than $1.3 billion in annual research expenditures, receives most of its research funding from federal sources, and is ranked highly for both overall research and interdisciplinary research. Examples discussed included the Clinical and Translational Science Institute, the Forever Green initiative, and research tied to sustainable crops, health, and commercialization. Members asked questions about specific research areas, including biodegradable or renewable plastics, wheat research, food dyes, health and environmental toxins, and the market for winter camelina and winter pennycress. University staff said they could follow up with more detailed information and explained that the winter crop work is intended to become market-driven over time, while also improving soil health and creating new revenue streams for farmers. They also clarified that the university’s federal research funding includes money from NIH, NSF, DOE, DOD, and other agencies, and that the “other” funding category includes foundations, subawards, and internal university seed funding. The committee then heard a second University of Minnesota presentation focused on partnerships, commercialization, and workforce development. Testimony highlighted collaborations with industry and government partners such as U.S. Steel, 3M, Medtronic, Cisco, and defense-related industry leaders, as well as programs supporting microelectronics, AI, cybersecurity, and sustainable aviation fuels. No formal votes were taken beyond approving the minutes, and the committee ended the segment by moving on to the next testifier.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:19:07.159> that<00:19:08.159> I<00:19:08.320> think<00:19:08.640> but
• 19:31.960> the<00:19:32.159> program<00:19:32.559> changes<00:19:33.080> with
• every forecast<00:19:34.880> so<00:19:35.600> I<00:19:35.720> guess<00:19:35.919
• > I<00:19:36.039> would<00:19:36.200> say<00:19:36.679> the<00:19:37.000>
• ><00:19:42.520> a<00:19:42.720> purpose<00:19:43.120> that<00:19:43.240> it's

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee met for an introductory overview of its jurisdiction and budget, with the chair emphasizing the committee’s role over a large portfolio of children, youth, and family programs and the new Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF). House Research and House Fiscal staff explained their roles and described the 2023-24 reorganization that transferred many programs from DHS, DPS, MDH, and MDE to DCYF, along with a statute recodification and a crosswalk resource for members. Doug Berg then walked through the committee’s budget structure, explaining the difference between all-funds and general fund views, the major funding sources, and how forecasted programs and grant bases roll forward. He highlighted that the committee’s general fund base is a little over $2.1 billion for the biennium, with large federal components such as SNAP and TANF, and noted smaller accounts including child protection-related opioid funds and federal reimbursement offsets (FFP) for administrative costs. Members asked several questions about federal financial participation, TANF, and the effect of the repeal of the Diversionary Work Program (DWP). Staff explained that FFP generally applies to administrative costs for federally related programs and usually does not change much unless program activity changes, while TANF is a block grant that has been stable for years. On DWP, staff said the program was sunsetted effective March 1, 2026, and that the associated funding and administrative costs were being reworked rather than simply removed. A member also asked about federal funding fluctuations; staff said no changes were currently factored in, though SNAP or other federal policy changes could alter future numbers. Danielle Penelli then presented on economic assistance and employment supports transferred to DCYF, focusing first on MFIP, Minnesota’s state-supervised, county-administered welfare program jointly funded by state and federal dollars. She explained that MFIP provides cash and food assistance, employment and training services, and related supports, with a 60-month time limit and certain exemptions for illness, incapacity, or other barriers to employment. She also described the program’s income and asset standards, including a $10,000 asset limit with exclusions for homesteads and one vehicle per assistance unit member age 16 or older. Members asked clarifying questions about how the time limit applies and what assets count, and staff responded that the limit applies to the caregiver and does not restart with additional children. Penelli also introduced support services grants, which fund employment services for MFIP, DWP, and SNAP participants through workforce centers, counties, tribes, and community agencies, and help cover some county and tribal administrative costs. She began outlining nutrition programs under DCYF, including SNAP, the Minnesota Food Assistance Program, the Minnesota Food Shelf Program, the Emergency Food Assistance Program, and the American Indian Food Sovereignty Program. No formal votes or bill actions were taken during this meeting; it was primarily an informational staff briefing and question-and-answer session.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:19:02.840> examiners<00:19:03.840> to<00:19:04.000> meet<00:19:04.240> the
• :19:27.520> sharp<00:19:27.960> rise<00:19:28.480> has<00:19:28.720> has<
• critical need not only<00:19:35.159> to<00:19:35.480> pay<00:19:36.159> for<00:19
• to<00:19:40.240> find<00:19:40.520> an<00:19:40.760> adequate<00:19:41.159
• <00:19:45.280> in<00:19:45.400> a<00:19:45.600> timely<00:19:46.320> manner

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee met to approve the January 16 minutes and then heard a budget presentation from State Court Administrator Jeff Shorba on behalf of the Minnesota judicial branch. Shorba described the courts’ structure, mission, and workload, noting 322 judges, about 2,800 staff, roughly 1 million district court filings annually, and a current budget of about $479 million. He emphasized the branch’s constitutional obligation to provide fair and timely access to justice and said the courts are funded almost entirely through legislative appropriations. He also highlighted recent accomplishments made possible by prior legislative funding, including eliminating the pandemic felony and gross misdemeanor backlog, expanding remote and hybrid hearings, improving courtroom technology, sustaining treatment courts, and increasing pay for interpreters and psychological examiners. Shorba outlined the judicial branch’s 2026–27 budget request, which he said totals a 12% increase over the starting biennial base. Major requests included $77.3 million in 2026–27 and $104 million in 2028–29 for a 6% judicial salary increase and related compensation costs; $5.1 million in 2026–27 and $1.76 million in 2028–29 for digital accessibility compliance with new federal ADA rules; $4 million in 2026–27 and $800,000 in 2028–29 to modernize justice partner access to court records; $7.2 million in 2026–27 to raise pay for contract psychological examiners; and $18 million in 2026–27 to increase juror pay from $20 to $100 per day and align mileage rates with federal rates. He also discussed ongoing funding needs for interpreter services, jury costs, cybersecurity, and other statutorily required court services, saying temporary funding provided in the prior session will expire and that permanent support is needed. Members asked questions about treatment courts, employee bargaining, and mental health competency issues. Representative Eric requested more detail on funding for newly launched and existing treatment courts, and Shorba said many treatment courts begin with federal grants before transitioning to state support after about three years. He confirmed the judicial branch negotiates its own employee contracts rather than the executive branch doing so, and said the branch has three unions plus many unrepresented employees. On mental health and competency, Shorba said the branch is focused on obtaining timely psychological evaluations and is not responsible for treatment services themselves, but acknowledged a shortage of examiners and treatment beds and said a related competency board would be testifying the following week. No votes or formal actions were taken beyond adoption of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• The House will come to order. Today, let us bow our heads for a few moments in silent reflection.
• National Holiday, the House is meeting today only to meet its constitutional requirement to meet every
• I move that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn until noon Wednesday, January 22, 2025.
• I move that the House do now adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no.
• The motion prevails, and the House stands adjourned until noon Wednesday, January 22, 2025. [Music]

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House convened with a silent reflection and the Pledge of Allegiance, then the clerk took the roll and noted Representative Oumou Verbeten was absent. Members explained that the House was meeting on Martin Luther King Jr. Day only to satisfy the constitutional requirement to meet every three days, and all absent members were excused. A member delivered remarks honoring Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., highlighting his commitment to justice, equality, nonviolence, his visits to Minnesota, and his legacy of judging people by the content of their character. No bills or substantive legislative business were taken up. The majority leader moved that when the House adjourned it would stand adjourned until noon Wednesday, January 22, 2025; the motion prevailed by voice vote. A subsequent motion to adjourn also prevailed, and the House adjourned until noon Wednesday, January 22, 2025.

Transcript Highlights:

• I call in the house a budget resolution I call in the house a budget resolution I don't<00:14
• :43.720> what<00:19:44.320> the<00:19:44.480> house<00:19:44.720> should
• they negotiated of what the house should they negotiated of what the house should function<00:19:45.440
• > like<00:19:45.919> with<00:19:46.080> a<00:19:46.400> tie<00:19:47.400>
• /c><00:19:52.440> to<00:19:52.520> get<00:19:52.679> the<00:19:53.159> F<

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House DFL leaders held a press event outlining their priorities and criticizing Republicans for what they described as illegitimate or sham proceedings in the Minnesota House. Speakers said Democrats would focus on affordability, workers, families, and protecting prior DFL accomplishments, while opposing efforts they said would roll back paid family and medical leave, clean energy, Dreamer access to higher education, reproductive rights, consumer protections, and universal school meals. Individual members highlighted issue areas for the coming session: Children and Families Chair Kaohly Her emphasized child care, food security, and support for parents and caregivers; Health Finance and Policy Chair Robert Bierman said Democrats would expand access to dental, maternal, and mental health care, lower prescription drug costs, and address hospital service cuts; Commerce co-chair K.H. Her focused on consumer protections and maintaining out-of-pocket caps on drugs like insulin, inhalers, and EpiPens; Housing co-chair Mike Howard discussed the housing shortage, rising rents, and corporate ownership of homes; and Rep. Emma Greenman framed the agenda as a push to curb corporate power and monopolies. A substantial portion of the event and Q&A centered on the House power-sharing dispute and the effort to deny quorum after the controversy over Rep. Brad Tabke. Leaders said Republicans had rejected co-chairs, equal committee membership, and co-speaker arrangements, and they argued the GOP was trying to use its temporary advantage to control the chamber and potentially force special elections. They also discussed the legal status of the House after adjournment, the lack of a legal hopper for bill filing, and the possibility of court review of whether the House is duly organized. In response to questions, DFL leaders said they were still open to negotiation and expected eventual collaboration, but maintained that Republicans had broken the power-sharing agreement. They said the February budget forecast and the governor’s budget would shape the session’s formal work, and one speaker noted that the ERA remains a caucus priority and that the DFL would continue pursuing it when the opportunity arises.

Transcript Highlights:

• > that<01:19:06.320> we<01:19:06.480> would<01:19:06.800> have<01:19:07.040>
• :08.239> and<01:19:08.480> and<01:19:08.679> again<01:19:09.120> I<01:19:
• ><01:19:16.719> blue<01:19:17.320> at<01:19:17.480> both<01:19:17.679> sides<
• that<01:19:31.480> they<01:19:31.679> contract<01:19:32.120> with<01:19:32.520>
• year they<01:19:38.679> can<01:19:38.800> start<01:19:39.000> to<01:19:39.199><

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee’s first official meeting was framed as an informational session, with the chair saying no legislation would be acted on and that testimony would focus on what is working and not working for businesses and workers in Minnesota. The stated topics included earned sick and safe time, paid family and medical leave, labor shortages, and broader business climate concerns. The chair also noted the absence of DFL members and invited questions to be held until the end so testifiers could present fully. Lauren Shodor of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce argued that Minnesota’s business climate has worsened because of high taxes, rising costs, regulation, and new workplace mandates. She cited chamber survey and research findings saying more businesses are considering leaving the state, that Minnesota companies are investing more in other states than vice versa, and that the state lags national growth rates. She said employers are especially concerned about earned sick and safe time and the upcoming paid family and medical leave program, which the chamber believes add compliance burdens and costs, particularly for small and medium-sized businesses. Matt Hilgart of the Association of Minnesota Counties said the new leave laws affect county budgets and operations because labor is the main county cost and services are often state-mandated. He said the programs were imposed outside the collective bargaining process and can duplicate existing county benefits, increase costs, and create staffing and service challenges. He asked for changes including clearer premium-sharing language, exclusion of elected officials and short-term election workers from paid leave requirements, better exemption and private-plan rules, coordination requirements for intermittent leave, and more clarity for essential employees during weather emergencies. Owen Worth of the League of Minnesota Cities said cities are facing similar implementation problems, with overlapping leave policies and concerns about stacking state and federal leave rules, and he indicated the league would support changes to reduce administrative and budget pressures on cities.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bless now this House of Representatives with your presence.
• Bless now this House of Representatives with your presence.
• The chief clerk will report the House Files and give them their first reading: House Files 1 through
• I move that the House do now adjourn. The House do now adjourn.
• , January 20, 2025, at noon. madam speaker I move at the house to now madam speaker I move at the house

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House convened with a prayer by Chaplain Keith Beckwith of the Minnesota National Guard, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance and a roll call. An initial quorum was not present with 65 members, so a call of the House was ordered and the Sergeant at Arms was instructed to bring in absent members. After members were secured, a quorum was established with 67 members present. The House then approved the Journal of the preceding day without objection and proceeded to the introduction of bills. House Files 1 through 10 were introduced and given first reading. No substantive debate on the bills is included in the transcript excerpt. During announcements, Majority Leader Nisa moved that when the House adjourned it would reconvene at noon on Monday, January 20, 2025, and that motion prevailed. The House then adopted a motion to adjourn, and the chamber stood adjourned until Monday, January 20, 2025, at noon.

Transcript Highlights:

• assistance and<00:19:50.120> housing<00:19:50.559> supports<00:19:51.200> and<00
• :19:51.960> the<00:19:52.120> behavioral and housing supports and the behavioral and housing
• c> one<00:19:53.919> I<00:19:54.320> again<00:19:54.520> will<00:19:54.720><
• that<00:19:58.280> is<00:19:58.440> a<00:19:58.799> base<00:19:59.080> of
• > the<01:19:05.360> 48<01:19:05.800> hour<01:19:06.159> rule<01:19:07.199

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee met for an introductory overview of its jurisdiction and staff roles. Nonpartisan House Research and House Fiscal staff explained that they draft bills and amendments, prepare bill summaries and background research, answer legal and fiscal questions, and help track revenue and budget effects. They also distributed a Budget Overview Brief intended to condense the larger budget materials into a more usable format for members. Staff then walked through the Human Services budget and the committee’s areas of responsibility. They described the department structure, noting that DHS oversees administration, compliance, rulemaking, and county support, and that the overall Human Services budget is large, with medical assistance as the dominant program. They also explained recent and upcoming reorganizations: many children and family-related functions are moving to the new Department of Children, Youth, and Families, Direct Care and Treatment is becoming its own agency, and some homelessness-related functions remain at DHS. Staff reviewed how the budget is organized by program and budget activity, the difference between direct appropriations and standing appropriations, and how forecasted programs and “tails” work in the budget process. The presentation also covered Medicaid financing and long-term care. Staff explained the federal-state FMAP match, including Minnesota’s current 51.16% federal match for most Medicaid spending, the CHIP match, and the 90% federal share for the expansion population. For long-term care, they outlined Medical Assistance services for elderly and disabled people, state-funded long-term care supports, and Board on Aging programs. They highlighted the personal care assistance program’s phaseout and replacement by Community First Services and Supports, and reviewed the five home- and community-based waivers. Members asked one question about refugee resettlement funding, specifically whether it covers flights; staff said they would need to follow up on the exact use of the federal funds. No bills were heard, and no formal votes or other committee actions were taken during this meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• > don't<00:19:03.360> know<00:19:03.559> what<00:19:03.840> passed<00:19:
• <00:19:08.720> bonding<00:19:09.039> Bill<00:19:09.280> didn't<00:19:09.600>
• no<00:19:15.039> I<00:19:15.120> don't<00:19:15.280> think<00:19:15.480>
• anything along<00:19:16.360> those<00:19:16.559> lines<00:19:17.000> that<00:19
• :19:53.799> I<00:19:53.880> can<00:19:54.200> uh<00:19:54.320> go<00:19:54.520

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Capital Investment Committee met on January 16 for an informational overview on state bonding and capital investment. House Research analyst Chelsea Griffin and House Fiscal analyst Andrew Lee explained the nonpartisan roles of their offices and then walked members through the basics of Minnesota bonding: how bonds are issued and repaid, how they are categorized, and the main legal authorities governing state general obligation bonds, including the state constitution, Minnesota statutes, and federal tax law. Griffin emphasized that state GO bond proceeds must be used for a public purpose, for a purpose authorized in the constitution, as specifically described in law, and must mature within 20 years. She also noted that state GO bonding is typically originated in the House and that capital projects financed with state GO bonds generally require a three-fifths vote in each chamber. The presentation also covered practical limits and requirements on bonding projects, including the distinction between state and local GO bonding, the role of bond counsel, restrictions on bond-financed property, the prohibition on reimbursing already-paid costs, and the full funding and non-state match requirements. In response to member questions, Griffin clarified that the full funding requirement in section 16A.502 means a project must be fully funded before the appropriation is available, while section 16A.86 reflects an expectation that local governments provide about half the financing for local projects, though the legislature can choose to fund more than half or waive a local match. She also said she did not believe a bill to make the 50 percent match requirement statutory passed last session. Lee then began a spreadsheet-based overview of the 2023 capital budget laws, explaining how capital investment spreadsheets are organized and how different fund types appear in the documents. He highlighted examples such as University of Minnesota projects funded with GO bonds and Minnesota State projects using user financing, where the system contributes a share of project costs from non-state sources such as tuition or system revenues. The committee did not take any votes or formal actions during this informational meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've been with House Research for 19 years; this is my 20th legislative session, but my first time staffing
• I've been with House Research for 19 years; this is my 20th legislative session, but my first time staffing
• I've been with House Research for 19 years; this is my 20th legislative session, but my first time staffing
• than you might think it should compare to<00:19:03.799> the<00:19:03.960> house<00:19:
• 04.799> the<00:19:05.240> house<00:19:05.799> rent<00:19:06.320> at<00:19

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee met on January 16, 2025, for an organizational and informational session. Members and staff introduced themselves, and Chair Jim Nash reviewed committee expectations, including that nonpartisan staff are to be used for factual information rather than political arguments. He also noted the committee rules were a blend of prior chairs’ rules and would be posted without a vote. Helen Roberts of House Fiscal gave a high-level overview of the committee’s jurisdiction and budget structure. She explained that the State Government Finance Committee oversees funding for major administrative agencies, the legislature, constitutional offices, and several boards, councils, and commissions. She emphasized that the committee’s general fund base for fiscal years 2026-27 is about $1.31 billion, less than 2% of the state general fund, and that the largest pieces are the Department of Revenue, the legislature, and pension aids. She also described how all-funds presentations differ from general fund views, highlighting internal service funds such as Minnesota IT Services, Department of Administration services, and other chargeback or reimbursement arrangements. Members asked questions about House and Senate budgets, debt service related to the Capitol Area building project and move costs, and how Minnesota IT Services is funded through fee-for-service chargebacks. Colby Sullivan of House Research then summarized a memo in the packet that outlines the entities within the committee’s jurisdiction and the constitutional and statutory provisions governing them. He pointed members to the memo as a reference and noted that the committee also has jurisdiction over the Legislative Coordinating Commission, the legislative auditor, the legislative reference library, the reviser of statutes, the Secretary of State’s budget and certain duties, and three gambling-related agencies, though gambling policy itself is generally handled by another committee. He offered to help members with bill drafting and amendments and to provide a linked electronic version of the memo. The Office of the Legislative Auditor then began an overview of its work. Legislative Auditor Judy Randall explained that the office is nonpartisan, serves all 201 legislators, and provides oversight through financial audits, program evaluations, and special reviews focused on state funds. She distinguished the Legislative Auditor from the State Auditor, noting that the State Auditor is an elected constitutional officer who focuses on county and local government funds. Randall said the office would also present a deep dive into its November performance audit of the Minnesota State Lottery. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• The key thing about the February forecast is that in the House it starts a clock to enact a budget resolution
• c> see<00:19:04.360> on<00:19:04.880> on<00:19:05.799> all<00:19:06.000>
• <01:19:07.800> the<01:19:07.920> House<01:19:08.080> and<01:19:08.239> Senate
• the legislature the House and Senate the legislature the House and Senate come<01:19:08.880>
• 19:25.000> um<01:19:25.159> if<01:19:25.239> there<01:19:25.360> are<01:19

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Higher Ed Finance and Policy Committee met to begin a budget overview for higher education. The chair noted quorum, committee member introductions, and that Democratic members were absent. The chair also said the Office of Higher Education would not be appearing for the planned budget deep dive, so nonpartisan fiscal staff would present instead. Ken Savory, the committee’s nonpartisan fiscal analyst, introduced a presentation on the higher education finance structure and timeline. Savory explained the state budget cycle, the difference between direct appropriations, statutory appropriations, open appropriations, base funding, tails, and one-time appropriations, and how those concepts apply to higher education. He described the committee’s usual budget areas: the Office of Higher Education, Minnesota State, the University of Minnesota, and the Mayo Foundation. He also reviewed historical spending charts showing higher education’s share of the general fund over time, the 2/3-1/3 funding policy in statute, and how tuition and general fund support have shifted. He noted that the FY 26-27 base for the Office of Higher Education area is about $725 million, including roughly $450 million for the State Grant program and about $99 million for North Star Promise. Members asked about comparing the current budget to earlier biennia, and staff responded that they would need to calculate the percentage difference. The chair then summarized prior budget growth, saying the previous budget was about $650 million over base and the current budget/tail was about $450 million over base. Staff also reviewed the 2024 omnibus higher education bill, including a roughly $5 million reduction to North Star Promise that was redirected to the Fostering Independence Grant program and a $500,000 appropriation for Minnesota State’s Kids on Campus program. The committee did not take any formal votes or actions during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• :07.400> taught<00:19:07.600> me<00:19:07.720> a<00:19:07.799> lot<00:19:
• :08.760> it's<00:19:08.880> good<00:19:09.000> to<00:19:09.080> see<00:19
• > lot<00:19:13.640> a<00:19:13.760> few<00:19:14.000> years<00:19:14.280>
• kind<00:19:20.640> of<00:19:20.760> an<00:19:20.919> overview<00:19:21.480>
• of<00:19:21.799> of<00:19:22.200> of<00:19:22.480> uh<00:19:22.600> in

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Committee on Energy Finance and Policy met for an informational session and quorum was present, but the chair stated no action would be taken. Members and staff introduced themselves, and Chair Chris Swedzinski outlined the committee’s broad goals of improving Minnesota’s energy system for families and businesses, with an emphasis on affordability, reliability, and development. Several members echoed those priorities, especially concerns about electric reliability, base-load generation, and the needs of rural communities, co-ops, munis, farms, and small businesses. House fiscal analyst Ashley presented a budget overview for the committee’s jurisdiction. She reviewed spending and base amounts for the Energy Resources Division, the Renewable Development Fund, the Petroleum Tank Release Cleanup Fund, and the Public Utilities Commission, and explained that the committee also oversees special revenue and other accounts. She noted that the Renewable Development Fund is supported by utility payments for spent nuclear fuel storage, the cleanup fund by a petroleum distribution fee, and that the Commerce Department receives significant federal LIHEAP and weatherization funds. Members asked about the large increase in the Climate and Economic Development Fund and the status of recent appropriations; staff explained that the 2023 session set a larger target, that about $79 million had been spent from the relevant budget, and that some funds may carry forward. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on community solar gardens. Representative Dave Baker asked for an update on the program, and staff explained that Minnesota has about 1,600 megawatts of solar, with more than 900 megawatts in community solar. Staff said 2023 legislative changes capped annual additions and created new incentives for low- and middle-income participation. Members also discussed concerns about program cost, local siting opposition, and a large interconnection queue; staff said there is a backlog of projects, including a reported 56 gigawatts in the MISO queue, and that utilities need distribution upgrades to handle new capacity. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• > so<00:19:17.799> as<00:19:17.960> you<00:19:18.200> get<00:19:18.360>
• get to that stage<00:19:19.679> of<00:19:20.000> things<00:19:20.400> I<00:19:20.480
• > will<00:19:20.679> be<00:19:20.880> the<00:19:21.000> one<00:19:21.400>
• > most<00:19:22.400> of<00:19:22.520> the<00:19:22.640> drafting<00:19:23.080
• related<00:19:26.000> to<00:19:26.280> those<00:19:27.200> Appropriations<00:19

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee met for an introductory session focused on committee organization, staff roles, and an overview of the committee’s jurisdiction. Members and staff introduced themselves, and the chair explained that one member was absent due to a meeting with the governor. House fiscal staff member John Walls reviewed the committee’s budget spreadsheet and explained the agencies under the committee’s jurisdiction, including the Supreme Court, Board of Civil Legal Aid, Court of Appeals, district courts, Guardian ad Litem Board, Tax Court, Uniform Laws Commission, Board of Judicial Standards, Board of Public Defense, Human Rights Commission, Office of Appellate Counsel and Training, and the Competency Restoration Board. He also explained how fiscal notes work and how costs or revenue impacts are tracked for bills. Nathan Hopkins then described the committee’s broad civil law jurisdiction, covering areas such as property, torts, contracts, civil rights, consumer protection, employment, family law, remedies, statutes of limitations, damages, burdens of proof, due process, and attorney general enforcement. He also outlined the committee’s role in government data practices under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, emphasizing the distinction between transparency and privacy and noting that bills affecting Chapter 13 are often re-referred to this committee. Ben Johnson added that he handles appropriations and court-related policy provisions, with most budget drafting expected later in the session. A member asked about the Competency Restoration Board, and Johnson explained that it was created to address cases involving criminal defendants found incompetent to proceed, with the goal of coordinating placements and services to restore competency rather than serving as long-term civil commitment. The chair also noted the importance of privacy and technology issues, mentioning past bipartisan work on body cameras, license plate readers, and drones. The meeting ended with a brief announcement about a law school for legislators program and an invitation to attend upcoming Zoom sessions, after which the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• over<00:19:02.039> time<00:19:02.799> uh<00:19:02.919> so<00:19:03.080><
• ><00:19:14.919> is<00:19:15.000> a<00:19:15.240> multi-year<00:19:15.919> phase
• c><00:19:38.799> that<00:19:39.159> is<00:19:39.600> on<00:19:39.840> more
• 00:19:41.960> a<00:19:42.400> 99.2%<00:19:43.400> rate<00:19:44.400> uh<00
• <00:19:54.159> tax<00:19:55.400> uh<00:19:56.400> where<00:19:57.400> the

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Transportation Working Group met on January 15, 2025, with Chair John Kosnik opening by saying the committee expected to pass a transportation bill this year and emphasizing efficient use of transportation revenues, maintenance of roads and transit, and safety. Members and staff introduced themselves, and several representatives noted their interest in roads, bridges, and regional transportation needs. Kosnik also said he had spoken with Representative Kel about leadership arrangements and stressed that bipartisan support would be needed for a transportation bill. House Fiscal Staff’s Andrew Lee and House Research’s Matt Burus then gave an overview of transportation finance, focusing mainly on highways and transit. Burus explained Minnesota’s highway funding structure, including the constitutional Highway User Tax Distribution Fund and the related Trunk Highway Fund, County State-Aid Highway Fund, and Municipal State-Aid Street Fund. He reviewed the main revenue sources: the motor fuels tax, motor vehicle registration tax, motor vehicle sales tax, portions of the general sales tax tied to auto parts, vehicle rentals and leases, and the retail delivery fee. He noted several changes from 2023 legislation, including indexing of the gas tax, creation of the Transportation Advancement Account, and the retail delivery fee, which began in July 2024 and therefore would affect fiscal year 2025 rather than the fiscal 2024 data shown. The presentation also covered how highway dollars flow through constitutional formulas, including the 95/5 split from the Highway User Tax Distribution Fund, with the 5 percent set-aside used for town roads, town bridges, and flexible highway purposes such as turnbacks. Burus distinguished trunk highway bonds from general obligation bonds and explained that both are debt-financing tools for transportation projects, but with different repayment sources and uses. No votes or formal actions were taken at this informational meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• :16.720> is<00:19:16.799> to<00:19:17.000> think<00:19:17.200> about<00:19
• <00:19:19.200> those<00:19:19.400> agencies<00:19:19.919> and<00:19:20.320><
• 20.600> want<00:19:20.799> to<00:19:21.559> um<00:19:21.720> manage<00:19
• c> so<00:19:23.880> there's<00:19:24.039> lots<00:19:24.240> of<00:19:24.480
• <00:19:27.919> my<00:19:28.080> general<00:19:28.440> comment<00:19:28.720> M

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Elections Finance and Government Operations Committee met for an introductory, familiarization-only session. Members and staff introduced themselves, and House Fiscal Staff provided a budget overview for the committee’s elections-related jurisdiction. That overview covered the Office of the Secretary of State, including a requested $200,000 one-time general fund match to draw down additional federal HAVA funds released in 2024, and the presidential primary, which is an open statutory appropriation that reimburses state and local costs in even-numbered election years. It also reviewed the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board’s operations budget, the public subsidy program’s statutory and taxpayer checkoff funding, and the Voting Operations and Elections Resources account, which is funded at $3 million annually for local election-related costs. Members asked questions about the HAVA match, including whether the funds were tied to the most recent election cycle and what specific goals or security-related uses the Secretary of State’s request would support. Staff said they would need to research the details further and would share responses with the full committee. One member also raised broader concerns about non-state money entering elections and the need for clear guidance and oversight; staff said that area was beyond their expertise but could be researched further. The chair noted that the Secretary of State would appear at a future meeting and encouraged members to submit questions for shared follow-up. House Research then gave an overview of the committee’s government operations jurisdiction. Staff explained that the committee historically deals with structural and administrative issues such as agency organization, rulemaking, boards and commissions, state contracting, state IT services, emergency management, and state symbols and recognition days. They emphasized the committee’s role in maintaining consistency and compatibility across state government and in considering the balance between legislative authority and executive-branch discretion. Staff also noted overlap with State Government Finance for fiscal matters and said they would return for more detailed discussion if members wanted it. The final presentation introduced local government concepts. House Research outlined Minnesota’s local government structure, including counties, cities, towns, and special districts, and explained terms such as political subdivision, home rule charter, and Dillon’s rule. The presentation described local governments as creatures of the state, reviewed home rule charter and general welfare authority, and noted that local government powers are defined by statute unless otherwise provided. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• in 2015, 17, 19, 21, and 23.
• in 2015 17 19 21 and 23 as the house in 2015 17 19 21 and 23 as Chief<00:09:14.279> clerk<00:
• <00:16:09.040> of couldn't be luckier in the house of couldn't be luckier in the house of
• The resolution is adopted.
• The resolution is adopted.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House opened with a prayer, pledge, and roll call, then approved the prior day’s journal and confirmed a quorum. The main business was organizing the chamber for the 2025–26 session, beginning with the election of Pat Murphy as chief clerk. Members from both parties praised Murphy’s long service, parliamentary knowledge, work on remote voting during COVID, and commitment to youth programs and the integrity of the House. After nominations closed, Murphy was elected by a 67-0 vote and took the oath of office. The House then adopted a resolution allowing the remaining front-desk officers and assistant sergeant at arms to be elected on a single roll call unless there was more than one nominee for an office. Representative Niska nominated Stephanie Miller, Kathy Carlson, Erica Brinson, Andrew Olen, and Carl Hamry, and the slate was approved by voice vote. The House also elected Lori Hadap as chief sergeant at arms by a 67-0 vote after nominations and supportive remarks about her law-enforcement background, security work, and responsiveness to members; she then took the oath of office. After the chamber was organized, the House adopted resolutions directing the chief clerk to notify the Senate that the House was duly organized and appointing a four-member committee to notify the governor. The appointed committee consisted of Representatives Paul Anderson, John Koznick, Ben Bakeberg, and Max Rymer, who reported back that the governor had been notified. Members also observed a moment of silence honoring former Representative Mary Murphy for her long service. The House then set its next meeting for 3:30 p.m. on Thursday, January 16, 2025, and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• 00:19:04.360> older<00:19:04.880> they're<00:19:05.400> U<00:19:05.640> per
• <00:19:06.480> premiums<00:19:07.360> and<00:19:07.480> they're<00:19:07.640>
• from0<00:19:11.640> to<00:19:12.080> $28<00:19:13.080> um<00:19:13.200>
• > to<00:19:17.000> $80<00:19:18.000> and<00:19:18.120> that<00:19:18.240>
• :19:28.760> have<00:19:28.840> to<00:19:28.960> pay<00:19:29.120> if<00:19

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The meeting was an informational walkthrough for the Health Finance and Policy Working Group, focused on committee structure, budget basics, and major health-related accounts and programs. Staff explained the roles of House Research and House Fiscal, then reviewed key funds used by the committee, including the general fund, government special revenue fund, federal funds, the health care access fund, remediation account, and drinking water revolving fund. They also outlined the committee’s main budget areas, noting that medical assistance is the largest general fund item and that the Department of Health is a substantial agency funded by a mix of federal, general fund, and special revenue dollars. A major portion of the presentation covered subsidized health coverage programs. Staff described Medical Assistance (Minnesota’s Medicaid program) as an entitlement for eligible Minnesotans, with no premiums or cost sharing, and explained its managed care and fee-for-service delivery systems. MinnesotaCare was presented as a separate federal-state basic health program for people who are not eligible for MA, with income limits, premiums for adults age 21 and older, and cost-sharing requirements; staff noted that federal premium tax credit changes affect MinnesotaCare premium ranges. The presentation also summarized MNsure’s role in the individual market and in determining eligibility for premium tax credits, cost-sharing reductions, MinnesotaCare, and MA. The committee also received an overview of health-related licensing boards and occupational regulation. Staff said Minnesota has 16 health-related licensing boards, funded mainly through the state government special revenue fund and subject to legislative appropriation, and explained that health occupations may be regulated by the Department of Health, the Office of Emergency Medical Services, or the boards under chapter 214. Interstate licensure compacts were briefly noted as a way to ease practice across states. No bills were debated and no votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I call this Committee on House Rules and Legislative Administration to order.
• Next, we have the 2025 R11 resolution. I moved to approve the 2025 R11 resolution.
• Seeing no further discussion, I renew my motion to move the 2025 R11 resolution.
• <00:01:59.360> today participating in this resolution today participating in this resolution
• > that opposed the resolution is adopted that opposed the resolution is adopted that is<00:03:

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Rules and Legislative Administration Committee met to approve the prior day’s minutes and then considered 2025 R11, a resolution to retain outside counsel for the House in connection with pending legal matters. The chair explained that the resolution followed the general format of a prior LCC resolution and was needed so the House could defend itself in lawsuits challenging its legislative business after members were sworn in. The resolution was amended to insert the names Nicholas Nelson, Samuel Deal, and Ryan Wilson. Representative Niska stated that the named attorneys are colleagues from his outside law practice and that he had no private interest in the resolution; he said he was not participating in the matter and that nonpartisan staff were documenting that fact. Representative Nash asked about the attorneys’ prior work in a ballot-access case involving Donald Trump, and the chair confirmed that the same lawyers had represented Hortman, Long, and Holland in that litigation and had prevailed in the case. There was no public testimony and no further discussion. The committee adopted the 2025 R11 resolution by voice vote, and the meeting then adjourned.