Transcript Highlights:

• She doesn't serve on any Senate committees, the only senator who doesn't.
• She doesn't serve on any Senate committees, the only senator who doesn't.
• Our hope is, you know, we could have removed Senator Mitchell from the Senate.
• Our hope is, you know, we could have removed Senator Mitchell from the Senate.
• <00:04:08.959> Mitchell Senators have called on Senator Mitchell Senators have called on Senator

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The meeting centered on a motion to expel Senator Nicole Mitchell from the Minnesota Senate while her criminal case remains pending. Republican speakers argued that Mitchell’s trial delays and continued service were undermining the Senate’s integrity, distracting from legislative work, and denying her constituents full representation because she is not serving on committees or participating in caucus. They said the motion was intended to uphold accountability, justice for the alleged victim, and the institution’s standards of conduct. DFL leaders and other defenders of Mitchell argued that she has not been convicted, is entitled to due process, and remains the duly elected representative of Senate District 47. They said Senate rules, Mason’s Rules, and custom require ethics proceedings to be completed before expulsion, and that the Senate should not act on her criminal case. They also emphasized that the Senate’s priority should be passing a budget and continuing to work under the chamber’s power-sharing agreement. The expulsion effort did not succeed. After debate and a procedural vote, Senate Democrats voted to keep Mitchell in the Senate, and leaders said the matter would remain unresolved until her court and ethics proceedings move forward. Republicans indicated they may continue to raise the issue, while DFL leaders said they would focus on governing and expected the chamber to reorganize if control changes after the upcoming election.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, I see Senator Housley. Senator Housley: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Next on my list I have Senator Draheim. Sorry, Ms. Wael, Senator Draheim had a question.
• Senators can be on the list too. My question has to do with the grants.
• <00:26:22.000> Senator list I have Senator Senator list I have Senator Senator dreim<00:26
• from um from St Cloud and Senator from um from St Cloud and Senator putnam's<01:37:51.880> district

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The committee on Housing and Homelessness Prevention heard informational presentations from Housing First Minnesota and the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities on the state of housing in Minnesota. Mark Foster of Housing First Minnesota said the state has a severe housing shortage, with demand outpacing supply since the 2007-09 housing crash, and argued that Minnesota is nearly 100,000 units short of a healthy market. He said new homes are increasingly unaffordable, citing a median new single-family price above $530,000 and declining affordability in the Twin Cities metro, and he urged lawmakers to remove exclusionary zoning and other regulatory barriers that he said make starter homes and smaller-lot housing difficult or illegal to build in many growing cities. He also highlighted the group’s Housing for Heroes projects, including transitional housing for veterans and other crisis housing projects around the state. Members asked Foster about starter-home examples and his view that the committee’s top priority should be reforming residential development approvals. He said most new housing is negotiated through planned unit developments rather than built under base zoning, which he argued adds cost and reduces supply. The committee then heard from Elizabeth Wael of the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, who said housing challenges outside the metro are different but equally serious. She said many Greater Minnesota cities face a lack of developers, inadequate infrastructure such as roads and utilities, and gaps in the housing continuum, especially starter workforce housing and senior housing. She thanked the committee for 2023 housing funding and said cities are contributing their own resources, updating zoning, reducing parking requirements, allowing ADUs, and partnering with developers and nonprofits. Wael also urged faster rollout of the Greater Minnesota infrastructure grant program and said the state should consider changes to the housing tax credit and housing TIF rules to make them easier to use. In response, senators said they shared frustration with the slow implementation of the infrastructure program and emphasized the need for state investment and locally tailored zoning reforms. No bills were heard and no votes were taken; the meeting was informational and focused on stakeholder testimony and committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Lang.
• We're going to lay over Senate File 133 today, and Senator R, would you like to move Senate File 133
• We're going to lay over Senate File 133 today, and Senator R, would you like to move Senate File 133
• We're going to lay over Senate File 133 today, and Senator R, would you like to move Senate File 133
• > K mention that Senator sadinski Senator K mention that Senator sadinski Senator K Senator<01:54

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Education Finance Committee met on January 28, 2025, to receive updates on chronic absenteeism work funded in the 2024 education finance bill. The chair introduced presentations from districts in the student attendance pilot program—Minneapolis, Columbia Heights, Chisago, and Rochester—and noted that the committee would also hear the student attendance and truancy legislative study group report and later a bill from Senator Weber. The chair also thanked educational assistants and paraprofessionals for their work in schools. Minneapolis Public Schools described common attendance challenges across pilot districts, including inconsistent attendance coding, weak family communication, difficulty identifying interventions, and uneven responses to absences. The district said pilot districts want statewide definitions for absences, tardies, and exempt codes, as well as better internal dashboards and clearer procedures. Minneapolis also highlighted strategies such as attendance teams at each school, quarterly postcards to families after five or more absences, Promise Fellows, home visits, multilingual communication through TalkingPoints, and a morning nurse line to help parents decide whether a child should stay home. The district said its main attendance goal is to raise consistent attendance from 68 percent to 80 percent by 2026. In response to committee questions, Minneapolis said its main post-COVID absenteeism reason has been illness or medical issues, followed by transportation problems, and that it does not penalize students for transportation-related absences. The district said it counts secondary absences when students miss more than three periods in a day, with truancy beginning after seven such absences, while elementary students are counted absent for the full day. Members also asked about whether reduced truancy referrals reflected more attendance or diversionary supports; the district said its approach is to focus on understanding root causes and providing support rather than quickly referring students to truancy processes. The district reported improved communication, greater parent awareness, and fewer truancy referrals so far, and said the attendance team model should be sustainable because it uses existing staff with clearer direction.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Abeler, well, thanks.
• Senator Abeler, well, thanks.
• Senator Abeler, well, thank you.
• Senator Abeler, well, thank you.
• <01:30:11.400> Senator down thank you Senator Senator down thank you Senator Senator greenhagen

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Health and Human Services Committee met on January 28, 2025, to review Governor’s budget proposals for several health-related licensing boards. The chair said no formal action would be taken and noted that final budget language was not yet available. The committee began with an overview from Bridget Anderson of the health-related licensing boards, who explained that the boards are fee-funded, operate as independent executive agencies, and handle licensing, complaints, rulemaking, and disciplinary matters. She also noted that the Board of Dentistry’s budget includes the Administrative Services Unit and criminal background check program, which can make the budget graphs appear larger than the dentistry board’s own operations. The Board of Dentistry requested funding for a new administrative staff position, estimating about $100,000 in salary, insurance, and fringe costs, to replace support lost when an administrative position was reclassified. Anderson said the board handled more than 300 complaints last year, with cases becoming more complex, especially involving surgical and implant procedures and imaging. Members asked about dental Medicaid access, but Anderson said that issue would be better directed to DHS’s Medicaid oral health division. The Board of Behavioral Health and Therapy requested a full-time position due to rapid growth in the number of regulated professionals, from about 4,000 in 2014 to nearly 10,000 now, and also sought authority to set a fee for out-of-state applicants under the Counseling Compact, with a cap of up to $100 though the board expects to charge much less. The Board of Podiatric Medicine asked to raise its fee ceiling, saying fees had not been increased since 1999 and that the board now faces a structural deficit of about $40,000 per year and declining reserves. Several senators expressed concern about “not-to-exceed” fee authority, calling it too open-ended and suggesting the legislature should scrutinize specific fee needs rather than approve broad ceilings. Similar concerns were raised during the Board of Chiropractic Examiners presentation, where the board sought $100,000 in additional spending authority and a fee increase after 32 years without an adjustment; members questioned the proposed ceiling approach and asked for more historical information before deciding. The Board of Dietetics and Nutrition Practice also discussed fee-setting authority, with the executive director explaining that the board had previously lowered fees without clear authority and later faced audit questions; she requested funding for a vacant administrative position, saying applications and revenues have increased sharply and no fee increase would be needed. The final presentation began with the Board of Pharmacy, which said it serves more than 26,000 licensees and oversees the Prescription Monitoring Program and opioid product registration. The board requested an extension of previously appropriated general fund dollars through fiscal year 2027 to continue paying legal costs tied to the insulin safety net lawsuit, emphasizing that this was not a new funding request but an extension of existing authority. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first item on the agenda is Senate File 59, Senator Green.
• Amendment<00:01:18.080> Senator Amendment Senator Amendment Senator drazkowski<00:01:20.640>
• Thank you, Senator Green.
• All right, thank you, Senator. Uh, any other question? Senator Bahr? Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Senators, any other questions or comments? Senator K, thank you, Mr. Chair.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard Senate File 59, authored by Senator Green, which would require counties to locate and restore original public land survey monuments and related boundary markers. Green argued that newer GIS/GPS-based surveys have sometimes shifted long-established property lines, creating disputes for landowners, counties, and state agencies. He described examples involving his own property and constituents, including a case where a neighbor allegedly lost access to a well and septic system after a new survey and another where a landowner was told he was farming school trust land based on a newer plat reference. Testimony in support came from Allan Roger Olen, who said a newer survey changed his family’s property lines and created a dispute over land, a building permit, and ownership of well and septic systems. Senator Green also said county plat books are not legally binding and that the bill is intended to force counties to find original monuments before more disputes arise. Committee members raised concerns from the Association of Minnesota Counties about the bill’s timeline, funding, and requirement that counties employ a land surveyor. Green responded that counties had already been told to hire surveyors in some disputes, acknowledged the funding concerns, and said he would look for funding sources while emphasizing protection of property rights. A committee member who teaches surveying explained that adverse possession is a real legal doctrine in Minnesota and noted that restoring all monuments would cost far more than the $10 million already appropriated, estimating the total need at about $300 million. Phil Reigns of the Minnesota Society of Professional Surveyors testified that the Public Land Survey System underlies Minnesota’s land tenure system, that the original monuments were set mostly between 1850 and 1908, and that surveyors aim to restore them as accurately as possible using historical records and modern tools. He said the work is expensive because many counties lack staff surveyors and must hire consultants. Members discussed whether the bill would create boundary conflicts or authorize counties to alter lines, and Green said his intent was to restore original monuments and avoid litigation. Co-Chair Lang moved that Senate File 59, as amended, be recommended to pass and re-referred to the Committee on Judiciary. The motion prevailed on a voice vote. Afterward, the committee began receiving an overview from the Minnesota Council on Latino Affairs.

Transcript Highlights:

• [Music] The Senate Labor Committee is called to order.
• <00:18:15.360> body of the paper work but the Senate body of the paper work but the Senate
• Okay, Senator Dornink, are you ready to make a motion? Thank you, Senator.
• chair I move to recommend to the Senate chair I move to recommend to the Senate that<00:29:11.519
• <00:31:15.399> labor much for coming um to the Senate labor much for coming um to the Senate

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Labor Committee received an overview from Chief Judge Patricia Millan of the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals (WCCA). She explained the court’s history, created in 1981, its role as the appellate body for workers’ compensation disputes after Department of Labor and Industry and Office of Administrative Hearings proceedings, and its original jurisdiction over petitions to vacate settlement agreements. She also noted the court is composed of five judges, is funded entirely by the workers’ compensation fund, and operates with five staff attorneys and two full-time employees. The committee then heard introductory remarks from the judges present for confirmation: Deb Sunquist, Katherine Carlson, Shan Quinn, and Thomas Christensen, with a procedural note that Quinn’s reappointment had not yet been formally referred to the committee, so his motion would be held until paperwork arrived. The judges emphasized their collaborative, panel-based work, their experience representing both injured workers and employers, and their commitment to the workers’ compensation system. Quinn also described efforts to teach workers’ compensation at the University of Minnesota and encourage younger lawyers to enter the field. Members asked about the court’s caseload and about delays in workers’ compensation claims. In response, the judges said the WCCA’s caseload has generally declined and fluctuates, and they offered to provide case-count data. In a more detailed exchange, a senator described a family member’s long-delayed claim; judges explained that repetitive-trauma or “Gillette” injuries often require substantial medical proof and can be difficult for insurers to accept, but that the system is intended to be no-fault and typically takes about a year to a year and a half from filing to resolution. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting reflected here.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Nelson, follow up, and then Senator Putnam.
• file 249 Senator agenda is a senate file 249 Senator Johnson Good morning, everybody.
• Senator Bar, yes. Senator Bar, thank you, Mr.
• chairman chair Senator C Senator bar yes chairman chair Senator C Senator bar yes Senator<01:44:
• <01:45:01.800> Senator Senator Senator Senator Senator rowski<01:45:05.199> thank<01:45

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The committee met to hear a presentation from the Commissioner of Revenue on Governor Walz and Lieutenant Governor Flanagan’s tax proposal, with members told no public testimony would be taken because bill language was not yet available. The commissioner said the proposal would lower the statewide sales tax rate by 0.75 percentage points while expanding sales tax to selected professional services such as legal, brokerage, banking, and accounting, with several carve-outs. He emphasized that the plan would not add business-to-business sales taxes, arguing that taxing business inputs leads to tax pyramiding and higher hidden consumer costs. The commissioner said the rate cut would be the first sales tax rate cut in state history and estimated it at about $95 million annually, while the service expansions would raise about $203 million to $205 million annually, for a net increase of roughly $110 million per year. He said the proposal is part of the governor’s broader budget, which he described as addressing long-term structural deficits and funding other priorities such as an R&D credit, an expanded sustainable aviation fuel credit, fraud prevention, and service-member retention bonuses. He also said the carve-outs and exemptions would be reflected in the revenue estimate. Members questioned whether the proposal was truly a tax cut or instead a tax increase, and several asked for a revenue-neutral rate if all or more services were taxed. One member raised concerns about how pro bono legal work with a fee would be treated, and another asked about possible streamlining issues and whether fees are treated as taxes in statute. The commissioner said a fee would be taxable depending on the arrangement and that the department would review the language carefully once drafted. He also said the department would provide more detailed estimates later, including what the rate would be if the tax were made revenue neutral. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, Senator Menendez. Senator Paxton.
• Thank you, Senator Hinojosa. Senator West. Several questions. Senator West. Yes.
• Thank you, Senator West. Senator Paxton. Thank you, Madam Chair. Senator Paxton.
• Senator Bittencourt. Senator, Senator, Senator Menendez. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Allman.
• Senator King: Thank you very much, Senator King. Thank you very much, Senator King.

Bills: SB 2

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• **Senator Eckhart**: Here. **Senator Kohlkors**: Here.
• **Senator Menendez**: **Senator Middleton**: Here.
• **Senator Menendez**: **Senator Middleton**: Here.
• **Senator Hall**: Aye. **Senator Hinojosa**: Aye. **Senator Cook**: Aye. **Senator Eckhart**: Aye.
• **Senator Kohlkors**: Aye. **Senator Menendez**: **Senator Middleton**: Aye.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, Senator.
• Thank you, Senator.
• Thank you, Senator. Senator, um, thank you, Mr. Chair.
• I'm sorry, Senator, go ahead. Thank you, Senator.
• Um, Senator, can you... Senator, can you tell us where this came from?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, Senator.
• Senator L, sure.
• I'd like to open a public hearing for Senate Bill 12 and recognize the senator to introduce Senate Bill
• Senate Bill 12, yes. Senate Bill 70 is where we're—oh, yes, Senate Bill 70 is where we're speaking.
• Senator Waters, welcome to Senate Transportation. Please introduce your bill, Senate Bill 12.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Carol Fukunaga, Senate District 11, thank you.
• Senator McKelvie, thank you, Chair. I appreciate it.
• Any more questions on the Senate side? Maybe we can move on to the Senate side.
• Senator Mel, no, it's more of a comment.
• <01:11:31.159> a but I do want to give the Senate a but I do want to give the Senate a chance

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• you uh chair Duckworth chair P Senators you uh chair Duckworth chair P Senators um<00:35:36.119>
• <00:51:16.240> I'm<00:51:16.440> W appreciate it Senator I'm W appreciate it Senator
• Anything further, Senator Putnam?
• grade thank you anything further Senator grade thank you anything further Senator putam<01:02:38.359
• > fah<01:13:18.480> and Senator Duckworth and Senator fah and Senator Duckworth and Senator

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, Senator Weber. residence Senator lucer same subject residence Senator lucer same subject thank
• <01:11:20.800> Senator sorry Senator sorry Senator Matthews<01:11:23.480> you<01:11:23.719
• Thanks, Senator Carlson and Senator Matthews.
• thanks Senator Carlson uh and Senator thanks Senator Carlson uh and Senator Matthews<01:19:49.880
• Next is Senator Marty. Senator Marty doesn’t have a question. Senator Schinski, thank you, Mr.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Pratt that it isn't the Senator Pratt that it isn't the taxpayer's<00:19:00.120> best<
• Senator Dibble, thank you.
• Senator Dibble, then Senator Nelson. Thank you, Madam Chair.
• c> Nelson well Senator dible then Senator Nelson well Senator dible then Senator Nelson um<00:41:
• Senator Dibble, thank you.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Prince? Senator Murphy: Not a question, just a comment.
• Thank you, Senator Sullivan. Senator Sullivan, thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Lang.
• Senator Ward, Senator Lang, good to see you again.
• Senator Pes?
• Senator Pes?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator, I guess I...
• <01:49:53.119> Tim Senate Bill 107 on behalf of Senator Tim Senate Bill 107 on behalf of Senator
• Senator, thank you.
• Senator, thank you.
• Senator, thank you.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Our prime sponsor for our first bill, Senator Rosenwald, so we will open the hearing on Senate Bill 92
• I have the honor to represent Senate District 13, and I'm pleased to introduce Senate Bill 92.
• Thank you, Senator. Thank you, Senator.
• Yeah, thank you, Senator.
• Thank you, Senator.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all