Transcript Highlights:

• On slide 8, just a couple of potential impacts here that we've calculated.
• I think that the payment error rate calculation has been around for decades.
• So Every state is really interested in what those states are doing.
• On page 16, it's interesting—the explicit exclusion.
• I think it's interesting.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so the goal is to really get at a calculation of the difference between what this model generates
• So for every FTE that we calculate, we are weighting them.
• We do the calculation based on the costs associated with the FTE.
• So that's the difference between the total calculation and what is being locally collected.
• That is currently calculated for the year and final for us.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee for Higher Education met to review Florida’s workforce and Florida College System funding models as part of budget planning. Chair Harrell opened by emphasizing the state’s growing focus on technical education and workforce pathways, and the committee first heard from Tara Goodman of the Department of Education on district workforce education. Goodman explained the programs funded through district workforce dollars, including career certificates, applied technology diplomas, registered apprenticeship, and adult general education, and described the model’s reliance on lagged enrollment, program cost weights, local tuition offsets, and supplemental factors such as disability services, GED testing, and minimum funding for small rural districts. She also noted federal support through Perkins and WIOA and said the model is used to determine unmet need and guide appropriations. In response to questions, she said health care programs are generally among the higher-cost offerings and may be supplemented by pipeline funds. The committee then heard from Kathy Hebda, Chancellor of the Florida College System, on the college system’s funding model. Hebda described the main funding sources, including the program fund, student success incentive funds, pipeline funds, tuition and fees, and performance-based incentives, and explained that the current model was developed by the 28 college presidents under legislative direction. She said the model uses a three-year average FTE, weights workforce enrollment more heavily than non-workforce enrollment, gives significant weight to completions, includes a small-college factor and regional cost differentials, and also provides targeted funding to bring colleges up to a floor based on per-FTE funding. Senators asked about colleges below the target, cost differences among programs, faculty salaries, and health insurance costs; Hebda said the model is meant to provide flexible operating dollars that colleges can use for those expenses, but specific salary and benefit decisions are left to the institutions. Seminole State College President Georgia Lorenz also testified in support of the college funding model, saying it holds institutions accountable for enrollment and completions, can be adjusted to reflect state priorities like workforce, and addresses differences in size and regional costs. No bills were voted on, and the committee adjourned after brief closing remarks thanking Seminole State College and the presenters.

Transcript Highlights:

• Three years can be interest-only, so that's important.
• As I got out my calculator and did some quick calculations, it looks like these units are coming in at
• I think it'd be an interesting question.
• So do you think, given the initial interest, you sort of indicated that there was very strong interest
• And I'm interested in your section 52.

Transcript Highlights:

• Ble, it causes some real complexities relative to the calculation.
• Ble, it causes some real complexities relative to the calculation.
• <00:42:25.440> that gasoline purchase we can calculate that gasoline purchase we can calculate
• All of that is calculations, and if you're wrong, then what?
• All of that is calculations, and if you're wrong, then what?

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 5 was heard in the Transportation Committee and moved by the author, Representative Jim Joy, to be referred to the Tax Committee. Joy described the bill as a package to make Minnesota more affordable by fully eliminating the Social Security tax subtraction, ending the motor fuels tax indexing, repealing the retail delivery fee, and studying vehicle registration/license taxes compared with neighboring states. Committee fiscal staff explained the bill’s fiscal effects across the general fund, highway user tax distribution fund, transportation advancement account, and metro county sales tax allocations, including that the delivery fee repeal would reduce Transportation Advancement Account revenue and that the bill would shift some revenue sources to offset losses. Several stakeholders testified. The Minnesota Grocers Association strongly supported repealing the retail delivery fee, arguing it is costly and complex for retailers to administer, especially small businesses, and that the costs are ultimately passed on to consumers. The Minnesota Propane Association also supported repeal, saying the fee is burdensome for propane businesses, that only a small share of deliveries are actually subject to it, and that compliance costs can exceed the fee revenue collected. Fiscal staff noted that delivery fee revenue forecasts have fallen below earlier projections, and explained that the fee is imposed on sellers with several exemptions, including a $100 transaction threshold and exemptions for some sales such as bars, restaurants, nonprofits, and certain small businesses. Opposition came from local government groups. The League of Minnesota Cities said it supported the Transportation Advancement Account and its 2023 funding sources, including the delivery fee and motor vehicle parts sales tax, and warned that the bill would prematurely alter a funding structure that cities rely on for predictable transportation revenue. The Minnesota Association of Small Cities said small cities had long lacked dedicated transportation funding and wanted a stable, ongoing revenue stream, but were neutral on the exact source as long as it was reliable. Metro Cities echoed support for stable, predictable transportation funding for metro-area cities. The committee took testimony and discussion only; no final vote was recorded in the excerpt beyond the motion to refer the bill to the Tax Committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't want that volatility in our calculations.
• So, we try to smooth out that volatility when we do our calculations.
• In that calculation, we're not necessarily going to be at that minimum.
• All of that comes into play when we do our calculations.
• That's not currently built into our calculations.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's the more interesting part, in my opinion.
• So we look at that number when we calculate those debt ratios.
• This study that we prepare, we calculate different scenarios.
• needs to be included in this calculation needs to be included in this calculation so<00:43:50.760
• <00:44:55.280> we low and so so this is a calculation we low and so so this is a calculation

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Public Works and Highways committee held a capital budget orientation led by Legislative Budget Assistant Office staff, who walked members through the budget materials, the capital budget process, and the committee’s compare sheet. The presentation explained that agencies begin developing capital requests nearly a year in advance, submit them by May 1, and that the governor’s recommended capital budget is a reduced version of the much larger agency wish list. Members were told the agencies initially requested about $1.1 billion in projects, the catalog was trimmed to just over $400 million in general fund projects, and the governor’s recommendation in the pink book totals about $143 million in general fund capital appropriations. The committee also reviewed the prior capital budget and related statutes and committee procedures. Several specific projects drew discussion. The Department of Education’s CTE projects were explained as having been shifted into the operating budget in the prior cycle and now returning to the capital budget recommendation; members asked whether there was a backup CTE project and whether local approval had been secured for the named project. The Cannon Mountain tramway request was highlighted as a $20 million recommendation, with the presenter explaining that an earlier $18 million appropriation would be lapsed back to the general fund to help balance the budget. The Department of Corrections’ new prison project was also discussed; members were told the state has already appropriated $50 million for planning and site evaluation, but the governor’s current capital budget does not include a new prison construction appropriation because the project is not yet ready for that phase and may need to be funded differently, possibly through a separate, staggered appropriation. State Treasurer Monica Mezzapelli then presented on debt affordability and the state’s borrowing capacity. She said the state’s credit position has improved, with the debt-to-revenue ratio falling from 8.2% in 2015 to 3.8% in 2024, and explained that RSA 6-C limits debt authorization to 10% of unrestricted prior-year revenue. She noted that the Treasury’s planning assumes $60 million in annual bond issuance, with the prison-related $40 million now expected to be issued in 2026 rather than 2025 because the project is not ready to spend the funds. She said the state can still borrow more, but additional debt service must be paid from operating funds, and recommended keeping capital bonding in the $120 million to $130 million range to preserve affordability and the state’s credit rating. Members asked for clarification on the CTE funding shift, the prison schedule, and the meaning of the large agency request totals. The chair and treasurer discussed the governor’s $143 million recommendation versus the committee’s usual target range, and the treasurer said $130 million would be more comfortable than $140 million, with $135 million described as a possible compromise. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the portion provided; the meeting was informational and ended with the presenters offering to answer follow-up questions as agencies come before the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I think it'd be interesting.
• The ESS school index has currently not been calculated for 24 and 25.
• And that is no longer being calculated as of 2024.
• Okay, I'll be interested in that.
• DESE calculates these in the same manner.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The committee received a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on Arkansas academic standards, accountability, and achievement as part of the adequacy study. Staff reviewed how state curriculum and standards have evolved from the 1997 Public Education Act, the 2003 Quality Education Act, and the 2017 Educational Support and Accountability Act, including required course offerings, graduation requirements, career and technical education pathways, and recent additions such as success-ready pathways, Arkansas history, firearm safety, and fetal growth and development instruction. Members asked for a comparative chart showing how the laws and requirements changed over time, and staff agreed to provide one. The presentation then turned to the federal ESSA plan and Arkansas’s state accountability system. Staff explained the state’s long-term goals for 2030, including 80% proficiency in ELA and math, 52% of English learners on track to English proficiency, and 94%/97% four- and five-year graduation rates. They reviewed 2025 assessment results showing proficiency rates generally in the 30s, with English learners and students with disabilities performing lowest and white students highest. They also discussed school support and improvement categories, equitable access to educators, and report card/public reporting requirements, noting that some ESSA-related measures such as the school index, equity labs, and certain 2024 report card data were not currently available or not being calculated. Members questioned whether those ESSA commitments were being met and asked staff to follow up with DESE, including whether the legislature can revise the ESSA plan. The committee also reviewed the Arkansas Accountability Act and related assessment data. Staff described the Atlas assessment system, alternate assessments for students with significant cognitive disabilities, ELPA 21 for English learners, ACT results, and NAEP comparisons. They reported that no student group met the 80% proficiency goal in 2025, Arkansas’s ACT composite score declined slightly over time, and Arkansas generally trailed national and SREB averages on NAEP. Members asked for additional data, including historical highs and lows, the number of assessments students take by grade, dropout data, and comparisons with other states. The meeting ended with agreement to invite the Department of Education to a future meeting to answer questions about missing data, equity labs, report cards, and ESSA compliance.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, it's interesting. You know, a lot of us know about fraud in general.
• interesting. I got a lot of calls. interesting. I got a lot of calls.
• We need to calculate the risk of fraud. We need to calculate the cost of additional oversight.
• We need to calculate the risks involved.
• We need to calculate in risk of fraud.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: State Auditor Julie Blaha discussed fraud in Minnesota, emphasizing that recent attention on fraud during COVID-19 should be separated from broader, ongoing fraud risks. She explained that the Office of the State Auditor oversees about $60 billion in local government activity, including school districts, cities, townships, counties, special districts, and port authorities, and works both to prevent fraud through audits and to investigate cases when they arise. Blaha said the biggest current challenge is workforce shortages in accounting and accountability fields, which makes it harder to provide oversight even as public demand for accountability increases. She urged legislators to involve her office early when drafting bills so the right oversight tool can be matched to the risk, rather than simply adding an audit requirement by default. She also said a proposed Office of the Inspector General would be a useful accountability discussion, but stressed that internal audit structures are often more effective than relying only on external audits. Blaha said the public plays a major role in detecting fraud because tips are the most common way fraud, waste, and abuse are uncovered. She encouraged public employees and local officials to report concerns, especially around unusual spending or misuse of purchasing cards, and noted that reporting can be confidential and is often required for certain public employees. In her closing remarks, she warned that COVID-era fraud often involved private-sector actors and said outsourcing government work requires careful risk analysis and added oversight. The segment ended with a reminder that allegations of state government fraud can be submitted to the Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor online, by phone, or by mail.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's just an interesting comparison of how much it costs the state.
• It's just an interesting comparison of how much it costs the state, Tracy.
• So that's interesting as well if you go to ICUF.org to look at that net price calculator.
• So that's who's in the cohort where you calculate if that student graduates.
• I would be very interested in seeing that breakdown of the passage rates by school.

Summary: The Higher Education Budget Subcommittee heard and advanced House Bill 1145, which clarifies that public charter schools may participate in the CAP Grant Fund. The bill’s amendment expanded a separate “money-back guarantee” concept for state colleges, requiring participating institutions to offer six eligible programs and refund tuition if graduates do not find qualifying employment within six months under standardized job-search requirements. Members asked about refund rates, student notification, fiscal impact, and whether the proposal accounted for disability or out-of-state job searches. Public testimony on the amendment and bill was in support from Nathan Hoffman of the Foundation for Florida’s Future, and the committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably as a committee substitute by a 16-1 vote, with Representative Aristide voting no over the charter school issue. The committee then received presentations on the William L. Boyd IV Effective Access to Student Education (EASE) Grant and the private nonprofit college sector. Department of Education staff explained that EASE, created in 1979, provides tuition assistance to eligible full-time undergraduates at participating private institutions, with a 2024-25 maximum award of $3,500 and an additional EASE Plus incentive of up to $850 for students in high-demand fields. The department reviewed the program’s funding history, disbursement process, and accountability metrics, including access, affordability, graduation, retention, and postgraduate employment/continuing education. Members asked about award proration, eligibility for other aid, religious-program restrictions, and why some institutions had low or unavailable graduation-rate data. ICUF President Robert Boyd argued that EASE is a strong return on investment and described ICUF institutions as not-for-profit, four-year schools serving many Pell-eligible, adult, military, and minority students. He said the sector produces a significant share of Florida’s bachelor’s, graduate, nursing, and education degrees, and highlighted ICUF’s dashboard with additional transparency metrics, program earnings data, and net price calculators. Boyd and members discussed graduation and completion rates, NCLEX passage rates, affordability, institutional flexibility, and whether schools with lower graduation rates should be compared differently because of their student populations. The presentations ended with no further business, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So they're interesting figures to us.
• I thought that was rather interesting—induced inflow.
• Whether or not that was an over-calculation or an under-calculation, because there's no way to really
• There are competing interests—huge competing interests.
• And so those are competing interests.

Bills: HB24, HB27, HB24, HB27

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there a way to calculate the return on investment from each of these offices and what's the average
• The way to calculate the return on investment is the engagement that we have with the organizations or
• In terms of consumer interests, in terms of advocating for public interests, the Public Utilities Commission
• In terms of consumer interests and advocating for public interests, the Public Utilities Commission could
• The witness said that, in terms of consumer interests and in terms of advocating for public interests

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Economic Development and Technology met on February 5, 2025, and heard testimony on several bills related to economic development, broadband, tax policy, and family support. HB 455 drew support for a startup-business loan program, with DBEDT, the Hawaii Food Industry Association, the Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii, and Hmua Collective among those in favor; Tax Foundation Hawaii questioned the need for a special fund. HB 437, concerning Hawaii trade/investment offices, received support from DBEDT and Hawaii Friends for Civil Rights, and members asked DBEDT about how to measure return on investment from the overseas offices. HB 650, dealing with broadband-related administration, was supported by DBEDT, the Department of Agriculture, the Hawaii Food Industry Association, and others, while committee discussion focused on the role of the state’s trade and investment offices and broadband administration. HB 935, on digital navigator support, received testimony in favor from DBEDT, the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities, the University of Hawaii system, and others, but also drew comments about consumer representation and the need for service on neighbor islands. The committee also heard strong testimony on tax and family-related measures. HB 572, which would remove the grocery tax, received overwhelming support from groups including the Hawaii Food Industry Association, AARP Hawaii, and others, with testimony emphasizing food insecurity and cost-of-living relief; Tax Foundation Hawaii offered technical comments. HB 701, a caregiver tax credit bill, was supported by AARP Hawaii, Hawaii Children’s Action Network Speaks, and others, with AARP stressing the burden on family caregivers and Tax Foundation Hawaii suggesting the credit percentage be reduced to preserve price-shopping incentives. HB 753, another child and dependent care tax credit measure, drew support from AARP Hawaii, Catholic Charities Hawaii, Hawaii Children’s Action Network Speaks, and others; Tax Foundation Hawaii again raised technical concerns, this time about the complexity of the formula. After testimony, the committee took up decision-making. HB 455 was passed with amendments, including transferring administrative responsibility from the Hawaii Technology Development Corporation to the Community-Based Economic Development Program, blanking out the appropriation, adding one business loan officer FTE, and noting a $95,000 cost. HB 437, HB 650, HB 934, HB 442, and HB 572 were all advanced with amendments, generally involving blanking out appropriations, moving amounts into committee notes, technical cleanup, and setting effective dates to July 1, 3000. HB 935 was deferred because of overlap with public library programs and uncertainty about federal funding for digital navigator positions. The chair also indicated HB 7 would be amended to add a nonrefundable family caregiver tax credit and related technical changes, but the transcript cuts off before final action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Tillerson mentioned that Roy has had some interests, you know, we just built some in Mosquero.
• It was an interesting situation.
• Um, the initial request was to go up to the max the calculator said was allowed, um, but as Mr.
• A total calculator value to program, um, the school with some flexible spaces. Um.
• The um Calculator was actually phase 2 and that was completed. Moving forward, we have.

Transcript Highlights:

• to independently match the calculations to independently match the calculations and<00:41:56.960
• What's interesting is that only 99.4% of that was mandated by statute.
• <01:41:00.840> under calculation under calculation under 352.00<01:41:03.400> subdivision
• We got some teachers here who are probably interested in these questions.
• We got some teachers here who are probably interested in these questions.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Here you can see the calculation for the ESSA school index. This is in the ESSA plan.
• The ESSA school index has currently not been calculated for '24 and '25.
• The ESS school index has currently not been calculated for 24 and 25.
• Okay, I'll be interested in that.
• These are the indicators used to calculate the letter grades for 2025.

Summary: The committee received a lengthy Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on Arkansas academic standards, accountability systems, and adequacy requirements. Staff reviewed how state curriculum and standards have evolved from the 1997 Public Education Act through the 2003 Quality Education Act and the 2017 Educational Support and Accountability Act, including required coursework, standards for accreditation, career and technical education, graduation requirements, and recent additions such as computer science, personal finance, firearm safety, and fetal growth and development instruction. Members asked for a chart comparing the major laws and repeals over time, and staff agreed to provide one. The presentation then turned to federal ESSA requirements and Arkansas’s state accountability system. Staff explained Arkansas’s long-term goals for proficiency, English learner progress, and graduation rates, and reported 2025 ATLAS proficiency results, which remained below the 80% goal across student groups. They also reviewed English learner progress, graduation rates, school support and improvement, and equitable access to educators. Data showed gaps by subgroup and by school poverty/minority concentration, with Title I and high-poverty schools more likely to have emergency/provisional teachers and less experienced staff. Members questioned the lack of recent data for some ESSA measures, including equity labs and school index calculations, and asked staff to follow up with the Department of Education. The committee also discussed NAEP results, ACT scores, and teacher quality measures under the state accountability act. Arkansas’s NAEP performance remained below national averages in fourth- and eighth-grade reading and math, and ACT composite scores and benchmark attainment were also reviewed. Members asked for additional information on historical highs and lows, the number of assessments students take by grade, dropout data, and comparisons with other states. No formal votes were taken; the main action was agreement to request additional information from DESE and to schedule department follow-up at a future meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• that go into uh the calculations that go into uh the calculation<01:09:05.400> for<01:09:05.600
• formulas that will drive the calculation formulas that will drive the calculation um<01:09:37.199
• How do you calculate that?
• > up<01:20:47.440> to how do you calculate up to how do you calculate up to 2029<01:20:
• <01:30:16.800> in the folks that are interested in the folks that are interested in education

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Education Finance Committee met on January 21 with a quorum present for the first meeting of the 2025 biennium. The co-chairs described the temporary power-sharing arrangement in the tied Senate, introduced committee staff and pages, and had members briefly introduce themselves and share what subject they would teach. After the introductions, the committee moved to a presentation from State Demographer Susan Brower. Brower reviewed Minnesota’s school-age population trends and projections, noting that the state had just under 1 million children ages 5 to 17 in 2023 and that, for the first time, the older adult population exceeded the school-age population. She said the school-age population is concentrated in the Twin Cities metro and other regional centers, and projected an overall decline of about 5% over the next 15 to 20 years, driven mainly by declining birth rates and long-running net outmigration of young adults. She also explained that growth is expected in some areas, especially along the I-94 corridor north of the metro, while northern regions are projected to see the largest declines. She clarified for members that her figures measure resident children, not school enrollment, and that boundary changes are not reflected in the district-level data. The presentation also covered demographic change among students. Brower said about 35% of Minnesota children ages 5 to 17 are children of color, with growing multiracial populations and increasing linguistic diversity. She reported that about 20% of school-age children have at least one foreign-born parent, and about 18% of enrolled students speak a language other than English at home, with Spanish, Somali, and Hmong the largest home languages. She also discussed child poverty, saying Minnesota’s rate is just under 10%, below the national rate of about 15%, and that poverty is concentrated in Minneapolis-St. Paul, some first-ring suburbs, and parts of northern Minnesota, including districts with larger Native populations. Members asked questions about whether the projections accounted for migration and whether open enrollment affected the figures; Brower said the data reflect where children live, not where they attend school, and that the projections are based on recent migration and birth patterns, with future changes more likely to come from international immigration than from domestic migration.

Transcript Highlights:

• get away from those micro calculations get away from those micro calculations and<00:23:27.919><
• additional information and calculations additional information and calculations needed.<01:10:53.199
• Um and the calculation, figure it out.
• So, it's an algorithmic progressive<02:29:40.640> calculation.
• progressive calculation. progressive calculation.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So was the taconite homestead credit the ninth in the order of calculation?
• And this is because of how and when they're applied in the tax calculation.
• Credits, on the other hand, are applied after the calculation of gross tax.
• um they're applied after the calculation um they're applied after the calculation of<00:47:20.599
• <01:10:34.920> by the effective tax rate is calculated by the effective tax rate is calculated

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Some calculation figured out.
• It's just how we calculate how it's funded. Yeah.
• And then one... ...calculation of how it's funded, yeah.
• Well, we'd be interested to hear it.
• Well, we'd be interested to hear it.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to hear and discuss three education bills and related budget items. House Bill 1214 would revise K-12 transportation funding by replacing the current rider-based formula with a new formula tied more closely to district size, square mileage, building counts, and the weighted student payment. Sponsors and DPI said the change would better reflect actual transportation costs, hold districts harmless overall, and likely increase funding by about $4 million beyond current spending; they also said parent-provided transportation and open-enrollment mileage rules would remain largely unchanged. No opposition was heard, and the committee closed discussion without taking final action in the transcript. The committee then reviewed House Bill 1013, the education appropriations bill, and walked through proposed adjustments to program and pass-through grants. The chair proposed keeping or reducing some items, eliminating others, and moving one-time items to the stabilization fund; examples included leaving free meals at $4.5 million for now, keeping the paraprofessional-to-teacher program, reducing some grant lines, and removing several new or one-time grants. DPI also explained that the student information system would remain a flow-through grant for this biennium but would move in-house after July 1, 2026. The committee also discussed adding an FTE for the School for the Blind and making a small equipment swap at the Center for Distance Education. House Bill 1369 was discussed as the main school aid bill, including a proposed 2 percent and 2 percent per-pupil payment increase, higher construction bidding thresholds, elimination of the 12 percent cap, and a transfer of $75 million from Foundation Aid to the School Construction Revolving Loan Fund, with the chair suggesting $100 million instead. DPI explained that the bill also included a policy change returning placement decisions for students with disabilities in congregate care to the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with support from the governor’s office. The committee heard testimony from school officials seeking gap funding for Title I losses caused by a switch from free-and-reduced-lunch to census-based allocations, saying districts with many open-enrolled students could lose substantial funding and staff positions. Later, the governor’s office presented a proposed $1.5 million one-time appropriation to help schools buy secure storage for student cell phones if a statewide device policy is adopted; members raised concerns about cost, local control, and whether the money would be enough. The committee also heard student testimony and then recessed without voting on the amendment in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• OK, and I don't want to step on anybody else's interests, but I've actually had a lot of child support
• Please identify yourself and state your interest in this before you go into comments.
• So, in the old days when you did hand calculations...
• I don't want to go back to those days of doing the Howland calculations. So, the only way...
• So you could see all the calculations. Is that what you're wanting to help you?

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• She said PNNL uses modeling to calculate annual savings.
• ><00:30:07.039> annual uses modeling to calculate annual uses modeling to calculate annual savings
• Interesting study. So, there's a lot of things that go into it.
• Interesting study. So, there's a lot of things that go into it.
• Interesting study. So, there's a lot of things that go into it.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: Representative Mecklin moved House File 3545 to the general register and offered a DE amendment that removed the commissioner’s authority to choose a more efficient standard and removed the requirement that the 2038 residential energy code achieve a 70% reduction in annual net energy consumption compared with the 2006 energy use index. The amendment was adopted, and the bill was then discussed as amended. Mecklin said the bill was intended to address home affordability, arguing that energy code requirements add to housing costs and make it harder for younger Minnesotans to buy homes. Several testifiers opposed the bill, including representatives from the Center for Energy and the Environment, AIA Minnesota, Sierra Club, Fresh Energy, Housing First Minnesota, and ARXUS. They argued that energy codes are not a primary driver of housing costs, that stronger codes do not slow housing production, and that more efficient homes lower utility bills and improve comfort, safety, resilience, and climate outcomes. Testifiers cited studies and examples showing payback over time, including estimates that efficiency upgrades could pay for themselves in five to nine years and save homeowners tens of thousands of dollars over 30 years. The Department of Labor and Industry said it had concerns about the bill because it would move away from a more energy-efficient standard and could create unintended consequences in the code adoption process, though it said the current technical advisory group process already considers cost concerns. Members questioned the cost and savings estimates, especially the comparison between higher upfront mortgage costs and lower utility bills. Fresh Energy explained that its figures were based on Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and Slipstream analyses using a typical Minnesota home and that the savings were modeled over time. Representative Johnson expressed skepticism about the assumptions behind the savings numbers and argued that utility costs are not the main barrier to homeownership. The chair said the committee intended to take a vote on the bill that day, but the transcript ends before any final vote or disposition is shown.