Ronald Sorvaag — Ronald Sorvaag is identified as the chair at the start of the meeting, calling the committee to order and being acknowledged by another speaker as Chair during the opening remarks.
Ronald Sorvaag — Chair Sorvaag is repeatedly addressed throughout a continuous question-and-answer exchange about program administration and policy. The discussion covers whether programs were online or in person, the significance of a 10-graduate threshold, reactivating inactivated programs, how class loads and minimum class size are determined, and why campuses are moving away from diploma terminology.
Ronald Sorvaag — Chair Ronald Sorvaag is repeatedly addressed during a committee discussion about a program’s placement in the budget and its reporting requirements. The exchange includes questions about whether the program belongs in higher education rather than Commerce, whether there have been conversations about moving it, and clarification of the program’s history. Sorvaag confirms there have not been conversations about moving it and later corrects the timeline, noting the program began in 2013–15 and initially involved all five colleges.
Ronald Sorvaag — Chair Sorvaag is referenced in the ongoing discussion about tuition determinations, specifically as part of the distinction being drawn between what is appropriate for the legislature versus what is appropriate for the board.
Ronald Sorvaag — Addressed as Chair Sorvaag.
Ronald Sorvaag — Ronald Sorvaag is referenced in connection with a proposed rate change, with the discussion clarifying that the change he raised relates to UND and NDSU.
Ronald Sorvaag — During the committee’s discussion of research funding and formula costs, Chairman Ronald Sorvaag is repeatedly addressed while members compare spreadsheet figures and clarify the biennium variance being discussed. The exchange concludes with the chair calling a five-minute recess.
Ronald Sorvaag — Chair Sorvaag is repeatedly addressed during a continuous discussion about the proposal and its funding/reimbursement details. The speaker notes that the hold harmless language is included, refers to Senator Beckett’s question, and explains that the provision helps members explain the proposal to colleagues. Later, the commissioner thanks Chair Sorvaag and notes his involvement in developing the reimbursement numbers.
Ronald Sorvaag — As chair, he is discussing the impact of the formula change and the transition support for the affected institutions.
Ronald Sorvaag — As chair, he responds that he is comfortable with the request for a narrative at the next meeting.
Ronald Sorvaag — The chair is asked whether he is comfortable with having a narrative prepared for the next meeting, and he agrees.
Ronald Sorvaag — As chair, he asks whether the committee wants to change the $7,000 split in the next version and announces a lunch break.
Ronald Sorvaag — Addressed as Chair Sorvaag in discussion about sending the spreadsheet and explanation to committee members.
Ronald Sorvaag — Addressed as Chairman Sorvaag in confirming the proposal as a reallocation.
Ronald Sorvaag — Addressed as Chairman Sorvaag while the discussion continues.
Ronald Sorvaag — The chair is addressed in the discussion of whether there are any other comments or questions on the bill.
Ronald Sorvaag — Addressed as Chair Sorvaag in the transition to the next speaker.
Ronald Sorvaag — Named as part of the conversation about joint-use space.
Jonathan Sickler — Jonathan Sickler is first noted as present during roll call, then welcomed as a new committee member, and finally identified as the chair who will provide an update on dual credit information.
Jonathan Sickler — Senator Sickler asks about cost drivers and how class loads are determined.
Jonathan Sickler — Senator Sickler is mistakenly addressed and then corrected by the witness.
Jonathan Sickler — The chair asks Senator Jonathan Sickler to state his name, and he introduces himself as Jonathan Sickler, Senator from District 17 in Grand Forks.
Jonathan Sickler — Senator Sickler is referenced in a continuing discussion about dual credit and committee oversight. Another member notes his attention to direct costs and variation across institutions, then cites his earlier point about multiple committees becoming involved in dual credit, and finally mentions that he and others met with leadership about assigning dual credit to one committee.
Jonathan Sickler — Jonathan Sickler is referenced in a continuous discussion about dual credit and related policy framing. The transcript notes that he has said all he wants to say about dual credit, and then cites his point that the one-rate approach is only a working model.
Jonathan Sickler — Not mentioned in this section.
Jonathan Sickler — Addressed as 'Senator Beckett' in the transcript; likely a mis-transcription, but not confidently corrected.
Jonathan Sickler — Asked whether he had more to discuss on dual credit and how the committee should proceed.
Jonathan Sickler — Senator Jonathan Sickler is involved in a continuous discussion about capital building funds and related wording. He first asks a question about the funds, then is referenced in follow-up discussion about whether the verbiage should be changed, and is later mentioned again in connection with joint-use space, all within the same broader exchange.
Scott Meyer — Scott Meyer was noted during roll call as present in the record, but the committee also clarified that he was not physically with them and might be joining virtually or popping in and out online.
Scott Meyer — Not mentioned in this section.
Scott Meyer — Likely the intended speaker reference behind 'Representative Nathan' in the response to the challenge grant question.
Karla Hanson — Karla Hanson is mentioned during roll call as present, and then clarified as being represented by Odell from UND taking her place.
Karla Hanson — Identified as having a question or statement.
Karla Hanson — Karla Hanson is discussed in the context of where to place the ongoing dual credit-related program in the budget, with the conversation weighing whether it would be better incorporated in the higher education budget instead of Commerce.
Karla Hanson — Likely the speaker identified as 'Senator Beckett-O' is addressing Senator Sickler; the name is uncertain and may refer to Karla Hanson or another member, but the transcript is unclear.
Karla Hanson — Not mentioned in this section.
Karla Hanson — Representative Karla Hanson is referenced as the discussion is brought to her on dual credit policy, and she then responds by explaining that some campuses have multi-use buildings that include sports facilities and other qualifying uses.
Lisa Johnson — Lisa Johnson, Deputy Commissioner for academic and student affairs for the North Dakota University System, introduced herself and then provided an update on low completion programs, including the board’s actions and ongoing work by the participating campuses.
Lisa Johnson — Responded to a question about whether faculty layoffs resulted from program inactivation and termination.
Mike Nathe — Representative Nathie is involved in a continuous discussion about program terminations and their effects. The exchange begins with questions about whether inactivating or terminating programs led to layoffs, then follows up on how many of the terminated programs were online. It continues into a specific inquiry about the 13 diploma programs at Dakota College at Bottineau, with Nathie asking for clarification and the discussion moving into an explanation of those diploma program changes.
Mike Nathe — Referenced as having asked about cost savings in the June presentation.
Mike Nathe — Mike Nathe questions the Turtle Mountain program’s current participation levels, asking how many students are actually benefiting and whether the program may require additional funding in a future session. He also raises the broader issue of where the grant belongs in the budget process, noting that the program has been funded for several sessions and referencing prior Commerce budget discussions.
Mike Nathe — Asks whether facilities costs pertain more to K-12 campuses and whether schools are charging colleges to use facilities.
Mike Nathe — Mike Nathe is referenced during the committee’s funding formula discussion and then speaks to express that the document is difficult to read. He asks for clarification about the undergraduate FTE factor, questioning whether the bill would increase undergraduate FTEs by 1,000 or even 10,000 under the proposal.
Mike Nathe — Representative Nathe was addressed during a continued explanation of the spreadsheet, including discussion of funding increase estimates.
Mike Nathe — His absence from the 19th to the 4th was referenced while scheduling the next meeting.
Steve Swiontek — Representative Swiontek is identified and addressed across a continuous exchange that begins with a response about a threshold issue and continues into discussion of reactivated programs, all within the same broader conversation.
Steve Swiontek — Asked how often schools collaborate when one program has low enrollment and another school offers the same program.
Steve Swiontek — Representative Swiontek is addressed in the course of the discussion, first in a brief correction of his name and then again as part of a response about how state priorities are broadly defined.
Steve Swiontek — Representative Steve Swiontek is referenced in a brief Commerce budget discussion: he and Nathe are noted as supporting the budget, and then Swiontek asks about tracking completions and success rates. The response indicates that this tracking is already included as part of the reporting requirement.