Ty Dressler — Representative Ty Dressler was called during roll call and answered present.
Ty Dressler — Ty Dressler is referenced throughout a continuous discussion about property tax levy limits, including the effect of a zero-mill year, the 3% cap, and how zero-levy years relate to the broader question he raised.
Ty Dressler — Representative Dressler is referenced in connection with an earlier question about the county capital projects levy and whether money could be moved into the capital projects fund.
Ty Dressler — Suggested moving Stark County up on the agenda to allow comment while the county representative was present.
Ty Dressler — The speaker references a question from Representative Dressler about the 3% cap and its effect on local political subdivisions.
Ty Dressler — Addressed as Vice Chair.
Ty Dressler — Vice Chair Dressler asked the presenter to return to the map slide and requested a comprehensive list of what the blue states are doing so the committee could review their requirements and approaches. The presenter responded by thanking him for the question and promising to share the comprehensive list with the committee after the meeting.
Ty Dressler — As Vice Chair, he asks a follow-up question about Commerce's role in evaluating economic activity and data collection.
Ty Dressler — Voted yes on the motion.
Jim Grueneich — 'Greenyke' appears to refer to Jim Grueneich, who was called on the roll and answered present.
Jim Grueneich — Likely the member being addressed as 'Representative Grueneich.'
Jim Grueneich — The discussion briefly references Representative Grueneich in connection with a prior comment about the primary residence credit, and the speaker follows up by asking whether the explanation helps Representative Grueneich.
Jim Grueneich — Jim Grueneich thanked the witness and asked a follow-up question about whether the lengthy research and decision-making timelines seen with data centers are common across a broader range of businesses considering investment in North Dakota.
Craig Headland — Headland was called on the roll and answered present.
Craig Headland — Representative Headland is called the expert and responds modestly.
Craig Headland — Referenced for his comment that levy limitations may no longer be needed in a 3% growth environment.
Craig Headland — Referenced as being present in Megan Gordon's office during a discussion about how the 3% cap applies across funds.
Craig Headland — Referenced as the next questioner.
Craig Headland — Addressed in the question about whether county auditors receive calculation worksheets with district budgets.
Craig Headland — The speaker responds to a question attributed to Representative Headland.
Craig Headland — Representative Craig Headland is introduced to present a bill draft from the property tax statement subcommittee. He explains that he chaired the subcommittee, which reviewed the property tax statement issue and voted to forward a bill draft.
Craig Headland — Chairman Headland presented the bill draft and responded to questions.
Craig Headland — Representative Headland asked how much new taxable value was created by projects completed in 2025, then added that future reports should include the amount of new property value created because it helps assess the program’s cost and impact.
Craig Headland — Representative Headland asked whether tenants pay sales tax up front and then seek a refund from the tax department.
Craig Headland — Representative Headland was addressed in the exchange about tenant exemption letters.
Craig Headland — Representative Headland asked about server ownership and space allocation in data center projects.
Craig Headland — Craig Headland asked whether the presenter had data or a slide that could be overlaid with the incentives map to compare incentives with the number of data centers by state. He then followed up on whether localities can choose where data centers locate, and later raised the issue of states with data center moratoriums, continuing the discussion of how incentives and state or local policies affect where data centers are sited.
Craig Headland — Craig Headland is referenced in connection with Senator Rummel’s question about Commerce’s role in evaluating data center exemptions; the second mention repeats the same reference without adding a new topic.
Craig Headland — Representative Headland asks for a realistic count of data centers in conversation with North Dakota.
Craig Headland — Representative Headland is addressed in the response about data center inquiries.
Craig Headland — Referenced as wanting the committee to entertain a vote on the subcommittee bill draft regarding property tax statements.
Craig Headland — Opened discussion and asked for the proper motion to move the bill draft forward.
Craig Headland — Responded that a centralized database had been discussed but not included in the bill because of uncertainty and unknowns.
Craig Headland — Said the issue will likely be addressed by individual legislators in a future session through a bill draft.
Craig Headland — Referenced as the chair calling for a roll call vote on the motion.
Craig Headland — Voted yes on the motion; name appears in the roll call and later as the chair.
Craig Headland — Asked about procedure for requesting additional bill drafts and committee directives before the next meeting.
Craig Headland — Argued the committee should consider additional reform-oriented bill drafts rather than leaving reforms to individual legislators.
Craig Headland — Referenced as having raised the issues under discussion.
Megan — Megan presented the background memo and walked members through the packet materials, including the possible study approach, and then the committee invited questions on her presentation.
Megan — Megan explains that under the supplementary rules, a Legislative Council draft can be reviewed and approved in one meeting. The discussion then shifts to asking Megan to make notes on the issues raised so they can be used for possible future bill drafting and relayed to the chair and staff.
Josh Gallian — Josh Gallian, the state auditor, introduced himself and began his presentation.
Lindsay Slappy — Identified as the director of Quality Assurance who reviews audit reports for compliance and documentation support.
HB1176 — Referenced as the bill being considered in relation to a 3% growth cap and zero-mill situations.
HB1176 — Referenced as the 3% cap law in the discussion of zero mills and exemptions.
HB1176 — Referenced as the law whose passage prompted additional training.
Megan Gordon — Council staff member Megan Gordon is brought in to answer a policy question about the 3% cap, including how it applies in a zero-levy year and whether it is tied to the adjusted year levy or the base year. She responds that she does not have the provision in front of her at that moment but explains that the 3% cap can apply to either the adjusted year levy or the base year.
Neil Messer — Introduced himself as chairman of the Stark County Commission and began testimony on the auditor's findings.
Chris — The witness is addressed by name while still at the podium.