Committee on Jobs and Economic Development - 03/20/24

[Music] it's coming good afternoon members uh good afternoon to the public we're happy that you are here whether you are joining us in person or online uh we are excited that you're here and our called uh to order the committee on jobs and economic development and it is Wednesday March 20th uh we have a quorum quorum is present I always like to give a pathway or at least a some guidance as to how today is going to look we'll be hearing my bill C file 4027 from me which is our policy Bill and we'

ll kind of go through that and then we have Senate file 3502 from Senator M Quade and Senate file 4435 from Senator her uh and Senate file 4331 from Senator Hoffman you may have seen on the agenda earlier that there was Senate file 4446 from Senator H hild and we will not be hearing that bill today just so that everyone is uh clear on that uh we also make sure it's clear outside of my bill that is going to be our policy bill that when other testifiers come up uh outside of the presenting author

uh other testimony will be relegated and timed to 2 minutes maximum so just want to make sure that you know that we'll keep track of that as well because we like to make sure that everything goes fluidly uh and at so with that being said as you can see we have a full agenda today so we'll we will begin uh and so I'm going to ask our worthy and and uh wonderful Vice chair Senator Muhammad to come and start chairing and we'll begin with Senate file 4027 Senator Champion my understanding is that we

have um folks ready to come in forward and speak about the separate sections of the bill uh yes um go ahead with your presentation thank you uh Madam chair thank you to the committee uh thank you to all those who worked hard on our policy bill here today and I'm here to present Senate file 4027 um I believe the bill is really fairly straightforward uh but we have a number of folks in the audience who can speak to in depth questions if members have them so just know that you may not see anyone s

itting up here with me but they're in the back so if there's a section or question they are prepared to come forward um first before we uh uh go forward I would like to move the A8 Amendment which is addressing Senator Nelson's concerns as well as other members uh to the section of the bill from Senate file 4925 as amended which will which we heard on Monday so I'd like to move that Amendment now if possible Madam chair the A8 Amendment okay Senator uh Champion moves the A8 Amendment all those a

re there is there any discussion on the amendment I'm looking for it Madam chair no we're looking for it okay we'll give it a minute could Senator Champion explain it Senator Champion you want to explain the amendment or maybe Council will yeah so so the uh hearing lies the concerns that um Senator Nelson had around the rate of 10% and there was that ongoing conversation about that and how that should be written is my understanding that uh the amendment the A8 Amendment reflects the proposed cha

nges that Senator Nelson wanted addressed if you need anything much more in- depth with that I can call up a testifier who can talk even more about the A8 Amendment awesome um all those in favor for the amendment please say I I all those opposed say nay the motion prevails thank you madam chair uh thank you for helping me get the bill in the shape that we wanted to to be in and thank you to all uh to all for your feedback and for working with with Senator putam on this there are four sections me

mbers of the bill composed of these Senate files so Senate file 4027 my bill which originally was just one small policy provision but if you recall we did a delete all to wrap all six small policy Provisions that were inadvertently split up by the reviser which we uh when they were intended to be in one bill from deed we made that change in committee on March 6th as you know that language has not changed however we obviously amended additional language from three other bills we heard in committe

e after the Lang in the bill so Deputy Commissioner uh Commissioners Kevin McKinnon and Mark majes are here in the audience to answer the questions uh on this section that you may have next uh we have uh cile 49 25's language from Senator putam which we heard on Monday and we just amended with the A8 amendment to incorporate your feedback um Carrie Johnson as you probably heard on Monday she is with us again she's from the metropolit Metropolitan Consortium of community developers is here if you

have any additional questions or concerns you like to address or discuss on that section and remember that was the group they got together with other stakeholders and they came with the recommendations and they presented those recommendations so uh Senate file 4925 reflects those recommendations um after that we have the language from Senate file 4172 from Senator FR and and Marty Cipher and uh he is in audience there he is over there uh so if anyone will have any questions on that section agai

n this is that Federal Conformity language and we believe it to be non-controversial uh thank you to Senator friends and and and Mr cyer for helping bring this forward but LA and last but certainly not least we have the language from Senate file 3756 from Senator haow which simply raises the Caps from 5 million to 10 million on line 23.18 and 23.3 and 24.9 of the bill we also increased the cap from 7 million to 12 million online 2432 and as you heard in the testimony on Monday this increase will

help our local communities afford uh afford to take on water treatment projects that the public facilities Authority distributes grants to help them complete so we do have Jeff Freeman from the the public facilities Authority is here to help address any questions you may have on this section members that's all I got that's all the uh uh those are all the provisions that are in uh Senate file uh uh 4027 at this time we can entertain any questions um or any amendments that you may have and I know

that there there were some amendments I know that there's a a a a potential A4 and there's a potential A5 a potential A6 and a potential A7 so whoever wants to go in any particular order is fine and and when that section is discussed I'll have uh one of my testifiers come up and answer any and all questions uh uh that pertains to that Amendment thank you madam chair thank you Senator Champion Senator dream thank you chair Muhammad and thank you Senator Champion for uh bringing the bill forward

um I have two amendments I I think I mentioned briefly to you uh before session um the first would be the A6 Amendment um so that would be um page [Music] two delete section two and insert the C limitation uh language um and I don't know if uh did you find it I did I have it the the A6 Amendment okay and so is there anything Madam chair is there anything else that Senator Jam wants to say about the A6 or should I have the department come up and talk about why um or my testifier why uh the change

s were made in our underlining uh Senate file 4027 Senator J do you have anything else to add or do you want the I think it' be great to hear from the Department okay perfect so I guess we'll take somebody from the Department Madam chair we have uh Deputy Commissioner uh Mark major who is going to tackle this and and I'm sure to he introduce himself for the record thank you chair uh good afternoon Mark major Deputy Commissioner for Workforce vment at deed um Madam chair and committee members uh

thank you for the opportunity to be here today um just kind of recapping on my testimony from last week uh where we talked about the 10% uh cap on this as I mentioned during that time and I'll repeat it so forgive me is that indeed we have tendency to uh for our Workforce Development grants the grants range everywhere from approximately about $440,000 all the way up to a maximum of $750,000 um the 10% as you can do the calculation I won't do that for you all but I know you you handle it um is is

a minim amount of dollars given the amount of work that we're asking our community based organizations our partners to do um this is feedback that I've received as well as the department has received that it is extremely difficult uh to with the limited dollars for admin to actually do the level of oversight that I think that this committee and other indiv other a excuse me other legislative bodies expect um to do with the minimum dollars that are available this will allow uh while allowing the

uh agencies to have an expanded range of dollars to spend on administrative dollars will help them to ensure that they're hiring the staff acquiring the equipment that they need in order to deliver the services as I mentioned again last week There's four steps that in which deed goes through to actually look at budgeting one again is at risk we do risk assessments at the beginning uh before any awards are let two is that once the rfps once the award is made we do look at the budget and do a com

parison to the work that's being offered up or suggested three there are monitoring that we do we perform during the course of the of the training um where services are provided so we are actually evaluating the uh the spending that the grantees are going through during throughout the time of their um of the Grant and then lastly if there is an amendment to the proposed budget at any time that also goes under a under a level of scrutiny so we have four types of checks and balances to make the as

sessment of whether or not that the actual uh admin dollars or training dollars or Supportive Services actually coincide with the actual work that's supposed to be done during that time and I know again this is you know we're looking at this from a perspective that we've received from our partners this is not deed just that coming and asking for it this is Partners throughout the state who have raised this and asking for this to be UNCA uncapped so thank you thank you Mr major Senator Champion o

r did you have something U maybe if I mean I think uh Madam chair that the Deputy Commissioner did a really good job of of articulating their thinking behind uh this proposed policy change it gives them more discretion to look at uh what makes sense based on the work that is being put forward we know as a guiding principle we try to make sure that we control administrative costs and we do not want entities having high administrative costs and so much money being sucked up in uh the admin cost bu

t we also recognize that there's work that needs to be done and we want to be respectful of that work and still keep our administrative cost down so it doesn't mean that they're going to get any more money we just want to be reasonable and thought so thank you madam chair thank you Senator CH Senator do you want to move the amendment I I would like to move but I'd like to add a comment before we go to that if I could and and thank you both for your comments and and I understand what you're tryin

g to get at but you know the way I approach it is that we have what 5 10% of the nonprofits that come in through those doors sit down here and beg for money um it would be nice to help out more of the nonprofits that are doing good work and if we aren't a little careful and have guide rails in statute that dictate overhead expenses I'll call it administrative costs um I I think it's just a crack for abuse and we've seen plenty of abuse so I I think this is Comfort language I like it I think almo

st every member on this committee at one time or another has talked about this issue um I I I think it's just common sense we keep it the way it is and I appreciate the agency's work I understand the perspective where you're coming I understand the perspective of the nonprofits um but unfortunately we're in a position where we can't fund everybody um and we need to make sure that those dollars are being used what for what the intent is so I I urge everybody to vote Yes and I do move the 86 thank

you madam chair Senator Champion uh Madam chair uh I would hope that the committee would not adopt the a 86 A6 Amendment um for a couple reasons one I do think uh the department is our back stop when we think in terms of uh their discretion they understand what is needed in the marketplace they're not willing to give any more uh to any particular person for administrative cost than what is necessary and we've seen that we could trust the work of deed even if we have questions about others we ca

n certainly uh trust the work of deed and know that they will uh uh not only articulate but Implement our uh careful careful consideration when we think in terms of um uh uh administrative costs and apply the guard rails that we've talked about so I would ask the committee not to adopt the a6th amendment thank you Senator Champion senator Pat well thank you Mr chair or Madam chair and and senator rheim for bringing this amendment and I certainly appreciate you know where the department has come

from we've been having this discussion uh for many years but members the the the fact of the matter is is that we we allocate these Grant funds the administrative fee is meant to cover the cost in addition to what their normal UH responsibilities are and what we found is that we're not hiring people to take these this is deed pretty much has the overhead they need uh in order to administer these grants this is why they're built in part they built an entire uh Department around or portion of thei

r organization around Grant Administration and and you know I might say they they do it better than most of the other agencies in the in the state to say that you know to to Senator draheim's point to put to put some some guardrails around this to make sure that the funds that you know whether it's it's for deed or whether it's for the the nonprofit um who should have the capacity to make manage these grants if they're coming to us um I think is more than reasonable and I personally I think I th

ink 10% is a little rich but um I think it's a good start for us and we should have dropped the the dram Amendment Senator champion thank you madam chair and and and thank you madam chair and thank you Senator Pratt for your your thoughtfulness and and comments and of course those of of Senator dreim and we understand we're on the same page as pertaining to really making sure that we keep uh those guard rails in place but but we do uh and I think that we should trust the commissioner and and dee

d in order to make that call based on the work that they've already done what they're seeing in the market place and how to best um address the concerns that have been articulated and what they see uh we don't want anything that was that's going to interfere with the work being done um out in public so with that being being said Madam chair I hope that we will continue to have the discussion but for today um uh that I asked the committee not to adopt the A6 Amendment okay members any other discu

ssion on the A6 Amendment Senator FR Ro okay sha will do the roll call cheer champion no Vice cheer Muhammad no ranking member dreim yes Senator Guston no Senator her no Senator Howley I Senator Pratt Senator putam no Senator Nelson all right that there being four yeses and five Nays the motion does not Prevail or the amendment does not Prevail very close um any other discussions on the senator dram you have another amendment thank you uh chair Muhammad and um members thank you for the discussio

n on that Amendment um I I have one other Amendment I'd like to offer and that would be the A7 [Applause] Amendment Senator Jam do you want to explain the A7 Amendment yeah it's pretty simple um members it deletes on line 10. uh 27 it deletes the repealer and the repealer is um section 116 j435 and I don't know if we could have our fantastic nonpartisan staff um explain uh explain that okay Miss fontin uh Mr chair members is this um regarding the priority section of in the program Senator my und

erstanding it the way it's drafted um proprietary technology right would be oh let me you have no I got the wrong section yeah the priorities you're right uh Mr chair and and members or Madam chair and members and Senator Duram so I I believe when um the department testified earlier they they are doing a whole sort of re um organizing of this particular statute for this program and as I read it and as um the department testified they are rolling the priorities into sort of the criteria and they

just kind of were rethinking the configuration but if the department wants to come up and and just verify that that's what they were trying to do that was kind of my read of it that um the priorities were were sort of being brought up into the criteria section and it was just a reworking um to make it work better for the department but um Deputy Commissioner McKinnon could could answer that Mr McKinnon yes um uh if I can just jump in then I will'll have the department um uh further articulate it

what they're doing that is correct what general counsel said if you look at on page 10 uh you also see where uh the things from uh that were placed in the repealer are now in that section so you're not taking away any of the uh the criteria or the guidance from the repealer it is now embedded on page 10 and and other places so with that um uh Deputy Commissioner uh McKinnon can confirm what I'm saying and then speak a little more about it Mr McKinnon uh thank you madam chair and members Kevin M

cKinnon Deputy Commissioner for economic development uh at the uh Senator Champion that is uh correct uh we have uh reorganized this the criteria um that were previously in subdivision 5 under priorities um the majority of them are included in this such as um the ability to attract substantial investment uh the economic benefit to the city your county very similar to how we run the uh its sister program the bdp um program uh it also retains that uh projects aren't just relocating from one city t

o another uh and uh also of course uh the job creation aspects of uh why we do uh these programs to begin with uh so that's the reason for the repeal of those priorities there's a few other uh pieces in there proximity to public transit um and uh some of the other uh public benefits that are articulated uh generally in an application process that communities make of us uh anyway and Madam chair if you could if you look at line 10.18 and 10.19 it still talks about the project is expected to creat

e or retain full-time job so it doesn't really remove anything again is reorganizing and putting the necessary U guidance uh uh more in the bill itself thank you Senator Champion Senator dram thank you and and thank you Deputy Commissioner um for your comments um you know the part I didn't find that with the revamp and deletion of this section is that grants must be made for public structure that in the commissioner's judgment provided the highest return and public benefits for the public cost i

ncurred sen Champion so the cost benefit analysis very loose language that's in statute now um Can can you point that out on this page yes Champion through the chair I'm sorry uh Madam shair you're right Madam shair she was waiting all day to get me on that I know I know she was uh Madam chair thank you uh to Senator Dre heim's question if you look at line uh 10.8 uh through 10 uh 10.10 uh I believe this is the section that you're talking about the project is expected to result in or will attrac

t substantially public and private capital investment and provide substantial economic benefit to the county or city in which the project would be located I believe that addresses your concerns or maybe it doesn't unless there's another space so Senator jham don't thank you chair don't um thank you Senator Champion you know it to me it it it doesn't quite line up to what was in statute before and that's my intent of reversing the repealer I I can understand the other language that's in here um b

ut if we look at the the second sentence more or less on that subsection five uh under priorities you know it provides the highest return in public benefit for the public cost incurred that's a cost benefit analysis and you know so that's what's missing in this language so I I get the other parts that you did and I I understand why you're doing it but I think that's a pretty important piece and and I think the the people Minnesota public would expect that um and I'm sure that is something that i

s wrestled with in in within your own department but I think it needs to be in statute like it is now Senator dreim Senator Champion uh thank you madam chair uh what what we can commit to Senator dreim if there's something uh that you can work with the Department on if there's something else that they might be able to um provide in this language to that gets to your point if they don't already feel like it's already there uh we are certainly open to that but for but for today's purposes I'd ask

that the committee not adopt the A7 amendment I don't know if there's someplace else in the in the criteria that would be helpful to point out uh thank you madam chair and Senator dream yes we'd be happy to uh obviously uh work with you if there's more Comfort language that's uh that's needed the um what I would say is when we do these types of award Wards yes there has to be tax base created yes there has to be uh all the outcomes that are that are ultimately expected or the unfortunately the c

ommunity does have to pay these funds back um and what I would uh additionally say uh is that when we have these large infrastructure projects ultimately uh these are grants to help uh the communities uh provide that infrastructure to support uh not only that use but um uh potentially other uses that have a similar need from a land perspective so thank you any other discussion on the A7 Amendment okay um Senator Jam do you want to move the amendment I would still yeah okay um so all those in fav

or say I I all those that are opposed say nay no the motion does not Prevail all right any other discussion on the bill Senator Pratt well thank you madam chair and uh before I before I offer an amendment let me just uh you know say a few things SAR champy and I have been talking about Workforce I'm sorry I'll get closer uh Senator champion and I have been talking about Workforce Development for many many years um you know as we continue to uh find a Workforce shortage that we've you know seen c

oming for almost a decade as the demographics uh show that Minnesota is growing older and and we've got fewer you know fewer young people coming in to to fill those jobs um we are having to get more creative in how we uh look at Workforce Development um and I've shared you know I've shared with Senator champion and others you know some of the stories in my district and one I'm particularly proud of is is we've got um an electrical contractor that brings kids on straight out of high school he uh

trains them through uh and provides classwork for them all the way uh to journeyman status and these kids walk out and uh most of them stay with him voluntarily uh but they can take that uh they can take that credential anywhere they want I've talked to manufacturers they're taking uh people with very very few skills and up up trining them not only to an entry-level job but up training them to the point where they are getting very um good paying careers and and Senator champion and I have talked

about this uh uh this A5 Amendment I'd like to introduce sen champion and I have talked about this concept on on multiple occasions and uh this language just came together yesterday um and so I didn't get a chance to talk to him but Madam Sher I'd like to offer the A5 Amendment okay Senator Pratt moves the A5 Amendment it should be in your packets Senator Pratt you want to explain the A5 Amendment yeah uh Madam chair the A5 Amendment recognizes that um we're we're relying on many of our employe

rs to do Workforce Development to do those basic skills not only for those entry level jobs but also uh to develop skills on an ongoing basis um we just you know heard a a pilot program from shaki the other day about a public private partnership and this would be a little bit different where we have um employers paying a special assessment into the Workforce Development Fund and yet they're providing Workforce Development for their own for their own Workforce and not getting any of that benefit

they're paying in an additional tax but but they can't recoup any of that money for uh um for their own expenses um to upskill their employees and and what we really want to do Madam chair is focus this on our smallest employers those with a 100 employees or less to say that they can apply back to deed for a refund on the on the uh special assessment they paid into the Workforce Development Fund and then there would be a report back to the legislature to make sure that we keep that fund healthy

for the um for the dislocated worker program because we certainly don't want to lose you know that program which is been uh so crucial when we have uh big layoff uh events we want to make sure that that's whole but recognize our small employers are doing a lot of the work that the Workforce Development Fund was initially set up to do and we think that they ought to be able to recruit some of those expenses so uh with that Madam chair I'll stand for any questions and ask members to support the A5

Amendment okay Senator Champion to the amendment thank you madam chair thank you Senator Senator Pratt as usual for your thoughtful in this around some of these important issues uh and Senator Pratt is right that we've had a a ton of conversations about these things and the creative ways by which to do things uh and I recognize that uh we're always looking for ways to uh benefit small businesses and how do we help make sure that they're able to use res resources in a meaningful way uh upscaling

uh upskilling um uh uh uh employees is very important right and uh uh but there is a special assessment and there's a reason for this special assessment um and and I understand what cator Pratt is attempting to do is to recoup some of the revenue that a small employer and others have used in order to provide training uh and uh and I know that there would be a report and I I I recognize that but the 85 Amendment uh it D doesn't have a great way as a state agency to know how many employees you ha

ve at every time at every business uh and our Workforce grows and shrinks more than more than any state in the country because of seasoned workers Etc there are all these rationals for it and vir and so it's virtually impossible to do this uh uh I recognize that others have been talking about this the chambers been talking about it and it's all this notion of give the tax back to the employer but it's really difficult in my opinion and but I'm going to have deed come up and talk about it CU I do

n't work at deed I'm a policy uh person but one thing that is uh uh uh that's clear at least from what I understand is that details of being of them being able to administer this would require a lot of a lot more thought and build out to to do it so it is 100% at any point whether it's they have 100 employees at any point in the year only when it goes below 100 but what about then going back over 100 so I just think that the the uncertainty of it and the additional thought that needs to happen u

h so I will ask Deputy Commissioner Mark major or Deputy Commissioner Kevin McKinnon to speak to this issue but as of right now I think more time is needed for this idea and is for that reason that you'll hear from that you've heard from me and then hopefully from De that I I'll probably ask you not to adopt the A5 Amendment okay Mr Majors thank you madam chair and members of the committee um I have to agree with um the chair on on this and I appreciate the the comments around we were trying to

be uh creative during this time and we certainly are that's why we've actually asked for the dislocated worker eligibility requirements to be expanded not restricted um to who be who can be served with uh funding but in terms of the Workforce Development fund the Workforce Development Fund is actually a very important fund for work uh for the state um it not only supplies funding to deed but also the Department of Labor and Industry receives funding through this our vocational rehab uh uh progra

m receives funding but also what we call our local Workforce Development uh areas which we have 16 of them across the state and they receive formula dollar from the Workforce Development Fund now let me just be very clear these local Workforce Development areas are are actually led by employers um and who are in some cases are recipient of these dollars um so those fun they would be impacted by this Gravely in addition to the um Minnesota jobs skills partnership There's an opportunity uh board T

here's an opportunity for employers to actually go and actually ask for dollars for with assistance for training so they are not employers are not shut out from actually accessing the dollars that they do put forward this and then I'll just say lastly obviously this has a great deal administrative burdensome you're adding additional work on deed is as the chair mentioned is to go assess whether it's 100 folks or not uh now you're getting us into a whole biling scenario where then we're going to

rebuild I have to go back and refund dollars so administratively there it would be very challenging I do believe that the employers can benefit from it if they seek to do so the the funding is there for them to apply for their Grant along with some of our partners so that they can access these dollars and it's just so important for us to continue to be creative as we think about addressing our labor shortage and doing that in partnership with our employer Partners which is what our local Workfor

ce Development areas to on a daily basis so thank you madam chair you Senator dram did you have something to add to the amendment or Senator Pratt thank you thank you chair and and thank you Deputy Commissioner and Senator Champion um you know just interacting with businesses all over the state most businesses want to train their own employees and I I think Senator Pratt's Amendment here kind of gets to the smaller end of those employees or employers excuse me um that probably don't want to appl

y for any Grant from deed they probably don't have the Personnel to do that they're too busy servicing haac systems or Plumbing or electricians or whatever they do build widgets um and they love what they do and they they just need more employees and and I think anything we can do to help people on a career path is the whole goal of everybody here in this room more than like um I can't think of someone better to do that training than someone that wants them to be a coworker with them and I I kno

w there would be a little administrative work on this but I I I think Senator Pratt's on the right track if we want effective training why not have the people that do it every day have that training for these really small businesses um you know 100 100 employees really isn't that many um you know at my Peak I we had 110 um it's a lot of people I get it but you're still a small business um you know so I I hope we can work on this proposal um I I think it's probably more effective than some of the

other things we already fund um and and I I do think we could maybe put a little guard rails on this amendment to make sure we target maybe certain industries um but I I I'm really in favor of this thank you Senator Pratt for bringing it Forward Senator PR well thank you madam chair and just hopefully to to close this out you know Senator Champion talked about this as a tax break and a tax benefit for businesses that's not how I see it I see this as a benefit for employees when you look at the

amendment must be used to upscale current entry-level employees for training that leads to an increased salary or increased opportunities for career advancement we've had a lot of dis you know we're hearing discussion around increasing minimum wage increasing this increasing that what we should be doing is preparing people to take on those roles that create those higher wages that incent them to get into those higher wages and the reason Senator Champion I think that this is an employee focused

Amendment rather than an employer a focused amendment is that this training may not be going on today because the small business can't afford it but with a rebate program maybe they could bring that training in and do it in-house and benefit themselves with a better trained Workforce and better productivity and and and the ability to pay better wages than some new state mandate um we tend to think about third-party providers here we've had a lot of them come through and and I think we have to br

eak that mindset we have to break that that perspective that we always have to have third party this that might have been the case 25 years ago when we had a 6% unemployment rate and um we were you know we weren't dealing with the labor shortages that we are today and the report is not just to be an informational report and the reason we're targeting the very smallest businesses is to protect the Workforce Development Fund for all the things that the assistant commissioner said are there and we'

re C you know and and and you know nobody can pull out more than they've put in it's a rebate it's not it's not a grant right so so by that very nature they can only pull out what they've what they've put into the fund and I think those are the protections that we're looking for um that the agency could and should be feel comfortable with I'm happy to have further conversation with them uh on that but this is an employee Center Amendment not an employer Center Amendment and I I just want to make

that perfectly clear because we need motans to be able to take on some of the most highly skilled jobs um we've talked for years about becoming a technology Hub about you know back back when we were kids Senator this was this was a technology Hub Honeywell helped put men on the moon some of the some of the greatest Innovations and we still have some great technology here but some of the greatest Innovations in the world were developed here in Minnesota and we need to figure out how to bring tha

t back and and I don't know that we're going to get the big Behemoth corporations again boy we've got a lot of smart people starting their own businesses and wouldn't it be great to help them train their employees to be the best they can and so Madam chair I I would like to uh request a roll call on the A5 am Amendment thank you Senator Senator trampy do you want to add anything to the discussion yes Madam chair thank you I don't think there's any disagreement about the fact that we always want

to make sure that we have a highly skilled Workforce and I don't think uh there's a disagreement that we should do everything we can to support small business employees as well as owners I just think that the A5 Amendment uh misses the mark although there's a commitment from us to continue to have this discussion uh in the future because I think we always want to entertain everything we can let me highlight a couple points that uh between the comments of Senator dreim and the comments of Senator

Pratt that I think um shines a light as to why uh the A5 amendment should not be adopted so Senator dreim Madam chair says individuals uh employers should be able to train their own employees uh in fact currently they can they can do that right now there's nothing that changes that in fact uh they can have access to the dollars that are currently in the very fund that Senator Pratt wants to take money from you know how they can do that they can ask they can apply they can say the deed hey look

at what we're going to do and de would say yes Absol absolutely give us uh we'll enter into this uh we'll give you the application here's what you got to prove and show to us and they will give them give them the nod to go forward so what happens the employer gets money in order to to do their training the employees get the opportunity to be trained by their employer we're also supporting uh a alignment of training even for colleges and techs uh when when we think in terms of others who are goin

g in the marketplace they uh uh going forward so they can train they can have access to the money there's nothing that says that they can have access access to the money and even though I know the cater Pratt says 100 employees is not big but they're still recognized as a small business we understand that is something that can continue to go forward but there's something else that I don't want you to miss and if I'm wrong the Deputy Commissioner can correct me he says not only can identify emplo

yers articulate to deed what they want to do around training and and and submit an application and get grant money in order to do it for their own employees but there are other people who benefit from this fund as well and and he gave and he articulated a long list of others who benefit so we don't want to say just this industry or this or another industry There's an opportunity for our small business businesses across our great state regardless of what profession they're in can apply for the fu

nds and get the support that they need so we are in fact currently right now um helping small employers every single day so I will be happy for this committee to uh not adopt the 85 Amendment and know with Clarity that you're already helping small businesses cuz there's nothing that would suggest that you're not help helping small businesses as as we sit here right now today now can we do better and consider other creative options absolutely do we have a commitment to do that with Senator Pratt

we absolutely do because we see that as a guiding principle I'm just saying today the proposal that is before this this wonderful uh committee should not be adopted so the A5 should not be adopted and I'll ask uh Deputy Commissioner Mark major if he has any additional comments Mr major thank you madam chair and members of the committee I I wholeheartly agree with uh the chair Champion um always open to having conversations um other conversations Senator Pratt and others um about this but I think

where we stand now with the way that the fund operates now I think it does serve multiple uh indiv multiple entities um in a fair and Equitable way okay um Senator Pratt thank you uh thank you m Madam chair and thank you I appreciate I appreciate that offer um and I appreciate sen Champion's explanation we give tens of millions of dollars uh every budget cycle to third party providers I don't think there's a concern with these small employers who may not be taking advantage of this because it's

difficult to access as a way to um uh streamline the process and and create more opportunities uh for employees so I think Senator champion and I have a a very different perspective on on the uh on the health of the Workforce Development Fund I certainly don't want to hurt any of the the organizations that are uh currently relying on those monies which is why we we so very specifically targeted this to this um to this small group and have that report coming so that we assure that we don't uh ta

ke that fund below a reasonable letter uh level and and Madam chair I want to um revise my request for a roll call vote to be printed in the journal okay Senator Pratt asked for a roll call to be printed to the journal we will ask Shamika ban to help us with the roll call okay chair champion no Vice chair Muhammad no ranking member dreim yes yes Senator gustavson no Senator her no Senator Howley yes Senator Pratt yes Senator putam no Senator Nelson okay there being four yeses and five Nays the m

o the amendment does not Prevail all right any other discussions on the bill Senator Nelson thank you madam chair um I have the A4 Amendment okay Senator Nelson moves the A4 Amendment uh it should be in your packets Senator Nelson you want to tell us a little bit about the A4 Amendment yes uh the A4 Amendment just adds some um requirements for larger grants grants exceeding uh $500,000 or more uh and this amendment just simply requires that the commissioner submit a draft measurements uh to MMB

and consult with them and budget on these measures and so I think it's critically important that we know what we're trying to measure and I think it's important when we're looking at large grants like this that there actually be some um specific uh measurements that we are trying to obtain um that is uh the uh first part of the amendment and then uh paragraph B uh just um mentions that um there needs to be a summary of how the funds were used again just good government good transparency um and t

hen a final report needs to come to the legislature within 90 days um again I think it's just good government transparency building a confidence in in what we're doing here okay Senator champion thank you madam chair and thank you Senator Nelson for your uh A4 Amendment um as as this particular committee knows that uh D does a really thrill job as it when it comes to um contracts with with uh um other agents other um granes for for lack of better word uh they have a n number of accountability No

tions that's already in place they also have to do reporting that is provided to us when I read this 84 Amendment thank you Senator Nelson for your guidance on it because I was trying to figure out what you were trying to do there and I think this is work that uh a substantial amount of it has already been done by deed already so to do this would only be duplicative and some of it may be a little more challenging but again I'll let the department speak to that uh unless I hear something differen

t I'm going to ask the committee not to adopt the A4 Amendment but I reserve the right to come back and change my mind in the event I hear something that uh persuades me but uh I'll go to Deputy Commissioner Kevin McKinnon if that's okay Madam chair Mr McKennon thank you madam chair uh and members and uh Deputy Commissioner Majors will uh also comment here as this is the part of the uh Workforce system uh reporting uh as well um there are multiple types of Grants uh obviously that deed uh makes

uh and or loans and or uh other types of financing that we make uh some are already very well prescribed in law uh like many of our Economic Development programs which have very clear um uh measurements and expectations that actually dictate the amount of money that uh that a organization may may get uh in addition we are required uh when doing uh grants and or loans uh to businesses uh directly that we enter into business subsidy agreements which uh are very clear um documents that if um a gran

tee does not perform uh the state uh and through deed um is required ired to go and collect that grant money back um much to uh uh many people's maybe disbelief uh we actually do that um and in some cases we chase people around the world in order to get money back uh and have been successful and and so that is part of uh how we deal with businesses today um secondly there's also grants for services uh that in some cases may go over $500,000 uh and that's where we're providing money to others to

perform services on our behalf and paying for staff and they uh serving others like uh the last discussion um and in those cases they make applications and you negotiate the um the uh outcomes uh and the measurements associated with it uh and uh the department would then reimburse the the individual grantee based on its achievement of those uh of those goals that they set out in the application uh and then lastly uh there's capital investment uh projects uh that um we administer through the capi

tal investment budget uh that already requires uh significant consultation with MMB uh the department of administration's design guidelines uh Etc and there are very very specific uses of uh state capital investment dollars as you likely know uh already in our grant already in our grant contracts uh furthermore the legislature uh often determines what um we will pay for and what the reasons for doing those grants uh that those grants are I just will mention that all of these programs are reimbur

sement based uh that we run uh and so uh grantees are not re receiving money until they actually perform the services by the uh pieces that they're uh that they set out to buy or do what they set out to do uh in the in the grant contract uh and we do close out collect reports on all of these uh all of these projects uh of which we do roughly I would say 700 of these a year uh and uh we do probably less than a hundred that would go over $500,000 and M chion if I could say something before we go o

n to Deputy Commissioner Mark major as you look at the A4 Amendment what is also a little concerning is if you look at Western subdivision 8 it doesn't take into consideration as uh Deputy Commissioner McKinnon says is that these programs are reimbursed reimbursement based so this says uh before issuing any Economic Development or Workforce Development Grant of $500,000 or more so are they able to do it if it's less than $500,000 if it's is it $499,000 right um and then it goes on to say before

implementing any new grant program the commissioner I naturally assume on the line uh 1.8 that commissioner means commissioner of deed must submit draft measurements to the commissioner of of of management and budget now you got another commissioner now and another agency you want to pull in this to help administer uh the work that is supposed to be done by deed uh and then the last line of it or at least the last sentence uh uh if you look at line 1.12 it says after cons consultation the commis

sioner must incorporate measurements agreed upon uh through consultation with the commissioner of management and budget into grant applications requests for proposals and contracts well there is no request that says that there had to be an agre that that there had to be a Grant application uh that's filled out a certain way that had to be um approved by uh the commissioner of management and budget so it's now you're having another agency serve as the Watchdog for lack of better word of another a

gency and you're putting on additional layer for the government to govern themselves uh and so I just think that this uh A4 amendment is well-intentioned but it uh but it probably doesn't meet uh uh their reporting uh that it's necessary and deed already does these things so if we could go to and just get any comments from uh Deputy Commissioner Mark major that would be great Mr Majors thank you madam chair members of the committee I just want to add that um that's uh what Deputy Commissioner Mc

Kinnon said it holds true for the Workforce Development grants as well where we are invoice uh agency's invoice and we reimburse um but I also like to add on the Workforce Development all I mentioned earlier when we were talking about the 10% that our our grants range from 40 to $750,000 all grantees actually are required to submit data on the individuals that they're serving through a system what we call WorkForce One um which generates the exact information I think that we're looking for here

and under uh I think statute 116 L 976 it actually provides the parameters in which uh the the the uniform report card um we're supposed to report out on which we do do um that report card is actually on actually online uh so that anyone can go on and look at the dashboard about how programs are doing doing so we are very um transparent about our reporting um and then in terms of the U reimburse we again we're in a reimbursement situation like uh Deputy Commissioner McKinnon mentioned earlier so

thank you okay any other discussion Senator Nelson uh thank you madam chair well um just a couple things I I I'm concerned because um earlier today um we repealed 116 l17 uh subdivision 5 and um I could pull that up here again to look at it but what that does that that requires priorities um that requires that we show the value of the project and so when I see that we have removed that entire subdivision that would be subdivision five I find that concerning and when I look at the A4 I mean you

know if you don't know where going you're probably going to end up somewhere else that's just kind of a fact of life and if we don't know the priorities that we're seeking and we don't have an evaluation to see oh did we how did we do um we're not going to achieve the goals that we're we're seeking and so um I am concerned about the earlier movement today that um removed uh that was um removing subdivision 5 in section 116 l17 uh that's statutes 2022 and so when I look at the amendment here befo

re us today in the A4 uh this is just specific and it's not towards all the it's just the larger grants um $500,000 grants and so when there's a couple Commissioners listed in the in the amendment uh Senator Champion which certainly I understand perhaps um I've never been one to expand government uh unnecessarily but what I would say is when you see the commissioner within this statute we know it's the deed commissioner because of the context that it's in uh and then of course um then it does br

ing in certainly the MMB commissioner and again it I think this is like necessary even more so because of what we repealed earlier today um so I I renew my motion that we do uh pass the A4 uh that we do know what it is that we're measuring what the priorities are and also um that there must be a report uh and so I um I would renew my motion for the A4 and before I do that I also want to say the other piece I was very concerned about in repealing uh 116 l17 subdivision 5 it appears that there's n

o repayment uh if the grant uh is not if not completed so that's a different subject but I would renew my motion that we support the A4 um Madam uh chair Senator Champion so a couple things so uh thank you madam chair Senator Nelson thank you for articulating your your concerns uh Senator Nelson I'm not certain if you were here when we talked about that the uh information that is a part of the repellar is already back into the other aspects of this bill so what they did was that they did some re

sling and move those things back into the other parts of the bill uh there was one section of one notion that Senator dreim felt like the wording still didn't quite line up with the reshuffling and there's already ongoing commitment to take a look at that and see if there's anything there um so that so so those priorities that you you thought would were removed are still there the value is still there and the repealer um is talked about you you also covered the issue of of if someone doesn't ful

fill the contract and whether they're going to be repaid you don't get the money if you don't fulfill the contra contract so there's nothing to be repaid because if you did not fulfill the contract you don't get the money I remind us here uh even when we talk about nonprofit sometime people talk about it as if there's a direct appropriation to a nonprofit and a truck is backed up to uh deed and the money is put in and it just goes off to the nonprofit that's not the way this goes it's reimbursab

le means you got to do the work first that's after you got a contract and priorities and measurements and everything is there uh and then you have to do the work and then you submit an invoice that invoice will be looked at scrutinized all this other stuff that happens and if you've done the work for that invoice then you get paid and then you got to do the work again and that that that uh uh system sort of repeats itself so we don't have to worry about the issue of being repaid the last thing t

hat I'll say around the A4 Amendment unless there's someone else that wants to say something even in the A4 with us expanding government and having other um uh Commissioners looking at the work of deed which is unnecessary uh when you look at lines 1.12 to 1.14 it even expands it I briefly talked about it because it expands the mmb's in uh uh participation around Grant applications request for proposals contracts it just expands it and last but certainly not least we can assume what if mnb commi

ssioner doesn't agree with the commissioner of deed about something then guess what I guess it's missing from the contract or from the agreement because you only say that after consultation it must incorporate measurements agreed upon through consultation I just believe that expends government it provides oversight that's not necessary and I would ask this committee not to adopt the A4 Amendment unless there's something else from one of my testifiers then we should be able to go for it thank you

Senator champion thank any other discussions on the A4 Amendment okay all those opposed say Nay Nay Nay all those that are in favor say a I thank you so the motion fails I'm sorry okay any other discussions on the bill okay and Senator Champion moves to A3 Amendment A3 as amended by the AA yes that's my Amendment okay all those in favor say I I all those that oppose say nay no the motion passes thank you Senator Champion all right is that another that he has anything else on this bill Madam cha

ir on the policy Bill the FL okay uh Senator Pam moves that c 54027 be passed as amended and that staff be instructed to make any minor Corrections they find all those in favor say I I all those that oppos say a the motion passes thank you Senator Champion you can have your chair back thank [Applause] you thank you Senator muhamed thank you Senator Muhammad and thank you to the committee for consideration of Senate file uh 4027 as amended uh members uh now uh next up on our agenda we have Senate

file 352 from uh with Senator mqu Senator mqu if you'd be so kind to come to the testifiers table and I think we also have Aaron Zimmerman and Dr uh Angela k uh gford Gord for gford gford uh could you approach the testifiers table are they here mhm all right and as they are being seated Senator uh mqu before you get into the Crut of your bill I recognize that you have um an A2 amendment is that correct that's correct Mr chair all right members uh let's see Senator Muhammad moves adoption of the

a A2 Amendment um uh is that your motion Senator Muhammad so moved any questions on the A2 Amendment CN n the um all in favor say I all those opposed say no the motion prevails the A2 is adopted we will now go from there okay Senator mqu you can uh give us context to your uh Bill and then a reminder to the testifiers when she is uh uh completes her opening then then you all will testify and you'll be given two minutes each in order to um uh talk about this bill so thank you and welcome to the c

ommittee uh Senator mcoy thank you Mr chair members of the committee um and thank you for agreeing to hear Senate file 3502 which provides a 1 million onetime $1 million onetime appropriation to pund to support lgbtqia plus to us families who have either relocated or are already living in Minnesota um last year we passed crucial legislation that established Minnesota as a safe haven for transgender and LGB individuals and this legislation has become a Beacon of Hope and compassion for families t

hat have been on the receiving end of anti-lgbtq attacks Nationwide families from across the country are making Minnesota their new home and now it's time for us to provide needed support and access to services for those new motans and for motans who have lived here for a very long time Senate file 3502 will relieve pressures on our Healthcare Workforce strengthen our economy and ensure that Minnesota is a place where all minnesotans including and especially lgbtqia plus individuals and families

can Thrive and I hope I can count on your support uh thank you Senator McQuade and who would you like to testify first first uh thank you to testify if you um identify yourself for the record and go forward yep my name is Aaron Zimmerman uh my proun are Heim and I'm with P fund Foundation uh thank you chair champion and members of the committee um uh pund Foundation has a 36 year leg as the lgbtq plus Community Foundation serving our individuals families and organizations here in Minnesota and

across the Upper Midwest through our scholarships for students and grants to small businesses and nonprofits pund Foundation was awarded several million has awarded several million dollars um over our history and utilizes a community-driven review process our foundation is truly for and by lgbtq plus communities last year's passage of the trans Refuge bill was a critical step forward to protect Healthcare Providers and patients we've seen firsthand that people from all across the country are mov

ing here to seek safety refuge and a better life for themselves and for their children since the trans Refuge law passed pund has convened and surveyed lgbtq plus people and providers of gender affirming care across the Upper Midwest to identify our community's biggest challenges and needs data from a community survey shows in the first 8 months of the trans Refuge law 130 individuals and 62 families have or are soon moving to Minnesota to seek Refuge additionally 89% said they need gender affir

ming care across all our listening sessions surveys and convenings access to Affordable and affirming healthc care and economic economic insecurity were consistently top challenges this bill addresses those top challenges by dedicating funds to expand Minnesota's gender affirming care Workforce supplying Healthcare facilities uh with funds needed to hire train and support providers in this field providers will then seek the job skills necessary to deliver highquality competent and affirming care

for hundreds of patients in need we estimate that we could add seven or more trained gender affirming care providers over two years and each new provider could result in 250 more patients treated each month thank you so very much Mr Z for your uh testimony if you have one last line you can say it but if you got more than that then your next testifier is going to have to take over no that's okay thank you so much are you sure you got it all right to the next testifier if you state your name for

the record that would be great sure good afternoon uh thank you chair champion and committee members my name is Dr Angela Cade gepford I use the them pronouns I'm the chief education officer and the medical director of the gender health program at Children's Minnesota where our team is committed to providing Essential Health Care for transgender and gender diverse youth I'm here today to express our support for Senate file 3502 in 2023 after the passage of the trans Refuge bill um and while stat

es around us began to ban or restrict care our gender health program at Children's Minnesota saw a 30% increase in new patient calls to our Clinic these families are calling hopeful that we'll be ready to welcome them with open arms and help them get the care that they need unfortunately our hands are already incredibly full prior to the passage of the trans Refuge Bill our waiting list at Children's Minnesota was over a year long and we've watched it grow my colleagues in the Twin Cities who sp

ecialized in this Healthcare outmatched by the demand the trans Refuge law was an important first step to protect Essential Health Care for transgender and gender diverse Youth and now we need to improve access to that care what I like about the approach in this particular bill is that we're using the expertise we already have in Minnesota to increase access to developmentally appropriate highquality care according to well-established clinical guidelines it's an apprentiship approach that levera

ges the expertise and Care Systems we already have here in the Twin Cities without sacrificing the excellent quality of healthc care that motans have come to deserve and and need here in this state this investment in health care infrastructure will not only improve health outcomes it attracts families to our state who bring with them Workforce skills Financial Resources real estate investment and contribute to a culture of inclusion we live in a country where far too many trans youth are harasse

d and scared to engage in their daily lives as their authentic selves I'm proud of Minnesota for being a state that acknowledges all young people deserve to be their wonderful and authentic selves and protect protecting their legal right to Access healthcare but it's time to take the next step it's time to make good on our promise to have room in our arms to embrace the families that need us it's time to make sure that transgender and gender diverse young people can step into the beauty and joy

of fully thriving as the gifts they are to them to their families and to us here in the state of Minnesota thank you so very much thank you Senator McQuade and thank you committee members there you go thank you so very much uh any uh questions for the testifiers I know I do have a question I recognize the pund has been around is it since 1987 uh and um and and and and and can you tell me I think you started to say that over the next two years that that you're looking to serve an additional 250 p

eople with this allocation is that correct and if so correct tell me if that's correct and two how many have you did you serve in 202 uh 3 and 2022 uh thank you uh chair champion this would be a new a new program with pund Foundation we have been you know last year we were awarded funding through our Equity Fund Small Business program we testified here last year and that program has been going really well but this is identifying a new uh you know a new situation as we're approaching the one-year

anniversary of the trans Refuge Bill and Mr chair uh uh Senator M thank you Mr chair and I think the specific um the stat that you heard and we're trying to tease out there was with this grant program um they can train seven new providers who could see up to 250 patients per month more than we're seeing right now so it would clear up that backlog and uh to the testifier um I believe last year we gave you how much money H how much was it uh for pund foundation it was 750,000 to be spent over the

banum um in Partnership Quorum uh the Chamber of Commerce got a $250,000 appropriation any other questions cuz I someone said last year that we didn't give pund and others some money I wanted to make sure that we were very clear what we had given some some money last year um uh Senator dreim thank you um I I guess my question has to do with the Workforce Development piece o of the bill um you I'm just a little foggy on how this fits into Workforce Development um you know we're going to hire peo

ple is what I heard uh seven new positions um but can can we just get into what the roles will be of these people and and um yeah go from there Senator MC thank you Mr chair and Senator dreim and I can definitely let my experts speak to this more but um it's it the plan is to train seven new physicians in a specific type of Health Care that is in great Demand right now with very few providers providing it and so it would be apprenticeship like where they would be training with um providers that

already provide that care um but it is highly specialized and so it is very uh timec consuming and um difficult to break into and so this kind of financial support will help develop our Workforce in this way with with the grants and I can ask my testifiers if I covered it accurately any other anything else from one of the testifiers are you okay with that answer yeah yeah I think that that soon as you're follow up thank you chair and thank you for the answer so um is this like aedit ated program

or is I I this is all new to me so please help elaborate and help me understand uh what kind of program it is who does the training is is the individual that does the training on staff um Senator M thank you Mr chair and I I'll turn it over to Dr gford to talk a little bit more about it but it's um uh specific it's it's a specialty and within Healthcare and so it's learning from people who have that specialty I'll I'll Dr gford has it so I'll let them explain sure yeah thank you if you identify

yourself with the record and go forward sure uh Dr gford again uh answering thank you for your question Senator so uh there are a number of accredited fellowships in pediatric medicine and there is no specifically credited Fellowship in uh essential healthcare for Trans and gender diverse youth however those of us in the Twin Cities who provide this care have been doing it over decades and are following um both both National and international standards of care it's important to us that anyone e

lse in this state who's providing care to young people have the benefit of our expertise and our training when they are providing that care so I think there's a lot of well-intended um Physicians and other Healthcare clinicians that really want to help young people we want to make sure that they help them um in a really high quality way so this would establish uh apprenticeship program for already practicing um Physicians so these are people who are done with their training they're currently ly

seeing patients in practice but they can come spend time with one of the programs here in the Twin Cities who's already providing this highquality care to help them learn how to do it in a way that is consistent with our International standards and guidelines uh Senor JM thank you and thank you dror for the explanation um so these seven providers that will be trained uh where will they office out of to the testifier yeah it depends where they apply from so some of them may be in the Twin Cities

area some of them may be in Greater Minnesota right now the bulk of our care is um really concentrated in the Twin City's metro area so many people are traveling even in the state of Minnesota several hours for care Senator joim thank you um so I I noticed on your website the P fund website excuse me it it shows five STS uh so we're covering more than just Minnesota uh um with the work you do um so how do we know that the resources are going to be used and stay here in in Minnesota uh to the tes

tifier uh Senator McQuade or or uh thank you chair champion and thank you for that question uh we uh are a five state region uh Regional Foundation um and we do Grant making across those five states but we like similarly with our deed funding from last year we are very diligent about making sure that those resources stay in Minnesota to impact minnesotans um so with this particular program you know so pund we're a grant maker what we would do is put an open call to healthcare institutions based

in Minnesota providing care in Minnesota and ask already licensed Physicians and other healthc care providers at the top of their you know fully licensed um uh role to Common Shadow or to Apprentice under an already established care provider and then take that care back to their home place so we're hopefully going to see providers across the state that it won't just be in the Twin Cities it will likely still have a a pretty intense uh intensive kind of concentration there but we are seeing as a

fstate foundation people are traveling across state lines to get healthare in this state and we want them to get Quality Health Care and so how can we best um support Minnesota through this process and just so I'm clear so are you saying that you're going to train seven individuals and then what do you project so you're projecting that those seven individual idual are then going to also train up to 250 more individuals just so so you can give me some clarity that would be great to the testifier

or or senator make Mr chair those providers would be able to see um 250 patients per month and so it would um provide a lot more capacity for health care in the state of Minnesota and and develop the workforce to provide that healthc care and Senator mqu how do we come up with the number 250 per month what assures us that they're going to see 250 patients a month senator make wait um Mr chair I'd like to turn over to my testifier uh thank you uh uh chair Champion um that is an approximation of c

ourse we surveyed um six of the uh five of the six largest uh gender affirming care providers in the Twin Cities here um and ask them for an estimation of if they were to bring on a new um Apprentice or you know someone to participate in that program that's what they estimated it was a range of course but really it averaged around 250 patients all right any other questions for the testifiers senator Pratt thank you um thank you Mr chair and uh you know let me start off by just saying I'm I'm con

cerned with this being uh a Workforce Development Fund uh request we just had long and lengthy conversations about the stresses that are on Workforce Development right now um and you know I think if if that's the the kind of the tone and tenor of in in the position of the committee I think we have to look long and hard especially when this is probably based on the conversation more appropriate uh to be in the Health and Human Services uh committee rather than than the jobs committee although I d

o want to I do want to compliment uh our testifiers for coming in with only 5% uh for administrative cost I think you win the prize for being lowest so far this year thank you and and hopefully a um a standard for others uh that are that are seeking this type of funding um but Mr chair I was wondering you know um the last the last 990 I could find uh for pund was the 2021 tax year filed in 2022 I'm wondering can you tell me how much you had in uh in revenues and contributions uh in 2022 and 23 t

o the testifier um I I just have to think our fiscal year we're on a July 1 fiscal year what can I ask specifically what what kind of date range you're looking at and I'm also happy to provide our most recent 990 I'm so sorry I'm happy to take a fiscal oh thank you Mr chair and I apologize for the lack of protocol there for a minute my uh my mistake uh Mr chair and and uh uh to the testifier I'm you know I'm just looking for your fiscal year you know what would you report on the tax form to the

testifier thank you uh chair Champion I also apologize for the lack of um procedure there um in our last fiscal year you know we our our revenues were approximately 1.5 million between 1 and 1.5 million this year we're anticipated to be closer to to 2.5 million in revenues U to to testify what did you say the last number of your anticipated amount was for this current fiscal year 2.5 million thank you uh Senator Pratt well thank you Mr chair and um you know back in 2021 we were you know we were

looking at less than a million as as was filed on the tax form so my concern was we were going to be more than doubling uh what was being requested with that type of growth I would think a lot of this work could be done within you know organically within your organization but you know I will say again I think this is a inappropriate use of the Workforce Development Fund I think this ought to be in the in the uh Health and Human Services committee and to to testify that that anticipated 2.5 milli

on that you are anticipating for this year does that include the the $750,000 that came from this committee uh thank you uh chair Champion um that would only include uh the first half of it because it's a reimbursable grant we don't get the funding until we do the work and can provide adequate um receipt of that actual work so no that only includes partial like plus the amount that deed has so maybe an additional 300 out of that total yeah thank you to the testify I just wanted to make sure that

we the committee had that clarity as well Senator mqu were you going to say something uh no Mr CH I was just acknowledging that they might need my vote in a different committee and I was going to ask them that all right Senator Nelson oh thank you uh Mr chair and uh thank you for bringing this bill I had a few questions that some were answered as we went through the other questions but some some remain and um I I would just note that um I do believe this bill rightfully needs to be elsewhere do

n't see the uh Workforce Development and job skills training really appropriate for the medical field uh have you worked with the U Minnesota Board of medical practice uh so I'm I'm just somewhat concerned about about that aspect of it because if I understand correctly the million dollars is to train seven new Physicians is what I heard but then I think you U maybe clarified that a little bit that it's not training physic I we have two medical schools in the state of Minnesota um and uh certainl

y the U ofm and Mayo Clinic um and so but training new seven training seven new Physicians to see 250 patients per month is what I heard and that's about 35 visits per month or about 1.75 visits per day per person that you have here so I'm you know somehow the numbers so the training just doesn't line up with what I would think and you talked about having people work to the top of their lure which is always important in uh everywhere but particularly in the medical community and so I I am very I

'm not sure what type of job skills and Workforce Development this million dollars would be used for because I don't believe that pund Foundation actually trains people specifically in the medical uh world and so what would this million dollars be used for I understand what what what you're saying seven new Physicians new positions maybe that's it new positions maybe not new Physicians um but to see 250 more clients per month which is you know 1.7 visits per position or physician per per day so

what would the money be used for I'm I'm just not clear about that uh uh anyone in particular okay to testify I identify yourself for the record just so the record knows who's speaking okay uh you want me identify myself again um Aon Zimmerman uh thank you uh chair Champion um that's a great question so pund Foundation is a grant maker similar to other community foundations you might find across the state of Minnesota our focus is really on lgbtq community so no we are not um in fact training um

any of the Physicians were not a medical provider you know we're not a medical school there's some great ones uh what we do is we provide grants uh to institutions including small businesses but also our what we're proposing here is the the different Hospitals and Clinics uh that might be interested in providing this uh type of training so we are kind of acting as a a broker if you will in the sense that it's really important for us to connect uh on a CommunityWide basis the the institutions th

at would be best equipped to do this work and uh Senator Nelson oh yes thank you uh Mr chair so that that's that helps clarify a little bit it's uh grants to different institutions uh who and so are those institutions if we're talking about medical training that would be our two medical schools are they asking for grants for this specific type of training and uh do we know is it already in uh the medical training that is being that that they're seeking uh to the testifier and Mr chair I'm going

to talk turn thank you Mr chair I'm going to turn to Dr gford I also um want to just be really clear that in our de it's um it's Workforce Development and job skills a a portion a large portion of that is this apprenticeship program so it's for already licensed Physicians it's not um training people to become Physicians but it's already licensed Physicians who are going to work with other licensed Physicians who have expertise in a specific kind of healthcare delivery in order to be able to to d

eliver that Healthcare and um in concert with the you know international national guidelines and and evidence um but it's also for wraparound services to help um lgbtqia plus individuals um improve their economic and employment uh standing self-sufficiency and and have Pathways out of poverty as well and so that's where the Workforce Development piece comes in is it's a you know part of it is a specific Workforce Development and then the other part is the broadly Workforce Development in the lgb

tqa plus Community um and then Dr gford might want to speak more to the medical c m can you clarify something that you said you said that a portion of the proceeds would be used for the for the training of the Physicians and and that there's this whole notion of lining up and giving grants to those institutions because pund doesn't have Physicians under its opes but you then said wraparound services so if these grants are going to institutions and those institutions have patients cuz they're doc

tors it sounds like where would the wraparound Services uh fit into your analysis um thank you Mr chair and I I think that's the important part is that um the there are other organizations in the state of Minnesota who also provide those wraparound services so you know someone is able to access the healthc care that they need to to live their full lives as themselves and then there's other services that are needed to be provided by other organizations and and I they would apply for this competit

ive Grant through pund um that would be delivering those wraparound Services related to Workforce Development and long-term economic self-sufficiency and then how much of the $1 million would be used for competitive grants because I somehow I missed that but but competitive grants so so how much of this will be used for competitive grants uh thank you uh chair Champion uh all but 5% for the administrative and technical assistance overhead so $950,000 at minimum if not more a portion going toward

s that physician training and a portion to other smaller nonprofit organizations who are providing those wrap round Support Services to lgbtq communities okay um Senator Nelson I I jumped in but I just wanted to clarify something that was being said Senator Nelson and recognize members that we have until 2:30 and we have some other bills that we have to do as well uh Senator Nelson uh thank you Mr chair I appreciate the clarification that you were seeking as well um so I still have I mean there

are specific spe so when when you use words like apprenticeships medical apprenticeships those are very specific things or medical training or so I'm very concerned that this it it sounds like some of the things you're trying to achieve need to really be looked at elsewhere I would be looking through the health committee uh because of the training that you're talking about so when you're talking about training in the medical world that really does need to go through go to health uh certainly we

need to hear from the Minnesota uh Board of medical practice I mean there's just so many uh un un I I just think this is the wrong venue or maybe it's not the wrong venue Mr chair maybe uh I will just make a motion that this be re-referred to health uh Senator Muhammad um thank you Mr chair and I appreciate my colleagues for the discussion thank you sen for being in the bill I think there's some confusion one I disagree with with Senator Nelson that this should go to a different committee becaus

e I it's clear that what we're talking about is Workforce and economic development I think there's some confusion around whether some of this money will be used for economic development or for Workforce um in terms of like granting other organizations I think that can be cleared up as I assume the bill is going to be laid over but I think that this bill belongs in this committee and in this jurisdiction Senator Nelson any followup and then I can probably provide some some clarity as well because

because what I think I heard is is on the um Workforce side and and what they're articulating as the justification for being here is because you have these these doctors and I did hear apprentices and I recognize that in this committee when you use that sort of term that's a term of art for us right uh and doctors are usually not included in that term of art right um but but there being this dis ability or need to enhance their capacity in this area in order to uh provide uh uh service to not o

nly the the clients that they see which I heard is probably around 250 right but also them being in the position to also train someone else and say hey here's here's how you provide gender firming care uh for you know those sort of things I think that's what I heard and then there's this and and so those grants in order to help those doctors would would be given to other institutions that would apply for Grant is what I think I'm hearing right and I think I heard 950,000 of the million dollars w

ould go there the wraparound Services uh would be for other organizations who would compete for competitive grants to provide wraparound services to the Target population that would would need the treatment that the other doctors are being trained around and and just really helping to make certain that they get the support that they need I don't hear Economic Development as Senator Muhammad said but I but that's what I believe I heard and if I'm wrong or right please correct me now cuz because g

uess what we all going down together if we're wrong I just want you to know but I want us to be really clear so to the testifier uh chair Champion just a quick point of clarification on the I can is there are two Grant pools within the 950,000 all of it targeted towards lgbtq communities s and to the the medical field which is seeing an undo amount of like an unprecedented amount of need right now and um the workforce that's Landing here the the families that are landing here they are also needi

ng those wraparound support service so of the 950 there are two pools both aimed at Economic Development one specifically within the medical field and one more broadly speaking and Mr chair I think Dr gford wants to add something as well yeah thank you chair Champion I just wanted to clarify um for Senator Nelson we're not talking about um training new doctors we're not talking about becoming a medical school we're not talking about any of those things I'm I happen to be the chief education offi

cer at Children's Minnesota so I'm in charge of our 800 trainees that come through our children's hospital every year so I'm well versed in the medical training what we're talking about is um say you live 3 hours from here in a small rural town in Minnesota and you have a hockey team and they need a a sports medicine doctor for the hockey team and no one in that Community understands how to provide sports medicine they learned a little bit about it in medical school but they've been on a practic

e for 10 years and they really don't have the skill set sharp so they reach out to someone here in the Twin Cities at Tria at Twin Cities Ortho someone who really specializes in providing Youth Sports Medicine and they say can I come and train with your team for 6 months so I can get really good at this go back to the hockey team you know up in Mora Minnesota and be their sports medicine doctor that's what we're talking about so we're talking about board certified Minnesota licensed Physicians w

ho are already in practice that are lacking a specific skill set for an underserved and targeted population of young people who can't get the Essential Health Care they need and training up to seven Physicians who are already in practice at institutions like children's Minnesota or henan Healthcare or places that are already providing high quality care to be able to bring that care then to the communities of minnesotans and new families that are moving here and Mr chair uh the last Senator M tha

nk you Mr chair the last thing I'll add is that we worked with Deed on this bill and on this language too just to make sure that it is the right venue and that was the feeling from the agency as well as as the folks who are supporting this bill is that this really is related to um Workforce Development and and job skills and an economic opportunity for a targeted group of people uh why you never fin Senator Nelson thank you Mr chair we kind of thank you you know I just my question though is if t

he pund foundation is the right recipient of this I understand what what you're hoping to do I understand though that what I don't understand is how the pund foundation is going to advance whether it be apprenticeships or preceptorships or any of these things I just don't see the connection with what how pund is going to connect with those already established medical institutions practices training preceptors all of those things I'm missing that connection which is why um I think perhaps it need

s to go to the health a committee I will withdraw my motion Mr chair only because I see the makeup of the committee and what what has transpired with with every other Amendment but I want to be clear that I do not understand the connection between this training money for medical providers and how the pund uh fits into that I I don't see that I think it it it needs to be uh looked at in a broader context of our full Medical um Arena uh Senator Muhammad um Senator McQuade um I think we're seeing s

ome wraparound services without job trading uh skills is there some job trading component for the individuals Senator makeway um thank you Mr chair and thank you Senator Muhammad for the question so there are um for for the two two Grant pools the people who would be applying for this the specific pool that you're referencing Senator Nelson are the healthcare institutions themselves to house those Physicians with Physicians uh that are already have that specialty and then to your point Senator M

uhammad there are other organizations in the state of Minnesota who provide those wraparound Services whether it's um interview prep or support for resume writing or things like clothes right shelter violence prevention things that that prevent people from entering into the workforce and so those um those organizations are the ones that would be in that second pool that serve this population that we're talking about to enter the workforce and and if I could ask this question and in that those fo

lks in that second pool how many people are you intending to uh serve in that pool um thank you Mr TR for the question I that is up to the organizations who are applying so let's say an organization like uh rainbow health is saying that we are going to help you know 45 people get into um to you know get everything that they need in order to enter the job market because of XYZ services that we provide and then you might have a different organization like out front Minnesota that's like we could d

o a 100 because we do this really specific piece and so I think it depends on the organization and the services that they provide and and then capacity and and how many you know how much time it takes to provide that service so it depends on the organization and it depends on their role in these wraparound Services some organizations do things like um peer support groups in mental health that can serve more people than maybe something that's uh labor intensive like finding shelter and so Senator

mqu uh uh even though there's the intent to lay this bill over for possible conclusion and there's a a variety of concerns at the table um there might be some help because one of the things it says make Grant Statewide for Workforce Development and skills right and not um that that gets a a little fuzzy even when you think in terms of like competitive grants if there's a process for that how that process will be considered who will be um uh doing that right because this committee sometimes is v

ery detailed about those things like for an example if someone is going to say I'm going to provide 200,000 they're going to ask how many people are you looking to serve right uh how do you come up with that number uh and then it also throws the committee off just a little even though we'll continue to talk about this is when money is given when you think in terms of your two buckets money's given in the medical area for for um doctors right because the first question is that training should rea

lly be coming from some place else right or who should be paying for that training someplace else so that's why we're asking the questions about Workforce and jobs and all that other stuff because the committee is feeling I'm sure a little anxious about this whole notion of spending money on doctors okay although we love Doctors Don't We Love Doctors we all love doctors uh uh Senator dreim thank you thank you chair and and I I assume this is getting laid over yes and I I do have the A3 but I kno

w we're running short on time um and I know we have a couple more bills to get through uh if this does move forward I would really love it if my A3 reporting language which Senator we put on I put I have an amendment on every bill that comes through just reporting back to us on how well the program is doing um I won't offer the amendment but I just would like to work with you if this does move forward that we put some kind of language on it and and thank you yes senator and I'm certain that Sena

tor mcoy would also be willing to help talk through some of the language there and so we can get a clear understanding um uh um and so that is what I'll say there Senator Pratt well thank you Mr chair and and um I think I had some of the same uh key words Peak my attention through this discussion and and one thought for you and the author would be um we already have a process for for uh fulfilling competitive grants and that's that's through deed we have an established protocol we have establish

ed criteria for what is appropriate coming out of the Workforce Development Fund and I just have a concern that we're going to be making this appropriation potentially uh to a third party to basically do the work that deed already does and it seems a bit redundant and another reason why I think this is probably an an inappropriate use of our funds any other questions or comments for the testifiers seeing that let me say that senator may thank you for your patience and thank you to the testifiers

for your patience and uh and willingness to answer some questions and help bring clarification uh but again this bill will be laid over for possible inclusion and as we do with any Bill if it makes it you know to to be included in our Omnibus Bill we try to talk to you and try to figure out the best ways by which to deal with it in real time time and and how to make sure that it lines up with Workforce Development CU that is a big issue from this committee versus like general fund dollars right

it still jurisdiction still becomes an issue but we'll certainly continue to talk to you about it any any closing comments uh senator may Quade because we always like to give the author an opportunity to say something in closing thank you Mr chair and and members for the really great discussion and I appreciate the questions and I think it shows that you do a lot of good diligence in your committee around the work that you do um similarly we did a lot of really D good due diligence on this bill

to make sure that it does fit your committee and I hope that uh when time comes time to put your Omnibus Bill together that this makes it in thank you so much Senator M thank you to the testifiers thank you so much for being here with that send it file 352 will be laid over for possible inclusion members we uh if we're going to try to get through these last two bills we're going to ask the others who are coming up that you you know be as succinct and as thoughtful as possible we have Senate fou

l 4435 from Senator how we have Christy Sovereign and David Booth could you come up to the testifiers table as well um Senator her uh what once you are I'm here oh I said Senator how I'm sorry Senator her Senator how is on my mind I'm sorry about that I don't know how and why he's on my mind Senator her so thank you senator mahamed for reminding me that I said Senator how instead of Senator her uh uh Carlin do fontain wasn't going to give me any help was support she was going to sit there and le

t me say the wrong word say wrong name Senator her her I know who you are thank you if you identify yourself with the record give us your opening statements and then your two testifiers will be able to uh testify for two minutes each Senator her thank you chair champion and members uh Senator Fong her is here um so uh Senator file 40 4435 is about special Olympic USA 2026 in Minnesota and when it comes to Special Olympics I'm reminded and also inspired by the story of Loretta CLA Bourne who was

born with physical and intellectual disabilities yet she overcome the odds and won gold medals under many dis disciplines more importantly the Special Olympics allow Miss Clare Bourne to discover her gifted abilities where she became fluent Spanish Russian and American Sign Language despite her intellectual U disability so I'm honored uh to be asked to carry cile 4435 to provide an opportunity for our state to make a one-time investment in an exciting and meaningful event in the summer in the su

mmer of 2026 Minnesota will be hosting the 2026 Special Olympics USA games the mission of the event is to create an inclusive event that celebrate ability Del delivers the highest quality experience for all who participate and leaves a legacy of positive change in Minnesota the event is projected to be one of the largest sporting events in 2026 over the course of the week-long program this event is an important and unique opportunity for Minnesota to elevate and event focus on disability Communi

ty a critical but at time Overlook part of our inclus inclusion and diversity effort of our state Additionally the event is anticipated to have a significant economic impact here in the Twin City nearly $75 million the cifi 4435 $4 million in one-time funding for 2026 special on the big games and I ask for your support members and chair champion and stand by to full question and my my testifier and include Miss christe Sovereign and David Booth and either of you can proceed thank you Senator her

uh we will now go to Christie uh Sovereign if you'll be so kind as to state your name for the record and provide us your two minutes of testimony welcome to the committee thank you Mr chair and members of the committee we really app appreciate the opportunity to be here and for your consideration of our bill and Senator her thank you I'm Christy Sovereign I'm the CEO for the 2026 Special Olympics USA games related to the bill the most important thing that I'd like you to take away is that while

the games will be anchored in sporting activity we're really hosting a humanitarian event the Special Olympics mission is to improve the lives of people with intellectual disability and it does so via a focus both on and off the field on the field we'll host 17 sporting competitions but off the field three important priorities will be Advanced the first is health and wellness healthy athletes is a Special Olympics program focused on addressing challenges that people with intellectual disability

have with Access to Health Services accordingly free health services free screenings will be provided to athletes during the games the second priority is advancing inclusion in youth we want inclusion to be a focused at the earliest ages possible therefore our efforts will include young athlete program which unifies children with and without disabilities from the ages of 2 to S it'll also include Champion schools Focus to grow the number of schools with Unified sports programming across the sta

te of Minnesota finally our third priority is athlete employment only 18.5% of people with intellectual disability are employed to the level of their ability we want to see the inclusivity of sport move to the workforce so our priorities in this space include a unified workfare that gives both athletes and corporations the tools that they need to address these statistics of under and unemployment the event is expected to generate an economic impact of over $75 million but more so we're looking t

o address an underserved community and funding is particularly important to enable these off- the- field priorities we're really Keen to bring min s together and with the platform we have leave a lasting Legacy of inclusion across the state thank you so very much thank you for your testimony thank you for that important information we will now go to uh uh Mr David Boo for your two minutes of testimony welcome to the committee state your name for the record thank you m Mr chair members of the com

mittee my name is David Booth I'm an athlete and member of the board of directors for Special Olympics I'm here on behalf of Special Olympics athletes and others from from the proud state of Minnesota to share a vision of what the USA games can bring to our great state of Minnesota Minnesota has made important strides to help people feel more included not excluded there are many health and wellness services offered and future Investments planned to help those without intellectual disabilities an

d with disabilities to create one Minnesota and for this we are grateful but there's always more work to be done the USA games and its platform of sports gives us a once- in a-lifetime opportunity to play the games we love while showing our appreciation as athletes to the people who've devoted time and resources to help us Prosper while at the same time unifying the community in Minnesota and Beyond through the power of sports these games in 2026 are an opportunity an opportunity for which Minne

sota can take the light that's been growing from the efforts conceived by all motans we have the chance to spread this light to the rest of the nation while showcasing The Unbelievable unity and resiliency of our athletes we are Minnesota the place of opportunities exist while helping to change the world for the better with your help Mr chair and members of the committee we can ensure that the 2026 Special Olympics USA games is able to set a path in ignite of movement from which we hope the rest

of the nation will follow thank you Mr chair and members of the committee for your time for for considering our fundraising request thank you so very much and we'll go to senator dreim for the A2 Amendment Senator dreim thank you chair and um Senator hurry as you know I always offer this amendment I I'm going to hold off I understand it's going to be laid laid on the table and just hope that Senator Champion will work with me on some reporting language moving forward I know we're short on time

um I love the Special Olympics so thank you both uh Senator I'd like to sign on to the bill I I think it's important I think this is something that we should do here in Minnesota um I I like the uh health screening I like the work the Special Olympics do um I had an uncle that worked really close down in Iowa and it changed his life his whole world the experience that he got working with the athletes and uh sorry so thank you for bringing it Forward I I really appreciate it and cheer if we have

funding I really think this is something that we should do um you love sports I love sports what a great opportunity to showcase the whole country Minnesota and I know money is tight but if we do have some funds I think this with 75 million economic impact to the Ste um the people that participate in these sports are so passionate and loving thank you and thank you her for bringing it forward thank you Senator Dre um uh Senator Pratt well thank you Mr chair and and I just want to you know uh rei

terate you know support for Special Olympics you guys do a great job but I do have just you know one business related question is is What's the total cost of putting on the event that and how much of that is coming from non-state government sources uh uh Miss Sovereign is that a question for you yeah Mr chair thank you for the question Senator um we expect that 90% of what'll be required to put on the games will be privately uh funded via corporations and and private donors so our ask for the 4

million is for 10% the last 10% to really make the games exceptional related to the Legacy components that I spoke of uh Senator Bratt thank you thank you Mr sh so just to clarify you know Senator dreim said we're expecting a 7075 million economic impact but the cost to put on the games is about 40 million yes thank you all right thank you all right uh Senator uh her notice I didn't call you Senator how this time Senator her um time is of the essence so can you give us just yes closing uh commen

ts and we'll go from there thank you sen Champion members and I definitely will add s j dhan as a co-author to the bill and we're um have some com commonality here D drein And I and I know sporting is an exciting activity but it's the humanity based and your more so C handang that we are connecting in that sense so I ask for your support thank you so very much uh and uh with that being said uh Senate file 4 4435 will be laid on the table for possible inclusion we ask Senator Hoffman to please co

me forward to present caile 4331 um I believe he also has testifiers Adam dunck JoJo uh Kil kjaro there we go uh please approach the table and Scott gerlier yes yes Scott's here too uh he please be on deck all right thank you all for being patient we do have a uh a a tough schedule here so senator give us your opening statements Mr chair members I want to spend the next 45 minutes talking about the importance of Minneapolis music scene as it relates to what we're doing uh in this uh committee I

can't even get Senator Champion to smile but caile 4331 is a bill providing appropriation to the taste of Minnesota Festival of course the foundation is a celebration of cultures community and Cuisine and you know the festival includes a wide variety of History music food Renown chefs and arts right Taste of Minnesota it's actually free unlike other festivals which cost hundreds of dollars to get in the doors with the public partnership helped to make this event inclusive accessible and to motan

s from all over here's the thing Mr chair the taste of Minnesota organizers have been intentional to include everyone and last year the taste had over 68% bipac and women owned vendors businesses artists staff and performers this year's Festival is going to exceed that and believe it or not you have a flyer in front of you and you might recognize a few of those uh artists that are on there Senator Champion I will not mention 1994 and anything like that but I with that I'm going to give this over

to Adam dunck and then Chef JoJo Kilimanjaro and then Scott gerer is here as well and there you go all right Mr dck welcome to the committee state your name for the record and we uh and provide your two minutes of testimony thank you Mr chair I'll try to be brief and keep it to a minute my name is Adam dunck I'm the president CEO of the Minneapolis downtown Council I'm here in strong support of this bill and and want to start by thanking Senator Hoffman for carrying it you Mr chair for hearing

it as well as the rest of the committee you only have to look at the last couple weeks to see what it's like downtown Minneapolis when there's a lot of things happening from a Big 10 women's and men's championship tournament uh to some conferences at the convention center as well as having Target and US Bank back in the office a little bit more than they have had over the the previous weeks so super excited to see what an extra 100,000 people does to downtown Minneapolis for its economic impact

and its social cohesion um as Senator Hoffman mentioned this event is not is is a free event so unlike having to pay to go see Taylor Swift or a Big 10 Basketball game this event is open to the public and accessible we also work hard with metrotransit to ride free rides last year there were uh thousand tens of thousands of free rides given on Metro Transit and lastly I just want to say Nicolet Avenue is Minnesota's Main Street and we love to Showcase it for this event we're extremely proud of th

e work the downtown improvement district does every day to keep it clean and green and safe and really proud to host this event look forward to making it even more successful in 2024 thank you Karo you are up next do we have the chef okay there you go if you state your name for the record and give us your two minutes a testimony thank you chair and everybody else uh I go by Chef JoJo kimaro Chef owner of TAMU Gand King a Kenyan Fusion Restaurant over the Riverside Neighborhood in South Minneapol

is I was a vendor last year at the taste of Minnesota and apart from it being a great day for sales for my business and of course great publicity it was an opportunity for Minnesota to Showcase its diversity in terms of the food offerings uh everywhere from classic American hamburgers to African to Asian Cuisine Mexican everything you can think of so it brought a cross-section of motans Downtown Minneapolis on Nicolet mall last but not least and of course it was a free event but last but not lea

st while a lot of our fellow motans are down uh in The Boundary Waters enjoying nature Fourth of July weekend most immigrants and Min uh transplants into Minnesota stay in town so this is a great opportunity for all of us to come together for this great fre event downtown Minneapolis nicholet mall and Minneapolis downtown also needs it thank Youk thank you so very much we're going to Scott uh gerer uh yes good morning uh my name is Scott gerer uh Mr chair committee members I serve as a director

of security for Taste of Minnesota and as you know Minneapolis of Minnesota has a long history of Hosting large and successful events last year Taste of Minnesota was just another one of those events as was pointed out we had over 100,000 people in downtown Minneapolis uh in order to do that and really if you think about z a successful event it's all about safety and creating a safe atmosphere for all the attendees we were able to do that last year and we'll be doing that this year with a larger

footprint but as you might imagine um creating safety is both complex and costly to do so we anytime you section off a large section of downtown Minneapolis put barricades and fencing around it uh weapons detection system systems and bring in private security as well as law enforcement from Minneapolis henen County the state of Minnesota uh that all adds the complexity but also creates a great sense of Safety and Security one of the added benefits we saw last year and with other events that we'

ve had in Downtown Minneapolis Super Bowl Etc is the connection the positive connection between law enforcement and the community anytime you can create that connection not during a crisis situation but get those police officers those Deputy sheriffs to interact with the community in positive uh it's positive method it really serves as almost a healing uh perspective for some of the challenges of course that we've seen in Minneapolis so very positive event we're looking very much forward to doin

g it again this summer and we look forward to your support thank you thank you so so very much for being here Senator Hoffman your closing comments before we go forward to lay this bill on on the table for possible inclusions thank you madam thank you uh Senator Champion Mr chair and members for the support last year on this absolutely fantastic thing and as Senator Pratt has a question he does and I I'm sorry that I was moving so fast trying to get you out of here that he's worried Senator Prat

t that I'm going to start talking about PR thank you Mr chair and and same same question I had for the other organization can you tell me what the total cost of the event is and and how much is coming from nonstate resources from agencies direct Grant testifiers uh they can come to the table yep come on up here identify yourself with the record and answer the question please yeah my name is Clayton Kerns uh and it's over $2 million um I'm sorry two million two over $2 million operating budget fo

r 24 so the state is picking up over almost 1.9 million of of a $2 million operating budget and only about 100 50,000 is coming from private sources it's a sponsor uh public private you know partnership is what we're looking for and uh we're hoping to get more sponsors this year Senator PR thank you Mr chair and and how much is the city uh I'm specifically looking at the state so the city's not putting in any money on this on this there is not a direct cash infusion from you got to wait until I

recognize you then you can be so H you can be enthusiastic about answering to the testifier uh the city is not putting a direct cash infusion into the event but they are supporting the event uh through other uh other ways senator Brett uh what otherwise no that's my questions Mr chair I just you know I was so impressed with the 90% coming from private private donations on the on the uh Special Olympics I was hoping we'd hear more about private and and partnership uh in covering the cost of this

program because it's it's a really great event um I just hope we can figure out a way that we can get better participation financially on it any other questions be uh for any of testify fires of Senator Hoffman first one was last year Senator Hoffman now you can give your closing comments before we lay uh uh sener file 4331 on the table for possible inclusion Mr chair thank you very much I think you're going to love the lineup this year cuz you know there's Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis are coming b

ack we got you're going to gavel me out but there's some great music that's absolutely the Minneapolis sound and I appreciate you being there and I appreciate your support and thank you very much for letting us show showcase this with that being said cile 43 31 will will be laid over for possible inclusion thank you so much Senator Hoffman members thank you for your patience today thank you also for looking at the um uh policy bill it went up on on Monday after committee thank you to uh staff wh

o was so helpful in that as well thank you Senator uh Muhammad for coming forward uh should I call you someone else okay Senator M Muhammed okay just don't call you how I got it uh thank you so very much with our business being concluded we are now [Music] adjourned