welcome to Minnesota Legislative Report our region's longestr running public affairs program Lawmakers from northeastern Minnesota are joining us today for a recap of the week's activities at the state capital This is your opportunity to call or email your legislative questions and have them answered live on the air Minnesota Legislative Report starts now Hello and welcome to the Minnesota Legislative Report I'm your host Tony Certich We're in the final two weeks of the legislative session which must be completed by May 19th There's still much work to be done on the state's two-year budget Will the legislature get done on time and what else might they be able to accomplish Tonight you can join the conversation Email or call in with your questions for the lawmakers that represent you To ask a question dial the phone number on your screen or you can also email your questions to askpbsnorth.org Each week we invite legislators from all across the region and from both political parties to join us on the show If they respond and are available we make room for as many as possible to share their views and answer your questions And joining us in studio today are two elected officials Representative Spencer Iggo is a Republican from Ovana Township representing District 7A and Representative Isaac Schultz is also a Republican from Elmdale Township representing District 10B Welcome to both of you and welcome your first time Representative Schultz Thank you It's uh great to be with you and your uh your viewers uh this evening Just excited to chat about this session There's a lot going on There is And let's dive in First and foremost let's talk about the state budget Uh we're going to start with uh Representative Igo Uh you chair a committee this year for the first time and actually co-chair You're both members of the House there's a 50-50 split and so you have co-chairs of committees and divided government and divided uh power sharing and so uh can you explain what it is to be the chair of a committee and what some of your responsibilities are beyond just being a state representative Yeah so being you know a co-chair in this legislative session what it's really all about is working with the other member the uh the other chair so that' be Mike Howard and we're we're the chairs of housing together um and our job is focusing on the state budget as it pertains to housing So mostly that's Minnesota Housing Finance Agency So our job there is to appropriate the dollars make sure we pay for the certain programs and streamline that through the process as we're hearing bills that don't even affect the budget So it's kind of a tricky process but really we just kind of navigate um a a committee process to keep bills in line and in order Um and we had our budget bill pass last week Uh so now that's moving towards what's called the conference committee And that conference committee is going to be the House and the Senate working together on what the final bill language needs to be because the Senate didn't write the same bill as us And I mean I'll argue the House bill is a better bill So we're going to work on trying to keep that one All right And we'll get back to the specifics of that bill and the budget Uh Representative Schultz first time on the show You come from central Minnesota Just for the viewers at home uh you are also have a a role a different job title as well You're a speaker prom I believe Is that correct What does that mean Viewers probably don't know what all those words mean together Speaker prom What is that additional responsibility that you have Yeah So in moments especially when the speaker of the house has to be off the floor whether uh she's in negotiations or if she needs to run to dinner or something like that or grabs grab a bite off the floor of the house then I have the chance to kind of uh guide the debate um from the rostrm um in the House chamber and to ensure that we keep our our debate confined to the topic at hand um and that we aren't straying into into topics that that isn't the issue before the body Okay great Well thank you both And we already have our first question in from a viewer Uh and the viewer is calling in and asking "Is putting fluoride in water or fluidation required by either the state or the federal government?"

Are either of you familiar with this issue Yeah I'm I'm slightly familiar with this and and I believe it is require a requirement both from the federal level and from the state level is my understanding And there's actually a bill that I've signed on to uh to allow a local municipality to choose whether or not they want to um have uh fluoride in their water or not Um and at the federal level you're seeing that discussion play itself out um uh through Robert uh Kennedy Jr Um he's certainly bringing that topic to the forefront and and really debating whether or not that's the right policy for Americans for motans Um and I think it's a worthwhile conversation to have Anything to add on that you know with being housing chair and then focusing on energy committee issues I just haven't really when it gets into that stuff I'm not uh up so up to speed on it So I'm glad glad represent Schultz here was All right And and just for viewers sake if the federal government's working on it and they change it the state if they still required it it would still be a requirement The federal government can't supersede the state And so in order for something to happen in Minnesota in particular there would need to be change probably both at the federal and state level Is that correct Yeah that's my understanding I think I'd have to do a little bit additional research as to to tell you exactly what the federal requirements are and how that impacts uh the states Um I think like I said it's a worthwhile conversation to have It's been uh the policy for a long long period of time I'm sure there are some merits uh to having fluoride as well as some detrimental impacts uh to to human health And when we're talking about what what it looks like for the long term uh let's make sure that we're working towards making sure that people are healthy uh and that we're helping with health outcomes for our whole population And with two weeks left of the legislative session uh this is probably an issue that wouldn't be changed at this point in time probably for next year Is that true You know this is a topic that would have to be fully um worked through the legislative process The bill that I happened to sight on to to provide that local control and decision-making was just introduced in the last couple weeks and so uh that bill would have to work its way through during the policy session So in the even numbered year so a you know next session would be the time to appropriately address that Great And as we've said this session is a budget session and so you are required by the state constitution to pass a two-year budget for the state of Minnesota Uh actually by July 1st is when it would start uh or else government would not be funded And so you have a deadline the legislature of May 19th And so we're going to talk big picture and then we'll get to some of the different topics And so there is disagreement between Democrats and Republicans on how to balance the budget and then the governor has a proposal The Senate has a proposal broadly and the House has a proposal There's a small budget surplus this this two years But if you project it out four years there's about a $6 billion deficit So there's been a lot of talk about making some decisions in this budget that will hopefully help that budget and so can you talk broadly about what you're looking at some of your priorities and balancing the budget maybe in the first two years and looking at it longer represent I'll let you go first Yeah you know I'll start with that I mean we've been having some great conversations in the House right This power sharing that we have in this split chamber has really driven a conversation and the uh the budget that we were able to handshake on in the Ways and Means Committee and the targets that went out to the committee chairman to find out what our bills need to look like would have been the largest uh budget cut in state history that we were able to navigate in a way that was still taking care of people and taking care of the programs that the state needs to offer But also like you just said realize that we got a big problem coming down the pipe And the fact of the matter is the state budget grew by almost $20 billion in two years this was going to happen And now it's time for it doesn't matter if you're a Republican or a Democrat it's time to tighten up the belt you know trim the fat on these agency programs and programming that we do so that we can stabilize state government so we're not going into a deficit into the future And that's the path that we're on right now inside the House I really couldn't agree more uh with what he said You know it was it was a nearly 40% increase in state spending And for frame of reference for your viewers one of the big cost drivers is the fact that uh the bills that were passed equates to 6,000 new full-time employees for the state of Minnesota at an average cost of $125,000 per full-time employee which equates to three4ers of a billion dollars every single year as a cost to state taxpayers Think about that I mean that's wholly unsustainable We have to curtail that and and frankly drive it in the other direction Um because motans can't afford that level of government growth and frankly we're getting our hands into way too many areas of of life that government never had a role to begin with Okay And I'm hearing from both of you cuts are needed Uh our viewers have been uh pushing legislators on prior shows to talk about where those cuts might come from some specifics Now $6 billion is a big number and uh guests on this desks have talked about things in the you know millions or tens of millions of dollars To the three of us individually that's a lot of money but you'd have to cut a lot of tens of millions of dollars to get to six billion And the two biggest pots of money uh that we spend money on in the state of Minnesota is on education and human services which is funding for seniors folks with different abilities and the like And so where are some of the categories you're looking at to find these cuts uh to make sure that the state can balance its budget Well first I actually want to reframe your question Yes of course we're going to talk about cuts and there isn't any legislator who's proposed more cuts than I have uh during this session And at the same time it's a little bit of the wrong way of thinking about the issue What legislators what the governor should be thinking about is how do we grow our economy How do we think about the future How do we how do we see Minnesota through a lens of growth Why aren't we as legislators And and Spencer and I both are on board each of us the priorities that I'm going to talk about next which is growing our economy can start with a few key things It's permitting reform It's helping bring about the investment in data centers It's about enhancing trade for Minnesota It's about um growing the economy for medical devices It's about growing the economy that results in more people wanting to live in Minnesota and really not carrying the same level of burden u for all state taxpayers We need to make sure that government programs work best but we also need to have a bright vision for the future of Minnesota I mean one of the things that we're also working on is is is helium for for northeastern Minnesota The growth that that could bring to our state is immense So why aren't we spending as much time and why hasn't the governor uh spent more of his time focusing on what can grow the economy in Minnesota rather than focusing on whittling around the budget when the growth potential for our state is so much larger than the the cuts that must be made So but but you're not surely saying that growing the economy in Minnesota will solve a $6 billion deficit two years from now are you Well think about the the the wild change in our economic forecast that we've seen in the last two years We went from an 18 nearly a nearly 20 billion budget surplus to then four years later a $6 billion budget deficit Certainly growth can be a huge part of changing um the budget You know if if if it weren't for what happened with the pandemic the years of the first Trump administration brought about the greatest growth that our country and our state has seen in decades And but but a significant portion of that budget surplus was federal dollars stimulus dollars that came from Washington So the swing actually happened in our economy was negatively impacted by the pandemic And I don't think anyone would disagree with that with plenty of business being shut down Absolutely But directly to your point you're growth is one factor in figuring out the budget but the economist would say that the reason that the deficit's growing is demographics more older folks Sure And pushing on our health and human services budget So so once again the viewers at home want to know some specifics So growing the economy certainly is specific but that is probably not going to bridge a $6 billion deficit Let's represent come in here and see if he's got some specifics Right So represent Schultz made a great point You know we need to grow the economy No one's going to argue that Republican or Democrat But I think as we look at the situation we're in right now one of the things I'm discovering as a chairman when we start looking into state agencies we start looking at programming there's a lot of redundancy right And even just um on the one state agency that I work most closely with when you see four different programs that all do the same thing that that have you know each have five 10 full-time employees for them each have their own pot of money Well I'm not arguing whether the program's good or not but why isn't that streamlined into one place Because even if you were able to cut that down programming wise you could save 10 million there And I know that's a small number but let's bring it up to a larger type programming like the education budget for example You know so much of the uh education spending that's in there is because of the funded mandates that are going back to our independent school districts So if we looked at education from the approach of the actual constitutional duty which is to fund education and stop getting in the way of Minnesota being the department of education then the dollars would actually still be remaining but we wouldn't have the same sort of burdens that would take place You know and the free school lunches is a prime example of that No one's going to debate that any child should be hungry at school But when you have u demographic differences with how school districts operate when you have school districts up in northern Minnesota might be at 30 40 50% free and reduced lunch you know yes we should be helping out in that situation but then why should a school district that's you know at less than a half% free and reduced lunch that has five times the population as one of our school districts why is that getting the tab picked up Those are the kind of ways where you can save not just 10 million hundreds of millions of dollars out of a budget So two points to that though is uh the some would also argue that uh if you were to institute a way to either means test or base this on ability to pay that actually costs potentially more money to run a program to figure out who would qualify or wouldn't qualify and you'd be spending money on that sort of bureaucracy you're talking about And so what would you say to that Well so you know it's again let's not recreate the the wheel right Because there was already federal programs and waiverss that were being filled out or filled out to do this for schools already The way Minnesota ran the free and uh free and reduced lunch plan was again trying to recreate the real wheel very quickly in a way that created this uh duplicative stance and now we're kind of caught holding the bag and how do we fix this because the federal dollars can't come to help anymore because of what we instituted So what there should have been instead of passing this right away in a sprint and and this is my feelings on a lot of the last two years before this um we should have really sat down and talked about it because um being a legislator I've had the opportunity to go travel around the country and meet with other colleagues and I've been learning about how other states have done this and when I explain how Minnesota instituted free reduced lunch people look at me like I have three heads because they're like why would you ever do it that way that you left money on the table and you're not taking care of kids So that's the kind of stuff we should be doing right now And I think going into the policy year we need to open these things up and look at them And that's just one program for example Any other places you'd look to cut in the state budget Still looking for some specifics Oh absolutely I mean that was a that was a really good one Republicans have proposed by the way um a bill to say that if you make more than $150,000 a year as a combined income that you shouldn't receive free school lunches and instead that those dollars uh should go to help uh make sure that teachers are paid adequately or that the their pensions are benefiting teachers That's what Republicans at the legislature have proposed But that wouldn't balance the state budget once again You would just be repurposing those dollars So still looking for more cuts still looking for specific examples It's mandate relief for sure and it's on state agencies So when I talk about a a growth in government of of 6,000 new state employees that's I believe three new state agencies that were set up in the last two years And one of the big and heavy burdens whether it's for local employers local school districts or counties or the state of Minnesota and every single state agency it's the paid family medical leave um act that hasn't yet gone into law that oh by the way carries a huge price tag not just in what it costs to set it up or even to administer it but the cost to every state agency you know Representative Igo as the chair of the housing realm He has one state agency The addition to the budget for just paid family medical leave over his issue area is huge And that's the same for every state agency So Republicans are saying there's a better way to do this There's a private sector model to do this And we can be providing these sorts of benefits without a brand new state agency And that's a better way of approaching it It's a way more affordable position and frankly we've seen with state agencies over the last decade or two that when Minnesota the state of Minnesota tries to set up a new state agency it falls flat on its face and we don't want that to happen again here in Minnesota especially when it's going to add to the costs that so many motans are seeing at this moment in time In the last two weeks here of the legislative session do you see any changes to that specific uh issue of paid family medical leave So paid family medical leave So you uh and for your listeners like we have the single most generous paid family medical leave program anywhere in the country Most states that have already set this up in in in other places across the country that they don't have the additional mandate and burden from the state onto counties or onto school districts because those things are already negotiated um in those those bargaining agreements And so Minnesota's program is far heavier and far more costly and far more ownorous than those other states and we need to bring this back in line with some common sense and to lower the costs uh for families across the state Are we going to see any changes uh to that do you think before the end of the legislative session So when it comes to paid family leave I don't think we're going to see the changes I think we're going to see a stay I think we're going to see it get delayed one year and you look at what the agency's doing what they're doing when they're I mean there's a lot of nitty-gritty that goes into this right You need to design a program you need to staff it up you need to you know research and find out so you can make sure actually make people be able to file for it Minnesota's already behind the eightball on it from experts that are tracking this And the last thing anyone wants to happen is you promise something like this and then on January 1 2026 it doesn't work So my argument and most most people are saying just give us a year to stay get us into that policy year so we can have a conversation and fix some of the things that Representative Schultz was talking about But I think that's firmly on the table All right Well keep those questions coming in folks Uh both of you uh recently hosted town halls uh and have been talking to your constituents Uh what are the top couple of issues that are on the minds of what you're hearing I know Schultz you had one on just yesterday I did as an example yesterday morning You know at the end of the day motans are most concerned about their family budgets They haven't seen um huge increases to how much money they're taking home and they want to see government more and better reflect their family budgets And so um that means we need to rein in spending and make sure that we're doing everything that we can to lower costs for them And that's the number one thing that I hear across my community and across the state And so that's what I'm laser focused on And I know that that's an overly broad statement to say but that's how it goes back to mandates right Um and and you know I'm I'm the chief author of the bill to as an example uh reign in and try and make more flexible the earn sick and safe time mandate um that was added in at the beginning of of uh 2024 Um that that mandate is heavy for people too and it has only added to the costs uh for families across the state I'll also add that you know when we hear uh folks from the political left uh whether it's at this desk or in St Paul the the the biggest thing that they advocate for is more tax increases I mean you heard it last week when Senator Hoschild said you know we need to add additional sick taxes so when someone goes to the hospital that they're paying more in taxes when they go to the hospital You heard him say that he wants to increase taxes for people that want to go on Facebook or any uh ounce of social media For frame of reference for us all like coming from a main street small business in central Minnesota who advertises on Facebook do do we really want to add taxes to to the main street small businesses that are pro providing for products goods and services to the consumers across the state And are we really not expecting for those costs to be shifted right on to consumers I mean this is a way of thinking thinking that we have to get back to just saying what makes sense for people because at the end of the day you can target the biggest most wealthy people in the world but you have to understand that every single time that you add a new tax here in Minnesota it's going to fall upon the people um who frankly are in the tightest financial position And so when it comes to what people are saying it's about please lighten the load of the costs that we see from state government If I go what are you hearing on the Western Iron Range You know I think the thing that I hear the most right now is people are just looking for that hand up right I mean it's no excuse that things are things are hard right And I'm going to make my own plug for housing right I mean it's become a top three issue for people We don't have enough homes The cost of even having a home Energy prices are up Grocery prices are up All these things are kind of compounding at a time we have high interest rates Um and you know obviously we have horrible news with the layoffs that we're dealing with up north I mean it's kind of this perfect storm of of a lot of negativity But I think the biggest thing that I hear that I I try to bring to the capital is that people really want that message of hope and how we can make things better for the future Um and that's why I'm carrying a lot of bills around uh some things we've already started talking about permitting reform regulation changes streamlining of government agencies making Minnesota's government work for people Um and not just you know people if they live in St Paul or Minneapolis but people if they live in Hibbing or in or in Nashwok and that's the message I get from back home Um and it's very like non-political if you will It's very simple People want to you know grow up raise families here live here and let's give them the tools to do that So um and we're hearing about it multiple ways A lot of the stuff I hear about is from school districts right I think just about every single school district from Grand Rapids to Elely is dealing with cuts in some shape or form after a record-breaking education budget Well why Because there was unfunded mandates in those bills and then the school districts have to pick it up So it's working in a way that's kind of cross party lines but also working with our communities to say let's get back to this local government local control that matters so people can live the best lives they can um and get government out of the way in some sense That's really what I hear on a daily basis Okay And you mentioned housing again So you're the chair of the housing committee You're responsible for shephering through along with your co-chair and the folks in the Senate Solutions to housing and this is a crisis issue whether you're living in the metro area central Minnesota up on the Iron Range What are some of the solutions in your bill to help uh provide more and affordable housing across this state So I mean here here's the fact that I just have to put out there whenever I get a chance The average age of buying your first home in the state of Minnesota is now 38 years old Um the average mortgage is over $2,500 a month and we need $106,000 housing units That's how many short we are So the problem is is that you've got all these different aspects now contributing to the fact that people can't afford homes Now our bill in front of us has recordbreaking investments into greater Minnesota to help build the brick and mortar in our cities and our towns to build out the homes that we need That's one of the biggest hurdles we have is when you have to put in sewer and water and curb to build out a new neighborhood We've we made investments there We also made investments into workforce housing manufactured housing The line I use is that we need to have diverse housing types So everything from small homes large homes town homes apartments all of it And when you have diverse homes you create affordable homes and that combined together creates stability for every Minnesota family Now that's what our bill has But one of the big things we've been working on is a nationwide conversation around land use and zoning Um some of the most red states like Florida and Texas and some of the most blue states like Colorado even Vice President uh JD Vance and the Governor Nome of California agree land use and zoning when when we make changes to allow for smaller lot sizes and smaller homes and allow for personal property rights we start building homes way faster And that's what's going to solve this crisis right now It's not down payment assistance It's it's not finding new ways to capitalize money because the fact of the matter is we don't have enough homes So if we put money into buying homes all it is is going to superinflate the price which is going to superinflate your assessed value which is going to superinflate your taxes So the solution to all this is building more homes Represent Schultz on on the issue of housing Um you know there's a proposal out there right now to say that many local communities through local control have developed different zoning requirements that is really limiting their ability to house and they're looking for the state to come in and kind of level the playing field Do you have a position on on that issue of should these local communities have that ability uh to have their own zoning requirements which some would argue could impede housing uh or or not back to represent Viggo's point of making sure that uh land owners and others can build the homes uh the way they they so choose Yeah You know on on housing and on a host of different fronts um each community is a little bit different right And and while Representative Iggo's uh district has a lot of different circumstances comparison to my own and the reason that I bring that up is because it looks different in different parts of the state and and what works for one community isn't necessarily what works for another and and so we need to take a more a balanced approach uh to these topics Uh certainly you know on this issue you know from above we do need to have some guiding principles while at the same time realizing that everybody along the sphere has a role to play in ensuring that we can create that affordable way of life for people and I I don't want to step on the toes of what the chair is doing and his work Um and so I'm trying to be a little bit careful in this but but know that I I listen to my local elected officials on on their perspectives on a lot of these either zoning related issues or what a house should look like and allow those local units of government to do their work and um because if we're trying to tell them what they need to do from St Paul or from Washington DC I don't I don't believe that that's the right path for us to go down because I believe that local decision-m works best Okay Sounds like we might have a disagreement between the two of you here We do Yeah It's it's been an interesting conversation at the capital And you know yes I'm firmly planted in local control but I'm also against local out of control And some of the examples I'll use when Ring suburbs or even some places in greater Minnesota when they have a minimum lot size of 5 acres inside city limits Well all that's doing is inflating the cost of housing You just and you just priced out tens of thousands of motans from the ability to do this And I wish I could say like this was my grand idea I came up with But this idea of smaller homes and smaller lot sizes or putting apartments in our downtowns again this is everything our country did in the late 40s 50s and 60s This is how we built our neighborhoods across our communities across the state It's how we gave our our GIS when they returned home from World War II a place to start a family and start that path Right now the path doesn't exist And yes we need to have the ability for people to have conversations at their city halls and their planning and zoning commissions but a fact that I've always said to people the people that show up to those meetings have a luxury in something and that luxury is a home We the people that aren't showing up to that meeting don't have a home And that's what we need to address Right We're going to uh take another question from a a caller and asking uh can you tell us how you're working across the aisle with Democrats As we know it's a divide evenly divided uh state house in particular where you both serve Uh there are 67 Democrats 67 Republicans You need 68 votes to pass a bill So there has to be bipartisan support for anything to get done Can each of you share how you're working across the aisle 100% Uh I'll just start by at the legislature and frankly in life if you want to get something accomplished oftentimes if you are needing to work with another person you need to start by building a personal relationship And I I believe that representative Igo is an excellent example of this as well But like you you look at your foray and and the the issue areas that you're working on and then you go and build the relationships with the people um who are working on that issue but maybe from a different perspective or a different lens or from across the aisle and you seek to build a relationship with them outside of your political work so that you know understand and frankly hopefully come to like one another outside of a political lens so that you can build the bridges across the biggest most thorny issues that we deal with at the legislature and that's the approach that I try to take and so you know I'm going to I'm going to give an example of some good work happening this year at the legislature because this is also a topic that came up at my town hall yesterday that I also believe that motans deeply care about and that's fraud our state has seen a rampant amount of fraud over the last six years and when we look at that we have to realize that we have a divided legislature nearly even so anything that you want to achieve has to achieve bipartisan um support and I'm going to give the example of what I believe is probably going to be the most significant and most important thing that will happen this session um even more important than crafting the state budget and that is creating the office of inspector general um and that is being worked on uh in both the house and the senate with bipartisan support in both bodies where they've been crafting this piece of legislation during the entire ity of the of of this session meeting intentionally together to find agreement to have a true um executive branch um individual that is able to help hold each of these agencies accountable that have allowed for this rampant amount of fraud that we've seen And when we achieve that this session um it is going to be the most significant thing for the future of the state so that when money is appropriated from the legislature it is doing that which it was appropriated to do and gets to help serve the people who need it most rather than the fraudsters and the people who've been stealing from the taxpayers of Minnesota And so I'm really excited about that and that would only have been achievable if uh if Republicans and Democrats were willing to work together like we have been this session Do you have another example of where you're working across the aisle Yeah So I mean just this co-share model has really I think driven that message But I mean it's worth saying the most effective legislators are ones that are bipartisan and can you know compromise you know and I'll use my committee as an example My my co-chair Mike Howard and I we left our partisan politics at the door and we gave in for our first meeting Um and for viewers back home we were able to go through an entire committee process without any roll-led votes which basically says any bill that came in front of our committee was worked on to the point where Republicans and Democrats were supporting it in a way where we were just voting together as a unit That's why we developed an incredible bill that has people from the left side of things and the right side of things happy at the housing bill That's why it passed with over a hundred votes off the House floor I mean the these good things can happen and we need to lift up bringing back compromise to our legislature because that's how this place is supposed to work That's how our founding fathers came together and put this stuff together 250 years ago Um and that's just a prime example And I' I've told stories on the show before about how getting money for the Cross Range Expressway The only way that happened is because I was friends with the chair of transportation at the time and he knew about the issue and and that's how you can get real great things done not just for your community but for the state and generations down the line So there's going to need to be compromise to get this done at the end of the day Uh and so you've talked a bit about how you work across the aisle So it's always easier uh to say what the other side needs to do to compromise to get done That's the easier job I'm going to give you the Jedi level on May the 4th I'm going to give you the Jedi level question of there's going to need to be compromise which means your side's going to have to give some and the other side's going to have to give some Where we only got two weeks left Where do you see your side needing to give in more to make sure to meet somewhere in the middle and then the Democrats have to give up something but where does your side need to give in more do you think on what issues or what topics or what places So I think what the happy medium place we're going to find is you have the Republican party right now that's very let's cut and eliminate these programs that went out like the paid family leave ESST that kind of stuff Um and you have the Democrat party saying no you can't touch that I think the give is going to be Republicans are saying "Okay they can stay but then we're going to open them up and do this kind of work on them or they're going to be re-evaluated this way or you know like a paid family medical leave is going to be delayed a year."

That's where we're going to reach the compromise Um and it's really going to matter on our larger bills like the labor bill um the education bill the human services health and human services bill That's where we're going to see this the state budget get balanced for the most part I think those three committees alone is where two and a half to three billion dollars of the cuts are located And that's where the compromise is going to come I think a lot of your smaller bills are going to come together relatively quickly with little to no policy just so we can get lights on budget and we'll return that next year Um but that's the point where I think we'll come together at the end and you know everyone's always saying there'll be a special session special session that two weeks to go We're always saying at this point there's going to be a special and crazier things have happened I I think we'll get done on time and we should try to get done on time because that's our constitutional duty Where do you see your side needing to compromise to get to a successful conclusion Well I think Representative I go actually hit it out of the park with his answer I there's not much more to add to what he said I and I think that viewers should know that this negotiation has been happening because of the split house This the entirety of this session Uh once Democrats showed up for work after their 23-day standoff uh we have been working together throughout this session And so when you take a look at it um a lot of the budget bills that are have already been on the floor of the House are negotiated deals They're not everything that Spencer and I want at all Like there is negotiation that got those bills And so um when you take a look at it there's it's very little that needs to be worked out in these next two weeks Think about the fact that the governor the Senate and the House are all within $1 billion of a budget target That's tiny by comparison to the fact that we're talking about a $66 billion budget There's room to get this done There's the right people in place to you know get a pragmatic budget that hopefully can be more focused about the future and where we're going as a state Uh rather than talking about you know the edges of things Got a lot of questions coming in We're going to try to get to as many as possible Uh tax related question Are there any new conversations or information on the total elimination of income tax on social security I know last budget go around uh there was progress made on this but there are still some upper income earners that are taxed on social security Uh do you have an update or know any progress or is this in the cards for this year potentially I mean what I'll say is we should have done the full elimination when it was promised two years ago Um and unfortunately now in the situation we're in a full cut of it is very unlikely Um I stand committed to the fact that if a benefit you paid into your entire life should not be getting taxed regardless of the situation you find yourself now in when you're taking it Um so I remain an advocate for the full repeal of those taxes Unfortunately I'm going to be pragmatic and understanding that in a $6 billion deficit the money is just not going to be there to a full repeal All right Yeah this on this topic I am of the same sentiment um as Representative Igo that we should be committed long term to the full repeal of this Um but we also have to understand if if that's our goal which it is one of my goals to do that we have to curtail state spending in order to do so So when you add 6,000 new state employees to the tune of $125,000 per state employee that equates to $750 million You can't do both So you either have to curtail state spending and the growth of government so that you can give the money back to the people where it rightly belongs All right A question that I think I'm going to start with you represent Schultz because I believe you're a co-author of this bill A question coming in about undocument undocumented motans receiving uh health care and uh a proposal to eliminate that I believe you're one of the authors of that bill I happen to be the chief author of that bill So happy to talk about it in great detail So yeah Can you explain what your proposal is and then I'll have a few questions for you Yeah Two years ago uh Democrats uh passed into law a bill to allow for Minnesota care uh for uh people who do not have legal status in our country And at the time we were told uh that it would cost the state approximately $198 million over a 4-year period of time The program started on January 1st of this year 2025 And at the time in 2023 when it was passed we were told that at its max it would really only have uh 7,700 enrolles We are now a full four months into it and we have the data from the first three months and in the first three months 17,000 and more 17,000 people have enrolled in the program at a cost of $7,091 per enrolle per year which equates to a $600 million cost over the next four years So it's three times the cost that we were originally told And it's incredibly important that we realize that these benefits aren't available to any other motan for free And our state is providing these benefits to people who broke the law to come here And so this is um one of the what I think bright lines of this session for Republicans And uh and we will be using this as an example of the waste that we have seen in state government during the DFL trifecta the last few years that we are going to bring about fiscal responsibility because that money belongs to motans people who are here legally So a couple of questions and clarifications and so the state agencies though are saying yes uh 17,000 are registered only 3,000 have actually applied for and received claims of the 17,000 So they they are saying it's still in alignment And if you run that math out it's still closer to the $200 million and not the three times as you say And so uh there is a difference in a distinction between registering for a program and actually getting claims from the program What do you say to the agencies who say it's it's still on track to where they think it is So again the state agencies have to my knowledge have not said that nor not to me nor to House Republican uh chairs like that has been that has been said uh by DFL politicians who are trying to protect the program That has not been told to me by any member of the actual agency And so what I would just say to that is who is paying the monthly premium for that benefit The answer is it's the Minnesota taxpayer It's not in this instance the illegal immigrant They're not paying the monthly premium which other motans would be paying And so that's the thing that I think that the left is trying to paint over this glossy picture of what this program is when you're providing these benefits that no other motan receives for free And we'll get you in here in a second represent but uh represent he's the chief author There you go So it's not just the left or Democrats that are actually supportive of this program It's the Minnesota Hospital Association which is made up of local hospitals all across the state Their view uh as I read it is it is better to encourage folks regardless of their immigration status or the documented status uh to make sure they get preventative care or real-time care because we also have a law that says anybody who walks in the door of a hospital needs to get treated and if they don't have health insurance or if they wait until they get too sick that's uncompensated care that then falls to the rest of us to potentially pay in either higher insurance rates or passroughs uh to other Minnesota taxpayers And so what say you about the experts in the field the hospital association saying no this is probably the right way to address the issue regardless of their status as citizens of the United States Yeah You know the way that I look at this is you know those same individuals are able to buy health insurance on the individual marketplace And if they don't how are they why would we as a state be choosing to use taxpayer dollars to support that one population over every other population especially our seniors right This is a question for our state budget over seniors and those with disabilities who by the way are American citizens And to the point that you'll hear from folks like the hospital association many of them this they they have paid for this for a long period of time through their their charity care dollars Like that's how it has been paid for And I guess my open question would be I'm not sure why when this program just began on January 1 that it would be any different from the previous years and decades before except for that maybe it's a greater concern because Joe Biden allowed 10 million new illegal immigrants into this country Anything to add on this issue Yeah I mean Representative Schultz did a great job talking about I think the the fact that we got to look at this is that and and it's a tough conversation right We're talking about people and health and making sure everyone's we're taking care of our neighbors right But it's hard to justify a spend that when we were talking earlier about balancing a budget that already is going to cost almost $200 million and I have constituents calling me about rising property uh taxes and trying to figure out how they're going to pay for things Yet the state's going to take the approach of working on undocumented people first I think that's not fair to the motan taxpayer I don't think that's fair to anyone in the state of Minnesota So I think the solution is we need to pull that back um and invest in motans who are here raising families paying taxes and here legally and not breaking the law Um and in that I know it can sound harsh and that can sound brutal but I challenge you to hear those phone calls from people inside your district as they're elected member and then hear the the worry and the concern in their voice And when you see something like this and it's not going to help them you get pretty frustrated And just for a frame of reference just to kind of put a cherry on top of this this is a bipartisan issue If if you want to talk about what the polling says and stuff like this you have Democrats maybe not elected Democrats but you have Democrats who have reached out to me people from my own district they voted for Camala Harris and they don't believe that illegal immigrants should be getting state paid for free healthcare And instead they think that we need to take care of those in need in our own community At the end of the day it's about making sure that this works for our people first and motans first right Keep those questions coming in by phone or email or in this instance somebody grabbed me on the soccer field for a teacher from Duth to ask a question about teacher pensions this weekend And so we get this topic u probably every show and so want to see if either of you have any updates on any changes to the teacher pension program that the state provides I don't think either of you sit on the committee but want to check in Yeah neither of us sit on the committee Um and this is an ongoing conversation that's happening at the legislature And I think we need to frame this more so through the lens of like the long term What what are what is the legislature what is the state going to do about making sure that we get really top talent in uh our classrooms Because when we look at education as a whole over the last few years our education graduation rates have plummeted And frankly that is the most dangerous trajectory that we're on right now as a state is the future of education the future of our kids And so we need we need a lot of the best and brightest going into education to be teachers So what are we going to set up as the framework for teachers or for people who want to go into a profession How are we going to attract them into into teaching Um because if you're compar comparing it to the private sector oftent times those wages or pensions they don't quite line up And I think that our Republican colleagues are trying to work in a very pragmatic way to try and achieve positive results Uh I made light reference to it earlier but one of the proposals brought this session was to say that instead of providing um free school lunches uh to uh kids who come from households that make over $150,000 a year that instead that those dollars be reallocated to supporting teacher pensions Now that was rejected flatly by Democrats on the education committee I believe is what it was And it didn't make any sense in that moment and it still doesn't make any sense At the same time for the sake of this session the current landscape of where things are at with where the budget's at as a state those decisions haven't been made to allow for a budget target large enough to ultimately solve the teacher pension issue So what that means is it's going to continue to be a long-term challenge for us as a state until we really take a hard look at it and make tough decisions about what this is going to look like for the future All right want to touch on it We have 10 minutes left Want to touch on some other talk Let's get to some questions Uh question from the Iron Range We've been tracking the unemployment insurance for laid-off uh steel workers at two mines up north It's making its progress through the legislature Do you have any updates on that Represent Yeah you know we're sitting in a really good place uh for the UI extension So unemployment insurance we don't do acronyms on this show Right All right Unemployment insurance So um in the house we have the standalone bill that is now moved out of the jobs committee has passed ways and means is now sitting on the general register which means that uh it's in the rules committee to be calendared for a floor vote in the house On the senate side that same bill has now been amended into the jobs bill on the senate side So all indicators are pointing towards that is looking like to be in a really really good position and that just I mean is a huge accreditation to how amazing the ranges and how fast we came together because uh when we found out about the layoffs it was within a week Um the range delegation was meeting um daily with the steel workers and with the communities we were able to put bills together We have multiple bills floating around the capital on this one Um the standalone unemployment insurance is well on its way But at the same point I need to talk about another bill we drafted that I'm chief authoring House File 3030 which is um that same unemployment uh insurance but it also includes two uh regulation changes for environment Actually brings in stricter standards but it addresses the sulfide standard and it addresses one of the last hurdles um for copper nickel mining here in northern Minnesota And this came out of um conversations with the USW saying yes unemployment insurance is great in the long run to protect ourselves while wait for these mines to open back up but the best thing they want is jobs And they want them right now So we came together and said let's put these two things on the bill to drive the narrative saying we on the iron range enough's enough We need to have these opportunities Um so those bills are getting a lot of attention right now and a lot of talking behind the scenes you know we're done having actual committees on these types of bills right now but we have been able to raise this issue to the top Um so hopefully we're going to be able to get this unemployment insurance extension done along with some of the permitting and regulation reform changes we got to do so we can put the next generation of Iron Rangers to work for another generation Uh as it relates to sulfates and uh the storage of waste rock uh do you foresee any progress being made this session on those two issues the bills that you're talking about you know with two weeks to go anything can happen Um the sight specific standards became really real really fast on sulfites Uh it was just a few weeks back that KTAC was just you know denied being able to do a sight specific standard because it wasn't in state law Um this is not just a huge in u huge issue for the tachinite industry This is coming for waste waters for all of our cities and towns across the state And that's because back in the 70s Minnesota put a 10 parts per million into state law the only state in the country that to ever do something like this So now the the measure is we got to get this right and we got to fix it now Otherwise we're going to see not just mining go through a hard time but our communities and other industries across this straight of the state I really do think that this is an incredibly important thing that we do address this session Um I'm I'm blessed to kind of sit on the convergence of the the two the two issues that he's talking about I you serve on the natural resources committee correct and then also for the purposes of the UI stuff the uh workforce development um and labor committee And so I've had the chance to be involved in these issues quite a bit And I have to say when it my personal perspective even you know not as necessarily an Iron Ranger myself I think it's critically important that this issue be addressed whole scale Not just one thing but whole And the reason that we need to be focused upon that is because this can't just be about going along to get along which is what I'm fearful of And it kind of goes back to what I talked about at the very beginning We need to be more growth mindset in Minnesota We need to be focused upon the future We need to be focused upon what helps make the Iron Range grow not just survive not just sustain until the next uh economic boom that might ha exist for one or two or five years but how do we create long-term sustainable growth patterns based upon our legacy industries and what we do best here in northern Minnesota And it's for the sake of the state that this battle is so important And I I think that there's the right mix at the legislature to address this this session Um you know you could draw the parallels to Senator Hoschild and his role in the Senate uh to the mix that we have uh in the House I think it's possible and I think that this is one of the key points that we should address in these final two weeks Okay Okay we only have a few minutes left but the sulfate standard is in place to protect wild rice which has cultural significance to our indigenous populations in northeastern Minnesota How are how are you able to balance the ability to continue to make sure wild rice grows uh if you're looking at changes to this Right So and I'll just clarify the bill I'm carrying isn't eliminating that 10 parts per million It allows for a sight specific standard So you look at the area whether it's your wastewater system whether it's your TAC plant whatever it is and see what the average amount of sulfates are in that area Sulfates are naturally occurring right It's not like humans have put them all where they exist Some places have higher sulfate levels In fact nationwide and I say this whenever I get the chance and I wish we had a bottle of water in front of us because I would say that that bottle of water could legally have up to 250 million parts per liter of sulfates in it and you could legally buy it off a counter and drink it But if you're in the state of Minnesota and you're a wastewater facility or attack plant you can only emit 10 parts per million Sometimes that water is actually too clean for the environment that it's going into Uh in Canada has really been leading this in a lot of ways They have they have wild rice thriving in waters up there that have sulfate levels in the sevens eights and 900s Um so the science behind this is that we're we can have more and I'm not going to advocate saying I want sulfate levels that high But what I am going to say is we should be following the science because we can have both We can have a vibrant wild rice industry and and continue to have its cultural significance to the people of Minnesota um from all shapes and sizes and places but we have to address this because we've put oursel in a box and if we don't get out of this box right now we are going to have some very hard times in the future I don't want to get into federal issues specifically in our two minutes remaining but uh a a significant portion of the state budget almost a third of the state budget is impacted by federal spending It's money we receive from Washington DC back to the state of Minnesota And uh they won't put their budget together until after you all are done And now you're both former federal employees You've worked uh for Congressman Stubbers so you know a little bit about how Washington DC works Um how concerned are you that you're going to get done either on time May 19th or hopefully by the by July 1st so government doesn't shut down How concerned are you that you're going to make all of these really hard decisions and put a budget together and then potentially have to come back after that to to solve a further deficit by potential cuts we might see in Washington DC What's the likelihood of that happening You know I guess I'm I'm going to be optimistic because I also think that's the role I'm in The way I'm looking how the federal government's working right now is it's a very quick retraction Let's tighten the belt and let's vet everything that's going out and we're going to see that's why everything was frozen so quickly because if you're I mean look at it like a company If you're going to re-evaluate how your company's operating to make sure you're making profits you're paying all your people and you're paying all your dues Well you can't just do it in peacemail You freeze everything up and you audit And that's exactly what's happening at the federal government right now And that's why we'll see funds that are frozen slowly trickle back out Maybe we'll have different guidelines Maybe mandates will be removed I'm not sure But moving forward past the state budget I'm not overly concerned we are going to see those bad things happen that people are worried about because at the same time you're going to have Congress that has a lot of the same views that I have which is we need to take care of people and that's how they're going to look at those funds Do I have agreement or disagreement on this one 100% agreement And I'll add on top of that that um let's let's look at the lens of the fact that Minnesota budgets over a 4-year period of time There's no reason for us to have a knee-jerk reaction to something that's going to happen at the federal level because number one we'll come back in for a full session uh next year to address anything that needs to be cleaned up And yet we will still have an additional two sessions beyond that to address the needs um as they arise Certainly the governor has the authority uh to call us into special session but I'll just say as it relates to a larger budget challenge like that I think that it would not be in the governor's best interest to do so because once we're in session we determine when we would adjourn and as the legislature and I think that as it relates to those larger budget challenges frankly I think that's a risk that the governor wouldn't want to take All right we only have 20 seconds so I'm going to try to squeeze a one-word answer out of a politician which is pretty hard to do Are you going to go into special session Yes or no Representative Schultz No No Oh All righty We We end with agreement as well from you two And we are out of time I would like to thank Representatives Igo and Schultz for joining us here this evening answering questions and sharing their thoughts We'll be back again next Sunday at 5 to speak with even more members of the state legislature and answer more of your questions Thank you for watching For the team here at PBS North I'm Tony Certich Have a great evening