(patriotic music) - This is "Legislative Review" on "Prairie Public".

I'm Dave Thompson.

Thanks for joining us.

Our guest in the program is Republican Senator Sean Cleary of Bismarck, who is a first term senator.

Senator, thanks for being here.

- Thanks for having me.

- So you just got elected in November and you're serving your first term in the North Dakota legislature.

How's the session been so far?

- I've really been enjoying it.

It's been flying by, but really grateful for the chance to do the work and my colleagues have been really great about helping me learn the process and learn how the committee work works and how the floor process goes and it's been going well.

- Did anything surprise you about the Senate so far?

- I'd have to say the most surprising thing has been the pace of it.

You know, we get right to work.

We only have 80 days to get through almost a thousand bills and there's plenty of work to do.

- You've already made kind of a mark by some of the bills that you've introduced.

One, I wanted to get to is the retirement plan, because that could be a huge issue.

Coming up to the session, you had the house majority leader who has proposed a defined contribution plan, but you're talking about a defined benefit plan.

Keeping that, but making a choice, giving state employees a choice, tell me why you did that.

- So there's broad agreement that our defined benefit plan needs help with the funding.

We have about a $1.8 billion funding shortfall, and my bill seeks to address that in a sustainable way and keep the plan open for state workers.

It's a valued benefit.

We know that folks have chosen it over time and from the feedback we get from state employees, they really do find value in the plan.

But my bill sustainably funds it over a 30 year timeframe.

But then to your point, also gives state employees the option to choose a defined contribution plan.

Typically, the defined benefits is viewed as a better plan, but there are some folks who the flexibility of a defined contribution plan might work a little better for them.

- Have you gotten pushback for, or what's been your colleagues' reaction?

- I've been having a lot of good conversations with my colleagues, you know, some of whom agree with what we're trying to do with the bill and others who view it a little bit differently.

But I do think there is agreement that we need to address the funding shortfall and I'm just trying to do that in a way that's most fiscally responsible at taxpayer dollars and continues to provide a competitive choice of benefits for state employees.

- So do you think you're going to be invited to the conference committee on it?

- I would hope so, but I guess we'll see here in a few weeks.

- Well it seems like leadership would be, this is one of the leadership bills, kinda like the OMB bill that could be the end of the session bills.

- Yeah, historically I think the retirement bills go pretty close to the end.

You know, it's one of the reasons why it's important.

It's a lot of dollar and it's over a long period of time, so it's an important thing to get right.

- So your argument is that state employees like it and that perspective state employees might be attracted to state government because of it?

- Yeah, you know, it's a recruitment and a retention tool that the state has typically public sector employees just don't make as much as their private sector counterparts and salary.

And so this retirement benefit is something that we do use to, you know, get folks to work there, but maybe even more importantly, get them to stay, you know, folks are working there and they realize that they're building a pretty good retirement plan and you know, we've received a lot of good feedback on it from state employees and it's something I would like to see as an option for them to continue to go forward.

- Well that's one of the big issues in the session.

Another one is discussion on is it going to be property tax relief, is it gonna be income tax relief?

Is it gonna be some kind of combination of both?

So I'd like to ask you where you come down on that.

- I'd like to see a combination of both of them.

You know, property tax is definitely top of mind for voters, but not everyone's a property owner.

And so I think with some of these income tax plans that we'd be able to make that tax relief a little bit more broad-based so that everyone can benefit from it.

We're fortunate to be in a really strong position financially.

We just got those updated revenue forecasts this week and those were pretty close to what we were expecting.

So I think we're in a good spot to provide pretty significant tax relief.

- Do you like the plan that it was floated, I think by Senator Shibly to put more money into K-12 education as a way to buy down property taxes?

- Yeah, I voted in support of Senator Shibly's bill and I think I'd like to see that in some form regardless of what sort of compromise we come to on the agreement.

But I do think he provided a good way to get money out to communities and in a way that avoids some of the concerns we have about political subdivisions just raising it back up because that amount is fixed in law.

So I think Senator Shibly's bill addresses that concern pretty well.

- And just not to put too fine a point on that, he wants to go down to 30 mills as the local property share instead of 60.

Right now it's at 40 as a placeholder, so we'll watch that one too.

- Yeah, I think that was viewed as a little bit of a compromise as we move forward in session and it'll be one that goes to, I think one of the last couple weeks.

- Since you represent Bismark, you probably have a lot of state employees in your district and one of the things that's also at play is raises for state workers.

Right now it's at four and four, 4% for each year of the next biennium.

And there's some thought that they might be able to go to six and four.

So, your thoughts?

- You know, I would like to see us get to that six and four number.

I do think we're gonna have the revenue to do it, and you are right, I do have a lot of state employees in my district, but ultimately I do just think it's the right thing to do for the state.

You know, in our body we have a lot of differences on how folks view government and the role of government, but I do think having a well-functioning state workforce that we're able to execute on the laws that legislature pass as well and have talented people working for the state is really important.

And I think compensation, especially in a really high inflationary environment that six and four would would help, would go a long ways in that regard.

- There's been a lot of talk this session about attracting workers to North Dakota, attracting workers to jobs not only in state government but in private industry as well.

And some of the things they're talking about is childcare efforts and you know, trying to recruit.

So childcare is still a big, big issue at play, isn't it?

- Yes.

You're definitely right.

And our caucus, our whole chamber has really been taking a deep dive on the different options we have in front of us for the childcare proposals.

And it's a multifaceted approach.

We have things that help providers, we have things that go directly to families.

And I think to your point on the workforce issue, for a lot of families, working and middle class families, the math just doesn't make sense to have both parents working if you have to pay thousands of dollars a month in childcare.

So I think we're gonna be able to pass a handful of proposals that will address that in various ways.

And I think that'll go a long ways in helping more people stay in the workforce.

- So you're seeing more acceptance of finding ways to help out.

And I go back to some of the earlier legislative sessions, childcare was discussed, but there seemed to be some resistance to it.

But I see it and maybe you see it the same way that resistance is starting to fade away.

- Yeah, you know, I do think there is a broader consensus that we need to do something.

I think there is some hesitation and warranted hesitation sometimes in that we wanna make sure we're doing it the right way.

You know, we're talking about close to a hundred million dollars, tens of millions of dollars and to make sure we're actually getting that out in a way that is improving our workforce situation and providing relief to those families and really helping the kids too.

You know, sometimes it's funny with some of these conversations we forget that ultimately it is for the children to have, you know, quality daycare opportunities too.

So that's, it's an important part of it for me.

I guess maybe a little bias too.

My wife and I, we have a little 14 month old at home, so it's been enjoyable.

- I heard discussions on this and Watford City seems to be one shining example where it seems to work.

The Watford City mayor apparently says his city considers childcare's infrastructure.

So maybe that's where we're going.

- Yes.

And I do think Watford City's been a good leader in showing how there can be different public-private partnerships and, you know, to use my employer as an example, the Medora Foundation, when I'm not working at the legislature, you know, the Medora Foundation, we actually opened up our own childcare facility in Medora for our colleagues and folks who work in other organizations in the area.

Because at the end of the day, if you don't have access to that, you just can't go to work.

And so I do think there's room for more public-private partnerships to help provide those services too.

- Now, I couldn't let you go with during this interview without asking you about the curling though, so tell us how that came about.

- Yeah, I sponsored along with some of my colleagues a bill to make curling the state sport of North Dakota and you know, we deal with a lot of serious issues during the legislative session and I viewed this as a lighthearted bill, you know, to make a unique winter sport, the state sport of North Dakota.

And it was brought to me by an 11 year old in my district, a sixth grader at Horizon Middle School, who is a big curler and, you know, sponsored it.

She came in and testified and advocated on behalf of the bill and frankly, I'm really proud of her too.

It's a hard thing as an 11 year old to come testify and talk to legislators and she did a great job and I am a curler myself too, but something I grew up doing with my family and it's been kind of a fun thing to work on.

- What's your favorite part of curling?

- It's a really social sport.

It's almost like bowling and it's fun.

A lot of people do it for the first time 'cause it is kind of a unique thing.

And we have the most curling clubs per capita in the country here in North Dakota.

And we're actually home to the most famous curse in curling too.

And we lost the world championships to Canada one time, but that might be a story for another day.

- Okay.

Very good.

Well, I've not curled, but I find it fascinating, you know, watching the Olympics and watching Olympic curling, you know, putting the rock in the house and getting the stone down the ice.

It's fun.

- Yeah, it's a really enjoyable sport.

- So what else is on your plate in terms of bills that you have introduced or are watching very carefully?

- Well, in addition to the pension issue, that's probably been my number one focus this legislative session, but I've had a few other bills that have been moving through the legislative process that I've been proud to work with my colleagues on.

And the first of those is related to helping family caregivers with people who have children at home who are developmentally disabled or otherwise medically fragile.

There's a lot of complicated situations and going back to workforce, a lot of these providers that we have for these Medicaid services, for these in-home services, they just don't have the staff in order to help serve these families and these children.

And so I have a bill that would help family caregivers receive a little bit of financial support for when they have to stay home to provide complex medical care for their children.

And I think it would be a good bill to help address some of those workforce issues we're having, having and provide a little financial stability for those families and help keep families together.

You know, if folks can't juggle those responsibilities, that's where we end up in a situation where children have to go to an institution and we have a lot of great organizations providing those services in North Dakota, but, you know, I think a lot of families would prefer to stay together and so this bill helps to address part of that.

- And what's the status of that bill right now?

- It passed unanimously through the Senate, which I was really thankful for the support of my colleagues.

I've presented it to the house committee on Human Services where it was well received and now we're talking with the appropriations committee to try to make the dollars and cents work.

- I wanted to ask you something.

You mentioned institutions, maybe think about the penitentiary system and that bill that's going through about building a new women's penn in Mandan and there's been discussion on and off, I don't think it's going anywhere about selling the Missouri River Correctional Center south of Bismarck and selling that to either make it a day park or maybe sell it to developers.

Have you looked at all of the corrections budgets?

- I've been aware of those conversations and it's actually something I worked on when I worked for Governor Bergham during the 2019 legislative session because to go, I guess one step even further with the women's facility in New England, I think there's a broad understanding that that facility needs to be upgraded.

We need to provide better services for the women who are staying there.

It's part of our criminal justice system, but they have a right to services and equal treatment under the law too.

And so I think there is a need for investment in the facility that provides those services.

But with that comes the things you mentioned where we have a lot of moving pieces.

We have the Missouri River Correctional Center, they're talking about potentially building a new center in Mandan.

And I think those conversations will lead in the next couple weeks to iron out exactly how all those moving pieces fit together.

- One thing that I was a little surprised, there wasn't a firm proposal to redo the state hospital in Jamestown and the governor put in his budget some money for a continued study of that, your take?

- Yeah, we passed a bill in the Human Services Committee in the first half of the legislative session to provide for the funding for that study and that architectural design of the new hospital.

And that's also been something that's been considered multiple times over the last couple years.

But as the state moves kind of away from more institutionalization and more home and community based services, I think there's an understanding that there is still a role for a state hospital, but what that looks like might be a little smaller, a little more targeted.

And so I'm hopeful that if we move this study, we can put together a good plan and then bring that back and upgrade that facility in a way that serves North Dakota as well too.

- To follow up, are you seeing more progress in getting, you know, behavioral health services out, for example, in Western North Dakota where it's been a challenge again goes back to the issue of workforce?

- Yeah, we've really been making a concerted effort to push those services out into communities.

And I think part of where you're seeing it, and we have great work being done right here in Bismarck at the schools, you know, you gotta meet people where they are and there's students a lot of whom really struggle with behavioral health issues.

And so to be able to provide those services in schools, in prisons, in other places where we know people are going is an important part of that work.

And on that topic, another bill, probably the next most important to me, this session is related to North Dakota joining counseling compact for folks providing counseling services.

And I think that would help in part, to both help us get more counselors into the state.

There's less licensure barrier, but then also when we're talking about things related to telehealth, it makes it easier to do those things on an interstate basis.

So that could help provide services, I think in more rural areas too.

- And what is the status of that bill?

- That passed the Senate nearly unanimously and it passed the house too, actually, but we got a word wrong, so we need to fix that in conference committee before it goes to the governor's desk - One word was wrong?

- It was a typo.

So I know as a journalist, you know, that's something you take seriously too, but we're gonna get it right and I'm optimistic the governor is gonna be supportive of that as well.

- So how many states are in that compact?

- I think there's 19 right now and it's still fairly new.

North Dakota as a workforce issue in general has been looking at a lot of compacts like this.

We also pass on this session related to psychologists, and really what it is about is mobility as we have people coming in and out to help them have more flexibility with their licensure and so they can do the work that they've been trained to do.

- And that's been an issue not only in this field, but other fields, medical fields, maybe even legal fields, to make sure that licensure things, there are reciprocal agreements among states.

- Yes.

And that's also why these sorts of compacts get support from our military community.

You know, we have pretty mobile populations in Grand Forks and Minot with the Air Force base and those folks and their spouses who come and go from North Dakota, these compacts go a long way in helping them again do the work that they've been trained to do.

- Have you looked at the higher education budget, that's another one that I think is going to be like toward the end of session.

- Yeah, you know, I have looked at that it started on the house side and is now being reviewed by the Senate side and well, I don't sit on the appropriations committee, you know, as we talk about workforce, in my opinion, higher education is one of the biggest levers we can pull as a state for workforce.

So I'd like to see more of a focus on those training issues.

We know a lot of students, especially who come to our community colleges like BSC, I guess technically now a polytechnic institution providing a lot of different programming, but those folks who go to school there are really likely to stay in North Dakota.

So as we fine tune that higher ed budget, I would like to see a focus on workforce and, you know, coming over from the house there, we have a lot of money in it right now too.

And I'm sure you've seen the reports, we're pretty overspent as far as what we're gonna ultimately gonna have to get to on a budget.

So I do think we're gonna have to make sure we're being fiscally responsible with some of those big ticket items too.

- Yeah.

I was talking recently with the Senate Appropriations Committee chairman, he said it's maybe a couple billion dollars, but you're talking about, we had a pretty big budget presented by the governor and he thinks it's not going to be that much of a problem in cutting that down back to where the governor's level is.

- Yeah, I think we'll be able to get through it.

You know, the first half of session is a little tricky because you're not sure what the other chamber's gonna send over and you wanna make sure all the ideas that you like, that started in our chamber get to them.

And so as they review what we sent them and we take a look at what they passed to us, I think we'll be able to make some cuts there and get to a right size budget.

- Yeah.

This is not unusual.

but I know that the plan is to have a decent cushion for the next bium.

- Yeah.

And you know, in North Dakota we're fortunate in that we are in a strong financial position and we have things like the legacy fund that, you know, we receive earnings from that we can use to fund certain priorities and we know that money's gonna be there.

So that's an incredible tool for our state.

- There were a couple constitutional issues that came up and I think the house is to handle them right now.

One is to maybe go an extra 20 days on the legislature and maybe 20 more going from 80 to a hundred to 120 with the possibility of doing annual sessions.

You have any thoughts on that?

- You know, the first half of the legislative session, the Senate, we passed a study resolution on the impact that term limits are gonna have on the legislative body.

And I do think that there is a good argument to be made about the legislature kind of ramping up its institutional capacity, whether that's being there more frequently or maybe staffing or different oversight roles because we're gonna have a lot more people coming in and out.

And so I would be supportive of things that help us improve our capacity to do our jobs.

You know, our constituents elected us to represent and advocate for them at the Capitol.

And in order to do that, you know, we need to have the resources available to us to do our jobs well.

- And of course the other one is Casper's resolution, Representative Casper's that would basically say it's gonna be 12 years instead of eight for legislators and it would be 12 years for the elected members in the executive branch.

What do you think about that proposal?

- I do think that 12 years would be a reasonable timeframe for folks in the legislature.

You know, not everyone's gonna serve that amount of time, but eight years is a really short amount of time for a legislator to get up to speed and be able to navigate the process well.

And so I think an extra term would be helpful in doing that.

And ultimately that resolution will also have to go to the voters.

And so, you know, voters clearly decided that they wanted term limits this last election cycle, but if we do make this change to expand that by a single extra term, that will also have to be approved by voters too.

So they'll get a chance to review that as well.

- Yeah.

And the current as passed by voters 8 and out.

- Yeah.

- You have no chance to come back in, even if you wait a little bit, the Casper Resolution would say 12 and you can either go to another chamber or do something else and as long as you're out for four years, you can go back for another 12.

Does that look like promising maybe to have some continuity?

- Yeah.

You know, the idea of coming out and coming back in hasn't been something I've spent a ton of time thinking about.

But ultimately I do think having a little extra time for folks to learn the process and learn the issues will help legislators do their jobs better.

And you know, when we look at how the legislature interacts with different advocacy groups and the executive branch, we wanna make sure that as the policy making branch of government that we're able to do our jobs well.

And so I think Representative Casper's resolution would be a positive step in that direction.

- And that's a possibility that there might be a core challenge on that too.

- You know, yeah, that's a good point.

And there was a little bit of, I was pretty confused actually when the first term limits ballot measure passed last year because that contained a provision saying you can never alter this effectively.

And I can't think of a lot of other examples of that.

And so it'll be an interesting legal issue too, as to whether that holds up or this new resolution is even possible to do with that provision.

- What was the hardest thing in becoming a state legislator?

What did you find hard as being a... - You know, I wouldn't say it's been hard, but a challenge.

You know, I'm a working professional.

I have a young family and so trying to make sure I'm doing all those things well, you know, I take it really seriously.

It's been a really tremendous honor to be able to work in the capitol and get to work right away on a lot of these important issues.

But balancing that with my professional responsibilities and making sure I'm being a good dad and a good husband, it's been something that's been top of mind for me as we fly through session here.

- Well, I can't let you go because you've said you work for the Medora Foundation, the library is going to, looks like it's going to become a reality.

What is that going to mean for Medora?

- Yeah, the library, they've been moving right along and fundraising's been going well, you know, I'm sure you saw the gift from Harold Ham at the beginning of session two, the Library Foundation.

And I'm really excited about it, you know, on a personal and a professional level.

It's going to give people a whole new reason to come to the Medora area and see not only the library, but the beauty of the National Park and all the other activities and opportunities that we have in Western North Dakota.

So there will be growth and there'll be challenges with managing that too, as far as infrastructure and housing and utilities and that sort of thing.

But overall, it's gonna be, I think, an incredible opportunity for the state and for people to come visit here.

- I bet you can't wait for the road to be rebuilt.

The loop road.

- Yes, I grew up going out to Western North Dakota, the Medora area and you know, as I go out there now for work or as a family, it'll be nice to see that complete, 'cause that national park, I think is one of the best in the country.

- I'm gonna throw a curve ball at you, short answer.

Would you like to see the speed limits raised to 80 miles an hour?

- No, you know, I don't see the really need for that.

75 to me is a pretty reasonable speed limit.

We have really low fines in this state for folks who do speed and anecdotally, I think if you go a few miles per hour over 75, you usually don't have too hard of trouble.

So, you know, I don't see the huge benefit of raising it to 80 as we take a look at how we can minimize traffic fatalities and all the other issues that coincide with that, I haven't seen a compelling case to raise it to 80 miles an hour.

- Well, I ask every guest this question, when is the letter, when is the adjournment date gonna happen?

- Well, we have taken a few days off, so I would guess May 2nd.

- May 2nd.

Very good.

Well, thank you for taking your time.

- Yeah, thank you David.

It's been great to be here.

- Our guest today is Senator Sean Cleary of Bismarck.

He's a Republican first term state senator.

For "Prairie Public", I'm Dave Thompson.

(patriotic music)