March 24, 2026 · Health and Human Services - Part 1 · 13,579 words · 21 speakers · 179 segments
Good morning. I'd like to call this meeting to order of the Health and Human Services Finance and Policy Committee. It is Tuesday, March 24, 2026, and we do have a quorum present. We are going to go to the second bill on the agenda, Senate File 4551. Senator Utke and members. An amendment for Senator Atke's bill was just passed out. So that should be near the top of your packet, Senator Etke.
Thank you, Madam Chair. And if we could, I would move the A2amendment, which is a delete all amendment to the Senate files.
Senator utke moves the A2amendment. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? The A2amendment is adopted. Senator Adke.
Thank you, Madam Chair and members. Just to touch on the amendment slightly, it substantially follows substantially the same purpose of the original bill. It gives some flexibility for different business structures, doesn't have an impact on initial licensure or enrollment, and upholds oversight on those entities receiving state dollars in various forms. When the state gives entities money, we should know who they are, what they do and how they've used their money in the past. And so the amendment just kind of put a little more structure to the original draft of the bill. So from there, Senate File 4551 has two sections for two agencies. The Department of Children, Youth and Families and the Department of Human Services. This bill provides certain requirements for any provider, vendor or individual seeking to enroll, become licensed, receive grant money or register in any any program administered by the commissioners of these two previously named agencies. With fraud being a major issue in our state government, this bill starts to address the issue and puts processes in place to make sure providers we work with are qualified and reputable. You will notice that we referenced current statute 16B981 subdivision 2 numerous times as that statute addresses the financial information required and and a determination of ability to perform. Again, we want to make sure we are dealing with individuals or organizations that are going to be quality partners, whether they are grant recipients or applying for a licensure or re enrollment. This is now a process that must be followed. The bill lays out what is required and expected of and from prospective entities and also give instructions gives instructions to the commissioners Commissioner duties that the duties of the commissioner they must review all information provided in the subdivisions 1 and 2 in the first section and it's 1 through 3 in the second section for awarding grants, renewing a license or re enrolling a provider. If after reviewing the information provided under subdivision two, the commissioner has concerns that there is substantial risk that the provider, vendor or individual seeking to renew a license or re enroll in a program administered by the commissioner cannot or would not perform to the necessary duties required under the license or enrollment agreement. The commissioner must deny the license renewal or the re enrollment request. Again, this is just putting a process in place to help ensure we are working with qualified partners and it also gives the commissioners a process to follow when working with these vendors. With that, Madam Chair, I would entertain questions or comments or concerns.
Thank you. Senator Adhi, have you since this came together and was posted this morning, have you had discussions with the agencies about kind of the new language that you've added, or is that something that you plan to do to talk more about what you the changes you made to the underlying bill?
The changes we did make to the underlying bill were in response to an email that we did get from the Department of Children, Family and Youth or Youth and Families with some of their questions and concerns. And frankly they were good comments and such because the original bill was pretty vague in some areas and that's why you see some of the changes we did make in reference current statutes and such. But we did just finish up the amendment late last night and you all just got copies this morning. So if there's further follow up, I'm happy to have those conversations. But that was the reason for the amendment was to start getting it into the form where it was workable for the agencies.
Okay, thank you. Members, do you have questions or comments about the bill? No, I am not seeing any. I think, you know, these the areas that you're touching on as far as getting more information up front and helping make sure that people are prepared for what they're taking on, if they're becoming a provider or if they're receiving a grant are general topics that we've been discussing over the past few months like how can we strengthen those things. So I appreciate your working on that and bringing this forward for us to consider as we look at all of the different program integrity kind of bills that we have before us. So I, I don't have other questions right now. I guess I don't see any members who have questions.
It's early.
I guess it is this bill, we will have pass this bill to human services so that there can be discussion there about if as it might affect providers and that that area as well. Good. Seeing no other questions or comments. Any final thoughts?
No, I just thank you for hearing the bill. It's one that just came on board here in the last few days and I appreciate having the discussion and I look forward to further discussing this in Human Services so we can hopefully bring something together that's going to help them out.
Great. Thank you so much. Senator Etke's motion is to recommend that Senate File 4551, as amended, is recommended to pass and be referred to the Committee on Human Services. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? The motion does prevail and Senate File 4551, as amended, is passed and referred to Human Services.
Thank you.
Thank you. Next we will go to Senator coran, Senate file 4746.
Senator Graham, thank you, Madam Chair. Appreciate the opportunity to present Senate file 4746 before the committee today. So much like many bills we've heard before, Minnesota is facing a challenge and a shortage of marriage and family therapists. And one of the barriers, of course, is difficult difficulty licensing therapists from other states that states face when becoming licensed in Minnesota. This bill removes unnecessary barriers while maintaining Minnesota's high professional standards by allowing qualified licensed therapists from other states to more easily get licensed in Minnesota. Currently, 14 other states have already adopted similar licensure portability standards, including border state of Iowa. And so with that, Madam Chair, I'd like to turn over to the experts and to our testifier, Ms. Leah Seeger.
Thank you. Welcome to the committee and if you can state your name for the record and begin.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, committee members. My name is Leah Seeger. I'm a licensed marriage and family therapist here in Minnesota. I'm also the current president of the Minnesota association for Marriage and Family Therapy. My organization represents the professional interests of the nearly 3,300 marriage and family therapists in our state as well as those training to become a member of our field. Thank you, Senator Corhan for carrying this bill and to the committee for hearing this proposal, which is about access to mental health care. The proposal would update Minnesota's marriage and family therapy licensure by reciprocity law by moving the requirements from administrative rule into statute and simplifying the process for qualified out of state therapists to become licensed in Minnesota and practice here. This bill would eliminate the current five year waiting period and removes the equivalent or substantially similar experience requirement that often makes licensure very difficult for qualified applicants. Instead of the Board of Marriage and Family Therapy would issue a Minnesota license to an applicant who holds a valid unrestricted MFT license from another state, is in good standing, passes a background Check and completes Minnesota's jurisprudence, or what we refer to as our ethics exam. As Senator Koran mentioned, this approach is already in place in 14 other states, including our neighboring state of Iowa, and is being considered in many other states as part of a broad national effort with our partners at the American association for Marriage and Family Therapy to improve licensure portability. Licensure portability is different than an interstate compact. Given the size of the marriage and family profession, a compact would be costly and complex to implement because of the fact that two of the states where there are large populations of mfts are notoriously anti compact, making it cost preventative
for the rest of us.
Thus, licensure portability is a more practical approach that allows Minnesota to maintain full oversight of licensure standards while reducing the barriers for qualified providers. This proposal does not lower Minnesota standards. Any licensed therapists seeking application for licensure in this state must have graduated from an accredited master's or doctoral program, completed their supervised experience, and passed a national licensing exam. You should have a letter of support in your materials from the Minnesota Legislative Mental Health Legislative Network, which includes 40 mental health organizations and professional organizations across the state. State. We also ran this proposal by the Board of Marriage and Family Therapy. One of their members is here today and they have stated they are neutral on this. We're currently not aware of any opposition to our proposal. Thank you for your time and I am open to any questions.
Thank you. Members, do you have any questions about this bill? I don't see any questions. I appreciate your bringing this forward. I think we're always trying to look for ways that we can improve access to mental health care in Minnesota. And especially if it's a way we can do it without additional policy changes or funding that we aren't able to provide right now. So this seems like a practical step that we could take. If there are no other questions, This bill doesn't need to go to any other committees. And so we will be laying it over today. I appreciate your testimony and any final comments.
No, Madam Chair, thank you for the opportunity to present this bill. And again, I agree with you entirely. It creates an opportunity without lowering our standards and increase accessibility to vital services and needed within the state. So thank you.
Yes, thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Senate file 4746 is laid over. Next we will go to Senator Muhammad. Senate File 4604. Welcome back to our committee, Senator Muhammad. And please go ahead with your test or you're presenting your bill.
Yes.
Thank you, Madam Chair Members Today I bring another proposal for what remains our biggest challenge this year. How to maintain program integrity and build public trust without sacrificing quality or continuum of care. Senate File 4604 contains several pieces which this committee has already heard this session including a mandatory compliance training for providers enrolling and identified as high risk and increased disclosures of third party actors who facilitate enrollment or licensure of providers. In a moment I will offer an amendment to incorporate two other bills which deal with our state level efforts to improve home and community based services which provide care for more than 100,000 Minnesotans. One part of the amendment deals with early and often a team the legislature created in 23 to work within the Department of Human Services with a focus on licensing and compliance of HCBS providers. This legislation would codify and strengthen the early and often teams teams proposed and duties including support to applicants up front, followed by technical assistance and most importantly three unscheduled visits within the first 18 months of operations of a new home and community operation. Another part of the amendment creates a provider support and technical assistance team which would do just what it sounds like when we can't figure out a device or understand terms of a service. We call. We call customer service for tech support. This team would fill that role for providers who have technical who have questions about state level, local or federal regulations. This team would then use the insights gained from that work to create onboarding and training for providers as well as collect data and recommendations back to the department. As amended, this bill would address a historic shortcoming in how this state has has often acted in the human services field. Investing in programs and private contractors, but not enough in the people and systems that uphold their integrity and their effectiveness. By codifying expectations and investing in personal in people we will see improvements in compliance, yes, but also in cost and in quality of care. Members, I welcome your contributions to discussion today and throughout the remainder of the session. As I assume we will not end today.
Thank you very much. Members, there is a an A one amendment. Would you like to adopt that as an author's amendment? Senator Mohammed Yes, Madam Chair. Senator port moves the A1amendment. All those in favor please signify by saying Aye. Aye. Any opposed? The A1amendment is adopted. Thank you. And I believe we have one testifier who is on Zoom. Ms. Abdul yes good morning Madam Chair
and members of the committee. My name is Aydel Abdul. I have a 23 year old son with autism and he was diagnosed when
he was three and a half.
I along with other Somali Autism parents have been asking the state Medicaid agency to provide compliance policy training for EIDVI for years and years. We went to DHS back in 2023 and asked them to do an in person training for both families and providers. You can't just train compliance on providers. You also have to train the families or the recipients so that we can all understand our rights and responsibilities. We were told by DHS they don't want to do any compliance training for families, not agencies. We then went to the chair of the Minnesota House Human Services who told us, well, no, we can't do anything because DHS doesn't want to do it. Then finally we went to the chair of the Minnesota Senate human services in 2025, who initially added funding for an autism agency to provide families training and families and providers. But sadly, at his direction, Senator Mohammed and Senator Fatah took that funding out in the omnibus. So now I'm glad Senator Mohammed is realizing that there is a need for compliance training. I would only add that the compliance training is not just for providers. Again, it is also for families. I would also suggest that we include
the
CTSS because that also provides autism therapy, as you know. Madam Chair, again I want to thank you. I wrote a long letter people can read if they want to. But I want to thank you Madam Chair for always allowing people to testify in your committees whether you agree with their issue or not. That's very commendable of you. And I also thank you Enabler, for supporting EIDVI and for voting for EIDVI when it was 1915. I Medicaid waiver back in 2013. So yes, finally one more thing. I'm sorry, we need compassion, but we also need compliance training for both providers and families not just 14 or 15 so called high risk, but all across the board. We should all know what we're supposed to do. Thank you again.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Members, do you have questions or comments about the bill? Everybody's so quiet today. Well, I do think this is another bill we had. Senator Etke had a bill earlier that has to do with setting more standards up front and helping providers as they come into becoming a provider. And I think this is another example of ways that we can strengthen our programs. And it has seemed over the past few months that there is a gap in what information people receive and training they receive. I think the early and often program that DCYF uses for childcare providers I think has been successful. And so that concept I think is a good one to bring forward for us to examine as well. So I really appreciate your efforts to bring all of these things together.
Madam Chair, request a roll call.
Senator Cran, Request a roll call. Roll call will be granted. This bill, as amended, needs to go to the Human Services Committee. Any other questions or comments before we take the roll or any final thoughts? Senator Mohammad?
Just.
Thank you.
Okay. And with that, Senator port moves that 4604, as amended, be recommended to pass and be referred to the committee on human services. And Ms. Haley will take the roll. Chair Wicklin? Yes. Vice Chair Mann?
Leigh Duttke?
No.
Senator Abelor?
No.
Senator Bolden? Senator Fate?
No.
Senator Coran?
No.
Senator Kupek?
Yes.
Senator Lisky?
No.
Senator Port?
Yes. There being three yes votes and five no votes there, the motion does not prevail. And Senate File 4604, as amended, does not pass and will not be referred. Senator Muhammad. We will continue the discussion.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Members. We are working on figuring out who we can move to or which bill we can move to because a couple of our authors are not here right now. I am here. Yes, I am here. But I need someone to chair for me. And that is what we were. We are investigating right now. So I think Senator Port is going to chair, and I will present my goals.
Chair Wicklin, we'll start with 4611. Whenever you're ready. And I think you may have an amendment for that one.
Yes, Madam chair. Senate File 4611 is a bill brought to a state by Mncher, and There is an A1amendment. Mincher provided two agency bills and we are taking the second one and amending it to 4611 so that we have them all together. Okay.
Senator wicklin moves the A1 authors amendment. All in favor?
Aye.
Aye.
Opposed?
The amendment is adopted to your bill as amended, Senator Wickler.
Thank you, Madam chair. Senate File 4611 is an agency bill that relates to the easy enrollment health insurance outreach program. And then the author's amendment adds language regarding a report that MNsure currently produces. And I will turn it over to my testify. Fire.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Members of committee, my name is Erica Helvig Anderson. I'm the senior director of public affairs for M. We have two small, rather technical bills that we are putting together at this point. And I'll review both of them for the easy enrollment piece. This proposal makes an update to bring statute in, align with our current practice with the Department of Revenue. MNsure is able to conduct direct targeted outreach to tax filers with information about their potential eligibility for health insurance programs and financial help available through MNsure. This update to our statute would clarify that Mnsure does not provide a true eligibility assessment when interested tax filers request information this year in tax year 2025. We've connected with over 38,000 households already who asked for for this information so far and we're just asking for this clarification to be in statute. Our second piece is to eliminate a duplicated reporting requirement. This proposal streamlines reporting requirements to eliminate a duplicate requirement in statute. Under Minnesota Statute 15, MNsure is required to report each interagency agreement, including those with minute, dhs, MDH and commerce to the legislature. This requires us to report annually on interagency agreements and appropriations transfers over 100,000. This proposal that would that covers the same agreements that's referenced in 62V05 subdivision 7D. This provision would repeal the 62V portion which requires Venture to file a six separate report on interagency agreements while leaving in place more comprehensive reporting required under statute 15. We see no negative impact for the legislator cutting these duplicate Legislature cutting these duplicate requirements would not affect transparency or legislative oversight. Almondsure required reports are accessible via the legislative library. We believe this will approve efficiency. This issue will was identified by Mnsure's internal team as part of efforts to help efficient to find efficiencies and reduce unnecessary workload. This change does not affect the services Minnesotans will receive, but it ensures reporting is clear, consistent and efficient and in one place. We take reporting seriously. We have successfully submitted this requirements under both division, both sections every year since they were since they were required of us. We understand that some duplicate of requirements may have been warranted in the early years of MNsure as the marketplace and systems were being built and new partnerships were established. But now that these are routine and there's not much change year to year,
we think we could codify them under one. Thank you. Senator Wicklin, any other comments before members discussion questions. We are quite a bunch this morning members to let you know the hope is that this bill will be added on Thursday in markup to the omnibus to the passable omnibus. Just so you know. All right, Senator WICKLIN, SENATE FILE 4611 is laid over for possible inclusion.
Thank you.
All right, we'll do Senate File 4096. Next.
Next. Thank you, Madam Chair. This Senate File 4096 is another agency provided bill. This comes from the MMB and it relates to two repealing two obsolete contingent transfers. The first transfer for repeal comes from statute initially enacted in 2008, and it directed MMB to transfer $50 million from the General fund to Health Care Access Fund if reforms delivered savings to public health care programs exceeding $50 million. But in 2022, the legislature repealed the formula by which this calculation would be made, leaving the transfer inoperable. But the transfer itself was not repealed, so this would repeal that. The second repealer is is related to a provision to backstop savings from speculative reduced future forecast spending and medical assistance with a transfer from the premium security account. This calculation was specific to the November 2019 forecast. Now that this time has now has passed, no additional transfers can occur under current law in this subdivision. And I do have a testifier available if there are questions. Josh Reason is here. Our budget policy and analysis Director Members questions.
All right. Maybe we'll get through this whole agenda today. We are going to lay over Senate file 4092. Thank you. We are now going to take a brief recess.
It.
Sa.
We will reconvene now and we will move to to senate file 513. That's Senator Mann. Senator Mann.
Thank you, Madam chair. Senate File 513 would establish the Minnesota Office of Gun Violence Prevention, which will be a centralized strategic hub dedicated to public education, public safety and coordination with law enforcement, prevention of community violence and supporting families impacted by this violence. Gun violence is a public health crisis. Guns are the number one killer of children in this country. Not illness, not cancer, but guns. A coordinated office would be able to pull research best practices and coordinate with entities doing this work. Would be able to work in tandem with other departments such as DPS for a more comprehensive and collaborative effort to combat this public health crisis. Offices like this are sprouting up around the country and are serving to break down silos between state agencies to direct federal and state funding to areas of most need and decrease duplicative efforts in this area. This office will be housed under MDH because we want to treat it like a public health crisis that it is. The public health approach to Prevent gun violence addresses the many forms of gun violence by focusing both on firearm access and underlying risk factors that contribute to said violence. Do you want to do amendments now or after testimony?
Madam Chair, do you want to. It is not the committee. This is not the committee. Well, yes, so it's been heard in Judiciary. So we're not the first stop. Do you want to describe. Is it the A5amendment? Is that.
Yes, Madam Chair. So the A5 is mostly a technical change that was recommended by council for some more language consistency throughout the bill. And then it also incorporates the oral amendment that was made in judiciary about the reporting of grants.
Senator Mann, we are just waiting. Senator Port was here and why don't we continue with testifiers and then we can.
Senator Abel, I just had a question about line 1.2.
Yes, Senator Abelr to the author.
Could you differentiate shall and must for me, please? Never mind, Madam Chair.
Thank you.
Was that a real question,
Senator Mann? Okay. Are there any other questions about the A5amendment?
Madam Chair, I have no objection to the amendment if you're worried about.
Okay. Seeing no other questions or comments about the amendment, we will. Senator mann offers the A5amendment. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? The amendment is adopted. Senator Mann, would you like to go to testimony now?
Yes, Madam Chair.
Our first testifier is on Zoom. Dr. Schreck, if you could please state your name for the record and begin your testimony.
Good morning, Madam Chair and members. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am Kate Schreck, a family physician practicing in Minnesota. I'm the Legislative Chair of the Minnesota Academy of Family Physicians, representing more than 3,000 family physicians and medical student members across the state. I am here in strong support of Senate File 513 authored by Senator Manna, which would establish an office of Gun Violence Prevention in our state. Every week in my clinic, I see the ripple effects of gun violence. I care for children with anxiety after school shootings and lockdown drills in their schools. I treat patients living with significant disabilities from gunshot wounds. I counsel parents who are terrified about the safety of their teenagers. And tragically, I've lost patients to suicide involving firearms and cared for their grieving families. Gun violence is not an abstract policy issue to us in medicine, it is a daily public health crisis. Senate File 513 takes a public health approach to a complex problem. First, the bill would coordinate and promote effective efforts to reduce gun violence and related traumas. Right now, prevention efforts are fragmented across communities, nonprofits, law enforcement, health care systems and state agencies. An Office of Gun Violence Prevention would create alignment ensuring that successful strategies are shared and scaled. Second, the office would coordinate, promote and conduct research on the causes of and evidence based responses to gun violence. This would include collection and reporting of comprehensive data on gun related incidents and deaths. As physicians, we rely on data to guide treatment. We should do the same for public policy. We need rigorous Minnesota specific research to understand risk factors, effective interventions and and where resources will have the greatest impact. Third, the creation of public health campaigns is essential. We've seen how coordinated campaigns have reduced tobacco use, increased seatbelt compliance, and improved vaccination rates. Education about safe firearm storage, suicide prevention and conflict de escalation can reduce harm. Fourth, the office would support and provide resources for victims of gun violence. Trauma does not end when a patient leaves the emergency department. Survivors often face long term physical rehabilitation, mental health challenges, lost wages and family disruption. A coordinated state response would help ensure they are not navigating recovery alone. Finally, the office would serve as a resource to the legislature on gun violence prevention legislation. As members of the Minnesota Senate, you are asked to evaluate complex proposals with significant implications. Having a dedicated office to provide data analysis and evidence based recommendations will strengthen policymaking and improve outcomes. This proposal is not about politics, it's about prevention. In medicine, we know that upstream interventions are more effective and less costly than treating injuries after they occur. Gun violence is preventable, but prevention requires coordination, research, data, education and sustained commitment. Senate File 513 applies proven public health principles to one of the most pressing safety and health challenges facing our communities. As a family physician, my oath is to protect and promote the health of my patients. Supporting Senate Final 514 is consistent with that commitment. I urge you to pass this bill and take an important step toward a safer, healthier Minnesota. Thank you for your time and consideration. I'm happy to answer questions.
Thank you very much. Next, I'd like to call up Dr. Beth Elfstrand. Welcome to the committee and please state your name for the record and you can begin.
Chair and members of the Committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify today. My name is Beth Elfstrand. I'm a recently retired OBGYN. I practiced in Minnesota for 31 years. I represent both ACOG and the MMA and I'm in strong support of Senate File 513. As an OB GYN, I've always been focused on women's health and especially maternal health. I was one of the founding members of the Minnesota Maternal Mortality Review Committee and I served in that committee from 2010 to 2020. We all hear about the maternal mortality health crisis and we think of the common complications of pregnancy such as hemorrhage, hypertension, infection, embolism as the main causes. However, that is not the case. What became increasingly alarming that the majority of deaths were by injury, mostly drug overdoses, suicides and homicides. And what has really changed over the last 20 years is that women who die by suicide are more apt to use a firearm. A national study that came out this year by the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine found homicide and suicide combined as the leading cause of maternal death in our country. That means that far too many women the greatest threat to the survival during and after their pregnancy is not a medical complication, but a bullet. Senate File 513 addresses this crisis using a public health framework that is urgently needed. First, since pregnant and postpartum patients interact with multiple systems such as healthcare providers, social services, mental health professionals, and sometimes the criminal justice system, having a centralized office of gun violence prevention would help align domestic violence and suicide prevention programs with maternal health initiatives and community safety efforts so that they're all working together, not separately. It could serve as a hub to connect efforts from various groups. In Minnesota, we have made great progress in reviewing maternal deaths, identifying preventable causes, but we need to take the next step and do state specific research and how firearm access, intimate partner violence, and pregnancy all intersect. Without robust data, we cannot design the interventions that protect pregnant and postpartum patients. Timely, transparent data can help us identify trends and evaluate whether prevention strategies are working. Public health campaigns like those within this legislation are essential. We counsel patients about seat belts, safe sleep practices for infants, smoking cessation. Because education changes outcomes, we should normalize the conversations about firearms in the home, safe storage, intimate partner violence screening and suicide prevention. Carefully designed campaigns can reduce stigma while promoting safety. As an ob gyn, we have to look at the continuum of care, not just getting women safely through the childbirth process, but ensure they survive and thrive afterward. We must recognize that death by firearm, homicide or suicide are among the leading causes of death during pregnancy and postpartum and treat this as the public health emergency it is. Senate File 513 offers a coordinated, data driven, prevention focused approach to a public health crisis. For the health and safety of Minnesota mothers and families, I urge you to support this bill. Thank you for your time. I'm happy to answer any questions.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Next, I'd like to call up Anna Leamy. Welcome to the committee. Please state your name for the record and you can begin.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Members of the committee, my name is Anna Leamy, Director of Government Relations and Advocacy for the Minnesota Governor's Caucus. While presented as a public health initiative, this bill would establish a permanent taxpayer funded office with broad authority to shape firearm policy, influence legislation, coordinate with outside organizations and promote regulatory strategies. Under the banner of research and data collection, Minnesota does not need another layer of government bureaucracy focused on reframing and restricting a constitutional right. Senate File 513 grants the proposed office sweeping authority to conduct and promote research on gun violence, collect and report firearm related data, create public messaging campaigns and build partnerships with national stakeholders, and serve as a legislative resource on gun violence prevention policy. The bill contains no meaningful guardrails limiting how this authority may be used. There is no clear statutory limitation on coordination with private advocacy organizations, nor is there a prohibition on engaging in activities that functionally support policy advocacy. Minnesota already funds and operates substantial public safety infrastructure. If violence is the concern, the solution lies in enforcement, prosecution and accountability. Additionally, Minnesota and the federal government already collect extensive data on violent crime and suicide involving firearms. At the state level, the Department of Public Safety, the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension and the Office of Justice programs, the Department of Health and local law enforcement agencies compile and publish firearm related crimes and mortality statistics. At the federal level, the FBI, the CDC and the Bureau of Justice statistics collect and publish comprehensive data annually. Information about homicide, assault, domestic violence and suicide involving firearms is already tracked, analyzed and reported. If the legislature believes reporting or coordination can be improved, it can direct current agencies to refine their data collection and collaboration efforts. It does not need to establish a permanent standalone office with its own staff, budget and policy mandate. To accomplish that goal, Minnesota should strengthen the institutions it already funds rather than laying on redundant bureaucracy. For these reasons, I respectfully urge you to vote no on Senate file 513.
Thank you.
Thank you. That concludes the testifiers that I have on the list. Members, do you have any questions or comments about the bill?
Senator CORAN thank you, Madam Chair. Senator Mann I think we all, we absolutely all share the common goals of gun violence and I think I agree of course I agree some of the last testifier about we've got so many resources today but in the, in the either the testifying for in your opening statements were about, you know, assessing risk factors and that contributed gun violence. But a huge portion of the violence that we have today is happening every day in our streets, right and split between suicide but every day that, that racks up that body count and but I didn't hear one thing about how we need to move to ensure those that are with firearms committing violent crimes every day in our neighborhoods today. And a mass shooting, no matter where it's at is unacceptable. But we know them and today I don't see anything in here that or I haven't heard any advocacy that we must track county prosecutor or prosecutors in general where we need to make sure they're charged, actually actually charged and charged in a meaningful manner and then secondarily with the hopes of a successful prosecution and then even a greater hope that a judge imposes material, material consequences for those. I think you get. You know, in Ramsey County, I think Sheriff Fletcher could give you the 90 names of the, of everybody that had commit 98% of all the gun violence. And they know who they are, they know who all them are. We could stop that with an effective judiciary. I'm curious to know how would that, how would any of this proposal look to impose or to influence that when it's not even a dialogue? Today we see multiple people have been convicted of multiple felonies, caught with weapons, and we've got federal law which they've not prosecuted and had directions to not prosecute over the last decade so or 15 years probably. And they dropped the most serious charges from the most violent people and really imposed no meaningful sentences. They're out there committing the vast majority of the violence. Again, the half that's not suicide in the accident and the youth gun accidents that occur through those. How would this help or change that?
Senator Mann.
Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator. So this bill is not the end all, be all of gun violence prevention. This bill focuses on prevention. What you're talking about is way after the fact. So we're trying to prevent those things from even happening with this data, this research, research and this collaboration between agencies. You know, we talk about prosecution and accountability. Absolutely, that's a part of it. That's not what this bill is about. Again, we are completely ignoring the preventative piece of gun violence. Gun violence is preventable and that's what we're trying to do. We're trying to save lives, save money, save court time from those things ever happening in the first place.
Thank you, Senator Koran and Senator Mannan. I agree with the preventable side and I think when you testifiers talked about. We need to normalize the conversation regarding firearms and safety. That was the norm. It was the norm across every environment. Every high school kid had had the rifle and weapon in the back of the truck. They had gun training class in school and all of those things. And we've moved so far away from that and what the safety is and, and again that's in a particular home. But you keep talk, we talk about we gotta prevent it. Well, the preventing those future deaths that are count racking up in the cities every day, that's gonna be on the prosecution side. Hopefully we could get on the front side of those children with the families and keep them out of the crime side, but they're not. But half the crimes or the deaths are attributed to that factor. So to me that's a huge portion of the prevention. How do we prevent those future in the most violent environment and the quality of life that is impacted based on in Minneapolis or St. Paul that they can't let their children outside and play because of random gunfire. It's the same people firing many weapons. And then I'll just the comment is I also worry about the grant side. How many, how many grants is that group going to be soliciting from pro second amendment groups about helping them positive education. I have little faith that it will happen and we'll be in the same group. We're a nonpartisan non profit group working to end whatever and without a single non part without a an equally partisan type participation. I hate the word nonpartisan. I prefer equally partisan is what I'd like to see. So we want them all we want any unnecessary death to stop. I don't know how adding another layer will do so so thank you Madam Chair. Thank you Senator Mann for bringing the bill forward.
Senator Port thank you Madam Chair. Thank you Senator Mann for bringing this. I think as we have talked about gun violence for years and years and years often what we talk about is the after the fact, what is the prosecution, how long are we going to lock them up for. But we don't talk about the fact that this is a public health epidemic. It is shocking and should be horrifying to all of us that after giving birth a pregnant a woman in postpartum is more likely to commit suicide with a gun than ever before. The letters in this packet are heartbreaking stories from people whose families have been in impacted by gun violence. And I think as we think about what is the way to move us forward what we have been doing hasn't solved the problem. We have to look at this in a new way. And I appreciate that this is research
based
to really find those upstream impacts that we can have an effect on to change the quality course. We do the same thing with any kind of epidemic. Try to find that root cause, try to find the way to prevent it from spreading to prevent it from happening to someone else. I think that's incredibly important. I'm really glad that this looks at this and I will just say
just
because the science and research behind something comes to a conclusion illusion that is supported by one political party does not mean that that research was partisan. And I really want to stress to the folks who are studying this for public health. Thank you. It is critical that we have this information, that we understand this information and research in itself isn't political. It's our job then to act on it. And unfortunately that has become partisan. I can't stress how important I think it is that you are carrying this bill, Senator Mann, because I assume this is an unfortunately regular occurrence in your job to have to deal with gun violence. And I think for lots of other people, the only place we see that is in the news. And the news doesn't often cover suicides, which are an increasingly damaging, horrible outcome of the prevalence of guns in our society and is directly impacting greater Minnesota at a much higher rate than it
is
in the metro for suicide deaths. And I wonder if you can just talk a little bit about like how your background as a doctor and seeing not just the physical impact of a gunshot wound, but like the, the whole impact around it on that person's overall health, on their family, on mental health, like what does that look like to you on a day to day basis, Senator Mann?
Thank you, Madam Chair. When I Interesting question you ask. When I graduated my residency program, I did my very first job in a rural town in North Dakota for two weeks I was the only doctor there for two weeks. I was on call 24 hours a day. One of my very first patients as a brand new doctor was a 21 year old male with a gunshot wound to the head. They brought him in with his skull half on the gurney and that's how I was introduced to medicine as a brand new physician. And about two days later I had a 28 year old female with a gunshot wound to the leg that she suffered through her boyfriend. So the aftermath of that was not just a my introduction to medicine, but also my introduction to the overall effects of what happens when guns are introduced into situations. I had to keep a 21 year old male alive for a few hours so that his wife could come and say goodbye to him with his three year old son. So those things could have been prevented. Both of those things could have been prevented. And the trauma that the entire staff suffered that week could have been prevented. To your point, prosecution does not prevent gun violence. It simply deals with the after aftermath of it. And when we have a group of people dedicated to scientific research so that we can solve a problem, to say that they're not going to welcome other groups is just false. Because if you look at line 2.1, the purpose of this office is to build partnerships with local, state, national experts, agencies and stakeholders. So if you feel like the NRA or the Gun Owners Caucus are not going to participate, it is because they don't want to build those partnerships and prevent gun violence. Otherwise, they are more than welcome to come and show up as well. So, again, the goal here is prevention, data driven scientific research that we know can prevent the death and the violence and the trauma from gun violence.
One more question, Senator Port.
In other public health campaigns unrelated to gun violence, when you have research and then are able to educate the public, does it help prevent the spread of disease or whatever the public health campaign might be?
Senator Mann.
Madam Chair. Senator Port. Historically, public health campaigns have been generally quite successful in educating the public and, and preventing what it is that they aim to do.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Senator Utke.
Thank you, Madam Chair. A lot's been said already, so I won't try and repeat anything, but one thing was, is gun violence preventable? Sure, but it's not the guns, it's the people. And I will stick with that forever because I grew up in an era where we all had to say many guns as you could possibly want and nobody was getting hurt. But what has changed? Not the tool, which is the gun, it's the people. And so I just disagree totally with this bill putting this into the Department of Health. I want my doctors and nurses to be focused just on health. We have law enforcement that will take care of anything that's related to somebody doing the wrong thing with a firearm. And I think we need to keep that separation there. So I appreciate the information that came from the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, laid out a lot of good data. And again, I just don't see any reason to do this and import some more into the Department of Health when I think they've got their hands full and we can do it much better with what we've got in place now. So thank you. I just can't support this.
Senator Bolden.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Mann, for your work on this, for bringing this bill. I'm honestly a little baffled by some of the conversation we're having here today. Gun violence is a public health crisis. It is the number one killer of kids. I just, it's sort of unfathomable to me that, that being the case, we wouldn't look into it. We wouldn't want information and data and an office, you know, dedicated to how do we prevent that. That should not be happening. So, you know, again, just want to thank you for this work. This very much feels like incredibly necessary. Again, referencing the letters from families and parents. And, you know, we sort of are talking about this here as it is a partisan issue. When we get outside of this building. It is not a partisan issue. There are families and teachers and students and Minnesotans are saying, can you please do something? And so this will provide information, data, evidence, which is an important tool that we should be using as we make policy. And we should be making policy because, as was said, this is a crisis, it is preventable, and people want us to do something. And just to. The idea of we should look into this but not look at guns is also really just baffling to me, you know, and I will also just add that, you know, tools have changed in the last decades. We had an assault weapons ban. We now do not. So, like, there's a lot of information and things sort of within this conversation, but this having an office and intention, intentional resources and effort dedicated to getting evidence and data and research to help inform actions that we should be taking to save people's lives is absolutely the right thing.
So thank you, senator Fatih.
Yeah, thank you, madam Chair. And thank you, senator man, for putting this forward. I'm not going to repeat a lot of the stuff that I agree with already with what my colleagues said, But I want to add that with this legislation, it's not going to create or mandate any sort of immediate changes towards people's behaviors or actions. It'll provide simple recommendations, and if you agree or disagree with the information, that's fine. It still has to go through a legislative process because it's the legislature that handles the policy making and the bill making and the rulemaking. And so both chambers, the house and the senate, will still have to do the work to put forward legislation towards the recommendations. Is that correct, Senator Mann?
Senator Mann?
Madam Chair. Senator, that's correct.
Awesome. So I just wanted people to be.
Senator Fatih.
Thank you, madam Chair. And I just wanted people to be very clear on that. Thank you so much.
Thank you. Any other comments or questions, Senator Kupek?
Sure.
Thank you, madam Chair. As somebody with a science background, I am very pro data. You know, we. As. As a meteorologist, we are. We are always craving data, more data, more data, more data. Atmosphere is a very difficult thing sometimes to. To forecast. What is more difficult to forecast, though, is human nature. We can make policies we've seen countless times where the legislature's made policies, and we think people will react one way and then they react a completely different way because we just don't know. And so by gathering data around this issue, we should be able to craft not only better legislation, but there should be a better understanding from our health community how we could prevent gun violence. And go forward. So there's, I don't understand why we would not want to have as much possible information as we can. So thanks for the bill.
Thank you. Any other questions or comments? Senator Mann, any final thoughts?
Thank you, Madam Chair. So again, this bill has nothing to do with gun ownership. It has everything to do with data collection and science based evidence. I did hear a couple things that I just wanted to briefly talk to. One was that our tool, the people have changed, but the tools have not and that is just completely inaccurate. However, many years ago we did not have weapons that could spray 100 bullets
into a church full of children.
The other thing I heard was that we want our health care providers focused on health and not guns. I feel like I'm speaking into the void because I just told a story about how medical practice is. We see gun violence every single day and that is part of health. So again, this bill would give us data. And if you are voting against data, then in the back of your mind you must know what the data shows and that's why you are against it. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
What's the pattern of this bill?
This bill is going to be laid over. It's gone to all the committees it needs to go to and we are laying it over today.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
With that, no other questions or comments. Senator Mann, thank you for bringing this forward. I think prevention and focusing on prevention is absolutely urgent that we do. It's just so disturbing to me that when we have in front of us this, this statistic that kids are, this is one of the leading causes of death of kids and we aren't putting efforts towards studying it. Understanding what causes are and what we can do to prevent just makes no sense to me. So I really appreciate you bringing this forward. With that Senate File 513 as amended is laid over. And next we move to Senator Umu Verbatin, Senate File 4581. Welcome to the committee.
Thank you, Madam chair. Senate File 4581 allows child care providers accepting the child care assistance program CCAP to apply for an absent days limit exemption when extraordinary events result in substantially less than normal attendance or closure. There are already rules in place for absent days which mean any day that a child is authorized and scheduled to be in care and the child is an absent form for the entire day. Child care providers receive reimbursement for days a child is absent, but only up to 25 days per child, excluding holidays and up to 10 consecutive days. There are some Exemptions to this rule, which include children with medical conditions that may require more absences. An exemption for children with a parent under 21 who has not graduated high school but is specifically enrolled in a program to graduate that includes or arranges child care. So there are exemptions in place already. What this bill is proposing to do is to add exemptions for extraordinary events that result in less than normal attendance. Extraordinary event is something that would affect the community and is beyond the control of the child care provider. Is defined in the bill as circumstance again affecting the community that is beyond the control of the child care provider, including but not limited to natural disaster, mechanical breakdown in the facility, extreme weather event, epidemic, or exceptional circumstance determined by the Commissioner. We know that child care providers are already dealing with extraordinary events. In January, a center in Duluth had to close for over a week because one of their pipes burst, flooding a large part of their center. And under secret rules, the center had to navigate the loss of any CCAP reimbursements as well as the cost of cleanup. Any and any of the kids on CCAP then lost multiple days in their bank of absent days. We also know that centers that serve a lot of children on CCAP are centers that are, you know, inherently serving low income families, often many families of color. And these families were definitely impacted in the last few months during Operation Metro surge and resulted in an increased number of absences due to the ICE activity. I will stop there and allow our testifiers to just share a little bit more about their experiences and the need for this change.
Thank you. If you could please state your name for the record and begin your testimony.
Thank you Chair Wicklin and members of the committee for hearing my testimony in support of Senate file 4581. My name is Amanda Schollinger. I am the director of a child care center in Burnsville, and I have been a child care professional for over 30 years. So I want you all to think about how many days you were absent
from work last year.
Absences for a broken car, family emergency to celebrate a loved one's birthday for illness or injury to yourself, your spouse, your children, your grandchildren. For those of you with children, you know how absences can pile up during cold and flu season. In Minnesota, child care programs can only bill for 25 absent days per child per year for children on child care assistance. Even though our private pay families pay for every single absence. When a child is absent more than 25 days, child care programs have to decide to either absorb the cost of additional absentee days or try to charge families who are already financially struggling for these absences. So what happens when a child care program, a community or our state experience an unexpected crisis? A crisis that's out of our control? Families on child care assistance quickly go through all of their absent days before the year is half over and they leave child care programs holding the bill for childcare programs who serve large numbers of low income families, this can be devastating. During the recent ICE occupation in Minnesota, many childcare programs like ours experienced increased absences from families who were scared to leave their homes out of fear they would be wrongfully detained by ice. And let me be clear, these families were US Citizens and people who were legally in this country and they have children who are US Citizens. These families quickly went through their absence days and it's not even April yet. This is because there is no policy in place for handling increased absences due to extraordinary events that are not in the control of a child care center. Even a snowstorm, a burst pipe, a broken furnace or power outage can throw child care centers into financially precarious situations. When they resolve result in multi day closure by pushing families over their 25 allowed absent days. As you've all heard, many, many times, child care centers operate on very thin margins as they work to serve and support the families and children in our communities. For child care programs who serve large numbers of low income families, an unexpected closing or increased absences due to events outside of our control can cost us a thousand. I'm sorry, can add up to thousands of dollars in lost income needed to pay our mortgage, our payroll and our other bills. This makes it even more difficult for us to keep our doors open to provide these much needed services to our communities. Senate File 4581 addresses this problem by allowing the commissioner to develop the processes and procedures by which child care programs could apply for and receive a CCAP absent policy exemption when there are extreme situations that are out of our control. During the COVID pandemic, child care assistance programs had to adjust. I'm sorry, the child care assistance program had to adjust on the fly to create temporary modifications to their absent day policy so that people were safe and to prevent childcare programs from closing permanently. But you know, we all know that the best policies are never developed in the middle of an emergency. Healthy businesses and healthy governments create clear policies that promote sustainable operations in a crisis before the crisis hits. I urge you to pass this bill before the next crisis hits. Thank you. And I'm happy to answer any questions.
Thank you. And then I have on the list Claire Sanford in person. And then we have one testifier online. Welcome to the committee. And please state your name for the record. And begin.
Good morning, Chair Wickland and members. My name is Claire Sanford and I represent the Minnesota Child Care association, which is a statewide association of licensed child care centers. And I am here in support of the need for this type of bill. So thank you, Senator, for bringing this. Extraordinary or unexpected events do happen, and we've seen several in the last few years. Weather, of course, is not unexpected or extraordinary, but it is something that this bill could help address. We have a situation right now, it's very weird and seems backwards where if we have a major, you know, weather event, some childcare centers might close because their staff can't even get there if they close. And families using CCAP physically can't go get childcare because their provider closed. The provider can still get paid for that day, whereas a provider that stays open, and we've had instances of directors sleeping overnight in centers to be able to open, knowing they wouldn't be able to get there because of weather. And they are open, but families can't come due to weather. Sometimes Metro Transit even shuts down then because the provider was open but the family did not come. The provider does not get paid. So if you're open and operating, you don't get paid, but if you're closed,
you do get paid.
And that's backwards. And there's not enough flexibility. We're told by DCYF to fix that situation.
Situation.
Two other main extraordinary issues. One, of course, was the pandemic. And we saw flexibilities for families using CCAP during the pandemic. And it didn't require a 10 year IT infrastructure build. The department was able to suspend absent days and also pay providers on an enrollment basis, which is something we've been trying to get to for a while, a while. And all they needed was the authority to do that. And the authority came from both the peacetime emergency in Minnesota and some federal waivers due to the universal nature of the pandemic. So that was a situation that showed we can do it and we can respond quickly if the appropriate authority is in place. And then contrast that to what we've had with recent ICE activity in Minnesota, where some child care centers saw attendance drops of 30 to 40% or even higher because as the previous testifier stated, there were families who were legitimately frightened to leave their homes even though they had legal status. They saw people who had completely legal status being wrongfully detained. We all saw young children themselves being detained and those absent days got used up real quick. And we as providers were working with DCYF to say what can we do? We don't want these families high and dry for the rest of the year because they've already had to use these absent days. And we were told there's not much we can do because we don't have the authority that was granted to us during the pandemic with federal waivers or during the peacetime emergency. So I'm just here in support of the direction of this bill that it would be really good for these early childhood funding streams to have a little more authority and flexibility to respond in situations like this. Thank you.
Thank you. And on Zoom we have John Fanning. If you could please state your name for the record and begin your testimony.
Thank you, Chair Woakman and members of the committee. I'm John Fanning. I'm director of the Education Partnerships Coalition of Minnesota, or EPC, speaking in support of Senate File 4581. EPC is a bipartisan coalition of nine cradle to career partnerships across Minnesota. Our collective impact model engages more than 600 local partner organizations supporting more than 300,000 young Minnesotans and their families. Of course, many of these partner organizations are early care and education providers. EPC communities are in greater Minnesota as well as metro and urban parts of our great state. We take our bipartisan stance very seriously, coming together across communities red and purple and blue in support of young Minnesotans and their families, who of course deserve nothing less than our bipartisan support across EPC communities. Our early care and education providers offer critical economic and social lifelines, fulfilling roles as employers of local talent, consumers of local goods and services, and multipliers of both local supply and demand. By supporting the workforce participation of others, the disruptions of the past three months deeply and negatively impacted attendance not just at early care and education facilities, but also K12 schools and places of employment. With the worst of this period hopefully behind us, it is time for us to come together and rebuild. The financial viability of our early care and education providers is especially fragile right now, and I'll give you some examples. In a survey conducted from December to February by Think Small, with more than 300 early care and education providers responding, 41% of those providers expected half or more of their families to hit the 25 day limit and 11% expected all of their families to hit the 25 day limit. 59% of those providers were worried about payments and 36% were so worried that they are fearful that they will have to close permanently in 2026. Think of that. More than a third of providers closing in a community. This bill, thank you for it, not only supports the well being of our youngest Minnesotans and their families, of course course our top priority, but also re engages these early care and education workers. Re engages these early care and education centers as consumers. And then of course, re engages the multiplier effect of these early care and education providers by supporting the workforce participation of others. We strongly encourage support of Senate file 4581. Thank you so much for your kind consideration of this time testimony on BEH on behalf of EPC. Our nine member organizations are 600 plus partners and more than 300,000 young Minnesotans and their families.
Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony. Members, do you have any questions or comments about the bill?
Senator Atke thank you, Madam Chair. I've got a few different questions. First would be when we're changing, it's being proposed to change something like this with the paying these absence days, does this need federal approval?
Senator um, over Baden.
Thank you, Madam Chair. You know, I would have to defer to the department on. On that question. My understanding is that there is some flexibility for the state to adjust rules and there are other situations where the plan that the department has in place would need to be approved by the federal government. For this specific bill, I'd have to defer to them.
Senator Edgy.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Next question would be the need for this. You know, I've heard a couple different things through the testimony. The current activity this winter and the unrest back in 2020. Are there other instances other than these that were kind of manufactured disturbances due to lack of a lot of people's judgment and interactions? Do we have other things that really would affect this? That's what I'm wondering how needed this is.
Senator Uber Verbaton.
Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for the question. Center Aki so absolutely. The events around Operation Metro surge. But one of the extraordinary events that I did mention in my opening statement was a center in Duluth that had to close for over a week because their pipes burst. So they had a flooding in the center sort of outside of their control. We heard Ms. Sanford also talk about extreme weather, those situations where staff may not be able to make it to the child care center or families aren't able to get to the center due to weather.
Senator Atke.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Yeah, I guess that kind of. That is to me it proved what I was thinking is the Fact that we have these other little instances where we've already got the 25 days built in. We've got what I see as substantial or plenty of coverage other than these other instances which again I've said it before and you know, I guess I live rent free in some people's heads because of the fact that I don't believe in or I called out the fact that I believed our governor and mayor of Minneapolis were responsible for what we saw this winter. And we could go back to the 2020 incident. And again it was a lack of leadership that created the length of the disturbance disturbance. So I can't see a good reason for this because I'm afraid of the fraud will the commissioner. You know we got a lot of daycare providers out there and these things aren't going to come through once every now and then you could see this happening quite regularly. And how are they going to approve these and not pick winners and losers and not let this be a runaway freebie? I'm very concerned about that part of it. And so there I guess I would need to see a lot more reason for the need because so far I haven't seen it. But thank you
Senator Abel.
Well, thank you.
And actually Senator Umar Verbeaton. I get it actually, you know I just to the whole topic
interesting to
see the statistics about how childcare did during the month of January I guess would be whenever the height of all this stuff was. And I think it's horrible that people were terrified to leave their homes. They couldn't go get food. In my town, churches they were putting together some food shelf things and taking packages of 10 for one family and then they would kind of. They were worried that they would be seen taking some homes and so they
would take them to a school and
people would kind of sneak in and get it. And it just isn't a. I don't think it's a time to be proud of frankly. And so I understand the bill and I think there maybe if it was repackaged in a way that kind of made sense for a time limited thing for the single event that we lived through kind of like what some of the bills that are going through. I have a feeling this is going to cost a bunch of money to me some indefinite amount and But I think there's something to say and if they're, if a place could, you know, I don't know how much you pay, maybe you give them half of the days they lost more than usual or something just kind of keep them on track Just to be practical. I mean if I had all the money, the world, I would spend it in some way. But I think that the fiscal note is going to really harm you on this matter. But I just think in the packages that are being prepared, there might be some way to show some relief to child care centers. But then it lands into the same discussion about different companies, the little restaurants that we're closing and it's a massive amount of money. And the thing that I'm just commenting about is that the people that were running the child care center, the people that worked there, the people that had the wrong appearance were afraid, which I thought that was a horrible Supreme Court ruling, frankly, they didn't do anything wrong and the people that were suffering the consequences here, the little restaurants, the childcare centers, just regular employers, they weren't doing, they weren't on the street streets at all. They were just hanging around. So anyway, so wish you well in figuring out a solution.
Thank you other Senator Port thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Senator Umu Verbatin for bringing this. This is something that I can very easily see like 25 days. I think back to when my kids were little and you get an ear infection that turns into something else. And two weeks is like very, very easy to have your kid be sick for two weeks and then you have a small family vacation planned and suddenly you are like right up against it and then there's a snowstorm or then there's whatever. And if your kid only gets sick two or three times a year, that feels like you're winning. So like in just the normal process of things, I can see needing to use those 25 days just in the regular process of kids lives very, very simply. I also like, want to like correct some of what has been said in 2.13 to 2.17. It does require that the commission puts out a process. This isn't just like there's, you know, every absence forever is paid by ccap. That's not what this bill says. It puts together a process to figure out when and how to extend those days. So I do think it's well thought out and careful. And you know, regardless of what people think, the reason for, for the disruption that Metro surge brought to our communities, whether it was, you know, as some of our colleagues said, the governor, the mayor or the president and a bunch of entree thugs, the outcome was the same for families. They couldn't safely go to daycare, they couldn't safely go to work. That is the thing that needs to be addressed. That is what this bill is addressing. So I really appreciate your thoughtfulness on this. I think it's tailored and clear. I think this process should absolutely exist and appreciate your bringing this bill.
Any other questions or comments, Senator Lisky?
Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, is there anybody here from DCYF that I could ask a question to, just out of curiosity?
Looks like there is. Government relations person who works on child care. So welcome to the committee. If you could state your name for the record.
My name is Shayna Morse.
I'm the legislative director at DCYF College
covering early childhood and Senator Oski.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess my question is, if I remember correctly, last year we started an attendance tracking system. Is that correct,
Senator Liske? The one that's being put into place is not in place yet for CCAP that's coming this year, Senator.
Thank you, Madam Chair. That helps answer kind of where I'm at, I guess. I guess I'm curious as to why this needs to happen when we don't even know the answer of how our attendance is working, at least not very well. Senator Utke has made a pretty good point of it seems like there's pretty coordinated situations in which this might be valuable, but it doesn't happen all the time. And so without knowledge of when those things might happen, you know, give it a week of a pipe bursting, something of that nature. Well, under the 25 days without any questions. And so I'm trying to figure out why we would want to have something that basically gives unlimited access to lack of attendance when we're trying to enforce attendance on the other side. And so with that, the lack of attendance, we could have a provider that says, hey, this person who has left is still in my care, even though they say that and they tell DCYF that, and DCYF approves them to not have this person in their attendance, but continue to get paid for months on end. How do you not see that as a possible problem going forward? And that's something that I'm seeing here by reading this bill. There's no guidelines, no limits. It's giving the opportunity for a provider just to request that without much proof of what that extraordinary circumstance might be.
Senator Omova Brayton thank you, Madam Chair. Senator Liske, I just want to point folks back to the language in the bill that says the commissioner must establish a process that includes the application procedure for a provider and a method to determine the end date of the extraordinary event. So the extraordinary event is also defined, and this language is includes a process to determine the end date. It is in no way unlimited. There are already exemptions that do exist that I mentioned at the beginning of my testimony as well. There are those situations with children who have medical conditions. For some of those younger parents in specific programs, we have already figured out a way to allow for exemptions and to navigate them. And so this is would be allowing for those extraordinary events which we have heard from our providers are needed. 41% of the providers say that half or more of their children are going to hit that 25 day limit. 11% of respondents say all children will hit the 25 day limit. Our testifier talked about a third of providers potentially closing. So I think it's very clear that this is needed and that there is a process already to navigate exemptions that we do have in place. This would allow the department to determine how to, how to provide those, those exemptions for these extraordinary events.
Senator Liske.
Thank you Madam Chair. Senator Uma Verbatin, I guess you kind of pointed out what I was getting at is it is an open ended decision of the Commissioner to decide what those extraordinary events would be. They're going to put the process in. It's not going to be a legislated process like the other exemptions that you've already explained. I'm just curious as to what the fiscal note will be on this. I imagine it's going to come with a pretty high cost and I'm not sure how this will be able to fit within those parameters. So thank you.
Any other questions or comments, any final comments?
Senator Umar Baten yes, thank you Madam Chair. Appreciate all the discussion. The committee and members have already shared
just
how, how difficult it was for our families during Operation Metro surge. You know, I think one of the things that is most frustrating is hearing that fraud was the reason for that increased federal presence. DCYF didn't, you know, receive investigative or audit support from the federal government and the prosecutors who played really a key role in securing, you know, justice for the fraud cases that we have seen have all just recently resigned in large numbers from the U.S. attorney's office. Meanwhile, we saw, you know, YouTubers come and you know, demand to see children, demand to get access to childcare centers. That led to a lot of threats of violence that actually kept our families home and they did not feel safe bringing their children to childcare centers. And in addition to citizens being afraid of being detained by ICE and their children being detained by ice and we saw all those examples. So we didn't receive support for what we're hearing was the cause for this surge. And instead, you know, our families and our kids are not able to get the care that they need. So I think this is really needed to ensure that families can stay in this program and that our providers can stay afloat.
Thank you. Yeah, I really appreciate your bringing the bill forward. Back in January and February, I was on calls with Zoom calls with many providers speaking about how concerned they were about the families who they were providing care for them and, and worried about their safety and they could understand why they weren't able to come to work. In addition, their own workers who were seeing the impacts of the immigration surge being detained, some of them for extended periods for no reason. I really became concerned about, you know, the number of absent days and how providers would fare if this continued for a significant amount of time early in the year when there's certainly many other reasons that people have to use the absent days. And so I really appreciate your bringing this forward. I think it is a good way for the department to work on a process. It is something that has a beginning and end and can be determined, you know, what qualifies. It's not set up to be just an unlimited payment program for any reason. And I think that the data that your testifier brought, as you mentioned, should give us all pause about how many families are impacted. This has economic impact on providers who are already struggling. We don't want there to be incentives for providers to not accept CCAP participants. And if they feel that there's a risk in their being able to stay financially stable, we don't want them to not accept, except people who need subsidized childcare. And we don't want families to have to, I don't know, drop out of the workforce because they can't afford their child care. So I appreciate your bringing it forward and we will continue to have discussion about it. And Senate file 4581 is laid over. Thank you, members. We are now going to go into recess the bills that we have remaining. You may wonder whether we could have fit in more this morning, but we had a couple constraints on several of the bills. One was we wanted to accommodate child care providers being able to come into an evening hearing. And so that's one reason we have a couple bills that relate to childcare tonight, and then we have several bills that relate to counties. And our understanding was that county commissioners had meetings on Tuesdays during the day, and they wouldn't be able to come to a meeting, you know, and help testify for bills during the day today. So we scheduled those for this evening, and so we will. And also we had a member who needed accommodation who was going to present a bill for his schedule. So we will be reconvening in the Capitol in the room that we were in last week, Capitol 123 at 5:30. And we are now in recession. This.