Committee on Environment and Natural Resources Finance - 03/09/2022
[Music] good afternoon everybody this is the senate environmental natural resource finance committee wednesday march 9 2022 we got rather robust uh agenda today so we're going to get started right away if we can we do have a quorum maybe maybe noted most all but one of these bills will actually be held over so we'll be taking a vote and sending if if the committee still chooses to the state government which would be the senate file 33 excuse me 3667 but today we're going to start out with senator road senate file 2769 tourism industry recovery grant program appropriation i see you have a crowd of testifiers welcome well i should say welcome to the vice chair do i have to say welcome to the vice chair yes you do so all right please proceed thank you mr chair and uh we're going to hand out the new cereal boxes are here for the year and so um there it's really exciting that that we have them for this hearing and um i think they look great today yeah aren't they cute and they have a little bemidji plaid on the top very nice so mr chair and committee today we have senate file 2769 the tourism industry recovery grant program appropriation and i have quite a few people to testify today so i'm going to just bring them right up to the table so that we can i know you have a long agenda you know that the tourism industry has really uh struggled but they are working very hard to bring this industry back and this bill would appropriate 6 million in fiscal year 2023 and with me today i have um first um miss pizza you're going to be up first bishop good morning welcome to the committee thank you thank you mr chair and members my name is sarah pasic i represent the minnesota tourism growth coalition a statewide group of public private and non-profit tourism organizations and businesses i want to thank senator rood and the bill co-authors many of who are on this committee for sponsoring senate file 2769 the tourism and hospitality industry was the first sector shut down at the beginning of the cova 19 pandemic and while there has been some recovery in the industry that recovery has not been consistent there have been multiple starts and stops recovery is not even across the state or across tourism sectors and full recovery will take several years we know that the success of the tourism and hospitality industry plays a strong role in the success of a community local regional and state taxes provide support for community services and increased tourism activity benefits local bars restaurants gas stations grocery stores theaters event planners stage crews printing shops outdoor recreation providers and many more businesses on the explore minnesota cereal boxes that you just received you'll see information about how the industry has suffered economically during the pandemic and there's also information broken down by county on the back of the box information from explorer minnesota shows that minnesota's tourism industry has suffered nearly 12 billion dollars in travel spending losses since 2019. leisure and hospitality gross sales fell from 16.6 billion in 2019 to 11.7 billion in 2020 state sales tax collections fell from 1.1 billion in 2019
to 731 million in 2020 and jobs in these categories are down approximately 70 000 workers the bill under consideration today senate file 2769 will direct six million dollars in one-time funding to a tourism industry recovery grant program the grant program will flow through explore minnesota with 100 percent of the funds going directly toward accelerating tourism recovery the grants will be used to support meetings conventions and group business multi-community and high visibility events and tourism marketing it's important to note that no other state agencies are serving the needs of minnesota's destination marketing organizations event organizers or the meeting industry with a grant recovery program like this request and this also does not overlap with any existing explorer minnesota tourism programs in 2021 the legislature appropriated 750 000 for a tourism recovery grant program and thank you for that explore minnesota reports that those funds were consumed within eight hours of opening the application period so clearly there is a need for this bill today the bill is also supported by the minnesota association of convention and visitors bureaus the community of minnesota resorts hospitality minnesota as well as hundreds of individual tourism and hospitality businesses and organizations across the state i will now turn things over to testifiers who will share a perspective on tourism recovery from different points of view and will all be available to answer questions sure and members i think we'll hold our questions to left with all the testifiers thank you i think next we're going to go to um mike schweiter's from boyd lodge who is georgetown remotely okay uh good morning uh senators my name is mike sweeters i'm from boyd lodge up in cross lake minnesota and i apologize for not being able to be there in person today uh as i am also the president of the community of minnesota resorts and we're doing our day on the hill yesterday and today via zooms so i jumped out of that and some of you i've already seen and i will see later um as i said i represent the community minnesota resorts we are mostly uh made up of mom and pop resorts throughout the state of minnesota we have approximately 150 current members and i'd like to you know we as a group ourselves probably fared the best out of all of the tourism sectors in the state of minnesota however even within our areas that is not consistent or uniform i'm in the cross lake area brainerd lakes area we did we had a pretty good year last year however my colleagues that have the bigger resorts that lie on the the um corporate events uh the larger event type things uh any kind of music venue events all of those type of things that gather bigger groups of people together they are struggling and they have continued to struggle we have not seen the bounce back that we did where we have individual families coming back and forth and so that's where i truly asked for your support on this bill because this generally will go out to those type of uh sectors uh like the saint cloud area the saint paul minneapolis areas the hotels in those areas have struggled and are continuing to they have not seen the bounce back the the other challenge that we're starting to see already is if you've watched news lately uh the wisconsin dells is inundating our airwaves with you know come visit us come visit us and even the dakotas are starting to get their their message out and so that's where what we're we're fighting with that as well not just pandemic but now these outside markets are starting to realize that the travelers are looking to get out and and go and do some uh things that maybe they haven't done in the last you know probably two plus years and so this is where explore minnesota does such an amazing job uh of being able to reach out to some of that out state you know the iowa's the dakotas illinois wisconsin and bringing new dollars into the state of minnesota i know uh as we were talking with some uh representatives earlier today when they come up to stay on a small resort like ours uh they are not just staying there they're going out and spending money in the restaurants and bars as sarah said earlier they're spending money at the local bait shops at the gift shops they're buying ice cream at the local vendors all of those places rely on bringing tourism and tourists into our communities so with that again i appreciate you taking time to hear me today and i thank you for the opportunity i look for your support on this very very important piece of legislation thank you all thank you very much and who do we have next mr chair i believe we have um rachel thompson from visit greater saint cloud and she is also virtual today ms thompson welcome to the committee please identify yourself and go ahead thank you mr chair of cody for the opportunity to speak today my name is rachel thompson and i'm on the board of directors of the minnesota association of convention and visitors bureaus as well as the executive director of visit grace and cloud that is the destination management and marketing organization for the cities of saint cloud wake park and the surrounding central minnesota region i'm here fully supporting the minnesota senate files 47-69 it is imperative to destination management organizations like mine and the communities that we represent to get this appropriation these recovery dollars directly impact the hospitality sector that went and got hit the hardest in the last two years as of january 27 2022 u.s travel association reported that the minnesota tourism industry had suffered nearly 12 billion dollars in travel spend loss since 2019. those losses are not going to be recovered without substantial support from entities like explore minnesota and these appropriations individual cvv budgets are largely tied to hotel motel lodging tax and those have been severely impacted due to the decrease in travel and tourism through the pandemic and its ongoing impacts to the travel industry visit grantersthink cloud operated at a 28.4 decreased budget in 2021 and is still projected to be 28 down in revenue in 2022 compared to that 2019 level that is better than the 53.2 percent
decrease that we had in 2020 from lodging collections but it still has not made enough of an advancement the market is ready and we need to have those dollars to be able to go out and get that business the one-time recovery grant that you all gave um before greatly impacted what we were able to do and it attributed to the past um advances in our industry and we thank you greatly for that in that last recovery appropriation you have heard that it was used within eight hours something that's really key to note of that is it opened at midnight and so we all as destination management organizations set alarms to wake up to receive those dollars because they are so vital to the recovery of our industry emt is prepared to alter those start times uh more like an 8 a.m on an opening but it does demonstrate a clear need and a clear responsibility of getting those funds from our organizations because we were willing to do that and really was imperative to the success of our our communities there's still clearly a great need in the tourism industry and these grant funds allow for destinations to execute placements target niche markets win event contracts fulfill marketing plans necessary for travel in their area and for every dollar invested in minnesota tourism marketing it returns an estimated 180 spent in travel as well as 18 dollars in state and local taxes we all know those additional taxes raised help to residually impact our communities visit grantersen cloud was very fortunate and received 20 thousand dollars in the last recovery grant program of those funds we were able to receive over 500 000 impressions on banner ads placed during travel and outdoor seasonal activities run an ad in minnesota travel e-newsletter for february and may and contract with a local video and photography company for nine months which included six videos twelve short social format videos along with photos from each of the thirty attractions visited in those segments those new assets are invaluable as they're the first thing that potential travelers see when they're looking to make a travel decision they're getting inspiration and they're really finding that awe again to visit minnesota it was extremely important that we received those funds because we wouldn't have never been able to with the current budget afford any of those items this explore minnesota recovery grant program funded with the appropriation would aid in bringing these financial tax collection gaps and provide a recovery source directly for the promotion and support of tourism in all of our great minnesota destinations it is my recommendation and my true plea to move senate file 2769 forward thank you thank you very much and mr chair we just have one more testifier um we have um from visit roseville judy warren good morning thank you good morning mr chair thank you members my name is julie warren i am president and ceo of visit roseville we consider ourselves perfectly positioned in the twin cities area between minneapolis and st paul and before i start my test one i'm going to tell you a very exciting thing that happened to us last week at the explore minnesota tourism conference we were awarded the marketing campaign of the year for roseville and bloom which took place in 2020 we were going to start it in june of 2020 and then we kicked it back to july thinking covert would be done by then and then of course we turned it from bringing visitors into a covered friendly promotion in the twin cities area for everyone because it was all the roses were outside you could drive to them you could walk out in in the fresh air i mean it was a totally covered safe environment and now this year we're going to start it bringing in promoting it for tourists so that because all the statues are still up but i'm also i'm on the board of the minnesota association of convention and visitors bureau and i chair the education committee i'm here today to ask you to support senate file 2769 passed through six million dollar tourism recovery grant program thank you senator rood and the co-authors of this bill as a destination marketing organization in the twin cities i know firsthand how devastating the past two years have been on the metro area minnesota was and still is deeply impacted by the global pandemic the pain is widespread the comeback curve swings widely depending on where you are in minnesota the situation in the minnesota st paul market remains desperate typically 70 percent of minnesota's overall tourism sales are generated from the metro area those revenues remain down by half or more i'll share with you specific roseville examples our occupancy in 2019 was 70 percent with an average rate of 102 in 2020 we ended the year at 39 percent with an average rate of 81. in 2021 that figure left and i never thought i would ever say be glad to say this to 49 percent with the 94 average rate tpi hospitality owns and operates 39 hotels in minnesota and 28 of those are in the twin cities area we have five in roseville gina miller regional director of sales told me that corporate travel in some markets is coming back but not in roseville which is the toughest market of all of all tpi markets the big corporate players are not traveling to pre-covered numbers boston scientific medtronic veritas and lando lakes to name a few most of their travel is still essential travel only sporting and leisure continues to stay strong and grow typically ramsey county tourism generates 2.3 billion in sales and directly supports 30 000 jobs terry matson president and ceo visit st paul has noted that in the immediate st paul area they have lost more than 1 billion in sales and 70 million in related tax revenues and anywhere from 15 to 20 000 jobs the dramatic loss of hotel revenues has devastated funding sources for destination marketing organizations our funding dropped by almost 70 percent during this time and we were forced to make massive budget cuts and lay employees off all destinations need this grant program to attract new meetings conventions and events we need to attract visitors across multiple segments who access our resources and media to plan their travel from online to print to social media and digital influencers in a direct quote from gina at tpi hospitality minneapolis needs the tourism grant we need to get positive exposure out there to the consumer i know that many people we are talking to have concerns of what the environment is like in minneapolis we need to find a way to showcase it the way it should be while travelers expressing plans to resume traveling this year is increasing the return to normal travel is still elusive our destination marketing organizations in minnesota are in the best position to reach travelers but also in the worst because of seriously depleted finances our metro cities our state will not recover without tourism and tourism will not recover without visit roseville and every other destination marketing organization out there promoting travel the latest blow to our economy might also be a silver lining according to longwoods international a leading and respected market research firm within the travel and tourism industry the travel recovery we all have hoped for this year faces a new challenge the quickly rising cost of both gasoline and jet fuel after two long years of pandemic isolation and restrictions the last thing consumers need is this oil price shock this increased expense might not only limit the number of trips travelers take but also lead to selecting destinations closest to home as primary drivers of tourism's economic benefits we need to be in the best position to attract visitors as soon as possible i need your help and so do leaders in other communities have the stakes have never been higher than they are right now for the long-term health of our economy we can return better and stronger with your help getting visitors moving again safely will in turn get the metro moving again thank you mr chair senator rood and others i encourage you to enthusiastically support this critical bill thank you very much to the to the testifiers members any questions thank you mr chair thank you senator ruud for bringing this forward and allowing me to be a co-sponsor on it as you've heard today and i think was highlighted very well that you know our tourism industry took a big hit regardless of what people think during covet and lockdowns and mandates and that kind of thing i think a lot of people think that the tourism industry our resorts still did well but that's not the case as i'm looking at these neat cereal boxes we get it's it's interesting to see how much one dollar really brings back for the state and why this is such a good investment uh it says for every one dollar invested it brings back 180 in spending on 6 million that would be 1 billion or just over a billion and it would generate over 108 million in additional tax revenue for the state so this i think is a very good value for the state and i think it's very timely uh considering what we're going through with higher gas prices and stuff that you know we can really highlight that minnesota really is a good value for tourism not only for people that live here but from our neighbors as well so thank you for bringing this forward thank you members any other questions well certainly some compelling testimony here there's no question about that my question that i have is you talk about some of the recovery dollars you had did you in fact get any recovery dollars from the federal government at all yeah i received a 150 thousand dollar idle loan and then we took advantage of the ppp the payroll protection plan and then our city um gave us a a grant funding for money that they received from the government so that was a true blessing for us in the industry with the tourism industry itself did not receive anything sir yeah thank you mr chair um sarah pasic i you asked me that question yesterday so i checked in with explore minnesota and they did not receive they're available the director lauren bennett mcginty is available on the zoom to answer that directly they received no arp dollars to explore minnesota and none of the federal dollars that the state received flowed through to in the way that these grants do to individual destination marketing organizations but i think if you want to have lauren respond to that as well from explore minnesota she should be available to answer that ms painter bennett mcminty yes um lauren mcginty director of experiments tourism yes we did receive eda funding um approximately four million dollars just over four million dollars for that and that money was used um to do some research projects specifically at our welcome centers and strategic planning and then the bulk of it was actually used to invest in out-of-state marketing any grants that we gave out in the most recent grant program so our 2022 grant program was a million dollars and then the crisis grant program one of them was the 750 000 tourism recovery grant and then the two crisis ones were just over a million so we gave um over two million dollars from our general fund to um folks in the industry but we did not receive any additional fund maybe on that so so those were state funds then did you receive eda yes those were just part of the explore minnesota budget so we used our own money um to fund those grants and with the exception of course that tourism recovery grant that um sarah mentioned previously for 750 000. so members if there's no other questions i i just uh find it kind of interesting the governor had the opportunity and was given the authority to spend a lot of money and uh his administration did when it came to the uh pandemic and and uh no dollars came to the tourism recovery uh because knowing that they were going to definitely have trouble um uh that's really unfortunate but uh nevertheless we have to move on and and uh uh the dollars invested certainly have a good return and and uh um you know as you know this will be held over for possible inclusion but senator wrote to your finding any final comments thank you mr chair and thank you for all the members that signed on and support this bill and i think you we've clearly demonstrated the need for all of minnesota greater minnesota the metro area the whole state is in need of these dollars and i think um as visit roseville pointed out the gas prices will probably impact us and what we and what we spend our dollars on so it's very important to get this money out into the field as soon as we can so that we can capture those uh dollars for our state so very good thank you for your support thank you very much senate file 2769 will be laid over for possible inclusion thank you all thank you thank you next up we have senator icorn senate file 3509 we'll talk about 404 permitting under the clean water act senator eichorn thank you mr chair thanks for the invite all right so we have senate file 3509 i'd like to thank my co-sponsors senator matthews bach and tomasoni what senate file 3509 would do is direct the state to finalize application materials for minnesota's assumption of 404 permitting it would direct 740 000 in fiscal year 23 from the general fund to the board of soil and water resources to develop and assemble the material required for the state to assume the section 404 permitting it would require a report to the legislature when that's done minnesota has been exploring and studying the assumption of permitting authority under section 404 for many years thank you the action would result in more streamlined permitting process that maintains all of the current environmental protections in 2019 the legislature required state agencies to develop a report on the framework for the assumption and the cost estimates the report submitted to the legislature last month and the assumptions should benefit minnesotans 3509 follows the report's recommendations by funding the development of materials necessary to submit the application and with that we have two testifiers to provide the committee with more information about the report and the next steps moving forward okay if you could have them come forward or are they online um let's see here i think they might be i see we have the st louis public works environmental project manager carol andrews is she here right i'm here with you first year would les lem like to go first uh either one works for me mr chair go ahead all right thank you thank you mr chair and committee members um i think i will leave my video off i was having some audio issues here this morning so if it's all right with you i'll just uh go through a little presentation i'll share my screen here with you yeah just go ahead that's fine yeah go ahead and identify yourself and who you're with and uh please proceed my name is les lem i am the wetlands section manager for the board of water and soil resources um i'm trying to get my screen to share here are you able to see my screen uh mr chair many members oh we can see something but there's nothing that made a lot of sense it says we can now see the screen but there is nothing there at least in mind interesting all right dude [Music] is it something on our end or is it um i i don't know i was having some audio issues this morning and when i reconnected that was solved but um i don't know if there's something with the zoom um that's one thing sorry this is carol but it was showing i think your screen with the video do you if you have two screens going there you go now we have something there you are go ahead i see a view that we're all looking forward to looking at which is cattails water and green that's what i have mr lim did you lose us mr chair yeah we have somebody here from bowser that said he's able to give the presentation orally if we're having technical issues here very good so let's let's do that right for some reason it's muting me when i when i share my screen so okay so director is uh is here would you like him to con continue or do you want to go ahead uh mr lam um we can try one more time here can you still hear me yes we can and can you see my screen now yes interesting um did the same thing that i did the first time but we will uh if this works we'll keep going then um so let's hope let's keep our fingers crossed here i appreciate the opportunity to to speak with you today just give a brief uh overview of uh what's known as 404 assumption and the conclusions of a recent report on the funding estimates so i'll just start with a little context so the primary federal and state water regulatory authorities in minnesota that regulate activities in lake streams and wetlands we have the federal clean water act section 404 and that is implemented by the u.s army corps of
engineers with oversight from the environmental protection agency on the state side we also have the state well conservation act the rules are promulgated by the minnesota board of water and solar resources with implementation primarily occurring through local governments we have the state public waters work permit program and the permit to mine programs implemented by the department of natural resources the public waters work permit program applies to lakes rivers streams and certain wetlands and the permit to mine program implements the wetland conservation act for mining projects and there are state water quality standards that are implemented by the minnesota pollution control agency so that brings us to 404 assumption and what is 404 assumption well the federal clean water act section 404 allows for state implementation of an equivalent program which eliminates separate federal permits in most waters in order to do that the state has to demonstrate that it has adequate jurisdiction that its regulations are at least equivalent to the federal regulations that it has the legal authority and staffing capacity to implement the program adequate authority to enforce the program in compliance with certain standards and procedural requirements that are listed in federal law so essentially you have a separate state regulatory program and a separate overlapping federal regulatory program but there are gaps between the two so you fill those gaps and end up with one comprehensive state program and one permit rather than two separate permits and two partially overlapping programs so why is minnesota considering assumption well those that are interested in assumption have cited uh several reasons including improved permitting timelines and faster processing uh due to dealing with you know local and state governments rather than the federal government uh reduced regulatory duplication and redundancy because there's one comprehensive program as opposed to you know separate state and federal programs more responsive regulatory authorities because landowners are dealing with local and state staff versus federal reduced costs for permanent applicants due to a more efficient process and more effective resource management that draws on localized expertise and better incorporation of watershed planning and just an example of that watershed planning is the federal regulations require that a watershed approach be used for implementing mitigation and the state of minnesota has invested a significant amount in in watershed planning at the state and local level and 444 assumption would allow the state to basically implement those state and federal regulations consistent with those watershed planning efforts and target that mitigation to better meet the goals of those local watershed plans and finally it's congressional policy that the states implement the section 404 permitting program it's included in federal law so that brings us to the recent report that was mentioned the legislation was passed in 2019 and amended in 2021 providing funding to the environmental quality board to begin to develop and assemble the material to assume 404 and to submit the report to the legislature on the funding needed to secure 404 assumptions and to fully implement the status zoom program the the legislation also uh was clear that the environmental quality board can execute contracts or interagency agreements to facilitate that work uh if you've noticed at the beginning slide there the the environmental quality board is not one of those agencies that has responsibility for implementing um water regulations in minnesota so they entered into an agreement to the eqb with the board of water and soil resources bowser then entered into separate agreements with the department of natural resources and the pollution control agency to facilitate this work so we've made it it's a pretty uh complex and significant uh you know undertaking um but you know we did make pretty substantial progress on a lot of program development issues one of those is the wetland conservation act implementation model as we talked mentioned earlier um it's a state law that's primarily implemented by local governments it's a pretty substantial state and local partnership that we think is you know really important to the success of that law and and it's worked very well but the state or the federal regulations for assumption require that a state assume the program and have that permitting authority so we work very closely with the environmental protection agency to develop an implementation model for the wetland conservation act that would allow for the the state issuance of permits but would still continue to utilize local governments for reviewing and approving the vast majority of the activities happening out there in wetlands so that was a pretty significant uh accomplishment that really affected our funding estimates um we were we identified those gaps in jurisdiction for the most part the state has greater authority and jurisdiction over waters and wetlands than the federal government does but there were a couple specific gaps that we identified and we've also identified the mechanism by which those those resources would be regulated under assumption i mentioned the minnesota pollution control agency and their responsibility for water quality standards and one one way that that currently happens is that the mpca reviews federal permits under 404 to ensure that they meet that those activities meet state water quality standards so we developed a process by which the mpca would coordinate with bowser and the dnr on the implementation of the wetland conservation act and the dnr programs public arts permit program etc to ensure that those water quality standards are met we did have some prior cost estimates there was a 2017 feasibility study that had some initial cost estimates in it and those cost estimates for the the border water and soil resources and the wetland conservation act implementation were reduced um substantially from those prior estimates due to some of the processes that we developed and that and that well conservation act implementation model we also of uh explored ways to accomplish many of the required administrative tasks through online permitting systems and that would not that would be a benefit to the state and to local governments even outside of 404 assumption right now there's a lot of time spent manually with the weld conservation act specifically manually processing applications and noticing etc and a lot of that work could be done through a online permitting system which would be uh which would improve efficiency we've also made significant progress on the process for which we would have to screen for potential impacts to threaten endangered species and historic properties that's actually even since the report has has been issued we've we've been working with the environmental protection agency on that and making continued progress so that brings us to the conclusions of the report so based on the information that we have available to us right now um these are the the cost estimates the additional annual funding that would be required to implement the the assume program and this would this would include all the necessary staff to to implement to fully and and adequately implement the additional federal requirements the additional expanded jurisdiction some of that threatened endangered species review etc so these estimates are based on the information that we currently have available we fully expect that if we continue this process we'll continue to refine these estimates the more we develop what the program would look like and work closely with the epa to to figure out some of the specifics and the details of the program the more confidence we have in our estimates so the the bowser estimate does also include additional funding for local governments because we as we mentioned earlier the local governments would still continue to be implementing the majority vast majority of uh of the wetland conservation act permitting process so um these the the bowser estimate has also been reduced as i mentioned because of the the the process we worked out with the environmental protection agency there are some additional one-time costs so i mentioned the uh the electronic permitting systems right now there is not an online permitting system for the wetland conservation act so that would have to be developed from scratch so we have an estimated cost of about 1.5 million for that we also the department of natural resources does have a permanent system in place m pars and but that permitting system would need to be uh some modifications would need to be done to that permitting system so there's some costs associated with that and there's also some programmatic changes uh the application process the application the epa so there are some costs associated with that for amending state statutes and rules and finalizing some agreements with agencies there's you know be some workload associated with the formal application process and as well as some training and outreach those costs we don't have a a good handle on right now so they would be determined later after we we developed the more specific statutes and rule amendments that would be required and have a little better picture as to where we're at at that point so the steps in the timeline for potential 404 assumptions so the step that we just completed was the legislative report on funding estimates so where we're at right now is you know the potential appropriation for additional funds to finish assembling the remaining materials and if that happens we would complete the pro the agencies would complete the program development work assemble the draft application materials develop the specific statute changes have final cost estimates provided to the legislature then at that point the legislature would have the full package the final cost estimates and that's when the decision would be made as to whether the state would would uh move forward with the application to assume um if that would happen there'd be the enactment of statute changes uh funds appropriated for the for the implementation of the program some agency rulemaking policy development submit the application to epa and then after approval by epa implement the assume program uh so that brings us to the additional funding necessary to finish this process of uh developing the program and and assembling the application materials um these are one-time funds um in thousands we're looking at uh approximately a total of about 740 000 that includes uh the 580 000 for for the board of water and soil resources includes um a full-time project coordinator that would also do work for the department of natural resources and the pollution control agency so that's why the funds there for bowser are higher than the other two agencies and we would expect that this uh this work would occur over at least the following biennium and that's just a brief overview of 404 assumption and the conclusions of the recent report if you have any any questions we'd be happy to answer them now otherwise uh you could contact executive director jaske or myself if you want additional information you have a screen now you see any questions are there any questions of mr lam members i'm not seeing any any questions so i would suggest that they do that in fact if they have questions uh they could go offline uh with the director or yourself and and uh but it was pretty pretty clear i mean it was a good it was a good presentation so um thank you if there's any if there's any other questions do you have any other testifiers uh um senator mr chair um uh st louis county public works person okay carol andrews carol you were there earlier go ahead identify yourself please thank you mr chair please identify yourself and and go ahead we're a little short on time so if you can be brief that'd be great thank you all right we'll do my name is carol andrews i'm the environmental engineer with st louis county public works department i'm making brief comments today on behalf of three county associations the county engineers association association of minnesota counties and minnesota inner county association these organizations have been involved with 404 assumptions for many years now actively participating as stakeholders in the process counties play a important role in implementing the state's wetland conservation act often serving as the local government uni unit implementing related permit and mitigation processes and in addition and is my primary role in relationship the topic county public work department works departments are regulated parties that have to obtain permits to implement road bridge trail transit and other projects and i just have a couple main points to make and first is that we're really pleased with the work that the board of water and soil resources and other agencies have done to fulfill the 2021 law that led to preparation of the joint report that um les just presented about several county representatives participated in the stakeholder meetings last year and the invitation to provide input so we appreciate that as les explained in addition to record the required cost estimates the work over the last year really has done a lot to flesh out more detail how the state might best meet the requirements for 404 assumption and overcome some of the potential hurdles this is a big endeavor and we really appreciate the effort that agencies have invested in it second we do support the proposed legislation which would move the process into the final stages of information collection and deliberations necessary to make a fully informed go no go decision on four or four assumptions and the counties are very committed to continue to work closely with the state agency staff as the work proceeds including work necessary to quantify associated direct and indirect costs pros and cons benefits to make that decision and lastly in particular the county engineers association really supports any efforts including this that might ensure state wetland conservation agencies and permitting agencies continue to look for and implement streamlining permitting procedures for transportation projects so we can continue to improve the infrastructure that serves minnesota so in closing i thank senators icorn matthews bach and thomasoni for bringing the legislation forward and that concludes my remarks thank you members any questions of the testifiers seeing none senator icorn thank you mr chair for the opportunity to hear this i think it's important that we uh streamline our permitting process i think all of the people that deal with this in the state deserve that and deserve to deal with somebody at the state level instead of the federal government so i think this is a good good idea and appreciate the opportunity to hear today i agree thank you so much uh so we'll be holding senate file 3509 over for possible inclusion oh dnr wanted to testify i'm sorry i'm sorry i missed that go ahead come on up i did have that on here too welcome to the committee thank you mr chair committee members my name is katie smith i'm the director of ecological and water resources at the minnesota department of natural resources the dnr appreciates the direction and funding provided in the bill which are necessary to continue the process gather the information needed to make an informed decision on whether to apply for assumption of the 404 program the recently submitted legislative report described dnr's current concerns dnr identified areas of uncertainty regarding assumptions such as technical complexities public engagement needs tribal interest considerations and federal coordination which have limited dnr's ability to provide greater accuracy for some of those funding estimates the dnr believes that prior to making any recommendations on whether or not to pursue 4-4 assumption state agencies would need to collect this additional information a fiscal note is currently under development for this particular bill and the dnr would like to make the committee aware that there would be future perpetual costs if the 404 program was assumed and implemented as mr lem outlined finally dnr believes you must check in with federal partners and the tribes the legislature and the governor's office as part of the decision making on whether to make application the bill requires application for assumption of the program the dnr believes it's premature to require that step because of the uncertainties that we've shared as well as that important decision making step dnr will continue to talk to amc and the author regarding these items thank you smith did you have a handout at all or any any information at all to what you testified about uh mr chair would you not okay um maybe it'd be good to do that if you could do it online and give them your concerns so any other questions members thank you next up is the senate file 3667 senator icon thank you mr chair and thanks for the opportunity to present senate file 3667 i'd like to thank my co-sponsors senator karan lang and dibble and we do have an amendment mr chair it's the a4 amendment uh this did have a previous committee stop in transportation so uh this amendment and we will i'll go over it it's kind of a delete all has similar substance to the underlying bill um go ahead but we need to move it so if we can move the a4 amendment mr chair senator ikorn moves the a4 amendment all in favor say aye aye opposed same sign amendment carried so again the a4 amendment replaces the underlying bill to delete all and it just takes care of mostly some cleanup language and a few concerns that were that had arose during the transportation committee hearing what it would do is require the department of natural resources to work with uh the deputy registers and the folks doing the min drive system to see if there is an opportunity where we might be able to get onto that system it would require requests for proposals and a scoring preference and it would allow a scoring allow the dnr to give preference to a software vendor that is currently providing registration software to the state it would require a report within 45 days when after a vendor is selected it required the names of all the vendors who submitted proposal which vendor was selected an estimate for the timeline and if preference was given what the preference was and how they arrived at that number and if the software vendor that currently provides vehicle registration software the state submitted a proposal and that vendor was not selected an explanation of why the vendor was not selected this bill came out of a report an independent expert review that was submitted to initially the transportation committee if anybody wants a copy of that report senate council can send the link to that so you can see that but we believe this will streamline the system it will allow the deputy registers to streamline their operations as well the the consumer the end consumer won't see the difference but it will create some synergies and we certainly don't want to see a situation um where the dnr's looking to replace their system which they are looking to do where we end up in a mnlar situation again i know the legislators around here remember the mess we had there and by trying to to plug into a system the state's already paid for we might be able to save the state a lot of money so that's why we want to explore this option and mr king who was kind of the lead on the report is here and can talk to this as well and i didn't see senator dibble online maybe he is on now but he was part of the discussion and transportation as well and may want to add to this if he's online so i would bring if we can bring up mr king first mr king welcome to the committee please identify yourself and go ahead thank you very much mr chair my name is rick king i chaired the independent expert review for the state and uh also chair the technology advisory council for the state among other things i used to be the cio cto at thompson reuters before i retired anyway welcome uh glad to have you talking about this today um our independent review made 31 recommendations to the state around driver and vehicle services and the use of of the software around deputy registrar and exam stations and so forth we were asked by the transportation committees in both the house and the senate to report on a couple of those items and we reported and found a few other things along the way during our visits which were 20 plus to various deputy registrar sites and locations as well as doing a 50 state survey of this kind of thing we found out as we looked at the deputy registrars that they had systems on their counters that were dnr systems right alongside of what they were doing with the dvs system and we found out that dnr was looking at the replacement of their system for some of the registrations that they do that the deputy registrars do and um replacement for things that possibly go beyond what the deputy registrars do as well so in the report what we recommended and i'll read this because it's really important to hear what we say and what we don't say dvs should engage dnr to review the min drive system as a potential solution to replace the dnr system for boat atv and snowmobile registration so our goal was not to let an opportunity pass where the state has spent multi millions of dollars to replace auto registration and a driver's licensing system not to miss the opportunity if in fact the same system can be used for further registrations we do not recommend any kind of requirement to do so and i'm pleased to report that in conversations with dnr up and down the line we've found good evidence of great dialogue between dvs and dnr and we can be hopeful that the vendor that provides min drive would be considered in their in their evaluation for replacement of of their system so just to finalize our intent was to bring this opportunity for potential synergy to you with an idea toward making sure it doesn't escape unlooked at so we will be happy as an independent review if it's looked at and i will say that currently because the state has spent the money on the system of record that includes names addresses and that type of information as well as the ids that are currently used for many many many uses and residency location we're also going to be able to put kiosks out there that can do self-service that's just the beginning and there are now underway some things that deal with a digital or mobile driver's license in the future so it's it's a very interesting future and i know that dnr will give all those things consideration and the types of systems that they look at that's the end of my testimony mr chair i'm glad to answer any questions that anybody might have going for i think i think maybe we do have a couple testifiers we'll go ahead and wait until we're done there might be questions next we'll move to um ray bone atv minnesota a very familiar face welcome to the committee how are you thank you senator mr chair members of the committee my name is ray bone i'm representing here today the all-terrain vehicle association of minnesota as well as the amateur writers know of dirt bikes which is armchair district 23. we just became aware of this on i became aware of it on friday that this recommendation was this legislation was around uh so i knew you had that much time really i had that much time yes and uh and worse than that uh i have to speak to the old bill because we don't have the amendment uh i don't have the amendment i'm sorry you're right we don't it's been it's being distributed that's that's my fault my fault only here i assumed it was here does it doesn't mean we just had a little little error here and getting it there's no man okay okay well like say i'm playing ketchup so i apologize um but i um you know looking at this and i did a very brief look at it uh the you know this is the the analysis that appears to be done by the expert committee and and you know and maybe that's all that's needed i mean i i don't know but um i he's got a copy now anyway there's been no stakeholder input at all on this you know we're we're very protective of our constituency and we have a lot of issues have had a lot of issues over the years on registration and all that sort of thing and we like it when frankly we can go to dnr and we can get those resolved because we have been able to resolve a lot of issues even though it is yes we've spent some money on it it's an adequate antiquated system but you know we are fearful we are fearful of having to deal with some bureaucrats over in dps that don't even know what a snowmobile atv are uh when it comes to registration so one of our major concerns is what are we going to have any say any i mean who are we going to be able to talk to can we go to the commission dnr and say hey we got a real problem with this although it must it sounds like it's the best system since sliced bread uh men drive but you know we don't know and so so what kind of protection are we going to have and who are we going to be able to appeal to or are we going to have to come back to the legislature and have you fix things that may be wrong so control or at least feeling we have some control over some of the issues and some people that we know that we can talk to and then understand what we're about recreational vehicles boats and atvs and by the way two of the the recreational vehicles are missing this report that the the dirt bikers and the four by four trucks uh they probably they're on the same registration system as with dnr as as atvs and snowmobiles so anyway the the the question they are not cars they are not trucks so to say that you can easily integrate them into min drive i'm sorry i'm a little skeptical about that and and it may be true it may be true but i haven't i have not seen the analytics that bears that out so i i'm sorry for being skeptical i've got a whole list of questions about this system and i assume that we can discuss those if we're part of the part of a group if we can be part of this group that's going to evaluate going into min drive but we do not like the idea of having to come to this committee come to the environment committee and then do we have to turn around and go to are we going to have to go to [Music] dps the public safety committee are we going to have to go to transportation committee actually it will go to state gov if it's passed out of here and it also has had a hearing already in traffic no mr sherman i'm sorry i'm not being very clear in the future well if we're made part of this system then if it's if the data is is under the purview i might be able to clear up some okay senator and from staff and we already knew this as well the best way to look at this is it's going to be separate but equal um the dnr will still own it it'll be a separate system they will still work with the dnr they're not going to have to work with the with any other departments um the only one the only people that'll see the difference is on the back end managing the system so these folks will still be able to work directly with the dnr they're not going to have to go through more bureaucracy again the the people on the front end of it the end consumer won't know the difference other than the person they talk with that the deputy registrar isn't going to have to switch between systems to do this so concerns are certainly valid but unfounded because it the way this is set up the dnr will still control still have control and still own the system so it's fair to say that it's going to streamline the system correct and mr bone i understand i understand change is certainly certainly hard um and and i'm you know i can't apologize that you weren't involved because i wasn't either so um but now that you have at least a little idea what's going on here maybe you can uh contact the uh the author and he can tell you where and who to work with here uh with your concerns and mr chair i'd also recommend that folks work with the dnr as well the dnr had already started down this path and it was found out through the independent report that they were starting this process so in order to have what we all want is good governance kind of an extra eye on it based on past experiences with how we've dealt with agencies so they certainly should reach out to the dnr and try to be a part of that discussion as well this does not mandate anything but it makes sure the legislature has an eye on what's happening and i and i have discussed this a little bit before the committee meeting that uh the dollars and cents that that are you know brought in by the interested parties that mr bone uh represents is not going to change that's that's going to stay the same um well so mr bones go ahead and finish it up and then we have to we'll have to move on here if i could um we already work on dnr with this stuff and we work with them all the time on it and we have been working with them on this antiquated system there are certain elements of this that sound attractive like the kiosk we've been asking to do have more mobile type registration flexibility over the years so so there are elements of it but but i'm just maybe i'm being overly protective but but i i i i really get nervous when it when we talk about having to do with a couple of other agencies and and all that but if in fact those safeguards are i don't know are they in the legislation or i don't know where they'll be i guess they'll have to be in the agreement between dnr and and the other agencies but the main point is because all this is going to be be hashed out presumably when they discuss it is that we want to be part of the hashing we want to be part we want to be involved in it i understand we also have the dnr here as well i believe someplace are they here are they online maybe they can make some comments okay thank you mr chairman thank you mr bone hi welcome to the committee please identify yourself and proceed thank you mr chair members of the committee my name is jenna covey i'm a chief business technology officer with minnesota i.t services partnering with the minnesota department of natural resources thank you for the opportunity to be here today i'd like to start with a quick overview of our electronic licensing system known as els and an update on our status to modernize the system currently the els is a vendor supplied commercial off the shelf cot system that processes hunt and fish related transactions and recreational vehicle transactions this includes includes boat snowmobile atv off highway vehicle and off-road vehicle transactions and starting in the summer of 2022 the els system will also support hunter safety volunteer management registration the els project team
2022-03-12 10:00
