-------------------------------------------
Xcel Asks Some In Minnesota To Lower Thermostats - Duration: 1:41.
For more infomation >> Xcel Asks Some In Minnesota To Lower Thermostats - Duration: 1:41. -------------------------------------------
Illini look for season sweep at Minnesota - Duration: 0:39.
For more infomation >> Illini look for season sweep at Minnesota - Duration: 0:39. -------------------------------------------
House Greater Minnesota Jobs and Economic Development Finance Division 1/30/19 - Duration: 42:17.
>> [GAVEL]
>> CHAIR PELOWSKI: THE HOUR
OF 1245
HAVING ARRIVED I WILL CALL THE GREATER MINNESOTA JOBS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FINANCE DIVISION TO ORDER. WELCOME EVERYONE TO THE COMMITTEE. I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH
WHAT ARE THE NON-FORMAL RULES. THERE WILL BE NO
FORMAL POSTED RULES FOR THE NON-FORMAL RULES ARE THIS BUT WE WILL START ON TIME.
WE WILL NOT PASS ANY BILL OUT OF THIS COMMITTEE UNLESS IT
IS IN SHAPE FOR THE
NEXT COMMITTEE FOR
THE FLOOR. SO I'M GOING TO ONE MEMBERS NOW; IF YOU HAVE A BILL OR A AMENDMENT AN
D YOU SAY; WE WILL FIX IT IN THE
NEXT COMMITTEE; WE WILL LAY
THE BILL OR THE AMENDMENT; OVER. UNTIL
YOU DECIDE HOW IT CAN
BE FIXED IN THIS COMMITTEE BUT
NO BILL IS LEAVING
THIS COMMITTEE IN ANYTHING OTHER
THAN IT IN THE SHAPE IT NEEDS TO BE FOR THE FLOOR FOR THE NEXT COMMITTEE. I WOULD
REQUEST MEMBERS NOT BRING FOOD TO THE COMMITTEE. WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE TRAITS. WE DON'T NEED TO EAT IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC. IF YOU NEED SOMETHING TO DRINK IS FULLY UNDERSTANDABLE. THAT'S FINE; BRING THAT BUT WE
DON'T NEED TO EAT. PARTICULARLY;
ON TELEVISIONIT IS
EXTREMELY ANNOYING WATCHING SOMEONE FILLED HER MOUTH WHILE
ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC IS TRYING
TO TESTIFY. SO THOSE ARE THE SIMPLISTIC RULES AND I WILL ADD THIS ONE. THE OTHER RULES WILL BE DEFINED OPERATIVELY DURING
THE COURSE OF
THE SESSION. SO IF SOMETHING COMES UP
WE WILL HANDLE IT. WE WILL HANDLE IT IN COMMITTEE. WE WILL TRY TO TREAT
EVERYONE FAIRLY.
WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE AN ARGUMENT HERE
I'M FULLY CAPABLE OF RECESSING THE COMMITTEE OR ADJOURNING
SO WE CAN SETTLE OUR DIFFERENCES AND
COME BACK AND MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE
GOING. SO WITH THAT THE CHAIR IS DOING THE FIRST PRESENTATION. MY VICE CHAIR IS NOT HERE SO REPRESENTATIVE POPPE; YOU WILL GET THE
GAVEL BECAUSE THE VICE CHAIR IS
NOT HERE.
MME. CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ONE OF THE CHARGES OF THIS COMMITTEE WAS
TO REINVENT ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT WE FOR THE VICE CHAIR FINALLY IS HERE. I
JUST ANNOUNCED MR. VICE CHAIR; WE DO START ON
TIME AND I HAD TO TURN THE GAVEL OVER
TO REPRESENTATIVE POPPE BECAUSE THE VICE CHAIR WAS
NOT PRESENT. SO IN THE FUTURE; I MAY
NEED YOU >> I APOLOGIZE. I DO
LOCAL ISSUE. >> CHAIR PELOWSKI:
APOLOGY IS ACCEPTED ARE OF COURSE THE WEATHER IS EXTENDED WHERE THE CHARGES OF THIS
COMMITTEE IS TO REINVENT SOMETHING THAT EXISTED
FOR APPROXIMATELY A DECADE
IN THE
MINNESOTA HOUSE. THE MANY SESSIONS IN THE MANY SESSIONS WENT FROM 19871997.
THERE WERE 14 OF THEM. THEY LASTED APPROXIMATELY THREE DAYS ALL AROUND THE STATE AND IN THE
METROPOLITAN AREA AND YOU WILL SEE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. SO I'M GOING TO
GO OVER THE HISTORY OF THE MANY
SESSION. THIS WILL BE POSTED
ON OUR WEBSITE FOR YOU TO REVIEW
AND IT IS A WORK IN PRICE. NOW THE CHAIR CREATED THIS. SO THE CHAIR TAKES FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY ERROR AND I KNOW THERE'S ONE SPELLING ERROR IN YOUR PACKET BUT WE DID CATCH IT INSTRUCTED ON PRESENTATION IT SO IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR PRESENTATION; THIS IS PROBABLY THE COLDEST DAY OF THE YEAR. SO WE WILL START WITH SWEATERS.
THE WINONA MANY SESSION
AT SWEATERS FOR
HOUSE MEMBERS AND YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THE
THEY WERE PRODUCED BY
WINONA WITT NET. BLACK SWEATERS
FOR MEMBERS WHITE SWEATERS
FOR HOUSE AND THE SWEATERS WERE WON BY THE THREE DAYS NO BILL MARX IS
NOT HERE TO BILL MARX IS FROM WINONA. BILL MARX WAS PART OF THE MANY SESSION THAT WAS HELD IN WINONA.. BILL MARX STILL HAS
HIS WHITE SWEATER.YOU
ALSO SEE THE BANNER THAT IS THERE
ONE OF THE OTHER CHARGES OF
THIS COMMITTEE IS TO LINKTHESE
MANY SESSIONS WITH
THE POSSIBILITY OF THE
GOVERNOR HAVING HIS STATE OF THE STATE;
AGAIN; OUTSIDE OF ST. P
AUL. WINONA WAS THE FIRST
COMMUNITY IN THE HISTORY OF
THE STATETO HAVE A STATE OF THE STATE OUTSIDE OF
ST. PAUL. AND
WE WILL TALK ABOUT THE POLITICAL RAMIFICATIONS OF THIS BUT THERE WERE SOME OTHER RAMIFICATIONS THAT ARE MUCH MORE SUBSTANDARD
SUBSTANTIAL THE MARKETS IF YOU TAKE A LOOK YOU CAN SEE THE BENEFIT YOU CAN SEE THE SWEATERS. YOU COULD BE ONE BY
THOSE SWEATERS BY JUST LOOKING
AT THEM. SO THESE ARE THE 14
MANY SESSIONS. NOW EACH OF THE
MANY SESSIONS HAS A
SESSION REPORT
WHICH I RESEARCH KNOW WHAT TO THINK A LEGISLATIVE
REFERENCE LIBRARIAN AT HOUSE RESEARCH. YOU'LL SEE LINKS TO THESE IN THE PRESENTATION. NOW; IF ANY OF YOU
REPRESENT ANY OF THESE AREAS I WOULD HIGHLY SUGGEST YOU GO BACK AND YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE ISSUES
THAT WERE DISPLAYED DURING
THOSE MANY--SESSIONS OF THAT DECADE.
THERE'S BEEN SOME OF THOSE ISSUES ARE STILL GET TTO BE
RESOLVED. NOW THIS
IS A BLOWUP OF
THE MANY -- SESSION. FIRST ONE WAS IN
MANKATO. JOHN -- WAS THE REPRESENTATIVE AND
I ROOMED WITH JOHN -- FOR 20 YEARS AND I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO THE STORIES OF
JOHN DORNAN AND I ROOMED TOGETHER OTHER THAN TO SAY HE WAS ONE OF THE MOST ECONOMICAL INDIVIDUALS I HAVE EVER MET.
EVEN TO THE POINT OF STEALING
EVERY OTHER ONE OF MY SHOWER CURTAIN
HANGERS BECAUSE
HE FORGOT TO BRING HIS OWN. SOTHE MANKATO
MANY SESSIONAND YOU CAN
SEE HERE THIS IS A HIGHLIGHT OF THE MANKATO MANY SESSION. YOU CAN SEE PAULSANTANA CAN. SO YOU
KNOW PAUL.
PAUL IS NOW WITH OF MINNESOTA PRIVATE
COLLEGE CONDOM PAUL MECHANIC WORK
FOR THE SPEAKER DOES.
YOU SEEBOB AND YOU SEE PAUL AND THERE'S ANOTHER FELLOW NEXT TO HIM THAT YOU MIGHT RECOGNIZE FROM AN
EARLIER TIME AND THEY ARE LOOKING AT A PAINTING ON THE
GREEN ELEVATOR AND I THINK
THIS IS
[INAUDIBLE] NEAR MANKATO AND WERE ALL >> REPRESENTATIVE METSA: THESE LEGISLATIVE REPORTS ARE INTERESTING BECAUSE WE DID GO OUT LITERALLY EVERYWHERE. SO
T
HE COMMITTEE'S WENT OUT; WE HAD MAYBE A DOZEN-15 AND 100 NUMBERS FOUND OUT ACROSS THE ENTIRE AREA FOR
THREE DAYS. THESE ARE THE LINKS AND THESE LINKS
WILL BE ACTIVE ONCE I POST ON MY WEBSITE SO YOU CAN GO AND TAKE A LOOK AT
THESE PARTICULAR
LEGISLATOR REPORTS AND SEE WHAT HAPPENED IN
YOUR AREA. NOW THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED
IN WINONA. I AM GOING TO BE
VERY PARTISAN HERE IN PROMOTING
WINONA PRODUCT. SO HERE IS A WINONA COMPANY; WHEN CRAFTED IF YOU KNOW WHAT WINDOW CRAFTERS; IF YOU WATCH THE SUPER BOWL; ALL OF THE
TENANTS COME ALL THE MATERIAL FOR THE SUPER BOWL; FOR THE RYDER CUP; FOR ANY NATIONAL SPORTING EVENT IS PRODUCED USUALLY IN WINONA. THEY PRODUCED A LITTLE KEYCHAIN WHICH YOU SEE HERE. YOU ALSO NOTICE THAT THE PAPER HAD AN
OUTLINE OF ALL THE HEARINGS OVER THE THREE DAYS. I WANT
TO STRESS AT THE BOTTOM;
PRESTON; WAYNESBORO AND BYRON.
THEY WERE IN VIRGIL
JOHNSON DISTRICT. SO THIS ISN'T JUST
A DFL OR REPUBLICAN
MINI-SESSIONS IT WENT EVERYWHERE AND WE HAD
THE ROCHESTER REPRESENTATIVE WHO
JUST ARRIVED
. THIS WAS A FOUR-DAY MINI SESSION; THREE DAYS IN OUR AREA AND THEN
ONE DAY
IN ROCHESTER. YOU CAN THANK DAVE BISHOP FOR THAT ONE.NOW
THE ITEMS
THAT WERE USED TO PROMOTE THE MANY SESSIONS WERE VARIOUS. HERE ARE
TWO. NOTE;A TURTLE. THE TURTLE IS A
NATIVE AMERICAN PIPESTONE TURTLE.
IT'S APPROXIMATELY
THE SIZE OF THE STICKER AT THE BOTTOM IS THERE. THIS WAS IN WORTHINGTON. IT WAS PUT BY OUR DINNER PLATES
FOR DINNER. THE DINNER WAS SORT OF
DARK PEOPLE SAW THE TURTLE AND
I THOUGHT IT
WAS CHOCOLATE. THEY WERE PICKING IT UP AND BITING INTO THE PIPESTONE TURTLE
AND THAT AN ANNOUNCEMENT HAD TO BE MADE; DON'T BITE INTO THE
PIPESTONE TURTLE. SO THIS IS
AN FYI. IF
WE DO REINVENT THESE WORDS TO MAKE SURE WE DISTINGUISH BETWEEN CHOCOLATE AND PIPESTONE FOR FUTURE MANY SESSIONS. THE OTHER IIS A
RATHER
REMARKABLE FROG THIS IS A TREE FROG IT WAS THE ACTUAL SI
ZE AND NOTE THE COMPANY THAT DID GET THIS COMMITTEE
STILL EXIST. IF YOU WATCH THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL OR IF YOU WATCH NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC; THIS IS THE COMPANY THAT RE-CREATES ALL OF
THOSE MARVELOUS MAJOR THINGS FROM PAST
AND PRESENT. THEY HAD CREATED THIS AND
NOTE THAT WHILE WE DID GET THE
STATE MONEY FOR THIS; THE
CONGRESSIONAL EARMARK
DIDN'T HAPPEN SO WE CAN BLAME CONGRESS FOR NOT HAVING THIS
PARTICULAR ITEM. THE NEXT ARE A SERIES
OF ARTICLES FROM
THE PAPER AND HERE IT SAYS NEARLY 100 OF
THE HOUSES
103 FORMULAS ARE EXPECTED FOR A
MINUTE SESSION. WE ARE HOPING THE MANY SESSION WILL BE VERY HELPFUL AS MAJORITY
[INAUDIBLE] AND SETTING THE AGENDA FOR THE 1990
LEGISLATIVE SESSION. I NOTICED SOME OF YOU; AND 1990 MIGHT AS WILL BE
1066 OR SOME OTHER ARBITRARY
DATE BUT IT ISN'T THAT
LONG AGO AND AS YOU SEE THE RESULTS OF THE MANY SESSION STILL
EXIST. BOB -- IS HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER. YOU WILL SEE HE WILL SOON BECOME SPEAKER. THE SIT
ES FOR THE
LEGISLATIVE SESSION. THIS IS WHERE BECOMES POLITICAL AND I KNOW IT'S MISSPELLED ON YOUR HANDOUT BUT I CORRECTED
IT HERE.
SITES FOR THE LEGISLATIVE MANY SESSIONS ARE SELECTED MAINLY FOR POLITICAL
FORTIFICATION ACCORDING TO AN INDEPENDENT REPUBLICAN LAWMAKER WHO ASKED NOT TO BE EDIFIED.
THE LEGISLATURE
NOTED THAT THE MANY SESSIONS OR VERSIONS OF
ADDED HOWEVER;
THAT HIS PARTY WOULD PROBABLY USE THEM THE
SAME WAY IF THEY WERE
IN CONTROL. TH
E INTENT OF THIS IS NOT TO BE PARTISAN. THE INTENT OF THIS IS TO TAKE THE COMMITTEES OUT
AND SPREAD OUT IN AN AREA WHERE WE C
AN UNDERSTAND FULLY FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE WITH THE
ISSUES ARE
AND AS YOU SAW IN WINONA AS WE SAW IN THE
OTHER AREAS. WE DID THAT AND WE CONTINUE TO DO THAT. SO WE CAN
FIGHT PLAY PARTISAN GAMES WITHOUT AND
ECHOES BACK 30 YEARS; TOO; BUT I WOULD HOPE WE WOULD NOT. THE IMPACTOF THESE
IS HUGE. YOU CAN SEE HERE
WE ARE LOOKING AT AN
AVIATION PRODUCT.. ONE OF
THE BIG STRANDS OF HAVING THE MINI SESSION IS BEEN ABLE TO GO ON SITE AND
SEE EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE PASSING LEGISLATION FOUR. IN THIS CASE; THE TECHNICAL COLLEGE WANTED IN AN AVIATION CENTER BECAUSE AVIATION WAS ALL THE RAGE
DURING THE 1989 MANY SESSION AND HERE
IS ONE THAT'S MADE OUT OF METAL AND COMPOSITE.
AS HE WAS A COMPOSITES WILL BECOME VERY IMPORTANT IN BOTH OF MANY SESSION AND IN
THE STATE OF THE STATE. SO HERE WE KEEP
SURPRISING OURSELVES WITH THE SUCCESS OF EVERY
MINI SESSION. IT CERTAINLY IS THE SMOOTHEST FUNCTIONING SESSION EVER
HOUSE SPEAKER BOB [INAUDIBLE]. HE PROBABLY SAID THAT AT EVERY MEETING.
BUT IT ONLY COUNTS IF HE SAYS IT
IN YOUR DISTRICT. SO AGAIN THERE
WAS COMPETITION BETWEEN
THESE AREAS ON HOW TO HAVE THE BEST
MINI SESSION. HERE IS
ANOTHER ONE.
TAKE A LEGISLATURE TO DO BETTER. WE ACTUALLY HAD LEGISLATORS GOING TO BE POEMS FOR DINNER
.. NOW THIS IS A CAUTIONARY TALE. WE HAD SOME
MEMBERS WHOWE KNEW HAD COLORFUL LANGUAGE. WE WERE TOLD THAT IF THEY WENT TO DINNER PARTICULARLY IN-HOME SMALL CHILDREN; BE EXPECTED THEM NOT TO USE THE
COLORFUL LANGUAGE WHEN THEY WERE IN THE
PERSON'S HOME. BUT NOTICE THE OTHER COMMENTS. EXPOSURE TO WINONA IS PHENOMENAL. FOR SOUTHEASTERN MINNESOTA THEY HAVE A VISION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR BUSINESS AND GOVERNMENT
TO SHARE THEIR IDEAS AND
CONCERNS WITH LEGISLATORS IS PHENOMENAL.
I THINK IN BACK OF ME IS THE
LOBBYIST FOR THE CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE. [INAUDIBLE /
OFF MICROPHONE] IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHO THAT IS USED TO BE A STAFFER HERE NOW HE WORKS FOR THE CHAMBER. TOM
-- WINONA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND I WILL TALK A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THEY WERE SET UP. I COCHAIRED
THE WINONA MINI SESSION WITH
GARY EVANSWAS THE VICE PRESIDENT AT WINONA STATE BUT
THE CHAMBER; THE CITY THE COUNTY
WERE ALL INVOLVED IN SETTING THIS THING UP. IT TOOK US
FOUR MONTHS
TO SET IT UP. TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE READY
TO GO WHEN THE
LEGISLATORS ARRIVED AND WE HAD PLACES FOR EVERYBODY
TO STAY
IN COMMITTEE HEARINGS AND WE HAD COMMITTEE HEARINGS
OF SUBSTANCE. SO I AM GOING TO
EMPHASIZE HERE THAT THINGS LIKE
THE CHAMBER SHOULD
BE USED IF WE ARE HAVING MANY SESSIONS IN
THE FUTURE. NOTICE
THE OTHER THE LOCAL COST HERE WAS
ABOUT 3000-$4000. NOW THIS IS AGAIN 30 YEARS AGO.
BUT THERE ARE SOME COST TO THE LOCAL COMMUNITY
FOR THIS. WE WILL TALK ABOUT HOUSE COSTS; SOON.
SO ON THE NEXT SLIDE FROM GOD THE ROCHESTER REFERENCES HERE. ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING
HEARINGS WAS IN ROCHESTER. ON
A NEW STATE FLAG.
NOW THE TWO STATE FLAGS YOU SEE THERE ARE
ACTUALLY MINE.
THEY WANT ME TO CARRY
THE BILL. IF THERE'S TIME IN COMMITTEE I COULD EXPLAIN WHY I DID NOTCARRY THE BILL
BUT REPRESENTATIVE
GOOD NECK FROM ROCHESTER
DID AND THIS IS STILL AN ISSUE
; CHANGING MINNESOTA'S STATE FLAG. SO THE FIRST STATE FLAG WAS REJECTED
FOR A LOT
OF REASONS AND THEN THEY CAME UP WITH THE SECOND THE SECOND WAS THE ONE THAT WAS ACTUALLY HEARD IN ROCHESTER. SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE;; YOU CAN SEE THAT
THE SECOND SLIDE HAS A HEARING AND YOU
HAVE THE FORMER
STATE REP; JOHN ANDERSON; YOU CAN SEE I
THINK THAT
[INAUDIBLE] BACKGROUND AND
FILL THE AYE THING WAS PRESENT IN THE BILL. ALSO NOTICE
THE WINDOW LEGISLATURE THIS YEAR 2018 TOOK UP THE FLAG BILL
AND A STUDENT FROM ROCHESTER
OR FROM [INAUDIBLE] PETERSON TOOK UP THE BILL AND GOT AS FAR AS THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE WHERE IT DIED. WENT TO TAXES AND WENT
TO ENVIRONMENT BUT IT DID NOT MAKE IT OUT OF
IT EDUCATION. SO THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT IS STILL WITH US BUT IT MIGHT COME UP IN A MINI SESSION BRING UP HERE AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE WINONA
MINI SESSION AS I THINK WE HAVE SOME BILL BOOKS THAT WERE PASSED OUT TO MEMBERS. YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK
WITH THE MANY SESSION IS. THERE IS THE THANK YOU THAT WAS IN THE PAPER AND WE WANT TO REMIND MEMBERS TO
THANK EVERYONE THAT ATTENDS.
ALSO; NOTICE
I DID A LITTLE COLUMN HERE AND ASK FOR FEEDBACK AND OF COURSE ONE
OF OUR
CONSTITUENTS SAID THE LEGISLATORS SHOULD TAKE US
TO DINNER
SO THAT IS ANOTHER OPTION. INSTEAD OF US INVITING
LEGISLATORS INTO HOMES; WE SHOULD BE TAKING THEM TO DINNER. WELL YOU CAN DELETE THAT ON YOUR OWN. THE RESU
LTS. HERE YOU SEE GOVERNOR PERPICH
IN WINONA SIGNING THE 1990 BONDING BILL TO THE 1990
BONDING BILL WILL HAVE IN IT THE PURCHASE OF
BOARDS HALL FROM WHAT WAS THE OLD ST.
TERESA CAMPUS. IT WILL BECOME
THE FIRST PRESIDENCY COLLEGE
AND STILL THEE ONLY
RESIDENCY COLLEGE INSIDE
WHAT WAS THE STATE
UNIVERSITY SYSTEM AND MNSCU
SYSTEM ANOTHER MNSTATE SYSTEM. THIS BECAME A
CASH COW FOR
WINONA STATE.IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT A RESIDENCY COLLEGES; THE STUDENTS LIVE IN A FACILITY
WHERE THEY NOT ONLY HAVE DORM ROOMS BUT THEY ALSO TAKE
THEIR CLASSES. THIS WAS AN
EXPERIMENT BY PRES. KRUGER AND IT TURNED OUT TO BE A
VERY [INAUDIBLE] NOTICE AND A BISHOP IS THERE BECAUSE THERE WERE LITTLE ITEMS
FROM ROCHESTER
THAT WERE ALSO THERE AT
THE TIME. THIS; I JUST ACQUIRED. NOW I KNOW IT'S
DIFFICULT TO READ YOU CAN READ IT AT YOUR LEISURE BUT WE WERE SEARCHING FOR A COST TO A MINI SESSION. NOW WE SAW THE
LOCAL COST. OF 3000-$4000
FOR WINONA. THESE ARTICLES HAVE OUR
FIRST LOOK AT WHAT THE
HOUSE COSTS
AND APPARENTLY; ONE OF THESE MANY SESSIONS IN 1995
COST ABOUT $50;000. SO THIS
IS NOT AN INEXPENSIVE ITEM AND
I SUSPECT THAT SOME OF OUR
COMMITTEE BUDGETS INCLUDING THIS ONE WILL BE USED TO SUPPORT
MANY SESSIONS SHOULD WE GO OUT. SO THIS IS FOR READING LATER. IN FACT; I JUST GOT THIS
MONDAY SO
THIS IS INCORPORATED RELATIVELY LATE. THE NEXT THING WE WILL TALK ABOUT ARE THE STATE OF
THE STATE. THE FIRST STATE OF THE STATE AS YOU CAN SEE THE BOTTOM
WAS ON FEBRUARY 9; 1988 IN WINONA.
WAS GOVERNOR PERPICH COMING
TO WINONA
FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND OF COURSE THAT'S THE NAME OF THIS COMMITTEE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
THAT'S HOW WE TIE ALL
THIS TOGETHER BY THE WAY THERE IS
A HIGH-STAKES TEST ON THIS LATER. IT WILL BE IN NOVEMBER OF NEXT YEAR IT'S CALLED THE REELECTION. SO
LISTEN CLOSELY. NOW I HAVE TWO GRAPHICS. I HAVE A GRAPHIC FOR WINONA. I HAVE ONE FOR ROCHESTER. BECAUSE THE STATE OF THE STATE THAT I'M GOING TO FOCUS ON HAD A HUGE IMPACT ON
THESE TWO COMMUNITIES. SO IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE; THIS
IS A PAPER I DID BASED ON MY JOURNAL
SOME OF YOU HAVE WONDERED WHAT
THAT JOURNAL IS GOOD FOR. IT'S GOOD FOR SO MANY THINGS YOU REALLY DON'T KNOW. SO
THE JOURNAL IS A DAY BY DAY
LITERALLY EXAMINATION OF
THE PROCESS OF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN GOVERNOR PERPICH PROPOSED A COMPOSITE
ENGINEERING PROGRAM FOR WINONA STATE.
THE BILL AS IT
WENT THROUGH THE MINNESOTA HOUSE AND SENATE SIGNED BY
THE
GOVERNOR AND THE SUBSEQUENT STATE OF THE STATE WHERE THE GOVERNOR CAME DOWN TO ANNOUNCE
NOT ONLY THE
BILL BUT THERE WOULD BE A FACILITY IN THERE
WOULD BE
OTHER ADD-ONS TO WHAT WAS HAPPENING. SO THIS PAPER
I DID IN 1992WHICH OF COURSE
WOULD BE A COUPLE OF YEARS AFTERWARDS; AND YOU CAN SEE THE BOTTOM THIS STARTED WHEN PERPICH
VISITED WINONA ON
A CAMPAIGN[INAUDIBLE] 1986 HE WENT TO PASTOR H
ALL AND HE SAW WHAT WAS HAPPENING
WITH COMPOSITE. NOW I SHOULD; MME. CHAIR; ASK THIS QUESTION
OF OUR ESTEEMED GROUP BECAUSE I KNOW THEY ARE VERY SHARP. WHAT IS
A COMPOSITEMATERIAL?
>> CHAIR POPPE: I BELIEVE REPRESENTATIVE
METSA GOD HAS AN ANSWER TO
THE QUESTION. >> REPRESENTATIVE LISLEGARD: I THINK
I DO MME. CHAIR. I BELIEVE IT'S WHEN YOU
PRESS DIFFERENT SHOWS TOGETHER AND IT GOES THROUGH A PROCESS AND
ITS HEATED AND IT COMES OUT THE OTHER SIDE
. >> REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI:
ADAM CHAIR; HE IS CLOSE TO A COMPOSITE MATERIAL IS THAT BUT IT'S ALSO MUCH MORE THAN THAT.
WINONA IS CONSIDERED TO BE
THE HOME OF THE FIRST
PRACTICAL USE OF CARBON FIBER IMPREGNATED IN
A RESIN TO REPLACE
METAL MATERIALS. YOU HAVE
CARS TODAY THAT ARE PRIMARILY
COMPOSITE MATERIALS
ON THE INSIDE. IF YOU SWING A GOLF CLUB IS WHEN COMPOSITE MATERIAL IF YOU SWING A RACKET YOU SWING
COMPOSITE MATERIAL. ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT YOU SEE
HERE INCLUDING THE [INAUDIBLE] ARE MADE FROM
COMPOSITE MATERIALS.
THERE WERE FIVE COMPANIES IN OUR AREA
THAT HAD SOME TYPE OF COMPOSITE COMPONENT IN THE WORK WITH
PASTOR HALL ON DEVELOPING A TYPE OF
TECHNIQUE THAT THEY COULD TEST THE
MATERIALS PERPICH CITED HE SAID WHAT YOU NEED IS AN
UNDERGRADUATE COMPOSITE
ENGINEERING PROGRAM AND THAT'S WHAT THIS STORY IS
ABOUT. SO HE
PROPOSED IT. IT BECAME A BILL. GOING TO
CAPITOL HILL
AND BOTH IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE. IT WAS JUST
ONE BILL CARRIED BY MYSELF
AND SEN. MORRIS AND IT WAS BACKED UP BY MATERIAL FROM WINONA STATE YOU CAN SEE THE FIRST ONE HERE; THE ANALYSIS OF THE
IMPACT OF COMPOSITE SCIENCE.
THEN YOU CAN SEE THE SECOND AND ACTUALLY HAVE A LITTLE CARBON FIRE MATERIAL HERE IN THE FIRST PAGE
. THE BILL WAS THE FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF
THE LEGISLATUREA MULTIMEDIA PREESENTATION WAS DONE. THIS IS THE PULASKI JOURNAL AGAIN. THIS IS JANUARY
14; 1987.'S ARE NOTES FOR
MY JOURNAL WILL BEGIN TO FIELD TEST THAT
MULTIMEDIA PRESENTATION. IF YOU NOTICE; THE
MULTIMEDIA PRESENTATION WAS PRODUCED BY MEDIA WORKS IN WINONA AT A COST OF $20;000.
NOWTHIS IS 1987. THAT IS $1000
A MINUTE. THAT MULTIMEDIA
IN 1987 WAS SIX STACKED
SLIDE PROJECTORS IN A STAINLESS
STEEL CONTAINER WITH DIFFERENT MOTORS
THEY WORKED
IN SEQUENCE DRIVEN BY MUSIC. IT WAS SORT OF KEN
BURNS EFFECT WHERE YOU TOOK STILL PICTURES BUT BECAUSE
YOU ARE MOVING WITH SIX IT GAVE
THE IMPRESSION
OF MOVING. NO ONE HAD EVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE IT. IT WAS CALLED THE AGE OF COMPOSITE AND I HAVE THREE SECTIONS HERE. IT BECAME OUR
BASIC TOOL FOR LOBBYING FOR THE COMPOSITE ENGINEER. NOW I HAVE A
HIT; TREASURY THE 20 MINUTE BUT I AM GOING TO
SHOW YOU IS THE BEGINNING SO YOU GET A FLAVOR FOR IT AND HAVE TO USE THE MICROPHONE BECAUSE THEY ARE
TAPED SYSTEM YOU CANNOT LINK THE SOUND FROM A NEW IPAD 3
2018 TO A SYSTEM. SO I HAVE TO TAKE THE MICROPHONE WHICH; BY THE WAY IS COMPOSITE AND
TURN IT.
>> >> [MUSIC] THE AGES
OF MAN ARE NAME BY
THE MATERIALS THAT SHIP THE TECHNOLOGIES. STONE;
BRONZE;
AND OTHERS. THE EVOLUTION CONTINUES
AS MATERIALS MAKE A
DECISIVE DIFFERENCE IS OUR
CIVILIZATION ADVANCES. ENTER; THE AGE
OF COMPOSITE. >> WE CHOOSE TO GO TO THE LOAN. WE CHOOSE TO GO TO
THE MOON
WE CHOOSE TO GO TO THE MOON IN THIS DECADE AND OTHER THINGS NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE EASY BUT BECAUSE THEY ARE HARD. BECAUSE THAT GOAL WILL SERVE TO ORGANIZE AND MAKE
IT [INAUDIBLE] OF OUR ENERGIES AND SKILLS. BECAUSE THAT CHALLENGE
IS ONE THAT WE ARE WILLING
TO ACCEPT. WHEN WE ARE WILLING TO
PROPOSE AND ONE WE
WILL [INAUDIBLE] >> THIS IS A STORY
THIS [INAUDIBLE]
IT IS THE STORY OF ADVANCED COMPOSITES IN MINNESOTA
WITH CHAPTERS IN MEDICINE; TRANSPORTATION; RECREATION;
AND AEROSPACE.
IN FACT; A CHAPTER FROM NEARLY EVERY UNITED STATES
SPACE ENDEAVOR.
>> HOUSTON;
[INAUDIBLE] THE EAGLE
HAS LANDED. >> REPRESENTATIVE
PELOWSKI: SO THERE HASN'T BEEN A SPACEFLIGHT THEN OR NOW THAT DOES
NOT LAUNCH WITH A SIGNIFICANT PERCENTAGE OF THE MATERIAL IN THAT SPACE
VEHICLE SOURCED FROM WINONA MINNESOTA. NO EITHER
THE MATERIALS THAT ARE PUMPED INTO IT OR THE
FINAL PRODUCT
ARE PRODUCED IN THE SOUTHEASTERN MINNESOTA IN SOME
AREA. SO WITH THAT I WILL GO TO A SIMPLER MATERIAL. WE HAD
THE MULTIMEDIA. THEN WE CAME
ACROSS THIS. AN ICE FISHING ROD.
DIVERSIFIED FABRICATORS
WAS PRODUCING COMPOSITE ICE
FISHING RODS.
TO WIN AND 50 OF THESE WERE PURCHASED AND
DONATED AND THEN GIVEN TO TH
E LEGISLATORS. DUANE BENSON JUST PASSED AWAY AND WAYNE BENSON CAME IN MY OFFICE AND SAID CAN I
HAVE TWO? I WOULD LIKE ONE FOR MYSELF AND ONE FOR
MY SON. SO HE TOOK TWO AND THEN
WHEN THE BILL WAS PRESENTED IN
THE SENATE THEY HAD ALREADY USE THEM
AND EXPLAIN TO THE
SENATE COMMITTEE HOOW MANY FISH THAT HE AND HIS
SON CAUGHT WITH A COMPOSITE
ICE FISHING RODS. SO
NEVER UNDERESTIMATESMALL
LOBBYING TOOL. IT WORKS WELL. IN FACT;
[INAUDIBLE] THAT WAS DIVERSIFIED FABRICATORS. THAT WAS STAN
PROS AND STAN PROS AND WAS CONSIDERED THE FIRST INDIVIDUAL IN THE UNITED STATES COME IN THE WORLD; TO TAKE
CARBON FIBER
IMPREGNATED WITH THE RESIN AND CREATE
A SIX-INCH CHEST RING THAT USED TO BE METAL AND THE
N TEST THE COMPONENTS. SO STAN HAD DIVERSIFIED FABRICATORS. NOW ALL OF THESE COMPOSITE COMPANIES
HAVE CHANGED. HIS COMPANY NOW
IS [INAUDIBLE]. SO IF YOU ARE
A MUSICIAN AND YOU PLAY A FIDDLE
;; YOU PLAY A CELLO; YOU PLAY ANY
STRINGED INSTRUMENT; THIS IS CONSIDERED TO BE THE
[INAUDIBLE] MADE OUT OF COMPOSITE MATERIALS BUT STAN HAS SINCE PASSED AWAY. HE WAS; VERY
BY THE WAY A VERY GOOD GOLFER BUT THAT IS THE STORY FOR ANOTHER DAY BUT
THESE COMPANIES ARE NOT THE SAME AS THEY WERE 30 YEARS AGO BECAUSE THE MATERIALS ARE NOT THE SAME. WE CAN THANK
THE WINONA STATE COMPOSITE
ENGINEERING PROGRAMFOR THE EVOLUTION OF SOME THESE
COMPANIES. SOHERE'S THE GOVERNOR
IN WINONA SIGNING YET ANOTHER BONDING BILL AND
NOTICE ITS 1987 AND THERE IS THE
ACTUAL BILL AND SIGNED ON THE BILL OR THE CONFERENCE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
; LYNDON CARLSON IS ONE OF THEM ON THE COMPOSITE ENGINEERING AND WINONA
-- WINDOWS IT WAS THE FOURTH OF THE ENGINEERING SCHOOLS IN
THE STATE
UNIVERSITY SYSTEM IF THEY WERE ONLY GOING TO BE FIGURED SO WINONA HAD TO DONATE; HAD TO FIND $1 MILLION; WH
ICH THEY DID TO COME UP TO SUPPORT THE
SCHOOL. NOW THE DISCUSSION
FROM 1987-1988 WAS HOUSE THE GOVERNOR GOING TO PROMOTE THIS ONCE A BILL IS SIGNED
. THIS IS HOW HE PROMOTED IT. HE CAME
TO WINONA. HE HAD THE STATE OF THE STATE AND WAS HELD ON FEBRUARY 9; 1980.
YOU WILL SAY HOW DO I REMEMBER THAT DAY? IT HAPPENED TO BE
REPRESENTATIVE JEAN
PELOWSKI'S
BIRTHDAY AND IF YOU REMEMBER MY SPEECH ON THE HOUSE FLOOR ABOUT TOM RUKAVINA AND
THE LETTERS MY FATHER
ALSO WROTE THE GOVERNOR. TOLD THE GOVERNOR
WAS MY BIRTHDAY. SO THIS IS THE FRONT PAGE OF THE WINONA DAILY NEWS
DECLARING IT
JEAN PELOWSKI DAY. SO IF YOU WANT TO WORK
THAT IN TO A STATE OF THE STATE OR A
MINI SESSION; WE CAN PROBABLY DO IT BUT
ALSO NOTICE THAT THE SPEECH IS ALL ABOUT
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. AND PERPICH NOW IS GOING TO PUSH NOT JUST FOR COMPOSITE ENGINEERING. HE WANTS AND ENGINEERING BUILDING. SO
THE RESULTS;; I HAVE SORT
OF STATION THESE THIS WAY. IF IT IS NOT THE BUTTON
IT'S A STATE OF THE STATE. IF IT'S GOT THE LITTLE KEYCHAIN
IT'S THE MINI SESSION BUT NUMBER ONE;
UNDERGRADUATE COMPOSITE ENGINEERING WHICH IS STILL THERE AND SO THE
ONLY UNDERGRADUATE
PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY BUT NUMBER TWO; A NEW BUILDING WHICH IS NOW
STAR; BUT WAS APPLIED HEALTH AND SCIENCE BUILDING FOR NURSING AND COMPOSITES. NUMBER THREE;
NEW AVIATION CENTER FOR THE TECHNICAL COLLEGE. NUMBER FOUR; PLAN FOR THE WSU LIBRARY WHICH ARE BE THE FIRST DIGITAL LIBRARY
AN
D WHEN IT WAS BUILT WILL BE THE MOST EXPENSIVE BUILDING AT
THE TIME BY THE STATE
UNIVERSITY SYSTEM. THE OVERPASS OF THE WINONA RAILROAD TRACKS
TAKES STATE MONEY FEDERAL MONEY AND THE MONEY TO BUILD FOR THE DISCUSSION WAS HELD DURING THE
MINI SESSION. AND THE ACQUISITION OF
BOARDS HALL AS THE ONLY
RESIDENCY COLLEGE IN THE STATE
UNIVERSITY SYSTEM. SO THOSE ARE THE RESULTS OF THE STATE OF THE STATE AND THE
MINI SESSION JUST FOR WINONA. SO THE NEXT ONE; ROCHESTER.
ROCHESTER HAD A STATE OF
THE STATE AND YOU CAN SEE IN
2005 TIM PAWLENTY CAN TRIM
TIM PAWLENTY
WITH DOLLARS THAT HE WOULD SUPPORT A BRANCH OF THE UNIVERSITY MINNESOTA IN ROCHESTER. HE THEN ESTABLISHED
A COMMITTEE TO STUDY IT
AND BECAME THE ROCHESTER
BRANCH OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF MINNESOTA. THIS IS
A SIGNIFICANT EDUCATIONAL ADDITION TO
THE UNIVERSITY AND TO
SOUTHEASTERN MINNESOTA AND IT WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED WITHOUT THE STATE OF THE STATE.
SO WITH THAT; MEMBERS; IF YOU WONDER WHERE THESE COME FROM; THIS IS HOW
I TAUGHT MY HIGH SCHOOL CLASSES AND MY COLLEGE CLASSES
.. THESE ARE AN ARRAY OF DIFFERENT
COURSES I'VE CREATED AND ALL OF THESE ARE NOW PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC IN VARIOUS WAYS. SO IF YOU ARE WONDERING WHEN THE NEXT
ONE IS;
NOTICE THAT WE HAVE THE
FRENCH REVOLUTION AND NAPOLEON. THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED
NEXT MONTH AT CASTLEROCK MUSEUM
.. THIS IS THE THIRD TIME I
PRESENTED IT. THIS CONTAINS MUSIC; ART; ARCHITECTURE AND LITERATURE
FROM THE ERA OF NAPOLEON THE
FRENCH REVOLUTION. YOU CAN SEE THE REST COULD PROBABLY DO WHEN YOU'RE MOST INTERESTED AND IT TOOK TWO YEARS TO CREATE THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE RENOVATION OF
THE CAPITAL. THIS TOOK THREE YEARS AND I USE THE 3000
HIGH-RESOLUTION PICTURES FROM TOM -- AND I PUT ABOUT 700 OF THEM OUT AND IT HAS
THE ENTIRE RESTORATION OF THE CAPITAL FROM THE GROUND ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP. SO WITH THAT MEMBERS AM OPEN TO QUESTIONS. THEN; THERE
IS A HIGH-STAKES QUIZ
NEXT NOVEMBER.
>> REPRESENTATIVE POPPE:
YES; REPRESENTATIVE
>> REPRESENTATIVE
I'M REALLY INTERESTED IN THIS BECAUSE
I'M ONE OF THE OLDER MEMBERS
THAT DOESN'T THINK 1990 WAS VERY
LONG AGO. >> [LAUGHING]
I'M JUST WONDERING HOW THIS
RELATES TOGOVERNOR PERPICH
IS CAPITAL FOR
A DAY? I WAS PRESENT OF THE GRAND RAPIDS
AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND I THINK WAS 1990
THAT HE HAD A SERIES OF
CAPITAL FOR THE DAY EVENTS AND
JUST LIKE
WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE; MANY SESSIONS; THE COMMUNITIES CAN TOGETHER
. IN OUR CASE IT WAS THE
MINNESOTA CITIZENS LEAGUE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; WE CREATED OUR
OWN AGENDA. BASED ON THAT AGENDA;
COMMISSIONERS WERE ASSIGNED
TO VISIT.. I DON'T REMEMBER
LEGISLATIVE HEARINGS SO MUCH AS
I REMEMBER
COMMISSIONERS COMING OUT
AND LOOKING THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION AND SO ON AND IT WAS FABULOUS.
LIKE
AN OVERNIGHT AND AT THE END OF A REALLY
CONFERENCE OF DAY THAT I
S BEEN WELL-PLANNED THAT THE GOVERNOR SPOKE AND WRAPPED EVERYTHING UP
AND INITIATIVES REALLY TOOK OFF AFTER THAT. I WAS AT THE CAPITAL FOR A DAY WAS A
WONDERFUL INITIATIVE. >> REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI:
MME. CHAIR REPRESENTATIVE CAPITAL FOR DAY IS DIFFERENT THAN STATE OF THE STATE.
GOVERNOR PAWLENTYALSO AT
CAPITAL FOR DANA TO GET FIND THEM. [INAUDIBLE] THEY HAD CAPITAL FOR A DAY AND IT'S A
DIFFERENT VENUE THAN WHAT I DESCRIBED FOR YOU HERE. THE STATE OF THE STATE TAKES A GREAT DEAL OF PLANNING. THE CAPITAL FOR THE DAY DID NOT TAKE AS
MUCH PLANNING. THE MANY SESSIONS TAKE EVEN
MORE PLANNING.
LOGISTICS OF A MINI SESSION OR SOMETHING
TO SEE. SO CAPITAL FOR THE DAY IS ANOTHER WAY OF DOING THIS BUT
I WOULD SAY IT'S A MUCH LIGHTER EXPERIENCE THAN THE TWO I HAVE DISCOVER YOU HERE.
>> CHAIR:
REPRESENTATIVE LAYMAN >> REPRESENTATIVE LAYMAN: THANK YOU; MME. CHAIR
AND REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI. AS
I RECALL IS A LOT OF PLANNING. I
WAS IN THE PLENTY
OF MINISTRATION WHEN HE WAS
IN ROCHESTER.
THAT WAS THE STATE OF THE STATE BUT THIS CAPITAL FOR A DAY; IT WAS
LIKE A MONTH OR MORE OF PLANNING AND REALLY I LIKE IT BECAUSE IT WAS FROM THE GROUND UP.IT WAS
VERY GRASSROOTS AND VERY SIMILAR TO THINK WHAT YOU'RE TALKING
ABOUT HERE. IT SOMETHING
-- I WAS WAIT TO SEE
IT RESURRECTED. BY FUTURE ADMINISTRATION >> REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI: MME. CHAIR; THE STATE OF THE STATE IS A PRESENTATION TO THE
ENTIRE STATE BUT IT'S A AT A LOCATION OUTSIDE OF
ST. PAUL WHERE THE GOVERNOR IS PROPOSING TO
THE LEGISLATURE. WHEREAS THE CAPITAL FOR THE DAY IS
A DIFFERENT PRESENTATION ALTOGETHER. I'VE BEEN PART OF ALL OF THE. SO I LIKE ALL THREE. I WISH THEY WOULD DO MORE
AND I THINK WE NEED TO GET OUT BUT WE NEED TO GET OUT
INTO AREAS OUTSIDE OF ST. PAUL
AND LISTEN MORE. THEN; BE ON SITE MORE. IT'S A GREAT DEAL OF DIFFERENCE WHEN YOU ARE ON SITE WHEN YOU'RE LISTENING TO PEOPLE PEOPLE WILL NEVER TRAVEL HERE TO TESTIFY BUT WHO YOU MIGHT MEET THE DINNER WITH IN THEIR HOME. >> REPRESENTATIVE LAYMAN: I AGREE.
>> CHAIR:
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
REPRESENTATIVE SAUKE >>
REPRESENTATIVE SAUKE: THANK YOU; MME. CHAIR I WOULD LIKE
TO INVITEREPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI
TO SEE IF HE CAN FOCUS HIMSELF
TOWARD HOW DO COMMUNITIES AND
OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVES
AND POSSIBLY EVEN THE ADMINISTRATION TO FIND ELEMENTS
OF FOCUS THAT ARE GOING
TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF LEGS INTO
THE FUTURE? ARE GOING TO HAVE
SOME SIGNIFICANCE
SO THEY DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO
BE LEVERAGED? >> REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI:
MME. CHAIR; THAT WAS THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THESE.
THAT YOU WOULD PLAN IN ADVANCE WHAT
MIGHT BE LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS AND THAT YOU WOULD WORK TOWARD
EXPLAINING THOSE AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. NOW WE HAD ONE ADVANTAGE WITH PERPICH AND THAT I HAD ALREADY PROPOSED A COMPOSITE ENGINE
AND WHEN ADVANTAGE BECAUSE HE WAS PROPOSING THE
ROCHESTER BRANCH OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BUT YOU SAW THERE WERE OTHER ELEMENTS HERE; TOO. SOME OF THEM TRANSPORTATION.
RAILROAD TRACKS. ALL OF THESE THINGS NEED TO BE PLAN IN ADVANCE AND ONLY IN YOUR COMMITTEE'S KNOW WHAT THEY ARE AND THEN YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK WITH THE HOUSE TO MAKE SURE THAT
THE COMMITTEES ON
SITEHERE THOSE; VISIT THOSE; AND
UNDERSTAND THIS. SO THIS IS A PROCESS
THAT STARTS 4-5 MONTHS
IN ADVANCE AND IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE
WORKED OUT.
BELIEVE ME; THERE WERE A LOT OF COMMUNITY
MEETINGS AND A LOT
OF INPUT. BEFORE THE HEARINGS WERE HELD.
MUCH MORE PLANNING THAN SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE HELD HERE. THAT'S JUST A COMMENT ON
MY PART.
>> CHAIR:
REPRESENTATIVE PAWLOWSKI; THE FACT THAT YOU ARE PRESENTING TO THIS
COMMITTEE TODAY; DOES THAT TELL US THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE
THE COMMITTEE THAT'S GOING TO
HELP TO FACILITATE
AND CREATE THE NEXT GENERATION
>> REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI: MME. CHAIR I'M GLAD YOU ASKED THAT BECAUSE A MUCH OF THE STAFF MEMBERS ON EITHER SIDE. WE'VE ARTIE HAD THIS CONVERSATION IN
MY OFFICE. NO ONE COMMITTEE AT THE MINNESOTA HOUSE CAN ORGANIZE THIS. THIS IS GOING TO TAKE LEADERSHIP
AND GOOD STAFF TO ORGANIZE IT AND THEN IT'S GOING TO TAKE ALL OF
OUR COMMITTEES TO WORK WITH LEADERSHIP AND THE COMMUNITIES
TO UNDERSTAND
HOW WE ARE GOING TO DO THIS
ON SITE. WE LITERALLY WENT THROUGH EACH
OF THE COMM
ITTEES AND WHERE THEY WOULD BE; WHAT THEY WOULD BE DOING; AND HOW IT'S GOING TO LINK TO A LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
WHEN THEY HIT THE ROAD IN
OUR AREA. EACH ONE GOT A LITTLE
BIT BETTER. THE MANKATO AND STARTED IT AND IT WAS EXCELLENT
BUT ON
CE STAFF GETS THE FEEL FOR THIS AND ONCE MEMBERS GET THE FEEL FOR IT IT DOES BECOME SORT OF
A COMPETITION WHO CAN DO THE BETTER JOB? WHO CAN MAKE SURE THAT THERE PROPOSING WHAT THEY WANT TO PROPOSE FOR THE NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION/
I WOULD'VE GOVERNOR WALZ; GOV. WALZ HAS BEEN APPROACHED
BY THIS. HE WOULD PIGGYBACK HIS STATE OF
THE STATES WITH OUR SELF WE ARE IN ONE AREA
THE STATE
OF THE STATE HE'S IN ONE AREA OF THE STATE HE'S GOING TO GIVE ESTATE OF THE STATE AND WE WILL APPAREL LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
MOVING HERE. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M HOPING WILL HAPPEN. NOW; AGAIN; THAT
TAKES WORK.
WILL WE BE PART OF THE PLANET? YES. I SUSPECT WILL BE PART OF THE BUDGET; TOO.
>> CHAIR: OKAY. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS; COMMENTS? A LOT TO
DIGEST ITYES
REPRESENTATIVE GUNTHER
>>
REPRESENTATIVE GUNTHER: I THINK I REMEMBER THREE IF NOT FOROF THESE MANY SESSIONS
AND I WILL NEVER FORGET GOING TO
WILMER AND SEE MY FIRST 40
POUND TURKEY. AND REMEMBER IN
THE
COMMENT THAT WE DON'T CALL THESE BIG BIRDS THE SMALL PIGS
>> [LAUGHING] BUILDING WAS VERY
EVENTFUL. I REMEMBER CERTAIN
THINGS [INAUDIBLE] AND
WERE 1700
>> REPRESENTATIVE METSA: CAUSE A LOT OF THINGS
THE LEGISLATURE TO LOOK AT THE WE HELP CORRECT THOSE THINGS AND IT WAS VERY
POSITIVE FOR WILMER; VERY POSITIVE FOR ALL OF US.
>>
REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI: >> TESTIFIER: MME.
CHAIR REPRESENTATIVE GUNTHER AND
THE FEEDBACK FOR THIS AND YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE
WHEN YOU READ A LEGISLATIVE SESSION REPORT IT'S ALMOST UNANIMOUSLY GOOD
. THE PARTISANSHIP COMES IN AND EVERYONE IS GOING TO PICK A LITTLE BIT BUT
WHEN YOU ARE TALKING TO THE PEOPLE IN
THE COMMUNITY IS A GREAT DEAL OF
PRIDE.. THEY WANT TO SHOW OFF AND THEY WILL
SHOW OFF AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED
TO DO. WE NEED TO SEE THEM AT THEIR BEST
AND ALSO
WHEN THEY NEED HELP; WHAT ARE
THE NEEDS. IT'S MUCH EASIER TO UNDERSTAND THEM LOCALLY THAN IT IS
JUST TO TESTIMONY UP HERE AND I SAY THIS WITH THE CHAMBER LOBBYISTS IN THE BACK OF ME I HOPE. WE DON'T NEED LOBBYISTS FOR THIS. WE ARE ON
SITE NOW. IT IS GOING TO BE THE LEGISLATORS AND THE COMMUNITY SETTING THIS UP. NOT
THE LOBBYISTS.
>> CHAIR:
JUST TO MAKE A COMMENT AS WELL
; AS I LOOK AROUND AT THE COMMITTEE
MEMBERSHIP HERE; WE
HAVE MAYBE A LITTLE BIT OF
REPRESENTATION FROM THE
METROPOLITAN AREAS BUT FOR THE MOST PART WE ARE
GREATER MINNESOTA
REPRESENTATIVES AND THIS IS OUR OUR OPPORTUNITY COME I THINK;
TO SHOWCASE OUR PARTS OF
THE STATE THAT PERHAPS
PEOPLE DON'T ALWAYS
COME TO. WE COME TO ST. PAUL. WE
ARE HERE FOR WEEKS ON END; MONTHS ON END; BUT
FOR THEM TO COME TO OUR AREA FOR A FEW DAYS SOUNDS LIKE A REALLY POSITIVE THING
TO SHOWCASE. SO APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR ABOUT
IT TODAY
>> REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI: MME. CHAIR JUST ONE
OTHER POINT. IT'S A LOT OF FIRST-TIMERS IN
THE LEGISLATURE NOTICE THAT FIRST TERMER
IN THIS PRESENTATION REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI WAS ALSO IN HIS FIRST TERM. YOU CAN DO A LOT IN YOUR
FIRST ON. IT TAKES A LOT
OF WORK.
>> CHAIR:
REPRESENTATIVE LISLEGARD
>> REPRESENTATIVE LISLEGARD:. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR DOING THIS BECAUSE TO TRULY UNDERSTAND SOMETHING FEEL IT TOUCH IT
AND BY US GOING OUT THERE AND HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHOWCASE ACROSS ALL STATE I THINK
IT HELPS LEGISLATORS FOR ALL OF US TO GET A FEEL FROM DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE STATE.
I THINK THIS IS WONDERFUL AND
I TRULY AM GRATEFUL. SO;
THANK YOU. >>
REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI: MME. CHAIR; NEXT WEEK WE HAVE A
HISTORY OF
CHAPTER 12 A AND 12-B OF HOW WE DEAL WITH THE NATURAL DISASTERS. IT'S GOING TO BE A SIMILAR PRESENTATION. THIS ONE THOUGH IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SERIOUS. SO
NEXT WEEK IS ALSO IN THIS
COMMITTEE AND WE HAVE
DURING THE
ACCOUNT FOR DISASTERS. SO WE WILL DISCUSS WHAT WE NEED TO DO AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO
HELP MINNESOTA WHEN THERE ARE NATURAL DISASTERS. SO THERE WILL BE
SIMILAR PRESENTATIONS. >> CHAIR: ALL RIGHT. I BELIEVE THIS IS THE AGENDA FOR TODAY. SO IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS
OR QUESTIONS; AYE YES
REPRESENTATIVE LAYMAN
>> REPRESENTATIVE LAYMAN: MME. CHAIR REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI;
WOULD WITH YOUR TEACHING BACK ON THEM JUST A LITTLE CONCERNED WITH MAYBE RECEIVE GRADES AT
THE END? >> [LAUGHING] >> REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI: MME. CHAIR REPRESENTATIVE YOUR GRADE COMES THE NEXT ELECTION
. AND
IT'S HIGH-STAKES. WHETHER YOU WIN OR LOSE I PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT I'M PRESENTING. >> >> [LAUGHING] >> CHAIR: ALL RIGHT WELL
THANK YOU
REPRESENTATIVE PELOWSKI AND MEETING ADJOURNED. >> [GAVEL] >> [ADJOURNMENT] >>
-------------------------------------------
Latest Minnesota Hockey Rankings Released - Duration: 1:03.
RECORD WITH 183 SOLO TACKLES.
>> THE LATEST STATE HIGH SCHOOL
HOCKEY RANKINGS WERE RELEASED
TODAY, AND DESPITE DROPPING A
PAIR OF GAMES LAST WEEK, THE
BRAINERD LITTLE FALLS GIRLS TEAM
ONLY FELL TWO SPOTS TO NUMBER
7.
RIGHT ON THEIR TAILS IS THE
ROSEAU RAMS AT NUMBER 8.
BRAINERD WON BOTH REGULAR SEASON
MATCHUPS BETWEEN THOSE
TEAMS, AND YOU HAVE TO THINK A
REMATCH IN THE PLAYOFFS IS
LIKELY.
GRAND RAPIDS GREENWAY HOLDS
STEADY AT 15TH IN THE 2-A
POLLS.
WARROAD REMAINS AT NUMBER ONE IN
CLASS A.
THE WARRIORS ARE 20 AND 0 ON THE
SEASON.
THEY TAKE ON MOORHEAD ON
SATURDAY.
IN BOYS HOCKEY ROSEAU REMAINS AT
NUMBER 16 IN CLASS 2-A
FOLLOWING THEIR TIE TO WARROAD
LAST NIGHT.
WHILE THE WARRIORS REMAIN AT
NUMBER 10 IN CLASS A, AND
DESPITE THEIR 8 AND 13 RECORD,
THE GREENWAY RAIDERS HAVE
IMPRESSED VOTERS ENOUGH TO KEEP
-------------------------------------------
2019 Federal Title IV-E Minnesota Foster Care Eligibility Review training - Duration: 35:53.
Mary Kelsey: Hello. Welcome to
the Minnesota Department of
Human Services training session
on preparing for the 2019
federal Title IV-E Foster
Care eligibility review.
I'm Mary Kelsey.
I'm Title IV-E policy
specialist here at the
Department of Human Services
in the child safety and
permanency division.
With me today are Debbie
Retterath, our eligibility
determination trainer for the
southeast region and
Paula Katzenmeyer,
our eligibility determination
trainer for the southwest
region of the state.
For today, we will start with
an overview of our agenda.
Our agenda for today will
include first an overview of
the timelines and the logistics
for our preparations for the
2019 review.
We'll cover case record
requirements including both
the requirements for the
official case file submissions
as well as the blue file folders
and IV-E case summaries that
will need to be submitted.
We will discuss the delivery of
the files to the Department of
Human Services in St. Paul and
we will also discuss resources
for you in preparing for the
federal review.
The schedule of events we'll
begin to discuss now.
In late January which is what
is happening now,
we've sent you an email
notification that your county
or trial agency has cases that
have been selected for the
federal review.
Along with that notification
we provided you the link to this
training to assist you with
preparing for the review.
On Wednesday, February 6th from
1:00 to 3:00 in the afternoon,
we will be having a WebX
question and answer session
for all of you to be able to
ask any questions that you have
in preparing your files.
On Friday, February 15th is
when the case records are due
at DHS.
February 19th to March 1st,
for those two weeks,
we will be preparing for the
review at DHS.
We'll be conducting our
pre-review preparation
activities.
Then from March 11th to the
15th, that is the week of the
federal review when the federal
review team will be on site at
DHS conducting the review.
Then from March 18th to the
21st, we will be returning the
case files to the counties and
tribal agencies.
Review logistics.
The period under review for
this review is April 1st 2018
to September 30th of 2018.
The statewide sample for the
review consists of 80 cases
plus an over sample of 10% or
20 additional cases.
For the review, substantial
compliance consists of an error
rate of 5% or less.
So, that means of the 80 cases
that are ultimately reviewed
during the federal review week,
we will need to have four or
fewer cases in error in order
to be in substantial compliance
and pass our federal review.
For the review preparation,
counties and tribal agencies
will need to provide DHS with
the entire official case file
for each child in the sample.
This will include the social
service, income maintenance
and the licensing files for
each child and their placement
episode in the period
under review.
Counties and tribal agencies
will also need to use blue
case files and forms that
will be provided by DHS and
prepare the cases according to
the blue case file folder
format instructions that are
also provided to each agency.
This format is mandatory.
Then finally, you'll be
submitting all of your case
files to DHS by the end of the
day on Friday,
February 15th 2019.
The case record requirements
for the period under review
again of April 1st to September
30th of 2018, we are asking that
your agency submit one blue
file for each continuous
placement episode that includes
a completed Title IV-E Foster
Care eligibility review on site
review instrument,
and that's the July 2015 version
that we've provided to you.
A completed case summary for
the federal Title IV-E Foster
Care eligibility review form
and again, use the blue case
file format for the document
placement.
Debbie and Paula will now
discuss the details of the case
record requirements.
Debbie Retterath: Hi, I'm
Debbie Retterath.
I am the Title IV-E trainer for
southeastern Minnesota and I'm
going to be going over the
instrument itself and how to
exactly tab the case file and
get it prepared and shortly
Paula Katzenmeyer will be
coming and wrapping it up from
how to exactly to get those
files prepared and using the
instrument to do so.
Okay, the first thing I'm going
to talk about is the
case summary.
And what that is, and you've been
given a copy of what that case
summary is, the case summary is
about the Title IV-E history of
the child.
It is not the child
protection history.
So, we really don't want to
know the details of what led to
the placement.
We want to know the Title IV-E
activities, court hearing dates,
petition filing dates,
those types of details.
Not the child protection
history.
So, keep that in mind when
you're completing the case
summary.
The next slide is about the blue
case file.
You've all been given a copy of
the blue case file.
You've also been given a copy of
how the blue case file is
separated out.
How the tabbing works and where
documents go inside that blue
case file.
That just makes it easier for
us to find the necessary
information and makes the
review itself more efficient.
So, as part of the blue case
file format, we need to know
exactly where the documents are.
So, by putting them in this
file format, it makes it easier
for us as reviewers to find the
information quickly and make
sure we have all of the
necessary information so that's
why you're following this blue
file format.
Tells you what to file and
where to file it.
Also you were provided
with tabs.
Those tabs you will use to
identify every document and the
question that document
relates to.
So, for example if you were
answering question number 9,
you are going to put number 9
on the document that answers
that question.
You do not have to put multiple
copies of every document.
If the document itself
addresses more than one
question, just go ahead and
write every question number
that it identifies on that tab.
If you need to use an extra tab,
that's fine too.
But you do not have to have
more than one copy of any
particular document within that
blue file folder.
So, now onto the fun part.
The review instrument itself.
You should all have a copy of
the actual review instrument.
Before I get started on the
review instrument, I just want
to clarify that not every
question is talked about in
detail as part of this
PowerPoint or as part of this
presentation.
We are kind of focusing on more
of the areas that cause us a
little stress and trouble.
Some of the self
explanatory ones.
We'll talk about them briefly
but we're not going to go into
them in a whole lot of detail,
so if you're wondering why
question numbers might be
missing, we did that
intentionally to focus on the
ones that we needed to really
make sure everybody understood
what was necessary.
So, in section D of the
instrument, it starts out with
the child's demographics.
Name, sample number.
Those are provided by DHS, the
sample number.
The child's PMI number.
All of that identifying
information goes in the first
part of section D.
And then we move on the substance
which would be starting on
section E.
The first question we have
there is question number nine.
It starts out what was the
child's age.
So, in my little previous
example, if you're answering
question number nine,
you're going to tab the birth
certificate with a tab that
says number nine because that's
how we're verifying the child's
date of birth.
Question number 10.
This is one that we have
struggled with in the past and
that is the date the child has
been removed.
What we are looking for here
is was it a police hold?
Was it a court order?
Was it a VPA?
Court order, ex parte,
what action started the removal
for this particular continuous
placement episode?
So, that's pretty important and
it's also important to make
sure that you provide us with
that document.
If the police hold started the
placement episode,
we need a copy of that police
hold so if you don't have it in
your file, you have to go find
it for us.
In the next slide, we actually
have a sample of what a police
hold looks like.
Kind of small print but you can
kind of get the gist for it.
We also have a sample of an ex
parte order.
Those are court actions that
start placement episodes.
So, ex parte orders are very
important and we
can't ignore them.
So make sure you're double
checking to make sure that we
don't have an ex parte order
that started this particular
continuous placement episode.
Ex parte orders will typically
or I shouldn't say typically
should contain the best interest
judicial finding and we're
going to talk about that in a
few more slides.
They may or may not have the
reasonable efforts to prevent
findings.
So, keep that in mind as you're
going through and answering
additional questions.
Your ex parte order may be used
for more than one question.
So, the next slide talks about
number 11.
The entered foster care date.
The one date that we truly,
truly, truly struggle with.
For the most part, if you use
the data that comes to you from
SSIS and have coded SSIS
properly the entered foster care
date will be identified for you
by SSIS, but the slide tells you
how to manually calculate
that date.
What's important here is was
there a chips adjudication
finding?
Was there a finding that the
child is in need of protection
and services and when did that
finding occur?
So, question number 11 is
looking for that finding within
that first 60 days but we want
you to provide us that chips
adjudication finding and order
regardless of when it happened.
That way then we are sure that
you actually looked for it.
We know that a chips
adjudication occurred but it
was outside the window that we
are using for question 11.
Question 11 becomes important
when we talk about permanency
here in a few more slides.
So, getting this date
established properly in the
beginning makes everything go
smoother a little bit farther
down this instrument.
On the next slide, we actually
have a little sample of what
you're looking for in a chips
adjudication order.
We're actually looking for
something that says this child
is adjudicated as a child in
need of protection and services.
Not necessarily just that
you've held a court hearing but
the court actually has made
that finding of a chips
adjudication child is in need.
If you have questions about any
of these questions on any of
the cases, please make sure you
contact your EDT.
We will help you go through it
and get the right answers from
the get go.
So the next question we're
going to talk about is
number 12.
This one's applicable only to
court ordered removals.
So, if you have a VPA removal,
you're going to hit not
applicable and move on to all
of these court ordered removals.
And we are looking for in questions
12 and 13 when did the judicial
finding of best interest occur?
Again, we need a copy of that
particular court order.
Now, there's some subset
questions underneath of there.
13A, 13B.
You're basically going to just
be following along with the
questions and answering them
correctly yes or no if you made
the findings timely and
hopefully you made them
all timely.
Question number 14 refers to
the reasonable efforts to
prevent the removal.
So, again we need a copy of
that particular court order as
well which may be the same court
order that you've identified in
question 13 and it may be the
same order or action that
you've identified in
question 10.
Again you do not have to put
multiple copies of the same
document to answer multiple
questions.
If you have a child that was
removed prior to March 27th of
2000, just call your EDT.
We need to talk about that.
If you have any child that
falls into those questions on
the instrument, call your EDT
before even going any further
so we can get those taken
care of.
The next section is section H.
Voluntary placements.
So, if you've answered in the
court ordered section that your
child was not court ordered,
now you are answering this
section, we also need a copy of
the signed voluntary placement
agreement.
So make sure you're submitting a
copy of that.
We always use the final
signature date of a voluntary
placement agreement.
So, anytime you're asked for
the date of the voluntary,
it's going to be that last
signature date.
The next slide has some of the
examples of what the DHS
documents and voluntary
placements look like.
There are two different
versions for Indian children
and non-Indian children.
Just as a reference as to what
you're looking for if you're
not quite sure what you're
looking for.
So, in a voluntarily placed
child as you all know,
you need a best interest
determination within 180 days.
You're going to identify that
in question 17.
Again make sure you provide us
that documentation even if you
were late and you didn't get it
within that first 180 days,
we still want to see it.
We still want to know when you
got it.
And make sure that we are
identifying that particular
element properly.
So, the valid removal.
What that means is that they're
looking for the timeline
between when either the court
said remove these children or
the parent signed the voluntary
placement agreement and you
actually put those children in
to foster care.
We refer to this one as the
coincide issue.
So, that's what question 18 is
all about.
Did you actually remove the
children when the court said or
the parents signed that VPA.
If there's a gap, you need to
get in touch with your EDT
right away because we're going
to have to do a little extra
work on any of those children
if there's a gap between the
court order or the voluntary
placement agreement and actual
the physical removal or
constructive removal
of that child.
So, now on to section J for
those of you who are
following along.
You're going to go,
"Oh no it's the permanency
section."
It can be kind of complicated
but I'm going to try to make it
as simple as possible.
So, if you will please look at
the little dialogue box in
which we are identifying the
dates of those permanency
actions, the first question
you need to bring forward from
the beginning of the instrument
is question number 10 and that
was that removal date.
Is it a police hold?
Is it an ex parte?
Is it a court order?
Is it a voluntary?
What's that date?
You're going to drag that one
forward.
You're also going to drag
forward question number 11.
That entered foster care date.
Okay. So, once you get those
two things pulled forward that's
going to tell us when your first
permanency is required.
It's going to be required 12
months after the entered foster
care date, the question 11.
That's going to start your chart
of when permanency is due.
Now, as you all know here in
Minnesota, we do a really good
job on getting permanency on
our children.
More often than we're required
under both state law and
federal Title IV-E policy.
It is okay to identify all of
those court orders in this chart
and provide us copies of those.
At a minimum we need to have
this every single 12 months.
So, make sure you are getting
enough permanency orders within
your chart because in a second,
I'm going to talk about the
questions we need to answer.
Make sure you have enough
permanency orders in your chart
to satisfy that 12 month
requirement for the entire
placement episode.
Not just the period under
review, but from the time the
child originally went in and
permanency was first required
12 months after the entered
foster care date.
Again if you're struggling with
this section, get in touch with
your EDT and we'll help you walk
through it.
Okay. So, question 19 talks
about permanency and if it was
timely.
So, as you're answering these
questions, the first question
we're asking is when was a
permanency finding made?
Immediately before April 1st
2018?
So, if it happened on March
31st that's the date we're
looking for.
If it happened on April 2nd,
that's not the date we're
looking for.
We need the one
previous to that.
Then that helps you answer the
next set of questions to make
sure that permanency is timely.
If you have a situation where a
child's permanency is not
timely, you need to call your
EDT right away because we need
to look into that, walk you
through it and make sure we
don't need to order some
transcripts or come up with
some other way to justify the
permanency finding that may or
may not be timely.
So, that's the permanency
section.
I'm going to pass this off now
to Paula.
She's going to start with the
AFDC relatedness questions in
section K and she'll run
through the second half of the
instrument.
Paula Katzenmeyer: Hi. I'm
Paula Katzenmeyer.
As Mary and Debbie both already
mentioned, I'm the trainer for
the southwest region of
Minnesota.
I'll be going through the
remainder of the Title IV-E
review instrument and
addressing the questions and
the necessary information for
those questions.
I'll be starting with section K.
The AFDC relatedness section.
Specifically question 20.
In question 20, you'll be
listing the removal home that
was used for the AFDC
relate and SD
determination.
The removal home is defined as
either the person who was the
subject of the country to the
welfare finding in the removal
order or the person who signed
the voluntary placement
agreement.
The next screen is covering
question number 21 and we'll
be identifying the lived with
requirement and addressing was
the child living with that
specified relative in the month
court proceedings were initiated
or the date the voluntary
placement agreement was signed.
There's one tricky term in that
sentence on that question in
that date court proceedings
were initiated.
We want to be sure that we're
using the appropriate
date there.
That is either the petition
filing date or the court
hearing date that initiated the
removal if there was not a new
petition filed or the petition
was filed after the
court hearing.
So, we're looking for either
one of those two dates.
The other areas are pretty self
explanatory.
Question 21A.
It's a bit different than
question 21.
Question 21 we were looking
for if that child lived with
the specified relative in that
eligibility month.
Question 21A is if they did not,
did they live with that
specified relative in any one
of the six months prior to the
eligibility month?
Questions 22 and 23 are not
addressed in the PowerPoint.
However they cover were the
living with and removed from
requirements met by the same
specified relative.
So you'll address that.
And then also was eligibility based
on the circumstances in that
removal home that you've
identified.
So, again you will identify
the removal home there and if
the AFDC determination was made
for that particular home.
The next slide then is question
number 24.
Was the AFDC eligibility based
on the circumstances in the
specified relative's home in
either the month that those
court proceedings were initiated
or the VPA was signed?
Well, again it lists the
eligibility month in that
question and then move on to
question 24A.
Question 24A specifically asks
if the financial need
requirement was met and
question 24B, whether or not
the deprivation factor was met
for that ADFC relatedness
determination.
Then question 25, just an
overall question asking if the
AFDC requirements were met for
that child.
As part of the documentation
for this area, we need to
remember that we have to
provide all of the
verifications that were
necessary to make that AFDC
relatedness determination.
Most importantly including a
copy of the Title IV-E Foster
Care AFDC relatedness
determination form.
You'll see a copy of that on
your next screen.
We will be requiring an AFDC
relatedness determination form
for each of the Title IV-E
sample cases.
If you have not already
completed one when you made
the original determination,
you will need to complete one
at this point to provide with
the file.
Moving on then to section L.
Section L is in regard to our
youth age 18 to 21 population.
Question number 26 it includes
26 A through D and all of those
are not applicable for this
review.
So, you can disregard those
when you're completing the
instrument.
Question 27 which is the start
of section M, did the agency
have legal responsibility for
the placement?
If yes, you can move forward.
If no, this is where you'll
need to provide verification
that if another agency had
legal responsibility for that
child's placement, care and
supervision that you would need
to have a IV-E agreement in
place with the other agency and
you'd be required to provide a
copy of that agreement.
If you're working with one of
the tribal agencies,
the Mille Lacs band,
Leech Lake, White Earth or Red
Lake, you do not need to
provide a copy of the Title IV-E
agreement for those agencies.
Section N is placement and
licensed foster care settings.
The first screen in regard to
that indicates and shows you
the steps that you need to take
in order to print a placement
grid, placement history grid.
We will be requiring that for
each of the cases.
So, if you have any problems
or questions as you're going in
to print that grid from SSIS
just get a hold of your EDT
trainer and we can walk you
through that if you're not
certain how.
The next screen in section N
covers questions 28 through 35.
All in regard to the facility
or the provider that the child
is placed in.
You complete this section if
there's more than one provider,
the additional appendix as well
for each facility or provider
that the child lived with or in
during the period under review.
So, questions 28 through 31 are
just identifying the placement.
The name of the provider and the
information about the provider.
32 is listing the dates that the
child was in that placement.
33. The type of placement
setting.
34 whether or not that provider
was fully licensed during the
child's placement there.
That goes on then to a final
question in 35 of whether the
licensing requirements were met
overall.
If it is a family foster home
and that family foster home was
licensed by another agency,
you'll need to contact the
licensing agency to request a
copy of that licensing file to
be submitted with this sample.
If the family foster home was
approved by a tribal agency,
you'll contact the tribal agency
to either provide the licensing
file directly to DHS or to your
agency so that that can be
attached to or included with
the sample for the review.
If the child is in a children's
residential facility or child
caring institution,
for those situations you'll
notify Mary Kelsey as soon as
possible so that we can begin
to gather those licensing files
for that type of a setting.
Question 36 then moves on to is
this a family foster home?
That's not in your PowerPoint
but you just answer yes or no
to that if it is a family
foster home.
36A will be answered for any
family foster home that was
newly licensed before October
1st 2008.
So, for any home licensed
between November 19th, 1997
and October 1st, 2008,
we will be requiring
verification over the criminal
record checks for that period
of time.
You will have to verify that
or provide verification of the
criminal record check that was
completed for that provider.
The next one. 36B is not
applicable here in Minnesota
because we did not opt out.
So you can just disregard
question 36B and move on to 36C.
36C is in regard to any homes
that were licensed on or after
October 1st, 2008.
For these homes we had a newer
requirement in that we have to
provide fingerprints to the
National Crime Information
database.
Also known as the Adam Walsh
requirement.
So, you will have to provide
the documentation that that
background study has been
completed including the NCID
submission of the fingerprints.
Again, for question number 37,
if the child was placed in a
childcare institution,
you'll contact Mary Kelsey and
she will obtain that licensing
file to verify both the
licensing status and the safety
and background check
requirements.
That is the end of the bulk of
the instrument.
There's one additional page
that if you know you've run
into any issues with eligibility
or any payments that maybe
should not have been claimed,
you'll refer to appendix two.
This is the page that's used to
document any potential over
payments or under payments that
you identify maybe claims that
you could have made and didn't.
So, if you have anything to
report on this page,
I would recommend contacting
your EDT trainer to talk
through that too so that we're
aware of those situations and
can help you complete that and
the dollar amounts.
Okay. So, that concludes the
instrument itself.
There's one other area that we
know will come up and that is
what if you have all of your
cases saved as electronic case
files?
So, if your agency has all of
your records stored
electronically, you will have
the opportunity to submit that
on a jump drive or flash drive
along with the blue case file
that you have completed.
The blue case file will need to
have the paper documents in it
that relate to each of the
questions on the instrument as
we've been discussing.
So, you'll have the blue case
file folder and if you have
paper files, you will also
submit all of the paper files
that go along with that.
Your social service file,
your IV-E case and your
licensing files.
If you have electronic files
then you will follow what's on
the next screen.
A jump drive format in order
to clearly identify all of
those documents on
the jump drive.
There's a labeling protocol
that needs to be followed.
So we have different sections
that we would like
noted in that.
A copy of that jump drive
protocol it is included in your
blue case file as well so that
you can check off to make sure
that you've identified each of
those areas on the jump drive.
You will need to submit that
back with the case file with
the identifying information in
the top.
The name, phone number and
email address of who can be
contacted with any questions
that we might have about the
jump drive.
That is where I will conclude
with the instrument itself and
the case files and I think
Mary at this point would like
to continue to give you some
more information about the
review itself and the process
that we'll be using to
complete that.
Mary Kelsey: So, to recap the
file requirements once again
because we want to be sure that
you have all the information
that you need to submit what we
need so that our review process
can move efficiently,
we'll cover it one more time.
Again we need you to submit
your entire case file including
first your social service
records regarding the foster
care placement and IV-E
eligibility.
Your income maintenance records
that document the child's IV-E
eligibility and then the
licensing files for children
placed in foster homes.
Again, the completed blue case
file with your case summary,
your review instrument for each
continuous placement episode
during the period under review.
Delivery of the files to the
Department of Human Services.
We're asking that you send the
files via certified mail so that
there is tracking so that we
don't have issues with lost
cases.
You'll mail them to attention
Mary Kelsey, K-E-L-S-E-Y.
Title IV-E Foster Care
Eligibility Review.
Minnesota Department of Human
Services.
Child safety and Permanency
Division.
PO Box 64943 St. Paul,
Minnesota 55164-0943.
If you wish to personally
deliver your files to DHS,
contact Angela Gruber,
G-R-U-B-E-R at 651-431-4713 or
via email at
Angela.gruber@state.mn.us.
Again, we're asking that the
files be delivered to DHS by
the close of business on Friday
February 15th.
Having said that,
we do also want to say that if
you're a larger county with a
large number of cases and you
feel like you'll need a little
extra time,
you can please contact me to
discuss those arrangements.
We understand we have a short
time frame here.
We're asking you to do a lot
and so if you need a little
extra time,
please feel free to contact us
to see what we can arrange.
Next we'll talk about security
of the files at DHS.
We want to assure you that your
case files will be kept in a
secured location here in a
locked conference room and that
only authorized DHS staff and
the federal review team will
have access to these files.
We also ask that you be sure to
use secured email for any
communications with DHS that
include names or other identify
or private information.
Some final thoughts.
First of all, we wanted to
encourage you to begin
preparing your case records
immediately.
We realize that we're working
on perhaps a shorter time frame
here than we have been able to
in years past.
So, we just encourage you to
start preparing your case
records right away and to be
sure to reach out to your
regional eligibility
determination trainer for
assistance early in the process.
They're available and happy to
assist.
The broader question of who
can help.
So, in addition to your
eligibility determination
trainers, again as we mentioned
earlier we're going to be
hosting a WebX question and
answer session on February 6th
from 1:00 to 3:00 in the
afternoon.
So, that's one way that you can
ask your questions.
You can also talk to other
staff in your country or your
tribal agency who have
experience with the F IV-E
eligibility determinations and
preparing for the federal audit.
Finally we have a slide here
with all the contact
information for all four of our
eligibility determination
trainers as you know.
We have regionally assigned
trainers and each county and
tribal agency has a designated
contact and so we've listed all
four of those individuals here
and then also my contact
information.
Deb Trotter Kovar.
She's the northwest Minnesota
regional trainer.
Telephone number 218-961-0080.
Email. Deborah, D-E-B-O-R-A-H
.a.trotter,
T-R-O-T-T-E-R @state.mn.us.
Deb Miller.
Northeast Minnesota trainer.
Phone number 218-850-4585.
Email.
Deborah Miller, D-E-B-O-R-A-H
.miller, M-I-L-L-E-R
@state.mn.us.
Paula Katzenmeyer.
Southwest Minnesota trainer.
Phone number 320-587-7982.
Email. Paula,
P-A-U-L-A.j.katzenmeyer,
K-A-T-Z-E-N-M-E-Y-E-R
@state.mn.us.
Debbie Retterath.
Southeast Minnesota trainer.
Phone number 507-582-1046.
Email. Debbie,
D-E-B-B-I-E.retterath,
R-E-T-T-E-R-A-T-H@state.mn.us.
Finally, Mary Kelsey.
Phone number 651-431-4386.
Email, Mary.kelsey,
K-E-L-S-E-Y@state.mn.us.
We want to thank you all both
for your assistance with this
review process and your ongoing
excellent work on this
complicated IV-E work.
We know that it's complicated
and we know that the review
process is a lot of work for
you to gather the information
and send to us in the time
frames that we ask.
We do appreciate your
assistance with that and we
look forward to
a successful review in 2019.
Thank you.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét