Regent Selection:

On Tuesday evening, the Senate and House Higher Education Committees got together to review and send forward
a slate of candidates to be the next Regents for the University of Minnesota. The candidates that came before this
Joint Committee had previously been vetted by the Regent Candidate Advisory Council, which is responsible for
recruitment and first round interviews of all hopeful candidates. The Joint Committee is tasked with recommending
a slate of candidates for the open Congressional Districts slots. This year, the Board has openings in the 1st, 3rd, 4th,
6th and 7th Congressional Districts.
It is customary to send forward just one candidate for each opening. However, this year the Joint Committee voted
to send two recommended candidates for the 1st and the 3rd districts. The reason for this was an impasse during
voting. Typically, one would assume that it is members of opposite parties who cannot agree. On Tuesday, this was
not the case. Rather, it was the Senate and House that were in disagreement. We ultimately decided that it was in
the best interest of the Committee and the process to send forward two names in both the first and third districts.
The next step in the process is for the House and Senate to get together in a Joint Convention and vote for the final
Regents. The date for this event has not yet been set as it needs to be agreed upon by the leaders of both houses. I
have been on the record stating that I do not believe it is in the best interest of the Legislature, the University or
the State to hold this Joint Convention until the Legislative Auditors report on the alleged misconduct with the
Universitys psychiatric department is released.
The candidates who were recommended last night are the following:
Congressional District 1 Randy Simonson and Patti Simmons (current Regent)
Congressional District 3 Paula Prahl and Michael Belzer
Congressional District 4 Richard Beeson (current Chair of the Board of Regents)
Congressional District 6 Michael Hsu
Congressional District 7 Tom Anderson

Deficiency Bill:
On Thursday, the Senate met to hear the Deficiency Bill. This legislation is a clean-up bill that addresses shortfalls
in Agency funding that was not projected in the previous Legislative Session. It is usually a non-controversial but
critical bill that passes with little debate. However, as some of you may have heard, the Governor recently gave
raises to several Agency Commissioners. This was looked at as being relatively controversial and while the specific
raises were not part of this bill, the Agency budgets were up for discussion. It is important to remember that this
bill is critical to the well-being of the State. For instance, there was funding in the bill to take care of the Security
Hospital in St. Peters that holds over 300 dangerous and mentally ill patients, as well as to make sure that all of the
hospitals that acted quickly and responsibly to the Ebola threat were funded appropriately. Therefore it was
imperative that the Legislature pass this bill with little delay.

Given the controversy surrounding the pay raises, our Majority Leader, Tom Bakk, addressed the issue head on. He
proposed an amendment to the bill that froze the Commissioners pay increase until July and promised that the
Senate would hold informational hearings on the matter. When this amendment passed with overwhelming
support, there was a huge sigh of relief in the Chamber as it gave comfort to those who had been troubled by the
matter.
This measure does not take away the Constitutional authority of the Governor but does allow for the important
needs to be addressed.

Topic Rewind: Transportation Survey

As you can see from the results below, the majority of respondents were supportive of the transportation
proposals. I expected to see support for the gas tax increase, as that was the general feedback I received at the
Town Halls. However, the fact that over 50% favored a cent sales tax for transit was a surprise. I should mention
that I received several e-mails to clarify that this issue is not a simple yes or no and some wanted to explain in
more detail their thoughts. The reason that I chose to format the survey in this way is that I wanted to give you a
taste of what it is often like here at the Legislature. There are many issues in which I have to decide to vote green
or to vote red. As you can tell from this small Transportation survey, this is not always an easy task.
I do want to highlight how close the results were. I attribute this to the wide variety of mindsets and opinions in
Senate District 44. I am so proud to represent a district that is comprised of strong minded, independent thinking
citizens. I stand with you.

Transit Survey Results:

Transportation Survey Results: