A
weekly
message
from
your
Senator
Dear
Constituents
and
Friends,
I’m
glad
to
report
that
our
first
SD49
Day
at
the
Capitol
was
a
tremendous
success.
We
had
dozens
of
students
representing
robotics
programs
in
the
district
demonstrating
their
robots
in
the
Capitol
Rotunda.
We
also
held
a
“mini”
town
hall
meeting
and
had
a
very
engaged
discussion
with
constituents
in
attendance.
Topics
covered
included
health
care,
education,
transportation,
and
taxes,
among
others.
We
also
held
tours
of
the
newly
renovated
Capitol.
Thank
you
for
all
of
those
who
attended!
The
Sunday
liquor
sales
debate
dominated
the
headlines
this
week.
The
House
passed
the
bill
with
a
wide
margin
on
Monday,
followed
by
the
Senate
Commerce
Committee
passing
the
bill
to
the
Senate
floor.
Several
Senators
held
a
Twitter
Town
Hall
following
the
committee
hearing
on
Wednesday
to
add
more
voices
to
the
conversation.
The
vast
majority
of
the
discussion
was
positive,
with
constituents
from
across
the
state
asking
when
the
bill
would
be
voted
on,
and
when
it
could
potentially
go
into
effect.
I
am
leaning
in
support
of
this
bill,
but
I
always
welcome
your
thoughts,
comments
and
concerns.
Sincerely,
Sen.
Melisa
Franzen
Senate
and
House
elect
four
to
fill
U
of
M
regent
positions
The
House
and
Senate
elected
two
new
faces
to
the
University
of
Minnesota
Board
of
Regents
and
approved
full
six-year
terms
for
two
incumbents.
The
House
and
Senate
met
in
joint
session
on
Wednesday
night.
Positions
in
Congressional
Districts
Two,
Three
and
Eight,
and
one
At-Large
were
open.
Thirty-five
people
applied
last
fall
and
the
Regents
Candidate
Advisory
Council
(RCAC)
approved
17
candidates
for
potential
election.
The
House
and
Senate
Higher
Education
Committees
met
and
approved
a
slate
of
four
candidates
in
early
February.
The
following
candidates
were
elected
by
the
House
and
Senate:
CD
2:
Steve
Sviggum
CD
3
Darrin
Rosha
(incumbent)
CD
8:
David
McMillan
(Incumbent)
At-Large:
Ken
Powell
Senate
Commerce
Committee
approves
Sunday
alcohol
sales
This
week,
the
Senate
Commerce
Committee
approved
a
bill
that
would
allow
for
Sunday
liquor
sales
in
Minnesota.
The
bill
allows
for
the
sale
of
liquor
on
Sundays
between
the
hours
of
11
a.m.
and
6
p.m.
It
also
prohibits
the
wholesale
delivery
of
alcohol
to
off-sale
licensees
on
Sundays.
Minnesota
is
currently
one
of
12
states
that
prohibits
the
sale
of
liquor
on
Sundays.
Supporters
of
Sunday
sales
argue
that
the
law
is
outdated
and
limits
the
ability
of
Minnesota
businesses
to
compete
with
neighboring
states
on
the
sale
of
Sunday
spirits.
Sixty
%
of
Minnesotans
live
within
30
miles
of
the
border,
and
supporters
of
the
bill
are
concerned
with
Minnesota
tax
dollars
going
to
neighboring
states.
Opponents
of
the
bill
argue
that
family-owned
and
municipal
liquor
stores
will
not
necessarily
generate
any
more
profits
by
staying
open
on
Sundays.
Rather,
small
stores
will
have
to
compensate
for
the
increase
in
operating
costs
by
raising
prices
and
further
tilting
the
marketplace
in
favor
of
big-box
retailers.
Opponents
also
say
allowing
Sunday
liquor
sales
will
result
in
more
alcohol-related
accidents,
more
substance
abuse
throughout
the
state,
and
will
negatively
affect
the
finances
of
municipal
liquor
stores
in
rural
area
that
depend
on
funds
from
these
stores.
Legislators
have
attempted
to
remove
the
ban
on
Sunday
liquor
sales
over
the
course
of
the
last
several
sessions.
This
year
is
the
first
year
that
the
Legislature
has
heard
the
issue
as
a
stand-alone
bill
rather
than
an
amendment
on
the
Senate
floor.
The
bill
was
approved
by
the
House
Monday
with
a
bi-partisan
vote
of
85-45.
Governor
Dayton
has
said
that
if
the
bill
passes
both
chambers
he
will
sign
it
into
law.
(SF
1086)
Lawmakers
discuss
Social
Security
benefits
and
taxes
The
Senate
Tax
Committee
heard
six
bills
this
week
aimed
at
reducing
taxes
owed
on
Social
Security
benefits.
This
has
been
a
recurring
topic
during
the
past
few
years,
but
one
main
point
often
is
overlooked:
about
68%
of
Social
Security
benefits
received
in
Minnesota
already
are
tax-exempt.
Minnesota
follows
the
federal
government’s
treatment
of
these
benefits,
which
means
a
minimum
of
15%
of
all
taxpayers’
benefits
are
already
exempt
from
taxation.
Nearly
half
of
households
pay
no
taxes
at
all
on
their
benefits
an
exemption
that
already
costs
the
state
about
$489
million
every
two
years,
according
to
the
Tax
Expenditure
Budget.
However,
28
states
fully
exempt
all
Social
Security
earnings
and
nine
states
do
not
have
an
income
tax
at
all.
Five
of
the
bills
heard
this
week
would
add
Minnesota
to
the
list
of
states
that
fully
exempt
Social
Security
benefits
from
state
taxes.
Some
of
those
bills
phase
in
the
reduction
over
several
years,
but
all
would
cost
more
than
$1
billion
each
budget
cycle
once
fully
implemented.
Permanently
spending
$1
billion
on
a
full
exemption
could
benefit
about
394,000
Social
Security
recipients
but
would
provide
no
tax
relief
to
the
thousands
of
Minnesota
households
already
exempt
from
paying
taxes
on
their
benefits.
In
addition,
almost
50%
of
the
benefits
would
go
to
seniors
with
incomes
over
$100,000.
Committee
testimony
from
the
North
Star
Policy
Institute
pointed
out
that
61.6%
of
Social
Security
recipients
in
Greater
Minnesota
would
see
no
benefit
from
a
full
exemption,
and
58.1%
of
recipients
in
the
metropolitan
area
would
be
unaffected.
A
sixth
bill
heard
this
week
would
provide
a
new
Social
Security
income
tax
subtraction
more
directly
targeted
at
middle-income
seniors.
All
beneficiaries
would
be
able
to
deduct
a
portion
of
their
taxable
benefits
from
their
income
taxes:
up
to
$1,600
for
married-joint
filers,
$1,250
for
single
filers,
and
$800
for
married-separate
filers,
adjusted
annually
for
inflation.
This
approach
would
provide
an
equal
benefit
to
all
Social
Security
recipients
but
concentrate
the
impact
more
among
lower-income
seniors
who
need
tax
relief
the
most;
the
net
effect
of
a
$1,600
subtraction
would
be
far
greater
for
those
earning
$50,000
as
opposed
to
those
with
higher
overall
incomes.
Providing
tax
relief
and
support
for
the
state’s
senior
citizens
is
a
bipartisan
priority
this
year.
As
a
co-author
of
one
of
these
bills,
I
will
work
to
compromise
on
fiscally
responsible
solutions
that
provide
targeted
tax
relief
to
the
senior
citizens
who
need
it,
without
toppling
the
state’s
budget
stability
or
depleting
resources
for
tax
relief
for
other
segments
of
Minnesota’s
population.
Committee
considers
expanding
Working
Family
Tax
Credit
The
Working
Family
Credit,
Minnesota’s
version
of
the
federal
Earned
Income
Tax
Credit,
is
a
proven
tool
to
directly
improve
the
financial
health
of
working,
lower-income
families.
A
bipartisan
bill
to
increase
and
expand
Minnesota’s
Working
Family
Credit
was
considered
by
the
Senate
Tax
Committee
this
week.
The
proposal
would
bring
an
estimated
average
tax
reduction
of
$124
to
about
372,000
tax
filers
in
2017
by
expanding
income
levels
and
percentages
at
which
the
credit
begins
to
phase
out.
The
bill
also
would
expand
the
credit
to
an
additional
107,000
Minnesotans,
including
those
ages
21-24
who
previously
were
ineligible.
The
tax
credit
is
widely
used
in
every
corner
of
the
state:
48%
of
the
recipients
live
in
Greater
Minnesota.
About
one
out
of
every
six
tax-filing
households
in
Greater
Minnesota
received
the
credit.
The
proposal
to
increase
the
important
tax
benefit
was
also
included
in
last
year’s
vetoed
tax
bill
and
is
included
in
the
Governor’s
budget
again
this
year.
The
bill
was
heard
in
the
Tax
Committee
and
laid
over
for
possible
inclusion
in
the
omnibus
tax
bill.
(SF
28)
Tax
committee
focuses
on
health
and
wellness
The
Tax
Committee
took
a
health
care
focus
this
week,
considering
two
bipartisan
bills
aimed
at
supporting
Minnesota’s
health
care
workforce
and
promoting
more
employer
involvement
in
their
employees’
health.
The
first
bill
would
create
a
temporary,
$5,000
tax
credit
pilot
program
for
health
care
professionals
willing
to
serve
as
unpaid
preceptors
to
medical
residents
still
in
training.
The
idea
stems
from
the
Legislative
Healthcare
Workforce
Commission,
which
heard
stories
of
students’
graduation
dates
being
delayed
by
up
to
a
year
because
of
the
lack
of
preceptors,
which
are
a
necessary
part
of
medical
students’
degree
requirements.
In
other
cases,
medical
students
are
paying
preceptors
out
of
their
own
pockets
to
act
in
a
mentorship
role.
The
tax
credits
would
be
one
tool
to
support
the
growing
industry
and
address
health
care
workforce
shortages
across
the
state.
The
committee
also
considered
a
bill
to
exempt
employee-provided
fitness
benefits
from
taxes.
Employees
must
currently
report
employer-paid
benefits
for
utilizing
fitness
facilities
as
wages
and
pay
taxes
on
that
sum.
The
bill
discussed
this
week
would
provide
up
to
a
$30
tax
credit
per
year
to
offset
the
tax
impact
of
what
the
bill
sponsors
say
is
a
necessary,
important
benefit
that
should
be
encouraged
among
more
employers.
Both
bills
were
laid
over
for
possible
inclusion
in
the
committee’s
omnibus
bill
(SF
139,
SF
687).
|