June 1st, 2026. It's 11:00 a.m. Or excuse me, 11:02 a.m. And I'd like to call the Minnesota Senate Committee on Rules and Administration to order. Thank you, members, for joining. We have three items on our agenda today dealing primarily with our employees and compensation. Um we're going to have Secretary Bottern and Ms. Stangle join us. Uh [clears throat] and uh the materials that uh we're discussing today were sent to everybody last Thursday and again again this morning. So, hopefully you all have before you what it is that you need. We're going to begin uh with the committee resolution on compensation and I'll call on Secretary Bottern. >> Good morning, Madam Chair and members. You have a document uh available to you the code is CR019-1. Uh that's the Senate Committee Resolution, a proposed resolution that provides uh compensation for Senate employees. It's in much the same form uh as the resolution approved last year. I can walk you through what's in the document. Um the most important component in the document is of course annual salary increases for Senate employees. The document provides a 2% across-the-board increase for Senate employees and a merit pool of 1.5% of salaries. Um a word or two about the process used to arrive at those numbers. The Management Advisory Committee began meeting earlier this year and met, I think, about four times uh to consider how to set those amounts. There were pressures on the Senate budget at the outset of the year. Um primarily health insurance increases were greater than had been forecasted for calendar year 26 and 27. And security costs had increased significantly. So, the management advisory committee had to deal with trying to arrive at what would be a competitive and also sustainable number for those increases. Before I go too much further, I'll say this every time, but just to be sure, the management advisory committee is composed of myself, the director of human resources, the director of SCURFA, and the chiefs of staff of each caucus. Generally, we operate in a manner where we try to find consensus on proposals for the rules committee. So, walking you through the document itself, paragraph four, beginning on line 1.8, item A, provides the salary increases that I've just mentioned and provides the terms for the how they can be administered. Um, the document does call for the preparation of a merit plan by the director of human resources to provide guidance on how the merit increases are administered. That document, although it does not need further approval by the rules committee, is available to you in draft form with the documents that have been sent to you. Um, walking fairly quickly through the document on line 1.21, paragraph four, provides treatment for employees who are at the range maximum. [clears throat] That's consistent with what has been done in past years. Paragraph five, beginning on line 1.23, provides allowances for technical adjustments to ranges to keep them where they need to be in relation to each other. Um, and paragraph B, beginning on page two, line one, uh, provides the authority for development of the merit plan that I referred to a moment ago. Uh, beginning on line 2.8, the authorization is provided for SAND to >> [clears throat] >> um cash out up to 20 hours of comp or vacation time. And line 2.16 provides the standard language on the deferred comp uh matches. That's uh employee option for either $1,150 in matching or up to 50 hours of vacation or comp time. And lastly, uh paragraph E on line 2.26 provides the technology and communication stipend for another fiscal year in the same form that has been provided in the past. Um happy to take any questions. >> Thank you, Secretary Batten. Members, do you have questions? Senator Limmer. >> Yes, I do. Uh uh Secretary Batten, uh when we total the cost of health insurance expenses, uh and then the uh let's say the cost of uh uh inflation, uh when you combine those costs, do you know what that rate would be compared to uh the 2% that we're offering our employees? >> Secretary Batten. >> So, Senator Limmer, I want to make sure I understand the question. Um are you referring to the expected health insurance premium increase that employees will be expected to pay, you know, their share of the premium in addition to inflation? >> No, um I was I was kind of playing off your words as you were explaining health care costs. Um and I'm I'm uh just wondering, are we are we this year even keeping up with inflation uh for our employee uh benefits? >> Secretary Batten. >> Thank you, Madam Chair, and Senator Limmer. Um what I would say to that is, you know, this point I think inflation has been a pretty fluid number. Um it seems to be perhaps increasing in I think the last month or two. I haven't paid careful attention to that. [clears throat] Um much of this would depend on the slice of time that you include um within the the previous year. I think what I would say Senator Limmer is we're we're trying to do our best um and recognize that and and I think also hope that um most Senate employees are doing fairly well with the additional 1 and 1/2% uh available in the pool for the merit plan. So that provides you know in other words I wouldn't look only at that 2% number when you're thinking about what's available to I would say almost all Senate employees. I hope that's helpful. That's really about the best I can do uh >> The other the other question I would have have to ask is is the merit increases. Uh does is it typical that every employee gets a merit uh recognition? >> Thank you Senator Limmer. Senator Secretary Bottern. >> So Senator Limmer um there's you know basically three levels within the merit plan. There's um not meeting expectations where there's still some possible amount available. Performance hasn't met expectations. That's very rarely used. That would be I think if memory serves about up to 1%. Um meeting would get you to uh I believe um 1.5. And I may have misspoke I think. Not meeting there's a range available up to 1.5. Meeting would be 1.5 and exceeding anywhere up to 2.5. Um historically you know if you're looking for sort of a distribution of employees I would say most employees exceed maybe not to the full um extent of the 2 and 1/2%. Um if you were doing some very rough arithmetic uh you can you know I think it's reasonable to use the 1.5% for what's available to most. Almost all. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, Senator Senator Marty. >> And is Secretary Barden to be clear, the 1.5% is the pool that's available. So, in other words, in a DFL caucus or the Republican caucus or non-partisan, but average it has to average 1.5%. It can't go above that. So, if some are getting more equivalent number have to get less. >> Secretary Barden. >> Madam Senator Marty, that is in essence correct. The pool provides, you know, exactly what that is, like a total dollar amount, and then the merit plan provides the limitations on sort of minimum and maximum amounts within those ratings. So, you're correct, and it has to all balance out. The the pool serves as a limiting factor. >> And members, there is a memo in our in our materials today from Darren Hoff from Human Resources. If you have other questions after this meeting. He is a good resource for us. Are there other questions on the committee resolution on compensation? Seeing no questions, then Senator Rest moves to adopt committee resolution 19. All those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> And those opposed, say no. And that motion is adopted. Thank you, members. Next, we'll move to the committee adoption of the Senate employee roster. And before I move to Secretary Barden, this is in our packets. This is a document that is sensitive in that it names members and salaries. So, it is not distributed publicly, but it is available to the public, and if you'd like it, please reach out to our committee administrator, and Rachel Carlson. You find her email online because we want to make sure that if people want it, they can get their hands on it. But it is not something we readily distribute to everybody because it contains sensitive personnel information about salaries. I'd like to turn now to Secretary Batten. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. So you have in the materials provided to you the Senate roster dated June 1st, 2026. It is picking up on some of what Senator Murphy said, what the chair said. This is sensitive information. If you have questions about it, what the practice for the Rules Committee has been to avoid reference to [clears throat] individual employees. It's possible you might have questions about, you know, a group or class of employees. And certainly also happy to take questions offline as well of their individual concerns. We've made every effort to make sure that the information is correct. The director of human resources and his team go out of their way to circulate this and give um the chiefs of staff, the director of fiscal affairs, and myself the opportunity to review it and make sure all of the information is accurate. It is a snapshot in time. That has to be emphasized. So, you know, for example, the number of employees will vary day to day depending on separation from service. And then dollar amounts um will vary based on promotional increases. You know, it's possible an employee might be eligible for a promotion increase the day after tomorrow. You wouldn't see that reflected on this roster. So, keep that in mind as you're making comparisons and so forth, you know, as as we look through this document, as you look through it. The The one thing I want to say here and and in keeping with past salary increases is I have received some feedback that has been generally very positive in terms of how the Senate is doing vis-a-vis the employment market. I think we're in a position now where hiring is more competitive. That's that's certainly what I've heard. I welcome any and all feedback that supervisors, others, any you know, hiring managers um uh you know, any of you would have for me regarding that competitiveness. What what we're trying to accomplish here is, you know, that sort of uh careful line between keeping a the Senate budget, using that in a very sustainable fashion, and remaining competitive with with the work that's been done in the previous years um to improve Senate salary competitiveness. That's what I would have to tell you about the roster. And again, as always, happy to take any questions. >> Senator Limmer, do you have a question or is your hand still up? >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> It's okay. >> No, I do not have a question. >> Thank you. Senator Marty. >> Thank you, Madam Chair, and um Secretary Bottern, um I appreciate hearing that you feel they're fairly that our wages are getting more competitive. Out of curiosity, is there anybody maybe there in Hoff or somebody who tracks how many people we're losing to other positions that we think are leaving because of wages and sort of thing? Or is that I mean, I haven't heard of a lot of people I left to take a much better paying job somewhere else, and I know that happens, but curious if there's if you've noticed a downtick in the number of people doing that. >> Um >> Thank Senator Marty. Sec- Sec- Sec- Secretary Bottern. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm out of practice here. I apologize. It didn't all right. Front of you. Um so, Senator Marty, anecdotally, I would say I think that's true. Uh retention has improved quite a bit. Um but, you know, certainly for a more comprehensive look at the data or something more grounded in, you know, let's say the experience of the past 6 months, um I can check in with the director of human resources and just follow up more informally with you. I think it's a good question and we need to be we need to be very mindful of that. Again, we want to retain the advantage that has been created. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Senator Marty, and I know there's been a real effort on the part of the Senate to uh, make sure that the salaries are competitive, um, so we retain our talent. Are there other questions? And seeing no questions, Senator Marty moves to approve the Senate employee roster dated June 1st, 2026. Seeing no questions, all those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> And those opposed, say no. And that motion is adopted. Thank you, members. And last, uh, we'll take up the Senate Senate interim travel expenses and per diem memo, and I'll turn to Director Stangle. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. This is the interim travel expense and per diem memo. This is very similar to what you've seen in past years. Um, the first section talks about per diem, mileage, lodging, and travel expenses. The next section talks about authorized reimbursements, um, for certain types of business related to your position as members. The communication reimbursement is the same as last year. Constituent service mileage is the next section, and then finally, in in in-state and out-of-state travel guidelines. This is all the same that you've seen in years past, except for the dates have been updated, and the IRS mileage rate has been updated to match the current IRS mileage rate of 72.5 cents per mile. And then there were some minor formatting changes, um, from the memo from last year, but otherwise, uh, the memo and its contents remain the same. >> Thank you, Ms. Tingle. Um, Senator Johnson. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. So, I just wanted to make one point on here, too. I know this is this is not been a change in this year's document, but it was brought to my attention just half an hour ago or so that, you know, underneath the authorized reimbursements, underneath that bulleted headline that's underlined, uh, you know, there's a number of things that we were authorized for reimbursement on. Uh, back in 2022, the memo used to have a line in there that had, uh, part of the reimbursement authorization was majority leader, assistant majority leader, president of the Senate, uh, but then also minority leader for appropriate duties. And as we are, you know, having a few changes within our leadership staff right now, we're we're finding that, you know, there's there's more duties that, uh, I'm kind of being responsible for on this stuff. And so, is there an opportunity here to to address that? Otherwise, looks like everything else kind of has to go through the majority leader, and we're not sure if, uh, those expenses are, um, authorized reimbursable for the minority leader duties, uh, too. >> Senator Johnson, can you just, um, can you draw my attention to where in the memo? >> To which you would So, that's that's, yeah, I'm sorry, I should have clarified. So, in the current memo, there is hasn't been a change or anything this year. I think this happened probably back in '23 or '24, um, under uh, Leader Deets at that time. But, we were just comparing the notes between the 2022 memo, which we can send that over to you. Uh, I just received it here a few minutes ago. And so, there's a line that was taken out that that just highlights uh, majority leader, assistant majority leader, president of the Senate, and minority leader for their appropriate duties within their caucus structures. And so just wondering if if that's something that we could maybe have a little time to to reflect on going forward here. Just so that we know cuz we just don't have clarity on on are those duties that you know that I have to come down and address? Are those covered or not? But then >> Okay. So that you're looking for per diem, Senator Johnson, for those days? >> Well, this is the authorized reimbursement. So it would be those expenses that are incurred in the duties of coming down. >> Okay. Thanks for raising it, Senator Johnson. And yes, let's talk it through to make sure and I I just like to see where it was, but >> Yep. I'd be happy to do that. Sorry to throw this out here. We're just we're thinking about this today. And so >> It's okay. Um happy to take it up with you. Wonderful. Yeah. Um Senator Frantz. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Johnson. I'm interested in hearing more as well. A vigorous minority and the way we provide for it sounds very important. Senator Johnson, do you know when that change was made? If it was present 2022, do we know at what point there was a a removal, if that's the right term? Thank you, Madam Chair. Senator Johnson. >> Senator Johnson. >> Yeah, it and I don't know the exact in term that that was made. It was either in the '23 in term or the '24 in term. So I'm not sure which one it was, but we can get that information over. >> Thank you, Senator Johnson. And thank you, Madam Chair. Looking forward to that discussion. >> And Madam Chair, >> Senator Johnson. >> I just got a text that said it was the the '23. After the '23 year. >> All right. Thank you, Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator French. Uh we'll have that follow-up conversation and I'm glad you called it out. On that note, um as we're talking about changes, we we are in order to maintain the stability of our budget, um going to use the tool of a a hiring pause, um not a freeze, um but a pause um with intention of making sure if we have positions to fill that there is a process through the MAC to do that. And I think it is important to acknowledge um Jason's departure right at the end of session and that important role to be filled. Um so, while we have often used a a freeze and just said no hiring, um we are going to use a pause, but we want to make sure there's a process by which the MAC can take up those questions, um so that we have the complement of staff necessary for our caucuses. >> Don't you worry. >> Senator French. >> I appreciate that recognition and accommodation for for our group to so. >> Absolutely. >> in conversations as things kind of progress here. >> Thank you. Are there any questions on the interim travel expenses and per diem memo? And seeing no questions, Senator Pappas moves uh to approve the interim travel expenses and per diem letter dated June 1st, 2026. All those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> And those opposed, say no. And that motion is adopted. There being no further business before the Rules Committee, this meeting is adjourned. Thank you, members. >> Have a good summer. >> Mhm. Mhm. Mhm. Mhm.