(ceremonious music) - This is North Dakota Legislative Review.

I'm Dave Thompson.

Thanks for joining us.

Our guest is the Senate Minority Leader, Senator Kathy Hogan from Fargo.

Senator, thank you for being here.

- Thank you for having me.

- I wanted to get your opinion as we're getting closer to the crossover date.

How do you think the session's gone?

- The session has been amazingly smooth.

We had increased numbers of bills, but our hearing process is very, and the Senate side at least, is very under control.

We're actually over 50 bills ahead of where we were two years ago for crossover, and we're starting to hear house bills.

There's been a real difference in committee hearings in general, not as many, four and five and six-hour hearings, and not quite the same level of controversy on bills.

- How do you square that?

Why is that that way, do you think?

- I think in some ways, we haven't, at least on the Senate side, haven't what I call silliness bills that consume a lot of energy, but don't really impact real people's lives or impact them negatively.

And so I think our longest hearing in human services has maybe been two hours.

And we had hearings that went six and eight hours last year.

So it's got a different pace.

- Now, we should remind everybody that you're in the minority and you have to serve on committees.

- I do serve on committees.

I do, I serve on human services, and this year, I moved from Agriculture to transportation, which I'd been on in 2011 in the house, but it's a whole new committee and it's very different issues.

- Which one do you like better?

- Well, human service is my love.

- Yes.

- Human service is my love.

But I like learning and the learning that you do when you're on a committee is really fascinating.

Today, we were looking at a bridge over the Oahe at Fort Yates, and those are things that I wouldn't even think about in my day-to-day life.

- It's funny you mention that.

That's one of the bills I've been keeping my eye on, because I know that this has been in proposals for years and years and years to have another crossing over the Missouri River, especially at Fort Yates.

- Yes, it has.

And it hasn't been done for a number of reasons, but we have a planning process.

It'll probably be a four to six-year planning process for it, but it was, I think it's important for the citizens of those areas to be able to get to places.

- Now, on human services, has your committee tackled the issue of the Jamestown State Hospital yet?

- We have not heard any of the bills on the state hospital, because it's in the Department of Human Services.

But the state hospital is something I've been, we've been working on this for six years, and because many of us have been really involved in looking at what currently is happening at the state hospital, which is truly unacceptable.

You know, there are 6 active buildings, but there are 30 buildings on the grounds that really need to be torn down.

- You know, we've been talking about this issue for a number of years.

- Probably 20 years, we've been talking about it.

And the last six years, we've gotten serious about it.

You know, first, we looked at some of the options.

We expanded community-based services substantially.

With the private sector, primarily with acute psychiatric beds in local units.

And then we had the acute psychiatric treatment program, where we looked at all the state hospital models, and we decided that we wanted, what we wanted to, thought we needed to have, in terms of forensic, geriatric, a small acute psychiatric, and the evaluations for people who have criminal kinds of issues, you know, who's competent, those kinds of evaluation skills.

And we made those decisions two full years ago.

And then we started the design process, and we had $12 million this last biennium to start the design to actually build it.

And we have a whole plan ready to go.

- Now, it's interesting, because we go back a number of years, and remember when they wanted to put the James River Correctional Center on the grounds of the state hospital, and there was such a human cry on that.

- There was, there was.

And in some ways, the James River Correctional Center will take over much of those grounds that used to be the state hospital.

And the new plan moves the state hospital away from the James River Correctional Center.

So there'll be a better separation.

- So what do you think is the main purpose to have a state hospital?

- I think it needs to be very specialized services for people with serious and very chronic conditions.

First, we have to provide service in the community for everyone who can be served in the community.

But there are some people, particularly the group we're seeing now, are geriatric people with serious psychiatric disabilities that can't function in a skilled nursing facility.

And that's a population.

And then sex offenders, no one really wants to have a sex offender treatment program next door to them.

And so that's the sex offender treatment program, and then the forensic psychiatric issues.

And other than a short term acute unit, though, that's what the state hospital will be.

We become based on our planning, a really highly specialized facility.

- But a short term unit, - Well, not, some of this forensic could be long term.

- Okay.

- And the geriatric psychiatric stuff could be long term, 'cause many of those people also have physical disabilities.

They need Hoyer lifts.

So they're the most complex individuals in the state.

And we couldn't really make them available in each of the regions because there's not enough numbers.

- But we won't see shovels yet probably for a couple years because of planning.

- Well, the original plan that we did four years ago was to have the plans shovel ready by this summer.

And because of the change in administration, they wanna re-look at it, but we're hoping that we can get to shovel ready soon.

- Do you think the new governor supports the idea?

- I think he understands the needs.

I think it's very complex to look at what we've done for six years and understand it.

- I wanna switch bases to, for a little bit to talk about the idea of school meals.

You know, that the... one bill I believe has died, but one bill is still alive.

- Absolutely, and the thing about school meals is all of the polling on school meals said is so universally agreed to, it's hard to vote no on this, because this is basically feeding children.

And that when we started with school milk eight years ago and we couldn't get that passed to where we are today, I think the citizens of North Dakota really don't want children to go hungry.

- And I think that they buy into the argument that, you know, feed a child, you feed the mind, as well as a stomach.

- Absolutely.

If you're hungry, you and I don't do well when we're hungry.

- So the funding system, I understand the bill that's still alive is General Fund.

- Yes.

- The other one that was alive was to use Legacy Fund profits.

- Right, and Legacy Fund earnings, as you well know, get spent five times by the end of the session, and we have to cut down where we're going to actually spend them.

- Well, that reminds me, do you know where you're at in terms of underwater at this point?

- Oh, we're still way underwater.

- Which is normal.

- Which is normal size.

- Yeah, we are way underwater.

We're spending more money than we have.

- So what are the kind of issues are top of your mind right now?

- I think the school meals, I think the ESA and school choice.

I think we need to protect public education.

And I think some of the ESA diverts funding from public schools to private schools.

And I think we have a very strong public education system in this state.

And somehow, it has gotten a reputation that it doesn't deserve.

I know that my schools in my district, and I have both West Fargo and Fargo, are terrifically solid, and that we need to maintain them.

But the people I'm hearing from now are the rural communities.

Rural communities are really concerned that they won't have their public schools, and we have to maintain access to children even if they don't live within 10 miles of a school.

And so I think the ESA discussion is going to be one of those last issues that we deal with.

- I'm glad you brought up the rules, because there was a, you know, debate in the house, and one of the rural representatives said, you know, I live in coal country and the oils there, oil and coal are funding a lot of education, and our schools look like bomb shelters, is what she said.

- That's right.

And the school construction issues, I think are major issues, because many of our schools have really deteriorated over the last 20 years.

And that, whether it's building for the new districts that are growing or some of those small rural, I think the construction issues on rural schools is representative Jim Jonas had a plan.

And I think those kinds of issues have to be on our table, just like we do, be intentional about roads, we have to be intentional about school buildings.

- And nobody's talking about the quality of education.

They have buildings that leak.

They have- - That's right.

- Boilers that need to be replaced.

But from what I'm gathering in talking to legislators who represent rural districts, their teachers are working hard to make sure the kids get an education.

- They are, they are.

And I think, sometimes, when you have something that works so well, and, you know, we're still recovering from COVID, we still have lags from COVID, but I think we've really seen increases in performance in reading and math, and the mental health issues have lowered substantially.

We still have a major problem with truancy for some children.

And there's some work on with the REAs on a diversion program to help with those children who really need an alternative approach to education.

- Yes, I understand that.

And we cannot discount the pressures and the challenges going through that COVID pandemic.

- Of course.

And it's life changing.

It really is life changing.

But I think we are seeing the children kind of recover from them, and not talk about those days as much.

But the children who have special needs, or who are socially isolated, or have family problems, or any learning disabilities, I think learning disabilities, many of them didn't get the early intervention that they needed to.

And now, they're gonna have a longer time to recover.

- I'm gonna change subjects again, and talk about this tobacco tax bill that you have, and that Representative Steiner has in the house.

And they're both still going through the process, correct?

- No, no, Representative Steiner's died last night.

- Oh, it did.

- It died last night.

And she was looking at a tobacco tax to make North Dakota comparable to South Dakota at $1.09 a pack.

And Montana's at $1.70.

Minnesota's at $3.05, and North Dakota's at 44 cents.

And she wanted to make it comparable to South Dakota primarily to make sure that we reduce youth starting to smoke, and youth start smoking.

Right now, they're starting with vaping products, and our vaping numbers have grown substantially over the last five years.

And so those are, were her health concerns.

And many of the health agencies, the cancer, the lung, the heart liked her bill, because they thought it would be more effective at stopping starting.

I was more gradualist, and I only raised the tax 25 cents per pack, from 44 to 69 cents.

So mine was more gradual, so I didn't get the support of the health advocates.

But the tobacco lobby still opposes the bill no matter what the increase is.

- That's right, in the North Dakota Retail Association, as well.

- The North Dakota Retail Association, I don't believe that we will lose sales when Minnesota's at $3.09 and North Dakota's at 69.

That's enough of a difference for people not to change their buying habits.

- I've talked to some people since you had the hearing at your bill, and a lot of people were surprised that we don't have much of a tax on vaping or e-cigarettes.

- We have no tax on vaping and e-cigarettes.

So it's a non-taxed product, and it's a dangerous product.

It's a gateway to other kinds of tobacco and other kinds of drugs.

And, you know, we don't know the research on the outcomes, but we know that other kids, the kids who start with vaping often move on to other drugs.

And so that's why I think we have to tax this as we do other kinds of substances that create problems.

- So you're hoping that maybe your bill will survive, and maybe you can do something, you know, to cut down on it.

- I'm cautiously optimistic.

I think my bill may live.

- Yet, at the time, when you testified before the committee, you said, "Nobody likes this bill."

- Nobody likes this bill because it was a compromise.

It was not the high tax and it's not, but it added the e-cigarette kinds of materials.

And the other issue that this bill does is it puts half of the revenues into 988 and crisis response, because 988 is important, which is suicide intervention and prevention.

And it puts half of it into local public health.

And local public health is what does the tobacco education.

And so I have a different funding strategy for where the funds would be used.

- Another committee you mentioned that you're on is transportation.

So there are a couple interesting bills and transportation about speed limit, the 80 mile per hour speed limit.

What do you think?

- I don't like the 80 mile an hour.

This is the bill I probably hear about more from anybody else.

And people have strong feelings.

What we know is the faster you go, the more likely you are to get hurt.

And we have a 75 mile on our speed limit, most of us go 80.

And so if we had an 80, and there's a lot of difference in accidents between 80 and 85.

And I think it as a public safety rule, I really am committed to staying at 75.

The other thing we're doing, of course, is looking at at points and fees, which is really an emotional issue.

- Oh yes, I understand that one, too.

- That's right, and we have such low fees for speeding violations.

This morning, we just got that on where the biggest citations were.

And it's distracted driving and distracted diving.

And then when do you lose your license?

And how do we, if you lose your license, what are the consequences?

And so there's this is a very serious committee.

- It does sound like it.

And distracted driving, that is really dangerous in my mind, because you're looking at your cell phone when you're trying to navigate a curve.

- Or you're getting something out of a glove compartment, or you're picking up something off the floor, or eating.

Eating is a distracted driving cause.

And so it's a real serious problem.

- Well, I can't say that I haven't done it in terms of eating, but cell phones are off for me.

That's just my point.

- Yeah, yeah.

Well, and I think with hands free, it's a little easier with all the technology now, 'cause you can talk, but again, you still have to push a button or you have to answer.

So all of that's a little bit distracting.

- Yeah, at least if you have the consoles in your cars these days.

- Yeah, yeah.

- So that's a good thing.

The other thing that Senator rumble's bill about raising the fees that if you're caught speeding in a construction zone.

- Oh, the construction zone, bill was very important to us.

And then the other one was if you hit a parked vehicle and you injure issue, we expanded who can be covered with that?

And we saw a video of a highway patrolman at an accident when his vehicle was hit after the first vehicle.

And then in the end, I think there were 8 or 10 vehicles involved in this crash.

And this poor highway patrolman was the only one on the scene trying to save lives.

And when you see that, we need to say this, if you've caused this accident or you participate, you need to be responsible.

- Was that an accident in the Fargo area?

- It was actually just east of Jamestown.

- Okay, it was that accident.

- Yeah, it was that accident.

It was really, it was horrific.

I mean, it was painful to watch.

- Another issue that still is big in North Dakota.

Well, there are a couple of them, workforce is a big issue.

And then there's the childcare and the availability of affordable housing are really intertwined.

- They are all intertwined.

I think so many people don't understand what it is to lose first year housing.

You know, if you don't have a place to call home, your entire life is disrupted.

And, you know, the number of children who are experiencing homelessness in the schools has grown over the last two or three years as rents have gone up.

And those kids really face challenges.

I think we have a couple good packages on homelessness, particularly, we have to get housing, 'cause we don't have affordable low income housing, but we also have to have the services to help people get stabilized.

And so that's important.

But then to go to work, you have to have affordable childcare.

And right now, childcare assistance is a good federal program that we have supported, but only 20% of the eligible families are enrolled.

Isn't that amazing?

- That is amazing.

Why is that?

- Well, I think they don't know how, and there's not enough outreach to them.

And many of the large childcare centers have added staff to enroll theirs.

So then the small group homes, or the small family homes are at a disadvantage, because they're not getting that childcare assistance.

So we put money in last year in 1540, the big childcare bill.

And it hasn't been implemented, we'll go after that again, because we needs to be at 50% in 2 years.

- So is it messaging, trying to get, you know, more education on how you sign up for something like that?

- And we need to make the process simple enough.

We need to make it simplify it, and then really be aggressive about tracking those numbers.

And we haven't done that yet.

- Along with that, and I just wanted to get your reaction to it.

Representative Rio stands at, he introduced the bill that would basically get rid of the Office of Legal Immigration.

- Oh, that's so sad.

That makes me sad, because what we know from our employers is that makes all the difference in the world, and that we have in rural communities where the healthcare providers are from the Philippines and from India.

And that has made a huge difference in stabilizing our healthcare system and many of our other industries.

And legal immigration is something, we're all immigrants and we came legally, and most of the people, in fact, are legal immigrants.

And so we need to protect those legal immigrants, and we need to say, "We need these people," because if you go to a fast food store, or you go to any service kind of industry, the cleaning ladies in my hotel, many of them are minorities from other countries.

And they are doing the work that we want need done.

- And farm laborers, of course.

- Farm labor, yeah.

Farm labor, healthcare, it's epidemic.

I mean, they are us and we need them, and they need us.

And so we need to figure out a way to work together.

- I would be remiss if I didn't ask you about the whole property tax reform and reduction package that's going through the house right now.

- Yeah.

- What do you think about what's been proposed for?

- I really did like the proposal from the governor, and I think, I haven't seen the final revisions and the bills that have come from the house.

It's been nice to have them sort up for us, so we don't have to look at all of those other bills, because we have a very strong finance and tax commission committee.

And I think they will do, the issue of CAPs I think is going to be one of the hardest thing, because there are differences from community, and that we have to be really careful about if you have an emergency, what do you do?

How do you use reserves?

I think that I've heard some discussion about perhaps putting a 3% CAP in for the next 2 years, and then reviewing it.

And so I think there's a lot of talk yet.

- There's a lot of talk.

And the one proposal that came out that was interesting is having, if you want more than 3%, you can go to your next general or primary election.

- Yep.

- And do it that way.

And you can erase the cap for a while.

And I can understand why, because if you live in Slope County, you're not living in Cass County, which has sales tax, you can back up.

- That's right.

- Slope County has nothing except property tax.

- Yeah, exactly, and that's why to put all property taxes into one set of rules makes it so difficult, because local political jurisdictions, cities, counties, parks, all of them are quite different.

And all of them are dependent on property tax.

So to make a black and white statement on any of this is hard.

- Yes, there are different needs to different counties, and we all know Cass County has different needs than Western North Dakota.

- Yeah, yeah, that's right.

- I wanted to get your take on a couple other things.

Number one, the 10 Commandments bill did not pass.

- I was really pleased when I looked at that vote.

It was, I actually watched some of the discussion.

I'm concerned that people don't understand the separation of church and state, because I think that's such a founding principle in our constitution and even basic freedoms.

They don't understand, the freedom of the press worries me.

And that freedom of religion is really a backbone of who we are.

And I was really impressed that the house defeated that bill.

- Yes, and so it was very interesting discussions.

- Yeah, really interesting discussion.

- You know, and they were thoughtful.

We've gotta say that, they were thoughtful discussions.

- They were, they were.

- And, of course, in North Dakota law, you can display the 10 commandments if your school board will give you the authority to do it.

And it has to be in a historical context.

- Yeah.

- This one took away school board authority and the teacher could just do it.

- That's exactly right.

And I think it's particularly hard as we become more diverse, as we have larger Jewish and Muslim populations, or as we have a fairly large in Fargo, you know, group from India and Pakistan, mostly physicians.

And all of that is, in some ways, hurtful to other faiths.

And I think we don't think about that.

- Yes, and the Native American community was very concerned about that.

- The Native American community has every right, because they were, in some ways, the last group to get religious freedom in this country.

And that didn't happen until the 1970s, the right to practice their own faith.

They were the last group.

And so they should be worried.

- Absolutely.

Well, we have about a little over a minute left, so I'm going to ask you a few quick questions.

Number one, we're sitting here, we haven't gotten to crossover yet.

When does (indistinct) - May 2nd.

- May 2nd.

- May 2nd.

- Do you know what day that is or... - Well, you know, it depends on how we call days, of course.

- Okay, that's true.

- That I think I would hope that we could save at least five days.

I'd really like to be at 75, 74.

- Do you like the idea of annual sessions?

- I think in the long run, we're going to have to be as we get implementing term limits, because there's so much to learn.

And when you meet every other year, you forget.

I think we're gonna go to short terms, similar to Minnesota, a shorter term and a longer term.

- So you're talking about maybe an issues thing and a budget session.

- Maybe a budget section, or maybe, you know, really controlled bills.

- Okay, and in the few seconds we have left, do you think the state will have a decent sized surplus to work from?

- Absolutely, absolutely.

Right now, I think, because the world economy is so unstable, we're budgeting right now in lower oil prices.

And so that's the real variable.

We are dependent on commodities.

- Well, I have to thank you very much.

- You're welcome.

- We run out of time.

Our guest today is the Senate Majority Leader, Kathy Hogan from Fargo.

For Prairie Public, I'm Dave Thompson.

(ceremonious music)