[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6088544,"mediaKeyId","2880015-90e2daccc9b4b6706850bd6a945e0733","parentId",2880015,"title","Mill & Elevator staff explain transfer math as representative proposes 6% breeding‑program allocation","audioSeconds",276,"startMs",10762000,"endMs",11038000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2880015-90e2daccc9b4b6706850bd6a945e0733&start=10762&end=11038","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2880015-90e2daccc9b4b6706850bd6a945e0733/thumbnail_10762000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6088544/North-Dakota/Mill-Elevator-staff-explain-transfer-math-as-representative-proposes-6-breedingprogram-allocation","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6088544-f11e448d47039db89fb689a2443f39a9/orig.mp4?Expires=1770452909&Signature=Glw15A84VFlvYTdLLfKHLe0eVRNqK7t9GZPoWWcbo8NAzXeCJ79QS6GC1n2kCbvZzpL3hxK6Vi~LZ1SwRgFFipWIDyhx48RoOwQj25J2d-uFexBwWs4-OU5JocDs0GoI0IaR-wpGKJNWhxlG4f5lb0LogG4Alq1g1U28~0LeII1WmMDbI2N9HMxSp-0F3Z7gpc6QASVn8WYqnTGw0-IXcYL1hh0u-rEfzpIpsEnh3FqzXWA1CJoxsvfUZxbMmzEXxBEB70yXZS1KKR9F2ypO9kGtqKWm5KM8SXOY2XQPuHh4MxQQKT-LS3EPa9pKicuZLWHhgBClaEF2IJg-1m1hhw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","North Dakota State Legislature","date","2025-04-04T00:00:00Z","article","The House Appropriations Government Operations division heard from North Dakota Mill & Elevator finance staff clarifying how the mill calculates transfers to the state and discussed a representative’s proposal to dedicate additional milling proceeds to agricultural breeding programs.

Kathy Duke, chief financial officer at the mill, told the committee the mill first computes net income after internal obligations such as employee profit‑sharing. The mill then transfers 5% of net income to a designated ag program (the transfer was cited in testimony at roughly $1.039 million for fiscal year 2024). After that 5% deduction the mill calculates the remaining profits and transfers 50 percent of that remainder to the general fund; the mill retains the other 50 percent for its operating and capital needs.

Representative David Fisher outlined a proposed amendment that would allocate a 6 percent amount for seed/breeding programs and other agricultural research. Under the amendment as discussed in committee, the proposed 6 percent would be deducted from profit and effectively reduce available cash. Mill staff explained how the proposal would change the math: the additional 6 percent would be taken off the top (after the 5 percent transfer), and the remaining funds would continue to be split 50/50 between the mill and the general fund — meaning both the mill and the general fund would each receive roughly 3 percent less than they otherwise would under current law.

Profit sharing and timing: Committee members asked whether employee profit‑sharing or gain‑share payments are included before the transfer calculation. Kathy Duke clarified those payments are deducted before the net‑income transfer calculation; the FY24 net‑income figure provided to the committee was reported after the profit‑share expense was recognized.

Committee reaction and next steps: Legislators expressed support for agricultural research goals but also concern about reducing the mill’s retained cash, which the mill uses for capital projects and operations. Members suggested staff and Representative Fisher rework statutory language so the mill’s necessary operating cash would be held harmless while directing new money to breeding and research — for example by changing the statutory transfer trigger or moving the allocation to a different revenue stream. The committee did not adopt formal language during the hearing and directed staff to take the comments into account for later drafting.

Ending: Mill staff said the mill has produced a long track record of profits, and they emphasized that large capital projects and ongoing operations rely on retained earnings. The committee agreed to continue the discussion and asked staff to return with alternative drafting options that would protect mill operations while advancing breeding and research funding goals.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Appropriations - Government Operations Division Friday, Apr 4, 2025 8:27 AM - 12:02 PM","oneSentenceSummary","Mill financial staff told a House budget subcommittee how net income, a 5% ag‑program transfer, and a 50/50 split between the general fund and the mill determine annual transfers; a legislator proposed a new 6% allocation for breeding programs that would reduce both mill and general‑fund receipts unless wording is changed.","taxTitle","Appropriations - Government Operations Division, House of Representatives, Legislative, North Dakota","taxId",28887,"location","North Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6088540,"Housing Finance seeks two FTEs and flagged $13.5M eviction‑prevention package moved from HHS",1016,7564000,8580000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2880015-90e2daccc9b4b6706850bd6a945e0733&start=7564&end=8580","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2880015-90e2daccc9b4b6706850bd6a945e0733/thumbnail_7564000.jpg","/articles/6088540/North-Dakota/Housing-Finance-seeks-two-FTEs-and-flagged-135M-evictionprevention-package-moved-from-HHS","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6088540-b30338af4bfaa9b37e11660b24ddbd77/orig.mp4?Expires=1770452909&Signature=W2vzcr5K74n22coapPYQqFVsuj3c-VO0gr4jrVG7K1orhoJvAY-zMja45yb43Kv0lEfpKRhLvxQ~H~SRnvN1XqspIi655dmJ2XLqkM7KwPuswZjA5Sk8nkmmio8c5Tx4n0Jt2eUrOQibh7YPL9wJxSsljry6PPlBSSXMDnGMSw1jBL-9KozSgmM~hKv02mw2pWbWsfoosiDNoYJl9A353SJhBjHGFm0EXhjcE9fv~fvi8CnHT0f5A39Mm1nNInbeTLB-nlSYM3jsT2OJ4NHPrHa8MG5A~a8KlKmyXBMfJETz38z8rMSqZYzle3PDTQqIlq-USNZo7OVbnUN8T-UPsw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Appropriations Government Operations division heard from the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency (HFA) about FTE requests and a proposed $13.5 million housing assistance package that the House chair asked be moved into HFA’s budget from Health and Human Services.

David Floyd, executive director of HFA, said the agency requested five FTEs in the House plan (the Senate included three). He told the committee most of HFA’s operating work is funded by agency revenues — HFA’s requested positions (except one homeless program manager tied to the transferred homeless grant) would be funded from agency program revenue, not general fund dollars. Floyd described a workload increase: loan servicing volume has grown in recent years and HFA relies on in‑house servicing staff and legacy systems.

On the housing assistance package: Representative Pyle described language and an ask that had been in HHS’s budget and asked HFA to take over administration. The plan she presented to the committee totaled $13.5 million: $10 million for a housing assistance program to support households at risk and $3.5 million for an eviction‑prevention program; HFA staff told the committee two FTEs would be necessary to operate the program and that those staff could be paid out of the 13.5 million in one‑time funds.

HFA’s internal capacity and grants administration: Floyd said HFA already administers several housing programs and has taken on prior Commerce and Bank of North Dakota programs that included a small number of FTEs. He and committee members discussed whether HHS should retain the program (HHS currently runs a federal/treasury‑funded rental assistance program established during COVID) or whether HFA could absorb it. Connor Swanson, a senior advisor to the governor, spoke in support of moving the program to HFA and said the governor’s office would back the transfer if the committee wanted that structure.

Accountability and staffing: Committee members requested more detail about program eligibility and whether recipients are Medicaid‑eligible; Floyd said those questions would need an HHS representative for a full answer. Representative Meyer asked whether the assistance is targeted to Medicaid recipients; committee members asked for details on reporting, audit and administrative mechanisms. Floyd emphasized HFA would administer grants to local providers on a reimbursement basis and would report back to the Legislature on program metrics.

Next steps: The committee placed the $13.5 million on the worksheet but highlighted that staff should return with more details about eligibility rules, reporting and whether two FTEs would be adequate. Members also noted other housing bills and funds in play (including a $25 million Senate housing authorization and a separate $50 million infrastructure proposal) and asked staff to coordinate across proposals so the overall scope and funding are clear.

Ending: The committee took no final vote. Staff and agencies were asked to provide more information about program mechanics, which budget the program should reside in and whether HFA can absorb administration with two FTEs paid from the one‑time funding.","The House appropriations subcommittee heard the Housing Finance Agency’s request for additional staff and a proposal to administer $13.5 million in state housing assistance — $10 million for at‑risk households and $3.5 million for eviction prevention — which had been removed from HHS’s budget and proposed to be moved to HFA.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6088548,"Panel weighs Mineral Resources staffing, considers using abandoned‑well fund for reclamation technicians",955,3517000,4472000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2880015-90e2daccc9b4b6706850bd6a945e0733&start=3517&end=4472","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2880015-90e2daccc9b4b6706850bd6a945e0733/thumbnail_3517000.jpg","/articles/6088548/North-Dakota/Panel-weighs-Mineral-Resources-staffing-considers-using-abandonedwell-fund-for-reclamation-technicians","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6088548-efec8426f9df647b6dbce32aef166bfc/orig.mp4?Expires=1770452909&Signature=A-vMsLoPGFpGNv4YX3di2-77UC4XQGPWYi7jSmT9ZNDadIhO9oUDClYj42sKKVwmDaOkMTo73qsDwXEa-J4VZEZJsAmfx9dDVnksIMYLAiarqNSt~KuYAR8rZnw15I-oWLJcej8Lg63elqJgvtj~y0GNkoCbxPWfEcZ5Wr1hMsqkFkIp1K9~J4wHME2bTN6grlCQ1cBQN17ZGA-H-B-TSTm5mugyjkZ80y8ETC5hKFPqHqRredv18Jge8mkphsFnuIGgSF9GL3kfPnpu6PA~b4kH4A34HNIZ4i~jdcWPdJQzM7REtLMQcxQetgTg7a4VwZWIYfByd3KjwlctW9vObg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Appropriations Government Operations division discussed budget 474 for the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR), including a request for additional FTEs and a plan to place reclamation specialists in field offices.

DMR Director Nathan Anderson told the committee the agency’s workload is growing — producing wells and regulated pipeline miles have increased — while some staff positions remain unfilled. Anderson and staff presented a priority list that included an executive/deputy director, a land-and-legal specialist (a re-purposed CCUS position), and reclamation technicians for field offices in Williston and Dickinson.

Committee members scrutinized how to fund additional reclamation staff. Representative Kempnick proposed using the Abandoned Oil and Gas Well Reclamation Fund to pay some or all of the field reclamation positions; staff noted the fund held roughly $38 million as of March 1 and has a statutory cap of $75 million. Adam (committee staff) said the fund receives operator fees and up to $7.5 million per year from oil and gas tax collections, and recently has grown due to federal grants for plugging and reclamation.

Key points of discussion: Committee members wanted the DMR to prioritize positions and clarified which positions were conversions of existing appropriations versus entirely new FTEs. Anderson explained one position previously authorized for CCUS had been repurposed as a land-and-legal specialist and therefore did not necessarily require new funding. The committee and staff discussed adding a deputy director position (new) and reassigning or removing a permitting technician to accommodate priorities.

Reclamation work and funding options: DMR staff described recent and ongoing reclamation work, including a request to help process bond releases and close out hundreds of reclaimed sites. Members asked whether reclamation specialists could be funded from the Abandoned Oil and Gas Well Reclamation Fund; staff said that is legally possible but would require statutory changes or explicit appropriation language. Representative Kempnick proposed drafting trigger language so additional reclamation technicians would be funded when certain workload thresholds are reached; members asked staff to draft options for statutory language.

Numbers and timing: Anderson presented workload graphs showing FTE levels (about 108 in 2024), pipeline miles and well counts trending upward, and a history of unfilled positions. Committee members noted the department had received some FTEs in prior transfers (two from Bank of North Dakota servicing) and had absorbed the HOME program and other work from Commerce without commensurate staffing in all cases. Staff said DMR would supply a revised worksheet showing how many dollars of salaries and operating costs could be reallocated to match the committee’s chosen priorities.

Ending: The committee agreed to leave the matter open for staff to prepare statutory language and worksheet adjustments that would permit funding one or more reclamation technicians from the Abandoned Oil and Gas Well Reclamation Fund and to clarify which positions were conversions versus new appropriations.","The committee reviewed the Department of Mineral Resources' request for new positions, discussed converting an unfilled CCUS role to a land-and-legal specialist, and explored using the Abandoned Oil and Gas Well Reclamation Fund (about $38 million) to pay for reclamation technicians in field offices.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6088550,"Appropriations panel agrees to split $6 million in SIF money for enhanced oil-recovery work and salt-cavern business case",147,1472000,1619000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2880015-90e2daccc9b4b6706850bd6a945e0733&start=1472&end=1619","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2880015-90e2daccc9b4b6706850bd6a945e0733/thumbnail_1472000.jpg","/articles/6088550/North-Dakota/Appropriations-panel-agrees-to-split-6-million-in-SIF-money-for-enhanced-oil-recovery-work-and-salt-cavern-business-case","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6088550-2c5ada1ebb6b1f08847f81285cb951c2/orig.mp4?Expires=1770452909&Signature=Sw57jECskbih5W9BGgHUttk7plF56aHjj5mK960wY-hwpqVJTanmI~u58Mg1HI9tPIMPsOO6pnaHACEkiRB0zKeLCDDxmUmOgUSK3JY7XbcweTs8-00fekgb0kguhUP66UuS4XLzHnnYwSM3SgpEQzsmCNyNXVvUM8Z24eDd5rHSvakkae0U2qYHeZGdsJaHcdMsQ9vucAca2BMIwilf-WrT-~N2s-itoPzkSQA1UXfqD2I2etm-BZlHVj9Pg-keNPprero~wPb~l-8eQZ4Qhnv6sDJq5k-l4mm1gmyd0n7CkRJi-uI343vG8bX8PywXDXyudfn3duWVZywLZC7ycw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Appropriations Government Operations division discussed budget 04/2005 on the Industrial Commission and approved moving SIF money between line items to support enhanced oil-recovery work and further study of salt-cavern storage.

Committee members and agency staff told the panel the change is a reallocation within previously discussed funding. Committee Chairman Munson and Industrial Commission Executive Director Karen Tyler said $6 million of SIF money originally tied to salt-cavern work will be split: $4 million added into an enhanced oil-recovery grant program in section 10 of the worksheet and $2 million left with the Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC) for business-case development related to salt caverns.

Why it matters: EERC officials and legislators said the salt-cavern work could attract industry investment — for petrochemical storage, propane peak storage or hydrogen — but commercial partners have not committed to drill or build caverns. EERC CEO Charles Garecki told the committee earlier drilling and core-sampling work showed promising subsurface salt but that the project still needs business-case analyses to attract private, multi‑million- or billion‑dollar investments.

What the committee discussed: Staff and legislators reviewed several spreadsheet corrections and reassignments in the Industrial Commission admin budget: an earlier erroneous transfer of roughly $581,000 that staff said resulted from miscalculated salaries, the conversion of one-time to ongoing operating funding for IT and rent ($50,000), and whether to include a previously agreed $400,000 item for transmission projects. Committee members recorded “ok” or asked staff to update the worksheet to reflect the $175,575 salary reallocation and the $500,000 adjustment discussed in the meeting.

Salt-cavern and enhanced oil-recovery details: Committee members asked EERC and industry representatives to explain what remained to be done. Garecki described prior work: a well was drilled and core samples collected; that effort cost more than originally budgeted and forced a scope reduction that removed business-case development. The remaining request for $2 million for business-case work would fund EERC technical staff and consultants to model specific industrial uses and recovery rates so private partners could judge the cost of construction and operation. The committee and EERC officials acknowledged the $2 million would not fund construction; it is meant to complete a front-end engineering/business-case effort to attract private partners.

Funding sources: The committee recorded that section 10 would transfer $4,000,000 from the State Energy Research Center Fund and $21,000,000 from the Oil and Gas Research Fund to an enhanced oil-recovery grant program (transferred amounts referenced on the worksheet). The $6,000,000 SIF item discussed will be split so $2,000,000 remains with EERC and $4,000,000 moves to enhanced oil recovery. Committee members asked staff to update worksheets to reflect those amounts and the resulting lower total in the section that rolls up SIF obligations.

Next steps and caveats: Members emphasized that the EERC business-case work must be technical and complete before the Legislature, or private partners, consider construction funding. Representative Bosch and others repeatedly asked whether industry partners (for example, Basin Electric or 1 Oak) would fund or co-fund the business-case work; Garecki said EERC has sought partners but needs the state's business-case work to attract industry capital. Committee members said they would treat the split as a finalized worksheet change for the House budget but acknowledged additional conversations and final statutory language would be needed in conference with the Senate.

Ending: Staff were directed to update the committee worksheet to reflect the agreed $4 million/$2 million split from SIF, correct the earlier salary-transfer error, and provide more detail on the enhanced oil-recovery grant and EERC business-case deliverables for later review.","The House Appropriations Government Operations division approved a plan to reallocate previously appropriated State Investment Fund (SIF) money: $4 million for an enhanced oil-recovery grant program and $2 million to the Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC) to complete business-case analysis related to salt-cavern storage.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Mill & Elevator staff explain transfer math as representative proposes 6% breeding‑program allocation

Housing Finance seeks two FTEs and flagged $13.5M eviction‑prevention package moved from HHS

Panel weighs Mineral Resources staffing, considers using abandoned‑well fund for reclamation technicians

Appropriations panel agrees to split $6 million in SIF money for enhanced oil-recovery work and salt-cavern business case