Representative Nelson introduced House File 653 at a committee hearing to increase funding for the Farm Business Management (FBM) challenge grants. The bill would raise the FBM base appropriation by $750,000 each fiscal year above the current base of $2,250,000, producing a biennial increase of $1,500,000. Committee members and testifiers discussed using the added funding to hire instructors with expertise in farm transition planning, rural mental health, and specialty/urban crop production.

The bill author emphasized the role of FBM in helping beginning and transitioning farmers. Minnesota Farm Bureau representative Hunter Peterson said increased, stable funding is needed to ease instructors’ workloads and reduce burnout, noting the emotional toll instructors face: "continued funding, increased funding for this program will help ensure that, you know, these instructors have a reasonable workload." Pine County Farmers Union president Hannah Bernhardt described how a scholarship and an FBM instructor helped her organize finances and make management decisions: "I felt a huge sense of relief about my finances and the decisions I was making."

Agency and staff witnesses described program access and how grant dollars are used. Mr. Olander said the grants support the FBM program rather than provide direct payments to farms and that farmers pay tuition for the education they receive. Mr. Savory advised that the clause discussed is on line 2.9 (clause 3) of the bill and that the current statutory base is $2,250,000, with the bill proposing the $750,000 annual increase.

Committee members pressed for more detail about reporting and targeting. Representative Smith noted that the bill includes a reporting requirement for the Forever Green Initiative (lines 2.19–2.24) and asked why that program, rather than others, had that requirement. Representative Lee requested a breakdown of prior grant awards to see how funds have been allocated among priorities such as farm transition, rural mental health, and urban specialty crops. Mr. Olander responded that funds are awarded to faculty and centers based on student goals and that the program cannot deny access because it is offered through the public education system.

The committee did not vote on House File 653 at the hearing. Members indicated the bill will be laid over pending the budget forecast and further review; no formal vote tally was recorded in the transcript.

The discussion highlighted two recurring concerns: (1) ensuring the program serves smaller or beginning operations rather than unintentionally favoring larger farms that may enroll multiple participants, and (2) maintaining instructor capacity and mental-health-aware services as farms face financial stress. Representatives and testifiers asked for future reports showing prior funding distribution and for alignment with upcoming presentations on rural mental health.

Ending: Committee members noted next steps would include follow-up information and awaiting the budget forecast before the bill advances. No final action was taken on House File 653 at this hearing.