[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-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],{"_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",6610627,"mediaKeyId","2902116-cca0e1e833954cd235ae7219b5b00891","parentId",2902116,"title","Data‑center bill draws sharp testimony over review process, generators and water; amendment fails and measure tabled","audioSeconds",3348,"startMs",5848000,"endMs",9196000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2902116-cca0e1e833954cd235ae7219b5b00891&start=5848&end=9196","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2902116-cca0e1e833954cd235ae7219b5b00891/thumbnail_5848000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6610627/Minnesota/Datacenter-bill-draws-sharp-testimony-over-review-process-generators-and-water-amendment-fails-and-measure-tabled","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6610627-65b5eaac6af9a092b1e4961e26d11736/orig.mp4?Expires=1771092344&Signature=hlMKH2U2iklxG67OHe0a6gu84MwvGzqX0fB2niudK0b-6xrLeDssZEil3~b5Yv-JiPUrH-2QbKTAPSsvo1xG196oHuFXaDbFVC2gSXTyw6hUiU2QZBBWie7Mr5LJfk5gRHgI7gP9iGkKSpiGgeYkzeyYhN2xXFCKOTkahyixjQgC2VN~dTpnR0jeg9iVzbxT4QGz4Pjw2QxLTaph3~NTUAtp-42UWWwVncYu0pwz-twS9N2UxXXmfjBZBA37dOzSVe32R41OtB8s2y8YgBuk~CRXQTVcdvy4ApAqvXxLHCWDGaoRBNH7sl8qBvd9qym05S-S4RKeLWSCrI-ORmqFWA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Minnesota Legislature","date","2025-04-08T22:56:09.667Z","article","Senate File 13‑93, a bill focused on environmental review for large data‑center developments, prompted multiple hours of testimony and a contested committee process before the measure was tabled on April 8.

Sponsor Senator Matthew introduced the bill, saying the measure is intended to clarify how environmental review and air permitting rules apply to backup generators at large data centers. \"The permitting process ... limits when the data center generators can be run, how long they can be run, and the maximum annual emissions each site is allowed,\" he said, describing existing permit limits and staff estimates that many data‑center generators operate far below permitted maximums.

Opponents warned that the bill would weaken oversight for projects that can include hundreds of diesel backup generators and very large water withdrawals. \"A single data center can consume up to 5,000,000 gallons of water per day,\" said Ivana Stark, state director of Clean Water Action, adding that water‑use and chemical treatments for cooling can remove water from the local cycle and require close scrutiny. Environmental and public‑interest groups including Sierra Club North Star Chapter, the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, CURE and Clean Water Action urged fuller environmental review and stronger permit conditions.

Local officials offered mixed testimony. Rick Hendrickson, a Becker city council member, told the committee Becker completed an alternative urban area‑wide review (AUAR) intended to evaluate development in a designated area and asked that the local AUAR and local permitting not be overridden. \"It seems unfair to require an EIS which will jeopardize data center development throughout Minnesota,\" Hendrickson said. State Environmental Quality Board executive director Catherine Newshorn said AUARs are appropriate for light industrial and warehousing projects and are performed by local governments, but added that if a project includes significant on‑site power generation or large water appropriations, other environmental review categories may also apply.

Committee action and votes: Senator McHugh introduced an A8 amendment that would have required an environmental impact statement for data centers that meet the bill's definition. Sponsor Senator Matthew opposed the amendment. The committee conducted a division on the A8 amendment; recorded division votes were 4 in favor and 6 opposed, and the A8 amendment failed. Later in the hearing the committee voted to table Senate File 13‑93; the motion to table carried by voice vote and the bill was laid over for further consideration.

Why it matters: Testimony highlighted unresolved questions about how data centers should be reviewed and permitted in Minnesota, especially when projects include very large backup‑generation capacity, fuel storage and high water use. Opponents argued the bill could allow projects to avoid a full environmental impact statement and reduce transparency about energy, water and air impacts; proponents and some local officials said AUARs and local planning already provide review capacity for certain siting decisions.

What’s next: Senators agreed to continue discussion at a later date; several members said they plan to offer additional amendments to specify operating limits, reporting and permitting requirements for backup generation and water use.

Ending note: The committee deferred a final decision after a lengthy public record that included environmental organizations, local officials and industry stakeholders.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Committee on Environment, Climate and Legacy - 04/08/25","oneSentenceSummary","Senate File 13‑93, a measure addressing environmental review and permitting for data centers, provoked concern from environmental and community witnesses over backup generators, water use and transparency. The committee rejected an A8 amendment by division and later tabled the bill for further work.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature MN, Minnesota","taxId",77817,"location","Minnesota","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},6610632,"Tribes, environmental groups and lawmakers urge inclusion of Wild Rice Act in environment omnibus",2536,3374000,5910000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2902116-cca0e1e833954cd235ae7219b5b00891&start=3374&end=5910","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2902116-cca0e1e833954cd235ae7219b5b00891/thumbnail_3374000.jpg","/articles/6610632/Minnesota/Tribes-environmental-groups-and-lawmakers-urge-inclusion-of-Wild-Rice-Act-in-environment-omnibus","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6610632-b1823d53874f55a7431b32b664c8dc4c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771092344&Signature=SH8Q68Vft1dBaWkj-J6TJfF2H5cmqXnUlXawjjrLEs4VnHEgx1Mmj6P-u5ytqpmLT86F5pMiPvyzC8iB1yqRyTDOUKlASOvDJ74eIdVaaIsL8qqZw4tsUUQZVLvc2bZw76w-JTPNt2yBC4NnuVt1PJFNxBS693axSsUxg9LViaZxgC4Aw73Ah-aICi9muAzTgZl0TYyvmt6dTTJhCR9NypzNBopPRLHqokEaCCYmbDd43Dbt0L2X-U5ahyGULvvNEwTstLAyTk-K~gbYXOCDi2Bt9F3OKhE6o86QY-jHGGNWKYSpMjz0XcBOgH4X3c1dWsXTIJJ-R8hwWRjYKzvLwA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A coalition of tribal representatives, environmental advocates and faith‑based organizers urged the Minnesota Senate Environment Committee on April 8 to include the Wild Rice Act (Senate File 12‑47) in the omnibus environment and natural resources bill.

\"This bill recognizes that wild rice has the right to live because it is in fact alive,\" said Jessica Intermill, strategic policy consultant at Minnesota Interfaith Power and Light, during public testimony. Intermill told the committee the measure is not a legal personhood bill and that it focuses on recognizing the inherent, naturally occurring right of wild rice to exist and thrive.

Multiple tribal speakers and advocates described wild rice (manoomin) as a cultural and ecological keystone. \"By protecting wild rice today, we honor not just the past, but also the future generations who will rely on it for food, culture, and connection to the land,\" said Liana Goose of Rice and Repair Alliance. Gina Peltier, an Anishinaabe member of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa, told the committee that tribes and the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council support the protections and that extensive community organizing had built broad backing for the measure.

Michael Lane of the Indigenous Environmental Network and other testifiers emphasized that the proposed language does not create corporate‑style legal personhood or a new ability to sue; rather, they said, the proposal recognizes wild rice as a living component of the ecosystem whose continued survival is tied to treaty rights and tribal food security.

The Department of Natural Resources and other agencies were present during public testimony; several witnesses urged lawmakers to include the Wild Rice Act language in the DE amendment. Dozens of organizations and tribal governments, witnesses said, have signed on in support.

Committee response: Members acknowledged the testimony and several senators said they intended to continue work on the issue. Senator Sarah Kunish said she would offer an amendment on Thursday to include the Wild Rice Act language in the omnibus bill.

Why it matters: Testifiers framed the issue as preservation of a traditional food, treaty‑protected harvesting practices, and an ecological indicator of water quality. Advocates told the committee that statutory recognition would create a new policy framework for protecting wild rice beds across northern and central Minnesota.

What’s next: Committee members indicated the issue will be revisited at the next committee meeting; an amendment to the omnibus bill was pledged by a committee member for Thursday consideration.

Ending note: Witnesses asked legislators to consider treaty obligations and long‑standing cultural relationships with wild rice as they weigh amendments to the environment omnibus.

","Multiple speakers, including tribal members and advocates, urged the Senate committee to include language from Senate File 1247, commonly called the Wild Rice Act, in the environment omnibus. Witnesses emphasized cultural, treaty and ecological reasons for statutory protections urging legislators to add the language as an amendment.",{"_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},6610638,"Senate committee advances environment omnibus; agencies raise concerns about parks, legal costs and CWD funding",5442,492000,5934000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2902116-cca0e1e833954cd235ae7219b5b00891&start=492&end=5934","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2902116-cca0e1e833954cd235ae7219b5b00891/thumbnail_492000.jpg","/articles/6610638/Minnesota/Senate-committee-advances-environment-omnibus-agencies-raise-concerns-about-parks-legal-costs-and-CWD-funding","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6610638-59ee2a7e0d90f1a16f238eae0248c3cd/orig.mp4?Expires=1771092344&Signature=DwTiM8p35DXEHciOkuURZNQzrpbzktowJgHiFmeyUNRqRawDsMtBJR8CjM-kaGpZcW6iBL~L6zDuPyWUTB2JMpgCx2DQYGsM82jKuFAKXe1vhu3j3WQI5yhY4fE9ck4tkwRSrUj9QDDgSLLoXMp6PVQkFkTmj1Pk1BeNKnp8-ikRnQ0yc53vi6E6NsqSno06wqr3ebkqXue7fyiM7VRADKxziwtoZc7pt2kc1n6MNLGC7mHNvsFYN4fvDruu7-awlP-FM5l0zh6FoN4RKd7M2XRxT6fZQ92Ak2h2ca8snxQnM6yNR7ynqZZKyBscLV2XWrTMuhqSVDuRbkkcy4yyRw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Environment, Climate and Legacy Committee adopted the A4 delete-all amendment to Senate File 2,077 on April 8, advancing the omnibus environment and natural resources bill while hearing detailed budget and policy presentations from staff and agency leaders.

A fiscal staff member working from a spreadsheet summary said the committee bill makes a range of changes across the Pollution Control Agency, Department of Natural Resources and other agencies. \"The total for PCA…is about $31.7 million over forecast, but about $900,000 less than the governor,\" the staff member said while walking members through line items. He described a $2.68 million permitting-efficiency initiative for the PCA, a $736,000 general‑fund increase to PCA in fiscal 2026‑27, and an environmental‑fund increase in the first biennium of roughly $13.6 million tied to program shifts and new items such as a proposed e‑waste program.

The Department of Natural Resources also drew attention. \"We appreciate the inclusion of many of the governor's budget recommendations,\" DNR Commissioner Sarah Strom said, but warned the bill omits elements the agency regards as critical. \"State Park permit fee increases are necessary to keep pace with rising costs and without this additional revenue, the DNR will be forced to make publicly visible reductions to State Park services,\" Commissioner Strom said. She also said the bill does not include dedicated funding for legal costs and public-safety preparedness for conservation officers and expressed concern about reduced funding for private forestry assistance and chronic wasting disease response.

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Commissioner Katrina Kessler told the committee the bill contains several agency priorities, including operating adjustments and permitting reform, the battery and e‑waste stewardship program, and community engagement funding to support work in diverse languages. \"We appreciate inclusion of the MPCA's operating adjustment and permitting reform that will allow our agency to continue to protect air, land and water and improve efficiency and services for local governments and businesses,\" Kessler said. She asked the committee to continue discussions on sustainable aviation fuel, remediation statutory changes, and access to the closed landfill investment fund.

Other funded items described by committee staff include: DNR park operating backfills where the senate bill does not adopt the governor's proposed parks fee increase; a groundwater fee and aquatic invasive species (AIS) fee that replace some general‑fund support; reappropriations for stalled projects such as the Silver Bay trailhead and Redhead Mountain Bike Park; and a $28.18 million first‑year appropriation from the trust fund community grants program contained in Article 3. The spreadsheet also showed fee changes across multiple funds totaling roughly $12 million in 2026‑27 and $18 million in the tails.

Testimony from local and regional officials addressed provisions in the bill. Lisa Barrajas of the Metropolitan Council thanked the committee for language allowing tribal governments to be direct grantees under the council's tree‑planting grant program and for funding regional parks and trails operations. Representatives of the Minnesota Zoo warned the committee that the agency's modest state share of revenue leaves it vulnerable to a multiyear shortfall if state funding falls short, affecting admissions, programs and staffing. Conservation, boating, and ATV stakeholders spoke to specific program adjustments included in the bill, including abandoned‑watercraft language, ATV appropriations, and concerns about how an extended producer responsibility (EPR) e‑waste program could affect small businesses and consumers.

Committee action: Committee chair moved adoption of the A4 delete-all amendment to Senate File 2,077; a voice vote was recorded as \"aye\" and the motion prevailed. The committee also laid the bill over for additional work and scheduled further discussion for Thursday; members were told amendments would be considered at that time.

Why it matters: The delete‑all A4 carries operating, fee and programmatic changes that affect multiple state agencies and local partners. The bill shifts some program funding off the general fund to dedicated environmental accounts, creates new program appropriations, and includes policy provisions on permitting efficiency, e‑waste stewardship and the establishment of the Outdoor Schools for All grant program.

What’s next: Committee staff and agency representatives said they will continue to refine statutory language and answer member questions at a follow‑up committee meeting. Members and witnesses were asked to return Thursday for amendment consideration and additional Q&A.

Ending note: The bill combines finance and policy across many divisions; committee staff posted a detailed spreadsheet tied to the DE amendment to assist members in comparing Senate and governor proposals.

","The Minnesota Senate Environment Committee adopted the A4 delete-all amendment to Senate File 2077 on April 8 and heard extensive testimony on budget and policy changes across natural resources and pollution-control agencies, including funding moves, e‑waste stewardship, permitting reforms and a new outdoor-schools appropriation.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Data‑center bill draws sharp testimony over review process, generators and water; amendment fails and measure tabled

Tribes, environmental groups and lawmakers urge inclusion of Wild Rice Act in environment omnibus

Senate committee advances environment omnibus; agencies raise concerns about parks, legal costs and CWD funding