Helen Argraves, legislative intern for the House Commerce and Economic Development Committee, told members Feb. 21 that the Senate Committee on Economic Development, Housing, and General Affairs spent the week reviewing multiple bills touching wages, unemployment insurance, tenant protections and data privacy.

The most discussed item was S 37, a bill expanding eligibility for unemployment insurance to some seasonal workers, including school support staff. "The JFO on Thursday estimated that it would cost about between $5.5 million and $16 million a year to schools and therefore taxpayers," Argraves said. Senators asked for additional testimony from support staff and from officials in Minnesota, which has a similar law, to help quantify cost and scope.

Why it matters: If enacted as presented, S 37 could broaden unemployment benefits beyond traditional support staff to include other seasonal workers and independent contractors who earn income outside the school year. Committee members expressed concern that expanding eligibility would raise program costs beyond initial expectations and could increase school budgets.

Argraves said the committee expressed uncertainty over whether paraeducators would be categorized as instructional staff or support staff for the bill’s purposes. Senate members asked the Department of Labor to clarify definitions and urged broader testimony during future hearings.

Other labor measures reviewed included S 6, which would repeal the labor commissioner’s authority to recommend a subminimum wage for people with disabilities; S 67, proposing to tie the state minimum wage to a livable-wage metric; and a workforce omnibus (proposal 250652) that would remove agricultural workers from a minimum-wage exemption and expand overtime eligibility to workers earning less than $58,656 annually.

Argraves said lawmakers noted practical challenges in assessing farm wage data because some farm employers are reluctant to testify; advocates report that a substantial share of migrant workers say they are paid below minimum wage, while employers assert compliance. The omnibus would also require employers to include employer-paid health insurance in wage calculations, a change committee members warned could significantly increase employer costs.

Housing and tenant issues surfaced in discussion of S 34, which would limit tenants’ ability to contest rent increases on mobile-home park lots to increases that exceed 1% above the consumer price index. Committee members debated whether the bill would meaningfully restrict tenants’ current rights to contest rent hikes and sought clarifications on enforcement and scope.

On employee-rights legislation, Argraves reported that a proposal (250653) would narrow employers’ ability to fire without a legitimate business reason, ban noncompete agreements, and codify a worker’s right to sit when the job allows. Another bill (250654) would permit certain supervisory legal staff, including assistant attorneys general, to unionize and align decertification petition thresholds so both certification and decertification require a majority (50% plus one).

Other bills briefly noted by Argraves included S 70 and S 71 addressing data brokers and consumer data privacy, and S 78 to create a Vermont–Ireland Trade Commission. The committee planned follow-up testimony and additional briefings on several items.

Argraves concluded her report by noting next steps: the Senate committee requested outside testimony (including from Minnesota on unemployment changes), further cost estimates from the Joint Fiscal Office, and clarifying definitions from the Department of Labor. "That is all I have to report this week. I'm happy to take questions if there are any," she said.

No formal votes on the bills were recorded in the House committee meeting transcript; the session was a series of committee reports and scheduling discussions.