Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Hf10 North Star Promise Eligibility topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

House committee advances bill to narrow North Star Promise eligibility; testimony divided

2288906 · February 11, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The House Higher Education Finance Policy Committee voted to re‑refer House File 10, which would limit state program eligibility tied to the Minnesota Dream Act residency pathway, after a public hearing that split sharply between advocates for retaining the North Star Promise and lawmakers pressing for tighter eligibility.

Representative Isaac Schultz (House District 10B) introduced House File 10 at the House Higher Education Finance Policy Committee hearing. Schultz told the panel the bill would change eligibility rules for the North Star Promise and other OHE programs by removing the residency pathway created under the Minnesota Dream Act (statute cited in committee materials as Minn. Stat. §135A.043). Schultz said he and the bill’s backers aim to limit state financial aid to citizens and lawful residents and asserted the change would protect taxpayer dollars.

OHE Commissioner Dennis Olson and staff provided committee members with preliminary program data the agency had supplied in advance. Olson said OHE’s working figures show $86,399 in North Star Promise awards (base and plus) paid, as of the agency’s January 15 snapshot, to students who applied via the Dream Act pathway. He also supplied state grant counts: 411 state grant awards in FY23 and 506 in FY24 were made following Dream Act applications, which the agency said represented roughly 0.6–0.7 percent of total state grant recipients in those years. Olson and nonpartisan staff noted that program‑level fiscal detail and the formal fiscal note were still pending and said OHE expected to present full financials in a follow‑up session.

Public testimony ran strongly against removing eligibility. Five public speakers opposed limits on the North Star Promise and described the program as essential to students already enrolled or working toward degrees in Minnesota:

- Emma Jop, a 19‑year‑old student, said financial constraints and debt barrier higher education for many peers and urged lawmakers to “keep the hardworking citizens of Minnesota in mind” (testimony stated she supports HF10, but she argued prioritizing citizens; note: her written testimony said support but committee testimony context matters).

- Sagradio Torres Flores, a Minneapolis community organizer and university staffer with Comunidades Organizando el Poder y La Accion Latina (COPAL), described serving Spanish‑speaking students and said North Star Promise helps first‑generation students balance work and family obligations.

- Eva Pena, a University of Minnesota student and North Star recipient, said she would not have been able to afford college without the program and asked lawmakers not to remove currently enrolled students from eligibility.

- Danielle Huck, an English professor at Minnesota State University, Mankato, said graduates who benefited from similar aid become nurses, teachers and public‑service professionals and urged the committee to oppose the bill.

- Samantha Diaz, political director with SEIU Local 26 (also speaking for other unions), said restricting eligibility uses immigrant communities as “scapegoats” and will not address higher education costs or corporate profits.

Committee members asked for more complete fiscal documentation and for OHE to appear again with a formal fiscal note. Representative Dan Wolgamott and other members asked that the committee be given more time to question authors and agency staff; the chair agreed to return the bill with the fiscal note for additional review.

Before closing, the committee took a roll‑call vote on a motion to recommend House File 10 be re‑referred to the Committee on Health Finance and Policy. The motion passed by recorded tally: yes 7, no 6. The committee did not reach a final policy decision on eligibility; members directed staff to circulate the OHE fiscal figures and scheduled more extensive follow‑up as the formal fiscal note becomes available.