Senators debate amendment to bar state funds for moving U.S. Hockey Hall of Fame; amendment fails after lengthy floor argument
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
An amendment (A82) that would have prohibited state funds from being used to relocate the U.S. Hockey Hall of Fame from Eveleth was debated at length and rejected on a roll call; supporters framed the move as heritage protection while opponents warned of constitutional and governance issues.
Senator Hochschild offered an amendment (A82) to the state and local omnibus that would have prohibited state funds from being used to relocate or alter the U.S. Hockey Hall of Fame from its longtime home in Eveleth. The sponsor framed the amendment as a protection of heritage and Iron Range identity, noting Eveleth’s historical connections to American hockey. “I will fight with everything I have to ensure the US Hockey Hall of Fame remains in Eveleth,” Hochschild said on the floor.
Floor debate went on for more than an hour. Supporters argued the hall belongs in Eveleth — citing local pride and the town’s contributions to hockey history — and urged senators to adopt the protection. Opponents raised concerns that the amendment would amount to an unconstitutional restriction on future legislatures' appropriation powers and could tie the hands of a 12‑member board that governs the Hall of Fame Museum. Several senators, including Senate leadership and legal commentators on the floor, warned that the amendment could create constitutional and practical problems by restricting future legislatures’ appropriations.
The amendment was put to a roll call and failed. Members who opposed it described it as “symbolic virtue signaling” that could raise legal questions about binding future appropriations. The transcript records senators debating both the cultural importance of Eveleth and the practical governance and constitutional issues the amendment raised.
Why it matters: the exchange illustrates how cultural and heritage concerns can collide with constitutional and statutory constraints in appropriation bills. It also highlighted how a local cultural question (the Hall’s location) became a high-profile floor debate with wide participation.
What’s next: the Hall of Fame matter remains subject to local control and the museum’s board; spectators and local officials said they would continue discussions about funding and preservation outside the Legislature.