Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Idd Commission topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents and advocates present detailed plan for legislative IDD commission; committee sends bill to state/local government
Summary
A grassroots coalition including families of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities presented Senate File 683 proposing a legislative commission to study and pilot system reforms; the committee recommended the bill to the State and Local Government Committee without recommendation and noted appropriations to support planning.
Parents, self‑advocates and providers presented a multi‑part plan to the Senate Human Services Committee on Feb. 20 to create a legislative commission on intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) to study system gaps and pilot county‑level reforms.
Jeannie Pritnan, a parent from Eveleth, and Sue Hankner of A Team Minnesota described the proposal as a grassroots plan developed by families and local advocates that would create a bipartisan 12‑member legislative commission to gather statewide data, engage people with IDD and their families in accessible settings, and develop county pilot plans addressing case management, workforce training, housing, and work‑options programs.
Speakers said the commission’s work would include selecting two counties to develop data‑driven reform plans, identifying costs and implementation steps, and creating strategies for workforce development and housing. Testimony from Diane Kozlak and Mike Gobin described long waits, scarce day‑program capacity for people with severe needs and frequent case‑management turnover, risks the witnesses said the commission should address.
Appropriation and committee disposition: Authors discussed an appropriation to support the commission’s work; during the hearing committee members recited draft grant amounts for the planning grants and commission operations (committee discussion referenced figures of roughly $300,000 in one year and $600,000 in another as part of the planning grants and operations funding). By voice vote the committee recommended Senate File 683 to the State and Local Government Committee “without recommendation” for further work and cross‑referrals.
Why it matters: Presenters said Minnesota lacks reliable statewide data on the sub‑severe IDD population, that case management turnover and a shrinking vendor market have reduced access, and that community‑driven, county‑level pilots are necessary to design workable statewide reforms.
Ending: The bill will proceed to other committees for further review, where members said they expect to refine costing and implementation details and coordinate with Labor, Housing and local government stakeholders.
