Citizen Portal
Sign In

Counties show 'green screen' failures in Maxis as Senate considers IT modernization bill

Minnesota Senate Health and Human Services Finance and Policy Committee · March 25, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Sign Up Free
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

Senate File 4719 would fund a multi-year modernization of state human services IT. County trainers and commissioners demonstrated Maxis/METS problems—repeated manual data entry, duplicate fields and training burdens—and urged an integrated replacement with county roles on a steering committee. The bill was laid over and later referred to State Government.

Senate File 4719, presented by Senator Wicklund, would create a multiyear approach to modernizing state human services IT systems and a steering committee to formalize county–agency planning. The committee heard an on‑screen demonstration of Maxis (the legacy eligibility system) and METS (a newer system) that highlighted workflow inefficiencies and manual entry that burden county workers and risk program errors.

Zach Wagner, a Dakota County Maxis trainer, walked members through entering a client application and repeatedly entering the same income information in multiple panels: "I have to enter income a fourth time… Maxis does not read itself." Tiffany Miller Sammons, a deputy director in Dakota County, explained that Metro's METS can be user friendly for straightforward "happy path" applications but requires prescribed workflows that force workers to close and reenter cases when exceptions arise, increasing rework and training time.

Matt Hilgert of the Association of Minnesota Counties said the issue affects workforce recruitment and county levies: inefficient systems increase case ratios and local costs, shifting burdens to property taxpayers. Dan Jensen (Olmsted County) said vendors exist who can provide integrated tools if procurement and integration are done correctly; committee members pushed for procurement approaches that include test drives of proposed systems before contracting.

Committee discussion emphasized four lenses for evaluating modernization—staff/workforce impact, property tax pressure, fraud prevention/program integrity, and client experience—and members asked about procurement strategy, integration models and near‑term fixes to automate SNAP eligibility and data integration.

The committee laid SF 4719 over for possible inclusion and later moved the bill to the State Government Committee for its steering‑committee aspects. Witnesses urged integrated design and county parity in governance before large procurement steps.