Rep. Vang proposes tighter reporting for Minnesota biofuels incentive program

ST. PAUL

Representative Vang introduced House File 8,58 on the committee floor, proposing expanded reporting requirements for the state's biofuels production incentive program to increase transparency about how public funds are used.

The bill would require producers who claim reimbursement to submit an annual packet of information before payment, including business structure, names and addresses of producers and parent companies, financial statements or audited financial opinion, job-creation goals and progress (including any equity hiring goals), executive compensation, evidence of environmental-permit compliance and a description of intended and actual use of payments. Under current program rules, participating facilities are eligible for reimbursement payments for up to 10 years; the program's eligibility window closed June 30, 2025, and there are roughly 14 producers participating, the sponsor said.

"This bill follows the Legislative Auditor's recommendations and adds transparency so we know where our public dollars are being spent and whether they are well utilized," Representative Vang said before taking questions from committee members.

Brian Warner, executive director of the Minnesota Biofuels Association, told the committee he supports accountability but warned the bill's reporting list "goes well beyond what is necessary to evaluate the program's effectiveness." Warner said the requirements could increase administrative costs for refiners and the Department of Agriculture and might undermine the program's goal of attracting economic development that benefits local agricultural producers. He also said a 2020 Legislative Auditor performance and financial audit of the program returned no written findings and had concluded the program "was operating well."

Supporters of the bill argued additional, consistent reporting will help legislators measure program outcomes and ensure public money achieves stated goals. Critics and some members questioned whether the additional compliance layers are necessary given prior audits and noted it is late in the session to introduce new compliance obligations.

Representative Anderson and other members suggested the measure could be pursued through alternate legislative pathways if needed; Representative Vang responded that more consistent reporting across private entities receiving public funds is appropriate.

Outcome: Representative Vang renewed the motion to lay the bill over; the committee laid House File 8,58 over for further consideration. No final vote on the bill occurred.

What's next: The bill will be held for further negotiation and possible amendment before returning to committee or floor consideration. The committee record shows the sponsor and industry indicated willingness to work together on narrower reporting approaches.