Latest news with #Magrum
Yahoo
18-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
North Dakota Senate adds funding for local wastewater projects to replace federal cut
About $1.9 million in federal funding was approved for the Fessenden wastewater lagoon but rescinded with the cancellation of FEMA's Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program. (Photo provided by Wells County Emergency Management) The North Dakota Senate this week added funding to a budget bill to help communities that lost federal grants for infrastructure projects. Sen. Jeff Magrum, R-Hazelton, who introduced an amendment to House Bill 1577 on the Senate floor Thursday, said he's noticed some 'hiccups' involving federal fund distribution. The Federal Emergency Management Agency canceled about $20 million in grants designated for North Dakota projects. The pulled federal grants announced earlier this month were from FEMA's Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, designed to help state and local governments with projects that reduce risks to hazards. Loss of $20 million in FEMA infrastructure grants 'devastating' to North Dakota communities 'They had gotten these grants and they were ready to build their projects and the money was pulled out from under them,' Magrum said. The amended bill authorizes the state-owned Bank of North Dakota to issue up to $9.7 million in loans through the Department of Environmental Quality for wastewater projects affected by the funding cuts. Two wastewater projects that lost funding are a $7.8 million wastewater treatment project in Lincoln and a $1.9 million wastewater lagoon erosion project in Fessenden. The bill directs the Department of Environmental Quality to seek state funding in 2027 to repay the loans. If federal funds are restored to the projects, the bill requires those funds to be used to pay back the loans. The bill does not address the other FEMA grants that were cut, which included $7.1 million for a water intake project in Washburn. Lawmakers plan to add funding for the Washburn project in another bill, said Sen. Brad Bekkedahl, R-Williston, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Sen. Tim Mathern, D-Fargo, told lawmakers that backfilling the projects with state-backed loans is a major decision to help those communities. He pointed out that the state Department of Health and Human Services also lost federal funding that has not yet been replaced by the state. 'Get prepared for a special session because there will be a load of these,' Mathern said. The bill also includes the option for the interim Legislative Management Committee to conduct a study on the potential creation of a wastewater project fund for the state. The study would be presented during the 2027 legislative session and include input from cities, counties, townships and water resource districts. The bill returns to the House. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
North Dakota Senate tosses out kratom regulations in favor of study
Sen. Jeff Magrum, R-Hazelton, advocates for a study of the plant kratom during a North Dakota legislative session on April 15, 2025. (Jeff Beach/North Dakota Monitor) The path of kratom legislation took another turn in the North Dakota Legislature Tuesday as the Senate changed a bill that sought to regulate the plant and turned it into a study. Kratom is a plant native to Southeast Asia that is related to the coffee plant. Some people consider it an energy booster, like caffeine, or use it to manage pain. Kratom also has been used to wean people off drugs such as fentanyl and heroin with some people reporting withdrawal symptoms. Earlier this session, lawmakers considered versions of legislation that proposed to ban kratom, require state regulation by two different agencies or various study proposals. On Tuesday, Sen. Jeff Magrum, R-Hazelton, proposed an amendment to turn House Bill 1566 into a study by Legislative Management. The amendment and the final bill passed on 31-15 votes. Pain relief or a problem? North Dakota lawmakers hear kratom debate The journey isn't over yet for the kratom bill. It will be returned to the House, which passed a version giving the Agriculture Department regulatory authority and about $600,000 for two employees. Magrum said the wide-ranging attempts to regulate kratom by the Legislature, with its members largely unfamiliar with the plant, showed that a study made more sense. Kratom-related products are available to consumers, largely through online sales. Sen. Todd Beard, R-Williston, opposed the study amendment, noting that the kratom industry is advocating for regulation to combat adulterated products. Some products that contain kratom also include synthetic ingredients that enhance the opioid-like effects of kratom. The North Dakota Board of Pharmacy advocated for adding mitragynine, derived from kratom, to a list of controlled substances under state law. The proposed study would look at potential uses for kratom and potential regulations on the production and sale of kratom products. Magrum said after the vote that he has used kratom on a couple of occasions to treat back pain. He said the first time he made the mistake of taking it on an empty stomach, which made his stomach hurt so much he forgot about his back pain, he joked. 'At least people are learning about it,' Magrum said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
31-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Amended bill related to RIO incentive compensation program gets do-pass recommendation
Mar. 31—BISMARCK — A bill related to an incentive compensation program for the North Dakota Retirement and Investment Office got a do-pass recommendation on a 14-2 vote from the Senate Appropriations Committee on Friday, March 28, after it was amended to have the agency report to the appropriations committees during the next legislative session regarding its plan to internally manage 50% of the investments under control of the State Investment Board. Sens. Cole Conley, R-Jamestown, and Sean Cleary, R-Bismarck, were opposed. Before the Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on Friday, its Human Resources Division failed to include an amendment to House Bill 1022 on a 2-3 vote that would have removed Retirement and Investment Office fiscal operations positions from being eligible for the incentive compensation program. The amendment also included a 75% cap on the bonus for the Retirement and Investment Office's incentive compensation program for each eligible full-time-equivalent investment position. The motion also included adding an amendment that would require the North Dakota Retirement and Investment Office to report to the appropriations committees during the legislative session in 2027 about its plan to internally manage investments. Cleary and Sen. Jeffery Magrum, R-Hazelton, voted to approve the amendments. Later during the hearing on HB 1022, the Senate Appropriations-Human Resources Division approved on a 4-1 vote adding the amendment that would require the North Dakota Retirement and Investment Office to report to the appropriations committees during the legislative session in 2027 about its plan to internally manage investments. Magrum was opposed. The Senate Appropriations-Human Resources Division also gave a do-pass recommendation on HB 1022 on a 3-2 vote, with the amendment requiring RIO staff to report to the Legislature in 2027. Cleary and Magrum were opposed. The incentive compensation program could allow the top two RIO officials to earn up to 100% of their salaries as incentive compensation, although officials in the office said that might not happen every year. RIO is responsible for coordinating the activities of the State Investment Board and the Teachers' Fund for Retirement, according to RIO's website. The State Investment Board has statutory responsibility for the investment program of several funds, including the Legacy Fund. The annual salaries for the RIO executive director and chief investment officer are $237,400 and $312,000, respectively. The documents of the incentive compensation program say it is designed to help attract and retain talented investment professionals. The program is also designed to help RIO earn the highest possible investment returns at a reasonable cost and at controlled levels of risk and to reward long-term investment performance. During the 2023 legislative session, the state Legislature authorized RIO to develop an incentive compensation program for its investment and fiscal operations positions necessary for the management of funds under the control of the State Investment Board. North Dakota Century Code Chapter 54-52.5-04 says that RIO may develop an incentive compensation program for full-time-equivalent investment and fiscal operations positions necessary for the management of the investment of funds under the control of the State Investment Board. The State Investment Board must approve annually the provisions of the program. Cleary said one of his amendments to HB 1022 would remove "fiscal operations" from North Dakota Century Code Chapter 54-52.5.04. He said the incentive compensation program is an investment performance program for employees making the investments. "I don't know if the plan is to have the executive director as part of this," he said. "It looks like the plan they proposed in the interim is, but that also seems odd to me." Cleary told The Jamestown Sun that fiscal positions aren't directly involved in making the investment decisions. He said it's odd for fiscal positions to be eligible for the incentive compensation program that's designed to provide a bonus based on investment performance. "I think common sense here dictates that the bonus for investment performance should be given to folks making the investments," he said. "Whether it's executive director or fiscal staff ... I don't think the labor market is different on how we need to compensate compared to someone who's an investment analyst — there's a lot of different pressures there — from how they're being compensated in the private sector and in other public sector agencies. But, the fiscal staff and the director, those are positions that to me it just doesn't make as much sense to have them be part of this investment bonus structure, and I don't think anyone really had that in mind when we passed it two years ago." Another amendment by Cleary — which was not approved to be added to HB 1022 — included capping the maximum incentives at 75% of an investment position's salary for the incentive compensation program. "There is a bill in the House to get rid of this program entirely," Cleary said at the Senate Appropriations-Human Resources Division hearing. "I think I said when I introduced this amendment, that seems short-sighted. We are asking them to do more; they need to pay competitively to do that. Part of that is the bonus structure. "I don't want to speak for the subcommittee or the Senate, but I don't know if folks understood that that meant that there's going to be bonuses up to 100% of the salary," he said. "So when you see that, it seems like it could be a lot, and that's where the 75% of the cap came from." Cleary told The Jamestown Sun that the 75% cap for a bonus through the incentive compensation program was a guide rail into how high the maximum bonuses should go. "I think the way I landed on that number is it seems like a 100% bonus just seems pretty excessive in public-sector employment and so I thought 75%, that's still a pretty generous bonus on top of their base salary," he said. Cleary said he reviewed some testimony from the 2023 legislative session about RIO investment staff. "That's just now how it (incentive compensation program) was implemented during the interim (session)," he said. Sen. Kyle Davison, R-Fargo, said at the Senate Appropriations-Human Resources Division that he reviewed what he was involved in last session and what the Legislature's commitment was in looking at a new system to manage state investments. "It's what I committed to last session from a system change ... that I believe is the right system, and then when I look at the 75% of the base and the pay on the amendment, that wasn't what I agreed to previously," he said, referring to RIO's budget. "I think the State Investment Board has done their due diligence. I think RIO has done their due diligence on what this pay should be. I think we should let the process evolve over a session over the next couple of years before we meet again and monitor it." Jodi Smith, RIO interim executive director, told the Senate Appropriations Committee that Verus Advisory Inc. sets the benchmark for the incentive compensation program before the fiscal year begins. "If we are one basis point above, that's where you get the minimum compensation," she said. "If we are 25 basis above, that's where you get that middle ground. Then we would have to get to 50 basis points before you got that maximum." She said using the current benchmark and $23 billion in assets, RIO would need to bring a benefit of more than $19 million above the benchmark before the minimum bonus for the program is instituted. "That incentive payout then by gaining $20 million to the state is $205,000 so to me that's a pretty nominal number when we are gaining the state that $20 million," Smith said. "In order to gain up to that maximum amount, which is what the policy is written at today, we'd have to earn the state $132 million above that benchmark. That payout then is looking at about $2 million based off of our current pay scale of our employees." She said anyone eligible for an incentive bonus is not eligible for a performance bonus. Smith also said RIO determined it wanted the authority to design and implement an incentive compensation program during the last legislative session, "which is kind of stepping outside what most other agencies are able to do." "Then they wanted the time for the board to write a policy," she said. Conley told The Jamestown Sun that he is opposed to the top two people in RIO potentially receiving 100% of their salary as a bonus. "Those same two people were the ones that could set the threshold, and they set it at a half a percent," he said. "I think the people that have the most to gain shouldn't be the ones setting the threshold on how they get paid." He added that RIO has hired an independent consultant to set the benchmarks, which "is probably a good thing." Smith wasn't the executive director when the incentive compensation program was approved. Jan Murth, former RIO executive director, resigned from her position, effective Jan. 3. The incentive compensation program provides incentive compensation as a percentage of regular compensation, with 80% of the incentive compensation based on the financial performance of the investments and 20% based on individual goals, according to the Retirement and Investment Office's budget No. 190 for SB 2022. If the three-year rolling average return of the investments exceeds the benchmark return by 0.5%, 100% of the incentive compensation based on financial performance is available to the employees, the document says. The maximum incentives as a percentage of regular compensation are as follows: * 100% for the chief investment officer and executive director * 90% for the deputy chief investment officer * 75% for the chief risk officer, senior investment officers and portfolio managers * 60% for the chief financial officer * 50% for investment officers, risk officers and accounting managers * 25% for senior investment accountants and investment accountants Plan participation is determined based on employment status and the executive director's assessment of the position's impact on the Retirement and Investment Office's overall investment performance.
Yahoo
17-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Bill supports North Dakota landowners caught in costly legal battles
Sen. Jeff Magrum, R-Hazelton, talks to landowners Jan. 30, 2025, at the Capitol. (Jeff Beach/North Dakota Monitor) Sen. Jeff Magrum has not had much success backing bills that seek to protect landowner rights and curb the use of eminent domain and the development of carbon pipelines. But Magrum, a Republican from Hazelton, got strong backing last week from Senate Majority Leader David Hogue on a bill that would allow landowners to recoup legal fees in eminent domain cases and easement negotiations. 'I love pipelines,' Hogue, R-Minot, said testifying Wednesday in favor of House Bill 2321, 'but that doesn't mean the landowner shouldn't be treated fairly.' Lawmakers vote down 6 bills to limit carbon capture in North Dakota Landowners are asked to provide right-of-way on their land by developers of large infrastructure projects such as pipelines, power lines and roads. Landowners are compensated for that right-of-way, known as an easement, but how much they are paid is subject to negotiation between the developer and landowner. If an agreement can't be reached, a developer may be able to obtain the easement through a legal proceeding known as eminent domain. With eminent domain, a landowner can be forced to provide right-of-way. The court would determine how much a landowner is paid if it allows eminent domain. But during negotiations and court proceedings, the landowners may incur thousands of dollars in expenses through fees to attorneys or obtaining an appraisal or other expert testimony. Bismarck attorney Derrick Braaten, who represents landowners, said a growing number of eminent domain cases are ending up in federal court because one of the parties is from out of state. He said federal judges are still basing their rulings on state law, including awarding of fees and expenses, and that federal judges are looking for clarity in state law on how to handle those awards. He said judges also have discretion not to award the full amount of fees and expenses if it seems unreasonable. The bill could also address situations where a project developer begins negotiations with a landowner but abandons the project or changes the project footprint. In those cases, a judge could award compensation to the landowner. 'This addresses the situation where there is no win or loss,' said Hogue, who is an attorney. The Senate Judiciary Committee did not act on the bill but indicated it might pick up the bill again Monday. More 2025 legislative session coverage The bill is one of several backed by Magrum to give support to landowner rights. In testimony, he has singled out the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline as being forced on landowners who can't afford the court costs to fight back. Earlier in the week, the Senate defeated Senate Bill 2322, sponsored by Magrum, which would have eliminated eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines. Hogue voted against the bill but noted during discussion on the Senate floor that North Dakota eminent domain law is flawed, treating half-inch fiber optic cable and 24-inch pipelines the same way and without fair compensation for landowners who seek to negotiate the best possible contract with a project developer. Another Magrum bill, Senate Bill 2320, sought to remove property tax exemptions for interstate carbon pipelines. That bill also failed last week. Magrum was a co-sponsor of six House bills related to carbon capture. All six failed on the House floor Friday. His bills addressing carbon pipelines in the 2023 session also failed. There is opposition to Magrum's bill addressing fees and expenses. 'Eminent domain is a necessary tool to ensure reliable and affordable electric service, particularly in the development of transmission infrastructure,' lobbyist Dennis Pathroff wrote on behalf of the Power Companies of North Dakota. 'The added costs mandated by SB 2321 could increase project expenses, delay infrastructure investments, and result in higher costs for North Dakota electric consumers.' After hearing Hogue's comments on eminent domain, Magrum said he looked forward to getting more support on the bill to improve the stand of landowners in easement negotiations. 'Thanks, Mr. Leader,' Magrum said. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
07-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Bill to kill carbon pipeline property tax exemption in North Dakota fails
Sen. Jeffery Magrum, R-Hazelton, speaks on the Senate floor during the organizational session on Dec. 4, 2024. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor) A bill that would have required carbon dioxide pipeline developer Summit Carbon Solutions to pay property taxes in the first 10 years of operation in North Dakota failed Thursday in the state Senate. Sen. Jeff Magrum, R-Hazelton, sponsored Senate Bill 2320 that would have removed a tax exemption for interstate carbon dioxide pipelines such as the Summit project. North Dakota law requires the state to reimburse counties for the property tax they would have collected for the first 10 years the pipeline is operating. Summit Carbon Solutions is attempting to build a 2,500-mile pipeline network across five states, ending in western North Dakota. About 333 miles would be in North Dakota. Landowners, energy industry at odds over bills limiting CO2 pipelines in North Dakota Summit officials testified last week that about $800 million of the $9 billion project would be spent on the North Dakota portion of the pipeline that would gather carbon emissions from ethanol plants for permanent underground storage. Sen. Dale Patten, R-Watford City, contended that eliminating the exemption would be a 'bait and switch tactic' at this stage. Magrum argued that the Iowa-based company has already benefited from research by the Energy and Environmental Research Center in Grand Forks and will benefit from other tax breaks. 'We're trying to reduce property tax for our residents,' Magrum said. 'Why wouldn't we charge these out-of-staters?' The bill is one of several related to carbon dioxide bills in the 2025 session. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
