Ethics panel: MN Senate President must disclose possible future conflicts

Alex Derosier, Pioneer Press on Apr 24, 2025

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

The Senate Subcommittee on Ethics on Thursday advised Minnesota Senate President Bobby Joe Champion to disclose potential conflicts of interest in future bills he sponsors.

Though in that same motion, the panel made no finding on whether Champion had a conflict of interest when he carried a 2023 bill that gave state money to a nonprofit whose founder he had done free legal work for in the past.

Further, they found no financial conflict in a bill he sponsored this year to bring that organization another $1 million.

The decision was unanimous, though the Ethics Subcommittee has two Democratic-Farmer-Labor and two Republican members and often deadlocks or rules inconclusively.

On May 5, it’s expected to hear a Senate GOP complaint against Champion regarding his relationships with nonprofits he helped fund.

Violence prevention nonprofit

Champion, a Minneapolis DFLer, has been under scrutiny in recent weeks after reports that he helped the violence prevention nonprofit 21 Days of Peace obtain $3 million in funding, and that he had done pro bono work for its founder, Jerry McAfee.

The senator temporarily stepped down as chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Ethical Conduct and asked for an advisory opinion on April 7, and has maintained that his pro bono work did not coincide with his sponsorship of the bills.

‘“I appreciate the conclusion the members of the Ethics Subcommittee, which as expected found that I had not violated Senate rules,” Champion said in a statement. “I sought the advisory opinion from the in full confidence that I have followed the rules of the Senate with regards to conflict of interest, and conducted myself with integrity.”

Minnesota’s ethics rules for legislators are not particularly expansive. Current law bans members from voting on matters that result in a direct financial gain for themselves or their business disproportionate to others in the same field.

Political observers and lawmakers of both parties have noted that Minnesota’s part-time “citizen legislature” naturally lends itself to members voting on issues directly related to their work and communities. Teachers, nurses and business owners often back or carry bills directly related to their lines of work.

Connections may effect work as lawmakers

As the Senate Ethics Subcommittee prepared to pass a motion Thursday, Chair Sandy Pappas, DFL-St. Paul, who joined the committee after Champion stepped down, reflected on that challenge for Minnesota lawmakers.

“I think that we have to be very careful with this advisory opinion and what we issue, because if we’re doing our job as legislators, as I said, we have a lot of relationships and a lot of people we know in the community, and that informs our work as legislators,” she said. “That should be considered a good thing.”

Pappas said the advisory opinion from the Ethics Subcommittee telling Champion to disclose potential conflicts in the future was a reminder for all members to weigh how their connections might affect their work.

Champion’s connection to nonprofits he helped fund has raised questions in the Legislature about changing state ethics rules.

Senate Republicans have said that regardless of whether Champion violated rules, state lawmakers should hold themselves to a higher standard of conduct.

Privilege rules

Sen. Michael Kreun, R-Blaine, who brought the complaint against Champion, has said a big part of his concern is that Champion had interactions with McAfee, which would be private under attorney-client privilege rules.

“The choice to carry legislation that provided funding to an entity with which Champion has a privileged relationship without disclosing the relationship fails to meet those standards,” he said in a Thursday statement. “This opinion from the Subcommittee on Ethical Conduct acknowledges that fact by saying he should make disclosures in the future.”

The Ethics Subcommittee will hear Kreun’s complaint at a meeting where they’ll officially adopt Thursday’s advisory opinion. Kreun’s complaint requests that the subcommittee look into whether Champion violated rules prohibiting actions that discredit the Senate or undermine public trust in government.

________