What's next for DEI?

Since taking office, President Donald Trump has signed a series of executive orders to reverse federal policies around diversity, equity and inclusion. The most recent order signed last month prohibits DEI activities in private companies that contract with the federal government. Some states have also passed anti-DEI legislation and many private companies have pulled back on diversity initiatives.

So, where does this leave efforts to create workplaces that are more inclusive and fair?

Coming up at 9 a.m. on Thursday, MPR News host Angela Davis and her guests talk about how DEI is evolving and what it takes to create workplaces that work for everyone.

And we want to hear from you, too.

What have you or your employer done to make your workplace more inclusive? If you’ve worked in DEI, what changes are you seeing?

Call us during the show at 651-227-6000 or 800-242-2828.  

Guests:

• Stacey Gordon is the founder of Rework Work, a leadership strategy and consulting firm, and author of “UNBIAS: Addressing Unconscious Bias at Work.”

• Lily Zheng is a consultant who works with leaders to create inclusive workplaces, and the author of several books, including "DEI Deconstructed," "Reconstructing DEI" and "Fixing Fairness."

• Milton Dodd is the executive director of the Forum on Workplace Inclusion and president of Infinity Systems, a Minneapolis consulting company specializing in organizational alignment and inclusive workplace cultures.

Subscribe to the MPR News with Angela Davis podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.

A citizen’s group fighting a proposed Google data center in the small northeastern Minnesota city of Hermantown has filed a lawsuit against the city, alleging it has violated state law in its pursuit of the data center.

The lawsuit was filed Wednesday in St. Louis County District Court by Stop the Hermantown Data Center. The group claims the city of Hermantown improperly changed its 2045 comprehensive plan and rezoned the neighborhood where the data center is proposed to be built to allow the controversial project to move forward.

The lawsuit also alleges the city violated Minnesota’s open meeting law by closing three meetings to the public while Hermantown officials secretly worked with the developer to make changes to its development plan.

City officials met with representatives of Google for more than a year before the project was made public last year. Several city and county officials signed non-disclosure agreements forbidding them from discussing the proposal, which was dubbed “Project Loon” in documents.

The group filed the lawsuit “to appeal the city’s actions and lack of transparency,” said Hermantown resident Emma Richtman. “We found it necessary to try and get a seat at the table to have a say in the plans for the development of a hyperscale data center in our community.”

Hermantown officials say they don’t comment on pending litigation.

The Hermantown city council voted last October to approve a zoning change to make way for the proposed data center on about 200 acres in a rural corner of the city, about eight miles west of Duluth.

It’s one of about a dozen large-scale data centers proposed around the state. Only one is under construction: a Meta facility in Rosemount.

Data centers are huge buildings that house rows of computer servers. Those servers contain the raw computing power that undergirds cloud computing and the rapid rise of artificial intelligence. The complex in Hermantown would include up to four buildings. Each one would be up to 50 feet tall and would cover an area about the size of five football fields.

The more than $1 billion project would create around 100 permanent jobs and hundreds of construction jobs. The city is weighing a proposal to grant Google significant tax incentives. In return, the tech giant would contribute tens of millions of dollars toward infrastructure upgrades, as well as payments to the city and school district.

Opponents argue the massive project would fundamentally change the character of a rural neighborhood, depress property values, increase traffic and create noise and light pollution.

Community residents say they were kept in the dark as the city negotiated with Google. Jonathan Thornton, who lives about a mile from the proposed data center, was part of an advisory committee helping develop the city’s 2045 comprehensive plan.

Thornton said those committee meetings abruptly stopped in the summer of 2024. Shortly thereafter, city officials changed the comprehensive plan to allow for a data center at its proposed location.

“This complaint is the direct result of what happens when government officials sign non-disclosure agreements and circumvent the public process,” Thornton said at a rally announcing the lawsuit outside Hermantown city hall.

The Hermantown citizens group is also involved in another lawsuit that alleges the project’s environmental review was inadequate. The Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy is representing the group in that lawsuit. The MCEA also has filed lawsuits against proposed data center projects in Faribault, Lakeville, Monticello and Pine Island.

The Monticello City Council voted 4-1 Monday night to adopt an ordinance that could open the door to developers building massive data centers in the community 40 miles northwest of Minneapolis.

The ordinance also includes new restrictions for data centers that city officials say are aimed at reducing negative impacts on people living nearby and ensuring Monticello residents don’t bear any financial costs.

After the vote, council member Tracy Hinz called it “one of the best, most well-framed ordinances in our state, if not broader.”

“I feel disappointed that I've let down some people with my vote, but I also have really, I think, balanced that disappointment out with my duty as a public servant,” she said. “It’s not about pleasing everyone. It’s about doing what’s in the best interest of the community and not closing any doors for future development.”

The vote came after more than two hours of debate. About a dozen people spoke, nearly all opposed to data centers being built in Monticello.

Many expressed deep worry that the massive facilities could lower their property values, drain resources like water and electricity and create constant noise from equipment, affecting people and wildlife.

“I am very much against the data center, because to me, it’s experimental, and I don’t think Monticello should have to be the guinea pigs for this,” said Joan Bondhus, who has lived in the city since 1964.

Monticello is one of several Minnesota cities wrestling with whether to permit hyperscale data centers, which are huge warehouses filled with computer servers that help power cloud computing and artificial intelligence.

The plans have sparked strong opposition from some residents who are concerned about their massive size, water and energy consumption and possible noise and light pollution.

But some cities, including Monticello, see potential benefits they could bring, including property tax revenue, construction jobs and investment in roads and utilities.

“We need to diversify our tax base,” Hinz said before the vote. “We need to think about opportunities. And I cannot possibly deny an ordinance that allows for future applications and consideration of opportunities."

Monticello is considered a prime location for a data center because of available land, water and electricity. No developers have submitted formal applications to build a data center yet. But at least two have expressed interest in building facilities on land the city plans to annex.

That includes Monticello Tech, which has proposed building a data center campus covering about 3 million square feet — about 50 football fields — on about 550 acres east of Highway 25.

Another developer, Scannell Properties, wants to build a 1.3 million-square-foot data center on about 100 acres near the Bertram Chain of Lakes Regional Park.

Monticello’s ordinance creates a zoning designation specifically for data centers. Developers who want to build a data center would first have to get the property rezoned, then apply for a conditional use permit.

The ordinance requires data centers to demonstrate that there’s adequate water and energy to meet their needs. It also tries to reduce impacts to people living nearby by setting standards for landscape buffers, screening, noise and lighting.

After a debate, the council increased the distance that data centers will be required to be located from residential areas to at least 300 feet. Opponents of data centers wanted to require a much greater distance.

David Thorsen, who lives in a neighborhood near one of the proposed sites, said he’s worried about potential health impacts if he has to live next to a data center, and not being able to sell his house if he wants to move.

“I don’t want to sit on my patio for six years and listen to construction,” he said. “And fine, great, it brings temporary jobs to the community to build it, but it doesn’t bring long-term jobs.”

Several residents asked the city to consider pausing new data center development, as some other Minnesota cities have done.

Monticello officials say the ordinance does not mean that the city will automatically approve a proposal to build a data center. They say each application will be considered individually.

The ordinance also makes clear that the city will not extend tax incentives to lure a data center to Monticello, and the project’s developers would have to pay for any new infrastructure that’s needed.

Mayor Lloyd Hilgart said he thinks that the city has done “everything within our power” to create an ordinance that is the best for the city of Monticello” and addresses residents’ concerns.

“I believe that everything but the kitchen sink is in that ordinance,” he said.

After the meeting, some residents voiced disappointment, but said the ordinance was better than originally proposed because of public input. They vowed to closely watch any applications to build a data center to make sure they follow the rules and aren’t granted any exceptions.

Jenna Van Den Boom, who helped organize a group called Stop the Monticello Data Centers, called the council’s vote “a kick in the gut.”

“I think we kind of expected that it was going to happen,” she said. “But also, I think there's always that hope that Monticello is family-first city, and that we would pick our families and our community. And it was just really disappointing that we didn't see that.”

Megan Horsager is not looking forward to buying more fuel for her farm.

She’s got a large, white, cylindrical fuel tank that sits in the middle of her family’s row-crop farm in Montevideo. While she buys her fertilizer and other planting needs in the fall, ahead of planting season, she opts to buy fuel whenever her tank needs a top-up.

That next refill will happen in June, Horsager said.

"I'm just kicking myself that I didn't price more ahead of time,” Horsager said. “Usually, June hasn't been a bad time to buy fuel, but you don't plan on the global events."

The prices of key agricultural necessities such as diesel and nitrogen fertilizer have soared since the Strait of Hormuz, a vital trade passageway, has largely been choked off amid the war in Iran.

While Horsager didn’t book enough diesel in advance, she is set with fertilizer. However, not everyone is. In fact, a recent American Farm Bureau Federation survey found that about 70 percent of respondents nationwide report they are unable to afford all the fertilizer they need.

And Horsager still worries about what fertilizer costs might be in the fall. Those worries may not be without cause.

What it’ll take for prices to come back

The Agricultural Risk Policy Center at North Dakota State University ran fertilizer price projections under different scenarios, including the Strait of Hormuz opening soon or remaining closed throughout the year.

“We have seen that even in the most optimistic scenario, we're going to see elevated prices on the nitrogen as well as phosphate side that continues on through the fall and moving into 2027,” Agricultural Risk Policy Center Associate Director Shawn Arita said.

Arita added that those prices will be higher than the ones farmers worked with this year and last year. Part of that is because it’ll take time to repair Middle Eastern fertilizer production infrastructure that’s been damaged in the war.

The center’s report shows that the price of urea, a nitrogen fertilizer, will remain 13 percent higher than its pre‐crisis price, even if the strait were to open soon.

It could also take some time before barge companies feel safe to pass through the Strait, Arita said. There are leftover underwater mines through the waterway that the U.S. is working to clear, according to President Donald Trump. The Associated Press reports that Pentagon officials told lawmakers it would likely take six months to clear the mines.

Vessels and insurance companies would likely also want some stability between the U.S. and Iran, Arita said.

“Many of these ships, as well as the insurance companies, are very, very risk-averse,” Arita said. “It's going to take time for them to see how the situation is, to feel comfortable and to have assurances that they'll be willing to re-enter the strait to pick up cargo.”

There is also a growing backlog of vessels that are stuck in the strait. There are about 2,000 vessels stranded in the Persian Gulf, according to the International Maritime Organization. Though some experts say that estimate is high, there is nevertheless a backlog.

“You're not going to see a return to normal for several months, even if the Strait of Hormuz was opened relatively quickly, because you've got to get all those ships out of there,” Michigan State University ag economist Bill Knudson said.

Once the strait opens and oil tankers pass through, there could be some immediate relief for oil prices, Knudson said. However, he adds that relief is contingent on the extent of energy infrastructure destroyed during the war.

“That'll tell us how quickly prices will return to where they were before the war started,” Knudson said. “If, say, a refinery has been destroyed, it's going to take months for it to get back online and start processing oil again.”

The longer the war goes on, the greater the risk of further damage to energy infrastructure, he added, which could further set back oil prices.

On top of that, if nitrogen fertilizer remains expensive next year, Knudson figures some farmers would likely switch from growing corn, which needs a lot of nitrogen fertilizer, to soybeans, which draw most of their fertilizer from the atmosphere. Regardless, if the war extends into the summer, farmers could continue to see higher operational costs eating into their profits next year.

“The crunch on profitability would continue if there's no solution in the next seven or eight months,” Knudson said.

‘It's not panic mode, but it's getting closer’

Megan Horsager, the farmer in Montevideo, grew up on her family’s land but wasn’t a huge fan of farm work as a kid. She went into the corporate world and took a job that, as it turned out, she didn’t like much, either. Horsager missed farm life, so she earned an agribusiness degree, got married in the process and returned to the farm five years ago.

“Every day I feel like I don't know what I'm doing,” Horsager said. “Dad said it would be five years before I felt like I had a handle on anything. It's been about five years, and I have a handle on maybe half of the different aspects of the farm.”

She’s a member of her local sugarbeet co-op, with which she signed a five-year contract. That means growing sugarbeets at a time when the crop’s prices have been rocky.

“I'm required to plant a crop that I'm fairly confident that I will lose money on, maybe at best break even,” Horsager said. “I’m trying to be optimistic, but it definitely puts a damper on the mood.”

Despite the challenges, Horsager and her family remain optimistic. They still feel the joy of planting seeds in the ground and watching them grow. Farming is what Horsager loves, which means it’s “impossible” not to feel optimistic.

For now, she says her family takes each year as it comes and “trusts the Lord for the rest.”

In the meantime, U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins recently told lawmakers that the Trump Administration is poised to draw tens of billions of dollars from tariffs and trade deals to invest in domestic fertilizer supplies. Secretary Rollins added she’s hopeful the Trump Administration will release a detailed plan soon.

It’s likely farmers will again struggle to turn a profit despite several rounds of government assistance, and experts say it wouldn’t be surprising if the government offered yet more aid.

The alleged gunman who interrupted the White House Correspondents’ Dinner on Saturday evening when he fired multiple shots makes his first appearance in federal court on Monday.

He reportedly opened fire outside a crowded ballroom at the Washington Hilton as President Donald Trump and several members of the Cabinet joined journalists inside.

One of the guests was Minnesota-based independent journalist Georgia Fort, who pleaded not guilty in February to felony civil rights charges in connection with a demonstration that disrupted a Cities Church service. Her lawyer has said her presence at the protest is protected under the First Amendment.

President Trump and officials within his administration have condemned protesters at the church and said they would be investigated and prosecuted.

Fort spoke to Cathy Wurzer about why she attended the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.

The transcript below has been edited lightly for clarity. Press play on the player above to hear the conversation.

It looked pretty chaotic with men in tuxes and women in sequin gowns diving under tables. What did you experience?

Well, Cathy, I’ll tell you this: as an independent journalist, I attended the White House Correspondents Dinner to stand for the First Amendment by walking out during the president's speech. Unfortunately, I didn’t have the opportunity, because the program barely got started.

It was extremely terrifying to be in the room, to hear a loud boom and to see the entire ballroom — everyone inside — just drop from their chairs under their tables. In those moments of panic, I began to pray.

I may have been one of the first people to leave. We found an emergency exit out of the side door, and we were able to find our way to safety.

Wow. A lot of people in that room have been trained to deal with violence. As a reporter, your work has focused on police violence against Black people. As you reflect on what happened, what do you think the incident says about our society?

You know, being in Minnesota and seeing the assassination of Melissa Hortman, we have seen this escalation of political violence. And again, to underscore the very reason why I was there to take a stand against what is happening in our country right now and to encourage our colleagues — other journalists — who are often trained to not make the story about themselves, to challenge the status quo.

Because the truth is, if we don't dismiss our neutrality about the First Amendment, then we cannot be upset when we lose those rights. To be at the White House Correspondents Dinner as an independent journalist who was prepared to make a stand for the First Amendment and challenge others to do the same, I am hoping that this is a conversation that we can still have, a dialogue that we can still have.

I know it wasn't just me that was planning to take a stand, and so it's not just the violation of the First Amendment our constitutional rights, it's also an escalation of violence that we're seeing here under the Trump administration. There were a lot of journalists who didn't think the president belonged in that room, given his attacks on journalists.

The head of the White House Correspondents’ Association, in her early comments, before everything happened, told the president it was evidently meaningful that he was there, according to what I read. Do you think it was meaningful to have the president in the room?

The White House Correspondents’ Dinner belongs to the press, not the White House. And I think if journalists and journalism institutions are going to continue to be neutral about the First Amendment, including the White House Correspondents’ Dinner Association, then they need to accept that they are complicit to the constitutional crisis we are currently experiencing.

That is why I attended. I attended to take a stand for the First Amendment because I don't think that the press should be intimidated. I don't think that we should be silenced, and certainly my presence there represented that.

MPR News host Angela Davis and her guests talk about something that affects every one of us, but most of us were never formally taught — how to manage money.

Guests: 

• Kumar Balasubrahmanyan is the vice president of Innovation for Junior Achievement North.

• Sara Dziuk is the president and CEO of Junior Achievement North.

• Isaac Kreis is a 10th grade student at Washington Technology High School in St. Paul.

• Rengsona Yawa is a 9th grade student at Washington Technology High School in St. Paul.

Subscribe to the MPR News with Angela Davis podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation. 

Elected leaders in Monticello could decide Monday night whether to adopt controversial new rules for data centers.

Faced with at least two proposals to build data centers in the small community about 40 miles northwest of Minneapolis, Monticello staff and city officials decided to craft an ordinance to govern where and how they could be built.

But some residents don’t think the ordinance is strict enough, and are frustrated that city leaders are considering allowing a data center to be built near their neighborhoods.

"Obviously we don't want a data center at all anywhere near our homes or in our community,” said Lisa Keenan, who lives a few hundred feet from one of the proposed sites. She helped start a Facebook group called “Stop the Monticello Data Centers,” which has more than 1,400 members.

At a packed City Council meeting earlier in April, many people wore red and carried signs reading “No data centers.” Mayor Lloyd Hilgart called a recess after some residents shouted their displeasure.

City Administrator Rachel Leonard said she's not surprised that people feel strongly about the issue.

"This is one of the biggest decisions that we've had to make as a community,” she said. “And people feel really invested in the future of Monticello and in the lives that they're building here."

Prime location

With plenty of available land, water for cooling equipment and electricity from Xcel Energy’s nuclear power plant, Monticello is considered an attractive location for a large data center.

But when developers first approached Monticello in 2024, data centers weren’t on city officials’ radar.

"Honestly, I’d probably never even heard of them before,” Hilgart said in December. “Probably most people hadn't.”

Monticello officials decided that if data centers were coming, they wanted to be ready with information and some ground rules.

"While they could see benefits to this type of potential development, they could also very clearly see some of the risks and what has happened in other places in the country,” Leonard said. “And that they did not want to pursue this at any cost.”

So city staff, planning commission and City Council members spent the past year researching data centers, and how other communities have handled them.

They drafted an ordinance that would create a special zoning district specifically for data center campuses, which can be several football fields in size. Data centers would need to be set back at least 200 feet from residential areas, and demonstrate there’s adequate water and energy available.

The ordinance also tries to address how a data center would affect the people living around it, Leonard said, by requiring landscape buffers, screening and setting limits on noise and lights.

‘We don’t get any say’

The rules have gone through many revisions and public meetings. Lots of people have weighed in, and some aren't happy with the results.

Keenan said the ordinance is better than nothing. But she thinks it should require data centers to be much farther away from homes. And she worries the ordinance could signal a green light for developers.

"When that application comes in, it's our understanding basically that if they can check all the boxes and get the permits from the DNR or the state or whoever, it's pretty much the city doesn't have any right to say no,” Keenan said.

Monticello leaders say an ordinance doesn't mean the city will automatically allow a developer to build a data center. They say they'll consider each application individually.

Hilgart said the ordinance makes clear that the city won't provide tax incentives or pay for new infrastructure for a data center.

"I believe the ordinance offers the protection that the city is looking for,” he said.

Jenna Van Den Boom owns a home in a housing development close to one of the proposed data center sites, and has helped organize the opposition. She said residents are frustrated because they feel city officials aren’t listening to their concerns.

Van Den Boom said she’s worried about noise and dust from construction, which could last for several years.

“We've invested time, money and energy in making these our forever homes,” she said. “And then we don't get any say, it feels very, very wrong and very violating.”

Building boom

Proposals to build the huge warehouses filled with computer servers that power cloud computing and artificial intelligence have been popping up in communities across Minnesota and the U.S.

Opponents are concerned about their massive size, their vast water and energy consumption, and noise and light pollution.

But some cities see the potential benefits they could bring, including property tax revenue, construction jobs and economic growth.

City officials say proposals to build data centers in Monticello and elsewhere likely will keep coming.

“We believe that it is in our best interest to have local regulations related to this type of development,” Leonard said.

But some Monticello residents say there should be state or even national rules on data centers to protect people from their impacts.

State lawmakers are considering several related measures this session, including a statewide moratorium on data centers and a bill to stop local officials from signing nondisclosure agreements with developers. It’s not clear whether any will become law.

A handful of Minnesota cities have passed their own moratoriums on new data centers, including Carver, Eagan, New Brighton and Rosemount.

Monticello officials say they’ve had an unofficial pause on data center development for the past year, by alerting developers that they wouldn’t accept any applications until the ordinance is complete.

Twin Cities residents struggling to pay rent can now apply for help from emergency funds in St. Paul and Minneapolis.

Both cities approved millions of dollars in funding as the federal immigration enforcement surge pushed some residents to stay home from work out of fear and forced closures at some businesses. Some families saw primary breadwinners deported, leaving them scrambling for funds.

Mutual aid networks have distributed millions of dollars in rental assistance since the start of the surge. Those networks are still up and running, but organizers say they need help from cities.

Here’s how it works in both cities.

Minneapolis

Minneapolis has $2 million available in its emergency rental assistance fund so far. Applications for the fund opened this week.

To qualify, applicants need to live within city limits and make less than 30 percent of the area median income.

For a four-person household, that’s less than $39,720 annually. For one person, it’s $27,810.

Residents also must have received a pre-eviction notice from their landlord. In Minneapolis, landlords are required to issue these notices 30 days before filing for eviction.

Erik Hansen, Minneapolis community planning and economic development director, said renters should apply as early as possible.

“The best thing for Minneapolis residents to do is — as soon as you know that you think you're going to be evicted — to contact the organizations that we have as intake organizations,” Hansen said at a city council meeting Thursday.

Hansen said that’s a different requirement than the county’s rent assistance fund, which requires tenants to have an eviction filing.

Residents can apply for funds through several partner organizations: Comunidades Latinas Unidas en Servicio, Isuroon, the Minnesota Indian Women’s Resource Center and Tenant Resource Connections.

The council and the mayor have allocated $3.8 million total and the Wilson Foundation has agreed to match $3 million of that. City officials said the rest of the approved funding will be available soon.

St. Paul

St. Paul added $1.4 million to its emergency rental assistance program this year, bringing the total program budget to $3.8 million.

Applications for funding are available on the city website. They’re open on the first two days of each month, with the next round starting May 1. The city enters applications into a lottery due to high demand.

To qualify, residents must make less than 80 percent of the area median income. That’s $104,200 per year for a family of four, or $72,950 for one person.

Tenants also need to have received a pre-eviction notice or a summons to housing court.

Applicants who are eligible for help can get a one-time payment of up to $3,500, which the city pays directly to the landlord. Residents can get help from this fund once per year.

A state Democratic lawmaker running for Congress apologized for placing a wager on himself that he'd win his party primary.

State Sen. Matt Klein of Mendota Heights said he wagered $50 in an online prediction market last October. The platform Kalshi flagged it as a political insider trading, penalized Klein $540 and banned him from the platform for five years.

This situation is one of the many ethical conversations around prediction markets. At the State Capitol there's a bill looking to ban them. Minnesota Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement director Jon Anglin's job is to regulate this market.

He spoke to Minnesota Now host Nina Moini to talk about the challenges around regulating prediction markets.

The following was edited for length and clarity. Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.

What is a prediction market?

A prediction market is basically the stock market for real world events, anything from sports to weather. I could choose how many times I'm going to say ‘um’ through this interview. So if I say ‘um,’ 12 or more times, I could put that on a prediction market. Let's say 70 percent of the population said yes, I'm going to say ‘um’ over 12 times, you're going to pay 70 cents on the dollar. And if I do under 12, they're going to pay 30 cents on the dollar.

Traditional sports wagering is only on sports, where the house picks the odds.

Prediction markets went from $9 billion in 2024 to over $60 billion global volume in 2025, which is just explosive. It's easy to use.

What makes it hard to regulate?

A lot of these prediction markets have registered with the Commodities Futures Trade Commission. They're the ones that say, “OK, prediction markets are securities, and so therefore they cannot be regulated by state gambling laws.”

Because of that, that's where the big fight is coming in between the federal government and the states like Nevada, Massachusetts and Tennessee. And they've all been already in court trying to say the states have been saying we need to regulate the gambling.

What would a responsible prediction market look like?

It's really hard, because no one has regulated it as of yet, and we're still finding things out as we go through this. And I think it would be easier to answer that question once we have all the facts on what it is, and how it all works, and what it can do to the public. Because how do you handle insider trade information?

And I think that that's going to take some work, and that's not something easily we can figure out how we would handle if it was regulated. A ban on it is easier than regulating.

Minnesota governor and former vice presidential nominee Tim Walz appeared Wednesday night on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” in Los Angeles.

The big topic of conversation was President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota. He also talked about fraud in the state, his decision not to run for reelection, and introducing Bruce Springsteen at St. Paul’s No Kings Rally.

Walz wondered aloud where the states' rights crowd was during the ICE surge, especially after the deaths of two U.S. citizens at the hands of federal agents in Minneapolis.

“This is a very dangerous situation where the federal government weaponized — literally weaponized — against citizens, and nothing would happen. And I said this whole time ‘where are the don't tread on me people?’ Because we were sure the hell getting tread on in Minnesota,” Walz said.

The ICE surge began because of allegations of fraud in Minneapolis daycares, preceded by the Feeding Our Future scandal and subsequent investigation. But Walz insisted fraud problems weren't what pushed him out of the gubernatorial race.

Walz said his goal is to help elect other "good people." On Monday, Walz launched a political action committee, or PAC.

Before going on Kimmel, Walz said he’s writing a book called “Good Neighbors,” which he says will be inspired by Minnesota’s response to the surge of federal immigration officers in the state.

Last week, the U.S. Senate overturned a 20-year federal mining ban on land near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. Supporters say modern mines can protect the environment while producing critical minerals and boosting the regional economy. Opponents argue the environmental risks are too great and the economic benefits aren't what they seem.

MPR News guest host Catharine Richert talks about what comes next and how lifting the ban could affect the environment and jobs.

Guests:

• Julie Lucas is the executive director of MiningMinnesota, an industry trade group.

• Ingrid Lyons is the executive director of Save the Boundary Waters.

Subscribe to the MPR News with Angela Davis podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.    

Best Buy on Wednesday named insider Jason Bonfig as CEO, replacing longtime executive Corie Barry, in a leadership change that comes as the U.S. retailer grapples with weak consumer demand and tariff‑related supply‑chain pressures.

The company, which operates more than 1,000 stores across North America, has been working to revive growth by expanding online sales, services and advertising as competition intensifies across the sector.

As the company's chief customer, product and fulfillment officer, Bonfig has been overseeing many of these initiatives, along with the company's Canadian business and its retail media unit, Best Buy Ads.

He most recently led the launch of Best Buy's online marketplace in the U.S. and the expansion of its advertising business, much like Amazon and Walmart, as retailers look to leverage their own customer data to attract brands.

"As a board, we are confident that Jason is the right leader to accelerate the business," board chair David Kenny said in a statement.

Best Buy had seen a boost in demand during the COVID-19 pandemic, but it tapered off as consumer sentiment for big-ticket items such as televisions, computers and appliances weakened due to inflation and higher borrowing costs.

The CEO change at Best Buy is the latest in a string of C-suite changes over the past year at consumer goods companies and retailers, including Coca-Cola, Procter & Gamble and Walmart.

Barry, a nearly three-decade Best Buy veteran, who became the retailer's first female CEO in 2019, will remain a strategic adviser for six months after stepping down at the end of October.

Shares of the company were down 4 percent in early trading.

"Barry turned the company around during a challenging time- Covid! But it looks like Bonfig wants to position the company for the AI age," said Kimberly Forrest, chief investment officer at Bokeh Capital Partners.

This story was produced in partnership with Harvest Public Media, a collaboration of public media newsrooms in the Midwest and Great Plains. It reports on food systems, agriculture and rural issues.

By Frank Morris | Harvest Public Media

Farming’s a tough business. Most of the people doing it now, at scale, are driven survivors with a knack for innovation, like Thayne Larson.

Larson’s operation in north central Kansas narrowly survived the 1980s farm crisis. He grew hay for local cattle operations, but, in dry years, he couldn’t grow enough, and in wet ones, he grew too much, and the price tanked. So, Larson started a business buying, selling, and shipping hay nationwide, which spun into a diverse family of companies called Bestifor Farms, with thirty-some employees.

“Between the pet food company, and software, running the grain elevator mechanics, we have secretaries and staff and HR and accountants,” said Larson, sitting in the Bestifor board room. “It adds up before you know it.”

Larson’s also running a trucking business, while growing lots and lots of hay, corn and soybeans.

He could use more employees, but said that, where he is, in Bellville, Kansas, an hour from the nearest Walmart, no one looking for a job is willing to put in the long hours and hard work necessary to keep a farm running. Larson said he’s got little choice but to hire foreign guest workers through the H-2A visa program.

“You're not replacing workers here. They're just filling a void,” said Larson. “If you're going to be in this business, you got to find people.”

Larson has found good people through the guest worker program. Three of them spent a recent afternoon working diligently to get a precision corn planter ready to run hard this spring. Nobody stopped to check their phone.

“That’s what you get, just work, work, work,” Larson said of the guest workers.

But Larson said the H-2A visa program has grown more complex in that time, becoming a regulatory and bureaucratic minefield that keeps one of his employees tied up just handling the paperwork.

It’s also become more expensive. Larson estimates total labor costs — including transporting workers from their home countries and free housing — hit about $30 an hour.

So, he was delighted when the Trump Administration changed the way H-2A wages are calculated, cutting guest farm worker pay.

“Absolutely, it needed to happen, because you could not afford to pay,” Larson said.

The U.S. Department of Labor abruptly issued an “interim final rule” last fall, making the changes. It split H-2A workers into two different categories based on skill, allowed employers to start charging for housing, and threw out the old way of calculating H-2A wage rates.

The upshot was a big pay cut for many guest farm workers and pushback from organizations across the political spectrum.

H-2A changes draw fire from left and right

The H-2A program has exploded, from about 50,000 foreign farm workers two decades ago to nearly 400,000 last year. Cutting guest worker wages will make the program more attractive to farmers and likely drive more growth.

But a flood of guest workers raises issues for farm workers’ groups concerned with pay and for immigrant hardliners.

John Miano is legal counsel for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which calls for strict immigration limits. He backs much of Trump’s MAGA agenda but does not view the H-2A visa program as “America First.”

“It provides a subsidy for employers to bypass the free market,” said Miano. “I can go for a massive pool of cheap, cheaper foreign labor that undermines Americans.”

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, which has served as a blueprint for much of the president’s domestic agenda, calls for the H-2A visa program to be phased out over the next decade or two.

At the same time, the United Farm Workers union is suing to stop the Labor Department’s rule change. It argues that the department acted without first offering a public comment period, as required by law.

Teresa Romero, president of the United Farm Workers union, said while H-2A wage rates vary from state to state, some workers saw a cut amounting to about $5 an hour.

“What he's doing right now is transferring $2.4 billion a year from the farm workers' pockets to the employers,” Romero said of Trump.

That also could impact other workers, she said.

Congress set up the guest worker program with safeguards to protect domestic incomes. The wage rates are supposed to be set high enough that they could have no ‘adverse effect’ on the livelihoods of American workers or of job seekers.

The lower pay for guest workers means lower pay for domestic farm hands competing for the same jobs, according to Romero.

“We are not lowering the pay only of H-2A workers. We're lowering the pay of domestic workers. We're making these workers more vulnerable,” she said.

The most vulnerable are those working in the U.S. illegally.

A woman named Lourdes, who didn’t want to use her last name because she does not have legal immigration status, said she’s supported her children working in the fields and greenhouses of eastern Colorado. She said the work was hard, but fairly steady, until recently.

“Back when the tomato season was in full swing, they let a lot of people go, laid them off from their jobs in the tomato fields, because they started bringing in workers with work permits known as H-2A visas,” said Lourdes through an interpreter.

The pressure to expand the H-2A visa program is strong. Farm organizations have pushed lawmakers to allow more foreign workers into the country. Bills in both the House and the Senate, backed by both Democrats and Republicans, would make the H-2A visa system cheaper and easier for farmers to find legal, foreign guest workers willing to do the hard, dirty work of growing food in America.

Minneapolis is taking a new approach in its goal to revitalize Uptown: New safety patrols will be coming to the neighborhood in November.

The city plans to assign eight community safety ambassadors to Uptown. Those city employees are trained to give first aid, offer people connections to social services when needed, and check in with local businesses about crime and livability.

At a press conference along Hennepin Avenue on Tuesday, Community Safety Commissioner Todd Barnette said it’s meant to improve safety without relying solely on police.

“We’ve learned that the community wants officers to do more than answer to 911 calls. We’ve also learned that every 911 call does not require an officer to be present,” Barnette said.

The city’s Community Safety Ambassador program is currently running as a pilot project, with ambassadors patrolling neighborhoods along Lake Street and Franklin Avenue. Staff plan to spend $1 million — already allocated to the program — to expand it to Uptown.

The pilot project started last year. City officials said it’s taking time to get it off the ground, as they hire and train staff and collect data on results in the first pilot locations.

Police have also stepped up patrols in Uptown. The department assigned a patrol unit to the neighborhood in December, following a recent uptick in 911 calls to Uptown. Police Chief Brian O’Hara said those were mostly calls about drug use, theft and public nuisance.

O’Hara said those increased patrols may be helping: Calls related to drug use are down so far in April.

City Council member Elizabeth Shaffer said the city is working to provide more help for people facing addiction and homelessness, but that Uptown needs policing enforcement, too.

“True compassion comes with boundaries,” Shaffer said. “Meeting people where they are at does not mean anything goes, and we are working to get this balance right.”

Officials and residents agreed there’s not just one solution to ongoing concerns about Uptown’s future.

Local resident Kevin Norman runs Uptown United, a group working to get more people out and about in the neighborhood. The organization is leading Friday and Saturday night walks through the area to spark foot traffic and bring customers to local businesses.

Norman said Uptown isn’t necessarily unsafe, and he’s seeing new businesses open and draw in customers. He’s hoping the new efforts will change negative perceptions of the area.

“I don’t think you’re going to find a neighborhood in Minneapolis that has more pride than Uptown does,” Norman said. “We don’t have to necessarily wait around for politicians to fix all of our problems. We can kind of take our part and do some things to make a change ourselves.”

City officials said they’ll be seeking input from residents in the coming months on what services locals would like to see from the new community safety ambassadors.

A survey of residents and business owners in Minneapolis and St. Paul finds that workers lost an estimated $244 million during the Trump Administration’s immigration enforcement operation while businesses missed out on $610 million in revenue.

The research from the University of California San Diego’s U.S. Immigration Policy Center is included in an amended complaint that the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office filed Tuesday in an ongoing federal lawsuit in which the state is asking a judge to declare the administration’s actions illegal.

The researchers found that nearly 36 percent of survey respondents in Minneapolis reported missing work, in most cases because their place of employment had closed; the workers lost an average of $2,315 in pay.

In St. Paul, nearly 21 percent of employees surveyed said that they missed work; workers in the capital city lost $1,754 on average.

The researchers gathered data from 1,390 people across both cities who responded to the survey. The study also found that federal agents “frequently engaged in broad, non-targeted stops of residents” and were more likely to ask people of color than white people about their immigration status.

Large majorities of residents in both cities who had encounters with immigration agents said that they are less likely to seek help from law enforcement in the future.

The research team also conducted a similar survey of businesses in Minneapolis and St. Paul using city license lists. Nearly 900 business owners responded.

“A strong majority of businesses reported that Operation Metro Surge had a negative impact on their business,” the researchers write of both cities.

They estimate that Minneapolis businesses lost $445 million in revenue while those in St. Paul lost $165 million. Many business owners also answered “yes” when asked if they took on unexpected debt because of the enforcement operation.

This story was produced in partnership with Harvest Public Media, a collaboration of public media newsrooms in the Midwest and Great Plains. It reports on food systems, agriculture and rural issues.

By Celia Llopis-Jepsen | Harvest Public Media

South-central Kansas is sandy. Commodity crops abound. And you don’t have to dig very deep to hit groundwater.

These three seemingly unrelated facts make for a trifecta with an unwanted prize: A lot of the drinking water is now polluted with nitrate, mostly from chemical fertilizer.

Scientists have tested more than 200 private wells across nine counties in this region. About half of the sites turned out to contain more nitrate than the federal government considers safe to drink.

Many of the others were not far from crossing that point.

“In another year or two, you could be above it,” said Matthew Kirk, a geology professor at Kansas State University who’s been busy for the past five years helping families in this region find out what’s in their water — and simultaneously piecing together a picture of how widespread the contamination has become.

Across the Midwest and Great Plains, large-scale fertilizer application and livestock facilities have upped the pace of nitrate accumulating in groundwater.

In parts of the region, many private wells that rural households relied on for decades are no longer safe to drink from without installing pricey treatment.

In Kansas, communities are discussing how to fertilize crops more carefully. In Iowa, economists are trying to pin down the costs of polluted groundwater. In Minnesota, well owners and environmental groups are suing for stricter fertilizer and manure regulations.

Meanwhile, some researchers worry that families often don’t know that their water has changed over time, and now poses a serious health risk.

“Most of the families are just — from generation to generation — using the same well,” said Kansas State graduate student Thisura Ilukgoda Gedara, who helped sample wells for free for farmers, ranchers and others in the area. “ We can help them to understand whether the water that they are consuming is good or bad.”

Some aquifers are especially vulnerable

Nitrate pollution has hit risky levels faster in some parts of the country than others.

It’s not that these places are the only ones spraying chemical fertilizer on crops or concentrating animals on feedlots. But accidents of local geology allow the nitrogen produced by these activities to more quickly penetrate the groundwater there.

In south-central Kansas, nitrogen easily seeps into the Great Bend Prairie Aquifer because its water is often just tens of feet below ground and the sandy soil is particularly permeable.

In southeast Minnesota, highly penetrable, fractured bedrock gives the nitrate easy access, as do the many spots where surface and groundwater connect.

Such contamination has repercussions for human health.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has for decades considered 10 milligrams per liter of water to be the safety limit for nitrate in public water supplies. This is based on evidence that higher amounts can cause a dangerous condition in infants — methemoglobinemia. Also known as blue baby syndrome, this can be fatal.

But some public health researchers remain concerned that unnaturally high amounts of nitrate in drinking water might play a role in other conditions, too, such as thyroid disease or colorectal cancer. And they aren’t convinced the EPA’s 10-milligram limit is low enough.

Meanwhile, since the 1990s, more water utilities have been blowing past the EPA’s limit – in particular, those that depend on groundwater instead of lakes or rivers.

In Texas alone, at least 50 community water systems tested above the EPA limit in 2022 and 2023, affecting the water supplies for 45,000 people.

The city of Pratt, in south-central Kansas, had to shut off two wells that comprised nearly a quarter of its total water supply. The town of just 6,500 people must now figure out how to afford infrastructure to treat the water, which is expected to cost tens of millions of dollars.

Because they are regulated, public water suppliers monitor nitrate levels and have to protect their customers from this contamination. But more than 40 million Americans get their drinking water from private wells, and it’s not clear how many test their well water for pollutants.

A survey of rural households in parts of Iowa with known nitrogen pollution found in 2022 that 10 percent of respondents had tested their water in the past year.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention urges well owners to test annually. Nitrate levels can change that fast, and the contamination doesn’t make itself known in any obvious way.

“There’s no smell, there’s no color,” said Kirk, the Kansas State geologist. “If you have high nitrate, it looks and tastes fine potentially.”

The price of groundwater pollution

Installing equipment to remove nitrate can cost a household hundreds or thousands of dollars, depending on the treatment system and how comprehensive it is.

“Brita filters aren’t going to do it,” said Gabriel Lade, an economist at the Ohio State University.

Lade is one of the researchers behind the 2022 Iowa study. His expertise is environmental and agricultural economics.

A decade ago, while at Iowa State University, he and some colleagues set about documenting the economic benefits for Iowa of reducing nutrient pollution, which includes nitrate. Lade said the information could help policymakers weigh how much money to spend on conservation practices that help mitigate nutrient pollution, such as wetland restoration.

To tally the potential benefits of less pollution, economists worked on understanding the pollution’s toll on Iowa. For example, nitrogen and phosphorus accumulates in lakes, fueling toxic algae blooms.

“People tend to change where they recreate,” Lade said, “And there’s a cost to that.”

The researchers found that reducing this nutrient load in lakes could translate to $30 million in recreational benefits for Iowans.

Another example is when elevated contamination pushes water utilities to spend millions of dollars on removing nutrients from drinking water to protect public health.

Iowa’s most high-profile example of this is in Des Moines, which has worked to combat nitrate in its drinking water for years. The city’s water utility sued upstream agricultural areas in court. The case was dismissed.

Iowa State researchers also noted that nutrient pollution impacts rural families that depend on private wells instead of utilities. Only, they ran into hurdles pinning down the extent of the impact.

No one knows, for example, how many Iowans are drinking untreated, nitrate-laden wellwater. This makes it difficult to explore the cost to human health.

“This is one of the biggest challenges,” Lade said. “It’s really hard to tell what exposure is.”

This sent Lade and his colleagues down a different path: Surveying people who depend on wells. The researchers mailed surveys to rural households in counties with known nitrate problems and more than 8,000 private well users replied.

About 40 percent said they drink their well water without filtering it and without having tested it in the past year.

Many respondents believed nitrate can be a cause for concern. But they were more likely to think it was a problem somewhere else in Iowa than specifically in their area.

“ It may relate to just basic human biases,” Lade said. People may think, “‘I know it’s an issue, but my water looks clear, smells fine. We’re probably good to go.’”

Lade and his colleagues have now secured funding to expand their research in Iowa by surveying households in more counties and potentially giving them information tailored to shed light on the nitrate situation in their specific area.

Iowa funds counties to test households’ well water for free. However, University of Iowa researchers found in 2019 that most counties weren’t using up the money for tests because not enough people were requesting them.

A more informed public

Nitrogen pollution has many sources, including livestock facilities, wastewater treatment plants and spreading manure on fields. Individual wells can even become contaminated from being located near a septic tank.

In south-central Kansas, chemical analysis indicates most of the nitrate in the region’s aquifer comes from synthetic fertilizer applied to cropland, said Kirk, the Kansas State geologist.

The increases in nitrate over the past four decades in this region rank as some of the biggest nationally compared to data gathered in a national long-term study, he said.

Kansas State scientists found one well with more than five times as much nitrate as the EPA considers safe to drink.

The university has been sampling wells for free the past five years. Many rural households found out that their water was unsafe to drink without treatment.

Kirk hopes word will spread among relatives and neighbors, prompting others to test their water, too. His team also gave public presentations in the region to show residents what they were finding.

At a recent workshop, Kirk said, farmers, Kansas State Extension agents, water managers, scientists and others gathered to discuss the problem.

Participants talked about ways to get more precise with fertilizer or to reduce how much they need. For example, they spoke about improving the soil by planting cover crops or applying fertilizer only when and where crops will use it. Overapplying or applying at the wrong time makes it more likely that nitrogen will escape into the groundwater.

Meanwhile, Kirk co-published a guide for Kansas farmers who irrigate. In areas with high nitrate levels in the groundwater, irrigation is now effectively a source of fertilizer.

“You can account for that and basically buy less fertilizer,” he said. “That’s going to decrease your nitrogen input … and save you money.”

The legal battle in Minnesota

Nitrate contamination has led to lawsuits in some states.

In southeast Minnesota, private well owners, environmentalists and trout conservationists accuse state agencies of falling down on the job while nitrate surges in groundwater, rivers and streams.

In 2023, they petitioned the EPA to take emergency action to protect public health. The EPA told Minnesota to take “timely actions” to address the pollution, to make sure people know about the hazard, to help them test their well water and to offer bottled water where wells prove to be contaminated.

Minnesota state agencies told the EPA they would tackle the most immediate matters first — such as making sure households had bottled water where needed — and review and update rules related to sources of nitrate pollution in the long term.

But those who originally petitioned the EPA are unimpressed with the state’s efforts.

Last year, three of the groups — the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, the Minnesota Well Owners Organization and Minnesota Trout Unlimited — sued the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency in state court. They argued the agencies’ regulation of feedlots and farms is far too weak.

A judge ordered the agencies to gather public feedback on how they currently regulate manure and fertilizer. The Pollution Control Agency has started work toward updating its regulations for the state’s 17,000 feedlots.

Agriculture groups disagree with the push for stronger rules. Nine groups filed to intervene in state court last year, including the Minnesota Corn Growers Association, Minnesota Milk Producers Association and Minnesota Soybean Growers Association.

“Minnesota has some of the strictest water protection rules in the country,” the 7,000-member Minnesota Corn Growers Association wrote in a news release. “Farmer organizations and individual farmers share the goal with the public of protecting our water.”

The groups are arguing that the lawsuit risks undermining the integrity of the state’s regulatory process.

“Rules should be based on ‘sound/accepted science’ and not political positions and the PR claims of advocacy organizations,” the news release said.

But supporters of tighter regulation say they want Minnesota to figure out what truly effective regulation looks like, even if it ends up requiring a significant rewrite.

“That’s the fight we’re looking for,” said Paul Wotzka, co-founder of the Minnesota Well Owners Organization and a resident of rural southeast Minnesota with a private well. “We think the existing rules stink and you’ve got to kind of tear down what is there before you can build anew.”

Wotzka is a water quality expert who spent decades working for the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and other state and local agencies. That work included monitoring pollution in streams, which in southeast Minnesota easily ends up in the groundwater, too.

He believed it must be possible to farm without polluting water and ultimately decided to try. So he and his wife became organic farmers. They grow about 16 acres of vegetables, fruits and nuts, from asparagus and rhubarb to peaches and hazelnuts in Wabasha County.

During their three decades on the farm, Wotzka said the nitrate concentration in their well has dropped 80%. He credits two changes for the decrease: The state reverted nearby cropland to forest, and he farms without chemical fertilizer.

“That’s a success story,” he said. “There is hope.”

Still, Wotzka worries state regulators don’t have much appetite to challenge the status quo approach to farming that relies heavily on fertilizer.

“ Big Ag would like you to believe that there are no alternatives to what you need to do to grow corn and beans,” he said. “People have to start looking at alternatives.”

He’d like to see more discussion of environmentally friendly approaches.

Half a century ago, agriculture in southeast Minnesota looked far different from today, he said. Many more farmers owned pasture and hayfields. They rotated alfalfa and small grains onto their fields, helping the soil.

In recent decades, corn and soybean acres have surged, federal policies steer farmers toward monocropping, and conservation programs remain too rigid for farmers who might otherwise take a very different approach in hopes of growing food while keeping water clean.

“It’s really easy for people to say, ‘Well, they’re going to give me subsidized crop insurance for corn and soybeans,’” Wotzka said. “‘Why would I grow anything else?’”

Celia Llopis-Jepsen is an environment reporter for Harvest Public Media and host of the environmental podcast Up From Dust. You can follow her on Bluesky or email her at celia (at) kcur (dot) org.

Harvest Public Media is a collaboration of public media newsrooms in the Midwest and Great Plains. It reports on food systems, agriculture and rural issues.

During Billie Little's roughly two decades working at Thomson Reuters, she felt pride in the company, which is known for its legal database Westlaw, its media company Reuters, and its role as a major data broker.

But as masked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents swarmed Minneapolis early this year and the country reeled from federal agents fatally shooting Renée Macklin Good and Alex Pretti, Little and other colleagues grew alarmed that ICE agents could be abusing Thomson Reuters investigative tools that provide vast quantities of personal data on people including license plate information.

Little, who worked in legal publishing, was part of a committee of employees that sent a letter to company management in February flagging that ICE could be using Thomson Reuters products unlawfully and asking for greater transparency about the company's oversight of its contracts with the Department of Homeland Security and ICE. Soon after their effort was made public in the media, however, Little was fired from her role.

"Instead of addressing our concerns, our legitimate concerns — instead, they turn toward investigating me," Little told NPR. "And I was instrumental in leading the group. So I think that clearly they were trying to chill [the] activity of workers and that should scare every worker across the country."

Little is now suing the company, arguing that her dismissal violated a law in her home state of Oregon that bars employers from firing whistleblowers.

An unnamed Thomson Reuters spokesperson told NPR it would be inappropriate to comment on an individual employment matter but said of the lawsuit, "We strongly dispute the allegations and intend to robustly defend the case."

Thomson Reuters, which is headquartered in Toronto, is also facing pressure from shareholders over its ICE contracts.

British Columbia General Employees' Union, a public sector union that holds shares in the company, filed a proposal to commission an independent evaluation of the extent to which the company's products "may contribute to adverse human rights impacts" when used by law enforcement agencies and immigration authorities.

Thomson Reuters contracts with ICE

In late January, Little was closely following news reports about U.S. citizens detained by ICE and heightened tensions in Minneapolis in the aftermath of shootings that killed Good and Pretti. She was also worried about what she heard from colleagues who work out of the Thomson Reuters office in the Twin Cities suburb of Eagan.

"People afraid to go to work, people afraid to take their kids to school, people being followed and all of that," Little recalled.

So when a colleague shared a post on an internal employee chat that claimed Thomson Reuters was a top corporate collaborator with ICE, Little said she felt "sick to my stomach."

"After that post, everybody was kind of like, 'What?' There was a lot of confusion and anger, concern," Little told NPR. But she said management turned off the comments on the post.

Not all employees had been aware that Thomson Reuters has held tens of millions of dollars in contracts with ICE in the last several years for its data and investigative tools.

One of the key products Thomson Reuters sells to law enforcement agencies, including ICE, is called CLEAR, which aggregates billions of data points on individuals from public and proprietary records, as well as social media. CLEAR's platform also includes images from a network of license plate readers. ICE has a nearly $5 million contract with Thomson Reuters from May 2025 for "license plate reader data to enhance investigations for potential arrest, seizure and forfeiture."

Little's own work at the company had nothing to do with CLEAR. But she had heard over the years that it was being used to go after human traffickers or child exploitation crimes.

"So that was all to the good. And I could feel good about that," Little said. But she began to grow concerned that the tool was potentially being used far more widely than that by ICE to identify immigrants and protesters without criminal histories.

In an email to NPR, Thomson Reuters said its tools "support investigations into areas of national security and public safety, such as child exploitation, human trafficking, narcotics and weapons trafficking and financial crime."

The statement continued, "We remain committed to this mission while maintaining strong safeguards that ensure our products and services are used in accordance with our contractual terms and applicable law."

The company has previously asserted that CLEAR was not intended to be used to help deport undocumented immigrants with no criminal records.

A Thomson Reuters description of CLEAR that no longer appears on the company's website but was archived by the WayBack Machine says it is "not designed for use for mass illegal immigration inquiries or for deporting non-criminal undocumented persons and non-citizens."

Company documents from as recently as February that outline the terms for using CLEAR say that vehicle registration data shouldn't be used for immigration enforcement.

But as news stories showed dramatic increases in the number of immigrants arrested without any criminal history, Little said she began to doubt the company's line.

And protesters in Minneapolis began describing that ICE agents knew their names and home addresses, seemingly from looking up their vehicle registration information from their license plates.

Little and other colleagues worried Thomson Reuters tools were possibly being used unlawfully in Minnesota, including potentially against the company's own employees there.

She and other employees formed a group they called the "Committee to Restore Trust," which sent a letter to management on Feb. 20 that was signed by about 170 employees. Some 27,000 people work for the company globally.

"We are troubled by the possibility that [Thomson Reuters] products may enable activities that violate constitutional protections — including Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure, Fifth Amendment due process rights, and Fourteenth Amendment equal protection guarantees," reads a portion of the letter that Little then included in her lawsuit. "Thomson Reuters products may be used in ways that conflict with state and local laws in sanctuary jurisdictions, as well as data protection and privacy regulations at multiple governmental levels."

The letter asked for an all-hands meeting to discuss the company's oversight of its ICE contracts.

"They called us brave for bringing it up to their attention," Little recalled. But she said nothing else happened, and the committee members felt "stonewalled."

Thomson Reuters did not respond to specific questions about its interactions with employees, but told NPR, "We take employee concerns seriously and provide clear channels for colleagues to raise issues, as outlined in our Code of Conduct."

The company's statement also read, "We take seriously the legality and legitimacy of our products."

Both the Minnesota Star Tribune and The New York Times wrote about the employees' concerns in March.

Five days after the Times article was published, Little was summoned to a meeting with HR where she was told she was being investigated for violating confidentiality and data-sharing policies, according to her lawsuit. A few days later, she was fired. The lawsuit says she was told she violated the company's code of conduct but she did not receive written findings from an investigation or an explanation of which provision the company alleges she violated.

Little's lawsuit also says she had never previously received a negative review or been subject to discipline. The suit seeks to reverse her termination, as well as award her lost wages and compensatory damages.

"My client reported conduct that she reasonably believed was unlawful and she was fired for it, and that is expressly prohibited here in Oregon," said Maria Witt, one of the attorneys representing Little in her lawsuit.

One former Thomson Reuters employee told NPR they voluntarily left the company over dissatisfaction over how the company responded to employee concerns over potential misuse of the company's tools by ICE in the Twin Cities, where many employees live. They asked NPR not to use their name because they fear retaliation from Thomson Reuters.

"I feel like the company's response in terms of supporting its employees and supporting justice has strayed so far from the path," the former employee told NPR. "It seems like they are profiting off their own employees being terrorized at this point, which is upsetting and makes me sad."

Concerns from advocates and shareholders

Privacy and civil liberties advocates have long been worried about the government's ability to purchase detailed data on individuals from data brokers like Thomson Reuters without stronger guardrails.

"Right now, there are few legal safeguards in place preventing [Thomson Reuters] from selling tons of data to whoever it wants or preventing TR's customers from using the data however they want," Sarah Lamdan, a privacy researcher and author of the book Data Cartels, wrote in an email to NPR.

The company asserts that the type of records it provides its customers do not include the kind of information that law enforcement would traditionally need a warrant to obtain. But privacy advocates have argued that aggregation of so much data in one place provides details law enforcement would not be able to obtain otherwise unless they had a warrant.

"If you consolidate enough data about a person, you can infer all sorts of very personal information about them that would require a warrant to obtain through normal intelligence, investigation, and interrogation practices," Lamdan wrote to NPR.

Furthermore, reporting by technology outlet 404 Media has found that CLEAR is being integrated into other Palantir and Motorola tools used by ICE.

Activists who observe and record federal immigration enforcement operations have filed lawsuits alleging that federal agents have violated their First Amendment rights, including by attempting to intimidate them by taking down their license plate information or using it to identify them.

Emma Pullman, the head of shareholder engagement at the British Columbia General Employees' Union, told NPR that her union has been engaging with Thomson Reuters about its ICE contracts since 2020.

"The questions that Billie Little was asking of her employer weren't all that different from the questions that we, as a long term shareholder, have been asking of her employer," Pullman told NPR.

She said the issue has become even more urgent as there are allegations of ICE agents violating people's rights, which she said has changed the investment risk profile for Thomson Reuters and warrants "renewed scrutiny, more due diligence and more disclosure."

Thomson Reuters' board of directors has come out in opposition to the shareholder proposal.

The unnamed spokesperson told NPR in a statement that such an assessment would be "duplicative and an inefficient use of resources" because an independent consultancy completed the company's second human rights impact assessment in 2025 and the company plans to publish key findings on its website later this year.

But Pullman said that 2025 assessment was completed before ICE's escalation in Minnesota in early 2026 and before employees at the company raised concerns. Furthermore, she said her union was dissatisfied with the level of information the company disclosed in 2022 when it did its first human rights impact assessment. "This isn't duplicative," Pullman said of her union's shareholder proposal. "This is due diligence."

As for Billie Little, she told NPR that anyone would be intimidated to take on such a big company. But she said she feels a moral and ethical obligation to bring her lawsuit, and that it is bigger than what happened to her individually.

"This is about the issues of protecting our privacy, our law enforcement agencies abiding by the Constitution and protecting our civil liberties," she said.

Copyright 2026, NPR

Out at a farm near Farmington, a dozen greenhouses sit on 12 and a half acres of land that have been left untouched for over a year.

Overgrown weeds poke out of a clear tarp that just barely covers the greenhouse roofs. Tangled hoses are piled on the floor by one of the doors. Bundles of blue wire hang from the ceiling in the main corridor, where a new security system was supposed to be installed.

Regulatory problems, namely getting local signoff, have the plans stuck in place. That’s led to litigation and is among a series of lawsuits cropping up around Minnesota as the still-forming legal marijuana industry is getting off the ground. Clashes between local authorities and would-be cannabis operations are leading to rearranged plans, court fights or resignation that some might not come to pass as planned.

In the case of the Farmington fields, things are in limbo.

“It’s honestly depressing,” said Josh Kasprzyk. “We’ve invested millions here.”

Farm sits idle amid township conflicts

Fullscreen SlideshowPrevious Slide

5 of 5

1 of 5

2 of 5

Next Slide

Since 2019, Kasprzyk and his business partner, Richard Brama, have grown hemp at the farm to produce low-dose THC products under BKR Brands. The plan had always been to cultivate recreational cannabis there once it became legal in Minnesota and lease some of their space to other license holders.

“We were transparent [with the township] about what we were attempting to do,” Brama said. “We felt like we had a really good relationship with the community.”

But when the time came to pivot into the adult-use market, the duo ran into issues with the local township. They spent about half a year working with Eureka Township — which has jurisdiction in this instance — but couldn’t get approval for their cultivation plans.

Now, Kasprzyk is suing the township for barring their operation.

“It's absolutely been very painful for us personally, for our business, employees and our families,” he said.

Denied approval

Last year, Kasprzyk and Brama stopped cultivating hemp at the farm to prepare for the shift into cannabis. In early 2024, they got approval from Eureka Township to construct two buildings where he planned to grow indoors for hemp and later for cannabis.

Kasprzyk then secured one of 50 cannabis cultivator licenses through a lottery held by the Minnesota Office of Cannabis Management last June. Everything seemed to be on track, except for the local township.

It started out as Eureka requiring them to obtain an interim use permit.

“Instead of bringing us into a conversation to see how we could make this work together in a partnership, they passed a special use permit without informing us knowing that we had put all this money into the infrastructure anticipating adult-use cannabis,” Brama said.

The operators applied for an interim use permit, a process that cost more than $100,000 between architects, lawyers and site planning. They were also invoiced by Eureka about $24,000 for legal research.

After months of back and forth on building codes and other disputes, Kasprzyk told the town they would scratch plans for the two new buildings and use the existing land they had used for hemp. But the town ultimately denied their permit last November.

“The township had multiple reasons the proposed project did not meet the criteria for issuing an IUP, including but not limited to the incompatibility with the neighboring property, the adverse effect on the neighboring property and the traffic concerns,” said Jason Kuboushek, the township’s attorney.

In its denial letter, the town cited concerns with increased traffic on a nearby public road, neighbors who were worried about their property value dropping and an “unwillingness” to comply with local building codes and other rules.

“The law is clear that they can't deny us because we're asking for cannabis, as long as we meet the conditions,” Kasprzyk said.

State law says cities and counties can only govern time, place and manner of a cannabis business and enact “reasonable restrictions,” but cannot prohibit it. Despite that, several municipalities have passed ordinances that zone out or restrict cannabis.

In response to allegations that Eureka is acting in defiance of state law and is biased against cannabis, Kuboushek said cannabis businesses are allowed in certain locations but “for the reasons set forth in the resolution, this was not the right location.”

A few other lawsuits are pending challenging similar decisions by local governments. Minnesota’s cannabis agency says it cannot compel a city or county to action even if it’s not complying with state law.

“The office has recommended that license applicants seek legal counsel about their options if they believe their local government is not complying with the law,” said Jim Walker, an agency spokesperson.

The agency is monitoring ongoing cannabis lawsuits and court decisions.

In Albert Lea, a dispensary owner argues the city unlawfully denied him registration for his retail cannabis store after a past criminal conviction involving a minor became the center of controversy. And a farmer in Silver Bay is fighting against an ordinance that explicitly prohibits local approval of all cannabis businesses.

House DFL Speaker Zack Stephenson, one of the major sponsors of cannabis legalization, said he anticipated conflicts with local governments. He’s confident lawsuits like Kasprzyk’s will be successful.

“We wanted a uniform approach across the state, so cities have very little discretion when it comes to these businesses. And yet they are. Some of them continue to try and push the envelope,” he said.

Other efforts are underway at the Capitol to focuses on local government’s ability to approve a cannabis business. Rep. Jessica Hanson, DFL-Burnsville, is pushing a bill that would allow the OCM to waive the requirement of getting local government certification and may issue a license to an applicant if a municipality does not issue certification within 30 days of receiving a copy of the application. The prospective business owner still has to comply with local zoning ordinances and state fire and building codes.

A companion bill is also making its way through the Senate.

Early struggles

That leaves Minnesotans like Kasprzyk and Brama with losses they’ll never be able to recover.

They estimate damages could stretch into the millions if they can't get crop into the ground. That’s from the farm sitting idle, missing out on getting into the market early and an ongoing lawsuit with the township.

“They went behind our backs, pulled the rug out from underneath us, and put us in a position where not only could they have bankrupt our businesses, but they could have bankrupt us personally,” Brama said.

Many say the most crucial time to get into the market is the first 12 to 24 months, which is the goal for most prospective cannabis business owners. The adult-use market is still in its early stages, but is slowly shaping up with at least 180 businesses licensed and more than $64 million in retail revenue.

Supply is still extremely limited and Minnesota only has four licensed cultivators so far.

The pair say they have lost the opportunity to take advantage of that window where their business would be the most successful. Fortunately, Kasprzyk and Brama found a new cultivation facility in St. Paul and have about another year before the market matures and profit margins slim down.

The difference between Eureka and St. Paul is night and day. Their focus now is getting the facility ready to grow cannabis.

“Our hope is to get operational within three to four months,” Brama said.

He also hopes they win the lawsuit so they can still grow cannabis at the farm in Farmington, like they originally planned eight years ago.

“The damage has been done,” Brama said. “And so at this point, I'm hopeful that we can continue to find a path forward in Farmington, that’s the goal.”

MPR News political correspondent Dana Ferguson contributed to this report.

The Trump administration on Monday began accepting refund requests for tariffs that were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in February, opening an online portal importers could use to begin claiming refunds. For some U.S. businesses, the refunds could be substantial financial relief.

MPR News host Clay Masters spoke with Todd Fagley, founder and CEO of MedSource Labs, a medical device manufacturer and one of several Minnesota businesses that filed for refunds since the tariffs were ruled illegal.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.

It’s been one year since the U.S. raised tariffs on Canada. MPR News host Angela Davis and senior economics contributor Chris Farrell take a look at the impact — on both sides of the border.

Angela and Chris will talk again with some of the people they first interviewed last April in Thunder Bay, Ontario and Grand Marais, Minn.

Guests:

• Livio di Matteo is a professor of economics at Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, Ontario.

• Charla Robinson is the president of the Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce.

• Chris LaVigne is the manager of the Grand Marais Municipal Liquor Store.

Subscribe to the MPR News with Angela Davis podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.

A refund system for businesses that paid tariffs which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled President Donald Trump imposed without the constitutional authority to do so is scheduled to launch Monday.

Importers and their brokers will be able to begin claiming refunds through an online portal beginning at 8 a.m., according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the agency administering the system.

It's the first step in a complicated process that also might eventually lead to refunds for consumers who were billed for some or all of the tariffs on products shipped to them from outside the United States.

Companies must submit declarations listing the goods on which they collectively put billions of dollars toward the import taxes the court subsequently struck down. If CBP approves a claim, it will take 60-90 days for a refund to be issued, the agency said.

The government expects to process refunds in phases, however, focusing first on more recent tariff payments. Any number of technical factors and procedural issues could delay an importer's application, so any reimbursements businesses plan to make to customers likely would trickled down slowly.

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court on Feb. 20 found that Trump usurped Congress' tax-setting role last April when he set new import tax rates on products from almost every other country, citing the U.S. trade deficit as a national emergency that warranted his invoking of a 1977 emergency powers law.

Although the court majority did not address refunds in its ruling, a judge at the U.S. Court of International Trade determined last month that companies subjected to IEEPA tariffs were entitled to money back.

Not all taxed imports immediately eligible

Customs and Border Protection said in court filings that over 330,000 importers paid a total of about $166 billion on over 53 million shipments.

Not all of those orders qualify for the first phase of the refund system's rollout, which is limited to cases in which tariffs were estimated but not finalized or within 80 days of a final accounting.

To receive refunds, importers have to register for the CPB's electronic payment system. As of April 14, 56,497 importers had completed registration and were eligible for refunds totaling $127 billion, including interest, the agency said.

System requires accuracy

Meghann Supino, a partner at Ice Miller, said the law firm has advised clients to carefully list in their declarations all of the document numbers for forms that went to CBP to describe imported goods and their value.

“If there is an entry on that file that does not qualify, it may cause the entire entry to be rejected or that line item might be rejected by Customs,” she said.

Supino thinks the portal going live will require composure as well as diligence.

“Like any electronic online program that goes live with a lot of interest, I would expect that there might be some hiccups with the program on Monday,” she said. “So we continue to ask everyone to be patient, because we think that patience will pay off.”

Nghi Huynh, the partner-in-charge of transfer pricing at accounting and consulting firm Armanino, said most companies claiming refunds will have imported a mix of items, and not all will qualify right away.

“It’s about having a clear process in place and keeping track of what’s been submitted and what’s been paid, so nothing falls through the cracks,” she said. “Each file can include thousands of entries, but accuracy is critical, as submissions can be rejected if formatting or data is incorrect.”

Patience with the process

Small businesses have eagerly awaited the chance to apply for refunds. Brad Jackson, co-founder of After Action Cigars in Rochester, Minnesota, said he starting compiling records and preparing to enter information into the system the minute CPB announced the launch date.

The company imports cigars and accessories from Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic. Last year, it paid $34,000 in tariffs and absorbed much of the cost instead of raising customer prices, Jackson said.

Last spring, he had a two-week delay in a shipment due to a missing document, so he is being more careful with refund documents, he said.

“My main concern is the turnaround time,” Jackson said. “A refund process that takes several months to complete doesn’t solve the cash flow problem that it is supposed to fix.”

Will consumers see refunds?

Tariffs are paid by importers, and some companies pass on the tax costs to consumers via higher prices.

The system starting up Monday will refund tariffs directly to the businesses that paid them, which are not obligated to share the proceeds with customers. However, class-action lawsuits that aim to force companies, ranging from Costco to Ray-Ban maker Essilor Luxottica, to reimburse shoppers are winding their way through the U.S. legal system.

Individuals may be more likely to receive refunds from delivery companies like FedEx and UPS, which collected tariffs on imports directly from consumers. FedEx has said it would return tariff refunds to customers when it receives them from the CPB.

“Supporting our customers as they navigate regulatory changes remains our top priority,” FedEx said in a statement. “We are working with our customers as CBP begins processing refunds and plan to begin filing claims on April 20.”

After weeks of waiting to hear how — or whether — the U.S. government might refund the tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court, Monday is the day it finally begins.

Imagine tens of thousands of business owners with their fingers hovering over laptops, ready to enter America's hottest new queue: the U.S. tariff refund portal.

U.S. Customs is launching just the first phase of payouts, so not all the goods imported under the illegal tariffs will immediately qualify. And the latest federal guidance says that after refund requests are approved, it could take 60 to 90 days to return the money to the importer.

Still, this marks a turning point for U.S. importers, who've waited for clarity for exactly two months since the U.S. Supreme Court declared most of President Trump's tariffs unconstitutional. The high court did not opine on the process of refunds, and government officials at first suggested the process could prove unwieldy.

“Small businesses organized, spoke out, and won a major victory,” said Main Street Alliance, which advocates for U.S. small businesses, in a statement. “Now, the federal government must follow through with a refund process that truly works for Main Street.”

U.S. Customs has estimated that it owes a total of $166 billion in tariff refunds, and the agency's legal filings suggest that the initial phase would tackle the majority of affected imports. On Tuesday, a Customs official told a judge that the vast majority of eligible importers signed up for electronic payments, as the agency is requiring, and that group is owed about $127 billion.

Will consumers see any of that money land in their pockets? Probably not, economics and legal experts say.

The cost of tariffs has been woven into the prices of many products in a way that can make it hard to separate out what customers ultimately paid. Often, manufacturers, suppliers, importers, retailers and shoppers all absorb costs along the way. And with tariffs landing on the heels of historic inflation, companies big and small have argued that they ate much of the cost to avoid spooking shoppers with higher prices.

In fact, many retailers find themselves in a similar quandary because tariff refunds will go to whoever paid the actual customs bill. It's unclear how, or if, the refunds might trickle down to store owners who paid tariff surcharges to their suppliers.

“As a retailer, I didn't pay tariffs directly. However, I did pay them indirectly in the form of higher wholesale prices,” says Joe Kimray, owner of B & W Hardware in North Carolina. Most of his products are either made abroad or use imported parts.

“I plan to have conversations with a number of manufacturers and hope that they will do the right thing and share some of the tariff refund money with us,” he says. “I don't expect to get a direct refund check from anyone, but it could be even as simple as offering discounts on the wholesale cost of future product purchases.”

Shoppers hoping to recoup their own tariff expenses have launched class-action lawsuits against several companies, including Costco and FedEx. The shipping giant has pledged to pass down any refunds it receives. Costco's CEO last month told investors the company would return shoppers' money through “lower prices and better values” and would be transparent about its plans.

U.S. Customs' initial phase of refunds will focus on tariff payments that haven't been finalized because they technically are still under federal review. (Companies typically pay import duties as soon as their goods arrive at the border, but the complete customs review that follows can take nearly a year.) The government will continue to set up its new system, called CAPE, so that it can later on refund older, finalized tariff payments.

NPR asked U.S. Customs and Border Protection about the scale of tariff refunds it expects to handle in the first phase, including the volume of claims the agency's new tool is prepared to handle on Monday. A CBP spokesperson in response said that CAPE was developed “to efficiently process refunds” and referred importers and brokers to the agency's updated tariff-refund guidance.

NPR's Scott Horsley contributed to this report.

Copyright 2026, NPR

The Walker Art Center on Thursday cut ties with Cardamom, the restaurant housed inside its ground floor, exactly a week after restaurant management announced staff layoffs in favor of a QR-code service model.

The restaurant is set to close within 90 days.

“We were caught by surprise by the changes at Cardamom and, after careful consideration, have decided to part ways,” Walker executive director Mary Ceruti said in an emailed statement. “The reduced-service model, which favors automated efficiencies over a human-centered approach, does not align with our core values.”

Cardamom owner DDP Restaurant Group, started by chef Daniel Del Prado, has owned and managed the restaurant since 2021. Last week, a company spokesperson cited rising costs and varying traffic levels as factors to moving away from full-service dining.

In an emailed statement Thursday, DDP Restaurant Group said Cardamom was never profitable.

“Our innovation was designed to preserve jobs and a restaurant at the Walker, just as dozens of other restaurants in Minneapolis have done to achieve financial survival,” DDP said in the statement.

A Hospitality Minnesota report released last week showed the state’s industry is “on the brink of no return” following the surge in federal immigration enforcement in recent months. Businesses are also still recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic and navigate pressures from tariffs and mounting regulations, according to the report.

Former Cardamom workers said at a worker press conference outside Cardamom on Thursday afternoon QR codes are not the solution.

“Hospitality is human,” said Hazel Nelson, who had worked at Cardamom for about a year.

DDP terminated 16 Cardamom employees, according to CTUL, a workers’ rights nonprofit supporting Cardamom workers in organizing. A spokesperson said most do not have another source of income.

Most of those employees declined to re-apply for Cardamom’s new role food-running and bussing and would receive severance pay, according to restaurant management.

Former employees picketed after the press conference and plan to again on Sunday to advocate for workers at other DDP Restaurant Group businesses, which include Porzana and Flora Room. They’re demanding the company give its employees at least two weeks’ notice of termination in the future, allow labor organizing without fear of retaliation and sign onto the “86 ICE” campaign to support workers amid federal immigration operations.

Oil prices are falling by more than 10 percent Friday, and Wall Street is rallying toward another record after Iran said the Strait of Hormuz is fully open, allowing oil tankers to exit the Persian Gulf again and carry crude to customers worldwide.

The S&P 500 climbed 0.8 percent as U.S. stocks run toward the finish of a third straight week of big gains, their longest such streak since Halloween. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 678 points, or 1.4 percent, as of 9:35 a.m. Eastern time, and the Nasdaq composite was 1 percnet higher.

Stocks have jumped more than 11 percent since hitting a bottom in late March on hopes that the United States and Iran can avoid a worst-case scenario for the global economy despite their war. The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz is the clearest yet signal for optimism, and President Donald Trump said in a speech late Thursday that the war “should be ending pretty soon.”

The price for a barrel of benchmark U.S. crude tumbled 10.8 percent to $81.28.

Brent crude, the international standard, dropped 10.3 percent to $89.13. To be sure, it remains above its $70 level from before the war, indicating some caution is still embedded in financial markets.

Several times since the war began, optimism on Wall Street has quickly swung to doubt about a possible end to the fighting. That in turn has caused vicious and sudden swings of prices for everything from stocks to bonds to oil.

A strong start to the earnings reporting season for big U.S. companies has also helped to support the U.S. stock market, and several more financial companies joined the list Friday of companies delivering bigger profits for the start of 2026 than analysts expected.

State Street rose 2.9 percent, and Fifth Third Bancorp added 1.9 percent after both reported better results for the latest quarter than expected.

They helped offset an 11.5 percent drop for Netflix, which fell even though it likewise delivered a better profit than expected. It did not raise its forecast for revenue growth for the full year, which analysts said may have disappointed some investors. It also said Reed Hastings, cofounder and chairman of the streaming company, will step down from its board of directors in June when his term expires.

In stock markets abroad, stock indexes leaped in Europe following Iran’s announcement about the Strait of Hormuz. France’s CAC 40 jumped 2 percent, and Germany’s DAX returned 2.2 percent.

In Asia, where trading finished for the day before the announcement, indexes were weaker. Japan’s Nikkei 225 lost 1.8 percent, and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng fell 0.9 percent for two of the bigger losses.

In the bond market, Treasury yields eased sharply as falling oil prices took pressure off inflation. The yield on the 10-year Treasury dropped to 4.24 percent from 4.32 percent late Thursday.

NPR has received two of the largest gifts in the public media network's existence, totaling $113 million. They will go toward fueling innovation in NPR's use of digital technology, increasing its connection with audiences, and ensuring the viability of public radio stations after Congress eliminated all federal funding for public media.

NPR President and CEO Katherine Maher said the gifts would help to set up the network and its stations for the next 50 years, beyond the radio network infrastructure that sprang up in 1970 from a coalition of community and university-owned public radio stations across the country.

Maher said that requires NPR and its stations to use tech to collaborate more effectively in providing programs and news coverage, to analyze how people are consuming their offerings and to discern how to raise money more effectively to pay for it. She said the gifts would be "catalytic investments" in NPR's future.

"Audiences don't just listen in their cars or in their kitchens," Maher said. "They're reading, they're viewing, they're listening on the go."

The donations would help answer a key question, Maher said: "How do we make sure that we have the infrastructure necessary to be able to deliver the high quality reporting to people in all those places when they want?"

The philanthropist Connie Ballmer contributed $80 million specifically toward ensuring NPR transforms its technology to meet the needs and serve the interests of public media audiences on whatever platforms or devices they may seek it.

"I support NPR because an informed public is the bedrock of our society, and democracy requires strong, independent journalism," Ballmer, a former member of the NPR Foundation board, said in a statement. "My hope is that this commitment provides the stability and the spark NPR needs to innovate boldly and strengthen its national network."

Ballmer and her husband, former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, have given away more than $3 billion in recent years, according to a joint interview they gave last year to the "Chronicle of Philanthropy."

Another donor, who has elected to remain anonymous, has given NPR $33 million to build and acquire tools and services that will be shared with public media organizations across the nation. The network intends to aid stations in analyzing their audiences, marketing themselves, and raising money, among other things.

The gifts arrive at a time of great financial strain for public media.

End of federal funding

Last summer, under pressure from President Trump, the Republican-led Congress voted along party lines to claw back all $1.1 billion in federal funding that lawmakers and the president had already approved for public media. The move represented the shattering of a tradition of bipartisan support for public broadcasting stretching back more than a half-century.

The average public radio station lost about 10% of its annual budget; for public television stations and PBS, the figure stood closer to 15%. NPR itself lost about 1 to 2% of its annual budget with the end of federal dollars. The elimination of federal funds has forced widespread layoffs throughout the system.

Though NPR owns no stations, more than 240 public radio stations are full NPR News member stations and hundreds of others carry some of its content.

NPR moved to shore up station finances by easing the fees it charges them to carry its major news programs, such as Morning Edition and All Things Considered, and to offer assistance in fund-raising, marketing, and other endeavors.

The gifts announced Thursday are the largest NPR has received since Joan B. Kroc, the widow of McDonald's magnate Ray Kroc, left more than $200 million to the network. That bequest, in 2003, elevated NPR's newsgathering capabilities, allowing it to open international bureaus and NPR West in Culver City, Calif. It also established a major endowment that has enabled it to weather a series of financial storms.

In 2018, former NPR CEO Jarl Mohn and his wife Pamela gave the network $10 million from the personal fortune he had made as a tech investor when he announced he would be stepping down from role running the network.

Questions remain about layoffs

Asked about concerns that NPR may still face layoffs to ease ongoing budget strains, Maher noted the contributions announced Thursday were intended for specific purposes, not to build the endowment or to expand news coverage. And, when asked, Maher did not rule out job cuts this year.

"This does not replace federal funding," Maher said. "This does not replace the shortfalls. We still need to continue to operate effectively in order to be able to do the work that we do day in and day out."

Several people within NPR said the network has been planning scenarios for alternative levels of job cuts, though no plans are currently set. Executives also are trying to figure out the degree to which the network could rely more heavily on reporters from local stations for national coverage, staffers said. (They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on internal matters.) The ability to do so could be complicated by two factors: the fact that covering the same story often requires a different emphasis for local audiences familiar with a subject, as opposed to a national audience; and the additional strain on local newsrooms, which are often quite small, as a result of the loss of federal funds.

The question of NPR's relationship to its stations was thrown into sharp relief during the Washington debate over federal funding. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which had dispensed federal dollars to public media outlets until its demise, had sought to withhold money from NPR last year for a satellite distribution service it provides local stations. A federal judge ruled that CPB officials were trying to distance themselves from NPR in an attempt to appease Trump. Ultimately, CPB paid the money.

In the wake of the loss of federal funds, some stations have decided to rely more heavily on NPR programming as they've been forced to cut their budgets for local news. Yet Maher says the local stations' journalism represents a competitive advantage for NPR.

"This has been my ambition for us as a network since I arrived," said Maher, who became NPR's chief executive in early 2024 after a career spent mostly in the tech world, including as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation. "My intent was for us to find ways to work together as a network, to be greater than the sum of our parts, so we were able to take advantage of our footprint... to tell stories that matter to the country from the places where that was occurring."

Disclosure: This story was written and reported by NPR Correspondent David Folkenflik and edited by NPR Deputy Business Editor Emily Kopp and Managing Editor Vickie Walton-James. Under NPR's protocol for reporting on itself, no corporate official or news executive reviewed this story before it was posted publicly.

Copyright 2026, NPR

Minnesota lost thousands of jobs in February, and state officials say federal immigration enforcement actions likely played a significant role.

At a media briefing, Department of Employment and Economic Development Commissioner Matt Varilek said the state lost about 6,100 jobs over the month — double the rate of decline seen nationally.

Minnesota lost about 700 jobs in February 2025.

DEED Labor Market Information Director Angelina Nguyen says that while this year’s loss is substantial, it is not a record. She notes that each year typically includes at least one sharper monthly decline, pointing out that Minnesota has seen larger drops in other months, including losses of more than 8,000 jobs in early 2025 and more than 9,000 in mid-2024. She adds that the largest monthly decline on record came in April 2020, when the state lost 339,800 jobs at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Minnesota’s unemployment rate also ticked up to 4.5 percent in February, while the labor force shrank by more than 8,500 people.

Varilek said the timing of those changes aligns with the federal government’s “Operation Metro Surge.”

“While we cannot say that it was the one and only factor, ICE actions do seem to align with influencing Minnesota’s February numbers in a negative way,” he said.

State officials pointed to signs that workers may have left jobs or stopped looking for work altogether. Minnesota saw an increase in unemployment — but not a correlating increase in unemployment benefit claims — suggesting some newly unemployed workers are not applying for benefits.

The impacts were not evenly distributed. Varilek said the hospitality industry saw disproportionate job losses, reflecting both workers staying home and fewer customers.

Varilek noted that over the past year, Minnesota jobs grew slightly, while national job numbers declined.

Still, officials expect the effects of the enforcement surge to linger.

“I think it is fair to say that it will have ripple effects for years,” Varilek said, pointing to potential long-term challenges for both workers and businesses.

State officials say while the data certainly suggests a connection, it’s difficult to measure exactly how much of the job loss is tied to immigration enforcement versus other economic factors.

Early spring means the return of warm weather and … taxes. On a recent weekend, Dan and Glynna Courter were enjoying the sun with friends over a picnic of blueberries and Cheez-Its at Birmingham's Railroad Park.

When the topic moved to how they're feeling about their tax refunds, nearly everyone at the gathering responded with a chorus of lukewarm just fines.

The lack of enthusiasm was surprising considering everyone on the picnic blanket received sizable refunds, including about $10,000 for the Courters combined. But Glynna thinks their refund wasn't that much different from last year. The couple withhold the maximum taxes from their paychecks, which helps them avoid the risk of owing taxes and leads to a bigger refund.

"We might go to a nice restaurant," Dan added, after Glynna said they'd use the refund for savings.

This is not the vibe Republican lawmakers were planning for this tax season. The White House had already declared this the "largest tax refund season in U.S. history," and so far it's on track to be, due to the Republicans' signature tax and spending law, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The White House projected the average refund "to rise by $1,000 or more this year."

But that extra refund bump has fallen short of that projection.

So far, the average refund has totaled about $350 more than last year. By early April, the average tax refund sat at $3,462, which is 11.1 percent higher than the same point last year, according to the IRS.

And Americans appear to be shrugging their shoulders at the tax changes. A recent survey by the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington think tank advising on federal policy, found 62 percent of respondents either thought the tax changes harmed them or made no difference. Even among Republicans, only 35 percent said the changes favored them.

"There's a bit of a disappointment in how much those refunds are," said Tom O'Saben, the director of tax content and government relations at the National Association of Tax Professionals. "People are quietly, perhaps, happy but not to the extent where I would call it significant."

Americans who owe taxes could be seeing a bigger slice of the savings

One possible explanation for the lower refunds is that the benefits from the tax law changes could be showing up more for Americans who don't receive refunds, but owe taxes. The IRS data on tax refunds this season does not factor in how much less Americans owed compared to last year.

"The evidence is stronger that more tax relief is relatively flowing to those who otherwise would owe when they file," said Don Schneider, deputy head of U.S. policy at the investment bank Piper Sandler.

But Schneider points out that owing less money is harder to notice than getting cash in hand.

"Getting it in a refund is probably more impactful, more easy to understand than having a reduction in what you otherwise would owe," Schneider said.

Higher-income procrastinators still have to file

Wealthier filers so far seem to have received larger benefits from the tax changes.

"Higher income taxpayers are much more likely than lower income taxpayers to report significantly higher refunds this year," said Andrew Lautz, director of tax policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

That's due in part to the increase in the SALT, or state and local tax, deduction cap raised by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Filers can now deduct up to $40,000 for property, sales and income taxes paid to state and local governments. The deduction primarily goes to wealthier Americans who own homes with big mortgage payments.

Since they traditionally are more likely to procrastinate sending in their returns, that could cause this year's average tax refund to grow later on, but likely still fall short of the additional $1,000 mark, Lautz said. "It is unlikely that we will see that kind of boost by the end of this."

Refunds are getting eaten up by higher gas prices

Part of the tepid response to refunds could be related to the extra cash Americans are spending at the pump.

The war with Iran has brought the average price for a gallon of regular in the U.S. well above $4. Data from the Bank of America Institute and PNC shows consumers have continued spending on gas, and depending on how long gas prices stay elevated, all of the benefits Americans received from the 2025 tax and spending bill could go solely to staying fueled up.

"The tax refund season might be very good, but it's also being offset by this price in gasoline," said Michael Pearce, chief U.S. economist at Oxford Economics.

Bob Jones, a retiree in Birmingham, is satisfied with his refund. He benefited from an extra deduction of $6,000 for a lot of seniors 65 and up. But the war with Iran has him worried about what that means for the price of gas, so he's put it all in savings.

"You need the savings simply for gas," Jones said.

Copyright 2026, NPR

While crude oil prices dropped this week following news of a tenuous ceasefire in the United States and Israel’s war with Iran, gas prices continue to rise in Minnesota.

AAA reported that the average price of regular gas in Minnesota on Thursday was about $3.74 a gallon. That’s up more than 15 cents a gallon since Monday, and close to 50 cents higher than a month ago.

The average price in Minnesota is 57 cents a gallon more than it was a year ago.

There was significant variation in gas prices across the state on Thursday. AAA reported an average price of $3.80 a gallon in the Twin Cities, and about $3.83 in Rochester. But average prices were about $3.57 in Moorhead, $3.65 in Duluth and $3.68 in St. Cloud.

Prices in Minnesota remain well below the national average of about $4.17 a gallon.

Diesel fuel prices were averaging about $5.13 a gallon in Minnesota on Thursday — up about 25 cents over the past week, and $1.65 a gallon more than a year ago.

The Associated Press reported that crude oil prices climbed back toward $100 per barrel on Thursday. The price for a barrel of benchmark U.S. crude oil rose 5.6 percent after semiofficial news agencies in Iran suggested forces have mined the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway that has been at the center of President Donald Trump’s demands of Iran. Blockages there have kept oil and natural gas stuck in the Persian Gulf, away from customers worldwide.

Brent crude, the international standard, rose 2.3 percent to $96.95 per barrel. It’s still below the $119 level that it briefly reached when worries about the war reached their height, but it remains above its roughly $70 level from before the war.

Given how far apart the United States and Iran seem to be in their demands, upward pressure on oil prices may be “here to stay for a while” according to strategists at the Macquarie Group.

Risks remain for renewed fighting, which could cause customers worldwide to hoard whatever oil supplies they do get. That could itself keep oil off the market, much like actual fighting targeting pipelines or oil tankers.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

A key measure of inflation stayed high in February, before the war in Iran spiked gas prices, a sign that everyday costs were elevated even before the conflict began.

An inflation gauge monitored by the Federal Reserve rose 0.4 percent in February from January, up slightly from the previous month. Compared with a year ago, prices rose 2.8 percent, the same as January. Thursday's data was delayed by a backlog of economic reports created by the six-week government shutdown last fall.

Excluding the volatile food and energy categories, core inflation also rose 0.4 percent in February from January, and it was 3 percent higher than a year earlier. The annual figure is slightly below January's reading of 3.1 percent.

Still, the monthly increases are at a pace that if continued for a whole year, would easily top the Fed's 2 percent inflation target.

“Consumer inflation was firming even prior to the outbreak of war in the Middle East, and it is primed to jump sharply higher in March,” Kathy Bostjancic, chief economist at Nationwide, wrote in a client note. “Even if a long-lasting deal to end the war is reached and the Strait of Hormuz is fully reopened, it would take months for oil, gasoline, diesel and other commodity supplies to snap back to prewar levels and thus for prices to settle back to preconflict levels.”

Thursday's report is largely a warm-up for the more important inflation data to be released Friday, when the government will publish the higher-profile consumer price index for March. The Friday report will be the first to reflect the impact of the gas price spike from the Iran war. Economists forecast it will show a big increase of 0.9 percent just in March from February, and a 3.4 percent gain from a year earlier. The annual figure would be a big increase from 2.4 percent in February.

The large jump in inflation in March will heighten concerns at the Fed that prices are moving further away from their inflation target and make it much less likely the central bank will cut rates anytime soon. At their most recent meeting last month, some Fed officials supported opening the door to the potential for rate hikes if inflation didn't show signs of improving.

Thursday's report from the Commerce Department also showed that Americans' incomes slipped 0.1 percent in February, the first decline since October, while spending after adjusting for inflation barely increased.

Higher inflation is sapping Americans' purchasing power. Spending rose a solid 0.5 percent in February from the previous month before adjusting for higher prices. Bostjancic expects consumer spending, adjusted for inflation, will rise a modest 1.2 percent at an annual rate in the first three months of this year, below the 1.9 percent reached in last year's fourth quarter.

The economy may still grow a decent 2 percent in the first quarter, Bostjancic said, driven by investments in artificial intelligence and a bounceback in government spending after last year's shutdown. The government said Thursday growth was just 0.5 percent at the end of last year.

The Science Museum of Minnesota has wowed generations with its dinosaur fossils, including an 80-foot Diplodocus. And tens of thousands of people have visited its other exhibits explaining everything from outer space to the history of race.

But these days, fewer people are visiting.

Like other cultural institutions across the country, the St. Paul museum has struggled to lure people back after the COVID-19 pandemic. Attendance is half of what it was in 2019, forcing the museum to eliminate summer camps, lay off employees and make other cuts.

MPR News host Angela Davis talks about what contributed to the drop in visitors and how the museum is trying to sell more people on its cool collections, current exhibits and educational programming.

Guests:

• Alison Rempel Brown has been the president and CEO of the Science Museum of Minnesota since 2016. She was previously chief of staff at the California Academy of Sciences.

• Colleen Dilenschneider is founder and managing member of IMPACTS Experience, a market research firm that works with cultural organizations, including museums, zoos, aquariums and science centers. She is based in Chicago.

Subscribe to the MPR News with Angela Davis podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.

Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.