Summer in Minnesota usually means time at the lake, grilling, and weekends at the cabin. This year, it also means a special session at the Legislature (then hopefully the lake, the grill, and the cabin).

As I write this, budget negotiations are still unfolding at the Capitol. By the time you read this, a deal may have been worked out or a special session might already be underway. Instead of focusing on what’s next, I want to step back and look at how we got here.

There’s no easy answer to complex problems, especially when it comes to writing a two-year state budget. A lot of voices are in the mix, from lawmakers and the governor to state agencies, lobbyists, and unions. In all that noise, the voice of the average Minnesotan can get lost.

What I hear from constituents are reasonable concerns: the high cost of living, the need for responsible government spending, safe communities, and a desire for families, not government, to guide how their kids are raised and educated. These are common-sense priorities that many on both sides agree on, even if we don’t always agree on how to get there.

With the Legislature this closely divided, disagreements are to be expected. The House is split 67 to 67. Democrats have a one-seat advantage in the Senate. Nearly every major decision requires compromise.

Further complicating the process is the projected $6 billion budget deficit. That means tough decisions and real trade-offs. This follows what was recently an $18 billion surplus. That kind of swing doesn’t happen overnight. It’s the result of choices, and not always the right ones.

Take nursing homes. At a time when our population is aging and facilities are struggling to retain staff, the governor’s proposed budget included a $220 million cut to nursing home funding. Because these dollars are typically matched by the federal government, that cut effectively doubles, resulting in a $440 million loss.

Meanwhile, Democrats proposed allocating that same amount—$220 million—to healthcare for undocumented residents. Unlike nursing home funding, these dollars aren’t eligible for a federal match, meaning the state bears 100% of the cost burden for this program. As part of the final agreement, that program is now scheduled to end at the close of the year.

We’ve seen similar questions in education. Graduation rates have improved, but student achievement is slipping. In 2019, 55 percent of students were proficient in math. By 2024, it dropped to 45 percent. Reading scores fell nearly 10 points. The question isn’t just how many graduate, but how prepared they are when they do.

Another concern I hear often is property taxes. When the state shifts costs to counties without funding them, counties raise property taxes to make up the difference. It may not be called a tax hike, but homeowners feel it just the same. And with everyday costs rising, it’s another burden families can’t afford.

All these issues, from education and healthcare to taxes and the budget come down to one thing: priorities. Sometimes lawmakers agree on the goals but have different ideas about how to get there. Other times, we have different visions for the state’s future. Either way, the work must continue.

In the private sector, if you don’t serve your customer well, they walk away. Government doesn’t work that way. Spending grows, but results don’t always follow. That’s why we need to be clear-eyed about how we use taxpayer dollars and stay focused on the priorities that matter most.

We’ve faced tough moments before, and we’ll get through this one too.