12. Full document available on the Federal Register website:
public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-00512.pdf

11. CMS to Gov. Walz: “The quarterly withholding will be … estimated as $515,154,947.56, or an alternative substantiated amount.”

10. CMS to Gov. Walz: “Subject to an opportunity for a hearing, CMS will withhold a portion of FFP [federal financial participation] from the Minnesota Medicaid quarterly claim of expenditures … until [MN is in compliance with] federal requirements.”

9. The back pages of the CMS document include a letter from CMS to Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, dated January 6.

8. CMS document: “CMS has ... found that Minnesota’s policies, practices, and oversight mechanisms violate federal regulations at 42 CFR Part 455, Subpart A”

7. CMS document: “The withholding will end when the Minnesota Medicaid agency fully and satisfactorily implements a corrective action plan (CAP) to bring its program integrity operations into compliance with federal requirements.”

6. CMS document: “This finding will be the basis for withholding federal financial participation (FFP) from Minnesota’s Medicaid program, as described in more detail in the letter below.”

5. CMS document: “[The] Minnesota Medicaid agency fails to adequately identify, prevent, and address fraud, waste, and abuse in its Medicaid program.”

4. The document announces an “administrative hearing concerning the finding of the Administrator of [CMS] that the State of Minnesota is substantially out of compliance … in administering its Medicaid state plan.”

3. CMS document: “Notice of Opportunity for Hearing on Compliance of Minnesota State Plan Provisions Concerning Program Integrity and Fraud, Waste, and Abuse With Title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act”

2. Link contains a “public inspection document” from CMS to to be published in the federal register on 1/14/26.
public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-00512.pdf

Public Inspection: Opportunity for Hearing on Compliance of Minnesota State Plan Provisions Concerning Program Integrity and Fraud, Waste, and Abuse With Title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Ac... Opportunity for Hearing on Compliance of Minnesota State Plan Provisions Concerning Program Integrity and Fraud, Waste, and Abuse With Title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act

1. Public inspection notice currently available on Federal Register: “Opportunity for Hearing on Compliance of Minnesota State Plan Provisions Concerning Program Integrity and Fraud, Waste, and Abuse With Title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act”
www.federalregister.gov/public-inspe...

The Minnesota Medicaid controversy: A history told through documents Originally published April 17, 2013

From the PRM archives: “The Minnesota Medicaid controversy: A history told through documents”
publicrecordmedia.substack.com/p/the-minnes...

27. Since 2020, PRM has been developing a document-based history of the 2020 civil unrest, which PRM will complete and publish once the DPS documents are released.

26. The case number for Public Record Media v. Minnesota Department of Public Safety is 62-cv-24-5264. PRM’s motion and related materials are available on the docket.

25. Both parties have maintained their positions on the Sydnee Woods e-mails, which remain before Judge Smith for review.

24. After PRM submitted its motion to the court, DPS agreed to lift many of the redactions made to the riot-era documents when those documents are released.

23. Substantial redactions were made to the Sydnee Woods e-mails, but smaller numbers of redactions were also made to documents dating from the week of the 2020 civil unrest.

22. Through its recent motion, PRM has challenged the use of attorney-client privilege to withhold the entire contents of the Woods e-mails.

21. Under its settlement agreement, PRM and DPS agree that PRM is able to contest redactions made in the presented documents.

20. Other than the e-mail header and footer information, the bodies of all the e-mail messages were entirely redacted by DPS, on the grounds of attorney-client privilege.

19. DPS did not acknowledge or respond to PRM’s request until over two years later.

18. E-mails reveal that on December 7, 2022 and other dates, Sydnee Woods of DPS corresponded with staff from the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office.

17. Documents show that DPS officials likewise corresponded with staff of the Wilder Foundation in November and December of 2022, in the wake of PRM’s follow-up requests.

16. Messages were exchanged between then-DPS data practices compliance official Woods, then-Commissioner John Harrington, and other top DPS staff on August 23.

15. PRM’s request was submitted to DPS on August 18 of 2022. Internal agency emails show that DPS staff began exchanging messages about the request days later.

14. DPS also produced redacted versions of e-mails related to the agency’s search, showing that DPS officials began corresponding about PRM’s request within weeks of receiving it.

13. During discovery DPS stated, in answering an interrogatory, that then-DPS chief counsel Sydnee Woods “acknowledged receipt” of PRM’s Request in 2022 and “searched for responsive documents.”

12. As the lawsuit proceeded through the discovery process, PRM began to subpoena witnesses for depositions, and the State of Minnesota offered to engage in settlement discussions.

11. PRM sued DPS in August of 2024.