Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
User avatar
Tiller
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 740
Joined: January 17th, 2015, 11:58 am

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby Tiller » May 30th, 2016, 7:27 pm

Yeah, that's the ironic part. Republicans say they're opposed to big government all the time, but they're really only opposed to big government when it suits them. It's only some strands of libertarianism (since a lot of different things fit under that umbrella) that are consistently against "big government", though that can also depend on how one defines government. The latter thing starts getting into some philosophical weeds that aren't relevant here since MN doesn't have a Libertarian party involved in the transportation funding fight.

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2620
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby RailBaronYarr » May 31st, 2016, 9:22 am

It's a really unhelpful way to frame any debate, since the most "okay-with-big-government" DFL folks would take HUGE issue with the state or Met Council imposing a minimum zoning on their neighborhood, and the most "local control, small government" libertarians (a notable exception from Brainerd, MN, obviously) are totally fine with the state paying for their local collector street to drive to the nearest Target. That's why I don't think it's enough to say "give us local control" when fighting for something - there's nothing inherently good or bad about local control over anything and everything, nor is there in having the state or federal government handle or regulate things. Outcomes are what matter, and they need to be articulated why you support local-/higher-level spending/regulation. But that requires nuance, something rhetoric is really bad at handling.

User avatar
Anondson
Capella Tower
Posts: 2931
Joined: July 21st, 2013, 8:57 pm
Location: Where West Minneapolis Once Was

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby Anondson » May 31st, 2016, 9:45 am

True. But restricting how cities can pay for things they need to do, (property tax, LGA) unless granted case-by-case approval, distorts outcomes.

Qhaberl
Rice Park
Posts: 443
Joined: February 25th, 2016, 9:51 am

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby Qhaberl » August 8th, 2016, 7:48 pm

It's been a few months since the last post.

I want to throw out a scenario, and see what people think. Let's just assume, for purposes of this discussion, that our legislature is able to have a special session. Obviously one of the big keys is funding the Southwest light rail. I honestly think that it will happen. I think Hennepin County will end up paying the remainder of the state share. I am more interested in knowing what others think about the possibility of the metro getting a sales tax increase during the special session, that sales tax would obviously benefit transit projects throughout the seven county metro. Am I living in a complete delusion? Or is this even a possibility?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
Mdcastle
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 761
Joined: March 23rd, 2013, 8:28 am
Location: Bloomington, MN
Contact:

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby Mdcastle » August 8th, 2016, 8:27 pm

Absolutely zero chance of it happening, unless it also benefits suburban highway expansion projects. In that case it's just an almost zero chance.

Qhaberl
Rice Park
Posts: 443
Joined: February 25th, 2016, 9:51 am

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby Qhaberl » August 9th, 2016, 6:41 am

Do you think the state will actually end up paying a share for the Southwest light rail? Or do you think that Hennepin County, or the Metropolitan Council, will end up covering the costs?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

HiawathaGuy
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1268
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 12:03 pm

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby HiawathaGuy » August 9th, 2016, 12:33 pm

I guess a lot depends on how things go with the primaries today.
Daudt may be posturing since he's being challenged.

It's possible they agree to a special session during Friday's meeting - where the remainder is added to the bonding bill.
Regardless, I believe the GOP will lose the House majority this fall, allowing the Governor and both branches of the legislature to put forth a truly comprehensive transportation package next spring. I would think that package would likely phase out the CTIB as we know it today and give the Met Council a 7 county taxing option for transit, unlike the CTIB. Just my hunch.

There are many, many options when those who stick their heads in the sand are removed from the legislation process.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5121
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby MNdible » August 9th, 2016, 2:09 pm

After reading MinnPost's write up of the competitive races, I'm no longer very optimistic that the DFL will retake the House. I think that Minnesota is becoming a little version of the rest of the country, where Democrats are more numerous than Republicans, but wastefully concentrate their votes in urban districts. The upshot of which is that they'll win statewide races but lose the legislative branch.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7293
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby mattaudio » August 10th, 2016, 11:40 am

So non-metro counties CAN levy a 0.5% sales tax for roads and bridges?
http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/ ... f1e59.html

But Hennepin County CANNOT levy a 0.5% sales tax for transit?

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1272
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby amiller92 » August 10th, 2016, 1:58 pm

MNdible wrote:Democrats are more numerous than Republicans, but wastefully concentrate their votes in urban districts.
It's a total bummer when the other party controls the legislature during redistricting.

I'm irrationally optimistic about re-taking the House, mostly because I think there's going to be a landslide at the top of the ticket.

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4528
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby David Greene » August 10th, 2016, 2:04 pm

We haven't had a partisan redistricting in some time. The courts have handled it due to split government.

Eventually redistricting will lead to more districts in urban areas. That's probably further out than I would like but it will happen if trends continue. During the last redistricting my House district moved to a suburban area. I want it back.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5121
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby MNdible » August 10th, 2016, 2:07 pm

amiller92 wrote:It's a total bummer when the other party controls the legislature during redistricting.
I don't think Minnesota's districts are particularly gerrymandered. The problem is that Democrats really are much more concentrated in urban districts, some of which are 70% or more Dem voters. Even if you were trying, you'd be hard pressed to draw districts which were the Republican equivalent. So, a lot of "wasted" Democratic votes.

Of course, there's a FiveThirtyEight article for this.

masstrlk67
City Center
Posts: 46
Joined: December 23rd, 2014, 2:52 pm
Location: Northeast Minneapolis

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby masstrlk67 » August 11th, 2016, 9:19 am

MNdible wrote:I don't think Minnesota's districts are particularly gerrymandered. The problem is that Democrats really are much more concentrated in urban districts, some of which are 70% or more Dem voters.
Does it matter that Minnesota districts weren't intentionally gerrymandered, if the end result (Dems highly concentrated in Dem districts) is the same? I think there's a case to be made for drawing pie slice shaped districts (a la Illinois's congressional districts) that start in the metro and sprawl out into the countryside if it made for more competitive races. You could argue that this would be Dem gerrymandering, but IMO there is no such thing as a neutral map, even if its districts don't look weird like in North Carolina.

HiawathaGuy
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1268
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 12:03 pm

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby HiawathaGuy » August 17th, 2016, 2:33 pm

Dayton: Time for special session talks nearly done
http://blogs.mprnews.org/capitol-view/2 ... arly-done/

With the recent news that even the House GOP majority in DC may be up for grabs this fall - it makes me really scratch my head at Daudt and the MN GOP House thinking that no action on a tax bill and a bonding bill before November makes sense for them! I hate that this is causing potential delays in critical projects - but at the same time, I look forward to a DFL controlled Senate and House come January - and a truly comprehensive transportation funding bill to be passed!

What a bunch of hypocritical asshats.
I'm SO sick of the money for transit improvements being used as some sort of wedge! I get that it's one of the very few things they can actually use - but it seems they fail to realize that it doesn't help improve their image with millennials or urban dwellers in this state. So they risk further ostracizing themselves for the future.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2033
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: North End, Saint Paul

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby EOst » August 17th, 2016, 3:02 pm

I've long thought that a DFL takeover of the House this year would require something like a perfect storm. The good news is, that might be brewing.

Trump's down with every group relative to Romney, but especially among college-educated white voters, who are a disproportionately large part of the GOP coalition in Minnesota. There's a real chance that some percentage of them simply don't turn out to vote this fall, especially since there are no compelling statewide races (e.g. governor) and basically zero national GOP spending on turnout in the state. If Clinton can maintain most of the Obama 2012 coalition here, even a relatively small drop in GOP college+ turnout might be enough to swing some of the closer suburban/exurban seats.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7293
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby mattaudio » August 17th, 2016, 3:23 pm

True, this is the one election in every twenty year period when we neither elect a governor or a senator.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5121
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby MNdible » August 17th, 2016, 5:06 pm

I think that what EOst describes above would help the DFL in suburban districts, but unfortunately (fortunately) the DFL has already picked off most of those easy seats. What's left, and what will be needed to take back a house majority, are the rural and exurban seats, and unfortunately those probably play better to Trump's core supporters.

acs
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1366
Joined: March 26th, 2014, 8:41 pm

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby acs » August 17th, 2016, 8:41 pm

Another thing to consider: The reason this state is majority DFL isn't the Twin Cities, it's the Iron Range that pushes the democrats over the in both chambers and statewide. Unfortunately, they are also some of the same demographics which Trump is polling strong with. They even got socked by unfair international trade within the last year to boot. Not sure the down-ballot effect will play out, but the Iron Range going red would be a nightmare scenario.

Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 2951
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: 9Marq

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby Silophant » August 17th, 2016, 10:22 pm

Agreed. It's going to be important to keep an eye on the Nolan/Mills race.

DanPatchToget
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 187
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Minnesota Transportation Funding (General)

Postby DanPatchToget » August 18th, 2016, 6:08 pm

Special session is a no-go:
http://www.startribune.com/special-sess ... 390619801/

And the GOP blames the Southwest LRT in 3... 2... 1...


Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests