My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1987/09/14
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1987
>
Agenda Packets - 1987/09/14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/28/2025 10:17:18 AM
Creation date
4/28/2025 10:17:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
9/14/1987
Description
Regular Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
92
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
LUEET-3. Transportation (A) (cont'd) <br />Furthermore, environmental concerns and the need to conserve energy <br />require that alternate modes of transportation be utilized in meeting <br />the diverse needs which exist in various communities and regions of <br />the state. <br />Governor Perpich and other political leaders have listed the lack of <br />an adequate transportation funding program as the single biggest <br />failure of the 1987 Legislature. Funding inadequacy was almost <br />assured when the governor proposed suspending the transfer of the <br />estimated ;225 million generated by the motor vehicle excise tax <br />(MVET) from the state's general fund to the highway and transit fund. <br />The legislature agreed with the non -transfer of MVET and these IdVET <br />funds, along with an approximate $700 million dollar tax increase, <br />used to balance the state's general fund. <br />The Minnesota Department of Transportation recently cancelled <br />approximately $90 million in proposed highway projects because of the <br />shortage in road funds. Many of the projects were in greater <br />Minnesota. Metropolitan projects were spared somewhat because many <br />qualify for additional federal funds. <br />Additional road funding is necessary. The administration has <br />apparently abandoned as a possible source the transfer of the MVET. <br />Tiad in with the funding issue are the issues of jurisdiction studies <br />and turnbacks, and potential constitutional amendments regarding <br />dedication of the motor vehicle excise tax to the highway fund and <br />the current allocation formula (62 percent to the state, 29 percent <br />to the and 9 percent t.. cities over 5,000 population) for road funds. <br />Jurisdictional studies that attempt to establish the level of use for <br />particular roads (i.e. classifying roads as collectors, arterials, <br />etc) will soon be completed. Some advocate the assignment of road <br />maintenance responsibilities to the level of government that best <br />matches the jurisdictional clossification of the road. The League <br />recommends the following. <br />1. The League supports the continued dedication of the sales tax on <br />motor vehicle sales for transportation purposes, and advocates the <br />prompt transfer of the motor vehicle excise tax into --he highway user <br />and transit assistance fund. <br />The Legislature has made some effort to provide transportation <br />funding recently by increasing license fees and the gasoline tax. <br />The league opposes further increases in the gas tax at this time. <br />2. The League supports legislative efforts to establish a system of <br />direct appropriations to cities under 5,000, either through a <br />constitutional amendment modifying the 62-29-9 formula, or out of the <br />current 29 percent county share of the highway user funds, or at <br />least to the extent that townships receive direct appropriations. <br />Mandatory state guidelines concerning county use of road fands should <br />be required to insure that all communities within a county receive an <br />- 41 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.