Laserfiche WebLink
LUEET-3. T1 rta*'°� LA= �cnt�A least. Further, the state` <br />equitable share of these funds at the fundingeparticipation requirements <br />should establish minimum tprojects. <br />for state and federal highwaythe possibility of <br />use <br />3, As an alternative to increased state funding, use The <br />reclassifyinn many roadways in the stbeen studiedate as to appropriate <br />classifications <br />fordcitiesdtotassumeresponsibilitp for p9e1eYa1 <br />capacities of cities. Rather than saving money, turnbacks <br />maintenance and life cycle treatment far exceeds the current <br />financial cap tax payer rather than the users -- <br />merely make the property For these rzasons, no wholesale <br />responsible for financing highways. ' <br />program of hiyhwal' turnt�cYs should be instituted at this time. <br />tc <br />ld <br />increasing the level of funding in the <br />Instead, existing mech^^'sms for the or�arly i_rback of roads shoo <br />be fine tuned, including and prci':iLiti:; un.ilsteral revocatiot:s or <br />municipal. turnback account, is held and the road <br />turnbacks by road authorities unless a hearing <br />is brought up to its normal maintenance standards before the _ <br />re <br />vocation is effective. <br />Other changes needed to facilitate turnbacks include: <br />a) state aid rules should be changs.a.h. funds ed to allow counties to upgrade <br />aeX <br />county state aid highways usinC.as currently <br />r to with <br />city concurrence and without penalty <br />riles; ion of the highway motor vehicle <br />b) The League supports use of a portand; <br />excise tax to provide an adequate so <br />ur:a for turnback funds, <br />c) Tre League supports allowing cities to determine if a turnback <br />road will be 6 signated astatthecd or <br />road asaa statecaid al sroad, this if <br />the city chooses to designateprocess, so <br />designation shoucdnot ties willbeablehe ttodard continue to designate a <br />that developing <br />percentage of new road growth as part of the state -aid d to system. <br />4. The special state bonding program should be continued t <br />funds for counties, towns, and cities for the replacement or repair <br />of bridges. <br />5, Hass transit funding should remain a priority for the state. <br />Funding <br />for the existing level of operation for mass transit shoal governments. <br />be maintained at a fixed share formula for local <br />tment <br />6. The legislature should-sharecontinuprograme the icoordinatinnesota ngragency, fand to <br />Transportation as the ridfOrhits continuation. <br />provide adequate funding <br />7. The possibility and feasibility of utilizing existing railroad <br />of a fixed guideway and/or light rail mass tran <br />trackage as part <br />sit <br />- 42 - <br />