HighLight Heading
June 2002
Plenary Session
Panelists give three perspectives on legislative gridlock
Satveer Chaudhary, Pamela Wheelock, and
Carol Molnau
Carol Molnau
Pamela Wheelock
Satveer Chaudhary
Like the recent legislative session itself, the May 23 plenary panel at the conference—titled "A Recap of the 2002 Legislative Session"—was infused with deep philosophical differences over transportation.
Republican Carol Molnau, chair of the House transportation finance committee and a member of the CTS executive committee, declared that "we tried to work out a package between the House and Senate that we could support." Transportation had been on the backburner for years, creating "pent-up demand and insufficient and literally in some areas unsafe infrastructure and roadways," she said. Now recognizing transportation as an important issue, legislators have responded with what is possible, such as the allocation a few years ago of about $500 million of surplus dollars to transportation.
Even with a looming deficit this year, transportation still was emphasized. The House came forth with a three-cent gas-tax increase, "if those dollars were only used for roads and bridges" and for some "smart" transit options, she said. (The Senate plan called for a six-cent gas-tax increase while the governor's plan called for a five-cent increase.) House members also wanted to preserve the $245 million remaining from the earlier one-time cash allotment. The legislature added bonding provisions for some local roads and bridges and some rail projects, although the governor vetoed the local money. That was important, she said, because some of the major bottleneck relief projects are held up when local governments lack the budget to build adjoining local roads. In sum, she said, "we didn't make as much headway as we had hoped," but the remaining allotment wasn't lost to general deficit reduction.
Pamela Wheelock, commissioner of the Department of Finance, said the session "fell short from what all of us hoped would happen." All tough choices were delayed until the future, she said, due not just to gubernatorial elections but also to a very sensitive political year because of redistricting, retirements, and other uncertainties. "There wasn't enough political will between branches to make the tough decisions," she claimed, despite the governor having led the way with his comprehensive proposal.
She then defined two challenges for the future. First, what's possible with transportation can't be considered apart from the overall state budget. Despite revised figures indicating economic growth nationally, Minnesota tax collections are still below forecast levels from February. "There is no reason to believe with the information we have now that next January we'll be looking at a rosier picture," she said.
Second is the inability to bridge differences in perspective about the role of transit as part of a transportation package. "It is unbelievable that we knock heads about even funding the existing bus services in the metro area." Most legislative leaders will privately admit a tax increase is needed to solve the general budget deficit, she said, but it will not happen unless there is some resolution about how transit and multimodal choice fit in to a discussion about the future of this state. "Your job is to help bridge some of these different perspectives and get policymakers on the same page before January," she told the audience.
Democrat Satveer Chaudhary, vice chair of the Senate transportation committee, echoed Wheelock, lamenting "what we could have accomplished but didn't." He castigated the "absolute intransigence" of the House for refusing to accept monies for the Northstar commuter rail project, particularly when this was the last year federal money was available for it. Northern metro legislators from both parties had pulled together a range of constituencies who saw Northstar as "a wonderful common sense project," he said. Refusing to fund it not only jeopardized future funding for commuter rail, it "set into question the work of Rep. Oberstar in bringing monies to Minnesota for road funding as well."
He then explained that the Senate does not oppose roads but sees the need for a multimodal approach, whereas the House plan even excluded busways. The Senate proposed a compromise package with funding for roads and transit that was supported by a coalition of 150 organizations across the state, but it did not pass in conference committee. He also noted that only one of the House conferees actually voted for the three-cent tax increase they had proposed.
In closing, he urged the audience to ask their senators and representatives how they will vote on these issues and "take to task" those running for election: "Know who the policymakers are who will promote a balanced transportation package.