The Met Council Problem - Reform Needed! - June 2016
• un-elected people (least accountable regional authority in the US)
• has a billion dollar budget (largest in the US)
• can levy and increase taxes without voter approval
• uses plans hostile to roads and cars
• has the broadest authority (of any regional authority in the US)
• only regional authority to own public housing and direct housing policies
Yet Minneapolis - St. Paul
• lags behind in population growth
• lags behind in job growth
• lags behind in transit ridership
• has concentrated centers of poverty
(Met Council: A Comparative Assessment - PDF - Met Council Needs Reforming Now)
2016 Minnesota Transit Bills
Contact your Minnesota legislators to suggest to them how they should vote._____Vote Yes_____✓
House File 3744 (status) Fixed guideway transit project development governed, streetcar and bus rapid transit project requirements established, municipal consent amended, and transportation sales tax revenue permitted allocation amended (establishes disapproval process)
House File 2930 (status) and Senate File 3025 (status) Light rail transit operating costs governed
House File 3659 (status) Passenger rail requirements on project development process, state fund use, eminent domain, and land use and acquisition
House File 2508 (status) and Senate File 3384 (status) Metro Transit fare revenue schedule (more for fixed transit - LRT & BRT, than for flexible buses)
_____Vote No_____X
House File 3428 (status) and Senate File 3176 (status) Minneapolis to Duluth high-speed passenger rail funding (winter, too?)
House File 3325 (status) and Senate File 2569 (status) East side transit project PR-propaganda - blank check (no $ amount)
This bill will promote new transit projects (BRT & LRT) to minority groups.
Instead of sitting on fast express buses steering around obstacles, stand up while riding a slower transit (BRT & LRT) with more connections and station waits!
Plus, Transit Oriented Development (TOD) subsidies will surround each transit station with high priced four-story condominiums. TOD is a Portland invention to tear down undesirable neighborhoods and put in
It practically advertises itself!
2015 Minnesota Transit Bills
The 2015 Minnesota state legislature session passed $172,480,000 of transportation funding. Lobbyists from Transit for Livable Communities (transit for bikers & walkers?) and the Minnesota Transportation Alliance (safety?!?) spent over $250,000 in the first half of 2015.Contact your Minnesota legislators to suggest to them how they should vote.
_____Vote Yes_____✓
House File 899 (status) and Senate File 1250 (status) transit development and finance requires legislative authorization
✓ billion dollar projects should require legislative attention & authorization
✓ huge Twin Cities metropolitan projects affect the entire state
House File 413 (status) and Senate File 366 (status) streetcars prohibited
✓ Minneapolis and St. Paul downtowns do not need more trains on the streets
✓ transit advocates oppose streetcars because:
✓ streetcars increase traffic congestion
✓ streetcars block bus traffic
✓ streetcars are costly without increasing mobility over buses
✓ MPR filed a lawsuit against the green line for noise and vibration abatement. The green line solution was an unproven concrete-over-rubber-pieces and springs foundation. St. Paul is looking at putting another train (streetcar) downtown on 7th Street to intersect the green line at the MPR studios. Is St. Paul trying for 100% vacancy?
The streetcar (p.23) spends $246 million in capital costs and $8 million in annual operations to have a potential of $134 million in development. If you think that's good, give me $246. I may give you $134 back but expect to give me another $8 each year from now onward.
• St. Paul Streetcar Scam - with national streetcar news
• The Magic of Streetcars, the Logic of Buses by Prof. David Levinson, UofMN
• Meet the Worst Transit Project in America
• U.S. Streetcars Just Aren't Meeting the Standards of Good Transit - CityLab
• Portland subsidies, not streetcars, enabled development
House File 11 (status) and Senate File 108 (status) no Zip line (Rochester to Twin Cities)
✓ Rochester has an airport with flights from Chicago, Detroit, Phoenix, and the Twin Cities
✓ Rochester has bus service (Jefferson Lines 800-451-5333)
✓ Amtrak runs to Winona (43 miles from Rochester)
House File 106 (status) and Senate File 130 (status) eminent domain can't break up a farm
✓ eminent domain shouldn't be used to break up farms or put farm business on hold indefinitely
House File 448 (status) and Senate File 71 (status) local cities have input into Metropolitan Council membership
✓ bipartisan support for representational government is good
✓ “Nobody Likes the Met Council,” MinnPost pointed out recently
✓ opposition: Eliminate the Met Council
✓ Met Council thinks they just need a new mascot
✓ Met Council signs lie about city ordinance 140.02 (MPR, StarTribune)
✓ Anoka, Carver, Dakota, and Scott counties are notifying the U.S. Department of Transportation that the Met Council violates a federal requirement for elected officials
House File 195 (status) and Senate File 370 (status) Metropolitan Council - no debt
✓ Met Council is already a second transportation department. It should not be a second Minnesota legislature also.
✓ Met Council should not sell bonds for its real estate deals. Transit oriented development is the number one overreach of the council.
House File 9 (status) and Senate File 127 (status) Legislative Commission on the Metropolitan Council created
House File 310 (status) and Senate File 277 (status) light rail transit facilities must have local approval
House File 911 (status) and Senate File 770 (status) light rail announcements must be in two languages
✓ Safety communication must be understood
_____Vote No_____X
House File 1310 (status) and Senate File 1234 (status) $40 million for Kellogg-Third Street bridge replacement
X repair bill for the Kellogg-Third bridge is less than $8 million
X bridge that was overbuilt in 1982 will be over-overbuilt again if replaced
X the bridge has only 9,900 annual average daily traffic (AADT)
X transit disguised as infrastructure - transit planners want to use the bridge for future Gateway Corridor BRT & as a connection to future Rush line transit
House File 1616 (status) and Senate File 1464 (status) Gateway Corridor wants $3 million from the general fund
House File 1617 (status) and Senate File 1463 (status) Gateway Corridor wants $3 million from the sale of bonds
No matter where the funding is from, Gateway Corridor is a needless east-metro transit plan to replace the existing express buses that already run successfully on I-94 (MetroTransit express 294, limited stop 350, express 351, express 353, express 355, express 375), using the shoulder to move around traffic. Gateway wants $450 million to build a dedicated bus lane.
X Gateway wants bus money to replace several express buses with 1 bus.
X In 2014, Gateway received funding and took 30 people to Los Angeles.
That wasn't part of last year's funding request, was it? No, it wasn't. What vacation destination is planned for this year's funding?
X Gateway would replace express buses, but does not include the cost of feeder buses (Washington County Watchdog)
X Rep. Kelly Fenton campaigned against wasteful transit spending but was pressured by transit lobbyists to support this bill.
House File 267 (status) and Senate File 312 (status) $121 million for Southwest light rail
X wrong route (better route if at all)
X $1.6 billion price tag
X transit oriented development (TOD) purpose, not transit
X the largest employer in downtown Minneapolis: Target's 1,700 layoffs
X lawsuits continue: Minnetonka residents sue Met Council
X lawsuit by the owners of 500 apartment and townhouses in three complexes within feet of the proposed Southwest light rail tracks
X metro small businesses oppose SW plan, its sales tax increase, and its ongoing subsidy of $30 million per year (NFIB, Star Tribune)
House File 754 (status) and Senate File 493 (status) $18 million for Bottineau light rail
X Bottineau opposition: Say No To Bottineau
X Bottineau opposition: Golden Valley meeting
House File 757 (status) and Senate File 192 (status) $1 million for Red Rock Corridor in 2015
House File 758 (status) and Senate File 193 (status) $1 million for Red Rock Corridor in 2016
House File 600 (status) and Senate File 87 (status) Gov. Dayton's 2015 Transportation Bill - increase gas tax & sales tax for transit when the state has a $1.87 billion surplus
X 52% opposition, according to a StarTribune poll (March 16-18)
X Propose $11 billion for light rail, bridges, & bike path
X Increase registration & license tab prices
($10 + 1.25% vehicle value)
X Increase metro sales tax for riderless transit projects & studies
(currently .25%, increased .5% to an additional .75% for transit)
X Penalize the Minneapolis Park Board over SW light rail
($1.6 billion cut in 2016 and in 2017)
X Hire Adam Duininck to head Metro Council & give job 236% raise
(Susan Haigh received $61,414. Duininck will make $145,000.)
House File 279 (status) and Senate File 245 (status) $15 million improvements to Mall of America transit station
X Heavy price for light rail
House File 1137 (status) $9.56 million Lake St. & 35W transit station
X Overpriced elevator
House File 186 (status) and Senate File 11 (status) 40% of transit sales tax goes to Ramsey, Washington, & Dakota counties
X St. Paul wants what Minneapolis gets (less 10%)
House File 956 (status) and Senate File 747 (status) $10 million to transportation economic development grants
2014 Minnesota Transit Bills
The 2014 Minnesota state legislature is in session now, committees are meeting, and legislators want to know how to vote for the bills in front of them. Help Minnesota legislators to know how to vote.
House File 2751 (status) and Senate File 2268 (status) Transportation Accessibility Advisory Committee - amendment S2268A2 (May 14, 2014, defeated 56-73):
"Sec. 3. Minnesota Statutes 2012, section 473.399, subdivision 1, is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. General requirements. (a) The council must identify in its transportation policy plan those heavily traveled corridors where development of a transit way may be feasible and cost-effective. Modes of providing service in a transit way may include bus rapid transit, light rail transit, commuter rail, or other available systems or technologies that improve transit service.
(b) After the completion of environmental studies and receipt of input from the
governing body of each statutory and home rule charter city, county, and town in which a transit way is proposed to be constructed, the council must designate the locally preferred alternative transit mode with respect to the corridor.
(c) The council shall ensure that any light rail transit facilities that are designated as the locally preferred alternative and that are to be constructed in the metropolitan area will be acquired, developed, owned, and capable of operation in an efficient, cost-effective, and coordinated manner in coordination with buses and other transportation modes and facilities.
(d) Construction of light rail transit facilities in a particular transit corridor may not commence unless and until that mode is designated as the locally preferred alternative for that corridor by the council, and requirements under section 473.3994, subdivision 1.215a, are met.
(e) The council may not enter the federally authorized preliminary engineering phase on a light rail transit project until the project is specifically authorized by a law enacted by the legislature.
Sec. 4. Minnesota Statutes 2012, section 473.3994, subdivision 3, is amended to read:
Subd. 3. Preliminary design plans; hearings and local approval. At least 30 days
(a) Before the hearing under subdivision 2, the responsible authority shall submit the physical design component of the preliminary design plans to the governing body of each statutory and home rule charter city, county, and town in which the route is proposed to be located. The Within 60 days of submission of the preliminary design plans, and following public notice of at least 30 days, each statutory and home rule charter city, county, or town shall hold a public hearing, at which the responsible authority shall present the physical design component of the preliminary design plans.
(b) Within 45 days after the hearing under subdivision 2 90 days of a hearing under paragraph (a), the city, county, or town shall review and approve or disapprove the preliminary design plans for the route to be located in the city, county, or town in writing.
A local unit of government that disapproves the plans shall describe specific amendments to the plans that, if adopted, would cause the local unit of government to withdraw its disapproval. Failure to approve or disapprove the plans in writing within 45 days after the hearing the time period is deemed to be approval, unless an extension of time is agreed to by the city, county, or town and the responsible authority.
(c) Following disapproval under this subdivision by one or more local units of
government, the responsible authority shall (1) resubmit amended preliminary design plans, (2) prepare final design plans with amendments identified by the local unit of government, or (3) decide not to proceed with the project. Upon resubmission of amended preliminary design plans, each local unit of government shall follow the procedures under paragraphs (a) and (b).
Sec. 5. Minnesota Statutes 2012, section 473.3994, subdivision 4, is amended to read:
Subd. 4. Preliminary design plans; council hearing and review. If the governing
body of one or more cities, counties, or towns disapproves the preliminary design plans within the period allowed under subdivision 3, the council shall may hold a hearing on the plans, giving the commissioner of transportation, if the responsible authority, any disapproving local governmental units, and other persons an opportunity to present their views on the plans. The council may conduct independent study as it deems desirable and may mediate and attempt to resolve disagreements about the plans. Within 60 days after the hearing, the council shall review the plans and shall decide what amendments to the plans, if any, must be made to accommodate the objections presented by the disapproving
local governmental units. Amendments to the plans as decided by the council must be made before continuing the planning and designing process.
Sec. 6. Minnesota Statutes 2012, section 473.3994, subdivision 5, is amended to read:
Subd. 5. Final design plans; hearings and local approval. (a) If any of the
following applies, the responsible authority shall submit the physical design component of the final design plans to the governing body of each statutory and home rule charter city, county, and town in which the route is proposed to be located:
(1) the final design plans incorporate a substantial change from the preliminary
design plans with respect to location, length, or termini of routes; general dimension, elevation, or alignment of routes and crossings; location of tracks above ground, below ground, or at ground level; or station locations, before beginning construction, the responsible authority shall submit the changed component of the final design plans to the governing body of each statutory and home rule city, county, and town in which the changed component is proposed to be located.; or
(2) a local unit of government disapproved the preliminary design plans under
subdivision 3, following any resubmission if applicable.
(b) Within 60 days of submission of the final design plans, and following public
notice of at least 30 days, each statutory and home rule charter city, county, or town shall hold a public hearing, at which the responsible authority shall present the physical design component of the final design plans.
(c) Within 60 days after the submission of the plans 90 days of a hearing under
3.20paragraph (b), the city, county, or town shall review and approve or disapprove the changed component located in the city, county, or town final design plans in writing. A local unit of government that disapproves the change shall describe specific amendments to the plans that, if adopted, would cause the local unit of government to withdraw its disapproval. Failure to approve or disapprove the changed plans in writing within the time period is deemed to be approval, unless an extension is agreed to by the city, county, or town and the responsible authority.
(b) If the governing body of one or more cities, counties, or towns disapproves the changed plans within the period allowed under paragraph (a), the council shall review the final design plans under the same procedure and with the same effect as provided in subdivision 4 for preliminary design plans.
(d) Following disapproval under this subdivision by one or more local units of government, the responsible authority shall (1) resubmit amended final design plans, or (2) decide not to proceed with the project. Upon resubmission of amended final design plans, each local unit of government shall follow the procedures under paragraphs (b) and (c).
Sec. 7. Minnesota Statutes 2012, section 473.3994, is amended by adding a subdivision to read:
Subd. 5a. Municipal consent for construction. The responsible authority may not commence construction on light rail transit facilities under sections 473.3993 to 473.3997 unless each statutory or home rule charter city, county, and town in which the route is proposed to be located approves the design plans as required under subdivision 3 and, if applicable, subdivision 5."
Page 2, delete line 30 and insert "This act is effective the day following final
enactment. This act applies in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott and Washington. Section 3, paragraph (d), and sections 4 to 7 apply to a project in preliminary engineering, or final design, on or after that date."
House File 3250 (status) gives $50 million (in Section 17) for a list of transit projects, including the Gateway Corridor mystery vehicle and East 7th Street (?) mystery corridor. (What East 7th Street plan? Some sort of real estate gift wrap for 3M-Beacon Bluff?) Section 16 of the bill has $27 million more for rail projects to welcome back 19th century Minnesota.
House File 2490 (status) and Senate File 2605 (status) is Governor Dayton's 2014 bonding bill with $1.3 millon for greater Minnesota transit, whatever that is. It also has $15 million (in Section 17) slush fund for a list of transit projects, including the Gateway Corridor mystery vehicle and East 7th Street(?) mystery corridor. The $5 million for Saint Paul's Palace Theater says the money can't be spent until an equal amount of non-state money could be found -- shouldn't most bonding items include that provision? The House passed HF 2490 on Thursday, May 15, 2014 (technically early Friday). The Senate passed HF 2490 on Friday, May 16.
House File 3172 (status) and Senate File 2785 (status) give $37 million to the befuddled Southwest Corridor (page 80). Plus, $500 thousand to light rail planners for the next rail misalignment (page 75). On Thursday, April 3, 2014, the MN House of Representatives passed this bill. On Tuesday, April 8th, it passed the Senate. There was no mention of the $37 million funding for the divisive Southwest Corridor at the House of Representatives, despite its questionable alignment, its questionable construction method, and an unknown total cost. The current Southwest Corridor starting prices are:
$1.6 billion for Kenilworth Shallow Tunnel
$1.7 billion for Kenilworth LRT Tunnel
$1.7 billion for MN&S North Freight Rail Relocation
So many people believe this plan should be either scrapped or moved to Uptown and the Midtown Greenway where it could benefit Minneapolis. Tucking SW Corridor (and other bills that couldn't have had a prayer on their own), under the disability bill is wrong. Minneapolis and St. Louis Park residents have told the Southwest Corridor they'd rather have freight traffic than light rail. Here is Safety in the Park, an MPR video, Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges' statement, and here's a Minneapolis City Council meeting from March 5, 2014. And the Metro Council sent the wrong plans to Minneapolis in April 2014.
House File 3260 (status) and Senate File 2858 (status) give $37 million to the befuddled Southwest Corridor. Plus, $500 thousand to light rail planners for the next rail misalignment. Two identical sets of bills?!? The purpose is to either confuse the public or speed up the committee process (or both).
House File 3250 (status) gives $50 million for a list of transit projects, including the Gateway Corridor mystery vehicle.
House File 2061 (status) and Senate File 2077 (status) is $10 million to Ramsey County for whatever will increase rail capacity in the east metro. Is their a rail capacity problem in Ramsey County's east metro?!? This is very vague. Is this a slush fund for streetcars or Gateway Corridor? If this bill were to pass and Ramsey County used or attempted to use this money without actually causing any increase to rail capacity, any litigious individual would have the civic responsibility to challenge the purpose in a court of law. Contact the House Transportation Finance (schedule) or Senate Finance (schedule) committee members to voice your opinions.
House File 2332 (status) and Senate File 2074 (status) is $5 million for Gateway Corridor (see details below) despite no decision on whether it is a bus or a train (big difference!) or if it is needed at all. Contact the House Transportation Finance (schedule) or Senate Finance (schedule) committee members to voice your opinions.
House File 2231 (status) and Senate File 2251 (status) is $75.3 million Met Council funding for the next two years for the 7 metro counties. Usually, the Met Council only asks for one year at a time.
House File 2395 (status) and Senate File 2107 (status) gives $200 million to Corridors of Commerce as study money and to begin property salvage and seizure (eminent domain). Was Kelo v. New London (2005) so long ago that state legislators have forgotten its lessons? After a $1.2 billion surplus, the plan is raise the gas tax rate to either: ten cents per gallon or five percent of the Minnesota wholesale gasoline price per gallon, whichever is more (added to the existing MN 28.5¢ & 18.4¢ US per gallon). If gas is $3.50 per gallon, the new tax is 17¢ per gallon ($3.50 x 5% = 17 cents per gallon). If gas is $2 or less, the tax is 10 cents per gallon. Plus there's a sales tax increase of 1%. Plus an additional tax of $20 on cars purchased. All of this money will be spent by a new GEARS Committee and must be used for the Southwest light rail transit project and the Bottineau Boulevard, Riverview, Robert Street, Red Rock, Gateway, I-394 Commuter Corridor, and Rush Line transit ways. Scott and Carver counties add money without receiving any. But without federal money, there will not be any big transportation projects. According to the Washington Post, with the Federal Highway Trust Fund forecast to go bankrupt next year and the current U.S. transportation bill expiring Oct. 1st, Congress is struggling to find funds for a new long-term transportation bill. Contact the House Tax (schedule) or Senate Finance (schedule) committee members to voice your opinions. The transit advocates talk in committees about roads and bridges, but the bill puts gas taxes to transit not roads and takes the MN Legislature out of the decision making process.
Senate File 1963 (status) tells the Met Council, cities, and counties how to address disagreements like what has happened to the Southwest Corridor project. Contact Senate Transportation & Public Safety committee members to voice your opinions (schedule).
House File 2817 (status) and Senate File 2491 (status) appear to be a blank check for Southwest Corridor. The bill shows no dollar amount -- understandable since the route has not been decided.
House File 2613 (status) and Senate File 2162 (status) somehow makes transit a watershed district activity! Senate File 2162 passed the legislature.
2013 Minnesota Transit Bills
House File 1444 the Omnibus Transportation Finance bill will be taken by the Minnesota House for a vote on Wednesday, April 24th. The bill is a compilation of previous transportation bills.
Representative Runbeck had an interesting amendment, H1444A30:
1.1.................... moves to amend H.F. No. 1444, the third engrossment, as follows:
1.2Page 29, after line 22, insert:
1.3 "Sec. 15. Minnesota Statutes 2012, section 473.408, is amended by adding a
1.4subdivision to read:
1.5 Subd. 11. Transitway fare collection system. The council shall develop and
1.6implement a controlled access fare collection system for each light rail transit line or bus
1.7rapid transit line that enters into final design on or after the effective date of this act.
1.8The system must include physically secured access at each stop on the line that prevents
1.9boarding, and entrance to a waiting area, prior to demonstrating proof of payment."
1.10Renumber the sections in sequence and correct the internal references
1.11Amend the title accordingly
Los Angeles is in the process of adding gates and eliminating the light rail honor system of payment. KABC-LA reported that in a test, revenue increased as much as 32%. An April 2013 article in the LA Times, discusses the status of the implementation of the gates.
Using Metro Transit data -- in 2009, the light rail passenger fares were $9,315,345 times 9,863,042 riders = 94 cents per ride. If each of the 9,863,042 riders paid the off-peak $1.75 fare, the annual passenger fare should be $17,260,323 instead of the reported $9,315,345.
===============================================================
[Earlier information:]
Two bills of consequence for the Gateway Corridor will be working their way through Minnesota Legislative committees (for public input) and potentially appearing before the Minnesota House and Minnesota Senate for votes in the next few weeks.
House File 1223 would allow Washington County to proceed with the Gateway Corridor as a bus rapid transit system, although news items indicate the Gateway Corridor Commission has not yet decided whether the Gateway Corridor is a bus system or light rail system. The determining factor has been reported as "whatever funding allows." The first step for this bill is to appear before the Transportation Policy committee at 2:15pm on Wednesday, March 13, 2013. Committee path for House File 1223. On March 21, 2013, Chair Hornstein laid HF 1223 over for possible inclusion in the Omnibus Transportation Finance bill (HF 1444). House File 1444 was presented Friday, April 12, 2013 at 9am in the State Office Building basement.
House File 793 would provide a slush fund of $26 million for any intercity passenger service through the sale of Minnesota bonds. Gateway Corridor would connect St. Paul, Minnesota with Wisconsin (or the border), making it an interstate passenger service, not an intercity passenger service. By name the bill separates the Gateway Corridor from other passenger service projects. This bill would remove the Minnesota Legislature from specific light rail and bus transit system funding. It is a blank check. The first step for this bill is to appear before the Transportation Finance committee at 10am on Thursday, March 14, 2013. Committee path for House File 793.
If House File 793 includes the Gateway to Wisconsin (Corridor), it would give the blank check to Wisconsin commuters. Wisconsin commuters still owe Minnesota money. (A recent report says the MN & WI revenue departments agree that Wisconsin owes Minnesota $69 million. Minnesota wants an additional $6 million annually to cover lost money from Wisconsin commuters.)
The problem with any blank check for transit has been highlighted by the Central Corridor's disconnection with its communities (businesses and residents). The Metropolitan Council needs help. Legislative committees need to help ask the tough, detailed questions. The Gateway Corridor has already headed down the wrong road, failing to assure residents that any rapid transit system will be kept off residential streets.
 |
| Weekday morning "congestion" on Interstate 94 east of downtown Saint Paul, Minnesota |
Original language of the 2013 House files:
House File 1223 - authorizing the Washington County Regional Rail Authority to exercise existing powers for bus rapid transit purposes.
Washington County Regional Rail Authority may exercise the powers conferred by Minnesota Statutes, section 398A.04, to plan, establish, acquire, develop, construct, purchase, enlarge, extend, improve, maintain, equip, operate, regulate, and protect a bus rapid transit system located within Washington County on transitways included in and approved by the Metropolitan Council's 2030 Transportation Policy Plan, including the Rush Line, Highway 36, Gateway, and Red Rock transit corridors.
House File 793 - appropriating money for intercity passenger rail projects; authorizing the sale and issuance of state bonds.
Appropriation. $26,000,000 is appropriated from the bond proceeds fund to the commissioner of transportation to implement capital improvements and betterments for intercity passenger rail projects as identified in the statewide freight and passenger rail plan under Minnesota Statutes, section 174.03, subdivision 1b, which are determined to be eligible for United States Department of Transportation funding.
Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, a portion or phase of an intercity passenger rail project may be accomplished with one or more state appropriations and an intercity passenger rail project need not be completed with any one appropriation. Capital improvements and betterments include preliminary engineering, design, engineering, environmental analysis and mitigation, acquisition of land and right-of-way, and construction.
Bond sale. To provide the money appropriated in this section from the bond proceeds fund, the commissioner of management and budget shall sell and issue bonds of the state in an amount up to $26,000,000 in the manner, upon the terms, and with the effect prescribed by Minnesota Statutes, sections 16A.631 to 16A.675, and by the Minnesota Constitution, article XI, sections 4 to 7.
No comments:
Post a Comment