Minnesota bonding package lists hundreds of millions for colleges, water and roads; transit funding absent, lawmakers say

A proposed Minnesota capital investment (bonding) bill presented to members lists large appropriations for higher education, water infrastructure, local roads and bridges, veterans projects and other local facilities, but includes no direct transit capital money, one lawmaker said during the briefing.

At a morning briefing, the chair opened the meeting by calling the package a bipartisan effort and turning the floor to staff for a line-by-line review. "This is not a Republican bill. It is not a Democrat bill. It is a bill that benefits the entire state of Minnesota," the chair said, urging members to proceed.

Andrew Lee, House fiscal staff, walked members through the spreadsheet and identified major buckets: $145,000,000 for higher-education asset preservation; $80,000,000 for the Department of Natural Resources (including earmarks); $177,000,000 for transportation, which staff said includes local roads, bridges and earmarks; $57,000,000 for the Metropolitan Council and parks; $154,000,000 for the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) largely for local projects; and $420,000,000 for water projects spread across the state. Lee also called out specific line items including $40,000,000 for University of Minnesota asset preservation and $35,000,000 for the McGrath Campus Center phase 1.

Eric Olson, fiscal analyst for the Minnesota Senate, detailed the Public Facilities Authority list and hundreds of named water and wastewater projects, noting grant amounts that range from several hundred thousand dollars to multimillion-dollar plant upgrades. Olson also reviewed housing, historic-preservation funding and estimated bond-sale expenses.

Several members praised locally targeted projects. One lawmaker highlighted Highway 14 funding as a long-sought priority, and others thanked negotiators for adding airport and municipal projects, park restorations and community facilities across greater Minnesota and the Twin Cities.

But committee member Senator Dibble said the bill contains no direct transit capital funding and called that "a glaring omission." "There is zero for transit in this bill, and that is a huge and glaring omission," the senator said, noting that transit advocates lack political power compared with road and pavement interests. Other members acknowledged the absence and said they would raise transit questions on the floor.

Lawmakers also noted a one-time license-tab reduction included in the package intended to address affordability concerns. Staff briefers pointed to some cancellations and transfers from prior bills and a planned general-fund adjustment related to motor-vehicle registration tax changes and debt-service impacts associated with the proposed authorization.

No formal vote was recorded during the briefing; chairs urged members to keep substantive remarks for the floor and to finish negotiation work before floor consideration later in the day.

The committee is expected to move the bill to the floor after this briefing; members said remaining substantive debate would occur during floor debate and that they hoped to complete passage in the next several hours.