ST. PAUL, Minn. — At the State Capitol a wave of black leather and bandanas flowed through the front doors as hundreds of Minnesota bikers rallied on Wednesday February 23rd for “Minnesota Biker Day.”
“When we can smell that leather, that riding leather, we know we’re smelling freedom. That’s what it’s about, being able to have those freedoms to go out wherever we need to go and really enjoy life, enjoy nature, and everything this state and our country has to offer,” Republican Senator Michael Jungbauer said.
Every year avid bikers rally to voice their concerns about the no helmet law, but this year new issues have risen for the group. As part of Pawlenty’s $1.2 billion budget cut proposal, many dollars from a motorcycle safety fund would be funneled out to make up for some of Minnesota’s deficit.
“I think it’s important that we don’t raid this fund, raiding this fund would decrease safety and affect bikers everywhere,” DFL-Representative Terry Morrow said.
Another main issue the group is concerned with includes careless driving legislation that would beef up penalties for people that drive while texting, talking on the phone, and partake in other distractions.
The Star Tribune is correct: Public transit demands in the metropolitan area are significant and should be addressed (”A shrinking pot for transportation,” Jan. 30). But Minnesota’s public transit needs do not stop at metropolitan borders. The state’s recently completed State Transit Plan will illuminate the troubling gaps in transit service throughout outstate Minnesota.
Two immediate issues exist. First, the existing standard for measuring transit service in outstate Minnesota is inadequate. State law sets the goal at meeting 80 percent of transit needs outside of the metro area: Metro Transit, by contrast, apparently has a 100 percent service goal. Currently, only about 60 percent of transit needs in outstate Minnesota are being met. We must set a higher standard and treat transit expectations equally throughout our state. Minnesota’s economic development and the aging of Minnesota’s rural population require that we act responsibly and adequately.
Second, the 80 nonmetro counties need an advocate for public transit on par with the Metropolitan Council. On paper, MnDOT is responsible for identifying outstate Minnesota transit needs and requesting state funding. In reality, MnDOT’s role has been uncertain, especially when contrasted with the Metropolitan Council’s advocacy for Met Transit. The State Transit Plan offers hope that a new model of MnDOT transit leadership and coordination with local and regional transit systems will emerge.
Last week’s bonding bill meetings, though, highlighted the current problem. MnDOT recommended improvements to outstate Minnesota transit facilities as its second-highest bonding priority. Unfortunately, the governor did not adopt the recommendation, choosing instead that no money be spent on these bus and transit facilities throughout Minnesota.
A “house divided” approach regarding Minnesota issues is divisive and unproductive. The metropolitan area indeed has transit needs. I only ask that outstate Minnesota’s challenges regarding public transit receive equal attention.
