Question 3: To what extent do you intend to support investment in maintaining Minnesota’s highway system and expanding its mass transit system given the age of the state’s highway system, population and business growth, and the mass transit needs of an aging and dispersed population?

QUIST Response to Question 3

One of the most obvious shortcomings of the leadership of Minnesota state government, in the face of budget surpluses that now exceed $3 billion, is its inability to provide adequate funding for transportation needs.

Shortchanging transportation does not save money. On the contrary, the failure to make timely repairs and upgrades to existing roads and bridges will actually increase transportation costs in the future. Inadequate transportation funding is like running a deficit. It passes the costs, with interest, on to our children. I find this policy to be unacceptable.

At the same time, the proper solution to the problem is not raising taxes; it is a matter of good management. For example, all the MVET money should dedicated to transportation needs. I would also dedicate the sales tax proceeds from sales of motor vehicles and trailers to our transportation system.

I am a supporter of light rail. I see a well-planned light rail system as being an essential ingredient of sustained economic growth and stability in the greater metropolitan area.

The greatest transportation needs in Greater Minnesota relate to substandard maintenance and upgrading of existing roads and bridges. Unless we want Minnesota to become even more of a two-economy state, this deficit must be remedied.