I was on the radio with Justice and Drew on behalf of the Center of the American Experiment, talking about the Minneapolis 2040 plan. The plan seeks to drive wholesale changes in the housing stock of the city, in pursuit of "reducing disparities" and addressing climate change. 

But a funny thing happened on the way to the socialist party - citizen activists from both North Minneapolis and Southwest Minneapolis rose up in collective opposition to the plan. Now, any plan that can bring together the poorest and wealthiest parts the city together in opposition must have a few problems with it. 

Perhaps my favorite "highlight" of the plan is the following statement: 

"In Minneapolis, 9 out of 10 trips are taken in personal automobiles, accounting for approximately 24 percent of the the annual greenhouse gas emissions in the city. Achieving the City's goal of an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 requires reducing the number of daily car trips by 37%." 

The hubris of this "city planning" approach is startling. Thirty-two years ago, the internet did not exist, the Soviet Union did, and South Korea was run by what amounted to a form of military regime. Trying to dial in society to bring about a 37% reduction in the number of car trips, 32 years from now, is absurd. 

​My segment starts at 20:00.

​

​In the last two weeks our ever-expanding Metropolitan Council announced that it intends to become the owner of a rail corridor in order to facilitate the construction and operation of the proposed Southwest Light Rail line (SWLRT), which would be an extension of the current Green Line. Specifically, for the new line the Council would own the rail corridor and operate light rail trains adjacent to freight trains.
 
It seems no task is too big for our uniquely unelected regional authority, which already has by far the largest scope and budget of any such organization in the country. So where would that leave us?
 
Is the proposed SWLRT a good use of taxpayer funds? No.
 
Is the proposed route one that serves a densely populated area, with many potential riders? No, not even the Met Council pretends that is true. 
 
In light of the most recent developments, legislators and others are asking, is the Met Council even qualified to safely operate both freight and passenger light rail trains adjacent to each other? The data suggest the answer is no. 

I joined Justice and Drew today to update listeners with the latest on the Met Council. We touch on Southwest Light Rail, the origins of the Met Council, and more. Takeaway: Don't build the Metrodome of Transit! 

On October 4th, 2017 the Office of the Legislative Auditor released the first in a new series of quarterly audits of our sprawling regional authority, the Met Council, with a focus on its transit financial activity. Transit financials are of particular interest right now, as the Met Council is pursuing nearly $1 billion in federal funds for its much maligned Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) line that it hopes to impose on the Twin Cities as part of expanding its Metro Transit system.

However, as that project has stumbled, an apparent disconnect has emerged: On the one hand, the Met Council appeared to be telling the federal government that Metro Transit's financials were in good enough shape to earn SWLRT the second highest rating available (Medium-High) from the Federal Transportation Administration (FTA).
 
And on the other hand, the Met Council was telling the Minnesota Legislature (and anyone else who would listen) that its Metro Transit division is facing a structural deficit that must be addressed with additional taxpayer funding.

And the OLA's verdict is...

I joined Justice and Drew on KTLK on Wednesday to discuss the just released audit from the Office of the Legislative Auditor on the Met Council's finances. Rep. Nash joins us in Part 2 of the discussion. I'll have more details on this later in the week.

Listen to the podcast here.

The long and crazy story of the the Twin Cities' proposed Southwest Light Rail Transit line took another twist today as the project sponsor, the Great and Wonderful Metropolitan Council, rejected all four construction bids they have received for the $1.9B boondoggle.

The source of the problem may well be that bids are 30% more expensive as a percentage of overall project cost as was the construction phase of the original leg of the Green Line (SWLRT is an extension of that line, which runs from St Paul to Minneapolis).

Of course, there is much more going here, with a new $20M "Crash Wall" proposed for the line, a lack of environmental analysis, and even a host of left wing critics who are astonished at the brazen way in which the Met Council has tried to ram through recent "tweaks" to the project. 

As Hennepin County Commissioner Peter McLaughlin recently noted, they "haven't won the argument" on putting through this overpriced Met Council toy.

Stay tuned - much more to come!

Per a press release today from Rep. Jason Lewis (MN CD-02), the FY2018 federal budget request will not fund the Twin Cities' infamous Southwest Light Rail (SWLRT). This expected development is the result of at least four things:

• Rep. Lewis specifically requested Transportation Secretary Chao to not fund the nearly $2 billion boondoggle project, as it does next to nothing to solve congestion issues in the region.
• The entire MN state GOP Caucus did the same, and reminded the Secretary that there is no commitment from the State to subsidize the ongoing operating costs of the SWLRT, as is required.
• The Trump administration has made clear that it does not intend to fund projects that do not already have a federal Full Funding Grant Agreement - which  SWLRT does not have.

Of course, this is really the result of actions by the line's local champion - the unelected, unaccountable Met Council, which has broken promises, lied, and ignored lawsuits as it schemed to ram through SWLRT. The Met Council is now faced with having foolishly spent around $160 million to "plan" for the line.

That $160 million hole in our taxpayer wallet is a natural outcome of the broken governance structure of the Met Council.  That structure features a governing board filled with 17 patronage positions held by unelected friends of the Governor. With its complete lack of local elected officials who represent voters, is it any surprise the Council has utterly failed to build a true regional consensus around this wasteful project (or much else for that matter)?

When this story ends, how  will the Met Council pay for its malfeasance?

What direct recourse do citizens have to demand change and accountability to prevent more Met Council disasters like this?

President Trump today signed S. 496, the bill rejecting the last minute Obama rule that greatly expanded the geographic reach of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (e.g. the Twin Cities' Met Council).

 As I've detailed elsewhere, the Obama rule was a federal power grab intended to override local control of transportation and land use planning by creating massive, multi-state planning agencies that must answer to the federal government. In Minnesota, the end game would have been a single planning region stretching from west of St. Cloud, across the St Croix River into western Wisconsin. 

Some media outlets have stated that S. 496 has little meaning, particularly in Minnesota. That perspective, intentionally or not, overlooks the fact that Obama's goal with the original rule was to create a system that undermines local and state control. Stanley Kurtz's book, Spreading the Wealth, How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities provides excellent background on this topic. 

Finally, we got the ball rolling on this back in January with the report, Midnight Monkey Business - Expanding the Met Council's Regional Boundary. A friend at the Center of the American Experiment, Kim Crockett, brought this to the attention of Rep. Jason Lewis, from Minnesota's 2nd Congressional District.  He championed the cause and introduced the bill that, after some modifications, passed unanimously out of the House committee, and passed the full House 417-3 - a shining star of bi-partisanship. 

This is a great bill that supports local control in the face of egregious federal overreach. Thank you Rep. Lewis for leading the charge!

UPDATE: Rep. Lewis has this to say today about the bill:

"I was glad to see that S. 496, our bill to restore local planning authority, was signed into law by the President today. People at home need accountability in their local government, especially when it comes to planning major projects, and this bill keeps decision-making in our neighborhoods where it belongs.

"As my first bill, it was a pleasure to take a lead on this issue with my colleague Rep. Dan Lipinski and with Senator Duckworth."

It appears that I missed the fact that an identical bill to reject Obama's expansion of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) has already passed the Senate, back on March 8th. 

We have it from a good source that this Senate bill will be adopted by the full House this week and will be on its way to the President for his signature. 

This deals a bi-partisan blow to Obama's egregious overreach, and a rebuke to our local administrative state monster, the Met Council.

Nice work, Rep. Jason Lewis, who got this all rolling in the House earlier in the year.