HF 1967

as introduced - 93rd Legislature (2023 - 2024) Posted on 02/20/2023 12:20pm

A bill for an act
relating to transit; requiring a cost-benefit analysis for proposed guideways;
requiring a report; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter
473.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:

Section 1.

new text begin [473.4487] GUIDEWAY COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS.
new text end

new text begin Subdivision 1. new text end

new text begin Definitions. new text end

new text begin (a) For purposes of this section, the following terms have
the meanings given.
new text end

new text begin (b) "Commissioner" means the commissioner of transportation.
new text end

new text begin (c) "Project options" means the proposed guideway and each alternative identified
pursuant to subdivision 2, paragraph (b).
new text end

new text begin (d) "Responsible governmental unit" means the unit of government responsible for the
environmental analysis of the project.
new text end

new text begin Subd. 2. new text end

new text begin Analysis required. new text end

new text begin (a) Prior to the selection of a locally preferred alternative,
the responsible governmental unit must perform a cost-benefit analysis as described by this
section. The responsible governmental unit must submit the analysis to the commissioner
and the Metropolitan Council within 30 days of completing the analysis. The commissioner
must post the final analysis on the Department of Transportation's website. The chair of the
Metropolitan Council must post the final analysis on the council's website. The commissioner
and the council must jointly submit a copy of the final report to the legislative auditor and
to the chairs and ranking minority members of the legislative committees with jurisdiction
over transportation finance and policy.
new text end

new text begin (b) The responsible governmental unit must determine alternatives that would serve
substantially the same area as the proposed guideway but would provide service in a different
manner. At a minimum, the alternatives must include an arterial bus rapid transit line, a
regular route bus service line, and a nontransit option that expands capacity of the road.
new text end

new text begin (c) At a minimum, the analysis must include the following information:
new text end

new text begin (1) for guideway and busway project options, the estimated ridership numbers;
new text end

new text begin (2) for the capacity expansion option, the number of additional vehicles accommodated
by the expansion;
new text end

new text begin (3) for each project option, an estimate of the increase or decrease of the number of
vehicles on the road;
new text end

new text begin (4) the amount of revenue derived from or attributable to each project option, including
but not limited to fares, tax on gasoline, and motor vehicle sales tax;
new text end

new text begin (5) for each project option, the estimated ongoing maintenance costs, which entity will
pay for the costs, and the percentage of the costs to be paid by each entity;
new text end

new text begin (6) for each project option, the estimated future capital costs, which entity will pay for
the costs, and the percentage of the costs to be paid by each entity;
new text end

new text begin (7) the estimated economic benefit attributable to each project option, including but not
limited to new or expanded housing units or businesses, increased freight movement, and
reduction of supply chain issues;
new text end

new text begin (8) for each project option, the estimated timeline for construction, road closures, and
detours and an estimate on how that timeline affects the surrounding areas;
new text end

new text begin (9) for each project option, an estimate of whether vehicle collisions will increase or
decrease due to a change in the projected number of vehicles on the road;
new text end

new text begin (10) for each project option, an analysis of whether each project option could be altered
or stopped once construction is started and the estimated costs related to alteration or
stopping;
new text end

new text begin (11) for each project option, travel time along the route from end to end and for various
points of interest in between, including time spent waiting for transit, changing modes of
transportation, and other time spent directly related to travel but not inside of a vehicle;
new text end

new text begin (12) for busway and guideway project options, how travel time for vehicles would be
affected by any estimated reduction in vehicle traffic; and
new text end

new text begin (13) for each project option, the estimated increase or decrease in carbon emissions or
other environmental pollutants.
new text end

new text begin (d) The analysis must also determine how many miles of arterial bus rapid transit, regular
route bus service, or congestion mitigation construction could be funded for the amount
proposed to be spent on the guideway.
new text end

new text begin (e) A responsible governmental unit may request assistance from the commissioner or
the Metropolitan Council. The commissioner or the Metropolitan Council must provide the
requested assistance and may bill the responsible governmental unit for reasonable expenses
incurred in providing the assistance.
new text end

new text begin EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICATION. new text end

new text begin This section is effective the day following
final enactment and applies to all guideways seeking state or federal funding on or after
that date, except this section does not apply to the Gold Line bus rapid transit project. This
section applies in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and
Washington.
new text end

Sec. 2. new text begin GUIDEWAY COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; TRANSITION.
new text end

new text begin (a) This section applies to a guideway for which a locally preferred alternative has been
selected prior to the effective date of this section but is not in revenue operation on the
effective date of this section, except this section does not apply to the Gold Line bus rapid
transit project.
new text end

new text begin (b) For each guideway subject to this section, the commissioner of transportation and
the Metropolitan Council must perform a cost-benefit analysis as required by Minnesota
Statutes, section 473.4487, subdivision 2, paragraphs (b), (c), and (d). Within 30 days of
completing a cost-benefit analysis required by this section, the commissioner must post the
final analysis on the Department of Transportation's website and the Metropolitan Council
must post the final analysis on the council's website. The commissioner and the council
must jointly submit a copy of the final report to the legislative auditor and to the chairs and
ranking minority members of legislative committees with jurisdiction over transportation
finance and policy.
new text end

new text begin EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICATION. new text end

new text begin This section is effective the day following
final enactment and applies in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey,
Scott, and Washington.
new text end