> a year to operate LRT. However, that was pure operating costs with > estimates that ridership revenues would cover $7m-$8m of that. But > that's just off the top of my head.
State LRT operating costs for FY04 were 2.8 million. FY05 is 3.9 million. http://www.dot.state.mn.us/transit/treport/Program_Mgmt.pdf The underlying problem is using MVST for transit funding, the estimates happened to not work out as they hoped. (second page of above document outlines MVST amounts, I'm not sure if this includes opt-out costs needed, but I'm guessing they do). http://www.budget.state.mn.us/budget/operating/200607/revision1/metrocouncil_transit.pdf Looking at the first page there, they said the MVST income will be $255.7 for the two years. http://www.dot.state.mn.us/information/funding2005/highwayfinances.html In 2004 it came out to 104.49 million instead of 127.67 million. (21.5% of mvst goes to transit) http://www.finance.state.mn.us/ffeu/forecasts/2005feb/2005feb_sum.pdf In 2005 its likely to come to 115.455 million rather than 134.719 million. In 2006 its projected to be 114.165 million. The budget for the next two years says that they were hoping for $133 million of MVST (need to fund the opt-out systems). Easily, this rosy prediction of taxes have helped caused the problem , and its not a new problem since there has been deficiencies in the past with using MVST. MVST was 23 million behind in 2004. Projected 19 million behind in 2005 and 2006. So this funding source alone is 61 million behind over three years at this point. Yikes. -- Scott Dier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.ringworld.org/ Coon Rapids, MN _______________________________________________ Twin Cities Metropolitan Issues Forum http://www.e-democracy.org/tcmetro Rules: Sign posts with real name. You may not post more than twice a day.
