Transportation proposal divides unions, leaves DFLers in the middle

As legislative director for the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 49, Jason George has been busy advocating for the proposed constitutional amendment and the 13,500 workers he represents. George told members of the House Ways and Means Committee Thursday that the measure would be good for Minnesota.

"If passed and supported by the public, this amendment will create thousands of good-paying jobs, jobs that will raise families and feed kids," he said.

The proposal asks voters to decide in November whether to constitutionally dedicate sales tax revenue from auto parts and repairs to pay for road and bridge projects. The money would be taken out of the state's general fund and could no longer be used for other budget needs.

That's why teachers, state government workers and other public employee unions that rely on general fund money oppose the measure.

George said the disagreement has been awkward.

"I've never opposed a teacher initiative or an AFSCME initiative or any other labor initiative," he said. "So, it is a little strange to see our brothers and sisters standing in opposition to us. But our men and women need to work, and this state needs roads and bridges."

Richard Kolodziejski, public affairs director for the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, said the 14,500 people he represents want to remain employed. He believes the amendment would put some of those state jobs at risk.

"Dedicating constitutional funds for one particular purpose is not a good idea. It's not something we can support," Kolodziejski said.

Traditionally road and bridge construction has been funded by the tax on gasoline and other fuels, which has been constitutionally dedicated for decades. But lawmakers have been reluctant to raise the gas tax, especially when the state has a budget surplus.

Kolodziejski is also concerned about how the proposed amendment came together. He said his union and other public employee unions were not included in behind-the-scenes discussions.

"This is the first time in my 12 sessions where I've seen a labor organization or other trade organizations actually work on an issue and then come back to public employee unions as recent as two weeks ago, wondering how they can find support from us on this issue," he said.

The amendment disagreement has put some DFL lawmakers, who rely on support from both sides, in an uncomfortable position during the final days of the 2018 session. Senate Minority Leader Tom Bakk, DFL-Cook, is among those feeling the squeeze.

"I don't like getting stuck in the middle. There are a lot of friends in that room for me," Bakk said.

Bakk is trying to thread the needle by suggesting an alternative plan for transportation. He wants to dedicate a comparable amount of money for transportation by law, rather than the constitution.

Minnesotans will continue to hear opposing views on the amendment if the House and Senate agree to put the question on the ballot.

DFL Rep. Alice Hausman said the labor divide is very unusual. But Hausman, who opposes the amendment, said she doesn't think the disagreement will linger in her party for long. She noted that the numbers favor public employee unions.

"The trades, unfortunately, are smaller. It is a smaller group," she said. "So, I think it will sort itself out. I don't think it's going to be a long-lasting division."