Panel approves repeal of e‑bike rebate and moves funds to highway account amid budget debate
Loading...
Summary
The committee recommended House File 2066 to repeal the e‑bike rebate, transferring funds to the Highway User Distribution Tax Fund; testimony split between bike advocates citing access and health benefits and economists arguing the rebate should be cut to help close projected deficits.
On March 17 the Transportation Finance and Policy Committee recommended House File 2066 to pass and be referred to the Ways and Means Committee. The bill would repeal the state e‑bike rebate program and transfer the money into the Highway User Distribution Tax Fund.
Representative Weiner, the bill’s sponsor, described the proposal as a budgetary measure to repurpose approximately $2 million in prior appropriations for highway funding and said he was following broader efforts to scrutinize and reduce non‑essential spending.
Michael Wojcik, executive director of the Bicycle Alliance of Minnesota, opposed the repeal. Wojcik said the rebate has been ‘‘incredibly popular’’ and helps people in Greater Minnesota where fixed‑route transit is limited. He described e‑bikes as a ‘‘powerful tool for augmenting transit’’ and said the program’s first‑come, first‑served structure has produced heavy demand; he said an estimated 77,000 Minnesotans tried to access the rebate at once during a release.
Martha Noli (economist, Center of the American Experiment) testified in support of repeal, arguing Minnesota faces a multibillion dollar deficit and that the rebate primarily benefited higher‑income households. ‘‘Subsidizing the individual decisions of primarily affluent Minnesotans is not a core responsibility of the Minnesota state government,’’ she said, and urged redirecting funds to essentials.
Committee members debated equity and budget priorities. Chair Kosnick noted e‑bike prices have fallen and asked whether the program should be broadened to include pedal bicycles if the policy goal is active transportation. Representative Cagle expressed concern that moving the money to the highway fund does not address the general fund shortfall. Several members voiced support for the repeal as a start on larger budget cuts.
After questions and closing remarks from Representative Weiner about price trends and program incentives, the committee voted to recommend the bill to pass and referred HF 2066 to the Ways and Means Committee.
