BREAKING: Democrats Behaving Badly and What We're Doing About It

Why are there "surplus" funds? (0.00 / 0)

How about a rebate?

"Gee, I had no idea..."  Simple J. (Festus) Malarkey  

---

by: V @ Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 13:32:56 PM UTC

Asked and answered (0.00 / 0)

They told us to go fly a kite....they're keeping our money.

It's MA...once handed over to the state....it's theirs.  Right, Fair, Equitable do not enter into the discussion.

Suffering Battered Voter Syndrome since 8/31/1981

---

by: garyrlake @ Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 15:50:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually, the bulk of Ch. 90 comes from bonds. (4.00 / 1)

Specifically, the Transportation Bond Bill from Patrick's first term.  And because these funds ARE from a bond, which describes how the proceeds will be spent, they cannot be spent for another purpose - like propping up the MBTA.

So why the hold-up?

Factoid - the original Ch. 90 statute said that once funds were appropriated, they CANNOT be cut (i.e., 9-C exempt).  The MassDOT re-org tried to do away with that, but not sure if that was successful.

Of course my ultimate rant - why are these funds subject to being held as reimbursement anyways?  Why do towns have to do work and wait to be reimbursed?  Why not just send a check like we do Ch. 70?

(pssst...Rep. Winslow....Ch. 90 funds must be spent on capital PROJECTS, not maintenence.  Potholes are a big no-no use for Ch. 90 funds.  So pick another example....)

Yr. Obedient Servant, Peter Porcupine, Republican

---

by: Peter Porcupine @ Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 16:23:35 PM UTC