The 2012 Minnesota Legislature broke a partisan deadlock over building project authorizations by doing something legislatures seldom do: It ceded authority to the executive branch to decide how $47.5 million in state bonds would be spent.

That leaves Gov. Mark Dayton with an unenviable task. To his credit, he has acted responsibly by asking the Department of Employment and Economic Development for a data-driven analysis of the 90 applicants.

Five key criteria were considered: Project readiness, jobs, investment and leverage (beyond state dollars), regional impact and other public benefits. The first three categories accounted for 75 percent of the total possible score, while regional impact and other public benefits represented 20 percent and 5 percent, respectively.

Only 37 proposed projects made the final analysis. They were divided relatively evenly between the metro area and northern and southern portions of Minnesota, reflecting the need for bonding investment to benefit multiple regions.

The process led to a result some Minnesotans will find surprising, and maybe objectionable. Accordingly, Dayton's decisionmaking challenge won't be easy. Many projects are worthy.

But he won't go wrong by choosing the three projects that emerged as the most competitive from each region: A new minor-league ballpark for the St. Paul Saints; funds for downtown development and a parking ramp in Duluth, and wastewater infrastructure improvements in Litchfield. If fully funded, these three projects would account for $39.55 million.

Many Minnesotans understandably have stadium fatigue. But it's important to remember what a smartly planned multi-use facility can do for a community -- and for a downtown. The new Saints ballpark would accelerate an aggressive, innovative redevelopment of downtown St. Paul's Lowertown area, and it would connect to Target Field at the other end of the soon-to-open Central Corridor light-rail line.

The projects in Duluth and Litchfield don't have as much of a "wow factor," but represent the bricks-and-mortar investments that state bonding often accomplishes.

Dayton can accept or reject DEED's rankings. We'd urge him to make an exception for the proposed Southwest light-rail transit line, which would connect the burgeoning business districts in the southwest suburbs with downtown Minneapolis.

Investing even limited state funds in Southwest LRT would likely allow the project to retain its high priority with the federal government, which would pay half the eventual $1.25 billion cost. (The state would pay 10 percent; 30 percent would be provided by the County Transit Improvement Board, and 10 percent would be covered by the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority.) The line is projected to carry 30,000 riders a day by 2030 and alleviate traffic in an area that will grow by 60,000 jobs over the same time frame.

The estimated 3,500 jobs in construction, and 325 permanent positions -- let alone the nine-to-one leveraging of state dollars -- would normally have ranked the project much higher in DEED's data. But the criteria of projects being "shovel-ready" within about a six- to 12-month time frame doesn't fit the multiyear Southwest project timeline. And yet the project may lose its place in line for federal funding if some state investment isn't made.

Dayton, a long-term thinker regarding business development, shouldn't overlook this opportunity, which is a high priority for the Minneapolis Regional Chamber of Commerce, the St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce and the TwinWest Chamber of Commerce. Together, these organizations represent more than 3,000 businesses.

We were surprised that three projects this page has championed -- civic center expansions in Rochester, Mankato and St. Cloud -- did not score better in DEED's analysis. Those projects won preliminary funding from the Legislature years ago, and have been delayed -- we think unfairly -- ever since. Each would be a major asset to its region.

But when a key legislator like Senate Majority Leader Dave Senjem from Rochester, who headed the Senate's bonding committee, declined to secure funding for the Mayo Civic Center project when he had the chance, he left it and the other two civic center proposals at risk. We hope those projects fare better at legislative hands in 2013.

--------------------------

Readers, what do you think? To offer an opinion considered for publication as a letter to the editor, please fill out this form. Follow us on Twitter @StribOpinion and Facebook at facebook.com/StribOpinion.