The House's half-million dollar bonding bill was put on hold Thursday night after concerns about the lopsided funding for the state's university systems.

"There was a tweak that needed to be made," said Zellers, walking off the House floor after calling off what would have been hours of debate over a new $496 million bonding proposal.

The sticking point was the funding gap between the University of Minnesota system – which was in line for $54 million in funding under the House bill -- and the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system – which would have gotten $144 million.

U of M officials have been lobbying hard for the big-ticket construction project that Gov. Mark Dayton had included in his bonding wish list – $54 million for a new campus power plant. The campus's aging power grid struggles to keep up with the demands of the campus buildings and research facilities, university officials argued. The House bill did include $10 million for the new plant.

The House bill did double the amount of money the U of M would get for asset preservation and replacement – the unglamorous HEAPR program that takes care of maintenance and wear and tear issues around campus. The governor had requested $20 million and the House budgeted $40 million.

"HEAPR is something that's very, very important, that's hard to explain. It's hard to find a constituency…nobody comes to the Capitol with a sign that says 'Build More HEAPR,'" he said. "But HVAC systems, you want to fix up that science lab so that it's safe for the students who are using it. You want to make sure the roof isn't going to collapse or that the electrical system isn't going to short out."

The latest House bonding bill "looks a lot like last year," Zellers said. "There's MnSCU, there's U of M, there's waste water, there's local roads, there's bridges. There's a number of things in there that look like last year, and those needs are still out there.
Some members were disappointed to see their local projects – like civic centers – left out of the bill, Zellers said.

"But when you look at the overall need out there and the assets we have that need to be repaired before we add to that burden, I think most people look at that and say, 'It would be nice to have my project in there, but I get it. We've got to maintain what we have so it doesn't fall down, doesn't become dangerous or unfit for use,'" he said.