This fall voters face a decision on whether to approve an amendment to the state constitution that would require 100 percent of the state motor vehicle tax to go toward transportation.

There&8217;s no guarantee that the money would be spent on rural roads. There is a guarantee that 40 percent of it would go toward public transit. But the way the amendment is worded, all of the money could go to transit. Or 40 percent to transit and the remainder to airports, sidewalks and bike trails with none going to roads.

Practically, it is doubtful the state would spend zero dollars on roads, but it makes the point that the rural roads of Minnesota are neglected in practice and in concept.

Rural areas of the state don&8217;t seem to oppose that a share of the funds benefits transit systems, which pretty much means the urban areas get that money. There is a need to relieve traffic congestion in light of high gasoline prices.

However, we wish the urban areas would reciprocate. We feel the amendment would be stronger if it guaranteed funding for rural roads in greater Minnesota.

It must be embarrassing for the state of Minnesota when people cross our borders on routes that aren&8217;t interstate highways. Cross the Iowa-Minnesota line anywhere except Interstate 35 and you&8217;ll see. One example that comes to mind is Minnesota Highway 105 south of Austin where it enters Mitchell County, Iowa. Everything is smooth until you drive north into Minnesota. Things then get bumpy.

Even though we wish the transportation amendment were stronger, it is worth supporting this fall because requiring the funding now is better than the existing system. But we sincerely hope, like many voters, that a good portion of the motor vehicle tax will go to roads in outstate Minnesota.

The whole state will be watching.