Sample Script for Gov. Walz

I am reaching out about the Rethinking I-94 project in Saint Paul and Minneapolis.

I was deeply concerned to learn that MnDOT plans to remove the boulevard conversion options (called at-grade A & B) from further consideration in the Rethinking I-94 process.

This project is a generational opportunity for MnDOT & local governments to repair the highway’s historic and ongoing harms and invest in reparative justice. However, this decision to exclusively proceed with options that rebuild the highway trench shows that MnDOT has no interest in repairing past harms and allowing the community to envision a different future. Instead, MnDOT staff are steamrolling community input to rebuild a highway that was never needed in the first place.

This decision follows months of actions by MnDOT to silence community dissent. This included the removal of public comment during the last two project meetings and action to prevent elected officials on the project’s advisory committee from considering resolutions to communicate their priorities for the project.

This decision perpetuates the historic injustice of I-94, where impacted communities were silenced, and neighborhoods like Rondo and Cedar-Riverside were bulldozed to build a freeway. Today, as was the case back then, phony traffic models executed by highly-paid consulting firms were used to justify routing tens of thousands of cars through densely populated neighborhoods.

There is another way forward. While important questions still need to be answered, it is premature to eliminate the boulevard options.

The boulevard options have many potential benefits, including reconnected neighborhoods, reduced pollution, new land for affordable homes, businesses and parks, and improved transportation options. They also have broad community support. The at-grade options scored most favorably in MnDOT’s community survey. The City Councils of Minneapolis and Saint Paul have also passed unanimous resolutions that demanded that MnDOT continue to study innovative alternatives. MnDOT should not prevent our community from considering these options!

Please support the continued study of the at-grade A & at-grade B options in the next phase of the Rethinking I-94 project. If MnDOT moves forward with removing these options at this stage, municipal consent for the project should be denied and state funding for the project should not be granted.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your response.