Congresswoman McCollum's Statement on Replacing the Stillwater Bridge

Statement

Residents of Stillwater deserve a replacement for the existing, outdated lift bridge over the St. Croix River. I support a fiscally-responsible alternative that complies with federal environmental law and meets the needs of Stillwater without creating new transportation problems for other Minnesota cities. I do not support the already-rejected $700 million mega-bridge proposal because it is unnecessarily expensive, undermines wild and scenic river protections and will adversely impact communities along Highway 36 in Minnesota's Fourth Congressional District.

My primary responsibility is to represent the interests of residents in the Fourth Congressional District. There has been no attention to the traffic congestion that a new interstate-style bridge in Stillwater would add to the Highway 36 corridor, including Oakdale, Maplewood, Mahtomedi, Roseville and North St. Paul. If there's enough traffic projected to justify building a bridge that costs nearly three times as much as the new Interstate 35W Bridge in Minneapolis -- which carries over 140,000 vehicles every day -- then the communities along Highway 36 should expect to be overrun with thousands more semi-trucks, buses, and commuters. Expanding Highway 36 to accommodate an interstate-style bridge in Stillwater raises the true cost of the mega-bridge project close to a billion dollars. Today, the existing Stillwater lift bridge handles approximately 18,000 vehicles each day. In this fiscal environment it's hard to justify why a billion dollar bridge is necessary.

Some elected officials from Minnesota and Wisconsin have given their support for the mega-bridge, yet these statements of support leave the key questions facing the proposal unanswered:

* How much -- if any -- of Wisconsin's share of this project is secured?
* How much money will it cost Minnesota taxpayers to expand Highway 36 between Stillwater and Minneapolis to accommodate the traffic from an Interstate-style bridge over the St. Croix?
* Will legislation pass Congress and be signed by President Obama to undo decades of federal protections for wild and scenic rivers?
* The St. Croix crossing at Stillwater is only one of many significant transportation problems across the state, if a more appropriately-scaled bridge were constructed over the St. Croix, what other Minnesota cities and counties are in line for transportation improvements? How many other structurally deficient or fracture-critical bridges in the state could be repaired and replaced?

Even if it is unpopular to raise them, these questions are critical to the ultimate success of the bridge proposal now under debate. Champions of the proposal should be able to provide answers and explain why the current proposal -- already rejected by the federal approval process -- isn't simply the next in a long line of disappointments for Stillwater.

Let me be clear: I support a new bridge for Stillwater. My experience -- and plain Minnesota common sense -- suggests the fastest path to a new bridge is the path of consensus and fiscal responsibility. The I-35W bridge over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis is proof that Minnesota can build a new bridge in record time when there's community consensus around a sensible plan. An affordable St. Croix bridge could be designed and constructed long before the mega-bridge proposal and offer Minnesota taxpayers much greater value.

As discussions regarding an Interstate-style St. Croix bridge continue, I will work with local elected leaders in the Highway 36 corridor to ensure they receive clear, timely answers to questions about the potential for negative impacts to their communities.

Source