Congresswoman Michele Bachmann and Gov. Mark Dayton were positively chummy Friday afternoon in Stillwater, where they met to discuss the best ways to build a new bridge over the St. Croix River.
It’s not too often these two agree on something, but Bachmann has introduced legislation in Congress trying to get a new bridge back on track, and Dayton said he agrees that a new bridge is needed and that if something doesn’t get done soon, it will be at least a decade before another plan can be put in place.
A new bridge south of Stillwater, connecting with Hwy. 36 near Oak Park Heights, had been approved in 2005 by the National Park Service, but that ruling was changed after environmentalists went to court saying that the bridge design would interfere with the scenic beauty of the river. The Park Service’s new ruling stopped all progress.
Bachmann has introduced legislation in Congress that would allow construction to go ahead, by reverting to the 2005 positive ruling on the bridge. There’s no money in her bill, though.
At Bachmann’s request, Dayton went to Stillwater today for a thorough briefing on the issue. They emerged from the meetings just after 1:30 p.m., with Bachmann thanking the governor profusely for taking time to meet, and Dayton thanking her for taking leadership on the issue.
The current bridge crossing in the area — the aging Stillwater Lift Bridge — has been in the news recently for concerns about corrosion, but Dayton said regular maintenance and repairs will keep it safe. The big issue, he said, is its inadequacy in getting people safely and quickly across the bridge.
He said Minnesota and Wisconsin are prepared to provide funding for a new bridge, if Congress takes action to make it possible.
Bachmann said she’s confident that the House will pass her bill to get the project rolling again, but there is still work to be done to get the Senate to go along.
While Dayton seemed reluctant to full-out endorse the new bridge, he did say the current plan “is the only realistic option for the next decade.”
He said that while not everyone will agree, economics and safety point to the need for the new bridge.
“We have to deal with reality — if this can’t go forward, it’s back to square one,” he said.
Asked about traffic problems on the Minnesota side, where a new bridge would feed into the existing Hwy. 36, Dayton said he assumes MnDOT has researched the issue.
After their meeting, Dayton and Bachmann went down to the riverside to fill sandbags, as part of Stillwater’s effort to minimize damage from flooding that soon expected to cause the St. Croix to overrun its banks.
Huh? This doesn’t make sense on multiple levels. From a policy perspective, why not take this golden opportunity to reorient a profoundly flawed concept? Why appoint a Met Council that, for the first time in many years, can provide leadership for regional sustainability and vitality, and then line up for a bridge that would blow a gaping hole in the side of regional planning efforts? From a fiscal standpoint, why pledge hundreds of millions in Mn taxpayer dollars, and presumably present one’s flank to the GOP as an incorrigible spender, for a project that overwhelmingly will benefit Wisconsin, will benefit Stillwater maybe a bit, and otherwise will damage the metropolitan area? From a political standpoint, why throw Ms Bachmann a lifeline in one of the few areas where her hypocrisy has exposed her to criticism even by the establishment media? Who is advising the Governor here?
Since it was Governor Pawlenty’s fault for the deteriorating state of our bridges, it seems like Governor Dayton is trying to do something about this failing infrastructure problem. The fact that hundereds and even thousands of jobs would be created by replacing our ailing bridges should be particularly appealing. If the Federal government picks up even part of the tab, so much the better. We can’t very well complain about how our infrastructure is failing all around us and then kill any attempt to actually do something about it, can we?
When Mark Dayton agrees with George Bush (who originally over-ruled the National Park Service) I get nervous.
Of course, I assume that the fact that Bachmann’s bill includes no money means that she, like a good capitalist, thinks that the bridge should be paid for by private funds, paid for in turn by tolls.
M.B. has lost it. Let’s keep them cheesehead revolutionaries out of MN!
I think nearly everyone agrees that we need a new bridge. It is flawed thinking that a new design, much smaller in scope and with less impact on the environment will take ten years to design, implement the appropriate environmental reviews and receive funding. Proceeding with the current bridge project which is wildly expensive and overly massive is perplexing in it irresponsiblity to tax payers in this age of “efficient government”. In fact this has all the “earmarks” of a local boondogle for area legislators. That is remarkable, considering the conservative, “no new taxes”, efficient spending senators and representatives (local and state level) that have made their living on rejecting those earmarks. This bridge to nowhere will suck up nearly a billion dollars when it is finished, and should brand all of those local politicians as hypocrites and wreckless with taxpayer dollars. The right effort should be to expedite a new design, using a bipartisan effort to shorten approval and find funding. That would be good government. Embarking on the massive new bridge will have a horrendous effect on traffic around Stillwater and promote sprawl on a scale that would give most citizens nightmares. Ultimately it will create many more traffic problems than it solves, while wasting critical transportation dollars and weakening the entire Wild and Scenic Rivers Act with the precedent to ignore the Park Service and allow a proliferation of bridges. Dayton has just been bullied by Bachmann and other conservatives as they ironically advocate for a lavish local pet project that is entirely out of line with today’s spending realities and reduced revenues.
No, NOT “everyone” agrees that we need the proposed bridge in Stillwater!
1. It would divert traffic from downtown Stillwater, turning it into a ghost town;
2. It would make Highway 36 into an uninterrupted string of strip malls and housing developments;
3. It would compound the traffic congestion on Highway 36, making it virtually impassible during the busiest times of the day…
4. But it WOULD increase property values on the Wisconsin land owned by Michele Bachmann’s family…
5. And it WOULD compromise the wild and scenic beauty of the St. Croix River — and believe it or not there are some of us who still care about that, even though the Sierra Club is now advocating on behalf of a new bridge — albeit a smaller one than the 4-lane superhighway that the Wisconsinites are demanding.
6. Why not repair what we have? It is unique and attractive and it is the symbol of our city — as Duluth’s lift bridge is that city’s symbol. Nobody has proposed tearing that bridge down and replacing it with a big modern cement behemoth. Last time I looked, it seemed to be in reasonably decent shape, despite its age.