I-94 Updates and Thoughts

By Rob Huffman

Note: This is an opinion piece and does not reflect the view of the SUPC organization.

In mid-April Our Streets hosted a dinner and discussion with members of the Rondo community, the Summit-University neighborhood, and the St. Paul Reparations Commission at the Hallie Q. Brown Community Center. To promote the event I posted a flyer and got a reply typical of social media, from someone outside the community: “It was 60 years ago. Get over it!” A few days before, I was facilitating a discussion with 8th graders at a neighborhood school to help them design posters about various racial slurs and why not to use them, beyond simply being hurtful. One of the big takeaways they expressed was that these words carry the weight of their histories for the people they target, and that pain is still felt when they are used today. What that commenter failed to realize is that it isn’t just words that hurt, it’s also when people dismiss the pain that marginalized groups still feel from past harms, whether it’s from outright hostility or simple indifference.

This was the point of the evening – to get the conversation back to what it’s really about, because when we live in a society that sees progress as synonymous with economic growth, we tend to forget that the lived experiences of real people matter most. It often feels like today’s generation is starting to figure this out, but the adults who make decisions based on tired metrics like to feign ignorance and change the subject. So we had a talk about reparations. We had a talk about identifying the past and present harms so that we could home in on what it would mean to repair them and what effort it will take to make that happen.

The evening was curated by Hawona Sullivan Janzen and the events team at Our Streets, featuring a panel of local activists, leaders, and organizers and moderated by St. Paul Reparations Commissioner, Trahern Crews. After the panel, the audience broke into smaller groups where we had discussions facilitated by the panelists. Stories were shared, ideas were tossed around, and opinions were strong. While each person had their own unique take on the topic, there was a common theme: the physical scar in the community is bad enough as a reminder of what families lost, but the lingering injustices are far more insidious.

There wasn’t necessarily anything tangible to come of the conversations other than connections between neighbors. But it was pleasant and joyful and informative. It was great to hear a wide variety of perspectives and to be together as a community of folks who care deeply about this ongoing injustice even if we currently have different desired outcomes. It almost felt like the beginning of a new type of conversation that could join us as a community, and with communities along the corridor, to develop a shared understanding of what rethinking I-94 should really look like.


In Case You Didn’t Know

This whole thing began in 2016 when MnDOT announced its initiative to determine future plans for the stretch of freeway between downtown Minneapolis and downtown St. Paul. Several years before that, elders of the Rondo neighborhood had started dreaming of a land-bridge to literally reconnect the fractured community. ReConnect Rondo was created in 2017 to bring those ideas to fruition. A few years later, Our Streets was expanding its scope under new leadership and began having conversations with communities across the metro area about transportation issues of all kinds.

Throughout that time, there have been countless community meetings, informational sessions, and public comment periods held by each of these entities. They’re all governed by different missions, so naturally they have their own visions, informed by their stakeholders.

A slightly reductive breakdown of each looks like this:

MnDOT’s job is to build and maintain roadways. That’s their entire job. End scene.

ReConnect Rondo, while mostly known for its land bridge concept, aims to revitalize the historic Rondo neighborhood by creating an African American cultural enterprise district, much like it was before businesses and residents were targets of malicious displacement.

Our Streets, as a transportation advocacy organization with a focus on environmental and racial justice, wants the freeway gone, filled in, and the land returned for use to the benefit of all the neighborhoods that were harmed by the immeasurable destruction I-94 caused.

Here’s a basic description of recent developments for each:

MnDOT is currently compiling a report on the responses it received from its recent public comment period that ended in late March. According to their website (https://talk.dot.state.mn.us/rethinking-i94/news_feed/meetin...), they will be holding a public meeting to discuss the findings with the general public on June 3rd and will have an opportunity for people to speak to the project’s representatives. They have narrowed the options down to 4 that will be studied further.

ReConnect Rondo recently hosted a webinar to discuss their environmental assessment process in relation to the proposed land bridge, and is moving forward with a lot of great new endeavors to further their mission for the community. Find updates on their website and view the latest monthly newsletter (https://reconnectrondo.com/news/).

Our Streets is continuing to meet with communities along the corridor in an effort to force MnDOT to pause the process and re-evaluate the path forward. Elected leaders of both St. Paul and Minneapolis heard that call and submitted comments for MnDOT to rethink its own approach and put communities most affected by the freeway at the forefront of decision-making. Learn more about how to get involved on their website (https://www.ourstreetsmn.org/resources/insights/).



My Two Cents
Since last November, SUPC has hosted presentations by these three organizations. The goal was to give everyone in the neighborhood the chance to hear from them and come to their own, informed opinions. I’ve been peripherally aware of all the parts of this conversation, but in the past year or so I took a deep dive. After hearing from each on multiple occasions and studying the myriad documents they’ve all produced, I’ve come to some conclusions.

The role of MnDOT in this is clear. In fact, they started it. Both times. When it comes to the other two organizations, people seem to have big feelings, as if they are in competition. I personally don’t see it that way. Our Streets wants to see the freeway gone. ReConnect Rondo wants to see the neighborhood reconnected. In its simplest terms, this seems like the occasion for an analogy about birds and stones.

Where it gets contentious is in the details with the proposals and renderings they’ve developed. But again, I don’t see it that way. These are merely theoretical. Nothing is set in stone, and I can almost guarantee neither group thinks it is. If I can put words into their mouths, I’d say Our Streets is definitely interested in ensuring there’s a people-centered transportation element to it, and ReConnect Rondo wants any reclaimed land to benefit the families whose lives were affected. I’m fine with all of that.

Where’s the competition? Where’s the contention? From what I’ve heard, each organization fully supports all of the biggest community demands, such as no additional displacement through development, to have more economic opportunities that actually benefit the community, and ensure the same thing never happens again, to name a few. These aren’t the arguments we need to be hung up on at the moment. They should definitely be the foundation that all future decisions are based on. But for now, allowing those to distract from the conversation only plays into the hands of people who want to see us divided, so they can just make decisions for us.

As you can likely tell, I’m supportive of entirely removing the freeway and putting the land back into the hands of the Rondo community. I haven’t been convinced by any arguments against it. As far as promoting regional commerce, it’s evident by looking at a map that there are plenty of other arteries that allow heavy freight traffic to get to the industrial zones, not to mention the fact that the contentious stretch of freeway mostly serves short trips that don’t produce much for economic outcomes. It’s more a convenience than a need. Concerns for small businesses are the one I’m most sympathetic to; however, I’d imagine that most small storefronts are supported by the surrounding communities and destination businesses are going to be sought out regardless of easy access. When it comes to cost, it seems like actual land that can support housing, economic development, and transit would produce more local revenue than the vehicles that travel the freeway.

While I’m cautious about power in the hands of developers and elected officials, I also like to ponder the bright side. If commuting became less convenient, wouldn’t it make sense for businesses to create satellite offices in downtown St. Paul, increasing foot traffic, thus commerce and tax revenue? That’s something our city leaders can promote. Imagine a quiet neighborhood where our children aren’t subconsciously overwhelmed by the constant noise. Cognitive processes for academic achievement could be improved as well as mental health in general. Perhaps most importantly, rather than heartfelt apologies, justice-driven decision-making could relieve historic resentments and give people something to trust in again.

Despite what MnDOT may think, this conversation is far from over. Those of us who value true sustainability and justice will continue to fight for all that entails. Regarding sustainability, we must keep in mind that the more complex something is, the more maintenance it requires. That’s neither good for people, the planet, nor public spending. As for justice, the elders and descendants of historic Rondo deserve genuine, meaningful actions to repair the harm done. After all, we’re collectively better than we used to be, and most of us realize that if we dismiss the pain that marginalized groups still feel from past harms, we’re part of the problem.