This is my first post the Minneapolis Issues Forum. My name is Antonio
Rosell, I live in Whittier.
I have been participating in the 35W Project Advisory Committee (PAC) for
the past three years. I have sat as a voting member of the PAC,
representing Ventura Village, for more than 2 of those 3 years. I have
attended virtually all meetings of the PAC, and many meetings of PAC
sub-committees.
I am opposed to the continuation of design work on, and the eventual
construction of, the 35W Access Project.
My reasons are many, including the basic lack of fairness inherent in a
process that puts a private legal/public relations/lobbying firm (Smith
Parker) in charge of a project that directly affects and benefits major
corporations to whom they are legal counsel, and the absolutely inadequate
approach taken to address fundamental land use/ economic development/
revitalization/ transportation/ equity questions in the project area.
But I don't think that I can explain each of these issues in detail now,
this note would be too long, and others have done a much better job than I
could. The folks at stride (http://www.stride-mn.org) have already told a
lot of the story, as have many people who have posted their insights to this
list. Also, the Spokesman-Recorder, in an excellent two-part series, has
captured many of this project's underlying themes.
My reason for this post is to share a couple of impressions from last
Tuesday's open house, to comment on a couple of easily dismissed details
from that event. I am not saying that these details justify the
cancellation of this project, but rather, that they are important and useful
for understanding it, that they give us a window into the nature of the
thing, the way that you can know a box is hollow by the feel of its weight
on your palm.
The first is this: a man from the audience made the claim that we ought to
support this project because that's what Paul Wellstone would have wanted us
to do. That claim has now been repeated on this list and I fear that it
might soon wind its way into the promotional literature produced for this
project.
So as somebody who considers himself a student of history (or more
correctly, the retelling of history), I'd like to state my opinion of that
specific claim, based on the genesis and evolution of the 35W Access
Project, which I have been in the position to witness.
My reaction? I have rarely heard such a ridiculous thing. If there was one
thing that set Mr. Wellstone apart from other DC politicians is that he
always took the position of supporting the little guy over the bully, the
activist over the lobbyist, and the community over the corporation.
The genesis of this project never was the desire to meet the needs of our
neighborhoods or of our community: of the small business owners, of the
transit riders, of the immigrant shopkeepers, of the pedestrians, of the
low-income homeowners, of the optimists who chose to live here because they
wanted to, or of the realists who chose to live here because they could not
afford to live anywhere else.
Rather, it was the desire to provide more convenient access to visitors and
workers of the Allina hospital complex. Abbott Northwestern Hospital, in
1997, commissioned a traffic study seeking to resolve that issue. The study
was carried out by OSM, an engineering firm with experience in highway
engineering. Not surprisingly, their recommendations included engineering
and constructing highway ramps: one from northbound 35W to 28th Street, and
another from 26th Street to southbound 35W; in essence, a duplication of
existing access at 31st Street but this time specifically provided to serve
the needs of the Allina complex and Honeywell [whose site is now occupied by
Wells Fargo]. The project that has moved forward to us today, and which has
been entirely funded by taxpayer's moneys, has grown from that beginning,
but has not re-examined the very first, initial assumptions that governed it
then, and govern it today.
The second thing is less alarming, but for those that continue to put their
faith on this particular project, more significant. During the course of
Tuesday's open house, opportunity was to be given for people to sign up and
speak (for two minutes max.) about the project, so that their comments would
be recorded in the project's public participation log. Many people spoke up
against the project; many also spoke in favor.
What was disturbing is that several of the people who were present (and
whose positions in favor of the project were already known) were called to
speak although they themselves had not signed up; they had been added to the
list of speakers without their knowledge or consent.
What was funny is that it was so clumsily done. What was not funny is that
it was a clear attempt at undermining viewpoints opposite to those of
project proponents; it is hard to come up with a more self-evident effort
toward the manipulation and fabrication of the public record.
What was extremely disappointing is that none of the project officials, or
the representatives of public agencies, or the board commissioners who were
present in official capacity said a thing about it.
But then again, our agencies and leaders seem more intent in reinventing
themselves out of responsibility and espousing last decade's mantra of
private/public partnering.
At some point people in our local government will have to realize that the
reason why we have government is the citizens, all of the citizens, even the
ones who don't drive fancy cars or live in boardrooms. Until then, we'll
have more of the same, and it will matter to more than just Minneapolis -
Smith Parker, who shepherded this project through from its inception, has
now been selected by the MetCouncil to lead their "Smart Growth" initiatives
for the Metropolitan Region. I can't wait to see what they do for
region-wide affordable housing, or transit, or suburban expansion after
seeing what they plan to do for the most pedestrian and transit-dependent
area in our city (a plan, which logically, includes expanding a freeway,
adding highway ramps to a residential street (28th), tearing down
businesses, and destroying housing).
I applaud Councilmember Robert Lilligren for having the courage to stand up
and speak up about this project. I am thankful that he has used his voice
to oppose the project, but that is just a bonus. Speaking when you are in
the position to do so is important, then the people can now who their
leaders are and act accordingly.
I have waited to see where our other leaders are on this important issue,
but they have been mostly quiet, or acquiescent. If the leaders are waiting
for the parties involved to decide this issue for them then they are not
leaders, they are leaves tossed by the wind.
So I would like an answer. Mayor Rybak, where are you on this? And other
members of the City Council? Our Greens?
This project is now moving forward with great speed. It has been in the
planning stages for almost 4 years. There has been enough time for a
position to be developed by each of you. Please do not wait until
construction begins to stand up and say there was nothing you could do - we,
the present and future citizens of Minneapolis, need your leadership now.
Antonio Rosell
Whittier
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:mpls@;mnforum.org
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
- Re: [Mpls] some thoughts on the 35W Access Project Antonio Rosell
