Guest columnist: Empty critiques of I-69

The most recent surge of opposition to the extension of Interstate 69 from Indianapolis to Evansville has proved to be no less baffling than the various waves before it.

As has happened occasionally through the last decade or so, opponents of the project, or at least of the sections that will be built in Monroe County, were out in force once again Aug. 27, this time at a meeting of the Monroe County commissioners.

The IDS has already reported on many of the criticisms that were leveled against the project, but it will be instructive to review some of the more prevalent ones.

Perhaps the most oft-repeated criticism of the project is that it involves the construction of a new road at a time when money is tight and so many other roads and bridges are in need of improvements.

I suppose those who level this criticism are unaware that this state is in the middle of a 10-year, $12 billion transportation infrastructure improvement project known as Major Moves. According to the Indiana Department of Transportation, this project will result in the rehabilitation or replacement of 15 percent of the state’s bridges and preservation projects on more than one-third of the state’s roads.

Thanks in large part to Gov. Mitch Daniels’ lease of the Indiana Toll Road to a private consortium, which brought the state some $3.8 billion in capital, Major Moves has not resulted in any tax increases or additional debt.

In addition to all of the rehabilitation and preservation projects the effort entails, Major Moves will result in the construction of 104 entirely new roads, which means we are actually managing to build new roads while repairing old ones — all without getting ourselves back into debt like most states.

Then there are the environmental criticisms of the project. While these may actually be among the best arguments for thinking twice about this project (if only because of the relative weakness of the other arguments), they have been by far the most thoroughly addressed of all the concerns citizens have raised.

On the project’s official study website, www.i69indyevn.org, the list of possible environmental effects that have been under careful scrutiny for years is astonishingly long and detailed. A brief sampling of the concerns that have influenced decision-makers in their choice of a route: the highway’s effect on land use, air quality, threatened and endangered species, floodplains, wetlands, forests and water quality.

Another common criticism of the proposed construction is that it would result in temporary road closures, detours and general inconvenience.

Coming largely from the same people who criticize the plan on the grounds of environmental protection, this argument strikes me as remarkably short-sighted.

I also wonder what those who offer this critique and feel more should be done to rehabilitate existing roads think about the fact that the rehabilitation of existing roads also causes closures, detours and inconvenience.

Given that few of the major concerns about the proposed sections of I-69 that will pass through Monroe County stand up to scrutiny, I remain baffled that opposition to this project persists and continues to pervade our public discourse.


E-mail: jarlower@indiana.edu