As the $690 million St. Croix River crossing proposal heads into the home stretch, it appears that time—or the lack thereof—is the next big hurdle the project faces.

Gov. Mark Dayton has put a Sept. 30 deadline for Congress to pass an exemption to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, or funding that has been set aside for the river crossing may be put toward other state projects.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn) pushed to schedule Thursday’s Senate Energy Committee hearing so the legislation can move forward as quickly as possible. She has also been working with Rep. Michele Bachmann who introduced a similar bipartisan bill in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“Some of the state and federal funds that would be used for construction will expire in 2014,” Klobuchar testified before the subcommittee. “Unfortunately, the Minnesota Department of Transportation estimates that it will take three years to complete all the necessary permits for constructing this project. That is why Governor Dayton has said that legislation to authorize the bridge should be enacted by Sept. 30.”

The issue is that the governor’s deadline follows a month-long congressional recess in August and lawmakers are in the midst of a contentious debt debate.

"I'm hoping we can buy a little more time with the governor," Klobuchar told the Star Tribune after the hearing. "We have a major challenge here right now with the debt ceiling."

Bachmann’s legislation had a House subcommittee hearing May 4, but it has not yet gone to a vote.

Thursday’s Testimony

Testimony before the National Parks Subcommittee of the U.S. Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources Committee started Thursday afternoon with Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) speaking to his fellow subcommittee members.

“Stillwater, Minnesota is a beautiful city that is between a rock and a hard place,” Franken said. “While the witnesses before the committee today may disagree about on the size and the design of a bridge, the fact remains that a new bridge is absolutely necessary and any bridge would need Congressional approval to move forward under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

"I want to make clear that this is a unique situation with unique needs and we are not declaring open season on the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act,” Franken said.

Klobuchar then testified that the bridge is a source of significant traffic congestion, especially in the summer months, when it lifts frequently to allow watercraft to pass.

“This backs up on both sides of the bridge, as much as an entire mile, creating extensive gridlock and air pollution, hindering economic activity and threatening public safety—particularly when emergency vehicles are unable to pass through,” she said. “Simply put, there is nearly unanimous agreement that the current bridge is completely inadequate.”

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) testified that the bridge has long been put on hold raising the cost of constucting the bridge and putting current funding in jeapardy if the project doesn’t move forward quickly.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), the ranking member of the subcommitte, said he is supportive of the exemption for the project, but the first thing that comes to his mind is that if a project takes from 1992 to the present to get something done because of federal legislation that “perhaps the original federal legislation has some problems.”

“I understand the ode to Walter Mondale, but for goodness sakes 20-some odd years to build a bridge makes me think there is something wrong with the legislation,” Paul said

Peggy O’Dell of the Department of Interiors said the department “cannot support this legislation” as the National Park Service has determined that the project would have direct and adverse impact on the river that cannot be mitigated.

Stillwater Mayor Ken Harycki testified that it’s time for Congress to take action and help resolve the bridge issue.

It has been difficult to find a plan that is consistent with three federal laws—the  Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, the Transportation Act of 1996 and the National Historic Preservation Act, Harycki testified.

The St. Croix River is an important natural resource to area residents, he said, and the proposal will continue to protect the river from over-development.

"But we also need a safe, reliable crossing," Harycki said. "The project that we are asking the Congress to permit to go forward was developed through an unprecedented environmental-mediation process that was administered by the Udall Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution."

Harycki went on to criticize the Sensible Bridge Partnership's plan for a lower, slower bridge.

"It will be functionally obsolete upon opening," he said. The "sensible bridge" would obliterate Stillwater views from downtown, as residents would be looking at 40 to 50 foot bridge spanning the river from bluff to bluff, he said.

Roger Tomten then took to the podium to testify on behalf of the Sensible Bridge Partnership's lower, slower alternative to the “boondoggle bridge.”

“Our Sensible Stillwater bridge would cost less than $300 million, be more respectful of the St. Croix River it graces and continue to bring scores of visitors to downtown Stillwater, while managing traffic flow and easing congestion for commuters,” Tomten said.

The $690 million bridge proposal should be viewed through the harsh lens of today’s economic realities, he said.

“The thought of forgoing the protection of the Wild and Scenic River Act to benefit roughly 9,000 daily commuters is wrong,” Tomten testified. “And to move this boondoggle bridge forward when our nation is locked in debate over spending and the state of Minnesota is coping with a $5 billion budget deficit makes no sense.

The community of Stillwater needs a new bridge to replace the historic lift bridge, but not the one prescribed in this bill," he continued. "It is too much bridge at too high a cost for my state and my community.”

View Original Article