Five years ago, New Orleans made a grand symbolic gesture to itself and the world, when a

single crane removed the stain of racism from what is now known as Melody Circle. Throughout
that year, one-by-one these long shadows of white supremacy were plucked from their
pedestals, clearing the light and the air for something new, something hopeful. One crane at a
time.

Undoubtedly, it will take far more than one crane to remove the scar of racism that runs through
our city known as the Claiborne Corridor. This is due mostly to the fact that the removal of this
monument built on the foot-print of an active, thriving, and beautiful Black community, will be
much more than merely symbolic. It will require a fundamental rethinking of our city. This is
something, however, we believe is not only the right thing to do to atone for the sins of the past,
it is fundamentally required in order for our city to have a sustainable future.

The following is our argument, in brief, as to why we believe Secretary of Transportation

Buttigieg, Former New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu, in his capacity as administrator of the
infrastructure bill funds, local electeds, business leaders, and the city as a whole should rally
around the ultimate removal of the I-10 overpass. Here we wish to address the moral,
economic, and public safety reasons for this belief.

First, there is the moral argument for why the overpass must be removed completely. To do
anything less along the lines of repair, or removal of ramps, is not to just ignore the moral wrong
perpetrated upon the Claiborne Avenue community but to accept and legitimize it. Spending
2022 dollars to patch-up a relic of segregation and redlining is to resign our city to racist urban
planning for good. It will be at least 50 years before a choice like this comes along. By then, the
history of Claiborne Avenue will be just that; long since papered over by a meager
improvements project that accomplished little more than solidifying this monument's place in our
city.

By removing the overpass completely, we will live up to the promise we made as a city in 2017,
when the first of the statutes came down. As Mayor Landrieu said at the time:

“This is however about showing the whole world that we as a city and as a people are able to
acknowledge, understand, reconcile and most importantly, choose a better future for ourselves
making straight what has been crooked and making right what was wrong.”

We strongly suggest to Mayor Landrieu and all those involved, that this high and just standard
he set for ourselves and our city, can only truly be obtained by doing the hard thing. This
standard can not be adjustable according to budget or pushback from business. This standard
must be stronger than the concrete and steel or monuments both symbolic and functional.

This brings us to the second argument, that is the pushback to the removal of the overpass by
the New Orlean Port Authority. Afterall, hundreds of trucks a day use the overpass to haul
goods off-loaded from the port to destinations across the country. The port argues that the
necessity of the port for commerce necessitates maintaining the overpass with the money from
the infrastructure bill going predominantly to repair the damage to the overpass from the wear of
hundreds of trucks crossing it everyday. Does this sound like making a better future? Or does
this sound a lot like just trying to patch up the past so we can keep doing and thinking the way
we’ve been thinking and doing?

And yet, the Port has a point. We are a vital lifeline for commerce and the condition of our
highways, roads, and bridges is a testament to this fact. My question is, why is that argument
not being made in favor of a far larger piece of the infrastructure dollars than what the
established players are seeking? Why are we not asking ourselves how we can solve this
instead of patching it up for a few years. The overpass is falling apart. Everyone agrees with
this. The question is, are we going to throw good money after very bad money just for the sake
of maintaining the status quo?

We have the opportunity before us to not just reimagine the transportation of goods across our
city but for us as well. High speed rail, increased public transit, these are the pieces of a better
future and a path much straighter than the crumbling crooked corridor.

Finally, with regards to public safety. No moves should be made until we have a complete
picture on both the short and long-term impacts that any alteration to the Claiborne Corridor
would have on our ability to evacuate hurricanes as well as for police and first responders.
There are enough problems with 911 response times already. We can’t afford to make them
longer. With this said, removal of key ramps, particularly those that directly feed to LSU-UMC,
will create as many if not more challenges than full removal, especially in the long-term as we
take fuller advantage of cross-town streets and other routes. Investment in our roads should be
our priority.

How we address the Claiborne Corridor will literally, as it did in the 1960s, chart the course of
our city for generations to come. This is the place where our culture and commerce collide and
and from where the identity of our city radiates. How we arrive at this plan and whose interest
takes precedent will define who we are as a city far more than any statue ever could. This is our
chance to make things right and to make things work.