Letters: I-49 extension plan would execerbate earlier redlining

The editorial board published an editorial, “The ‘racist’ road is needed for I-49,” discrediting my use of Title VI of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964.

First, please spell my name correctly; it’s Burruss. Second, Title VI allows citizens to complain that a federally funded project such as interstate highway construction may have disparate impacts on groups of people protected by the act. I asked the federal highway department to investigate the I-49 Connector for disparate impacts due to its proposed path through the center of the city of Lafayette, Louisiana.

This path follows Evangeline Thruway, which runs directly along a racial redline, established in 1923 by a racist Lafayette city ordinance. That ordinance outlined two areas where Black residents of Lafayette would be required to live.

All I ask is that the federal highway department investigate the choice of this path. Why is the editorial board against investigation?

If disparate impacts occur, are you against remedies such as running the interstate extension to the west along the path of the already proposed Lafayette Regional Expressway, or investigating paths to the east? Such paths would not have similar negative impacts, plus they would save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.

My hope is that an interstate extension is built elsewhere and the Evangeline Thruway becomes a low-speed, center-city boulevard allowing people, neighborhoods and local businesses to thrive along it, connecting all people to the prosperous heart of Lafayette instead of dividing the city along a racial redline forever. Which side are you on?

ANN BURRUSS