Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Coastal Restoration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
New Orleans City Council backs Mid-Barataria sediment diversion, urges project to move forward
Summary
The New Orleans City Council unanimously adopted a resolution urging support for the Mid‑Barataria sediment diversion project, after public comment from coastal scientists, advocates and residents about the project’s benefits and costs.
The New Orleans City Council voted to adopt Resolution R25273, urging state and federal partners to advance the Mid‑Barataria sediment diversion project aimed at coastal restoration in southeast Louisiana.
The resolution, moved and adopted at the May council meeting, frames the diversion as a major coastal restoration investment and calls for prompt action to keep the project on schedule.
Why it matters: supporters said the diversion would rebuild wetlands and reduce future storm surge risk for New Orleans and Jefferson Parish, providing regional benefits for fisheries, wildlife and cultural resources. Opponents and some commenters questioned the project’s scale and federal funding case but the council framed the resolution as an expression of the city’s support for moving the science‑based project forward.
Council President J.P. Morrell introduced the measure and called for a vote after a lengthy public‑comment period. Public speakers included Michael Burns, Ann Miller of Women of the Storm, regional planners and environmental scientists. Burns acknowledged the project’s multibillion‑dollar price tag but urged urgency: “$3,000,000,000 is not a small amount of money,” he said, and argued the nation must be persuaded by a clear case for the investment. Ann Miller said the diversion had been vetted and that the region’s long‑term survival depended on it: “This resolution that you’re gonna send to Baton Rouge is so important,” she told the council.
Scientists and regional planners who spoke during public comment described ecological and economic benefits. One commenter, Devin Boyle, identified himself as a regional planner and urged the council to back the project as “one of the most critical investments we need in our long‑term resilience.” Several online commenters and local advocacy groups similarly urged adoption, noting the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina as context for urgency.
Opposition focused on cost, governance and local impacts. Michael Burns and other speakers urged the council to make the federal funding case to audiences outside the region before asking for billions in federal dollars. Council members acknowledged the concerns but said the state and region have long borne the costs of coastal land loss tied to historic oil and gas activity and that action was needed now.
The vote: the council adopted the resolution on a voice vote with six ayes and no nays.
Next steps: the resolution is a formal expression of the City Council’s support; it does not authorize funding from the city budget. The council directed the clerk to transmit the adopted resolution to state and federal partners and to the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority.
