Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Section 2 of the Mid-States Corridor Project: Tier 2 National Environmental Policy Act

Virginia LaGrange, a long-time resident of Dubois County, opposes the Mid-States Corridor project. She argues that the corridor would bypass local businesses, hurting the local economy, and would increase truck traffic beyond what the existing roads can handle. She suggests that funds should instead be used to improve current county roads.

The commenters, including Erin McCaig, Candice, and Shawn Michelle Sims, express strong opposition to the Mid-States Corridor project, arguing that it threatens homes, heritage farms, and the community way of life in Southern Indiana. Additionally, owners of Betico Creek Farms request specific engineering protections, environmental safeguards, and a commercial-based property valuation if the project proceeds.

Steve Krampe, a private citizen from Ferdinand, Indiana, opposes the Mid-States Corridor project, arguing that it is a fiscally irresponsible "vanity project" that would devastate local communities and Amish lands. He advocates for redirecting the proposed federal funding toward repairing and maintaining existing highway infrastructure instead of constructing a new corridor.

The Sierra Club Hoosier Chapter opposes the Mid-States Corridor project, arguing that the long-term environmental costs—including significant impacts on forests, wetlands, and 88 species of concern—outweigh any short-term economic benefits. They request that the Tier 2 EIS specifically address wildlife habitat loss, vehicle collisions, and the impact on local geological sites and community enjoyment.

The commenter opposes the Mid-States Corridor project, citing concerns about its negative impact on local farms, businesses, Amish families, and the tax base. They also argue that existing highways are in poor condition and lack funding, making the new project unjustifiable.

A resident of Dubois County opposes the Mid-States Corridor project, citing concerns over road safety, increased travel times for emergency services, and the destruction of multi-generational farmland. The commenter also argues that the project is unnecessary due to existing infrastructure and lacks sufficient funding.

The commenter, identifying as a taxpayer, opposes the Mid-States Corridor project, arguing that it is an unnecessary and fiscally irresponsible use of public funds that primarily benefits a few wealthy business owners. They advocate for redirecting the project's funding toward improving existing infrastructure and the state's school system instead.

The commenter opposes the Mid-States Corridor Project, arguing that it is an unnecessary and expensive project that will lead to increased property taxes and a misuse of taxpayer funds. They also express concerns about negative local impacts, including the loss of road access and the fact that the project primarily benefits large corporations rather than local citizens.