Minnesota’s Environmental Future: A Vision for Clean Water, Safe Land, and Climate Leadership in 54B
Why I’m Proud to earn the DFL Environmental Caucus endorsement
I am honored to have earned the endorsement of the DFL Environmental Caucus, which supports candidates who put clean air, safe water, and climate action at the center of public policy. I share the belief that every Minnesotan deserves to live in a clean, healthy environment, and I am committed to matching that belief with detailed, practical action.
People may differ on how much environmental risk they are willing to tolerate or how they weigh short‑term economic gains against long‑term environmental harm, but our shared values are clear: we want safe drinking water for our families, healthy outdoor spaces to enjoy, and a livable climate for future generations. My environmental agenda is rooted in that common ground.
A personal connection to Minnesota’s outdoors
I am outdoors every single day, whether I’m walking in local parks, enjoying our lakes, or simply breathing in Minnesota’s changing seasons. Time outside is not just a hobby—it is essential to my physical and mental health, and I know many of my neighbors feel the same way. Protecting the environment is, in my view, one of government’s greatest responsibilities because once certain kinds of damage are done, they are extraordinarily difficult and expensive to reverse.
That is why my environmental priorities focus on prevention, accountability, and smart, forward‑looking investment—so we safeguard what we love before it is lost.
Standing up for the Boundary Waters
In conversations with residents of Minnesota House District 54B, one issue comes up again and again: deep concern about proposed copper‑nickel mining near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.
Our district may be miles away, but Minnesotans understand that pollution does not discriminate based on political boundaries or map lines.
Recently, federal actions have stripped away critical protections and lifted a long‑standing moratorium on mining near the Boundary Waters, paving the way for sulfide‑ore copper projects upstream of this globally unique wilderness.
Scientific reviews by agencies like the U.S. Forest Service have warned that sulfide‑ore copper mining in this watershed poses a high risk of irreversible contamination, including acid mine drainage and heavy metals that threaten downstream lakes, rivers, and communities.
If I am elected to the Minnesota House, I will:
Support strict state oversight of any mining activity near the Boundary Waters, including strong financial assurance requirements so companies—not Minnesota families—pay the full cost of any cleanup.
Back legislation that reinforces scientific standards and respects the overwhelming public input calling for long‑term protection of this area.
Stand with organizations like Save the Boundary Waters that are working to prevent toxic mining in this fragile watershed.
The cleanup costs of a major contamination event would almost certainly exceed the cost of prevention, and the ecological damage could be permanent. Minnesotans should never be left footing the bill for corporate pollution in one of our most cherished places.
Protecting undeveloped land and responsible local growth
Closer to home, residents of 54B care deeply about how we use and protect our remaining undeveloped land. I respect landowners' rights to use their property as they see fit, as long as they comply with existing zoning and environmental rules. But I will oppose zoning variances or waivers that lack a clear and compelling public interest, especially when they accelerate sprawl, destroy critical habitat, or strain local infrastructure.
I am also skeptical of subsidy‑driven development deals in which local governments effectively help finance projects that primarily benefit large developers.
Too often, these “cost‑sharing” arrangements privatize profits while socializing long‑term costs like traffic, stormwater management, and infrastructure maintenance. As your representative, I will:
Scrutinize zoning changes that convert open space or agricultural land into high‑impact development without strong justification.
Oppose public subsidies for projects that do not deliver clear, measurable benefits for existing residents, local small businesses, and the environment.
We can welcome growth in our community without sacrificing our green spaces or writing blank checks to developers.
A roadmap to carbon‑free electricity
Minnesota has already set ambitious goals for carbon‑free electricity, but we need to move faster and smarter to meet the scale of the climate crisis. I support a straightforward, graduated policy for reducing emissions across our electricity sector, aiming to reach net‑zero emissions by 2050 or sooner—paired with real accountability and economic tools that make this transition achievable.
My approach includes:
Streamlining clean energy permitting: Eliminating unnecessary permitting delays for wind, solar, storage, and grid‑modernization projects, while maintaining strong environmental and community protections.
Targeted financial tools: Using options like tax‑increment financing and state incentives to reduce the upfront costs of clean energy projects that deliver long‑term public benefits, such as lower pollution and more stable energy prices.
Graduated emissions standards: Setting clear, declining emissions caps for utilities leading to zero by 2050, with meaningful penalties for going over the cap and tax incentives for operating well below it.
This framework can also be applied to other major pollution sources so that Minnesota not only meets but leads on climate action, in line with what environmental advocates and scientists say is necessary.
Tackling transportation emissions with fairness and incentives
Transportation is widely recognized as the largest source of climate pollution in Minnesota, accounting for a substantial share of statewide greenhouse gas emissions. If we are serious about climate leadership, we must treat transportation emissions with the urgency they deserve while keeping policy fair and practical for everyday Minnesotans.
I support a balanced strategy that includes:
Stronger standards and incentives to accelerate the adoption of more efficient and zero‑emission vehicles, including rebates, tax credits, and charging infrastructure where appropriate.
Polluter‑pays principles that ensure heavy‑polluting vehicles contribute more toward the environmental and public health costs they create, while efficient vehicles receive tax benefits that reward cleaner choices.
Better transit and active transportation options, especially where they reduce congestion, improve air quality, and connect people to jobs and schools.
If someone chooses to drive a vehicle that significantly worsens air quality and climate impacts, they should pay proportionately for that choice. Meanwhile, drivers who invest in cleaner cars, car‑sharing, or transit should see tangible rewards.
Protecting our water and confronting PFAS
For many people I talk with, water is the number‑one environmental concern—whether it’s PFAS in drinking water, nitrates from agricultural runoff, or contamination tied to industrial activity. Minnesotans should be able to trust that what comes out of the tap is safe, now and for generations to come.
PFAS, often called “forever chemicals,” persist in the environment and in our bodies and are increasingly found near industrial sites, landfills, and even areas affected by data center discharges. I will fight for:
Extremely protective standards for PFAS and other contaminants in drinking water, grounded in the best available science and public health research.
Strict liability for polluters: Any business that contaminates our water should be required to clean it up and pay significant fines—fines large enough to be a real deterrent, not just a “cost of doing business.”
Targeted action on agricultural runoff, including support for farmers to adopt soil‑healthy practices, buffers, and conservation measures that reduce nutrient pollution in our rivers and lakes.
In a district with a strong agricultural presence, it is essential to partner with farmers as problem‑solvers and stewards, not cast them as adversaries. Healthy soil and clean water benefit everyone.
For more background on PFAS and water threats, organizations such as Clean Water Action Minnesota and local reporting on statewide data center proposals have documented how industrial water use and chemical discharge can compound existing PFAS risks.
Holding data centers accountable for water, energy, and light pollution
Data centers are expanding rapidly in Minnesota as companies race to keep up with cloud computing and artificial intelligence—but the way many are currently planned raises serious concerns for our water, our power grid, and our communities. Large data centers can require millions of gallons of potable water every day for cooling and electricity generation, and their discharges can contain chemicals and PFAS that municipal treatment plants are not designed to fully remove.
They also consume huge amounts of electricity, potentially straining the grid and increasing emissions if not paired with clean energy, and they can contribute to light pollution that changes the character of nearby neighborhoods. Clean Water Action and others have raised the alarm that if all proposed large Minnesota data centers are built, their water use could rival that of more than a million Minnesotans combined.
I am personally skeptical of large‑scale data center expansion in Minnesota under the status quo and would advocate for:
Stricter siting and permitting for any data center expected to consume significant water or power, including robust environmental review and public input.
Clear ownership transparency so communities know exactly who owns and profits from these facilities.
Higher property taxes and impact fees for data centers relative to similar‑sized developments, ensuring they pay their fair share for grid upgrades, water infrastructure, and environmental safeguards.
Strong reporting requirements on water use, cooling methods, waste streams, and energy sources, in line with proposals at the Legislature to increase scrutiny of large water users like data centers.
Some advocates are even calling for a moratorium on new large‑scale data centers until we fully understand and manage their impacts; I believe we should, at a minimum, adopt strong guardrails that prioritize community health and sustainability.
Making Minnesota a true environmental leader
None of these ideas—protecting the Boundary Waters, safeguarding clean water, reining in data centers, or driving a just transition to carbon‑free energy—are radical or untested. They reflect what scientists, frontline communities, and environmental advocates have been urging policymakers to do for years. What is missing is consistent political will and a willingness to prioritize long‑term public good over short‑term corporate profit.
Implemented together, these policies can make Minnesota a standout environmental leader, both nationally and internationally: a state known for pristine waters, resilient communities, clean energy jobs, and a government that insists polluters, not taxpayers, bear the cost of pollution. That is the vision I will bring to the Minnesota House for District 54B, and I am proud that the DFL Environmental Caucus has recognized this commitment with their endorsement.
