Casting an optimistic vote for cleaner water

If you're searching for something optimistic to vote for on Tuesday's ballot, I humbly suggest 'Public Measure E.”

That's the $40 million bond issue also known as 'Linn County Water and Land Legacy.” The County Conservation Board would direct 55 percent of the money to water quality projects, including restoring wetlands and putting in place other measures to reduce runoff, pollution and flooding. Thirty and 15-percent shares would go to park improvements and trails. Many of those projects also would seek to protect waterways and curtail runoff.

Yes, it needs 60 percent support to pass, a very tall order. And yes, it's a lot of money. It's been panned by some local leaders and folks pushing various local projects because county leaders didn't promise them a cut of the loot. Some folks say its spending plan isn't specific enough. Others simply don't want to pay the property tax boost it will take to pay back the bonds.

But since I started caring about water issues, shortly after seeing 31-feet of the stuff flowing through the heart of Cedar Rapids, I've learned to remain optimistic, even when the headwinds are gale force.

Protecting water is always too expensive, it seems. There are always other interests lined up to get their cut before our irreplaceable natural resources are tossed scraps. People want clean water, but paying the bill is a less popular prospect. Skittish politicians are more into career quality efforts.

And it seems like we don't always do 'legacy” very well. We'll pony up for a pool or a pothole, but investments in stuff with benefits far over the horizon too often get a lukewarm push to the back burner.

But water is now a front-burner issue in Iowa. And make no mistake, the benefits of this legacy plan would be real and lasting.

Just days ago, members of the Cedar River Watershed coalition were told how the 6,100-acre Big Marsh wetland system in Franklin and Butler counties likely held back enough water to cut the crest of September's major flood. As Cedar Rapids officials nervously waited to see if their temporary flood protection would hold, every inch of cresting floodwater raised the stakes.

So positive changes in the way we use our land and handle runoff matter.

In Linn County, the $40 million bond would provide dollars, for example, to restore wetlands and create buffers along the Cedar River and other creeks and streams, in partnership with landowners, governments and environmental groups. It's not a land grab. Eminent domain will not be used.

It's actually more of a water grab, grabbing runoff before it carries soil and fertilizer pollutants into our waterways, drinking water systems and flood-prone properties downstream. Improving water quality also would improve and protect wildlife habitat. Streams and oxbows damaged by rapid, heavy runoff would be restored.

Partners undoubtedly will bring dollars to the table, meaning the $40 million county bond could leverage three or four times as much money in matching investments.

I suppose we could always wait for the state Legislature to at long last fill the Iowa Natural Resources and Outdoor Recreation Trust Fund, created by voters in 2010. If that happens, Linn County's bond proceeds could be used as a local match for those state dollars.

But it's entirely possible Tuesday's election will leave us with a Legislature even less interested in making new investments in water quality. We may get a House and Senate that will simply shift a pile of existing bucks into programs favored by farm groups.

On the flood protection front, we're still waiting for the federal government to keep its promise to fund east bank walls and levees in Cedar Rapids.

Of course, the city's prospects might improve if east bank funding is expedited by WRDA during the upcoming lame duck. Meanwhile, the CBO will be digging into the corps' BCR. Of course, in the end, we still could be SOL. It's all very simple, really.

My point is, while we're watching and waiting for federal funding, we might as well help ourselves and invest more in upstream measures that mitigate flooding. The city already has partnered with landowners, with the help of U.S. Department of Agriculture funds. Adding the county's bond proceeds would kick upstream efforts into a higher gear.

Even with full funding, walls and levees are a 20-year project. According to research spearheaded by Gene Takle, director of Iowa State University's climate science program, 100-year floods in the 20th Century are now 25-year floods, or four times more likely. More frequent heavy precipitation is boosting our flood risk. The best way to meet that threat is a comprehensive approach that starts upstream.

I'm focused, not surprisingly, on water quality. But there also will be dollars in the Linn County proposal for long-planned projects updating the county's park facilities, expansion of campgrounds and completion of trail networks. Improvements to the county's quality of life infrastructure benefit not only users but also make Linn County more attractive place to live and work. Economic development today is about more than tax breaks and handshakes.

It's a forward-thinking, thoughtful proposal that seeks to tackle a big problem in a collaborative way. It's an investment in our natural resources and in the future. Will it pass? I'm staying optimistic.

l Comments: (319) 398-8452; todd.dorman@thegazette.com