No time to give up

By The Gazette Editorial Board

---

Cedar Rapids voters' narrow defeat of the 20-year extension of the local-option sales tax clearly was tough to swallow for the mayor, City Council and other supporters.

We also backed the proposal. And we're not convinced the outcome indicates that most residents reject the idea of building comprehensive flood protection.

We see the results as a wake-up call - not the end of trying to protect Cedar Rapids from another flood approaching or even exceeding our $6 billion 2008 disaster. Leaders should do more homework and put a more palatable plan on the table.

Dig into the reasons the measure lost in Cedar Rapids. Obviously, tax supporters didn't fully understand why more than 16,000 voters said no.

It's time to regroup, not give up. Review the considerable baggage that, whether all fair or not, became attached to the sales tax initiative - the issues of trust, the perception that this referendum was mostly about Big Downtown Business asking everyone else to protect them, and the length and makeup of the proposed sales tax extension.

Asking voters to commit for 20 years with the revenue divided three ways - half for flood protection, 40 percent for fixing streets and 10 percent for property tax relief - was, we suspect, asking too much for too long for many voters. Too many pieces to explain and justify.

Or, a campaign that did not do a good enough job of explaining why the city needs an extra tax to take better care of streets. A campaign that, despite some 20 neighborhood meetings leading up to the vote, did not adequately make the case for how the sales tax would help keep property taxes at bay.

OK - some miscalculations and mistakes were made. But after city leaders sort through them, they should take time to sit down with “no” voters. We Can Do Better CR members say they don't oppose flood protection. Press them for what kind of plan they and other opponents could support.

Other fallout from Tuesday's vote was the Legislature's pending plan to divert some of the growth in state sales tax to help Cedar Rapids pay for protection - without a local funding commitment, it's very likely not going to happen this legislative session.

But that doesn't mean state assistance is out the window for good. Cedar Rapids could bring back a revised proposal in November. Legislators could reconsider the state's role in January.

We believe, for example, that many “no” voters on the 20-year plan might prefer a 10-year plan dedicated only to flood protection.

Most important, we shouldn't give up on protecting both sides of the river. The risks remain. The enormity of what's at stake hasn't changed.

So what's the plan?

n Comments: thegazette.com/

category/opinion/editorial or

editorial@sourcemedia.net