Sales tax vote defines future

By The Gazette Editorial Board

----

What's your preference, Cedar Rapids voters, for the year 2016?

Scenario No. 1: Residential neighborhoods in the city's core are still struggling to rebuild from the 2008 flood devastation. Downtown boasts several major new public facilities, including a library, convention center and upgraded U.S. Cellular Center, as well as a restored Paramount Theatre. But new private-sector investment in both the business and residential areas is largely stagnant.

The downtown's vital tax base, which dropped $30 million in value and after the flood, has not fully rebounded. A net job loss persists. Basic city services are reduced.

Scenario No. 2: Core neighborhoods are filling the flood-damaged gaps, beginning to bustle again as new residents and remaining neighbors mingle and build relationships and property values. Downtown, pent-up interest in new investment has erupted, spawning new and expanded businesses of all sizes. The tax base and employment surge beyond pre-flood levels. The tax burden is spread as existing infrastructure expands, instead of sprawl increasing at the city's edges.

The choice is easy.

And the difference maker? Construction of comprehensive flood protection is well under way or nearly finished. The city's collective confidence is soaring because the risk of repeating massive destruction from another major flood is greatly reduced for the next 50 years or beyond.

Big decisions loom

Certainly, no one knows for sure what the exact impact of having or not having such permanent flood protection will be five years from now. But there are good reasons to believe either scenario is possible, depending on what happens in the state Legislature and local ballot box in the next few weeks.

First off, we support building comprehensive flood protection on both sides of the river. It's the single-most important action needed to leverage the public-sector projects under way and assure the most vibrant future possible for our downtown and the community as a whole. The cost, estimated at $375 million, is formidable but protecting property and infrastructure worth several billion is at stake.

Better management of the watershed feeding the Cedar River is the best long-term solution to flood mitigation in this region, but it will take decades to establish. Cedar Rapids can't wait. Climatologists, insurance company risk managers and many scientists say Iowa's wetter weather in recent years is likely to continue well into the future and produce continued major flooding along our tributaries.

Paying for such extensive protection is daunting. It requires both state and federal assistance. But Cedar Rapids must show political leaders at those higher levels we're willing to do our share.

We agree with Mayor Ron Corbett, the City Council and a broad coalition of labor, business and other community leaders that extending the local-option sales tax is the best way to do that.

The referendum on the May 3 ballot would extend the current five-year LOST, approved in 2009 for immediate flood recovery needs, for 20 years. Half of the revenue would go toward the flood protection system, 40 percent to speed up repair of 118 city streets and 10 percent for property tax relief.

What critics say

Little organized opposition to the protection plan has surfaced. But critics of extending LOST say they can't trust city leaders to do what they say they'll do with the money. They point to the current penny tax, saying the city so far has mismanaged the 90 percent designated for flood recovery. They ask where's the 10 percent for property tax relief. They say the flood protection plan is laden with all kinds of fancy amenities.

The record shows they're largely mistaken.

Most of the $30 million in LOST funds spent so far has gone to help flood victims, homeowners and renters, replace some of what they lost - essentially, emergency recovery help after a disaster.

Property tax relief is more difficult to quantify. Relief doesn't necessarily mean your property tax bill goes down. Instead, the LOST revenue has been used to help offset the city's extra flood-induced costs, thereby easing the need to increase the property tax rate - although many taxpayers' bills are up some anyway because of property valuation changes and an increase in the state-mandated rollback formula.

The plan itself pays for levees, flood walls, pumps, land acquisition, and administrative and design costs. No fountains or skating rinks. Protection.

We also think the 40 percent of extended LOST that would go toward streets fits a critical need. The city has fallen behind on street maintenance, in part because of lagging revenue from a state road-use tax that is increasingly underfunded and also needs a formula revision that's fairer to cities.

Least painful option

The flood protection and street projects need a steady, designated stream of revenue, and LOST is the least painful option. It spreads the cost more fairly and over time. Visitors to the city contribute. It avoids unpopular, more burdensome options such as higher property tax and utility franchise fees.

And the option sales tax by law must be tied to results people can readily see - in this case, flood protection and better streets.

So if you prefer something closer to Scenario 2 within the next few years, vote yes on May 3.

n Comments: thegazette.com/category/

opinion/editorial or editorial@sourcemedia.net