Fall Replay Should be Focused on Flood Protection

Sounds like the local option sales tax could be returning to a precinct near you. Or maybe it's the “Groundhog Tax.”

City leaders, tax supporters, opponents, hack columnists, everyone is now waking up from the fog of May 3. They're turning off that blaring radio alarm. “I've got you babe ...,” like Bill Murray in “Groundhog Day.”

Supporters of the failed 20-year tax extension are shaking off a bad dream. And they're realizing, after a couple of weeks with the covers pulled over their heads, that the ballot measure failed by roughly five votes per precinct. Not a drubbing after all.

“There's no sense in panicking. There's no sense in overreacting,” a well-rested Mayor Ron Corbett told our editorial board.

Some opponents are stirring after sweet victory to find that hurling protest votes didn't do much real damage. The convention complex is still being built. The hotel is still owned by the city. The public library and amphitheater are on track. The mayor has more than two years left in his term. That bleeping City Council remains. And part of Second Avenue SE is still closed.

And for the 75 percent of voters who didn't bother showing up? Do not disturb, apparently.

So it's a new day, which seems eerily like a replay. Flood protection remains a critical but unresolved issue in this town. And a sales tax measure is headed for the ballot, likely in November.

Corbett wants a scientific analysis of the May 3 results, but there's really only one way to go. And that's to shorten the tax extension period considerably and make the next vote about flood protection, period. Forget the distracting undercard fights over roads and property tax “relief.” We're ready for the main event, win or lose.

Corbett says the city is sticking with its $375 million plan for earthen levees, flood walls, removable flood walls and pumps. Stanley Consultants, an engineering firm with a global reputation, created it, and two City Councils approved it. The Army Corps of Engineers couldn't recommend funding, based on its flawed formula, but says it would work.

We'll now have ample time to dig into that plan. Backers will get a fresh chance to explain how the system works, why climate and economic factors make it necessary and how the city is on pace to spend more than $170 million on property buyouts and demolitions to clear much of the 100-year flood plain.

Opponents can better explain their objections. I hope we can get beyond fighting over removable flood walls that add $12.8 million, just 3 percent of the project's total cost, and secret “pork” that simply doesn't exist. But I expect a repeat.

Comments: (319) 398-8452; todd.dorman@sourcemedia.net