Council members push to extend sales tax to fund flood-protection system

The city has to look to itself, too, if it wants an attractive flood-protection system here that protects both sides of the Cedar River, four members of the nine-member City Council who live on the city's west side said on Thursday.

All four - District 4 and District 5 council members Chuck Wieneke and Justin Shields and at-large council members Don Karr and Chuck Swore - lined up in support of Mayor Ron Corbett's idea, floated on Wednesday, to ask voters to extend the city's 1-percent local-option sales tax for 20 more years to help pay for the city's “preferred,” $375-million flood-protection system that protects both sides of the Cedar River against a flood disaster like 2008's.

Wieneke pointed out that the federal and state governments to date have shipped hundreds of millions of dollars into the city to help the city's flood recovery, which has become for some, he said, like an always-flowing stream of non-local public money that will never slow down or shut off.

“I think in a lot of people's minds, they think, ‘The money's coming,'” Wieneke said. “Personally, I think if this city wants flood protection, it's going to have to pay for most of it itself.”

Karr said both the federal and state governments have facing their own new pressures to contain spending, and as a result, he said the city is going to have to depend more on itself if it wants a flood-protection system.

“Should we just wait as council people and hope and pray that the federal and state governments will come up with the money?” Karr asked. “Should we gamble on that?”

Part of the pickle that City Hall finds itself in regarding the construction of a flood protection system is that the Army Corps of Engineers has concluded that a federally mandated formula that weighs benefits versus costs allows the Corps to recommend only a no-frills, $100-million flood-protection design for Cedar Rapids that protects only most of the east side of the Cedar River.

Mayor Corbett and the City Council have said repeatedly that the city's flood-protection system must protect both, at-risk sides of the river. The council's preferred flood-protection plan also calls for features, like removable flood walls in the downtown and at Czech Village, that add to the cost of the preferred system.

“We got to start thinking, ‘Where is the money going to come from?'” Wieneke said.

If the Corps' proposal is approved by Congress, the city and state would be responsible for 35 percent of the cost of the Corps' $100-million, east-side-only project. It's the city's task, too, to find money for west-side protection, for additional protection on the river's east side and for removable flood walls and other upgrades, Corbett has emphasized this week.

His preference, he said, is to lean on the 1-percent local-option sales tax rather than raising property taxes.

The city's current 1-percent local-option sales tax, in place for 63 months, expires June 30, 2014. During that period, the tax is expected to raise, perhaps, $96 million, 10 percent of which is being used for property-tax relief and 90 percent for flood recovery, but little if any for the city's needed flood-protection system.

Corbett is contemplating asking voters to extend the tax for 20 years beyond 2014, with 50 percent of the funds for flood protection, 50 percent for street repairs.

Swore on Thursday noted that the city continues to fight in Washingon, D.C., and at the Statehouse to find money to help pay for some of the city's flood-protection system. At the Statehouse, the city is asking lawmakers to divert for a number of years the growth in the state's share of state sales tax collected in Cedar Rapids and Linn County to the city's flood-protection system. That could help pay some of the system's cost.

“But if we don't show we're willing to step up ourselves, it's going to be tough to convince other legislative bodies that we have to have their help,” Swore said.

Shields agreed. He said taking steps to extend the city's local-option sales tax will show state lawmakers how serious the city is about building a flood-protection system.

Without a system, investors will continue to shy away from investing in a place still prone to flooding, he said.

Shields said City Hall won't stand for the thought of protecting just one side of the river from future flooding, and he said residents throughout the city won't either.

“You don't have a city and protect just one side of that,” he said.

Shields said the only other way to raise local money for flood protection might be to have a casino in Cedar Rapids. But he said voters here rejected the idea in the past and governor-elect Terry Branstad is not in favor of additional gambling in the state.

“So I don't see any other way (but an extension of the local-option tax),” he said.

Karr said the city will become a casino if voters go to the polls - Corbett has suggested a possible referendum on May 3 - and oppose a sales-tax extension.

“Do citizens want us to gamble and not spend the money and not extend the sales tax and not do flood recovery?” Karr asked. “Do they want to roll the dice and hope we don't get flooded again? I want to know, do citizens want us to gamble or not?”

Some of Iowa's larger towns and cities, Corbett has noted, have the local-option sales taxes in place without a sunset date. Those include Dubuque, Davenport, Clinton, Ames, Sioux City, Council Bluffs, Keokuk, Fort Madison, Fort Dodge and Washington.

Every town in most of the counties surrounding Cedar Rapids and Linn County also has the tax in place without a sunset date. That includes Benton, Buchanan, Iowa, Jones, Tama (except for LeGrand), Jackson and Dubuque counties, according to the Iowa Department of Revenue.