City needs to better define ‘protection’

We are being asked to extend the local-option sales tax for flood protection that even some proponents admit would be inadequate to protect against a catastrophe like 2008. Remember pictures of floodwater reaching near the tops of the handrails on the bridges? What flood walls could possibly contain that? They would only exacerbate the problem by constricting the flow, causing even worse flooding upriver, raising the speed of flow, perhaps washing away the bridges, and then the walls would still be breeched, trapping floodwater behind them.

We should prepare for a “100 year flood” by establishing flood-absorbing wetlands, building catch basins along the river and her tributaries, and dredging the river.

We have more than two years to pay our current 1 percent local-option tax. This was to have provided relief for flood victims. So we're getting a convention center and a hotel in the flood plain!

The language on Tuesday's ballot is not specific about what constitutes flood protection. I am voting “no” until I am provided with a clear and workable proposal.

David D. Hall Jr.

Cedar Rapids