I yield the floor to my colleague from Winner, who suggests the proper use of federal funds in flood assistance in the Pierre&ndashaquaplex:
The only money the federal government should dump into Pierre and Ft. Pierre should be for moving buildings to higher ground. There is no sense subsidizing stupidity and incompetent local and state officials who failed proper zoning terribly. At least Rapid City learned a little bit from the flood there and got housing out of the flood plain...even if there seems to be a continued demand by know-nothings to build in the flood plain again [Douglas Wiken, "Get Your Lot Right Next to the River with a Canal Right to Your Door," Dakota Today, 2011.08.22].
Or how about giant stilts? Put our ex-governors' houses fifty feet up in the air. That would draw some tourists!
Rep. Kristi Noem's "hearing" in Pierre last Friday was really just an excuse for her and fellow Republican Reps. John Mica and Bill Shuster to bask in the angry glow of citizens scapegoating government and demanding that government subsidize the riverfront property to which they think they are entitled (read that word several times: entitled).
Rep. Noem also appear to be a believer in government so big it can control the weather:
When you look at these communities and the hell they've been through, they want to know it's not going to be the same story next year [Rep. Kristi Noem, quoted in "Corps Booed at Meeting on Missouri River Flooding," AP via Rapid City Journal, 2011.08.19]
Boy, when Kristi says hell, you know she thinks she has a winning issue. Unfortunately, she's pasting that word onto another vague promise. Just how does Kristi propose to provide the certainty of which she speaks? Dispatch the Army Corps of Engineers with snowblowers to Montana to blow all of the coming winter's snowpack back across the Continental Divide to the Columbia River Basin? Bring Rick Perry to Pierre to pray the rain away to Nebraska?
It is easy to lay the blame on the Army Corps of Engineers, a group of intelligent, dedicated federal officials who spend more time following orders and science than they do staging mock trials and photo ops. As Wiken points out, it may be more difficult yet more logical to lay the blame at the local level:
I can imagine that Ft. Pierre officials were absolutely thrilled with the idea of more property to generate property taxes, but my guess is the costs of this and future floods will make those property taxes seem like a pittance [Wiken, 2011.08.22].
Blame is easy. Controlling a river is hard. Kristi Noem, who still hasn't hosted her college graduation reception, is just barely qualified for the former. Let's let the Army Corps of Engineers (Engineers!) do the latter.
I thought about actually going to Pierre because it might have been interesting, but after thinking about it for over five seconds and doing some reading I knew it was going to be as productive as Rep. Noem's Pine Beetle listening session. From the AP report, it seems that I would have wasted my gas money. There are options that can be done to protect the people, but they also have negative affects. One is leave the levees up. It would kill the view, but protect the property if the waters got higher again. Another one would be drain the basins. The problem here is tourism and fish populations would be hurt dramatically. Mr. Wiken's idea of relocating the people out of the flood plain is a good idea, but who is going to pay and are we going to have lawsuits on inadequate compensation? Mr. Kurtz idea to return the river to its natural state, which would make that whole area possibly prone to flooding. There is not a win win situation.
The last time a major flood hit and made the State of South Dakota and the Corps of Engineers look bad lead to the formation and implementation of the Pick-Sloan Plan in 1943-44. Which has provided flood protection for the last 50 years. We have to remember that Missouri River flows into the Mississippi River. The Mississippi River had record flooding also. The Corps had to think about the whole river system not just Pierre, Ft. Pierre, and Dakota Dunes.
You make an interesting point, TC. Should we really be taking those levees down? I've crossed the river on Highways 34 and 47 a few times this month, and that water still looks awfully high. Are we going to be back in March or May putting up the same earthworks?
Cory,
In order for FEMA to reimburse the cities for putting up the levvees, they have to be taken down. Period.
Now before we go bonkers accusing them of being bureaucrats, the levees were built as temporary levees without the design and requirements to be permanent. For instance, the composition of the soil must be of a particular make-up to be appropriate for permanent. The speed required to construct the levees didn't give anyone time to do all that needs to be done for them to be permanent. Also, if permanent, they would have had drainage built into them to allow rain runoff on the non-river side to run into the river, which wasn't done since the level of hte water was above the normal level to allow run-off to go into the river.
This said, my guess is the decision on whether the temporary levees are removed this fall, next spring or some later date will depend on how long it takes to get sufficient capacity in the reservoir to hold a certain level of excess run-off whether from rain or snow pack.
Long-term the issue will be resolved as follows:
The Corp. and the states will discuss the relative priorities (flood control, navigation, recreation) and amend the Master Plan. This will expose the degree of risk to downstream cities (Pierre, Ft. Pierre, Yankton, and the Dunes). Each will then assess how to go forward. No answer is discernable until the Master Plan is amended. But then, each city will deal with it.
Because flood control will have even greater priority, my guess is South Dakota will have greater toleration for empty reservoirs and its impact on recreation. Downstream states will tolerate less protection of transportation via barges.
Together, the risk to future flooding will be less, few if any permanent levees will be constructed, and in a few cases around Pierre and Ft. Pierre will be "rapid creek-ized" and residential construciton will be prohibited.
I know they were rushed levees, but if we tear them down and the water rises again at the same levels it did this year. Are we going to complain and throw more money into temporary levees next year if they cannot draw down the water enough. This idea of building next to the river is quite new, I am remembering a Bob Mercer column when the flooding started saying that the building boom happened "10 to 20 years ago." I would like to know what happened in Omaha on the 19th. I would think that meeting was more productive.
I was surprised Noem said "hell". Actually makes me think less of her.
When would John Thune ever say something like that? Never.
John Thune would only say anything when it concerns him. J.T. worries about himself no one else.
This may sound terribly draconian, but the feds should put liens on all the LOTS under the houses for the amount of the flood control costs. Then allow the homeowners some fixed time to get the homes moved to higher ground and some financial aid for that. Or, the homeowners could pay off their lien and stay there, but be guaranteed they would never get any flood insurance or flood relief on their property.
The federal government can't afford to subsidize flood-plain living, and certainly not luxury flood plain living. How about Marion pay for all the damages to the homes in Marion's Gardens? Maybe Marion can get contribution from the zoning officials who allowed homes to be built there, the builders who built there, and homeowners who live there.
Hey, who is this Marion who built Marion's Gardens anyway? Any relation to a former governor?
from the looking up a dead horse's ass department:
http://interested-party.blogspot.com/2011/05/south-dakotas-earth-hating-governor.html