A number of my Madison neighbors tell KELO they plan to hit the Madison City Commission meeting tonight to demand some flood control action. Frequent Madville Times commenter Tim Higgins, Kelli Stout, and Heather Roling all got heavy flood damage, and they lay some blame on the city:
"I think they should just hear our stories and what we went through and find out why something hasn't been done to prevent this from happening again. We were told this was not supposed to happen. Last time in 1993, when this town flooded, they told us they fixed the problem and that was a 100 year flood. Twice now, since then we've had water," Roling said.
After that major flood in 1993, Higgins says city leaders proposed a water retention facility to control heavy rains down Memorial Creek, but nothing was built.
"I honestly believe if they had that detention facility in place, this event would not have happened. I do believe it's time to revisit putting up a detention facility north of town," Higgins said [Hailey Higgins, "Madison Storm Victims Say Damage Preventable," KELOLand.com, 2012.05.12].
The folks KELO talked to also complain that the city didn't get the word out about the rising water fast enough. It's not that the city wasn't trying: Arlyce Freet told KJAM she learned about the flood from a firefighter who knocked on her door at 2:45 a.m. But Roling thinks the city should implement a phone notification system like the schools use for snow days.
Now Higgins, Roling, and Stout aren't on the official agenda yet, but I hope the city can squeeze them in and have engineer Chad Comes come in to talk about the fabled detention pond and why the city hasn't taken on that project yet. It could well be that no pond is going to be big enough to keep six-plus inches of rain from overflowing Memorial Creek. But if Madison can do more flood mitigation, acquiring land for a new detention pond or widening and deepening the creek channel could do more for enhancing Madison's quality of life than subsidizing the country club.
Related: Folks concerned with emergency management procedures during the May 5–6 flood may want to drop by the Lake County Commission meeting Tuesday around noon: that's when Don Thomson will present information on the flood and how the county responded.
Memories must be short. The city started down the path of building a retention facility north of Madison after the flood of '93. Mayor Royce Hueners and the city commission attempted to purchase the land and then tried eminent domain but lost in court to the landowners. Todd Epp was one of the attorneys who represented the landowners, Doyle and Wanda Paul.
There's a simple solution to this. The creek isn't deep enough, so they should just dig it out. Unless there's sewer lines running underneath, it should be pretty easy.
The creek averages probably 10 feet deep (not the water, but the walls). Make it 15 or 20, and it won't overflow. That's at least 90% of the problem.
Goodness, an evil Democrat like Todd Epp assisted in maintaining property rights. Who would have ever guessed?
Pay enough or provide better than equivalent property and I suspect most people will decide to sell. When cities try to screw people, they ought not be surprised when they run into a wall of rejection.
They might also look at moving the housing that flooded to more appropriate sites. The real problem is nearly worthless zoning.
Nicole, thanks! Doyle's name was in my jead, but my short memory couldn't nail down the details. When did that case unfold?
Does anyone remember the voters passed a bond issue for the amount of 1.6 million dollars to build a retention dam north of town? After the true price of 2.2 million dollars came up it went to the voter's again and the issue failed. I am working from memory and have not researched this so if I am wrong I will stand corrected.
Elisa Sand does a good job of summarizing the history of this issue in tonight's Leader.
I do like the idea of widening, or at least purchasing more of the land and homes around the creeks, letting it flood without worry and concern, and redeveloping that into a more natural area, maybe a non-permanent path could be added alongside...but I wonder if we do try to widen the creek, or make it deeper, wouldn't that effort be mute if the existing tunnels under the roads remain the same size, thus allowing the a restricted amount of water volume to pass through, especially at Washington and Second...but yes, something should be done, as more extreme weather patterns will only continue in the coming years, think faster larger storms, and fewer slow soaking rains in favor of these 6 inch bursts...