Should We Go Forward With the Levee Project for Flood Control?
By Sen. Dan Swecker
Special to The Chronicle
In recent days, The Chronicle has run several stories and editorials regarding possible solutions to prevent or minimize flood damage in the Chehalis River Basin. The Feb. 7 editorial (“Levee-First Solution to Flooding Shortsighted”) in particular has prompted me to respond.
Opponents of the Corps of Engineers’ levee plan say it will protect just Interstate 5. That is not true. In addition to I-5, the levee plan would protect most of the Centralia and Chehalis communities that flooded last December. That includes more than 500 residences. It would also protect schools, public buildings and public infrastructure. Eighty percent of the benefit of the levee project is to the community, and only 20 percent goes to the freeway.
The levee project has been in the works for almost eight years. It has had a great deal of local input and has addressed many concerns. It would meet many of the objectives that people identified as important for the Twin Cities.
That editorial mentioned concerns that the I-5 levee protection plan could cause worse flooding, including more flooding for the downstream communities in Thurston and Grays Harbor counties. The fact is, the Corps’ levee plan would not cause any additional downstream flooding. In fact, it would hold a minimal amount of water back, which actually improves the situation downstream. Grays Harbor County Commissioner Bob Beerbower has indicated he understands and agrees that is the case. In fact, he has urged us to go forward with the levee project in Centralia and Chehalis.
The issue of whether the Corps’ levee plan may cause flooding problems upstream has been analyzed. It does in fact cause a slight increase in the flood level (about four inches) for eight houses. These houses would be raised to accommodate new flood levels (based on the 1996 flood) in the Corps plan itself. Because of last December’s flood, which the U.S. Geological Survey called a “500-year” event, flood levels must be reanalyzed. All of that would take place before the plan goes ahead.
The Corp of Engineers has indicated that we could abandon the current levee project in the twin cities area and begin a basin wide analysis of alternatives. They believe that such a process would take another 5 to 8 years and would determine that the current levee project is still the best option in the entire basin. As a result we would have accomplished nothing except another multi-year delay while our local communities remain vulnerable to more flooding.
I echo the editorial’s praise of Rep. Gary Alexander. He should be commended for his legislation that appropriates $50 million to fund flood control efforts. We also support his initiative to amend the legislation providing some flexibility to use that money for other purposes in addition to the Corps’ levee project should an opportunity present itself.
What About Alternatives to the Levee Project for Flood Control?
By Sen. Dan Swecker
Special to The Chronicle
The Feb. 7 editorial said Gov. Gregoire and I want basin-wide solutions, but only after getting the Army Corps plan underway. Actually, I want both basin-wide solutions and the Corps plan to proceed at the same time. While we are waiting for funding from the federal government for the levee project we can begin work on other basin wide opportunities.
The Feb. 7 editorial mentions the examination of smaller-scale dams on Chehalis River tributaries in combination with retention pools that might mitigate the massive flooding.
The Corps of Engineers, in its current flood plan, analyzed the capacity of the upper Chehalis River watershed to store flood waters. The Corps determined that not enough capacity exists in the upper watershed to protect Centralia and Chehalis. In fact, when the Corps did a cost-benefit analysis of putting structures in the upper watershed, it determined that the ratio was 1 to 0.05. To qualify for federal funding, there has to be at least a 1-to-1 ratio. That is too low by a factor of 20 to 1.
Projects are needed to protect these communities in the upper watershed. I would support them. But those specific projects won’t necessarily protect the Twin Cities. Part of the Corps’ levee plan is to strengthen the capacity for the Skookumchuck Dam. I support that as well.
The editorial states that funding for a “locally-developed plan could come and construction could certainly fit inside the governor’s four-year window.” What people need to understand is that changing the project to include anything outside of the defined project area of Centralia and Chehalis will cause us to lose the current funding. The federal government will not give us the money unless we go back, start over, and go all the way through the process again. That is federal law. There is no way to get around it. Remember, we are competing for funding with other flood control projects around the nation, many of which have a higher cost benefit ratio than ours does.
Finally, the editorial stated, “We fear state and federal politicians’ concerns are more on infrastructure and commerce and not as much on the small towns and their people that exist in the Chehalis River Basin.”
That is certainly not true in my case. I totally support the creation of a local flood control district. Unfortunately, there is no perfect solution to minimize future flood damage. We need to keep an open mind as we try to reach solutions that will help us avoid a repeat of last December’s catastrophic flood.
I think a combination of levee projects and creating a flood control district for Lewis, Thurston and Grays Harbor counties is the best solution. We should proceed on both options at the same time. They aren’t mutually exclusive. But we need to take advantage of federal resources as soon as they become available.
While the proposed levee plan isn’t perfect, while it won’t protect the entire watershed, it does far too much good to delay implementing it.
