The House Capital Budget Committee on Monday voted 8-5 to pass Rep. Richard DeBolt’s substitute bill which awards $1.5 billion to water management issues throughout the state, but does not provide any specified amount to the Chehalis River Basin.
Previous legislation allocated $300 million for the basin.
The scope of the project dwarfs previous requests. The $5 million in 2012 and $28.2 million awarded to this region over the summer both were considered victories, but now, going big is the only way to go, DeBolt, R-Chehalis, said in an interview Monday.
“I knew the only way to get it done would be to have enough allies,” he said. “I’m trying to form the (other supporters) into a coalition to move the bills. This is one of those things where it helps to have been in the Legislature a while.”
J. Vander Stoep, an alternate to the Chehalis River Basin Flood Authority and a member of the governor’s work group, described DeBolt’s method as “bringing a number of different water problems in the state under one umbrella.”
“His approach is very wise,” Vander Stoep said. “If someone said, fund the Chehalis all by itself, well there’s about 12 legislators who care about that, but instead he putting the different parts together.”
Stakeholders from throughout the state spoke last week in support of DeBolt’s Flood Reduction Act of 2014, which authorizes the state finance committee to issue $1.5 billion in general obligation bonds to be appropriated in phases over the next 10 years, starting in 2015.
Half of the money goes to flood reduction projects, half to stormwater management projects.
Of the money requested in DeBolt’s bill, the Chehalis River Basin receives $300 million.
The remaining money is awarded as grants via a competitive bidding process to qualifying jurisdictions such as counties, cities and federally recognized tribes.
Applicants must provide a 20 percent match from non-state sources.
In the original bill, the Chehalis River Basin received $300 million, flood reduction projects received $700 million and storm water reduction projects received $500 million.
At Monday’s meeting, DeBolt urged his fellow committee members to vote in favor of his substitute bill.
“Everybody’s district knows somebody who’s been flooded out, everyone knows the damage this causes,” he said.
Committee Chairman Hans Dunshee, D-Snohomish, gave the bill his cautious support.
“I am voting yes,” Dunshee, a secondary sponsor of the bill, said, “but I do have some concerns. It’s unfunded at the moment, and we have enormous pressure without debt capacity.”
“I’m voting yes for the purpose of keeping it alive and to continue talking about it.”
Another idea for comprehensive water management comes in the form of a bill co-sponsored by Sen. John Braun, R-Centralia, which creates a bipartisan taskforce to study financing for flood control and stormwater projects.
The task force would address flood projects such as those in the Yakima and Chehalis basins — projects with estimated costs in the billions of dollars and no identified source of funding — and look for money outside the state general fund.
The task force members also would make sure funding continues to be available through the completion of the projects, ensuring that benefits from projects are not eroded by inability to maintain the projects.
Eight legislators, the governor and four local government representatives selected by the governor make up the task force, according to the bill prime sponsored by Sen. Jim Honeyford, R-Sunnyside.
Of the local representatives, two must come from communities at risk from scarce water and two from communities at risk from flooding and storm water control problems.
The task force would be appropriated $1 million and would submit its findings and recommendations to the appropriate committees of the Legislature by Dec. 1, 2015.
Office of Financial Management Director David Schumacher on Thursday afternoon told the Senate Ways and Means Committee that complex water issues deserve funding, and that he appreciated the suggestion that money not come out of the state general fund.
But he cannot be fully supportive until more details are worked out.
“Through a combination of new revenue, appropriated money, long term funding, and smart uses of the capital budget we could support this,” he said. “But we’re a little concerned about where the money will come from from and until we see that, we’re going to be cautious.”
Department of Ecology Director Maia Bellon praised the bill as timely and much needed for Washington, a state where the environment and the economy go hand in hand.
“We are living in a time of new or growing pressures — population growth, cycles of drought, historic storm events,” she said. “These pressures coupled with our aging infrastructure are absolutely a challenge for this state.”
