Text Box: Questionnaire Responses Continued From Page Eight Text Box: adjoining areas that the city has annexed do not have codes in place that the city has existing in place. It is expensive to bring these areas up to code standards. (Continued on Next Page) Do you think the proposed “Superlevee” should be built in North Jefferson City? Why or why not? Ron Medin: I harbor a healthy skepticism for projects that propose expending large amounts of money but regard the Missouri River as nothing more than something to be controlled. I’ve had the chance to canoe past the Jefferson City riverfront several times in recent years and each time I am struck by its potential for development and recreation. It seems like there should be a way to harmonize the Missouri River’s dual nature as both a threat and a resource with an approach that diminishes the former while embracing the latter. (And given the unlikelihood of any funding for the Superlevee in the short term, we should have plenty of time to explore those options.) Jane Smith: I am not convinced that the construction of a “superlevee” in North Jefferson City would not just shift the problem of flooding to other areas. Jim Penfold: I do not support new residential, commercial or industrial development in floodplains, nor significant expansions of existing development. I believe that the existing commercial and industrial sites, the sewage treatment plant and perhaps the National Guard facility in North Jefferson City should be provided a reasonable degree of flood protection through construction of ring levees or a smaller levee system. If possible the remaining residential properties should be purchased by the city (or other government) for non-residential use. While the “superlevee” project would protect the commercial and industrial sites, it would also protect the entire airport and a substantial amount of agricultural land to the east of the airport. I question the value of protecting the airport and agricultural land. A reasonable degree of protection for the airport can be provided by main-taining the agricultural levee system and wet flood proofing the terminal and hangers. The “super-levee” project would increase flood elevations upstream which includes portions of western Jefferson City in the Grays Creek watershed and could increase flood elevations in downtown Text Box: Jefferson City along Wears Creek. I think that Jefferson City and the US Army Corps of Engineers need to re-evaluate the “superlevee” project. Joe Wilson: No, I do not support a proposed “Superlevee.” I don’t think we’ve been told the whole truth about the need for this, because Federal money is involved and we, as taxpayers, will pick up our share. When Federal money is involved, there’s always strings attached. It’s a well known fact that Federal money is squandered but that does not justify doing the same on the local level. The fencing around the airport, which doesn’t prevent the geese from entering the flightways, is a prime example of our wasted Federal tax dollars to the tune of $14,000. The “Jokelevvee”, in my opinion, is another farce that will only direct more flood water into the main channel and Jefferson City will feel the results. The “hundred year flood” is not that big of a threat to justify such waste. There was a time when the river was bluff to bluff and Nature was doing just fine until Man changed the channel.