4 firms hired to plan levee project

4 firms hired to plan levee project

There are 326 comments on the Belleville News-Democrat story from Mar 2, 2008, titled 4 firms hired to plan levee project. In it, Belleville News-Democrat reports that:

The East-West Gateway Council of Governments board of directors hired four St. Louis-based firms to make plans for an estimated $180 million project to repair the metro-east region's levees.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Belleville News-Democrat.

First Prev
of 17
Next Last
Ryan

Ballwin, MO

#1 Mar 22, 2008
West county baby!
www_leveewaste_c om

Simi Valley, CA

#2 Aug 25, 2009
The price tag is up to $400 million. This is a waste. What else could the federal government be doing with that money? Maybe helping local schools, updating hospitals, fixing roads. Why should we pay for people and businesses that chose to build in the flood area?
Please sign our petition at www.leveewaste.com .
wondering

United States

#3 Aug 25, 2009
www_leveewaste_com wrote:
The price tag is up to $400 million. This is a waste. What else could the federal government be doing with that money? Maybe helping local schools, updating hospitals, fixing roads. Why should we pay for people and businesses that chose to build in the flood area?
Please sign our petition at www.leveewaste.com .
Are you aware of the vaste amount of commercial and residential property included in this project?
Country Boy

Highland, IL

#4 Aug 25, 2009
Yea, what else could our great government spend 400 million on? You have apparently been in a closet for the last year and have no idea how much money your government has blown on stupid crap. Money is no problem for them,and guess what it's all your tax dollars. We will all be taken care of,seriously,Obama said so. Hea don't blame me,I didn't vote for the idiot.
www_leveewaste_c om

Simi Valley, CA

#5 Aug 25, 2009
wondering wrote:
<quoted text>Are you aware of the vaste amount of commercial and residential property included in this project?
And there is a heck of a lot more property up the bluff, where mother nature intended people to build. Even if this was a reasonable project--big IF--Why should people in Arizona or Nevada or Michigan pay for it? Let the people who built down there and anybody else who benefits from the levees pay for the levees.
Country Boy

Highland, IL

#6 Aug 25, 2009
Too many sink holes and trees in the bluffs. Where would all the birds go and roost if you cut down all the trees. Why should we the people of Illinois have to pay for hurricane damage to New Orleans and all the other coastal areas that get pounded every year? How much money did the government spend in New Orleans in 2005? I would have to say that the 400 million is peanuts compared to what was spent down there.
Alessandro Machi

Los Angeles, CA

#7 Aug 26, 2009
Why not dredge the Mississippi River, install some type of hydroelectric energy absorbing river bottom that can be lowered during flood season?

Imagine all the hydroelectric energy that the Mississippie River could produce. Energy taps could be sent to several dozen states. A stimulus project that creates jobs that in turn creates energy AND reduces future flood damage.

Works for me.

Did you know that the Mississippi River was dredged after World War II by returning war veterans so they could have jobs that also had meaning. Might be nice to transition soldiers coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan with worthwhile jobs on the Mississippi River that creates the energy we are fighting for halfway around the world.

http://www.dailypuma.com
Oma

Kansas City, MO

#9 Aug 26, 2009
I hope this goes through. We need something to bring people in and spend money in our community. Have you seen the amount of empty buildings downtown Columbia? And what's not empty is filled with hairdressers. How many beauty salon/spas do we need? We need to do something drastic to get out of this rut we're in!
Muskrat Trapper

Waterloo, IL

#10 Aug 26, 2009
Rain falls, water flows, and taxes rise. Trappen rats is easy. thays the ones dat get dem taxes.
septen in texas dems difrnt taxes. Fixen levees aint no fools game butt fixen taxes dats harder. 400 million and the levees aint no taller on both sides by law. that willn't stop dat 500 year risen river. problems employ peeps hopes i get me sum enjoymnt employmnt. goodae mt
www_leveewaste_c om

Henderson, NV

#11 Aug 27, 2009
And spending $400 million on levees is going to fill the empty shops downtown? It's going to fill the pockets of people who own property protected by the levees. What would help downtown is the city fixing the road and giving some incentives to people to fix up their property downtown. Right now, all the incentives are to stay away from downtown.

Since: Jul 08

Columbia, IL

#12 Aug 27, 2009
Actually the city is moving forward with the Main Street project and there is at least two incentive programs available to business owners to improve their businesses. Until someone actually puts a name to this endless drivel they are spouting I give it no credence whatsoever. The website has no contact information and they go as far to hide their server.
Levee guy

Waterloo, IL

#13 Aug 28, 2009
For the people that don't understand why people like me choose to live in a flood plain,let me explain.In the mid 50's,'we the people' built a great levee system and were told 'we' the people,that it's safe to locate there as we are protected up to a 500 year flood event.I'll take those odds.It seems that 150,000 people and 65% of Southern Illinois economic engine located there also.Interstate Hiways,rail and trucking..Refineries,steel mills...all on that promise of 500 year protection.Now,'we the people' are telling 'we' the people, that we built these levees deficient according to modern engineering standards.They now claim our levees are 33 yr levees and are preparing to insure accordingly.Guess who gets the profits from the increased rates.'We the people' just lied to 'we',the people.Not only are you saying that our levees are deficient,with no engineering data to substantiate that claim,you claim that it is the responsibilty of 'we' the people to fund the upgrades.If 'we the people' continue to shrug the obvious responsibility of fixing the levees,'we the people' will be responsible for destroying many peoples livelyhoods of 'we' the people, by allowing the beauracracy to continue to distort time and cost estimates' to ridiculous levels.Our properties become worthless...and the truth is..we are still protected by a 100 yr levee.Just wait till you,that don't understand,get hit by FEMA when they declare Southern illinois an extreme eartquake risk,and raise your rates tenfold.Try to understand those just north saying...why would one choose to live in an earthquake area.Or a woods where there is fire,or a beach?.Get it?
www_leveewaste_c om

United States

#14 Sep 1, 2009
Will, is the city going to give $400 million of incentives to property owners downtown? how about $1 million? Nope. Until the city, county, state and federal governments start putting the same kind of money into the ret of Columbia that they are putting into the levees, than the priority is the levees. Plain and simple.

And Levee Guy, when was the last time that an earthquake damaged significant property in Metro East? Nobody in the area built on a fault line. You built behind a levee. That was your choice. But don't expect me or my parents in Inidiana to pay to maintain and improve the levees. I understand that "we the people" built the levees, but you seem to believe that the whole country has an obligation to maintain them forever. I disagree.

Why does it matter who set up our web site? I suspect that you want to pick that person apart instead of addressing the facts.
dude

Millstadt, IL

#15 Sep 2, 2009
Um...I think the Downtown plan and improvements are well over a million. Several hundred thousand for 13 blocks...something like that? So that sure seems like a priority to me.

I could agree with "No new development in the bottomlands"...but what's there, we have to protect. Should the feds have just given up on New Orleans? Should we just give up on your house if something happens and tell you tough luck, you shouldn't have built there?

I for one, do think it matters who is behind your group. There is a group of people in this town that think it is ok to attack real efforts to move this city and make up any lies that they feel like. When you take a stance like your own website, you should identify yourself so you are not mistaken for this group. Hey...maybe you'd get more than 2 people to sign.
www_leveewaste_c om

Duchesne, UT

#16 Sep 2, 2009
Dude, you're saying that the message does not matter as much as the messenger. I disagree. In fact I think that's a problem when people look at the messenger and immediately form an opinion about what that person is saying based on who that person is. That is part of oour country's problem and the reason we have such polarization. Too many people act based on what somebody they like says, not based on what the facts are.
As for your idea that the city spending a couple hundred thousand dollars makes downtown a priority, you have not addressed the discrepancy between $400 million on levees and the money being spent downtown.
How much longer do we have to protect the property in the bottomlands? And why should it be the federal government? Building levees does not seem like something that came out of our federal constitution. Are my friends in California on the line for these levees for an indefinite period?
Here's the real problem: We all want the federal government to quit growing, but we want it to keep helping us. Screw the folks in Utah. Make cuts in what they get from the feds. So back to my question from the other day: Why should this be a federal government responsibility? Anyone?
dude

Saint Louis, MO

#17 Sep 2, 2009
Couple hundred thousand x 13 blocks is well over a million in our Downtown.

$400 million to fix levees...maybe, but it's not all Columbia's share.

My point was that Columbia has MANY priorities and I think Downtown is one of them.

And yes, the messenger does matter. You think so too or you'd identify yourself.

I think it's a federal government responsibility because of exactly what you said "Screw the folks in Utah"...or anywhere that isn't in my backyard. Because of that attitude the Counties and Cities with land in the bottoms will never work together to fix these issues...so the feds have to make them work together.
DupoFan2

Waterloo, IL

#18 Sep 2, 2009
That same old story.I got mine,I'm safe from flood..the hell with those in the bottoms.Like I said,the Federal Government built the levees and said they were safe to a 500 yr event.We did maintain them to the point that they are one of the best in the midwest system.Now they say they are not safe.They were built deficient.But we in the bottoms should pay for the Governments failures.If we have a 500 yr event,and flood,I'll take my loss,but don't penalise me by lying.You seem to think that one must be stupid to build in the bottoms,but look who invested there.The most expensive Interstate Hiway anywhere in the country is there,thats your and my Interstate Hiway,not just mine,yet that you expect us to protect for free.The tax money generated here by the biggest corporations in southern Illinois are here.I can agree that going from 180,000 to 400,000 is ridiculous.The Corps is a moving target.Our engineering firm will certify our levees.All we are asking for at this point is 70 million and 4 years to get us to the 100 yr certification,then the corps can take as long as they feel necessary to get them to a 500 yr. level.The COE does not recognise this option.They have been directed by FEMA to go to a 500 yr level.We are not asking for handouts...we just want a fair deal to protect our livelyhoods.The 'whole country' does not maintain the levees.We do that with the meager taxes collected in the flood zone.To expect us to pay for the federal Governments screw ups in the construction of these levees is just unacceptable.
Levee Guy

Waterloo, IL

#19 Sep 2, 2009
Hey 'leveewaste',when was the last time we flooded.You act as though we have cost you money.These levee's are maintained on meager taxes collected in the flood zone..not out of you or your parents pocket.In fact,we have one of the highest rated districts in the COE system.You seem to feel that Columbia is paying the 400 million.Here are the facts.Columbia is not paying the 400 million.No one knows for sure yet what the true costs will be.Instead of running with your lack of factual information on your little website,how about doing the right thing and help us fix the levee system.Our history in both the 93 and 95 flood events deserve that consideration.And if you live in Columbia..how about all your stormwater that you illegally send down to us.We have monitored for many years the 'vodoo' stormwater systems that provide those expensive lakefront lots.Storm water retention areas that were built over so that others can proffit from expensive developements.We observed a northflow from the PalmerCreek pump station that actually flooded parts of our system due to your developements 'on the hill'.We never felt the need to fire off some upland /downland lawsuits as the lawyers make the proffits...but guys like you make me wonder.I visied your site..you may be a fiscal conservative,but in my opinion,common sense is not one of your high points.
www_leveewaste_c om

Duchesne, UT

#20 Sep 2, 2009
You are either liberal Dems or selfish Republicans. You say spend somebody else's money to help me. That's how we got into this mess of debt spending to the tune of $35,000 per person.

DupoFan, get your facts straight.
1.The feds built a 100-year levee, not a 500-year levee.
2.The levees do not protect the interstate; they are built above the levees.
3.Property owners down there are not eeking $70 million; they want $480 million to get to 100-year certification.
4.You are asking for a hand-out.

As for Leveeguy, I cannot even start to comprehend what you wrote.

Back to my question, why should people all over the country pay for levees that benefit a few property owners in Illinois?
WTF Levee Waste

Waterloo, IL

#21 Sep 2, 2009
I for one want to know how you can claim that Interstate 255 is built totally above the flood plane.

The fact is that the majority of I-225 & I-270 on the Illinois side is built below the heights of the Levee system. This is a fact that even IDOT will admit. It does not take much of a rocket scientist to realize that you are actually driving down hill from the levee as you head into Columbia from JB bridge.

You need to get your facts straight. And quit hiding behind anonymous IP address. You are looking more like the same people behind the old Citizens 4 Columbia web site. You give no name and would not offer one when asked. Be like Levi and show your face.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 17
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Stifel Financial Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Stifel Stalks Faltering Firms for Share in Brok... (Feb '13) Feb '13 fayebryant00 2
News Coffee wars reach full boil (May '09) May '09 Unknown27 3
News Coffee wars reach full boil (May '09) May '09 Frankie Lovemuscle 1
News Coffee wars at full boil (May '09) May '09 JASON 1
News Coffee wars: McDonald's, Starbucks, Dunkin Donu... (May '09) May '09 1rightamerican 3
News 8 experts pick investments for an uncertain 2009 (Jan '09) Jan '09 U r not so smart 19
News U.S. stocks end slightly lower amid bailout unc... (Oct '08) Oct '08 OilyGasMiner 1
More from around the web