by Robin Opsahl, Iowa Capital Dispatch
March 6, 2024
A bill prohibiting local governments from passing more restrictive topsoil and storm water regulations than those set by the Department of Natural Resources failed Wednesday in the Iowa House.
Senate File 455 failed on a 44-49 vote — an unusual event given that the majority Republicans hold 64 seats.
The bill proposed prohibiting local regulations on stormwater runoff that are more restrictive than the state’s existing flow rates based on five-year frequencies. The bill also would bar local regulations related to topsoil preservation, compaction, placement or depth that are more restrictive than those set by the DNR.
The bill passed the Senate last year on a 33-15 vote, but did not reach the House floor.
The House amended the bill Wednesday to include allowances for local governments to impose more restrictive measures if they pay the difference in cost of implementation compared to costs under the federal or state standards.
Rep. Jon Dunwell, R-Newton, said the measure helps ensure new housing is affordable, and does not have extra costs because of local regulations.
“It gives us an opportunity to allow cities and counties, in circumstances where they have existing stormwater issues, to actually go beyond what we ask,” Dunwell said. “But with the way it’s handled is, the developer takes care of their costs that would have been according to this regulation, and makes the city and or county accountable for the dollars extra that would be required for those extra regulations.”
Multiple lawmakers objected to the legislation, saying that it would limit local control on an important issue. As many Iowa communities face more floods and other extreme weather, the ability to set regulations allows local governments to best mitigate flash floods and prevent property damage or harm to residents, Rep. Jerome Amos Jr., D-Waterloo said.
Amos Jr., a former Waterloo City Council member, said the provisions dealing with topsoil would prevent Iowa local governments from taking preventative action. He called the metric cited in the legislation, the “National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System” standard, a minimum — saying, “when you use a minimum standard, someone told me that becomes the maximum.”
Only allowing cities to exceed the minimum if they take on the costs of higher regulation would essentially put developers’ costs on taxpayers, Amos Jr. said.
“If a developer wants to come in if we already have infrastructure in place, no harm, no foul, they just put down the house or the property,” Amos Jr. said. “But when you have some new development coming in that may have a negative impact on the people below, then the cities need the ability to be able to control what’s going on in their community. Because if not, then those taxpayers, according to this, are going to share the burden of it. And I do not believe that that is the way that things should happen.”
Rep. Austin Baeth, D-Des Moines, said the legislation could result not only in higher taxpayer costs, but also could potentially put people and communities at risk from flash floods. Baeth said sports radio broadcaster Larry Cotlar, who died in a 2018 flood in Des Moines, is an example of how Iowans could be harmed if local governments are prevented from requiring infrastructure to prevent or mitigate flooding.
He also said a provision stipulating that storm water runoff regulations cannot be calculated using 100-year flow rates does not account for the increased severity and frequency of severe storm events, or the specifics of topography and infrastructure that may prompt a locality to adopt stricter rules.
“What was 100-year flood is now maybe a 20-year flood,” Baeth said. “And if we are going to codify one antiquated standard to apply to all Iowa towns, our cities and towns are not going to have the agility to respond to their own changing conditions and to the changing of our weather. So this is this is about protecting public infrastructure, it’s about protecting private property, it’s about protecting human life.”
Groups like the Iowa Stormwater Education Partnership have advocated against the legislation, saying in a document that the bill will lead to higher flood insurance rates, and increased local fees, taxes and home ownership costs.
Dunwell objected to the bill’s opponents using the term “developers,” when the regulations also apply to individual homeowners building on a property as well. He also emphasized that cities and counties would still have the ability to “address their long-term standing stormwater issues by passing larger, more excessive regulation if they so choose,” using their general fund dollars.
“In regards to these long-term standing issues in terms of stormwater, which we all admit exist within our communities: should that only fall upon the shoulder of that new homeowner who’s struggling to buy their first home?” Dunwell asked. “Or should that not be a shared responsibility, since it’s a long-term standing issue?”
Amos Jr. argued the shared responsibility would be a “shared tax burden” on other residents in an Iowa town or city for the cost of development of a private property. While limiting topsoil regulation may save a homeowner a few dollars, Amos Jr. said, it is not a cost that should be put on other local residents — especially when removal of that regulation could result in much higher costs related to flooding or storms.
“From a standpoint of a developer coming in, you want to build, you want to make money — that’s fine, no problem at all,” he said. “But don’t put that burden on individuals who are already living in that community, who may have to look at buying more flood insurance, doing the things that (are) going to add cost to them, because I can tell you there’s not a lot of people out there that are going to agree with sharing that cost.”
Iowa Capital Dispatch is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Iowa Capital Dispatch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Kathie Obradovich for questions: info@iowacapitaldispatch.com. Follow Iowa Capital Dispatch on Facebook and Twitter.
