DataPDF Available

Flood Resiliency Engagement in Repetitive-Loss Missouri River Communities: Jefferson City, MO, USA "

Authors:
Flood Resiliency Engagement in
Repetitive-Loss Missouri River Communities: Jefferson City, MO, USA
Damon M. Hall, Angela J. Catalano, Gerardo M. Gentil
Northeastern University
University of Missouri
December 24, 2023
Missouri Department of Natural Resources Project Manager: Erin Fanning
Director, Water Resources Center
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 176
Jefferson City, MO 65102-0176
Contact:
Damon M. Hall, Ph.D.
Northeastern University
University of Missouri
Associate Professor, Marine and Environmental Sciences, Northeastern University
Associate Professor, School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs, Northeastern University
Faculty, Missouri Water Center, University of Missouri
Courtesy Faculty, School of Natural Resources, University of Missouri
Northeastern University
430 Nahant Road
Nahant, MA 01908
dam.hall@northeastern.edu
Recommended Citation: Hall DM, Catalano AJ, Gentil GM. 2024. Flood Resiliency Engagement
in Repetitive-Loss Missouri River Communities: Jefferson City, MO, USA. Technical report
submitted to Missouri Department of Natural Resources, 82 pages.
2
Jeff City Voices Report
“What we have to realize is that the river owns from bluff to bluff. So what we have to do is build
resiliency there when it does flood.” – Government JC2
“There's a lot of odd dynamics with water in this town and floods.” – Government JC10
Executive Summary
Following the unprecedented floods of 1993, Jefferson City, Missouri governmental
agencies, businesses, and residents responded with sweeping investments in flood preparations.
These changes were difficult but proved effective at rebuffing flood events for more than 25
years.
The national attention to the 2019 floods that followed led to a joint agreement between
Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, and Iowa to work with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE
aka “the Corps”) to develop a system-wide flood resiliency study: The USACE-led Lower
Missouri River Flood Risk & Resiliency Study (LoMo Study). The LoMo Study authorizes the
USACE a unique range in freedoms to study and design innovations that increase flood
resilience in spin-off locations—areas at specific flood risk aka repetitive-loss locations—while
simultaneously conducting new system-wide studies and models. This proactive approach to
flood risk reduction departs from emergency projects authorized only to build back to the same
levels of protection (PL 84-99). It is no surprise that long-serving staff call the LoMo Study a
once-in-a-generation kind of USACE study.
Jefferson City was selected among the first three spin-off locations in part for its
repetitive flooding but, importantly, also because it had already overcome the hurdle of a 2001
Congressional authorization for its L-142, a federal levee project designed and authorized but not
yet constructed. The addition of Jefferson City as a LoMo Study spin-off site provides an
unprecedented opportunity to expedite a federal flood-mitigation project under this already
unpreceded LoMo authorization.
Jefferson City residents are accustomed to flooding, both from the river and from extreme
precipitation events—flash floods—that overwhelm local creeks and stormwater management.
Local farmers and appointed government agents oversee private levee districts that prevent
flooding in most years. There are many local experts who have firsthand lived experience with
flooding that is invaluable to the LoMo study.
This study reports on a parallel research effort of the University of Missouri designed to
listen to the people of Jefferson City who are most experienced with flooding, who have a record
of participating in Missouri River management, and who have a stake in its management.
Through in-depth interviews with 45 community leaders, businesses, farmers, and residents with
a history of working on Missouri River issues in Jefferson City, this study documents what these
local water experts know about flooding, as well as what they don’t know and feel that the
USACE should research as a part of the LoMo Study. Importantly, it documents locally preferred
options and ideas about what they think should be done to improve the area’s flood resilience.
In interviews, community members shared their experiences with flooding and how the
floods—and responses to the floods—have shaped their opinions on what they believe should be
done about flooding in the area. While some interviewees support a federal levee, many reported
a need to improve existing infrastructure and a desire for study on other engineering or nature-
based solutions as preferred options. Those in support of adding a new federal levee cite
3
Jeff City Voices Report
economic development as a main reason. Levee districts would prefer to continue management
of private levees with engineering changes (raising the height and widening the levees). Local
businesses have robust flood preparation plans, but many reported they are unable to expand
their operations because of insurers pointing to a lack of adequate flood protection from the
current levee system. Finally, many interviewees pointed to flash flooding as a primary concern
for flood management. The extensive grey infrastructure and poor management of lands adjacent
to creeks is a source of frustration for those reporting on the increased flash flooding events.
Overall, there is recognition that there is a flooding problem that needs to be fixed.
People want a clear, concise, succinct plan that's put in place. This technical report is a snapshot
of Jefferson City community voices and collates what was heard in interviews and public
meetings.
4
Jeff City Voices Report
Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 2
1. Project Background ................................................................................................................................ 6
1.1 Major flood events in Jefferson City ................................................................................................... 6
1.1.1 The Great Flood of 1993 .............................................................................................................. 6
1.1.2 1995 flood .................................................................................................................................... 9
1.1.3 2019 floods .................................................................................................................................. 9
1.2 Coordinated responses to 1993 and 2019 floods ............................................................................... 13
1.2.1 Federal home buy-outs post-1993 flood: Cedar City, MO ........................................................ 14
1.2.2 The old L-142 levee project ....................................................................................................... 14
1.2.3 Post-2019 state and federal coordinated response to flooding ................................................... 15
1.2.4 Lower Missouri Basin Flood Risk & Resiliency Study ............................................................. 16
1.2.5 Why L-142 matters today: The new L-142—TBD .................................................................... 17
2. Project Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 18
3. Research Approach ............................................................................................................................... 18
3.1 Representativeness of data ................................................................................................................ 19
3.2 Recruitment ....................................................................................................................................... 19
3.3 Field research .................................................................................................................................... 20
3.4 Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 20
4. Detailed Findings: The Past ................................................................................................................. 22
4.1 Floods in 1993 & 1995 were bad but transformative; made us think about preparedness ................ 22
4.2 The response to 1993 floods made 2019 less damaging to communities ......................................... 23
4.3 Proposed federal levee at L-142: “The super levee ......................................................................... 24
4.3.1 Flood protection: A super levee that wasn’t .............................................................................. 24
4.3.2 The L-142 experience shaped attitudes toward USACE planning ............................................. 25
4.3.3 Lack of trust in governmental agencies ..................................................................................... 26
5. Detailed Findings: The Present ............................................................................................................ 27
5.1 Two sides of the river: Cole (South) and Callaway (North) Counties .............................................. 27
5.2 Ambivalence to riverine flooding from city, Cole County, and state officials ................................. 28
5.3 Jefferson City’s sufficient flood preparedness .................................................................................. 28
5.3.1 Public works and emergency management plans ...................................................................... 28
5.3.2 Private business flood management plans ................................................................................. 30
5.4 Flash flooding is a problem: Wears Creek, Cole Junction, Boggs & Grays Creek, etc. ................... 32
5.5 “Flooding, which river?” Other rivers flood the area too ................................................................. 36
5.6 Flooding, and even the threat of river flooding, affects public revenue ........................................... 36
5.7 River flooding damages leave lasting impacts on community members .......................................... 38
5.8 Farmers and the agricultural industry deal with flooding long after the waters recede .................... 39
5.9 River & flash flooding cause extensive physical & financial damage to local businesses ............... 40
5.10 Residents share opinions about what has made flooding events worse .......................................... 45
5.10.1 Gavins Point Reservoir releases ............................................................................................... 45
5.10.2 FEMA flood maps, floodplain regulations, and buyouts ......................................................... 47
5.11 Other issues inform flood risk management opinions ..................................................................... 48
5.11.1 Port Authority .......................................................................................................................... 48
5.11.2 Notches in the wing-dikes erode the banks .............................................................................. 49
5.11.3 We are generally disconnected from the Missouri River ......................................................... 50
5
Jeff City Voices Report
6. Locally Preferred Options for the Future ........................................................................................... 52
6.1 Do not build a new federal levee ....................................................................................................... 52
6.1.1 Instead, improve private levees .................................................................................................. 54
6.1.2 Instead, fix Wears Creek flash flooding .................................................................................... 55
6.1.3 Invest in stormwater infrastructure ............................................................................................ 56
6.2 Build a federal levee ......................................................................................................................... 57
6.3 Move the levees back: Give the river more room ............................................................................. 58
6.4 Better communication from state and federal agencies .................................................................... 59
6.5 Change private levee organizations .................................................................................................. 62
6.6 Other economic development in the floodplain ................................................................................ 62
6.7 What should the Corps study?........................................................................................................... 63
6.7.1 Relocating out of the floodplain ................................................................................................ 63
6.7.2 Cedar Creek needs attention ...................................................................................................... 64
6.7.3 Other engineering options and system economics ..................................................................... 65
6.7.4 Whole-system models and plans ................................................................................................ 67
6.7.5 Competing management priorities ............................................................................................. 69
6.7.6 How U.S. Public Law 84-99 limits solutions ............................................................................. 69
6.7.7 Process: Don’t just study the systemDo something! .............................................................. 71
7. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................ 72
8. References and Appendices .................................................................................................................. 74
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. 74
References ............................................................................................................................................... 74
Appendix A: USACE project approval process ...................................................................................... 77
Appendix B: Interview protocol ............................................................................................................. 80
Appendix C: Informed consent handout ................................................................................................. 81
Appendix D: Analysis codebook ............................................................................................................ 82
6
Jeff City Voices Report
1. Project Background
In 2019, flooding in the Lower Missouri and Mississippi Rivers transformed Midwestern
landscapes and communities, affecting an estimated 14 million people (Almukhtar et al., 2019).
The 2019 floods were long-lasting and broke records for duration (Rice, 2019). They affected
five Midwestern states, including Missouri, and caused an estimated $13 billion in damages
within the Missouri River Basin (NCEI, 2020). Research and long-term residents report greater
and more frequent severe flood events (USACE, 2023). The anticipation of future floods and the
experience of the 2019 flood impacts on flood-mitigation infrastructure, like dikes and levees,
are changing how repetitive-loss communities and the federal government think about flood
control.
Floods are the most common natural hazard in the world (Schipper & Pelling 2006).
Historically, technical engineering approaches to flood hazard mitigation have been prioritized
without adequate consideration of the social and cultural aspects of the affected communities
(Mileti, 1999). Local residents, businesses, and communities must be consulted and included in
flood risk management planning for transparent and inclusive decision making (Gibbons, 1999;
Pisor et al., 2022).
This project aimed to advance flood-risk reduction and community resilience by
gathering and documenting community membersstated preferences for revising flood
control efforts in their communities.
This document reports findings from in-depth interviews with 45 community leaders,
businesses, farmers, and residents with a history of working on Missouri River issues in
Jefferson City. Section 1 provides context of flooding in Jefferson City, Missouri. Section 2
outlines the need and objectives for this research. Section 3 details the methodological approach
and methods for recruiting, conducting, transcribing, and analyzing the interviews. Sections 4, 5,
and 6 report our findings sorted into past, present, and future periods of Missouri River flooding
and the flood responses in Jefferson City. Section 6 documents what these local water experts
advise the USACE to research as a part of the Lower Missouri Basin Flood Risk & Resiliency
Study (see section 1.2.4) and outlines the entire spectrum of locally preferred ideas about what
interviewees think should be done to improve the area’s flood resilience.
1.1 Major flood events in Jefferson City
Jefferson City residents recall several major flood events. Most readily recall the
devastation from the 1993, 1995, and 2019 floods. Because the city is also Missouri’s state
capital, local flood events have statewide significance, including interruptions to state
governance.
1.1.1 The Great Flood of 1993
The Mississippi River basin experienced above average rain in autumn 1992, followed by
record-breaking snowpack during winter 1993 (Lott, 1993; Figure 1). From April to October
1993, Missouri and other Midwestern states suffered one of the most destructive flood events in
7
Jeff City Voices Report
the history of the United States, with approximately $15 billion in damages (Josephson, 1994;
Larson, 1997), fifty reported deaths, and over 20 million affected acres of land (Gregory, 2020).
Missouri River flooding within Jefferson City happened over two periods in 1993. Major
flood stage at Jefferson City is 30 feet (Table 1), and the 1993 floods crested at 38.65 feet on
July 30ththe highest recorded crest in area history (NWS, 2020; Figure 2). It crested again at
31.85 feet on September 29th. The Missouri River was above flood stage for 62 days in Jefferson
City (NWS, 2020). The Missouri River floodplain sustained damage from scouring or sand
deposits on nearly 48% of its land (Allen et al., 2003) because of flooding and levee breaches. In
1993, 473 Cedar City residents applied for individual aid (SEMA, n.d.).
Figure 1. Map of weather patterns that explain why the 1993 flood was so severe in the
Mississippi River Basin. Source: Alexander, T. W. (1995).
Table 1. Table of flood categories and recorded historic Missouri River crests at Jefferson City.
Color codes correspond with those in Table 3.
Flood categories
Stage height (feet)
Major Flood Stage
30
Moderate Flood Stage
25
Flood Stage
21
8
Jeff City Voices Report
Highways 63 and 94 were under water and closed for several days, as was the Jefferson
City Memorial Airport. All air traffic was suspended, with floodwater nearly reaching the ceiling
within the terminal. In some locations in Cole and Callaway Counties, the flood lasted for nearly
200 days (Alexander, 1995).
The extent of the damage brought new policy approaches to the floodplains. In January
1994, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Missouri State Emergency
Management Agency (SEMA) began offering flood buyout options for residents in the Cedar
City area of Jefferson City (SEMA, n.d.).
Figure 2. Aerial view of the Missouri River flooding on July 30, 1993 in the vicinity of Cedar
City, MO and Jefferson City Memorial Airport immediately north of Jefferson City, MO,
looking South. Source: Photograph from the Missouri Highway and Transportation Department.
9
Jeff City Voices Report
1.1.2 1995 flood
With only two years to recover from the devastation of the 1993 floods, Jefferson City
sustained more flooding beginning in May 1995 (NWS, 2020) Many of the breached levees from
1993 were still being repaired, and flooding caused further damage to the degraded structures
and inundated unprotected areas along the Missouri River.
Despite floodwaters damaging nearly the same areas as 1993, substantially less recovery
funds were requested because of the ongoing federal buyout program in Cedar City. Following
the 1995 flood, 53 residents applied for aid (SEMA, n.d.).
1.1.3 2019 floods
On March 3, 2019, Winter Storm Ulmer became a bomb cyclone snowstorm, which
resulted in nearly three feet of snow accumulation in the Lower Missouri River Basin (NCEI,
2020). Temperatures rose quickly in the days that followed, causing rapid snow melting. On
March 14, 2019, the Spencer Dam in Niobrara, Nebraska broke, sending an 11-foot wall of water
down the Missouri River (NCEI, 2020). The cascading effect of levee breaches and failures
upriver contributed to the subsequent breaches and failures in Cole and Callaway County, with
discharge rates spiking at Jefferson City beginning in mid-April 2019.
The Missouri River at Jefferson City briefly hit flood stage in mid-April, with the first levee
overtopping on May 24, 2019. Three levee districts reported overtopping due to the rising water,
and four levee districts reported levee breaches (Table 2; Figure 3 for reference). The flooding in
2019 marked the fourth highest floodwater crest at Jefferson City in the previous 100 years (see
Table 3).
Table 2. Levees damaged during the 2019 floods. Source: Tom Waters testimony, U.S. House of
Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure hearing, July 2019.
Date
Levee district
Type of levee damage
05/24/2019
Jacobs, Tebbetts East
Overtopping
05/28/2019
Prison Farm
Breach
06/01/2019
Reveaux
Breach
06/07/2019
Capital View, Renz
Breach
10
Jeff City Voices Report
Figure 3. Callaway County (a) and Cole County (b) levee districts. These are private levees
enrolled in the Levee Safety Program, where levee sponsors partner with USACE for design
guidance and inspections. Source: USACE National Levee Database at:
https://levees.sec.usace.army.mil/#/.
a.
11
Jeff City Voices Report
Table 3. Historic flood events in Jefferson City (Jan 1950–Oct 2023) withwhat floods” taken
from Jefferson City Public Works’ Missouri River Flood Event Action Plan historical
observances and city action items at different flood stages in feet. The colors correspond with the
National Weather Service’s flood categories for the Jefferson City stream gauge (Table 1, Figure
4). The selected date range captures the 1951 event, which was the earliest flood mentioned by
interviewees, to 2023. See Figure 5 for extended dates of 1880–2023. Data source: National
Weather Service Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service at
water.weather.gov/ahps2/hydrograph.php?gage=jffm7&wfo=lsx
Flood Stage
Stage
Height
(in
feet)
Date
City’s Action Plan & Levee Breaches (selected entries)
MAJOR FLOOD STAGE
38.65
7/30/1993
Record flood stage event.
34.2
7/18/1951
Flood insurance broker is notified; airport control tower & ice arena
have been flooded.
33.41
6/7/2019
Wastewater division sandbags Riverside Pump Station; Renz &
Capital View levees breach.
33.05
5/19/1995
Parks & Recreation protects ice arena north entrance double doors
with sandbags.
32.6
10/5/1986
Parks & Recreation closes ice arena perimeter floor drain valves.
31.85
9/29/1993
Parks & Recreation sandbags ice arena doors; evacuates
equipment/contents under Wash. Park
31.4
4/24/1973
Most airport facilities begin to flood.
30.83
6/2/2013
Wastewater division begins storage of treated sludge. Police surveil
flooded businesses and residences. Swift Water Rescue Fire
personnel readied.
30.59
6/8/2001
Parks & Recreation evacuate ice resurfacing machines, propane
tanks, equipment, and contents from ice bed floor at Washington
Park ice arena; remove equipment and contents from Duensing Field
concession/restroom building and close entrance gate.
MODERATE FLOOD STAGE
29.95
10/7/1998
Emergency Operation Center is activated by the City Administrator.
29.67
9/16/2008
Parks & Recreation evacuates North Jeff City Rec Area,
Multipurpose Building, and greenhouses; Removes bleachers, picnic
tables, trash barrels and other equipment and contents from the park
and turns off electricity and removes trash cans from state park.
29.46
5/13/2007
Federal Aviation Administration removes navigational facilities &
lighting equipment.
29.4
2/25/1985
State Route 179 near Sandy Hook & Highway K a mile east of
McBaine in Boone Co. closed.
29.25
4/12/1994
Katy Trail floods between McBaine and Easley.
29.25
5/30/1996
Osage City on the Osage River may begin flooding from backwater.
28.96
6/21/2010
Contracts for moving airport radio and electric equipment are
activated.
MODERATE
FLOOD STAGE
28.75
4/14/1997
Potential for flash flooding due to rainfall within the city intensifies
due to backwater of river.
28.24
5/14/2002
Portions of City Parking Lot 26 begin to flood along W.
Handley Way and oil Well Road in north Jeff City.
28.13
5/3/2019
Portions of South Blvd. and Oregon St. begin to flood
near Washington Park.
12
Jeff City Voices Report
28.13
4/1/2019
Flooded portions of city parking lots are closed. Daily
inspections of levee in north Jeff City.
28
6/13/1982
Sandbags to protect ice arena. Walnut St. just southwest
of US Highway 50/63 floods.
27.84
2/23/1997
Airport prepares to vacate terminal and notifies tenants.
27.81
6/9/2015
27.69
5/1/2009
27.58
6/28/2021
27.55
5/17/2010
27.47
6/18/2015
Sanitary sewer manholes in flood path may be affected.
27.37
6/17/2008
27.3
4/6/1960
27.25
7/23/1958
Highway 94 near Portland, Harold Cunningham, Fox
Hollow Roads near Easley begin to flood.
27.23
7/2/2011
27
5/20/1986
Additional traffic controls points are established.
26.97
5/2/2017
26.9
9/24/1965
26.82
4/3/1998
26.8
12/29/2015
State parking at Missouri Blvd. and Main St. begins to
flood.
26.7
7/12/1969
Katy Trail floods near Wilton.
26.55
6/29/2015
Katy Trail floods near Easley.
26.52
5/12/2019
YMCA Soccer Fields at 179 begin to flood.
26.3
10/14/1985
26.26
6/30/2008
26.23
5/31/2016
26.19
7/10/2015
Walnut St. south of Expressway begins to flood.
26.11
8/4/1958
26.1
10/7/2019
26.1
6/24/1965
26.1
4/27/1952
Traffic control points established; manhole lids in flood
prone areas are sealed.
FLOOD
STAGE
23 events
Peaked at 24.0–26.0 ft. from 5/9/1961 to 5/31/2020.
24.0
At 24.0 feet, Public Works closes gate at the treatment
plant and begins pumping.
23.0
East Cole Junction begins to flood.
13
Jeff City Voices Report
Figure 4. The gauge location in Jefferson City, Missouri. Source: National Weather Service.
1.2 Coordinated responses to 1993 and 2019 floods
Increased riverine flooding along the Missouri River (see Figure 5), as well as flooding
along the Osage River in southern Cole County, have brought different approaches to flood
mitigation in Jefferson City. These efforts shape local perceptions of river management and the
agencies involved in current flood risk reduction and resiliency efforts. They serve as context
and backdrop for all future local, state, and federal efforts to live with and manage the flooding
on the river. Two efforts in recent memory include the FEMA home buyouts and federal levee
proposal at L-142.
14
Jeff City Voices Report
Figure 5. Number of events per year (diamonds) that the Missouri River at Jefferson City
entered “Flood Stage” at 21 feet from 1880–2023. Note: Gavins Point Dam, SD completed in
1957.
1.2.1 Federal home buy-outs post-1993 flood: Cedar City, MO
The 1993 flood and the clean-up efforts afterwards reshaped the area. Nationally, the
federal response to the 1993 floods included a national home buy-out program of 36,707 homes
through the federal Community Development Block Grant (Associated Press, 2011). No state has
had more buyouts than Missouri. Cedar City, a community of around 400 people and a former
steamboat stop north of Jefferson City annexed by Jefferson City, was used to flooding. But the
1993 flood damaged homes beyond repair. In total, 162 houses were bought, totaling $1.7
million spent by FEMA as part of the voluntary buyout program—only a couple of houses and
businesses were not purchased (Cole, 2018; FEMA, 2002).
1.2.2 The old L-142 levee project
Following the 1993 and 1995 floods that overburdened levee infrastructure, USACE
began a flood risk management project developing engineering plans for a new 4.7-mile long,
1000-year levee locally called the super levee” (Allen, 2001). Congress approved authorization
for these plans for L-142 in 2001. Jefferson City, the local sponsor for the project, did not enter
into an agreement with the USACE, putting construction on hold indefinitely. See Figure 6 for
location of L-142—Missouri River Left Bank mile marker 142.
15
Jeff City Voices Report
Figure 6. L-142 study area map with river miles. Green and yellow lines are private levees:
Renz, Capital View, and Reveaux. Inset shows the location of the site within the state of
Missouri. Source: Memorandum CENWD-PDD 1105-2-10b2, July 4, 2023.
Residents spoke of being surprised by the levee location. It cut through homes and farms.
Others spoke of contentious public meetings. For many we spoke with, the planning events were
recounted as troubling to residents affected (see Section 4.3). In 2005, the Sierra Club filed a
lawsuit alleging that USACE violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by not
completing an environmental assessment (Sierra Club vs. USACE et al., 2006) and that FEMA
violated the Stafford Act by permitting a levee that included land designated for open space uses.
On October 14, 2005, chief circuit judge Loken and circuit judges Lay and Benton dismissed the
claims for lack of jurisdiction. The L-142 levee project, however, was ultimately put on hold
(Leiser, 2005; See Sect 4.3).
1.2.3 Post-2019 state and federal coordinated response to flooding
In response to the statewide 2019 floods, Missouri Governor Mike Parson signed
Executive Order 19-14 on July 18, 2019 to establish the Governor’s Flood Recovery Advisory
Working Group (FRAWG). Jefferson City was one of the three Missouri locations identified by
the working group as priority sites for improving flood resiliency (FRAWG, 2019, 2020). The
16
Jeff City Voices Report
final report stressed that the state of Missouri should take a leadership role in improving flood
protection infrastructure, which included a focus on facilitating communication between
floodplain stakeholders and agencies involved in flood risk and river management (FRAWG,
2020). The Missouri Department of Natural Resources has led the state in providing outreach
and communication about the status of state and federal flood protection plans.
In January of 2020, governors from Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska signed the
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) Between the States of Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and
Nebraska – for Cooperation on Flood Recovery and Future Flood Control in the Lower Missouri
River Basin (2020). The MOA allows this four-state region to work cooperatively for
comprehensive planning and requires, in short, that any flood risk mitigation planning must
account for upstream and downstream impacts. The MOA also called for USACE to do
something different to address recurring floods.
1.2.4 Lower Missouri Basin Flood Risk & Resiliency Study
(LoMo Study, in some places called the “Four-State Study”)
In November of 2019, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska signed 50–50 cost-share
study agreements, called Planning Assistance to States (PAS), with the Corps’ Kansas City and
Omaha Districts to identify problem areas and scope the development of flood risk management
plans for those sites. In 2020, Section 216 of the Water Resources Development Act authorized
an expansion of the original PAS studies to recommend long-term, large-scale measures to
reduce flood risk exposure, recurring damages, and to improve resiliency and robustness of
infrastructure and investments for the 735 Missouri River miles from Sioux City, Iowa to the
river’s mouth near St. Louis, Missouri.
This funding authorization is unique to the Corps’ project planning protocol in that it
allows for seamless progression from feasibility reports into design for approved project areas.
The two general planning mechanisms for this process are a systemwide analysis via computer
modeling of river flow under different conditions (flow model) and “spin off” feasibility studies
for specific problem sites on the river (USACE, n.d.). Initial sites in Missouri identified for this
program are Holt County, Brunswick, and Jefferson City. More sites are scheduled to be added
as the system plan progresses.
The outputs of these planning studies are intended to identify specific flood solutions and
policy recommendations to improve the resilience of communities to flood risks. The Federal
Cost-Share Agreement for the Jefferson City spin-off study was signed by the State of Missouri
and USACE on November 28, 2022. An interim report is due to United States Congress in
December of 2023. The tentatively selected plan with recommendations for the Jefferson City
study is slated for May 2024. The study completion date is 2027 (Figure 7).
17
Jeff City Voices Report
Figure 7. LoMo Study System Plan Deliverables timeline as of October 18, 2023. AMM =
Alternatives Milestone Meeting, TSP = Tentatively Selected Plan, ADM = Agency Decision
Milestone. Source: USACE Kansas City District
1.2.5 Why L-142 matters today: The new L-142—TBD
The USACE manages approximately 1,500 water resources projects (U.S. 116th
Congress, 2019). Corps projects are completed by two Congressional authorizations: One for
studying project feasibility and one for construction. Congress traditionally considers Corps
projects and policy authorizations biennially through the enactment of a Water Resources
Development Act (WRDA) bill (see Appendix A).
L-142 received authorization in 2001 and was designed but not built. There is a
procedural advantage to using this previously authorized study area. Thus, the final proposed
design of a federally funded flood risk management project at Missouri River mile L-142,
because of its prior authorization, is closer to construction than any other LoMo Study
spin-off project. The 2001 design projected cost was $24M. The 2026 design—yet to be
determinedis estimated at $200M based on the size of the area covered (Memorandum
CENWD-PDD, 2023, p. 8). The USACE acknowledges that there will most likely be a design
change, stating that “the same [2001] plan will likely not be selected(Memorandum CENWD-
PDD, 2023, p. 8). But because it has already been designed, the old levee design must be among
the options considered. Among the candidate designs, USACE must also consider thelocally
preferred option.The locally preferred option is the design idea that local communities
determine as most preferred. This detail underscores the importance of studies that engage
stakeholders with a record of participating in Missouri River flood issues as well as the
importance for stakeholders of participating in USACE planning meetings.
18
Jeff City Voices Report
2. Project Objectives
This project used a stakeholder-engaged, social-science, field-research approach to gather
the social, economic, and cultural information necessary for flood risk reduction and resiliency
planning. The objectives were (1) to catalog locally desired strategies for implementing flood-
risk reductions and (2) to gather local perspectives of state and federal flood resiliency planning
efforts on the lower Missouri River system.
This research project is a separate study from the LoMo Study; it is not a part of the
LoMo Study. Instead, it is a parallel project funded by the state of Missouri’s Department of
Natural Resources (MDNR) to ensure that community voices and preferences are made known to
decision makers, as recommended by the 2020 FRAWG report’s recommendations section.
Our aim was to ensure that the federal efforts of the LoMo Study for Jefferson City align
with Missourians’ and Jefferson City residents’ local knowledge, interests, and desires for flood
management. The findings below provide context for this alignment.
Documenting the voices of stakeholders from repetitive-loss flood communities enables
integrating communities’ long-term flood mitigation interests and willingness to participate in
new flood mitigation planning efforts. In addition to providing valuable insights for federal
planning, this local community-level research should increase the quality of communication and
participation in future flood resiliency programs before and after flood events.
This report has been given to the USACE LoMo Study leadership as well as distributed
through Missouri’s Department of Natural Resources by the sponsors. It is available online for
public distribution (see Cover Page 1 for link and source citation recommendation).
3. Research Approach
This project aimed to understand how Jefferson City residents are coping with floods and
what they think should be done about flood risk reduction. We used a cultural inventory
approach (Gilbertz et al., 2006, 2020, 2021; Gilbertz & Hall, 2022; Hall et al., 2012, 2021a,
2021b; Horton et al., 2017) of convenient, conversational, and confidential interviews to listen
to, then catalog, community voices about flood risk reduction and resiliency. We conducted one-
on-one, in-person, conversational (semi-structured) interviews in various locations across
Jefferson City. To encourage participation and comfort, we interviewed people at the times,
dates, and locations preferred by each interviewee. All interviews were audio recorded,
transcribed, and examined.
Unlike a survey or structured interview, one-on-one conversational interviews allow for
more authentic engagement that gives participants space to find the language that best captures
their experiences. Floods are often traumatic events; one-on-one interactions in participants’
chosen locations provide a safe space to share such personal experiences and encourage
reflecting on personal thoughts and opinions.
19
Jeff City Voices Report
Rarely do community members get the opportunity to express themselves in policy
processes about decisions that affect their life and livelihoods (Anderson et al., 2018). Despite
public participation events, such as public hearings and open houses, the venues function to keep
citizens distanced from decision makers, a fact often unwittingly overlooked by governing
agencies.
Our research approach is designed to give space for people to think and time to speak
(Hall et al., 2021a). We listen to and document community perspectives. This is not outreach. It
is not education. It is social science research that gathers, documents, synthesizes, and
summarizes key stakeholders’ voices as a new source of information for including local voices in
decision making.
3.1 Representativeness of data
Findings do not represent the general public of Jefferson City because we did not speak
to everyone in the area, nor did we seek a statistically significant randomized sample of Jefferson
City residents. We made this choice for two reasons. First, not everyone in the area is
knowledgeable or even interested in the river (see Sect. 5.11). Second, the residents of Jefferson
City have disproportionate stakes in the outcomes of floodplain planning. Therefore, we spoke
with people in the community most knowledgeable about living with the Missouri River and
most affected by and concerned with the outcomes of any planning effort. In other words, our
sample of interviewees was targeted to reflect the voices of floodplain landowners, businesses,
local government, and community leaders with a history of working on Missouri River issues—
individuals with high stakes in any decisions made for the river. Therefore, we do not present our
results quantitatively (“X% of our sample said Y) because those claims about representativeness
are irrelevant in a non-representative sample of a population. Instead, we organize trends
qualitatively (few/some/most of interviewees said Y”). Importantly, we use verbatim
anonymized quotes to evidence the patterns of ideas, preferences, and concerns from those
Jefferson City residents most experienced with managing, living, and working on and along the
Missouri River.
We conducted these interviews from September 2022 to July 2023; thus, this report
provides a snapshot in time of key stakeholders’ ideas and preferences concerning flood risk
reduction and resiliency planning. These voices represent the active conversations and ideas
about the Missouri River at that time. However, from previous longitudinal qualitative studies of
the Yellowstone River floods and management where we interviewed communities in 2006,
2012, and 2018, we find that cultural perspectives tend to persist over time (Kidd, 2022).
3.2 Recruitment
We created a list of Jefferson City floodplain landowners and community members—
from both Cole and Callaway Counties—with a record of participation in Missouri River issues
from information provided by Missouri’s Department of Natural Resources. We then used
archival research (USACE meeting records, plat maps, etc.) to identify additional key members
20
Jeff City Voices Report
from the area who are actively engaged in flood risk management or flood recovery work. We
also conducted internet searches of government websites, news media (print, radio, and video),
social media, and other sources to identify levee and drainage district board members, county
and local representatives, and local farmers. To arrange for the interviews, we contacted each
person on our list via phone, email, or in person. We added names to the initial list by asking
each interviewee who else we should speak with for this study (called snowball sampling).
3.3 Field research
From September 2022 to July 2023, we spoke with stakeholders directly affected by
floods in Jefferson City. If respondents were unavailable during scheduled fieldwork visits, we
conducted, and audio recorded video calls and phone calls. In total, we interviewed 45
participants representing three sectors: government, agriculture, and industry (see Table 4,
Appendix B and C). Jefferson City is unique in that it has a footprint in two counties and lies on
the north and south sides of the Missouri River. We conducted interviews with participants from
both sides of the river to capture experiences and opinions from the two counties, which also
represent the urban and rural parts of Jefferson City. We continued interviewing until we got to
the point where when we asked interviewees who else we should speak with, we started to hear
the same names we had already spoken with.
Table 4. Participants by representation.
Interest Area
Interviewees
Government
17
Agriculture
9
Industry
19
TOTAL
45
3.4 Analysis
After interviews were completed, a transcription service was used to transcribe all
recorded audio content. Using the audio recordings, we reviewed each interview transcript to
ensure specific names, acronyms, and locations were correct. Re-listening to the interviews at
this phase helped us understand the project as a whole: hearing the voices of participants, both
how they spoke and which words they chose to use, was crucial to picking up nuances in speech,
semantics, place names, and other details.
To analyze the interviews, we used the qualitative analytic software QSR International’s
NVivo 12.0 and 14.0 to code each interview. In advance of coding the interviews, we created a
coding system specific to the research questions and objectives (see Appendix D for codebook).
We then analyzed interview quotes systematically and thematically to identify key themes based
on the coding (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2011).
It was important to us that the team of three authors who conducted the interviews also
re-listened, read, re-read, and analyzed the interviews. By the end of the analysis, each interview
21
Jeff City Voices Report
was listened to and transcript read at least 10 to 20 times. We used software to help us organize
our selection of quotes, but the software does not do any of the work. The analysis is all done
manually by hand. It is long hours in front of a computer. Further, artificial intelligence (aka
AI”) was not used in any part of this analysis or summary report.
In total, we coded and analyzed over 2,011 minutes (over 33 hours) of recorded
interviews. Of course, these recorded hours only represent the time the audio recorders were
running; we spent many additional hours talking with community members informally to get to
know them better or being toured in their pick-up trucks on and near levees so we may best
reflect the community’s experiences with flooding and what they want done about it.
We found patterns of shared perspectives as well as a spectrum of unique views of flood
hazards and mitigation strategies. We also documented community members’ experiences,
desires, and ideas about what they believe are the best options for flood resiliency in Jefferson
City and, specifically, what the Corps should consider in the LoMo study for Jefferson City.
22
Jeff City Voices Report
4. Detailed Findings: The Past
The following sections highlight the comprehensive themes we found in analyzing the
interviews. Direct quotes are shared anonymously to evidence the spectrum of themes we heard
from residents. We divide our findings into essential elements of context: past, present, and
future.
4.1 Floods in 1993 & 1995 were bad but transformative; made us think about preparedness
Jefferson City residents acknowledged that living by the Missouri River meant accepting
the risk that flooding may occur. However, the catastrophic flooding in 1993 and 1995 stand out
as disasters that lasted longer than floods in recent memory and caused more damage to houses,
businesses, farmland, and infrastructure. The flooding of 1993 was unprecedented in its damage,
but the floods of 1995 only two years later almost rivaled the previous devastation. These two
floods were noted by many participants as events that changed the landscape of their community
and how they thought about and prepared for future floods.
That is one major drawback to the floods, when I lose my crop . . . It's devastating for any
farmer to lose his crop, obviously. My crop takes 12 months, on average, to grow. The
average corn or soybean crop is about five months. So, my exposure level for a year is
quite a bit longer and it takes me that much more to get back in business. Like '93, we
lost everything. '95, we lost everything again, almost back-to-back years, '93, '95, 2 years
apart. That was tough. Agriculture JC21
'95 come after '93. I mean, well yeah, it's two years after. The levees were...part of the
reason for the 95 flood was the levees were not put back up into shape yet. So basically
the water just come right in through open holes, and it created behind the levee flooding.
Industry JC13
Well, in the flood of '93, we couldn't go to the other side of the river. The road was
covered back in '93. You couldn't go to Holts Summit. We do pest control in Holts
Summit, Callaway County, and we couldn't get over there at that time. – Government
JC29
I mean, there's whole neighborhoods in Cedar City that have been flooded out that don't
exist anymore. – Government JC10
Right, all of this [Cedar City] was bought out. There's maybe three properties that people
wouldn't sell. – Government JC6
Cedar City, prime example. When I moved up here in '86, Cedar City, there was 500
people living in that town, probably there was four gas stations, there was a lumber yard,
there was a liquor store, there was a drive-in theater, there was all kinds of stuff in these
river bottoms because of the levees, people trusted them. Agriculture JC21
23
Jeff City Voices Report
I was born and raised here in Jefferson City, I took a job in Kansas City. I was up there
for about six months, and I moved back to Jefferson City, at the tail end of the flood in 93.
And finding a place to live was very difficult. Because there were all kinds of people that
lived on that side of the river that were renting places in Jefferson City because they
couldn't get across the bridge. So, you start thinking about floods of that magnitude
disrupting transportation, disrupting daily life, disrupting commerce. – Industry JC40
What we have to realize is that the river owns from bluff to bluff. So what we have to do
is build resiliency to when it does flood. Now '93, I don't want to use the term “flush the
toilet”, but as a result, we've cleaned out a lot of that river bottom that dated back to the
1800s. Cities back from the 1800s where ag led development, you lived in the bottom
because that's where the fertile soil was. You also didn't have all the development and
confining of the river. With a flood, you come back and build your cabin back. You would
have 10 more years of great crops. That's kind of changed now. So, I think we've done a
lot of cleaning out of the floodplain from '93, but we can't let it start coming back in.
Government JC2
So in 2019, if it hadn't been for that result of the '93 flood, we probably would've been out
of business here for five or six weeks because out here in the front field that you kind of
drove through by the asphalt plant that stayed underwater for five or six weeks.
Industry JC12
4.2 The response to 1993 floods made 2019 less damaging to communities
The community and the federal, state, and local government response to 1993 included
significant investments of capital: money, expertise, and planning time. These investments in
flood preparedness, disaster management, and flood risk reduction, though difficult (i.e., Cedar
City relocations, private levee repairs, alterations in business and farming practices, etc.), made
the 2019 flood less destructive on the community.
And after '93 we had built an addition and to kind of flood proof ourselves a little bit we
had to build the floor of that warehouse six feet off of ground level. So our warehouse sits
up. And so now when anything might flood, it may or may not get on the floor, but at least
inventory and stuff is protected. – Industry JC31
I mean, I lived through the flood of '93, and I remember the magnitude of that. It's very
rare. Those are events that you don't see that often. But then, every few years, there's '93,
'95. Then what was it? 2019 and 20, I don't know. All those years that it comes over the
tracks, and it just happens. So you just expect it, and you know. . . . Well, how often does
it really flood? When it floods, it floods. I get that because it takes a major river event to
flood. But you know it's coming. – Government JC10
24
Jeff City Voices Report
[The 2019 flood] Seven to 10 days later, water receded. And then so fortunately water
didn't enter the plant and things like that. So, yeah. So, we got through that. And then we
had a flood contingency plan that came from 1993.Industry JC3
But all that was so many thousands and millions of dollars spent that if nothing would've
changed, if they hadn't relocated the houses and they hadn't did what they did with the
levee, we would be in the exact same boat. The only thing they did differently, and that's
why I keep using this as the crown example, is they built up their levee, and we had no
problems.Agriculture JC16
4.3 Proposed federal levee at L-142: The super levee
Part of the response to the 1993 and 1995 floods was the study plan, design, and eventual
Congressional authorization for a federal levee named L-142. Jefferson City participated in L-
142 planning primarily through USACE public meetings and submitting public comments. Most
spoke of the planning experience as unpleasant largely because of the surprise of the plans and
how the plans were presented to the community.
4.3.1 Flood protection: A super levee that wasn’t
Nearly all participants mentioned the super levee,” often used interchangeably with the
L-142 project. Most participants spoke about the perceived lack of communication between
USACE and the Jefferson City community during the design and planning process, which they
attribute to the project’s incomplete status.
The other issue, there's a lot of talk about doing a super levee, they called it L-142 back
in the day and maybe changing the footprint, et cetera, et cetera. And I had just started
working here not too long after that kind of came to a head, but the problem with that is
the cities can't come up with the matching money for that because people are like, “Well
that is fine, protects the airports, some agriculture, businesses, but doesn't do anything
for me. Why do I want to put millions of dollars into a super levee over there that’s more
regulated?” Then from our standpoint, you have to keep that up. It's really a tough nut to
crack with the level of money we're talking for. I've had people point out Chesterfield
levee system. Well, that's not Chesterfield, right, with all the businesses and whatnot
could contribute, we don't have that and we won't have that because again, slow growth
community, middle Missouri, you just don't have big box stores and super malls.
Government JC1
And then the residential folks from the city started showing up to meetings and going,
“We don't want this. What's it going to do to Jeff City?” Well, they never could come up
with a good . . . No one, no hydrologist ever came up with a good analysis saying it
wouldn't create any, they couldn't say it wouldn't create a rise in the river on the south
side along the Wears Creek. Well then basically it turned most of the city of Jefferson on
the south side of the river all at once. Now these people are up in arms, they don't want it.
The farmers down here don't want it. – Agriculture JC38
25
Jeff City Voices Report
We made it through the '93 stuff, and things were kind of getting back to normal. And
then they came up with this idea that, for lack of a better word, we were going to be the
next Chesterfield Bottoms in St. Louis, and build this huge levee, industrial levee. And I
was like, “Wow, this is going to change my way of life forever.” Basically, they wanted to
turn my house, where I live, would be in what they were considering their flood way,
where they were going to use it as a borrow area to build this super levee, turn this back
to no flood control of anything that's left out here, and build this super levee.
Agriculture JC38
L-142 was done after the 1993 flood and the Corps of Engineers came in, designed it,
they got everything bought off. And then something happened in Jeff City and it's a lot of
money, but they didn't get the private side financing like the federal government. This
thing has been approved at the federal level and you can't unapprove it. – Government
JC32
If it's [L-142] funded at 80/20, you got to come up with 20%. And the city didn't want, it's
really Jefferson City and Callaway County. And you got all these private owners down
there and farmers and stuff. I don't know what happened to Callaway County side, but I
know that there's somebody in Jefferson City pretty much put a kibosh on it.
Government JC32
4.3.2 The L-142 experience shaped attitudes toward USACE planning
The communication between the community and the Corps about L-142 soured the
community on the project and on the Corps. Specifically, interviewees reported that the Corps
had decided to build a federal levee, showing plans and maps, all without community input.
Using “L-142” language in current study planning and meetings brings back resentment and
perceptions of being left out of the initial federal levee plans following the 1993 and 1995 floods.
And then I go to the first [USACE] meeting and here we're right back at this L-142 talk.
And if that was to come up, they will drag me out of here kicking and screaming before I
let them have one inch of my property. And I don't care how much money they offer me,
the land's worth more to me than the money is. It's what I love to do. I don't care if I die a
millionaire, I just want to die doing what I want to do and being happy. And doing what's
good for my community and my home where I grew up.Agriculture JC38
And my problem with these meetings is that yes, if the Corps of Engineers were coming to
town and they were going to build a super levee, and they drove a stake in our yard with
a little sign on it that said, come to a public meeting. Yes, we would go. But the problem
is when the Corps of Engineers is ready to have the meeting, they've already made up
their minds because my point is, for example, they had umpteen meetings about this exit
ramp over here. They had city council meetings devoted to talking about it. They had
question-and-answer public forums and stuff and basically what the highway department
did is said, “Well, we're thinking about doing this. We can do it this way, we can do it
26
Jeff City Voices Report
this way, or we can do it this way.” And the people that drive on that road go, “They all
three sucks. None of them are a good idea.” But the problem is they've already decided
it's going to be one of these three, but they should have involved the people way before
they got that far along. – Industry JC30
I think that's one of those issues that the original 142 design, the community didn't like.
And so, that didn't happen. And so, my understanding is that a new levee can be built
using the 142 authority that Congress established. However, if the Corps comes in and
talks about, and even calls it L-142, there's enough historical baggage around that, that
the local community is going to get scared and think that that levee is what they're talking
about. So, I think that community, they're open to new ideas. They just have to be
reassured that that levee, that particular design and path of where it's going to be isn't
what we're talking about, because that's what they're concerned about. – Industry JC45
4.3.3 Lack of trust in governmental agencies
The majority of participants expressed a disconnection between federal and state
agencies’ actions and public expectations because of a lack of effective communication and
stakeholder involvement in decision-making processes. Members of the community talked about
wanting their voices included in planning and management decisions to repair trust, encourage
transparency, and help develop effective outcomes for flood mitigation.
Corps is a complicated place to navigate if you're not doing it all the time. – Government
JC1
I'm not sure that we know the process [LoMo Study]. The last I left off, which is where I
think I got connected with you, is there's someone inside our site who now . . . He's a
corporate person, but he had been talking to some people from the state and said, “Oh,
we have this initiative.” Well, the last call that I had was like, “Oh, okay, go fill out this
form.” I was hoping for a little bit more aligned for them driving the process. I don't have
the bandwidth to be filling out forms in triplicate to figure out . . . I would like them to
come to me and say, “Hey, you're providing jobs, income. You're supporting this local
economy with a factory of a thousand people. What can you as the state or local vicinity,
Corps of Engineers, partner with us to do these things?” – Industry JC18
You know how it is. Got a year out and, “Oh, well. – Industry JC19
So with the river, we kind of let them [USACE] handle their business, but if we need to
step in some time and raise a little hell, that's kind of what we're here for. – Government
JC9
27
Jeff City Voices Report
5. Detailed Findings: The Present
5.1 Two sides of the river: Cole (South) and Callaway (North) Counties
The Missouri River cuts through Jefferson City, with its annexed north side in Callaway
County and the majority of the population and infrastructure on the south side in Cole County.
Residents on each side of the river reported different experiences with flooding and different
concerns. Callaway County residents were worried about flooding and the management of the
Missouri River, whereas the Cole County residents spoke most frequently about flash flooding of
several creeks and the potential flood impacts they would face should L-142 be built on the north
side.
You have Callaway County and you have Cole County, but Jeff City is in Cole and
Callaway. So that kind of pulls Cole County into it and it does affect Cole County.
Industry JC15
Once you go to the river, you're in a different county, but you're still in Jeff City. So
there's an odd dynamic of same city, different county. – Government JC10
One of the things, everybody that lives along a river wants to know how they connect with
the river and Jefferson City has had a desire to really connect with the river and never
been able to do it and we're separated by the train tracks on this side of the river. And so
sometimes when you cross the bridge, you feel like you're out of Jeff City probably or you
can't live over there. It's a floodplain now. It's all bought out in '93. – Government JC1
Respondents often spoke from their side’s perspective and spoke about the other side.
Perceptions varied about which side floods more frequently and at what costs.
During the flood, the damage we were going to get was over in Callaway County. –
Government JC2
But I think a lot of people think that we flood on the north side quicker than the south
side, when really it's just the opposite. And they can go do the research. It's out there, the
Millbottom area and Capital Plaza, that'll always flood before we flood. – Industry JC15
Although community perspectives denote north–south differences, most of our participants serve
in community and business leader roles, and a comprehensive view that everyone is affected by
flooding prevails.
If I'm a business on the south side of the river and I've got 10 employees that live in Holts
Summit or on the Callaway County side of the river, but they can't get to work. If I've got
10 employees that can't get to work, that'd be bad. – Industry JC27
28
Jeff City Voices Report
5.2 Ambivalence to riverine flooding from city, Cole County, and state officials
Many officials we interviewed were unconcerned with riverine flooding based on two
reasons: riverine flooding is perceived as infrequent, and when the waters do rise, their work and
personal lives are rarely impacted. A combination of acceptance of riverine flooding and an “out
of sight, out of mind” perspective contributes to this lack of concern.
This doesn't really affect us too bad. Jefferson City, they're a lot more impacted,
especially with having the airport, and then having roads on North . . . well, it's now
North Jefferson City, but the old Cedar City area. – Government JC6
It's going to flood no matter what. – Government JC4
As far as the Missouri River flooding, the biggest impact is just, like I said, the backwater
mostly, and Osage City for us. . . . It's kind of out of sight, out of mind. . . . You go put up
a few flood signs, and that's about it. – Government JC6
In some instances, participants pointed to a lack of political will to improve flood resiliency,
referring both to the river flooding and flash flooding.
They did a . . . what was the plan called? Greening of America or I don't know,
something goofy like that. They'd looked at the [Wears] creek and doing improvements to
it and stuff. What's interesting that I've learned here is that there's not a great deal of
cooperation between the state and the city. All that area that's highly visible downtown
by the Capitol is owned by the state. So, I don't think they [the state] really care to
improve it. They don't want to build a parking garage and then give the land to a park
and make it beautiful and green. They don't care, I don't think, or it's not a priority or
however you want to put it. – Government JC25
5.3 Jefferson City’s sufficient flood preparedness
5.3.1 Public works and emergency management plans
Jefferson City and Cole County public works and emergency management personnel
shared their riverine and flash flooding protocols during our interviews, which demonstrated a
high level of preparedness for flood scenarios. Most respondents stressed preparedness as an
essential tool in handling river and flash flooding events.
What this [Flood Action Plan] does is it basically tells us at this [flood] stage, this is the
infrastructure that gets affected. . . . This tells us, hey, what we should be doing at these
different stages. – Government JC2
Every time there would be a flood, we had a city administrator at the time and somebody
from the military, National Guard, I guess, they wanted to do some drastic stuff and we
didn't think it was a good idea. So don't get excited. This is what we [Jefferson City] do.
And so we decided, well we've got to write this down. And that way if we're not here,
somebody else can look at it and they can modify it too, but this is what we do and what it
affects.Government JC1
29
Jeff City Voices Report
What we do is if we believe it's coming over the levees, we move out [of the airport].
Move out means all our equipment's got to come out of the office. We got a big storage
container that we put everything in . . . then haul it out. The equipment has to come out.
The control tower, we have to go through the lower floor of the control tower and remove
all the equipment that is based there. Some of it's ours, some of it is the FAA [Federal
Aviation Administration]. Then we secure the tower. We put some plastic down to try to
keep the moisture because there's a lot of equipment in the tower. So we try to minimize
the humidity in the building if you will, because utility is going to be shut off. The FAA
has numerous navigational aids. They have to come and remove some of those. Some of
them they can remove. Some of them they can't remove. So, whenever the flood waters
recede, it's usually a long time before we can restore instrument flight rules.
Government JC2
Last time we had a scare, Highway Patrol went ahead, got out early. Even though
nothing happened, they were just, "No, we're just going to get out," flew all their aircraft
out. They had, I think it took three semis to evacuate them. The City Flying I know has
four of them on standby, if there's a flood. They have lots of space. They can put things up
high. So, they're not even evacuating everything. – Government JC5
We do have flash flooding that occurs all the time. We have a select number of roads.
Our public works is very, very good at getting out information to talk about which roads
are closed. We have permanent signs that are up that remain, they're folded signs, and so
they remain closed so that at any point at which there's a flood that we know that when it
hits a certain stage, because usually, you know maybe a day or two ahead of time if it's
not a flash flood that you're going to hit the stage at which that road will flood. They
deploy those signs out and so it tells people don't pass when flooded or something like
that. – Government JC14
So, our response plans, we have what is called Local Emergency Operations Plans,
LEOPs. But we also have, it's not flood mitigation plans, actually, I was just looking at
an old one the other day. They are called the Missouri River Flood Event Action Plan.
And what that does is it gives us a playbook so that we know what the stages are for
certain areas that'll start to cause flooding. – Government JC14
Unfortunately, we can't help clean up private roads and things like that, but we tried to
make sure that water structures we have—be it boxes, culverts or whatever—that we
could get those cleaned up as quick as possible to make sure that if we had another event
behind it, it wasn't going to cause another flooding event. Because there are all the flash
flood material coming in like that. In those situations, we also coordinate and try to do
site visits to make sure that everybody's following floodplain regulation for rebuilding or
clean up or things like that. – Government JC17
30
Jeff City Voices Report
I think the main thing is just being prepared for it [river flooding], and I think that we've
got emergency management that is really set up for it and prepared for emergency
services. They communicate well, the fire departments, the sheriff, our EMS, we've got an
emergency management director that he's kind of the cog in the mill, I guess, so that he
can bring everybody together and everybody has their own thing. They work good
together. – Government JC9
5.3.2 Private business flood management plans
Much like government agencies, business owners demonstrated a high level of flood
preparedness, particularly on the Callaway County side of Jefferson City. Business owners
shared extensive flood preparation plans and flood event contact lists during our interviews.
We were posting on the door because people wanted to know the flood height. And there's
certain heights that trigger certain events that we do. Whether it's order sand for
sandbagging, get volunteers to do the sandbagging. It's getting kind of high, we got to
plan on shut down process. – Industry JC36
It's a factory [Hitachi Energy], but yeah, they have their own flood plan. They operated
during the '19 flood. Their engineers have come up with a way to keep that thing going
and producing through floods. They have a levee system too and a way to get the workers
there. They had busing-type arrangements happening. So, it's pretty important to them.
Government JC1
I mean, hopefully we never see it, but they have a wall built to go through the whole
perimeter inside the building up the steel wall that gets welded to the floor grate or the
floor expansion joints, and then they pump water out to keep the water out of the
building. – Industry JC20
There's a box out there, the gray box. It's got the lifting device that lifts all those concrete
barriers and inside that box, there's a laminated sheet. All of the numbers, each one of
them and where they go, just a map. Pretty much a layout of where everything goes. The
wall included. The wall is all numbered. I mean, back in the day in '93, there was a lot of
people came together and done a lot of stuff on a short amount of time. – Industry JC20
There's a ton of things you got to do in advance, like get rid of waste oils and anything
that can potentially spill out into the water. You got to get rid of all of it. We take
everything that's on low ground to higher ground. We got some pads outside that are
elevated so we can move a lot of our materials up on those.Industry JC20
We had a flood contingency plan that came from 1993. It's actually very detailed on when
the water gets to a certain level, start bringing sand in. When it gets to a certain level,
start sand bagging. When it gets to a certain level, we ask for volunteers. Come up with
contingency plan. It's all by the feet in the river. How many feet it goes up in the river.
Industry JC36
31
Jeff City Voices Report
They bring a concrete truck in when they get them [sandbags] all laid out and they fill
them with a concrete truck. – Industry JC20
It was just really an accident. It really was a gift from God that we even found a place
that we could go to because most people there wasn't any space available. And now we've
taken steps, we've built our own flood gates to try and if it's a flash flood, to keep water
out. And we first did that with a series of bladders, but they were so time-consuming and
man-consuming that you probably would flood before you ever got enough water in them
to do any good. So we've had gates manufactured that one or two guys can get them in
place. – Industry JC30
The people that are called out in the flood plan absolutely are aware of it because it's a
ton of extra work that they have to do. Everybody in there's got a different assignment. I
think two feet below flood stage we have to start calling rental companies to get tractors.
Industry JC 37
It's [flooding events] not really a controllable situation. We keep a watchful eye on what
it's doing and react accordingly as far as fleeting our equipment, maintaining that in a
safe way. Boy, we just prepare in, we have the right water pumps in the right places and
just years of experience.Industry JC13
Most businesses need to coordinate flood preparation efforts with public agencies and
other private businesses because of the proximity of their property to highways, trails, and other
shared infrastructure. These added interactions require additional communication and resources,
like sandbagging, to effectively prepare for a flood.
Well, you’ve got to sandbag underneath the 54 bridge over here on the Katy Trail. You
have to sandbag. Basically, they need to sandbag the receiving road. They sandbag down
the road. – Industry JC19
Yeah, there's some farmers. We got a sandbagger on their property, so we have to make
sure we're good with them and that we have reached out to them. There was a couple
down the road, we used to use our tractor to run them big pumps. – Industry JC20
We definitely have an emergency action plan. Yes. As far as a specific flood plan, I mean,
we have history, and we manage to work through it. – Industry JC41
At this point, we have a general manager that runs the facility. He would notify myself
and our engineers. Then we would come up with a plan to make sure that we have
everything covered, depending on how bad it's going to be. Sometimes it's a matter of
pulling pumps out, plugging drains, sandbagging around equipment, just making
different arrangements so that we're ready for it.Industry JC41
32
Jeff City Voices Report
5.4 Flash flooding is a problem: Wears Creek, Cole Junction, Boggs & Grays Creek, etc.
When asked about flooding, most participants asked if we were referring to the Missouri
River or flash flooding. In Jefferson City, flash flooding was reported as a more immediate
concern than Missouri River flooding because of the increased frequency of flash flood events
and short notice of flash flooding. Many participants noted the change in weather patterns over
the past few years, pointing to the increase in intense precipitation events. Others noted the role
of development patterns and historic codes in flash flooding.
In 2010, Jefferson City worked with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
for assistance with the Wears Creek and Millbottom area that had become “a flood-prone and
forgotten zone of the city with vacant properties and parking lots. Jefferson City worked with the
project team to develop design options that could provide both community and water quality
benefits, including improving public access to the Missouri River and integrating brownfield
cleanup and redevelopment and appropriate reuse of vacant lands” (EPA, 2011; Figure 8).
That Wears Creek rises and falls. So when they did Greening of America's Capitals, they
gave a plan for, you should fix up Wears Creek. You should make it green space. And
then you have this beautiful water feature. Well, Wears Creek is a dump. It's like a trash
heap. It looks ugly. It's overgrown. It detracts from our community. But at the same time,
I don't know if you could ever corral it. I don't know if you could ever control Wears
Creek. – Government JC10
The city's got their own issues. I mean, you've got Wears Creek, which, “Well, let's take a
waterway and just concrete the whole thing.” Probably not a good idea. So, obviously
they've got their spots that really need to be looked at. – Government JC17
It [water] starts from the river. It comes over by Big Whiskey, and then it's over here
along Highway 50. And then you get Coca-Cola's plant, and their parking lot is caving in
because Wears Creek erodes. So, it causes significant erosion in a major thoroughfare on
private property, and then they want the city to fix it. So, the dynamic of water in creeks
and flooding, it's just huge here. – Government JC10
Mostly just, like I said, we have some roads. It's Cole Junction, we call it. We'll have
some bottom ground there, that if it gets . . . but there's a levee there, I think. But see, it's
got roads, or it's got Wears Creek that is at tributary, and so it'll back up and get into
some of the fields there. We got a road at Cole Junction. . . . It goes underneath the
railroad tracks, and when water gets up, it submerges it pretty easily. – Government JC6
Wears Creek was rerouted at one point, so that's also, again, as we've talked about,
government entities messing with waterways and transportation. The one that floods this
area was rerouted to basically be where it is now. – Industry JC31
Now, Jefferson City has had several flash floods. I don't know all the names of the creeks,
but Wears Creek, Boggs Creek, there's another one. And some of those areas have
33
Jeff City Voices Report
reacted to flash flooding because the water just can't get out to the river quickly enough.
Industry JC27
2020 they had a flash flood and they're very localized, so people think something's
wrong, but we actually had a rainfall gauge right there with a wastewater facility. But I
mean the water jumped and got in a bunch of buildings and stuff. – Government JC1
You always have your areas that are prone to flash flood, so you're always watching
them. You have people that still try to drive through the water. I think that people are a
lot better about not doing that now. Flash flood areas are different than if the Missouri is
up and it backs up the Osage, which affects not me getting to and from work or anything,
but it does affect people that live a little farther south than me. – Government JC9
And I think, also, the dynamic of our city, we have flash floods out at Washington Park
where the ice arena is located much more frequently than Adrian's Island River will ever
flood. – Government JC10
I just know it's always an inconvenience whenever it closes down the public highways
and streets and whatnot, which happens a lot here in Jeff City. The streets will get closed
down when backwater comes up Wears Creek from the Missouri River, but yeah, just the
challenges of streets and stuff being closed are always, but it's something you get used to,
I think when you live in a river town like Jeff City. – Industry JC26
That same area floods as the ice arena flooded, a homeless person died under the bridge,
got caught up in the flash flood. That happened within a few months of me being here, so
I learned how mean the river, I suppose, the water can be. – Government JC25
One of the flooding things that you don't hear much about is the flash flooding on this
side. We've had several issues. We had an eight-inch flood, eight-inch rain not too long
ago that did a fair amount of damage on the east side of town. Boggs Creek. It floated
some vehicles at an auto repair shop. Took out what used to be a motel and it later
became kind of a weeklong, well not a little apartments kind of thing. Floated those
vehicles away. – Government JC11
34
Jeff City Voices Report
Figure 8. Greening America’s Capitals program map generated to highlight areas along Wears
Creak vulnerable to flooding. Source: US EPA, 2011.
There are a variety of explanations for the flash flooding.
In a lot of the urban residential areas, the storm systems are sized for a 10- or a 25-year
rainstorm, some of them are 50 or 100, but if they get the rainstorms that just sit and park
in one spot, well then, you far exceed any capacity of any storm system. – Government
JC4
The problem in Jefferson City, we didn't have a storm water code until 1986. And so that
first code established lowest elevations for structures and a setback distance from
channel drainage. And I think we had looked up, 70 or 71% of the structures in Jefferson
City had been built prior to that code adoption. And so, the overflow path that we look
for, now that we require, if a storm exceeds a pipe, then the drainage is routed around
the houses. Well, that didn't exist. And so, a lot of the structures are built in the overflow
path. And so, that's where the flash floods. – Government JC4
35
Jeff City Voices Report
They [Bald Hill residents] flooded in this flash flood event and they blame the city
because it's all always the city's fault. – Government JC2
Well, they [south side of Missouri River] get a lot of flash flooding over there and it's
only, I mean, it's common sense. I mean, if you have more trees, more bushes, more
rocks, more weeds and everything, the water's not going to come down as quick. Now, all
of a sudden you start clearing and you're building more roadways, more buildings, more
rooftops. So, you're losing the trees, you're losing all, everything that would slow down
the water before and you're actually speeding it up. Cause it's coming off these rooftops,
they're coming off these gutters, they're coming down the roadways. – Industry JC15
I think some of the other problems that have happened recently in Jeff City, and correct
me on this one if I'm wrong, but as there's more development in certain things in the
area, runoff water has become pretty interesting. And so, Wears Creek has had other
problems where it's gotten backed up, and in our particular location too, Wears Creek
getting underneath the highway and out to the river has caused slow movements of water.
So, we've seen a lot more flash flooding in Jefferson City in the last few years than we
probably did a couple of decades prior just because natural water runoff is going in
different directions. – Industry JC31
It's just hard to tell you, you got a weather pattern coming, you can't tell where that cell's
going to stop and drop. West side of Jeff City that time, six months before that, east side
of Jeff City got nine inches in 30 minutes. So, what do you do? – Government JC17
It seems like their intensity is higher. We get one more 50-year storm a year, it seems.
Government JC17
We've had a few really odd major record-breaking rains over the last few years. And when those
big rains happened, I don't think we could throw all the money we have in the city at
infrastructure for stormwater and actually prevent flooding in some of those. I mean, those are
the events where you get ridiculous amounts within an hour. And I don't care what you build. It
just will never be sufficient. And those are the times when it comes so fast out of nowhere that
you hope and pray that nobody loses their life. – Government JC10
The flash flooding part, we can cover that pretty quick as far as impactful because that's
usually a quick event. It comes up, and within an hour it's gone. Flash flooding, it's a
nuisance. You have to do a lot of work. Normally, we prepare for it because you watch
the weather, and you know when there's going to be a big storm coming. We try and
prepare as much as we can. – Industry JC41
Now, all the water from the whole west side of town is coming through its creek channel
and the channel's been constricted and a few people have gotten variances from retention
pools and ponds and stuff. So, the water's coming down with a force and if it comes
through it all has to go underneath that major intersection of Highway 50 which you just
36
Jeff City Voices Report
came in. By Big Whiskeys and that, the creek goes underneath the whole highway, so if
the west end water gets here first and it's going through it actually makes a dam for the
east end water, and then it starts to back up and then just kind of wreaks havoc on things.
Industry JC31
5.5 “Flooding, which river?Other rivers flood the area too
When asked about river flooding, many participants shared different experiences with
Missouri River, Osage River, and Moreau River flooding.
Flooding is not just on the Missouri River or the Mississippi, it happens on the Osage, it
happens on the Moreau River that we've got here in town. Every tributary that we've got,
when we have inordinate amount of water, those people that live and work around those
have got issues. – Government JC28
And it's just basically just water coming up. There are certain areas, for sure, maybe not
so much direct to Missouri, but related to the Osage River, you get the Moreau River,
those types that we deal with, water over road and things like that.Government JC6
5.6 Flooding, and even the threat of river flooding, affects public revenue
Government officials outlined local spending to update and improve flood resilience of
existing infrastructure. Additionally, officials shared direct and indirect costs incurred when
flooding occurs, including lost income when agencies and buildings are forced to shut down
because of flooding. Flood preparation, such as moving out equipment and airplanes at the
airport, stationing additional emergency responders, and closing down major roads and
highways, makes an economic impact even if the river does not crest.
We spent $22 million to upgrade the treatment plant. A lot of that was elevating stuff. We
talked about, the treatment plant can still operate to the flood record, where like one foot
of free board above the flood of '93, which I believe was the highest. So, again we can
still treat but if water gets over the levee, we can't land apply sludge . . . in '19, I think we
spent about $400,000 in fees to the landfill hauling sludge there instead of land applying
it. – Government JC3
The thing with the river rising too, we've had problems with erosion along the river. So,
my utility spent $1.1 million doing erosion control on the south bank of the river.
Government JC3
The airport generates about a $25 million per year economic impact to the region. When
that is removed from there, and it's not just because when there was water, it takes
months to recover. The navigational aids had to be brought back online. Obviously, it has
to all be cleaned. We cleaned for weeks before we could actually operate again.
Government JC2
37
Jeff City Voices Report
I think one of the biggest challenges is Jeff City's put so much money and investment into
the airport being over there, and the sewage treatment plant is right next to the airport
and both of those are in the floodplain, and when it floods, they flood. The sewage
treatment plant, they've rebuilt it up higher, so it's above the 500-year flood elevation,
but one thing I've found is if you're in the floodplain, eventually, the thousand-year
flood's going to happen or the 2000-year flood.Industry JC26
An important thing down in Jefferson City is you got to pull all those airplanes out of
those hangars. You got damage every time. It's terrible. It's very expensive and it costs
them a lot of money. And then they lose their fuel sales, which is really how the city of
Jefferson collects money for the airport. Makes money is off of fuel sales and their city
sales tax. And you shut the airport down. You ain't got that. I mean, you need revenue to
keep an airport running. – Government JC32
Government officials provided distinctions between river and flash flooding as they
impact public revenue. Stormwater infrastructure and Wears Creek were reported as areas that
need improvement for better flash flood mitigation.
I'm also remembering how I wasn't here but a few months and Wears Creek flooded at
Washington Park, and flooded the whole ice arena, which every time it floods, it costs us
25 or 30 grand to get it reopened, basically. – Government JC25
When you start talking about indirect expenses, we have a lot of lost revenue. We have a
very robust hockey program and figure skating program and synchronized skating
programs, so they're lost on practice time, which the closest rink is an hour and 45
minutes, which a lot of people go to, to be honest around here. Just because the ice folks,
they're passionate. I mean, you're putting the disruption into the hundreds of thousands
[of dollars], I think easily. If you have to cancel a tournament, you're talking about
economic impact. We gauge economic impact in this community with our basketball
tournaments that we do here or gymnastics tournaments, or cheerleading tournaments
and baseball tournaments, and amphitheater shows. So, we gauge all of those economic
impact things, so you lose that, obviously, when your rink is down a month.
Government JC25
And we spend a significant amount of money on stormwater every year in Jeff City. We've
added a stormwater crew to specifically work on that. And we even spent ARPA
[American Rescue Plan Act] money because ARPA, when it first came out, one of the
allowable expenses was stormwater, which I thought was odd. I don't know why. It's like
tourism and other things I could see with the pandemic, but stormwater was one of the
expenses that was allowed. . . . But we did allocate a significant amount to stormwater.
Government JC10
38
Jeff City Voices Report
You can't just build without making sure your stormwater has somewhere to go. So, does
it cost more? I would guess yes. We're allocating more every year to stormwater.
Government JC10
5.7 River flooding damages leave lasting impacts on community members
Most community members expressed flood fatigue due to repetitive floods and losses,
which constrains relationships between government agencies and residents. Different community
members shared experiences of not being able to get to work because of road closures, as well as
having their farms, businesses, and households underwater, bringing both economic and social
impacts to Jefferson City and surrounding areas.
It disrupts the day-to-day business of people's lives and just, whether it's a flood or
whether it was some other reason, if you and your family had a medical emergency or
medical situations, you needed to be going to Columbia on a day-to-day basis, but that
was disrupted for whatever reasons, the highway closed, for whatever reasons you would
feel those difficulties when that Highway 54, 63 closure happens because of waters. Well,
there's no other way. You could come to the Missouri River Bridge, you cross and you're
on 54, 63, there's no other avenue to get there unless you drive over to the Tipton area
and you come around, like I said, to Booneville and come around. Or you go down to the
Hermann area and you come around. I would just have to imagine that there's been
families that were totally disrupted at a crucial time of life when they're saying, and we're
going through this struggle, cancer, and we need to be going to Columbia, and now we've
got a flood that is keeping us from making that an easy commute, an easy track.
Industry JC27
So, it affects not just the farmers, but everybody with businesses. Towns get basically
isolated. We couldn't go that way, and we couldn't go that way in 2019.Agriculture
JC16
I actually reside in Holts Summit, and so I had to take 54 in 2019. It was right on 54 and
63. I live on a bluff, so I know my home won't ever be an issue to experience flooding. But
for me to get to work and cross the bridge, there was some dicey weeks there. – Industry
JC35
Or you go over and you cross at Boonville is where you'll cross the river there. So,
there's the idea that if Central Missouri is cut off because Highway 54 and 63 are
underwater, the idea of how you get people back and forth, how do you get medical
emergencies from one side of the river to the other, and things like that.Industry JC27
It is frustrating that in my personal opinion, the very people that rely on the US 54
corridor for everyday commuter to and from the Capitol City [are rarely considered in
planning]. The number of commuters, including food and vital transport, hospitals and
blood to lab work, among hundreds of services that travel this vital corridor must be
39
Jeff City Voices Report
fairly represented. These people are working people that rely on representatives like me
to make sure someone has their backs. They are the ones that make things work, not go
out and voice opinions. The backbone of our society, making wages, paying taxes, raising
families. It’s a full time job that does not give them the luxury of “showing up” [to flood
management planning meetings]. Working parents of children that go to school through
5th grade north of the river, and 6th grade – 12th are bussed across the river, to
Jefferson City School District in Jefferson City [must be] represented. The frustration of
figuring out what, when, and where their children will spend days or weeks, when
flooded road closure disrupts their lives and parents are at work. – Government JC32
Even with significant individual losses, for FEMA funds to become available the county must
reach certain thresholds of damage.
And even when we had some of the minor flood events, I think the challenges were, we
didn't quite hit enough damage. So that's always frustrating when you're like, “Yeah,
people who lost everything, but it wasn't big enough for FEMA to really do anything
about it.” So, they're relying on their own insurance. – Government JC10
5.8 Farmers and the agricultural industry deal with flooding long after the waters recede
Much of the riverfront land is owned and operated by local farmers and other agricultural
industries and are the first to experience impacts of river flooding. Levee breaches and standing
water damage farmland, making for a costly clean up. Depending on the timing of the flood and
the duration of water remaining on farmland, entire growing seasons can be lost.
Well, in 1993, that was my first year I was a landowner. We went underwater. Of course,
we rebuilt the levees. We had a loss in production. We had a little bit of say in silt
problems, which we addressed over time. And then just the financial toll of it, rebuilding
the levee infrastructure and stuff.Agriculture JC23
It was interesting driving to Columbia and seeing the sod farm on the north side there in
Cedar City, North Jeff City. Watching it, driving up one day, and there's water in one
field, and driving back that same day, and the whole bottom's underwater. – Government
JC8
Oh yeah, it's a deal. You don't get to do anything [when it floods]. That's one reason why
I was working for . . . so you got some income.Agriculture JC24
Not just the flood waters, but when sand and silt move onto farm fields, it costs a lot of money
and time to remediate the soil.
There was sand, like I said, up there, those sand piles. There was sand everywhere up
there. Down by the airport, there was another huge hole where that blew out. I mean, it
destroyed these bottoms down through here. There was no crop. – Agriculture JC16
40
Jeff City Voices Report
We took the big drink on the north side, so then that was a zero, that was 100% loss. And
then we ended up with about 50 acres with up to five foot of sand on that 50 acres. The
majority of it was about 18 inches, but it got up to . . . the average was probably 18
[inches], two foot on 50 acres. Then we had to remediate that.Agriculture JC23
I had to hire a guy to level my farm out because it put a lot of sand and stuff on it. But,
that's the way it was with everybody. When the river comes down through there with that
much water, it's going to move some dirt. – Agriculture JC24
Whenever you have a flood, the farmers suffer because it's going to deposit sand.
Government JC1
So personally, it doesn't necessarily affect me, but that's what's so interesting about Jeff
City is either you live up on a hill, or you're at the bottom. You're either at the top or the
bottom. There's almost no in between. Either you're going to flood, or you're not.
Government JC10
Despite flood events, the community of farmers work together to help one another during floods.
Every time there's a flood, this community of farmers up and down this river bottom, and
I don't care what levee district you're in, it doesn't make any difference, they do come
together and help each other a bunch. Agriculture JC21
I mean floodplain insurance just costs you more. It's another expense. And that every
expense, we have a cooperative system we're designed as a group of farmers coming
together, we have a corporate board that is... Our farmers are on there and so they direct
our business. The whole idea of the co-op is to help farmers save money and buy together
buying power and it's another thing that makes it challenging to buy a better, do a better
job of buying because their costs will get higher. Industry JC33
5.9 River & flash flooding cause extensive physical & financial damage to local businesses
In addition to the impacts on agriculture, Jefferson City business members reported the
negative impacts flooding has on their operations. Many business owners and workers expressed
disruptions to their operations and severe economic impacts due to the impossibility to move
equipment, deliver goods, and bring their employees into their offices or plants when water
covers a significant number of roads and routes of access. Even minor flooding events can cause
businesses to close temporarily or make it impossible for employees to get to work safely.
You lose productivity. I'm sure nobody's quantified it, but that's huge. People might just
decide not to come to work, so you may not have the people. And then, these resources,
like maintenance and facilities, are tied up doing things other than managing our
business. – Industry JC18
We actually rode a boat all the way through our building. – Industry JC30
41
Jeff City Voices Report
The one that people don't realize is in 2019, that flood there lasted for months, where '93
and '95, yeah, they were strong, but they were in and out. And the one in 2019, I mean we
were closed down here for five months. – Industry JC15
Like, there's another house over here, our neighbors, and we will go through there to get
to our business. I mean, it will affect us that way, that we can't actually use our driveway.
We have to use our neighbor's driveway to get into our business. – Government JC29
Plans for continuity can be challenging, making sure that there's adequate infrastructure,
resources, broadband, and others to allow people to work remotely. But I think some of
the big impacts are just as a community that has a lot of professional service and then
commercial activity that, in being an eastwest corridor along Highway 50-63, that
really shut down activity. And I think that there's fear of capital investment and
additional activity on the north side of the river from some of our major industry. Hitachi
being one of those that based on where they're at, it's a great location outside of, flooding
times do impact their operations. And from a vital entity that they are and what they
produce, being down, especially at times of crisis can be a challenge. – Industry JC22
So, when the 1993 flood. The big flood. And it actually came into the building. Like three
feet of water in the building. And so the factory was down for a couple of weeks. And they
talked about coming across the river in the jon boats, and they had to shut down things
and keep things running. And then a propane tank, a huge propane tank, was floating
down the river and went against the bridge so they couldn't get in the river anymore.
Industry JC36
However, we were only down for a couple days because we were able to bus people in.
So, what we did was we arranged for the . . . it was June, so school was out. The city of
California. We used their bus services and we had parking at Holts Summit, the mall, and
Helias. And 24/7 we ran buses and we were able to . . . the lot was dry right by the
driveway. And we dropped people off. And the water receded, I don't know, about 10
days later.Industry JC36
The lost revenue from tourism recreation dollars would be a heck of a lot less than the
cost of the flood reconstruction. – Industry JC31
We've got 75 based aircrafts. We're talking anything from a $20,000 little two-seat
aircraft up to probably mid-25 million, somewhere in there, $24 million aircraft. A lot of
businesses, a lot of infrastructure, a lot of ... There's a lot out there [at the airport]. –
Government JC5
In order to flood protect ourselves when it floods once every 25 or 30 years there are
costs that happen every day because we have to operate in a way, like our floor is higher,
right? So, every day you've got to send down conveyors with all of your beer to keep this
beer safe when it does flood, but when it would flood you just kind of become an island.
42
Jeff City Voices Report
You may have to look for another warehouse to cross dock stuff while your beer just kind
of sits here, but when the water was high it was high in the front but we could get in
through the back streets and go up and around town and still get out. So, in the pictures I
showed you from 2019, we were still operating once the water got too high that those
truck drivers wouldn't drive through the water anymore, you could come in the backside
and it was dry. – Industry JC31
And without that opportunity, we got 60 families employed here and that kind of stuff that
all of a sudden you got to trying to figure out how you're going to pay them, how you're
going to do this or that. And if your inventory's sitting up here as an island surrounded by
floodwaters, you can't sell it, so you don't have anything to do. Everybody works off
commissions, those kinds of things as well. So again, you can protect the facilities and we
can protect the physical assets, but our ability to operate becomes significantly reduced.
Industry JC31
Well, again, we've taken steps to protect, but the issue is that if there's water on the street
and you can't get a vehicle in and out, we're just sort of stuck because you would've had
to move all your product out of the building into another building until the water goes
down. And the flood of ‘93, once the river came up and started a crest, we were in a
different building for over 90 days. So, three months we were out of this building.
Industry JC30
But, of course, in ‘93, when you have a flood of that magnitude, it was higher and much
longer duration than anything we'd ever seen before. I mean, it put our parking lot
underwater. It put part of our operation underwater. It cut off access to areas because
Highway 50 was underwater. You had the Missouri River Bridge that was closed when
54 got cut out. For us to continue to operate, that was one aspect that made it very
difficult because we had a lot of things that were in the flood area that were impacted,
just day-to-day life, whether it be trying to get ingredients, cartons moved around,
electric issues, parking issues. – Industry JC41
Well, when you look at a flood like that, it's a very localized area that's affected.
Jefferson City understands what's going on, but when you serve a hundred-mile radius
around Jeff City, you're getting into west, north, east, south parts of Missouri. They're not
affected by the flood, so they could care less how you get the product there. They just
want it there. It takes a lot of extra overtime, a lot of manpower, a lot of extra fuel,
sometimes extra trucks because you can't make the run in a single loop any more like you
used to. – Industry JC41
We spent a lot of money 'cause of the office, we had to rip all the sheetrock out, tear it
back down the studs and build it new again inside the office. Every one of the bins, the
ones that got water in them. We had to replace the floors in the grain bins. So we had
43
Jeff City Voices Report
significant expenses. It was north of $600,000 we spent at that location just because of
the flood. – Industry JC33
The largest employer over here is probably the Hitachi plant and who knows if Hitachi
would leave Jefferson City and those four or 500 jobs left Jefferson City, what that
impact would be because that's a good-paying factory job over at Hitachi. – Industry
JC27
So, there's many industries throughout this little area that we call the floodplain of
Jefferson City, but before that, I would look at the access to the highways. If the highways
go under, then that cuts off a major thoroughfare that you now have to go an hour plus
out of your way, either direction before you can cross over and go north. So it's a pretty
major setback if the highways are underwater. So that's a bad thing and then just the
expense of cleanup and the timeout and the delays and everything that comes with it. It's
hard. – Industry JC27
When I've got 30 employees out of work because we're flooded, that's an economic
impact. When we've got to come in here and rebuild because we've flooded and we're
tear out, clean up and all that, we have to fund that ourselves.Industry JC27
Holts Summit is just north here on Highway 54. There's a lot of people that live in Holts
Summit that work in Jefferson City . . . if the highway's closed because it's underwater,
you can't get to the bridge. Then how are they getting to work? What are they doing for
employment? Same way with Columbia people. I mean, there are a lot of Columbia
residents that drive to Jefferson City for their jobs. And if the highway's underwater and
they can't get here, what are they doing? How are they doing that? So, the employers will
feel a pinch, even if they're not employers that are affected directly by the river, they
would be indirectly affected because their employees couldn't get to one side or the other.
If Highway 54 and Highway 63 are underwater. – Industry JC27
But from an economic standpoint, . . . five days a week we have a first shift, second shift,
and third shift. You got three shifts of production all week long. Then a weekend you have
two 12-hour shifts running with maintenance folks and some of the areas. If we're down
for seven to 10 days, it's a humongous economic impact to the folks that work here and to
our customers that are counting on us to deliver the product because that just going to
slow down the process.Industry JC37
In town, a lot of places got flooded themselves, businesses and streets, things like that. So
farmers aren't the only ones. When you go to town, you feel sorry for those people also
because their business is on hold. But in Jefferson City here, well at this airport, this all
gets shut down when it floods. That's why this cafe's up high now. But it affects people's
livelihoods quite a bit.Agriculture JC24
44
Jeff City Voices Report
Columbia residents that drive to Jefferson City for their jobs, and if the highway's
underwater and they can't get here, what are they doing? How are they doing that? So,
the employers will feel a pinch, even if they're not employers that are affected directly by
the river, they would be indirectly affected because their employees couldn't get to one
side or the other. If Highway 54 and Highway 63 are underwater. – Industry JC27
I've got Jefferson City and surrounding just you can imagine a company with 35
employees that are scattered throughout central Missouri. I've got them everywhere. So
the idea of getting to and from work gets difficult for many of them when the road's
underwater. . . . And you try to, first and foremost keep everybody safe, you get into a
hurry, you get into a rush and you start loading things on trailers, heavy equipment, and
things like that. You don't want to get somebody hurt. So, the safety aspect of just not ever
having to move out again would be awesome.Industry JC27
We lose that day-to-day business. We can't do as large maintenance projects when we're
not in our own home. So, it gets difficult, but we just try to maintain, try not to lay
anybody off. We try and sustain all the payroll and keep everybody employed because
you can't take employees and lay them off for six weeks while the airport's closed because
they'll eventually leave you. If you're going to retain your employees that you like and
you want to keep them employed and paid. So, our revenues go down and our expenses
stay up and we just got to try and do the best we can. So, if you, young man, can fix this
and never let us flood again, that'd be awesome.Industry JC27
Some spoke about how repetitive flooding is a disincentive for companies operating
plants or offices in Jefferson City. Companies consider relocating to areas where disruptions
from flood events are less probable.
So, we tried to advocate and stuff, but the interesting thing is as time changed, Central
Dairy's now owned by Prairie Farms, and the people that own Prairie Farms, they've
never been here when it flooded. I mean, they're not local. So, you run into that, that
these companies are like, “Hell, let's just close that plant down and we'll ship the milk in
on trucks because we can't afford to run it if there's going to be a flood.” So, it cost you
economic development and businesses close and jobs are lost because of it. – Industry
JCYY
They [Hitachi] have been on the cusp edge of being shut down. I mean, this got right to
the edge and they've had to deal with water. They've had to pump a little bit, but they've
been able to maintain it without having to pull out of the facility, thank God. Because
after they were bought out, then I'm sure that they had some restructuring going within
the company. Which ones do we keep? Which ones we done at? And they kept this one
open and now they've invested another 10 million dollars in expansion in the last 12
months. They're in the process of getting that ramped up right now. – Government JC32
45
Jeff City Voices Report
5.10 Residents share opinions about what has made flooding events worse
5.10.1 Gavins Point Reservoir releases
Many participants attributed the USACE’s timing and management of the reservoir
releases as a cause of flooding and/or an exacerbating factor of flood severity in the Lower
Missouri River area, with direct mentions to Gavin’s Point.
Several of our floods we've had over the years, when we know we're getting into wet
patterns or we got a lot of snow melt up north, they could control some of this flooding by
just managing the infrastructure that we already have. And they seem to ignore that, and
they worry more about recreation, fish, and wildlife on the Upper Missouri than they are
worried about flood control and navigation on the lower Missouri. There's some floods
that I think could have been . . . In '19, part of the reason we went so long underwater is
they didn't cut the water off when we were having all these torrential rains down here;
they never slowed the water down up there because the reservoirs were full.
Agriculture JC38
You can't open the valve and shut it off. They raised that several feet and that's part of
their master manual. When they revised that years ago, they revised that with a higher
spring rise that would start...I forget when they started up there, but they hold it in their
bigger dams in Gavins Point and then they do their release. And I think 2011 was one of
their major floods that they caused because of their spring rise. Then extra rain started
hitting at the same time. And that has happened many times in the last 20 years that we
suddenly got 6, 7, 8 more foot of water than we normally would have because they
artificially raised it up to begin with. Agriculture JC7
When I was talking about how they [USACE] operate it for recreational use. If the
reservoirs are dropped, then they got a lot more storage. It sure helps down here really. –
Government JC4
I mentioned Gavin's Point, it was not built for major flood control storage. But the
storage that it has, it keeps being diminished from a siltation that's coming into the
reservoir. So in the not too distant future it will have zero flood control capability.
Agriculture JC39
That’s the other thing is whenever they [Upper Missouri River area] have a snowpack, if
they get a rain on a snowpack, that will bring the water faster. – Government JC2
There has to be a strong hold with the federal government on South Dakota. . . . I mean
that water from the Corps needs to be released early and get out of there so Iowa,
Kansas, Missouri, all the way down, we're not flooded out. – Industry JC15
I'm not in the meetings with the Corps of Engineers when they're releasing water that
may be two, three, four states away that affects us. Sometimes hindsight's always 20/20,
but sometimes just looking at it you're like, we had this rain coming, couldn't they have
46
Jeff City Voices Report
made some kind of changes up above us to let it come down a little easier? – Government
JC9
Gavins Point, excellent point he had over here, I think it was in . . . never mind my lack of
remembering the year, but I think it was 2013, we were flowing so much water out of
Gavin's Point. We were down here and it was dry and we're seeing levees being
overtopped upstream from here. This is the end of . . . we were on the tail end of where
they got overtop. – Agriculture JC23
The Corps of Engineers has done the shittiest job in the whole wide world of anybody
managing the Missouri River Basin and what's happened, and I didn't know any of this
prior to the flood . . . to the pleasure of vacationers and boaters and things like that,
systematically up along the Missouri River above Jefferson City especially in the
Dakotas, they put in a whole system of dams. And they did it to create reservoirs for
pleasure boating and vacationers, campers, and stuff like that. And they just don't have a
clue how to manage that. . . . They're holding water and then naturally in the wintertime
it snows and for whatever reason, they didn't want to draw the water down during the
wintertime to prepare for the snow melt. And I guess that was so that it didn't damage
people's docks and things like that, but anyway, they totally misread it and the snow melt
was higher than they anticipated and faster than it anticipated. And they were at full
reservoir up there so the only thing they could do is let water out. And they basically
devastated areas north of St. Joseph, Missouri, and south of Council Bluffs, and in that
area. Interstate highways were shut down and stuff and they totally mismanaged the
program. And it's particularly scary to me. – Industry JC30
‘93, ‘95 and every high-water sequence subsequently and again, the last time that it
flooded up around King City, Missouri, which is north of Kansas City, north of St. Joe,
that whole area at the Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri border where they closed I-29 and stuff,
that was all just because they didn't bring the water levels up north down in the
wintertime. And then while they were at full reservoir, they took on all the snow melt and
you have to prepare for that, and unfortunately, if you lower the river and it doesn't come
up as fast as you wanted it to by May, well boo-hoo for some guy that can't drive his
fishing boat for a couple weeks up there. Because by doing it in prudence all the farmers
can still farm their crops, and I-29 is still open, which is a major corridor north and
south. . . . But to help boaters, they screw everybody else. – Industry JC30
If they lowered the water in the wintertime to prepare for the snow melt and the snow
melt was late, so what if you have to stay home and roast a hot dog instead of going
fishing one day? Look at everything that got ruined just so they kept the water level the
way they wanted it up north. – Industry JC30
When I began in talking about upstream, and I think that that's where a lot of work could
be done better, is to be able to have those communities that are upstream, and especially
47
Jeff City Voices Report
the Corps of Engineers, when they release water that they let us know. – Government
JC28
Well, you're depending on the Corp of Engineers, how much they release at Gavins
Point. And when they're totally full, they got to cut it loose. Management is very
important. But they have an issue, they have to satisfy recreation. You have the tribes in
North Dakota and South Dakota, and they have a real management issue. – Agriculture
JC42
But sometimes they wait too long before they start releasing water. A good example of
that was 2000...I mean they had to open it all the way up. Because I mean there was
significance. It's mother nature, you can't control that part of it. But see a little further
ahead that this could happen. We should be dumping some of this water.Industry JC13
2019 flood, the bulk of it happened in the upper end of the river. I mean we got local
rains that contributed, but Nebraska and like South Dakota, North Dakota got a lot of
rain and anything above the dams. Then the dam had to go through the dam system. I
know the initial part of 2019 when it flooded on the upper end, it blew a dam out on a
small river. It was below the Gavin's Point dam below Sioux City. So that water did not
pass through the lake system, I don't believe. I think it was it.Industry JC12
You could get on your telephone and look up what Gavin's Point was flowing. And it
seemed like in a week or two they went from flood levels down here to not record lows,
but it was significantly below flood stage and it was just a matter of a couple weeks. And
if they would've played with that water one week or two weeks longer and not had all...
There's levees that got lost. Cole Junction stayed. But there's levees up the stream
towards Kansas City that got lost.Agriculture JC43
5.10.2 FEMA flood maps, floodplain regulations, and buyouts
Updates to FEMA’s floodplain mapping and adhering to federal floodplain regulations
have made both recovery efforts and development challenging for residents and city officials.
And I think that's a continuation of Wears Creek, is that the FEMA flood maps have been
drawn in such a way that some of those homes are now in a floodplain. And so people
want to maybe buy and renovate and fix up these homes. They can't. They basically have
to just tear them down. So, there's a lot of odd dynamic with water in this town and
floods, so that's how it affects our future is areas of development, putting economic
growth and dollars into places that eventually are going to take on water. And even if it's
only once a year or once every five or 10 years, how do you handle that? Do you just not
build there forever, or what do you put there? And try to tell someone that they can't fix
up their home or that they can't build because FEMA says they can't, and that's difficult.
– Government JC10
48
Jeff City Voices Report
As stringent as the floodplain regulations are, we don't see the development in the
floodplain the way we used to. Now we've got a couple areas where, for whatever reason,
people really want to be there, and so they will go and make sure that they can get to an
engineered no-rise certification and go through those process steps. – Government JC17
I talk with some of them [residents in the floodplain], and they're like, “Well, we'll deal
with that when that comes.” But I think for some of these people, it's going to be a pretty
good eye opener. And obviously, our hands are tied because we're just trying to make
sure we're following the minimal federal guidelines that we have to, to stay in line with
National Flood Insurance Program. – Government JC17
I've gotten the feeling here lately from what I hear from people that their rates just keep
skyrocketing, and I know it's probably a combination of all the hurricanes and different
things like that, but I get the feeling that FEMA's trying to raise the rates to encourage
people to get out of the floodplain, just be like, okay, I'm tired of paying this. – Industry
JC26
5.11 Other issues inform flood risk management opinions
5.11.1 Port Authority
Jefferson City needs to use the Port Authority, but since city limits are shared between
Cole and Callaway counties, “on which side of the river?” is a robust debate that influences
residents’ position on a levee.
But from the river standpoint, I think it's probably lacked some of, from the Missouri
River standpoint, some of the value or asset that could be achieved by being a river
community. We have been granted a port designation as a community, can't remember
when that was applied for, in 2018 I believe. And so, looking, still going through a
process to identify the best location for a port facility. But I think from a strategic
advantage, I don't know that we've maximized the Missouri River. – Industry JC22
It'd be a brand new port we've been studying on for four years, trying to locate, find a
specific location where we want it. Best place on the river, least most affordable as far as
the development goes. Property might not be the most affordable, but it's all about site.
It's just like you want to be in the right location. If you don't have the right location on
the river, then you're fighting the water all the time for lots of different reasons.
Government JC32
Yeah, we work with them [Callaway County] as far as there's a port, we're trying to get a
port issue going and they'd like to have one on the North side of the river. We're working
on the South side of the river and stuff. And obviously, the river levels would affect that.
Government JC9
Currently, we're looking at 200-foot dock face, which is relatively small. It's manageable
and it's an affordable way to get a star on the map. You start going out and marketing it.
49
Jeff City Voices Report
It's big enough to load and unload several barges at a time. If the American Patriot
Holdings is the one that's got the big boat, that's 900 feet long. We are set up to have a
900-foot dock there if we go through as planned. And it's on the deep-water side, the
current's correct. And there's no wing dike and there's no structures. It happens to be in
this location, there's no other structures that's impeding us or developing that.
Government JC32
5.11.2 Notches in the wing-dikes erode the banks
Many government officials expressed frustration with the handling of notches in the
wing-dikes by the USACE. Many pointed to the notches as a cause of bank erosion, leading to
the potential for more flooding on eroded land.
Wing dikes are another thing that needs to be addressed, I think, for erosion. The farmers
are on them about it. People who farm. Your farmers up and down the river because
they're losing ground. – Government JC1
The dikes in Missouri River orient this way. So water comes over, hits this dike. What's it
do? It goes straight at the bank at an accelerated speed. So, we put a notch in it. Now, the
water that's building up behind this is now concentrated flow into this notch. Now, we've
taken it, basically made a jet engine out of it, and headed it right at the creek bank. Now,
if this is a vegetated bank and it's in good shape, probably not going to be a problem. If
we're having high fluctuations of water level, you're not going to have a vegetated bank,
and you're going to dig an erosion. – Government JC2
The Corps has promised to close those notches, so that, we think that will help.
Government JC3
Spent a million dollars putting rocks on there. The notch still wasn't closed. So, what
happens, Wears Creek comes out, rivers coming this way, it's going in behind these wing
and through notches and it's swirling where these come together, and that's my non-
technical term. The swirling is eating the bank away, obviously. And something's eating
the bank away and oh that's just natural?! When we talk to the Corps guys, we say “No,
we have to have this fixed so we're going to have to do it ourselves.You guys spend a
million bucks and we can't get help on it. – Government JC1
What it did was the velocity coming through that there was a 40-foot hole right below
that dike and basically was eating out the Jeff City side. Basically where all those notches
are cut, the water cuts through there, causes a swirling action and actually eats into the
bank. There's been a lot of farmers that's lost ground due to that. – Industry JC13
They've went up and down the river closing notches and they still haven't closed this one.
So, we're hopeful in the spring they'll be back, but you can see the heat out there.
Government JC1
50
Jeff City Voices Report
Fix the notches. Get rid of the notches. – Government JC2
5.11.3 We are generally disconnected from the Missouri River
Most participants recognized the river as an asset that is underutilized. Most mentioned
that people of Jefferson City do not have a connection to the river. Cole County and Jefferson
City officials pointed to Adrian’s Island and the Carl R. Noren Access as recent improvements
aimed at forging a public connection to the river. Many others commented on how more
recreational and economic development could happen along the river with proper funding and
the political will to make it happen.
One of the things, everybody that lives along a river wants to know how they connect with
the river. Jefferson City has had a desire to really connect with the river and never been
able to do it. We're separated by the train tracks on this side of the river. And when you
cross the bridge, you feel like you're out of Jeff City probably or you can't live over there.
It's a floodplain now. It's all bought out in '93. – Government JC1
Just use it [Missouri River] as an asset instead of a liability! . . . And so, you don't see a
big desire to [connect]: oh, the river's dangerous and all these other things.
Government JC1
They just opened up that Adrian's Island, which I think is a huge benefit for the city.
That's one thing. I've lived here 16 years now and I feel like this [separation] is the case
along almost every Missouri River city, except for maybe Hermann and, yeah, maybe
only Hermann, there's a few, Lexington, I guess, Waverly. But most of the cities keep this
wall up . . . not a literal wall, but this separation from the river. There's nowhere in Jeff
City to sit and have dinner and look at the river, see the river. The only places you can
really see the river are from the Capital or the DNR [Department of Natural Resources]
building, or if you go over to access now that they added the pedestrian parkway across
the bridge. That was a huge improvement, Adrian's Island. – Government JC8
A lot of people are scared of the river, especially from a recreation standpoint. It does
look scary from the bridge. – Government JC8
Well, I mentioned a lot of people are scared of the river and just getting people more
comfortable going out in a kayak, even walking the river, walking the banks, which right
now, they're pretty hard to walk. But being here in Jeff City, you look just upstream of the
bridge to the next curve, there's a big point bar that happens at every sandbar. I've never
seen anyone out on that sandbar. It's a beautiful beach essentially, but no one's ever out
there. Just people taking advantage of it being there and not just being this impediment to
their travel to Columbia, that they have to go across the bridge. Yeah, just less scared,
more accepting, more use. – Government JC8
There was no access. People in Jeff City couldn't get to the river because the railroad
tracks cut it off on the other side. And so, we had a strong desire to create access to the
51
Jeff City Voices Report
river so people could... it's a great recreational resource. Not to mention a great view of
the Capital. – Government JC34
I had never been a, or knew much about the Missouri River, but a friend of mine who
volunteered hundreds of hours of time down here to beautify this area and make it more
prominent and kind of got me out on the river in a boat and I later bought a boat, I love
getting out on the river in a boat. An evening sunset, it's beautiful. And the river has a
bad reputation, because if you're not careful out there, you can get in a lot of trouble
because of the hidden dikes under the water and swift spots and current that can sweep
you away if you're not very cautious. – Government JC34
Unless you live on the bluff, you do not see the river. You only see it when you really
drive over the bridge, the Missouri River Bridge. Otherwise, we're completely cut off
from it. And there was a large group of people that wanted to get to what they call
Adrian's Island, which is like 30 acres of land on the other side of the tracks on the
riverside. It was an island at one time, and now it's grown onto the land. It was formed by
accretion, so it didn't even exist until the last 50 years or more. And so, we finally built
the access bridge, and that was almost a $5 million project. A lot of naysayers, a lot of
challenges, a lot of private fundraising. Most of that's all private. – Government JC10
There's the trail. And then, as you go past Adrian's Island to the east, we'll eventually
have some more walking trails down there. Now you can actually get down to river level.
You can actually view the river. You can see it all the way coming down as you walk or
bike the bridge, so you have a great view. You can go down and have a picnic. People
are taking photos there. It's just a newly discovered destination for Jefferson City and a
long time coming, a long time. – Government JC10
I think finally getting to enjoy it has been really exciting and refreshing. I think growing
up here and knowing that we couldn't get to it, especially the last . . . how long have I
been in city government, now? Like 15 years of the frustration of the naysayers saying,
“Why would you ever want to build anything out to the river? It's only going to flood.
What a waste of money. What a waste of time, and nobody is going to go.” I think I just
have a different perspective as an elected official trying to lead this effort. – Government
JC10
52
Jeff City Voices Report
6. Locally Preferred Options for the Future
Interviews expressed a range of views about what could be done and what should be done.
6.1 Do not build a new federal levee
Most interviewees stated that a new federal levee, often called a super levee,” is
unnecessary, poses new risks, or is unfair to north-side businesses. The most strongly held belief
is that a north-side levee would deflect floodwaters to the more developed south side. Some
believe a federal levee will create an additional chokepoint impacting downstream farm ground.
We don't want the super levee.Government JC2
And they continued to constrict the river flow, and the problem that we run into now
there's talk of super levee on the north side of the river to protect nothing. There is
nothing over there that can't flood. I mean, yes there is an airport there, but you get in
your plane and you start the engine and you fly it out of the way and then when the water
goes down you bring it back. But over here [south side] there's people that live here and
there's businesses here and there's restaurants and hotels and all that kind of stuff, and if
they put this super levee on that side, now the natural rise of the river during flooding
season has nowhere to go over there. So it's going to get deeper on the south side of the
river, which is here in Jefferson City. So the problems only get worse if they do it.
Industry JC30
But even locally as you mentioned that, a couple years back there was talk about putting
the levee on the north side of the river or something along those lines. It may flood as he
mentioned, the airport, which belongs to the state right now. But you put the super levee
in, now it stays dry, but there's six multi-generational businesses all along the edge of the
floodplain right up here. And, so, the state protects its asset of the airport so that planes
can fly in and out and possibly a FedEx or somebody along those lines may decide to
come to Missouri or Jefferson City's airport, but we've created problems for all of the
businesses that sit down here in the floodplain. – Industry JC31
But when they began to have these public hearings, my gosh, everybody down river, all
the farmers down river showed up that didn't have any interest here, but goes, “Do you
know what that's going to do? You've created this huge bottleneck in the river.” So now,
yes, you've protected this, but that water's going to be narrowed down when it comes
through Jeff City, you're going to choke the river down and when it opens back up when
we're a 33- or 34-foot river and we're all flooding, it's going to rip and tear everything
down here. And then they had an excellent point. And then the residential folks from the
city started showing up to meetings and going, “We don't want this. What's it going to do
to Jeff City?” Well, they never could come up with a good... No one, no hydrologist ever
came up with a good analysis saying it wouldn't create any, they couldn't say it wouldn't
create a rise in the river on the south side along the Wears Creek. Well then basically it
turned most of the city of Jefferson on the south side of the river all at once. Now these
53
Jeff City Voices Report
people are up in arms, they don't want it. The farmers down here don't want it.
Agriculture JC38
The airport, Jeff City, if you look at how much funding the Jeff City Airport lost, and see,
my argument with this is everybody wants to talk about building the super levee there at
Jeff City just to protect the businesses and commercial aspect right there in what I call
Cedar City. That's the area north of the bridge at Jeff City. Well, that always sounds like
a good idea, but we see it with Chesterfield Monarch down there, that if you have it built
just specifically there and don't allow anybody else, it actually poses a bigger problem
for the people upstream because you're funneling that down. – Agriculture JC16
It's been more of the fear and probably what came out last time this was looked at was
that if there's something done to ease the water rising and impacts to the north side of the
river, that means an assumption is that then that water is going to be redirected into the
southern side. And, so, they're already challenged, more of them are retail, commercial-
type businesses and professional. And, so, they rely on retail sales, walk-in traffic, and
then from a professional setting, accessibility to their offices. And I think people are
becoming more risk tolerant just with COVID taught a lot of people, a lot of things about
being able to operate in a different kind of economic conditions. But I think the further
investment in long-term sustainability in these prone flood areas is something that will
weigh their decision to continue operations in that location or look at investments
elsewhere. – Industry JC22
I want this L-42 talk, I want it gone. I want no super levee. It affects too many people. I
want to go back to common sense things. – Agriculture JC38
Other concerns include a belief in the inevitability of levee failure and the liability that
accompanies it.
They [federal levees] were still overseen by a bunch of levee districts . . . because one of
them saying, “It's the other levee district's fault.” The other one's saying, “No. It's this
other levee district's fault.So, infrastructure fails. Chesterfield, I get the heebie-jeebies
every time I drive through it. That's the reason I say, we don't want a super levee.
Government JC2
Some also expressed that the actions being explored by the Corps at L-142 are unclear.
The super levee might take care of the Callaway side, but it's going to push it over here to
where we flood out Coca-Cola and Central Dairy and folks up and down the Wears
Creek. So then I heard, okay, we don't want to use that term “super levee” anymore, but
we want to do a new levee and just set it back further so it's not going to back water up or
whatever upstream. – Government JC10
54
Jeff City Voices Report
6.1.1 Instead, improve private levees
Many who oppose a new federal levee want to see improvements to the existing private
levee system. Participants spoke of specific fixes, such as the narrow pinch point spot on Capitol
View levee that washes out and causes a large scour hole. It is made worse by the notched wing
dikes.
I just want to improve the levee system that we have. I really do not like this talk of this L-
142 project because I think we can do a lot with very little, given the opportunity, and
improve everyone's lives. That's the biggest takeaway that I got. – Agriculture JC38
So, we have communicated to both Corps and DNR, our preferences through various
meetings they've held and whatnot and comment letters. I don't have a copy of that handy
probably, but I can definitely get one. But yeah, if we could raise our ag levee footprint
up to the 34, like they said, that would get most of our floods, but ‘93. Reinforce it maybe
where it has weak points and whatever that would be. – Government JC1
We are in favor of raising the existing Capital View Levee to a 34’ stage. At this stage it
will hold back the water from 8 of the top 10 historic crests. This is an economically
feasible solution and is most likely the least intrusive on the various landowners’
properties.Industry JC12
So, what my proposal that I keep telling everybody is, okay, is let us build our levees to
the highest point we are right now. I'm not saying to raise them a lot. I'm saying to let us
build to our highest point in our current elevation and then, also, help to provide funding,
instead of having to have a three to one. Let us come in here and improve our levee, make
it more of a four to one with a wider top, make it to where we can maintain this.
Agriculture JC16
What I'm saying is you could have the opportunity to go out there and in that stretch
along Jeff City, take the existing levee and improve it. Don't try to build a separate levee.
Go in there and improve the levee you have, and it would greatly reduce the amount of
problems we have. . . . I'm asking to build to the highest point and then turn around and
make a more robust levee. – Agriculture JC16
The other thing too is it's like I said, we've got a secondary levee system that's private
outside. If those areas were purchased and those levees removed, it would make for a
wider channel for the water to flow down through. But I as a farmer, I'm not going to
give up that ground outside unless I'm compensated adequately enough that I can come
here to the inside and replace it, and that's what's got to happen. – Agriculture JC16
And I know we can't levee our way out of this, but I think the have to, have to be done and
then if you get more storage, I think everybody benefits from that. – Government JC1
55
Jeff City Voices Report
The biggest challenge is the farm has grown bigger than what I originally leveed in
myself. So now I have to rely on the levee district levees on the river now, which aren't as
tall as the one I have, which aren't as good as I feel they should be, or as high as they
should be. Agriculture JCZZ
6.1.2 Instead, fix Wears Creek flash flooding
Among those who expressed ambivalence towards any new infrastructure needs on the
north side, there is consensus that fixing Wears Creek is a priority.
It would take some very deep investigation to see what can be done. I mean, they even
talked about Wears Creek, the creek that backs up in front of and under the highway. It's
been enclosed over the years when they put in what they call five points. – Industry
JC41
The flash flooding, Wears Creek really has been changed so much over the years, where
it got throttled down where it goes under Five Points, but then upstream from us, they
concreted it, so the water gets to you faster. So, it's kind of a double whammy of, does it
need some barriers in there to slow the water down, to give it time to egress? I don't
know. But a study definitely could be done to help that situation. – Industry JC41
In town, and I think down in the Millbottom area, somebody got into it, and it was, I
would say some flash flooding coming down Wears Creek, but because the Missouri was
coming up at the same time, it was all hell. – Government JC6
Long term, I would say in the next 5, 10, 20, 50 years, it'd be nice if we could figure out
what to do with Wears Creek. I think it's going to be an issue for future generations to
figure out. – Government JC10
So, if we could get Broadway raised, it would provide additional access to state
government. – Government JC2
Flash floods would be almost as valuable to us is Missouri River because flash flood is
localized, but it's high impact to localized area. – Government JC2
There's not a great deal of cooperation between the state and the city. All that area that's
highly visible downtown by the Capitol is owned by the state. So, I don't think they [the
state] really care to improve it. They don't want to build a parking garage and then give
the land to a park and make it beautiful and green. They don't care, I don't think, or it's
not a priority or however you want to put it. – Government JC25
56
Jeff City Voices Report
6.1.3 Invest in stormwater infrastructure
A few spoke about the need to invest in new stormwater infrastructure to fix Wears Creek flash
flooding but getting funding is difficult.
And for me personally, I live on a hill. My parents live on a hill. My business is on a hill.
And then you get the people who are at the bottom of the hill. A few years ago, we talked
about stormwater tax to actually fund more additional stormwater, but the public said no
way. I mean, people don't want to be taxed because half of us live on a hill. And the other
half that don't . . . How do you get support to actually fund ongoing major improvements
in your stormwater infrastructure? It's impossible because you're never going to get
consensus because those that don't get flooded don't see the value in paying either a tax
or whatever for it. So that really never got any traction, but we still do allocate a certain
number of funds every year from our budget. – Government JC10
And while we have said as a city, “Well, the interesting thing with new construction is
you're required to build basins for your floodwater.” Back in the day, you just built. Now
you have to put things in place to mitigate stormwater, but people correlate whether it's
real or not, or perception, or reality. And probably hard to prove whether it's a little bit
of both. So then you get residences that say, “I never flooded until such and such was
built.” But there's pretty stringent requirements to build now. You can't just build without
making sure your stormwater has somewhere to go. So does it cost more? I would guess
yes. We're allocating more every year to stormwater. That's for sure. – Government JC10
This is Washington Park here and it floods very frequently, mainly because of storm
water events. Like I say, this ice arena has flooded at least four times in the last six years
since I retired. Part of that's because more development upstream and not enough
stormwater detention. The city's been fairly aggressive about enforcing stormwater
detention basins at different places, spending money or requiring private developers. –
Government JC34
So I think it takes a progressive mindset, I believe, to progressive, aggressive, whatever
you want to call it, to keep drainage ditches maintained. Because if you don't maintain
those, if you let them all grow up in brush or fill them with silt, they can't function the
way they were designed. – Agriculture JC39
57
Jeff City Voices Report
6.2 Build a federal levee
A few participants expressed a desire for a federal levee, often with some modifications
to the initially delimitated levee of the L-142 project. Proponents argued that the merits of a
federal levee include the protection of the airport, highway infrastructure, and water treatment
facility. Although most north-side businesses and public facilities have adapted to floods as best
as they can, a federal levee would allow existing businesses affected by floods operational
certainty and opportunity to expand and enable additional economic development and tax
revenue for North Jefferson City and Callaway County.
Build the levee. – Industry JC19
This is the easy growth over here if you can protect them from flooding. And that's why
if we went all the way up to Cedar Creek and protected both sides of the Turkey Creek,
then we've got some real future economic development. – Government JC32
And that's where a lot of people on the south side of the river who don't understand. They
think that they're going to build a great big levee up right on the river and it's really
going to flood the south side. But that's not true. It's actually going to be back just behind
MFA [ is where they'd like to propose it, which, that widens the river, and that allows it
all to go through quicker instead of coming up higher and getting on and flooding
everybody out more. The last study they had actually showed that if you had something
like, let's take the flood of ‘93, if it was to come through and you had the L-142 levee in,
even though it’s higher, there was water over Highway 50, but you would only have
about a foot of, about 12 to 14 inches over Highway 50. – Industry JC15
There's thoughts of maybe we could expand the building to handle more capacity. But as
a company, since we're on a floodplain, the risk insurers don't want us to do that.
Because we're on a floodplain. So they don't want to expand our building even though
there's a couple of our sister factories that they're expanding now. And they're not going
to do it here because of the river and the flood and things like that. So, it'd be great if
Corps of Engineers could put levees up and give us a guarantee that we're not going to
flood anymore. That'd be a big story.Industry JC36
I would propose we use the county road, the Turkey Creek Road elevated and put it on
top of the new levee, which is being done now, which didn't use to be. I would follow the
current levee right on down Turkey Creek…That's the head of that wall right there. I
would say tie into that, into the bridge on this side at that existing elevation. And the
height of that levee would be to the bottom of that steel and I'd bring it straight on down
and I'd stay on county and state road as much as I possibly could. And what that does, it
eliminates having to either buy a farmer out or force him to sell, which is what we'd
really like to stay away from. Eminent domain scares the hell out of people.
Government JC32
58
Jeff City Voices Report
I think that there needs to be a more diverse discussion on all that because, as you know,
they're doing studies on the L-142. I've been trying to get that through since about 2002,
which it wasn't called the 142 before, it was called the super levee. But I'm old school. I
think you draw a line down the middle of the paper, you write your pros and you write
your cons, and you try to find an area where everybody's happy. But I think if you weigh
the whole thing and look at, what are the positives and what are the negatives on this.
Industry JC15
The new levee I hear them talk about is one that would be the width of the bottom to get
over to the embankment, the bridge embankment over there, and then maybe peel back.
We do have to protect our airport. We've got to do that. I mean, it's just crazy that we
wouldn't. We've got to protect the sewer plant, which is downstream there. Probably
sacrifice the sand plant and the farmer brothers and those boys. Got to protect Hitachi
across there. And maybe to some extent MFA, I don't know. And of course, you got to
protect the golf driving range. – Government JC11
The Capitol View District Members are not aware of nor have confidence that it may be
possible to have Federal Assistance for both—the current Ag levee and a new more
robust levee built farther from the river that can protect vital infrastructure and not
increase the elevation of water going into Jefferson City. We need to let them complete
the flow analysis and planning to know about the river levels at various sit-back
distances. I really want the Corps’ confirmation that the Feds will continue assistance to
repair existing Ag levees at their current alignments if we build a new one. – Government
JC32
6.3 Move the levees back: Give the river more room
A few people spoke about the levee system being too close to the riverbank, limiting the
amount of space the river has to flow during high-water seasons, leading to bank erosion and
putting too much pressure on levee structures.
Personally, I think the levees need to get set back off the river bank a little bit, not so
much for the berth that the river needs, it's for the bank stabilization more than anything.
We're losing our bank on that Missouri River in the floods, it's really bad. That's what
concerns me more than anything. Agriculture JC21
You're dumping money in it constantly on repairs, cleanup, where if you move it back and
you let the water get through quicker, there's going to be less damage, less repairs, clean
up, the whole works. Keeping businesses open. Like I said, again, we could be a mini-
Chesterfield right here, I mean we could be the mini-Chesterfield. We're centrally
located, our airport's right here. There's a lot of positives that can be done with the L-
142. – Industry JC15
59
Jeff City Voices Report
There are tiers of land and both rivers—Mississippi and Missouri—are conservation
opportunities their entire reach. That does raise their point value in our system, but a lot
of land doesn't typically come up for sale in those areas. I think there are lands that some
of our managers would like to see be pulled in for our management, but it takes willing
sellers and all that. – Government JC8
Well you see how it was, one of the unique things we have opportunity here to do is if we
want to stay with an already previously approved levee by number so that we can get the
federal money, what we have to do is ask for a realignment. And John Grothaus has said
that if we were to get this realigned and stay basically within the same parameters of
what we have. That there's a good chance that we could stay with the L-142 name. We
might not have to go 20 foot tall, we may only have to go 18 feet tall and redo this whole
thing. – Government JC32
6.4 Better communication from state and federal agencies
Many participants noted improvements in communication by state and federal agencies
with the community. But participants across sectors also talked about the need for having closer
communication with local, state, and federal authorities to understand how each entity is working
towards improved flood resilience. Some provided suggestions for continuing to improve
communication with people affected by flood mitigation planning and options.
The meeting Monday night [USACE Public Scoping Meeting] I thought was very
beneficial to everyone there: Corps, DNR. We had people there that had been through the
‘93 flood. Had witnessed it. And they had a lot of information to provide. That was
valuable information. I think the more we get those people at the table to have those
conversations, the better we could be prepared if that situation were to happen again.
Industry JC37
But Dru Bunton is a man of his word and he's reached out to me several times. He's got
my trust and he said, “Please come to the meetings. Please don't just be quiet. You're just
as much part of this as anybody else is. And I want you to be there because we truly
respect what you have to say.” And I appreciated that. – Agriculture JC38
Honestly, right now they're doing a better job than I've ever seen them do, ever in history.
It was more of a dictatorship 25 years ago.Agriculture JC38
It's transparency, and it's public conversation. I'm going to say if it's public comment
where they just open it up for anybody, you get people that aren't really stakeholders
involved that start making comments. But if we're talking about, if we do this, our
building will flood, how can they not talk to us and have direct communication with us
instead of just having this meeting where we get to sit in the back of the room and listen
and maybe be able to give two minutes worth of comments in the front? If we're going to
make a decision that directly impacts our family, our lives, our assets, our business, and
60
Jeff City Voices Report
all the people that work for us, I don't know how you don't have a public conversation.
But just having a hearing in a room where we all get to watch you make this decision for
us, ain't a whole lot better. – Industry JC30
And some visibility to what they're doing and maybe even, again, some input. I don't want
to be the one having to drive DNR or local projects. I can give input on what would help
us as a business, and I think it's actually, the onus is on them to want to protect us as a
local business. That's kind of where my head's at. That's not my expertise. I'm not the
Corps of Engineers. I'm not there with the Corps of Engineers. That is not what I do for a
living. – Industry JC18
So, what my suggestion or recommendation would be is that there needs to be a way of
informing if it's key stakeholder groups as a board of what's going on, not necessarily the
town hall we want your feedback. But it's an informational purpose of “here's what we're
doing” then a way to broadcast from a more local media outlets to share that awareness
broader within the community. Industry JC22
We're like, something happened, we think there's an ice dam. I called the Corps of
Engineers and reported it to our contact. So we were talking about communication of
how we'd handle it. So when that ice jam happened, the Corps of Engineers, they got an
airplane, they flew, they pinpointed the location. And then as it went on, there were
several other ice jams upstream of that over...It was about a week that it was jammed.
But there was very good communication. The Corps was keeping the people on the river
that had barges because we were at risk of when that ice dam broke. – Industry JC12
And we commend the Corps for that, being open, having discussions. We do see that they
alter some of their, they originally want to do this, but after discussions then they back off
and they do X instead of Y. – Industry JC12
Participants also suggested that more frequent communication is needed, specifically, to let
community leaders know what they could be doing to advance the process.
I think the biggest challenge is a social challenge, just getting consensus from the local
communities on each stretch of the river around what the correct passport is. And so, I
think the biggest challenge is the Corps of Engineers and who are running the study,
putting in a facilitated process that can really pull out the ideas from each of the
communities, sort through them, and then help them decide what the ideal path forward
is. And I think that's a really hard thing to do. And I think, I'm not sure the Corps of
Engineers has the expertise. They're good at engineering, they're good at a lot of things,
but this management of ideas and people and social management isn't necessarily a
skillset they have or originally were supposed to have. – Industry JC45
And not to throw stones here, and since this one's confidential, but you're here working
for the Department of Natural Resources, who's probably doing some community
61
Jeff City Voices Report
research for an idea for a project, right? Possibly. And if they are, they send you, right?
No one from the Department of Natural Resources has come to discuss with the local
business owners on those kinds of things. – Industry JC31
We've got a transportation infrastructure community, or committee, excuse me, that
meets once a month here in Jefferson City. This was something we met on with Dru and
Jennifer and the others and talked about eight months ago, 10 months ago. That's been
the only thing. And since then, people are asking, there's no more information. There's
this wait, but then it's: What could we be doing? How can we better serve the project at
the local level? And then how can we also mitigate some of the risks of the lack of
information being out there? And so to me, that's where, if it's an outsider handling the
project, it's probably going to fail. It's got to have a local management to it as well.
Industry JC22
I think there's definitely a need for the interaction and the communication going on. This
is our livelihood, and the livelihood of 60 families depends on the decision that a few
people make regarding waterways. And so, communication should be the first and
foremost thing. Government entities work for us, the taxpayers, and work for us, the
citizens, and it's our private assets that are the ones at risk for a public government
project. So, I definitely think that any public organization or any public entity has a duty
and responsibility to communicate with the people they exist to serve.Industry JC31
I think we do better just . . . so people have a better understanding of why things work the
way they do, and I don't know what the real answer there is. That's just an easy answer, a
lot, to about any subject. More communication is better.Agriculture JC23
For me, it really begins on the local level. I think your local government, your city
councils, your town councilmen and alderman, your county commissioners, those people
that are really the leaders of that community need to interact with the state agencies that
are involved. They need to have conversations with them. And like I said, when we're
actually involved in a disaster relief at that particular time, that's when we are having
those sit-down meetings and we're talking and trying to make plans. It's when we have
days today, when there's not an issue, that we need to be having more conversations . . . I
think communication with the upstream communities and the Army Corps of Engineers,
that they communicate better with us when we can expect a lot of flooding and issues.
Government JC28
It's up to each individual. And you're saying other businesses, farmers, and stuff in the
area, it's just kind of up to them to take it upon themselves to reach out. To say, “Hey
what input can we provide to make this better for us?” So that's why I represented
[Business name] Monday night at the meeting and will continue to participate in those
meetings going forward to try to help come up with a resolution to keep the business up
and running in a time of a flood. – Industry JC37
62
Jeff City Voices Report
6.5 Change private levee organizations
With the private levee and drainage districts’ board historically populated by agricultural
leaders and interests, some participants want to see more diverse board members that represent
other local businesses. There is some talk of combining levee districts to improve coordination
and reduce workload because several people serve on multiple district boards. This is difficult
because levee districts are structured on drainage topography. These watershed and drainage
differences need to be accounted for in the structure and membership of private levee districts.
You will see these guys, there's like four or five levees right through here, boards, which
they really need to eliminate that. The Corps said that and so has Dru. We don't need
them, I mean it goes Renz, what you have, Haygaller, Renz, Capital View. Then you have
. . . five of them right through here just, and it's like no, they should have either one right
through this whole stretch, maybe two. – Industry JC15
You would think that the businesses would know and be able to vote on who the board
members are going to be. – Industry JC15
It's tough to marry a levee district because you have these creeks that divide it. So, a
system is divided by drainage in creeks. So, there's no way to combine, you can't combine
Reveaux with Capital or Renz with Capital because you have creeks that divide them. So,
we are a levee system in itself because those creeks all have to flow to that drainage
system still, you still have to drain, still has to come down a creek on each side. So, you
couldn't hook levee systems together.Agriculture JC38
I think they’re [private levee districts] going to have to work with [the government] 'cause
you get the waterways of the United States, this is government ground. It's going to be a
thing where it's going to have to be legislature to take care of it.Industry JC33
6.6 Other economic development in the floodplain
Several participants argued that the Missouri River has untapped economic development
potential (see Section 5.11.3). Connecting residents to the river in recreational, aesthetic, and
cultural ways could be profitable.
But that river has been an underutilized asset for Jefferson City. So being able to see the
economic potential of it and just the recreation potential, there's a lot more I think we
can do. But just getting to it has been the challenge all these years. – Government JC10
I would say, how do they help us make it an asset? How do we get an economic benefit
from being on the river? And that's a tough one to crack. – Government JC11
Well, it's [Missouri River] just a thoroughfare that is a way to move stuff. So, we're right
on it. We should be able to take advantage of it and some of the other stuff in the
Washington, Missouri, and Hermann, I mean, they've got businesses and stuff, not on the
banks, but along the river. They take advantage of having the river down there. I think we
63
Jeff City Voices Report
need to try to do that around here. It's not ever happened yet. I mean they've got Adrian's
Island, but it's going to get flooded and stuff. I've been down there. It is pretty neat to go
down there and walk along the river. I think it's a needed asset for people that are in this
city, to have that ability to go venture out there. So, the port thing is probably just the
biggest thing where we would be using the river. – Government JC9
You go up to the upper Miss [-issippi River] states and their towns are right on the river.
They have walking trails along the river, bike trails, kayak rental places. We're missing
that recreation. . . . There’s nowhere in Jeff City to sit and have dinner and look at the
river, see the river.Government JC9
I'm learning at North Jefferson Park, a lot of that land was sold to us or given to us by
the federal government in the land buyout when it flooded so badly there. There was a
little city there, Cedar City basically. And basically, they either gave or sold the property
to us at a discounted rate back then. But it's interesting because it's like I want to put a
plan together for that area, that park, because it's highly visible, it's lots of space, it's
easy to get to, and all the reasons why, next to the Katy Trail, for crying out loud. We
don't have a good connection to the Katy Trail here in this community, and it's right
there. A lot of people use it, but there's no development based on it or anything, but I'm
learning that there's not a lot I can do, because of all the restrictions that the federal
government has put on that property when we took it over. – Government JC25
But I think Missouri [River]'s always been one that's the untamed beast. I think at times
we don't necessarily capitalize on it.Industry JC22
How do we put things in place so we're not reacting to it? I mean, the team has put a lot
of stuff in place to have the right things that we need when it [flooding] happens. But
there's some changes—not having concrete barriers and steel walls on site—but actually
changes to the land or changes to wastewater pumps or other things like that. That would
be a spend that, in order for us to continue to do business here and be a huge employer in
Jefferson City, would be helpful if the state would work with us on those kind of things.
Industry JC18
6.7 What should the Corps study?
We asked all participants what they thought the Corps should include in their study. The
following sub-sections include all areas, ideas, and opinions referenced in response to this
question. This section includes bolding, added by the authors, to emphasize text about what the
Corps should study.
6.7.1 Relocating out of the floodplain
Some participants want to see more economic data on relocating businesses out of the
floodplain for realigning levees or levee setback land acquisitions (see Chambers et al. 2023).
64
Jeff City Voices Report
But even from the total other right turn, even with a levee setback, you look at the L-536
setback, which is highly successful at the needs of the levee district, but it cost $130
million to do, and purchasing that land with no levee setback, just complete removal of
the levee, would've been $90 million. Yeah, there's a cost benefit that . . . it's hard. I
mean, I know those people have livelihoods and farm that ground. There's a lot of
calculations that go in there, but yeah, there's a lot of benefit to moving out of the
floodplain too. – Government JC8
I have thought about relocating out of the bottoms, but it all, again, comes back to quality
of dirt and accessibility to water. In my crop, I'm a little different than the average row
cropper, the corn and soybean farmer, those farmers don't have to irrigate. My crop, if I
don't irrigate, I don't sell [it]. When it gets dry in summertime, it would limit me to only
cutting in, say, the fall or the spring. Agriculture JCAA
I think the most common sense thing is, don't build in the floodplain. You need to use that
land for something. And if there's a use for it, if it's agricultural or recreational, you look
at things pre '93 and post '93. The big thing that happened to where we don't really talk
about the flood of '95 and 2019 is, we took the homes out of the floodplain in this
immediate area, and that fixes a lot of it, and then good communication with the
businesses and stuff that will be affected by it. – Industry JC40
You can't get ahead if every three or four years, all the stuff in your house is ruined and
you have to remodel your house every three or four years. But, at the point that they have
a home built, they also can't abandon it, and they also can't sell it for what they got in it.
So the government coming through and buying out those properties is probably good
economic sense. Buy them out and put something there that makes sense. Use it for
farmland, use it for soccer fields, use it for recreational areas, that if something goes
wrong, you don't have a multimillion-dollar building sitting on it. – Industry JC40
6.7.2 Cedar Creek needs attention
While most interviewees pointed to Wears, Boggs, and Grays Creeks as problem areas,
one participant reported that Cedar Creek is overlooked as a tributary that contributes to Missouri
River flooding and should be included in the study.
Cedar Creek is the creek that feeds into the river, probably two miles upriver. And now,
see, when it floods, all that water backs up Cedar Creek. Goes underneath 63 highway
there at a bridge and comes around the backside, and then floods the sod farm and just
works its way this way. So, as we come in and build levees up around us, between us and
the river here as that water comes in from Cedar Creek, that's only going to hold the
water in here if we don't take care of that issue up there first. – Industry JC37
65
Jeff City Voices Report
6.7.3 Other engineering options and system economics
Interviewees offered alternative options for flood mitigation that they believe the Corps
should include in their study options. These include levee setbacks, controlled spillways, water
storage, increased riparian vegetation, effects of channelization, upstream detention options, and
navigation, among others.
My first thought wouldn't decrease flooding. Yeah, it's hard. I mean, the easy answer is
levee setbacks, but there's other options. I mentioned those controlled spillways. I don't
know where that would be feasible here. You look across right here, it's a sod farm, but
then you go to the other side of the highway, east of the highway, and it's all corn and
soy. Where that would have less economic impact on sod farms or corn and soy, I don't
know where that would . . . but that's certainly an option. – Government JC8
The L-536 [levee setback] and buying the entire [floodplain] . . . I realize that's not
possible, but it would be from a purely habitat fish and wildlife perspective, the whole
floodplain would be great. But I know that's not possible. I know that we, as a society,
benefit from agriculture in the floodplain. There's some middle ground we need to meet.
Government JC8
Well instead of saying, for instance, if your levee is too close to the river and they'll fix it
back, if you move it further inland to create habitat. I think that in a scenario like that,
[levee setback] ought to be separated out and say, “Okay, we'll help you all with fixing
your levee, but would you all consider letting us lease this ground for habitat?” I know
over in Europe they do that, but they actually lease ground from farmers for habitat. So
just all kinds of little things like that. And the biggest thing would be to try to get the
repairs expedited. That's the biggest thing. – Agriculture JC24
Let's fix this thing. Not necessarily the L-142, but let's put a plan together and we need a
new system over here. And what I mean, not necessarily by the L-142. If it ends up that
the citizens don't want it designed as the L-142, okay, but at least we need more
protection. But I think if they understood and they would balance it out that, “Hey yes,
this is going to cost this amount to build this L-142,” but on the other hand we can run a
TIF [Tax Increment finance], we can sit there and bring in a ton of businesses that's
going to generate a lot of money and jobs for their kids. – Industry JC15
But something we've been discussing a lot lately is that reduction of channel storage
from groundwater going into the channel as the channel deepens. Yeah, that's a tough
one. This is, again, anti-flooding maybe or the opposite of flood reduction. The FRAWG
[Flood Recovery Advisory Working Group] talked about this a lot and I've seen it talked
about multiple times since then, is this keeping floodplain vegetation in herbaceous
vegetation, non-woody . . . grasses and prairie plants or sedges, wetland emergent plants,
of non-woody trees, shrubs to reduce the roughness value, which then allows the water
to move faster. I struggle with that a lot. I realize that water moves faster when the
66
Jeff City Voices Report
roughness value's lower, but I think we see a lot of scour damages on the levees from
that. I'm the flip flop of that where I support more riparian woody vegetation. Again,
probably doesn't reduce flooding, but reduces potential impacts to levees if we set them
back to reduce those velocities on the levees to have woody vegetation. – Government
JC8
I just think there needs to be, whether it's upstream detention or through the park
systems detention, or I just think there needs to be a clear, concise, succinct plan that's
put in place. You tell them all to get rid of everything they've ever had before and get
everyone's buy-in like, Okay, here's what the experts said. Here's the plan.” Somebody's
got to stick their flag in the dirt and say, “We've got to do this.” Because there's too
much various shit that's going on. It's like they've did this plan, they did this plan. This
plan was done so many years ago. . .whatever kind of plan is put in place, I [want to]
have a clear direction of what needs to be done, so I can start putting these in my
designs, then I'm going to do it. – Government JC25
The river flooding is number one, I think. . . . But again, it's a huge challenge money-
wise and the benefit, and what you're building for, and what you're protecting. Because
when you protect something, then something else is going to flood. So, finding that
balance of what can you flood with your levee, then what do you protect? Where are
those lines drawn? It's like you're on the top or bottom of the hill. Suddenly, somebody is
going to be . . . you can't flow water one way without affecting the outcome on another
way. It's going to go somewhere else. – Government JC10
They always got to study something. But right now, at this point in time, I think what they
need to do is look at rehabbing the river back. There's a tremendous amount of bank
erosion now. A tremendous amount. And that's bad. One, it's a big pollutant. The other
one is it takes private property. You own to the river, to the water's edge. If banks keep
eroding, you're losing the property. Years ago, the property was not worth much. It
wouldn't have been a big deal. But nowadays, it's worth a lot of money and you're not
being compensated for it. Plus, you lose your . . . Like our levee is set back from the river,
we're losing our floodway area. And all that dirt just goes into the river, creating more
sand in the bottom of the channel. Then the big boats can't carry a lot of product up the
river. I would like to see the dikes fixed back pre-1993 and do bank stabilization. Armor
plate the banks. – Agriculture JC24
Navigation should be a big thing. I know we've got to do a certain amount for
environmental stuff, but some of the stuff that they've done in the past for environmental
purposes hasn't worked. They tried it, didn't work. But there is a balance out there you
can come up with pretty easily.Agriculture JC24
Future economic development for expansion for Jefferson City [should be studied]. And
that makes sense for both of us. I mean Jefferson City, it gives them, allows them to
67
Jeff City Voices Report
expand rapidly and offers a relatively safe area for companies to invest their money in
and develop and have access to everything. It's the capital of the State of Missouri for
goodness sakes. And they shouldn't be bashful about trying to spend the money to make
Jefferson City be a dime, a shining star instead of something kind of mediocre. Which is
kind of where it stands right now. – Government JC32
6.7.4 Whole-system models and plans
Many respondents spoke about the need for whole-system studies to understand upstream
and downstream relationships.
I mean, the money that DNR has received, which is part to the Corps, the whole project
on the Corps, studying a new model on making sure that this is how much water is
going through. You need that new model, that new model to show, so, you're not
guessing, you're not throwing, hey, this is what it's going to be. Because things have
changed since their last model. So, they need that new model. They need to show the
water flow, how much it's coming through there, how high a new levee needs to be . . .
you don't have to go all the way up to the L-142 height. So, there's different heights you
can go. What is a good height to protect it majority of the time, or how high do you need
to go on the L-142 to protect it?– Industry JC15
I think there has to be a shared awareness of the goals and objectives of the stakeholder
engagements. And what would be the objective of the study recommendation that would
be provided to the Corps of Engineers? What are we wanting to achieve? And, so it's
from the very beginning, a consensus awareness of the process, a shared awareness of
what we're trying to achieve, and with an understanding that it is not to be a, I don't even
know the term, but if it's good for one, it's bad for the other. And so, the goal is to find
the most agreeable type of project to study. – Industry JC22
I do think this study's important, and especially when it comes to, like I said, knowing
what's going on upstream and downstream. And you can only do that with those types of
academic studies. – Government JC14
This idea of resiliency and how we bounce back from floods is I think really important.
And it's not that we're going to prevent flooding. I think even those that live on the
Missouri River know that living and working along the river, the risk of flooding is
something they have to accept and deal with. At a certain level, it's how do we design the
system to where water can come up, it can go down, it has less impacts as it's doing that.
So, less long-term impacts. – Industry JC45
I think it should be focused on stream management. . . . And then whenever he says
maintaining crops, I think the economic infrastructure of the system. And whenever I
say that, I'm not just saying crops. That includes the economic drivers that are on the
Missouri River. – Agriculture JC23
68
Jeff City Voices Report
I think they need to study, first off what I told you, take the money, look at the costs spent
within levee districts from the confluence, say, up to Nebraska if you want to, and look
at each levee district of what the cost to repair it was versus [the damages]. . . . So, I
mean, that's the first thing to look at. The other thing that I think they really need to study
is the river channel being the core and figure out where the most troublesome areas are
on river flow and then figure out the best way to increase the flow within the river
channel.Agriculture JC16
Well, my thoughts would be that the Corp of Engineers would come up with a system and
a plan to where they would manage that river to operate and I would just say, a
navigable range below the traditional flood stages along the river basin. Agriculture
JC23
If they want to study something, they need to study and prioritize their master manual
back to the master plan, back to flood control, and make that the number one priority.
Agriculture JC21
If the Corps of Engineers were to do a study, go study how to run what you already have
before you screw up something else. – Industry JC30
Well, really, there's a couple things they need to study. One is the 100-year floodplain
and what it does affect in Jeff City? There are parts of the city that are affected by it that
a lot of people don't expect when you get to that level. The other thing is, what has been
done upstream from us that could either help or hinder? Are there things that need to be
addressed as far north as North Dakota? You don't know what's been done upstream
from us, or I don't. I'm sure somebody does. What has affected it upstream that we need
to look at that gets water to us faster? What could be done downstream, if anything?
When you look at any project like that, you can't look at a pinpoint. You have to look at a
broad stroke. – Industry JC41
Should be studying capacity. Flood capacity throughout the Missouri River system.
Where can the water go? What land is more valuable to be flooded? That sort of stuff. –
Industry JC36
Effects of channelization is probably the biggest one. That's the biggest driver for
modern flooding. It's not really climate change. It's crazy channelization and control of
the river so that it floods everywhere else. – Industry JC44
Like we said, it's not easy, and anything that you do is going to have ripple effects, no
pun intended since we're talking about water. But again, if we're looking for innovative
ways, that's what I would be studying. There's no new way of building a dam that
something isn't going to happen that we don't already know about. It's just who's going to
be impacted. And so, to me, the study needs to be, as he said, the innovative solutions not
69
Jeff City Voices Report
for water management, but for the people management and the local economy
management and those kinds of things. – Industry JC31
Fully fund better mapping because of mapping, especially in urbanized areas, which I
see is a big problem on this side of the river. And a lot of it's flash flooding, but our flash
flooding has some correlation if the river happens to be up then it exacerbates and they
make the maps that way, but okay. It's hard for folks to understand that. – Government
JC1
I think for me, it's as good a mapping as you can get because so many people come to me
that are in the floodplain and they're in a zone A, and it costs a lot of money for me to try
to get them out and deal with that. So having better mapping that shows detailed studies
everywhere would be very helpful to me. – Industry JC26
6.7.5 Competing management priorities
Are navigation and flood control mutually beneficial, competing, or perhaps conflicting
objectives? This question brought up by participants resurfaces old debates from the early
twentieth century concerning what USACE’s management priority should be.
With all the channelization, and the levees, and all that—that's mostly due to shipping,
and freight, and that kind of thing. Which, that's kind of the double-edged sword. Do you
provide more for that, or do you make it to where it doesn't flood as much?
Government JC6
With every street that's built, every building that's built causes faster moving water. But
when they [USACE] go and start monkeying, when they got all the dams up on the
Missouri that were made for flood control, they don't use them like that anymore. They
use them to artificially make the river what they want it to be. And they need to emphasize
on, for one, keeping the river open for barge traffic. They haven't been doing that. They
don't keep that channel open anymore and that becomes an issue.Agriculture JC7
6.7.6 How U.S. Public Law 84-99 limits solutions
Some participants shared frustrations with the limitations of Public Law 84-99 and the
cost–benefit analysis of repairing a damaged levee versus setting the levee back. Some
recommend that the Corps will need to consider the limitations of 84-99 in this study.
I think that that [PL 84-99] program has really hindered appropriate response because it
is repair and replace driven. That's a federal government change, probably legislative
change that would need to occur. I don't know if that's a core implementation or
legislative change. I imagine legislative. That just locks everything in place to where a lot
of even the levee districts don't even take the time to consider potential benefits of even a
50-foot setback. Yeah, it's frustrating, but it's the world we live in. Government JC8
70
Jeff City Voices Report
Well, I mean that PL 84-99 program, they need to maybe . . . I don't know. The way they
do their cost–benefit, it has to be cheaper to do a levee setback than to repair in place.
Unless the damage is incredibly extensive, then repair in place is always going to be
cheaper. They do little loops around the giant blue holes that blow out. That economic
calculation of repair in place versus a levee setback or some other non-structural
measure would definitely need some thought towards improving. I don't want to say the
Corps is not doing a good job, because they do a good job in their flood response. When
they do have the opportunity, based on their calculations, to do something positive, they
do a good job at doing the positive thing. I'll blame the program, not the implementers of
the program. – Government JC8
And I know after a couple of the floods, some of the local people wanted to get their
homes fixed and their levees real fast, so they went ahead and done it themselves. Which,
if a program was available where they could do that and get reimbursed would be better
than just waiting on all the process that goes on like it does now. And then there's the
issues with environmental stuff, I think it ought to be separated out from the 84-99
program. It ought to be separated by itself.Agriculture JC24
One was the process of how the Corps and how all the rebuilding process from the
damage was orchestrated. Because we had issues there too, where from the time the river
went down to the time when we could actually start construction to rebuild levies was a
very long period, and that doesn't need to happen. And the farmers themselves, I have the
equipment, I could have easily went out and a bunch of us farmers have tractors and stuff
to where we could have went out and did repair ourselves. The problem is there was
nothing in place to allow us first to do that. – Agriculture JC24
I think that the Corps of Engineers, their levee safety proposed rules for the PL84-99
program are trying to make volunteer levee boards like what we have at tri-county to
make them more into emergency management type roles. And so our levee district guys
are pushing back on that saying we're here providing a flood control infrastructure and
that's where it stops. We're not in charge of all kinds of emergency response on the dry
side of the levee. We can't be held responsible for that. – Agriculture JC39
71
Jeff City Voices Report
6.7.7 Process: Don’t just study the system—Do something!
In addition to a transparent and inclusive process, interviewees spoke about the
importance of having a meaningful study that leads to an actual project that reduces flood risk
and improves resilience. This includes concerns about the timeline for study completion.
The levee system: There are already studies that are out there. There are already
recommendations that have been made. And that's what happens so often, we bring in
consultants that we talk to and have them draw up plans for us, and then we pay them a
lot of money to do all that research for us. And then we just put it on the shelf somewhere
and let it stay there until the next issue happens. – Government JC28
By the time they get all their studies done, it's kind of like our highway department, a lot
of this stuff is passed up. By the time they design something, the population has grown in
Missouri. . . . a lot of their stuff is already outdated by the time they build it. – Agriculture
JC42
I think if we're getting into a situation where there is going to be some sort of project that
we're even batting around, now's the time to be talking with the stakeholders about it
before the decision's made. Because we may be able to find an actual innovative solution
that works for everybody instead of trying to deal with the ramifications of the decision
that's already been made.Industry JC30
72
Jeff City Voices Report
7. Conclusions
The history of flood control has been driven by technical expertise, yet communities and
landowners disproportionately experience the burdens and benefits of floods and flood risk
reduction infrastructure. This report focuses on the voices of those who frequently experience
flooding and will be affected by flood risk reduction projects. It is a snapshot of Jefferson City
community voices and collates what was heard in public meetings and interviews. Through in-
depth interviews with 45 community leaders, businesses, farmers, and residents with a history of
flooding and engagement in Missouri River planning in Jefferson City, this study documents
what these local water experts’ think should be done to increase flood resiliency. Participants
agreed about the need for concrete solutions but disagree about what should be done.
Some interviewees support a federal levee to safeguard floodplain assets, initiate
economic development opportunities, and enhance certainty for conducting and expanding
business operations. We heard from company leaders who said their national and international
headquarters view the flood risks of their Jefferson City facilities as unnecessary risk and a
reason to relocate. From their perspective, a federal flood risk reduction project (levee or
something else) would offer a degree of certainty.
Others view a federal levee as an unnecessary disruption to everyday life and instead
suggest a need to improve existing infrastructure, study other engineering or nature-based
solutions, or invest in studies to better understand the entire river system. The L-142 levee
sketches of past and present place burdens on a finite number of landowners and businesses.
When the larger community seems ambivalent to Missouri River flooding (Sect. 5.2), they
wonder why they should accept an unwanted disruption. Jefferson City floodplain residents live
with floods; is there a way to live with flooding differently? Jefferson City residents and leaders
are concerned about how a federal levee would change how flood water moves into and through
the city. The flash flooding of Wears Creek was almost always mentioned in this context. Wears
Creek represents larger problems that are more frequent, damaging, and disruptive to the city
than Missouri River flooding. The extensive grey infrastructure and the development made prior
to floodplain management adjacent to creeks is a source of frustration. These deserve
consideration either before or alongside Missouri River flood risk reduction efforts.
Among all interviewees—both opposed to and in favor of a federal levee project—many
spoke of a need for improving system-wide understanding of floods, water resources
management, and the role of infrastructure and channel maintenance on floods at Jefferson City’s
place on the river.
Participants agreed that the Corps’ Lower Missouri River Study presents a unique
opportunity for improving the understanding and management of the river. The Congressional
authorizations to study and design flood resiliency and risk reduction project(s) at river mile L-
142 places this project ahead of its peer sites in Brunswick and Holt County, MO. A project(s)
could reduce flood losses for floodplain businesses and infrastructure while simultaneously
73
Jeff City Voices Report
serving other community needs. These needs include taking advantage of opportunities to
integrate public and private ventures that use the river as an aesthetic amenity--such as parks and
trails and restaurants, shops, and lodging. Connecting the city to the river was stated as untapped
potential.
Respondents expressed both appreciation and frustration with how the MDNR and the
Corps have communicated about this project. Some of the frustrations are difficult to separate
from the previous L-142 planning from 20+ years ago. But those closest to the project shared
that they recognize the uniqueness of this which inspires them to participate. The Congressional
authorizations in the context of the 2019-flood motivated Lower Missouri River System-wide
study makes this a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
74
Jeff City Voices Report
8. References and Appendices
Acknowledgements
The research team wishes to thank the people of Jefferson City, the staff of Missouri
Department of Natural Resources Water Resource Center, and the USACE Kansas City and
Omaha Districts’ staff. This work was supported by the Missouri Department of Natural
Resources Water Resource Center, the Missouri Water Center at the University of Missouri,
Northeastern University’s Coastal Sustainability Institute and the Marine Science Center,
USDA-ARS Missouri River Basin Water Management Project Agroclimate and Hydraulics
Research Unit Project Number: 3070-13000-014-010-S, and USDA National Institute of Food
and Agriculture, McIntire Stennis, project 1021674.
References
Alexander, T. W. (1995). Delineation of flooding within the upper Mississippi River basin
Flood of July 30, 1993, in Jefferson City and vicinity, Missouri (No. 735-A). U.S.
Geological Survey. https://doi.org/10.3133/ha735A
Allen, S. B., Dwyer, J. P., Wallace, D. C., & Cook, E. A. (2003). Missouri River flood of 1993:
Role of woody corridor width in levee protection. Journal of the American Water
Resources Association, 39(4), 923–933. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-
1688.2003.tb04416.x
Allen, W. (2001, May 27). Levee plans raises issues on use of flood plain: Wall built to protect
Jefferson City would be river’s most formidable. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, A1.
Almukhtar, S., Migliozzi, B., Schwarts, J., & Williams, J. (2019, September 11) The Great Flood
of 2019: A complete picture of a slow-motion disaster. The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/11/us/midwest-flooding.html
Anderson, M. B., Ward, L. C., Gilbertz, S. J., McEvoy, J., & Hall, D. M. (2018). Prior
appropriation and water planning reform in Montana’s Yellowstone River Basin: path
dependency or boundary object?. Journal of Environ Policy & Planning, 20(2), 198–213.
Associated Press (2011, July 12). FEMA flood buyouts top $2B since 1993. Deseret News.
https://www.deseret.com/2011/7/12/20203370/fema-flood-buyouts-top-2b-since-1993
Chambers, M. L., van Rees, C. B., Bledsoe, B. P., Crane, D., Ferreira, S., Hall, D. M., ... &
Suedel, B. C. (2023). Nature-based solutions for leveed river corridors.
Anthropocene, 44, 100417.
Cole, A. (2018, July 8). Officials: Jefferson City better equipped for a disaster. News Tribune.
https://www.newstribune.com/news/2018/jul/08/Better-prepared-for-a-crisis/
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (2002). Success stories from the Missouri
Buyout Program. https://www.fema.gov/pdf/casestudys/mo_buyoutreport.pdf
Flood Recovery Advisory Working Group (FRAWG). (2019). Flood Recovery Advisory
Working Group interim report for Governor Michael L. Parson.
https://dnr.mo.gov/document-search/2019-flood-recovery-advisory-working-group-interim-report
Flood Recovery Advisory Working Group (FRAWG). (2020). Flood Recovery Advisory
Working Group final report for Governor Michael L. Parson.
https://dnr.mo.gov/document-search/flood-recovery-advisory-working-group-final-
report-may-31-2020
Gibbons, M. (1999). Science’s new social contract with society. Nature, 402, C81-C84.
https://doi.org/10.1038/35011576
75
Jeff City Voices Report
Gilbertz, SJ, Emerson MR, & Hall, DM. (2020). Yellowstone River Cultural Inventory-2012:
Summary Report of all Segments. Co-Sponsored by the Yellowstone River Conservation
District Council, with funding from the US Army Corps of Engineers. 94 pages. DOI:
10.13140/RG.2.2.22355.12321
Gilbertz, SJ, Emerson, MR, Kidd, KR, & Hall, DM. (2021). Yellowstone River Cultural
Inventory-2018: Summary Report of all Segments. Co-Sponsored by the Yellowstone
River Conservation District Council, US Army Corps of Engineers. 111 pages. DOI:
10.13140/RG.2.2.18860.80005/1
Gilbertz, SJ, & Hall, DM. (2022). Bringing Sustainability to the Ground Level: Competing
Demands in the Yellowstone River Valley. New York: Business Expert
Press. ISBN 9781637421482
Gilbertz, S., Horton, C., & Hall, D. M. (2006). Yellowstone River Cultural Inventory. United
States Corps of Engineers and the Greater Yellowstone River Conservation District
Council. http://geoinfo.msl.mt.gov/data/yellowstone_river/Socioeconomics
Gregory, H. (2020, January 2). The great flood of 1993. Missouri’s Natural Heritage.
Washington University in St. Louis. https://sites.wustl.edu/monh/the-great-flood-of-1993/
Hall, D. M., Gilbertz, S. J., Anderson, M. A., Avellaneda, P., Ficklin, D. L., Knouft, J. H., &
Lowry C. S. (2021a). Mechanisms for engaging social systems in freshwater science
research. Freshwater Science, 40(1), 245–251. https://doi.org/10.1086/713039
Hall, D. M., Kidd, K. R., Emerson, M. R., & Gilbertz, S. J., (2021b). Comparative Analysis of
Yellowstone River Cultural Inventory 2006–2018. Co-Sponsored by the Yellowstone
River Conservation District Council, US Army Corps of Engineers. 468663 Planning
Assistance Study MT. 161 pages. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29438.72001
Hall, D. M., Gilbertz, S., Horton, C., & Peterson, T. R. (2012). Culture as a means to
contextualize policy. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 2(3),
222−233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-012-0077-9
Horton, C., Hall, D. M., Gilbertz, S., & Peterson, T. (2017). Voice as entry to agriculturalists’
conservationist identity: A cultural inventory of the Yellowstone River. Environmental
Communication, 11(5), 609-623.
Josephson, D. H. (1994). The Great Midwest Flood of 1993. Natural Disaster Survey
Report. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Kidd, K. (2022). The staying power of perceptions in a dynamic system: A longitudinal study in
the Yellowstone River Valley (Publication No. 10355/88086) [Master’s thesis, University
of Missouri-Columbia]. MoSpace. https://doi.org/10.32469/10355/88086
Larson, L. W. (1997). The great USA flood of 1993. IAHS Publications – Series of Proceedings
and Reports, International Association Hydrological Sciences, 239, 13-20.
Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2011). Beyond constant comparison qualitative data
analysis: Using NVivo. School Psychology Quarterly, 26(1), 70.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022711
Leiser, K. (2005, October 26). Jefferson City levee put on hold: The proposed levee is disputed
because it would be built on land that was part of a federal flood buyout in 1993. The St.
Louis Post-Dispatch, A2.
Lott, N. (1993). The Summer of 1993: Flooding in the Midwest and drought in the Southeast.
Tech. Rep. 93-04, Research Customer Service Group, National Climatic Data Center,
Asheville, NC.
76
Jeff City Voices Report
Memorandum CENWD-PDD 1105-2-10b2. (2023). Lower Missouri River Basin, Jefferson City
L-142, Missouri Feasibility Study Review Plan Approval. Memorandum for Commander,
Kansas City District, CENWK-PMP-R/Mr. Todd Gemeinhardt. 4 July 2023. CENWD-
PDD (1105-2-10b2). https://www.nwk.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Civil-Works-Programs-
And-Projects/Lower-Missouri-River-Basin/Jefferson-City-MO-L142/igphoto/2003234692/
Memorandum of Agreement between the states of Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska
Cooperation on flood recovery and future flood control in the Lower Missouri River
Basin. (2020). https://governor.iowa.gov/press-release/2020-01-25/four-midwest-
governors-sign-new-agreement-combat-flooding
Mileti, D. S. (1999). Disasters by design: A reassessment of natural hazards in the United States.
Joseph Henry Press.
Missouri State Emergency Management (SEMA). (n.d.) Stemming the tide of flood losses:
Stories of success from the history of Missouri’s Flood Mitigation Program.
https://sema.dps.mo.gov/docs/publications/stemming.pdf
National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI). (2020) Billion-dollar weather and
climate disasters – Missouri summary. Retrieved 19 November 2023 from
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/billions/state-summary/MO
National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI). (2020, April 17). Extreme wetness of
2019 sets records. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/extreme-wetness-2019-sets-records
National Weather Service (NWS). (2020). Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Retrieved 19 November 2023 from:
https://water.weather.gov/ahps2/hydrograph.php?gage=jffm7&wfo=lsx
Pisor, A. C., Basurto, X., Douglass, K. G., Mach, K. J., Ready, E., Tylianakis, J. M., … &
Holland Jones, J. (2022). Effective climate change adaptation means supporting
community autonomy. Nature Climate Change, 12, 213–215.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01303-x
Rice, D. (2019, May 28). Mississippi River flood is longest-lasting in over 90 years, since 'Great
Flood' of 1927. USA Today. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation
/2019/05/28/mississippi-river-flooding-longest-lasting-since-great-flood-1927/1261049001/
Schipper, L., & Pelling, M. (2006). Disaster risk, climate change and international development:
scope for, and challenges to, integration. Disasters, 30(1), 19-38.
Sierra Club vs. United State Army Corps of Engineers; Federal Emergency Management
Agency; et al. (2006, April 4). No. 04-3910.
U.S. 116th Congress. (2019, July 1). Water Resources Development Acts: Status of
implementation and assessing future needs [Subcommittee hearing]. United States House
of Representatives Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Water Resources
and Environment. Serial No. 116-26. https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/CHRG-
116hhrg40659/CHRG-116hhrg40659
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Kansas City District. (n.d.). Flow frequency and stage
analysis: Lower Missouri River Basin. https://www.nwk.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-
Works/Civil-Works-Programs-And-Projects/Lower-Missouri-River-Basin/Flow-and-
Stage-Frequency-Analysis/
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2011). Greening America's Capitals - Jefferson
City, Missouri. Spectrum Consulting Group LLC., & BNIM for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Sustainable Communities, Washington D.C.
https://archive.epa.gov/epa/sites/production/files/2014-
02/documents/gac_jeffersoncity.pdf
77
Jeff City Voices Report
Appendix A: USACE project approval process
Project approval via Water Resources Development Act (WRDA): Source: Edited from the Congressional
Research Service (CRS).
Project approval process via WRDA
1. Initiation and Planning:
Need for a water resources project, such as flood control, navigation improvement, or
environmental restoration, identified – typically proposed by a federal agency, local
government, or interest group.
2. Feasibility Study:
Feasibility study conducted to assess the technical, economic, and environmental
aspects of the proposed project.
3. Drafting of the Chief's Report:
Draft report, based on results of feasibility study, prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
4. Chief's Report Review:
Reviewed by the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) and the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
If approved, submitted to Congress for authorization.
5. Authorization by Congress:
Congressional review and authorization determined.
6. Appropriation of Funds:
If authorized, appropriations necessary to move project forward.
7. Project Design and Engineering:
Detailed design and engineering plans developed.
8. Environmental Compliance:
Environmental impact assessments and compliance with relevant laws (such as the
National Environmental Policy Act) conducted.
9. Construction:
Construction occurs with approved plans and specifications.
10. Post-Construction Evaluation:
Project's performance evaluated to ensure standards are met.
11. Operation and Maintenance:
Project managed to ensure continued effectiveness.
12. Monitoring and Adaptation:
Ongoing monitoring to ensure effectiveness; adaptations made as necessary.
78
Jeff City Voices Report
Figure 10. Schematic of USACE project workflow from problem identification to preliminary analysis to
feasibility analysis to construction. Source: Edited from the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
79
Jeff City Voices Report
Project approval process via Emergency Response Authorization
During presidentially declared disasters pursuant to the Stafford Act (P.L. 93-288), USACE can be delegated
authority for emergency response and recovery funded through the Disaster Relief Fund and performed at the
direction of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Under the National Response Framework,
USACE coordinates emergency support for public works and engineering. Furthermore, Congress has given
USACE direct emergency response authority under PL 84-99, based on the act in which it was originally
authorized, the Flood Control and Coastal Emergency Act (P.L. 84-99, 33 U.S.C. §701n). Until supplemental
appropriations are provided, Congress has provided USACE with authority to transfer money from ongoing
USACE projects to emergency operations (33 U.S.C. §701n). USACE can provide both emergency technical and
direct assistance in response to flooding. The assistance must be requested by the State, and it must be
supplemental to State and Local actions including resources and capabilities, as well as National Guard assets.
Emergency authorization usually follows the following structure:
1. Emergency Declaration:
The process begins when an emergency situation occurs, such as a natural disaster (e.g., hurricane, flood,
earthquake) or a human-made event (e.g., dam failure, hazardous materials spill).
A local, state, or tribal authority typically requests federal assistance from the President of the United
States.
2. Preliminary Damage Assessment (PDA):
USACE, along with other federal agencies and state/local authorities, conducts a Preliminary Damage
Assessment (PDA) to assess the extent of the damage and determine the level of federal assistance
required.
3. Activation of the National Response Framework (NRF):
The NRF provides guidance for how the nation responds to all types of disasters and emergencies.
USACE operates under this framework during emergency response efforts.
4. Emergency Work Authorization:
Once an emergency is declared and USACE is activated, they have the authority to initiate emergency
response activities.
This may involve actions like flood fighting, debris removal, and temporary emergency protective
measures.
5. Coordination with Other Agencies:
USACE collaborates with various federal, state, local, tribal, and private sector partners to ensure a
coordinated response effort.
6. Environmental Compliance:
While expediency is crucial in emergencies, USACE still takes environmental considerations into
account. They work to comply with laws like the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other
relevant environmental regulations.
7. Funding and Resource Allocation:
Funding for emergency response efforts is typically provided through the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) and other federal agencies involved in disaster response.
8. Public Communication and Outreach:
USACE provides regular updates to the public and stakeholders regarding the progress of emergency
response activities.
9. Recovery Planning and Long-Term Solutions:
Once immediate emergency response actions are taken, USACE may be involved in long-term recovery
planning and infrastructure repair or reconstruction.
10. After-Action Review:
After the emergency response is complete, USACE conducts an after-action review to evaluate what
went well and identify areas for improvement in future responses
80
Jeff City Voices Report
Appendix B: Interview protocol
Interview Protocol
for
Piloting a Flood Resiliency Conversation and Engagement Process in Repetitive Loss Communities along
the Missouri River
1. Can you tell me about your place in the Jeff City area? How do you describe it to people who
have never been here?
2. What is it like to live with the Missouri River here?
*3. Can you talk about all the ways the floods disrupt your day-to-day life?
3a. What would you say is the biggest disruption or challenge(s) for you?
3b. How do you typically cope with/adjust to these disruptions?
3c. For coping and acting, where does the best information come from?
4. Thinking about the wider community (town, county, this corner of the state) and the floods;
what are the biggest challenges faced?
5. What organizations are involved in managing floods here? Do you interact with them? In what
ways?
5a. Who is getting it right?
What are they doing differently than others? What do they know that others don’t?
5b. Which organizations, governmental or non-governmental, consistently get it wrong,
in your opinion? What are they missing?
6. Thinking beyond the Jeff City area, who is engaging in effective or innovative flood
management? What are they doing?
**7. What should be done, in your opinion, to address repetitive flooding here?
**7a. What would it take to make that happen?
**8. The Corps of Engineers has funding to study this system to improve flood control efforts.
What, specifically, should they study?
9.What do you think your place will look like 10 years from now?
9b. How about 30 years from now for the next generation?
*10. Of all we have talked about, or not, what is most important to you?
11. Who else should we speak with? Do you have their contact information.
*, ** denote priority questions
81
Jeff City Voices Report
Appendix C: Informed consent handout
This handout was given to each interviewee in print and/or electronically.
Consent to Participate in a Research Study
Title: Piloting a Flood Resiliency Conversation and Engagement Process in Repetitive Loss Communities
along the Missouri River
Investigator: Damon M. Hall, University of Missouri
IRB Reference Number: # 2074362.
The goal of this study is to listen to and gather local ideas, perspectives, and opinions about what should
be done concerning Missouri River flood planning in Jefferson City, MO. Results will be delivered to
Missouri Department of Natural Resources, the sponsor of this research.
To further these aims, we are interviewing Jefferson City residents who have a history of engaging in
flood risk management issues. I will be available to answer any questions you have about this and other
activities of this project.
Interviews last between 30-60 minutes. Your participation is completely voluntary. You may choose to
withdraw or not to participate at any time. Your identity will remain confidential with strict protocols
regarding who will have access to the master interview list. Participant names will not be used in our
reports. At no time, will we tie statements to any names when reporting the findings from this study and
there will be no effort to identify individual respondents. The risks to you as a participant are minimal.
Although participation in this study will not benefit you directly, it may benefit the Jefferson City
residents and communities for years to come.
Participants must be 18 years of age or older. The results of this study may be published in scientific
research journals or presented at professional conferences. However, your name and identity will not
appear anywhere in research products and your record will remain confidential.
If you have questions about this study, you can contact the University of Missouri researcher Damon Hall
or 573-882-2280. If you have questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Missouri Institutional Review Board (IRB) at 573-882-3181 or
muresearchirb@missouri.edu. The IRB is a group of people who review research studies to make sure the
rights and welfare of participants are protected. If you want to talk privately about any concerns or issues
related to your participation, you may contact the Research Participant Advocacy at 888-280-5002 or
email muresearchrpa@missouri.edu.
Damon M. Hall, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, School of Natural Resources;
Biomedical, Biological & Chemical Engineering
103 Anheuser-Busch Natural Resources Building, Columbia, MO 65211
Email: halldam@missouri.edu Phone: 573-882-2280
82
Jeff City Voices Report
Appendix D: Analysis codebook
Engaging community voices in flood resiliency planning along the Lower Missouri River
Damon M. Hall, Angela J. Catalano, Gerardo M. Gentil
Version 3: June 20, 2023
Nodes for NVivo analysis
Description
Types of flood mitigation/resiliency
solutions/strategies
All references to controlling or allowing flooding;
lessen damage or catastrophic flooding; levees; levee
setbacks; storage
Communication with federal and state organizations
Positive or negative communication with USACE,
FEMA, SEMA, MDNR, MODOT
Causes of flooding
All references to weather events, dams, reservoirs, or
USACE oversight of Missouri River
Private Levees
level of protection, funding, monitoring, and repairs.
Code alternative names such as farm levee, non-federal
levee, agricultural levee
Federal Levees
level of protection, funding, monitoring, and repairs.
Include alternative names such as super levee
Endangered Species Act priorities
Pallid sturgeon or any references to ESA listed species;
piping plover
What should the Corps study?
Any mention of USACE work or planning
Effects of flooding on the community
Residents moving out of floodplain; buyouts
abandoned or low-population towns; lost revenue or
business closures; taxes
Land & property ownership & exchange
Allowing NGOs/nonprofits/governmental
organizations to buy back land; allow farmers to keep
land for taxable purposes if setting levee back; eminent
domain; property taxes (on combine harvesters, taxed
farm equipment); FEMA buyouts
L-536
L-536 as an attitude object
Fatigue
Expressions of fatigue from disaster, from
planning, from studies
L-142
L-142 as an attitude object
Flash flooding
Any mention of flash floods, stormwater management,
creek flooding
Connection to the Missouri River
Includes mentions of connection and disconnection on
individual and community level

File (1)

... With the interest in national electrification via hydropower and the protection of development from annual flooding, the USACE was authorized under the Flood Control Act of 1944 (P.L. 78-534) with constructing, modifying, and maintaining a system of dams and levees along the Missouri River as part of the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Program (hereafter Pick-Sloan). Following the passage of the Flood Control Act, federal and non-federal levee construction along the Missouri River took place from the 1950s through the 1980s, resulting in a patchwork system of federally and privately owned and maintained levees (Hall and Catalano 2023;Catalano et al. 2024;Hall et al. 2024). Additional alterations, including wing dikes to channelize the river and dams that control river flows, have changed the geomorphology and flow regimes of the Missouri River (Jacobson et al. 2015). ...
Article
Full-text available
Riverine flooding is increasing in frequency and intensity, requiring river management agencies to consider new approaches to working with communities on flood mitigation planning. Communication and information sharing between agencies and communities is complex, and mistrust and misinformation arise quickly when communities perceive that they are excluded from planning. Subsequently, riverfront community members create narratives that can be examined as truth regimes—truths created and repeated that indicate how flooding and its causes are understood, represented, and discussed within their communities—to explain why flooding occurs in their area. To better understand community perceptions of river management related to repeated flooding, we employed a qualitative methodology of semi-structured interviews with 112 community members in 3 communities on the Missouri River, USA. Discourse analysis of the interviews revealed three dominant truth regimes that shape perceptions of river management in these communities: (1) upstream reservoir releases are driven by recreational aims, such as fishing and boating within reservoirs, instead of downstream flood control; (2) endangered species protection surpasses other river values and flood management; and (3) river navigation for commerce is no longer prioritized. For environmental managers, understanding the truth regimes circulating within local affected communities can help moderate mistrust of and frustration with governing bodies, guide project messaging to disarm false truth regimes, and improve the communication of river science, management options and policy implementation.
Article
Full-text available
As climatic extremity intensifies, a fundamental rethink is needed to promote the sustainable use of freshwater resources. Both floods and droughts, including water scarcity, are exacerbating declines in river biodiversity and ecosystem services, with consequences for both people and nature. Although this is a global challenge, densely populated regions such as Europe, East Asia and North-America, as well as the regions most affected by climate change, are particularly vulnerable. To date mitigation measures have mainly focused on individual, local-scale targets, often neglecting hydrological connectivity within catchments and interactions among hydrology, biodiversity, climate change and human wellbeing. A comprehensive approach is needed to improve water infiltration, retention and groundwater recharge, thereby mitigating the impacts of heavy rainfall and floods as well as droughts and water scarcity. We propose a holistic catchment-scale framework that combines mitigation measures including conventional civil engineering methods, nature-based solutions and biodiversity conservation actions. This framework integrates legislation, substantial funding and a governance structure that transcends administrative and discipline boundaries, enabling coordinated actions across multiple spatial and temporal scales. It necessitates the collaboration of local and regional stakeholders including local people with scientists and practitioners. A holistic vision for the sustainable management of freshwater resources could have synergistic effects that support biodiversity and mitigate climate change within functional ecosystems that deliver benefits to people.
Preprint
Full-text available
Riverine flooding is increasing in frequency and intensity, requiring river management agencies to consider new approaches to working with communities on flood mitigation planning. Communication and information sharing between agencies and communities is complex, and mistrust and misinformation arise quickly when communities perceive that they are excluded from planning. Subsequently, riverfront community members create narratives that can be examined as truth regimes — truths created and repeated that indicate how flooding and its causes are understood, represented, and discussed within their communities — to explain why flooding occurs in their area. To better understand community perceptions of river management related to repeated flooding, we employed a qualitative methodology of semi-structured interviews with 112 community members in 3 communities on the Missouri River, USA. Discourse analysis of the interviews revealed three dominant truth regimes that shape perceptions of river management in these communities: 1) upstream reservoir releases are driven by recreational aims, such as fishing and boating, instead of flood control; 2) endangered species management surpasses other uses; and 3) river navigation for commerce is no longer prioritized. For environmental managers, understanding the truths circulating within communities can help moderate mistrust of and frustration with governing bodies, guide project messaging to disarm false truth regimes, and improve the communication of science and policy.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.