Posted: Tuesday, September 2, 2008 12:00 am
It appears other local governmental bodies have painted the Waterloo City Council into a corner over whether or not to waive or rebate building permit fees for flood victims.
Good.
Council members are apparently divided over whether or how much of a break to give flood victims.
Meanwhile, the Cedar Falls City Council already has waived such fees.
This morning, the Black Hawk County Board of Supervisors was expected to approve full rebates for flood and tornado victims looking to rebuild in the county's unincorporated areas.
"Those permits wouldn't have been taken out if we had not had those disasters," said Supervisor Frank Magsamen, a retired Waterloo fire chief and former county emergency management director.
All five county board members said they supported 100 percent rebates, provided the owner shows proof of flood damage. Permits would still be required and the rebates would occur after the final inspections.
While the other two governmental bodies are waiving or rebating the fees, the Waterloo council is apparently proceeding more cautiously. Some may question why.
Councilmen Ron Welper and Reggie Schmitt said they supported a proposal to rebate 50 percent of the permit fees paid to repair flood damage for homeowners, with no refunds on electrical, plumbing and mechanical permits.
But Councilmen Harold Getty and Steve Schmitt were pushing for a full refund of all fees for flood repairs.
Council members Bob Greenwood, Carolyn Cole and Quentin Hart weren't on hand to lend their perspective during the work session.
Homeowners from the Cedar Terrace and Foulk Road areas of Waterloo expressed anger with the city several weeks ago over having to pay for the permits.
Reggie Schmitt said some of the fees need to be retained by the city. "At least we're covering the cost of (inspectors) so we're not operating at a loss," he said.
But with total permit revenues from flood damage estimated at about $60,000 to date, Steve Schmitt said it would be a good symbolic gesture just to rebate the entire amount rather than half.
"For $30,000, I just think that's the wrong message to send," he said.
Getty was the most vocal proponent of full refunds, arguing the Building Inspections Department already returns $200,000 to $300,000 in excess fees to the general fund each year.
"All these extra things because of the flood would be a windfall to the city if we charge for it," Getty said. "They need help and we shouldn't take money out of their pockets to pay for it."
Welper replied, "So what you're saying is their neighbors should pay for their permit?"
And Getty answered, "Good God, yes. Help them out. That's the American way. - It's the Christian thing to do."
We'll leave any conclusions about the religious sentiment up to our readers. That set aside, we couldn't agree more.
Getty's sentiments remind us of similar comments made years ago by another council member.
"People need to know there's someone down here in this building that cares about them," the late Sammie Dell once said.
What would Sammie do? We have no doubt what he would have done. He'd be with Getty and Schmitt and rebate the whole thing.
He'd do the right thing. So should the rest of the council.