Quote:
Originally Posted by jyl
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GH85Carrera
It is the same problem everywhere. Politicians. When the weather is normal spending money on infrastructure is minimized, and the money is wasted on other things. They would rather wait for a catastrophe and then spend 10 time more to fix a problem after the fact. They can go pose in front of a camera and pledge to do "whatever is necessary" to help these citizens in the problem area.
|
These two posts sum it up ^^.
It's not just politicians, it's the public, it's the departments, and it's about
money. The dam had been in service for nearly 40 years when the push to improve the emergency spillway was happening. The improvements were brought forth by groups often identified as "Tree Huggers" and "Do Gooders"at a time when there had been no historical reason for the improvement. The state, water contractors, and water districts saw the push as an unnecessary expenditure that would result in increased water rates, eventually, for the public. The water departments had the "facts" of the engineering designs and projections as well as the history of the dam on their side. The groups warning of danger had only speculation and hypothetical scenarios which came with a huge price tag.
Hindsight is 20/20. Not defending anyone here, but we need to look at things in the context of their occurrences. In all fairness, there was not much public support in 2005-6 for spending millions of dollars and raising water rates based on a remote possibility. The emergency spillway had never been used in its history. The controlled spillway had been doing its designed job. The dam had never been in danger. The greatest portion of the public who would foot the bill for the improvement lives no where near the dam. Support for the improvement was lukewarm, at best.