The main emphasis of the conference was to highlight the importance of the President’s reduction of the fiscal ’05 WRDA appropriations Bill to the same level as last year of $4.2 billion. The President has a ’04 projected $521 billion Federal deficit and wants to reduce it down to $364 billion in ’05 and $237 billion in fiscal ’06. The President’s budget will focus on three main areas:
The President needs to cut back the overall Federal budget to reflect a nation at war. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) recommended $121 million for shoreline restoration portion but the OMB (Office of Management & Budget) reduced it to $64 million with possible additional cuts down to $52 million. Howard Marlowe emphasized what the President presented is only a proposal and it has to go through the House and Senate before finalization, which is usually August/September. We have time to lobby the various legislators and appropriation committee members to maintain what the COE recommended. In addition, we heard from many coastal House of Representatives members in how important it was to keep the $121 million recommendations of the COE.
The OMB proposal is also to end Federal funding for beach nourishment projects. From a statement by the USACOE Assistant Secretary, "The Administration has determined that the Federal participation beyond the initial nourishment phase no longer can be supported in the budget. This policy applies to all projects involving periodic beach nourishment." The initial nourishment project of a beach will continue but any future projects will be the responsibility of the local entity.
For the budget, $52 million is recommended to reduce storm damage of coastal communities, 50% of what it was the year before. There is no refunding of shoreline nourishment program in the budget except one in New York because of a court ordered one. Beach nourishment will only be considered for flood prevention projects and not as a recreational one. The proposed budget has 8 major projects with the possibility of 11 additional projects and 5 new studies are targeted for areas such as $8 million for a Los Angeles coastal study. The funds will be directed to the highest return on investment projects. The shore and beach preservation policy for the COE for the $52 million budget will carry out renourishment once done, the local entity will take over. Funding will no longer be requested for renourishment.
There were many speakers but I found the USACOE presentations the most significant impact. Major General Carl A. Strock, Director of Civil Works, UASCOE spoke about the COE today. Three main areas of the COE budget The Office of Management & Budget (OMB) are out to change the ways the US Army Corps of Engineers performs work.
Although the OMB recommended no more beach nourishment projects, the USACOE will continue with programs until the new budget is approved. For beach nourishment, the COE plans to direct more of the dredge near or on the beaches. The BUD (Beneficial Use of Dredged material) can cost more but they will have to work through it. Currently, 30% of dredged material finds its way to beaches. Since 2000, the COE has a national and regional sedimentation program and also have a GIS map for all the regions.
The National Shoreline Management Study was called for in WRDA ’99. The COE is not far along with the project. It originally called for a total cost of $6-7 million but they have only accumulated to date almost $1 million. To get serious funding would take 2- to 3 years as compared to the 7 to 8 year level currently. The program called for a systematic study of the movement of sand along the shoreline. The funding of this important program depends on how much money the COE secures to complete the project.
The future direction of the COE was discussed. Recreational benefits of the shore have been taking on more importance and 20% of the budget goes to environmental work and restoration. The technical aspects of the study are changing to see the needs and impact on the national environment. They want to address regional problems and to use more the resources of other agencies like the EPA, etc. The COE needs to leverage grants with other agencies. As an example, the incremental costs in moving dredged sand from one location to another would be borne by someone.
The COE will be emphasizing Regional Sediment Management programs. We really need to focus more on this concept and understand the program. The objectives are to improve how people manage the regional sediment resources. The approach is to keep the desired sediment in the system and to use only the littoral component of the sand. Minimize the need to re-handle and to combine projects and to coordinate efforts including other State, Federal, and local programs. The purpose is to fit each sediment management action into the context of regional strategy and to recognize sand and other sediments as resources. It sounded like Texas was already ahead of the program with the efforts of the Galveston District and the Texas Coastal 2020 Program.
The purpose of shoreline restoration is to slow down the erosion or to stabilize it with systems like breakwaters, cells (submerged breakwaters), reef balls, and/or groins. Sometimes, you will need to draw the line like coastal armament with a seawall or revetment or precast concrete armor units or geotextile projects. The future trends with beach nourishment will be:
With the new budget, approximately $100 million of WRDA projects will be cancelled. There will be $35 million placed in a reserve maintenance fund for major disruptions such as lock and dam problems. The COE will have three priorities with the WRDA budget:
Dr. Tim Kana from Coastal Science and Engineering had a presentation on "Why Beaches Erode?" Although the sea level is rising, it is not the major cause of beach erosion. Sea level rise has been approximately 1 foot every century, which equates to 30 feet of beach erosion during this period or o.3 feet per year. If the sea level rise was 2 to 3 feet each century than the annual erosion rate would be 0.6 to 1 foot per year.
Several representatives from various coastal States reviewed the economic benefits from their beaches. Texas will also have information since the TSBA received a CIAP grant of $40,000 to perform a study on the "The Economic Value of Recreational Beaches on the Texas Gulf Coast." The project is in the final phases and will be completed later this year.
Political Contacts: The ASBPA prepared a list of important shoreline restoration Bills to discuss and to emphasize with the legislators during the Thursday meetings as well as suggested letters or Emails to send to various committee members. The recommended Bills include:
John Lee of the Galveston County Emergency Management Office met several legislators prior to and after the conference. He presented to each Legislative Aide or representative resolutions adopted by the County, Parks Board, Galveston County Beach Erosion Task Force, and Jamaica Beach. Howard Marlowe’s office set up meetings for John and he met with Congressman Nick Lampson and his Policy Director, Dan Easley; Keagan Resler, Legislative Correspondent for Congressman Tom Delay; Tom Lizardo, Chief of Staff for Congressman Ron Paul; and, Colin Woodall, Special Assistant for State Projects for Senator John Cornyn.
The Conference dedicated a Thursday afternoon for all the participants to visit and to lobby the legislators from their various Districts. I had individual meetings with Congressman Nick Lampson and his Policy Director, Dan Easley; Tom Lizardo, Chief of Staff for Congressman Ron Paul; and, Colin Woodall, Special Assistant for State Projects for Senator John Cornyn.
John and I met Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson that morning and her Legislative Assistant, Jamie Moore, to present the resolutions and requests to restore the shoreline restoration funds under WRDA.
John and I presented at the Thursday luncheon an ASBPA appreciation award to Congressman Nick Lampson on his efforts to fund shoreline restoration projects.
John and I had a very long and interesting late afternoon meeting with Roger Cockrell, Professional Staff Member from the Committee on Appropriations. He was with the COE for 22 years and transferred to this new assignment and he wants to help the COE. He mentioned although the budget will not be finalized until late summer, there is really only 60 working days to convince Congress to legislate the changes in the Fiscal ’05 budget. It is campaign season plus long recesses, etc. Every dollar appropriated is available until it is spent. If there are any unspent funds that are not specific in the Bill, then they can be used in other areas. He said 85% of the COE studies go away mainly from local sponsors pulling out or no money from the local entities. The key person in the OMB is Gary Waxman, who had two previous similar jobs in other agencies, and is one of 8 examiners in the department. He is notorious in cost cutting and reports to Gene Ebner and Norm Stiller, all career OMB people. Roger recommended any request for funds should show how the beaches are benefiting the State’s economy as well as helping the Federal Governments revenue source. Beaches provide jobs just like you have with a new auto plant in the same area. The OMB uses an old argument that if the government does not participate, you will do the project anyway because the economics benefits the City and State.
Comments made during presentations:
Copyright © 2006 West Galveston
Island Property Owners Association - All rights reserved
Last updated March 18, 2004