The University of Iowa seems determined to commit one of the most egregious misuses of public money in modern times. Think the great Alaska "Bridge to Nowhere" would have been a travesty? Read on...

I'll admit right up front that I have a sentimental attachment to Hancher Auditorium. I spent four years there as a stagehand, I performed on that stage, and I have a lot of great memories in that building. My late brother Steve was also a Hancher stagehand. But as an adult, I have to look at things through the more practical eyes of a taxpayer, and the University's proposal to replace the Hancher and Art Building complexes just doesn't pass this taxpayer's "smell test".

In June, 2008 the state of Iowa and much of the Upper Mississippi Valley were devastated by the most severe flood season in recent memory. Iowa City, like many communities on the Iowa and Cedar Rivers, saw a flood crest which exceeded the previous record (the 1993 flood) by more than ten feet. The University of Iowa suffered a tremendous amount of damage to buildings that stand near the river's edge. The Iowa Memorial Union, the English-Philosophy Building, the Adler Journalism Building, and several others received millions of dollars of damage. Those buildings have been, or are being, repaired. The total flood damage to the University was estimated in late summer 2008 as approximately $230 million.

But several other damaged buildings have been left untouched. The Hancher Auditorium complex, which includes Clapp Recital Hall and the Voxman Music Building, and the original Art Building and its additions, were damaged, yet no repair work has started. Flood-ruined fixtures and building components like sheet rock have been removed, but that's it.

At first, the delay was somewhat understandable. It was essential for the UI to get as much classroom space back on line as quickly as possible, as well as the ground floor of Mayflower Residence Hall. Initial funding was somewhat limited, as were the number of construction crews available to do the work. The University, in its "Flood Updates", stated the importance of getting music students back into quality classroom and rehearsal space as quickly as possible, as the rented temporary facilities were, and still are, grossly inadequate for those purposes. So, it was reasonable to surmise that the plan was to restore the existing Hancher and Art Building complexes, as the nearby Theater Building and Museum of Art had been. (It should be noted that the museum building will no longer be used for that purpose. A portion of the building is presently being used as classroom space) The University stated that it had retained a consultant to prepare a mitigation plan for the buildings, to protect them from future floods should the Federal Emergency Management Agency determine that they could be restored.

In January, however, the real story was beginning to come out. During that month, FEMA informed the University that both the Hancher and Art complexes were eligible to receive "restoration/mitigation" funding--in other words, the UI would be able to repair and restore those buildings to their condition prior to the flood, and take necessary measures to protect them against future floods. However, FEMA also advised the UI that the buildings were also eligible for "replacement" funding--money to knock down the existing buildings and construct brand-new replacements elsewhere.

Do the buildings have to be replaced? Obviously not. FEMA would not have authorized restoration/mitigation funding if the buildings were not structurally sound, or could not be adequately repaired or protected. Make all the FEMA jokes you want, (think, Katrina) but I sincerely believe that FEMA's problems are political and at the highest levels, and that the engineers and other professionals who made the evaluation of the Hancher and Art complexes did a proper, professional job.

What's the difference? Plenty. Restoring the Hancher complex was estimated to be in the neighborhood of $35 million. With FEMA providing 90%, the University would need to provide about $3 million for its match. Add in possible overruns, and we're talking maybe $4 million. 

But the replacement option is mind-boggling--somewhere around $300 million to replace Hancher with a like structure. Now, the University's share becomes around $30 million. Add in the "improvements" the UI wants to add--like a smaller "studio theater", similar to the Stoner Theater in Des Moines' Civic Center, and the University's cost approaches $70-75 million. The comparison for the Art Building complex is similar.

Suddenly, the estimates of the cost of flood damage, given to the public by UI officials, skyrocket overnight from $230 million to a stratospheric $750 million--more than triple.  What the heck? And the University expects hundreds of millions of dollars to come from FEMA. Hundreds of millions of Federal dollars spent with little if any oversight from Congress, the Iowa Legislature, or Governor Chet Culver. At least Alaska's "Bridge to Nowhere" provided some entertainment, as Congress debated the subject.

And isn't it just a bit inaccurate to place the damage estimate at $750 million? That's not the amount of damage that was done, that figure includes the cost of replacing buildings that could be repaired. That's not an honest "damage estimate".

It's obvious that University administrators, including president Sally Mason, are drooling over the prospect of being able to construct a sexy new theater facility without those pesky nuisances of going to the Board of Regents and the Iowa Legislature for funding, or having to do private fund-raising. The skies have opened up over Iowa City, and Free Federal Money is falling onto the campus. Who do they think they're kidding? This isn't about flood damage anymore--it's about greed.

Since January, UI officials have started a campaign to convince the people of Iowa that demolishing and replacing two perfectly good buildings is a good thing.