Newton plans to construct detention basin in area known for its flooding
Public Works Director Joe Grife said it would be a two-phase project that could be bid and constructed in the upcoming fall or winter seasons. In addition to building the 0.75-acre basin, the city would also reconstruct sanitary and storm sewer conflicts in the area, which caused issues during the May 2024 floods.
"We had significant flash flooding throughout mostly the northeast part of town," Grife said while showing a picture of the intersection at First Avenue East and 12th Street East near Walgreens and Scooters. "...And if you remember, not long before this event, we had shared our stormwater study."
Lo and behold this intersection was one of the locations identified in the study for staff to take a better look at. The storm fueled the city's efforts to find a solution. Public works teamed up with HR Green, a civil engineering company, to create digital modeling of the neighborhood that was heavily affected by the flooding.
Using the existing conditions as a base, the digital modeling showed the effects of a 500-year storm in that area. Grife said the models lined up exactly with what the city saw the day of the floods: two to four feet of water on First Avenue and five to six feet of water in the nearby empty lot.
Funding for the project would come from urban renewal area TIF funds. The city estimates the first phase of the project will cost $700,000 to construct.
The basin would be located on city property north of Walgreens.
"So just about 18 months from that storm we're going to be moving dirt out of there and getting some problems solved with that issue," Grife said. "This will be a dry basin. It won't hold water other than during rain events. There won't be any safety issues ... It will be maintained, mowed just like area is now."
When the detention basin is built, the severity of the flooding drops dramatically, according to the digital modeling from HR Green. The second phase of the project would upgrade the existing storm sewer and constructs a new concrete box culvert. The second phase would cost $1.8 million. Funding is undetermined.
"We'll be upgrading what's existing and building some new ones," Grife said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
A $200 million endowment focused on Black Americans is taking shape
Started in 2020 as a five-year initiative inspired by the racial justice outcry following the police murder of George Floyd, the California Black Freedom Fund plans to expand to a $200 million endowment. The move is both rare in the world of philanthropy and politically bold, given the Trump administration's efforts to eliminate race-based grant making. Originally a designated fund of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, the fund spun off on July 1, renaming itself the Black Freedom Fund, to indicate its new national scope. Over the past five years, it has drawn more than $97 million in donations. Of that, it has directed $45 million to 206 nonprofits in California, largely working to increase the sway of nonprofits that serve Black people, with a portion of the remainder being reserved to start the endowment. Marc Philpart, the fund's executive director, said the endowment will let the fund make grants of $10 million a year without cutting into its asset base, assuming historical rates of return on investments. By establishing a durable institution with a sizable reservoir of cash, the fund can serve as a lasting beacon to smaller organizations serving Black communities in California, Philpart said. 'When a crisis occurs in the Black community, philanthropy parachutes in, there's a wave of support, and then as soon as the news cameras turn away, the support recedes,' he said. 'We need enduring institutions that are led by and committed to the Black community in ways that have a lasting impact.' DEI targeted Philpart's fundraising for the endowment comes as the Trump administration has characterized diversity, equity, and inclusion programs as illegal and has called for investigations of large foundations that support diversity programs. Under Philpart's leadership, the California Black Freedom Fund started the Legal Education, Advocacy, and Defense for Racial Justice Initiative, which provides pro bono legal consulting and training for nonprofits. The program operates on the premise that there isn't anything illegal about racial justice funding. But the 2023 Supreme Court ruling against considering race in college admissions, in a pair of cases brought by Students for Fair Admissions against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, was viewed by some as an indication that private philanthropies could not legally engage in race-based grant making — and the issue is far from settled. While Philpart's fundraising pitch might resonate with some donors, others are sure to be nervous, given the scrutiny placed on race-based grant making by the White House, said Dan Morenoff, executive director of the American Civil Rights Project, a litigation and advocacy nonprofit that has challenged affirmative action programs. The White House has directed the Department of Justice to root out instances of race-based grantmaking, which it considers discriminatory. 'You don't want to be on their radar because they are fervently looking for people to make examples of at this point,' Morenoff said. While some corporations and philanthropies, including the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, an early supporter of the California Black Freedom Fund, have retreated from supporting racial justice, Philpart is counting on securing support from donors who want to stay with the cause even as the issue is argued in various court cases stemming from Trump's anti-DEI executive orders. The attacks from the administration, Philpart said, have been a 'clarifying moment' for many donors and have generated interest in the fund. 'People have rallied to us and really doubled down on their commitments to support Black freedom and Black power,' he said. 'That is the most telling thing coming out of this moment — that there is a critical mass of leaders throughout the country who care very deeply about the community.' 70 financial supporters One grantmaker that has doubled down is the California Wellness Foundation. The foundation made an initial grant of $500,000 when the fund was first launched, then made a $200,000 commitment to a separate fund created by the California Black Freedom Fund in response to the January Los Angeles fires, and recently added $500,000 to support the spin-off. Richard Tate, president of the California Wellness Fund, said the new fund is 'needed now more than ever' because of attempts by the administration to roll back equity efforts. 'The fact that we are talking about a Black Freedom Fund is an acknowledgment that not everyone has equal standing in the culture,' he said. 'Whatever headwinds that may exist because of this political moment, now is the time for us to continue to be explicit about our intentions of supporting a community.' Philanthropy needs to act quickly by unleashing more money in grants to support areas like litigation, public advocacy, and the replacement of lost federal funds, said Glenn Harris, president of Race Forward, a nonprofit racial justice advocacy group. But, he said, lasting institutions that can respond to future challenges are also needed. 'There's a balancing act,' Harris said. 'It's really clear that struggles for liberation and justice are going to be with us for a minute.' Among the two dozen grant makers that chipped in to start the fund are the Akonadi, Conrad Hilton and San Francisco foundations as well as the Emerson Collective, Crankstart, the Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr. Fund and the Silicon Valley Community Foundation. The total of institutional funders to the effort since 2020 now exceeds 70. Why endowments Among the groups the fund has supported are the East Bay Permanent Real Estate Cooperative, a community-owned cooperative that 'removes land and housing from the speculative market and places it into permanent community stewardship,' according to the fund. A late 2023 survey of nearly 300 foundations conducted by the Center for Effective Philanthropy found that more than two thirds of grantmakers did not offer endowment grants. Half of those that did so made them to arts organizations and museums. Nonprofits led by Black people receive endowment grants even more rarely, according to a 2022 analysis of social change organizations by the Bridgespan Group, a philanthropy consultancy, which found that nonprofits led by Black people had endowments that were only a fourth as big as those led by white people. Since then, some grant makers have stepped forward to support endowments at organizations serving members of Black communities, said Darren Isom, a partner at Bridgespan. For instance, in 2022 the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation made grants of $5 million each to three racial justice organizations led by people of color: UnidosUS, the NAACP, and Faith in Action. 'Endowments are transfer of power from philanthropic organizations to the organizations that are closest to the work,' he said. 'From an impact perspective, the work is more high impact, more beneficial, and more durable if it's owned by and led by those that are the closest to issues and closest to the communities.' Philpart is confident that despite the blow-back against diversity and racial justice, the fund can raise enough money to meet its goal. 'We're drawing people out who want to prove we are greater than divisiveness, we are greater than bigotry, and we are a greater than racism,' he said. 'We are better than all the things that pull us apart and don't fundamentally improve anyone's well-being.' ______ Alex Daniels is a senior reporter at the Chronicle of Philanthropy, where you can read the full article. This article was provided to The Associated Press by the Chronicle of Philanthropy as part of a partnership to cover philanthropy and nonprofits supported by the Lilly Endowment. The Chronicle is solely responsible for the content. For all of AP's philanthropy coverage, visit
Bloomberg
30 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump to Ask Congress for DC-Specific Crime Bill, Funding
President Donald Trump said he would ask Congress to approve a crime bill that would allow him greater authority over Washington, DC's police department as well as new spending to fund beautification projects, days after announcing he was taking control of law enforcement in the capital. 'We're going to be going to Congress for a relatively small amount of money,' Trump said during an event at the Kennedy Center on Wednesday, adding that he expected his Republican allies to approve the spending.
CNN
31 minutes ago
- CNN
Appeals court allows Trump to continue ending foreign aid grants
Only the legislative branch can sue a presidential administration for making changes to congressionally approved budgets, the federal appeals court in DC ruled after looking at President Donald Trump's administration ending planned grants for foreign aid. The decision empowers the Trump administration to refuse to spend budgeted money. And it will make it much harder for outside entities that don't already have contracts with the federal government to challenge the president's decisions, even in spite of Congress' power of the purse. The decision allows Trump to continue with his wind-down of foreign aid grants. The US DC Circuit Court of Appeals panel, voting 2-1, interpreted the law around the Impoundment Control Act, which regulates the action of a president to delay or withhold funding that has been already appropriated by Congress in the federal budget. In the case, grant recipients sued over access to almost $4 billion for global health and more than $6 billion for HIV/AIDS programs that were appropriated by Congress to be disbursed by the State Department and the now-essentially shuttered agency USAID. Circuit Judge Karen Henderson, in the opinion, wrote that 'the record is simply less developed' on how long grantees would survive if they can't compete for foreign aid grants in the future. Lauren Bateman of Public Citizen Litigation Group, as the lead attorney for some of the grantees that sued, said on Wednesday her organization would 'seek further review from the court.' 'In the meantime, countless people will suffer disease, starvation, and death from the Administration's unconscionable decision to withhold life-saving aid from the world's most vulnerable people,' Bateman said. The decision, however, doesn't wholesale end legal challenges around USAID. Some of the ongoing legal challenges over USAID grants regard the fulfillment of contracts rather than budget allocations in the future. The court noted that the federal government has paid 'substantially all of the amounts owed on existing contracts for work' earlier this year. The court found on Wednesday that only the Comptroller General, which is part of the legislative branch of government in the Government Accountability Office, has the ability to sue the executive over alleged impoundment. 'Here, the (Impoundment Control Act) created a complex scheme of notification of the Congress, congressional action on a proposed rescission or deferral and suit by a specified legislative branch official if the executive branch violates its statutory expenditure obligations,' Henderson, a Reagan appointee, wrote in the opinion. 'It does not make sense that the Congress would craft a complex scheme of interbranch dialogue but sub silentio also provide a backdoor for citizen suits at any time and without notice to the Congress of the alleged violation.' Judge Greg Katsas, a Trump appointee also sided with Henderson. Judge Florence Pan, a Biden appointee, wrote in a dissent that the court's decision degrades that ability of the balance of powers to be 'security against tyranny.' 'It is our responsibility to check the President when he violates the law and exceeds his constitutional authority. We fail to do that here,' Pan wrote. The majority, Pan added, 'depart from the norms of impartial appellate review' to 'announce a new and sweeping rule in the President's favor.' Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and a Georgetown law professor, criticized the powerful appellate court's reasoning on Wednesday as 'nonsensical,' because the court cut out the ability of parties to bring constitutional challenges to the president on budget changes. 'It's difficult to imagine that the full D.C. Circuit won't want to rehear this ruling,' Vladeck said. 'If it stands, Congress is only going to sue when it's adverse to the president. The real problem is the court is taking a textbook violation of the Constitution and minimizing it.'
