They Just Couldn't Do It

Iowa state legislators fail Iowans; rebuff IIHR water sensor funding

Photo: PaniYani/Shutterstock.com

by Diane Rosenberg | Executive Director 

What appeared to be a low hanging fruit during this year’s state legislative session – restored funding for the University of Iowa IIHR real-time nitrate water sensor program – became a major battle with Iowans on the losing end. A 2:00 am last-minute budget bill amendment diverted expected IIHR money to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources instead. 

The IIHR water monitoring program through the Iowa Water Quality Information System (IQWIS) network measures nitrate levels every 15 minutes at approximately 60 sensor locations throughout the state. The network, originally 70 sensors strong, was defunded in 2023, a casualty of political payback. Over the last two years, the Walton Family Foundation donated a total of $600,000 to keep the sensors afloat. That funding ends on June 30 this year. 

Many vulnerable, small, rural municipalities without denitrification plants rely on the data from these sensors to provide advance warning of high nitrate levels. This enables them to take measures to reduce nitrate levels to below 10mg/L, the EPA limit, without last-minute scrambling. 

Nitrate levels have been running especially high since last summer, and environmental leaders were cautiously optimistic funding would be restored. 

The network costs $600,000/year to operate. Environmental groups were asking for an additional $500,000 to replace old equipment and even $1 million to measure for additional pollutants. Pressure was high on legislators with Iowans lobbying in Des Moines, emailing, calling, and writing postcards all session long. 

Meanwhile At the State House 

The Iowa House Agriculture and Natural Resources Appropriations Committee, under the chairmanship of Rep. Norlin Mommsen, initially allocated $300,000 for the Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection portion of the proposed state budget, HF 2771. The Senate side of the appropriations committee, chaired by Senator Tom Shipley, initially allocated zero dollars. 

$300,000 is only half the amount needed to fund all the sensors. Larry Weber, Director of the University of Iowa IIHR-Hydroscience and Engineering and the IQWIS sensor network, said he had numerous conversations with Rep. Mommsen on the network. 

Mommsen told Weber, “There’s just so much pressure on the Senate Republican side to not do anything,” said Weber. But Weber hoped at least with a line-item budget of $300,000, “we could work on full funding the following year.” 

Weber said Mommsen was having a hard time getting the Senate to agree, “I really do believe Norlin was fighting very hard for us,” he said. The Senate appropriations committee, “finally came around and said they would also do the $300,000. So, the deal was then done as far as we understood,” says Weber. 

That was a week before the session’s end. Then on Friday, May 1 Governor Kim Reynolds and Secretary of Agriculture Mike Naig announced the “Farm to Faucet” water quality funding package. This proposal mainly channels unspent money, initially allocated in a 2018 water quality bill for watershed projects throughout Iowa, to projects in the Des Moines Lobe, abandoning other parts of the state. 

“The people in Des Moines and Central Iowa deserve to have clean water, but there are many other areas that are struggling with high nitrates, too. This bill shifts funding away from those communities,” said Kerri Johannsen, Senior Director of Policy and Programs at the Iowa Environmental Council (IEC). 

Among its many features, the water package provides $500,000 annually to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR), not IIHR, for the agency’s ambient water testing program. The DNR conducts monthly snapshot tests around the state to track Iowa’s contribution to nutrient loads heading to the Gulf of Mexico. 

The DNR would have the option to allocate the $500,000 towards additional contaminant testing, real-time sensors, or a combination of both. It’s totally at the DNR’s discretion with no guarantee of real-time monitoring. 

A Broken Agreement 

On May 1, the House rewrote the agricultural appropriations amendment, H-8404, for the state budget bill to include language for the water quality package. H-8404 included the $300,000 for the IIHR funding that the Senate had agreed upon. The House passed it with a floor vote and sent it over to the Senate. 

But late in the night of May 2 during a 32-hour marathon session, Senator Tom Shipey rewrote the amendment. S-5254 rerouted the $300,000 for IIHR to the DNR instead, providing the agency now with $800,000 for water monitoring. The Senate passed S-5254 on a 43-2 vote with 12 Democrats joining 31 Republicans. 

Senator Art Staed said Democrats compromised on the amendment, even though the caucus supported IIHR network funding, because of concerns Republican senators would completely remove the $300,000 regardless of the earlier agreement. “We were hoping for the best with an opportunity for the IIHR to apply for a grant from the DNR,” said Staed. 

The new amendment went back to the House at 2:00 am. Rather than scheduling a conference committee to hammer out the differences between the two amendments, Rep. Mommsen called for a vote. “Norlin got rolled on Sunday morning and was told to stand down by leadership,” says Weber. “Leadership wasn’t defined whether that was [Rep. Pat] Grassley or the governor.” 

The amendment passed 66-18. 

The Aftermath – What Happens Next? 

The final amendment is very complicated, says Johnnsen. “Mostly the money in the Farm to Faucet program is being moved around into the same failed water quality programs,” she says. The IEC is currently conducting a detailed analysis of the amendment, and JFAN will make the analysis available when it’s released. 

One of the issues with allocating water monitoring funds to DNR is the agency’s lack of capacity and expertise to administer the real-time IQWIS network. If the DNR decides to pursue real-time monitoring, Weber says there are a couple of ways they could proceed. One includes contracting with the US Geological Survey (USGS). 

“The contracting process itself will take at a minimum of six months. By the time they get money to the USGS, it'll be winter, and they’ll want to try to do something in the spring,” says Weber. 

“Then what are they going to do? Are they going to buy new equipment and create new locations? Or would they…offset federal monies already coming to USGS to support existing sensors? I would guess it would take the USGS a year to get through contracting and the purchase of equipment if they actually put new sensors out.” 

Contracting with the USGS would “supplant federal dollars that are supporting current USGS sensors,” Weber added. “Basically, it would be spending state money instead of federal money. We'd be losing money.” 

Operating USGS sensors aren’t cheap either. The DNR currently contracts with the USGS for a handful of sensors that cost $20,000 each per year to operate. Conversely, IIHR sensors cost approximately $8750 each to operate annually. 

If the DNR does conduct water monitoring with the USGS, the amendment doesn’t contain any language to share nitrate data with the public through the IQWIS network. 

A Possible Alternative Through the DNR 

The other option that spurred Democrats to compromise on the amendment would entail IIHR applying to the DNR for funds from the $800,000 to cover the sensors. However, that would have to be approved by the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship (IDALS), DNR, and Iowa State University, which could pose a challenge. 

Currently Secretary of Agriculture Naig controls the Groundwater Protection Fund at IDALS, which historically funded the sensors, and which could continue to do so right now. But there seems to be little appetite on his part to do that. Weber says Naig won’t even meet with him. 

“This has been part of an ongoing conversation with [Rep. Mommsen] for two or three years now. Norlin keeps asking me would I be willing to sit down and meet with Mike Naig? And I tell him, I’ve been saying yes to this for three years. 

“I don’t know what Mike Naig is so afraid of that he’s unwilling to talk to me,” says Weber. 

It’s unclear whether the DNR, led by former agribusiness lobbyist Kayla Lyons, or Iowa State University would also agree to fund the sensors. 

The Fate of Nitrate Monitoring Through 2027 

Over the past year, several counties prepared for the possibility of lost funding and are providing more bridge funding for an additional 12 months until the state restores IIHR funding. 

With this support, the IIHR nitrate monitoring network will continue through June 2027, but in a somewhat reduced and targeted capacity. 

“That’s the tricky part,” Weber said. “The reason this should be done statewide is that each of the counties have different stipulations on the funding.” 

Polk County committed $200,000. In addition to funding some sensors in their watershed, its supervisors agreed to fund other sensors in areas not covered by other counties. 

Johnson County also is contributing $200,000. “Some of that has to be spent in the county, and some of it has to be spent in the Iowa River watershed that drains into Johnson County,” Weber said. Linn County is allocating $100,000 mainly targeting the Cedar River watershed draining to Cedar Rapids, with the contract being finalized at publication time. 

The City of Decorah will add another $17,000 to operate two sensors on the Upper Iowa River, and Wright County is contributing $35,000 for the Boone River watershed. 

In addition, an Isaak Walton League GoFundMe page has so far raised $73,725 for the network. 

The two sensors in the Clayton County area that monitor Bloody Run Creek will continue to operate. “Believe me, we’re going to keep that going,” says Weber. 

“That’s the landscape of where we’re at,” he said. “That’s why getting funding from this DNR pool of funds…a couple hundred thousand there would completely fill us out. That would get us back to the 70 [sensors] that we ran a few years ago.” 

It’s Up to Us 

Whether that happens or not, Iowa critically needs real-time nitrate water sensors throughout around the state to be fully funded on an annual basis. It goes without saying that water monitoring should not be a political football. With Iowa’s high cancer rates, it’s irresponsible of legislators to treat nitrate pollution and awareness as anything but a public health issue. 

Environmental organizations are regrouping to drive the water quality issue into this summer, through the elections, and into the next legislative session. Watch for announcements of how you can help support these efforts. 

With the midterms coming up, key pro-agribusiness legislators like Senators Tom Shipley and Ken Rozenboom are retiring, and new candidates are running for their seats. 

Follow candidates running in your districts, learn all you can about what they would do to improve water quality, and ask if they would fund the IIHR water sensor network. Then vote for candidates who stand with Iowans, clean water, and public health, not corporate agribusiness interests. 

Iowans deserve better than this.