They lined up more than 100,000 feet of giant sandbags, relocated offices, installed emergency pipes and generators and even elevated streetlights to keep them dry and visible.

King County, the state and four area cities spent more than $30 million in 2009 because the federal government said it might have to flood the Green River Valley so the damaged Howard Hanson Dam wouldn't blow.

But the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) still refuses to help foot the bill, arguing that there was never an imminent threat.

"That's just baffling to us," said Hillman Mitchell, King County's emergency-management director. "Uniformly, everyone has been surprised by these denials."

Tuesday, representatives from King County made a presentation to FEMA officials in Washington, D.C., as part of a third attempt to get reimbursed for taking the emergency measures. U.S. Sens. Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell and five Western Washington congressmen signed a letter supporting the request.

But there's no telling how the federal agency will respond. FEMA officials in Seattle and D.C. wouldn't make anyone available Tuesday to answer questions.

"It's a fairness and equity issue," county spokesman Frank Abe said. "The county had to spend this money because of the potential failure of a federal facility."

The county spent $24 million on preparations.

The dispute dates back to January 2009, when a series of storms seriously weakened the right abutment of the Howard Hanson Dam.

It wasn't until late that summer that Col. Anthony Wright, with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Seattle, said he feared that if future rains filled the reservoir behind the dam to capacity the structure would fail. He said he believed there was a 1 in 3 chance he might have to inundate Auburn, Kent, Renton and Tukwila to avoid a more deadly catastrophe.

Because that part of South King County is home to 26,000 residents and 100 million square feet of buildings, local governments began preparing for the worst. They stacked oversized sandbags on miles of levees and moved the county elections building and a state health-department office. They did it not knowing who ultimately would pay the tab, though many officials presumed they'd be able to get reimbursed by FEMA.

But even though the White House declared the region a disaster area during the January storms, FEMA said the new threat that emerged that summer wasn't actually urgent enough.

"The applicants' reliance upon the USACE's (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers') 'one in three' risk of flooding statements does not meet FEMA's eligibility of an immediate threat," the federal agency wrote in December.

FEMA also quoted portions of an Army Corps news release issued in June 2009 as evidence that there was no emergency. In that release, FEMA pointed out, the Corps said the abutment appeared to be performing normally.

Mitchell, with the county, said FEMA's use of that information was one of many "complete misrepresentations." The same release also quotes several people who say the danger hadn't passed and there remained a high risk of flooding.

"The portion they selectively quoted made it sound like the dam was working fine," Mitchell said. "But if you read the whole release in its entirety, it shows the probability of flooding still existed. That's the kind of thing I think was upsetting to many."

Kent Mayor Suzette Cooke said FEMA's position suggests spending money to protect against flooding is a less worthy expense than reimbursing people once calamity strikes.

"I know FEMA is usually in the business of paying for the aftereffects of a disaster," Cooke said." But our actions were trying to prevent a disaster. We saw that as being much less costly."

Estimates of potential losses during a serious Green River flood ranged from $1 billion to $4 billion.

Cooke said the $797,000 Kent spent on temporary measures along the Green River had been earmarked for more permanent flood-control work elsewhere — work that would be delayed if no reimbursement is available. The county borrowed its share of the money and put off other capital projects while it pays down that debt.

Gary Urbas, with Washington State Emergency Management Division, was sympathetic to FEMA's plight. He said the agency was used to responding to weather events — not mechanical defects in aging dams.

"Normally for them it's very straightforward," he said. If the emergency measures had been taken in advance of a flood everyone was certain was coming, "there would have been no problem."

The flooding threat dropped dramatically by the end of 2009. The Army Corps determined that building up levees with sandbags and a temporary fix to the dam using concrete grout reduced the chances of a major flood to about 1 in 33.

But it's not entirely clear where the risks stand today.

Earlier this year, a federal contractor using about $44 million in emergency funds from Congress installed 12 drains between the dam and the abutment and are constructing additional drainage systems. All that work is designed to help keep the water level behind the dam from ever reaching its capacity. But the Corps can't test the system until it gets more heavy storms.

Meanwhile, FEMA has 90 days to decide on King County's second appeal. But even if it rules that the threat to the dam in 2009 constituted a reimbursable emergency, that would be just the beginning. The local governments would still have to submit each individual claim to see if it meets FEMA's reimbursement criteria.

MARK HARRISON / THE SEATTLE TIMES

Four-foot-high bags of sand line the Green River Trail as it winds through Kent near the Riverbend Golf Complex. South King County governments stacked sandbags on miles of levees in preparation for flooding.

MARK HARRISON / THE SEATTLE TIMES

Four-foot-high bags of sand line the Green River Trail as it winds through Kent near the Riverbend Golf Complex. South King County governments stacked sandbags on miles of levees in preparation for flooding.

Craig Welch: 206-464-2093 or cwelch@seattletimes.com

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2015589986_flood13m...