Deluged with an outpouring of concern from Napa Creek residents wanting flood protection, the local flood control board promised Tuesday to make the creekside neighborhood a higher priority.

Exactly what this means will be better known on July 24. Flood control staff will report on the options for beginning creek defenses before 2013, which is when work would start under the current schedule.

It may come down to the board’s willingness to shift money now committed to building two railroad bridges and digging a bypass channel in the Napa River Oxbow.

With more than three dozen of her neighbors looking on, Linda Kerr of the citizens’ group In Harm’s Way spoke for 30 minutes, making a lawyer-like case for putting Napa Creek on equal footing with the Napa River.

Unless the board can find the “political will” to change priorities, 413 residences and 125 business will be vulnerable to flooding well into the next decade, Kerr said.

Flood district staff said federal funding, which continues to be inadequate, should be focused on the Napa River. Once work in the Oxbow is done, protecting much of downtown and Soscol Avenue, then the focus could shift to the creek, project manager Heather Stanton recommended.

The flood board, representing the Napa County Board of Supervisors and five city councils, accepted Kerr’s argument that flood defenses for the creek and river proceed concurrently.

“Certainly the commitment is here,” said Napa Mayor Jill Techel, who chairs the flood board. “We’ve just begun to see the creative ways we may be able to handle this.”

Supervisor Bill Dodd suggested jumpstarting Napa Creek flood work using a potential FEMA grant or diverting local flood tax dollars for a purpose not originally intended when voters approved the Measure A sales tax in 1998.

If that’s not legal, then maybe voters could be asked to modify the purposes of Measure A money at a future election, Dodd said.

Kerr said these alternative funding possibilities left Napa Creek vulnerable to too many uncertainties. The board needs to recommend that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers divert some federal funds to the creek, even if this means slowing river work, she said.

“It’s a start,” said Kerr after the board voted to put the creek on equal footing with the river. The board’s seriousness will be determined by what happens in July, she said.

The Corps of Engineers wrote a letter opposing scheduling changes. That could leave the corps with no construction contract to award in 2008, jeopardizing future federal funding, said Col. Ronald Light.

The corps’ letter misrepresented In Harm’s Way’s request, Kerr said. Napa Creek residents want their portion of the flood project to be built concurrent with river work, not first, she said.

Staff will report in July on whether it is feasible to split federal funds in coming years without jeopardizing continued federal support.

Construction of the two Napa Valley Wine Train bridges is estimated to cost $37 million (one will go over the river, the other over the proposed bypass). Digging the Oxbow bypass could cost $15 million to $20 million.

Construction of culverts and flood terraces along Napa Creek near downtown is estimated to cost $15 million to $20 million.

Corps officials expect to be able to award at least a partial railroad contract for 2008. With design of Napa Creek defenses just beginning, creek construction couldn’t begin before 2009, according to district staff. Creek work is estimated to take two years.

The best solution to the flood control debate is for the Napa community to redouble its lobbying for more money from Congress and the Bush administration, said Stanley Ho, a corps engineer.

Napa has been getting $11 million to $12 million in recent years, but will need $20 million annually for five or so years to put the flood project back on schedule, Ho said.