Illinois Environmental Council | Federal Water Policy Brief | November 2026
Focus: Illinois’ 2nd and 5th Congressional Districts
The Bottom Line
When heavy rain overwhelms Chicago’s sewers, floods south suburban neighborhoods, or sends polluted runoff into local waterways, the consequences extend beyond damaged infrastructure. Flooding threatens homes, public health, neighborhood stability, and the health of the Great Lakes. These challenges are interconnected, but the federal programs designed to address them are often considered separately.
Two federal policy tools are especially important: the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) and the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). GLRI supports restoring wetlands, rivers, shorelines, and watersheds, while WRDA authorizes U.S. Army Corps of Engineers activities for flood risk management, ecosystem restoration, navigation, and other water resources priorities.
These investments serve different purposes, but they can reinforce one another. Restoring natural landscapes can improve water quality and, where conditions allow, slow or store stormwater. Flood control infrastructure can help manage the runoff that existing landscapes and drainage systems can’t absorb. Together with local sewer investments, these approaches offer a more comprehensive response to increasingly severe storms.
For Illinois’ 2nd and 5th Congressional Districts, the connection is particularly important. From the industrialized Calumet region to the North Branch of the Chicago River, communities are confronting overlapping challenges involving flooding, aging infrastructure, habitat degradation, and environmental injustice.
As Congress considers the future of GLRI funding and WRDA 2026, Illinois has an opportunity to make the case that protecting the Great Lakes and protecting communities from flooding are complementary federal responsibilities.
Two Federal Tools, One Connected Water System
The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative: Restoring the Natural Systems That Protect Water
Established in 2010, GLRI is a federal interagency initiative led by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It supports efforts to address major threats to the Great Lakes ecosystem, including contaminated sediments, invasive species, polluted runoff, habitat loss, and degraded shorelines.
GLRI’s importance to flood resilience lies primarily in its watershed restoration investments. Wetlands, floodplains, stream corridors, and vegetated landscapes can provide natural functions that conventional infrastructure cannot fully replicate. Depending on site conditions, restored wetlands can temporarily store water, vegetation can slow surface runoff, and healthier streambanks can reduce erosion and sediment entering waterways.
These functions are particularly valuable in urbanized watersheds where pavement, rooftops, and other impervious surfaces limit the amount of rainwater that can infiltrate the ground.
GLRI Action Plan IV, covering fiscal years 2025 through 2029, explicitly recognizes the relationship between watershed restoration, polluted runoff, erosion, and flooding. The plan reports that GLRI-supported projects have prevented more than 500 million gallons of untreated urban runoff from entering the Great Lakes and establishes a cumulative target of 925 million gallons by FY2029.
These are program-wide water quality outcomes, not estimates of flood damage avoided in Chicago. Nevertheless, they demonstrate the scale of federal investment in restoring the natural systems that influence how water moves through the Great Lakes basin.
GLRI is not a general-purpose flood control or sewer construction program. Its statutory framework limits water infrastructure spending to eligible green infrastructure that provides ecological benefits. That distinction matters: its strongest contribution is improving watershed health while delivering additional stormwater benefits where project design and local conditions support them.
The Water Resources Development Act: Authorizing Federal Water Projects
WRDA is the principal recurring legislative vehicle through which Congress authorizes U.S. Army Corps of Engineers water resources projects and modifies related authorities. Typically considered every two years, WRDA provides direction for federal activities involving flood risk management, navigation, aquatic ecosystem restoration, and other water resources needs.
Although WRDA is often associated with levees, reservoirs, and navigation channels, the Army Corps’ responsibilities extend beyond traditional structural infrastructure. Congress has also authorized the Corps to undertake ecosystem restoration, wetland rehabilitation, stream restoration, and nonstructural flood risk management measures such as building elevation, floodproofing, and voluntary property acquisition.
The Corps’ Continuing Authorities Program, including Section 205 for small flood control projects and Section 206 for aquatic ecosystem restoration, can provide pathways for smaller projects without requiring separate project-specific congressional authorization.
Important note: WRDA generally establishes or modifies federal authority; it does not automatically provide the funding needed to complete a project. Congress must subsequently appropriate funding, and many Corps projects require nonfederal sponsors to share costs and fulfill other responsibilities.
The 2026 Senate WRDA proposal also includes provisions concerning EPA water programs and GLRI reauthorization, demonstrating that Congress can address multiple dimensions of water policy within a broader legislative package.
Where GLRI and WRDA Meet
The connection between these two federal tools is both practical and institutional.
The Army Corps is among the federal agencies participating in GLRI. Through this partnership, GLRI resources can support eligible Corps-led ecosystem restoration activities. A single restoration project can therefore advance GLRI’s Great Lakes objectives while drawing upon Corps technical expertise and existing project authorities.
At the watershed level, the relationship is broader. GLRI can support wetland and river restoration that strengthens ecological conditions and, in some cases, improves stormwater management.
These investments are most effective when planned with an understanding of how water moves across an entire watershed, rather than treating individual projects as isolated improvements. Below, we break down those comparisons:
| GLRI | WRDA/Army Corps | |
|---|---|---|
|
Primary Role |
Great Lakes ecosystem restoration and water quality |
Biennial bill approving Corps water projects; the 2026 Senate version also renews EPA water program |
|
Typical Activities |
Wetland and habitat restoration, polluted runoff reduction, shoreline restoration |
Flood protection (walls, reservoirs, and flood-proofing homes), ecosystem restoration, harbors |
|
Federal Leadership |
EPA and participating federal agencies |
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers |
|
Local Partnerships |
Grants and cooperative agreements with park districts, forest preserves, nonprofits, and cities |
Nonfederal project sponsors, often with cost-sharing requirements |
|
Funding Pathway |
Yearly appropriations to EPA, shared with partner agencies |
Project and program authorities followed by appropriations |
Department of Public Health
What they do: Provides guidance, services, and strategies to protect Chicagoans’ health, including disease control, mental health, substance abuse, violence prevention, food protection and environmental permitting, and inspections.
Passed Budget: $335,049,660, a significant drop from $539,054,471 in the FY2025 budget. This is primarily due to a continued decline in grant funding, especially COVID-19 dollars.
Accomplishments in 2025:
- Responded to 2,541 out of 2,638 (97.7%) environmental complaints from January to July 2025
Department of Water Management
What they do: Operate and maintain the City’s sewer and drinking water infrastructure. The Department collects, processes, and distributes the City’s drinking water to residents and 120 suburbs. Most notably, they oversee lead service line replacement and collaborate with DOE and other departments on the Chicago Green Stormwater Infrastructure Strategy.
Passed Budget: $774,039,573, up from $417,185,283 in FY2025. This increase largely comes from a $318.2M infusion of Community Development Block Grants Recovery Funds (CDBG-RF) to support long-term recovery of neighborhoods impacted by the 2023 and 2024 floods.
Accomplishments in 2025
- Executed a funding agreement with the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRD) that will provide $6M for Combined Sewer Wing Storage projects. Once completed, the projects will store 1.5M gallons of sewer water
- Completed roughly 5,000 lead service line replacements
- Secured $14M in State Revolving Fund (SRF) funding for lead service line replacements on the South Side
- Completed the first combined water main replacement/sewer main replacement/lead service line replacement pilot. Implemented on a wide scale, it could speed up LSLR and reduce construction disruption
Priorities in 2026:
- Complete 8,000 lead pipe replacements
- Begin designing a new West Side Trunk Tunnel sewer to the MWRD Tunnel and Reservoir Plan (TARP) to provide additional sewer relief to the West Side of Chicago
- Use the investment of Community Development Block Grant – Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funds to perform sewer grid cleanings, install new local sewer mains, resurface streets, and replace lead service lines
- Replace 12 miles of water mains and six miles of sewer mains, both with lead service line replacement
The policy connection: GLRI can improve the health and function of the watershed, while WRDA provides authorities for managing water resources and flood risks. Neither replaces local infrastructure investment, but coordinated use of these tools can help communities address multiple water challenges.
Illinois' 2nd District: Flooding, Restoration, and Environmental Justice in the Calumet Region
The Calumet region illustrates why Great Lakes restoration and flood resilience cannot be separated from environmental justice.
Southeast Chicago and neighboring south suburban communities contain an interconnected network of wetlands, rivers, industrial waterways, residential neighborhoods, and transportation infrastructure. Decades of industrial development, altered drainage patterns, and habitat loss have reshaped how water moves through the landscape. For communities already confronting industrial contamination and infrastructure challenges, severe storms create additional risks.
The September 2023 flooding in Calumet City demonstrated how vulnerable south suburban communities are to extreme rainfall. Meanwhile, the EPA’s ongoing work at the Lake Calumet Cluster Superfund site reflects the region’s history of industrial contamination and the importance of environmental cleanup.
These issues are distinct but interconnected. Flooding can disrupt neighborhoods and infrastructure, while polluted runoff and contaminated sites present additional water quality concerns.
Federal restoration investments already show how ecological improvements can help build a more resilient Calumet landscape.
At Powderhorn Lake, GLRI-supported work improved water-control infrastructure and restored key ecological functions. EPA’s GLRI Action Plan IV identifies benefits for surrounding communities that have historically experienced flooding.
At Big Marsh Park, GLRI funding has supported invasive species management and habitat restoration, helping improve the ecological condition of an important urban natural area.
These projects show how federal restoration funding can help communities recover natural assets in landscapes heavily affected by industrial development. However, they should not be treated as substitutes for direct flood protection. Restoring a wetland does not automatically eliminate neighborhood flooding; protection depends on location, hydrology, available storage, and storm intensity.
Instead, these projects offer opportunities to coordinate ecological restoration with local stormwater planning and targeted investments to reduce flood risk.
What WRDA 2026 Could Mean for the Calumet Region
The Senate’s WRDA 2026 proposal includes a provision directing the Army Corps to expedite work related to dredged material management at Calumet Harbor.
Although this provision addresses navigation and sediment management rather than neighborhood flood protection, it demonstrates the range of federal water resources decisions affecting the Calumet system.
For advocates, the bigger opportunity is to ensure future federal planning accounts for the region’s cumulative needs: flood risk, water quality, habitat restoration, contaminated lands, and the burdens borne by nearby communities.
The takeaway for IL-02: A healthier Calumet watershed requires both restoration and direct infrastructure investments. Federal programs should help communities improve ecological conditions without leaving residents to shoulder the costs of repeated flooding.
Illinois' 5th District: Connecting River Restoration with Urban Flood Protection
On Chicago’s North Side and in the northwest suburbs, the relationship between urban development, river restoration, and flood control is equally apparent. Many neighborhoods depend on combined sewer systems, while heavily modified river corridors reflect more than a century of urban development.
The July 2023 storm demonstrated how quickly intense rainfall can overwhelm regional storage systems. When combined sewer capacity is exceeded, untreated or partially treated wastewater mixes with stormwater and enters local waterways, raising water quality and public health concerns.
Addressing these challenges requires investments that operate at different points in the water system.
Albany Park: Managing Floodwaters Through Infrastructure
Albany Park offers an example of targeted flood-control investment. After repeated flooding along the North Branch of the Chicago River, the City of Chicago and MWRD built a stormwater diversion tunnel to redirect high river flows toward the North Shore Channel.
The approximately mile-long tunnel, completed in 2018, was supported through a combination of federal, state, and local investment. City officials reported that it could divert more than 1,000 cubic feet of water per second during high-flow conditions.
The project illustrates how engineered infrastructure can protect neighborhoods from river flooding.
River Park: Restoring Ecological Connectivity
Near the tunnel’s outlet, the Army Corps’ River Riparian restoration project offers a complementary example. Supported by GLRI funding, the Corps undertook work along the North Branch of the Chicago River, including dam removal, invasive species management, habitat improvements, and restoration of aquatic connectivity.
These improvements help address the ecological consequences of decades of river modification. Importantly, the project’s documented outcomes emphasize habitat restoration and river connectivity rather than quantified reductions in neighborhood flooding. Therefore, the restoration should not be described as having prevented a specific amount of flood damage without additional supporting analysis.
Taken together, the Albany Park tunnel and River Park restoration demonstrate how different investments can serve complementary purposes within the same waterway system: one focused on flood protection and the other on ecological recovery.
The Des Plaines River: A Regional Federal Priority
The Des Plaines River watershed presents another important flood risk management challenge for communities across northeastern Illinois.
The Senate’s WRDA 2026 proposal includes direction concerning an Army Corps report for the Upper Des Plaines River flood risk management effort. Such reports are important steps in the federal project development process because they provide the technical basis for potential congressional authorization and subsequent funding decisions. For IL-05, the larger lesson is that flood resilience requires planning beyond individual neighborhoods or municipal boundaries. Decisions about upstream storage, river conditions, and floodplain management can influence downstream communities.
The takeaway for IL-05: Federal water investments should recognize the relationship between engineered flood protection, regional watershed management, and restoration of urban rivers. Stronger coordination can help communities pursue these objectives together rather than competing for attention and resources.
The Federal Decisions Ahead: WRDA 2026 and the Future of GLRI
Congress is considering important decisions that will shape the future of Great Lakes restoration and federal water infrastructure investments.
Reauthorizing the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative
GLRI’s previous statutory authorization extended through FY2026 at up to $475 million annually. That authorization has expired, although expiration does not automatically terminate the program or prevent Congress from appropriating funds.
- The House and Senate have advanced different proposals to continue the initiative.
- The Senate-passed S. 528 would authorize $475 million annually for FY2027 through FY2030, while the House-passed H.R. 6422 would extend authorization through FY2031.
- The Senate WRDA proposal also contains GLRI reauthorization provisions.
Congress must resolve the differences among these legislative approaches to establish a renewed statutory framework.
Reauthorization is particularly important for multiyear restoration planning. Watershed projects often require extensive coordination, permitting, engineering, community engagement, and monitoring. A predictable federal framework helps local partners plan and sustain these efforts.
Advancing WRDA 2026
- On September 16, 2026, the House passed H.R. 9497, its WRDA legislation, by a vote of 415–9.
- The Senate has developed its own proposal, S. 4949, containing provisions related to flood risk management, Corps project delivery, ecosystem restoration, and federal water programs.
- The Senate proposal would also address certain small-project authorities and nonstructural flood risk management measures.
For Illinois, WRDA remains an important opportunity to advance regional water resources priorities, but congressional authorization is only one step. Projects must still move through applicable planning, environmental review, cost-sharing, and funding processes.
Authorization Does Not Equal Funding
The distinction between authorization and appropriations is essential.
An authorization establishes or continues legal authority for a federal program or project and may specify funding levels. An appropriation provides the budget authority needed to spend federal funds. For GLRI, Congress must both maintain the program’s statutory framework and provide annual funding. For WRDA-authorized Corps projects, Congress must similarly provide appropriations to support implementation.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provided GLRI with an additional $1 billion over FY2022–FY2026, equivalent to $200 million annually. That supplemental funding period has ended, increasing the importance of sustained annual appropriations.
As of October 2026, temporary federal funding extends through December 11, while final FY2027 appropriations decisions remain pending.
For Illinois, the central question is not simply whether Congress supports Great Lakes restoration or flood protection in principle. It is whether federal authorizations are matched by sufficient, predictable resources to turn those commitments into projects.
Four Priorities for Congress and Illinois Water Advocates
- Reauthorize GLRI and sustain strong annual appropriations
- Congress should establish a stable, multiyear authorization for GLRI and provide reliable annual funding to support watershed restoration, water quality improvements, and habitat protection
- Strengthen the connection between ecosystem restoration and flood risk management
- Congress and federal agencies should support opportunities to integrate nature-based approaches into watershed planning and eligible federal water projects
- Where appropriate, this includes wetland restoration, floodplain reconnection, streambank stabilization, and other measures that provide ecological benefits while complementing structural flood protection
- Prioritize communities experiencing disproportionate water burdens
- Federal investment decisions should account for repeated flooding, infrastructure disinvestment, environmental contamination, and limited local capacity to secure project funding
- Community participation should begin early in project development, particularly in neighborhoods where residents have historically been excluded from infrastructure planning. Congress should also consider how cost-sharing requirements and application capacity affect smaller municipalities and underserved communities
- Improve coordination across federal, state, and local water programs.
- EPA, the Army Corps, Illinois EPA, MWRD, municipalities, park districts, and watershed organizations all influence water outcomes. Better coordination among GLRI, Corps programs, the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, and local stormwater initiatives can help identify opportunities for complementary investments. This approach should include improved tracking of ecological, water quality, and flood risk outcomes so decision-makers can better understand the combined value of federal investments
Water this Means for Illinois Water Affiliates
For environmental organizations, watershed advocates, community groups, and local governments, the pending federal decisions create an opportunity to connect policy debates in Washington with the water challenges residents experience every day.
In IL-02, advocates can elevate the relationship between flooding, industrial legacies, environmental justice, and restoration in the Calumet region. In IL-05, advocates can demonstrate why river restoration, combined sewer management, and regional flood control require sustained federal partnerships. Across both districts, local organizations can help identify projects, document community impacts, and communicate where federal programs are delivering results or where additional investment is needed.
Affiliates can also help ensure community experiences inform federal decision-making, rather than letting funding debates focus exclusively on program totals or project authorizations.
Conclusion: Protecting the Great Lakes Means Protecting the Communities Connected to Them
Chicago’s water challenges do not begin and end at a sewer pipe, a riverbank, or a municipal boundary. Flooding, polluted runoff, degraded wetlands, and aging infrastructure are connected through the watersheds that sustain the region.
GLRI and WRDA offer different but complementary federal tools to address these challenges. One supports restoring the natural systems that sustain water quality and ecological health. The other authorizes federal water resources projects that can reduce flood risks, restore ecosystems, and support regional infrastructure needs.
Neither program can solve Chicago’s water challenges alone.
Together, and with sustained local investment, they can help build a more comprehensive approach to protecting communities and the Great Lakes.
As Congress considers WRDA 2026, GLRI reauthorization, and FY2027 appropriations, Illinois’ congressional delegation has an opportunity to advance a coordinated vision for water resilience; one that recognizes healthier watersheds, stronger infrastructure, and more equitable communities as mutually reinforcing priorities.
Additional Resources:
Key Terms within WRDA
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
|
Continuing Authorities Program |
Standing Corps authority for smaller flood-control and restoration projects, including small flood control (Section 205) and aquatic ecosystem restoration (Section 206) |
|
Section 1135 |
Lets the Corps modify existing projects to improve the environment |
|
Section 506 |
Corps authority for Great Lakes fishery and ecosystem restoration |
|
Section 219 |
Corps help for local water-related environmental infrastructure, such as water, wastewater, and stormwater projects |
|
Chief’s Report |
The Corps’ final recommendation on a project, used by Congress to consider authorization |
|
Categorical exclusion |
A streamlined path that skips a full environmental assessment for qualifying projects |
|
Nonstructural measures |
Elevating, flood-proofing, or buying out buildings instead of building walls or reservoirs |
|
Combined sewer |
A sewer carrying stormwater and wastewater together; it can overflow to rivers in heavy rain |
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan IV, FY2025–FY2029. Includes watershed restoration objectives, runoff reduction metrics, and Great Lakes restoration priorities
- U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, S. 4949, Water Resources Development Act of 2026. Proposed provisions concerning Corps authorities, water infrastructure programs, and Illinois projects
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan IV, FY2025–FY2029. Includes watershed restoration objectives, runoff reduction metrics, and Great Lakes restoration priorities
- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Continuing Authorities Program, Section 206 Fact Sheet. Describes aquatic ecosystem restoration authorities
- U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, S. 4949, Water Resources Development Act of 2026. Proposed provisions concerning Corps authorities, water infrastructure programs, and Illinois projects
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Lake Calumet Cluster Superfund Site: Update on Site Activities, June 2024
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan IV, FY2025–FY2029. Includes watershed restoration objectives, runoff reduction metrics, and Great Lakes restoration priorities
- U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, S. 4949, Water Resources Development Act of 2026. Proposed provisions concerning Corps authorities, water infrastructure programs, and Illinois projects
- City of Chicago, Mayor Emanuel Celebrates the Completion of the Albany Park Stormwater Diversion Tunnel, July 2018
- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Chicago District, River Riparian Project. Documents GLRI-supported habitat and aquatic connectivity restoration along the North Branch Chicago River
- U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, S. 4949, Water Resources Development Act of 2026. Proposed provisions concerning Corps authorities, water infrastructure programs, and Illinois projects
Congressional Research Service, Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). Overview of statutory authority, appropriations, and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funding
- Congress.gov, H.R. 6422, American Water Stewardship Act; U.S. Government Publishing Office, S. 528, Senate-Passed Text. GLRI reauthorization proposals
U.S. House of Representatives, Roll Call Vote 313, H.R. 9497, September 16, 2026
- Congressional Research Service, Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). Overview of statutory authority, appropriations, and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funding
- Congressional Research Service, Overview of Continuing Appropriations for FY2027. Temporary federal funding and FY2027 appropriations context
About the Authors
Cate Caldwell, Sr. Policy Manager, State-to-Federal
Cate Caldwell serves as Senior Policy Manager, State-to-Federal, where she leads federal policy strategy and works to align Illinois’ environmental priorities with congressional action. A former U.S. Senate policy staffer, Cate brings expertise in environmental policy, legislative affairs, and intergovernmental coordination. Her work translates federal policy into actionable priorities that strengthen environmental protections, advance equitable infrastructure investments, and address Illinois communities’ needs.
Lily Aaron, Federal Policy Fellow
Lily Aaron is IEC’s Federal Policy Fellow, working on clean water and Great Lakes advocacy in Illinois’ 2nd and 5th Congressional Districts. Her background in environmental science research, from stream health assessments to habitat restoration fieldwork, shapes how she connects federal water policy to what it actually means for Illinois communities.
IEC is committed to advancing smart, equitable water policies with the Great Lakes as our guiding focus. From defending Lake Michigan against invasive species and plastic pollution to ensuring safe, lead-free drinking water in every home, IEC works to safeguard the waters that define our state.