The IMU’s ground floor doesn’t contain any mud, mold, or moisture from the flood. It also doesn’t contain anything that made it the popular hangout it once was. The devastating 2008 flood washed away all resemblance the IMU had to its former self. It is empty and barren. There are signs of cleaning and repair, but no signs of rebuilding.

Students don’t merely lack access to the IMU’s bottom floor. They’re also bereft of when they’ll have access to the IMU basement.

Officials need to change that, working expeditiously both on the ground floor’s restoration and in crafting a general reconstruction timetable.

The UI is preparing a flood-mitigation report for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, whose Hazard Mitigation Grant Program provides funding to prevent future flooding. David Grady, the director of University Life Centers, said the university will not start construction until FEMA approves the mitigation report. This wait is holding up reconstruction efforts and leaving a question mark where a completion date should be.

On Sept. 10, the UI sent an unofficial report to FEMA detailing the university’s mitigation efforts, FEMA spokeswoman Crystal Payton said. The report is only preliminary: Its goal is to ensure that the school is taking the correct reconstruction and mitigation steps. Payton said FEMA will evaluate the report and return it to the UI with recommendations. University officials will then send back an official report.

The money from Hazard Mitigation Grant Program would cover 15 percent of mitigation costs. The UI could begin construction on the IMU prior to receiving FEMA approval, but it would risk losing funding from the governmental agency if mitigation efforts don’t adhere to FEMA guidelines. Grady said the university will not continue any future construction or repair efforts until they receive such approval.

The UI already has some FEMA allocations lined up. After last year’s severe flooding, the federal agency approved millions of dollars to fund flood-relief efforts around the state. That money covers both flood mitigation and construction. FEMA certainly must have set guidelines for spending the money. The UI could structure a plan based on guidelines FEMA set when it granted funds to the state, as well as the mitigation report the school sent last week. The university could provide tentative dates for completion from this plan — which could motivate FEMA and the university to expedite the bureaucratic process.

Payton and UI officials have said it is possible, but not prudent, to start construction now without mitigation approval from FEMA. Grady said starting repairs without any mitigation might require numerous construction bids — which could cause problems in the future.

That shouldn’t stop school officials from crafting a general plan and timetable.

Payton and Grady raise valid points. Restoration of the IMU’s ground floor will be a lengthy, arduous, and complex process. The UI should make sure to minimize possible flood damage in the future. FEMA, like most other federal agencies, is a complex body. The university should take great care in dealing with it and make sure to take full advantage of its assistance.

But the planning process appears to have no end. Grady could not provide any time frame for the IMU’s completion, and the university’s bureaucratic process is cumbersome enough without having to deal with FEMA. There is a good chance students who were freshmen last year may never see a fully restored IMU. That is a great shame — the IMU was once a great student hub. Students could buy textbooks, write final papers, and grab bites to eat all in the same place.

The UI has a timeline for the Campus Recreation & Wellness Center now that construction is under way. An analogous timetable for the IMU would provide a good indication of when students will be able to return to the IMU’s ground floor.

They deserve no less.