Sable Minded: Pallone's legislation introduced

Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., has introduced legislation in Washington, D.C. that would, if adopted, stop FEMA from issuing new flood maps in the Bayshore (or anywhere else for that matter). Rep. Pallone's bill places a temporary moratorium on the federal agency issuing the new flood maps, until the protocol being used by FEMA is revisited.

This bill was in response to a situation during recent months in the Bayshore, where FEMA has been discounting decades of work by the Army Corps of Engineers where it involves flood remediation. Many lawmakers on both sides of the aisle believe the methodology used by FEMA is deeply flawed.

FEMA officials have already gone on the record about how a petition that was circulated in recent months by Assemblywoman Amy Handlin, R-Monmouth/Middlesex, is not going to change any decisions by the agency. That leaves Rep. Pallone's legislation as the Bayshore's last best hope for some common sense.

Click on the headline to go to Melissa Gaffney's Sable Minded.

Committee action is symptom of a larger problem

In Middletown last night, the governing body adopted a resolution supporting Rep. Frank Pallone's legislation in Washington D.C. to place a moratorium on FEMA issuing new flood maps. The resolution had to contain the name of 13th District Assemblywoman Amy Handlin, though, or it would not have passed. It had to acknowledge her petition drive.

Assemblywoman Handlin turned the whole FEMA flood map issue into a partisan matter by coming out of the gate a few months ago swinging for Pallone in her early community meetings, obstensibly organized to address the flood maps. However, nearly from the beginning of this controversy, Rep. Pallone crafted a bill to stop the issuance of the new flood maps, giving some time for the agency's methodology to be addressed before finalization.

Perhaps trying to eye her next office, Mrs. Handlin has been preoccupied with the politics of it all. Far from endorsing Mr. Pallone's bill, she just doesn't address it. Instead, she gathers signatures on a petition that asks FEMA not to issue the maps (a delay -- same thing Pallone is trying to do) and for action from Pallone (which he has already done).

FEMA's representatives have made it clear they aren't going to change a darn thing about what they are doing as a consequence of Mrs. Handlin's petition. However, her energies could have been useful in informing area residents about Pallone's bill. But that would be too bipartisan for an office holder that places party above common sense or effective service. One of the least effective legislators in Trenton, perhaps a less egocentric view of government service might assist in getting something accomplished in office (other than PR campaigns for strictly public digestion without any other effect).

Mr. Pallone's bill will, if adopted, give the Bayshore another shot at getting these maps amended. But FEMA said it will do nothing at all as a consequence of the petition because FEMA is governed by Congress, and so the bill is the only thing that will work.

In Middletown, in line with the party above common sense war cry, the Republican majority on the committee acted as if they had never heard of Pallone's bill, or his efforts in Washington D.C. aimed to getting this important measure approved. Rather, they were cognizant of the Handlin petition, which accomplishes nothing and makes a lot of noise while doing it.

If Middletown's Republican majority cannot summon enough common sense to understand the ability of this bill to assist this area directly, nor have the wherewithall to work cooperatively with other office holders, even if they are of another party, then they should not hold office. Last night, it was made clear the Republican majority on the committee were not even aware of the actions of their congressman to remediate this matter, and at that point this ignorance surrounding party nonsense has gone too far.

This bill needs to be supported by this area. It needs to be adopted in Congress. And, Middletown needs a new majority.

FEMA flood map issue should not be about town politics

Commentary...

The FEMA flood map crisis in the Bayshore is a serious thing, which requires a bipartisan effort to help area residents avoid paying unnecessary costs for flood insurance.

By mid-June, FEMA will announce the new flood maps for the Bayshore, and the moratorium that Rep. Frank Pallone has introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives is the only thing that can stop it. His legislation would, if approved, mandate that the new flood maps would not go into effect yet.

Frankly, the Middletown Township Committee may have missed the boat in supporting essential federal legislation that could assist every single taxpayer in the impacted areas of Middletown. The committee failed to adopt a resolution doing so at its May 19 meeting.

I suggest that the committee should weigh in on this vital issue for the area to not only Rep. Pallone, but also New Jersey’s two U.S. senators, Frank Lautenberg and Bob Menendez. Such a resolution would do a great deal more good than simply posturing and grumbling about the unfairness of it all. FEMA has already made it abundantly clear it will not, in word and deed, change its mind because of any amount of petitioning. Mr. Pallone’s bill is the only game in town for this area and its residents, in a practical sense.

Every other Bayshore town in the areas impacted by the flood maps have banded together to support this legislation for the singular reason of bringing relief to residents. And then…there’s Middletown.

Committeemen Sean Byrnes and Patrick Short moved to adopt the resolution, while Mayor Gerard Scharfenberger moved to table it until the next meeting. Committeeman Thomas Wilkens seconded the mayor’s motion. Just how much time do these folks believe there is until mid-June. This is a matter of weeks.

While politics is good theater in Northern Monmouth, the notion of playing politics at the expense of the township’s residents is ridiculous. It is my opinion that this committee simply does not want to adopt a resolution that supports a bill by Rep. Pallone because he is not a Republican.

The petition drive by Assemblywoman Amy Handlin has sought to create an environment for change, though the reality is that FEMA has already stated it will not do anything about this process at all, short of a congressional order. Sen. Joe Kyrillos’s State Senate resolution amounts to the same thing: Registering disapproval without any practical work. The fact is that the only actual piece of legislation that could assist in this matter is the one currently proposed by Rep. Pallone, and that is because his measure would cease the issuance of new maps on an agency-wide basis. Accordingly, this would give the Bayshore enough time to potentially change the ruling by that agency.

I think it is clear that if this committee majority is unable to get past partisan politics, it has no right running this municipality anymore. Should these FEMA maps be issued without the Middletown Committee lending its voice to the Bayshore’s in defense of residents then the committee majority invites criticism of its motivations and actions, or lack thereof.

While political parties are all well and good, how the representatives from these parties conduct themselves in office is far more important than how candidates part their hair or what lapel pins they wear. This is a simple matter actually, which involves nothing more than doing what is right and what the Middletown Committee was elected to do in the first place.

Menendez, Lautenberg should support Bayshore measure

The FEMA flood map crisis is a serious one. The only way, right now, for FEMA to get the message about the significance for this to the Bayshore is for action on Rep. Frank Pallone's legislation, which would place a moratorium on FEMA issuing new maps. FEMA's answer to 'could you please delay this action' is posted below.

I do suggest that calling the offices for U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez, at 202-224-4744, and U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, at 202-224-3224, is the best way to drum up support for this issue in Washington, D.C., where it is going to count.

FEMA is not changing its position by pointing out that their position may be flawed, asking them to stop. It's been tried and it didn't work. This state has two U.S. senators, and hopefully they will support this measure by Mr. Pallone, and help the Bayshore avert a problem that it will have to lilve with for many years to come.

This is the moment when Mr. Menendez and Mr. Lautenberg are needed in the Bayshore. I certainly do hope that they take this area's side in this issue.

FEMA's response to Rep. Pallone about new flood maps

This is a long post. It is the response from FEMA to Rep. Pallone about the FEMA flood map crisis in the Bayshore. This is a primary source of information in this entire issue, so I believe it is worth the room for those who want to see it.

--The Management

------------------------------------------------------------------

May 1, 2008

The Honorable Frank Pallone, Jr.
U.S. House of Representatives
6th District, New Jersey
237 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-3006

Dear Representative Pallone:

Through this letter, I hope to answer the specific questions you raised regarding what we see as confusion that exists over the community’s new Flood Risk Maps in the Bayshore section of your District. These questions were discussed in a conference call with your staff on April 18, 2008.

FEMA joins hands with local communities and the state to update these maps. This teamwork uses state-of-the-art technology to produce maps of a far greater degree of accuracy so that residents can see and understand the risk they may face and how they and communities can take individual or joint action to protect themselves.

What formulas were used to calculate the expanded flood zones?

The determination to expand the flood zones was not based on formulas. Rather, it was based on several key facts: 1) FEMA’s determination that the Keansburg Beach and Dune System (KBDS) does not provide citizens’ protection from a flood that has a one percent chance of occurring in any given year; 2) detailed hydrologic and hydraulic studies and; 3) more accurate topographic information.

The Beach Erosion and Hurricane Protection System is not a levee along the shoreline of Raritan Bay. This System was designed to reduce damage from coastal storms, but was designed and constructed prior to the formation of the National Flood Insurance Program. This means that the System does not meet the standards developed since that time.

What has changed in terms of the topography of the area to create such a large increase of the flood zone?

It is not a case of one factor alone increasing the risk. As explained above, several key facts were considered.

Although some small changes in topography have occurred in Monmouth County, these changes were not the primary cause for changes in the flood zone. The primary change in flood risk determination resulted from the above re-evaluation of the Beach Erosion and Hurricane Protection System.

In addition, methods for obtaining and incorporating more modern topographic information have been developed. These modern methods allow much better determination of flood risk, especially in a particularly flat area such as Monmouth County.

Would the requirements for the flood zones change if there were infrastructure upgrades to the dune system?

No; the issue here is that the dune system was identified on the 1983 map as providing protection as a levee. In 1986, the regulatory definition of an Accredited Levee changed (in the Code of Federal Regulations 44, #65.10 and 11), stating that dune systems do not provide protection from a flood with a one percent chance of occurring in any given year.

While it is always possible to upgrade the dune system, it would likely be cost-prohibitive. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) are currently discussing a feasibility study concerning the dune system’s upgrade.

Are there any provisions in current law that help property owners pay for flood insurance?

No. However, there are actions that individuals can take to protect themselves from risk and save money. Likewise, communities are positioned to undertake efforts to protect residents.

I should point out first that flood insurance wasn’t always available, which is why Congress stepped in to create the National Flood Insurance Program. The NFIP is a voluntary program based on a mutual agreement between local communities and the federal government. In exchange for adopting and enforcing a floodplain management ordinance, communities are eligible to receive Federally-backed flood insurance for property owners.

“Grandfathering”

Holders of flood insurance policies who have maintained continuous coverage, or who have built-in compliance with the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) are able, under “grandfather rules,” to buy flood insurance at lower rates before a new map takes effect.

“Community Rating System”

Recognizing that the adoption of new flood maps is the responsibility of the community, FEMA encourages communities to participate in the Community Rating System (CRS). Through voluntary community education and flood mitigation activities, community-wide discounts on flood insurance may be earned – from five to 45 percent. When a community is approved to participate in the CRS, property owners receive at least a five percent reduction in flood insurance rates. Details on CRS can be found online at: http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip/crs.shtm).

“Community Mitigation Plans”

Local jurisdictions play a central role also in the development of mitigation plans that protect residents. Communities that adopt FEMA-approved mitigation plans become eligible for FEMA grants. These include grant programs for Hazard Mitigation, Pre-Disaster Mitigation, Flood Mitigation, and others, in which FEMA pays a portion of the cost.

“Other Mitigation Efforts”

New or upgraded structures may be constructed to exceed minimum community flood plain management standards. For example, a $150,000 house elevated two feet above the anticipated depth of the flood water will experience a 40 – 50 percent savings in premiums over the period of a 30-year mortgage.

Additional successful flood mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, voluntary property acquisition (in which the state and communities may offer homeowners who agree to participate a buyout at fair market value before a disaster struck), flood-proofing non residential structures, and storm-water management systems.

Outreach

There will be a Community Risk Open House in Monmouth County later in May. This meeting will be open to residents of Keansburg, Hazlet, Middletown, and Union City and will allow those communities to see the new preliminary maps. We will ask your help in getting out the word to interested parties.

Residents will be able, as well, to ask questions of local, state, federal officials, and map contractors about the maps, flood insurance, building permits, and the like. We will keep you apprised of the date of this meeting and others that may be held.

I have attached two documents for your use in further explaining the complex issues involved here; one attachment is a quote from a local mayor in Montana who faced a similar situation as we find in Monmouth County, and the other is a more detailed response to the questions you posed to my staff earlier in April. I hope you find these items useful in responding to your constituents’ inquiries.

Once again, the focal points of FEMA’s and New Jersey’s work on Flood Risk Maps are local communities. The aim is to be sure that residents and communities both are aware of flood risks and of the steps available to them to protect themselves while saving money.

Mr. Bill Douglass of our External Affairs team will be contacting members of your staff to ensure we have answered your questions satisfactorily.

I hope this letter answers the questions contained in your April 9, 2008 letter. If you have further questions, or would like additional information, please don’t hesitate to contact me or Kristina Simpson, Director of External Affairs, at (212) 680-8563 or online at kristina.simpson@dhs.gov.


Sincerely,




Stephen Kempf, Jr.

Attachments – as
Attachment 1 –

Mayor Joe Whalen of Miles City, Montana

Mayor Joe Whalen wrote a timely guest editorial in The Miles City Star (Montana) April 25, 2008. He notes that the US Army Corps of Engineers recommended that FEMA include 3,100 existing structures in the Special Flood Hazard Area [SFHA], reminiscent of Monmouth County’s and many other U.S. cities’ experience.

He said, “We expect FEMA to act upon the recommendation, endorse a new Flood Insurance Rate Map, present it to the community next fall, conduct a lawful public hearing, and then formally adopt it.” He noted that the city’s requirements to stay in the NFIP, would include “higher flood insurance premiums for most property owners.”

He then asks, “What would be so horrible about slipping out of compliance with the NFIP? The short answer,” he says, “is that no federal financial assistance would be available to anyone within the community for recovery should a flood event occur…no loans may be guaranteed by the Federal government or approved by Federally-insured lenders for the construction or remodeling of any new structures within the SHFA.

“That constraint,” he continues, “would effectively depress property values, end new home construction and restrict home improvement in Miles City. It would also deeply depress our general business climate at a time when our local economy wants to expand.”

Mayor Whalen goes on to say that fighting the new map would be “expensive, time-consuming, and ultimately, unsuccessful.

“Or,” he concludes, “we can openly acknowledge that our entire community faces a shared risk. We can become informed and explore the range of exposures and options inherent in that risk. And we can wisely choose to develop a course that expands our options inherent in that risk.”


Attachment 2 – Detailed Responses to Questions

This attachment is intended to build on the direct answers provided in the basic letter, and to offer additional information for your office to share with the all the residents of these communities to help manage their risk from natural hazards.

You raised questions in your correspondence that we would like to address. To respond to your question regarding formulas used to calculate expanded flood zones: Formulas were not the basis for the increase of the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) in the area previously shown as protected by the KBDS. The basis for this increase was FEMA’s determination that the KBDS is not a levee.

As such, this system does not provide protection from the one percent annual chance flood (see enclosed regulations 44 CFR §65.10 for this determination). It is likely, however, that the KBDS may benefit landward properties and offer protection against flood events of a lesser magnitude, and further lessen the impacts of wave erosion.

In response to your second question regarding changes in topography in Monmouth County: The current effective maps for the county were developed from the late 1970s to the mid 1980s. There have been no significant changes in topography of this geographic area since that time. However, noteworthy advancements in the ability to accurately measure and obtain topography have been made since that time and were incorporated into these map update products. Most of the Monmouth County flood risk mapping update effort used existing hydrologic and hydraulic data and was blended with more accurate topographic information. In a particularly flat geographical area such as Monmouth County, small changes in flood elevation are more far reaching than in areas of greater topographic relief.

Regarding the condition of the dune system: What is at issue is that the dune system was identified erroneously on the 1982 (current) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and shown as providing protection as a levee. Our recent determination had nothing to do with the “maintenance” condition of this system. More to the point, our flood risk mapping effort at that time (1982) was inadequately advised as to how to assess and reflect flood risk as it related to these particular conditions on the ground. In 1986, FEMA published 44 CFR §65.10 which established criteria for mapping areas protected by levee systems. Accordingly, as mentioned above, the KBDS does not satisfy these criteria, as it never did. The area behind this system currently reflected on the preliminary DFIRM as flood prone has always been in harm’s way and subject to flooding from the 1% annual chance flood.

You also ask if requirements for flood zones would change if there were infrastructure upgrades to the area in question. While it is always possible to upgrade a system to meet regulatory standards. The KBDS would require significant investment which might outweigh insurance premium costs for local property holders. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) are, as mentioned earlier, currently discussing a feasibility study as to the removal of this area from the SFHA.

* * *

Cocuzza is trying to drum up support for Pallone's legislation

The FEMA moratorium legislation being sponsored by Rep. Frank Pallone, D-NJ, needs support in Washington, D.C. and at home. The FEMA maps constitute a real danger to homeowners where it involves unnecessarily paying for flood insurance, in some cases, or paying far too much in flood insurance, in other cases.

The legislation being proposed by Rep. Pallone is absolutely necessary for the Bayshore. Letting FEMA know that this area will not put up with being arbitrarily picked out for this unnecessary form of federal abuse is important. I think calling U.S. senators Bob Menendez (202-224-4744) and Frank Lautenber (202-224-3224) and making it clear this area supports Rep. Pallone's bill and efforts is also important.

The reason that elected officials are supported politically, in the first place, is for them to address issues like this FEMA thing. No public official, regardless of party, that is not a part of the solution for this issue, in my opinion, deserves public support come election time in the Bayshore.

I know there is an effort under way, starting with Union Beach Councilman Charlie Cocuzza, to get Bayshore communities to send resolutions supporting Rep. Pallone's measure to our U.S. senators and various other agencies.

I give Councilman Cocuzza a lot of credit for working in a bipartisan manner to try and beat the clock in the FEMA issue. The Bayshore is a highly political place. However, when it floods it will get wet in Republican households just like it will Democratic ones. This is a time to be focused on getting something done, and Councilman Cocuzza is doing just that.

To go to Sen. Menendez's Web site, click on the headline.

Pallone addresses FEMA flood map controversy

CONGRESSMAN FRANK PALLONE, JR.
Sixth District of New Jersey

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
CONTACT: Andrew Souvall

April 25, 2008
(202) 225-4671

PALLONE WILL INTRODUCE LEGISLATION
TO PUT MORATORIUM ON FEMA FLOOD PLAN

Long Branch, NJ --- U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) today announced plans to introduce legislation as early as next week that would place a moratorium on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) plans to expand flood zones. The New Jersey congressman is also calling on FEMA, as an agency, to implement the moratorium on its own for the Bayshore area.

Pallone voiced concern over a new Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) that would expand the flood zone maps to more than 4,300 more homes in the Bayshore area of our district. The proposed plan has created a great deal of confusion in Hazlet, Keansburg, Middletown and Union Beach, and Pallone said, to date, FEMA has not been particularly helpful in addressing the residents' concerns.

Under Pallone's legislation, the national moratorium would remain in place until FEMA has developed an extensive public notification plan so that all affected communities are individually briefed and affected residents have the opportunity to investigate whether their homes were placed in the flood zones appropriately.

"FEMA's expanded flood maps are causing confusion and frustration in the Bayshore area of my district," Pallone said. "I would imagine that these new maps are causing similar feelings nationwide. At a time when families are struggling to make ends meet during a national recession, Congress must institute a moratorium on these expanded flood maps until FEMA has properly addressed serious questions that are rightfully being asked by affected homeowners."

The New Jersey congressman said a moratorium is needed in light of several questions that he has asked FEMA that have gone unanswered. In an April 9th letter to FEMA Regional II Director Steve Kempf, Pallone asked the following questions. What formulas were used to calculate the expanded flood zones? What has changed in terms of the topography of the area to create such a large increase of the flood zone? Would the requirements for the flood zones change if there were infrastructure upgrades to the area in question? And, are there any provisions in current law that help property owners pay for flood insurance?

"The proposed maps will negatively affect thousands of my constituents who have not been properly briefed on many of the issues that I raised in my letter earlier this month," Pallone continued. "FEMA needs to develop a better plan for reaching out to the public so that all affected residents have the opportunity to have their questions and concerns addressed."

Pallone also plans to bring together the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to discuss ways to remove the area in question from the new flood zone.

###

GANGS LEGISLATION PASSES OUT OF COMMITTEE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 14, 2007

CONTACTS:Afshin Mohamadi (Menendez) 202-224-4744
Heather Lasher Todd (Pallone) 202-225-4671

GANGS LEGISLATION PASSES OUT OF COMMITTEE

Bill includes provisions authored by New Jersey legislators

WASHINGTON – The Senate Judiciary Committee today voted on and passed gang legislation introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), which is closely tied to the Fighting Gangs and Empowering Youth Act of 2007(http://menendez.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=271326) introduced by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and co-sponsored by Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ). The legislation also included two specific provisions from the New Jersey legislators’ bill that would provide demonstration grants for innovative approaches to gang prevention and increase funds for mentoring programs for youth involved in the juvenile justice system.

“I am proud that Sen. Feinstein included provisions from our bill in her own, and grateful that the Judiciary Committee has shown a commitment to fighting gang activity,” said Menendez. “Gangs are ravaging our communities, and a comprehensive, national approach to combating this problem is long overdue. We must focus on prevention, empowerment and enforcement in order to stop the scourge of violence in our towns and cities.”

"I believe that overcoming the gang crisis takes more than just law enforcement, it takes an entire community," Pallone said. "That is why I applaud Senator Menendez's work to ensure that key provisions of our Fighting Gangs and Empowering Youth bill were included in Senator Feinstein's comprehensive gang legislation. These are encouraging developments, which will only help me press for action in the House."

"Gang violence finds its way into our schools, our neighborhoods and even our homes and we're working to stop it on the street, where it happens most," Lautenberg said. "Our bill would help communities work with at-risk youth to show them the possibilities of a productive life out of gangs and off the streets.

Law enforcement officials recently reported that gang activity in New Jersey is increasing and becoming more sophisticated and aggressive in recruiting and preying on young people in all communities. According to a survey by the State Police, the number of gang members has nearly doubled to slightly more than 17,000 in 2005, up from about 10,000 in 2000.

Senators Menendez and Lautenberg are both co-sponsors of Sen. Feinstein’s legislation. For further details on the similarities between the two bills, visit: http://menendez.senate.gov/pdf/MenendezFeinsteinBillProvisions.doc

# # #