By Peter DeFazio
In their recent opinion piece ("A common sense approach to reforming development in Oregon flood plains," July 19), Bob Sallinger, Mike Houck, and Travis Williams inaccurately described my opposition to recent changes to the National Flood Insurance Program, or NFIP. These new, restrictive regulations could severely impact or prohibit economic development across the state of Oregon due to purported impacts on threatened species, and I want to take the opportunity to correct the record and explain why every member of Oregon's congressional delegation, Gov. Kate Brown, Oregon counties and a number of Oregon cities have expressed their serious concerns and opposition.
Congress created the flood insurance program to reduce future flood damage to structures and provide protection for property owners against potential losses. Participation in the program is voluntary and based on an agreement by a community to adopt maps identifying flood-prone areas, and flood plain regulations. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has found no evidence to show that the flood plain insurance program directly or indirectly causes flood plain development.
The flood insurance program is not "taxpayer-subsidized." Flood insurance policy holders pay premiums to cover loss to their homes should flood damage occur. Is the program perfect? Absolutely not. That's why I voted for reforms in 2012 that restricted construction in high-hazard areas that have experienced severe, repetitive losses due to flooding. Unfortunately, Congress overturned those reforms in 2014, and I was one of only five Democrats who voted against the rollback.
The program's new regulations go beyond preventing new construction in pristine, irreplaceable and undeveloped areas to protect endangered species habitat. They prohibit improvements in already developed areas.
According to the city of Springfield, the Glenwood redevelopment project would have to be stopped. It includes an area currently being used as a solid waste disposal system -- hardly a pristine, untouched habitat for endangered species.
According to the city of Coos Bay, redevelopment of the downtown area would be prohibited to protect a salmon habitat that doesn't exist. This community has suffered for decades with chronic unemployment. How can it create living-wage jobs and economic growth if the downtown must remain frozen in time?
Since portions of downtown Portland are currently in the 100-year flood plain, it's possible that development downtown and Oregon Health & Science University's lower campus will be negatively impacted by these new regulations.
In their opinion piece, Sallinger, Houck and Williams have significantly understated the impact of the regulations being forced on Oregon communities.
FEMA has stated it will not send the 251 Oregon affected communities guidelines to help them comply with the new federal regulations until April 2017 and that new flood plain maps won't be available until several years later. Communities, however, will need to adopt city development ordinances based on the new federal regulations no later than April 2018. In the meantime, FEMA advised all communities participating in the flood insurance program to "voluntarily impose a temporary moratorium on all flood plain development."
A moratorium on all flood plain development is not a workable solution for Oregon's 251 affected communities. Even FEMA has objected to the program's changes, arguing that they are being forced to use the flood insurance program to regulate land use, which is beyond its legal authority related to flood plain management.
The changes to the national insurance program are neither a necessary nor common sense approach toward protecting critical habitat and riparian cover. FEMA must work closely with Oregon's communities and state partners to establish rules that are not overly burdensome, that are scientifically supported, and that don't exceed its legal authority.
We can protect endangered species and their habitat without dictating unworkable solutions for Oregon communities.
*
Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Eugene, is the ranking member of the congressional House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.