[StBernard] what I concluded today

[Westley Annis]

 Deborah, I read this, but much didn't provide your true conclusion to me.
It looked as thought you wanted to say something in this fact gathering
mission, but somehow, it appeared to have some sort of symbolic or hidden
meaning. Please, what is it that you feel you should say as conclusive to
what you've gathered from the meeting or head-butting with officials in
attendance? Did you feel ineptness? Lack of knowledge by those in charge?
Wishy-washy attitudes? Please be specific as to what you determined. 

Thanks...

Jer.

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

I attended the two hour FEMA meeting as your planning commissioner today.
Your parish president and several council people were there, as was the
Planning Director, the other at large planning commissioner, and  Mike
Hunnicutt, and several insurance company representatives to name a few I
recognized
 
This is a summary of what I concluded today-
 
FEMA must have been under pressure to produce something after so long and
the best they could do was eithe say to ignore the levees and advise us to
all be to El. 14 or say that life is no different than before 8/29/05 or
come up with something that require more height but not too much height that
would cause political upheaval and panic in the streets. This 3 feet above
highest adjacent existing grade is the latter. It is a one size fits all
proposal.
 
FEMA emphasized that this is only an advisory and each parish can adopt it
or not with various consequences if not adopting. The most serious being our
LRA has said that substantially damaged homes will not get LRA money at all
if they otherwised quailified if their parish doesn't adopt it.
 
FEMA also stressed that if a home is not "substantially damaged", then none
of this applies to them.  They gave the definition of substantially damaged
that I quoted from the FEMA website the other day.
 
After hearing Mike Hunicutt explain that everyone is welcome to come to the
Office of Community Development and sit down to discuss their individual
home situation, I realized that he is the designated person with the power,
authority and responsbility to sign off on who is "substantially damaged" or
not.  He encourages you to bring with you a slab elevation certificate if
you have one, and a pre Katrina appraisal if you have it, but it sounded
like he may be able to make his determination of your situation even if you
don't have these things. He will refer to the initial engrs' report done by
FEMA (the drive by one) unless you bring in your own engrs report to the
contrary.
 
Many of us pointed out to FEMA that this 3 foot above highest existing
adjacent grade could mean that a substantially damaged homeowner on St.
Bernard Hwy at El 8 has to raise up three feet making it El 11, but a
Bucaneer Villa North homeowner at El -2 raises up 3 feet and is at +1.  But
water seeks its own level so what was achieved? 
 
I argued for them to just pick an elevation they want for the parish that is
within the levees. I also argued about their definition of highest adjacent
existing grade of the ground before the house was built. What the heck is
that? I asked why not reference the top of the street curb or the centerline
of street which a 10 year old with a ruler and a tape measure can use to get
an idea of where their slab is today compared to that. Do you know where the
ground was on your lot before anyone built the house on it?
 
They said that the definition could be revised by the parish as part of
adopting the advisory-oh, so it's negotiable?  
 
Deborah keller