[StBernard] LRA

[Westley Annis]

David,
 
Jim's response touches on the answer pretty well.
 
Here is a brief answer to explain my commentary.
 
The LRA has handcuffed much of the money that has been spoken about for all
these months.  It uses a combination of Hazard Mitigation and CDBG money to
fund the housing program.  Keep in mind that this plan is HUD sponsored,
which means that the mission must include a focus on low to low moderate
income properties.  By its very nature, the obstacles that are included,
such as insurance benefit deductions, adopting a non-scientifically sound
flood elevation requirement, not allowing the local municipalities to
implement the redevelopment plans revealed by the LRA planners themselves,
poorly designed and proposed management of the valuation estimates formulas
and damage conclusions, and a lack of access to the money in an expedient
manner will all contribute to a botched plan.
 
While I recognize that this is a huge issue and that many people worked hard
on making it a reality- getting the money and getting the money to the
people who will contribute to redevelopment verses getting it to people who
will not are two very different scenarios.
 
What this program will eventually amount to (if nothing changes) is an
income based retroactive flood insurance program.  What a misuse of so much
money.  Keep this in mind- if the money had been just allocated to the local
municipalities so that disbursement could have been made to accomodate the
implementation of the redevelopment residents would have known very clearly
what to plan on.  The current implementation forces local municipalities to
have wishy washy concepts that have no funding mechanism to make them
reality.
 
As people attempt to access the plan, here is what many will find- the
insurance they received puts them out of eligibility to receive grant money
from the LRA or greatly reduces the amount that they are eligible for- this
is fine if a person was not expecting this money as part of their recovery,
but those waiting for something that is not coming is going to create a set
of new problems and obstacles to decisions.  With the LRA requiring the
adoption of the Advisory Base Flood Elevation (which we have argued against)
as a requirement for the receipt of grant money it forces people into one of
two scenarios- I will have my house rated under 50% so I am not required to
elevate which reduces the amount of grant money that one is eligible and in
many cases will put them below getting any money at all (example- a 130K
home damaged at 50% is 65K; right off the bat the assistance for that person
is 65K before insurance is deducted.  the problem is that to repair that
home is not the same econimics as before the storm so the dollars are not
one for one, which creates a bigger financial gap in the recovery---- the
other sceanario is that you have the house rated above the 50% level and
tear the house down- lets use the extreme the house is 130K prestorm and
100% damaged so the initial eligibility is 130K minus insurance which may
sound great, except that now the house has to be raised three feet- as Jim
pointed out the increased money for mitigation will not pay for the added
cost to raise the house (slab built homes especially) so the net gain is
very little if any at all.
 
The other question will be how the LRA decides what to do with the people
who have moved forward with their recovery and repaired their homes- it is
anticipated that the formula will include how to identify the damage and
value based on areas so those people should still apply.
 
The really frustrating situation with this is that at the outset, this
concept had a chance to really make a difference.  The current reality is
that many of the wonderful ideas that have come out of the discussion of
redeveloping our community are secondary issues to the housing redevelopment
and will likely struggle to become realities until we have answered our
housing issue first.  At this point, where the LRA plan fails St. Bernard is
that is almost certainly assures the same design and layout as prior to the
storm but with fewer people and potentially a housing recession or depressed
market that undermines the economic and safety redevlopment of the parish.
 
All is not lost though in that we continue to explore opportunities to
redevelop areas through the property owner association model.  What will be
needed is for the property owners to band together and self impose quality
of life standards that will save neighborhoods and subdivisions from blight
and sub-standard recovery.  The government can support this effort with
enforcement activity.  More about this later.
 
Everyone should register with the Road Home program and make them determine
your eligibility.  If we can convince any changes to the program, you do not
want to be left out.
 
Hope this helps a little.
 
Good luck and God Bless,
Craig