Monthly Archives: May 2015

Texas Receives Presidential Disaster Declaration

Texas Receives Presidential Disaster Declaration

FEMA released the Presidential Disaster Declaration for Texas early this morning due to the severe weather, tornados, and flooding the state has experienced since May 4th.

Early this morning, the Federal Emergency Management Agency released a statement regarding the Presidential Disaster Declaration for the State of Texas (which includes Harris, Hays, and Van Zandt counties). As many may know the State has experienced severe storms, tornados, straight-line winds, and flooding since May 4th, and is still ongoing. The declaration makes grants available for temporary housing and home repairs, low-cost loans to cover uninsured property losses and other programs individuals and business owners can use to recover from the disaster’s impacts.

Individual Assistance (Households and Businesses)

Though damage assessments are ongoing (which may cause more counties to be added to the disaster declaration) the federal assistance programs have been made available for individuals in: (i) Harris, (ii) Hays, and (iii) Van Zandt counties. The declaration makes grants available for temporary housing and home repairs, low-cost loans to cover uninsured property losses and other programs individuals and business owners can use to recover from the disaster’s impacts. For specifics on what you may qualify for it is important to visit www.disasterassistance.gov or call 1-800621-FEMA (3362). The toll-free number will operate between 7AM and 9PM seven days a week until further notice. Below are summaries of the programs available, it is important to note though, you must apply to FEMA for the assistance, it is not an automatically applied for you.

Rental Assistance for Temporary Housing: Initial assistance may be provided for up to three months for homeowners and at least one month for renters.  Assistance may be extended if requested after the initial period based on a review of individual applicant requirements.

Home Repair/Fixture Replacement Grants: Grants for home repairs and replacement of essential household items not covered by insurance to make damaged dwellings safe, sanitary and functional.

Immediate Personal Property Replacement Grants: Grants to replace personal property and help meet medical, dental, funeral, transportation and other serious disaster-related needs not covered by insurance or other federal, state and charitable aid programs.

Unemployment Compensation: Unemployment payments up to 26 weeks for workers who temporarily lost jobs because of the disaster and who do not qualify for state benefits, such as self-employed individuals.

Low Interest Loans for Uninsured Losses: Low-interest loans to cover residential losses not fully compensated by insurance.  Loans available up to $200,000 for primary residence; $40,000 for personal property, including renter losses.  Loans available up to $2 million for business property losses not fully compensated by insurance.

Low Interest Small Business, Non-Profit & Agricultural Loans: Loans up to $2 million for small businesses, small agricultural cooperatives and most private, non-profit organizations of all sizes that have suffered disaster-related cash flow problems and need funds for working capital to recover from the disaster’s adverse economic impact.  This loan in combination with a property loss loan cannot exceed a total of $2 million.

Low Interest Agricultural Property Loss Loans: Loans up to $500,000 for farmers, ranchers and aquaculture operators to cover production and property losses, excluding primary residence.

Other Miscellaneous Assistance: Crisis counseling, income tax assistance for filing casualty losses, legal advice assistance, veteran’s benefits, and social security matters.

Public Assistance

Federal funding has also been made available for local governments and select non-profits (on a cost sharing basis) for emergency work and repair/replacement of facilities damaged by the severe weather and flooding in: (i) Cooke, (ii) Gaines, (iii) Grimes, (iv) Harris, (v) Navarro, and (vi) Van Zandt counties. Local governments and select non-profits can find out more about application procedures at the federal and state applicant briefings hosted by recovery officials in the near future. Local governments can apply for assistance in:

Cost Sharing of Expenses from Lifesaving Measures Taken: Payment of not less than 75 percent of the eligible costs for emergency protective measures, including direct federal assistance, taken to save lives and protect property and public health. Emergency protective measures assistance is available to state and eligible local governments on a cost-sharing basis.

Cost Sharing of Repair/Replacement of Public Infrastructure: Payment of not less than 75 percent of the eligible costs for repairing or replacing damaged public facilities, such as roads, bridges, utilities, buildings, schools, recreational areas and similar publicly owned property, as well as certain private non-profit organizations engaged in community service activities.

Cost Sharing of Hazard Mitigation Projects During Recovery: Payment of not more than 75 percent of the approved costs for hazard mitigation projects undertaken by state and local governments to prevent or reduce long-term risk to life and property from natural or technological disasters.

Read the Press Release on the Disaster Declaration here.

Visit FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Website here.

Visit a list of all assistance available for application on diasterassistance.gov here.

Minimizing Liability for Displaced Children Post-Disaster

Minimizing Liability for Displaced Children Post-Disaster

How can a local agency minimize their liability while caring for children displaced after a disaster? Possibly by shortening the timeframe the children are in their custody.

After a disaster or emergency, families can become separated from each other. This causes a serious issue when trying to protect children from potential neglect and abuse at the hands of one’s own agency. Though claims of abuse can end up unfounded, the mere threat of a lawsuit and the publicity that would follow it would be enough to scar any local government or public safety agency for generations. So how do you minimize the risk the agency is exposed to while trying to reunite families after a disaster? One of the easiest things to do is get the families reunited faster. Now, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCME) has developed a system to assist local agencies with doing just that.

Three systems available to state and local authorities:

1. The National Emergency Child Locator Center

The National Emergency Child Locator Center is activated during presidentially declared disasters. In the event of a natural disaster, the center will: (i) establish a toll-free hotline to receive reports, (ii) create a website to provide information about displaced children, (iii) deploy staff to gather information about displaced children, (iv) provide information to public about additional resources available, (v) partner with law enforcement agencies at various levels, and (vi) refer reports of displaced adults to the Attorney General’s designated authority.

Visit the Site here.

2. The National Emergency Family Registry and Locator System (NEFRLS)

The National Emergency Family Registry and Locator System was established to facilitate the reunification of families separated as a result of a presidentially-declared emergency or major disaster. NEFRLS is a web-based system enables authorities to provide a nationally accessible system that allows displaced adults to voluntarily register and share specific information on their post-disaster well-being or location with specified family members or friends. Registration is voluntary and can be done either online or via a toll-free phone number. No citizenship or immigration status questions are asked when registering.

Visit the site here.

3. The Unaccompanied Minors Registry

the Unaccompanied Minors Registry allows the public to report information related to children who have been separated form their parents as the result of disaster. This tool enables NCMEC to provide assistance to local law enforcement and assist in the reunification of displaced children with their parents or legal guardians. Reporting is done on the NCMEC’s secured (SSL) website and is encrypted.

Visit the site here.

 

Federal Assistance Granted for three Oklahoma Counties

Federal Assistance Granted for three Oklahoma Counties

FEMA has approved disaster assistance for 3 of the most severely hit counties in Oklahoma with more expected to come in the near future as damage assessments are completed. All 77 counties in Oklahoma remain under a state of emergency.

Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin announced yesterday that FEMA has approved the state’s request for disaster assistance for three of the most severely hit counties in the state. Currently, all 77 counties in Oklahoma are under a state of emergency. The approval makes assistance available to individuals and business owners impacted by the flooding, tornados, severe storms, and straight line winds that occurred in Cleveland, Grady and Oklahoma counties since May 5th, 2015. FEMA has approved federal assistance for: (i) housing repairs or temporary housing, (ii) US Small Business Administration low-interest loans for individuals and business to repair or replace damaged property, (iii) disaster unemployment assistance, and (iv) grants for other needs and expenses not met by other programs. Though these three counties are the first to receive assistance, others may soon receive similar types of assistance in the near future as the damage assessments from storms striking other parts of the state since May 10th are still in progress.

Part of the request process for assistance from the federal government is completion of a damage assessment. This assessment tells the federal government what conditions on the ground are and expected to manifest into in the near future. This may seem like a bureaucracy at its finest, but it is imperative to complete. Without an accurate damage different state and federal agencies who are willing to provide assistance, may not provide the right assistance at the right time. For example, if you need assistance removing debris, having a National Guard or Army Reserve Engineer Battalion mobilized to assist would be a lot better than the Red Cross showing up with Coffee and Blankets (though this is merely an example to show the difference in assistance and support, the Red Cross does much more than hand out Coffee and Blankets. The American Red Cross is actually chartered by the federal government to oversee sheltering during disasters).

– Will

Read the Oklahoma Governor’s statement here.

Read the Oklahoma Governor’s Amended Executive Order here.

Visit Disaster Assistance.gov here.

Read FEMA’s Press Release from May 26th, 2015 here.

Texas Governor Expands Disaster Declaration

Texas Governor Expands Disaster Declaration

With the continued onslaught of severe weather and rising lakes and streams in the state, the Texas Governor expands the state disaster declaration to 46 counties in the state.

Texas has been experiencing one of the wettest–and most turbulent ones as far as severe weather goes–months since the 1980’s. All the severe weather does come with consequences however. The biggest step in the process of getting any outside aid to an area (especially from the federal level) is a disaster declaration from the State.

State Disaster Declaration Effects:

The State of Texas is limited to providing only in-kind assistance from individual agencies to counties and municipalities encompassed by a disaster declaration. A state disaster declaration comes after the request of a county and municipal emergency managers (County Judge and Mayor respectively). A state disaster declaration does allow for: (i) additional liability protection to government agencies and special/volunteer emergency workers, (ii) implementation of economic stabilization measures (e.g. wage, rent and price controls), (iii) curfews, (iv) access control, (v) implementation of curfews, and (vi) suspension of select codes and ordinances. These measures are only implemented to support response and recovery from a disaster or emergency condition. (i.e. if curfew is not needed, it would not be used).

Federal Disaster Declaration Effects:

The Federal Government is able to provide both in-kind and financial assistance to counties and municipalities encompassed by a disaster declaration. A federal disaster declaration is made by the President of the United States after request by the governor of a state. Federal disaster assistance comes in two forms: (1) Individual/Household Assistance and (2) Public Assistance. Individual/Household Assistance comes in the form of uninsured: medical care and evacuation, emergency shelters, food and clothing, mortgage and rent assistance, job placement, property cleanup and counseling. Public Assistance comes in one of seven different varieties aimed at supplementing available resources and help prevent conditions from developing which a community would not be able to reasonably recover.

Read the Governor’s Declaration here.

The current list of counties is:

  • Archer
  • Bastrop
  • Blanco
  • Bosque
  • Bowie
  • Caldwell
  • Cass
  • Clay
  • Collin
  • Comal
  • Cooke
  • Denton
  • Dewitt
  • Eastland
  • Fannin
  • Gaines
  • Garza
  • Grayson
  • Grimes
  • Guadalupe
  • Harris
  • Harrison
  • Hays
  • Henderson
  • Hidalgo
  • Hill
  • Hood
  • Houston
  • Jasper
  • Johnson
  • Kendall
  • Montague
  • Navarro
  • Newton
  • Nueces
  • Parker
  • Red River
  • San Jacinto
  • Smith
  • Van Zandt
  • Walker
  • Wichita
  • Williamson
  • Wilson
  • Wise
  • Zavala

Legislation to ensure SBA loans can build storm shelters

H.R. 2397: Authorizes use of SBA loans to build storm shelters

The Tornado Family Safety Act of 2015 helps clarify that SBA disaster loans may be used by homeowners to construct safe rooms in their rebuilt homes.

Representative Tom Cole (Oklahoma District 4 which includes Moore, OK) introduced the “Tornado Family Safety Act of 2015 on May 18th. The bill was then referred to the House Small Business Committee. The idea behind the bill would be to clearly allow for Small Business Administration Disaster Loans to be used to build storm safe room shelters as homeowners rebuild homes devastated by severe weather. Currently safe rooms meeting FEMA and ICC (International Code Council) standards cost anywhere between $3,000 and $12,000 to install.

Though as of May 21st, 2015 the text of the bill is not available, it will be interesting to note if businesses will also be eligible for these funds. Locally, many severe weather incidents occur in the late afternoon-evening timeframes and people tend to be away from their homes at that time. If these funds are made available to businesses re-building after a storm strikes, it would undoubtedly be beneficial to business owners given the scene experienced several years ago in Joplin, Missouri. (See our post asking whether safe rooms are now the new standard of care here.)

Read the Full Article here.

See the bill’s status in congress here.

President Bans Some Military Equipment Sales to Police

President Bans Some Military Equipment Sales to Police

President Obama announced on May 18th that the federal government would cease the flow of certain types of equipment to police departments following the recommendations of a multi-agency working group on the subject.

President Obama announced on May 18th, 2015 that the federal government would cease the flow of certain types of equipment to police departments through the federal surplus programs. The announcement follows one of several recommendations made by a multi-agency federal working group tasked with reviewing what could have been done different or better following the riots in Ferguson, Missouri.

Specifically, the program would no longer allow for tracked armored vehicles, bayonets, grenade launchers, camouflage uniforms, and large-caliber weapons and ammunition to flow through these programs to police departments. The programs would still be allowed to still provide aircraft, wheeled tactical vehicles, mobile command centers, battering rams, and riot gear. This equipment would be provided to departments who meet national policing standards and agree to not transfer or sell the equipment unless they receive approval from the federal government.

Though they have not been fully written, other recommendations made by the working group will go into effect with the new fiscal year on October 1st. The thing agencies should be aware and ready to work with is that the programs will now require that agencies adopt “robust and specific written policies and protocols covering not just the use of the federal equipment, but their policing practices in general.”

Though many might think this is a sudden and new idea of limiting the flow of military surplus to police departments and other law enforcement agencies, many states have been looking at ways to control what type of equipment their law enforcement agencies would be allowed to obtain through the federal surplus programs. (Read our prior post about control measures the states are looking at here)

Emergency Managers and Law Enforcement Planners should be aware of these federal recommendations and state control measures as they are implemented. I estimate that we will start seeing these rules start going out in draft format later this summer ahead of the fiscal year. Most importantly though, it might be a wise decision to sit down with the agency’s legal counsel to lean forward and assess the potential impact these control measures will have on your agency’s plans, protocols, and overall operating procedures.

– Will

Read USA Today’s Full Article here.

Read our article on state’s actions to control surplus military equipment sales here.

Feature Blog: Interview with Mr. John Murphy Part 3 of 3

Week 3: “Pencil” and “Whip” Shouldn’t Describe Your Department’s Training

Finally, John brought up the issue of training documentation. Both John and I have experienced the overwhelming pressure within agencies to not only perform the mission but also do all the required training. Sometimes this leads people to “pencil-whip” their training paperwork in order to save time, money, and headaches. However, the opposite is most likely the case.

Just as important as having quality training though, the training needs to be documented properly so that there is some proof of what training was done if lawsuits are filed. John described a case where a firefighter’s family brought suit against the city for not enforcing the fire department’s fitness standards, and won. As sad as this situation is, hard lines have to be drawn sometimes and turning a blind eye to a situation or letting a standard lax may actually cause more harm than good.

John describes that the best solution is not really a new one. Training needs to be meaningful and documented. The first place lawyers are going to go if something happens is the department’s training records. If the department is consistently maintaining all applicable training hours and the department’s training manager documented this training in each employee’s training record, there are far fewer issues. However, frequently the case is that even if the training was done, it wasn’t documented or was a mere “check-the-box” training event that was done half-heartedly. Though it is hard work, maintaining meaningful and documented training will not only yield benefits in court, but will also ensure your department can serve the public they are charged with protecting to the best of their abilities.

Impact on Emergency Management

            Frequently Emergency Managers are responsible for planning exercises varying in different scopes and sizes. These are essential training events designed to test an agency’s ability to implement a plan, and the ability of the plan to be implemented. If exercises are done and not documented or documented but haphazardly done, it is essentially like they were never done if the agency is called into court over an issue post-disaster. However, if exercises are meaningfully planned, executed, and documented, there are far fewer issues when the lawyers come knocking.

Federal Judge Rules Federal Government Liable for Some Flooding From Katrina

Federal Judge Rules Federal Government Liable for Some Flooding From Katrina

Judge Braden of the US Court of Federal Claims ruled that the United States is liable for at least some flood damage during Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

Judge Susan G. Braden ruled that the United States is liable for at least some of the flood damage caused in during Hurricane Katrina on August 29, 2005 from the failure of the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet canal. The Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet–nicknamed MR-GO– was linked to flood damage in the Lower Ninth Ward in New Orleans and damage to the nearby St. Bernard Parish. However, Judge Braden’s decision set a mediation hearing for May 6, 2015 in an alternative measure to determine how much government would be liable for.

Judge Braden praised the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for being “open, transparent and helpful in educating the court to understand what happened” while simultaneously critical of the Department of Justice for “pursuing a litigation strategy of contesting each and every issue”.

Most importantly, this case is the first instance where the federal government was found liable for damage associated with flooding from Hurricane Katrina. Prior claims have been generally unsuccessful due to the government’s immunity for claims resulting from failed flood control projects.

The initial case (in 2006) was brought in the Federal District Court, for the Eastern District of Louisiana seated in New Orleans, and ruled that because MR-GO’s purpose was for navigation, rather than flood control, the damage was different. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the district court’s decision and the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari (to hear the case).

Judge Braden’s decision relied on Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States, allowing the Akransas Game & Fish Commission to recover under the takings clause since “recurrent flooding, even if [limited in] duration, are not categorically exempt from Takings Clause liability.” Ark. Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 511, 516 (2012).

Mr. Joseph Bruno, a New Orleans lawyer who lost the initial case before the District Court in New Orleans said that note next question is whether the lawsuit will be expanded into a class action lawsuit.

– Will

Read the New York Times Article here.

St. Bernard Parish Gov’t v. United States, 2015 U.S. Claims LEXIS 526 (Fed. Cl. May 1, 2015).

 

Texas House Advances Bill to Establish Regional Search and Rescue Teams

Texas House Advances Bill to Establish Regional Search and Rescue Teams

With only two weeks left, the Texas House Advances a bill establishing search and rescue response teams in each of the Texas disaster response regions.

With two weeks left in the legislative session, the Texas House of Representatives advanced a bill establishing regional search and rescue teams to the floor vote. The next phase is for the bill to be considered by Senate Committee hearings and a vote by the full senate before moving to the governor for action.

This bill represents one of the only disaster management related legislative actions to advance from committee this legislative cycle. HB 1970 (defining a new disaster victim lighted identification system), 2376 (relating to the creation of a disaster relief fund), and 4085 (relating to state disaster declarations are made) were either withdrawn from the schedule or left pending in committee.

The State of Texas currently operates six field response regions. The state expects for this bill to have no impact on local government fiscal requirements, while adding nine state employees to administer the program and provide training to local entities. The concept behind this program would be to synchronize training and coordination among individual volunteers and volunteer organizations instead of creating a new organization of full-time employees.

With an estimated initial investment in 2016 of $12.5 Million into starting the program (equipment, facilities, hiring, and initial training), it is estimated that approximately $1.6 million will be spent annually on upkeep.

– Will

Read the State Committee Report here.

 

Feature Blog: Interview with Mr. John Murphy Part 2

Part 2 of 3: Talk to the Lawyer Before Something Bad Happens

We all have really good ideas sometimes, which is great. Innovation and improvisation is the way things get done in Emergency Management. However, Emergency Managers tend to be a one-person show, having many more things to do than time to do it. The important thing though is to involve the lawyers early. If done right, they can help you craft a plan, agreement, or strategy that is nearly bullet proof should something happens.

John shared a situation in Washington that he observed, which was luckily caught in time. At one point, if a firefighter was deployed in support of another agency fighting Wildfires, a question arose “who is financially responsible if the firefighter gets hurt?” Luckily, the lawyer got together and decided that if anything happened to a firefighter deployed in support of another agency’s emergency, the freighter would be covered under Washington State’s Worker’s Compensation program.

 

Impact on Emergency Management

An easy example of when Emergency Managers should talk to the lawyers is in mutual aid agreements. When you boil it down, mutual aid agreements are essential a contract between two or more government entities. Because of this, it is an extremely good idea to let the attorneys in on the process early to help craft the most effective agreement possible. The key is to not look at involvement of lawyers as a roadblock, but a protection. John stated that by having adequate legal counsel, Emergency Managers will ensure that plans and agreements can be made nearly bullet proof. Involvement early also helps preserve relationships by addressing issues early in agreements instead of waiting until they blow up into litigation later on.