Laserfiche WebLink
<br />D. Evaluate other Federal programs to ensure these programs do not have a negative impact <br />on floodplains and are complementary to overall floodplain management objectives. <br /> <br />E. Develop national standards for the design and placement of infrastructure. <br />Infrastructure damages constitute a major portion of Public Assistance costs following <br />disasters. <br /> <br />F. The Federal Government should set an example by enforcing appropriate restrictions on <br />floodplain land it leases to private individuals. <br /> <br />G. FEMA should partner with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to support the National <br />Streamflow Information Program, which will improve flood forecasting, provide more <br />timely assessment of flood characteristics, and assist in the development of new tools for <br />improving flood inundation mapping and enhancing the flood information delivery <br />system. <br /> <br />3. Encourage and provide incentives for communities to develop master plans and hazard <br />mitigation plans. <br /> <br />A. Support and encourage local planning processes that reduce risk and protect and restore <br />floodplains. FEMA should accept local mapping and local plans for management <br />actions. FEMA and other Federal agencies should officially recognize these local plans. <br />This would provide a level of additional acceptance and credibility for local <br />implementation. <br /> <br />B. Link disaster relief to comprehensive mitigation planning. Larger shares of disaster <br />relief should be made available only to States, tribes, and local governments that have <br />comprehensive plans for multi-risk reduction and sound hazard management programs. <br /> <br />4. Develop incentives to encourage States and communities to foster sustainable development <br />and to fUcept responsibility for their land use decisions. <br /> <br />The Federal Government has assumed too much of the total responsibility for the flooding <br />problem. Federal policies should be adjusted to foster much greater sharing of responsibility <br />with State and local governments and individuals. Built-in subsidies and cross-subsidies in <br />the NFIP have sent the wrong economic signals, have failed to discourage high-risk <br />development, and have placed a financial burden on the Program. <br /> <br />Disaster assistance has come to be an expectation disconnected from either a landowner's <br />responsibility to avoid undue risks or governmental authority to use land use regulations to <br />prevent harm to the community and the environment. Unless bold, albeit unpopular, policy <br />decisions are implemented, there will be no incentives for States and communities to take <br />responsibility for their land use decisions and flood risks. <br /> <br />A. Disaster relief cost-share adjustments may be the most effective mechanism to <br />encourage communities to adopt hazard mitigation plans, foster sustainable <br /> <br />Floodplain Management Forum <br /> <br />7 <br />