Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Ed Thomas
Ed Thomas
Good
Day!
I
appear
today
represen-ng:
The Natural Hazard Mi-ga-on Associa-on This is not and cannot be legal advice This is a statement of general principles of ethics, law and policy
Key
Themes
We
Need
To
Think
Broadly
To
Solve
Our
Serious
Problems
We
Must
Stop
Making
Things
Worse
Right
Now
We
Have
A
System
Which
Rewards
Dangerous
Behavior
We
Need
To
Remove
Bad
Incen-ves,
Reward
Good
In
the
Law-especially
criminal
law-
AQorneys
oRen
oRen
Mother Nature
interna-onally
recognized
Natural
Hazards
Center,
headquartered
in
Colorado,
stated
the
facts:
Floods
are
Acts
of
Nature;
But
Flood
Losses
Are
Largely
Acts
of
Man
of this Decade:
We
Need
Safe
Housing
for
Employees
to
Work
at
are increasing
challenges
detailed study on the cost of oodproong and eleva-on That study supports the idea that eleva-on and oodproong costs add very small sums and have a signicant societal payback The Mul-hazard Mi-ga-on Council, a group which includes private industry representa-ves, reports that hazard mi-ga-on has a proven 4-1 payback 11
Two Major Reasons Cited: Fear of the Taking Issue Economic Pressure
13
Replacement of Something Yet Dierent Person or Group Uses That Same Something, We ORen Have Problems Disaster Assistance Is An Classic Example of Externality Who Pays For Disaster Assistance? Who Benets? 15
18
18
Liability
19
19
20
20
21
Reason #2 Why Safer Standards Are Not Implemented: Concerns About A Taking
22
22
Taking
Lawsuit
Results:
Regula-ons
clearly
based
on
Hazard
Preven-on
and
fairly
applied
to
all:
successfully
held
to
be
a
Taking
almost
none!
Many,
many
cases
where
communi-es
and
landowners
held
liable
for
harming
others
23
23
to a Third Party
24
25
25
26
26
27
Current approaches deal primarily with how to build in a floodplain vs. how to minimize future damages 28
28
Management?
ASFPM
denes
it
as
an
Approach
that
ensures
the
ac/on
of
any
property
owner,
public
or
private,
does
not
adversely
impact
the
property
and
rights
of
others
29
29
NAI broadens property rights by protecting the property rights of those that would be adversely impacted by the actions of others.
30
30
Quite Dierently Than Making the Community a BeQer Place. Preven-on of Harm to the Public Is Accorded Enormous Deference by the Courts 31
31
Higher
Standards:
Are
consistent
with
the
concept
of
sustainable
development Provide a pragma-c method for regula-on Make sense on a local and regional basis May be rewarded by FEMAs Community Ra-ng System, especially under the new CRS Manual Can reduce the poten-al for li-ga-on against a community 32
32
34
34
Summary
Higher
Regulatory
Standards
Are:
A)
Legal
B) Equitable C) Prac-cal D) Defensible in Court E) Supported by good economic analysis F) The very basis of sustainability G) Rewarded under the Community Ra-ng System
35
Occur
We
Can
Pay
A
LiQle
Now;
Or
Society
Pays
Lots
Later
The
Legal
System
Is
Ready
To
Help
Society
Pay
Later
36
36
37
Find
A
Yes
We
Are
For
Development
We
Are
For
Safe
Place
For
Our
Ci-zens
To
Live
We
Must
Consider
Others
When
We
Develop
Channel
Any
Emo-on
Into
Ac-on
38
39
40
If
It
Is
A
Good
Project...
Yes.
Yes.
Yes!
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
Summary
Fundamentally
Our
Society
Must
Choose
Either:
BeQer Standards to Protect Resources and People or Standards Which Inevitably Will Result in Destruc-on and Li-ga-on
The higher regula-ons which this Workshop is promo-ng are a step in the Right Direc-on 46
47