Midwest Flood Victims Feel Misled By Feds

Source: Associated Press

(06-19) 15:01 PDT Gulfport, Ill. (AP) --

Juli Parks didn't worry when water began creeping up the levee that shields this town of about 750 from the Mississippi River — not even when volunteers began piling on sandbags.

After all, local officials had assured townspeople in 1999 that the levee was sturdy enough to withstand a historic flood, and FEMA had agreed. In fact, some relieved homeowners dropped their flood insurance, and others applied for permits to build new houses and businesses.

Then on Tuesday, the worst happened: The levee burst and Gulfport was submerged in 10 feet of water. Only 28 property owners were insured against the damage.

"They all told us, `The levees are good. You can go ahead and build,'" said Parks, who did not buy flood coverage because her bank no longer required it. "We had so much confidence in those levees."

Around the country, thousands of residents who relied on risk maps from the Federal Emergency Management Agency may unknowingly face similar dangers.

"People put all their hopes in those levees, and when they do fail, the damage is catastrophic," said Paul Osman, the National Flood Insurance Program coordinator for Illinois. "New Orleans is the epitome; a lot of those people didn't even realize they were in a floodplain until the water was up to their roofs."



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/06/19/national/a115950D36.DTL

If you have previously suffered flooding and are putting all your faith in a levee just remember: given enough water, any levee will fail. If flood insurance is not required, then it is up to the individual to determine what risk to take and they should not simply rely on somebody's word that they do not need it.

"After all, local officials had assured townspeople in 1999 that the levee was sturdy enough to withstand a historic flood, and FEMA had agreed."

That we haven't lived in this country very long, geologically speaking. That's the worst press release ever.. I live near Seattle, and not only do I pay extra for non-mandatory earthquake coverage, but I pay for flood insurance too. Not required, not even recommended, but there is a river not too far away, and it has moved in the last 100 years, the town I live in didn't exist 100 years ago.

How people can put so much faith in a thin concrete shell of a levee boggles my mind. Water can destroy anything.

I'm not gonna bitch about having to help pay for their homes, disaster can strike anywhere, I understand. But I do hope they think twice about rebuilding in the same spot, or at the very least consider flood insurance part of the cost of living, not a frivolus luxury.

Mobile Ala. newspaper reported last year that the Flood Plain maps/information put out by FEMA were wildly inaccurate.
But people re-building after Katrina in the area were happily not buying flood insurance. Saving them so much money,don'tcha know.

Hmmm..I see a cunning plan by insurance companies to save a bundle come the next surge of water.
All anyone has to do is look at a map or picture of the area to know the land will be underwater if there more than 2 feet sea level rise.
It is that obvious.
But they don't, and contractors were building like crazy since 2005.

til the housing crunch stopped them a few months ago.

I'd live any where near and area that relied on levees and not have flood insurance.