1. OFMA 2011 Annual Conference September 21, 2011
Association of State Floodplain Managers
OFMA Annual Conference September 21, 2011
Thank you for inviting me to speak at this wonderful conference. Previous speakers have told me that the Georgia Association puts on an educational and fun event.
Chad Berginnis, CFM
Associate Director, ASFPM

2. ASFPM Chapters 14,000 members State Assoc. & Pending ChaptersFL WI MN IL MI NY IN OH VA NC SC MS AR LA TX OK NM AZ CO MO
FMA
NORFMA MT ID NE KS GA KY NJ MD RI OR UT WA AK AL TN WV PA IA
ASFPM has 14,000 members nationwide, and 31 state chapters.
There are approximately 6,700 CFMs nationwide.
14,000 members
31 Chapters
State Assoc. & Pending Chapters

3. Mitigate the losses, costs, and human suffering caused by flooding.
WHAT is ASFPM?
ASFPM’s Mission
Mitigate the losses, costs, and human suffering caused by flooding.
and…
ASFPM Accomplishments:
First to promote hazard mitigation--from the beginning
Advocate for improved mapping
Advocating to continue Map Maintenance (unmet needs)
Certification of floodplain managers--now over 6,700 in nation
Annual conference over 1,000 - Louisville- many regional workshops
National Floodproofing Conference V, November 2011
Input to Congress and Administration
Internationally recognized and interacting

4. Protect the natural and beneficial functions of floodplains.
ASFPM’s Mission
Protect the natural and beneficial functions of floodplains.
ASFPM Accomplishments:
First to promote hazard mitigation--from the beginning
Advocate for improved mapping
Advocating to continue Map Maintenance (unmet needs)
Certification of floodplain managers--now over 6,700 in nation
Annual conference over 1,000 - Louisville- many regional workshops
National Floodproofing Conference V, November 2011
Input to Congress and Administration
Internationally recognized and interacting

5. ASFPM 13 Policy Committees
Floodplain
Regulations
No Adverse Impact
Floodproofing /
Retrofitting
Natural & Beneficial
Functions
Training & Outreach
International
Arid Regions
Coastal Issues
Flood Insurance
Flood Mitigation
Mapping & Engineering Standards
Professional Development
Stormwater Management

6. What does ASFPM do? National CFM® certification
State chapter services & support
Legislative activities
Review national flood programs & policies
Represent all members on national policy
No Adverse Impact (NAI) tools/training
White Papers on policy issues
Coordination with FEMA & the NFIP
Conferences & events & training
Continuing education

7. Review National Flood Programs & Policies - 2007
22 major categories for policy on all federal programs impacting floods
270 recommendations
Available on the ASFPM website
(Hold Book Up)
ASFPM’s Policy Guidance For Upcoming Years
Input from Committees, Members, and Board
Approved by Board

8. ASFPM Chapter Services
National representation and voice in Washington, DC
Notifications and newsletters on national policy updates, letters to policy makers, and current events
Support and resources for training, State conferences, and committees
Chapter administration (optional)
Website hosting (optional)

9. PART 1: WHERE ARE WE GOING?
We are going to have to find some ways to do things differently. We can’t just cling to the same old rock with a life vest.

10. Trends in Flood Risk #1: Flood Hazard is Changing!
Risk = Probability x Consequence
Many states nationwide have experienced multiple 100-year plus events in the last 25 years.
Damages are increasing – 2011 – 4 multi-billion dollar “national” events.
Climate is “weirding”
Demographics continue to shift

11. Flood Damages are Increasing
Now $10 billion annually
Five-fold increase from early 1900s
Per capita damages increased by more than a factor of 2.5 in the previous century in real dollar terms
The key here is that despite what we have done and the money we have
spent this century, damages continue to go up
-Unnecessarily, in our opinion
Then there was Katrina --- $6 Billion + 11

12. Better Understanding of Climate Change
Ability now to downscale global and national climate models
Impacts on flood risk vary with location
Global losses to natural hazards in 1980s - $25 bln/year $130 bln/year.

13. This is based on past data and is the trend from 1958-2007
This is based on past data and is the trend from But the trends aren’t just about increases or decreases in extreme events, rainfall, humidity, etc. For example one trend identified in the Iowa report is that the flood season has shifted more towards summertime versus springtime. This is something that I had seen in Ohio from our extreme events.

14. Demographics By 2050: 460 million people in the US
200 million housing units (up from 116 million in 2000), however between replacement units and new units, 90% of units in 2050 will have not existed in 2000
180 billion sq. ft. non-residential space (up from 80 billion in 2000); however between replacement and new space, 225% of spaced will not have existed in 2000.
Life span of homes – over 150 years!
Source: Arthur Nelson, Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech.
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

15. Trends in Flood Risk #2: Technology and Methods are Advancing
Computing capability is growing – high speed internet and low cost computers.
Web based applications means a lot less expertise needed at the user end.
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

16. Flood Risk Assessment Methods Evolving . . .
Yesterday
Today
Tomorrow

17. Better Understanding of Uncertainty
Each model has uncertainty and unique methodology
Use ensemble or collaborative approach
With time, we have higher confidence – as long as we have data!

18. Models Getting Better
Models will get more sophisticated and results will be more meaningful
Scenario analysis will be increasingly useful
Multi-disciplinary approach
Decent information should be available everywhere in the US
How many of you have heard of ARK Storm?

19. Trends in Flood Risk
#3: States and Communities are Leading out of Necessity
A 2011 U.S. Conference of Mayors survey of nearly 396 mayors from cities in all 50 states showed that 31 percent already incorporate climate change adaptation into their fiscal planning, while 40 percent do not and the remaining 29 percent were unsure. The report found that cities in the Northeast and West were most likely to already be considering climate change planning, while cities in the Midwest were least likely.
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

20. Policy Implications
Existing policies and programs not strong enough in light of demographic and climate trends without significant change.
The aging and decaying of water infrastructure is leading to higher vulnerability. New digital infrastructure has own vulnerabilities.
Natural resource degradation trend continues, will lead to impacts on regional economies, leading to higher prices and scarcity of products.
Climate change will overwhelm in-place systems.
Current policies and decision making process are too shortsighted and at cross-purposes.
Responsibility for cost of flooding is distributed inappropriately.
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

21. PART 2: NFIP LEGISLATION
We are going to have to find some ways to do things differently. We can’t just cling to the same old rock with a life vest.

22. NFIP Has it Worked? As-Is State: 5.5 million NFIP policies
$36.9 billion in claims paid out
$3.5 billion/yr premiums
21,000 communities participate
Single family home market penetration rates 49% nationally, in Northeast 28%
Mandatory purchase compliance rate 75% nationally, in Northeast 45%
$17 billion in debt
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

23. NFIP Has it Worked? As-Is State:
4 mitigation programs - $90 million annually in authorization
Funds flood mapping for about $100 million annually (not including Congressional appropriations)
Annual losses avoided due to compliance with NFIP standards - $1.5 billion
CAP-SSSE program funding
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

24. NFIP Intent Congressional purpose:
Authorize nationwide flood insurance program that is cooperative effort between federal government and private industry
Pool risk, distribute burdens among those flood protected and the general public
Encourage state and local governments to make appropriate land use adjustments to constrict the development of land which is exposed to flood damage and minimize damage caused by flood losses
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

25. NFIP Intent Congressional purpose:
Guide the development of proposed future construction, where practicable, away from locations which are threatened by flood hazards
7 other purpose statements identified that speak to lenders involvement, consistency with federal programs and continuing studies of the NFIP to improve it
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

26. So . . . Is the NFIP meeting its intended purpose? Insurance Mapping
Regulations
Mitigation
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

27. NFIP Reform - Insurance
More classes of structures move to actuarial rates (H/S). Strongly supported by ASFPM!
Mandatory purchase in residual risk areas after all areas mapped (S)
Establishes reserve fund (H/S)
Phases in actuarial rates for newly mapped SFHAs (H/S)
Adds optional coverage (H)
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

28. NFIP Reform - Insurance
Annual premium cap limit increased – 20% (H) and 15%(S)
Studies initiatives to increase private sector involvement related to reinsurance (H/S) and community based insurance (H)
Higher penalties to lenders (S)
Mandatory purchase extended to state lenders (S)
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

29. NFIP Reform - Mapping
Authorizes national flood mapping program (S). Strongly supported by ASFPM!
Re-establishes Technical Mapping Advisory Council (H/S)
Requires mapping of residual risk areas (S). House bill really bad!
Establishes FEMA and National Committee on Levee Safety task force on levee accreditation issues (S)
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

30. NFIP Reform - Mitigation
Streamlines and reauthorizes NFIA mitigation programs: FMA, RFC, SRL (H/S). Strongly supported by ASFPM!
3 1/2 Years since Katrina and no Major Policy Changes
Debt Forgiveness - $17 Billion
ASFPM recognizes the need for changes in the program and more movement toward actuarial rates. We recommend that all such changes be carefully evaluated in terms of the overall (and cumulative) impact on the continued viability of the NFIP and the desire that at-risk property owners have accurate information about the risk they face, including residual risk, and the need to purchase flood insurance as sound financial protection. It is important to remember that the NFIP is not purely an insurance program but provides for mitigation and significant land use guidance through local flood ordinances. ASFPM recommendations are intended to provide the at-risk public and the taxpayer at large with better protection and to improve functioning of the program.
While it is necessary to recognize the devastating effect of catastrophic losses on the program, ASFPM recommends acknowledgement that the NFIP is an effective tool for policy holder protection and loss mitigation during the average loss year. The program was not originally designed by Congress to cover catastrophic losses. ASFPM recommends that Congress and the Administration explore the full range of options for meeting the nation’s taxpayers and property owners needs related to catastrophic disasters.

31. Questions?? www.floods.org
More information will be available on
the ASFPM website, future newsletters and member/chapter alerts!