Reports - Mississippi Renewal

More documents

Recommendations

Info

162 | POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS“As we decide howbest to go aboutrebuilding theMississippi Gulf Coast,it is critical that wemake plans whichsquarely address thecentral issue of thecommunity: ‘What sortof quality of life do we,the citizens, wish toenjoy during our livesand pass on to ourdescendants for themto enjoy after we aregone?’”– Donald Newcomb, Long BeachConsider the Development of State EnablingLegislation. The Mississippi Legislaturemay consider the adoption ofenabling legislation that codifies howthe state will recover from a major disaster.Specific actions may include, thecreation and funding of state programsdesigned to address shortfalls in theStafford Act and traditional supplementalfunding packages, the possible creationof a state disaster-recovery fund,and the development of a state longtermrecovery organizational model.This fund should emphasize the hiringof permanent state staff members whoare experts in long-term recovery planningand policy. This expertise shouldinclude a thorough knowledge of recoveryprocesses and programs beyondthose administered by FEMA and notedin the Stafford Act.Policy ImplementationChallenges:Coordinating the collection of programsand developing a strategy thatmeets identified needs will require agreat deal of cooperation across federal,state and local recovery partners. Meetingas a group on a regular basis, preferablyas part of a widely recognizedorganization with political standing, iskey to success. Members of the groupshould also be willing to assign the staffand resources needed to make policydecisions and implement proposed actionover a long period of time.Recommendation 4:Maximize the use of mitigation inlong-term recovery. Under ideal circumstances,communities have developedand implemented a comprehensivestrategy to reduce the impact ofnatural hazards before a disaster occurs.In reality, policies and implementationof specific projects are often adoptedfollowing a disaster. This is due to severalfactors, including a willingness toalter the status quo based on a betterunderstanding of hazard risk, the presenceof federal mitigation funding, andan educational effort to demonstratethe merits of adopting hazard mitigationpractices. Specific hazard mitigationstrategies should include, but arenot limited to:■ Hardening or relocating vulnerablecommunity infrastructure. Anemphasis should be placed on theuse of 406 Public Assistance fundsto rebuild damaged infrastructurewhenever possible.■ Investigating nontraditional mitigationfunding sources. Numerousfederal agencies, nonprofits andthe private sector may be able andwilling to pay to implement hazardmitigation measures.■ Adoption of building codes. Theadoption of building codes representsone of the most far-reachingand effective options available tolocal governments. The success ofbuilding codes depends on the developmentof an effective enforcementprogram.■ Develop local hazard mitigationplans. Hazard mitigation planninginvolves the identification of a longtermstrategy to reduce the vulnerabilityof communities to identifiednatural hazards. Several communities,including some on the GulfCoast, have not completed localhazard mitigation plans. The completionof these plans is necessaryto remain eligible for post-KatrinaHazard Mitigation Grant Programfunding. The recommendations inthese plans should be integrated
THE GOVERNOR’S COMMISSION REPORT | 163into the actions sited in local comprehensiveplans, plans being developedby the Center for the NewUrbanism, and the recovery plansbeing developed by ESF-14 teams.■ Local communities should consideradopting FEMA’s Advisory FloodElevation Maps for reconstructionpurposes. The maps represent thebest available information regardingcoastal flood hazards. Rebuilding tothe pre-Katrina Flood InsuranceRate Maps will result in communitiesexposing people and theirproperty to an unnecessarily highflood risk.■ Consider the adoption of zoning,impact fees, and other land usetechniques to reduce the impactsof natural hazards. Local governmentsshould consider how theirexisting land-use practices increaseor decrease overall vulnerability tohazards.■ Educate citizens, local officials,business owners, lenders, insuranceagents, and others about the naturalhazard risk faced by coastal communitiesin Mississippi. Armingthose who may be affected by futuredisasters, including those whoprovide financial assistance to disastervictims, allows them to makebetter decisions that reduce theirphysical vulnerability or financialrisk.■ Encourage the purchase of flood insurance.Hurricane Katrina causedflooding outside of the boundariesof local Flood Insurance RateMaps.Recommendation 5:Expedite disaster-recovery processes,recognizing that federal, state and localgovernments must make decisionsthat are wise in the long run. The rapidprovision of assistance is often hinderedduring a major disaster. Federal, state,and local officials are typically overwhelmed.In the case of HurricaneKatrina, the magnitude of damages isunprecedented, requiring new and innovativeapproaches to distribute assistance,emphasizing the importance ofrelying on a broad recovery networksuggested in an earlier recommendation.Expedite federal and state recoverypolicy as appropriate. The adoption offederal and state policies related to hazardmitigation, and disaster-recoveryin general, should be expedited. Majorpolicy issues must be resolved prior tobeginning outreach, training, grant writing,and other implementation actions.At the state and local level, this can beachieved through regular meetings ofstate and local recovery task forces whopossess the authority to make policyand assign staff required for their implementation.Coordinating regular meetingsbetween the state task force andlocal recovery task forces also is importantto resolving local policy issues thatnecessitate state and federal guidance orinterpretation. This approach also allowsthe state to gain a greater understandingof local needs and create or amendweakened policy as appropriate. Specificpolicy issues may include, but are notlimited to, the provision of non-federalmatch requirements for mitigation andother recovery grant programs, and thedevelopment of specific measures tospeed up the delivery of assistance. Thestate of Mississippi should consider theuse of “global match” whenever possible,in order to stretch the use of federalmitigation assistance. Global matchinvolves the documentation of specificnon-federal mitigation-related activitiesthat may be used as a match to federalfunding. Examples may include thefunds used to implement the MississippiRenewal Forum and the Governor’sCommission.
Page 3 and 4:
Governor’s Commissionon Recovery,
Page 5 and 6:
THE GOVERNOR’S COMMISSION REPORT
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19:
INFRASTRUCTUREThe four subcommittee
Page 22 and 23:
12 | LAND USE■ City land use plan
Page 24 and 25:
14 | LAND USEgional level, coastal
Page 26 and 27:
16 | LAND USElored for South Missis
Page 28 and 29:
18 | LAND USEThe qualityof life and
Page 30 and 31:
20 | LAND USEand building requireme
Page 32 and 33:
22 | LAND USEThroughout the Renewal
Page 34 and 35:
24 | LAND USEapproval process for c
Page 36 and 37:
26 | INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATIONINTER
Page 38 and 39:
28 | INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATIONson C
Page 40 and 41:
30 | INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATIONOn pu
Page 42 and 43:
32 | INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATIONOn th
Page 44 and 45:
34 | INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATIONOn th
Page 46 and 47:
36 | PUBLIC SERVICESPUBLICSERVICESK
Page 48 and 49:
38 | PUBLIC SERVICEStic tank use; a
Page 50 and 51:
40 | PUBLIC SERVICESsources. The go
Page 52 and 53:
42 | PUBLIC SERVICESBefore Katrinan
Page 54 and 55:
44 | PUBLIC SERVICEScoverage capabi
Page 56 and 57:
46 | PUBLIC SERVICESThe methods by
Page 58 and 59:
48 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGAFORDABLEHOU
Page 60 and 61:
50 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGTable 1, bel
Page 62 and 63:
52 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGlived below
Page 64 and 65:
54 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGthat about 6
Page 66 and 67:
56 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGbe helpful.
Page 68 and 69:
58 | AFFORDABLE HOUSING[I]t would a
Page 70 and 71:
60 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGcities or co
Page 72 and 73:
62 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGand heavy tr
Page 74 and 75:
64 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGInvestment A
Page 76 and 77:
66 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGmendations i
Page 78 and 79:
68 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGadvice on th
Page 80 and 81:
70 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGAs insurance
Page 82 and 83:
72 | AFFORDABLE HOUSINGRecommendati
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
ECONOMICDEVELOPMENTIn this section
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122: THE GOVERNOR’S COMMISSION REPORT
Page 131 and 132: HUMANSERVICESThe reports that follo
Page 151 and 152: SPECIALREPORTSWhere do we go from h
Page 171: THE GOVERNOR’S COMMISSION REPORT
show all

Reports - Mississippi Renewal

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?