McCarthy fails to address real FEMA concerns

To the Editor:

A letter that I recently received from Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, combined with her letter in the Herald (“Working to solve flood map issue,” May 17-23) have convinced me that, after three years, she either does not understand the true nature of the problem with the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s flood maps as they relate to Gibson, or that she does not want to confront the actual cause and solution to this situation. In the past I have made efforts to explain this issue in writing to her and members of her staff. This letter represents my last attempt to bring this problem and the solution to her doorstep.

When FEMA created and implemented flood zones pursuant to its “revised” maps of 2009, they changed the designation for Gibson to “AE.” They raised the elevation requirements for exemption from that designation from 8 feet to 11 feet 4 inches. In spite of the fact that Gibson did not experience flooding or related damages at 8 feet, FEMA raised the exemption level more than three feet. They raised it to a level just beyond the elevation level of most of Gibson. This had the effect of placing most of Gibson in the high-risk “AE” flood zone, where it had never been before.

Please note that if Gibson did not experience flooding and storm surges at the lower 8-foot level, it is extremely improbable that flooding would occur at an elevation significantly higher than 8 feet. In fact, the hurricane, earthquake and torrential rain of 11 inches in August confirmed Gibson’s history. Gibson barely had some mud puddles, and experienced no power outages or flooding. Ironically, residents during the hurricane were urged to evacuate and go north of Sunrise Highway in Valley Stream. Those who made the journey experienced two things that those who remained in Gibson did not experience — flooding and power outages.

Why then was the elevation level increased for Gibson, and why has FEMA been allowed to avoid direct responsive answers to that question?  When FEMA officials were at a public meeting at Valley Stream Central High School, their maps were completely discredited and they refused to show me the historical evidence of flooding in Gibson in response to my questions. Could it be that FEMA was looking to place an area in the high-risk “AE” zone for the purpose of collecting huge flood insurance premiums with next to no chance of payouts on potential claims? Could it be that Gibson has been designated to be a cash cow by FEMA to help pay its gigantic debt?

If Representative McCarthy really wants to help the FEMA “victims” of Gibson, then she might want to consider the following. She is part of Congress, which oversees agencies like FEMA. Why doesn’t she go to the committee that oversees FEMA and demand that it meet and subpoena the director of FEMA? Then, ask him one simple question — What historical or engineering evidence directly related to the geography and specific location of Gibson justified and required its designation to be changed to “AE”? In other words, why was the elevation requirement changed?

Of course, McCarthy might want to ask the related question, “Why is Gibson’s elevation requirement 11 feet 4 inches while Long Beach, which is a barrier island, has a 9-foot requirement? The answers to these questions are much more relevant and important than trying to develop a way for lessening the pain of paying for exorbitant flood insurance premiums that have been wrongfully placed on the citizens of Gibson. Her approach also does nothing to correct FEMA’s effect on the marketability of homes in Gibson. The people of Gibson deserve the same treatment as the people of Hyde Park (south Los Angeles) who were victimized by FEMA in the same manner. Their flood maps were rescinded for the same reason ours should be.

Joseph B. Margolin

Valley Stream