Reading Time: 4 minutes

Initial damage assessment reports indicate that this month’s flood damage is smaller in scale to last year’s storms and will not meet the requirements to request federal assistance, according to county and city officials. 

Milwaukee County is coordinating with municipal emergency managers to evaluate damage using resident reports to 2-1-1 and communication with local and regional partners, according to Emily Tau, public affairs director with the Milwaukee County Office of the County Executive. 

“While the impacts to affected households are significant and taken seriously, at this time, the impacts from this flooding in Milwaukee County do not meet the thresholds required to initiate a FEMA Preliminary Damage Assessment and potential Presidential Disaster Declaration,” Tau said.

Ryan Zollicoffer, director of the City of Milwaukee Office of Emergency Management, said joint teams from the Department of Neighborhood Services and the Milwaukee Fire Department are continuing on-site evaluations of the most impacted residential areas.

Based on preliminary reports, both Zollicoffer and Tau said the magnitude of damage to date appears substantially lower than after August’s flooding, when historic rainfall exceeded 10 inches in parts of Milwaukee. Rainfall totals from April 13 to April 15 topped 5 inches in the city. 

Zollicoffer said some residents may be eligible for assistance through the U.S. Small Business Administration disaster loan programs, depending on final damage determinations.

The city and county will then work with the state to determine whether any additional recovery resources or support mechanisms are warranted, he said. 

Some elected leaders have expressed interest in exploring options to request aid.

Governor’s effort

On Wednesday, Gov. Tony Evers announced that he directed Wisconsin Emergency Management to submit a request for FEMA to assist the state in conducting a formal federal preliminary damage assessment from recent extreme storms and flooding throughout the state.

Wisconsin Emergency Management is the division of the state’s Department of Military Affairs that coordinates disaster and emergency responses.

Evers signed an executive order declaring a state of emergency on April 15 and authorized the Wisconsin National Guard to assist in relief and recovery efforts from flooding, hail, strong winds and tornadoes that hit communities across Wisconsin in April.

In an April 17 letter, Evers requested Wisconsin’s two U.S. senators and eight U.S. representatives help urge the Trump administration to reconsider the denials of the state’s requests for assistance from August’s storms and approve outstanding requests.

President Donald Trump approved individual assistance to Wisconsin homeowners and residents after the August flooding. However, the administration denied requests for assistance to repair public infrastructure and for the hazard mitigation grant program. 

Wisconsin appealed both decisions to FEMA but was once again denied public assistance and is still waiting on a response for the hazard mitigation grant. 

“These denials and delays have left Wisconsin more vulnerable to this next wave of storms and flooding,” Evers wrote. 

Wisconsin does not have its own standing assistance program to help property owners make repairs from flooding or storms, according to Wisconsin Emergency Management, the division of the state’s Department of Military Affairs that coordinates disaster and emergency responses. 

Next steps

Milwaukee County Board of Supervisors Chairwoman Marcelia Nicholson-Bovell authored a resolution to be introduced at the outset of the new board term in May that requests the county Office of Emergency Management conduct a comprehensive assessment of the damage from April’s storms, according to Erin Caffrey, communications specialist with the Milwaukee County Clerk’s Office. 

The countywide review of damage would be used to inform recovery efforts and strengthen future applications for state and federal aid, she said. It would also support the development of a coordinated flood preparedness, response and communications plan that would create a flooding information alert system and help supervisors effectively engage with residents, Caffrey said. 

“This resolution is about bringing our partners together, assessing the damage, improving communication with residents and making sure we are better prepared before the next storm hits,” Nicholson-Bovell said in a statement. “Our communities deserve a coordinated response and the long-term investments needed to protect homes, neighborhoods and businesses.” 

Ald. Andrea Pratt introduced a communication file to the Milwaukee Common Council to discuss city intersections and areas that are hot spots for flooding, which was on the agenda for a Public Works Committee meeting on Wednesday morning at City Hall.

Mayor Cavalier Johnson, County Executive David Crowley and Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Executive Director Kevin Shafer formed a Flood Mitigation Task Force to evaluate mitigation efforts to reduce impacts from future storms and solicit feedback. It is expected to meet soon.

Other resources

Anyone can report storm damage or request to be connected to volunteer cleanup resources by calling 2-1-1 or submitting a report online through the 211 Wisconsin website. 

The Wisconsin Conference of the United Methodist Church, in partnership with UMCOR and Team Rubicon USA, is organizing 100 volunteers to assist families with cleanup in Milwaukee County in the coming weeks and months, Tau said. The American Red Cross and the Salvation Army are also active in support efforts. 

Organizations interested in coordinating with partners through the Southeast Wisconsin Community Organizations Active in Disasters can visit sewicoad.org or contact coadsewi@gmail.com.

Residents who lost food purchased with FoodShare can apply for replacement benefits through the Wisconsin Department of Health Services until the extended deadline of May 4.^.

Call or text the Disaster Distress Helpline at 1-800-985-5990 for free, 24/7, confidential, multilingual emotional support.

The Department of Neighborhood Services’ Compliance Loan Program helps owner-occupied properties address building code violations with a no-interest, deferred payment loan. Residents can apply if flood damage is under the purview of the program and they meet the requirements.  

Jeremy McGovern, marketing and communications officer for the Milwaukee Department of Neighborhood Services, said the department would not be opposed to waiving permit fees related to flood damage repairs like it did for the August floods, but doing so would require Common Council authorization. 

He also said the city’s Neighborhood Improvement Project inspectors and plan examiners can be resources in helping navigate timelines and repairs.

---

Find more resources in NNS’s previous reporting. 

---

Meredith Melland is the neighborhoods reporter for Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service and a corps member of Report for America, a national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on under-covered issues and communities. Report for America plays no role in editorial decisions in the NNS newsroom.

---

Jonathan Aguilar is a visual journalist at Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service who is supported through a partnership between CatchLight Local and Report for America.

Federal flood assistance unlikely in Milwaukee: Officials discuss next steps is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

The mayor’s office and the Milwaukee Department of Public Works are defending the city’s parking enforcement during last week’s flooding. 

From April 15 to April 16, the city issued 4,666 parking citations, according to data provided by the Department of Public Works, or DPW. 

Officials said enforcement is still necessary during extreme storm-related conditions. 

“Severe weather events make it particularly important for people to obey the posted parking restrictions,” said Jeff Fleming, spokesperson for Mayor Cavalier Johnson. “During rain events, quite a number of parking restrictions are in place to enable full street cleaning.” 

Fleming also said flooding can be exacerbated when street cleaning is impeded by parked vehicles.

South Side resident Jacob Quinones said he was too busy dealing with the flood to worry about parking. 

“My basement flooded, and I was late to work because of getting towed,” he said. 

Parking enforcement looked much different during the historic storms on Aug. 9 through Aug. 10, which also caused severe flooding throughout the city. 

According to DPW data, 991 citations were issued on those days, which occurred over the weekend.

Behind the numbers

The 4,666 parking citations issued on April 15-16 include all standard parking enforcement activity, said Tiffany Shepherd, DPW marketing and communications officer. 

Citations were issued earlier on Wednesday before the storm and after conditions improved on Thursday, she said.

She said officers did adapt during the most intense conditions. 

During a peak storm window, from roughly 7 p.m. to 11 p.m., parking enforcement continued but focused on responding to complaints, resulting in 141 tickets, said Shepherd. 

She said safety concerns limited enforcement during that time.  

“Our staff is not going to be driving through flood waters or anything like that. That’s just not safe,”  Shepherd said. “For those two hours where things were really bad, no tickets were being issued.”

Response in August

During the August floods, there was a period when parking enforcement was formally suspended and staff redirected to flood-related work, said Lisa Vargas, administrative specialist with DPW, in an email.  

Overnight enforcement was also formally suspended in the days following the storm, from Aug. 11 to Aug. 14. Enforcement was not suspended as a result of last week’s storms. 

Staff assisted stranded or abandoned vehicles, conducting 88 free relocation tows, Vargas said. During last week’s floods, four free relocations were provided.

‘It cost me $566’

When Quinones’ car was towed near his home on South 13th Street and West Ohio Avenue, he said it left him with no real alternatives. 

“It’s my only form of transportation,” he said. “It cost me $566 plus a favor from a friend for the ride to the tow lot.” 

Quinones said being ticketed and towed while also dealing with flooding created a great deal of stress. He said the city needs to rethink its approach.

“If severe weather is on the horizon, keep your meter maids and parking checkers safe at home,” he said.

The importance of parking enforcement

Shepherd emphasized that although most enforcement took place before and after flooding conditions, weather is still not an excuse to park irresponsibly.  

“What you’re going to find out is the majority of these tickets don’t have anything to do with anyone being affected by the flood,” she said. “Just because there was bad weather, you can’t block a hydrant.”

Appealing citations

The mayor’s office has no plans to forgive tickets issued during last week’s floods, but residents do have an option to appeal. 

“The appeal process is pretty straightforward, so we do not have plans for any blanket amnesty,” Fleming said. 

People can go through the appeals process if the flood was pertinent to the ticket, and the city will look at that on a case-by-case basis, Shepherd said. 

More parking information can be found on the city’s website. 

Data shows stark difference in Milwaukee parking enforcement between August and April floods is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The National Weather Service says at least 14 confirmed tornados hit Wisconsin during last week's spate of severe storms that caused widespread flood damage in areas around Milwaukee and Green Bay.

The post Wisconsin cleaning up after week of storms, 14 tornadoes and extensive flooding appeared first on WPR.

Reading Time: 7 minutes

This story was originally published by Circle of Blue.

Since its creation in 1979, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has been charged with protecting communities from natural disasters. Central to that mission is curtailing serious flooding, the most prevalent and severe weather threat to people and property across all 50 states.

That objective, though, is impeded by an old and obscure federal regulation — overseen and enforced by FEMA itself — that is actually making flooding worse.

That result was felt in December, when a powerful storm hit the Pacific Northwest. Flooding along Washington’s Nooksack and Skokomish rivers destroyed homes and inundated roads, prompting evacuations and the declaration of a state of emergency. Some losses may have been alleviated, experts assert, had planned flood mitigation work along these same rivers’ banks not experienced significant delays and cancellations as a direct result of the rule’s powerful reach, which extends nationwide.

Here in Wisconsin in the past year, watershed conservationists in Walworth and Ashland counties — located in the state’s south-central and northern regions — were forced to abandon two water quality and flood mitigation projects in local streams after discovering they would be subject to the regulation.

Known within FEMA as the “no-rise” rule, the directive prohibits any earth-moving activity in low-lying, flood-prone areas if water levels during a storm would rise above what was present before the construction started. In other words, any project — defined as “development” by the agency — must not increase the volume of water in flood-prone areas by any amount.

The rule, written in 1976 as a feature of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), and described in detail for the first time by Circle of Blue, was enacted with good intentions to restrict development in floodplains. Its initial focus was population centers: Even an incremental increase in the volume of water that might overflow into a street or neighborhood can have perilous effects on basements, utilities, infrastructure, and human lives.

At the time it was enacted, restoring floodplains and watersheds was a novel pursuit. A half century later, these efforts are recognized for their environmental and human benefits. But as the no-rise rule is currently written and interpreted, “development” is an all-encompassing term that pertains equally to the paving of a new downtown road, as it does to the restoration of wetlands in a remote field. In the eyes of FEMA, a project to address pollution or flooding in a stream is held to the same “no-rise” standards as the construction of a new building.

FEMA’s enforcement of the rule is producing unintended effects. Meeting the “no-rise” standards, project managers say, adds tens of thousands of dollars to project costs and causes years of delay. As a result, land planners — from small nonprofits to federal agencies — routinely abandon efforts to improve water quality and restore watersheds before they even hit the ground.

By barring “development” in floodplains, the no-rise rule allows for the degradation of habitat, lowering of water quality and flooding to persist and worsen.

Viewed broadly, the rule’s compounding outcomes could not be felt at a more consequential time for the nation’s waters. The Trump administration is eliminating environmental safeguards, scaling back protections for the majority of the country’s wetlands and proposing limits on states’ power to issue water quality reviews.

Bipartisan lawmakers have developed legislation in both the U.S. House and Senate to amend FEMA’s no-rise rule in order to remove barriers to restore floodplains and watersheds. The agency has worked with legislators in writing these proposed policies, but did not respond to Circle of Blue when asked for a comment.

“It was never an NFIP goal to see rivers and floodplains restored, which might be why these policies are so antiquated,” says Jennifer Western Hauser, a policy liaison at Wisconsin Wetlands Association. “We understand now that restoring floodplains can reduce flood risks and damage, so it’s long overdue to restore common sense.”

A case in point in Wisconsin’s Driftless Area

Addressing risks and recovery in flood-prone areas is an exhaustive undertaking. FEMA invests tens of millions of dollars each year in projects to reduce threats where storms are likely to hit.

But the agency spends significantly more in their aftermath. Since its launch in 1968, the agency’s National Flood Insurance Program has fulfilled north of $88 billion in property damage claims.

The economic realities and the extreme human cost of floods mean that flood control remains a heavily regulated effort codified within dozens of federal statutes, mandates and supplemental acts. Among this tangle of federal regulation is the no-rise rule that is producing unwelcome effects in rural regions, where efforts to reduce flood risks and improve the quality of long-polluted waters are routinely stymied. The dairy farms and modest homesteads that mark the snowy fields of Barre Mills, Wisconsin, offer a case in point.

The small unincorporated community recalls a typical Midwestern landscape, save for the towering bluffs and rocky cliffs that wreathe around it, rising hundreds of feet. This unique stretch of southwestern Wisconsin, part of a wider region known as the Driftless Area, was left untouched by heavy ice sheets and retreating glaciers during the most recent Ice Age. Cold-water streams, waterfalls and deeply carved river valleys abound as a result. Both the Mississippi and Wisconsin rivers flow through La Crosse County.

But when managed unsustainably, this steep terrain can accelerate watershed degradation. In rural Barre Mills, a legacy of tilling, deforestation and livestock grazing atop tall bluffs has left the town’s low-lying areas with floodwaters polluted with fast-moving farm runoff.

Bostwick Creek, which stretches for 13 miles through 30,000 acres of woods and farms, is one prime example.

The creek’s final four miles are severely impaired. Destructive storms and flooding, fueled by a changing climate, have exacerbated the erosion of its vulnerable banks. Non-point pollution from local farms has poured into the channel. Since 2014, the waterway has held unsafe concentrations of phosphorus, fecal matter and suspended solids.

These unwanted pollutants are not contained to just the creek. The Wisconsin DNR has issued fish consumption advisories after detecting high concentrations of forever chemicals in the La Crosse River, into which Bostwick flows. Duckweed and green algae, a side effect of nutrient spillage, has inundated downriver marshlands.

The county has identified the creek’s water quality woes as a high-priority issue. From a conservation approach, its restoration portends to follow a straightforward plan of soil stabilization and the addition of new vegetation, which will make its floodplain more durable. Local farmers have even pledged crucial support for the effort, agreeing to give up precious land and private fishing access and commit to no-tilling practices near its banks.

But FEMA’s “no-rise” rule is throwing a wrench in the entire operation. Creek restoration requires navigating a mountain of costly and time-consuming engineering, modeling, mapping, and permitting requirements that “seems to end up in a drawer, if anyone even looks at them at all,” says Jacob Schweitzer, La Crosse County’s lead watershed planner.

The rule has delayed the creek’s restoration by months and added roughly $8,000 in expenses so far.

Floodzones AE, floodways and maps

FEMA reaches its conclusions about development projects in rural valleys, like the one drained by Bostwick Creek, after three stages of formal consideration.

First, the agency defines the valley as a floodplain, which is broadly defined as an area that is susceptible to being inundated by water during a storm. Second, FEMA designates land directly adjacent to Bostwick Creek with the more specific distinction of being a “Floodzone AE,” which is identified as a “high-risk” area within a floodplain. And third, within Floodzones AE are other pockets of land called regulatory floodways — the highest-risk area within a floodplain to flooding.

Herein lies the culprit and its burdensome penalty.

All “development” done inside regulatory floodways, whether related to construction or conservation, is subject to the “no-rise” rule. Failure to comply with the regulation, Schweitzer says, would result in the entire county’s population losing access to federal flood insurance.

Adding to the frustration is the agency’s lethargy in upkeeping current records. Most flood zones were set decades ago when FEMA drew its inaugural set of flood maps for the NFIP. But these landscapes have changed vastly over the past half-century, and most of these maps and designations no longer reflect today’s terrain. Despite this, the agency does not systematically work to ensure its digital records match the risks or non-risks present on the ground.

“It’s a long, complicated and political process,” says Brandon Parsons, director of river restoration at American Rivers. “Landowners and farmers living on thousand-acre ranches, with nobody in sight, might have to pay $50,000 to go through this conditional process with FEMA to restore banks on their own land.”

The responsibility of updating maps thus falls on project planners, who must demonstrate that their work will follow the “no-rise” requirements. At Bostwick Creek, original flood maps have not been touched since 1982. Months of work to bring these maps up to date, Schweitzer says, has cost thousands of dollars, all to prove that the water level will remain unchanged.

“Restoration work in zone AEs is frequently avoided,” Western Hauser adds. “That can only lead us to untenable conclusions. If zone AEs are degraded, they’ll remain degraded, or get worse because no one will work on them.”

The Floodplain Enhancement and Recovery Act

On a blustery December afternoon, Jacob Schweitzer navigates shin-deep snow near a chicken farm along the Bostwick, where more than 50 feet of sediment has fallen into the creek in just the past few years. Further downstream, fallen trees zig-zag and soils slump into the channel.

Hardly a dozen farmhouses fill the view, and yet the project is held to the same standards as the construction of a new office building along the Milwaukee River in downtown Milwaukee.

Policy experts agree that a significant amount of restoration work can be unlocked if FEMA regulations are updated with more nuance. This winter, a pair of bipartisan bills have been introduced on Capitol Hill to remedy this sticking point.

Senate Bill 1564 — the Floodplain Enhancement and Recovery Act, authored by Sens. Patty Murray, D-Washington, and Steve Daines, R-Montana — and a companion House bill, co-authored by Wisconsin Rep. Bryan Steil, a Republican, would add a definition of “ecosystem restoration” to the NFIP, differentiating it from other forms of development. States and communities would have the flexibility to allow up to a one-foot rise in a regulatory floodway’s water level, so long as no nearby insurable infrastructure is affected.

“In other words, we’re talking about less-developed areas,” Western Hauser says. “We’re talking about areas upstream of development, where you might want to get your river working in tandem with your floodway.”

Barre Mills is the exact kind of community where this legal nuance could make a big difference for water quality. If the act becomes a law, FEMA would have 180 days to develop guidance for how communities can work in compliance with this new rule. The agency would also be obligated to collaborate with natural resources agencies when drafting these directions.

Floodplain managers, conservation groups, insurers, and tribes across the country continue to voice their support for the legislation. Supporters say its passage is most likely if it is attached to a larger congressional package.

“Bureaucratic red tape should not stall common sense restoration projects,” Rep. Steil said in a statement. “The Floodplain Enhancement and Recovery Act eases administrative burdens and empowers Wisconsin communities to make our waterways healthier, strengthen our resilience to floods, and enhance ecosystems across the nation.”

This article first appeared on Circle of Blue and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

This little-known FEMA rule may be making flooding worse in rural Wisconsin is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.