Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd like to discuss the flood study that's affecting several of our clients and many island residents.
It came to our attention late last year when we had a family working to set up a nice, sustainable, eco friendly home. They had purchased 10 acres in Kurtistown, up Mauka, their property paperwork clearly indicated that the property was not in any flood zone whatsoever. We completed the design and submitted all the paperwork for permits. Several weeks later, Frank DeMarco in the Dept of Public Works, kicked the plans back and said that the residence was in the middle of a flood zone. Confused, I researched and responded that it was clearly stated with Planning and Zoning that there were no flood zones on the property. This is when he threw us the curve ball.
It is a 'proposed flood study', that someone (Frank?), somewhere (in the Department of Works), back in June or July of 2014 decided to start enforcing. Now, I don't know exactly how this works, but it seems that if something is 'Proposed', then it is not yet full reviewed or 'Accepted', and if it is not accepted, then why on Earth would a government agency attempt to enforce it?? Not only that, but with the enforcement beginning back in 2014 and absolutely no announcement to the public that this was coming down, this created many, many victims; People are buying properties that clearly state that they are not in a flood zone, only to be stuck once they try to build and discover that they're in a pretty much 'secret' flood zone. When asked for the maps, Frank could not or would not provide them, saying that they hadn't been made public yet. Yes… Exactly! For several months I worked to get our client's through this mess. I tried to jump the hoops that Frank set forth, only to find after they spent money on the 'fixes', that there were more costly hoops, essentially burning their money for no good reason because it wouldn't fix the issue in the end.
In these client's case, the county said they would need a $1300 elevation certification, which only showed that they were indeed 8' below the elevation needed (elevation needed was a whopping 960'+). Actually, first it said 4', then Frank said that wasn't accurate, so then it went so 6', and finally 8'. So we elevated the platform design, only to be told that no, that wouldn't work, they'd have to do hollow tile 8' up. ???!!!! And raise the 10,000 gallon catchment tank up to 8' as well. Mind you, they have a huge gulch downhill from the house pad and they are up Mauka. The gulch is about 25' deep and 50' wide. There is no way this area is flooding unless we have Noah sized flooding, or someone builds a huge dam. These people have 4 kids. They moved here ready to get building as soon as permits were through. Instead, they were essentially homeless, camping on their land for over a year while the county pulled this crap. We asked if they could challenge the study - get an engineer out there to testify that this 'proposed' study is inaccurate in this case. They said we could. I asked for writing stating that they would accept this. They said they wouldn't put it in writing, that they might accept the engineer's cert, but they might not. They almost wasted another 5k.
We took it to Carter, who was above Frank. He essentially said, 'Whatever Frank says'. There REALLY needs to be an appeals board when we get someone in a place of power in a county department who makes decisions that don't make sense… an objective panel of people to review a situation, and not the county council as it now stands. What does the county council know of these things, and don't they have tons of other things to be doing? This is standard procedure in most counties. As it now stands, if anyone wants to challenge, they have to add a year to their plans and take it in front of County Council. That's what my architect said in our last conversation. There is absolutely ZERO accountability in this system. Now Frank is suddenly not there anymore and a person even higher than Carter has finally begun to review the issue. A bit late since we have already begun implementing all new site clearing and drafting, etc several months ago… But he looked things over and is scratching his head. Why, why, why? Are his questions. Yep. That was where we have all been for nearly a year now, Why? With zero recourse to get a rational review of the situation.
I finally wrote to Frank and Carter and various news outlets several months ago about the chaos. Seems to me it's a HUGE liability for county to be enforcing a proposed study that has not yet been adopted, enforcing it for over a year with no public announcement, with no solution to hundreds of new (and old) property owners who believed their properties to be not within a flood zone. The lack of concern and proper handling has caused countless victims, many who won't even know of the damage for many years until they're ready to build. Within 3 days of that letter, Frank sent me a link to his new flood page that reviews a bunch of the info, finally. Still no maps though.
This is a total debacle on a grand scale. Frank also informed me that this study will affect people retroactively, i.e., even people who built houses many years ago will be considered in a flood zone with no grandfather clause available, so their flood insurance will go sky high. His mantra throughout my conversations with him? 'We have to go on the best information currently available in order to protect people'. Yeah? What about protecting people from financial ruin? In the course of protecting people from a doomsday flood, they are creating immediate and definite victims. They just had a meeting about it I heard. I saw nothing about it in the paper, no public announcement, nor have I figured out how to find out what occurred in that meeting.
Thoughts? Info? Please share. Aloha All~
Last edited by YurtGirl; 08-28-2015 at 02:07 PM..
Reason: Add a detail
Is that perchance why Frank was recently fired? Seriously, we need to eliminate the potential for victims from this kind of thing from here on out. Our client's scene wasn't pretty (no home for over a year, tens of thousands of dollars wasted), but it could have been much worse if they hadn't been more prepared. It is unconscionable of our county to allow one idiot to unilaterally control these things and victimize this many people. I'm not one for lawsuits, but the negligence on this matter… it was and is sickening. I personally fought tooth and nail to get this made right, and I don't fight lightly - I turn every stone, I keep decorum, I keep respect. But every door was shut. Now, miraculously, doors are opening because they see the liability. But it's just too little, too late. I will pass that name along, Jonah. PM me more details if you can? I'd much appreciate it.
Seriously, we need to eliminate the potential for victims from this kind of thing from here on out. Our client's scene wasn't pretty (no home for over a year, tens of thousands of dollars wasted), but it could have been much worse if they hadn't been more prepared. It is unconscionable of our county to allow one idiot to unilaterally control these things and victimize this many people.
The County of Hawaiʻi was lax in not having more folks onboard who understood the inner workings of the Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA), the Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration (FIMA), and the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In 2012, Congress passed legislation that changed Federal subsidies for flood insurance and FEMA decided to update the flood maps. Frank was trained as an engineer, not as a policy analyst or manager, so he was a little out of his league when it came to policy interpretation and implementation. Although it might take a little while for folks to get up to speed with what Frank was supposed to be doing, let's hope that they can find someone who's really qualified to handle the job. Hilo Flood Map Changes Could Affect Insurance Requirements | Big Island Now
Quote:
Originally Posted by YurtGirl
I'm not one for lawsuits, but the negligence on this matter… it was and is sickening. I personally fought tooth and nail to get this made right, and I don't fight lightly - I turn every stone, I keep decorum, I keep respect. But every door was shut. Now, miraculously, doors are opening because they see the liability. But it's just too little, too late. I will pass that name along, Jonah. PM me more details if you can? I'd much appreciate it.
Sometimes, lawsuits are necessary and quite cost-effective when it comes to getting things done. The "Smith et. al. v. DeMarco et. al." lawsuit cost the plaintiffs a few thousand dollars, triggered a long-overdue retirement, and managed to eliminate some red tape, without having to go to trial.
Is this affecting the whole Island of Hawaii, or just the Hilo/Puna areas? What a major pain in the a$$ for you, Melissa, and for the future home builders! We are planning to move to BI next year, buy property and put one of your yurts on it. Hopefully this issue will get figured out soon.
I'm not surprised his profile says that he 'retired'. Word from a source on the inside is that he was forced.
Crash, I'll look forward to talking with you more soon then! This study affects all of the Big Island, but the hardest hit, no surprise really, is the lower income areas, mostly on the East side of the island. If you own property anywhere in Puna, I strongly encourage you to call up the department of public works and make sure they aren't about to put your previously flood zone X (meaning no flood zone) smack dab in the middle of a proposed flood zone. If they do, your property values drop majorly and your insurance rates raise considerably. There's not much you can do about it either as far as I can tell. And at least in a few instances, their claims of flood zones are ridiculously off base.
Frank said that FEMA came in with their updated maps, but that the county opted to do their own flood study, and this is the result.
I'm all for outlining accurate flood zones, the biggest issues I see are as follows:
1. The lack of being able to effectively challenge the info in cases where it is very obviously wrong, even with trained professionals backing a person/situation.
2. The lack of notice to the public, which has caused unnecessary burden to people who have bought property since they started enforcing the new maps well over a year ago.
3. That they would start enforcing maps before they've been reviewed and accepted.
And of course, 4. We the people need to be able to challenge the 'God-like-figures' in places of power within our own government. A process of appeals that goes before a panel of objective, qualified people. Otherwise there is no accountability for unjust decisions made by one fallible person in a position of power, and there is no recourse for the victims of that scenario.
These things combined make a well and true, often immediate, disaster for many people.
I hate to say it - I want to be supportive of the inner workings of our county, but this was handled negligently, even when it was brought to the people 'in charge', no one cared one bit about the damages that were being caused. I think a lawsuit would send a clear message to steer clear of this half-assery in the future… Great points, Jonah.
I would advise not to ever buy or sell any property that is in a flood zone. Period. Problem solved. This sort of thing comes up over and over where we currently live in Florida, and that is the only way to deal with it.
I think you may have missed a large portion of the point...
When a person buys a property, they should be able to trust the deed that states whether a property is or is not in a flood zone. They should also be able to trust County Planning & Zoning, further backing that up. But with a flood study that proposes to radically changes these lines (and for no good reason that I've been able to find - we haven't had major flooding in these new areas), with the building department enforcing these new line proposals before they've even been reviewed and accepted, with realtors selling soon-to-be designated flood zone properties with no idea, and the new maps held in secret and not released to the public, the only way a person finds out is either if they know to confirm the TMK with the Department of Public Works (And even then they could be mislead -prime example: after all this time, all the added cost, now we hear from county that they're backing off on the above mentioned clients, so graciously saving them another 15k for new drive, clearing, foundations dug, but already having wasted about that much in lost time, redrafting, pointless elevation certifications, etc.) OR they get blindsided with it when they go to permit. The insanity of how this is being handled leaves victims in the wake.
That is my point. There is no way to know if they are buying or selling within newly designated flood zones.
Last edited by YurtGirl; 09-10-2015 at 10:30 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They just had a meeting about it I heard. I saw nothing about it in the paper, no public announcement, nor have I figured out how to find out what occurred in that meeting. 
Word from a source on the inside is that he was forced. 
