State Waits for Word on Storm Cleanup Funds
By Sara Hatch
Washington, April 28 – In early March, Gov. Jodi Rell asked the Federal Emergency Management Agency to declare a state of emergency for all of Connecticut to deal with the after-effects of the severe winter storm of February 11 and 12. If granted, the declaration would clear the way for the federal government to help the state and its municipalities pay for the storm cleanup costs, estimated to be $15 million.
If FEMA’s track record in recent years is any indication, the governor has good reason to expect approval. Emergency declarations for winter storms in Connecticut and the rest of New England have dramatically increased in the past four years. The state has received more than $30.2 million in federal reimbursement funds from FEMA since 2003, including approximately $880,000 to reimburse for administrative costs.
Emergency declarations in Connecticut, not to be confused with major disaster declarations for hurricanes, flooding and severe storms, have in particular seen an upswing since 2003. There was an emergency disaster declaration in 2003, again in 2004 and again in 2005. Disaster declaration funds reimburse up to 75 percent of the total costs for the state, with special occasions warranting more funds.
This has been repeated across the New England region. In 2003 to 2005, Maine, Massachusetts and New Hampshire had emergency declarations each year for snow, sometimes more than one in the same year. In the five years before that, in only one year did any of these states receive an emergency declaration for snow.
Connecticut, according to the governor’s office, has consistently applied for aid. From 1951 to 2003 there had been only two emergency declarations: in 1978 and 1993. But in the past four years there have been three as well as another emergency request now pending with the federal government for 2006.
If the request for 2006 is approved, the total could rise to approximately $41.5 million for winter storms since 2003, not including the administrative costs for 2006.
“It’s almost unexplainable,” said Barry Scanlon, a former FEMA official who is now senior vice president and partner at James Lee Witt Associates.
“We set up pretty strict and tight parameters by which you would support someone during a winter incident,” he said, but “now it seems that those purse strings have been opened quite a bit, loosened quite a bit…. I’m very surprised to hear this is the case.”
Scanlon was also careful not to assign blame. He said FEMA has “terrific people” who work well when they have good leadership. When Scanlon worked at FEMA it was a separate agency, but in March 2003 it became a part of the newly created Department of Homeland Security.
James McIntyre, a spokesman for FEMA, said that if there is a change in why declarations are being granted it doesn’t come from FEMA.
“FEMA’s criteria for recommendations has not changed and has not liberalized the rate at which FEMA recommends approval of declarations to the president,” he said. “When FEMA reviews any declaration request under the Stafford Act, there are several primary factors the agency considers in making a recommendation to the President whether assistance is warranted.”
That law, revised in 2000, says that the federal government may reimburse up to 75 percent of storm costs. On certain occasions, depending on the severity of the storm, a higher percentage will be allowed.
There are many criteria FEMA uses to determine whether emergency assistance is merited, including estimated cost of assistance, localized impacts, insurance coverage in force, hazard mitigation, recent multiple disasters and other federal assistance.
There has not been a policy change in the state of Connecticut, according to John Wiltse, a spokesman for Gov. Rell’s office.
“The State of Connecticut…carefully evaluates all requests,” Wiltse said. He added that the state “aggressively takes advantage of any opportunity” for federal assistance.
He said the state has been applying for storm assistance all along, and he had no answer as to why the requests in the past three years had been granted.
Often there are other motivations for giving out money. Russell Sobel, a professor of economics at West Virginia University who has long studied disaster declarations, said that determining what a disaster is more often has to do with who’s on the FEMA congressional oversight committee and whether it’s an election year.
“One of the consistent explanations with this is that it’s political favoritism and manipulation,” Sobel said.
Sobel highlighted the fact that the director of FEMA is a political appointee. James Lee Witt, the director during the Clinton administration, is the only one of the past few FEMA heads to have had experience in disaster relief. Witt is now chairman and CEO of James Lee Witt Associates, a crisis and emergency management consulting firm based in Washington.
Emergency assistance funds are awarded through a distinct process that starts in the states. After any snowfall, states must determine whether it is a “historical” snowfall, according to Wiltse. If there is significant snowfall, the governor then requests help from the Region 1 FEMA office in Boston, which is responsible for Connecticut.
According to FEMA’s official snow policy, there must be a significant amount of snowfall for FEMA to consider reimbursement.
“Requests for emergency or major disaster declarations for winter storms that cause substantial infrastructure damage resulting from snow, ice, high winds and other blizzard conditions shall cite ‘severe winter storm’ as the incident type, the policy reads. “Eligible work will not include snow removal unless ‘record’ or ‘near record’ snowfall criteria are met. Rather, only a very limited level of snow removal, incidental to the recovery, will be eligible for assistance.”
If the regional office approves the request, the governor then sends it to FEMA headquarters, and the president will decide which disaster cleanups deserve federal reimbursement. At that point, an emergency declaration will be issued and funds made available.
Since 1990, the amount of snowfall in Connecticut has been “bouncing around,” according to Kathryn Vreeland, a climatologist with the Northeast Regional Climate Center.
In the New Britain area, which she used as an indicator for statewide snowfalls, snow ranged from as high as 55 inches and as low as 12 inches during the 2000-01 and 2004-05 seasons, she said.
Vreeland said one consideration is that winter storms are much better reported than they were 40 years ago. She said that with people driving everywhere, even a “three-inch storm” can have an impact.
Scanlon, who held many positions at FEMA, including director of corporate affairs, during the Clinton Administration, said the process of emergency assistance “evolved throughout the ’90s.”
After 1995 and 1996, FEMA set strict standards for handing out emergency assistance. Scanlon said FEMA even adapted the slogan “no dough for snow” in the period following 1996.
Scanlon said that state and local agencies should be able to handle and “should plan for” these disasters. He also said that FEMA, at least during his tenure, did not recommend reimbursement for “business interruptions.” A March letter from the Connecticut congressional delegation to the President supporting the governor’s request specifically mentions the closure of Bradley International Airport for three and a half hours during the February storm as one justification for granting funds.
As of now, it is a waiting game for Connecticut on whether it will receive funds for the February storms. In the past year, according to Wayne Sanford of Connecticut’s Emergency Management and Homeland Security Department, the federal department has been very responsive to the state’s requests for emergency assistance funds, generally answering within 30 days of the first request. Currently, he said, the state has been waiting more than 45 days to get a response from Washington.
##
