TREASURE ISLAND, Fla. — The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has multiple concerns about how the City of Treasure Island is rebuilding after Hurricanes Helene and Milton.
In a letter sent to the city last week, FEMA said it is concerned the city is not properly validating the extent to which homes are damaged before issuing permits to respective homeowners.
FEMA expressed those concerns after meeting with city staff earlier this month.
“It was suggested the staff has been directed to accept the cost estimate provided by the applicant, without screening to ensure that they include all of the necessary repairs and reasonable costs for material and labor,” Tammy Hansen with FEMA wrote in the letter.
Because all of Treasure Island is located within a Special Flood Hazard Area, the city participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), and it must follow FEMA rules and make sure homes are not substantially damaged before issuing permits to rebuild them.
If a home’s monetary damage is determined to be more than 50% of its pre-damage value, it must be demolished, relocated, or elevated.
To make this determination, the city was using a subcontractor to assess homes and businesses. Data collected in that assessment was inserted into a FEMA calculator to determine a structure’s extent of the damage. Then, letters were being mailed to the property owners to inform them of the damage determinations.
However, homeowners argued the process was inaccurate and unfair since most assessments were done hastily without entering impacted homes.
So, in December, the city switched to a new process that it calls option two.
Under option two, the city now waits for property owners to apply for permits and, following its normal permit review procedures, makes substantial damage determinations at that time.
According to City Manager Chuck Anderson, after the switch to option two, the city stopped using data from inspections and other sources, in determining if a home was substantially damaged.
“While inspections are not required, they are a vital component of the validation process,” FEMA wrote in the letter of its concerns. “In lieu of inspections, the community must have some method(s) in place to ensure that they’re able to confirm that submitted repair cost estimates include costs to repair [all] of the damage that occurred.”
In a lengthy Tuesday meeting, commissioners debated and discussed FEMA’s findings and how the city should move forward.
In a 4-to-1 vote, commissioners ultimately decided to make some course corrections to its permitting process.
For instance, the city will now consider “all available data” as it determines substantial damage under option two. The city also decided to resume sending out substantial damage letters to those who have not submitted permit applications.
Most homeowners who filled the commission chamber were not happy with the commission’s decision.
“It’s a nightmare. It’s a frickin’ nightmare. Nobody needs any more permission,” said Tammy Vasquez. “We’ve got a plan, you guys have voted on it twice. Frickin’ stick with it! It’s ridiculous. Come on!”
In a surprise resolution, commissioners also 4-to-1 voted to show their support of City Manager Anderson.
Anderson and other city staff members have come under fire from homeowners for their handling of the post-storm recovery. Some city staff have resigned as a result. Many homeowners in the room Tuesday suggested Anderson’s resignation or firing should come next.
Anderson told the room he is making changes to further streamline the permitting process and clear up the backlog of permits that exists right now.
If FEMA’s rules are broken, though, the city could lose key federal flood insurance discounts or be suspended from the program altogether.
Many homeowners, however, suggested the city should prioritize its residents before FEMA.
Mayor John Doctor was the lone dissenter in both votes. He is not wholly satisfied with Anderson’s performance. He also did not believe the city should respond to FEMA’s letter.
Doctor, who attended FEMA’s visit with city staff, said questions the city posed to the agency were leading in nature.
"Why are you not giving us our money back? You owe it to us — just pay us.”
After waiting over eight months for a refund from a medical clinic, an ABC Action News viewer reached out to consumer investigative reporter Susan El-Khoury for help.
