Directors OK payments for flood damage
5 from 1 street set to get $2,500; tort claims policy change tabled
FORT SMITH — City directors unanimously agreed to reimburse homeowners who had personal property damaged in a flash flood last summer.
During a regular meeting on Thursday, the board amended the city’s 2024 operating budget to allow the payment of $2,500 from its general fund to four property owners and one tenant at five residences on Edinburgh Drive.
City Administrator Carl Geffken told the directors at their study session last week that during the flash flood on July 14, Edinburgh Drive received 6 inches of rain in about an hour. No matter what, none of the city’s storm drains could handle that amount of rain that quickly, he said.
Deputy City Administrator Jeff Dingman said the city is working to acquire three of these properties to mitigate future damages. The remaining two property owners declined to sell.
Josh Buchfink, public relations manager for the city, said the city has closed on one property, with the other two expected to close in the next two or three weeks. He said the total cost is $644,000 and the houses will be removed to become green space.
“Purchasing the houses will be more cost-effective than expanding the drainage system,” he said. “I am told that we may grade the area to provide for some stormwater detention in the future, but that plan has not yet been finalized.”
The directors also considered adopting an ordinance amending the tort claims policy, which would govern how the city deals with future instances of damage to personal property caused by flash flooding.
Dingman said in a memo
to Geffken the draft ordinance states in order to qualify for payment, a person must demonstrate a rational basis for why the flash flooding they experienced was due to the delay of a specific drainage improvement project identified on the city’s adopted five-year Capital Improvement Plan for streets, bridges and associated drainage; they must live outside of the National Flood Insurance Program regulatory flood zones; and they must have flood insurance coverage as part of a homeowner’s or renter’s insurance policy.
Dingman said any payment will be the lesser of $2,500 or the specific amount of the deductible on a homeowner’s or renter’s insurance policy, and there must be enough money appropriated in the city budget specifically for this purpose in order to make any payments under this policy. Any money budgeted will be available on a first come, first served basis until the appropriation is exhausted.
Ward 3 Director Lavon Morton said he is against the amendment as written because he doesn’t think there should be an insurance requirement. He said he spoke with a local broker and flood insurance can cost $500 to $1,000 a year and this amendment should help people who never thought their residence would flood.
“I tend to agree with Director Morton,” At-large Director Neal Martin said. “In looking at this, I think it’s really, really strict in terms of who would actually qualify. I don’t necessarily see anybody being able to qualify through this.”
Dingman said the insurance requirement was something added to the ordinance after the directors’ discussion at the Jan. 9 study session. He asked for clarification on what the directors wanted.
“I certainly agree you don’t have to live in the flood zones, and I really thought that in the first place, because the only time I have ever had a flood insurance policy was because the lender said you must buy flood insurance,” Morton said. “But the premium was $150 a year. Now that was a long time ago, and that’s why when we were going through this, I was thinking $150 a year, that’s something people can afford. That’s not the case anymore.”
Geffken said at the study session that the city has put flyers in utility bills talking about flood insurance and can provide information about it via email and text through the city’s GovDelivery program.
The first notification was sent out before the meeting Thursday and went over some common misconceptions about flood insurance and emphasized its importance regardless of where a resident lives in the city.
“Many believe flood insurance in Fort Smith is limited to specific areas, but in reality, almost anyone in Fort Smith can purchase flood insurance through the National Flood Insurance Program,” it states.
The notification went on to detail that flood insurance can be purchased even if a resident lives in a high-risk flood area, that flood insurance is different than disaster insurance, that renters can get flood insurance to replace belongings that may be damaged by a flood, that flood insurance is needed and available in all flood zones and that flood insurance can be purchased at any time, but usually takes 30 days to go into effect.
At-large Director Christina Catsavis said she would still be in favor of a campaign to incentivize people to look at the insurance.
“I just don’t know that for me personally, I’d like to see that as a requirement, because a lot of times when people are coming to us, at this stage they kind of have no hope because they don’t have the insurance,” she said.
Ward 2 Director Andre Good asked if the qualifiers Dingman listed are in line with similar ordinances within the state, and not more or less restrictive.
“I think by having this policy we’re going above what other cities in the state do,” Geffken said. “No other city covers if there’s a flood in the ditch that affects a private property.”
The directors unanimously agreed to table the ordinance to allow administration to amend it, and to have it be brought back at the Feb. 5 meeting for consideration.