Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Disaster Recovery topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Roswell officials outline $220 million in damage claims, say insurance paid initial losses and FEMA steps next
Summary
City consultants told the Roswell City Council they have submitted a damage inventory to FEMA, described how insurance proceeds were used first and laid out an initial plan to turn roughly 350 damage line items into 108 FEMA projects while seeking other state funding for the 25% cost share.
Roswell has submitted a comprehensive inventory of damages from the recent floods and is moving projects into FEMA’s review pipeline while pursuing state and other funding to cover the federal cost-share, city-contracted disaster consultants told the City Council on May 8.
The consultants said the city’s commercial insurance policies have already paid initial claims and that the city will now route some uninsured or excess costs through FEMA. “Your city had a $10,000,000 flood policy, and that flood policy has been exhausted and paid by commercial insurance,” consultant Deb Gallagher told the council, adding that the city also has a separate fine-arts policy under review.
The consultants said they had initially cataloged roughly 351 damage line items totaling about $220 million and had grouped those into 108 FEMA projects to speed reimbursement. “We have 351 line items. Actually, 350. We took 1 off the list since last week, totaling about $220,000,000,” Jeff McPherson said. He and colleagues described a strategy of grouping some work as smaller projects (under FEMA’s small-project threshold) so the city could receive funds faster while protecting the right to recover additional costs on larger projects.
Why this matters: FEMA reimburses 75% of eligible costs and requires a 25% local match; consultants told the council they are pursuing multiple avenues to reduce the city’s out-of-pocket share, including state disaster funds (CDBG-DR) and low-interest loans that FEMA may allow the city to recover the interest on.
Most important details and timeline
- Inventory and submission: Consultants said the city’s damage inventory was due May 1 and that staff and consultants filed the projects into FEMA’s system. They described an active process of converting site-specific damages into appropriately scoped FEMA projects. McPherson said 39 projects were already in FEMA’s grants portal, and four projects had been obligated to the state for about $5.1 million.
- Project grouping strategy: The consultants explained they deliberately grouped damages into smaller projects when appropriate because “small projects under a million ... go through the system a lot faster than projects over the million” and therefore yield earlier cash flow to the city.
- Insurance, fine arts and duplication of benefits: Gallagher said the city’s insurance covered a number of immediate losses but that the fine-arts policy had sublimits and that FEMA could cover restoration costs that exceed insurance appraisals. She said FEMA is “a means of last resort” and can also fund mitigation to reduce future flood risk.
- State funding and cost-share: Consultants noted the state made discretionary funds available that could offset the FEMA 25% cost share and that the city had pursued those programs. They also reported $37 million in a disaster allocation to the state (CDBG-DR) that included housing earmarks and could be used strategically to reduce the city’s matched exposure.
Local facilities at risk and next steps
Consultants identified several city facilities that likely will trigger major repair or replacement rules under FEMA, including the museum, an adult recreation center and several other public buildings. They said some facilities may exceed FEMA’s “50% rule,” which can require replacement rather than repair. For those large sites they recommended securing architect and engineering (A&E) allowances early to move designs and scopes forward.
The consultants asked departments to finalize backup documentation and procurement narratives so the city can clear remaining compliance reviews. They estimated the state could draw down obligated funds to the city in about four to six weeks after FEMA obligates the federal portion.
What the council asked and what remains unresolved
Councilors pressed for clarity on how quickly funds would be available and whether the city could bond against projected receipts to provide up-front cash for major projects (for example, a replacement museum). Consultants said that bonding and gross-receipts-tax projections could inform upfront financing but that the FEMA and state drawdown processes remain the gating steps. The consultants also said some state legislative funding allocations were still being sorted and that competing regional needs could affect the city’s share.
Ending
City staff and consultants said they would return with finer-grained, department-level project lists and funding scenarios for council review. They also urged councilors to expect a lengthy administrative process: FEMA documentation and state drawdown procedures are detailed and time-consuming, but the consultants said the city had made measurable progress in early obligations and preparing large projects for A&E work.
