Pasco officials weigh NFIP/CRS tradeoffs as residents face post‑storm rebuild choices

County officials and emergency‑management staff spent a large portion of the Feb. 18 stormwater workshop reviewing the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and the Community Rating System (CRS), the voluntary NFIP program that rewards communities for floodplain management activities with premium discounts for policyholders.

Andy (staff member) briefed the board on the program’s benefits and costs. He said participating communities earn CRS points for activities that go beyond NFIP minimums — for example public education, improved permitting, and floodplain mapping — and that Pasco’s current CRS participation produces an estimated countywide reduction in flood insurance premiums. Andy summarized the local financial effect: participation has produced a premium reduction the county estimates at roughly $3.9 million annually in aggregate premium savings for policyholders, and Pasco’s current CRS rating is a 5 with staff working to reach a 4.

Why it matters: county staff and commissioners debated the tradeoffs. Leaving the NFIP/CRS program might relieve constraints some homeowners face when rebuilding (for example, stricter elevation and substantial‑damage rules), but exiting would also sever pathways to federal mitigation grants and loans. Andy warned the board that nonparticipation would make homeowners in special flood hazard areas ineligible for many federal programs (HMGP, FMA, disaster recovery loans such as SBA), and the county would lose eligibility for federal mitigation grants and certain disaster assistance programs that previously supported acquisitions and infrastructure repairs.

Officials described practical consequences shown in the transcript: JP Murphy, director of building construction services, said county inspectors had inspected roughly 13,000 properties after the storms and that about 2,000 had been identified as substantially damaged under applicable thresholds. Murphy described the rules the county uses: for mobile/manufactured homes one foot of water is often treated as substantial damage; for single‑family structures a commonly applied threshold is three feet or a comparable 49% of replacement value test applied through an appraisal process.

Speakers noted mitigation options tied to federal programs: awarded HMGP funds (Andy referenced a recent HMGP award of roughly $3.2 million tied to a prior storm) and other hazard mitigation grants and loans could subsidize elevation, buyouts, demolition, or reconstruction in compliance with current federal and NFIP rules. Commissioners raised equity concerns: strict elevation/repair rules can make it infeasible for long‑time homeowners to rebuild in place because compliance costs may exceed post‑claim payouts or household means.

Ending: The discussion closed without a board vote. Staff said the county will keep participating in NFIP and CRS activities while exploring mitigation funds (including HUD and HMGP) and local options (grants or loans) to help lower‑income homeowners comply with elevation or buyout standards.