Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nfip Floodplain Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Umatilla County chooses permit‑by‑permit approach in face of FEMA NFIP changes, commissioners say mapping of impacts will follow
Summary
County staff recommended and the board authorized notifying FEMA that Umatilla County will evaluate floodplain development via permit‑specific habitat assessments and mitigation (a permit‑by‑permit, no‑net‑loss approach) to remain in the National Flood Insurance Program while staff maps likely property impacts.
Umatilla County commissioners on Nov. 26 authorized staff to notify the Federal Emergency Management Agency that the county will select a permit‑by‑permit option to meet pre‑implementation requirements tied to recent National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) changes.
Bob Walder, the county’s community development director, told the board that FEMA’s biological opinion and associated NFIP changes require participating jurisdictions to select a pre‑implementation compliance approach by Dec. 1. Staff presented three options: (1) prohibit all development in special flood hazard areas; (2) adopt a 2024 model ordinance requiring mitigation to achieve no‑net‑loss of floodplain habitat; or (3) require a special habitat assessment and mitigation plan on a permit‑by‑permit basis. Walder recommended the third option as a way to remain in NFIP participation while still applying mitigation requirements.
Walder said the county will map properties in unincorporated areas to estimate how many parcels and dwelling units lie in floodplain areas and to better understand cost and practical impacts. He warned that all options carry substantial uncertainty, that legal challenges are expected across Oregon, and that the new requirements could conflict with existing state land‑use priorities and protections for farming.
Commissioners expressed frustration with the limited time and complexity of the rule changes, the potential cost burden on homeowners and developers to meet a no‑net‑loss standard, and the possibility of being placed between conflicting legal requirements if the rules are litigated. One commissioner urged that the county be at the table for any legal challenges to preserve Umatilla County’s voice.
The board voted to authorize staff to notify FEMA of the county’s chosen pre‑implementation option (permit‑by‑permit). Walder and staff said the decision keeps the county in NFIP, preserving flood insurance eligibility and access to federally backed mortgages for property owners while staff refines local mapping and code language that will be needed for implementation.
Why it matters: the county’s choice affects property owners in floodplains, the cost and ability to develop or repair structures in special flood hazard areas, and the county’s legal exposure as statewide rule challenges proceed.
Next steps: staff will complete mapping work and prepare code language as needed; commissioners said they expect continued regional legal and policy discussions and possible litigation.
