Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hazard Mitigation Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rohnert Park planners hear informational update on Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Summary
City staff briefed the Planning Commission on a draft update to the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, explaining the five‑year update cycle, FEMA/Cal OES review, outreach plans (including bilingual utility-mailers) and how the plan links to funding eligibility; commissioners pressed staff on fire risk, hydrogen‑fuel permits and emergency medical capacity.
City planning staff told the Rohnert Park Planning Commission on Dec. 12 that the city is preparing an update to its Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), a document that assesses natural‑hazard risks and lists mitigation actions to reduce future loss and keep the city eligible for state and federal hazard funding.
Elliot, a city planning staff member, said the LHMP is required to be updated every five years and that the current plan expires in February 2025. “This is a plan that must be updated every 5 years,” Elliot said, and staff intends to carry forward many previously identified mitigation actions so the city can continue pursuing grants and Disaster Recovery funding. He said the update will revisit risk levels, infrastructure and programmatic actions, update data and analysis, and include outreach and equity considerations. The public review draft will undergo Cal OES and FEMA review before the city adopts the plan.
Commissioners pressed staff on what the plan means for residents. Chairperson Epstein asked, “how does this work for somebody living in the city — what are the things they should be looking for?” Elliot replied that the plan focuses on hazards such as flood, fire, earthquake and extreme heat; the plan evaluates risks to life and structures and recommends actions ranging from natural‑system protections (for example, upstream riverbank work) to infrastructure changes, raised roads and public education to improve preparedness.
Commissioners also raised several specific concerns they want reflected or coordinated with other planning efforts. A commissioner asked that hydrogen‑fueling stations and the expedited permitting some applicants receive under state law be treated as a new hazard and that the plan make clear how county hazmat resources and mutual aid would be used in those incidents. Another commissioner urged the city to commission a current fire‑fuel density study and a standards‑of‑coverage review to assess station siting and staffing needs as the city adds housing near wildland‑urban interface areas. Commissioners additionally questioned how the city’s BLS (basic life support) public‑safety model, which relies on outside paramedic and ambulance services, would function in the event of a major countywide emergency when mutual and automatic aid could be strained.
Staff said some operational topics (such as staffing and service‑level standards) are typically addressed in General Plan chapters rather than in the LHMP, and noted the city plans to pursue coordination with Sonoma County on a multi‑jurisdictional hazard plan in 2026, while maintaining an interim city plan through fall 2026. For outreach staff described early steps already taken: a National Night Out table, stakeholder meetings with housing service providers, a planned bilingual utility‑bill insert to notify residents and request input, and continued coordination with neighboring jurisdictions and utilities.
No formal action was required or taken on Dec. 12; staff characterized the presentation as informational and said a public review draft will be circulated once prepared. The next procedural steps are public input, preparation of a public review draft, Cal OES/FEMA review, and then a return to the city for adoption and formal compliance to remain eligible for hazard‑mitigation funding.
