Louisiana, 9 Other States Ask Federal Judge to Block Changes in National Flood Insurance Program
State attorneys said during arguments before U.S. District Judge Darrel Papillion that participation in the National Flood Insurance Program requires that local governments adopt building-elevation policies and flood-control efforts that often require taxes.
September 15, 2023 at 03:25 PM
3 minute read
Increases in federal flood insurance premiums that are projected to surpass 700% over the coming years are already leading people to back out of home purchases and will likely lead to an exodus of residents and businesses from southern Louisiana, officials told a federal judge Thursday in New Orleans.
The testimony came in a hearing in a lawsuit Louisiana and nine other states filed against the federal government to block sharp increases in national flood insurance rates. A phase-in of the new rates began in 2021. Annual increases are limited to 18%. The Federal Emergency Management Agency said the new method of computing rates has resulted in reductions or little or no increase for most policy holders.
But FEMA figures also show huge impending increases in some Louisiana ZIP codes. State and local officials who testified Thursday said the increases are expected to result in some people in working-class southern Louisiana to abandon their mortgages, try to sell homes that have been in families for generations, or drop their insurance.
"We've already seen a slowdown in new building," said Matt Jewell, president of St. Charles Parish, west of New Orleans.
The implications go beyond blows to the real estate market and tax revenue. Officials said lower revenue could also hamper flood prevention and mitigation efforts. And some federal disaster programs require people in certain areas to have flood insurance, which the officials argued is becoming unaffordable.
State attorneys said during arguments before U.S. District Judge Darrel Papillion that participation in the National Flood Insurance Program requires that local governments adopt building-elevation policies and flood-control efforts that often require taxes, approved by voters believing the mitigation efforts will hold rates down.
"They turned us into liars," state Solicitor General Liz Murrill told Papillion.
Papillion was hearing arguments on the federal government's motion to dismiss the suit and on the states' motion for an injunction blocking the rate increases pending further court proceedings. It was unclear if he would rule Thursday.
Florida, Idaho, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia are the other states listed as plaintiffs, along with some local governments and flood control bodies in Louisiana.
FEMA has said its new premium system is an improvement over past methods, incorporating data that wasn't used in the past, including scientific models and costs involved in rebuilding a home. The agency has said the old method could result in people with lower-valued homes paying more than a fair share, while those with higher-value homes pay relatively less.
A return to the old system of calculating premiums would not guarantee a reduction of rates, Justice Department attorney Yoseph Desta argued.
He and other government attorneys argued Thursday that the new rate plan had been in the works for years, that the states had plenty of opportunity for input, and that the lawsuit, filed months after the phase-in began, was filed too late. They also argued the states have no standing to sue over the rates set by the National Flood Insurance Program.
Kevin McGill reports for the Associated Press.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Trending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250