Louisiana has long been familiar with the challenges of flooding. With extensive expertise in flood management and a history of proactive measures to protect its communities, the state knows how to reduce flood risk and safeguard its residents. However, recent changes in the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) flood insurance policies have sent shockwaves through the state, impacting homeowners, small businesses, and communities. In this blog post, we delve into the issue of FEMA Risk Rating 2.0 and provide an update on the progress of the parishes’ ongoing lawsuit against it.

The Human Toll: Homeowners Caught in the Crossfire
To illustrate the impact, consider the stories of Russell Hebert and Steve Bourgeois, Louisiana residents who had previously enrolled in the National Flood Insurance Program, a requirement for government-backed mortgages. Both of these homeowners lived in parishes where tax dollars had been invested in mitigation efforts, including levee construction and other protective measures. However, despite these local investments, Russell’s flood insurance premium increased from a little over $3,000 to $5,600, while Steve’s premium skyrocketed from slightly over $600 to over $6,000. These unjustifiable rate hikes are a direct result of FEMA’s Risk Rating 2.0, raising questions about transparency and fairness.

The Heart of the Problem: Lack of Transparency
At the core of this issue lies the lack of transparency in FEMA’s Risk Rating 2.0. Homeowners like Steve, whose properties had never flooded and were not considered part of a flood zone previously, were left in the dark about how FEMA’s flood map changed and how the calculations were made. Prior to Risk Rating 2.0, local mitigation measures, such as building levees and elevating homes, would have led to discounted premiums. However, the new system ignores these local efforts, resulting in higher premiums based on undisclosed criteria.