Federal Emergency Management Agency Review Council; Notice of Meeting

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) opposes the FEMA review council's final report, arguing that it ignores climate science and attempts to shift the burden of disaster response and funding onto state, local, tribal, and territorial governments. They specifically criticize recommendations to reduce federal oversight, privatize flood insurance, and consolidate individual assistance programs, which they argue would harm vulnerable communities.

The State of North Carolina, through the Governor’s Recovery Office for Western North Carolina and the NC Department of Public Safety, supports the Council's goals of creating a faster and more flexible disaster system. However, they express specific concerns regarding potential reductions in survivor assistance, the shifting of federal costs to state and local governments, and the need for parametric triggers that account for inland and non-tropical hazards.

The State of Minnesota's Homeland Security and Emergency Management Division submitted comments regarding the FEMA Review Council Report. While the state supports modernization and certain programs like BRIC, it expresses significant concerns regarding proposed changes that would shift costs, increase administrative burdens, or reduce federal investment in workforce development and disaster assistance for state, local, tribal, and territorial partners.

The commenter opposes the proposed Refined Risk Reduction Program (R3P) as a replacement for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, arguing that it is too vague, rigid, and poorly suited for California's specific hazards like wildfires and earthquakes. They express concerns regarding unrealistic timelines, unpredictable cost-share structures, increased administrative burdens on states, and a lack of clarity regarding eligible activities.

The Maryland Department of Emergency Management (MDEM) supports the FEMA Review Council's efforts to modernize the national emergency management system but urges a phased implementation of its recommendations. They argue that transitioning responsibilities to state and local governments requires sustained federal investment in workforce development, funding, and technical capabilities to avoid fracturing national readiness and placing undue burdens on states.

The Placer County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, a special district representing local residents, opposes the proposed rule to weaken or dissolve FEMA and defer disaster mitigation responsibilities to states and local communities. They argue that these changes would create disastrous consequences for disaster recovery and recommend preserving the NFIP and continuing nationwide floodplain mapping efforts.

The State of Montana supports the FEMA Review Council's proposed reforms to elevate the role of states in disaster management but emphasizes that these changes must not become unfunded mandates. They argue for realistic implementation timelines (at least six years), federal funding to build state capacity, and the preservation of state discretion in hazard mitigation and funding models.