The Batesville people who stayed away in droves for Wednesday’s Flood Risk Open House in Sardis will likely appear in those numbers (how many’s in a drove, anyway?) at city board meetings next year after they finally figure out that they’re going to have to buy flood insurance with annual premiums ranging from $1,000 up.

I hope that the foregoing will prove to be an overstatement of the impact of the proposed Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) which will become effective around January 2012, but it has potential to be costly for every home or business in the flat areas of this town.

Background

The county has participated in the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance program since 1980. The flood insurance rate map adopted back then has been in effect since, with the exception of the City of Batesville, which was revised in 1989.

In 2003, the President asked Congress to appropriate funds to update the nation’s flood maps. That’s what is going on now in Panola County.

Interestingly, the 1989 flood insurance rate map did not take into consideration Sand Creek, the main drainage channel running through the middle of Batesville. The Flood Map Modernization program begun in 2003 uses modern technology and the latest data. In Batesville it has certainly taken Sand Creek into consideration.

Extensive residential and business property within corporate limits has been determined to lie within special flood hazard areas.

What does it mean?

Designation as a flood hazard area can impact property values and bring with it requirements for the purchase of flood insurance. It impacts property owners and renters, mortgage and commercial lenders, and real estate interests.

Using the figures provided by FEMA representatives at Wednesday’s meeting, the annual premium for $125,000 in building coverage and $40,000 in content coverage for a home in a flood hazard area is $2,355. The home’s owner could be required by his or her mortgage holder to provide the flood insurance just like it requires fire insurance. It is a big deal.

What’s the city doing about it?

City officials including the engineer have moved quickly to gather data that could result in some of the property being reclassified as less risky.

Using the same coverage example as above in an area classified as “moderate-to-low risk” would bring the annual flood insurance premium to $1,002, according to FEMA. That’s less than half of the premium for the high-risk area but still leaves suffering from sticker shock the property owner heretofore not required to carry any flood insurance

The engineer has proposed “monumentation markers” on city-owned property at intervals in low-lying areas. This would give owners of private property elevation reference points from which to have their own survey work performed.

Keep in mind that the city cannot provide the survey work to prove the elevation of private property. That burden will have to be borne by the property owner.  The city plans to make it easier and less costly by establishing elevations nearby on public property.

The engineer is also gathering other pertinent data: permits for construction, for instance, require surveys establishing elevation. City officials are also gathering other pertinent data, including hydraulic data, that may help reclassify property more favorably for its owners.

What can you do?

First, determine whether your property will be affected. Go to the City Code Office. City Flood Plain Manager John McCollum will be glad to show you the map and help you find your property to determine whether it’s in a high-risk area.

There will be at least one meeting in Batesville, a Mississippi Emergency Management official said. Date and time to be announced. Watch for it. Attend the meeting to learn more.

Understand the problems

Batesville residents really have two (at least) flood problems that are separate and distinct.

Heretofore, we’ve discussed the potential problem that will come with changes to the FEMA map. There’s not much property owners can do other than to join the city to minimize the impact.

A second problem affects owners of property adjacent to the Sand Creek, especially those who live on Acorn Lane.

Those properties are rapidly being eroded each time there is extensive rainfall over the watershed. Some property owners have lost 12 feet or more from their backyards.

The city has received grant help from the Natural Resources Conservation Service for placement of rip rap to stabilize bank erosion along other sections of the creek. However, access to the site for the large equipment necessary presents problems.

Another problem for the city is private ownership of the land. State law prohibits city improvements to private land, and property lines run to the center of Sand Creek. Yet property owners affected by the erosion point to the city’s permitting of construction and paving upstream that has increased the volume and flow of the runoff substantially within a few years.

Forty years ago in the city’s first comprehensive plan a recommendation was made to create upstream dams on the city’s streams to hold back runoff and stabilize the flow. Nothing much ever came of it, and today most of the land then available for such holding basins has been used otherwise.

Perhaps a comprehensive watershed plan for the city could be developed to address flood map, creek bank erosion and other drainage problems. With such an undertaking, the city is not the solution, but it should be the leading partner in the solution.