Section One [Introduction]

SECTION ONE [INTRODUCTION] Section One [Introduction] Section One introduces hazard mitigation planning, including the purpose of the plan, benefits and challenges of utilizing the multi-jurisdictional approach, an overview of the laws, regulations, and guidance, hazard mitigation assistance grant programs, plan financing and preparation, and organization of the plan. Section One [Introduction] SECTION ONE [INTRODUCTION] TABLE OF CONTENTS HAZARD MITIGATION AND PLANNING 1-2 PURPOSE OF THE PLAN 1-2 MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES 1-3 LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND GUIDANCE 1-4 DISASTER MITIGATION ACT OF 2000 1-4 MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK 1-4 HAZARD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE 1-5 PLAN FINANCING AND PREPARATION 1-6 ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN 1-7 SECTIONS OF THE PLAN 1-7 TABLE OF FIGURES FIGURE 1.1: HAZARD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE [FEMA] GRANT PROGRAMS 1-5 TABLE OF TABLES TABLE 1.1: CRITICAL FACILITIES SUMMARY 1-6 1 - 1 Section One [Introduction] HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN ANTELOPE, HOLT, AND KNOX COUNTIES SECTION ONE [INTRODUCTION] HAZARD MITIGATION AND PLANNING Natural hazards, such as severe winter storms, tornados and high winds, severe thunderstorms, flooding, extreme heat, drought, earthquakes, landslides, and wildfires are a part of the world around us. Their occurrence is natural and inevitable, and there is little we can do to control their force and intensity. Each year in the United States, natural disasters take the lives of hundreds of people and injure thousands more. Nationwide, taxpayers pay billions of dollars annually to help communities, organizations, businesses, and individuals recover from disasters. These dollars only partially reflect the true cost of disasters, because additional expenses incurred by insurance companies and non-governmental organizations are not reimbursed by tax dollars. Many natural disasters are predictable, and much of the damage caused by these events can be reduced or even eliminated. While the threat from hazards may never be fully eliminated, there is much we can do to lessen their potential impact. The concept and practice of reducing risks associated with known hazards is referred to as hazard mitigation. Hazard mitigation is defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as “any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to human life and property from a hazard event.” The results of a three-year, congressionally mandated independent study to assess future savings from mitigation activities provides evidence that mitigation activities are highly cost-effective. On average, each dollar spent on mitigation saves society an average of $4 in avoided future losses, in addition to saving lives and preventing injuries (National Institute of Building Science Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council 2005). Hazard mitigation techniques include both structural measures, such as strengthening or protecting buildings and infrastructure from the destructive forces of potential hazards, and non-structural measures, such as the adoption of sound land use or floodplain management policies or the creation of public awareness programs. A comprehensive mitigation approach addresses hazard vulnerabilities that exist today and in the foreseeable future. Therefore, it is essential that projected patterns of future development are evaluated and considered in terms of how growth will increase or decrease a jurisdiction’s hazard vulnerability over time. As a jurisdiction formulates a comprehensive approach to reduce the impacts of hazards, a key means to accomplish this task is through the development, adoption, and regular update of a hazard mitigation plan. A hazard mitigation plan establishes the vision, guiding principles, and specific actions designed to reduce the future hazard vulnerabilities. PURPOSE OF THE PLAN The purpose of this plan is to guide hazard mitigation planning to better protect the people and property of the jurisdictions from the effects of hazard events. This plan demonstrates the jurisdiction’s commitment to reducing risks from hazards and serves as a tool to help decision-makers direct mitigation activities and resources. This plan was also developed, among other reasons, to ensure Antelope, Holt, and Knox Counties’ continued eligibility for certain federal disaster assistance; specifically, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program (PDM), and the Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA). Completion also earns credits for the National Flood Insurance Program’s (NFIP) Community Rating System (CRS) which can lower flood insurance premiums for home and business owners in participating CRS communities. Information in this plan will be used to help guide and coordinate mitigation activities and decisions for local land use policy in the future. Proactive mitigation planning will help reduce the cost of disaster response and recovery to jurisdictions and their residents by protecting critical facilities, reducing liability exposure, and minimizing overall impacts and disruptions. The Counties have been affected by hazards in the past and thus are committed to reducing future impacts from hazard events and maintaining eligibility for mitigation-related federal funding. 1 - 2 Section One [Introduction] All jurisdictions participating in this plan are vulnerable to a wide range of natural hazards that threaten the safety of residents, have the potential to damage or destroy both public and private property, and disrupt the local economy and overall quality of life. The Antelope, Holt, and Knox Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan is an effective means to incorporate hazard mitigation principles and practices into the day-to-day activities of county and municipal governments. This plan recommends specific actions designed to protect residents as well as the built environment from those hazards that pose the greatest risk. Identified mitigation actions go beyond recommending structural solutions to reduce existing vulnerability, such as elevation, retrofitting, and acquisition projects. Local policies on growth and development, incentives tied to natural resource protection, and public awareness and outreach activities are examples of other actions intended to reduce future vulnerability to identified hazards. MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES Mitigation is most effective when it is based on a comprehensive, long-term plan that is developed before a disaster occurs. The purpose of mitigation planning is to identify local policies and actions that can be implemented over the long-term to reduce risk and future losses from hazards. These mitigation policies and actions are identified based on an assessment of hazards, vulnerabilities, and risks through the participation of a wide range of stakeholders and the public in the planning process. Mitigation plans form the foundation for a jurisdiction's long-term strategy to reduce disaster losses and break the cycle of disaster damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage. The planning process is as important as the plan itself. It creates a framework for risk-based decision making to reduce damages to lives, property, and the economy from future disasters. Local governments benefit from mitigation planning by: Identifying cost effective actions for risk reduction that are agreed upon by stakeholders and the public. Focusing resources on the greatest risks and vulnerabilities. Building partnerships by involving citizens, organizations, and businesses. Increasing education and awareness of threats and hazards, as well as their risks. Communicating priorities to state and federal officials. Aligning risk reduction with other jurisdiction objectives. According to FEMA, “A multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan is a plan jointly prepared by more than one jurisdiction.” The term ‘jurisdiction’ is equal to any ‘local government’. This is defined at 44 CFR §201.2 as Title 44 Part 201, Mitigation Planning in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), defines a ‘local government’ as “any county, municipality, city, town, township, public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council of governments (regardless of whether the council of governments is incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under State law), regional or interstate government entity, or agency or instrumental of a local government; any Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, or Alaska Native village or organization, and any rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other public entity.” For the purposes of this plan, any ‘taxing authority’ was included, except for public power districts. In Nebraska, public power districts are considered a ‘quasi-state government’ and are required to submit individual plans as an annex to the Nebraska State Hazard Mitigation Plan. Multi-jurisdictional planning processes can offer the following benefits: improves communication and coordination among jurisdictions and other regional entities, enables comprehensive mitigation approaches to reduce risks that affect multiple jurisdictions, maximizes economies of scale by leveraging individual capabilities and sharing costs and resources, avoids duplication of efforts, and provides an organizational structure that local jurisdictions may find supportive. While offering these potential benefits, a multi-jurisdictional planning process can also present the following challenges: reduces individual control and ownership over the mitigation

Load more