Subject: RE: Save Warfleigh: Thank-you and feedback
From: “Glaser, Karen” <Karen.Glaser@mail.house.gov>
Date: Tue, Feb 24, 2015 10:06 am
To: Jim Polito
Thanks again for inviting me to your meeting last Thursday and thanks for the summary of your concerns. I briefed Congresswoman Brooks on the meeting and shared your email with her. I am working closely with her and our DC office to figure out how we can assist. We have several irons in the fire at this point and I hope to have more information on our specific steps to you next week. In the meantime, if there is other information or specific questions you have, please let me know.
From: Jim Polito
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 8:16 PM
To: Glaser, Karen
Subject: Save Warfleigh: Thank-you and feedback
Thank-you so much for taking the time out to share your perspective on recent changes in the National Flood Insurance Program and the status of the Indianapolis North Flood Damage Reduction Project. We especially appreciate your attendance on perhaps the coldest night of the winter season. We also appreciate the ways you mentioned Congresswoman Susan Brooks may be able to intervene on our behalf in a matter that so profoundly and fundamentally affects our lives and well-being.
We are beginning to receive feedback on your presentation. Unfortunately, there is a certain sense of disappointment, especially with the characterization of the dire circumstances in which we now find ourselves as largely a local issue:
(1) Warfleigh neighbors face the distinct possibility of foreclosure and bankruptcy as annual premiums for flood insurance rise to the range of $8,000 – $11,000 per year. This possibility results from recent changes in federal legislation and, accordingly, it likely is not appropriate to characterize our issue as a local issue.
(2) Homeowners who must relocate due to personal or professional reasons are unable to sell their homes due to uncertainty regarding future premiums and rates for flood insurance. These same homeowners also are not able to rent their homes as an alternative to selling because annual flood insurance premiums for non-primary residences are roughly double the rates and premiums of primary residences. We may colloquially refer to this as adding insult to injury. This situation results from recent changes in federal legislation and, accordingly, it likely is not appropriate to characterize our issue as a local issue.
(3) Finally, representative Warfleigh homes will be under at least 5’ of water should a significant flood event occur. It is a federal issue when a locality fails to protect in an expeditious manner the life and property of its citizenry.
I’m sorry I can’t share more positive feedback. Unfortunately, the Warfleigh neighborhood finds itself in an extremely negative and untenable position.