disaster mitigation leads to disaster resilience

The value of continuous improvement and disaster mitigation is offered up on the altar of “saving money” and “making money” and if the Piper is to be paid, it hopefully won’t be on my watch. “Why should I spend money on something that only ‘might happen’ when there is a buck to be made or saved today?” 

The above type of thinking leads to deferred maintenance and weak building codes. Two news stories from today highlight both.

Remember the 2021 partial collapse of the Champlain Towers South condominium in Surfside, FL? Well, it takes a disaster to get legislators to act and now in taking action the “failure to maintain” has come home to roost with people owning older condos that are now being required to make repairs to their structures. It is the condo owners who must bear this expense—that most if not all have put off for many years. See this New York Times article, Why Owning (and Buying) a Florida Condo Has ‘Turned Into a Nightmare’   How would you like getting a bill for over $200K for “repairs” to your building?

And, a couple of years ago I did a Disaster Zone Podcast: Litigating Insurance Claims After a Disaster which focused significantly on the challenges of having a property loss that occurs when you are an owner of a condo. Not good! If you own a condo, you should listen to this one.

Then again today there is this NY Times article, How the North Carolina Legislature Left Homes Vulnerable to Helene  It is the same old story I’ve been writing about for many years. Developers, builders, construction trades and HOME OWNERS fight any new requirements meant to keep them and their properties safer in a disaster.

Here’s a brief summary of what is contained in the article, “Over the past 15 years, North Carolina lawmakers have rejected limits on construction on steep slopes, which might have reduced the number of homes lost to landslides; blocked a rule requiring homes to be elevated above the height of an expected flood; weakened protections for wetlands, increasing the risk of dangerous storm water runoff; and slowed the adoption of updated building codes, making it harder for the state to qualify for federal climate-resilience grants.” Climate change—what a hoax!

This disaster is “maybe” big enough to counteract what has been done in the past—but maybe not. People get “disaster amnesia” and it is only when there are repeated disasters, one right after the other, like in the Big Bend of Florida, which has had three hurricanes in one year, do people start to say, “Maybe I need to move!”  If this Helene disaster is considered a “one off” then why change what we are doing!  There is money to be made and saved—in the short term.