In this story from today’s Bee we learn that the mandatory flood insurance bill, not a good idea to begin with, died in committee. While the legislator’s intention to impose some financial protection for citizens who suffer from flooding was a good one, the means was not.
The better method of providing financial protection for citizens living in flood-prone areas is to do all that can be done, optimally, to ensure floods don’t happen to begin with.
While heavy rains and repeated storms hitting our region are out of our control, the means of stopping floods by capturing flood waters through large dams are not.
Hopefully, the legislature will soon realize this is the better alternative for protecting Sacramento from flooding and rally behind those public leaders working in this direction.
Here is an excerpt.
Sweeping mandate for flood coverage dies in committee
By Jim Sanders -- Bee Capitol Bureau Published 2:15 am PDT Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Legislation to require virtually every Sacramento home and business owner to purchase flood insurance as a hedge against catastrophic levee failure died Monday in an Assembly committee.
The measure by Assemblyman Dave Jones, D-Sacramento, ended with a whimper when nobody seconded a motion to approve Assembly Bill 1898, thus ending the Banking and Finance Committee session without a vote.
"I think we've missed a very important opportunity to make sure people are protected so that when a flood comes, they'll have something to fall back on," Jones said.
AB 1898 was opposed by the insurance and lending industries.
"We do not think it's the appropriate role of state government to mandate flood insurance - or any insurance," said Michael Paiva of the Personal Insurance Federation of California.
Two Sacramento-area legislators serving on the Assembly banking committee - Republicans Roger Niello of Fair Oaks and Doug La Malfa of Richvale - spoke against AB 1898.
