Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) is federal legislation that establishes a pre-disaster hazard mitigation program and new requirements for the national post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). DMA 2000 encourages and rewards local and state pre-disaster planning, promotes sustainability, and seeks to integrate State and local planning with an overall goal of strengthening statewide hazard mitigation planning. This enhanced planning approach enables local, tribal, and state governments to articulate accurate and specific needs for hazard mitigation, which results in faster, more efficient allocation of funding and more effective risk reduction projects. Go to Top
What is hazard mitigation?
Hazard Mitigation is any action taken to reduce the loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters (natural, technological and man-made) (www.fema.gov). It is often considered the first of the four phases of emergency management; mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery.
Mitigation measures fall into the following six general categories:
Prevention: Measures such as planning and zoning, open space preservation, and development regulations, building codes, storm water management, fire fuel
reduction, soil erosion, and sediment control.
Property Protection: Measures such as acquisition, relocation, storm shutters, rebuilding, barriers, floodproofing, insurance, and structural retrofits for high winds and earthquake hazards.
Public Education and Awareness: Measures such as outreach projects, real estate disclosure, hazard information centers, technical assistance, and school age and adult education programs.
Natural Resource Protection: Measures such as erosion and sediment control, stream corridor protection, vegetative management, and wetlands preservation.
Emergency Services: Measures such as hazard threat recognition, hazard warning systems, emergency response, protection of critical facilities, and health and safety maintenance.
Structural Projects: Measures such as dams, levees, seawalls, bulkheads, high flow diversions, spillways, buttresses, debris basins, retaining walls, channel modifications, storm sewers, retrofitted buildings and elevated roadways. Go to Top
What is a hazard mitigation plan?
FEMA defines a Hazard Mitigation Plan as the documentation of a state or local government’s evaluation of natural hazards and the strategies to mitigate such hazards.
Hazard mitigation planning is the process of determining how to reduce or eliminate the loss of life and property damage resulting from natural hazards. Section 322 of the DMA 2000 specifically addresses mitigation planning at the state and local levels. FEMA has promulgated hazard mitigation planning regulations pursuant to the DMA 2000. These regulations identify four essential phases to mitigation planning: (1) organizing resources, (2) assess the risks, (3) develop the mitigation plan, and (4) implement the plan and monitor progress.
Hudson County is preparing a Multi-Jurisdictional All-Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Plan will demonstrate the County and participating jurisdiction’s commitment to reducing risk and serve as a guide for decision makers as they commit resources to minimize the effects of natural hazards. Go to Top
How does this plan benefit Hudson County?
- A hazard mitigation plan will assist Hudson County with the following:
- An increased understanding of natural hazards the County faces and its residents
- Development of more sustainable and disaster-resistant communities
- Eligibility for federal funds for pre-disaster mitigation planning (DMA2000)
- Partnerships that support planning and mitigation efforts and may offer potential financial savings. For example:
- Possible Flood insurance premium reduction
- Broader resources for funding of mitigation projects
- Enhanced benefit-cost rations for U.S. Army Corp of Engineers projects
- Reduced long-term impacts and damages to human health and structures and reduced repair costs
Proactive mitigation leads to sustainable, more cost-effective projects. By contrast, reactive mitigation tends to lead to the “quick-fix” alternatives; it simply costs too much to address the effects of disasters only after they happen. A surprising amount of damage can be prevented if the County anticipates where and how disasters will occur, and take steps to mitigate those damages