by Jack Igelman, Carolina Public Press
June 3, 2025

As climate-related disasters grow more frequent and costly, communities and governments face tough questions about how to mitigate future floods.

Federal, state and local decision makers often clash because they’re driven by different incentives, budget constraints and timelines, making coordination among governments challenging.  

State Sen. Julie Mayfield, D-Buncombe, is making resilience from floods a priority, with dam removal and lake dredging a part of the conversation.

[Subscribe for FREE to Carolina Public Press’ alerts and weekend roundup newsletters]

While removing obsolete dams can restore natural stream function and reduce the risk of floods, she said that dredging sediment-filled lakes behind structurally sound dams is another tool worth considering. 

For example, Mayfield helped secure funding to dredge Lake Susan in Montreat in Buncombe County. Construction began following Hurricane Helene to restore the lake’s depth and reestablish natural vegetation.  

Those solutions, however, are costly. Dam removal can range in costs from tens of thousands of dollars to millions, depending on the dam size, condition, and composition.

This article is the second in a three-part investigative series, Restraining Rivers, which examines the complexities of water control in the North Carolina mountains.

This article discusses how the lack of harmony between political leaders and governments makes mitigation of floods challenging. The first article in the series explored how dam failures and costs make them an unlikely solution to preventing future floods. The final article will identify the types of solutions that may be most effective in various locations.

Channeling money after floods

U.S. Rep. Chuck Edwards, R-Hendersonville, told CPP that the biggest challenge in recovery and resilience after floods is moving funding from the hands of the federal bureaucracy to state and local governments. 

“The federal government is very slow to reimburse local governments for the investment that they had to make to rebuild infrastructure,” he said.

“The folks in the state are far more knowledgeable about the needs of their constituents. I believe anytime you put the decision making and the accountability closer to the people that they represent, the more efficient response that you get.”

Beyond red tape, however, some federally funded projects may be in jeopardy due to funding freezes and staff reductions in federal agencies that oversee dam-related projects.

Money matters, “but we can do a lot with policy too” to lessen risk from future floods, Mayfield said, such as adopting stronger protections for floodplains and wetlands beyond federal standards.

Natural systems play a critical role in managing the risk from floods by absorbing and storing excess water during heavy rains. Yet in 2024, the NC General Assembly moved in the opposite direction, weakening the state’s authority to safeguard isolated wetlands following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Sackett decision, which narrowed the federal definition of a wetland.

The tension raises pressing questions: how can governments coordinate efforts to reduce future flood risks and make smarter decisions about where and how to rebuild? Yet the urgency to rebuild quickly may result in decisions that leave communities exposed to future risks from floods.

Streambank mitigation against floods

A case study of challenges regarding flood mitigation is the removal of debris and the restoration of streambanks damaged by Helene.  

Environmental organizations throughout the region are concerned that removing too much woody debris from storm damaged streams leaves riverbanks exposed, warms water temperatures, increases sedimentation, and harms fish and wildlife habitat. 

Debris removal in streams following a disaster is coordinated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 

Southern Environmental Law Center attorney Patrick Hunter has received calls from throughout the region regarding debris removal, including concerns on the Little River in Transylvania County, the French Broad River and the Broad River in hard-hit Chimney Rock. 

“I don’t mean to suggest that it’s all problematic, but I think some of the things the Army Corps is doing is just too aggressive,” Hunter said.

Among the clean-ups criticized by environmental organizations and local residents is a section of the French Broad River Park in Asheville below the confluence of the Swannanoa and the French Broad rivers. 

Waters from intense floods uprooted and washed away scores of trees, but critics of the debris removal argued that many of the live trees should have remained. Trees were also removed on a two-acre site adjacent to the parkland by the Metropolitan Sewerage District of Buncombe County in order to replace a pump station. 

Hunter is concerned that species already impacted by Tropical Storm Helene now face additional harm, compounding ecological stress. He also worries that cutting live vegetation from stream banks will increase erosion risks during future floods. 

Following a tropical system disaster declaration, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers operates under the direction of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the state impacted, with input from local governments.  Private contractors carry out most debris removal, part of a fast-growing disaster recovery industry. While their work is vital, it may come with ecological trade-offs, including impact to sensitive habitats and ecosystems.

The N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission and N.C. Department of Environmental Quality has issued guidelines to safeguard sensitive habitats during debris removal, but enforcement is uneven. Since contractors are paid by the volume of debris hauled rather than the quality of stream restoration, critics argue it’s an incentive to remove live trees, root systems, and riparian vegetation — potentially valuing heavy loads over ecological responsibility.

Rep. Edwards told CPP that his office has received complaints about contractors, however, he praised the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 

“My overall perception of the Army Corps is that they have done a terrific job in western North Carolina,” he said. “There have been some cases where some of the contractors have not been as delicate with our ecosystem as we might have liked. Under the circumstances they have really done a good job.”

Hunter understands the need to move quickly, but an expedited process of rebuilding without information or without public input may lead to trade-offs that communities are unwilling to make. 

“No one is trying to inflict harm on the landscape, but I think some of the incentives need to be restructured,” he said, such as rewarding contractors monetarily based on how much volume they’re taking from rivers. “That pretty obviously creates a problematic incentive to take more than necessary.”

Over-clearing or reckless removal of debris without consideration of the ecological impact is not tolerated, said Col. Brad Morgan, commander of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District. Contractors that exceed limits receive warnings or are removed from the job.

In addition to environmental challenges, existing laws and policies may also lead to rebuilding in floodplains, locking communities into cycles of future flood risk.

Some choices after floods are legal ones

In the aftermath of the storm, residents, industry, and shop owners throughout areas that Helene impacted, face a difficult question: whether to rebuild — and where.

For many, the decision is far more complex than it seems.

Zoning laws, floodplain regulations, and insurance requirements all shape that choice. And as storms grow stronger and more frequent, the answers are becoming increasingly urgent and perhaps more complex.

According to Emory University legal scholar Mark Nevitt, who examines the various ways that cities and regions rebuild following a national disaster, it’s not so simple where, when and how to rebuild.

He told CPP that climate change creates a difficult choice for property owners and governments on whether to invest in costly adaptations or to retreat from climate-exposed areas.

“What I’m seeing on climate adaptation is that lots of our laws, statutes, doctrines, are designed for what I call Earth 1.0,” he said.

“But what’s happening now is that climate change is a destabilizing force. The question from a legal standpoint is, what is the duty to upgrade, to repair, or to fix. That’s actually a really challenging question.”

In addition to building or rebuilding costly infrastructure, communities often adapt to a natural disaster like floods through managed retreat, Nevitt said, that may involve the purchase of at-risk properties through eminent domain or through voluntary buy-back programs. 

The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program administered by the NC Department of Public Safety’s Division of Emergency Management provides funding for local governments to purchase impacted properties from owners, returning the land to open green space. The program is voluntary, and property owners can apply and later withdraw applications. 

By May 30, 2025, the state received 659  applications from residents of Western North Carolina impacted by Helene, NC Division of Emergency Management Spokesperson Blake Swix said. The City of Asheville received 47 of those applications. Property owners have until Oct. 31, 2025, to apply. 

However, proactive managed retreat can be fraught, expensive and hampered both by a community’s attachment to a place and the economic costs of losing property tax revenue, Nevitt said.

“In a perfect world, you have a bottom-up swell of buy-in from the community for a truly voluntary buyout, but it’s expensive, it’s hard and it takes time,” Nevitt said. 

Typically, however, the default strategy following a natural disaster is an unmanaged retreat that’s ad hoc, reactive and disjointed. As a result, he argued that following extreme weather events like floods, a taxpayer-funded cycle of “destroy-repair-rebuild” occurs that’s guided by economic incentives and perhaps, psychology.

Attachment to place by individuals is really understandable, Nevitt said, especially in North Carolina. Nevertheless, “what happened in Asheville is a wakeup call for a lot of people.”

The US Stafford Act plays a critical role in federal disaster response by providing federal assistance to a state during an emergency.  Once an emergency or major disaster is declared, federal funds and assistance flow in.  Passed in 1988, it governs how the US responds to natural disasters.

Yet, the immediate steps of the government “will often not be the best long-term solution,” Nevitt said, such as the choice to rebuild a road with a high probability of risk from future floods.

“One of the issues North Carolina needs to think through is the process of choosing to retreat or abandon some of these roads or bridges for example. We really haven’t had this conversation in a meaningful way yet.”

Having “the kind of comprehensive, community-wide conversation” that Mayfield had hoped for in the days after the storm was nearly impossible, she said.

“I wanted to quickly launch a planning process and ask residents what they envisioned for moving forward — whether to rebuild, reimagine, or reshape the area,” she said.

Among the discussions with other elected officials was an Asheville-wide moratorium on redevelopment of places hard-hit by floods, such as the River Arts District. A moratorium, however, just wasn’t practical or politically feasible.

The reality, she said, was that property owners have the right to rebuild under existing rules unless the city condemns the property. 

“What we’re going to end up with is this patchwork of some people who are going to rebuild, and some people who are going to take the buyout,” she said. “That’s going to happen all over the city, in the county and all over the region.”

A future consequence of ad-hoc rebuilding may emerge with property transfers to new buyers who may be unaware of actual risk and history of floods. The Privacy Act of 1974 disguises climate risk for prospective homeowners by hiding prior flood history as a protected record and mandatory flood disclosures vary state by state. 

North Carolina improved its flood risk disclosure rating from a “D” to an “A” with new regulations effective July 1, 2024. The Southern Environmental Law Center filed a petition in February 2023 on behalf of multiple advocacy groups. The North Carolina Real Estate Commission approved the final disclosure form in March 2024, ensuring greater transparency for homebuyers.

Homebuyers are now informed whether a property is in a flood zone, has experienced damage from floods, has had a flood insurance claim, carries flood insurance, has a flood elevation certificate, or has received federal disaster assistance. 

“This is a no brainer; when people buy a home, they should know it’s flood risk,” Nevitt said.

What we learned for the next storm

Despite delays, money will soon be flowing from the federal government to areas impacted by Hurricane Helene.

On May 22, North Carolina’s state House passed a storm recovery package that would add more than $565 million to the Helene Fund, bringing the state’s total contribution to nearly $2 billion. 

Rep. Lindsay Prather, D-Buncombe, said while she appreciates this help, she would ask for even more direct assistance to local governments that are facing budget shortfalls. 

“Local governments in Western North Carolina are making the decision today on whether they’re going to have to fire people who just went through the state’s worst natural disaster, or they’re going to have to raise property taxes on people who just went through the state’s worst natural disaster,” she said. 

Additional funding may be delivered to local governments by Congress.

On May 15, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development approved $225 million supporting the City of Asheville’s 2025 Community Development Block Grant – Disaster Recovery Action Plan. According to the plan, $125 million will be spent on infrastructure, including improvements to parks, the water systems and public facilities, with the remaining funds divided between economic revitalization, housing, planning and public services.

Of the estimated $1 billion in total damages to city-owned property, a portion of the block grant could be used to fund the rebuilding of the John B. Lewis Soccer Complex at Azalea Park along the Swannanoa River — an area heavily damaged during Helene, although specific uses remain to be determined.

The City of Asheville included a public engagement process to help the government choose and prioritize projects, Hunter said.

“Once they start rolling out projects I anticipate the process will work much better,” he said, allowing citizens the opportunity to weigh in on the rebuilding process.

“I hope that once we get through this we can think about the lessons learned from Helene and make some changes to the way the disaster recovery process works and to make it work better.”

Still, he’s concerned there is a lack of coordination between local, state and federal governments, with no one overseeing how this all fits together to improve the community’s resilience to future floods.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency is a vital, irreplaceable partner in supporting communities with funding and coordination for greater flood resilience for the future, Mayfield said.

No state — aside from perhaps exceptionally well-resourced ones like California — has the capacity to manage disaster response and long-term recovery alone, she said. In places like North Carolina, where political will to invest in resilience is limited, a strong federal presence is crucial to drive those efforts forward.

“We have to have that federal push,” she said.

Congressman Edwards agreed with Mayfield on FEMA’s importance, but not its size.

“I’d like to see FEMA scale back significantly,” he said, to 25% of existing congressional appropriations. The remaining funds should go directly to states, with FEMA serving primarily as an adviser and consultant following a disaster, Edwards said.

“People in Western North Carolina are not used to dealing with hurricanes, and so we would need a set of consultants to fall back on,” Edwards said. “But the accountability for acting should be in the hands of the leaders in North Carolina, not through a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington.”

The federal government is slow to release funds, according to Edwards, which for example delayed the NC Department of Transportation’s ability to keep projects moving and holding up reimbursements to farmers for lost crops and land restoration.

Edwards was appointed to a FEMA task force to “overhaul” the agency in January. 

On April 15, 2025, Edwards delivered a report to senior White House staff with recommendations to reform FEMA and accelerate the recovery. 

Among the recommendations are a review of FEMA’s technological capacity, streamlining the waterway debris removal process, increasing transparency in FEMA communications with disaster survivors, and to reform federal reimbursements to rebuild private roads and bridges.

However, on April 28, the White House appointed new members to a FEMA Review Council led by Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Edwards was not appointed to the council.

“I’ve urged (the council) to take a look at my report and listen to the recommendations that I’ve made,” Edwards said. “I believe that my team has a point of reference they would find valuable. None of them have been up close and personal with a hurricane.”

Among potential federal staffing and funding cuts that may increase future risk from tropical systems are cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Weather Service. More than 550 of the 4,800 weather service employees earlier this year were dismissed, retired, or accepted incentive offers to leave following the Trump administration order to reduce staff and draft reorganization plans. 

Edwards lauded forecasting by the National Weather Service. “Had the National Weather Service not been on their game and sounded the alarm to the correct people using the correct methods” more lives may have been lost, he said.

He also hailed the efforts of neighbors, churches and nonprofit organizations in the storm’s aftermath.

“The reason that Western North Carolina has rebounded is because of the strong people that live here,” he said.  “We saw them come together immediately and make sure that folks were safe, had the supplies that they needed, and are helping begin the rebuilding process.”

Editor’s note: The Restraining Rivers investigative series is supported in part by the Pulitzer Center, whose mission is to champion the power of stories to make complex issues relevant and inspire action; Sugar Hollow Solar, a B-Corp certified, locally owned full-service renewable energy company; and by readers like you.

Clarification: Specific uses of block grant funding by the city of Asheville have not been determined at the time of writing. This article has been revised on this point based on new information from the city that was provided after publication.

This article first appeared on Carolina Public Press and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The post Floods mitigation in NC complicated by political clashes appeared first on carolinapublicpress.org

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

This article, published by Carolina Public Press and supported by the Pulitzer Center and a renewable energy company, reflects a Center-Left orientation through its emphasis on environmental protection, climate resilience, and criticism of deregulation. It features Democratic voices like Sen. Julie Mayfield and Rep. Lindsay Prather advocating for proactive federal involvement, environmental safeguards, and floodplain protections. While it includes Republican Rep. Chuck Edwards’ perspectives and critiques of FEMA, the tone remains more favorable toward liberal-leaning policy solutions. The piece is investigative and issue-driven, with a factual tone, but its framing leans toward progressive environmental and governance values.