Notes from the meeting-

Mayor Collier opened the meeting, explaining that the Town had applied to FEMA to replace the berm; this application was rejected by FEMA, which stated that the existing shoreline was "unstable". The Town appealed the decision, but what has been proposed by Alabama Emergency Management Agency, which is our liason to FEMA, is instead that we have a berm built on the right-of-way south ofBienville Blvd.

Beth Cox has posted detailed notes on what what was said at the meeting on her site so I don't think there's any point in duplicating her efforts, you can read her notes here ,    but I do want to comment as follows:

These are my opinion, unless noted otherwise:

• Even with this proposed berm, anything south of the berm, including existing water, sewer, roads, signs, etc. would not be covered by FEMA if damaged by storm. Existing infrastructure, such as water lines, sewer lines, power lines, especially from St. Denis west (as presented at the hearing etc is presently south of where the berm would be and therefore not be protected by the berm, meaning that the only thing possibly protected by this would be Bienville Blvd, unless these facilities were moved to the north side of the road, at Town expense. 

• The berm would have no drainage and as presented at the hearing would act like a dam and would likely create standing water around the homes south of the berm, perhaps even raising the water table and exacerbating the problems already faced there (personal observation)

• There would be no access from Bienville across the berm. Access to the streets and homes south of Bienville would be via a gravel road, which would be built at Town's expense and maintained at Town's expense (Mayor Collier).

• With no drainage, this road (is this the gravel road) would be under water much of the time. Garbage trucks, Fire Rescue vehicles, and Utilities vehicles may have difficulty utilizing this road, and cause problems with garbage service, electric or water service, and,  lead to potential insurance issues with NFIP, AIUA or other insurance carriers, and may be  to the eventual condemnation of these houses.

• Another point brought out during the hearing- if the Town went forward with the berm,and this berm resulted in rendering these homes uninhabitable, would this be a case of what is known as "inverse condemnation" (indirect taking of all of the West end Beach property) and would this not mean the Town would be taking property without just compensation?  Based upon the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, which states “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”, this cannot be done.   

• If inverse condemnation occurs to these 138 houses and lots would result in a loss of land and property in excess of $80 million dollars and a "writing off" of the West End itself . . .  all in order to receive a temporary berm which provides limited protection to Bienville Blvd.
  

• There were several suggestions were presented including jetties, geo tubes,     approachingthe Oil Companies operating the offshore gas rigs to request financial participation, among others.

In conclusion, the benefits from this berm is inconsequential  when compared to the problems and expense it causes. It would cost us over $ 1 Million to participate in this berm, plus the cost of a 3- mile-long gravel road, and the likely loss of the Lodging Tax and revenue generated by vacationers, all to protect the road?

We would be better off taking the estimates $1 million dollars it would cost us to participate in this berm project, and spend it to obtain expedited permitting to begin rebuilding the beach ourselves.

More on possible long term solutions later . . . .