.

Tetreau: ‘Flood Insurance Program Has Failed Fairfield Residents’

Kupchick, Tetreau attend legislative task force on shoreline preservation.

State Rep. Brenda Kupchick (R-132) with Fairfield First Selectman Mike Tetreau. Credit: Submitted
State Rep. Brenda Kupchick (R-132) with Fairfield First Selectman Mike Tetreau. Credit: Submitted

In order to listen to important information about new changes to the National Flood Insurance Program, State Rep. Brenda Kupchick (R-132) along with Fairfield First Selectman Mike Tetreau participated in the Shoreline Preservation Task Force at the State Capitol on Jan. 15.

Kupchick, who has been a member of the Shoreline Preservation Task Force since 2012 invited Tetreau to join the panel to listen to testimony and provide comments to the Task Force.

“We have many Fairfield residents that are still in limbo due to a broken system of the Federal Flood Insurance program,” said Rep. Kupchick. “Many shoreline residents are severely impacted by the Biggert-Waters changes. Bottom line, residents paid into an insurance program for many years and rightfully expected appropriate coverage after Sandy.”

Shoreline Preservation Task Force was hosting an Informational Forum on the Biggert-Waters changes to the National Flood Insurance Program with representatives from the insurance and real estate industries, state departments and agencies, as well as municipal and congressional leaders.

The Task Force members, municipal leaders, realtors, private insurance industry and congressional representatives discussed the current challenges shoreline communities are facing any possible legislative solutions on the horizon, and an outlook of the future.

“Thanks to the State Legislature for looking into problems with the National Flood Insurance Program,” said Tetreau. “Up to this point, the flood insurance program has let down many of our residents in Fairfield by not providing adequate coverage for damages to their homes and many are still suffering today because of this failure.  I look forward to changes in this program that will hopefully not only address the future, but will help many people who are still struggling.”

fairfield newcomer January 22, 2014 at 11:24 AM
The Biggert-Waters Act is to have flood insurance premiums reflect the true cost of having flood coverage.
Ajack January 23, 2014 at 06:50 AM
The reason I sold my house along the shore a while back was my fear that with the changes in the weather systems something like Sandy might happen. . Had premonition that something like this might happen and acted on it. Saved a ton of money and headache. . It will happen again folks...trust me a Sandy type storm is just waiting to happen. .Insurance was never meant to cover mass destruction like what happened as a result of Sandy. The Connecticut coastal towns should never have allowed the building along the shore that has happened over the last 50 years. Then again , the towns want the tax revenues so they can 'grow' their revenue stream. Power corrupts. Anyone with any sense would have not allowed this development. Now they all want relief from their bad decisions. Stupid is as stupid does.
Ajack January 23, 2014 at 06:58 AM
If they keep getting help they will continue to build in these hazardous areas. When your insurance rates go up folks , you can thank the people who wanted the $3,000,000.00 home on the beach for that. Now we will all have to pay for their 'gotta' have it mentality. If we ever get a category 5 hurricane , a direct hit from one.....all I can say is told you so. Sandy was a warning of a much bigger storm to come. The government is an enabler and no one but the people who decide to live there should be held responsible for storm damage like what occurred and what will inevitably occur in the future , maybe a lot sooner than you think. A direct hit from a 5 storm will be interesting. Maybe then people will make better choices. Stronger than the Storm ..more like Dumber than the Storm. Good luck folks.
Jim Eastwood January 23, 2014 at 05:56 PM
STOP ALREADY The Beach Houses get bigger and Bigger----so where are the issues ????? They choose to live on the Beach, the Real Estate people(locals????) sell the Beach and all know the risks. The Fairfield U kids want o LIVE The Beach while they pay extreme rents!!!!! So where is the issue with paying for it ???? Why must the average guy(Who can't even use the Beach without paying for it Pay for their losses with increase taxes or Insurance premiums???? I d feel sorry for those renters along Longdean, Forest ave etc who lost everything!!!!! But the Beach owners NO!!!! And Further more why didn't anyone listen to FEMA or does FAIR???? Field thinks it is above anyone or anything?? Have a Great day( and pay and pay for buying in danger)

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something