The director of the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency sent his federal counterpart a letter this month urging the Federal Emergency Management Agency to reconsider proposed policy changes and cuts that would “severely hinder” Pennsylvania’s ability to respond to and recover from future disasters.
In a strongly worded letter, PEMA Director David R. Padfield cautioned FEMA of the detrimental impacts that proposed changes to its disaster assistance policies would have on Pennsylvania and its municipalities during future natural disasters.
“The Commonwealth is a committed partner in the stewardship of taxpayer dollars and efficient disaster management. However, the proposed changes will not further those important goals,” Padfield wrote in the letter to FEMA acting Administrator David Richardson. “Instead, these proposed changes will severely hinder Pennsylvania’s capacity to adequately respond to and recover from future disasters, particularly impacting local communities.”
The July 2 letter takes aim at an April memo to the White House Office of Management and Budget that calls for significant changes to FEMA’s disaster responses.
What would change?
Under current FEMA policy, Pennsylvania is required to validate about $24.5 million in damage to public infrastructure to qualify for a presidential major disaster declaration for public assistance, but the proposed policy would raise that threshold fourfold to nearly $100 million, Padfield wrote.
“Retrospective analysis indicates that under this new threshold, the Commonwealth would have received zero federal disaster declarations since Tropical Storm Lee in 2011, even though the Commonwealth has faced significant disasters in the 14 years since,” Padfield said in the letter.
The policy would have prevented Pennsylvania from receiving any FEMA funds for Hurricane Sandy in 2012, Hurricane Ida in 2021, Tropical Storm Debby in 2024 and countless severe winter storms, amounting to the denial of $467 million in critical public assistance recovery funding from seven major disasters over the past 14 years, according to Padfield. Citing National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration figures, Padfield said weather-related hazards killed 109 people across Pennsylvania between 2012 and 2024.
FEMA also proposes to change disaster recovery cost sharing, according to Padfield. The agency’s long-standing approach has provided a nonfederal share ranging from 10% to 25%, depending on the severity of the disaster. However, the proposed change increases that to a minimum of 50% for a nonfederal match, which would “substantially increase the financial burden on the Commonwealth and our 2,560 municipal partners, who are already struggling with limited resources,” he said.
That change alone would create long-term recovery challenges for communities across the state, impacting their resiliency for generations, Padfield wrote in the letter.
Since 2004, Pennsylvania has received $147.9 million in hazard mitigation grant funding as part of 17 federally declared disasters, he said. The proposal to make hazard mitigation funding optional rather than automatic following disaster declarations risks eliminating one of the most cost-effective tools available to reduce future disaster impacts, Padfield said in the letter. Continued access to hazard mitigation funds is essential to reduce future impacts of disasters, which ultimately reduces future reliance on both state and federal recovery funding from disasters, Padfield wrote.
There are many properties throughout the state susceptible to hazards, including flooding, he said.
In April, FEMA announced that it had ended its Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, or BRIC, and canceled all applications from fiscal years 2020 through 2023.
The BRIC program supported states, local and territorial governments and Tribal Nations as they worked to reduce their hazard risk; the program aimed to support communities as they build capability and capacity, according to a program description on FEMA’s website.
An April 4 press release announcing the cancellation called the program “wasteful and ineffective” and “politicized.” The 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act — also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law — had made $1 billion available to BRIC over five years, and $133 million had been distributed for about 450 applications; FEMA estimated at the time that more than $3.6 billion would remain in the Disaster Relief Fund to assist with disaster response and recovery for communities and survivors, and about $882 million would be returned to the United States Treasury or reapportioned by Congress.
Effects of that cancellation were quickly felt locally, with Scranton losing out on $2.5 million for buyouts of 21 flood-prone properties that were impacted by severe flash flooding on Sept. 9, 2023. Olyphant borough had also been in the process of applying for BRIC funding to enhance its levee and potentially lift its downtown out of a flood zone when the program was shuttered.
Padfield went on to criticize a proposal to remove snowstorms from being eligible for federal disaster declarations, which he said disregards regional hazards unique to northern states. Over the last 20 years, Pennsylvania has received more than $87 million in federal support for two snowstorm-related disaster declarations. That aid is critical, especially for municipal governments, he said.
“The Commonwealth remains fully committed to supporting our municipalities before, during, and after all disasters,” Padfield said. “We are diligently working to provide state-run and state-funded programs.”
Padfield pointed to Pennsylvania’s 2023 launch of its Disaster Recovery Assistance Program, or DRAP, to support survivors in cases where federal aid is unavailable. Without a dedicated public assistance fund at the state level, the burden of infrastructure recovery largely falls on local governments, and the proposed policy changes would force DRAP to fill financial gaps that it was neither designed nor funded to address, he said.
If the policy changes go into effect, it will require additional time, training and the appropriate policies and procedures to develop and deploy the surge workforce needed at the state level to fulfill the roles that were customarily filled by FEMA for larger disasters, Padfield said.
“Any delays in providing much needed Individual Assistance to those most impacted by a disaster will only exacerbate their suffering and extend the time for their personal or family recovery,” he said in the letter to FEMA.
In an emailed statement Friday afternoon in response to the letter, a FEMA official said that it is “not a secret” that under Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and acting Administrator Richardson that FEMA is “shifting from bloated, DC-centric dead weight to a lean, deployable disaster force that empowers state actors to provide relief for their citizens. The old processes are being replaced because they failed Americans in real emergencies for decades.”
“After a thorough assessment, FEMA will approve a disaster declaration request if the assessment shows the event’s damage exceeds the state, local governments, and voluntary organizations’ capacity to respond,” according to the email. “Just like all declaration requests, it is a decision based on policy, not politics.”
FEMA will work with state and local officials to conduct preliminary damage assessments, and once complete, the collected information will be turned over to the state(s) for evaluation and for the governor’s consideration to submit or not a request for a disaster declaration, the FEMA official said.
Local leaders respond
Local and state legislators quickly railed against the proposed cuts in statements and phone interviews Friday.
State Sen. Marty Flynn, D-22, Dunmore, called the proposed changes deeply concerning for communities like Scranton and all of Northeast Pennsylvania.
“We know firsthand that the current disaster threshold is already too high for many communities to meet. After the September 9, 2023, flood caused more than $22 million in damage, our communities were still left fighting for help that never fully came,” Flynn said. “Raising that threshold to nearly $100 million would make it nearly impossible for small and mid-sized towns to qualify for federal disaster assistance in the future.”
Increasing the local cost share to at least 50% would place an even larger burden on working families and local governments, Flynn said, explaining most communities don’t have the funds ready when roads wash out or homes are destroyed.
Additionally, with snowstorms hitting Northeast Pennsylvania hard each year, and about 40 inches of snow on average in Scranton annually, a single major storm can paralyze neighborhoods, damage roads and public buildings, and drain local budgets overnight, Flynn said.
“Removing snowstorms from federal disaster eligibility means cities like ours would be left with no safety net when the next blizzard strikes,” he said. “I stand with PEMA and local leaders in urging FEMA to reconsider these changes. Disasters do not check budget lines before they hit. Our communities should not be forced to clean up alone.”
State Rep. Bridget Kosierowski, D-114, Waverly Twp., called the proposal “yet another disastrous move” from Washington, D.C., that puts Lackawanna County and communities across the state at risk.
“First, they slash Medicaid, now they’re gutting FEMA,” she said. “If these changes had been in place last year, some Pennsylvania residents wouldn’t have seen a dime in federal help after the floods. Our communities can’t afford to be abandoned every time they need support. We need stronger support from our federal partners, not cuts that leave us on our own.”
State Rep. Kyle Mullins, D-112, Blakely, said it comes as no surprise that President Donald Trump’s administration “continues to find ways to hurt residents and our communities.”
“Trump and FEMA should recognize that natural disasters are increasing and so too will the need for disaster recovery aid. After passing the Big Awful Bill, you’d think that Trump and Republicans in Washington would give it a break,” Mullins said. “I have and will continue to support flood protection projects from the state level, but such a retreat by the federal government in the case of a disaster would make it nearly impossible for my communities and residents to recover.”
U.S. Rep. Rob Bresnahan, R-8, Dallas Twp., did not respond to an emailed request for comment by Friday evening.
Scranton Mayor Paige Gebhardt Cognetti contends the threshold for FEMA aid needs to be lower, not higher, after the city experienced $7.5 million in damage from flooding on Sept. 9, 2023.
“The Trump administration is essentially gutting FEMA assistance for localities, cities like Scranton, counties like Lackawanna,” she said. “I don’t know why you would want to leave your country in a lurch like this where there’s no help on the way when natural disasters occur.”
Torrential rains that night caused deluges in the Abingtons and parts of Scranton in Lackawanna County, the Back Mountain in Luzerne County and various areas of Wyoming County. Flooding from the heavy rains killed two Lackawanna County residents and destroyed public infrastructure, washing out roads and bridges and rendering some impassable for days.
FEMA denied a major disaster declaration for the region in the aftermath of the flood, prompting letters from local and federal officials urging former President Joe Biden to reverse the denial, including from former U.S. Rep. Matt Cartwright, former U.S. Sen. Bob Casey, U.S. Sen. John Fetterman, U.S. Rep. Dan Meuser, R-9, Jackson Twp., Cognetti, Scranton City Council members, Lackawanna County commissioners, and officials in Luzerne and Wyoming counties.
FEMA ultimately denied an appeal for disaster funding from the state in March 2024.
If the policy changes go into effect, Cognetti said the idea of FEMA essentially being out of the picture is scary.
“We continue to be vigilant about and creative about how we might fund recovery, restoration, rehab and stormwater mitigation in the future, but the reality is, it’s going to have to come from local dollars at this point, and it’s going to be very, very difficult to meet the growing need for stormwater mitigation both on the front end to try to prevent harm to property and life, and then also on the recovery side, when things do happen,” Cognetti said. “It’s unclear where the dollars are going to come from to do that.”
Scranton is committed to buying out its flood-damaged properties for about $2.5 million, and paired with the $7.5 million in damage to public infrastructure, the city could be out $10 million from a 90-minute storm two years ago, she said. To fund the buyouts, Scranton applied through PEMA for funding through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, which still requires FEMA approval, she said.
“It’s really hard to see how we’re going to be able to meet those needs in an efficient way for local taxpayers with all these cuts to FEMA,” she said. “I’m further concerned because the less money we have for mitigation and prevention, the more likely it is that we’ll have to send out our firefighters, our first responders, like we did (in September 2023).”
CHRISTOPHER DOLAN / STAFF PHOTOGRAPHERScranton firefighters from Rescue 1 arrive in a boat at Jackson Street and South Merrifield Avenue in West Scranton with a woman rescued from a flooded home on Saturday, Sept. 9, 2023.
In Mayfield, the borough had $2.34 million in federal funds earmarked to effectively raise the height of the town’s levee, which was built in 1968, by 1 to 3 feet, but the town hasn’t heard anything in months, Mayor Al Chelik said. Mayfield has an annual budget of about $1 million, which means a flood could be devastating for the small Upvalley community.
Chelik called the proposed cuts ridiculous.
“They’re destroying our federal government,” he said. “They’re going to screw the small community and the states … so that they could have money for the billionaires.”
As he concluded his letter to FEMA, Padfield “strongly urged” the agency to reconsider the policy changes and instead engage in collaborative dialogue with state emergency management leaders to achieve their shared goals of resilience, fiscal responsibility and public safety.
“The Commonwealth would welcome more flexibility for state and local emergency management, but we strongly oppose any cuts to funding that would hurt our communities and deny Pennsylvanians help when they need it the most,” Padfield said.