Replies

Anywhere there is large amounts of standing water should be evacuated until the water is away from the homes.

I know what just 3 days without electric is like and it grows old ‘very fast’ trying to work around that....and my building wasn’t flooded nor was it in the heat of a major crisis.

Cutting power is a valid government role in this case, as is asking them to leave, as is telling them they’re on their own if they stay.

Forcing them to leave, or preventing return, IMO, is a purchase agreement, at prevailing rates, under eminent domain type seizure. Exceptions would be those obviously unable to fend for themselves, or any other situation where continued occupancy puts others, involuntarily, at risk. You can construct logic where sanitary sewer concerns make it permissible to force everyone out.

That applies to just about everyone not used to throwing on a backpack and heading off the grid on a regular basis. Probably inclusive of just about every there, who’s home is wet now, and you don’t spell details like that out in evac orders. But those executing the orders won’t exercise that judgement either, and you’ll have people who ould manage it, caught in the cracks.

Government COULD have seized those properties, along with those to the west of normal flood retention levels, but chose not to, and happily enjoyed proceeds from the increased tax base. Different entities, overlapping responsibility, it’s all a mess.

A local area I’m familiar with, crossed a few lines in the process of creating a reservoir and exercising eminent domain. They cleared the area AROUND the reservoir by threatening to flood it, when such was never their intention. They then sold the “lakefront property” at premium prices and pocketed the difference. Business as usual. Good thing for them that their victims were complacent sheep.