THOMPSON FALLS — The Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing to review proposed amendments to floodplain regulations on Mar. 2.

Katherine Matthew, a Floodplain administrator, presented the amendments to the commissioners.

The purpose is twofold: to update the county’s floodplain policies, and by extension to allow for protection of land via insurance from the federal government to private land owners.

Matthew said the reason for amending the regulations is to bring it up to current with the Dept. of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC), which recently released new model regulations. She added that the amendments are routine and do not deviate from the original intent of the county’s floodplain policies. However, there are a few changes in the 56-page document, which was originally 38. The regulations were adopted in May of 2012.

“This is pretty much a reorganizing of what we already have in our regulations,” Matthew said. “There are a few higher standards we can consider.”

Matthew said the she initiated the amendments after looking at the DNRC’s regulations and drafted the changes in a few days. In it the original regulations are intact with red lines through the sections of obsolete or removed content.

Sanders County, Matthew later said in an email send to the Clark Fork Valley Press, participates in the in the National Flood Insurance Program by the Federal Emergency Management Program (FEMA). Matthews writes: “Therefore, DNRC provides model regulations which adhere to State and FEMA minimum procedural and development standards. DNRC has done this in 1989, 1990, 1992, 2006, 2012 & 2014. As the latest model becomes obsolete a new model is drafted.”

A noticeable change in the document’s language is aesthetic: what was once “flood plain” has now turned into “floodplain.”

Another early proposed change is the authority which flood hazard areas, or “Regulated Flood Hazard Areas” as they are designated by the county, are determined by the sole order of the DNRC. In the 2012 regulations the order could be designated by the DNRC “and/or” (FEMA).

The proposed change would allow the DNRC to designate what constitutes a floodplain, but would be reviewed by both the DNRC and FEMA.

Matthew brought a few items to the attention of the commissioners that included proposed changes in policy.

Under the section regarding prohibited usage in floodway and floodplain areas, a higher standard would be to not allow cemeteries, Matthew said, adding that any current cemeteries in the floodplain would be “grandfathered in.”

Construction of buildings would need to have access to emergency vehicles if built in a hazarous area, and added to this: a proposed change would prohibit “critical facilities,” such as schools and hospitals to be in those areas.

Two representatives from Rocky Mountain Bank—the only two citizens in attendance—in Thompson Falls asked if that included day cares.

“I know a ton of people who do day cares in their homes,” said a representative for the bank.

Matthew could not say with any certainty, but said she would look into the matter before finalization or approval of the proposed amendments.

Clearing—either vegetation or land—near edges of the floodplain is a proposed change to county policy. It states on page 36: “No large scale clearing out riparian vegetation within 50 feet of the mean annual high water mark.”

The final higher standard proposed to the commissioners is the enforcement of these regulations—as a whole, not just the amended changes.

A Floodplain Administrator could possibly issue a search warrant and enter private property as a last resort if a land owner’s property is found in noncompliance—in construction or activity—or disregard of the regulations.

However, there are two ways the owner or owners must be notified before a search warrant can be initiated.

The floodplain administrator is ordered to “provide a notice of entry by mail, electronic mail, phone call, and personal delivery to the owner, owner’s agent, lessee, or lessee’s agent whose lands will be entered.”

If no contact can be made, the floodplain administrator will “affix” a notice of entry in a “conspicuous” place or places on the property. In the 2012 amendments, this notice would have to be up for 5 days; in the proposed amendments, no time is designated for the notice to be posted.

Upon hearing Matthew present this to the commissioners, Commissioner Carol Brooker said she is does not know of any instance in her 20 years as commissioner if that type of disregard has happened, nor the use of such authority.

“It’s unclear if that’s ever been the case,” Brooker said.

A land owner or owners are required to apply for a variance or appeal to the county commissioners and the DNRC.

Once the presentation ended, the commissioners opened the hearing to public comments.

Brooker asked Matthew if notice of the public hearing was made available for the proper time before the meeting, to which Matthew confirmed that a notice was printed for two weeks in the Sanders County Ledger. She also said Rocky Mountain Bank’s request was the only request to see the proposed amendments.

“The construction stuff is where we’d be affected,” said a bank representative. “If a portion of property is in the floodplain, that’s a red flag. We do lend if property is in the floodplain, but we require insurance.”

Brooker noted that Thompson Falls is not included in the floodplain, nor is the Flathead Indian Reservation.

Commissioners Brooker, Tony Cox, and Glen Magera did not have any public discussion regarding the proposed amendments.

When asked whether the floodplain amendments are related or are affected by Sanders County being designated a primary disaster area due to drought, the commissioners said it has no effect.

Matthew said a finalized version would be made in a few days time.

The commissioners motioned to put the proposed amendments under advisement until 10 a.m. on March 10.

Read the 2012 Regulations here. 

Other documents of interest, including floodplain maps, permit applications, and subdivision regulations can be found here.