Historically, areas such as Natchitoches in rural Louisiana are known to grapple with recurring devastating incidents. In a reputable instance last month, torrents of floodwaters marauded the neighborhood, inundating residential structures and local commerce. Mirroring dominoes toppling over, more than a thousand dwellings fell prey to power outages, with the rising tide infesting houses and ruining valuable assets. These were not one-off occurrences for this predominantly African-American town, which has seen its fair share of deluges as the fifth major calamity of the decade hits them.
Residents fostered hope that the proverbial storm would pass soon, expecting a respite from the chronicle of floods. They had geared up to receive assistance from a federal initiative, targeted towards bolstering critical infrastructure development and mitigating impacts of such climate-triggered catastrophes. The Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program, helmed since 2018, stands as the largest climate resilience scheme in the annals of federal backing.
A snap of irony was felt as the FEMA released an April 2 memo. It revealed an abrupt termination of more than a billion dollars worth of unpaid BRIC grants by the federal government. The citizens of Natchitoches were looking up to a significant monetary aid of $120,000 through BRIC to enhance their backup generator system, which was also intoxicated in the bureaucratic wrangle.
In situations of stormy severity, the proposed generator promised to power a drain system, whose role was to exhaust the floodwaters. As Ronnie Williams, Natchitoches’ inaugural African-American mayor, vestigially stated, ‘Securing and maintaining any sort of funding for a relatively small location where resources are scarce is mandatory.’ A paucity of a bottomless money chest made them veer towards federal grants, success in which offered an optimistic outlook.
BRIC’s provision looked promising in facilitating the townsfolk to brace for disasters ahead of time. The emphasis of the program was to aid the socially susceptible cope with climate menaces. Federal aid is seen to inflate the wealth of white homeowners following a disaster, while their Black counterparts average a loss of $27,000. The promising BRIC program, by preemptively funding projects focusing on rural regions and poverty-riddled communities, possessed the capability to mitigate this growing disparity.
The demise of the potentially life-saving program coincided with the tragic event of at least seven individuals losing their lives to tornadoes, amidst instances of unprecedented flood events in different zones of the nation. Scrutinies reveal that communities inhabited largely by minorities felt compelled to apply for BRIC resources, despite wealthier and populous states emerging as prime candidates for receiving monetary aid.
The BRIC program typically shouldered up to a whopping 75% of project costs, while also taking on as high as 90% of expenses associated with undertakings in underprivileged communities similar to Natchitoches. It was stated that by upfrontly investing in infrastructure, the government stood to save trillions by averting damages from severe climate threats including rising sea levels.
The initiatives under BRIC varied from large-scale infrastructure reforms to nature-centric solutions, each uniquely crafted to cater to the specific vulnerabilities of communities at the receiving end of nature’s wrath, often in the form of floods, hurricanes, wildfires, and earthquakes.
Projects under BRIC took diverse forms such as erecting flood barriers along coastlines to shield communities from the threat of rising waters, updating water drainage systems, and promoting the establishment of natural rain-absorbent gardens. These interventions hoped to decrease urban flooding.
In ambition to curb power disruption during turbulent weather and to reduce risks associated with sparking wildfires in drought-ridden locales, BRIC suggested burying power transmission lines.
Yet another novel approach involved rehabilitating wetlands across Texas and Louisiana to buffer storm surges sparked by hurricanes. Evident success in saving lives and averting damage to property was seen from these bespoke projects.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) estimated a return of $6 in future disaster recovery expenses for every dollar that BRIC spent on damage prevention. Even localized efforts made strides, such as in Detroit’s Jefferson Chalmers vicinity, where BRIC-funded sewage modernizations now shield more than 600 households from the peril of floods.
In this predominantly Black neighborhood, where the poverty rate is twice the national average, the BRIC intervention has played a crucial role in easing the emotional and financial burdens that come with recurring floods.