Laserfiche WebLink
Response <br />requires change as needs change or are identified. The City will continue to assess need throughout the recovery process and will change allocations proportions accordingly. Comments <br /> duly noted. No change to Action Plan necessary at this time.The City is exploring a number of options for creating better and more sustainable infrastructure and reducing repetitive <br /> loss and flooding within the City of San Marcos. We appreciate and will consider your suggestion.No change to Action Plan necessary at this time. <br />Comment <br />anguish caused by the floods though). However, we do believe that the majority of the $25 million federal assistance should go to housing assistance for flood victims--not just 30%. <br /> The City's plan calls for 50% for infrastructure and 20% for planning andadministration. Infrastructure needs could be addressed through bond elections; aid to individual flood victims <br /> cannot. The city should see how much administration / planning could be absorbed in-house. The long term infrastructure repairs ARE important. The $12.5 million barely touches the $83 <br /> million need. But the causes and the fixes are regional in nature and should be addressed long term through state & federal grants, county contributions and city bond elections.At stake <br /> here is the survival of a family neighborhood with affordable housing. As the city's data indicate, San Marcos has urgent housing needs and a high level of low income families and residents. <br /> Please reconsider this plan and dedicate more funding to help the families in SF homes and public housing who were devastated by the two disasters and have yet to recover. Thank you.Dear <br /> City Officials,I have been following the news stories of the $25 million grant from the federal government to the City of San Marcos for the purpose of recovering from both the 2015 <br /> Memorial Day Flood and the All Saints Floodthe following October, and putting into placepolicies and infrastructure to mitigate future flood damage.We did not suffer any loss during <br /> the first flood but suffered mightily from the second.And we do not live anywhere near the river.The closest landmark to our residence is the observation tower at the Wonder World tourist <br /> attraction at Bishop and Prospect Streets.We did not have flood insurance which would <br />Element <br />Infrastructure-General <br />Source <br />Address <br />Date <br /># <br />78/30/16City Hall Email <br /> <br />