I have been saying this from the beginning, but once again, no one would listen. I hope those who have worked hard to discredit me will realize how much they screwed themselves and other flood victims due to not allowing me the opportunity to be on the inside to make sure these errors would not have occurred.
Reminder: A Duplication of Benefits (DOB) is utilized to check on funds received for the SAME specific purpose for which the assistance is given (for instance structure, personal possessions, etc.)
The following is one of the several waivers that the states of Louisiana and Texas asked for from HUD and received. I have no documentation if Iowa ever requested this waiver, probably not the with where their priorities were. However, our state IS using “$10,000 incentive” for those acquisitions in the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), aka “greenway” zone.
I’ve seen enough files from flood victims who were in the 100 year flood plain (HMGP) and their Iowa Dept. of Economic Development (IDED) DOB papers that say “$10,000 Incentive” + “$15,000 Replacement Housing Assistance” – in order to make equal the $25,000 of RHA that everyone was offered (if they qualify).
For these flood victims who received the $10,000 “incentive,” it is NOT a DOB of Replacement Housing Assistance (RHA) and should have NEVER BEEN DEDUCTED as such from the $25,000 RHA. It is for a different purpose from any replacement housing funds and is in addition to their buyout and RHA.
Also, those who relocated from the 500 year flood plain could’ve been eligible for this $10,000 incentive also had the State (urged by our local government) asked for it.
NOTE: the following quote below comes from the Federal Register /Vol. 74, No. 156 / Friday, August 14, 2009 Notice:
“For example, a grantee may offer an incentive payment (possibly in addition to buyouts) for households that
volunteer to relocate within a particular period of time, or who choose to resettle outside a 100- or 500-year floodplain. Note, however, that if the grantee requires the funds to be used for a particular purpose by the household receiving the assistance, then the activity will be that required use, not an eligible incentive. The Department is waiving 42 U.S.C. 5305(a) and associated regulations to make these uses of grant funds eligible.”
The buyout forms state “incentive payment” therefore it is not officially used as replacement housing assistance or on the structure in any way, and it should not have counted within the $25,000 RHA. INCENTIVE is the use; not RHA.