An Atlanta District Court judge denied Fema’s move to dismiss a lawsuit from the city of Atlanta for more than $ 1 million that the city spent on repairing a water treatment plant that the federal agency agreed to refund.
On March 31, the Judge of the North District -American Seven D. Grimberg denied Fema’s motion to dismiss the case, giving the agency until April 14 to respond to Atlanta’s complaint after the agency claimed that the city lost the term to appeal a decision to drastically reduce the amount that it would pay in the city.
The demand comes from repairs that Atlanta made at his Robert M. Clayton Water’s claim center after serious floods in September 2009 at a cost of more than $ 1.2 million, for the presentation. In December of this year, FEMA approved the estimated costs of less than $ 1.1 million, although it did not force funding at the time. Two years later, FEMA reduced estimated costs to less than $ 37,000.
Atlanta called for a reduction in April 2011 through the Georgia State Degreementary, the Georgia Emergency Management Agency (GEMA), according to Gema, could not present this call to FEMA until August 17, 2011, after a 60 -day resource period had passed. Fema then did not make a decision on the Call or requested more information in the 90 days, according to the regulations they require, Grimberg’s presentation says, although “according to Atlanta, this was not alarming because Fema regularly ignored his own term to rule the appeals, sometimes taking years to issue a decision.”
While the call was still pending, Atlanta found out in November 2014 that FEMA had reiterated his decision less than $ 37,000, and then deduced the planned flood insurance income, concluding that Atlanta had only the right to receive $ 200.61 from $ 1.2 million he requested for plant repairs. Atlanta resorted to again, reiterating the points in his first appeal, and challenging the calculation of the Flood Insurance Revenue Fema, after which FEMA did not request information or made a decision in the period of 90 days.
The presentation says that FEMA took until August 31, 2017, more than six years after the initial call from Atlanta, to request more information, considering the punctuality of the city’s 2011 city appeal, and saying that he did not show the documentation that Gema has presented in the required 60-day period.
From this, Fema denied Atlanta’s appeals in January 2018, saying that he “lacked the ability to consider the call because it did not appear timely”. Atlanta traveled again, and in May 2018, Fema also denied that one, reiterating the claim that the city’s appeal rights had disappeared because Gema could not advance the first appeal.
This caused Atlanta to be set up in May 2024, seeking the court review of “Fema’s refusal to be substantially considered his appeals.”
Grimberg writes that the dispute refers to whether the initial call was bad because Gema could not forward -within 60 days. It was not, according to the law, he writes, because all that is required for this period is to present the call to the successful bidder, not the sending of the appeal of the dealership to Fema.
“The entire Stafford law requires the applicant to do is to present the call within 60 days after receiving the notice of the action that is attractive,” says the presentation. “By virtue of the regulation, the applicant must submit the call to the grantor of the state within this period. That’s all.”
