• While Stormtrack has discontinued its hosting of SpotterNetwork support on the forums, keep in mind that support for SpotterNetwork issues is available by emailing [email protected].

The Emergency Management and Storm Warning Mess in St. Louis Friday, May 16, 2025

This is doubly true if you are talking about major disasters impacting areas of poverty and limited resources like Appalachia and north St. Louis city. But it looks like the kind of help that other places got in the past might not happen in St. Louis, as outlined in the article below. So from how it looks to me, things are getting worse, not better.

John, I have thoughts about what you have written but I fear I would violate the rules about political opinions if I wrote too much.

Please keep in mind that north St. Louis has sunk deeper and deeper into poverty since the 1950's. It was already quite poor when I arrived in STL (Carter Administration) and -- tragically -- it still is. A single political party has ruled STL the entire time.

Trying to blame the STL recovery issues on a president who has been in office 7 months (vs more than 60 years of local single party rule) seems to me to miss the mark. I do strongly support the D. mayor for firing the head of the local EM agency after the terrible siren fiasco and related issues (see the report).

As to NC floods and Katrina, the then and current governor of NC plus the mayor of MSY and governor of LA during Katrina are of the same political party that has ruled STL.

That is all I feel I can say without running afoul of the rules.
 
John, I have thoughts about what you have written but I fear I would violate the rules about political opinions if I wrote too much.

Please keep in mind that north St. Louis has sunk deeper and deeper into poverty since the 1950's. It was already quite poor when I arrived in STL (Carter Administration) and -- tragically -- it still is. A single political party has ruled STL the entire time.

Trying to blame the STL recovery issues on a president who has been in office 7 months (vs more than 60 years of local single party rule) seems to me to miss the mark. I do strongly support the D. mayor for firing the head of the local EM agency after the terrible siren fiasco and related issues (see the report).

As to NC floods and Katrina, the then and current governor of NC plus the mayor of MSY and governor of LA during Katrina are of the same political party that has ruled STL.

That is all I feel I can say without running afoul of the rules.

I think you missed my point. I am well aware of the history of north St. Louis. It is a truism among disaster researchers that those who are poorest always suffer the worst in natural disasters, and both north St. Louis and Appalachia are good examples of that. (and yes, those are the folks that most need governmental help after a major disaster.) My point in my post was merely that, with the change in administrations and de-funding of FEMA, response to large disasters has not gotten better, and has likely gotten worse. So while local and national political control is often under different parties as you point out, the necessary help from the feds that some other places have gotten has not come through in St. Louis. A prime example is the help that Los Angeles and other places got from the Army Corps of Engineers, as noted in the article I linked. Local and state officials from both political parties have been pushing for that help, and it would make a big difference at least in the cleanup. So far that help has not been forthcoming, hopefully it will in the future but I will believe it when I see it. And while FEMA may have done a lousy job with temporary housing structures in NC, I have not seen any such structures provided in St. Louis. Lots of people are still in tents or houses missing roofs or walls, although more have just simply left. As with you, Mike, there is more I could say but I will not so I do not get on the wrong side of the rules.
 
This will be an interesting test of the new model for disaster relief being promoted by the federal administration and some in Congress. In past extreme disasters such as the St. Louis tornado, cleanup has been handled by the Army Corps of Engineers, but in this case it will be more of a federal-state-local collaboration, with assistance from the Corps but not with them in charge. State and local leaders of both parties seem to be on board with it, and the funding, though not entirely clear, looks decent. So let's see how it works - hopefully well!

 
This will be an interesting test of the new model for disaster relief being promoted by the federal administration and some in Congress. In past extreme disasters such as the St. Louis tornado, cleanup has been handled by the Army Corps of Engineers, but in this case it will be more of a federal-state-local collaboration, with assistance from the Corps but not with them in charge. State and local leaders of both parties seem to be on board with it, and the funding, though not entirely clear, looks decent. So let's see how it works - hopefully well!

John, I can't access the St. Louis Post-Dispatch article above because of a paywall. Would it be possible for an ST Member in the St. Louis area to cut out the article from the newspaper, scan it and re-post that here?
 
John, I can't access the St. Louis Post-Dispatch article above because of a paywall. Would it be possible for an ST Member in the St. Louis area to cut out the article from the newspaper, scan it and re-post that here?
Interesting. I was able to read it from the link without being paywalled. (only part that didn't show was the photos)
Could copy & paste here as long as its ok with the admins...
 
Shouldn't be a problem with the Admins...I've done this many times with articles in the Wall Street Journal and other printed publications.
Ok, here it is then!
Austin Huguelet | Post-Dispatch

ST. LOUIS — The federal government will not take over the removal of hundreds of thousands of tons of wreckage left by the May 16 tornado despite the city’s request for reinforcements to supercharge the effort.

But city officials said Thursday that’s OK. The federal government will still send experts to guide the process, and advance tens of millions of dollars to accelerate cleanup efforts. And the state will step in to manage contractors, relieving the city of an administrative burden it couldn’t handle alone.

The deal, said Mayor Cara Spencer, is “the very best” the city could get given the push by the administration of President Donald Trump for state and local governments to take larger roles in disaster recovery across the country.

“This is a huge win for our community,” Spencer said at a Thursday press conference. She thanked U.S. Sen. Eric Schmitt and Gov. Mike Kehoe for pressing for the deal. The news drew applause from both politicians.

“Our office has been proud to work closely with Senator Eric Schmitt, alongside the rest of Missouri’s federal delegation, and Mayor Spencer to ensure St. Louis can move forward and expedite its recovery,” Kehoe said in a statement.

“This will unlock rapidly deployed federal funding and assistance,” Schmitt added in a statement of his own, “to strengthen state and local efforts to remove debris, protect public health and safety, and support St. Louis’ full recovery.”

The tornado cut a wide path as it moved across the city, from Forest Park through north St. Louis to the Mississippi River. Thousands of buildings were damaged, many severely. The city and contractors have since collected many truckloads of what fell in the public right-of-way.

But officials say substantial debris remains on private property — at least several hundred thousand tons.

And as the city rebuilds and rehouses displaced residents, that debris is an obstacle: collapsed structures, downed trees, and asbestos- or lead-containing materials must be removed before new homes, businesses and infrastructure can rise.

For months, City Hall had counted on the Army Corps to lead the cleanup. Last month, the cost was estimated in the hundreds of millions — as much as $730 million, double initial estimates — and while the Federal Emergency Management Agency agreed to reimburse its usual 75% share of the costs, officials said that wasn’t enough.

The city, they said, had neither the capacity nor the expertise to manage contracts on that scale.

The Army Corps of Engineers, however, has handled many such tasks. It oversaw the removal of enough debris to fill three Empire State Buildings after Hurricane Sandy in 2012. It removed 50,000 tons after a Baltimore bridge collapse last year. And it finished last month clearing over 1 million tons of debris left by the Palisades fire in Los Angeles.

In a July letter seeking aid, Spencer said a Corps-managed cleanup would take 6 to 8 months, while a city-managed effort could take three times as long.

But on Thursday, after more than two months of waiting, Spencer described a new arrangement, with the state managing contractors, the city handling permissions to get on private property, and the Army Corps offering guidance as needed.

And Casey Millburg, the mayor’s chief of staff, said FEMA’s decision to pay out millions of dollars before work is done — rather than reimbursing after the fact — could speed operations considerably.

The exact level of financial support was not immediately clear Thursday. Schmitt’s office said in a news release that he had secured a commitment from FEMA for a debris removal mission estimated to cost at least $180 million, with an initial payment of $63 million.

And, at the news conference Thursday, Spencer said she did not think a final cap had been placed on federal assistance.
 
Ok, here it is then!
Thanks, John and James. Very informative. It will be interesting to see whether such tri-level governmental arrangements will actually work out to shorten recovery time (and cost) overall and hold together over the "long haul," i.e., over the course of several different types of possible disaster events. Seems like a good start, anyway...
 
such tri-level governmental arrangements will actually work out to shorten recovery time
This is one of the things I have most disliked about FEMA. The tornado was May 16. It is now Sept. 21 more than 4 months later and little of the debris have been removed thanks to having to deal with FEMA.

Go back to the 1957 F-5 Ruskin Heights Tornado. That neighborhood was middle to slightly lower than middle class. Yet, with no federal assistance, all of the debris was cleaned up in a few weeks! Insurance covered it. FEMA has done nothing but gummed up the works. We had this discussion several months ago and the STL tornado is a perfect example.

So, I'm 100% in favor of the direction President Trump is taking FEMA. If it doesn't work, it can be tweaked further. Just about anything is better than having debris clogging the area six months after the storm which is where STL would have ended up.
 
I think the concept of having local and state officials leading the recovery effort rather than FEMA makes a great deal of sense, as long as there is adequate funding support from the feds. Hopefully that will be the case and it will work well in St. Louis, because as Mike notes, very little is getting cleaned now months after the tornado. State and local officials seem OK with the new model for debris removal as opposed to having the Army Corps of Engineers doing it as has been done in the past. One place where I do think a direct federal role is important in very large scale disasters is in the immediate response. Not sure that was needed on a large scale in St Louis, but in top-end disasters like Katrina, Sandy, and the North Carolina floods, it is. For example, people were stuck on roofs for days until Lt. General Honore and his troops came to the rescue in New Orleans after Katrina.
 
As always, the devil is in the details. What worries me about the overall change in approach being suggested by the administration is that there are signs it will come with less federal money, placing more burden on states and localities that are already overburdened. If the money stays the same (or goes up, in response to growing population and increasing disasters and associated costs), then I am on board with shifting implementation of the recovery phase to states and localities. But if the federal money is cut, it will probably make a bad situation even worse. If you can access this article from USA Today, you can see the basis of my concerns:

 
John, I don't see how the USA Today article supports your concerns at all:

Smathers agrees that FEMA needs "major reforms," so people aren't dealing with an inefficient system in their darkest hours.

Some of his constituents are still waiting on promised support from 2021's Tropical Storm Fred, which caused catastrophic flooding that destroyed many homes.

"That's inexcusable," he said.


Who was president in 2012? Obama, a Democrat. The article interviewed multiple D EM's that dumped on Trump but then issued major criticism of existing FEMA. Biden, via FEMA, utterly politicized the response to Helene.

I know you don't like President Trump but it is long past time to do something radically new.
 
Just about anything is better than having debris clogging the area six months after the storm which is where STL would have ended up.
Yes, I agree. Same issue occurred in several communities along the west coast of Florida after both Hurricanes Helene and Milton last year. DeSantis could have removed this debris in a fraction of the time that FEMA did, using primarily state funding resources. However, big private property insurance companies also "dragged their feet" with paying damage claims, so afflicted property owners suffered even more unnecessary delays. The State of Florida government insurance "backstop," Citizens, is also so underfunded relative to claims filed that it has been kicking residents in coastal/flood-prone areas off their existing coverages, or are just not renewing such policies...leaving Floridians will few other affordable alternatives.

I know you don't like President Trump but it is long past time to do something radically new.
Regarding John's position, I also am no great fan of Trump's vision. So, the idea of dumping the entire FEMA mess on 50 states with different/totally unrelated EM laws and resources (or lack of) available for EM response has always seemed to me, at first glance, to be a DOGE-style cop-out. Nevertheless, I agree with you, Mike, that an entirely different approach is absolutely necessary if the American public can ever trust our crucial institutions, such as one that will always be there to defend and protect our country and people from overwhelming natural/climate-change-related disasters. I only wish that a little more bipartisan debate had been put into advancing a more thorough and thoughtful solution to this difficult issue, rather than taking the "easy" way out. I know you won't agree with that viewpoint, and that's fine; it's the willingness of people like us with differing views to have a meaningful, polite, and serious discussion that, in the end, will lead ultimately to the "right" outcome for all Americans in the future.

Great discussion, guys!
 
I only wish that a little more bipartisan debate had been put into advancing a more thorough and thoughtful solution to this difficult issue, rather than taking the "easy" way out. I know you won't agree with that viewpoint, and that's fine
Randy, I'm not sure where you get that impression. I would be fine with a bipartisan reform of FEMA if it worked. Keep in mind FEMA was so terrible after Katrina, Congress passed a bipartisan 'reform.' And, here we are.

Always remember: the TSA was bipartisan and passed both houses of Congress overwhelmingly. Bipartisan ≠ competent.

The bottom line issues are:
  1. Bureaucrats are overwhelmingly Democrats. So, FEMA's people in DC view the R's, especially rural R's, with contempt. We saw multiple issues with this in Helene and Milton. And, because they are civil service, they have zero accountability. So, they can -- on a whim -- drag out cleanup with no consequences.
  2. By placing the primary decision process with state and local politicians you have accountability. You can vote them out of office.
  3. Somehow, the Republic survived and recovered from tornadoes and hurricanes (Galveston 1900?) long before there was any federal role in disasters.
  4. You wrote, "However, big private property insurance companies also "dragged their feet" with paying damage claims, so afflicted property owners suffered even more unnecessary delays." We've talked about this before, remember? This is due to the devil's bargain Obama made in the wake of Sandy and Chris Christie went along. Until then, insurance companies usually paid natural disasters quickly. Again, get the federal government involved and it gums up things 99% of the time.

There is a bipartisan FEMA reform act before Congress right now. See: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/4669 I have been so busy with the NDRB, I haven't read it. Why don't you read it and report back?
 
Back
Top