[DannyTN]

I think they already are paying the price. Their insurance reflects the cost for their property and they aren’t responsible for the town, just their own property.

I can see the homeowner’s viewpoint. Their home is worth a lot more with an ocean front view, instead of a backside of a dune view.

So if you are going to take from the homeowner in order to protect the town property, then you should compensate the homeowner.

The town has to pay the price too. They built where there was known risk and now they want to mitigate that risk by taking the beach front homeowner’s property and decimating it with dunes.

(I live in TN and own no water front property of any kind.)

[wiggen]

Reading and you’re correct.
Simple. Build flood walls behind them. The water will then turn back and flood the house from a second direction.
Of course they’ll sue over this probability as well.

[Abby4116]

Back in the days of self-responsibility, beachfront homeowners, at their own expense and using their own labor, put up storm fence every fall to build the dunes up to protect their property.

The government did not subsidize insurance nor did they pay to build the dunes.

Harvey Cedars (where the one couple whose comments were cited have a home) is about 3 blocks wide - ocean to bay. These are barrier islands, shifting naturally if no human intervention is used.

Despite what the global warming souls tell us, these storms are not more frequent nor more destructive.

[Abby4116]

South Jersey News

Press of Atlantic City

These are some articles with pictures from the 1962 storm that hit Harvey Cedars. Only difference is now there are MORE houses.

[Sherman Logan]

Their insurance reflects the cost for their property

Not in most states, certainly not in Florida, which is what I'm familiar with.

What the bureaucrats setting the rates do is lump a very large chunk of homes inland in with the few immediately on the waterfront to calculate rates. This results in much lower rates for the few rich people on the water, who are of course much more politically powerful per capita, and considerably higher but not exorbitantly so rates for the on average much less wealthy homeowners inland.

I've lost track of the numbers, but apparently if risk were calculated individually by home, nobody would actually build expensive homes "on the water," at least not in Florida. Insurance rates would be much too high.