California WaterBlog

By Nicholas Pinter, Kallee Bareket-Shavit, and Indumati Roychowdhury

. . .

As California eyes a record-breaking El Niño winter, eyes have begun to turn from other recent crises towards the possibility of flooding. In recent years, wildfire has been the primary natural hazard threatening California – and driving policy action – but the state’s exposure to flood risk is even greater (Natural Catastrophe Resiliency Study, 2026). And potential El Niño-driven storms are not the only looming threat to the state. Since early 2025, the Trump Administration has repeatedly targeted the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) for downsizing and possible elimination. Today, the Securing California’s Flood Future (SCFF) panel releases its final report to help the state navigate this “perfect storm” of meteorological and political headwinds.

Approximately 7 million people in California and $900 billion in infrastructure are at risk from flooding. For the past century, flood risk management in California has relied on a partnership between federal, state, and local institutions. In early 2025, that partnership began to face increasing uncertainty as the federal government began rolling back critical services and programs, targeting FEMA and disaster management in particular.

The Securing California’s Flood Future Panel was conceived in early 2025 to provide solutions to California to weather this federal turbulence. The Panel includes academics, policy leaders, and insurance specialists. The group was tasked to: (1) examine the strengths, weaknesses, and plausible trajectories of FEMA and NFIP during the current period of unprecedented turmoil; and (2) develop a toolkit of actionable solutions to address challenges proactively, with recommendations geared towards federal reform and/or state-level initiatives.

In September 2025, the Panel released a broad scoping report that assessed a range of threat scenarios, focusing on rapid policy shifts in Washington and their potential impacts on California.

The SCFF final report includes actionable management and policy recommendations for California to consider. Five focus areas are highlighted: flood risk mapping, land-use planning, insurance, hazard mitigation, and emergency management. A durable and resilient flood future for California requires a coordinated approach that considers all of these elements of disaster management.

1. Build upon California flood-risk mapping capability. FEMA’s existing flood maps are an important foundation for regulating flood risk, but have limited scope. The Panel recommends that California build a comprehensive statewide mapping system that can augment–and if necessary, operate independently of–existing FEMA flood risk maps. These next-generation maps should account for changing climate-driven flood risk, show a range of flood possibilities (including risks beyond the traditional 1% annual chance of flooding) and draw on emerging global flood-risk models and new measures of community vulnerability. California could develop different mapping products tailored to different uses, including land-use decisions, planning infrastructure, and informing insurance.

2. Stop adding new infrastructure to California’s floodplains. California has grown rapidly for decades, with persistent growth in flood-prone areas. While California needs to facilitate new growth, and new housing in particular, several measures could be taken to keep new housing out of flood plains and increase protections for at-risk communities. The Panel recommends the state adopt higher state-based standards for new growth, invest in educational platforms to increase risk awareness and guide land-use planning, and promote in-fill developments as an alternative to urban sprawl in floodplains.

3. Protect and expand investment in mitigation. Mitigation – measures to reduce flood damages before they occur – is one of the most effective and cost-efficient mechanisms for reducing future disaster losses, but federal mitigation funding has become both politicized and unstable, with funding to California projects severely reduced. California should identify new streams of funding to augment eliminated federal programs. In more extreme disruption scenarios, California can also establish a state-based Community Rating System to guide community-level risk reduction.

4. Close California’s flood-insurance gap and prepare for potential disruptions to the NFIP. Though flood insurance is an important tool for protecting against disaster losses, flood insurance coverage in California remains low. California should pursue measures that increase insurance uptake across the state, including stronger enforcement or expansion of mandatory coverage, parametric microinsurance options, and a lower-limit flood insurance option incorporated into homeowner policies. More ambitious approaches should be considered, including universal flood coverage.

5. Prepare now for greater state responsibility for disasters. The transfer of disaster responsibility from the federal government toward states and local governments is no longer hypothetical. California should plan for greater financial and operational responsibility across preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation. California should strengthen interstate and intrastate mutual-aid agreements, potentially including a formal Western States Disaster Alliance to coordinate policy, technical expertise, and resources across states.

With El Niño already roiling the equatorial Pacific and creating storm after storm, there is an increased potential for flooding in some or all of California. The political turbulence in Washington is at least as great a threat. And while California will emerge from this El Niño next spring – wet or dry – the potential damage to US flood-management and disaster-management institutions may take much longer to repair.

But a possible silver lining to the current turbulence is that political crises – like natural disasters themselves – open windows of opportunity for change. California possesses significant strengths on which to build. The recommendations in the SCFF report are intended to help shift flood management from a reactive system that pays for losses after disasters occur toward a proactive system that reduces risk before disasters happen. If pursued thoughtfully, these actions can strengthen California’s resilience regardless of the future direction of FEMA, the NFIP, or other federal programs, while providing a model for other states confronting similar challenges.

About the Authors

Nicholas Pinter is the Roy J. Shlemon Professor of Applied Geosciences and Associate Director of the Center for Watershed Sciences at the University of California Davis. Prof. Pinter and his students study earth-surface processes, including coastal geomorphology and geodynamics as well as river systems, flood risk management, and adaptation to climate-driven changes. Prof. Pinter is the Co-Chair of the Securing California’s Flood Future panel.

Kallee Bareket-Shavit is a PhD Candidate in the Geography Graduate Group at the University of California Davis. Kallee’s research evaluates the nexus between social vulnerability, urban growth, and flood risk at multiple scales. She previously obtained an M.S. in Environmental Policy and Management from UC Davis, specializing in Spatial Information Science.

Indumati Roychowdhury is a PhD Candidate in the Geography Graduate Group at the University of California Davis. Indu researches disaster risk and ecosystem services, and how these things interact in an institutional space.

Further Reading

California Earthquake Authority (CEA). (2026). Enhancing California’s Resiliency to Natural Catastrophes: Senate Bill 254 Report. California Earthquake Authority (CEA). https://www.cawildfirefund.com/sites/wildfire/files/documents/2026/sb-254-natcatresiliencyreprt-4-7-26v3.pdf

Pinter, N., Kousky, C., Conrad, D., Fugate, C., Ghilarducci, M., Neal, A., Serra-Llobet, A., and Watkins, N. (Sept. 2, 2025). Securing California’s Flood Future. Policy [White Paper]. U.C. Davis. Available from https://tinyurl.com/FloodFuture.

Pinter, N. (2026). Durable Solutions in California Disaster Resilience. California WaterBlog. https://californiawaterblog.com/2026/05/10/durable-solutions-in-california-disaster-resilience/

Pinter, N., Conrad, D. (2025). Think Now about the Unthinkable in US Disaster Management. CaliforniaWaterBlog. https://californiawaterblog.com/2025/11/09/think-now-about-the-unthinkable-in-us-disaster-management/

Pinter, N. (2025). Don’t Let a Shutdown Wash Away U.S. Flood Protection. California WaterBlog. https://californiawaterblog.com/2025/09/30/dont-let-a-shutdown-wash-away-u-s-flood-protection/