NJ Governor estimates Sandy will cost state at least $29.4 billion

NEW YORK Fri Nov 23, 2012 8:42pm EST

The extensive damage to an amusement park roller coaster in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy is seen in Seaside Heights, New Jersey, November 13, 2012. REUTERS/Tom Mihalek

The extensive damage to an amusement park roller coaster in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy is seen in Seaside Heights, New Jersey, November 13, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Tom Mihalek

Related Topics

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Superstorm Sandy caused at least $29.4 billion in overall damage in New Jersey, according to a preliminary analysis released by Governor Chris Christie's office Friday.

The estimate of the damage caused by the storm, which ravaged the Northeastern U.S. coastline late last month, includes personal property, business, infrastructure and utility damage, Christie said in a statement.

The statement said the preliminary cost estimate is "inclusive of aid received to date and anticipated from federal sources," including the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Small Business Administration. Christie said it was a "conservative and responsible estimate" that could be revised higher, Christie said.

Last week, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said he planned to ask the federal government for $30 billion in disaster aid for the state. Earlier this month, New York City Comptroller John Liu said the storm was costing New York City $200 million a day in lost economic activity, with that amount likely to top out at about $1 billion.

"This preliminary number is based on the best available data, field observations and geographical mapping, and supported by expert advice from my Cabinet commissioners and an outside consulting company," Christie said in the statement Friday.

Christie said the estimate will be refined in the future to include impact on the next tourist seasons, real estate values and population shifts.

The record-breaking "superstorm" blasted through eight Northeastern U.S. states on October 30, killing dozens of people, battering coastal neighborhoods and forcing mass evacuations. The storm shut down the entire New York City subway system for days.

(Additional reporting by Hilary Russ; Editing by Bill Trott)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (5)
DHites wrote:
Fiscal Conservatives … Cut Federal Aid Programs … Unless of course it is US that needs the federal aid program.

Nov 23, 2012 9:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BioStudies wrote:
Yea that’s not what Fiscal Conservatives say. They want to put more power of how the states respond into states hands and receive the money directly from the feds. Right now the feds oversee a lot of how that money is spent and they do a bad job of it at times.

On a side note I personally don’t think they should get any federal aid. The areas worst hit should be moved back from the coast or this is going to happen again. Nothing to do with Global Warming, just pure and simple FACTS. I feel no pity for the people caught in that storm. No pity at all.

Nov 23, 2012 11:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
morbas wrote:
@BioStudies, this is the historical record. Since 1870 the sea level rise is 9 feet, the rate is constant since 1992, atypical of any cyclic prognosis. This trend needs consideration for planning flood potential through the next 142 years.
As to the Article label, costing the state $29.4 Billion, it is the people that bear that burden, not the state. @SCOTUS, Inanimate structures are not living beings. SCOTUS Citizens United ruling exceeds Constitutional contractual limitations, endowing money with rights? Term limits are needed.

Nov 24, 2012 7:35am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.