Dichotomies of current water news

For Jim wescoat's class we are asked to read current events focusing on water and report back to the group what we found interesting. I noticed who dichotomies in reviewing the news which I think reflect strongly (but poorly) on urban infrastructure in the us. The first is the simultaneous 3-year severe drought in California and accentuated withdrawals of lake mead while we have severe flash flood warnings in la. The second is the citizen based reform At the house to revise the revised FEMA insurance rates and europe's 2050 assessment of projected changes to flood risks. The reform is based on reducing insurance to low income households who are essentially grandfathered into a floodplain or reducing premiums so you don't pay as high as 1% of your coverage per year (I.e. if you have a $200,000 coverage you pay $2,000 a year in flood insurance). The report in europe showed how by as early as 2030 Europe may see extreme flood disasters on an annual basis. This stems form the convergence of increased urbanization and population growth, climate changes, and increase in wealth concentrated along floodplains. In New England, a report by the new England aquarium in 2012 projected that by 2030 in Boston, a 100 year flood  will occur ever 30 years (this number changes for different cities along the east coast).  how can FEMA stay (is it currently?) solvent if it has to pay out insurance claims at 3 times the frequency without raising premiums?

Need to add references.