flood mitigation Q1 spending trends

Latest Spending Trends: Flood-Mitigation Quarterly Update

Numbers for Harris County Flood Control District’s (HCFCD) first quarter are in. They show several spending trends.

Spending Decline Continues

They show that the pace of overall flood-mitigation spending continues to decline, though there are signs that it could turn around soon – depending on your basis of comparison.

Year over year, the totals show a pronounced decline. Annualized first-quarter spending is now less half of what it was at the post-Harvey peak in 2020.

All data for this and other graphs in this post was compiled from HCFCD spreadsheets in response to a FOIA request.

To underscore that trend, spending declined from $74 million to $51 million between the last quarter of 2023 and the first quarter of 2024 – a 31% decrease in one quarter. So I checked for seasonality.

Spending often drops between the fourth and first quarters, but it’s not consistent.

From the 7-year chart above, you can see that spending dropped five times after the holidays and increased two.

However, change the basis of comparison and you can see an encouraging sign. If you compare the first quarter of 2023 with the first quarter of 2024, the spending is up by 20% – from about $41 million to $51 million.

Where the Money Goes by Watershed

Harris County has 23 watersheds. The chart below shows the total of HCFCD spending in each since Hurricane Harvey. Variation between Brays on the high end and Galveston Bay on the low is more than 100 to 1.

From data supplied by HCFCD in response to FOIA request

Comparing the graphs above and below shows where the action shifted in Q1. Notice that Brays shifts from first to eighth place. White Oak moves from fourth to first. And Halls jumped from ninth to third.

To learn more about specific projects in each of these watersheds, click on a watershed’s link on HCFCD’s home page.

What Drives Investments in Some Watersheds and Not in Others

To a large extent: damage and political priorities. I compiled the chart below from Harris County Federal Reports. One of the first things you notice is that Brays is on the left and Galveston Bay is toward the right.

Data compiled from HCFCD Federal Reports

The next two charts show how prioritizing projects in low-to-moderate income (LMI) areas can skew spending in different watersheds. The first shows LMI funding since Harvey. The second shows LMI funding in the first quarter of 2024. Comparing them, you can see how higher and higher percentages of the total are going to watersheds with a majority of LMI residents.

In the longer run, about half the money has gone to watersheds with a majority LMI population. But currently, about two-thirds goes to LMI-majority watersheds.

Keep in mind that although you see two categories in these pie charts, the categories are not equal. The blue area contains eight watersheds and the orange area 15 – almost twice as many. Said another way…

Half as many watersheds now get twice as much money.

The eight LMI watersheds include: Brays, Greens, White Oak, Halls, Sims, Hunting, Vince, and Goose Creek/Spring Gully.

The government defines LMI as “below the average income for the region.” In the other 15 areas, a majority of residents make “above the average income for the region.”

Harris County uses an Equity Prioritization Formula to select projects it will fund. The formula places a premium the percentage of low-to-moderate income individuals who live in an area. The theory: low-income families are less able to repair their homes after a flood.

Other Variables Skew Funding

The deeper you dig into these numbers, the more you can see other variables that skew funding, too.

  • Dense building next to bayous can increase cost of land for mitigation projects by making buyouts necessary to widen channels or build stormwater detention basins.
  • Previous mitigation spending – Some watersheds received extensive mitigation before Harvey.
  • Spending by others, i.e., the Army Corps, which is not reflected here
  • Timing of studies – Some studies that would justify grants haven’t even been completed yet, whereas others completed before Harvey were shovel ready when the flood bond came along.
  • Land acquisition and construction represent the two largest component costs of flood mitigation. Some large projects haven’t reached those stages yet.
  • Building code variations – Newer codes generally stipulate safer standards, reducing flood risk and damage in newer areas at no cost to the public.
  • Frontier Program – The county sometimes acquires land in developing areas to prevent future flood damage. Prevention is always cheaper than correction, but that land can be expensive.
  • Speed of partnership funding – Just last week, Harris County, the City of Houston and GLO reached an agreement related to $322 million in Harvey Disaster Relief Funds. That will make more money available to watersheds that were heavily damaged during Harvey.
  • Protection of employment centers, such as the Medical Center, Downtown, the Ship Channel, etc.

Someday soon, I hope to do a series of posts on projects within each watershed and the specifics of why they were funded.

The San Jacinto Gap

For now, let me discuss just one. The San Jacinto is Harris County’s largest watershed. It had the highest flooding in the County during Harvey. It also had a quarter of all the flood-related deaths during Harvey.

The San Jacinto had the eighth most damage, but ranks 13th in funding since Harvey. Of the twelve watersheds that received more funding, five had less damage. 

  • Cypress Creek has received more than 4X the San Jacinto. 
  • Little Cypress has received 3X more.
  • Addicks has received 2.5X more.
  • Clear Creek and Willow Creek have each received approximately 50% more.

And most of those watersheds have more affluent populations than the San Jacinto. So how do you account for the gap between severity of flooding and flood-mitigation funding?

For one thing, most of the San Jacinto watershed lies outside of Harris County. And some commissioners have flat out rejected spending money to build projects outside the county even though the 2018 flood bond permitted it.

Protecting areas like Humble, Atascocita and Kingwood will most likely require building upstream projects outside the county. Until the political winds change, funding for such projects will most likely have to come from the state or federal government.

Posted by Bob Rehak on April 22, 2024

2428 Days since Hurricane Harvey