Editorial: “Me vs. We” in Scarborough Development Debate
6/7/2026 – Much of human history comes down to balancing the rights of individuals vs. those of society as a whole. Said another way, where do we draw the line when considering “Me vs. We?”
The proposed Scarborough Development, backed by the State of Texas General Land Office, in the floodplains of Spring Creek, Cypress Creek, Turkey Creek and the San Jacinto West Fork makes a good example.
Should a developer have the ability to build on its own property? Even if altering the floodplain will endanger the lives of future homeowners, first responders, and people in surrounding areas? And what if you, the taxpayer, are asked to mitigate that risk in the future? That’s the Me vs. We debate. What’s good for one isn’t always good for the majority.
Me vs. We in American Life
The Me vs. We debate permeates almost every aspect of American life. For instance, we give up some of our freedom as individuals when we:
- Marry and raise a family
- Obey laws
- Choose to live in a city
- Join the Armed Forces
- Take a job with a company
- Go through airport security
- Stop at a red light.
In America, the “Me vs. We debate” divides conservatives from liberals and Red states from Blue on most contentious issues
After 250 years, we still haven’t figured out where to draw that line – at least not universally. We just let people and companies shop for jurisdictions compatible with their own self-interest. Want conservative? Move to Texas. Want to hedge your bets? Move to Harris County.
Different Jurisdictions, Different Philosophies
Want to file a lawsuit against the EPA or against polluters? Shop for a court friendly to your point of view.
Should a company be allowed to build on cheap, floodplain property likely to destroy homes and lives? That is the debate with Scarborough. The company stands to make immense profits if it can secure development permits for its 5,300-acre property.
Against that backdrop, lies the safety and security of hundreds of thousands of people, most of whom remain blissfully ignorant of the developing threat upstream.
Engineers using mathematical models estimate the probability of becoming a victim due to alterations they propose to the floodplain. But, in the end, they are highly paid consultants trying to prove the viability of their recommendations to clients.
The public rarely has the knowledge or money to challenge their findings. The public must rely on elected representatives to protect them, the same representatives who receive immense campaign contributions from the engineering companies and their clients.
The High Cost of Failure
If the engineers get it wrong, which they often do, you, the taxpayer, not the developer, will pick up the tab.
If engineers always got it right, American government(s) wouldn’t spend $40–70 billion per year on disaster relief and flood mitigation.
And the shame of it is that floodplain preservation is almost always cheaper than flood mitigation and disaster recovery…by a huge margin.
The proposed Scarborough development is almost half as large as Kingwood. And almost all of it is in floodplains or floodways.
Houston and Harris County have already passed unanimous resolutions against developing the Scarborough land. But it’s in Montgomery County, which has less stringent flood regulations.
Regardless, concerned Montgomery County residents have started a petition against the development.
Please join them by signing the petition today.
Change.org
Ask everyone you know to sign it, too. Help protect your home and family.
This is an election year. Let’s make elections painful for the people pushing this development. The best time to stop a problem is before it starts.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 6/7/2026
3204 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
