$320 Million of CDBG Funds Still in Doubt Despite 6X Increase in Construction Activity and 1-Year Deadline Extension

11/13/26 – Despite a 6X increase in construction activity and a one-year extension of deadlines, Harris County Flood Control District (HCFC) may still lose $320 million of Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) administered by the Texas General Land Office (GLO).

One week after mid-terms, Harris County residents finally got a peak at the presentation that Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia kept them from seeing before the election. Garcia pulled discussion of Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) from the agenda on 10/15.

And it’s no wonder! The numbers likely would have shifted the tide in his re-election campaign.

Stuckett’s Presentation

The slides below come from a presentation that Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) Executive Director Marcus Stuckett gave to Commissioners Court on 11/12/27. The at-risk money falls into two categories:

• $113 million of CDBG – DR grants (disaster recovery)
• $207 million of CDBG – MIT grants (mitigation).

Excess Contingency for DR Projects Leaves $80 Million on Table

Stuckett said that the “$113 million … does not mean a loss in projects or benefits.” He explained that actual construction “bids came in low” due to “excess contingency.” Eighty million dollars low! The remainder of the $113 million is due to project scope changes.

All projects in the DR group will get done and their flood-mitigation benefits will be realized. But better estimating by Stuckett’s predecessor, former HCFCD Executive Director Dr. Tina Petersen, could have built more projects. Actual construction bids came in far under Petersen’s estimates. How much? $80 million is a quarter of the $322 million originally approved for DR projects by HUD and the GLO.

Garcia defended Petersen for more than a year after other commissioners raised questions about her performance. Regardless, unless HCFCD can quickly come up with another way to use that money quickly, it will still be left on the table.

In that regard, Stuckett suggested two possibilities:

• Moving all Harris County Housing and Community Development DR Projects under HCFCD
• Moving two CDBG-MIT projects to the DR category.

If possible, those might eliminate or at least narrow the loss of DR funds.

Preserving MIT Money Will Require Yet More Deadline Extensions

“The $207 million is a little bit of a different story,” added Stuckett. “Some of those projects are still in design and development, and a one-year extension does not give us enough time to complete some of those projects.”

Stuckett next showed how additional time could reduce the amount of money left on the MIT side of the table.

• An additional year could reduce the funding lost to $48 million.
• Two additional years could reduce the loss to $0.

Against that backdrop, Stuckett explained how HCFCD wasn’t just asking for deadline extensions.

6X Increase in Rate of Completion Saves DR Projects

HCFCD is also focused on accelerating projects to beat deadlines. The focus has paid off. The rate of work being completed has increased 6X since he took office at the end of June. And he expects that rate to continue to increase.

It makes you wonder why Garcia defended Petersen’s performance for so long. Stuckett predicts that all eleven CDBG-DR projects will finish before their deadlines even though HCFCD will have to hustle up on two: the Genoa Red Bluff and Dinner Creek Stormwater Detention Basins. See below.

MIT Projects Will Require More Time

Stuckett next showed exactly which MIT projects will need more time and where they are. Six project in Precincts 1 and 2, and eight projects in Precincts 3 and 4 will finish past their deadlines.

Options Being Considered to Narrow Losses

Stuckett then discussed possible moves to narrow losses. He showed examples of projects that could benefit from additional time to restore components previously eliminated to meet the tight deadlines.

He also talked about simply cutting losses by eliminating two projects with environmental or land-acquisition hurdles. That would also potentially allow increases in the scope on other projects that had been trimmed back previously. See below. It’s like a complex puzzle.

With that, Stuckett concluded by reprising his first slide that showed $320 million at risk.

Overall, Stuckett’s presentation provided a remarkable degree of candor and detail that commissioners will need to make difficult decisions. It’s a vast improvement over his predecessor’s updates that provided false hope as projects slipped further and further behind.

Each of the Commissioners and the County Judge thanked Stuckett and his team for their work.

Garcia Motions and Probability of More Time

In the discussion that followed, Adrian Garcia proposed two motions. They both passed unanimously.

• To establish a working group to find elevate pathways for additional spending of existing Cdbg funding and return to Commissioners Court by February 11th, 2027 with recommendations on a proposed path forward using the county’s Equity Prioritization Framework
• To draft a letter to Senator Elect Talarico re: Harris County’s CDBG allocations.

Garcia claimed that unnamed sources in Washington “repeatedly” told him that “this money had no timeline.” He then backpedaled and said, “Um, and so, uh, but there was some conversations I had heard that there was a potential of, okay, no timelines.”

That assertion contradicts written contracts between HCFCD, the GLO and HUD. The GLO explained that grants made after Hurricane Ike in 2008 had no deadlines. As a consequence, some of the money is still unused and has recently been moved into a Disaster Recovery Reallocation Program.

HUD imposed the deadlines after Harvey specifically to avoid the Ike scenario, i.e., money going unused that could have mitigated flooding elsewhere in a more timely way.

Commissioners Ramsey, Briones and Ellis then discussed finding a path forward on 20 or so projects that had been cancelled. Judge Lina Hidalgo cautioned against raising false hopes.

For More Information

For additional detail, here is:

• The description of Item 84 on the 11/12/26 agenda
• Stuckett’s entire presentation
• A PDF of a spreadsheet that shows details, phases, timing, costs and percentages spent to date for each project
• The video of Stuckett’s presentation including the discussion among Commissioners that followed.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/13/26

3363 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.