Chris Bloch, a local engineer and flood activist says he showed the detention opportunities to HCFCD. However, Neel-Schaffer did not consider them in its report for unknown reasons.
Detention South of River Will Not Help Flooding Along Diversion Ditch
The Neel-Schaffer PER recommended building 405 acre-feet of detention south of the San Jacinto West Fork.
The location south of the river may help people downstream, but it will do nothing to reduce the volume of water flowing down the Diversion Ditch during a major storm.
Detention south of the river will help people farther down the West Fork. But Bloch points out that locating detention along the Diversion Ditch would help both Kingwood residents and others downstream.
Overview: Three Stormwater Detention Opportunities Inside Kingwood
Bloch consulted with Stan Sarman before Sarman’s untimely death several years ago. Sarman was one of the consulting engineers who designed Kingwood’s original drainage for Friendswood. Bloch says that he and Sarman identified several recommendations to improve Kingwood drainage. From north to south, they include:
Adding detention between Northpark Drive and St. Martha Catholic Church
Removing a berm between Kings Manor and Kings Mill detention ditches, then increasing the width and depth of the combined ditches
Creating extra capacity near the proposed new San Jacinto River outfall of the Diversion Ditch.
According to Bloch, these alternatives could provide far more capacity than the 405-acre feet that Neel-Schaffer says it needs – especially if combined with some channel-widening opportunities. I will discuss channel widening in a future post. But first, let’s look closer at these three.
Opportunity #1
Neel-Schaffer evidently didn’t look at anything north of the Harris/Montgomery County line. Since Neel-Schaffer released its PER, the Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority announced plans to build 100 acre-feet of detention in the area where the Diversion Ditch splits off from Bens Branch just north of Northpark. That’s a quarter of the needed 405 acre-feet right there.
Opportunity #2
Removing the berm between the Kings Mill and Kings Manor ditches and increasing the width and depth of the combined ditches would provide another 100 acre-feet of detention capacity. Both ditches are owned by Montgomery County Municipal Utility Districts.
Kings Mill is under fire to reduce runoff due to the new high-density Northpark Enclave development. Construction plans show runoff entering the Northpark evacuation route during extreme high-water events.
Plus, additional Enclave runoff will further reduce Diversion-Ditch capacity. Parts of the Diversion Ditch have a 50% chance of flooding every year.
Opportunity #2 could help mitigate both Enclave and Diversion-Ditch capacity issues.
Looking East toward Russell Palmer Road. Eliminating the berm between Kings Mill and Kings Manor Drainage could provide an estimated 100 acre-feet of additional stormwater detention benefitting Kingwood residents.
Opportunity #3
Neel-Schaffer recommends extending the Diversion Ditch from below Deer Ridge Park to the West Fork – without forcing it to make an S-turn through River Grove Park.
New outfall for Diversion Ditch (red line) creates another opportunity for more detention (in red box).
That coincides with one of the recommendations originally made by Sarman and Bloch. But Sarman and Bloch also called for construction of a large pond at the outfall location. This pond would slow water velocities exiting the Diversion Ditch and provide a sediment-settling area before the water enters the River.
Depending on the configuration, such a pond could provide another 80 to 100 acre-feet of inline detention.
High Cost of Detention South of River
Those three alternatives alone could provide approximately three quarters of the needed detention and reduce flood risk for more than 500 residents who flooded near the Diversion Ditch during Harvey.
Bloch and Sarman identified other opportunities within the ditch to expand capacity. They could easily bring the total to far more than the 405 acre-feet needed.
Yet the projected cost of the basin they proposed is between a quarter and a third of total project costs – almost $15 million out of $55 million. In fairness, Neel-Schaffer says on the same page, “Due to limited effectiveness and significant cost, the recommended detention basin should be further examined during final design.”
Final Design Getting Underway
On May 8, 2025, Harris County Commissioners Court approved a motion to advertise final design and construction of the diversion ditch project for bids. However, an engineering design firm has not yet been selected.
When they are, I hope they evaluate some of these recommendations.
A transmittal from HCFCD Executive Director Dr. Tina Petersen shows that the EPA and Texas Water Development Board have apparently pledged $7 million to the project. That won’t cover much construction. So, Petersen says HCFCD will continue to look for more grants. Her timeline shows construction starting in mid-2028…if she can find the money.
These recommendations may help make the project more affordable.
Posted by Bob Rehak 7/30/25
2892 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/20250601-DJI_20250601115054_0643_D.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=16191100adminadmin2025-07-30 11:01:112025-07-30 11:01:12Diversion Ditch Study Did Not Consider Obvious Opportunities that Might Have Reduced Costs, Flood Risk
7/28/2025 – State Representative Steve Toth has announced a bid to unseat U.S. Congressman Dan Crenshaw in next year’s Republican primary. While Crenshaw helped secure more than $120 million dollars for dredging in the Lake Houston Area after Harvey to reduce flood risk, Toth voted against bills to create a Lake Houston Dredging District THREE times in five years.
Toth claims that the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), a powerful Republican think tank, was “also against the bill.” However, a search of the TPPF website turned up no mention of any of the three bills. They included:
HB 2525 in 2021 (by former State Rep. Dan Huberty)
HB 5341 in 2023 (by current State Rep. Charles Cunningham)
HB 1532 in 2025 (also by Cunningham)
I searched the TPPF website for each of the bill numbers (with and without spaces and hyphens). I also searched it for key words such as “dredging” and “Lake Houston.” None of the searches turned up any mention of any of the bills. Moreover, neither of the bills’ authors could recall TPPF taking a stance for or against the bill(s), nor could their chiefs of staff.
Likewise, neither Google, nor ChatGPT, found any public records indicating that TPPF adopted a position against the creation of a Lake Houston Dredging District.
Witness Lists Don’t Support Toth Claim Either
The list of witnesses who addressed the House Natural Resources Committee on HB 2525 in 2021 shows no one from the TPPF. Ditto for the Senate testimony.
In the six full sentences above, I quickly spotted five major issues.
#1 – I can find no public records of TPPF being against any of the dredging bills as discussed above.
#2 – “One more taxing agency.” The 2025 version of the bill (HB 1532) that became law states explicitly that the dredging district cannot levy taxes. Do you really want a representative who doesn’t read the legislation he’s voting on?
#4 – Even if TPPF was against the bill, who cares? Toth is running to represent tens of thousands of Lake Houston Area residents and business people that flooded – not the TPPF. Do you really want a representative who votes against the needs of constituents to curry favor with a think tank in Austin that doesn’t even list flooding as an issue it cares about?
#5 – If the TPPF was against the 2025 bill, why did so many Republicans vote for it? It passed the House by 114 to 19 and the Senate by 30 to 1.
Mr. Toth certainly doesn’t inspire my trust.
No Reply from Toth Yet
Johnna Wells, the lady who elicited the response above from Rep. Toth has invited him to come to Kingwood and address voters on these issues. He indicated a willingness to talk to her, but wouldn’t say when.
In the hall of mirrors that political discourse has become in recent years, it’s important to verify the claims you hear or see.
If Mr. Toth wishes to respond to the observations in this post, I will be happy to print his point of view. But he must start with who at TPPF came out against the bill. What did they say? When? And where? And how can it be verified?
What started out as unexplained votes has quickly morphed into a major trust issue.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/28/2025
2990 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.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Dredging-e1753753680332.jpg?fit=1100%2C608&ssl=16081100adminadmin2025-07-28 21:24:172025-07-28 22:01:14Explanation of Toth’s Negative Votes on Dredging Bills Not Supported by Evidence
7/27/25 – Callan Marine is done with its City of Houston West Fork dredging contract. The contract used the last of the FEMA money that U.S. Congressman Dan Crenshaw helped obtain for dredging the West Fork Mouth Bar and the surrounding area after Harvey.
The City hired Callan to dredge 800,000 cubic yards from the San Jacinto West Fork between Kings Point, Atascocita and FM1960. But even though that contract is now complete, the need for dredging is far from over. Let me explain.
Pictures Taken Today
The General Pershing, Callan’s dredge was docked today on the east side of Lake Houston, just south of FM1960.
Dredging DemobilizationMiles of massive dredge pipe used in the operation were pulled onshore, waiting for removal.The placement area next to the Luce Bayou Inter-Basin Transfer Canal was vacant. Callan had removed all of its equipment.The gates that let return-water out of the placement area had been removed (lower right).The return-water channel from the placement area was filled in. Straw had been placed across the filled channel to retard erosion.Callan filled the area inside the perimeter bermsalmost completely.
But just upstream from from where the dredging took place, the West Fork is already filling in again near the West Lake Houston Parkway Bridge.
The area near Kings Harbor is only 1-2 feet deep.The Army Corps dredged this area just a few years ago.Not many people will be tying their boats up here near Raffa’s.Farther upstream, it’s the same story. Boaters told me today the outfall of the Kingwood Diversion Ditch (shown above) is only about 6″ to a 1′ deep at River Grove Park.
Same area in 2018 before Army Corps dredging. An estimated 500+ homes above this point flooded during Harvey.
Sediment buildups like these reduced the conveyance of both the East and West Forks by 15 feet in places.
Another massive build up less than a half mile downstream from River Grove took the Corps months to dredge.
The Would-Be Congressman Who Denies Need for Dredging
Reducing flood risk in the Lake Houston Area requires reducing sediment build ups like these. Before the Corps left the West Fork, it recommended setting up a maintenance dredging program to help prevent such massive buildups in the future.
And yet a person upstream who wants to represent the Lake Houston Area in Congress, State Representative Steve Toth, voted against Cunningham’s Dredging District bill. And now he’s challenging Crenshaw.
I have yet to hear a credible explanation as to why Toth voted against the dredging district bill and the needs of the people he hopes to represent. Perhaps he would care to go on the record.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/27/25
2889 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.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/20250727-DJI_20250727113351_0613_D.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=16191100adminadmin2025-07-27 18:28:202025-07-27 19:14:04West Fork Dredging Contract Complete, But Job Far from Over
Diversion Ditch Study Did Not Consider Obvious Opportunities that Might Have Reduced Costs, Flood Risk
7/30/25 – The Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) of Kingwood Diversion Ditch Conveyance Improvements makes no reference to three obvious detention opportunities that could potentially reduce project costs and help protect people in Kingwood from flooding. Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) commissioned the PER in 2021 after the Kingwood Area Drainage Analysis identified fixing Diversion Ditch issues as one of the top priorities in Kingwood.
Chris Bloch, a local engineer and flood activist says he showed the detention opportunities to HCFCD. However, Neel-Schaffer did not consider them in its report for unknown reasons.
Detention South of River Will Not Help Flooding Along Diversion Ditch
The Neel-Schaffer PER recommended building 405 acre-feet of detention south of the San Jacinto West Fork.
The location south of the river may help people downstream, but it will do nothing to reduce the volume of water flowing down the Diversion Ditch during a major storm.
Detention south of the river will help people farther down the West Fork. But Bloch points out that locating detention along the Diversion Ditch would help both Kingwood residents and others downstream.
Overview: Three Stormwater Detention Opportunities Inside Kingwood
Bloch consulted with Stan Sarman before Sarman’s untimely death several years ago. Sarman was one of the consulting engineers who designed Kingwood’s original drainage for Friendswood. Bloch says that he and Sarman identified several recommendations to improve Kingwood drainage. From north to south, they include:
According to Bloch, these alternatives could provide far more capacity than the 405-acre feet that Neel-Schaffer says it needs – especially if combined with some channel-widening opportunities. I will discuss channel widening in a future post. But first, let’s look closer at these three.
Opportunity #1
Neel-Schaffer evidently didn’t look at anything north of the Harris/Montgomery County line. Since Neel-Schaffer released its PER, the Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority announced plans to build 100 acre-feet of detention in the area where the Diversion Ditch splits off from Bens Branch just north of Northpark. That’s a quarter of the needed 405 acre-feet right there.
Opportunity #2
Removing the berm between the Kings Mill and Kings Manor ditches and increasing the width and depth of the combined ditches would provide another 100 acre-feet of detention capacity. Both ditches are owned by Montgomery County Municipal Utility Districts.
Kings Mill is under fire to reduce runoff due to the new high-density Northpark Enclave development. Construction plans show runoff entering the Northpark evacuation route during extreme high-water events.
Plus, additional Enclave runoff will further reduce Diversion-Ditch capacity. Parts of the Diversion Ditch have a 50% chance of flooding every year.
Opportunity #2 could help mitigate both Enclave and Diversion-Ditch capacity issues.
Opportunity #3
Neel-Schaffer recommends extending the Diversion Ditch from below Deer Ridge Park to the West Fork – without forcing it to make an S-turn through River Grove Park.
That coincides with one of the recommendations originally made by Sarman and Bloch. But Sarman and Bloch also called for construction of a large pond at the outfall location. This pond would slow water velocities exiting the Diversion Ditch and provide a sediment-settling area before the water enters the River.
Depending on the configuration, such a pond could provide another 80 to 100 acre-feet of inline detention.
High Cost of Detention South of River
Those three alternatives alone could provide approximately three quarters of the needed detention and reduce flood risk for more than 500 residents who flooded near the Diversion Ditch during Harvey.
Bloch and Sarman identified other opportunities within the ditch to expand capacity. They could easily bring the total to far more than the 405 acre-feet needed.
Neel-Schaffer makes a frank confession about its detention recommendation south of the West Fork on page 38 of its Preliminary Engineering Review. It says that…
Yet the projected cost of the basin they proposed is between a quarter and a third of total project costs – almost $15 million out of $55 million. In fairness, Neel-Schaffer says on the same page, “Due to limited effectiveness and significant cost, the recommended detention basin should be further examined during final design.”
Final Design Getting Underway
On May 8, 2025, Harris County Commissioners Court approved a motion to advertise final design and construction of the diversion ditch project for bids. However, an engineering design firm has not yet been selected.
When they are, I hope they evaluate some of these recommendations.
A transmittal from HCFCD Executive Director Dr. Tina Petersen shows that the EPA and Texas Water Development Board have apparently pledged $7 million to the project. That won’t cover much construction. So, Petersen says HCFCD will continue to look for more grants. Her timeline shows construction starting in mid-2028…if she can find the money.
These recommendations may help make the project more affordable.
Posted by Bob Rehak 7/30/25
2892 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Explanation of Toth’s Negative Votes on Dredging Bills Not Supported by Evidence
7/28/2025 – State Representative Steve Toth has announced a bid to unseat U.S. Congressman Dan Crenshaw in next year’s Republican primary. While Crenshaw helped secure more than $120 million dollars for dredging in the Lake Houston Area after Harvey to reduce flood risk, Toth voted against bills to create a Lake Houston Dredging District THREE times in five years.
Toth claims that the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), a powerful Republican think tank, was “also against the bill.” However, a search of the TPPF website turned up no mention of any of the three bills. They included:
I searched the TPPF website for each of the bill numbers (with and without spaces and hyphens). I also searched it for key words such as “dredging” and “Lake Houston.” None of the searches turned up any mention of any of the bills. Moreover, neither of the bills’ authors could recall TPPF taking a stance for or against the bill(s), nor could their chiefs of staff.
Likewise, neither Google, nor ChatGPT, found any public records indicating that TPPF adopted a position against the creation of a Lake Houston Dredging District.
Witness Lists Don’t Support Toth Claim Either
The list of witnesses who addressed the House Natural Resources Committee on HB 2525 in 2021 shows no one from the TPPF. Ditto for the Senate testimony.
I could find only two public comments in 2023 – both written and neither from TPPF.
The same holds true for HB 1532 in 2025. No comments from TPPF in the House, nor in the Senate!
The only people who ever testified against any of the three versions of the Dredging District bills represented water authorities, not TPPF.
Error-Ridden Defense of Negative Votes
A close examination of Rep. Toth’s defense of his negative votes shows other troubling issues, too. See below.
Five Issues in Six Sentences
In the six full sentences above, I quickly spotted five major issues.
Mr. Toth certainly doesn’t inspire my trust.
No Reply from Toth Yet
Johnna Wells, the lady who elicited the response above from Rep. Toth has invited him to come to Kingwood and address voters on these issues. He indicated a willingness to talk to her, but wouldn’t say when.
In the hall of mirrors that political discourse has become in recent years, it’s important to verify the claims you hear or see.
If Mr. Toth wishes to respond to the observations in this post, I will be happy to print his point of view. But he must start with who at TPPF came out against the bill. What did they say? When? And where? And how can it be verified?
What started out as unexplained votes has quickly morphed into a major trust issue.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/28/2025
2990 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.
West Fork Dredging Contract Complete, But Job Far from Over
7/27/25 – Callan Marine is done with its City of Houston West Fork dredging contract. The contract used the last of the FEMA money that U.S. Congressman Dan Crenshaw helped obtain for dredging the West Fork Mouth Bar and the surrounding area after Harvey.
The City hired Callan to dredge 800,000 cubic yards from the San Jacinto West Fork between Kings Point, Atascocita and FM1960. But even though that contract is now complete, the need for dredging is far from over. Let me explain.
Pictures Taken Today
The General Pershing, Callan’s dredge was docked today on the east side of Lake Houston, just south of FM1960.
But just upstream from from where the dredging took place, the West Fork is already filling in again near the West Lake Houston Parkway Bridge.
Ironically, the Army Corps liberated River Grove from a giant sand build up just a few years ago. Remember what this area looked like then? See below.
The Would-Be Congressman Who Denies Need for Dredging
Reducing flood risk in the Lake Houston Area requires reducing sediment build ups like these. Before the Corps left the West Fork, it recommended setting up a maintenance dredging program to help prevent such massive buildups in the future.
Following the Corps’ lead, former State Rep. Dan Huberty tried to set up such a program in 2021. So did State Rep. Charles Cunningham in 2023. Cunningham finally succeeded this year when HB1532 became law.
And yet a person upstream who wants to represent the Lake Houston Area in Congress, State Representative Steve Toth, voted against Cunningham’s Dredging District bill. And now he’s challenging Crenshaw.
I have yet to hear a credible explanation as to why Toth voted against the dredging district bill and the needs of the people he hopes to represent. Perhaps he would care to go on the record.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/27/25
2889 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.