1/26/25 – According to data provided in response to a FOIA request, Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) spending has now declined for the fourth straight year, despite $3 billion left in the flood bond (including committed partnership funding).
HCFCD spending more than doubled after passage of flood bond in 2018, but is now less than in 2019.$2.1 billion of the $5 billion in the bond has now been spent.
High Cost of Slowing Down
HCFCD spending picked up slightly last quarter compared to the previous quarter. But overall, the trend is still down compared to the years following passage of the flood bond in 2018.
A quarter-by-quarter analysis shows the decline has not been perfectly smooth. Dips and bumps have occurred with changes in management, direction, organization, and processes imposed by Commissioners Court. But overall the slowdown has been unmistakeable and costly.
Between 2018 and January 2025, the United States experienced a cumulative inflation rate of approximately 25.62%. Thus, the $3 billion remainder of the $5 billion flood bond has lost approximately a quarter of its purchasing power. And that means some planned projects may not get done.
Equity Prioritization Index Ignores Flood Damage
One of the biggest changes: the county’s focus on equity in prioritizing bond projects. On the left of the graph above, money was allocated to mitigation projects in areas with the most flood damage.
But starting in August 2019, that changed. Commissioners started ranking projects using a multi-factor index that omitted damage while emphasizing the average income in an area. Then, they kept tweaking the formula for the next three years.
The constant changes let Democratic commissioners direct money to pet projects in their precincts. But it also has reportedly slowed down HCFCD, and delayed or denied flood-mitigation assistance to areas that desperately need it.
San Jacinto Watershed: Worst Flooding, Modest Mitigation Investment
For instance, in five major storms since 2000 (Allison, Tax Day, Memorial Day, Harvey and Imelda), the San Jacinto watershed ranked 8th among Harris County’s 23 watersheds in terms of damaged structures.
Based on HCFCD Federal Reports. Total number of damaged structures in five major storms between 2000 and 2020 shown on right.
The San Jacinto also ranked 4th in the percentage of its population that experienced flood damage in those storms. That indicates how disruptive flooding has been to a watershed.
Based on 2022 population estimates by HCFCD in each watershed.
The San Jacinto had almost half the flood-related deaths in Harris County during Harvey – 15out of 36.
And we also had the deepest flooding in the county during Harvey – more than 20 feet above flood stage!
Chart showing feet above flood stage of 33 gages on misc. bayous in Harris County during Harvey.San Jacinto is at far left.
However, since Harvey, the San Jacinto watershed ranks 14th in terms of HCFCD spending.
Hopeful Comparisons Between Short- and Long-Term Trends
The San Jacinto watershed’s ranking increased from 8th place last quarter compared to 14th “since Harvey”. That’s a hopeful sign. Work in some other watersheds, such as Brays, finally appears to be winding down. Compare the relative positions of Brays and San Jacinto above and below.
Here are the actual spending totals during the two time periods. They vary by more than a 1000 to 1. Political priorities have skewed the numbers.
As of end of 2024
The lifecycle stages of projects have also skewed the numbers. For instance, within a project’s lifecycle, construction usually ranks as the most expensive stage by far. Looking at the percent of construction dollars within the “Total Since Harvey” column on the right above, yields the table below.
From Harvey through end of 2024
Watersheds near the bottom of the list may have had upfront studies completed, but little more. The San Jacinto’s low ranking (#17) indicates that commissioners have prioritized mitigation work in other watersheds higher.
Remember that studies don’t mitigate flooding. Construction does.
Another hopeful comparison shows how the percentage of HCFCD spending in watersheds with a majority of low-to-moderate income (LMI) residents decreased last quarter compared to the longer-term trend.
Harris County has eight watersheds with majority LMI populations. LMI means residents earn less than the median income for the region.
Since Harvey, LMI watersheds have received more than half of all funding from HCFCD, despite the fact that there are only eight such watersheds vs. 15 others.
On a per watershed basis, the LMI watersheds received twice the money on average. But last quarter, the percentages were much closer to equal.
Of course, the imminent kickoff of $863 million worth of projects funded by HUD – with a 70% cumulative LMI percentage – could skew these percentages back in the other direction faster than you can say Rodney Ellis.
I have two big worries at this point:
Inflation’s Toll – Will there be enough money left in the flood bond to complete all the projects in it – especially if we have to wait years more to finish the HUD projects?
HCFCD Spending Slowdown – Will HCFCD be able to complete almost a billion dollars worth of flood-mitigation projects before HUD deadlines?
If either worry comes to pass, projects that benefit higher income neighborhoods may not get done.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/26/25
2707 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/2025/01/HCFCD-Annual-Spending-since-Bond-e1737935492739.png?fit=1100%2C747&ssl=17471100adminadmin2025-01-26 19:33:202025-01-29 22:06:15HCFCD Spending Declines for Fourth Straight Year, San Jacinto Watershed Still Slighted
1/25/25 – Yesterday, Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) released two lists ofprojects proposed for $863 million in funding.
The lists correspond to Community Development Block Grants for Mitigation (CDBG-MIT) and Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) programs from the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD). The Texas General Land Office (GLO) administers the funds at the state level.
Per HUD rules, at least 50% of the funding for all projects taken together must benefit Low-to-Moderate Income (LMI) citizens. However, HCFCD is working towards a goal of 70% mandated by Harris County Commissioners Court.
Differences Between DR and MIT Funds
Of the total $863 million awarded, $322 million will go to Disaster Recovery programs and $541 million will go to Mitigation programs.
CDBG-DR dollars fund areas impacted by Hurricane Harvey. CDBG-DR projects must be completed by May 31, 2026.
CDBG-MIT dollars fund projects that mitigate future disasters and flooding. They must finish by March 31, 2028.
You can review one-page summaries of each recommended project on these pages:
HCFCD’s release of the lists yesterday opened public comment, which closes at 4:30 p.m. on Monday, February 24, 2025.
Email comments to CDBG@hcfcd.hctx.net or mail them to Harris County Flood Control District, ATTN: CDBG Communications, 9900 Northwest Freeway, Houston, TX 77092.
Only One Project in Lake Houston Area
HCFCD has proposed one project in the Lake Houston Area out of all this money: Taylor Gully Channel Improvements/Woodridge Village Stormwater Detention Basin. HCFCD estimates the project at $33 million. It will serve a population that’s 26% LMI.
The project overview says, “This project will improve the stormwater conveyance in Taylor Gully and increase the volume of detained stormwater with the construction of the Woodridge stormwater detention basin. The stormwater detention basin will be constructed on undeveloped land the Flood Control District owns and adjacent to three existing stormwater detention basins. This part of the project will be completed before the channel conveyance improvements on Taylor Gully start.”
Taylor Gully starts in MoCo on the Woodridge Village Property and runs through the northern part of Kingwood to the East Fork. Hundreds of families flooded twice in 2019 in this area after Perry Homes clearcut the Woodridge Property.
Shortly after purchasing the Woodridge property in 2021, HCFCD got a head start on the detention basin portion of the project when it entered an excavation and removal contract with Sprint Sand and Clay. But the contract ended and work stopped when HCFCD decided to apply for the HUD grant. Under HUD rules, work cannot continue while a grant application is being evaluated. That left a gaping, disconnected hole in the ground.
Start of Woodridge Village stormwater detention basin as of October 25, 2024. When complete, it will extend to small grove of trees near top of frameand the diagonal channel that bisects the property. See map above.
Other Mitigation Projects
See the other Projects in the screen captures below.
Notice that the Kingwood Diversion Ditch did not make either list. HCFCD’s Kingwood Area Drainage Analysis named it one of the two most important projects in the Kingwood Area, which suffered the worst flood in the county during Harvey.
Regardless, I look forward to seeing the Woodridge detention basin resume construction.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/25/25
2706 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/20241025-DJI_20241025151123_0019_D.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=16191100adminadmin2025-01-25 16:49:262025-08-30 16:46:16HCFCD Recommends Projects for $863 Million in HUD Funding
1/24/25 – Only hours remain to reduce your flood risk from sand mining.
The public comment period for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s (TCEQ) proposed new best management practices (BMPs) for sand mines closes tonight at 11:59 PM. As of this morning, fewer than 200 people statewide had left comments. That’s less than 1% of all the homes and businesses that flooded in the Lake Houston Area alone.
Small Response Says People No Longer Care About Flooding
And that’s a pathetically small number considering sand mining’s contributions to flooding in this area. Sediment released from the mines during floods accumulates at the mouths of rivers streams and ditches, blocking drainage. Accumulated sediment also reduces the conveyance of rivers and streams.
Blockages and reduced conveyance contributed to an estimated billion dollars in damages during Harvey. They have also cost almost $200 million to dredge in the last five years.
Yet the new BMPs do nothing to address this problem. They show the heavy hand of lobbyists on a state agency eager to create the appearance of public protection.
What We Need
In my opinion, the mines need to be on higher ground, farther from rivers. And the setbacks need to retain their natural vegetation. This will reduce the chances of:
Erosion at greater than natural rates
Rivers migrating into mines over time
Pit capture (That’s when a river starts flowing through a mine pit.)
Floodwaters inundating the mines and carrying off sediment
Downstream sediment accumulations that contribute to flooding homes and businesses.
Hallett and surrounding mines on the San Jacinto West Fork on May 3, 2024. This was during what amounted to a 2- to 10-year rainfall, according to HCFCD.However, flood levels downstream reached 100-year levels, a testament to the reduced conveyance of the West Fork.
The dikes around sand mines are supposed to protect them in a 100-year flood. But as you can see in the photo above, it doesn’t really work that way.
Submitting Your Comment Should Take Less Than 2 Minutes
Please help. Submit public comments to the TCEQ that urge them to include BMPs that address better sediment control.
Here’s how. It should only take a minute or two. Follow these simple steps.
Paste the text into their webform or use your own words.
RE: APO BMP List Proposal
TCEQ’s proposed list of Best Management Practices for Aggregate Production Operations completely ignores mining issues that contribute to flooding in the Houston area.
Most mines on the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto were inundated last year in what amounted to 2- to 10-year rainfall. Floodwaters swept industrial waste downstream into Lake Houston, the drinking water supply for two million people.
The rivers also broke through the dikes of at least six of those mines. The rivers now run through pits instead of around them. This flushes sand and sediment downstream, where it reduces conveyance, blocks drainage and contributes to flooding.
Addressing these issues requires building mines on higher ground, farther from rivers.
I recommend doubling the minimum setback from 100 to 200 feet for mines in the San Jacinto watershed. That will put the mines on higher ground, farther from the floodway.
I also recommend leaving forests undisturbed in the widened buffer zone. That will reduce the velocity of floodwater and, with it, the volume of sediment carried downstream. It will also decrease the likelihood of pit capture, by increasing the amount of time that it takes a river to migrate into a mine. The forest will also help capture sediment that may escape a mine.
Finally, the wider buffers will give rivers more room to spread out during floods. Right now, dikes are supposed to protect mines from a hundred-year flood. But when mines build tall dikes on one side of a river, they double the volume of water flooding the other side. And when they build tall dikes on both sides of a river, water has no room to spread out without invading the mines. The tall dikes effectively eliminate ALL floodplains and turn rivers into erosive firehoses.
I also support the concerns and list of alternative BMPs proposed by Texans for Responsible Aggregate Mining.
Hurry. There are only hours left. So please don’t put this off. Your voice could make a difference for thousands.
West Fork mouth bar formed during Harvey and was 8-10 feet above water line in place. Picture taken before dredging. This backed water up into the Humble/Kingwood/Atascocita Area.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/24/25
2705 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/20240503-DJI_20240503180502_0197_D-1.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=16191100adminadmin2025-01-24 15:11:102025-01-24 15:11:14Last Chance to Reduce Flood Risk from Sand Mining
HCFCD Spending Declines for Fourth Straight Year, San Jacinto Watershed Still Slighted
1/26/25 – According to data provided in response to a FOIA request, Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) spending has now declined for the fourth straight year, despite $3 billion left in the flood bond (including committed partnership funding).
High Cost of Slowing Down
HCFCD spending picked up slightly last quarter compared to the previous quarter. But overall, the trend is still down compared to the years following passage of the flood bond in 2018.
A quarter-by-quarter analysis shows the decline has not been perfectly smooth. Dips and bumps have occurred with changes in management, direction, organization, and processes imposed by Commissioners Court. But overall the slowdown has been unmistakeable and costly.
Between 2018 and January 2025, the United States experienced a cumulative inflation rate of approximately 25.62%. Thus, the $3 billion remainder of the $5 billion flood bond has lost approximately a quarter of its purchasing power. And that means some planned projects may not get done.
Equity Prioritization Index Ignores Flood Damage
One of the biggest changes: the county’s focus on equity in prioritizing bond projects. On the left of the graph above, money was allocated to mitigation projects in areas with the most flood damage.
But starting in August 2019, that changed. Commissioners started ranking projects using a multi-factor index that omitted damage while emphasizing the average income in an area. Then, they kept tweaking the formula for the next three years.
The constant changes let Democratic commissioners direct money to pet projects in their precincts. But it also has reportedly slowed down HCFCD, and delayed or denied flood-mitigation assistance to areas that desperately need it.
San Jacinto Watershed: Worst Flooding, Modest Mitigation Investment
For instance, in five major storms since 2000 (Allison, Tax Day, Memorial Day, Harvey and Imelda), the San Jacinto watershed ranked 8th among Harris County’s 23 watersheds in terms of damaged structures.
The San Jacinto also ranked 4th in the percentage of its population that experienced flood damage in those storms. That indicates how disruptive flooding has been to a watershed.
The San Jacinto had almost half the flood-related deaths in Harris County during Harvey – 15 out of 36.
And we also had the deepest flooding in the county during Harvey – more than 20 feet above flood stage!
However, since Harvey, the San Jacinto watershed ranks 14th in terms of HCFCD spending.
Hopeful Comparisons Between Short- and Long-Term Trends
The San Jacinto watershed’s ranking increased from 8th place last quarter compared to 14th “since Harvey”. That’s a hopeful sign. Work in some other watersheds, such as Brays, finally appears to be winding down. Compare the relative positions of Brays and San Jacinto above and below.
Here are the actual spending totals during the two time periods. They vary by more than a 1000 to 1. Political priorities have skewed the numbers.
The lifecycle stages of projects have also skewed the numbers. For instance, within a project’s lifecycle, construction usually ranks as the most expensive stage by far. Looking at the percent of construction dollars within the “Total Since Harvey” column on the right above, yields the table below.
Watersheds near the bottom of the list may have had upfront studies completed, but little more. The San Jacinto’s low ranking (#17) indicates that commissioners have prioritized mitigation work in other watersheds higher.
Remember that studies don’t mitigate flooding. Construction does.
Another hopeful comparison shows how the percentage of HCFCD spending in watersheds with a majority of low-to-moderate income (LMI) residents decreased last quarter compared to the longer-term trend.
Harris County has eight watersheds with majority LMI populations. LMI means residents earn less than the median income for the region.
On a per watershed basis, the LMI watersheds received twice the money on average. But last quarter, the percentages were much closer to equal.
Of course, the imminent kickoff of $863 million worth of projects funded by HUD – with a 70% cumulative LMI percentage – could skew these percentages back in the other direction faster than you can say Rodney Ellis.
I have two big worries at this point:
If either worry comes to pass, projects that benefit higher income neighborhoods may not get done.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/26/25
2707 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.
HCFCD Recommends Projects for $863 Million in HUD Funding
1/25/25 – Yesterday, Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) released two lists of projects proposed for $863 million in funding.
The lists correspond to Community Development Block Grants for Mitigation (CDBG-MIT) and Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) programs from the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD). The Texas General Land Office (GLO) administers the funds at the state level.
Per HUD rules, at least 50% of the funding for all projects taken together must benefit Low-to-Moderate Income (LMI) citizens. However, HCFCD is working towards a goal of 70% mandated by Harris County Commissioners Court.
Differences Between DR and MIT Funds
Of the total $863 million awarded, $322 million will go to Disaster Recovery programs and $541 million will go to Mitigation programs.
You can review one-page summaries of each recommended project on these pages:
Public Comment on Two Lists Open Through Feb. 24
HCFCD’s release of the lists yesterday opened public comment, which closes at 4:30 p.m. on Monday, February 24, 2025.
Email comments to CDBG@hcfcd.hctx.net or mail them to Harris County Flood Control District, ATTN: CDBG Communications, 9900 Northwest Freeway, Houston, TX 77092.
Only One Project in Lake Houston Area
HCFCD has proposed one project in the Lake Houston Area out of all this money: Taylor Gully Channel Improvements/Woodridge Village Stormwater Detention Basin. HCFCD estimates the project at $33 million. It will serve a population that’s 26% LMI.
The project overview says, “This project will improve the stormwater conveyance in Taylor Gully and increase the volume of detained stormwater with the construction of the Woodridge stormwater detention basin. The stormwater detention basin will be constructed on undeveloped land the Flood Control District owns and adjacent to three existing stormwater detention basins. This part of the project will be completed before the channel conveyance improvements on Taylor Gully start.”
Shortly after purchasing the Woodridge property in 2021, HCFCD got a head start on the detention basin portion of the project when it entered an excavation and removal contract with Sprint Sand and Clay. But the contract ended and work stopped when HCFCD decided to apply for the HUD grant. Under HUD rules, work cannot continue while a grant application is being evaluated. That left a gaping, disconnected hole in the ground.
Other Mitigation Projects
See the other Projects in the screen captures below.
Disaster Recovery Projects
Not on Lists
Notice that the Kingwood Diversion Ditch did not make either list. HCFCD’s Kingwood Area Drainage Analysis named it one of the two most important projects in the Kingwood Area, which suffered the worst flood in the county during Harvey.
Regardless, I look forward to seeing the Woodridge detention basin resume construction.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/25/25
2706 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Last Chance to Reduce Flood Risk from Sand Mining
1/24/25 – Only hours remain to reduce your flood risk from sand mining.
The public comment period for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s (TCEQ) proposed new best management practices (BMPs) for sand mines closes tonight at 11:59 PM. As of this morning, fewer than 200 people statewide had left comments. That’s less than 1% of all the homes and businesses that flooded in the Lake Houston Area alone.
Small Response Says People No Longer Care About Flooding
And that’s a pathetically small number considering sand mining’s contributions to flooding in this area. Sediment released from the mines during floods accumulates at the mouths of rivers streams and ditches, blocking drainage. Accumulated sediment also reduces the conveyance of rivers and streams.
Blockages and reduced conveyance contributed to an estimated billion dollars in damages during Harvey. They have also cost almost $200 million to dredge in the last five years.
Yet the new BMPs do nothing to address this problem. They show the heavy hand of lobbyists on a state agency eager to create the appearance of public protection.
What We Need
In my opinion, the mines need to be on higher ground, farther from rivers. And the setbacks need to retain their natural vegetation. This will reduce the chances of:
The dikes around sand mines are supposed to protect them in a 100-year flood. But as you can see in the photo above, it doesn’t really work that way.
Submitting Your Comment Should Take Less Than 2 Minutes
Please help. Submit public comments to the TCEQ that urge them to include BMPs that address better sediment control.
Here’s how. It should only take a minute or two. Follow these simple steps.
RE: APO BMP List Proposal
TCEQ’s proposed list of Best Management Practices for Aggregate Production Operations completely ignores mining issues that contribute to flooding in the Houston area.
Most mines on the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto were inundated last year in what amounted to 2- to 10-year rainfall. Floodwaters swept industrial waste downstream into Lake Houston, the drinking water supply for two million people.
The rivers also broke through the dikes of at least six of those mines. The rivers now run through pits instead of around them. This flushes sand and sediment downstream, where it reduces conveyance, blocks drainage and contributes to flooding.
Addressing these issues requires building mines on higher ground, farther from rivers.
I recommend doubling the minimum setback from 100 to 200 feet for mines in the San Jacinto watershed. That will put the mines on higher ground, farther from the floodway.
I also recommend leaving forests undisturbed in the widened buffer zone. That will reduce the velocity of floodwater and, with it, the volume of sediment carried downstream. It will also decrease the likelihood of pit capture, by increasing the amount of time that it takes a river to migrate into a mine. The forest will also help capture sediment that may escape a mine.
Finally, the wider buffers will give rivers more room to spread out during floods. Right now, dikes are supposed to protect mines from a hundred-year flood. But when mines build tall dikes on one side of a river, they double the volume of water flooding the other side. And when they build tall dikes on both sides of a river, water has no room to spread out without invading the mines. The tall dikes effectively eliminate ALL floodplains and turn rivers into erosive firehoses.
I also support the concerns and list of alternative BMPs proposed by Texans for Responsible Aggregate Mining.
Hurry. There are only hours left. So please don’t put this off. Your voice could make a difference for thousands.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/24/25
2705 Days since Hurricane Harvey