9/25/2025 – At this morning’s San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) board meeting, the president of the Lake Conroe Association (LCA) protested the SJRA’s latest efforts to find a suitable compromise that protects upstream and downstream interests.
LCA argued against SJRA’s request to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to increase the maximum release rate in advance of storms from 700 to 2,000 cubic feet per second – even though the increase could help prevent unnecessary releases and conserve water – two things the LCA claims to want.
SJRA president Kevin Lacy (white shirt with back to camera) addresses SJRA board today.
Why the Need for Lake Lowering?
During public comment, Kevin Lacy, LCA president, attacked the SJRA’s lake lowering policy, which has been modified several times since Governor Greg Abbott directed the SJRA to “immediately implement” policies that protected downstream residents from flooding.
The release of 79,000 cubic feet per second from Lake Conroe accounted for roughly a third of all the water coming down the West Fork at the peak of Hurricane Harvey in 2017. The resulting surge came without warning in the middle of the night.
The idea behind the lake lowering strategy: create extra storage capacity in Lake Conroe to minimize the need for such massive releases in the future. That would reduce flood risk for downstream residents until the City finishes new flood gates on Lake Houston that can keep up with Lake Conroe releases. But the gates are taking much longer than originally anticipated.
Iterations of Lake Lowering Strategy
The SJRA board has modified its lake lowering policy several times in response to pushback from the Lake Conroe Association.
At first, the policy called for lowering the lake by fixed amounts for fixed times during the spring rainy season and the peak of hurricane season.
Then, the SJRA began lowering the lake by lesser amounts and for shorter times.
Next, the SJRA began lowering the lake only in advance of major storms on an as-needed basis.
However, the maximum pre-release rate allowed by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality was 700 cubic feet per second. That was not always fast enough to lower a lake as large as Conroe significantly before storms struck.
Higher Release Rates Actually Conserve Water
So, the SJRA had to release much further in advance of storms, i.e., a week instead of 2-3 days. The excessive lead times sometimes meant that storms could veer away before they struck. Such a “false release” happened last June, according to Lacy’s testimony today.
The obvious solution was to increase the maximum allowable release rate. That would create more storage capacity faster. So, SJRA petitioned TCEQ to increase the release rate to 2,000 CFS, almost triple the previous rate, but not so much that it would flood downstream residents. And its a rate that the existing gates on Lake Houston can keep up with.
But LCA complained about that, too, even though it would minimize wasted water and inconvenience for Lake Conroe boaters.
According to Matt Barrett, SJRA’s Flood Management Division Manager, TCEQ has not yet ruled on the increased release rate.
View Live Testimony
You can view the live testimony on the SJRA website. Lacy’s public comment and the SJRA General Manager’s response take about ten minutes. Start watching at 2:13 into the video as Lacy takes his seat.
Throughout his time at the microphone, Lacy repeatedly complains about how long the City of Houston is taking to install additional floodgates on Lake Houston. Never once does he acknowledge the number of times that the lake lowering policy saved downstream residents from flooding.
Make sure you also watch the response to Lacy’s comments from Aubrey Spear, SJRA’s general manager. Spear explains how SJRA is trying to find a suitable compromise between upstream recreational and downstream flood-mitigation interests.
Spear said in regard to the increase in the release rate to 2,000 CFS, “We are committed to optimizing flood mitigation during major storm events to reduce flood impact to properties both upstream and downstream of the dam. We are adding another tool to our toolbox that could be helpful, but may never be used.”
Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/25/2025
2949 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/20250925-SJRA-Board-Mtg.jpg?fit=1100%2C611&ssl=16111100adminadmin2025-09-25 17:44:012025-09-26 10:38:31LCA Still Complaining to SJRA About Lake Lowering
According to ChatGPT, the 2025 Texas legislature this year devoted 2.7 times more money to increasing water supply than to mitigating flooding.
The water-supply funding aims to keep Texas growing, even as large sections of the state struggle with water shortages, drought, aquifer depletion and subsidence.
Dual-Purpose Funding
But some of the money allocated by the legislature to water supply can also be used for flood mitigation – if it serves a dual purpose, such as new reservoirs. This may be a way to reduce flooding and sustain growth at the same time.
Location of Winters Bayou Project approximately 10 miles upstream from Cleveland on the East Fork in San Jacinto County.
They chose the site for its ability to reduce flows in downstream damage centers, limited development within the footprint, and steep terrain that allows for increased storage volume.
But detention basins don’t qualify for water infrastructure funding under Texas Water Development Board SWIFT fund guidelines. SWIFT stands for State Water Infrastructure For Texas.
However, some changes in the name and design might make the Winters Bayou Project eligible.
Winters Bayou Project Might Qualify
Of all the projects listed in the San Jacinto Watershed Flood Plan, the Winters Bayou project was one of the largest.
A 54-ft tall concrete dam would create a 1.60-mile-long impoundment that captures runoff from Winters Bayou. It was conceived as a dry dam with five reinforced 10×10 concrete culverts and twin 300′ backup spillways that could hold 45,000 acre feet of floodwater (see page 180). To put that in perspective…
45,000 acre feet is about a third of the storage volume of Lake Houston.
The Winters Bayou project is already in the Lake Houston watershed. And the City’s Northeast Water Purification Plant on Lake Houston could purify the water.
But could a water-supply reservoir still serve a flood-control purpose? Perhaps with a different design.
The project made it into the final version of the 2024 state flood plan – as a flood-mitigation-only project. But it ranked #82 in the state. And its projected $134 million cost means it won’t be done for decades, if ever.
Perhaps given the state’s new water-supply priorities, a dual purpose reservoir would rank higher and get built sooner. Plus, the sale of water might help generate revenue that defrays expenses.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/24/25 based on a suggestion from Kingwood flood fighter Chris Bloch
9/19/25 – On 9/18/25, Harris County Commissioners reviewed a presentation about the status of 2018 Flood Bond Projects. They also.adopted six motions that will affect the future of Harris County Flood Control District and the 2018 Flood Bond. In fact, they will result in an “updated bond package.” (See Motions below.)
Highlights of Presentation
The presentation identified 75 active bond IDs out of the original 181 that are moving forward into construction. They include projects that rank in the top quartile of the 2022 Equity Prioritization Framework as well as those in lower quartiles that already had partner funding committed.
An additional 26 projects will be paused and reactivated if additional funding materializes.
15 Projects will be closed because they turned out not to be technically feasible or because partner funding never materialized.
54 projects have been marked “completed” meaning their full scope as outlined in the original flood blond has already been realized.
In all, 75 bond IDs that include 248 discrete projects will move forward. They include stormwater detention basins, channel improvements and bridge replacements that theoretically remove 183,000 people from the floodplain.
According to Eric Heppen, Precinct 3’s director of engineering, the engineering teams from each precinct have met weekly with HCFCD since June to arrive at recommendations that all four precincts and Flood Control could agree on. In that respect, yesterday’s meeting represents a dramatic improvement over earlier meetings that rapidly devolved into brawls.
This set of recommendations means the County is only $400 million short, not the $1.3 billion that Dr. Tina Petersen, executive director of HCFCD, previously alluded to.
Substance of Six Motions Adopted by Court
Commissioners adopted the following six motions.
Funding Allocation:
Motion to approve the allocation of 2018 Flood Bond funds for each Bond ID and all associated projects, as presented in the Updated Bond Package and as directed by Commissioners Court, funding current and future needs for all projects in Quartile 1 of the 2022 prioritization framework and projects with secured partnerships.
Dashboard:
Motion to direct Flood Control to maintain the public 2018 Flood Bond dashboard – which includes but is not limited to project schedules, prioritization scores, budget, location, and lifecycle stage for all projects – and to update the dashboard quarterly in advance of Commissioners Court updates, including directing the Flood Control District to continue to work with court offices and the community to improve the dashboard’s user friendliness, including but not limited to:
Providing Bond ID previews
Improved language accessibility
Incorporating the ability to filter projects by features such as:
Partnership projects
Quartile score
Project status, and
Project precinct;
Opportunities for the community to be engaged on testing the dashboard and relevant applications
Court Updates:
Motion to direct Flood Control to provide quarterly updates to Commissioners Court on the progress of all bond projects including spending and lifecycle stage.
Working Group:
Motion to direct Flood Control to convene the 2018 Flood Bond Working Group – composed of staff from the Court offices – at least quarterly in advance of Court updates:
The Working Group will be consulted on the following:
Project progress, schedules, and spending
New partnership opportunities that may arise
Unneeded/excess funds that may be freed up for reallocation
For projects completing a lifecycle stage where the estimated budget exceeds 15% of the allocated amount for that project or the proposed scope materially shifts from what was originally identified and agreed to, approval by Court will be required. The Working Group will work with Flood Control to define what constitutes a material shift and transmit the agreement to Court.
Prioritization Framework:
Move to direct the Flood Control District to use the 2022 Prioritization Framework scores to allocate any 2018 Flood Bond funds that become available to Bond IDs that are paused and other bond projects where the scope and funds identified in the Updated Bond Package need to be increased. Funds shall be considered available when the bond reserve contingency exceeds 15% of the total remaining funds left to be spent. Any deviation from the Framework shall require prior approval by a majority vote of Commissioners Court.
Prioritization Scoring:
Move to direct Flood Control District to add 2022 Prioritization Framework scores to every Bond ID and associated projects where feasible and with the exceptions of buyout projects and countywide projects as noted in the 2022 Prioritization Framework transmittal.
Additional Information about Project Rankings and Spending
Heppen also provided two spreadsheets shared with commissioners:
In future posts, I will discuss how these changes affect Bond IDs and projects in the Lake Houston Area and elsewhere that didn’t make the cut. So check back often.
Posted by Bob Rehak
2943 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/75-remaining-projects--e1758333314133.png?fit=1100%2C578&ssl=15781100adminadmin2025-09-19 21:11:092025-09-19 21:12:24Harris County Commissioners Adopt Six Motions Affecting Future of 2018 Flood Bond
LCA Still Complaining to SJRA About Lake Lowering
9/25/2025 – At this morning’s San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) board meeting, the president of the Lake Conroe Association (LCA) protested the SJRA’s latest efforts to find a suitable compromise that protects upstream and downstream interests.
LCA argued against SJRA’s request to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to increase the maximum release rate in advance of storms from 700 to 2,000 cubic feet per second – even though the increase could help prevent unnecessary releases and conserve water – two things the LCA claims to want.
Why the Need for Lake Lowering?
During public comment, Kevin Lacy, LCA president, attacked the SJRA’s lake lowering policy, which has been modified several times since Governor Greg Abbott directed the SJRA to “immediately implement” policies that protected downstream residents from flooding.
The release of 79,000 cubic feet per second from Lake Conroe accounted for roughly a third of all the water coming down the West Fork at the peak of Hurricane Harvey in 2017. The resulting surge came without warning in the middle of the night.
It killed more than a dozen people; flooded more than 13,000 homes and 3,300 businesses; damaged the US59 and West Lake Houston Parkway Bridges; flooded Kingwood High School to the second floor; and ultimately cost the City of Houston an estimated $100 million in lost tax revenue. That last number is predicated on lost sales tax revenue AND a decrease of commercial and personal property taxes of 25%.
The idea behind the lake lowering strategy: create extra storage capacity in Lake Conroe to minimize the need for such massive releases in the future. That would reduce flood risk for downstream residents until the City finishes new flood gates on Lake Houston that can keep up with Lake Conroe releases. But the gates are taking much longer than originally anticipated.
Iterations of Lake Lowering Strategy
The SJRA board has modified its lake lowering policy several times in response to pushback from the Lake Conroe Association.
However, the maximum pre-release rate allowed by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality was 700 cubic feet per second. That was not always fast enough to lower a lake as large as Conroe significantly before storms struck.
Higher Release Rates Actually Conserve Water
So, the SJRA had to release much further in advance of storms, i.e., a week instead of 2-3 days. The excessive lead times sometimes meant that storms could veer away before they struck. Such a “false release” happened last June, according to Lacy’s testimony today.
The obvious solution was to increase the maximum allowable release rate. That would create more storage capacity faster. So, SJRA petitioned TCEQ to increase the release rate to 2,000 CFS, almost triple the previous rate, but not so much that it would flood downstream residents. And its a rate that the existing gates on Lake Houston can keep up with.
But LCA complained about that, too, even though it would minimize wasted water and inconvenience for Lake Conroe boaters.
According to Matt Barrett, SJRA’s Flood Management Division Manager, TCEQ has not yet ruled on the increased release rate.
View Live Testimony
You can view the live testimony on the SJRA website. Lacy’s public comment and the SJRA General Manager’s response take about ten minutes. Start watching at 2:13 into the video as Lacy takes his seat.
Throughout his time at the microphone, Lacy repeatedly complains about how long the City of Houston is taking to install additional floodgates on Lake Houston. Never once does he acknowledge the number of times that the lake lowering policy saved downstream residents from flooding.
Make sure you also watch the response to Lacy’s comments from Aubrey Spear, SJRA’s general manager. Spear explains how SJRA is trying to find a suitable compromise between upstream recreational and downstream flood-mitigation interests.
Spear said in regard to the increase in the release rate to 2,000 CFS, “We are committed to optimizing flood mitigation during major storm events to reduce flood impact to properties both upstream and downstream of the dam. We are adding another tool to our toolbox that could be helpful, but may never be used.”
Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/25/2025
2949 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Winters Bayou Project Might Reduce Flooding, Increase Water Supply
According to ChatGPT, the 2025 Texas legislature this year devoted 2.7 times more money to increasing water supply than to mitigating flooding.
The water-supply funding aims to keep Texas growing, even as large sections of the state struggle with water shortages, drought, aquifer depletion and subsidence.
Dual-Purpose Funding
But some of the money allocated by the legislature to water supply can also be used for flood mitigation – if it serves a dual purpose, such as new reservoirs. This may be a way to reduce flooding and sustain growth at the same time.
Back in 2022, I wrote a story about a draft of the first State Flood Plan. The San Jacinto/Region 6 Flood Planning Group recommended a project far upstream on the East Fork called the Winters Bayou Detention Basin. In 2024, the North Houston Association identified it as one of the Association’s top priorities.
They chose the site for its ability to reduce flows in downstream damage centers, limited development within the footprint, and steep terrain that allows for increased storage volume.
But detention basins don’t qualify for water infrastructure funding under Texas Water Development Board SWIFT fund guidelines. SWIFT stands for State Water Infrastructure For Texas.
However, some changes in the name and design might make the Winters Bayou Project eligible.
Winters Bayou Project Might Qualify
Of all the projects listed in the San Jacinto Watershed Flood Plan, the Winters Bayou project was one of the largest.
A 54-ft tall concrete dam would create a 1.60-mile-long impoundment that captures runoff from Winters Bayou. It was conceived as a dry dam with five reinforced 10×10 concrete culverts and twin 300′ backup spillways that could hold 45,000 acre feet of floodwater (see page 180). To put that in perspective…
The Houston region continues to grow at breakneck speed. And the Harris-Galveston Subsidence District is looking for new water sources to serve the area east of Lake Houston.
The Winters Bayou project is already in the Lake Houston watershed. And the City’s Northeast Water Purification Plant on Lake Houston could purify the water.
But could a water-supply reservoir still serve a flood-control purpose? Perhaps with a different design.
The project made it into the final version of the 2024 state flood plan – as a flood-mitigation-only project. But it ranked #82 in the state. And its projected $134 million cost means it won’t be done for decades, if ever.
Perhaps given the state’s new water-supply priorities, a dual purpose reservoir would rank higher and get built sooner. Plus, the sale of water might help generate revenue that defrays expenses.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/24/25 based on a suggestion from Kingwood flood fighter Chris Bloch
2948 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Harris County Commissioners Adopt Six Motions Affecting Future of 2018 Flood Bond
9/19/25 – On 9/18/25, Harris County Commissioners reviewed a presentation about the status of 2018 Flood Bond Projects. They also.adopted six motions that will affect the future of Harris County Flood Control District and the 2018 Flood Bond. In fact, they will result in an “updated bond package.” (See Motions below.)
Highlights of Presentation
The presentation identified 75 active bond IDs out of the original 181 that are moving forward into construction. They include projects that rank in the top quartile of the 2022 Equity Prioritization Framework as well as those in lower quartiles that already had partner funding committed.
According to Eric Heppen, Precinct 3’s director of engineering, the engineering teams from each precinct have met weekly with HCFCD since June to arrive at recommendations that all four precincts and Flood Control could agree on. In that respect, yesterday’s meeting represents a dramatic improvement over earlier meetings that rapidly devolved into brawls.
This set of recommendations means the County is only $400 million short, not the $1.3 billion that Dr. Tina Petersen, executive director of HCFCD, previously alluded to.
Substance of Six Motions Adopted by Court
Commissioners adopted the following six motions.
Funding Allocation:
Motion to approve the allocation of 2018 Flood Bond funds for each Bond ID and all associated projects, as presented in the Updated Bond Package and as directed by Commissioners Court, funding current and future needs for all projects in Quartile 1 of the 2022 prioritization framework and projects with secured partnerships.
Dashboard:
Motion to direct Flood Control to maintain the public 2018 Flood Bond dashboard – which includes but is not limited to project schedules, prioritization scores, budget, location, and lifecycle stage for all projects – and to update the dashboard quarterly in advance of Commissioners Court updates, including directing the Flood Control District to continue to work with court offices and the community to improve the dashboard’s user friendliness, including but not limited to:
Court Updates:
Motion to direct Flood Control to provide quarterly updates to Commissioners Court on the progress of all bond projects including spending and lifecycle stage.
Working Group:
Motion to direct Flood Control to convene the 2018 Flood Bond Working Group – composed of staff from the Court offices – at least quarterly in advance of Court updates:
Prioritization Framework:
Move to direct the Flood Control District to use the 2022 Prioritization Framework scores to allocate any 2018 Flood Bond funds that become available to Bond IDs that are paused and other bond projects where the scope and funds identified in the Updated Bond Package need to be increased. Funds shall be considered available when the bond reserve contingency exceeds 15% of the total remaining funds left to be spent. Any deviation from the Framework shall require prior approval by a majority vote of Commissioners Court.
Prioritization Scoring:
Move to direct Flood Control District to add 2022 Prioritization Framework scores to every Bond ID and associated projects where feasible and with the exceptions of buyout projects and countywide projects as noted in the 2022 Prioritization Framework transmittal.
Additional Information about Project Rankings and Spending
Heppen also provided two spreadsheets shared with commissioners:
In future posts, I will discuss how these changes affect Bond IDs and projects in the Lake Houston Area and elsewhere that didn’t make the cut. So check back often.
Posted by Bob Rehak
2943 Days since Hurricane Harvey