The details of the Austin Transit plan story differ from the Harris County 2022 Road and Parks Bonds. But both controversies arise from alleged “bait and switch” tactics used to sell voters something radically inferior to what was promised to them beforehand. If successful, the Austin lawsuit could set a precedent for Harris County.
Outline of Austin Lawsuit
To summarize the Austin controversy, voters approved a tax rate increase in 2020 to fund construction of three light rail routes and an underground transit system at a cost of $7.1 billion. Three years later, the cost has ballooned to $11.6 billion – a 63% increase in three years – while the length of the proposed rail system has decreased from 27 miles to 10 – 62% less.
The crux of the lawsuit: the current project is different from the one voters approved, “and represents the largest property tax increase in Austin’s history.” The complaint reads, “This lawsuit is brought because “Austin taxpayers are not getting anything close to the benefit of the bargain they made for Project Connect …”
The lawsuit continues, “They (the plan authors) unilaterally adopted a Replacement Plan, that in the context of consumer-protection law would be called a “bait and switch” because it is so inferior to what voters “bought.” For reasons described in the lawsuit…
“…the Defendant Officials no longer have statutorily required voter authorization to assess, collect, or spend the Project Connect Tax increase nor do they have authority to issue bonds to be paid from that tax.”
Austin Lawsuit
But it gets worse. Paragraph 18 of the suit contends, “None of the Project Connect advocates have publicly admitted that the dramatic 257% increase in cost per rider—a key criteria in the competitive process for federal funding—reduces the odds of Project Connect receiving a 50% federal match…” Then it continues, “Nor is there any recognition of the effect on whether federal evaluators—or Austin voters for that matter—can trust the figures presented…”
That plan went off the rails. Much like Harris County’s 2022 Road and Parks Bonds.
Parallels with Selling 2022 Harris County Bonds to Voters
The Harris County 2022 Bonds have nothing to do with the Austin Transit Plan – except for the way they were sold, i.e., with false information.
Before the Commissioners Court put the 2022 Road and Parks Bonds on the ballot, Commissioners Ellis and Garcia openly talked about the need to distribute funds based on so-called “equity” principles, using a race-based social vulnerability formula – not one that accounted for road miles or square miles of parks that required maintenance. Their race-based approach would skew the distribution of funds from the new bond in favor of their precincts.
An uproar then ensued that threatened to kill the bond offering. So, Ellis, Garcia and Hidalgo voted to guarantee a minimum $220 million from the bonds to each precinct. Based in part on the promise of an equal minimum for EACH precinct, the bonds passed comfortably.
Then shortly after the election, the deal changed again. Equity and social vulnerability were back in. The minimum guarantee was ignored.
Precinct 3, which has 47 percent of the county’s roads and 35 percent of the county’s parks to maintain, received $188 million – $32 million less than the minimum and only 19% of the total money allocated.
Commissioners Ellis and Garcia received 30% and 27% respectively. That was because of their race-based formula, despite the fact that their precincts fall largely within municipalities that maintain roads and parks. Those municipalities are responsible for their own roads and parks.
In a commercial context, the FTC would consider this bait and switch.
To sell the bonds, the County told people one thing in newspapers, on social media, in public meetings, in handouts and on the County’s website. But soon after the bonds were approved, the deal changed.
Ironically, Precinct 3 voters who were all negatively impacted could have sunk the bond offering had they not been deceived.
Frankly, I see the Austin lawsuit as a positive thing. I hope someone in Harris County lodges a similar lawsuit. Perhaps it can rein in some egregious, bait-and-switch promises that have become hallmarks of Harris County politics lately.
The bait and switching didn’t start with the Road and Parks Bonds. Consider the 2018 Flood Bond. It promised “equitable” treatment of the various watersheds, with the worst being addressed first. Since then, equitable was redefined as “equity” by Rodney Ellis in a way that Webster’s Third International and Oxford English dictionaries do not recognize.
Ellis even bragged openly in commissioners court about tricking voters.
And of course, the areas with the worst flooding are among those getting the least help…and pushed to the end of the line.
Feet above flood stage at 33 gages throughout Harris County during Harvey.
The San Jacinto West Fork had the highest flooding in the county during Harvey. But the San Jacinto watershed ranks twelfth in the county in funding to date. See below. And most of that has gone to areas downstream from where flooding was so severe.
Worse, while we wait our turn for projects, a steady decline in the speed of project delivery has added to inflation costs which now threaten the delivery of promised projects. Just as in Austin.
Flood-mitigation spending has slowed to less than half its peak in 2020. Delays add to the inflation burden on the entire bond program and threaten cancellation of some projects.
We need some civic-minded lawyers who care about the future of Harris County to step up and look at these policies.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/9/2023 with thanks to Brad Johnson and The Texan
2263 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/2023/11/20231108-Screenshot-2023-11-08-at-9.04.03%E2%80%AFPM.jpg?fit=1100%2C663&ssl=16631100adminadmin2023-11-09 10:40:422023-11-09 10:52:55Austin Bait-and-Switch Lawsuit Could Set Precedent for Harris County
Last Wednesday, 11/1/23, Houston City Council approved an agreement with the Union Pacific railroad that will give contractors the right of entry so that private utilities can continue to relocate their facilities. Utility work must be completed before construction of two at-grade crossings over the UP tracks at Loop 494. Now that City Council has approved the agreement, the Mayor and UP need to approve it. That will likely happen before next week.
The at-grade crossings are a separate issue from the bridge that will be built over UP’s tracks. TxDoT requires ground-level turn lanes for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians who want to turn onto and off of 494 from Northpark and vice versa.
Utility Work Already Making Way for Extra Turn Lanes
Contractors have already started rerouting utilities for the extra turn lanes on both sides of Northpark.
Looking N across Northpark along UP tracks.Note utility work on right on each side of Northpark.Looking SE from over railroad tracks. Closer shot of utility work.Looking E from over tracks down Northpark shows current extent of utility work.
Change in Plans: 3-Day Road Closure
The at-grade crossings will require new traffic control gates and signals. Given the longer trains that UP is running these days, UP wants to coordinate the Northpark signals with those at crossings from Kingwood Drive all the way north into Porter. But the new one-piece system will stretch cross both east and westbound lanes of Northpark.
That will require shutting the entire road down for three-days at some point in the future. This represents a change in plans. Earlier, LHRA/Tirz 10 indicated that Northpark would also have at least one lane of traffic open in each direction.
However, the new system should improve safety for both the railroad and the public.
Sidewalk Extension West of 59
De Leon indicated that the signing of the agreement with the railroad should accelerate construction in this area.
Farther west, sidewalk construction has started on both sides of Northpark immediately west of US59.
Looking West from over 59. North sidewalk almost complete. South sidewalk is being prepped.Closer shot of south sidewalk.
Next Up
In the meantime, contractors are:
Continuing work on the 6×5 RCB at Outfall B
Continuing work on the 8″ waterline south of Northpark from the Railroad tracks east to King’s Mill
Continuing work on the sidewalks west of I-69
In other developments, the Redevelopment Authority website shows:
12″ waterline testing has been pushed to the last week of November
8″ waterline will be tested the week before Thanksgiving
Work will begin on the temporary detours on LP 494 the week before Thanksgiving.
Excavation of Detention Basins at Northpark Not Yet Started
Excavation of two stormwater retention basins at Northpark has not yet begun. Contractors will not start excavation until they start to build the new lanes between 494 and Russell-Palmer Road. They will use the recycled dirt to fill in under the two new lanes. If they started excavation now, they would have to store the dirt somewhere and move it twice, or pay to have it hauled off and then purchase more dirt when it’s needed.
Dirt from stormwater retention basin excavation at entry will fill in over concrete culverts in the median east of 494 (top center).
The Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority (Authority), and Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number Ten, Lake Houston Zone (Zone), will hold a joint board meeting on November 9, 2023, at 8:00 a.m., at the Kingwood Community Center, 4102 Rustic Woods Drive, Kingwood, Texas 77345, and is open to the public.
This board packet contains three change orders. One calls for a temporary stoplight at Russell-Palmer. The reason: contractors must remove the existing pole in the center so that they can continue installing culvert. The temporary light will serve the intersection until a new permanent one on an arm which extends over the roadway can be fabricated. Those reportedly take months.
Another change order increases the amount allocated for tree transplantation by $239,000.
Have questions or concerns? Voice them at the meeting.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/5/2023
2259 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231105-DJI_0770.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2023-11-05 19:37:152023-11-05 19:44:48City Council Approves Northpark Expansion Agreement with Union Pacific
On Tuesday, 10/31/23, Harris County Commissioner’s court took no action on a request from Commissioner Tom Ramsey PE to abide by a pre-election promise to voters re: the 2022 Road and Parks Bonds. Ramsey could not even find a second for his motion on Agenda Item #418, which would guarantee the promised minimum of $220 million for Precinct 3.
During debate on the topic:
Only one of the four Democrats on Commissioners Court agreed with the idea that “we need to deliver on what we say.”
One confused the 2022 road and parks bond for the 2018 flood bond.
Two claimed they had already spent their allocation; so they couldn’t re-allocate the money even if they wanted to (which they didn’t).
One claimed “everybody” lost track of $110 million.
Two claimed that allocating the money to poor areas was more important than an equal split or honoring promises.
Screen capture from 10/31/2023 Commissioners Court Meeting at start of debate on Item #418.
When they talked about allocations to poor areas, they did not mention the percentage of county-maintained parks or roads in their precincts. Nor did they take into account the percentage of their precincts inside incorporated areas, such as the City of Houston. Municipalities are already responsible for maintaining roads and parks within their boundaries.
Bait-and-Switch Tactics
BEFORE the 2022 election, commissioners voted to allocate a minimum $220 million from the 2022 Road and Parks Bonds to each precinct. The county then trumpeted that promise in:
Pre-election publicity
Postings on county websites
Speeches and handouts at community meetings.
Voters approved the bonds on the basis of that promise.
Then, in January 2023. shortly AFTER the election, the Democrats on commissioners court broke that promise. They voted to adopt a different formula that resulted in drastically less money than promised for Precinct 3, the only Republican-led precinct remaining in Harris County.
Precinct 3 received $187.5 million – $32.5 million less than promised.
Meanwhile, the Democrats voted to award themselves far more than Ramsey’s Precinct 3 which contains the highest percentage of unincorporated areas in the county.
Precinct
Minimum Promised Before Election
Allocated After Election
Difference
% of Allocated $
One
$220 million
$269 million
$49 million MORE
27%
Two
$220 million
$293 million
$73 million MORE
30%
Three
$220 million
$188 million
$32 million LESS
19%
Four
$220 million
$239 million
$19 million MORE
24%
Promised vs. Actual funding from 2022 Road & Parks Bonds
The FTC calls this “bait-and-switch” advertising. It’s illegal. In a commercial context, intentionally advertising a product or service with the intent to lure customers in, only to then provide a different, less desirable offering is considered a deceptive trade practice and fraudulent. The FTC often forces companies caught in bait-and-switch schemes to refund money.
Ironically, had Precinct 3 voters realized the bait and switch, they could have defeated the bonds.
Was There Intent to Break the Promise?
In my opinion, it would be easy to prove intent in this case. Before the election, Commissioners Ellis and Garcia talked for months about how they wanted to apply so-called “equity” and “social vulnerability” factors to the distribution of proposed bond funds…without identifying projects or nailing down a formula.
Then on August 2, 2022, they relented and consented to a $220 million per precinct minimum. After voters approved the bonds and Lina Hidalgo won re-election, the Democrats changed the deal back. We got exactly what Ellis and Garcia argued for all along – an SVI-based formula that radically skewed the distribution of bond funds.
So, in the end, after redistricting (which packed more roads and parks into Precinct 3 than any other precinct), and after an election in which voters were deceived…
Precinct 3 gets 19% of the funding, yet has 47% of the County’s roads and 35% of its parks to maintain.
Some would say Democrats planned that all along.
What Democrats Said During Debate on Ramsey Motion
Precinct 4 Commissioner Leslie Briones
The newly elected Briones, a lawyer by trade, was not part of the pre-election promises. She said, “I agree fundamentally that we need to deliver on what we say and need to be transparent in doing so.” However, she later added that rectifying such situations is important … on a ‘go forward’ basis.
Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia
Garcia said, “In terms of Precinct 2, I’ll say that our projects have already been lit. So we’re already, you know, our funding is already committed. We got our project partnership commitments already out. And so the funding is already allocated and you know … I absolutely love leveraging equity. Otherwise I wouldn’t have the 30%, uh, the precinct to, uh, needs it because we’re down to the downstream side of five counties, not just Harris County. Um, and but I am open to seeing if there’s another way of, of getting there, because flooding is flooding regardless of its downstream side or wherever. But right now, of the allocation that I’ve got, my guys have already let that out the door. Yeah.”
Commissioner Garcia evidently confused the 2022 Road and Parks Bonds being discussed with the 2018 Flood Bond.
Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis
Ellis said, “Yeah, we’ve already committed our funds as well. And I would say that I’m strongly committed to SVI.” SVI means the CDC’s race-based Social Vulnerability Index as a means of allocating dollars.
County Judge Hidalgo
Judge Lina Hidalgo argued that the $220 million promise was based on faulty math. She said, “We hadn’t thought about … there’s overhead costs of $110 million. And I think that just literally nobody thought about it.”
Hidalgo narrowly won a hotly contested re-election bid on the same ballot as the bond, based in part on her assertion that she represented ALL the people of the county.
Could You Really Spend $562 Million in 10 Months?
With all of the County’s purchasing procedures, could you really spend (or at least commit) $562 million in ten months? That’s the total of Ellis’ and Garcia’s split.
Democrats didn’t approve the SVI-based allocation formula until earlier this year. Then you would have to study projects, rank them, advertise the projects, review qualifications of potential bidders, bid the projects, pick a winner, acquire right of way, sell bonds, and mobilize the projects.
That can take years. For instance, the Northpark Drive expansion project in Kingwood began in 2015 and won’t finish for another 2 or 3 years. And two miles of Loop 494 renovations have taken 4.5 years.
And, perhaps more important, how do you just forget about $110 million in overhead costs? I couldn’t follow the Budget Director’s attempted explanation on that one! Forgetting about $110 million in the private sector would get most people fired.
Think about these issues as you go to the polls and vote on new bond projects next Tuesday.
In the end, Ramsey, the only Republican, couldn’t even get a second for his motion, so the court took no action.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/4/2023
2258 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231104-Screenshot-2023-11-04-at-3.50.10%E2%80%AFPM.jpg?fit=1100%2C639&ssl=16391100adminadmin2023-11-04 16:26:242023-11-05 07:18:54Four Dems Take No Action to Honor Pre-Election Bond Promise
Austin Bait-and-Switch Lawsuit Could Set Precedent for Harris County
On November 7, Brad Johnson published a copyrighted article in The Texan under the headline, “Austin’s Project Connect Challenged for ‘Bait and Switch’ of $11 Billion and Rising Transit Plan.” The subhead reads, “The suit alleges a breach of what voters were originally promised by the city since the tax increase was approved in 2020.”
The details of the Austin Transit plan story differ from the Harris County 2022 Road and Parks Bonds. But both controversies arise from alleged “bait and switch” tactics used to sell voters something radically inferior to what was promised to them beforehand. If successful, the Austin lawsuit could set a precedent for Harris County.
Outline of Austin Lawsuit
To summarize the Austin controversy, voters approved a tax rate increase in 2020 to fund construction of three light rail routes and an underground transit system at a cost of $7.1 billion. Three years later, the cost has ballooned to $11.6 billion – a 63% increase in three years – while the length of the proposed rail system has decreased from 27 miles to 10 – 62% less.
The crux of the lawsuit: the current project is different from the one voters approved, “and represents the largest property tax increase in Austin’s history.” The complaint reads, “This lawsuit is brought because “Austin taxpayers are not getting anything close to the benefit of the bargain they made for Project Connect …”
The lawsuit continues, “They (the plan authors) unilaterally adopted a Replacement Plan, that in the context of consumer-protection law would be called a “bait and switch” because it is so inferior to what voters “bought.” For reasons described in the lawsuit…
But it gets worse. Paragraph 18 of the suit contends, “None of the Project Connect advocates have publicly admitted that the dramatic 257% increase in cost per rider—a key criteria in the competitive process for federal funding—reduces the odds of Project Connect receiving a 50% federal match…” Then it continues, “Nor is there any recognition of the effect on whether federal evaluators—or Austin voters for that matter—can trust the figures presented…”
That plan went off the rails. Much like Harris County’s 2022 Road and Parks Bonds.
Parallels with Selling 2022 Harris County Bonds to Voters
The Harris County 2022 Bonds have nothing to do with the Austin Transit Plan – except for the way they were sold, i.e., with false information.
Before the Commissioners Court put the 2022 Road and Parks Bonds on the ballot, Commissioners Ellis and Garcia openly talked about the need to distribute funds based on so-called “equity” principles, using a race-based social vulnerability formula – not one that accounted for road miles or square miles of parks that required maintenance. Their race-based approach would skew the distribution of funds from the new bond in favor of their precincts.
An uproar then ensued that threatened to kill the bond offering. So, Ellis, Garcia and Hidalgo voted to guarantee a minimum $220 million from the bonds to each precinct. Based in part on the promise of an equal minimum for EACH precinct, the bonds passed comfortably.
Then shortly after the election, the deal changed again. Equity and social vulnerability were back in. The minimum guarantee was ignored.
Precinct 3, which has 47 percent of the county’s roads and 35 percent of the county’s parks to maintain, received $188 million – $32 million less than the minimum and only 19% of the total money allocated.
Commissioners Ellis and Garcia received 30% and 27% respectively. That was because of their race-based formula, despite the fact that their precincts fall largely within municipalities that maintain roads and parks. Those municipalities are responsible for their own roads and parks.
In a commercial context, the FTC would consider this bait and switch.
Ironically, Precinct 3 voters who were all negatively impacted could have sunk the bond offering had they not been deceived.
This 2 minute and 39 second YouTube video distills key dialog from Commissioners Court before and after the switch.
It Started with the 2018 Flood Bond
Frankly, I see the Austin lawsuit as a positive thing. I hope someone in Harris County lodges a similar lawsuit. Perhaps it can rein in some egregious, bait-and-switch promises that have become hallmarks of Harris County politics lately.
The bait and switching didn’t start with the Road and Parks Bonds. Consider the 2018 Flood Bond. It promised “equitable” treatment of the various watersheds, with the worst being addressed first. Since then, equitable was redefined as “equity” by Rodney Ellis in a way that Webster’s Third International and Oxford English dictionaries do not recognize.
Ellis even bragged openly in commissioners court about tricking voters.
And of course, the areas with the worst flooding are among those getting the least help…and pushed to the end of the line.
The San Jacinto West Fork had the highest flooding in the county during Harvey. But the San Jacinto watershed ranks twelfth in the county in funding to date. See below. And most of that has gone to areas downstream from where flooding was so severe.
Worse, while we wait our turn for projects, a steady decline in the speed of project delivery has added to inflation costs which now threaten the delivery of promised projects. Just as in Austin.
Flood-mitigation spending has slowed to less than half its peak in 2020. Delays add to the inflation burden on the entire bond program and threaten cancellation of some projects.
No one can even guarantee there will be enough money left to do anything in the hardest hit Lake Houston and Spring Creek areas.
And the 2018 flood bond was a $5 billion program!
We need some civic-minded lawyers who care about the future of Harris County to step up and look at these policies.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/9/2023 with thanks to Brad Johnson and The Texan
2263 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.
City Council Approves Northpark Expansion Agreement with Union Pacific
Last Wednesday, 11/1/23, Houston City Council approved an agreement with the Union Pacific railroad that will give contractors the right of entry so that private utilities can continue to relocate their facilities. Utility work must be completed before construction of two at-grade crossings over the UP tracks at Loop 494. Now that City Council has approved the agreement, the Mayor and UP need to approve it. That will likely happen before next week.
The at-grade crossings are a separate issue from the bridge that will be built over UP’s tracks. TxDoT requires ground-level turn lanes for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians who want to turn onto and off of 494 from Northpark and vice versa.
Utility Work Already Making Way for Extra Turn Lanes
Contractors have already started rerouting utilities for the extra turn lanes on both sides of Northpark.
Change in Plans: 3-Day Road Closure
The at-grade crossings will require new traffic control gates and signals. Given the longer trains that UP is running these days, UP wants to coordinate the Northpark signals with those at crossings from Kingwood Drive all the way north into Porter. But the new one-piece system will stretch cross both east and westbound lanes of Northpark.
That will require shutting the entire road down for three-days at some point in the future. This represents a change in plans. Earlier, LHRA/Tirz 10 indicated that Northpark would also have at least one lane of traffic open in each direction.
However, the new system should improve safety for both the railroad and the public.
Sidewalk Extension West of 59
De Leon indicated that the signing of the agreement with the railroad should accelerate construction in this area.
Farther west, sidewalk construction has started on both sides of Northpark immediately west of US59.
Next Up
In the meantime, contractors are:
In other developments, the Redevelopment Authority website shows:
Excavation of Detention Basins at Northpark Not Yet Started
Excavation of two stormwater retention basins at Northpark has not yet begun. Contractors will not start excavation until they start to build the new lanes between 494 and Russell-Palmer Road. They will use the recycled dirt to fill in under the two new lanes. If they started excavation now, they would have to store the dirt somewhere and move it twice, or pay to have it hauled off and then purchase more dirt when it’s needed.
For More Information
For more information about the project including construction plans, visit the project pages of the LHRA/Tirz 10 website. Or see these posts on ReduceFlooding:
LHRA/Tirz 10 Board Meeting
The Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority (Authority), and Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number Ten, Lake Houston Zone (Zone), will hold a joint board meeting on November 9, 2023, at 8:00 a.m., at the Kingwood Community Center, 4102 Rustic Woods Drive, Kingwood, Texas 77345, and is open to the public.
This board packet contains three change orders. One calls for a temporary stoplight at Russell-Palmer. The reason: contractors must remove the existing pole in the center so that they can continue installing culvert. The temporary light will serve the intersection until a new permanent one on an arm which extends over the roadway can be fabricated. Those reportedly take months.
Another change order increases the amount allocated for tree transplantation by $239,000.
Have questions or concerns? Voice them at the meeting.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/5/2023
2259 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Four Dems Take No Action to Honor Pre-Election Bond Promise
On Tuesday, 10/31/23, Harris County Commissioner’s court took no action on a request from Commissioner Tom Ramsey PE to abide by a pre-election promise to voters re: the 2022 Road and Parks Bonds. Ramsey could not even find a second for his motion on Agenda Item #418, which would guarantee the promised minimum of $220 million for Precinct 3.
During debate on the topic:
When they talked about allocations to poor areas, they did not mention the percentage of county-maintained parks or roads in their precincts. Nor did they take into account the percentage of their precincts inside incorporated areas, such as the City of Houston. Municipalities are already responsible for maintaining roads and parks within their boundaries.
Bait-and-Switch Tactics
BEFORE the 2022 election, commissioners voted to allocate a minimum $220 million from the 2022 Road and Parks Bonds to each precinct. The county then trumpeted that promise in:
Voters approved the bonds on the basis of that promise.
Then, in January 2023. shortly AFTER the election, the Democrats on commissioners court broke that promise. They voted to adopt a different formula that resulted in drastically less money than promised for Precinct 3, the only Republican-led precinct remaining in Harris County.
Precinct 3 received $187.5 million – $32.5 million less than promised.
Meanwhile, the Democrats voted to award themselves far more than Ramsey’s Precinct 3 which contains the highest percentage of unincorporated areas in the county.
Before Election
After Election
The FTC calls this “bait-and-switch” advertising. It’s illegal. In a commercial context, intentionally advertising a product or service with the intent to lure customers in, only to then provide a different, less desirable offering is considered a deceptive trade practice and fraudulent. The FTC often forces companies caught in bait-and-switch schemes to refund money.
Ironically, had Precinct 3 voters realized the bait and switch, they could have defeated the bonds.
Was There Intent to Break the Promise?
In my opinion, it would be easy to prove intent in this case. Before the election, Commissioners Ellis and Garcia talked for months about how they wanted to apply so-called “equity” and “social vulnerability” factors to the distribution of proposed bond funds…without identifying projects or nailing down a formula.
Then on August 2, 2022, they relented and consented to a $220 million per precinct minimum. After voters approved the bonds and Lina Hidalgo won re-election, the Democrats changed the deal back. We got exactly what Ellis and Garcia argued for all along – an SVI-based formula that radically skewed the distribution of bond funds.
So, in the end, after redistricting (which packed more roads and parks into Precinct 3 than any other precinct), and after an election in which voters were deceived…
Some would say Democrats planned that all along.
What Democrats Said During Debate on Ramsey Motion
Precinct 4 Commissioner Leslie Briones
The newly elected Briones, a lawyer by trade, was not part of the pre-election promises. She said, “I agree fundamentally that we need to deliver on what we say and need to be transparent in doing so.” However, she later added that rectifying such situations is important … on a ‘go forward’ basis.
Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia
Garcia said, “In terms of Precinct 2, I’ll say that our projects have already been lit. So we’re already, you know, our funding is already committed. We got our project partnership commitments already out. And so the funding is already allocated and you know … I absolutely love leveraging equity. Otherwise I wouldn’t have the 30%, uh, the precinct to, uh, needs it because we’re down to the downstream side of five counties, not just Harris County. Um, and but I am open to seeing if there’s another way of, of getting there, because flooding is flooding regardless of its downstream side or wherever. But right now, of the allocation that I’ve got, my guys have already let that out the door. Yeah.”
Commissioner Garcia evidently confused the 2022 Road and Parks Bonds being discussed with the 2018 Flood Bond.
Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis
Ellis said, “Yeah, we’ve already committed our funds as well. And I would say that I’m strongly committed to SVI.” SVI means the CDC’s race-based Social Vulnerability Index as a means of allocating dollars.
County Judge Hidalgo
Judge Lina Hidalgo argued that the $220 million promise was based on faulty math. She said, “We hadn’t thought about … there’s overhead costs of $110 million. And I think that just literally nobody thought about it.”
Hidalgo narrowly won a hotly contested re-election bid on the same ballot as the bond, based in part on her assertion that she represented ALL the people of the county.
Could You Really Spend $562 Million in 10 Months?
With all of the County’s purchasing procedures, could you really spend (or at least commit) $562 million in ten months? That’s the total of Ellis’ and Garcia’s split.
Democrats didn’t approve the SVI-based allocation formula until earlier this year. Then you would have to study projects, rank them, advertise the projects, review qualifications of potential bidders, bid the projects, pick a winner, acquire right of way, sell bonds, and mobilize the projects.
That can take years. For instance, the Northpark Drive expansion project in Kingwood began in 2015 and won’t finish for another 2 or 3 years. And two miles of Loop 494 renovations have taken 4.5 years.
And, perhaps more important, how do you just forget about $110 million in overhead costs? I couldn’t follow the Budget Director’s attempted explanation on that one! Forgetting about $110 million in the private sector would get most people fired.
Think about these issues as you go to the polls and vote on new bond projects next Tuesday.
To see the entire Commissioners Court debate on Item #418, start at 2:30:21 into the video of Departments Part II of IV. The discussion lasts 20 minutes.
In the end, Ramsey, the only Republican, couldn’t even get a second for his motion, so the court took no action.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/4/2023
2258 Days since Hurricane Harvey