The San Jacinto West Fork has turned into a sludge fest again. I took the picture below on 11/11/23. Not since the day that the West Fork turned white have I seen the contrast so dramatic at the confluence with Spring Creek.
Looking NW from over US59 Bridge. Confluence of Spring Creek (left) and San Jacinto West Fork (right). Cypress Creek joins Spring Creek 2.7 miles west of this location.
In that prior case, the cause was obvious. Two sand mines were discharging process wastewater into the West Fork. The TCEQ determined that one, the Liberty Materials mine, dumped 56 million gallons of white sludge into the river.
This time, the cause is not so obvious. I can’t even be certain I determined the cause. After taking the photo above, I spent a whole day ruling out various possibilities while searching for others.
Ruling Out Causes
The dramatic difference was not caused by huge variation in rainfall totals across the region.
The highest total on the West Fork was that 2.68 inches south of Conroe at SH242. Further investigation showed that 1 inch fell between 3 and 4PM on 11/09/23. That was the highest intensity at that gage in more than a month.
Uneven soil saturation across the region would also not cause the zebra pattern in the river. The entire region is still rated either “abnormally dry” or in “moderate drought.”
And Lake Conroe did not release any large volumes of water lately that would have scoured river banks. That eliminated another potential cause.
Now here’s where it gets really baffling.
SJRA Study Claims Most Sediment Comes from Spring/Cypress Creeks
The San Jacinto River Basin Master Drainage Study by Freese & Nichols claims that more sediment comes down Spring and Cypress Creeks than the West Fork.
In fact, they say, of all the sediment coming into Lake Houston, two thirds comes from Spring and Cypress Creeks while only 13% comes from the West Fork upstream of US59. So where is all the sludge coming from?
In my opinion, it most likely came from new developments or sand mines that move large volumes of loose sediment.
So the next day, I went out with my drone and found several possibilities.
Possible Sources for Sediment Pollution
Two sand mines had pits open to the river, but I did not see large volumes of sediment oozing out of them as I sometimes do.
The most interesting possibility: new developments very near that gage on SH242 that read 2.68 inches.
Two connected developments straddle FM1314 immediately north of SH242. Early plans called them both Mavera. But now, the one on the east has a sign that says Mavera. The sign on the west section calls it Evergreen.
Most of the development’s stormwater drains into Crystal Creek and then into the West Fork about a half mile downstream from where I took this photo.
Sediment-laden stormwater burst through the wall of this detention basin.Enlarged detail from shot above shows water was strong enough to destroy the outfall pipe.
Now let’s see what’s upstream from this breach.
Evergreen drainage channel. Water flows toward camera and the breached detention basin.Even farther up the channel. Note all recently exposed sediment.
The ditch above appears to be much wider than it was in January 2021, almost three years ago. Now, let’s jump back south to where this area drains into the West Fork.
Crystal Creek (middle) empties into the West Fork (bottom left). Note how milky water from Crystal comparesto the West Fork.
Note that the picture above was taken two days after the heaviest recent rainfall, so the volume may not seem impressive.
There likely were other areas along the West Fork that contributed to the sedimentation you saw in the first photo at the top of this post. But I was not in a helicopter and it’s virtually impossible to cover the entire river with a drone. So I can’t say for sure.
How to Report Issues You May See
This is not the first time I have documented excessive sediment coming off the West Fork.
The zebra effect at the confluence is common.
The angle of the shots above varies. But in each instance, the West Fork is the most polluted branch.
Why is sediment so concerning? After all, it’s natural, right?
When sediment reduces the conveyance of rivers, they come out of their banks faster and higher on smaller rainfalls. The rivers flood more frequently and increase your flood risk.
So, if you see unnatural situations in rivers or streams, make sure you report them to the TCEQ, which investigates such matters.
Together, we may be able to improve our safety and water quality.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/13/2023
2267 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.
Colorado-based Century Land Holdings of Texas, LLC has started clearing land for Northpark South in Porter along the West Fork of the San Jacinto River at the west end of Northpark Drive.
Documents from the Houston Planning Commission, USGS, and FEMA; eyewitness accounts from nearby residents and flood professionals; and aerial photos indicate:
Most of the area is in floodplains defined decades ago and not updated since.
The entire area – and then some – went underwater during Harvey.
The entrance to the property near Northpark Drive and Sorters-McClellan Road sits in a bowl that rescue trucks could not get through during Harvey. That would make evacuation difficult in the event of another large flood.
Wetlands dot the property.
Abandoned sand mines may pose safety threats.
The same developer just completed a sister development called Northpark Woods across a drainage channel from this one. But so far, the gutsy developer has avoided any consequences for its risky gamble thanks in large part to a multi-year drought and interminable delays at FEMA releasing the new post-Harvey flood maps.
All Underwater During Harvey
Eyewitness accounts and damage reports indicate that Harvey floodwaters stretched about a third of a mile east of Sorters-McClellan to Northpark and Kingwood Place Drive. That’s on the high side of Sorters-McClellan; the new development will be on the low side.
Floodwaters in this area stopped at about 83 feet above sea level. However, the entrance to the new subdivision is at 75 feet, according to the USGS National Map. That means the water was an estimated 8 feet deep at the entrance.
One long-time resident in the area said, “The intersection of Sorters and Northpark sits in a bowl. It was not passable by Montgomery County Precinct 4 constables in an Army deuce and a half [used for high-water rescue]. Water from the river came right up past that intersection and continued up Northpark to just past the intersection of Kingwood Place Dr.”
Also on the high side of Sorters-McClellan, six of nine buildings at nearby Kingwood College flooded during Harvey. Restoration cost: $60 million!
Documents obtained from the Houston Planning Commission indicate that RG Miller is the engineer of record for Northpark South.
Bordering River and Sand Mines
During Harvey, 160,000 cubic feet per second rampaged down the West Fork behind this property.
Looking west past Sorters-McClellan Road toward what will become Northpark South.Note clearing starting in the middle in what used to be wetlands(see below).From the National Wetlands Inventory.Dark green area on right corresponds to cleared area above.Looking NW. Intersection of Northpark and Sorters-McClellan in lower left. Another subdivision called Northpark Woods by the same developer is in the upper right. West Fork San Jacinto and sand mines at top of frame.
Here’s what they hope to build on this property.
General plan submitted to Houston Planning Commission in 2021.
Current Floodplains Will Soon Expand
Most of the property already sits in floodway or floodplains. But the FEMA map below has not yet been updated to reflect new knowledge gained as a result of Memorial Day, Tax Day, Harvey and Imelda floods.
In fact, the 2014 date on the map below is misleading. It reflects an update of the base map, but the data that determines the extent of floodplains has not been updated since the 1980s, according to an expert familiar with Montgomery County flood maps.
FEMA and Harris County Flood Control have warned people that when new “post-Harvey” flood maps are released in the next year or two, floodplains will expand 50-100%. The floodway (striped area above) will likely expand into the 100-year floodplain (aqua). In turn, the 100-year will expand into the 500-year (tan). And the 500-year floodplain will extend past any of the colored areas.
That’s consistent with eyewitness accounts. And that could potentially put the entire property in floodplains.
Taking Advantage of Map-Update Window
The developer seems to be taking advantage of a window between post-Harvey flood surveys and release of the new maps.
I’m sure the developer’s lawyers would argue that they are complying with all current, applicable laws. But an ethical question arises. Will the new development expose unsuspecting homebuyers to greater-than-expected risk?
If so, why aren’t officials pushing to update maps and floodplain regs faster?
Could some officials be prioritizing economic development now over public safety later?
Certainly not all are. But many flood professionals worry about that.
Next to 5-Square Miles of Sand Mines
The new development sits next to the largest sand-mining complex on the San Jacinto West Fork. Sand mines in this area occupy almost five square miles. However, not all the mines are active. But they still show signs of heavy sediment pollution.
Looking E toward Sorters-McClellan from over West Fork. Northpark South is at top of frame beyond the sand pits.The operator of this mine decided not to fish its equipment out when they abandoned the site.More colors than Crayola. No telling what’s growing in these ponds.
Will routing drainage from Northpark South through these sand mines pose a safety risk for people downstream?
Will it be safe for kids to play or fish near these steep-sided pits?
Floodplain Development Called New Form of Redlining
Owner financing often accompanies floodplain developments. Such financing can bypass many flood-risk detection procedures that accompany traditional bank financing.
Then, when floods come, the people who can least afford to repair homes suffer the most and longest. Neighborhoods decay faster. And that makes it harder for people to recover their investments.
Years later, the public is left holding the bag. We are asked to fund expensive flood-mitigation projects that would not be necessary had the developer built in a safer area.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/11/2023
2265 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/2023/11/20231109-DJI_0802.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2023-11-11 12:04:192023-11-11 17:53:15Northpark South Starts Clearing Wetlands, Floodplain
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
West Fork Sludge Fest
The San Jacinto West Fork has turned into a sludge fest again. I took the picture below on 11/11/23. Not since the day that the West Fork turned white have I seen the contrast so dramatic at the confluence with Spring Creek.
In that prior case, the cause was obvious. Two sand mines were discharging process wastewater into the West Fork. The TCEQ determined that one, the Liberty Materials mine, dumped 56 million gallons of white sludge into the river.
This time, the cause is not so obvious. I can’t even be certain I determined the cause. After taking the photo above, I spent a whole day ruling out various possibilities while searching for others.
Ruling Out Causes
The dramatic difference was not caused by huge variation in rainfall totals across the region.
The highest total on the West Fork was that 2.68 inches south of Conroe at SH242. Further investigation showed that 1 inch fell between 3 and 4PM on 11/09/23. That was the highest intensity at that gage in more than a month.
Uneven soil saturation across the region would also not cause the zebra pattern in the river. The entire region is still rated either “abnormally dry” or in “moderate drought.”
And Lake Conroe did not release any large volumes of water lately that would have scoured river banks. That eliminated another potential cause.
Now here’s where it gets really baffling.
SJRA Study Claims Most Sediment Comes from Spring/Cypress Creeks
The San Jacinto River Basin Master Drainage Study by Freese & Nichols claims that more sediment comes down Spring and Cypress Creeks than the West Fork.
In fact, they say, of all the sediment coming into Lake Houston, two thirds comes from Spring and Cypress Creeks while only 13% comes from the West Fork upstream of US59. So where is all the sludge coming from?
In my opinion, it most likely came from new developments or sand mines that move large volumes of loose sediment.
So the next day, I went out with my drone and found several possibilities.
Possible Sources for Sediment Pollution
Two sand mines had pits open to the river, but I did not see large volumes of sediment oozing out of them as I sometimes do.
The most interesting possibility: new developments very near that gage on SH242 that read 2.68 inches.
Two connected developments straddle FM1314 immediately north of SH242. Early plans called them both Mavera. But now, the one on the east has a sign that says Mavera. The sign on the west section calls it Evergreen.
Both are being built on top of wetlands in a 10-year flood zone. Together, they have roughly 1400 acres of exposed soil.
Most of the development’s stormwater drains into Crystal Creek and then into the West Fork about a half mile downstream from where I took this photo.
Now let’s see what’s upstream from this breach.
The ditch above appears to be much wider than it was in January 2021, almost three years ago. Now, let’s jump back south to where this area drains into the West Fork.
Note that the picture above was taken two days after the heaviest recent rainfall, so the volume may not seem impressive.
There likely were other areas along the West Fork that contributed to the sedimentation you saw in the first photo at the top of this post. But I was not in a helicopter and it’s virtually impossible to cover the entire river with a drone. So I can’t say for sure.
How to Report Issues You May See
This is not the first time I have documented excessive sediment coming off the West Fork.
The angle of the shots above varies. But in each instance, the West Fork is the most polluted branch.
Why is sediment so concerning? After all, it’s natural, right?
Remember the mouth bar that virtually blocked off the West Fork after Harvey? Also the one on the East Fork?
When sediment reduces the conveyance of rivers, they come out of their banks faster and higher on smaller rainfalls. The rivers flood more frequently and increase your flood risk.
So, if you see unnatural situations in rivers or streams, make sure you report them to the TCEQ, which investigates such matters.
Together, we may be able to improve our safety and water quality.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/13/2023
2267 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.
Northpark South Starts Clearing Wetlands, Floodplain
Colorado-based Century Land Holdings of Texas, LLC has started clearing land for Northpark South in Porter along the West Fork of the San Jacinto River at the west end of Northpark Drive.
Documents from the Houston Planning Commission, USGS, and FEMA; eyewitness accounts from nearby residents and flood professionals; and aerial photos indicate:
The same developer just completed a sister development called Northpark Woods across a drainage channel from this one. But so far, the gutsy developer has avoided any consequences for its risky gamble thanks in large part to a multi-year drought and interminable delays at FEMA releasing the new post-Harvey flood maps.
All Underwater During Harvey
Eyewitness accounts and damage reports indicate that Harvey floodwaters stretched about a third of a mile east of Sorters-McClellan to Northpark and Kingwood Place Drive. That’s on the high side of Sorters-McClellan; the new development will be on the low side.
Floodwaters in this area stopped at about 83 feet above sea level. However, the entrance to the new subdivision is at 75 feet, according to the USGS National Map. That means the water was an estimated 8 feet deep at the entrance.
One long-time resident in the area said, “The intersection of Sorters and Northpark sits in a bowl. It was not passable by Montgomery County Precinct 4 constables in an Army deuce and a half [used for high-water rescue]. Water from the river came right up past that intersection and continued up Northpark to just past the intersection of Kingwood Place Dr.”
Also on the high side of Sorters-McClellan, six of nine buildings at nearby Kingwood College flooded during Harvey. Restoration cost: $60 million!
And then there’s Tammy Gunnels‘ former home a quarter mile south of the new development. It flooded 13 times in 11 years and had to be bought out by Montgomery County and FEMA.
Documents obtained from the Houston Planning Commission indicate that RG Miller is the engineer of record for Northpark South.
Bordering River and Sand Mines
During Harvey, 160,000 cubic feet per second rampaged down the West Fork behind this property.
Here’s what they hope to build on this property.
Current Floodplains Will Soon Expand
Most of the property already sits in floodway or floodplains. But the FEMA map below has not yet been updated to reflect new knowledge gained as a result of Memorial Day, Tax Day, Harvey and Imelda floods.
In fact, the 2014 date on the map below is misleading. It reflects an update of the base map, but the data that determines the extent of floodplains has not been updated since the 1980s, according to an expert familiar with Montgomery County flood maps.
FEMA and Harris County Flood Control have warned people that when new “post-Harvey” flood maps are released in the next year or two, floodplains will expand 50-100%. The floodway (striped area above) will likely expand into the 100-year floodplain (aqua). In turn, the 100-year will expand into the 500-year (tan). And the 500-year floodplain will extend past any of the colored areas.
That’s consistent with eyewitness accounts. And that could potentially put the entire property in floodplains.
Taking Advantage of Map-Update Window
The developer seems to be taking advantage of a window between post-Harvey flood surveys and release of the new maps.
I’m sure the developer’s lawyers would argue that they are complying with all current, applicable laws. But an ethical question arises. Will the new development expose unsuspecting homebuyers to greater-than-expected risk?
If so, why aren’t officials pushing to update maps and floodplain regs faster?
Certainly not all are. But many flood professionals worry about that.
Next to 5-Square Miles of Sand Mines
The new development sits next to the largest sand-mining complex on the San Jacinto West Fork. Sand mines in this area occupy almost five square miles. However, not all the mines are active. But they still show signs of heavy sediment pollution.
Will routing drainage from Northpark South through these sand mines pose a safety risk for people downstream?
Will it be safe for kids to play or fish near these steep-sided pits?
Floodplain Development Called New Form of Redlining
This is an example of why the population of Texas floodplains is greater than the populations of 30 entire states. Yep. Thirty entire states have populations smaller than that of Texas floodplains.
One former floodplain administrator, who requested to remain anonymous, characterized these types of developments as a new form of redlining.
More than a few floodplain and wetland developers target minorities who may not fully understand the flood risk.
Owner financing often accompanies floodplain developments. Such financing can bypass many flood-risk detection procedures that accompany traditional bank financing.
Then, when floods come, the people who can least afford to repair homes suffer the most and longest. Neighborhoods decay faster. And that makes it harder for people to recover their investments.
Years later, the public is left holding the bag. We are asked to fund expensive flood-mitigation projects that would not be necessary had the developer built in a safer area.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/11/2023
2265 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.
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.