H.B. 1540 passed in the Texas House on Friday, April 28, 2023. The bill concerns recommendations from the Sunset Advisory Commission affecting the board of the SJRA.
However, Representative Will Metcalf from Conroe offered a last-minute amendment from the House floor that would effectively fire Jace Houston, the SJRA’s general manager, who reports to the board. The amendment has the potential to upset the delicate balance between upstream and downstream interests mandated by the Governor after Harvey.
The senate version of the bill does not include Metcalf’s amendment. So, this fight isn’t over yet.
Let me cover the bill, the amendment, and implications in that order.
Key Provisions of H.B. 1540
The House analysis summarizes key provisions of H.B. 1540. It revises provisions governing SJRA. It implements – across-the-board – all Sunset Advisory Commission policy recommendations relating to the following:
Gubernatorial designation of the presiding officer of SJRA’s board of directors;
Specific grounds for removal of a board member;
Board member training;
Separation of the board’s policy-making responsibilities and the staff’s management responsibilities;
Maintenance of complaint information; and
Public testimony at board meetings.
The bill also provides for the transition to the new training requirements for current board members. Significantly, it also adds an additional member to SJRA’s board of directors, decreases the length of a member’s term from six years to four years, and provides for the transition to this new membership and term length.
H.B. 1540 would require at least four of the seven SJRA board members to reside in Montgomery County.
H.B. 1540 requires SJRA’s board of directors to develop and implement a comprehensive policy that provides a structure for public engagement in advance of major actions and projects. The policy must include a clear and detailed description of how SJRA will seek to actively engage stakeholders, including the possible use of the following:
Advisory committees;
Community panels;
Town hall meetings;
Surveys;
Other strategies on a recurring basis.
General-Manager Amendment
After the bill was voted out of the House Natural Resources Committee, Representative Metcalf offered an amendment on the House floor that surprised Committee Chair Tracy King.
Rep. Metcalf from Conroe
The terse amendment requires that the board appoint a new SJRA General Manager within 30 days who hasn’t been employed by the SJRA as general manager within the last six months. It’s a dagger in Jace Houston’s back.
Chairman King spoke against the amendment, but in the end voted for the bill. King stated that the amendment tried to usurp the Governor’s authority. He pointed out that the Governor appoints the board and that the board hires the general manager. The legislature should not get in the middle of that, he said.
Why Try to Fire Houston?
During Metcalf’s testimony, he complained bitterly about SJRA’s:
Water rates
Groundwater reduction plan
Water treatment plant
Insistence that the City of Conroe uphold its SJRA contract
Seasonal-lowering policy of Lake Conroe that protects downstream residents
Battles with the Lonestar Groundwater Conservation District over subsidence.
As SJRA General Manager, Jace Houston has played a prominent role in all these controversies.
Chairman King raises a point of order against the amendment at 2:29:10. He says the amendment is not germane to the subject of the bill. Then there’s a long break in the action while they confer on the point of order.
At 2:41:10, discussion resumes. King has withdrawn his point of order and rises to speak in opposition to the amendment. Metcalf follows him. Then they hold a vote. The bill passes with the amendment.
At 2:47:50, discussion moves to the next bill.
Amended Bill Overwhelmingly Passes, But…
The House bill passed with 145 Yeas, 2 Nays, and 1 Present but not voting. However…
Four days earlier, on 4/24/23, the Senate passed S.B. 2586, an identical companion bill (minus the Metcalf amendment). It’s now in King’s House Natural Resources Committee.
That means the bill could go to a conference committee to iron out the difference and find a compromise. Then the House, Senate or both will have to vote on it again. Exactly one month remains in this session.
In the meantime, you can bet heavy-duty politicking will happen in Austin.
What’s Next?
Does the Senate have the appetite to engage in a local water war this late in session?
Will Jace Houston fight to stay? Or will he throw in the towel?
Is Metcalf trying to scare the SJRA into concessions?
Will the Governor weigh in? Stay tuned.
San Jacinto River Basin
The San Jacinto river basin encompasses more than 5,000 square miles and 6.4 million people in 11 counties.
Yet Representative Metcalf seems concerned with only a small portion of them. Montgomery County has a tenth of that population in only a 1,000 square miles. And Metcalf represents only part of Montgomery County and a third of its population. Yet Mr. Metcalf seems to want to manage the SJRA for the benefit of 1 out of every 30 people in the watershed.
The San Jacinto river basin is much larger than Conroe, Metcalf, and his district.
That point seems to have eluded everyone who voted for Metcalf’s amendment. I hope calmer minds prevail.
Had this vote happened after Harvey, I think few would have defended the SJRA or Jace Houston. But since then, I have seen a concerted effort to find balance between upstream and downstream interests, as the Governor directed.
Metcalf’s amendment could potentially tilt the balance back upstream, the way it was before Harvey. We just don’t know. The uncertainty worries me. Will we be saying goodbye to lake lowering and hello to more subsidence?
Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/29/2023
2069 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/2023/04/Rep.Will-Metcalf-e1682815112490.jpg?fit=599%2C450&ssl=1450599adminadmin2023-04-29 19:47:282023-04-30 10:27:48Amendment to H.B. 1540 Could Force Changes in SJRA Management
On Tuesday, 4/25/23, Harris County Commissioners gave Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) approval to incorporate almost $3 billion worth of studies and projects into the first State Flood Plan. The approval will make the studies and projects eligible for future funding from the State Flood Infrastructure Fund.
The San Jacinto Region 6 Flood Planning Group will first incorporate the requests into its regional flood plan. The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) will then compile a master list of projects throughout the state and rank order them.
TWDB is working toward a September 1, 2024, deadline
Being in the new state flood plan will now be a prerequisite for applying for Texas Flood Infrastructure Fund grants and loans. If you’re not in the plan, you will not even be eligible to submit an application until the next revision of the flood plan. That could take another five years. So this is a good and timely move by HCFCD.
Agenda Item 136 Contained 136 Requests
Harris County Commissioners Court Agenda Item #136 read, “Request for approval of the Flood Control District’s Flood Management Evaluations and Flood Mitigation Projects to be included in the Amended San Jacinto Regional Flood Plan, for incorporation into the Texas State Flood Plan.”
The backup states: “All identified FMEs and FMPs in the Regional Flood Plan will be incorporated into the State Flood Plan, which once adopted by the State of Texas, will enable the Flood Management Evaluations and Flood Mitigation Projects to become eligible for future TWDB Flood Infrastructure Funding.”
102 “evaluations” totaling $43,150,000. Flood Management Evaluations (FMEs) include such things as surveys, studies, preliminary engineering reports, etc.
34 projects totaling $2,928,966,000. Flood Management Projects (FMPs) include construction, which explains the much larger number.
All projects are technically in the San Jacinto watershed (see map below). However, Harris County breaks projects down even further by sub-watersheds. It calls one the San Jacinto, which creates some confusion. For clarity, HCFCD’s San Jacinto sub-watershed includes the East and West Forks, Lake Houston, and the main stem of the river down to Galveston Bay. HCFCD also recognizes 22 other sub-watersheds. All were included to some degree in the list of projects.
Of the 34 construction projects, HCFCD included two in the San Jacinto sub-watershed totaling $128.8 million out of the $2,928,966,000, or 4.4% of the total. They are the Kingwood Diversion Ditch ($82.3 million) and Taylor Gully ($46.5 million).
Deadlines Looming
The deadline for incorporating FMEs and FMPs into region flood plans is May 14, 2023. The 15 Regional Flood Planning Groups (RFPG) will submit their amended regional flood plans to TWDB by July 10, 2023. The TWDB must combine the approved regional flood plans into a single state flood plan and deliver it to the Legislature by September 1, 2024.
To keep with the bottom-up approach of the regional flood planning program, TWDB has elected to utilize only RFPG-reported data for ranking.
How TWDB Will Rank Items
TWDB has proposed a scoring matrix to rank FMEs and FMPs throughout the state. The criteria differ for the two categories. Proposed criteria in the:
FME category include flood-reduction benefits such as the number of structures, people, critical infrastructure, acres, miles of roadway removed from the floodplain, and cost projections.
FMP category also weighs factors such as social vulnerability; environmental benefits; flood severity; life and safety; and operations and maintenance costs.
Note, however, that the legislature may change the criteria. One flood expert said legislators are evaluating the fairness of the benefit/cost ratio, for instance.
The TWDB website contains this note. “While inclusion in the state flood plan is a requirement for eligibility for future FIF project funding, the associated rankings are not intended for allocating state funding. Future funding decisions will occur through a separate TWDB process if and when funds are appropriated by the Texas Legislature. How the state flood plan project ranking may be considered in future flood project funding prioritization and allocation processes remains to be determined although it is anticipated that the state flood plan ranking will be at least one of the considerations.”
Harris County’s prioritization framework includes many of the same factors proposed by TWDB. But the County’s weights vary radically. For instance, TWDB gives 2.5% weight to social vulnerability and Harris County gives social vulnerability 20% – eight times more. However, only TWDB criteria will affect the final statewide rankings.
Initial Funds No Longer Available
Texas initially funded the Flood Infrastructure Fund with $770 million after voters passed Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment, in 2019. All of that money has either been distributed or committed.
Future projects will require a new infusion of cash from the state legislature. TWDB declined to say what that might be. However, an interested “legislature watcher” said appropriations ranging from $300 to $700 million have been discussed to cover projects throughout the state. He suspects the final total will be a compromise somewhere in the middle of that range.
Alternative Sources of Funding
Obviously, $300 million statewide won’t cover a $3 billion ask from Harris County, not to mention projects elsewhere.
So I asked HCFCD if it was pursuing alternative sources of funding for some of these projects. HCFCD answered “yes.”
A spokesperson said, “The Flood Control District is actively working to identify funding opportunities through grants, loans and other funding mechanisms, including for some projects included on the Region 6 Regional Flood Planning Group list. Including these projects on the State Flood Plan list serves to demonstrate the need for flood mitigation projects in the region, as well as to allow for future funding opportunities.”
The list of projects submitted by Harris County focused overwhelmingly on projects inside Harris county, though a few do have components that spill over county lines.
HCFCD and the San Jacinto Regional Flood Planning Group have both tried to reach out to municipalities, neighboring counties and MUDs throughout the entire watershed. But many reportedly don’t have experts skilled in filling out the lengthy TWDB applications. Many also don’t have the seed money to attract matching funds for flood projects. Whether that disadvantages people at the edges of the county and beyond remains to be seen. It could take years to tell.
However, HCFCD says that at this time, “We are not aware of any major projects outside of Harris County that were not included on the State Flood Plan list. ”
Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/28/23
2068 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/20230428-Screenshot-2023-04-28-at-12.55.43-PM.jpg?fit=1040%2C1200&ssl=112001040adminadmin2023-04-28 15:50:072023-04-28 15:55:00HCFCD Incorporates $3 Billion of Studies, Projects into State Flood Plan
“Before” satellite photo from 2015. Note middle, greenish pond on right where road curves.File photo from February 2020 showing same pond, mostly filled. Townsendcurve in foreground.After dredging in 2021, the pond was completely filled.
A regular reader emailed me about a large volume of truck activity in the area recently. So I went there today to see what I could see. The pond was half empty again. The mystery deepened. Were they taking dirt out or putting it in?
Half empty pit photographed on 4/26/23.
Trucks Filling Pond Again, Not Emptying It
Closer inspection showed that dozens of dump trucks were depositing dirt. That deepened the mystery even more. How did the pond get half empty with trucks dumping more dirt into it?
Also photographed 4/26/23. Trucks offloading dirt and bulldozer spreading it into remainder of pond.
A gentleman drove up and engaged me in conversation as I was landing my drone. He introduced himself as the owner of the property and said that a private contractor bought the dirt left by the Corps, thus emptying the pit again.
No Intent to Build Here
I asked if he intended to build on the newly filled area and he said “no.” I also pumped him for information about where the dirt was coming from, but didn’t get anything definitive.
When I took these photos, it was the end of the workday. Trucks were scattering in all directions. The City did not immediately return calls or emails about next steps in its dredging program, if that’s where the dirt came from.
The good news for now: it appears we won’t have more building in the floodplain in this area. More news to follow when I get it.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/26/23with thanks for the heads up from Eric Hayes
2066 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/20230426-DJI_0652.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=17991200adminadmin2023-04-26 19:31:162023-04-27 17:30:39Placement Area #1 Gets New Life
Amendment to H.B. 1540 Could Force Changes in SJRA Management
H.B. 1540 passed in the Texas House on Friday, April 28, 2023. The bill concerns recommendations from the Sunset Advisory Commission affecting the board of the SJRA.
However, Representative Will Metcalf from Conroe offered a last-minute amendment from the House floor that would effectively fire Jace Houston, the SJRA’s general manager, who reports to the board. The amendment has the potential to upset the delicate balance between upstream and downstream interests mandated by the Governor after Harvey.
The senate version of the bill does not include Metcalf’s amendment. So, this fight isn’t over yet.
Let me cover the bill, the amendment, and implications in that order.
Key Provisions of H.B. 1540
The House analysis summarizes key provisions of H.B. 1540. It revises provisions governing SJRA. It implements – across-the-board – all Sunset Advisory Commission policy recommendations relating to the following:
The bill also provides for the transition to the new training requirements for current board members. Significantly, it also adds an additional member to SJRA’s board of directors, decreases the length of a member’s term from six years to four years, and provides for the transition to this new membership and term length.
H.B. 1540 requires SJRA’s board of directors to develop and implement a comprehensive policy that provides a structure for public engagement in advance of major actions and projects. The policy must include a clear and detailed description of how SJRA will seek to actively engage stakeholders, including the possible use of the following:
General-Manager Amendment
After the bill was voted out of the House Natural Resources Committee, Representative Metcalf offered an amendment on the House floor that surprised Committee Chair Tracy King.
The terse amendment requires that the board appoint a new SJRA General Manager within 30 days who hasn’t been employed by the SJRA as general manager within the last six months. It’s a dagger in Jace Houston’s back.
Chairman King spoke against the amendment, but in the end voted for the bill. King stated that the amendment tried to usurp the Governor’s authority. He pointed out that the Governor appoints the board and that the board hires the general manager. The legislature should not get in the middle of that, he said.
Why Try to Fire Houston?
During Metcalf’s testimony, he complained bitterly about SJRA’s:
As SJRA General Manager, Jace Houston has played a prominent role in all these controversies.
Let’s Go to the Videotape!
If you want to watch how this debate unfolded, here’s a link to the Texas House proceedings on H.B. 1540 and Metcalf’s amendment.
Amended Bill Overwhelmingly Passes, But…
The House bill passed with 145 Yeas, 2 Nays, and 1 Present but not voting. However…
Four days earlier, on 4/24/23, the Senate passed S.B. 2586, an identical companion bill (minus the Metcalf amendment). It’s now in King’s House Natural Resources Committee.
That means the bill could go to a conference committee to iron out the difference and find a compromise. Then the House, Senate or both will have to vote on it again. Exactly one month remains in this session.
In the meantime, you can bet heavy-duty politicking will happen in Austin.
What’s Next?
Does the Senate have the appetite to engage in a local water war this late in session?
Will Senator Brandon Creighton whose district now includes Lake Conroe intervene?
Will Jace Houston fight to stay? Or will he throw in the towel?
Is Metcalf trying to scare the SJRA into concessions?
Will the Governor weigh in? Stay tuned.
The San Jacinto river basin encompasses more than 5,000 square miles and 6.4 million people in 11 counties.
Yet Representative Metcalf seems concerned with only a small portion of them. Montgomery County has a tenth of that population in only a 1,000 square miles. And Metcalf represents only part of Montgomery County and a third of its population. Yet Mr. Metcalf seems to want to manage the SJRA for the benefit of 1 out of every 30 people in the watershed.
Last session, he introduced a bill that would have prohibited any downstream representation on the SJRA board. Luckily, it failed.
That point seems to have eluded everyone who voted for Metcalf’s amendment. I hope calmer minds prevail.
Had this vote happened after Harvey, I think few would have defended the SJRA or Jace Houston. But since then, I have seen a concerted effort to find balance between upstream and downstream interests, as the Governor directed.
Metcalf’s amendment could potentially tilt the balance back upstream, the way it was before Harvey. We just don’t know. The uncertainty worries me. Will we be saying goodbye to lake lowering and hello to more subsidence?
Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/29/2023
2069 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 Incorporates $3 Billion of Studies, Projects into State Flood Plan
On Tuesday, 4/25/23, Harris County Commissioners gave Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) approval to incorporate almost $3 billion worth of studies and projects into the first State Flood Plan. The approval will make the studies and projects eligible for future funding from the State Flood Infrastructure Fund.
The San Jacinto Region 6 Flood Planning Group will first incorporate the requests into its regional flood plan. The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) will then compile a master list of projects throughout the state and rank order them.
TWDB is working toward a September 1, 2024, deadline
Being in the new state flood plan will now be a prerequisite for applying for Texas Flood Infrastructure Fund grants and loans. If you’re not in the plan, you will not even be eligible to submit an application until the next revision of the flood plan. That could take another five years. So this is a good and timely move by HCFCD.
Agenda Item 136 Contained 136 Requests
Harris County Commissioners Court Agenda Item #136 read, “Request for approval of the Flood Control District’s Flood Management Evaluations and Flood Mitigation Projects to be included in the Amended San Jacinto Regional Flood Plan, for incorporation into the Texas State Flood Plan.”
The backup states: “All identified FMEs and FMPs in the Regional Flood Plan will be incorporated into the State Flood Plan, which once adopted by the State of Texas, will enable the Flood Management Evaluations and Flood Mitigation Projects to become eligible for future TWDB Flood Infrastructure Funding.”
Here is the list of the 136 evaluations and projects added to the state flood plan. The categories include:
All projects are technically in the San Jacinto watershed (see map below). However, Harris County breaks projects down even further by sub-watersheds. It calls one the San Jacinto, which creates some confusion. For clarity, HCFCD’s San Jacinto sub-watershed includes the East and West Forks, Lake Houston, and the main stem of the river down to Galveston Bay. HCFCD also recognizes 22 other sub-watersheds. All were included to some degree in the list of projects.
Of the 34 construction projects, HCFCD included two in the San Jacinto sub-watershed totaling $128.8 million out of the $2,928,966,000, or 4.4% of the total. They are the Kingwood Diversion Ditch ($82.3 million) and Taylor Gully ($46.5 million).
Deadlines Looming
The deadline for incorporating FMEs and FMPs into region flood plans is May 14, 2023. The 15 Regional Flood Planning Groups (RFPG) will submit their amended regional flood plans to TWDB by July 10, 2023. The TWDB must combine the approved regional flood plans into a single state flood plan and deliver it to the Legislature by September 1, 2024.
To keep with the bottom-up approach of the regional flood planning program, TWDB has elected to utilize only RFPG-reported data for ranking.
How TWDB Will Rank Items
TWDB has proposed a scoring matrix to rank FMEs and FMPs throughout the state. The criteria differ for the two categories. Proposed criteria in the:
Note, however, that the legislature may change the criteria. One flood expert said legislators are evaluating the fairness of the benefit/cost ratio, for instance.
The TWDB website contains this note. “While inclusion in the state flood plan is a requirement for eligibility for future FIF project funding, the associated rankings are not intended for allocating state funding. Future funding decisions will occur through a separate TWDB process if and when funds are appropriated by the Texas Legislature. How the state flood plan project ranking may be considered in future flood project funding prioritization and allocation processes remains to be determined although it is anticipated that the state flood plan ranking will be at least one of the considerations.”
Harris County’s prioritization framework includes many of the same factors proposed by TWDB. But the County’s weights vary radically. For instance, TWDB gives 2.5% weight to social vulnerability and Harris County gives social vulnerability 20% – eight times more. However, only TWDB criteria will affect the final statewide rankings.
Initial Funds No Longer Available
Texas initially funded the Flood Infrastructure Fund with $770 million after voters passed Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment, in 2019. All of that money has either been distributed or committed.
Future projects will require a new infusion of cash from the state legislature. TWDB declined to say what that might be. However, an interested “legislature watcher” said appropriations ranging from $300 to $700 million have been discussed to cover projects throughout the state. He suspects the final total will be a compromise somewhere in the middle of that range.
Alternative Sources of Funding
Obviously, $300 million statewide won’t cover a $3 billion ask from Harris County, not to mention projects elsewhere.
So I asked HCFCD if it was pursuing alternative sources of funding for some of these projects. HCFCD answered “yes.”
A spokesperson said, “The Flood Control District is actively working to identify funding opportunities through grants, loans and other funding mechanisms, including for some projects included on the Region 6 Regional Flood Planning Group list. Including these projects on the State Flood Plan list serves to demonstrate the need for flood mitigation projects in the region, as well as to allow for future funding opportunities.”
Harris County Vs. Regional Projects
TWDB established 15 regional flood planning groups. Each represents a major river basin in Texas. Region 6 represents all or parts of 11 counties drained by the San Jacinto. See below.
The list of projects submitted by Harris County focused overwhelmingly on projects inside Harris county, though a few do have components that spill over county lines.
HCFCD and the San Jacinto Regional Flood Planning Group have both tried to reach out to municipalities, neighboring counties and MUDs throughout the entire watershed. But many reportedly don’t have experts skilled in filling out the lengthy TWDB applications. Many also don’t have the seed money to attract matching funds for flood projects. Whether that disadvantages people at the edges of the county and beyond remains to be seen. It could take years to tell.
However, HCFCD says that at this time, “We are not aware of any major projects outside of Harris County that were not included on the State Flood Plan list. ”
Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/28/23
2068 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Placement Area #1 Gets New Life
After Hurricane Harvey, when the Army Corps established its San Jacinto West Fork dredging program, the Corps used an old sand pit off Hamblen Blvd. East in Humble to store the spoils.
Before, During, After, Now Photos
A regular reader emailed me about a large volume of truck activity in the area recently. So I went there today to see what I could see. The pond was half empty again. The mystery deepened. Were they taking dirt out or putting it in?
Trucks Filling Pond Again, Not Emptying It
Closer inspection showed that dozens of dump trucks were depositing dirt. That deepened the mystery even more. How did the pond get half empty with trucks dumping more dirt into it?
A gentleman drove up and engaged me in conversation as I was landing my drone. He introduced himself as the owner of the property and said that a private contractor bought the dirt left by the Corps, thus emptying the pit again.
No Intent to Build Here
I asked if he intended to build on the newly filled area and he said “no.” I also pumped him for information about where the dirt was coming from, but didn’t get anything definitive.
When I took these photos, it was the end of the workday. Trucks were scattering in all directions. The City did not immediately return calls or emails about next steps in its dredging program, if that’s where the dirt came from.
The good news for now: it appears we won’t have more building in the floodplain in this area. More news to follow when I get it.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/26/23 with thanks for the heads up from Eric Hayes
2066 Days since Hurricane Harvey