More than $400 million in Unexplained Harris County Transfers Receive No Discussion During Rants On Other Items

A Harris County Commissioners Court meeting yesterday lasted 8 hours and 30 minutes. While viewers were repeatedly treated to rants alleging racial discrimination, partially documented transfers of approximately $470 million received absolutely NO discussion.

Let’s begin with the rants. Here’s one example. A revision to equity guidelines for the Flood Resilience Trust consumed 20 minutes of discussion including a 6-minute monologue from Commissioner Rodney Ellis. In essence, Ellis said, “I support the new formula” in 894 words. I transcribed the rant in its entirety below. See if you can follow it. Among other things, Ellis:

  • Says he hopes to reduce a HUD appropriation from $750 million to $250 million. 
  • Confuses the County with the City; and flood mitigation with parks and police. 
  • Drags Harris Health into the discussion for some unexplained reason. 
  • Invokes ‘back of the bus’ language to describe watersheds receiving the lion’s share of funding. 
  • Threatened to sue a federal agency trying to give the county $750 million.
  • Claims the County didn’t make specific project recommendations/allocations for the flood bond (which it did).
  • Overlooks the contribution of partner funding to build a case for not chasing partner funding.

It gets better! Read on.


Rodney Ellis on New Equity Formula

“Commissioner Garcia, some of the issues that you were raising and Commissioner Ramsey were raising, I think that this proposal for prioritization-framework modifications will address some of them. Commissioner Ramsey, first of all, I want to point out that the 2018 package of $2.5 billion would in no way fund all of the projects that people talked about. I also want to reiterate that coming off city council a long time ago, I argued to list specifically what the projects were. It was a short fuse. If you remember Commissioner Cagle, you might agree with me. I was worried about having the election in August, as opposed to when more people would show up.

“But I didn’t win that battle and it passed despite my misgivings. But we were on a short time frame and I was told you cannot lay out the specific projects, because if a project…If you put in 20 million and it costs 50 million, can you get the creek? Or you put in 50 million and it costs 40 million and it didn’t quite sound right to me. Because unless the city did a better job of projecting what parks and police command stations will cost, you know, inflation. But that’s what was said. And I was not going to argue with it and didn’t think I had the support of the court anyway.

“But 2.5 billion was never going to fund all of the items that were on the radar, shall we say, because a decision was made not to lay them out with specificity was how to do a cap improvement program. I also want to say that to my knowledge, maybe others’, two projects had come to my mind that weren’t on the radar. One was in your precinct. The education project came from them.

“The other one was in another county – Commissioner Cagle’s area. I don’t know where it is now, buying some land in another area that certainly had some political gravitas to it.

“I argued for two things. The varnish was coming off. What I wanted to despair to say, and everybody said that they were for getting rid of disparities until it was time to vote. Send somebody to do statistical analysis to see if they had one. And I was told, you pay for it. And you can do it. So Precinct One paid for it. Thank you to the women. Precinct One, you added $660,000 back. And of course, it showed there was a tremendous disparity. I would encourage you to listen to Harris Health’s discussion of why they’re going to lay off the expert study off. So it will be interesting to see what Bert came up with, but that’s history. Going forward, we will do better as we are doing better here, I think. 

“The other item I wanted was the equity guidelines. Now, once it passed, there were those who thought equity meant just split 2.5 billion…four ways…which would be highly inequitable if we all agreed that chasing federal money with a cost benefit ratio and a host of other issues meant certain neighborhoods that flooded all the time didn’t get funding regardless of why, chasing federal money, that’s what happened. So all of these projects were started. We know three big ones, Commissioner Garcia, in your precinct and mine, and might touch all our precincts, in Halls and Greens.

“We were chasing GLO money or federal money that never came, so they were delayed. So, then resiliency was created as a way to get stuff here created to fill up the gap. And whether or not it would fill it all up, I don’t know. But I, for one, would not just talk the talk. You got to pay for it, pay for it. Or maybe politely find a way to just pass a resolution and say you resolve to do it down the road. This prioritization framework makes sense because it places a greater emphasis on the number of people that a project would address instead of what neighborhood you live in.

“I can’t say it enough. Something’s wrong. When this county had a system where you protect the neighborhood I live in now, but the neighborhood I came out of – even if that one historically flooded more. It also says we do not consider partner funding as a factor because who gets partner money? Well, that’s part of the funding.

“The neighborhoods have always been privileged. It’s just that way. And we use the latest data to invest in projects that address structural delay both inside and outside the 100-year network. So, I can’t wait until you bring it up and I’m going to vote for it when it comes up.

“And I tell you, just as I’m proud of what Texas Housers did, and I’m proud of what HUD did to get us our 750. Hope we get down to 250 and I hope the city gets this bigger because they deserve it. We both do.

“And if we don’t follow prioritization framework like this, I will be the first one finding somebody to file a lawsuit and raising all kind of hell at HUD because we will continue to neglect those neighborhoods that have always been on the back of the bus. But other than that, thank you very much.”

– End of Ellis Monologue –


Diversionary Tactic?

How can one react to rambling, unsubstantiated rants such as this!

During the meeting, as I tried to look for backup on several agenda items, the county website froze on numerous occasions – shades of the IT debacle at Universal Services.

To set the record straight, Brays Bayou, the watershed in which Commissioner Ellis grew up AND in which he now lives, has received $575 million in flood-mitigation funding in the last 22 years. White Oak, the watershed where Commissioner Garcia now lives, has received $525 million in funding. That’s almost one third of all the flood mitigation money spent in the county since 2000 – on two watersheds out of 23. No watersheds have received more!

Flood mitigation spending in Harris County during first quarter 2022 and since 2000. Obtained via FOIA Request.

Greens and Halls received another $620 million. That makes $1.72 billion. And that’s 46% of all the flood mitigation money in recent history.  

More than one long-time Harris County insider has characterized such rants as a diversionary tactic. Elsewhere on the agenda yesterday was a motion to make “routine transfers” between departments (see Item 17). 

It received absolutely NO discussion and the Budget Management Department provided no backup for the agenda item. But the transfers totaled almost half a billion dollars. I had to obtain the backup through a special request. Notice how many of the transfers do not follow the industry standard for double-entry accounting – even though the forms request it.

Double-entry accounting shows where money is coming from and going to. That facilitates balancing the books and auditing. But in this case, the ‘from’ or the ‘to’ were omitted in 21 of 39 transactions for this year. Those 21 transactions alone totaled approximately $470 million.

I have no proof that anything illegal occurred and I’m not suggesting it did. But I am suggesting that Democrats, who pride themselves on transparency, could improve on that score.

Eight hour meetings filled with incomprehensible rants, agenda items without backup, backup that omits crucial elements, and a website that intermittently stopped responding during the meeting create barriers to public participation and government oversight.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/27/2022

1702 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.

Harris County still has not posted video of yesterday’s meeting. Here’s an audio recording of Mr. Ellis‘ rant so you can check the transcription yourself. He is admittedly hard to understand at times.

First Quarter 2022 Flood-Mitigation Spending Update, New Equity Formula

In the first quarter of 2022, Harris County Flood Control District spent a total of $84 million. That brought the total of flood mitigation spending since 2000 up to almost $3.8 billion.

For the first time since ReduceFlooding.com started tracking these numbers via Freedom of Information Act requests, spending in the Hunting Bayou watershed led all other watersheds. Brays Bayou, the previous front runner, dropped into second place. Cypress Creek, White Oak Bayou, Clear Creek, and Halls and Greens Bayous virtually tied for third place in spending. The San Jacinto Watershed came in 17th despite the fact that it is the largest in the county.

Watershed spending by Harris County Flood Control District last quarter and since 2000. Includes partner funds and all phases of all projects.

The Galveston Bay and Vince Bayou Watersheds had no invoices reported during the quarter. Totals for Jackson and Addicks were restated to account for a change in accounting, resulting in negative numbers. Previously HCFCD reported dollars spent by project management status. The District now reports totals by invoice date. The new method is more precise.

First Quarter 2022 Watershed Rankings

Negative numbers reflect adjustment for change in accounting described above.

Cumulative Spending Since 2000

Ratio between highest and lowest is almost 100 to 1.

Totals Since Harvey

Between Harvey and the end of 2021, HCFCD spent $1.45 billion on all watersheds. The $85 million spent in the first quarter of 2022 brings the total since Harvey up to $1.535 billion.

San Jacinto Watershed

Of the almost half million dollars spent in the San Jacinto Watershed during the first quarter of 2022, virtually all of it was spent on preliminary engineering and design. The Harris County Flood Control District shows only one active capital improvement construction project in the San Jacinto Watershed valued at $1,000. That’s the Excavation and Removal Contract on the Woodridge Village Property to develop additional floodwater detention capacity. Compare that to the $15.6 million spent on construction in Hunting Bayou.

Equity Formula Being Changed Again

The disparity in totals between watersheds largely has to do with Federal partner funding and the equity funding formula passed by three Democrats at Harris County Commissioners Court. The original formula has been revised again and again to send more and more funding to watersheds with high percentages of low-to-moderate income residents. Commissioners started debating another set of changes to the formula today that would apply to money in the Flood Resilience Trust, but did not vote on it.

The changes recommended include:

  • Prioritizing people over structures
  • Eliminating partnership funding from consideration
  • Recommending proxies for FEMA data since 1977
People Over Structures

This change would favor spending in densely populated neighborhoods inside Beltway 8 as opposed to neighborhoods with more single-family homes outside Beltway 8. For example, 100 people could live in an apartment building on a single acre. So could 3 people in a single family home. The only problem: Flood control has no way of determining how many people live in an apartment building. So the District will have to use an average for the watershed, according to Dr. Tina Petersen, the new head of flood control.

Partner Funding

Democrats don’t want to wait for partner funding. They want to start projects right away, using bond money and other funds diverted from the toll road. Using out of pocket money could speed up flood-mitigation projects in low-to-moderate income neighborhoods, but it could also reduce the size of the total pot, jeopardizing badly needed projects somewhere.

Dated Data

Using 1977 data would disadvantage areas outside the Beltway, which was under construction at that time. Places like Kingwood were just beginning to be built. So using the older data from the Seventies would stack the deck in favor of inner-city neighborhoods. However, there was no universal agreement on a suitable substitute for the FEMA damage claims.

“Who Goes First?” No Longer the Issue

These constant changes to an equity formula which was originally conceived as a “Who goes first?” tool, seem to make less and less sense now that all flood bond projects have started. So commissioners are considering these changes in regard to the Flood Resilience Trust. That money will theoretically allow development of more projects when the flood bond expires. But no one has yet determined the list of projects for that money. So Commissioners still have many details to work out.

One huge related detail is developing a plan for how to spend $750 million in HUD partner funds. The county administrator seems to have turfed the assignment to the Community Services Department. Said another way, they took it out of Flood Control and put it in a department that has had four leadership changes in four years.

Out of 154,000 homes in the county damaged by Harvey, Community Services managed to distribute only $21.4 million in repair funds.

No offense. I’m sure this is a difficult job. And I’m sure the county has talented people. But justifying flood-mitigation grants seems to be more of a job for engineers than people who handle claims. The adventure continues. More details in coming weeks.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/26/2022

1701 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Royal Pines or Vanishing Woods?

On paper, it appears to be called Royal Pines. On foot, it appears that a more appropriate name would be Vanishing Woods.

Live in a place long enough and you are bound to lose some of the things that attracted you to that area. Today, I discovered contractors clearing land for another new development in Montgomery County. It’s at the north end of West Lake Houston Parkway in Porter, just west of Country Colony. See red oval below.

Contractors are clearing land in the red oval.

In White Oak Creek Watershed

I do not yet have any firm details about the size of the new development or the number of homes. But White Oak Creek will cut just north and east of it.

New development sits in middle of map south of White Oak Creek. White Oak joins Caney Creek (right) and then the East Fork (out of frame, farther right).

Layer After Layer of Ownership

The developer has not yet posted any signs at the entrance to the development. However…

Montgomery County Appraisal District shows that a limited partnership named TC LB Royal Pines LP owns 150 acres at this location.

Royal Pines bought the land from the 1992 Guniganti Credit Shelter Trusts on 12/9/21. The Guniganti family owns the Triple PG sand mine east of the area being cleared.

From Montgomery County Appraisal District Web Site.

The Texas Secretary of State shows that the purchaser of the land registered its partnership just two days before the sale. TC LB GP, Inc. in Vancouver, British Columbia, is the general partner of the limited partnership. The general partner is registered in Delaware. However, the MoCo Appraisal District lists the mailing address for tax bills at 8655 S. PRIEST DR., TEMPE, AZ 85284-1903. Google Maps shows a company named Coronado West at that address. The relationship between Coronado West and TC LB Royal Pines LP remains unclear.

The Houston Business Journal ran a story in February about Royal Pines. It said that Ashton Woods Homes (a Starlight Homes subsidiary which targets first-time home buyers), plans to build 350 to 450 homes in the area.

Photos Taken 4/24/22

Contractors have cleared only a small portion of the property to date.

Looking SE toward the northern end of West Lake Houston Parkway, Country Colony, and Royal Brook. A sliver of the Triple PG mine appears in the upper left.
Looking east toward WLHP, Country Colony and the Triple PG mine.
Without plans, it’s impossible to tell how many trees the developer plans to retain.
Some not so royal pines stacked at entrance at north end of West Lake Houston Parkway.

Eyeballing the cleared area, I estimate that contractors have only cleared about about 10-20% of the 150 acres to date. Stay tuned for more news as it becomes available.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/24/22

1699 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.