Seventh in a series of eight articles on flood-mitigation funding in Harris County.
For the last two years, I’ve heard the same tirades in Commissioners’ Court – that rich neighborhood’s get all the flood-mitigation money while the poor neighborhoods get none. According to Commissioners Ellis and Garcia, that’s because higher home values in rich neighborhoods generate higher Benefit/Cost Ratios and therefore get more FEMA grants. Problem is, FEMA looks at many other factors. And HUD grants favor low-income neighborhoods. But you never hear Ellis or Garcia talk about those.
In reality, most flood mitigation-money in Harris County goes to watersheds with high percentages of low-income residents. (See links to previous posts below.)
By focusing on a narrow part of the flood-mitigation funding process as opposed to outcomes, Ellis and Garcia have been looking though the wrong end of the telescope. Why? To focus attention on the wrong end of the drainpipe!
In the most flooded parts of Halls and Greens watersheds, street after street has clogged ditch drains. Responsibility for cleaning those drains falls onto, you guessed it, Ellis and Garcia, along with their counterpart at the City of Houston, Mayor Sylvester Turner.
Simple FOIA Request Disproves Narrative
The Ellis/Garcia narrative just didn’t sound right to me. So I submitted a Freedom-of-Information-Act (FOIA) request to the Harris County Flood Control District in March for historical funding data. I wanted to see if the allegations were true. They’re not.
Analysis shows that the Ellis/Garcia narrative is 180-degrees from the truth. By almost any statistical measure, flood-mitigation spending favors the poorer watersheds in Harris County. That’s where most of the damage is.
Surely Commissioners Ellis and Garcia can’t be oblivious to more than a billion dollars of construction benefitting their own precincts.
Verbal Sleight of Hand Deflects Attention from Who’s Responsible
So, what’s going on here? Why the constant barrage of racial accusations and divisive rhetoric?
In my opinion, the deception, omissions and distortions of fact are about misdirection.
They seem designed to deflect attention from those responsible for a crucial part of the problem: street drainage.
And if you don’t fix that, you will never solve flooding no matter how much money you throw at channel widening, detention ponds and green solutions.
A process engineer in the oil and gas industry once told me, “There’s always a bottleneck in every system somewhere.” And one of the biggest issues in neighborhoods that flood repetitively is street drainage. Water can’t get out of the neighborhoods to the bayous.
Poor Ditch Maintenance Contributes to Street Flooding
By alleging racism in the HCFCD funding, Commissioners Ellis and Garcia are deflecting attention from a serious issue; many of the neighborhoods in their jurisdictions have awful internal drainage (streets and storm sewers) that contribute to frequent street flooding. Street flooding happens when high rainfall rates exceed the capacity of storm drains and ditches to carry the water away. The reduced capacity of the ditches below makes the streets flood on smaller rains.
Swale filled with sediment, almost totally blocking drain on Kashmere Street between Octavia and Engleford in Kashmere Gardens.City of Houston’s maintenance responsibility.
Ignacio Vasquez has lived in Kashmere Gardens for 45 years. He says he has called 311 about blocked drains like this one on Engleford St. “thousands of times”, but they never get fixed.City of Houston’s maintenance responsibility.
Vasquez says that after a heavy rain, this drain backs water up throughout his neighborhood and contributes to flooding. He says it can take up to 3-4 days for water to drain away. Completely unprompted, he then said that Kingwood was getting all the help from the City. I told him that I lived in Kingwood and that our drains were just as bad as his. See below.
Drainage swale on Valley Manor Drive in Kingwood is completely filled in. City of Houston’s maintenance responsibility.
But I digress. Here are some more street drainage photos taken on 6/26/21 in Halls and Greens Bayou Watersheds as well as Kashmere Gardens on the southeast corner of US59 and Loop 610.
Wherever I drove for five hours, residents repeatedly told me that because of poor maintenance, water has a hard time getting out of neighborhoods. It must either sink in or evaporate. See below.
Amboy and OctaviaStreets. City of Houston’s maintenance responsibility.
On Octavia just east of Amboy St.City of Houston’s maintenance responsibility.
Etheline St. near Korenek St.Harris County Precinct 1’s maintenance responsibility.Octavia St. near Kashmere Street. City of Houston’s maintenance responsibility.
To be fair, not all the ditches were this bad. But I saw thousands like these on hundreds of streets while driving around for five hours. Sometimes sediment almost completely covered drains. I often had hard times spotting the pipes.
On north side of Laura Koppe just east of Arkansas Street.Harris County Precinct 2’s maintenance responsibility.On Kowis Street a few hundred feet east of the Hardy Tollroad. Harris County Precinct 2’s maintenance responsibility.
The saddest sight I saw all day was this home on Etheline Street between Homestead and US59.
Note the mold and rotting exterior. Also note how close to street level this home is.Harris County Precinct 1’s maintenance responsibility.
Red circle shows location of drain completely blocked by sediment.Harris County Precinct 1’s maintenance responsibility.
Sixteen more representative shots in Harris County Precinct 1, Precinct 2 and City.
With drainage this bad, water may evaporate or infiltrate faster than it flows out of neighborhoods!
Who is Responsible for Streets and Storm Sewers?
Who is responsible for clearing blockages like these? Not the Harris County Flood Control District.
Inside the City of Houston, it is the Houston Public Works Department and a mayor who has been sued for diverting drainage fees.
Who is responsible for the unincorporated areas of Harris County? The Precincts. And the worst drainage happens in Precincts One and Two with Commissioners Ellis and Garcia.
Why does Kashmere Gardens (in the City) have open ditch drainage that hasn’t been maintained in years?
How do areas in East Aldine still have barely functional roadside ditches and residents who do not have municipal water and sewer service?
Commissioners Ellis and Garcia have the power and the money to address these issues. Yet they have chosen not to. Why have they not helped the very people they claim are left behind?
Show Us the Data
It is important to note the questions NOT being asked in this so-called “equity” debate.
How much has the City of Houston invested in these flood-damaged areas to remediate drainage?
How much have Precincts 1 and 2 invested?
What drainage projects have they completed since 2000?
What is the capital improvement plan for each precinct, and how much of that includes drainage improvements?
What is the equity prioritization framework for precinct spending?
How much unspent money does each precinct have for infrastructure?
The answers may point right back at the people making racial accusations.
The City and Commissioners Ellis and Garcia need to provide answers. Let’s see the data. How much have the City and the Precincts spent in these areas? If these areas are underserved, Commissioners Ellis and Garcia, and Mayor Turner are responsible.
They have claimed transparency is important to them. The time to prove that is now.
Blaming the problems on racial discrimination is an easy sell in minority neighborhoods. But it’s misdirection and it keeps the spotlight off Commissioners.
And it diverts focus from finding solutions to the real problems that contribute to flooding. For that, many people need look no further than the end of their driveways.
We all need to step back and look at flooding from end to end. Then maybe we’ll make life easier for the most vulnerable people among us.
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/2021/06/20210626-RJR_8673.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2021-06-27 12:35:382022-01-03 15:25:38Looking Through the Wrong End of the Drainpipe: The Politics of Misdirection
Location of six six high-income watersheds used in the same analysis
Voter turnout for the 2018 Harris County flood-bond referendum
Damage from Harvey
Ironically, low-income watersheds had the lowest turnout for the 2018 flood-bond referendum and they’re getting the vast majority of flood mitigation funding.
Previous articles in this series have shown that, out of 23 watersheds in Harris County, six low-income watersheds:
The low-income watersheds are all located primarily inside the Beltway.
Most of Greens Bayou is inside Beltway 8, though a portion of it wanders just outside.
Location of Watersheds with Highest Income
Now let’s look at the location of the six high-income watersheds.
High-income watersheds are all outside the beltway.
Who Approved that $2.5 Billion Flood Bond?
Now look at the voter turnout map below from the 2018 flood bond referendum.
Light areas had the lowest voter turnout.
Dark areas had the highest voter turnout.
Note the area inside the yellow outline. It contains all the watersheds that Commissioners Ellis and Garcia complain about the most as having the least funding: Greens, Halls, Hunting, White Oak and Sims.
To see turnout in both absolute numbers and percentages in individual precincts, go to the interactive version of this map. Click on the visual above or here.
Some precincts in those watersheds had 0 voters. That’s right. No one showed up at the polls. At all. Many precincts had less than 1% turnout. Those light tan-colored areas generally had 1-5%.
The darkest areas, such as those around Kingwood, had turnout in the 20 to 30% range – generally 5-20 times higher than in the neighborhoods where most of the money is going.
Compare damage in Harvey (below) with the area outlined in yellow in the map above.
When you consider these four maps together with the historical funding data discussed in previous posts (see links below), they show that most of the money is already going where most of the damage was.
But large pockets of damage exist elsewhere that get comparatively little to no funding.
For instance, in the map above, note the curving arc of damage along Cypress Creek in the northern part of the county which extends into the Humble/Kingwood area.
People in those damaged areas turned out in high percentages for the flood bond. But they are seeing the vast majority of flood-mitigation projects being built in neighborhoods that didn’t even bother to vote in many cases. That doesn’t bode well for future bonds referendums.
Misleading Statements Undermine Trust in Government and Future
Some political leaders are telling poor people that flood-mitigation projects are all going to rich neighborhoods and the Houston Chronicle blindly repeats what they say without checking the real numbers. Or even bothering to mention projects already completed.
Twitter feed of Chronicle writer who wrote the article above.
But as I’ve shown in previous articles (see links below), depending on how you measure it, up to three quarters of the money is actually flowing to poor neighborhoods.
Funding in six highest and lowest income quartiles.
Funding in six low income watersheds compared to 15 higher income watersheds
Yet poor people believe all the money is going to rich watersheds – because that’s what their leaders tell them. And rich people see the lion’s share of the money going in the opposite direction.
Everyone believes someone else is getting the funding. So who would vote for another flood bond at this point? No one.
How are you going to convince people that taxed themselves $2.5 billion – and think they aren’t receiving any benefit from it – to vote for the next bond?
We need to restore trust in government by giving people accurate information, not misleading them with racial rhetoric for political gain. More on that tomorrow.
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/2021/06/Voting-Map-W-Legend-and-Outline-Small.jpg?fit=1200%2C599&ssl=15991200adminadmin2021-06-26 10:05:322021-06-26 12:34:20Watersheds with Low Voter Turnout Get Most Flood-Mitigation Funding
Fifth in a series of eight articles on flood-mitigation funding in Harris County
On June 11, Russ Poppe, executive director of the Harris County Flood Control District, resigned after two years of hounding by Commissioners Rodney Ellis and Adrian Garcia over the distribution of flood-bond money. Ellis and Garcia kept pushing Poppe to accelerate flood-mitigation projects in minority/low-income neighborhoods, using racial “equity” as the justification. But the discussion should be about damage, not race.
Alleged “Back-of-the-Bus” Treatment
Ellis was particularly vocal. He described Halls and Greens Bayous as getting “back-of-the-bus” treatment. With Shakespearean flare, he would rub his bald head and perfectly frame himself in front of aggressive artwork that says “Pay,” “We are fed up,” and “No Way.” Then he would lean into his camera and pronounce, “They flood every time.” If we don’t fix that, “We’ll have blood on our hands.”
Precinct One Commissioner Rodney Ellis during the Feb. 9, 2021, Commissioners Court Meeting.
But there was also a Shakespearean irony to Ellis’ monthly melodrama. As the posts in this series have shown…
Those minority, low-income neighborhoods have received the vast majority of flood-control district funding since 2000.
Narrow Questions Lead Viewers to Wrong Conclusion
This is a manufactured melodrama, born from a lie, and then exploited for political gain. Ellis even sweeps up community groups and flood survivors into his monthly melodrama. He would trot them out in meeting after meeting to anecdotally embellish his narrative, as he grilled Poppe like a prosecutor.
“Russ Poppe, is it not true? Did you not tell me that FEMA evaluates flood control projects with a benefit/cost ratio?”
Poppe would respond, “Yes, Commissioner.”
Ellis continued to ask pointed questions that demanded yes or no answers and could only lead to the conclusion he wanted. “Are the home values in Kingwood higher than around Halls Bayou?”
“Yes, Commissioner.”
“Would that not raise Kingwood’s benefit/cost ratio?”
“Yes, Commissioner.”
You get the idea. Ellis would focus on a narrow sliver of truth that bolstered his narrative of discrimination. Basically, it was a story of systemic racism – that the white man built the system to favor white men. He led listeners to conclude that areas like Kingwood got all the flood mitigation money, and that poor black and Hispanic neighborhoods got none.
However, Ellis had viewers looking through the wrong end of the telescope. He focused them on process, not outcomes. Had he bothered to check the facts, he would have found two problems:
Kingwood has NEVER received a Harris County Flood Control District Capital Improvement Project.
Halls’/Greens’ Funding vs. Kingwood’s as of March 31, 2021.
Benefit/Cost Ratios Factor in Far More than Home Value
The federal grant-funding process includes dozens of other factors besides home values. And when you combine them all, watersheds such as Greens, Brays, and Sims came away with benefit cost ratios as high as 6 or 7, while areas like Kingwood struggled to get above 1. The Flood Control District’s Federal Briefing document shows the benefit-cost ratios for all Federal Projects. See for yourself.
Percentage of low-to-moderate income residents in an area
Number of structures that can be removed from the floodplain by a project.
When you look at outcomes, instead of one small part of the process, you see that poorer, inner-city watersheds get the vast majority of funding in Harris County.
Dollars Flow to Damage
The two tables below compare actual flood-mitigation funding since 2000 in high and low quartiles when ranked by “damaged structures” in four major storms: Allison, Tax Day, Memorial Day, and Harvey. The last column ranks watersheds by LMI%. That’s the percentage of low-to-moderate-income residents with less-than-average income for the region. Halls has the highest LMI rank of any watershed – 71%, making it the lowest income watershed.
Capital improvement funds; includes no maintenance dollars. Listing omits Vince. It lies almost wholly within Pasadena and is the City’s responsibility.Omits Little Cypress Creek, which includes the Flood Control District’s experimental “frontier program.”
In comparing these two groups, several things become clear:
Dollars flow to damage.
Damage happens primarily in low-income watersheds.
Low-income watersheds received a billion more than the high-income (low LMI%) watersheds
Low-income watersheds averaged 3X more dollars
The median for low-income watersheds was 4X higher.
Stats Show No Racial Bias in Distribution of Flood-Mitigation Funding
Harris County does not discriminate against minority, low-income groups in the allocation of flood-mitigation funds. Dollars flow to damage. Of all the factors I examined, flood-mitigation funding most closely tracked damage. That’s a logical, valid basis for distribution of funding.
The most money went to the watersheds with the highest damage. They just also happened to be watersheds with high percentages of minority and low-income residents.
The discussion should be about flood damage, not race.
The real factors that contribute to flooding have become lost in the racially charged rhetoric. The sooner we lose the racial rhetoric, the easier it will be to address flooding.
The real factors that contribute to flooding become apparent when you look at the maps below. They correspond to the tables above.
Watersheds with the most damage lie mostly inside Beltway 8.
Watersheds with the least damage all lie outside Beltway 8.
Low Income Watersheds
All mostly inside Beltway. Part of Greens skirts north side of Beltway
Higher Income Watersheds
All outside Beltway
Neighborhoods inside the Beltway:
Are older
Were developed decades ago, with lower drainage standards
Have more structures built in floodplains and closer (lower) to street level
Have structures built right up to the edges of ditches and streams
Are downstream from newer areas, often in other counties that don’t mandate detention ponds
Are more densely populated, and thus have higher percentages of impervious cover
Two giant detention ponds straddle I-69 along Halls Bayou. Before HCFCD could build these ponds, they had to buy out the areas circled in red.
The sooner we can focus this discussion on issues such as these, the sooner we will solve our flooding problems. Polluting the discussion with antagonizing, racial rhetoric will only delay solutions and drive off more good people like Russ Poppe. Poppe’s only “sin” was that he was appointed in 2016, a year when Republicans controlled Commissioner’s Court. So, he became an easy target, like so many other department heads before him.
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/2021/06/20210209-Screen-Shot-2021-02-09-at-5.16.24-PM.jpg?fit=1200%2C669&ssl=16691200adminadmin2021-06-25 06:49:082022-06-27 21:09:23Racial Rhetoric Distracts from Focus on Real Solutions to Flooding Problems. Here is Why.
Looking Through the Wrong End of the Drainpipe: The Politics of Misdirection
Seventh in a series of eight articles on flood-mitigation funding in Harris County.
For the last two years, I’ve heard the same tirades in Commissioners’ Court – that rich neighborhood’s get all the flood-mitigation money while the poor neighborhoods get none. According to Commissioners Ellis and Garcia, that’s because higher home values in rich neighborhoods generate higher Benefit/Cost Ratios and therefore get more FEMA grants. Problem is, FEMA looks at many other factors. And HUD grants favor low-income neighborhoods. But you never hear Ellis or Garcia talk about those.
In reality, most flood mitigation-money in Harris County goes to watersheds with high percentages of low-income residents. (See links to previous posts below.)
In the most flooded parts of Halls and Greens watersheds, street after street has clogged ditch drains. Responsibility for cleaning those drains falls onto, you guessed it, Ellis and Garcia, along with their counterpart at the City of Houston, Mayor Sylvester Turner.
Simple FOIA Request Disproves Narrative
The Ellis/Garcia narrative just didn’t sound right to me. So I submitted a Freedom-of-Information-Act (FOIA) request to the Harris County Flood Control District in March for historical funding data. I wanted to see if the allegations were true. They’re not.
Analysis shows that the Ellis/Garcia narrative is 180-degrees from the truth. By almost any statistical measure, flood-mitigation spending favors the poorer watersheds in Harris County. That’s where most of the damage is.
Surely Commissioners Ellis and Garcia can’t be oblivious to more than a billion dollars of construction benefitting their own precincts.
And had they bothered to look, they would have found Kingwood, their favorite whipping boy, has never received one Harris County Flood Control District Capital Improvement Project.
Verbal Sleight of Hand Deflects Attention from Who’s Responsible
So, what’s going on here? Why the constant barrage of racial accusations and divisive rhetoric?
They seem designed to deflect attention from those responsible for a crucial part of the problem: street drainage.
And if you don’t fix that, you will never solve flooding no matter how much money you throw at channel widening, detention ponds and green solutions.
A process engineer in the oil and gas industry once told me, “There’s always a bottleneck in every system somewhere.” And one of the biggest issues in neighborhoods that flood repetitively is street drainage. Water can’t get out of the neighborhoods to the bayous.
Poor Ditch Maintenance Contributes to Street Flooding
By alleging racism in the HCFCD funding, Commissioners Ellis and Garcia are deflecting attention from a serious issue; many of the neighborhoods in their jurisdictions have awful internal drainage (streets and storm sewers) that contribute to frequent street flooding. Street flooding happens when high rainfall rates exceed the capacity of storm drains and ditches to carry the water away. The reduced capacity of the ditches below makes the streets flood on smaller rains.
Vasquez says that after a heavy rain, this drain backs water up throughout his neighborhood and contributes to flooding. He says it can take up to 3-4 days for water to drain away. Completely unprompted, he then said that Kingwood was getting all the help from the City. I told him that I lived in Kingwood and that our drains were just as bad as his. See below.
But I digress. Here are some more street drainage photos taken on 6/26/21 in Halls and Greens Bayou Watersheds as well as Kashmere Gardens on the southeast corner of US59 and Loop 610.
Wherever I drove for five hours, residents repeatedly told me that because of poor maintenance, water has a hard time getting out of neighborhoods. It must either sink in or evaporate. See below.
To be fair, not all the ditches were this bad. But I saw thousands like these on hundreds of streets while driving around for five hours. Sometimes sediment almost completely covered drains. I often had hard times spotting the pipes.
The saddest sight I saw all day was this home on Etheline Street between Homestead and US59.
With drainage this bad, water may evaporate or infiltrate faster than it flows out of neighborhoods!
Who is Responsible for Streets and Storm Sewers?
Who is responsible for clearing blockages like these? Not the Harris County Flood Control District.
Inside the City of Houston, it is the Houston Public Works Department and a mayor who has been sued for diverting drainage fees.
Who is responsible for the unincorporated areas of Harris County? The Precincts. And the worst drainage happens in Precincts One and Two with Commissioners Ellis and Garcia.
Commissioners Ellis and Garcia have the power and the money to address these issues. Yet they have chosen not to. Why have they not helped the very people they claim are left behind?
Show Us the Data
It is important to note the questions NOT being asked in this so-called “equity” debate.
The answers may point right back at the people making racial accusations.
The City and Commissioners Ellis and Garcia need to provide answers. Let’s see the data. How much have the City and the Precincts spent in these areas? If these areas are underserved, Commissioners Ellis and Garcia, and Mayor Turner are responsible.
They have claimed transparency is important to them. The time to prove that is now.
Blaming the problems on racial discrimination is an easy sell in minority neighborhoods. But it’s misdirection and it keeps the spotlight off Commissioners.
Hounding talented executives like Russ Poppe, the soon to be ex-head of the flood control district, out of their jobs won’t fix the issue either. That’s also misdirection.
And it diverts focus from finding solutions to the real problems that contribute to flooding. For that, many people need look no further than the end of their driveways.
We all need to step back and look at flooding from end to end. Then maybe we’ll make life easier for the most vulnerable people among us.
For More Information
For more information, see:
Posted by Bob Rehak on 6/27/2021
1398 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.
Watersheds with Low Voter Turnout Get Most Flood-Mitigation Funding
Sixth in a series of eight articles on flood-mitigation funding in Harris County
In August of 2018, Harris County voters approved a historic flood bond of $2.5 billion. Afterwards, KTRK ABC13 created an interactive precinct-by-precinct voter turnout map for the referendum. Now, with spending data for flood mitigation projects in hand, we can see that, in general, but not in every case:
Ironically, the worst-damaged areas generally had the lowest turnout.
Four Maps Tell Story
Let’s start by looking at four maps. They show:
Previous articles in this series have shown that, out of 23 watersheds in Harris County, six low-income watersheds:
Location of Lowest Income Watersheds
The low-income watersheds are all located primarily inside the Beltway.
Location of Watersheds with Highest Income
Now let’s look at the location of the six high-income watersheds.
Who Approved that $2.5 Billion Flood Bond?
Now look at the voter turnout map below from the 2018 flood bond referendum.
Note the area inside the yellow outline. It contains all the watersheds that Commissioners Ellis and Garcia complain about the most as having the least funding: Greens, Halls, Hunting, White Oak and Sims.
Some precincts in those watersheds had 0 voters. That’s right. No one showed up at the polls. At all. Many precincts had less than 1% turnout. Those light tan-colored areas generally had 1-5%.
In fact, Kingwood precincts had five of the top eight turnout percentages in the county. But Kingwood has NEVER received even ONE Harris County FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT capital improvement project.
Damage Concentrations
Compare damage in Harvey (below) with the area outlined in yellow in the map above.
When you consider these four maps together with the historical funding data discussed in previous posts (see links below), they show that most of the money is already going where most of the damage was.
For instance, in the map above, note the curving arc of damage along Cypress Creek in the northern part of the county which extends into the Humble/Kingwood area.
People in those damaged areas turned out in high percentages for the flood bond. But they are seeing the vast majority of flood-mitigation projects being built in neighborhoods that didn’t even bother to vote in many cases. That doesn’t bode well for future bonds referendums.
Misleading Statements Undermine Trust in Government and Future
Some political leaders are telling poor people that flood-mitigation projects are all going to rich neighborhoods and the Houston Chronicle blindly repeats what they say without checking the real numbers. Or even bothering to mention projects already completed.
But as I’ve shown in previous articles (see links below), depending on how you measure it, up to three quarters of the money is actually flowing to poor neighborhoods.
Certain Harris County commissioners have fought to prioritize funding for minority and low-income neighborhoods. And in the next Commissioners Court meeting on Tuesday 6/29/21, they’re pushing to expand that prioritization framework to include future projects and funds. See Item 191 on the agenda.
Yet poor people believe all the money is going to rich watersheds – because that’s what their leaders tell them. And rich people see the lion’s share of the money going in the opposite direction.
How are you going to convince people that taxed themselves $2.5 billion – and think they aren’t receiving any benefit from it – to vote for the next bond?
We need to restore trust in government by giving people accurate information, not misleading them with racial rhetoric for political gain. More on that tomorrow.
For More Information
For more information, see:
Posted by Bob Rehak on 6/26/2021
1397 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.
Racial Rhetoric Distracts from Focus on Real Solutions to Flooding Problems. Here is Why.
Fifth in a series of eight articles on flood-mitigation funding in Harris County
On June 11, Russ Poppe, executive director of the Harris County Flood Control District, resigned after two years of hounding by Commissioners Rodney Ellis and Adrian Garcia over the distribution of flood-bond money. Ellis and Garcia kept pushing Poppe to accelerate flood-mitigation projects in minority/low-income neighborhoods, using racial “equity” as the justification. But the discussion should be about damage, not race.
Alleged “Back-of-the-Bus” Treatment
Ellis was particularly vocal. He described Halls and Greens Bayous as getting “back-of-the-bus” treatment. With Shakespearean flare, he would rub his bald head and perfectly frame himself in front of aggressive artwork that says “Pay,” “We are fed up,” and “No Way.” Then he would lean into his camera and pronounce, “They flood every time.” If we don’t fix that, “We’ll have blood on our hands.”
But there was also a Shakespearean irony to Ellis’ monthly melodrama. As the posts in this series have shown…
Narrow Questions Lead Viewers to Wrong Conclusion
This is a manufactured melodrama, born from a lie, and then exploited for political gain. Ellis even sweeps up community groups and flood survivors into his monthly melodrama. He would trot them out in meeting after meeting to anecdotally embellish his narrative, as he grilled Poppe like a prosecutor.
“Russ Poppe, is it not true? Did you not tell me that FEMA evaluates flood control projects with a benefit/cost ratio?”
Poppe would respond, “Yes, Commissioner.”
Ellis continued to ask pointed questions that demanded yes or no answers and could only lead to the conclusion he wanted. “Are the home values in Kingwood higher than around Halls Bayou?”
“Yes, Commissioner.”
“Would that not raise Kingwood’s benefit/cost ratio?”
“Yes, Commissioner.”
You get the idea. Ellis would focus on a narrow sliver of truth that bolstered his narrative of discrimination. Basically, it was a story of systemic racism – that the white man built the system to favor white men. He led listeners to conclude that areas like Kingwood got all the flood mitigation money, and that poor black and Hispanic neighborhoods got none.
However, Ellis had viewers looking through the wrong end of the telescope. He focused them on process, not outcomes. Had he bothered to check the facts, he would have found two problems:
Benefit/Cost Ratios Factor in Far More than Home Value
The federal grant-funding process includes dozens of other factors besides home values. And when you combine them all, watersheds such as Greens, Brays, and Sims came away with benefit cost ratios as high as 6 or 7, while areas like Kingwood struggled to get above 1. The Flood Control District’s Federal Briefing document shows the benefit-cost ratios for all Federal Projects. See for yourself.
Benefit/Cost Ratios (BCRs) also factor in such things as:
When you look at outcomes, instead of one small part of the process, you see that poorer, inner-city watersheds get the vast majority of funding in Harris County.
Dollars Flow to Damage
The two tables below compare actual flood-mitigation funding since 2000 in high and low quartiles when ranked by “damaged structures” in four major storms: Allison, Tax Day, Memorial Day, and Harvey. The last column ranks watersheds by LMI%. That’s the percentage of low-to-moderate-income residents with less-than-average income for the region. Halls has the highest LMI rank of any watershed – 71%, making it the lowest income watershed.
In comparing these two groups, several things become clear:
Stats Show No Racial Bias in Distribution of Flood-Mitigation Funding
Harris County does not discriminate against minority, low-income groups in the allocation of flood-mitigation funds. Dollars flow to damage. Of all the factors I examined, flood-mitigation funding most closely tracked damage. That’s a logical, valid basis for distribution of funding.
The most money went to the watersheds with the highest damage. They just also happened to be watersheds with high percentages of minority and low-income residents.
The real factors that contribute to flooding have become lost in the racially charged rhetoric. The sooner we lose the racial rhetoric, the easier it will be to address flooding.
The real factors that contribute to flooding become apparent when you look at the maps below. They correspond to the tables above.
Low Income Watersheds
Higher Income Watersheds
Neighborhoods inside the Beltway:
As a consequence, it also becomes harder to implement flood mitigation projects. For instance, HCFCD had to buy out whole subdivisions to make room for giant detention ponds in the Halls Bayou Watershed. This is just one reason why these projects cost so much money and take so much time.
The sooner we can focus this discussion on issues such as these, the sooner we will solve our flooding problems. Polluting the discussion with antagonizing, racial rhetoric will only delay solutions and drive off more good people like Russ Poppe. Poppe’s only “sin” was that he was appointed in 2016, a year when Republicans controlled Commissioner’s Court. So, he became an easy target, like so many other department heads before him.
For More Information
For more information, see:
Posted by Bob Rehak on 6/24/2021
1396 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.