More Delays, Denials, and Victim-Blaming in Elm Grove Lawsuit

Defendants in the Elm Grove flood lawsuit have filed more than 20 new documents with the Harris County District Clerk since mid-July. The big news: The addition of Concourse Development, LLC to the lawsuit has pushed back the trial date from March to September next year. It has also triggered more victim-blaming plus claims and cross-claims among the defendants.

Background

In 2019, runoff from 268 clear-cut acres under development by Perry Homes contributed to flooding in Elm Grove, not once, but twice. Victims sued two subsidiaries of Perry Homes who were developing the property. They also sued several contractors, and LJA, the engineering company.

Screen capture from video taken by Cogdill family during May 7th flood of 2019 shows water streaming out of Woodridge Village into Elm Grove.

In June 2020, lawyers for plaintiffs added Perry Homes and Concourse Development to the lawsuit.

Perry promptly responded, blaming the victims for their own damages.

Perry Homes is the parent company of subsidiaries PSWA and Figure Four Partners, who were originally sued.

Many Elm Grove Families had to be rescued.

Concourse Development bought the property now known as Woodridge Village on 1/12/2018 and sold it to Perry Homes six days later.

Five developers owned the Woodridge Property before Figure Four Partners, LTD, a Perry Homes subsidiary. Concourse owned it for six days before flipping it to Figure Four. Source: Montgomery County Appraisal District.

Concourse is also the developer of Woodridge Forest, immediately west of Woodridge Village. Approximately one year before the purchase and quick sale, Concourse reportedly told Woodridge Forest residents at a community meeting that the Woodridge Village property would never be developed because it was “just too wet.” USGS classified large parts of the area as wetlands and multiple streams converged there.

Where Case Stands Now

The addition of Concourse to the lawsuit prompted multiple requests by Concourse and other defendants to delay the trial again – until September 20, 2021. Concourse said it didn’t have enough time for discovery and preparation. Given that the case was already almost a year old, Concourse claimed it had a lot of catching up to do. In their response to the plaintiffs’ sixth amended petition, Concourse also pointed some fingers at other defendants. One then filed a cross-claim against Concourse (see below).

Concourse Blames Victims and Almost Everyone in Sight

Defendant Concourse Development LLC denied each and every claim in Plaintiff’s latest petition. This is called a General Denial.

Concourse then lists eight pages of defenses. They repeat the phrase “Pleading further, and in the alternative, if such be necessary and subject to the foregoing pleas and without waiving same…” a grand total of twenty times. That means, “If the general denial doesn’t work, we reserve the right to claim X. And if X doesn’t work, we reserve the right to claim Y. Etc.”

More Than 20 Defenses Asserted

With that as a preface, Concourse also pleaded that:

  1. Concourse was not the immediate or sole cause of the flooding and damages.
  2. “Acts, omissions, fault, negligence and other conduct of the Plaintiffs” were the immediate and sole cause, in whole or in part, of the flooding and their damages. (They do not explain why they believe that, though.) Said another way, the victims caused their own damages.
  3. Other defendants caused the damages.
  4. New and independent third parties caused the damages.
  5. Other people caused the damages.
  6. Concourse had no obligation to the victims.
  7. Concourse’s conduct was reasonably prudent.
  8. The flooding was an unavoidable accident.
  9. Plaintiffs failed to mitigate their damages.
  10. Their contract (presumably with Perry) gives them indemnity.
  11. Any payments made by other parties (not a part of the litigation) to Defendants should offset any liability Concourse may have. (Presumably, they’re talking about insurance companies.)
  12. Any award against Concourse must be reduced by the percentage of fault attributable to others, including the Plaintiffs themselves, and third parties.
  13. Flooding was caused by an intervening, but unspecified cause.
  14. Plaintiffs’ claims fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
  15. To the extent that Plaintiffs allege lost wages or loss of earning capacity, recovery should be limited to post-tax earnings or net earnings.
  16. Plaintiffs’ damages resulted from prior or pre-existing conditions over which Concourse had no control and did not cause.
  17. God caused the damages.
  18. Any punitive damages awarded in the case should be reduced in proportion to Plaintiffs’ own negligence.
  19. Plaintiffs’ claims should be barred because Concourse acted with due care and complied with all laws and regulations.
  20. Plaintiffs’ assumed the risk that resulted in their “alleged” damages.
  21. Punitive damages violate the Due Process and Equal Protection provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment of the US. Constitution and the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
  22. Punitive damages violate Chapter 41 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, the Texas Constitution, and the United States Constitution.
  23. Prejudgment interest should be limited under Texas Law.
  24. Plaintiffs have not fulfilled all the conditions necessary to maintain the lawsuit.
  25. The One Satisfaction Rule should govern any awards.

The last point means that a plaintiff should only recover once for a particular injury. It applies when several defendants commit the same act or when multiple defendants commit different acts that result in one injury.

Defendants Now Fighting Among Themselves

If many of those points sound contradictory, they are. But Concourse has covered all its bases.

In #3 above, Concourse pointed the finger of blame at other defendants in the case. Evidently, Double Oak Construction, Inc., one of the other defendants didn’t like that. So…

On 8/6/2020, Double Oak filed a cross-claim against Concourse. Double Oak alleges that Concourse should be held directly liable to plaintiffs for any and ALL damages they suffered. Double Oak also wants a jury to decide Concourse’s percentage of liability.

Why is that? Double Oak alleges that “…the Developer Defendants hired Concourse on May 8, 2019, the day after the extreme weather event on May 7, 2019, to inspect the Development and that Concourse did not advise the Developer Defendants to make any changes to the detention.” Nor, they claim, did Concourse advise Double Oak or the other Contractor Defendants to make any changes to their work after the inspection.

Therefore, Double Oak further alleges, Concourse is liable to Plaintiffs for damages and any award levied against Double Oak.

Double Oak Objects to Concourse Production of Documents

In its response to the Plaintiffs, Concourse also gave “notice to all parties that any and all documents produced during discovery may be used against such parties at any pre-trial proceeding and/or trial … without the necessity of authenticating the document.”

Double Oak objected to this. Double Oak claims it doesn’t know what specific documents Concourse intends to use, therefore Double Oak is handicapped in its defense.

Trying to anticipate every single document produced by any party would cause an undue hardship, claims Double Oak. Double Oak reserved its right to authenticate any and all documents that Concourse produces as part of discovery.

Woodridge MUD Fights Subpoena for Documents

In other news on the case, the Woodridge Municipal Utility District (MUD) is fighting production of documents that have been subpoenaed.

The Woodridge MUD claims that the Plaintiffs’ subpeona is “overly broad and seeks to inquire into matters subject to the attorney-client privilege.” They also claim that some of the requested documents involve matters discussed during executive sessions of the Woodridge MUD board.

The MUD also refuses to produce documents anywhere other than at the offices of its counsel.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/10/2020

1077 Days after 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 Could Shift Billions of Flood-Bond Dollars Tuesday without Public Vote

Tuesday, Harris County Commissioners Court could vote on a proposal to create a Community Flood Resilience Task Force (CFRTF). The Task Force has the potential to shift billions of flood-bond dollars from Republican-controlled Precincts 3 and 4 to Democratic-controlled Precincts 1 and 2. It should be noted that resilience appears nowhere in the flood bond language that voters approved, so this may not even be legal.

County Judge Lina Hidalgo, Commissioner Rodney Ellis and Commissioner Adrian Garcia are using the committee and unusual definitions of “equity,” “equitably,” and “resilience” to justify the shift. Their efforts could kill much-needed flood-mitigation projects in areas such as Elm Grove and the wider Lake Houston Area. Mr. Ellis especially has been openly hostile toward helping Elm Grove.

Secrecy Surrounds Creation of Task Force

The CFRTF proposal has been placed on the Emergency/Supplemental portion of the agenda with no public explanation of what commissioners would actually vote on. See Item #8. It reads only: “Request by the County Judge for discussion and possible action on reconstituting the Harris County Flood Control Task Force as the Harris County Community Flood Resilience Task Force and amending the bylaws accordingly.”

The current version of the Task Force by-laws is not posted online, but I have obtained a copy via a FOIA request. The wording of the bylaws has changed from the version posted on July 24. A distinctive bias runs through the wording that’s contrary to the wording approved by Harris County voters in 2018.

2018 Flood-Bond Election Called for Equity

Because not one joint USACE/HCFCD project had ever been conducted in the area, Lake Houston Area leaders actually argued to include this language in the flood bond. It is now being turned against the area.

Harris County voters approved the flood bond in 2018 with the understanding that flood-bond dollars would be distributed “equitably.” The approved language specifically required that. Since then, however, Commissioner Rodney Ellis has led a concerted effort to redefine the word equitably so that flood-bond dollars can be shifted disproportionately to low-income “communities of color.”

Recognized Definitions of Equitable and Equitably

Most people likely define equitably as fairly or impartially.

  • Webster’s Third International Dictionary defines it as equality – “without prejudice or favoritism.”
  • The Oxford English Dictionary defines it as “unbiased, impartial.”
  • Roget’s Thesaurus lists two pages of synonyms, most centered around the idea of “a level playing field.”
  • Black’s Law Dictionary has pages of definitions, most centered around the idea of “fairness.”

Ellis’ Definition of Equity

Mr. Ellis defines equity as righting the wrongs of the past, especially in regard to racial injustice. His definition relates to fairness only if you define equity, not in terms of the present, but of the past. He talks a lot about reparations for slavery. However, he ignores:

I doubt this is what voters had in mind two years ago when 88% voted for the flood bond.

They more likely felt they would see their fair share of flood-bond projects going to their neighborhoods, not making up for social injustices.

Making up for for social injustices is NOT how the bond was sold. HCFCD identified projects in every watershed based on 22 community input meetings.

Task Force To Ensure “Equitable Resilience”

Judge Hidalgo, Commissioner Ellis and Commissioner Garcia intend to use this supposedly impartial task force to advise them on flood-control decisions. However, the flood-control experts and engineers don’t get to vote. They will only advise 17 political appointees. The appointees must have, according to the proposed bylaws, “a demonstrated knowledge of or interest in equitable approaches to flood resilience and the socioeconomic, demographic, and environmental factors that affect the relative resilience of communities in response to flooding.”

Of the 17 members:

  • At least two must represent low-income communities.
  • At least two must represent communities of color.
  • At least three must have expertise in flood resilience.
  • At least one will be a City of Houston representative with responsibilities related to resilience.

The task force will also include at least one person from each of eight competency areas, six of which are based on the idea of equity (See appendix A, page 12):

  1. Housing equity
  2. Health equity
  3. Equitable infrastructure
  4. Equitable urban planning and transportation
  5. Environmental equity
  6. Equity and social justice

The other two competencies are:

  1. Flood risk mitigation
  2. Authentic connections to local communities with “lived experience” (whatever that means).

A minimum 14 out of the 17 positions on the task force will ensure Hidalgo’s, Garcia’s and Ellis’ definitions of equity and resilience based on “social justice” are implemented.

Note that resilience, like equity, has become political code for programs that benefit primarily the socially vulnerable. (See the resilience study produced by the City of Houston.)

Double-Speak Definitions Enshrined in Bylaws

Article II (Definitions) Paragraph 3 even spells out what’s meant by the term “equitable resilience.” It “takes into account issues of social vulnerability,” say the bylaws.

The bylaws then go on to say equitable resilience “…starts from people’s own perception of their position within their human-environmental system and accounts for their realities and their need for a change of circumstance to avoid imbalances of power into the future.”

Talk about political double speak! What does that even mean?

I think they’re saying that decisions will be made on subjective, not objective, criteria.

Also note Definition #6 – Flood Resilience Projects. The word mitigation (as in flood mitigation) appears nowhere in the definition.

In fact, the phrase “flood mitigation” appears nowhere in the entire 12-page document. Neither does the word “equal.” However, resilience appears 63 times. But “resilience” never appears once in the bond language that voters approved.

Resilience, like equity, does not apply to the entire county. Most people probably see resilience as a positive word that helps everyone. It doesn’t. The Ellis/Hidalgo/Garcia definition helps only a subset of people.

More Double Speak

A footnote on page 3 says “It is not within the scope of the CFRTF to alter or re-prioritize 2018 flood bond projects, except that the CFRTF should evaluate and provide feedback on whether those projects are being implemented in accordance with the [Harris County Commissioners] court-approved equitable prioritization framework and schedule.”

In other words, the task force can only make sure the equity priorities that Ellis, Hidalgo and Garcia approved are being implemented. These aren’t advisors; they’re enforcers.

Troubling Questions

  • Why are technical experts on flood mitigation being replaced by “equity” experts?
  • Why is the judgment of experts on flood mitigation being replaced by political appointees who don’t represent the spectrum of views in Harris County?
  • Why are changes that could fundamentally alter the nature of government and the allocation of tax dollars being considered on an “emergency” agenda?
  • Why has the voter-approved definition of “equitable” been replaced by one that’s inequitable?
  • Why are hundreds of millions of tax dollars moving to Precincts One and Two, denying other precincts their fair share?
  • If the Community Flood Resilience Task Force is so important, why is it not being put on the ballot for November?

Of all these questions, perhaps the last is the most critical. Voters deserve a say in how their $2.5 billion is spent. Not just a subset of voters. All voters.

Please email the county judge (CRTF@cjo.hctx.net) before Tuesday’s meeting and demand that creation of the resilience task force be put on the ballot for November. We need to clear up any confusion about what we approved in the flood-bond referendum of 2018 and how voters want bond dollars allocated.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/9/2020

1076 Days after Hurricane Harvey

The Long, Hard Road from Vietnam to Elm Grove for John Hulon

This is the story of a Vietnam veteran and former police officer who has lived in Elm Grove for more than 25 years. John Hulon’s troubles started when he was laid off from his job after brain surgery. Then he had a stroke. Followed by a heart attack. After being forced into retirement, he discontinued his flood insurance to save money. Then he flooded. Twice. John spent his life savings to restore his home and replace two vehicles. Now, a planned mitigation project that could protect his home from future flooding has become a political football. Regardless, he focuses fondly on his neighbors and the 12 volunteers from Second Baptist Church who helped him in his darkest hours. 


Interview with John Hulon

Rehak: How badly did the 2019 floods affect you?

Hulon: We lost everything.

Gutting the Hulon Residence after May Flood

Rehak: Why did you buy your house in this neighborhood?

Hulon: We always wanted to buy a house. So, we started looking around. A real-estate lady, who was an ex-Marine, took good care of us and showed us some homes.

You can tell immediately as you walk in a house if you like it. My wife fell in love with this one instantly. And then the real estate agent opened the curtains and we saw the home had a swimming pool. That was the icing on the cake. So, we bought it. And we’re still in love with it.

No Flood Insurance

Rehak: Did you pay off the mortgage before it flooded? 

Hulon: Yes. 

Rehak: Is that why you didn’t have flood insurance? 

Hulon: Flood insurance was a condition of the mortgage. But after paying the mortgage off, I dropped the insurance because, in the history of Elm Grove, it had never flooded here. And at that point, all we had was Social Security and military retirement. I couldn’t afford the insurance anymore.

Swollen doors and waterlogged studs.

High School Graduation Trip…to Vietnam

Rehak: What branch of the military were you in? 

Hulon: Air Force. In security.

Rehak: Was that back during Vietnam?

Hulon: Yeah, for my high school graduation trip, I went to Vietnam. 

You could say I grew up over there. I went when I was eighteen. In 1967.

Rehak: How long were you in the Air Force?

Hulon: Twenty years. I retired in 1987.  

Preserving the Uniform. The Army uniform belonged to Hulon’s father. He died of Agent Orange after serving in WWII, Korea and VietNam where he was also wounded.

Rehak: Were you in combat?

Hulon: Minor. Mostly I guarded airplanes. 

Switch to Law Enforcement

Rehak: What did you do when you came back?

Hulon: I was stationed at March Air Force Base in Riverside, California. And then I got out of the Air Force for a while after initially serving four years and went back to Louisiana, where my parents lived. I got a job as a city policeman in Leesville, Louisiana. And while there, I met an Air Force recruiter. He persuaded me to rejoin the Air Force. I told him I’d rejoin if he could get me changed from security to law enforcement, which he did. Then after I got out of the Air Force the second time, I started working in retail as a loss prevention manager. And later in IT.

Loss Prevention Manager Who Lost Everything

Rehak: Loss prevention! That makes a good transition to Elm Grove. You lived there for decades. Did you flood in May or just in September of 2019?

Hulon: I flooded in both. In the first flood, we only had to tear out half the walls. But we also had to buy all new furniture, new beds, new everything. We’d just finished that when it flooded again in September.

Rehak: How much of the house did you have restored before it flooded again?

Heirlooms lost to sediment-laden floodwater

Hulon: Walls and floors. We were in the process of repairing the cabinets. We had brand new cabinets before the first flood and they’re still here. They were still usable after the first flood. But after the second flood, they wouldn’t close. They still need to be redone, but we haven’t redone them yet.

Rehak: Will you tell me a little bit about your medical history. 

“I Died in the Back of That Ambulance”

Hulon: I was sitting at my desk working and I started feeling really funny and I knew something was wrong. My co-workers wanted to call an ambulance. But instead I drove my truck home. My wife and daughter were going to take me to the hospital. But we only got to the end of the street before they had to turn around. They called 911. By the time the ambulance came, I was pretty much out of it. They put me on the stretcher. 

In my mind, I died in the back of that ambulance.

John Hulon

Rehak: Why do you say that?

Hulon: I had an out-of-body experience. I was actually looking down at myself from above somewhere while they worked on me. When I got to the hospital, they did a brain scan and thought I had cancer. Turned out it was an abscess. The surgeon told me, “I just barely touched it and it popped.” So, I’m very lucky. They did the surgery and I stayed in the hospital for about two months.

Stroke and Heart Attack

Rehak: And then?

Hulon: Then I had a stroke.

Rehak: When did you have your heart attack, John?

Hulon: About two years ago. After Harvey.

Rehak: What triggered that? 

Hulon: I don’t really know. I was just sitting watching TV when I started feeling funny and had a lot of pain in my back. It wasn’t normal. I was injured pretty bad in Vietnam. So, I’m used to back pain, but not like this. I laid down on the couch and I knew something was wrong. I called 911. They came and said I was having a heart attack.

Rehak: Did you need a bypass or a stent?

Hulon: No, they just put me on a blood thinner and some blood pressure medication. 

Floods Used up Entire Life Savings

Rehak: Rebuilding your house twice must have cut into your life savings. 

Hulon: Used up every penny of it. Everything had to be redone. Everything. In the first flood, they only had to go up about four feet on the sheetrock. But in the second flood, they had to replace everything up to the ceiling, all rooms. 

Rehak: How far are you from the Perry site?

Hulon: About three blocks.

Rehak: Did the water come from that direction?

Hulon: Yes, through yards and down the street.

Rehak: Was it clear or a muddy?

Hulon: Very muddy. 

Dog encounters glove

Rehak: Was there a current going down the street?

Hulon: The water was flowing like a river.

“This is What I Could Do in My Life”

Rehak: What went through your mind as the water came up?

Hulon: I said to myself, “Look at everything we’ve built 40 years of marriage on!” Believe it or not, I was very calm at the time. I just said, “This is what I could do in my life.” 

Paid Contractor Up Front for Work Not Completed

Rehak: Were you able to find a good contractor?

Hulon: We found one that wanted $5000 upfront. They did 90 percent of the work and never showed up again.

Rehak: So sad.

Thinks About Volunteers from Second Baptist All the Time

Hulon: Yeah, but, you know, before that, volunteers from the Second Baptist Church came over. They’re great people there. They sent 12 people to our house when my daughter called. They stripped the walls for us. Wow. They were in and out in like a couple of hours, men and women. And I was so impressed.

Rehak: Incredible.

Hulon: And they kept coming back for a month after that. Every day. They brought us hot meals!

Rehak: That’s amazing.

I think about their kindness all of the time. 

John Hulon

Rehak: This was such a beautiful neighborhood before it flooded.

“These Were All Nice Houses Out Here”

Hulon: It still is, considering all the devastation. People on the internet talk about how this area is so poorly maintained. That’s a bunch of crap. These were all nice houses out here.

“We lost everything.”

Rehak: What do you hope will happen at this point?

Hulon: I hope we can recover some of our life savings and complete the work that we still need to do. I’m not getting any younger. We just need a little cash. I don’t want to leave my wife with nothing. 

“It Would Probably Kill Me”

Rehak: How do you feel about having invested your life savings in restoring a house that may flood again?

Hulon: (Choking up) I don’t know. If we flood again, I’ll probably move to Louisiana and live with my sister. Jesus, I can’t live through that again, I’ve got flood insurance now, but I don’t, I don’t, I don’t know. I’ll probably move to Louisiana. I don’t want to. But I don’t think I could take another flood. I mean, it would probably kill me.

Everybody Helping Everybody

Rehak: Is there anything else you want to tell me, John?

Hulon: How our little neighborhood came together. I mean, it was just amazing. Everybody on the street was just like family. Everybody was helping everybody. But of course, all of Kingwood is that way. That’s what makes this such a great community.

Posted by Bob Rehak on August 07, 2020

1074 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 323 Since Imelda