Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) spending data obtained via a Freedom of Information Act Request shows that countywide:
Spending now tops $2 billion since Hurricane Harvey back in 2017
It modestly rebounded between the first and second quarters of this year
More money is now going to land acquisition and construction compared to other phases of the project lifecycle, while less money is going to upfront studies
On a per watershed basis, watersheds with a majority of Low-to-Moderate Income (LMI) residents still get far more than those with a minority of LMI residents.
Spending in the San Jacinto Watershed continues to lag despite high flood risk
Spending has fallen off a cliff in some watersheds.
For details, see below.
Modest Rebound Compared to 1Q24
The chart below shows HCFCD spending in 27 quarters since Hurricane Harvey. It shows a dramatic uptick between 2018 and 2021, followed by an even more dramatic decline through the first quarter of 2023. Since then, spending has averaged slightly more than $60 million per quarter, about half of the peak in 2021.
What accounts for the lower totals recently?
Changes in leadership and personnel turnover at HCFCD
Numerous changes in “equity” allocation formulas that required reprioritization of projects
Lengthy delays at Harris County Community Services involving more than $750 million in U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development funds.
COVID
Inflation during COVID forcing a re-evaluation of the Bond project list
The 2018 Flood Bond was considered a 10-year project. We are now almost 6 years into the bond, which was approved on the first anniversary of Harvey, but the money is only about 40% spent. That means projects are moving slower than originally anticipated. And that gives inflation a chance to gobble up a higher percentage of them.
More Money Now Going to Land Acquisition and Construction
On a positive note, more projects are moving off the drawing boards and into construction. You can see this trend most clearly by comparing two pie charts that show spending broken down by project phase. The first shows spending since Harvey and the second shows spending during the last quarter.
Looking back at the last 27 quarters, HCFCD spent 76% of its funds on right-of-way acquisition and construction. But during the last quarter, those combined percentages jumped to 85% – up 9%.
Meanwhile, feasibility studies and preliminary engineering reviews fell from 8% to 3% during the comparable periods.
Perhaps we’re starting to mitigate more than ruminate.
Since HarveyDuring second quarter this year
The following table may make it easier for you to compare percentages if you are viewing this on a phone.
Spending in Watersheds with Majority LMI Populations
The percentage of LMI residents in a watershed helps determine eligibility for flood-mitigation grants from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
Harris County has 23 watersheds. Of those, 8 have a majority of LMI residents.
Regardless, since Harvey, those 8 received almost as much money as the other 15 put together.
Since Harvey
Looking only at the last quarter, that trend has moderated somewhat.
Second quarter this year only
But on a per watershed basis, the 8 LMI watersheds still each receive an average of 5.5% of the budget. Meanwhile, the 15 other watersheds each receive an average of 3.7%.
This is largely a function of the weighting given to LMI-majority projects in Harris County’s equity prioritization project scoring formula.
Spending by Watershed: A Study in Extremes
Comparing bar graphs of spending by watershed shows extreme differences between the highs and lows that are getting wider.
Since Harvey, difference between high and low equaled 100 to 1.
Note also the disappearance of the middle ground.
During second quarter, difference between high and low equaled 375 to 1.
During the second quarter, the entire San Jacinto Watershed – the county’s largest – received less than $400,000 of support…while moving up from 13th place to 11th.
Harris County watersheds in the upper San Jacinto River Basin include Spring, Cypress, Willow, Little Cypress, Luce and San Jacinto. They all funnel through the Lake Houston Area.
Since Harvey, they have received about 20% of HCFCD spending. But they drain an area about 50% larger than where the rest of the other 80% of the money went.
And as we saw in May, that can have a huge impact on flood damage.
Harris County and the Houston area are receiving $863 million from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) via the Texas General Land Office (GLO) for disaster relief and flood mitigation. So, on Thursday, April 25, 2024, GLO Commissioner Dr. Dawn Buckingham met with a group of Lake-Houston-Area leaders to discuss the area’s flood mitigation needs.
The meeting, arranged by State Representative Charles Cunningham, also included Director Tina Petersen of the Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD); Director Thao Costis of Harris County Community Services (CSD); Humble Mayor Norman Funderburk; and Dustin Hodges, Chief of Staff for City of Houston Council Member Fred Flickinger.
(L to R) Dustin Hodges; Tina Petersen; Thao Costis; Dr. Dawn Buckingham; Rep. Charles Cunningham; Norman Funderburk; Alice Rekeweg; Scott Elmer, HCFCD; and Kathleen Jordan.
Projects Vie for Funding
As reported on 4/23, Buckingham was in Houston to discuss Disaster Relief and Mitigation projects totaling $863 million. But there are more deserving projects than money to fund them all. So Buckingham, her team, HCFCD and CSD met with area leaders to discuss needs.
The GLO administers the distribution of HUD funds in Texas. Among Lake Houston Area projects discussed for funding were:
No commitments were made at the meeting, but the mood was positive and everyone left smiling.
Buckingham is still collecting information. She listened attentively, asked probing questions and left with a better understanding of the area’s needs.
Splitting the Woodridge Basin into two phases helps ensure that at least one compartment will get funded and provide enough mitigation to let the Taylor Gully Channel Improvements move forward.
Other Topics
Several other topics came up toward the end of the hour-long meeting. They included sedimentation, dredging, and the need for sand to nourish beaches along the Texas coast. The GLO needs sand to replace eroding beaches…and this area needs to remove sand collecting in streams and Lake Houston.
That raised the tantalizing possibility of collaboration for mutual benefit and solving two problems at once.
More news to follow.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/26/24
2432 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Buckingham-Meeting.jpg?fit=1100%2C413&ssl=14131100adminadmin2024-04-26 11:38:552024-08-01 16:41:46Area Leaders Meet with GLO Commissioner Buckingham
City of Houston District E Council Member Fred Flickinger addressed a group of local executives at the Kingwood Country Club this morning. He covered a wide range of topics, both in his talk and during Q&A. They included the status of five flood-related topics for the Lake Houston Area:
New Gates for the Lake Houston Dam
Seasonal Lake Lowering
Additional dredging in Lake Houston
Kingwood Diversion Ditch expansion
Last weekend’s flooding on Northpark Drive
Flickinger addressing the Kingwood Executive Group at the Kingwood Country Club on 4/24/24
Floodgate Construction Could Start in ’25 or ’26
Within two sentences of standing up, Flickinger got straight to the subject of flooding and new, bigger floodgates for the Lake Houston Dam. He said, “Obviously, the big thing is getting additional gates. That is currently pending a FEMA review and approval.”
He continued, “We have about $150 million secured for those. Much of that has come via Rep. Dan Crenshaw’s office. Also the State, thanks to Representatives Dan Huberty and Charles Cunningham, and Dave Martin, my predecessor. Stephen Costello [the City’s Flood Czar] has also all done great work. They’ve all really done yeomen’s jobs getting money for the dam gates.”
Looking S.New gates will be built in the earthen portion of the dam to the left of the four small gates you see now.
“We’re looking at construction probably in late 2025 or sometime in 2026,” said Flickinger. “That’s obviously the biggest key to reducing flooding.”
Flickinger also said that he believes the current Mayor remains committed to the project.
Seasonal Lake Lowering
Regarding lowering Lakes Houston and Conroe, Flickinger said the City and SJRA have moved to an event-driven strategy rather than a seasonal one. Automatically lowering the level of Lake Conroe twice a year to reduce flood risk in the Lake Houston Area generated pushback from Lake Conroe residents.
For some time now, the politically divisive strategy has been replaced by an “as-needed” lake-lowering policy in one or both lakes depending on where and when rain falls.
However, the “as needed” policy requires precise forecasting. And several times lately, rain has shifted at the last minute. Ironically, that supports the need for bigger gates that release water faster. They can create extra storage in Lake Houston while still reducing the lead time needed, so forecasters can be absolutely certain of the need to lower the lake.
After all, that’s the drinking water supply for more than 2 million people. You don’t want to lower it needlessly if it won’t be refilled right away.
More Dredging on Tap
Flickinger next addressed the need for more dredging. He said that the City is currently removing another 800,000 yd³ of sediment between Kings Point and FM1960.
“Again, funding for that largely came from Rep. Dan Crenshaw’s office,” he said. “Some people in the government questioned whether that was Harvey-related sediment. But we got the funding! And dredging has started. So that’s a really good thing.”
Diversion Ditch/Walnut Lane Bridge
“The next issue with flooding,” said Flickinger, “is really the Kingwood Diversion Ditch.” The ditch cuts south from St. Martha’s Catholic Church to River Grove Park through the western portion of Kingwood.
“The Walnut Lane Bridge has about a fourth of the surface area below it that the Kingwood Drive and North Park Bridges have. Because of that, it works somewhat like a dam. Crenshaw just secured $4 million to address that, but we have got to have a cost/benefit ratio of one or greater, which will be a challenge. So, we’re working on that.”
Looking north along Diversion Ditch. Notice how it narrows under the Walnut Lane Bridge.
“And that money probably won’t become available for another six months. Hopefully, we can get that cost/benefit analysis to where we need it by then and use that money to rebuild the Walnut Lane Bridge. It’s a huge deal that affects Trailwood, Forest Cove, and even people who live along Bens Branch.”
“Part of the water from Ben’s branch is actually supposed to go to the lake via the Diversion Ditch,” said Flickinger. (That’s how the ditch got its name.) However, Flickinger noted that when the Diversion Ditch backs up, water goes down Bens Branch instead.
“And we’re getting more and more of that because of the development in Montgomery County…That’s part of why Kingwood High School flooded.”
Northpark Flooding
Last weekend, Northpark Drive flooded near the construction zone.
At the time, I conjectured that one or more of the drains may have been blocked. Flickinger revealed the cause this morning.
He said the drain was never tied into the new drainage system.
“It turns out that they had a change in foremen on the job, and one of the drains was not connected to the storm sewer.”
Houston City Council Member Fred Flickinger
“That is what caused that big fiasco. Now our office is going to contact the construction team every time we have a significant rain event and ask them to double check, so we don’t have any issues obstructing stormwater,” said Flickinger.
“Anytime you’ve got construction, there’s a certain amount of mess associated with it. But obviously, we don’t need somebody causing flooding by forgetting or blocking something.”
Looking E along Northpark on Sunday morning, 4/21/24 at area where drain was not tied in.
Before Flickinger had to leave for a meeting downtown, it became clear to everyone in the room that flooding was one of his primary concerns.
For someone who’s been in the job less than four months, he was very aware of the complex intricacies and interdependencies of the Lake Houston Area’s drainage problems. And that was very encouraging news!
Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/24/24
2430 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/COH-CM-Fred-Flickinger-at-KWCC.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2024-04-24 13:32:152024-04-24 13:32:16Flickinger Provides Updates On Gates, Dredging, Northpark, More
In a transmittal to Harris County Commissioners Court today, Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) updated commissioners on how it hopes to spend $863 million in U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds.
Two projects in the Kingwood Area remain funding priorities: Taylor Gully Channel Improvements and Woodridge Village Stormwater Detention. However, the stormwater detention, currently listed as an alternate backup project, is being split up into two smaller projects to help improve funding chances for the most critical component. See more details below.
Ins and Outs of Funding
The HUD money comes in two “buckets” with different requirements – Disaster Relief ($322 million) and Mitigation ($541 million). Both buckets fall under HUD’s Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG). CDBG’s flexibility lets people and communities design and implement strategies tailored to their own needs and priorities.
When I last reported on the CDBG lists, the Lake Houston Area had one project in each bucket.
In Disaster Relief, the Woodridge Village Stormwater Detention Basin was “below the line.” That means it was an alternate on the backup list; a primary project would have had to have been canceled for it to receive funding.
In Mitigation, Taylor Gully Improvements were above the line, i.e., primary recommendations.
Extent of Woodridge excavation when paused before applying to HUD
Changes Outlined in Transmittal
The latest updated project lists feature five main changes. They affect both Lake Houston Area projects. But first, let me explain the others that are changing, because their financial impact affects everything else.
Transferred the Boudreaux Basin (Phase 1) from the DR list to Mitigation, so that it could benefit from the longer timeline for Mitigation projects. This project is between Willow Creek and SH99 at Huffsmith Kohrville Road. The transfer will free up another $38.6 million on the DR list.
Thus, you would think approximately $21.3 million was freed up on the DR list. That would theoretically let the Woodridge Stormwater Detention Basin move up from “below the funding line.” However, it remains below…at least for now.
Moreover the Woodridge Stormwater Detention Basin has morphed into two projects. One provides the detention required to help mitigate Taylor Gully now. The other provides an extra safety margin as a hedge against future developments.
Splitting the detention up into two smaller pieces gives HCFCD more flexibility and greater confidence that the most important part will get funded.
The Woodridge/Taylor Gully discussion in the document is a bit confusing unless you speak HUD.
“The second basin will provide additional regional stormwater detention. Splitting the project helps us ensure the compartment of the Woodridge basin that mitigates Taylor Gully can move forward,” said Crouser.
She concluded, “The ultimate goal is to eventually construct both compartments. This follows our traditional rationale for phasing projects when possible and practicable. Both compartments will be advanced to bid-ready state using local dollars. That will give us the maximum flexibility to advance the projects.”
Numbers for Harris County Flood Control District’s (HCFCD) first quarter are in. They show several spending trends.
Spending Decline Continues
They show that the pace of overall flood-mitigation spending continues to decline, though there are signs that it could turn around soon – depending on your basis of comparison.
Year over year, the totals show a pronounced decline. Annualized first-quarter spending is now less half of what it was at the post-Harvey peak in 2020.
All data for this and other graphs in this post was compiled from HCFCD spreadsheets in response to a FOIA request.
To underscore that trend, spending declined from $74 million to $51 million between the last quarter of 2023 and the first quarter of 2024 – a 31% decrease in one quarter. So I checked for seasonality.
Spending often drops between the fourth and first quarters, but it’s not consistent.
From the 7-year chart above, you can see that spending dropped five times after the holidays and increased two.
However, change the basis of comparison and you can see an encouraging sign. If you compare the first quarter of 2023 with the first quarter of 2024, the spending is up by 20% – from about $41 million to $51 million.
Where the Money Goes by Watershed
Harris County has 23 watersheds. The chart below shows the total of HCFCD spending in each since Hurricane Harvey. Variation between Brays on the high end and Galveston Bay on the low is more than 100 to 1.
From data supplied by HCFCD in response to FOIA request
Comparing the graphs above and below shows where the action shifted in Q1. Notice that Brays shifts from first to eighth place. White Oak moves from fourth to first. And Halls jumped from ninth to third.
To learn more about specific projects in each of these watersheds, click on a watershed’s link on HCFCD’s home page.
What Drives Investments in Some Watersheds and Not in Others
To a large extent: damage and political priorities. I compiled the chart below from Harris County Federal Reports. One of the first things you notice is that Brays is on the left and Galveston Bay is toward the right.
Data compiled from HCFCD Federal Reports
The next two charts show how prioritizing projects in low-to-moderate income (LMI) areas can skew spending in different watersheds. The first shows LMI funding since Harvey. The second shows LMI funding in the first quarter of 2024. Comparing them, you can see how higher and higher percentages of the total are going to watersheds with a majority of LMI residents.
In the longer run, about half the money has gone to watersheds with a majority LMI population. But currently, about two-thirds goes to LMI-majority watersheds.
Keep in mind that although you see two categories in these pie charts, the categories are not equal. The blue area contains eight watersheds and the orange area 15 – almost twice as many. Said another way…
Half as many watersheds now get twice as much money.
The eight LMI watersheds include: Brays, Greens, White Oak, Halls, Sims, Hunting, Vince, and Goose Creek/Spring Gully.
The government defines LMI as “below the average income for the region.” In the other 15 areas, a majority of residents make “above the average income for the region.”
Harris County uses an Equity Prioritization Formula to select projects it will fund. The formula places a premium the percentage of low-to-moderate income individuals who live in an area. The theory: low-income families are less able to repair their homes after a flood.
Other Variables Skew Funding
The deeper you dig into these numbers, the more you can see other variables that skew funding, too.
Dense building next to bayous can increase cost of land for mitigation projects by making buyouts necessary to widen channels or build stormwater detention basins.
Previous mitigation spending – Some watersheds received extensive mitigation before Harvey.
Spending by others, i.e., the Army Corps, which is not reflected here
Timing of studies – Some studies that would justify grants haven’t even been completed yet, whereas others completed before Harvey were shovel ready when the flood bond came along.
Land acquisition and construction represent the two largest component costs of flood mitigation. Some large projects haven’t reached those stages yet.
Building code variations – Newer codes generally stipulate safer standards, reducing flood risk and damage in newer areas at no cost to the public.
Frontier Program – The county sometimes acquires land in developing areas to prevent future flood damage. Prevention is always cheaper than correction, but that land can be expensive.
Speed of partnership funding – Just last week, Harris County, the City of Houston and GLO reached an agreement related to $322 million in Harvey Disaster Relief Funds. That will make more money available to watersheds that were heavily damaged during Harvey.
Protection of employment centers, such as the Medical Center, Downtown, the Ship Channel, etc.
Someday soon, I hope to do a series of posts on projects within each watershed and the specifics of why they were funded.
The San Jacinto Gap
For now, let me discuss just one. The San Jacinto is Harris County’s largest watershed. It had the highest flooding in the County during Harvey. It also had a quarter of all the flood-related deaths during Harvey.
The San Jacinto had the eighth most damage, but ranks 13th in funding since Harvey. Of the twelve watersheds that received more funding, five had less damage.
Cypress Creek has received more than 4X the San Jacinto.
Little Cypress has received 3X more.
Addicks has received 2.5X more.
Clear Creek and Willow Creek have each received approximately 50% more.
And most of those watersheds have more affluent populations than the San Jacinto. So how do you account for the gap between severity of flooding and flood-mitigation funding?
For one thing, most of the San Jacinto watershed lies outside of Harris County. And some commissioners have flat out rejected spending money to build projects outside the county even though the 2018 flood bond permitted it.
Protecting areas like Humble, Atascocita and Kingwood will most likely require building upstream projects outside the county. Until the political winds change, funding for such projects will most likely have to come from the state or federal government.
The Texas General Land Office (GLO) is currently conducting a final review on more than $498 million in grant applications from Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) and Harris County Community Services Department (CSD). That’s out of a total allocation of $1,072,033,863 allocated to Harris County. And that means projects for almost half the Harvey money allocated to Harris County will soon go to Washington for a final review by HUD.
Additional applications for the rest of the money will soon follow the projects listed below. They will be submitted “on a rolling basis,” according to Brittany Eck, a GLO spokesperson.
The GLO administers all HUD funds in the state of Texas.
GLO Working Side by Side with Harris County
GLO has a “Strike Team” embedded at HCFCD headquarters, working side by side with both CSD and HCFCD to eliminate any delays on the HUD applications. The billion dollars allocated to the county falls into several different programs, each with different deadlines and complex rules.
“We are currently in the ‘Eligibility Phase,’ which is the most critical, but also the most time consuming. During this phase we must ensure that the projects proposed sync with HUD regulations in terms of LMI beneficiaries, environmental impacts and more,” said Eck.
No Performance Benchmarks Missed So Far
“It is important to note that Harris County has not missed a performance benchmark yet on the HUD applications. The GLO is working with Harris County to ensure all administrative paperwork is completed in accordance with federal regulations. This protects both Harris County and the State of Texas from incurring costly ‘findings’ during the post-project audit process.”
A finding during a post-project audit could potentially cause HUD to claw back part of its grant money. So it’s vitally important to ensure all regulations are followed to the letter.
Three Main Batches of Money
The three main pots of money include:
Harris County CSD – $208,152,174 in CDBG-MIT funds
HCFCD – $322,033,863 in CDBG-DR funds
HCFCD – $541,847,826 in CDBG-MIT funds
That brings the total of original allocations to $1,072,033,863.
Since this involves the government, it also includes acronyms. So let me explain some of the terms.
CDBG stands for Community Development Block Grants. These grants provide communities with resources to address a wide range of development needs, providing projects meet one or more of HUD’s three defined national objectives. Namely, a CDBG project must:
Benefit to low- and moderate- income (LMI) persons
Aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight and/or
Meet an urgent need (UN), especially one impacting public health and safety.
But what about the rest of those acronyms?
DR stands for Disaster Relief
MIT stands for Mitigation.
What’s the difference? According to HUD, CDBG-DR grants provide housing, infrastructure, and economic revitalization assistance to impacted areas. The CDBG-Mitigation (CDBG-MIT) program provides additional funding to lessen the impact of future disasters.
To learn more about HUD applications for the specific Harris County projects, see below.
Harris County CDBG-MIT
Harris County Community Services Department was allocated $208,152,174 in CDBG-MIT funds for infrastructure, planning, and project delivery.
The contract was executed on 08/31/2022. All projects in this batch of funding must close out by 8/31/27.
The $208 million breaks down into three subcategories.
Infrastructure programs – $154 million
Planning programs – $37.5 million
Project delivery – $16.7 million
Infrastructure Programs
Of 11 projects initially proposed in this category, the three largest in terms of dollar amounts – totaling $75M of the $154M – have been submitted for preliminary review.
$37,500,000.00
Pine Trails Subdivision Drainage Improvements Involves upgrading approximately 63,650 LF of drainage systems and developing two (2) detention ponds in Harris County Precinct No. 2. 66.97% LMI
$20,545,326.00
Ralston Acres Subdivision Drainage Improvements Involves upgrading approximately 15,250 LF of drainage systems and developing two (2) detention ponds in Harris County Precinct No. 1 and Ralston Acres Subdivision. Income Surveys TBD
$16,954,674.00
North Forest Subdivision Drainage Improvements Involves upgrading approximately 19,700 LF of drainage systems and developing one (1) detention pond in Harris County Precinct No. 1 and the North Forest Subdivision. Income Surveys TBD
As of 3/19/24
Planning Programs
Four projects – costing a total of $16.5M out of the $37.5 million – have been submitted for preliminary review out of the 23 proposed planning projects.
$500,000.00
Harris County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The Harris County Office of Homeland Security & Emergency Management is seeking to update the Harris County Hazard Mitigation Plan. The plan will develop strategies and action items to minimize vulnerabilities and damages and include 37 participating jurisdictions.
$12,500,000.00
Drainage Master Plan for Unincorporated Harris County The planning project will evaluate drainage infrastructure capacity status and deficiencies in Harris County’s unincorporated areas. It will also guide the identification and implementation of mitigation alternatives to reduce flood risk.
$500,000.00
Halls Bayou Watershed Flood Risk Analysis Study The scope of the Halls Bayou watershed study is to analyze the best available data incorporating the Halls Bayou watershed flood risk reduction-related project and to evaluate existing program benefits using the new Atlas 14 precipitation data to identify additional potential flood reduction needs within the watershed.
$3,000,000.00
The Evacuation Routes Study The Evacuation Routes Study aims to enhance transportation resilience in road-flooding-prone areas of Unincorporated Harris County.
As of 3/19/24
Project Delivery:
$16,652,174 of the $208,152,174 County allocation will be used to administer the funds for projects.
HCFCD Disaster Relief
HCFCD was allocated $322,033,863 in CDBG-DR funds for infrastructure projects.
HCFCD submitted 13 projects costing a total of $317,494,724.78 for CDBG-DR grants and is putting up local funds in the amount of $45,899,821 for those same projects. All of the applications have been officially submitted and are being reviewed for HUD eligibility completeness by the GLO.
The HCFCD/CDBG-DR contract was executed on 11/27/2023 and must be closed out by 3/31/2026. The 13 projects include:
$20,361,143.56
Arbor Oaks Stormwater Detention Basin To construct one 431-acre-feet stormwater detention basin within the White Oak Bayou watershed. 60.55% LMI
$20,247,760.00
Isom Stormwater Detention Basin To construct one 550-acre-feet regional stormwater detention basin within Halls Bayou. 74.23% LMI
$8,692,644.00
Lauder Stormwater Detention Basin To construct one 341.47-acre-feet stormwater detention basin within Greens Bayou. 78.10% LMI
$20,361,143.56
Brookglen Stormwater Detention Basin To construct one 33.45 acre-feet stormwater detention basin within Armand Bayou Watershed. 52.54% LMI
$25,390,047.00
Kluge Stormwater Detention Basin – Phase 3 To construct one 350 acre-feet stormwater detention basin within Little Cypress Creek watershed. 14.25% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
$77,899,107.00
Greens Bayou Mid-Reach Channel Conveyance Improvements To rehabilitate 19,008 LF of channel conveyance along Greens Bayou. 78.61% LMI
$18,878,499.00
Cypress Creek Channel Rehabilitation, Main Stem, Batch 5 To rehabilitate 7,500 LF of channel conveyance along Cypress Creek. 49.18% LMI, but qualifies under Urgent Need
$36,710,019.00
Dinner Creek Stormwater Detention Basin ‐ Phase 1 To construct two (2) detention basins, northwest and southeast of Dinner Creek. 52.36% LMI
$7,642,742.00
Barker Reservoir Channel Rehabilitation, Repair Package 2 To rehabilitate 18,528 LF of channel conveyance at 19 different sites along Barker Reservoir. 21.64% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
$9,742,750.00
Stormwater Detention Basin along Jackson Bayou To rehabilitate 2,025 LF of channel conveyance and construct one (1) 15 acre-feet stormwater detention basin within Jackson Bayou. 60.78% LMI
$23,496,000.00
Addicks Reservoir Channel Rehabilitation & Restoration, Repair Package 3 To rehabilitate 49,296 LF of channel conveyance at 49 sites along the Addicks Reservoir. 37.04% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
$23,844,000.00
East TC Jester Detention Basin – Compartment 1B To construct one 725 acre-feet stormwater detention basin within the Cypress Creek watershed. 36.14% but qualifies under Urgent Need
$12,293,732.00
Keegans Bayou Stormwater Detention Basin Near Old Richmond Road – Phase 1 To construct one stormwater detention basin within the Brays Bayou watershed. 56.71% LMI
As of 3/19/24
HCFCD CDBG-MIT
Harris County Flood Control District was allocated $541,847,826.00 in CDBG-MIT funds for infrastructure hazard mitigation projects.
Five projects – totaling $73 million – have been submitted for preliminary HUD eligibility completeness review out of the 19 mitigation projects originally proposed.
Halls Bayou Channel Conveyance Improvements Downstream of Hopper (HALLS HOPPER) Includes widening approximately 4,525 LF of the existing channel along the left (east) bank from downstream of Hopper Road to just upstream of Pinewood Village Park. 70.03% LMI
$10,427,946.00
Hahl North Stormwater Detention Basin (Hahl North) Includes construction of one 220 acres-feet of stormwater detention basin adjacent to Halls Bayou and the widening of approximately 2,100 LF of the existing channel along Halls Bayou. 73.65% LMI
$17,300,036.00
West TC Jester Stormwater Detention Basin Will create one 414 acre-feet stormwater detention basin in the Cypress Creek watershed. 36.13% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
$11,987,888.00
Taylor Gully Channel Conveyance Improvements Includes approximately 13,118 LF of stormwater drainage channel improvements in the affected stretch of channel. 20.92% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
$30,007,445.00
Boudreaux Stormwater Detention Basin – Phase 1 Will build one 458 acre-feet stormwater detention basin west of Holderrieth Road along Willow Creek. 33.59% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
Altogether, the HUD applications must benefit at least 50% LMI individuals according to HUD regulations governing these funds.
Taylor Gully looking S from the Montgomery County Line. Up to 600 homes flooded twice here in 2019, after Perry Homes clearcut 270 acres without installing the required detention basin capacity.One of the HUD applications seeks to improve the channel.
Even though some projects drop below the 50% threshold, as a group they meet the requirement. Those that fall below the threshold also qualify under HUD’s Urgent Need mandate.
Extensions Requested, But Not Yet Confirmed
GLO has requested extensions for all these projects. While HUD reportedly seems favorable, written confirmation has not yet been received. That places a premium on HUD applications that can be executed quickly.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/19/24 based on information provided by the Texas GLO
2394 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/20230124-DJI_0785.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=17991200adminadmin2024-03-19 16:42:062024-03-19 21:41:51GLO Reviewing HUD Applications for Harris County Projects Totaling Half Billion Dollars
Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) flood-mitigation spending finished down for the third year in a row last year. Spending for all four quarters totaled $243.1 million, a little more than half of its peak in 2020.
Spending for 2023 was 56% of its 20-year peak in 2020 at $433 million. Here are the exact amounts spent by HCFCD year by year since 2000.
Possible Reasons for Slowdown
HCFCD flood-mitigation spending increased each quarter last year, but the total wasn’t enough to prevent another annual decline.
HCFCD watchers have conjectured about possible reasons for the slowdown. They include:
The departures of key executives who sold the 2018 flood bond
A focus on planning how to spend $850 million in U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds administered by the Texas General Land Office (GLO)
Loss of experience in related county departments, such as IT, that provide support to HCFCD.
Bond Fully Funded, But Inflation Taking Toll
Despite the slowdown, there was some very good news last year. During 2023, thanks to those HUD funds, the 2018 flood bond became fully funded.
The original bond contained approximately $5 billion in projects. But voters approved only $2.5 billion. The ambitious project list associated with the bond contained a bet that HCFCD could raise as much money from partners as it did from voters. And last year, the District did just that. Partner commitments now exceed another $2.5 billion.
Now, HCFCD must spend the money before inflation steals it away. Inflation has already reduced the purchasing power of bond funds by 15-20% in the last four years. Twenty percent of a $5 billion, is another billion that the grant writers must raise just to stay even.
Where is Money Going? Will There Be Enough to Finish All Projects?
That raises two questions, “Where is the money going?” It certainly isn’t going proportionally to all watersheds or precincts.
The four graphs and tables below show where the flood-bond money and partner money has gone since Harvey and during the last quarter.
County-wide projects include such things as planning, MAAPnext, subdivision drainage projects and preliminary planning for flood tunnels (see Z-level projects at end of list).
Q3 2017 through end of 2023.
Note that “Since Harvey” includes a year’s worth of spending not in the flood bond. Voters passed the bond on the first anniversary of Harvey. The District spent $172 million during that year. So the actual amount of bond/partner funds spent to date should total a bit over $1.8 billion.
Q4 2023 Spending Shows Shifts in Some Spending Priorities
Compare those figures with the last quarter of 2023 to see how priorities have or haven’t changed.
By comparing this bar chart with the one immediately above, we can see that relative spending in the San Jacinto watershed has remained consistent if dismal. The county’s largest watershed ranked 14th since Harvey and 13th last quarter.
Other noteworthy observations:
Brays Bayou spending dropped to fourth place from its perennial spot atop the pyramid. Most projects in Project Brays are now completed.
Willow Creek dropped from eighth place to last.
Sims Bayou jumped from 12th place to 6th.
Spending in the Little Cypress Creek watershed jumped to first place from fifth…even outpacing county-wide spending. That may be related to engineering for several large land purchases made earlier in the bond for the Harris County Frontier Program. The Frontier Program buys land in optimal locations in developing watersheds for flood-mitigation projects, such as detention basins. Then it leases capacity back to developers.
Fourteen watersheds received less than a million dollars in spending last quarter.
Based on data obtained via FOIA Request
And four watersheds of Harris County’s 23 watersheds received less than $100,000 last quarter.
The difference in spending between the high and low watersheds last quarter was more than 500 to 1!
I need more time to dig into these numbers. Look for additional analysis in the days to come.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/22/2024
2337 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/2024/01/Spend-By-Year-Since-2000-Graf.png?fit=1862%2C1100&ssl=111001862adminadmin2024-01-22 21:04:372024-01-22 21:31:38HCFCD Flood-Mitigation Spending Down for Third Straight Year
On 12/13/23, Texas General Land Office (GLO) Commissioner Dawn Buckingham, M.D. announced the approval of Coastal Erosion Planning & Response Act (CEPRA) funding for a Bolivar Peninsula Beach and Dune Restoration project.
The beach-restoration project seeks to:
Restore additional essential beach and dune systems
Provide crucial protection for Highway 87, Bolivar Peninsula’s only hurricane evacuation route
According to the GLO, the CEPRA funds – initially aimed at an engineering study – will provide both economic and coastal resilience benefits.
Part of SH 87 Already Washed Away
Highway 87 once had a stretch between Sea Rim State Park and High Island that washed out repeatedly over the decades. TXDoT closed it permanently in 1990. Today, eastbound SH 87 stops at High Island. Evacuees must then turn north on SH 124 toward I-10.
The stretch being protected provides the only remaining land-based evacuation route for the 2,800 residents of the Bolivar Peninsula. Seventeen people died there on September 13, 2008, during Hurricane Ike.
The scope of this project: to develop focused beach nourishment engineering design specifications for a U.S. Army Corps permit. Beach nourishment will alleviate tidal impacts threatening SH 87’s eastern terminus on Bolivar Peninsula near High Island.
Satellite Image Sequence Shows Severity of Shoreline Erosion
This series of Google Earth images shows how shoreline erosion now has waves lapping at the shoulder of the highway in this area.
State Highway 87 near High Island in 1974. Note dunes between highway and broad beach.Same area immediately after Ike. Note erosion of beach and deposition inland from SH87.Same area in 2023. Note continued erosion of beach toward highway.Enlargement of nearby stretch shows high tide lapping at riprap which maintenance crews are replenishing (2023).
The beach nourishment engineering design specifications under this project are focused on an approximately four miles of the Bolivar Gulf-facing shoreline beginning at the Galveston-Chambers County line and extending west toward Gilchrist. This is where tides come closest to Hwy. 87 on a recurring basis.
Improving Resilience
“Ultimate benefits from this beach nourishment design work would include protection of the peninsula’s only hurricane evacuation route,” said a GLO spokesperson.
The CEPRA Program helps communities across the Texas coast implement erosion response projects and related studies to understand and reduce coastal erosion as it threatens public beaches, natural resources, coastal development, public infrastructure, and public and private property.
The Bolivar Peninsula Special Utility District, Bolivar Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, Galveston County Road Administrator Lee Crowder, Galveston County Judge Mark Henry, and Galveston County Precinct 2 Commissioner Joe Giusti played pivotal roles in securing this funding.
Nature-Based Solutions Help Protect People and Wildlife
Commissioner Buckingham said, “As a Texan who grew up near the coast and lived on Galveston Island for more than a decade, preserving our state’s precious shorelines and their communities is a top priority.”
FEMA has found that such nature-based solutions increase quality of life for both humans and wildlife. And make no mistake. This is an important wintering and nesting area for many species of wildfowl that depend on the wetlands in this area.
Snow geese flocking near High Island in December 2008, shortly after Ike.
Inflation has reduced the 2018 Flood Bond’s purchasing power. The general rate of inflation during the last five years adds up to 20%. That could potentially eliminate one fifth of the projects in the flood bond.
It’s a serious concern for the people whose mitigation projects have been put at the end of the line by the County’s Equity Prioritization Framework. Some residents may never see any benefit from their tax dollars, which are going to other areas.
Here’s how Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) will look at projects that now have an uncertain future.
Local Costs Consistent with General Rate of Inflation
In a presentation to the Harris County Community Flood Resilience Task Force, Jesal Shah PE, the new Chief Project Delivery Officer for HCFCD, discussed the issue of inflation. Shah, a Houston native, has been in his job since May, 2023. He previously led flood-risk reduction planning, design, engineering, and construction efforts for the government of British Columbia.
Shah cited 15-20% increases in construction, material, and right-of-way acquisition costs for Harris County flood-mitigation projects.
This and other screen captures below arefrom Shah’s presentation to Flood Task Forceon 12/14/23.
Summary of 2018 Flood-Bond Funding To Date
The 2018 flood bond contained $2.5 billion in funding for approximately $5 billion worth of projects. Partnership funding, i.e., grants, were supposed to make up the difference.
And at this point, all of the partnership funding has been secured thanks to an infusion of $825 million in Community Development Block Grant funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Texas General Land Office (GLO).
“Anticipated”should now be removed from this slide.
That’s very good news.
63% of Bonds Sold Already
Shah says that the County has sold $1.575 billion worth of bonds to date, almost two thirds of the original $2.5 billion.
Of the two thirds, about half the money has been spent or “encumbered.” Encumbered means the money is committed to projects and difficult to move. For instance, a project may be in construction, but not yet completed.
The other half has been committed to projects, but not yet encumbered. For instance, bonds may have been sold, but the construction job may not have been awarded yet.
See below.
Securing the partner funding is huge good news. But the impact of inflation is worrisome. To help deal with that, the County is re-evaluating all projects associated with the flood bond.
How Projects are Being Re-evaluated
Shah cited three types of projects listed in the original bond. Those with:
Well defined scope and accurate estimates.
Clear scope but inaccurate estimates. For instance, the Lauder basin has almost tripled its original cost estimate.
Vague scope and unreliable estimates.
See examples below.
To complicate matters, some backstop funding from the Flood Resilience Trust is no longer available because of new “guidance” from Commissioners Court. That will eliminate $343 million in funding flexibility.
And keep this in mind. The bond program is far from complete. We could easily see another 15-20% of inflation before its over. So what to do?
Sharpening the Pencil
Shah’s team is dividing the remaining bond projects into two piles.
Those with clear scope and funding will be completed.
Those without clear scope or funding will be re-evaluated.
Shah hopes to present an updated project list to Commissioners Court sometime during the second quarter of 2024.
Shah has already taken a first pass at re-evaluating the bond’s project list. Of the 181 projects identified in the bond:
30 have already been completed or eliminated.
63 will continue moving forward.
88 (almost half) will need more funding or more clarity (i.e., more engineering studies/tighter estimates) to move forward.
The slide below shows the guiding principles for evaluating the 88 projects that need more funding or clarity.
Lack of Balance Could Jeopardize Future Bond Offerings
One possible way to mitigate the toll of inflation involves phasing projects in areas that have already received large amounts of funding so that projects in areas that received little funding could move forward.
For instance, in a project that involves multiple stormwater detention basins, one or more of the basins could be delayed until the next bond. Meanwhile, delaying that basin could free up money for a basin in a different watershed.
However, during Q&A, Shah said he has no plans to phase projects.
A lack of equitable distribution could jeopardize future bond offerings.
And many areas have received little funding from this bond.
More than a 100 to 1 difference exists between projects on the left and right.
In the future, voters who saw no benefit from the 2018 flood bond might, once again, feel victimized by bait-and-switch tactics.
Selling future bonds will require restoring faith in the fairness of government. And that will require spreading bond funds around so that everyone – in all parts of the county – sees some benefit from them. That’s my humble opinion.
When HCFCD presents its updated project list to Commissioners Court in the second quarter of 2024, it will be interesting to see whether Commissioners and the County Judge agree with it.
John Whitmire’s landslide election in the Houston Mayor’s race may send a message to them. Whitmire is a Democrat who campaigned across the aisle and received heavy Republican support.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/16/2023
2300 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/20231214-Screenshot-2023-12-14-at-6.16.06 PM.jpg?fit=1100%2C704&ssl=17041100adminadmin2023-12-16 14:47:262023-12-17 10:47:10HCFCD Grappling with Inflation’s Impact on Flood-Bond Purchasing Power
This is a week for good news and bad. Yesterday, we locked in another $50 million for the Lake Houston Gates Project. But one of the key people who helped us secure that funding is himself locked in a runoff election for City of Houston Mayor. And turnout so far has been abysmally low.
Whitmire Helped Secure $50 Million for Gates from State
More about the good news first. Yesterday, the Texas Water Development Board officially confirmed a $50 million grant to help build additional floodgates on the Lake Houston Dam. That will clear the way for final design, approvals and construction.
State Senator John Whitmire, candidate for City of Houston Mayor, helped secure that money. According to Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin, who has shepherded the gates project since Hurricane Harvey, Whitmire reportedly talked several reluctant senators into supporting the grant. Whitmire has been in the Texas Senate for 40 years and sits on the Finance Committee.
So Whitmire already has some skin invested in the gates project. If elected Mayor, he could provide necessary consistency for the project as it moves forward during the next four years.
Martin also reminded me that future FEMA grants for Lake Houston will depend on a maintenance dredging program. So, we need a mayor who can work with the state legislature to help secure future dredging grants. And Whitmire has relationships with all the key players in Austin.
Turnout Abysmally Low
Now, for more on the bad news. Turnout in the Houston runoff election so far has been “sluggish” according to the Houston Chronicle.
I personally would call it “somewhere south of abysmal.” Only 131,887 people in a City with roughly 1.75 million adults voted early. So, less than 10% of Houston adults have voted so far in what could be the most consequential election of this generation!
Why Mayor is Crucial
After Harvey, the Lake Houston Area Task Force identified more gates for Lake Houston as one of the three most crucial projects to reduce flooding in the area. In case you’re new here, this is what the San Jacinto West Fork looked like during Harvey.
Looking south toward Humble along US59.Water here was more than 20 feet above flood stage, the highest in Harris Countyand knocked out the southbound bridge for almost a year.
The flood affected 16,000 homes and 3,300 businesses in the Lake Houston area. That included 44% of all the businesses in the Lake Houston Chamber and 100% of all the businesses in Kingwood Town Center, which still hasn’t fully recovered. At the time, many people said, “If it happens again, I’m leaving.” That said…
It will likely take four years to complete the gates – the entire term of the next mayor. We need a mayor who will remain committed to the project.
The Mayor has the power to prioritize the project…or not.
This election could determine the future direction of our community and the City for decades to come.
Four 500-Year Storms in Eight Years
And lest you think a 500-year flood only happens once every 500 years, I would remind you that four hit this area in the last eight years: Tax Day, Memorial Day, Harvey, and Imelda.
We Have Power to Swing This Election
Now for the final piece of good news. So few people are voting throughout the City that Kingwood has the power to swing this election on Saturday.
Only 8,381 people have voted so far at the Kingwood Community Center – in a community of more than 70,000 people. While that’s one of the highest totals in the county, it still leaves the citywide outcome in doubt.
So please vote. Get your neighbors to vote. And get your neighbors to get their neighbors to vote. Etc.
When I voted early, I got to the polling place and back before my screen saver kicked in. It took less than 20 minutes round trip. With so much at stake, there’s just no excuse not to vote.
Voting Times, Places, Ballots, Etc.
Remember, races for several council positions and city controller remain open. View your sample ballot here.
