Tropical Forecast Lowered for Remainder of 2026 Season

8/6/2026 – One of the strongest El Niños ever is suppressing tropical activity in the Atlantic, Caribbean and Gulf. El Niños create wind shear that disrupts the formation of tropical storms and hurricanes. As a result, forecasters have lowered their estimates which were already below normal to begin with.

NOAA Updates Seasonal Forecast

In an email this morning, Jeff Lindner, Harris County’s meteorologist, wrote, “Updates to the seasonal Atlantic basin hurricane outlooks this week continue to indicate a high chance of below to well below normal activity across the Atlantic basin as we move through the peak of the season (August-October).”

That’s welcome news. “The main driver of the highly negative conditions is the continued increasing El Niño event well underway in the waters of the eastern and central Pacific Ocean. There, sea surface temperatures are currently running (1-3º C above normal values),” said Lindner.

El Niño Region 3.4 (the dark area off the western coast of South America) tends to correlate highly with weather impacts in North America, including shifts in the jet stream. Niño 3.4 is currently averaging a sea surface temperature anomaly of +2.3º C.

One of Worst El Niño Events since 1950

“That already approaches some of the maximum El Niño events since 1950,” added Lindner. “With the likely peak of this event around December or January…it is now fairly likely that one of the strongest El Niño events in modern times will occur.”

El Nino events, especially of this magnitude, tend to produce tremendous wind shear values across the deep tropics in the Caribbean and tropical Atlantic. They effectively tear apart any tropical system attempts at development.

“Wind shear values of 40-60 kts have been common across the Caribbean so far this hurricane season,” said Lindner. “They extend eastward into the tropical Atlantic and are some of the strongest on record in this part of the basin.”

In addition to the high wind shear values, Lindner also cited dry sinking air that continues to dominate much of the Atlantic Ocean and Caribbean. He noted slightly more favorable conditions north of the Bahamas and through the northern Gulf.

Sea surface temperatures are running near normal to slightly above normal in some parts of the Atlantic basin. High negative wind shear values and dry sinking air are resulting in lower than average instability and a general overall lack in thunderstorm activity.

“One of the Quietest Seasons since 1997”

Accordingly, the seasonal outlook numbers for the basin remain well below the average of 14 named storms. Two “tropical storms” have already occurred (Arthur and Bertha) both of which impacted the northern Gulf coast and suffered greatly under adverse conditions keeping their intensity low and organization poor.  

The basin is on track to be one of the quietest seasons since 1997 (another powerful El Niño year).

Lindner says there will be small windows of favorable conditions, most likely in August and September. For instance, areas in the middle Atlantic north of the highly unfavorable deep tropics could produce a few storms if tropical waves can reach those areas.

Budding meteorologists may be interested in reading NOAA’s entire seasonal outlook updated today. It’s a deep dive into the science of tropical forecasting.

It Only Takes One

Remember! Just because the outlook numbers are lower than average, does NOT mean there will not be any additional tropical storms or hurricanes or potential threats this year.  So remain prepared.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/6/2026 based on information from Jeff Lindner

3264 Days since Hurricane Harvey

SJRA Announces More Delays on Joint Reservoir Operations Study

8/5/2026 – In 2020 – three years after Hurricane Harvey – the San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) applied for $500,000 grant from the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) to study Joint Reservoir Operations between Lake Conroe and Lake Houston. They hoped they could reduce flooding through better coordination of releases from the two dams.

March 2026 Public Input Session in Humble

Earlier this year, SJRA held a public input session at the Humble Civic Center where it outlined the goals of the study and listened to dozens of downstream residents still harboring PTSD from flooding and angry about delays.

At the event, SJRA said it would present its conclusions this FALL in The Woodlands. Now, five months later, the schedule has slipped to Spring 2027. See the screen capture below from SJRA’s website.

Screen capture taken 7/21/26

Proffered Reasons for Delays

Matt Barrett, PE, SJRA’s Water Resources and Flood Management Division Manager, offered this explanation for the delay in an email.

Barrett said, “We are budgeting more time for reviews due to the number of partners involved. A couple other items that impacted the schedule and may delay the report are the modeling for the pre-release analysis, as well as required coordination with the ongoing Lake Houston Gates Project. We also expect a fair amount of stakeholder engagement.”

At the July SJRA Board Meeting, General Manager Aubrey Spear said that the Joint Operations study could not be done before the gate design was completed. Spear said he would have more information at the October SJRA Board Meeting. Mr. Sprear’s comments about the study begin at about 14:30 into this video and last for about 3 minutes.

Mr. Spear addressing SJRA Board Members at their 7/23/26 meeting.

Houston City Council Member Fred Flickinger said today that the part of the Gates project that the SJRA needs to finish its work should be ready in 4-6 weeks.

Before Mr. Spear concluded his remarks at the SJRA Board Meeting, he spent another minute addressing the status of SJRA’s long-delayed sand-trap study, which has been sitting on the shelf for more than four years.

No SJRA Study Results Implemented Yet

SJRA has conducted a number of studies since Hurricane Harvey. They include a:

Yet nine years after Harvey, to my knowledge…

No drainage recommendations from any of these studies have ever been constructed.

The 661-page Birch and Walnut Creek study took so long that recommendations could not be implemented. By the time it was finished, the land had been sold to developers. A large solar farm was already built on one of the parcels needed when the SJRA Board reviewed the results and decided to take no action.

I hope the same does not happen with the Joint Ops study. Downstream residents desperately need something actionable this time from the SJRA.

One expert familiar with the issues involved told me, “Frankly, there’s no reason this study could not have moved forward long ago. It’s about procedures and operations. If the design of the gates changes, just update the procedure manual.”

Plea for Downstream Involvement

At every SJRA Board meeting, one or more residents from Lake Conroe speak during the public comments to oppose any pre-release. Downstream residents rarely if ever appear. So, the “no pre-release” mantra goes unchallenged. The SJRA Board needs to hear opposing points of view if downstream residents ever hope to see recommendations from the Joint Ops study implemented.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/5/2026

3263 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.

Public Comment Period Opens for Amendment 22 to GLO’s Harvey Action Plan

7/4/2026 – Yesterday, the Texas General Land Office (GLO) posted Amendment 22 to its Hurricane Harvey $5.6 billion State Action Plan for public comment. That began a 30-day public comment period is required under federal law. The GLO administers disaster aid for the US Department of Housing and Urban Development in Texas.

Cover of Amendment 22 to GLO's Harvey Action Plan
Cover of Amendment 22 to GLO’s Harvey Action Plan

Allocation and Language Updates

The proposed amendment updates funding allocations and administrative language to better align available resources with current program needs. It also supports the effective and strategic expenditure of federal disaster recovery funds. And it ensures continued implementation of Hurricane Harvey recovery programs.

Table 1 (pages 11-13) summarizes the financial impact of the changes.

  • State of Texas – Total + $3.1 Million
    • State of Texas – City of Houston Homeowner Assistance + $1.7 million
    • State of Texas – Affordable Rental – $2.4 million
    • State of Texas – Housing Project Delivery + $3.8 million
  • City of Houston – Total -$3.1 million
    • City of Houston – Single Family Development – $1.4 million
    • City of Houston – Economic Revitalization – $1.7 million
    • City of Houston – Multi-Family Rental +$12.7 thousand
    • City of Houston – Public Services –$12.7 thousand

Two financial changes to City programs offset each other.

Two more, totaling $3.1 million, will send money back to the State. Using that, plus a decrease of $2.4 million from the State’s own Affordable Rental program, the State will bump up the totals for its Houston Homeowner Assistance Program and Housing Project Delivery.

On pages 7-8, you can find an index to text changes in the 493-page Action Plan. But at the end of the day, most could have been handled in a casual conversation around the water cooler.

Usually they amount to less need than anticipated in one category, so they shift money where the need is greater than anticipated.

The totals all offset and balance each other, like debits and credits. But hats off to GLO for its transparency and thoroughness.

Review and Comment

Review the amendment at https://www.glo.texas.gov/sites/default/files/documents/disaster-recovery/public-notice/5b-sap-amend22.pdf

Submit all comments to cdr@recovery.texas.gov by 5:00 p.m. on September 2, 2026. Per federal requirements, the GLO must respond to public comments before the amendment can be sent to HUD for final approval.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/4/2027

3262 Days since Hurricane Harvey

HCFCD Still Has Steep Hill to Climb on CDBG Projects

8/1/26 – A transmittal from Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) to Commissioners Court for their 8/6/26 meeting shows the updated status of all Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Projects.

Since Dr. Tina Petersen’s last update on 5/1/2026, the new schedule shows that, of 28 projects in the Disaster Relief (DR) and Mitigation (MIT) groups, expected completion dates have:

  • Slipped on 10
  • Remained the same on 8
  • Sped up on 10.

However, schedule delays exceeded gains by a total of 862 days. I assume that’s due to more accurate reporting under HCFCD’s new Executive Director Marcus Stuckett.

Woodridge Taylor Gully Groundbreaking
Marcus Stuckett, new Executive Director of HCFCD, at Taylor Gully/Woodridge Groundbreaking on 7/20/26

Of an additional seven neighborhood drainage projects, six should finish before the end of this year.

Beating the CDBG Clock

Stuckett replaced Petersen a little more than a month ago. Petersen resigned under pressure when it finally became clear that the county could lose hundreds of millions of dollars due to missed deadlines on CDBG jobs.

As Petersen came under increasing pressure, she developed a plan with the Texas General Land Office (GLO). The plan applied spending from three different types of CDBG jobs against the $322 million designated for the DR group. Those have the tightest deadline – February 28, 2027. Just seven months away!

The other two types of projects being applied against the DR total include Mitigation (MIT) and neighborhood drainage.

By applying spending from the latter two groups against the DR total, HCFCD hopes to meet its obligation to spend $322 million by the end of February, 2027. Worst case, HCFCD will reduce its potential losses.

Only $56.77 million has been spent to date in the DR and MIT groups, with $67.33 million in the neighborhood drainage group. Those total $124.1 million. That means…

…the $322 million finish line is still $197.9 million away.

Calculated from HCFCD spreadsheet submitted to Commissioners Court for 8/6/26 meeting.

How Deep is the Hole?

This transmittal shows that Stuckett still needs to get HCFCD out of a deep hole that Petersen left HCFCD in.

  • About one third of the $322 million has been spent to date.
  • That leave two thirds to spend within the next seven months.
  • Seven months represents about 15 percent of the time between the announcement of the CDBG-DR award and the deadline for spending it.
  • So, HCFCD must spend the remaining two thirds in 15 percent of the time.

That’s a tall order. It’s sad that Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia defended Stuckett’s predecessor to the bitter end and delayed her exit by a year or more as the CDBG funds fell into a deeper and deeper hole.

Now, it will take extraordinary effort to climb out of that hole.

The spreadsheet submitted by Stuckett for the next commissioners court meeting is extremely detailed: about 40 lines deep by 51 columns across.

Such updates will hopefully let commissioners discuss any concerns they have. And help HCFCD answer their questions.

In the next few months, accurate and timely updates will also show whether the current “running rate” will get us to the $322 million finish line in time.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/1/26

3259 Days since Hurricane Harvey

The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.

Harris County Slowdown Extends Beyond HCFCD

7/31/2026 – For the last few years, I’ve posted about the slowdown in the Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD). Based on a tip, I recently explored contract awards taking up to 20 months to get through the Purchasing Department. So, the slowdown appears to extend beyond just HCFCD.

Bonfire, the County’s purchasing portal, shows the status of projects in the Purchasing Department. Among them are engineering/design for the Kingwood Diversion Ditch and numerous feasibility studies.

I’m not alleging incompetence, malfeasance or corruption. I’m just alleging slowness and a lack of urgency. See examples below.

Kingwood Diversion Ditch

The Kingwood Diversion Ditch project grew out of the Kingwood Area Drainage Analysis conducted by Neel-Schaffer, Inc. in 2019. The 600-page report, delivered a year later, recommended immediate implementation of two projects: the Diversion Ditch and Taylor Gully.

In 2024, U.S. Congressman Dan Crenshaw secured an earmark for final engineering of the project through the EPA.

After that, entries in Bonfire, the county’s purchasing database show how long it took to secure and mobilize a vendor.

  1. 04/18/2025 – Request for Qualifications (RFQ) released on Bonfire
  2. 05/19/2025 – Consultant Submittals due
  3. 09/11/2025 – Authorization to negotiate with Halff (the contractor) goes to Commissioners Court
  4. 07/30/2026 – Notification that the contract with Halff will be on 8/6/2026 Commissioners Court (See #335.)
  5. Total Time  = 475 days (almost 16 months)

I asked ChatGPT what the normal vendor procurement time for such projects should be. It replied, “Texas state procurement guidance for formal service contracts estimates a minimum procurement cycle of roughly 86 days, with complex procurements commonly extending to 198 days or more.”

Drilling down, ChatGPT also indicated the following ranges for large counties, such as Harris.

  • Excellent performance: 2–3 months
  • Normal performance: 3–5 months
  • Acceptable but slow: 5–7 months

ChatGPT concluded, “If a county repeatedly takes 9–12 months simply to hire a consultant, that often indicates process inefficiencies, staffing shortages, indecision, or governance bottlenecks.”

I verified these time ranges and conclusions with former county leaders.

Vendor Selections for Various Feasibility Studies

To see if the Diversion Ditch selection process was an anomaly, I checked several other recent vendor procurements involving HCFCD projects.

  1. 12/09/2024 – (Yes… 2024!) RFQ released on Bonfire
  2. 02/03/2025 – Consultant submittals due
  3. 04/09/2025 – Authorization to negotiate with several vendors went to Commissioners Court. Vendors included: AECOM; Civitas; Frees-Nichols, Inc.; Gauge; Halff; HDR; Huitt-Zollars; LJA; LAN; Michael Baker; Pape-Dawson; Torres.
  4. 03/11/2026 – Award to Gauge and Michael Baker – 457 days after RFQ issued (15 months)
  5. 06/04/2026 – Award to Michael Baker, Halff and Torres 542 days after RFQ issued (18 months)
  6. 07/22/2026 – Award to Pape-Dawson and Aecom – 590 days after RFQ issued (almost 20 months)
  7. 07/30/2026 – Award to LAN, and Frees-Nichols, Inc. – 605 days after RFQ (20 months)

Times Represent One Phase of Many

Keep in mind that these times represent single phases of projects. Other phases include: preliminary engineering and construction and maintenance.

HCFCD Lifecycle
Typical HCFCD project lifecycle

And then there’s the time required for the chosen vendor to actually DO THE WORK.

People familiar with HCFCD and Harris County call the situation unacceptable. They point to the previous Executive Director of HCFCD; the Purchasing Department; the Department of Economic Equity and Opportunity; and the County Attorney as the architects of this quagmire. It’s not just Purchasing.

Costs of Delays Not Reported

HCFCD’s new Executive Director, Marcus Stuckett, has his work cut out for him. He must not only turn around HCFCD, he must light a fire under other county departments as well.

Such delays have real costs even though they are rarely reported.

The hidden costs include the potential loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding; loss of purchasing power due to inflation; higher tax rates to pay for future construction; people living with flood risk longer than necessary; and, lest we forget, potential future flood damage.

Big Box Stores in Humble During Harvey

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/31/2026

3258 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.

Video of Flood Destruction Shows Scarborough Development Risks

7/30/2026 – A new 4-minute video shows flood destruction in communities immediately downstream from the proposed 5,300-acre Scarborough development at the confluence of the San Jacinto West Fork with Spring, Cypress and Turkey Creeks. It illustrates the risks of development in that area.

It is one of the most flood-prone properties in the San Jacinto River Basin. Yet the Dallas-based developer is looking for ways to build thousands of homes there.

Watch Video, Then Sign Petition

In case anyone needs a reminder of Harvey’s destruction in the Lake Houston area, here it is.

The video is set to country music that speaks of “Scarborough Bottom” and the risks of developing land near rivers and streams in southeast Texas. Bottomland is low-lying land, typically by a river and subject to overflow during floods.

Please watch and share this video with your friends, families and social networks. Then consider signing this petition on change.org if you haven’t already done so.

Local Leaders and Residents Lining Up Against Proposed Development

As of this morning, it had more than 8,600 signatures. Plus the support of State Representative Steve Toth, the Bayou Land Conservancy and more.

One of the areas leading hydrologists has stated that if Scarborough’s land gets developed, it would be like aiming a firehose at the Humble/Kingwood area.

The Houston City Council passed a unanimous resolution against it.

Harris County Commissioners Court also passed a unanimous resolution against it.

The Montgomery County Engineers office blasted the idea of developing this land.

And Montgomery County Precinct 3 Commissioner Ritch Wheeler took a road to and through it off the County’s road bond.

Still, the developer is reportedly exploring ways to develop the property.

In my opinion, the safest thing would be to turn this land into a state park. That would enhance rather than undermine existing home values. It would limit future flood losses and mitigation costs. And it would provide recreational opportunities for the public.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/30/2026

3257 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.

Advice to Those Considering Living Near Water

7/29/2026 – The allure of living near water is both primal and spiritual. Water is soothing, refreshing, sustaining, beautiful, comforting and necessary. For much of human history, people HAD to live near water. Rivers became cradles of civilization.

But occasionally, river flooding also brings destruction. And when modern engineering and infrastructure made it possible to live farther from rivers, most moved to higher ground away from danger.

Empty townhomes near San Jacinto West Fork stand a mute witness to the power of nature after Harvey.

Still, for some people, living near water is worth the risk and uncertainty … so much so that they often pay a premium for homes with higher flood risk. Whether that premium is worthwhile depends on your disposable income and risk tolerance. Go into a major purchase with eyes wide open. Here are several things to consider.

Understanding Flood Risk is Crucial

If I were advising a close friend buying a home near water in the Houston area, I would say this:

“Buy for the water view only if you fully understand what comes with it.”

Bob Rehak

Waterfront homes — whether on a lake, river, creek, bayou, or even a retention pond — often command a price premium. But in Houston, that premium can come with higher flood risk, higher insurance costs, more difficult resale, and greater uncertainty as flood maps and rainfall assumptions evolve.

Recent draft FEMA flood maps, for example, significantly expand mapped floodplains in Harris County. Meanwhile, many other surrounding counties, eager to expand their tax bases, have not updated flood maps in decades.

10 Key Considerations

Here are several topics I would explore before making an offer.

1. Has the structure ever flooded?

This may be the single most important question. Don’t just ask the seller.

Also:

  • Talk with neighbors.
  • Check county flood records if available.
  • Look for old news photos.
  • Search social media after Harvey, Tax Day, Memorial Day, Imelda, and other major storms.
  • Ask whether water entered the structure—not merely the yard.

A home that stayed dry during Harvey generally deserves a closer look than one that flooded repeatedly.

2. Is the home near the water or above the water?

Those are very different.

A house perched 40 feet above a lake may have spectacular views with little flood risk.

A house six feet above a bayou may have the same view — but vastly different risk.

In Houston’s relatively flat terrain, the elevation of the first finished floor relative to expected flood levels matters far more than the horizontal distance to the water.

3. How high is the slab?

Ask for the:

Two houses across the street from one another may differ by only 18 inches in slab elevation — but that can dramatically affect both flood risk and insurance premiums. We saw that in the Elm Grove flooding in 2019.

4. Don’t stop with FEMA maps.

FEMA maps are useful. But they are not the complete story.

In Harris County during Harvey, more homes flooded outside the mapped 100-year floodplain than flooded inside it (Page 13).

Maps also become outdated as:

FEMA itself notes that mapped flood zones are only one tool for understanding risk. And few FEMA maps incorporate the risk from street flooding. Many streets (especially in new neighborhoods) are designed to become auxiliary storage for stormwater during major events.

5. Look upstream—not just nearby.

Most buyers look at the kitchen. Look at the entire watershed.

Questions you should ask include:

The house itself may not have changed. But the watershed may have.

Pay particular attention to upstream land-use change. In rapidly growing watersheds such as Spring Creek, Lake Creek, Cypress Creek and the San Jacinto River basin, today’s flood risk is not necessarily tomorrow’s. A home that has never flooded can become more vulnerable given rapid upstream development, insufficient mitigation or changing channel conditions.

6. Study the neighborhood’s drainage.

Some homes flood because of rivers. Others flood because streets become rivers.

Ask:

  • How quickly does water leave?
  • Are storm sewers undersized?
  • Is there ponding after ordinary thunderstorms?
  • Do roads become impassable before houses flood?

Access matters. Especially during emergencies. A dry house isn’t very useful if emergency vehicles can’t reach it.

7. Budget insurance before buying.

Many buyers discover the insurance cost after they’ve emotionally committed.

That’s backwards. Get actual quotes first.

Compare:

  • National Flood Insurance Program
  • Private flood insurers

Remember:

  • Homeowners insurance generally does not cover flooding
  • Flood insurance usually has a 30-day waiting period.
  • Under Risk Rating 2.0, premiums now vary substantially depending on elevation and risk characteristics. FEMA no longer quotes nationally subsidized prices based solely on flood zones. Quotes are now on an actuarial basis.
8. Think about resale.

Ask yourself:

“If I needed to sell this house in ten years, would someone else hesitate for the same reasons I’m hesitating today?”

Flood disclosure laws are becoming more robust.

Insurance costs are becoming more visible.

Risk information is easier to obtain than it was 15 years ago.

Future buyers may discount flood-prone properties more heavily than previous generations did.

9. Separate emotional value from financial value.

Water views have real value. They also have real costs.

Ask yourself:

  • Is the view worth an extra $100,000?
  • Would it still be worth it if my insurance doubled?
  • What would happen to my equity after a major flood?

Only buyers can answer those questions. And remember: a home in a 100-year floodplain has a 1-in-4 chance of flooding during the life of a 30-year mortgage.

10. Look for evidence of thoughtful engineering.

Examples include:

  • Higher slabs
  • Additional freeboard beyond minimum code requirements
  • Pier-and-beam construction where appropriate to let water flow under homes
  • Effective site drainage
  • Preserved natural floodplains
  • Elevated HVAC equipment
  • Backflow preventers
  • No history of repeated repairs

Minimum code is just that—a minimum. Builders who voluntarily exceed it often produce more resilient homes.

A study by former Harris County Engineer John Blount found higher building codes reduced flood damage by 20X during Harvey.

Bottom Line

In Houston, water itself isn’t the risk—low elevation is.

Some of the region’s finest neighborhoods are built around lakes, rivers, and bayous and have experienced little flooding because they’re situated on high ground. Others have flooded multiple times despite looking attractive on a sunny day.

When evaluating property, think like an engineer, not a tourist. Ask, “Where will the water go during the worst storm of the next 30 years?” If no one can answer that satisfactorily, keep looking.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/29/2026

3256 Days since Hurricane Harvey

HCFCD 2026 Q2 Spending Update: San Jacinto Watershed Still Ignored

07/28/2026 – Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) has released new figures showing where it has spent money through 2026 Q2. The County has spent only $49.15 million dollars in the entire San Jacinto Watershed since passage of the 2018 Flood Bond eight years ago.

That compares with $367,450,000 worth of projects advertised for the San Jacinto in the 2018 Bond Project list.

Thanks goodness HCFCD got a new executive director last month!

Little Money Spent on Construction

The previous executive director kept slighted the San Jacinto watershed for years. Studies dragged out for years with no end in sight. HCFCD spent little money in the watershed. Period. And it spent even less on construction.

When you look at the spending by project stage, construction ranked highest. That actually surprised me.

Calculated with data from HCFCD Activities Page

But of the $21.7 million total spent on construction, HCFCD spent only one third on capital improvement projects (CIP construction = $7.28 M). The remainder went to maintenance.

While maintenance spending is absolutely critical, we shouldn’t forget that it is designed to keep flooding from getting worse as opposed to CIP projects which actually improve flood risk.

So, in eight years, HCFCD spent only about $7 million to actually improve flood risk in the county’s largest watershed.

To date, HCFCD hasn’t come close to delivering what was promised in 2018.

What Did Bond Advertising Promote?

The final project list came with 13 Bond IDs for the San Jacinto Watershed; each contained one or more projects. Together the money allocated for them totaled $367,450,000. So, with only $49.15 million spent to date, just 13% of promised funding has been delivered in the last 8 years.

Start drilling down further; you will find even more egregious examples.

Floodgate Example

Take for example the new floodgates on Lake Houston. Initial plans allocated $70 million ($50 million coming from the federal government and $20 million from the flood bond as a local match).

If the reported figures are accurate, the county actually spent only $20,000 so far – one thousandth of the local match. And 1/3,500th of the total. In fairness, perhaps they’re waiting for the City to finish the engineering.

Dredging Example

And then there’s dredging. Dredging was supposed to receive $50 million ($10 million from local funds with a $40 million match). But so far, HCFCD reports only $7.28 million spent for dredging. (See CI-61.)

I’ll bet Charles Cunningham’s new Lake Houston Dredging District could use some of the difference!

How to Explore Data Yourself

There are millions of ways to slice and dice this data. Explore it for yourself. Here’s how.

  1. Look up projects near you on the HCFCD website: https://www.hcfcd.org/Activity/Projects/San-Jacinto-River
  2. See how much was allocated before the bond vote: https://reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/2018bondprojectlist2018-08-06-1130.pdf
  3. Compare how much HCFCD has actually spent through July 1 this year: https://www.hcfcd.org/Activity

Hopefully, Marcus Stuckett, HCFCD’s new executive director, can right some of the slights from the past administration. On a positive note, the recent start of construction on the Taylor Gully/Woodridge project may help turn the San Jacinto spending drought around.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/28/2026

3255 Days since Hurricane Harvey

HCFCD Construction Slowdown May Be on Verge of Turnaround

07/27/26 – New spending figures are available from Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) through the end of 2026 Q2. This quarter marks the end of Dr. Tina Petersen’s administration and the start of new Executive Director Marcus Stuckett’s. In that sense, it represents (pardon the pun) a watershed moment.

HCFCD spending data shows that Stuckett inherits a production pipeline that was not pushing flood-mitigation projects into and through construction at historically normal rates.

Eight years into what was supposed to have been a 10-year bond program, Harris County has spent only 37% of the dollars approved by voters while inflation in the heavy-construction sector of the economy has totaled more than 50%.

As a consequence, inflation is taking a huge toll on the Flood Bond’s purchasing power…and making residents live with higher flood risk longer than necessary.

But there’s also some good news: 6 HCFCD construction jobs on the Harris County Commissioners Court Agenda this week!

Let’s look at each of these points.

Construction Slowdown

Shortly after voters approved the flood bond in 2018, spending on flood-mitigation projects soared. But then, the team that sold the bond and defined hundreds of projects was pushed out by Democrats starting in 2021.

Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia managed to get Dr. Tina Petersen appointed head of HCFCD at the start of 2022. And ever since, for whatever reason, project activity has plummeted. You can clearly see it in the rate of spending below – despite having billions of dollars available.

HCFCD spending since 2018 Flood Bond as of 26Q2. Far right reflects only 2 quarters. But even doubled, 2026 would represent a continuation of the long-term decline.

The gray area in the graph above represents construction spending. It has dropped almost by half since its peak during the previous administration. Construction is down to $90 million per year [annualized] from $160 million per year [actual].

As a result of the slowdown, Harris County could lose hundreds of millions of dollars in HUD Community Development Block Grants for Disaster Relief, whose deadlines are fast approaching.

Lower-than-Normal Construction Expenditures as Percent of Total

Typically, construction accounts for about 65% of most flood-mitigation projects, give or take 10%.

That number can vary even more depending on land-acquisition costs, environmental permitting, etc. There are always exceptions. But on average, 65% is considered a defensible rule of thumb for planning purposes by many flood experts; some suggest the figure may even be higher.

So, how has HCFCD spending compared? It falls far short of 65%. Looking at everything spent to date, only 46% has been on construction. But even that number may be deceptively high.

Construction spending on maintenance masks what’s happening on the capital-improvement side. So let’s also look at each sub-category.

As of 7/1/2026. Computed from HCFCD 26Q2 Bond Update.

HCFCD capital-improvement construction spending to date is just 37% of all capital improvement costs. And the Total percentage is buoyed up by construction spending on Maintenance.

Remember that only capital-improvement construction dollars actually reduce flood risk.

Only 37% of Bond Money Spent After 8 Years into 10-Year Bond Program

There’s another significant takeaway from last quarter’s update. HCFCD has spent only 37% of the bond money approved by voters – eight years into what was supposed to have been a 10-year bond program.

Sorting expenditures on the HCFCD Activity Page by “Fund Source” shows that only $932.69 million of the $2.5 billion bond has actually been spent to date. This excludes district and partner funds.

2018 Flood Bond Funds spent to date by watershed

54% Inflation in Heavy Construction Sector Since Start of Flood Bond

But all the data above illustrates only part of the problem. Cumulative inflation in the heavy-construction sector of the economy totals 54% from mid-2018 (when voters approved the Flood Bond) to mid-2026. (Source: Federal Highway Administration’s National Highway Construction Cost Index, considered by many as a good analog for flood-control work).

This inflation has progressively eroded the purchasing power of flood-mitigation construction budgets.

A Bad Institutional Hangover

Problems moving projects into and through HCFCD’s production pipeline in a timely way has resulted in:

  • Inflation gobbling up a large percentage the bond’s purchasing power
  • Fast-approaching deadlines jeopardizing hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding
  • People living with higher flood risk longer than necessary.

Yet Commissioner Adrian Garcia defended former HCFCD Executive Director Dr. Tina Petersen to the bitter end… against the interests of his own constituents. It will be interesting to see if this affects his re-election campaign this Fall.

Some Good News This Thursday

There is some good news in all of this on the horizon. It looks like HCFCD’s new Executive Director, Marcus Stuckett, is making an immediate impact. This Thursday’s Commissioner’s Court agenda shows six CIP projects starting construction or going out for construction bids. They include:

  • Meyergrove Stormwater Detention Basin
  • Halls Bayou Channel Conveyance Improvements – Phase II
  • T.C. Jester Stormwater Detention Basins – Compartments 1A and 2
  • Lauder Stormwater Detention Basin – Phase 3A
  • Genoa Red Bluff Stormwater Detention – Basins Phase 2 – CDBG-DR/MIT
  • Kluge Stormwater Detention Basin – Phase 3 – CDBG-DR/MIT

Hopefully Stuckett can get construction projects moving again.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/27/26

3254 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.

Luck as a Flood-Control Strategy

7/25/2026 – Last Thursday, a meteorological fluke spared the Lake Houston Area from the worst of Tropical Storm Bertha. Others nearby were not so lucky.

The lopsided nature of Bertha, the collapse of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) at Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD), the potential loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in Federal funding, and the resignation of former HCFCD Executive Director Dr. Tina Petersen under pressure should all serve as powerful reminders that luck is not a reliable flood control strategy.

2018 Flood Bond CIP spending as of 7/1/2026. Chart turned down when previous management was pushed out under political pressure.

Throughout history, many cultures, military organizations, emergency managers, coaches and writers have coined sayings that contrast the value of preparation with luck. Here are some of my favorites that could apply equally to flood control.

Classic Proverbs

“Luck favors the prepared.” (Often attributed to Louis Pasteur in various forms)

“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” (Ben Franklin)

“Failing to prepare is preparing to fail.”

“Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.”

“Dig the well before you’re thirsty.”

“Repair the roof while the sun is shining.” (Popularized by John F. Kennedy)

Military Sayings

“The more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed in war.”

“Proper planning prevents poor performance.” (Known as the Five Ps)

“Amateurs talk strategy. Professionals talk logistics.”

“Success depends on preparation, not hope.“

Emergency Management

Emergency managers often express the same idea without mentioning luck:

“Preparedness saves lives.”

“Disasters don’t plan ahead. You can.”

“Prepared, not scared.”

“When seconds count, preparation matters.”

Some that mention luck:

“Hope is not a strategy.”

“Luck is not a plan.”

“Don’t confuse good luck with good judgment.”

“Past success is not proof of future safety.”

“Just because you’ve been lucky doesn’t mean you’re safe.”

“Luck eventually runs out; preparation doesn’t.”

“Every disaster survivor was lucky. The prepared ones needed less luck.”

“The safest families don’t count on luck; they count on preparation.”

“Ignoring risk is gambling. Preparing for it is responsibility.”

Flood Control

“The best time to prepare for the next flood is before the river rises.”

“Floods don’t care how lucky you’ve been.”

“Every floodplain eventually reminds people why it’s a floodplain.”

“Nature keeps no record of how many times you’ve gotten away with it.”

“A century without a flood doesn’t cancel tomorrow’s forecast.”

Past is Not A Prologue

Many people mistake the absence of past losses for the absence of risk, when in reality they may simply have benefited from a run of favorable conditions. Two poignant expressions in that regard:

“When it comes to protecting your family, hope is a virtue—but preparation is a responsibility.”

“Building your family’s safety on luck is like buying insurance after the storm has begun.”

What You Can Do

So, what can ordinary citizens do to prepare? I have a very short list of suggestions.

  1. Familiarize yourself with preparation guides available on websites, such as this one and the National Hurricane Center’s.
  2. Become politically involved. Understand what is and isn’t being done to reduce your flood risk. And demand results.
  3. Support HCFCD’s new executive director as he tries to turn the organization’s CIP program around and start, once again, building the projects voters approved almost 9 years ago.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/25/2026

3252 Days since Hurricane Harvey