Tag Archive for: glo

August Flood Digest: Brief Summaries of Nine Items in the News

Here’s a short digest of nine flood-related items in the news this month.

Fifth Anniversary of Harvey

This month marks the fifth anniversary of Hurricane Harvey. It’s hard to pinpoint an exact day for Harvey. The system moved off of Africa on August 13, 2017. It became a tropical storm on the 17th; moved into the Gulf on the 22nd; became a Cat 4 hurricane; and made landfall at Port Aransas on the 25th. The outer bands reached Harris County on the 26th.

Harvey dumped heavy rain over Houston for four days. It started moving back offshore on the 29th and 30th. Ninety percent of the river forecast points in southeast Texas reached flood stage; forty-six percent reached new record levels. Harvey dumped more rain than any storm in the history of North America. For more information, see the Hurricane Harvey tab on the Reports Page.

West Fork San Jacinto During Harvey. Looking NE toward Kingwood from the Townsend Park N Ride.

New SJRA Director From Lake Conroe

Most flooding in the Lake Houston Area during Harvey happened after the SJRA started releasing 79,000 cubic feet per second (CFS) from Lake Conroe to save homes there. Many Lake-Houston-Area residents blamed the absence of downstream representation on the SJRA board for what they saw as disregard for their property.

After touring the extensive damage by helicopter, Governor Abbott appointed two Lake-Houston-Area residents (Kaaren Cambio and Mark Micheletti) to the seven-person board. Cambio later resigned to avoid a conflict of interest when she joined Congressman Dan Crenshaw’s staff. Last month, the Governor appointed a Lake Conroe resident to fill her vacancy, Stephanie Johnson. That now leaves Micheletti as the lone downstream representative.

Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District Elections

Sometimes it seems that the main requirements for membership on the LSGCD board are half a brain, a willingness to kiss Simon Sequiera’s ring and indifference to science. Sequiera owns Quadvest, the largest private groundwater pumping company in Montgomery County. And excessive groundwater pumping in MoCo has been linked to subsidence and flooding. But concerned citizens will have a chance to take back the LSGCD board from a slate of directors backed by Sequiera. The deadline for applying is August 22. This page on the LSGCD site is all about the election and how to file if you are interested.

Edgewater Park

Harris County Precinct 3 is trying to jumpstart the development of Edgewater Park at 59 and the San Jacinto West Fork. The county has stated it is hiring a new consultant to re-design the park and that construction could begin 1 to 2 years from now. Quiddity Engineering will get the nod. The project will provide a boat launch, an additional park for the Humble/Kingwood Area, and a connection to the Spring Creek Greenway hike and bike trail. Quiddity’s contract will cover design, engineering, and other pre-construction expenses. Quiddity is the new name for Jones and Carter.

Houston Planning & Development Department News

The Planning and Development Department has a new initiative called Livable Places. The objective: create more housing options for Houstonians. The four options they visualize all increase housing density and impervious cover. I wrote them asking, “Won’t that increase flooding?” In essence, they said, “But it may help other places stay green.” True. But that’s not going to help flooding in the City much. Wasn’t our Drainage Fee designed to provide an incentive to REDUCE impervious cover. Oh well. These are different times. Can we get our drainage fees back now?

Flood Tunnels

Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) released Phase 2 of its $30 billion flood tunnel study last month – along with a recommendation to study the recommendations in more detail. The current plan for Phase 3 is to spend the next 4-6 months:

  • Working with the Army Corps to explore possible federal involvement
  • Scoping the Phase 3 study
  • Beginning procurement.

HCFCD hopes to start Phase 3 in early 2023. Said Scott Elmer, P.E. CFM and Assistant Director of Operations for HCFCD, “We expect it to take approximately 3 years to complete.” For the complete Phase 2 study, click here.

GLO HARP Program Deadline

The Texas General Land Office (GLO) announced that applications for its Homeowner Assistance and Reimbursement Program (HARP) will close at 5 p.m. on Aug. 31, 2022. Those include applications for repairs/rebuilds from Tropical Storm Imelda in 2019. To be eligible, you must submit applications by the deadline … unless funding runs out first. So hurry. 

The program includes repair or reconstruction of owner-occupied single-family homes and reimbursement up to $50,000 for certain out-of-pocket expenses incurred for reconstruction, rehabilitation, or mitigation. Repayment of SBA loans is also eligible for reimbursement.

The GLO has $71,604,000 to help residents of Harris, Chambers, Liberty, Jefferson, Montgomery, Orange, and San Jacinto counties. HARP is only available for a primary residences, not second homes. Interested homeowners should visit recovery.texas.gov/harp to apply online or download an application.

Harris County Attrition and Pay Reports

As reported in April, the loss of employees and managers in dozens of Harris County departments has created a brain drain that impacts delivery of county services. On Tuesday, 8/2/22, Commissioners considered two related reports. The first had to do with attrition. The second had to do with pay and benefits.

Commissioners did not discuss the first, but they did discuss the second at length. They also voted unanimously to have the Office of Management and Budget investigate pay disparities. Certain commissioners wanted to apply equity guidelines to low-paid employees and freeze pay for those making more. I didn’t hear the words “Pay for Performance” once during the discussion.

In the end, commissioners recommended having HR create a job architecture, pay structure, and new evaluations that would determine pay increases or freezes. More in future posts.

New Bond Package

Discussion of a new $1.2 billion bond package consumed the last 90 minutes of commissioners court this week. The County Administrator still cannot say where the money is actually needed. Commissioners Adrian Garcia and Rodney Ellis want to apply equity guidelines to this bond. And neither wants to say which projects they would spend the money on. Garcia even threatened in a previous meeting that Republican-leaning precincts would not get ANY of the money if their commissioners voted NO on the bond.

When Hidalgo suggested guidelines for distribution of the money, Garcia stomped out of the meeting. He later reluctantly agreed to a split that would give his precinct and Ellis’ $380 million each while Republican precincts would get only $220 million each.

During the debate, it came out that much of the money from the 2015 bond program still has not been spent. That raised the question, “Why do we need another bond?”

Bragging About Trickery on One Bond While Pitching Another

Also, Commissioner Rodney Ellis publicly bragged that he purposefully didn’t define “equity” in the 2018 flood bond. “It was side language,” he said. “It was not in the language that was on the ballot, but that was the side agreement we agreed to.”

Ellis later said, “Those poor neighborhoods are the ones who have gotten the short end of the process.” But the HCFCD July flood-bond update shows that Halls, Greens, White Oak, Brays and Hunting Bayou Watersheds have received $400 million out of the $1 billion spent to date from the flood bond. Twenty percent of the watersheds are getting 40% of the money. Short end?

I personally don’t plan to vote for another bond until I start seeing some benefit from the last two. Especially when there’s no guarantee how, where or on what the money will be spent. To me, this looks like a $1.2 billion dollar slush fund for Garcia and Ellis.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/6/22

1803 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.

Montgomery County Allocated $60 Million in Harvey Mitigation Funds

The Houston-Galveston Area Council of Governments (H-GAC) has allocated $60 million to Montgomery County. The money comes out of a $488 million of Harvey flood-mitigation funds previously allocated to HGAC by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) through the Texas General Land Office (GLO). The $60 million is the single largest allocation to any governmental entity in the region out of the $488 million pot.

50% Committed to LMI Areas

At least 50% of the money must go to low-to-moderate income (LMI) areas in Montgomery County. The GLO has determined that MoCo plans meet HUD rules and conditionally approved the allocation.

However, things could still change and Montgomery County has not yet received the money.

According to H-GAC, the conditionally approved preliminary method of distribution (a plan for whom gets how much) is still pending acceptance by eligible entities and is subject to change through a published re-allocation process. A complete list of eligible activities is available in the Texas General Land Office (GLO) guidelines for the Regional Mitigation Program – Council of Governments Method of Distribution (COG MODs). Depending on changes, another 30-day public comment period may necessary, according to the GLO.

Where, How MoCo Will Spend the Money

I reached out to the Montgomery County Judge’s office to see how MoCo hopes to spend the money. Jason Millsaps replied, “Montgomery County will attempt several projects with these funds as soon as final approval has been granted.”

Millsaps continued, “In East County, we will work to de-snag, de-silt and remove vegetation that hinders flow from the Peach Creek, Caney Creek, White Oak Creek, and East Fork of the San Jacinto River. We will do the same for Lake Creek and Stewart Creek in Central/North County, with additional bank armor going in for Stewart Creek near the River Plantation Subdivision.”

Those should reduce flooding in Montgomery County. This flood map shows the areas most affected by repeat flooding in the county.

And this map shows the location of each creek and how much floodwater each conveyed during Harvey.

Peak Flows During Harvey
Peak flows in the San Jacinto Watershed during Hurricane Harvey

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/12/22

1778 Days since Hurricane Harvey

General Land Office Launches Disaster Preparedness Campaign

The Texas General Land Office (GLO) has launched a disaster preparedness campaign called “Don’t Ignore Your Risk.” GLO developed the new outreach initiative to encourage Texans to prepare for hurricane season and stay prepared. The season began Wednesday, June 1, and runs through November 30, 2022.

“Don’t Ignore Your Risk”

The disaster preparedness campaign includes a series of video advertisements in English and Spanish. They urge Texans to take time now to:

  • Know their risk
  • Purchase flood insurance
  • Protect their home
  • Safeguard documents
  • Prepare emergency supplies
  • Map an evacuation route.

Most Homeowner Insurance Policies Don’t Cover Flooding

GLO produced a series of twelve short videos that you can watch and share on YouTube from this page. They’re powerful, poignant and compelling. Each makes a simple point about the value of preparedness. And each underscores the value of flood insurance.

Kickoff commercial in English or Spanish.

“Be prepared and have a solid plan in place prior to severe weather,” said Commissioner George P. Bush. “Knowing your risks, having an evacuation plan, gathering supplies, securing documents, and protecting your property with flood and wind insurance are key steps to being prepared for storms or wildfires.

Texans can follow the GLO on social media and find disaster preparedness information for family and pets at recovery.texas.gov/preparedness.”

Aid No Match for Flood Insurance

According to a report by the Risk Management and Decision Processes Center at The Wharton School, homeowners received an average of $8,900 in individual housing assistance from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) following Hurricane Harvey. Meanwhile, the average of flood insurance claims was $115,104.

And almost five years after Harvey, the City of Houston’s Housing and Community Development Department still has hundreds of millions of dollars left to distribute. Counting on aid, as opposed to insurance, could mean years of living in subpar conditions.

According to FEMA, just one inch of flood water can cause more than $25,000 in damage.

Five Essential Steps

The GLO encourages all Texans to prepare for hurricane season by doing the following:

Know Your Risk

Sign up for your community’s emergency warning system. The Emergency Alert System (EAS) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Weather Radio also provide emergency alerts.

Make Your Evacuation Plan

Check with local officials about updated evacuation shelters for this year. Know where your family will meet up if you are separated and where you will stay. Pack a “go bag” including items you need to take with you if you evacuate. A “go bag” should be easy to carry and kept in a place where you can grab it quickly. Check with drivetexas.org to find routes near you. To find a shelter near you, download the FEMA app at fema.gov/mobile-app.

Gather Supplies

Plan for your entire household including children, people with disabilities or access/functional needs, and pets. Don’t forget medications.

Secure Documents

Remember to secure copies of important personal documents. Filing for government assistance requires documentation. Be sure to keep documents in a secure location and take them with you if you need to evacuate. Place these documents in a waterproof bag and back them up on cloud storage or a thumb drive.

Protect Your Property

Shutter your home as needed. Review your flood insurance policy (or sign up for one). And declutter drains and gutters. Most homeowner and renter insurance policies do not cover flood damage. And a flood insurance policy generally does not take effect until 30 days after purchase. So, be sure to maintain your policy or get one now. Take a video “tour” of your home to document all items and the home’s current condition.

Remember, just because you may be outside of the 100-year flood plain doesn’t mean you won’t flood. Sixty-four percent of Harris County homes that flooded during Harvey were outside of the 100-year flood plain.

For more information, visit recovery.texas.gov/preparedness.

Credits

The campaign will run for the next three months. It includes social media, digital display, cable, broadcast and streaming platforms. Inspired by Senate Bill 285. It was signed into law during the 86th Session of the Legislature.

The GLO helps educate Texans about the benefits of protecting their homes and finances through flood insurance and being prepared for storms and other natural disasters.

Credit for the commercials goes to 1820 Productions for production and editing.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 6/15/22 based on a GLO press release

1751 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Harris County Commissioners Court Discusses What to Do with HUD, Flood Resilience Trust Money

If you managed to watch Harris County Commissioners Court yesterday, near the end you saw a lively and somewhat confusing discussion of flood mitigation funding. See the video at approximately 6:38:10. Agenda Item 249 was a request by Adrian Garcia to discuss disbursement of the $750 million in Community Development Block Grant Mitigation funds allocated to Harris County by the Texas General Land Office (GLO) and the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

During the debate, commissioners also discussed approximately $830 million currently sitting in a Flood Resilience Trust that they created last July to compensate for an expected shortfall in flood-bond partner funding.

In the end, Commissioners made no decisions. But it became clear that Commissioners Ellis and Garcia leaned toward spending it in low-to-moderate income neighborhoods, cleaning out roadside ditches, and sharing money with the City of Houston.

Still No Plan for How to Spend $750 Million

HUD and GLO made the award on March 18, contingent on approval of what HUD calls a Method of Distribution (MOD). Basically, that’s a plan for how and where the money would be spent.

Commissioner Ramsey noted that the pursuit of the money was bi-partisan and that he hoped the distribution would be bi-partisan as well.

Commissioner Garcia said he was immensely frustrated because a) he just didn’t know when the $750 million was going to arrive, and b) what strings came with the money.

He then referenced the Flood Resilience Trust created by commissioners last year from toll road and other county funds. “If we’re going to be getting $750 million, then I think those other dollars (approximated $830 million in the Trust) can be put somewhere else for practical use,” said Garcia. He also noted that another hurricane season was fast approaching.

He then asked Dr. Tina Petersen, the new head of the Flood Control District, whether she had a chance to study this and come up with any recommendations. Petersen who has been in her job about a month said, “We’re working on that.” She reiterated that no project has been delayed due to a lack of partnership funding and that she was working hard to ensure none would be.

Garcia, Ellis Argue for More Money in LMI Neighborhoods

Garcia then claimed, without citing a source, that 70% of the people who flooded in an unspecified flood (but presumably Harvey) “are still without a given project.” He also said that $830 million had accumulated in the Flood Resilience Trust to date.

Commissioner Ellis claimed the County and City of Houston should each have gotten $1 billion and that he would continue to fight for the County’s other $250 million, as well as a billion for the City.

Ellis then tried to add up the amount of committed funding in the flood bond to date but forgot to add approximately $1.5 billion in partner funds already committed. Oops! With the $750 million and the money already in the flood resilience trust, the flood bond should be more than fully funded by now.

flood bond funding
As of the start of this year, HCFCD had $1.57 billion in committed partnership funding and $833 million in the flood resilience trust, leaving a gap of $100 million. The $750 million HUD allocation in March should have created a $650 million surplus.But nobody talked about that.

Ellis assumed the $750 million would be spent in Greens, Halls, and Hunting Bayou watersheds. All qualify as low-to-moderate income areas. But if you look at the latest flood-bond project list spreadsheet, Harris County Flood Control District needed $69 million in partner funding for Greens, $269 million for Halls, and $65 million for Hunting. So partner-funding needs for the three watersheds total about $400 million. That leaves about $350 million out of the $750. Nobody, however, even mentioned that in the discussion.

County Administrator Says “Not So Fast”

The County administrator David Berry then pointed out that we don’t have the $750 million yet. “It was not a direct allocation. The county must prepare the method of distribution (MOD) and a citizen participation plan first,” then get them approved by HUD and the GLO.

Then Berry dropped a bomb. He said, HCFCD was proposing projects, but not preparing the documents about how the money would be spent. That tells me the distribution will be based on political, not technical considerations.

Ellis Uses Threat of Title 6 To Support LMI Funding

Ellis concluded the discussion by saying that HUD used a Title 6 complaint as a lever against the GLO, “and if we’re not sensitive to [LMI, Social Vulnerability], there will be a Title 6 Complaint against us.”

Title VI, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., was enacted as part of the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964. It prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.

According to a summary of the Texas CDBG-MIT Action Plan Amendment approved by HUD, HUD requires that at least 50% of total funds must be used for activities benefiting low and moderate income (LMI) persons. However, the summary also states that “all programs will have an LMI priority.”
Click here to see the complete text of the GLO’s action plan amendment approved by HUD on March 18.

Berry didn’t see the LMI focus as a problem, though. He concluded by saying, “The goals of this court in terms of protecting the most people at the highest risk of flooding, and who are the most vulnerable from recovery, all of that seems straight up the alley of the way we should be distributing this money.”  

Ellis Wants More But…

Ellis said that he still wanted to fight for more funding. He felt the City of Houston and the County each deserved $1 billion. And he wanted to fight for another $250 million. He volunteered to fight on the City’s behalf, too. No one told him that all the flood mitigation money had already been committed.

Ellis claimed the City got $0, but HUD and the GLO made a direct allocation to the City of $61,884,000. And the Houston Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) received $488 million.

According to Brittany Eck, a spokesperson for the GLO, “Funding for three competitions, Harris County’s allocation, and the Regional Mitigation Program all totaled more than $3 billion. Entities within H-GAC were either awarded or allocated a little over 56% of that. Congress has not indicated additional funding may be coming, though it could appropriate additional funds at any time. But that is not likely.”

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/6/2022

1681 Days since Hurricane Harvey

HUD Approves $750 Million to Harris County for Flood Mitigation

Today, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) approved the Texas General Land Office’s (GLO) amended plan for Community Development Block Grant Mitigation (CDBG-MIT). The amended plan allocates $750 million in funding for Harris County and an $488 million to the Houston-Galveston Area Council for additional mitigation projects in the region. The funds allocated to the county should now mean that the 2018 flood bond is fully funded, if numbers provided last month on partner funding to date are accurate.

George P. Bush Quote on Process

According to a press release issued by the GLO at 7PM, 3/18/22, “Ensuring Texans receive disaster recovery and mitigation funding in a timely manner to recover from Hurricane Harvey has always been my top priority,” said GLO Commissioner Bush. “The Biden Administration’s politically weaponized Department of Urban Development and Housing has forced us to fight through mazes of red tape to secure this direct allocation for Houstonians. I will continue to fight to send money to Texans as quickly as possible. The $750 million allocation will go directly to Harris County for projects that help mitigate future flooding events, creating a stronger more resilient Texas.”

George P. Bush, Commissioner, Texas General Land Office, 2019 photo

$1.138 Billion Total

HUD’s approval of the latest Harvey Action Plan brings the total infrastructure and mitigation investments in Harris County to more than $1.1 billion. HUD’s approval of the GLO’s plan to provide $750,000,000 to Harris County is in addition to HUD’s direct allocation of $61,884,000 to the City of Houston, plus $117,213,862.96 in CDBG-MIT awards for Harris County projects, plus $209,221,800 in infrastructure funds from CDBG-DR, equals $1,138,319,662.96 in total investment in projects within Harris County. Additionally, H-GAC continues to develop its method of distribution on more than $488 million for mitigation projects within the greater Houston region.

Bush first requested a direct allocation for Harris County in May of 2021 after the county received very little money from the first round of competition for HUD. A direct allocation would have allowed Harris County to work directly with HUD and taken the GLO out of the loop. However, HUD reportedly insisted that the GLO remain involved. Subsequently, the GLO developed a 650-page action plan for the $750 million. However, HUD found it insufficient. As of early this week, the action plan exceeded 1000 pages, according to a GLO spokesperson. That apparently provided HUD what it needed. HUD notified the GLO in a letter received after 5PM today.

Method of Distribution Must Still be Developed

However, Harris County won’t get all the money immediately.

Since last November, H-GAC has been developing something called a MOD (Method of Distribution) for its allocation. However, according to the GLO, because of the expense involved, Harris County has delayed developing its MOD until the the award was approved by HUD.

Harris County’s next step will be to develop its MOD which describes where the money will go, how it will be used, and who will get it. GLO will review that and forward it to HUD. After HUD approves the MOD, HUD still won’t write a check for $750 million to the county. The money will be reimbursed to the county in batches as it is spent on approved projects.

Flood Bond Close to Fully Funded Even without Resilience Trust

Still, this will go a long way toward fulfilling the potential shortfall in partner funding for the Harris County Flood Bond. Of the original $5 billion bond, half is being paid for by Harris County taxpayers. The County hoped to get local, state, and federal partners to fund the other half.

Last July, when it looked like the $750 million might not materialize, Harris County Commissioners approved a Flood Resilience Trust that committed $833 million from the Toll Road Authority and other Harris County sources of funding. That, along with partner funding already committed, was enough to keep construction of Harris County Flood Bond projects rolling through approximately 2026.

From a presentation to the Harris County Community Flood Resilience Task Force in February 2022.

Today’s approval should make the flood bond fully funded if the numbers above are accurate. That should come as good news for all citizens who have been fighting for limited dollars. With money in the trust, this should accelerate mitigation projects throughout the county. And even fund some not identified in the original bond!

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/18/2022

1662 Days since Hurricane Harvey

New GLO Review Slams Houston on Five Counts Relating to Harvey Relief

Two months ago, the Texas General Land Office (GLO) launched a review of Houston’s Housing and Community Development Department (HHCD) after Mayor Sylvester Turner allegedly tried to steer a $14 million affordable-housing contract using HUD money toward his former law partner. The GLO review, released Tuesday, notes both findings and corrective actions required of Houston to ensure a fair, open, and competitive award process in the future.

The GLO review criticized HHCD for five major problems listed below. The City has until December 10, 2021, to address the GLO review’s findings by delivering a Corrective Action Plan. Houston then has another 90 days to implement the plan. Hanging in the wind: the fate of the City’s entire multi-family rental program, Harvey multi-family relief projects in the pipeline, and millions of dollars in past awards now being questioned.

Image courtesy of HUD. For more on the need for affordable housing, click here.

The GLO review was triggered on September 22 when the HHCD’s former Director Tom McCasland accused the Mayor during a City Council meeting of overriding his department’s recommendations. The Mayor recommended a project that would have benefited his former law partner. McCasland alleged that his department’s recommendations could have built four times the amount of affordable housing units in poorer neighborhoods for roughly the same amount of money. McCasland also alleged that he was being forced to participate in what he called a “charade of a competitive process.” The Mayor promptly fired McCasland, leading to multiple investigations. The GLO review was just one.

Summary of Five Main Findings

The GLO never uses the word “charade” in its findings, but one could easily infer a charade from their substance.

The GLO’s objective was to evaluate whether the City had adequate controls in place to meet program and contract requirements for the allocation of $450,050,472. At a high level, the five findings released on Tuesday 11/23/21 require the City to:

  1. Strengthen NOFA/RFP Issuances – GLO found inconsistencies among the way NOFA/RFPs (Notice of Funding Availability/Request for Proposals) were issued, evaluated and scored. Inconsistencies included program content; threshold criteria; and award processes.
  2. Strengthen the NOFA/RFP Scoring Method – GLO found the City does not have controls in place to ensure it follows criteria for awarding projects.
  3. Ensure Documentation Supports Project Awards – GLO found that Houston does not document subjective criteria used by HHCD and the Mayor’s office when evaluating applications.
  4. Strengthen Conflicts-of-Interest Provisions – GLO found the City does not have internal controls that screen out Conflicts of Interest.
  5. Produce Documentation Justifying Award Recommendations – GLO found inconsistencies between grant requirements and recommendations. Subjective factors – not based on the competitive process – were often used to recommend projects without explanation.

Full Text of Findings and Exhibits

Here is the GLO’s entire 11-page letter to HHCD’s Interim Director Keith Bynam, and three exhibits referenced in the letter:

  • Exhibit 1 – Scoring results for four NOFAs
  • Exhibit 2 – A memo to the Interim Director from an Assistant Director attempting to justify the Mayor’s intervention on a low scoring project
  • Exhibit 3 – Examples of HHCD responses to appeals from developers. The responses do not document specifics for rejections.

If you read nothing else, make sure you see Page 1 of Exhibit 1. It recommended making an award to one project that 25 other projects outscored. Those 25 higher scoring projects were either wait-listed or not recommended. Hmmmm!

Egregious Examples of Specifics Cited in GLO Report

Here are some of the more serious infractions that support the five major findings.

GLO complained about Houston’s lack of consistency, accuracy and fairness. For instance:

  • Data for 40% of tested applications was entered incorrectly, resulting in incorrect scoring.
  • Submission deadlines for some RFPs were shortened in a way that excluded some applications and diminished the quality of others. This resulted in competitive disadvantage for some applicants and presumably an advantage for others.
  • Conflict of interest disclosures were excluded from some rounds of funding.
  • 9 of 12 applications in two other rounds of funding did not have conflict of interest forms actually signed by applicants or co-applicants.
  • Some NOFAs contained language giving the Mayor’s office the right to approve or deny applications in accordance with the Mayor’s priorities, but the Mayor was not required to explain why.
  • The City frequently did not give specific reasons for approving or denying a grant.

ABC13’s Ted Oberg ran this story Tuesday night about the millions of dollars now at risk for poor people who still need help after Harvey.

Here is the Mayor’s response to the charges in GLO review.

Posted by Bob Rehak on November 24, 2021

1548 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.

GLO Extends Deadline for Harvey Homeowner Assistance Applications

The original deadline for Hurricane Harvey Homeowner Assistance applications has been extended from this Friday to New Year’s Eve at 5 P.M. Applications do not have to be completed by then, just started by then. So if you still hope to receive aid, move quickly. Money is running out and eligible applications will be prioritized based on who applied first.

The process involves a large number of documents and complex rules that govern eligibility. Here is the full text of this morning’s press release from the GLO. It includes information on where to apply.

What remained of a home washed downstream during Harvey. Photo by Dan Monks.

AUSTIN — The Texas General Land Office (GLO) has extended the deadline to submit applications for the Homeowner Assistance Program (HAP) to 5 p.m. Dec. 31, 2021. All potential applicants must submit draft applications by the deadline to be considered for eligibility so long as funding is available.

We encourage the community to remember that applications do not need to be fully complete to be submitted. Once application intake concludes, additional program resources will be dedicated to processing applicants for eligibility, through the permitting process and into construction. Applications can be submitted even if documentation is missing as HAP applicant coordinators continue to help applicants who are missing documentation.

The HAP regional offices will remain open, and processing of applications will continue indefinitely until program funds are fully expended. Applications will be considered for award on a first-come, first-served basis, according to the priorities outlined in the Regional Housing Guidelines.

Submitting a complete application does not guarantee eligibility nor funding availability, but applicants must submit a complete application by the deadline to be potentially considered for assistance.

Those residing inside the Houston city limits should apply at recovery.texas.gov/hap/houston, while non-Houston residents of Harris County should apply at recovery.texas.gov/hap/harriscounty. New applicants can also call the toll-free intake center line at 1-866-317-1998.

Harris County and the City of Houston received direct allocations of funding for residents in their jurisdictions. Applicants who previously applied to and are receiving assistance from Harris County and the City of Houston directly should continue to work with their program representatives.

In the City of Houston, applications being processed for eligibility already outnumber available funds, but funds remain available in non-Houston Harris County areas. HAP continues to take waitlist applications in Houston in case additional funding becomes available.

Waitlisted applications will be reviewed for eligibility in the order received based on their submission date, should additional funding be approved. Applications that are started, but not yet submitted by 5 p.m. on Dec. 31, 2021, cannot be considered for assistance.

Thus far, in all 49 counties eligible for Community Development Block Grants for Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funding from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the GLO has approved nearly 6,900 applications for construction, with about 850 homes currently under construction and more than 4,000 completed with keys in the hands of homeowners.

The GLO continues processing completed applications with the expectation of rebuilding up to 10,000 homes total for those needing assistance with available funds, with approximately 3,000 of those homes expected to be rebuilt in Harris County and the City of Houston.

Individuals affected by Hurricane Harvey may qualify for assistance through the Homeowner Assistance Program if:

  • They owned their home
  • It was damaged or destroyed by Hurricane Harvey
  • It was their primary residence at the time of the storm
  • Other eligibility factors also apply.

The program offers qualified homeowners assistance to repair, rehabilitate or rebuild homes damaged by Hurricane Harvey. Potential applicants should review the Homeowner Assistance Program Checklist to have all applicable documents ready prior to applying.

Interested homeowners can visit recovery.texas.gov/hap/houston or recovery.texas.gov/hap/harriscounty to find more information.

– End of Release –

For More Information About Homeowner Assistance Applications

The GLO’s main Homeowner Assistance Program website – https://recovery.texas.gov/hap – also provides links to these important documents:

Applications, including all necessary documentation, must be completed and submitted BEFORE the GLO and its partners will begin processing it for eligibility. Each application submitted must be individually evaluated to determine eligibility. If applicants or potential applicants have questions, please contact 346-222-4686 or 1-866-317-1998 (toll free).

Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/15/2021 based on a Texas GLO press release.

1539 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Special City Meeting Thursday At 2 PM Will Address Multi-Family Housing Flap

City of Houston called a special joint committee meeting for Thursday, October 7, at 2PM between Budget & Fiscal Affairs and Housing and Community Affairs. Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin will chair the meeting.

The agenda is scant. It entails a Housing and Community Development “Financial Update” with three speakers:

  • Keith Bynam, Deputy Director, Housing and Community Development
  • Temika Jones, Chief Financial Officer, Housing and Community Development
  • Andy Icken, Chief Development Officer, Mayor’s Office

I asked Mayor Pro Tem Martin for more detail. He replied, “Fiduciary update on City of Houston Housing, specifically CDBG and DR-17, and the status of the investigation from the City Attorney regarding his decision to bring in outside Firms and appropriate resources to ensure independence and completeness.”

Turner Vigorously Denies Allegations

The last part about the City Attorney refers to a self-investigation Mayor Sylvester Turner launched in the wake of explosive allegations by Tom McCasland, Housing and Community Development’s former director. Turner fired McCasland two weeks ago after McCasland accused the Mayor of improperly influencing the award of a housing grant. The Mayor skipped over the top seven recommendations by McCasland’s department to pick the eighth ranked project. The Mayor’s selection would have delivered one quarter of the affordable housing for basically the same price as the four projects recommended by the Department of Housing and Community Development. It just happened to turn out that the Mayor’s former law partner, Barry Barnes, is also a stakeholder in the eighth ranked project.

Turner vigorously denies any charges of impropriety and asked the City Attorney to investigate. However, the appointment of an appointed official to do the investigation was panned by the media.

Since then, the Texas General Land Office (GLO), HUD and the Harris County Attorney have each launched separate investigations. And now it appears that the City Attorney will also bow to public pressure by appointing an outside investigator.

Documents At Heart of Controversy

I spent the better part of the day reviewing complex documents in this case. I will post them below with some brief comments for those who like to refer to original source materials.

  • The 110-page contract between the GLO and City of Houston for $835 million. This is a subset of the $1.2 billion original contract that became the subject of a lawsuit between the same two parties last year. It lays out the expectations for each party, allocates totals to each program, sets performance goals for each, and lists deadlines. The Mayor signed it on Page 104.
  • A letter from the GLO to Keith Bynam, Interim Director of Housing and Community Development. It requested a review of the City’s Multi-Family Rental Program, starting no later than September 29, 2021.
  • The agenda for a review and a list of requested documents. Some of the acronyms in this may be puzzling. MQA stands for “Monitoring Quality Assurance.” MFRP stands for Multi-Family Rental Program. Page 4 lists the purpose of the review. Page 5 lists the scope. Page 11 lists the items that the City had not yet supplied as of 9/30/2021. Page 12 explains regulations that could penalize the City if it fails to provide the requested records.
  • The 40-page 2021 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) refers to Round 3 of the Disaster Recovery (DR-17) and Multifamily Program. It lays out the ground rules and selection criteria for the controversial Clear Lake apartment complex preferred by the Mayor. This was the “report card” for companies submitting proposals. It told them how they were going to be graded – i.e., what would increase or decrease their chances of success. It includes such factors as “flood resilience,” “experience,” “project readiness,” “cost reasonableness,” “disaster-recovery construction standards,” “location relative to the floodway,” and more.

Significantly, in the last document, the City’s Chief Procurement Officer, Jerry Adams, promises, “Bid proposals will be reviewed, underwritten and scored to select awardees based on a predetermined set of criteria outlined in the NOFA.”

Is There a Contract?

Yes and No.

No, in that a contract has not been signed with the Mayor’s hand-picked developer. The developer has not been paid any money. GLO has not even received a recommendation yet as to the developer. Everything blew up on the launching pad before things got that far.

However, the GLO and HUD contend that the NOFA is a contract. It obligates the City to solicit proposals according to criteria that have been agreed to beforehand.

The documentation calls into question whether bypassing seven higher scoring proposals in favor of a lower scoring project might violate the NOFA and federal procurement process regulations.

Here are some important federal requirements listed in the Code of Federal Regulations under 2 CFR Part 200:

  • Appendix I to Part 200 – Full Text of Notice of Funding Opportunity: “The intent is to make the application process transparent so applicants can make informed decisions when preparing their applications to maximize fairness of the process.” (E. Application Review Information)
  • § 200.319 Competition: “All procurement transactions for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award must be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with the standards of this section and § 200.320.

Additionally, in CONTRACT NO. 21-134-000-C788 above (section 8.05, page 19), the City of Houston agreed to strictly adhere to sections 318-326 of 2 CFR Part 200.

From that perspective, there was and is a contract. As this controversy plays out, the contract question will likely play a central role. Don’t be fooled if someone says, “There was no contract.” Clarify what that means.

To View Special Meeting Thursday At 2PM

To view the Microsoft Teams Live Meeting, go to: https://tinyurl.com/JOINTMTGBFAHOU.

Presentation handouts may be available at: https://www.houstontx.gov/council/committees/bfa.html. As of this posting, no handouts were available.

This meeting will also be broadcast on HTV, the City of Houston’s Municipal Channel.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/6/2021

1499 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.

Blowup Between Mayor and Housing Director Triggers Fraud Investigation over Harvey Funds

Tuesday, City of Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner and Houston Housing and Community Development Director Tom McCasland got into a verbal brawl over alleged improprieties in the distribution of Harvey relief funds.

Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner
Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner photographed in February of 2020.

The trigger was the award of $15 million to build a Clear Lake multi-family housing complex in which the Mayor’s former law partner is a co-developer. (Here is the group’s full application.)

The Mayor overrode the recommendations of McCasland and his staff, who pointed out that $16.2 million could have created four times the number of affordable units in poorer neighborhoods. Those projects all scored higher in the competition for funding.

General Land Office Response

Brittany Eck, a spokesperson for the Texas General Land Office (GLO), issued a statement within hours. She said, “The GLO is looking into the serious allegations of fraud or corruption regarding projects by the City of Houston’s Harvey Multifamily Program. The GLO is responsible for ensuring all money allocated through the Community Development Block Grants for Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) are spent appropriately. These projects and funds are intended to be utilized to aid the greatest number of low-income Texans as possible.”

Eck continued: “As such, we will re-review all requests for funding draws allocated to the City of Houston by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The GLO will coordinate with HUD and other investigative entities to determine what actions should follow regarding these allegations. Fraud has no place in helping Texans recover from disaster.”

She concluded, “Anyone with information relating to potential fraud, waste, and/or abuse is encouraged to report it by calling 1-844-893-8937 or emailing cdr@recovery.texas.gov.”

Mayor’s Response

According to multiple news reports and a press release from the Mayor’s Office, Turner denied specific knowledge of the deal with his former law partner. He claimed there was no impropriety, that McCasland had raised no objections to the deal, and that he (Turner) had the right as Mayor to override McCasland’s objections.

The Mayor also asserted he was trying “to place affordable housing projects throughout the City…” Finally, he claimed he severed all ties with his former law partner before assuming his position as Mayor.

McCasland’s Point of View

McCasland insisted this was not the first time the Mayor’s office interfered. The Houston Chronicle, which broke the story, said “McCasland acknowledged the Mayor has the authority to overturn staff recommendations, but McCasland argued that in this case it represented a subversion of a competitive process to benefit one applicant.

McCasland said he was not alleging fraud, but said the pattern of behavior was emblematic of a broader problem in Turner’s administration, a “do-it-because-I-said-so” management style. McCasland did say that drives out public servants dedicated to integrity and breeds a “culture for corruption.”

Further, the Chronicle article quoted McCasland as saying he briefed the Mayor August 17 and again on August 24.

McCasland said the Clear Lake complex (Huntington at Bay Area) ranked 8th out of 12 proposals, and had the lowest percentage (60%) of its units reserved for low income tenants.

Here’s a 77-page document that catalogs nine months of correspondence between McCasland, MST (Mayor Sylvester Turner) and their staffs regarding the controversial project.

Note McCasland’s comments on page 4. He claims “The outcome of that process was predetermined before the funding opportunity was even issued.”

If you don’t read anything else, skip to the last page. It’s an email from McCasland to the Mayor dated September 17. In it, he summarizes all his objections to the Clear Lake deal. That would seem to contradict the Mayor’s claim that McCasland did not register his objections.

Mayor Fires McCasland

McCasland said to City Council, “I am being forced to participate in a charade that this was a competitive process, when I know it was not a competitive process. That’s the problem here and I’m being forced to ask my teammates to participate in that charade and that is not something that we can do and that is not something that we will do.”

According to those who watched the gripping testimony in City Council, it was like watching someone commit career suicide. By the end of the day, the Mayor issued a terse press release. He denied McCasland’s allegations, said he had lost confidence in McCasland, and that it was time to move on.

Why All of a Sudden?

The big question is this: Why now? McCasland and his embattled department have been under fire for years:

Coming forward when he did – as he did – almost felt like a Law & Order episode in which the DA flipped a witness with a promise of immunity. Some veteran City Hall observers felt McCasland was being unusually frank and fearless for someone at the center of such a huge mess. If there was a pattern of ethics violations, why wait years before objecting to them?

Mayor Likely Overstepped Authority

Both McCasland and the Mayor said the Mayor had the right to overturn staff decisions. But Eck pointed out the Mayor did not have the power to “rewrite” the Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) to favor one applicant; any project selected must meet federal regulations.

She said that had the City written the NOFA to favor affluent neighborhoods, and had HUD and the GLO approved it that way, there would be no problem at this point. However, the City did not do that.

From McCasland’s report and the documentation provided, it appears the City’s award went against the scoring system laid out in the published NOFA, resulting in a competition that was not full, fair and open. The result led applicants to believe their projects would be considered against one criterion when other unknown criteria were actually utilized. 

We now know the City awarded the project to a former partner of the Mayor in a high-income area…ignoring the posted and approved scoring system. In that regard, the Mayor evidently overstepped his authority.

This was not the first time the presence of the Mayor’s former partner in a deal has raised eyebrows and questions. The Houston Chronicle reported in 2018 that several city council members complained about the optics of the partner’s role as a subcontractor for a firm hired to find Harvey victims.

What Next?

The GLO has been in touch with HUD, the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, Gov. Greg Abbott’s office and the Department of Public Safety, according to Eck.

KTRK’s Ted Oberg said DPS would only be involved to investigate criminal matters.

Oberg also reported Wednesday that Chris Brown, the city’s controller, said, “This week’s revelations underscore an ongoing pattern concerning procurement processes and a continued lack of transparency at City Hall.”

Brown, who audits City projects, continued, “In the past several months alone, our office has been denied procurement documents required to conduct an audit of the Strategic Procurement Department and were told to stop all work on a financial transparency project that would bring much-needed insight into the city’s spending practices. Taxpayers deserve a city government that is transparent and above reproach. Unfortunately, recent events suggest that the city is falling short of that goal.”

Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/22/2021

1485 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.

Help Needed: Public Comment Period Swiftly Closing on $750 Million HUD Flood-Mitigation Grant for Harris County

The Texas General Land Office (GLO) has announced that the public comment period for the first amendment to the state’s action plan for Community Development Block Grants for Mitigation (CDBG-MIT) will close in twelve days – on September 29, 2021. The GLO first posted the amendment to its $4.3 billion action plan on August 23rd.

Harris County essentially got shut out of the first round of grants last summer. This amendment would allocate $750 million to Harris County in the second round. That’s good as far as it goes, but Harris County needs more and the proposed amendment needs tweaks. Read more below.

Townhome destroyed by 240,000 cubic feet per second during Harvey.

Background

Earlier this year, the GLO held a statewide competition for approximately $1.1 billion in Harvey flood mitigation funds. Harris County received none, despite being one of the most heavily populated and impacted counties in the state.

A public uproar ensued. GLO Commissioner George P. Bush then agreed to commit $750 million to Harris County for the second round of funding.

The amendment also obligates the county to define a method of distribution (MOD) for that money within US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rules.

The “amendment” has been folded into the state’s action plan. The combined document totals a whopping 1134 pages – more than 100 megabytes. You can download the entire doc from the GLO site here. You can read the relevant seven pages (Section 5.4.5) here. Or read the discussion below.

Outline of MOD Rules

The amendment is based on a Method of Distribution (MOD) program. It makes the GLO the direct recipient of HUD funds and Harris County a sub-recipient.

Harris County must define the MOD plan to allocate funds to eligible entities within rules defined by HUD.

Eligible entities include:
  • Local governments (cities/towns)
  • Special purpose districts (MUDs/improvement districts/drainage districts, etc.)
  • Ports
  • River authorities

GLO encourages prioritization of projects that meet regional mitigation needs.

Harris County’s MOD plan must benefit at least 50% LMI (low-to-moderate income) residents.

Eligible activities include:
  • Flood control and drainage improvements
  • Infrastructure improvements
  • Natural or green infrastructure
  • Communications infrastructure
  • Public facilities
  • Buyouts
  • Relocation assistance to outside of floodplains
  • Public service (housing, legal, job, mental health and general health counseling with a 15% cap)
  • Economic development
  • Elevation of critical structures
  • Planning (5% cap)
Ineligible activities include:
  • Emergency response services
  • Enlargement of a dam or levee
  • Assistance for privately owned utilities
  • Improvement of buildings used by government
  • Funding USACE projects in excess of $250,000
  • Projects involving use of eminent domain that benefit private parties
Buyouts

Have their own guidelines which are too complicated to summarize here.

Timeline
  • The clock starts ticking 4 months after HUD’s approval of Amendment #1.
  • 50% of the grant must be expended by Jan. 12, 2027.
  • 100% must be expended by January 12, 2032.

Experts say all this time may be needed given the complexity of navigating HUD processes, which are lengthier than other sources.

Discussion/Recommendations

Harris County and the Flood Control District support the amendment. It is certainly justified by the number of people in Harris County and the amount of damage inflicted by Harvey.

However, $750 million is not enough. A fairer amount would be closer to $1 billion. As the action plan points out, approximately one third of Harris County went under water during Harvey.

Alan Black, interim executive director of the Harris County Flood Control District, points out several other reasons for increasing the allocation:

The City of Houston has still been left out. Flooding in Harris County has a dual nature. “You can address the rivers and channels,” he says, “but if water can’t get to the bayous, people will still flood when water ponds in neighborhoods. Both riverine and street flooding must be addressed together.”

Black also points out that administrative fees are capped at 6%, but with HUD compliance costs, 8% is more realistic. Moreover, those administrative costs must come out of the $750 million – they are not on top of it. So the real amount of money available for flood mitigation would be reduced to about $690 million.

Finally, the Amendment also allocates approximately $450 million to Houston/Galveston Area Council, much of which would go back into the City of Houston. Black points out that flood mitigation is the Flood Control District’s core competency and that HCFCD can construct projects much faster and more efficiently than HGAC.

An estimated one third of Harris County went under water during Harvey. Photo courtesy of Sally Geis before her rescue.

With the trust fund recently created by Commissioner’s Court, plus $750 million, Black feels confident every project listed under the flood bond could be constructed.

But he worries about inflation of construction costs (which he is already seeing) and the admin costs.

Black intends to build projects as quickly as he can. If there’s a project in an LMI neighborhood that’s shovel ready, he will build it with bond money and not wait for HUD funding which could add years of delays.

That said, there are many projects that are not shovel ready that could benefit from this money. In fact, the need is greater than available funding, says Black.

Make Your Feelings Known

Please consider these points and take time to submit a public comment. Email is probably the easiest way. It doesn’t require you to wait through a meeting for your turn to speak, and doesn’t limit you to a certain amount of time.

Photo by Camille Pagel. Her children are helping to gut the kitchen instead of going to school after the Harvey flood.

How to Register Your Opinion

You can register your opinion in any one of five ways.

All public comments submitted by 5 p.m. on Sept. 29, 2021, will be considered. The method of submittal does not matter. Per federal requirements, the GLO will respond to public comments before the amendment is sent to HUD for final approval.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/17/2021

1480 Days after Hurricane Harvey