Tag Archive for: Ramsey

North Houston Association Identifies 27 Strategic Flood Reduction Priorities

9/19/24 – On Tuesday 9/17/24, the North Houston Association held a reception for members and the press to promote 27 strategic flood-reduction priorities in the new state flood plan.

The state flood plan contains thousands of recommendations from 15 different river basins around the state. However, the boundaries of the North Houston Association (NHA) fall entirely within the San Jacinto River Basin (Region 6). And NHA represents interests only in the northern part of the basin.

North Houston Association Service Area

The Association represents business interests primarily in northern Harris and southern Montgomery Counties.

The 27 priorities extend from northern Montgomery County to central Harris County. They also spread from Waller and Grimes Counties on the west to Liberty County on the East. See map below.

For a comprehensive description of each project and its importance, see: https://www.north-houston.com/nha-strategic-flood-reduction-priorities.

Summary of Each Recommendation

Below is a high level summary of each NHA recommendation. For maps and additional details including benefits, funding potential partnerships, and costs, click on the embedded links.

  1. Garret’s Creek Stormwater Detention Basin will provide approximately 16,850 acre-feet of storage capacity to reduce flood risk along Lake Creek and the San Jacinto West Fork.
  2. Caney Creek Stormwater Detention Basin at FM 1097 will provide approximately 13,900 acre-feet of storage capacity to reduce damage downstream. Steep terrain at this site allowed for necessary volume within a smaller footprint which minimizes land acquisition costs.
  3. East Fork San Jacinto Winters Bayou Dam and Stormwater Detention Basin will provide 45,055 acre-feet of storage capacity north of Cleveland.
  4. Little Caney Creek Stormwater Detention will provide approximately 17,500 acre-feet of storage capacity and will reduce flooding along both Lake Creek and the West Fork.
  5. Joint Reservoir Operations Study for Lake Conroe and Lake Houston will determine the most efficient and safe way to operate the two reservoirs in series. The study will include:
    • Evaluation of synced operations protocols
    • Joint notification protocols
    • Public communication strategies
    • Pre-release procedures
    • Related impacts on water supply
    • Development of a forecasting tool for Lake Houston.
  6. Caney Creek Stormwater Detention Basin at SH105 will provide approximately 28,090 acre-feet of storage capacity to reduce downstream damage. Again, the steep terrain minimizes land acquisition costs.
  7. Another Caney Creek Stormwater Detention Basin in Lake Creek Watershed will provide approximately 19,750 acre- feet of storage capacity.
  8. Peach Creek Stormwater Detention Basin at SH105 will provide approximately 36,197 acre-feet of storage capacity.
  9. Walnut and Birch Creek Stormwater Detention Basins in the Spring Creek Watershed will provide approximately 12,159 acre-feet of storage capacity and 7,731 acre-feet respectively.
  10. River Plantation Channel will widen a 9.3- mile-long stretch of the West Fork to increase conveyance capacity and lower the water surface elevation.
  11. Peach Creek Channelization at I-69 would widen a 4.3-mile-long stretch of the creek to increase conveyance capacity and also provide approximately 800 ac-ft of detention volume.
  12. Spring Creek Woodlands Channel improvements include a 9.7-mile long, 500-feet-wide “benching plan.” It would accommodate increased flow by excavating a series of steps in the floodplain and reduce flood elevations by 3.5 to 8 feet. The project would also provide 12,500 ac-ft of detention volume to mitigate adverse impacts downstream.
  13. West Fork San Jacinto Sediment Removal and Sand Trap Development would try to intercept sand and sediment before it reaches the Lake Houston Area. Miners would remove sand from the river in select locations.
  14. Caney Creek Channelization at I-69 would “bench” a 7.8-miles of the creek to increase conveyance capacity. To offset adverse downstream impacts, the program would require approximately 530 ac-ft of detention volume upstream.
  15. Willow Creek Detention Basins include nine areas along Willow Creek totaling 900 acres. Another 450 acres would be acquired for floodplain preservation.
  16. Spring Creek at I-45 channelization would provide a 300-foot-wide benched improvement stretching 6.9 miles. The project would also include approximately 8,000 ac-ft of detention volume upstream of offset potentially adverse impacts downstream.
  17. Little Cypress Creek Frontier Program acquires land for future, regional stormwater mitigation projects such as stormwater detention and conveyance.
  18. Cypress Creek Implementation Plan outlines a comprehensive, watershed-wide approach to flood mitigation including stormwater detention basins, channel improvements, and right-of-way acquisition for floodplain preservation.
  19. Cypress and Little Cypress Creek Storm Tunnels would convey some stormwater underground to reduce surface flooding.
  20. Kingwood Benching would widen the West Fork to 3,500 feet starting at the elevation of 42 feet. It will require over 30.5 million cubic yards of excavation over a surface area of 3,527 acres. Mitigating potential downstream impacts will also require approximately 923 ac-ft of detention volume upstream.
  21. Greens Bayou Mid-Reach Program will make numerous channel improvements to provide at least a 10-year level of service within the project area.
  22. West Fork San Jacinto Lake Houston Dam Project will add 11 tainter gates to the dam to provide more controlled releases during floods and reduce flood risk.
  23. Greens Bayou Flood Tunnel will reduce surfaces flooding by conveying stormwater underground.
  24. Halls Bayou Flood Tunnel. Ditto.
  25. Halls Bayou Vision Plan and Federal Study would provide a comprehensive flood-reduction plan involving more than 30 separate projects within the watershed.
  26. Luce Bayou Interagency Coordination. The Luce watershed covers about 227 square miles, of which only 23 square miles are within Harris County. Solving flooding problems here will require cooperation with other counties.
  27. Jackson Bayou. A recently completed comprehensive planning effort included a combination of channel conveyance and stormwater detention improvements. Now the challenge is to make them real.

Cooperative Effort

Any effort as large as this involves many community groups, companies and governmental organizations working together. US Representative Dan Crenshaw, Harris County Commissioners Leslie Briones and Tom Ramsey, Freese Nichols, Halff, Quiddity Engineering, and the SJRA all sponsored Tuesday’s event. But there were many other participants including the Greens Bayou Coalition, the Cypress Creek Flood Coalition, the East Aldine District, North Houston District and more.

Subcommittee members within NHA’s Water Committee who crafted the list above.

Eligibility for Funding from State

Alan Black of Quiddity Engineering and a former Acting Director of the Harris County Flood Control District, explained how NHA compiled its list. In addition to the reasons listed in each link above, he emphasized the importance of funding and the state flood plan.

“Every single one of these projects in this plan are included in the recently completed state flood plan,” he said.

Alan Black, VP of Quiddity Engineering, one of the events sponsors.

“The reason that’s important is that since 2019, the state legislature has appropriated more than $1 billion to the Flood Infrastructure Fund. And recently, in the 2023 legislature, they added criteria that said those funds can’t be spent on anything except projects in the state flood plan. So every one of these projects is eligible for funding through state appropriations,” said Black.

Call to Action

Black also acknowledged that a billion dollars is wholly inadequate to fund all the projects in the state plan. He estimated the $54 billion of projects currently included in the plan could easily double within the next five-year planning cycle.

“So my call to action,” said Black, “is to encourage each of you to talk with your state representatives, your state senators, and say, ‘Continue to provide meaningful investment into the flood infrastructure fund, so we can see these projects come to fruition.'”

Posted By Bob Rehak on 9/19/24

2578 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Ramsey to Discuss Proposed County Tax Increase Thursday Night at Town Hall

Harris County Precinct 3 Commissioner Thomas Ramsey PE will discuss the proposed 2024 budget and a potential county tax increase Wednesday at 6 PM at the George H.W. Bush Community Center in Spring.

The community center is at 6827 Cypresswood Drive.

Bring Your Questions

Scan the QR code below to familiarize yourself with the budget. After answering a few high-level questions, it takes you to a summary of this year’s shortfall and ways you could make it up – if you don’t want to raise taxes.

Where to Review the Proposed Budget

The web address listed on the right takes you to a page that includes links to the actual budget documents for past years and this year. Comparing them lets you see how priorities have changed.

The amount of expenses you have to cut if you don’t want to increase taxes is about $200 million.

At the same time, we have critical needs in criminal justice and “maintenance and operations.” For instance, Beryl just trashed the entire county. I’ve created several recent posts that talk about the need to clear ditches and streams of blockages.

Here’s a Harris County Flood Control District presentation that summarizes its needs. And HCFCD is just one department within the county. So what to do?

Come prepared to talk about what you would cut.

Commissioner Ramsey should have a few suggestions in that regard.

Your Needs, Your Dollars, Your Decision

I’m not going to make any recommendations about the proposed county tax increase. While there certainly are legitimate needs, I’ve been burned too many times in recent years by broken promises under the guise of equity.

In selling the 2018 Flood Bond, the county told us it would fix the worst flooding first. But we’re no longer allocating bond money on the basis of flood damage.

With the 2022 Bond, Democrats promised to give each precinct a guaranteed minimum. That lasted until the day after voters approved the bond. How many times will people fall for the false promises?

Some Thought Starters and Head Scratchers

I’d like to see wasteful spending cut. For instance, today we learned about corruption charges by County DA Kim Ogg brought against a county employee responsible for distributing ballot paper during the botched 2022 election.

According to the complaint, the employee allegedly held a private-sector engineering job that paid $250,000 while also being paid $90,000 by the county to distribute ballot paper. Miraculously, most of the paper he failed to distribute was in Republican-leaning precincts.

By the way, on Election Day 2022, the employee reported working 18 hours for Harris County but also claimed to work 8 hours for his other employer. 

Then, of course, there was the whole issue of replacing an election system that had worked well for years (in which elected officials oversaw elections) with an Elections Administrator’s Office. Someone with no election experience headed that office, which terribly botched the narrow 2022 election. She hired more political friends, also with no experience.

Luckily, that $15-million line item got the axe. See page 101 in the budget.

But the $21-million budget for the Office of County Administration did not. That was another Hidalgo innovation that previous administrations did not feel the need for. That department’s budget tripled in two years. (Line 200, Page 100)

And can someone tell me why public defender expenses have more than doubled in less than 2 years? (Page 101)

The closer you look at this year’s proposed budget, the more questions you will have. Bring your list to the:

George HW Bush Community Center
Thursday at 6PM.
6827 Cypresswood Drive, Spring, TX

Please don’t blame the proposed county tax increase on Commissioner Ramsey. He is a conservative voice of reason and responsibility on Commissioners Court.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/14/24

2542 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.

Ramsey Hosting Infrastructure Meeting at KHS Tonight

Harris County Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey’s Office will host a meeting about local infrastructure at Kingwood High School tonight. The meeting will include representatives from the City of Houston, San Jacinto River Authority, Congressman Dan Crenshaw’s office, and Harris County Flood Control District.

6:30-8:00 PM

The infrastructure meeting will follow an open-house format. After brief remarks, residents will be free to mingle with representatives from the various organizations at tables set up throughout the room. So you can come and go as you please.

This will give everyone a chance to discuss issues in depth. See details below.

Focus on Infrastructure

Infrastructure covers a lot of territory. Drainage. Roads. Parks. Water. And more.

Ever wonder:

  • What’s holding up those new floodgates on the Lake Houston Dam?
  • Whether seasonal lowering of Lake Conroe will return if this turns out to be the hurricane season everyone is predicting?
  • What is really being done to reduce flood risk in this area?
  • When will Edgewater Park become a park?
  • Are mitigation efforts keeping us ahead of upstream development?
  • Can the SJRA help reduce sedimentation from sand mines?
  • What happened to the Harris County investigation of Colony Ridge impacts?

So many questions! Tonight’s your chance to ask them. And get answers from people who can do something about your concerns.

Be there. Let local leaders know what your infrastructure priorities are.

Posted by Bob Rehak on on 4/25/24

2431 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Harris County To Reconsider Colony Ridge Impacts

On Tuesday, 1/9/24, Harris County Commissioners court will consider a motion by Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey, P.E. to monitor the potential flooding, housing, and environmental impacts of Colony Ridge on Harris County. (See Item 282 on the Agenda.)

Ramsey submitted a similar item for the 10/10/23 session of Commissioners Court. The Court took no action at that time, but agreed to revisit the issue. Now is that time. And the political landscape has changed.

How Tuesday’s Discussion Will Differ from October’s

The discussion on Tuesday will probably differ radically from October’s.

First, Tuesday’s agenda item is broader; it includes housing and environmental impacts, not just flooding.

Second, in October, the discussion quickly devolved into an argument about the credibility of media allegations that triggered a special session of the State Legislature. Among other things, the media allegations concerned illegal immigration. At the time, County Judge Lina Hidalgo characterized them as “conspiracy theories.” Things went downhill from there.

Ultimately, the State Legislature decided not to do anything about Colony Ridge except build a DPS substation there to beef up law enforcement.

But since then, things have changed.

DOJ/CFPB Lawsuit Changes Political Landscape

The U.S. Department of Justice and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau have filed a lawsuit against the developer for predatory lending practices targeted mainly at Hispanics.

The 45-page lawsuit alleges that the developer violated the:

  • Fair Housing Act
  • Consumer Financial Protection Act
  • Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act
  • Equal Credit Opportunity Act

It also offers specific examples of alleged abuses, including:

  • Sky-high interest rates
  • Untrue statements in marketing materials
  • Omitting material facts
  • Failing to provide required accurate translations
  • Failing to report and disclose other required information
  • Marketing in Spanish but providing legal documents that buyers couldn’t understand in English
  • Foreclosing on properties multiple times

The inclusion of housing issues in Tuesday’s agenda may broaden the base of support for action re: Colony Ridge. Suddenly, we’re talking about people allegedly abusing Lina Hidalgo’s, Lesley Briones’ and Adrian Garcia’s core constituents. All three are Hispanic.

The lawsuit has already motivated LULAC (the League of United Latin American Citizens) to join the fight. The headline of this press release on their website says, “LULAC SUPPORTS FEDERAL ACTION IN MASSIVE REAL ESTATE FRAUD CASE THAT TARGETED LATINOS IN TEXAS.” As a result…

Commissioners may now see Colony Ridge as abusing immigrants, not helping them achieve the American Dream.

Plus, Colony Ridge is expanding into Harris County. That brings the issue much closer to home for Commissioners. We could soon be talking about how the Colony Ridge developer affects voters in Harris County, not voters in Liberty county.

Putting a Finer Point on Upstream Flooding Study

Even though Commissioner’s Court did not approve Ramsey’s Colony Ridge motion last October, the other commissioners didn’t totally ignore him. Commissioner Rodney Ellis also expressed concern about flooding issues originating outside Harris County.

On December 5, 2023, Commissioners Court approved a study of several watersheds including the East Fork San Jacinto River, which drains Colony Ridge. The purpose: to identify potential flood impacts due to unmitigated flows coming into Harris County from upstream counties and to evaluate the impacts of the increased flows on erosion and sedimentation issues.

If approved, Ramsey’s agenda item for next Tuesday, could put a much finer point on that. Instead of looking at flooding issues that originate in surrounding counties in general, it would specifically look at erosion issues originating in Colony Ridge. That could potentially lead to more legal action against Colony Ridge depending on what they find.

At a minimum, I hope it stimulates a discussion about two things:

In regard to the latter, I would point out that Harris and Liberty Counties have almost identical regulations for construction of drainage ditches. However, we get very different results.

The image on the right was taken over Colony Ridge. Such erosion contributes to the buildup of sediment that reduces the conveyance of rivers and streams, contributing to flooding.

For more information and issues relating to Colony Ridge, see this post.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/5/2024

2320 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.

Karma Strikes Again: Colony Ridge Drainage Systems Severely Eroding

October 8, 2023 – Karma is fast catching up with the corner-cutting Colony Ridge developer in Liberty County. Drainage infrastructure that doesn’t meet Liberty County regulations is fast eroding.

And tomorrow, a special session of the Texas legislature will start investigating the embattled development. The special session will focus on crime, infrastructure, illegal immigration, and more.

To offset negative publicity, the developer invited legislators to meet at his development last week and tour it.

But just before the meeting, Liberty County deputies, a narcotics unit, and SWAT team responded to an abduction at gunpoint. They also launched a manhunt for two escaped suspects in the sprawling development, which is now 50% larger than Manhattan.

On the day of the developer’s meeting, the main entrance to the development flooded. Badly. Ditches designed to keep roads clear in a 5-year storm overflowed during a 1-year rain.

The next day when the storm clouds cleared, an aerial survey showed that Colony Ridge drainage channels and stormwater detention basins were badly damaged.

Had the developer simply followed Liberty County regulations, he could have reduced or avoided the costly damage.

Missing Erosion Controls

Section 50 of Liberty County’s Subdivision and Development regulations specifies requirements for construction of drainage ditches and stormwater detention basins.

The County emphasizes the need to control erosion and sedimentation. It warns these twin threats can have very serious effects on stormwater ditches and basins. Specifically, they can:

  • Cause slope failures
  • Reduce the efficiency of drainage channels
  • Clog drainage culverts
  • Reduce channel capacity
  • Reduce maintainability of drainage facilities
  • Increase maintenance costs
  • Require more frequent repairs
  • Increase turbidity
  • Impair water quality.

To counter these problems, the regulations say…

“Interceptor structures and backslope swale systems are required to prevent sheet flows from eroding the side slopes of open channels and detention facilities.”

Liberty County Subdivision and Development Regulations, Page 100

The diagram below explains how they work.

backslope interceptor design

The regulations also specify design requirements for these structures and other erosion control measures. Altogether, Colony Ridge apparently violated requirements for:

  • Backslope interceptor and swale systems
  • Bermuda grass on side slopes of channels and ditches
  • Erosion controls around outfall pipes
  • Geo-textile bedding under rip rap
  • Pilot channels at the bottom of detention basins
  • Maintenance strips
  • Storage of excavated dirt
  • Side-slope angles

Not all locations in Colony Ridge exhibit all problems. Regardless, karma was swift. Thursday’s 1-year rain severely eroded the side slopes of channels and basins. Eroded sediment also started filling in new ditches and basins.

Repairs and compliance – if attempted – will be costly and time consuming.

Karma Hurts Residents Upstream and Down

While critics might rejoice at the karma, others will pay the price. The developer’s practices increase flood risk for people in Colony Ridge as well as those downstream.

  • In the development, erosion threatens property.
  • Downstream, sediment reduces the conveyance of streams, increasing flood risk.

TCEQ has warned the developer about his construction practices before. But many dubious practices continue. See photos below.

The first two are NASA satellite images from Google Earth. I shot the rest on 10/6/23 with one exception.

Threat to Colony Ridge Residents

When a three-mile ditch down the center of Colony Ridge was completed, it was about 120 feet wide at the yellow line.

August 2017

Today, it’s 76 feet wider.

Residents on EACH side lost 38 feet of their back yards.

This ditch has steadily widened since its construction. Without backslope interceptor swales or grass to reduce erosion, millions of cubic feet of dirt swept downstream from this single ditch.

Then, when the water slowed at the headwaters of Lake Houston, the sediment dropped out of suspension, reducing the conveyance of the East Fork San Jacinto.

Here are several shots showing what that erosion damage looks like up close from a helicopter.

The ravine forms more ravines.
No room for a maintenance road here.
Or here.

Virtually every ditch in Colony Ridge has erosion and compliance problems. Here’s another one.

No maintenance road. No backslope interceptor swales. No grass on sides of ditch. Note: home on right has no back fence. What happened to it?
Note piles of dirt stored where they can erode back down into ditches.

Even detention basins in the newer sections of Colony Ridge have erosion problems. Again, most don’t have grass on the side slopes. Nor do they have backslope interceptor swales. Many, like the one below, don’t have room for maintenance roads.

Note the erosion threat already to these recently placed mobile homes in a newer section of Colony Ridge.
Erosion will soon threaten one of the new roads in Colony Ridge. Regs specify that rip rap like you see here should have had a geo-textile lining under it to reduce erosion.
Erosion washed sediment into new basin. Also note how erosion is starting to block the outfall at the lower right.
No backslope swales here. Not much Bermuda grass either. Regs say “side slopes shall be no steeper than 3 horizontal to 1 vertical (3:1).”
No grass or backslope interceptor system here. No pilot channels either.
Note piles of excavated dirt stacked on both sides of road, eroding back into ditches.

As all those ditches and basins gradually fill in, they will add to future flood risk.

But repairing such issues will be a big, costly challenge – one that the developer has ignored for years.

Threat to Downstream Residents

All this erosion also contributes to downstream flooding and likely violates Section 11.086 of the Texas water code. It states that “No person may divert … the natural flow of surface waters in this state … in a manner that damages the property of another…”

Where does all that eroded sediment eventually go? To Lake Houston, of course.

East Fork San Jacinto downstream from Colony Ridge on Thursday 10/5/23 – same day as shots above.

The river slows down where it meets the headwaters of Lake Houston. That causes sediment to drop out of suspension.

Harris County, City of Houston and the State just finished a major dredging effort on the East Fork that cost the public tens of millions of dollars.

Before dredging, it looked like this.

East Fork Mouth Bar after Imelda and before dredging. This bar grew 4,000 feet between Harvey and Imelda.

But the cost is only part of the issue. Reduction in the river’s conveyance contributed to the flooding of thousands of nearby homes during Harvey and Imelda.

Harris County Commissioners Court May Address Issues on Tuesday

Drainage is a public-safety issue. And it’s not the only one caused by the developer’s disregard for regulations.

  • Colony Ridge has filled in wetlands.
  • TCEQ has also documented problems with the Colony Ridge sewage system that led to a 48,000 gallons of fecal matter escaping into Lake Houston, the source of drinking water for 2 million people.
  • Colony Ridge does not have enough fire hydrants or water pressure to comply with the Liberty County fire code.

Harris County Commissioners Court may discuss these problems on Tuesday at the request of Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey, PE. See Item 406 on the Agenda.

The developer alleges that racism motivates criticism of his Hispanic development. But racism does not explain flooding, feces and fire.

The failure of a developer to follow regulations shouldn’t pit Liberty County against Harris County, rich against poor, or Democrats against Republicans.

We all suffer equally. We all face increased risk. And Colony Ridge is one issue where we should all find common cause.

I hope that Commissioners Courts in both counties support the legislature’s investigation into Colony Ridge. I also pray that both Counties can work together to protect all residents.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/8/23

2231 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.

Funding Announced for Massive Detention-Basin Complex on Cypress Creek

9/25/23 – Approximately 425,000 people live in the 204 square mile Cypress Creek watershed which has severe repetitive flooding. At a press conference this morning, County, State and Federal officials announced $50 million in funding for a massive complex of stormwater detention basins on Cypress Creek at T.C. Jester Blvd. to help protect those people.

The basins will span approximately 150 acres on both sides of T.C. Jester and include 1200-acre feet of planned stormwater detention capacity, wet bottoms, and recreational trails.

Approximate boundaries of three detention basins – one will go west of TC Jester and two more east. White area is existing basin.

Altogether, the stormwater detention capacity in this area will increase approximately 75X.

Google Earth calculation of existing and planned ponds

The existing pond covers approximately 2 acres and the new areas will cover more than 150.

Looking E over T.C. Jester. Existing 2-acre basin in foreground was site of press conference. Wooded area beyond will become two new detention basins.

Thanks to County, State and Federal Governments

The $50 million will come from three primary sources:

Harris County Flood Control District Executive Director Tina Petersen also reminded everyone of the money designated for Cypress Creek in the Flood Bond, which was considerable.

The GLO/HUD money has been requested but not yet confirmed although all indications are positive at this time. GLO Commissioner Dawn Buckingham has committed to making sure that people in all parts of Harris County benefit from the $750 million.

Timetable and Project Scope

HCFCD Director Dr. Petersen addressed the next steps in the projects. “A portion of the projects on the east side of T.C. Jester will start construction in the next 6 to 9 months. The remainder should go into construction no later than the end of 2024. So we’re going to see these projects move quickly. This type of progress would not have been possible without the critical funding that our Congressman and Representative secured “

The overall project includes three stormwater detention basins within a broader footprint. Two basin compartments are on the east side of T.C. Jester Boulevard and another is on the west side.

Excavation of the west side basin (see below) has already begun under an E&R (Excavation and Removal) Contract. A private contractor is removing the dirt, almost free of charge, then selling it at market rates to recoup costs and make a profit. An estimated 120,000 cubic yards of material has already been excavated to date.

Work to date on basin west of T.C. Jester. Looking N toward Cypresswood Drive.

The contractor began removing dirt in the general area to get a head start on construction, even before final design of the basin. The final design will begin soon.

Each basin will have a wet-bottom with maintenance berms, side slopes and high banks along the outside.

Construction for all basins should begin no later than Q4 2024. They have estimated 8-month construction timelines.

Extent of Benefits

The three stormwater detention basins will work together – taking stormwater from the main stem of Cypress Creek and holding it until water levels recede on the main stem.

The projects will also have recreational benefits such as hike and bike trails.

Director Petersen stated that the projects will primarily benefit the local area, i.e., benefits will not extend very far downstream. The 1200 acre feet will likely take several thousand homes out of the floodplain.

Even though those homes will be in the Cypress Creek area, 1200 acre feet being held back upstream is 1200 acre feet that won’t be in the living rooms of Lake Houston Area residents during the next big flood.

More to Come

Ramsey also pointed to more projects to come, though he didn’t elaborate. He said, “This is $50 million of the $100 million that will be spent over the coming months in the Cypress watershed. So hold on. We’re getting started. This isn’t the end. This is the beginning.”

Speakers at T.C. Jester Detention Basin Press Conference included U.S. Representative Dan Crenshaw, State Representative Sam Harless, Harris County Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey P.E., and HCFCD Executive Director Dr. Tina Petersen.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/25/2023

2218 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Commissioners Approve New Formula for Scoring Future Flood Projects

Harris County Commissioners Court approved a motion on 1/10/23 that will change the formula for scoring future flood projects. It gives two thirds of a potential project’s score to population density, building density and social vulnerability, but only 20% to flood risk and nothing to actual flood damage.

Stacking the Deck

The new formula could be used both to compare and eliminate projects. With only 20% of a project’s score determined by flood risk, fixing minor flooding inside the Beltway could soon take precedence over fixing severe flooding outside the Beltway. The formula provides only the illusion of transparency and fails to ensure fairness.

worst first
Chart showing feet above flood stage of 33 gages on misc. bayous in Harris County during Harvey.

During Hurricane Harvey, the highest flooding in the County occurred outside the Beltway along the San Jacinto River, Spring Creek and Cypress Creek.

Evacuation Route during Harvey
North Shore evacuation route during Harvey. Photo by Jim Balcom.

Regardless, despite being the largest watershed in the county and one of the most heavily damaged, few flood-mitigation dollars have come to the San Jacinto Watershed.

Since Harvey, 4.6 more flood-mitigation dollars have gone to the Brays watershed than the county’s largest, the San Jacinto.

Brays is the county’s most populous watershed. It’s also where Commissioner Ellis lives. Could that have anything to do with the factors and weights in the new formula for scoring future flood projects? They include:

  • 45% Project Efficiency
    • 15% Resident Benefits 
    • 30% Structure Benefits 
  • 20% Existing Conditions 
  • 20% Social Vulnerability Index 
  • 5% Long Term Maintenance Costs 
  • 5% Minimizes Environmental Impacts 
  • 5% Potential for Multiple Benefits 

This new formula omits consideration of damage, risk reduction and partnership funding. Partnership funding has provided approximately one third of all Flood Control District funding since 2000. The new formula gives the most weight to building and population density incorporated in the Project Efficiency formula (project cost divided by # residents and structures benefitted). This 15-page PDF explains how projects are scored within each category above.

Other Problems with Formula

The formula for scoring future flood projects, proposed by Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis has many other problems. It also:

  1. Does not differentiate between types of structures while giving them almost a third of the weight. Thus, a mobile home counts for as much as a hospital or college. 
  2. Gives no weight to protecting critical infrastructure such as bridges, hospitals, grocery stores, wastewater treatment plants, etc. 
  3. Omits actual damage from consideration, which “ground-truths” risk assumptions (see Existing Conditions, Page 6).
  4. Eliminates consideration of partnership funds, which have provided almost one third of HCFCD funding since 2000
  5. Gives 20% weight to social vulnerability, but ignores the severity of flooding. Thus a low-income home with one inch of flooding counts as much as an entire condo complex swept away by 22-foot deep floodwaters. 
  6. Makes awards more subjective because HCFCD has no way of estimating how many people live in apartment buildings or homes. HCFCD can count buildings in satellite photos, but the number of residents benefitted will always be a guess. Census tracts do not follow floodplain boundaries. 
  7. Undermines efforts to prevent flooding, as opposed to correcting it after people are damaged. Prevention, such as HCFCD’s Frontier Program, is always more cost effective in the long run. 
  8. Places 45% of the weight on cost data that has not yet been determined when deciding whether to explore projects further.

Ellis’ proposal passed 3-1 yesterday. Commissioners Rodney Ellis, Adrian Garcia, and Lesley Briones voted for it. Commissioner Tom Ramsey voted against. County Judge Lina Hidalgo was absent. Commissioner Ellis ran the meeting.

To see the discussion on Ellis’ proposal, click on “Departments 2 of 2” in the meeting video and scroll forward to 3:03:53. The discussion lasts 16 minutes. Below is a summary of key points and their time codes.

Summary of Debate with Video Timecodes

Ellis positions his proposal as a “transparency measure.” 3:04:10

Dr. Tina Petersen, head of the Flood Control District describes it as a “clear, consistent and equitable basis” for comparing projects that the flood control district is undertaking. 3:04:53

Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey says “criteria and frameworks are not necessarily a bad thing,” but then expresses a list of concerns about the proposal, none of which are addressed later in discussion. 3:06:19

Petersen responds that it’s “not perfect.” She says, “there’s no reason we can’t continue to refine this tool.” It’s very “general.” It let’s us “use what we have as a basis for comparison and continue to look forward to opportunities to refine” the tool.

Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia asks whether the proposal will add costs or time to projects. 3:11:00

Petersen says no. “The framework should not require additional costs as long as we don’t look back.”

New Precinct 4 Commissioner Asks Probing Questions

New Precinct 4 Commissioner Briones then asks “how often will it be updated?” 3:13:20

Petersen replies, “We’re not considering making any changes to the framework.” She describes the primary uses as: comparing projects and determining which are eligible for funding from the Flood Resilience Trust.

Briones asks whether the framework incorporates “severity of flooding.”

Petersen points to the “efficiency” metric as the closest thing because it incorporate the number of people and structures benefitted. But Petersen sidesteps the point of the question about “depth of flooding” raised by Ramsey earlier. 3:14:25

Briones questions why partnerships are excluded.

Petersen responds that the framework was designed for use with the flood resilience trust, on projects where partnership dollars were no longer considered a possibility. “It was intended to be a backstop for projects that do not have partnership funding.” Petersen does not mention $750 million in HUD/GLO dollars pending final approval.

Briones next asks whether the framework will provide a threshold for making go/no-go decisions on projects. 3:15:40

Petersen replies, “I want to be clear. It will be used for determining whether a project is eligible for flood resilience trust funds.”

At 3:19:30, Ellis quickly closes debate before someone asks for clarification. The measure passes.

Debate Filled with Unresolved Contradictions

Petersen sidestepped Brione’s tough questions about severity of flooding and the eliminating projects. At one point, Petersen said it was “only a point of comparison.” Later, she said it would determine project “eligibility.”

She also equivocated in her response to Ramsey’s concerns. At first she implied the framework was a first step. Later she said that she didn’t plan to change it. Even though the framework is intended for future projects, most of Petersen’s answers related to the past.

Bellwether Vote

Only one thing is certain.

We’re in for four more years of fog described as transparency!

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/11/2023

1961 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.

Flood- and Garcia-Bond Updates

The Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) August update to County Commissioners on the progress of the 2018 flood bond shows a continued lopsided distribution of funds in favor of low-to-moderate income (LMI) watersheds. It also showed slowing activity overall.

Separately, the County has posted a new website and scheduled input sessions for Adrian Garcia’s proposed new $1.2 billion bond proposition(s). The dates of input sessions relative to the legislative deadline for bond language make it clear that the bond language will not reflect much voter input.

Lopsided Distribution of Funds Continues for Flood Bond

Five watersheds with a majority of LMI residents have received 39% of all the flood bond spending. LMI is defined as “below median income for the region.” Brays, Greens, White Oak, Halls and Hunting watersheds received a total of $430.4 million – an average of $86 million each. Together, the other 18 watersheds received $443.5 million – an average of $24.6 million each. Countywide projects received the rest – $217 million.

Page 9 from the August Flood Bond Update.
Data transferred from map above and arranged by total spending per watershed.

I’ve said it before. Facts do not support the political narrative that affluent watersheds get all the funding. To see what the funding in those five LMI watersheds helped buy, see the photos in these posts.

Flood-Bond Progress Appears to Slow

During the month, HCFCD:

  • Awarded only one new construction contract valued at $1 million.
  • Awarded three new agreements with other contractors but spent $0 with them.
  • Completed 19 buyouts compared to 21 the previous month.
  • Spent $2.4 million on buyouts compared to $6.6 million the previous month.

The total value of active capital improvement construction projects fell to $225.8 million from $231.9 million in July and $235.6 million in June. Out of that, the Lake Houston Area still only has $2,000 or 0.0009% of the total. Although that should improve in the future, it could also worsen, depending on election outcomes in November.

Page 12 from full update.

Total reported bond spending increased to $1.1 billion, up from $1.06 billion the previous month, an increase (with rounding) of slightly more than $40 million.

Overall progress of the bond program? 23.5% complete – four years into a 10-year program.

However, HCFCD believes it is only slightly behind schedule. The District’s key performance indicators stayed steady at .97 percent.

Major-Maintenance Flood-Bond Spending Holds Steady, but Still Lopsided

Major maintenance projects held fairly steady. HCFCD spent $78.4 million in August compared to $78.8 million in July. But there’s only one maintenance project in the entire northeastern section of the county – some drainage system repairs in the Jackson Bayou watershed with an unspecified value. It’s unspecified because the report lumps it together with two projects in the Halls Bayou watershed. The total for all three is about $1 million. Assuming each project got one third of that million, the entire northeastern section of the county received 0.42% of all the maintenance spending from the bond last month.

Active maintenance projects reported on page 11 of full report.

The largest group of maintenance projects is along Cypress Creek and its tributaries. There are 14 projects valued at $48.1 million. That’s 61.4% of the major-maintenance total.

Input Sessions for Garcia-Bond

Separately, Adrian Garcia has proposed another $1.2 billion bond – even though hundreds of millions remain from the 2015 bond. Unlike the 2018 Flood Bond, which specified projects in each watershed so people knew what they were supposedly getting, Garcia’s bond contains only three high-level categories split up into Propositions A, B, and C. They include:

  • A) Public safety: $100 million
  • B) Transportation: $900 million
  • C) Parks and Trails: $200 million

That’s right. Garcia wants to spend twice as much on hike-and-bike trails as public safety.

The county will hold four open houses in each of the four precincts during the next five weeks. It will also hold four virtual open houses. For a complete schedule, see HarrisCounty2022Bond.org.

The one input session in the northeastern section of Precinct 3 will be at the Humble Civic Center at 6PM on October 4th. Neither Kingwood, Huffman, Atascocita, nor Crosby will have its own input session.

Bond Language Will Not Reflect Voter Input

The county must post bond language by September 30 at the latest. But the input sessions run until October 20th. Early voting starts on October 24. And Election Day is November 8. So the bond language will not reflect much voter input. Neither the county, nor media, will have much time to digest voter input. It’s pure political theater.

The bond website simply says that “Input will be shared with Harris County Precinct staff as they make decisions regarding future projects.”

https://harriscounty2022bond.org

The bond website provides absolutely no detail about SPECIFIC PROJECTS or WHERE projects would be – despite promises made by the County Administrator to Commissioners Court.

In contrast, my records show that Harris County Flood Control under Judge Ed Emmett posted a comprehensive list of projects almost two full months before the Flood Bond Referendum in 2018.

Equity and Political Leaning Will Guide Distribution of Garcia-Bond Funds

Commissioners Ramsey and Cagle argued for months to delay the bond referendum until details could be nailed down, but Hidalgo, Garcia and Ellis refused.

During debate in Commissioners Court, it became clear that Hidalgo, Garcia and Ellis intend to use “equity principles” to divvy up the money, not just to prioritize the start date of projects as they did with the 2018 flood bond. Hidalgo, Garcia and Ellis even passed a motion that would give Democratic-leaning Precincts about 40% more money than Republican-leaning Precincts. For instance, Precinct 3 would be guaranteed only $220 million. That’s 18% of the total even though P3 has 47% of the county’s unincorporated area to maintain, improve and patrol.

Why Trust in Government is Eroding

During debate, Rodney Ellis even bragged about how he redefined “equitable distribution of funds” in the 2018 Flood Bond text after the election.

My takeaway: Hidalgo, Garcia and Ellis don’t want to be held accountable. They talk transparency, but this is nothing more than a slush fund. And this is why trust in government is eroding in my humble opinion.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/20/22

1848 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.

Former Commissioner Radack Files Second Redistricting Lawsuit; Hidalgo Responds to First

Former Harris County Precinct 3 Commissioner Steve Radack filed a redistricting lawsuit on New Years Eve last week. This lawsuit comes hot on the heels of a previous lawsuit by Commissioners Jack Cagle, Tom Ramsey and their supporters. That lawsuit is now in the Texas Supreme Court. Here’s an overview of where both cases stand. The fate of flood mitigation in Harris County could hang in the balance.

File photo from 2021 of Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis whose redistricting plan sparked two lawsuits.

Radack Lawsuit Alleges Lack of Sufficient Public Notice

The Radack lawsuit alleges that County Judge Lina Hidalgo, Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis, and Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia passed a redistricting plan without providing sufficient public notice.

Radack claims that constitutes a violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA). TOMA requires that members of the public must have 72 hours notice of provisions being considered, but the Ellis-3 redistricting plan was posted on the day of the meeting in which it was approved. The public had virtually no advance notice of the plan, and thus, no opportunity to comment on it. People first learned of the plan when Ellis rolled it out in the meeting during which he, Garcia and Hidalgo approved it.

The lawsuit further alleges that:

  • Hidalgo, Ellis and Garcia planned the surprise in advance.
  • Their plan makes it impossible for Jack Cagle to get re-elected.
  • It will give Democrats a 4-1 supermajority.
  • Failure to timely post notice of the plan invalidates the vote on it.
  • In violating TOMA, Lina Hidalgo overstepped her authority and therefore does not enjoy governmental immunity.

A supermajority would give Hidalgo, Ellis and Garcia the power to shift flood-bond dollars around at will.

Radack filed his lawsuit on December 31st. The county clerk posted it on her website on Monday, January 3rd. The case landed in the 190th Court where Judge Beau Miller presides.

Hidalgo, Ellis and Christian Menafee, the County Attorney, issued public denials on Tuesday’s evening news. However, they have not yet filed a formal response to Radack’s lawsuit with the court.

Hidalgo Files Response to Cagle/Ramsey Suit Pending in Supreme Court

Commissioners Jack Cagle, Tom Ramsey and their supporters filed the first lawsuit. It is currently before the Texas Supreme Court. Their complaint focused on denial of voting rights for more than a million people. Judge Dedra Davis of the 270th District Court dismissed that lawsuit without explanation. The plaintiffs then directly filed for a writ of mandamus from the Supreme Court. Plaintiffs did not have time to go through the normal appeal process.

In that case, Hidalgo filed a 185-page response on December 30th to the plaintiffs’ charges. Hidalgo contends that:

  • The county did not violate voting rights because when you redistrict precincts with staggered terms, voting rights for some will always be delayed but not permanently denied.
  • The court has no way to evaluate whether Harris County went “way beyond” what was necessary to redistrict
  • Plaintiffs took too long to seek relief.

For the full text of Hidalgo’s response, click here.

Plaintiffs in this case also filed a request for an expedited ruling. To affect the next election without delaying it, a ruling would reportedly have to come sometime in January.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/5/2022

1590 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Will Redistricting Affect Flood-Mitigation Priorities?

The recent redistricting of Harris County precincts could not have been more disruptive. More than half the county’s residents changed both precincts and commissioners. Can you say, “Tossed Salad”? It will take some time to work this out. In the meantime, “Many are asking how will new precinct boundaries affect flood-mitigation priorities?”

We’ve already seen how Commissioner Adrian Garcia tried to divert flood bond money from an area he was giving up in the redistricting process to one he was inheriting. That got voted down, but…

Priorities Already Altered Multiple Times in Past

We’ve also seen how Democrats re-ordered flood-bond priorities in 2019, shifted money from other budgets to accelerate projects in poor watersheds, and are suggesting another flood bond with new priorities based on so-called racial equity.

Officially, Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) does not allocate flood-bond mitigation money by precinct. They allocate it by watershed and project – with the most money going to the most heavily flood-damaged areas.

But those who watch Commissioners Court regularly know that Commissioners control HCFCD priorities, and no project moves forward without their approval.

Lake Houston Dam Example

All this raises the question, “How will the re-alignment of Commissioner’s precincts re-align flood-mitigation priorities?”

For instance, the Lake Houston Dam was half in Precinct 1 and half in Precinct 2 both controlled by Democrats. But P2 Commissioner Garcia has given that area up. The east side of the dam will now be in Precinct 3 now controlled by Republican Tom Ramsey. Ramsey will now also control virtually all the homes around the lake with the exception of a small area in Summerwood. The flood bond allocated $20 million to help support expansion of the flood gates on Lake Houston (Project CI-028). How solid is that commitment now that Democrats have given up most of the area?

Across the county, from Cypress Creek to Armand Bayou, people have dozens of questions like that about projects affecting them. The answers will take time to sort out.

New High-Resolution Precinct Maps Finally Available

Until a few days ago, the lack of resolution and streets in redistricting maps made it difficult to tell exactly where the new precinct boundaries were.

But just last week, the Harris County Attorney posted a new high-resolution map showing new boundaries. The map also shows major streets and voting precincts (in addition to the county precincts).

The biggest changes happened on the north side of the County where Commissioner Adrian Garcia staged a strategic retreat from Republican voters to bolster his re-election chances. Also, Precincts 3 and 4 switched positions. P3 formerly on the west side of the county is now on the north and east sides. And Precinct 4, formerly on the north and east sides is now mostly on the west and north sides.

The plan, designed and approved by Democrats, will force Commissioners Cagle and Ramsey to run for re-election in areas where they are relatively little known – unless they want to move their residences. Commissioner Rodney Ellis carefully drew district boundaries so that Cagle and Ramsey would no longer live in precincts they once represented. And by law, Commissioners must live in the precinct they represent.

Ramsey and Cagle will now have whole new watersheds to learn.

Watershed Boundaries Not Yet Shown on New Precinct Map

Unfortunately, the new high-res precinct map does not show watershed boundaries, although it shouldn’t be hard to create one – for someone with better Photoshop skills than mine!

At the moment, to see how your watershed could be affected, compare two maps side by side.

The latter shows watershed boundaries if you click on the Watershed button in the left-hand column.

Most of the Lake Houston Area including Huffman, Kingwood, Humble (east of Bush Intercontinental Airport), Atascocita, Crosby and Spring will now be in Precinct 3 with Commissioner Tom Ramsey.

New Precincts adopted by Harris County Commissioners Court in 2021. Click link for high res map.

To learn more about redistricting and your new commissioner, visit the landing pages for Harris County Precinct 3 or Harris County Precinct 4.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/15/2021

1539 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.