12/4/25 – The new 512-acre-foot Mercer Stormwater Detention Basin Project at FM1960 and the Hardy Tollroad is finally nearing completion. The project – originally expected to take a year – took more than three and a half.
The impending completion is good news. But the length of time it took is not. It raises serious questions for hundreds of millions of dollars of other projects with tight deadlines imposed by the federal government.
Before we get to that, let’s first look at Mercer.
Mercer Project Announced in June 2022
In June 2022, Harris County Commissioner Rodney Ellis announced the start of the Mercer project next to Mercer Botanic Gardens. He said the twin basins would be done on an expedited basis and take a year.
Photos taken this afternoon show that the excavation work appears to be done, but the landscaping work remains. Specifically, the sides and perimeters of the basins need to be planted with grass to retard erosion.
Close examination of the photos show that recent rains have already washed a significant amount of dirt from the slopes into the bottom of the twin basins.
The first photo shows the two Mercer basins from over Cypress Creek.
Looking S at Mercer Basins. Hardy Tollroad in upper right. FM1960 at top of frame.
Notice how the north basin is partially grassed in. The south basin has no landscaping yet. Neither basin has grass on the perimeter roads or back-slope interceptor swales.
Closer view of south basin (top) also shows erosion on slopes of north basin (bottom).Reverse angle shows erosion on slopes of north basin also. Note collection of sediment at bottom of ramp (lower right).Looking N from over FM1960. Wider shot shows erosion in foreground. Luckily, contractor has not yet demobilized equipment.
Implications for Other Projects with Tight Deadlines
As I write this, HCFCD is gearing up to construct eleven other projects related to HUD/GLO Community Development Block Grant Disaster Relief (CDBG-DR) grants. They total almost a third of a billion dollars. All eleven must be completed before February 28, 2027 – just 15 months from now.
Yet most of the projects won’t be advertised for bids until the first quarter of next year. And two of the projects won’t even be bid until the second quarter of next year according to HCFCD’s most recent Bid Outlook Calendar published on 10/15/25.
One is the $32.8 million East TC Jester Stormwater Detention Basin. The other is the $29.4 million Kluge Stormwater Detention Basin (not even shown on the calendar). Both fall into Commissioner Tom Ramsey’s Precinct 3.
Ramsey has requested “discussion and possible action on the Harris County Flood Control District Construction Bid Calendar.” See Item 495 on the 12/11/25 Commissioners Court agenda.
According to sources in the Flood Control District, it typically takes 3 to 6 months from the time a project is first advertised until dirt starts flying. That would not leave much time to complete the disaster relief projects. Accordingly…
HCFCD Requests $17 Million for Outside Help
Also on the agenda for December 11 are five items relating to staff augmentation for HCFCD. Items 299, 302, 303, 304, 305 request “engineering services to provide program management, project management, construction management, and inspection services for the development and implementation of CDBG-DR and CDBG-MIT projects.” They include five engineering companies and total $17 million:
Ardurra Group $5 million
Jacobs Engineering $1 million
WSP USA $1 million
BGE $5 million
Quiddity $5 million
I have posted ad nauseam about the slowdown at HCFCD. Let’s hope it doesn’t cost the County the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars.
2/6/2025 – Fireworks erupted in Harris County Commissioners Court today over the 2018 Flood Bond and Subdivision Drainage shortfalls. It was a rare display of bipartisan outrage.
All four commissioners and the county judge expressed concerns about budget shortfalls. The County Engineer, the Head of the Flood Control District, the County Budget Manager and the County Administrator all took turns in the crosshairs when it became clear that the County didn’t have enough money to deliver flood-mitigation projects promised long ago.
That said, the cost of subdivision drainage projects alone increased from $451 million to $590 million since 2018. Comparable figures were not provided for flood-bond projects although the July 2024 Flood Bond Update alluded to 33 projects that have “uncertainty about whether current funding levels are sufficient to take the associated projects through construction.”
Reasons cited for the subdivision drainage project budget shortfall included 30-35% inflation in the construction sector, scope creep, additional projects, and adoption of higher Atlas-14 rainfall standards after passage of the flood bond. Atlas 14 requires projects to handle larger rainfall events than the previous standards.
Reasons cited for the bond-project funding uncertainty included “inflationary pressures and the rising cost of property acquisition, as well as potential schedule impacts due to inclement weather, supply chain pressures, and regulatory changes.”
“An Abysmal Failure” and Loss of Trust
During the contentious 24-minute discussion, the County Judge said that the county needs another flood bond.
Precinct One Commissioner Rodney Ellis said that he would campaign against it. Ellis also accused the County Engineer of ignoring the county’s equity plan.
“This is an abysmal failure to deliver on the bond issue.”
Rodney Ellis, Harris County Precinct 1 Commissioner
Ellis also said, “It would be very challenging to go to voters in Precinct One [and ask them] to ever trust this county with money again … even to trust me. … This is an abomination.”
We haven’t heard the last of this. Ellis addressing the county engineer said, “So, you would have a $150 million hole before you discovered there was a problem. I’m just curious about all of the bureaucracy we put in place. I’m a person who voted to have a county administrator, our deputy county administrators … paying the best money, if not in the state, in the country for these folks.”
Ellis continued, “I’m curious to know, when did the county manager know about it? When did the deputy county administrator know about it, and when did the Budget Office know about it? When did you all discover it? Is it tracked by anybody?”
“Major Crisis” with No Sense of Urgency
Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey, PE, said, “This is a major crisis. I sense no urgency from flood control. I sense no urgency from the county engineer’s office. And I don’t sense any urgency from the county administrator.”
Ramsey also said, “We need to go back and take a look at it, but there needs to be an adult in room to be sure that we get honest answers back.”
“Utter Dismay. Frustration. Shock.”
Normally restrained Precinct 4 Commissioner Lesley Briones said, “I share my colleague’s complete and utter dismay. Frustration. Shock.” She emphasized that the county needed to find solutions for both the subdivision drainage projects and the flood bond.
“This is not OK,” she said. “And we need to get it done with a sense of urgency.” Then in a thinly veiled threat, she added, “If we’re not being clear, I don’t want to go back to the policy about wages. But when we say something, we mean it.” Commissioners recently voted department heads large pay increases.
Before finishing, Briones emphasized that Flood Bond Projects, not just subdivision drainage projects needed to be completed also.
Motion to Revisit Issue on March 27 Unanimously Approved
In the end, Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia introduced a motion to direct the Office of Management and Budget “to work with flood control, county engineering, and any relevant departments to return to court on March 27 with proposed options and recommendations using any and all county resources for closing the shortfall on the Harris County Engineering Department Subdivision Drainage Program and ensuring the implementation of the flood bond framework adopted by Commissioners Court.”
Commissioner Ramsey offered a friendly amendment. “The financial analysis should include, at a minimum, the entire program showing all projects completed. Projects under construction with any potential changes in contract. Active projects awaiting funding. Remaining available funds for all projects now that the project budgets have been increased.”
The motion with the amendment carried unanimously.
Video of Meeting
You can view the entire discussion and vote on the motion at this link. Click on Departments (Part 2 of 3). Then scroll forward to 3:24:01. You’re looking for item 217.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/6/2025
2718 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/20250206-CC-court.jpg?fit=1100%2C624&ssl=16241100adminadmin2025-02-06 22:14:092025-02-07 13:08:41Flood Bond, Subdivision Drainage Shortfalls Prompt Harsh Words From Commissioners
1/29/25 – $863 million in HUD funds sit in limbo tonight. Just last Friday, Harris County Flood Control (HCFCD) finally presented its long-awaited list of flood-mitigation and disaster-relief projects to Commissioners Court. They totaled that amount.
But by Monday, a series of presidential executive orders targeting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs put the future of those projects in jeopardy.
Thousands of homes flooded in Kingwood during Harvey, but after 7.5 years, HCFCD has not constructed one flood mitigation project in the community.
Everyone Scrambles to Understand OMB Memo and Its Impact
On Monday, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) announced that it paused funding for trillions of dollars in grants. Reportedly, the pause affected many HUD programs.
The OMB memo said that Federal agencies “must temporarily pause all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance.”
On Tuesday, the New York Times reported, “The Trump administration’s order … prompted confusion across state capitols and local government offices, leaving them at a loss on how to even calculate its impact.”
Then late Tuesday afternoon, a federal judge temporarily blocked part of the Trump administration’s grant freeze.
After the flurry of concerns raised Tuesday, dozens of media outlets reported around noon today (Wednesday) that OMB had rescinded the pause order.
Rescission of the Rescission
But less than two hours later, The Hill quoted White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt as saying, “This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo. … The President’s executive orders on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.”
Before the rescission of the rescission, I talked to official sources at the local, state and federal levels.
A Flood Control District spokesperson thinks that the $863 million is not in jeopardy. She said that everyone is moving forward as though the money were still committed.
The Texas General Land Office (GLO) also feels the chances of the money being pulled back are slim. GLO hopes that any changes made in Washington would improve efficiency in the grant process.
While we sort this out, we should remember that the $863 million in HUD funds come with some very tight deadlines. Not one of the three sources above knew yet whether those deadlines would be extended because of a pause in funding federal grant applications. So uncertainty reigns.
I watched Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis rant about how “Kingwood was getting all the damn money.” Yet Kingwood has received only $230 in capital improvement construction funds while the Brays Bayou Watershed where Mr. Ellis lives has received $206,576,424 between Harvey and the end of 2024 … all in the name of equity. That’s almost a million times more.
But denying aid to predominantly white neighborhoods may have backfired on Mr. Ellis. Only 50% of the HUD money had to benefit LMI residents. But like others who benefitted from DEI initiatives across the country, Ellis kept pushing for more.
He insisted on 70% while excluding projects in predominantly white and middle class areas. And that has fueled resentment among people who received virtually nothing for their taxes.
Of course, Ellis alone didn’t generate a backlash that catapulted Trump into the White House. He had plenty of help nationwide from others pushing the DEI envelope as he did.
And now Trump is delivering on campaign promises – terminating people, policies and programs relating to DEI.
Fairness for All Needed, Not Winner-Take-All Mentality
Perhaps had politicians like Ellis treated everyone fairly and not pushed their advantage so egregiously, we wouldn’t be in this mess. We need a “fairness for all” mentality that replaces the “winner take all” mentality currently pervading our politics.
Long before Abraham Lincoln said in 1858 that “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” Jesus used the phrase. He said in the Gospel of Matthew 12:25, “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand.”
Surely, there’s a way to divvy up the HUD money that benefits all the residents of Harris County. Withholding it all simply penalizes everyone.
In the meantime, we potentially have $863 million in limbo doing no one any good.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/29/2025
2710 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/20170830-IMG_9552-e1738208930459.jpg?fit=1100%2C825&ssl=18251100adminadmin2025-01-29 23:25:142025-01-30 09:40:37HUD’s $863 Million in Limbo Tonight
On Tuesday, 10/31/23, Harris County Commissioner’s court took no action on a request from Commissioner Tom Ramsey PE to abide by a pre-election promise to voters re: the 2022 Road and Parks Bonds. Ramsey could not even find a second for his motion on Agenda Item #418, which would guarantee the promised minimum of $220 million for Precinct 3.
During debate on the topic:
Only one of the four Democrats on Commissioners Court agreed with the idea that “we need to deliver on what we say.”
One confused the 2022 road and parks bond for the 2018 flood bond.
Two claimed they had already spent their allocation; so they couldn’t re-allocate the money even if they wanted to (which they didn’t).
One claimed “everybody” lost track of $110 million.
Two claimed that allocating the money to poor areas was more important than an equal split or honoring promises.
Screen capture from 10/31/2023 Commissioners Court Meeting at start of debate on Item #418.
When they talked about allocations to poor areas, they did not mention the percentage of county-maintained parks or roads in their precincts. Nor did they take into account the percentage of their precincts inside incorporated areas, such as the City of Houston. Municipalities are already responsible for maintaining roads and parks within their boundaries.
Bait-and-Switch Tactics
BEFORE the 2022 election, commissioners voted to allocate a minimum $220 million from the 2022 Road and Parks Bonds to each precinct. The county then trumpeted that promise in:
Pre-election publicity
Postings on county websites
Speeches and handouts at community meetings.
Voters approved the bonds on the basis of that promise.
Then, in January 2023. shortly AFTER the election, the Democrats on commissioners court broke that promise. They voted to adopt a different formula that resulted in drastically less money than promised for Precinct 3, the only Republican-led precinct remaining in Harris County.
Precinct 3 received $187.5 million – $32.5 million less than promised.
Meanwhile, the Democrats voted to award themselves far more than Ramsey’s Precinct 3 which contains the highest percentage of unincorporated areas in the county.
Precinct
Minimum Promised Before Election
Allocated After Election
Difference
% of Allocated $
One
$220 million
$269 million
$49 million MORE
27%
Two
$220 million
$293 million
$73 million MORE
30%
Three
$220 million
$188 million
$32 million LESS
19%
Four
$220 million
$239 million
$19 million MORE
24%
Promised vs. Actual funding from 2022 Road & Parks Bonds
The FTC calls this “bait-and-switch” advertising. It’s illegal. In a commercial context, intentionally advertising a product or service with the intent to lure customers in, only to then provide a different, less desirable offering is considered a deceptive trade practice and fraudulent. The FTC often forces companies caught in bait-and-switch schemes to refund money.
Ironically, had Precinct 3 voters realized the bait and switch, they could have defeated the bonds.
Was There Intent to Break the Promise?
In my opinion, it would be easy to prove intent in this case. Before the election, Commissioners Ellis and Garcia talked for months about how they wanted to apply so-called “equity” and “social vulnerability” factors to the distribution of proposed bond funds…without identifying projects or nailing down a formula.
Then on August 2, 2022, they relented and consented to a $220 million per precinct minimum. After voters approved the bonds and Lina Hidalgo won re-election, the Democrats changed the deal back. We got exactly what Ellis and Garcia argued for all along – an SVI-based formula that radically skewed the distribution of bond funds.
So, in the end, after redistricting (which packed more roads and parks into Precinct 3 than any other precinct), and after an election in which voters were deceived…
Precinct 3 gets 19% of the funding, yet has 47% of the County’s roads and 35% of its parks to maintain.
Some would say Democrats planned that all along.
What Democrats Said During Debate on Ramsey Motion
Precinct 4 Commissioner Leslie Briones
The newly elected Briones, a lawyer by trade, was not part of the pre-election promises. She said, “I agree fundamentally that we need to deliver on what we say and need to be transparent in doing so.” However, she later added that rectifying such situations is important … on a ‘go forward’ basis.
Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia
Garcia said, “In terms of Precinct 2, I’ll say that our projects have already been lit. So we’re already, you know, our funding is already committed. We got our project partnership commitments already out. And so the funding is already allocated and you know … I absolutely love leveraging equity. Otherwise I wouldn’t have the 30%, uh, the precinct to, uh, needs it because we’re down to the downstream side of five counties, not just Harris County. Um, and but I am open to seeing if there’s another way of, of getting there, because flooding is flooding regardless of its downstream side or wherever. But right now, of the allocation that I’ve got, my guys have already let that out the door. Yeah.”
Commissioner Garcia evidently confused the 2022 Road and Parks Bonds being discussed with the 2018 Flood Bond.
Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis
Ellis said, “Yeah, we’ve already committed our funds as well. And I would say that I’m strongly committed to SVI.” SVI means the CDC’s race-based Social Vulnerability Index as a means of allocating dollars.
County Judge Hidalgo
Judge Lina Hidalgo argued that the $220 million promise was based on faulty math. She said, “We hadn’t thought about … there’s overhead costs of $110 million. And I think that just literally nobody thought about it.”
Hidalgo narrowly won a hotly contested re-election bid on the same ballot as the bond, based in part on her assertion that she represented ALL the people of the county.
Could You Really Spend $562 Million in 10 Months?
With all of the County’s purchasing procedures, could you really spend (or at least commit) $562 million in ten months? That’s the total of Ellis’ and Garcia’s split.
Democrats didn’t approve the SVI-based allocation formula until earlier this year. Then you would have to study projects, rank them, advertise the projects, review qualifications of potential bidders, bid the projects, pick a winner, acquire right of way, sell bonds, and mobilize the projects.
That can take years. For instance, the Northpark Drive expansion project in Kingwood began in 2015 and won’t finish for another 2 or 3 years. And two miles of Loop 494 renovations have taken 4.5 years.
And, perhaps more important, how do you just forget about $110 million in overhead costs? I couldn’t follow the Budget Director’s attempted explanation on that one! Forgetting about $110 million in the private sector would get most people fired.
Think about these issues as you go to the polls and vote on new bond projects next Tuesday.
In the end, Ramsey, the only Republican, couldn’t even get a second for his motion, so the court took no action.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/4/2023
2258 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231104-Screenshot-2023-11-04-at-3.50.10%E2%80%AFPM.jpg?fit=1100%2C639&ssl=16391100adminadmin2023-11-04 16:26:242023-11-05 07:18:54Four Dems Take No Action to Honor Pre-Election Bond Promise
Citing the urgent need to spend half of a billion flood-mitigation dollars quickly, the Texas General Land Office (GLO) has made a common-sense suggestion to streamline flood mitigation in Harris County. It recommended making Harris County Flood Control District a “direct recipient” (rather than a “sub-recipient”) of the half billion dollars carved out of $750 million awarded to the County in 2021.
Harris County Commissioners put Community Services, not Flood Control, in charge of managing the $750 million award. But Flood Control is spending two thirds of the money.
The GLO suggestion would streamline working relationships, speed up mitigation, and give Harris County a fighting chance to spend the money before the deadline.
Following the Money
In May 2021, the GLO recommended allocating $750 million of U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) money to Harris County for Harvey mitigation and recovery. In March 2022, HUD approved the recommendation.
Later that year, Harris County Commissioners Court decided to have its Community Services Department (CSD) administer the funds rather than Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD).
Since then, CSD recommended giving two-thirds of the money to HCFCD and distributing the rest to various entities within the county. But so far, CSD has only received one application from a potential partner. And six years after Harvey, none of the money has yet been spent moving dirt to reduce flood risk for Harris County residents.
Meanwhile, the county is under HUD deadlines to use the money quickly or lose it.
So, on June 20, 2023, Mark Havens, Deputy Commissioner of the GLO, asked County Judge Lina Hidalgo to make HCFCD a direct recipient. Hidalgo reportedly did not reply to the letter.
The change would shorten lines of communication and reduce layers of administration while speeding up mitigation, protecting residents, and hopefully beating the imminent HUD “use it or lose it” deadlines.
Going into the third year since the announcement of the $750 million flood-mitigation award, none of the money has yet been spent.
Commissioners Court Will Discuss Issue on Tuesday
After more than six months of deliberation, CSD eventually allocated $502.5 million to HCFCD from the $750 million. CSD was then going to allocate most of the rest to unspecified sub-recipients within the county after soliciting applications from potential partners.
However, on next Tuesday’s Commissioner Court agenda, Item 401 reveals…
CSD has found only one entity interested in applying for any of the remaining money in more than six months.
As of this morning, 7/16/23, CSD’s web page that solicits applications has not been updated for two months. It still talks about a May 4th meeting in the future tense.
Screen Capture from solicitation announcement page on 7/16/23.
It also contains some hysterical typos in the first line above. “Applicant’s Conference” singular? “Question” singular? They expected to have only one attendee and one question!?
Worse, it takes a lot of work to find the application web page. CSD’s home page has no direct link. The architecture of CSD’s site revolves around consumer issues such as rent relief and bus ridership, not applicants for mitigation projects.
To get to the $250 million pot of gold at the end of this rainbow from the CSD Home Page, one must click on:
Links
Harris Recovery (a separate web site)
CDBG-MIT
Not very intuitive! CSD blames the lack of response on a $20 million funding limit. That may be so. But the first rule of sales is, “Make it easy for the customer.” And that certainly didn’t happen here.
Projects Put on Hold While $250 Million Sits on Table
Management turnover has also plagued CSD. Under Lina Hidalgo, the department has had six different directors in 4.5 years.
Meanwhile HCFCD is still looking for money to complete projects in low-to-moderate income neighborhoods. Moreover, Harris County Engineering is putting subdivision drainage projects on hold for lack of funding. And all this is happening while a quarter of a billion dollars is still sitting on the table.
I hope Judge Hidalgo, Commissioner Garcia and Commissioner Ellis can connect those dots and streamline flood mitigation quickly.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/16/23
2147 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Screenshot-2023-07-16-at-10.52.33-AM.png?fit=1196%2C754&ssl=17541196adminadmin2023-07-16 12:30:142023-07-16 21:15:48GLO Suggests Plan to Streamline Flood Mitigation in Harris County
Late in the afternoon on 9/13/22, my phone started blowing up. Frantic callers asked, “Are you watching Commissioners Court?” I wasn’t unfortunately. I was working on a post about the completion of a flood-mitigation project. But my priorities quickly changed when I learned that the three Democrats (Garcia, Ellis and Hidalgo) voted – as a block – to take take “no action” on 32 separate projects. Each will deprive residents of Precincts 3 and 4 of services.
Adrian Garcia, Rodney Ellis and Lina Hidalgo removed 32 items from the 8/13/22 Harris County Commissioners Court Agenda that would have helped residents of Precincts 3 and 4.
The brazen no-action votes, led by Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia, were in retaliation for Republican commissioners walking out of a vote that would have allowed Democrats to increase taxes at a time when rising inflation makes larger tax bills doubly difficult.
A quarter of the no-action votes directly targeted residents. The other three-quarters target companies that provide services that benefit residents, such as engineering companies that improve drainage.
Targeted items included residents’ community center wellness classes, maintenance, flood-rescue equipment, roadway improvements and drainage projects.
Violating Historical Norms
By agreement and tradition, historically, Harris County Commissioners do not interfere with each others’ business. So this sets a dangerous precedent in which one party weaponizes its majority to punish the opposition’s constituents. Here’s what happened.
Ramsey and Precinct 4 Commissioner Jack Cagle boycotted the meeting so that the Court would not have sufficient votes to raise taxes. In retaliation, Commissioner Adrian Garcia, aided by Commissioner Rodney Ellis and County Judge Lina Hidalgo, pulled dozens of Precinct 3 and 4 items from the agenda.
Commissioner Ramsey said in a press release that, “This is retaliation against Harris County residents at its lowest level. It punishes residents because they disagree about having a responsible fiscal budget. It’s childish and embarrassing for the Court and Harris County.”
Ramsey and Cagle have tried for several months to engage their Democratic counterparts in substantive budget discussions with little luck. The Democrats even rammed through a $1.2 billion bond proposal with no details except for a lopsided allocation plan that gave about 40% more to Democratic precincts.
Previously, Commissioners have agreed to respect the boundaries of one another’s precincts. “Today’s action is the latest example of Precinct 3 residents being stripped of services by the current Court,” said Ramsey.
Ramsey’s allusion to “latest” referred to a redistricting plan that left Ramsey with 47% of the county’s unincorporated area to maintain with only 25% of the budget.
Said Ramsey, “Judge Hidalgo and others would have you believe that since there was not a quorum at today’s Commissioners Court, the budget will fail. In reality, the lack of a quorum simply means that the maximum tax rate allowed by law – without voter consent – cannot be implemented. Instead, a smaller budget will be adopted.”
The difference between the two budgets is $100 million. Out of a $2.2 billion budget, that’s 4.5%.
Hidalgo counters that the extra money is needed for more “officers.” According to Ramsey, she referenced investigators and detention officers, “yet didn’t mention adding one patrol officer” who could combat street crime.
Hidalgo also threatened that if the maximum budget and tax rate aren’t passed, 180 flood projects that “…affect the lives of every single resident in Harris County” will be jeopardized. But the bond pays for those projects, and the difference between the two budgets for flood control is only $14 million. That’s .6% of the HCFCD’s budget. And Commissioners Ramsey and Cagle volunteered $7 million each from their precinct budgets to make up the difference.
Finally, Judge Hidalgo asserted that not passing the Voter-Approved-Rate budget instead of the No-New-Revenue budget would dramatically affect the Harris Health System. The difference between the two budgets is less than 2%. And Ramsey points out that many of the Health System’s requests are for capital investments which are not even a part of these budgets at all.
On-Call Engineering Contracts Delayed by Dems
So which projects did Dems pull from the agenda? Let’s start with retainer fees for on-call engineering in Precincts 3 and 4. The numbers below refer to agenda items. See full descriptions here.
#43 Pape-Dawson Consulting Engineers, Inc. for Precinct 3
#44 Volkert, Inc. for Precinct 3
#45 Cascade Civil Services, LLC for Precinct 3
#49 HVJ Associates, Inc. for Precinct 4
#52 Eneval, LLC for Precinct 4
#53 Volkert, Inc. for Precinct 4
Engineering Contracts for Specific Projects Also Delayed
In addition, the Dems agreed to delay approval of engineering contracts or contract amendments for specific projects in Precincts 3 and 4..
#51 Request to amend a contract Isani Consultants, L.P. for Professional Engineering Services relating to Stuebner Airline Road Segment C in Precinct 3.
#55 Approval of a contract with Edminster, Hinshaw, Russ and Associates, Inc. d/b/a EHRA to develop a Master Plan for improvements to Burnett Bayland Park in Precinct 4.
#67 Approval of an amendment to a contract with Huitt-Zollars, Inc. for improvements to Atascocita Area Trails Phase 2 in Precinct 3.
#76 Approval of Interlocal Agreement with City of Tomball to construct improvements to Nabors Parkway between Highway 249 and Holderrieth Road in Precinct 4.
#114 Approval of a contract with HNTB Corporation for engineering and landscape architecture services for a Road and Drainage Master Plan, Precinct 4.
Bizarre Delay
For unknown reasons, the Dems also voted to pull the following from the agenda:
#119 Request for approval to change the names of several projects in Precinct 3.
Delaying Release or Retention of Financial Surety
The following motions relating to approval of the release or retention of financial surety from developers were also taken off the agenda.
#123 Grand Oaks Section 9 in Precinct 4.
#124 Breckenridge West Section 7 in Precinct 3.
#125 Breckenridge West Section 10 in Precinct 3.
#126 Bridge Creek Section 2 in Precinct 3.
#127 Bridgeland Creek Parkway in Precinct 4.
#128 Bridgeland Sec 44 in Precinct 3.
#129 Bridgeland streets in Precinct 4.
#131 Groves Section 35 in Precinct 3.
#132 Groves Section 36 in Precinct 3.
#133 Newport Section 7 Partial Replat #3 in Precinct 3.
#134 Newport Section 7 Partial Replat #4 in Precinct 3.
#135 Windrow Section 3 in Precinct 4.
Delaying/Denying Services Directly Affecting Public
The items that most directly and immediately affect residents include the following. Garcia, Hidalgo and Ellis took each off the agenda.
#155 Approval to negotiate an agreement for surveying as needed in Precinct 3.
#160 Approval to convert Sam Houston Tollway Segment #3 in Precincts 3 and 4 to an all-electronic roadway.
#278 Approval to construct pedestrian trails along a drainage ditch of Brays Bayou under Addicks Clodine Road Bridge in Precinct 3.
#291 Renewal of 1-year contract for exercise classes in Precinct 3.
#342 Approval to bid reinforced concrete pipe, saddle inlets and related items for Precinct 4.
#343 Approval to bid asphalt roadway rehabilitation for the Western Trails Subdivision in Precinct 3.
#351 Approval to bid airboat and trailer purchases for Precinct 3.
#352 Approval to bid passenger buses for Precinct 3.
Most Troubling Item Cancelled, Not Just Delayed
#351 is especially concerning because the airboats would presumably be used for rescue operations during flooding…something the Lake Houston Area remembers all too well. The Dems outright cancelled that; they didn’t just delay it.
Watch the meeting and form your own opinions. Apocalyptic predictions take up the first three hours and fifty minutes. Garcia then starts listing the agenda items he wants to kill or take off the agenda.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/14/22
1842 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/20220913-Screen-Shot-2022-09-13-at-11.48.04-PM.jpg?fit=1200%2C629&ssl=16291200adminadmin2022-09-14 01:10:112022-09-14 19:26:54Dems Deprive Republican Precincts of Services
A lawsuit by Harris County Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey, Precinct 4 Commissioner Jack Cagle and their supporters that sought to overturn a redistricting plan devised by Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis has been dismissed by an Ellis-backed judge, Dedra Davis.
In the Ellis-3 Redistricting plan, almost all of the Lake Houston Area including Kingwood, Humble, Atascocita, Huffman and Crosby will change from Precinct 4 to Precinct 3. Tom Ramsey will remain the Commissioner of Precinct 3, and will not be up for re-election in 2022.
Details of Redistricting Plan
The Ellis redistricting plan swapped the numbers of Precincts 3 and 4. It also redrew the boundaries of Precincts 3 and 4 so that Ramsey’s home and Cagle’s home changed precincts. The Ellis plan has two immediate effects.
It forces Cagle and Ramsey, both Republicans, to run in each others’ precincts because commissioners must live in the precincts they represent.
The number swap will deny voters in the new precinct 3 the right to vote for commissioner in the next election. That’s because only even-numbered precincts will vote in the next election cycle for commissioners. So the Lake Houston Area will not be able to vote for commissioners next year as it normally would have.
In addition, the plan redraws boundaries of the new Precinct 4 so that it becomes more Democratic. That jeopardizes Cagle’s chances of re-election and could shift the balance of power in Commissioners Court. Four Democrats could create a super-majority, enabling them to raise taxes at will.
Judge Davis, who was supported in her election bid by Rodney Ellis, a key player in this drama, did not recuse herself. Nor did she cite any reasons for dismissing the case in her terse ruling.
Rodney Ellis and Judge Dedra Davis during her election bid.
Stage Set for Appeal
A spokesperson for Commissioner Jack Cagle’s office responded that the plaintiffs intend to file an appeal. However, because of the holidays, no other details were immediately available.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/23/2021
1577 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/20211117-Screen-Shot-2021-11-17-at-9.12.02-PM.jpg?fit=1200%2C798&ssl=17981200adminadmin2021-12-23 11:32:432021-12-23 11:49:51Redistricting Lawsuit Dismissed by Ellis-Backed Judge
Dedra Davis, a district-court judge that Harris County Commissioner Rodney Ellis backed for election in 2018, has been chosen to hear a constitutional challenge to Harris County’s redistricting plan developed by – you guessed it – Rodney Ellis. The plan will likely give Democrats a supermajority in Commissioners Court and allow them to dictate everything from tax increases to the future of flood mitigation in Harris County.
1.1 Million Will Lose Right to Vote for Commissioners Next Year
The suit alleges that the Ellis-3 plan, by switching precinct boundaries and numerical designations – will deprive 1.1 million people of their right to vote for commissioner in the next county election. Further, the suit alleges that precinct lines could have been redrawn without depriving anyone of their right to vote.
Ellis switched numbers of Precincts 3 and 4 and moved a large part of P2 into P3. Because only even-numbered precincts will vote next year, voters in the new P3 – which includes virtually the entire Lake Houston Area – will not be able to vote for commissioners as they normally would have.
Screen capture from 2018 Bar Association poll.Did Ellis’ support tilt the scales in the other direction?
Some might call Davis’ 10-point win over a highly respected incumbent a stunning upset. But Ellis swings a lot of weight in Harris County.
Commissioner Ellis reportedly campaigned heavily for candidate Davis.
One Harris County insider who spoke on condition of anonymity said, “She is one of the judges Ellis got elected. There are several of them.” A second person sent me the photo above that shows Davis campaigning with Ellis.
Can Davis Be Impartial?
Judges don’t get to chose their cases. And this case has barely begun. The lawsuit was filed just two days ago. No rulings have yet been made according to Harris County District Clerk records. So I’m not alleging any impropriety.
Davis just had the bad luck to draw a case involving one of her biggest supporters – someone whose support likely swung her election.
According to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 18b, Judge Davis has a perfect out if she wants it. Rule 18b, Paragraph B states, “Grounds for Recusal. A judge must recuse in a proceeding in which:
(1) the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned;
(2) the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning the subject matter or a party.”
Only the Honorable Judge Davis can know what’s inside her heart, but a million disenfranchised voters will be looking over her shoulder on this case and wondering whether her association with Commissioner Ellis will color her judgement.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/18/21
1542 Days after Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/image001.png?fit=256%2C256&ssl=1256256adminadmin2021-11-18 22:12:202021-11-19 08:02:48Ellis-Backed Judge Set to Hear Case on Constitutionality of Ellis Redistricting Plan
At a special redistricting meeting that lasted four and a half hours Thursday night, approximately 100 people spoke out against Rodney Ellis’ redistricting plan. Only two people endorsed Ellis’ Plan and a third liked an element of it. An exact count of those who spoke for or against is difficult because the video/audio feed went down for several speakers precisely as the Harris County Republican Chair got up to speak. At the end of the meeting, no map emerged as a clear redistricting winner. But Commissioner Ellis requested the county’s redistricting mapmaker to come up with a map that created four Democratic precincts “just to see what it looks like.”
To this observer, Ellis’ request came across as a not-so-subtle threat designed to discourage the withering protests against his plan that would have created a mere 3-1 democratic majority.
He clearly hopes to make Harris County a second Big D in the state of Texas.
Meeting Gets Off to Slow Start
The hastily called and poorly organized meeting took almost an hour to get started. During the meeting, County Judge Lina Hidalgo and Commissioner Adrian Garcia claimed they had nothing to do with Ellis’ proposed map and had not submitted their own recommended maps.
One hundred people signed up to speak either in person or online. Twenty-two came from Precinct 4; most speakers had exactly one minute to address the court and dozens were cut off in mid-sentence. However, those who brought slides, maps or props, such as League of Women Voters and Houston in Action, received more time.
Persistent Themes by Public Commenters
Members of the public commented about several persistent fears they had re: the Ellis Plan. They felt:
Communities of interest, such as Asian-Americans would be severed.
Working relationships with commissioners would be destroyed.
Service request response time would suffer.
A Democratic supermajority would enable tax increases and reckless spending.
Senior centers such as Bayland would be disrupted.
It would have a negative impact on parks and recreation.
Drastic change is not needed
Doubling Precinct 4’s size would be setting it up to fail.
The gerrymandering is a “power grab”.
Citizens want Democrats and Republicans to work together.
Commissioners should be re-elected based on the service they provide, not by gerrymandering.
The process behind the plan lacks transparency.
It’s an act of self-preservation.
Desire Not to Split Up Communities
A recurring theme among the many speakers was a desire not to have communities split up. Under the Ellis Plan, the City of Humble would have been split into two precincts. Representatives from Aldine and Barret Station also expressed wishes to have one commissioner.
Houston City Council Member Amy Peck spoke against Ellis proposed map along with former Precinct 3 Commissioner Steve Radack.
Challenger for County Judge Seat Speaks Against Ellis Plan
Martina Lemond Dixon who will challenge Lina Hidalgo in the next election also spoke against the Ellis Plan. Dixon felt it would be “dangerous” during the next disaster. She said Ellis’ plan would put a majority of unincorporated Harris County in one precinct “for the sole purpose of political power.”
Dixon also said that if the Ellis map is “adopted by a majority of this court, you will have voted to abandon the majority of voters in unincorporated Harris County. The recommended map won’t stop the current crime wave. It won’t get traffic moving. And it won’t keep the water out of our homes. It will only ensure that these problems persist.”
At the end of her one minute speech, Hidalgo told Dixon “I look forward to a spirited contest.”
Concern about Diminished Support for Community Resources
Another persistent threat among many speakers was a concern about how Ellis’ map would diminish support for community centers and parks in many areas.
Many speakers from Bayland Community Center lined up against Ellis’ proposed map. The center, along with dozens of other resources, would have been crammed into Precinct 4, without increasing the Precinct 4 budget to operate and maintain them.
Precinct 3 Commission Ramsey, who would have seen the size of his precinct cut in half by Ellis, stated that he would lose 29 parks and community centers along with 5,000 miles of roads. Ramsey pointed out that Precincts are not like Congressional Districts. Precincts do more than represent people; they actually provide services that support quality of life.
“Corrupt” and “Chaotic”
Ramsey would lose 450,000 constituents under the Ellis Plan. Ramsey called the plan “corrupt and chaotic.”
Democratic Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia bristled at that suggestion. He said that if Ramsey persisted in using that word, three fingers would be accusing him of the same thing from the other side of the table. The “three” referred to Democrats Hidalgo, Garcia, and Ellis. It seemed like a childish, schoolyard act of bullying.
But Ramsey did not back down.
Cagle Lists Numerous Concerns
Commissioner Cagle said that his overall concern was to protect his constituents. He claimed his proposed map was the closest to the status quo while still meeting constitutional and other legal requirements.
The Cagle proposal made minor “tweaks” to precinct boundaries rather than major changes. It respected population changes and diversity, but didn’t divide cities. It also kept voting locations intact and provided sufficient voting locations, unlike the Ellis Plan, which would have given Republicans fewer voting locations.
Cagle also claimed that Ellis Plan significantly changed the demographics of precincts and did not respect diversity, a claim echoed by many from the public.
Commissioner Cagle feared that adding 2000 miles of roads, 29 parks and 450,000 people to his district without making provisions for additional funding would disrupt emergency and other services. In that regard, he had a staffer drive from one end of the Precinct 4 boundaries proposed by Ellis to the other end. It took more than 5 hours – longer than it takes to get to Dallas.
In the end, Cagle called the Ellis Plan “not practical.”
Said Cagle, “We serve the people in real time, we are NOT just policy makers.”
Jack Cagle, Harris County Precinct 4 Commissioner
Ellis Calls for Quick Resolution
After several people complained about having neither the time, nor the data, to analyze proposed maps, Commissioner Ellis said, “We need to put this baby to bed.” Then he asked for a map that would make all four precincts Democratic and suggested Commissioners Court should vote on the map(s) next Tuesday.
Redistricting is not on the Court agenda that was posted this morning for next Tuesday. But it could still be added via a supplemental agenda posted at the end of the day on Friday.
Three Leading Maps Now in Contention
Below are maps produced by three commissioners as of 2:30 PM Friday, October 22, 2021.
Proposed new Harris County Precinct Boundaries in Ellis Plan. Lines represent existing boundaries. Colors represent proposed boundaries.
Precinct 4 Commissioner Jack Cagle’s recommended plan.
Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey did not make recommendations beyond his own precinct’s boundaries.
Lina Hidalgo adjourned the meeting at 8:25 p.m. with NO ACTION TAKEN. A vote on a new redistricting map has yet to be scheduled.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/22/21
1515 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Harris-County-Big-D.jpg?fit=1200%2C834&ssl=18341200adminadmin2021-10-22 14:44:582021-10-22 16:22:52Redistricting Drama Thickens: Ellis Requests New Map To Make All Four Precincts Democratic
Last in an eight part series on flood-mitigation funding in Harris County
For two years, Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis and Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia have alleged that rich watersheds get all the flood-mitigation funding, while poor and minority watersheds get none. But data suggests that is far from the truth.
Three months ago, the din from Ellis and Garcia reached a crescendo. I became so alarmed about the allegations of racism in flood-mitigation funding, that I submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request to Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) for historical funding data by watershed. I also requested related data such as watershed size, damaged structures, the number of low-to-moderate-income (LMI) residents, and more.
Data Contradicts Ellis/Garcia Narrative
My analysis contradicted the carefully crafted Ellis/Garcia narrative. I found the exact opposite of what they claimed.
The most dollars flow to low-income watersheds which, coincidentally, have the most flood damage.
The strongest correlation I found with flood-mitigation “funding” since 2000 was “damaged structures.” And the percentage of low-to-moderate income residents in a neighborhood correlates very strongly to damage per square mile.
When you think about this, it makes sense. We put the most flood-control dollars in areas that flood the most.
Damage Per-Square Mile Correlates Highly with LMI %
To understand patterns in the data, one must start by evaluating damage “per square mile.” That’s because high- and low-income watersheds differ radically in size and number.
Harris County has only eight low-to-moderate income watersheds, but 15-high income watersheds.
The low-income watersheds are half the total size – 600 square miles vs. 1176 square miles.
When looking at damage on a per square mile basis, the highest concentrations occur in low-income neighborhoods.
LMI percentage and damaged structures per square mile have a 0.82 coefficient of correlation. Mathematicians consider that very strong. 1.0 is the highest you can get, a perfect correlation.
Damage includes structures flooded in four major storms since 2000 (Allison, Tax Day, Memorial Day and Harvey).
Low-income watersheds cluster on the left and high-income watersheds on the right because of “Damage,” not racial discrimination in mitigation funding. Mitigation dollars already overwhelming flow to minority and low-income neighborhoods as they have for decades.
Flood-Control Dollars Flow to Damage
There’s also a strong relationship between total funding and total damage. Notice how the shape of the curves align closely with a few exceptions.
Total funding since 2000 and the number of damaged structures show a 0.84 coefficient of correlation. Mathematicians consider that very strong.
You can see a general downward trend in both blue and orange, indicating a strong correlation. This relationship supports other statistical analyses in this series. (See links to previous articles listed below.)
At the highest level, when you look at the data from multiple perspectives, one thing stands out:
Dollars flow to damage, not affluent watersheds.
Possible Causal Links Between LMI Percentage, Damage and Funding
Touring lower income watersheds by car or helicopter helps explain why those watersheds have so much more damage and consequently receive so much more funding. In general, they:
Are much more densely packed with buildings, a consequence of more than twice the population density (3,900 residents/square mile compared to 1,600).
Have more impervious cover, so water can’t soak in as quickly or as much
Have many clogged roadside ditches and storm drains, due to poor maintenance by county precinct crews and the City of Houston’s Public Works Department. (Water has a hard time getting out of neighborhoods.)
Have more structures per acre.
Re: the last point, in Kashmere Gardens (an LMI neighborhood), I found six homes on a third of an acre worth more than my house on a full acre in Kingwood. The density can offset higher home values in suburban neighborhoods when calculating Benefit/Cost Ratios for FEMA or HUD.
Flood-Mitigation Funding by Watershed Since 2000
Here’s how much money each watershed received for capital improvement projects since 2000. No maintenance dollars or dollars committed to complete projects are included – only dollars “out the door” as of the end of March 2021.
The graph above dramatizes two things:
The wide variation from high to low. Luce Bayou received only $4.5 million while Brays received $510 million. That’s 113 to 1.
A few watersheds received multiples of the average and median, while far more received a small fraction.
Funding Data Disproves Racist Allegations
Remember that the next time you hear the allegations of racial discrimination from Ellis and Garcia. This discussion shouldn’t be about race. It should be about fixing flooding problems.
The government is not funding flood-control projects in rich areas that didn’t experience flood damage. It funds them in areas that had the MOST damage. Those just happen to be in minority and low-income neighborhoods. And it is critical that people focus on WHY those structures flooded if we are to find solutions.
Implying that they flooded because of racial bias is misdirection. The racial allegations divide and distract people. They also keep HCFCD, from focusing on real solutions to our flooding problems. That harms all voters in Harris County.
If commissioners continue to focus on race, it will prove they care more about political gamesmanship than fixing drainage.
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/LMI-v-Funding-Per-Sq-Mi.jpg?fit=1200%2C713&ssl=17131200adminadmin2021-06-28 13:24:492021-11-18 15:37:54Flood-Mitigation Funding Flows to Damage, Not High-Income Neighborhoods
