San Jacinto Watershed Archives

Details of HCFCD Spending in San Jacinto Watershed Since Harvey

10/20/24 – My latest FOIA request revealed some surprising details about Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) spending in the San Jacinto Watershed and how it contrasts to the Brays Bayou Watershed.

For several years, I have tracked HCFCD spending by watershed and project phase on a quarterly basis. I have discovered tremendous disparities in flood mitigation funding across the county.

From high to low, the ratio varies by more than 1000:1. The types of activities also vary greatly from watershed to watershed. The Brays and San Jacinto Watersheds make illuminating examples.

San Jacinto Watershed Vs. Brays

Out of the county’s 23 watersheds, the San Jacinto ranks in the bottom half of total funding since Harvey. Despite being the county’s largest watershed and having the most severe flooding, it comes in at #13 in terms of dollars received.

The San Jacinto Watershed received approximately $40 million between Harvey and the end of the third quarter in 2024. That’s less than 2% of the total $2.03 billion HCFCD has spent since Harvey.

Compare that to Brays Bayou where Commissioner Rodney Ellis lives.

Brays has received 10% of all the money spent by HCFCD since Harvey – $202.4 million out of $2.03 billion. That’s more than five times as much as the San Jacinto.

The totals show an impressive difference. But they don’t tell the whole story.

71% of Brays spending has gone into construction activities that actually reduce flood risk.

Meanwhile, the San Jacinto watershed received a fifth as much in total dollars. And one tenth as much went into construction that actually reduces flooding.
Data from FOIA Request

Details of San Jacinto Spending: Where Money Went

Drilling down even deeper into the data, I discovered that virtually all of the San Jacinto “construction” spending was classified as maintenance. In other words, the construction dollars went toward repairing the insufficient infrastructure that resulted in the county’s worst flooding. Very little went toward construction of new capital improvement projects.

On a sad note, HCFCD reported spending $230 on true capital-improvement construction in the San Jacinto Watershed. That’s not a typo. We’re not talking about thousands or millions. We’re talking about just a little more money than the default withdrawal from most ATMs.

That was for the Excavation and Removal (E&R) Project on the Woodridge Village property. HCFCD later cancelled the E&R project when it applied for HUD grants for Woodridge and Taylor Gully improvements.

E&R contracts give contractors the right to sell dirt excavated from detention basins in exchange for a nominal fee, usually $1,000. They make their money, not from HCFCD, but from developers, homebuilders and road builders who buy the dirt at market rates.

The single largest expenditure in the San Jacinto Watershed since Harvey was for the purchase of the Woodridge Village property itself for $13,994,735.

*Spike in middle of graph is purchase of Woodridge property. Other spike in 2022 was dredging*.

Here’s a breakdown of $40 million in spending against all significant projects.

*Spending in San Jacinto Watershed Since Harvey*	*Amount 17Q3 – 24-Q3*
Purchase of Woodridge Village	$13,994,735
Unspecified Maintenance Projects, most classified as construction	$8,303,416
County’s Share of Dredging (East and West Forks)	$7,278,626
SJRA’s San Jacinto River Basin Master Drainage Plan	$2,777,980
Bens Branch Conveyance Improvements (maint)	$1,788,949
Panther Creek Feasibility Study	$1,744,343
Kingwood Diversion Ditch Preliminary Engineering	$872,759
Baytown Storm Sewer Improvements Design Study	$810,869
Taylor Gully Preliminary Engingeering Study	$584,179
Atascocita Preliminary Flood Reduction Study	$541,186
Drainage Study for Watersheds East of Lake Houston	$298,534
Deer Park Project(s)/Design and Right of Way	$213,089
SJRA’s River Basin Sedimentation Study	$162,500
Indian Shores Partnership Project	$130,000
SJRA’s San Trap Location Study	$128,820
Redesign of Failed Sheet Pile Wall/Location Not Specified)	$118,799
Boggy Gully Study	$42,280
Lake Houston Gates Study	$23,547
USACE Support on West Fork Dredging	$9,265

$7.2 million of the HCFCD money spent in the San Jacinto Watershed since Harvey has gone toward studies. That’s almost twice as much as the $3.7 million spent on studies in the Brays Watershed during the same period.

The engineering studies are necessary to qualify for grants which might eventually lead to construction projects that mitigate flooding. But since the studies exist only on paper, they don’t actually reduce any flooding. At least, not until they qualify the area for funding.

For instance, none of the studies that HCFCD partnered with the SJRA on (River Basin Master Drainage Study, Sedimentation, Sand Traps) have advanced to the construction phase yet.

Less than $2 Million Per Quarter with Two Exceptions

Here’s how San Jacinto Watershed funding breaks down over time.

*Tall blip in middle contains Woodridge purchase. Blip in Q3 22 includes county’s share of dredging*.

The thing that chaps me most about all this is Commissioner Rodney Ellis continually harping about how Kingwood gets all the money. He has convinced low-income people throughout the county that areas with high-dollar homes get all the money. The opposite is true according to the data.

Meanwhile, Ellis is pushing funding from just about everywhere else into the watershed where he lives.

Such heavy-handed politics make me skeptical about the 63% tax increase being proposed by HCFCD.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/20/2024

2609 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.

Where HCFCD Spending Goes

Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) spending data obtained via a Freedom of Information Act Request shows that countywide:

Spending now tops $2 billion since Hurricane Harvey back in 2017
It modestly rebounded between the first and second quarters of this year
More money is now going to land acquisition and construction compared to other phases of the project lifecycle, while less money is going to upfront studies
On a per watershed basis, watersheds with a majority of Low-to-Moderate Income (LMI) residents still get far more than those with a minority of LMI residents.
Spending in the San Jacinto Watershed continues to lag despite high flood risk
Spending has fallen off a cliff in some watersheds.

For details, see below.

Modest Rebound Compared to 1Q24

The chart below shows HCFCD spending in 27 quarters since Hurricane Harvey. It shows a dramatic uptick between 2018 and 2021, followed by an even more dramatic decline through the first quarter of 2023. Since then, spending has averaged slightly more than $60 million per quarter, about half of the peak in 2021.

What accounts for the lower totals recently?

Changes in leadership and personnel turnover at HCFCD
Restructuring at HCFCD
Numerous changes in “equity” allocation formulas that required reprioritization of projects
Lengthy delays at Harris County Community Services involving more than $750 million in U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development funds.
COVID
Inflation during COVID forcing a re-evaluation of the Bond project list

The 2018 Flood Bond was considered a 10-year project. We are now almost 6 years into the bond, which was approved on the first anniversary of Harvey, but the money is only about 40% spent. That means projects are moving slower than originally anticipated. And that gives inflation a chance to gobble up a higher percentage of them.

More Money Now Going to Land Acquisition and Construction

On a positive note, more projects are moving off the drawing boards and into construction. You can see this trend most clearly by comparing two pie charts that show spending broken down by project phase. The first shows spending since Harvey and the second shows spending during the last quarter.

Looking back at the last 27 quarters, HCFCD spent 76% of its funds on right-of-way acquisition and construction. But during the last quarter, those combined percentages jumped to 85% – up 9%.

Meanwhile, feasibility studies and preliminary engineering reviews fell from 8% to 3% during the comparable periods.

Perhaps we’re starting to mitigate more than ruminate.

The following table may make it easier for you to compare percentages if you are viewing this on a phone.

Spending in Watersheds with Majority LMI Populations

The percentage of LMI residents in a watershed helps determine eligibility for flood-mitigation grants from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Harris County has 23 watersheds. Of those, 8 have a majority of LMI residents.

Regardless, since Harvey, those 8 received almost as much money as the other 15 put together.

Looking only at the last quarter, that trend has moderated somewhat.

But on a per watershed basis, the 8 LMI watersheds still each receive an average of 5.5% of the budget. Meanwhile, the 15 other watersheds each receive an average of 3.7%.

This is largely a function of the weighting given to LMI-majority projects in Harris County’s equity prioritization project scoring formula.

Spending by Watershed: A Study in Extremes

Comparing bar graphs of spending by watershed shows extreme differences between the highs and lows that are getting wider.

*Since Harvey*, *difference between high and low equaled 100 to 1.*

Note also the disappearance of the middle ground.

*During second quarter, difference between high and low equaled 375 to 1.*

During the second quarter, the entire San Jacinto Watershed – the county’s largest – received less than $400,000 of support…while moving up from 13th place to 11th.

Harris County watersheds in the upper San Jacinto River Basin include Spring, Cypress, Willow, Little Cypress, Luce and San Jacinto. They all funnel through the Lake Houston Area.

Since Harvey, they have received about 20% of HCFCD spending. But they drain an area about 50% larger than where the rest of the other 80% of the money went.

And as we saw in May, that can have a huge impact on flood damage.

From the San Jacinto River Basin Master drainage study.

I wish HCFCD spending flowed to the Lake Houston Area as fast as the water.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/5/2024

2502 Days since Hurricane Harvey

More People Live in Texas Floodplains than Live in 30 States

According to Texas Water Development Board data compiled for the first state flood plan, 5.9 million Texans live in 100- or 500-year floodplains. That means more people live in Texas floodplains than live in 30 states. Yep. Thirty entire states have populations smaller than that of Texas floodplains.

Other key observations also emerge from the data:

One in five Texans lives in a floodplain
42% of those live in the San Jacinto watershed.
The number of floodplain dwellers in the San Jacinto watershed alone exceeds the population of 15 states and the District of Columbia.

Where Biggest Problems Are

No other watershed comes close to 42%. To understand where the most people live with the most flood risk, see the table below. I compiled it from reports by the 15 regional flood planning groups in Texas.

*Column 3 shows people living in 100-year floodplain (1% annual chance) and Column 4 shows the 500-year (.2% annual chance) floodplain population.*

When looking at all people living in floodplains, Texas has almost 5.9 million. The last column shows where the largest concentrations of those people reside:

Only two other watersheds, the Trinity and Lower Rio Grande, reported double-digit percentages.
Trinity had 11.7%.
Lower Rio Grande had 17%.
No other watershed even made it over 5% of the floodplain dwellers.

The pie chart below really drives home the lopsided percentage of the state’s flood-plain dwellers living in the San Jacinto basin. San Jacinto is the large green area.

*Compiled from data reported by each of Texas’ Regional Flood Planning Groups.*

The San Jacinto basin has more people living in floodplains than the next five watersheds put together.

Possible Reasons for San Jacinto Issues

The TWDB report does not explain why. Likely, a number of factors contribute to the high percentage:

The state’s largest concentration of people, jobs, industry
Rapid growth and lax enforcement of development regulations
Insufficient upstream mitigation
Proximity to coast, tropical storms/hurricanes
High rainfall rates
Low, flat terrain

Floodplain Dwellers as Percent of State’s Total Population

The U.S. Census Bureau now estimates that 30,029,572 people live in Texas. With almost 5.9 million of them living in a 100- or 500-year floodplain, that means a whopping one in five live in floodplains.

Of the 20% of Texans who live in floodplains:

8% live in a 100-year (1% annual chance) floodplain
12% live in a 500-year (0.2% annual chance) floodplain.

So, statewide, more people prefer to live in the less risky floodplains. But that’s not the case in every watershed. See the San Antonio watershed in the table above. Three times more people live in the riskier, 100-year floodplain than the 500-year.

Coastline Concentrations

The numbers also show concentrations of floodplain dwellers near other parts of the Texas coastline.

The lower Rio Grande has 13 times more people living in a floodplain than the upper Rio Grande.
The lower Colorado has twice as many people living in a floodplain than the upper Colorado.
The lower Brazos has 2.5 times more people living in a floodplain than the upper Brazos.
The San Jacinto, which is one of the state’s shorter rivers and mostly near the coastline has the highest number of people in floodplains by far.

This 2014 NOAA study showed that 40% of the U.S. population lives in coastal counties. Density is far higher in coastal counties compared to inland areas. Coastal counties have 40% of the population but only 10% of the land.

Coastal areas also face different issues than inland communities. According to NOAA, “These include increased risks from high-tide flooding, hurricanes, sea level rise, erosion, and climate change.”

Cost of Making People Safe

The San Jacinto Regional Flood Planning Group recommended $46 billion worth of studies and mitigation projects in its regional plan. And the San Jacinto is just one of 15 watersheds in the state!

In sharp contrast to the magnitude of mitigation needs, the legislature voted only approximately $1 billion for flood prevention projects this year.

If I’ve learned one thing about flood prevention, it’s that nothing moves quickly.

Need for More Awareness

And that gives me a sinking feeling – especially knowing how few people have flood insurance and how many more need it.

The floodplains in our area are huge. We have a lot of people. And thus, the scary numbers for the San Jacinto watershed. And also consider this. The numbers above are likely understated, because they only reflect riverine flooding and not street flooding from poorly maintained ditches.

With few affordable structural solutions in sight, TWDB should spend some of their funds on public awareness and education while we wait for projects to happen. Few people understand how much flood risk they live with…until they flood.

For the entire 63-page report, see TWDB Board Agenda/Item #8 from their July 25th meeting. (Caution: 33 meg download.)

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/29/23

2160 Days since Hurricane Har vey

TCEQ Approves New Best Management Practices for San Jacinto Sand Mining

This morning, the TCEQ approved new Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Sand Mining in the San Jacinto Watershed. The effort to inventory, establish and publish BMPs for sand mining began shortly after Harvey. This web site contains thousands of pictures and 210 posts about area sand mine operations.

But the real credit for today’s agreement goes to:

The Lake Houston Area Flood Prevention Initiative (FPI)
Bill McCabe and Dave Feille (now deceased), two FPI steering committee members
Dianne Lansden, FPI founder
The Bayou Land Conservancy
Bill Dupre, professor emeritus in Geology from the University of Houston
State Representative Dan Huberty.

Others, too numerous to mention also picked up the baton and worked tirelessly for years to reach an agreement with the sand miners.

*West Fork Sand Mine* *that will be affected by new best management practices.* *Photographed in August*

McCabe composed the short article below that describes the significance of today’s events.

History of Project

The Lake Houston Grassroots Flood Prevention Initiative (FPI) formed shortly after Hurricane Harvey, led by a group of citizens concerned with the area’s future. Its goal: to seek out and remedy issues that made Harvey’s flooding more devastating than expected. Early on, one issue became evident as a major area of concern for future floods —the effect of sand mining on sediment and pollution in the San Jacinto Watershed.

We had looked at litigation, legislation and negotiation solutions as ways to address this situation. Other groups were already pursuing Litigation and Legislation. So, we decided to address the future through negotiation with the sand-mining industry.

Negotiation with TACA

We contacted the Texas Aggregates and Concrete Association (TACA), the industry representative for sand miners, and began negotiations on Best Management Practices (BMPs).

Starting with a blueprint of Best Management Practices for sand mining developed by other states, we re-formulated them to fit the Texas situation. For several months FPI, TACA, and other groups and individuals worked on a document we could present to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). Many individuals, including Representative Dan Huberty, Jill Boullion with the Bayou Land Conservancy, and former City officials from Humble and Kingwood, worked with us to fine tune a document for presentation.

Because TACA and FPI could not fully agree on the requirements for sand mining BMPs in the San Jacinto River Watershed, we presented separate Petitions to TCEQ. TACA presented its on June 12, 2020. FPI presented its a week later.

Scope of Petitions

Although they differed in several key areas, both Petitions followed the same basic pattern. We focused on a three part approach: Pre-mining, Mining and Post mining.

Following submittal, TCEQ conducted a series of stakeholder meetings and public input requests. The Commission fine-tuned our proposals and developed its own Rules and Guidance Documents.

View the original Petitions and subsequent modifications on the TCEQ website. See Rulemaking: Best Management Practices for Sand Mining in the San Jacinto River Watershed – Texas Commission on Environmental Quality – www.tceq.texas.gov.

Final Approval, a Good First Step

On December 15^th, TCEQ Commissioners approved the new BMP Rules document. It will become effective early next year. Although we did not get everything we would have wished for, this is a very good start and will help to hold sand miners to an accountable standard in the future.

Between the Rules Document (Subchapter J, Best Management Practices for Sand Mining Facility Operations Within the San Jacinto River Basin, Sections 311.101 – 311.103 of 30 TAC Chapter 311, Watershed Protection) and the associated Guidance Document developed by TCEQ, we now have a comprehensive standard for the sand-mining industry to follow.

By Bill McCabe on 12/15/2021

1569 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Harris County Flood Control Solicits Ideas for Flood Bond Package on New Portion of Website

Harris County Flood Control District has just launched a new portion of its website designed to explain the proposed $2.5 billion flood bond package. Residents will go to the polls on August 25, the anniversary of Hurricane Harvey, to vote on the package. For details about the bond package, access the site at https://www.hcfcd.org/bond-program/.

The site is organized by all watersheds in Harris County. For people new to the Lake Houston area, we live within the San Jacinto watershed. Within each watershed, the site also talks about:

Potential project types
Community engagement meetings
Community input
Frequently asked questions

One of the more interesting features of the site is an interactive map with icons representing the locations of potential projects. Clicking on an icon reveals the type of project under consideration at that location, the number of people affected and more.

Preliminary map of projects currently under consideration within the San Jacinto River Watershed.

Transparency and Equity Among Goals for Flood Bond

Remember several important things: In addition to flood mitigation, two goals of this project are transparency and equity. The county wants to ensure that the bond money helps each watershed throughout the area, and that money is spent in ways that will help the largest number of people and yield the greatest benefit. That’s why you see the population numbers for each watershed and the number of people affected by each project as you click on icons throughout the map.

More Projects Than Dollars To Do Them

The county has far more potential projects than dollars. Some projects currently under consideration may not make the final cut. Likewise, other projects not yet listed could make the final cut. According to Matt Zeve of Harris County Flood Control, “Our staff is working furiously to define projects for the bond.”

Community Input Meeting for Flood Bond on June 14

Zeve says the County is also soliciting citizen input through community meetings and the website itself. Mark your calendar. One of the first meetings will be in Kingwood at:

Kingwood Community Center
4102 Rustic Woods Drive
Kingwood, Texas 77345

June 14, 2018
6 p.m. to 8 p.m.

Citizens can also submit input through the website.

“The Harris County Flood Control District accomplishes its mission by working with our partners and local stakeholders to evaluate, develop, and implement flood damage reduction plans and then perform long-term maintenance of drainage infrastructure,” says the site.

Flood damage reduction plans and projects can include:

Modifications of streams and bayous to increase the amount of stormwater they carry
Creation of detention basins to store excess stormwater
Nonstructural flood mitigation tools
Any combination of the above

Types of Flood Bond Projects Currently Under Consideration

Currently, the vast majority of projects fall into the following categories. Types of projects eligible for bond funding include:

Voluntary Home Buyouts – The purchase of flood-prone structures from willing sellers in areas that are too deep in the floodplain to benefit from structural flood risk reduction projects, or in areas where flood risk reduction projects are not feasible. This process includes the demolition of the structure and relocation of the seller to higher ground.
Storm Repair – Major maintenance projects that restore the designed function and capacity of a channel or stormwater detention basin.
Subdivision Drainage Improvement – Partnership projects with the Harris County Engineering Department and a Municipal Utility District to provide drainage improvements to subdivisions in unincorporated Harris County.
Local Projects – Flood risk reduction projects such as channel modifications or stormwater detention basin construction using only Harris County Flood Control District funds.
Partnership Projects – Flood risk reduction projects such as channel modifications or stormwater detention basin construction using a combination of Harris County Flood Control District funding and funding from local, state, or federal partners such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Prioritization of Projects

Make sure you read the Frequently Asked Questions. One asks, “How will projects be prioritized?” Answer: “High on the priority list are construction-ready projects with federal funding partners (such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Emergency Management Agency) that give the County “the most bang for its flood control buck.”… Consideration is also given to areas that have a lower level of current protection as compared to other areas in the county.”

The county will give highest consideration to projects that meet the following criteria:

Provides the greatest potential flood risk reduction benefits relative to the community’s population
Causes NO increase in existing flood risks upstream or downstream
Offers potential for multiple benefits, in addition to flood risk reduction
Features long-term viability and relatively low maintenance
Includes a clearly defined drainage issue and flood risk reduction benefit
Uses readily available, proven engineering techniques and industry standards
Poses NO undue burden on disadvantaged communities
Minimizes adverse impacts on the environment

Submit Your Flood Bond Ideas Now

If you have ideas to contribute, submit them now so that they can receive the full consideration they deserve. Remember: when it comes to “equity,” historically the San Jacinto watershed has received 0% of flood mitigation budgets, but we suffered 13% of the damage in the region during Harvey. For an excellent discussion of equity and needs throughout the region, see the Greater Houston Flood Mitigation Consortium’s report.

The consortium’s report provides an excellent summary of the needs of the San Jacinto watershed.

Posted on May 31 by Bob Rehak. Thanks to Clay Crawford the tip.

275 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Tag Archive for: San Jacinto Watershed