Harris County Flood Bond Proposal

[Jograves 357]

Quote

A $2.5 billion bond proposal that would fund flood protection projects in the Houston area will go to Harris County voters on Aug. 25, the one-year anniversary of when Hurricane Harvey made landfall in Texas.

The Harris County Commissioners Court unanimously approved placing the proposal on the ballot Tuesday. If passed, the bond would fund projects like “drainage improvements, upgraded warning systems, infrastructure repairs, home buyouts, and construction of more detention basins” in the state's most populous county, according to a news release from the office of Harris County Judge Ed Emmett.

“We must take steps now to make our county more resilient,” said Emmett, a Republican. “We all saw the way that Texas helped Texans during the Memorial Day floods of 2015, the Tax Day floods of 2016 and Hurricane Harvey last year. Now is our chance to work together to protect each other proactively.”

The county estimates that most homeowners can expect a property tax increase of no more than 1.4 percent if the bond proposal is passed.

The Harris County Flood Control District cites more than 150 potential projectsthat could be funded by the bond and will host 23 community engagement meetings — one in each county watershed — to present projects and receive public input.   

The Army Corps of Engineers also announced Tuesday the allocation of more than $509 million to fund multiple flood mitigation and coastal projects in the state, according to a release from Gov. Greg Abbott. This is in addition to the approximately $360 million in disaster relief funds the Corps announced in May.

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/06/12/harris-county-billion-bond-flood-protection-hurricane-harvey/

Just curious what other Harris County voters think of the upcoming bond vote. I have two issues with it: 1) It sounds like we're just writing them a blank check. There's 150 "potential" projects but nothing definitive. They also want to propose other ideas and request input from the public. The other thing is when has the county or city ever been able to manage their budget well enough that we can expect them to properly account for $2.5b? 2) The election is on 8/25 with early voting set to begin on 8/8. They're clearly trying to elicit an emotional response by setting the vote on the anniversary of Harvey. Why couldn't this wait until the November elections? 

I haven't decided how I'm going to vote yet. It's the biggest issue we face in this part of the state. I'm just not sure creating a slush fund is the answer. 

[Huckleberry 32694]

As an American I will be selfishly voting for it while I lobby to have my subdivision added to the project list. My home flooded twice and my garage flooded three times in a 17-month period. I'm still remodeling (almost finished finally) from Harvey and will be making my sell decision based on this project. So much for researching and making sure to purchase in the 500-year floodplain instead of in a worse location.

I completely agree that this will get screwed up somehow. I'm also in a fight to get the MUD responsible for the property directly behind our neighborhood (and between our neighborhood and a bayou) to maintain it. For some reason our MUD isn't the one that owns it so we have to fight with a nearby MUD about it and cover maintenance expenses in the meantime.

[HenryJames 65887]

www.adjustedfloodplains.com

[Johnny Sack 8397]

I am voting no.  Too vague.  But I suspect it will pass easily.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13410]

I don't understand how any bond project can change the geography of Houston unless the plan is to tear down x% of Houston to rebuild as massive retention ponds.  

There are currently many projects that only seem to push storm waters to the bayous faster but how can they get the bayous to empty faster?   I don't see us changing gravity or lowering Galveston Bay's level.

I'm not advocating doing nothing and letting development continue to run rampant, but I haven't heard of any good ideas to prevent flooding.  And I question whether a few, small retention ponds really do much of anything for the 1-5% storms.  My next house in Houston will definitely be one of the ones built up, or have a 1st floor that I don't care as much about.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Require all homes in the 100 and 500 year plains to be built on pier and beam to a height that won't flood.  Problem will fix itself over time.

[Huckleberry 32694]

5 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't understand how any bond project can change the geography of Houston unless the plan is to tear down x% of Houston to rebuild as massive retention ponds.  

There are currently many projects that only seem to push storm waters to the bayous faster but how can they get the bayous to empty faster?   I don't see us changing gravity or lowering Galveston Bay's level.

I'm not advocating doing nothing and letting development continue to run rampant, but I haven't heard of any good ideas to prevent flooding.  And I question whether a few, small retention ponds really do much of anything for the 1-5% storms.  My next house in Houston will definitely be one of the ones built up, or have a 1st floor that I don't care as much about.

One thing they need to do is have a continuing budget for maintaining the drainage system. For the Tax Day floods many of the drainage creeks, bayous, etc. near me were overrun with brush and debris and that contributed to the problem. They made some minor improvements and cleaned out a bunch of it (but not nearly all) and the drainage noticeably improved. If Harvey had been a Tax Day level of rain I would not have flooded.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13410]

7 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

One thing they need to do is have a continuing budget for maintaining the drainage system. For the Tax Day floods many of the drainage creeks, bayous, etc. near me were overrun with brush and debris and that contributed to the problem. They made some minor improvements and cleaned out a bunch of it (but not nearly all) and the drainage noticeably improved. If Harvey had been a Tax Day level of rain I would not have flooded.

Agree 100%.  We don't need to spend money on large capital projects if they're not correctly maintained.  I don't want to add more govt, but Houston or Harris County needs a flood czar that has power to make things happen.

[bernorange 8348]

I figure roughly half of that $2.5b is going to be pure cream for politicians and contractors.  Bond proposals should be tied to specific projects with set completion milestones IMO.

[Jograves 357]

Culberson and Fletcher have both endorsed the flood bond. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13410]

Another good method to solve some of the problem is that any new house does not get subsidized, govt backed flood insurance.  And existing homes should have a deadline (10-20 years) of when it ends for them.    Let the private market decide how much flood insurance should cost.   If you want to build in an area that will most likely flood, then deal with it yourself.

[Huckleberry 32694]

What about suckers like me who trusted the Army Corps of Engineers' floodplains? I specifically researched and ensured that both of my Harris County home purchases were in the 500-year floodplain at worst. Turns out we have 500-year floods twice a decade or so.

Now I'm no longer eligible for NFIP coverage and have private flood insurance at 500% of original cost.

New construction or purchases makes sense, but phasing out of existing coverage seems like a terrible idea.

Edited July 31, 2018 by Huckleberry

[David Dennison 18652]

29 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Another good method to solve some of the problem is that any new house does not get subsidized, govt backed flood insurance.  And existing homes should have a deadline (10-20 years) of when it ends for them.    Let the private market decide how much flood insurance should cost.   If you want to build in an area that will most likely flood, then deal with it yourself.

Fuck off, poors.*

* Includes the middle class.

Edited July 31, 2018 by David Dennison

[Nice Guy Eddie 13410]

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

What about suckers like me who trusted the Army Corps of Engineers' floodplains? I specifically researched and ensured that both of my Harris County home purchases were in the 500-year floodplain at worst. Turns out we have 500-year floods twice a decade or so.

Now I'm no longer eligible for NFIP coverage and have private flood insurance at 500% of original cost.

New construction or purchases makes sense, but phasing out of existing coverage seems like a terrible idea.

Existing coverage should be phased out over time.  Be it 10, 20 or 50 years.  I'm ok with giving current owners time to recoup their investment in their home but that doesn't mean you get low insurance prices forever.  

On a side now, I've long wondered how the 500 year floodplain is created.  Do they take continued development into account and not just look at rainfall only?    I'm not anti-development but I don't see how more development does anything but make the problem worse.

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

2 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't understand how any bond project can change the geography of Houston unless the plan is to tear down x% of Houston to rebuild as massive retention ponds.  

There are currently many projects that only seem to push storm waters to the bayous faster but how can they get the bayous to empty faster?   I don't see us changing gravity or lowering Galveston Bay's level.

I'm not advocating doing nothing and letting development continue to run rampant, but I haven't heard of any good ideas to prevent flooding.  And I question whether a few, small retention ponds really do much of anything for the 1-5% storms.  My next house in Houston will definitely be one of the ones built up, or have a 1st floor that I don't care as much about.

I just don't believe a Houston of this size is sustainable, period, for the reasons you cite. It takes an hour in every direction to get from downtown to forests of any size or open land and away from impermeable concrete and rooftops. Retention ponds help a little but nowhere near enough. If there are a couple more devastating floods in the next ten years or so, I think there will be a pretty significant exodus to higher ground on the part of corporate HQs and not just their employees but also many more people. I don't have any stats on this, but I don't think many Americans have their homes destroyed/rendered unlivable for months at a time or their cars ruined via natural disaster even once, much less multiple times. 

[Brothahorn 10085]

I figure roughly half of that $2.5b is going to be pure cream for politicians and contractors.  Bond proposals should be tied to specific projects with set completion milestones IMO.

Exactly. I don't trust them to do the right thing with the money.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

So anyone voting today? They posted the list of projects mid-August.  But still not as much detail as I'd like.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

For those needing the info, here is the project list.

https://www.hcfcd.org/media/2907/2018bondprojectlist2018-08-06-1130.pdf

There is still half a billion unallocated.

What I do not like about this, is this is just a list of plans.  There are no time frames attached to these.  I am on the fence.  Improvements are needed.  I get that.  But I would like to see better oversight.

[Hate 20103]

I have absolutely zero faith that any projects will be completed in a timely manner or within the budget. I already pay a high tax rate living in Harris County.

[Guest]

On 7/31/2018 at 10:17 AM, Johnny Sack said:

I am voting no.  Too vague.  But I suspect it will pass easily.

I don't live in Harris County, but some of my friends who do are saying the plan doesn't do much to mitigate the threat of flood waters as opposed to the power it gives to grab land and run 'projects.'

[Nice Guy Eddie 13410]

In some cases, the best project may be to buy land from people whether they want to sell or not. 

I’m not the biggest fan of undefined projects and even the undefined goals of the bond but we have to do something.  I predict waste, delays and corruption but better than waiting until the next flood to start. 

[Guest]

 

We have had 3 major, major events in the past 2 years that we will likely never see again in our lifetimes; but should they occur, we damned sure know what areas flood now.

(Sam Kennison voice)  Move where the water ain't.  You've seen where it floods, so remaining there is your own choice.

Houston generally drains extremely well.  I disagree with legislating( taxing) for extreme events.

[suddenly shaggy 929]

Unless your lifetime ends before the next hurricane season, odds are decent you'll get another. Those are the new normal. We will get at least one of these events every 10 years going forward.

It's going to get a lot worse before it gets better and it's not going to get better until humans are extinct. 

[Guest]

Sure, man, science backs up what you just said...

 

But let's raise taxes to show we're being proactive.

Edited August 25, 2018 by slorch

[Hate 20103]

I voted no.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13410]

If houston remained the same, perhaps we could gamble that we won’t see another 1% or .2% storm in the near future but Houston isn’t remaining the same.  Houston’s growth is expected to be north of 33% from 2010 to 2030.    That’s a fair amount of infrastructure required for that many new people to live.  

As we continue to build over the remaining green spaces especially on the west side, all we do is push more and more water into the bayous during a storm.    But the bayous empty into the bay at the same rate as always.   Bayous fill up.  Storm sewers then can’t empty.  Water rises on the streets and into the houses.   More homes flood today when the same amount of rain as yesterday. 

Houstons ease of development isn’t going to change so we have to find a way to solve the problem when that much rain is dropped.  After Ike, the question was how to handle a large storm surge and the decision was to do nothing.  Hopefully we won’t repeat that with  flooding. 

[wildcat09 29226]

7 hours ago, slorch said:

 

We have had 3 major, major events in the past 2 years that we will likely never see again in our lifetimes; but should they occur, we damned sure know what areas flood now.

(Sam Kennison voice)  Move where the water ain't.  You've seen where it floods, so remaining there is your own choice.

Houston generally drains extremely well.  I disagree with legislating( taxing) for extreme events.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13410]

Appears to have passed easily.  So much the chronicle stopped reporting the results early last night.  Was at 85% For at the time 

[Guest]

So the flooding has been eradicated...

Yippee!!!

[bad_teammate 13132]

Love to vote to flood myself and my fellow Texans to own the libs

[Hate 20103]

Goddamn, you and your cabal are a beating.

[High Plains Drifter 10970]

On 8/25/2018 at 12:25 PM, slorch said:

 

We have had 3 major, major events in the past 2 years that we will likely never see again in our lifetimes; but should they occur, we damned sure know what areas flood now.

(Sam Kennison voice)  Move where the water ain't.  You've seen where it floods, so remaining there is your own choice.

Houston generally drains extremely well.  I disagree with legislating( taxing) for extreme events.

 

The fact you've had three major events in two years means you probably will see them again in your lifetime. If lighting strikes three times in the same place, only a goddamned idiot is going to think that spot is now free from the danger of lightning strikes.

Climate change, can you dig it?

 

And I agree with whoever said end subsidized flood insurance. Let the free market take care of it.

[bad_teammate 13132]

5 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

And I agree with whoever said end subsidized flood insurance. Let the free market take care of it.

The unregulated free market is what created this problem.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The unregulated free market is what created this problem.

Man made floods... get there by any means necessary.

 

And High Plains Drifter- I didn't say Harris County should stand pat or not give due diligence to the risks of flooding.  I just disagree with some of the ambiguity/ undefined parameters of the bond issue.

[bad_teammate 13132]

pump as much co2 as you want into the air

build all the massive concrete pads you want in this swamp of a city/county

owning the libs all day

[wildcat09 29226]

Slorch is nearly incomprehensible in his ramblings in this thread.

[Jograves 357]

150,000 voted out of 2.2 million registered voters. 

Lame AF. 

[Guest]

15 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Slorch is nearly incomprehensible in his ramblings in this thread.

Simplified, for you:  from Coach Wooden: Never confuse activity with achievement.

[elfenix 34171]

On 8/25/2018 at 7:56 PM, Nice Guy Eddie said:

If houston remained the same, perhaps we could gamble that we won’t see another 1% or .2% storm in the near future but Houston isn’t remaining the same.  Houston’s growth is expected to be north of 33% from 2010 to 2030.    That’s a fair amount of infrastructure required for that many new people to live.  

As we continue to build over the remaining green spaces especially on the west side, all we do is push more and more water into the bayous during a storm.    But the bayous empty into the bay at the same rate as always.   Bayous fill up.  Storm sewers then can’t empty.  Water rises on the streets and into the houses.   More homes flood today when the same amount of rain as yesterday. 

Houstons ease of development isn’t going to change so we have to find a way to solve the problem when that much rain is dropped.  After Ike, the question was how to handle a large storm surge and the decision was to do nothing.  Hopefully we won’t repeat that with  flooding. 

 

those mcmansions up in cypress cost half a million dollars in downstream flooding.  now the rest of us get to subsidize them even more.  yay.

https://www.marketplace.org/2017/08/29/economy/make-me-smart-kai-and-molly/30-hurricane-harvey-pounds-pavement