On September 2, 2018, the Houston Chronicle published “Remember the Villains of Hurricane Harvey” as their lead editorial. The byline was listed simply as “The Editorial Board.”  The editorial board is currently composed of the following people (just in case you wondered):

• John McKeon, Publisher.
• Jack Sweeney, Chairman.
• Lisa Falkenberg, Opinion Editor.
• Evan Mintz, Deputy Opinion Editor.
• Jim Newkirk, Outlook Editor.
• Andrea Georgsson, Sunday Outlook Editor.
• Harold Jackson, Editorial Writer.
• Andrea White, Editorial Writer.

STAR WARS meme prepared by m. bloom paraphrasing the lead editorial only slightly.

The editorial called for Houstonians to remember villainous developers “who saw nothing wrong with building neighborhoods inside the flood pools behind Addicks and Barker reservoirs, and then kept the risks to themselves.”

First, some definitions of the word “villain,” to place the editorial in the proper context:

Dictionary.com: Villain: (1) a cruelly malicious person who is involved in or devoted to wickedness or crime; scoundrel; (2) a character in a play, novel, or the like, who constitutes an important evil agency in the plot.

Merriam-Webster: Villain: (1) a character in a story or play who opposes the hero; (2) a deliberate scoundrel or criminal; (3) one blamed for a particular evil or difficulty. 

Cambridge: Villain (1) a bad person who harms other people or breaks the law; (2) a cruel or evil character in a book, play, or film.

Let’s break this down one bit at a time.

The developers (and the professional engineers who designed their developments) invested private capital to provide affordable housing on privately-owned land, with an annual risk of flooding of much less than 1%, which is the consensus standard used by all communities in the United States to design and locate new homes and other structures.  Engineers designed streets, lights, traffic controls, water systems, wastewater systems, and drainage facilities that functioned perfectly from the day they were built until Harvey arrived.

I believe that the engineers designing these neighborhoods did so in compliance with Sections 137.51 through 137.55 of the rules promulgated by the Texas Board of Professional Engineers under the legal authority of the Texas Engineering Practice Act.  These rules require engineers “to safeguard, life, health and property, to promote the public welfare” as well as “to protect the health, safety, property, and welfare of the public.” Please note that this rule does not require engineers to design neighborhoods with zero risk of flooding.

Why do I believe that the developers and engineers acted ethically and appropriately? Simply because the health, safety, property, and welfare of the residents were safeguarded.

Because the potable water provided to the residents was clean and healthy every day until Harvey arrived. Ever try to raise a family without potable water?

Because sanitary wastewater was collected from every home, treated, and properly discharged into nearby bayous every day until Harvey arrived.  Ever try to live in a home without a toilet or proper wastewater facilities?

Because none of the homes fell down on their owners every day until Harvey arrived and even during Harvey.

Because the roads carried traffic every day until Harvey arrived. What if there were no roads? Because the traffic lights and street lights worked every day until Harvey arrived. What if there were no lights?

Because rainwater from storm after storm was carried downstream from the developments without flooding anyone every day until Harvey arrived.  Because the systems worked.

All of these critical public health, safety, and welfare facilities were designed by ethical engineers with private funding from developers. All of the facilities and homes were made possible by the developers who invested private capital to create desirable places for people to live with a low and acceptable level of risk.

We’ve already decided to push our inundation risk exposure down for new construction in the City of Houston and Harris County to significantly less than 0.2% per year. Note that a finished floor elevation placed 2 feet higher than the 500-year flood elevation has an annual chance of inundation of much less than 0.2% per year in most places in this region.

But, if we collectively wish to retrofit existing homes and businesses in our region that are exposed to higher annual risk levels than 0.2% or 1% (think Hunting, White Oak, Brays – but certainly not neighborhoods in the Addicks or Barker flood pools) we need to have an open conversation about the desired risk level, the costs to achieve it, and the benefits realized.

We should avoid villainizing folks that built communities and facilities that worked and that beat the desired risk levels established at the time those facilities were built.

The villains pictured below are not developers.

A still from the silent comedy, Barney Oldfield’s Race for a Life MACK SENNETT/PUBLIC DOMAIN