Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities US Department of Commerce – Economic Development Administration Grant No

Lower Rio Grande Valley Regional Economic Adjustment Plan For Building Disaster Resilient Communities US Department of Commerce – Economic Development Administration Grant No. 08-79-04390

Prepared for: Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council

Hurricane Dolly July 23, 2008

Prepared by:

Program Manager: Daniel O. Rios, PE Senior Project Manager: Sharlotte L. Teague, PE Project Engineer: Mardoqueo Hinojosa, PE Engineering Assistant: Ryan Hall, EIT

In association with: 2012 Bickerstaff Heath Delgado Acosta, LLP Civil Systems Engineering, Inc. Guzman & Muñoz Engineering and Surveying, Inc. L&G Consulting Engineers, Inc. Olivarri & Associates, Inc. Rigcatco Consulting TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc.

September 28, 2012 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Pl September 2012

an for Building Disaster Resilien

t Communities LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………………… e1~e6

SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND ………………………….………..………………………..……… -1 1.2 PLAN FRAMEWORK………..…………..……….………………………………….-1 1.3 OBJECTIVES IMPLEMENTED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAN … -2 1.4 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF RURAL AFFAIRS………………………………. -2

SECTION 2 BASELINE CONSIDERATIONS 2.1 PROJECT STUDY AREA………...…..…………………….……..……. -3 2.2 JURISDICTIONAL INTEREST AND COOPERATION……………..… -4 2.3 OVERSIGHT, INPUT, AND EXPECTATIONS …………………...…… -5 2.3(a) Plan Development Oversight / Team…………………………...…… -5 2.3(b) Government Entity / Public Input and Expectations………...…..…… -5 2.4 APPLICABLE FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS … -6 2.4(a) Federal……………………………………………….……...…… -6 2.4(b) State……………………………...………………….……...…… -7 2.4(c) Local……………………………………………….……...... …… -9 2.5 CURRENT REGION / SYSTEM CONDITIONS …………………………… -9 2.5(a) Historic Storm Events……………………………….……...... …… -9 2.5(b) Region Topography ……………………………….……...... …… -11 2.5(c) Drainage Features ……………………………….……...... …… -11 2.6 DESIRED REGION / SYSTEM CONDITIONS……………………………… -14 2.6(a) Improvements to Localized Flooding of Incorporated Areas …....…… -14 2.6(b) Improvements to Localized Flooding of Un-incorporated Areas …..… -15 2.6(c) Improvements to Localized Flooding of Colonias …...... …… -17 2.6(d) Improvements to USIBWC Floodways / Arroyo Colorado ……...…… -18 2.6(e) New Region / Main Channels ………………………………....…… -18 2.6(f) Drainage Standards ……………………………………….....…… -19 2.6(g) Irrigation Drainage Ditches ………………………………...... …… -19

SECTION 3 FUTURE DEMANDS 3.1 DEMAND FORECAST ….…………………………….…………..………… -21 3.1(a) Population Growth ….………………………….…………..………… -21 3.1(b) Economic Growth….………………………….…………..………… -22 3.2 CHANGES IN TECHNOLOGY …………………………………………… -21 3.2(a) Geographic Information System (GIS) ….……….…………..………… -23 3.2(b) Storm Water Management Systems ….……….…………..………… -23

i LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

3.3 DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN……………… …….………..………… -26 3.3(a) Grants and Loans ……………………....……….…………..………… -26 3.3(b) Drainage Impact or User Fees………....……….…………..………… -27 3.3(c) State and Federal Programs…………....……….…………..………… -28 3.4 INCORPORATON OF NEW ASSETS FROM GROWTH ….………… -29

SECTION 4 WORKING TOOLS OF THE PLAN………………..…………. -31 4.1 GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM / INVENTORY DATABASE .. -31 4.2 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN….………………..……….……… -35

SECTION 5 IMPLEMENTATION / MAINTENANCE OF THE PLAN … -45

SECTION 6 OVERALL PLAN MONITORING AND UPGRADES……… -47 6.1 RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING FUTURE OVERSIGHT ENTITY… -47 6.2 UPGRADES / IMPROVEMENTS OF PLAN ….……...…..……….……… -48

REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………………..… -51

TABLES Page Table 1: LRGVDC – County Populations….……………..………...…… -3 Table 2: Summary of Government Entities ……..……………………… -4 Table 3: Hurricane Alex Rainfall ……..……………………….………… -11 Table 4: LRGV Population Growth…..……………………….………… -21 Table 5: CIP Summary ……..…………………….…………….………… -36 Table 6: CIP / Project Ranking Development Process-Goal I.………… -36~37 Table 7: Texas State Land Codes ……..……………………….………… -39 Table 8: CIP / Project Ranking Development Process-Goal II.………… -41~43 Table 9: CIP / Project Ranking Development Process-Goal III………… -43~44 Table 10: Maintenance Plan Summary…………………………..………… -45~46 Table 11: Plan Upgrade Timeline………………………………..………… -49

FIGURES Page Figure 1: Project Study Area / Location Map….……………..…..……… -4 Figure 2: Hurricane Dolly Total Rainfall….……………..……………..… -10 Figure 3: Location Map – Existing Raymondville Drain.……………..… -12 Figure 4: Location Map – North Main Drain / Main Floodwater Channel -12 Figure 5: Location Map – USIBWC Floodways / Arroyo Colorado…..… -13 Figure 6: Location Map – Drainage District Boundaries.……………..… -16 Figure 7: Chart – Colonias, Flooded Households – Flood Events……..… -17 Figure 8: Example of Low Impact Development………………………..… -24

ii LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Figure 9: Example of LID – City of Alton Calichera Project…………..… -25 Figure 10: Aerial Imagery ………………………………….……………..… -32 Figure 11: Future Land Use Map – City of Brownsville.……………..… -33 Figure 12: Sales Tax Revenue Generation Report (Texas Comptroller)..… -40

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A LRGVDC BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND MEMBERSHIP LIST APPENDIX B ENTITIES BY COUNTY APPENDIX C COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP APPENDIX D EVAULATION / SCORING OF PROJECTS FOR RANKING APPENDIX E COMPLETE PROJECT LIST APPENDIX F CIP / RANKED PROJECT LIST APPENDIX G DECISION MATRIX APPENDIX H COLONIA DOCUMENTATION APPENDIX I TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF RURAL AFFAIRS PROJECTS

iii LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

This Page Intentionally Blank

iv LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 2009, the LRGVDC obtained a grant (Grant No. 08-79-04390) from the US Department of Commerce - Economic Development Administration (EDA) to develop a project entitled “Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities”. The purpose of this grant was to develop a regional master plan for the four counties of the Lower Rio Grande Valley (LRGV), to include Cameron, Hidalgo, Willacy and portions of Starr, that will ensure economic growth and economic recovery following natural disasters. Work on the project began in 2010, and was completed in 2012. The effort has resulted in: identification of over 418 projects developed as the result of meetings and coordination with representatives for over 203 entities in the region; development of a project evaluation system that ranked 212 of these projects in terms of various factors, including cost-benefit, public support and shovel readiness; production of a ranked list of projects in three categories – Large (over $25 million in project cost), Medium ($2.5 to $25 million) and Small (less than $2.5 million); a GIS (Geographic Information System) centralized database with a wealth of information on the region, including district and entity boundaries, tax and sales tax data, land use and value of development information, public infrastructure information, and existing stormwater systems data; extensive public outreach; and analysis of the legal and organizational options for the future.

The LRGV region in southernmost Texas is one of the most unique areas in the United States. The region:  is an extremely fast growing area with over 1.2 million people and a relatively young population.  contains major international crossings and maritime ports critical to import and export trade.  home for operations of more than 80 of the Fortune 500 global manufacturers as well as countless other businesses.  has millions of dollars of state and federal investment in public facilities and infrastructure.  contains multiple, and often overlapping local entities, including four counties, which have fairly limited powers by state law.  has significant elevation in the northwest and west that falls to flat country with only four major drainage outfalls and is subject to periods of extreme rainfall, particularly as the result of tropical storms and hurricanes. Three of the major outfall systems are under the control of the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC), a bi-national organization.  consists of rapidly expanding urbanized areas interspersed with large areas of rural farm /ranch land.  despite the growth, remains one of the poorest per capita areas in the United States with local entities that struggle to address the pressures of growth with relatively small local tax bases and revenue sources.  has 1,338 colonias (as per the Texas Secretary of State), a large majority without, or have limited, community level drainage infrastructure that would be considered capable of substantially providing drainage control and flood protection, including connections to regional structural drainage facilities.

The result is a region with significant needs in terms of stormwater systems but limitations on the ability to deliver solutions. The lack of the systems is severe, resulting in billions of dollars in potential economic loss with impacts that radiate from the local to the state to the national and international levels. Over the last decade, storms have resulted in business shut downs that lasted from days to weeks, business bankruptcies and closures, crops and livestock losses, homes destroyed and emergency management and insurance costs. Stormwater threatened human lives and created health issues – potable water and wastewater system availability, mosquito infestations, refuse disposal issues, among others.

ES- 1 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Regional problems demand coordination. The LRGV Regional EAP, the result of an extensive and collaborative effort, has identified solutions. The costs are substantial, but the costs versus the benefit are evident from both an economic and human perspective. The benefits accrue not only regionally but statewide and nationally. The solutions demand broader collaboration and investment from all levels.

Project Location

Lower Rio Grande Valley, Texas

SOUTH TEXAS

PROJECT STUDY AREA

MEXICO

PROJECT STUDY AREA PROJECT STUDY AREA Overall Goal / Plan of Action The overall goal of the Lower Rio Grande Valley Regional Economic Adjustment Plan (LRGV Regional EAP or The Plan) is to provide a framework for the government entities within the LRGV to collaboratively plan and manage their current and future public works infrastructure and storm water-related systems in order to compete globally for future funding. Essentially, the primary objectives in the development of the LRGV Regional EAP included the following:  Collection of data to map, evaluate, and integrate existing regional assets and critical infrastructure systems.  Evaluation of the data for existing and future conditions (10 to 20 years) through land use characterization studies which will help identify needed improvements to provide relief for facilities that are determined to be inadequate and future facilities that will be necessary to accommodate development and land usage with respect to zoning, development trends and city annexation plans.  Incorporation of a “big picture” plan that identifies the contributing flow nodes and the associated major outfalls for storm water, identifying known flooding problems as well as recorded impacts that were generated by major storm events such as Hurricane Dolly, and providing a comprehensive picture of the current and projected region- wide drainage systems.  Evaluation of assets and revenue generators focusing on major economic areas, or those areas which are employment centers and generate substantial sales tax and other revenue. It is critical to overall recovery and future growth that these areas in the four counties have adequate systems to minimize storm-related water damage and economic impacts.  Identification of projects and needed improvements that would improve conditions critical to the diversification of the region’s economic base.

ES- 2 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

 Development of a Regional Drainage Capital Improvement Program (CIP), prioritizing and ranking projects based on criteria developed through consensus of Steering and Technical Committees as well as Public Forums, and identifying funding sources as well as preparing a CIP schedule to implement projects based on funding availability.

Key elements of the LRGV Regional EAP include the following:  Baseline Considerations  Future Demands  Working Tools of The Plan  Geographic Information System / Inventory Database  Capital Improvement Plan  Implementation and Maintenance of The Plan  Plan Monitoring and Upgrades

Project Management / Input / Collaboration / Guidance The project was managed by the staff of the Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council under the direction of Kenneth N. Jones, Executive Director and Terrie G. Salinas, Director of Economic Development. The 8-member consulting team was led by S&B Infrastructure, Ltd., and also included the firms of: Civil Systems Engineering, Inc.; Guzman & Muñoz Engineering and Surveying, Inc.; L&G Consulting Engineers, Inc.; TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc.; Bickerstaff Heath Delgado Acosta, LLP; Rigcatco Consulting; and Olivarri & Associates, Government Entities Within Project Study Area Inc. The large consulting team was required due Counties to the scope of work, and the massive Entity Type Cameron Hidalgo Willacy Starr undertaking of obtaining input from City - Incorporated 18 22 3 0 representatives of approximately 203 City - Un-Incorporated 36 44 11 4 governmental entities, such as county and city County Precincts 4 4 4 2 governments, drainage districts, irrigation Drainage Districts 4 1 2 1 districts, navigation districts, water districts, and Irrigation Districts 6 14 1 0 economic development corporations. The Navigation Districts 2 0 1 0 consultant team was strategically organized to Water Districts 0 5 0 0 Economic Development Corporations 4 7 12 match each firm’s expertise, working knowledge / history of the project study area and the Total 74 97 23 9 government entities. This was essential in the data collection efforts and plan development. 203

Additionally, the LRGV Regional EAP was developed with a broad public involvement effort to educate and provide opportunity for input from local citizens, businesses and stakeholders, as well as advocates for colonias. Activities included site visits with the entities, regular reports to the Board of Directors of the LRGVDC, three rounds of public meetings in each of the four counties, meetings with stakeholders, including periodic updates to the Commissioner Courts of each of the four counties. Also key to encouraging input were the Steering Committee and Technical Committee; both committees helped guide the development of the project and assisted with data collection and project prioritization.

LRGV Regional EAP – Joint Meeting of Steering and Technical Committees

ES- 3 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Data Collection PROJECT INVENTORY / REGIONAL DATABASE / GIS Over a period of 18 months, in-depth interviews, site visits, and conferences were held with representatives of each of the identified government entities, as well as other interested parties and groups. Each entity was asked (1) what were their issues and challenges during and after major storm events such as hurricanes, tropical storms, and large-scale rain events; (2) what projects they had on the books or envisioned to overcome these issues and challenges; and (3) what were the current codes and standards that they used to develop the projects. Additionally, comprehensive efforts were made to meet with colonia residents during special public forums where information was gathered for use in the potential development of projects that would provide community level drainage infrastructure and flood improvements capable of substantially providing drainage control and flood protection. All data was collected in electronic and/or hard-copy (ultimately scanned to electronic format) format for the development of a regional database. The regional database also included the gathering and development of Geographic Information System (GIS) data, allowing for the capture, storage, manipulation, analysis, and management of all types of geographical data, spatial data, and engineering data, including aerial photography, shape files, maps, CAD data, engineering reports, engineering studies, economic data, flooding photos, etc. The development of the GIS portion of the regional database was not without its own challenges --- one of the greatest issues with collecting any type of data from multiple entities is the standard and form in which those entities save or present their data. The non-uniformity of the data required large amounts of conversion in order to adhere to the hierarchy as well as to allow for better integration to the finalized database and its future use. To-date, the regional database contains over 1.4 terabytes of electronic data.

Project Evaluation Process Members of the Steering Committee and Technical Committee worked diligently with the Project Team to ensure the LRGV Regional EAP continued to move forward. One of the major activities of the Committees was to develop a process for evaluating and prioritizing projects that were identified by the governmental entities. Development of this system needed to occur before projects were individually considered and discussed to increase objectivity in the process.

First, recognizing that it may not be desirable to rank very large projects against small projects, the Committees approved three size ranges to be established based on the estimated costs of the projects:

● Large Projects = $25 Million or more ● Medium Projects = $ 2.5 Million to less than $25 Million ● Small Projects = less than $2.5 Million

Second, as shown in the table on the next page, a total of 418 projects were identified by the government entities. This complete list of projects is included in the LRGV Regional EAP. However, with input from the Project Team, the Committees decided that each government entity would begin the evaluation process and make a determination on their top 3 large projects, top 3 medium projects, and top 3 small projects. The top 3 projects for each size would be further evaluated for ranking.

Third, an evaluation criterion was developed for use by the Project Team in the determination of ranking. Three categories of evaluation criteria were developed by the Steering and Technical Committees: 1. Develop an integrated stormwater management system throughout the region. 2. Maximize the cost-benefit of stormwater management expenditures in the region. 3. Encourage investment in projects with public support to ensure successful implementation and the necessary commitment to long-term maintenance.

ES- 4 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Within each of these goals, distinct criteria were identified Scored / Ranked Projects to evaluate the projects Complete List systemically. For example, in County of Projects Small Medium Large Total Total Cost terms of the second goal, addressing cost-benefit, two of Cameron 224 48 47 3 99 $485,492,846 the criteria are the number of persons impacted by the Hidalgo 148 52 24 3 79 $547,944,276 project (including employment) Starr 6 1 0 0 1 $1,500,000 and the property/tax loss avoidance. A total of sixteen Willacy 40 20 13 0 33 $94,930,512 distinct criteria were identified, and each criterion was assigned Total 418 121 84 6 212 $1,129,867,634 a maximum numeric value. Each project was then evaluated and scored based on how it addressed these criteria. Thus, projects were separately evaluated in comparison to projects of relatively similar size. Once the projects were evaluated and scored, they were prioritized in ranking order of their individual scores.

Capital Improvement Plan / Impacts / Future Funding A total of 212 projects were ranked for the region, with a cost of $1.13 billion. APPENDIX F of the Plan provides a listing of the ranked projects CIP. The project study area is primarily located in what is known as the LRGV Basin, which has a watershed area of approximately 2.21 million acres. With a population of 1.26 million (US 2012 census), the total net property value in the four counties is approximately $43 billion. This figure does not include the value of the public infrastructure subject to loss as the result of flooding nor does it include the other potential losses, such as sales, income and other tax revenue loss that results when businesses are shut down and international trade with Mexico (the number three trading partner of the US) is affected.

Some of the project funding needs will be addressed by local entities, but the magnitude of costs is beyond the capacity of the local entities. Pro-active investment by the state and federal governments, especially in the large projects that will enhance the major portions of the regional drainage system, will help reduce or avoid the inevitable costs associated with destruction as the result of major storm events. In addition, consistent and state of the art approaches to development standards can prevent creation of new issues in the future.

Maintenance and Monitoring of the Plan The LRGV Regional EAP was developed to be a dynamic tool, as the ranked projects are funded / constructed, the CIP will need to be maintained and updated. Projects that are in the overall list that were not evaluated may become a priority and be evaluated for ranking and incorporated into an updated CIP. Also, as land use changes, technology changes and new information is available, additional projects are likely to be identified and will need to be evaluated and addressed. The LRGV Regional EAP identifies recommended processes and procedures to implement and maintain the plan. One of the most important elements is the determination of the entity that will provide for the future maintenance and monitoring of the plan. With the substantial investment in the development of the LRGV Regional EAP and the commitment of the LRGVDC Board regarding the future facilitation, maintenance and operation of the Plan to continue the regional collaboration regarding storm water management, the Steering and Technical Committees recommended that the Project Team review, analyze, and provide a working tool in the form of a “Decision Matrix” regarding the legal capabilities of four existing government entities and a new government entity. With approval from the LRGVDC Board, Project Team member Bickerstaff Heath Delgado Acosta, LLP (BHDA) performed the analysis, prepared a Report Memorandum entitled “Analysis of Legal Structure / Decision Matrix Regarding the Future Facilitation, Operation, and Maintenance of the Lower Rio Grande Valley Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities”, and prepared the Decision Matrix within the Report Memorandum. The Decision Matrix is also attached to this Plan as APPENDIX G. BHDA’s Report Memorandum and the accompanying Decision Matrix and referenced legal statutes identify and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the available entities that may have some

ES- 5 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

existing legal capabilities that can be dedicated to administering the LRGV Regional EAP, or have the capacity to fund or obtain / manage funding, maintain the Plan, and that can administer the required policies. The available entities chosen by the Committees that the Report Memorandum analyzed included the following:  Rio Grande Regional Water Authority  Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council  Counties  Drainage Districts  Storm Water Control District (new entity) The different types of entities above are available to implement and administer the Plan, but have differing regulatory responsibilities and powers. A broad range of these powers will be required to fully implement the LRGV Regional EAP. The list above is not an exclusive list of all entities that could conceivably undertake the administration of portions or the entirety of the Plan. However, the above-listed five entities represent leading potential options. An analysis was performed on each type of entity above regarding each one’s regulatory responsibilities and powers, to include:

 Creation (Legal Authority on which entity is  Purpose based)  Powers and duties  Leadership Structure  Bond authority  How long it takes to create  Taxing and fee imposition powers  Governing structure  Strengths (“Pros”)  Geographic boundaries  Weaknesses (“Cons”)

The Report Memorandum recognizes that no single existing entity will have the panoply of powers that are required to fully implement and administer the LRGV Regional EAP. This is the case whether a multi-jurisdictional model or a single entity model is selected. Accordingly, legislative options could address creation of a new entity to implement and administer the Plan as well as its agreed-upon powers and authorities or legislation options could address gaps in existing statutory authorities. In order to meet current and future needs of the Plan, and after reviewing the BHDA analysis, the Steering and Technical Committees determined that creation of a new, regional entity appeared beneficial. Thus, the Committees recommended to the LRGVDC Board that it look into the conceptual creation of a regional entity that could coordinate the management and operations of watershed management in the region and the administration of the LRGV Regional EAP. Creation of a new entity would require state legislation, and decisions would need to be made by the LRGVDC regarding the powers and authorities of that entity. Some of the benefits of this coordinated approach include: expedited development, operation and/or maintenance of projects, particularly projects spanning multiple jurisdictions; enhanced ability to develop projects in areas outside of drainage or irrigation districts; increased ability to attract federal and state funding at a regional level; and enhanced revenue potential and effectiveness. The Committees recognized that many questions and details remain and will need to be addressed. Members of the committees indicated a willingness to continue working on this effort and assisting the LRGVDC with further evaluation and tasks. And, the Decision Matrix is included in the LRGV Regional EAP as a working tool for future decisions of the LRGVDC Board regarding this matter.

All in all, the LRGV Regional EAP shows the collaborative effort of the LRGV government entities and public to work together to maintain and enhance the economic viabilities of their communities, and provides a tool for the state and federal governments to assist in the funding needs of the region.

ES- 6 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND The Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council (LRGVDC) is a regional planning organization designated by the State of Texas as a Council of Governments. The LRGVDC includes membership of governmental entities residing in Cameron, Hidalgo, and Willacy counties. Since 1967, the LRGVDC has served as a link between federal and state programs and a means for local units of government to work collaboratively in the development of planning efforts. The membership list (as of September 2012) for the LRGVDC is included in APPENDIX A.

The major product of the project is a master plan entitled “Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities in the Lower Rio Grande Valley” (herein referenced as the LRGV Regional EAP or the Plan). Associated with the LRGV Regional EAP is a Geographic Information System (GIS) centralized database for the collection and maintenance of infrastructure and assets that will be housed at the LRGVDC’s Economic Development Department and available for use by the public and government entities.

1.2 PLAN FRAMEWORK The EDA grant outlined several scope of work elements to guide the development of the LRGV Regional EAP which included the following: ● Develop and coordinate a regionally-based collaborative effort by bringing together key stakeholders (cities, counties, economic development organizations, private sector, irrigation and drainage districts, and state and federal agencies) for the purpose of developing regional strategies to restore, replace, and expand economic activity in the region; ● Map, evaluate and integrate existing regional assets and critical infrastructure systems for the next ten to twenty years; ● Identify projects that will diversify the region’s economic base in order to compete globally; ● Assess, identify, and map out a regional plan for infrastructure re-building based on long-term re-development strategies; ● Create and develop a data collection system and centralized database as an economic development tool to be used for assessing the region’s financial implication for pre- and post-disasters; ● Other activities to help the region recover from Hurricane Dolly and mitigate possible damage from future natural disasters and improve the Region’s economic competitiveness.

All in all, the overall goal was to provide a framework for the government entities within the LRGV to collaboratively plan and manage their current and future public works infrastructure and storm water-related systems in order to ensure economic growth and recovery following natural disasters and to be able to compete globally for future funding. Key elements of the LRGV Regional EAP included herein are the following:  Baseline Considerations  Government Entity / Public Input And Expectations  Legislative Requirements  Current System Conditions  Desired System Conditions  Future Demands  Demand Forecast  Changes In Technology

Page 1 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

 Demand Management Plan  Incorporation of New Assets From Growth  Working Tools of The Plan  Geographic Information System / Inventory Database  Capital Improvement Plan  Implementation and Maintenance of The Plan  Plan Monitoring And Upgrades  Upgrades / Improvements of The Plan  Recommendations Regarding Future Oversight Entity

1.3 OBJECTIVES IMPLEMENTED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAN

Essentially, the objectives implemented to accomplish the development of the Plan and its overall goal included the following: OBJECTIVE 1: Collection of data to map, evaluate, and integrate existing regional assets and critical infrastructure systems. OBJECTIVE 2: Evaluation of the data for existing and future conditions (10 to 20 years) through land use characterization studies which will help identify needed improvements to provide relief for facilities that are determined to be inadequate and future facilities that will be necessary to accommodate development and land usage with respect to zoning, development trends and city annexation plans. OBJECTIVE 3: Incorporation of a “big picture” plan that identifies the contributing flow nodes and the associated major outfalls for storm water, identifying known flooding problems as well as recorded impacts that were generated by major storm events such as Hurricanes Dolly, and providing a comprehensive picture of the current and projected region-wide drainage systems. OBJECTIVE 4: Evaluation of assets and revenue generators focusing on major economic areas, or those areas which are employment centers and generate substantial sales tax and other revenue. It is critical to overall recovery and future growth that these areas in the four counties have adequate systems to minimize storm-related water damage and economic impacts. OBJECTIVE 5: Identification of projects and needed improvements that would improve conditions critical to the diversification of the region’s economic base. OBJECTIVE 6: Development of a Regional Drainage Capital Improvement Program (CIP), prioritizing and ranking projects based on criteria developed through consensus of Steering and Technical Committees as well as Public Forums, and identifying funding sources as well as preparing a CIP schedule to implement projects based on funding availability. The strategies and accomplishment for each of these objectives are illustrated in SECTION 4.

1.4 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF RURAL AFFAIRS

During the course of development of the LRGV Regional EAP, a non-housing funding program was also being developed under the Texas Department of Rural Affairs. Additional information regarding this program is included in APPENDIX I.

Page 2 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

SECTION 2 BASELINE CONSIDERATIONS

2.1 PROJECT STUDY AREA The project study area is located within the LRGV. The LRGV is an area located within the southernmost part of Texas. It lies immediately adjacent the northern bank of the Rio Grande, which separates Mexico from the United States. The LRGV is comprised of four counties: Cameron County, Hidalgo County, Willacy County, and Starr County. Figure 1 on the next page provides a map of the project study area in relation to the LRGV. As per the 2012 US Census, the estimated population of the LRGV is 1,264,091. Table 1 below provides a breakdown of the population by county.

County Population

Cameron 406,220

Hidalgo 774,769 Starr 60,968

Willacy 22,134

Total 1,264,091 Table 1: County Populations1

The LRGV is one of the most unique areas in the United States. The region:  is an extremely fast growing area with over 1.2 million people and a relatively young population.  contains major international crossings and maritime ports critical to import and export trade.  home for operations of more than 80 of the Fortune 500 global manufacturers as well as countless other businesses.  has millions of dollars of state and federal investment in public facilities and infrastructure.  contains multiple, and often overlapping local entities, including four counties, which have fairly limited powers by state law.  has significant elevation in the northwest and west that falls to flat country with only four major drainage outfalls and is subject to periods of extreme rainfall, particularly as the result of tropical storms and hurricanes. Three of the major outfall systems are under the control of the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC), a bi-national organization.  consists of rapidly expanding urbanized areas interspersed with large areas of rural farm and ranch land.  despite the growth, remains one of the poorest per capita areas in the United States with local entities that struggle to address the pressures of growth with relatively small local tax bases and revenue sources  has 1,338 colonias (as per the Texas Secretary of State), a large majority without, or have limited, community level drainage infrastructure that would be considered capable of substantially providing drainage control and flood protection, including connections to regional structural drainage facilities. The result is a region with significant needs in terms of storm water systems but limitations on the ability to deliver solutions. The lack of the systems is severe resulting in billions of dollars in potential economic loss with impacts that radiate from the local to the state to the national and international levels. Over the last decade, storms have resulted in business shut downs that lasted from days to weeks, business bankruptcies and closures, crops and livestock losses, homes destroyed and emergency management and insurance costs. Storm water threatened human lives and created health issues – potable water and wastewater system availability, mosquito infestations, disposal of refuse issues, among others.

Page 3 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Lower Rio Grande Valley, Texas

SOUTH TEXAS

PROJECT STUDY AREA

MEXICO

PROJECT STUDY AREA Figure 1: Project Study Area / Location Map PROJECT STUDY AREA

2.2 JURISDICTIONAL INTEREST AND COOPERATION The project study area encompasses 4 counties as shown on Figure 1. To fully engage jurisdictional interest and cooperation, governmental entities within each county were identified. Table 2 below summarizes the number of entities that participated in the development of the LRGV Regional EAP, and APPENDIX B identifies the names of those entities by county.

County Entity Category Cameron Hidalgo Willacy Starr

City-Incorporated 18 22 3 0 City- Un-incorporated 36 44 11 4 Precincts 4 4 4 2 Drainage Districts 4 1 2 1 Irrigation Districts 6 14 1 0 Navigation Districts 2 0 1 0 Water Districts 0 5 0 0 EDCs 4 7 1 2 Sub-Totals 74 97 23 9 Total 203 Table 2: Summary of Government Entities

Page 4 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

2.3 OVERSIGHT, INPUT, AND EXPECTATIONS 2.3(a) Plan Development Oversight / Team. The development of the Plan was managed by the staff of the LRGVDC under the direction of Kenneth N. Jones, Executive Director and Terrie G. Salinas, Director of Economic Development. The 8-member consulting team was led by S&B Infrastructure, Ltd., and also included the firms of: Civil Systems Engineering, Inc.; Guzman & Muñoz Engineering and Surveying, Inc.; L&G Consulting Engineers, Inc.; TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc.; Bickerstaff Heath Delgado Acosta, LLP; Rigcatco Consulting; and Olivarri & Associates, Inc. The large consulting team was required due to the scope of work, and the massive undertaking of obtaining input from representatives of approximately 203 governmental entities, such as county and city governments, drainage districts, irrigation districts, navigation districts, water districts, and economic development corporations. The consultant team was strategically organized to match each firm’s expertise, working knowledge / history of the project study area and the government entities. This was essential in the data collection efforts and Plan development. Also key to encouraging input and facilitating the development of the Plan were the Steering Committee and Technical Committee. Membership on the committees (identified in APPENDIX C) reflected broad representation across the LRGV, and members were nominated and approved by the LRGVDC Board of Directors.  The Steering Committee, with 29 members, was chaired by Godfrey Garza of Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 and vice-chaired by Commissioner David Garza of Cameron County. Membership was comprised of county commissioners, county precinct coordinators, county drainage and irrigation general managers, port directors, industrial foundation/economic development corporation directors, city mayors, city managers, assistant city managers, city public works directors, and various citizens representing landowners and colonias. The Steering Committee guided and facilitated the overall development of the Plan, including providing input for potential projects, prioritization of projects, and guidance regarding the determination of the future operation, facilitation, and maintenance of the Plan.  The Technical Committee, with 18 members, was chaired by Sonia Lambert of Cameron County Irrigation District No. 2 / Drainage District No. 3 and vice-chaired by Raul Sesin, Hidalgo County Planning Administrator, and was included federal government employees from various agencies that had a technical background, a county judge, county precinct administrators, drainage and irrigation district managers, a drainage district board member, County technical engineers, engineering firm presidents, and various citizens representing landowners and colonias. The Technical Committee guided the technical development of the Plan, assisted with the collection of data, and provided input regarding technical aspects for project identification and prioritization. 2.3(b) Government Entity / Public Input and Expectations. The collaborative effort was comprehensive and included the input and expectations of local government entities and organizations, federal agencies, and the public. The LRGV Regional EAP was developed with a broad public involvement effort to educate and provide opportunity for input from local citizens, businesses and stakeholders, as well as the Rio Grande Valley Partnership and Proyecto Azteca, the advocates for colonias. Activities included site visits with the local government entities and organizations, regular reports to the Board of Directors of the LRGVDC, three rounds of public meetings in each of the four counties, meetings with stakeholders, including periodic updates to the Commissioner’s Courts of each of the four counties. Additionally, agencies such as the US International Boundary and Water Commission, US Department of Agriculture – Natural Resource Conservation Service, and US Fish and Wildlife Service were contacted and allowed to participate in the process in order to ensure there was interagency cooperation. These groups were not only contacted for information, but were also allowed to participate on the Steering and Technical Committees. In general, the

Page 5 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

expectations of all these groups indicated support of the overall goal of the LRGV Regional EAP to collaboratively plan for regional storm water management.

2.4 APPLICABLE FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS Development and ultimate implementation of the Plan includes the adherence to the regulations and requirements of the following legislative and agency requirements:

2.4(a) Federal. (a-1) Federal Laws: Primary federal laws applicable to the Plan are the following:  The Clean Water Act (CWA). The CWA is a law that establishes environmental programs to protect US water quality. It establishes the EPA as the authority to issue rules and development programs to implement the CWA. One such program that is pertinent to storm water drainage is the National Pollution Elimination Discharge System (NPDES), which establishes rules and requirements for storm water drainage during construction of projects, and also establishes the municipal storm water program. Pertinent to the municipal storm water program is the definition of municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4), which is defined by Part 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 122.26(b)(8)) as a conveyance or system of conveyances including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels, or storm drains: (i)Owned or operated by a state, city, town, borough, county, parish, district, association, or other public body (created to or pursuant to state law)…including special districts under state law such as a sewer district, flood control district or drainage district, or similar entity, or an Indian tribe or an authorized Indian tribal organization, or a designated and approved management agency under Section 208 of the Clean Water Act that discharges into waters of the United States, (ii)Designed or used for collecting or conveying storm water, (iii)Which is not a combined sewer, and (iv)Which is not part of a Publicly-Owned Treatment Works (POTW).  National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Under the oversight of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), NEPA requires federal agencies (and state and local agencies with federally-funded projects) to integrate environmental investigations, analysis, and determinations into their decision-making processes for proposed projects by considering the environmental impacts of their proposed actions and reasonable alternatives to those actions. To meet NEPA requirements agencies prepare a detailed environmental document, which EPA (or other designated oversight authority) reviews and comments, maintains a national filing system for all Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), and assures that actions comply with NEPA. Most federal agencies establish their own guidelines to comply with NEPA, and are required to follow their agency-established guidelines. State agencies that administer federal funds are also required to comply with NEPA, and some of them also have established their own guidelines. When a LRGV Regional EAP project is federally-funded, research will need to be performed to determine the applicable guidelines to comply with NEPA, which is dependent on who is designated as the lead agency. Additionally, all environmental documents are circulated through the other federal and environmental resource agencies (see list below for federal and state agencies), as well as the public, for their review and opportunity for comment.  Federal Emergency Management Agency Program and Policies. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) exists within the United States Department of Homeland Security. The Administrator for FEMA reports directly to the Secretary of Homeland Security. The primary purpose of FEMA is to coordinate the response to a disaster that has occurred in

Page 6 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

the US and recovery cannot be performed with the resources of local and state authorities. Along with on-the-ground support during disaster recovery efforts, FEMA also provides field / specialized experts, funding for rebuilding efforts, relief funds for infrastructure, as well as access to low interest loans, in conjunction with the Small Business Administration. FEMA is also responsible for mitigation programs that take action before a disaster, in order to identify risks and reduce injuries, loss of property, and recovery time, including analysis programs for floods, hurricanes, and dams. Pre-Disaster Mitigation grants are available to acquire property for conversion to open space, retrofit existing buildings, construct storm shelters, manage vegetation for erosion control, and small flood control projects. FEMA works to ensure affordable flood insurance is available to homeowners in flood plains, through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), and also works to enforce no-build zones in known flood plains and relocate or elevate some at-risk structures. On July 6, 2012, the President signed the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 extending the National Flood Insurance Program’s (Nauthority through September 30, 2017.

(a-2) Federal Agencies: The primary federal agencies that administer laws or provide guidelines to meet the requirements of those laws applicable to the LRGV Regional EAP projects that would potentially be federally-funded include the following:  US Economic Development Administration (EDA)  US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)  US Coast Guard (USCG)  US Department of Agriculture – Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS)  US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)  US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)  US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)  US International Boundary & Water Commission (USIBWC)

2.4(b) State. (b-1) State Laws: Primary federal laws applicable to the Plan are the following:  Constitution of the State of Texas:  Article III, § 52. Counties, cities, towns or other political corporations or subdivisions; lending credit; grants; investment of funds… … for (1) the improvement of rivers, creeks, and streams to prevent overflows, and to permit of navigation thereof, or irrigation thereof, or in aid of such purposes, (2) the construction and maintenance of pools, lakes, reservoirs, dams, canals and waterways for the purpose of irrigation, drainage or navigation, or in aid thereof, and (3) the construction, maintenance and operation of macadamized, graveled or paved roads and turnpikes or in aid thereof.  Article VIII, § 1-a. State ad valorem tax levy; county levy for roads and flood control; tax donations… …to be used for construction and maintenance of Farm to Market Roads or for Flood Control..  ARTICLE VIII, § 59. Conservation and development of natural resources …of this State… …including the control, storing, preservation and distribution of its storm and flood waters, the waters of its rivers and streams… …the reclamation and drainage of its

Page 7 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

overflowed lands, and other lands needing drainage…  78th Legislature, Chapter 385, S.B. No. 1902, & 80th Legislature, Chapter 522, S.B. NO. 707. …relating to the creation, administration, powers, duties, operation and financing of the Rio Grande Regional Water Authority…  Local Government Code:  Title 12, Subtitle C, Chapter 391, Regional Planning Commissions.  Title 13, Subtitle B, Chapter 561, Water Control by Counties  Texas Water Code. The Texas Water Code enacts policy of the State to provide for the conservation and development of the state's natural resources, including: (1)the control, storage, preservation, and distribution of the state's storm and floodwaters and the waters of its rivers and streams for irrigation, power, and other useful purposes; (2)the reclamation and irrigation of the state's arid, semiarid, and other land needing irrigation; (3) the reclamation and drainage of the state's overflowed land and other land needing drainage; (4) the conservation and development of its forest, water, and hydroelectric power; (5) the navigation of the state's inland and coastal waters; and (6) the maintenance of a proper ecological environment of the bays and estuaries of Texas and the health of related living marine resources. Chapters of the Texas Water Code relevant to the LRGVDC Regional EAP include, but are not limited to the following:  Title 2, Chapter 5 - Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission  Title 2, Chapter 6 - Texas Water Development Board  Title 2, Chapter 26 - Water Quality Control  Title 4, Chapter 49 - Provisions Applicable To All Districts  Title 4, Chapter 50. Provisions Generally Applicable To Districts  Title 4, Chapter 51. Water Control And Improvement Districts  Title 4, Chapter 54. Municipal Utility Districts  Title 4, Chapter 55. Water Improvement Districts  Title 4, Chapter 56. Drainage Districts  Title 4, Chapter 58. Irrigation Districts  Title 4, Chapter 59. Regional Districts  Title 4, Chapter 60. Navigation Districts--General Provisions  Title 4, Chapter 66. Stormwater Control Districts

(b-2) State Agencies: The primary state agencies that administer laws or provide guidelines to meet the requirements of those laws applicable to the LRGV Regional EAP projects that would potentially be state-funded include the following  Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)  Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT)  Texas Historical Commission (THC)  Texas Parks & Wildlife (TP&W)  Texas Water Development Board (TWDB)

Page 8 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

2.4(c) Local. It is not the intent of the LRGV Regional EAP to reduce or remove authority of any individual entity, but rather provide a tool for the region to utilize in planning efforts. Therefore, local regulations of the counties and cities within the project study area are still applicable and must be adhered to.

2.5 CURRENT REGION / SYSTEM CONDITIONS

The term “valley” in Lower Rio Grande Valley is somewhat a misnomer as the LRGV is not quite a valley, but rather a river delta. A large majority of the area is flat, which creates issues with drainage, and these issues become major when events such as tropical storms and hurricanes impact the area.

2.5(a) Historic Storm Events. To illustrate the LRGV’s vulnerability to flooding and major storms, The National Weather Service Weather Forecast Office in Brownsville, Texas cites a number of significant events that have affected the LRGV since the late 19th century, including the following2:

 September 4th and 5th, 1933. A 13-foot storm surge inundated coastal Cameron County, leveling all sand dunes on South Padre Island; developed areas along the coast were abandoned until after World War II.

 September 20th-22nd, 1967; Hurricane Beulah. This storm remains the significant storm of record for longtime residents of the LRGV, and included one or more impacts from wind, flooding, and storm surge affecting people from Cameron to Zapata County. Hurricane Beulah made landfall south of the mouth of the Rio Grande as a Category 5 storm, but weakened over land and produced Category 3 conditions in Texas.3 Records indicate winds between 109 mph and 136 mph in Brownsville, and gusts to 100 mph were noted as far inland as the cities of Pharr and Edinburg in Hidalgo County. Storm tides affected South Padre Island, Port Isabel, and Boca Chica in Cameron County, and were estimated to range between 8 ~ 14 feet, and south of Port Mansfield along the Willacy-Cameron County line were measured as high as 18 feet. Hurricane Beulah was very slow moving, with it’s Texas path traveling from Cameron County heading across Willacy and Brooks counties, then briefly into Duval and Webb counties, and then turning southwest and dissipating in northern Photo 1: Beulah Flooding – Harlingen Mexico. Beulah's slow movement, relatively large (Parkwood / Arroyo Estates), size, and tremendous amounts of rains on Harvey Aerial Photo saturated ground across LRGV and other counties caused nearly every community to have some type of flooding. It was estimated that damages were $100 million (1967) for the deep south Texas area.

 August 10th, 1980; Hurricane Allen. Hurricane Allen was a Category 5 just prior to entering the Gulf, but weakened to a Category 3 just prior to landfall near Port Mansfield. Reported rainfall varied between 5 to 7 inches within the LRGV. A storm surge was reported as high as 12 feet at Port Mansfield (Willacy County), Texas. The northern and uninhabited portion of Padre Island had 68

Page 9 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

new cuts from storm surge. A brief wind gust of 138 mph was reported at Port Mansfield where significant damage occurred. Other reports had buildings in Brownsville inundated with 4 feet or water, most likely from rainfall. The landfall of the most intense portion of the eyewall north of the LRGV spared the region from what would have been one of the worst storms on record.

 September 16th and 17th, 1988; Hurricane Gilbert. Weakening substantially after striking the northern Yucatan peninsula, Gilbert made a comeback to Category 3 (115 mph) before making landfall in Tamaulipas. Impacts to the LRGV were felt in stages. The first stage was a notable storm surge that flooded South Padre Island, and hurricane force wind gusts to 83 mph in Coastal Cameron and Willacy counties. The second stage was flooding along the Rio Grande, a result of very heavy rain flowing from the Sierra Madre Oriental into the basin. While no comparison with Beulah (1967), the flow required the opening of the US International Boundary and Water Commission’s (USIBWC) floodways.

 July 23rd, 2008; Hurricane Dolly. As Dolly approached from the south, a storm surge of 3 to 4 feet affected South Padre Island, Port Isabel, and Port Mansfield. Making landfall at the Cameron- Willacy County line, Dolly's wind and torrential rains caused damage and flooding across the LRGV estimated at over $1 billion, making it the fourth most destructive Texas hurricane on record in raw value not adjusted for inflation. Sustained winds for the most part were below hurricane force, but an area extending from South Padre Island through Laguna Vista and Port Isabel, Rio Hondo, Harlingen, and San Benito experienced frequent gusts to hurricane force, along with widespread minor to moderate wind damage to roofs, poorly designed buildings, trees, and power lines and poles. Rainfall of 12 to 18 inches or more produced widespread flooding in Cameron, Hidalgo, Willacy, and even Starr County. Figure 2: Hurricane Dolly Total Rainfall, NOAA

 September 12th and 13th, 2008; Hurricane Ike. Ike is most remembered for its devastation of the Bolivar Peninsula northeast of Galveston, after a storm surge of at least 17 feet demolished homes and left only a few buildings remaining. However, Ike's large wingspan drove high water across the entire Gulf of Mexico. It was Ike which caused severe erosion on the South Padre Island beaches. Initially, water levels of at least 5 feet overtopped a few seawalls, and then encroached through beach access points to flow across Padre Boulevard and into the Laguna Madre.

 June 30th, 2010; Hurricane Alex and Tropical Depression Two. The LRGV experienced locally heavy rains from Hurricane Alex; Table 3 on the next page outlines recorded / observed inches of rainfall. Rapid strengthening of Alex just prior to landfall along the central Tamaulipas coast, about

Page 10 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

100 miles south of Brownsville, produced severe flash flooding in Monterrey, Nuevo Léon, from more than 30 inches of rainfall in the foothills of the Sierra Madre Oriental. Days of torrential rainfall in the Sierra Madre ultimately led to severe river flooding along the Rio Grande from Laredo to Rio Grande City and into Hidalgo County. The USIBWC activated their floodways for the first time since 1988. River and floodway levels would reach their highest value since 1971. Combined with the rainfall produced by Tropical Depression Two, the Rio Grande was under flood conditions for much of the month of July 2010. An estimated $10 million of agricultural damage was reported for Hidalgo County.4

*Rainfall Rainfall City / Community City / Community (Inches) (Inches) Cameron County: Hidalgo County: Bayview (4 NE) 5.30 Alamo (1.4 NNE) 8.34 Brownsville 5.64 Edinburg 7.53 Brownsville (1.9 ESE) 7.79 Edinburg (1 WSW) 8.22 Brownsville (2.2 W) 7.12 La Joya 6.35 Brownsville (3 NNW) (i) 6.76 La Joya (11.1 N) 6.93 Brownsville (3.5 N) 7.28 McAllen 7.58 Brownsville (4.1 NE) 9.10 McCook 8.25 Brownsville (4.1 E) 8.02 Mercedes 7.08 Brownsville (4.2 NE) 7.31 Mission (1.9 ENE) 5.90 Brownsville (4.4 NE) 7.14 Progresso 8.14 Brownsville (4.9 NW) 7.67 San Manuel 5.91 Brownsville (5 NW) 6.06 Santa Ana NWR (i) 7.94 Harlingen/Coop 6.61 Sharyland (i) 6.00 Harlingen/Valley Airport 3.87 Weslaco (2E) 7.96 Harlingen (4.3 WSW) 6.64 Starr County: Harlingen (4.7 WSW) 6.40 Falcon Dam 2.90 Los Fresnos (0.3 NE) 8.14 Willacy County: Palm Valley (2.2 WSW) 5.93 Lyford 7.05 Rancho Viejo (0.7 E) 9.79 Port Mansfield (i) 5.83 Rancho Viejo (3 SE) 8.83 Raymondville 5.67 San Benito (5 SSE) 7.62 Sebastian 5.00i South Padre Island 6.87 *Rainfall data, June 29th through July 1st, 2010, from airports, cooperative observers, and Community Collaborative Rain, Hail & Snow Network (CoCoRAHS) (i) incomplete data Table 3: Hurricane Alex Rainfall2

2.5(b) Region Topography. The majority of the project study area (excluding the portion of Starr County) is within what is referred to (for hydrologic and hydraulic analysis as well as environmental, ecological, and water conservation) as the Lower Rio Grande Basin. The Lower Rio Grande Basin is comprised of Cameron, Hidalgo, and Willacy counties. The Lower Rio Grande Basin has an area of approximately 2.21 million acres. The area is nearly flat terrain with a coastal plain that slopes primarily from the west to the east and northeast away from the Rio Grande and toward, and ultimately outfalling to the Laguna Madre. Topographically, elevations range from sea level at the Laguna Madre, to 45 ~ 65 feet at the western boundaries of Willacy and Cameron Counties, to 300 ~ 370 feet near the western edge of the Hidalgo County (approximately 80 miles inland).

2.5(c) Drainage Features. Regional and primary drainage for the Lower Rio Grande Basin is accomplished through the following existing features:

Page 11 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

(c-1) Raymondville Drain. The Raymondville Drain is an existing man-made channel located in northern Willacy County, and it is owned by Delta Lake Irrigation District. It is trapezoidal shaped channel with a 20-foot flat bottom, varying steep side slopes at a depth of approximately 10 feet. At the time of this plan, the channel hosted large, over-grown sections. The majority of the Raymondville watershed is within Willacy County (including Willacy County Drainage District No. 2) and portions of Hidalgo County. Figure 3: Location Map – Existing Raymondville Drain The watershed encompasses four cities / communities: Raymondville, San Perlita, La Sara, and Hargill. The total watershed area is approximately 490 square miles. The drain flows in an east-west direction and empties into the Laguna Madre south of Port Mansfield. Figure 3 above provides an illustration of the location of the existing Raymondville Drain.

(c-2) The North Main Drain / Main Floodwater Channel. These man-made drainage channels were excavated starting in the 1970’s, completed in the mid 1980’s, and, as shown in Figure 4 below, run consecutive to each other in an east-west direction, starting at Edinburg Lake in Hidalgo County, and ultimately outfall to the Laguna Madre in Willacy County. These channels are owned by Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 (HCDD1), and an interlocal agreement between HCDD1 and Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 allows for joint use of the Main Floodwater Channel between the two counties. HCDD1 has a system of existing lateral ditches that ultimately drain to these main channels, providing some relief to cities such as McAllen, Edinburg, Elsa, Edcouch, and La Villa in Hidalgo County, and the city of Figure 4: Location Map – North Main Drain / Main Floodwater Channel

Page 12 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Lyford and the southern rural areas of Willacy County. The original design of the existing HCDD1 system was to carry agricultural runoff from a 9½-year storm event although it currently carries the storm water from an area with the population greater than 750,000. HCDD1 requires that impervious runoff from developments are retained for a period of time prior to discharging into these channels, alleviating the potential for extreme overloads of the system in the event of a major storm.

(c-3) USIBWC Floodways / Arroyo Colorado. The US International Boundary and Water Commission (USIBWC), along with a joint agency of Mexico, control the flow elevations of the Rio Grande. This is done with a series of dams, levees, as well as other control features and procedures. Pertinent to the LRGV Regional EAP, the Rio Grande runs along the southern boundaries of Starr, Hidalgo, and Cameron Counties. Along with a series of levee reaches along the Rio Grande, the USIBWC also owns, operates, and maintains various internal floodways to control overflow of nearly 180 miles of the Rio Grande. As shown in Figure 5 below, the Banker, Main, and North Floodways (all known as part of the USIBWC Lower Rio Grande Flood Control Project) run consecutive to each other, extending from Peñitas, to the Anzalduas Dam at the Rio Grande in Hidalgo County, running east and then north through Cameron County, to ultimately outfall to the Laguna Madre north of the Willacy / Cameron county line. The Banker Floodway has an earthen berm control structure at Anzalduas Park that overtops when the Anzalduas Dam structure is closed, which raises the river’s levels causing it to overtop the berms and re- direct the additional flow into the floodway. The Main Floodway was developed by constructing levees alongside a series of resacas and excavating a pilot channel midway between the levees. The North Floodway was constructed with added levees along a natural overflow channel to ultimately convey the water to the Laguna Madre. The Arroyo Colorado, known as an ancient distributary of the Rio Grande, branches off the Main Floodway just north of the city of Progreso in Hidalgo County, travels east and north through Cameron County and also outfalls to the Laguna Madre at the Willacy / Cameron county line.

Laguna Madre

Rio Grande

Figure 5: Location Map – USIBWC Floodways / Arroyo Colorado

Page 13 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

The local governmental entities (drainage districts, counties, and cities) can use the floodways with pipe / gate structures through the floodway’s levees; however, when the USIBWC has to use the floodways to control the Rio Grande during flood events, the gates to the levee structures are closed, and the local government entities must rely on pump structures to pump the water over the levees in order to utilize the floodway for drainage. This becomes critical for the communities and cities during regional storm events such as hurricanes and tropical storms. Although the defined purpose of the floodway system is to control floodwaters from the Rio Grande and storm water from cities within the Lower Rio Grande Valley, the land between the levees is also utilized for farming and grazing livestock by either private land owners or the leasing of areas by the IBWC.

All in all, due to the lack of distinguishing characteristics or features conducive to efficient drainage, including natural watercourses, as well as inadequate capacities or absence of drainage channels, detention or retention ponds and/or structures, portions of the project study area can become flooded. This flooding can be detrimental to the safety and well-being of the public, as well as the economy of the area.

2.6 DESIRED REGION / SYSTEM CONDITIONS To get a comprehensive understanding of the issues and desires of the LRGV region, public meetings and visitations with the entities and various representatives of other stakeholders were held throughout the development of the LRGV Regional EAP. Desired conditions included requests for improvements in the following categories:

2.6(a) Improvements to Localized Flooding of Incorporated Areas. In general, many of the incorporated cities of the LRGV are experiencing population growths and increased industrialization / commercialization (see Section 3.1), which ultimately converts previously un-inhabited lands to inhabited or with the increase of the cities boundaries, farming, ranching, or vacant lands into inhabited, resulting in largely impervious areas that produce significant amounts of storm water runoff. The quantity of runoff increases substantially each year and without adequate drainage first in the developing areas, the initial runoff has shown tendencies to either pond or back-up at undersized drainage facilities, which causes localized flooding in the developed areas.

Photo 2: Hurricane Dolly Flooding (2008) – Harlingen at US 77 Frontage Road / Wilson Road; Overflow of Existing Drain Ditch.

Page 14 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

In general, the entities of the LRGV are experiencing new sources of flow from the influx of land development as well as from water treatment plants. The water coming from new developments and from the constant flow from new treatment plants increases the demand for water conveyance on an already undersized system. In the case of land developments, there are requirements and standards in place that require localized retention of the runoff, which facilitates and necks down the flow rate of the water entering the storm water conveyance system. The combination of new and existing drainage infrastructure as well as more water treatment plants for cities and unincorporated areas creates more of a need for either a regional storm water delivery system to the Laguna Madre or an alternative to releasing the fresh and brackish water into the bay’s salty water.

2.6(b) Improvements to Flooding of Un-incorporated Areas. Not only are cities experiencing high runoff rates and potential flooding with each rain, but the population growth has moved to areas outside of the city limits, which have even less potential for direct funding and drainage improvements.

The unincorporated areas, including but not limited to Abram-Perezville, Alton North, Arroyo City, Arroyo Colorado Estates, Arroyo Gardens – La Tina Ranch, Bausell and Ellis, Citrus City, Cuevitas, Doffing, Green Valley Farms, Hargill, Havana, La Blanca, La Feria North, La Paloma, Laguna Heights, Laguna Seca, Lasara, Laureles, Lopezville, Los Angeles Subdivision, Los Ebanos, Lozano, Lyford South, McCook, Monte Alto, Olmito, Port Mansfield, Ratamosa, San Carlos, Santa Monica, Sebastian, South Point, Val Verde, Villa Del Sol Yturra, Yznaga, and Zapata Ranch, have had a history of drainage issues, and these issues will only continue to grow as more impervious area is added.

Drainage districts are primarily responsible for some of the un-incorporated areas of the LRGV region. As listed in APPENDIX B and shown on the map on the next page, there are eight drainage districts within the Plan study area; four in Cameron County, one in Hidalgo County, two in Willacy County, and one newly- formed in Starr County. Drainage districts are created under the Texas Water Code, Title 4, Chapter 56. The purpose of a drainage district, as per the Texas Water Code is to control and supervise the construction and maintenance of canals, drains, ditches, levees, and other improvements of the district and to keep them in repair.5 The district must map the boundaries of the district as well as the canals, drains, ditches and levees of the district, and their outlets extending even beyond the district’s boundaries.6 Powers and duties of a drainage district include the following: (1) power to construct, maintain, and repair drainage facilities;7 (2) power of eminent domain to acquire land, easements, or other property inside or outside the district’s boundaries that is necessary for its projects or purposes;8 (3) power to construct bridges and culverts in certain instances;9 and (4) power to enter into interlocal agreements with other political subdivisions to accomplish their purposes, and these agreements may address a scenario in which all or part of the same watershed of a waterway is contained in more than one district or political subdivision so that jurisdiction is shared.10

The drainage districts in the LRGV were created with distinct geographic boundaries that do not cover the entire un-incorporated areas of each county. Areas within a county that are not within the boundaries of a drainage district typically become the responsibility of the county. These areas have been referred to as "no- man’s land". Drainage in these areas is typically handled on a case-by-case basis by the county as problems arise and funds become available. The proximity of Cameron County to the coast provides for an increased incidence of urban development in un-incorporated areas with poor drainage, making no-man’s land more prevalent. All in all, the expectation of a county to provide for drainage outside of a drainage district’s boundary places a strain on county budgets and sometimes the inability to fund needed improvements. Unlike drainage districts counties lack the ability to tax specifically for drainage improvements.

Page 15 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Figure 6: Location Map –Drainage Districts of the LRGV

Page 16 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

2.6(c) Improvements to Localized Flooding of Colonias. Colonias are defined by the Texas Secretary of State as “as a residential area along the Texas-Mexico border that may lack some of the most basic living necessities, such as potable water and sewer systems, electricity, paved roads, and safe and sanitary housing.” As per the Texas Secretary of State there are 1,338 colonias in the LRGV; and, a large majority of these colonias are without or have limited community level Photo 3: Hurricane Dolly Flooding (2008) - Southern Breeze drainage infrastructure that Subdivision (Colonia) near North Wind Drive. would be considered capable of substantially providing drainage control and flood protection.

During the development of the LRGV Regional EAP, efforts were made to meet with colonia residents during special public forums at the following colonias: Charro #2 (8-29-2011), Hidalgo Park (9-1-2011), San Carlos (9-7-2011), Green Valley Acres (10-5-2011), and Lyford (10-18-2011). There was excellent attendance and participation from colonias residents. Information was provided to the residents of recent, current and future drainage improvement projects applicable to their areas. But also, information was gathered for use in the potential development of projects that would provide community level drainage infrastructure and flood improvements capable of substantially providing drainage control and flood protection to at least equal to that present within the corporate limits of nearby cities. Advocates, for the colonias, stressed that “community level infrastructure” is defined as specific, street and lot level physical drainage systems including but not limited to; storm water drains, storm water retention facilities, curbs and gutters, streets designed to conduct storm water, and connections to regional structural drainage facilities.

Question 5 Occurrences in Past 12 Months (2010 ~ 2011) Colonias issues varied and included damage to homes 45 42 (interior / exterior) and 40 possessions, isolation due to 35 flood waters preventing

30 1 Flooding Event access to home, and long-term 2 Flooding Events 25 evacuations. Documentation 3 Flooding Events under the development of the 20 4 Flooding Events Every Time it Rains LRGV Regional EAP 15 Never included comments received 10 10 from colonias residents

Number of Flooded Households Flooded of Number 5 4 outlining these issues, which 5 2 1 are included in the database; a 0 Number of Flooding Events summary of this information is included in APPENDIX H. Figure 7: Chart – Colonias, Flooded Households – Flood Events

Page 17 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

2.6(d) Improvements to USIBWC Floodways / Arroyo Colorado. It is greatly felt that improvements need to be made with regards to the existing USIBWC Floodways /Arroyo Colorado, specifically in the matters of (1) operation and cooperation, (2) maintenance, and (3) improvements to the physical features of the flood control works. First, as previously stated, the local governmental entities can use the floodways with pipe / gate structures through the floodway’s levees; however,

Portable 12-inch when the USIBWC has to use the Pump North Floodway floodways to control the Rio Grande during flood events, the gates to the levee structures are closed, and the local Mercedes Lateral government entities must rely on pump Eleven 6-inch structures to pump the water over the Conveyance Hoses levees in order to utilize the floodway for drainage. The pumps, in lieu of an actual drainage channel or ditch, are Photo 4: Hurricane Alex Flooding (2010) – North Floodway, primarily used to remove the water after on West Levee looking North; Pumping from Drainage Ditch the actual event and are more often- (on the left) over Levee into the Floodway (on the right); than-not inadequate to handle the water ¼ - mile south of Mile 13 N, and 6 miles north of Mercedes. efficiently during the flood event.

Although the USIBWC has operations and procedures that are mandated through treaty with Mexico at an international level, it is felt that improvements are needed in the operations and procedures in an effort to accommodate and incorporate the needs of the local entities. The existing operations and procedures should be reviewed at the federal level and revised. And most importantly, when a storm or major event is imminent, any storm-specific procedures should be ultimately and timely published for the public and local government entities.

Second, maintenance of the physical features of the floodways and the Arroyo Colorado is imperative. Although environmentally, it may appear problematic, it is recognized that silt build-up and plant growth in the channels and outfalls diminishes hydraulic efficiency and capacity. Additionally, the mechanical and structural features, such as the dams, levees, and gate structures must also be maintained.

Third, improvements to the flood control works are of a paramount necessity. During 2009 ~2011, the USIBWC, with funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as well as major contributions from Hidalgo County, made improvements to the levee system in an effort to meet levee certification requirements. Not all of these improvements have been completed for the LRGV levee systems, including Cameron County, which are part of what is known as the USIBWC Lower Rio Grande Flood Control Project. And, as of the publish date of the LRGV Regional EAP, none of the improved levees have been certified by FEMA. Failure of these and other levees not to be certified would lead to portions of the LRGV (and primarily the major urban areas as well as low-income areas such as the colonias) to be designated flood zone. Failure to get the levees certified by FEMA and the construction of additional improvements could lead to eventual / major economic impacts to the LRGV residents and businesses.

Finally, it is recognized that funding for the USIBWC has been limited in the past (typically to approximately $10 million per year); however, this Plan supports advising the congressional leadership that additional funding is needed to operate, maintain, and improve the existing USIBWC Floodways / Arroyo Colorado.

2.6(e) New Regional / Main Channels. Although many of the small areas and cities focused on their own drainage deficiencies, almost all of the interviewed entities, as well as residents that attended the public

Page 18 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

forums, felt that another major goal for regional drainage is to have multiple, independent outfalls that flow from the inner developed areas of the LRGV to the Laguna Madre independent of the USIBWC Floodways / Arroyo Colorado.

2.6(f) Drainage Standards. Another desired improvement of the entities was to create regional drainage and development standards. These standards would be enforced at both the city and county level, and these new regulations would at the very minimum ensure that developers create positive drainage and refrain from building in the floodplain. The guidelines set in the standards would also ensure that all developments would be analyzed in the same manner, no matter the developer and also ensures that all plans are evaluated in the same manner so as to create uniformity within the LRGV.

2.6(g) Irrigation Drainage Ditches. As previously discussed, the majority of the LRGV was used for farming or ranching, and from those operations, miles of irrigation channels and pipes have been laid since the first irrigation district was founded in 1898. A large majority of the earthen channels that carry water from the river to settling/retaining basins and eventually to landowners for irrigation have seepage, overflow, and runoff ditches on one or both sides. The ditches that are near or in the recently developed areas are not being utilized to not only hold the water from the channel, but also carry the runoff from some of the developed land as well. The once inaccessible farming and ranch lands with above ground channels now have roads that range from 2 lanes to 6 lanes and require that some of the channels be converted to underground pipes. Once the channels have been moved underground, the ditches that are located in or around the cities and unincorporated areas are taken over by either the counties or cities, which then have the responsibility of daily operation. Since these ditches were designed for seepage, overflow, and field runoff and typically are not preserved in the same manner as drainage ditches, the entity taking over the ditch must increase ditch capacity and ensure that the ditch has a final outfall, which some irrigation drain ditches do not.

Page 19 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

This Page Intentionally Blank

Page 20 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

SECTION 3 FUTURE DEMANDS

3.1 DEMAND FORECAST There are many and various factors that affect demand regarding storm water management; including but not limited to population growth, changes in demographics, seasonal factors, vehicle ownership, consumer preferences and expectations, economic factors, agricultural practices, environmental awareness, etc. One of the biggest influences on future storm water drainage systems is the expected population growth and type and rate of development, and the resulting storm water runoff increases. Essentially, there are two Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) within the LRGV; (1) Brownsville-Harlingen MSA in Cameron County and (2) McAllen-Edinburg-Mission area within Hidalgo County. At one time, the McAllen-Edinburg-Mission area within Hidalgo County ranked as the nation’s 3rd fastest growing Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). 3.1(a) Population Growth. The population in each county of the LRGV has multiplied significantly over the last 20 years. The number of people living in Hidalgo County doubled from 1990 to 2010 while Cameron County’s population increased by 146,000 people during that same time period. Both Willacy and Starr also experience significant growth while remaining mainly rural areas. Table 4 below outlines population of the counties from 1980 ~2010.

Population Counts County Year Total Cameron County Hidalgo County Willacy County Starr County 1990 260,120 383,545 17,705 40,518 701,888 2000 335,227 569,463 20,082 53,597 978,369 2010 406,220 774,769 22,134 60,968 1,264,091 At Total Population of 1,264,091 in the RGV Population Increase County Year Total Cameron County Hidalgo County Willacy County Starr County 1980-1990 50,440 100,316 210 13,252 164,218 1990-2000 75,107 185,918 2,377 13,079 276,481 2000-2010 70,993 205,306 2,052 7,371 285,722 Total 196,540 491,540 4,639 33,702 726,421 At Total Population of 1,264,091 in the RGV Population Increase % County Year RGV Cameron County Hidalgo County Willacy County Starr County 1980-1990 24.06% 35.42% 1.20% 48.60% 30.54% 1990-2000 28.87% 48.47% 13.43% 32.28% 39.39% 2000-2010 21.18% 36.05% 10.22% 13.75% 29.20% A Total Growth of 35.1% Overall in the RGV in the Past 30 Years. Table 4: LRGV Population Growth (1980 ~ 2010)

(a-1) Cameron County Population Growth. Keeping a close pace with Hidalgo County growth, Cameron County had 260,120 residents in the 1990 census while 406,220 were counted in 2010. Cameron County beats Hidalgo County in the number of drivers who use their vehicles to commute to work alone—with 78.2 percent of drivers preferring to travel solo to their jobs each day. With 238,765

Page 21 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

registered vehicles on Cameron County roads in 2006, again advanced planning is needed to ensure the workforce can continue to operate, no matter the conditions.11 (a-2) Hidalgo County Population Growth. Hidalgo County’s population exploded during this 20-year period with 383,545 residents in 1990 to 774,769 people in 2010. With 415,187 registered vehicles in use in 2006, 76.6 percent of the Hidalgo County workforce drives to work alone and does not participate in a car pool or public transportation. Expected population growth projections for the year 2025 were at one time estimated to be 1,279,014.11 (a-3) Starr County Population Growth. Starr County saw an uptick in population, with 40,518 residents in 1990 and 60,968 in 2010. Like Hidalgo County, a large majority, 73.8 percent of drivers used their car form commuting to work and drive alone. Starr County had 37,413 registered vehicles in 2006 and as their population numbers continue to rise, so will the need for additional infrastructure that will protect jobs, homes and investments.11 (a-4) Willacy County Population Growth. With a population of 17,705 in 1990, Willacy County showed a solid increase with 22,134 residents in the 2010 Census. As expected, the increase in residents has resulted in an increase for services and infrastructure. With 13,601 registered vehicles on the road in 2006 and no public transportation available, Willacy County residents primarily use their cars to commute to work. 11 3.1(b) Economic Growth. Texas is the third largest producer of citrus fruit in United States, the majority of which is grown in the LRGV. While the LRGV has a long standing tradition of farms and ranches that help in generating produce cash receipts averaging more than $500 million annually—the area is swiftly moving toward shopping carts and merchandise sales; as retail trade now comprises 50 percent of the region’s economic generators. Retail sales positions are expected to be in demand in South Texas with the second most projected job openings in 2012, falling just behind positions in home care aides. Hidalgo County, in particular, has the highest number of retail jobs in the region, followed by Cameron County. With McAllen’s La Plaza Mall offering 1.2 million feet of stores, Hidalgo County had cash register receipts totaling $13.1 billion in 2006, which resulted in $306 million in state sales tax the same year.12 Retail sales positions are expected to be in demand in South Texas with the second most projected job openings in 2012, falling just behind positions in home care aides. Hidalgo County, in particular, has the highest number of retail jobs in the region, followed by Cameron County. With McAllen’s La Plaza Mall offering 1.2 million feet of stores, Hidalgo County had cash register receipts totaling $13.1 billion in 2006, which resulted in $306 million in state sales tax the same year.12 The region’s second retail-driven economy, Cameron County, followed with $6.5 billion in gross sales which generated $163 million in state sales tax that same year. In addition, Hidalgo County and the Reynosa area is home to about 80 of Fortune 500 manufacturers, including AT&T, Bissell, Black & Decker, BMW, GE, Nokia, Sony, West Bend and Whirlpool, to name a few. Being able to access and transport goods across the international border is essential and necessary for the McAllen-Edinburg-Mission MSA marketplace.12 Likewise, the Brownsville-Harlingen MSA is growing at a rapid pace, due to its low cost of living and its ever expanding sales tax base. Recent moves to the area include second locations for major retailers such as Ross, Conn’s and a Kohl’s outlet. Retail activity in Cameron County has grown 56 percent since 2000.12 Over the last several decades, the emergence of maquiladoras (factories or fabrication plants) has caused a surge of industrial development along the border, while international bridges have allowed Mexican nationals to shop, sell and do business in the LRGV. Development and expansion of new business will be aided by two

Page 22 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

major developments for the South Texas Region: the Interstate 69 route and a new railway international bridge crossing. Both US 77 (Cameron County) and US 281 (Hidalgo County) are being phased into the I-69 corridor in sections, with completed portions stretching out to the north and south of Houston for over 15 years. Already US 77 is completed to interstate highway standards for the 40-mile stretch between Brownsville and Raymondville and this section can now be added to the Interstate System. With each completed section added to the interstate system, more avenues for economic development become a reality for the South Texas Region, as more efficient freight movement, shorter travel times and easier journeys will be realized; granting the public an effortless avenue to medical facilities, shopping, leisure activities and jobs.13 The first railway international bridge crossing to be built in the State of Texas in 100 years is under construction in Cameron County. The Brownsville West Rail Bypass International Bridge is scheduled for completion in December 2012. While the vast majority of goods are moved by truck, rail lines are close behind, carrying about 6 percent of all goods across the Mexican—US international border. Cameron County’s newest international crossing has properly positioned itself for the next several decades, as the Mexican government has predicted that this trade will increase to 35 percent in the next five years. The bridge is expected to ease traffic congestion caused by the current tracks on both sides of the border.14 Finally, the LRGV encompasses several landmarks that attract tourists, and is primarily known for South Padre Island. Popular destinations include Port Isabel Lighthouse, Laguna Atascosa National Wildlife Refuge, Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge, and Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park. The LRGV is also a popular waypoint for tourists seeking to visit Mexico. Popular destinations across the border include: Matamoros, Nuevo Progreso, Río Bravo, and Reynosa, all located in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas. And, the LRGV also attracts large numbers of consumers from the Mexican states of Nuevo Leon, Coahuila, Distrito Federal, and Tamaulipas.

3.2 CHANGES IN TECHNOLOGY Technology has significant impacts on how storm water is managed. The following provides a listing of technologies that could change or is changing for the future:

3.2(a) Geographic Information System (GIS). An in-depth discussion, regarding GIS, is provided in Section 4.1. GIS is one of the ever-growing and emerging technologies, and it is the baseline tool for the engineering aspect and current / future use of the LRGV Regional EAP. The project database was developed under ESRI software, Version 9.3, which was the latest version at the starting of the development of the Plan. ESRI’s latest version as of the date of the Plan, is Version 10.1. This does not mean that the current database is not valid, but the technology is growing, and it must be acknowledged that the database must be maintained to keep up with the changes in software.

3.2(b) Storm Water Management Systems. Technology for drainage features and systems are varied and also changing. Two examples, are water re-use and low impact development.

(b-1) Water Re-Use / Rainwater Harvesting. Rainwater harvesting stores water that can later be used for irrigation, flushing toilets, washing

Page 23 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

clothes, washing cars, pressure washing, or it can be purified for use as everyday drinking water. These systems can focus on having the method applied at individual buildings or houses as well as larger public water supply system.

(b-2) Low Impact Development (LID). The use of LID in storm water management is on the rise in recent years and is now highly encouraged by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s (TCEQ) Storm Water Management Team for all Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Storm Water Management Plans (SWMP). LID encourages lawmakers, policy writers, and developers to re- consider the traditional style of development that takes runoff water from improved land and moves it away as fast as possible. The new way of development would be one of which the ground water is first recharged, and the remaining water is either utilized for sport, recreation, is reclaimed, or allowed to continue in the draw down process. This type of development decreases the demand for massive drainage conveyance systems and recent studies and experiments have shown that developers can utilize more land for developing when LID is used rather than using large areas for retention/detention.

Courtesy of www.epa.gov Figure 8: Example of a Low Impact Development Courtyard

Examples of using LID can be found in the current LRGV Regional EAP CIP. First, the City of La Villa is proposing a project (HC122), and recently completed planning for the creation of regional detention facilities that hold water coming from the Delta area and utilizing a water treatment plant to clean and sell the water that would otherwise be dumped into HCDD1’s Master Drain System and eventually carried to the Laguna Madre. The City of La Villa and the Delta area as a whole have had drainage issues as more land is developed upstream towards the western portion of Hidalgo County, and the increased impervious land’s run-off impacts the over-burdened drainage systems. Instead of digging deeper ditches and moving

Page 24 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

the water further away from the City, the City has embraced the water’s presence and plans on not only increasing the capacity of the treatment plant, but also a watershed learning facility that aids in research and education for these types of projects. The second example of LID is the City of Alton Calichera Project (HC 093). This project converts old caliche pits into retention ponds and a park with amusement and entertainment areas. Areas include a possible dirt bike course and paintball/airsoft course, both of which would be used for regional competition.

Figure 9: Example of a LID – City of Alton Calichera Project (HC093)

(b-3) Drainage Elements. Traditions regarding slope maintenance, vegetation, slope stability, and sediment removal should also be evaluated with regards to changing technology. One of the biggest issues with drainage ditches in the LRGV is the existence of sand and non-cohesive material that erodes from slopes in short periods of time creating excessive siltation in the channel bottoms which ultimately leaves slopes near or less than 2:1 slopes and decreased capacity. Although the preferred method of securing slopes is the placement of vegetation, cutting or mowing the planted vegetation too short also leave slopes unsecure and allow for the transient materials to more readily leave the slope and settle further downstream, creating voids on the slopes. A more effective (and more expensive) alternative to slope vegetation is the concreting of slopes, which removes all chance for soil movement as well as greatly diminishing maintenance costs. Along with cost of installation, another deterrent to the concrete alternative is the diminished ability to readily increase capacity of the existing system when needed. With an earth embankment, benching and the deepening or widening of the ditch would be most of the

Page 25 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

production and construction cost associated with expansion. In the case of concrete protection, the concrete would have to be removed and replaced once the deepening or widening operation was completed. At any rate, channel and drainage ditches design for construction and ultimately maintenance would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Photo 5: HCDD1 Main Floodwater Channel, Willacy County – Slope Erosion

3.3 DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN The demand management plan is proposed to consist of a combination of upgrading-rehabilitation-repairs of existing drainage system assets, construction of new drainages system assets, maintenance of all drainage system assets, management of the LRGV Regional EAP, and funding.

A total of 418 projects were identified by the entities within the entire four county areas. These projects are listed in APPENDIX E. Out of the 418 projects, 212 were evaluated, ranked and prioritized for a capital improvement plan. The CIP and ranked projects are included in APPENDIX F. As projects are funded and constructed, the CIP will need to be updated on a regular basis.

Funding of these projects can come from several agencies for drainage and emergency projects. These sources could be in the form of grants and loans, drainage impact fees or state and federal programs. The sources provide relief for major disaster events. In addition, several requirements have to be met to qualify for funding under these programs.

3.3(a) Grants and Loans. Examples of grants and loan programs include the following:

Page 26 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

(a-1) FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program or Post-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program provides funds for states and local governments that have declared a major disaster. The principle behind this program is to reduce the loss of property and life during major disaster events like hurricanes, tropical storms, and dam and levee breaks. Projects that qualify for this fund must provide a long term solution to protect public and private property. Furthermore, the project’s benefit-to-cost ratio should be significant. According to FEMA, projects that qualify under this program include but are not limited to the following:  Acquisition of real property for willing sellers and demolition or relocation of buildings to convert the property to open space use;  Retrofitting structures and facilities to minimize damages from high winds, earthquake, flood, wildfire, or other natural hazards;  Elevation of flood prone structures;  Development and initial implementation of vegetative management programs;  Minor flood control projects that do not duplicate the flood prevention activities of other Federal agencies;  Localized flood control projects, such as certain ring levees and floodwall systems, that are designed specifically to protect critical facilities; and,  Post-disaster building code related activities that support building code officials during the reconstruction process.

(a-2) In addition to FEMA funds, the US Economic Development Administration (EDA) also provides grants. A grant that can be used for the CIP is the EDA Disaster Relief Opportunity. The purpose of this grant is to “help communities and regions devise and implement long-term economic redevelopment strategies through a variety of construction and non construction projects, as appropriate, to address economic development challenges in regions impacted by a major Federally declared disaster.” According to the EDA, the following entities can receive funding:  State governments;  County governments;  City or township governments;  Public and State controlled institutions of higher education ;  Native American tribal governments (Federally recognized);  Nonprofits having a 501(c)(3) status with the IRS, other than institutions of higher education;  Nonprofits that do not have a 501(c)(3) status with the IRS, other than institutions of higher education; and,  Private institutions of higher education.

3.3(b) Drainage Impact or User Fees. Another way to fund projects includes implementing fees; the following are a few methods:  Users/Utility Fees: Utility service charges are rates billed to customers for providing storm water management services. These service charges may be flat rates, or variable rates based on classes of customers eg., residential, commercial, or industrial. Utility service charges may represent a dedicated source and an ongoing method of funding for some or all storm water management programs.  Special Assessment: Properties can be assessed annually to fund storm water management programs. Often, special assessments are used to fund a special district or authority that can

Page 27 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

implement all or portions of a region’s storm water management program.  Local Improvement: Under this type of funding system, individual properties benefited by storm water projects are assessed to fund the project.  Inspection Fees: Plan review and inspection fees allow the community to recover some or all of the direct cost associated with performing design reviews for pre-construction and post-construction best management practices.  Developer Impact Fees: The developers construct needed on-site storm water facilities as a condition of development and bear associated costs.  Alternative Fees: Instead of constructing on-site facilities to meet development requirements, developers may be given the option of paying a comparable fee to be used by the local government to build regional facilities that are designed to meet the same objectives as the developer- constructed on-site mitigation.  Connection Fees: A one time charge assessed at the time of development to recover a proportionate share of the cost of existing facilities and planned future facilities. The applicability depends upon legislation in each state.

3.3(c) State and Federal Programs.

(c-1) Texas Water Development Board (TWDB). The TWDB has several programs in which storm related projects can be funded in the form of grants or loans. These programs include Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF), Texas Water Development Fund (TWDF), and Flood Protection Planning.  The CWSRF allows the TWDB to provide a loan to entities at a low interest rate offering fixed and variable rates with a maximum repayment period of 30 years. Projects that qualify for this loan include stormwater pollution control, nonpoint source pollution control and statuary management projects. In addition, 20 percent of these funds have to be spent on green infrastructure, water or energy efficiency improvements, or other environmentally innovative activities.  The Texas Water Development Fund, which is administered by TWDB, provides loans for planning, designing, and constructing water supply, wastewater, and flood control projects. To apply for this loan, applicant must be a part of a political subdivision that includes cities, counties, districts and river authorities. These loans provide assistance for projects dealing with water wells, retail distribution and wholesale transmission lines, pumping facilities, storage reservoirs and tanks, and water treatment plants.  Flood Protection Planning provides grants through TWDB. The principle behind this grant is to provide solutions to flooding problems by considering the needs of an entire watershed. Upstream and downstream effects on problems areas must be considered for this funding. Furthermore, the planning involved under these types of projects must be regional. Planning measures under this grant, according to TWDB, include: ■ determine and describe problems resulting from or relating to flooding; ■ determine the views and needs of the affected public relating to flooding problems; ■ identify potential solutions; ■ estimate benefits and costs of potential solutions, including structural and nonstructural measures; ■ recommend feasible solutions to flood protection problems; and ■ determine that any proposed solutions are consistent with appropriate regional or statewide plans and relevant laws and regulations. Applicants for Flood Protection Planning must be political subdivisions. Grants for this funding must be limited to 50% of total project cost, except for areas which have an unemployment rate exceeding the state average of 50% or more. When unemployment rate is higher, the TWDB may supply grant up to 75% of the project cost.

Page 28 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

(c-2) Texas Department of Rural Affairs (TDRA). TDRA provides funds to small, rural cities with populations less than 50,000 and to counties that have a non-metropolitan population less than 200,000. These communities are considered non-entitlement areas because they must apply for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) fund from TDRA and not directly from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This program’s main objective is to provide basic human needs and sanitary infrastructure to small rural communities.

3.4 INCORPORATION OF NEW ASSETS FROM GROWTH As the LRGV Regional EAP is implemented through the construction of the projects in the CIP, the entities will be taking on new assets in the form of drainage channels, structures, and other features. These assets will need to be maintained and the drainage system inventories of the Plan database updated.

Page 29 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

This Page Intentionally Blank

Page 30 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

SECTION 4 WORKING TOOLS OF THE PLAN

4.1 GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM / INVENTORY DATABASE Over a period of 18 months, in-depth interviews, site visits, and conferences were held with representatives of each of the identified government entities, as well as other interested parties and groups. Each entity was asked (1) what were their issues and challenges during and after major storm events such as hurricanes, tropical storms, and large-scale rain events; (2) what projects they had on the books or envisioned to overcome these issues and challenges; and (3) what were the current codes and standards that they used to develop the projects. The data was collected in electronic and/or hard-copy (ultimately scanned to electronic format) format for the development of a regional database. The regional database also included the gathering and development of Geographic Information System (GIS) data, the baseline feature of the database. A GIS-based database, utilizing ESRI software, was developed for the LRGV Regional EAP because GIS offers a system for creating, editing, managing, analyzing, and displaying information, allowing for the capture, storage, manipulation, analysis, and management of all types of geographical data, spatial data, and engineering data, including aerial photography, shape files, maps, CAD data, engineering reports, engineering studies, economic data, flooding photos, etc. GIS utilizes what is known as spatially-referenced datasets, and it provides three types of geographic information: (1) the geodatabase, which defines the geographic representations (the use of polygons, points, and lines to define features), attribute descriptions, spatial relationships, and the layering of the data; (2) visualizaton which includes the mapping, charts and tables and other visualization tools, and (3) modeling and analysis or geoprocessing to evaluate alternatives, perform hydrologic / hydraulic modeling, and assess for future conditions. The development of the GIS portion of the regional database was not without its own challenges --- one of the greatest issues with collecting any type of data from multiple entities is the standard and form in which those entities save or present their data. The non-uniformity of the data required large amounts of conversion in order to adhere to the hierarchy as well as to allow for better integration to the finalized database and its future use. To-date, the regional database contains over 1.4 terabytes of electronic data. Available data was acquired from representatives of the 203 entities. Another major source was the Texas Natural Resources Information System (TNRIS), which is the principal state archive in Texas for natural resources data. TNRIS provides a central access point for Texas Natural Resources data, census data, digital and paper maps, and information about datasets collected by state agencies and other organizations. TNRIS is a division of the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) and receives guidance from the Texas Geographic Information Council (TGIC). Additional sources included the US Geodetic Survey (USGS), US Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory Map database, the Texas Department of Transportation, the US Department of Agriculture – Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS), the Texas Office of the Attorney General, and various other federal, state, and local government entities. The following provides an overview of the locations from which the data on the existing database was acquired: 4.1(a) Aerial Data / Photography – Acquired from TNRIS and ESRI, which update periodically; data was also acquired from the LRGVDC’s 911 office. This data can be used in the creation of maps, analysis of land for land use characterization study, and creating master plans for drainage and entities. 4.1(b) CAD Data – CAD data and all CAD-related files were obtained from entities and their engineering representative. 4.1(c) Digital Images – Photos were acquired through entity interviews as well as through FEMA, disaster recovery organizations, and from citizens throughout the LRGV. After all major storm events it may be deemed necessary to solicit photos from entities and citizens either through the website, telecasts, or public

Page 31 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

meetings. W hen reporting on creating solutions for regional drainage, these photos can show what transpired in previous events and once the solution to the drainage issues have been resolved, the database can be updated to show the improvements to the area.

Figure 10: Example of Aerial Imagery and Boundary of City of La Villa

4.1(d) GIS Data – This data has many subfolders and is comprised of multiple facets of acquired and manipulated data.  Boundary – This data includes delineated watersheds, city boundaries, county boundaries, state boundaries, ETJs, 1 mile city limit buffers, Census Designated Places, Census boundaries, drainage district boundaries, hospitals and their services areas, public safety limits, voting areas, zip codes, etc. This information came from entities, TNRIS - StratMap, the US Census Bureau, LRGVDC, and the County Appraisal Districts. This information can be used to create maps, complete drainage studies, delineate project areas, find areas impacted by projects, assess land values, and aid entities in their strategic planning.

Page 32 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

 Colonias – This information is acquired from the Texas Office of the Attorney General, and can be used in planning and coordination with areas that are underserved in regards to drainage or public utilities.  Environmental – These files depict and express environmental issues that exist within a mapped area. These files include constraints, floodplains, natural resources, wetlands, parks, pumping or water conveyance infrastructure, quarries, radio communication towers, ranches, recycling areas, refineries, refuge areas, reservoirs, schools, soils, and areas deemed protected by various government agencies. This information was acquired through entity interviews, from the LRGVDC, FEMA, USFWS, USDA-NRCS, USGS, and the Texas Water Development Board. This information can be used to show which areas are restricted, protected, or sensitive to development or would benefit from drainage projects in terms of adding wetlands or other natural resources. Areas such as old quarries, parks, and schools have been found useful for creating regional detention areas, which is a part of some entities’ master drainage system and master drainage plan.  GeoHMS – These GIS-based files are used for hydraulic analysis of areas in order to depict the topography and flow profiles. This information was acquired through entities and/or their engineering/hydraulic experts representatives.  GPS – The Global Positioning System (GPS) is a space-based satellite navigation system that provides location and time information in all weather, anywhere on or near the Earth, where there is an unobstructed line of sight to four or more GPS satellites. It is maintained by the US government and is freely accessible to anyone with a GPS receiver. This information has endless uses, but was utilized in this project for location and project site verification. Existing GPS surveys were acquired through entity interviews.  Hydro – This information depicts the locations and lengths of streams, rivers, lakes, ditches, channels, resacas, etc. This information was acquired from the LRGVDC, entities, TWDB, TNRIS, and USDA-NRCS, and it can be utilized in the creation of regional drainage projects that utilize existing water conveyance features such as resacas and streams, as well as which areas have existing infrastructure so projects may be focused on underserved locations.  Land Use – This data depicts what parcels are currently zoned and used for, as well as depicts what the parcel is proposed to be used for. This information was acquired from the LRGVDC, entities, planning organizations, EDCs, and land developers. This data is imperative in the regional drainage planning process, especially in projecting the future Figure 11: Future Land Use Map – City of Brownsville

Page 33 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

requirements for drainage projects. Land use values were also used in the scoring of proposed projects, so as to accurately find tax values and land values.  LIDAR – This data includes aerial survey, ground elevation data, contours, TIN files, GRID files, etc. and was acquired from entities and TNRIS. This information is utilized to assess the topography of land so as to show flow profiles due to the topography.  Maps – Throughout the development of the Plan, the information gathered and processed was developed into various maps to illustrate features of the project study area. This information aided in the identification of projects, and the associated planning elements. Examples of mapping are included in APPENDIX F, illustrating the location of proposed / ranked projects and their relation to the project study area..  Metadata – This data is used to describe the digital data of the GIS. By describing the contents and context of data files, the quality of the original data/files is greatly increased. This data is the background information for acquired and manipulated data. Metadata (metacontent) is often defined as “data about data”, but essentially it is defined as data providing information about one or more aspects of the data, such as: the means of creation of the data, the purpose of the data, the time and date of creation, the creator or author of data, the location on a computer network where the data was created, and the standards used. When new data is acquired or any information is created for the GIS database, the files’ metadata is to be updated to show the changes or updates, so accurate logs of files can be kept. This information should be included in data acquired through entity interviews, but may also be created or updated by the database’s maintenance team.  Parcel – This data shows each taxed and/or registered parcel for a county and is provided by each county’s appraisal district. This data was used to analyze land values, taxation values, land use, and to create project areas during the proposed project analysis and scoring process. Although the inclusion of all parcels on a county map may overload and blur the intention of maps, concentrated areas or project identification and analysis files can be created with this data as well.  Project/Problem – These files are created files that include the placement, location, and base information for proposed projects submitted by the entities through interviews. There are two sets of files, complete list of projects and the narrowed lists (the entities chosen 3 small, 3 medium, and 3 large projects). This information should be updated bi-annually if possible, should projects on the narrowed proposed list be funded or requested to be removed or supplemented by entities. This data can be used to assess the current and future drainage needs for the LRGV as well as can be used to show what projects currently require funding.  Scripts – This is data that was utilized in the creation and manipulation of acquired information. This information was used in the creation of other data and maps and an example of a script file is the clipping tool created to clip all data within a specified boundary using all information within the database’s GIS collection.  Structures – These files include the locations of pump stations, flood gates, water control structures etc. that were provided by entities and their engineering representatives. This data can be used to assess the needs and status of the current drainage infrastructure. Antiquated or outdated structures will require updating and areas which have undersized or inadequate drainage also require upgrades, all of which can be assessed through the information available through this data.  Survey – This information includes land survey and project area survey data, which was provided by entities and their engineering representatives. This information can be used to accurately show locations and areas that may be required for project analysis.  Topo (Topography) – This data depicts the elevations and topographic features of the LRGV and was acquired from the USGS. This information can be used to create flow profiles and assist in the regional drainage planning process

Page 34 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

 Transportation – This data includes bridges, streets, roads, highways, etc. and was acquired from TxDOT, TNRIS, and the entities.  Utilities – This data includes power plants, gas lines, electric lines, water lines, water meters, etc. and was acquired from the Railroad Commission of Texas, AEP, Time Warner, AT&T, other utility companies, and the entities. This information was / can be used to assess future development, show utility constraints, and show areas in which utilities need to be protected from flood waters during and following events. 4.1(e) H&H – This data includes existing hydrologic & hydraulic studies or analysis features of the project study area as by the entities and their engineering representatives. This information is valuable in the assessment of areas for regional drainage planning as well as for proposed projects. 4.1(f) Manuals – This data includes information used and/or created for the development of the LRGV Regional EAP as well as for proposed projects. This portion of the database also houses the project information sheets (the background provided by the entities and their engineering representatives), scoring forms, and ranking forms which illustrate the guidance and background for proposed projects. These documents can also be used as guidance and templates for future project manuals. 4.1(g) Meeting Exhibits – This data includes Microsoft PowerPoint exhibit files, pictures, PDF maps, and other information created and used during the development of the LRGV Regional EAP by the project team. 4.1(h) Reports – This portion of the database contains the historical development of the project through reporting including information and Technical Report created during the data acquisition process (Preliminary), and the final Plan.

4.2 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

Members of the Steering Committee and Technical Committee worked diligently with the Project Team to ensure the LRGV Regional EAP continued to move forward. One of the major activities of the Committees was to develop a process for evaluating and prioritizing projects that were identified by the governmental entities. Development of this system needed to occur before projects were individually considered and discussed to increase objectivity in the process.

● Large Projects = $25 Million or more ● Medium Projects = $ 2.5 Million to less than $25 Million ● Small Projects = less than $2.5 Million

Photo 6: LRGV Regional EAP – Joint Meeting of Steering and Technical Committees

Page 35 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Second, as shown in the table to the right, a total of 418 Scored / Ranked Projects projects were identified by the Complete List government entities. This County of Projects Small Medium Large Total Total Cost complete list of projects is included in the LRGV Cameron 224 48 47 3 99 $485,492,846 Regional EAP. However, Hidalgo 148 52 24 3 79 $547,944,276 with input from the Project Starr 6 1 0 0 1 $1,500,000 Team, the Committees decided that each government Willacy 40 20 13 0 33 $94,930,512 entity would begin the Total 418 121 84 6 212 $1,129,867,634 evaluation process and make a determination on their top 3 Table 5: CIP Summary large projects, top 3 medium projects, and top 3 small projects. The top 3 projects for each size would be further evaluated for ranking.

Within each of these goals, distinct criteria were identified to evaluate the projects systemically. For example, in terms of the second goal, addressing cost-benefit, two of the criteria are the number of persons impacted by the project (including employment) and the property/tax loss avoidance. A total of sixteen distinct criteria were identified, and each criterion was assigned a maximum numeric value. The evaluation and scoring form incorporating this criteria is included in APPENDIX D. Each project was then evaluated and scored based on how it addressed these criteria. Thus, projects were separately evaluated in comparison to projects of relatively similar size. Once the projects were evaluated and scored, they were prioritized in ranking order of their individual scores.

Maintenance of the CIP will include incorporating new projects and re-ranking as projects are funded and constructed. The following identifies the requirements that were followed for identifying and incorporating projects into the CIP (and these are the requirements that would be followed in the future for re-ranking and new projects):

4.2(a) Goal I – Development of an integrated storm water management system throughout the region; there are four criteria to evaluate projects under Goal 1; requirements are outlined in the table below:

Criteria Purpose Task Plan of Action Data is obtained from the watershed  Project limits need where the project is situated. This area to be determined. Focuses on the area is obtained using GIS software and is  A shapefile needs to that the project will 1 delineated with both created and be created in GIS. serve obtained boundary data. Projects that  Project area will be serve a greater area (in square miles) determined by GIS

Page 36 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Criteria Purpose Task Plan of Action are given a higher score. software. The project area is analyzed for flow Focuses on the need and drainage characteristics and is for additional  Watersheds in the analyzed for downstream and improvements in the project area need to surrounding area impacts due to area or downstream be checked for 2 draining. Projects that create great of the proposed project to determine improvement downstream of the project with an downstream effects. location while reducing maintenance additional focus costs are given a higher score. As the system is upgraded and drainage Focuses on the relief capacity is increased, previous  Determine overall of choke points or connections and drainage features purpose of the other problems that become too restrictive. This category project could enhance the focuses on ensuring the project does  Determine how the overall system. These not create any points at which bottle- project benefits the projects would necks or restricted flow is created and 3 area it encompasses improve areas that awards higher scores for projects that  Interview with entity would limit the eliminate the areas in which restricted can assist in drainage capacity and flow takes place while presenting no response for this affect upstream negative impacts on the entire system scoring criteria draining capabilities. in which the project will not only service, but also tie into. The score on this question is based on the responses provided during Focuses on the interview process and how much of a project’s proposed project has been completed in feasibility/constructa its planning phases. The interviewed  Determine how bility/sustainability entity had a better idea of PSE (Plans, much of a project from engineering and Specifications, and Estimates), ROW has been completed legal perspectives. (Right of Way), or other measures based on the entity’s Projects may be taken in order to get the project started. interview. strongly advocated An analysis and evaluation was also  Determine if entity by the general public, 4 conducted by the project team in order owns ROW or if public officials or to ensure nothing from their experience projects is a utility other individuals but would raise a question as to the upgrade may present serious feasibility, constructability, or  Determine any clear engineering or legal sustainability of the proposed project. impediments for the barriers that are Projects with complete or substantiality project to take place difficult or complete PSE, acquired ROW, full impossible to developed utility adjustment, and no overcome. legal or jurisdictional issues are given the highest score. Table 6: CIP / Project Ranking Development Process – Goal I

4.2(b) Goal II – Maximizing the cost-benefit of storm water management expenditures in the region. Goal II is the “economics” part of the scoring process. This goal is broken down into eight criteria and an evaluation process for these criteria can be found in the table at the end of this section.

The first criteria is related to the amount of people impacted by the project. As in Goal I, the computation used for ranking is obtained by using the watershed of the project and checking the population of the area with GIS software.

Page 37 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Criteria 2-4 in Goal II uses two cost-to-benefit ratio mechanisms to rank projects and have a level of service of each project being cost effective. One of the mechanisms built into the ranking system for the projects was the use of land values, taxable value, and the revenue generated from land through taxes within the project area. From the data obtained through each county’s appraisal district (2011 data), the watersheds delineated for the area were used for project boundaries (as previously explained) and the parcels that were found within the project area were extracted using ArcGIS and the data from the extraction was used to find the total assessed values, land values, and improvement values. These values were broken down further to revenue generators (parcels designated as industrial, commercial, agricultural, etc. by the state codes D1,D2,E1,F1,F2, and J1-J6) and to residential (state codes A1,A2, and B1-B4) parcels (see table on next page). The taxing entities and taxing entity rates, provided by the appraisal districts, were then used to decipher the amount of obvious taxes obtained for each parcel though exemptions such as homestead or tax relief deals were not included, giving the whole property value and tax value rather than the exact number. No exemptions were given to any property or parcel analyzed for any project throughout his entire project to ensure continuity. These values were factored into the scoring of the cost to benefit ratio as well as used to answer questions for land value.

A second system built into the ranking of projects was the sales tax obtained for each entity. The sales tax figures that were submitted to the Texas Comptroller for 2010 were taken in the following fashion: Agricultural, Commercial (which includes Accommodation/Food Services, Arts/Entertainment/Recreation, Finance/Insurance, Information, Management of Companies/Enterprises, Real Estate / Rental / Leasing, Retail Trade, and Wholesale Trade) and Industrial (which includes Admin /Support / Waste Mgmt / Remediation Services, Construction, Educational Services, Manufacturing, Professional / Scientific / Technical Services, Transportation / Warehousing, and Utilities). The sales tax for each city was summed up and divided by the total area of the corresponding land use for the city. An example of this would be the total agricultural sales tax was divided by the total agricultural land for a particular city, giving a total dollar per square foot. The project areas were broken down into the state land code usage as described above, then the total agricultural, commercial, and industrial land area was extracted for the project area (areas were in square feet). These numbers were then used to find the total sales tax generated for the areas that falls into the project, which was found by multiplying the corresponding land usage area by its dollar per square foot figure. The total area of Agricultural land within a project’s boundaries was multiplied by the dollar per square foot figure of Agricultural land sales tax generated for 2010. This task was completed for all three revenue generating functions that affected or existed in a project’s area. Areas outside of city limits were not assessed due to counties not directly benefiting from local sales taxing. County figures submitted to the State Comptroller were a summation of the figures generated by the cities and not additional money obtained through received taxes from businesses outside of city limits.

Cost estimates were completed by either a submittal of the project information sheet, including costs provided by the entity where were based on studies that had been completed or the cost estimates were completed by the project team based on the description of project provided by entities.

When entities provided projects without cost estimates, assumptions had to be taken since given projects had not been designed for construction. For this reason, cost estimates included a 10% contingency to account for design assumptions by project team. Assumptions ranged from quantities of earthwork, depths of existing ditches, dimensions of proposed ditches, existing and future flow rates of drainage infrastructure. Additionally, mobilization and engineering fees were included on each cost estimate at 10% each. When projects receive funding, the project’s engineering designers will determine a final cost estimate with estimated quantities along with the percentages for contingencies, mobilization, engineering and other

Page 38 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

associated project costs which will have a more exhaustive breakdown than what was originally created through the scope of this project. .

Type State Category ID Description A1 Real, Residential, Single-Family

A2 Real, Residential, Mobile Homes

B1 Real, Residential, Multi-Family

B2 Real, Residential, Two-Family

B3 Real, Residential, Three-Family

B4 Real, Residential, Four- or More-Family RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL

D1 Real, Qualified Agricultural Land

D2 Real, Unqualified Agricultural Land

E1 Real, Farm & Ranch Improved AGRICULTURAL AGRICULTURAL

F1 Real, Commercial COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL F2 Real, Industrial J1 Real & Tangible Personal, Utility Water J2 Gas Companies J3 Electric Companies J4 Telephone Companies J5 Railroads

INDUSTRIAL J6 Pipelines Table 7: Texas State Land Codes

Cost estimates created by the project team for projects that were submitted by entities not containing their own cost estimates were completed using two tools: RS Means Heavy Construction Cost Data and Texas Department of Transportation Average Low Bid Unit Price. The RS Means Heavy Construction Cost Data was primarily used to complete this task. Pricing was also compared with recent Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) construction projects in the Pharr District as well as Statewide. Decisions as to which price sector to use was made based on volume of the particular item. For uniformity, the same unit price was used for all of the project team’s estimated projects. Also, construction activities were assumed to

Page 39 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

be performed on a straight-time basis and no costs were included to expedite construction. It was assumed no testing, removal, handling and/or disposal of hazardous materials will be required.

Figure 12: Sales Tax Revenue Generation Report from Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts

Submitted projects competed against each other depending on the size of the project, as previously discussed. For this reason, cost estimates are essential to determine the project group into which each is to be placed. To facilitate this indispensable element of the ranking process, a cost estimates must be provided or developed for each new project that is submitted and that is to be included in the list of ranked projects. The cost estimate shall include all features and associated items pertaining to the project.

Criteria 5’s main focus is on the project’s repair of the current system. A project receives the maximum amount of points if this is a final fix with complete functionality. However, if flooding still occurs or project is design for a low storm return period, a project is ranked lower. This criteria bases its score on the type of project and the responses given by the entity during the interview process.

Page 40 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Under Goal II, reducing maintenance cost is a factor in the scoring in Criteria 6. A maximum punctuation for a project is obtained when there is a substantial percentage of total reduction in maintenance costs. A project also receives credit, however, when some maintenance improvement is actually made.

Criteria 7 and 8 base their computations using GIS software to obtain the output data. Criteria 7 deals with the percentage of project area with respect to the tax base of the local entity. For example, a project’s watershed included in over 50% of the entity’s area will receive points for the mentioned criteria rather than when a project only benefits a small portion of the entity. Criteria 8, however, uses GIS software to verify the colonias that receive benefit from project. Again, to receive a higher score, colonias need to be located within the project’s watershed and be considered as a substantial improvement.

Criteria Purpose Task Plan of Action  Project limits that have The total numbers of residents within a been determined need project’s area as well as the total Quantify the amount of to be used. number of employment figures, that people directly impacted  Project area will be were obtainable, are delineated and 1 by the project, including used to determine quantified. Projects with higher employment figures. population impacted by numbers of residents and employed project utilizing GIS individuals are given higher scores. software.  Clip Parcels with Project Boundary  Find which entities have taxing jurisdiction with Utilizing the parcel data and taxing rates the project parcels provided by appraisal districts and using  Add all project parcels the project area to pull out parcels Find the estimated into the tax assessment within the area, property tax values property/tax loss spreadsheet and add the were found. These property tax values 2 avoidance for existing coordinating columns for both residential and business properties/businesses with the proper taxing properties were assessed and project entities on the Property areas with higher tax property tax Data sheet values are given higher scores.  From the first sheet from the spreadsheet, find the Total Taxes from Taxable Amount  With project parcels and tax assessment spreadsheet, add all Utilizing the parcel data provided by revenue generating data appraisal districts and using the project parcels (from 5.1.2) area to pull out parcels within the area,  Add the coordinating Find the estimated value property improvement values for columns with proper of public sector industrial, commercial, agricultural taxing entities on the infrastructure, critical 3 parcels (as stated above) were found. Revenue Generating public and/or economic Once added together, improvement Value sheet facilities. values for all 3 categories were given a  From the first sheet in score with higher total improvement the spreadsheet, find the values are higher scores. Total Revenue Generator Assessed Value – Improvement Value

Page 41 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Criteria Purpose Task Plan of Action  With project parcels and tax assessment spreadsheet, add residential parcels (from 5.1.2)  Add the coordinating columns with proper In the Benefit/Cost ratio, the benefit taxing entities on the portion consists of the estimated Residential sheet property tax value (category 2), land  From the first sheet in improvement values (category 3), and the spreadsheet, find the Determine benefit to cost the sales tax generated for the project Total Residential 4 ratio of the project. area. The cost portion consists of the Assessed Value total project cost approved by the entity. Generator Assessed Projects with Benefit/Cost rations equal Value – Improvement to or greater than two are given higher Tax Value scores.  Add category 2, category 3, the Residential Assessed value, and sales tax generation value  Divide the summed quantity by the total cost of the proposed project All proposed projects were questioned for storm occurrence design (5 year  Interview process will storm, 10 year storm, etc.) and the assist on determining the Determine whether the sustainability of the design. Projects that design process and project repairs and/or were designed to contain 10 year events sustainability of a adds additional or greater as well as that created 5 project and know if a improvements the exiting solutions for future problems are given project is being system higher scores. This encouraged looking constructed as a to future issues that may arise in the temporary solution. area rather than only finding solutions to issues to short sided issues. Projects such as replacing worn, failing pumps, substantially stabilizing ditch or conveyance feature slopes, adding  Determine the purpose detention to reduce flash flow, etc. are of the project analyzed for the amount of additional  Determine how much Determine whether the work they will create for the entity and maintenance the area of project reduces how the project’s completion will a project currently has 6 maintenance costs or improve the life cycle of the overall  Determine if by building improve life cycle costs. drainage system. Projects that a project, future significantly reduce the maintenance maintenance costs are cost and improve the life expectancy of improved. the drainage system are given higher scores.

Page 42 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Criteria Purpose Task Plan of Action Utilizing ArcGIS, the submitting entity’s boundary (or tax base) was  Project limits that have compared to the total project boundary been determined need Find the percentage area and a clip was created. The percentage to be used. that the project impacts as of the project area that lies within the  Project area will be used compared to the tax base entity’s boundary was used to score this 7 and compared to the of the submitting entity’s category. Projects covered all of the area of service for each jurisdiction? entity’s area is given maximum points entity by project where as a project that covers only half utilizing GIS software. of the entity’s area is given the medium score. Areas lying outside of a city’s or  Project limits that have municipality’s boundaries are usually been determined need to Find the project’s impact neglected or not provided with equal be used. on health, safety and/or opportunities for drainage  Project area will be used quality of life in a improvements. In looking to future and colonia information colonia(s) or expansion and spreading of 8 will be incorporated into unincorporated areas city/municipality boundaries, outlying the picture by project outside of existing cities areas need to be provided with the utilizing GIS software to or districts. opportunity to progress at the same rate determine the impact the in order to foster economic and revenue project has on Colonias. development. Table 8: CIP / Project Ranking Development Process – Goal II

4.2(c) Goal III - Encourage investment in projects with public support to ensure successful implementation and the necessary commitment to long-term maintenance; there are three criteria to evaluate projects under Goal III; requirements are outlined in the table below.

Criteria Purpose Task Plan of Action Find the amount of permits submitted, amount of land acquired in preparation Identify public support as for the project, and other commitments  This item can be defined by commitment in from the local funding entity. The closer determined during the local funds or resources the project is to being ready for full interview process. that may include land, construction with maintenance funding  Determine if a project is 1 ROW, maintenance and and planning once the project is ready to go into operating funds, and complete, the higher scores the project is construction and funds readiness for given. Projects with permits with some have been secured constructability. foreseeable delays are given a lower score and projects with no prior planning are given the lowest score. Determine whether the project has full public support. The score on this Determine actions by question is based on the responses public and private entities  Same as task; but also provided during interview process and to obtain citizen/resident through public meetings 2 approved by the entity. Projects with support for a particular and public comment. proof of full public support and the project creation of a resolution are given the highest score.

Page 43 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Criteria Purpose Task Plan of Action Focuses on identifying The score on this question is based on potential flaws in a the responses provided during interview  This item can be project that might create process, the project type and its location. determined during the construction delays. Projects that are ready for construction interview process. These flaws include lack and that have engineering reports 3  Determine if a project of support, associated with them will have higher has issues that might environmental/ regulatory scores than projects that have been obstruct constructability issues, legal impediments attempted and that have hit issues with or other problems. legal or constructability issues. Table 9: CIP / Project Ranking Development Process – Goal III

Page 44 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

SECTION 5 IMPLEMENTATION / MAINTENANCE OF THE PLAN The LRGV Regional EAP was developed to be a dynamic tool, as the ranked projects are funded / constructed, the CIP will need to be maintained and updated. Projects that are in the overall list that were not evaluated may become a priority and be evaluated for ranking and incorporated into an updated CIP. Also, as land use changes, technology changes and new information is available, additional projects are likely to be identified and will need to be evaluated and addressed. The LRGV Regional EAP identifies recommended processes and procedures to implement and maintain the plan. One of the most important elements is the determination of the entity that will provide for the future maintenance and monitoring of the plan (see Section 6.1). Recommended procedures implementing and maintaining the plan are shown in the table below.

Item No. Procedure Description Entities should be required to submit (twice-a-year) any changes Obtain input from entities to their project(s)’s status, and any other relevant issues regarding 1 regarding their project’s status their projects. The oversight entity of the Plan will need to send on the CIP. out reminders requesting said information. A website could also be used to facilitate this task. Maintaining and update of the GIS database is a necessity; recommended to be performed on a minimum 6-month basis. As counties and cities create a new plan for growth and all participating entities set their budget for the year, the GIS should be upgraded accordingly to show the proposed changes that the participating entities plan on completing. Also, previously completed changes and frequent interactions with participating entities to ensure updated information has been acquired will be imperative. A yearly solicitation for data will be required by the oversight entity to the participating entities and should include the following:  Entity Information – ETJ, current and future land use, existing or proposed FTZs, TIRZ, areas, Enterprise Zones, Industrial Parks, city limits and ETJs, hospitals, updated streets, new 911 data, new drainage and/or GIS updates 2 irrigation infrastructure, new schools and school district data, parks, maps, updated utility information, regulations, drainage or engineering reports/studies, and any new manuals put out by the entity. Interviews should also include the verification and updating of all submitted projects. Upon the updating all of the information collected from the entities, the acquired and organized data should be relayed back to the entities to acquire their approval of what was collected and created.  Existing Databases / Datasets - Data collected from online sources such as TNRIS, USGS, ESRI, etc., should be checked at least once per year to verify the latest aerials and topographic files are in the database.  Project Site Visits – Periodic site visits may need to be performed to validate information gathered. A newsletter should be sent periodically to entities to inform of success and challenges faced during funding periods. The 3 Newsletter newsletter should also remind entities to inform the oversight entity of any changes or updates to data that may have recently occurred.

Page 45 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Item No. Procedure Description A meeting should be held with the participating entities, preferably once-a-year to discuss the LRGV Regional EAP, and Bi-Annual Meetings. 4 it’s yearly status. A contact list has been created for this project but will require updating. When entities are visited and new projects are added to the CIP list, the ranking list will require updates. Updates not only include Ranking 5 adding new projects but also the removal of completed or no longer relevant projects; ranking should occur every two years. Since projects will not be funded during similar periods or all at once, pending projects will require updates to the proposed cost based on the current inflation rates as specified by the Bureau of 6 Inflation on CIP Labor Statistic’s Inflation Calculator. All preliminary project costs should assume to have been completed in 2011 when using the Inflation Calculator; updates in cost estimates should occur every two years.

Table 10: Plan Maintenance Summary Table

Page 46 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

SECTION 6 OVERALL PLAN MONITORING AND UPGRADES

6.1 RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING FUTURE OVERSIGHT ENTITY With the substantial investment in the development of the LRGV Regional Economic Adjustment Plan and the commitment of the LRGVDC Board regarding the future facilitation, maintenance and operation of the Plan to continue the regional collaboration regarding storm water management, the Steering and Technical Committees recommended that the Project Team review, analyze, and provide a working tool in the form of a “Decision Matrix” regarding the legal capabilities of four existing government entities and a new government entity. With approval from the LRGVDC Board, Project Team member Bickerstaff Heath Delgado Acosta, LLP (BHDA) performed the analysis, prepared a Report Memorandum entitled “Analysis of Legal Structure / Decision Matrix Regarding the Future Facilitation, Operation, and Maintenance of the Lower Rio Grande Valley Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities”, and prepared the Decision Matrix within the Report Memorandum. The Decision Matrix is also attached to this Plan as APPENDIX D. BHDA’s Report Memorandum and the accompanying Decision Matrix and referenced legal statutes identify and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the available entities that may have some existing legal capabilities that can be dedicated to administering the LRGV Regional EAP, or have the capacity to fund or obtain / manage funding, maintain the Plan, and that can administer the required policies. The available entities chosen by the Committees that the Report Memorandum analyzed included the following:  Rio Grande Regional Water Authority  Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council  Counties  Drainage Districts  Storm Water Control District (new entity) The different types of entities above are available to implement and administer the Plan, but have differing regulatory responsibilities and powers. A broad range of these powers will be required to fully implement the LRGV Regional EAP. The list above is not an exclusive list of all entities that could conceivably undertake the administration of portions or the entirety of the Plan. However, the above-listed five entities represent leading potential options. An analysis was performed on each type of entity above regarding each one’s regulatory responsibilities and powers, to include:  Creation (Legal Authority on which entity is based)  Leadership Structure  How long it takes to create  Governing structure  Geographic boundaries  Purpose  Powers and duties  Bond authority  Taxing and fee imposition powers  Strengths (“Pros”)  Weaknesses (“Cons”)

Page 47 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

jurisdictional model or a single entity model is selected. Accordingly, legislative options could address creation of a new entity to implement and administer the Plan as well as its agreed-upon powers and authorities or legislation options could address gaps in existing statutory authorities. In order to meet current and future needs of the Plan, and after reviewing the BHDA analysis, the Steering and Technical Committees determined that creation of a new, regional entity appeared beneficial. Thus, the Committees recommended to the LRGVDC Board that it look into the conceptual creation of a regional entity that could coordinate the management and operations of watershed management in the region and the administration of the LRGV Regional EAP. Creation of a new entity would require state legislation, and decisions would need to be made by the LRGVDC regarding the powers and authorities of that entity. Some of the benefits of this coordinated approach include: expedited development, operation and/or maintenance of projects, particularly projects spanning multiple jurisdictions; enhanced ability to develop projects in areas outside of drainage or irrigation districts; increased ability to attract federal and state funding at a regional level; and enhanced revenue potential and effectiveness. The Committees recognized that many questions and details remain and will need to be addressed. Members of the committees indicated a willingness to continue working on this effort and assisting the LRGVDC with further evaluation and tasks. And, the Decision Matrix is included in the LRGV Regional EAP as a working tool for future decisions of the LRGVDC Board regarding this matter.

6.2 UPGRADES / IMPROVEMENTS OF PLAN Should a future oversight entity be established, the following table provides a recommended overall timeline for future upgrades and monitoring of the LRGV Regional EAP.

Task Recommended Recommended Suggested Task No. Responsibility Required Resources Timeline

Identify future oversight entity LRGVDC LRGVDC Board June 2014 1 (see Section 6.1).

Appoint / hire manager of oversight LRGVDC LRGVDC Board June 2014 2 entity.

Hire personnel/staff for oversight 3 entity including GIS specialists and Oversight Entity Staff September 2014 management

Coordinate data transfer and Oversight Entity / Staff/GIS Specialist March 2015 4 transition period. LRGVDC

Oversight entity to take over the Oversight Entity Staff March 2015 5 Plan.

Page 48 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Task Recommended Recommended Suggested Task No. Responsibility Required Resources Timeline

Review project lists and determine / 6 adjust project cost to accommodate Oversight Entity Staff July 2015 inflation.

Contact and coordinate with entities Oversight Entity Staff September 2015 7 to evaluate project status.

Contact and coordinate with entities to obtain / monitor updates of GIS Oversight Entity GIS personnel September 2015 8 data (land use, future land use, road infrastructure, drainage systems, etc.)

Create a newsletter to distribute to Oversight Entity Staff September 2015 9 entities quarterly.

10 Update project and ranking lists. Oversight Entity Staff/GIS Specialists September 2015

Monitor and review procedures on yearly basis to assess effectiveness of Oversight Entity Management/Staff September 2015 11 the program prior to submitting report to LRGVDC.

Provide a report on progress to 12 LRGVDC on a yearly basis to inform Oversight Entity Staff/GIS Specialists October 2015 of progress.

Repeat tasks 6-13 for subsequent Oversight Entity Staff/GIS Specialists 13 years.

Table 11: Plan Upgrade Timeline

All in all, regional problems demand coordination. The LRGV Regional EAP, the result of an extensive and collaborative effort, has identified solutions. The costs are substantial, but the costs versus the benefit are evident from both an economic and human perspective. The benefits accrue not only regionally but statewide and nationally. The solutions demand broader collaboration and investment from all levels.

Page 49 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

This Page Intentionally Blank

Page 50 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

REFERENCES

1 http://quickfacts.census.gov/ 2 National Weather Service, Weather Forecast Office, Brownsville, Texas 3 National Weather Service, National Hurricane Center 4 “Tropical Cyclone Report, Hurricane Alex (AL012010)”, Richard J. Pasch, National Hurricane Center, 15 December 2010. 5 Texas Water Code, § 56.111 6 Texas Water Code, § 56.115 7 Texas Water Code, § 56.111 8 Texas Water Code, § 49.222 9 Texas Water Code, § § 56.120, 56.121, 56.122 10 Texas Water Code, § 56.142 11 http://quickfacts.census.gov 12 http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/housing-center/docs/09-MktStdy-McAllenBrownsville.pdf 13 http://www.i69texasalliance.com/i69html 14 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/us/brownsville-west-rail-bridge-set-to-be-completed-in-december.html

Page 51 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

APPENDIX A LRGVDC BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND MEMBERSHIP LIST

APPENDIX A LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

This Page Intentionally Blank

APPENDIX A LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

LRGVDC Board of Directors 2012-2013

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

President 1st Vice-President 2nd Vice-President Mayor Steve Brewer Honorable Norma G. Garcia Mayor Tony Martinez City of La Feria Member-at-Large (Membership) City of Brownsville P. O. Box 1026 2810 South Business Hwy 281 P.O. Box 911 La Feria, TX 78559 Edinburg, TX 78539-6243 Brownsville, TX 78522-0911 Ph: 797-2261 Fax: 797-1898 Ph: 318-2506 Fax: 318-2507 Ph: 548-6001 Fax: 504-5428

Secretary Treasurer Immediate Past President Mayor Chris Boswell Commissioner Gerardo “Jerry” Tafolla Mayor Pro-tem Eddy Gonzalez City of Harlingen City of Weslaco City of Edcouch P. O. Box 2207 255 South Kansas P. O. Box 54 Harlingen, TX 78551 Weslaco, TX 78596 Edcouch, TX 78538 Ph: 428-9191 Fax: 428-9283 Ph: 968-3181 Fax: 968-6717 Ph: 283-8134 Fax: 283-8402

REMAINING BOARD MEMBERS

Judge John F. Gonzales, Jr. Commr. Sofia C. Benavides Commr. Hector “Tito” Palacios Willacy Co. Precinct #3 Cameron County Precinct #1 Hidalgo County Precinct #2 546 West Hidalgo Ave 1100 E. Monroe St. 300 West Hall Acres, Ste G Raymondville, TX 78580 Brownsville, TX 78520 Pharr, TX 78577 Ph: 689-2413 Fax: (same)689- Ph: 574-8167 Fax: 544-0820 Ph: 787-1891 Fax: 787-4683 4214

Commr. Pilar Garza Mayor David S. Simmons Council Member Gus Garcia City of Alamo City of Donna City of Edinburg 423 N. Tower Road 307 S. 12th Street P.O. Box 1079 Alamo, TX 78516 Donna, TX 78536 Edinburg, TX 78540 Ph: 787-0006 Fax: 787-1160 Ph: 464-3314 Fax: 464-9923 Ph: 383-5661 Fax: 383-7111

Mayor Henry Hinojosa Commr. Jim Darling Council Member Norie Garza City of Mercedes City of McAllen City of Mission P.O. Box 837 P. O. Box 220 1201 E 8th Mercedes, TX 78570 McAllen, TX 78501 Mission, TX 78572-5812 Ph: 565-3114/3261 Fax: 565- Ph: 972-7000 Fax: 972-7213 Ph: 580-8650 Fax: 580-8669 8592

Mayor Leo "Polo" Palacios, Jr. Mayor Orlando Correa Commr. Celeste Sanchez City of Pharr City of Raymondville City of San Benito 118 S. Cage Blvd., 4th Floor 142 South 7th 485 N. Sam Houston Pharr, TX 78577 Raymondville, TX 78580 San Benito, TX 78586 Ph: 702-5200 Fax: 702-5313 Ph: 689-2443 Fax: 689-0981 Ph: 361-3800 Fax: 361-3805

APPENDIX A -1 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Mr. Roberto Loredo Mayor Pro-Tem Armando Garza Dr. Cesar Maldonado, President Donna Independent School City of San Juan T.S.T.C. District 7098 S. Nebraska 1902 No. Loop 499 116 North 10th Street San Juan TX 78589 Harlingen, TX 78550-3653 Donna TX 78537 Ph: 702-6400 Fax: 787-5978 Ph: 364-4021 Fax: 364-5100 Ph: 464-1642 Fax: 464-1752

Mr. J. Shane Cameron Mr. Gale Armstrong Port Mansfield PUB & Willacy Mayor Pro-Tem Alvin Samano El Jardin Water Supply County Navigation District Member-at-Large (Membership) Corporation 400 W. Hidalgo Avenue, Suite P. O. Box 4604 5250 Coffee Port Road, Suite D 200 Hidalgo, TX 78557 Brownsville, TX 78521 Raymondville, TX 78580 Ph: 354-2007 ext. 7969 Ph: 831-9981 Fax: 831-9983 Ph: 689-3332 Fax: 689-6165

Mr. Arturo Ramirez Mr. Don Medina, Director Grassroots Organizations Member-at-Large (Board) Center for Economic 1701 Orchid Opportunities

McAllen, TX 78504 P.O. Box 45 Cell Ph: 878-9030 Fax: 843- San Juan, TX 78589 3304 Ph: 783-7730/3051 Fax 787- 7270

APPENDIX A -2 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

LRGVDC Membership 2012-2013

Cities | School Districts & Public Education Institutions | Special Purpose Districts | Members-at-Large

CITIES

Alton Bayview Combes Mayor Salvador Vela Mayor Leon Deason Mayor Silvestre Garcia 205 W. Main 102 S. San Roman P.O. Box 280 Mission, Texas 78573 Los Fresnos, Texas 78566 Combes, Texas 78535 Tel: 581-2733 Fax: 581-2253 Tel: 233-6445 Fax: 233-4343 Tel: 423-2714 Fax: 412-6795

Elsa Granjeno Hidalgo Mayor Alonzo "Al" Perez Mayor Rafael Garza Mayor John David Franz 216 E. 4th Street - P.O.Box 427 6603 South FM 494 704 Texano Drive Elsa, Texas 78543 Mission, TX 78572 Hidalgo, Texas 78557 Tel: 262-2127 Fax: 262-5002 Tel: 519-0032 Fax: 519-7662 Tel: 843-2286 Fax: 843-2317

Indian Lake Laguna Vista La Joya Mayor Barbara Cullum Mayor Susie Houston Mayor J.A. “Fito” Salinas 62 South Aztec Cove Drive 122 Fernandez St. P.O. Box H Los Fresnos, TX 78566 Laguna Vista, Texas 78578 La Joya, Texas 78560 Tel: 233-4021 Fax: 233-5140 Tel: 943-1793 Fax: 943-3111 Tel: 581-7002 Fax: 580-7000

La Villa Los Fresnos Los Indios Mayor Hector Elizondo Mayor Polo Narvaez Mayor Rick Bennett P.O. Box 60 200 N. Brazil P.O. Box 369 La Villa, Texas 78562 Los Fresnos, Texas 78566 Los Indios, Texas 78567 Tel: 262-2122 Fax: 262-2516 Tel: 233-5768 Fax: 233-9879 Tel: 399-4255 Fax: 399-4582

Lyford Palmhurst Palm Valley Mayor Henry De La Paz, Jr. Mayor Ramiro J. Rodriguez, Jr. Mayor Dean Hall P.O. Box 130 4417 N. Shary Rd. 1313 Stuart Place Rd., Suite 100 Lyford, Texas 78569 Palmhurst, TX 78573 Harlingen, Texas 78552 Tel: 347-3512 Fax: 347-5434 Tel: 583-8697 Fax: 581-4630 Tel: 423-8384 Fax: 423-6324

Palmview Peñitas Port Isabel Mayor Jorge G. Garcia Mayor Marcos Ochoa Mayor Jose Eliseo Vega 403 West Veterans Blvd. P.O. Box 204 205 E. Maxan Mission, TX 78572 Peñitas, Texas 78576 Port Isabel, Texas 78578 Tel: 581-7411 Fax: 581-7994 Tel: 581-3345 Fax: 581-3346 Tel: 943-2682 Fax: 943-2029

Primera Progreso Progreso Lakes Mayor Pat Patterson Mayor Omar Vela Mayor O.D. Emery 22893 Stuart Place Rd. P.O. Box 699 P.O. Box 760 Primera, Texas 78552 Progreso, Texas 78579 Progreso, Texas 78579 Tel: 423-9654 Fax: 423-2166 Tel: 565-0241 Fax: 565-1332 Tel: 565-3602 Fax: 565-3602

APPENDIX A -3 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Rio Hondo San Perlita Santa Rosa Mayor Alonzo Garza Mayor Oscar De Luna Mayor Ruben Ochoa Jr. P.O. Box 389/121 N. Arroyo P.O. Box 121 P.O. Box 326 Rio Hondo, Texas 78583 San Perlita, Texas 78590 Santa Rosa, Texas 78593 Tel: 748-2102 Fax: 748-4394 Tel: 248-5725 Fax: None Tel: 636-1113 Fax: 636-2044

South Padre Island Mayor Bob Pinkerton, Jr. P.O. Box 3410/4501 Padre Blvd. South Padre Island, Texas 78597 Tel: 761-6456 Fax: 761-7561

SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND PUBLIC EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS

Harlingen CISD McAllen ISD Mercedes ISD Dr. Steve Flores Mr. James Ponce Mr. Daniel Trevino Jr. Superintendent Superintendent Superintendent 1409 E. Harrison 2000 North 23rd Street P.O. Box 419 Harlingen, Texas 78550 McAllen, Texas 78501 Mercedes, Texas 78570-0419 Tel: 430-9502 Fax: 427-3589 Tel: 618-6027 Fax: 686-8362 Tel: 514-2000 Fax: 514-2032

Monte Alto ISD P-SJ-A ISD Rio Hondo ISD Mr. Gabriel Farias Dr. Daniel P. King Mr. Anneliese McMinn Superintendent Superintendent Superintendent 25149 First Street 604 E. Kelly 215 W. Colorado Monte Alto, TX 78538-0116 Pharr, TX 78577 Rio Hondo, TX 78583 Tel: 262-1381 Fax: 262-5535 Tel: 702-5600 Tel: 748-4400 Fax: 748-4408

San Benito CISD Valley View ISD Weslaco ISD Mr. Antonio Limon Mr. Leonel Galaviz Mr. Richard Rivera Superintendent Superintendent Superintendent 240 North Crockett 9701 S. Jackson P.O. Box 266 San Benito, Texas 78586-4608 Pharr, Texas 78577 Weslaco, Texas 78596-0266 Tel: 361-6100 Fax: 361-6115 Tel: 843-8825 Fax: 843-2109 Tel: 969-6500 Fax: 969-0201

SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS

Brownsville Navigation Agua Special Utility Group Brownsville Public Utilities District Mr. Frank Flores, General Board Mr. Eduardo Campriano Manager Mr. John Bruciak, Manager Port Director P. O. box 4379 PO Box 3270 1000 Faust Road La Joya, TX 78573 Brownsville, Texas 78520 Brownsville, Texas 78521 Tel: 585-2459 Fax: 585-1188 Tel: 983-6277 Fax: 983-6289 Tel: 831-4592 Fax: 831-6153

Cameron County Drainage Cameron County Drainage Cameron County Irrigation District #1 District #5 District #2 Mr. Scott Fry, Manager Mr. Alan Moore, Manager Ms. Sonia Lambert, Manager 3510 Old Port Isabel Road 301 E. Pierce P.O. Box 687 Brownsville, Texas 78526 Harlingen, Texas 78550 San Benito, Texas 78586 Tel: 838-0162 Fax: 831-7602 Tel: 423-6411 Fax: 423-4671 Tel: 399-2484 Fax: 399-4721

APPENDIX A -4 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Delta Lake Irrigation East Rio Hondo Water Port of Harlingen Authority District Supply Mr. W.G. (Butch) Palmer, Troy Allen Mr. Brian Macmanus, Manager Manager 10370 Charles Green Rd PO Box 621 P.O. Box 2646 Edcouch, TX 78538 Rio Hondo, Texas 78583 Harlingen, Texas 78551 Ph: 262-2101 Fax: 262-5695 Tel: 748-3633 Fax: 748-3179 Tel: 423-0283 Fax: 423-0284

Harlingen Irrigation Dist. Harlingen Waterworks Hidalgo and Cameron County CC#1 Systems I.D. #9 Mr. Wayne Halbert, Manager Mr. Darrell Gunn, P.E., Manager Mr. Jo Jo White, Manager P.O. Box 148 / 301 E. Pierce P.O Box 1950 P.O. Box 237 Harlingen, TX 78551-0148 Harlingen, Texas 78551 Mercedes, Texas 78570 Tel: 423-7015 Fax: 423-4671 Tel: 430-6100 Fax: 430-6111 Tel: 565-2411 Fax: 565-0521

Hidalgo County Irrigation Hidalgo County Water Hidalgo County MUD #1 District #6 Control #18 Mr. Jack Martin, Manager Mr. Joe Aguilar, Manager Mr. Jerry Ahrens, CEO 7400 W. Expressway 83 P.O. Box 786 2500 S. Bentsen Palm Dr. Mission, Texas 78572 Mission, Texas 78572 Mission, TX 78572 Tel: 585-5821 Fax: 585-5821 Tel: 585-8389 Fax: 585-9920 Tel: 287-2800 Fax: 287-2804

Laguna Madre Water McAllen Public Utilities Military Highway Water District Board Supply Mr. Gavino Sotelo, Manager Mr. Tony Aguirre, Chairman Mr. Amado E. Salinas, Manager 105 Port Road PO Box 220 P.O. Box 250 Port Isabel, Texas 78578 McAllen, Texas 78501 Progreso, Texas 78579 Tel: 943-2626 Fax: 943-6827 Tel: 681-1600 Fax: 972-7155 Tel: 565-2491 Fax: 565-9471

North Alamo Water Supply Port Isabel-San Benito Nav. Olmito Water Supply Steven Sanchez Dist. Mr. Victor Trevino, Manager General Manager Mr. Steve Bearden, Manager P.O. Box 36 420 S. Doolittle 250 Industrial Drive Olmito, Texas 78575 Edinburg, Texas 78539 Port Isabel, Texas 78578 Tel: 350-4099 Fax: 350-4480 Tel: 383-1618 Fax: 383-1372 Tel: 943-7826 Fax: 943-8922

Sharyland Water Supply United Irrigation District Valley MUD #2 Corp. Mr. Mike Warshak, Manager Mr. Robert Burkhart, Manager Ms. Sherilyn Dahlberg, Director P.O. Box 877 P.O. Box 939 P.O. Box 1868 Mission, Texas 78573-0877 Olmito, Texas 78575 Mission, Texas 78573-1868 Tel: 585-4818 Fax: 585-9743 Tel: 350-4136 Fax: 350-4575 Tel: 585-6081 Fax: 585-5450

Brownsville Economic McAllen Economic Economic Development Development Council Development Corporation Corporation of Weslaco Mr. Jason Hilts, President Mr. Keith Patridge Mr. Hernan Gonzalez, Exec. Dir. 301 Mexico Blvd., Ste F-1 6401 S. 33rd Street 305 W. Railroad St. Brownsville, TX 78520 McAllen, TX 78503 Weslaco, Texas 78596 Tel: 541-1183 Fax: 546-3938 Tel: 682-2875 Fax: 682-3077 Tel: 969-0838 Fax: 969-8611

APPENDIX A -5 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Workforce Solutions Cameron Mr. Pat Hobbs, Executive Director 851 Old Alice Rd. Brownsville, Texas 78520 Tel: 548-6700 Fax: 548-6715

MEMBERS-AT-LARGE

Commr. Jose Gomez Ms. Ann Cass Ms. Celeste Sanchez City of Mercedes Proyecto Azteca San Benito ISD 400 S. Ohio St. P.O. Box 27 240 N. Crockett St. P. O. Box 837 San Juan, TX 78589 San Benito, TX 78586 Mercedes, TX 78570 Ph: 702-3307 Fax: 702-3309 Ph: 361-6120 Fax: 361-6202 Ph: 565-3114 Fax: 565-8592 (Membership) (Membership) (Membership)

Mr. Eleazar "Yogi" Garcia, Jr. Commr. Guillermo Ramirez Commr. Leonardo Garcia, Jr. City of Raymondville City of Hidalgo City of Mercedes 142 South 7th Street 704 Texano Dr. P. O. Box 837 Raymondville, TX 78580 Hidalgo, TX 78557 Mercedes, TX 78570 Ph: 689-2443 Fax: 689-0981 Ph: 843-2286 Fax: 843-2317 Ph: 565-3114 Fax: 565-8592 (Board) (Board) (Board)

Mr. Leo Munoz Trinity MEP Engineering 3533 Moreland Dr., Ste A

Weslaco, TX 78596 Ph: 973-0500 Fax: 351-5750 (Board)

APPENDIX A -6 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

APPENDIX B ENTITIES BY COUNTY

APPENDIX B LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

This Page Intentionally Blank

APPENDIX B LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Government Entities - Cameron County County Precincts / Special Districts / City Un-Incorporated Communities Economic Development Corporations

Bayview Precinct 1: Drainage Districts: Brownsville Commissioner Sofia C. Benavides Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 Combes Arroyo City Cameron County Drainage District No. 3 Harlingen * Bixby Cameron County Drainage District No. 4 Indian Lake * Laguna Heights Cameron County Drainage District No. 5 La Feria Reid Hope King Laguna Vista South Point Irrigation Districts: Los Fresnos Villa Pancho Adams Garden Irrigation District No. 19 Los Indios Precinct 2: Bayview Irrigation District No. 11 Palm Valley Commissioner Ernie Hernandez Brownsville Irrigation District No. 1 Port Isabel Cameron Park Cameron County Irrigation District No. 2 Primera * Chula Vista-Orason Harlingen Irrigation District No. 1 Rancho Viejo Del Mar Heights La Feria Irrigation District Rangerville Olmito Rio Hondo * San Pedro Navigation Districts: San Benito Precinct 3: Brownsville Navigation District – Port of Brownsville Santa Rosa Commissioner David A. Garza Port Isabel-San Benito Navigation District South Padre Island Arroyo Colorado Estates * Chula Vista-Orason Water Districts: El Camino Agosto ~ none ~ Green Valley Farms Laguna Heights Economic Development Corporations: Las Palmas-Juarez Harlingen EDC Laureles Brownsville EDC * Villa Del Sol Port Isabel EDC Precinct 4: South Padre Island EDC Commissioner Dan Sanchez Arroyo Gardens – La Tina Ranch Lozano * Bixby Ratamosa Blue Town - Iglesia Antigua * San Pedro Encantada-Ranchito El Calaboz Santa Maria Grand Acres Solis La Feria North Tierra Bonita La Paloma * Villa Del Sol Lago Yznaga Lasana * shares with another Precinct

APPENDIX B -1 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Government Entities - Hidalgo County County Precincts / Special Districts / City Un-Incorporated Communities Economic Development Corporations

Alamo Precinct 1: Drainage Districts: Alton Commissioner Joel Quintanilla Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 Donna Heidelberg Mila Doce Edcouch Indian Hills Monte Alto Irrigation Districts: Edinburg * La Blanca Olivarez Donna Irrigation District Elsa Laguna Seca Rekanoagi Engleman Irrigation District Granjeno Llano Grande Scissors Hidalgo / Cameron Counties Irrigation District No. 9 Hidalgo * McCook *South Alamo Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 1 La Joya Midway North Villa Verde Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 2 La Villa Midway South Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 6 McAllen Precinct 2: Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 13 Mercedes Commissioner Hector “Tito” Palacios Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 16 Mission * Lopezville Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 19 Palmhurst * McCook Hidalgo County Water Control / Improve District No. 18 Palmview * Nurillo Hidalgo County Water Improvement District No. 3 Penitas Runn Hidalgo County Water Improvement District No. 5 Pharr * South Alamo Santa Cruz Irrigation District No. 15 Progreso Precinct 3: United Irrigation District of Hidalgo County Progreso Lakes Commissioner Joe Flores San Juan Abram-Perezville Havana Navigation Districts: ~ none ~ Sullivan City Alton North La Homa Weslaco Citrus City Los Ebanos Water Districts: Cuevitas * McCook Agua Special Utility District Doffing Palmview South Hidalgo County Municipal Utility District El Gato Sharyland Military Highway Water Supply Hargill Sharyland Water Supply Corporation Precinct 4: Valley Acres Water District Commissioner Joseph Palacios Cesar-Chavez Muniz Economic Development Corporations: Doolittle *Nurillo Alamo EDC Faysville San Carlos Development Corporation of Mercedes * La Blanca San Manuel-Linn Edinburg EDC * Lopezville Val Verde McAllen EDC * McCook Mission EDA Pharr EDC * shares with another Precinct San Juan EDC

APPENDIX B -2 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Government Entities – Starr County County Precincts / Special Districts / City Un-Incorporated Communities Economic Development Corporations

~ None in Project Precinct 3: Drainage Districts: Study Area ~ Commissioner Eloy Garza Starr County Drainage District La Reforma Santa Elena Irrigation Districts: ~ none ~ Precinct 4: Commissioner Ruben Saenz Jr. Navigation Districts: ~ none ~ La Gloria San Isidro Water Districts: ~ none ~

Economic Development Corporations: Rio Grande City EDC Starr County Industrial Foundation

Government Entities – Willacy County County Precincts / Special Districts / City Un-Incorporated Communities Economic Development Corporations

Lyford Precinct 1: Drainage Districts: Raymondville Commissioner Eliberto “Beto” Guerra Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 San Perlita Lasara Ranchette Estates Willacy County Drainage District No. 2 Los Angeles Subdivision Yturra Precinct 2: Irrigation Districts: Commissioner Noe Loya Delta Lake Irrigation District Port Mansfield Navigation Districts: Precinct 3: Willacy County Navigation District Commissioner Fred Serrato Bausell and Ellis Water Districts: ~ none ~ Willamar Precinct 4: Economic Development Corporations: Commissioner Dora Perez Raymondville EDC Lyford South Sebastian Santa Monica Zapata Ranch

B-3 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

The following tables outline the Team Members Assignment to the Entities:

Cameron County Category Entity Assigned Team Member

Bayview TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Brownsville TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Combes S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Harlingen S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Indian Lake TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc La Feria S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Laguna Vista TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Los Fresnos TEDSI / S&B Infrastructure Los Indios TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Cities Palm Valley TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Port Isabel TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Primera TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Rancho Viejo TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Rangerville TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Rio Hondo TEDSI / S&B Infrastructure San Benito S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Santa Rosa TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc South Padre Island TEDSI / S&B Infrastructure

Precinct 1: Sofia C. Benavides TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Precinct 2: Ernie Hernandez TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Precincts Precinct 3: David A. Garza L&G Consulting Engineers, Inc Precinct 4: Dan Sanchez L&G Consulting Engineers, Inc

Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Drainage Cameron County Drainage District No. 3 TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Districts Cameron County Drainage District No. 4 TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Cameron County Drainage District No. 5 TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc

Adams Garden Irrigation District No. 19 TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Bayview Irrigation District No. 11 TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Irrigation Brownsville Irrigation District No. 1 TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Districts Cameron County Irrigation District No. 2 TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Harlingen Irrigation District No. 1 TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc La Feria Irrigation District TEDSI / S&B Infrastructure

Brownsville Navigation District – Port of Navigation S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Brownsville Districts Port of Isabel – San Benito Navigation District S&B Infrastructure, Ltd.

Economic Harlingen EDC TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Brownsville EDC TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Development Port Isabel EDC TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Corporations South Padre Island EDC TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc

B-4 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Hidalgo County Category Entity Visiting Firm

Alamo S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Alton S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Donna S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Edcouch S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Edinburg S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Elsa S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Granjeno S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Hidalgo S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. La Joya S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. La Villa S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. McAllen S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Cities Mercedes Guzman & Muñoz Engineering Mission S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Palmhurst S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Palmview S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Peñitas S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Pharr S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Progreso S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Progreso Lakes S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. San Juan S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Sullivan City S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Weslaco Guzman & Muñoz Engineering

Precinct 1: Joel Quintanilla L&G Consulting Engineers, Inc Precinct 2: Hector “Tito” Palacios S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Precincts Precinct 3: Joe Flores L&G Consulting Engineers, Inc Precinct 4: Joseph Palacios S&B Infrastructure, Ltd.

Drainage Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Districts

Donna Irrigation District S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Engleman Irrigation District S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Hidalgo / Cameron Counties Irrigation District S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. No. 9 Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 1 S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 2 S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Irrigation Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 6 S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Districts Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 13 S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 16 S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 19 S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Hidalgo County Water Control / Improvement S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. District No. 18 Hidalgo County Water Improvement District S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. No. 3 Hidalgo County Water Improvement District S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. No. 5

Santa Cruz Irrigation District No. 15 S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. United Irrigation District of Hidalgo County S&B Infrastructure, Ltd.

B-5 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

Hidalgo County Category Entity Visiting Firm

Agua Special Utility District S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Hidalgo County Municipal Utility District S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Water Military Highway Water Supply S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Districts Sharyland Water Supply Corporation S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Valley Acres Water District S&B Infrastructure, Ltd.

Alamo EDC S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Development Corporation of Mercedes S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Economic Edinburg EDC S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Development McAllen EDC S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Corporations Mission EDA S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Pharr EDC S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. San Juan EDC S&B Infrastructure, Ltd.

Starr County Category Entity Visiting Firm

Precinct 3: Eloy Garza S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Precincts Precinct 4: Ruben Saenz Jr. S&B Infrastructure, Ltd.

Drainage Starr County Drainage District S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Districts

Economic Rio Grande City EDC S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Development Starr County Industrial Foundation S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Corporations

Willacy County Category Entity Visiting Firm

Lyford S&B Infra. / Guzman & Muñoz Cities Raymondville Guzman & Muñoz Engineering San Perlita S&B Infrastructure, Ltd.

Precinct 1: Eliberto “Beto” Guerra S&B Infra. / Guzman & Muñoz Precinct 2: Noe Loya S&B Infra. / Guzman & Muñoz Precincts Precinct 3: Fred Serrato S&B Infra. / Guzman & Muñoz Precinct 4: Dora Perez S&B Infra. / Guzman & Muñoz

Drainage Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 TEDSI / S&B Infrastructure,Ltd. Districts Willacy County Drainage District No. 2 TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc

Irrigation Delta Lake Irrigation District TEDSI Infrastructure Group, Inc Districts

Navigation Willacy County Navigation District TEDSI / S&B Infrastructure, Ltd. Districts

B-6 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

APPENDIX C COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP LISTS

APPENDIX C LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

This Page Intentionally Blank

APPENDIX C LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

APPROVED MEMBER LIST Update: 3-29-2012

STEERING COMMITTEE Member Information

County Allotment Name Title / Organization / Affiliation

Chair Godfrey Garza District Manager, Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 Vice-Chair David A. Garza Commissioner, Cameron County Precinct #3 Hidalgo County 11 members Eddy Gonzalez Mayor, Pro-Tem City of Edcouch Tito Palacios Commissioner County Precinct #2 Domingo Villareal HCP#3 Coordinator County Precinct #3 Joseph Palacios Commissioner County Precinct #4 Godfrey Garza District Manager Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1

Pilar Rodriguez, PE Asst City Manager City of McAllen

Elias Longoria Councilmember 4 City of Edinburg

Leo "Polo" Palacios Mayor City of Pharr Julio C. Cerda, PE City Manager City of Mission Troy Allen General Manager Delta Lake Irrig Dist Sonny Hinojosa General Manager Hidalgo County Irrigation District #2 Cameron County 9 members Robert Pinkerton Mayor South Padre Island

Eddy E. Hernandez Dir of Customer & Inf Services Brownsville Public Utilities Board David A. Garza Commissioner County Precinct #3 Steve Brewer Mayor City of La Feria Dan Serna Public Works Director City of Harlingen Jeff Johnston Asst City Manager City of Brownsville Wayne Halbert General Manager Harlingen Irrig District

Eddie Campirano Port Director and CEO Port Of Brownsville

Tom Hushen Past Chief Emergency Officer Cameron County Willacy County 7 members Marco "Tony" Nieto Representative Willacy County Jerry Taylor General Manager El Sauz Ranch Fred Serrato Commissioner County Precinct #3 Dora Perez Commissioner County Precinct #4 Eleazar "Yogi" Garcia City Manager City of Raymondville Orlando Correa Mayor City of Raymondville Shane Cameron Port Director Willacy County Navigation District - Port Mansfield Starr County 2 members Ruben D. Saenz Commissioner County Precinct #4 Rose Benavidez Executive Director Starr County Ind Found At-Large Member Ann Williams Cass Executive Director Proyecto Azteca Ex-Officio Julian Alvarez President / CEO Rio Grande Valley Partnership

APPENDIX C -1 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

APPROVED MEMBER LIST Update: 3-29-2012

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE Member Information

County Allotment Name Organization / Affiliation

Chair Sonia Lambert General Manager, Cameron Co Irrig District #2 / Drainage District #3 Vice-Chair Raul Sesin, PE Planning Engineer, Hidalgo County Hidalgo County 7 members Jo Jo White General Manager Hidalgo & Cameron Counties Irrig Dist #9 Ramiro Guitierrez, PE President R.Gutierrez Engineering Corp. Javier Hinojosa, PE President Javier Hinojosa Engineering Raul Sesin, PE Planning Administrator Hidalgo County Planning Noe Saldivar, PE Technical Engineer Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 Raul Lozano Chief Administrator County Precinct #1 Richard Garcia City Manager City of Mercedes Cameron County 6 members James L. Holdar, PE Professional Engineer Holdar Engineering Louis Ara Road/Bridge Superintendent County Precinct #3 Jack L. Brown, PE President Brown Leal & Associates Sonia Lambert General Manager Cameron Co Irrig Dist #2 / Drainage Dist #3 Alan Moore, PE General Manager Cameron Co Dain Dist #5 Bobby Sparks Landowner - agricultural / farmSRS Farms Willacy County 4 members Freddie Nieto Wildlilfe Manager El Sauz Ranch Gary Palousek Board Member Willacy County Drainage District No. 2 Paul Greenhill General Manager Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 Raul Flores Flores Engineers Willacy County Engineer Starr County 1 member Eloy Vera, PE County Judge Starr County At-Large Member Armando Garza Development Director Proyecto Azteca Ex-Officio Juan Pena District Conservationist Lyford - NRCS Rodolfo Montero Area Operations Manager USIBWC

APPENDIX C -2 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

APPENDIX D EVAULATION / SCORING OF PROJECTS FOR RANKING

APPENDIX D LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

This Page Intentionally Blank

APPENDIX D LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

PROJECT EVALUATION SCORING

GOAL I: DEVELOP AN INTEGRATED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM THROUGHOUT THE REGION SCORE (35 POINTS TOTAL)

1. How much area will the project serve? (Maximum Value of 10) 10 = Greater than 200 square miles 8 = Greater than 100 square miles to 200 square miles 5 = Greater than 50 square miles to 100 square miles 3 = Greater than 5 square miles to 50 square miles 0 = From less than 1 square mile to 5 square miles

2. Will the project relieve the need for other improvements or maintenance in an area or downstream? (Maximum value of 10) 10= Improve maintenance costs in area and downstream 7 = Improve maintenance costs OR downstream, but not both 2 = Minimal improvement in maintenance costs OR Downstream 0 = No improvement in either

3. Does the project relieve a “choke” point or some problem that could enhance overall system? (Maximum value of 10 ) 10= Totally relieve choke points with no negative impact or problem for overall system 7 = Partial relief to problem and/or some impact 4 = Temporary solutions with some potential negatives 0 = Does not address choke point and overall system

4. Is the project feasible/constructible/sustainable from engineering and legal perspectives? (Maximum value of 5) 5 = Complete, substantially complete with PSE, ROW acquired, utility adjustment fully developed, no legal or jurisdictional issues 4 = Substantially complete with environmental, started PSE, ROW acquired, utility done 2 = Some work done 0 = No planning or environmental work done.

SUBTOTAL (GOAL I)

1 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

PROJECT EVALUATION SCORING

GOAL II: MAXIMIZE THE COST – BENEFIT OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES IN THE REGION SCORE (45 POINTS TOTAL)

1. How many people are directly impacted, including employment? (Maximum value of 10) 10 = Greater than 100,000 8 = Greater than 50,000 but less than 99,000 5 = Greater than 10,000 but less than 49,999 3 = Greater than 5,000 but less than 9,999 0 = Less than 5,000

2. What is the estimated property/tax loss avoidance for existing property/businesses? (Maximum value of 5 ) 5 = Greater than $2,000,000 3 = Greater than $500,000 0 = Less than $25,000

3. What is the estimated public sector infrastructure loss avoidance or avoidance of flooding to critical public or economic facilities? (Maximum value of 5) 5 = Greater than $2,000,000 3 = Greater than $500,000 1 = Greater than $100,000 0 = Less than $99,999

4. Would the improved drainage conditions be consistent with impact? (Maximum value of 5) 5 = Benefit / Cost Ratio greater than 2 3 = Benefit / Cost Ratio greater than 1 0 = Benefit / Cost Ratio less than 1

5. How does the proposed project repair the existing system? (Maximum value of 5) 5 – Complete functionality without damages – final fix (ie flooding no longer occurring) 3 – Improvement but not final fix (fix damages but not repair to ultimate need, issue of 10 year flood) 0 – Don’t do either of above

2 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

PROJECT EVALUATION SCORING

GOAL II: MAXIMIZE THE COST – BENEFIT OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT EXPENDITURES IN THE REGION SCORE (45 POINTS TOTAL)

6. How does the proposed project reduce maintenance costs or improve life cycle costs? (Maximum value is 5) 5 – Substantial percentage or total reduction in maintenance costs (e.g. line ditches with slope maintained, “green” attributes if possible, pond with clean water system to continuously remove sediment and meet MS4) 3 – Some level of improvement in maintenance or life cycle costs (e.g. replace pump, add pump) 0 – no discernable reduction in maintenance or life cycle costs)

7. What is the percentage area that the project impacts as compared to the tax base of the local entity – county, city, or a jurisdiction? – (Maximum value is 5) 5 = Greater than 75% 3 = Greater than 50% 0 = Less than 50%

8. Does the project improve the health, safety and/or quality of life in a colonia(s) or unincorporated areas outside of existing cities or districts? (Maximum value is 5) 5 = Makes a substantial improvement to health, safety and quality of life 3= Makes some improvement to health, safety and/or quality of life 0 = No measurable improvement

SUBTOTAL (GOAL II)

3 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

PROJECT EVALUATION SCORING

GOAL III: ENCOURAGE INVESTMENT IN PROJECTS WITH PUBLIC SUPPORT TO ENSURE SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION AND NECESSARY COMMITMENT SCORE TO LONG TERM MAINTENANCE (20 POINTS TOTAL)

1. Does the project have public support as defined by commitment of local funds or resources including land/ROW /maintenance/operating funds in support of project – shovel ready versus up to 20 years? (Maximum value is 10 ) 10 = All permits or clearances received, any ROW obtained, local or other funds committed for ongoing operation and maintenance 8 = Permits or clearances underway and ROW process underway with less than 12 months delay anticipated, funds for operation and maintenance committed 5 = Permit and/or ROW obtainable within 24 months or less, funds committed 3 = Permit and/or ROW not obtained, or only partial funding available for operations or maintenance 0= No work done on permitting, ROW or no funding available for operations/maintenance

2. Does the project have resolutions or other actions by public agencies or private entities in support of project and citizen/resident support (Maximum value of 5) 5 = Resolutions of support on record or part of adopted plan and plan has citizen support 3 = Citizen support or private develop support (including private funding commitment) on record 0 = No Resolutions, not part of adopted plan, etc.

3. Are there any potential fatal flaws in the project – lack of support, environmental/regulatory agency issues, legal impediments, problems that could result in lengthy delays (more than 5 years) in project construction (Maximum value of 5 ) 5 = No potential fatal flaws identified, or known regulatory, legal or other issues 3 = Some level of problems possible (for example, regulatory change needed but only in process, or legal/contractual issues) 0 = Substantial legal or regulatory issues in terms of control, funding or oversight that could require lengthy delays

SUBTOTAL (GOAL III)

NOTE: In terms of project size, it is recognized that no small project is likely to score 100% but projects are only scored against similar sized projects (small, medium and large). Thus, the highest score for small projects hypothetically may be 75, but other small projects would be prioritized based on this as the highest score.

4 LRGV Regional EAP Regional List of Scored and Ranked Small Projects

GIS Project Estimated Goal I Goal II (1) Goal II (2) Goal III Inventory Entity Project Name Project Description Total Score Proposed Rank Cost Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Subtotal Q 6 Q 7 Q 8 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Subtotal ID Create a retention pond system from existing caliche pits and connect the pits to the HCDD#1 MDS. One 1 pit to be used as a $ 1,998,508.00 HC093 City of Alton Calichera Project detention pond 3 7 10 2 22 5 5 5 5 5 25 5 3 5 13 5 0 5 10 70 1 Repair and replacement of pumps along the floodway at Mile 12 $ 94,264.00 HC097 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 Floodway Pumps 1/3, Mile 14 1/2 and Mile 17 1/2 3 10 7 4 24 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 0 5 8 5 3 5 13 68 2 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District Combine projects 116-118 ALT 10 in Espey 2008 Report, $ 180,895.00 CC155 #1 Primera Culvert Improvements replacement of culverts and excavation of Primera Lateral 3 10 10 2 25 5 5 5 5 5 25 5 2 5 12 3 0 3 6 68 2 Clean growth and trash out of drainage/irrigation ditch on FM1423 $ 388,318.00 HC022 Donna Irrigation District FM 1423 Ditch Rehab Project 2 between Elm & Pine 3 7 7 0 17 8 5 5 5 3 26 5 5 5 15 3 3 3 9 67 4 Complete drainage study for detention pond(s) for the City of $ 2,291,566.00 HC069 City of Pharr Pharr Detention Pond Study Pharr 3 2 10 4 19 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 10 5 5 20 67 4 Improvements/expansion along Wilson main tract to relief stacking $ 922,250.00 CC031 City of Primera Primera/Wilson Tract Main Outfall Improvements into Primera. 3 10 10 0 23 5 5 5 5 5 25 5 5 5 15 0 0 3 3 66 6 Clean growth and trash out of drainage/irrigation ditch on FM1423 $ 881,047.00 HC021 Donna Irrigation District FM 1423 Ditch Rehab Project 1 south of Bus83 3 7 7 0 17 5 5 5 5 3 23 5 5 5 15 3 3 3 9 64 7 Owassa Drain for Seminole Valley and Seminole Valley No. 2 Re-excavate and possibly widen the existing drainage ditch $ 440,960.16 HC083 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 Subdivision Drainage connected to the FM 495 Drain 3 2 7 4 16 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 3 3 6 10 0 5 15 60 8 WC006 Willacy County Drainage District #1 626L "Smith Gate" addition addition of pump to move water into IBWC floodway $ 2,100,000.00 8 7 7 0 22 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 5 3 11 0 0 3 3 59 9 Replace ~4000 RCP Irrigation Pipe by Railroad Tracks South of $ 250,000.00 HC037 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #19 Old Military Road Irrigation Line Replacement Old Military Rd. 0 7 7 2 16 5 5 5 5 3 23 5 5 0 10 5 0 5 10 59 9 HC060 City of Edinburg Hobbs & 2nd Street Drainage Improvements Upgrade the 18" RCP to 36" RCP to mitigate flooding $ 462,057.50 3 0 7 2 12 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 10 3 5 18 58 11 CC211 Port of Brownsville/ Director Engineering Services POB Road Drainage Improvements Increase Ditch & Pipe Capacities for existing drainage $ 696,576.00 0 10 10 0 20 0 5 5 5 5 20 5 5 0 10 3 0 5 8 58 11 Establish Beach Protection/replenishing program. Build up dunes $ 174,750.00 CC046 South Padre Island EDC SPI Sand Dune restoration/protection program to protect against tidal surge 3 10 10 0 23 10 5 5 5 0 25 5 5 0 10 0 0 0 0 58 11 Addition of fuel storage. Addition of pumps to cycle between to $ 2,100,000.00 WC005 Willacy County Drainage District #1 WCDD1 pump station improvements decrease risk of damage. 8 7 7 0 22 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 3 3 9 0 0 3 3 57 14 HC040 City of Mission Downtown Drainage Connector Connect existing drainage infrastructure to US 83 drainage $ 460,000.00 3 2 4 4 13 8 5 5 5 3 26 0 5 0 5 10 0 3 13 57 14 HC100 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 Mercedes Lateral Clean out existing ditch $ 358,851.00 3 2 10 5 20 3 5 3 5 5 21 0 0 0 0 8 3 5 16 57 14 CC098 Bayview Irrigation District Laguna Atascosa Gate Upgrade / Expansion Larger/more gates needed for more outflow capabilities. $ 2,354,625.00 8 7 7 0 22 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 5 3 11 0 0 0 0 56 17 Replace railroad bridge with 10x10 box culverts to allow free flow Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District of water for the North Main Drain main stem. 2008 ESPEY report $ 832,962.25 CC127 #1 US77 and Loop 448 Railroad Bridge Replacement for 7.3.2 - Alternative 2, page 42 3 7 7 2 19 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 2 3 8 3 0 3 6 56 17 CC015 City of Brownsville Colonia Galaxia Outfall improvements. addition of Pump station to pump water into Rio Grande $ 1,953,515.86 0 10 10 0 20 3 5 1 5 5 19 3 5 5 13 0 0 3 3 55 19 HC057 City of Edinburg Downtown Drainage Improvements Improve drainage in Downtown Edinburg $ 1,624,503.13 0 0 7 2 9 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 10 3 5 18 55 19 Increase capacity of drainage/irrigation ditch on FM493 south of $ 460,479.00 HC020 Donna Irrigation District FM 493 Ditch Rehabilitation / Capacity Improvements Calle Chaparral 3 2 7 2 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 5 10 3 0 5 8 55 19 Owassa Rd between Cesar Chavez and Alamo Drainage Create drainage lines (pipes and gutters) and connect the new $ 596,412.30 HC078 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 Improvement system to the Pct. 2 Drainage System 0 0 7 4 11 5 5 5 5 5 25 0 3 5 8 5 0 5 10 54 22 CC024 Cameron County Drainage District #1 San Martin Lake dredging Dredge lake to increase storage capacity $ 1,196,000.00 5 7 7 0 19 8 5 5 5 3 26 0 2 3 5 0 0 3 3 53 23 Complete drainage for subdivision as described in Sam's $ 447,643.00 HC068 City of Progreso Catarina Subdivision Drainage Engineering Drainage Study 3 2 7 4 16 3 5 5 5 3 21 0 0 0 0 10 0 5 15 52 24 HC058 City of Edinburg Dawson Rd. - Stadium Dr. Drainage Improvements Proposed 30" and 24" RCP lines to solve flooding issues $ 437,768.75 0 0 7 2 9 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 10 0 5 15 52 24 Drainage ditch clearing and rehabilitation along FM 493 North & $ 691,720.00 HC044 Engleman Irrigation District FM 493 N - FM 1925 Ditch Rehab FM 1925 0 2 7 2 11 3 5 5 5 3 21 0 0 5 5 10 0 5 15 52 24 CC113 La Feria Irrigation District Tio Cano Lake Capacity Improvements deepening/widening of Tio Cano Lake to provide storage $ 772,750.00 3 7 7 0 17 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 3 3 9 0 0 3 3 52 24 Curb and gutter and connection to Mission Inlet for Bentsen Palms $ 625,636.00 HC035 Mission Economic Development Authority Bentsen Palms Drainage Improvements / Connection Development 0 2 7 2 11 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 0 5 5 8 0 5 13 52 24 Extend subdivision drainage to outfall into Mission Lateral (curb $ 1,073,947.00 HC039 City of Mission NW Subdivision Connection to Mission Lateral and gutter) 3 2 7 0 12 8 5 5 5 3 26 0 3 3 6 3 0 5 8 52 24 Various improvements to the AN-49 canal as outlined in the La $ 1,395,793.39 CC222 City of La Feria AN-49 Drain Feria FPP, 2010 0 7 7 2 16 0 5 5 5 3 18 5 0 3 8 5 0 5 10 52 24 CC055 Cameron County Drainage District #1 Rancho Viejo Resaca Improvements. Dredge, improve Resaca drainage connectivity $ 822,250.00 3 7 7 0 17 8 5 5 5 3 26 3 2 3 8 0 0 0 0 51 31 Major flooding impedes emergency response. 5ft water. Improve $ 914,610.00 CC078 City of Palm Valley Stuart Place Road Drainage Improvements drainage structures. 0 7 10 0 17 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 5 0 8 0 0 3 3 51 31 Widen existing drain ditches and acquire more ROW for the $ 618,730.00 HC072 City of Hidalgo Northern Hidalgo Drainage Relief expansion to the USIBWC Floodway 0 7 10 2 19 3 5 5 5 5 23 0 3 0 3 3 0 3 6 51 31 Create drainage for subdivision existing subdivisions to Alamo Lateral (Between Owassa and Alberta, bounds ~1 mile East of $ 2,147,544.80 HC086 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 Alberta Drain Phase I Tower 3 0 7 2 12 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 3 3 6 5 0 5 10 51 31 Connect City of Alton's drainage system to the HCDD#1 Master $ 1,463,284.00 HC094 City of Alton Alton Drainage System Connection Drainage System (MDS) 3 7 7 0 17 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 3 5 8 0 0 3 3 51 31 Downtown, Airport Dr., Border Ave & Bus 83, North Border, South Georgia, North Bridge, 6th St., and South Bridge drainage $ 1,600,000.00 HC108 City of Weslaco Drainage System Improvements for the City of Weslaco improvements 3 2 7 2 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 3 3 6 3 0 5 8 51 31 Ditch maintenance and improvements, increase culvert size where needed , .5mi W of FM 803 to .5mi E of FM 3609 along FM 510 $ 970,789.99 CC058 Cameron County Precinct #3 West Bayview Drainage Improvement (South Green Valley Farms) &~1mi N along FM 803 0 7 7 2 16 0 5 5 5 5 20 3 0 3 6 3 0 5 8 50 37 Create new J-09-00 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the $ 2,077,795.40 HC116 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 J-09-00 Northwestern Edinburg, North McAllen Area 3 2 7 2 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 5 10 0 0 3 3 50 37 Create new K-07-01 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the $ 1,136,810.60 HC117 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 K-07-01 Northern PSJA Area 3 2 7 2 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 5 10 0 0 3 3 50 37

1 LRGV Regional EAP Regional List of Scored and Ranked Small Projects

GIS Project Estimated Goal I Goal II (1) Goal II (2) Goal III Inventory Entity Project Name Project Description Total Score Proposed Rank Cost Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Subtotal Q 6 Q 7 Q 8 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Subtotal ID Create new K-07-02 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the $ 1,080,374.20 HC118 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 K-07-02 Northern PSJA Area 3 2 7 2 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 5 10 0 0 3 3 50 37 HC130 City of McAllen West La Vista Drainage Improvements Storm sewer infrastructure $ 850,000.00 3 2 7 0 12 8 5 5 5 5 28 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 10 50 37

Connectivity needed to alleviate major flooding during 50-year $ 383,237.50 CC120 City of Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Connectivity storms. Connection of Santa Rosa to surrounding drainage district 0 7 7 5 19 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 0 0 3 3 50 37 HC007 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #6 Walker Lake Pump Upgrade Pump upgrade for pump from Rio Grande to Walker Lake $ 760,674.00 3 2 0 5 10 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 5 0 8 3 0 5 8 49 43 HC006 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #16 Havana Pump Upgrade 1 Pump upgrades for pump leading to La Joya Lake $ 452,341.00 3 2 0 5 10 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 5 0 8 3 0 5 8 49 43 CC017 City of Brownsville Central Blvd/Stovall Rd connection improvements Improve drainage system connecting Resaca $ 667,391.79 0 7 7 0 14 3 5 5 5 3 21 3 5 3 11 0 0 3 3 49 43 dredge sediment from outfall in Bahia Grande ( in Navigation $ 560,625.00 CC025 Cameron County Drainage District #1 Ditch 1 outfall dredging dist/port of Brownsville) 3 7 7 0 17 10 5 5 5 3 28 3 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 49 43 Enlarge Culverts, exchange 60" RCP for 8'x8' concrete box culvert (FM 732 crossing), and a 4'x3' RCB with a 8'x8' RCP. See 2010 $ 383,237.50 CC121 Cameron County Drainage District #3 Main Drain A Downstream Improvements, Drain B-1 ESPEY 6.2.2 Alternative 2. page 37 3 7 7 0 17 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 0 3 6 0 0 3 3 49 43

$ 206,080.00 HC067 City of Progreso Progreso Portable Pumps 4 150hp Portable pumps for the City to use at necessary locations 3 7 0 5 15 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 0 0 3 3 0 5 8 49 43 Rehabilitation of pumps for flood relief and to protect Colonias $ 126,500.00 HC045 Engleman Irrigation District FM 493 - FM 1925 Pump Rehab near FM 493 & FM 1925 (2 portable 175hp pumps) 0 0 7 5 12 3 5 5 5 3 21 3 0 5 8 3 0 5 8 49 43 Connecting existing San Benito laterals to Drainage District $ 705,838.00 CC215 City of San Benito Lateral Connections to DD ditches 3 2 10 0 15 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 3 0 3 6 49 43 CC056 Brownsville Irrigation District #1 Resaca De La Palmas Improvements. Dredge, improve Resaca drainage connectivity $ 2,417,250.00 3 2 7 0 12 8 5 5 5 3 26 3 2 3 8 0 0 3 3 49 43 HC052 City of Donna Donna - HCDD#1 System Connection Connect existing drainage line to HCDD#1 System $ 805,134.00 0 7 7 0 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 3 3 6 0 0 5 5 48 52 HC042 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #16 Pump System Upgrades Replace 5 existing pumps with more efficient pumps. $ 1,314,695.00 3 2 0 2 7 5 5 5 5 5 25 3 0 5 8 3 0 5 8 48 52

$ 542,407.00 HC031 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #5 FM 1015 West Pump Station Proposed Pump at USIBWC Floodway ~.75 mi West of FM1015 3 2 7 0 12 5 5 5 5 5 25 3 0 0 3 3 0 5 8 48 52 HC102 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 4 Mile Line Pipe/drainage system outfalling into West Main 3. $ 830,901.00 0 7 0 4 11 0 5 5 5 3 18 3 0 0 3 8 3 5 16 48 52 Improve drainage South of US83 and West of FM 886, add storm $ 464,219.00 HC016 Sullivan City US 83 - FM 886 Drainage Improvements drain through US 83 and curb and gutter for remaining 3 2 4 0 9 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 5 10 0 0 5 5 47 56 CC039 City of Los Fresnos Los Fresnos S.E Outfall Improvements. Improve/widen ditch to increase flow $ 2,145,533.75 0 7 7 0 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 1 3 7 0 0 3 3 47 56 Repair and rehabilitate the Dam that holds Resaca water and $ 1,339,590.00 CC219 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Dam Repair connects City to park on the peninsula 0 7 7 0 14 0 5 5 5 3 18 5 0 0 5 5 0 5 10 47 56

$ 363,693.00 HC032 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #5 FM 1015 Central Pump Station Proposed Pump at USIBWC Floodway ~ 3/4 mi East of FM1015 0 2 7 0 9 3 5 5 5 3 21 3 3 0 6 3 3 5 11 47 56 New Drainage Route for Mercedes and Floodway, not in VA ID $ 1,081,954.00 HC054 Valley Acres Irrigation District Mercedes-Floodway Drainage Ditch system 3 0 10 0 13 5 5 5 5 5 25 0 0 3 3 3 0 3 6 47 56 HC131 City of McAllen Highland Ave. at N. 6th St. Drainage Improvements Storm sewer infrastructure $ 850,000.00 3 2 7 0 12 5 5 5 5 5 25 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 10 47 56

Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District Project 11 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - replacement of $ 185,634.15 CC141 #1 Drain Project A-Lateral 46A Rehab & Extension crossings and cleaning of a portion of the existing lateral 46 drain 0 7 7 2 16 5 5 0 5 3 18 3 1 3 7 3 0 3 6 47 56 Create a master drainage plan for the newly formed Starr County $ 1,500,000.00 SC006 Starr County Drainage District SCDD Master Plan Drainage District 10 0 0 0 10 8 5 5 5 0 23 0 5 0 5 0 3 5 8 46 63 HC103 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 Palm Dr. Pipe/drainage system outfalling into West Main 3. $ 1,108,196.00 0 7 0 4 11 0 5 5 5 3 18 3 0 0 3 8 0 5 13 45 64 Project 4 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Demolition of $ 483,632.50 CC138 Cameron County Drainage District #3 East Line Relief Drain Ditch AS-09 Structure Replacement existing and replacing with 10'x10' box structures 3 7 7 0 17 5 5 0 3 3 16 3 2 3 8 0 0 3 3 44 65

$ 508,794.00 HC033 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #5 FM 1015 East Pump Station Proposed Pump at USIBWC Floodway ~1.3 mi East of FM1015 0 2 7 0 9 3 5 5 5 3 21 3 3 0 6 3 0 5 8 44 65 Provide drainage (bar ditch or curb and gutter) for original Alamo $ 838,089.00 HC055 City of Alamo Original Town Site Drainage Improvements Town site 0 0 7 2 9 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 3 0 3 6 43 67 HC104 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 Moorefield Rd. Pipe/drainage system outfalling into West Main 3. $ 603,989.00 0 7 0 4 11 0 5 3 5 3 16 3 0 0 3 8 0 5 13 43 67 CC035 City of Laguna Vista Addition of Laguna Vista Relief Drain Relief drain North of Hw100 to Bahia Grande $ 174,750.00 0 7 7 0 14 3 5 5 5 0 18 5 5 0 10 0 0 0 0 42 69 Regional stormwater detention pond; Excavation and grading, $ 1,500,000.00 HC129 City of McAllen El Rancho Regional Stormwater Detention Facility stormwater pump station 0 2 7 0 9 3 5 5 5 5 23 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 10 42 69

$ 637,529.00 WC029 Willacy County Precinct #1 Los Angeles Drain Ditch Maintenance Maintain ~2,500 LF of drain ditches in Los Angeles Subdivision 0 2 4 0 6 3 5 5 5 3 21 0 5 5 10 0 0 5 5 42 69 Dredging required for increased storage capacity and water usage $ 1,777,390.00 CC043 City of Rancho Viejo Rancho Viejo-Resaca Dredging capabilities for Valley MUD2 0 7 7 0 14 0 5 5 3 3 16 0 5 3 8 0 0 3 3 41 72 CC077 City of Palm Valley Palm Valley Resacas Improvements Dredging of Resaca in Golf Course to inc capacity $ 1,569,750.00 0 7 0 0 7 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 5 0 8 0 0 3 3 41 72 Project 22 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - $ 1,228,807.50 CC151 Cameron County Precinct #2 CCP2 Ditch Reclaim D Reclaiming/Repairing/Regrading of ditch SW of rancho Viejo. 3 2 4 0 9 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 0 3 6 0 0 3 3 41 72 Project 22 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Reclaiming/ Repairing/ Regarding of ditch between Florida/Dockberry and $ 1,060,620.00 CC152 Cameron County Precinct #1 CCP1 Ditch Reclaim A brown/fm511 0 7 7 0 14 5 5 0 5 3 18 3 0 3 6 0 0 3 3 41 72 Project 22 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Reclaiming/Repairing/Regrading of ditch NW of Rancho Viejo $ 748,912.50 CC154 Cameron County Precinct #2 CCP2 Ditch Reclaim E Between FM1421 and HW100 0 7 7 0 14 5 5 0 5 3 18 3 0 3 6 0 0 3 3 41 72 Remove drainage from HCID #16 lines and reconfigure drainage $ 1,756,857.00 HC041 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #16 Weston Road - Subdivision Drainage Improvements. (not in HCDD#1 jurisdiction) 3 2 4 0 9 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 0 3 3 0 0 5 5 40 77 Replace existing 48" RCP at Williams Road and 36" RCP at Irene Street with 6'x6' RCB. See 2010 ESPEY 6.2.7 Alternative 7. page $ 192,729.25 CC126 Cameron County Drainage District #3 Drain F-23 Culvert Improvements 41 0 7 7 0 14 5 5 0 3 3 16 3 0 3 6 0 0 3 3 39 78 Project 21 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Infrastructure to $ 1,228,807.50 CC150 City of Los Indios Los Indios-Del Rio East Subdivision Improvements include the improvement of storm water drainage. 0 7 7 0 14 3 5 0 3 3 14 3 0 5 8 0 0 3 3 39 78

2 LRGV Regional EAP Regional List of Scored and Ranked Small Projects

GIS Project Estimated Goal I Goal II (1) Goal II (2) Goal III Inventory Entity Project Name Project Description Total Score Proposed Rank Cost Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Subtotal Q 6 Q 7 Q 8 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Subtotal ID Clean and maintain ~2,500 LF of drain ditch, install 30" RCP, and $ 498,953.00 WC031 Willacy County Precinct #3 Various Drainage Improvements in Bausell & Ellis 18" RCP Culvert 0 2 4 0 6 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 5 5 10 0 0 5 5 39 78 HC029 Hidalgo County Precinct 2 Floodway Pump Station Upgrade Increase pump size for draining into Floodway $ 150,091.00 0 2 7 0 9 0 3 1 5 3 12 3 5 0 8 3 0 5 8 37 81 Construction of ditch to alleviate ponded water within the Las Brisas Subdivision and at the intersection of Mile 3 Rd. West and $ 696,414.00 HC098 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 Las Brisas Ditch Mile 13 1/2 0 7 7 2 16 0 5 0 5 3 13 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 8 37 81 Connection of San Perlita drainage infrastructure to East Main $ 1,357,390.00 WC037 City of San Perlita Box Culvert Extension Drain through 4'x8' RCB 3 2 4 2 11 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 5 0 5 0 0 3 3 37 81 Improve drainage structure under FM1732 to equalize flooding $ 1,604,593.08 CC041 City of Rancho Viejo FM 1732/Carmen Ave Crossing Improvements. across roadway. 0 7 7 0 14 5 5 3 3 3 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 36 84 Drainage infrastructure improvements needed along Broadway and $ 922,250.00 CC033 City of Laguna Vista Broadway/ FM510 Drainage Improvements connecting streets. 0 7 7 0 14 0 5 0 5 3 13 3 3 0 6 0 0 3 3 36 84 Connect Resaca and pump station needed to move water out of $ 2,492,000.00 CC094 Bayview Irrigation District Bayview-San Roman North Pump Station Resaca 0 2 4 0 6 5 5 1 5 3 19 0 5 3 8 0 0 3 3 36 84 Heavy equipment (dozer, long reach excavator) for ditch cleaning $ 390,280.00 HC066 City of Progreso Progreso Storm Ditch Maintenance Equipment operations 3 0 0 0 3 3 5 5 5 3 21 3 0 0 3 3 0 5 8 35 87 4 Generators to power existing well pumps while no electricity is $ 445,775.00 HC027 Military Highway Water Supply Corporation Well Pump Generators available 3 0 0 0 3 3 5 5 5 3 21 3 0 0 3 3 0 5 8 35 87 Extension of southwest end of San Perlita drainage infrastructure $ 234,627.00 WC038 City of San Perlita School Storm Sewer Extension and connect system to existing drainage ditch 3 2 4 0 9 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 5 0 5 0 0 3 3 35 87

$ 688,748.00 WC039 City of San Perlita Community Drainage Improvements Extend city's southwest storm sewer to connect into drainage canal. 3 2 4 0 9 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 5 0 5 0 0 3 3 35 87 Clean up and maintain existing ditch as well as create additional $ 411,793.00 WC025 City of Lyford Lyford detention and ditch maintenance detention on existing I Lateral 0 2 4 0 6 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 5 3 8 0 0 3 3 35 87 create roadside ditches and positive outfall/flow for FM 1847, $ 504,274.64 CC059 Cameron County Precinct #3 FM 1847 Roadside Ditch and Drainage Improvements north of FM 510 0 7 7 0 14 0 3 3 3 3 12 3 0 0 3 0 0 5 5 34 92 Create means of controlling the Rio Grande by use of backflow $ 20,751.00 HC095 City of La Joya City of La Joya back flow / river control preventer near rail line and Old Military Highway. 3 0 0 0 3 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 0 0 3 3 34 92 WC021 Delta Lake Irrigation District Larger Crossing Siphon under SH186 Need Larger Culverts at sh 186 crossing $ 1,400,000.00 3 2 7 0 12 3 5 0 3 3 14 0 2 3 5 0 0 3 3 34 92 WC022 Delta Lake Irrigation District Scot Mayers Drain Improvements Need new Larger culverts $ 1,000,000.00 3 2 7 0 12 3 5 0 3 3 14 0 2 3 5 0 0 3 3 34 92 WC023 Delta Lake Irrigation District Block 33 Drain Improvements Improve Culvert Crossing- 4 Structures $ 1,400,000.00 3 7 7 0 17 0 5 0 3 3 11 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 3 34 92

$ 1,209,719.00 WC028 Willacy County Precinct #1 La Sara Drain Ditch Maintenance Clean and maintain ~6,000 LF of existing drain ditches in La Sara 0 2 4 0 6 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 0 5 5 0 0 5 5 34 92 Maintain ~6,000 LF of drain ditch or swales, including ~600 LF of $ 324,603.00 WC033 Willacy County Precinct #4 Lyford South Various Drain Ditch Maintenance 18" RCP Culverts with S.E.T. 0 2 4 0 6 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 0 5 5 0 0 5 5 34 92 Clean and maintain ~18,000 LF of main drain ditch and install 60" $ 2,068,532.00 WC036 Willacy County Precinct #4 Zapata Various Drain Ditch Maintenance RCP Culvert as necessary 0 2 4 0 6 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 0 5 5 0 0 5 5 34 92 HC015 City of Hidalgo Hidalgo Drainage Study Drainage Engineering Study $ 124,800.00 3 0 0 0 3 5 5 5 5 0 20 0 5 0 5 0 0 5 5 33 100

$ 124,800.00 HC071 City of Hidalgo Hidalgo Commercial District Drainage Study Conduct drainage study for South East area of the City of Hidalgo 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 0 0 5 5 33 100 Berm or intake structure between irrigation canals to protect $ 1,635,615.30 HC114 City of Peñitas Peñitas Berm neighborhoods 3 2 4 0 9 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 33 100 Regrade swale, install RCP w/ S.E.T. Culverts, and clean/maintain $ 921,875.00 WC030 Willacy County Precinct #1 Various Drainage Improvements in Ranchette Estates R.E. Main Drain Ditch 0 2 4 0 6 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 0 3 3 0 0 5 5 32 103

$ 928,345.00 WC034 Willacy County Precinct #4 Santa Monica Various Drain Ditch Maintenance Maintain existing swales, including ~750 LF of 18" RCP Culverts 0 2 4 0 6 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 0 5 5 0 0 3 3 32 103 CC006 City of Brownsville FM802/HW48 Drainage Improvements Roadway and drainage improvement for industrial dist $ 413,887.34 0 2 0 0 2 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 31 105 CC029 City of Indian Lake Indian Lake Resaca Dredging Dredging of Resaca to increase detention $ 598,000.00 0 2 0 0 2 5 5 2 5 3 20 0 5 0 5 0 0 3 3 30 106 Install 60" RCP culvert and maintain ~6,000 LF of the main storm $ 285,292.00 WC032 Willacy County Precinct #3 Willamar Culvert Install and Ditch maintenance system 0 2 4 0 6 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 29 107 CC030 City of Indian Lake Indian lake Drainage Infrastructure Funding Funding for further drainage infrastructure $ 2,186,558.91 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 2 5 0 17 0 5 3 8 0 0 3 3 28 108 need to develop channel/connectivity either north to Arroyo $ 1,829,205.00 CC111 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Connectivity Colorado or South to Rio Grande River 0 7 7 0 14 3 5 5 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 109 Project 20 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Drainage $ 1,228,807.50 CC149 Cameron County Engineering Dept. Reba-Bass Lake Drainage Improvements improvements between Bus 83 and Arroyo Colorado 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 5 3 18 3 0 3 6 0 0 3 3 27 109

$ 900,000.00 WC009 Willacy County Drainage District #1 Los Mesquites Subdivision Connectivity drainage infrastructure needed. Connectivity to WCDD1needed. 0 2 7 0 9 0 5 0 3 0 8 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 23 111 CC040 City of Los Fresnos Los Fresnos N. Drainage Improvements Improve existing drain system for future development $ 249,500.00 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 5 5 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 21 112 CC048 City of South Padre Island SPI White Sands Washout Prevention Develop temporary sea wall to minimize washout $ 174,750.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 3 18 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 21 112 Project 17 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - install new sanitary sewer main w/ connections, street recon, new storm water drainage $ 667,307.98 CC146 City of Los Indios Los Indios-Carrasitos Trail Drainage Improvements sys 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 0 8 0 5 5 10 0 0 3 3 21 112 Master drainage study map needed. Structures have never been $ 100,000.00 CC100 City of Palm Valley Palm Valley Master Drainage Study mapped 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 18 115

$ 1,100,000.00 CC051 City of South Padre Island Padre Outfall ROW Acquisition Acquire ROW for Outfall into Laguna Madre S. of Go Cart Track. 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 116

$ 2,400,000.00 WC016 Willacy County Navigation District Navigation Beacon Back-up Power Navigation beacons in/out of port need emergency power backup 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 3 0 8 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 14 117 WC018 Willacy County Navigation District Airport Generator Backup backup generator needed for airport during storm event $ 1,200,000.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 3 0 8 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 14 117 CC036 City of Laguna Vista Laguna Vista Establish/Join Drainage District secure funding to become/join drainage district $ 174,750.00 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 5 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 119 Identify drainage issues and Develop storm sewer sys and outfall $ 100,000.00 CC052 City of South Padre Island SPI drainage study/identification of infra improvements. for Gulf Blvd 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 120

3 LRGV Regional EAP Regional List of Scored and Ranked Small Projects

GIS Project Estimated Goal I Goal II (1) Goal II (2) Goal III Inventory Entity Project Name Project Description Total Score Proposed Rank Cost Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Subtotal Q 6 Q 7 Q 8 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Subtotal ID Dredging of all Harbors needed to give incentive for deep water $ 2,496,650.00 CC089 City of Port Isabel PI - Overall Harbor Dredging boats (yachts) 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 121

Total Small Project Cost $ 113,112,714.02

4 LRGV Regional EAP Regional List of Scored and Ranked Medium Projects

GIS Project Name Project Estimated Goal I Goal II (1) Goal II (2) Goal III Inventory Entity Project Description Total Score Proposed Rank Cost Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Subtotal Q 6 Q 7 Q 8 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Subtotal ID CC026 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD3 Drain Expansion Expand capacity along CCDD3 Drains, acquire add ROW $ 15,937,875.00 8 10 10 0 28 8 5 5 5 5 28 5 5 5 15 0 0 3 3 74 1 WC003 Willacy County Drainage District #1 Willacy County Drainage District 1 expansion expansion of entire system to facilitate more storage capacity $ 5,100,000.00 8 10 10 0 28 5 5 5 5 5 25 5 5 5 15 0 0 3 3 71 2 Re-negotiate agreement with El Sauz Ranch to facilitate more $ 2,500,000.00 WC010 Willacy County Drainage District #1 Re-negotiate El Sauz contractual agreement outfall volume 10 7 10 0 27 10 5 5 5 5 30 3 5 5 13 0 0 0 0 70 3 CC018 City of Brownsville N Main Drain Expansion Expand capacity along N Main Drain, acquire additional ROW $ 7,724,257.50 3 10 10 0 23 10 5 5 5 5 30 5 2 5 12 0 0 3 3 68 4

Raising the levee around the pumping plant and the Carlson $ 7,403,586.07 Settling Basin as well the electrical components of the pumping HC092 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #2 Carlson Lake Levee and Pump Station Rehabilitation plant to protect them from a catastrophic river flood event 8 7 0 2 17 10 5 5 5 5 30 3 5 5 13 3 0 3 6 66 5

Install new curb inlets, grate inlets, storm drain manholes, and $ 2,604,461.00 HC089 City of San Juan San Juan Downtown Revitalization Project Phase I, II and III pipes, then connect new system to existing City storm sewer system 3 0 7 4 14 8 5 5 5 5 28 0 3 0 3 10 5 5 20 65 6 CC002 Cameron County Drainage District #1 Ditch 1 detention ponds 200 acre elevated detention pond with pump station $ 4,568,612.85 3 10 10 0 23 10 5 5 5 3 28 3 2 5 10 0 0 3 3 64 7 CC003 Cameron County Drainage District #1 Ditch 2 detention ponds 200 acre elevated detention pond with pump station $ 4,568,612.85 5 10 10 0 25 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 2 5 10 0 0 3 3 61 8 Proposed auxiliary canal from USIBWC Main Floodway to $ 9,314,528.00 HC024 Hidalgo / Cameron County Irrigation District #9 New Auxiliary Canal to USIBWC Main Floodway HCCID#9 irrigation line 3 7 7 0 17 5 5 5 5 3 23 5 5 3 13 3 5 0 8 61 8 Detention facilities for Willacy Main Drain, increase holding $ 10,000,000.00 WC011 Willacy County Drainage District #1 Add Detention to Willacy Main Drain capacity 5 10 7 0 22 5 5 5 5 3 23 5 2 5 12 0 0 3 3 60 10

$ 12,013,500.00 CC101 Harlingen Irrigation District #1 Adams Garden Crossing Expansion Enlarge crossings on entire system to outfall into main floodway 3 7 10 0 20 5 5 1 5 5 21 5 5 5 15 0 0 3 3 59 11 New channel to river is needed. pump station required to pump into $ 4,197,256.25 CC110 Cameron County Engineering Dept. SouthPoint/Reid Hope King/Villa Pancho Channel / Pump Station river when levels are high 3 10 10 0 23 5 5 5 5 5 25 3 0 5 8 0 0 3 3 59 11 Improve outfall capacity by deepening the USIBWC Main $ 7,311,635.00 HC023 Hidalgo / Cameron County Irrigation District #9 USIBWC Main Floodway Outfall Canal Improvements North Floodway Outfall Canal 3 2 10 0 15 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 3 8 5 5 3 13 59 11 Improvements to the AN-47 canal as outlined in the La Feria FPP, $ 9,594,951.21 CC221 City of La Feria AN-47 Drain 2010 0 7 7 2 16 3 5 5 5 3 21 5 3 3 11 5 0 5 10 58 14 WC024 Delta Lake Irrigation District SH 186 crossing improvements Improvement to Bottleneck sh186 and Canal Crossing $ 2,500,000.00 8 2 10 0 20 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 5 3 11 0 0 3 3 57 15 Mercedes Park, Mercedes south east quad, HCCID#9 Later 19 and HCCID#9 Anacuitas drainage improvements for the City of $ 5,400,000.00 HC110 City of Mercedes Drainage System Improvements for the City of Mercedes Mercedes 0 7 7 2 16 5 5 5 5 3 23 5 3 0 8 5 0 5 10 57 15 Expand the Wilson Main Tract Drain which acts as primary drain and outfall for a major part of The City of Primera $ 2,862,925.00 North. The expansion will prevent stacking throughout connecting CC082 Cameron County Drainage District #5 Wilson Main Tract Drain Expansion laterals and to protect assets in effected area. 3 2 7 2 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 2 3 8 8 0 3 11 56 17

$ 7,922,216.00 HC038 City of Mission Mission Lateral Capacity Improvements Increase Mission Lateral capacity Northeast of the City of Mission 3 2 7 2 14 8 5 5 5 3 26 0 3 3 6 5 0 5 10 56 17 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District Correct issues stated in 2008 ESPEY report for 7.3.5 - Alternative $ 3,423,550.00 CC130 #1 North Main Drain and Dixieland Main flooding improvements 7, page 45 0 7 10 2 19 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 1 3 7 3 0 3 6 55 19 Improve existing drainage ditch NF-13 and existing culverts on $ 10,522,087.36 CC069 Cameron County Precinct #4 NF-13 Capacity and Structure Improvements (North FM 800) North FM 800 3 10 7 2 22 3 5 0 5 3 16 3 0 5 8 3 0 5 8 54 20 channel widening from Arroyo Colorado to Wilson Main Tract $ 3,511,885.00 CC112 La Feria Irrigation District La Feria/ 6.0 Channel Widening crossover 3 7 7 0 17 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 5 3 11 0 0 3 3 54 20 Incr. channel width, replace N. and S. bridges at Bus77 to CR596 & replace flume with siphon downstream of Iowa Gardens Rd. See $ 16,073,613.38 CC122 Cameron County Drainage District #3 Main Drain A Capacity Increase Project 2010 ESPEY 6.2.2 Alt. 2a. page 38 3 7 7 0 17 8 5 5 5 3 26 3 1 3 7 0 0 3 3 53 22

$ 7,350,750.00 CC103 Cameron County Drainage District #4 FM 510 Crossing Improvements Improve flow capacity at crossings on FM 510 to prevent stacking 3 7 7 0 17 5 5 5 5 3 23 3 3 3 9 0 0 3 3 52 23 Ditch maintenance and improvements, increase culvert size where needed , .5mi W of FM 803 to .5mi E of FM 3609 along FM 510 $ 5,187,721.07 CC061 Cameron County Precinct #3/Cameron County Drainage District #4 West Bayview Drainage Improvement Phase IV &~1mi N along FM 803 5 7 7 2 21 3 5 0 3 3 14 5 0 3 8 5 0 3 8 51 24 Increase Hutto & South Rd. drain ditch capacity and create $ 4,905,850.00 HC051 City of Donna North Donna Drainage Improvement drainage for West Scobey Rd. 3 0 7 0 10 8 5 5 5 3 26 0 3 5 8 3 0 3 6 50 25 Create new F-14-01 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the $ 2,916,826.00 HC119 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 F-14-01 Northern Alamo area, north of US-83 and west of FM1423 3 2 7 2 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 5 10 0 0 3 3 50 25 Storm sewer infrastructure; detention pond excavation and grading, $ 2,700,000.00 HC124 City of McAllen Westway Heights Drainage Improvements inlet/outlet structures 3 2 7 0 12 8 5 5 5 5 28 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 10 50 25 Regional stormwater detention pond; Excavation and grading, inlet $ 3,100,000.00 HC125 City of McAllen Municipal Park Regional Stormwater Detention Facility and outlet structures 3 2 7 0 12 5 5 5 5 5 25 0 0 3 3 5 0 5 10 50 25 CC032 City of Primera Add Primera Detention Ponds Additional Detention facilities needed $ 3,544,949.77 3 7 7 0 17 5 5 5 3 3 21 3 5 0 8 0 0 3 3 49 29 HC005 City of Peñitas Peñitas Drain Create drainage ditch to drain Peñitas area $ 5,477,300.00 3 0 10 2 15 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 0 3 3 5 0 3 8 49 29 HC050 La Villa / Edcouch La Villa / Edcouch Ditch Rehab and Improvements Increase existing drain ditch capacity $ 8,054,213.00 3 2 7 0 12 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 0 3 3 3 3 5 11 49 29 Expand drain ditches throughout the City to increase outfall to the $ 11,615,064.00 HC070 City of Pharr Pharr Drain Ditch Expansion HCDD#1 System 0 0 7 5 12 0 3 3 3 3 12 0 5 0 5 10 5 5 20 49 29 Clay lines in place. Total system infrastructure improvements $ 3,245,221.25 CC116 City of Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Drainage System Improvements needed. Manholes collapse. 0 7 7 0 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 3 8 0 0 3 3 48 33

Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of $ 4,074,801.80 CC157 City of Harlingen COH System A existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets, 9th & Jackson 3 0 7 2 12 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 5 0 3 8 48 33 South of R.R. -Drainage improvement and flood elevation $ 6,607,849.00 CC213 City of San Benito South Rail Drainage measures 0 2 10 0 12 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 5 0 3 8 48 33 CC095 Bayview Irrigation District Bayview Detention Facility detention facilities needed to increase holding capacity $ 3,837,500.00 3 7 7 0 17 5 5 1 5 3 19 0 5 3 8 0 0 3 3 47 36

5 LRGV Regional EAP Regional List of Scored and Ranked Medium Projects

GIS Project Name Project Estimated Goal I Goal II (1) Goal II (2) Goal III Inventory Entity Project Description Total Score Proposed Rank Cost Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Subtotal Q 6 Q 7 Q 8 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Subtotal ID Increase Alamo Lateral ditch capacity within Precinct 2 $ 9,457,346.00 HC028 Hidalgo County Precinct 2 Alamo Lateral Capacity Improvements Jurisdiction 3 2 7 2 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 10 47 36 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District Project 7 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - construction- $ 11,245,110.27 CC139 #1 Hensz and Perk Lane Laterals Crossing Replacements replacement of crossings on Hensz and perk Lane laterals 0 7 7 2 16 5 5 0 5 3 18 3 1 3 7 3 0 3 6 47 36

$ 2,616,250.00 CC068 Cameron County Precinct #4 North Floodway Control Structure Improvements Proposed replacement of gates and check valves into the floodway 3 7 10 2 22 0 5 0 5 3 13 3 0 0 3 3 0 5 8 46 39 Drainage Improvements/infrastructure at crossing under US77. $ 2,901,630.00 CC045 City of Rancho Viejo Rancho Viejo Outfall at US77 Expansion Expansion of outlet needed. 0 7 7 0 14 0 5 5 5 3 18 3 5 3 11 0 0 3 3 46 39

$ 6,617,489.79 CC074 Cameron County Precinct #4/Camreon County Drainage District #5 Santa Rosa Capacity & Structure Improvements Improve / replace existing drainage structures to increase capacity. 3 7 7 0 17 0 5 3 3 3 14 5 0 5 10 0 0 5 5 46 39 North of R.R. -Drainage improvement and flood elevation $ 10,696,236.00 CC214 City of San Benito North Rail Drainage measures 0 2 10 0 12 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 3 0 3 5 0 3 8 46 39 Create new J-08-00 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the $ 14,106,973.00 HC120 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 J-08-00 Northwest Edinburg area, between SH107 and FM1925 3 2 7 2 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 3 3 6 0 0 3 3 46 39 Northeast McAllen/Edinburg Lateral - Redbud Ave. to future Drainage ROW, Channel improvements, Roadway Culvert $ 6,000,000.00 HC123 City of McAllen Zinnia Ave. Crossings 3 2 7 0 12 5 5 5 5 5 25 0 0 3 3 3 0 3 6 46 39 Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of $ 2,768,953.75 CC156 City of Harlingen COH System 02 existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets, 3rd & A 0 0 7 2 9 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 0 5 5 0 3 8 45 45 HC034 Mission Economic Development Authority Bryan Rd - FM 1016 Detention Improvements Proposed Detention Cells between Bryan & FM1016 $ 12,224,123.00 3 2 7 0 12 5 5 5 5 5 25 0 5 0 5 0 0 3 3 45 45 WC019 Delta Lake Irrigation District Culvert Improvements Need new culverts FM 1015 and Delta Orchards $ 3,600,000.00 3 2 10 0 15 0 5 5 5 3 18 3 2 3 8 0 0 3 3 44 47 CC117 City of Santa Rosa Santa Rosa - 107 Channel / Crossover Expansion of channel and crossovers at railroad tracks. $ 3,245,221.25 0 7 7 0 14 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 43 48

Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of $ 5,908,714.04 CC158 City of Harlingen COH System B existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets, Van Buren & 21st 0 0 7 2 9 3 5 5 5 3 21 0 5 0 5 5 0 3 8 43 48 Laguna Vista Mangrove removal and addition of Laguna Vista $ 2,500,000.00 CC034 City of Laguna Vista Drain Relief Relocate outfall or remove Black Mangroves (Endangered species) 0 7 7 0 14 3 5 3 5 3 19 3 5 0 8 0 0 0 0 41 50 Flooding issues compounded by inadequate infrastructure. Improve $ 4,197,256.25 CC109 Cameron County Engineering Dept. Chula Vista Orason Drainage Improvements to overall drainage infra. 0 7 7 0 14 5 5 0 5 3 18 3 0 3 6 0 0 3 3 41 50 CC083 Cameron County Drainage District #5 Young Lateral - Wilson Main Tract Connection Connection of Young lateral to Wilson Main Tract. $ 5,796,285.00 0 7 7 0 14 5 5 0 5 3 18 3 0 3 6 0 0 3 3 41 50 Create new drainage on north part of town and clean up existing $ 4,454,730.00 WC026 City of Raymondville Raymondville Drainage ditches on south part of town. 0 2 4 0 6 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 5 3 8 0 0 3 3 40 53 Create new J-06-00 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the $ 6,124,767.40 HC121 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 J-06-00 Northwest Edinburg area, west of Edinburg Lake 3 2 7 2 14 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 5 0 5 0 0 3 3 40 53 Improvements to Ditch San Martin Lateral from county line/490 to $ 2,900,000.00 WC020 Delta Lake Irrigation District Improvements to San Martin Lateral Ditch sh 186/490 3 7 7 2 19 0 5 0 3 3 11 3 1 3 7 0 0 3 3 40 53 Add. of three (3) 72" RCPs to increase capacity of C-Right Drain btwn the railroad tracks and Bus 77, adjacent to Helen Moore Rd. $ 5,372,651.08 CC124 Cameron County Drainage District #3 Drain C-Right Culvert Improvements See 2010 ESPEY 6.2.5 Alt 5. page 40 0 2 7 0 9 3 5 5 5 3 21 3 0 3 6 0 0 3 3 39 56 Construct a ditch to the Arroyo Colorado via the CCDD#5 $ 4,409,960.44 CC072 Cameron County Precinct #4/Camreon County Drainage District #5 Southwest Main Drain / Arroyo Colorado Connector Southwest Main Drain (Baker Potts - Hoss Lane) 0 7 7 0 14 0 5 0 5 5 15 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 5 39 56 CC086 Harlingen Irrigation District #1 Morris Rd Connectivity Connectivity needed for neighborhoods in Morris Rd Area. $ 2,500,000.00 0 7 7 0 14 3 5 0 5 3 16 3 0 3 6 0 0 3 3 39 56 CC114 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Drainage Improvements Overall H&H improvements throughout city $ 3,245,221.25 0 7 7 0 14 3 5 0 3 3 14 3 5 0 8 0 0 3 3 39 56 CC027 Cameron County Drainage District #1 Cameron Park lateral improvements Clean, expand and define responsible party $ 2,918,075.00 0 2 7 0 9 5 5 3 5 3 21 0 0 5 5 0 0 3 3 38 60 CC008 City of Brownsville North Airport Drainage improvements. Add detention facilities and improve outfalls $ 2,529,275.00 0 7 0 0 7 5 5 5 5 3 23 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 36 61 CC038 Cameron County Drainage District #4 CCDD4/Los LaurelesMaintenance Funding Need funding to maintain ditches for the Los Laureles area $ 12,530,925.00 3 0 0 0 3 5 5 5 5 0 20 0 5 3 8 0 0 5 5 36 61 Cameron County Drainage District #4 / Texas Department of Proposed Ditch to bypass water around the subdivision to existing $ 2,580,108.34 CC064 Transportation West Bayview Drainage Improvement Phase V drainage structure 0 2 7 0 9 0 5 1 5 3 14 3 0 5 8 0 0 5 5 36 61 Seepage protection from USIBWC Floodway Levees near VA $ 8,029,212.00 HC053 Valley Acres Irrigation District VAID Reservoir Seepage Protection Reservoir 3 7 0 0 10 0 5 3 0 5 13 5 5 0 10 0 0 3 3 36 61 HC107 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 Inspiration Rd Pipe/drainage system outfalling into the Raymondville Drain $ 5,014,031.00 3 7 0 2 12 0 5 0 5 3 13 3 0 0 3 3 0 5 8 36 61 HC096 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 Eastern Delta Laterals Construction of ditch to alleviate ponded water. $ 12,134,186.00 0 7 0 0 7 0 5 5 0 5 15 0 0 5 5 0 3 5 8 35 66 Install drainage infrastructure for various areas inside the City of $ 8,387,536.00 HC115 City of Peñitas Penitas Drainage Infrastructure Penitas 0 2 7 0 9 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 0 3 3 0 0 5 5 35 66 WC035 Willacy County Precinct #4 Lateral G Maintenance Clean and maintain ~24,000 LF of Lateral G drain ditch $ 3,808,376.00 0 2 4 0 6 0 5 5 5 3 18 0 0 5 5 0 0 5 5 34 68 HC106 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 Mile 8 1/2 Pipe/drainage system outfalling into the Raymondville Drain $ 2,561,306.00 0 7 0 2 9 0 5 0 5 3 13 3 0 0 3 3 0 5 8 33 69 Road blockage by TX dot roads. crossovers Need expansion along $ 2,500,000.00 CC087 Harlingen Irrigation District #1 Ebony / 800 Expansion roadway 0 2 7 0 9 3 5 0 3 3 14 3 0 3 6 0 0 3 3 32 70 HC101 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 Monte Alto Alleviate subdivision flooding by creating a ditch. $ 2,554,452.00 0 2 0 0 2 0 5 5 5 5 20 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 8 30 71 Detention facilities for Sebastian, pumping station to pump into $ 7,300,000.00 WC012 Willacy County Drainage District #1 Sebastian Detention IBWC Floodway 3 2 7 0 12 0 3 0 3 3 9 0 3 3 6 0 0 3 3 30 71

$ 5,796,285.00 CC102 Harlingen Irrigation District #1 North Combes - Connectivity No current connectivity to drainage system. Connectivity needed. 0 2 7 0 9 3 5 0 3 3 14 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 29 73 Connectivity/extension of current drainage facilities. Residents $ 3,800,000.00 WC001 Willacy County Drainage District #2 HW 186 East Drainage Extension currently flood. 0 2 7 0 9 3 5 0 3 3 14 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 29 73 WC002 Willacy County Drainage District #2 San Perlita South Expansion Expansion of Drains from 36in to 72in for better outflow $ 4,400,000.00 3 2 7 0 12 0 3 0 3 3 9 0 1 3 4 0 0 3 3 28 75 CC050 City of South Padre Island Addition of SPI Outfall Need outfall between Sheraton/Sea Vista $ 3,022,570.00 0 7 10 0 17 0 5 0 5 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 76

$ 10,258,636.23 CC106 La Feria Irrigation District Bixby Drainage Improvements Homes flood during storm event. Upgraded infrastructure needed. 0 2 4 0 6 0 5 0 0 3 8 3 1 5 9 0 0 3 3 26 77 CC071 Cameron County Precinct #4 Tio Cano Lake Detention / Retention Facility Proposed detention / retention pond $ 10,027,317.73 0 0 4 0 4 0 5 0 0 3 8 3 0 5 8 0 0 5 5 25 78 Refuge hinders outfall cap for Bayview ID11 Coop Needed for $ 3,946,800.00 CC097 Bayview Irrigation District Laguna Atascosa Outfall Expansion more outflow/larger gates 3 0 0 0 3 5 5 1 0 0 11 0 5 0 5 0 0 5 5 24 79 CC115 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Evacuation Center Construct an evacuation center needed during storm event $ 3,245,221.25 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 5 0 0 13 0 5 0 5 0 0 3 3 21 80

6 LRGV Regional EAP Regional List of Scored and Ranked Medium Projects

GIS Project Name Project Estimated Goal I Goal II (1) Goal II (2) Goal III Inventory Entity Project Description Total Score Proposed Rank Cost Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Subtotal Q 6 Q 7 Q 8 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Subtotal ID Emergency generators with alternative fuel supply/storage facilities $ 2,500,000.00 WC014 Delta Lake Irrigation District Addition of Emergency Generators needed during storm event 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 3 0 8 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 14 81 conversion of overhead electrical lines to underground. To prevent $ 20,000,000.00 WC017 Willacy County Navigation District Electrical Conversion of District erosion/wind damage 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 3 0 8 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 14 81 CC088 City of Port Isabel PI - "The Fingers" Dredging Dredging of harbor needed to increase boat traffic $ 2,616,250.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 83 Additional crossing needed for evacuate from disaster. Only one $ 19,061,250.00 CC091 City of Port Isabel PI - White Sands Additional Crossing currently 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 83

Total Medium Project Cost $ 522,084,329.43

7 LRGV Regional EAP Regional List of Scored and Ranked Large Projects

GIS Project Estimated Goal I Goal II (1) Goal II (2) Goal III Inventory Entity Project Name Project Description Total Score Proposed Rank Cost Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Subtotal Q 6 Q 7 Q 8 Subtotal Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Subtotal ID New drainage system from Edinburg Lake to connect to existing $ 265,000,000.00 HC004 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 Raymondville Drain & Connecting Laterals Raymondville Drain 10 7 10 4 31 10 5 5 5 5 30 3 3 5 11 8 5 3 16 88 1

Clean and remove approximately 2.7 million CY of sedimentation $ 52,000,000.00 CC224 Brownsville Public Utilities Board Resaca Restoration Project and material from Resacas and Lakes in Brownsville 8 7 7 4 26 10 5 5 5 3 28 5 5 3 13 8 3 3 14 81 2 Complete Phase II of the La Villa Regional Detention Project to $ 48,649,455.00 HC122 City of La Villa Phase II - La Villa Detention Project allow for detention and improved detention ditches 3 10 10 2 25 5 5 5 5 5 25 5 5 5 15 0 0 3 3 68 3

Proposed major east -west ditch utilizing some existing drainage $ 65,657,932.63 CC070 Cameron County Precinct #4 North Floodway Bypass / Hardin Ranch Drain Extension structures to provide a major outfall in lieu of floodway 5 10 10 2 27 5 5 5 3 5 23 3 3 5 11 0 0 5 5 66 4 Construction of ditch running north and south along the west side of the levee beginning at approximately Mile 13 1/2 and $ 26,713,940.00 HC099 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 North-South Floodway Ditch proceeding north. 3 10 10 2 25 5 5 5 5 5 25 5 0 5 10 0 3 3 6 66 4

Various Structure and Drainage improvements for La Feria and the $ 36,649,263.45 CC223 City of La Feria Tio Cano Drain Tio Cano Lake area as outlined in the La Feria FPP, 2010 0 7 7 2 16 3 5 5 5 3 21 5 0 3 8 3 0 3 6 51 6

Total Large Project Cost $ 494,670,591.08

8 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

APPENDIX E COMPLETE PROJECT LIST

APPENDIX E LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

This Page Intentionally Blank

APPENDIX E LRGV Regional EAP Cameron County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name Project Description ID

1 1 City of Brownsville Brownsville North Main Drain Outfall New Pump Station for Intake and Outfall 2 2 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Ditch 1 detention ponds 200 acre elevated detention pond with pump station 3 3 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Ditch 2 detention ponds 200 acre elevated detention pond with pump station 4 4 Brownsville Irrigation District/Precinct No. 1 BID/Pct. #1 Southpoint Gate / Gatehouse New gate and gatehouse with remote-activated gate 5 5 Cameron County Drainage District No. 3 CCDD#3 Rancho Viejo West Detention Pond Build detention pond west of Rancho Viejo 6 6 City of Brownsville Brownsville FM802/HW48 Drainage Improvements Roadway and drainage improvement for industrial dist 7 7 City of Brownsville Brownsville Garden Park Pump Station Add pump station at existing detention facility 8 8 City of Brownsville Brownsville North Airport Drainage improvements. Add detention facilities and improve outfalls 9 9 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Los Fresnos E Ditch Conversion Convert from Irrigation ditch to drain ditch in Los Fresnos East of FM 1847 10 10 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Bayview West Expansion Northern drainage expansion to the Resaca 11 11 City of Brownsville Brownsville Impala Pump Station Increase drainage capacity and number of pumps 12 12 City of Brownsville Brownsville Eagle Building Roadway and Drainage Improvements Roadway and drainage improvements for industrial district 13 13 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Bayview West Control Structure Upgrade Replace and upgrade control structure at outfall 14 14 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Concrete Line Portion of Ditch 1 Concrete line ditch south of SH-48 to control erosion 15 15 City of Brownsville Brownsville Colonia Galaxia Outfall improvements. addition of Pump station to pump water into Rio Grande 16 16 City of Brownsville Brownsville SH 4 - SH 48 Detention Facility Improvement Enlarge existing detention in the vicinity of SH4 and SH48 17 17 City of Brownsville Brownsville Central Blvd/Stovall Rd connection improvements Improve drainage system connecting Resaca 18 18 City of Brownsville Brownsville N Main Drain Expansion Expand capacity along N Main Drain, acquire additional ROW 19 19 City of Brownsville Brownsville Brownsville CC Outfall Improvements Increase detention capacity and improve ditch 1 outfall 20 20 City of Brownsville Brownsville VICC Drainage Improvements Improve drainage system connecting resacas 21 21 City of Brownsville Brownsville Airport Resaca Connection (SH 4 Irrigation Canal) Connect Resaca to irrigation canal across SH4 22 22 City of Brownsville Brownsville Airport West Drainage Improvements Roadway and drainage improvements for industrial district 23 23 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Ditch 2 Capacity Improvements Expand the capacity along Ditch 2 and acquire additional Right of Way 24 24 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 San Martin Lake dredging Dredge lake to increase storage capacity 25 25 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Ditch 1 outfall dredging dredge sediment from outfall in Bahia Grande ( in Navigation dist/port of Brownsville) 26 26 Cameron County Drainage District No. 3 CCDD#3 CCDD3 Drain Expansion Expand capacity along CCDD3 Drains, acquire add ROW 27 27 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Cameron Park lateral improvements Clean, expand and define responsible party 28 28 Brownsville Irrigation District BID Southmost Point Gate Replacement and Upgrade Replace and upgrade control structure at outfall 29 29 City of Indian Lake Indian Lake Indian Lake Resaca Dredging Dredging of Resaca to increase detention 30 30 City of Indian Lake Indian Lake Indian lake Drainage Infrastructure Funding Funding for further drainage infrastructure 31 31 City of Primera Primera Primera/Wilson Tract Main Outfall Improvements Improvements/expansion along Wilson main tract to relief stacking into Primera. 32 32 City of Primera Primera Add Primera Detention Ponds Additional Detention facilities needed 33 33 City of Laguna Vista Laguna Vista Broadway/ FM510 Drainage Improvements Drainage infrastructure improvements needed along Broadway and connecting streets. 34 34 City of Laguna Vista Laguna Vista Laguna Vista Mangrove removal Relocate outfall or remove Black Mangroves (Endangered species) 35 35 City of Laguna Vista Laguna Vista add Laguna Vista Relief Drain Relief drain North of Hw100 to Bahia Grande 36 36 City of Laguna Vista Laguna Vista Laguna Vista Establish/Join Drainage District secure funding to become/join drainage district 37 37 City of Los Fresnos Los Fresnos Los Fresnos Crossover Drainage Improvements Improve drainage system under SH100 38 38 Cameron County Drainage District No. 4 CCDD#4 CCDD4/Labrellas Colonias Maintenance Funding Need funding to maintain ditches 39 39 City of Los Fresnos Los Fresnos Los Fresnos S.E Outfall Improvements. Improve/widen ditch to increase flow 40 40 City of Los Fresnos Los Fresnos Los Fresnos N. Drainage Improvements Improve existing drain system for future development 41 41 City of Rancho Viejo Rancho Viejo FM 1732/Carmen Ave Crossing Improvements. Improve drainage structure under FM1732 to equalize flooding across roadway. 42 42 Cameron County Precinct No. 2 CCP2 Rancho Viejo S Detention Facility Detention facilities needed for storage 43 43 City of Rancho Viejo Rancho Viejo Rancho Viejo-Resaca Dredging Dredging required for increased storage capacity and water usage capabilities for Valley MUD2 44 44 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Retention / Park - Ditch No. 1 Detention Improvements Increase detention for Ditch No 1 45 45 City of Rancho Viejo Rancho Viejo Rancho Viejo Outfall at US77 Expansion Drainage Improvements/infrastructure at crossing under US77. Expansion of outlet needed. 46 46 South Padre Island EDC SPI EDC SPI Sand Dune restoration/protection program Establish Beach Protection/replenishing program. Build up dunes to protect against tidal surge 47 47 City of South Padre Island SPI SPI White Sands Washout Prevention Develop temporary sea wall to minimize washout 48 48 City of South Padre Island SPI White Sands Washout Prevention Develop temporary seawall to minimize washout

1 LRGV Regional EAP Cameron County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name Project Description ID

49 49 City of South Padre Island SPI SH 100 Drainage Improvements Drainage improvements for hurricane evacuation 50 50 City of South Padre Island SPI Addition of SPI Outfall Need outfall between Sheraton/Sea Vista 51 51 City of South Padre Island SPI Padre Outfall ROW Acquisition Acquire ROW for Outfall into Laguna Madre S. of Go Cart Track. 52 52 City of South Padre Island SPI SPI drainage study/identification of infra improvements. Identify drainage issues and Develop storm sewer sys and outfall for Gulf Blvd 53 53 City of Brownsville Brownsville Town Resaca Box Improve drainage system connecting resacas 54 54 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Ditch 1 Capacity Improvements Expand the capacity along Ditch 1 and acquire additional Right of Way 55 55 Cameron County Drainage District No. 1 CCDD#1 Rancho Viejo Resaca Improvements. Dredge, improve Resaca drainage connectivity 56 56 Brownsville Irrigation District No. 1 BID#1 Resaca De La Palmas Improvements. Dredge, improve Resaca drainage connectivity 57 57 Cameron County Drainage District No. 4 CCDD#4 CCDD#4 Ditch Maintenance / Improvements Ditch maintenance and improvements within all of Drainage District # 4 West Bayview Drainage Improvement (South Green Valley Ditch maintenance and improvements, increase culvert size where needed , .5mi W of FM 803 to .5mi E of FM 3609 along 58 58 Cameron County Precinct #3 CCP3 Farms) FM 510 &~1mi N along FM 803 59 59 Cameron County Precinct #3 CCP3 FM 1847 Roadside Ditch and Drainage Improvements create roadside ditches and positive outfall/flow for FM 1847, north of FM 510 Ditch maintenance and improvements, increase culvert size where needed , .5mi W of FM 803 to .5mi E of FM 3609 along 60 60 Cameron County Precinct No. 3/Cameron County Drainage District No. 4 CCDD#4 West Bayview Drainage Improvement Phase III FM 510 &~1mi N along FM 803 Ditch maintenance and improvements, increase culvert size where needed , .5mi W of FM 803 to .5mi E of FM 3609 along 61 61 Cameron County Precinct No. 3/Cameron County Drainage District No. 4 CCDD#4 West Bayview Drainage Improvement Phase IV FM 510 &~1mi N along FM 803 62 62 Cameron County Precinct No. 3/Cameron County Drainage District No. 4 CCDD#4 Los Laureles Drainage Improvement Clear drainage ditches in Los Laureles area. Clear and reshape existing ditches 63 63 Cameron County Drainage District No. 3 CCDD#3 N. Nelson Rd Drainage Improvement Clear drainage ditches along N. Nelson Rd. Clear and reshape existing ditches Cameron County Drainage District No. 4 / Texas Department of 64 64 Transportation CCDD#4/TxDOT West Bayview Drainage Improvement Phase V Proposed Ditch to bypass water around the subdivision to existing drainage structure 65 65 Cameron County Precinct No. 3 CCP3 USFWS Refuge Outfall Improvement Increase outflows of water from the USFWS refuge to the Laguna Madre. 66 66 Cameron County Precinct No. 3 CCP3 USFWS Refuge Ditch Maintenance Identify a mechanism for maintenance of existing drainage structures located within the USFWS refuge 67 67 Cameron County Drainage District No. 3/Cameron County Precinct No. 3 CCDD#3/CCP3 Arroyo Colorado Estates Drainage By-pass Proposed Ditch to bypass water around the subdivision to existing drainage structures 68 68 Cameron County Precinct No. 4 CCP4 North Floodway Control Structure Improvements Proposed replacement of gates and check valves into the floodway

69 69 Cameron County Precinct No. 4 CCP4 NF-13 Capacity and Structure Improvements (North FM 800) Improve existing drainage ditch NF-13 and existing culverts on North FM 800

70 70 Cameron County Precinct No. 4 CCP4 North Floodway Bypass / Hardin Ranch Drain Extension Proposed major east -west ditch utilizing some existing drainage structures to provide a major outfall in lieu of floodway 71 71 Cameron County Precinct No. 4 CCP4 Tio Cano Lake Detention / Retention Facility Proposed detention / retention pond 72 72 Cameron County Precinct No. 4/Camreon County Drainage District #5 CCP4/CCDD#5 Southwest Main Drain / Arroyo Colorado Connector Construct a ditch to the Arroyo Colorado via the CCDD#5 Southwest Main Drain (Baker Potts - Hoss Lane) 73 73 Cameron County Precinct No. 4 CCP4 New Ditch to USFWS Refuge Proposed drainage ditch to USFWS refuge (FM 106 - La Tina) 74 74 Cameron County Precinct No. 4/Camreon County Drainage District #5 CCP4/CCDD#5 Santa Rosa Capacity & Structure Improvements Improve / replace existing drainage structures to increase capacity. 75 75 Cameron County Precinct No. 4 CCP4 FM 508 / Combes Capacity & Structure Improvements Improve / replace existing drainage structures to increase capacity. 76 76 La Feria Irrigation District LFID La Feria New Drainage District Create Drainage District for La Feria 77 77 City of Palm Valley Palm Valley Palm Valley Resacas Improvements Dredging of Resaca in Golf Course to inc capacity 78 78 City of Palm Valley Palm Valley Stuart Place Road Drainage Improvements Major flooding impedes emergency response. 5ft water. Improve drainage structures. 79 79 City of Palm Valley Palm Valley CCDD#5 Outfall Improvement/addition of outfall into CCDD#5 80 80 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 North Main Drain Expansion Improvements to North Main drain. Inc capacity 81 81 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Primera Road Crossing Improvements Expansion of road crossings in Primera Expand the Wilson Main Tract Drain which acts as primary drain and outfall for a major part of The City of Primera 82 82 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Wilson Main Tract Drain Expansion North. The expansion will prevent stacking throughout connecting laterals and to protect assets in effected area. 83 83 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Young Lateral - Wilson Main Tract Connection Connection of Young lateral to Wilson Main Tract. 84 84 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Industrial/US 77 Choke Point Improvements Expansion of crossover us77 to North Main 85 85 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Detention Facility Improvement Conversion of flooded transmission lines into detention pond. 86 86 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Morris Rd Connectivity Connectivity needed for neighborhoods in Morris Rd Area. 87 87 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Ebony / 800 Expansion Road blockage by TX dot roads. crossovers Need expansion along roadway 88 88 City of Port Isabel Port Isabel PI - "The Fingers" Dredging Dredging of harbor needed to increase boat traffic 89 89 City of Port Isabel Port Isabel PI - Overall Harbor Dredging Dredging of all Harbors needed to give incentive for deep water boats (yachts)

2 LRGV Regional EAP Cameron County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name Project Description ID

90 90 City of Port Isabel Port Isabel PI - Dust Storm Mitigation Dust storms currently cause electrical fires on poles in P.I 91 91 City of Port Isabel Port Isabel PI - White Sands Additional Crossing Additional crossing needed for evacuate from disaster. Only one currently 92 92 City of Port Isabel Port Isabel PI-Bank Stabilization/Erosion Control Erosion control needed to halt sedimentation of all harbors/bays. Foster econ growth. 93 93 Bayview Irrigation District BvID Bayview-San Roman North Resaca Connection Connection between resacas to move water needed. 94 94 Bayview Irrigation District BvID Bayview-San Roman North Pump Station Connect Resaca and pump station needed to move water out of Resaca 95 95 Bayview Irrigation District BvID Bayview Detention Facility detention facilities needed to increase holding capacity 96 96 Bayview Irrigation District BvID Bayview Ditch Maintenance Current budget doesn't allow for Bayview ID11 to clean ditches. No equip. 97 97 Bayview Irrigation District BvID Laguna Atascosa Outfall Expansion Refuge hinders outfall cap for Bayview ID11 Coop Needed for more outflow/larger gates 98 98 Bayview Irrigation District BvID Laguna Atascosa Gate Upgrade / Expansion Larger/more gates needed for more outflow capabilities. 99 99 City of Palm Valley Palm Valley Palm Valley - Connectivity Localized flooding. Increase of capacity needed. 100 100 City of Palm Valley Palm Valley Palm Valley Master Drainage Study Master drainage study map needed. Structures have never been mapped 101 101 Harlingen Irrigation District #1 HID#1 Adams Garden Crossing Expansion Enlarge crossings on entire system to outfall into main floodway 102 102 Harlingen Irrigation District #1 HID#1 North Combes - Connectivity No current connectivity to drainage system. Connectivity needed. 103 103 Cameron County Drainage District #4 CCDD#4 FM 510 Crossing Improvements Improve flow capacity at crossings on FM 510 to prevent stacking 104 104 Cameron County Irrigation District #4 CCID #4 CCDD4 Crossing Capacity Improvements Double the size of crossings along main ditch (1 every mile) 105 105 Cameron County Irrigation District #4 CCID #4 CCDD4 Drainage System Improvements Homes flood during storm event. Upgraded infrastructure needed. 106 106 La Feria Irrigation District LFID Bixby Drainage Improvements Homes flood during storm event. Upgraded infrastructure needed. 107 107 Cameron County Engineering Dept. CCED Reid Hope King Lateral Improvements lateral improvements needed 108 108 Cameron County Engineering Dept. CCED Del Mar Heights Buy-Outs / Relocations No longer currently issuing permits. Need Funding to purchase and relocate (40) homes/residents 109 109 Cameron County Engineering Dept. CCED Chula Vista Orason Drainage Improvements Flooding issues compounded by inadequate infrastructure. Improve to overall drainage infra. SouthPoint/Reid Hope King/Villa Pancho Channel / Pump 110 110 Cameron County Engineering Dept. CCED Station New channel to river is needed. pump station required to pump into river when levels are high 111 111 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Connectivity need to develop channel/connectivity either north to Arroyo Colorado or South to Rio Grande River 112 112 La Feria Irrigation District LFID La Feria/ 6.0 Channel Widening channel widening from Arroyo Colorado to Wilson Main Tract crossover 113 113 La Feria Irrigation District LFID Tio Cano Lake Capacity Improvements deepening/widening of Tio Cano Lake to provide storage 114 114 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Drainage Improvements Overall H&H improvements throughout city 115 115 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Evacuation Center Construct an evacuation center needed during storm event 116 116 City of Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Drainage System Improvements Clay lines in place. Total system infrastructure improvements needed. Manholes collapse. 117 117 City of Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Santa Rosa - 107 Channel / Crossover Expansion of channel and crossovers at railroad tracks. 118 118 City of Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Drainage Upgrade (Ditch-C&G) Bar ditches currently. Curb and Gutter needed throughout entire city. 119 119 City of Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Santa Rosa - La Jara Drainage Improvements Major flooding into homes. Drainage infrastructure needed. Connectivity needed to alleviate major flooding during 50-year storms. Connection of Santa Rosa to surrounding drainage 120 120 City of Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Connectivity district Enlarge Culverts, exchange 60" RCP for 8'x8' concrete box culvert (FM 732 crossing), and a 4'x3' RCB with a 8'x8' RCP. 121 121 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 Main Drain A Downstream Improvements, Drain B-1 See 2010 ESPEY 6.2.2 Alternative 2. page 37 Incr. channel width, replace N. and S. bridges at Bus77 to CR596 & replace flume with siphon downstream of Iowa 122 122 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 Main Drain A Capacity Increase Project Gardens Rd. See 2010 ESPEY 6.2.2 Alt. 2a. page 38

123 123 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 Main Drain "A" Detention Facility ALT 3 in 2010 ccdd3 ESPEY report - Addition of detention facilities to help lower water surface levels on Main drain A Add. of three (3) 72" RCPs to increase capacity of C-Right Drain btwn the railroad tracks and Bus 77, adjacent to Helen 124 124 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 Drain C-Right Culvert Improvements Moore Rd. See 2010 ESPEY 6.2.5 Alt 5. page 40 125 125 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 Drain D Channel Improvements ALT 6 in 2010 ccdd3 espey report - increasing channel size from turner to arroyo Colorado. Replace existing 48" RCP at Williams Road and 36" RCP at Irene Street with 6'x6' RCB. See 2010 ESPEY 6.2.7 126 126 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 Drain F-23 Culvert Improvements Alternative 7. page 41 Replace railroad bridge with 10x10 box culverts to allow free flow of water for the North Main Drain main stem. 2008 127 127 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 US77 and Loop 448 Railroad Bridge Replacement ESPEY report for 7.3.2 - Alternative 2, page 42 128 128 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Offline detention pond ALT 3 in 2008 ccdd5 espey report - addition of offline detention along North Main Drain. 129 129 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Culvert improvement ALT 4 in 2008 ccdd5 espey report - replacement of current (2) 5x5 boxes with 10x10,72ft long box

3 LRGV Regional EAP Cameron County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name Project Description ID

130 130 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 North Main Drain and Dixieland Main flooding improvements Correct issues stated in 2008 ESPEY report for 7.3.5 - Alternative 7, page 45 131 131 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Bridge Improvements ALT 7 in 2008 ccdd5 espey report - increase flow capacity by reducing restrictions under bridges ALT 7 in 2008 ccdd5 espey report - maintenance needed to increase flow capacity. Sedimentation present - removal of 60 132 132 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Bridge Improvements in rap culvert 133 133 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Harlingen G.C Channelization ALT 8 in 2008 ccdd5 espey report - replacement of existing pipe with open trapezoidal channel.

134 134 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Primera culvert improvements Alt 10 in 2008 ccdd5 espey report/ #6 in Cam Co Digest req forms - replacement of culverts with larger 5x5 box culverts 135 135 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Primera Lateral Excavation Alt 10 in 2008 ccdd5 espey report - excavation of primer lateral to facilitate increased channel capacity 136 136 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Primera culvert improvements Alt 10 in 2008 ccdd5 espey report - replacement of culverts with larger 4x4 box culverts 137 137 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 Green Valley Farms Detention Basin Project 2 in Cam Co Digest Request forms - Conversion of "Green Valley Farms" into detention facility.

138 138 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 East Line Relief Drain Ditch AS-09 Structure Replacement Project 4 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Demolition of existing and replacing with 10'x10' box structures

139 139 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Hensz and Perk Lane Laterals Crossing Replacements Project 7 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - construction-replacement of crossings on Hensz and perk Lane laterals

140 140 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 Ranch Grande South Structures Project 8 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - design and construction of (2) 10'x10' box culverts to facilitate un-obstructed Project 11 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - replacement of crossings and cleaning of a portion of the existing lateral 46 141 141 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Drain Project A-Lateral 46A Rehab & Extension drain Project 10 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - demolition of existing and replacing with 120' of 54'' RCP and 80' of 54'' 142 142 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 Rio Hondo Drain F Structure Replacement RCP 143 143 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 East Line Extension to Arroyo Project 12 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - extension of East line west then north to Arroyo Colorado

144 144 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 E-1 Drain Concrete Lining Project 15 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - concrete lining of E-1 Drain between US77 and Railroad Crossing Project 16 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - land acquisition/design/construction of drainage system/ditch from Gen 145 145 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD#3 La Tina Drainage Improvements Brant N to Arroyo Col Project 17 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - install new sanitary sewer main w/ connections, street recon, new storm 146 146 City of Los Indios Los Indios Los Indios-Carrasitos Trail Drainage Improvements water drainage sys 147 147 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Drainage Project "B" Lateral Extension Project 18 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - new ditch construction Project 18 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - new grate inlets at Cook Ln / Mayfield Rd and at new ditch and existing 148 148 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Drainage Project "B" New Grade Inlets canal 149 149 Cameron County Engineering Dept. CCED Reba-Bass Lake Drainage Improvements Project 20 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Drainage improvements between Bus 83 and Arroyo Colorado

150 150 City of Los Indios Los Indios Los Indios-Del Rio East Subdivision Improvements Project 21 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Infrastructure to include the improvement of storm water drainage. 151 151 Cameron County Precinct #2 CCP2 CCP2 Ditch Reclaim D Project 22 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Reclaiming/Repairing/Regrading of ditch SW of rancho Viejo. Project 22 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Reclaiming/ Repairing/ Regarding of ditch between Florida/Dockberry and 152 152 Cameron County Precinct #1 CCP1 CCP1 Ditch Reclaim A brown/fm511 153 153 Cameron County Pct 2 / Cameron County Project Digest Request CCP2 CCP2 Ditch Reclaim B Project 22 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Reclaiming/Repairing/Regrading of ditch W of rancho Viejo. Project 22 in Cam Co Digest Request Forms - Reclaiming/Repairing/Regrading of ditch NW of Rancho Viejo Between 154 154 Cameron County Precinct #2 CCP2 CCP2 Ditch Reclaim E FM1421 and HW100

155 155 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 CCDD#5 Primera Culvert Improvements Combine projects 116-118 ALT 10 in Espey 2008 Report, replacement of culverts and excavation of Primera Lateral

156 156 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH System 02 Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets, 3rd & A Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets, 9th & 157 157 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH System A Jackson Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets, Van Buren 158 158 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH System B & 21st

4 LRGV Regional EAP Cameron County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name Project Description ID

Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Van Buren and 21st, North to outfall at Jefferson Drainage Ditch. Theresa and 21st, South to outfall at Jefferson DD, lateral at 159 159 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH007 Washington and Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Along Treasure Hills from Haine to outfall at the lakes. Additional leg extends North on 25th from Treasure Hills to intersection 160 160 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH008 of Becky Lane Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Located 161 161 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH011 within the limits of the airport Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Alcott 162 162 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH012 from approx. midblock east to the outfall at 13th St. Ditch Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Arroyo 163 163 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH013 Vista between Arroyo Vista and Mississippi Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Adams between A and 3rd, on Jefferson between A and 3rd, A between Monroe and US 77/83, 5th between Van Buren and 164 164 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH021 US77/83, and 7th between Po Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On 1st 165 165 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH022 from Davis to Williamson Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Along Buchanan from F to A, on Lincoln from D to B, Grand from E to A, and from the intersection of Cleveland and B, South to 166 166 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH027 Roosevelt then Wes Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Along Ed 167 167 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH100 Carey from Sesame to 25th

Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. from 168 168 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH102 midblock of Ted to the intersection of Emerald Lake, North to Ponciana, then East to the outfall at the golf course lakes Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On 169 169 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH103 Hoogland from Euna to Black and on Regency from Encino to the outfall at the 3rd St. Ditch Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Teege, East to R, then South to Adams, then East to P. Additional leg along Fair Park from O along the ROW to midblock of Fair 170 170 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH105 Park and US 77 Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Intersection 171 171 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH113 of Haine and FM 509, West for Approximately 500 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Houston from Falcon to the outfall at Hale Drainage Ditch, on Live Oak from outfall to approx. 450 feet to the East, on 172 172 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH115 Hale from Falcon to H Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On M from Filmore to Lincoln, West for approx. 600 feet, South for approx 700 feet to the outfall. Additional leg on Buchanan from J 173 173 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH118 to H and on Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Intersection 174 174 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH122 of Jacaranda and Willowicke, Southwest for approx. 600 feet to Jacaranda Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On 5th from Van Buren to Monroe, on 13th from Harrison to Jefferson, on Jefferson from 4th to 10th, and 76 Drive from Jefferson 175 175 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH124 to Sul Ross Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Estrellita, South to Lamb, then West on Lamb for approx. 190 feet, then South approx. 200 feet to the outfall at Libscomb 176 176 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH127 Drainage Ditch

5 LRGV Regional EAP Cameron County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name Project Description ID

Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On midblock of Calle Princessa, east for approx. 440 feet, then South for approx. 300 feet, and East for approx. 200 feet, then 177 177 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH132 South for approx Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Intersection 178 178 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH135 of Matz and Rose to Breedlove, then North to the intersection of Linda then East to 1st Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Jefferson and 77 Sunshine Strip, North to Crockett. Additional laterals from 77 Sunshine Strip to Morgan on Chaparral and 179 179 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH139 from 77 Sunshine St Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Grimes from High to Morgan, on Austin from 25th, West approx. 700 feet, on Susan from 25th, West approx. 500 feet, at Grimes 180 180 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH141 and Citrus Terra Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. on G, South to 77 Sunshine Strip, then East to Markowsky, and from 77 Sunshine Strip on Orange Heights, West approx. 1300 181 181 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH142 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. From Rail 182 182 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH148 Road Tracks on New Hampshire, on West and East side of the road, North for approx. 600 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Oregon 183 183 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH149 approx. at midblock, Southwest for 1000 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. 1200 feet 184 184 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH153 from New Comb and Loop 449, South for approx. 300 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. 1000 feet 185 185 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH154 from Fiesta and Dilworth, extends North for approx. 500 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On La 186 186 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH158 Vaca from Colorado, Southeast to Rangerville, then Northeast to Knox Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Ponderosa and Rangerville, Northwest approx. 1000 feet to the outfall at the Arroyo Colorado, Southeast from Rangerville 187 187 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH159 and Ponderosa approx Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Intersection 188 188 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH161 of Davis and 7th, South approx. 800 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. From the 189 189 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH200 outfall at Little Creek Ditch, Northeast approx. 750 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. From the 190 190 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH204 outfall at Roosevelt, North for approx. 1250 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. From the 191 191 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH206 outfall at Hale Drain Ditch, Southeast for approx. 300 feet, then Northeast approx 300 feet to Sesame Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Intersection 192 192 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH216 of Tyler and 77 Sunshine Strip, South to Little Creek and Sunshine Strip Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Intersection 193 193 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH224 of US 77 and Fair Park, East for approx. 1000 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Intersection 194 194 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH229 of Tamm and US 83, East for approx. 7000 feet to the outfall Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Intersection of Northbound Frontage of US 77 and Harrison, West to the Southbound frontage, then South to the intersection of Tyler, 195 195 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH230 and East to Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Intersection 196 196 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH233 of Vinson and 77 Sunshine Strip, south approx. 1350 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. From the 197 197 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH234 end of Austin approx. 500 feet to the East

6 LRGV Regional EAP Cameron County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name Project Description ID

Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. From 198 198 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH244 Christian's Circle to Gabriel's Landing, then West on Gabriel's Landing Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. From the outfall at 13th St. Ditch, West approx 1350 feet. Secondary area at intersection of Mark Circle and Thomas, East for 199 199 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH247 approx. 300 feet,

Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. From the 200 200 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH248 outfall at 3rd St. Ditch and Matz, East for approx. 1400 feet, then North on 7th to the intersection of Tumbleweed Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Intersection 201 201 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH251 of Hoogland and Breedlove, North approx. 1500 feet, then East approx 1400 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. Intersection 202 202 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH252 of Sun Chase and Sun Down, Northeast approx. 1050 to the outfall at Stuart Place Drain Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Kelley Street from Davis to Matz with laterals on Marjory, East to Dennis. East from intersection of Davis and Kelley to New 203 203 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH023 Combs, then turn Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing storm sewer lines, manholes, and inlets. On Sam 204 204 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH145 Houston, West for 300 feet, then North for 1000 Feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing drainage ditch and culvert crossings. South from 205 205 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH-Lipscomb Ditch Morris, Northeast approx. 3,500 feet to Lipscomb and at the outfall at the Lipscomb Drain Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing drainage ditch and culvert crossings. From Lincoln, 206 206 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH-Dixieland Ditch South paralleling Trucker for approx. 4,000 feet Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing drainage ditch and culvert crossings. From Amistad, 207 207 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH-13th Street Ditch South for 8,800 feet along 13th to the intersection of Barbara Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing drainage ditch and culvert crossings. From the culvert improvement at Loop 499 and extends South between 3rd and 5th, 6,600 feet to the intersection of 77 Sunshine 208 208 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH-3rd Street Ditch Strip Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing drainage ditch and culvert crossings. Just South of 209 209 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH-Hick Hill Detention Pond Hickory Hill Subdivision, West of FM 800 Storm sewer improvements consisting of increased capacity of existing drainage ditch and culvert crossings. Just South of 210 210 City of Harlingen Harlingen COH-T Street Detention Pond Carroll and East of R 211 211 Port of Brownsville/ Director Engineering Services POB/BND POB Road Drainage Improvements Increase Ditch & Pipe Capacities for existing drainage 212 212 Port Isabel - San Benito Navigation District PI/SB ND Sunken Dock and Drainage Rebuild sunken dock and repair drainage infrastructure 213 213 City of San Benito San Benito South Rail Drainage South of R.R. -Drainage improvement and flood elevation measures 214 214 City of San Benito San Benito North Rail Drainage North of R.R. -Drainage improvement and flood elevation measures 215 215 City of San Benito San Benito Lateral Connections to DD Connecting existing San Benito laterals to Drainage District ditches 216 216 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Drain Ditch Cleaning Clean CCDD#3 ditches that surround the City 217 217 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Rio Hondo New Main Connection Resize RCP carrying stormwater on CR106 218 218 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Outfall Additions Create connections on north City subdivisions to outfall to the Arroyo Colorado 219 219 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Dam Repair Repair and rehabilitate the Dam that holds Resaca water and connects City to park on the peninsula 220 220 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Street Improvements Improve streets in identified neighborhoods/colonias 221 221 City of La Feria La Feria AN-47 Drain Improvements to the AN-47 canal as outlined in the La Feria FPP, 2010 222 222 City of La Feria La Feria AN-49 Drain Various improvements to the AN-49 canal as outlined in the La Feria FPP, 2010 Various Structure and Drainage improvements for La Feria and the Tio Cano Lake area as outlined in the La Feria FPP, 223 223 City of La Feria La Feria Tio Cano Drain 2010

224 224 Brownsville Public Utilities Board BPUB Resaca Restoration Project Clean and remove approximately 2.7 million CY of sedimentation and material from Resacas and Lakes in Brownsville

7 LRGV Regional EAP Hidalgo County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name ID

1 1 Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 HCDD#1 East Lateral Improvements Create and widen existing ditches, connect to HCDD#1 system for area south east up through La Villa 2 2 Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 HCDD#1 J-09 Channel Create drain ditch to drain from FM 3601 to North Main Drain, ~1 mi south of FM 1925

3 3 Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 HCDD#1 Pharr-McAllen South Drain Rehab / Capacity Improvements Rehabilitate existing ditches and rehabilitate existing gate structure 4 4 Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 HCDD#1 Raymondville Drain & Connecting Laterals New drainage system from Edinburg Lake to connect to existing Raymondville Drain 5 5 City of Peñitas Peñitas Peñitas Drain Create drainage ditch to drain Peñitas area 6 6 Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 6 HCID#6 Havana Pump Upgrade 1 Pump upgrades for pump leading to La Joya Lake 7 7 Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 6 HCID#6 Walker Lake Pump Upgrade Pump upgrade for pump from Rio Grande to Walker Lake 8 8 City of La Joya La Joya La Joya Drainage Improvement Various drainage and paving improvements 9 9 Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 HCDD#1 Delta Area Connector Drainage connection for the Delta Area; from La Villa/Edcouch 10 10 Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 HCDD#1 South Fork Drain Rehab / Capacity Improvements Rehabilitate existing drain ditch and create ditches and outfalls for South "I" Road area 11 11 City of McAllen McAllen McAllen 10th St. Drainage Improvement Improve drainage along various areas along 10th St. 12 12 Hidalgo / Cameron County Irrigation District No. 9 HCCID#9 Pump System Upgrade Improve pumping capacity

13 13 City of Edinburg Edinburg Dove / McColl Drainage Improvements Drainage improvements for Dove / McColl, including curb and gutter and increased capacity to HCDD#1 System. 14 14 City of McAllen McAllen Pharr-McAllen North Drain Capacity Improvements Increase drainage capacity and number of outfalls 15 15 City of Hidalgo Hidalgo Hidalgo Drainage Study Drainage Engineering Study

16 16 Sullivan City Sullivan City US 83 - FM 886 Drainage Improvements Improve drainage South of US83 and West of FM 886, add storm drain through US 83 and curb and gutter for remaining 17 17 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Hoehn Subdivision Drainage Improvements Create ditch and connect to existing near Hoehn Rd. and widen existing ditch from Hoehn to McColl 18 18 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 FM 493 -FM 2812 Drainage Improvements Acquire land for retention pond, construct lift station, and install culverts to cross FM 493 19 19 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Faysville-Tamaron Drainage Improvements Improve drainage at Faysville, Tamaron Subdivision to include force main, drain pipe, and gate structure 20 20 Donna Irrigation District Donna ID FM 493 Ditch Rehabilitation / Capacity Improvements Increase capacity of drainage/irrigation ditch on FM493 south of Calle Chaparral 21 21 Donna Irrigation District Donna ID FM 1423 Ditch Rehab Project 1 Clean growth and trash out of drainage/irrigation ditch on FM1423 south of Bus83 22 22 Donna Irrigation District Donna ID FM 1423 Ditch Rehab Project 2 Clean growth and trash out of drainage/irrigation ditch on FM1423 between Elm & Pine 23 23 Hidalgo / Cameron County Irrigation District No. 9 HCCID#9 USIBWC Main Floodway Outfall Canal Improvements North Improve outfall capacity by deepening the USIBWC Main Floodway Outfall Canal 24 24 Hidalgo / Cameron County Irrigation District No. 9 HCCID#9 New Auxiliary Canal to USIBWC Main Floodway Proposed auxiliary canal from USIBWC Main Floodway to HCCID#9 irrigation line

25 25 Hidalgo / Cameron County Irrigation District No. 9 HCCID#9 USIBWC Main Floodway Outfall Canal Improvements South Increase outfall capacity to USIBWC Main Floodway 26 26 City of McAllen McAllen McAllen Downtown Drainage Improvements Improve drainage at various downtown locations (engineering study provided) 27 27 Military Highway Water Supply Corporation MHWSC Well Pump Generators 4 Generators to power existing well pumps while no electricity is available 28 28 Hidalgo County Precinct 2 HCP2 Alamo Lateral Capacity Improvements Increase Alamo Lateral ditch capacity within Precinct 2 Jurisdiction 29 29 Hidalgo County Precinct 2 HCP2 Floodway Pump Station Upgrade Increase pump size for draining into Floodway 30 30 Hidalgo County Precinct 2 HCP2 Precinct 2 Drainage Improvement Southfork Subdivision Drainage improvements (curb and gutter) for the Southfork Subdivision (Colonia) 31 31 Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 5 HCID#5 FM 1015 West Pump Station Proposed Pump at USIBWC Floodway ~.75 mi West of FM1015 32 32 Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 5 HCID#5 FM 1015 Central Pump Station Proposed Pump at USIBWC Floodway ~ 3/4 mi East of FM1015 33 33 Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 5 HCID#5 FM 1015 East Pump Station Proposed Pump at USIBWC Floodway ~1.3 mi East of FM1015 34 34 Mission Economic Development Authority Mission EDA Bryan Rd - FM 1016 Detention Improvements Proposed Detention Cells between Bryan & FM1016 35 35 Mission Economic Development Authority Mission EDA Bentsen Palms Drainage Improvements / Connection Curb and gutter and connection to Mission Inlet for Bentsen Palms Development 36 36 Mission Economic Development Authority Mission EDA Mission Inlet Capacity Improvements Increase flow capacity for Mission Inlet 37 37 Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 19 HCID#19 Old Military Road Irrigation Line Replacement Replace ~4000 RCP Irrigation Pipe by Railroad Tracks South of Old Military Rd. 38 38 City of Mission Mission Mission Lateral Capacity Improvements Increase Mission Lateral capacity Northeast of the City of Mission 39 39 City of Mission Mission NW Subdivision Connection to Mission Lateral Extend subdivision drainage to outfall into Mission Lateral (curb and gutter) 40 40 City of Mission Mission Downtown Drainage Connector Connect existing drainage infrastructure to US 83 drainage 41 41 Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 16 HCID#16 Weston Road - Subdivision Drainage Improvements. Remove drainage from HCID #16 lines and reconfigure drainage (not in HCDD#1 jurisdiction) 42 42 Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 16 HCID#16 Pump System Upgrades Replace 5 existing pumps with more efficient pumps. 43 43 Hidalgo County Water Improvement District No. 3 HCWID #3 Rio Grande Pump house Bank Rehab Rehabilitate the bank of the Rio Grande near the HCWID#3 Pump house, eroded from high Rio Grande flow 44 44 Engleman Irrigation District Engleman ID FM 493 N - FM 1925 Ditch Rehab Drainage ditch clearing and rehabilitation along FM 493 North & FM 1925

8 LRGV Regional EAP Hidalgo County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name ID

45 45 Engleman Irrigation District Engleman ID FM 493 - FM 1925 Pump Rehab Rehabilitation of pumps for flood relief and to protect Colonias near FM 493 & FM 1925

46 46 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Fike Pump Station Proposed lift station will pump storm water from existing ditch from south side of the road (lower) to north side (higher) 47 47 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Owassa-Wisconsin-Trenton Drainage Improvement Create drainage (curb and gutter) for subdivisions within Owassa, Wisconsin, and Trenton 48 48 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 SH107 - Sunflower Drainage Improvements Create drainage for subdivision located at SH107 & Sunflower 49 49 La Villa / Edcouch Delta Delta Area Connector Drainage connection for the Delta Area; from La Villa/Edcouch 50 50 La Villa / Edcouch Delta La Villa / Edcouch Ditch Rehab and Improvements Increase existing drain ditch capacity 51 51 City of Donna Donna North Donna Drainage Improvement Increase Hutto & South Rd. drain ditch capacity and create drainage for West Scobey Rd. 52 52 City of Donna Donna Donna - HCDD#1 System Connection Connect existing drainage lines to HCDD#1 System 53 53 Valley Acres Irrigation District VAID VAID Reservoir Seepage Protection Seepage protection from USIBWC Floodway Levees near VA Reservoir 54 54 Valley Acres Irrigation District VAID Mercedes-Floodway Drainage Ditch New Drainage Route for Mercedes and Floodway, not in VA ID system 55 55 City of Alamo Alamo Original Town Site Drainage Improvements Provide drainage (bar ditch or curb and gutter) for original Alamo Town site 56 56 City of Edinburg Edinburg Northside Drainage Phase I Proposed ditch and existing ditch expansion in North Edinburg 57 57 City of Edinburg Edinburg Downtown Drainage Improvements Improve drainage in Downtown Edinburg 58 58 City of Edinburg Edinburg Dawson Rd. - Stadium Dr. Drainage Improvements Proposed 30" and 24" RCP lines to solve flooding issues 59 59 City of Edinburg Edinburg Curry Ditch Widening and Irrigation Improvements Widen existing drainage canals and replace ID lines with 72" RCP 60 60 City of Edinburg Edinburg Hobbs & 2nd Street Drainage Improvements Upgrade the 18" RCP to 36" RCP to mitigate flooding 61 61 City of Edinburg Edinburg Pig Pond Expansion Connect 48" RCP to Curry ditch, 30" RCP to Sun Rise Subdivision, and upgrade existing pump 62 City of Edinburg Edinburg Pursley Detention Facility Purchase 32 acres of vacant property to develop into storm water detention facility 63 63 City of Edinburg Edinburg Doolittle Ditch Expansion Increase Doolittle ditch capacity, install proposed 60" and 72" RCP, create drain ditch 64 64 City of Progreso Progreso Capetillo Subdivision Pump Proposed pump to remove water from the Capetillo Subdivision and drain to HCID#5 System 65 65 City of Progreso Progreso Las Palmas (Progreso) Subdivision ditch maintenance Clean and reshape the drainage ditches in the Las Palmas subdivision 66 66 City of Progreso Progreso Progreso Storm Ditch Maintenance Equipment Heavy equipment (dozer, long reach excavator) for ditch cleaning operations 67 67 City of Progreso Progreso Progreso Portable Pumps 4 Portable pumps for the City to use at necessary locations 68 68 City of Progreso Progreso Catarina Subdivision Drainage Complete drainage for subdivision as described in Sam's Engineering Drainage Study 69 69 City of Pharr Pharr Pharr Detention Pond Study Complete drainage study for detention pond(s) for the City of Pharr 70 70 City of Pharr Pharr Pharr Drain Ditch Expansion Expand drain ditches throughout the City to increase outfall to the HCDD#1 System 71 71 City of Hidalgo Hidalgo Hidalgo Commercial District Drainage Study Conduct drainage study for South East area of the City of Hidalgo 72 72 City of Hidalgo Hidalgo Northern Hidalgo Drainage Relief Widen existing drain ditches and acquire more ROW for the expansion to the USIBWC Floodway 73 73 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Trenton Drain Phase I Increase drainage capacity of existing drainage canals to prepare for increased load from Phase II 74 74 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Trenton Drain Phase II Add proposed storm drain system for subdivisions and attach new/existing system to Phase I 75 75 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 San Carlos Area, Subdivisions, and Colonia Drainage Relief Create drainage lines (pipes and gutters) and connect the new system to the existing drainage system Tower Heights, Bandera Estates, and Four Queens Subdivision 76 76 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Drainage Create drainage lines (pipes and gutters) and connect the new system to the existing drainage system 77 77 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Los Tinacos Subdivision Drainage Improvements Create drainage lines (pipes and gutters) and connect the new system to the Pct. 2 Drainage System Owassa Rd between Cesar Chavez and Alamo Drainage 78 78 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Improvement Create drainage lines (pipes and gutters) and connect the new system to the Pct. 2 Drainage System 79 79 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Owassa Acres Subdivision Drainage Improvements Create drainage lines (pipes and gutters) and connect the new system to the proposed Alberta Drain Create drainage lines (pipes and gutters) and connect the new system to the existing system on north side of Mile 7 1/2 80 80 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Alamo Brias Subdivision & Off Site Drainage Improvements Road 81 81 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Faysville Pump Station Phase I Retention pond excavation, force main pipe, and gate structure 82 82 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Faysville Pump Station Phase II Pump station, gravity pipe, and bores Owassa Drain for Seminole Valley and Seminole Valley No. 2 83 83 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Subdivision Drainage Re-excavate and possibly widen the existing drainage ditch connected to the FM 495 Drain Acquire land east of FM493, excavate a detention pond, build a lift station, install culverts along FM493 to drain properties 84 84 Hidalgo County Precinct 1/4 HCP1/HCP4 FM493 & FM2812 ROW and Retention Pond West of FM493

85 85 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Natasha Subdivision Drainage Improvements Construct a swale along rear of the tracts from north to south to act as an equalizer to the drainage running east to west

9 LRGV Regional EAP Hidalgo County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name ID

Create drainage for subdivision existing subdivisions to Alamo Lateral (Between Owassa and Alberta, bounds ~1 mile East 86 86 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Alberta Drain Phase I of Tower Create drainage for subdivision existing subdivisions to Alamo Lateral (Between Owassa and Alberta, bounds ~500 feet 87 87 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Alberta Drain Phase II West of Tower Create drainage for subdivision existing subdivisions to Alamo Lateral (Between Owassa and Alberta, bounds ~2600 feet 88 88 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 HCP4 Alberta Drain Phase III West of Alamo Install new curb inlets, grate inlets, storm drain manholes, and pipes, then connect new system to existing City storm sewer 89 89 City of San Juan San Juan San Juan Downtown Revitalization Project Phase I, II and III system Install new curb inlets, grate inlets, storm drain manholes, and pipes, then connect new system to existing City storm sewer 90 90 City of San Juan San Juan San Juan Downtown Revitalization Project Phase II system Install new curb inlets, grate inlets, storm drain manholes, and pipes, then connect new system to existing City storm sewer 91 91 City of San Juan San Juan San Juan Downtown Revitalization Project Phase III system 92 92 Hidalgo County Irrigation District No. 2 HCID #2 Carlson Lake Levee and Pump Station Rehabilitation Raise levees and pumps that service Carlson Lake to meet IBWC levee height and to increase capacity of the Lake Create a retention pond system from existing caliche pits and connect the pits to the HCDD#1 MDS. One 1 pit to be used 93 93 City of Alton Alton Calichera Project as a detention pond 94 94 City of Alton Alton Alton Drainage System Connection Connect City of Alton's drainage system to the HCDD#1 Master Drainage System (MDS) 95 95 City of La Joya La Joya City of La Joya back flow / river control Create means of controlling the Rio Grande by use of backflow preventer near rail line and Old Military Highway. 96 96 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 HCP1 Eastern Delta Laterals Construction of ditch to alleviate ponded water. 97 97 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 HCP1 Floodway Pumps Repair and replacement of pumps along the floodway at Mile 12 1/3, Mile 14 1/2 and Mile 17 1/2 Construction of ditch to alleviate ponded water within the Las Brisas Subdivision and at the intersection of Mile 3 Rd. 98 98 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 HCP1 Las Brisas Ditch West and Mile 13 1/2 Construction of ditch running north and south along the west side of the levee beginning at approximately Mile 13 1/2 and 99 99 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 HCP1 North-South Floodway Ditch proceeding north. 100 100 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 HCP1 Mercedes Lateral Clean out existing ditch 101 101 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 HCP1 Monte Alto Alleviate subdivision flooding by creating a ditch. 102 102 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 HCP3 4 Mile Line Pipe/drainage system outfalling into West Main 3. 103 103 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 HCP3 Palm Dr. Pipe/drainage system outfalling into West Main 3. 104 104 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 HCP3 Moorefield Rd. Pipe/drainage system outfalling into West Main 3. 105 105 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 HCP3 7 1/2 Mile Line Pipe/drainage system outfalling into West Main 3. 106 106 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 HCP3 Mile 8 1/2 Pipe/drainage system outfalling into the Raymondville Drain 107 107 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 HCP3 Inspiration Rd Pipe/drainage system outfalling into the Raymondville Drain Downtown, Airport Dr., Border Ave & Bus 83, North Border, South Georgia, North Bridge, 6th St., and South Bridge 108 108 City of Weslaco Weslaco Drainage System Improvements for the City of Weslaco drainage improvements 109 109 City of Weslaco Weslaco Improvements on Colonias Create drainage for various colonias and business district. Mercedes Park, Mercedes south east quad, HCCID#9 Later 19 and HCCID#9 Anacuitas drainage improvements for the 110 110 City of Mercedes Mercedes Drainage System Improvements for the City of Mercedes City of Mercedes 111 111 City of Mercedes Mercedes Improvements on Various Roads Improve streets that have a lack of flow. 112 112 City of Edcouch Edcouch Drainage System Improvements Maintenance of drainage canals 113 113 Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 HCDD#1 New/Improved laterals for the HCDD #1 System Construct and/or excavate laterals proposed in the 1997 Flood Protection Plan for Hidalgo County 114 114 City of Penitas Penitas Peñitas Berm Berm or intake structure between irrigation canals to protect neighborhoods 115 115 City of Penitas Penitas Penitas Drainage Infrastructure Install drainage infrastructure for various areas inside the City of Penitas 116 116 HCDD#1 HCDD#1 J-09-00 Create new J-09-00 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the Northwestern Edinburg, North McAllen Area 117 117 HCDD#1 HCDD#1 K-07-01 Create new K-07-01 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the Northern PSJA Area 118 118 HCDD#1 HCDD#1 K-07-02 Create new K-07-02 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the Northern PSJA Area Create new F-14-01 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the Northern Alamo area, north of US-83 and west of 119 119 HCDD#1 HCDD#1 F-14-01 FM1423 120 120 HCDD#1 HCDD#1 J-08-00 Create new J-08-00 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the Northwest Edinburg area, between SH107 and FM1925 121 121 HCDD#1 HCDD#1 J-06-00 Create new J-06-00 drain ditch to provide drainage relief for the Northwest Edinburg area, west of Edinburg Lake

10 LRGV Regional EAP Hidalgo County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name ID

122 122 City of La Villa La Villa Phase II - La Villa Detention Project Complete Phase II of the La Villa Regional Detention Project to allow for detention and improved detention ditches Northeast McAllen/Edinburg Lateral - Redbud Ave. to future 123 123 City of McAllen McAllen Zinnia Ave. Drainage ROW, Channel improvements, Roadway Culvert Crossings 124 124 City of McAllen McAllen Westway Heights Drainage Improvements Storm sewer infrastructure; detention pond excavation and grading, inlet/outlet structures 125 125 City of McAllen McAllen Municipal Park Regional Stormwater Detention Facility Regional stormwater detention pond; Excavation and grading, inlet and outlet structures 126 126 City of McAllen McAllen Northwest Regional Stormwater Detention Facility Storm Sewer Infrastructure; Detention Pond Excavation and Grading, Inlet/Outlet Structure 127 127 City of McAllen McAllen Southeast RDF - Nyssa Avenue at N 4th Street Regional Stormwater Detention Pond; Excavation and Grading, Inlet and Outlet Structures Bicentennial Blueline (Tamarack Avenue to Harvey Avenue) 128 128 City of McAllen McAllen Bridge Replacements Bridge Replacement/Channel Improvements 129 129 City of McAllen McAllen El Rancho Regional Stormwater Detention Facility Regional stormwater detention pond; Excavation and grading, stormwater pump station 130 130 City of McAllen McAllen West La Vista Drainage Improvements Storm sewer infrastructure 131 131 City of McAllen McAllen Highland Ave. at N. 6th St. Drainage Improvements Storm sewer infrastructure 132 132 City of McAllen McAllen Kennedy Avenue Drainage Improvements Project Storm sewer Infrastructure Kendlewood Avenue - N 19th St to N 22 1/2 St Drainage 133 133 City of McAllen McAllen Improvements Storm sewer Infrastructure 134 134 City of McAllen McAllen Torres Acres Paving and Drainage Improvements Storm Sewer Infrastructure and Paving 135 135 City of McAllen McAllen Quince Avenue Drainage Improvements Storm sewer Infrastructure Redbud Avenue at K" Center Avenue Drainage 136 136 City of McAllen McAllen Improvements" Storm sewer Infrastructure 137 137 City of McAllen McAllen 4th & 6th From Harvey to Fern Storm sewer Infrastructure Primrose Avenue at Bicentennial Drive Storm Sewer Outfall 138 138 City of McAllen McAllen Improvements Storm sewer Infrastructure - Outfall 139 139 City of McAllen McAllen Harvey Stormwater Pump Station Upgrades Stormwater Pump Station Infrastructure 140 140 City of McAllen McAllen Northwest Blueline Hibiscus Tributary Improvements Channel Improvements 141 141 City of McAllen McAllen South 20th Street Storm Sewer Inlet Project Storm sewer Infrastructure 142 142 City of McAllen McAllen North Main Street at Jay Drainage Improvements Project Storm sewer Infrastructure

143 143 City of McAllen McAllen Crockett Elementary Regional Stormwater Detention Facility Storm sewer Infrastructure 144 144 City of McAllen McAllen Gardenia Avenue at N 25 1/2 Street Drainage Improvements Storm sewer Infrastructure 145 145 City of McAllen McAllen Trade Zone Pump Station Improvements Stormwater Pump Station Infrastructure South McColl Road at Pineridge Avenue Drainage 146 146 City of McAllen McAllen Improvements Storm sewer Infrastructure 147 147 City of McAllen McAllen Balboa Ditch Sluice Gate Project Stormwater Control Structure 148 148 City of McAllen McAllen McAllen Lateral Channel Improvements Channel Improvements

11 LRGV Regional EAP Starr County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name Project Description ID

1 1 Rio Grande City EDC RGCEDC Los Olmos Creek Rehabilitation Clean and regrade Los Olmos Creek to allow for drainage of storm water 2 2 Starr County Industrial Foundation SCIF Grulla High School Development Drainage Relief Create drainage infrastructure/drainage study for new development around Grulla HS 3 3 Starr County Industrial Foundation SCIF US83 System Relief at Embassy and Garza Rd. Provide drainage relief for backed up flow just south of US83. Drainage study may be necessary 4 4 Starr County Pct 3 SCP3 Drainage Infrastructure for Precinct 3 Build drainage infrastructure using completed drainage studies 5 5 Starr County Pct 1 SCP1 Funding to implement Drainage Studies in Roma Funding to implement completed drainage studies for the City of Roma 6 6 Starr County Drainage District SCDD SCDD Master Plan Create a master drainage plan for the newly formed Starr County Drainage District

12 LRGV Regional EAP Willacy County Complete List of Identified Projects

GIS Count Inventory Entity Entity Acronym Project Name Project Description ID

1 1 Willacy County Drainage District No. 2 WCDD#2 HW 186 East Drainage Extension Connectivity/extension of current drainage facilities. Residents currently flood. 2 2 Willacy County Drainage District No. 2 WCDD#2 San Perlita South Expansion Expansion of Drains from 36in to 72in for better outflow 3 3 Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 WCDD#1 Willacy County Drainage District 1 expansion expansion of entire system to facilitate more storage capacity 4 4 Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 WCDD#1 Creation of Single Drainage District Merge WCDD1 and WCDD2 into single district 5 5 Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 WCDD#1 Pump station improvements Addition of fuel storage. Addition of pumps to cycle between to decrease risk of damage. 6 6 Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 WCDD#1 626L "Smith Gate" addition addition of pump to move water into IBWC floodway 7 7 Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 WCDD#1 Sebastian Connectivity Connect Lateral G (WCDD1) to Sebastian and improved drainage facilities 8 8 Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 WCDD#1 Sebastian - Lateral G Expansion Improved holding capacity to facilitate additional Sebastian drainage 9 9 Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 WCDD#1 Los Mesquites Subd. Connectivity drainage infrastructure needed. Connectivity to WCDD1needed. 10 10 Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 WCDD#1 Re-negotiate El Sauz contractual agreement Re-negotiate agreement with El Sauz Ranch to facilitate more outfall volume 11 11 Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 WCDD#1 Add Detention to Willacy Main Drain Detention facilities for Willacy Main Drain, increase holding capacity 12 12 Willacy County Drainage District No. 2 WCDD#2 Sebastian Detention Detention facilities for Sebastian, pumping station to pump into IBWC Floodway 13 13 Willacy County Drainage District No. 1 WCDD#1 Relief Channel Expansion Expansion of relief channel to facilitate more outfall into Hidalgo Main Drain 14 14 Willacy County Navigation District WCND Addition of Emergency generators Emergency generators with alternative fuel supply/storage facilities needed during storm event 15 15 Willacy County Navigation District WCND Emergency power at lift stations 11 total lift stations need emergency power backup/fuel supply/storage 16 16 Willacy County Navigation District WCND Navigation Beacon power backup Navigation beacons in/out of port need emergency power backup 17 17 Willacy County Navigation District WCND Electrical conversion of district conversion of overhead electrical lines to underground. To prevent erosion/wind damage 18 18 Willacy County Navigation District WCND Airport generator backup backup generator needed for airport during storm event 19 19 Delta Lake Irrigation District DLID Culvert Improvements Need new culverts FM 1015 and Delta Orchards 20 20 Delta Lake Irrigation District DLID Improvements to Ditch San Martin Lateral Improvements to Ditch San Martin Lateral from county line/490 to sh 186/490 21 21 Delta Lake Irrigation District DLID Larger Crossing Siphon under SH186 Need Larger Culverts at sh 186 crossing 22 22 Delta Lake Irrigation District DLID Scot Mayers Drain Improvements Need new Larger culverts 23 23 Delta Lake Irrigation District DLID Block 33 Drain Improvements Improve Culvert Crossing- 4 Structures 24 24 Delta Lake Irrigation District DLID SH 186 crossing improvements Improvement to Bottleneck sh186 and Canal Crossing 25 25 City of Lyford Lyford Lyford detention and ditch maintenance Clean up and maintain existing ditch as well as create additional detention on existing I Lateral 26 26 City of Raymondville Raymondville Raymondville Drainage Create new drainage on north part of town and clean up existing ditches on south part of town. 27 27 City of San Perlita San Perlita Drainage maintenance and linear detention Create approximately ~1,800 LF of linear detention and clean up existing ditches 28 28 Willacy County Precinct #1 WCP1 La Sara Drain Ditch Maintenance Clean and maintain ~6,000 LF of existing drain ditches in La Sara 29 29 Willacy County Precinct #1 WCP1 Los Angeles Drain Ditch Maintenance Maintain ~2,500 LF of drain ditches in Los Angeles Subdivision 30 30 Willacy County Precinct #1 WCP1 Various Drainage Improvements in Ranchette Estates Regrade swale, install RCP w/ S.E.T. Culverts, and clean/maintain R.E. Main Drain Ditch 31 31 Willacy County Precinct #3 WCP3 Various Drainage Improvements in Bausell & Ellis Clean and maintain ~2,500 LF of drain ditch, install 30" RCP, and 18" RCP Culvert 32 32 Willacy County Precinct #3 WCP3 Willamar Culvert Install and Ditch maintenance Install 60" RCP culvert and maintain ~6,000 LF of the main storm system 33 33 Willacy County Precinct #4 WCP4 Lyford South Various Drain Ditch Maintenance Maintain ~6,000 LF of drain ditch or swales, including ~600 LF of 18" RCP Culverts with S.E.T. 34 34 Willacy County Precinct #4 WCP4 Santa Monica Various Drain Ditch Maintenance Maintain existing swales, including ~750 LF of 18" RCP Culverts 35 35 Willacy County Precinct #4 WCP4 Lateral G Maintenance Clean and maintain ~24,000 LF of Lateral G drain ditch 36 36 Willacy County Precinct #4 WCP4 Zapata Various Drain Ditch Maintenance Clean and maintain ~18,000 LF of main drain ditch and install 60" RCP Culvert as necessary 37 37 City of San Perlita San Perlita Box Culvert Extension 1820 LF of 4'x8' Box Culvert to extend to Raymondville Drain 38 38 City of San Perlita San Perlita School Storm Sewer Extension Extend storm sewer system to provide relief to school pavilion with a 18" RCP 39 39 City of San Perlita San Perlita Community Drainage Improvements Extend city's southwest storm sewer to connect into drainage canal. Create new drainage district with drainage infrastructure for the northern portion of Willacy County not covered by existing 40 40 Willacy County WC Northern Willacy Drainage District DDs

13 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

APPENDIX F CIP / RANKED PROJECT LIST

APPENDIX F

CAMERON COUNTY RANKED PROJECTS LIST Cameron County Ranked Projects Project No. Entity Project Name Estimated Cost Size Ranking CC002 2 Cameron County Drainage District #1 Ditch 1 detention ponds $4,568,612.85 Medium 7 CC008 8 City of Brownsville North Airport Drainage improvements. $2,529,275.00 Medium 61 CC018 18 City of Brownsville N Main Drain Expansion $7,724,257.50 Medium 4 CC024 24 Cameron County Drainage District #1 San Martin Lake dredging $1,196,000.00 Small 23 CC025 25 Cameron County Drainage District #1 Ditch 1 outfall dredging $560,625.00 Small 43 CC046 46 South Padre Island EDC SPI Sand Dune restoration/protection program $174,750.00 Small 11 CC048 48 City of South Padre Island SPI White Sands Washout Prevention $174,750.00 Small 111 CC050 50 City of South Padre Island Addition of SPI Outfall $3,022,570.00 Medium 76

Precinct 1 CC052 52 City of South Padre Island SPI drainage study/identification of infra improvements. $100,000.00 Small 119 CC056 56 Brownsville Irrigation District #1 Resaca De La Palmas Improvements. $2,417,250.00 Small 43 CC051 51 City of South Padre Island Padre Outfall ROW Acquisition $1,100,000.00 Small 115 CC110 110 Cameron County Engineering Dept. SouthPoint/Reid Hope King/Villa Pancho Channel / Pump Station $4,197,256.25 Medium 11 CC152 152 Cameron County Precinct #1 CCP1 Ditch Reclaim A $1,060,620.00 Small 71 CC211 211 Port of Brownsville/ Director Engineering Services POB Road Drainage Improvements $696,576.00 Small 11

CC003 3 Cameron County Drainage District #1 Ditch 2 detention ponds $4,568,612.85 Medium 8 CC006 6 City of Brownsville FM802/HW48 Drainage Improvements $413,887.34 Small 104 CC015 15 City of Brownsville Colonia Galaxia Outfall improvements. $1,953,515.86 Small 19 CC017 17 City of Brownsville Central Blvd/Stovall Rd connection improvements $667,391.79 Small 43 CC027 27 Cameron County Drainage District #1 Cameron Park lateral improvements $2,918,075.00 Medium 60 CC039 39 City of Los Fresnos Los Fresnos S.E Outfall Improvements. $2,145,533.75 Small 56 CC041 41 City of Rancho Viejo FM 1732/Carmen Ave Crossing Improvements. $1,604,593.08 Small 83 CC043 43 City of Rancho Viejo Rancho Viejo-Resaca Dredging $1,777,390.00 Small 71

Precinct 2 CC045 45 City of Rancho Viejo Rancho Viejo Outfall at US77 Expansion $2,901,630.00 Medium 39 CC055 55 Cameron County Drainage District #1 Rancho Viejo Resaca Improvements. $822,250.00 Small 31 CC151 151 Cameron County Precinct #2 CCP2 Ditch Reclaim D $1,228,807.50 Small 71 CC154 154 Cameron County Precinct #2 CCP2 Ditch Reclaim E $748,912.50 Small 71 CC224 224 Brownsville Public Utilities Board Resaca Restoration Project $52,000,000.00 Large 2 CC026 26 Cameron County Drainage District #3 CCDD3 Drain Expansion $15,937,875.00 Medium 1 CC029 29 City of Indian Lake Indian Lake Resaca Dredging $598,000.00 Small 105 CC030 30 City of Indian Lake Indian lake Drainage Infrastructure Funding $2,186,558.91 Small 107 CC033 33 City of Laguna Vista Broadway/ FM510 Drainage Improvements $922,250.00 Small 83 CC034 34 City of Laguna Vista Laguna Vista Mangrove removal and addition of Laguna Vista Drain Rel $2,500,000.00 Medium 50 CC035 35 City of Laguna Vista Addition of Laguna Vista Relief Drain $174,750.00 Small 68 CC036 36 City of Laguna Vista Laguna Vista Establish/Join Drainage District $174,750.00 Small 118 CC038 38 Cameron County Drainage District #4 CCDD4/Los LaurelesMaintenance Funding $12,530,925.00 Medium 61 CC040 40 City of Los Fresnos Los Fresnos N. Drainage Improvements $249,500.00 Small 111 CC058 58 Cameron County Precinct #3 West Bayview Drainage Improvement (South Green Valley Farms) $970,789.99 Small 37 CC059 59 Cameron County Precinct #3 FM 1847 Roadside Ditch and Drainage Improvements $504,274.64 Small 91 CC061 61 Cameron County Precinct #3/Cameron County Drainage District #4 West Bayview Drainage Improvement Phase IV $5,187,721.07 Medium 24 CC064 64 Cameron County Drainage District #4 / Texas Department of Transportatio West Bayview Drainage Improvement Phase V $2,580,108.34 Medium 61 CC077 77 City of Palm Valley Palm Valley Resacas Improvements $1,569,750.00 Small 71 CC078 78 City of Palm Valley Stuart Place Road Drainage Improvements $914,610.00 Small 31 CC088 88 City of Port Isabel PI - "The Fingers" Dredging $2,616,250.00 Medium 83 CC089 89 City of Port Isabel PI - Overall Harbor Dredging $2,496,650.00 Small 120 CC091 91 City of Port Isabel PI - White Sands Additional Crossing $19,061,250.00 Medium 83

Precinct 3 CC094 94 Bayview Irrigation District Bayview-San Roman North Pump Station $2,492,000.00 Small 83 CC095 95 Bayview Irrigation District Bayview Detention Facility $3,837,500.00 Medium 36 CC097 97 Bayview Irrigation District Laguna Atascosa Outfall Expansion $3,946,800.00 Medium 79 CC098 98 Bayview Irrigation District Laguna Atascosa Gate Upgrade / Expansion $2,354,625.00 Small 17 CC100 100 City of Palm Valley Palm Valley Master Drainage Study $100,000.00 Small 114 CC103 103 Cameron County Drainage District #4 FM 510 Crossing Improvements $7,350,750.00 Medium 23 CC109 109 Cameron County Engineering Dept. Chula Vista Orason Drainage Improvements $4,197,256.25 Medium 50 CC121 121 Cameron County Drainage District #3 Main Drain A Downstream Improvements, Drain B-1 $383,237.50 Small 43 CC122 122 Cameron County Drainage District #3 Main Drain A Capacity Increase Project $16,073,613.38 Medium 22 CC124 124 Cameron County Drainage District #3 Drain C-Right Culvert Improvements $5,372,651.08 Medium 56 CC126 126 Cameron County Drainage District #3 Drain F-23 Culvert Improvements $192,729.25 Small 77 CC139 139 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 Hensz and Perk Lane Laterals Crossing Replacements $11,245,110.27 Medium 36 CC157 157 City of Harlingen COH System A $4,074,801.80 Medium 33 CC213 213 City of San Benito South Rail Drainage $6,607,849.00 Medium 33 CC214 214 City of San Benito North Rail Drainage $10,696,236.00 Medium 39 CC215 215 City of San Benito Lateral Connections to DD $705,838.00 Small 43 CC031 31 City of Primera Primera/Wilson Tract Main Outfall Improvements $922,250.00 Small 6 CC032 32 City of Primera Add Primera Detention Ponds $3,544,949.77 Medium 29 CC068 68 Cameron County Precinct #4 North Floodway Control Structure Improvements $2,616,250.00 Medium 39 CC069 69 Cameron County Precinct #4 NF-13 Capacity and Structure Improvements (North FM 800) $10,522,087.36 Medium 20 CC070 70 Cameron County Precinct #4 North Floodway Bypass / Hardin Ranch Drain Extension $65,657,932.63 Large 4 CC071 71 Cameron County Precinct #4 Tio Cano Lake Detention / Retention Facility $10,027,317.73 Medium 78 CC072 72 Cameron County Precinct #4/Camreon County Drainage District #5 Southwest Main Drain / Arroyo Colorado Connector $4,409,960.44 Medium 56 CC074 74 Cameron County Precinct #4/Camreon County Drainage District #5 Santa Rosa Capacity & Structure Improvements $6,617,489.79 Medium39 CC082 82 Cameron County Drainage District #5 Wilson Main Tract Drain Expansion $2,862,925.00 Medium 17 CC083 83 Cameron County Drainage District #5 Young Lateral - Wilson Main Tract Connection $5,796,285.00 Medium 50 CC086 86 Harlingen Irrigation District #1 Morris Rd Connectivity $2,500,000.00 Medium 56 CC087 87 Harlingen Irrigation District #1 Ebony / 800 Expansion $2,500,000.00 Medium 70 CC101 101 Harlingen Irrigation District #1 Adams Garden Crossing Expansion $12,013,500.00 Medium 11 CC102 102 Harlingen Irrigation District #1 North Combes - Connectivity $5,796,285.00 Medium 73 CC106 106 La Feria Irrigation District Bixby Drainage Improvements $10,258,636.23 Medium 77 CC111 111 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Connectivity $1,829,205.00 Small 108 CC112 112 La Feria Irrigation District La Feria/ 6.0 Channel Widening $3,511,885.00 Medium 20 CC113 113 La Feria Irrigation District Tio Cano Lake Capacity Improvements $772,750.00 Small 24 CC114 114 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Drainage Improvements $3,245,221.25 Medium 56 CC115 115 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Evacuation Center $3,245,221.25 Medium 80 Precinct 4 CC116 116 City of Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Drainage System Improvements $3,245,221.25 Medium 33 CC117 117 City of Santa Rosa Santa Rosa - 107 Channel / Crossover $3,245,221.25 Medium 48 CC120 120 City of Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Connectivity $383,237.50 Small 37 CC127 127 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 US77 and Loop 448 Railroad Bridge Replacement $832,962.25Small17 CC130 130 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 North Main Drain and Dixieland Main flooding improvements $3,423,550.00 Medium 19 CC138 138 Cameron County Drainage District #3 East Line Relief Drain Ditch AS-09 Structure Replacement $483,632.50 Small 65 CC141 141 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 Drain Project A-Lateral 46A Rehab & Extension $185,634.15Small56 CC146 146 City of Los Indios Los Indios-Carrasitos Trail Drainage Improvements $667,307.98 Small 111 CC149 149 Cameron County Engineering Dept. Reba-Bass Lake Drainage Improvements $1,228,807.50 Small 108 CC150 150 City of Los Indios Los Indios-Del Rio East Subdivision Improvements $1,228,807.50 Small 77 CC155 155 Cameron County Drainage District #5/ Harlingen Irrigation District #1 Primera Culvert Improvements $180,895.00 Small 2 CC156 156 City of Harlingen COH System 02 $2,768,953.75 Medium 45 CC158 158 City of Harlingen COH System B $5,908,714.04 Medium 48 CC219 219 City of Rio Hondo Rio Hondo Dam Repair $1,339,590.00 Small 56 CC221 221 City of La Feria AN-47 Drain $9,594,951.21 Medium 14 CC222 222 City of La Feria AN-49 Drain $1,395,793.39 Small 24 CC223 223 City of La Feria Tio Cano Drain $36,649,263.45 Large 6 Total $485,492,847 APPENDIX F- 1

CAMERON COUNTY RANKED PROJECTS LIST

APPENDIX F- 2

HIDALGOHidalgo COUNTY County RANKED Ranked PROJECTS Projects LIST Project No. Entity Project Name Estimated Cost Size Regional Rank HC020 20 Donna Irrigation District FM 493 Ditch Rehabilitation / Capacity Improvements $460,479.00 Small 19 HC021 21 Donna Irrigation District FM 1423 Ditch Rehab Project 1 $881,047.00 Small 7 HC022 22 Donna Irrigation District FM 1423 Ditch Rehab Project 2 $388,318.00 Small 4 HC023 23 Hidalgo / Cameron County Irrigation District # USIBWC Main Floodway Outfall Canal Improvements North $7,311,635.00 Medium 11 HC024 24 Hidalgo / Cameron County Irrigation District # New Auxiliary Canal to USIBWC Main Floodway $9,314,528.00 Medium 8 HC027 27 Military Highway Water Supply Corporation Well Pump Generators $445,775.00 Small 86 HC031 31 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #5 FM 1015 West Pump Station $542,407.00 Small 52 HC032 32 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #5 FM 1015 Central Pump Station $363,693.00 Small 56 HC033 33 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #5 FM 1015 East Pump Station $508,794.00 Small 65 HC044 44 Engleman Irrigation District FM 493 N - FM 1925 Ditch Rehab $691,720.00 Small 24 HC045 45 Engleman Irrigation District FM 493 - FM 1925 Pump Rehab $126,500.00 Small 43 HC050 50 La Villa / Edcouch La Villa / Edcouch Ditch Rehab and Improvements $8,054,213.00 Medium 29 HC051 51 City of Donna North Donna Drainage Improvement $4,905,850.00 Medium 25 HC052 52 City of Donna Donna - HCDD#1 System Connection $805,134.00 Small 52 HC053 53 Valley Acres Irrigation District VAID Reservoir Seepage Protection $8,029,212.00 Medium 61 HC054 54 Valley Acres Irrigation District Mercedes-Floodway Drainage Ditch $1,081,954.00 Small 56

Precinct 1 Precinct HC055 55 City of Alamo Original Town Site Drainage Improvements $838,089.00 Small 66 HC066 66 City of Progreso Progreso Storm Ditch Maintenance Equipment $390,280.00 Small 86 HC067 67 City of Progreso Progreso Portable Pumps $206,080.00 Small 43 HC068 68 City of Progreso Catarina Subdivision Drainage $447,643.00 Small 24 HC096 96 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 Eastern Delta Laterals $12,134,186.00 Medium 66 HC097 97 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 Floodway Pumps $94,264.00 Small 2 HC098 98 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 Las Brisas Ditch $696,414.00 Small 80 HC099 99 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 North-South Floodway Ditch $26,713,940.00 Large 4 HC100 100 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 Mercedes Lateral $358,851.00 Small 14 HC101 101 Hidalgo County Precinct 1 Monte Alto $2,554,452.00 Medium 71 HC108 108 City of Weslaco Drainage System Improvements for the City of Weslaco $1,600,000.00 Small 31 HC110 110 City of Mercedes Drainage System Improvements for the City of Mercedes $5,400,000.00 Medium 15 HC119 119 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 F-14-01 $2,916,826.00 Medium 25 HC122 122 City of La Villa Phase II - La Villa Detention Project $48,649,455.00 Large 3

HC015 15 City of Hidalgo Hidalgo Drainage Study $124,800.00 Small 99 HC028 28 Hidalgo County Precinct 2 Alamo Lateral Capacity Improvements $9,457,346.00 Medium 36 HC029 29 Hidalgo County Precinct 2 Floodway Pump Station Upgrade $150,091.00 Small 80 HC069 69 City of Pharr Pharr Detention Pond Study $2,291,566.00 Small 4 HC070 70 City of Pharr Pharr Drain Ditch Expansion $11,615,064.00 Medium 29 HC071 71 City of Hidalgo Hidalgo Commercial District Drainage Study $124,800.00 Small 99 HC072 72 City of Hidalgo Northern Hidalgo Drainage Relief $618,730.00 Small 31

Precinct 2 Precinct HC089 89 City of San Juan San Juan Downtown Revitalization Project Phase I, II and III $2,604,461.00 Medium 6 HC092 92 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #2 Carlson Lake Levee and Pump Station Rehabilitation $7,403,586.07 Medium 5 HC123 123 City of McAllen Northeast McAllen/Edinburg Lateral - Redbud Ave. to future Zinnia Ave. $6,000,000.00 Medium 39 HC129 129 City of McAllen El Rancho Regional Stormwater Detention Facility $1,500,000.00 Small 68 HC131 131 City of McAllen Highland Ave. at N. 6th St. Drainage Improvements $850,000.00 Small 56

HC005 5 City of Peñitas Peñitas Drain $5,477,300.00 Medium 29 HC006 6 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #16 Havana Pump Upgrade 1 $452,341.00 Small 43 HC007 7 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #6 Walker Lake Pump Upgrade $760,674.00 Small 43 HC016 16 Sullivan City US 83 - FM 886 Drainage Improvements $464,219.00 Small 56 HC034 34 Mission Economic Development Authority Bryan Rd - FM 1016 Detention Improvements $12,224,123.00 Medium 45 HC035 35 Mission Economic Development Authority Bentsen Palms Drainage Improvements / Connection $625,636.00 Small 24 HC037 37 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #19 Old Military Road Irrigation Line Replacement $250,000.00 Small 9 HC038 38 City of Mission Mission Lateral Capacity Improvements $7,922,216.00 Medium 17 HC039 39 City of Mission NW Subdivision Connection to Mission Lateral $1,073,947.00 Small 24 HC040 40 City of Mission Downtown Drainage Connector $460,000.00 Small 14 HC041 41 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #16 Weston Road - Subdivision Drainage Improvements. $1,756,857.00 Small 76 HC042 42 Hidalgo County Irrigation District #16 Pump System Upgrades $1,314,695.00 Small 52 HC093 93 City of Alton Calichera Project $1,998,508.00 Small 1 HC094 94 City of Alton Alton Drainage System Connection $1,463,284.00 Small 31 HC095 95 City of La Joya City of La Joya back flow / river control $20,751.00 Small 91 HC102 102 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 4 Mile Line $830,901.00 Small 52 HC103 103 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 Palm Dr. $1,108,196.00 Small 64 HC104 104 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 Moorefield Rd. $603,989.00 Small 66 HC106 106 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 Mile 8 1/2 $2,561,306.00 Medium 69 HC107 107 Hidalgo County Precinct 3 Inspiration Rd $5,014,031.00 Medium 61 HC114 114 City of Peñitas Peñitas Berm $1,635,615.30 Small 99 HC115 115 City of Peñitas Peñitas Drainage Infrastructure $8,387,536.00 Medium 66 HC004 4 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 Raymondville Drain & Connecting Laterals $265,000,000.00 Large 1 HC057 57 City of Edinburg Downtown Drainage Improvements $1,624,503.13 Small 19 HC058 58 City of Edinburg Dawson Rd. - Stadium Dr. Drainage Improvements $437,768.75 Small 24 HC060 60 City of Edinburg Hobbs & 2nd Street Drainage Improvements $462,057.50 Small 11 HC078 78 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 Owassa Rd between Cesar Chavez and Alamo Drainage Improvement $596,412.30 Small 22 HC083 83 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 Owassa Drain for Seminole Valley and Seminole Valley No. 2 Subdivision Draina $440,960.16 Small 8 HC086 86 Hidalgo County Precinct 4 Alberta Drain Phase I $2,147,544.80 Small 31 HC116 116 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 J-09-00 $2,077,795.40 Small 37 HC117 117 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 K-07-01 $1,136,810.60 Small 37 Precinct 4Precinct HC118 118 Hidalgo County Drainage District 3 Precinct #1 K-07-02 $1,080,374.20 Small 37 HC120 120 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 J-08-00 $14,106,973.00 Medium 39 HC121 121 Hidalgo County Drainage District #1 J-06-00 $6,124,767.40 Medium 53 HC124 124 City of McAllen Westway Heights Drainage Improvements $2,700,000.00 Medium 25 HC125 125 City of McAllen Municipal Park Regional Stormwater Detention Facility $3,100,000.00 Medium 25 HC130 130 City of McAllen West La Vista Drainage Improvements $850,000.00 Small 37 Total $547,944,275.61

STARR COUNTY RANKED PROJECT LIST Starr County Ranked Project Project No. Entity Project Name Estimated Cost Size Regional Rank SC006 Starr County Drainage District Drainage Master Plan $1,500,000.00 Small 63

Total $1,500,000.00 APPENDIX F- 3

CAMERON COUNTY RANKED PROJECTS LIST

APPENDIX F- 4

WILLACY COUNTYWillacy CountyRANKED Projects PROJECTS LIST Project No. Entity Project Name Estimated Cost Size Regional Rank WC019 19 Delta Lake Irrigation District Culvert Improvements $3,600,000.00 Medium 47 WC020 20 Delta Lake Irrigation District Improvements to San Martin Lateral Ditch $2,900,000.00 Medium 53 WC021 21 Delta Lake Irrigation District Larger Crossing Siphon under SH186 $1,400,000.00 Small 91 WC022 22 Delta Lake Irrigation District Scot Mayers Drain Improvements $1,000,000.00 Small 91 WC023 23 Delta Lake Irrigation District Block 33 Drain Improvements $1,400,000.00 Small 91

Precinct 1 Precinct WC026 26 City of Raymondville Raymondville Drainage $4,454,730.00 Medium 53 WC028 28 Willacy County Precinct #1 La Sara Drain Ditch Maintenance $1,209,719.00 Small 91 WC029 29 Willacy County Precinct #1 Los Angeles Drain Ditch Maintenance $637,529.00 Small 68 WC030 30 Willacy County Precinct #1 Various Drainage Improvements in Ranchette Estates $921,875.00 Small 102

WC002 2 Willacy County Drainage District #San Perlita South Expansion $4,400,000.00 Medium 75 WC003 3 Willacy County Drainage District #Willacy County Drainage District 1 expansion $5,100,000.00 Medium 2 WC014 14 Delta Lake Irrigation District Addition of Emergency Generators $2,500,000.00 Medium 81 WC016 16 Willacy County Navigation District Navigation Beacon Back-up Power $2,400,000.00 Small 116 WC017 17 Willacy County Navigation District Electrical Conversion of District $20,000,000.00 Medium 81 WC018 18 Willacy County Navigation District Airport Generator Backup $1,200,000.00 Small 116 WC024 24 Delta Lake Irrigation District SH 186 crossing improvements $2,500,000.00 Medium 15 WC037 37 City of San Perlita Box Culvert Extension $1,357,390.00 Small 80 WC038 38 City of San Perlita School Storm Sewer Extension $234,627.00 Small 86 WC039 39 City of San Perlita Community Drainage Improvements $688,748.00 Small 86 WC001 1 Willacy County Drainage District #HW 186 East Drainage Extension $3,800,000.00 Medium 73 WC010 10 Willacy County Drainage District #Re-negotiate El Sauz contractual agreement $2,500,000.00 Medium 3 WC011 11 Willacy County Drainage District #Add Detention to Willacy Main Drain $10,000,000.00 Medium 10 WC025 25 City of Lyford Lyford detention and ditch maintenance $411,793.00 Small 86 WC031 31 Willacy County Precinct #3 Various Drainage Improvements in Bausell & Ellis $498,953.00 Small 77 WC032 32 Willacy County Precinct #3 Willamar Culvert Install and Ditch maintenance $285,292.00 Small 106

WC005 5 Willacy County Drainage District #WCDD1 pump station improvements $2,100,000.00 Small 14 WC006 6 Willacy County Drainage District #626L "Smith Gate" addition $2,100,000.00 Small 9 WC009 9 Willacy County Drainage District #Los Mesquites Subdivision Connectivity $900,000.00 Small 110 WC012 12 Willacy County Drainage District #Sebastian Detention $7,300,000.00 Medium 71 WC033 33 Willacy County Precinct #4 Lyford South Various Drain Ditch Maintenance $324,603.00 Small 91

Precinct 4Precinct WC034 34 3 Precinct Willacy County 2 Precinct Precinct #4 Santa Monica Various Drain Ditch Maintenance $928,345.00 Small 102 WC035 35 Willacy County Precinct #4 Lateral G Maintenance $3,808,376.00 Medium 68 WC036 36 Willacy County Precinct #4 Zapata Various Drain Ditch Maintenance $2,068,532.00 Small 91 Total $94,930,512.00

APPENDIX F- 5

CAMERON COUNTY RD PROJECTS LIST

APPENDIX F- 6

This Page Intentionally Blank

LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

EXHIBIT G DECISION MATRIX

APPENDIX G LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

This Page Intentionally Blank

APPENDIX G LRGV Regional EAP Decision Matrix - Future Entity

Lower Rio Grande Rio Grande Regional Valley Development Stormwater Control Governing Structure: Water Authority Council Counties Drainage Districts Districts

Legal Authority/Statute/ SB 1902 (78th Leg. Texas Local Government Texas Local Government Texas Water Code Texas Water Code Constitutional Authority 2003), amended by SB Code Chapter 391 Code Chapter 561, "Water Chapter 56; Tex. Const. Chapter 66; Tex. Const. 707 (80th Leg. 2007). Control By Counties" Art. III, § 52, or Art. XVI, Art. XVI, § 59 § 59

Leadership Structure A Board of 18 directors, CCOGs may, by joint County commissioners District is initially TCEQ appoints five 12 of which are appointed agreement, determine the court. governed by three temporary directors, after by the governor and number and qualifications directors appointed by which directors are represent the of the members of their commissioenrs court; elected pursuant to Water constituencies of the governing body, 2/3 of Court then must order an Code Ch. 49. Authority, and a director which are elected officials election of three from each of the six of participating entities. permanent directors who counties in the authority LRVGDC board has 26 serve four year terms. selected by majority vote members, the majority of Board duties can be of the commissioenrs whom are mayors or transferred to court of that county. county commissioners of Commissioners Court. Each county, the Council's members. municipality, water supply corporation, irrigation district, and water district in the Authority is a member of a conference. The Board elects a president, VP, and secretary-treasurer.

Creation Created by Legislature in Any combination of No creation necessary; By petition of residents of District is created when 2003. counties and/or However, county may the district to person or commissioners municipalities may agree undertake a joint project commissioners court; courts in the counties to form a COG by by contracting with a multiple districts may be where all or part of the ordinance, resolution, governmental unit, consolidated by district is to be located rule, order, or other including a municipality, agreement or petition and file a petition with the means. LRGVDC has other county, or other election. (TWC § 56.802- TCEQ requesting creation already been created. political subdivision, to 3). Alternatively, districts that is signed by at least jointly acquire and/or may be created by 50 people residing within construct flood control or petition and election. the proposed district, or a drainage projects. mjority of commissioners.

Creation Time N/A N/A N/A Commissioners' court has If TCEQ determines a 60 days to hold hearing hearing on the petition is on petition and determine necessary, TCEQ will whether to form district; grant or deny petition alternate creation method after hearing, which can calls for election be appealed to state following petition, which district court. would take longer.

Geographic Boundaries Boundaries are Agreement creating COG Within the county, unless All or part of any village, Must be located within a coextensive with the must designate a region the county contracts with town, or municipality. watershed area; may boundaries of Cameron, including jurisdiction of another county or political Land in one district consist of non-contiguous Hidalgo, Starr, Webb, the counties or subdivision. cannot be included in property and may include Willacy, and Zapata municipalities, including another. Likely must be property in multiple counties, except the ETJ. contained within a counties. Authority does not county. include the area within the corporate limits of the City of Laredo.

APPENDIX G‐ 1 LRGV Regional EAP Decision Matrix - Future Entity

Lower Rio Grande Rio Grande Regional Valley Development Stormwater Control Governing Structure: Water Authority Council Counties Drainage Districts Districts Purpose To supplement the To make studies and To build canals, drains, Control and supervise the To control stormwater services, regulatory plans to guide the unified, levees, and other construction and and foodwater and powers, and authority of far-reaching development improvements to provide maintenance of canals, downstream flooding in irrigation districts, water of a region, eliminate for flood control and water drains, ditches, levees, all or part of a watershed. development supply duplication, and promote outlets. and other improvements corporations, counties, economy and efficiency of the district and keep municipalities, and other in the coordinated them in repair. political subdivisions development of a region. within their respective COGs develop plans and boundaries and corporate recommendations for the limits. development of the region, including public utilities, land use, drainage, etc.

Powers and Duties Authority has "all of the A COG may contract with Eminent domain to acquire Construct, maintain and Acquire land to construct rights, powers, privileges, a participating easements and right of way repair drainage facilities; regional flood control and authority, functions, and governmental unit to as well as fee simple to Eminent Domain (TWC § drainage projects; duties of a conservation perform a service in real property; County may 49.222); Levy property Eminent Domain (TWC § and reclamation district which the COG may contract with tax; Construct bridges 49.222); Tax property; under Art. XVI, § 59 of purchase or sell property, governmental unit, and culverts; may inter Adopt rules. District the Constitution and consult with and retain including municipality or into interlocal agreements engineer must prepare given by general law in experts, and apportion other county, or a with other subdivisions. detailed plan for district Chapters 49, 51, and 54 costs and expenses among drainage district, flood facilities before district of the Water Code." May members. control district, levee may acquire land or begin acquire any property improvement district, or construction. necessary to accomplish conservation and its purposes, both inside reclamation district, to and outside the Authority. jointly acquire right of way Eminent Domain (TWC § or construct a flood control 49.222). project.

Bond Authority Authority may issue COGs do not have bond The contracting agency, 40 year bonds may be Board may issue and sell bonds that may be sold authority. district, or municipality issued in name of district; bonds to acquire land and for cash at a private or may issue bonds payable refunding bonds require construct facilities; public sale, issued in from and secured by the election; district may Election required to issue exchange for property, or contract; ability to issue issue tax anticipation or bonds; Payment of issued to refund prior- bonds. bond anticipation notes. principal and interest of issued bonds. Issuance of bonds from property taxes bonds must be authorized on all taxable property in by resolution of the District. board. No election necessary.

APPENDIX G‐ 2 LRGV Regional EAP Decision Matrix - Future Entity

Lower Rio Grande Rio Grande Regional Valley Development Stormwater Control Governing Structure: Water Authority Council Counties Drainage Districts Districts Tax/Fee Authority Authority may impose a No tax power; Commissioners court must Board may levy tax on Authority to establish fees fee or assessment on any Participating hold referendum for voters property in district to pay and charges (TWC § member of the conference governmental units may to approve funding to an interest and principal on 49.212); Primary source or water user to pay for its appropriate funds to cover existing or proposed flood bonds; board can tax of revnue for operating expenses; Any county in COG's costs and control project; taxes may property in district for and tax bonds is property the authority may expenses; COGs may be levied (pursuant to Art. construction and tax; May issue three-year contribute county money apply for grants. VIII, §1-a) if majority maintenance fund; five- revenue notes without to support expenses of the approves project and year notes may be issued voter approval (TWC § Authority; Authority may increase in taxes. Voters payable from the 49.153). only impose fee on public may also vote to decrease maintenance tax; Districts or privat taxes. operating under Art. XVI, § 59 can levy taxes on "benefit basis" or uniform basis on each acre of land in district; Authority to establish fees and charges (TWC § 49.212); may issue three-year revenue notes w/o voter approval (TWC § 49.153).

Pros No election required for The Council already has No creation necessary; Quick creation, eminent Can be created issuance of bonds; been created and eminent domain power; domain power, options relatively quickly; Eminent domain power; includes relevant ability to levy taxes; for taxation and bonds, Flexible boundares, Specifically authorized constitutencies; ability to contract with may include territory which may include to undertake Mechanism for multiple other political outside of City. territory outside of a stormwater projects; political subdivisions subdivisions in order to single city or county. Includes multiple- and counties to plain share cost; bond Fairly broad bond and county area. joint projects. authority; ability to use tax authority. bonding authority of contracting subdivisions.

Cons Authority may not issue COGs do not have Projects require Tied to county A detailed plan for bonds or create regulatory power or the referendum approval to government officials -- construction of facilities indebtedness that would authority of cities, receive funding via taxes; without interlocal or land acquisition must be payable from ad counties, or local voters may deny projects agreements or be approved by TCEQ; valorem taxes on governments; No tax or or vote to decrease consolidation of District must convey property within the bond power; The entity funding; cooperative districts, likely cannot title to its facilities to Authority. itself does not have agreements likely be used outside of a county or counties upon eminent domain necessary to undertake county; Voter approval completion (TWC § authority; No specific projects in multiple of most tax and debt 66.216); election authority to control counties/municipalities. required. required to issue bonds. stormwater; ecisions of COGs are not binding on member governments; COG is required to maintain comprehensive development plan; Governor may develop rules relating to operation and oversight of a commission; annual auditing and reporting requirements to the state auditor.

APPENDIX G‐ 3 LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

APPENDIX H COLONIAS DOCUMENTATION

APPENDIX H Blank Page ADDENDUM: THE REGIONAL ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT PLAN COLONIAS REPORT

By: Mario Garcia, LRGVDC

Colonias can be found in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California, but Texas has both the largest number of colonias and the largest colonia population. Approximately 500,000 people live in colonias. Overall, the colonia population is predominately Hispanic; 64.4 percent of all colonia residents and 85 percent of those residents under 18 were born in the United States. There are more than 2,294 Texas colonias, located primarily along the state’s 1,248 mile border with Mexico. Approximately 1,400 of these colonias are located in the Rio Grande Valley.

HB 1001 (Chapter 979, regular session, 74th Leg.) revamped county regulation of platting in many counties in the border region. Its key feature was the enactment of a new Subchapter B of LGC Chapter 232. Subchapter B contains enhanced planning requirements (including requiring building or bonding to assure water and sewer services), utility connection limitations, advertising and disclosure provisions, and restrictions on the sale of lots (even platted lots) lacking water and sewer. Subchapter B initially applied in counties within 50 miles of the border having high unemployment and low per capita income. For 1995- 1998, seventeen counties were covered; for 1998-1999, 19 counties were covered. (Under a 1999 amendment, all 28 counties within 50 miles of the border are covered.) Within the affected counties, the special requirements of Subchapter B applied to subdivisions of four or more lots intended primarily for residential use outside city limits and outside the Chapter 42 ETJ of any municipality. For a subdivision that did not fall under Subchapter B, the more lax provisions of Subchapter A of Chapter 232 governed the county’s review and approval of the subdivision plat.

Other legislation, SB 336 (Chapter 994, regular session, 74th Leg.) amended and added Property Code provisions regarding the use of contracts for deeds or other executor contracts for property used or to be used as the purchaser’s residence. Enhanced notification requirements were imposed (statewide) before a seller may enforce the remedies of recession or of forfeiture and acceleration. A new subchapter E of Chapter 5 of the Property Code applies in high unemployment and low income counties within 200 miles of the border. It requires enhanced disclosures to purchasers (including in Spanish), annual accounting statements, limits on late fees, and protection of the purchaser’s equity. As required by the law, TDHCA has developed a consumer education program on contracts for deeds.

The development of Texas colonias dates back to at least the 1950s. Using agriculturally worthless land, land that lay in floodplains or other rural properties, developers created unincorporated subdivisions. They divided the land into small lots, put in little or no infrastructure, then sold them to low-income individuals seeking affordable housing.

It is estimated that there are currently approximately 350,000 colonia-residents in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. Hidalgo County is estimated at approximately 150,000 colonia-residents, 100,000 in Cameron County, and 15,000 in Willacy County. Close to half-million colonia-residents together have immense economic impact in today’s Rio Grande Valley economy. These colonia-residents have a cross-section of the workforce from farm workers to school teachers, from public school bus drivers to college students; they all live and work in the Rio Grande Valley. They have a huge buying power in the South Texas economy.

Colonia residents generally have very low incomes. Per capita annual income for all Texas counties bordering Mexico-where most of the colonias are located-tends to be much lower than the state average of $16,717. In border counties such as Starr, Cameron, and Hidalgo, per capita annual incomes in 1994 were $5,559, $7,631 and $8,899, respectively.

1 ADDENDUM: THE REGIONAL ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT PLAN COLONIAS REPORT

On July 2010, the Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council (LRGVDC) Regional Economic Adjustment Plan (LRGV Regional EAP) joint committees recommended to the Board of Directors, and it was discussed and approved, to include colonias as part of LRGV Regional EAP. The colonias are where a lot of the region’s workforce resides; economic impact in the region is massive.

The LRGVDC and the Regional EAP joint committees recognized the limited supply of adequate, affordable housing in cities and rural areas along the Texas-Mexico border, coupled with the rising need for such housing has contributed to the development of new colonias and the expansion of existing ones. People with low-incomes often buy the lots through a contract for deed, a property financing method whereby developers typically offer a low down payment and low monthly payments but no title to the property until the final payment is made. Houses in colonias are generally constructed in phases by their owners and may lack electricity, plumbing and other basic amenities. Colonia residents build homes as they can afford materials.

The colonias’ growth has challenged residents, as well as county, state and federal governments and others, to seek ways to provide basic water, drainage and sewer service and to improve the quality of life in the colonias. Local public funds and other resources are often limited and unable to provide service to the current and growing colonia population. Hidalgo County, which has the most colonias and largest number of colonia residents in Texas, is typical of many Lower Rio Grande Valley counties.

Because of the potentially serious consequences for public health and its effect on quality of life, one of the greatest concerns regarding the colonias is the lack of potable water, wastewater, and drainage infrastructure.

Many colonias do not have sewer systems. Instead, residents must rely on alternative, often inadequate wastewater disposal methods. Septic tank systems, which in some circumstances may provide adequate wastewater disposal, often pose problems because they are too small or improperly installed and can overflow. The problem is exacerbated by the poor quality of colonia roads, which are often unpaved and covered with caliche or their materials that prevent thorough drainage. During heavy rains, water collects because of inadequate drainage systems, elevation and topography. These conditions, combined with inadequate septic tanks, often result in sewage pooling.

Even if the colonias had adequate sewer systems, the border area lacks sufficient facilities to treat wastewater. In many places, there are no treatment facilities at all. Consequently, border communities often discharge untreated or inadequately treated wastewater drain into canals and arroyos (a creek or stream), which then flow into the Rio Grande or the Gulf of Mexico.

LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff recognized that the colonia-residents are among the key stakeholders. This is why staff collaborated with the Equal Voice Network (prominent non-profit organization, strong voice for colonia-residents and housing advocates). Ann Cass serves as Executive Director of Rio Grande Valley Equal Voice Network and is also a LRGV Regional EAP Steering Committee member. City of San Juan, Texas Commissioner Armando Garza Director of the Housing Policy Analysis (local housing non-profit agency) also serves on the LRGV Regional EAP Technical Committee. The LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff and the colonia housing advocates established a firm dialog. This dialog with the Equal Voice Network and the colonia-drainage outreach meetings were vital to meet the terms of the Fair Housing Act. The LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff also collaborated with the Texas Department of Rural Affairs (TDRA) Housing Disaster Recovery Program (see Appendix I).

2 ADDENDUM: THE REGIONAL ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT PLAN COLONIAS REPORT

The LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff coordinated several colonia-drainage meetings with Colonia Advocacy Group and colonia-residents. Staff held meetings for three different colonia groups (identified by Equal Voice) in Hidalgo County, one meeting in Willacy County that covered six colonias, and one meeting in Cameron County that covered one colonia. The LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff also met with the following entities in order to provide additional outreach for project collaboration: Rio Grande Valley Equal Voice Networks, PROYECTO AZTECA, Texas Organizing Projects (TOP), a Resource in Serving Equality (ARISE), La Union del Pueblo Entero (LUPE) and two planning meetings with South Texas Adult Resource and Training (START CENTER). These colonias agencies are described as follows:

RIO GRANDE VALLEY EQUAL VOICE NETWORK: In 2008, ten non-profit organizations funded by the Marquerite Casey Foundation formed the Rio Grande Valley Equal Voice Network. The organizations offer a variety of service to families that live in every part of the Valley. The more than 20,000 families associated with the organizations enjoy legal, medical, educational, and housing benefits that are offered by different agencies. The families’ commitment to the Equal Voice Network was forged in a series of town-hall meetings that took place in different parts of the Valley during the winter and spring 2008. Several hundred members of the organization made a long trip to Birmingham, Alabama, where they joined, via internet, with fifteen thousand others delegates assembled in Los Angeles and Chicago. These delegates succeeded in creating American Families’ political convention. The Equal Voice convention nominated no one for public office, nor did they seek to endorse a particular party or candidate. They did, however, create a national platform that represents the best interests of America’s working families. The Rio Grande Valley group took this platform back home, and created five working groups based on the values of the platform. They presently share the work on projects in the areas of housing, access to health care, education, immigration, and jobs. LRGVDC staff collaborated with Ann Cass Executive Director of the RGV Equal Voice Network on planning and coordinating colonia-drainage meetings in the region.

PROYECTO AZTECA: In 1991, the United Farm Workers of America, Texas Rural Legal Aid, and the Texas Low Income Housing Information Service came together and organized Proyecto Azteca to respond to the housing crisis in South Texas colonias located in Hidalgo County. In the first year, Proyecto Azteca organized construction with just four families. Over the years, Proyecto Azteca has gradually increased its production rate and its present construction rate is 35 to 60 homes per year. Today, Proyecto Azteca is a nationally recognized, community directed, self-help housing organization that has financed and trained more than 600 families in the construction and first time homeownership in over 150 Hidalgo County colonias. The LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff collaborated with Armando Garza Executive Director in planning meetings, as well as mapping and coordinating colonia-drainage meetings throughout the region.

ARISE: Arise is a community-based program that works with low income immigrant families to help them to create the future they wish for and mobilize themselves to be contributing members of society. They have different projects, classes and programs to help families in the LRGV. ARISE tries to instill leadership; ARISE doesn’t do for the people what the people can do for themselves. They come here following a dream, ARISE helps them to make that dream a reality. The LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff coordinated with Lourdes Flores Executive Director, Eva Soto (Community Organizer), Priscilla Rocha (Community Organizer), Ramona Casa (Community Organizer), and Jazmine Frances (Communication Coordinator).

TOP: TOP is a Texas-based, non-profit organization promoting social and economic equality for low to moderate income Texans through community and electoral organizing. The grassroots organizing efforts are anchored by dues-paying members who take ownership and have a personal stake in the success of an effort to better their neighborhoods and communities. TOP helps to empower members and their communities so that they can bring real change and improve the quality of life for their families. TOP has

3 ADDENDUM: THE REGIONAL ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT PLAN COLONIAS REPORT been working going door to door connecting with members of the community to see what challenges face their area. With six million Texans living without health insurance, the fifth highest poverty rate, and a student dropout rate at 33% statewide and 50% in urban areas, TOP provides low-moderate income Texans a vehicle to exercise their rights and responsibilities in the community and at the ballot box. TOP firmly believes that working together they can take neighborhoods to the TOP. The LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff coordinated with Esmeralda Zuniga (Community Organizer).

LUPE: Founded in 1989 by labor rights activist Cesar Chavez, LUPE is committed to building stronger, healthier communities where colonia residents have the power to effect social change through community organizing and civic engagement. The LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff coordinated with Daniel Diaz (Community Organizer).

START CENTER: The START Center strategy proactively assists the residents of the Rio Grande Valley in educational and life skill development while exploiting partnerships with government, foundations and other relevant stakeholders to gain access to additional financial resources to address growth and performance needs for the citizens and business community. The START Center Advocacy Initiative is dedicated to working with the community, network affiliates, policy-makers, English and Spanish language media, and the greater community to inform and elevate the dialogue around policy issues at the local, start and national level. START efforts focus on several strategies, including policy research, information gathering and sharing, advocating specific issues affecting low income families, coordinating and convening statewide networks, hosting and participating in local and regional, statewide events, and building the strength of low income families by advocating for civic participation.

All in all, the Colonia Drainage Outreach Meetings (held during the Summer of 2011) were helpful to identify drainage projects that directly impacted colonias, and in some cases identify drainage needs. Data was collected through a COLONIA AREA FLOODING QUESTIONAIRE – SURVEY formulated and implement by LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff. The content and/or questions on the questionnaire were economic development and workforce interrelated. Some of the data obtained is shown on the following pages.

LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

APPENDIX I TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF RURAL AFFAIRS PROJECTS

APPENDIX I LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regional Economic Adjustment Plan for Building Disaster Resilient Communities EDA Grant No. 08-79-04390

This Page Intentionally Blank

APPENDIX I Texas Department of Rural Affairs (TDRA) 2008 Supplemental Disaster Recovery Fund

In 2008 the LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff began the participation and coordination process for the TDRA 2008 Supplemental Disaster Recovery Fund. The primary focus of the TDRA program is to provide relief for those people impacted by Hurricanes Ike or Dolly while addressing recognized impediments to affirmatively furthering fair housing as required under the Fair Housing Act.

The LRGVDC Economic Development Department staff was given the responsibility of developing the Regional’s Method of Distribution (MOD) for Disaster Recovery Funding. Part of the integrated approach to disaster recovery, was the non-housing effort, which included improvements to drainage infrastructure. Drainage has been one of the largest outcries from citizens, communities and organizations as the most pressing need to reduce the likelihood of the repeat damage from inevitable future storm events. In the LRGV region, low income populations were severely impacted by flooding, particularly in rural areas. Drainage is a serious, pressing need for the county, reaching a level of need that could only be addressed using hurricane recovery funds.

A regional approach was utilized in determining need. The regional approach was necessary due to the interconnectedness of drainage infrastructure; the cause of flooding in one city could be the result of inadequate facilities downstream or upstream, outside of the city’s jurisdiction. Addressing improvements to inadequate drainage facilities provides an environment where it will be less likely that low-income households will need Federal Assistance funds to repair their homes because of flooding. The projects ultimately identified (included as part of this Appendix in the following pages) for the non-housing funds were based on local need identified through planning documents, and further verified during the public involvement process.

1 Blank Page

State of Texas Plan for Disaster Recovery

Council of Governments PARTIAL Method of Distribution for Round Two Disaster Recovery Supplemental Allocation

Summary Information

Contact Information Council of Governments: Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council

Principal Contact Name, Title: Kenneth N. Jones, Executive Director

Principal Contact Telephone: (956) 682‐3481

Principal Contact Email: [email protected]

Principal Contact Address: 311 N. 15th Street

City, State, Zip: McAllen, TX 78501

Allocation Summary Overall MOD Eligible for Allocation Under Partial MOD

Regional Allocation for All Activities: $185,515,915. $61,220,252.

Housing Activities Total: $106,925,787. $2,238,,725.

Non-Housing Activities Total: $63,481,528. $58,981,527.

Citizen Participation

Below is a description addressing how the Council of Governments complied with the Citizen Participation Plan regarrding citizen and non-governmental organization outreach, and any efforts exceeding TDRA minimum public participation requirements: The LRGVDC has scheduled three Public Hearings, one in each County (Cameron, Hidalgo & Willacy). LRGVDC is promoting written comments for those unable to attend the meetings. Notices for the Public Meetings will be advertised in local newspapers in English and Spanish and notice will also be published in local newspapers that are provided free of cost to the public. LRGVDC will also submit a public service announcement to all local news media. Notices will also be sent to CDBG Directors, housing agencies, housing authorities, emergency management staff, DHHS contacts annd many other interested entities.

LRGVDC will also schedule a meeting with housing groups to develop and finalize the draft MOD. All information pertaining to the MOD will be posted on LRGVDC Web site.

Posting and 15‐day Public Comment Period Information

Date MOD Posted: 07/30/2010 End Date of Comment Period: 08/20/2010 Public Hearing Information (Copy and paste this section for additional public hearings) 08/10/2010 Willacy County Courthouse, 576 W. Main St., Date/Time: Location: 10:00a.m. – 12:00 noon Raymondville, Texas Attendance: 13

Second Public Hearing Scheduling Information Date/Time: 08/11/10 Location: Transit Center, 510 S. Pleasantview Drive, 2:00 p.m. ‐ 4:00 p.m. Weslaco, Texas Attendance: 37 Third Public Hearing Scheduling Information Date/Time: 08/12/10 Location: Cameron County Courthouse, Exhibit Room 5:30 p.m. 1st Floor, 1100 E. Monroe, Brownsville, Texas Attendance: 20

Personal Notice. As required, personal notice was sent to eligible entities at least five days in advance of the public hearing using the following method(s) (at least one must be selected): Method Date Sent Documentation See the attached list of individuals receiving notification in this Electronic Mail 07/26/2010 manner, copy of the email, as well as the copy of the email sent to [email protected]. See the attached list of individuals receiving notification in this Fax 07/26/2010 manner, copy of the letter sent by fax, and the fax transmission receipts. See the attached list of individuals receiving notification in this Regular Mail 07/26/2010 manner, copy of the letter mailed. See the attached list of individuals receiving notification in this manner, copy of the letter given by hand-delivery, and a signature Hand Delivery sheet signed by a representative of the entity that the notice was received. See the attached list of individuals receiving notification in this Certified Mail manner, copy of the letter, and copies of each of the signed delivery receipts.

Internet Notice. As required, public notice was distributed on the Internet at least five days in advance using all of the following methods: Method Date Published Documentation See attached printed copy of the hearing notice on the website and the COG Website 07/27/2010 link emailed to [email protected]. Secretary of See attached printed copy of the hearing notice on the website and the 08/04/2010 State Website link emailed to [email protected].

Published Notice. As required, notice of the public hearing was published in at least one regional newspaper at least three days in advance. Notice of public hearing was published in the following regional newspaper(s): Newspaper Name Date Published Documentation The Monitor, Valley Morning Star, See attached copy of the hearing notice and a 07/28/2010 Raymondville Chronicle, publisher’s affidavit. Brownsville Herald Town Crier, La Feria News, See attached copy of the hearing notice and a San Benito News, 07/28/2010 publisher’s affidavit. The Advance News El Nuevo Heraldo 07/29/2010 See attached copy of the hearing notice and a

Progress Times 07/30/2010 publisher’s affidavit.

Citizen Comment Documentation The required copy of a sign-in sheet from the public hearing is attached.

A summary of the citizen comments and meeting discussion is attached. Describe any efforts to notify and accommodate Translation services will be available at all three public those with modified communication needs, such as hearings. Public Service announcements will be posting information and providing interpretive submitted to all local media (Spanish & English). Notice services for other languages. will be posted on local newspapers free to the public.

The COG specifically targeted organizations representing protected classes of individuals and interested in fair housing issues to gain additional perspective on fair housing and civil rights issues in the region, and how the people they represent were affected by Hurricanes Dolly and/or Ike. The COG employed approaches beyond simple written notification of public hearings. The methods used to contact, the organizations, and the issues identified by those discussions are discussed below:

In addition to the public hearings, LRGVDC sent public service announcements to all local media on the MOD. LRGVDC Executive Director provided interviews at local radio & TV stations on the issue. LRGVDC Staff also met with sever nonprofit organizations such as Valley Interfaith, Proyecto Azteca, etc to discuss the MOD. LRGVDC also responded to several inquiries from citizens via email and phone on the MOD.

Long‐Term Planning and Recovery

The following is an explanation of the region’s method of distribution fosters long-term community recovery that is forward-looking and focused on permanent restoration of infrastructure, housing and the local economy.

The Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council, along with Advisory Committees reviewing all Dolly related issues have determined that addressing the flooding and drainage problems is the over‐riding regional priority to better serve all communities within the three County Region. The LRGVDC reviewed the “Cover the Border Hazard Mitigation Plan for Rio Grande Border’ (2007‐2012) and Drainage Studies provided by Cameron, Hidalgo and Willacy County Drainage Districts. The LRGVDC will be submitting “Project Specific” projects for this region to address these issues. Most of the housing and non‐housing damage that occurred during Hurricane Dolly was due to flooding and these projects will address the failure‐to‐function issues and prevent further flooding in the region.

In an effort to truly achieve a sustainable long‐term recovery, LRGVDC will target portions of the housing funds to compliment the regional drainage system. In addition, LRGVDC will pursue, if deemed necessary after further study of housing needs, development of a floodplain hazard area buyout program that incentivizes relocation out of areas at severe risk for a future disaster, provided that the households and employers were affected by Hurricane Dolly. Furthermore, LRGVDC will develop, if deemed necessary after further study of housing needs, individual mitigation measures, such as elevating structures, to make residential properties less prone to damage. These programs including funding levels are further discussed in the housing program design.

Despite efforts to target funding toward creating a resilient built environment, the region still has unmet recovery needs. Many of these needs impact long‐term recovery, with region’s ambitious goals of reducing the regional impact of flooding so as to avoid repeat damage in future disasters, the region still has unmet recovery needs. As shown with the drainage system, approximately $50 million is still needed to complete the major drainage needs of the region as a direct result of Hurricane Dolly.

Based on public hearing feedback, the region suspects the nearly $105 million allocated toward housing will still not be sufficient to address long‐term recovery. Buyouts and individual mitigation measures are expensive. In addition, many affordable rental housing providers have indicated desires to relocate and harden facilities, which can be expensive.

The following documents related to civil rights, fair housing and community development activities were reviewed as part of the effort to inform this method of distribution:

The 2006 TDHCA Community Needs Survey Report The 2008 TDHCA Market Analysis of the McAllen‐Edinburg‐Mission and the Brownsville‐Harlingen MSA The 2006 TDHCA Report on Migrant Labor Housing Facilities in Texas The 2005 TDHCA Report on Housing Needs of Texans with Disabilities The 2009‐2014 LRGVDC Regional Strategic Plan The 3‐5 Year Rio Grande Valley Strategic Plan (HUD Consolidated Plan of all entitlement jurisdictions)

A summary of key findings and themes from the civil rights, fair housing and community development activities documents appear below:

The existing Statewide Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing identifies a number of statewide issues, though they have varying levels of impact on the Lower Rio Grande Valley. Statewide issues include: lack of funding available for affordable housing (particularly below 30% AMI), lack of affordable housing stock to meet growing demand, limited organizational capacity in rural areas, NIMBY‐ism when affordable housing projects are proposed, zoning practices that increase construction costs to the point that affordable housing projects are no longer financially feasible, inconsistent building codes between jurisdictions, restricted construction options (optimal value engineering, manufactured housing, etc.), impact fees, overlapping authorities within the construction process, environmental regulations, low rural median incomes, difficulty entitling housing for special needs populations (group homes & institutions), higher insurance rates for less coverage for minority/low‐income populations, ignorance of fair housing laws (organizations as well as individuals), lack of universal design in many existing affordable units, large unmet need for multi‐bedroom affordable housing for large families, substandard housing for migrant workers and in colonias, and deterioration of and lack of new public housing units.

Local documents indicate some statewide issues are present in the region, while others are not or fail to reach a level to negatively affect fair housing. As expected, there was only limited discussion of infrastructure. However, inadequate drainage infrastructure was cited as a key contributor to creating an unsafe environment for low‐income persons, particularly in rural subdivisions and colonias (which are further exacerbated by poor water, sewer and transportation infrastructure). Poor roads, drainage and utilities were also cited as a significant issue in developing and improving housing for migrant workers. Migrant housing was also affected by lack of financial support to develop new or improve existing facilities, substandard construction, lack of appropriate zoning, and NIMBY‐ism.

The documents were far more revealing for housing. Low educational attainment and limited job skills were listed as a primary reason for populations to remain in the low income category. A lack of affordable rental housing, particularly multi‐bedroom low‐income housing for large families is a serious issue in the region. In addition, there is a scarcity of land that could be developed easily for affordable housing (appropriate drainage improvements will help address this scarcity). Rising costs for rehabilitation are a key market issue affecting fair housing, especially the rising cost of materials. Unlike some regions, the Lower Rio Grande Valley does not face many issues related to zoning or building codes excluding protected groups or negatively affecting fair housing. One city was mentioned as having a minimum lot size that could discourage affordable housing. Most of the cities and counties have similar building codes (International Building Code) with similar or identical local amendments. Likewise, many of the zoning regulations are similar between jurisdictions, helping to create an environment for each community to support its regional fair share of affordable housing and encourage equal treatment of protected classes.

There is also a lack of knowledge about fair housing laws and regulations, both within organizations related to housing and citizens, which creates higher risk of violations and violations going unreported. In addition, there appears to be a public culture of fear/skepticism of government programs (too good to be true, etc.). Method of Distribution Between Housing and Non‐Housing Activities

The split between housing and non-housing activities should be 55% and 45%, respectively, between the activities for the region’s combined Round One and Round Two total allocations. The State of Texas Plan for Disaster Recovery – Amendment No. 1 for the Round Two provides the appropriate amounts by COG to achieve this activity split. COGs are reminded that grantees and subrecipients for funding must comply with all applicable Federal requirements, including, but not limited to, the Civil Rights Act and other associated anti-discrimination laws, the Fair Housing Act, and the state’s requirement to ensure at least 55 percent of all Disaster Recovery Supplemental

5 funds serve the “benefiting low and moderate income persons” national objective. While the Partial MOD did not require a particular breakdown between housing and non-housing, the COG has explained below why it chose to split housing and non-housing funds as it did for the Partial MOD and ensure any breakdown of housing or non- housing funds remains consistent with the Plan. This discussion is consistent with findings from document research discussed in long-range planning and feedback from housing and civil rights organizations. Drainage improvements related to flooding during Hurricane Dolly are continually mentioned in local media and public meetings as a major need given its contribution to damage and failure to function of other facilities and housing. In the region, low‐income populations were severely impacted by flooding, particularly in rural areas (though the flooding was widespread and affected all urbanized areas as well). Drainage is a serious, pressing need for the region, reaching a level of need that can only be addressed using hurricane recovery funds. LRGVDC is pursuing development of housing programs to compliment the drainage improvements, and plans to target a portion of the future housing funds toward the service areas of the drainage projects. This effort will result in both the reduction of risk to housing in future hurricane and flood events and eventually the improvement of affordable housing stock in the region. By addressing the drainage, it is less likely that low‐income households will have a need for Federal assistance funds to repair homes as a result of flooding in future events. In short, the drainage improvements are necessary to achieve an acceptable level of resiliency and sustainability in the use of housing funds—they are intertwined.

The regional approach to drainage was necessary due to the interconnectedness of drainage infrastructure in the region—the cause of flooding in one city could be the result of an inadequate facility further downstream, outside of the city’s jurisdiction, causing a backup. The projects identified are consistent with recommendations in the long‐range plans. Also, the drainage facilities serve to address some of the impediments to fair housing, as it should result in the following:

 Improvement of flooding issues in low‐income rural subdivisions and colonias, a commonly cited contributor to substandard housing  Reduced flood risk to low‐income and minority populations, which should reduce insurance costs  Ease development of new/improved affordable housing through the reduction of flood risk, thus addressing issues with scarcity of land available for affordable housing

Additionally, it is preferable to address the cause of so much housing damage in the region, flooding, first so that investments in housing can be more lasting and resilient.

The LRGVDC attempted to conduct a survey among local entities to try to determine or identify the specific needs for housing and the numbers submitted could not be verified. Given LRGVDC’s lack of experience in developing and administering housing programs, coupled with difficulties in accurately identifying housing need related to the hurricane, LRGVDC has chosen in the Partial MOD to fund housing to a level to allow the hiring of a consultant and staff to develop the organizational capacity necessary to develop appropriate housing programs for the region. This will allow more accurate assessment of needs, allow the region to efficiently contribute information to the new State Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing being developed, educate local organizations and citizens in regards to fair housing, and ensure effective implementation of housing programs consistent with the Federal obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. The LRGVDC expects it would take a couple of months to develop housing program designs, and would prefer to include any findings of the new State Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing along with improved local knowledge of housing issues directly related to the disaster before proceeding. The LRGVDC will adopt a regional approach to disaster recovery housing programs in an effort to address issues present in the various fair housing documents reviewed. This regional approach will help ensure housing needs are addressed throughout the area, achieve economies of scale, ensure program consistency given the fragmented political jurisdictions, and build organizational capacity.

Non‐Housing Method of Distribution Detail

The Council of Governments is required to prepare a method of distribution for non-housing activity funds between the eligible entities. TDRA has directed the COG to use a direct allocation technique based on objective, verifiable data. For the partial MOD, the COG must prioritize the grantees so that back-up applications are available in case of disqualification. This ensures funding through the partial MOD process is utilized and available to communities as fast as possible. The Method of Distribution clearly identifies appropriate national objectives for each activity type, the entities eligible to serve as grantees and contract with TDRA, supports minimum allocation amounts that help ensure project feasibility and provides an explanation of the distribution factors selected.

In selecting funding distribution factors and grantees to receive partial funds, the COG was mindful of the Federal obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. The COG has indicated how it has considered fair housing in developing its non-housing method of distribution as well as how the factors direct funds toward those communities most likely to have locally-determined priority projects that cannot proceed without Hurricane Recovery Funds. The COG also considered that only locally-identified priority projects meeting the LMI national objective would be considered during the Partial MOD application cycle. Discussion is given below:

Local Need and Fair Housing Consideration in Non‐Housing Distribution Drainage has been continually identified by citizens, communities and organizations as the most pressing need to reduce the likelihood of repeat damage in the inevitable future storm events. In the region, low‐ income populations were severely impacted by flooding, particularly in rural areas (though the flooding was widespread and affected all urbanized areas as well). Drainage is a serious, pressing need for the region, reaching a level of need that can only be addressed using hurricane recovery funds. The projects listed in the non‐housing distribution are based on local need identified through recent drainage planning documents developed regionally, further verified during the citizen participation process. This effort will result in both the reduction of risk to housing in future hurricane and flood events and eventually the improvement of affordable housing stock in the region. By addressing the drainage, it is less likely that low‐income households will have a need for Federal assistance funds to repair homes as a result of flooding in future events.

The projects identified are consistent with recommendations in the long‐range plans. Also, the drainage facilities serve to address some of the impediments to fair housing, as it should result in the following:  Improvement of flooding issues in low‐income rural subdivisions and colonias, a commonly cited contributor to substandard housing  Reduced flood risk to low‐income and minority populations, which should reduce insurance costs  Ease development of new/improved affordable housing through the reduction of flood risk, thus addressing issues with scarcity of land available for affordable housing

Repair Weirs/Bridges & Bank Erosion & connecting outfall laterals in and around Sebastian area was not fully‐funded in the Partial MOD. In discussions with the local drainage districts, it was determined that given the limited funds available in the Partial MOD, a portion of this project could wait until the Full MOD is prepared. This was based on the shorter construction schedule necessary for the portion of the project removed from the Partial MOD.

Project Specific Distributions From the State’s experience with Hurricanes Ike and Dolly and examples from other states, the state has determined that the citizens and communities of Texas can derive long-term, cost-effective benefits by introducing a comprehensive and holistic approach to selecting, planning, funding and implementing certain disaster recovery projects. Recognizing that the regional impact of the storms may lead to identification of regional projects affecting

7 multiple entities, TDRA has allowed the Council of Governments to make direct allocations to specific regional projects under limited circumstances. These projects must be of significant scope beyond what may be achieved regionally through the distribution formula. There must be documented regional agreement of the need and willingness to accept lesser local formulaic allocations in order to address regional need. Examples include regionalized sheltering and drainage programs benefiting multiple jurisdictions. The Council of Governments has identified the following project(s) for a Project Specific Distribution:

Project Name Detailed Description, Assigned Grantee Estimated Cost Estimate* Amount including National Beneficiaries Funded by Objective and Storm 1st Phase Relationship Repair Drainage improvements Hidalgo/Willacy Hidalgo/ $14,834,290. $10,334,290. Weirs/Bridges & in and around the County Bank Erosion & community of Sebastian Willacy connecting and surrounding area to Inter-local with appropriate Total: outfall laterals in include other local 132,320 and around jurisdictions which failed Drainage District Sebastian area. to function during or local LMI: 58.03% Hurricane Dolly. Also, jurisdiction repair to the two county main floodways and north and south main drain consisting of bank scour repair of main floodway, main floodway upstream and downstream embankment scour repair on the downstream of the weir. Riprap repair and severe bank failures downstream of weir, as well as all associated structures.

Raymondville Clean existing ditches of Willacy County Willacy $3,162,500. $3,162,500. Drain & proposed Raymondville County Connecting Drain project for flood Inter-local with Outfall laterals control, from Delta Lake Irrigation District Total:16,969 or appropriate Irrigation District’s LMI: 63.47% lateral L-5 to the Laguna Drainage District Madre in Hidalgo & or local Willacy Counties. Project jurisdiction includes construction activities for cleaning existing ditches; project

length is approximately 45.5. The project is located in Hidalgo & Willacy Counties, beginning northeast of Edinburg and ending near just south of Port Mansfield at the Laguna Madre.

Drain “A” The drainage system Cameron County Cameron $2,825,500. $2,825,500. Widening & which drains the area County connecting from Rio Grande River, Inter-local with laterals near Los Indios, and the Respective Total: eastern side of the City of Drainage District 42,418 San Benito, is deficient in or local Jurisdiction LMI: capacity. With continued 54.05% development over the years this channel failed to function during Hurricane Dolly and proven inadequate and the section of Drain “A” from US Expressway 77/83, north to County Road 596. The proposed project is to widen the existing channel to a 50’ bottom width, where it currently is approximately 10’ wide. A section of the drain where the right of way is restricted is proposed to be concrete lined. One bridge will be removed at County Road 596 and the existing bridge at FM510 will need to be widened. Right of Way for the widening of the drain is also required. Project specific location is generally east and north of the city of San Benito in Cameron County,

Texas. The project extends from US Expressway 77/83 in San Benito, northeast of County Road 596 a distance of approximately 4.3 miles. The project is within a number of subdivisions but lies principally within the City of San Benito city limits and is mostly located outside of incorporated areas.

Tio Cano/Tamm Drainage improvements City of La Feria Cameron $18,474,242. $18,474,242. Lane/Southwest in and around La Feria County Drain to include which failed to function Inter-local with appropriate Total: Santa Rosa during Hurricane Dolly. connections A portion of the project is Drainage District 14,082 or local located inside the city LMI: 51.14% limits of La Feria and the Jurisdiction

remainder outside the city limits of La Feria.

Tamm Lane drainage ditch improvement entails land acquisition and the design and City of Santa Rosa construction of the $500,000. $500,000. drainage system ditch to include Santa Rosa drainage improvements, ($500,000.) Jesus avila outfall 48” rcp, inlets, 1st street outfall, 36” rcp & inlets.

Drainage improvements will extend from the Cameron County Drainage District #5 southwest drain to the low lying area at Hoss Lane. Improvements will include the construction of storm sewer, a drain

ditch and road closings. Project location is outside of the city limits of Harlingen, just east of Tamm Lane, in Survey 296 of the Leelands subdivision.(Census tract #120).

Peñitas Drain Peñitas Drainage Hidalgo County Hidalgo $4,674,450. $4,674,450. Basin(Expressway 83- County Tom Gill Road) Ditch Inter-local with Excavation, 8’x6’ Box Hidalgo County Total:11,574 Drainage District culvert, 8’x6’ Box LMI: 57.01% culvert(Jack & Bore No. 1. Expwy. 83), 8’x6’ Box Culvert Jack & Bore District No 6 Canal), 72” RCP(Jack & Bore Tom Gill Road, Concrete Rip Rap (Erosion Protection), 72” Headwall, 8’x6’ Headwall

South Fork Drain Phase I – Right of way Hidalgo County Hidalgo $4,166,252. $4,166,252. acquisition cost County Inter-local with Phase II – Excavation Hidalgo County Total: 1,907 (channel), trench Drainage District excavation protection, No 1. LMI: 84.60% concrete rip-rap, concrete box (5’x5’), concrete box (7’x6’), concrete box (8’x7’), concrete box (8’x8’), concrete box (10’x8’), 6’x6’ gated box structure @ibwc levee, gates for 6’x6’ gated box structure, 18” rcp field drain, concrete headwall, concrete weir @ tributary junctions, irrigation pipes (18”) (rclhpp), irrigation stand pipes (18”)

Phase I & Phase II

addresses failure to function during Hurricane Dolly.

Pharr-McAllen Basic Project – Hidalgo County Hidalgo $1,031,581. $1,031,581. South Drain Barricades & signs, rock County filter dams (install) (ty Inter-local with 3), rock filter dams Hidalgo County Total: (remove), temporary Drainage District 23,188 No. 1. sediment control fence. LMI: 51.79% Preparing Right of Way, dewatering (cofferdam), riprap (conc) (cl-b). Roadway construction – proof rolling,, cement treatment, cement, roadway base (flex base). Structures – excavation, backfill (flowable backfill), concrete structures, conc box culv (8’x8’ box), reinforced concrete pip (36” diameter), conc headwall (sw-o) (hw=8’), conc headwall (pw-15) (hw=8’), sluice gates, grates & frame (5.5’x20’), ladder, clean exist culvs.

Connection Combes ($1,000,000.) – Town of Combes Cameron $1,000,000. $1,000.000. Between SW Area Ditch widening, County Municipal Ditch widening & Total: 9,285 Communities & grading, pavement Drainage replacement, 6” LMI:52.17% stabilized subgrade, 8” flexible base, & culvert replacement.

Primera ($1,000,000.) – City of Primera $1,000,000. $1,000,000. Stuart Place Road, regrade road ditch, culvert adjustment, west primera road, re-grade road ditch, culvert adjustment, street culvert crossings,

drainage outfall grading,

& lantana court drainage.

Rio Hondo ($1,000,000.) City of Rio Hondo $1,000,000. $1,000,000. – Madero outfall, 36” rcp, grate inlets, junction box, 72” bore & casing, pavement repair, outfall structure, Robert Garza Storm sewer, 36” rcp, 24” rcp, grate inlets, regrade road ditches, connection structures, pavement repair, & driveway replacement.

Delta Area Channel Excavation, Hidalgo County Hidalgo $5,236,790. $5,236,790. Connector & hydro-mulching for Inter-local with County Connecting erosion control, 8’x8’ appropriate laterals reinforced concrete box, Drainage District Total: 3,249 5” concrete riprap & or local LMI: storm water connections. jurisdiction 71.47%

East Line Drain & The east line drain Cameron County Cameron $4,798,401. $4,798,401. Relief improvements project County entails the design and Inter-local with construction of widening appropriate Total: 7,449 of an existing drainage Drainage District or Local LMI: ditch. The proposed 61.85% project will commence at Jurisdiction FM 1516 (Fresnal Road) and will extend North a distance of 9.4 miles of FM 2925.

The east line relief drain improvements project entails the design and construction of widening and existing drainage ditch. The proposed east line relief drain improvements project will commence North of San Fernando, east road located approximately 0.5 mile east of FM 2925. The project will then

extend in north eastern direction of distance of 7.1 miles to Arroyo Colorado.

J-09 Channel The J-09 Channel is a Applicant: Hidalgo $11,502,229. $777,521. Project drainage improvement Hidalgo County County project to provide flooding relief in Hidalgo Inter-local with Total: County directly north and Hidalgo County 10,545 west of Edinburg. The Drainage District No. 1. LMI: Channel limits are from 60.53% the North Main Drain to County Road 3601 approximately following the Mile 11 North alignment. One significant deviation is at Lone Star citrus Farms where the channel follows existing drainage ditches north around the edge of the property and back down to just north of Mile 11. The construction project consists of an open channel and culverts that run along both existing ditches and virgin ground to outfall into a major existing drainage channel. Total project costs include engineering, geotechnical, survey, ROW, and appraisal costs.

East Lateral The East Lateral Drain is Benefit: Hidalgo $17,915,479. -0- Improvements a flood and drainage Cameron/Hidalgo County improvement project & Willacy located in southeast Total: 9,610

Hidalgo County near the LMI: towns of Elsa, Edcouch Applicant: 73.65% and La Villa, Texas. The Hidalgo County proposed channel begins on the Mercedes Lateral Inter-local with

channel and outfalls into Hidalgo County the main floodway. The Drainage District East Lateral drain will No. 1. involve approximately 7.54 miles of channel improvements. The purpose of the East Lateral Drain is to relieve local flooding in the area due to inadequate drainage along with the flat terrain that is prevalent in the region. This construction will address disaster damages caused by hurricane Dolly and thereby alleviating additional damages to these areas.

Rancho Grande Immediately after Cameron County Cameron $9,071,211. -0- South Hurricane Dolly in County Precinct 4 the area Inter-local with surrounding La Tierra appropriate Total: 7,085 was under water due to Drainage District or Local LMI: the drainage system not 54.96% being able to handle the Jurisdiction amount of rain experienced. Residents in this area experienced from 1 to 3 feet of water in their homes. The project entails land acquisition, design and construction of the drainage system ditch.

Hardin Ranch This project is located in Cameron County Cameron $1,300,000. -0- Cameron County from County Bouldin Road (East of Inter-local with appropriate Total: 3,552 Combes) to FM 1420. Replacement of crossing Drainage District or Local LMI: on Hardin Ranch Drain to 52.46% alleviate flooding that Jurisdiction occurred from Hurricane Dolly.

San Benito Two lateral drains (A1” & Cameron County Cameron $3,125,000. -0- Lateral Drains A2”) situated Inter-local with County perpendicular to drain Drainage District “A” are deficient in or local Total: 1,898 capacity and failed to jurisdiction LMI: 65% function during hurricane Dolly. Lateral drain “A1” is approximately 9,000 feet in length. It begins near the intersection of McColloch St. & U.S. Business 77 and terminates at drain “A”. Lateral drain “A2” is approximately 9,000 feet in length. I begins near the intersection of McColloch St. & Batts Street and terminates at Drain “A”. Storm sewers (30” – 60” in diameter), are proposed upstream of drain “A2”. Due to limited space in some areas of drains “A2 & A2”, concrete channel lining is proposed. Space limitations are due to existing irrigation canal and railroad.

Brownsville Project will remove City of Cameron $8,000,000. -0- approximately two Brownsville County hundred thousand cubic yards (200,000) c.y.) of excavated material, Total : 3,727 install approximately twenty thousand cubic LMI: 62% yards (20,000 c.y.) of compacted fill material, three hundred linear feet (300 l.f.) concrete riprap weir structure, on hundred linear feet (100 l.f.) concrete riprap weir

structure, one hundred linear feed (100 l.f.) of twenty four inch (24 in.) diameter RCP, two each (2 e.a.) of twenty four inch concrete headwall with flap gate, seven hundred and fifty linear feet (750 l.f.) of 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk, one thoughsand linear feet (1,000 l.f.) of 9 foot wide caliche access road, four thousand square yards (4,000 s.y.) HMAC pavement repair, native seeding approximately thirty (30) acres of disturbed area, fifty thousand square feed (50,000 s.f.) of wetland plantings and associated appurtenances. Proposed improvements will provide approximately 130 acre feet of additional storm water storage for the City of Brownsville North Main Drain.

Explanation:

The Representatives from the three counties and the cities within met to develop a regional approach to drainage to address the flooding and drainage issues. Representatives agree that addressing these flooding issues will not only address the Dolly impacted flooding areas, but will ultimately address flooding issues and long term planning and recovery, and economic sustainability. The Building Disaster Resilient Communities Planning Committee was created and charged with the development of the regional drainage project for the non‐housing allocation was the, which is comprised of members appointed from the LRGVDC Board of Directors and the Rio Grande Regional Water Authority (RGRWA). All the members of the various committees have been directly involved in the development of individual local drainage plans within their respective districts and communities and will also be instrumental in the development of the Regional Master Drainage Plan that will cover Cameron, Hidalgo, Starr, and Willacy Counties.

To provide an opportunity for cities to access funds, the committee members made contact with individual cities and drainage districts to determine their needs and root causes of the drainage system failures. Using the committee, which included drainage experts and community development professionals,

LRGVDC developed a regional drainage project and strategy totaling approximately $106,000,000. To address funding constraints and the need for a Unit of General Local Government to serve as the grantee, the committee broke the regional drainage project into separate sub‐projects, targeting those sub‐projects that would address the root issues and benefit multiple jurisdictions. Factors that were taken into consideration by the Building Disaster Resilient Communities Planning Committee for the prioritization of the drainage sub‐projects were; the areas that received the majority of the impact and flooding during Hurricane Dolly based on total precipitation, Low Moderate Income (LMI) that the sub‐project(s) would serve, and whether the drainage sub‐project(s) was ready for implementation within the allotted two‐year TDRA timeframe. Upon completion of the proposed regional drainage sub‐projects list, the Disaster Recovery Advisory Committee (DRAC) gave a final recommendation to the LRGVDC Board of Directors. The sub‐project ranking is included with the MOD submission.

As a result, focusing on an interconnected, regionalized drainage system represents the most advantageous use of federal funds to achieve long‐term recovery and resilience. Many comments received at the public meetings were related to flooding problems and homes that received major damage due to flooding (see “Common Themes of Public Comment” section). The LRGVDC has identified the sub‐project(s) of the regional drainage project listed above for a Project Specific Distribution to resolve the failure to function drainage issues. A total of fifteen (15) sub‐projects have been identified for a total funding amount of $105,668,725. While the 15 sub‐projects function as part of a single regional drainage project, they are listed separately to provide greater detail and more accurate cost estimates and beneficiaries. In addition, the separate listing allows the COG to properly assign portions of the drainage project to each county as the unit of general local government to serve as grantee. Though the value of all projects exceeds available non‐housing funds, LRGVDC has listed the projects in priority order in case additional funds become available. If one of the recommended sub‐projects is determined ineligible, then the funding shall be allocated to the next recommended project. With the region’s ambitious goals of reducing the regional impact of flooding so as to avoid repeat damage in future disasters, the region still has unmet recovery needs. As shown with the drainage system, approximately $50 million is still needed to complete the major drainage needs of the region. Additional drainage needs not submitted remain throughout the region. Should available funding exist after all submitted projects have been considered the LRGVDC will submit additional drainage projects focused on direct municipal drainage needs.

A map of all projects is included with the Method of Distribution submission.

* Cost estimate attached and prepared by a relevant professional

Determination of Grantees The processes and factors used to determine which grantees will receive funds under this partial MOD are described below. If separate factors were used to select grantees than the factors used to make the allocations, then they are indicated below.

Describe process:

Determination of grantees was based on the jurisdiction of the sub‐project and capacity to administer the grant while achieving economies of scale and efficiency. As the Partial MOD for non‐housing is project‐ specific, a formulaic approach was not appropriate for assigning grantees.

Distribution Factor Weight Documentation Source Explanation of Factor Selection and Weighting LMI percentage for entity HUD Census Information from the TDRA requires LMI percentage for TDRA Website the entity be included in the distribution factors. This factor recognizes the likely limited resources of entities with large low- moderate income populations.

Funding Distribution Factors The Council of Governments has selected the following distribution factors to allocate funds under the partial MOD: Distribution Factor Weight Documentation Source Explanation of Factor Selection and Weighting LMI percentage for entity 10 HUD Census Information from the TDRA requires LMI percentage for TDRA Website the entity be included in the distribution factors. This factor recognizes the likely limited resources of entities with large low- moderate income populations. Estimated Number of 20 Service maps of each subproject Assess the regional nature of each Units of General Local subproject and how it addresses the Government Benefitting needs of multiple jurisdictions. Project connectivity to 10 Service maps of all projects Assure that sub-projects that are others necessary to the success of other sub-projects are implemented to ensure maximum benefit in reducing damage/failure-to-function is achieved. Total Beneficiaries 20 HUD Census Information Maximize the number of persons directly benefitting from each subproject funded—regional impact Readiness to proceed 30 Level of study completed Score given for level of completion of design:  Preliminary detail plans  Concept and some detail plans  Concept plan only

All allocations must meet or exceed a floor of $75,000 to help ensure sufficient funds for at least one eligible project.

Eligible Activities Grantee activities must be specifically related to Hurricane Ike and/or Dolly, and must meet the following criteria:  Activity must be a CDBG-eligible project;  Activity must be in response to a Hurricane Ike and/or Dolly related impact in one of the following ways: o Direct verifiable damage from the storm that requires improvement of conditions, or o The facilities must have failed to function in the normal capacity as a result of the storm.  The COG has added a stipulation that projects must meet a regionally-established recovery priority. The Council of Governments has addressed prioritization of eligible activities as follows: The Council of Governments has chosen not to limit Grantees in the region to projects meeting regional

priority activities. ‐OR‐ The Council of Governments has limited Grantees in the region to selecting projects meeting the following

regional priority activities: Water Facilities Specially Authorized Public Facilities & Improvements Sewer Facilities Public Services Other Public Utilities (gas, et al) Clearance & Demolition Activities Street Improvements Code Enforcement Flood and Drainage Improvements Specially Authorized Assistance to Private Utilities Debris Removal Economic Development Community Centers and Emergency Shelters Planning and Urban Environmental Design Senior Centers Fire Protection Facilities and Equipment Parks, Playgrounds and other Recreational Facilities

In addition to the priorities selected above, the following activity types are considered priorities due to their relationship in delivering all other activities:  Acquisition, including buyouts  Relocation Payments and Assistance  Engineering and Architectural Services  Planning and Project Delivery

The State of Texas has received a limited waiver for buildings for the general conduct of government which allows the State to fund the rehabilitation or reconstruction of public buildings that are otherwise ineligible and that the state selects in accordance with its approved Action Plan for Disaster Recovery and that the state has determined have substantial value in promoting disaster recovery. TDRA has received additional guidance from HUD that this limited waiver was not intended to include all general conduct of government activities. HUD has further particularly identified fueling stations, points of distribution (PODs), precinct barns, and emergency operation centers (EOC) as general conduct of government activities that will remain ineligible for supplemental CDBG funding. Additional examples of common ineligible activities include:  Purchase of construction equipment  Operation and maintenance expenses  Duplicate projects  Projects that do not comply with local, district, state and/or federal regulations

Parks, playgrounds and other recreational facilities are eligible activity types, but may not use the Urgent Need National Objective.

Housing Method of Distribution Detail

The Council of Governments is required to prepare a method of distribution for housing activity funds between the eligible entities. TDRA has directed the COG to use a direct allocation technique based on objective, verifiable data. For the partial MOD, the COG must prioritize the grantees so that back-up applications are available in case of disqualification. This ensures funding through the partial MOD process is utilized and available to communities as fast as possible. The Method of Distribution clearly identifies the entities eligible to serve as grantees and contract with TDHCA, supports minimum allocation amounts that help ensure project feasibility, provides an explanation of the distribution factors selected, and identifies an appropriate reallocation process for any unused or ineligible funds.

In selecting funding distribution factors and grantees to receive partial funds, the COG was mindful of the Federal obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. The COG has indicated how it has considered fair housing in developing its housing method of distribution as well as how the factors direct funds toward those communities most likely to have locally-determined priority programs that cannot proceed without Hurricane Recovery Funds, keeping in mind the requirement that Partial MOD programs be locally-identified priorities. Discussion is given below:

Local Need and Fair Housing Consideration in Non‐Housing Distribution As discussed earlier, the LRGVDC attempted to conduct a survey among local entities to try to determine or identify the specific needs for housing and the numbers submitted could not be verified. Given LRGVDC’s lack of experience in developing and administering housing programs, coupled with difficulties in accurately identifying housing need related to the hurricane, LRGVDC has chosen in the Partial MOD to fund housing to a level to allow the hiring of a consultant and staff to develop the organizational capacity necessary to develop appropriate housing programs for the region. This will allow more accurate assessment of needs, allow the region to efficiently contribute information to the new State Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing being developed, educate local organizations and citizens in regards to fair housing, and ensure effective implementation of housing programs consistent with the Federal obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. The LRGVDC expects it would take a couple of months to develop housing program designs, and given that issue, would prefer to include any findings of the new State Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing along with improved local knowledge of housing issues directly related to the disaster before proceeding. The LRGVDC will adopt a regional approach to disaster recovery housing programs in an effort to address issues present in the various fair housing documents reviewed. This regional approach will help ensure housing needs are addressed throughout the area, achieve economies of scale, ensure program consistency given the fragmented political jurisdictions, and build organizational capacity. Issues identified in the various documents related to fair housing will be provided to the staff and consultant to develop housing programs in a manner that those issues can be addressed in conjunction with housing recovery associated with Hurricane Dolly.

Funds provided in the Partial MOD will be used to hire a consultant and staff to develop appropriate housing programs for the region and work with the State on its Analysis of Impediments, ensuring that any findings from it are addressed in the region’s housing programs. This will allow rapid implementation of housing programs following completion of the future Full MOD.

Budget for 2,238,725. is as follows:

LRGVDC Administration: $238,725. Contractual (Planning): $2,000,000. Total: $2,238,725.

Staff Administrative expenses are detailed as follows:

 Coordinate with state to develop hurricane Dolly and Ike Round 2 General Program Guidelines  Participate and coordinate on both Housing Taskforce and AI Taskforce  Participate and coordinate on Fair Housing workshops, public hearing notices, TDHCA meetings, and conference calls  Develop the Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) and Request for Proposals (RFP)  Establish and coordinate Housing Advisory Committee meetings, public notifications and ensuring appropriate State and Federal requirements are met  Administer process and support Regional Housing Committee in selection of management firm  Once firm is selected, formulate appropriate scope of work consistent with State Housing Guidelines and Conciliation Agreement as well as State’s Analysis of Impediments Study  Follow through in the preparation of Regional Housing Assessment Study and submission of MOD for Phase II of Round II Disaster Recovery Funding that meets all Federal and State Requirements

Contractual ‐ Management firm will develop Regional Housing needs assessment including the following program requirements:

 Research for local AI’s as necessary  Develop Affirmative Marketing Plan approved by TDHCA and Posted for 15 day review  Identification of Housing Programs to be offered  Design Program process that addresses future housing needs by the LRGVDC  Identify detailed activities offered by each housing category  Identify demographics to receive concentrate attention of services and target areas served  Design Program that identifies specific areas to benefit from approved housing program categories  Identify programs that will assist beneficiaries to overcome identified impediments to housing  Utilized Analysis of Impediments and Conciliation Agreement in the formation of program design  Submit statement to TDHCA indicating reviewed AI and applied findings prior to services provided  In compliance with TDHCA deadlines identify sufficient eligible beneficiaries and process to ensure expenditure of all funds  Prepare needs assessment compliant with all Federal and State guidelines/requirements  Provide required documentation throughout the program process  Coordinate with local non‐profit agencies in development of needs assessment  Assist LRGVDC in preparation of Phase II Round II MOD supporting State’s AI study and furthering Fair Housing in the LRGVDC Region

Describe process: Implementation of this housing fund category will entail professional services through an LRGVDC Board of Directors approved RFP process which incorporates to the maximum extent possible local professional services with direct knowledge in the implementation and administration of HUD funded programs. Under this partial MOD LRGVDC has chosen to allocate $2.2 million to secure professional services and hire LRGVDC Staff to begin the assessment on the level of housing need and to determine the level of met or unmet needs for the region.

LRGVDC will be subrecipient of housing funds for the region. Distribution Factor Weight Documentation Source Explanation of Factor Selection and Weighting

Distribution Factors The Council of Government has selected the following distribution factors: Distribution Factor Weight Documentation Source Explanation of Factor Selection and Weighting

All allocations must meet or exceed a floor of $500,000 to help ensure sufficient funds for at least one feasible housing program.

Eligible Activities Grantee activities must be specifically related to the effects of Hurricane Ike and/or Dolly, and must meet the following criteria:  Activity must be a CDBG-eligible project;  Activity must be in response to a Hurricane Ike or Dolly related impact in one of the following ways: o Direct verifiable damage from the storm that requires improvement of conditions, or o The housing activity addressed the impact on the housing stock in the community or region as a direct result of Hurricane Ike or Dolly in a quantifiable and measurable way.

The Council of Government has addressed prioritization of eligible activities as follows: The Council of Governments has chosen not to limit Grantees in the region to projects meeting regional

priority activities. ‐OR‐ The Council of Governments has limited Grantees in the region to selecting projects meeting the following

regional priority activities: Homeowner repair, rehabilitation, or replacement Demolition activities in slum/blighted areas Single-family or multifamily rental repair, Downpayment Assistance

rehabilitation, or replacement Single-family elevation of homes in flood plains Acquisition /Buyout program from properties in the floodplain Relocation from floodplains, slum/blighted areas, Code enforcement activities or identified environmental hazard area

Program Design The COG Partial Method of Distribution is required to include specific elements of the designated entity(ie)’s program design. These elements include:  How each entity’s program is designed to affirmatively further fair housing; o The COG must confirm in the method of distribution that each selected entity for funding has processes in place to ensure non-discrimination, specifically each designated entity: . Has an existing affirmative marketing plan with respect to current programs; . Has clear policies in place in regard to serving people as required under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and subsequent amendments; . Maintains records regarding Fair Housing and accessibility with respect to current programs; . Is familiar with laws and regulations regarding these issues; . Has identified impediments to Fair Housing and has processes in place to work with recipients to meet the goals of the Fair Housing Act; and . Accommodates persons with special needs in accordance with state and federal law. o The COG must also: . Ensure that each designated entity has a formal complaint process in place; and . Assert that it has considered and addressed Fair Housing issues prior to the submission of its MOD.  The types of housing activities that will be offered o The method of distribution must specifically state which CDBG-eligible activities the entities are proposing to accomplish. These activities must correspond to the Council of Governments regional priority activities if applicable.  How awards will be prioritized for each activity o For homeowner programs, the COG must include a description of how each entity will prioritize the funding of applications or awards; o For rental repair/ rehabilitation programs, the COG must include a description of the proposed methodology each entity will use for awarding funds; o For all other programs, a brief description of the hurricane-related need for the activity.  How the program or activity is designed to mitigate future storm damage in the community or region (if the entity is a regional entity) o Mitigation activities include but are not limited to elevation, the use of storm resistant materials and features, buyout programs for properties in the floodplain, and activities related to the implementation of new or existing hurricane building codes, including training on new standards and code enforcement.

Below are the elements in the entity(ies) housing programs that are designed to affirmatively further fair housing as described above:

The funds provided in the Partial MOD are designed to ensure that the LRGVDC housing programs developed are consistent with obligations to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing. The individual housing programs will be addressed in the Full Method of Distribution.

Below are the program characteristics of each entity(ie)’s housing program: Entity Activity Type Priority of Funding for Storm Mitigation Additional Activity Component(s) Information

TDHCA requires that the COGs consult with them if incentive programs are considered as part of any entity(ie)’s housing program design.

27 Blank Page PROPOSED REGIONAL DRAINAGE PROJECT

SAN PERLITA ® 2 RAYMONDVILLE

1 LYFORD 11

EDINBURG 14 LA VILLA ELSA 9 ALTON 8 10 SULLIVAN CITY EDCOUCH 12

PENITAS PALMHURST LA JOYA SANTA ROSA COMBES RIO HONDO PA5LMVIEW PRIMERA MCALLEN 7 MISSION PALM VALLEY SAN JUAN ALAMO HARLINGEN DONNA 4 PHARR WESLACO LA FERIA MERCEDES 15 3 GRANJENO SAN BENITO 6 BAYVIEW HIDALGO RANGERVILLE PROGRESO INDIAN LAKE LOS FRESNOS PROGRESO LAKES

LOS INDIOS RANCHO VIEJO Legend

1 REPAIRS WEIRS, BRIDGES & BANK EROSION 11 J-09 CHANNEL

2 RAYMONDVILLE DRAIN 12 EAST LATERAL BROWNSVILLE

3 DRAIN "A" WIDENING 13 RANCHO GRANDE SOUTH 4 TIO CANO/TAMM LN SOUTHWEST DRAIN 14 HARDIN RANCH DRAIN 13 16 5 PEÑITAS DRAIN 15 SAN BENITO LATERALS

6 SOUTHFORK DRAIN 16 BROWNSVILLE

7 PHARR-McALLEN SOUTH DRAIN STREETS HISTORY CREATED BY: LRGVDC 9-1-1 DEPT COUNTY 8 CONNECTION BETWEEN MUNICIPAL COMMUNITIES AND DRAINAGE CREATED ON: NOVEMBER 30, 2009 CITY LIMITS 9 DELTA AREA CONNECTOR REVISED ON: APRIL 29, 2011 0 5 10 10 EAST LINE DRAIN & RELIEF Miles