The city of La Porte should get an award for clear thinking and unequivocal writing.
Governments are notoriously bad about getting to the point. But here’s a line from La Porte’s resolution opposing the Centennial Gate, a rival concept to the proposed Ike Dike:
“The City of La Porte does not accept the notion that areas of lower elevation seaward of Centennial Gate within any community fronting Galveston Bay should be considered collateral damage from the impacts of a storm surge.”
The Ike Dike was proposed by Bill Merrell, a professor at Texas A&M University at Galveston, to protect the whole bay from the kind of storm surge seen in 2008. A rival concept, the Centennial Gate, was proposed by Severe Storm Prediction, Education and Evacuation from Disasters Center at Rice University to protect the upper Houston Ship Channel with floodgates near the Fred Hartman Bridge.
And that’s precisely what’s wrong with putting any flood protection system so far north. The communities to the south would be collateral damage.
Such a system would not protect them. And it would make things worse as the surge of water, stopped by the floodgates, backed up. La Porte’s resolution estimated that the Centennial Gate would raise the floodwaters an additional six inches.
La Porte’s City Council let it be known it wasn’t going to acquiesce quietly.
Communities across Galveston County — especially those that need protection — should note the example.