Kerr County Texas: When is the price too high?
More than one hundred lives were lost in Texas flooding that began July 4. Eighty-six in Kerr County alone. And apparently that’s not the final count.
We’ve read or seen numerous accounts of loss and sorry, bravery, heroics, tenacity, and love.
Most of us became aware of the devastation when the Guadalupe River breached its banks and, in effect, demolished a girl’s summer camp–and much else.
Families are devastated. What happened is unthinkable. Unimaginable. You drop your child off for a summer respite—and you never see them alive again. How does that happen?
The blame-game has begun, I’m sure. Agency to agency. Parents to agencies. Maybe even parent to parent in cases where there wasn’t agreement on sending their child in the first place.
Attorneys are circling, I’m certain, and lawsuits will strangle the courts for years to come.
But if there’s a lesson for the future, we may find it, not in the courtrooms of tomorrow, but in meeting rooms of the past. Specifically from 2017.
The Guadalupe River has a history of severe flooding. So in 2017, Kerr County applied for a grant to fund a million-dollar state-of-the art advance warning system.
No grant was forthcoming. So, proponents sought funding from Kerr County’s budget. Denied as being too expensive.
I bring this up, not to vilify leaders of the past, but to inspire leaders now and in the future.
Sure, it’s important to be wise with public money. But how could public money be better spent than on saving lives from a well known treacherous river?
Here’s the full, AI verified story of the 2017 Kerr County plan to install a modern floodwarning system along the Guadalupe River—and why it never materialized:
What actually happened in 2017?
• January 2017: The Kerr County Commissioners Court unanimously approved applying for a ~$975,000 FEMA grant (later cited as $980K or $1M) to develop a comprehensive flood warning system—including river gauges and sirens—in “Flash Flood Alley”.
• Mid2017: An engineering study (funded by the county at a cost of $50,000) recommended this system, estimating implementation would cost $750,000–$1M.
• The proposed system was modeled after tornado siren networks in nearby Comal County, plus upgraded flowgauges……cited as vital for monitoring and warning folks downstream at camps and river crossings.
Why it wasn’t approved?
• Grant application denied: The FEMA grant—and a subsequent application after Hurricane Harvey in 2017–18—were both rejected, as those funds were prioritized for coastal and Harvey affected communities.
• Local funding roadblocks: With no federal funds, commissioners considered investing local dollars but ultimately shelved it. Budget constraints, taxaverse sentiment,
and resident resistance—especially concern over disruptive sirens—were cited.
• One commissioner famously joked that sirens might drive him back to drinking, reflecting community pushback .