EDITOR'S NOTE: The op-ed below has been edited to reflect that the bridge project will be paid for with toll dollars, not taxpayer dollars. Under current law, toll revenues cannot be used for flooding mitigation.

Rising like a glorious giant from the sea, the world's tallest statue is being built in India for the enormous sum of $500 million dollars. The statue will honor the 17th century warrior Chhatrapati Shivaj as he charges on horseback about to face battle. As one might expect in a nation poorer than Nigeria and Papua New Guinea, such a lavish expenditure has caused outrage and protests. How, the furious people ask, could a nation with such pressing needs fail to take care of its own citizens before erecting such a statue?

Regrettably, there are no easy answers to the people of India, but as Houstonians, we can offer them comfort in sharing our own bewilderment that some of the leaders of Harris County are committing a similar offense.

RELATED: Project to replace Ship Channel Bridge at $1 billion cost will take 6 years to complete

EDITORIAL: Freeways aren't free, and Texas politicos don't want to pay

Harris County Judge Ed Emmett and Harris County Commissioner Jack Morman just successfully lobbied to spend not one, but two times the amount of money it will cost to build the statue of Chhatrapati Shivaj. In other words, they'll be spending $1 billion dollars to tear down a perfectly fine bridge and replace it with a bigger bridge. Purely on its own, the project would be a catastrophic waste of resources. But of course, nothing can be evaluated without taking account of the bigger picture. When we expand our horizon, we see that this reckless project is being conducted at time when Greater Houston faces a life or death struggle with flooding. True, the bridge is being paid for with toll funds, not taxpayer dollars. And under current law, those toll funds can't be spent on flood mitigation. But true political leadership responds to the gravity of the times with appropriate measures. If they wanted to, county leaders could get creative and lobby the Texas Legislature to change the law and allow toll revenue collected by the Harris County Toll Road Authority to be used for projects that reduce flooding.

As it is now, we are spending $1 billion on the aesthetic makeover of a bridge when we can't promise Houstonians that we won't flood again before this next hurricane season ends.

The $1 billon dollars will be spent to replace a two-by-two lane stretch of the Beltway 8, known as the Sam Houston Ship Channel Bridge, with a four-by-four lane bridge. Despite the project's futility, Mormon argues that this is money well spent to reduce a traffic jam and address "one of the county's great needs." Now, there is no question that Houston has several major traffic issues. Many sections of Interstate 10, Interstate 45, Interstate 59, Texas 288, Texas 290 and the Interstate 610 loop receive over 150,000 vehicles per day, and some stretches even top 180,000 vehicles.

The Sam Houston Ship Channel Bridge, however, receives a paltry 55,000 vehicles, one of the lowest totals for a major stretch of highway in Harris County.

Of course, vehicle traffic does not tell you the whole story about traffic flow, as a two-lane highway could back up much worse than a 4-lane highway even if the 4-lane highway had many more vehicles. However, this is not the case for the Sam Houston Ship Channel Bridge. The bridge is a relative Mecca for traffic issues in Greater Houston - someone can virtually fly across it compared to the time it takes to drive through one of several other stretches of highway in the region. And fixing these stretches' issues could be addressed for a fraction of the cost.

Traffic issues also need to be considered cumulatively. Even though this bridge is hardly used by Houston standards, the project could still have merit if it alleviated other areas of congestion. Again, this will not be the case for this project. The Sam Houston Ship Channel Bridge is currently one of four ways to cross the Ship Channel, all relatively close. A driver can also cross the Ship Channel at 610 East, the Washburn tunnel or at the Fred Hartman Bridge, the latter two being only 10 minutes away, and together these alternatives constitute as close as Houston gets to excellence in traffic management.

As such, we can safely say that Morman is wrong. The reconstruction of this bridge is hardly "one of the county's great needs." The real need stems from the fact that our city floods like a scene from Noah's Ark every time a sprinkler system runs too long, or when it pours for just a few hours like it did on this past July Fourth. Unless we solve flooding, there is no Houston, there is no industry to protect, and resolving traffic congestion issues - particularly where there are none - will be the least of our concerns. We have to prioritize just like every other county, city and country ought to. The $2.5 billion flood bond Harris County voters will consider in August is a start, but county leaders must do more.

It may be challenge to relocate these funds to flood mitigation, but until the Texas Supreme Court itself rules that it is impossible, we should fight for it as if our future itself is at stake. Accordingly, Emmett and Mormon should both lobby the Texas Legislature to allow them to reallocate these funds and also submit a referendum to the people of Harris County calling for these funds to be spent on flood mitigation as well. And if this fails, or somehow cannot be done, I have simple solution: find a more reasonable project, or just don't spend the money at all.

Rose is a lawyer in Houston.