The unscrupulous understand four truths about politics: vigilance is exhausting, memory fades, elected officials are greedy, and litigation trumps common sense.

A majority of Houston’s City Council stood up to industry pressure last week and approved new building regulations that will prevent new and rebuilt homes from future flooding. But expect the lobbyists and lawyers working for real estate developers and builders to either kill or stall efforts to enforce these responsible land use regulations.

Luckily for us, my colleagues at City Hall, Mike Morris and Rebecca Elliott, never tire or forget, and they have been reporting on how “lobbyists spent weeks huddled with city council members on behalf of home builders, land developers, engineers and real estate professionals — all of whom happen to be among the most reliable campaign donors at City Hall.”

These hired guns use what could be called the Texas Gospel to preach against protecting homebuyers and renters: New regulations violate property rights, undermine free enterprise and will ruin Texas capitalism forever, they claim.

The new regulations are admittedly complicated, but essentially, they require new homes to sit 2 feet above the projected water level in a 500-year storm. If these rules had been in place, 84 percent of homes Harvey flooded in Houston’s floodplains would have been spared.

The development lobby, though, is unconvinced. The city's recovery czar, former Shell CEO Marvin Odum, best sums up the dilemma.

"How acceptable is it to have new homes flood? What is your point of diminishing returns that you think is appropriate?" he asked the council.

Tens of thousands of homes flooding every 20 years or so is apparently a small price to pay for freedom from regulation, industry lobbyists suggest. And of course, they would say that, because their clients will have made their millions long before the first raindrops trickle across a homeowner’s threshold.

Others argue the onus is on the buyer to beware. But we learned after Harvey that developers have dodged disclosing flood risk, claiming that such requirements constitute a job-destroying, profit-crushing government mandate.

Risk disclosures are also tied to federal flood maps, which as I’ve discussed previously, are anything but scientific. The maps’ first drafts are usually based on flawed data, and then federal officials negotiate the second-draft with landowners and politicians worried about protecting property values and the property tax base.

Bad maps are the main reason the region has seen three so-called 500-year flood events over the last three years. Houston and Harris County officials have asked for new ones, but the federal government will take years to finish them.

Don’t believe for a minute, though, that this matter is settled, or that we’ve done enough.

If history is any guide, developers will launch a public relations campaign denouncing the new regulations as overreach. They will aggressively lobby council members for waivers and exemptions all the time reminding them who finances election campaigns in this state.

When pressure and campaign donations don’t work, developers usually threaten lawsuits. The typical claim is that city regulations represent an unjust diminishment of property values, and the landowners demand compensation.

When faced with handing over millions of taxpayer dollars, or spending millions on attorney’s fees, cities tend to settle by granting waivers. Chronicle investigative reporter Mark Collette revealed in December how landowners had used such lawsuits to pressure the city to allow development in known floodways.

Experts say these new regulations should only be the beginning. And council certainly needs to stop diverting drainage fees and use them to improve areas where poor drainage caused the flooding, not waterways. Draining water faster is as important as raising structures.

Recalibrating our flood mitigation efforts, by necessity, will change the way Greater Houston develops. Responsible developers and builders should welcome the new data that will help them provide better, safer products for their customers.

Too many developers, though, want to short-circuit the mitigation effort because it might hurt their ability to flip questionable properties. These unscrupulous business people will use every tactic to hobble necessary reforms.

While it may be exhausting, public vigilance is the only way to keep elected officials focused on safety and not their campaign fund. This fight is far from over.