admin | FMDam.org

Delores & Jay Kleinjen Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

March 6, 2012January 20, 2013adminLeave a Comment

The Army Corps has a history of not being accurate in their predictions. Several articles have been written verifying the Corps mistakes in mismanagement. The daily news detailed ineptness of the Corps management with regards to the Missouri River issues. The Army Corps knew they were going to use the upstream route prior to the Cass County sales tax vote. Our neighbor was approached by a Corps engineer about farm buyout costs in October 2010. Why was this hidden from the taxpayers until after the vote for the sales tax took place?Mike and Cindy Zick Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

Is it true that property in the proposed buyout area has no value and cannot be sold?

March 5, 2012March 6, 2012adminLeave a Comment

Each property has value and that value shall be determined as though no project were considered. The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires the government to provide just compensation to the owner of the private property to be taken. What is unique about the Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion is the unjust relocation of the natural floodplain, in violation of Executive Order 11988, causing new potential flood impacts onto property owners, many of whom, that derive their lively-hood from the land being force-ably taken.

Mike and Cindy Zick Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

March 5, 2012January 20, 2013adminLeave a Comment

Whats wrong with Fargo? We do not understand why Fargo thinks they need the CADILLAC plan designed for a 500 yr flood event. But this ridiculous plan to install a dam on the Red River and flood all the communities, residences, and farms upstream because they are greedy and want to reserve future developments in south Fargo.

Does the Fargo Moorhead Diversion and Dam violate Executive Order 11988?

March 4, 2012March 5, 2012admin2 Comments

The USACE and Fargo have not exercised due care in performing their duties pursuant to Executive Order 11988. Viable alternatives exist, however, have been procedure-ally disregarded. The current LPP calls for willful destructive development of the natural flood plains both south and north of Fargo for future economic development.

Claire Askegaard Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

March 4, 2012January 20, 2013adminLeave a Comment

I am writing you today to inform you of my opposition to the North Dakota Alignment commonly referred to as the Locally Preferred Plan (LPP). I cannot support a plan which is not economically viable or needed and does a grave injustice to not only the communities and farms in the proposed water staging area but also the entire Red River Basin. By choosing the LPP, you are doing a grave injustice for not only the citizens of my hometown and its surrounding communities, but also for the nation.

Why was the current alignment selected?

March 2, 2012March 4, 2012adminLeave a Comment

The current alignment was selected by the non-federal project sponsor to protect Fargo’s future development interests. The design intent was to benefit as much existing development as possible, without respect to Executive Order 11988. Land developers south of Fargo, to be named later, will realize exponential financial benefit as a result of their lobbying efforts of County, City and Corps officials.

Bette J. Stieglitz Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

March 1, 2012January 20, 2013adminLeave a Comment

The problem is not the water, it is the greed of developers and Fargo city officials that encouraged new neighborhoods near the river, or in flood prone low lying areas. I am serious when I ask “Just what are we thinking?” First of all our community has dealt with a number of floods in the past few years. We do know the high water mark. Finish the “buy outs” necessary, and learn from those mistakes.

Concerns over F-M diversion project brought to Polk County Board

March 1, 2012May 8, 2017adminLeave a Comment

The USACE – United States Army Corps of Engineers uses procedure to their own detriment. 20 months ago, the Crookston Daily Times ran an article by author Natalie J. Ostgaard, which lends an insight into the Corps adherence to procedure to ensure that ZERO progress is made with interactions they have with the very taxpayers […]

Sherri Smith Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

March 1, 2012January 20, 2013adminLeave a Comment

In total, three North Dakota communities and hundreds of homes will be erased from the map. As we understand the plan, the diversion along with holding areas of water would inundate our property with 7 to 8 feet of water that we did not previously have to deal with. We, however, cannot support the current plan to use our home as the sacrificial lamb to increase the comfort level of the metro area without knowing where we stand relative to a potential buyout, land usage, and opportunities/costs related to whether or not we will be able to afford to continue the lifestyle we chose to live outside of the FM Metro Area in the 1st place.

Joyce Hendrickson Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

February 29, 2012January 20, 2013adminLeave a Comment

I oppose the above mentioned proposal for many reasons. Obviously, upstream communities were not asked to participate in the decision making process. I know alternatives do exist that address flooding basin wide. These have not been studied or addressed by the Corp nor have areas affected by the issue been included in the planning stages. Although the Corp acknowledges that there will be impacts outside the 33,390 acre staging area, these issues have not been assessed and these costs are not included in the project.