Fargo Moorhead Diversion Authority Monitor | An Independent News Organization
I say no to the diversion, maybe they should put it up to a vote again now that the people know what the whole deal is. I feel that our taxes are already to high. Who is expected to pay the 3 to 5 million a year that they say will take to maintain the diversion?
Continue Reading<< Read and Download Original Sandy Meyer Comment Letter >> Nov. 6, 2011 Dear U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, I’m writing in regards to your proposal for a diversion in the Fargo – Moorhead area. As a taxpayer and teacher of Minnesota, I highly OPPOSE of this plan. This plan is not in the best […]
Continue ReadingRemember Fargo keeps building in low area and they expect the people on higher ground to sacrifice homes and business so some body can make money on development and there growth. Why does Fargo want to keep building in a low area behind a big body of water this would be.
Continue ReadingI’m Ruth Evert (90 years old). I’m appalled at the Fargo City Commissioners and Mayor and the Corp of Engineers for the Diversion they have planned south of Fargo around the Hickson area. It’s too drastic.
Continue ReadingThe 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
Continue ReadingWhats 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.
Continue ReadingI 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.
Continue ReadingThe 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.
Continue ReadingIn 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.
Continue ReadingI 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.
Continue Reading