In a recent February 15, 2013 Forum news article by Erik Burgess several inconsistencies have been thrust into the view of public scrutiny.
In particular was the obvious mathematical errors being cited by the Forum to further support their pro-diversion agenda.
Excerpt from article:
“One survey submitted to the authority by Dennis Biewer, a resident of Bakke, showed that of 57 respondents, nobody wanted a ring dike, eight wanted buyouts and 49 were undecided.”
Fact: There are only 57 properties in Bakke. Of those 57 properties the article cites that nobody wanted a ring dike, however, 8 were open to buyouts.
So…, where did the imaginary and erroneous 106 Bakke property total come from that would allow for an additional 49 properties that are allegedly undecided?
This is just another example of proponent(s) manipulating data numbers, sticking their fingers in their ears, being unwilling to listen to reason or check their facts.
But it gets even better…
“Fargo City Commissioner Tim Mahoney said in Thursday’s meeting that maybe Bakke and Hickson weren’t surveyed fairly.”
Gee Mr Mahoney…Ya think…?
Without question, the entire survey is/was a joke. The entire survey was slanted toward the desired agenda of a ring-dike and Oxbow utilized a completely separate set of survey options which were asked door to door wherein surveyors failed to pursue known opponents.
But set aside the inconsistent surveys for a moment to look at a fundamental lack of fairness in the entire process.
Is it fair to allow Fargo to displace water from the natural flood plain and create increasing flood threats, hold its hand out for federal and state funding and expect neighboring communities to shoulder the burden and indignities that are being thrust upon them?
• The proposed ring-dike is not a sensible solution for Bakke, Hickson and Oxbow.
• It does not have majority support by the residents expected to endure life in its shadow.
• It presents a new set of problems and property devaluations with related undetermined tax assessments.
• Even more concerning is the 24 properties that have indicated they are planning on leaving the area entirely.
So why all the PR hype for a proposed ring dike that has less than than 38 percent genuine local buy-in?