Additional Content 1234567891011 Last »
FM Diversion and Dam Increases national debt

Archive for Diversion Authority

You are browsing the archives of Diversion Authority.

MN DNR Letter to Tim Mahoney Fargo Dam and FM Diversion Authority

MN DNR Letter to Tim Mahoney Fargo Dam and FM Diversion Authority

It is beyond acting in bad faith; indeed, the continuation of construction is an insult to collaboration.

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D425 and D426) | US District Court, District of Minnesota (Preliminary Injunction)

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D425 and D426) | US District Court, District of Minnesota (Preliminary Injunction)

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Motion and Memorandum in Support of Preliminary Injunction against the Fargo Dam and FM Diversion Project.

MN DNR Press Release: December 29, 2016

MN DNR Press Release: December 29, 2016

Minnesota will ask the court to prohibit construction of the dam and diversion channel because the Minnesota has not issued the necessary permits.

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D341) | US District Court, District of Minnesota (Motion to Reinstate USACE as an Active Defendant)

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D341) | US District Court, District of Minnesota (Motion to Reinstate USACE as an Active Defendant)

Richland Wilkin Joint Powers Authority file Motion to Reinstate USACE as an Active Defendant involving Fargo Dam and FM Diversion project case.

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D341) | US District Court, District of Minnesota (Motion for Permanent Injunction)

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D341) | US District Court, District of Minnesota (Motion for Permanent Injunction)

Richland Wilkin Joint Powers Authority file Motion for Permanent Injunctive Relief against Fargo Dam and FM Diversion project.

LTE: Diversion IS NOT the Right Way to Secure Area Flood Protection

LTE: Diversion IS NOT the Right Way to Secure Area Flood Protection

I cannot support a project which clearly violates state law. I will continue to be a voice for the farmers and residents of rural Minnesota and will not let the state of North Dakota run roughshod over our interests. We need a process that follows the law, treats people fairly and looks at all options to provide permanent flood protection to the area while protecting the livelihood and interests of upstream property owners.

Letter: MN DNR Tom Landwehr

Letter: MN DNR Tom Landwehr

Since the Diversion Authority declined to consider a more modest project alternative, the only options included for consideration in the permit application were the “No Action” and “No Action with Emergency Measures” alternatives. This left the DNR with two choices: 1) permit the project or 2) deny the project.

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D323) | US District Court, District of Minnesota

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D323) | US District Court, District of Minnesota

The FEIS clearly advances two other alternatives for serious consideration in the permitting phase. One of those alternatives would reduce the area of flood plain developed and protected, thereby reducing the volume of water diverted by the proposed project.

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D321) | US District Court, District of Minnesota

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D321) | US District Court, District of Minnesota

Commencement of Eminent Domain Proceedings: For the initial phase of Corps construction, the Diversion Authority must secure title to three properties in North Dakota.

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D322) | US District Court, District of Minnesota

Case Civil No. 13-2262 (D322) | US District Court, District of Minnesota

Eric Dodds, AE2S: “…it is clear that at least some of the property owners will not agree to sell voluntarily, and those properties will need to be acquired through eminent domain…”

Page 1 of 1512345678910...Last »