Fargo Moorhead Diversion Authority Monitor | An Independent News Organization
I am not in favor of this project as it has been written about to date; my reasons are listed below. The damage to cities, farms, roads etc due to such a large wide project. The cost of this project when the federal government is worse than broke. I have no idea on how you expect to find the funds to pay for such a large project.
Continue ReadingI 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<<< Return to FAQs >>> EO-11988: Federal agencies are required to avoid to the extent possible the long and short term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a practicable alternative. The USACE and the non-federal sponsor of Fargo […]
Continue ReadingThe factual project purpose, as illustrated by the Corps of Engineers in its reports, is to develop a project that will accommodate the city of Fargo’s current future plans of development. Which is illustrated in Value Engineering Study 1 and Value Engineering Study 2 and both directly and in-directly violates Executive Order 11988.
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 ReadingWhy would farmers, homeowners and rural residents threatened to be flooded by the Fargo dam (called a diversion) wish to pay a Fargo sales tax to hasten their own destruction?
Continue ReadingThe United States Army Corps of Engineers indicates an annual operation and maintenance cost of $3,631,000 in 2011 dollars, Using 2011 as the benchmark year and the preceding decades inflation rate, the “estimated” annual operation and maintenance costs are as follows: year 2022 – $4,438,122.57
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 Reading