Fargo Moorhead Diversion Authority Monitor | An Independent News Organization
<< Read and Download Original Brenda Sauvageau Comment Letter >> Fargo Dam and Diversion, Our immediate family has lived here for over a quarter of a century. We reside in a home which we moved onto our land eight years ago. Our seventeen year old daughter has lived with us here her whole life. If […]
Continue ReadingThe impact and importance of cultural and community heritage should be valued with the same weight as other economic values. If the diversion project proceeds, please confirm, with historical examples, what federal law means by: “each affected parcel will be appraised and assessed for impact: as a way to determine what “just compensation” might be”.
Continue ReadingThe USACE previous responses to Violations of EO11988 are insufficient. This suggests a conflict of interest and lack of representation to affected taxpayers and areas outside the protected area. Darrell Vanyo’s testimony is self-evident that Fargo is pursuing this project for future flood plain development which is a direct violation of EO11988. 43 feet of protection in Fargo is a game changer and all previous cost benefit ratios are no longer valid.
Continue Reading<< Read and Download Original Wayne & Lori Rheault Comment Letter >> To the army corps of engineers; We would like to address this Fargo diversion/dam, we live just south of Fargo in Hickson an area that has never been flooded. Our concerns are that you are going to sacrifice our area to save a […]
Continue ReadingI 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<< 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 Reading