Fargo Moorhead Diversion Authority Monitor | An Independent News Organization
Fargo wants to take 40 square miles out of the flood plain immediately south of town – where the Wild Rice and Red Rivers meet – to provide future development room for Fargo. Should someone whisper that the emperor has no clothes?
Continue ReadingHow long will the Diversion Authority continue to push this illegal budget-busting boondoggle while people in need of reasonable flood protection remain at risk? The North Dakota Constitution was amended to provide that a public use or public purpose may not include: “… public benefits of economic development, including an increase in tax base, tax revenues, employment or general economic health.”
Continue ReadingFargo cannot expand south as the land south of Davies High School is a natural flood plain that collects water when we have even moderate flooding. Fargo’s solution: protect the extra 40-square miles for development by building dams on the Red and Wild Rice and back up the water that would normally and naturally spread out into the floodplain.
Continue ReadingMinnesota Flood Hazard Mitigation Grant funds were not intended to be Fargo development funds for flood- prone areas south of Fargo. There are better solutions that have been ignored, primarily because it may restrict Fargo expanding to the south. I would suggest 52 Street South in Fargo. In the past, that is where Fargo has successfully placed a temporary levee.
Continue ReadingWhat will the Diversion Cost You? ** SHOCKING TAX ASSESSMENTS ** that officials have kept from property owners. Fargo-Moorhead can be protected without destroying Red River Basin communities. This plan will lead to the destruction of farms, communities and businesses south of the diversion channel, Clay and Cass counties and northern Richland and Wilkin counties. A Dam & Reservoir is not needed!
Continue ReadingWhy should Fargo’s poor planning and reckless development of a flood plain, caving into the economic interests of Fargo, Mayor Walaker, and his political cronies be rewarded? Their past development decisions have proven extremely negligent and stupid.
Continue ReadingThe question as presented, is speculative, leading and incorrect. The original flood reduction proposal located on the Minnesota side of the Red River included a diversion channel as a main feature to convey water from south to north of the metro area. The proposal released in the SDEIS and FEIS utilizes high risk dams, levees […]
Continue ReadingI believe that the project, as put forth, is an unsustainable project. I don’t believe that the ACE is capable of either designing, building or maintaining a man built water system that will go over or under 5 different water sheds in a 36 mile man made route around a metro area.
Continue ReadingThe staging area presents a greater threat to the city of Fargo, ND due to excessive water levels held above the elevation of the entire city on historically unstable ground. It is generally accepted that populations that have permanent protection in place are less likely to evacuate because the flood protection offers an unwarranted sense of security that does not reflect a true flood risk specific to the given area.
Continue Reading<<< Return to FAQs >>> The USACE indicates a variety of 500 year flood levels in the FEIS and supporting documentation, without embracing any specific 500 year flood level as an absolute. Craig O. Evans, P.E. Chief, Plan Formulation Section, attributes the disparity as “…not an inconsistency, but rather an outcome of the uncertainty analysis.” There […]
Continue Reading