I recently submitted a letter to the editor via the Fargo Forum in response to Mike Hulett’s February 15, 2020 opinion column.
Despite Hulett using 505 words to demean “folks residing in upstream areas”, the venom spewed from the FMDA’s mouthpiece illustrates the parochialism of dam and diversion proponents.
It’s also rather convenient that the Fargo Forum allows only 250 word reply’s which unfortunately removes considerable content.
Here is the original draft:
In true bully fashion, Mike Hulett’s comprehension of the FMDA (Fargo Moorhead Diversion Authority) project appears to be like a person reading the summary on the back of a paperback and thinking they’ve captured the essence of all the pages in between.
Hulett’s February 15, 2020 opinion column is rife with diversion authority misinformation and talking points. Whether these words are Hulett’s own or ghost written by one of the taxpayer funded FMDA public relations firms – it’s a “rocky” road to feign knowledge and then prove the contrary.
Hulett falsely accused “folks residing in upstream areas” as those who are holding up the project with multiple lawsuits. There has been nothing stopping Fargo from finishing internal flood measure to protect the city that existed post 2009.
In reality, residents of Fargo, West Fargo and Moorhead along with “folks residing in upstream areas” are digging deep and donating to support the rights of property owners to present a legal challenge in defense of being unjustly treated by the FMDA. The court recognized the injustice and handed down a temporary injunction(s) to ensure the hegemony of Fargo’s development plan disguised as flood control is met with some semblance of balance.
This would have been a great time for Fargo and the FMDA to make a genuine effort to address upstream concerns and modify the project accordingly, but Fargo chose to double-down with taxpayer money and expand the project and litigation.
Since inception, no version of the FMDA included voting representation for downstream or upstream property owners. The entire FMDA project has moved forward in the vacuum of Fargo, yet, nearly 100 percent of the impacts are being foisted onto areas outside of Fargo’s jurisdictional boundaries.
Hulett reduced himself and his credibility to that of an FMDA apologizer when he tried to dismiss that future development is driving this project. The FM Home Builders Association, FM Realtors Association and Greater Fargo Moorhead Economic Development Corporation have all been very outspoken for the FMDA project, locally, in Bismarck and Washington DC.
In 2007 Fargo laid out Strategies for Growth stating (read more…): “The ability to accommodate this growth is contingent on completing flood control projects in the city.” The USACE corroborated that objective (read more…) stating the ND alignment was generally chosen “to accommodate the city of Fargo’s current future plans of development.”
In April 2009 the USACE indicated that Fargo Southside Project would violate Executive Order 11988 (read more…) because it facilitates development of undeveloped flood plain.
In November 2009 the CCJWRD passed resolution #2009-18 (read more…) supporting a ND diversion with the largest geographical area possible to improve the struggling cost/benefit ratio.
Hulett marginalized upstream impacts as a few structures. In reality – over 1,500 structure rooftops exist and socio-economic impacts to health, welfare and safety of upstream residents would last in perpetuity.
Hulett claimed most of the protected area is previously developed land – in reality over 123,954 acres (193.6 square miles) (read more…) of undeveloped flood plain are impacted by the proposed project to allegedly protect a 90 square mile metro city area that existed in 2009.
The Governors Task Force did not address legitimate concerns. To date, no flow-age easement mitigation has been determined.
Did you know that the group tasked with establishing a value to mitigate impacts to farmland has not finalized a value and the ag-subcommittee has not met for over 2 years.
Despite Hulett’s assurances of land being “fairly acquired”, there are several instances where litigation was the only resolution to the low-ball offers from the FM diversion authority. In 2016, the FMDA offered $5,900 per acre for the land in and around where the Diversion Inlet Structure exists, argued by the FMDA as a critical project component, whereas, in 2019 the FMDA via the CCJWRD paid $1.18 million ($130,207 per acre) for land to connect drainage ponds in Oxbow, ND.
These are just 2 examples of Hulett’s version of “fairly acquired”.
If Fargo-Moorhead were truly concerned about “historically life-threatening and economically-crippling” flooding – then internal protection should have been completed.
No Mr. Hulett, it is NOT time to end opposition.
Now…, would you kindly remove your misinformed black jack-boots from our properties?
Views: 560