Gene Sauvageau Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

<< Read and Download Original Gene Sauvageau Comment Letter >> The Fargo Dam & Diversion Project is bad for hundreds of people and many surrounding communities’ on the Red River Basin. Water detention is a much better system for every body and the land and “Fargo”. My farmstead value is worthless right now, No improvements […]

Continue Reading

Seeking Answers: My F-M diversion quest

Kudos are in order for Kristin Kirtz of MSUM. Through the eyes of a wayward college student and aspiring journalist, she’s captured a portion of the uncertainty and indifference that many feel as the proposed project silently overwhelms better senses. More curious is Kristin Kirtz’s corroboration of a behavioral defect that should have more people […]

Continue Reading

Self Appointed Metro Mayor?

Sometime innocuous statements…aren’t so innocuous after all. Two different reporters, from two different publications, nearly two months apart report eerily similar words spoken by Fargo Mayor Dennis Walaker. When Kristin Daum, of the Fargo Forum reported Fargo Mayor Dennis Walaker’s comments on January 28th, 2012: EXCERPT FROM: Walaker’s Warning Reignites Divide Between Diversion Supporters, Opponents […]

Continue Reading

Why are upstream impacts rather than downstream impacts being proposed?

<<< Return to FAQs >>> Short answer, to benefit Fargo’s future plans for economic development. Excerpt from USACE FEIS Appendix C 3.9 Project Performance, Risk and Uncertainty Given the uncertainty associated with the various hydraulic, hydrologic, and economic relationships used in the flood damage analysis, there is likewise some uncertainty regarding a project’s ability to […]

Continue Reading

Marcus Larson Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

The 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direct violation of EO11988. 43 feet of protection in Fargo is a game changer and all previous cost benefit ratios are no longer valid.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

Wayne and Lori Rheault Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

<< 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 Reading

Is the real, hidden purpose for the staging area to serve as a water supply for Fargo?

The 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

Sandy Meyer Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

<< 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 Reading

Charles Christianson Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

Remember 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 Reading