August 21, 2010 at 7:00 pm in INFORUM
An initiative by Fargo City Commissioner Tim Mahoney to talk with opponents of the proposed Fargo-Moorhead flood diversion project is a nice gesture, but
Tags: downstream impacts, Editorials, flooding, Opinion, red river diversion, tim Mahoney 6 Comments »
Here the Forum goes again, supporting only one opinion; the mayor of Fargo is right and everyone else are just cry babies.
I am sure there are more than a few hundred people who are against this diversion, as the Forum states.
I live in Fargo,and I was also evacuated from my apartment, during the flood of 2009; however, I still think all peoples voices should be heard, until the final and I mean final reports come out stating the impact on higher river levels downstream.
Commissioner Tim Mahoney is also a doctor. I am sure in his professional career, he has had to tell people that they need surgery. Sometimes he might have to say that this surgery could cause complications in other areas of the body. He probably has told them that this surgery would be extremely expensive.
I am sure many people who Doctor Mahoney has told this to have asked to have a second opinion, and I am sure Doctor Mahoney would agree.
This, I believe, is why Commissioner Mahoney, wants to hear every one’s second opinions. Not just the opinion of the Forum or Mayor Walaker; where Fargo comes first.It sounds like they just don’t worry about Climax’s 29 inch increase in flood crests, or other downstream communities, if the division is built.
Commissioner Mahoney; your profession as a doctor is shining through into your city commission position; where you just want to be positive before you start surgery, that could help or or destroy a lot of peoples lives, not to mention the costs.
So, thank you once again Commissioner Mahoney; for your understanding, caring and compassion towards others in time of worry and troubling times that lie ahead of us all; when the mighty Red River, will once again swell up to
flood our vulnerable Red River Valley.
Like or Dislike: 16 6
If something is going to be done about the proposed Fargo-Moorhead flood diversion project threes no longer a choice, sense no one is going to change their mind on this. The Government or who ever is responsible will just have to take over and do it.
Like or Dislike: 2 11
Oh yes, I give myself a thumbs down on this. I hope for the good of all a compromise will be found.
Like or Dislike: 2 6
It’s ironic how the Forum’s own editorial is proposing that the propenents for the diversion begin submitting comments to the Corps to drown out the letters of opposition that have been sent already.
In the same issue of the Forum today there is an article stating that letters and comments are weighed on their merit, not on volume. Also Fargo was firmly against extending the comment period, yet now when they think it could benefit them they want it extended.
Geez Fargo, we get it, you have a higher population than those of us downstream. Anyone that can read census data knows that. Also anyone that can read the proposed diversion plan can see that there is nothing in the proposal to mitigate downstream impacts. Those impacts are not even fully known yet because the Corps is continueing to study it. If you’re only arguement to justify the diversion is there are more of us than them, it shows how weak the plan is.
Like or Dislike: 17 7
So, instead of addressing the concerns of downstream residents, the Fourm is just advocating Fargo/Moorhead and Cass/Clay officials along with the USACE say “Sucks to be you” to anyone with legitimate concerns downstream. I guess they figure that diversion supporters will entrench themselves to the point were the trench serves as a diversion. I was keeping an open mind about the project, but if you’re going to refuse to cooperate and instead dig a trench, don’t be surprised when the opposition grows stronger. The Red River valley is more than just Fargo/Moorhead, and the rest of the valley cannot be ignored.
Like or Dislike: 14 2
To those who only say NIMBY or just NO I say give them leafy spurge or even an infestation of kudzo. This is something that needs discussion and done in a way that can benefit the most and not harm others. The waffle plan doesn’t look all that good because if the water is over the top of the ridges of the waffle you might as well have a pancake plan. Water retention needs to take place in the tributaries and if that happens the diversion, which is needed, might not have to be so big.
Like or Dislike: 7 2
Click here to cancel reply.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
To start connecting please log in first.
Topics is proudly provided by the Forum Communications Company