Letter: Fargo floodplain plan inconsistent
I agree with The Forum’s recent editorial observation that the Fargo-Moorhead area has made progress in flood protection. I applaud Moorhead leaders who acted responsibly to protect their city “from all but a flood of unprecedented proportions.” When that flood occurs, Moorhead can build upon the protection and emergency programs now in place, without a diversion.
Fargo is soon to reach this level of protection as well. The editorial lists as Fargo’s flood protection improvements, among other works, the buyout of “hundreds of homes in the ... floodplain”; amended building codes so structures are “raised above flood-risk elevations”; and the clearing of “as much of the river floodplain as is possible ...” A list so “impressive,” in fact, that with completion of its remaining projects, Fargo will be protected from predicted future flood levels, as Moorhead is. Fargo will reach a commanding position to conquer future record-breaking floods without the costly F-M diversion.
Victory is absolute only if the development of floodplain areas ceases. Removing houses from the floodplain, while developing land within the floodplain, is counterproductive and contradictory to the city’s “impressive” measures supported by The Forum.
Residents must seek facts about the diversion project (see www.fmdam.org), and then ask: Do we really need a diversion?