Dayton wades into flood diversion controversy

Gov. Mark Dayton plans to get more involved in the nearly $2 billion project that would divert Red River floodwater around the Fargo-Moorhead area.

At a public meeting today in Moorhead, Dayton said he wants to make sure Minnesota residents and property aren't harmed by the controversial project.

Efforts to divert the Red River got underway shortly after record flooding in 2009 nearly inundated Fargo-Moorhead.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers designed a 36-mile ditch to move floodwater through North Dakota farmland, around the community. But during floods, the project would create a large holding area for water. That would flood farmland and force permanent relocation for some rural residents.

Create a More Connected Minnesota

MPR News is your trusted resource for the news you need. With your support, MPR News brings accessible, courageous journalism and authentic conversation to everyone - free of paywalls and barriers. Your gift makes a difference.

Corps of Engineers officials determined that North Dakota and Fargo will receive 90 percent of the benefits from the diversion and North Dakota is paying for 90 percent of the local share of the project.

But Dayton wants to make sure the project's impact on Minnesota's rural residents is not overlooked.

The governor said he aims to ensure "that those concerns are being heard and being listened to, honored, respected."

"I think that's really important as part of this process to recognize that people do have different stakes in this," he said.

Minnesota is also at odds with the Diversion Authority, the project's governing board, over the state's role granting permits for the project.

Minnesota law requires an environmental assessment of the project before permits are issued or state funding is committed.

Dayton said he considers ongoing levee construction in North Dakota this summer as part of the diversion and said it should stop. He recently asked the Assistant Secretary of the Army to stop any federal work on the project. Congress authorized the diversion project earlier this year but has not appropriated money for construction.

The issue is dividing the Moorhead City Council. Council member Nancy Otto defended the project, telling the governor it's essential for long-term flood control.

"It's the best that we can do for over 200,000 people," Otto said. "These are not just Fargo residents. We're protecting 103,000 jobs. Not just Fargo jobs."

But Moorhead council member Heidi Durand has serious questions about the flood control issue. She thinks the Diversion Authority is trying to short circuit the Minnesota environmental impact study.

"The advocates for the project have their talking points down pretty good," Durand said. "But the fact of the matter is we have a right and our state has the right to do our diligence. Let's do the EIS so we know what the impacts are. And that's being ignored."

Durand and other diversion opponents say the Corps of Engineers plan is flawed and that other flood control options should be considered.

Fargo Deputy Mayor Tim Mahoney defended the project as the best option created by experts.

"We don't know how to do this; we're not engineers," Mahoney said. "So we're working with the Corps, asking them what to do and trying to figure it out. And if anybody has a better plan let's look at it. We'd be happy to look at it."

The Minnesota environmental assessment could offer alternatives. Diversion Authority members say they support the environmental review but think they have received confusing information from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

With that in mind, Dayton offered a solution.

"I think in a project of this magnitude and this sensitivity and this controversy, that from this point forward the only two people authorized to speak on behalf or represent the state of Minnesota are [DNR] Commissioner Landwehr or myself," he said.