Laserfiche WebLink
37 <br /> <br />Ken Vein- City Council Member, Grand Forks <br />Governors and Task Force members agreed to the ‘Task Force Charter’ which defines Purpose and <br />Key Parameters. Purpose was to develop ‘Design Principles’ and ‘Concept-Level Engineering <br />Solutions’ to achieve balanced flood risk management for Fargo-Moorhead region. Key Parameters <br />are ‘Finding Solutions that ‘Meet Applicable Local and State Law’ and ‘Maintain Federal <br />Authorization and Appropriations’ (unless more expedient and low-cost options are presented). I <br />felt it was essential to use this charter as the framework for my recommendations to achieve <br />balanced flood risk management. <br /> <br />The Key Parameter of ‘finding solutions that meet local and state law’ was frustrating as I was <br />never able to understand Minnesota law requirements and why the current project did not receive a <br />permit. On several occasions task force member Tami Norgard asked for clarification of state law, <br />but answers never had clarity I could understand. It appears the intent of MN DNR was to more <br />closely balance new water storage between both states and to send more water downstream. <br /> <br />The second Key Parameter of ‘maintaining federal authorization and funding’ indicated the current <br />project remains the base project, but subject to ‘expedient and low-cost options’ to meet applicable <br />local and state law. <br /> <br />I commend the Governors for establishing and utilizing the Technical Advisor Group (TAG). TAG <br />was able to quickly analyze Concept Level Engineering Solutions. They, along with their support <br />staff and consultants, should be commended. <br /> <br />Task Force agreed on the ‘Design Principles’ of setting 100-year flood flow at 33,000 cfs. I felt there <br />was general agreement that Distributed Storage has basin-wide benefits but wouldn’t be <br />incorporated into project design. <br /> <br />Task Force assessed six Concept-Level Engineering Solutions studied by TAG. My level of support <br />is as follows: <br /> <br />I support adding both Western Tie-Back Levee and Eastern Tie-Back Levee. Both solutions <br />were supported by TAG as they reduce upstream impacts and are expedient and low-cost. <br />