Spatny, I didn't mean to confuse you with such a difficult question earlier. Let me re-phrase it. If you are so right regarding this dam issue, why is the Board ignoring you? You would think that a Board so rich in historical knowledge (all of the former FLOS members) would share just a minute level of concern. How did the compromise offer go over?
Riverside Info » About Riverside
Damn Removal
(24 posts)-
Posted Monday Feb 28, 2011 21:13 #
-
I am absolutely correct that no one has seen the complete proposal for the project. When I ask about that they say "don't worry" or don't answer at all. Same for when I ask "What has ever been built here or undergone destruction here without a finished plan, scrutiny, some verified knowledge of what will happen, etc. They won't answer, because what could they answer? Could they, would they say "You are correct, we don't have a finished plan yet and we didn't have one when we granted the easement" That wouldn't look right. Will they answer, "You are correct, nothing is allowed to be built or destroyed here without a plan, code checks, permits, etc." I doubt it. But if they go ahead and allow the Fairbank Dam to be removed without knowing and checking what the total project will be, then do you think they would be able to say - "Stop! - Don't go any further, don't do what you are planning to Hofmann or the Swan Pond if they don't like what they see? " Do you think they would do that?
What is the problem with waiting until the IDNR/ACofE plan is finished, checked and scrutinized before doing any work. The IDNR estimated that Fairbank could be done in a month, so what is the rush? And what is the delay in finishing the whole project plan - they've spent lots of money and worked - they say - on it for years. I think it took less time to build the great pyramid of Cheops.
Posted Monday Feb 28, 2011 21:29 # -
I think this letter in the Landmark shows that expenditures like the one for dam removal should - and probably will be - the exact kind of thing that the State and Feds could easily skip.
Can't spend money that's not there
In the coming days and weeks, state lawmakers will begin the process of crafting a state budget. The passage of recent budgeting reforms by the General Assembly now help ensure an end to business as usual when it comes to how the state spends tax dollars.No longer will the budgeting process start by taking the appropriations made to state agencies from last year and simply add more funds. These agencies will have to justify the need for all of their spending requests and learn how to do more with less than before.
Under the new budgeting process, the House Revenue Committee will be tasked with determining actual anticipated revenues that the state will be able to appropriate. When the Revenue Committee determines anticipated revenues, the House' appropriations committees will be given a finite spending limit. In short, we can't - and won't - spend money that isn't there.
As a member of the Revenue Committee, I will be in a unique position to help hold the line on state spending by acting as a fiscal watchdog over the House appropriations committees.
Just like a family that has to live on a budget, the state must also start to live within its means. Through my work on the Revenue Committee and in my other duties as state representative, I pledge to do everything I can to help pass a state budget that does more with less.
State Rep. Mike Zalewski (21st)
Riverside"No longer will the budgeting process start by taking the appropriations made to state agencies from last year and simply add more funds. These agencies will have to justify the need for all of their spending requests and learn how to do more with less than before."
That's just why Fairbank Dam should not be removed until it is certain that the Hofmann project will proceed. With both the State and the Feds looking for items to cut or eliminate how could you find a better one than this?
Also, today I visited the FPD person in charge of easements and he told me that neither the ACofE nor the IDNR had contacted him regarding an easement for the FPD to work from that side, which I was told back in November they would both explore doing. Too bad for us. Up at the FPD HQ they have a lot of pix of the construction back in the 1920s and 30s when they were working at other places on the river, up in Skokie Lagoons, etc. In those days they used a steam shovel with a 1 cu. yd. capacity and had to push the wheeled vehicles with a crawler dozer. Nowadays they use wheel loaders like they have at the quarry with eight cubic yard buckets. Imagine what the streets and parks will look like when they bring in that kind of equipment and ten cu. yd. trucks. What do you think that kind of wight will do to the roads, sewers, utilities up in the First Division? And the bridge? Back in the 1950s when the old bridge wore out and was closed for about two years people up there said how nice it was to not have all the traffic. Well that's going to be different now.
BTW, I saw a couple articles on Dutch Elm and how they found the first two affected trees on Michaux Road. They drew a circle around those two that extended to Delaplaine, Northwood and Nuttall and within that small area there were about 1000 elms, most of which are gone now. Those trees were replaced mostly with ash, and now we have the EAB looming. It seems like there is always something out there. Kudos to Mike Collins the Forester for getting that $10K EAB grant.
Posted Wednesday Mar 9, 2011 14:42 # -
King G - I went to the Olmsted meeting and asked them to get involved and look closely at the potential results. After I left I'm told they appointed a committee to look into it, which is good. Also, believe me when I say I am not the only one concerned about this. Here's the text of a letter a homeowner who is right on the river wrote the ACofE. He has not been getting any answers to his questions either.
"We spoke a number of months ago when I requested two things from the Army Corp: 1) a topographical map showing the width of the river at low water with the dam removed, 2) a public discussion of the remediation process above the dam. At a subsequent meeting, you handed me a study with some numbers, whereby I could figure out the widths myself. Unfortunately, the figures do not make much sense to me and I have been unable to ascertain what the river will look like after the dam is removed.
To those of us who live along the river and to other concerned parties, this is a serious issue. The wellspring of desire to see the dam removed, particularly among our elected officials and others who live far removed from the rivers banks does not justify the haste with which this project is currently being pursued.
What I am requesting is not beyond your capabilities. Conduct a thorough survey of the river, use flow rates from last summer and fall, when water levels were sufficiently low, then generate a map which will show clearly what the width of the river will look like and contrast it with what the river looks like today, with the dam in place.
At that same meeting, I gathered from your colleagues comments that the remediation process will be one where "nature will take its course". That is hardly a plan, especially when you consider that the dam was put in to alleviate that very thing.
The idea that this project was funded under the guise of public safety is beyond ludicrous. For a fraction of the $8 million dollars of taxpayer money this project will require, Riverside could have had a handicap accessible tunnel beneath the Burlington Northern railroad tracks. A safe passage for children and commuters alike. Instead the old tunnel was declared beyond repair and filled in with cement. There currently is no fine or penalty for coming close to or going over the dam.
The reluctance of our elected officials to require the Corp to be more thorough in this matter, while dismaying, does not remove the responsibility."
Posted Wednesday Mar 9, 2011 18:22 #
Reply
You must log in to post.