Orleans Levy Board and Flooding Issues

The Army Corps of Engineers blamed local New Orleans officials for the flooding during Hurricane Katrina, claiming they were forced to build an inferior system. However, evidence shows the Corps preferred a cheaper gates plan over more robust canal walls. The Orleans Levy Board advocated for the better plan, but the Corps' engineering failures led to the canal walls' collapse. The Corps lacks evidence to support their claims, and attempts to shift blame are deceptive.

What did the Army Corps of Engineers claim about the role of New Orleans officials in the flooding?

• They claimed officials supported the best plan.

• They claimed officials forced them to build an inferior system.

• They claimed officials had no involvement.

• They claimed officials provided additional funding.

What was the Corps' preferred plan for storm-proofing the drainage canals?

• Raising the height of the canal walls

• Building a new drainage system

• Gates-only plan without pumps

• Installing additional pumps

What was the Corps' justification for preferring the gates-only plan?

• It was the fastest to implement.

• It was the most effective solution.

• It was the cheapest option.

• It was the most popular choice.

Why did the Orleans Levy Board prefer the more expensive plan?

• They were pressured by the Corps.

• They wanted to save money.

• They believed it was the superior plan.

• They had no preference.

How did the Orleans Levy Board secure authorization for their preferred plan?

• By lobbying the state Congressional Delegation

• By negotiating with the Corps

• By conducting a public vote

• By securing private funding

What was the main reason for the failure of the canal walls during Katrina?

• The Corps failed to drive the steel sheet pilings to a proper depth.

• The walls were too old.

• Local agencies did not maintain the walls.

• The wrong plan was chosen.

What did the Corps admit regarding their claims about the flooding?

• They could not find any data to support their claims.

• They had no involvement in the decision-making.

• They had partial evidence.

• They had extensive evidence.

What was the outcome of the Corps' attempt to shift blame for the canal wall failures?

• It was ignored by the public.

• It led to new policies.

• It was criticized as deceptive.

• It was widely accepted.

What did the group Levees.org do in response to the Corps' claims?

• They funded a new study.

• They asked the Corps directly for proof.

• They supported the Corps' claims.

• They ignored the claims.

What was the reaction of the retired lieutenant general to the lack of evidence?

• He provided new evidence.

• He admitted to not personally researching the claims.

• He denied any wrongdoing.

• He blamed local agencies.