Board of Supervisor - Regular Meeting

Well, we'd like to welcome you all to uh the courthouse today and all of you out in Zoom land on this beautiful April morning. Little chilly, but it's okay. We'll start out today with awarding bids on joint one, two, and three Dickinson and Oola team FEMA projects and Opola is on right now as well. Michelle, can you hear us? We're not waiting. You're talking to me, Rachel?

Uh, no. Rachel, we uh will be on at 9:15 for you. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay, you're fine. I will I will sign off. I I couldn't hear you very well. Okay, thank you. You're good. You're good. Can you hear us, Jordan? Yes. Hey, good morning. Awesome. Good morning. Good morning, Dickson. We're kind of ready to go if you guys are. Yeah, we're ready. Good. Mr. John Heights here.

Good morning. On Friday, uh, April 3rd, we had the bid letting for the, uh, FEMA drainage district improvement projects. This included joint drainage district one, two, three with Oola County and then also solo drainage district 19 with Dickinson County. On Friday, we received five bids that were very competitive uh with the estimate with one bid being um extremely competitive from Diamond Concrete uh being the apparent low bidder for the sum total of $94,1028. Uh it would be my recommendation that we would award that project to Diamond Concrete of Spirit Lake, Iowa for the project. Is there any questions?

How can they be so much lower? That would be a question for them. So, yep. Um, they have up to 24 hours to rescend their bid and then save their bid bond. When there is a bid, they have to put up 10% up front or the most three of them. 90,000. So, we have not heard from representative of diamond. There was a representative there that would have had bid letting that heard all the other numbers um and haven't gotten a response yet. So I'm going to take no response as they're okay with their 90ome,000. Is that for all three districts?

$94,1028 is for all four districts. All four. Do we need to have a separate motion for the one, two, and three? And then I would Okay. Okay. I would assume so. Would anyone like to make a motion on accepting Diamond Concrete's bid on Joint Drainage District number one? You could probably do one, two, and three all together. Do one, two, and three together. And then DD19 separate.

Okay. Jordan says we should do one, two, and three together. So, if I could have a motion, please. I have one question first. Is is this? You froze up on us. Comparing there or or who is the who's the lead there? He said it froze up. Sorry. Can you hear us now? Yep. Yep. Okay. Are these comparing apples to apples? It it really seems I don't know what I want to say.

Expressively low extensive on what what the lower bid is. Are they doing the same as the others? Yeah. So we have engineered documents that specify the materials, specify the work, specify the extents of the work, the quantities of the work along with specifications for the standards of the work. So yes, they are bidding apples to apples and then also we will be inspecting the work during the work to make sure that the work gets completed per plans and specifications. So, okay.

Is there concern that they might withdraw than the 24 hours? The 24 hours is up um at after you open them. Okay. Thank you. The 24hour time period has been expired. I would I would add that Diamond Concrete is a very reputable contractor in the Lakes area. Uh has extensive work history um and has the ability and capability of doing this work. I'll make a motion. This is Kim Warmerson to accept the bid from Diamond Concrete or one, two, and three.

Steve Doard, I'll second. Now further discussion hearing none. Kim I Steveard I Steve Clark I Levi I Bill I see. Well I'm waiting for O Mr. Schulty. Hi Mr. Laur. Hi Mr. Vandy. Hi Mr. Hi. And Mr. Helmer's votes I.

Now we need a motion on division DD19. I'll make a motion to accept diamond concrete for DD19. Second. De Clark has seconded. Is there further discussion? none. Hi, Mr. Clark. Hi, Mr. Dollar. Hi, Levi. Hi. And Bill. All right. Thank you. We'll sign off now.

Thank you. Thanks, guys. I before you go, you guys really should vote on the B19 or that's No, that's only Dickens. That's Dickens. Okay. 9:07. We have a story. to item number eight.

Hey, Jordan. Um, the time and date for the amendment to the fiscal year 26 county budget is to be held on April 28th, 2026 at 9:00 a.m.

Do I have a motion on that? Motion to approve. Mr. Clark moves. I'll second. Levi seconds. Further discussion hearing? None. Mr. Clark. Hi. Levi. Hi. Mr. Dollar. Hi. Mr. Ch. Hi. And Bill was high. If I do number six bill,

number six. That would be good. Item number six, the approval of the March 23rd, 24th, and 31st board meeting minutes. Motion to approve. I'll second. Kim moves. Mr. Dollars. Further discussion hearing. None. Kim. Hi. Mr. Dollar. Hi. Mr. Clark. Hi. I

and Bill. And there is there are no drainage claims. I have six minutes. So, let's uh do our general discussion. Kim, you can start us off, please.

Um, I had a Zoom meeting with the rest of you last week about drainage district 19 for change order for more bank shaping and excavation. I was unable to make the conference board meeting because I had a doctor's appointment I couldn't reschedu and I did receive a call that I want to share with you board members about solar energy for the county buildings. They're talking about a five-year payback on the project which is pretty good. And I said I would bring it to you guys just to see if there's any interest for more discussion and learning more about it. What do you all think? This would be on all the buildings for Dickinson County.

They're going to cover everything that's I mean like what happens with hail disposal? Again, I I'm only bringing it to the table, Steve. I I have no knowledge of it. I said I'd bring it here. If you guys want more information, I'm going to be gone December. So, obviously, if you guys want more discussion on it, learn more, I think it would be up to you to do that. So, would they come here to present? They certainly would. Absolutely. So is there interest and I can tell them and then they could come and worst thing to do say no once they've presented, right? I guess it's no commitment. So I'll let them know. That's all I have.

Well, on Tuesday 24th, I had a Zoom meeting with Upper De Moine. uh discussion was about funding received, narrowing down their uh new goal structure that they're attempting and uh still working on their bibs and they had a selection of a new board member and then there was a bunch of questions that people had on their bylaws. So, they're in the process of answering those uh through the email. We've already gotten the answers on a couple. On the 26, I have a meeting with our church food pantry elders to uh get the materials requested by the hunger coalition. They have a uh which include the survey and a questionnaire. And we actually had nine people that uh supplied or that supplied answers to those questions and and filled out the surveys. Uh that afternoon I attended the recycle commission. They they renewed their IAP insurance coverage uh which had a 2.2% increase from last year and they discussed whether or not they wanted to further increase protection due to cyber security because there's a lot of issues going on right now with cyber security but they decided to keep it as quoted. Uh next they had a discussion on new fee structure and all fees are to uh remain the same except for the commercial loads. The fee increase we discussed with the conservation board in April and the summer hours at the RCC began in April. On the 30th, Bill, Mr. Clark, Levi and I attended the conference board. As a board, I think we need to have further discussions on this in the in the future. Uh later in the morning, Mr. Clark Levi and I attended a presentation put on by the Iowa Lakes Corridor about affordable

housing and uh home by homes for Iowa and that was uh hour and a half long and it it was pretty good. Uh I don't know that they'll ever get up this far, but they're they're like just a little south of us. These are homes that are built over uh at the uh correctional facility and then they transport around the state. Uh on the 31st, we had a Zoom call on DD19. And after that meeting, uh Bill and I uh had a meeting with the Spirit Lake city manager and Beck Engineering rep to address our concerns on the Cypress Ridge development. And on Thursday, I helped unload our church food pantry and then gathered up all the numbers from the uh that we were uh getting for the hunger coalition. I just emailed those over this morning and that's all I have.

Pretty good week, Steve.

Uh after the 24th meeting, I had uh didn't have anything the rest of that week. On the 30th, um we had the assessor's meeting. Um it was compromised. Let's say it that way. It was a compromise. Not much we can do about that. Uh the 31st was the uh lakes corridor development. Uh I really think that that's a a program worth exploring, but more for probably Terrell and Superior. Uh I don't think anybody in in the Lakes area, you know, wants to sacrifice land to that low of income development, but it may be something that will work in those smaller communities. Uh, it's a possibility. 31st or 31st we did the Zoom call.

Steve, we have just a little bit time. Just FYI. What? We only have just a little bit more time before 95. I'm watching there. The time's up. So, okay. A minute early. Well, I can keep going, but No, that's okay. It is now 9:15 and so it's uh time to that I open a public hearing on joint 61 branch 399 West

morning. So I yeah first of all we I've got some handouts back there if you did not get them in the crowd know there was some that got there a little before I did the board have you want me to I I take one

Rachel can you see that. Thanks. Yes, I can see it. Thank you. Yep. Half of the hands. armed.

Well, I appreciate everybody coming in once again. I know we've we've had approvals on this project technically twice already and now we're back back here revisiting it for a third part. So, I guess just to get us up to date, I'll kind of take us back in time a little bit. The the mostly familiar faces in here, but you know, a petition was filed. We went through the process, looked at different improve drainage improvement options in this district that includes approximately the north half of Terrell. Um we had several meetings and we we ended up kind of narrowing it down to this option you see on the map which is open ditch. So, it's that blue line starting at the joint 61 main open ditch at the right hand side of that map and extending westward approximately 3,000 ft on the north side at 230th Street. Uh that was, you know, going to be a low lower cost option. We talked about the pros and cons. You know, initially I had more extensive that extended further into the watershed. Um, but the cost was not something that was very, you know, landowners were very excited about. So, this was at least a foundational piece that could be built on in the future. At the time that the first approval was made, we, you know, based on discussions in legal counsel, you know, we were under the understanding that this the yellow line on the map, which is a

natural gas pipeline, that if it there was conflict with that, which there would be with a with an open ditch. If we just dug this open ditch, that pipeline would be sticking out into the air basically where the where the two cross. And so either the pipeline needed to be relocated underneath the new ditch or alternatively you would just pause the open ditch and and replace that section little hole underneath the pipeline for to get across the pipeline. Uh, and I guess we were under the understanding at that point that either the pipeline company was going to either have to pay for one of those two things. Um, and so then the the approval was made and that was a $450,000 project at that time was the cost estimate. Um after that meeting uh county at county county attorney at that time Steve Goodlo and myself worked on drafting a letter to send to them basically saying you're going to be responsible for this and they came back and said basically no we're not and here's why and uh the legal council basically thought that they had a pretty good argument and essentially the argument was that the section of Iowa law that was being relied upon to say that they would be responsible for the cost was not enacted until after that pipeline was installed. And the attorney said that, you know, more than likely that cannot be retroactively applied. So obviously very disappointing.

Um, so with that being said, the the lower cost option is doing the covert. So we came back again on January 6th of this year, a few months ago, and talked about, all right, do we still want to proceed with this project knowing that there's going to be that additional cost? So 450,000 to 520,000 to add that add that culbert. Um and the the decision that was made at that time was yes but with yes proceed but we need to have an acceptable agreement with the pipeline company to eliminate or at least limit potential liability on the drainage district in the future. So in simple terms, what if we put a ditch or a covert across there and 20 years from now something happens to that pipeline in that in that area and you know the pipeline company says well that's the drainage ditch did that and so now you guys are li are liable to to pay to pay to fix this. And obviously that could be a large sum of money. I mean, if you've seen pipeline explosions winds and stuff, it doesn't look like a good thing. Uh so that's that's where we were at. And then we went to the pipeline company and they gave us their standard their standard crossing agreement. So, if you look at that map, um the open ditch, we were trying to keep it from crossing, you know,

people's farmland. And so, we wanted to keep it right along the road. And what that did was is we're moving out of the tile easement and the pipeline has their own easement. And so if we're entering into their easement where we don't already have one, we b they need their permission to do that. And so the unfortunate thing is that gives them basically the leverage. They hold the cards. And so that agreement if it was approved, see there was something I wanted to read out of that. So it it basically states in this agreement that the operator as in the drainage district accepts full responsibility for all damage to the pipeline as a result of the initial installation operation or future maintenance of operator's facility that being the open ditch. So the there's different parts to that. The initial installation actually is actually we would be covered because if we get a if we get a con we put this out for bid, we get a contractor, that contractor is required to have um liability insurance. And so if something happens, the contractor hits the pipeline or damages it as part of the construction, that contractor and their insurance would would take care of that. Uh so that part of it really isn't as concerning as the next ones, operation or future maintenance of of the facility. So that's and maybe for those of you that weren't here on in January,

one of the things that was talked about with the liability concern is, okay, what if we have this scenario where it there's a flood and we've got this open ditch and then we we stop it to put a culvert in to cross this pipeline and it over tops that crossing and cuts a erodess a gully and exposes the pipeline maybe causes some damage and then you know oh the drains district liable. That was a a scenario that was brought up as you know being a concern. And so anyways that that's one thing that we're going to talk about. But I'm going to kind of circle back to that actually because I think that's the big crux of the whole decision is, you know, we we sign this and there's potential liability there, but the alternative if we still want improvements is a higher cost option. And question is, is the is the is it worth the risk? And so you have to ask what is the risk? What is the risk of something happening that they could come back and pin on the drainage district and actually succeed in in getting damages that would that the land owners in the drainage district you all would be responsible for paying. Uh but this this handout here is amendment number four to the engineers report. We've had several of them and essentially it's basically my thoughts on this as an overall like

whether or not we should do this or not. It's my thoughts. But it's easier for me to stand up here and say this is what I think you all should do when it's not not my money. It's not my not my neck on the line. So, we're going to go through this and then I'm going to open it up for questions, comments from land owners, board members, and you know, I know that this this is a this is a crappy situation. I'll just put it that way. Nobody wants to be in the like we want to do drainage improvements and this has been a thorn a thorn in our side for being able to accomplish those. Uh so now we're we're again faced with the decision where do we go from here? So I'm going to kind of hit some of the high points. Um and I'd circle back to is it worth the risk? And so I I've got starting on page one at the bottom of page one and moving on I've got several questions that you know if I'm trying to figure out the answer to that question what's some information that I would want to consider in evaluating the first one is we kind of touched on it what could happen that that would cause the open ditch or covert crossing to damage the pipeline and how likely Is this to occur? We talked about this flood over topping the covert cutting with gnully. It's that sort of a thing is not very likely to occur. For one thing, this is a very flat area. So, more than likely, if it's flooding out of its banks or something, it's going to be wide and not in a

concentrated flow. But, there's some erosion that could happen. I would be I would be very very very very surprised if there was a single event that could cut five feet down into the to the pipeline in one in one go. And so if it but it could happen over multiple and if nobody's watching, you know, it could get worse and worse and the pipeline would be exposed. But even if the pipeline expo is exposed, that doesn't necessarily mean it's damaged. So, and kind of an example of this is really like a quarter mile away that pipeline crosses uh the main open ditch of joint 61. Jordan, if you could bring the map, sorry, you could bring the map back up for just a little bit. Yeah, you see the very right hand side of that south of 230th Street, it crosses the main open ditch of Joint 61. And I wasn't around at the time, but um not that many years ago, that ditch was cleaned out and the pipeline actually is above the design bottom of that open ditch. And so when they dug, they didn't dig through it obviously, but they dug up to it on both sides and that pipeline was exposed in the bottom of that ditch. Pipeline company was notified of that and they never did anything. And that was very that's surprising. I mean, that's kind of telling to me that they either believe that it's quite strong because you can have ice jams and things that and now you can't see it. I mean, it's silted in enough that it's not visible, but I guess that's an example that it's quite strong. That's not to say that

something couldn't hurt it, but if if it's was exposed in the bottom of that ditch, I'd be a lot more worried about that harming the the pipeline than, you know, our scenario. Um, another possibility, and there's there could be more to this list than I'd be certainly over. We put a culvert underneath the pipeline. Something could happen with the culvert, right? It could collapse or get a hole and start sucking dirt and create a void um and avoid where the pipeline's at and possibly cause a problem. Uh, how likely is that to happen? Quite unlikely. Culverts typically don't just completely collapse down and typically they would rot out, get a hole in the bottom and not not as often in the top. Um, and they would very rarely suck dirt because typically the dirt thing is about there's water flowing in it and so it's pulling pulling dirt as it goes. So, we get the hole in the top. It's not likely to just suck tons and tons of dirt out. Uh if see, but that's another possibility. And then the second question is, all right, those are things that could theoretically happen. They kind of they're pretty unlikely, but I can't say impossible. So, are there things that we can do as part of this project that don't add a bunch of costs, but that would help protect against some of these potential failures that, you know, that could cause a problem. And there are some things. So, for example, if we've got that crossing and there's

dirt, where I would expect there to be a problem is if you have water above it where it's diving back into the ditch, that's where it's going to start eroding and then head cutting backwards. And so if you put rip wrap up there to if there was ever water that was that exited the ditch and wanted to dump in there, you could protect, you know, you could protect from erosion starting starting there by putting some rip wrap down at at not much cost. Uh for the for the culvert, you know, typically we would be looking at using a galvanized corrugated metal pipe. And you know, if you've seen those in different places, they don't last forever. And you can look at using different materials. So, one example is instead of galvanized coating, you can use aluminized coating. And that that has shown to last significantly longer without rotting out as compared to galvanized. And that actually I've I've looked at the price price points on those and you could do that for not not much more dollars. I actually had kind of considered doing that anyways before some of this discussion. If we went to kind of the the Lamborghini of the covert pipe, it would be uh reinforced concrete pipe and that if we did that would increase the cost significantly. Um, so I guess if we were going to do it, I would I would be recommending using aluminized corrugated metal cloud. And then another thing is, you know, we talked about it's pretty unlikely for something to all happen at once, but it's the slow over the over time, like maybe there's multiple events that start some erosion

or slowly you get this hole in there or it starts to rot out or maybe it's you start to see it collapsing a little bit. And so checking in on it and some, you know, every so often could help and and addressing things that come up. You know, be proactive instead of react. You know, you'd be reactive a little bit because if you see an issue, you fix it, but it would at least help address any issues before they became a real problem in the pipeline. Uh, we talked about number three a little bit. If the pipeline sustain damages, what cost? The drains district could be liable.

That's going to depend obviously, but it could be a lot of money. I've got in the report. It could be in excess of $1 million. You could put a number in there. I I can't answer that. I don't know. Um, but it could be significant. That I I guess that's the point. So, can the drainage district be held liable for money damages? Well, this is an interesting one. Uh, courts have hysterically historically hysterically historically held that drainage districts cannot be held liable for money damages. Most, you know, if you familiar with the De Mo Waterworks lawsuit, that was kind of a key part of that. But that's basically case law and as core cases come up, you know, that could change. And so you don't want to be the one on the wrong end of that either. And also, you know, we talked about this this crossing agreement. Does that affect things? If we if we sign off on this saying that it's agreed that the that the drainage district accepts responsibility for damages. Um yeah, anyways, so those are potential cause for concern, but historically drainage districts have not been held liable for money damages. Then one other thing I just want everyone to think about is if today or you know if we continue the hearing or whatever if ultimately it's decided that we just nyx the whole project

what are we saying about the future because th this problem isn't going to go away with with the with the natural gas pipeline. time. You know, if we want to do an open ditch, which for a reminder, the one reason why we wanted to do an open ditch instead of a tile was because of the significantly lower cost, you know, 300,000 plus less. And so we could there's one possibility of how we could maybe avoid maybe I don't know for sure, but maybe avoid signing this agreement. And you earlier I talked about easements, right? The drainage district has an easement for the existing tile system and that was put in over, you know, 100 years ago before the before the pipeline was put in. So we we have the rights within our easement. We could put a ditch or a tile

in that existing easement and probably not have to deal with this. um because it yeah we were there first basically but the tradeoff there is the tile is much more expensive. So those are all things to kind of think about. Um and I guess you know at the at the end of it my my thoughts are and I try to put myself in everyone you know landowner position and trying to think about this but my opinion would be is that it is basically the risk of something happening you know if we take reasonable steps to help protect against it. The risk of something happening that could come back on the drainage district and have a liability claim is very very small. If if we agree if we accept that well we can't do this because of the liability our only really our only possible alternative to get drainage improvements is to use the existing easement at a much higher cost. And so that doesn't sound great either. Uh so I guess I don't like this situation either. You know, I'm I'm recommending to to move forward with it, but obviously that ultimately is not my decision to make. Um I'm trying to look at this thing from engineering perspective and risk, you know, cost benefit analysis and or riskreward. so to speak, and try to give information

to land owners and the board to help you all make make the final decision. And I'll open it up to comments, questions, and I'll do my best to to answer and help help guide things. Thank you. Read the one letter that we received.

Yes. This letter serves as a formal written objection to the drainage district's proposed improvements to construct an open ditch at the bottom end of the tile system within joint drainage district 61 branch 399 west. Within joint DD61 branch 399 west, HCN Limited Partnership owns 122.24 acres, equating to 8.66% of the total acres. The HCN farm is located at the top of the drainage system in section 16 and has adequate drainage. An open ditch will not immediately enhance our farm's drainage. At best, the open ditch will relieve pressure from the existing system. Merely relieving pressure from the line is not worth our f financial expenses. We are opposed to an open ditch. We are in favor of abandoning the ID on an open ditch at the bottom end of the tile within joint drainage district 61 branch 399 west, especially now since natural gas company is unwilling to sign an agreement waving all liability to the drainage district from any future damage surrounding the natural gas pipeline. Even with waiver of liability, we are not in favor of an open ditch. Sincerely, David Crier, farm manager for HC Unlimited Partnership. Does anyone have any thoughts on this situation?

I got off the floor for a second. My name is Brandon Anderson. Um I'm a city superintendent for the city of Terrell. Um there was discussion at the last council meeting about this and there was quite a few people that are opposed to it. Um as far as city council, there's no guarantee that this ditch is going to help the city. If there were those guarantees, it'd be a different story. But the city of Ter's already a struggling community and we're putting more burden on these people through the financial obligation of it. So um we're just thinking about the people of the community since we're already struggling. So

yeah, just a quick comment on that. I know that as this project has kind of evolved that has that was a big part of the discussion. You know, initially initially there was like a $ 1.5 million price tag and we were taking tile a tile line up to taro that definitely would help up there, but the the overall cost was deemed too expensive. So, we got it whittleled down to this. But the downfall of it is this other comment from HCN. They're on the west. Let's see. Yeah. On the west side of N52. So they're west N14. Sorry.

Yep.

Um the same thing with Terrell as is with them. We put this open ditch in. It's 3,000 ft. And so you still have the existing undersized drainage infrastructure to take the water that to that ditch. And so it is a lower cost, but it's not going to reap immediate benefits for for everyone the way that the higher cost one would. One thought behind it was well this can be the kind of the foundational piece and in the future we can build upon it in in maybe in phases or a piece at a time. But yeah, I I completely get where you're coming from. There would be an expense to be paid for, you know, really is there going to be an immediate drainage benefit to the folks in Terrell? Probably not. But then doesn't that mean, Colin, that those that it would help the most would pay the most?

Yeah, that's that's true. Yep. So that we did we did a pre-class and

Yes. You know, the further away you are from the improvements, the less benefit you have from them. So if we have this open dish, the the lands that are further away from that are have less benefit from it being completed. So they're playing paying a lower proportion of the the overall cost. It's not an equal dollar per acre. It's set up by benefit. So the less benefit there is, the less the land owner pays towards the project. Yeah, good point. Yes,

you have a question. What's the quantitative exposure in terms of money to these people in ter if we go with one scenario or the second scenario or the third scenario? So, if you could break that out instead of so it's less vague. I mean, you have some kind of projections that that you haven't put out here in terms of the quantification. So, I'd like to know what the numbers are. Yeah, I I really don't have those. So, it I can't I can't make an estimate of what the possible damages could be if there's an issue with the pipeline because there's there's a lot of different scenarios of what could happen. And so, it's really hard to say this is the potential exposure. That's that's kind of what I was talking about with well it could be in excess of a million dollars but I really can't say

okay but where is that where is that exposure who is exposed in other words you there's an issue raised about the people of terror which I think we all understand that but what are we talking about specifically how much is it likely if we do one thing or you do another how much exposure is to the citizens of terror that's my question. Okay. There's got to be some way to figure that out. It's not a mystical question. It's it's a quantitative question. Yeah. So, and when you say scenarios help, I'm going to try to answer your question, but you mean if there's issues with the natural gas pipeline or do you mean if there's not?

Look, there's different alternatives on the table. So, what I'm saying is is go through the alternatives and give us the quantification on the pool. If we go this way, what's it likely to cost? What's the upper upper limit? What's the lower limit? This is not rocket science. This is just basic construction issues. Okay. I The only option we're talking about as far as construction is this 30,000 foot open ditch. The cost estimate for that project is $520,000. We did a pre we did a preliminary classification as part of a prior uh amendment to the engineers report that showed cost breakdowns for for that for it was a $450,000 project. So you'd have to add 15%. But I believe got it back there. It's I believe it's amendment maybe amendment two

this one is this what you're asking like different options of what we've talked about previously what I'm asking is is what's the exposure you've got a bunch of citizens that are evidently concerned that he's referring to what I'm asking is depending on what is done what's the what's the exposure to these citizens and territory. Are you talking the exposure of the pipeline or are you talking the exposure of the different projects that were proposed? Like how much is it likely to cost? Right. We've already done this project. We've done this for a long time. But I can

I think what Mr. Kelly is is really asking is what's the liability exposure to the to the citizens if something would happen to the pipeline and the drainage district would have to pay for repairing the pipeline. What would the liability exposure be? Is that is that correct? Yeah, that's fair enough. I just think instead he wants to know what move away from vagueness to more

wants to know what the liability exposure you know that would have let's let's and you can only do this in an a proposed scenario if the there was a problem with the pipeline and it cost a million dollars to fix it. Then if it went to court and the court ruled that it was the pro the uh it the drainage district should pay for it then it should would have to be prorated out based on uh

the reclassification on what it would be. So, you know, based on a million dollars, well, let's make it a million half dollars because we have a estimate on what that would would cost uh to put it in. You know, that'd be $95 or $1,000 an acre. So, if you owned a small lot in Terrell and it was a a quarter acre, it cost you $250. I'm just just kind of doing this off the top of my head. That would be the liability exposure if there was a P pipeline problem.

I I have the dollars map based on a $450,000 levy for this open ditch project. So it's lower dollars per acre in Terrell because they're farther away, but it's still similar. I mean, if you take these numbers times three, even most of those most of those lots are well below $500 if there was some, you know, if there was a $ 1.5 million liability claim that succeeded against the drainage district.

But here again, if there was a claim filed against the drainage district, we would have to spend money to defend that. And that money would come from the people on that branch, branch 3, 399 west of the drainage district. So it would could possibly cost them no matter what. Well, there's got to be something that's driving that emotion that he was talking about. The fellow from Terrell mentioned there's some kind of concern over there amongst these people. I'm just trying to flesh out what is that exposure that's got them so jumpy about

Yeah, I'm Don Ericson. I I think I live right next to where you're putting it through. Um I haven't Right. Well, then you came and we have to cut down six trees to maintain another drainage ditch or tile. But then you're going to expect us to pay for this thing which is not on our land. But why am I losing six of my good trees to repair an old tile? Several years ago, uh these guys voted to cut down false tree and tarot, which don't mean crap to anybody but except me. And we had to cut that down. We shared, you know, the cost with the neighbor and uh then they go through to check this, you know, put the whatever they examine it. No, no, no. That tree never caused any problems. So now you're saying my six trees that you come and tied the ribbon around and you want me to cut them down just because I have nothing better to do and and keep an old pipeline open and then when this comes through to go back to the farmer that started this in the first mess, then I can pay for that for him, too. I don't I've thought about it and I thought about it and I don't get it.

Yeah. Well, the the tree thing and you know, we've talked about that. Initially, there was a tile line that we were going to improve and go around your acreage. And that, you know, that co the cost of that project was deemed by the land owners and the board to be too expensive to want to do. And so, we backed off of that to this where we're just doing the open ditch. So, there's an existing 10-in clay tile that goes through your acreage, and there was a concern raised by a land owner that, hey, you ought to check to see if there's tree roots blocking the tile. And so, we had a contractor go out and dig out in the field and run a camera from both directions. And sure enough, there's three roots completely filling that tile. So we we know where that camera was, where the tree roots were in the tile, and there's a tree right there on your property. So that's that's kind of the process we went through. I I apologize. I I was not part of the previous situation that you're talking about with a tree being cut down and you know, that wasn't a problem. Any I don't know anything about that. I'm sorry I can't understand that,

but I I can just tell you that that the tile through through your acreage is blocked with tree roots and there's no cleaning it out like other places do. So see that's yeah that's the problem is that you put in a a what do you call it in the ground not something the sewage thing and in an acreage in Spencer and yes it did cost us 30 grand but one of them was to have how go through rotor router

them out so is this not I mean I know my trees don't mean nothing to you but they're 35 five years of us growing them. And so then I don't even know uh Powels apparently think that that's where it's plugged. So if that's where it's plugged, why are you doing this other project and when you get your other project done, then you you discontinue the one that just caused our trees gone?

No. The concern with the tree roots would have been eliminated if we were going to do that improvement project that ran a tile around your acreage. But since that did not go through that tile that go runs through your acreage, I mean it the water from the north part of Terrell goes in it's supposed to go in there and I know that water comes out of the intake and the road and runs across the field and stuff and the the board of supervisors as trustees for that district has has a legal obligation to keep it in operation. And so if it's restricted or obstructed with tree roots, I mean, it says it right in state law that they they have to fix that. And you're right. I mean, and that's part of as as far as cleaning it out, cleaning the tile out. You're right. That's something that can be done and it will be done. However, if you just clear it out, the tree runs scroll back in. If you don't do anything about the tree, the tree itself, you're not you're going to have to come back there, you know, every few years and and rotoroot it again.

So, where would that one start? The tile. You mean the tile that was previously proposed?

The one I got a Where's my trees to that? The one that's existing. If you look at the map there, that shows, you can see your acreage there in the northeast corner of Terrell. That black dotted line. Go to the left, Jordan, if you would. That's where it ends up. But you can, if you follow that black dotted line, that's the tile. That's the existing tile system. So the the tile that runs through your property is branch 46. And that dumps into the main that then dumps into the 61 main open ditch.

Was the tile put in before the trees or were the trees put in after the top? The tile was put in before the trees. The tile was put in a 100 years ago.

Okay. And then tile then trees were planted. Right now in general, I don't know what the Iowa law is. I know a little bit about the California law, but if you plant a tree, and I did it. I took a Christmas tree and I planted it out in front of my house and then it grew up, you know, fast, unbelievably fast. And the next thing I know, few years later, I've got a major root hassle and a backup in my house. Now, it seems just kind of off the cuff, with all due respect, you if you plant a tree, you got some kind of responsibility for what happens with the roots from that tree.

Now, I'm not trying to cast anything, but it seems like there's got to be maybe this is what the board has to decide what's the accountability piece and how much does it cost and who pays, right? We talked about that. We talked about all this back in January. Really isn't

I mean I I don't want to just shut down the conversation, but it's really not directly what we're having the hearing about either. Uh we we did we did talk about that though. I mean there's Yeah. Well, just an easy explanation for a lot of this is back when this drainage district was established in 19 well was proposed in 1912 and established and I think constructed in 15 1915 and 16. the north half of the town of Terara was still fields, you know, and it was drained then, you know, and unfortunately there's nothing required in the state law or anything to tell a person when they buy a piece of property that there could be could be in a drainage district and be responsible for those costs to maintain it because you can't just shut a drainage district down. You know, this has all been addressed before and unfortunately, you know, farmers think about drainage, you know, that's that's right up to the top of things. You know, when they consider purchasing a property, land owners in town, expect especially as towns move out into rural areas don't, you know, personal property land owners for a house don't think about, you know, drainage districts. you know, it's something we address a lot here and it's unfortunate, but there's no law that pertains to that. You know, uh it just it's it's how the old drainage district law or state drainage code is written and we have to adhere to it. The challenge today is though, do we go with the open ditch with open liability from the gas company and proceed with that at the cost we're

talking about or do we go back and maybe take a look at the $300,000 more project because something has to be done. This isn't going to go away. Something has to be done. What do you as land owner see in the long run is the best for you? Unfortunately, and and we've run into this in in my district as well, cities get involved with this because they're part of a drainage district and it affects folks. And so, are you going to take a look at we want to take this with the liability from the natural gas on the drainage district at that cost or we scrap that and go with a better tile system or correct tile system? That's where we're at. Oh, can I how how long and how deep is a culbert that would go underneath the gas line?

It actually would to meet their requirements. It actually would have to be pretty long like 130 feet. I think it's it's not just a 40 foot cover because they had some requirements about free distance perpendicular to the pipeline that they need like 30 feet on each side essentially. So that made it longer and that would be five foot in the ground. The covert, no, the covert would be could the ditch actually in some places would be up to 13 feet deep. And so, you know, we put this cover underneath that pipe of the pipeline is about five feet deep.

And so we need to be to actually have two foot of separation. So, you know, the covert would be quite quite deep. So, I mean, our risk exposure would be we'd have to take out 13 foot of soil over top of this thing for 120 ft and the rip wrap on both sides. I'm just looking at what's the likelihood of taking out, you know, our exposure to damage the pipeline would have to take all that dirt out. How much dirt is actually there that would have to be taken out? Well, and you know, you'd have to take out five feet of dirt to to expose the pipeline, but if you were going to damage it, you'd

I guess I get what you're saying. You you'd probably want it would erode deeper to get underneath it to create a void or something. I Yeah, I live in Spencer, so I've seen it all. Sure. Sure. But I'm just looking at I mean, we'd have to take out 130 feet of soil in one rain event, right? I mean, if it's if it's if it's over time, I mean, we can monitor that, right? Yeah. And exposure exposure doesn't mean damage either. It can be exposed and not be damaged. And we can if it's exposed and we do something about it, we're fine. It would have to be, you know, expos something that would cause it to do damage to the pipeline.

So, probably the longer that cover would be, the safer we would be from water doing damage to it. Correct. Yeah. that we'd be coming in further away. Yeah. Wouldn't that be a simple fix to to help at least remedy some of the exposure? I guess it do. A piece of cover would probably be a lot cheaper than a alternative, I guess. Right. Right. I have a question. When whenever you're ready, you're on.

Okay. I I don't have anything in front of me to look at, but Colin, could you explain exactly what it looks like existing what the existing pipe pipe or I mean drainage looks like where that co where the uh gas pipeline crosses and it Yeah. What does that look like? Right where it crosses right now. Mean where the where the pipeline crosses the existing drainage district tile. Is that correct? Over where you're going to put the um drain the actual ditch.

What's there now?

The ditch the ditch and the existing drainage tile. The proposed ditch is in a different location than the existing drainage tile. So, we were going to run the we were going to run the open ditch on the north side of 230th Street, right along the edge of the road and h basically hugging the road. And that tile kind of weaves around a little bit further to the north as it's as it's going west and then it crosses to the south side of 230th Street about the location where we would end the Oval. I don't know if that paints enough of a picture for you, but

yeah. So, it doesn't actually I mean, there's nothing you can do to go with the existing um uh tile that's down there without interfering with the pipeline at all. Even if it was to just join existing tile um with better better tile for little ways, it would make wouldn't make any difference if you didn't even have to do a covert. You know, stop wherever the pipeline.

You're talking about running a larger diameter tile and stop on the east side of the pipeline. Yeah. And then and then yeah so to where you yeah you just leave the existing rather than do nothing per se. Per say you just Yeah. Okay. You understand what I'm asking?

Yes. That's kind of an extreme version of what we've talked about a little bit today where we've kind of weaned this project down to this open ditch. We narrowed the scope I'll say. And there's already comments from citizens of Terrell and lands on the outer fringes of the district saying, "Well, this open ditch isn't going to have an immediate, you know, drainage improvement response for me." And that would be much even more so the case if we only did, you know, 600 feet of of tile improvement and just stop short of the pipeline. In in my opinion, if if that's what we're getting down to, we just assume scrap scrap the project. I don't think it's worth putting in 600 feet of of improved tile. It's not going to help it's not going to help people enough to be worthwhile.

Okay. And then in in that respect, what what was the other option you were talking about? if you actually used the the good new u aluminiz tile or drainage and and uh actually did part. I mean, do you have to do another amendment to to make that work or is that all set up?

Well, the aluminiz stuff that was about the culvert in the open ditch to cross the natural gas pipeline. So, that's all fine. The other potential option that I don't have, you know, a a full cost estimate or option for would be running a improved tile, you know, just off to the side of the existing tile about the same distance as this open ditch. But I can tell you I can tell you it's going to be much more expensive than this open gauge option.

300,000 plus. I've looked at it enough to know that. Um so truthfully, if we've had a lot of meetings and and I feel like that we probably have enough information that going back and doing that and coming back again isn't going to get us enough additional information to say to be worth it. Every time we do this, it's, you know, there's time spent by me and everyone else and then, you know, there's engineering bills that continue to rack up and I want to be sensitive to that as well. So I don't guess in my opinion that would not be a wise use of the drainage districts the land owners resources. Okay. Thanks. And then the other question I have is could you clarify what you meant by like um doing the there was something that you were comparing uh that it wouldn't be quite the problem as of as of doing the covert if you did something else. Is that is is that what what you meant with if you did new tile where the existing tile is versus No,

I don't know based on your question. I'm speculating that that was part of the discussion about different pipe materials to be used as the covert that would be put underneath the natural gas pipeline. basically, okay, put in a better put in a better culvert to limit concerns about future issues that could come up that would cause a that could cause a a liability claim against the drainage district.

Okay, I understand that. Okay, thank you. to to back off to piggy back on to what Rachel I think it was Rachel was asking the the idea of leaving the original rightway terrifies me but I did I hear her ask about running like you had a 45 inch diameter pipe proposed in the expensive number one plant 45 I think it's 48 48 so running a 48 inch tile from wherever it's going to terminate at the dredge ditch to beyond the point where it crosses the gas and then going open ditch the rest. Is that 600 feet? 200 feet. What is that?

Yeah, it's about 600 feet. 600 feet. So cost prohibitive in your opinion, huh?

Yeah. The So the the problem with that one and initially, if you remember back, I didn't start with an open ditch option. I it was strictly tile and open ditches. It's cheaper to throw dirt than it is to buy pipe, throw dirt, put it in. But when you do an open ditch, you have to purchase rightaway. And the rightway, it isn't, you know, it's a damage. It's damage payments basically. And so it's how much are you damaging property by putting that open ditch in? If we keep it along the road like what I have proposed, we're not, you know, it's it's basically only hurting the land that we took and we can buy that. But if we run across the middle of a field and it's not the middle, but if we go up there, there's this strip that is severely degraded, it would hurt the property value of that. And so we would have the drainage district would have to pay for that damage to the property value. So that's my concern with doing open ditches out more in the middle of a field where there's farmland on both sides to square that up from the road to the original easement. It it can't be a couple acres, can it? Involve you were to buy the square.

Uh 30,000 bucks. Not that big of a deal. Yeah, I would have to look at that a little bit closer. I mean that because the tile according to the you know we haven't gone out there and dug it up but according to the original maps you know it doesn't just go straight across that property. It kind of does a little bit of of a wiggle. So if we wanted to put a ditch we and try to stay as much in that easement as we could. We still want to run it straight, but shift it to the north and then there'd be more acres on the on the south side of that ditch that, you know, we'd need to up that rightway acquisition cost.

Yep. I I don't The last thing I'll do is kick the can down the road on a thing any further. I from what I heard the people that own that land would be negotiable with something if if you could continue the ditch like you had get to where you need to get to the easement and then do a veer with a then you could put in a pipe and then you could probably go back to the ditch on the other side. We would have to buy some land. But I, no pun intended, but the price of immunity for any financial charges is priceless. When you give that up, right? You know, I get that.

The original the original easement is my first choice. Now, if we can't do it, so be it. At the same time, if we literally just drop this project and walk away, that's a pretty pretty bad statement to make as well because there are people I mean, personally, I don't really benefit from this much at all. I mean, I don't need this at all. But I also understand there are people that do need drainage here and they need an improvement and I get that. What to me and I'll just go on a minute. What the biggest surprise to me this whole project was the way this rightway worked out. I really thought drainage districts would have this. What I didn't do after I did a lot of study on case history and precedence on this and what I found is that yes the pipeline rarely lost the argument of who pays for relocating almost never. The reason that they lost was because they had huge at huge armies of attorneys to fight a drainage district just like us. bunch of people that don't have the funds or the desire to waste their money on it. The uh the second thing I learned was while yes, they they never have to pay for rarely had to pay for the cost of relocation, they don't have veto power either. In other words, they can't stop you from putting an improvement in, especially in your easement that's already existing,

right?

They can they can use standard uh distances. they can't make new ones to stop you from doing it. So, they can't stop us from doing this at all. And that gave me some hope here that we could take the easement we've got, drop it down to a 48 inch or whatever you had, put it in there and finish the tile out. And yes, it would cost us some more money, but I'm terrified giving up that I'm terrified of giving up the immunity. I mean, there has never been a stronger case of immunity that I'm aware of passed down anywhere. We literally as a drainage districts have total immunity or we can do with impunity. We can send a probable cin carcinogen into drinking water and there's not a damn thing anybody can do about it. Go drainage districts, right? We've we are really safe until we get out of this. We give it up now that something happens to the pipe. we're on the hook. I would like to know what kind of a deal we can make with that land owner to try to get this through the existing easement. Granted, that might not work and we'd be back to where we are now. But the last the last thing I'd want to do is sign that document. That's that would be my last last favorite move. Keeping in mind, I'm not saying I wouldn't do it because people do need access to drainage. We can't, it can't be true that the law is such that we can't drain land. That just can't be true. So, we've got to find a way. So, in summary, how much more would it really cost to stay in the Eastman?

Yeah, I don't I don't know the answer to that. Well, we can assume land is 15,000 an acre. So, we can take that times in Right. Because it Yeah. Essentially at that point, if you squared it off across there, you just you pretty much have to buy land where the ditch is going to be and everything to the south. And I don't know how far that is. I They really don't. I always thought it was closer to the road than that, but been a long time since I fished bullheads there. Yeah, it would be a fairly simple calculation, but I have to look at that.

The other Yeah, there's other stuff to think about that with that too because we'd want to run this ditch straight across and the tile goes like this and there's not a established width of easement of that, you know, along that existing and then we'd be switching from a tile to a ditch. and all that stuff.

Well, I guess it for the pipeline, none of that matters except where we cross the pipeline. So if we cross the pipeline at the exact I mean really close to the location of that existing tile then we're are we are within our easement drainage code is clear that that easement exists since it was establish the district was established and is can be used for the purposes of improvements not just repairs or you know maintenance or inspection you can do improvements within that easement. So it is re and it can be bigger like if you put a bigger pipe in there. Yeah. That's that would be considered to be an improvement. Sure. Yeah.

And that could be done in 50 years too if they needed if they needed to come back here they would have that easement. If we give up that easement we don't have that opportunity. I don't think I mean if we go with a new location we've seated our subordinate or our our in major our advant yeah we've given it up I would rather buy land if I had to buy land that's so then the question would be is how much more would that cost and that's where you were leading oh Jane knows how much it would cost I mean it's 15,000 catches most of the land who are buying land from who would that be?

Uh, what's the name of the Don or something? Who pays for the purchase? If you do, oh, the land owners of the district do advertised across the whole universe. It would be part of this project cost. So, if we, you know, we were talking about $520,000 for the the overall project. If we moved it and there was additional cost, you know, whatever that would be, that would be the project cost. So it' be spread out based on that same.

So that I mean that'd be something that'd be fairly easy for me to to look into and get an answer on. The question would be is if man I don't know where we're at with the board but we can continue the hearing without doing if we set a new date today without sending no notices all I know we've done notices several times um but we're kind of into getting close to planning season too and we typically don't have hearings during that. So, I don't know if we continue it to late May or I don't know.

What are you talking about now? Going with a 48 inch tile from the drainage ditch to west of the pipeline. Well, and then go open ditch from there to the I probably would promote the idea of actually doing open ditch the whole way and then just put this cover crossing right where right where the existing tile crosses that pipeline. So, it's within our existing e

and if it's in within our existing easement this this agreement is because it was in their easement and so we're we need permission. We need consent to to to use their easement for this ditch. Well, if we put it where our easement is and our easement was first. Yeah. That's the idea where easement is is where the black dots are. So, it's a further a little further north. Yes. Than what the original pipe or original ditch would be.

Right. Yep. So then if we move the ditch to the north, then you'd have additional land on the south side of the ditch that would have to be ba basically the rightway acquisition cost at a minimum would go up. But how much? That's that's the question. Then what when you got west of the pipeline, you'd move it back south the ditch or right along the gravel road. That's something I would have to look at. I was thinking about that as Tim was talking about. Okay, once we once we get across the road, what do we need? It goes through my 80. Yeah, that pipeline's a lot further north and I don't want that sliver of ground on the south side that I can't use.

And we don't need to have the ditch up there in that location. Anyways, we just need it where the cross where the existing tile crosses the pipeline. That's where we want the ditch to be there. But beyond to the west, we can put the ditch wherever we want because we don't have the pipeline.

Yes. The other thing you keep coming back to every time you have the discussion is you give up that easement forever. Never again can you just look at Iowa drainage law. You have to look at the easement you signed with the gas company in 2026. And it's you're forfeiting a really good position or a really bad position. Nobody here in this room will probably be alive when it happens. Well, maybe in, but not very many people are going to be around then, but boy will we be a bunch of we would really be scorned going forward if they ever have to do anything really serious with that drainage or decide to. Probably everybody will go to putting in wetlands and retain that so we won't have bigger culprits. But in the meantime, we're doing this. Were you suggesting that we were going to transfer our easements back or was this just giving them up by attrition or something?

Well, so Tim, you can correct me if I'm wrong here, but he he was saying give up our easements, but we would still have that district tile. Look, in my opinion, we would still have that easement and then we purchase this right away for the open ditch. So, we wouldn't give it up. But what he's saying is we'd be operating on their terms instead of, you know, us being having the having the power being in the driver's seat. Understand that part. I'm just wondering where the idea comes from. We're t we're talking about the dotted lines of

north of the where you're planning on digging. We're not going to give up those easements where the where they exist already. We're not going to sign them over. No. So Tim, are you suggesting just by legal effect?

What I'm suggesting is those drainage easements are spelled out by how many feet from some measurement and they are right here 50 feet plus or minus. Right. So if we move out of that area and we get a new prescribed I suppose it would be prescribed easement again giving a specific location where we're going to cross. So this one over here will sit there unused. Now drainage districts have I don't even think drainage district can give up rightway hard. It it's really complicated to give up rightway. You have to go through a process to do it. In fact, many court cases have come back and found a drainage easement that had been used for years was still valid because that board of director, board of supervisors never gave it up. So, yeah, I I guess I maybe misspoke when I said give it up. What I'm saying is we're not going to use that drainage that easement anymore if I'm correct in that they're prescribed for a given number of feet in each direction and at a given depth as well. Is that am I right on that, Colin?

Well, we would Yeah. How I would view it is we would retain those easements because we're going to if if we did this ditch project as is, we would leave those tile in place and hook them if they come to the ditch, we'd hook them in, but we would still have that easement to that to that tile. The only way if we abandoned it, then then you might have acquiescent issue like what he's kind of talking about. I think

I don't think so though. I I think it stays unless you literally take the action to abandon it. I I feels like I read that someplace. I can't say that. But but all of our money is going to be spent over here on this easement. It's a separate easement, right? That's the way they would spell it out. They're going to give you a easement across here, right? And isn't it usually 50 feet with a 100 foot construction or some number that they use here or for the new east that you get for the drainage district? Are you talking for the

from the pipelines to the drainage district where we're going to cross if we move it? They really didn't specify a width. They just had a requirement of different. It says no physical structure within 25 feet of a pipeline. It's a C. It's really it doesn't consent for crossing companies pipelines and easiness. Maybe they're done as build or something. I don't know how they do that. But I know that every ement I've got on every farm I have has a specific place where it's applies to said where it gets exactly.

I So I don't know that this is conveying an easement. This is permission to cross, which I don't The point's the same. If you want to do anything in the future, you still have to go back through this, right?

Whereas for a little more money up front now, we could just buy buy right away, buy the land, whatever we have to do, and then we can put in what we need. And keep in mind, too, that this is a step. If the drainage continues to be bad and people want drainage upstream, they can get it. If for some reason my grandkids decide they want to drain our farm, they they would have an outlet. But if we don't solve this problem first, nobody's going to get an outlet out of here. Is buying the land a better option than just running a 48 inch until you get past the pipeline? The current system now that we have an easement and goes to the ditch, could you run an open ditch to there?

So you're saying do an open ditch from the west end up to the pipeline and then run a 48 inch tile underneath the pipeline all the way to the creek. You mean from the creek to the pipeline? Is that Yeah, correct. That's what we talked about a minute ago. Can you compare that cost with actually buying the land and having ditch? Yeah. Um I I have something I'd like to share. Okay.

Hello. Yes. Um, I just want I want to thank everybody for all the deliberation that's going on here and all the the amendments and everything because this has really shown, you know, strong community togetherness with the board and and the farmers and and everybody speaking and trying to come up with a solution and and I realize it's a tough situation for everybody and and I think

I'm not sure exactly where things stand because we don't have enough. There wasn't enough to nyx the project, right? And so the the board actually has the say, but listening to everybody um voting for that decision to start with just the the small step. Um I thought was real bill. It'sformational so it's okay if we go over

Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. Go ahead, ma'am. Apparently, I was misled. Continue. The 10:30 that's on the agenda isformational, so doesn't have to start at 10:30. So, I apologize. Please continue.

No, that's no problem. But I I think I've said what I need to say. Um, and I know that uh I appreciate everybody taking the time to think it all through and and if that someone else has to make the ultimate decision for the land owners um hearing what everybody said, I I just wanted to tell tell you I appreciate everything and I don't know if my video works, but but if it does, hi and thanks. Thanks, Rachel.

Yeah. And our pot, please. Anything else anyone would like to discuss? Colin, do you have any suggestions for us at this point? Well, I guess I think I think it would be worthwhile to look at this idea of moving it to the north and seeing what that cost would be. You know, it it it's when I was thinking about it like in this amendment four, right? This ditch versus just doing a t that replacing that tile for 300 over $300,000 more seems like a lot. But if we could do we could move the ditch up or do a ditch tile thing and cross and eliminate this issue operating our own easement at the crossing. How you know if it cost 40,000 more then we'd have we'd be able to come here and ask that question. Is it is it worth that? So we don't know unless we have that number. But it's not gonna I don't think it's going to be $300,000 for. So it's probably worth looking at. It's not going to be a lot of engineering effort to try to figure that out either.

Could we schedule something for the end of April? Would three weeks be enough like April 28th? If the land owner I mean yeah with planting season is my only concern if people wouldn't be able to come because of that or something there's snow tomorrow end of April I can change it changes every day

so whatever you want to do is fine with me but I would and I don't want people to be able to not participate because they're busy with army. One one thing going forward though is just because I said it loud doesn't mean it's right. I mean, what if John is on to something where that easily, if we got it from them, would would carry the same weight as the original easel, then the plan that you came before him with today, would be probably a pretty good idea if you don't, you know, John's got me think second guessing now a little bit. But every time I've seen one of them, it's been they have to cross in a certain spot. But what if what if like you know John's got me thinking because what if it is blanketed where the drainage ement would have the same where would be the same have the same value as the drainagement in a new location because I maybe it's worth asking that because then all your engineering stays right where it's at because that is my only objection to getting out of the original easement is losing the Iowa grain. law coverage that we have today. Yeah. You got a couple inches of rain.

Yeah. Well, yeah. I guess unless board is ready to make a decision on this, you can continue it to a later date. From here to here. No. If there's no more public comment, I will close the public meeting and then board. What do you want to do? Did you come up with a date? It's April 28th to Is that in the middle of everything? April, we're all available. If if if people are in the field, they can get they can call us and let us know,

you know. So, April 28th at 9:30.

I remember if I've got no line. Give me a little bit. figure out. I know I've got something in Forest City on either 25. I don't know. I don't have it in my emails. Of course, I don't have my calendar.

I'm going to call Brooke.

I have to get on my computer. That's okay. Sorry about that. Figured out how to think my computer is is the 21st or the 28th for those days would be okay. Yeah. Would just Well, I mean depending on if you're not if you're not available on the 28th 21st. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Your call is important to us. We'll be right with you

at the mercy of the answering machine.

Okay, I'm going to go see if we have anything. Yeah, I everybody I appreciate Rachel was saying I appreciate all the conversation and comments and participation I think that they're talking about now just try to get yeah to a good resolution I wish we didn't have to deal with this pipeline deal no I want

I used to be the best option it's more expensive in time to get her blood off the

No, still have to pay these guys help them out. It was also here early on peace meal. That's my mess with that size.

April 21st at 9:30. April 21st at 9:30. That'll work. I'll make a motion we continue the hearing till April 21st at 9:30. Thank Mr. Clark. I'll second. Is there further discussion? at 8:15 that day. Okay, we should be good. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

So, let's go. Okay. If there's no discussion, Mr. Clark, I Mr. Dollar. I have this hearing again 21st at 9:30. Rachel, if you need another Zoom link, go ahead and let us know. Okay. Okay. I'll let you know. I might be in town then, so Okay, sounds good. Yep. Just email and let us know. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Yeah. I have two minutes. old that Sorry. Used to trap a lot of muskrats up that way, didn't back in the day. Back when they were worth something.

Well, they were they worth a buck 50 to two bucks a rat. I used to sell them to uh down here to Rumble and me and a ter native Paul live down the street from me. Young Paul and his grandfather was the mayor of Carol. He used to go out along with those drainage ditches. There was quite a few muskrats. We we just we were young. I'd be the uh we let we didn't mess with any m beaver. We let the older guys do that. We used for the rats. It was a lot of fun.

Different days, but there's still a lot of rats around them now. Well, I don't know if you knew Mike and Agnes Lavel. They live north long 71. No, I didn't know. Okay. Not too far from you. No, they had 88 acres there and they paid that off. I believe I forget. Maybe three minutes. Mike could skin a rat while he walks the next. Well, he had it down. He knew how to do it. Yeah. I used to my We used to trap a little bit on the little soup and some over there, but not most of the trapping I did was right there. right north of Brit Spirit Lake

where that boat ramp is that used to all be slooh. That was my turf. Yeah. I trapped that for about five or six years, but we used to like going out and running around, but gas was cheap. Oh, hell yeah. What? 10 cents or something? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, our gas we smell our gas deuces right down

different days. It's like you get up morning before the sun comes up and you be out there all these district issues. They're all getting older.

I have probably saying that they if the state would allow us allowed us from the start to say because an acre on a rain to put into a corner out there.

You know, there was some kind of allowance, right? Hey, I see we've got our lawyer back. Yeah. So, uh, let's start ourformational meeting. Did you need 76?

No. District 76. And there's something out in the back. This is so this is anformational meeting. So what that means is we're not at a stage where a decision is going to be made today on whether it's received as a project or how It's simply you know I've petition was filed um myself as the engineer has look worked through the situation and has written the preliminary report and this is an opportunity to kind of get introduced to the to the project to the procedure the process provide input and you know kind of go from here. The next presumably the next meeting that we would have would be a formal hearing where decision could be made on how to proceed. The there's two handouts. There's a engineers report. It's the full report. And then there's this one pager which is kind of like a condensed cliffnotes version. and you know maybe like a rough agenda for theformational meeting. So like I said a petition was filed and that's what triggered that's what triggered all this and basically once the petition's filed then I was appointed the engineers and then started looking at the situation. So to get our bearings I guess first in this in the engineers report you just the back pages are maps.

So there's it's like there's three maps. The first of the three maps if you go turn there um you'll see Range District 76. It kind of straddles County Road M27 south of Lake Park. On the east side of M27 there, the the tile system goes through stateown land that is managed by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. And that at the very east end on this map, see it says the main 16 inch in that area, there's several, you know, there's appearances that there's problems with the tile. There's holes and blowouts and all sorts of things going on. That area we'll talk about a little bit more, but it's actually which is a type of wetland. It's a and Chris Oh, yeah. But the DNR here, he probably tell you more about it than I can, but basically it's a it's a unique and rare type of wetland that is in there. So, it's it's got high pete soils. The tile is shallow in there. He deep soils are susceptible to, you know, freeze, heave, frost, heave, and that's probably over a 100 years or so has contributed somewhat to the condition of the tile today. But DD76 is about 334 acres, so it's not large and by drainage district standards. It was constructed in 1927

and has the existing tile system has tile ranging from 16 inches on the high side down to six inches in diameter. Um a little over a mile total and then there's a little bit of a beyond the tile there's a little bit they call it a ditch. It's

it's not much of a ditch. A couple hundred feet there. So that's considered to be an outlet ditch of position. Um in looking at in looking at this tile system, one thing I always do is 100-y old tile systems, they had different idea of drainage than we do today. And so typically when I look at the grades and the diameters and the capacities, they're not it's not sized for today's needs of what we're what we're doing today. Um, and I found that was the case with with DB76 with no no exception. So the drainage coefficient was kind of the the design criteria that we look at or the the figure and a lot of times a 100 years ago as low as an eighth of an inch per day or even lower than that. This this district is actually not as bad as some that I've seen. It's on the higher end almost a quarter of an inch per day. So we would still be looking today for something or you know half inch per day at a minimum. Some some drainage districts have gone up to an inch per day. Um so you know a half inch per day would still be double the capacity of the existing system the design capacity of the existing system. the course it it likely is not functioning at design capacity because there's these problems at the at the east the downstream end of the system. told that see let's look at another

we looked at that first map and I should have told you you can a page for this existing drainage coefficient map and that shows you I broke down different areas and what their drainage coefficient are of the pile you get a better idea of the drainage coefficient and you see that spot on the upper upper left hand corner that says 085. Uh that's there's a little bit of a of a caveat to that is that there's a short section of tile there that technically has, you know, good capacity to take that, but as you go further down, it gets lower. So, it may not actually be able to achieve that that level of drainage if it's restricted by the downstream tiles. but just viewing them as independent segments of the tile system assuming a free outlet or restrictions. Those are what the values would be. And then the next map, the last map in the packet. It's it's labeled proposed tile improvements map. And that's skipping ahead somewhat, but I wanted to point out there's a red circle near the outlet and that's that's the area where this Fen wetland is located. So being that being that it's a sensitive wetland, obviously the DNR would like, you know, disturbance of that area to be kept to a minimum if possible. And actually

for the drainage district being that the tile is shallow in this pete soils it's it actually would be advantageous to try to reroute if we could out of that area anyway. Obviously we don't want to be having these excessive additional costs because of that. But depending on what we we're looking at doing um if you for example at this map if you look the distance from the blue line how do I explain that from the outlet on the east you follow the blue dotted line and the black dotted line to where they meet that's that's basically the same distance so you're not paying for more feet of tile And so if we were going to do, let's just say we were going to do a repair of that stretch that's in in bad condition, we could just do that first that first stretch there and not not continue on any further, but we'd still go around that that wetland area. Um, that kind of brings me to, you know, with with these drainage projects. In this case, you know, we've got a tile that is in disrepair. So, one option would be just to repair that. Uh, typically for drainage districts, repairs are required. There's exceptions to that, but typically if there's a tile that's in failing condition, drainage district has an obligation to do what's necessary to repair that and get it back in working order.

However, in this case, if we're if we're looking at possible repairs, we could do that at a minimum. But knowing that the tile capacity is not really up to today's standards, do you consider upsizing the tile while we're spending money and and put in something that's going to provide adequate drainage capacity moving forward? So, what I've got if if we were going to do improvements, that map kind of shows what my proposal would be would be to improve both the main tile which goes from the outlet and then it connects with this branch 30 and then it goes north and west and you know crosses M20 to the west side of M27. improve that. And the first stretch would be 24 inch tile. And then once it branches, forks off, it would drop down to a 15 inch. And then the branch 30 tile would be an 18 inch the whole way. Let's see. So, if we do just a repair, we're getting into cost cost discussion, cost estimate. If we do just a repair, estimating about $80,000 for the project and if we were going to up the existing tile right there is a 16 inch and that's not commercially available. So, if we were doing to do we're going to do a strictly a repair, we would use an 18 inch. So, that actually would increase

the capacity slightly. Um, if we wanted to just do only mess with the tile in that area that there's problems, we could also upsize it to that 24, but then just stop there. That's an option, too. And if we did that, uh, you know, we bump it up from 80,000 to estimate estimated $87,000. If we did the full improvements that are shown on that map, I've got a cost estimate of $320,000. Uh, and that would be an average of $958 per acre on the approximately 334 acres in the district. So, but that's just an average. So, obviously some people would benefit varying amounts from a project of this nature. All you need to do is reclassify and set up an assessment schedule that's based on benefit

and then basically the lands involved pay according to their benefit and and actually so the existing drainage district see I don't believe that's ever been reclassified to

sometimes s I lose a little bit of my memory of this stuff. I put these reports together and then it's a month or something before we have a meeting. Um yeah, it's still under its original assessment schedule from when it was established nearly a hundred years. So if we were going to do a a major sort of project and really actually either way I would recommend reclassification. So one of they've got a single assessment schedule in place that if any work is done anywhere, everybody pays based on the the schedule that was set up to originally pay for the construction of of this system. Now, I I think everyone can agree that if um if there's repairs that are needed to like branch 30, let's say, the the people in the upper part, you know, on the main tile that don't even use that, it wouldn't really be fair for them to help pay the cost of that. So what we typ what we will do is separate into into multiple assessment schedules based on the facility that we're talking about. And so the idea is to make it more fair so it's more you're paying for what you actually use and benefit from.

We're not going to have to pay for any uh and and actually you know we've got that existing assessment schedule. I've said I've thrown out these different cost estimate figures, but that doesn't really help an individual land owner to know, hey, what what can I expect to pay

because that existing assessment schedule isn't much good for helping split that out for this project. So my recommendation would be is that since reclassification is really needed anyways, we could do a pre-classification where I do the work for that you know now basically before we have a formal hearing to decide whether what to do and then the land you all as the land owners would have maps and tables showing you know for each of these options what what approximately would we be looking at for cost? So, that's that's something I would recommend that we would move forward with. Um, and I will say too, we we talked about costs just for everyone's knowledge, drainage district assessments, they can be paid either all at once. you know, a levy gets made and it comes with your property taxes and you can pay it. Or if it's over $500 for an in individual parcel, you have the option to pay in installment payments for 10 to 20 years. Basically, that the maximum amount of years is set by the board of supervisors, but it has to be 10 to 20 somewhere in that range. and then at an interest rate set also by the board that typically has been five to six% in that range. So, just to give you some of that knowledge, uh, the economics of it, you know, obviously if we did a full improvement project at almost $1,000 an acre, that's that's a lot of money and there could be some big assessments on property owners in the district. So, there's a lot to think

about on is it worth it or not for me. Oh, I got a question on that. Yeah. Uh that's figured on the total acres, but what you have to take. Or did you already take what the the state, you know, the state doesn't pay on that kind of stuff? They do. They do. Oh, they do. Okay. Thinking feds. United States. The feds that don't pay. Okay. All right. Yep. Good point. I have a letter. Did you see that in my email? Okay.

Um from Patrick Fairchild, Jordan. I am not able to attend the drainage district 76 meeting tomorrow morning. However, I am representing the Fairchild group and over owners of some impacted land in this district. We understand the needs but are sensitive to the environmental effects of the project and request lower cost options to be considered including open ditches or possible use of the southwest corner of the Fairchild property for water retention and reduced demand on the county main tiles. Thank you, Patrick Fairchild.

I also have a letter from Matt Fairchild uh in regards to the DD76 discussion today. They are not for or opposed to the plan. have not studied the plan that well, but he says, "I don't know what kind of pipe is being used on state ground, but I don't know why you would have to use perforated tile there. Maybe non-perforated is cheaper, and the DNR, I'm sure, wouldn't care." In this case, it's ideal that this county tile dumps in into a series of wetlands before hitting the little sue. But bigger picture, DD laws are crazy to meet. The goal of getting water off land as fast as possible has serious consequences. And as you brought up several meetings ago, Iowa has plenty of impaired water bodies. Someday DD drainage districts will not be able to operate with impunity regarding this issue. I think the De Mo waterworks case was less win less a win for the drainage districts rather than a shot of across the bow. Maybe someday drainage districts options for improvements won't automatically be a bigger pipe or an open ditch. Maybe the engineer could be required to have in some instances to have a wetland option that is more than a list of programs available rather than an actual layout and plan with dollars included. Maybe someday drainage districts will be in the business of operating wetlands and drainage systems that work better and last longer because of those wetlands. The old system seems archaic but has been effective in draining the landscape with positive and negative outcomes. Drainage districts have enormous opportunities. perhaps the most of any government or quasi government body in the state to change their narrative on water quality for the positive and in this county in particular you'd have some backing to make changes any anyway thanks to you and the board for serving and considering this Matt Fairchild

I had a phone call from John Delaney who I talked at some length with yesterday and obviously there are a number of issues that he's been dealing with out there in the last few years but he said he's been flooded out for the last 5 years in some areas there. So, he's obviously in favor of going forward for some remedy. Any other comments, questions, thoughts? I just comment like I people have time I recommend uh take a ride out that area and around the Little Sue there and you'll see how wet a lot of the roads are right now. Now Little Sue, I was out there a couple days ago and it's not out of its banks. But if it we get a few more inches of rain, it's going to probably be out of its banks and and there'll be some flooding. But I just urge people, it's a beautiful area out there to go out and look around. It's and if he's got a four-wheel vehicle, you're probably better off because you I went out there and just a car and you sink right into the gravel, you know, uh depending. But anyway, it's a beautiful area and I I think it's it's a a great area to be able to go look around. you guys who work on it, you you're out there a lot, so you get to see it. But I I would just say that

our land out there to my knowledge is I think virgin grass. That's the front half. The front half. You're not too far from the cave of the prairie. So what I I It's a bit We're surrounded by DNR ground. You've got wind turbines spinning in the distance. It's a very peaceful area, so the less disturbance the better. But I I realize you need to you need to repair. I I get that.

I would be in favor of an update on the tile. This kind of things come around once in a century practically. This one's a century old now, you know, and when it gets time, it's just you have to pay the popper and do it and get it updated or stays being a problem forever. And further and longer you wait, the more likely you're going to get legislation that stops you from doing these things and and agriculture is just having a terrible time with those kind of things happening already. So, are you talking an improvement then or you talking a repair?

I'd rather see it be improved to the the new tile out there so it's done and done right and walk away from it and forget it. You know, these coefficients of drainage though are pretty good. It's not too bad. We don't they're not good. Obviously, we don't care. I mean, we don't you don't use them either and we keep all the water on our property if we could. So, but we do we just don't want to pay more than we have to either. Sure. It's just that's not a bad I would think that I don't know assessment as pasture. I wouldn't think you assessed as much as the crop land. I don't know how I would think is pasture ground assessed differently.

That's the how it's farmed is not really part of it. But if it's pasture ground depends on the reason why it's pasture. I suppose if we look at soil types, we if it's naturally well drained and doesn't have a need as much of a need for drain supplemental drainage as like low wet areas that would be that need drainage. Um that's the lower benefit and it's you know how far away are you? How much of the length of the system do you use? If you've got lands at the very bottom end, which I guess all most of this is I guess on state land, but doesn't apply as much for that. But you know, if there's a mile long tile and you've got your water dumping in in the last in the first 500 feet versus using that whole length of the system, people on the upper end would pay more. They use more of that system. those I mean and acres in the parcel and different things like that. So yeah, land use because land use can change.

Yeah. And with big drainage assessments is more likely to change and then I mean I care how I say this, but there's very few parcels of land that are involved in agriculture in Dick County that don't reach any governments, so to speak. We don't get bailouts. We're just out there doing our pasture thing. Very marginal. So there's tremendous pressure when you get a thousand dollar drainage assessment to put corn back in. You said that's first time I've ever heard anybody say that that been farmed on the on the west side, right? A long time ago. There's there's a line up on the hill.

My grandma told me on the back. My grandma said that on his backside he said never couldn't get across the creek. Yeah. Anyway, Chris, we're again planning any work out there at all in the future.

Uh if good point. I mean again I like to just allow folks to weigh but there there is opportunity that's out there for additional uh wetland restoration. Um, you know, it's currently hadn't been drifted. So, of course, like I said, we haven't really even owned this parcel really that long. I mean, we've had it a little time. I've actually been out on this site uh with three different county engineers over the last eight years and and we talked through it. Brad's been out there with me, uh, you know, and going all the way back to Danley, uh, when they were just looking at the issues and these issues were there prior to our ownership of the thin area. Um, but yeah, there is a up there in the northwest corner between the Fairchild property and our property. There's an area that our it seasonally still acts under certain rain events and hydraology, you know, is acting as a as a wetland, but of course it is draining because of the of the tile line that's there. Um, you know, so again, that's and it is over in a natural area as these folks have said that we intend to hopefully have for a very long time going forward and hopefully have those things help with water quality, help with flooding concerns and not just hopefully sending everything, you know, as fast as we can downstream. You know, like in the outlet, no doubt over time and all this time with it, there's a lot of sediment that's been deposited in that poor outlet that's literally all came from west of the M27. That's a big watershed that's over there coming out of that one area. Um we don't know that the private individual there with their private tiles if there isn't maybe an issue with some of that. U there is kind of an an area where even the existing road cover culvert there's kind of where the low pocket sits along 27 the water is not actually getting you know over to the culvert area. Um so it's solely dependent on that tile to move the water. Uh and again is that tile you know that branch I believe it's 12 isn't

it 30 as it runs north and south there functionality may not be up to snuff in order to give them what they need because you know that area has formed a delta or sediment you know because of the big watershed farming historically. Um looking back at the aerial photos it's had troubles since literally the 1950s because replaced where they currently are. Um but basically down in the fen location obviously has a very unique geological formation wetland uh they they sustain rare you know vascular plants and it's a habitat that's it's based upon its its unique features way back in the day I'm sure they looked at that and went oh my lord why in the you know what are we going through there uh and but they were literally in a position that they had nowhere to where they should have thought about trying to go around it even at that point. Uh but you can't it's very difficult as anyone knows to maintain infrastructural integrity in in an area of ground that has consistent and annual basically upwelling of water things of that nature and the heaving that goes on in a fan it with the pete uh which forms you know a floating bog and and uh and whatever. So obviously when we've looked at it with these engineers, all of them all agreed that the best scenario would be to move the infrastructure where it's one going around the outside. It actually still is going to be on the edge of the fan in a spot or two, but it's not in the middle. Uh so so it'll have better depths for maintaining integrity, things like that. Um our department really we're'd like to just like I said, see a costefficient fix because it definitely has some functionality issues. this could be, you know, causing obviously issues upstream and we don't want that for those folks. U so basically where that junction is at, as you know, Collins indicated, I mean,

there's literally 3 to 3.7 ft of fall down to the outlet. That drainage coefficient is actually really pretty good. That's basically running at about 3% or, you know, in that area. And that's also why they didn't where two 12s came together, they historically went with the 16 back in the day. um because the the fall gave them you know it was speeding up at that stage. So the other thing you know for repair I guess this is a suggestion we'd like which is for everyone is to just maybe look and did have it in his report you know to look at cost analysis involved on on using dual wall tile. Um and this is for a couple different reasons. Um one just to look at the overall cost. um and the areas that would need to maybe be embedded with rock depending on soils and things. Uh obviously we added a couple anti- seeps and stuff into those locations so water's not wanting to follow the exterior of the pipe. But we go from where you have 133 connections and an 800 foot, you know, repair with RCP gasketed pipe down to 40 connections that you would not, you know, have more risk of of, you know, damaging the pipe or those connections draining our wetland or continuing to take water from uh from the fan itself, which is contributing. So, we'd like as much, you know, whatever we do here to not be contributing to the system and and that's for the folks that are coming from upstream. So, Um, just a few things that, you know, putting out there.

Well, I'm just wondering if the work that's going to be done with the DNR, if we're okay doing a repair. My concern is for for you guys that are farming, if you're getting flooded out four out of five years or getting flooding four out of five years, that's that's a that's a big deal. And so we just have to look at the options I think that work um to make sure that that that that works for the farmer as well as applies with the fan and the DNR and what's going on.

There was a concern raised about that branch 30 tile possibly there being a problem under M27. We did have a contractor dig that up, run a camera, and I don't know when they when they did M27 if they put they did that then, but there under the road there's corrugated metal pipe instead of the, you know, the original tile. It's not in the best of best shape, but it's not plugged or collapsed or anything like that. just looks kind of ugly, but it's not it's not plug. It is moving water. So, there's not a

Well, you not a restriction there. Well, you had a contractor out there. Wouldn't it maybe be advisable to fix that while you're working on the whole thing? You know, extend that underneath there. That I know that'd be the part of the county's expense. Well, if we do an improvement, we'd be putting a new tile through through M27. We'd be uh boring it underneath. Boring it. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. We don't I wouldn't really want I don't think Jeff would want me to do an open cut of N27.

Okay. All three places where it crosses. Then would you be wearing those?

Just two. I my life in that factory there the DNR ground. Um you look on the map uh crosses into my ground of where actually there's a depression in the soil where that tile heads right up to the right up through the DNR driveway where it's been dug originally from that original tile. But nobody ever digs there. And I've wanted people to dig there, you know, and they come and they dig in the wrong damn spots all the time. They never come talk to me or ask about it. They just go do it. So that's where you thought there was a problem.

Well, that's where I think the original tile actually goes. They dug there and didn't do it or something, but they actually dug ditch in the thing originally and at the driveway for the DNRs in Texas, right? that I I know the area Brad's talking about and and actually I think that is the part of the private system that was tied into this system historically uh that's in that vicinity you know is what I believe that is because you can see right where they had done some obviously investigation way back before ownership over time so I don't know again if there an issue

once it was burned off it was really visible yeah you know you could see it so easily The other thing it and Colin is I mean again if some improvement is considered or looked at especially up to the northwest uh where that line comes out of there from way up high in the system. Is there potential to bring bring that out and maybe get it on the surface up in that northwest corner that would allow for functionality of that wetland to filter that water, you know, and and basically have a wetland on that, you know, on that portion of the area. Well, yeah. I think I mean, in my opinion, something like that certainly could be considered because if we can daylight that and not have any, you know, something backing it up, I mean, that would be a concern potentially. But as long as it can have a free outlet and dump out, then we wouldn't have to do the rest of that length of tile, it would be beneficial for everyone. So I think yeah certainly it's something we could look at and obviously something like that the fair child family would need to work in coordination with everybody you know if that is a possibility but it it the grades definitely tend to show that there's the opportunity for that the things that would have to be figured out would be you know is we're going to be okay with some water in the rightway or do we address that in a different way uh you know with the existing system is still stuff of that nature that you know some engineering can figure out

and we are supporting I guess Patrick's letter but we are supporting and we do want these guys to have drainage as well drown anybody out down bottom end of that there's an open ditch there and I don't know I don't see anything about dredging that out that needs to be dredged out in that original district but further down I know the cattails are creeping up on it too. But um that is part of wise a little further drive down there would be better rather than just with open water today.

Our department would probably prefer not getting outside the district. I mean it it's in in the 200 foot that's in there and there's clearly significant sediment buildup and we hope to not see additional sediment buildup that will continue to just impact that area long term. Um but but yeah it it is planned to be cleaned in cleaning it out is but not at 200 feet and drainage districts do have some ability to go beyond its limit or something but I haven't looked extensively at that but nonetheless cleaning out cleaning out at least that 200 feet is I hadn't mentioned that I'm glad you brought it up because either the improvement or the repair that would be part of it.

The other suggestion that I'd have would be, you know, based upon the the drainage coefficient we have on that 800 foot toward the outlet. I mean, I would encourage you potentially bringing your outlet up a little bit. I mean, give yourself a little more freeboard there. Um, instead of, you know, dropping it completely because we literally we have a lot of fall there. That's that's the bonus. So I have tile coming on on my farm that dump in that open ditch part though and they need all the all that they can get. I have two tile dump there. Does that go through into the fence area? Is that is there tile that ties in there Brad or is it further to the No, it's to the it's in the open ditch part.

So there after the end of the after the end Okay, because I I haven't really seen them, but I think they got paint covered right now with water. That's why I didn't They're underwater all the time. So you're dumping in dugout creek or in this outlet? To this? It's just further further down a little further. Yeah. Further east. This is what's it's east of the map. Okay.

It's east of the red lines from the end of the tile where the red line is. It's east of that. There's two tile come out AC across into there. Any any thoughts on a pre-classification? Try to get a better idea of parcel specific project. That way I know how mad I want. Right.

I just have a question. That area there, does that basically does that ultimately drain to the Little Sue or to the lake or where's that water go? That all goes to the west branch of the Little Sue and then into the Little Sue and then if there is anything else. No concrete findings column.

So yeah, I guess the only question for today that would be whether to do the go ahead and do the pre-class and then once I have that done and look at good conversation look at some more of this stuff maybe talk with Chris about um you know possibly a wetland thing and then get the have a have a hearing basically and decide how to proceed. So once we once we get all that finished, we would schedule a formal hearing and you would get notices as land owners to to let you know when that's going to be.

So for today, are you basically wanting a motion for a pre-classification? That it Yeah. So moved. And Mr. support but we have a preclassification on PD71 I believe 76 further discussion hearing none Kim hi Mr. Dollar hi Mr. Clark hi Levi I am Jill

one more just general comment I don't know if maybe Somebody could visit with Mr. Delaney and do they want to see if that tile that we believe or Brad and I believe is in that one location does not need to be investigated that maybe it has an issue underneath, you know, going back underneath seven or something of that nature. I think he'd be open if you just want to talk to him, Chris, and go through that for sure. He'd be happy to work with him on a soft lands permit to to investigate that. Uh that may solve some problems for him. Um, I don't know.

Yeah, I guess, you know, the where I've got the tile drawn in is where they, you know, the contractor were digging and that's based on the the original plat map from the drainage district where they kind of showed where that be a long ways away from where where they intended to put it.

That's not impossible though that they would move it, but I would be surprised. Yeah, I don't know that it's it's actually branch 30. I I the old map you see it shows that kind of line coming through that area and of course we can see depressional area there um on over on our side of the road. So there's no doubt a tile was coming from there kind of how old it is or if it's loaded and and nonusable at this stage and then that's what's causing but if that tile is repaired it might also result not needing to significantly enhance anything else to just get it back to functionality as well. Well, if you would give John a call that would be great. I just need a phone number from you after the meeting.

Thank you. Thanks Chris. Thanks everyone. Thank you. He's gone. Okay. That didn't have a natural gas pipeline. So on this not yet. Okay. Uh number eight is to set the time and date for amendment. We did that. We did that. We're on number six. April 28th or sorry, number five. You're right. So I know.

Um then let's have Jeff. He sat around. Yeah.

Jeff on my agenda. Uh the first is to approve repairs on DD6 branch B as an boy tile in D county for repair and that's less than $2,000. Uh this is the same tile just on the north side of Lake Park that we had troubles with last year. I got um several property owners say we're still having funding problems. So, I'd like to do is get your approval to jet along the bin like we did last year, but possibly put a camera through there, too, to see we find out exact exactly where the problem is.

Motion to approve. Second. Kim moves. Mr. Clark Seconds. Further discussion. There is none. Kim I. Mr. Clark. Hi. Mr. Dollar. Levi. Hi.

And Bill is I. Thank you, board. Second item is to approve request repairs on DD35 or 872 tile and direct county portions to complete the repair, which I'm thinking it's going to be less than $2,000. Uh Berlin brought this to me uh because there's sections out in the field that need to be repaired, which would be a reimbursement from the district, but there's also repairs to be done in the road right away, too. I've asked them to keep the building separate. So, there may not be much in the field, but most of the repairs could be in the road right away. Motion to approve. Mr. Clark moves. I'll second. Kim seconds. Further discussion. Hearing none. Mr. Clark. Hi. Jim.

Hi. Mr. Dollar. I. Levi. Hi. And Bill. I thank you board. And my last item today is to make a recommendation to approve an intersection marker light at the intersection of 200th Avenue and tour and 10th Street. I got a quote from Iowa Electric to be less than $2,000. I drove out there and there's water on all three sides. It's a a road coming from the south to the north and it's a dead end. It's a T.

There's water on the other side and there's water on both sides of the road there. So, if you went off in the dark, it would be rough. So, I'll make a motion that we put a light at the intersection of 200th Avenue and 210th Street. moved. I'll second. Levi seconds. Further discussion. A light or a sign. Light. Okay. So you can see it at night because it's really dark out there. They just call it intersection marker light. Intersection. Just a standard light. Oh, okay. There's no more discussion. Jim, I Levi. Hi Mr. Clark. Hi

Mr. Dollar. Hi. And Bill. That's all I have for today. Thank you board. Thanks Jeff. Okay.

All right. We're back to Mr. Park. We're back here. Let me We actually have number five with Colin. Anybody wants to hear it? Additional work. Not another drainage. Okay. Approval of additional work in DD number one mod beyond original. Oh, yes. Yep.

Yeah. So, this is Oh, I think um there was a request for repairs on this open ditch in section seven of Boyd Township. It's range dish number one. Uh and when we first went out there, I had sent uh kind of a new guy and he he came back with, you know, stuff that needed to be repaired. And so we put together basically a an itemized thing for getting quotes from from contractors and got quotes and B&D farm drainage was the low bid on it. Since that time, you know, when they were going to start to work, I went out there to look at the ditch and stake it out. As I was taking it out, I noticed right away that there's more damages than what, you know, we had planned on doing. Uh, so basically that's in a nutshell what this is. And I've got this packet of information. It's quite a bit of additional work. So there's an additional four surface drain pipes. That that's really the big issue with this section of ditch is that there's surface runoff. Typically a dredge ditch, you know, they dug it out and they put the spoils up and that helps keep water from running over the land and then over the side of the ditch and making a gully. Well, in this case, that's been happening for some time and it's made some pretty big gullies. If you look at the pictures in the packet, you can see es especially one uh one of them is really really bad.

It'll be third picture. I think it's the third picture. No one picture this one. That's the picture I got up. that one. Yep.

And that one picture doesn't really even do it justice, but it's the best I can do in a picture. Uh that's been forming over many years. And you can see in that picture at the bottom there's tile that outlet into that kind of and it keeps sections of tile keep breaking off and it keeps going advancing toward the field. So this this hole by itself, we really need to bring in fill material. That's not something we had planned on. Needs 22 side dumps of bill material to fill this in.

And your engineer missed this. Yeah. He basically what I think happened is he No, this one he did not. Oh, but that's what I'll say.

He Yeah, this one he saw that there was a problem, but thought that we just needed to put a surface drain pipe in there and fix these tile outlets and not necessarily fill this in. But he didn't have a lot of experience looking at ditches like, and honestly, this is not something that when I go out there, I don't see this very often. Um, but anyways, so what one good thing about the fill is that there's a pile of dirt not that far away that's available to be used so that you know there's not as much trucking costs and things like that. So, what we've got is 40 total side dump loads of bill material to load it, haul it, place it, $100 a load. And each load, I mean, a side dump, you know, we're basing that on 18 cubic yards per side dump load. So actually per cubic yard on that basis, it's a fairly good price compared to stuff I've seen. And then we've got four additional surface drain pipes where that's that's something that he did not see, but there was places where it didn't look that bad because there was grass, but it was these big gullies where water continues to go through and and erode from time to time. Some were worse than others, but we really should put surface drain pipes in there. And then we have to bring in fill to fill over those pipes. Otherwise, the water's just going to go over top of them and we'll have a mess. So, I wish we would have seen that to begin

with. Yes. The the positive thing is is it's, you know, there this is work that needed to be done anyways. we just didn't I didn't know about it until more recently. Um so basically this additional work would amount to $16,240 which the original quote was $22,220. So it I mean it's a large increase. The the surface drain pipes the same unit price per foot. We did add 18 inch and price is between 15 to 24 of the original quoted number and then a lot of you know there's a lot of cost in the fill material too 4,000. Any questions? is be taken out of his salary

in South Carolina. That was kind of harsh.

And I don't want to I mean really at the end of the day like this was work that needed to be done anyways. So there's really not a lot of harm done, but it would have been nice to just have it all in there to begin with. I I agree with that. And I've got honestly some responsibility in that. I sent him out there thinking this would be a good thing, you know, for young engineer to go look at and find the problem areas here. And there was some stuff that he missed. He didn't he didn't know how to he didn't recognize it as a problem, I guess. What is our competitive competitive bid threshold on projects?

50,000 is the bid threshold 50,000. Uh so just just for clarity on that 50,000 is the hearing threshold. If you're going to spend more than 50,000, you need to have a hearing to talk about it. if the competitive bid threshold is actually somewhere around 200,000 where you don't have to have you can do competitive quotes rather than a public bid bid process. So in this case, we did competitive quotes.

And normally when you're more than 50% over the original bid, then you have have a hold here. But since we're under the $50,000, I don't think you need to worry about it. Okay. I would make a motion we give the okay and proceed with the additional work proposal on uh DD number one. It's moved. Do I hear? I'll second it. Levi seconds. Further discussion hearing none. Hi

Levi. Hi Hi. Hi. Thank you. We'll get it get it done right. Thanks Colin. The first time. Thanks to South Carolina.

Okay. Now we've all been waiting a fed breath for Mr. part to continue. I didn't know our breath was bathing, but wait till I go. Yeah. Uh on the 31st I did the Zoom board meeting with everybody else. Kind of lost my place, but can't imagine why.

And Oh, I missed on the Yeah, I talked about the the lakes corridor development that we went to. Then on the 31st, I did the supervisor mean meeting. Uh and then the rest of that week was pretty mild, but yesterday uh had ton of phone calls on the DD61 deal again. So, nothing really, no meetings, just okay. A lot of phone calls on that. So, you are

on March 26th. Um, even though Mr. Clark said he didn't have anything that day, he did. We met with I missed that. We met with uh Beck and That's right. and Greg. I can go back that far. Um but yeah, we talked about I would assume the same information that that you two had talked about. Well, Dr. Yep. Um on the 30th, uh I was at the conference board meeting and would agree that that probably didn't go as well. At least we as a board stuck together. You know, that's all we could do. Yeah. Legally, that's all we can do. That's why it's a conference board. The schools and cities are involved in that. Yeah. That was

know who their people call if they complain about taxes.

Um yeah, then after that I went to the corridor connections um presentation as well. Uh that evening I stopped briefly at the meet and greet with Jim Carlin. Um on Tuesday, yeah, Tuesday the 31st, I was a part of the board meeting on the Zoom as well. And then later this week, um I plan to attend a taxpayer association meeting on Thursday morning. And then I have a trails meeting on Friday morning. And then um I did get a an email update from our Northwest Iowa early childhood director. Um and she sent that out to to our former board and she just said, "I want to share an update. I have attached the amendment language that we understand we will be discussed in a subcommittee meeting on Monday yesterday at 12:30 and a comparison of what is asked for since it is not what we are expected to see. The ECI association remains opposed to it. I have included one area director's versions of the differences and what we ask for versus what is in the language. We are still planning to submit our letter of intent to merge to the state ECI board. And I will keep you updated as if they discuss or make decision at their April 10th meeting what the next steps are. I will also need to keep in mind that this is a fluid situation. We have no idea what happens with our funding either way whether legislation passes or not. It has been shared the CDCI board does not intend to discuss our fiscal year 27 funding formula at their April 10th meeting. So we will not know until after May uh unless there is a special meeting. So uh all that to say wait I guess so but that's the current. So that is what I have. Well, went to the comp board meeting. I

was uh proud of you guys for trying to make a point to get our taxes lowered. That was interesting. Had to take four votes to get that motion a motion passed. So, that was good. Uh on my day off, oh hell, I didn't do anything. No, I came in for the Zoom meeting for another engineer that didn't do everything they should have for this time. We got to start penalizing these guys, put it in the supervisors happiness fund. Uh after that, I was invited up to Mr. Martin's office to have a little meeting. After that, went to see Mr. Owens of miss the best and I came back and I saw Jeff Bill uh Jones who's the grandson of Lou Jones who originally owned Jones pasture was wondering if we weren't supposed to concrete that road on west of what's now 253rd street out in Jones pasture. And I thought maybe at a point reading back in the original agreement with Jerry Jones that they were going to uh hard surface this road so all the cottages could get out and have 365 day a year residents there.

And the reading says all the cottages by Blake. Well, that would have included those to the west of the road that's there. But in looking at the construction maps, Jeff pointed out, there was nothing there about that. So, I told Mr. Jones that if he wants the records, I can send those to him. That was about all I did last week. So, is there any other things anyone wants to say about the agenda?

Go ahead. All right. So, we awaited everybody. The public sick of it. Well, talking about drainage, I that letter that Lori sent out about may possibly a drainage engineer. Is that something we could discuss or should discuss? Well, I think we should look at it maybe from all directions. Yeah. Yeah. I think I think so. There's a lot involved with that and I think it's it could warrant it, but you have to look at all sides of it. But now when it comes to that, would it be him replacing somebody like Collins or would he be the guy that just goes out decides?

They they'd replace these guys who ISG Beck and Westard that that person it's my understanding would replace those come out of the county. Okay. The challenge with that is don't don't misunderstand all of those outfits have additional people that help with that. Yeah, that was my if we hire one person that's a load just that's the the only thing but they also have a lot of other projects going on here. So absolutely you know it just it's something that would but take a look Steve at what we have done today. Yeah, 80% of it's drainage. Yeah.

And and maybe but you know what I'm saying. Colin Collins sent out somebody, you know, that's that's what I was looking at is if you're looking at just one person and then where does he sit in the scheme of things for that probably under Jeff and then would that tax his staff? What do we have to add to all those things we have to look at? Absolutely. Consider all of that and look at all that while you know going forward. But a valid point because there are other counties that are doing that. So, it's a valid thing to look at. Yeah. It seems like we've got an awful lot of drainage work. Well, we do. And and think just to think we have the smallest land mass Yeah.

of any county and have that much drainage work. Anyway, are you looking for a motion? Oh, hell. Let it just go on forever. I'll make that motion to adjourn. See, Mr. Oops. Did you second? Second. Mr. Clark Seconds. Further discussion. Process. Mr. Dollar. Hi. Mr. Clark. Hi. Levi. Hi. Hi. This is John. Hi. Behind you. We are officially suburb.