Scott County delays decision on abandonment of County Ditch 5; hearing continued to June 17

Scott County commissioners on April 15 agreed to continue the public hearing for Scott County Drainage Ditch Number 5 to June 17 at 8 a.m., after multiple landowners requested more time to review easements, culvert elevations, partial-abandonment options and potential assessments.

Staff said Ditch 5, constructed in 1916 and located in Cedar Lake Township, has a long history of contested petitions, limited maintenance and complex environmental constraints. Staff reported that more than 62% of benefited owners did not respond to the recent mailing and that a large portion of benefited acreage — 358.59 acres — is owned by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Staff also noted two culverts (at Highway 13 and 230 Third Street) that sit above the legal ditch bottom and which, residents said, prevent water from flowing off the system.

Several nearby owners and residents described on-the-ground flooding and standing water, raised concerns about high culvert elevations under public roads, and showed historic photos and recent images of hay harvests taken in the drainage area. Some residents who currently are not listed as benefited owners said they use outlets or easements that connect into the ditch and asked for additional notice and time to consider whether they would be assessed under a redetermination of benefits. One resident said, "I'm neutral in this, but I'm really frustrated because I feel like this is the county's negligence," while others pressed staff for cost estimates and for clearer information on whether the DNR would be a paying party if benefits were redetermined.

County counsel told the board that the drainage code does not specify how frequently abandonment petitions may be filed and that redetermination of benefits can significantly increase the number of parcels assessed, sometimes raising the threshold for a petition result. Counsel and staff described typical redetermination expenses and timeframes, noting viewing-team fees that are commonly charged per watershed acre and giving a redetermination-cost order-of-magnitude in the tens of thousands of dollars where larger watersheds are involved.

Given the number of affected landowners, the DNR’s ownership of a large acreage, and contested easement questions raised by residents, the board voted to continue the public hearing to June 17 at 8 a.m. and instructed staff to work with the DNR, neighbors and the watershed partners to explore partial-abandonment alternatives and culvert/permit issues before reconvening.