Wright County approves three contracts for County Ditch 19 repairs, rejects one section pending DNR concurrence

The Wright County Board of Commissioners voted to approve three contracts for repairs to County Ditch 19 and to reject bids for a fourth section while staff seeks additional state concurrence.

County staff described the work as following Moore Engineering's repair report and said bids came in below the engineer's estimate. Matt Dettchen, agricultural drainage and natural resources supervisor, told the board the recommended work includes 30 feet of tree removal on one side of the ditch to allow equipment access, excavation of the ditch bottom and reseeding to reduce erosion. "Moore's recommendation ... was for 30 feet of tree removal along 1 side of the ditch," Dettchen said. "We will be removing close to 3 and a half feet of soil in areas, and the ditch bottom channel is about 16 to 18 feet wide." He said the county will follow the engineer's scope and use county equipment (including hydroseeding) to limit erosion after contractor work.

The board authorized the county agricultural drainage and natural resources supervisor to sign the approved contracts. The board then approved three contractor awards: Clearview Tree Services LLC for Reach 1 tree removal ($22,715), Weethridge Drainage, Inc. for Reach 1 excavation and repairs (contracted amount $20,950; bid alternatives 7 and 8 rejected to allow county crews to handle seeding), and Cottola Brothers Excavating LLC for Reach 2 repairs ($7,975). Each of those motions was moved and seconded and passed (most by 4-1 tallies; the Reach 4 rejection was 5-0). The board rejected all bids for Reach 4 and directed staff to continue securing required DNR and Soil & Water paperwork and concurrence prior to moving forward.

The meeting included extended discussion about how Minnesota's drainage law (103E) allocates repair assessments among landowners. At length, the chair said he understood resident frustration but argued the county was required by the statute to make repairs and assess owners under the 103E framework to avoid potential litigation and larger costs later: "If we didn't do this work, we would be holding individuals, at harm of greater expenses," the chair said. Commissioners and staff discussed pursuing legislative changes to address perceived inequities in the 103E process; several commissioners said they will continue to push for statutory reform at the state level.

Attorney Lutz clarified the county's process for state involvement in repairs, saying the DNR typically provides concurrence for repair work rather than issuing a formal permit unless the work is considered an improvement. "We are not gonna be getting a permit ... for a simple repair, we'll be seeking concurrence," he said.

The board acknowledged public emails and comments submitted about Ditch 19 and said staff had considered those concerns. Several board members emphasized the long timeline of Ditch 19 issues and the difficulty of reaching consensus among a large number of affected landowners.

The board's decisions allow county staff to proceed with the contracted work for Reach 1 and Reach 2 while pausing Reach 4 pending completion of permitting/concurrence steps. The board also reiterated interest in legislative changes to the state drainage statute to address perceived fairness concerns.