Middleton council declines Drainage District No. 2 master pathway license over liability concerns

The Middleton City Council voted May 14 to decline Drainage District No. 2’s request for a master pathway license that would allow paved walking and bicycle pathways in irrigation easements along sloughs and canals. The decision follows roughly three years of negotiations and a city staff recommendation that the council consider whether Middleton should assume legal and maintenance responsibility for paths that cross the district’s facilities.

Miss Stewart, a city staff member involved in the negotiations, told the council “we've been negotiating it with irrigation drainage district 2 Middleton Mill for upwards of 3 years,” and said the district wants the city to be the primary contact for repairs, liability and collection rather than dealing with developers or homeowners associations (HOAs).

Council and staff described the central issue as whether the city is willing to accept additional liability and the costs of enforcing maintenance against HOAs and developers. City Attorney Douglas told the council that other municipalities joining the same agreement would not change Middleton’s liability, saying, “it wouldn't the fact that other people are doing it won't change the city's liability,” and explained the irrigation district’s position is that it wants to deal with a single municipal entity instead of multiple HOAs and developers.

Councilman Christiansen noted the long negotiation and asked whose idea the district’s approach originally was; Stewart said the irrigation district initiated the request. Councilman O'Meara raised maintenance and enforcement concerns, noting HOAs go defunct and that the city might not be able to recoup repair costs: “Unless we have something on our books that says we can go after the members or the home sites that are in that HOA and the current members for replace repair, I don't see where that's a good idea for us at all to take that on.”

After discussion, a motion was made to not proceed with Drainage District No. 2’s master pathway license request “in their right of ways at this time.” The motion was seconded and the council approved it. The council invited the district to return with funding proposals, but did not commit to further negotiation.

Why it matters: The license would have allowed pathways that form part of a regional trail corridor described by staff as running from Arrowrock Dam through Meridian and Middleton to Parma. Council members said the project aligns with regional pathway policy but questioned whether Middleton should assume new operational and financial obligations for infrastructure on irrigation district land. The vote halts the city's participation until the district or other partners address liability and cost concerns.

Discussion details and next steps: Staff framed the issue as a trade-off between regional connectivity and localized cost and liability. Stewart said developers and HOAs build and maintain many of these pathways now, but the irrigation district is tired of pursuing remedies against individual HOAs and wants municipalities to be the point of contact. Attorney Douglas said the district could withhold licenses for pathways if the city refuses to accept responsibility, which would limit future contiguous path development along the irrigation network. Council members suggested that a multi-jurisdictional agreement with neighboring municipalities could reduce individual exposure but would not eliminate Middleton’s legal risk.

The council did not direct staff to pursue a revised agreement; the stated path forward was that the district could return with funding or other mitigations. The council decision was procedural — declining the district’s current request — not an adoption of an alternate policy or funding commitment.

Provenance: The topic was introduced during agenda item 2 and the motion and vote occur later in the same discussion.