Supervisors prepare for Drainage District 4 public hearing after auditor’s review of FEMA reimbursements and warrants

Kossuth County staff briefed supervisors on accounting for Drainage District 4 as the board prepares for a public hearing next week on a citizen petition seeking details about FEMA reimbursements and recent assessments.

Tammy, the county auditor who prepared the spreadsheets, told the board she compiled year‑by‑year data to show warrants issued, warrants outstanding, amounts redeemed and what had been assessed. "What I did starting back in 2011... the first column is warrants issued. Second column's warrants outstanding. Third, warrants redeemed, interest paid, and then the assessed value," Tammy said as she walked supervisors through the worksheet.

Why it matters: Drainage district work after recent storm events generated invoices, FEMA reimbursement requests and warrants. Landowners are asking why the board recently assessed them for $300,000 and $700,000 and whether FEMA funds have covered parts of the projects. The auditor’s spreadsheet is intended to show how warrants, assessments and FEMA dollars interact.

Key points from the discussion: - Auditor’s accounting: Tammy showed the board a summary that, in her words, indicated "total warrants issued 3.8 [million], only assessed 2.6 [million], which is a difference of about $1.15 million." She also noted the treasurer’s current report showing "total outstanding warrants on the books is $404,143.77." The auditor told supervisors these worksheets were accurate through the end of fiscal year 2025 and did not include July and August transactions. - FEMA reimbursements and timing: Board members and staff discussed how FEMA reimbursements and state grants have paid some older warrants, reducing the principal that would otherwise have been on assessment rolls. The auditor said that if all remaining FEMA funds and waivers come in as anticipated, the district could show a positive balance and the board would later decide how to handle any surplus (for example, retain as a positive cash balance or issue refunds to landowners depending on statute and precedent). - Public hearing logistics: Staff agreed to print copies of the auditor’s spreadsheets and the citizen petition for distribution at the hearing. The board discussed how far back an independent review should reach if landowners request it; supervisors said they can consider larger historical reviews but that outside expert reviews would be an additional expense for petitioners or the district.

Quotes and context: Tammy told the supervisors, "So the money that's been received has been based on reimbursement requests or invoices that have been sent to FEMA from work that's happening before. The other ones have not had reimbursement." Supervisor Kyle argued the board should show comparisons of time periods to clarify why the 2022 and 2023 assessments were necessary; the auditor agreed and retained her multi‑year worksheet for the hearing.

Next steps: The board directed staff to prepare printed copies of the spreadsheets and petition for the public meeting next week and noted that questions about historical assessment decisions may require deeper review or a requester‑paid independent audit. Supervisors said they would present the auditor’s material as the official accounting at the hearing.

Ending: The meeting produced no formal action beyond scheduling and packet preparation; the board and staff emphasized transparency and that more detailed follow‑up may be necessary if petitioners request independent verification.