Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Irrigation Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners hear pitch for regional irrigation feasibility study; funding request debated
Summary
Presenters asked Emmons County to contribute $25,000 toward a $200,000 feasibility study to examine Missouri River intakes and irrigation routes; commissioners expressed support for the project but divided on using county funds.
Emmons County commissioners heard a presentation on a proposed multi‑county irrigation project and were asked to commit $25,000 toward a $200,000 feasibility study that would identify potential Missouri River intake locations, irrigation routes and preliminary acreage and water‑need estimates.
The feasibility study presented to the board would cost about $200,000, presenters said; the plan described a likely financing package of a $150,000 state grant (state cost‑share), $25,000 already committed by Logan County and a requested $25,000 contribution from Emmons County to move the study forward. Presenter Eric Holberg opened the discussion, saying the study is an early step to determine where water intakes and pipe routes would best serve landowners who have expressed interest.
Why it matters: supporters said the study would give landowners and local governments a data‑driven basis for decisions that could expand irrigated acreage and crop diversification, particularly for younger farmers seeking higher‑value crops. Opponents and some commissioners said county funding sets a precedent for investing public dollars in privately‑driven development projects and urged that local agriculture stakeholders or existing economic‑development entities provide the local match.
Moore Engineering principal Jim Guler described the study scope: identify locations along the Missouri River for potential intakes, map where landowners want irrigation inside Emmons County, estimate irrigable acres and required conveyance capacity, and analyze alternatives for pumping, sequencing and operation. A farmer who helped organize interest in parts of the county told commissioners he had gathered dozens of landowner signatures showing local demand but warned that exact pipe routes and intake points will determine whether particular farms remain feasible for service.
Commissioners discussed legal and budget questions. County staff and the board referenced an attorney‑general opinion saying counties should not give money directly to private entities for water development; presenters and one county official said that if a county acts jointly with another county or through a public body (for example a county JDA) it can be the applicant for state cost‑share grants. Logan County’s JDA had committed $25,000 in the presenter’s plan, and the state grant would require a public entity as the recipient.
Board reaction was mixed. Several commissioners said they supported the idea of investigating irrigation and praised the organizers for collecting landowner interest; others said they were unwilling to use county general funds for a feasibility study that primarily benefits a subset of landowners and urged organizers to seek funds from local JDAs, economic‑development entities or direct landowner contributions.
No formal county vote on the $25,000 request was taken at the meeting; commissioners asked staff and presenters to follow up with more detailed cost sources, clarifications about the grant contract holder and a list of Emmons County landowners who have signed up as potential participants.
Ending: Presenters said they will continue outreach to secure local buy‑in and to provide the technical detail commissioners requested; the board left the item open for further information and potential future action.
