Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drainage Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Landowner raises concerns about drainage lawsuits, legal bills at Kossuth County meeting
Summary
A resident questioned supervisors about large legal payments to Goodwin Law Firm tied to drainage-district court cases and asked how litigation can be limited; trustees and staff described the district's limited options and evidence-gathering steps taken to defend against claims.
A Kossuth County resident used public comment time at the Jan. 21 Board of Supervisors meeting to press trustees about legal fees the drainage district has paid to outside counsel and to ask what can be done to reduce the cost of repeated lawsuits.
The comment thread centered on invoices from Goodwin Law Firm that the resident said totaled “almost $50,000” within a short period and particular invoices exceeding $5,000 tied to specific drains. The commenter asked what the payments were for and why the county — and by extension drainage-district taxpayers — were paying outside counsel instead of relying on the county attorney.
A trustee and staff replied the outside firm handled litigation matters for drainage cases because the county attorney does not handle these specialized drainage lawsuits. One trustee explained the district had spent money to hire a televising crew that video-inspected a section of tile alleged to exist in a claim; the footage, the trustee said, showed no buried 36-inch tile, but a lawsuit nonetheless followed. The trustee said the televising company would be called to testify to support the district’s defense.
The resident asked whether the county could sue McClure (the consulting engineer referenced in the discussion) over an assessment that allegedly omitted interest. Trustees said the engineering and assessment work had historical roots and that the engineering firm had produced documentation; pursuing its own lawsuit would be a separate decision and could also generate legal costs.
Trustees said they were changing processes to avoid repeating assessment errors and acknowledged they had limited ability to prevent citizens from filing lawsuits in the first place. They reiterated that defending claims requires paying counsel to protect the drainage district and its taxpayers.
Ending Board members acknowledged the resident’s concerns and promised to provide invoices and correlate bills to specific lawsuits on request at the auditor’s office. The trustees said they will continue to pursue documentation and process changes to reduce recurring assessment problems and legal exposure going forward.
