Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Morton County Commission denies developer liability for Honey Hills drainage permit, directs attorney to work with NDDOT
Loading...
Summary
The commission voted on May 8, 2025 to deny a developer’s request that Morton County assume liability and co‑sign a North Dakota Department of Transportation drainage‑permit re‑application for Honey Hills Estates; commissioners approved an amendment directing the county State's Attorney to work with the developer and NDDOT to draft alternative paperwork.
Mandan — The Morton County Commission on May 8 denied a developer’s request that the county assume liability and co‑sign a re‑application with the North Dakota Department of Transportation (NDDOT) for a drainage permit along Highway 1806 in the NE ¼ of Section 32, Township 140N, Range 81W.
Commissioner Zachmeier moved to deny the liability request, and Chairman Nathan Boehm seconded the motion, citing advice from the Morton County State's Attorney, Koppy. Commissioner Morrell then moved, with Commissioner Buckley seconding, an amendment directing the State's Attorney to work with the Honey Hills Estates developer and NDDOT to draft a document that could better meet NDDOT requirements and limit or remove county liability. The amendment passed on a roll call with all commissioners voting aye. On the roll call for the amended denial, Commissioners Zachmeier, Buckley, Tokach and Morrell voted aye; Chairman Boehm voted nay. The amended motion carried.
The request the commission considered asked Morton County to take liability for any damages arising from drainage discharge from the residential development known as Honey Hills Estates 1 & 2 Additions into the existing NDDOT highway drainage system. The commission’s denial preserves the county’s position that it will not accept contingent liability for the developer’s discharge into state highway right‑of‑way.
The amendment requires the county State's Attorney to attempt to negotiate or draft alternate language with the developer and NDDOT that might satisfy the highway agency and reduce county risk; the transcript record does not specify the exact language proposed or a timeline for completion. State's Attorney Koppy was present for the meeting and provided the legal advice cited by the commission.
What happens next: The commission’s action does not itself grant or deny an NDDOT permit. Instead, the State's Attorney is to engage with the developer and NDDOT on paperwork that could facilitate the developer’s permit application while trying to limit county liability. The transcript does not record whether NDDOT has responded to the developer or any prior exchange of drafts. The commission did not set a follow‑up date in the public minutes recorded at this meeting.
Details taken from the public record: the matter concerned a drainage permit in Highway 1806 right‑of‑way (NE ¼ Sec. 32, T140N, R81W) and was decided by roll call; the amended motion carried with a 4–1 vote. No direct quotes were recorded in the minutes for this item.
The commission’s full minutes and the underlying permit documentation and any draft language will be available in the county records if and when submitted to the county offices.