Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drainage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Drainage district members raise concerns about tile work in DD 84 after landowner reports muddy 'mayhem'
Summary
At a Winnebago County drainage-district meeting, board members discussed unreported tile and pipe work along County Road 69 in Drainage District 84 after a landowner reported muddy conditions and possible impacts to a district tile. Members urged staff to confirm whether contractors submitted required documentation.
Committee member (S2) told other members at a local drainage-district meeting in Winnebago County that he had "run into Gordie Anderson after viewing all the mayhem in the field across from me," describing extensive tile and pipe work near County Road 69 that occurred during wet conditions.
The concern centers on work in Drainage District 84 (DD 84). Committee member (S2) said contractors identified as Hasselbrook and Yaghi appeared to be installing large sections of tile and "big pipe," and that crews were working across fence lines near neighboring fields. He said the work happened during muddy conditions that made it difficult for landowners to access fields.
Committee member (S2) described seeing "20 foot sections of tile" and estimated some piping at about 12 inches in diameter. He said it was unclear whether the contractors submitted documentation to district staff after completing the work, and recommended reminding contractors to contact district staff — "calling Chris," as S2 put it — so the district can confirm what was done and whether it complies with the district's controls.
Committee member (S1) asked whether the contractors had submitted paperwork for the work; S2 replied that he did not know and that he would need to ask Chris in the auditor's office. Chair (S3) had introduced the drainage agenda item, and earlier in the meeting called for a voice vote to approve the minutes and agenda.
No formal enforcement action or permit determination was recorded during the discussion. Members described difficulty accessing the site because of the wet conditions; S2 said his truck could not get into the field. The discussion ended with members agreeing they needed to follow up with district staff to confirm whether proper submissions and approvals were on file for the work in DD 84.
The meeting record shows the board approved the minutes and agenda by voice vote before moving to the drainage-item discussion. The transcript does not record a formal outcome about the tile work itself, and staff follow-up was presented as the next procedural step.
