Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drainage Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Drainage staff outlines backlog, 196 drains under county responsibility and possible abandonments
Summary
A Kosciusko County drainage staff member reported 69 outstanding work orders, 196 drains the county manages and 32 non-repayable drains many in poor condition that staff may recommend abandoning; six DNR permits and multiple reconstruction projects were also described.
A staff member from Kosciusko County’s drainage office presented an update on maintenance activity and backlog, saying the county is responsible for 196 separate drains and currently has 69 outstanding work orders, mostly for brush control.
The staff member said crews or contractors have worked on 73 drains in the first six months of the year and the office has used about 30 contractors so far in 2026; last year the office used 45 contractors and reported about $21,000 in animal-control costs. "We actually have a hundred and ninety six different drains that we're responsible for," the staff member said.
Why it matters: the staff member said many drains are in poor condition and that 32 of them are classified as non-repayable (maintenance-only, without a maintenance assessment). Because those drains have deteriorated, the staff member said the office will likely recommend abandoning some that cannot be restored to their original design. "There's several of them that are so bad ... I'm gonna make a recommendation that we abandon them," the staff member said.
Details and next steps: the presenter listed four major active projects, including work on the Burkholder project, and said six Department of Natural Resources (DNR) permits are being prepared to clear ditches near lakes. The staff member said roughly 64–65 projects are on their desk for late summer or early fall but that not all have formal work orders yet. They also described an effort to fold non-repayable drains into the same maintenance-tracking procedure so staff can analyze conditions and identify upgrade needs.
The staff member announced a re-advertised legal maintenance-assessment hearing for affected landowners is scheduled next month and said letters have been sent to property owners. A motion to adjourn was made and seconded and members voiced approval; the transcript does not record a roll-call vote or the names of the mover and seconder.
Context and limits: the transcript labels a single presenter throughout; the record does not include a named presenter or a formal roll-call vote. Quantities cited (69 outstanding work orders, 196 drains, 32 non-repayable drains, 73 drains worked in six months) were stated by the presenter in the meeting and are reported here as given. Funding sources or detailed dollar-line items for the drainage budget beyond the mentioned animal-control figure were not specified in the presentation.
What’s next: staff said they will complete DNR permit applications, pursue reconstruction on larger projects internally where feasible, finalize recommendations on non-repayable drains (including possible abandonment), and proceed with the advertised legal hearing next month.
