Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drainage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brainerd Township officials tell Brown County commission they are being sued over culvert replacement
Summary
Brainerd Township representatives told the Brown County Board on July 28 that a long‑running drainage dispute has escalated to litigation after a landowner installed a larger culvert; township leaders said engineers recommended four 24‑inch culverts, the township has spent about $7,000 in legal fees, and officials warned of possible broader liability for townships downstream.
Brainerd Township representatives told the Brown County Board of Commissioners on July 28 that a local drainage dispute has become a lawsuit after a landowner installed a 24‑inch culvert where the township expected an 18‑inch pipe.
“We’ve been sued now,” a township resident told the commission, and “we’ve spent $7,000 out of our own money” defending the township so far. Township speakers said the dispute began two years ago and involves appeals and civil claims that seek damages for alleged drainage failures.
Township speakers cited an engineering review (name given in the meeting transcript as Gutenkoff) that recommended up to four 24‑inch culverts at the site but warned that installing larger culverts could create “excessive down‑low issues” for downstream landowners. The townships argued that the downstream system includes multiple points of restricted flow — county and township roads with smaller culverts — and said the flow path across roughly 8,100 acres complicates the situation.
County administrative staff (Ross) told the board that if a local drainage board has been dissolved, state law directs administration to the county commission’s process and that ultimately many disputes “all roads lead to a lawsuit” — confirming the matter is now primarily a civil Litigation issue and not administrative enforcement by the county.
Speakers at the meeting discussed options for the township, including obtaining a formal engineering study paid from township opt‑out rate funds and seeking county support or a formal statement from the county if the case proceeds to court. County staff cautioned that some opt‑out funds have restrictions and likely cannot be used for legal fees; they suggested using the funds for engineering work to establish technical evidence.
The board did not take formal action on the dispute during the meeting. Township representatives said they would continue to pursue engineering validation and legal defense; county staff said they would review procedural options for whether the county commission should accept drainage‑board jurisdiction or otherwise offer administrative assistance.
