Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the County Ditch 52 Legal topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Faribault County holds closed attorney-client session on County Ditch #52 improvement claims

Faribault County Board of Commissioners · June 2, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Faribault County Board, acting as the Drainage Authority for County Ditch #52, closed a special meeting for attorney-client privileged information about potential litigation tied to a proposed improvement project; no board action was taken and the meeting was later reopened.

The Faribault County Board of Commissioners, acting as the Drainage Authority for County Ditch #52, met in a special session beginning at 8:00 a.m. on June 6, 2026, in the Faribault County Courthouse Board Room in Blue Earth. Chair Bruce Anderson called the meeting to order and the board unanimously approved the agenda.

Commissioner Bill Groskreutz moved, with Commissioner Tom Loveall seconding, to close the meeting under Minn. Stat. §13D.05, subd. 3(b) for attorney-client privileged information related to the County Ditch #52 Improvement Project; the motion “carried unanimously” and the meeting was closed at 8:01 a.m. The meeting record states the closure was for attorney-client privileged information regarding potential pending litigation concerning CD52 improvement claims.

The meeting was reopened at 8:28 a.m. after a unanimous Paschke/Young motion. Attorney Justin Short gave a brief statement saying the closed session had provided attorney-client privileged information about potential pending litigation related to the County Ditch #52 Improvement Project claims and that no board action was taken during the closed session. The special meeting concluded with a unanimous Groskreutz/Paschke motion to adjourn.

The transcript contains two date references: a header lists "June 2nd, 2026" while the body says the meeting met at 8:00 a.m. on June 6th, 2026. This article follows the body’s date (June 6, 2026) and notes the inconsistency. The record does not include verbatim content of the attorney’s closed-session remarks beyond the summary that privileged information was discussed and no action occurred.