Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drain Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hagar Township residents press for forensic audit, oppose drain assessments
Summary
Multiple Hagar Township residents and the township supervisor urged the Berrien County Board on July 9 to halt two drain projects, alleging irregularities in petition signatures and financial concerns and requesting a forensic audit of the previous Drain Commissioner’s work.
Get email alerts on the Drain Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At the Berrien County Board of Commissioners’ July 9 meeting in Buchanan, Hagar Township Supervisor Izzy DiMaggio and several residents urged the board to halt two local drain projects and to order a forensic audit of the previous Drain Commissioner’s work and financials.
DiMaggio told the board he believed there were “irregularities in the petition that would render the petition null and void” and explicitly asked for a forensic audit of the prior commissioner’s records. Multiple residents echoed financial concerns: some said they had received assessment letters they could not afford and asked what physical work had been completed and what costs remained.
Interim Administrator Mike Sepic read a statement from County Corporate Counsel clarifying the legal framework for drain proceedings. As read to the commission: “The Drain Code vests jurisdiction over all established county drains exclusively with the Drain Commissioner.” The counsel’s statement also said the Drain Code provides a “strict, exclusive judicial remedy” — a writ of certiorari filed in circuit court — for anyone wishing to challenge a drain proceeding.
The board did not take a formal vote to stop the projects at the meeting. Speakers asked the commission for more transparency on amounts already spent, remaining work and loan interest rates, and several requested information be provided to affected property owners. The Corporate Counsel guidance underscored that, under state law, challenges to the drain process proceed in circuit court rather than through Board oversight.
Next steps noted in the meeting record: residents were advised that judicial review is the statutorily prescribed remedy and that the Board’s role does not include authority to suspend a project run by the Drain Commissioner.
