[{"_1":2,"_97":-5,"_98":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6372720,"mediaKeyId","2147300-ede40e2b84a4a17abbfd261488133ee5","parentId",2147300,"title","House Ag Committee hears Sargent County testimony on Legal Drain 11; bills would bar votes by landowners who don’t pay assessments","audioSeconds",5373,"startMs",416000,"endMs",5789000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2147300-ede40e2b84a4a17abbfd261488133ee5&start=416&end=5789","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2147300-ede40e2b84a4a17abbfd261488133ee5/thumbnail_416000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6372720/North-Dakota/House-Ag-Committee-hears-Sargent-County-testimony-on-Legal-Drain-11-bills-would-bar-votes-by-landowners-who-dont-pay-assessments","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6372720-db2d793f0f82e13cad7a58b9ecfb1326/orig.mp4?Expires=1771158064&Signature=arNllSCjZfu3J--onZYhTW6RUVQkFvXM43~CeziPu0Huj5gz4lbWeMUGmnA5~31F~fC1HohUMz-M88nq-dfl2EwK6blIpFl2bao8d~ep-a8cJd~YwgHf2yYVQJM5KwU7SjOFagt57k1JJ-yCCoYAD~4gQC559TBNXhjJJQVluxKb5kOV~RQAGCCebvEy3S9O96XVvgfSWRnqE5YhiDDd-hTclgufeUFKWqZ0pwq42fqGUZ8lziFyHm0yg547lsWrAIzOTIavAlT~g8qV4ls3ifsj9gMQC66583gg5TEZbUIBKIpv52f4pWYsqw72K~N4C5OS5zkIEwI3QTcUnXqzJw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Agriculture, ND","date","2025-01-23T00:00:00Z","article","The House Agriculture Committee took testimony on House Bill 1280 and House Bill 1396, both titled “relating to maintenance of drainage projects,” focusing on long‑running problems in Sargent County tied to Legal Drain 11 and disagreement with neighboring Ransom County over assessment and voting rights.

The bills would change how votes on maintenance projects affect landowners’ access to a legal drain: under the proposals, landowners who are assessed but fail to pay required maintenance fees could be barred from voting on measures obligating the district to finance work; a related provision in HB1396 would deny access to surface and subsurface drainage for five years to owners who vote against projects that proceed. Committee members heard detailed local testimony about how a 2013 upgrade of culverts at Highway 13 altered downstream flows and contributed to prolonged flooding and lost cropland in Sargent County.

Why it matters: Sargent County officials and landowners said Legal Drain 11 is a century‑old system that now faces maintenance and legal obstacles that have stopped long‑planned repair work. Witnesses warned the cost of litigation and stalled projects is already large and could grow: they cited $833,000 in legal fees and estimated full reconstruction at $30–35 million. Committee members repeatedly asked how voting and assessment rules applied across county lines and whether the bills would create forced obligations for landowners.

Representative Mike Brandenburg, who introduced the bills, described the local situation to the committee and urged action. He said county and water board efforts to persuade Ransom County to join the watershed or pay a share of the maintenance have repeatedly failed. \"I support watershed districts,\" Brandenburg told the committee, noting that the problem was magnified after Highway 13 work in 2013 installed larger culverts that changed flows into Sargent County.

Sargent County water board members and farmers gave multiple on‑the‑record examples of the drain’s condition and the political dispute. Michael Wyom, a member of the Sargent County Water Board, told the committee that Ransom County was not assessed when the drain was originally built and refused the first reassessment bills after a more recent reassessment. Lucas Chimenowski and Todd Stein, both with the Sargent County water board, described tile drainage and surface drainage that now enter Legal Drain 11 even as some landowners oppose paying assessments.

Supporters said the bills are meant to protect local taxpayers and to move stalled maintenance projects forward. Opponents —including landowners who have voted against projects and some commenters online—argued the bills would effectively penalize voters for their ballot choices and create an unfair coercive link between voting and use of drainage infrastructure.

Committee members asked for clarifications on technical and legal points: how votes are apportioned by acreage and proximity; why some landowners in Ransom County are not being billed; the legal consequences of reassessments; and the ability of watershed districts and county commissioners to pursue joint powers agreements. Witnesses and lawmakers discussed practical fixes raised in testimony, including gated culverts and phased construction, but several said those approaches would face resistance from the Department of Transportation or would need significant state funding.

The committee did not take a final recorded vote on HB1280 or HB1396 during the hearing; both bills received extended testimony and were left in committee pending possible amendment or future action.

Ending: Committee members and witnesses agreed the underlying problem—cross‑county drainage that benefits landowners who do not share maintenance costs—raises questions about statutory authority, practical remedies, and the precedent set by the recent court ruling requiring a vote before work can begin. Several speakers urged local negotiation before more litigation, while others said legislative clarity was required to prevent similar disputes across other legal drains in the state.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Agriculture Jan 23, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The House Agriculture Committee heard extended testimony on House Bills 1280 and 1396, both addressing maintenance of Legal Drain 11 after Sargent County officials said downstream flooding and crop losses followed larger culverts installed on Highway 13 in 2013.","taxTitle","Agriculture, House of Representatives, Legislative, North Dakota","taxId",28885,"location","North Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6372709,"Committee backs pesticide‑labeling bill that declares EPA‑approved labels meet state duty to warn",0,7522000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2147300-ede40e2b84a4a17abbfd261488133ee5&start=7522&end=7522","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2147300-ede40e2b84a4a17abbfd261488133ee5/thumbnail_7522000.jpg","/articles/6372709/North-Dakota/Committee-backs-pesticidelabeling-bill-that-declares-EPAapproved-labels-meet-state-duty-to-warn","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6372709-8c9a5725cc72b5105245ec634bfca2cc/orig.mp4?Expires=1771158064&Signature=ZdN0rEbsKlsVuPLFVDuQqXHxH1HijhxDCRCV14llXP0hY5Lz4JCuWcILx6~W~3unV98rPH6NK2laEyAyPHVV8G~WMav4-UnJx4~OoLNMQZI14kP~gVdVO0U3StpdmwFb1TadgehU-Sz4NMuYamzkCSTCNziCAC1wTwGm79iYy0KPQbgY-hX3-GOq56XA~g09dEqJM2N-21ChwHCf~xKEgDQi4lfReeruN87guehJ9LPnT53kjHeGnoVkovGPYeimzq-o~z9oFan0rhRTi7GH8htSQTdsikmJEHLD4b5Qb57wwEYgsFuJLuCgIYz1Vuj6fcnQaJ31LGKZ8lnZTUgFxQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Agriculture Committee voted to recommend passage of House Bill 1318, which would state that a pesticide’s label, as approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), satisfies North Dakota’s duty to warn or any common‑law duty to warn.

Why it matters: Supporters said the bill provides regulatory clarity and helps prevent court rulings or temporary label vacaturs from disrupting agricultural operations during the growing season. They argued that the federal label follows a rigorous scientific review and that state law should recognize an EPA‑approved label as the controlling duty‑to‑warn standard.

Supporters and testimony: The bill sponsor introduced the measure and testimony in support came from a broad coalition of agricultural stakeholders, including the North Dakota Corn Growers, the North Dakota Grain Growers Association, the North Dakota Soybean Growers Association, the Modern Ag Alliance, ag consultants, and the North Dakota Farm Bureau. Testimony emphasized that certified applicators are trained to read and follow standardized labels and that sudden changes or vacaturs of registrations can leave producers without tools they rely on during the season.

Opposition and suggested amendment: The North Dakota Association for Justice testified in opposition as written and proposed an amendment to ensure the statute operates with current label language if EPA modifies, revises, or otherwise updates a label. The association argued the bill should not become a static, point‑in‑time statute that fails to reflect later federal changes; it said an explicit cross‑reference to updated EPA language would make the statute durable.

Committee action: Representative Mehring moved for a due‑pass recommendation. After discussion and questions, including from members who sought assurance that federal review processes and label updates would be respected, the committee approved a due‑pass recommendation by roll call vote.

Ending: The committee’s recommendation reflects broad agricultural support and a narrow but vocal procedural concern from trial‑lawyer representatives; the committee did not adopt the Association for Justice’s amendment during the hearing, though members discussed possible future adjustments.","House Bill 1318 would make EPA‑approved pesticide labels the binding state standard for duty‑to‑warn claims; supporters from grower groups and applicators said the change would give legal and regulatory certainty, while the North Dakota Association for Justice proposed an amendment to ensure labels updated by EPA continue to apply automatically.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":79,"_43":90,"_45":90,"_47":91,"_49":92,"_51":93,"_53":94,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":95,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":96,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6372715,"House Ag Committee gives due pass to raw‑milk products bill after farm and consumer testimony",7423000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2147300-ede40e2b84a4a17abbfd261488133ee5&start=7423&end=7423","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2147300-ede40e2b84a4a17abbfd261488133ee5/thumbnail_7423000.jpg","/articles/6372715/North-Dakota/House-Ag-Committee-gives-due-pass-to-rawmilk-products-bill-after-farm-and-consumer-testimony","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6372715-3a8e1f3432058324845e1f61e918b4d2/orig.mp4?Expires=1771158064&Signature=VeVNpQ0EUG8k-1C0gf4CvoCh8R1LYo2Q~CXXqKyTN95YAFCHM7yuLXFphKRB1aNMFSdaxEy02HcTXCHA9t0eT3Tf~SX2t657AOeGYjj4yxHG-arGPe0ZMH9MV2zA694BCL9-Oi55KM2VtMGaH64r2wWMPF59H7I2IPS3rKOobkSUtiB5tAQjAiQS1txlbz1CS8xsa27ZBSXxRemOd7pqFDEimBpaKmCj4a9C2u7AF9pMXrzZE5E9g-kdl8M5c~jJ1hQnleAd31k9Du8BDjozbFuwwwgAa0lukQE-HpjPCdASHrWIe2qjRDOXUcWQszoswHER3xgNnfMOET27veKqtQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Agriculture Committee voted to recommend passage of House Bill 1131, a bill addressing sale and distribution of raw milk products, after testimony from producers and consumers and discussion about liability, labeling, and public health.

Why it matters: HB1131 would expand how raw milk products are handled under state law, and committee members debated consumer choice versus public‑health risk and potential state liability if outbreaks occur. Several lawmakers and witnesses urged caution while also noting producer diligence and low reported incidence since earlier legislation.

Committee discussion and testimony: Supporters urged the committee to allow industry stakeholders to form a working group to draft a fuller regulatory framework for the 2027 session rather than relying on a formal legislative study. Representative Holly said producers already take testing and safety steps; she noted that since the Legislature’s earlier raw‑milk law was enacted the prior session, \"we have had 0 instances of any outbreaks or anything.\" Opponents and some members raised legal and liability concerns, asking whether the state or producers could face lawsuits if consumers got sick despite signed waivers.

Representative Olson moved for a due‑pass recommendation; the motion carried after a roll call.

Ending: The committee approved a due‑pass recommendation for HB1131 and named a carrier for the bill. Lawmakers said they expected producers to continue work on labeling and safety details through an industry working group that would include Agriculture Department and committee representation.","The committee voted to recommend passage of House Bill 1131 (raw milk products). Supporters said consumers asked for access and producers would self‑police; some members raised concerns about liability and labeling but the committee approved a due‑pass motion.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

House Ag Committee hears Sargent County testimony on Legal Drain 11; bills would bar votes by landowners who don’t pay assessments

Committee backs pesticide‑labeling bill that declares EPA‑approved labels meet state duty to warn

House Ag Committee gives due pass to raw‑milk products bill after farm and consumer testimony