The Scott County Ditch Board on Oct. 21 adopted findings approving the abandonment of County Ditch 5 after hearing a viewers' report and staff recommendations.

Viewers Scott Henderson and Cody Fossum presented the results of their on‑site inspection and mapping. Henderson summarized their conclusion: “Overall, there’s just not a lot of benefit out there for his property,” referring to the property owner who filed the objection, Mr. Stillwell. Henderson told the board that spur 4 drains into the main ditch, that culvert flow observed at locations including 230 Third and Trunk Highway 13 was minimal at the time of inspection, and that public waters and current culvert elevations limit what practical restoration could achieve.

County counsel Mr. Kolb reminded the board of the statutory standard the drainage authority must apply, citing the rule that abandonment may be proper where a system no longer serves a useful purpose or where restoration is not practical. He said the standard of “practical” requires restoration to be likely to succeed in real circumstances rather than merely possible in theory. Staff told the board they had consulted MnDOT and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources about culvert alterations and permitting, and that individual landowners might obtain DNR permits to protect their own property but that the ditch authority could not use general fund money to pay for large restoration costs.

Nut graf: The board adopted the viewers’ findings and staff recommendation to abandon County Ditch 5 because the viewers found minimal present benefit to the objecting landowner, restoration would likely require substantial work and mitigation in public waters, and staff concluded restoration was not practical under existing regulatory and funding constraints.

Board discussion and action

Board members debated the practical and financial implications of repairing the ditch versus abandonment. One board member said the engineering and regulatory obstacles would likely require assessing millions of dollars to landowners and noted county law limits where such costs may be paid from. Other commissioners urged staff to continue to coordinate with Soil and Water and landowners about non‑ditch measures that might help drainage locally.

A motion to adopt the findings in order approving abandonment of County Ditch 5 was moved and seconded. The motion passed on an affirmative vote.

What the decision means

The board’s order abandons the formal ditch system known as County Ditch 5 and ends the county’s role as ditch authority for that system. Staff and viewers reported that the 2013 Bradshaw Lake WMA and County Ditch 5 study examined repair options and estimated substantial costs to reconstruct the ditch; that estimate has not been updated. The board’s decision does not prevent individual landowners from seeking DNR permits to perform property‑level drainage work where allowed by state rules.

Ending note

The viewers’ report and staff’s recommendation were entered into the record and will serve as the findings supporting the board’s order of abandonment. The board did not adopt a separate rehabilitation plan; instead it concluded abandonment was the appropriate disposition under the evidence presented.