Smith - MN Drainage Law Analysis and Evaluation

MINNESOTA DRAINAGE LAW MINNESOTA DRAINAGE LAW ANALYSIS AND EVALUATIONANALYSIS AND EVALUATION

Louis N. Smith

Charles B. Holtman

November 7, 2011

OverviewOverview

Project Purpose & Work PlanProject Purpose & Work Plan

Legal Analysis and Critical IssuesLegal Analysis and Critical Issues

Demonstration ScenariosDemonstration Scenarios

RecommendationsRecommendations


Purpose:Purpose: Legal analysis of Minnesota drainage laws Legal analysis of Minnesota drainage laws Evaluate costs, benefits and environmental Evaluate costs, benefits and environmental

impacts impacts Consider alternative strategies Consider alternative strategies Serve needs of public waters and property Serve needs of public waters and property

owners alikeowners alike


Approach: Approach: Pursue creative approaches to integrated Pursue creative approaches to integrated

water resource managementwater resource management Update drainage code procedures, standards Update drainage code procedures, standards

and funding authorities and funding authorities Include local land use planning Include local land use planning Protect property rights in drainage Protect property rights in drainage Enhance beneficial economic use of land. Enhance beneficial economic use of land.


Work Plan:Work Plan: Legal AnalysisLegal Analysis Critical Issues IdentificationCritical Issues Identification Demonstration ScenariosDemonstration Scenarios Policy RecommendationsPolicy Recommendations

PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEEPROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

NameName AffiliationAffiliationRay Bohn Minnesota Association of Watershed DistrictsRay Bohn Minnesota Association of Watershed DistrictsGary Botzek Minnesota Conservation FederationGary Botzek Minnesota Conservation FederationMark Dittrich Minnesota Department of AgricultureMark Dittrich Minnesota Department of AgricultureLes Everett University of Minnesota Water Resources CenterLes Everett University of Minnesota Water Resources CenterWarren Formo Minnesota Agriculture Water Resources CoalitionWarren Formo Minnesota Agriculture Water Resources CoalitionAnnalee Garletz Minnesota Association of CountiesAnnalee Garletz Minnesota Association of CountiesRon Harnack Red River Watershed Management BoardRon Harnack Red River Watershed Management BoardAl Kean Minnesota Board of Water and Soil ResourcesAl Kean Minnesota Board of Water and Soil ResourcesRick Moore MSU-Mankato Water Resources CenterRick Moore MSU-Mankato Water Resources CenterLance Ness Minnesota Fish & Wildlife Legislative AllianceLance Ness Minnesota Fish & Wildlife Legislative AllianceRon Ringquist Minnesota Viewers AssociationRon Ringquist Minnesota Viewers AssociationDoug Thomas Comfort Lake Forest Lake Watershed DistrictDoug Thomas Comfort Lake Forest Lake Watershed DistrictHenry Van Offelen Minnesota Center for Environmental AdvocacyHenry Van Offelen Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy


Legal AnalysisLegal Analysis Working with an 1883 framework Working with an 1883 framework 100+ years of water laws – gaps, conflicts100+ years of water laws – gaps, conflicts Limited options to reconcile various goalsLimited options to reconcile various goals Evolving interest in creative, integrated Evolving interest in creative, integrated

approachesapproaches


Critical Issues:Critical Issues: Conservation drainageConservation drainage Sub-watershed planningSub-watershed planning Updating “benefits” and “damages”Updating “benefits” and “damages” Anticipating TMDLsAnticipating TMDLs Rational regulation Rational regulation

Demonstration ScenariosDemonstration Scenarios

A: Drainage Repair Project in Red River ValleyA: Drainage Repair Project in Red River Valley

B: Drainage Improvement Project in Minnesota B: Drainage Improvement Project in Minnesota

River Valley River Valley

C: Developing Watershed in Metro C: Developing Watershed in Metro

PerspectivesPerspectives

Scenario B: Rural Agricultural Scenario B: Rural Agricultural Drainage System and TMDLDrainage System and TMDL

““Commissioner Strong’s General Principles”Commissioner Strong’s General Principles”

1.1. Green Meadows County’s economy depends Green Meadows County’s economy depends on agriculture.on agriculture.

2.2. We need to fix the pollution problem for Old We need to fix the pollution problem for Old Corncob River and Meadow Lake.Corncob River and Meadow Lake.

3.3. We need a plan for the drainage system and We need a plan for the drainage system and the watershed.the watershed.

4.4. Find a way to spread the costs fairly.Find a way to spread the costs fairly.

5.5. Don’t confine yourselves to existing law.Don’t confine yourselves to existing law.

The New Plan: Combining Conservation The New Plan: Combining Conservation and Drainage Improvementsand Drainage Improvements

Funding ConceptsFunding Concepts1.1. Benefited landowners assessed for drainage repair Benefited landowners assessed for drainage repair

and improvement as appropriateand improvement as appropriate2.2. Landowners also contribute, say 10%, to Landowners also contribute, say 10%, to

conservation measuresconservation measures3.3. City stormwater utility to cover city stormwater City stormwater utility to cover city stormwater

detention basindetention basin4.4. County “stormwater utility” (requires legislation) to County “stormwater utility” (requires legislation) to

assess based on phosphorus contribution from assess based on phosphorus contribution from predominant land use types or est. volume of runoffpredominant land use types or est. volume of runoff

5.5. Create incentives, or credits for reducing volume of Create incentives, or credits for reducing volume of runoff.runoff.

The New Plan: Combining Conservation The New Plan: Combining Conservation and Drainage Improvementsand Drainage Improvements

Project ElementProject Element Est. CostEst. Cost Funding SourcesFunding Sources

Drainage repairs Drainage repairs 575,000575,000 Drainage SystemDrainage System

Drainage improvements Drainage improvements 210,00210,00 Drainage SystemDrainage System

Upper watershed storage basins Upper watershed storage basins 250,000250,000 City SWU/County/DSCity SWU/County/DS

Two stage ditch sections Two stage ditch sections 40,00040,000 County SWU/DSCounty SWU/DS

In-channel sediment storage In-channel sediment storage 30,00030,000 County SWU/DSCounty SWU/DS

Native grass buffers - open ditch Native grass buffers - open ditch 30,00030,000 County SWU/DSCounty SWU/DS

Road crossing improvements Road crossing improvements 190,000190,000 Road authoritiesRoad authorities

TOTAL TOTAL $1,325,000 $1,325,000


Drainage and Watershed ManagementDrainage and Watershed Management

Drainage and Wetlands ManagementDrainage and Wetlands Management

Recommended ActionsRecommended Actions

Options to ConsiderOptions to Consider


1.1. Provide drainage authorities with more tools and Provide drainage authorities with more tools and

resources for watershed-based planning.resources for watershed-based planning.

2.2. Provide drainage authorities with more tools and Provide drainage authorities with more tools and

resources to implement projects with integrated resources to implement projects with integrated

drainage, flood control, conservation, and water drainage, flood control, conservation, and water

quality benefits. quality benefits.

2.2. Better integrate effects on wetlands and water Better integrate effects on wetlands and water

quality into drainage authority decisions about quality into drainage authority decisions about

drainage system work. drainage system work.

4.4. Provide drainage authorities with more clarity in Provide drainage authorities with more clarity in

legal authority to address drainage system legal authority to address drainage system

alignment, grade, cross section, and hydraulic alignment, grade, cross section, and hydraulic

capacity of bridges and culverts for multipurpose capacity of bridges and culverts for multipurpose

design of drainage system establishment, design of drainage system establishment,

improvement, or repair.improvement, or repair.

Extend the authority to establish a locally based Extend the authority to establish a locally based

wetland regulatory framework under a CWPMP wetland regulatory framework under a CWPMP

to public water wetlands.to public water wetlands.

Create replacement alternatives within a CWPMP Create replacement alternatives within a CWPMP for a landowner causing wetland impact who may for a landowner causing wetland impact who may not have a high-valued replacement option on site.not have a high-valued replacement option on site.

7.7. Coordinate USACE Section 404 jurisdiction withCoordinate USACE Section 404 jurisdiction with

a watershed-based CWPMP or other a watershed-based CWPMP or other

implementing framework.implementing framework.

8.8. Integrate MnDOT right-of-way, local road Integrate MnDOT right-of-way, local road

authority activities, and other state-managed authority activities, and other state-managed

lands within a CWPMP framework.lands within a CWPMP framework.

Foster reliability of CWPMP outcomes through Foster reliability of CWPMP outcomes through

coordination of local land use authority (LUA) coordination of local land use authority (LUA)

and wetland regulatory authority. and wetland regulatory authority.

Where from here?Where from here?

BWSR - Drainage Work GroupBWSR - Drainage Work Group U of M Water Resources ConferenceU of M Water Resources Conference Environmental Initiative Policy ForumEnvironmental Initiative Policy Forum MAWDMAWD MASWCDMASWCD LCCMRLCCMR

Questions?Questions?

[email protected]@smithpartners.com

Smith - MN Drainage Law Analysis and Evaluation

News & Politics

Transcript of Smith - MN Drainage Law Analysis and Evaluation