MEMBERS Thomas Schlarb- Board President Randall Matthys- - Board Vice President Johns Summers John Linn, P.E. Derek D. Dieter- County Commissioner RobertL. Kruszynski- Countys Surveyor Marcellus Lebbin, Esq. Board Counsel  ROBERT L. KRUSZYNSKI County Surveyor SKYK. MEDORS, P.E. County Engineer WILLIAMS S. SCHALLIOL, ESQ. Executive Dir. of Economic Development ABBYE.V WILES, AICP Executive Dir. ofArea Plan Commission  ST.JOSEPH COUNTY ESTABLISHED 1830 DRAINAGE BOARD  DEPARTMENT NFRASTRUCTURE,  OF  PLANNING & GROWTH  The Title VI Coordinator has made: available at this meeting/hearing a voluntary Public Involvement Survey to collect demographic data to monitor and demonstrate St.. Joseph County's compliance withi its non-discrimination obligations under Title VI and Federal Regulation 23CFR 200.9(b)(4), and morei importantly, ensure that affected communities andi interested persons are provided equal access toj public involvement. Compliance is voluntary. However, in ordert to demonstrate compliance with the federal regulation, thei information requested must be documented whenj provided. It will not be used for any other purpose, except tos show that those who are affected orl have ani interest  inp proceedings, ort the proposed project have! been given an opportunity to provide input throughout the process.  June 3, 2024, Drainage Board Meeting Minutes St.. Joseph County Drainage Board Monday, June 3, 2024 4th floor Chambers, County-City Building Present:  Thomas Schlarb - President John Linn - Member Robert Kruszynski 1- Surveyor Marcellus Lebbin - Counsel  Randall Matthys - Vice President John Summers Member Derek Dieter- - Commissioner Savannah Kish Secretary  John Law Absent:  Drainage Board Meeting 8:30A.M.  1. Call to Order 8:30: a.m.  Audio Position (0:00:00)  The St. Joseph County Drainage Board Meeting was called to order by Mr. Thomas Schlarb at  2. Approval of May 13, 2024, Minutes  Audio Position (0:00:09)  Mr. John Summers made aj motion to approve the May 13, 2024, minutes, being seconded by Mr.  Derek Dieter, and the motion was unanimously carried, 5-0.  3. Surveyor's Report  A. Payment to Contractors  Audio Position (0:00:29)  Robert Kruszynski: You see the list in front ofyou. Anybody have any concerns?  Mr. Derek Dieter made a motion to approve the May Payment to Contractors, being seconded by  Mr. John Summers and carried unanimously, 5-0. 4. Niespodziany Ditch Reconstruction A. Update- -Jared Huss  -MOU b/t St. Joseph County RDC and Drainage Board Audio Position (0:02:13) PLANNING & ZONING I PUBLIC WORKS I SURVEYOR I DRAINAGE I ENVIRONMENTAL IE ECONOMICI DEVELOPMENT  227 W.. Jefferson Blvd. I 7th &11hFI. I South Bend, IN 46601  P: (574) 235-7800 IF:(574)2 235-5057    Jared Huss. Lawson-Fishers: The Memorandum ofUnderstanding in front ofyou isa modification to the initial Memorandum ofUnderstanding between the Redevelopment Commission and yourselves related to the reconstruction oft the Niespodziany Ditch. This modification allows for an additional portion of the contract. There are two pieces: one for design and the other for construction inspection services for the ditch itself. The additional structure design was not in the original scope. The MOU is an update to the amount and the type ofwork being done there. Iknow Bill and Phil are also here, SO they can answer any questions Robert Kruszynski: Does anyone have any questions for Mr. Huss in regards to the MOU?  pertaining to that.  Randall Matthys: This is for additional work?  Jared Huss: Yes, sO the original scope did not conceive an additional structure, sO as part of that work we designed an additional structure across the ditch. So, a portion of that additional fee is for that activity and a larger portion of the fee is for the construction inspection or administration John Linn: The redevelopment commission is funding this through us, is that correct?  of the contract during construction.  Jared Huss: Correct.  Randall Matthys: Is the structure for the entrance to the GM plant?  Jared Huss: Yes. Both of those structures are for serving the GM site. And John thank you for pointing that out. This is to document the funding from the RDC to the Drainage Board.  John Linn: Our attorney I assume is okay with this?  Marcellus Lebbin: Yes.  Mr. John Linn made a motion to approve the MOU between the St. Joseph County RDC and the Drainage Board, being seconded by Mr. John Summers and carried unanimously, 5-0.  -Contract Amendment No. 1-LFA Construction Services Audio Position (0:04:15) Jared Huss: Tailing the MOU, you approved the interaction of funding between yourselves and the RDC, for that particular amendment, SO this amendment deals with the additional design for  the structure and the construction inspection services mentioned previously. John Linn: Once again, I assume our attorney has signed off on this.  Mr. John Linn made a motion to approve the Contract Amendment No. 1, being seconded by Mr.  Randall Matthys and carried unanimously, 5-0. -Approval of Contract for C&E  Audio Position (0:02:22)  Jared Huss: Yes, correct. As you are aware, the last meeting we did award the contract to C&E. This is just the summation of that process. First the contract itselfwas reviewed through Phil Garrett and we have that signed and in there along with all of the other insurances and bonding    required by the contract as reviewed by Lawson-Fisher Associates. That is all there prepared and ready to go. They have met all oft the requirements as previously stated during the award process. Robert Kruszynski: Are there any questions on the contract for C&E Excavating?  John Linn: Marcel, are you okay with it?  Marcellus Lebbin: Actually, for this one I didn'thear anything from Phil on this one. Idon't know. Ihaven'tl looked at it. Iassume that Lawson-Fisher looked at it and it met all oft the requirements for the bid and it's good to go. This was not in my packet for some reason. Jared Huss: The contract itself was the standard form from the county. Ik know Phil did review that. Ifyoul have any questions for Phil, I'm sure he can answer those. The remainder is the contract documents that set out the components for the contract itself. That was reviewed and gone through with the Drainage Board and everyone here. Those did not change. All ofthat information that was required for the bid was checked by Lawson-Fisher. That was check in the award letter that you received last time and then followed through here. There is nothing new. All had been previously reviewed, and this isj just a matter of semantics on the sign off.. All of the Phil Garrett: So, this is the same form that Sky uses for all of this Public Work contracts. The only change that was made was that the Drainage Board was allowed to terminate subject to if the permitting does not go through. Other than that, it's the same form that is used by the  information was there.  County.  John Linn: Marcel, do you have aj problem with us moving on this? Marcellus Lebbin: I don'th have aj problem. Imean I think Phil is liable.  Phil Garrett: I'll take responsibility for this one. Mr. Derek Dieter and carried unanimously, 5-0. -Approval of Notice to Proceed  Mr. John Linn made a motion to approve the Contract for C&E Excavating, being seconded by  Audio Position (0:08:00)  Jared Huss: Lastly, Notice to Proceed. We did have correspondence with both the Army Corps of Engineers and the IDEM: related to the project. Obviously, asking the Drainage Board to issue notice to proceed in advance ofh having those permits. Both Army Corp and IDEM granted permission to start the project as long as no disturbance of the existing channel take place. That activity is not supposed tol happen until late Spring and early Summer 2025. We feel that is reasonable to go ahead and move forward with the project. We anticipate having those permits in Robert Kruszynski: Kevin has been updating us with emails every sO often. Ia appreciate that. Jared Huss: Absolutely. I think it'si important that we had in writing from IDEM and Army Corp that we can move: forward with the project. It think that is a critical component before we can  hand before the end oft the year.  issue Notice to Proceed.    John Linn: Whatever happens with this, I presume that the RDC will take care of whatever costs  come up from this - whether there is a permit or not? JohnI Linn: Marcel, are you okay with this?  Bill Schalliol: Yes, sir. Marcellus Lebbin: Yes.  Mr. John Linn made a motion to approve the Notice to Proceed, being seconded by Mr. Derek  Dieter and carried unanimously, 5-0.  B. Dewatering Discharge Permit - Thad Bessinger  Audio Position (0:10:15)  Jared Huss: Thad and I have had direct conversations, soIcan answer your questions. What you have in front of you is a permit to discharge the Niespodziany Ditch that C&E Excavating has submitted, well in advance of when he anticipates doing it. He and I had a conversation andI directed him to speak with. John Law and the County Surveyor about the permit process. Within that discussion, this would happen late August and carry until the two structures are installed. Expect a duration ofa about a month and halft to two months, in order to complete that dewatering process that you have in front of you. Not a long duration for the dewatering process. Robert Kruszynski: Jared, that is coordinating this with IDEM in regards to SR 2 and Amazon? Jared Huss: It would not be coordination with IDEM sO much as it would be a permit request with the Drainage Board as part of! his dewatering process to a legal drain. Thomas Schlarb: You say this is approximately going to take place in August? Thomas Schlarb: Is the new system going to bei in by then? The new ditch...  Jared Huss: Yes, correct.  Jared Huss: They will discharge to the existing ditch, because this will take place in the summer oft this year. The new construction wouldn't be connected to this ditch until the summer of 2025. Randall Matthys: So, this dewatering permit is going to discharge into the existing  Niespodziany? Jared Huss: Correct. Jared Huss: Correct.  Randall Matthys: Between SR 2 and Fillmore Rd.?  Brian Bailey, 30970 Johnson Rd.: Did they give any estimate of per gallons? Jared Huss: 3 million gallons per day, which is equivalent to less than 7cfs. John Summers: When did we approve the Reith-Riley dewatering?    John Law: They are supposed to be doing it now, but they are having trouble getting the pipes to John Summers: I'm just concerned with all of this dewatering going on at the same time. Randall Matthys: That brings up the question that I have too. My question was ifitdid start, isi it doing what they want it to? But we won't get that answer ift they haven'tstarted yet. My question or concern is ift they asked for 8 or 10 well and that doesn'tdo it, are they going to come back John Law: And I think they've already asked for 20 more, but we only approved 12. Brian Bailey: The Niespodziany goes right through our farm. My questions were for the simple reason that when INTECH did the same thing, they did it right in the middle of planting season. 3million gallons extra on a wet spring. you may as well call it quits. I've had a pump running right now. This hasn'tbeen much of a rainfall year, but it's been more rain days than drying days. We've had a drainage pump going since mid-April 24/7 and it's still on as ofthis moment. Thisi isj just to get the crops on the ground. Starting in August and going 1.5-2 months is going to put you right into harvest season and rainier weather. I'm a little concerned about that. Most of the farmers have got their crops in, but quite a few south of SR 2 don'tyet. They are still trying to dry out some oft them wet spots. I'm not worried about them doing it. I'd like to see them start sooner on this, to get done by September if they could. So, they wouldn't be pumping and adding insult to injury on top ofrainfall this fall and on top oft trying to get a crop out of the ground. That would be my concern about it more than anything. Working with the Amazon and anybody else is going to be firing up pumps and doing work. Ifthey could do it in the off-season, have at it. Muck don't freeze in the wintertime. Bulldoze it all you want. They want to pump all winter long, that's fine. If they want to pump in the middle of summer, that's fine. Spring, fall - you are John Linn: Randy, do you have any thoughts on that? Do you think that's something we should Randall Matthys: IK know that Lawson-Fisher and Jared Huss are going to do a study on the Niespodziany. We've talked about the restrictions on the Niespodziany - one being that the culvert just north of the railroad Is there any way we could prioritize upsizing that culvert to  the ditch or something. They haven'tstarted.  and ask for more. And this is all temporary...  hurting every farmer south of SR: 2. That's my 2 cents worth. Thank you.  think about?  handle the water?  Brian Bailey: That can be done at any time now.  Randall Matthys: To me, that is the biggest obstruction down-stream on the Niespodziany - the Guillepse Culvert. And, depending on what is going on or how much water is flowing through there. What do we: need to do. To me, that is a concern. How can we address that concern? Jared Huss: Randy, Iappreciate you bringing that up and we will have the hydraulic study for the ditch prepared. In fact, we, through the blessing of the drainage board and others, went ahead and started the survey component of that. So, we've started the project in advance, because we know it's critical. From a time, perspective, through review comments made both by the County    Surveyor and County Engineer, we have also reduced that timeframe to get that study done. So, we were at closer to 8 months. We're now down to 61 months sO we're working diligently on the project. I don't Envision that that would all be done. Iknow Mr. Bailey's been talking about that culvert for some time, so I know that that's a critical component. I think that's what we want to do is also look at that in the rail bridge and the combined impact oft tail water into the drainage area. Iknow those are important aspects. Idon't know that that timing is going to line up with what the requests are from a storm water or dewatering standpoint. I do know seasonally we anticipate, and Iappreciate Mr. Bailey's comments related to getting the crops out oft the field as well. From the ditch reconstruction project standpoint expect the initial similar to what John explained to the north expect that initial rate of discharge to be higher. Once they draw it down near the two structures and then it'll bej just a maintenance activity. Again, we have an October 31st deadline ofhaving that completed which means the structure likely needs to be in no later than mid-October in order for them to get all their grading and the rest ofit dressed for that to be ready for the contract that the Count's adhered to. Ithink from that perspective the C&E remaining dewatering should be generally within the seasonal constraints that Mr. Bailey was concerned about. We are certainly sensitive to his comments. The C&E request is very seasonal and fits within that general timeframe. In terms oft the broader conversation without the completed study, it's tough for me to make an assertion. Iknow you guys are out there in the field. You see it. You live it every day, but that's just not something that I can speak to at this point until we get further movement on that ditch study. Not in an attempt to say anything negative but related to the overall capacity of the ditch, when we're looking at over 575 CFS for the 100-year flow I'm sensitive to smaller amounts of water being added certainly because that can make an impact, but this is fairly small in comparison to the overall capacity of the ditch and Thomas Schlarb: Putting in this new culvert, would that cost be under the Redevelopment Jared Huss: Ithink we need to get the actual determination of what the study says. It could very well be that everybody's assumption is correct that we need to replace that culvert. It think we need to then have that conversation once that study reveals that output. I think until we do that,I would be cautious advising spending dollars on something that we haven't completed yet related Thomas Schlarb: Like Randy said it's pretty much at its maximum now, you know. Randall Matthys: Yeah, Tom you're talking about the culvert downstream just north of.... what's before us is the structure north of SR 2 for the entrance. It sort ofall ties together. John Linn: Even if that was somehow authorized by somebody today, would that even be in by September or October? Is it even possible or do we need permitting and everything else? Jared Huss: Yes, there is a number. John, I have not looked into that SO there's a number of things that I haven't assessed individually. Id don't know ift that would be considered a maintenance activity or ifit would be considered something else. I want to wait to answer that. I just had not anticipated having a conversation on culvert replacement. I do believe that there  the flow events that it does see.  Commission?  to as study and the impact.    obviously needs to be additional information collected to make the right decision on the size of that culvert. I don't want to make a flippant comment on that without having more information or data to state it. Again, trying to be aware of the seasonality of what Mr. Bailey referred to Ido think C&E'sactivities are within that general window. This is part of the reason we asked them to submit early because we knew this was an ongoing conversation broader than just their John Linn: Is there anything in our permit that gives us the ability or the right to ask them to slow Marcellus Lebbin: Now this is kind of an interesting thing. If we don't think the drain can handle the discharge, we cannot issue the permit. We can upgrade the drain and then issue the permit. This process is al little bit backwards because they're asking us to issue the permit to do the water and then do the study and if the drain can't handle it, Idon't know where the funding is coming from. I was here last time we put a new culvert through the railroad tracks and that was a monumental task working with the railroad. I don't know ifthe redevelopment committee would set some money aside - essentially put an escrow or a fund for upgrading these culverts. Anybody who's been on this board and most ofyoul have even longer than II have known that there have been issues with that particular area backing up for decades. Idon't see how this much dewatering isn't going to require some work. Imean that's yet to be seen. That's what Jared will tell us but obviously we want the work to go forward. Obviously, we want to issue the permit but ifwe could get some money set aside for upgrading those culverts that would be good. Jared Huss: Marcel, Ia appreciate that, so I want to separate out two different pieces. We have long-term improvements to the Niespodziany which impact flood plains and floodways. Really that's what the study is looking at SO it's not assessing dewatering volumes it's assessing the overall capacity of the ditch. Understand that those are correlated. That's probably brought up the design storms or the storms that we've seen and that's part of what we'll do through the study process is to look at the various storms. We'll look at specific storms and want to talk to the farmers who work those fields to understand what those impacts are going to be. Here's a storm and here's what we've modeled, does that match what you saw let's say in 2018 for instance. That is very much about floodways and flood plains and the hydraulic capacity dewatering in this particular instance the amounts that we're asking even though when we summate them and at a daily level 8 million and 3 million seem substantial and I don't want to minimize that amount of water but in terms ofCFS they're a fractional component of what the overall ditch conveys. I think what we're talking about is the concern that if we have a large rain event let's say a 50-year storm or greater and you combine that with the dewatering activities I think that would be the concern. I don't want to speak for Mr. Bailey but that would be I think the thing to pay attention to, al large rain in addition to those activities. That's the impact where they combine. What we're asking fori is a dewatering permit that is small in fraction comparatively to the overall drainage course or the discharge to that ditch. I don't want to say that they're not correlated because they absolutely are but that that's the difference. I want to differentiate between those two as we're discussing it. Improvements made for the functionality of the ditch - replacing all the culverts those things should be done I think we've all agreed in an educated and processed manner.  discharge.  down or stop pumping if we have a flooding condition?    Looking at what it is what those impacts are and then making sure that we: spend the right dollars to doi it. Doing those in advance of dewatering discharges is likely not feasible. Ijust don't see that as a course ofaction from timing to satisfy the construction needs. That'sjust my  information to be considered.  Robert Kruszynski: Thank you for clarifying that because I was going to get to that point. Right now, we're talking, just the dewatering permit but once we get done with that then you might want to give a brief synopsis to the board Jared on what we're talking about ini regards to that study. That's been a two- or three-month process to get to that point with Sky Medors, the County Engineer - his input, Bill's input. and yours. Idon't know ift the board's really all up to speed on the study that. John Law and Ikind ofinitiated about three months ago or four months ago. With the help ofe everybody, we've got the Kankakeee-Yellow River Basin Commission involved in this. They're also funding part ofthis. Thanks to everyone's help. Thanks to Redevelopment. Ib believe, Bill, you're onboard with that study also which we need not just from everything north ofs SR 2, we wanted to look at everything that's going south of SR 2 also to the Kankakee and that's what this study's going to do.. Jared, you can fill the board in but let's get Randall Matthys: Just to comment I've had discussion with. Jared about the study. It would be extremely nice had the study been done prior to these dewatering permits coming before us. I think it would shed light on how the ditch can handle it. Although If feel confident Jared has a good handle on what the ditch can handle as it is. The dewatering permit before us here for the north side of SR 2 with C&E that relates to what's presented to us today, like 2,000 gallonsa minute being pumped in there. The farmer side of me says when we're irrigating or drawing water out of a ditch and we've got several where we pump 7,8, 900 gallons a minute. You look att the water before the suction or downstream you don't see that significant difference. 2,000 gallons a minute flowing down the Niespodziany, will it even raise it a fraction of an inch? Under normal circumstances you wouldn't see a raise in the water level. If we have a heavy rain event and more water coming in, plus the discharge, then that's a concern. Idon't know how to John Linn: Is there any way to make these permits subject toi ifwhatever the receiving water is reaches its flood stage that dewatering pumping needs to be cut back to 25% ofit. Marcellus Lebbin: You could put that in the motion, make that what we approve. I'm not familiar enough with the construction activities to know what that would do ift that's even possible for Jared Huss: Again, I'm not going to speak for the contractor, but I will tell you in general anticipate dewatering activities at the volumes requested to be at its peak at the beginning. This will draw down the groundwater and then at ai much lower rate to maintain that groundwater level. Ift they were: restricted to the point where they couldn't dewater, ori it was such a minimal amount then it would impact the ability of the contractor to complete theirj job. In this particular instance, the dewatering predominantly is for the establishment of footings below the ground in order to place the three-sided structures on SO anticipate that that beginning activity and  through the dewatering part oft this permit first.  handle that.  them.    dewatering amounti is going to be pertinent to the construction oft those foundations. That constraint or timeline is less than the full duration, but it would impact very generally the ability Marcellus Lebbin: My question is when they've started putting those footers in, can they throttle down the dewatering ori is therej just a period of time where they have to make sure that it's dry Jared Huss: Again, Idon't want to speak to means and methods oft the contractor but in general what I've seen in other projects ofs similar nature is that they would dewater in advance allow them to get a dry area to work in, complete compaction, set stone, and then need probably at least seven days for forms to set. I'm guessing they might use early set, but I don't know that for sure. Yes, it would be front ended on the activity kind of similar to where you expect additional Randall Matthys: II knowIa am jumping around here, but I know Lawson-Fisher is not involved at least I don't think there are. The new structure under State Road 2 with Reigh-Riley and the state ofIndiana, if C&E is needing to do dewatering toj put this structure in north are we going to need to be coming to us and dewatering from that at State Road 2 for that structure? Jared Huss: Iv would assume but I don't know that for sure. They may have already asked fori it typically on INDOT projects like that they may have come in advance. Ifit's the responsibility of the contractor and the contractor will come to the County Drainage Board to ask for that. I'm not Randall Matthys: I don't think that we have but Imean that's potentially another one. Marcellus Lebbin: John, to answer your question It think we could but the practical aspect oft the construction I mean ift they're in the middle oft that or they're about ready to set and then they can't it starts to get wet again I think it would reset the process to some extent. I don't know without actually talking to the contractor and saying what the impact would be I don't know if we can say we, got to shut down your permit because it might cause a snowball effect and delay it John Linn: Yeah, I understand that. Ourjob is to make sure the ditches are working to the best of Marcellus Lebbin: Iti is. Ourj job is to make sure the ditch can handle it and then issue the permit John Linn: I'm not terribly comfortable making amotion to restrict the flows during a certain period because that seems kind ofarbitrary at this point but seems like aj policy similar to that  for the contractor to do their work.  while those set?  draw down to happen.  aware ofi its status.  further.  their ability in the fields drain.  accordingly. I don't know ifyou can or not.  going forward would be a good idea for our board.  Robert Kruszynski: Jared, are you under contract with C&E or no?  Jared Huss: No.    Robert Kruszynski: You're doing the best you can to try to answer the question, but we: really Jared Huss: Bobby, ifImay Ithink the questions that you're asking are likely to be outside of the contract. Iknow what the contract documents say. Iknow the timeframe of which they're going to have to execute that work, which is basically end of August through the midpoint of October. We know that's the duration. I don't know that the contractor is going be able to tell you specifically what the varying rates might be other than to give you a general input on that. What the drainage board sounds like they're responding to or discussing is a broader impact to the ditch with the multiple dewatering activities. Ithink what I'm trying to indicate here is that we do have a dewatering permit that's in front of you for a seasonal timeframe which may make it easier for that particular activity to happen because it's a short duration. This would be less impactful to the downstream farmers than a long duration dewatering activity. I'm sure Thad would be happy to come and discuss the permit with you. The detail that that you're discussing is John Summers: Also, not to jump ahead but are we not going to have the same conversation on our next item which is with Kimly-Horn: dewatering and temporary construction? Randall Matthys: Yeah, It think that's going to be a little bit ofa different conversation depending where they are going to discharge into. Is it going to flow to the Niespodziany or is it going to flow to the county line? There are concerns there. But to this permit I'd like to comment that the work of the Kankakee River Basin Commission through the years on the Kankakee River, the work of our drainage board, and the contractors that we've had on the Niespodziany to do the maintenance and I believe most ofit's been Bailey Excavating there is one thing I've noticed with the maintenance that's been done on these two major systems. When we do have a heavy rain event, the water comes up but I've noticed that it goes down much quicker now than it was 10 Brian Bailey: Ever since that second pipe was put under the railroad. It does drop quicker. We have flooding events even when we get no rain because New Carlisle and it comes down to us. It  need the contractor here to answer questions.  likely outside of the contractor's specific request.  years ago or 20 years ago.  goes away quicker but lots of crops. Randall Matthys: Yeah.  Brian Bailey: This particular thing you're talking about here I would say the sooner they could expedite that the better. It shouldn't take 30 days to pour footers. Ift they could start August 1 or even sooner and be done before the second week of September, in the muck ground you're probably not harvesting until the third week of September SO at least we'd have a week to start the drying out process. Ifyou start pushing in through September and into October, I've seen plenty of snow events on November 1st.Icould tell you horror stories about that, sO no farmer Jared Huss: To Mr. Bailey's point, we recognize the critical path to these projects where the structures themselves and procuring those structures thus we asked the contractor in advance of actually having a written and approved contract which you did today upon a ward they started  wants to be out there with snow on the ground.    their coordination and shop drawing process to procure those structures. We recognize that as the critical path. I think we'd be willing to allow the contractor once he receives those structures or knows that those are coming to start his dewatering process as soon as possible. In order to do that we do anticipate a three-month time frame for the pre-cast manufacturer to make and deliver those structures. That's why we front ended that process. It's a little bit unusual to do that. We recognize that as critical path. We are working to that end to try to get that in the ground as quickly as possible. Maybe as part of this procedure we come back and update the Drainage Board process-wise sO that Mr. Bailey and others can be aware of where that's at sO there's some understanding of timing that goes along with that. Lawson-Fischer will be on the site doing construction inspection. We would be happy to provide those reports. Then come back here and Robert Kruszynski: Sky, Is see you sitting out there. Do you have any comments on this particular Sky Medors, Department of Infrastructure Planning and Growth: I think the main thing it's important to coordinate with the contractor and you know try to make sure that they are doing things outside the planting and harvest season or limiting their discharges. We don't know when it's going to rain. That's the issue. It could not be a problem, but it could be a big problem. When you look in the big scheme of things relative to what the ditch can handle these amounts seem small but talking with Mr. Bailey a minute ago down once you get further downstream a little bit makes al big impact. I think too just talking to Mr. Bailey that there may be some things that we can look at to potentially do something with that structure north of SR: 2 to make things a little better. It might not be the ultimate solution. Just talking with Mr. Bailey a minute ago there maybe some things that we can do to lower that structure in the interim and get some more relief down there. Knowing that's not the long-term solution to what needs to be done. The modeling  give that verbal report ifr need be.  permit?  can be done to say that. DidImisinterpret any of that Mr. Bailey? Brian Bailey: You said north of SR 2, it's north of the railroad. Sky Medors: I'm sorry. Yes, north of the railroad.  Brian Bailey: We are looking at the same thing with the Amazon property. If they're upstream pumping water down through there that's one section of the Niespodziany. We stop short of that property on the Niespodziany and it is chock full of seaweed and sandbars. As you push that water downstream from north ofs SR 2, you're going to be permeating that ground worse than it already is. That might be an alleviation too. To clean that section through the Amazon property, which would give you more free board because it's going to lower the water table in that whole 640 acres by a foot. Your pumping will never add a foot of water. So that would be an improvement right there. Now granted it's going to get down to me quicker but if we do something with that pipe north of the railroad track there where it can just pass on then I think Sky Medors: I think there's some things that that we can talk about, but I think as far as the permitting side of things for the dewatering I think you need to make sure that you include something in there that allows you to make them shut it down ift there are issues. You don't want  we got it.    those issues to be tied necessarily to a certain flood condition because it may not be a 100-year storm where you start to see the issues. Ithink with the permit you want to really give yourselfa way that you have the authority to go in and ask them to either lower the discharge or shut the discharge off completely. Iknow that will impact the construction, but oW looking at the ditch side of things and what it's really intended for. It think giving yourself that out is a good idea. When we're talking CFS you hear these numbers like many million gallons per day and it seems like a lot, but when you put it in the overall scheme of what the ditch can convey it's actually very small. The 4200 gallons per minute or whatever was around 7 to 10 cubic feet per second and the ditch can handle 400 to 500 cubic feet per second. Those are other things to think about. I don't know ifl helped or clouded the water. One other thing I wanted to mention you brought up next on the agenda that Kimley-Horn was going to be here to speak about dewatering I don't think they're ready for dewatering. I think they're here to speak more about the second item you got on there. That's just based on emails I got from them. Any questions for me? John Linn: agree with Sky 100%. Ireally like that approach and I also agree this is probably has like zero impact or very little. I would like to see a policy in place sO that when the ditch can't handle it that the Drainage Board has the right to say hey scale that back at least to 10% or whatever the number is. You may keep it pumping and maintain it but just cut it off until the ditch comes down. Idon't know if we can table this and maybe have a policy by next month. Marcellus Lebbin: It'll be permit by permit, ditch by ditch. I think you can make a motion that says you approve it, subject to the County Surveyor being able to restrict or shut down the dewatering based on flood levels downstream or water levels downstream. Mr. John Linn made a motion to approve this dewatering discharge permit subject to the County Surveyor having the authority to restrict or eliminate dewatering flows based on the water level downstream of the discharge, being seconded by Mr. John Summers and carried unanimously, 5- 5. Kimley-Horn Discussion Permanent Outlet & Retention Ponds Audio Position (0:07:24) Andy Taylor: Kimley-Horn - 500 E.96hh St. Suite 300 Indianapolis. IN: I am here today to discuss the application for the permanent outlet for the detention basins that we've designed on site. The site's located at the southwest corner State Road 2 in Strawberry. I believe you should have received kind of an abbreviated version of our original drainage report. It should have had an exhibit in it that outlined the proposed discharges and showed the proposed detention designs. The request is for two 30-inch RCP outlets to the Niespodziany Ditch. It's at the southeast corner oft the site. It outlets roughly where the ditch parallels Strawberry Rd. I think overall based on the county standards; the site is allowed roughly 65 CFS as an allowable discharge. We're providing roughly a 25% reduction in that discharge, sO the proposed calculations show roughly about 48 CFS discharge from that 225 acres. There are four interconnected basins on site. This is providing roughly a little over 100-acre feet of storage for storm water and the tailwater effects of the Niespodziany was taken into account during the design. Ift that's at flood stage, wel have the available storage on site. Once that flood stage goes down it will release. We're also putting in a backflow preventer on our outlet sO that that water stays on site and isn't discharging once  0.    the tail wateri is at flood stage. I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. Let me Robert Kruszynski: Anybody have any questions on the two 30-inch outlets going into the John Linn: I'm not terribly comfortable with two 30-inch shotgun barrels going into a ditch that's already struggling. I've read most ofyour report and I agree that what you're proposing probably won't have ai negative impact to the ditch and the drainage, but as you've heard the receiving stream just isn't in great condition. We've got some work to do on it. Also, just the two 30-inch pipes to me that's just more that we have to maintain and address long term. Then, I'mj just a little bit concerned about erosion although the velocities look reasonable. Even still trying to anticipate the worst case. Then with backflow preventers you know if you're having two of them one ofthem is probably going to fail at some point so if we could restrict that to one, I'd feel Andy Taylor: It think we can take a look at the calculations and see if one 30-inch outlet will have majorimpacts. We had planned for back-to-back 100-year storms basically. We were trying to meet the County'si requirements as far as 4-feet maximum staging in the ponds. That kind of hand ties us al little bit. Ifmaybe we're able to stack a little bit more on1 the ponds we could reduce the discharge. We're getting closer to one outlet point to maybe address some ofthose concerns. I think the 4-feet stacking really does put us in a little bit ofac disadvantage to try to solve that concern. It think we would provide whatever calculations you would need to feel comfortable with exceeding that 4-foot stacking. Ifyou need us to. Iu understand the concerns. Obviously, we've had al lot of discussion this morning about the Niespodziany, so I think it's John Linn: Okay. Thank you. I would be interested in Sky's comments at some point on the 4- feet. There's situations where that seems really important and there's other situations where Sky Medors: We've done a very thorough review in my office of their plan. It's a very good drainage plan, given the site that they have. I'm pretty sure that the site's going to be fenced. We can work with them on allowing greater than 4-feet depth in that pond, 4-foot stacking in that pond. They did plan for back-to-back 100-year storms, and with that they didn't account for a lot ofthe storage they have in the drainage swells that will be: storing water going to the pond. It'sa very good drainage design, and it does meet the criteria. However, I think the two outlets could cause some issues. Ifthere's a way that we can look at going with one outlet and then they could work with our office to get the numbers to work from our standpoint and still you know retain onsite what needs to be retained and making sure that there's definitely going to be less going into the ditch than the current existing condition with the one pipe. It think we can work on the  know ift there's anything else. Niespodziany?  more comfortable with that. Idon't know ift that's possible or...  something that we can look at and try to address.  maybe: not.  depth of the pond and everything.  John Linn: Those are my thoughts. Randy or anybody else have anything? Randall Matthys: So, we're now down to one 30-inch pipe or two?    John Linn: I'm just throwing out my concerns.  Marcellus Lebbin: Randy, Ithink what he's saying is that the request stands for two. Youcan approve one. They can work with Sky's office to make sure that works for them. Ifthe one pipe won't work, they can come back and request a second one again. That'll be up to you but if you guys are comfortable approving one you can approve one and maybe that'll work. Sky Medors: I think we could make it work. We'll do what we can to cause the least amount of pain possible with them having to do some redesign. The design that's there now does go above and beyond as far as storage on site. It's just right now the release now that everyone is concerned about. Ifyou change that you change everything upstream. It think that with the design that they have and allowing some other items like a deeper pond and so forth...I don't want to speak for Kimley-Horn, but based on what I've done in the past I think we can get it to work. Thomas Schlarb: It think what you said about the regulation oft the outlet ofyour pond would you even control that a little bit? That 30-inch pipe would definitely work instead oftwo. Andy Taylor: We'll have to rerun the calculations. It'll definitely reduce the discharge from the ponds themselves pretty drastically. I would assume it's going to be roughly half. I mean those pipes are pretty flat, sO what what's happening is the amount of head that has to build up you're not getting much discharge out of those pipes. I think we can take a look at it and like Sky mentioned if we're able to relax that stacking requirement we should be able to get something to  work. Obviously, we. just want to make sure veybodyscomfonable.  Thomas Schlarb: Thank you.  Randall Matthys: The elevation ofthe pipes where they discharge into the Niespodziany related Andy Taylor: I think it's 1.75 ft above the flow line SO the actual flow line of the ditch. It think  to the current average water level are they a foot above, two feet above? that puts us right about the actual water level in the ditch. Brian Bailey: Where would they be dumping this in at?  Randall Matthys: Brian, would you come up and speak your questions into the mic? Brian Bailey: I was just thinking, knowing the ditch, cleaning the ditch and where some oft the cave spots are in a ditch I was a little concerned about where they'll be bringing them in. If Randall Matthys: Yeah, Brian it would be between the curve and where the pipeline, gas line, oil  they're coming from the west, south of the curve there... line goes through. East-west across the property. Brian Bailey: They're going to be north of that gas line. Andy Taylor: Yes, north of the gas line.  Brian Bailey: Well, they said they're putting them up high enough that that it wouldn't affect that then. That's not too bad of an area, but you're going to have to put some sort of deflection    structure there. It aims it down the ditch. Ifthat comes across that stream Strawberry Road will  disappear.  Andy Taylor: We've got the outlet angled.  Brian Bailey: Even angled is kind of tough in that. We've tried that too. The soil types down in that ditch arej just tough to work with. A deeper retention pond, you dig deeper anywhere out there all you got is a pond. It's already going to have water in it sO deeper doesn't give you more capacity and that's the bad thing about working in shallow ground, Iti is the fact that the only way you get more gallons is bigger diameter. Can you add an extra pond? Do you have the acreage to Andy Taylor: It would be deeper as far as the normal water level. We would basically effectively Brian Bailey: Ifyou're building a berm up,you're higher than the ditch banks. You're not gaining anything. The ditch will be out ofi its banks. Id don't know. I haven't looked at your elevations or anything, but I'm just saying berming up aj pond out there higher than the ground... The ground Andy Taylor: We would plan to put a pond lineri in SO it wouldn't be necessarily dispersing through the soil SO it's going to be a closed system. The normal water level is where the water's going to sit all the time on our outlet elevation. What we're doing this available storage (freeboard) is above that and we would just be building up the banks higher to allow that storage  dos so?  be building up a berm.  is lower than the banks of the ditch. You might gain a little bit.  tol be relaxed.  John Linn: You would slow down the release?  Brian Bailey: Well, I realize that but boy when you say you're building up higher than ground level out in muck ground you're really not gaining anything. You're already out of the bank somewhere on that ditch. Ic don't know if you can actually call that storage or not. It's something that would have to be looked at. Where's the water going? It's all going to be in the pipe? Good  luck with that buddy.  John Linn: I wasn't aware of the liner. Is there a purpose for that?  Andy Taylor: Well basically because we didn't want the groundwater to be continually discharging through our system. We were trying to be smart about it. Not knowing how the groundwater would react once construction is complete, we didn't want the ground water. just to be flowing through the pond and then just straight out the outlet. This would purely be whatever rainfall falls on our site, would go to the pond and it wouldn't necessarily bei impacted by any Randall Matthys: You're going to seal the bottom oft these retention basins to keep the  kind ofg groundwater flow.  groundwater from coming up into them?  Andy Taylor: Yes.  Randall Matthys: As Mr. Bailey says good luck.    Andy Taylor: At least that's a thought.  John Linn: Is there aj problem with them not being lined?  Randall Matthys: Ijust think there's sO much water in that area to deal with. Thei irrigation wells you canj just put one anywhere you want and 20 to 30 feet you got all kinds of water. John Linn: From our standpoint or the standpoint ofthe ditch is there a problem with them not Randall Matthys: Ijust think it's going to blow apart because the groundwater pressure will just  lining them and letting them be?  push up.  John Linn: I agree but its seems to me that it might bel better to not line them.  Andy Taylor: We can consider that. I guess we were trying to not provide a straight conduit for John Linn: I don't think we care about that, because that's what the ditches are there for and they're draining the fields with field tile and so forth. That's up to you, Ig guess. Whatever you Randall Matthys: They're not going to add any more water to the ditch than what's currently Mr. Derek Dieter made ai motion to approve the one 30-inch pipe proposed by Kimley-Homn,  the groundwater to get to the ditch.  think is best for the project.  there.  being seconded by Mr.. John Linn, and carried unanimously, 5-0. Thomas Schlarb: John Law, is this in addition to...  John Law: Basically, Terry brought this to me last week. He's coming to the Drainage Board today to ask that that site, which is on 933 just south oft the toll road, have an easement reduction from 75-feet to 35-feet. It would be a 40-feet reduction. Everything is concrete there now.I should bring up that in that plants mill they don't have any access for the county to get in and use along the ditch. Ifthey can provide access for us along Juday Creek, that 35-feet isn'tgoing to make much ofa difference because it is all concrete. They are just kind of cleaning that site up. John Linn: Is there aj precedent for reducing to 35-feet in this kind of area of. Juday Creek? John Law: Yes, along Grape Road and Main Street. Some oft those projects, especially along College Avenue where Granger Community Church is, that ditch flows through. They've Randall Matthys: Will it be concrete or natural turf/grass along there when it's done? Terry Lang, Wightman Office. 1402 Mishawaka Avenue, South Bend: To give you a little history this used to be the old Holiday Inn site. The GipperLounge was located closer to the highway there, to the east. The original building was 10-feet away from the top oft the bank at the closest point. The area along the Juday Creek right there had been maintained as a yard area. The owner oft the property who previously owned the hotels has torn down all the buildings in anticipation of! putting newer buildings up and a newer restaurant on the site also. What they're  reduced that by 35-feet there.    looking to doi is to be able to create an area along Juday Creek for the restaurant to be able to have outdoor seating. They will have it as a nice, landscaped area, the way it used to be when the swimming pool was located on the north side of Juday Creek with the bridge going across to that side. It would make a nice recreational area right along the creek. The buildings being proposed right now would be 35 ft away from the bank sO we're basically 25 ft farther away from where the original buildings were. located. With the new buildings being done, we will also be doing controlled drainage structures inside our site where currently it is flash flood runoff of concrete that drains into Judy Creek. We'll be able to control what water goes where and there'll be an increase in landscape area around the whole site, which currently is all hard surface. As John can attest, it drains directly down toward the ditch right now. What we're doing is we're going to be adding more. landscape area. We're going to be using controlled drainage. Wej just like to be able to use that area al little closer to the Creek right there. They'll be very careful and using erosion controls to make sure that we don't have any... We met with the friends of. Juday Creek, and it was a...This is a very sensitive area with regards to storm water runoff and erosion into Juday Creek. We are taking all oft that into account and the plan probably gives more space for erosion tor not be into the creek with that being expanded to 35-feet from what is currently the concrete out there which is 10-feet away. That's the reason we are before you and I will try to answer any Robert Kruszynski: Terry going back to. John's question, there will be access for us to get to Terry Lang: The area along the roadway right there as you come in along the highway right there, along 933,y you'll be able to access from that to what would be the reduced drainage area. John Law: Terry did bring this along with the developer from the Juday Creek task force. They talked about quite al bit and the task force was really happy with what he had planned. They said John Linn: My only concern would be within that 35-feet that there's nothing put in ori it's put in ins such a way that it doesn't impede our maintenance or our access that we might need or want to, that language. They have to keep it out of our way. We don't want to have to go expend money trying to get whatever, a patio or a fence, out of the way to get access that we might need. (Online Speaker): Is this item on the agenda?Idontseet this item on the agenda and you're  questions that you may have. maintain that?  it was 100 times better than what's there now.  voting on it.  John Linn: Marcel, is that a problem for us? Is that okay?  Marcellus Lebbin: I guess the question it was it noticed? Did you meet the public notification Terry Lang: Yeah, Ih had submitted my application for this over a month ago to. John. So that it  requirements?  could be placed on the agenda. Marcellus Lebbin: Okay, was it published? John Linn: It didn't make the agenda. Marcellus Lebbin: So, no.  John Linn: Sorry, we'll take it up next month.    Terry Lang: Okay. Thank you. 6. Privilege of the Floor  Audio Position (1:14:14)  Sidney Schafer. 16500 Madison Road, South Bend, Indiana: II had a neighboring farmer come to me last fall and asked if he could have permission to go across me to drain his virgin ground which was wooded at the time. He cleared that. Itl had a wetlands in it, and Is said well ifyou would, we need to be able to take it all the way to the county ditch. I brought this up with Mr. Schlarb. I brought it up with Mr. Law. Mr. law informed me that you can only put one tile on the county easement even ift the person doing it paid for it. I'm just looking for guidance because since then this farmer chose, Mr. Martin, chose to come across my land uninvited and tie into my private ditch. Also, in the process crossed the county tile to get to it. I'm looking just for guidance as much as anything. I'm ready to write al letter to him from my lawyer, telling him he's no longer allowed on my ground. I would like to ask him what he plans on doing about the crop damage which has already occurred in approximately 9-acres in three fields. Id don't want to get ina a big lawsuit, but I'm just looking for guidance as much as anything. I do not believe that the county drain, the tile there, has enough capacity to handle his additional approximately 60-acres when there's already 240-acres going into it. Id do not know what the slope is sO that I cannot calculate. I would like to know what I should be doing to prevent my ground right now from being underwater. It was underwater yesterday, and it had been planted already, two weeks ago. This was the third day it set underwater from the last rain which was only I believe around an inch. It wasn't very much. I got a guy dumping water on me, coming into my private ditch when he should be going into the county tile. I don't know ift the county tile can handle it. I was told by Tom and John that legally you don't have to get permission to tie into a county drain, unless Thomas Schlarb: Yes. You have to get permission. Ifyou're coming in with a 10-inch you have  you're over 10-inches. to get permission to go....  Sidney Shafer: Correct, but ifyou're coming in with a six it's no big deal.  Thomas Schlarb: What size pipe did he put in?  Sidney Shafer: He put in a five. He told me originally; he was going to put in an eight. Then he only put in a five SO I'm guessing they figured with the slope he had....because he's probably has about 25-30-feet above grade. With the slope he had they figured he had enough head pressure  he didn't need a bigger pipe. He did put in a solid pipe.  Thomas Schlarb: When he come across your property and cut existing lines?  Sidney Shafer: Correct, he cut like five existing lines II had. Ifl he would have asked me, Iwould have sent him along the woods which was basically the same elevation. He would have had clean Thomas Schlarb: He hooked them, that he cut up, to the new tile as he went across? Sidney Shafer: Yeah, the one we put in about five years ago. He cut right through that. We paid  sailing all the way down to the county ditch.  for that, and the county provided the excavating toj put it in.    Thomas Schlarb: But he hooked what he cut of your tile he hooked them up to his new pipe? Sidney Shafer: No. He said he repaired them. His new pipe's only 5-inches. The county tile there is 12-inches. My field systems all messed up now, because I had 6-inch tile in, and he only puta 5-inch tile in. He basically tore out a bunch ofmines, but the only way you could repair them... He claims he's got photos. I Ihave yet to see the photos of the repair that he made. It think Mr. Matthews and Mr. Schlarb here can verify that when you disturb an existing system it's never the Thomas Schlarb: I talked with him this morning. Icalled him and he said that he hooked every Sidney Shafer: Well, what good would it be for a 6-inch getting tied into a 5-inch? Thomas Schlarb: He said that your tile were half full ofr mud anyway. He said you got a better drain now than you had before because your tile were halffull anyway. Sidney Shafer: AllIknowi isIwasn'tflooding: myself out before, so I don't know how much  same afterward.  one ofy your tile up to the new pipe that he put in.  betterI needed.  Thomas Schlarb: This is the other...  Sidney Shafer: And I also have ai riser in the one which is on a 6-inch that will sometimes lay water on too long. Generally, ify you got a riser on a 6-inch and the water lays on it too long it usually keeps them well flushed out especially if you're 25-feet above grade. Above the low spot in the field. Usually, they stay pretty clean. I got one that's almost flat that's a half mile long that's because oft the amount ofwater that flows through it it's clean and it's been in since the 40s. I'm looking for guidance, because it's all happening on my property. It ends up in the county  drain.  Marcellus Lebbin: Ifyou're talking about a private tile system...  Sidney Shafer: Correct.  Marcellus Lebbin: The Drainage Board doesn't regulate private tile systems.  Sidney Shafer: But it goes into the county.  Marcellus Lebbin: So, where it hits the county, we would regulate that. So, we regulate the  county tile. Sidney Shafer: Right.  Marcellus Lebbin: What you're complaining about is your tile and his tile, which is a private tile system. We don't have anything to do with that, sO you would have to have your lawyer... Sidney Shafer: The question for you though, could you determine if the regulated grain is large  enough.    Marcellus Lebbin: We could. Idon't have no idea where this is, but the surveyor can determine if the drain has enough capacity. Ifhe's only putting a 5-inch pipe in he has the right to do that. If  we need to clear out the drain or do something else with the drain, we can.  Sidney Shafer: But if the drain isn't big enough? cutting your tile or going across your land.  Marcellus Lebbin: Well once again, we could look at that piece. That has nothing to do with him  John Linn: He may or may not have the right to do that, right?  Marcellus Lebbin: That's not for us to decide is what I'm saying. We've got no opinion on that whatsoever. Now ifyou're saying our tile, our drain is not functioning properly then the surveyor can take a look at that. That's a separate issue from what your neighbor did on your property. Marcellus Lebbin: We have no... That's for your lawyer. Once again, ifyou're asking the  Sidney Shafer: Correct, so I should just tell him to cease doing it and... surveyor to take a look to see ifc our drain has capacity... Sidney Shafer: That's what I'm asking. Sidney Shafer: Okay and ifit does not? Marcellus Lebbin: Then we'll address it.  Marcellus Lebbin: Okay, we can do that. That's all we can do.  Sidney Shafer: Alright. Now, the other question would be isI was reading in some oft the state law as far as drainage law it did state that every tile that's tied into a regulated tile is supposed to be given to the surveyor to determine ift the capacity is capable of being handled. Marcellus Lebbin: So, all oft the tile is supposed to be sent to the surveyor's office so it can be  cataloged, inventoried, and accounted for. Sidney Shafer: He didn'tt tie into you. He tied into me.  Marcellus Lebbin: He tied into you, and you tied into us. Even still he should have submitted whatever it is he did to the surveyor's office so it can be cataloged, inventoried, and accounted for. Based on what we've got is how the surveyor determines what the system can handle.  Sidney Shafer: Correct.  Marcellus Lebbin: Once again, there are two separate issues. We can take a look to see ifwe can handle the water that's being discharged from those, It think he said 60-acres. That's a different Sidney Shafer: Correct. That's basically all I wanted to find out. Iknew that private tile was that  issue than what he is or is not doing to your private tile.  way.    Randall Matthys: His new private tile drains into your private ditch. Does your private ditch  drain into our county tile? Sidney Shafer: Correct.  Thomas Schlarb: How big of a tile is that, John? John Law: Ibelieve it's a 12-inch.  Sidney Shafer: Yeah, that's what we put in five years ago a 12-inch. Right now, there's 240 going into it and he just put another 60 into it. Idon't know the slope on it. Iimagine at a 20° slope Randall Matthys: I would have thought he should have asked permission to hook into your Sidney Shafer: Well, Idon't think they did.Itl think they thought it was a county. Thomas Schlarb: He said that he met with you and the landowner last fall.  which it's probably not it could probably handle the water.  private ditch.  Sidney Shafer: Now this is Mr. Martin or Verhagy?  Thomas Schlarb: Verhagy.  Sidney Shafer: Verhagy has never met with me. Icouldn't tell you what he looked like for the  life ofn me.  Thomas Schlarb: He said that you weren't in favor ofit but go ahead and do it.  Sidney Shafer: No, Inever said that. You weren't there and I understand that. You're just taking my word to his word, but I mean ifyou as a farmer and another farmer wanted to drain and you had the ability to avoid your system by going along a woods not right up in the woods but like 30 feet out or SO and take it all the way to the county drain, would you have a problem with it ifhe used aj perforated tile? Probably not, but to go across the field and tear up a bunch of drainage. Then repair it and then tie into aj private ditch, would you have a problem with its Marcellus Lebbin: It doesn't matter what we would or wouldn't have a problem with. Once again,  we...  Sidney Shafer: Well, I was just talking farmer to farmer. Marcellus Lebbin: We can do that after.  Sidney Shafer: Yeah, I understand. Thank you for your time.  7.Adjournment  Audio Position (1:26:41)  Mr. Randall Matthys made a motion to adjourn the June 3, 2024, Drainage Board Special Meeting at 9:56 a.m., being seconded by Mr. John Linn and carried unanimously, 5-0.    St.. Joseph County Drainage Board  ImmEkk6 Thomas Schlarb, President Borlale Randall Matthys JobLinn   John Summers (absont) Derek D. Dieter, County Commissioner  Datedt this Ist_ dayof_July.2024  *