NC Iowa | sand85 - 7/11/2018 19:54
There are many approaches to apportioning drainage benefit.
Once classic approach is to divide the overall ditch into several reaches, so the top mile pays in all the cost of fixing that mile, the second mile pays on only half the cost of their mile and the top mile pays in half the cost, etc. This means those farthest from the outlet pay a higher relative percentage of the cost per each assessed acre. This approach has its strengths and weaknesses, as compared to flat rate across the district. There are approaches opposite where the lower ground pays more than the high ground because the lower ground would flood and the high ground would still drain decently well. You can split forks and branches up into subdistricts with their own rules and sub-levies.
Ultimately, it’s up to the commissioners to figure this out, or hire someone to figure it out. The smaller the district the easier and simpler it is to go flat rate.
Sure would prefer that method. In Iowa the closest to main pays in the most from what I understand, it's ridiculius. I have a farm with 42" main through it, those repairs get expensive and I get the highest bills, and all the water from my neighbors. Just found out when main leaves my field, in the last 1/2 mile to ditch, it rises 24", gonna be interesting how that plays out. |
Ditch assessments and watershed drainage from below revisited.
