Wayne Wood was the ministry Drainage Coordinator in the mid-1980’s and he prepared the paper entitled "Comments and Suggestions for Reports Prepared by Engineers Under the Drainage Act" in 1986. Copies of this paper are available at this conference and I encourage you read it.

At the time the paper was written, there was a growing criticism of the Drainage Act, drainage engineers and the reports written by engineers. Wayne writes "Today, it appears the engineer experiences greater difficulty in convincing the client and the critics that he has made his recommendations based on careful analysis, sound judgment, and without bias or prejudice." The critics were identified as landowners, environmentalists, naturalists, and personnel from government agencies. Since, at that time, ministry personnel had an opportunity to read reports, evaluate their contents and at times, respond to critics, Wayne made a number of suggestions in his paper on how the engineer can better communicate the understanding of the project through the report.

From our observations, most drainage engineers have improved their methods of conveying the information in their drainage reports. However, there is always room for further improvements. When a report is written under the authority of the Drainage Act, there are actually several different "clients" or "stakeholders" who have an interest in that report. Listed below are some suggestions that may improve the understanding of a report from the perspective of these stakeholders:

The following suggestions apply generally to all stakeholders involved in a drainage project, but particularly to private landowners. On average, most landowners will be involved in about one drainage project in their lifetime. Therefore, drainage reports should contain enough information that they can be grasped by someone who knows little or nothing about the Drainage Act and it’s procedures. Here are a few suggestions:

• Provide a brief summary of the Drainage Act process that is being used. It doesn’t need to be detailed, but it should contain enough information that all stakeholders, particularly landowners, have a basic understanding of what is happening. With the computer systems we have today, once this procedure summary is written, it can easily be used over and over again for different reports.
• Provide a brief description of the types of assessments. Without this type of description, most landowners will not be able to understand the difference between benefit assessment and outlet assessments shown in an assessment schedule. How often have you heard landowners say "I shouldn’t be assessed. I don’t get any benefit from this drain"?
• Provide a brief description of the allowances that are being provided and don’t lump all allowances being given to a landowner into one sum. This is especially important when a landowner is receiving an allowance for land taken or for right-of-way. It is useful, from a municipal perspective, to state in the report that this right of access exists for as long as the drain exists, and will be used in the future for maintenance and repair and that the landowner is not eligible for further crop damages, etc.

Some engineers have made it a practice to include a copy of an OMAF factsheet such as "Understanding Drainage Assessment" in their report. I have brought along copies of all of ministry factsheets related to the Drainage Act for your use.

Landowners:

– Briefly describe the work being performed on each landowners property. A landowner may not be able to read the drawings or understand the specifications, but a brief description of the work to be performed on his or her property will reduce concerns.

Contractors:

– Review the report from the perspective of the contractor to ensure that all the information necessary to construct the drainage project is presented. You should not assume that the contractor understands what is required; every aspect of the drain should be clearly detailed and specified as part of the report. This is also necessary for the drainage superintendent for future maintenance and repair work on the drain after it is constructed.

Clerk/Treasurer:

– Consider providing a summary of assessments in the same format as required on the grant application. If the project is made up of two or more components (e.g. main drain plus two branches) that have been tendered and assessed separately, show the total cost and assessment summary for each of the components. This assists clerk-treasurers in prorating assessments on each component and will help OMAF understand the grant application that is submitted for the project.

Drainage Superintendent:

Other Agencies:

– If agencies such as the Ministry of Natural Resources or the local Conservation Authority have expressed any concerns about the project, indicate in the report how the concerns have been addressed.

OMAF:

– Ensure that all non-agricultural lands are distinguished on the assessment schedule. This is necessary for the payment of grants, but it is also a requirement of the Drainage Act.