Confusion over ownership has caused delays in work on restoring, repairing or replacing a dam on the south side of the Albert Lea Lake.

The Shell Rock River Watershed District Board Tuesday, in an emergency meeting, decided to delay any construction and work on the Albert Lea Lake dam until 2009, said watershed district Administrator Brett Behnke.

The delay, according to Behnke, was due to time constraints and negotiations with the dam’s new supposed property owner, Greg Jensen.

The confusion dates back to 1958 when Freeborn County — which built the timber bridge and dam in 1922 on the old County Road 19 — moved County Road 19 to its current location as South Shore Drive, according to County Engineer Sue Miller.

The county vacated the property with the original dam and bridge and the road right-of-way back to the Palmer family, Miller said. The Palmers are the original owners of the property. The county retained the right of ingress-egress — the right to come and go — in a county board resolution dated October 1958, according to Miller.

A new timber bridge was built on South Shore Drive leaving the old dam and bridge in place, which is where it stands today on a grassy field drive that used to be an old, narrow car path, Miller said.

However, none of the legal process was recorded on the abstract to the property, which recently changed ownership from Lloyd Palmer to Greg Jensen.

Lloyd Palmer had been trying to sell the property to the Shell Rock River Watershed District, he said. An offer was made in the deal, Palmer said. However, he said he hadn’t heard anything from the watershed district for three weeks, so he called up Jensen — who had been interested in the property for 25 years — and sold it to him.

“So I figured they were never interested in my offer, and Greg was,” Palmer said.

The confusion in ownership comes into play now that the watershed district, in conjunction with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, wants to work on the dam.

Recent bonding dollars were made available for work on the dam through the Minnesota Department of Transportation, according to Behnke. In 2005, the watershed district received a DNR grant of $250,000 to replace the dam.

Palmer said he originally made a deal with watershed board member Harley Miller for the watershed to rebuild the old dam. The watershed was welcome onto his property to work, Palmer said, and he was willing to provide parking for their equipment at no cost.

There is talk, however, of moving the dam north to where South Shore Drive sits. But because it isn’t clear who actually owns and has rights to the land, work can’t be done.

According to DNR papers, the county owns and is responsible for the land under the dam, said DNR Regional Hydrologist Dave Leuthe. In 1922, it was county money that built and maintained the dam until 1958, said Miller.

When the county vacated the property to the Palmers, Miller said, the county may not have gone through process correctly. However, there has never been a challenge or correction.

The Department of Natural Resources has interest in and jurisdiction over what happens to the dam and the lake levels, Leuthe said.

“It is our job to protect and manage the public waters,” he said, adding Albert Lea Lake are public waters of the state.

Leuthe said Jensen sent the DNR copies of the deed, and lawyers will look into the ownership.

“There’s information that we don’t have yet. We’re looking into the claim. Our records show the county owns the dam,” Leuthe said.

The Albert Lea Lake Dam is in need of repairs, he said, and it is expected that a project will be coming, but when is now unclear. The county is willing to work with the DNR if in fact the county is the owner of the land.

The actual project is still under discussion, according to Leuthe. There are concerns, he said, about elevation, what capabilities it has to protect lake levels and how it can manage flooding issues. All problems are complicated by people up and downstream and how the dam is operated. Plus, moving the dam could require additional structures downstream so it doesn’t drain wetlands.

There have been discussions for decades, Leuthe said, on what is best for the dam and the lake.

“There will be many discussions that need to continue,” he said. “We will be in the middle of that discussion.

“I would say the DNR already has all the jurisdiction and authority that it would need, regardless of where the dam would be placed.”

A public hearing about the project was held in September or October of 2007, Behnke said. The watershed district initiated the project with a detailed scope and plans to work with the DNR and the county.

In September 2007, Behnke said the watershed district board directed him to move forward with the project and incorporate certain elements of the project design of the joint bridge/dam structure.

The most recent official action taken by the board, Behnke said, was to postpone work on the dam due to time constraints and negotiations with the new property owner — Jensen.

“It’s all settled now,” Palmer said. “Greg owns the land and they can deal with Greg.”

Jensen said he is confident all parties will be able to work things out. Ownership has not yet been determined.