St. Croix County committee directs staff to rescind approval for Lake Maloo drawdown after public outcry

The St. Croix County Community Development Committee on June 18 voted unanimously to direct staff to rescind the county's conditional approval of an application to the Department of Natural Resources for a proposed drawdown of Lake Maloo.

Why it matters: Residents, conservation groups and county staff told the committee the drawdown risks mobilizing large amounts of phosphorus into the St. Croix River watershed, could undercut millions in past county investments to reduce phosphorus, and raises unanswered monitoring and implementation questions that the county needs to resolve before endorsing the project.

Public pressure and technical concerns prompted the vote. Dozens of residents urged rescission during an extended public-comment period. Bud Fuks of Hudson framed the decision as a choice between protecting water quality and worsening phosphorus pollution, saying, "A yes vote is a vote for the St. Croix River. A no vote is a vote to flush thousands of pounds of phosphorus into the St. Croix to grow more toxic blue-green algae." Celeste Cobrell of the Town of Hudson told supervisors the question before them is a policy decision that the committee has authority to make and asked the panel to use the committee's policy role to rescind the county's prior approval.

A technical presentation from the Wild Rivers Conservancy amplified those concerns. Mark White, the conservancy's natural resources manager, told the committee that the drawdown "is really a permission slip for what will be the largest point-source discharge of a regulated pollutant to the St. Croix River in documented history" and questioned the consultant's use of an analog bulk-density value in its phosphorus-transport calculations. White urged the committee to delay approval until site-specific sediment bulk-density samples and additional monitoring are completed.

County staff briefed supervisors that the community development department had offered to host and participate in a publicly advertised panel planned for July 6 that will include representatives from the project's consultant, the Wild Rivers Conservancy and the DNR; staff said the county retains the right to withdraw or revise its conditional approval. The panel is intended to give the public and elected officials a forum to question technical assumptions and monitoring plans.

Decision and votes: After discussion and amended language drafted by supervisors and corporate counsel emphasizing the county's policy role and prior investments in water-quality work, the committee voted to direct the community development director to resend the county's authorization for the Lake Maloo drawdown. The vote was unanimous among those present (Diana Delaney, Danny Ericson, Bob Swanipole, Carrie Rice, Scott Counter).

What happens next: Staff said the July 6 informational panel may provide additional facts the committee can use before the matter reaches the full county board. The committee also asked staff to pursue additional monitoring and sampling information so that any future consideration of the drawdown can be informed by site-specific data.

Background: Commenters and staff repeatedly referenced the county's long-term work to reduce phosphorus in the watershed and a roughly $4.4 million county investment in best-management practices and grant-funded projects; presenters also cited wastewater facility allocations and a disputed consultant model used to estimate downstream phosphorus transport. The DNR has posted a tentative approval and public-notice history for the DNR review process; staff noted the public-comment window on that notice has elapsed but emphasized the county retains a separate policy discretion.