Wright County board to weigh lake-improvement district after residents describe severe phosphorus, weed problems

Hundreds of residents and lake volunteers urged the Wright County Board of Commissioners on Jan. 20 to support creation of a lake improvement district (LID) for Buffalo, Deer, Goose and Mink lakes, saying decades-long phosphorus pollution, invasive species and large watershed inflows have pushed the lakes toward ecological collapse.

Bo Schaefer, a Buffalo Lake resident and member of the LID formation committee, opened the public hearing with an evidence-based summary of the lake’s condition and the need for an institutional structure to coordinate monitoring, funding and long-term restoration. “Without a lake improvement district in place, the lake has lacked ongoing monitoring and community involvement needed to secure funding and implement long-term restoration efforts,” Schaefer said.

Other residents gave specific examples and data. Mark Poninan, who has lived on Buffalo Lake 11 years, said volunteer sampling shows the inflow near the fountain averaged three times the phosphorus concentration of general lake water and urged a comprehensive professional study to identify cost-effective fixes. “If we can continue to expand upon this with a comprehensive professional study, we are confident that we will be able to develop a management plan that is cost-effective and meet the DNR’s goal of reducing phosphorus by 5%,” Poninan said.

Speakers described how zebra mussels and improved water clarity have coupled with curly-leaf pondweed and other invasive plants to create dense mats that blocked navigation and swimming last year. Tom Wright, a property owner, described docks swamped by rising water and August algal blooms that turned the lake green. “There’s an urgency to this right now because my fear is all of those weeds from last year… it will be the worst year ever for weeds,” Wright said.

Petitioners and lake association members emphasized the difference between a volunteer lake association and an LID. Jake Ellery, representing the Buffalo Lake association, said the association’s role is communication, social engagement and fundraising, while an LID would work closely with agencies and provide a sustained technical and funding pathway for monitoring, engineering studies and capital projects.

Not all speakers favored an ad valorem tax. Dr. Brett Odin, reading a statement for the association, argued the LID’s long-term ecological goals could be funded through grants and private donations and warned that mandatory assessments would be unpopular among shoreline owners. “We admit there will likely be some funding challenges eventually, but we are currently doing phosphorus testing very economically after being told it was very expensive,” Odin said, adding that many lakes have been improved without taxation.

Local officials and technical partners offered process guidance and resources. David Kelly, Buffalo’s community development director, said the city has studies underway and is ready to partner with whichever organization forms. Alicia O’Hare of the Soil and Water Conservation District told the board she would assist with water-quality analysis and site visits and noted the recent detection (October) of starry stonewort in Buffalo Lake, an invasive that can carry substantial management costs.

Several commenters and speakers pointed to watershed-scale drivers, including backflow from the Crow River and inflows from nearby lakes and development, as major phosphorus sources. Multiple residents urged the county, state agencies (DNR, MPCA) and watershed partners to be part of solutions because the system is interconnected across jurisdictions.

Following public testimony, Commissioner Mo moved and Commissioner Holland seconded a direction to staff to prepare a formal resolution to create a lake improvement district for Buffalo, Deer, Goose and Mink lakes and present it at a future board meeting. Staff and legal noted the rules allow up to 30 days for preparation and the board set target dates of Feb. 3 or Feb. 17 for formal action. The motion passed.

Why it matters: The board’s referral starts a formal process that could make project funding, monitoring and capital interventions more straightforward but raises funding choices (voluntary fundraising, grants, impact/use-based charges or ad valorem assessments) and governance questions that residents and the board will need to resolve. Next steps: staff will draft the resolution and present formal LID documents and legal notices at a future meeting, anticipated Feb. 3 or Feb. 17.