Posted on June 12, 2023
A defining moment for Lake Mitchell is on the horizon.
On June 20, the Mitchell City Council will consider approving a 30-year state loan for the primary source to fund a $25 million lake dredging project. After spending more than $1 million in studies and dredging designs over the past three years, the eight-person council has plenty of information to make an informed decision on the loan application.
For some council members in favor of dredging, the additional information on the lake and Firesteel watershed have helped solidify their support for dredging. But some council members who stand against dredging aren’t convinced the project is the right move at this time.
The council’s decision is expected to be close. As of Friday, three council members say they are against moving forward with dredging at this time, while four are in favor of the project. Kevin McCardle is the lone council member who hasn’t indicated whether he supports or opposes dredging.
“I’m still gathering all the information as to how this will be paid for. We’ll find out more Monday night, and that will help me make my decision,” McCardle said.
On Monday, the council will meet to discuss the financing of the dredging project in a work session. The city is seeking to utilize a 30-year fixed rate loan through the State Revolving Loan Fund, more commonly known as an SRF loan. Another funding source the city plans to use to finance dredging is revenue made from the sale of eight city-owned lake lots, which voters approved to allow the city to sell during the June 6 election.
A local nonprofit organization called Friends of Firesteel has also pledged to raise more than $3 million to help fund dredging. The city has $1.9 million in its lake fund, which the council could authorize to assist in funding dredging.
Tackling the lake’s algae woes that have hampered the city-owned body of water for decades has been a top priority for Mitchell Mayor Bob Everson, who is in the midst of his second term.
While Everson is convinced that mechanically dredging the soft sediment will have a profound impact on the lake, he will not have the ability to vote on the SRF loan application if the council votes in a 4-4 tie. According to state law, the mayor does not have the authority to vote on any ordinances or or proposal that “expends” or “appropriates” money.
Making the case for dredging
Jeff Smith is among the council members who backs the proposed dredging project, which would remove phosphorus-rich soft sediment on the lake bottom via mechanical equipment. His reasons behind his support are simple: the near century-old lake is close to reaching its life cycle.
“(Public Works Director) Joe Schroeder made a comment that this lake is at the end of its life cycle. Not too far in the future, you’re looking at a dead lake,” Smith said during an early May council meeting. “We’ve been slowly moving forward, and the council made a commitment years ago to clean up Lake Mitchell, and I would hate to see us fault now that we have a little bit of a finish line in place.”
Council member Susan Tjarks, a vocal advocate for restoring Lake Mitchell who won re-election on Tuesday, is convinced the proposed dredging project laid out by Barr Engineering will produce a clean lake for many years ahead. According to Eric Lund, the lead engineer who presented the $25 million mechanical dredging recommendation in early May, the project would remove roughly 70% of the surface area sediment playing a major role in the lake’s algae woes.
“Listening to this approach, I feel like this is exactly the way we need to do it to maximize our dollars on the dredging part by focusing on areas where it’s most needed,” Tjarks said of the recommendation. “To me, this is the most cost effective use of a lot of money.”
Cleaning the ailing water isn’t the only positive outcome Tjarks believes dredging will produce. She said restoring the lake will attract more residents and visitors, which means more tax revenue for the city.
Throughout the past few years during lake discussions, nearly every council member has issued a stance on dredging. Councilman Steve Rice is among the very few who has refrained from taking a hardline stance on the proposed project. But he indicated Friday that he’s “leaning in favor” of dredging.
“At this point, I’m leaning in favor of dredging. With the timeline we’ve been given, it would take three years before dredging begins if we approve it now. The Kelley wetland will be done and in place by then,” Rice said, noting the wetland along the former Kelley property in the Firesteel watershed is a great step toward reducing the runoff funneling into the lake.
If dredging is approved, Schroeder said the project would aim to begin in 2026 or 2027. A drawdown of the water would also be required for crews to mechanically remove the sediment.
Although Rice is tilting in favor of dredging as of now, he said financing the project remains a concern. Paying off the 30-year SRF loan would result in some sacrifices in the city’s general fund, which supports a large portion of the city’s annual budget, Rice said.
Signs warning of algae blooms posted along Lake Mitchell in 2017.
Longtime council member Marty Barington has left no doubts on where he stands on dredging. With the amount of time city officials have invested into exploring dredging, Barington affirmed this week he wants to see the project go ahead.
“We’ve put so much time into this. I’ve always sat here as a community thinking we are going to move forward on this project. If the votes aren’t there, I’d be pretty disappointed,” Barington said in May.
June is the final month for the current construction of the City Council, with Tim Goldammer replacing Rice and Mike Bathke replacing Dan Allen with the seating of a new council in July. John Doescher will return to his council seat.
Timing, budget impact remain biggest issues among opposition
Allen, who was the first official to issue his stance against dredging in the fall, called dredging the lake before creating more wetlands in the 350,000-acre Firesteel watershed a “waste of $25 million.” While Allen is pleased with the city’s upcoming wetland project on a piece of property located about two miles west of the lake, he said one 35-acre wetland is not nearly enough to drastically reduce the runoff working its way toward the lake.
“If we would dredge it now, it would be a waste of $25 million with the heavy loads of phosphorus we have coming into the lake from the Firesteel watershed. We need to be more aggressive working upstream in the watershed than what we’ve been doing before doing any dredging,” Allen said.
Councilman Dan Sabers shares Allen’s view on shifting focus toward advancing more progress in the Firesteel watershed before leaping into a multimillion-dollar in-lake solution like dredging.
“I think we should be getting more work upstream done first. I still need a clear answer on how long it will take to get the wetland on the Kelley property to be filled with cattails and ready to go. We haven’t got the wetland started, and it’s been over several years now since it was approved,” Sabers said. “I also don’t like the idea of dredging about half the sediment knowing phosphorus is still coming in through the creek.”
Sabers emphasized he wants to see a clean lake as much as everybody, but the timing of the dredging project and its budget implications has him standing firmly against it.
“Everybody wants a clean lake, but it comes down to whether we can afford it. Paying off that loan will put a lot of other projects to the wayside,” Sabers said.
Doescher said in order to consider supporting dredging, it requires clear proof that the lake water can remain clean while phosphorus and runoff are still funneling into the lake via Firesteel Creek. As of now, Doescher’s stance against dredging hasn’t changed.
“I have asked for clear evidence that the water and runoff coming into the lake from Firesteel Creek would not destroy what would be done with a dredging project, and I haven’t seen it. That would be about the only thing that would sway me to do that,” Doescher said. “We’ve dredged once in the past and did alum treatments, and look at the lake now.”
Dredging supporters’ counter to the argument of waiting to dredge until more wetlands are implemented in the Firesteel watershed center around the interest rate of the SRF loan likely rising with each passing day and the amount of time it would take to complete adequate work in the massive watershed.
As Everson put it, work in the watershed will be a project that spans “forever.” And he fears waiting will result in the dredging project never getting done.
