Council addresses drainage, pollution

The Waseca city council held a public hearing on Tuesday, May 16 to discuss the city’s stormwater pollution prevention plan. City engineer Nate Willey explained that the hearing is mostly related to the city’s municipal stormwater (MS4) permit responsibilities, and that the city provides an opportunity for public input every year.

The MS4 permit responsibilities are set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Willey shared that permits last five years, and that the prior permit for the city expired in November of 2020. Coverage officially became available November 18, 2021, and the permit will expire either in 2025 when the five-year period ends or when a new, updated permit is issued.

The city is to take six “minimum control measures” when it comes to its MS4 permit. It must inform and reach out to the public to educate them, have public participation and involvement, have a method of detecting and eliminating any illicit discharge into the system, have construction site stormwater runoff control, have post-construction stormwater management, and provide pollution prevention and good housekeeping (municipal operations).

The main topic of discussion throughout the hearing was the amount of phosphorus in lakes and how the actions taken through the MS4 permit allow the city to control those amounts. “High levels cause excessive algae growth and can impact water quality and aquatic life,” Willey explained. “But you don’t want to eliminate phosphorus. You need that to have life. Excessiveness is what causes problems.”

Alum treatment systems help remove phosphorus from the stormwater, for example. 

An example of an MS4 street improvement was the replacement of all the storm sewers in the Second Street SW/Second Ave SW projects. Willey also claimed that fall leaf pickup and street sweeping helps control phosphorus levels.

Council member John Mansfield wondered how much the city was paying to sweep the streets and whether the results justify the costs. Willey argued that the city receives credits for eliminating a certain amount of phosphorus. “If we didn’t do leaf pickup, we might not make the credit,” he added. “It’s true we also may not see immediate impact, but it will impact the lakes over time.”

“I get your point,” Mansfield said. “I just wanted to throw that out there. My constituents are saying taxes are high. I think we have to let them tell us they can pick up their own leaves.”

Council member Stacey Schroeder also asked people not to discharge grass clippings into the streets. “Yes,” Willey replied. “Please, please, don’t put grass and leaves into the city gutters. That creates a lot of phosphorus.”

Council member Jeremy Conrath then asked about the $50,000 the Waseca Area Lakes Association receives in funds every year and wondered if it could be better used for water retention. “It may not only benefit the leaves, but keep water out of residents’ basements.”

He also stated dissatisfaction with the Lakes Association’s handling of the issue. “This type of thing has been on their agenda for the last year, and it’s not very well received,” he said. “They say every single meeting that they are the voice of the lake and they need to take some drastic measures by asking us council members to give them more money.”

While he admitted that the county commissioners may have contributed more to the Lakes Association than the city has, he feels as if the group hasn’t been sufficiently appreciative. “We gave some people $1,000 and they were very grateful to us. We give them $50,000 and they act like we gave them nothing. I’m pro-lake, but I also feel a bit insulted.”

The public hearing opened at 7:56 p.m. Michelle Oswald, a Waseca resident, shared concerns about Gaiter Lake water flowing into a swamp and eventually into Clear Lake. She wondered if fertilizers from nearby farms and houses had any negative impact on Clear Lake. She also asked how much of a role leaf pickup played in reducing phosphorus levels in lakes.

“If we didn’t have leaf pickup, I don’t think we would meet our requirements,” Willey answered. “I think Clear Lake also benefits from Gaiter Lake picking up deposits as well as having that county tile nearby. As far as fertilizer’s impact, I don’t have a quantified answer. But if there is excess fertilizer on [a property owner’s] lawn, it will certainly run off into the lakes.”

Willey added that if the city decided to develop Gaiter Lake, that could potentially reduce any runoff going into Clear Lake. The public hearing closed at 8:01 p.m.

Before the end of the meeting, the subject of Clear Lake came up again when Mayor Randy Zimmerman suggested that the council give clear direction to city manager Carl Sonnenburg on what they want him to look into as far as developing the land.

Council member Mark Christiansen stood firm on his position that the city should move forward with it while Mansfield was vehemently against the city developing land, especially in the south part of the city. Mansfield added that he would be much less against more development on the northern side of town. “We can tie everything else over there out west,” he said.

Schroeder pointed out that if the city did its own development at Gaiter Lake, it would be showing residents that the city is investing in itself. “When I grew up, the threshold to get things in Waseca was $10,000,” she said. “Owatonna’s in a housing crisis.”

“And they’re not screwing around,” Christiansen added. “They’re developing as we speak.”

Zimmerman told the council, “Unless we’re willing to make an investment, I’m not blaming anyone for not wanting to develop. It’s getting to that point. I agree the city shouldn’t be involved, but I think we need to make a move to spur something to show we want growth. Everyone says they want lower taxes and a grocery store, but if we can’t develop, nothing’s going to happen.”

“I didn’t ask for money from the city when I developed my business,” Mansfield pointed out. “I want the city to get out of the way. I want the government to get out of the way.”

In the end, the council decided to put Gaiter Lake back on the action agenda for its Tuesday, June 6, council meeting.