The Lionite Mill: A Century of Industry, 3.7 Million in Publ

The Lionite Mill: A Century of Industry, $3.7 Million in Public Money, and Questions That Won’t Go Away

A former hardboard mill sits contaminated in downtown Phillips. A nonprofit bought it with plans for a recreation center and housing. An EPA grant is paying for cleanup. But who pays when the grant runs out, and why did the county take on the liability?Read more Price County stories from across the web.

—

The Lionite Mill at 115 Depot Road in Phillips, Wisconsin has been part of the field since 1883. For over a century, it produced hardboard and insulation board under a succession of owners, most notably Georgia-Pacific. The mill employed generations of Phillips residents. It was the kind of industrial anchor that small towns build their identity around.

Then it went idle around 2015. And the questions started.

The Contamination

The Wisconsin DNR’s BRRTS database lists 11 environmental activities at the site. Eight of them are from the Georgia-Pacific era, dating back to 1980: spills, leaking underground storage tanks, fuel oil discharges. All eight are closed.

Two more recent entries from 2024 involve Phillips Wood Products LLC, a later occupant: a spill and a drums investigation. Both are now closed.

The eleventh entry is the one that matters. It is listed as “Proposed Recreation Center Lionite Mill Fmr” under the Environmental Repair Program. It isOpen. It started December 10, 2024, and has no end date. This is the active remediation case, and it is ongoing.

The contamination identified in EPA grant documentation includes:
– Heavy metals and inorganic contaminants
– Asbestos in boilers, pipe insulation, duct insulation, roofing paint, building base sediment, penetration tar, caulk, and electronic panel components
– Petroleum and chemical storage tanks
– Low levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in soil and groundwater

An environmental consultant from Stantec noted that

An environmental consultant from Stantec noted that groundwater samples did not exceed Wisconsin NR 140 enforcement standards and soil samples did not exceed NR 720 direct contact residue levels for industrial land use. But testing was limited because most of the 9.2-acre project area is covered by concrete or asphalt. What lies underneath the pavement is less certain.

The EPA Grant

On May 20, 2024, the EPA awarded$1,677,894to Price County United Limited (PCUL) through the Brownfields Multipurpose, Assessment, and Cleanup Grant program, funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

The grant covers cleanup of a 9.2-acre portion of the larger 26.2-acre waterfront property. It started ticking on August 1, 2024, and PCUL has four years, until approximately August 2028, to complete the cleanup.

Here is the critical limitation:The EPA grant covers cleanup only.It does not cover demolition or redevelopment. PCUL must find separate funding for those activities, which are typically far more expensive than the cleanup itself.

The PCUL Purchase

Price County United Limited is a nonprofit community development organization. It purchased the 26.2-acre property, reportedly for approximately $2 million. The property transfer took place on April 1, 2024, according to tax records, though PCUL’s president sought to have the date corrected to November 10, 2023.

brings the public investment in the site to approximately$3.68 million: $2 million for the property purchase plus $1.68 million for EPA-funded cleanup.

The question that former supervisor Jason Hastings and community members have raised is straightforward: what does the public get for that investment?

PCUL’s Plans

PCUL’s EPA application described ambitious redevelopment plans: 132 residential units, including four 16-unit apartment buildings, 14 four-unit village homes, and 12 small homes near docks. A recreation center. Waterfront access.

These plans depend on cleanup being completed successfully, demolition being funded separately, and the contamination being contained to the degree necessary for residential use. Each of those is a significant if.

The Unanswered Questions

My Northern Wisconsin published a detailed article on January 14, 2026 raising questions that PCUL has not publicly answered:

Lawsuits.At least two lawsuits involving PCUL have been filed. CAP Minnesota LLC sued PCUL, Lynda Ludwig, and Associated Auction and Liquidation Co. Wausau Auctioneers sued PCUL and CAP Minnesota. The nature and status of these lawsuits is unclear.

Unpaid bills.A $205.50 city bill for grass length exceeding 6 inches. This is a small amount, but for a nonprofit managing millions in public funds, it raises questions about organizational capacity.

Auction proceeds.Questions about where proceeds from property auctions went and whether they were properly accounted for.

Demolition funding.The EPA grant does not cover demolition. Where will the money come from to take down the contaminated structures?

Floodplain concerns.The property includes waterfront areas. Building residential units in a floodplain requires specific permits, insurance, and flood mitigation measures.

Tax status and financial transparency.PCUL is a nonprofit. What is its financial status, and how transparent is it about the public funds it manages?

Georgia-Pacific’s Role

Georgia-Pacific or its predecessor companies operated the mill for decades. Under CERCLA (the federal Superfund law), past operators of contaminated sites can be held liable for cleanup costs. But PCUL purchased the property, not GP. If the county or PCUL did not pursue GP for contribution to cleanup costs before taking on the site, the public may have effectively socialized Georgia-Pacific’s environmental liability.

The U.T.A.V. Proposal to the May 19 County Board meeting specifically called for holding “owners of Lionite Mill and Phillips Plating Corporation fiscally accountable for remediation” and preventing “taxpayers from subsidizing private environmental negligence.” Whether that is still possible depends on the legal protections in the property transfer and the specific CERCLA liability framework.

What Happens Next

The EPA grant gives PCUL until approximately August 2028 to complete the cleanup. The KSU Technical Assistance to Brownfields program (Region 5) visited Phillips in January 2026 for community engagement. The DNR’s open Environmental Repair Program case will track the ongoing remediation.

But the hard questions are not about whether the cleanup happens. They are about what comes after: who pays for demolition, who builds the housing, whether the contamination is sufficiently contained for residential use, and whether PCUL can manage the project through to completion with its current organizational capacity and legal challenges.

What the County Board Should Do

1. Request a public presentation from PCUL on the current status of the cleanup, the demolition funding plan, and the timeline for redevelopment.
2. Investigate whether Georgia-Pacific was pursued for contribution to cleanup costs before the property transfer and, if not, why not.
3. Require financial transparency from PCUL as a condition of any continued county support or coordination.
4. Address the lawsuit questions. If PCUL is involved in litigation that could affect its ability to complete the project, the public needs to know.
5. Verify that the proposed residential development is feasible given the floodplain location and residual contamination risks.

—

*This article is part of an ongoing investigative series by Northwoods Explorer covering Price County governance, transparency, and accountability. Related coverage:The Hastings Resignation,Carbon Credits vs. Foreclosures,U.T.A.V. Proposal Analysis.*

Sources: EPA press release (May 20, 2024), WI DNR BRRTS database, Price County United Limited website, My Northern Wisconsin (Jan 14, 2026), Price County Review, WSAW TV, EPA ABCA document, U.T.A.V. Proposal documents.

\n\n

Related Coverage

This investigation connects to our ongoing series:

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the main industries in Price County?

Price County’s economy is driven by tourism, forestry and wood products, healthcare, small manufacturing, and local government. Historic industries like lumber milling have declined, though some wood products manufacturing continues in the area.

What happened to manufacturing in Price County?

Like much of rural Wisconsin, Price County has seen manufacturing employment decline over recent decades. Some former industrial sites have received public investment for redevelopment, with mixed results in attracting new employers. The Lionite mill is one example of a facility that received significant public funding.

What economic development programs exist in Price County?

The Price County Economic Development Corporation, along with state and federal programs, has business development assistance, revolving loan funds, and workforce training partnerships. Tax increment financing (TIF) districts have also been used to incentivize development, with varying degrees of success.

How does Price County track public investment in local businesses?

Public investments in local businesses are subject to open records requests under Wisconsin law. County board minutes, development agreements, and audit reports are available for public review. However, tracking outcomes — including job creation promises versus actual results — has been a source of community debate.