My Name is ___________________, I live at ___________________________. Fifty of my
concerned citizens and I are here to share our concerns about your management of our
reservoirs and why we feel sweeping changes are imperative not only for the quality of
our water supply, but also for the financial future of Spartanburg County and the growth
we wish to sustain as a community.

For convenience of communication, we have provided copies of our concerns to local
media outlets.

This message is for Spartanburg Water’s Commissioners along with the City and County
residents who have heard the ads on the radio, and who have been fed information
about how you are trying to protect their water, and how the homeowners around their
three lakes are a threat to their drinking water. Today will set the record straight and
expose the lies and mis-information that the Public and The Honorable leaders of
Spartanburg City and County have been given, as well as the double-standard being
applied to some lake residents, not to mention the mis-management of our Water Supply.
We citizens, who truly care about our drinking water, respectfully request your
consideration of our concerns :
1). Beginning in 2015, City and County residents began complaining of a sour odor and
foul taste in the water provided by SWS. SWS told customers that it was due to
increased algae levels in the lakes and that SWS was working to resolve the concerns.
By all accounts and information from several other Water Systems in this state, the algae
bloom was created by SWS’ negligence and mis-management by not lowering the lake
levels in the winter months to allow the shorelines to “freeze” which reduces the natural
algae blooms that occur in the summer months.
2). We have been told by certain respected individuals within SWS, that the SWS
Chairman gave the order to not lower the lakes. We also have been told that this order
was given so as to not interfere with the Chairman’s duck hunting. After the Algae
blooms occurred, SWS responded to public outcry with a public campaign to blame the
lakefront homeowners and development in the area for the algae problems. Funny thing,
though, algae blooms were hardly an issue in the past years when the lakes were
lowered in the winter.
The original attempt by SWS to eradicate the algae was to use underwater mowers
to cut up the algae. This not only did not work, but it made the algae come back
stronger.
Next, the SWS sprayed toxic chemicals into our drinking water to kill the algae. We
have it under authority that this decision was made by the SWS CEO, who researched
and approved the company and chemical to be sprayed in our lakes. As a result, at the
direction of SWS, what followed was the largest fish kill in the history of South Carolina.
Over 200,000 fish were killed.
3). Adding to the environmental debacle, is the fact that SWS Participated in a cover-up
of this colossal failure. Only when a concerned lakefront homeowner called the South

 Carolina Department of natural Resources was the SWS mistake documented. SC DNR is
on public record having said that SWS tried to cover up the fish kill it created. Further,
SC DNR has said that it took several requests to stop burying the dead fish before SWS
would stop the coverup. If the chemicals killed fish, just think of the harm it caused to
other living things, animal and human? What are the “down-stream” effects to humans
months and years later?
Also a matter of public record- the fine levied by SC DNR to SWS was $100K, AND,
the 200,000 fish had to be restocked.
4). Fallen trees have been allowed to remain in the lakes, rotting and contaminating the
lakes.
You have stated that you want a natural buffer zone around the lakes.
Lakes , when left unprotected by seawalls or stone, allow the roots of trees to be
exposed, weakening the earth around them, allowing them to fall into the lakes. Lake
Homeowners have not been allowed to remove these trees even when they wish to do so
at their own expense. Yet, SWS has time and again proven that they wish to leave them
to continue to rot and contaminate our waters.
How can this be homeowner’s causing a contamination issue , as you’ve been
quoted by the media, when we’ve been threatened by your 84 page document of rules
to NOT remove any fallen trees or trim any limbs below the 827 line?
5). Our lakes are filling in. Roadway runoff, and development around the lakes and
unmanaged shorelines have caused many areas around the lakes to be five feet more
shallow than they were 10 years ago. At the present rate, with many portions of our
lakes being twenty-three feet deep OR LESS, the lakes will fill in with silt within 40 years.
6).
SWS needs to be working with the Dept. of Transportation to ensure not only that
they are planting vegetation to filter the road and bridges runoff and debris, but also that
they are NOT spraying RoundUp and Cross Bow which contain known cancer causing
chemicals around the bridges that cross over the lakes and feeder streams.
7). SWS needs to work with the area farmers to protect our water. Farm animals (cows,
etc) have been allowed to graze in the creeks and streams that fill our lakes. This also
means that these cows defecate into our water, and in many cases, this is done on
Spartanburg Water’s property. Why is this allowed , when in the 84 page document , it
purports to restrict lakefront homeowners from allowing their domestic animals (dogs) to
urinate on the grass near by the lake?
Why not allow the farmers to pump lake water to a retention pond to allow the cattle to
drink and keep the cattle out of the lake?
8). Why is SWS not making their water testing results public for all to see? When, where
and how often are you testing, and how do the test results differ lake by lake and from
within various locations on each lake? We, the lake owners maintain that testing of
contaminate levels along manicured lawns and seawalls will show lower contaminate
levels in those locations vs the levels along the natural shorelines.

 9). As an example of why a natural shoreline with weeds, undergrowth and various other
types of vegetation won’t work can be seen by looking at Reservoir 1 and Lake Welchel
in Gaffney…they both have natural shorelines as SWS has said is preferred, yet, both
Reservoir 1 and Lake Welchel , as well as other lakes within the state have experienced
major algae blooms in recent years. These bodies of water all have fallen and rotting
trees, silt from road runoff, and waste from farm animals and large birds which all
contribute to an algae problem.
10). Per the South Pacolet River Watershed Based Plan for Nutrient Load Reduction in
Lake Bowen and Municipal Reservoir #1, the estimated existing Total Nitrogen, based on
monitoring results, is nearly the same as was estimated by the United States Geological
Survey in 1976, while the loading of Total Phosphorus has increased nearly threefold since
1976. An observed increase in nitrates over time could be attributed to untreated animal
waste entering the lakes. Per the report, pastureland appears to be the largest single
contributor of nutrient Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus loads within the watershed. A
natural, overgrown shoreline will do nothing to help with the algae problem.
11). It is past time for the leadership of SWS to begin to work with the lake front
property owners of the 3 lakes/reservoirs to truly have clean water.
12). It is vitally important that SWS and the lakefront owners realize that they are
partners in the challenge of keeping the lakes healthy.
SWS needs to put a plan in place for all bodies of water to stabilize the shorelines,
to prevent erosion in the lakes which is damaging them at an alarming rate.
It should be noted that currently Lake Lure requires anyone who is developing a
shoreline property to construct a seawall or at least riprap the shoreline, or request an
exemption justifying why the shoreline does not need protection.
Duke Energy controls 26 lakes and uses similar protection methods to protect the
shorelines of their lakes.
There are federal funds available for the construction of shoreline protection, and
dredging recreational lakes.
SWS can and should apply for these funds and begin a new phase of proactive
solutions which will save our lakes and increase their longevity.
SWS needs to work with the lakefront owners to find viable solutions to protect
these resources to insure safe and clean drinking water for the citizens of Spartanburg
city and county and for the growth of our county for generations to come.
13). For the record, the addition of Sterile Carp into the lake as an eco-friendly method
to reduce and eat the algae and the algae blooms was at the suggestion of a homeowner
during one of your previous public meetings. It was NOT an idea that originated within
the walls of SWS.

 14). The Bubbler system, installed in 2017 or 2018 , at a cost of $4M into Lake Bowen
has either proven to be a mistake or hasn’t been maintained because SWS has continued
to spray chemicals into the water. This is an expensive monthly endeavor…..$250K per
month! , and obviously, It isn’t working. We, the public tax paying, water drinking public
demand to know what these chemicals are, and why they continue to be applied despite
the fact that they are not working.
15). The geese continue to be a major source of water contamination. Why is there not
a viable plan to manage the population of geese?
16). Why do you restrict the trimming of tree limbs? By trimming low tree limbs, sunlight
is allowed to reach the ground, so that vegetation can grow which will actually hold back
silt and topsoil. Silt and topsoil do nothing but fill in our lakes and potentially carry
contaminants into the water,.
17). SWS has forced homeowners to implement planting plans at the homeowner’s
expense, but WITHOUT an expert horticulturist or landscape architect on staff. It is the
opinion of the homeowners that you have forced them to harm our drinking water by
forcing them to landscape in a manner that is detrimental to the water quality.
18). Maintaining a quality water supply is expensive, requires good management, and
partnership with all stakeholders.
What will happen, if the proposed rules are adopted, thereby lowering all
lakeowner’s property values by 25% to 40% due to the fact that all lakeowner’s properties
become lake view rather than lake front??
ANSWER? – LOWER TAXES for the County
LESS money for our schools, and road maintenance
LESS MONEY FOR SWS – which, by the way has already seen a reduction in
Wholesale Water Supplies of 55%
19). SWS has lost 21% in Water Sales.
We need a clean start, with leadership we can trust, and data we can rely upon
regarding the quality of our drinking water. How can we trust that our drinking water is
safe when you are applying chemicals in it every month?
20). SWS needs to address the global issues with the homeowners as a group rather than
in individual meetings.

 21). Why is Woodfin Golf course allowed to spray fertilizer on SWS Property when it
knowingly washes into our drinking water? This contributes to the contamination of our
water!
22). We respectfully wish to acknowledge that SWS has not acted in a manner that
deserves our respect, or for that matter, the respect of any citizen entrusting you with
maintaining our drinking water quality when you do not publish your test results nor do
you report your financials to the City of Spartanburg nor follow the laws of this state
governing municipalities and franchises furnishing water or waste disposal. We refer to
SC Title 5.5-10-20, as well as 5-7-110, 5-51-50 5-31-260, and 5-31-270. When did you
last request approval from the City Council for incurring debt, like the failed Bubbler
System, or the 72 acres purchased by SWS off the Pacolet River?
23). Why has SWS pulled out of the Lake Clean-up Days, currently being performed by
lakefront homeowners and community volunteers? Why not do as most utilities, and hold
these clean up days on a Friday when SWS Employees can work alongside of volunteers,
and the efforts of all involved can be rewarded by a dinner-cookout?
24). Why would you refuse to allow a homeowner to pay for the dredging of the cove
near his home? This would not only help to keep the lake clean of debris, but also, the
deeper water would be cooler, and allow for less algae growth.
25). Spartanburg City has direct responsibility for SWS.
SC Code # 5-51-50 speaks to the exclusive franchise of furnishing water or waste
disposal by the cities and towns of SC.
SC Code # 5-31-260 speaks to indebtedness- which the board of commissioners
may not incur without the concurrence of the City or Town council. Have your debts and
large expenditures been approved by City and County Council? Especially those
expenses for chemical spraying? DNR Fines? Fish Restocking?, Ineffectual Bubbler
Systems?
SC Code #5-31-270 says that each board of commissioners of Public Works shall
make a full statement to City and or town council at the end of each month for receipts
and disbursements in the preceding month. Has this been done?
26). Spartanburg County was recently ranked 6th nationally in industrial growth. NOT
protecting our water will be devastating to our economy, and an embarrassment to our
city, county, and state.
27). The combination of not protecting our water quality, the lakes, and implementing
the proposed rules will have a negative impact on the entire community due to the
reduction in lakefront home values. The homes around the lakes generate $10million in
tax revenue annually. The reduced value of these homes becoming lake VIEW lots will
result in a $5 million short fall in Spartanburg County’s tax revenue. This can only be

 replenished by increased taxes on the rest of the county or a reduction in services offered
by the county like park maintenance, walking trails, or other public amenities.
Public schools receive approximately 65% of the county’s tax income. A reduction
in home values can only translate into a reduction in dollars flowing into our schools to
the tune of $3.25 million annually. Our students deserve better than that.
28). SWS needs to follow the same policy as the Spartanburg City and County councils
regarding public speakers. They allow speakers to fill out a form up to 30 minutes before
a published meeting. City and County Council make it easy for citizens to speak in the
public comment period, at well published times and places, after normal work hours to
ensure easier access for those wishing to attend and/or speak.
In contrast, Speakers at SWS meetings must apply via form before noon the
Thursday before the meting to be held on a Tuesday. Meeting times and places are not
well published, and are held during normal business hours, making it more difficult for
people to speak. Many people have to take time off from work in order to speak at a SWS
meeting.
29). As Board members, you are all elected officials representing the City and County of
Spartanburg. SWS is not your private company.
30). We respectfully request an answer to the question of why the lake wardens are the
only deputized law enforcement officers in the state, when the SC DNR has agents
patrolling without any problems? Why are these wardens both employees of SWS and
Law Enforcement? To whom do they report? Are their processes and procedures fair and
equally applied to all landowners and situations?

 31). Why are homeowners subjected to new rules forcing them to obtain engineering
drawings costing at least $1500 to replace rotting boards on their docks? These rotting
boards present a safety and water quality issue when they break and fall into the water,
potentially harming not only the water, but boats, and people too. Would the wardens
want rusty nails on a board damaging their props and hulls? Or worse, getting thrown by
a propeller and becoming a projectile to injure innocent human life?
Furthermore, and after this rule about the engineering drawings was withdrawn, why was
the $1500 engineering fee only refunded to those homeowners who knew enough to
request a refund?
How is an engineering drawing for the replacement of boards relative to water quality?
32). Why are no trespassing signs being placed in homeowner’s yards without any
written or verbal notification of suspected violations by the homeowner?
33). Why would SWS Deny any homeowner’s access to navigable water ways? This is a
right of all citizens of SC. The water is not owned by SWS, it is owned by the people of
this state.
34). Why has SWS revoked the permits of homeowners for doing things such as trimming
tree limbs? This should not result in that homeowner’s permits for boats, or docks being
revoked. Trimming trees is unrelated to having a dock or a boat.
35). SWS should not be revoking permits due to fake violations and certainly not due to
unwritten and variable violations only to require the homeowner to request a new permit
and to shoulder the financial burden of improvements based on these loose and unwritten
policies and rules.
36). Why would one homeowner be allowed to create a man-made peninsula on his
property that required the lowering of the lake?
37). Why has SWS removed the public fishing areas like the one that had been around
the dam? Why is there now an 8 foot fence around this area? Where else is SWS
planning on erecting more fencing?
38). Why did SWS recently apply for an hydroelectric permit at a cost of over $200K, only
to discover it was not eligible for these permits? Did The City Council approve of this
expenditure? How would that help protect our water an water quality?
39). Why does it sometimes take SWS over a year to approve a dock permit, when we
are continually told it only takes 14 days?
40). Permits issued, then subsequently and immediately revoked and not refunded is not
only not fair, it’s an intimidation tactic that borders on a gestapo tactic.
41). What is the true reason behind SWS losing the wholeseller contracts with ICWD,
SJWD, and Woodruff Roebuck Water districts?

 This has resulted in a loss of revenue to SWS of over $4M annually. Inman,
Campobello Water now has their water supply pumped in from NC and they sell it to their
customers at a much lower rate than what SWS is charging its customers.
We have it on authority that this has caused the shutdown of the Whitlock plant,
which at this point would cost tens of millions of dollars to restart.
Is City Council aware of this?
42). What is the purpose of the shell company created by SWS to purchase property? Is
it to prevent other water company wholesellers from purchasing that property?
Why would SWS purchase over 70 acres of lake front land which includes a home?
Why is this property needed by SWS? As Tax payers, we deserve to know, and most
certainly , the City and County Commissioners need to know the plans for this, and other
land purchases made by SWS.
43). Why have the lake wardens been encroaching upon homeowner’s docks and boats
without the homeowner present , without a warrant, or even the suspicion of
wrongdoing? This is trespassing on the part of the lake wardens. How is this activity
related to water quality?
Why are the wardens allowed to do this? At the behest of SWS?
Why is this happening now, when it never happened in the previous 30+ years of these
lakes and reservoirs.
44). Why did SWS Spend $75K at the request of the CEO to update/purchase buoys at
the Dam on Lake Bowen, when these buoys are neither Coast Guard nor SCDNR
Approved? We have it on good authority that SC DNR would have provided approved
buoys at no cost to SWS if they had only been asked.
45). The EPA has labeled the Pacolet River as polluted. As customers of SWS and tax
paying citizens, we respectfully request that you share with the public what you have
done to protect our water from its polluted source water. Have you worked with the
farmers upstream who allow their livestock to enter the water, and , no doubt, defecate
in the water? What about planting plans like you have required of lakefront owners?
What about dredging the area where the river meets Lake Bowen?
46). How does having more than one communications director on staff at SWS translate
into better water quality? As a small water utility company, only one, at most should be
needed. Many large national companies with consumer products only employ one
communications director. Maybe having more communications directors somehow
translates into better management of the geese?
47). When can those homeowners who were forced into signing the LAA expect all of
their deeds to be returned to the former wording- that which it was prior to the signing of
the LAA which was recorded in the county courthouse?
48). Why is SWS using Drones to monitor the lakes? Furthermore, why are the drones
encroaching onto homeowner’s land beyond the 827? Is SWS maintaining all the proper
permits for these drones, and flying them in concert with all FAA rules and regulations?

 49). When can we expect feedback on the 84 page rules document , the comment
period which expired on August 30th?
50). We respectfully request that this Commission expand it’s current structure from
three City Residents. The overwhelming majority of your customer base resides outside
of the City of Spartanburg, and considering that they all pay 40% higher rates, they
should have representation on your Commission. The Commission should also include a
lakefront homeowner that lives full time on one of the three reservoirs. This individual
would be able to provide insight outside the scope of the current Commission. We
further submit that anything short of approving of this request suggests that your
purpose is something other than that of providing clean water.
51). Why, when SWS is so far in debt does it continue to donate to charitable causes?
This is not only foolish, but calls into the question of why this is approved, and by whom?
How does this relate to better water quality?
52). We respectfully submit that all future contractual bids be awarded on the basis of
quality of the prospective contractor’s work and cost, rather than favor being given to
any company which donates to charities which are in favor of the SWS Board, and CEO.
All bid approval processes should withstand the scrutiny of having merit based on the
financial and quality aspects of the individual/companies submitting bids.
53). Why is SWS not submitting it’s monthly financials to the City of Spartanburg. Could
this be due to the fact that several recent expenditures have not resulted in resolution to
the algae problems?
54). How is the annexation of the Chairman’s home into the City Limits while other
homes in the same neighborhood are not also annexed possible? Surely the Chairman
didn’t want to pay higher taxes out of the goodness of his heart. Surely his lifelong
ambition was not to ensure that Spartanburg has better water quality? Was there some
other reason that he might have wanted this not the least of which involved a position on
the board? What other reasons could there be? We have all used our imagination, and it
doesn’t involve better water quality.
55). Why have the wardens said to Numerous people and I quote: “I have no say about
THAT…situation…fill in the blank….our CEO is overseeing that situation personally”?
Why are we being told that the CEO is overseeing one homeowner issue over another?
Why not oversee all situations? Is this in the name of Water Quality?
56). We respectfully request full disclosure on The Milliken Project, and how that relates
to Water Quality, and was this done with the full endorsement of the City and County
Council?
57). Who really has instructed senior leadership at SWS to stop lowering the lakes in the
winter? Was it to benefit one particular individual who sits on the board, at the risk of
jeopardizing the water quality, while causing us to all have to deal with this algae bloom
every summer?
58). Why are residents of Reservoir 1 no longer allowed to place permanent seating
structures such as seating areas and docks on SWS Property? They weren’t causing
water quality issues before, but why is SWS now so emphatically saying that it does?

 59). Why is SWS forcing lakefront owners to sign documents to move the property lines
and change their deeds in favor of Spartanburg Water without compensation to the
landowners? Further, why is SWS surveying the entire property of some homeowners,
including the front yards? Will SWS be making restitution for the property of
homeowners that they have damaged?
How is this related to water quality?
60). Why are homeowner’s permits being denied without reason, with no appeal process
for the homeowner? Rules need to be clear, succinct, and applied equally to all.
61). We take issue with the ever moving survey pins on some properties, sometimes the
same surveyor has performed multiple surveys on the same property, yet the pins have
moved by SEVERAL FEET! FEET! Not inches!. What has happened lately is that in
summary, SWS is claiming land that was not in the original purchase of the land for Lake
Bowen. Any surveys done should be performed by an independent surveyor with no
connection to SWS.
62). The Lakeowners desire a relationship with the wardens such as we had for almost
40 years. That was a relationship of mutual respect and trust. The wardens worked with
the landowners, and while we didn’t always agree with them, at least they were fair and
equitable, and the landowners weren’t afraid to bring things to their attention and ask for
help. Currently, with the wardens having the same powers as real law enforcement
agencies, and answering only to SWS, the landowners have experienced harassment,
and the wardens have overstepped their authority. We implore you to make the
necessary changes so that the landowners can once again work with the wardens with
mutual trust.
63). What’s the purpose of the Press Pause program , and why is it needed now? The
landowners have never questioned the fact that the land below the 827 was not our
land, but we have treated it as though it was, and have cared for it. We understand that
you want to know what’s on the land, and how the land is being used, but after the
harassment and overreaching actions by SWS and it’s wardens of the recent 24 months,
we can’t trust that SWS and this Press Pause program are in anyone’s best interest.
We as adjacent land owners and customers of SWS, want clean water, and we want our
lakes to be clean, but we need to work together to achieve that, with open minds and
honesty try to work on a resolution for BOTH sides.

64) In conclusion, what We, as lakefront owners, citizens of Spartanburg county, and
customers of SWS want is :
*clean water
* a utility company we can trust
* Eco-friendly treatments used BEFORE using harmful chemicals
* dredging of coves to improve water quality
* Access to time, location, and the results of your water tests
* Representation on the Commission
* Permanent access to the water that as citizens , we own
* the continued ability to filter storm water runoff with landscaped/manicured
lawns

 * SWS Meeting times and public speaker comment rules which mirror the rules of
City and County Council
* SCDNR to be the law enforcement on the lakes
* Wardens to assist the landowners and not be adversarial or harassing them
* An appeal process to handle denied permits
* the deeds on record should serve as the rule of where property lines are.
* SWS should engage with property owners in a group setting
* SWS should pay for and remove all fallen trees that are contaminating our water
* Lake rules should be based on water quality and water safety
* Dam inspections should be made by licensed professionals, and made public
* we want a good clean water product , sold to us at a fair price.
* a board of commissioners of 7 members, including at least one lakefront
homeowner
* Leadership of SWS that can be fair and trusted by all – lakefront homeowners,
citizens of the county, City and County Council
Thank you