Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Quality topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Aiken resident-engineer accuses city of cover-up over July brown water; city says it will hire third-party reviewer
Summary
At the July 14 Aiken City Council meeting an engineer accused the city of a political cover-up and blamed "water hammers" for a June 24–30 brown-water episode; a city official said the cause is under review and that the city will hire a third-party firm to conduct an after-action review.
An Aiken resident who identified himself as Dr. Robert Lashear told the City Council on July 14 that the city’s recent brown-water incident amounts to a ‘‘grave injustice’’ and alleged the problem was caused by high‑pressure water surges, or "water hammers," rather than solely by hot-weather demand.
"Water hammers are the primary reason for increasing brown water complaints at Aiken," Lashear said during the meeting’s public comment period, and he urged the city to investigate further and allow independent interviews and testing. He also said lead service lines and other vulnerabilities could mean some residents were exposed to harmful contaminants.
A city official responded in the meeting that the city had cited both unusually high demand and work at the water plant as contributing factors in earlier public releases, and reiterated that the city will hire an independent, third‑party firm to perform an after‑action review. "We’re hiring a third party firm," the official said, adding the review is intended to answer outstanding questions about cause and remediation.
Council members and staff also urged residents with ongoing water concerns to report discolored water through the city's published line: (803) 642‑7629 or by filing reports online. City staff previously said the discoloration events most affected the period June 24–30, and that routine sampling had been performed; Lashear challenged whether those samples reflected conditions across the entire system.
The meeting record shows no safety determination beyond the city’s public statements; the city’s decision to engage an outside firm was presented as the next procedural step. No formal action or new testing protocol was adopted during the July 14 meeting.
What happens next: City staff said they expect to begin the third‑party review and to report findings through the normal staff‑reporting channels; residents were told to continue submitting complaints via the phone number provided.
