Measure Fails in Tie Vote
WINNSBORO – At its regular fourth-Monday night meeting on June 23, County Council failed to address the growing public concerns over algae blooms in Lake Wateree despite a warning from John H. Rodgers, Jr., an Emeritus Professor in Environmental Toxicology at Clemson University in the Department of Forestry and Environmental Conservation, that the increasingly toxic blooms, specifically Microseira wollei (formerly Lyngbya wolleiwill) would negatively affect the public health, environmental, and economic concerns of the county if not treated.
“This algae isn’t just unsightly—it’s toxic, and if we don’t act now, it’s going to keep spreading and hurting everything from recreation to property value,” said Rogers, who has published more than 150 peer reviewed papers and several books on topics related to aquatic toxicology and water quality.
He recommended that Fairfield County spend $30,000 to join a regional algae mitigation initiative, supported already by $70,000 in volunteer labor and in-kind donations committed by local stakeholders, including Fairfield’s neighboring counties.
Eight members of the public came to the podium, one after another, urging council to approve the funds that they said could help mitigate the growing algae problem affecting the lake.
“It isn’t just a science issue — it’s a community issue,” one speaker said. “Without action, Fairfield County risks losing one of its most valuable natural and economic assets.”
“It reminds me of a cancer—a cancer that we’re fortunate to have caught in its early stages. But left to its own devices, it will grow. It will suffocate our economy. It will harm the lives of children, and animals. It will ruin the brand of our county and hurt tourism in the long run.” said Randy Bright, a Ridgeway resident.
Another speaker referenced Water Watch, a volunteer science group that has been testing and tracking Lake Wateree’s water quality in partnership with USC and the Lake Wateree Association over the last 20 years, conducting bi-monthly data collection across the lake. The speaker said those findings over the years point to the following:
- a rising frequency of pH violations linked to algal blooms
- seasonal spikes in chlorophyll-a, a marker for algae biomass
- a shift toward phosphorus-limited conditions, ideal for cyanobacteria dominance
“Lake Wateree properties contribute approximately $6.6 million annually in property taxes to the county,” said County Councilman Don Goldbach, who represents the Lake Wateree area. “In my estimation, that is roughly 30% of the county’s tax revenue.” According to the 2024 Fairfield County financial statements, property taxes contributed $23.4 million to the county’s General Fund, making the $6.6 million figure an approximation of nearly 30%.
Fairfield County, with approximately 68 miles of shoreline on the lake, remains the only lakeside government to not significantly support the eradication of the growing algae.
Lancaster has pledged between $20,000 and $25,000 with only 43 miles of shoreline on the lake. Kershaw County is in discussion regarding its contribution. Chester County has already committed $30,000 to the treatment effort — despite not having any shoreline on the lake.
At a previous county council meeting held on June 9, 2025, a resident of the Lake Wateree community, Ann Corrao, urged council not to provide funding to mitigate the algae.
“I’m going to play devil’s advocate and be the voice of reason,” she said, “Catawba Riverkeepers cannot guarantee that there will be no environmental side effects from treatment with chemicals to animals, plants or humans.”
She called on the LWA (Lake Wateree Association) to put some skin in the game.
Already, the Association has pledged $15,000 to the project, according to Goldbach.
The Growing Algae Problem
Rogers explained that the algae growing in Lake Wateree looks like thick green mats.
“It’s not just unpleasant — it can cause rashes, respiratory irritation, and even make pets and wildlife sick. Currently, the issue is limited to certain coves, but the lake’s warm, nutrient-rich conditions make rapid spread likely,” Rogers warned.
“If left untreated, it will become harder and more expensive to control,” he said. “It can clog waterways, disrupt aquatic life, and limit how residents use the lake — from fishing and swimming to simply enjoying the view.”
Councilman Oren Gadson said he wanted to prioritize other funding needs instead of the mitigation effort.
“I’ve had numerous phone calls about this situation in the last two weeks, and I do agree that the lake is great. But I have constituents to answer to, and I serve on the Council on Aging. I’m trying to get at least $30,000 to feed our seniors. I can’t get $30,000 just to feed the seniors,” he said, “but y’all want $30,000 every year after this for housing.”
Speaker after speaker addressed how the algae threat will impact the broader community — from lost tax revenue to tourism, public health, and long-term growth. They pointed to the millions that Lake Water residents contribute annually to the county’s property tax revenue. They said the lake supports small businesses, boosts tourism, and offers residents and visitors a place to fish, boat, and gather.
“As toxic algae spreads, it threatens public health, lowers property values, discourages visitors, and could ultimately lead to restricted lake access,” Rogers pointed out, “hurting both quality of life and the county’s economic growth.”
Lake Wateree residents and the Lake Wateree Association members echoed support for the effort to treat the algae. Despite financial support from neighboring counties and data-driven recommendations, however, council remains divided.
Council members Goldbach, Peggy Swearingen, and Dan Ruff, voted to allocate the requested $30,000 to the Lake Wateree Association for algae treatment, but the vote failed in a tie vote when the other three council members present (Councilmen Carl Bell, Gadson, and Chairman Clarence Gilbert) voted against the funding. Councilman Douglas Pauley was not present.
When Swearingen made a motion to reconsider the allocation at a reduced amount of $15,000, County Attorney Tommy Morgan said that only a council member who voted against the motion could second the motion. With no second, the measure failed.
In other business, council voted unanimously to pass:
- third and final reading of Ordinance 846 (Lease-Purchase Agreement with Mega Metal),
- Resolution No. 2025-07: “No Through Truck” signage on Jenkinsville Road and Jenkinsville extension, and appointment of Tenika Watkins to the Board of Zoning Appeals (District 2 representing District 5).
