Residents of these communities are encouraged to participate in the meetings in other locations or take advantage of the virtual option available for remote attendance. Additionally, written comments can be submitted until June 21, 2024, via Charlotte Water’s IBT website at CharlotteWaterIBT.org or mailed to:
Charlotte Water
Attn: Jennifer Frost/IBT Modification Comments
4222 Westmont Drive
Charlotte, NC 28217
This situation underscores the need for inclusive and accessible public participation in decisions that impact essential resources. The absence of meetings in the affected communities of Tega Cay, Fort Mill, and Rock Hill calls for a reevaluation to ensure that all stakeholders have an opportunity to express their concerns and contribute to the decision-making process.
Historical Context of Water Withdrawal Disputes
Charlotte Water’s current efforts to withdraw additional water from the Catawba-Wateree Basin follow previous contentious attempts that reached the U.S. Supreme Court. The landmark case South Carolina v. North Carolina, 558 U.S. 256 (2010), addressed a dispute over water rights between the two states. The Court allowed the Catawba River Water Supply Project (CRWSP) and Duke Energy Corporation to intervene in the litigation but ruled unanimously that the city of Charlotte could not.
The case stemmed from North Carolina’s 1991 Interbasin Transfer Statute, which permitted water transfers between river basins with minimal oversight for smaller transfers. South Carolina opposed these transfers, particularly during drought conditions, as they could reduce water availability downstream. In 2007, South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster filed suit against North Carolina under the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.
A special master, Kristin Linsley, was appointed to review the evidence and recommend an equitable apportionment of the river’s water. The Supreme Court’s decision ultimately reflected the principle that states have primary responsibility for representing their interests in water disputes, though the involvement of other stakeholders like CRWSP and Duke Energy was acknowledged.
The historical context of South Carolina v. North Carolina highlights the ongoing complexities and regional sensitivities surrounding water rights and management in the Catawba-Wateree Basin. This backdrop adds urgency to the current debate over Charlotte Water’s proposed withdrawal increase, emphasizing the need for thorough public engagement and transparent decision-making.