Now that potable water has been restored to Asheville’s 63,000 customers, this is a good time to reflect on how the city handled the crisis and the lessons we’ve learned.
You may recall the great holiday water outage of 2022-2023 – that one didn’t go so great for the city, and folks lacked water for 11 days. This time, it took the city 52 days to restore drinking water, although non-potable water returned in mid-October.
Given the devastation from Tropical Storm Helene, it makes sense the water was out much longer. Both main transmission lines and the bypass line coming from North Fork Reservoir, which provides 80 percent of Asheville’s drinking water, washed out, as well as a lot of smaller distribution lines.
And the 350-acre lake itself essentially turned upside down, leaving the city stuck with muddy water it could not filter or treat.
So let’s get started with these lessons we all learned, including the most obvious:
We’ll never take water for granted again
I live in Fletcher and lost potable water for only a few days. And that was a pain.
Buying and lugging water sucks. And folks on Asheville’s system had no water at all until mid-October, and no potable water until Nov. 18.
Nothing will make you appreciate something like going without it.
The repair crews did an amazing job
Restoration work on a water distribution line along old U.S. 70 in Swannanoa a few days after Helene is shown in this drone photograph. // Credit: City of Asheville
After visiting North Fork Reservoir on Nov. 11, I really got an idea of what a monumental repair job contracting crews faced in restoring the washed-out transmission lines and fixing the road they run beneath. Not to mention replacing the distribution lines, especially those along the Swannanoa River, many of which also washed out.
So kudos to the city workers and those crews – TP Howard, T&K Utilities, and Tennoca – who literally worked around the clock to get pipes back into the ground. Excellent work!
Asheville’s communications were strong, for the most part
After Helene hit Sept. 27, Buncombe County took the lead in managing the recovery effort, following the system that’s set up by the state. The county arranged daily briefings, and the city had a strong presence at these events, providing crucial information about the water system.
Assistant City Manager Ben Woody, Water Resources Department spokesperson Clay Chandler and WRC compliance manager Brenna Cook have done yeoman’s work in providing timely information about the water crisis. From the start, Woody and Chandler showed photos and video of the damage and what work crews were up against in their frequent updates on progress.
A slide from one of Asheville Water Resources spokesperson Clay Chandler’s presentations showed how the department was using chemical applications and an in-lake filtration system to try to reduce the North Fork Reservoir’s turbidity. // Credit: City of Asheville
It was helpful and cogent, if extremely conservative. After being burned during the holiday outage by repeatedly promising potable water would return “within 24-48 hours,” the city adamantly refused to give a timeline for water restoration this time, other than steadfastly saying “weeks.”
Obviously, it’s much smarter to underpromise and over-deliver, which is what the city did this time. Possibly a little too much, which leads me to the next lesson.
Share more next time, and be more open about what you don’t know
We went from being told pretty definitively that the city would not be able to filter North Fork lake water until the turbidity measurement dropped to 1.5-2.0 Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTUs), to being told the city was pushing out 17 million gallons of treated water, then more than 20 million and then even more until potable water was restored.
It turns out the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had set up a small pilot treatment plant at North Fork that filtered water the same way the reservoir does, with direct filtration. In a nutshell, the Corps and the city used this to see what kind of turbidity North Fork could handle, and they found out that as the muddiness of the water cleared and smaller clay particles were left behind, it could indeed filter higher-turbidity water.
What’s clear here is that the city did not know beforehand the upper limits of turbidity that North Fork could handle, probably because the lake water is normally remarkably clear, as it comes from a pristine 20,000-acre watershed. And this was a unique event, very likely a 1,000-year rain and flooding event, and the city had never faced these issues.
In 2004, after hurricane remnants wiped out the two main transmission lines at North Fork, restoration took a couple of weeks, but the lake did not have a longstanding turbidity issue.
The pilot plant apparently worked great, and I’m glad the city did it, but it wasn’t clear early on that it was in use or the city was gauging its limits like this.
Along the same lines, the city said repeatedly that once it got the system repressurized with a water flow in the 25-million-gallons-per-day range, it would have to flush the system completely and test for purity. This would take two and a half to three weeks, the city said multiple times.
Tanks of aluminum sulfate sit near the edge of the North Fork Reservoir, which supplies 80 percent of Asheville’s water. The chemical was mixed with caustic soda to foster coagulation and sinking of clay particles. // Watchdog photo by Starr Sariego
Then on Monday, Nov. 18, the city announced it had restored potable water, after stating the previous Friday that drinkable water could return by mid-week. It turned out the flushing of the system had been ongoing for a couple of weeks, and that flushing essentially involved pushing out the old water that contained some untreated water and replacing it completely with treated, filtered water.
Again, great news, but not clearly communicated beforehand. I realize this is kind of a nitpick, and I realize the city did not want to build false hopes or say exactly when it started flushing because then people would demand water three weeks later. But water officials could have stated when flushing began well before they did.
Which leads me to the most serious misstep to date.
The announcement of detectable lead in the system was mishandled
Let’s look at the timeline:
Asheville Water Resources said in mid-November it had stopped including lead mitigation treatment in the water system on Oct. 11, because the city’s main reservoir’s sedimentation was so high and it had to use a bypass line to get water out. Corrosion control prevents lead, used in solder in pipes in homes and buildings built in 1988 or before, from leaching into the water. No lead is present in city pipes.
On Oct. 11, the city had not returned service to most customers, but that was coming within a few days. By Oct. 16, the city said 75 to 80 percent of customers had water, albeit non-potable.
The city restarted corrosion control treatment Oct. 30, but it can take a month or more to become effective again.
Water Resources got initial lead test results back Nov. 4 and final results Nov. 8, a Friday. The first mention of lead being found in the system was at the daily briefing on Nov. 14, six days later.
A screenshot shows a couple of the questions listed in a lengthy FAQ section on the City of Asheville’s water recovery page.
To be fair, until potable water was restored Nov. 18, Chandler and other city officials said at pretty much every briefing that the city recommended bottled water for any consumption. But once water service returned in mid-October, they also said repeatedly at these briefings that if you had no other options for consumable water, you could consume the water after boiling it for at least one minute.
So we have a window of time, from about mid-October through at least Nov. 18, in which people could have been drinking boiled city water with lead in it, particularly if they live in an older home or building.
Lead poses a serious health risk. No amount of lead is safe for human consumption, particularly young children, pregnant women and nursing mothers.
I suspect the number of people who were drinking the water before the return of potable water Nov. 18 was very low, because it was not fully treated and still discolored in some cases. But some people may have been consuming it after boiling it for one minute, thinking it was safe.
But boiling water that has lead doesn’t minimize the hazard.
I said this to Chandler and Woody in an email Friday: “So my question, and that of a lot of readers is: Why didn’t the city warn customers in mid-October, when it restored water to most people, that lead mitigation had been suspended and they should not consume the water without flushing, particularly if they lived in pre-1988 homes? This seems like a major oversight, and I want to be fair to you guys, because I think your messaging throughout has otherwise been on point.”
Chandler responded via email, first noting that after Helene, the city’s “singular focus was on restoring service to customers as quickly as possible.
“Once our infrastructure was rebuilt, our sole option was to provide hyperchlorinated raw water for critical fire protection and basic sanitation,” Chandler said. “The condition of the water necessitated a boil water notice.”
Chandler reiterated that they recommended bottled water for consumption, based on guidance from the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality and the EPA. This next part is long, but it’s important:
“Although it is impossible to predict with any accuracy the degree to which our established corrosion control was weakened during the period we were unable to provide it, this much is certain: Out of 25 sites sampled during the investigative lead and copper testing, which we performed at the directive of the NCDEQ, seven had detectable lead levels on the first draw,” Chandler said. “Keep in mind, ‘first draw’ means the water was tested right out of the tap, with no flushing, after it had sat stagnant for weeks.
“After a 30-second to two minute flush, only one site had a detectable level of lead,” Chandler continued. “Although corrosion control is important, and we’re certainly glad we were able to reinstate it almost a month ago, the easiest and best way to reduce risk of lead exposure is to flush your system.”
You should do that by running the tap for 30 seconds to two minutes, usually when you notice cooler water coming out.
Chandler also pointed out that since the city launched a Lead Awareness program in late 2021, “we have conducted broad outreach to property owners and media alike, but have encountered difficulty generating interest or participation.
“For example, 80 percent of our Lead Awareness page’s total page views came in the month of November,” Chandler said. “From the outset, we have made decisions – again, under the direction of our regulators – that we felt served the best interests of our customers and our community.”
Look, I don’t want to lambaste the city unfairly. It has so much good work getting the water system back online, after a biblical-scale disaster and under enormous pressure.
Also, the likelihood of lead exposure probably remains fairly low.
But we won’t really know until results come back from the more than 4,000 water customers who’ve requested lead testing kits. And that will take four to six weeks.
It tells us something that more than 4,000 customers are worried enough to test their water.
Chandler said the test results will “be published in some form, likely on the website with the other results.” That’s good to hear, because transparency here is absolutely crucial.
Lead rightly scares the daylights out of people, especially those with young children. You can’t have missteps or delays, and the city has had both.
It should’ve warned people much earlier about the potential for exposure and been advising people about flushing or just not drinking the water as soon as distribution resumed in mid-October.
Of course, none of this would matter had the system not gone out. I don’t think you can prevent the reservoir from turning upside down again after a tropical storm, but I think we’ve all learned this next lesson by now.
In the bigger picture, Asheville has to find some permanent fixes
After 2004, the city installed what it thought would be the solution to potential washouts of the two main transmission lines coming out of North Fork: a 36-inch bypass line, essentially a back up. Despite being buried 25 feet deep, it washed out Sept. 27.
Woody addressed this at a briefing Nov. 20, saying, “Yes, we are going to explore a primary water main that routes in a different direction” than the current bypass and main transmission lines.
“We recognize that a key part of redundancy would be to have a water main from North Fork, number one, that doesn’t go underneath the spillway areas,” Woody said. “And number two, as much as practical, avoids Swannanoa River Road.”
He acknowledged that will be expensive, but he also said it’s “absolutely something we’re going to look at and begin to initially move forward.”
The city simply has to look at that, and as Woody has also mentioned, supplementary water sources that can add to overall production. That could include boosting production at the city’s Mills River plant, or as Woody said previously, exploring an option for an additional water source, probably on the west side of town.
Curtains were installed at the North Fork Reservoir to help still the water and promote coagulation of sediment. // Credit: City of Asheville
The city is moving ahead with an Army Corps of Engineers program to install the mobile filtration equipment at North Fork that handles higher-turbidity water (which essentially was announced by City Councilwoman Maggie Ullman via an Instagram video, and not Chandler at a briefing, but I don’t want to pile on here). It should be running in early December.
Being able to handle higher turbidity is great. But as Woody acknowledged, another action item for the city is to proceed with “a permanent filtration improvement to North Fork so we don’t have to use the curtain anymore.”
That refers to a curtain system the city installed in the reservoir to help still the water and promote coagulation of sediment, and a system that can handle murkier water.
This makes sense, as North Fork is still the workhorse of the system, and likely will be for many years. North Fork typically produces about 21.5 million gallons of water a day, while the Mills River facility has been pumping out about 3 million gallons daily.
Clearly, the city has a lot more work to do, but it sounds like it has a clear-eyed approach. I just hope it communicates it every step of the way.
Asheville Watchdog is a nonprofit news team producing stories that matter to Asheville and Buncombe County. John Boyle has been covering Asheville and surrounding communities since the 20th century. You can reach him at (828) 337-0941, or via email at jboyle@avlwatchdog.org. The Watchdog’s local reporting during this crisis is made possible by donations from the community. To show your support for this vital public service go to avlwatchdog.org/support-our-publication/.
www.thecentersquare.com – By Alan Wooten | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-05-01 13:55:00
(The Center Square) – Diversity polices in state government would be eliminated if legislation passing the North Carolina House of Representatives becomes law.
Equality in State Agencies/Prohibition on DEI, known also as House Bill 171, is in the Senate’s Rules Committee after clearing the lower chamber 69-45. No Democrats supported it, and no Republicans were against.
“Bureaucracy has grown, not to serve but to sort, dividing people by race, sex, background, and calling it progress,” Rep. Brenden Jones, R-Columbus, said in his floor speech for the bill he authored. “It puts an end to the idea that the background should outweigh ability. It stops public jobs, promotions and contracts from being awarded based on political agendas, and it restores the principle that should have never been lost: Can you do the job? Did you earn it? Are you qualified?”
He told the chamber the proposal will ensure hiring and promotion decision based on qualifications. He also took time to explain it will not ban Black History Month, Pride Month or any cultural celebrations; rather, he said, “it explicitly protects them.”
“It bans unequal treatment funded by the public,” Jones said.
Rep. Robert Reives, D-Chatham, leader of the minority party in the chamber, on the floor said, “Rep. Jones said, ‘We value diversity.’ But the first line of this bill says, ‘an act eliminating diversity initiatives.’ You cannot value what you are seeking to eliminate.”
The bill says, “No state agency shall promote, support, fund, implement, or maintain workplace diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), including using DEI in state government hirings and employment; maintaining dedicated DEI staff positions or offices; or offering or requiring DEI training.”
The Senate has passed bills banning DEI in higher education and K-12 schools.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Center-Right
This article presents a factual report on the legislation in North Carolina that seeks to eliminate diversity policies in state government, particularly those related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). While it quotes both Republican Rep. Brenden Jones and Democratic Rep. Robert Reives, the tone of the article leans more toward reporting the bill’s proponents’ arguments and framing them in terms of qualifications and fairness. The language used by Rep. Jones emphasizes the idea of “restoring” principles and focuses on qualifications rather than background, which suggests a right-leaning stance. The article does not delve into a detailed counter-argument but merely reports the stance of Rep. Reives, the opposing Democrat, creating an imbalance in the attention given to the two sides of the debate. Additionally, the mention of bills already passed banning DEI in higher education and K-12 schools supports the right-wing position of the bill, without offering a deeper critique from the opposition’s perspective. This focus on the right-wing perspective aligns the article with a Center-Right bias. The content adheres to factual reporting, but the selection of language and emphasis on the arguments from proponents suggests a more conservative stance.
www.thecentersquare.com – By Alan Wooten | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-05-01 08:16:00
(The Center Square) – Taxpayers in North Carolina will face an average tax increase of $2,382 if the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act expires at the end of the year, says the National Taxpayers Union Foundation.
Results of analysis were released Thursday morning by the nonprofit organization billing itself a “nonpartisan research and educational affiliate of the National Taxpayers Union.” Its four state neighbors were similar, with South Carolina lower ($2,319) and higher averages in Virginia ($2,787), Georgia ($2,680) and Tennessee ($2,660).
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of eight years ago was a significant update to individual and business taxes in the federal tax code. According to the Tax Foundation, it was considered pro-growth reform with an estimate to reduce federal revenue by $1.47 trillion over a decade.
Should no action be taken before Jan. 1 and the act expire, the federal standard deduction would be halved; the federal child tax credit would decrease; higher federal tax brackets would return; the federal estate tax threshold will be lower; and some business tax benefits will be gone.
The foundation, in summarizing the impact on North Carolina business expensing, says the state conforms to Section 168(k). This means “only 60% expensing for business investments this year and less in future years. State policymakers could adopt 100% full expensing, particularly since the state conforms to the Section 163(j) limit on interest expense and the two provisions were meant to work together.”
The foundation says business net operation loss treatment policies in the state “are less generous than the federal government and impose compliance costs due to lack of synchronization with the federal code and are uncompetitive with most other states.”
The National Taxpayers Union Foundation also says lawmakers “should at least be conscious of any retroactive provisions when selecting their date of fixed conformity.” North Carolina is among 21 states conforming to the federal income tax base “only as of a certain date” rather than automatically matching federal tax code changes – meaning definitions, calculations or rules.
The foundation said nationally the average filer will see taxes raised $2,955. It estimates an increase for 62% of Americans. The biggest average increases by state are in Massachusetts ($4,848), Washington ($4,567) and Wyoming ($4,493) and the lowest are in West Virginia ($1,423), Mississippi ($1,570) and Kentucky ($1,715).
Individual wages, nationally, are expected to go down 0.5%, reducing economic growth by 1.1% over 10 years.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Center-Right
The content primarily reports on the potential impact of the expiration of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, relying heavily on analysis from the National Taxpayers Union Foundation, which describes itself as a nonpartisan organization but is known to advocate for lower taxes and limited government intervention, positions typically aligned with center-right economic policies. The article uses neutral language in presenting facts and data and does not explicitly advocate for a particular political viewpoint; however, the emphasis on tax increases and business expensing challenges following the expiration suggests a subtle alignment with pro-tax-cut, business-friendly perspectives associated with center-right ideology. Thus, while the article largely reports rather than overtly promotes an ideological stance, the framing and source choice reflect a center-right leaning.
www.thecentersquare.com – By David Beasley | The Center Square contributor – (The Center Square – ) 2025-04-30 21:25:00
(The Center Square) – Authorization of sports agents to sign North Carolina’s collegiate athletes for “name, image, and likeness” contracts used in product endorsements is in legislation approved Wednesday by a committee of the state Senate.
Authorize NIL Agency Contracts, known also as Senate Bill 229, is headed to the Rules Committee after gaining favor in the Judiciary Committee. It would likely next get a full floor vote.
Last year the NCAA approved NIL contracts for players.
Sen. Amy S. Galey, R-Alamance
NCLeg.gov
“Athletes can benefit from NIL by endorsing products, signing sponsorship deals, engaging in commercial opportunities and monetizing their social media presence, among other avenues,” the NCAA says on its website. “The NCAA fully supports these opportunities for student-athletes across all three divisions.”
SB229 spells out the information that the agent’s contract with the athlete must include, and requires a warning to the athlete that they could lose their eligibility if they do not notify the school’s athletic director within 72 hours of signing the contract.
“Consult with your institution of higher education prior to entering into any NIL contract,” the says the warning that would be required by the legislation. “Entering into an NIL contract that conflicts with state law or your institution’s policies may have negative consequences such as loss of athletic eligibility. You may cancel this NIL agency contract with 14 days after signing it.”
The legislation also exempts the NIL contracts from being disclosed under the state’s Open Records Act when public universities review them. The state’s two ACC members from the UNC System, Carolina and N.C. State, requested the exemption.
“They are concerned about disclosure of the student-athlete contracts when private universities don’t have to disclose the student-athlete contracts,” Sen. Amy Galey, R-Alamance, told the committee. “I feel very strongly that a state university should not be put at a disadvantage at recruitment or in program management because they have disclosure requirements through state law.”
Duke and Wake Forest are the other ACC members, each a private institution.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Centrist
The article primarily reports on the legislative development regarding NIL (name, image, and likeness) contracts for collegiate athletes in North Carolina. It presents facts about the bill, committee actions, and includes statements from a state senator without using loaded or emotionally charged language. The piece neutrally covers the issue by explaining both the bill’s purpose and the concerns it addresses, such as eligibility warnings and disclosure exemptions. Overall, the article maintains a factual and informative tone without advocating for or against the legislation, reflecting a centrist, unbiased approach.
