Blythewood Online 691

Category: Government

  • Chairwoman Clears Chambers

    Council Divided on Protocol

    STEM School Seeks County Funding

    And then there were none – Council holds forth in an empty chamber Monday after the Chairwoman cleared the room.
    And then there were none – Council holds forth in an empty chamber Monday after the Chairwoman cleared the room.

    WINNSBORO – A plea Monday night from students, teachers and administrators from the Midlands STEM Institute Charter School (MSICS) for funding assistance from County Council met with a cool reception from the Council Chairwoman who eventually cleared the chamber after her third warning to refrain from applause was violated.

    Chairwoman Carolyn Robinson (District 2) gaveled the standing room only audience twice after appeals for funding by a pair of elementary aged children elicited enthusiastic applause and warned that a third such outburst would result in the clearing of the chambers. Robinson then asked a small contingent of the STEM supporters to leave the meeting before proceeding with the second public comment segment of the night.

    “I think Mrs. Brown (Clerk to Council, Shryll) advised you that you could not discuss funding with us tonight,” Robinson said after asking the supporters to exit.

    Council’s bylaws contain no prohibition against requesting funding during the second public comment portion of the meeting, stating only that “Input will be for items not currently on Council’s agenda or under Council’s consideration. The subject matter shall be related to and limited to items, issues and topics regarding Fairfield County.”

    “Council does not have anything to do except collect the taxes on your tax notices for schools,” Robinson continued. “This is a subject that has to be dealt with with your Fairfield County delegation, which is Sen. (Creighton) Coleman and Mrs. (MaryGail) Douglas, as well as your school board. County Council has zero to do with funding for schools. If you had been attending our budget work sessions you would have seen there’s not one thing in our County budget that associates and deals with Fairfield County schools.”

    Asserting a point of order, Councilman Billy Smith (District 7) asked Robinson to hold her comments until County Council time, as she had similarly requested of Councilman Kamau Marcharia earlier in the meeting. Nevertheless, Robinson forged ahead, telling Smith she was “taking personal privilege.”

    In Roberts Rules of Order, under which Council operates, a “point of privilege” allows a council member to interrupt a speaker to complain about room temperature, lighting, noise, etc. It does not, however, provide a member a platform from which to engage in open debate or dispense their opinion on a subject.

    “You need to also check and see the lawsuit that’s out there and has been out there a long time with Chester County,” Robinson continued, addressing the remaining STEM crowd. “They’re doing the same thing of trying to get the funds to go to Chester County for the students in Chester to go there that you’re doing right now with this school.”

    Robinson’s uncertain reference to the four-year-long Mitford Case left many in the audience scratching their heads. The lawsuit, filed by Fairfield County Schools in July of 2010, was an effort to block legislation that required Fairfield to pay Chester County Schools 103 percent of Chester’s prior year per-pupil cost for each of the approximately 200 Mitford student enrolled in Chester schools. The case reached its end a little over a year ago when the S.C. Supreme Court ruled 3-2 in favor of the legislation and of Chester County Schools.

    State education per pupil dollars – a little more than $5,700 – follow students to whatever public school they attend, including Chester County and including the STEM Charter School. What the 2010 legislation achieved was to send an additional $10,000 or so in local funds along with it – funds that do not currently follow students to charter schools.

    When public comment continued, Marie Milam, Executive Director of MSICS, told Council that the school had been squeaking by on the $5,709 in state per pupil money, yet accomplishing great things. Barred from asking directly for financial assistance, Milam asked Council for moral support.

    “We are a struggling school, in terms of finances,” Milam said. “All new schools go through that. We are asking for your support in terms of your voice, in terms of your opinions, in terms of your judgment.”

    Closing the public comment segment, Douglas (D-41) told Council she was disappointed in how the applause for the children was gaveled away.

    “I am embarrassed,” Douglas said. “I’m embarrassed at what these children witnessed here tonight. They don’t know that it is the School District that controls that money. I have sat here on many occasions and have seen children come to this place and we have applauded them, we have encouraged them. And for us to let them leave tonight without that encouragement for having come, I am disappointed in that.”

    But it was Smith’s chiding of Robinson during County Council Time that elicited the applause that broke the camel’s back.

    “I’m embarrassed by what happened here tonight,” Smith said. “We shouldn’t conduct ourselves up here that way. If we’re not going to allow clapping, Madame Chair, we don’t need to allow it any time. We had clapping earlier in this chamber and nothing was said because it was something that we were all amenable to and we all appreciated it. Some folks may not appreciate what those folks from STEM came in here and said, but I certainly did and I don’t see a problem with applause if we’re going to allow it at another time.”

    The ovation for Smith was short lived. Robinson dropped the gavel and called for the room to be cleared. Only Council, members of the administrative staff and the media remained.

    With the room now virtually empty, Smith was allowed to continue his comments.

    “You already got most of them I was talking to out of here,” Smith said to Robinson. “We ought to be fair about things. If we’re going to allow something, then allow it. If not, then don’t. Either way I’m fine. But let’s just set a decision and then go from there.”

    Robinson said applause was reserved for presentations. The public comment segments of the meetings, in which each speaker is limited to 3 minutes, are for receiving information and for discussion items.

    “Asking for funding during that 3 minutes is not a presentation,” Robinson said. “For them to have properly done this tonight, they should have come to the Presentation Committee and asked for a time to come and make that presentation to us.”

    Councilman Dan Ruff (District 1), however, said the matter could have been handled with a softer touch.

    “I understand that applause rule,” Ruff said, “but I think there are some times when we can allow a little latitude, especially when there’s children involved, and maybe a little bit more diplomatic way of handling it when they do applaud.”

    When Robinson asked Ruff for specific suggestions on how the matter could have been handled, Ruff said it could have been done in “a little kinder way.”

    “Say, ‘I appreciate ya’ll’s interest in this, but we have an applause rule that we can’t allow it’,” Ruff offered. “I think it’s just a better way of handling it so we don’t disrupt everything like happened here tonight. I’m not condemning you; I just think there’s a better way—”

    “I already asked them three times,” Robinson interrupted.

    “I guess it was the way you asked,” Ruff said.

    “I’m sorry?” Robinson asked.

    “That’s just my opinion,” Ruff said. “I’m just making a suggestion.”

    When Councilman Walter Larry Stewart (District 3) also suggested Robinson could have handled it better, Robinson for the second time in her tenure as Chairwoman referred to her own rashness.

    “Sitting in this position, you have to make snap decisions and you can’t always think how ya’ll want us to think,” she said. “The adults sitting there should have been able to tell those children to behave and not participate.”

    Robinson also called her decision last June to change her vote and support cuts to County allocations to social programs a “snap decision” (see the June 12 edition of The Voice).

    Robinson did receive some support, however, from Marcharia (District 4) and Mary Lynn Kinley (District 6).

    “This is a business meeting,” Kinley said, “and my thought is why did they not come at budget time? I think the budget time is for those kinds of requests. In a business meeting you have to have your rules and you have to abide by them or you’re going to have chaos.”

    “You gave them ample warning not to do that,” Marcharia agreed, “but maybe we definitely need to make it clear – we’ve always had that rule about clapping.”

    Still, Marcharia said, Council was not likely to be viewed in a positive light after Monday night.

    “You go on their Web site tonight and we’re going to look like animals,” he said.

  • Ordinances Clear Council

    BLYTHEWOOD – Town Council passed final reading on a number of ordinances in short order on Monday night, including ordinances to:

    • Increase the height limit of buildings in all of the Town’s industrial zoning districts up to 110 feet;

    • Require the Board of Architecture to include the Blythewood Historical Society’s input when making recommendations for historical designation of properties in the town;

    • Revise and consolidate the Town’s regulations pertaining to the relaxation of and/or changes to landscaping, buffer yards and tree preservation;

    • Define and prescribe traffic impact studies for developments within the town;

    • Regulate the height of weeds and grass growth on town properties; and

    • Annex property located at 121 McLean Road into the town.

    Council passed first reading to increase the Town’s FY2015-16 budget from $1,301,286 to $1,341,034 as well as a new franchise agreement with Time Warner Cable, minor rate increases for the Manor and a change of date for the August Council meeting from Monday, Aug. 31 to Thursday, Aug. 20.

     

  • Funds Earmarked in Secret Meeting

    BLYTHEWOOD – At the Monday night Town Council meeting it was revealed that the Town’s Accommodation Tax Committee met via phone sometime in July, without public notice and without notifying the media, to vote to recommend funding for two Bravo Blythewood events: a Butterfly Festival ($7,500) and the Beach Bash ($5,000).

    Councilman Bob Mangone expressed concern to Council that telephone meetings are sometimes the only way the Committee can get a quorum. He also expressed his dismay that the town’s hotel owners, which make up three of the seven seats on the Committee, rarely attend the Committee’s meetings and didn’t participate in the phone vote.

    When the Committee’s recommendation came before Council Monday night for approval, Mangone questioned whether the town’s businesses would get a good return on such a large investment in a Butterfly Festival.

    “It sounds incredible,” Mangone said, “to spend $7,500 on a festival that we have no knowledge of how many people will be coming and how much the town’s businesses will reap from the event.”

    Citing what he learned at a recent workshop he attended sponsored by the state’s Municipal Association, Mangone continued, “We were told we should be looking at how much revenue is going to come in from an event (funded by Hospitality and Accommodations Taxes), not how much to give the group for the event. We were told we should be looking at revenue of 2-3 times the investment. So we should see at least $15,000-$20,000 in return for our $7,500 investment. But there’s no way of knowing if we will bring in anywhere near even $5,000. It sounds like we’re handing out candy because we have it, not because of how much we’ll bring in.”

    Mangone told Council that the purpose of the Accommodation Tax Committee is to invest money (in events) that will bring heads to beds and people to our restaurants.

    “It’s difficult for me to believe we’re going to bring in anywhere near $7,500 let alone $10,000-$12,000 from the 500-1,000 people Bravo Blythewood says they expect will attend the festival,” he said. “Is this a good investment for our town?”

    Both Mayor J. Michael Ross and Councilman Eddie Baughman argued that while the event might not meet expectations from the outset, it might grow.

    “I understand from Bravo Blythewood that 10,000 people attended a butterfly festival in Sumter,” Ross said. “You’ve got to start somewhere.”

    Ross pointed out that $2,600 of the $7,500 funding would be spent to rent The Manor and park and would therefore be coming back to the Town.

    “But when we look at our Hospitality and Accommodations Tax revenue during the month of the event and it’s not significantly higher than normal,” Mangone argued, “then we aren’t bringing heads to beds or the revenue in. If the Town government wants to fund an event from the general fund that’s fine, but not from the Hospitality and Accommodation Tax fund. We need to fund things that will make businesses want to come here.”

    Councilman Tom Utroska agreed with Mangone.

    “It befuddles me to give just $5,000 to the Beach Bash, a known commodity, but we are giving $7,500 to some unknown commodity (the Butterfly Festival),” Utroska said. “Maybe the Butterfly Festival will start small and get big, but in that case, we ought to start small with the money. I don’t think it should get more money than the Beach Bash.”

    The funding for the events passed with Ross and Baughman voting to approve the funding for both events, while Mangone voted for the Beach Bash funding and against the Butterfly Festival funding. Utroska voted for the Beach Bash funding and, after a very long pause, voted for the Butterfly Festival funding as well, but with the caveat that he would not vote for it next year if the numbers and return for the event do not meet expectations.

    Bravo Blythewood’s application for funding of the butterfly event listed the Butterfly Festival’s benefit to the community as bringing “outsiders into Blythewood for a unique weekend of shopping, fun and eating.”

    Besides the cost for The Manor and park, expenses for the Butterfly Festival were listed as: $300 for the ROTC; $440 for sheriff’s deputies; $350 for butterflies; $560 for a tent; $200 for electricity; $300 for banners; $250 each for a band and dancers; $600 for insurance; $1,000 for advertising and $600 for awards.

    After some intense discussion by members of the Town’s Accommodation Tax Committee at a previous meeting held on June 3 about how some organizations have spent money awarded to them from the A-Tax fund in past years, Committee members tightened up the rules for organizations applying for those funds in the future. Applicants are now required to provide receipts for all expenses for events receiving Accommodation Tax funding. According to the motion that passed unanimously, if applicants fail to attach those receipts to a financial report 90 days following the close of the funded event, 20 percent of their approved funds will be withheld and they will not be considered for future funding.

     

  • County Recreation Plan Meets Resistance

    WINNSBORO – Bids for the County’s $3.4 million recreation plan, which also includes a pair of fire and EMS stations, were opened at the County offices on the afternoon of July 14.

    Loveless Commercial Contracting of Cayce came in with the lowest offering at $7,453,044, with Solid Structures of West Columbia coming in second at $7,767,078. A late bid from Thompson Turner Construction in Sumter will still be considered, according to David Brandes, whose Genesis Consulting Group is assisting the County with the implementation of the recreation plan.

    Brandes, who conducted the bid opening, told representatives for Loveless and Solid Structure that the County would examine the bids and respond to them by July 20.

    But at County Council’s July 14 meeting, citizens lined up before the microphone during the first public comment segment to plead with Council to put the brakes on the recreation plan. Two Council members agreed, urging their colleagues to review the plan and get public input.

    “Please take a little more time to have town hall meetings in your district for feedback from the citizens as far as what we want,” Beth Jenkins, of District 2, said.

    District 3 resident Carrie Matthews, meanwhile, was a little more stern with Council in her comments.

    “This entire concept began with a false premise,” Matthews said. “The premise that money for recreational facilities is a gift to be passed out by a benevolent government in return for the citizenry willing to accept a large debt for economic development. What a flawed concept it is for a governing body to determine an amount of money to be spent on anything without first deciding what was needed.”

    District 7 resident Betty Gutschlag said that while she agrees recreational opportunities are needed in the county, she said it needed to be organized and supervised. And with the County’s big payday from two new nuclear reactors at the V.C. Summer plant now delayed to perhaps 2020, and with the debt coming due in 2018, taxpayers may be on the hook.

    The plan did have one supporter speak on its behalf Monday night. District 1 resident Moses Bell said the time has come for the County to forge ahead with its long-discussed plan for recreation improvements.

    “I am hoping we put this thing to bed and that we move ahead with the plan that’s already been talked about for the last two or three years,” Bell said. “We have talked about this long enough. Let’s move forward.”

    District 7 Councilman Billy Smith, during County Council Time, said the plan was approved on the very night it was first introduced to the public back in September of 2014 and that it could benefit from more citizen input.

    “I think we should allow (citizens) to drive the (recreation) process,” Smith said. “I don’t think they’ve been in the driver’s seat or behind the wheel on this one yet. I think we should maybe have a work session on it so we can put forward what all is included in the plan and I think we should have citizens input and let them tell us if they think we ought to look at it and change anything.”

    District 1 Councilman Dan Ruff agreed, suggesting that recreation could be incorporated into the County’s long-term strategic plan, currently being undertaken by T.Y. Linn International. But Councilman Kamau Marcharia (District 4) was adamantly opposed to any delay.

    “I want to move ahead with my plan,” Marcharia said. “We’ve been fighting for years. We certainly want to move ahead.

    “I’ve constantly had community meetings in my district,” Marcharia added. “Saying that the public is not involved, it is on their own volition. They didn’t want to get involved. It’s in the newspaper. We’ve been going through this for several years. I don’t know what stopped them from getting involved. If each individual has a problem with their district, they need to fix it rather than to cut this whole thing out and try to stop it.”

    Smith then said that the District 4 plan was the only plan he felt should move ahead without delay.

    “That’s the only part of the plan that has been in the works for years and years,” Smith said. “It’s been an identified need in that area. It’s been requested for years. There’s been land donated. We already have it ready to go. All the other ones, I think we need to look at them again. I don’t like the idea of borrowing money and then coming up with a plan.”

    There was no indication from Chairwoman Carolyn Robinson (District 2) that Council would review the plan as a whole. In that case, Smith said after the meeting, he intends to at least address the contents of the District 7 plan.

     

  • Former Councilwoman Awaits Day in Court

    Cauthen Cooperating with Feds

    Katie Cauthen
    Katie Cauthen

    NASHVILLE, TENN. – More than a year after she was originally charged, former Blythewood Town Councilwoman Kathleen (Katie) Devereaux Cauthen is still waiting for her day in court for her alleged part in a $28 million health care fraud.

    Cauthen has been charged with two felony counts in a U.S. District Court in Nashville, Tenn. The charges include conspiracy to commit “theft or embezzlement in connection with health care” and misprision, the failure to report the commission of a felony to judicial authorities. Cauthen, who was a member of the South Carolina Bar until her license to practice law in South Carolina was suspended last year, faces a maximum sentence of eight years in prison and $500,000 in fines if convicted of the two charges.

    Cauthen’s case has been delayed on multiple occasions as she has been helping the U.S. Attorney’s Office make a case against her co-conspirators. However, documents filed in her case, and that of others charged in the scheme, state she could plead guilty soon.

    “The Defendant (Cauthen) has been and continues to cooperate with the Government in its investigation of other individuals,” Cynthia C. Chappell, Cauthen’s appointed attorney stated in court documents. “The trial of related defendants was continued some time ago and has not been rescheduled. Based on the foregoing, the parties submit that the ends of justice would be best served by continuing Ms. Cauthen’s plea hearing and, therefore request that the Court continue this matter to a convenient date for the Court in or around August 2015.”

    Four of Cauthen’s alleged co-conspirators – William Worthy of Isle of Palms; Bart and Angela Posey of Springfield, Tenn. and Richard H. Bachman of Austin, Texas – were indicted by a federal grand jury in Nashville in June 2013. That case was scheduled for trial in U. S. District Court in Nashville in January 2015, but has been moved up and now is unlikely to see a jury until August 2016. Some of those charged in this case are also cooperating with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and so are likely to accept a guilty plea and not go to trial. According to U.S. Department of Justice statistics, more than 95 percent of federal criminal defendants plead guilty to charges.

    Filed June 16, 2014, the former Councilwoman is alleged to have aided others in a scheme purported to provide health care benefit coverage to more than 17,000 individuals and multiple employer groups in various states. It claims that although holding themselves out as providing health care coverage, the defendant and her co-conspirators did not comply with either state or federal regulatory requirements. Cauthen and her co-conspirators are alleged to have collected more than $28 million in insurance premium payments.

    Some of those premiums went into an account opened by Cauthen at First Citizens Bank in Blythewood in the name of Nationwide Administrators for which Cauthen listed herself as president and used her home address for the company’s physical address according to the federal charges. This action is the basis of the misprison charge.

    “The funds deposited into the account at First Citizens Bank were intended to represent payments to a non-existent underwriter, but were instead primarily converted to the personal use of defendant Kathleen Devereaux Cauthen and co-conspirator William M. Worthy II,” according to the information.

    On July 10, 2014 Cauthen waived her right to be indicted on the charges, and instead she was charged in a federal criminal information – a formal criminal charge made by a prosecutor without obtaining a grand jury indictment. In the document, Cauthen consented to prosecution by information, a path normally taken by individuals who implicate themselves and cooperate with the U.S. Attorney’s Office. This cooperation, if it is substantial, provides original information to the prosecution and if honest, can lead to a federal court reducing the offense level of the crime and so reducing the sentence.

  • Council Takes Up Ordinances, Budget

    BLYTHEWOOD – Town Council will hold a public hearing on Monday night to cover a multitude of new and amended ordinances. It will also be taking a final vote on those ordinances following the hearing.

    Heading the list is the ordinance to allow up to 110-foot-high buildings in the Town’s several industrial parks – the 350-acre Light Industrial Research Park (LIRP) bordered on the west by I-77, on the east by Highway 21, on the north by Firetower Road, with the southern border just above Exit 24 on I-77; a proposed 600-acre Limited Industry-2 (LI-2) Industrial Park  directly across I-77 from the LIRP and bordered on the east by I-77, the west by Ashley Oaks neighborhood, the north by Locklear Road and the south by North Point Industrial Park, which is situated on Community Road. There is also a small Limited Industry-1 Industrial Park on the south side of the Community Center property at the I-77/Blythewood Road Interchange.

    Council will also vote on the following ordinances:

    • Ord. No. 2015.004 to amend the Town’s historic preservation subchapter zoning text to include a requirement to include the Blythewood Historical Society’s input when making recommendations for historical designation of properties in the town.

    • Ord. No. 2015.003 to revise and consolidate the Town’s regulations pertaining to the relaxation of and/or changes to landscaping, buffer yards and tree preservation.

    • Ord. No. 2015.002 to amend the Town’s land development ordinances text to define and prescribe traffic impact studies for developments within the town.

    • Ord. No. 2015.010 to amend Section 302.5 of the International Property Maintenance Code to regulate the height of weeds and grass growth on town properties.

    • Ord. No. 2015.008 to annex property located at 121 McLean Road into the town.

    A first reading will be taken on a budget amendment to account for an additional $39,740 to increase the Town’s FY2015-16 budget from $1,301,286 to $1,341,034.

    Also scheduled on the agenda are votes for a new franchise agreement with Time Warner Cable, rate changes for the Manor and a change of date for the August meeting from Aug. 31 to Aug. 24.

    To receive agendas for Town meetings, contact Melissa Cowan at the Town Hall at cowanm@townofblythewoodsc.gov. or call 754-0501.

     

  • Council Mends Water Rates

    RIDGEWAY – With citizens protesting in numbers to their representatives, the Town of Ridgeway amended its June decision to raise water rates at their July Council meeting.

    With a 3-1 vote, Council members matched their supplier, the Town of Winnsboro, by raising rates to 10 cents per 1,000 gallons of water. Council members reported much contact with those they represent running up to the meeting about the proposed $1 per 1,000 gallon increase in water rates, which started out as a mistake, but some say is much needed.

    “There’s no reason to raise it a dollar. It makes no sense, no rhyme or reason,” Councilman Russ Brown said. “It’s a random number because of a mistake. Increases are going to come, but increasing it by a dollar just to increase it by a dollar would be bad government. We should at least research it first.”

    The $1-per-1,000 gallons increase passed final reading during Council’s June 11 meeting and was intended to coincide with what Council perceived as a 98 cents per 1,000 gallons hike by Winnsboro. However, according to a letter earlier in the year from Winnsboro, their rates increased $.098 per 1,000 gallons, not $.98.

    “My recommendation is that we go up with the Winnsboro rate increase,” said Councilman Heath Cookendorfer. “I’ve had a lot of people call me on this. I’d rather go up the .098 rather than a dollar, amending the budget and correcting the mistake.”

    Cookendorfer said he understood that rates will have to rise in the near future, but that doing so due to a mistake was not the way Council should do so.

    “We have reluctantly raised them when we have had to,” said Councilman Doug Porter, the lone vote of dissent and Council member to advocate for an immediate rise in fees. “Most of our city revenue comes from water and sewer. And we have capital projects we need to address. I think we would have asked a little bit more than that. We are losing ground to (water supplier Winnsboro).”

     

  • Second Horse Dead; County Defends Animal Control

    Third Account of Feeding Offered

    Documents May Be Missing From FOIA Request

    WINNSBORO – A second horse that spent nearly a month in the custody of the Fairfield County Animal Shelter died last week. The approximately 5 ½-month-old colt, transferred from the County to Big Oaks Rescue Farm in Greenwood on June 16, had been adopted by a volunteer staff member after about a week in their care.

    According to Dr. Lindsey Wilkins, an equine vet at Creek Run Veterinary Hospital in Pendleton, “The colt was brought in to the clinic about 10:30 p.m. Sunday, July 5 by its owner. The owner said the colt had become lethargic earlier in the day and as it became weaker, he brought it to the veterinary hospital where it died about 4 the next morning.”

    The cause of death was not able to be determined, Wilkins said. The colt’s mother, suffering from starvation and tape worms, died just two days after its arrival at Big Oaks (see the July 10 edition of The Voice).

    Addressing questions raised by The Voice’s July 10 article about the treatment of the mare while in the County’s custody, Interim County Administrator Milton Pope defended the actions of the Animal Control staff before County Council Monday night.

    Pope said the horses were taken from their Blair farm on May 18, and not May 19 as reported in The Voice – and as David Brown, the County’s Animal Control Officer in charge of the shelter, told The Voice two weeks ago.

    Contradicting himself, Pope later told Council, “The horses were taken into custody on the 19th and the surgery (on the colt) was performed within hours of when we brought it to our facility.”

    Pope also told Council that the feeding of the mare was per instructions to staff from Dr. Robert Chappell, a small animal vet used almost exclusively by the County. Pope said feeding consisted of “up to a half a bale of hay per day. We also provided Maintenance horse feed, Timothy grass pellets, Safe Choice feed and also the horse was given sweet feed.

    “The owner’s family provided information to the Animal Control staff that the mare would not eat unless you used sweet feed,” Pope added, “and what the Animal Control staff did was mix the sweet feed mixture in the food to get the mare to eat.”

    But Pope’s account marks the third different explanation of the mare’s feeding schedule reported by the County.

    In initial discussions with Brown shortly after the mare’s death, Brown told The Voice the mare was fed “sweet feed and adult horse feed” in “small amounts in three applications a day,” while hay was left in the holding pen at the shelter.

    A week later, Brown said the mare had been fed sweet feed four times a day in 3-quart portions. At no time did Brown tell The Voice the mare was fed grass pellets or that a mixture of sweet feed with any other kind of feed was used.

    According to records obtained by The Voice through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, Dr. Chappell paid for “the majority of the food costs.” The County’s only feed purchase, records state, was for two 50-pound bags of feed, indicated on a receipt from Tractor Supply Co. as Producer’s Pride 12 percent sweet feed and Nutrena SafeChoice feed. Two 50-pound bags each of the exact same feed were also donated to the shelter on May 27, according to the records.

    Pope also told Council that “The horses were watched daily by Animal Control staff and were under watch of the veterinarian. We have daily logs of that.”

    But The Voice’s FOIA request, dated June 26, specifically asked the County for (among other things) “all records associated with the rescue, surgery, housing, feeding, surrender by owner and relocation of the mare and foal . . .” If the County does in fact have a daily log of the vet’s and Animal Control staff’s care, it failed to provide it under The Voice’s FOIA request, placing the County in violation of the state’s open records laws.

    Pope suggested that the County adopt an animal cruelty ordinance, as well as retain an equine vet to have on call for potential future situations.

    “I think we definitely need to have an equine vet on call that can tend to big animals,” Councilman Marion Robinson (District 5) agreed, “because it is a completely different deal than dealing with a dog and cat. A horse is a lot more complicated person.”

    Councilman Billy Smith (District 7), who ultimately made the motion to send an animal cruelty ordinance into committee, said feeding a starving horse sweet feed was inexcusable.

    “When I first heard about the sweet feed to a horse that’s in this condition, I thought that would be like taking a human who was in that type of condition to a barbecue joint,” Smith said. “I looked up on Google and I typed in today ‘starving horse’ and ‘sweet feed,’ and every result that came back said don’t give a horse in that condition sweet feed.

    “We had the horse for about 30 days,” Smith said. “I wonder if we ever contacted an equine vet. That’s a pretty simple question. I don’t know if we did that or not, but I wonder that if we (had) would that have maybe had changed the course of events.”

     

  • Comprehensive Plan Winding Down

    BLYTHEWOOD – Amendments to the Town’s Comprehensive Plan are winding down and it is expected the Planning Commission will recommend them to the Town Council at the Commission’s next meeting on Aug. 3.

    Gregory Sprouse of the Midlands Central Council of Governments has been working on the project with members of the Commission both in regular meetings and individually for the last two months. State law requires that the Plan be updated every 10 years. Its purpose is to provide the Town’s officials guidance in planning and zoning.

    On Monday evening, the Planning Commission discussed changes that included updating the maps for water and sewer lines and information about the adoption of a capital improvement plan by Council. Sections on air quality and future availability of water were put in a more favorable light. New emphasis was placed on economic development and industrialization in the town as well as suggestions to provide incentives to developers who actively work to implement the visions of the Town. Another objective of the new plan will be to determine gaps in the town’s economic market and take steps to encourage development to fill those gaps.

    A new section was added that lists the town’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats as determined by the Planning Commissioners and Town Council members at recent meetings. Under the heading of Transportation, there are future plans to construct a park-and-ride lot and bus waiting area on the land just west of I-77, adjacent to the former community center. Future plans also include construction of a multi-model transportation center and parking lot.

    Chairman Malcolm Gordge announced that the terms of commissioners Marcus Taylor and Michael Switzer will end Sept. 30, and that Switzer will not reapply for appointment to the Commission. Taylor, who has served two terms on the Commission, told Gordge that he would like to continue serving. Residents of the Town who would like to apply for a vacant Commission seat should contact Town Hall at 754-0501.

     

  • Oakhurst Gets OK for Water

    More Upgrades for Martin Park

    WINNSBORO – Town Council Tuesday night gave the initial approval for water for phase two of a Blythewood subdivision, as well as OK’d improvements for one of the Town’s parks.

    Oakhurst Subdivision

    Developer Robert Wilder told Council that Oakhurst Subdivision, on Boney and Oakhurst roads in Blythewood, was ready to roll out its second phase, adding 100 new single-family homes in two phases of 50 homes each. While originally asking for 400 gallons per home per day, Wilder said Tuesday that request had been revised to 300 gallons per home per day, for a total of 30,000 gallons per day.

    Wilder said water for the first 50 homes will be needed within the next eight to nine months.

    Council gave unanimous approval, contingent on their acceptance of the developer agreement, a condition that has become standard in all developer water requests.

    Martin Park

    While Billy Castles, Director of the Building, Zoning, Streets & Sanitation Department, told Council that $4,400 in improvements had been made to Martin Park, and while Council had previously approved a total of $10,400 for park renovations, Castles and Councilman Danny Miller agreed that what the park really needs is another $19,050 of work.

    Miller said the asphalt paving on the parks two basketball courts is cracked, uneven and riddled with potholes, making play unsafe. Miller also said he had concerns about some of the playground equipment, which he also said was potentially dangerous and could make the Town liable for any injuries to children playing there.

    Castle said some rubberized mulch had been spread around the swings, but he was about 3 tons – and $1,900 – shy of what would be considered up to state Parks and Recreation Development (PARD) code. Castles also said 240-feet of fencing had been erected around the large playground, but an additional 8-feet of fencing was needed around the smaller playground, for a cost of $2,300. Miller also requested park benches, totaling $650.

    Once the courts are paved, Castles said, the Electric Department will not be able to bring in large work trucks to service the lighting, since Council had budgeted for inch-and-a-half instead of 3-inch asphalt. To remedy that, William Medlin, Director of the Electric Department, plans to rework the lighting system so it can be serviced elsewhere, adding $2,500 to the cost.

    When Councilman Clyde Sanders suggested applying for a PARD grant to cover the additional work, Miller recoiled.

    “Why we didn’t see if we qualified (for a PARD grant) for Fortune Springs Park?” Miller asked. “One thing we talked about . . . was trying to make sure we bring our parks up to speed. That’s all of them.”

    But Sanders said funding for the parks was discussed and approved during the budget process. The additional work on Martin Park, he said, was over and above what was approved.

    Mayor Roger Gaddy, meanwhile, said he was concerned about spending so much money on improvements that may only be temporary.

    “Martin Park has a long history of vandalism. We’ve put things in there and they’ve torn them up and torn them up,” Gaddy said. “We’ve had park benches torn up, we’ve had fences cut, we’ve had goals pulled down. It would be nice to have a nice park in that neighborhood, but by the same token, that community can’t just come here and say they’d like a nice park and then walk away from it. My question to you is, do you think the people wanting these improvements, are these people dedicated? Will they police the area and their community and call Public Safety when they see abuses down there?”

    Miller said he felt the community was indeed dedicated to helping maintain the park, which he said hadn’t had any improvements since its inception more than 20 years ago.

    “If you look at how the park has been kept over the last 20-25 years,” Miller said, “most of them probably feel like, the Town of Winnsboro doesn’t care anything about it, why should we care about it?”

    But, Miller added, “The community has changed. What we have to do is try to empower them to take ownership of that park.”

    Council ultimately agreed to spend $6,000 to resurface the basketball courts, as well as $2,500 for the lighting alterations and $1,950 for the mulch. The Town will apply for a PARD grant to cover the remaining improvements. If they do not qualify for the funds, Council agreed to revisit the matter and draw the money from the Town’s general investment fund.