Category: Government

  • Frier named to commission

    BLYTHEWOOD – Town Council made five reappointments to the town’s boards and commission last week as well as a new appointment.

    Frierson

    Sam Frier, who lives in Cobblestone Park, was appointed to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Frier moved to Blythewood four years ago and works in Lexington for a power tool company.

    Reappointments included Planning Commissioners Donald Brock and Rich McKenrick; Board of Arcitectural Review (BAR) board members Deborah Humphries and John Miles and Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) member Marion Hinds.

    There is one remaining vacancy on the BZA and one on the BAR.

    Board and Commission members must live in the town limits.

    Residents interested in serving on the board can contact Town Hall at 803-754-0501.

  • Bell casts blame for Teacher Village failure

    WINNSBORO – Although a proposed deal with a North Carolina hedge fund to build a “Teacher Village” appears dead, Fairfield County Council hopes the proposed subdivision catering to teachers can still be built. 

    At Monday night’s council meeting, several council members said the project might find success with another developer.

    Gorelick Brothers Capital had planned to invest $3.6 million to build the subdivision in exchange for a seven-year tax abatement of up to $600,000. But the hedge fund pulled out when it and the county couldn’t agree on an indemnity clause the county wanted in the deal. 

    “I’m saddened the Gorelick project fell through,” Council Chairman Neil Robinson said. “You don’t just lay down on the ground, you get back up on the horse and ride again. Gorelick isn’t the only developer we can depend on.”

    While several council members expressed optimism about finding another developer to revive the project, one council member blamed the media for the Teacher Village deal falling through. 

    Bell accuses media

    Councilman Moses Bell took issue with The Voice’s reporting of an email from Gorelick that spelled out the hedge fund’s objections to the indemnity clause.

    A Gorelick representative authored the email on Aug. 30.

    The Voice obtained the email, addressed to Fairfield School’s Superintendent Dr. J. R. Green and the district’s Foundation president Sue Rex, on Sept. 13, or about two weeks after its origination. It had been shared as information to multiple county officials according to Rex. The Voice obtained the email in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

    “The puzzling thing to me was a letter shared with the press and not shared with me and some members of the council knowing we were in negotiations,” Bell said. “How did [The Voice] know the letter was there and its contents?”

    Rex told The Voice in an interview last week that Gorelick’s objections have been common knowledge for some time.

    Rex said in a statement that the email “that was reported in the press, was shared on the day it was received from investors, August 30th, with both the County Manager and the County Council Chair.”

    The email was not labeled confidential, though Bell said he considered the email sensitive and part of ongoing negotiations.

    Developer was not all in

    Councilman Clarence Gilbert said Monday night that the county shouldn’t be blamed, because it was the developer who pulled out.

    “The developer was not all in,” Gilbert said. “In every major deal if there are differences, you meet and talk about those differences. Gorelick wouldn’t meet with us. So those of you accusing council of sabotaging this project, let’s get our facts together. We did everything we could to make this project work. The only thing we refused to do was to sign a blank check that may or may not have caused the county problems in the future.” Gilbert said. “If you believe strongly in something, and it didn’t work out, don’t blame someone else because it didn’t work out the way you thought it did. If Plan A doesn’t work, find a Plan B.”

    Indemnification not new

    Indemnification has not been new in the Gorelick discussions. 

    Fairfield County has been publicly pushing for an indemnity clause since at least November 2018, when former Council Chairman Billy Smith raised the issue at a joint county-school board meeting. 

    The issue arose again two weeks ago, at the Sept. 9 council meeting, when County Administrator Jason Taylor said Gorelick did not support the indemnification clause, but that indemnification clauses protecting the county are common to any contract the county enters into.

    The county is a co-defendant in a similar multi-county business park lawsuit filed over a student housing project in downtown Columbia. The county is incurring no legal cost on the lawsuit, however, because it has an indemnification clause in the deal that protects the county from liability. County leaders feared a similar suit could arise from the Teacher Village. For that reason, county officials sought similar protection with Gorelick.

    County Attorney Tommy Morgan said at a recent council meeting that legal bills stemming from any Teacher Village litigation could cost “six figures” without an indemnification agreement.

    Gorelick opposed indemnification, saying that it was already bearing the brunt of the risk. The hedge fund also wanted Fairfield County to be “invested” in the Teacher Village. 

    “If they [the county] believe in this project, they should be willing to bear some of the risk,” Gorelick stated in an email obtained by The Voice. “If we are forced to bear the cost of indemnification the risk-reward equation is too negatively skewed for us to continue.”

    Rex, Green respond to Pauley

    In her statement, Rex said that Gorelick’s withdrawal was a serious blow to Fairfield County. 

    Rex and Green also responded to past comments from Councilman Douglas Pauley, who’s previously questioned the Teacher Village.

    On Sept. 9, Pauley read a prepared statement in which he said, “other parties involved have been unwilling to help the county mitigate and manage its associated risk.”

    In a subsequent statement to The Voice, Pauley was even more blunt.

    “At best, it [the email from Gorelick confirms our concerns. At worst, it exposes those we considered partners trying to pull the wool over our eyes and over our citizen’s eyes, all for public risk and personal gain,” the statement said. “If Council is the least bit sane, this will end the circus act.”

    On Monday night, Green responded to Pauley’s remarks, claiming they were directed at him, although Pauley did not mention Green in his remarks.

    “I generally don’t comment on those things unless they assassinate my character or question my integrity, accuse me of being duplicitous,” Green said. “When those things occur, I am compelled to address them.”

  • Council defers final industrial park vote

    A large crowd attended a controversial town council meeting Monday night to weigh in on an industrial park zoning requested by Richland County on property in Blythewood. Jeff Ruble, Director of the county’s Office of Economic Development, is shown at the podium. | Barbara Ball

    BLYTHEWOOD – Richland County’s request for Blythewood Town Council to rezone 162 acres between Fulmer Road and I-77 from Development (D-1) to Limited Industrial 2 (LI2) hung by a thread Monday night. Things weren’t looking good for approval when Councilman Bryan Franklin made a motion to defer the issue until Monday, Sept. 30.

    That motion passed 3-2 with Mayor J. Michael Ross and Councilman Eddie Baughman voting against.

    The acreage is part of the 1,300-acre Blythewood Industrial Park the county is proposing to develop west of i-77. Much of that property is in the Town of Blythewood.

    At issue is the credibility of Richland County Council concerning promised covenants and restrictions to protect the community from any adverse effects that might arise from the industrial park.

    “Tonight’s vote for or against is probably the most vital thing to determine the future of Blythewood since I’ve lived here,” Cobblestone Park resident John Moore said in his address to council during public input. “It is my feeling that it is political suicide for Blythewood to vote ‘yes’ without written assurances from Richland County regarding traffic, recreational areas, fire protection, etc…I have absolutely no confidence in Richland County Council,” Moore said. “I am not against the industrial park, but without assurances, we are going down the wrong path.”

    Cobblestone resident Tom Utroska agreed.

    Utroska insisted that council maintain control over the section of the industrial park that is in the Town of Blythewood.

    “Richland County (should) agree to change the county’s proposed covenants and restrictions to provide for the Blythewood representative on the design review committee (for the industrial park) to have veto power over the balance of the design review committee with regard to any action occurring wholly or in part within the town limits of Blythewood. We need to maintain our control,” Utroska said.

    “I think this rezoning, if approved, should be contingent upon a binding agreement between the town and Richland County similar to an IGA (intergovernmental agreement) wherein Richland County agrees to a time frame and funding for a new fire station near Blythewood Road to service the new industrial park.” Utroska said. He also asked for full funding for the current Blythewood fire station.

    He also called for an agreement between the town, county and SCDOT that addresses the use of Blythewood Road and the proposed traffic circle at Community Road by truck traffic seeking ingress to and egress from the light industrial park to development on Community Road.

    “If we don’t maintain it, it will be a traffic nightmare,” Utroska said.

    Bill Shives, who’s residential property is adjacent to the proposed industrial park, urged council to consider what they are getting ready to turn Blythewood into.

    “You say you want a class A industrial park,” Dennis Lane resident Jim Christopher, a commercial real estate developer said.  “The way to have a class A industrial park is by putting covenants and restrictions in place. Reading it, I thought, ‘Well, it could be worse.’”

    But Christopher said he also felt it could be better.

    “They [covenants and restrictions] don’t address traffic on Blythewood Road, and nothing is dedicated to public spaces,” he said. “Nothing about limiting railroad access. If you eliminate railroad, you won’t have a lot of the noxious uses in the park. I’d like to see the design development committee address that in [the covenants and restrictions].

    When you put this document in place, that’s the most restrictive it will ever be. It will go backwards from there. Developers ask for this and that. Whatever you don’t get up front, you’re not going to get later after you guys vote on it. You need to get it now, up front,” Christopher said.

    “Everyone wants a Class A industrial park,” he said. “So let’s design that in to it.”

    “We’re trying to do everything we can to work with you.” Jeff Ruble of the Richland County Economic Development office, told the speakers and council. “We’ve listened. We’ve heard everything you said. I promise we’re not trying to do anything underhanded. We’re trying to work with you as best we can. The reason we’re doing this is to create good jobs and to bolster the tax base.”

    Addressing traffic, Ruble said that any project in the park over 25,000 square feet needs a traffic study.

    “And that traffic study will lead to results,” Ruble said.

    Middlefield Road resident, attorney Stuart Andrews, disagreed.

    “The reason traffic studies are inadequate,” Andrews said, “is that in virtually every case, they result in the identification of what improvements need to be made to accommodate increased traffic,” he said. “We don’t want a larger road on Blythewood Road, or a four-lane road with several traffic signals or even a six lane road with more traffic signals. That does not protect the integrity of the community. It invites and encourages more and more and more traffic. So traffic studies simply identify the increased volume of traffic,” he said.

    “And there are a couple of sleeper provisions that I hope the council is aware of,” Andrews added. “First, there is an additional property loophole that expands without approval, without review and without any public participation. It is the incorporation of any unlimited amount of additional property into the 1300 acre industrial park. Zoning of course, would have to be complied with and as you say other laws would govern. But in the absence of that, if zoning is consistent and it’s certainly outside the county, the county can do whatever it wants. They can bring in other parcels that don’t even have to be contiguous to the park. So they could go behind the elementary school, behind Cobblestone and, frankly, anywhere they wanted to, and designate the additional property as being part of this very industrial park. And that is an ability that is open ended, without limitation. Without any review. It’s a unilateral right the county has reserved to itself that I see no justification for. I would suggest you strike it out,” Andrews said.

    “There are a lot of things that can come up and bite us in ways that are unintended and unexpected,” Andrews told council. “And that’s the risk of rushing through too quickly with two days to review and negotiate it. And we’d like to ask you to permit more time to review it.”

    Ross, who has spoken in strong support of the industrial park, said he believes the industrial park is the best and highest use for the property.

    “If the industrial park doesn’t go there,” Ross has said in several meetings, “we could have thousands of more houses there and more traffic.” He said the council has been working almost two years with the county on the project.

    Ross said Monday evening that the covenants and restrictions would be voted on at a later time, perhaps a year later.

    After the vote to defer, Ross suggested that the deferred vote for the rezoning might be taken on Monday, Sept. 30 during a special meeting called for the final vote on the sale of the Doko Depot.

    However, on Tuesday, when asked by The Voice what leverage would be available to the town to influence the covenants and restrictions if they are negotiated after the vote is taken, Ross said he felt sure that the county would have revised the covenants and restrictions and have them in place before the rezoning vote. That vote, Ross said on Tuesday, might now be delated until Wednesday or Thursday of next week when all five council members would be available to vote.

    Richland County Council passed first reading Tuesday evening to rezone another parcel of the industrial park to Light Industrial (LI) that is in the county. These are the last two parcels of the 1300 acres to be rezoned.

    For specific information about the date, time and location of the Blythewood Town Council meeting, call town hall at 754-0501.

  • Council cuts comments, raises ire

    WINNSBORO – It’s not against the law, but the decision to delete a public comments period from the agenda didn’t sit well with several Fairfield County residents attending Monday night’s County Council meeting.

    Moving forward, the council is restricting public commentary to items on the agenda. Residents are not allowed to discuss non-agenda topics as was customary in the second public comment period.

    Instead of a second comment period, residents can now schedule “Citizen Concern Appointments” with County Administrator Jason Taylor.

    The appointments would take place every Tuesday starting at 9:30 a.m. Residents who register would be allotted 30 minutes to address issues of community concern.

    “We’d be glad to talk to you about any issue you’d like to talk about,” Taylor said.

    In a related move, the council is also reducing the number of meetings it holds during November and December. Instead of meeting the second and fourth Monday, the council is only scheduling once-a-month meetings until the end of the year.

    Council Chairman Neil Robinson said the reason for the move is that it’s becoming increasingly difficult to identify enough agenda items to justify holding two meetings a month.

    Ridgeway resident Randy Bright said he planned to praise the council during the second comment period, but he couldn’t because of the new policy restricting public comments to agenda items.

    As for cutting back on monthly meetings, he said Fairfield is a county that can hardly afford to cut back.

    “We have the sixth worst unemployment rate in the state. We have a declining population. We have a $50M weight of debt thanks to the Fairfield County Facilities Corporation, and our taxes are still going up. We have too much work to do to cut back on meetings,” Bright said.

    “If the football team is down 30-0 at the halftime, is that the time you put in the subs and give up? No. This is not the time to give up on Fairfield County. If I were you guys, I’d schedule more meetings. Don’t give up on the county, don’t give up on us,” Bright said. “A public that’s kept in the dark will give up on the county themselves.”

    Ten speakers took to the podium, the vast majority addressing the agenda controversy.

    No speaker supported reducing the number of public comment periods. One person even waived a handheld sign that read “Forget citizens. The chair rules. ‘No’ 2nd comment session.”

    Sue Rex, chair of the Fairfield County School District Education Foundation, came to speak about the Teacher Village. She submitted her comments instead.

    Dr. J.R. Green, superintendent of the Fairfield County School District, was nearly ruled out of order while attempting to deliver a rebuttal to comments recently made by a council member.

    Winnsboro resident Thomas (Tony) Armstrong was ruled out of order and cut off when he wouldn’t follow the new rule.

    Armstrong commented on a proposed Zion Hill/Fortune Springs revitalization project, which was on the agenda, but also veered into the council’s decision to cut meetings down from twice to once a month for the rest of the year.

    “Hopefully you’ve decided to reduce your pay, too, because you’re only doing half of the work,” Armstrong said. “You all are elected to represent the people. When you get too much power, you forget to whom you belong. You abuse power and allow administrators to abuse power.”

    Council members didn’t specifically say why the change was made, though Councilwoman Bertha Goins said the policy would help curtail divisive rhetoric.

    “I think the decision is just an awesome thing. When I think all of the violence going on in the world, until we get to the point where we can’t sit down and reason together, we are in a terrible place. If we could just learn how to reason together, maybe we can stop some of the violence.”

    At least two council members appeared to reverse course on the decision later in the meeting.

    After participating in a 6-0 vote to accept the agenda, which included only one public comment period, council members Moses Bell and Jimmy Ray Douglas signaled support for reinstating the second comment period.

    Council Chairman Neil Robinson said he wasn’t opposed to reinstating the public comment period.

    “I know a lot of people are a little irritated, a little in an uproar about it. A lot of counties don’t have a public comment session,” Robinson said. “Some have one, some have two. I’ve called around to different councils, spoke to different chairmen on how they do things. Nothing is in stone, but we are trying to make things better.”

    At one point, Robinson deferred to County Attorney Tommy Morgan, who said there’s no law requiring public comment periods at government meetings.

    “It is common across the state to have differences,” Morgan said. “The allegation that there’s been a constitutional violation by the removal of the second public comment session is an incorrect assertion.”

    Bill Rogers, executive director of the S.C. Press Association, agreed that including public comment periods is not a legal requirement. But he also said deleting them erodes public confidence in government.

    “I don’t think it serves the public well if they shut out discussion,” Rogers said. “These people are public servants. They need to listen to their bosses.”

  • Millage stays the same, but Fairfield bills rise

    WINNSBORO – Fairfield County’s millage rate will remain unchanged for the 2019-2020 budget year, though payers will likely still see a slight increase as the county’s millage rate remains among the highest in the state.

    At the Sept. 9 meeting, County Council passed a resolution setting the millage rate at 181.8 mills, the same as the past year.

    The county’s $26.15 million budget, according to council documents, and associated millage is broken down four ways:

    • General Fund – $23,417,841 (160 mills)
    • Hospital/Emergency Room – $937,000 (7.8 mills)
    • County Debt Retirement – $1,247,184 (10.4 mills)
    • Library Operations – $548,108 (3.6 mills)

    Fairfield County’s millage is the fourth highest in the state, trailing only Bamberg (231.1) and Allendale (224) and Hampton (196.8), according to a 2018 report by the S.C. Association of Counties, the most recent available.

    Berkeley is the lowest at 50.5, the report says.

    With that in mind, Ridgeway resident Randy Bright said during public comments that Fairfield County is already seeing its population decline and raising property taxes would accelerate that decline.

    “I fully understand that you guys are boxed in by the plethora of mistakes made by preceding councils,” Bright said. “And I’m not asking for a reduction in the millage rate, but I implore you to hold the line. Do not raise property taxes.”

    County Administrator Jason Taylor said the current budget does hold the line on taxes, but noted what taxpayers pay this year will be “slightly higher” due to declining sales tax collections.

    Taylor said local option sales tax revenues ordinarily provides a credit to property taxes, but sales tax revenues continue to plunge.

    “That credit has come down and down and down because our retail base has eroded,” Taylor said. “As we have less retail base here, the local option sales tax credit decreases for us.”

  • RCPC OKs industrial zoning in 29016

    COLUMBIA – Richland County Planning Commissioners voted unanimously Monday afternoon to recommend that Richland County Council approve the rezoning of 483.55 acres of property adjacent to the Town of Blythewood – 456.01 of those acres would be zoned Light Industrial (LI) and 27.54 acres would be zoned General Commercial (GC). The two parcels lie in Richland County’s zoning jurisdiction and are bordered by Blythewood Road, I-77, Ashley Oaks subdivision and North Pointe Industrial Park.

    While Town Administrator Brian Cook was in attendance and was asked several questions by the commissioners, no residents from the Blythewood community attended the meeting. The rezoning request will go before county council Sept. 24.

    The two parcels are part of about 1,300 acres that the county has been seeking to rezone for a Blythewood Industrial Park. The remaining 864 acres of the proposed industrial park lie in the Town of Blythewood.

    “I feel that this (LI) rezoning request will create a positive economic impact in the area.”

    Heather Carnes
    Richland County Planning Commissioner

    While the county’s staff recommended disapproval of the rezoning Monday afternoon, County Zoning Administrator and Deputy Planning Director Geonard Price said that disapproval was based on the 2015 comprehensive plan which designates this area as neighborhood low density for future land use.

    “Within this zoning [neighborhood low density] designation, the plan discourages industrial uses that will have significant community impacts, meaning noise, exhaust or heavy traffic. The uses allowed under this (LI) zoning district includes potential users which would be incompatible with how this general area is currently developed,” Price said.

    Price pointed out that the Town of Blythewood has already rezoned (in 2015) about 678 acres of the 1,300 acres for Limited Industrial 2 (LI2) uses and is in the process of rezoning 163 more acres as LI2. Town council will have second reading on the 163 acres on Sept. 23.

    “I point that out,” Price said, “because when you compare the location of that zoning request to what has been proposed, it may make this more compatible with the surrounding area.”

    In 2015, the county persuaded the Town to rezone the 678 acres to LI2, a new zoning designation created by the Town for county officials for that property. County asked Blythewood for the rezoning at that time for an industry it said was coming to the property. After the rezoning, the industry never materialized. At a recent town meeting, county officials disclosed that the rezoning of the 678 acres was part of their five-year master plan for a Blythewood Industrial Park.

    Jeff Rubble, director of the county’s economic development office, told commissioners that since March, his office has taken all the steps to get the zoning approved so the county could sell bonds to purchase the entire 1,300 acres. He said the bond closing is set for Nov. 1.

    “The folks that would purchase the bonds told us they want to see the land zoned consistent with how it will be used. And that’s why we’re going through this rezoning process before we purchase the land.” Rubble said. “We want to build a tax base, create quality jobs. This is another big, big piece. This is the next two decades of growth. We want to reserve the front edge along Blythewood Road for mixed use development, hotels, high end restaurants, offices. We don’t want growth to happen to us. We want to do what we want to do proactively.” Rubble said. “This is a major step.”

    Asked by Commissioner Heather Carnes what makes the area particularly appropriate for this industrial use, Tiffany Harrison, also with the Richland County Economic Development office, said it is prime for industrial grade use.

    “You have full infrastructure out there. You have 15 million gallons a day of water, telecommunications infrastructure, access to the land from two interchanges,” Harrison said. ”The area is primed for growth and development. It’s the idea of setting aside property to bring in industry to create jobs, to invest in the community. That’s what we’re trying to do here.”

    “With I-77, we’ve had companies like Sony, IBM, United Technologies all come in and buy big tracts of land,” Rubble said. “The interchanges at Farrow Road, Clemson Road, Highway 21 and Blythewood Road have all been swallowed up by commercial and residential. Some of these sites were our best industrial sites but were bought by car dealerships, etc. It (industrial land) just keeps disappearing. If we don’t act, this, too, will get swallowed up.”

    In making a motion for a recommendation of approval of the rezoning requests for the two parcels, Commissioner Carnes said her reason for going against the comp plan is that this is an opportunity to create a unique, well situated industrial park for the future.

    “The comp plan just didn’t anticipate this opportunity. But now that it presents itself to us, I think we should encourage it,” Carnes said. “I feel that this rezoning request will create a positive economic impact in the area.”

    Asked by Commissioner Wallace Brown if the county’s request is compatible with what the Town of Blythewood has in mind, Cook said it is.

    “Yes, based on the town council tying it together with the covenants and restrictions and their overall idea behind this project. But we need these assurances in place with the covenants and restrictions,” Cook said.

    Richland County Council will meet Sept. 24 in council chambers at 2020 Hampton Street in Columbia, to consider the planning commission’s recommendation.

  • County industrial property to go to RCPC

    BLYTHEWOOD – Of the 1,300 acres that Richland County hopes to purchase and have rezoned for a Blythewood Industrial Park, almost 500 acres (two parcels) are in the county, not the Town of Blythewood, and the county will have jurisdiction over their re-zoning.

    The two parcels, located along Blythewood Road, west of Fairfield Electric Cooperative’s facility, will go before the Richland County planning commission Monday, Sept. 9 at 3 p.m. for a public hearing and recommendation to council.

    While the public can sign up to speak their minds about the rezoning, county staff has already made up its collective mind, recommending that the planning commission not approve the rezoning.

    Both parcels are zoned rural (RU). The County is asking for one of the parcels (456.01 acres) to be rezoned to Light Industrial (LI) and the other (27.54 acres) to be zoned for General Commercial (GC).

    The 2015 Richland County Comprehensive Plan designates the RU zoned area as Neighborhood (Low-Density) for future zoning.

    According to the staff report, the LI district is intended to accommodate wholesaling, distribution, storage, processing, light manufacturing and general commercial uses.

    “The zoning request [for the 456.01 acres] is not consistent with the objectives for non-residential development within the Neighborhood (Low-Density) future land use designation,” staff stated in its report. “Within the Neighborhood (Low Density) designation, the Comprehensive Plan recommends that industrial development with significant community impacts, i.e., noise, exhaust, odor, heavy truck traffic) is discouraged. The variety of industrial uses allowed under the LI district includes potential uses which would be incompatible with the general area as it is currently developed.”

    For these reasons, staff recommended disapproval of the requested map amendment.

    Likewise, the county’s planning staff recommended disapproval of GC for the smaller parcel, stating that it was not consistent with surrounding zoning and would constitute leapfrog development.

    Blythewood Town Council has rezoned about 600 acres from Development (D-1) zoning to Limited Industrial (LI) at Richland County’s request and passed the first of two votes to rezone the remaining 163 acres of the 1,300 acres.

    The Blythewood planning commission voted 3-3 on the recommendation to Town Council which resulted in no recommendation. Blythewood Council will take its second and final vote on September 23.

    Richland County Planning Commission will meet on Sept. 9 at 3 p.m. in Council Chambers, 2020 Hampton Street in Columbia 29202. The Commission’s recommendation will then go to County Council.

    Blythewood Town Council will meet on Sept. 23 at 7 p.m., at the Doko Manor. That vote will be the final vote for the rezoning request for the 163 acres.

  • Eight candidates file for council, mayor seat

    BLYTHEWOOD – Eight town residents have filed for elective office in the upcoming Nov. 5 municipal elections – three candidates for mayor and five candidates for two at-large town council seats. The filing period ended Tuesday at 5 p.m.

    Filing to run for the four-year term of mayor are: former Blythewood Mayor Keith Bailey and town council members Bryan S. Franklin and Malcolm P. Gordge.

    Filing to run for the two four-year term council seats are: incumbent Eddie Baughman, Barry J. Belville, planning commission chair Donald Beaton Brock, Jr., planning commissioner Sloan Jarvis Griffin, III and former planning commissioner Marcus Taylor.

    Mayoral Candidates

    Bailey, Franklin and Gordge are all residents of the Ashley Oaks neighborhood.

    Bailey, a retired Army major and former mayor of Blythewood, began his municipal government career when he applied for the planning commission in 2002.  He was elected to the town council, serving from 2004-08, and then elected mayor, serving from 2008-12. Bailey holds a Bachelor’s degree in Business Administration from Hampton University in Virginia. His wife is Marilyn Bailey, and they have three grown sons who graduated from Blythewood High School.

    Franklin, retired from the Army as a Lt. Colonel, has served three years on the planning commission and the third year as chairman. He was elected to town council two years ago. Franklin graduated from the Citadel in 1990. He is married to Desde mona Franklin, and they have three grown children and five children still at home attending Blythewood schools.

    Gordge, a retired mechanical engineer, is a native of England. Gordge has lived in Blythewood since 2004. He served on the town’s planning commission for three years beginning February, 2013 and as chairman during 2014. He was elected to town council in November of 2015.  Gordge attended Gloucestershire College of Art and Technology in the United Kingdom and was awarded a Higher National Certificate (equivalent to a Bachelor’s degree) in Mechanical Engineering. Gordge is married to Emily Gordge, and they have a grown son, Zac.

    Council Candidates

    Baughman, a Navy veteran and retired from the Columbia Fire Department, was elected to town council in 2014 to fill the unexpired term of Roger Hovis who resigned to become a Richland County Sheriff’s deputy. Baughman was re-elected to a full four-year term in 2016. He currently serves as Mayor Pro Tem. A resident of the Lake Ashley area, Baughman is married to Donna Baughman and they have two grown children.

    Belville, the assistant athletic director for the Lexington Recreation and Aging Commission, lives in Cobblestone Park. A six-year resident of Blythewood, Belville said he has no political experience. He is married to Lindsay Belville and has three children ages 8, 5 and 2.

    Brock, an investment accountant with Public Employee Benefits Authority, has served on the town’s planning commission since 2016 and currently serves as chairman. He ran for mayor in 2017. Brock holds a Masters in Accountancy from the University of South Carolina. He is married to Mary Sternick Brock, and they have three children who attend Blythewood schools.

    Griffin is emergency preparedness coordinator II for SC DHEC. He has lived in Blythewood for three years and was appointed to the planning commission in October of last year. He holds a Bachelor’s degree in Fire Emergency Management from Kaplan University and is working toward a Master’s degree in public administration.  Griffin is married to Tennille Griffin and they are expecting their first child in October.

    Taylor, a self-employed structured wire technician, served on the planning commission from 2006-18. He lives in Dawson’s Creek and studied criminal justice at South University in Columbia. Taylor is married to April and they have two grown children and one child at home.

    Candidate Forum

    The Voice will publish campaign statements from each candidate in early October. A candidate forum, hosted by The Voice newspaper, will be held at Doko Manor on Oct. 24.

    Register to Vote

    The last day to register to vote in person for this election is Saturday, Oct. 5, by 12 noon. Voter registration by mail must be postmarked no later than Monday, Oct. 7. Voter Registration online, fax or by email must be entered no later than Sunday, Oct. 6, by 11:59 pm.

    To register to vote or to obtain absentee ballots, contact the Richland County Voter Registration Office, 2020 Hampton Street, Columbia, S.C. Absentee ballots may be requested by calling the Voter Registration Office at 576-2240. In-Person absentee voting will begin Monday, Oct. 7 at 2020 Hampton Street.

    The Polls will be open from 7 a.m. until 7 p.m. The polling place for all precincts in this election – Blythewood 1, Blythewood 2, Blythewood 3, Longcreek and Ridgeway (Fairfield County) – will be at Blythewood Park, 126 Boney Road in Blythewood.

  • The deed is done – Doko Depot is sold!

    Doko Depot

    BLYTHEWOOD – Approximately seven years after council voted in August, 2012, to pursue an economic development project that was characterized as the site where a replica of the town’s original train depot would be built, it appears that the disposition of that replica, the Doko Depot spec building, which sits across from Town Hall, has been sold – finally – but not without one more hitch.

    During last week’s regular monthly meeting, council was asked to authorize an amendment to the sales ordinance to reduce the purchase price of the building.

    “I would ask that you amend the contract at the request of the purchaser to an amount of $305,000 for expenses the purchaser has incurred over the last several months due to the delay of closing,” the town’s Economic Development consultant Ed Parler said, addressing council.

    That delay was due to the discovery about two years ago that the deed to the property was not clear despite the fact that the Town had paid $34,492.80 to two legal firms – Parker Poe and Winters Law Firm – for the initial legal work on the depot project. Satisfying that deed ended up costing the town another $39,922.07 ($14,639.26 to Callison Tigh law firm and $25,000 to Margaret DuBard who previously owned a portion of the property where the Depot sits).

    The total cost of the project, $469,908.52, includes the $74,132.06 in legal fees plus $147,872.50 in miscellaneous expenses including financing costs, architectural costs and other expenses incurred by the Town in the fiscal year prior to construction.

    In an interview with The Voice on Tuesday, Mayor J. Michael Ross said he was not happy with how much the Town had to pay to satisfy the deed for the depot.

    “There’s a reason why we’re where we are,” Ross said. “I’m not sure how much of those legal expenses for the deed we can recover or if we will recover them at all,” Ross said. “But we [council] are going to discuss it in executive session at the next meeting.”

    The project was originally funded through two grants totaling $456,881 from Fairfield Electric Cooperative as part of a franchise fee credit that is awarded for economic development purposes to governments and other institutions and nonprofits. Those grants plus the reduced sale price of $305,000 will leave the town with a net profit of $144,099.98 from the project.

    “When the project began, the town committed to build a building for a specific client, a restauranteur who was going to occupy the building,” Parler told council last week. “This deal didn’t go forward, so council elected to build a spec building and put it out for purchase.”

    The building was constructed and, after myriad delays, Don Russo, owner of Freeway Music, agreed almost two years ago to purchase the building for his own business on one end and a restaurant on the other when it was discovered the deed was not clear.  

    “The town has not lost any money with this transaction,” Parler assured council. “The $456,881 used toward building the depot was grant money.”

    “I would say the end result, again, is an economic development project that started with some scars and might end with one,” Ross said. “The end result, though, is that the town benefits with close to $150,000 and the people get a great music school/performers and another local restaurant.  Not all loss!”

    After an executive session to discuss the matter, council voted unanimously to approve the reduction in sales price from $325,000 to $305,000. 

  • Council OKs first vote for industrial zoning

    County: Rezoning Must be Finalized by Late September

    BLYTHEWOOD – Richland County made another appeal to Town Council Monday night, the strongest yet, to approve the rezoning of 162 acres west of I-77 for industrial use. That effort was met by strong opposition from a room full of citizens and a couple of council members.

    The property is part of 1,349 acres the County hopes to purchase for $26 million for an industrial park. Town Council has already rezoned an adjacent 678 Blythewood acres to LI 2 at the County’s request. The remaining 509 adjacent acres are located in Richland County and are currently being rezoned for industrial use by the County. The county hopes to have the zoning of the entire 1,349 acres by late September. To pay for the purchase of the land, the County taking out a bond. Hence the hurry-up to rezone.

    “The goal is to close on the bond by Nov. 1,” Director of the County’s Economic Development office Jeff Rubble told council members Monday night. “As part of the bonding process, the folks that sell the bonds want to see that the property is zoned consistent with its intended use [prior to issuing the bond.] So that’s the reason we’re coming to you now.”

    After the better part of a two hour meeting and an hour of contentious speeches by citizens opposed for one reason or another to the rezoning process, Council voted 4 – 1 to approve first reading. While Councilmen Bryan Franklin and Malcolm Gordge addressed stipulations they would like to see in regard to the rezoning, only Franklin voted against it.  A second and final reading is set for Sept. 23.

    “We would like to have gone through a nice, slow process, with about 100 different community meetings,” Ruble said. “But they’re saying, ‘Guys, you’ve got to sign or we can’t buy.’ So that has accelerated our process. That’s why we’re here tonight,” Ruble said. Addressing the concerns of those he said he expected to oppose the rezoning during public comment time at the meeting, Ruble assured the packed audience that the county is not trying to ram something down their throats, giving examples of how the County is trying to be accommodating to the town.

    “We will set 100 foot buffers and try to route as much of the heavy traffic as we can to Community Road to the south, away from town,” Ruble said. “By the second reading, we want to have covenants and restrictions in place for you to see.  We plan to set up an Architectural Review Board (ARB) for new companies coming into the industrial park.”

     “The Town of Blythewood could have a designee on that review board. So you’re not just signing away your life now. You’re an active participant in helping us develop it,” Ruble said.

    Those concessions fell short for audience members who insisted the ARB should predominately be peopled by Blythewood folks since the 840 acres of the industrial park are in the town.

    Ruble said the county envisions walking trails, bike paths and other amenities in the park. He also promised clean, high tech manufacturing.

    “We’re trying to create that nice environment. The kind of companies we’re trying to target are the higher rated companies with high wages and technology companies,” Ruble said.

    Warning: We Walk

    “I wish we had more time to have meetings and talk. But this is a critical step that if you turn it down tonight, we walk,” Ruble warned.

    He also warned that the land could be purchased for homes, many homes that could bring higher levels of traffic.

    “We know the [property] owners are hearing every day from residential developers,” Ruble said. “There’s a lot of folks offering money. What we heard from the town was they don’t necessarily want to see more dense residential development. We proposed a solution. Let us come in. We’ll buy the property and we’ll work together to develop it in conjunction with the town,” Ruble promised.

    But former Town Councilman Tom Utroska scoffed at what he called the emotional tact.

    “I’m taken aback that politics in our country are now run by emotions instead of facts,” Utroska said. “One emotional statement was made that it would be a lot better if it was an industrial development rather than some huge, complex of homes. Well, as I recall, in D-1 you have to have 20,000 square foot lots. So you can only get two homes to an acre. I don’t like leading people down a road and influencing them by telling them something that it’s not,” Utroska said. “Also, we need some kind of Memorandum of Understanding, in writing, that says what’s going to happen with the traffic that will be generated by this LI2. We also need something in writing to address the need for a fire station.”

    Utroska said he doesn’t want to look back 20 years from now and say ‘I’m a party to this. It’s a screw up.’

    “We shouldn’t have just one member on the ARB. The preponderance of the members should be from Blythewood if it’s in Blythewood,” he said. Utroska also called for a new exit off I-77 to accommodate the industrial park. “We don’t need semis on Blythewood Road going to the LI2 area.

    “I understand their need to have this done. But we need to have some protection,” Utroska said.

    Cobblestone resident John Moore called on Council to beware of the County’s promises.

    “I’m not opposed to the development. But it can change the shape of what we are. I don’t have a lot of trust in Richland County,” Moore said.

    Rural Blythewood resident Bill Shives also warned about the effect the development would have on the town.

    “So many people moved here because of the quality of life and what it has to offer,” Shives said “Once the tax incentives for companies and factories expire, they’re gone. I don’t see where that’s a great economic value to the community.”

    The town’s planning commission voted 3-3 for the rezoning earlier this month, leaving no recommendation to council from the commission. At that meeting, Stuart Andrews, who lives in the Middlefield Lane area off Persimmon Fork Road, suggested council eliminate the more intense manufacturing uses allowed in the LI2 zoning district.

    “Let’s not just open the door to everything,” Andrews said. “Some of those allowed uses we don’t consider good neighbors – textile mills, steel fabrication, wood product manufacturing, copper recovery, sheet metal, small arms and aircraft manufacturing,” he said. 

    “You can’t have a first class project unless you have a first class process,” Andrews said. Speaking Monday night for a number of rural residents along Syrup Mill and Persimmon Fork Roads, Andrews said the group had not reached a conclusion about whether they support the project or not. It depends in large part on the process itself,

    “It’s not fair to ask the public to support something with so little understanding of it,” Andrews said. He called for a process the community could participate in. “We aren’t going to be comfortable with a product presented publicly in 30 days.”

    Andrews asked for his group and others in the community to be allowed to review the covenants of restricted documents proposed for the project.

    “We’ve reviewed those documents for similar projects and have a feel for what needs to be in them, where the opportunities are for further public protection…With the County as a developer and public body, we think more public participation should be encouraged,” Andrews said.

    Rural resident Wes Penfield called for a portion of the park to be carved out for playing fields for area youth.

    Councilman Bryan Franklin agreed.

    “We now have an opportunity here with this property right here to take 40 acres on the north part that sits right on Blythewood Road and build us the park we’ve so need for years and years,” Franklin said. “This is an opportunity for us. The public is buying this property, we’re going to rezone it, maybe, and now is an opportunity to develop that upper end, buy it at a fair dollar and put our park there. When the lights go on and stay on until 11 o’clock at night. They won’t disturb anybody because it’s in an industrial area. It only makes sense.”

    Councilman Malcolm Gordge, who is running for the mayor’s seat in the upcoming election, said Franklin expressed his sentiments perfectly.

    “I would like to ask Jeff (Ruble) if he has any difficulty at all in pursuing that vision of a recreation area and football field within that LI2 district,” Gordge asked Ruble.

    “Yeah, I don’t know. I certainly can’t commit to something tonight. I think we’ve had some conversations with staff. So we’re working toward it,” Ruble said.

    Before calling for the vote, Mayor J. Michael Ross defended the project and the County’s process, saying “we have known about this for a long time. This is no surprise. I think that when you hear some of the things that they have talked about [in executive session], I can’t imagine that you would not want that level of a technology industrial campus. It would be unbelievable for this community and for this downtown.”

    Ross agreed with Ruble that if the industrial park doesn’t come, then more homes might take the space. But he also agreed with those who spoke, that traffic is an issue, that a fire station “is a no brainer,” but hedged on the call for more Blythwoodians on the proposed LI2 Architectural Review Board.

    “That needs to be a group that would be equally divided between the County and Blythewood,” he said. “But the sports complex is the clincher. I think that’s something we need to work on hard over the next 30 days to see if it can be done.

    The next meeting is set for Sept. 23 at 7 p.m. at The Manor.