BLYTHEWOOD – The sale of the Doko Depot has been delayed since December, 2017, for myriad reasons. In September, 2018, Mayor J. Michael Ross announced a new delay – this one caused by the discovery that property title restrictions had not been disclosed to the Town in prior financing efforts with Santee-Cooper.
“We are in the process of remedying this issue,” Ross told The Voice in August.
When asked last week about the progress of the remedy, Ross said the Town has not yet reached a resolution with the owners. The Town received both parcels for community use only. Both parcels contained reversion or repurchase clauses.
Those clauses kicked in when in 2016 the town re-designated park property that include sections of the two parcels.
If a resolution cannot otherwise be reached with all parties, Ross said he is looking at other options – two of them drastic – including cutting a portion of one end of the building off or moving it a few feet off the parcels in question.
Ross said one parcel was sold on favorable terms directly to the town government for community use and could be repurchased by the owner should the parcel no longer be used for community use. Records show that parcel was owned and donated by Margaret DuBard. The other parcel was originally conveyed to the Blythewood Volunteer Fire Department by Charles W. Proctor in 1971.
Proctor reserved a reversion of title if the property ceased to be used for fire department or other community uses. When a new fire station was built on Main Street, the land was donated to the Town. But the parcel was still subject to the reversion clause, documents state.
Proctor passed away in 1976, leaving no children. His wife died shortly thereafter. The heirs, Ross said, are being contacted and a civil action will be brought to determine their interests and compensation.
“According to the documents that were signed,” Ross said, “there’s not that much money involved. It’s just a percentage of the value of the land the building sits on.”
Not knowing about the title issue at the time, Council voted in December, 2017, to authorize Ross to sign a sales contract with Columbia developer Wheeler & Wheeler to purchase the property.
Last April, Don Russo told The Voice that his company, Freeway Music, was negotiating a contract to lease part of the building from Wheeler & Wheeler.
It was also announced that a popular Lexington restaurant is planning to lease the other part of the building.
Ross said on Tuesday those plans are now on hold. He further stated that the Town and Dubard have agreed to obtain an appraisal in order to get an appropriate purchase price for Dubard’s interest.
“We’re going to lose our tenants if the sale is delayed much longer,” Ross said. “So we have to come up with a plan of how to alleviate the connection of the owners with the Depot building.
“If the title to the properties had been clear when the building was built, we wouldn’t be in this fix right now. There are a lot of things we’re looking into,” Ross said.
Still, Ross said he understands the previous property owners’ perspective.
“They wanted to see the land used as a public park or other public use. The Town took the land and commercialized it in the pursuit of economic development,” Ross explained. “Now it’s a mess. We’re trying to figure out how we get around this mess.”
While the issue was discussed in executive session Monday night, Council did not discuss or vote on it in public session.
Category: Government
-
Town releases promotional video
WINNSBORO – The town of Winnsboro will be unveiling a new video on its website this week in the hopes of putting the small town “on the map” of local tourism and shopping destinations.
According to town clerk Lorraine Abell, the two and a half-minute video was filmed by the town’s website team this summer. The budget for the filming was presented and approved by the town council in April 2018.
“The town council has been fully on board for this video since the idea was first introduced,” Abell stated.
The video includes shots of key area focal points and landmark buildings, but it seems to truly shine with the commentaries and testimonies from local business owners who declare their love for the small town alongside their ability to successfully operate a homegrown shop in its downtown district.
“We knew we wanted to highlight our local businesses and so we created a list early on of both established businesses and new shops that recently opened that we wanted to offer a spot in the video to,” Abell stated.
Every business that the town approached jumped on board enthusiastically, Abell said, with only one business having to opt out because of scheduling conflicts.
The finished product, she said, exceeded all expectations.
“We (the town) are so very pleased with the result and we believe it accurately portrays the heart of Winnsboro,” she stated.
In addition to shining a light on the blossoming downtown shopping district, the video also spotlights the town’s railroad museum and Abell said she hopes the video will encourage viewers to see that there is much to do in the small town.
“Winnsboro really is a wonderful day trip destination with many hidden gems that people who don’t live here might not be aware of,” Abell stated.
Alongside the museum, which offers train rides for visitors in addition to its expansive historical collection, the town also features walking tours through some of its historical neighborhoods. All of which, she said, the town believes deserves the right to be noticed.
“The town of Winnsboro has a rich history and we have so much to offer, we hope to really showcase that through this video and reveal to the surrounding areas that our little town is a special place worth a visit,” Abell stated.
-
Animal ordinance set for second vote
WINNSBORO – After three years of handwringing over amendments to the county’s animal cruelty law, council is expected to have the second of three required readings Monday night on the matter. The proposed changes in the law are not going to be made public, however, until the agenda is released for Monday night’s council meeting, which by law does not have to be released until 24 hours prior to the meeting, according to County Council Chairman Billy Smith.
In an interview with The Voice, Smith said the amendments to the ordinance do not outlaw tethering altogether, but they do set some minimal guidelines to better protect animals and give law enforcement more guidance when responding to complaints. He said the amendments will also address housing, sustenance, transportation and punishment for those who abuse the ordinance.
Smith said the draft ordinance is still in the hands of the county’s attorney, Tommy Morgan.
“What we’re looking at on tethering is a minimum of 12 feet on length of tether and a weight limit of not more than 15 percent of the animal’s body weight,” Smith said.
While Smith said he thinks the use of a swing chain as a tether will be outlawed outright in the ordinance, the only other proposed restriction on tethering is that the tether must be connected to a swivel.
Smith said the amendments will also address appropriate housing and sustenance for animals and will call for limits on how long an animal can be confined while being transported.
Smith said the ‘up to’ dollar amount for fines is still being tweaked.
“As drafted, the maximum fine is $500,” Smith said. I’d like to move that to $1,000, but I understand there may be some legal concern on that. I am working with our county attorney to try and better understand that.”
So would members of the Hoof and Paw Benevolent Society, who have been pressing council for years to update the 11-year-old ordinance. Smith said Hoof and Paw members had input into the ordinance.
“I think this ordinance is not going to be what we ultimately want for animals, but it is a step forward,” Hoof and Paw board member Kathy Faulk said. “I think it’s the best we can get right now. Like Billy, we would expect to see punishment up to $1,000. It must be enough to be a deterrent.”
Paula Spinale, also a member of Hoof and Paw, said she remains optimistic that the proposed ordinance will pass.
“There are so many dogs that are on chains 24/7 in this area,” Spinale said. “Somebody needs to help them.”
“County ordinances, by law, can’t penalize people to the extent state law can,” Smith said. “The state can charge with felonies, for example, and counties can only charge with misdemeanors.”
For more egregious crimes against animals, however, county officers can charge offenders under state laws such as ‘Ill Treatment of Animals.’
Council’s first reading last month of the amended ordinance was in title only, meaning council members voted on the measure without any formal discussion or making the ordinance public.
Public comments can be made on Monday evening. Speakers are allowed three minutes per person and the session is limited to 30 minutes.
County council meets at 6 p.m., Monday, Nov. 26 at the County building, 350 Columbia Road, Winnsboro.
-
County bills Voice $309 for duplicate FOI request
COLUMBIA – It will cost at least $309 just to look for records showing charges to a Richland County councilwoman’s publicly funded credit card.
Making copies will cost even more.
“Richland County has determined it will cost approximately $309.89 to search for non-exempt documents responsive to your request,” the county said in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from The Voice.
Before proceeding, the county required a 25 percent deposit.
“If you decide to proceed with your request, as written or as amended, please send an advance non-refundable deposit of $77.47 (twenty-five percent of the total cost),” the response stated. “You will be notified of the balance due which must be paid at the time of the production of documents.”
Richland County also took 12 business days to provide its response, above the legal limit, placing the county at odds with recent changes in state law designed to reduce search and copy costs.
The cost estimate is also several times higher than virtually identical documents provided to another media organization, also a violation of the law.
“Fees charged by a public body must be uniform for copies of the same record or document,” the law states.
“The public is entitled to the prompt release of how their money is being spent,” said Bill Rogers, executive director of the S.C. Press Association, of which The Voice is a member.
“To miss a deadline and then overcharge says something about [the county’s] willingness to provide public information,” Rogers said.
In 2017, the state legislature adopted Act 67, which limits government agencies to charging “reasonable fees not to exceed the actual cost of the search, retrieval, and redaction of records.”
Such fees “shall not exceed the prorated hourly salary of the lowest paid employee capable of carrying out the request,” the law continues. “The records must be furnished at the lowest possible cost to the person requesting the records.”
Rep. Bill Taylor, R-Aiken, a cosponsor of Act 67, said it’s unfortunate that some government agencies still don’t provide public records at the lowest possible cost.
“They need to do the right thing every time“,” Taylor said. “Your request seems to be reasonable since they already provide it (the records) to others.”
Richland County Interim Administrator Edward Gomeau couldn’t be reached for comment.
It also took Richland County 12 business days, not counting Veterans Day, to provide a written response to The Voice’s public information request.
State law requires no more than 10 business days. It used to be 15 business days, but Act 67 also lowered the wait time.
The Voice submitted its request to Richland County on Oct. 29, but received the records instead courtesy of The State newspaper, which shared the documents the very next day.
The Voice’s FOIA request sought virtually the same records requested by The State.
“I would like to request the same Richland County Council member financial records provided to The State newspaper for the recent story about council member spending,” the FOIA request stated.
“Since these records have already been researched, and then provided to another media outlet, my hope was to obtain these records fairly quickly,” the request continued.
-
New industry could bring 200 jobs
WINNSBORO – Hundreds of new jobs could be coming to Fairfield County in time for Christmas.
But even if third reading of the economic development deal with the unnamed company isn’t finalized until early 2019, it won’t upset too many people.
“We’re really excited about the prospect of this,” said County Council Chairman Billy Smith. “Nothing’s done until it’s done, but everything looks good. All indications are that we’re moving in a positive direction.”
Council members voted 7-0 Monday night on first reading of an ordinance authorizing the county to enter into a fee in lieu of taxes and incentive agreement with the company.
Smith said talks with the firm have been taking place for at least six months. While he said it’s still too soon to identify the industry or where it would be situated, Smith said the company is international.
More importantly, the industrial prospect is expected to create 200 jobs and make a $30 million investment in Fairfield County. Smith said many of the jobs would be well-paying.
“These jobs are going to be good, factory jobs,” Smith said. “We’re not talking about jobs that are paying $8 to $10 an hour. These are good, stable factory jobs, and that’s what we need.”
The new firm comes as welcome news for Fairfield County, which has weathered some economic setbacks in recent years.
Most notably, nuclear reactor construction on the failed VC Summer expansion project resulted in thousands of lost jobs.
That’s on top of more lost jobs when the Winnsboro Wal-Mart closed in 2016.
Fairfield County faced another scare this past summer, when Element Electronics announced plans to eliminate most of its workforce, citing tariffs the Trump Administration slapped on China, where some components of Element TVs are manufactured.
Element reversed course in September when those components were removed from Trump’s tariff list. After turning that corner, Fairfield County is on the precipice of turning another.
“We’ve kind of had a tough road, but we stuck to it,” Smith said. “This will put us in a much better position.”
-
Ridgeway council deals with losses
Sidewalks reduced from 1.7 miles to 3,375 feet
RIDGEWAY – Ridgeway Town Council gave the official green light Thursday night to a $500,000 sidewalk construction project that started out as 1.7 miles (8069 linear feet) of sidewalk throughout the town and ended up as only 3,375 linear feet of sidewalk along the north side of S.C. 34 – for the same $500,000 price.
As proposed by Councilwoman Angela Harrison two years ago, the sidewalks were designed to connect the town’s historic downtown with the new town park and playground, improve sidewalk access to 600 town residents and improve pedestrian safety along S.C 34.
Harrison initially said the new sidewalks would create a network of five miles of sidewalks along major thoroughfares and Ridgeway’s historic walking tour to promote transportation alternative tourism visits and economic growth for Ridgeway.
But she told Council members last week that the $500,000 will now cover only 3,375 linear feet of ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliant sidewalk beginning at South Means Street and continuing to Long Road.
The project was paid for with $11,400 from the Town as part of a $57,000 matching grant from Fairfield County, $43,000 from the Fairfield County Transportation Committee (CTC) and $400,000 from the South Carolina Department of Transportation’s (SCDOT) Transportation alternative Program (TAP).
The unanimous vote from council came after a lengthy discussion about the 65 percent increase in price over the two-year course of the project’s approval.
“The price has increased from $100 a square foot to $250 a square foot over the past two years because that is how long it has taken me to work the system to get this to happen,” Harrison stated.
Councilman Dan Martin questioned the validity of Harrison’s figures, saying that council received a proposal from her as recently as August that showed the town was getting 1.7 linear miles of sidewalk for $55 per linear foot.
Harrison responded that the change in the figures was because of information provided by SCDOT, but had no other explanation as to why the project was not finalized earlier at the lower cost. Harrison missed four council meetings in 2018, between May and November.
“DOT is the one who filled out the application. When those figures changed, I can’t do anything about that and when I looked at the project and looked at what the management fees are at this point those figures have changed,” Harrison said.
She said further discussion on the prices would need to be directed to SCDOT.
Other discussions focused on the responsibility for future maintenance of the sidewalks upon their completion. According to town documents, the Town of Ridgeway must assume all responsibility for maintenance for the life of the sidewalks. More than half the sidewalks being constructed are outside the town limits, making the city legally responsible for a county sidewalk.
Councilman Donald Prioleau likened the council’s discussion over the project’s details to “beating a dead horse” and urged the council towards its ultimate approval.
“A person was killed on 34. Now, the city will take care of what is within town limits. All we have to do is go back to the county and let them adjust it (the contract). I’m for this 300 percent,” Prioleau stated.
Prioleau made his motion immediately after his statements, and the vote was taken without further debate.
The council also picked up discussions on a water line upgrade for the south end of Highway 34 where residents do not have access to fire hydrants. Harrison volunteered to spearhead research on the project with the town’s public works department and is expected to bring more information to council at a future meeting.
-
Ridgeway must now pay for access to Cotton Yard
RIDGEWAY – The town council of Ridgeway learned last week that it must pay a lease fee to access the town’s own Cotton Yard it purchased earlier this year, essentially making its purchase and control over the property a hollow accomplishment.
According to information presented during the town council meeting on Nov. 8, the town received an invoice from Norfolk Southern Railroad in the amount of $320. Mayor Heath Cookendorfer told council that upon his request for further explanation of the invoice, he was told that the town is being required to enter into a leasing agreement with the railroad every year from now on to gain access to the Cotton Yard which the town purchased in May at the price of $80,000.
Whether attorney Kathleen McDaniels, who handled the closing on the property for the Town, knew at the time of the purchase that the easement was not included in the property purchase is now a hot subject of inquiry for the town.
“This is a situation where we kind of all inherited this issue, so at this point in time I am going to go to the next level to find out why this information was not a part of the (purchase) discussion,” Cookendorfer stated Thursday night.
The purchase of the .6 acre cotton yard property was a process begun in 2014 by former mayor Charlene Herring. For decades, the town was allowed unrestricted use of the cotton yard, but in 2014, Herring began corresponding with Norfolk Southern about the limitations of its use – without the approval of town council.
Through the course of 2014 through 2016, Herring contacted the railroad directly regarding a sod truck and several ‘for sale’ vehicles that parked on the property. All contact made by Herring was done against the advice of council, actions that were repeatedly condemned by the panel.
Because one such user of the property was Rufus Jones, a former political opponent of Herring’s, some openly questioned the motives of Herring’s contact with the railroad. Herring, however, said at the time that she had received questions from members of the community about the vehicles parking on the lot.
Despite warnings from then-council member Cookendorfer and others on council that Herring was “poking a sleeping giant” by making repeated contact with the railroad about the property, Herring continued.
In 2016, railroad officials responded to the town with an ultimatum; purchase or get off the property. Norfolk Southern threatened to install a fence to ensure the town could not utilize the property without purchasing it.
With only three votes from the five-member council in favor of the motion, Herring pushed forward with the purchase just weeks before the election for a new mayor.
The total cost of the property included approximately $20,000 in survey costs and legal fees which were paid by the town to McDaniels to close the deal. Cookendorfer told the Voice that his office will be drafting a letter to send to McDaniels for clarification on the purchase details.
In addition, the town has yet to receive the deed to the property, something that McDaniels had said the council would have further information on within 30 days after closing in June. Cookendorfer said his letter to McDaniels would request information on both issues.
-
Council taking first vote on new animal cruelty law
WINNSBORO – It’s been a rough past few years for Fairfield County animals, with stiff penalties for animal cruelty few and far between.
Some proposed county level ordinance changes, however, could possibly become law by the end of the year.
First reading of an ordinance revising the county’s existing animal control laws could come as early as Monday.
Deborah Richelle, president of the Hoof and Paw Benevolent Society in Blythewood, which worked with Fairfield County on the draft ordinance, said the organization remains hopeful the council adopts the ordinance by year’s end. While Richelle said the suggested improvements are minimal at this point, they are small steps toward tougher laws to protect animals in Fairfield County.
“It’s been a slow march,” Richelle said. “This would be such a great opportunity to see some of the work come to fruition.”
Council Chairman Billy Smith said the revised ordinance is still being tweaked, but noted it includes stricter guidelines relating to tethering, housing and transporting animals.
The proposed changes do not outlaw tethering altogether, but they do set some minimal guidelines that better protect animals and give law enforcement more guidance when responding to complaints, Smith said.
“It says what the length and weight of a tether needs to be so that you don’t have situations such as a Chihuahua with a 20-pound chain that’s two feet long on them, for example,” he said.
Paula Spinale, also of Hoof and Paw, has been working with the county as well. She remains optimistic that the proposed ordinance will pass, crediting Smith for helping to keep the process moving forward.
“There are so many dogs that are on chains 24/7 in this area,” Spinale said. “Somebody needs to help them, to fight for them.”
Monday night’s first reading will be in title only, meaning council members will vote on the measure without any formal discussion. Three readings are required to pass.
Public comments, however, can be made. Council agendas routinely have two public input sessions, the first devoted to agenda items in which a public hearing hasn’t been scheduled, such as the animal cruelty ordinance.
Speakers are allowed three minutes per person, and the session is limited to 30 minutes.
Hoof and Paw is hoping for strong representation at the meeting.
“We’re excited and hopeful for this what this first reading is making possible,” Richelle said. “We certainly will be there, supporting endeavors to get this passed through.
Smith said he hopes Fairfield County’s effort will inspire state lawmakers to enact stronger animal control laws.
“It [the ordinance] is telling the state, ‘we wish you would address these things,’” Smith said. “County ordinances, by law, can’t penalize people the way state law can. The state can charge with felonies, for example, and Counties can only charge with misdemeanors. If the state would address it, they could do much more to solve more of these issues.”
County Council meets at 6 p.m., Nov. 12 at the County building, 350 Columbia Road, Winnsboro 29180.
-
Bell, Gilbert win County Council seats
No surprises in school, Dist. 41 races
WINNSBORO – Even though Fairfield County logged an impressive 61.24 percent voter turnout Tuesday, there was little evidence that voters were looking for a change in the direction of the county’s governments.
All the county council and school district incumbents were returned to their seats with the exception of County Councilman Dan Ruff (District 1) who was edged out by Moses Bell with 651 votes (53.98 percent) to Ruff’s 546 votes (45.27 percent). There were nine write-in votes (.75 percent).
In county council races, the other new face to emerge from Tuesday’s election is Clarence Gilbert who replaces District 7’s County Council Chairman Billy Smith. Smith, who announced in June that he would not seek re-election after his term ends on Dec. 31, said he will be moving to Baton Rouge, LA where his wife, Rachel, is a professor at Louisiana State University.
Gilbert, with 400 votes (40.77 percent), bested two opponents – Lisa Brandenburg with 356 votes (36.16 percent) and Jana Childers with 197 votes (20.08 percent). There were 29 write-in votes (2.96 percent).
Incumbent Mikel Trapp, Sr. retained his District 3 county council seat with 618 votes (58.19 percent) over challenger Peggy Swearingen’s 439 votes (41.34 percent). There were five write-in votes (.47 percent) in that race.
Incumbent Doug Pauley, District 5, won by the largest margin of all the county council candidates with 586 votes (66.47 percent) over Matthew Seibles, Jr. with 304 votes (33.97 percent) and five write-in votes (.56 percent).
In the school board election, all four incumbents were returned to their seats.
Incumbent Sylvia Harrison, District 1, captured 796 votes (65.89 percent) to turn back her challenger, Elliott Qualls with 397 votes (32.86 percent) and 15 write-in votes (1.24 percent).
With 621 votes (56.20 percent), District 7 school board incumbent Darreyl Davis fought off opponent Herb Rentz who had 470 votes (42.53 percent). It was the second time this year Davis and Rentz had run for the seat. Davis defeated Rentz in February in a bid to serve out the last few months of Board Chairwoman Beth Reid’s term that was cut short by her death last winter. There were 14 write-in votes in the Tuesday race.
School board incumbents for District 3, Henry Miller, and District 5, Carl Jackson, were challenged only by write-ins. Miller received 773 votes (98.36 percent) with 13 write-in votes (1.65 percent), and Jackson received 756 votes (97.95 percent) with 16 write-in votes (2.05 percent).
McDaniel In the race for the District 41 House seat currently held by MaryGail Douglas who was defeated by Annie McDaniel in the June Democratic Primary, McDaniel received 5,923 votes (74.63 percent) to United Citizen’s candidate Fred Kennedy’s 1,941 votes (24.46 percent). There were 73 write-in votes (.92 percent) in the race.
Sixth Circuit Solicitor Randy Newman, Jr. was unopposed Tuesday, taking 4,563 votes (97.42), with 121 write-in votes.
Claudia Dean won the race for the Rocky Creek Watershed, with 40 votes (50.63 percent) over William Wishert with 37 votes (46.84 percent).
In uncontested county races:
County Treasurer Norma Branham, 7,975
County Auditor Peggy Hensley, 7,682
Probate Judge Pam Renwick, 7,793
Soil and Water District Commission, Eric Cathcart, 4,422
Jackson Mill Watershed and Wateree Creek Watershed – Write-in results not available at press time.
All results are unofficial until certified by the County Election Commission Friday morning.