Category: Government

BLYTHEWOOD – When land at the corner of Syrup Mill Road and Blythewood Road began to be disturbed during the first week of December, The Voice received several inquiries about it from the community.

A town hall official verified in a phone conversation on Dec. 6 that the property is in the Town Center zoning district, that the town hall knew about the project, and that it was a “temporary natural gas stabilization site.”

Later that day, Town Administrator Carroll Williamson sent an email to The Voice stating that was not the case, that the newspaper reporter had misunderstood.

But a citizen had already provided The Voice with an email from a town official dated Dec. 5, with quotes from Dominion Energy confirming the project was “a compressed natural gas regulator station.”

“Basically it’s here for the winter to provide natural gas. Once winter is over, the property will be returned to its original site,” the quote in the email stated.

Finding out who approved/permitted the project was more difficult.

Williamson posted a stop-work order later on Tuesday, and called a meeting with Dominion for the next afternoon, Wednesday, Dec. 7, for about 1:30. After the meeting, work resumed later that day.

The property where the project is located is owned by Blythewood businessman Larry Sharpe, who told The Voice he has a one-year contract with Dominion to lease the land, and that Dominion had handled all the permitting. Sharpe said he had not been involved with any approvals.

During a special called town council meeting [on a separate issue] on Friday, Dec. 8, Williamson was asked by Councilman Brock for an update on the issue.

Williamson said that when he pulled up to the site [Dec. 6.] he knew nothing about what was going on and was presented with an approved plan for the work.

“While the project was land disturbance, it also changed the use of the land,” he said.

“Richland County approves all land disturbance/storm water permits,” Williamson said. “Richland County thought the Town was aware of the project, but they are not necessarily obligated to notify us.  So they approved it.

“So I talked with Dominion. In our ordinance is a temporary non-conforming use that the town administrator can authorize as long as it meets some benefit or upgrades the non-conforming use.

“So I wrote a non-conforming permit that says on May 31, 2022, this is over and has to be cleaned up,” Williamson said. “It was miscommunication on a type of project we don’t often see. Dominion was very apologetic.”

The project, according to Todd Feaster, a realtor with Utility Land Service, is intended to provide extra natural gas capacity for Cobblestone residents and others in the area who are served by Dominion until a permanent pipeline can be constructed.

“There have been so many new homes built in the area in a short time that the demand for natural gas has increased to the point that there is not enough capacity for them all,” Feaster said.

“An on-site tractor trailer on wheels will house a 50-foot-long tank of natural gas that will be hooked into Cobblestone’s natural gas system to provide additional capacity through this winter. When the tank runs empty, another one will be brought in,” he said.

 “The tractor trailers will leave as soon as winter is over,” Feaster said. “Options in the lease, however, allow the property to be used for two more winters if necessary.”

A member of the Cobblestone HOA board-elect told The Voice that the temporary tanks were originally to be situated on a lot in Cobblestone but were, for some reason, moved to Blythewood Road.

“It may be an eyesore for a while,” he said, “but it’s for the good of the community.”

WINNSBORO – A Fairfield County survey found county workers feel like county administration and council members treat them like second-class citizens.

Many were content with the nature of their job and living in Fairfield, but also blamed the current council majority for low employee morale.

Low pay and disdain for county leadership were common themes in the report.

One employee praised their boss, but lashed out at Fairfield County Council, accusing them of cronyism and taxpayer waste.

“I believe that my [redacted] has the County and its people in his best interest,” the employee wrote. “He is being hamstrung by County Counsel [sic] and is dead-set on making sure he DOES NOT succeed.”

Another employee said the current council majority’s prioritizing rec center construction over boosting employee pay “leaves a pretty sour taste in employees’ mouths.

“The fact that some council members see more fit to build unnecessary rec centers and not bat an eye that employees are living paycheck to paycheck is asinine,” the employee wrote.

Delayed for months, the survey was finally released this week following a story in The Voice and pressure from Councilman Clarence Gilbert, who initially requested the survey.

A table listing responses classifies employees with complaints as “detractors.” Respondents complimentary of the county are called “promoters,” while a handful are described as “passive.”

At least 43 comments from so-called “detractors” cited low pay and/or lack of pay raises as a major grievance.

During the budget process this past spring, council members said the county couldn’t afford pay raises. Council members eventually voted to increase pay and give bonuses days before the November general election.

Read more about this story in the November 23 edition of The Voice.

BLYTHEWOOD – Great Southern Homes’ representative Ned Purcell appeared before the Blythewood Board of Architectural Review Monday night to request approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness for 104 townhouses to be constructed at 158 Langford Road across from Town Hall.

The 12.55-acre parcel is zoned for the project that will consist of 1,500 to 1,700 square foot single family attached townhomes.

The meeting was live streamed for the public, but was not audible at times on the live stream or for the audience. The live stream is available on the town’s website (townofblythewoodsc.gov).

The presenter, after a few minutes of being heard plainly at the podium mic, stepped about eight feet away from his microphone, and the remaining 45 minutes of his presentation were not audible.

Purcell explained that there would be both two-unit and five-unit town homes that will be connected by traditional roof lines.

“The units have no yards,” Purcell said, “but we’re thinking about adding 8-foot privacy fencing. We try to accommodate people with animals,” he said. “We really have to design with pets in mind these days.”

The Town’s architectural consultant, Ralph Walden, pointed out that the shared roof with multiple height levels gives the townhouses a lot of character.

The board members had lots of questions about the roof drip line, overhangs, parking spaces, sidewalks, windows and more. They had so many concerns that Chairman Jim McLean questioned whether the board should deny the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness altogether or defer it to a later time.

“Do you want to deny them or allow them to go forward while they get things together and we can give them guidance?” McLean asked the board.

The motion was made to defer the issue and for Purcell to come back to the board later with more details regarding the following*:

• 24-inch foundation to be shown around the building
• Overhangs everywhere
• Overflow parking through the use of grass pavers
• Walkway to front door
• Proposal for fencing to be submitted for approval
• Roof
• Details on pecan area including entry sign as well as area shown in walkway surrounding it.
• Concrete walkway around units
• Door style
• The board voted unanimously to pass the motion.

*The motion was not entirely audible and was not available from town hall at press time, so it  may not be entirely accurate as presented in this story.

WINNSBORO – Winnsboro town officials hope revisions to its public nuisance ordinance will speed up compliance and reduce lengthy litigation.

On Sept. 20, Winnsboro Town Council approved first reading of amendments to the town’s property maintenance and nuisance ordinance.

The vote was unanimous. A public hearing and final reading is tentatively planned for Oct. 18.

Once approved, the ordinance would allow the Town of Winnsboro to bill non-compliant properties. If a property owner fails to pay, the town can attach a lien on the property to recoup abatement costs.

Town Manager Jason Taylor said public safety was the primary driving force behind the ordinance.

“The main focus is just making sure that we have the ability to clean our community up,” Taylor said. “We want our community to be safe. If you have a property that’s derelict, somebody might get hurt.”

Other goals are to improve property values and make Winnsboro more conducive to economic development, Taylor added.

“Derelict property values are hurting your property value,” he said. “It’s hurting everybody, dragging their property values down.”

Taylor estimated the typical public nuisance civil case takes around two years to resolve. Meantime, as cases languish in the legal system, it further complicates economic development efforts.

“It’s about community pride and marketing,” Taylor said. “And there’s economic development. If somebody comes to your community and sees a bunch of derelict houses or properties that are overgrown, they’re less likely to want to invest in your community.”

Winnsboro drew inspiration for the ordinance from the Municipal Association of South Carolina. The MASC has been briefing its members about provisions in state law that allow municipalities to recover costs associated with code enforcement.

Taylor said the town always prefers good faith negotiations with property owners.

But when faced with unresponsive property owners, Taylor said the town would be able to proceed with more direct abatement measures, including billing property owners for any work the town performs to fix non-compliant properties. Unpaid bills would be attached to liens on the property.

The Winnsboro ordinance also removes provisions for criminal penalties, which Taylor said further expedites enforcement.

Criminal prosecution virtually ensures going to court. It also imposes additional costs on taxpayers since the town would have to pay for a defendant’s attorney if he or she cannot afford one.

“If you go the criminal route that puts you back in the court system,” Taylor said. “This new law allows us to not have to bear the burden of going to court or provide an attorney for the person.”

WINNSBORO – A 22-acre private “Teacher Village” housing development slated to be built behind Fairfield Central High School could have much its county property taxes waived for up to 30 years, if council passes the Special Source Revenue Credit proposed by Chairman Moses Bell.

On Monday night, the council members approved first reading of the deal, though no discussion was allowed and the details of the ordinance were not revealed to the public.

Council members voted 5-2, with Councilmen Doug Pauley and Clarence Gilbert opposing. Two more readings are required before the ordinance becomes official.

If finalized, the deal could grant sweeping tax breaks for the proposed Teacher’s Village which will be owned by the Fairfield County School District Education Foundation, a non-profit the school district created to facilitate construction of the Teacher Village.

Council members did not discuss the deal Monday night. Council Chairman Moses Bell frequently announces on first readings that discussion is not allowed.

Councilman Doug Pauley thought council discussions during first reading on this ordinance would be appropriate.

“Is there any kind of statutory law that prohibits discussion at first reading?” Pauley asked.

Bell said the council traditionally approves first reading in title only, without deliberation.

“We are going by standard practice of this council for as long as I’ve been on council,” Bell said. “It’s always been, when we have first reading, it is by title only and no discussion.”

Bell said he’d be willing to discuss allowing discussion during future first readings of ordinances.

Ordinance 797 authorizes a Special Source Revenue Credit Agreement (contract) between Fairfield County and the Foundation to enable the county to waive property taxes for the Teacher Village. The property would receive the benefits of a multi-county industrial or business park designation.

SSRC’s are usually issued in conjunction with Fee-In-Lieu-of agreements to give tax relieve to the very high 10-1/2% state assessment on industrial property. The Teacher Village is not an industry and might only be assessed at 4% or 5%, not 10.5%.

At least one speaker and Pauley questioned why the county would be extending tax relief to a private housing development since the county is cutting back on its services and is so short on funds that it is cutting funding to all county departments by 10 percent, And there are other cutbacks as well.

Pauley noted the county has already earmarked $2.2 million in Dominion settlement money to build the Teacher Village. The school district donated the land.

“It’s wrong,” Pauley said, “to award more money to such a contentious project considering the county recently ordered departments to cut their budgets by 10 percent.

“We are electing to forgive taxes for the Teacher village when $2.2 million of taxpayer money was supposed to fund this project,” he continued. “We all want teachers in Fairfield County, but we also have to take care of citizens and employees.”

Randy Bright, a Ridgeway resident, voiced several concerns and objections. A lack of transparency stood chief among them.

“Are we putting plans in place or are we information from citizens about this teacher village,” he asked. “I have not read anywhere that the Town of Winnsboro has approved a site plan for the Teacher Village. If they have not, how can we go forward with this?”

Bright also questioned why the Teacher Village needs special revenue tax credits in the first place.

“The land was free from the school district, and the building is being paid for by Dominion,” he said.

“This ordinance needs to be tabled. I’m against willy-nilly plans to give them more money than they need.”

If the deal is approved, the Foundation would be exempt from paying property taxes on this property and the move would set the project up for a fee in lieu of taxes as well.

After Gorelick Brothers withdrew as lead developer in 2019, the Teacher Village lingered in limbo until March of this year, when the Foundation announced the groundbreaking of the project.

Teacher Village supporters think affordable housing is vital in luring and retaining quality teachers.

Opponents, however, have raised concerns about the cost, an apparent lack of demand and whether teacher housing will actually translate into improved student achievement.

Despite a reported $25,000 in total annual per pupil revenue in the Fairfield County School District, less than half of students met or exceeded state benchmarks, according to 2021 school report card data.

FAIRFIELD COUNTY – “It’s been about 20 years since my dad gave an easement across our property for access to a neighboring property.

“My father, Jessie Douglas, didn’t charge for the easement, and he had to do some talking to get all the family members to sign the paperwork,” said Margaret Branham. “But he said it was the neighborly thing to do and he was happy to help out. Everybody signed.”

Sometime around the middle of April this year, trucks and logging equipment rolled along that same easement on her family’s land to access the neighboring 400 acre property, bordered by Gum Springs Road and Devil’s Race Track Road, where they clear-cut much of the land up to the property lines of some of those same family members who signed documents to give that easement 20 years earlier.

 “About two weeks after the clearing was done,” Branham said, “a sign was posted for a rezoning request for the 400 acres where the trees were cut. The request was for county council to vote to change the zoning from RD-1 (Rural Residential District) property to I-1 (Industrial District).

Margaret said it’s a bitter pill for her and her husband Mike to swallow that if the requested rezoning goes through, industry could be moving next door to their family’s land, and now there would be no buffer left to hide it.

“If we had known that was coming, we might have had a chance to try to negotiate for wide tree buffers so, if industry moves next door to us, we would not have to look at it or use our own land to plant tree buffers. But we weren’t given the common courtesy of that chance.”

According to a county staff report, the properties surrounding the neighboring 400 acres are zoned to the west: Rural Residential District (RD-1) and to the east, north and south: Rural Residential (RD-1), Industrial (I-1) and Business (B-2).

While the County Planning Commission voted unanimously against recommending the rezoning of the 400 acres, that vote fell on deaf ears for the most part. Council has since passed two of three required readings and held a public hearing. The neighbors whose properties circle the 400 acre property that is seeking rezoning came to those meetings and spoke out, pleading for council not to vote for the rezoning which they fear will destroy their peaceful, rural way of life.

Every vote cast was to approve the rezoning except for two –Councilmen Douglas Pauley and Clarence Gilbert voted against.

The third and final vote is set for Monday night, July 11. (see meeting details below.)

Zachariah Willoughby, project manager for the Fairfield County Economic Development office told The Voice Tuesday that, although much of the buffer area bordering neighboring properties has already been clear cut, when a property is rezoned industrial, the county requires nine-foot buffer zones and some up-scale landscaping.

Asked if that would be enough to shield surrounding properties from the industrial facilities, Willoughby said the county can place some additional buffer restrictions over and above what the codes require.

“Our goal would be so that the residents wouldn’t be able to see the industrial site, If it’s a deal that comes through our office, that the county is working on, we can require the industry to provide some additional lower growth and vegetation buffering,” Willoughby said.

That information has not so far been offered by members of council, and the neighboring property owner has not been present at any of the meetings concerning the rezoning of the property.

“We’re going to put a presentation together to show buffers that we would require for development,” Willoughby said. But he said he isn’t sure whether that additional buffering requirement would be included in next Monday’s vote or later when the industry acquires the property.

“We’ll be looking at this on Monday,” he said.

“At this point,” Margaret Branham told The Voice, “we’ve all fought hard, and I’m not giving up. But I don’t trust, at this point, that council is going to listen to us. I think they have their minds made up.

“But there is something I hope,” Margaret Branham said. “I hope the county provides privacy for my family’s land and my neighbors’ properties, a wide enough buffering, at least 100 feet, so that we won’t have to live with the industry when it comes.”

The final vote on the rezoning will be taken on July 11, in council chambers at the new county government complex, 350 Walnut Street in Winnsboro. The public will be allowed to address the rezoning request  at the beginning of the meeting.