Category: Government

WINNSBORO – After signing a Memorandum of Understanding with Providence Hospital and the County last month, the Fairfield Memorial Hospital Board of Trustees took its first steps last week toward planning for the future.

The signed MOU set in motion the construction of a new freestanding 24-hour Emergency Services facility in the County. The facility will be owned and operated by Providence Hospital and will subsequently lead to the closing of the Emergency Room and inpatient bed services at Fairfield Memorial Hospital after the new ER is up and running.

However, on the agenda last week was the Planning and Operations Committee report, which called for Board approval of funding for a consultant to help lead FMH in updating its strategic plan. Clarence Gilbert, chair of the committee, said the planning committee voted on May 4 to ask the Board to approve a planning retreat as well as a consultant to help develop a new plan.

“It is good for our organization to do an annual update of the strategic plan,” Hospital CEO Suzanne Doscher said. “We have found a person who was formerly with the SC Office of Rural Health, who can help us gather the necessary data and facilitate a retreat with the Board to draft a new strategic plan.” The consultant would only cost $2,500 plus expenses, she said.

“We have discussed this before,” Doscher continued. “We have pretty much addressed all of the aims of the (current) strategic plan…. It is time to discuss where we are going next,” she said.

This set off some discussion among Board members about needing more information before the planning retreat and how the Board would approach this new plan given the eventual closing of the inpatient hospital.

Dr. Roger Gaddy, hospital Chief of Staff, noted that Providence will have to be an integral part of the strategic planning process.

“It’s somewhat limited and out of our hands” at this point, Gaddy said.

Board trustee James McGraw asked that the Board be given more detailed information up front before they dive into a new plan. He said they needed to identify the issues before meeting to develop a new plan.

“We have to do some legwork leading up to this,” McGraw said.

Trustee Randy Bright agreed.

“I am absolutely all for the plan, but the Board needs to get a clearer vision of the issues involved and what the Board is actually going to be planning for,” Bright said. He suggested postponing the planning retreat for a few months.

In the end, the Board approved scheduling a strategic planning retreat during the August Board meeting. Gilbert said the planning committee would come up with a plan to present at the next Board meeting that would help clarify the issues a new strategic plan would have to address. Doscher said the consultant could start the process of collecting the data needed now.

The Board also approved a recommendation from its planning committee to fund two new HVAC units for the hospital, with the procurement going to the lowest bidder.

In other business, Board Chairperson Catherine Fantry thanked McGraw, who was supposed to come off the Board in May, for agreeing to remain on the Board until “further notice” from the County.

Hospital Chief Financial Officer Timothy Mitchell said the hospital’s overall financial picture showed much improvement over last year, with earnings (before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) of $99,216, compared to a $992,121 loss during the same period last year.

The hospital is also in a fairly strong cash position, Mitchell noted, with more than $1 million in cash at the current time. However, the hospital owes more than $2 million in accounts payable, and patient revenues continue to decline. The hospital posted an operating loss of $276,430 for the month of April.

Doscher also updated the Board on the Duke Endowment grant the hospital applied for to help improve the health outcomes of the community through the Fairfield Community Coordinating Council. The program is called “Healthy People, Healthy Carolinas,” and Fairfield County is one of five South Carolina communities to receive the funding, which Doscher said should start coming in around July 1.

Note: The following is the second part of an inside look at why Richland County Council agreed to a $175,000 out of court settlement with disgruntled former employee Justine Jones after Councilman Norman Jackson illegally interfered in day-to-day County operations to ensure that Jones received benefits above and beyond any other County employee. The story first appeared on Quorum.com, investigative reporter Ron Aiken’s web journal. It is reprinted in The Voice by permission.

COLUMBIA – In May 2014, Council approved the idea of creating a new Office of Small Business Opportunity (OSBO). The new OSBO office would house the SLBE program, among others, and Jackson tasked Jones specifically with conceptualizing the idea for Council with the idea that she would become director of the new department. An unintended side effect of the planned new program was that Jones technically came back under the authority of Ancheta — briefly — when it came to authorizing payment for a proposed “disparity study” Jones wanted.

When Jones sent an email to McDonald on May 22 asking for an update on her funding request for the study’s completion, he instead forwarded it to Ancheta for a response, bringing her into conversation with Jones about a project in which Jones’ sought authorization to commit $250,000 for a study, in partnership with the City of Columbia, about economic disparity. In an email dated May 23, Ancheta posed several questions to Jones about the scope and nature of the job, contract specifics, management responsibilities, vendor selection and partnership percentages, making sure Jones knew “there are currently no funds dedicated for this purpose in the FY 15 recommended budget, so we’ll need to come up with a Budget Motions List item rather quickly to get this before Council for their consideration,” Ancheta wrote. Ancheta recommended meeting the following week to discuss answers to the questions raised and for her to provide possible meeting times.

Jones was not amused in her reply to Ancheta later that Friday afternoon.

“I’ve been focused on processing applications all day, coupled with taking care of a number of other major tasks related to the program,” Jones wrote. “Therefore, I’ll have to take a closer look at your requests and respond more thoroughly over the weekend.

“I know you’re not up to speed so I’ll take this opportunity to let you know both Tony and the Council have directed me to

work directly (emphasis hers) with Tony regarding the SLBE program, the OSBO and the DS which is the reason I’ve been working with Tony over the last several months on these items. Council have specifically directed me to report to him and Tony agreed it would be best to do so as well. All other issues/items I have always addressed with the appropriate assistant and will continue to do so going forward.”

Former Richland County Administrator Tony McDonald

The following Monday, Jones forwarded that exchange to Councilwoman Julie-Ann Dixon. On Thursday, Dixon sent an email to Jackson expressing her distress that Jones “informed me she will have to speak with her current new supervisor Miss Roxanne.

“According to what Council approve was that Ms. Jones to report (sic) directly to Mr. Tony McDonald. I would like to know with six councilmember voted to have this approval change (sic) and when was it presented to the entire council.”

Jackson wasted no time in leaping to Jones defense. An hour after receiving Dixon’s email, Jackson wrote back to Dixon and copied it to McDonald.

“Ms. (Councilwoman Joyce) Dickerson and I will schedule a meeting with Mr. McDonald tomorrow,” he wrote. Jackson said he was especially worried about the situation “giving (sic) the history of Roxanne’s behavior to Ms. Jones I am cautioned and concern (sic) that this will fall back to the abuse of the past.

“I will remind Mr. McDonald of Councils (sic) will and personally my concern with Roxanne’s past history. I have been discriminated before and it’s not nice and it (sic) am sure this administration will not tolerate or turn a blind eye and allow this to happen or continue.”

Despite the fact he later would agree in writing with Jones’ termination for cause and refute her complaints of racial discrimination both during her internal grievance and in the County’s official EEOC rebuttal of Jones’ claims, in an emailed response to Jackson the same afternoon McDonald capitulated to Jackson’s accusations without a fight.

“Thank you for your confidence in me, and you are correct…this administration will absolutely not tolerate discrimination in any way, shape or form,” McDonald wrote. “Please let me know when you and Ms. Dickerson would like to meet tomorrow and I will adjust my calendar accordingly. I feel sure we can resolve any misunderstanding once we meet.

“Thanks again.”

For a longtime Richland County source familiar with internal racial politics, McDonald’s acquiescence wasn’t unusual. In fact, it was to be expected.

Read Part II in The Voice next week. Reach Aiken at (803) 200-8809. Email him at ron@quorumcolumbia.org. Follow him on Twitter @RonAiken and @QuorumColumbia and like Quorum on Facebook.

BLYTHEWOOD – When Town Council turned down a request last week from Mike Switzer, Executive Director of both the Blythewood Chamber of Commerce and the Blythewood Visitor’s Center, to double the $12,500 Economic Development Grant the Town awards the Chamber each year for operations and to grant an additional $33,000 in Accommodations Tax (A-Tax) funding for the Visitor’s Center, a Town Hall staff member, who is also a member of the Chamber, came to Switzer’s aid during a Council budget workshop on March 25, with a plan she said would allow Council to accommodate Switzer’s request.

“Chris (Keefer, Finance Director) came up with this idea to take a look at how to make use of various (state and local accommodations) funding sources for the Chamber’s request,” Town Administrator Gary Parker, Keefer’s supervisor, told Council. “Good thinking on her part,” Parker added.

Keefer explained how the A-Tax distribution is broken down – the first $25,000 goes into the Town’s General Fund. One hundred percent of the remaining balance is divided into three designations: 5 percent goes into the General Fund, 30 percent goes to an organization that promotes tourism and the remaining 65 percent can be spent on any of a number of designated uses including a Visitor’s Center.

‘So with this in mind, I tried to figure out the best way to allocate so that (the Town) can fund what the Chamber asked for,” Keefer volunteered.

Because some of the $33,000 Switzer requested would go to renovate and pay rent for the Visitor Center’s McNulty Plaza offices, which are owned by Mayor J. Michael Ross and a partner, Ross recused himself from the discussion and vote at the May 22 Council meeting. He did not, however, recuse himself during an extended discussion on the $33,000 request during the budget workshop on May 25.

Of his $33,000 request, Switzer said at the May 22 Council meeting, $5,000 is designated for a website, $750 for a computer, $3,250 for office renovations and $18,000 for a part-time employee

at a cost of $15 per hour for 20 hours plus FICA. He did not say how the remaining $6,000 would be spent. (Switzer also presented Council with the proposed Chamber and Visitor Center’s FY 2017/18 budget as shown above.)

Not taking Council’s May 22, ‘No’ for an answer, Switzer appeared before Council again at the workshop to again request an increase in the Town’s annual Economic Development Grant from $12,500 to $25,000, but reduced his $33,000 request for A-Tax funds to $18,500 which, he said, would be used for the part-time employee even though the budget he submitted to Council shows that cost as $18,000.

After some back and forth discussion, Mayor J. Michael Ross was enthusiastic.

“You have an opportunity to take this to a level it’s never been before and I recognize that. You asked for $33,000, but I think you hear us coming back to $18,500. That’s what we paid (the Historical Society for a Visitor’s Center employee last year) and we didn’t get much from it. But we believe you might just pull that out,” Ross said.

“I appreciate that,” Switzer said.

“How many people joined the Chamber since last year?” Councilman Larry Griffin asked Switzer.

“We had flat growth last year because we took on three events and built this office. It took a lot of time away from recruitment,” Switzer said.

As Council eventually moved on to other agenda items without reaching a consensus on either of Switzer’s funding requests, Utroska called the conversation back to center stage.

“Before we run away from this, are we ok with spending $5,000 for a tourism website for the Chamber? Are we amending this? “

“I don’t know anything about this,” Ross said.

“We don’t need four tourism websites,” Utroska said, referencing a comment he made on May 22, that the Town already had three websites, including one for the Manor and a new $5,000 website the Town will soon unveil.

“(As for) the $5,000 they (Chamber) want for the website,” Parker said, “Chris is thinking we could pay for that as part of advertising and promotions from the state accommodations tax fund. So, that helps us spend those dollars for a good purpose. But if Council doesn’t want to, we don’t have to.”

“If we just go buy this, then we are saying we’re going along with this,” Utroska said. “Why would we want four tourism websites for the town. It is sheer bureaucracy. I’m not saying we shouldn’t spend $5,000 out of this (A-Tax) fund, but I don’t think we should spend $20,445 here, $5,000 here and $15,000 there.

Griffin suggested the Chamber link to the Town’s website, “so you can have a bigger spread,” instead of purchasing another new website.

Utroska suggested that, instead of giving $5,000 to the Chamber for a website to advertise the Town, give the money to the Columbia Visitors Bureau to advertise Blythewood.

“We don’t want to give more money to something we don’t know what we’re going to get in return,” Utroska said. “If we’re going to spend this money, let’s spend it where we’re going to get a bigger bang for our buck.

Griffin agreed.

“I would not give the Chamber $5,000 for another website.” Griffin said.

Parker made one last stand.

“I’m thinking this ($5,000) could be delegated to staff to decide,” Parker said.

“I will be the one to decide where it will be spent, for that much money, Ross said.

The funding request for the Chamber and Visitor’s Center will be further discussed at the next budget workshop at 9 a.m., June 13, at the Manor.

The Fairfield County School Board passed first reading last week with a 5-1 vote, with one member abstaining, to provide its members with compensation of $700 per member per meeting. The school board chair would receive an extra $50 per meeting under the proposal.

Board member William Frick proposed the compensation to the board members saying it was a long time coming.

In South Carolina, school boards were, until recently, dependent on the legislature to decide whether they should be compensated for their board work.

The move comes after the board formed a compensation committee last year and presented a school board compensation bill to the legislature. That bill, after remaining in limbo for some time, was passed in both the house and senate last winter, but promptly vetoed by Governor McMaster.

The Governor’s veto has since been overridden by the legislature giving way for school boards in the state to decide upon and set their own salaries.

Frick said that, with compensation, the board members would no longer be reimbursed for district travel or for travel to district athletic events.

“Why are we doing this?” he asked.

“Because it is simply fair, and because we have not always had the fiscal stability in this district that we have now,” he said.

“We have had a surplus for several years now. Appropriate compensation for board members feeds in to that stability.”

“Where will the money come from?” he asked.

“This compensation for the board is not dependant on any revenue in existence such as the nuclear plant. No additional funds are needed for us to do this. It will come out of our budget,” Frick said.

“It is already in our $38 million budget. It will come out of money already allocated for the board. It is a reallocation of funds from advertising ex

penses, some travel expenses, legal funds, etc. This compensation will not add to the budget,” he said.

“Richland School District 1 board members get $640. Richland District 2 gets $800. Newberry gets $640 and Lancaster gets $700,” he told the board.

In further comparisons to other boards with budgets in the range of the school districts, Frick said County Council members get $15,000 a year.

“We receive $35 per meeting,” he said. “We want to maintain quality leadership and it takes compensation to do that. If you don’t pay people, they’ll go someplace else.”

When Brian Smith, 41, walked out of General Sessions Court onto Congress Street last week with no fine and no jail time after pleading guilty to animal abuse, it was the second such occurrence in that court room that week.

Katera Alexander, 28, pled guilt earlier that week to Ill Treatment to Animals after she admitted allowing her dog to starve to the point of death while chained on her front porch. It had to be euthanized two days after being rescued from the porch.

Alexander received 90 days parole and was told she can not own another dog during that 90 days. She was not fined and was not asked to pay restitution for the dog’s care and medical treatment before she was euthanized.

Three days after Alexander’s guilty plea, Smith pled guilty to Ill Treatment to Animals after shooting a dog more than a year ago on March 21, 2016,

While the incident report stated that Smith at first denied shooting the dog, he later admitted shooting it because, the report said, Smith thought the dog was one that had attacked his mother’s small dog a week earlier while it was chained in his mother’s front yard.

No evidence was presented in court that the dog Smith shot was the same dog that attacked his mother’s dog.

The incident report states that Smith said he shot the dog with bird shot, but the report states that buck shot was used to shoot the dog.

Smith was arrested, and Animal Control was dispatched to the scene to take control of the dog who survived and has since been adopted, Assistant Solicitor Riley Maxwell told Judge Grace Knie.

“I think Mr. Smith did what most people would have done in that situation,” Smith’s attorney, William Frick, told the judge. “Some may disagree. Changing mores in society sometimes comes slower to the rural areas. In Fairfield County, with 23,000 people and many of them living in a great deal of poverty, the way animals are treated may be different in different parts of society,” Frick explained. “I’m not saying that’s right or wrong, but Mr. Smith acted as most people would in that situation. He does regret it  and he wishes he had not had to do it.”

No testimony was given that the dog had been aggressive or did anything to precipitate the shooting, only that Smith thought the dog he shot was the same dog who had days earlier attached his mother’s dog.””There was a reason he did what he did,” Frick said.

While Smith’s prior record was stated to include DUI, disorderly conduct, possession of marijuana and shoplifting, Frick told the judge that Smith had never been in General Sessions Court, but that now with a criminal record in General Sessions Court, “he will suffer the consequences.”

Frick said Smith is on disability and has limited means, “so I do ask you to consider terminating probation after an appropriate period of time.”

Smith was told to pay $1,500 in restitution to the Fairfield Animal Control for the dog’s care and treatment for his injuries.

Smith was given two years of probation and the judge prohibited from owning an animal during those two years.

WINNSBORO – Fairfield County Council members signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Monday evening with Providence Health and Fairfield Memorial Hospital that sets in motion the construction of a new state of the art, freestanding, 24-hour Emergency Services facility in the County. The facility will be owned and operated by Providence Health and will subsequently lead to the closing of the Emergency Room and inpatient bed services at Fairfield Memorial Hospital after the new ER is up and running, according to the MOU.

While it was not disclosed on Monday evening where the facility will be located, Council Chairman Billy Smith said it has been a primary concern of Council that the facility be centrally located within the County.

“We have been assured in executive session tonight that it will be,” Smith said. “We had hoped to be able to let everyone know with this announcement where it will be located, but I think we’ll be able to do that soon.”

“We look forward to working with Fairfield Memorial Hospital and Fairfield County to create a strong, viable model that preserves access to important healthcare services and meets the long-term needs of the community,” Providence Health Market CEO Scott Campbell said in a meeting with FMH board members prior to separate votes taken Monday evening on the MOU by that board and County Council.

Smith said the new facility is expected to take two to four months to design, then about a year to construct.

In addition to signing the MOU, Council also passed a Resolution stating that it would continue to financially support FMH’s operations for up to 18 months or until the new Providence emergency facility is open for business. That support will be in an amount not less than Council’s currently budgeted funding levels of $1.2 million per year

The Resolution also stated that the County will give Providence Hospital, LLC $1 million each year for 10 years.

“Despite the best efforts of FMH, its current model is not sustainable for the long term. Because of this, FMH, the County and Providence Health are partnering through this memorandum to ensure that our County’s residents continue to have access to critical 24-hour ER services. We feel the best interests of our citizens are best met by our entering into this agreement,” Smith said.

BLYTHEWOOD – Mike Switzer, Executive Director of both the Blythewood Chamber of Commerce and Blythewood Visitor Center, requested $70,750 from the town government on behalf of both of the organizations during Monday night’s Blythewood Town Council meeting. But all of Switzer’s wishes did not come true. Council basically ignored $12,000 of that amount that represented an increase in what the Town already gives the Chamber each year, and it said ‘No,’ outright to a request for $33,000 from the Town’s Accommodation Tax funds..

Switzer, along with Chamber of Commerce chairwoman Belinda Portnall, first requested a $25,000 Economic Development Grant, a significant increase over the $12,500 that Council allocated the Chamber last year. Switzer told Council the $25,000 would represent nearly a quarter of the Chamber’s total budget which is almost $100,000.

Funding, Switzer said, would go towards renovations for the new office in McNulty Shopping Plaza, as well as for rent, which the Chamber has not had to pay during the last year.

“The increase that we’re asking for this year is to cover our startup costs which were significant, about $7,000 in renovations,” Switzer said. “Our increase this year is representing that amount that we’ve had to spend out of our reserve as well as the fact that we now have rent which we didn’t have before.”

Councilman Tom Utroska felt he needed more time and wanted to see the Chamber’s budget and go over the financial information before making his decision.

“We’ve been approached about this year after year, Mike, for additional funds for the chamber and we’ve increased it since I’ve been on the council. I’d like to see what your budget is so I can understand where this money’s being spent,” Ustroka said.

No action was taken, and the council moved on.

When Council considered the recommendations from the A-Tax committee later in the meeting for dollar awards for events, Switzer requested $4,000 for a Total Solar Eclipse event the Chamber is organizing on August, 21. Half of the funds will go to advertising, including 5,000 bags emblazoned with the Blythewood logo and special eclipse viewing glasses and brochures, while the other 50 percent of funds will go into additional marketing items such as social media campaigns, Switzer said.

The motion to grant the $4,000 for the Total Solar Eclipse event passed unopposed.

Next, the Chamber requested $8,750 in A-TAX assistance to fund this year’s Big Grab event, including rental of Doko Park, advertising, temporary restrooms, Sheriff Deputies, staff and supplies.

“The Big Grab is pretty well attended. Last year we funded it per his request $5,000. This year he’s asking for more,” the Director of Doko Manor Steve Hasterok said. “Some more sophisticated marketing and also to pay for the rental on the park for a little bit on Thursday, Friday and Saturday. So there is an increase but some of that money will come back to the town.”

The motion passed 4-1, with Utroska being the only nay vote.

Acting as the director of the Blythewood Visitor Center, Switzer asked for $33,000 from the A-Tax funds. That represents a $15,000 increase from the $18,000 that was allocated for the Visitor’s Center in the past.

“So as a percentage of what we’re asking for as an investment into the interests of the town’s business community is 10 percent of just the annual revenues that comes in the H- and A-Tax,” Switzer said.

“We did present our ideas (for the $33,000) to the A-Tax Committee and they were thrilled! It was an overwhelming response from them that we utilize our services in this regard which in turn is going to help those businesses through the Visitors’ Center,” Portnall told Council.

Switzer asked for $9,000 upfront, and said the Visitor’s Center would be happy to bill the Town for the remaining $24,000. The $9,000 would go towards start-up costs for a $5,000 website, a $750 computer and the remaining $3,250 would cover renovation costs.

Switzer said the additional $24,000 would go to hiring a new employee for the Visitor’s Center.

“I don’t feel comfortable with it this evening to take into account all the information that you’ve given us and the impacts on the website we are planning on rolling out ourselves,” Gordge said, “There are just a lot of issues that I think we need more time to discuss and understand.”

Meanwhile, Councilman Utroska made his concerns clear.

“I cannot agree to this proposal. I have quite a few concerns. One is that we’re going to spend $5,000 on web-hosting when we got a brand new town website that we say is great, and you (Hasterock) have a good website (for The Manor), so now we’re going to have three websites that are doing basically the same thing,” Utroska said. “And I think the numbers for your quarter-share is way out of line. Being a businessman I would never have agreed to a joint-venture with somebody else for 25 percent. It’s just goofy to me.”

Councilman Larry Griffin then made a motion to table the proposal until the next Council meeting, but the vote was deadlocked at 2-2 with Griffin and Gordge voting to table it, while Utroska and Baughman voted against. The motion failed.

Then, Utroska made the motion to not approve the item at all. The vote passed 3-1 with only Larry Griffin voted against.

BLYTHEWOOD – The Blythewood Town Council passed first reading Monday evening on an ordinance that would allow Council to down-zone two R-5 parcels to D-1 and 28 R-12 parcels to D-1.

The ordinance was first proposed to help slow Blythewood’s rapid growth and the density and infrastructure issues that trail that growth, according to Town Administrator Gary Parker.

“The reason this is on the agenda and a subject of great interest is the growth that has taken place in the town and the concern about the density of that growth,” Parker said. “That prompted the initiation of an amendment to the ordinance to address that.”

The Planning Commission recommended approval of the ordinance to Town Council during their May 1 meeting, with the exception of 150 acres of the undeveloped phases in Abney Hills Estates.

“We followed up with a written description of the select parcels that might be considered for down-zoning as an alternative to deleting those districts,” Town Planning Consultant Michael Criss said. “We took that list to the planning commission, they considered it carefully and agreed with all but the last, the 31st parcel that

is the undeveloped portion of Abney Hills Estate.”

Essex Homes, the Abney Hills developer, has completed phase one of Abney Hills Estates, and construction on phase two has begun.

It was determined by the Planning Commission that down-zoning Abney Hills Estates would pull the rug out from under Essex Homes. Down-zoning the properties would raise the price of dues required by the Homeowner’s Association and could have potentially created legal ramifications for the Town Council and the Commission, Criss told Council.

“It seems to me that rocking the boat on that particular development would give a little bit of a bad taste. Probably would get us in a little bit of legal trouble, and I don’t really feel like fighting a lawsuit from a volunteer commission position,” Commissioner Donald Brock said during the May 1 Planning Commission meeting. “So I favor exempting your property from the down-zoning, kind of with the understanding that you will build in good faith.”

There were no R-8 zoning districts such as Oakhurst and Cambridge Point included in the ordinance because they have all been developed, or developers have already gotten permission to begin development. R-12 districts that are not at least 20,000 square feet were also excluded, because down-zoning those areas would result in nonconforming lots, Criss said.

“Nonconforming lots and nonconforming structures can have problems for the private sector as well as the public sector,” Criss said. “They can interfere with your title insurance, and your mortgage lender may be concerned.”

First reading passed unopposed and will be followed by a public hearing and a second reading at Council’s June 26 meeting.