WINNSBORO – Shortly after the Fairfield County School Board
passed a policy prohibiting school board members from communicating
electronically during board meetings, one member took to his cell phone.
Board chairman William Frick didn’t appear to take notice or
say anything as he briefed the board on some updates and announcements. A
routine vote to select a delegate for an upcoming conference followed.
It was an ironic sequence of events given that Frick, so
annoyed that board member Paula Hartman snapped a photo during a meeting two
months earlier, crafted a board policy meant to suppress electronic device communications.
That policy (BEDL) passed final reading by a 6-1 vote at the
Sept. 17 meeting. Hartman voted in opposition.
“This is against Freedom of Information and our rights,”
Hartman said.
Policy BEDL doesn’t disallow using electronic devices altogether,
but it does bar board members from communicating with each other or audience
members from the dais. It is not clear what actions if any can be taken
against elected officials for breaking the new rule.
The policy originated from an unsubstantiated claim Frick
made in the days that followed the August board meeting.
In an email obtained by The Voice, Frick wrote — without
providing any factual evidence for his claim — that “some board members are
engaging in electronic communication with members of the public, including
media,” during public meetings.
“This conduct will no longer be tolerated,” the email
states. “Such behavior is disruptive, inappropriate and likely violates public
participation in meetings and receiving information requests from the media.”
Frick pushed for the police because he said the use of
electronic devices has become a distraction, although, videos of past board
meetings do not bear that out. There have not been any electronic
communications between The Voice and board members, and Frick has not sought to
verify his claims.
Also on Sept. 17, the board passed second reading on
amendments to policy BEDB, which now compels board trustees to present any questions
about an agenda item to the superintendent before the meeting.
“Requests for additional information shall be specific and
relevant to the topics on the agenda,” the revised policy states. “Onerous
requests or ‘fishing expeditions’ shall be denied.”
Hartman repeated her prior objections to both policies,
saying they violate free speech and are inviting a lawsuit.
She also said both policies target her specifically. Hartman
often casts the lone dissenting vote on a board that otherwise typically votes
in lockstep.
Under questioning from Hartman, Frick acknowledged he hadn’t
consulted the board’s attorney regarding the policy revision. She asked a
similar question at first reading in August.
No other board member spoke about the policies.
“I want to remind everybody this is against our First
Amendment rights and the South Carolina Freedom of Information Act,” Hartman
said before last week’s vote. “If there’s a lawsuit, I don’t want to be
involved in it.”
Jay Bender, an attorney with the S.C. Press Association, of
which The Voice is a member, has said policy BEDB as written likely violates
First Amendment protections.
“I cannot imagine how that [policy] would be legitimate.
That’s a classic First Amendment problem,” Bender said. “It’s the substance of
the communication that the government wants to block here, which makes it
suspect constitutionally.”
Hartman added that the minutes incorrectly stated she
abstained from voting on both policies at the August meeting. She voted against
them at both readings.
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.”
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.
FAIRFIELD COUNTY – Vulcan Materials announced last week that
it plans to build an $18M facility in Fairfield County just north of the
county’s 1,500-acre megasite – just south of State Road 41 between I-77 and U
S. Route 21.
In a statement released on Sept. 18, Scott Burnham said
Vulcan expects to hire 15 new full-time employees with a payroll and benefits
of $1.3M.
“Fairfield County should reap significant tax revenue from
the facility and equipment.” said Ty Davenport, the Director of Economic Development
for Fairfield County.
Vulcan operates 16 facilities in the state, including its
Blair Quarry in Fairfield County and Columbia and Dreyfus quarries in Richland
County. It will open another quarry in Lexington latter this fall.
“The Fairfield Quarry will growth and will supply building
materials for nearby homes, businesses and infrastructure while creating
good-paying jobs and generating needed revenue,” Elliott Botzis, vice president
and general manager for Vulcan Materials in S.C., said.
Of its 909.7 acres along I-77, officials say only 127.7 (14
percent) will be mined. Approximately 86 percent of the site will remain
unmined, including setbacks, buffers, natural landscape and wildlife habitat
areas.
Vulcan is the nation’s largest producer of ready-mix
concrete and asphalt, according to the statement.
The company is in the process of applying for the necessary
permits from Fairfield County and the Department of Health and Environmental
Control (DHEC).
MYRTLE BEACH, SC – Sixth Circuit Deputy Public Defender
William Frick was named by his peers on Monday as the 2019 South Carolina
Public Defender of the Year at the South Carolina Public Defender Association
Annual Conference in Myrtle Beach.
Sixth Circuit Chief Public Defender, Michael Lifsey, right, presents award to Sixth Circuit Deputy Public Defender William Frick, of Winnsboro.
Frick has served as Deputy Public Defender for the Sixth
Circuit since the office was established in 2009. In that capacity, he has represented criminal
defendants in Chester, Lancaster and Fairfield counties, the counties that make
up the Sixth Judicial Circuit.
“I am so happy for William. This honor is well deserved,”
said Michael H. Lifsey, Chief Public Defender for the Sixth Circuit. “In addition to handling some of the most
difficult cases in our office, William has helped manage our office as it has
grown from five part time lawyers in early 2009 to a staff of ten full time
attorneys plus support staff today,” Lifsey said. “We now have full time staff
and offices open in the courthouses of Chester, Lancaster, and Fairfield
counties and we fight every day to make sure the constitutional rights of our
citizens are protected. We could not do that without William’s leadership.”
A resident of Winnsboro, Frick is a 1993 graduate of
Fairfield Central High School and received his bachelor’s degree and Master of
International Business degree from the University of South Carolina. He is a 2000 graduate of the University of
South Carolina School of Law. Frick and
his wife Elena live in Winnsboro with their daughter. In addition to his duties as a public
defender, Frick also serves as the Chairman of the Fairfield County School
Board of Trustees.
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.”
$250 Reward Offered for Conviction of Anyone Responsible
WINNSBORO – Around noon on Sept. 11, a Fairfield County
Animal Control officer picked up a young male Pit Bull stray with wounds so
gruesome that after he was brought into the shelter and photographed, the staff
felt the need to attach warnings ‘before opening’ on some of the photos they
posted on the shelter’s Facebook page.
Pepper was found with a two-inch deep gash around his neck caused by an embedded tether.
Those photos showed a gaping wound on the dog’s neck, a gash
about two inches deep, completely circling the neck. A tether (cord) around his
neck had cut through the flesh and was embedded in his neck.
“The cord was so tight around the dog’s neck we could only see it from underneath his chin [where the ends of the knotted tie were hanging down] near his jugular,” Samira Yaghi, a shelter volunteer, posted on the shelter’s Facebook page along with several horrific photos of the dog’s injuries. “Sliced through like a knife, the cord was so tight and so far in, the staff could not remove it. We could smell the infection from a distance,” Yaghi added.
In addition, the dog’s neck was swollen with fluid from the
restricted circulation caused by the cord, according to the veterinarian
report.
Unable to extract the cord, the shelter staff transported
the dog they named Pepper to Blythewood Animal Hospital for emergency surgery.
Within hours, shelter volunteers had raised enough funds
over social media to pay for the life-saving surgery to remove the cord.
At the animal hospital, doctors discovered two other lesser
cuts circling the dog’s neck consistent with the beginning of other cords or
objects embedding into the neck according to vet reports.
A veterinarian at Blythewood Animal Hospital removes the cord embedded two inches deep in Pepper’s neck.
The tether could have been embedded for up to three months,
the report stated.
And there were other problems.
Malnourished and infested with heartworms, Pepper needs more
donations for heartworm treatment.
The dog was reported to the shelter as a stray after he
reportedly roamed onto someone’s property in the Greenbrier area.
Members of the Hoof and Paw Benevolent Society say someone
in the community must know the dog and are offering a $250 reward for
information leading to the arrest and conviction of the person(s) responsible
for the dog’s condition.
“We are hopeful that by offering this reward that someone
will recognize this dog and come forward,” Kathy Faulk, a Hoof and Paw board
member said. “When you see something like this, say something so we can all put
an end to animal abuse and neglect.”
For now, Pepper remains hospitalized and will continue on
extended use of antibiotics and pain meds with consistent cleaning, Bob Innes,
Director of Fairfield Animal Control, said.
“What this poor dog has endured, for who knows how long is
deplorable,” Innes said.
“Despite his painful injuries when Pepper was brought in, he
was very sweet, wagging his tail, soaking in the kindness and care he was
receiving.” Yaghi said. “We would like to thank everyone who donated toward his
medical care. That support is the only way we can tend to these emergencies
efficiently and immediately.”
Anyone wishing to provide information about the person(s)
who neglected or abused Pepper, can contact the Fairfield County Sheriff’s
office at 803-635-4141.
To donate to Pepper’s heartworm treatment, go to:
https://www.paypal.me/friendsoffairfield.
Hoof and Paw Benevolent Society is offering a $250 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of anyone responsible for Pepper’s injuries.
BLYTHEWOOD – The Voice newspaper will host the 2019
Blythewood Candidate Forum at Doko Manor on Thursday, Oct. 24 at 6:30 p.m. The
forum will feature five candidates for town council and three for mayor.
In a departure from formats used for candidate forums in
years past, this year’s forum will follow a town hall format that will include
questions for candidates submitted by members of the audience who will be
identified when their questions are asked.
Council and mayoral candidates answer questions in two
rounds. Candidates for council will answer questions first and, after a
refreshment break, mayoral candidates will take the stage.
An added feature this year will be the awarding of six door
prizes, each in the amount of $100 for a specific item. Three will be awarded
prior to the council candidates’ session and three will be awarded prior to the
mayoral candidates’ session.
Candidates for mayor are former Blythewood Mayor Keith
Bailey and Town Councilmen Bryan S. Franklin and Malcolm P. Gordge. Candidates
for council are incumbent Town Councilman Eddie Baughman, Barry J. Belville,
Planning Commission Chairman Donald Beaton Brock, Jr., Planning Commissioner
Sloan Jarvis Griffin, III and former Planning Commissioner Marcus Taylor.
For information about the forum, contact The Voice at 803-767-5711 or email voice@blythewoodonline.com.
CMOG planners Gregory Sprouse and John Newman and Fairfield County Director of Community Development Chris Clauson met with the Zion Hill community. | Barbara Ball
WINNSBORO – A new day may be dawning for the residents of
Zion Hill and Fortune Springs Park neighborhoods.
Planners hired by the county to look into the possibility of
revitalizing the two neighborhoods are applying this week for a $400,000
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) to begin the first phase of a full
scale, long term revitalization operation.
Central Midlands Council of Governments (CMCOG) planners
Gregory Sprouse, Director of Research, Planning and Development, and John
Newman, along with Chris Clauson, Fairfield Community Development Director,
have spent the better part of the summer analyzing the needs of the Zion Hill
and Fortune Springs Park neighborhoods. They have walked the neighborhood
visiting with residents and finding out what can be done to rejuvenate the
area. The planners are also tasked with estimating the cost of the project.
While they found the needs to be many, Sprouse said the
initial focus will be on the demolition and cleanup of up to 40 vacant,
dilapidated homes in the area.
“We took all the info we heard from you at the last meeting
and talking to you in the neighborhood,” Sprouse said during a second gathering
of neighbors at the Fairfield High alumni building on Sept. 17. “We’ve engaged
with over 70 people either in the first meeting or in stakeholder interviews,
and the greatest concern expressed by 70 percent of you is the dilapidated
housing in your neighborhood. We want you to know that we’ve heard you,”
Sprouse assured the gathering.
“We’re also trying to get some funding as part of this
package for emergency housing rehabilitation for qualifying owner-occupied
units. If there are some folks who desperately need roof, porch, foundation or
other exterior repairs to help stabilize a house, we could apply some of this
funding for that,” Sprouse said.
Other maybes include new street security lights and cameras
for key areas, particularly around Zion Hill Park, increased patrols coupled
with signage to let people know the area is under police surveillance.
“These are rather low cost improvements that can help
discourage speeders,” Sprouse said. “We’re also looking at landscaping
opportunities in key areas. Part of the idea is trying to create a neighborhood
identity with gateways into the community and beautification of those areas.”
Aside from the CDBG, Clauson is in the process of applying
for transportation alternative funding which would provide for some
transportation accessibility improvements in Fortune Springs Park.
“Mitigating the drainage issues there and improving
conductivity will allow access from some of the neighborhoods into the
sidewalks in the park. There‘re no real defined shoulders in the park so it’s
not safe there,” Clauson said.
The plans also call for new playground equipment, picnic and
shade structures particularly in Zion Hill Park.
“That’s something that CDBG doesn’t typically cover, but for
a fairly low cost we could get some of that implemented in the park,” Clauson
said. “We are committed to pursuing opportunities to make that happen.”
Sprouse noted that the Zion Hill/Fortune Springs Park area
has a number of community assets that can be leveraged to improve the
neighborhood.
One asset is the proximity of the neighborhood to downtown.
“And Fortune Springs Park is a regional asset,” Sprouse
said. “It was once a destination for people all across the county to come and
swim and picnic. Other assets include the recreational ball fields, the old
Gordon school, the Fairfield High Alumni building, the Zion Hill Park, the main
library branch, the affordable housing in the senior living complex, the former
hospital site that could be redeveloped over time and many more.”
Sprouse said the focus of the efforts for the Zion
Hill/Fortune Springs Park area coincide well with a census designation.
“That’s what the Department of Commerce’s CDBG program uses
to determine eligibility for funding,” Sprouse said. “They also look for
neighborhoods that are 51 percent or more at low and moderate income. This area
qualifies at 63.4 percent. Winnsboro, itself, is about 63 percent and the
county is 59 percent.”
While the population of the neighborhood is about 1,200,
Sprouse said the trend is spiraling downward at about a 10 percent since 2015.
“About 50 percent of the houses were built between 1950-59
and not much after 2010. It is an aging housing stock which means we are going
to have a lot of upkeep and maintenance issues as people leave and properties
change hands,” Sprouse said.
“If phase one is successful, we will submit for funding next
fall for phase two to continue funding for some of the demolition activities,
probably try to step up the funding for the limited housing rehabilitation,”
Sprouse said. “We also want to pursue working with other non-governmental
partners such as Habitat for Humanity.”
Sprouse said he also hopes to continue improving public
safety, landscaping, playground and tennis court improvements in Fortune
Springs Park. He said he would be applying for funds for two high priority
sewer projects in the spring infrastructure round that will benefit the
community.
“In the long term, we want to bring new, quality, affordable
housing back to the area where we’re taking houses down. Vacant lots can become
an issue unto themselves,” Sprouse said.
Other long term goals are to Identify and prioritize
potential trail connection opportunities in the entire study area to better
connect residents.
Last, Sprouse said in order to make all this happen, and to
continue the effort into the future, it’s important to establish some type of
neighborhood organization or collaborative effort to help with things like
crime watch, communication and engagement with the police department, county
and town.
“We have a good starting point with the Fairfield High Alumni
Association. Because they are so engaged and so many of you work with them,
it’s an immediate thing we could start talking about. It doesn’t have to be a
formalized organization, but just a group of engaged citizens willing to help
be leaders in the community,” Sprouse said. “I think a lot of you all fit that
profile.”
COLUMBIA – Without providing documentation guaranteeing a
promised 250-foot buffer between Crickentree residents and an undetermined
number of homes proposed on the adjoining former Golf Course of South Carolina,
Blythewood’s representative on County Council, Joyce Dickerson, led the charge
on third and final reading Tuesday night to rezone the golf course from
Traditional Recreational Open Space (TROS) zoning to Low Density Residential
(RS-LD) zoning.
The vote was 8-3 with council members Calvin “Chip” Jackson,
Allison Terracio and Jim Manning voting against. The county planning commission
voted last spring to recommend that council not approve the request.
While the property owner, investment firm E-Capital, has
proposed no more than 170 homes on the property, the zoning designation allows
for several hundred homes. Robert Fuller, attorney for the firm, has said it
plans to flip the property to a developer.
Over the last year, Fuller and the developer proposed deed
restrictions to protect the environment of the Crickentree neighborhood from
what could be a much higher density of homes on the golf course property. Those
deed restrictions never materialized.
During 20 minutes of discussion, Jackson, Terracio and
Manning said they were dismayed that Dickerson had not produced documentation
that would establish the 250-foot buffer in perpetuity as residents had been
promise.
Jackson reminded Dickerson that the meeting had been
deferred from July to September to allow her and E-Capital sufficient time to
finalize plans with the neighboring Crickentree community and provide
documentation of those agreements.
Dickerson said it was her understanding that the 250-foot
buffer would be placed into a conservation easement. When Manning asked if that
had been done, a member of the county said no documentation for the easement
had been filed with the conservation commission.
Several county council meetings over the last year have been
marked with dissension between some members of council and the residents who
pleaded their case. At one point Dickerson accused the residents of sending her
threatening emails. She dismissed the emails as not that important, however
when asked by The Voice to produce them.
Jackson said he had hoped council would do the right thing.
He expressed concern with the out-of-control growth in the northeast and said
he had hoped for a deferral of the matter until everything had been properly
worked out.
“This is too important to rush this kind of decision through,”
Jackson said.
