Blythewood Online 691

Blog

  • Work Session Feedback Critical of Ordinances

    WINNSBORO (Jan. 29, 2016) – Interim County Administrator Milton Pope reviewed for Council Monday night the results of Council’s Jan. 20 work session, during which Council hashed out an animal control and a noise ordinance, while also agreeing to restructure their community enhancement grants process. Following Pope’s review, Council received some less than positive feedback on how they had handled all three.

    Animal Control Ordinance

    Pope said Council had agreed to “restructure language” in the animal control ordinance “regarding (the) restraint of animals.” Using York County’s ordinance as a guideline, Pope said Council would also be “redefining the shelter of animals; adding an appropriate definition for that.”

    But District 3 resident Kerry Matthews, who attended the Jan. 20 work session, said Council may be overreaching.

    “It just seemed to me, particularly with the depth and the length of discussions going on that evening, you so easily get bogged down in the minutiae about what kind of shelter is OK for a dog to live in,” Matthews, speaking during Monday’s second public comment segment. “I’m sorry but that was a little bit outrageous.”

    Matthews urged Council to make the ordinance as simple as possible.

    “Be considering the fact that the more detail you try to get into something, the harder it’s going to be to make it reasonable and sensible,” she said.

    Noise Ordinance

    The County’s revised noise ordinance, in the works since last April, was sidelined before its second reading on Oct. 26. Council’s Public Affairs and Policies Committee held no fewer than four meetings last year, during which they received input from the public as they worked over the details of the law.

    Nevertheless, following protests from Council members Marion Robinson (District 5) and Dan Ruff (District 1), Chairwoman Carolyn Robinson (District 2) moved the ordinance out of committee and into the Jan. 20 work session.

    The primary sticking point on Oct. 26 was, for Marion Robinson, the operation of firearms. Robinson said he was concerned that the revised ordinance would hinder private skeet shooting and other sport shooting on private property. District 7 Councilman Billy Smith said during the Oct. 26 discussion that the revised law contained numerous exemptions for sport shooting, but Marion Robinson said the exemptions were not clear enough.

    Monday night, Pope reported that, during the Jan. 20 work session, Council had agreed to loosen the firearm restrictions.

    “In the exemption section, number 10, which used to read ‘Noise associated with the legal operation of any firearm while hunting,’ we ended that sentence with ‘firearm’ and deleted the ‘while hunting’,” Pope said.

    Pope said Council also agreed to remove restrictions on noise from “the normal operations of any animal shelter, animal adoption center, boarding facility, professional kennel (or) pet shop.”

    Lake Wateree resident Jeff Morris, who has been involved with the revision process from the public standpoint since the beginning and who also attended the Jan. 20 work session, said during the second public comment session that it was clear to him that some Council members were not familiar with the existing ordinance, nor did they understand how noise ordinances operate.

    “For example, there were a couple of issues raised that if you have a bunch of hunting dogs, that under this new ordinance, you could be cited by the Sheriff for excessive noise,” Morris said. “And in fact that’s true. Of course that’s true in the existing ordinance. The existing ordinance doesn’t have any exceptions for hunting dogs and I don’t think you should. I’m not a fan of changing our ordinance.”

    The reason the noise ordinance was brought up for revision, Morris said, was at the suggestion of Sheriff Will Montgomery. District 6 Councilwoman Mary Lynn Kinley, who chairs the Public Affairs and Policies Committee, told Council the same thing back on Oct. 26.

    “The Sheriff said he had to have something that the magistrates could charge,” Kinley said on Oct. 26. “Before now, they had nothing really concrete they could charge a fine for.”

    The Committee last April tacked on measurable decibel (dBA) levels to the previous ordinance, and extended the period of time covered under the ordinance to include 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. The previous ordinance covered the 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. time period, but with no dBA levels, Montgomery said the law was difficult to enforce and convictions were all but impossible.

    Monday night, Morris told Council that most noise conflicts can be worked out between parties without the need of a deputy to mediate or issue citations. But in cases where those disputes cannot be peacefully resolved, a noise ordinance with teeth becomes necessary.

    “I think the worse thing to do is have those two neighbors escalate that dispute,” Morris said. “That’s why you have a noise ordinance. If the person creating the noise refuses to change their way and they’re not acting reasonably, then the Sheriff can take the action of actually issuing a citation. I think you need to keep those things in mind and think carefully about how this ought to be amended.”

    Community Enhancement Grants

    Council followed their Dec. 15 approval of community enhancement grants with a vote to terminate those grants, as awarded in their present form. Kinley, who moved to end the grants, suggested replacing them in the 2016-2017 budget with “specific funding that goes toward the support of community based programs or agencies that either develop or promote the improvement of quality of life activities for youth, adults and seniors.”

    Monday night, Pope reported that Council will continue to earmark $2,500 per district ($17,500 total) for similar purposes. Council will still require an application process, he said; however, during the work session Council agreed to review those applications themselves, instead of having them reviewed by staff, as had been the process for the last two cycles. Council members will recommend funding for applicants in their specific districts, but the funding would have to be approved by a majority vote of the full Council.

    The grants would be in the form of reimbursements, Pope said, with the recipient required to provide documentation of the expenditure to the County before receiving the funds. A hardship waiver would be required for applicants who cannot spend the money up front. The grants will be awarded in $500 increments and would be part of the 2016-2017 budget.

    “It seems like to me that this is just calling it something different or working it a little bit differently, but still basically the same thing,” Matthews said during her public comment, “and I’m bothered by people getting to petition for money from the County Council like this.”

    Matthews said numerous entities dedicated to many of the same things for which the grants are intended already exist in Fairfield County.

    “As far as I know, our schools feed probably free meals to a lot of our students,” Matthews said. “I know the Council on Aging does Meals on Wheels. There’s a food bank. My church is a regular donor to the food bank. There’s a local Red Cross. There (are) a lot of groups out there that are already designed to do these things and that ya’ll are talking about doing in little drips and drabs here and there and it just doesn’t seem logical to me to do it that way.”

    Changes to the ordinances, Pope said, will be brought back to Council for a vote at a future meeting. The enhancement grants, he said, would be placed on a parallel track with the budgeting process. Information on how to apply would be ready by the next meeting, and on July 1 the grants would be awarded when the next fiscal year begins.

    Council’s next regularly scheduled meeting is Feb. 15. It will be the only meeting scheduled for the month.

     

  • Board OK’s Architect for Classroom Construction

    Projects Not in District’s Budget

    WINNSBORO (Jan. 29, 2016) – During the Fairfield County School Board’s Jan. 19 regular meeting, Dr. J.R. Green, Superintendent, asked the Board to award a contract to the architectural firm, FW Architects of Florence, for engineering and design work for an expansion of Kelly Miller Elementary and Fairfield Middle schools so the portable classrooms can be removed.

    While the projects had not been budgeted, Green told the Board he planned to pay for them with the $2.5 million transfer of funds from the general fund to capital projects fund that he asked the Board to approve in October.

    “We have portables in the Middle School . . . and Kelly Miller Elementary School that I would like to see replaced,” Green told the Board. “Before we can go forward in terms of assessing what the ultimate cost of these projects would be, we need to bring an architect on board.”

    Green said he appointed a committee to bid out the project. That committee, he said, recommended FW Architects of Florence.

    “Is there any reason why this wasn’t brought up ahead of time, that you were pursuing these bids?” Board member Paula Hartman (District 2) asked.

    Green replied that he wasn’t sure what he had told the board, but that he “thought it was clear that we would have to bring in some architects and establish some designs in order to determine what the costs would be.”

    However, in a recording of the Oct. 20 meeting, Green made no mention to the Board that he planned to begin the bid process for an architect for the renovations. He only mentioned the need for renovations of the two schools in order to replace the portable classrooms, “a couple of new activity buses . . . we need to refresh some Chromebooks . . .and we have an issue with the cooling tower at the high school and I think we’ll eventually have to replace it.”

    Green’s committee has, in fact, been pursuing an architectural firm for the school renovation project for at least the past two months. An invitation for bids was published Nov. 24 in South Carolina Business Opportunities (SCBO), seeking an architect and engineering services for “classroom additions for elementary and middle schools.” The deadline for submission of resumes to the School District was Dec. 17, 2015.

    “What we are talking about today is getting designs for what you are looking at doing at Kelly Miller and the Middle School,” Board member William Frick (District 6) said. “To avoid any further confusion, are there any other projects you are anticipating?”

    “Maybe a field house addition at the football field,” Green answered. “Other than that, no other renovations to facilities are anticipated.”

    Board member Annie McDaniel (District 4) asked Green if the issues at the high school had been taken care of.

    “I did identify the cooling tower at the high school. I did identify technology enhancement,” Green responded. “But before we are in a position where I can bring a comprehensive list before the Board, I have to get an idea on what the cost of these major projects would be. That doesn’t preclude us from pursuing anything else.”
    If the costs are too high, Green continued, the District may not move forward with the school renovations.

    “The issue is that you did not bring back before the Board a list of projects you were going to do. It’s not about whether they are needed. The issue is following protocol,” McDaniel said.

    Hartman clarified that previously, when major projects such as the Career and Technology Center were initiated, the Board was much more involved in the selection process for the architects.

    Green said this project (classroom construction) was much more limited, so the Board was not involved.

    “Once we get these designs and you are able to prioritize, will you provide us a list of the capital projects you are looking to do?” Frick asked. Green said he would.

    The Board voted 5-2 to award the contract to FW Architects of Florence, with Hartman voting against and McDaniel abstaining. Other than Frick, none of the Board members who voted to award the contract had any questions or comments about the process or the architectural firm.

  • JWC Opens 2016 with FOIA Violation

    JENKINSVILLE (Jan. 29, 2016) – At the end of a raucous annual meeting of the Jenkinsville Water Company on Jan. 13, in which three new Board members were openly elected by the membership, the company’s president, Gregrey Ginyard, called for an executive session of the Board of Directors for the purpose of electing new officers for the Board.

    Following that executive session, Ginyard told The Voice that electing Board officers in closed session is a tradition, and that since the company is a non-profit and takes no public money, it is not subject to the S.C. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

    Bill Rogers, Executive Director of the S.C. Press Association disagrees, saying Ginyard violated the state’s FOIA.

    “Voting for officers in executive session is clearly illegal. They must vote in public. Tradition doesn’t trump the law,” Rogers said.

    Rogers’ opinion is backed by an Attorney General’s opinion issued Aug. 8, 2011, in which Deputy Attorney General Robert D. Cook stated, “It is our opinion that the (Jenkinsville) Water Company is a Public Body and must meet the FOIA’s requirements.”

    The company’s annual financial report presented at the January meeting further identifies the company as a public body subject to the FOIA, showing that it receives public money. According to the report, the company received an $89,365 public grant in 2011 and Ginyard told The Voice that it received a $175,000 loan/grant from Rural Infrastructure in August 2014 for a new filtration system for the Clowney Road well. According to the minutes of the June 27, 2015 regular monthly meeting, the company has applied for a $5 million grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to build a water treatment plant for water it hopes to pull from the Broad River. That grant is yet to materialize.

    Ginyard opened the meeting with a review of the Clowney Road well failure, explaining that it was taken off line in September due to radium contamination in the water. He said the company spent $107,092.04 with Mid County Water Company for water to serve the Clowney Road customers while the well was off line.

    “We have a new filtering system on that well now, and it should be back on line the week of Jan. 25,” Ginyard said. “But, through it all, we didn’t pass the Mid County water costs on to our customers. Their water bills did not go up.”

    Throughout the meeting, Ginyard had his hands full with a roundup of questions from members that set up shouting matches between himself and members.

    When Jeff Schaffer asked to speak during the question and answer period, Ginyard called on a sheriff’s deputy to eject Schaffer, saying he was not allowed to ask questions because he is not a member.

    “I am a member,” Schaffer countered. “I get water at my house and I pay a water bill. And I have a right to ask a question.”

    After a five-minute standoff, Schaeffer was allowed to identify his name on the membership list and ask his question.

    When asked by member Dee Melton whether the Board had changed the company’s bylaws in an executive session in a meeting that was not announced to the public, Ginyard denied that the minutes had been changed.

    “We only reviewed the bylaws in executive session,” Ginyard said.

    Melton held up two copies of the bylaws, one of which he said had been amended and read passages from the two versions. In each case, the passages were different.

    “Here, a whole sentence was added to the bylaws,” Melton said, referring to one passage.

    Asked why the Board had recently changed the bylaws in an executive session of an unannounced meeting, Ginyard again denied that the Board had made changes.

    “They were only reviewed, sir,” Ginyard answered.

    “Were they amended?” Melton asked again.

    “That line was added to clear up a misunderstanding,” Ginyard said.

    “Are these bylaws legal?” Melton pressed.

    “Yes sir,” Ginyard answered in frustration.

    According to the minutes of the Dec. 14 meeting, “Mr. McBride made a motion to enter executive session to make final revisions to the bylaws.” After returning to open session, the Board voted unanimously to accept the revisions.

    “The bylaws say that if they are to be amended, a 10-day written notice must be given to all members denoting the recommended changes before they can be amended,” Melton said. “Was a notice given?”

    “No sir,” Ginyard answered. “We’ve got to move on, Mr. Melton.”

    Regular monthly meetings of the Water Board of Trustees are held the second Monday evening of each month.

     

  • Blythewood to Host War Memorial

    The Wall that Heals, a half-scale replica of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C., will be featured at Doko Park in Blythewood Memorial Day weekend.
    The Wall that Heals, a half-scale replica of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C., will be featured at Doko Park in Blythewood Memorial Day weekend.

    BLYTHEWOOD (Jan. 28, 2016) – Before signing a contract for $7,500 to bring The Wall that Heals to Doko Park in Blythewood this Memorial Day, Town Council put out a call for a large number of volunteers from the community that will be required to make the mega event possible.

    “It’s a big undertaking, but it’s a big deal for our town,” Councilman Eddie Baughman said.

    The contract calls for the exhibit to be open 24 hours a day from May 26 – 30, with approximately 140 volunteers to work 4- or 6-hour shifts. The Town is required by the contract to also provide round-the-clock security and emergency medical service during the event.

    Baughman, a Vietnam War veteran, suggested last fall that Council bring The Wall to Blythewood. The exhibit features a half-scale replica of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C. The chevron-shaped Wall is made up of 24 panels that will stretch across approximately 250 feet of lawn in the park next to Town Hall. The Wall is accompanied by a mobile Education Center that tells the story of the Vietnam War and the era surrounding the conflict and includes displays of photos of service members whose names are found on The Wall, along with letters and memorabilia left at The Wall in Washington, D.C. The Center also includes a map of Vietnam and a chronological overview of the conflict.

    Hazel Kelly, a Town Hall employee, will receive training to serve as the Town’s representative to organize and oversee the event which will be paid for out of the Town’s Hospitality Tax fund. As many as 20,000 people could visit The Wall while it is in Blythewood, Baughman told Council last month.

    Council voted unanimously to accept the contract. Those who would like to volunteer to help with the event should contact Kelly at 754-0501.

    In other business, Council unanimously adopted amendments to the Landscape, Buffer Yard and Tree Preservation Ordinance that would ease previous requirements for tree studies and replanting. It also adopted the 2015 Comprehensive Plan and an Ordinance annexing property located at 355 Langford Road.

    Council members also decided to discuss at a future meeting whether to continue to sponsor a New Year’s Eve fireworks event since the weather has not cooperated the last two years. They also postponed finalizing a policy regarding presentation of Keys to the Town.

    Town Council will hold their annual retreat on Saturday, March 5 at the Langford Nord House at McNulty and Main streets in downtown Blythewood. The public is invited.

     

  • Pointe Gets Variances

    Now known as ‘Just the Pointe,’ the housing development planned for Main Street Blythewood was granted 16 variances by the BAR this week.
    Now known as ‘Just the Pointe,’ the housing development planned for Main Street Blythewood was granted 16 variances by the BAR this week.

    BLYTHEWOOD (Jan. 28, 2016) – After the Board of Architecture Review unanimously approved a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) last week for The Pointe, a 56-unit apartment complex proposed for Main Street in downtown Blythewood, the Richland County 9-1-1 addressing system required that the project’s official name to be changed to Just the Pointe since a nearby street is named Blythewood Pointe.

    Prior to granting the COA to the project, the BAR unanimously granted the developer, Prestwick Development LLC, 16 variances, including a request to omit the Town’s requirement that principal building facades provide a stoop or porch with a minimum height of 24-inches for all first-floor residential units. The Board did not omit the height requirement, but amended it to allow Prestwick to lower the height of the stoops on the principal building to 12 inches. The Board also allowed Prestwick to lower the required 48-inch elevation height on the building.

    The developers of the project told the Board last November they planned to install a chain-link fence on two sides and back of the property. At the December meeting the Board asked that the fence be changed to a wrought iron or similar decorative material. But at the January meeting, the project’s architect, Robert Byington, told the Board the owner had decided not to install a fence at all since one was not required by code.

    There was, however, some give and take between the Board and Prestwick in the finished design.

    “We wanted the developer to upgrade the building to be more than what was proposed,” Board chairman Michael Langston told The Voice following the December meeting. “I’ve been on the phone to them the last couple of weeks to get them (Prestwick) to come up to our codes instead of us giving them variances. They have met us about half way.”

    At that meeting, the Board negotiated for Prestwick to add several design changes to the window and entrance openings on the principal building to provide for a more upscale appearance on the street side.

    No one signed up to address the architectural requirements during public comment time on Tuesday evening. A representative of the company said he expected that the project is on track for completion by the end of the year.

     

  • Hospital Falls Behind on Power Bill Again

    WINNSBORO (Jan. 22, 2016) – Fairfield Memorial Hospital is once again behind on its electric bill, and Tuesday night Winnsboro Town Council nixed the hospital’s proposal to waive late fees.

    Council voted unanimously to reject the bid, opting instead for a counterproposal to waive the late fees only after the hospital has made good on 18 months of payments, provided the payments are made on time.

    “What they want us to do is waive those late fees,” Winnsboro Mayor Roger Gaddy said, “and we have a history with Fairfield Memorial with their previous contract that they complied with for about four months and then came in arrears. They wanted us to delay them right off the bat; what we said is we will waive them after 18 months of prompt payment – 18 months of a 36-month contract.”

    Gaddy, who is also a physician who serves on the Fairfield Memorial Board of Directors, abstained from the vote.

    Fairfield Memorial, as of Dec. 8, owes the Town $188,699.99.

    The counteroffer will be sent back to Fairfield Memorial and Council will officially vote on the measure during their Feb. 2 meeting.

    Mt. Zion

    Gaddy also said the Town has sent a letter to the Friends of Mt. Zion Institute (FOMZI) requesting a meeting with any seriously interested prospective developer of the former school property. Gaddy said Council would like the meeting to take place as soon as possible.

    After meeting with Council in executive session on Jan. 5, FOMZI Chairwoman Vicki Dodds said her group had significant interest from a developer, who had made more than one visit to the site.

    The Town officially transferred the property at 205 N. Walnut St. to FOMZI on March 4, 2014, with the caveat that the buildings had to be stabilized within 18 months to meet Winnsboro’s Dangerous Building Code or be torn down. After the Jan. 5 meeting, Dodds revealed the old school building had failed to pass inspection and was not up to code.

    Tuesday night, Gaddy said any prospective developer should be committed to “immediately stabilizing the building,” for Council to give them serious consideration.

     

  • As Council Cracks Down, Merchants Vow to Pay Back H-Taxes

    RIDGEWAY (Jan. 22, 2016) – Town Council members, during their Jan. 14 regular meeting, resolved to get tough with owners of a pair of downtown restaurants who have failed to remit any of their portion of Ridgeway’s hospitality tax. Both owners have since told The Voice that they intend to pay, although at press time no payments had been remitted.

    Two of the town’s four establishments subject to the tax – Laura’s Tea Room and Ridgeway Station Café – have made no payments to the Town since the ordinance establishing the tax went into effect last August. The first payments were due on Sept. 20.

    Over that same period of time, the Old Town Hall Restaurant and City Gas have combined to kick in more than $2,559 to the Town’s coffers.

    The issue first came to light during Council’s Jan. 7 work session, and during the Jan. 14 meeting when Council learned that the Tea Room and the Station Café had ignored late notices, Council considered the strength of the ordinance and the possible consequences for failing to comply with it.

    “I think the ordinance is good, but I think now we’re failing to follow through with the ordinance,” Councilman Heath Cookendorfer said. “We have to be more diligent as a Council to enforce it. I think we’re at the point now where we should be moving to the secondary section with this for some of these people, correct? We’re at that $500 penalty for some of these people.”

    The ordinance, which passed final reading last May, imposes a 2 percent tax on the gross proceeds of the sale of prepared meals and beverages, to be paid to the Town by the 20th of each month, beginning Sept. 20, 2015. Any tax not timely paid shall be subject to a 5 percent penalty, the ordinance states, each month. Failure to comply “shall constitute a misdemeanor,” the ordinance states, punishable by a $500 fine or 30 days in jail, or both.

    “The thing that we have to get in their minds is that it’s not their money,” Cookendorfer said. “It’s tax money.”

    Indeed, the 2 percent has been collected by restaurants from customers, as an additional tax on their bills. But if a restaurant has failed to tack that 2 percent onto customers’ bills, the ordinance states the establishment is still responsible for paying that 2 percent of gross proceeds to the Town.

    Karen Siegling, owner of the Station Café, confirmed Tuesday that she has been collecting the 2 percent from customers, but said her restaurant has been struggling to make ends meet.

    “We had some difficulties here at the restaurant,” Siegling said. “We’ve just been struggling.”

    Siegling told The Voice that she intended to pay this week.

    “I’m not trying to cheat anyone on my taxes, I promise you,” she said.

    Carol Allen, owner of the Tea Room, said she was planning to pay either Tuesday or Wednesday. She also confirmed that she has been collecting the 2 percent from customers.

    “I just plain didn’t get it done,” Allen said. “I felt so horrible when it came out.”

    The associated paperwork, Allen said, is a little more difficult for her business, which sells more than just food.

    While failure to pay could land the offenders in some hot water, it also puts the Town in a precarious position when preparing its annual budget. At press time it was not known how much the restaurants owe.

    “And the thing about it is, the merchants who are paying this,” Herring said, “part of the hospitality (tax) goes back to help support them to bring people here for tourism.”

    During Council’s discussion of the tax last March, then Town Councilman Russ Brown, who introduced the tax, said that state law regulated how hospitality tax revenues could be spent. The revenue could, he said, go toward tourism-related, cultural, recreational or historic facilities, as well as highways, roads, streets or bridges providing access to tourist destinations.

    The revenue could also go toward advertising and promotion of tourism development, and to water and sewer infrastructure serving tourism-related facilities. The funds could go toward preserving the arch on the old school property, and for promoting Pig on the Ridge, Arts on the Ridge and other Town events.

    The ordinance, which only states the taxes should be “timely remitted,” gives Council considerable leeway as to when to impose the 5 percent penalty and when to enforce the $500 fine. But with the Tea Room and the Station Café four months in arrears, Council elected to send out one more letter with a copy of the ordinance, informing both that they owed not only the 2 percent in back taxes, but the 5 percent penalty for each month as well.

    Those notices may be unnecessary, if Allen and Siegling pay as promised. However, if those notices go unanswered, Council said, the restaurateurs could find themselves facing a municipal judge.

     

  • Bracing for Life After Walmart

    Shoppers prepare for Walmart’s final days. (Photo/Barbara Ball)
    Shoppers prepare for Walmart’s final days. (Photo/Barbara Ball)

    WINNSBORO (Jan. 22, 2016) – With the announcement last week that Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. plans to shutter 154 stores nationwide, including its Walmart Express store at 721 Highway 321 Bypass S. in Winnsboro, local leaders have been scrambling for a plan to fill the enormous retail gap that will be left by the closing, or perhaps delay or even hold off for good the Jan. 28 closing date.

    “The thing that is paramount in everyone’s mind is getting those people placed who are losing these jobs,” Terry Vickers, President of the Fairfield County Chamber of Commerce said.

    Brian Nick, Senior Director of Corporate Communications at Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. said approximately 300 employees would be affected by the Winnsboro closing. Employees would be paid 60 days beyond Feb. 10, Nick said. Employees who qualify for severance pay (full- and part-time employees who have been with the company for more than one year) may begin receiving that pay after the 60 days has expired, he said. Some employees may be relocated to other stores, Nick said.

    Downtown Renaissance?

    Big box retailers can have a devastating effect on Main Street, U.S.A., particularly in small, rural communities.

    According to a 2010 study by the Center for Community Planning and Development at Hunter College in New York, Walmart kills three local jobs for every two jobs it creates. A 2004 study by Pennsylvania State University found that U.S. counties with a Walmart suffer an increase in poverty over time compared to counties without a Walmart. And a 1997 study by Iowa State University found that small towns can lose half of their retail trade within 10 years of a Walmart opening in their community.

    When Walmart opened its doors in Winnsboro in 1998, it quickly became the biggest kid on the block, drawing even more traffic away from Congress Street and onto the 321 Bypass. With its closing, a retail void opens that Vickers sees as an opportunity for downtown.

    Bringing downtown back to life has long been a goal of the Chamber. Now there is considerable impetus to do so. For the transition to be successful, both merchants and consumers will have to adapt.

    “We’re looking for things to service us when we lose Walmart,” Vickers said. “We’ve talked to the hardware store (Winnsboro Builders Supply, 340 S. Vanderhorst St.) and the Butcher’s Block (324 S. Congress St.) about the fact that they could see more business. We’ve asked them to take a look at their inventory and keep stock of what people will be looking for.

    “The main thing is for our citizens to look here first,” Vickers continued. “And if there’s something that you don’t like about a business, make suggestions.”

    Downtown merchants, Vickers said, may have to rethink how they have traditionally done business. In Winnsboro, she said, practically everything except the CVS Pharmacy and the Bi-Lo closes shop by 6 p.m. And some still observe that old Southern tradition of closing at lunch on Wednesdays.

    “We’re definitely going to need to look at store business hours,” she said. “If a business is going to be competitive, they have to structure their hours so they are convenient to customers.”

    Businesses may also have to consider adding staff, she said, and breaking them up into shifts in order to cater to customers who can only shop after 6 p.m.

    A United Front

    Filling the gap left by Walmart cannot be the Chamber’s cross to bear alone. If downtown is truly going to be the next destination for Winnsboro shoppers, it is going to take a joint effort between merchants, the Chamber, the Town of Winnsboro and County Council. At the very least.

    For starters, Vickers said, downtown is going to have to look and feel like the place to be. Toward that end, she said, additional lighting may be necessary, particularly well-lighted parking areas. An expanded police presence also wouldn’t hurt, “so people can feel safe and relaxed shopping downtown after hours,” Vickers said.

    The Town has done an excellent job, Vickers said, on downtown’s landscaping, and she hopes that can be expanded in the future. The walking trail on Mt. Zion Green is paved now, she said, and the growing monument park there has added an attraction for the downtown area.

    During Tuesday night’s Town Council meeting, Winnsboro Mayor Roger Gaddy addressed the loss of Walmart in his closing remarks.

    “It certainly will have a detrimental impact on the quality of life here in Fairfield County,” Gaddy said. “Hopefully we will be able to find some retailers to come in and fill the gap and the large void that Walmart is leaving us.”

    After the meeting, Gaddy told The Voice that additional monetary support for the Chamber may be one of the things Council looks at when budget talks ramp up in March.

    “I’m sure that our downtown development folks will be talking with the merchants to try to see if we can help them in any way to enhance their business,” Gaddy added.

    The County’s role, meanwhile, remains unclear. Vickers said she had not yet spoken with the County, and our phone calls to Chairwoman Carolyn Robinson (District 2) were not returned at press time.

    Can it be Undone?

    The Winnsboro location is one of only three S.C. Walmart stores to call it quits by the end of the month. Gray Court in Laurens County, and Pacolet in Spartanburg County are the other two. Worldwide, 269 locations are going out of business, putting 10,000 out of work in the U.S. and 16,000 across the globe.

    State Sen. Creighton Coleman (D-17) told The Voice this week that he had spoken with Gov. Nikki Haley and S.C. Secretary of Commerce Bobby Hitt about a possible plan of action.

    “We’re meeting with Wal-Mart next week,” Coleman said, “to see if they may be willing to reverse their decision. And if not, we want to do everything we can to get people who will be losing their jobs into new positions.”

    If a stay of execution is off the table, Coleman said the next concern was the physical building itself.

    “Will they let someone else come in and use it,” Coleman said, “or will they tie it up and let it remain empty?”

    And if the commercial winds blow back toward downtown, Coleman said he would have to have discussions with Hitt to determine if there were any state money that could help kick-start Congress Street.

    Lemons to Lemonade

    As she said in her letter to the editor this week (page 2), Vickers hopes to turn the sour news of the Walmart closing into a refreshing future for downtown. And she is confident that the building blocks are in place.

    “We have the makings,” Vickers said. “We have two drug stores (CVS on the Bypass and Price’s at 110 S. Congress St.) and Bi-Lo. We want to talk to the manager of our farmers market to see if we can have a storefront where people can get fresh vegetables. Winnsboro Builders Supply carries everything Walmart did and more.”

    As the process takes its first baby steps, Vickers said the Chamber is already courting grocery store chains to gauge their interest in Winnsboro. One of the community’s more immediate needs, she said, is a hunting and fishing supply outlet. Whether that is something that Builders Supply expands to take on – or, as Gaddy suggested, something Northside Feed and Seed tackles – remains to be seen.

    The one thing that is certain is that it won’t happen overnight. There may be slim pickin’s for Winnsboro consumers for some months to come.

    “The kicker at first is just going to be to keep the lights on and the doors open later,” Vickers said.

     

  • New Developer Eyes Rimer Pond Road

    Rimer Pond Map Jan 22 copyBLYTHEWOOD (Jan. 21, 2016) – Another Rural (RU) zoned property on Rimer Pond Road is on the block for rezoning; however, this one hasn’t drawn the ire of neighbors as have other recently requested rezonings on the road.

    A request by Kevin Steelman, representing Land Tech developers, to amend the current RU zoning on a 41+ acre Rimer Pond Road property to Residential Low Density (RS-LD) zoning for single-family homes will be heard by Richland County Planning Commission at 1 p.m., Monday, Feb. 2.

    The tract lies between the VillageChurch and a 5-acre parcel across from Blythewood Middle School that developer Hugh Palmer recently requested to have rezoned for commercial use. That request failed to win approval of Richland County Council in December when the motion died with a 5-5 tie vote.

    “This property already has higher density zoning on both sides and RS-LD on the back side,” Steelman told The Voice. “We decided low density zoning would be more in keeping with the surrounding area. I live in the area and we want to keep a rural feel to the road.”

    With a pond stretching along the road frontage leaving no room for a road, Steelman said he anticipates leaving a border of trees the length of the property with only one entrance into the neighborhood off Rimer Pond Road.

    “Land Tech already owns a 30-acre track adjacent to the 40-acre property,” Steelman said. “We have the option of a second entrance through our other property onto Longtown Road West.”

    Steelman expects to build about 60 homes on the site and has a commitment from Palmetto Utilities for sewer.

    “As for water, we have the option of using the Town of Winnsboro line that runs through the property, or we can use the City of Columbia line that is being installed along Rimer Pond Road. It will depend on the timing of the project and the fees,” Steelman said. “We have spoken with both providers and don’t anticipate any issues with either.”

    “I don’t think any of us really want any more development along Rimer Pond Road,” said resident Michael Watts who has frequently opposed other requested rezonings on the road. “But, realistically, something is going to go there. We don’t want commercial and we don’t want medium or high density, so this is probably the best we can hope for.”

    To print a copy of the Planning Commission agenda and rezoning request packet go to richlandonline.com or contact Susie Haynes at 576-2176. Steelman can be reached at 540-3474.

     

  • Shell Building Profit No Sure Thing

    BLYTHEWOOD (Jan. 21, 2016) – As Town Council’s proposed shell building, to be built in the park across from Town Hall on speculation, moves forward, there is no guarantee that the Town will reap a profit or even break even when the 3,800-square-foot building is sold, Ed Parler, the Town’s Economic Development Consultant, told Council members during their monthly workshop Tuesday morning.

    “Whether the Town gets back all the money it puts into the shell depends largely on whether we sell the land with the building or lease it over a period as long as 99 years,” Parler said, explaining that the land is currently valued at $130,700 on the Richland County Tax books.

    “The cost of the shell will be $456,881, paid for by a grant from Fairfield Electric Company. When you add on the $100,000 – $200,000 it will cost the end user to finish the interior of the building and the $130,700 cost of the land, the sale price could total up to $800,000,” Parler said. “I don’t think it is reasonable to expect that someone will offer that.”

    Including the land in the sale will make it difficult to get the full value of the land, Parker said. “There’s no guarantee we’ll get every dollar of that back. We just have to look at this as an economic incentive project.”

    Parler told Council that leasing the land is a more favorable option than selling it for several reasons. A lease would lower the purchase price of the project, making the sale more attractive to an end user, and a long-term lease might allow the town to recoup some of its investment. Parler provided a spread sheet outlining various returns the Town could realize from a multiple-year lease. Lease payments of $330/month at 1 percent over 40 years, for instance, would total $158,400. He said a long-term lease could be done without clouding the financing of the building.

    Parker said that while a deed restriction on the land would allow Council to limit the kinds of businesses that could operate on the property, a lease would allow the Town to further restrict the use of the property by future owners.

    The grant, which was originally to be used by the Town to build a restaurant for Sam Kendall three years ago, must be used for specific economic development projects or the Town must return it plus interest and penalties to Fairfield Electric.

    A new timeline for the project is to put it out for construction bids in early February, to award bids in late February or March, begin construction in March, advertise for the sale of the building in April and close on the property in June.

    While Council did not vote Tuesday on whether to move forward with the project, it did not stop the shell’s progress, prompting Parler and Ralph Walden, architect of the shell building, to go before the Board of Architecture Review (BAR) on Tuesday evening to seek a Certificate of Occupancy (COO).

    BAR members approved the building, but because Walden was not prepared to present lighting, landscape, signage and a site plan, the BAR granted a conditional COO until which time those items were brought to the board.