Tag: Fairfield County Council

WINNSBORO – Mitford’s community center averages one to three people a day.

Monticello’s averages three to five. Nobody visited either center at all in November.

With $3M already earmarked for three rec centers in the county, council wants to spend more taxpayer money on parks and recreation.

On Monday, council voted 5-2 to lease 8.12 acres in the North Monticello and Ladd Road area from Dominion Energy for another recreation center.

Council members Doug Pauley and Clarence Gilbert opposed.

“I ask this council to open your eyes and see what is needed for Fairfield County and its citizens, and not what is wanted by you for political reasons,” Pauley said.

While the cost of the lease is only $5 annually, per the lease, Fairfield County must purchase several insurance policies to cover the property. Those policies are valued at $3 million, documents state.

The county is also responsible for costs associated with adding any libraries, playground equipment or other amenities, the costs of which have yet to be determined.

Pauley said the lease vote represents another instance of the council majority building projects for campaign purposes and putting them above what the county really needs. He rattled off a laundry list of those needs.

He said the daily operating budget of the public works department was cut by 50 percent, yet the employees in that department have to do daily operations and make repairs to five county bridges that are out.

“That department lacks adequate gravel, piping and other materials to maintain county roads,” Pauley said.

“The Sheriff’s office and fire service must make do with antiquated vehicles. And what about the rising cost of gas for these vehicles?” he asked.

“Fire service has been asking for tankers for three years,” Pauley said. “They have two with over 35 years on them. One of them caught fire while responding to a fire recently and another has a transmission problem. If the ISO came tomorrow and a tanker was not at a station, it would not qualify as a station.

“We’ve needed a fire marshal for two years and we need four firefighters,” he said.

“EMS needs three ambulances, and three of the ones they have, have over 350 miles. We have cut on-the-road paramedics who provide life-saving support,” Pauley continued.

“We don’t even have a full time director to manage all these [recreation] facilities because we can’t afford to hire them,” he said.

Without responding to Pauley’s statement, Council Chairman Moses Bell called for the vote which was 5-2.

Later on, Bell once again took aim at the Mt. Zion contract, the subject of an unrelated agenda item following the lease vote.

“The reason we have to spend all this money is the disastrous contract. Even lawyers advised us not to get into this contract,” Bell said, without identifying the lawyers or the circumstance.

WINNSBORO – Fairfield County is facing a financial “mini crisis” after failing to timely file required financial statements. That failure has resulted in the county’s FY2021 audit being held up, according to emails obtained by The Voice.

In an email to council members, County Administrator Malik Whitaker said the county is six months tardy in submitting its audits, potentially jeopardizing critical infrastructure projects dependent on state money.

 “We have a mini-crisis situation with our audits being six months behind,” Whitaker wrote in an email to council members on Feb. 1. “Our team is committed to getting us through this situation with lessons learned so this will not happen again. Your patience is appreciated. I will keep your [sic] posted.”

However, the S.C. Comptroller General’s Office is withholding payments to Fairfield pending receipt of the required financial statements, according to the S.C. Rural Infrastructure Authority, or RIA.

Among the Fairfield County projects potentially impacted is a proposed water main project at Peach Road, said Kendra Wilkerson, a program manager with the RIA.

“We have been informed that the [Comptroller General’s] office is currently withholding state payments to a number of counties, including Fairfield, pending receipt of FY21 financial statements,” Wilkerson said via email to Fairfield County leaders.

“So, if you submit a request for payment to RIA for the Peach Road Water Main project (RIA grant R-21-2057), that payment will be withheld until this situation is resolved with the CG’s office,” the email continues. “RIA does not have any control over this situation, but we wanted to make sure you were aware of it.”

Whitaker said the county is working on an 18-day action plan to bring its financials up to speed.

“I have committed our finance team to a February 28th deadline for submitting our audited statements to the State,” Whitaker said. “We now have an action plan with weekly steps and two accountability meetings a week.”

Council chairman Moses Bell called the county’s predicament “unacceptable.”

Councilman Doug Pauley suggested that the loss of top tier county employees over the last year has exacerbated matters.

Since the installation of the current council, there have been a number of high profile resignations. Those resignations were most of the top county administration officials.

They include former County Administrator Jason Taylor, former Assistant Administrator Laura Johnson, former county attorney Tommy Morgan,  former Clerk to Council Patti Davis, former Community Services Director Chris Clausen, former County Parks & Recreation Director Russell Price and former Building Official Chris Netherton.

“We lost Laura, who was a big help in getting things like this done, and now all of it falls on [Finance Director] Ann [Bass],” Pauley said. “She now has to answer the many demands for information from council members and new members of the administration.”

During citizen comments, Ridgeway resident Randy Bright blamed council’s willy-nilly approach to budgetary and planning matters.

“We don’t even know where we stand financially. We haven’t done an audit in over a year,” Bright said. “Now and then we quote a one-day figure of the fund balance, which is mostly meaningless.”

Though not directly addressing the money being withheld by the state, Councilman Clarence Gilbert said on Monday that employee morale is worsening.

Gilbert suggested hiring an outside firm to anonymously poll staff about morale issues and how to solve them.

“It’s obvious that our county government is suffering from low employee morale,” Gilbert said. “Good or bad morale is contagious. If the soldiers are not happy, then the generals will fall on their face.”

WINNSBORO – Fairfield County scheduled Monday night’s public hearing on redistricting hoping to quell recent complaints of secrecy and personal politics.

Instead, more evidence arose illustrating that the proposed plan to redraw district lines may be politically motivated.

One proposed change shifts the street of a potential challenger of Council Chairman Moses Bell, ceding it from District 1 to District 5.

Bell lives in District 1, the same as Ridgeway resident Randy Bright, a frequent critic of the current administration who’s been politically active for years.

Bright called the proposed district lines “very odd,” though he stopped short of accusing Bell of gerrymandering.

“This little sliver was pulled out of its community, out of its natural boundaries. It’s a stark change – we were in District 1 – everything around us is District 1,” Bright said. “This is basically one street. I find that very odd, that one sliver.”

Winnsboro resident Brandon Peake was more direct in thinking the proposed maps were politically motivated.

Peake referenced recent council votes appropriating $500,000 for parks and playgrounds as well as approving the controversial Teacher Village housing development pushed by the school district.

“With $500,000 in one district [for parks] and the Teacher Village in another, it seems pretty apparent that they are trying to appease your agenda,” Peake said.

Bell pushed back against the criticisms. He restated talking points from the last council meeting, where he said the proposed map follows state and federal laws, and is more equitable than the current map.

“When you look at the total picture of these lines, they are significantly improved over 2011 [redistricting] with only 15 census blocks moved, which is a significant feat in itself,” Bell said. “This is really, really good.”

Who’s moving where

Fairfield County Council has already passed two readings of the redistricting plan. No votes were taken Monday night, though final reading could come as soon as Monday, Dec. 13 even though the federal deadline is March 1, 2022.

Federal law requires county governments to redraw district lines every 10 years, after census numbers are released.

Redistricting is also necessary because of routine population shifts. Since 2010, Fairfield County as a whole lost about 3,000 residents, shrinking 15.6%, according to the S.C. of Revenue and Fiscal Affairs office.

District 2 grew 7.1% while District 7 shrank 8.7%, the agency has said.

Federal law requires no more than 5% deviation in any council district, which means some precincts must move from one district to another to compensate for population shifts.

Revenue and Fiscal Affairs director Frank Rainwater said only 15 of the county’s 1,200 blocks shifted.

In District 1, one precinct moves into District 2 and three precincts shift to District 3, according to the proposed map.

District 2 loses two blocks to District 3, one to District 6 and another to District 7.

A precinct in District 3 moves to District 5, while District 5 loses three precincts – two to District 3 and two to District 7, the proposal shows.

“Your overall deviation is down to 5%. You have many districts that are down to 1% of the target,” Rainwater said.

Bell boasted that the proposed map brings the county into compliance with very few changes required to the district lines.

“It’s a significant change in the deviation which makes it a significant improvement in the lines,” Bell said.

Rainwater later acknowledged he discussed the proposed map only with Chairman Bell. He said it’s normal for the state to deal with one person, but he was also unaware that other council members had no input.

“Mr. Rainwater, when you talk about two blocks moved from one district to another, who’s responsible for the moving of those blocks?” Councilman Doug Pauley asked. “Who decides what blocks move from one district to the next?”

“Those were conversations we had with Mr. Bell,” Rainwater said.

“Did you have any conversation with any other council members?” Pauley inquired.

“No sir,” Rainwater responded.

Councilman Clarence Gilbert pressed as well.

“When you were given this draft, were you under the impression all of the council members had been a part of this?” Gilbert asked.

“I had no knowledge about who talked about it. I don’t know who [Bell] did or did not talk to,” Rainwater answered.

In an email of the draft redistricting map sent Bell on Monday and copied to all council members, Rainwater wrote, “Again, the draft map is based on the direction you (Bell) provided and is intended for you to share with council and the public for feedback.”

Lack of transparency

On Monday, transparency issues continued to dog Bell, with council members and residents accusing him of shutting them out of the process.

Pauley said Bell instructed staff not to stream the public forum online, which is the customary practice for council meetings. Bell denied that.

“For some reason tonight, Mr. Bell does not want to have this meeting live,” Pauley said.

Bell said it wasn’t feasible for the county, which operates on a $44.6 million budget, to broadcast the meeting live.

“We’re not prepared to do a live meeting. We’re not prepared to do that,” Bell said.

On short notice, a representative of The Voice was able to broadcast the proceedings live on Facebook using a smart phone.

Pauley also said Bell didn’t adequately publicize the public forum.

Waving a copy of the Country Chronicle, which generally publishes stories favorable to the current administration, Bell stated the county did publish a public notice in that newspaper to announce Monday’s forum.

“We did put it in the paper, so we did advertise,” Bell said.

The county did not advertise the forum in The Voice, which is mailed directly to more than 4,000 homes in Fairfield County.

WINNSBORO – County council pushed through first and second readings (5-2) on a redistricting plan for Fairfield County in less than a week and without public discussion or a public forum on the plan.

At the Nov. 22 council meeting, Councilman Douglas Pauley accused Chairman Moses Bell of unilaterally submitting a draft plan without informing council members or the public.

Victor Frontroth, a cartographer with the S. C. Revenue and Fiscal Affairs office, attended the Nov. 22 council meeting to explain the redistricting process, but there were no maps to present for the public. Frontroth said repeatedly during the meeting that feedback from council members and the public is crucial to every redistricting plan.

“Public input is a very important part of this entire process,” Frontroth said, adding that a public hearing is required before third (final) reading.

While Bell had emailed a draft map of his plan for redistricting to council members, there were few roads identified, making it difficult to determine how specific properties were affected.

It didn’t take long for Bell’s plan to come under attack, with many citing concerns over lack of transparency and the lack of the opportunity for input from all councilmen.

“The map that was presented to you, where did that map come from?” Pauley asked Frontroth.

“That was from working with Chairman Bell,” Frontroth answered.

“Wouldn’t you agree to have seven council members, that every council member should have a say in that draft?” Pauley asked.

“We were under the impression that every council member was aware,” Frontroth replied.

“They were not,” Pauley responded.

“They were not,” Councilman Gilbert echoed.

A letter dated Nov. 23, 2021, to Bell from Frank Rainwater, executive director of the S.C. Revenue and Fiscal Affairs office confirmed as much.

“The Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office (RFA) computed statistics and created a draft map based on the direction you (Bell) provided as we shared and discussed with you on November 17,” Rainwater wrote.

Bell’s assurances that his plan would meet constitutional requirements did little to sway angry residents who voiced frustration over being shut out of the redistricting process.

District 4 resident John Jones said during public comment at the Nov 22 council meeting that the county website is virtually devoid of any maps or detailed redistricting plans.

Jones feared the council majority’s endgame was gerrymandering, the manipulation of district boundaries to give one or more council members an unfair electoral edge.

“That’s not right, that’s not ethical,” Jones said.

Ridgeway resident Randy Bright said the lack of transparency over redistricting is indicative of the secrecy that surrounded budget talks, employee bonuses and other recent measures.

The day after the meeting, Bell sent the following email to council members and the media:

“We are scheduling a public forum on Dec. 6 at 6 p.m., to discuss the proposed redistricting map and the statistics that support the proposed map, purpose of districting, and public input. One of the reasons we want to have this forum is that we need for folks to understand the process and to review the proposed map along with the stats. Look forward to seeing you then. Forget the assumptions,” Bell wrote.

That meeting is scheduled to be held in council chambers. The public is invited to attend.

Pauley emailed the other council members about the need to provide the public with information prior to that meeting.

“I wanted to say if there is going to be a public hearing on Dec. 6, 2021 for redistricting, then we need to send out something soon so the public has time to plan for it.”

He also included a link (www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzOS4L8kwR8) of a redistricting in another county, “so we can see how it was done. They had 2 public hearings and the board offered 3 different maps to choose from and present to the public. It seems they took the time and made sure the public had a chance to express their input,” he wrote.

“The public is supposed to be a part of this,” Pauley told The Voice, “a big part. It’s not something Mr. Bell is supposed to work out to his satisfaction with no input from the rest of council and the public.”

Pauley: Mr. Bell’s Decisions Not In Best Interest of County

WINNSBORO – Redistricting is an inherently political process, and that reality was on full display at Monday night’s Fairfield County Council meeting.

After passing first reading of an ordinance adopting a redistricting plan by a 5-2 vote Thursday night, council members passed second reading of the ordinance Monday night with the same 5-2 vote. Council members Doug Pauley and Clarence Gilbert opposed.

No public discussion or public forums on the redistricting plan have been held prior to Monday night’s meeting, which drove complaints over the lack of transparency and personal politics.

Pauley accused Chairman Moses Bell of unilaterally submitting the draft redistrict plan without informing council members or the public.

“It goes to show Mr. Bell has excluded council from making decisions that are in the best interests of all Fairfield County citizens,” Pauley said.

Bell insisted he followed all state and federal guidelines. He also noted the public will have a chance to offer feedback sometime before the final vote.

“We will have an opportunity for public input and if we need to have another meeting, we can do that,” he said.

The exchange came following a presentation from the S.C. Revenue and Fiscal Affairs office.

Victor Frontroth, a cartographer with the agency, said repeatedly that feedback from council members and the public is crucial to every redistricting plan.

“Public input is a very important part of this entire process,” Frontroth said, adding that a public hearing is required before third reading.

Federal law requires local governments to redraw district lines every 10 years to compensate for population shifts. The goal is to maintain fair and equal representation.

In Fairfield County, census data shows that total population plummeted 12.56%, from 23,956 to 20,948. Council districts 2 and 7 saw the greatest shifts, with District 2, represented by Councilwoman Shirley Greene, growing 7.1% and District 7, represented by Gilbert, shrinking 8.7%.

Frontroth explained that federal law requires no more than a 5% population shift in either direction. Ideally, he said one-way deviation shouldn’t exceed 2.5%.

The proposed plan features a combined deviation of about 6%, Frontroth said.

It didn’t take long, though, for Bell’s plan to come under attack, with many citing concerns over lack of transparency.

“The map that was presented to you, where did that map come from?” Pauley asked Frontroth.

“That was from working with Chairman Bell,” Frontroth answered.

“Wouldn’t you agree to have seven council members, that every council member should have a say in that draft?” Pauley asked.

“We were under the impression that every council member was aware,” Frontroth replied.

“They were not,” Pauley responded.

“They were not,” Councilman Gilbert echoed.

Bell continued to defend his handling of the redistricting plan.

“Does the map meet the constitutional requirements?” Bell asked Frontroth

“As far as I see, yes,” Frontroth answered.

Bell’s assurances did little to sway angry residents, who voiced frustration over being shut out of the redistricting process.

District 4 resident John Jones said the county website is vir tually devoid of any maps or detailed redistricting plans.

Jones feared the council majority’s endgame was gerrymandering, the manipulation of district boundaries to give one or more council members an unfair electoral edge.

“That’s not right, that’s not ethical,” Jones said. “There’s a lot of lawsuits that say that’s not smart. Please don’t do that.”

Ridgeway resident Randy Bright said the lack of transparency over redistricting is indicative of the secrecy that surrounded budget talks, employee bonuses and other recent measures.

“Let’s be transparent for the first time this year,” Bright said. “This would be a great Christmas present if you were transparent with redistricting.”

When Frontroth explained that the maps another information would eventually be on the county’s website, Bright raised his hand to ask a question of Frontroth, but Bell shut him down. Bright went ahead and asked as Bell protested.

“Since Fairfield is an internet desert, how are you going to get this information out to the people?” Bright asked.

“No! No! Don’t answer that, Mr. Frontroth!” Bell shouted to the presenter. Councilman Mikel Trapp leaned over to whisper something to Bell who then turned to a nearby sheriff’s deputy and ordered him to eject Bright from the meeting. Bell also had a citizen sitting near Bright ejected as well.

As the two were escorted out, Gilbert offered a consoling comment to the two, “Council doesn’t have any input, either.”

After the vote, Pauley called upon Bell to reinstitute the second public comment session, which was eliminated in March 2020.

In addition, Pauley said meeting agendas should be published earlier than the Friday immediately preceding Monday meetings. He said that would give council members more time to prepare for meetings and residents more advance notice of council business.

Video Differs with Media Report on Bell’s Brush-Up with 1st Responders

WINNSBORO – In a confrontation with Fairfield County first responders following last week’s county council meeting, a video showed Council Chairman Moses Bell, when asked whether he thought he was a county employee, responding, “Yes, I am.”

During a council meeting earlier that evening, Bell and council members Shirley Greene, Michael Trapp and Tim Roseborough voted to pass first reading of an ordinance that would make all full time employees, including each council member, eligible to receive $1,200 from the first $2.2 million installment of the county’s American Rescue Plan (ARP) funds. A second $2.2 million installment will be received in 2022. The vote also gives $600 to all part-time employees and $200 to all temporary employees, including poll workers, for a total payout to employees of $460,000.

But according to ARP guidelines, council members are likely not eligible for the funds.

While council members receive salaries, insurance, retirement and workers compensation paid for by the county, a state official, in answer to an inquiry by The Voice, said council members are considered employees for tax purposes only, that they are not employees of the town subject to town personnel policies or eligible for additional payments to employees.

Council members not eligible

The U. S. Treasury’s final interim rule on ARP funding only designates premium pay for essential workers, and it is unlikely that council members can qualify as essential workers.

According to the state statue, when council votes to increase pay to its members, that increase cannot be implemented until after council’s next general election.

In a July 8, 2013 ruling, the S.C. Attorney General stated, “The General Assembly shall never grant extra compensation, fee or allowance to any public officer…

“Although the language of this provision expressly prohibits only the General Assembly from taking any such action, we have repeatedly advised that it also serves to limit political subdivisions, such as counties and municipalities, at least in the powers delegated to them by the General Assembly. Ops. S.C. Att’y Gen., 2012 WL 6218333 (Dec. 4, 2012); 2002 WL 1340428 (May 9, 2002).

“Our Supreme Court has defined ‘extra compensation’ for purposes of Article III, § 30 as “any compensation over and above that fixed by law or contract at the time the service was rendered.” State ex rel. McLeod v. McLeod, 270 S.C. 557, 559, 243 S.E.2d 446, 447-48 (1978).

Councilmembers Clarence Gilbert, Douglas Pauley and Neil Robinson, who said they were not included in creating the ordinance, voted against it, saying that essential workers in hazardous jobs like first responders should get the bulk of the ARP disbursements for employees.

First responders push back

It is that issue that brought 40 or so Fairfield County first responders to last week’s council meeting to protest what they felt was the majority 4’s inequitable distribution of the ARP premium payments. Prior to the meeting, four speakers – Fairfield County Coroner Chris Hill, Jennifer Fitch of EMS and citizens Randy Bright and Jeff Schaffer – supported the first responders’ viewpoint. 

While another media stated that public comment speaker Jeff Schaeffer was ejected from the meeting, a video of the meeting confirms that while Bell called for Schaffer to be ejected, he was not.

That media also reported that first responders “left in a huff” and “wait[ed] outside until council adjourned,” and “engaged in a heated discussion with Council Chairman Moses Bell until a concerned citizen encouraged Bell to ‘leave for his own safety.’

Video shows no danger

But a video of the scene outside the county building more accurately shows that Bell was never in any danger from the first responders, and that it was a South Carolina Law Enforcement (SLED) agent, in attendance on a separate issue, who placed his hand on Bell’s shoulder as Bell was shouting at first responders. The agent then guided Bell to his truck and suggested that he get in his truck and go home. Bell complied, but rolled down his window and shouted accusations at the first responders as he drove off.

While the video of the encounter shows the situation becoming boisterous, it also shows Bell thrusting himself into that escalation time after time, unlike Trapp, Green and Roseborough who exited the building, acknowledged the first responders, then got into their cars and left without confrontation.

The video shows Bell readily participating in a shouting match with first responders. Three times he started to get in his pickup truck to leave, each time turning back to the first responders, most of whom were across the street from him.

“You all didn’t say a word when they didn’t give you a dime,” Bell shouted several times, referencing comments he’d made earlier that evening in chamber that blamed members of a previous council for refusing to give CARES Act money to first responders a year earlier.

 “Last year, [former Councilwoman] Bertha Goins suggested that we give the essential workers – to include EMS and the sheriff’s department – a bonus pay,” Bell said. “Members from Saving Fairfield got involved and it didn’t even get to the agenda.”

That didn’t happen

Councilman Neil Robinson said that is incorrect.

According to Robinson, the proposal to give CARES Act funds to first responders last year was made by Goins and himself, but that it was Bell who balked at giving the CARES money to the first responders, Robinson said. “He wouldn’t cooperate in funding the first responders unless all the county employees got the same money, just like he’s doing now. He caused such a ruckus that the proposal never went anywhere, never even got to council for a vote,” Robinson said. “It was not Saving Fairfield’s or other council members. Sometimes Mr. Bell gets very creative in how he remembers things.”

Another sticking point with first responders, Gilbert, Pauley and Robinson was the ordinance’s allocation of $500,000 for recreation in Trapp’s district – $350,000 for a park in Blair and $150,000 for park upgrades at Willie Robinson Park – instead of to first responders.

“Is that $500,000 for recreation a bonus, too?” one first responder called out to Bell, mocking Bell’s insistence that the ARP payouts to employees was an employee bonus since they had not received a raise last year.

The ordinance allocated payouts for the following:

• $350,000 for a mini park on Overlook Road in Blair, Trapp’s district
• $150,000 for upgrades to Willie Robinson Park, also in Trapp’s district
• $8,000 for a Community in Schools program
• $500,000 to repair a DHHS building roof
• $75,000 for a project manager position in Economic Development
• $30,000 to repair a fire truck engine

“We don’t know yet which of these are actually allowed by the U.S. Treasury’s interim rule for payout,” Pauley told The Voice. “We have a lot to look into before paying out this money.

The third and final vote on the ordinance is set for 6 p.m., Monday, Nov. 8, in council chambers.

CORRECTION: The story originally said that Willie Robinson Park is in Councilman Bell’s district. That was an error. It is in Councilman Trapp’s district.