BLYTHEWOOD – Four years and many meetings later, Doko Depot is on the cusp of being finished, purchased and open for business by sometime in September or October, according to Chris Hill of Hill Construction LLC.
Representing Don and Sarah Russo of Freeway Music who are purchasing the building, Hill appeared before the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) Monday evening to request approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to permit the alteration of the Doko Depot Building.
The proposed alterations will address additional points of entry to the building to accommodate the music store on one end and a restaurant on the other.
The proposal includes the replacing two rear windows with entry doors consistent in appearance with the doors present on the existing structure. Another alteration would provide entry to and from a music/storage room and accommodate food deliveries to the restaurant.
Additionally, Hill is requesting a door located at the north end of the building be relocated to redirect traffic. The proposed doors will visually match the existing doors.
The applicant also proposed the installation of two new windows on the rear of the building (side facing the railroad track). Those windows would provide additional light for classrooms in the music store. The windows will be identical to the existing windows, so that the character of the property will be maintained, Hill said.
The board voted unanimously to approve the alterations
Signage will be reviewed by the BAR at a later time in consultation with staff.
WINNSBORO – After praising the Fairfield School District Honors Chorus’ recent trip to Italy, school officials couldn’t answer questions about how much the trip cost, how many people actually went or questions about funding.
At Tuesday night’s board meeting, when pressed by board trustee Paula Hartman for participation and cost figures, Superintendent Dr. J.R. Green couldn’t specifically say.
“It was less than 20 [students], Ms. Hartman. Apparently some were not able to make the trip,” Green said. “I won’t say definitively. I can’t remember what it wound up being, but it was less than 20. I would have to check to say for sure.”
“And how many adults?” Hartman asked.
“I couldn’t say for sure either,“ Green answered.
Hartman then questioned the cost.
“What was the total that the district paid for the trip?“
“I couldn’t recall that off the top of my head, Ms. Hartman,“ Green replied.
In January, the Fairfield County Board of Trustees called a special meeting where they voted to pledge $30,000 in taxpayer money toward a $35,000 down payment for the trip.
In January, school officials said the $30,000 expenditure was necessary to meet a time-sensitive booking deadline. A school district memo estimated the trip would cost $129,000, with about 30 people attending at a cost of $4,300 per person.
Green said in January that students would “contribute the vast amount of the cost” by fundraising. An exact breakdown of public versus private funding for the Italy trip was not available late Tuesday.
Things turned heated when Hartman asked if some district students had been involved in cheating on an exam. Green and several board members pushed back on Hartman’s question, without offering an outright denial.
“I’m not even going to address that,” Green said. “The fact that you cast that kind of aspersion, whether it’s a student in the STEM program, honors program or a student in a general program, I think is totally inappropriate.”
Board Chairman William Frick chided Hartman for raising the issue in public because he thought it should have been discussed privately with the superintendent. He also suggested Hartman was opening herself to litigation.
“Ms. Hartman, I would caution you to not bring up rumors that you heard on the street at a board meeting,” Frick said. “You are libeling a group of people and I would caution you to be careful about that.”
Hartman defended raising the issue, saying she thought the board should be informed if student cheating was taking place.
The discussion continued for a few more minutes, ending with Frick slamming his gavel on the dais and ruling Hartman out of order.
Court Replaces Swearingen with Feaster as Chief Magistrate
WINNSBORO – A recently appointed Fairfield County magistrate’s credit problems placed her in jeopardy of having her appointment invalidated.
On July 11, the county’s Columbia-based bond insurer denied Danielle Miller’s application seeking to be bonded, citing Miller’s credit, according to documents The Voice obtained through the S.C. Freedom of Information Act.
Magistrates must be bonded to serve, according to state law.
Miller was one of four new magistrates appointed recently by State Sen. Mike Fanning, D-Great Falls. Fanning couldn’t be reached for comment.
“Unfortunately, Ms. Miller’s credit didn’t meet the requirements for this bond. The application was denied,” a July 11 email from South Risk Management, LLC of Columbia stated.
According to documents obtained through the S.C. Freedom of Information Act, that email was forwarded to the S.C. Court Administration.
“Don’t know what to tell you. (S)he must have a bond or (s)he cannot hold office,” answered an official with Court Administration. “I would have the county manager look into alternative bonding companies. If (s)he is unable to be bonded that is a problem. (S)he would have to take that up with the Senator.”
Miller provides own bond
The following day, however, on July 12, Miller submitted her own bond to the county through Travelers Casualty and Surety of Hartford, Connecticut, in the amount of $10,000.
Had Miller’s efforts to acquire bonding not been successful, she would have been unqualified to serve as magistrate, according to state law.
“Any magistrate not in compliance with this section shall be subject to immediate removal from office until he shows good cause to the Supreme Court for not obtaining such bond,” the law states.
It’s unclear exactly what circumstances impacted Miller’s credit rating.
A default judgment was entered against Miller in July 2008, when she was ordered to pay $7,519,57 to Hudson & Keyse LLC, a debt collection agency, according to Fairfield County court records.
The judgment, however, was signed 11 years ago and most negative credit items typically drop off a credit report after seven years.
Also, in 2017, the three credit bureaus ceased including most civil judgments on a person’s credit report, according to a Consumer Data Industry Association news release.
Fairfield County court records don’t indicate whether or not Miller’s judgment was ultimately paid.
Her case, however, is representative of the kinds of cases over which she would have jurisdiction. Magistrates preside over civil cases up to $7,500 and certain misdemeanor cases, as well as issue bonds in most criminal cases.
Feaster Named Chief Magistrate
In a related matter on July 12, the S.C. Supreme Court issued a surprise order naming Russell Feaster as chief magistrate of Fairfield County, reversing the reappointment of Paul Swearingen as chief magistrate – an appointment that was confirmed by the Senate just two weeks earlier. Swearingen, an attorney, will now serve as a magistrate. Swearingen has served Fairfield County as chief magistrate since July 1, 2017 and as magistrate since 2010. Feaster, who is retired from the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, was appointed magistrate a little over a year ago.
WINNSBORO – The Fairfield County Board of Trustees voted 6-0 Tuesday night to approve a detailed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), pledging the district’s participation and $75,000 in taxpayer money to launch the program in Fairfield County.
Trustee Paula Hartman abstained.
Fairfield County Council has budgeted, but not yet awarded, an additional $75,000 for the Promise initiative. Council members discussed the Promise Program in executive session at its July 8 meeting.
If approved by the County, school district and Midlands Technical College, qualifying Fairfield County students could attend MTC-Winnsboro at no cost. The county has yet to weigh in on whether the program would fund tuition only, or also include books and supplies.
At Tuesday’s school board meeting, Hartman quizzed district officials about the MOU the district signed Tuesday night, which differs greatly from a document signed at a July 8 ceremony between the county, school district and Midlands Tech.
“This particular document that’s in front of us, is that what was signed on [July] 8th?” Hartman asked.
“No ma’am, it is not,” said Board Chairman William Frick. “There was some conversation about what the final agreement would be between the three parties. Since it [the signing] had been scheduled, we chose to go forward [with the shorter MOU]. It was very specifically a non-binding agreement, so essentially that was a ceremonial event that said ‘we intend to do this thing.’ This is the actual document that says ‘we are going to do this thing.’”
Council has not signed the detailed document passed by the Trustees Tuesday night.
Hartman isn’t the only person raising concerns about the Promise Program.
County Councilman Jimmy Ray Douglas has been vocal about his belief that the Winnsboro campus can’t fill classes.
Councilman Douglas Pauley thinks the details of the program are still too vague.
Pauley said any money, if approved, should be dispersed in installments based on conditions instead of by lump sum. The final contract should also clearly state academic, administrative and financial details, he said.
On Tuesday, Superintendent Dr. J.R. Green said approving the Promise Program is a no brainer.
“To suggest Fairfield County should not engage in this kind of innovative thinking is a bit perplexing,” Green said.
The detailed MOU passed by the school board requires applicants to have a 2.0 grade point average, which they must maintain at MTC to continue receiving aid.
Students can receive aid for up to nine semesters and can wait 12 months before enrolling, according to the document.
Kershaw County’s Promise Program, which also serves students in Sumter, Lee and Clarendon counties, restricts aid to six consecutive semesters. Students must also enroll in the summer or fall immediately after high school, the Kershaw Promise website states.
Kershaw only offers tuition aid, not books, supplies, lab fees and other costs.
Fairfield school district is proposing offering aid not only for tuition, but for books and supplies “pending availability of funds.” Greenwood covers tuition and fees.
Greenwood County offers two-year and four-year aid to students attending Piedmont Technical College or Lander University, respectively, according to the Greenwood Promise website.
There are no GPA requirements for high school seniors, though students in two-year programs must maintain a 2.0 and students in four-year programs must maintain a 2.5. They must also take at least 12 credit hours a semester and 24 hours a year, the website states.
Research into the public benefits of Promise Programs is mixed.
In April, NPR affiliate Michigan Radio published a report saying the Kalamazoo Promise Program, previously cited by Dr. Green as the gold standard of Promise Programs, has faced challenges.
Less than half of the initial students receiving aid have successfully earned a college degree. Only 15 percent of those receiving degrees are of African-American or Latino descent, the report states.
“It simply hasn’t changed the socio-economic numbers in our community,” Michael Rice, superintendent of the Kalamazoo school system, told the NPR affiliate.
A 2018 study by The Education Trust, a nonprofit advocacy group focused on educational equality, states that Promise Programs are often underfunded.
The report, though, states eligibility requirements tend to impair the effectiveness of Promise Programs.
“Free college programs that require students to maintain more than half-time enrollment or a GPA higher than 2.0 may shut out the students who stand to benefit the most, including adult students and students who are working while in school,” the report said.
COLUMBIA – On Tuesday night, Richland County Council cast a second vote in as many weeks in favor of a rezoning that could turn a former golf course bordering Crickentree neighborhood into hundreds of homes. A third vote, to be taken Sept. 17, will be the final say on the issue.
The 9-1-1 vote came after Councilwoman Joyce Dickerson, who represents the Crickentree area, presented a plan for developing the 183-acre golf course property that she said was a compromise reached during talks that occurred on July 2, between six Crickentree residents and E-Capital, a Texas investment firm that purchased the property out of bankruptcy last year.
But Crickentree resident Dr. Traci Cooper, who, along with the majority of Crickentree residents, opposes the rezoning, said she was shocked when she heard the plan presented by Dickerson.
“That was not a compromise reached at our meeting,” Cooper, one of the six negotiators, said following Tuesday night’s council meeting.
Dr. Traci Cooper, right, rallies her Crickentree neighbors outside Council chambers Tuesday night following a second defeat by County Council. | Barbara Ball
“That was an exploratory meeting that started out very healthy with both sides putting all their options on the table. But no conclusions were reached,” Cooper said.
“We proposed a map with a 500-foot buffer and a maximum of 140 homes. The E-Capital representative, to his credit, listened to us and said he would take the options we presented back to his planner to see if they would work and that E-Capital would get back to us. We were to have another meeting that never materialized. That’s what Ms. Dickerson should have presented to council, because we had not yet heard back from E-Capital and no consensus had been reached.”
In an email sent hours after the July 2 meeting to inform his fellow residents of the status of the evening’s negotiations, Crickentree resident Russ St. Marie wrote, “We offered a 500-foot buffer option that would have allowed E-Capital 138 homes. However, Mrs. Dickerson said she would not support a 500-foot buffer.”
In that email, St. Marie wrote that Dickerson had agreed to doubling the 150-foot buffer to 300 feet.
The next day, July 3, residents received an email from Dickerson indicating an agreement had been reached at the July 2 meeting for a 250-foot buffer and 205 homes.
“We did not hear back from E-Capital, so we sent a letter to Ms. Dickerson on July 7 reiterating our proposal but heard nothing further from either Ms. Dickerson or E-Capital until she announced her plan to Council last night,” Cooper told The Voice on Wednesday.
“The negotiations were cherry-picked and presented as an agreed-upon plan. How were the other council members to know her plan was not something we had agreed to?” Cooper said.
“Our proposal is a win-win for everyone,” Cooper told The Voice. “They still get to build and make a profit of about $24 million, and we get something that we want. I hope they [council] will look at our plan.”
Dickerson told The Voice on Wednesday that she left the July 2 meeting with the understanding that a consensus had been reached for 205 homes and a 250-foot buffer.
“I wasn’t going to make E-Capital give up any more homes since they were giving another 100 feet of buffer,” Dickerson said.
“While I don’t doubt what Ms. Dickerson is saying was actually discussed [with residents], I would like to see it in writing,” Councilman Calvin ‘Chip’ Jackson said after Dickerson made her proposal to council.
Jackson moved to table the issue until specifics could be worked out and sent back in writing to council.
“I don’t see why there is such a rush to do this, why can’t we defer it until the August meeting, until the details are worked out and if not, then it can be deferred again until the details are worked out and presented to this council,” Jackson said.
Jackson’s motion to defer failed.
Council voted 9-1-1 to approve the rezoning with Councilwoman Allison Terracio voting against and Jackson abstaining.
On June 25, the council voted 7-3 in favor of the rezoning requested by E-Capital. While the county’s planning staff recommended the requested rezoning from Traditional Recreational Open Space (TROS) to Low Density Residential (RS-LD), the Planning Commission voted twice against recommending the rezoning to Council.
The third and final vote is set for Sept. 17 at County Council Chambers.
BLYTHEWOOD – Three seats on Blythewood Town Council will be on the town’s election ballot Nov. 5 – two council seats and the mayor’s seat.
Because the mayor’s seat has term limits, Mayor J. Michael Ross will not seek re-election.
Councilman Eddie Baughman told The Voice that he will be seeking re-election. Councilman Malcolm Gordge, whose term is also up, said he will campaign to become the town’s next mayor.
Whether running for a seat or voting for one, the following is information residents need to know to participate in the Nov. 5 town election.
Filings for seats open at noon on Aug. 22 at Town Hall. Because Blythewood is not districted, the town’s candidates are at-large. Candidates will file by Statement of Candidacy.
Filings close at noon, Sept. 6. Candidates must file Statements of Economic Interests electronically with the State Ethics Commission and paper copies with the Blythewood Town Clerk by 5 p.m. that day. Candidates are certified by the Richland County Election Commission.
For residents who plan to vote in the November election, Oct. 5 is the last day to register to vote in person (9 a.m. – 12 p.m.) Oct. 6 is the last day to register to vote by fax/online (until 11:59 p.m.) Oct. 7 is the last day for a by-mail registration to be postmarked.
Oct. 7 is also the day absentee ballots are available at Richland County Voter Registration office.
The general election is held on Nov. 5. Winners are determined by non-partisan plurality method.
For information call Blythewood Town Hall at 803-754-0501 or the Richland County Election Commission/Voter Registration at 803-929-6000.
WINNSBORO – A Fairfield County incinerator proposal remains a hot topic between Winnsboro area residents and county leaders.
Over the objections of residence in attendance, Fairfield County Council voted 5-2 Monday night to rezone 11 acres off Old Airport Road as part of a plan to replace a wood chipper with an incinerator.
Council members Moses Bell and Mikel Trapp voted against the rezoning.
Those voting in the majority said the incinerator represented the cheapest and most environmentally viable option. They also said the rezoning vote doesn’t mean the incinerator is automatically a done deal.
Others weren’t convinced.
Shirley Seibles, an opponent of the incinerator, questioned whether it really falls outside a 500-foot buffer zone with residents’ homes. She said true distance is closer to 387 feet.
“It is not 500 feet unless it goes into someone else’s property,” she said. “We think that’s a matter of environmental concern.”
William Ott, an engineer with Davis and Floyd, Inc. of North Charleston, said measurements show the incinerator does lie at least 500 feet from the nearest home.
Ott added that state and federal regulators would closely monitor the incinerator, especially in the early months, to ensure it complies with regulations. He said environmental impacts on residents would be minor to nonexistent.
“These same pollutants are emitted out of your car,” Ott said. “These standards are set so that they will not be a hazard or health concern to the community.”
Seibles and others pressed the council to consider acquiring property located behind the site and locating the incinerator there, further shielding residents from its impacts.
“We are asking again you not put our property in jeopardy by voting for this air burner,” Seibles said. “Are you financially ready to accept the liability that will come from the citizens of Airport Road and the surrounding area for health concerns that may come, that will come, from being exposed to these kind of carcinogens?”
County leaders, however, said acquiring the eight acres wouldn’t be economically feasible.
“I really don’t want to be a part of something that’s going to add to their illness. Have we looked at a plan B?” Councilman Clarence Gilbert asked.
“Your concerns are valid. We should have a plan B, we do not have at this point,” County Administrator Jason Taylor answered. “It’s expensive to do that.”
Councilwoman Bertha Goins didn’t think purchasing the property was even possible since it’s owned by Dominion Energy, which acquired the eight-acre parcel after acquiring SCANA.
“My understanding is the county does not own that property,” Goins said. “The previous contract has expired. What they allow to go into that particular area will not be up to us.”
Council members were originally set to approve third reading on June 24, but deferred the matter so residents and elected officials could tour a similar, but substantially larger incinerator in Richland County.
Residents and opposing council members said the Richland County incinerator emitted large amounts of smoke, affirming their opposition to the Fairfield County incinerator.
“The one in Richland County was old and smoking from everywhere,” Bell said.
Ott said the Fairfield County incinerator would limit smoke emissions.
“The one in Richland County was overloaded. That’s going to cause smoke to release,” Ott replied, noting that with the rezoning, the county would still need to obtain air quality and solid waste permits, offering residents further opportunities for public comment.
Ridgeway resident Randy Bright said just because a facility is permitted doesn’t mean it’s right for the community.
“When it comes to the environment, even though you get a permit, you’ve got to be doubly sure that that’s correct,” Bright said. “How many EPA things have been approved in the past and turned out to not be so good?
“Let’s not rush to a site, let’s pick a site that won’t bother anybody.”
A memorandum of understanding to create a Promise Program was signed Monday by Midlands Tech President Ron Rhames, Fairfield County School Board Chair William Frick and County Council Chair Cornelius Robinson. | Barbara Ball
WINNSBORO – Providing free technical college tuition to financially struggling students is noble. Supporters say the Fairfield County taxpayer-funded Promise Program initiative will open college to more students and boost the local workforce.
On Monday, representatives from Fairfield County, the Fairfield County School District and Midlands Technical College inked a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), pledging their commitment to the Promise initiative.
“This is a wonderful program and a way to move our county forward,” County Administrator Jason Taylor said to those gathered at the signing. “A good education is one of the surest ways to guarantee that our children will have access to good jobs and the opportunity for a better future.”
Later that night, Fairfield County Council discussed in public, and also behind closed doors, its role in the Promise Program, recently pitched by Dr. J.R. Green, district superintendent.
“Any kid in Fairfield County could go to Midlands Technical Institute at no cost,” Green said. “Students have to apply for financial aid. They’ll look at all the federal and state aid, and Promise revenue will cover the difference. But no one will be required to pay any tuition.”
Similar programs exist in Kershaw, Sumter, Lee, Green wood, Clarendon and Williamsburg counties, according to the S.C. Technical College System, which governs the state’s technical schools.
Most counties make free tuition available, but not unconditionally. The only conditions of note in the Fairfield MOU are that recipients must live in Fairfield County and graduate from a public or private school, approved homeschool or have a GED.
Greenwood prorates tuition aid based on a student’s length of residency, according to the Greenwood Promise Program website.
Sixty-five percent aid is offered to students attending grades 9-12, but students attending two years or less receive nothing. Full aid only goes to lifetime residents.
In Sumter County, qualifying students can attend Central Carolina Technical College at no cost provided they maintain a 2.0 GPA and remain enrolled for six consecutive semesters, according to the CCTC website.
Aid only covers tuition, however. Books, lab fees and other miscellaneous costs aren’t covered, the website states. What the funding covers is not made clear in the Fairfield Promise MOU.
Promise creates confusion
There’s some disparity between how some council members, the school district and MTC perceive the Promise Program arrangement.
The MOU signed Monday describes the deal as a “nonbinding Memorandum of Understanding to announce their intent and purpose to work together to establish the Fairfield County Promise Program.”
An MTC media advisory announcing the signing states that dignitaries “will sign an agreement that allows 2019 high school and GED graduates living in Fairfield County to attend MTC at no cost.”
Both the school district and county have budgeted $75,000 for the Promise Program, but neither body has formally voted to authorize any expenditures for the program, though approval is likely.
At Monday’s council meeting, Councilman Jimmy Ray Douglas repeated prior assertions that MTC doesn’t attract enough students to its Winnsboro campus to justify holding classes there.
“I’m not against educating children, I’m all for it,” Douglas said. “I’ve been trying to get Midlands Tech to teach classes in the last five years, yet they’ve had no classes whatsoever. It’s a shame we have to pay them $75,000 to start a class.”
Speaking to The Voice on Tuesday, Councilman Douglas Pauley identified several elements that concern him, namely cost and accountability.
Pauley said MTC needs to more clearly state how many students plan to attend and what classes will be offered. He said county’s $75,000 share should be doled out in quarterly installments based on MTC’s ability to meet those standards.
“To give a lump sum of money with no accountability to the taxpayers how that $75,000 is specifically going to be used, I’m not in favor of that,” he said.
In addition, Pauley said students should be required to take more classes than the six-credit-hour minimum he said other council members support.
Many traditional student loan programs require students to register for at least 12 credit hours to receive full financial aid.
Pauley also said students should meet specific academic standards to qualify.
“To me, with a C average, you’re just kind of coasting along,” he said. “If someone else is paying for your college tuition, you can do better than a C average.”
Other council members embraced the Promise Program.
“This is a huge deal to be able to allow our students to go to school tuition free,” Councilman Moses Bell said. “This is big, this is a good thing. This is something we ought to be jumping up and shouting about.”
Council Chairman Neil Robinson also supports the Promise Program.
“I just think investing in our future for the kids is definitely something that’s needed in this county so we can have a stronger workforce, a better quality of life,” he said. “We’d be bridging that gap for the workforce.”
Robinson said the Promise Program would likely receive further discussion at the next meeting set for July 22.
Transparency concerns
Government secrecy is also throwing cold water on the initiative for some.
On Monday night, council members retreated behind closed doors to further discuss the Promise Program. Ridgeway resident Randy Bright chided the council for doing so.
“You’ve taken a slip back with this Promise Program. There’s lots of confusion, lots of secrecy,” Bright said during public comments. “Why are you talking about this in executive session? This is between governments. You shouldn’t need to talk about this in executive session. It should be open.”
An agenda for the meeting stated the executive session was for a “contractual matter” to discuss and receive “legal advice regarding [an] agreement between Fairfield County, Fairfield County School District and Midlands Technical College as to the Promise Program.”
Pauley said he didn’t agree with discussing the Promise Program behind closed doors.
“I thought that matter pertaining to the Promise Program could’ve been done in an open forum,” he said. “I didn’t see a need for it to be in executive session.”
Monday night’s executive session was improper because the county had already signed an MOU, said Jay Bender, an attorney with the S.C. Press Association, of which The Voice is a member.
Bender also called the receipt of legal advice explanation “vaguely worded.”
“The MOU sounds like a contract to me,” Bender said. “If there’s an MOU, which is a contract, you can’t go into executive session under the rubric of contractual matters.”
BLYTHEWOOD – The Blythewood Planning Commission voted Monday night to table a request by Richland County to rezone three connected parcels west of I-77, totaling 163 acres, to Limited Industrial 2 District (LI-2) zoning. Tiffany Harrison represented Richland County’s Economic Development Office at the meeting.
Richland County Economic Development Office is requesting to rezone 163 acres of property in the town to Limited Industrial 2 (LI-2) zoning. | Ashley Ghere
The parcels, currently zoned Development (D-1) are bordered roughly by Blythewood Road to the north, Community Road to the east and Ashley Oaks neighborhood to the southwest.
The three parcels are part of approximately 1,000 acres of potential industrial use. Two years ago, at Richland County’s request, council rezoned approximately 600 acres to the south of the 163 acres to Li-2.
On March 25, town council voted to update the town’s Master Plan priorities listing Economic Development as a number one priority. From that list Council voted to define a possible technical village within the 1,000 acres.
“The LI-2 zoning district allows a wider variety and greater intensity of manufacturing uses than the Limited Industrial (LI) district but not the most intense manufacturing uses of the Basic Industrial (BI) district,” Town Administrator Brian Cook explained to the commission.
But the long and varied list of manufacturing businesses that are allowed to operate under the LI-2 zoning designation did not set well with many of the 20 or so residents who attended the meeting.
Those uses include textile manufacturing, computer and electronics, pharmaceutical and medicine, aircraft, motor vehicle body and trailers, plastic and rubber products, certain steel and aluminum products, forging and stamping, machine shop, small arms ammunition and many other types of manufacturing as well as a number of kinds of services, warehousing and gas stations.
A complete list of allowed and conditional uses is available at town hall and on The Voice’s website (blythewoodonline.com).
Both Harrison and Blythewood’s Economic Development Director Ed Parler assured naysayers that the list does not include dirty manufacturing.
“This is the highest and best use of this property,” Parler said, noting that it would provide jobs and revenue for the town.
Asked by newly appointed commissioner Ed Kesser if the County has a master plan for the industrial acreage, Harrison said there would be covenants and restricts put in place, but that the priority is to get the properties rezoned. She said Richland County can’t move forward until the zoning is in place.
“A lot of these kinds of manufacturing you’re not going to want in your neighborhood, Commission Chairman Donald Brock said, looking over the list. “And what if you get the zoning, but don’t get the cleaner manufacturers to come here, then will you take less desirable ones?” Brock asked.
“We don’t want to limit uses too much,” Harrison said. “We want to keep it broad.”
“I feel like we’ve been kept in the dark,” Tom Utroska said, echoing others in the audience. “I’m not opposed to LI-2, but you need a better explanation before you make a recommendation to Council,” Utroska said to the commissioners.
Heeding that advice, the commission voted 4-2 to table the item until the August meeting.
RIDGEWAY/WINNSBORO – Summer fun is making the rounds in Ridgeway and Winnsboro as Story Walk brings kids and their families on to downtown sidewalks to read the “big book”, Good Food, written by DeMar Reggier, Much like a progressive dinner where participants eat from house to house until they finish the meal with dessert at the last house, so the book is read from store to store to store until it’s finished.
The giant pages of the book are taped in merchant windows up and down the streets of Ridgeway and Winnsboro, and the book is read as the reader moves down the street from store window to store window.
Book pages pasted on Ruff Furniture doors in Ridgeway.
Participants read each page and then follow the sequential numbers and simple instructions telling them where to walk and find the next page.
“This is a committee project initiated by the 15 members of Eat Smart Move More Fairfield,” explained the group’s chairperson, nutritionist Earnestine Williams. “We teamed up with the Fairfield County Libraries for the project.”
This combined effort to get folks out and moving and kids from pre-kindergarten through third grade reading more this summer is William’s first effort in this format.
“The merchants have been very supportive,” said Williams. “If the program is well received, we would continue it again next year.”
“The Good Food book has 28 pages”, she explained. “I believe we have 7 or 8 merchants in Ridgeway, and 14 merchants in Winnsboro with the enlarged pages in their windows.”
In Ridgeway, participants start at R. H. Lee & Co, 100 S. Dogwood Avenue, and proceed down Dogwood and around the block to Palmer Street and down both sides of Palmer Street.
In Winnsboro, the walk starts at Napa Auto Parts, 152 N. Congress Street, and continues down Congress Street, crosses over and continues down the opposite side of the street to finish at the library.
“We have already had some children complete the walk,” Beth Bonds, Circulation Desk Manager for the Fairfield County Library in Winnsboro, said. “After the participants have finished the whole walk by reading the book pages either in Ridgeway or Winnsboro, they can then come to the main branch of the Library in Winnsboro and receive a certificate, a prize and have their photo taken.”
The walk began June 8 and will run until July 31, 2019.
Sponsors include the Fairfield County Library, Eat Smart Move More Fairfield and Fairfield Community Coordinating Council.
For more information, Contact Williams at 803-635-1052 Ext. 2050.
