Blythewood Online 691

Tag: slider

  • Kroger hit by armed robber

    BLYTHEWOOD – A suspect wanted in connection with a strong-armed robbery at about 2:20 a.m. on May 22, rammed a grocery cart into an employee and ran from the store with a cart full of items from the Kroger store on Roberts Branch Parkway just off Killian Road.

    The Richland County Sheriff’s Department is asking for the community’s help in identifying the suspect, who was recorded on a surveillance camera fleeing the store (view video here) with approximately $100 worth of goods in a grocery cart.

    If you have any information about this incident, please contact Crimestoppers at 1-888-CRIME SC (888-274-6372).

  • Boat crash lawsuit settled

    Lanier

    COLUMBIA – A little over a year after a nighttime boat crash killed two Blythewood men on Lake Murray, the driver of one of the boats has settled two lawsuits that were filed against him that alleged wrongful death and carelessness.

    David Bruce Dyer was driving the powerboat that collided with a bass boat near Dreher Island the night of April 21, 2017. The crash killed Danny Phillips, 37, and his longtime friend, Shawn Lanier, 28, who were in the bass boat when the crash occurred.

    Phillips

    An injured passenger in the bass boat, Ashley Thomas Wannamaker, and his wife, filed a personal injury suit against Dyer soon after the collision. A few months later, Lanier’s family filed a wrongful death suit against Dyer, who is president of Dyer Toyota and whose name appears on several Midlands auto dealerships.

    Richland County court records show that both cases were dismissed on Monday. According to court documents, the parties involved in the litigation settled their claims; however, the documents did not outline details of the settlement.

  • Voters reject Jenkinsville annexation

    Turnout was High: 34 of 54 registered voters

    JENKINSVILLE – Annexation appears to be off the table in Jenkinsville.

    The controversial measure, which would have annexed 143 properties into the town limits, failed by a 19-15 vote, according to unofficial results.

    There were 36 ballots cast, but two under-votes – one absentee and one in-person – were discounted, said Debby Stidham, the county’s director of voter registration and election.

    Certification of election results is scheduled for 10 a.m. Friday, June 8 at the Fairfield County Voter Registration and Elections office at 315 S. Congress Street in Winnsboro.

    Turnout was comparatively high, with 34 ballots counted out of 54 registered voters.

    Only registered voters living in the proposed annexation area were eligible to vote Tuesday. There will be no mandatory recount.

    Contested ballots, allegations of voter intimidation and even threats of legal ac tion emerged during the election process, according to observers.

    Jenkinsville Mayor Gregrey Ginyard, who supported the ballot question and was present at the polling location Tuesday, said in a brief interview Wednesday that he doesn’t anticipate filing any election protests.

    Ginyard also couldn’t say whether or not Jenkinsville Town Council would consider pursuing annexation in a future referendum.

    “The outcome of the election is the outcome of the election,” he said. “As far as I’m concerned, the people spoke. It is what it is.”

    Others in attendance, however, said moments after election results were announced, Ginyard spoke openly about filing a protest and consulting a lawyer.

    “He was shocked, upset. He got loud,” said Fairfield County Councilwoman Bertha Goins, who was also present at the polling location and opposed annexation.

    “It was unbelievable. He said, ‘I’m going to protest, I’m going to call a lawyer.’ He was beside himself,” Goins added.

    The Voice was unable to ask Ginyard about Goins’ remarks because the call ended Wednesday before press time.

    Election controversies

    Unless a protest is filed, the 19 votes against annexation mean the measure dies. Stidham said according to state law, a majority of votes counted is required for a referendum measure to pass.

    In the case of the Jenkinsville vote, the magic number was 18, since 34 votes were counted, Stidham said.

    Tuesday’s election didn’t come without controversy. Several sources confirm at least one ineligible voter, who didn’t live in the proposed annexation area, cast a ballot. It’s unclear how that person voted.

    In addition, Ginyard spent most of the day at the polling location.

    At times, the mayor called voters over so he could speak with him before they could sign in with poll workers, Goins and Stidham said.

    State law prohibits public officials from campaigning inside a polling location, but the law does permit officials to have casual conversations. It’s unclear what Ginyard discussed with the voters.

    A state election official said Ginyard calling out to voters before registering would be questionable.

    “That certainly would not look good and could be construed as campaigning, interfering, or intimidating voters,” said Chris Whitmire, spokesman with the S.C. Election Commission.

    “In that case, the managers could ask him to stop that activity or leave the polling place,” Whitmire said.

    Stidham said she spoke to Ginyard about calling out to voters. She also said at least one voter telephoned her office to complain about the activity.

    “I just asked him to let people come into the precinct,” she said. “He was telling them if they could or could not vote.”

    Goins said she was angered by the mayor’s conversations with voters.

    “He was on the side and he would call them over to the area before they came in to vote,” she said. “It was not professional and it was not right.”

    There were also reports of Ginyard jokingly asking poll workers to count the ballots quickly.

    If the results are challenged, Goins said she’d file a counter-challenge.

    Contested ballots?

    Goins and Stidham both said Ginyard did verbally dispute a vote cast by a woman living outside of the proposed annexation area.

    Stidham said the woman’s name appeared on a voting list, but it shouldn’t have been there. She didn’t know how the woman was able to vote.

    Ginyard, observers say, claimed the woman voted against annexation because she sent him a letter stating that was her intention.

    Stidham said strictly looking at ballots, there’s no way to know how any person voted.

    There was no mistaking Ginyard’s reaction to the vote, with Stidham and Goins saying he was shocked. Stidham said Ginyard raised the issue about the woman’s address.

    “The mayor was standing there saying she shouldn’t be allowed to vote, but he didn’t challenge the ballot,” Stidham said.

    Stidham added that she doesn’t know whether any formal election protests will be filed. Any protests must be filed by noon Monday, June 11, she said.

    Goins said she was thankful the measure failed.

    “Thank God and thank the people,” she said. “I thank them for responding the way they did, for stepping up to the plate and did what needs to be done for the good of the community. It makes me very proud to be a representative in this area.”

  • Smith: ‘I won’t seek reelection’

    Council chair ushered in meeting order, efficiency

    WINNSBORO – Fairfield County Council Chairman Billy Smith told The Voice on Tuesday that he will not see re-election to his council seat representing District 7. His term ends Dec. 31.

    Smith

    “My wife has accepted an associate professor position at Louisiana State University, so we’ll be moving to Baton Rouge over the course of the next year. She’ll be moving a little bit earlier than me. I’ll finish out my term on Council and wrap up some other things here, and then I’ll move as well, after the first of the year,” Smith said.

    Smith was, by at least 20 years, the youngest member of council when he was elected to represent District 7 in 2014, during a tumultuous government turnover that changed the council’s balance of power. In spite of his youth, Smith was soon elected chairman by his fellow council members and assumed a strong leadership role. Smith brought a new era to council, conducting orderly, efficient meetings with a strict adherence to parliamentary procedure.

    “Rachel and I would have preferred staying in Fairfield, but we’re having to make the decision that’s best for us and our future. It’s a really good opportunity that we just can’t pass up. It’s one of those things in life that you don’t have much control over,” Smith said.

    The couple was married last month following Rachel (Williamson) Smith’s spring graduation from the University of Georgia with a PhD in industrial-organizational psychology.

    While Smith, who grew up in Fairfield County, said he is looking forward to the couple’s new adventure, he said he is disappointed to have to leave the work he and the council have been devoted to for the last three and a half years.

    “Serving on council has been an extremely rewarding and humbling experience. I was elected at a time that I was able to really kind of dig in and help the county move forward,” Smith said. “We have a good, cooperative council now, and I think we’ve made a lot of big strides. A couple highlights of my time on council are that we managed to find and hire one of the best, most talented administrators in the state, and that we’ve helped to keep 24-hour emergency medical care in the county. Now we’re working, among other big things, toward keeping doctor’s care, primary care, local, and that’s important. We’ve made some good headway in economic development by setting a path for infrastructure improvements, so that the county can capture some of the projects as they come to the state,” Smith said.

    Smith said he feels the county is on a firm footing right now.

    “We’ve made great progress. The good news is that with a combination of citizens who care, council members who care and an administration that cares, we are doing the right things,” Smith said. “The county is on the right track, a positive track, and is headed in the right direction. Now we just need to keep it there and continue to invest in infrastructure, water and sewer, and our future. We should be successful if we do that, if we focus on the right priorities.”

    County Administrator Jason Taylor said he and the staff that works closely with Smith will miss him greatly.

    ”Working with Chairman Smith has been a pleasure,” Taylor said. “He is smart, fair and has proven to be a decisive leader. I have always appreciated his approach to decision making. He makes every effort to make an informed decision, based on facts, while also taking into consideration what is best for all of our citizens. His tenure as chairman coincided with some of the most difficult days in the County’s history, but throughout the abandonment of reactors 2 & 3 at VC Summer, Chairman Smith stood strong, and never wavered in his commitment to doing everything he could to improve things for the citizens of Fairfield County. I am proud to have worked with him.”

    Smith said he will continue to work hard on council until his term ends on Dec. 31.

    “We’ve got some important work to do,” he said. “I’m not just going to sit back for the rest of my time here. No one who knows me, I’m sure, expects that I will become disengaged just because my tenure is ending. I’m not that type of person. I’m driven and I’m going to keep focused on what we have to do, to help set the table for Fairfield County’s future.”

    Related: Gilbert, Brandenburg seek District 7 seat

  • Church burglary suspect nabbed

    WINNSBORO – An individual has been identified as a suspect in several burglaries of churches in the Blair and Jenkinsville areas of Fairfield County over the weekend. Investigators with the Fairfield County Sheriff’s Office have obtained arrest warrants for Terrance Chisolm, 38, of Aiken, SC, for multiple counts of burglary.

    Chisolm is currently in the Newberry County Detention Center. This past holiday weekend, five incidents, three in Blair and two in Jenkinsville, are believed to be related to incidents that occurred in Newberry County several weeks ago.

    In Blair, the Sheriff’s Office responded to burglary/breaking and entering at Zion Hopewell  Church, Salem Presbyterian Church and Little River United Presbyterian Church. Burglaries in Jenkinsville included Little River Baptist Church and White Hall AME Church.

    Besides damage to the church buildings including broken windows and doors, the churches were robbed of speaker systems, televisions, audio/visual recording equipment and other electronics as well as boxes of food items.

    Fairfield County Sheriff Will Montgomery encouraged all citizens be vigilant and immediately report any suspicious activity at churches (vehicles at churches late at night, vehicles attempting to conceal themselves at or near churches, etc.) to the Fairfield County Sheriff’s Office, 803-635-4141.

    Note: The Voice was not able to acquire Chisolm’s mugshot by the press deadline. 

  • Council makes offer to FMH

    Liens, Other Conditions Pose Threat to Sale

    WINNSBORO – In a 6-1 vote Tuesday, council members voted to negotiate a purchase agreement with Fairfield Memorial Hospital to acquire select properties, including doctor offices and the rehab center.

    Councilman Mikel Trapp dissented.

    “[The hospital] knows if they don’t have an infusion of cash by ‘X’ date what that means to them,” Council Chairman Billy Smith said after Tuesday’s meeting. “That was one reason for putting this out tonight, to put the ball in their court to show the citizens that the county is willing to work something out.”

    The motion from Councilman Dan Ruff and approved by council Tuesday night authorizes the Fairfield County administrator and attorney to enter into negotiations with the hospital for purchase of some of its property.

    It also requires a conveyance of clean title and other conditions before any deal is reached, and also for a contract to be brought back for council member review.

    The vote came following a lengthy executive session that also included discussion of a legal update on the county’s lawsuit against SCANA, another legal matter concerning a former employee, and an economic development update of potential contracts.

    Council members only voted on the hospital negotiations. There was no discussion from the dais regarding the measure.

    Tuesday’s vote comes two weeks after the rehab center’s director spoke openly about problems employees face at the hospital.

    “We question and don’t quite understand decisions made by administration, such as finances, priorities at this stage of the game and treatment of employees,” Laura Willingham, the hospital’s rehabilitation director, said. “Of course we’ll do what we’re asked to do. But it’s still disconcerting.”

    “We’re interested in the two medical office buildings – the one housing Fairfield Medical Associates and the John Martin Primary Care facility,” Smith said. “The appraisal for those two is right at $1.6 million. If we add the rehab facility, that appraisal jumps up to about $1.9 million.”

    Smith said there is no timeline, nor a specific dollar figure the county has in mind.

    “We discussed a price, but don’t have a solid number yet,” Smith said. “We’re not settling on a dollar figure.”

    Money, however, isn’t the only issue.

    Smith said the hospital is facing several liens, including one he said was in the neighborhood of $400,000 from the S.C. Department of Revenue.

    The Voice couldn’t independently verify late Tuesday the extent of liens the hospital faces because that information wasn’t available on the Fairfield County Clerk of Court/Register of Deeds website.

    Smith said the immediate concern is ensuring the hospital can get its liens removed. He hopes a deal can be made as soon as possible to preserve general practitioner offices and the rehab facility.

  • Council grills chamber director

    Switzer has until June 12 to submit financial reports

    BLYTHEWOOD – Town Council’s second workshop for the 2018/19 budget, held Thursday, May 24, quickly jumped the rails from a budget discussion to an intense interrogation of the Greater Blythewood Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Mike Switzer about chamber and visitor center financial inconsistencies reported earlier that morning in The Voice.

    The session culminated in Switzer taking cover behind a S.C. Supreme Court ruling issued the day before the meeting in a case brought against the Hilton Head Chamber of Commerce, that strips the media and citizens of their ability to use the S.C. Freedom of Information Act to find out how Chambers of Commerce in the state spend tax-payer money awarded them by governments. With the ruling, only the government who awards the money now has recourse to find out how a chamber spends that money.

    Before Council could take its first swing, however, Switzer ducked, pointing out that Council, itself, has approved of how the chamber has conducted its business and spent its money.

    “I just want to say thank you to the council for the vote of confidence with the increases that you’ve proposed for the upcoming budget. We appreciate your vote of confidence in the work that we’re doing and we’re looking forward to continuing to grow that work,” Switzer said.

    “Despite the very misleading and sometimes often outright false statements that were put out there, we are completely of the upmost integrity at the Chamber, and I think a good testament to that is that the town has had a representative on our board for many years,” Switzer said. He made it clear that the mayor, himself, had served as that representative for a year before Ed Parler, the town’s economic development consultant, took the role.

    “He (Parler) attended every single board meeting where our treasurer’s report is given out and all our financials are laid out,” Switzer said. “The $4,500 increase [$2,500 to the chamber and $2,000 to the visitor center] that you have in the budget for us will cover ¾ of our rent increase of $6,000,” Switzer said.

    The chamber rents space in a building in McNulty Plaza that Mayor J. Michael Ross and a partner own. According to chamber documents acquired by The Voice, annual rent for the chamber/visitor center space was $600 in 2015/16, increased to $12,000 in 2016/17 and $18,000 in 2017/18. The increase of $6,000 will bring the annual rental fee to $24,000. Ross said that increase goes into effect July 1. While Ross recused himself from voting on $7,000 council awarded the Chamber to renovate the space last year, he has voted on all other allotments to the chamber and visitor center.

    “There are some questions being raised…,” Ross said, “and I think that we need a little bit more [information] than what you gave us the last time – a one sheet page. We [the Town] just did our budget proposal and it’s 19 pages long.  Whatever your financials are, I think it’s very important for this council to look at real numbers. And I mean salaries.”

    Ross said the Town government’s books are open for viewing and that the chamber’s should be also.

    “We know how much we’ve spent, how much we’ve got left, what we’re going to do. And I would think y’all are in the same boat. But this council needs to look at that to give you, truly, either a tremendous vote of confidence or have some pointed questions, as does this article, about how your allocations are being made and what salaries are being paid,” Ross said.

    While Switzer said the chamber/visitor center has never denied or refused to answer questions, Councilman Eddie Baughman pointed out that the story in The Voice stated that the newspaper had submitted an FOIA request to the chamber on May 4 and had not yet received any of the requested documentation.

    “I have 30 days to answer it,” Switzer said.

    “If your books are up to date, it shouldn’t take 30 days to answer,” Baughman shot back.

    Ross pointed out during Tuesday night’s council meeting that the same financial information had been requested of the chamber and to the Blythewood Historical Society and that the historical society provided their information the next business day.

    Switzer blamed the delay on several reasons. He said the chamber’s treasurer had been out of town a lot due to his wife’s illness and was only in the office a limited amount of time. Switzer said for that reason the chamber’s financials will not be available until June 12, when the treasurer returns.

    “He’s the one who does all of our billing, does all of our check writing, does everything [financially],” Switzer said. He also said the treasurer had never used a QuickBooks system prior to taking over the chamber’s books less than a year ago.

    While documentation in council member’s packets in January showed that the chamber spends $3,650 for accounting services, there was no explanation as to who receives that money.

    “Angie, who did the books the previous two years, worked with him [the chamber’s treasurer] from July to October, and then she kind of cut him loose. Almost every month, we find things that have to be fixed and corrected, so I’ve identified a couple more things that we need to be making sure they’re in the right category. So, yeah,” Switzer said, “I can promise you, we’ve been working many hours on this. We have always just lumped breakfast [meeting] expenses together, whether it was the rent for the Manor, the cost of a poster, or the cost for the food, we’ve just put it all under breakfast expenses,” he said. “We didn’t sub-categorize. We have since, between our last board meeting and the one upcoming, over the past couple of weeks, we’ve been working on building QuickBooks so that it itemizes everything out into sub-categories, so every event has rent, advertising, marketing, etc. So it’s not just all dumped into one category. You won’t believe the amount of detail,” Switzer said.

    “Well, we look forward to seeing that detail,” Ross said.

    But former Councilman Tom Utroska, who spoke during public comment time, pointed out that while council has been quick to appropriate increasing amounts of funds to the chamber, it has done little to hold the chamber accountable for those funds.

    “Last year at budget time, a representative from the chamber asked for continuing financial support, plus, he offered to operate the Blythewood Visitor Center if town council would fund it,” Utroska said.

    “Reluctantly, council agreed to fund the venture for one year, provided that the Chamber would provide verification [justification] that they were sufficiently increasing Town visitors/tourism,” Utroska said. “Based on council’s concerns at the time, the budget was passed with the oral stipulation that the Chamber would only receive partial funding in July 2017 and would be required to provide documentation of its success in order to receive the balance of the funds in December 2017.

    “At the January 2018 council meeting, the chamber made that presentation, which I would describe as a dog and pony show,” Utroska said.  “Chamber members stated that they were not able to present factual information to verify the visitor center’s operational success. Evidently, however, that presentation was sufficient to keep it funded [by council] through the end of the current fiscal year,” Utroska said.

    “Here we are at the town’s budget process, again, planning to fund the visitor center when, in fact, we have no idea if it is successful or if it is just a financial instrument helping keep the chamber afloat.

    “At the January 2018 meeting, I requested that council hold in abeyance future funding for operations of the visitor’s center until such time as the Town has received an audit that verifies that visitor center funds are providing the Town with the intended results and, that their use complies with state law concerning accommodation tax expenditures for tourism,” Utroska said.

    “If you don’t question their performance and use of funding,” he said to council members, “you are shirking your fiduciary responsibility.”

    The first reading of the 2018/19 budget, which was approved 5-0 Tuesday evening at the regular council meeting, proposes to increase the chamber’s economic development grant from the Town’s general fund from $15,000 to $17,500 and increase the accommodation tax award to the visitor center from $18,500 to $20,500. The mayor also suggested at the May 24 workshop that it might use approximately $10,500 in unspent state accommodations tax revenue to boost the chamber’s allotment to a total of about $48,000 annually.

    Ross is giving Switzer an additional three weeks, until June 12, to get its books in order before presenting them for town hall’s inspection. It is not clear, however, whether council is seeking the chamber’s past years of financials or just the budget for 2018.

    Council will have second reading of the budget June 25.

    Michael Smith contributed to this story. 

    Related articles: News Analysis: Are chambers laundering government money?,  Council considering $56K for Chamber, Visitor’s Center, Chamber financials reflect inconsistencies

  • Goins blasts JV annexation vote June 5

    JENKINSVILLE—A controversial effort by the Town of Jenkinsville to annex 143 properties is drawing the ire of at least one Fairfield County Council member.

    District 4 Councilwoman Bertha Goins, whose district includes Jenkinsville, issued a scathing indictment of the town’s government and the Jenkinsville Water Company, both of which are run by Greg Ginyard.

    During the council comments portion of Tuesday night’s meeting, Goins urged residents to reject the annexation measure.

    “Enemy and evil took it [Jenkinsville] over and took it down,” Goins said. “Twenty years of hate and bitterness should be enough for Fairfield County.”

    Ginyard couldn’t be reached for comment Tuesday.

    The Voice did ask Ginyard about the annexation vote following the Jenkinsville Water Company meeting in May. His only response was, “It’s in your paper.”

    If the annexation vote passes and is ratified, the town’s borders would grow by a factor of four and the value of taxable property would multiply fivefold, from $2,467,200 to $12.3 million, an analysis of public records found.

    Goins didn’t identify any Jenkinsville officials by name Tuesday night, but her disdain for the JWC and town leadership was made perfectly clear.

    “I’m going to stand against the annexation. I’m going to encourage people to vote against it. We’re divided enough by it,” Goins said. “I’m really ticked off about evil in the community.

    “Twenty years ago a snake came in the community and poisoned the community. I’m going to leave it at that,” Goins continued.

    Goins’ address comes on the eve of the June 5 vote.

    The town is utilizing the “25 percent” method to attempt the annexation, requiring the least amount of public support. Under this method, the vote can proceed with only 25 percent of the 143 property owners petitioning town government.

    In a prior interview, Ginyard declined to say why the town is utilizing the 25 percent method.

    Ginyard did say he supports annexation because he thinks a larger town will make it easier for Jenkinsville to generate economic development.

    The vote was originally scheduled for May 1, but was rescheduled to June 5 since state law mandates that annexation votes be taken within the boundaries of the municipality seeking annexation, said Debby Stidham, the county’s director of voter registration and elections.

    Stidham said the May 1 vote was previously scheduled to be held at the town’s volunteer fire department. But, she said, the town’s traditional voting hub technically lies outside Jenkinsville town limits.

    Now the election will be held at the old volunteer fire department and EMS station on S.C. 213. Polls will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.

    Stidham said her office hasn’t received any complaints or concerns from voters. She said communications with town officials have been strictly logistical in nature.

    “It’s actually been quiet. So far I’ve not had anybody calling and asking anything,” Stidham said. “I hope that means people are interested and know what they need to know.”

    The deadline for voters to cast absentee ballots by mail expires June 1 at 5 p.m.

    After that, voters can cast absentee ballots in person at the Fairfield County Voter and Registration Office through June 4.

    Related articles:  Jenkinsville prepares to annex 143 properties, Letter to the Editor: No to Annexation June 5,  Notice of Annexation Election: Town of Jenkinsville,

  • Council considering $56K for Chamber, Visitor’s Center

    BLYTHEWOOD- Asking for more accommodation tax and general fund money has become a common theme for the Greater Blythewood Chamber of Commerce, and Council continues to up the numbers every year.

    In 2017, Chamber Executive Director Mike Switzer sought additional funds of nearly $71,000 before scaling that number back amid town council protest.

    Of the $71,000, $33,000 was earmarked for the Blythewood Visitor’s Center which operates under the Chamber. Switzer ultimately received $18,500 which was to be dedicated to pay for an employee for the Center. And just last month, the chamber requested and received an additional $7,643 for the visitor’s center, citing projected deficits due to increases in hours worked, but no specifics.

    Now, Switzer is asking Council to increase the economic development grant the chamber receives from the Town from $15,000 to $20,000 in next year’s town budget. He also wants the Town to increase the annual accommodation tax funding for the visitor’s center from $18,500 to $25,000 and an increase in funding for the Big Grab from $8,750 to $12,500.

    Blythewood Town Council, initially at least, wasn’t willing at all to entertain $25,000 for the visitor’s center, preferring instead to leave funding at the current $18,500.

    “I kind of get tired, and there’s not many people who come in and do this, when you keep coming and asking,” Mayor J. Michael Ross said during the May 10 budget work session. “When you don’t get to a certain number, you want more. That doesn’t seem fiscally responsible to me,” Ross continued. “You have to look from within.”

    As the meeting proceeded, however, council member’s tone changed. They soon tentatively agreed to increase the annual visitor’s center funding to $20,500, with the potential for an additional windfall of $10,500 ($3,000 discovered in unspent accommodations tax revenues plus $7,441 that was returned unexpectedly by The University of South Carolina from a recent equestrian competition for which the town provided funding.)

    If the proposed funding is approved, the chamber will end up receiving a total of $57,500, an increase of $15,250 over current funding.

    The appropriations making up the $10,500 funding came from what’s called the “30 percent” fund. State law requires that 30 percent of accommodation tax revenues be spent specifically on an agency to promote tourism. It can’t be spent on salaries or operational expenses, the Town’s assistant town administrator, Chris Keefer, cautioned council members during the work session.

    “This is where the TERC dings us every year,” she said. “That money is supposed to go to some organization that has some existing tourism marketing program.”

    TERC, or Tourism Expenditure Review Committee, operates under the S.C. Department of Revenue. Its job is to review a-tax expenditures to ensure they comply with state law.

    For the visitor’s center to receive both the $20,500 funding and the $10,500 accommodation tax windfall, Ross said the chamber would have to submit a marketing plan by June 15, showing how funds will be spent. If the funds do not go to an agency that promotes tourism by June 30, Ross said, the town must return them to the state.

  • Ridgeway Council proceeds with Cotton Yard purchase

    RIDGEWAY – Mayor Heath Cookendorfer called a special council meeting Monday evening to put the Cotton Yard purchase to bed – to either move forward to purchase it or to back out of the purchase.

    Cookendorfer said he wanted both residents and Council members to have the chance to speak their minds in public about the pending purchase from Norfolk Southern. Two members of the audience, Tina Johnson and Vicki Maass, spoke in favor of the purchase. Council members then had their turns.

    “The Cotton Yard is the center of our town and is an asset,” Councilman Dan Martin said. “Nobody likes the price, but my feeling is that if we pull out now, we’re going to lose $15,000 up front,” Martin said. “It would be good to have control of it. That’s my thinking.”

    “No doubt we need to buy it,” Councilman Rufus Jones agreed, but with a caveat. “I hate to be forced to buy it and that’s what we have to do because of the last administration. We used it for years for free, and they kept messing with the railroad till they got ticked off and I don’t think we have a choice but to buy it. The amount is ridiculous, but I don’t see where we have a choice,” Jones said.

    “I voted against it in the previous administration, and I vote against it now,” Councilman Don Prioleau said. “I felt $73,000 plus all the other fees was too much. As Councilman Jones said, we always used this property at no cost. I voted against it, and today I vote against it.”

    Councilwoman Angela Harrison passed on speaking, and Cookendorfer took his turn.

    “As part of the previous administration, I thought the first price was a fair, economical decision,” Cookendorfer said. “Then we got the second one and I was against that. But I’ve also been one to say I hate losing money. At this point, we’ve spent $15,000 on the earnest money, the survey, legal fees and phase one of the environmental study.  The Cotton Yard is a big part of our downtown, so I agree that we need to move forward with the purchase.”

    Jones said he would like to see the fire station and police station on the property renovated for use as spaces for merchants.

    “Maybe we could get a grant to help pay for it,” Jones said.

    “So am I to understand that there have been discussions about what to do with the buildings in the Cotton Yard that I’ve not been privy to?” Harrison asked.

    “I’ve mentioned in open session that I would like to see something go there as rental space,” Cookendorfer said. “I’ve been more than forthcoming that that is something I would like to see.”

    “In the past we did discuss buying the property under the buildings. Just a discussion. We talked about taking the space next to the (old) post office and making that into public restrooms…” Prioleau said before Harrison interrupted.

    “Well that’s not what’s up for discussion tonight and it wasn’t on the agenda for discussion…”

    “We’re just discussing buying the property and what we’ll do with it if we buy it…,” Prioleau said.

    After further discussion about boundaries of the Cotton Yard and the railroad’s 65-foot right of way,
    Cookendorfer closed in on the purchase.

    “It sounds like Council would like to move forward except for Councilman Prioleau,” Cookendorfer said. Council agreed that the mayor would contact the Town’s attorney for the contract and move forward with the closing on June 22.

    Following the meeting, Cookendorfer said he would like to see the former Just Around the Corner consignment shop (behind Olde Town Hall Restaurant) renovated for use as public restrooms.

    “I think that would be helpful to the merchants and a good use for the building,” Cookendorfer said. “It’s all about funding. That’s where we stand now.”

    The property inside the red line is the .65 acres the Ridgeway Town Council is purchasing from Norfolk Southern Railroad.