City Council: August 24

Good Neighbor Award

Daniel Culpepper, James Dowdy, Sonny Miles, and Jack Thomas received the “Good Neighbor Award” for their prompt action in helping to put out a fire at the Sandbar Apartments.

Appointments

City Council reappointed John Kachmarsky as Municipal Court Judge, Been Peeples as City Attorney, and Mary Cunningham as Municipal Clerk. Mayor Tim Goodwin reappointed Marlene Estridge as City Clerk/Treasurer. An ordinance bringing the duties and terms of office into compliance with state law was also passed.

Mayor Pro Tem election

To no one’s surprise, Laura Beck was re-elected Mayor Pro Tempore. Every election cycle, which means every two years, Council selects one of its members to act as Mayor during an absence. In the event of a vacancy occurring, the Mayor Pro Tem would act as Mayor until an election could be held.

Red Bays revisited

After all the brouhaha at the last City Council meeting, Pennell Clamp’s ordinance revoking the previous Red Bay Laurel legislation was introduced and received unanimous approval. Now only those Red Bays that pose a threat to life or property will be removed. Not only will the City not pay to remove trees from private property, it will also fine owners who fail to remove hazardous trees. The price for failure to comply is steep – up to $500 and no less than $100. “There’s been lots of studies and work done that show it’s useless to try to fight this doggone little beetle that’s destroying these trees,” Clamp said. “I hate to admit defeat, but it’s fruitless to spend money where we’re not getting any return.”

Waiver of permit fees for lighthouse

Council then addressed the issue of building permit fees for work on the Morris Island Lighthouse that had been waived by then Mayor Carl Beckmann. City Administrator Toni Connor-Rooks said Beckmann’s decision to waive permit fees for work on the Morris Island Lighthouse had never been blessed by City Council, which was necessary in order to make the waiver legal, and that the City lost approximately $16,000 in permit fees due to this waiver. But, “in an effort to show support for this national monument” Council voted to “together as one voice waive all fees” for the ongoing work on the light house that had already been permitted. The waiver of permit fees will not apply to future work on the light house.

In another maverick move, the former Mayor had appointed a bridge committee – which, in and of itself, was a good thing – but, again, he had neglected to get the required blessing of his council, so Council moved to make the committee official.

New equipment for Public Safety

Two new Council members double teamed Chief Boatwright while the third new member tried in vain to defend him. D.J. Rich and Pennell Clamp went straight for the jugular questioning the Chief’s request for radar and camera equipment for two squad cars that had not yet been purchased. “Isn’t that putting the cart before the horse?” Rich asked. The Chief said the money for both the cars and the equipment had already been funded and he was just there to ask permission to swap out some of the equipment since he had determined that his actual needs were somewhat different from Council’s best guess when they itemized expenditures in the FY10-11 budget. The badgering continued to the point that a dismayed Chief Boatwright eventually responded “I have no idea how to answer that question.”

“The Chief is just asking you to take money that’s already been approved and shift it around so he can get the equipment he needs,” said Mayor Goodwin. Laura Beck reinforced the Mayor. “We told the Chief this was how much money he would get and this was what we thought he would need,” she said. “We’re just shifting things around to meet his needs. It’s not impacting the tax payers any more than what has already been allocated.”

Still the Chief was forced to defend his request for two in-car cameras and three radar units instead of the three cameras that had been allocated. “Some of our radars are dying on us, others can only pick up on-coming traffic,” he said. “Equipment that only works part of the time is no good. I asked for six radar units . I need six units. I’m here asking you for three units.” The harassment continued regarding the advisability of purchasing cameras and radar before the Chief had the three new squad cars Council allotted him. “I’m not here asking to buy the equipment today,” Boatwright said, “The money is there. Trust me to use the money as I see fit.”

Paul Hume finally brought some closure. “Everybody is right,” he said, “but this is a process, not an event. We shouldn’t hold up the process. He’s trying to make better use of the money we’ve already given him. He doesn’t want to be waiting for equipment after the cars come in. There are no smoke and mirrors here.”

After unanimous approval of the Chief’s request, Charlie McCarty told a story about two men talking about what they did for a living. “I buy pieces of submarines,” said one of the men. “Pieces of submarines?” said the other. “Why are you buying pieces of submarines?” “Because they’d never give me enough money to buy a whole submarine at one time.” So it goes.

Hobie Cat illegally removed from beach

With Boatwright finally off the hook, the little matter of the Hobie Cat that was damaged when it was removed from the beachfront on October 30, 2009 took center stage. The owner asked the City for $800 to repair the boat and $70 for the permit he had bought to store the boat on the beach since, apparently, that had been money down the drain. Council got all hot and bothered over whether the boat had a current registration since the picture of the boat showed a Michigan registration that expired in 2006 right next to the City of Folly Beach permit, which was issued on July 18, 2009. In the end, they voted unanimously to force the owner to provide proof of ownership and to give them an actual bill for the repairs, and went so far as to suggest that the owner find somebody who would repair the boat for less than $800.

According to records, Public Safety told the woman who complained about the Hobie Cat that the boat was properly permitted and could be stored on the beach, and she threatened to call the mayor. Later that day, Public Works employees were instructed to remove the boat. “Why was the boat removed?” asked Clamp. “There is no one here tonight who can answer that question,” responded Mayor Goodwin, and that was the end of discussion regarding the possible involvement of former mayor Carl Beckmann in the removal of the boat.

But it was Charlie McCarty’s question that really got to heart of the matter. “Do we really want to issue permits for unregistered boats to litter our beach?” Where else can someone park a boat for an entire year for $70? Hobie Cats stored on the beach have become airborne and damaged private property. The Cape Verde hurricanes are lining up like little soldiers ready to march across the Atlantic ocean. What would happen to the stored boats if one of those hurricanes hits Folly Beach?

Planning Commission: September 13

The Planning Commission will hold a Public Hearing on Monday, September 13 to give residents an opportunity to weigh in on the new regulations governing weekly vacation rentals. The Public Hearing will be at 7:00 p.m. in Council chambers.

Share on Facebook

City Council did not meet on July 13 because that was Election Day. Their next regular meeting will be July 27 at 7:00 p.m. in Council chambers. Agenda items were to include ordinances amending the current rules for dogs on the beach, requiring non-residents to purchase a license tag for pets they bring to the beach, and establishing rules for the use of golf carts within the City of Folly Beach, but Mayor Goodwin has decided to have a workshop on those issues so residents can come forward to express their ideas and opinions. The date of the workshop will be announced soon. On the agenda for the July 27 meeting are the repeal of the Red Bay Laurel Ordinance and discussion of the vacation rental management ordinance. Residents are encouraged to attend and speak their minds. To make a citizen comment, all you have to do is show up and sign in. It is not necessary to be placed on the agenda in advance.

Planning Commission

The Planning Commission met on July 12 and the first order of business was to swear in Elton Culpepper, Pennell Clamp’s appointee to the Planning Commission. Then the Planning Commission got down to business.

Zoning Administrator Aaron Pope introduced an ordinance he described as “a regulatory mechanism to manage short-term rentals and the problems associated with them” that will establish requirements for obtaining a business license to rent property on a short-term basis.

One of the issues discussed was limiting the number of occupants and including a list of all occupants on the rental agreement. Sam Robinson said there should be a maximum number of renters based on the number of bedrooms. “It’s a health issue because of the demands on the septic system,” he said, “and a safety issue in the event of a fire.” Kirk Grant thought it would be difficult to enforce occupancy limits, but LaJuan Kennedy said two guests per bedroom plus two additional guests conforms to maximum occupancy guidelines elsewhere and should be enforceable.

Another major issue was how to make sure owners as well as renters were aware of the rules regarding such issues as noise, trash, parking, animals, sea turtles and golf carts. “Some people don’t have a clue,” said Chairman LaJuan Kennedy. “The agents will abide by the rules, but we need to educate the people who don’t have agents.”

There was some squabbling about whether the rules should be included in the actual rental agreements that resulted in a vote of three for and three against with Kennedy recusing herself from the vote since she works for a rental agency. Tie votes fail, so the Planning Commission will recommend to City Council that the rules become part of the rental agreement vacationers must sign. The listing of all renters was scrapped, but Planning did vote to require the number of occupants to be included on the rental agreement.

The rules and regulations must also be posted in a prominent position in the homes. It was agreed that the door would be the best place to post the rules. “Keep it short so they will read and understand it,” said Millard Smith. Culpepper went even further. “It needs to be something a ten-year-old can understand,” he said. Grant suggested that the City provide a bulleted poster.

Carl Hally made the point that under current law, the owner is responsible for violations. “This will make the renters responsible, so they should know what the consequences are.” Culpepper agreed. “The owner is getting rental income, but he is not the one creating the problem.”

“How do we determine what constitutes a violation?” Pope asked. “That’s where we got derailed last time we tried to do this. The City has the right to revoke licenses, but we don’t have any parameters.”

“If we are going to have it this year, we have got to get something to City Council,” said Kennedy. “If we don’t have it in their hands by October, we will have to wait until next year.”

The Planning Commission voted unanimously to have their suggestions incorporated into the ordinance that will receive first reading at the City Council meeting on July 27. Council will hash it over and send it back to Planning for a public hearing. That’s when residents who will be affected by the new laws – and isn’t that just about everyone? – as well as owners of vacation rentals can most effectively contribute to the dialogue. The Planning Commission makes recommendations; City Council makes laws.

Share on Facebook

At 7:00 p.m. on July 13 it will all be over. Folly Beach residents will have chosen the City Council member who will represent them for the next two years. Either Susan Breslin or D.J. Rich will take the empty seat once occupied by Tim Goodwin and serve the remaining two years of his term.

Both candidates agree that the key to winning will be getting their supporters to the polls. Rich said personal matters kept him from really campaigning hard the first time around, but he still performed well and barely missed the cut-off for the run-off. Since then, he said, he has been focused and working hard to win. For Breslin, it’s her third campaign this year and she hopes the third time’s a charm.

“I think this is a crucial time for Folly Beach, Breslin said. “We have to choose the kind of place we want Folly to be and we’re running out of time to make that choice.”

Breslin’s “Residents First” slogan has at times annoyed Rich. “This town is made up of residents, businesses and vacationers,” he said. “The interests of all of them need to be represented. I’m a resident, too, but we need balance.”

But Breslin is focused on the number of residents, especially the full-time residents who have left Folly Beach. She said four years ago more than 30% of the homes on Folly Beach were owner occupied, but now it’s down to 20%. “So many people I have talked to are thinking about moving because they’re fed up.” She said reasons for resident dissatisfaction include noise and traffic issues, drunks in the street, and the feeling that they are losing control over Folly Beach, that Folly Beach controls them.

Rich says Folly Beach cannot exist without a viable business community to support the city. “We don’t need more growth, but we need to manage what we have,” he said. “We need to make sure we have a thriving business community.”

Breslin agrees with Rich on that point, but she said it should not be at the expense of the residents. She said the downtown area is about more than the shops and food and beverage establishments that line Center Street. “Center Street isn’t owned by a few bars. Center Street belongs to all of us and we are all affected by what happens there,” she said.

A major concern for Rich is that some people see him just as a business owner and think that’s all he cares about, but he said he is concerned about all the issues Folly faces just as any resident would be. “I talk to people seven days a week and, believe me, it’s easy to know what’s going on, to get opinions from people. Between the Planet and the Crab Shack (which he says are heavily frequented by locals) it’s not hard to keep track of the pulse of Folly Beach,” he said.

Both candidates think they could work well with the present Council members. “We need a cohesive Council this time around,” Rich said, adding that he feels he would bring needed balance to the group. According to Breslin, what the city needs most on Council is a middle ground on the issues. “People square off and don’t talk to each other, they don’t say ‘I can live with this, can you live with this?’ It’s really important to cooperate with other Council members.”

It’s the middle of the summer, people are busy with houseguests or have left town because of the weather or the crowds. It may seem like a ho hum election, but that’s not true. The person elected to City Council on Tuesday will be sitting in that chair for two years. And a lot can happen in two years.

Share on Facebook

Ordinances

The June 22 City Council meeting began at exactly 7:00 p.m. and the gavel came down at 8:01 p.m. No new ordinances were introduced and no one raised a stink about anything. The new Comprehensive Plan and Official Zoning Map unanimously passed final reading. The State requires that the comprehensive plan be reviewed every five years and the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the plan at its June 7 meeting. There were no objections from residents and after striking the provision regarding construction of a fine arts center, the PC recommended passage of the Comprehensive Plan and sent it to City Council for a final vote. A nuts and bolts ordinance updating Folly Beach building regulations to bring them into compliance with current codes also passed unanimously.

The FY10-11 budget was up for final reading and Mayor Tim Goodwin opened the floor to public comments. There were no questions or concerns raised by residents. Pennell Clamp reiterated his stance that there are some things he doesn’t like about the budget, but what the heck, all in all it’s a good budget with no millage increase so let’s “git ‘er done.” Clamp did propose a change that would require Council’s approval before the City purchases any new vehicles. That made sense to the other members – I’d wager Clamp maintains his vehicles rather than rushing to buy a new one every couple of years – and that provision was added before the final tally, in which only Eddie Ellis cast a dissenting vote.

An ordinance providing for the issuance of a $1 million general obligation bond to pay for the expansion of the Public Safety facility passed second reading with only Ellis voting against it. According to City Administrator Toni Connor-Rooks, the most recent value of all taxable property in Folly Beach is approximately $66 million and the City may borrow up to 8% of this amount without a referendum. Although the cost of the expansion was approximately $1.6 million, keeping the indebtedness at $1 million will keep the annual payment approximately the same as that for the current City Hall, which will be paid off this year. The bond will be repaid in ten annual principle plus interest installments of $122,739 at a fixed interest rate of 3.91%. Not only did the City negotiate a good deal, according to Connor-Rooks, but Folly Beach Building Inspector Eric Lutz will be on the job – monitoring construction work and costs – to make sure the City is getting its money’s worth.

Other business

A resolution authorizing the City of Folly Beach to withdraw from the Charleston County Consolidated Dispatch Center introduced by Ellis was shot down when he failed to receive a second to the motion. A resolution awarding the bid for the court room sound system for just at $21,000 passed unanimously with Connor-Rooks explaining that the City would receive a grant to cover approximately half of that expense. Connor-Rooks said she had seen a demo of the equipment and was very pleased that it would now allow residents the option of listening to meetings on the radio.

Public Safety

Chief Terry Boatwright talked about his plans to get Folly Beach through the Fourth of July weekend. To many residents, Boatwright is walking on water after the Memorial Day non-event and he aims to keep on walking. Boatwright said the Folly Beach Department of Public Safety is “staffed up and ready for the July 4 weekend.” He said his major problem this summer has been getting traffic off the West side of the island, but as far as front beach behavior is concerned, “small ops” since the Memorial Day weekend have had the intended effect on behavior. From May 1 to June 22 of 2010, 484 citations were written compared to 288 in this same period last year. There has also been a 60% increase in littering citations this year, according to Boatwright. Not more littering, he stressed, but more enforcement. He said he also intends to continue the vehicle check points that have proven very effective.

Council Comments

Laura Beck expressed concern about the new power poles SCE&G wants to put in the Folly River. She said the permit to OCRM failed to specify the height of the new utility poles and she thought it would be wise for Folly Beach to exercise some input before the permits are granted.

Eddie Ellis applauded Chief Boatwright for staying ahead of the curve. He said he was standing in line at the Piggly Wiggly and overheard the day-trippers in front of him talking about how visitors needed to “tone it down or you may get a citation.”

Hume reiterated his stance regarding his low-key approach that makes residents ambassadors of our beach. “We all need to work to keep our beaches clean. Pass out garbage bags, ask people to behave. If we all work at this, we can do it.”

Charlie McCarty reminded us that July 3rd, which will be celebrated at the beach as the 4th of July holiday, is also the birthday of Julius Caesar.

Mayor Tim Goodwin said residents need to remain focused on beaches and walk-overs, but we also needed to look in our own backyards. He encouraged people to purchase regulation garbage containers at City Hall and to refrain from putting trash cans and yard debris on the street days before pick up. “We know what gets picked up on what days,” he said.

Share on Facebook

Many residents have expressed interest in offering their services to the city, and volunteering is a great way for residents to actively participate in local government. By volunteering, you can help make the beach a safer, cleaner, and better place to live. If you are interested in participating in any of the programs listed below, please contact the appropriate Department Head:

Building and Zoning is seeking volunteers for Code Enforcement activities. The primary focus will be monitoring the island for violations of trash ordinances and right of way encroachments. Duties will include patrolling the island, documenting violations, and initial notification of property owners. The estimated time per week is 8 hours. For more info or to volunteer, contact Aaron Pope at 588-2447 ext 1839, or email apope@cityoffollybeach.com.

Beach Management Patrol is seeking volunteers to help keep our beach clean and act as ambassadors to our residents and visitors. Duties will include walkover cleaning, beach litter pickup, and monitoring. If you are a citizen who already patrols the beach in your spare time, please contact us so we can coordinate our efforts with those of you who already act as stewards of the beach. The time commitment per week will vary. For more info or to volunteer, contact City Administrator Toni Connor-Rooks at 708-9474, or email tconnor@cityoffollybeach.com.

Share on Facebook

Scruggs had previously been among the four person majority who voted against the original “Cadillac” version of the plan which would have also included a remodeling of City Hall to provide more space for staff and would have cost an estimated $1.7 million. Everyone seemed to determined to vote the same way they had previously, prompting those in favor of the plan to predict its failure during the public meeting. It was obvious, though, as the group voted that Scruggs was on the fence. His head was down and took several moments to think when it was his turn before voting yes, ensuring a passing of the plan by a 4-3 margin.

Scruggs later said that he originally voted “no” late last year because he wanted the City to explore other options before dedicating itself to spending $1.7 million of tax payer money. Dave Stormer had also presented a plan that he believed would provide the extra space necessary and would only cost $600,000. However, after further analysis it was thought the Stormer plan would cost at least $900,000. It was at that point that Scruggs began to move onto Mayor Carl Beckmann’s bandwagon to support the original plan. Everyone agreed that more space was needed and Scruggs did not believe the goal would be achieved any other way.

The plan that was passed on January 19 is a “basic” version that only addresses the Public Safety Building and does not include City Hall. It will create a second floor for sleeping quarters and other offices and will house the police department as well which is currently on the first floor of City Hall. That space will be utilized to give City Staff, still in City Hall, more space. While the plan is estimated to cost anywhere between $1.2 and $1.3 million, it was made public that the actual cost will be more. The City has to comply with County Codes that requires an estimated 73,000 in renovations. Furthermore, there are costs associated with the temporary housing of fire personnel and equipment during the construction that was taken into account. There is also the possibility of water damage in the walls that may have to be addressed but was not researched because Mayor Beckmann did not consider this cost worth discovering until the plan was passed.

Tom Scruggs, Mayor Beckmann, Laura Beck, and Charlie McCarty were the four members of the City Council which voted in favor of the plan. The Council will hold its next regular meeting on January 26 at 7pm at City Hall.

Share on Facebook

Good communication on behalf of a government body is essential to addressing the concerns of its citizens. When checking the City of Folly Beach’s web site for information on the  council meetings regarding the reconstruction of City Hall there is nothing; not even on the calendar. But lots of information about the Christmas Parade and a nice letter from the mayor are easy to find. One can argue about which is more important, but when it come to spending millions of the city’s money (potentially), one would hope that these meetings would be important enough to at least mention on the web site or a blurb in the Sandspur or Folly Current. Evidently they are not.

Lately, communicating with residents in regard to special City Council work sessions to which the public is invited to attend and comment has been reduced to a two day notice put up at the post office. On November 10, the City Council scheduled a special meeting on November 19. At that meeting they scheduled another special meeting for December 10. Neither were advertised on the website. Advertising required residents to stop by the post office or City Hall to find out.

Some say, “well the staff is overworked and they don’t have the time.” But again, referring to the web site, if there is time to write up the Christmas Parade and the mayor has time to post his monthly letter, there is time to post something about special City Council meetings that public should be attending. There were at least three weeks in between these last two meetings so there was plenty of time to get the information out about the first meeting and the date for the next publicized. This lack of notification has made me wonder if there is some reason why the public is not being informed about these meetings until the last minute. There was no problem letting people know about the special meeting about the trash issue. What’s happened between then and now?  Special Council work sessions with public comment should also be held at times when more residents can attend. Most of our council is retired or self employed and have the luxury of meeting early in the day. Early meetings leavemany residents who work unable to attend. The December 10 meeting focused on the City Hall and Public Safety expansion was scheduled for 4pm in addition to the lack of public communication.
To say that our city is technologically challenged when it comes to communication is putting it nicely. We are stuck in a time warp. Putting up a notice at the post office is quaint and a nice reminder to look at when we get our mail, but we also need the ability to sign up for email notifications on the City’s web site and the residents must be informed of what is happening on a timely basis. We still don’t have an effective emergency notification system and if there was ever anything we wanted to throw some money at, that should be it. I know council and staff feel overwhelmed, but it is time for a formal Communications Plan to improve the relationships between the Council, Public Services, Administration, staff, business’s, clubs, committees and most importantly, the residents. An effective Communication Plan will enhance the way we work and live and enable our city government to work more efficiently. What is our priority as a City?
Furthermore, the lack of communication leads to an “us versus them” mentality or in this case, more like the Surf Bar versus The Crab Shack.  I’m sure it’s too late for this Council, as it is, to heal the obvious fissures. Using a facilitator to help with these special meetings that address the trash issue and City Hall reconstruction was a good idea and enabled our crippled counsel to move ahead. I have no doubt that the Mayor and every Council member work with the best interests of Folly Beach at heart and I commend them for taking on these, all but, volunteer positions. In the future, the Mayor and Council need to take advantage of every opportunity to reach out and use every resource available to keep each other and the residents informed and involved. Let’s hope the next batch can do that.

Share on Facebook

Staff photo: Kathy Church tries to keep the City Council focused on the task of evaluating options for City expansion. However, the hired facilitator found herself getting drawn into the abyssal debate the Council has been circling for months.

As a result of their admitted inability to make any progress on how the City should go about providing more space for its staff and Public Safety Department, the City Council hired a facilitator, Kathy Church, to head their Special Meeting on November 19 which was intended to be an honest discussion on various options the City had at their disposal for expansion.
The Council came up with approximately seven options which included using the original $1.6 million plan, building a separate facility on City owned property, downscaling the original plan, purchasing a nearby private property with structures, using the old Water Plant, renting office space, and redrawing the current plan.
But as the Council examined the various options and developed criteria with which to evaluate them, the face of debate reared its ugly head. Council member Beck later suggested that since the Council members could not even agree on what constituted a reliable source for information, it would be difficult to make progress. However, they agreed to use cost, square footage, City services provided, professional benchmarks/models, and the need for temporary space as criteria to evaluate the various options. The meeting seemed to be flowing well at this point as Church kept them focused. However, when it was suggested that keeping all departments in one building, or Co-location, be used as a criteria, Church decided that the Council needed to agree on this point alone. She also weighed in with her opinion siding with McCarty who said the current trend is to keep all departments in one building. Of course, some Council members did not think co-location should be a deal-breaker when considering the small size of Folly Beach. Church, though, would not let the Council move on without addressing this issue. For reasons unknown, an agreement on how much money to spend, necessary square footage, or any other criteria did not require any consensus while co-location did.
The facilitator finally moved past the issue by excluding it from the list of criteria to be used and a plan was developed that would allow the Council to evaluate the agreed upon options at a future meeting. Every Council member was given an assigned criteria they would use to evaluate every expansion option. They are expected to come together at a future meeting to reveal their data and possibly choose a direction.
Several interesting points and opinions were raised at this meeting as a result of Church’s facilitation. Church began the meeting with a sense of order that inspired hope by giving Council members an opportunity to express any issues that had not been previously expressed in the public forum which resulted in an immediate identification of some problems. One of the main issues for those who opposed the $1.6 million project was that the process skipped what should have been the very first step: consideration of alternatives and a needs assessment process. Dave Stormer pointed out that while at least 11 meetings have occurred where the plan was discussed, the real issue was never actually talked about. There were no standards, he said. The Council never got to consider options prior to Mayor Beckmann presenting a plan.
Discussion quickly shifted to a criticism of the Mayor and foreshadowed the co-location schism that Church identified and put on a pedestal. Eddie Ellis suggested the original process had not been transparent and criticized the Mayor for trivializing their concerns. He also wanted the Council to share in the responsibility of developing a plan with the Mayor, contrary to how the previous plan was developed, so that the “we don’t have to rely on the Mayor for truth”. Scruggs echoed that comment by saying that the strong mayor/weak Council system they are employing is not conducive to teamwork and said Mayor Beckmann basically presented a plan and expected everyone to “fall in line”. Mayor Beckmann, who made his opinion of Council well known at their October meeting was especially quiet and had to be cajoled into speaking by Church. Laura Beck expressed the main counterpoint to Stormer, Ellis and Scruggs saying that the Council had no business “micromanaging” the project and their main responsibility was fiscal. She said that no member of Council is a professional in the field and they should listen to the hired architects in regards to how the City should expand its facilities.

Share on Facebook

In a controversial decision that ended with flared tempers and name calling, the City Council voted 4-3 against a resolution that would have resulted in the City spending $1.6 million for a 5000 square foot expansion of City Hall and the Public Safety Department. Council members Dave Stormer, Eddie Ellis, Tom Scruggs and Tim Goodwin made up the majority of the expansion’s opposition.
Mayor Carl Beckmann believes it’s “all political”, adding that there is no other explanation for anyone to vote against the expansion. “It’s a slap in the face to staff,” he said, to those who have worked hard on the current plan. At the end of the City Council meeting, Beckmann took a moment to publicly criticize the opposition.
“What Council has done proves this Council has no regard for staff, workspace or otherwise. This is the eleventh hour, do-nothing Council. I’m looking out for the residents of this City and you, my friends, are not,” he said. As the opposing Council members began to object, Beckmann banged his gavel to officially end the meeting.
Mayor Beckmann said that if any of the four opponents had issues with the plan, they should have spoken with him about it before the vote. However, none of them, according to Beckmann, were willing to sit down and address the plan. Instead, they waited until the last moment to “blow the project out of the water”.
“It’s sad. If that’s not political, then I don’t know what is,” he said.
However, the Mayor’s own comments could epitomize two of the largest reasons for the plan’s failure: miscommunication and fact misrepresentation. For example, while Beckmann claims that no one concerned about the expansion tried to talk to him about the plan, Stormer said that he sent the Mayor and the City Administrator memos as early as November of 2008 suggesting alternatives and expressing a need for a “neutral” architect. He claimed that neither replied to him. Ellis publicly referred to Beckmann’s statement as a lie.
Stormer, who has been the plan’s antagonist from the beginning, believes that the process used to develop and present the plan was questionable and resulted in a fallible cost assessment. For example, while attempting to sell the project to the public, Beckmann claimed that no tax increase would be necessary for the expansion. However, there was no accounting for the estimated $50,000 per year in maintenance and operation cost which the extra space would require, in addition to having to furnish 5000 square feet of additional space, Stormer argued.
PILOT (Payment In Lieu Of Taxes) money was also an issue, as it is the reason the project could supposedly be done without raising taxes. However, some consider this a “hidden” tax itself. PILOT funds are the result of the City taking 15% of the Water Utility’s revenue. Of course, that is money that is paid by residents and water bills have been raised to account for PILOT since its inception in 1997. While it’s not technically a tax on residents, they are the ones providing the money. This is important because the funds are currently used to pay the debt service on the current City Hall building, which is scheduled to be repaid in full in two years.
Additionally, while the City currently has a kennel for dogs and cats, the expansion actually removes the kennel, and the $1.6 million plan doesn’t include room for a new one. This was a problem for at least one Council member, Eddie Ellis, who voted against the plan. Beckmann said that they are looking into leasing an adjacent lot and building a kennel there, but the cost was not factored into the “tax-free” project.
One of the most agitating aspects of the issue arose from the “us versus them” attitude taken by the most outspoken proponents of the plan: Mayor Beckmann and Public Safety Director Terry Boatwright. Both made statements that attacked the character of anyone who might vote against the project.
Reiterating a previous speech to Council, Boatwright pleaded for approval before exclaiming “It blows my mind!” in reference to the fact that some Council members might not put their stamp of approval on the plan.
“You can’t tell me you care a flipping thing about the employees and not provide them with the tools they need,” he added. “This is not something you need to be playing politics with.”
However, every member of the Council has agreed that space is needed. Boatwright’s statement was taken personally by Scruggs, who pointed out that the Chief has a “pretty nice job”, gets a nice paycheck from the City and a free car to drive, as well as other benefits paid for with tax money to which he has the luxury of not contributing.
“You don’t live here,” Scruggs said to Boatwright before explaining that he should use tax payer’s money responsibly.
Whether unintentional or strategic, the inability to focus on facts and communicate effectively created a schism on Council, making any compromise on the project an impossibility. Of course, the fact remains that the City’s staff needs more space.
“The ball’s in their court,” Beckmann said, referring to the those who voted against the plan. “It’s all political.” For Council member Stormer, the success of his vote is an opportunity to explore alternatives which he feels were neglected in the face of the $1.6 million expansion, and will encourage his fellow Council members to do the same.
“Bottom line remains that Public Safety needs space,” Stormer says. “There are options that have not been explored that need to be explored.”
In the meantime, those directly affected by the dramatized delay can only hope that the City Council returns to the drawing board with an agreeable spirit. However, if you were at the November 10 City Council meeting, your hope may have been crushed as 30 minutes of debate were required for Council members to agree on the details of a special meeting to be held on November 19 where they will debate the matter again. It looks to be a long road.

Share on Facebook

Addressing concerns that have arisen since the City has begun to pass legislation banning dogs on the north end of Folly Beach for the sake of migratory birds, Mayor Carl Beckmann reiterated his arguments for the ordinance. First, he pointed out that Folly Beach has always been a bird sanctuary and the ordinance is consistent with that dedication. Second, he clarified that the legislation is not a dog ordinance but a people ordinance. He has stated that the ordinance would not be necessary if dog owners would control their pets.
The ban has birthed some controversy. Arguments against the ban suggest that a few people are ruining it for everyone and that a lack of enforcement on the City’s part is, at least, partially responsible for the purported dangers of off-leash dogs playing in areas designated for migratory and nesting birds. The lack of enforcement issue has also been brought up during recent discussions concerning litter and alcohol on the beach.

Bohrn again

Relic hunter Robert Bohrn spoke to Council regarding a monument for 19 Civil War soldiers buried on Folly Beach. Bohrn had participated in the discovery of the soldiers in 1987, and wrote an account of the fallen men – African-American members of the 55th Massachusetts regiment – in the October 30 edition of The Folly Current.
At the meeting, he expressed great passion and appreciation for the soldiers’ service and sacrifice for the United States and asked the City Council to support a monument in any way they could. He pointed out that there are many Civil War era monuments all over the Lowcountry while Folly Beach, a very important locale for the war, has very little.
“They deserve a monument,” Bohrn said. “We should stand up as Americans in a time of war and recognize their sacrifice for our country.”
Bohrn also suggested that Folly Beach could actually celebrate its creation in 1863, which is when the soldiers were documented to have been living on the island. According to Borhn, they created a small town on Folly Beach building roads, digging wells, and opening stores to support the 10,000-13,000 people who were stationed on the island.
“We’ll be glad to help you in any way we can,” Mayor Beckmann said before presenting Bohrn with a coupon for a family dinner in appreciation for his efforts.

CARTA becoming Folly friendly?

Council member Tom Scruggs presented an update on CARTA’s test route that ran during weekend days during the busy college beach season this past year. The route was designed for College of Charleston students. However, the route was so successful that the college is seeking a permanent route that would run 7-8 times a day during the week from a shopping center on James Island. The route would finally provide a regular mode of public transportation for Folly Beach residents to travel the Charleston area. Furthermore, Scruggs stated that he was planning to attend an upcoming CARTA meeting and that the City should attempt to attain a seat on the CARTA board. Doing so, he said, would help make CARTA more considerate of Folly Beach.
“I believe we can get a seat on there,” he said.

Grinch can’t ruin Christmas spirit

Mayor Carl Beckmann announced that Christmas lights will be put back on the bridge in time for the holidays. The Mayor previously had expressed his frustration at a previous meeting after vandals destroyed the lights. Beckmann and his wife have been responsible for putting the lights up and maintaining them. “Hopefully, we’ll have a lot more on them,” he said.

Ordinances

The largest issue of the entire night was the failure of Resolution 50-09, which would have awarded a contract for the Public Safety Expansion to the lowest bidder; Emory J. Infinger & Associates. The measure failed by a 4-3 vote with Council members Dave Stormer, Eddie Ellis, Tim Goodwin, and Tom Scruggs providing the “nay” votes.
Second reading was passed on two ordinances which established the budgets for the Water Utility and Sewer Utility. They were passed by a 6-1 vote with Council member Eddie Ellis voting “no” on each ordinance. He did not discuss why he was against the budgets.
Council unanimously passed an ordinance that authorized and directed the Mayor and City Administrator to switch their Workers Compensation Fund money to the South Carolina Municipal Insurance Trust. It was stated that the current company has largely ignored the City, provided poor customer service, and is increasing their rates.
Senior Citizens could begin receiving discounts from the City on particular building and construction fees. The ordinance seems designed to simply honor senior citizens who are residents of Folly Beach. Council member Scruggs brought to light a couple of potential issues with the ordinance, however, pointing out that builders could claim they plan to live in a new building to be constructed and end up renting it. While there was no resolution to the issue, the Council passed the ordinance unanimously.
The City Council passed five ordinances as part of their “approval of consent , agenda”which means they were all passed with a single vote and without discussion. In the order in which they appeared on the agenda, the resolutions that were passed were as follows:
1. Resolution 48-09 allowed the City to spend $1500 to provide turkeys to all City employees at Thanksgiving and Christmas.
2. Resolution 51-09 provided an unspecified amount of money for the 2009 Christmas Parade.
3. Resolution 52-09 gave an unspecified amount of money to the Folly Beach Senior Citizens Club.
4. Resolution 53-09 approved an historical marker at the corner of West Indian and Center Streets, recognizing and commemorating the 19 Union soldiers that were discovered buried there in 1987.
5. Resolution 54-09 submits that the City will donate $500 toward the purchase of an historical marker at the Community Center “in recognition of one of the most historically significant finds in the State of South Carolina”. The summary provided by the City did not specify if the “find” was the 19 Union soldiers or something else.
For the second successive regular Council meeting, an ordinance to ban styrofoam was postponed.

Share on Facebook