NEWBERRY COUNTY COUNCIL

MINUTES

FEBRUARY 2, 2005

 

The Newberry County Council met on Wednesday, February 2, 2005, at 7:30 p.m. for a regular meeting.     

 

            Present were:

                        Mike Hawkins, Chairman

                        William D. Waldrop, Vice-Chairman

                        John E. Caldwell, Councilman

                        Henry B. Summer, Councilman

            John David Dawkins, Councilman

            Andy Morris, Councilman

            Edgar Baker, Councilman

                        Leonard B. Sossamon, Jr., County Administrator

                        Gary T. Pope, County Attorney

            Susan C. Fellers, Clerk to Council

 

Representing the news media were:

                        Newberry Observer – Cindy Pitts

                        WKDK – Heather Hawkins

                        Whitmire News – Cassie Fowler

 

            As required by law, notice of the meeting was duly advertised.

 

OPENING OF MEETING

 

            Mr. Hawkins called the meeting to order and determined a quorum to be present. 

           

            Mr. Pope had the invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA

 

            Mr. Caldwell moved to adopt the consent agenda; second by Mr. Baker.  Vote was unanimous.

 

ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND ADOPTION OF AGENDA

 

            Mr. Hawkins requested the following additions:

 

1.         Under Personal Appearances, Dennis Caldwell, Administrator of J. F. Hawkins/Springfield Place.  (Agenda Item .5)

            2.         Under Executive Session, personnel matter (Agenda Item 12.1)

 

            There being no further additions or deletions, Mr. Waldrop moved to adopt the agenda as amended; second by Mr. Dawkins.  Vote was unanimous.

 

PERSONAL APPEARANCES

 

.5         Dennis Caldwell, Administrator of J.F. Hawkins/Springfield Place.

 

            Mr. Caldwell introduced Susan Dean, trainor, and other guests from Japan who were participating in a training program at J.F. Hawkins.   

 

1.         Newberry County Registration and Elections – Jean Simmons, Chair

 

            Ms. Simmons stated the State Election Commission requires approval by County Council to install the new ES&S voting system, which is the uniform statewide voting system chosen by the State under the 2002 Help America Vote Act.  Each county is responsible for the cost of warranty and support services from Election Systems and Software beginning January 1, 2007.  The Board recommended approval by Council to install the ES&S voting system.  Any monies derived from the old voting machines would go to the county. 

 

            Mr. Dawkins moved to approve recommendation; second by Mr. Waldrop.  Vote was unanimous. 

 

2.         Newberry County Memorial Hospital – Lynn Beasley and Stephen Sawyer.

 

            Lisa Senn, Chairman of the Newberry County Memorial Hospital Board, requested refinancing the Series 1999 Bond indebtedness using the hospital building as collateral.  This would allow the hospital to reduce its fees by approximately $1.2 Million over the current life of the bonds.  This reduction would allow the hospital to lower the life expand of the bonds from a 30 year period to a 25 year period or possibly even 22 years.  It will also reduce the amount of interest paid over the life span by about $1.6 Million.  That is a potential savings of approximately $2.7 Million.  The hospital is also interested in converting these bonds from a variable rate to a fixed rate. 

 

            Mr. Summer requested the hospital run numbers for 15 years and present that to Council. 

 

3.         Newberry County Airport – Gary Varga, W.K. Dickson.

 

            John Glasgow, Chairman of the Newberry County Airport Commission, reported that the last three years they have gotten $150,000 per year for airport improvement funds, but even with those improvements the airport is not viable in order to land planes.  A temporary overlay on the present runway has been done.  Some justification studies with the traffic and other things have been done, but the FAA says we have not justified lengthening the runway but have justified a new runway.  .  

 

            We are trying to secure monies for the airport through the State Aeronautics and the FAA, and we are on the brink of getting a grant signed to do a parallel 3500 foot runway and then use the present runway as a taxiway.   

 

            Gary Varga with W.K. Dickson advised that the FAA accepted the justification study for maintaining a 3500 foot runway.  The FAA mandated that we do an alternative study predicated on that decree.  The four alternatives were: 

 

(1)       Reconstruct the existing runway.  Widen it to 75 feet and put a parallel taxiway on the other side of the runway.

(2)       Put a parallel runway parallel to the existing runway and use the existing runway as a taxiway with a separation of 240 feet.  This is the one the FAA desires

(3)       Extend existing runway 500 feet to make it 4,000 feet, which would allow larger business class aircraft to use it.

(4)       Essentially the same thing but redevelop all the terminal area on the other side of the runway and put a taxiway on the other side of the parallel runway. 

 

            All of these alternatives will require property and/or easement acquisition to some degree, whether it is fee simple or easement can be determined.   Fee Simple acquisition would be on the west side of the airport.  If the county accepts the grant with the FAA, the county is saying it will exercise imminent domain.  

 

            An alternative not yet presented to the FAA is to totally reconstruct the existing runway to the existing length, which is the least expensive alternative at a cost of just under $1,000,000.  This would be a 95% grant from the FAA so the county would pay 2 ½ cents on the dollar.  This would not require any fee simple acquisition; however, there are some areas off the ends of the runway where there are obstructions, such as trees, that would have to be trimmed.  That would require acquiring an easement from the property owners in order to trim the trees.  This alternative would buy the county about 10 years.  It takes about that long to build a new airport presuming that funding will be in place and environmental issues are acceptable and assumes the property can be acquired either through friendly negotiations or through imminent domain.   

 

            There is a pre-application into the FAA for approximately $150,000 for putting in some fuel tanks at the existing airport, and the FAA needs know within the next 90 days whether the county wants to pursue the fuel farm or the runway.  If the existing runway is redone, the airport would be closed approximately 30 days from the day the bid is let. 

 

Mr. Glasgow indicated that the Airport Commission would like to see the County come up with funding for the fuel in the amount of approximately $75,000 to $80,000 and would hope the grant would stay in place to do the improvements to the airport.  Until the County gets the trees removed, the FAA is not going to let the grant to do the fuel tank. 

 

            Mr. Varga stated if the $150,000 is used for fuel at an approximate cost of $75,000 to $80,000, the rest of the money would take care of the obstructions.  Once the County accepts a grant one of the top priorities of the FAA is to insure there is no obstruction to the approach of the airport.  There is an application in to the FAA to cover the fuel farm at 95 cents on the dollar, and the rest of the money could be used to clear and get the obstructions removed. 

 

            Mr. Varga stated the length of the runway is determined by the number of operations you can document that would operate at the airport if the runway length were available.   

 

            Mr. Glasgow stated they anticipate getting the $150,000 continuously each year through 2007.  Mr. Varga said the $150,000 per year through 2007 has already been approved by Congress.  If the appropriations are there, the money will be there for Newberry County at $150,000 per year. 

 

            Don Cochell spoke in favor of the fuel farm. 

 

            Mr. Morris moved to grant approval for the fuel farm this year and reconstruction of the existing runway for next year to keep the airport operational until we can decide what to do long term; second by Mr. Baker.  Vote was unanimous.

 

            Mr. Varga advised Council that by accepting the FAA grant they needed to take care of the safety items, which are the trees. 

 

PUBLIC COMMENTS

 

            No public comments.

 

THIRD READING ORDINANCES

 

4.         An Ordinance approving the conveyance to the South Carolina Department of Transportation of certain portions of the rights of way of three county roads at their points of intersection with Highway 121, and to accept the compensation offered for those conveyances.

 

            Mr. Hawkins called for the public hearing.  There being no comments from the public, Mr. Hawkins declared the public hearing closed.

 

            Mr. Caldwell asked where the intersections were located. 

 

            Mr. Baker moved for third reading; second by Mr. Morris. 

 

Gary Williams, Right of Way Agent with the SC Department of Transportation, stated the rights of way were for Harmon Lane, Cypress Lane  and Maple Lane, all of which intersect with Highway 121.

 

            There being no further discussion, Mr. Hawkins called for the question.  Vote was unanimous.

 

SECOND READING ORDINANCES

 

5.         An Ordinance to amend the Official Zoning Map established pursuant to Zoning Ordinance No. 12-24-01 so as to rezone TMS Parcel Nos. 654-58 and 654-12 from Single Family Residential (RS-1) to a Planned Development District (PD).

 

            Mr. Dawkins moved for second reading; second by Mr. Waldrop.  Vote was unanimous.

 

6.         An Ordinance to amend the Official Zoning Map established pursuant to Zoning Ordinance No. 12-24-01 so as to rezone a 6.97 acre portion of TMS Parcel No. 335-47 from Single Family Residential (RS-1) to Single Family Residential (RS-3).

 

            Mr. Baker moved for second reading; second by Mr. Morris.  Vote was unanimous.

 

7.         An Ordinance adopting a revised Solid Waste Management Plan pursuant to §44-96-80 of the 1976 S.C. Code of Laws.

 

            Mr. Hawkins advised that on January 5 we heard from a group of people who were opposed to the landfill being located on 202.  On January 11, the following Tuesday, we had a meeting in Pomaria, and we heard a resounding voice from all the people there that they wanted us to continue to appeal.  On January 12 this Council voted unanimously to continue that appeal and to go ahead with the lawsuit.  In order to move forward rapidly and get this new Solid Waste Management Plan into place we had first reading by title only.  None of us had seen the contents of this Plan until last Wednesday night when we were handed a draft.  Once again in order to facilitate the movement of this forward as quickly as possible, we didn’t follow normal procedure.  Normally the Council would study the draft before we make it available to the public but we wanted you to have it available to look at as quickly as possible, so on Thursday morning the Clerk to Council made copies available to anybody that wanted to read it.  Many of you are here tonight because you object to having seen Option #1 included in that Plan.  A lot of people sitting up here objected to seeing Option #1 include in the Plan after we had voted unanimously to continue our appeal to the courts.  We have been working diligently to come up with an Option #4 (copies distributed to public).  We have ascertained from DHEC that the landfill beginning to be constructed near the city limits of Newberry will take construction and demolition debris. 

 

            Option #4 states:

 

“OPTION 4 – FOR C&D DISPOSAL IN NEWBERRY COUNTY

 

            The Southeast Resource Recovery, Inc. (SRRI) Industrial Waste Landfill located near H Elena is permitted by SCDHEC to accept C&D waste.  Considering the projected average C&D waste generation rate for Newberry County over the next twenty year planning period, the permitted C&D capacity of the landfill, and the recycling potential for the C&D waste stream, this landfill can serve the C&D disposal needs of Newberry County for the planning period.  Therefore, no additional C&D landfill capacity will be needed in Newberry County for the next twenty years.”

 

            Mr. Hawkins then called for the public hearing.

 

            Elsie Fields expressed objection to Option 1 of the proposed Solid Waste Management Plan and requested that any mention of Eagle Container and Highway 202 be deleted from the text. 

 

            Representative Walt McLeod stated Option 4 obviates the need for having a C&D landfill at Pomaria and asked if that was Council’s understanding.  Mr. Hawkins concurred and stated if Council approved Option 4, they would be killing Options 1, 2 and 3. 

 

Representative McLeod had one question on page 23 of the Plan:  “Establishment of one solid waste processing facility in or near the Town of Whitmire is consistent with this plan,” and inquired as to what a solid waste processing facility was.  Mr. Pope stated it was a recycling facility, not a landfill. 

 

Jim Redden said a landfill will generate revenue for Newberry County but the best way to generate revenue is with people coming to the County, people building homes and people spending money and paying taxes.  Pomaria is a prime prestige area for people to come and build. 

 

John Huggins spoke against the landfill in Pomaria and at Council’s attempt to undermine their progress, but tempered that with the fact that Option 4 had been introduced.

 

Nora Stuck thanked Council and the people who stood with them to fight the landfill. 

 

Barry Werts thanked John Caldwell for his support and asked for his continued support and the rest of Council’s support.  He questioned how Option 1 was even left in the Plan and asked who was actually running the County.  He asked Council to kill Option 1 and limit future landfills at other more acceptable locations to maximum amounts to take care of our own trash and not see dollar signs by taking other people’s trash. 

 

Buddy Johnson asked if Option 4 would be the only option under that category.   Mr. Johnson felt adoption of this plan would essentially put DHEC in a position to turn it down.  Rudy Curtis stated if Option 4 was the only option placed in the plan in the form it is written, he suspected DHEC would not allow any other C&D landfill in the County. 

 

Mr. Johnson asked Council if the permit is issued, would the county be willing to continue to fight this Pomaria landfill situation.  Mr. Hawkins stated Council voted unanimously to appeal, and until we hear from the Judge there is not much else we can do.  Mr. Johnson asked should DHEC issue a permit, would the County continue the fight.  Mr. Hawkins stated we had zoning which was about the only thing to work with other than DHEC.   Mr. Waldrop pointed out that the County had not put out any money on the Helena landfill lawsuit. 

 

            Nica Dowd (from audience) questioned Council as to why they didn’t respond to Mr. Caldwell’s question earlier about where the intersections were on Highway 121 and Council was willing to continue the vote and did so without knowing exactly where that was.  When Mr. Curtis was at the Pomaria Garmany school meeting, he was introduced as a representative of DHEC, having just retired.  No one ever mentioned that he worked for B.P. Barber and we wonder why that was the case.  Mr. Hawkins stated at that time he did not work for B.P. Barber. 

 

            Mr. Hawkins stated if the people at the Helena landfill had not moved any dirt prior to April 19, then they would lose their permit.  They have moved some dirt so they won’t lose their permit. 

 

            Mr. Morris, responding to Ms. Dowd’s comment about the intersections, stated the first reading on the ordinance for the driveway intersections, they were all listed, but he had forgotten where they were.  The first reading every one of them was specified, and we all had a chance to read it and see it. 

 

            Les Harrison stated Option 4 appears to be a clear reversal from what he had read originally in the first three options.  He was concerned because they don’t know for sure if the dirt turning in Helena has happened and encouraged Council to “put their eyes on it” to make sure.  He proposed taking out Options 1, 2 and 3 if Option 4 is approved. 

 

            Jimmy Johnston asked if Council had been doing something for Helena for the last 8 or 9 years, didn’t they owe Pomaria something else.  Mr. Waldrop stated no money had been spent by the County on the Helena landfill.  Mr. Johnston was asking about time, not money, and Mr. Waldrop had no problem with time for Pomaria. 

 

            Mr. Hawkins stated no tax dollars were spent to pay lawyers to fight the Helena landfill, and we have spent money on the Pomaria landfill. 

 

            Rudy Curtis stated Mr. Spotts could not apply for a permit from DHEC until he gets zoning clearance and gets consistency with the local solid waste management plan.  DHEC will not accept a permit application from him without those documents. 

 

            Don Cochell asked if the County Attorney could go look at the Helena property to be sure construction had started.  Mr. Pope stated they have invested an enormous amount of money in their appeal, and the information we have is that they are out there.  They have the surveying crews out there, and they will be opening that landfill.  We can call and verify that they are opening it, but they didn’t go through this as an exercise in futility.  They did this because they intend to put a lot of stuff in our county.  Right now asbestos and C&D.  Mr. Parr may or may not be having negotiations about transferring it into entirely a C&D landfill but at this point they have a lot of capacity for C&D and according to our consultants, they have enough to handle this for twenty years. 

 

            Ms. Dowd asked if Council voted to make Option 4 the only option, should they feel pretty much protected that this may not happen after all.  Mr. Hawkins stated he would feel a whole lot better, but this case is still in court, and we don’t know what the Judge will decide. 

 

There being no further comments from the public, Mr. Hawkins declared the public hearing closed.

 

            Mr. Waldrop moved for second reading; second by Mr. Dawkins.

 

            Mr. Dawkins moved to amend by eliminating Options 1, 2 and 3 and put in Option 4, not as an option, but as the proper wording in the waste plan; second by Mr. Baker. 

 

            Mr. Summer asked if this was an endorsement in any way of the Helena landfill.  Mr. Pope stated it would be a de facto endorsement because you are saying this would be the source of C&D waste disposal in this county for the next twenty years.  Mr. Summer said we needed an option 5.  Mr. Pope stated Option 2 is to have no landfill at all in Newberry County and to continue the current practice of taking it to the Transfer Station and that option is available. 

 

            Mr. Hawkins didn’t see it as an endorsement of the Helena landfill, but an acknowledgement that it is being built and is going to be in existence. 

 

            There being no further discussion, Mr. Hawkins called for the question.  Voting for the amendment:  Councilmen Baker, Morris, Dawkins and Hawkins.  Voting against the amendment:  Councilmen Summer, Waldrop and Caldwell.  Motion passed by majority vote.

 

            Mr. Morris moved for second reading as amended; second by Mr. Dawkins. 

 

            Mr. Morris stated this is still a draft and is still subject to change.  Mr. Morris has a number of concerns with the proposed plan and would like some covenants added to the document to protect the county in the event that the court comes through and says something will happen with a C&D landfill.

 

            Mr. Summer will vote for second reading but before third reading wants the option 4 reworded so it doesn’t sound like an endorsement of the Helena landfill.  He is in favor of protecting the people in Pomaria, but not in favor of passing the buck to the people in Helena. 

 

            Mr. Hawkins was offended that it says “final” draft.  It should say first draft because this is the first we have seen it.

 

            Mr. Waldrop is not in favor of a landfill in the Pomaria and not in favor of one in Helena. 

 

            Mr. Dawkins said Newberry County hired B.P. Barber to come up with a Solid Waste Management Plan and doesn’t understand why Option 1 is in there. 

 

            There being no further discussion, Mr. Hawkins called for the question.  Vote for second reading as amended  was unanimous.

 

            Mr. Waldrop moved for a 10 minute break.  Vote was unanimous.

 

]BREAK 9:35 P.M. – 9:50 P.M.]

 

COMMITTEE REPORTS

 

8.         Committee Reports.

 

            No reports.

 

APPOINTMENTS

 

9.         Appointments:

A.        Airport Commission: District 5

 

                        B.        Newberry County Recreation Commission :  District 3

 

            No appointments.

 

OTHER MATTERS

 

10.       Adoption of Budget Calendar for FY 2005-2006.

 

            Mr. Caldwell moved to adopt the Budget Calendar for FY 2005-2006 as presented; second by Mr. Summer.  Vote was unanimous.

 

11.       CSX Crossing Closing –        Gary Pope, County Attorney

Ron Lilly, Public Works Director

Nelson High, CSX Railroad

 

            Mr. Pope stated this road goes through from Old Whitmire Highway to Highway 76 right by Dickert Lumber Company.  The people in the area use it when coming into town from the Whitmire Highway instead of having to go all the way to the intersection and come back up.  They use it as a cut through, which cuts about a mile off their trip.  Mr. Pope talked with Johnny Dickert, who says a lot people use that road every day, and he would personally like to not see it closed. 

 

            John Dillard, Director of Public Affairs in South Carolina with CSX, stated it is a public safety concern.  Any time a crossing is closed some people will be inconvenienced but the safety concerns outweigh those concerns. 

 

            Nelson High, Public Safety Coordinator in North and South Carolina with CSX, stated the liability issue would be gone if the crossing could be closed.  There are dual tracks at this crossing; one is a main line and one is a siding track.  A train entering the siding has to stop and reverse the switch to change his direction. 

 

            Mr. Pope suggested the County obtain a traffic count as to how many cars go across on a daily basis.  Under State law the County has liability for county roads that cross railroad tracks.  We have the duty to inspect these crossings and advise them if there is a problem.  Mr. Pope suggested Council may want to take action to close the entire public road if it approves the closing of the crossing.      

 

            Mr. Baker moved to accept as information; second by Mr. Morris.  Vote was unanimous. 

 

            Mr. Pope requested that CSX send draft documents for our consideration.

 

EXECUTIVE SESSION

 

            Mr. Caldwell moved to go into Executive Session for an economic development matter and a personnel matter.  Vote was unanimous.

 

[EXECUTIVE SESSION 10:04 P.M. – 11:37 P.M.]

 

12.       Economic Development.

12.1     Personnel.

 

            Mr. Baker moved to return to regular session; second by Mr. Waldrop. 

 

FUTURE MEETINGS

 

13.       County/City Retreat:            February 12, 2005, 8:00 A.M.

                                                            Conference Room, Courthouse Annex

 

14        Council Meetings:                 February 16, 2005, 7:30 p.m.

                                                            March 2, 2005, 7:30 p.m.

 

15.       Council Annual Planning Retreat:    February 26-27, 2005, 8:30 a.m.

                                                                        Conference Room, Courthouse Annex

 

COMMENTS FROM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR

 

            No comments.

 

COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS

 

            No comments.

 

VOTE FOR ADJOURNMENT

 

            Mr. Baker moved to adjourn.  Vote was unanimous.

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

            There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:40 P.M.

           

 

                                                            NEWBERRY COUNTY COUNCIL

 

 

                                                            ________________________________________

                                                            Mike Hawkins, Chairman

 

 

                                                            _________________________________________

                                                            Susan C. Fellers, Clerk to Council