NEWBERRY COUNTY
COUNCIL
MINUTES
JUNE 21, 2006
The Newberry County Council met on Wednesday, June 21, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers at the Courthouse Annex, 1309 College Street, Newberry, SC, for a regularly scheduled meeting.
Present were: Mike Hawkins, Chairman
William D. Waldrop, Vice-Chairman (late)
John E. Caldwell, Councilman
Henry B. Summer, Councilman
John David Dawkins, Councilman
Andy Morris, Councilman
Edgar Baker, Councilman
J.E. Klugh, Acting County Administrator
Gary T. Pope, County Attorney
Susan C. Fellers, Clerk to Council
Media: Heather Hawkins, WKDK
Cindy Pitts, Newberry Observer
Cassie Fowler, Whitmire News
Notice of the meeting was duly advertised as required by law.
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
Mr. Caldwell moved to adopt the consent agenda; second by Mr. Summer. Vote was unanimous.
Amendments to the agenda were as follows:
1. Under Executive Session, add a contractual matter relating to Lynch’s Woods (#15) and a personnel matter (#16).
There being no further additions or deletions, Mr. Morris moved to adopt the agenda as amended; second by Mr. Hawkins. Vote was unanimous.
1. Presentation – Mike Hawkins, Chairman
Mr. Hawkins presented the attached Resolution Honoring Newberry Electric Cooperative, Inc. for its support of progress to Mr. William Kibler, Chairman of the Board of Directors.
2. Pomaria Fire Department request for reimbursement of matching funds for Forestry Grant – Thomas L. Long, Chief.
Mr. Long, Acting Chief of the Pomaria Fire Department, requested reimbursement of matching funds in the amount of $1,200 from Newberry County for a forestry grant they received.
Mr. Morris moved to approve the reimbursement; second by Mr. Waldrop. The money is available out of the Board of Rural Fire Control budget for this year. Vote was unanimous.
2.5 Newberry County Central Traffic Court request to implement credit card system for collection of fines and bonds – Art Jayroe, Chief Magistrate.
Judge Art Jayroe requested that County Council approve in principal the proposal to use a credit and debit card system for payment of fines and bonds in Central Court. If approved, Central Court will then obtain proposals and costs, which will then be brought back before County Council.
Mr. Baker moved to approve the proposal in principal; second by Mr. Waldrop. Vote was unanimous.
No comments from the public.
3. An Ordinance to amend the Budget Ordinance for the 2005-2006 fiscal year, Ordinance No. 06-18-05, so as to incorporate certain supplemental revenues and appropriations into the budget for the current fiscal year.
Mr. Summer moved for third reading; second by Mr. Dawkins. Vote was unanimous.
4. An Ordinance to amend the text of the Newberry County Zoning Ordinance No. 12-24-01 so as to amend Article 9 to further regulate the size of church signs.
Mr. Caldwell moved for third reading; second by Mr. Morris. Vote was unanimous.
5. An Ordinance to implement countywide reassessment and equalization for the 2006 tax year.
Mr. Hawkins called for the public hearing.
The following persons spoke and requested that Council not implement reassessment:
(1) Pee Wee Green, Lake Murray.
(2) Ronnie Hydrick, 240 Mariners Point Road, Prosperity, SC.
(3) Harold Broughton, 34 Lookout Point, Prosperity, SC.
(4) Harold Betty, 171 Middleton Place, Prosperity, SC.
(5) James Baldwin, 66 Homewoods Lane, Prosperity, SC.
(6) Several persons in the audience, who had not signed up, spoke but did not give their names or addresses.
Nancy Owen, County Auditor, explained that only 54% of the property in Newberry County would be reassessed this year. The other 46% is reassessed at 100% of its market value every year. The last reassessment program put on in Newberry County was in 1999, which were 1997 values. If reassessment is not implemented in 2006, all real property is being paid on a nine year old value. Public utilities, manufacturers, merchants, commercial property, everybody that owns vehicles, water craft, air craft, local business personal property have been paying 100% of their fair share plus the share of the persons who are not paying 100% of their fair share. The purpose of any reassessment program is to ensure that no taxpayer is paying more than his fair share. The more valuable the property, the more tax you pay. Reassessment is not to cause taxes to go up. Reassessment does not generate additional revenue for county government, municipal government nor school government. It equalizes across the board that everybody is paying on 100% of their fair market value.
The reassessment appeals filed last year are still outstanding and will be heard. If they have not been heard when it is time to send out tax bills, by law the County Auditor can only bill the taxpayer at 80% of the value. When it is all settled, the taxpayer will be billed for the difference or the County will issue a refund, depending on what the Court decides.
The 15% cap, if passed, does away with paying fair market value and equalization. There will no longer be an equalization program but a reassessment with a 15% cap.
Some counties also have fees such as road fees or waste disposal fees added to their tax bills, which Newberry County does not have.
There being no further comments from the public, Mr. Hawkins declared the public hearing closed.
Mr. Summer moved for second reading; second by Mr. Baker.
Mr. Dawkins stated reassessment is mandated every 5 years by state law for the purpose of equalizing property values. The same amount of dollars will be brought into the County with or without reassessment. Mr. Dawkins questioned who would really be saving the money. The utility companies, the REA, SC Electric and Gas, will save a lot on their taxes because they are assessed every year. Why give them the break when they won’t give it back to us. Approximately a month ago, County Council voted 6 to 1 not to implement reassessment, and what has changed. What does it mean for the County if we do? The biggest thing Mr. Dawkins has heard from Council is that we are at our maximum bond indebtedness. The most money this County can borrow currently is $600,000. If we go through reassessment, which is the way the bond indebtedness is figured, we could borrow several more million dollars. As Council goes through the budget process, Council members question how we got in such debt. It may not be a good idea to allow us to go out and borrow more. We can hardly afford to pay back what we have. Maybe it is a good thing that we can’t borrow money. Mr. Dawkins stated it would be a shock as to the amount of taxes that will come in if the reassessment is implemented. Mr. Dawkins asked Council to really consider what they are fixing to vote on. If you believe in your heart that this is a fair reassessment program, go for it.
Mr. Hawkins asked Mr. Dawkins didn’t he have an item further down on the agenda to extend the deadline for property reassessment. Mr. Dawkins stated he did because if this fails and Council votes to go ahead and implement reassessment, he would request that the appeals process be reopened. Mr. Hawkins advised he would second the motion even if State law says we can’t do it. We should do it in defiance of State law.
Mr. Waldrop advised anybody can appeal their taxes and usually differences can be settled with the tax appeal people.
Mr. Dawkins said most people here tonight are educated enough to appeal, but felt sorry for senior citizens who didn’t understand the reassessment and didn’t appeal because they didn’t understand.
Mr. Baker asked if we buck the State and put it off, what would happen. Mr. Pope stated the South Carolina Association of Counties believes if you don’t do it this year, you will be stuck with the 1997 or 1999 values when the cap is imposed. In their view you look at the value of the property on the last day of the preceding year. Mr. Pope was not sure that was a valid way to look at it but that is the way they are looking at it, and they are experts in this area. From their point of view if you do not positively implement it this year and because of Senate Bill S1245 saying we can’t implement it without an Ordinance, you could end up having the base year value being 1997 or 1999 values. Your bond indebtedness would be based on that, and to get the same budget you would have a higher millage on your property although it would be the old values. If you don’t do it this year, you might end up being locked in for the foreseeable future on the 1999 values plus a 15% cap on that, and it would take quite a while to get to where it should have been this year.
Mr. Hawkins said the State is not telling us we can’t. They slipped a Bill in the last day or two of the session telling us we can put it on. Let’s don’t hide behind the State. If we are going to vote to do it, we are going to take the blame for it.
Mr. Dawkins stated before this Bill was passed we either had to implement or the funding from the State would be cut because we violated the law. If we don’t pass this ordinance, we are not going to be penalized by the State.
Mr. Summer stated some of the comments are that people are just not happy with the appraisal of their property. There is an appeals process. If you appealed last year and haven’t heard, the reason is because we haven’t implemented reassessment. If we implement reassessment, they will get in contact with you to adjust your property. If you appealed, you will be taken care of. If you forgot to appeal or didn’t know how to appeal, you can always appeal next year. If you aren’t happy with the Assessor, they have an appeals board and you have the court system so there are ways to handle the flawed appraisal. We waited to see what the State Legislature would do. They could have raised the homestead exemption, which would have helped senior citizens, but they chose not to help senior citizens. What they decided to do was to have tax relief next year but put the 15% cap on the ballot this year, which put everybody in a box. You have to wait until next year before getting any relief but if we wait until next year to implement the reassessment, we are going to be permanently locked in on commercial property at 15% every 5 years. Wilson Road property has skyrocketed in the last few years. Property worth $90,000 four or five years ago is selling for $500,000 now, and if we postpone reassessment, that property is going to be locked in at 15% of the $90,000 value. Next year the people that own homes will get some relief on property taxes, but we will never be able to get the commercial development up to fair market value. All commercial property in Newberry will be paying less than they ought to pay, and when that happens somebody is paying more than they ought to pay. The real issue is locking in the commercial property at 15%.
Mr. Dawkins stated according to the Bill it can be reassessed at the point of sale. Mr. Summer stated that is the sale of the real estate. Companies know all kind of ways to transfer real estate and change ownership without the deed ever changing hands and without it ever being reassessed. There are all kind of ways companies can get around paying taxes.
Mr. Baker stated if with the reassessment we can get commercial property up, we could get residential property down. We as the Council and as Newberry County can’t take in one dollar more than we took in last year. This is equalizing the whole deal, and we have to get the commercial back in.
Mr. Pope pointed out that House Bill H4449 provides that in the year in which the notice of property tax assessment has not been mailed within 90 days after tax notices are mailed to taxpayers, they can give the Assessor written notice as to their objection of the fair market value, special use value, the assessment ratio, etc. They have 90 days after the tax notices are mailed to do that. In this case we mailed the assessment notices last year and under the strict reading of the law, they would have 90 days after the tax bill is mailed to file a new appeal.
Mr. Hawkins discussed the 15% cap and stated it would be relief for a certain group of people. Because of that he could not vote to put reassessment off another year.
Mr. Morris stated if the 15% cap passed in November he didn’t feel that would be end of it because somebody somewhere will file a lawsuit, and it will be tied up for years to come.
Mr. Dawkins stated if we put on the reassessment and the cap fails or a lawsuit ties it up, the people wouldn’t get any relief when we get the reassessment.
Mr. Hawkins stated they would get the penny sales tax relief, and all the school will be taken off.
There being no further discussion, Mr. Hawkins called for the question. Voting for the motion for second reading: Councilmen Hawkins, Waldrop, Caldwell, Summer, Morris and Baker. Voting against the motion: Councilman Dawkins. Motion passed by majority vote.
[BREAK 9:00
P.M. – 9:15 P.M.]
6. An Ordinance to require that certain information be provided with deeds to certain types of real property in Newberry County as to the availability of existing public or community wastewater treatment facilities or the ability of the property to support an individual sewage disposal and treatment system, and to provide remedies for the violations thereof.
Mr. Morris moved for second reading; second by Mr. Waldrop.
Mr. Pope reviewed the amendments:
1. Category was added to the affidavit, which says that the property is exempt from the application of the ordinance disclosure requirements.
2. Under paragraph 4, added “N. Deeds of an interest in a condominium unit.”
3. Delay the effective date to October 1, 2006 rather than July 1, 2006.
4. It has been made clear throughout that there is no legal duty of the Clerk of Court and no liability for the Clerk of Court or any other employee or elected official of the County if it is not complied with. The parties to the transaction are the ones who have to comply with it.
The purpose of this ordinance is to determine whether or not property suitable for residential or small business use has perc capability or sewage available or whatever.
Mr. Hawkins asked if the Clerk of Court could record a deed without this, who would put the people on notice that they are required to do this.
Mr. Pope advised that a copy of this ordinance would have to be sent to all of the attorneys in town so they would know the requirements. His opinion was that County Council could not increase or decrease the duties of the Clerk of Court
Mr. Summer stated before moving forward with this, County Council needed feedback from the real estate attorneys because we don’t need to be doing something that will mess up real estate closings. Mr. Summer requested that Mr. Pope contact some of the real estate attorneys because it could cause problems with closing loans and refinancing.
Mr. Summer moved to postpone until Mr. Pope checks with the real estate community to make sure it is something they can live with; second by Mr. Dawkins.
Mr. Morris said if those persons were going to be contacted, then the builders needed to be contacted for their point of view.
Mr. Summer so amended his motion.
There being no further discussion, Mr. Hawkins called for the question. Voting for the motion for postponement was unanimous.
7. An Ordinance to amend the Official Zoning Map established pursuant to Zoning Ordinance No. 12-24-01 so as to rezone a tract containing one and one-half (1.5) acres, designated as TMS Parcel No. 466-15, from Rural (R-2) to General Commercial (GC).
Mr. Baker moved for first reading; second by Mr. Dawkins. Vote was unanimous.
8. An Ordinance to amend the text of the Newberry County Zoning Ordinance No. 12-24-01 so as to amend the conditional use regulations of the R-2, RS-3, RS-4 and RG Zoning Districts so as to specify the type of skirting to be used to cover the underpinning of manufactured homes.
Mr. Morris moved for first reading; second by Mr. Baker.
Mr. Hawkins stated he would vote for first reading but wanted clarification as to whether or not this applied also to stick built homes.
There being no further discussion, Mr. Hawkins called for the question. Voting for the motion: Councilmen Hawkins, Waldrop, Caldwell, Summer, Morris and Baker. Voting against the motion: Councilman Dawkins. Motion passed by majority vote.
9. Committee Reports.
Emergency Services Board: Mr. Dawkins reported by unanimous vote the Board requests that County Council do a further study of the space needs of the Sheriff’s Office.
Mr. Morris so moved; second by Mr. Dawkins.
Mr. Summer asked why they were interested in the Sheriff’s space needs. Mr. Dawkins advised that falls under the Emergency Services Board.
Mr. Morris stated if it comes to the point in the future that the Sheriff is not going back to the building on Highway 219, that will put us behind the eight ball and we need to start planning now. Carter Goble Lee has made a proposal to do that study and gave it to the County Administrator in February. We allocated $600,000 to move the Sheriff’s Office from Highway 219 to Wilson Road and haven’t used all of that money and the study could be paid out of the remaining money. The study was approximately $25,000.
Mr. Caldwell asked how many studies the County has had made.
Mr. Hawkins asked if there was a motion to postpone until we found out exactly what it would cost.
Mr. Summer suggested taking this as information and moved to postpone; second by Mr. Caldwell. Voting for the motion: Councilmen Hawkins, Waldrop, Caldwell, Summer, Dawkins and Morris. Councilman Baker abstained. Motion passed by majority vote.
Mr. Hawkins reported on the status of the building on Highway 291. Newberry County has hired an attorney, who is eminently qualified to handle the case, Franklin J. Smith, Jr. with the law firm of Richardson, Plowden, Carpenter and Robinson. Mr. Hawkins reviewed Mr. Smith’s credentials. Mr. Hawkins stated we have someone qualified to handle this, and we all need to let the man do his job.
Airport: Mr. Baker reported that Todd Clamp had resigned as of the first of the month and is going to work with the FAA.
Mr. Summer asked what was going to be done about the building. Mr. Baker did not know. Mr. Baker also raised the issue of the rent on the hangars at the Airport.
Mr. Waldrop stated Mr. Clamp was given a 30 year lease of the property and that Mr. Pope needs to look into whether or not the lease can be broken.
Mr. Baker stated that Tommy Whitehead is trying to secure someone to take over as the fixed base operator.
10. Appointments.
Mr. Hawkins nominated Rosette Gallman for reappointment to the Community Hall Commission and Jerry Koon for reappointment to the Newberry County Water and Sewer Authority.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Waldrop moved to accept the nominations; second by Mr. Baker. Vote was unanimous.
11. Consideration to extend deadline for appealing property reassessment.
Mr. Dawkins moved to reopen the appeal time from July 1, 2006 to September 1, 2006; second by Mr. Waldrop.
Mr. Summer asked what the county’s cash flow would look like waiting until September 1, 2006 and asked Mr. Pope to explain why you couldn’t appeal after getting your tax bill.
Mr. Pope understands H4449 to allow 90 days to appeal after mailing of the tax notices.
Mr. Klugh stated that around the first of May when we first looked at reopening the appeal period, the estimate was it would be December before we could send out tax notices. We have now lost two months so if we reopen the appeal, we would be fortunate to mail out tax notices by February of next year.
Nancy Owen’s understanding was there were approximately 1,500 appeals presently underway. The law states that whatever appeals are outstanding at the time Ms. Owen starts billing the notices, she can’t bill them more than 80%. The Assessor has to notify Ms. Owen of each and every one of the appeals. Ms. Owen then has to mark each and every one that is under appeal before it goes to the computer service. If appeals are reopened and there are 1,500 more appeals, it will be that much longer delay. You can borrow tax anticipation notes but it has to be worked properly and correctly.
Mr. Hawkins asked if the Bill allowing the 90 days to appeal after the mailing of tax notices was in effect now. Mr. Pope stated it appeared to be in effect.
Mr. Summer stated that if sending out the tax notice is postponed until February not only are would it cause financial havoc on the County and the School District, but every municipality in the county since the County collects the taxes.
Mr. Hawkins called for the question. Voting for the motion: Councilman Dawkins. Voting against the motion: Councilmen Hawkins, Waldrop, Caldwell, Summer, Morris and Baker. Motion failed.
Ms. Owen stated that relating to the 90 day appeal after the mailing of the tax notices, it is still to be determined by the Department of Revenue as to whether that appeal will be for the 2006 or 2007 tax year unless Mr. Pope has gotten clarification. Mr. Pope will look into this.
12. Proposals for design and engineering services for 773 Industrial Park.
Mr. Klugh reported that five proposals were received Monday, and presentations are scheduled for next Tuesday and Wednesday (June 27 and 28) to be made to the Chairman, Teresa Powers and Mr. Klugh. They anticipate visiting some of the parks they designed and developed and hope to make a recommendation to Council by the second meeting in July.
Mr. Morris moved to go into Executive Session to discuss a legal matter concerning the building on Highway 219, a contractual matter, a personnel matter and an economic development matter; second by Mr. Summer. Vote was unanimous.
[EXECUTIVE
SESSION 9:49 P.M. – 10:36 P.M.]
13. Legal matter.
14. Economic Development.
15. Contractual
16. Personnel
[Councilman Baker left the meeting at 10:26 P.M.]
Mr. Waldrop moved to return to open session; second by Mr. Caldwell. Vote was unanimous. [Councilman Baker absent]
Mr. Hawkins reported the following:
1. The economic development matter was reported by Mr. Klugh earlier in open session.
2. Mr. Morris updated Council on negotiations regarding a possible Soil and Water Conservation District building.
3. Mr. Klugh received a report from our attorney relating to the building on Highway 219. That is considered attorney/client privilege. Neither Mr. Pope nor Mr. Baker was in Executive Session during the discussion of this issue.
4. Mr. Leonard Sossamon informed us that conditions have not improved to the point that he feels like he can return after the six month leave of absence. Mr. Henry Summer, who chairs the Personnel Committee, will take that information and start advertising for a County Administrator.
Mr. Hawkins stated to Mr. Sossamon that it had been a fun ride and hopefully we have not seen the last of him in Newberry County and hopefully things will work out that he can come back here in some capacity and assist us in the future.
Mr. Sossamon expressed appreciation to County Council and the staff for everything .
Council meetings: July 5, 2006, 7:00 p.m.
July 19, 2006, 7:00 p.m.
No comments.
Mr. Dawkins reported that the Newberry Rescue Squad and Haz-Mat have been looking for a building location. The site currently being considered, and which has been marked off, is located at the Fairgrounds. He requested that Mr. Klugh contact the Chairman of the Fairgrounds Commission to let them know what is going on and that it is a possible site.
Mr. Caldwell advised that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 would be coming up in 2007 for extension and requested that Council adopt a Resolution in support of the extension. Mr. Pope will prepare a Resolution for consideration at the next Council meeting.
Mr. Morris received a letter from Coleman Jennings, a precinct worker, relating to problems with storage of the new voting machines. Mr. Klugh was asked to look into this.
There being no further business, Mr. Morris moved to adjourn; second by Mr. Waldrop. Vote was unanimous.
Meeting adjourned at 10:50 P.M.
NEWBERRY COUNTY COUNCIL
___________________________________
Mike Hawkins, Chairman
___________________________________
Susan C. Fellers, Clerk to Council