NEWBERRY COUNTY COUNCIL

MINUTES

JULY 11, 2007

 

 

The Newberry County Council met on Wednesday, July 11, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers at the Courthouse Annex, 1309 College Street, Newberry, SC, for a regularly scheduled meeting. 

 

Present were:            Henry B. Summer, Chairman

                        William D. Waldrop, Vice-Chairman

                        John E. Caldwell, Councilman

                        Mike Hawkins, Councilman

                        John Dawkins, Councilman

                        Edgar Baker, Councilman

                        Henry H. Livingston, III, Councilman

                        Wayne Adams, County Administrator

                        Gary T. Pope, County Attorney

                        Susan C. Fellers, Clerk to Council

                        Debbie S. Cromer, Finance Director

 

Press:               Cindy Pitts, The Newberry Observer

                        Heather Hawkins, WKDK

 

Notice of the meeting was duly advertised as required by law.

 

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

 

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

 

1.            Adoption of Consent Agenda.

 

Mr. Dawkins moved to adopt the consent agenda; second by Mr. Livingston.  Vote was unanimous.

 

2.            Additions, Deletions and Adoption of Agenda.

 

  The following amendments were requested:

 

a.         Delete Item #13, consideration of approval of Light Lease Agreement, from the agenda.  This lease is effectively already in place.  There are some minor changes that are being worked out at staff level, and the total expenditure amount under the contract over prior years is expected to be no more than about $400.  We also don’t expect it to take us over budget in this fiscal year. 

 

b.         Replace deleted Item #13 with consideration of a letter from the City of Newberry attaching additional stipulations to the use of Friend Street parking lot and McKibben Street right-of-way in conjunction with the Library project.

 

c.         Add as Item #16(a) an Executive Session to consider the proposal of A.J. Tothacer, Jr. in response to Council’s advertised request for proposals to provide services of a county attorney.

 

There being no further amendments, Mr. Hawkins moved to adopt the agenda as amended; second by Mr. Caldwell.  Vote was unanimous.

 

3.            Ordinance #05-18-07:  An Ordinance amending Chapter 96 of the Newberry County Code of Ordinances relating to animal care and control, so as to amend the fees charged for unwanted animals brought to the Animal Care and Control Shelter from outside Newberry County, and other related matters.

 

Mr. Summer called for the public hearing.  There being no comment from the public, Mr. Summer declared the public hearing closed.

 

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

 

4.            Ordinance #06-19-07:  An Ordinance amending Code Section 50.01(A) of the Newberry County Code of Ordinances to provide for the periodic setting of solid waste disposal fees.

 

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

 

5.            Ordinance #06-20-07:  An Ordinance, amending Sections III and VII of Ordinance #04-14-07, the “Newberry County Budget Ordinance for County Ordinary and Other Purposes” to provide for additional funding for the Rescue Squad 14 building project.

 

Mr. Caldwell moved for first reading; second by Mr. Waldrop. 

 

Under discussion, Mr. Summer asked if there were dollar amounts in this ordinance.  Mr. Adams stated there were none at this time.  Mr. Caldwell offered this amendment and intended to leave the amount open for discussion.  Mr. Caldwell indicated that was correct.

 

Mr. Baker has had several phone calls, and the comments are “We have been hit with enough tax.  We don’t need any more and spending has got to slow down or stop.”  Mr. Baker stated he would have to be on the negative side of this one.

 

Mr. Summer asked if Council anticipated having a work session prior to third reading to talk more about exactly what it will cost. 

 

Mr. Dawkins said the project has not even been bid out and until we have it bid out and have actual numbers to negotiate with, it is premature.

 

Mr. Adams estimated a shortfall of approximately $150,000 on the most recent projections we have.  In any case an amendment to the budget would be in order if Council is going to add additional funding for this project.

 

Mr. Pope raised a legal point.  From last time he wasn’t sure whether Council had carried forward the original appropriation from the capital project sales tax fund and the other money.  Not an increase but just the money Council had set aside.  Mr. Summer’s understanding was that $200,00 plus had been carried over and the only shortfall was the other $150,000. 

 

Mr. Adams stated that budgeted now is $411,761, and the most recent construction estimates from Carter Goble Lee and Mr. Prothro, the architect, were $561,700.  That’s a shortfall of $150,000.

 

Mr. Summer asked how big the building would be.  Mr. Adams stated he did not have that here, but his understanding was it had been sized down to about as far as the architect and Rescue Squad thought they could go.  Mr. Summer asked if it had been shrunk as much as possible and still have a workable building.  Mr. Adams indicated that was his understanding from their comments. 

 

Mr. Livingston stated this was still part of the one per cent sales tax monies, and he has stood on his position on that all along, and he would not go along with adding any additional monies. 

 

There being no further discussion, Mr. Summer called for the question.  Voting for first reading:  Councilmen Waldrop, Caldwell and Summer.  Voting against first reading:  Councilmen Hawkins, Dawkins, Baker and Livingston.  Motion for first reading failed.

 

6.            Ordinance #06-21-07:  An Ordinance amending Ordinance #01-09-07, which authorized the issuance and sale of a General Obligation Bond, Series 2007, in an amount not to exceed $1,700,000.

 

Mr. Summer asked if this ordinance went along with #5 above.  Mr. Adams stated this would have included funding for #5, but it does not in this draft.  What it includes is not to exceed $200,000 for the additional funding Council approved for the Opera House in the amount of $100,000 and the shortfall for the Helena Community Center.

 

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

 

7.            Ordinance #06-22-07:  An Ordinance authorizing the sale by Newberry County, South Carolina, of its $1,200,000 Special Source Revenue Bond Anticipation Note, Series 2007, pursuant to the provisions of South Carolina Code Annotated Section 4-29-68 and Title 11, Chapter 17; providing for the form and details of the Note; providing for the payment of the Note; providing for the disposition of the proceeds thereof; and other matters relating thereto.

 

This Ordinance was presented as Title Only for first reading. 

 

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

 

Mr. Adams stated Frannie Heizer was present from the McNair Law Firm, bond counsel, and Council might have her discuss this Special Source Revenue Bond Anticipation Note and how it works so Council will be familiar with it.

 

Frannie Heizer stated this ordinance would authorize the issuance of a $1.2 million Special Source Revenue Bond for improvements and a project at the Industrial Park.  She and the County Administrator have had a number of discussions about the strategy that we would recommend in using a Special Source Revenue debt and then using a Bond Anticipation Note in particular.  It was in 2006 that Newberry County issued a Special Source Revenue Bond and that has a fixed interest rate and a long-term payout, and you will be paying that over a number of years. 

 

At this time the recommendation is to use a Note instead of a long-term Bond.  A Bond Anticipation Note is a form of debt issued in anticipation of actually doing long-term financing.  So the Bond Anticipation Note would be outstanding for up to a year.  During that year the project would go forward at the Industrial Park.  At that time at the conclusion of that year or really any time during that year when it was an appropriate time to have a final financing plan for this project, you would have the option of going long-term with the Special Source Revenue Bond subject to meeting certain requirements under your prior Bond Ordinance.  When you issued the 2006 Special Source Revenue Bond, there were certain commitments made that you would not issue additional debt payable from the same stream of revenue unless there was enough revenue to cover existing debt, any proposed new debt and have a little bit of a margin (called a coverage ratio).  That is something we would be working on during the course of the year in terms of meeting the requirements of your existing Bond Ordinance. 

 

By using a Note you have the flexibility of going long-term at the end of a year.  You could roll that Note over and re-issue a Note for another one or two years.  By using the strategy you are giving yourself the capital you need now to complete the project.  You are giving yourself total flexibility in terms of the long-term commitment to repay.  We are very comfortable that this is a good strategy for the County to follow at this time. 

 

She has talked with the bank representative that purchased the Special Source Revenue Bond in 2006, and they are very eager to work with the County on this Note or whatever your needs might be in the future.

 

Mr. Dawkins asked if in this Note, the bond would be paid back by fee in lieu of from industries.  Ms. Heizer stated that was correct.  Mr. Dawkins stated it would not be property tax paying it back, but fee in lieu of, or taxes, from industries paying for their own park.  Ms. Heizer stated that was the beauty of the Special Source Revenue Bond.  You borrow against that stream of revenue that is the fee in lieu that comes from the industries.  You do improvements that actually encourage more industry and a larger fee stream so it is self-supporting.  This Note would actually have language in it that says the only source of repayment would be fee in lieu or long-term bond.  This is not a property tax obligation by any means.

 

Mr. Adams stated in the meantime it doesn’t count toward the County’s debt margin.  Ms. Heizer stated that was correct; it does not count against the County’s 8% General Obligation Bond capacity.  It is not a full faith in credit pledge.  There are no property taxes that would go to pay this so it is outside of your debt limit. 

 

8.            Resolution #12-07:  A Resolution relating to the declaration of intent by Newberry County, South Carolina, to reimburse certain expenditures prior to the issuance by the County of its tax-exempt debt.

 

Mr. Adams stated this pertains to the fact that, for instance, with the Helena Community Center we will likely begin construction on that project, and accordingly, incur expenses prior to getting the bond funding for this project.  We would want to be able to reimburse ourselves since we hadn’t planned to dip into reserves to fund any part of the project.  Another part of it has to do with funds that we would pay to the Newberry Opera House to offset the roof repairs.  With respect to that project it is being done out of an abundance of caution.  The County itself has not yet expended any money on the Newberry Opera House project.  The roofing is complete, and normally you have to have this reimbursement resolution before you do the project.  Because our only expense is paying the money to Newberry Opera House, it likely will not apply here. 

 

Mr. Waldrop moved to adopt the Resolution; second by Mr. Baker.  Vote was unanimous.

 

9.            Committee Reports.

 

Airport Commission:            Mr. Baker reported that the airport has started.  They are grading and clearing land.  According to the schedule Tommy Whitehead sent today they should be through prior to December.

 

10.            Appointments.

 

Mr. Dawkins nominated Rick Richardson to serve on the Disabilities and Special Needs Boad.

 

Mr. Caldwell nominated for reappointment all persons currently serving from District 7 except for Thomas Boyd because he has been elected to City Council.

 

There being no further nominations, Mr. Waldrop moved to accept the nominations; second by Mr. Baker.  Vote was unanimous.

 

11.            Consideration of acceptance of bid to repave parking lot at the Courthouse Annex.

 

Mr. Summer stated there were two bids.  Satterfield Construction’s bid was $11,000 and Herbert Anderson Construction’s bid was $11,604.  Mr. Summer asked Tommy Whitehead, Public Works Director, if there was any reason Council should not accept the low bid.  Mr. Whitehead indicated there was no reason.

 

Mr. Dawkins moved to accept the Satterfield Construction bid in the amount of $11,000; second by Mr. Waldrop. 

 

Mr. Adams wanted to clarify the funding source.  This is not being funded by the CTC but by the $250,000 line item for paving projects in the County budget.

 

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

 

12.            Consideration of approval of the following County roads to be paved by the County Transportation Committee (CTC) during fiscal year 2007-2008.

 

            a.            Berley Boland Road

            b.            Clinton Heights

            c.            Outback Drive

            d.            Rabbit Lane

            e.            Rollin Road

            f.            Brookside Drive

            g.            Dallas Street

            h.            Park Avenue

            i.            McClean Drive

            j.            Summerset Bay Drive

            k.            Summerset Bay Road

 

Mr. Dawkins moved to approve these roads; second by Mr.  Waldrop. 

 

Mr. Livingston asked if we still had a scoring strategy as to how we come to terms with which roads get paved.

 

Tommy Whitehead, Public Works Director, stated the CTC has a consultant, and they use a matrix system of points based on the number of permanent residents and part-time residents on the road.  That is a guide to go by.  Then we look at the width and length of the roads.  Sometimes the CTC will actually ride the roads.  Right-of-way, width, all has a bearing on what they select.  We have some roads that have a lot of points that have maybe twelve-foot wide roads, and they are not available to pave.  They only pave 18 feet of surface and will not pave anything less.  The reason for that is so two cars can meet heading each other from opposite directions.  They have an obligation.  They choose the roads and present this to the County for permission to pave.  It is C-fund money that pays for the roads. 

 

Mr. Livingston asked how Berley Boland scored.  Mr. Whitehead stated Berley Boland is a short two-tenths of a road that ends out on Highway 76 and comes in on Berley Boland.  We did not have the right-of-way, but now have the consent that we have the right-of-way from the property owners and also Beal Lumber Company.  We are also negotiating with the railroad to widen that crossing so we can have meeting on that. 

 

Mr. Hawkins said the last time he checked the CTC didn’t take into consideration density.  They only counted the number of occupied residences on the road.  He asked if that had been changed.  Mr. Whitehead said that had not been changed.  They do basically say two cars to each permanent home.  Mr. Hawkins felt they should consider changing that to the number of houses per mile rather than just the number of houses on the road.  Mr. Whitehead said they did when it was a spur road.  They look at the density on those particularly that don’t go all the way through. 

 

Mr. Dawkins stated instead of property taxes, this is gas tax, which is under the control of the CTC, which stands for the County Transportation Committee, that is appointed by the State Legislative Delegation.  Basically they are in control of the money.  We just have to give them permission to spend it on our roads. 

 

Mr. Dawkins moved to approve the list; second by Mr. Baker.  Vote was unanimous.

 

13.       Letter from the City of Newberry.

 

Mr. Adams had the Clerk pass out copies of the letter from the City Manager (copy attached).  By way of background in 2005 the County asked the City to allow the new library project to encroach on McKibben Street and the Friend Street parking lot.  At present our prospects for funding the library project at that location as currently drawn are quite slim.  Meanwhile the City is working against a deadline whereby they can improve the Friend Street parking lot with paving and landscaping as long as they spend that money by the end of this calendar year (December 31, 2007).  The approximate value of that grant funding is $100,000 and that has been determined through an actual bid.  The City has awarded a bid for its streetscape project, and this is an alternate in that bid package. 

 

Because of the deadline the City has stipulated conditions on the continued availability of the property for the library project.  Specifically, the County would have to provide by August 1 a firm written commitment that if the property is not used for the library project, the County would fund and begin landscape construction on the parking lot according to the City’s design no later than March 1, 2008.  Otherwise, the  City will include the Friend Street lot in its immediate streetscape plans in order to take full advantage of the grant funding.  After the streetscape work is finished the County could only use the site for the project if, at it’s cost, the County obtains a release from the South Carolina Department of Commerce, which is the grant funding agency, to use the parking lot for a library site, and if necessary, negotiate an acceptable settlement with the streetscape contractor.  That provision comes into play by the fact that there is a 90 day deadline at which the City has to exercise it’s alternate deducts under the contract. 

 

This is a pressing matter in that the City has requested a firm written commitment by August 1 if the County still intends to include that parcel in its immediate plans for the library. 

 

Mr. Dawkins asked if we release this and they spend the money elsewhere and we decide to put the library there, we will have to do all of this at our expense.

 

Mr. Adams stated what the City if saying is they don’t want to be stuck with no library project and no improved Friend Street parking lot.  They have until December 31 to expend the funds on the Friend Street parking lot.  That’s why the City needs the County to decide if in fact we are going to use this parcel.  For assurances for the City, they want a firm written commitment that we would either locate the library project there or begin the construction landscape work that the grant would have done by March 2008. 

 

Mr. Hawkins moved to release the City from their obligation to hold this property for the County and let them go ahead and do their landscaping to improve the value of their property; second by Mr. Baker.

 

Mr. Summer asked Mr. Adams about the alternative places for the library.  Mr. Adams stated that staff is working with the firm of Stewart, Cooper and Newell, Architects, to assess the suitability of the old Wal-mart building.  The assessment they will conduct will include inspections on the structural, plumbing and electrical systems, as well as determinations on the presence of any mold, mildew or asbestos.  There will also be an in-depth assessment of the roof systems.  The firm hopes to complete this work by July 25th.  At that point if it is deemed that the building is suitable, only then could we go into negotiations with the property owner for the purchase.  We may not be far enough along to give a great deal of comfort, but we are proceeding as cautiously as we can. 

 

Mr. Dawkins’ understanding was if the motion passed and if we release that back to the City, is that saying we can’t build the library on our lot and that the way it was drawn it connects on to this City lot they were going to allow.  We weren’t just going to use it as parking.  There was actually some construction going on the City property.  Does that mean it cannot happen?

 

Mr. Adams stated if you don’t commit to locating the project there and after the streetscape work is done, that is when you would have to get the release from the South Carolina Department of Commerce to use the property as a site for the library project.  Our fate there is in somebody else’s hands. 

 

Mr. Hawkins said we could still build on the lot we own.  We just couldn’t have it in the center of McKibben Street like we had once thought we might.  Mr. Adams stated that was correct. 

 

Mr. Summer stated you wouldn’t be able to build on the City parking lot part. 

 

Mr. Dawkins stated the only reason he would vote to release it back to the City is the fact that wasn’t one of his favorite sites to start with. 

 

Mr. Waldrop stated we have already purchased a good bit of property there.  How much money do we have involved in the property?

 

Mr. Adams stated the total with moving of some telephone utilities is about $190,000. 

 

Mr. Waldrop recommended having a work session with the City about this project.

 

Mr. Adams stated the total was $190,000 before the cost for moving the telephone line.

 

Mr. Pope added that the County also had to tear down some buildings there.  We paid about $130,000 for the Coleman property and $65,000 for the Beckham property. 

 

Mr. Adams said the phone line was around $50,000.  There is a pending expense in that DHEC has inspected the site and determined that some of the monitoring wells on the site were disturbed during the clearing of the property, but we don’t know exactly what that will cost. 

 

Mr. Dawkins said since Council was just handed this tonight, and it is dated today, he moved to amend, not take any action and postpone to the next meeting.  Mr. Summer stated there was not another meeting this month.  The next meeting is August 8th.  Mr. Summer also felt a work session with the City would be beneficial prior to taking action.

 

Mr. Hawkins withdrew his motion. 

 

Mr. Summer requested that Mr. Adams schedule a work session with the City to work something out.  There is a lot of investment in that piece of property.  The City has the grant for $100,000 for streetscape, and they have to spend it by the end of the year.  They are under the gun on that.  We need to get together and see what we can work out.

 

14.            Requests by Councilmen.

 

Mr. Dawkins had a phone call from constituents concerning spraying for mosquitoes.  He called Clemson Extension and DHEC, and they say the spraying is very effective.  He will get some more information and asked if there was money in the Public Works budget.

 

Mr. Summer asked if the County had equipment to spray for mosquitoes.  Mr. Whitehead stated to his knowledge it did not. 

 

Mr. Waldrop stated at one time many years ago the County did spray for mosquitoes, but received so many complaints about the spray, we had to quit.  People complained about it getting in the lake and killing the fish. 

 

Mr. Dawkins asked that the Planning Commission look at two items.  He has talked with Anne Peters, who indicated it has been an issue, especially on the lake, the way the zoning is drawn up now no matter how the property is zoned, whether it allows mobile homes or doesn’t allow mobile homes.  He received a call from someone who bought a $185,000 lake lot, and he comes from Ohio in his $195,000 mobile home.  Somebody complained, and they had him to yank it up and he couldn’t stay on his lot for the 4th of July.  The Zoning Department has only enforced this by complaint.  The zoning doesn’t address this situation whatsoever.  Anne Peters indicated to him she was getting more and more complaints about this, and there is nothing in the zoning to address it.  About the only way, and it would still be by complaint only, is to issue a permit for a maximum of 7 days so a family from out of state, or even Newberry County, could stay on their lake lot in their camper.  He requested that the Planning Commission look at this.

 

Also, in the zoning there is such language for temporary housing where you can buy a lot and live in a mobile home in a district that does not allow mobile homes for up to two years to build your house.  You can pull a $10,000 trailer in there and live in it and not do anything, but you can’t pull a $100,000 camper in and live in it. 

 

Mr. Dawkins moved that Council request the Planning Commission to look into these two issues; second by Mr. Waldrop.  Vote was unanimous.

 

Mr. Adams asked if it was agreeable to accomplish this by a letter to the Planning Commission.  Council agreed.

 

15.       Public Comments.

 

Chris Johnson with Newberry County Rescue Squad asked the four Councilmen who voted against their project tonight to explain other than personal bias towards the members in their department their reasons for voting against this project when all the other public safety complexes were funded to 100%.

 

Mr. Livingston was not on Council at that particular time, but he has stood firm to the fact that the 1% was what was voted on since he has been on.

 

Mr. Baker realized a lot of the other projects were 100% funded, which he felt was Council’s mistake, but he has gotten phone calls to hold up on the spending, enough is enough when he comes to taxes, and they don’t want to see it raised any more.

 

Mr. Johnson said everybody he has talked to, and these were unsolicited comments, were more shocked against the way it was voted on at the budget.

 

Mr. Dawkins stated it has nothing to do with Newberry Rescue Squad than any other fire department or rescue.  No one has fought harder on rescue squads and fire departments than him.  A lot of these projects went over budget, and the highest over budget project that we have had up to this point is 30% plus over budget, where this project, even at the $444,000 is 89% over budget.  If we fund this additional $159,000, it would increase it to about 280% over budget.  One of your members, Curtis Wicker, did call Mr. Dawkins and had very good questions as far as he really liked the Consolidated Fire Station, and he couldn’t understand if that is basically what they need, why was their cost so much more.  Consolidated ran about $334,000 and Newberry Rescue Squad was running $500,000 plus for basically the same square footage.  You have two bays that are two vehicles deep.  Consolidated has four bays, which are single vehicle deep.  The heating square footage with the day room and all is about a good one-third larger than Consolidated station.  What ran the cost up is not the bays, but the heated square footage of that building compared to Consolidated.  Mr. Dawkins voted on a lot of projects that ran over budget, and he stands behind it.  After the Opera House and all that he couldn’t justify on a budget that runs 280% over budget when you start with $190,000 that the citizens say and you go from $190,000 close to $600,000.

 

Mr. Johnson said two separate construction companies gave that $190,000 figure, which is the reason we requested that.  Mr. Dawkins understood it was no fault of theirs. 

 

Mr. Caldwell asked what Mr. Dawkins was saying about the $334,000 and the $500,000. 

Mr. Dawkins said Consolidated ran $334,000.

 

Mr. Caldwell asked what year that was.  Mr. Dawkins said it was still under construction; they haven’t had the grand opening. 

 

Mr. Caldwell asked if he didn’t think the price might have gone up since then.  Mr. Dawkins said it certainly has, but this project hadn’t been bid out yet. 

 

Mr. Caldwell felt it was a slap in the face to these gentlemen because they work just as hard and diligent as any other rescue squad or fire fighters there are. 

 

Mr. Hawkins’ concern was with the percentage that this project is over the amount of the penny sales tax.  According to our work sheet from the last meeting, it said $173,000 from the capital project sales tax, but you said $190,000.  Mr. Johnson stated it was $190,000.

 

Mr. Hawkins said when we found out we couldn’t fund all of the penny sales tax projects, the project on the bottom of the list was our Public Works building.  If anybody has been out there, we need that desperately.  We gave it up and distributed that money around to these projects.  This project, which had been voted to receive $190,000, received $209,000 of that redistribution, which more than doubled the amount of money to work with then, plus the $15,000 from the C-funds, and $35,000 from Rural Fire.  It is now up to $430,000 without adding any more funds to it.  Mr. Hawkins felt that within those figures Station 14 needs to find a way to build a building.  This building is for Rescue Squad only.  Some of these other buildings are fire, rescue, EMS, Sheriff’s Department sub-stations.  They are multi-purpose building. This building is for one rescue squad, and we need to live within those numbers. 

 

Mr. Johnson requested that they be allowed to go back to their design build and they could get their building within the means they needed.  They had moved away from it because the County didn’t like it because of problems with the Sheriff’s Office building but if that is the only way we can get it, then that’s the way we are going to have to go with it. 

 

Mr. Waldrop asked if they were within the city limits.  Mr. Johnson said they were. 

 

Mr. Waldrop recommended they go with the design build.  He had no problem with that.  As far as he was concerned if we got people in the County that can look at that building and tell whether there is any problem with a design build, he has no problem at all with that kind of building.

 

Mr. Johnson pointed out that as of close of business today it is projected that the Rescue Squad is going to bring this County $150,000 worth of grant funds for equipment and training this year. 

 

Mr. Waldrop asked if he could build this building, he was talking for $190,000.  Mr. Johnson said it couldn’t be built for $190,000 now because we have been put off for over a year.  Mr. Waldrop said more than that had been approved, but it jumped higher than that over a short period of time.  Mr. Waldrop felt $411,000 was a nice building and didn’t see why they needed anything better than a $411,000 building for the Rescue Squad unless you are putting something in there.  Mr. Johnson said the only thing it contains is a kitchen and a training area and some office space and bathrooms. 

 

We have several CPR instructors, and we were planning to offer free CPR classes to the public as well as the County offices.  If we are forced to cut the training room, we will have to cut that project also. 

 

Mr. Waldrop asked if these kinds of buildings could be built to withstand 100,000 mile per hour winds.  Mr. Johnson said they were built to the same standards as the other buildings.  It is just a different process.

 

Mr. Waldrop didn’t know why we couldn’t build buildings like that.  We are under some kind of building code.  Mr. Johnson stated the rescue squads have to suffer for it now and it is not our fault.

 

Mr. Summer said we have a work session scheduled with the City of Newberry. We could have a work session to talk about this building at the same time. 

 

Mr. Waldrop asked why Rescue Squad 14 and Friendly Fire Department couldn’t get together and work some kind of deal where you could be together.  Most counties and states over this nation, the rescue and fire are the same.  They should be cross-trained.  Mr. Johnson said there were some places like that, and we were open to building with Haz-Mat, and they were the ones that pulled out.  That was no part of the Rescue Squad.  They pulled out on their own.  We have been open to working the whole time, but unfortunately we have been the project that has been put off every time, and now we are running into these cost overruns and nobody wants to fund it.

 

Mr. Waldrop stated that is something that needs to be worked on in the future where the fire departments and rescue squads are one and the same.  If we can’t have that, then we have a major problem in this County personnel-wise and it is our problem.  We are elected to make decisions, and we got people hired to help us make decisions.  Lewis Lee is one of them, and if he can’t do it, then we need to do something about that. 

 

Mr. Johnson’s concern was the longer we put it off, the higher the construction costs are going to go.  We are going to be no better off than we are now with the ceiling falling in at our current station.  We run the coroner’s truck for him.  We are stretching ourselves out, but not getting anything in return right now.

 

Mr. Waldrop didn’t think anyone on Council who voted against it really voted against you or anybody in the rescue squad.  It is the cost factor.  If we can work some kind of plan where you can get a decent building that would be safe, there would be no problem supporting it.  We don’t need to have a building that a hurricane or tornado might blow away.  Any building can be blown away regardless of how you build it or what kind of material you use. 

 

Mr. Johnson said they never asked for a Taj Mahal; they just asked for something better than what we got. 

 

Mr. Waldrop recommended a work session on the same date with the City.  Mr. Adams will schedule this.

 

Tommy Hedgepath asked permission to speak, which was granted by Council.  He recently missed a sale on a lawn mower for the County.  The County had requested a 50 inch mower and a 27 horsepower.  No other specs came out.  He was not asking that Council do anything about this, but in looking at the list that came to the Board of Rural Fire Control last night, Whitmire has asked for a heavy duty K-12 cut off saw, which is not much specifications on a cut off saw.  Mr. Hedgepath said if the County has a Purchasing Agent, they need to get the specs together and let everybody bid on the same thing.  You could go to Wal-mart or Lowe’s, and get a cut off saw, and they will tell you it is heavy duty.  It may or may not be.  You have got to have some kind of specs.  You have to know what cubic inch engine you are getting, what size blades you want, whether you want a carrying case, what you want to go with it. 

 

Mr. Hedgepath felt that when a contractor puts out a bid, if the you don’t make any change orders, he lives with the bid price that he bid.  He asked if that happened on these projects or were there change orders that caused the projects to go over budget.

 

Mr. Baker stated the main bid came in way over budget to start with from the estimate.

 

Mr. Hedgepath said that needed to be looked at.  He was told that I couldn’t bid on the mower.   

 

Mr. Hedgepath is not a member of the Newberry Rescue Squad.  Only four members of Council voted to not do it.  There is another man sitting on this Council that is getting a new fire house in his area.  Newberry Rescue Squad was promised three years ago they were going to get a rescue squad.  We’ve set on our behinds, and now you aren’t willing to willing to bite the bullet and go forward.  There is something wrong with that picture.  The Newberry County Rescue Squad is just as important to this county as anybody else. 

 

Mr. Dawkins asked if the price didn’t bother him. 

 

Mr. Hedgepath said if they could use the building they have a price on, it would be cheaper than that.  Newberry Rescue Squad has not asked for this $500,000.  It was something Council voted to give them because the architect said that was what it had to cost.  Council has had no no problem talking about floating a bond to do something about the Sheriff’s Office. 

 

Mr. Dawkins said Newberry Rescue Squad was as vitally important as any other station in this county. 

 

Mr. Hedgepath said the County Administrator said he didn’t know whether he liked a design build because the County wouldn’t have enough say so in it. 

 

Mr. Hedgepath understood there was a problem with Silverstreet, and it cost $8,000 to get the floor straightened out.  He was told that Newberry County paid half of it, and he felt that was a problem.  Mr. Adams said he would get copies of all the costs on that building and get it to Mr. Hedgepath. 

 

Mr. Adams said when we talked about the design build concept, what we discussed was the fact that we didn’t have the expertise in-house to oversee the design build process.  That was one reason for our reliance on the architect method.  It’s one thing to say that there are a lot of good people out there building buildings, and that might be enough comfort for some people, but when you ask for the building to be built, you can’t say build me a building with certain dimensions because anybody can meet the essential characteristics of a building and still not give you a great product.  We need some level of expertise in oversight.  He felt that could be done with the new representative we have from Carter Goble Lee, Mr. Ervin West. 

 

Mr. Baker said we were getting away from the original concept of design build here.  A design build contractor has to go out and hire an architect who draws up the plans and the specs.  Those specs sometimes will get to be an inch and a half thick, and it is not like build me a building.  It’s specific.  The City Building Inspector is the one that has to look at it and say alright it is done right.  The architect comes in and says it is done right.  Here is where we start to get away from it.  Used to pay an architect 6% to draw the plans, come out, check a building and approve it and give you a certificate of occupancy at the end.  Now we’ve gotten away from that and all he does is draw it.  We have to hire a consultant and pay him 6% to come in and see if he thinks it is the way the specs are.

 

Mr. Adams said under design build, the architect works for the builder, and he is preparing specs in conjunction with the builder.  He may present them to the buyer, but the problem is there is an information disparity between the consumer and the seller.  The consumer – the user of the building – has to have someone on their side to know what is in the specs, what it means.  The fact that they are an inch and a half thick is little comfort when you don’t understand the complexities of the blueprints, but you need someone on your side that can decipher whether that inch and a half thick worth of documents really includes what you desire in that building and also who can assure fidelity to those specifications during construction process.  The architect works for the builder in design build.

 

Mr. Hedgepath felt that Tommy Whitehead knew enough about buildings to know whether a piece of metal is thick or thin.   Mr. Adams asked what Mr. Hedgepath based that on.

 

Mr. Hedgepath said Mr. Whitehead had some specs on the lawn mower.  Mr. Adams said a lawn mower and a building were two separate things.

 

Mr. Adams explained what happened with the lawn mower since the point was being belabored.  What happened with the lawn mower is that Mr. Whitehead went to Mr. Hedgepath’s shop, asked for a purchase order for a certain lawn mower.  No bid process whatsoever.  We took the essential characteristics of the horsepower and the width of the cutting and a number of the other specs from the spec list and asked for competitive quotes, and we got a better price.  Marginally better, but better. 

 

Mr. Hedgepath stated the County didn’t get the same mower, with which Mr. Adams agreed. 

 

Mr. Adams said the County has a process for protesting procurement problems, and this was not done without specifications.  Mr. Hedgepath felt the County should look out for the people in Newberry County a little bit. 

Mr. Adams said that could be viewed in at least two different ways.  On the one hand you have the narrow interest of a specific bidder.  It may be in that person who happens to live in Newberry County’s interest that they get the bid, but it is in the larger population’s interest that the better price be given.

 

Mr. Hedgepath said it if was state contract price, the County didn’t have to get competitive bids.  Mr. Adams said that was right, but our investigation was that the mower was not on state contract, but we didn’t let that be a consideration.  We went straight specs.  Even if you can buy on state contract, does that mean you should if it is more expensive to do so? 

 

Mr. Hedgepath said if the County was going to draw up different specs, he should have gotten a copy of it. 

 

Mr. Adams said the original problem comes from someone going into an establishment, picking a specific piece of equipment and saying give me a purchase order.  That’s not the way procurement works.  Procurement has to be competitive.

 

Tommy Whitehead, Public Works Director, requested that he be allowed to address this issue.  Mr. Whitehead went to Mr. Hedgepath’s store and asked for a purchase order.  He went in to ask for specifications on a mower, a Toro mower that most of the grass cutters here in Newberry run.  That’s what was brought down to Crystal Waldrop (Purchasing Director) and she was asked to get competitive bids.  Mr. Whitehead said that was the last he heard of it until Ms. Waldrop told him that the mower was bought in Lexington. 

 

Mr. Adams asked why the County received a bill for the mower before anything was ever bid out.  Mr. Whitehead said because it was on Mr. Hedgepath’s letterhead, the Administrator’s Office assumed it was an invoice.  He said it was a misunderstanding from the get-go, and it never was cleared up.

 

Mr. Adams wanted to make it clear that the County was not just buying things arbitrarily, and didn’t intend to.

 

Mr. Dawkins said the Newberry Rescue Squad had the authority to spend the money they already have for the building.

 

Mr. Dawkins didn’t feel the Fairgrounds was the place to put the rescue squad because 37 acres of County property would be split up with the rescue squad in the middle of it.

 

Scott Meetze, Treasurer of Newberry County Rescue Squad, asked Council for a final number on what would be given to them for the building and from this standpoint, we will know where to go and where to work.  He has been on the building committee for three years with Chris Johnson, Curtis Wicker.  Whenever they first came up with the design of this building, we obtained quotes of $190,000.  We went before the taxpayers of Newberry County, and we asked for that money.  Since that time, we have had a hurricane that hit, building costs have gone up.  Every project that you have put out here on the one cents sales tax has run over budget. 

 

Mr. Meetze is also a member of Consolidated Fire Department.  They built a fire station down there.  The first time he looked at the plans approved by the County’s architect, you got a building built with a men’s bathroom and a ladies’ bathroom that doesn’t even have a toilet tissue holder in it.  You also built a fire station that doesn’t have a shower.  If you are going to build a station that will house manpower, in the case of an emergency, wouldn’t you want your first responders to be able to be standing by at that station during an emergency situation.  If we got extensive tornado damage, would they have the opportunity to come back in there and take a shower and be able to turn promptly around and run another call to help this community?  Consolidated Fire Department did not consider that when they came up with the design.  That is one of the things he pushed for with Newberry County Rescue Squad.  It will cost a little bit more money.  We are asking for at least instead of one person being able to go in that bathroom and use it, for two people to go in there.  We are also asking based on the plans for a shower.  Mr. Meetze lives on Mt. Pleasant Road, and he doesn’t run a lot of emergency calls in the city.  Within the last three months he has become an EMT.  If we ever got a building where he could come and stand by on the weekends so that he could roll that ambulance in a more quickly manner with another member of the station where he had shower facilities, he would be glad to do it.  Right now he can’t.  It is going to cost $460,000. 

 

He asked Council to bid the building.  Stop cutting the building.  Council has cut the building plans.  The last set of plans he saw stuff is being eliminated.  We are trying to get it within cost.  The building is not going to be suited for what it needs to be suited for ten years down the road. 

 

He asked the amount of money available right now.

 

Mr. Summer stated right now it is $411,761.

 

Mr. Meetze said at this point in time if we wait another month, is Council willing to give them another 15% because that is what building costs are going up 5% to 15% per month.  You keep bringing up the Consolidated Fire Department was $334,000.  When was it bid?  October?  Mr. Adams indicated that was correct.

 

Mr. Meetze said we are now looking at July; most likely August.  Figure the costs.

 

Mr. Dawkins stated if it went up $100,000 or better, you would still be in budget.

 

Mr. Waldrop felt the 15% a month was way out of line.  Mr. Meetze said it was 5% to 15%. 

 

Mr. Meetze said nine months ago former Council Member Andy Morris was here, and what percentage did he state was going up.  Mr. Adams said it was 1% per month; more like 12% to 15% per year.  Mr. Meetze stated it was going up more than that. 

 

Mr. Baker said we didn’t need to be arguing figures.  Mr. Meetze felt the building could be built for $411,000.  Nine months ago when he appeared before Council, he thought we were ready to progress along.

 

Mr. Waldrop said he and Mr. Baker met with several of them and they looked at different places from the Airport to behind Piedmont Tech campus to out at the Fairgrounds, and maybe other places.  No one could come to a decision.  We left that up to you all.  Our recommendation was for it to be out at the Airport. 

 

Mr. Meetze said the decision made in this meeting with Council was that we were going to the Fairgrounds.  Nine months ago we discussed it during a work session, and we walked into the Council meeting, and Council voted to put us at the Fairgrounds.  Mr. Waldrop stated there was dissension between you all and the Council, because he never did get an understanding about you wanted to be out there.  Some of you said you might want to be there.  Then we had a problem with the topo of the land, the perking of the soil, the location down in a hole with the race track.  We wound up at the race track looking down in that hole you were talking about. 

 

Mr. Meetze said their first suggestion was to put it either on the left hand side or the right hand side of Dixie Drive, which was a deeper hole.  Nine months we make a decision on where to put it, and we are still sitting here trying to figure out and put bids out for a building. 

 

Mr. Waldrop stated there had been a lot of problems for some reason or another.  We are not here to micro-manage our Administrator or anybody else.  That’s not our job to do that; it’s  not yours either to tell us what we need to do.  We are going to come to some kind of terms, and we are going to do it right.  If we build this building, we don’t need a building that will withstand a 1,000 mile per hour wind. We need a nice building.  Mr. Waldrop didn’t agree with the building codes, and he has argued that point with this administration.  All of the fire departments went over budget.  Everything we have touched with this one cents program has gone over budget. 

 

Mr. Livingston said except for Peak.

 

Mr. Waldrop agreed but said that was a problem, too, with where it is located.  We are going to work it out with you.  It’s not that we don’t want you to have a building, and a $411,000 building will be nice compared to what you have today.  The County doesn’t even own the building you are in now.  That’s another problem.  We don’t need that anymore.  The buildings need to be in the taxpayers’ hands; not the rescue squad’s hand.  If we going to spend the taxpayers’ money, it ought to be the taxpayers’ money. 

 

Mr. Meetze stated being that they are going to locate a building within the city limits, wouldn’t the building inspector for Newberry County be in favor of the Rescue Squad and the County to oversee that project.  Mr. Adams stated the Building Inspection Department considers life safety issues primarily in the inspection of homes.  They are not in the business of managing construction projects.  They look for specific things involving foundations, the ingress and egress on windows from bedrooms; they make a studding inspection, roof inspection, but they don’t manage construction projects.  We don’t have anybody with that experience.

 

Mr. Meetze said the building inspector is going to read that set of specs that comes from the design builder.  Mr. Waldrop said the City would, too, if it is in the City limits.  Mr. Meetze said we would have to be in compliance with the City Building Inspector. 

 

Mr. Waldrop said this is a County building, and that’s what Mr. Meetze needs to understand.  Mr. Meetze said it is being built inside the City, and the City inspector is going to have to be the one that also signs off on it.  Mr. Adams stated his liability under the Tort Claims Act is very little in any case where he misses something that pertains to the construction of a building.

 

Mr. Dawkins asked if this discussion could continue at the work session.  Mr. Summer called time on this topic.

 

Jim Hough asked Mr. Summer how many names were on the list for public comments tonight.  Mr. Summer stated there were two.  Mr. Hough asked how many people had been to the microphone.  Mr. Summer stated it has been more than two.  Mr. Hough asked if there wasn’t an ordinance that said only those who sign up for the meeting will be able to speak.  Mr. Summer stated that was correct.  Mr. Hough asked why it wasn’t enforced.  Mr. Summer stated when we got on the rescue squad topic, it seemed like it never would stop.  Mr. Hough said it looked that way and he didn’t appreciate being held up.

 

Mr. Hough commented on considering the ordinance about motor homes on lots.  When you are considering this, please remember that there are some subdivisions who have ordinances that prohibit.  Mr. Livingston stated those people know that before they buy the lot up front.  Mr. Hough said that was correct; when you purchase the lot, you are handed a copy of the ordinances.  You are entitled to review those ordinances before you purchase the lot but it is up to the purchaser to obtain that information prior to passing the check on to the seller. 

 

Mr. Hough referenced website, Quick Facts US Census Bureau for State and County Governments, at which he compared counties in South Carolina.  It is costing Newberry County more per citizen in monies spent than other counties as far as county operating expenses go.  He cited Kershaw County, which has an estimated population of 57,490 as of July 1, 2006.  Newberry County has 37,762.  Kershaw County’s county ordinary and other purposes budget for the coming fiscal year is $17.6 million.  They have 20,000 more people than Newberry County to serve.  This site contains a lot of statistics and data but felt the Citizens Advisory Committee should be made aware of this site and that they along with members of Council would look at some of the other counties around the State and how far out of line Newberry County is with the other counties.  There is information there that would be of benefit to  Council and to our Citizens Advisory Committee if they want to review it.  The web address is quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states. 

 

Mr. Dawkins advised we received that information through the South Carolina Association of Counties about a month ago, and they were discussing Kershaw County.  He asked Mr. Adams if he had gotten additional information on that.

 

Mr. Adams’ recollection was that Kershaw’s operating millage is the highest in the State of South Carolina; their rate of taxation. 

 

Mr. Hough didn’t think it could be higher because their housing units is 24,606 versus 17,389 in Newberry, and they are operating off of $17.6 million ordinary county expenses versus Newberry’s $21.6 million. 

 

Mr. Adams said what he saw was just in the guide, and it may be printed wrong or he could be recalling it wrong.  The interesting thing was it showed the county operating higher than the school bills.  There was something strange about it.  He will get the publication and check it.

 

Mr. Hough saw the State newspaper and the reason he looked at Kershaw is because they had their operating budget listed in there.

 

Mr. Adams stated even if Kershaw County is higher than Newberry, that doesn’t mean we aren’t too high. 

 

Mr. Hough said they were lower than Newberry by $4 million on the county ordinary operating.  We need to do some research.  We were not favorable with the four or five counties he looked at. 

 

Mr. Adams will send the information he referred to to Mr. Hough and will look at what Mr. Hough has. 

 

16.       Vote for Executive Session.

 

Mr. Dawkins moved to take a 10 minute break and then go into Executive Session to discuss a personnel matter relating to the proposal from A.J. Tothacer, Jr. for the County Attorney position; second by Mr. Baker.  Vote was unanimous.

 

17.            Executive Session – Personnel.

 

[EXECUTIVE SESSION 8:35 P.M. – 9:44 P.M.]

 

Mr. Hawkins moved to return to open session; second by Mr. Baker.  Vote was unanimous.

 

18.       Action on Matters Discussed in Executive Session.

 

No action required.

 

19.            Comments from County Administrator.

 

Mr. Adams said we had talked about the work with Stewart, Newell and Cooper Architects in assessing the old Wal-mart building.  The cost of that right now is quoted at $2,000.

 

We also have begun survey and testing work at Mid Carolina Commerce Park.  The proposed schedule envisions construction beginning in January 2008 and completing Phase I in July of 2008. 

 

Mr. Adams received an email from Mr. Baker about code enforcement.  We are preparing the code enforcement personnel in Animal Control and Building and Zoning Departments with training on court proceedings.  Todd Johnson with the Sheriff’s Department has helped with that.  The next thing we discuss with them will be Fourth Amendment procedures, which has to do with search and seizure restrictions on public entities.  At some point after that we will certify them.  We want to start with the Building Department and get the wrinkles out before moving on with the other departments.

 

Council approved tax refunds.  We spoke with the treasurer today and expect all software problems to be worked out and checks generated by the end of July.

 

20.            Comments from Council Members.

 

Mr. Caldwell moved to go into another Executive Session on a personnel matter.  Mr. Summer asked if the County Administrator would be in the Executive Session.  Mr. Caldwell stated not at the beginning.  Mr. Pope asked to also be excused.  Vote for Executive Session was unanimous.

 

[EXECUTIVE SESSION 9:49 P.M. TO 10:45 P.M.]

 

[TOMMY WHITEHEAD REMAINED IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS

FOR THE EXECUTIVE SESSION AND WAS INCLUDED

IN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION DISCUSSIONS FOR APPROXIMATELY

30 MINUTES.  THEREAFTER, COUNCIL CALLED MR. ADAMS

INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION]

 

Mr. Hawkins moved to return to open session; second by Mr. Caldwell.  Vote was unanimous.

 

No report from Executive Session,

 

21.       Future Meetings.

 

August 8 and August 15 at 7:00 p.m.

 

22.       Vote to Adjourn.

 

Mr. Baker moved to adjourn. 

 

23.            Adjournment.

 

Meeting adjourned at 10:46 p.m.

 

                                                                        NEWBERRY COUNTY COUNCIL

 

 

                                                                        ________________________________

                                                                        Henry B. Summer, Chairman

 

 

                                                                        ________________________________

                                                                        Susan C. Fellers, Clerk to Council

 

APPROVED:            August 8, 2007