Where Do They Stand on the Issues #2 Town Tax Credit

The Town collects no property tax.  How is that possible?  The Town is entirely included in the James Island Public Service District.  The JIPSD provides fire protection and solid waste collection in the Town.   These are paid for by the JIPSD millage--in 2022, it was 60 mils, which would be about $720 for a typical James Island home.  

In 2019, the Town and JIPSD adopted a cost sharing agreement.  The Town pays for a share of the cost of providing fire protection and solid waste collection in the Town in return for the JIPSD agreeing to allow the Town to provide a credit against the JIPSD line on the property tax bill.   

The Town receives approximately $1.2 million each year from the South Carolina property tax credit fund to reduce the property tax burden for taxpayers within the Town.  For the last five years. the Town has used this money to reduce the property tax paid by residents of the Town.   In 2022, the savings come out to $210 for a typical $300,000 James Island home.   That reduced the JIPSD taxes by 32% and the overall property tax bill for homeowners by approximately 13%.   Tax credits are provided for all property in the Town including businesses, rentals, vehicles, as well as boats and other personal property.

Should the Town continue to use the money from the property tax credit fund to provide a property tax credit on the property tax bill by continuing with the Cost Share Agreement with the JIPSD?

Where does each candidate stand on this issue?

Where Do They Stand on the Issues #1 Should the Town Begin Collecting Property Tax?

 Where do they stand on the issues?

The Town of James Island is having an election on Tuesday, November 7th.

The Mayor and all four seats on Council are up.

I am not running, and there are three candidates to serve as Mayor: Brook Lyon, Gresham Meggett, and Josh Stokes.

There are seven candidates for the four seats on Council:  Dan Boles, Lewis Dodson, Jeff Hayes, Cynthia Mignano, Troy Mullinax, Zinnie Quinn, and Warren Sloane. 

Where do the candidates stand on the issues?  

What are the issues?

I want explore some of the issues that I think face the Town and find out the position of each candidate for Council.

Should the Town of James Island begin collecting a property tax?

The Town of James Island (all four incarnations) has never collected property tax. 

The Town currently has a millage of 17.9, but we provide a 100% property tax credit, so there is no property tax collected by the Town on residences, rental properties, business property, vehicles, like cars, or personal property like boats.

If you look at your property tax bill, there is a Town of James Island line and a millage, but the net amount collected is zero.  There are plenty of other lines on the bill, such as Charleston County, Charleston County schools, the James Island Public Service District and more.   So, residents of the Town play plenty of property tax--just no additional property tax to the Town.

Where does each candidate stand?

Should the Town begin collecting property tax?

Dills Bluff Development

Town Council will consider a proposal to rezone two parcels of property on Dills Bluff Road at its regular meeting next Thursday at 7:00 at Town Hall. The two parcels are located immediately behind the Camp Center Shopping Center.  One parcel is 1.27 acres and zoned community commercial.  This is immediately behind the shopping center.  The second parcel is 5.25 acres. It is zoned low density residential.   This parcel is behind the smaller parcel and mostly is bounded by Whitehouse Plantation.  The proposal combines the two properties and rezones it as a planned unit development called Marsh Walk Village.    

The property is owned by the James Island Public Service District. The Commissioners, elected by the voters of the District, which includes the Town and the unincorporated area of James Island, voted to sell the property.  The JIPSD procurement policy requires that they sell it by open bid. The highest bid was KT Properties, offering just under $2 million.   The developer has a contract with the JIPSD.  The JIPSD is bound by the contract. but the developer can refuse to make the purchase if the Town votes down the requested zoning change.  If the contract falls through, the JIPSD will likely bid the property out again.

The reason the JIPSD is selling the property is to fund renovations to their facility at Signal Point Road.  In 2014, the JIPSD considered moving their operations from Signal Point Road to the Dills Bluff property. This would involve parking their fleet of garbage and waste water vehicles there, along with their maintenance shop. They had also planned on moving their administrative offices to Dills Bluff.    While their administrative offices could be placed on the smaller commercially zoned parcel without any rezoning, their other operations would require a rezoning to industrial. At the time, I told the JIPSD Commissioners that I would oppose that rezoning and that I was sure that the majority of Town Council would also vote against.  I told the JIPSD Commissioners that I would support having the Town purchase the back part of the property with greenbelt funds for a park, and purchase a portion of the front part of the property for a Town Hall.  The JIPSD could move its administrative offices to the remainder of the front of the property.  My plan would have required a rezoning of the front part of the property to office or office residential.

The JIPSD Commissioners voted against the proposed move in 2014, largely due to the outcry by neighbors in Whitehouse Plantation. In 2019, former Chair of the JIPSD, Alan Laughlin, again proposed moving their Signal Point operations to Dills Bluff, and the JIPSD Commission voted it down 6 to 1.    Since the Town is very unlikely to approve the rezoning necessary to move the JIPSD's industrial activities to the Dills Bluff site, they have decided to sell the property and use the money to fix up the Signal Point Road facility.  None of the current Commissioners support moving their industrial operations from Signal Point Road, but the buildings there are nearly 50 years old and need to be protected from flooding.

The question before Town Council isn't whether the JIPSD should be allowed to sell the property--they can--but rather a rezoning.  Again, over an acre of the property is currently zoned commercial.  Under the Town's Zoning Ordinance, property zoned community commercial can include a variety of business and office uses as well as multifamily housing.  The allowed housing density is quite low--4 units per acre.   So, for example, a developer could put businesses on the ground floor with apartments on the second floor.   Given the size of the parcel, that would be a total of 5.08 dwelling units, which rounds down to 5 apartments. Of course, they could dispense with the businesses and just put 5 single family homes on the site, with the quarter acre yards typical of much lowcountry suburban development.  Or, they could just put one or more businesses on the site without any apartments.

The larger 5.25 acre parcel is zoned low density residential and is limited to single family development.  The density allowed is 3 units per acre, so the total dwelling units that would be permitted is 15.75, which rounds up to 16.  These would be single family detached housing units.  Each home would be on an approximate 1/3 acre lot.

Considering the two parcels together, under current zoning, 21 housing units are allowed, as well a variety of businesses or offices.

The proposed rezoning has commercial uses in three buildings on 1.6 acres and then attached single family homes on the remainder.  These are townhouses, but each townhouse is on a separate lot, so it is single family attached. The developer has proposed two different approaches to the townhouses.  One approach would be 20 larger townhouses.  The other would be 25 townhouses, with some being smaller and others larger.   The first approach is consistent with the total number of housing units allowed by the current zoning, but the other approach increases the number of housing units by 4.  The smaller units would be less costly and so would help provide affordable housing on James Island.  (The smaller townhouses would be more affordable than the larger ones, though given current market conditions on James Island, even these small ones would be pretty expensive.)

The Town's Planning Commission considered the rezoning on Thursday, September 14th.  They voted to recommend that Town Council approve the rezoning 4 to 1, with conditions.  One condition is a 20 unit cap, in effect, mandating the larger townhouse option and limiting the overall density of the project to what is allowed with the current zoning. There were several other conditions recommended by the Town's Planning Director, that were adopted by the Commission.   For example, any restaurants in the business section would require a BZA special exception to sell alcohol. 

While the Planning Commission has already included what I consider the key condition--no increase in total number of dwelling units allowed, I cannot support the project unless further conditions are included. 

I don't believe that the Town's zoning code should include a prohibition on gun shops at this location.   The notion that a gun  shop located here would increase crime in the area is absurd.   Criminals don't get guns at neighborhood gun shops to commit crime in their neighborhoods.  The reason for this provision is "symbolic" to show that the Town of James Island feels that guns are too available in our society.  I don't believe this reflects the feelings of most residents of the Town.

More importantly, there is much interest by the residents of the area in using these parcels for a park.   The Town has $760,000 in greenbelt funds.  While this does not come close to purchasing property worth nearly $2 million, it will purchase a little less than 40%.    I beleive that having a park in this location would be desirable.

Regardless, property should transition the uses from commercial to the single family residential that currently exist in the adjacent portion of Whitehouse Plantation.

I plan to propose these conditions for the rezoning to Town Council.

A. Up to 20 single family detached dwelling units, with the possibility of substituting up to 5 single family attached dwelling units (townhouses) on a one for one basis.   The maximum allowed would be 5 single family attached dwelling units and 15 single family detached dwelling units.

B. The single-family attached dwelling units must be located in the southern portion of the property adjacent to Camp Center Villas and/or the Camp Center Shopping Center.  The single-family detached dwelling units may be located adjacent to Whitehouse Plantation.

C.  The commercial section of the property should be no more than 1.27 acres and located on the southwest portion of the properly adjacent to Dills Bluff Road and the Camp Center shopping center.  (Roughly where the plan currently locates the businesses.)

D. The prohibition on gun shops on this property shall not be included in planned unit development.. 

E.  The developer will agree to sell up to $750,000 worth of the property at the appraised value to the Town for a park, contingent on the Town obtaining a grant from Charleston County Greenbelt.   The property to be sold will be on the west side, adjacent to Whitehouse Plantation.  The number of  dwelling units will be reduced in proportion to the amount of property to be included in the park

With these conditions, I think the rezoning would be in the best interests of the Town.  

Clean James Island Creek

                                 James Island Creek seen from Dock Street Park

For some years, Charleston Waterkeeper has frequently included James Island Creek near Folly Road (the "Ellis Creek Bridge") as one of the local waterways too polluted for swimming.   Happily there were occasional "good" reports, but the bad ones were all too frequent.   Reports were better at their testing site by the Harborview Road bridge, but substantial bacteria counts were found there too.

Complaints to SCDHEC (South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control) by area residents resulted in an official designation of an "impaired waterway."   The three local governments responsible for stormwater management in the James Island Creek Watershed, the Town of James Island, Charleston County, and the City of Charleston, were mandated to monitor bacteria levels in the creek and develop an action plan during the next five years.   This mandate is directly from SCDHEC but indirectly from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Failure to comply can result in multi-million dollar fines for local governments.  The James Island Public Service District (JIPSD) and Charleston Water System (CWS) provide sewer service in the James Island Creek Watershed, but are regulated under a separate provision of the law and so are not directly mandated to clean James Island creek.   The James Island TMDL the initial report from SCDHEC, was completed in November 2019.

As SCDHEC reviewed conditions in the creek, public works staff from the Town, City, and County were involved at every step. Creation of a memorandum of agreement (MOA) for a joint response began early on and was signed in December 2020.   The County has hired a consultant, Wolpert Engineering to provide monitoring.   They will test the water each month and an additional four times each year after heavy rains.   Also, they will use microbial source testing four times each year to identify the waste--human, pet, or wildlife.   They will be testing at the traditional locations near the bridges at Harborview Road and Folly Road.   A third location has been approved off  Jim Isle Drive at Battery Point.  A fourth may be identified later   The Town, City, and County pay for this testing in proportion to our area of jurisdiction in the watershed, roughly 58% City, 34% Town, and 8% County.  The Town's expense is expected to be approximately $10,000 per year.

In February 2020, the local governments formed the James Island Creek Water Quality Task Force.  This was an initiative from Charleston City Councilwoman Carol Jackson.  The body includes elected officials from the Town, City, and County, key staff members from those local governments, as well as elected officials and staff members from the James Island Public Service District and the Charleston Water System.  State elected officials are represented.  Also, representatives from conservation groups such as Waterkeeper and Coastal Conservation League are included.   The Chairman is Mayor John Tecklenburg of the City and I serve as vice Chair.   Other elected officials serving include County Councilwomen Jenny Honeycutt and Anna Johnson, City Councilmen Ross Appel and Dudley Gregorie, City Councilwoman Carol Jackson, Town Councilman Garret Milliken,  JIPSD Commissioner Kathy Woolsey, State Senator Sandy Senn and State Representative Spencer Wetmore.

The Education and Citizen Outreach Committee, chaired by Waterkeeper Andrew Wunderly, will share  information to residents about how they can help clean our creek and about what the task force and local governments are doing on their behalf.   You may have seen an editorial in the Post and Courier and TV reporting due to their efforts.   The Town, County and City all contribute stormwater utility monies paid by our residents to help fund the Ashley Cooper Education Consortium.  Operated by Clemson University's Extension Service, the consortium provides a wealth of information about managing stormwater and protecting our marshes and creeks.

The Technical Committee, chaired by James Island Town Administrator Ashley Kellahan, worked to get the MOA between the City, County, and Town hammered out and approved.   The testing plan is moving forward.  We anticipate our first quarterly report next month (November 2021.)

The Policy Committee, chaired by Charleston City Councilman Ross Appel, initiated a Watershed Plan which was provided at no cost by Terracon   All James Islanders owe this public-spirited engineering firm a hearty thanks for helping clean our creek. The James Island Creek Watershed Plan  was completed in May 2021.  It has been approved by SCDHEC and will go to the full task force for a recommendation for adoption by the Town, City, and County Councils.

Also Charleston Water System funded molecular source testing for the first time this spring (March and May of 2021.)  Working with Charleston Waterkeeper, their limited sampling revealed that the human DNA concentration was by far greater than the other source types analyzed. While the test results are by no means conclusive, they do indicate that human waste is indeed a factor and contributor to the pollution in the James Island Creek.

The Watershed Plan points to aging septic systems being the culprit for  contamination.  The study shows that the CWS sewage treatment plant at Plum Island and Sanitary Sewer Overflows by the JIPSD and CWS pipes are not major contributors to the problem.  SCDHEC regulates the installation of new septic systems, but it does not require any maintenance.  It recommends that homeowners pay for regular inspections by licensed contractors and pump outs when needed.  Also, while septic systems can last for many years, most of the septic systems in the area were built decades ago, well past the usual estimates of a life-span of less than 50 years.   

Due to these concerns, James Island Town Council is currently considering an ordinance requiring homeowners to have their septic systems inspected as recommended by SCDHEC at least every three years.   Further, a properly functioning septic system or sewer connection will be required which will include regular pump outs and any other maintenance or replacement for septic systems.   If and when sewer becomes available, the Town will enforce the existing JIPSD ordinance requiring connection.   SCDHEC imposes strict regulation of JIPSD (and CWS) regarding any leakage of sewage from their pipes or pump stations. 

At an early stakeholders meeting organized by the Charleston Waterkeeper in 2019, the JIPSD was asked to explore the cost of extending sewer into areas in the JI creek watershed that now depend on aging septic systems.  The estimated cost was approximately $8 million.  At the time, there was little prospect of adequate funding for this major undertaking.  However, the American Rescue Plan Act provides federal funding that local governments can use for sewer extension.  The Town is slated to receive $3.2 million in ARPA funds, and Town Council has budgeted half to address water quality in James Island Creek.   All the local governments, as well as our state representatives, are seeking some of the more than $2 billion of ARPA money that was allocated to our state government.  All indications are that the state will require local government ARPA  money as a match to help fully fund this project. 

Approximately 85% of the homes in the James Island Creek watershed with aging septic systems are in the Town.  Most of the new development in areas under City jurisdiction already has public sewer.  The ARPA money is only available for a limited time and money not spent must be returned to the federal government.   In my view, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to solve a major problem that the Town and other local governments must address.

The Town of James Island has already taken key steps to address water quality.  The Town adopted a new stormwater ordinance to control fill and build and reduce flooding, which will also help protect water quality in our marshes and creeks, including James Island Creek.   The Town's limits for residential density also control runoff in this and other areas of the Town. Further, the Town, working with the JIPSD, has introduced a program of providing pet waste stations.   Pet waste can also a source of storm water pollution.   The key step, however, will be getting contamination from aging septic tanks under control.  

Please help us Clean Our Creek.

Chase is Coming to Camp and Folly

 The derelict Subway is gone.  Chase Bank is building a branch at the corner of Camp and Folly.   At some future time, the owners of the lot where Pizza Hut stood will put in a business, but that has yet to be determined.   For now, that area will be grassed and vacant. The parking for the bank will be to the rear, at the current location of Corky's.  Corky's is moving further south on Folly Road near Signal Point Road.  

The Town will retain the easement it purchased from Corky's for public improvements at the corner.   The planned bus shelter site, however, has been moved further up Folly, near the existing stop in front of where Pizza Hut stood. The after hours parking that Corky's had agreed to provide will now be provided by Chase bank.  

The Chase bank construction complies with the Town's new storm water regulations passed in May of 2020 as well as the Folly Road overlay.   There is no increase in overall elevation of the property and the grading at the property boundaries will be gently sloped to protect the neighbors.   Some of the parking will be pervious, as required by the Folly Road Overlay.   There will be trees and other landscaping in and around the building and parking lot.

The two buildings that have been demolished--Subway and Pizza Hut--and Corky's which is slated for demolition later, were all constructed  before there was any storm water regulation.   The area was nearly all impervious--buildings and asphalt with no retention ponds. There was very little green area or trees.   The redevelopment and landscaping of this property will substantially improve both the appearance and the control of storm water in this area.  Storm water will be collected in underground catch basins and  treated for water quality with a Stormceptor water quality device.  There will be an overall 15% reduction in storm water runoff.  Further, any new business at the old Pizza Hut location can add no additional storm water runoff.

The plans for the site, as well as the storm water pollution protection plan are available for inspection at Town Hall.  

After Chase Bank completes its project, the Town will develop a plan for landscaping and improvements for the easement area.  Council has approved the installation of flags in its easement.  Precise design is waiting until the Chase construction and landscaping is complete.

Abandoned Subway Building

New Park This Summer or a Vacant Lot?

James Island Town Council will vote Thursday, May 20th whether to open Brantley Park this summer.  Council budgeted $185,000 from the hospitality fund for the project last May and had approved the park plans in January.  Staff bid out the project this spring and the low bid was $153,000, well below budget.  The project was ready to move forward in April, but Council voted 3 to 2 to defer until the May meeting.   Some on Council question whether James Islanders want another park and raised concerns that too much money was being spent along Folly Road.  

The Town has more than $1.3 million in its hospitality tax fund and anticipates collecting an additional $540,000 next year.   Approximately 85% of that money is raised from restaurants along Folly Road.  The funds to purchase the land for the park came from the Charleston County Greenbelt Fund.  The Town’s application to purchase the land included a commitment to have a park open to the public. 

Do James Islanders want another park?   Do the people of the Town want to see some green space along Folly Road?    Please let Town Council know whether we should move forward to open Brantley Park this summer or do they want a vacant lot?  

 

Town Tax Credit Programs

    The Town of James Island has two tax credit programs.    The first is the Local Option Sales Tax Credit  The sales tax in Charleston County includes an additional one percent that is mostly used to reduce County and Municipal property taxes.   Town staff forecasts that we will receive approximately $1.1 million from the Property Tax Credit Fund over the 2021-22 fiscal year.   State law requires an equal credit against the Town’s 17.9 mill property tax.   

    I have asked Town Council to approve an additional $220,000 credit from the LOST County/Municipal Revenue distribution for this year.  If Town Council approves, the Town’s property tax will continue to be zeroed out.   When you look at your consolidated property tax bill from the Charleston County Auditor for your house, car, or boat, the Town’s millage will appear, but the amount next to it will be zero.   As always, the Town will add nothing to your total property tax bill, and no property tax revenue will go to the Town.  

    The Town’s second tax credit program is our Cost Share Agreement with the James Island Public Service District (JIPSD.)  The JIPSD is an independent special purpose district that provides fire protection and solid waste collection in the Town and unincorporated area of James Island.  The Town contributes part of the cost of providing fire protection and solid waste collection in the Town and in exchange the District allows for a tax credit.   As a result, everyone in the Town pays a reduced property tax on homes, cars and boats to the James Island Public Service District.   I have asked Town Council to provide a $1.1 million cost share to the District for the 2020-21 fiscal year.

     If Town Council approves the full LOST credit and the cost share, the amount Town property taxpayers must pay will be little changed from last year.  If Town Council votes down the cost share, the result will be a  40% increase in the amount Town homeowners pay to the JIPSD compared to last year.   Because this makes up nearly 50% of the total property tax bill, this would be a 16% increase in the total property tax bill for homeowners.  There would also be increases in the tax that must be paid on all property such as cars and boats.  

    I strongly support the Cost Share Agreement.   If the Town had its own fire and solid waste departments as do our neighbors in the City of Charleston and the City of Folly Beach, then the Town’s property tax millage would need to be much higher.   We would need to charge approximately the same millage as we currently pay the James Island Public Service District—likely 60.3 mills for this coming year.   However, we would be required by state law to use the Town’s distribution from the property tax credit fund to provide a credit.   The Town could not possibly zero-out property taxes, but the total charges to Town property taxpayers would be the same as what we must pay with the cost share agreement we have now.   So, the people of the Town can remain part of the James Island Public Service District, continue to receive the fire protection and solid waste collect services they have always provided us, while paying approximately the amount we would if Town had its own fire department and solid waste collection service.   

It would be wasteful triplication to add a third fire service and sold waste collection service on James Island. The cost share with the James Island Public Service District is a cost-efficient method of providing our Town taxpayers with the benefits intended by the LOST program.

Radical Resolution To Endorse Declaration of Climate Emergency and Mobilization to Return to Council in December

 Councilman Milliken proposed that the Town adopt a resolution supporting the declaration of a "Climate Emergency and Mobilization" at our September Town council Meeting.   Council voted 3 to 2 to postpone consideration until our December meeting.   Councilwoman Mignano and Mullinax joined me in voting to postpone.  Councilman Boles joined Councilman Milliken in seeking an immediate vote on the Emergency Resolution.

A copy of the resolution shared by Councilman Milliken is here:

RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE DECLARATION OF A CLIMATE EMERGENCY ANDMOBILIZATION EFFORT TO RESTORE A SAFE CLIMATE

The movement for declaring a climate emergency comes from something called "the climate mobilization."   They have a website which is very alarming:  

The Climate Mobilization

This group requested that their activists pressure their local governments to adopt a declaration of climate emergency.   Here is their model resolution:

RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE DECLARATION OF A CLIMATE EMERGENCY AND EMERGENCY MOBILIZATION EFFORT TO RESTORE A SAFE CLIMATE

As can be seen above, Councilman Milliken placed an almost identical resolution before the Town.   His resolution will have the Town go on record in support of the positions and agenda of this radical activist group--"the climate mobilization."

A declaration of emergency generally allow the chief executive to exercise emergency powers.   This allows prompt action without approval by the governing body.   For the Town, this would allow the Mayor to take action without approval by Council.   This resolution would not override existing Town ordinances which allow the Mayor  to declare emergencies.   Much more concerning is that this resolution would put the Town on record as joining others in calling for the U.S. President to declare a national emergency in order to unilaterally impose regulations on families and businesses without approval by Congress.   

The nature of the regulations the Town is being called on to support are very extreme.  It the words of the Climate Mobilization Movement:

Mobilization is an emergency restructuring of a modern industrial economy, accomplished at rapid speed. It involves the vast majority of citizens, the utilization of a very high proportion of available resources, and impacts all areas of society –

Nothing less than a government-coordinated social and industrial revolution.

What would this be like?  According to the climate mobilization, the U.S. should copy the World War II economic mobilization.   However, this would not be a three year effort that ended with the defeat of the Axis Powers.   It is rather a ten year program that will likely never end.

Councilman Milliken is asking Town Council to endorse this social and industrial revolution proposed by the climate mobilization group.   They make no secret that they propose the impoverishment of the American people.   In the resolution before Council, we are, in effect, asked to blame the people of the United States for global climate change.  It should be no surprise that they intend major suffering for our people.   

As they implement their social and industrial revolution, food and other necessities are to be rationed.   Children will be given smaller rations than adults!   It is all spelled out in the Victory Plan.

 Victory Plan

Included in this plan is the following:

■ Quantity rationing of basic necessities 

■ Weekly free allowance issuances to citizens 

■ Sharing of rations among family members 

■ Appropriately smaller rations for young children 

■ Strict enforcement 

■ No loopholes for the rich 

■ Local citizen rationing boards

Taxes?  The plan proposes raising taxes up to 94%!   

What about agriculture?   U.S. agriculture is very productive and helps feed the world.  That is all to end.   According to the "Climate Mobilization," we are to:  

Transform agriculture

A rapid shift from industrial agriculture to localized, regenerative farming with limits on livestock production and a phase-out of factory farming.

  What does this really mean?   Returning the U.S. to a third-world way of life, where most Americans will grow their own food.    As Councilman Milliken explained, we will all have "victory gardens" in our yards.     Meat?   The victory plan proposes a vegetable based diet.  Ban meat.

The most likely result of this 10 year crash effort is mass starvation. 

A social and industrial revolution indeed.

The shift from the production of cars and washing machines to tanks and bombs did require substantial hardship for the American people for several years in the 1940s, but this plan is much more extreme.   It is much closer to what the Chinese Communists attempted in the 1950's with their "Great Leap Forward."   Their goal was to enhance productivity and improve the standard of living of the Chinese people.   It failed utterly and set back the Chinese economy for decades and generated mass starvation.   Paradoxically, this effort by the climate extremists would likely greatly reduce the carbon output of the U.S.  as it has the same actual consequence of previous government-led social and economic revolutions--mass poverty.

    The problem of the build-up of greenhouse gases has been developing for centuries.   The notion that it can end in a decade is irrational.   A reasonable plan to gradually reduce emissions is the only feasible approach.  

President-elect Biden rejected the positions of the climate extremists included in the "Green New Deal" for good reason.   If if the U.S. started on such a  road, well before the children are given their smaller rations, the plan would be rejected by the voters and any hope for an effective response to global climate change and greenhouse gas production would be set back for decades.   

But the far left has been working hard to pressure the President-elect to adopt this and other radical positions.  Unlike Councilman Milliken, most James Islanders did not vote for Bernie Sanders to be the Democratic nominee for President.   Many James Islanders supported the reelection of President Trump.   

It is inappropriate to have our Town government, which should represent all of our people, endorse extremist positions held only by a few, especially when the proposals are a recipe for disaster. 

Millage Rollback Passes on 3 to 2 Vote

 Last Thursday, October 1, Town Council voted 3 to 2 to roll back the Town millage from 20 to 17.9.   The meeting was very contentious, but in the end Councilmen Boles and Mullinax joined me in voting to rollback the millage.  Councilman Milliken and Councilwoman Mignano voted against the rollback.  

The rollback was done in compliance with SC Code 12-37.250.    The effect of that section of state law is that local government collects the same amount of revenue after a reassessment, leaving the dollar amount collected from property taxpayers unchanged on average.   Reassessment is required every five years by the South Carolina Constitution and the procedures are laid out in the South Carolina Code.   These provisions are applied by the County Assessor and County Auditor.   

Without the requirement for a rollback, reassessment would result in a sudden jump in property taxes every five years.   If there were no other complicating factors, then property taxes for Town homeowners would have increased 11% this year without the rollback.

However, the Town is in a very unusual situation in that we use our Local Option Sales Tax distribution to provide a credit large enough to reduce the net property tax collected by the Town to zero.   Property taxpayers in the Town pay nothing to the Town and the Town receives no revenue from property taxpayers.   As long as the Town continues with that policy, reassessment and rollbacks by the Town will not impact anyone's property tax bill or property tax or any other sort of revenue obtained by the Town.  

So why the controversy?

While several Lowcountry municipalities have no property tax, such as Ravenel, Meggett, Kiawah Island and Seabrook Island, the larger municipalities such as Charleston and Mount Pleasant do.  Those municipalities, as well as some smaller ones, like Folly Beach, provide a credit against property tax bills, but there is still an ample net property tax paid by their residents which funds a substantial part of their budgets.   For those municipalities, a higher millage increases the amount paid by their taxpayers and the amount of revenue they can use to fund their services.

The residents of the Town, like residents of municipalities with no property tax, must pay property taxes that municipalities like the City of Charleston, the Town of Mount Pleasant, and the City of Folly Beach do not pay.   Those of us in the Town pay property tax to the James Island Public Service District, which funds the very expensive fire protection and solid waste collection services.   The millage in the Town, including the Town and JIPSD millage together, is similar to that in the City of Charleston and substantially higher than in the City of Folly Beach or the Town of Mount Pleasant.   With the Town zeroing out its own millage and providing a credit through the cost share program against the JIPSD property tax, the result is a tax bill lower than in the City of Charleston, but still higher than in Folly Beach or the Town of Mount Pleasant.

State law authorizes municipalities to increase their property tax millage to obtain extra funding, but only to a limit.   The limit is based upon past inflation and population growth.   It is calculated by the South Carolina Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office.   Permissible increases can be carried forward for three years, so the Town could legally increase its millage by up to slightly more than 10%.   While ordinarily, the Town could have increased it from 20 to up to 22 mils, because of the reassessment, any increase this year and in the future must be from 17.9, which means that the maximum legal millage at this time is 19.7.   

The allowed increase in our millage cap is unique to the Town because it depends on population growth.   While some municipalities, like Folly Beach and the Town, have had little or no population growth, the City of Charleston and the Town of Mount Pleasant have had rampant development and population growth, and so are allowed substantially larger millage increases.  

If the Town operated like the Town of Mount Pleasant or the City of Charleston, and provided a partial (and relatively small) property tax credit, and collected a substantial property tax revenue, then increasing our millage the maximum legal amount would have resulted in a more than 10% increase in the amount Town residents paid and our revenue from property tax.   The gross amount before the credit would increase about 10% and depending on the amount of the credit, the percent increase in net amount could increase by more.  

What happened at our meeting?

It appeared that initially Councilmen Boles and Milliken wanted to defeat the rollback and leave our millage unchanged.   Councilman Milliken claimed that his research suggested that no rollback was necessary.  There was also some question about what punishment the Town would suffer if we were to defy state law.   

However, Councilwoman Mignano proposed "as a compromise," that the Town provide a partial rollback to 18.9.   Councilman Milliken made the motion for this compromise and Councilwoman Mignano seconded it.

If there were no complicating factors, this would result in a 5% increase in the average property tax bill due the Town which would add about $73,000 per year in new revenue.   But there is a major complicating factor.  As long as the Town provides a property tax credit sufficient to zero out the Town's property tax, there would be no change in the amount Town taxpayers pay or the amount of revenue the Town collects.   

Similarly, as initially suggested by Councilman Boles and Milliken, if the Town did not roll back its millage at all, this would have increased property taxes about 11%, but if the Town continues to provide a credit to zero it out, there would be no change in property tax paid or revenue received.

Councilwoman Mignano then proposed that the Town reduce the amount of credit it provides so that taxpayers would have to actually pay something to the Town and the Town would receive more revenue.   She wanted to obtain this new revenue to help the Town avoid delays in drainage projects.   Charleston County does substantial drainage work for the Town at no cost, but sometimes we must be patient waiting for them to get to our projects while they do work in other parts of Charleston County.   She believes that the Town should collect property tax so that the money can be used to provide faster service.  

I suggested that we first vote on the millage amendment from 17.9 to 18.9.  That increase passed 3 to 2, with Councilmen Milliken and Mullinax joining Councilwoman Mignano to approve.   Councilman Boles and I voted against the amendment.   

Councilwoman Mignano then proposed that the Town reduce the amount of property tax credit it provides by 5%.  Her motion failed for lack of a second.   

The amended resolution to adopt a millage of 18.9 failed with Councilwoman Mignano and Councilman Milliken voting in favor, and Councilmen Mulllinax and Boles joining me to oppose.

The result then was that the Town's millage would remain at 20, in violation of state law.   Councilmen Mullinax and Boles joined me in reconsidering this action, reversing the amendment, and passing the rollback of 17.9.    

Councilman Boles expressed concern about voting on this matter at a special meeting and felt we should consider it at our regular meeting.  I pointed out that the County will have already mailed the property tax bills by the time of our October meeting and we had already missed a deadline the day before.   Councilman Milliken complained that since he is no economist, I should do a better job in educating him and the rest of Council about how property tax works.

In my view, having the Town for the very first time make our residents pay a property tax to the Town (along with continuing to pay the JIPSD) based upon a decision at a special meeting called because of a routine deadline for the property tax bill is little short of criminal.  If  members of Town Council believe that our residents should start paying property tax to the Town as well as the JIPSD, then they should have brought this up during the budget process last spring, which includes a public hearing and two readings.   If something new has happened since, they can impose a property tax our our residents as part of next year's budget.   Really, they should have told voters they plan to start having them pay a property tax when they ran for Town Council a year ago.

When the voters approved the fourth incorporation of the Town in 2012, Mayor Riley said vote NO.  He said the Town would soon have no choice but to start raising property tax.  I responded that it wasn't necessary for the Town to collect property tax and that we could reduce the total property tax paid by the residents of the Town.  It was a long struggle, but with the cost sharing agreement with the JIPSD, property taxes paid by Town residents have been reduced.  

But I always knew that what would happen in the future depended on who Town voters elected to Town Council.   

It still isn't necessary for the Town to collect a property tax for itself on top of what the JIPSD already collects, but if the voters of James Island don't take a stand, Mayor Riley's prediction will soon come true.   

Town Hospitality Tax Funds Improvements and Beautification at Camp and Folly

The Town just purchased an easement at the corner of Camp and Folly. Corkys purchased the old subway property from Charleston County for the appraised value of $500,000.  The Town purchased an easement on 30% of the property for $100,000.   This perpetual easement provides an area on the corner where the Town can place public improvements.  In effect, the Town has obtained use of 30% of the property for 20% of the total cost.  The improvements planned for the Town's easement include a bus shelter similar to the one across Folly by Walgreens, a bike rack, a multi-use path, informational signage, and landscaping.

Corkys will tear down  the derelict Subway building and expand its parking on the portion of the property it retains.  As part of the agreement, public parking must be allowed on the lot during week days evenings, Saturday afternoons and evenings, as well as all day on Sundays.

The Town purchased the easement and plans to fund the improvements using revenue from the hospitality tax.  Many municipalities in South Carolina have used hospitality tax to fund similar streetscape improvements.  Unfortunately, the improvements planned for the easement will likely be postponed for the coming fiscal year.   Still, I hope that before too long, this corner will become an attractive touch of green along Folly Road, improving and beautifying the center of  our Town's commercial corridor.  

Other projects the Town funds with the hospitality tax include Brantley Park at the corner of Brantley and Folly, the Town's $400,000 contribution to the multi-million Phase I Rethink Folly Sidewalk project which runs along Folly from Ellis Creek to Wilton Street (across from Walmart,) the Town's parking lot at Santee and Folly, and a multi-use path along Folly from Wilton Street to Fort Johnson Road.

The focus on Folly Road is no accident.   Folly Road is used by tourists and by improving the segment of Folly Road in the Town, we hope to encourage tourists who pass through our Town to stop at our local businesses, and especially at our restaurants.   It is our restaurants--mostly on Folly Road--that collect the hospitality tax.    

The hospitality tax is the Town's primary source for funds to pay for the improvements outlined in the Rethink Folly Road Plan.  Our goal is to make Folly Road to be a place where everyone wants to come, both tourists and Town residents.

Requiring a Special Exception for Hotels on Folly Road

Zoning in the Town's commercial core has always allowed for hotels and motels.  Because the Town limits the height of buildings on Folly Road to 35 feet (approximately 2 stories) there has been little interest in building one in areas under Town jurisdiction.  There has not been a hotel or motel on James Island for many years.

The Town's Planning Commission has recommended adding a further restriction--that hotels and motels only be allowed in the Town's commercial core with with a special exception from the Town's Board of Zoning Appeals.    If the specific location proposed for a hotel or motel were inappropriate, the Board could deny the request.  More importantly, the Board would be able to impose conditions needed to protect  neighboring residences or the natural environment.  While hotels and motels are already been a prohibited use in other areas on Folly Road under Town jurisdiction because the underlying zoning--mostly office residential--does not allow them, the Planning Commission proposal expressly prohibits hotels and motels in all areas areas of the Folly Road Overlay other than the commercial core..

The Town's commercial core is centered at the intersection of Camp and Folly and runs between Ellis Creek and Prescott Street (next to the new JIPSD fire station)  It is already commercially developed with only one very small vacant lot, so all that is possible is redevelopment. (The more open areas on Folly Road south of Grimball and Fort Johnson on to Folly Beach are not in the Town.)  

Nearly all of the Town's commercial core is made up of old strip malls, gas stations, and car washes. These were constructed long before there were any drainage requirements aimed at protecting our Island waters from pollution from stormwater runoff.   Similarly, sidewalks, trees, and other plantings were not required when these properties were developed decades ago.  All of these improvements will be required with redevelopment.  That is a key goal of the Rethink Folly Road plan--to promote redevelopment of the commercial core on James Island to make it a place of which all James Islanders can be proud.  

I believe that the right hotel would be help spur desirable redevelopment in the Town's commercial core.  Further, accommodation tax money can be raised to provide further improvements to infrastructure and beautification of Folly Road. There is currently little meeting space for local organizations on James Island and James Islanders would finally have a place for extended family members to stay nearby.   

The Planning Commission's proposed requirement that hotels and motels obtain a special exception is a a reasonable way to control hotels and motels on redeveloped  property in the Town.  It will allow us to limit the number and size of hotels and motels.  In my opinion, a ban on all hotels and motels on Folly Road is a rash and drastic approach that is not consistent with the well being of our community. 

Darren "Troy" Mullinax Seeks Reelection to Town Council

Councilman Mullinax was first elected to Town Council in 2012 and was reelected in 2014.   He serves as Chairman of the Public Safety Committee and Council Liaison to the Neighborhood Council.   The Neighborhood Council is responsible for promoting crime watch and emergency preparedness, especially for hurricanes.   Troy has worked hard to recruit representatives of the neighborhoods in the Town and has had success, though some representatives participate more than others.   Troy and the Neighborhood Council play a key role in one of the Town's major annual events, "National Night Out."   It is always a great success.   If you haven't been, be sure to come.  The emphasis is on promoting neighborhood crime watch and building bridges between the Town's law enforcement and the community.

Troy and I do not always agree, but we both support one of the key goals of the Town--giving our former residents in the unincorporated area an opportunity to rejoin.   All members of Council have been aware of the Town's work to change annexation law in Columbia.   Troy has been supportive.  However, Town Council never voted on the matter until last spring.   Troy voted in favor of a resolution in support of the legislation needed to reunite the Town.   

Troy has also supported cooperation with James Island Public Service District to allow for a tax credit.  That is what allowed Town homeowners to have a more than 13% property tax cut in October.  He is committed to continued tax relief in coming years.

Troy supports the Town's low density development policy.   He supports the Island Sheriff's Patrol and supported working towards having a Deputy assigned to the Town full time.   He has supported the Town's efforts to build sidewalks and parks.   He understands the need to emphasize drainage.

Troy Mullinax is a sound choice for Town Council.   He has a record.  And when it is truly important, he has come through for our Town.

Alexandra Purro Seeks James Island Town Council Seat

Alexandra Purro is running for James Island Town Council.   She has worked with the Town of James Island for several years on the "Town Market."   She had organized a market as a private venture.  The Town Administrator, with my blessing,  approached Alexandra with a proposal to work together on a "Town Market."  Alexandra is not a Town employee.  She recruits and supervises the vendors at the market and collects their fees.

When I heard from the Town Clerk that Alexandra had expressed interest in running for Council, I was taken totally by surprise.   I had no idea she was interested in seeking elected office. Later, I learned that she had filed for office.  Next time I saw her, I wished her luck.

Soon, I heard concerns from members of Council that there could be a conflict of interest.  In my opinion, there is absolutely no conflict for her to run for Town Council.   However, if she wins, the Town Attorney would need to review our current arrangement. It seems obvious to me that if she was on Council she would have to recuse herself from voting on any Town expenditure that benefits the Town Market.  Currently, the market is held at Town Hall and the Town pays for a jump castle and movies are shown using equipment purchased by the Town.

Early in the campaign, my wife, James Island Public Service District Vice-Chair Kathy Woolsey, told me that she was going to support Alexandra for Council.   Her explanation was that we need more diversity on Town Council.   I told Kathy that was fine, but I was more concerned about Alexandra's positions on the major issues facing the Town.

I have met with Alexandra since.   She explained that she would like to run the James Island Market on a volunteer basis.  Apparently, she has not been taking home a big profit because her expenses are about equal to the fees she collects from the vendors.  I would be open to that approach, but it would be a major change and would require a vote by Council.  The Town would take a larger role in the market, with the vendor fees going to the Town and all expenditures run through the Town's budget.  However, these considerations are only relevant if she wins.

I also asked her about the major issues facing our Town.  I asked about our effort to reunite the Town.  She supports that.  I asked if she supported cooperating with the James Island Public Service District to allow a tax credit.  She said that she did.  She supported the Island Sheriff's Patrol and thought experimenting with having a Sheriff's Deputy assigned to the Town full time was a good idea.  She suggested that should be a first step and we should move towards more full-time and fewer part time deputies.  She supported the Town's low density development policy.   She supports sidewalks.  She understands the need to focus on drainage issues. 

My impression, however, is that her real passion is to spearhead events and festivals. The Town has always depended on members of Council pitching in and helping with citizen groups and organizing various activities and events.   So she would fit in well.

My view is the Alexandra Purro would be a sound choice for Town Council.   

Reelect Josh Stokes for James Island Town Council

Please vote to reelect Councilman Josh Stokes to James Island Town Council.   Councilman Stokes is young, smart, and committed to the Island and its people.   His legal background has been a great help to me and the rest of Council.  Josh developed the concept for the legislation that will allow us to reunite the Town.  The new bill based on modification of contiguity passed the South Carolina House unanimously last spring and goes before the South Carolina Senate in January. 

Josh supports the Town's low density development policy.  By allowing our former residents to annex to the Town, more of the Island will be protected from high density development.

Josh also chairs the Town's Drainage Committee.  This committee includes all of Town Council and ex-officio representatives from the City of Charleston, Charleston County, and our state representatives.   Josh is working to continue the Town's progress in improving drainage to help protect our residents from flooding.

As chair of the Children's Committee, he has put together several of the Town's annual events--most recently, the annual Lights Out Halloween Festival, but also the Easter Egg Roll and the Christmas Tree Lighting.  It is these types of events that build our Island community.

Josh is also a strong supporter of cooperation between the Town and the James Island Public Service District, which led to this year' tax credit plan resulting in a more than 13% property tax cut for Town homeowners.   He is committed to continued property tax relief.

Josh and I don't always agree, but we can usually find a way to work together for the good of the Town.   Please return Josh Stokes to Town Council so that we can continue to keep our taxes low while improving our quality of life.

Reelect Leonard Blank to James Island Town Council

Please reelect Leonard Blank to James Island Town Council.   Leonard's long experience with the Town always provides guidance to me, the staff, and the rest of Council.   He was Chairman of the Town's Planning Commission from 2002 to 2004 and then began serving on Town Council in 2006.   After serving with me on the Free James Island committee in 2011, he returned to Council in 2012.   He serves as Mayor Pro-tem and is Chair of the Town's Land Use Committee, serving as Council liaison to the Town's Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals.

Leonard played a key role in developing the Town's low density approach to planning and zoning in 2002.  He understands what the Town can and cannot do under the laws of South Carolina.   He has always worked to protect the Island from over development.

Leonard and I don't always see eye-to-eye, but we both share a key Town goal to give our former residents in the unincorporated area the opportunity to rejoin the Town.   Today, approximately 1/4 of James Island is under Town jurisdiction and protected from over development.   Approximately 1/4 of James Island is unincorporated.  There is potential for major developments in "the County," but worse, developers continue to annex to the City of Charleston to allow for even denser development.   Councilman Leonard Blank understands that our best opportunity to protect James Island is to reunite the Town.

Leonard was also a strong supporter of cooperation between the Town and the James Island Public Service District that allowed for our new tax credit which reduced property tax for Town homeowners by more than 13% on our October bills.   He is committed to continued tax relief for residents of the Town.

Leonard understands the need to focus on drainage.  He has supported the Town's effort to restrict "fill and build."  Leonard has supported the Town's program to extend sidewalks.   He has supported Town Parks.

Please return Leonard Blank to Town Council so that we can continue to work together to keep our taxes low while improving the quality of life on James Island.

Camp and Folly Beautification Project

The Town is asking Charleston County Council to sell the old subway property at the corner of Camp and Folly to Corkey's for the appraised value of $500,000.   In exchange for our support, Corkey's has agreed to sell an easement on 30% of the property to the Town for $100,000. 

The net cost for Corkey's will be $400,000, so they are paying 80% of the appraised value and will be able to use 70% of the property.   In effect, the Town is paying 20% of the cost in exchange for permanent use of 30% of the property.

The County insisted on one buyer, so that is why Corkey's is paying the County for the property and then the Town is buying the easement from Corkey's.   The reason for the easement is that the property is too small to subdivide according to Town ordinances.  Everything the Town wants to do can be done with an easement.

Corkey's plan is to put a parking lot on the 70% of the property that they will retain.  They will pay to construct the parking lot.  The Town has insisted that their parking lot be "open" as a condition of our request to County Council.  That means there will be no signs stating that parking is for Corkey's customers only, others will be towed, etc. This is consistent with the Rethink Folly Road plan which encourages an open parking policy for all businesses along Folly Road. While it is likely that the parking will mostly be used by Corkey's customers during its business hours, in the evening and on Saturday afternoon and Sundays all spots will be available for the general public. 

The Town's plan for the 30% of the property we will obtain include a bus shelter, signage, a bike rack, a multi-use path, a bench, trees and other landscaping. The  purpose is to beautify this corner in the center of the commercial core of our Town.  The proposed bus shelter has been coordinated with CARTA and it will involve moving the current stop approximately 30 feet from its location in front of Pizza Hut.

We understand that a big developer is ready to outbid Corkey's and the Town.   I am skeptical that will work out.   I hope County Council agrees to the Town's proposal that Corkey's buy the property.  The partnership with the Town, including a Town financial contribution, is important for this sale.   If County Council does not accept this proposal, then County staff will recommend that they sell the property using a sealed bid. My greatest fear is that the property will remain vacant with a derelict building while some speculator waits for top dollar. 

If County Council accepts our proposal, the Town will be purchasing our 30% share of the parcel using some of our hospitality tax money.  That money cannot be used for most general government purposes. We cannot use those monies for drainage maintenance or law enforcement in our neighborhoods.  The Town can use these funds for Rethink Folly Road improvements because Folly Road is used by tourists--to access Folly Beach.

Unfortunately, there has been much misinformation spread about this proposal. The Town has not described this small spot of green on Folly Road as a park. The Town is not going to spend $100,000 per year, this is a one time expense.  The Town is not going to pay to construct a parking lot for Corkey's.  The Town is not paying Corkey's to use their new parking lot after hours.  The Town is not asking CARTA to remove the bus stop near Bi-Lo at Riverpoint Road.   

What the Town is doing is working to remove an abandoned building from the center of the Town and we believe that when our residents drive by they will instead see a small spot of green that will make all of us proud.

Rezoning on Dills Bluff?

At the July meeting of the James Island Public Service District Commission, Chairman Alan Laughlin proposed moving the JIPSD headquarters from its current location on Signal Point Road to Dills Bluff Road.  That would include both their administrative and industrial activities such as parking, cleaning, and maintenance of the District's fleet of garbage and sewer trucks.  The Chairman gave a long presentation regarding a 2014 plan that had been rejected by the Commissioners after an outcry by residents of Whitehouse Plantation, the neighborhood adjacent to the District's property behind the Camp Road Shopping Center. 

Most Commissioner's spoke against the proposal, reminding the Chair of the public outcry the last time the District proposed parking garbage trucks next to a residential neighborhood. Vice Chair Kathy Woolsey said that the first step would be for the Chairman go to the Town and ask to rezone the property to industrial.  The Chair's proposal never came to a vote.  The Chairman asked the Commissioners to give him an opportunity to share his proposal to the community.  The proposal to move from Signal Point Road to Dills Bluff as well as ordinances that would instead begin the process of selling the property were postponed until the August meeting on a 5 to 2 vote.   Vice Chair Woolsey and Commissioner Brown Crouch voted against the motion to postpone because they were ready to vote against the Chair's proposal and to move forward with selling the property. 

The Chairman said he was completely against selling the property.  Commissioners Engelman and Platt also spoke against selling the property, with Commissioner Platt proposing that the District move the administrative offices to Dills Bluff.  Those Commissioners in favor of selling the property argued that the District cannot afford to move its Administrative Offices and needs the funds from the sale of the property for other more important capital expenses such as renovation of the fire station on Harbor View Road.   Nearly all of the property is zoned single family residential.  If it is sold, then no more than 15 single family homes could be put in the area. 

The Town and District have begun monthly meetings between the Mayor and Chair.  At our meeting in August, I explained to the Chairman that his proposal to move their garbage and sewer operations to Dills Bluff would require that their property be rezoned to industrial.  I explained that I don't believe that there are any members of Town Council willing to vote for such a drastic rezoning.  I said that I would support rezoning at least some of the property to office residential to allow the District to move its administrative offices to Dills Bluff Road. 

The Chairman then discussed the matter with the Town's Planning Director.   She explained that moving the garbage truck operations would require a rezoning to industrial.   The Chairman said that she was wrong and that he would challenge her ruling.   Any such challenge would go to the Town's Board of Zoning Appeals.   The BZA ruling could then be appealed to circuit court.   While the District has every right to file an appeal of the Planning Director's opinion, I would think that it would only go forward with a favorable vote by the Commissioners.   I think that there is only one Commissioner, the Chair Alan Laughlin, that would support seeking a rezoning from the Town.

Stop Development on James Island? How?

The Town of James Island is almost entirely zoned single family residential with a density of three units per acre.   There is no vacant land in the Town zoned for apartments.   The only areas zoned multifamily have had apartment complexes on them before the Town was formed the first time--in 1992. 

The commercially-zoned properties in the Town do allow for apartments, but only four units per acre.  There are very few vacant commercial lots in the Town.  Nearly all of the commercial lots in the Town are along Folly Road and have businesses on them.

In fact, there isn't very much vacant land in the Town at all.   The Town is almost entirely "built out" made up of single family residential neighborhoods.

In last the ten years, there have been three small subdivisions built in the Town with 44 new homes.  Since the Town is made up of slightly more than 4000 households, that is an increase of about 1%.

When I see candidates for Town Council centering their campaigns on stopping excessive development on James Island, I am puzzled.  What developments in the Town of James Island are they complaining about?   Town Council can prevent rezoning of single family areas to commercial or multi-family.   But no one on Town Council has supported that.  And it hasn't happened. 

Of course, we see new apartment complexes and residential neighborhoods being constructed on James Island nearly every day.  It occurs on the approximately 50% of James Island that has been annexed by the City of Charleston.

James Island Town Council has no authority over development in the City of Charleston.  The City does not ask the permission of the Town's Mayor or Council before they allow developers to build.   The laws of the South Carolina do not require them to ask our permission.  County Council has no authority over the City of Charleston either.  County Council only governs development in the unincorporated area.

Former Mayor Riley supported dense infill development on James Island. Since he has left, City policy has improved, but there is a legacy of City zoning that allows for dense development.  Nothing requires a municipality to zone for dense development, but once you have zoned a property multi-family or commercial, reversing course is difficult. You can expect a legal challenge from the owners and they have a very good chance of winning in South Carolina.   Still, most City areas are zoned for their least dense single family residential--five units per acre.  Unfortunately, that is substantially more dense than in the Town.

In my view, what the Town needs to do is continue to work to change annexation laws in Columbia so that the voters in the 25% of James Island that is unincorporated and was in the Town in 2011 can rejoin.   The Town's density requirements will then apply on approximately 50% of James Island, rather than the County's slightly higher density or the City's substantially higher density.  The way to stop the City from annexing even more of James Island is to reunite the Town.

So, when a candidate for James Island Town Council tells you they will stop excessive development on James Island, ask them, how?   Do they think this excessive development is in the Town?   Do they support reuniting the Town and stopping the continued expansion of the City of Charleston on James Island?   Do they think they will make the City of Charleston change its development policies?  How?  Beg and Plead?  Cry?  Speak firmly?  Throw tantrums?   

The one member of Charleston City Council who lives on James Island fully understands the need to stop excessive development.   I have always been willing to work with her.   But she is just one member of City Council.   How can Town officials be most effective?    My observation over the years is that having Town officials insult City officials has been counter-productive.   The City of Charleston did modify their zoning on James Island so that commercial properties no longer automatically allow for large apartment complexes. 

I certainly hope that no candidate for James Island Town Council is so cynical that they hope that voters will be confused and think that these developments are occurring in the Town of James Island and that all that must be done is to elect new members of Council.    To me, that seems like exploiting voter ignorance. 

I certainly am open to new ideas.   Exactly how can a member of Town Council stop excessive development in the City of Charleston or the unincorporated area?   How can property owners in the unincorporated area be stopped from annexing to the City of Charleston to allow even more density than in unincorporated Charleston County?   Shouldn't candidates let the voters in on their plan?

Solid Waste Proposal--Cooperation

The James Island Public Service District Commission and the City of Charleston have been working on a plan to provide more efficient solid waste collection in our community. The effort is being spearheaded by Commissioner Meredith Poston, chair of the Commission's Solid Waste Committee, and Charleston City Councilwoman Carol Jackson.

Everyone on James Island has observed that in many neighborhoods, two sets of garbage trucks go down the street each week. One truck picks up at homes with the brown roller bins, and then another truck comes on another day and picks up at homes with the green roller bins.

In my opinion, this is the most blatant example of waste and duplication of public services on our Island.

The proposed solution is simple. The JIPSD will pick up garbage and yard debris for homes in both the Town and in the City in one area. In exchange, the City will pick up the garbage and yard debris for homes in both the Town and the City in another area. The total number of homes served by the JIPSD and the City will remain the same, but by coordinating their efforts, both will save on fuel and time. Instead of the JIPSD trucks going down a street and picking up garbage and yard debris for those in the Town and passing by the City homes and then the City trucks going by and picking up just the City and passing by Town homes another day, only one set of trucks will go down each street.

It is just commons sense. I support this proposal 100%.

The Solid Waste Committee of the JIPSD Commission will consider a limited pilot program to test the proposal on Monday night, August 26 at 6:30 PM. The Committee recommendation is scheduled to come before the full Commission at 7:00 PM that same night.

The test area will be for a neighborhood that is mostly annexed to the City with only a few homes in the Town that will be covered by the City and a nearby neighborhood mostly in the Town with only a few homes annexed to the City that will be covered by the JIPSD. Both neighborhoods are near Harbor View Road. The target date for the test is October.

Can we please try some cooperation between the City of Charleston and the James Island Public Service District?

Call 911 to Report Sewer Spills

On August 14, there was a major sewer spill next to Harbor View Road.  There was a break in a pressurized sewer line belonging to the Charleston Water System.  Raw sewage entered a tributary of James Island Creek between the Ellis Creek Fish Camp and the Harbor Creek Condominiums. 

We need citizen help.  Please promptly report sewer spills.   If you observe a spill call 911.  Charleston County Consolidated Dispatch will contact the proper wastewater utility to provide emergency repairs.   Charleston Water System and the James Island Public Service District both provide sewer service on James Island.  All the sewage is treated by Charleston Water System at Plum Island.

Getting emergency repairs started as soon as possible should be our priority.  However, DHEC (South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control) also encourages citizens to report sewer spills to them.  The technical term is Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSO.)  For James Island you would call North Charleston DHEC Office at 843-953-0150.    SSO reports are not unusual in Charleston County and are often associated with heavy rains or major storms. 

Call 911 first and then call DHEC at (843) 953-0150.

Please help your local government protect our waterways.

Map of Sewer Spill

View of Repair Site on Harbor View Road

View of Repair Site from Harbor Creek Condominiums