Lighthouse Boulevard Drainage Project

The Town of James Island has been working on the Lighthouse Boulevard Drainage Project for many years. Initially, the project focused on constructing a sidewalk to connect the Lighthouse Point Neighborhood to the sidewalk on Fort Johnson Road.  While that continues to be part of the overall project, because of flooding on Fort Johnson Road and homes to the north during major storm events, the project now includes a culvert under Fort Johnson Road and a storm drain along the east side of Lighthouse Boulevard to convey water to the Parrot Creek drainage canal that runs between the New Beginnings Church and the Lighthouse Point Neighborhood. 

The sidewalk portion of the project has shifted to the west side of Lighthouse Boulevard.  The James Island Soccer Club has agreed to provide an easement for the construction of the sidewalk on their property.   The sidewalk will wind through the heavily wooded area between the soccer field and the road.  No grand trees will be impacted by the sidewalk.

The drainage portion of the project, however, remains on the east side of Lighthouse Boulevard.   For the most part, the drainage pipe will be under the SCDOT right of way along the road, but it will encroach on the Church's property in several places.   The Church has agreed to give the Town an easement for the encroachments.

Unfortunately, there are two grand trees that will be impacted by the installation of the drainage pipe.   While both trees have suffered severe root damage due to the maintenance of the existing drainage ditch, digging the trench for the new drainage pipe will cause further damage.   One will need to be removed, and the root system of other will be further damaged so that it might not survive.  The Town will try to save one of the trees, but is asking the BZA for permission to remove both.

Initially, the Town had asked new Beginnings Church for an easement to construct a sidewalk on their property near Lighthouse Boulevard. The Church instead proposed that the Town construct a curb and gutter along the road, pipe the existing ditch, and place the sidewalk next to the newly constructed curb. That approach would have required the removal of some trees.   Due to the requirement that much of the ditch be piped, and the experience of flooding on Fort Johnson Road and the homes to the north during storm events, the Town expanded the project to include a culvert under Fort Johnson Road to help with drainage problems. A sidewalk project became a joint sidewalk and drainage project.

The Town won a grant from the Charleston County 1/2 cent Transportation Sales Tax to share in the cost.   We asked Charleston County Transportation to take over management of the project in 2017.   Their consultant proposed that the sidewalk portion of the project be moved to the west side of he road and that we approach the Soccer Club for an easement.   That was successful.

As for the drainage portion of the project, the west side of Lighthouse Boulevard would have many serious tree impacts, so the County's consultant proposed to continue to look at the east side of the road.   One option was to construct an open drainage ditch to convey the water away from the new culvert under Fort Johnson Road.   This would be partially constructed on the SCDOT right of way, but it would substantially encroach on the Church's property because of the need for slope on the sides of the ditch,  This would also create more tree impacts.   The drain pipe alternative requires less room, but it still will encroach on the Church's property some and impact two grand trees.  The Church agreed to the drain pipe rather than the open ditch just last month.

After receiving approval from the Church for the drainage portion of the project, the Town applied to its own Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance to remove the two grand trees. The Town's BZA always meets on the third Tuesday of each month. The Town's case will be heard at the BZA's next regular meeting on November 20th.   The Town met all legal notification requirements--a sign was placed on the property, letters were sent out to neighboring property owners, and an ad was placed in the Post and Courier.    During the coming week, our usual notifications for the BZA meeting will appear on the Town's website and other social media.

There has been some confusion spread by the media regarding the project.   While the overall project is for a sidewalk and drainage improvements, the sidewalk is not being constructed to improve drainage.   The culvert under Fort Johnson Road and the drain pipe along the east side of Lighthouse Boulevard is aimed at improving the drainage on Fort Johnson Road and the area on the north side of Fort Johnson Road. 

The two trees are partly on the SCDOT right-of-way and partly on the Church's property.   There is no drainage issue at that location.   The project is not aimed at controlling standing water there.  Exactly what the Church will do with that area of its property is up to them, but they are not replacing the trees with impervious surface.  Immediately, there will be a grassy area that will continue to absorb rainfall rather than create additional runoff. 

While the drain pipe will have inlet boxes along Lighthouse Boulevard and so remove storm water from that road, there is not a serious drainage problem because sheet flow down the road to the the drainage canal conveys most of that water on the road.   While SCDOT did dig out the ditches on the road recently, it wasn't because there was severe flooding on Lighthouse Boulevard.   The problem is that Fort Johnson Road blocks drainage from the north, which is the reason for putting a culvert under Fort Johnson Road.   The purpose of the drain pipe is to convey that water to the drainage canal.

This drainage improvement will not impact the Lighthouse Point neighborhood, which is on the other side of the drainage canal from the outlet of the drain pipe. Lighthouse Point does have drainage problems, which he Town continues to address.   For example, the Town recently replaced a drain pipe to convey water from the ditches on Grimsley Road to the outfall in Clark Sound. 

I am asking that the Town's BZA allow the removal of these two trees because controlling flooding is a major priority for the Town of James Island.

JIPSD Results

JIPSD Change--Brown-Crouch Reelected, Clifford, Poston, and Laughlin Win Seats

There was a major change at the James Island Public Service District.   Incumbent Inez Brown-Crouch was reelected.   Challengers Marilyn Clifford, Meredith Poston, and Alan Laughlin all won seats.   Incumbents Kay Kernodle, Donald Hollingsworth, and Bill "Cubby" Wilder all lost their bids for reelection. 

13% JIPSD Tax Hike on Property Tax Bill

The combined Charleston County property tax bills arrived in Island mailboxes in October. The James Island Public Service District increased its property tax by 13%. For the first time, JIPSD homeowners pay more than in the City of Charleston—3% more. Three-fourths of this year’s total property tax increase is due to the JIPSD, with their share of a homeowner’s property tax bill rising to more than 49%.

The Commissioners voted 4-2 for the double-digit tax hike this June. After a public hearing that saw a huge turn out of James Islanders speaking in opposition, Commissioners Donald Hollingsworth, Kay Kernodle, and William “Cubby” Wilder joined Chair Engelman in voting for the tax increase without discussion. Commissioner Inez Brown-Crouch and Commissioner Woolsey voted no and spoke out against the excessive tax increase.

Most of the added tax revenue will be used to pay back with interest money the JIPSD plans to borrow next year to build a new $8 million fire station, costing more than twice as much as new fire stations recently built by the Cities of Charleston and North Charleston. With slightly less than half of the total Island population, the JIPSD will have four fire stations while the City of Charleston will have two fire stations on James Island.

Town of James Island property tax was unchanged this year. Because of a 100% credit, the amount paid to the Town remains zero, but the JIPSD continues to collect its rising property tax in the Town as well as the unincorporated area. James Island Town Council has no power to review or limit JIPSD property tax increases. It is solely the responsibility of the elected JIPSD Commissioners.

City of Charleston millage is higher than in the JIPSD, but the amount of tax paid is lower in the City because of its tax credit. The Town offered to work with the JIPSD to allow for a credit against JIPSD taxes in the Town. The response was an insult-laced letter signed by Commissioners Hollingsworth, Kernodle and Wilder, in effect throwing away the Town’s offer of up to $1 million in aid. Efforts by Commissioner Inez Brown-Crouch and Commissioner Woolsey to bring up the offer for discussion met with a motion to table from Commissioner Hollingsworth. Commissioners Kernodle and Wilder joined Chair Engelman in blocking all discussion. The final word from Commissioner Wilder was that the JIPSD has no interest in working with the Town to save the taxpayers’ money. The bottom line—Commission insiders are just too proud to accept the Town’s help.

Look at your new property tax bill.

Do you want business as usual? The JIPSD plans to raise taxes up to 10% more over the next five years.

Commissioner Inez Brown Crouch voted no on the tax hike. Along with
challengers Alan Laughlin, Marilyn Clifford, Keane Steele, and Meredith Poston, she understands the need to limit property tax increases and will work with the Town to save taxpayer money.

Let’s vote for a change

Rethink Folly Road News--Bike/Ped Improvements Move Foreward

The Rethink Folly Road Steering Committee met last week and received a report from the Reveer Group and Charleston County Transportation staff.   The staff recommendation was to construct an eight foot wide sidewalk on the west side of Folly Road between Ellis Creek and Pittsford Street.   Pittsford Street is the entrance into Queensborough next to Nativity Catholic Church.   The Committee voted to recommend that Charleston County Transportation go forward with that plan.

The Committee also accepted a proposal to look at re-striping Folly Road so that the width of the bike lanes will be consistent with national standards.   The tentative proposal will be for the bike lanes to be painted green to improve rider safety. 

The Committee also recommended moving forward with a RFQ (request for qualifications) for a firm to manage the Rethink Folly Road Plan.   The key goal will be to work with the businesses on Folly Road to promote improvements and also redevelopment consistent with the plan.

The goal is to make Folly Road a place where people will stop and shop and not just pass through.  The area should be friendly to those driving but also to bus riders, bikers, and pedestrians.

Vote Joe Boykin for County Council

I believe that Joe Boykin will be an excellent choice for James Islanders on Charleston County Council.   Joe lives on Johns Island where he has seen the consequences of severe development pressure first hand.   These problems are especially severe in the unincorporated areas of James Island included in District 8.  In recent years, Mayor Tecklenburg and the City of Charleston have made substantial progress is changing their past policy of encouraging high density development on James Island.  Unfortunately, Charleston County's regulation of the unincorporated has moved in the opposite direction, particularly on Folly Road between the Town of James Island and Folly Beach--an area in District 8.   I believe Joe Boykin will work with the Town of James Island and the City of Charleston to improve our quality of life and especially work to protect against flooding.   I urge all James Islanders, including the Town residents in in District 8, to vote for Joe Boykin for County Council.

Vote Jenny Honeycutt for Charleston County Council

Jenny Honeycutt will be an excellent County Council representative for James Island.   She is from James Island and a resident of the Town.   She is bright and articulate.   She listens to people and wants to solve problems.  I believe she will be a strong advocate for James Island and all of district 9 on County Council.   Please join me in voting for Jenny Honeycutt on Tuesday.   

Vote Peter McCoy for SC House of Representatives

Peter McCoy is a James Islander.   We can count on him to work for our community in Columbia.   He directed $200,000 of state funds to help with our new sidewalk on Dills Bluff and with the new Town.    Thank you.   He has always supported giving James Islanders in the unincorporated area the opportunity to vote to join the Town of James Island.    He has persuaded some of the political leadership of the state to support our effort.    When I have asked for his help with drainage issues on South Carolina Department of Transportation roads in the Town, he has always come through for us.   Please join me in voting to reelect Peter McCoy to the South Carolina House of Representatives.

September Meeting of James Island Public Service District

Meredith Poston for JIPSD Commissioner

Meredith Poston is a good choice for James Island Public Service District Commissioner.   Meredith has represented the Centerville community on the James Island Neighborhood Council.    She is frequently found at community events taking photos.   A former reporter for the James Island Messenger, she attended many Commission meetings and has followed with concern Commission practices.  She is open minded and willing to consider Town proposals to share the cost of needed necessary expenditures.  Please consider Meredith Poston for JIPSD Commissioner.

Vote Keane Steele for JIPSD Commissioner

Keane Steele is an excellent choice for James Island Public Service District Commissioner.  Keane graduated from The Citadel with a degree in civil engineering and also earned a Masters Degree.   Supervising major construction projects, he will be able to provide effective oversight and make sure that JIPSD construction is cost efficient.   This includes the proposed $8 million fire station.   Keane has explained that this looks like a very high cost for the space and substantial savings are possible.  More importantly, the sewer infrastructure is aging and repair and replacement is necessary.    Keane will provide the expertise that will minimize the impact on monthly sewer bills.    I am confident that Keane will work with the Town to provide alternatives to ever increasing property taxes.  Please consider Keane Steele for JIPSD Commissioner.

Town Council Approves Island-Wide Drainage Basin Delineation Agreement

James Island Town Council unanimously approved an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Charleston and Charleston County for an Island-wide drainage basin delineation.   The City of Charleston has already signed the agreement.   It now goes to Charleston County for final approval.

The plan is that Charleston County will manage a consultant contract with Thomas and Hutton, and the Town, County, and City will share in the cost based upon the area of each jurisdiction on James Island.  The Town will pay 24% of the total cost, which amounts to $13,645.

The consultants will delineate approximately thirty drainage basins on James Island.   The drainage infrastructure, such as ditches and pipes, owned by all jurisdictions will be included--Town, County, City and SCDOT.  This will allow drainage maps of James Island that show all infrastructure for the first time.  (Current Town maps show no City infrastructure even when our ditches and pipes interconnect with theirs.   Our maps show Town, County, and SCDOT infrastructure in the Town and unincorporated area.) 

The consultants will also look for opportunities to make cost effective improvements that will benefit many residents.   This project should be complete in approximately six months. 

This is only the first step.   Elected officials representing James Island will then pursue further analysis of particular basins.   The result will be a road map for future drainage improvements.  The long run goal is to determine what is needed for all of James Island. 

This is an important milestone in intergovernmental cooperation on James Island.

Vote Marilyn Clifford for JIPSD Commissioner

Marilyn Clifford will be an excellent addition to the James Island Public Service District Commission.   Marilyn served for many years as the representative from Centerville on the James Island Neighborhood Council.   A graduate of James Island High School, she also has a college degree in business administration.    She is the senior paralegal for a local law firm.   She will be able to represent the people of James Island effectively as she helps oversee the complicated budget and legal issues facing the District.    Marilyn is best known for her service to James Island Veterans organizations and for singing the national anthem at Lowcountry events.   She understands the need to limit property tax increases and also supports the effort to give residents in the unincorporated areas of James Island an opportunity to return to the Town.   Please support Marilyn Clifford for JIPSD Commissioner.

Elect Alan Laughlin JIPSD Commissioner

Alan Laughlin has a long record of volunteer service to James Island. Most notably, he served as Chairman of the James Island Neighborhood Council for many years. He is also a long time volunteer for the Community Emergency Response Team, serving first as leader for James Island and Folly Beach and now Deputy Director for the Lowcountry. He has the training and experience needed to work with the JIPSD fire chief, who serves as incident commander for all of James Island, preparing our people for emergencies such as the growing threat of storms and flood. For the last four years, he has attended all the James Island Public Service District Commission meetings. He has detailed knowledge of the JIPSD budget.   He is a retired Associate Hospital Administrator with a Masters in business administration. A Navy Vet, he is also the product of James Island public schools.   Alan understands the need to limit JIPSD property tax increases, and I am confident he will work with the Town on new funding solutions. A long time supporter of the Town, including a turn on the James Island Election Commission, we can count on him to support efforts to give residents of the unincorporated area of James Island an opportunity to rejoin the Town of James Island. Please give Alan Laughlin your vote for James Island Public Service District Commissioner.  Help him by sharing and liking Alan's facebook page.

More Trouble on Greenhill Road

The Town responded to the murder on Greenhill Road last summer by expanding the Island Sheriff's patrol by 50% and our coordinator, Sheriff's Deputy Sergeant Shawn James, has focused efforts on the "Down the Island" community.   Sadly, we had a second murder this fall and just last week, two were injured in a shooting.

The Town's goal has been to deter criminal activity.   The continued gun violence in the community shows that has not been fully effective.   Still, there has been improvement.   There has been strong cooperation by the community resulting in prompt arrests.   The more recent murderer was soon arrested and the two shooters from last week were taken into custody after two days.

Mayor Tecklenburg has offered the help of the Charleston City Police. While most of the Down the Island community is in the Town, as usual, there are a few residents who had annexed to the City.  Also, as usual, there are a number of new City developments on Dills Bluff and Fort Johnson bordering on the Down the Island community.

The Chief Deputy of the Sheriff's Office and the City Policy Chief are planning a coordinated effort with the Town's Island Sheriff's Patrol.   I hope that we will develop a memorandum of agreement between the Town and the City so that we can deepen law enforcement cooperation on James Island.

The James Island Neighborhood Council is also working on the problem;  Henrietta Martin represents the community on the neighborhood council.   There are street captains throughout the community.   They are working with the Town to target abandoned buildings and overgrown vacant lots.   Not only are these unsightly, cleaning up the area is a matter of public safety.

The Town just completed a sidewalk project on Seaside Lane and is already obtaining easements to improve drainage.   I strongly support a program of community improvement along with a commitment to continued law enforcement.

Vote Inez Brown-Crouch for JIPSD

Inez Brown Crouch has served our community for many years.   She serves with James Island Pride, on the James Island Arts Council, and the James Island Historical Commission.  She voted against the excessive 13% tax increase.  She willing to work with the Town to limit the burden on taxpayers while maintaining quality service.   She supports giving all residents of the JIPSD the opportunity to join the Town.  Inez deserves your vote.  Please return her to the James Island Public Service District Commission.   

Abuse of Power at the JIPSD Commission Meeting

JIPSD Chairwoman Sandi Engelman and Vice-Chairman Donald Hollingsworth both refused to respect the first amendment rights of Alan Laughlin, a candidate seeking election to the JIPSD Commission in November.

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Like most governmental bodies, the James Island Public Service District Commission allows citizen comments at their meeting.   This provides an opportunity for citizens to exercise their first amendment rights, specifically, the right to free speech and to "petition the Government for a redress of grievances."   

The Chairwoman of the JIPSD, Sandi Engelman, and the Vice Chairman, Donald Hollingsworth have decided to impose censorship on citizen comments to prevent all criticism of any Commissioner or the Commission.

What is their rationale?   The JIPSD rules of procedure which include:

Rule 23  Purpose of Public Comment.  It is the purpose of this agenda item to
permit the public to address the Commission, not to debate or berate the Commission or
its employees.  

Rule 25  Decorum.   Any person making impertinent or slanderous remarks or
who becomes obnoxious or disruptive while addressing the Commission may be barred
from further presentation before the Commission by the presiding officer. 

Chairwoman Engelman and Vice Chairman Hollingsworth have interpreted these rules to prohibit all criticism of any Commissioner or the Commission.

There are two problems with this censorship.   Most importantly, the JIPSD is an elected, governmental body fully subject to the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution.   Any JIPSD rule that prohibits citizens from sharing concerns about the actions of  a Commissioner or the Commission is unconstitutional.

However, the existing JIPSD rules do not come close to prohibiting criticism.  Chairwoman Engelman and Vice Chairman Hollingsworth are violating the Commission's own rules as well as the U.S. Constitution.

To "berate" is to scold or criticize angrily.   Even harsh criticism can be delivered in a reasonable and calm matter.   "Impertinent"  means rude or showing disrespect.   Again, criticism may be provided in a respectful manner.  "Slanderous" means false and malicious.   A truthful criticism can never be slanderous.

What happened?

At the August meeting, Alan Laughlin was recognized for his three minute public comment.   He began to address the Commission.   He stated Commissioner Kay Kernodle was at the August meeting of James Island Town Council.  As soon as he mentioned her name, Chairwoman Engelman interrupted and said that he could not criticize any Commissioner.   Laughlin then began without using Kernodle's name, stating that a Commissioner had attended the August Town Council meeting.  Engelman again interrupted stating that she would not allow anyone to criticize any Commissioner. 

Alan Laughlin wasn't even given the opportunity to make any criticism, much less berate the Commission or be impertinent or slanderous.     It was obvious that Engelman had a good idea what Laughlin was going to say, and she was going to prohibit him from speaking.

At the September meeting, Laughlin tried again.   He prefaced his remarks by saying that he wanted to bring up a concern about the behavior of the Commission's official liaison to the Town at the August James Island Town Council meeting.  Engelman told him that he could not criticize the Commission or any Commissioner.

Commissioner Kathy Woolsey stated that Engelman was violating Laughlin's first amendment rights.   Vice Chair Hollingsworth said the Commission rules prohibit any criticism of the Commission.   Commissioner Woolsey asked what rule states that no criticism is allowed and asked that it be read.  Hollingsworth then read the rule 25.   Since Laughlin hadn't done more than mention the Commission liaison, he had no opportunity to be impertinent much less slander anyone.  Engelman said that Commissioner Woolsey was out of order and pointed to the sheriff's deputy at the back of the room and said that she would have her removed. 

What grievance was Alan Laughlin trying to share with the Commissioners?

At the August Town Council meeting, Commissioner Kay Kernodle signed up for the Town's public comment period.   She handed a letter to the members of Council and then turned her back and began to address the audience.    I asked her to address Council.   She refused, stating that she didn't want to address Council and wanted to address the audience.  Rather than insist that she follow the Town rules, I just let her go on for her three minutes.   She spent the three minutes thanking Mayor Tecklenburg for agreeing to adjust the City's boundary with the Town so that the new JIPSD fire station would be entirely within the Town. I thought she made a fool of herself with her impertinent behavior.  I was just baffled that she failed to use this opportunity to request that Town Council agree to a boundary adjustment.

Alan Laughlin believes that Commissioner Kernodle's lack of respect for Town Council was inappropriate, especially because such behavior would never be tolerated at a Commission meeting.   I imagine that is what he planned to say to the Commissioners at their August and September meetings.  I think it is highly likely that is what Engelman expected him to say as well. 

Surely, that is why she censored Alan Laughlin in clear violation of his first amendment rights.  And her vice Chairman, Donald Hollingsworth, backed up her abuse of power.

Isn't it time for a change?

Ethics Problems at the JIPSD

Conflict of Interest is a serious problem at the James Island Public Service District. 

JIPSD Commissioner Kay Kernodle was found to be in violation of South Carolina Ethics law.   She tried to have the JIPSD hire her husband to do legal work.  The South Carolina Ethics Commission determined that by participating in the selection process and rejecting other applicants, she sought to narrow down the field to leave her husband as the only candidate.   She claims that she did not intend to cause the District to choose her husband and that the other candidates were unsuitable.   She admitted that no one would believe her, so she decided not to fight the charge.

Here is the consent order.

When Trent Kernodle was the only applicant left, Commissioner Kernodle must have known that she could not get away with voting to appoint her husband.   With the Commission deadlocked 3 to 3, she instead voted to give up the Commissioners' role of voting for the General Counsel and instead turned the decision over to District Administrator Robert Wise.  The District Administrator has continued to approve payments to the Kernodle Law Firm, funneling taxpayer money to Commissioner Kay Kernodle's family.

It is up to the voters of James Island to decide whether they want this kind of insider dealing on their Commission.  Commissioner Kay Kernodle and her two allies who joined her in those votes--Commissioner Wilder and Hollingsworth--are up for election in November.

Isn't it time for a change?

How to Keep JIPSD Property Tax from Skyrocketing!

The Town asked the James Island Public Service District (JIPSD) to work with us to help limit the burden they impose on the property taxpayers in the Town.  I believe this is especially timely since the JIPSD has increased its property tax by 13% this year and its long run fiscal plan includes an additional 10% increase. The JIPSD property tax is a significant portion of a homeowner's tax bill--a little less than 50% last year and likely to rise to a little more than 50% next year.  Last year they collected approximately $3.5 million in the Town and plan to increase that to just over $4 million this year.

Right now, what the Town needs is a majority of Commissioners willing to agree to work with us to obtain a declaratory judgement.   We need them to come to an agreement with the Town that they would accept if it were legal and then approve it conditional on a court decision on its legality.

What is the Town's proposal?

Much would remain the same. From the point of view of Town residents all that would change is that the property tax bills they receive for their homes, cars, and boats would decrease.

First, the Town proposes that the JIPSD continue to provide services just as it does today--fire protection, solid waste collection, and wastewater transportation.   Most Town residents greatly appreciate the services provided by the JIPSD.

The JIPSD Administrator and Commissioners would continue to manage those services.  The Town has proposed no additional authority by Town Council to review JIPSD management of any of its departments or its expenditures.

In my opinion, as long as the residents of the Town can vote for JIPSD Commissioners, there is no need for the Town to have additional authority over management of services or expenses.   Town residents who have concerns about those matters should reach out to their elected JIPSD Commissioners and carefully consider who they support in the election this November and in 2020.

The Town is proposing no change in the fees the JIPSD charges to pay for wastewater collection and transportation.   That is, the Town's proposal does not involve the monthly sewer bills many of us in the Town must pay.

So what does the Town propose to change?

What would change is the method by which the JIPSD funds the provision of solid waste collection and fire protection in the Town.   In other words, what would change is the way that the residents and property owners of the Town pay the JIPSD for the provision of those services.

Rather than pay for fire protection and solid waste collection solely by property taxes directly levied by the JIPSD, residents and property owners in the Town would continue to partly pay by property tax but also would partly pay indirectly through their Town government using monies from the taxes, fees, and other revenues already collected by the Town.

What that means is that the Town would directly pay the JIPSD for a portion of the cost of fire protection and solid waste collection on behalf of its residents.   The Town is open to paying the full amount at the beginning of the  JIPSD's fiscal year in July, well before the property tax bills are sent out in October or due in January. 

I believe that the Town could pay as much as $1 million per year, but the exact amount would be determined by Town Council as part of its annual budget process.

The JIPSD Commission could continue to set its millage as usual during its annual budget process based upon the cost of providing services in its entire service area.   Town Council is not asking for any new authority to review or approve the tax millage set by the JIPSD Commissioners.

How would Town taxpayers benefit?   The amount the Town pays for the JIPSD  for services would be distributed to Town property taxpayers as a credit against the JIPSD property tax on the consolidated Charleston County property tax bill. 

The amount of the credit for each property taxpayer would be calculated by  the computers in the County Auditor's office when they print up the tax bills. The funds would be distributed in proportion to the appraised taxable property of each taxpayer in the Town's tax district.   The Town would be responsible for covering the cost of the needed changes in the computer software in the County Auditor's Office.   The County Auditor has always been very cooperative, but has always agreed with the Town that any credit or other change in the JIPSD property tax line on the bill must be approved by the JIPSD Commissioners.

The credit on each bill would be a subtraction from the amount charged by the JIPSD, and so would reduce the amount each taxpayer owes the JIPSD and the total amount paid on the property tax bill to the County Treasurer.

The amount that the Charleston County Treasurer receives from Town taxpayers would be less and  the County Treasurer would pay a smaller amount to the JIPSD. 

The JIPSD would receive less property tax revenue from the Charleston County Treasurer but they would have already received from the Town an amount of money that exactly compensates for that decrease. The total amount of revenue the JIPSD receives from the Town area would be unchanged by the plan.  .

For example, if the plan had been implemented for this tax year, the JIPSD would receive 13% more revenue than last year because of the 13% increase in its millage.   The taxpayers in the Town would pay less than last year because of  the Town credit.   With a $1 million payment from the Town to the JIPSD, there would be an approximate 20% saving for homeowners in the Town compared to last year.

If the JIPSD were to raise its property tax millage in the future, then property tax bills would rise for residents of the Town.    The Town would not be able to always expand its credit enough to offset whatever millage increase the Commissioners find necessary.    However, property taxes would still be less than otherwise because of the credit.   For example, if the Town pays $1 million towards services and the JIPSD does enact the 10% millage increase included in its long run fiscal plan, then even after that tax hike, property taxpayers would still be paying slightly less than they did last year.

It is possible that future Town Councils will find it necessary to reduce the amount of the credit because of other needs and priorities.   On the other hand, growing Town revenues could allow for a larger credit in the future even while the Town is able to expand other services.   Most Town revenues automatically increase with inflation and growing real income.   Because of the millage rollback required by state law, property tax revenues only increase with new development or millage hikes--not with rising home values.

Why the need for the declaratory judgement?   No other municipality and special purpose district have used this approach to reduce the property tax burden.  The legal justification is the South Carolina Constitution's provisions that allow local governments to share the costs of public services and also home rule provisions that require that the Constitution and laws of the state be interpreted in favor of the powers of local government.   The key reason to use tax credits is that the South Carolina Supreme Court has ruled that tax credits are consistent with the provisions of the South Carolina Constitution regarding assessment ratios and uniformity of millage.   Tax credits are the most legally certain route to tax relief as long as any part of the JIPSD remains unincorporated.

The Town retained the Pope Flynn law firm to work on this matter and they are very conservative.  They advise that before the Town and the JIPSD go forward with this plan, we obtain a declaratory judgement from a court to make sure that there are no legal problems. 

So that is the next step.   Working towards a declaratory judgement.   For that to occur, the Town and the JIPSD need to come to an agreement that both would accept if it were legal, both Town Council and the JIPSD Commission must approve it pending a determination of its legality, and then we go to court seeking a declaratory judgement.   Because the benefit of this plan would go to the taxpayers of the Town of James Island, I believe it is entirely appropriate for the Town to cover the full cost of the needed court action.   At this date, there is no realistic chance that this could be complete before the property tax bills go out this October, but we can begin work for the 2020 taxes that will be billed in October 2019.

Most municipalities pay for solid waste collection and fire protection using a variety of revenue sources, including property tax.   Special purpose districts, like the JIPSD, have more limited sources of revenue--property tax and fees.   However, with some creative thinking, it is possible to overcome that restriction and avoid an excessive increases in the property tax burden in the Town while the JIPSD continues to be able to fund its services.

James Island was VERY Lucky--Thank the Lord

In various areas near James Island, NOAA reported at least gusts of tropical force winds Friday night and early Saturday morning.   However, as dawn broke Saturday, there was little damage on James Island and SCE&G reported only a handful of homes without power.   I called JIPSD Fire Chief Seabolt early Saturday and he reported a quiet night. 

The Town's public works director and I drove the major roads on James Island Saturday morning and found a dangerous power line very low on Grimball Road.   It had already been reported, because the fire trucks arrived as we were calling it in.   Otherwise, we saw no serious damage.

Early Saturday, the local forecasts were calling for approximately 3 inches of rain for the day.   In the end, we had 1/2 inch from Florence.

Saturday afternoon and evening, I drove through every neighborhood in the Town and saw no serious damage.   I could see a few places where fallen trees had blocked roads, but they were already cleared away.   However,  I didn't check every street.

Especially those who are returning from evacuation, please use the Charleston County website to report any serious damage. 

https://www.crisistrack.com/public/charlestonSC/citizenRequest.html

The Town will be able to obtain that information from Charleston County EMD.

You may also call Town Hall at 843-795-4141 and leave a message with your address, phone number, and brief description of the problem.

We should all thank the Lord that our Island was spared again.    Do not allow this to make you complacent.   A Category 4 Hurricane coming ashore at Edisto or Johns Island would devastate James Island. 

Wednesday 5 PM Forecast -- Greater Risk for James Island

The 5 PM NOAA report shows a much greater risk for hurricane force winds in the Charleston area.   The probability was 14% this morning and now has increased to 23%.   The most likely time is Friday night and during the day Saturday, but there is also a substantial risk for Sunday.

The probability of some tropical force winds has greatly increased. It is now 82%. It is more likely to be mild, but a more severe tropical storm has a probability of 25% now.

Here is the link:https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/text/refresh/MIAPWSAT1+shtml/212431.shtml

Here is the section for the Charleston area:

18 is 1800 hours or 6 PM, and 6 is in the morning.  Tr is my abbreviation for Thursday. The last three probabilities are found by subtraction.  

The track didn't change much since this morning and still shows it going inland to our north.   Still, it is getting a bit close for comfort.   Some reports did suggest a less severe hurricane as it moves south.   Let us hope.

The Governor's mandatory evacuation for James Island is looking more and more wise.   While there is a small chance of heavy wind developing during the day tomorrow, it is very likely safe to leave now or in the morning.

Evacuation

All of James Island and all of Charleston County is under a mandatory evacuation order from the Governor.

I have been closely following the NOAA probability chart for the Charleston area.

	W   6	W 18	Tr 6	Tr 18	F 6	Sa 6	Su 6
	W 18	Tr  6	Tr 18	F   6	Sa  6	Su 6	M 6
greater than 39 MPH	x	1( 1)	5( 6)	23(29)	23(52)	13(65)	3(68)
greater than 58 MPH	x	X( X)	1( 1)	2( 3)	11(14)	13(27)	4(31)
greater than 74 MPH	x	X( X)	X( X)	X( X)	3( 3)	6( 9)	2(11)
X    = less than 1%
(  )   cumulative probability

This morning at 8, the probability of hurricane force winds in the Charleston area has risen to 11% (up from 3% just two days ago.)    The most likely time is Saturday.   

The chance that we will have at least a mild Tropical Storm in the Charleston area is getting very high, 68%.

There is a good chance it will start Thursday evening, but also Friday through Saturday.

There are at least some models that have the Hurricane moving South along the coast and even going inland to our south.   That is not a high probability according to NOAA, but the result would be devastating to James Island.

The Town will open our alternative MEOC in Greenwood tonight.

I urge everyone, especially those in low lying areas that have flooded in the past, to heed the Governor's order, and evacuate today, if you have not left already.

Boundary Adjustment and the new Folly Road Fire Station

The Chairwoman of the JIPSD Commission, Sandi Engelman, emailed me on August 1 to ask for a meeting regarding their proposed new Fire Station on Folly Road.

I immediately agreed.   The meeting was held at Town Hall on August 8.

I welcomed the JIPSD representatives and invited them to explain what they needed from the Town.  The District Administrator said that the JIPSD had purchased three parcels on Folly Road for their new fire station.   Two of the parcels are in the Town of James Island and one of the parcels is in the City of Charleston.  He explained that he had already met with Mayor Tecklenburg of the City of Charleston and asked that he agree to shift its boundary with the Town so that all three of the parcels would be in the Town. The District Administrator stated that Mayor Tecklenburg had asked that the boundary shift go the other direction, so that the two parcels in the Town would switch to City’s jurisdiction.  The District Administrator reported that he said that he did not want that and that the Mayor of Charleston then agreed to switch the one parcel to the Town   The District Administrator then reported that Mayor Tecklenburg said that he, the District Administrator of the JIPSD, now owed him, the Mayor of the City of Charleston, a favor.

I responded that I am sure that we can come to an agreement.

The architects then broke in and said that they had some questions.   They asked if they could begin the process of site plan review before the pending boundary adjustment.   They stated that they understood that completing a boundary adjustment would take months.  

We on the Town side all agreed that they could begin the process now.

Municipalities are authorized under state law to adjust their boundary by agreement.   Two municipalities that have a contiguous boundary first come to an agreement about a boundary adjustment.   Then each municipality must hold a public hearing and each municipal council must pass an ordinance enacting the agreed boundary adjustment. The soonest these things could be completed on the Town's side would be at the Town’s regular meeting in late October.   Charleston City Council would also have to pass an ordinance implementing the same agreement.  

The architects informed us that the JIPSD intended to combine the three parcels to form a single large parcel.  They asked if this could be done before the boundary adjustment was complete.   The Town’s Planning Director explained that they could, but that they would need to go through both the Town’s and the City of Charleston’s process.   The architects then explained that the combination of the parcels could wait because they did not plan on pulling any permits before the spring of 2019.

The architects said they were ready to leave, and oddly enough, the District Administrator and Commissioners Hollingsworth and Kernodle said they were ready to go as well.   They didn’t seem at all interested in discussing any agreement regarding this favor the JIPSD was requesting from the Town.

I stated that I would talk to members of Council about whether they would agree with this boundary change.   I said that I am sure members of Council would be watching the Commissioners at their upcoming Commission meetings.

Commissioner Hollingsworth asked if I thought there would be any problem with getting Town Council to approve the boundary adjustment.   I repeated that I am sure that Town Council would be watching the Commissioners at their upcoming meetings.

Commissioner Hollingsworth stated that building this new “state of the art” fire station was very important for the safety of James Islanders.   I said that I understand the need for a new fire station.

Commissioner Kernodle accused me of trying to prevent or delay the fire station.  I stated that I was not trying to prevent or delay the new fire station.

Commissioner Hollingsworth asked what I wanted from the JIPSD Commissioners.   I stated that they know what the Town wants from the JIPSD.

Commissioner Hollingsworth said that maybe it was better to have just him and me meet rather than continue discussions with the current group.    I stated that I was willing to meet with him.

Commissioner Kernodle told Commissioner Hollingsworth that she would just talk to Leonard Blank (the Mayor Pro-tem)   She also told Commissioner Hollingsworth to begin recording our conversation on his phone.   She demanded of him “Turn it on.”   He responded “cool your jets.”

Commissioner Hollingsworth apologized to the “young ladies,” for having to listen to this discussion.  (That is, the Town Administrator and Planning Director.  He may have also been referring to the JIPSD’s architects, since both of those attending were women.)

Commissioner Hollingsworth said the Town has asked the JIPSD for things that it just can’t do and stated he wanted a meeting to discuss these matters.    The meeting broke up.   I shook the District Administrator’s hand.   I also shook Commissioner Hollingsworth’s hand and said I was willing to meet with him anytime.   I said goodbye to Commissioner Kernodle.   She left without speaking.

Later that day, the JIPSD wrote the Town again asking if they could begin site plan review.  The Town responded that yes, they may, as we had already agreed at the meeting.  That same day, the Town wrote to add that any boundary adjustment is a Council decision but that the site review process with the Town is necessary regardless whether the fire station is wholly or partly in the Town.   It would be up to the JIPSD to determine if they wished to begin site plan review with the City of Charleston at the same time.  (That would be necessary if Town Council and/or City Council do not approve the boundary adjustment.)

Also, on that same day, I wrote Mayor Tecklenburg.  I thanked him for agreeing to a boundary adjustment that adds territory to the Town at the expense of the City.   I requested that we meet to make a formal agreement between the City and the Town regarding the boundary adjustment to bring to our respective municipal councils.  I explained to him that the architects had said that they didn’t anticipate pulling any permits until next spring, so that there is no real hurry and that Town Council couldn’t get to this before our September 20 meeting.   I suggested that this might be a good time to discuss any other matters of concern between the Town and the City.

As for what the Town wants from the Commissioners, I did not mean to be mysterious.   A decision about a boundary adjustment is a Council decision, and I said that I would be discussing the matter with Council.  What should the JIPSD do in exchange for this favor--having them solely go through the Town's zoning and building inspection process rather than having to go through both the City and Town processes?

My view is that if Commissioners want the Town Council to do this favor, they should do a favor for the taxpayers of the Town of James Island.   On June 10, I wrote then Commission Chair Cubby Wilder with a proposal to have the Town contribute up to a million dollars to pay for PSD services in exchange for a credit against PSD property tax.   The credit would offset the 13% property tax increase they have already levied, most of which is to be used pay back with interest the money they plan to borrow for the new fire station. 

While the Commissioners should care about the taxpayers of the Town, the letter signed by Commissioners Wilder, Kernodle, Hollingswoth, and Engelman on June 19 suggested otherwise.   They were willing to throw $1 million away in a barrage of insults to the Town.     

I also think it is past time for the Commissioners to quit stonewalling on support for legislation in Columbia to allow residents of the unincorporated area of the District to have the opportunity to vote to return to the Town.   

Each member of Council must make their own decision.  If the Commissioners would make a good faith effort to work with the Town, then I, for one, would be willing to vote to adjust the Town's boundary to help out their staff.   As the architects explained, they won't even be pulling permits to break ground until next Spring.  There is plenty of time to work this out. 

Is there a majority of Commissioners interested in mending fences with the Town?

Who is Responsible for Drainage on James Island?

Many residents are confused about who deals with drainage on James Island.

While the answer is not simple, it is not that complicated.

If you reside in the Town of James Island (the Town,) the answer is simple for you. 

Call the Town at (843) 795-4141 or email mjohnson@jamesislandsc.us

The Town's public works department will determine which government body is responsible for solving any reported drainage problems. We will contact the appropriate authority.   If the problem persists, call the Town for an update. 

If you are having problems with the Town, call me at (843) 697-7020 or email mayorwoolsey@gmail.com. If you feel that you are getting the run-around from anyone at the Town, get that person's name and call me.

If you live in the City of Charleston (the City,) you should call City public works at (843) 724-7367.   If you live in an unincorporated area of James Island, call Charleston County (the County.)  Their stormwater hotline is  (843) 202-7639. 

If you are unsure, you can call the Town and we will let you know where you live, forward your issue to the appropriate body, and tell you who it is best to contact in the future.

The James Island Public Service District (JIPSD) has no responsibility for drainage in any part of James Island.  Do not call them about drainage issues.  (They are responsible for fire protection, solid waste collection, and wastewater.   Wastewater is sewer and different from stormwater.)

The Town of James Island is directly responsible for the ditches and piped systems next to and under Town roads and the drainage ditches or piped systems behind or between homes in areas under Town jurisdiction.   Many neighborhood roads are Town roads.   However, many neighborhood roads are SCDOT roads. These are generally older neighborhoods that initially had dirt roads which were paved using state money.   There are even a few Town residents who live on a road owned by the City of Charleston.   Drainage systems outside of the roads often pass through the jurisdiction of the Town, the City of Charleston, Charleston County, and SCDOT.

Maintenance and repairs for the Town's drainage system is my key priority.  I don't want it to be the Town's ditches or pipes that are causing anyone a problem.   However, if you are a Town resident, you don't need to worry about who is directly responsible for your drainage issue.   You need to contact the Town.   We will make sure that it is addressed.

The Town has an intergovernmental agreement with the County for public works.  The County budgets approximately $150,000 per year for their crews to do basic maintenance on the Town's drainage ditches and pipes. The Town is responsible for paying the County for any additional work beyond that limit.  County crews also do repairs on drainage infrastructure in the Town and bill the Town for the work.   The Town has three on call private contractors that do maintenance and repairs on Town drainage infrastructure.   The Town budgets $200,000 per year to pay Charleston County and private contractors.

The Town has also budgeted $400,000 for specific drainage improvement projects  during the current fiscal year.  These funds often form the Town's match for County Transportation Sales Tax funds.  As the Town identifies additional projects, more funds will be budgeted in future years.    We place the items on the budget over the next five years as we obtain cost estimates.

The South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) is responsible for drainage in their right-of-way.   This includes the ditches and piped systems next to or under SCDOT roads.    All major roads on James Island are SCDOT owned.   That includes Folly, Camp, Harborview, Fort Johnson, Dills Bluff, Secessionville, and Maybank Highway.   Roads within neighborhoods are more complicated.    In many neighborhoods, Lighthouse Point for example, all of the roads belong to SCDOT.   In other neighborhoods, some or all of the roads belong to the local government--either the Town, the City, or the County.   Many SCDOT drainage system do not connect to an outfall (the marsh) but rather connect to Town, City, or County drainage ditches or pipes that convey the water to the outfall.

Last year, Town Council authorized expenditure of up to $100,000 per year for emergency maintenance and repairs on SCDOT drainage infrastructure in areas under the Town's jurisdiction.  We can pay Charleston County or private contractors to do the work.

It is important that Town residents contact the Town about drainage issues.   While you can directly contact Charleston County or SCDOT, they do not have access to the Town's funding or private contractors.   If Charleston County or SCDOT can solve the problem promptly, then it is usually better to let them do it and we will.  But if there are significant delays and the problem is urgent then the Town can bring additional resources.  But that is only possible if the Town has been informed about the issue.

The City of Charleston is directly responsible for drainage next to and under City roads as well as ditches and pipes between and behind homes in areas of City jurisdiction.  Some of the newer neighborhoods on James Island are entirely within the City and and all of their neighborhood roads belong to the City as well.   The City is responsible for all of the drainage--other than what is the responsibility of a private Homeowner's Association.   If you live in a City neighborhood, such as Bayview Farms, any drainage issues should be addressed to the City of Charleston.

Charleston County is directly responsible for drainage in the unincorporated area.   This includes drainage next to and under County owned roads.  It also includes ditches and pipes between and behind homes in the unincorporated area.   On James Island, County roads are those roads in an unincorporated area that do not belong to SCDOT.    When the City annexes an area on James Island, what were County roads become City roads.  When the Town was incorporated in 2012, what were County roads became Town roads.  If the Town annexes any additional areas, the County roads in those areas become Town roads.

There is a monthly stormwater meeting at the James Island Town Hall.   Representatives of the City, County, SCDOT and the Town meet to work together to solve stormwater problems.   Drainage has been an important issue on the James Island Intergovenrmental Council's agenda for the last several years.   The elected officials of James Island--Town, City, County, and State are united in their commitment to work together to solve drainage and flooding problems.

The City, County, and Town are currently working in an intergovernmental agreement to fund an Island-wide delineation of drainage basins.   The County has retained a consultant and the City, County, and Town will be sharing the cost.   The expectation is that approximately 30 basins will be identified.   Further, approximately 1/3 will be identified as areas where further study is likely to be most fruitful.   This process may identify some projects for immediate action.  However, the elected officials of the Town, City, and County will then select one or more basins for more detailed study and the identification of needed repairs and improvements.   Finally, projects will be identified and improvements will be made with cost shared by the Town, City, County, and SCDOT.

The Town's public works department and Town officials and staff keep an eye out for drainage issues.   However, we depend on our residents to also let us know when they see problems.   Please contact the Town, especially regarding drainage issues near your home, street and neighborhood. 

JIPSD Election in November

A majority of seats on the James Island Public Service District (JIPSD) Commission are up for election on November 6, 2018.   Filing closed on Wednesday at noon.

All four incumbents are seeking reelection:

Inez Brown Crouch
Kay Kernodle
William "Cubby" Wilder
Donald Hollingsworth

There are five challengers:

Alan Laughlin
Meredith Poston
Keane Steele
Marilyn Clifford
Ronald Ladson

The JIPSD Commission is independent of the Town of James Island and Charleston County.    The JIPSD provides fire protection and solid waste collection and it also operates the sewer system in the Town and the unincorporated area of James Island.   The Commissioners collect property tax for fire protection and solid waste collection.  They collect sewer fees for waste water. 

Taxpayers in the Town and the unincorporated area of James Island receive a consolidated property tax bill from Charleston County.   The JIPSD collects approximately half of the property tax from a homeowner.   After their recent 13% property tax hike, it is likely that their share will increase to slightly more than 50%.

Commissioners Kernodle, Wilder, and Hollingsworth all voted in favor of the property tax increase.   Commissioner Brown-Crouch voted against.

Flooding in the Town of James Island on July 7

On Saturday, July 7, there was serious flooding in the Town of James Island.  Fortunately it did not last long.

The Camp and Folly intersection was badly flooded.   The recently completed Camp and Folly improvement project included drainage that meets the 25 year design storm standard.   That is 3.2 inches per hour at high tide.   The rain was very heavy and almost exactly at high tide.  The best evidence is that the rainfall was at least slightly more intense--3.5 inches per hour.   Review of the drainage structures showed no blockage.  (Thank you to Charleston Transportation for providing this information.)  After the rain stopped and the tide fell, the water drained away.  The flooding was gone by Sunday morning. 

The neighborhoods near Folly and Camp also had significant flooding, especially in streets and yards.   Oakcrest, Lynwood, and Queensborough all reported problems.   Again, very heavy rain at high tide was the source of the problem.  Slightly worse than the 25 year event.   By the next morning, the water had drained away--at least from the roadways.   That is a sign that the drainage is working, even if it is not robust enough to take such heavy rain at high tide.

The Town of James Island, the City of Charleston, and Charleston County plan an Island wide drainage study.  The County is taking the lead, and is in the process of retaining a consultant who will identify all the drainage basins on James Island.   After that is complete, the three jurisdictions will identify a drainage basin for more detailed work.   The result will include recommendations for improved drainage infrastructure for that basin.  Then we will work on a study for an additional basin, while working to implement recommendations for the first basin.  The goal is to have a complete study for the entire island.  The basin between Folly, Fort Johnson, and Camp is an area of great concern to both the Town of James Island and the City of Charleston.

Right now, the City of Charleston is taking the lead on a drainage study for the area between Folly, Central Park, and Riverland and Maybank.   They are working with Charleston County.   That area is north of the Town's jurisdiction.   The County is taking the lead on a drainage study for Signal Point Road.   They are working with the City of Charleston.   That is south of the Town's jurisdiction.   These studies will lead to recommendations for drainage improvements. 

The cost is to be allocated to the three governments according to the area in each jurisdiction.

The Town of James Island has budgeted more than $400,000 for drainage improvements during the current fiscal year.  We also have $200,000 budgeted for public works projects, which can include basic drainage maintenance as well as drainage repairs.  Most of the money under that budget line item has been used on drainage problems in the past.  We have three on-call stormwater infrastructure contractors and have been mobilizing them to complete necessary drainage improvement projects throughout the Town.  County drainage crews continue to provide services valued at up to $150,000 per year in the area of the Town.

Earlier this year, we completed several repair projects in the Lynwood Subdivision. This summer, we upgraded an outfall in Lighthouse Point subdivision and this fall we have another drainage improvement project scheduled for the Tallwood neighborhood. We’re also hard at work securing necessary drainage easement acquisitions so we can properly maintain existing systems. We’re just wrapping up an easement project in the Stonepost subdivision, and we have another one underway in the Greenhill/Honey Hill community.

We have had a number of citizens report damage due to the storm on July 7.   Please contact the Town at 843-795-4141 or email mjohnson@jamesislandsc.us to report any flood damage, especially to the living areas of your home.   

Which PSD Commissioners Stand With James Island--More from the Wilder Memo

PSD Commissioner Kathy Woolsey placed four items on the agenda for the June 25th meeting.   They were all aimed at reducing the burden of the 13% tax increase that had passed first reading in May.   Commissioner Woolsey shared with former Chairman Wilder and the other Commissioners the motions she intended to make on June 24.

After voting in favor of the 13% tax increase, Commissioners Kernodle, Hollingsworth, Wilder, and Engelman voted to table all four of the agenda items as a group without discussion.   Commissioner Woolsey had no opportunity to make her motion, explain, answer questions, correct misconceptions or respond to concerns.  Former Chairman Wilder responded to these agenda items here.

One of the agenda items called for the Commissioners to support Representative Peter McCoy's bill that would provide an opportunity for voters to reunite the Town..

Agenda Item #10 - House Bill 3669 Clarifying the Meaning of Contiguity within Special Purpose Districts

The motion Commissioner Woolsey provided to Chairman Wilder and the other Commissioners was:

Move that the James Island Public Service District Commission support House Bill 3669 filed by Representative Peter McCoy to clarify the meaning on contiguity so that residents in the unincorporated area of the District will have the opportunity to rejoin the Town of James Island.   Further, the Commission calls on Senator Sandy Senn to file a companion bill in the South Carolina Senate.   Still further, calls on Representative Stavrinakis and Senator Campsen to co-sponsor these bills.

Representative McCoy is preparing to pre-file HB 3669 this December.   The Town is working to build support. Commissioner Woolsey asked the other Commissioners to join her in supporting this effort to give the former residents of the Town an opportunity to vote to rejoin the Town.   This would allow them to share in potential tax relief that the Town can offer its residents and property owners.

Commissioners Hollingsworth, Kernodle, Wilder, and Engelman voted to table, clearly not willing to support McCoy's approach at this time. Commissioners Brown-Crouch and and Woolsey voted against blocking discussion and a vote, showing their support for providing this opportunity for voters in areas formerly included in the Town.

The Wilder memo raises no issues or concerns with this bill.   Rather it states that this "matter" has been opposed by a "multitude" of parties.

There was no "multitude" and few beyond those listed.   The opposition was to a somewhat different bill filed by former Senator Paul Thurmond. Nearly all of those groups' concerns appeared to the result of misconceptions--perhaps due to misrepresentation.  When the bill was accurately described, the opposition evaporated.   I heard the lobbyists explain to Senator Thurmond that they would work with him to address their concerns.  The easiest path forward was to create a series of (unnecessary) exceptions.

Also at the hearing was PSD General Counsel Trent Kernodle who claimed that the bill was intended as a path for the Town to take over the PSD.   Senator Thurmond asked what provisions of the bill would have that effect.   Kernodle could give no examples, because there were none.

However, there could be some opposition. While the bill Mayor Tecklenburg said he opposed last spring was a version of the Thurmond bill, he may well oppose the McCoy bill as well.   Unlike many of the others, whose concerns were based on misconceptions, it is true that the McCoy bill would break the City of Charleston's monopoly on annexations on most of James Island.   If the McCoy bill passes, the Town of James Island would be able to annex parcels and areas on James Island on an equal basis with the City of Charleston.

The key question for James Islanders is whether they expect their PSD Commissioners to support them and allow an opportunity to vote to reunite the Town or else back the City of Charleston's monopoly power as well as enabling its continued annexation and over-development on James Island.

Representative Peter McCoy has committed to me that he will work to give the former residents of the Town an opportunity to return.   He has filed the necessary bills in the past and I am sure he will do so in the future.  He was able to shepherd the Thurmond bill through the House a few years ago.   He has many times expressed a willingness to work with the PSD Commissioners, but they continue to show no interest in discussion or dialogue.

Senator Senn, on the other hand, has told me several times that while she will not oppose our efforts, she will not support them unless the PSD gives her the go ahead.  I think it is very important to have the Senator who represents most of James Island working to help us.   We could always count on Senator McConnell and Senator Thurmond did his best for us as well.  I believe it is important to obtain the support of a majority of PSD Commissioners and so the support of Senator Senn.

The bottom line is that the Wilder memo provides no specific provision of the McCoy bill that would cause any harm to the James Island Public Service District.   That is because there are none.

The City of Charleston opposed the legislation that allowed the formation of the Town.   The Town is here.  I never expected that it would be any different for legislation that would provide an opportunity for James Islanders to vote to reunite the Town.

We have done it before.  We can do it again.  The question for the voters of the PSD is where do the PSD Commissioners stand.  Are they with James Islanders?  Or are they with the City of Charleston and special interest groups in Columbia?

PSD Chairman Wilder's Response to Proposed Intergovernmental Agreement

On June 19, PSD Commissioner Kathy Woolsey placed four items on the agenda for the June 25 Public Service District Meeting.  As the PSD rules require, the items were added to the agenda.

On June 24, Commissioner Woolsey shared with Chairman Wilder and the other Commissioners the motion she intended make for each agenda item.  After passing the 13% tax hike, Commissioners Wilder, Hollingsworth, Kernodle, and Engelman voted to table all four of these agenda items in a single 4-2 vote.  Commissioner Woolsey was given no opportunity to make her motions, explain them to the Commission, or respond to any questions or concerns.

At the meeting, then Chairman Wilder said that he would respond to the agenda items on the Commission website. His response has appeared.   I appreciate that this response was much more professional and civil than what appeared before.  Unfortunately, there are some misconceptions and errors.

The first tabled agenda item was:

Agenda Item 9. Intergovernmental Agreement with the Town of James Island to Reduce PSD Property Tax Burden.

The motion shared by Commissioner Woolsey to then Chairman Wilder and the other Commissioners on June 24 was:

Move that the James Island Public Service District seek an intergovernmental agreement with the Town of James Island for the purpose of reducing the property tax burden on the residents and property owners of the Town by: 

a. accepting monies from the Town to partly or wholly fund the provision of solid waste collection and/or fire protection services by the District to the residents and property owners of the Town. 

b. agreeing to allow a property tax credit on the county tax bill reducing the amount to be paid to the District for operations by property taxpayers under the Town’s jurisdiction.

What is most important in the Wilder memo is:

"The JIPSD has no interest in being a party to settle the questionable legality of another entity’s proposal."  

In other words, the majority of PSD Commissioners are willing to throw away an offer of $1 million dollars without any dialogue or discussion.   They would prefer to impose a 13% property tax increase on majority of their constituents -- the residents and voters of the Town of James Island. 

The Wilder memo suggests that  "the Town should seek a declaratory judgment action to settle the questionable legality of their proposal." 

Chairman Wilder is no lawyer, but one would hope that a competent attorney would have reviewed his memo.  The Pope Flynn law firm has explained that the Town cannot obtain a declaratory judgement on its own. That is because we do not believe that the PSD must agree to accept our money in exchange for services or provide tax relief to our residents and property owners.  Our argument is that a voluntary agreement between the PSD and the Town would be legal and desirable for both parties. Therefore, the only way to obtain a declaratory judgement is to prepare a specific agreement that the JIPSD and Town would support if it were legal, and then have the PSD Commission and the Town Council adopt it pending a determination of its legality. The PSD and Town would be on the same side of the declaratory judgement, claiming that our agreement is legal. Since the benefits of this proposal mostly go to Town residents and property owners, it would be entirely appropriate for the Town to bear the cost of this friendly legal action.

The Wilder memo criticizes this opportunity to provide tax relief because the well-respected Pope Flynn law firm has described the proposal they developed as being "novel" and "not settled law."   Novel means new.  It doesn't mean bad, speculative or doubtful.   Maybe no other PSD has raised taxes so much or perhaps no other municipality cares enough about its taxpayers to be willing to help. "Not settled law," means that this proposal has not been challenged and then determined  by a court to be legal  That seems to follow from it being new.  The Wilder memo provides no challenge to the legal principles argued by the Pope Flynn law firm.

I was surprised by the scare tactics included in the Wilder memo. Most shocking was the claim that the Commissioners or senior PSD employees might be held personally liable for accepting the Town's money in exchange for services or for consenting to a Town tax credit against PSD taxes on the County tax bill. If the PSD worked with the Town to obtain a declaratory judgement, and the courts determined that the proposal was contrary to South Carolina law, there would be no liability to anyone for trying to find out whether it was legal or not.   And if it was determined to be legal by the courts, there would be no liability to anyone for implementing the agreement.   Further, even if the Town and PSD implemented an agreement without a declaratory judgement (a course not advised by the Pope Flynn law firm,) elected officials and public employees have strong protections against any personal liability for their official actions.

Similarly, as long as no money changes hands before a declaratory judgement, then there is no way that the PSD would have to pay anything back to the Town.  Now, if the Town and PSD implemented an agreement without a declaratory judgement, and the Town lost in court, then there is a very slight chance that money would have to be paid back by someone.  However, it would almost certainly be the Town that would be responsible for making any such payments. The chance that the PSD would be required to return money used to pay for providing services is negligible. Further, the Town would be more than willing to agree to cover the cost of services provided to our residents by the PSD.  That would be fair and reasonable.  Still further, even that slight threat can be avoided if the PSD would work with the Town to obtain a declaratory judgement before implementing the agreement.

Finally, I have never said that the Town would use any part of its sales tax revenue to purchase services from the PSD.   While I don't think there is any problem with doing so, if that is of concern to the PSD, then the Town could use its other sources of funds to make payments to the PSD.   Fortunately, none of our other vendors or suppliers have ever been worried about whether the money they receive from the Town comes from sales tax or some other revenue source.   I would also note that the PSD receives more than $1 million per year from the City of Charleston and the City of Folly Beach without ever expressing worry about the source of funds used by those Cities to make their payments.

The Town's offer to the help the PSD by turning a 13% tax increase into a 20% tax cut remains open.   All that is necessary is to find a majority of PSD Commissioners willing to work with the Town.