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.