Florence County Council wrong not to listen to citizens’ petition

This article is in response to the Aug. 10 Morning News editorial supporting Florence County Council’s decision to take the Florence Citizens In Action and three defendants to court to invalidate a petition signed by over 11,000 registered voters.

The Morning News has published four editorials in support of this lawsuit. Two were written by the paper’s editor and two were written by Councilman James Schofield. Prior to publishing these editorials, the Morning News did not contact the Florence County Citizens In Action in regard to this issue. Since we are an organization that promotes open government, I would like to thank the Morning News for now allowing us this opportunity to respond and to inform the public of additional facts pertaining to this matter.

In the opening sentences of the Aug. 10 editorial, the Morning News commends FCCIA efforts to advance open government. We appreciate this recognition because this is the defining purpose of our organization. FCCIA is a volunteer, non-partisan, watchdog group that promotes more open government. However, in the case of the petition, the Morning News agrees with our open government goals, but is supporting a decision that was never voted on or discussed, by the full body of county council, in an open meeting. On May 1, 2008, at a regularly scheduled council meeting, Mr. James Schofield under the Administration and Finance Committee made a 20 minute report opposing the petition signed by over 11,000 citizens. In the last sentence of his report (this is documented in the minutes of the meeting), he stated, “we intend to ask the court to issue a declaratory judgment as such and this council will abide by the decision of the court.” The council then moved on to the next item on the agenda. A vote was never taken and no other councilman made a remark concerning the issue. The issue was never discussed again at a future council meeting. The decision as to how the defendants and plaintiffs were chosen was never discussed or voted on at a public meeting. The defendants (I am one of them) learned who they were when served with a summons. The question is, when, where and by who were these important decisions made. I think these covert decisions concerning 11,000 petitioners are clearly an open government issue and we hope the Morning News when presented with these facts will agree that, in this instance, open government failed.

The Aug. 10 editorial states “CIA members presented county council with a petition signed by 11,000 Florence County residents asking that a referendum be held on reducing the fee.” I will have to respectfully disagree. The petition asked that the present Road Maintenance Fee of $30 be reduced to $15 (the original amount), that all monies from the fee be deposited in the General Fund, and that the monies be used exclusively for road maintenance. It asked to prohibit the deposit of any monies from the fee into individual councilperson’s accounts (discretionary RSMF funds). The petition made no mention of a referendum.

As for the referendum issue, this is dictated by state law. To quote from Article 13 Section 4-9-1230, “the adoption or repeal of the ordinance concerned shall be submitted to the electors not less than thirty days more than one year from the date the council takes its final vote thereon.” The law goes on to say that county councils shall be bound by the results of any such referendum.

Since Council never voted yes or no and instead, without a public vote, initiated a lawsuit, the possibility of a referendum is now remote. Why? Because of the expense involved. Our nonprofit volunteer organization does not have the money to answer the complaint. If we don’t have the money to argue our case, the possibility of a resulting referendum is remote at best.

Once again I respectfully disagree with the Morning News editorial that stated, “Instead, despite concerns by some to the contrary the council is paying to take the matter to court. The group can either answer the county’s complaint or just let the judge decide based on the county’s argument.”

The Morning News is privy to information not available to the public because the fact that “council is paying to take the matter to court” was never discussed or voted on at a public meeting. I disagree with the wording that council is paying for the court cost, because the taxpayers, not council and not the two plaintiffs, are footing the bill. I also disagree with the statement that, “The group can either answer the county’s complaint or just let the judge decide based on the county’s argument.” FCCIA’s only option is to let a judge decide for the financial reason stated above.

After consultation with our attorney, we realized we had two choices. One was to not defend the case. The other was to spend an astronomical amount of money (that we didn’t have) and perhaps years in court trying to resolve the matter. Two of the defendants are in their late eighties. It hardly seemed fair; at this time in their lives, to put them though this ordeal. And then of course, there was no guarantee of the outcome. Unfortunately, FCCIA was left with only one option and that was to let a judge decide based only on the case presented by county council.

If it can be assumed that the above options or lack of options for FCCIA were anticipated by council, then taking the petition to court is a win, win situation for council. A judge makes an unpopular decision for council. Council never votes on the issue. The taxpayers foot the bill. The outcome is business as usual.

I respect the Morning News opinion that, “This is a valid response to the petitions that raise serious questions going forward not only about how Florence County government, but also how local governments across South Carolina operate.” In response, I think local governments are well protected by South Carolina state law. I don’t think our petition is in anyway a threat to other local governments. The wording of the petition is specific to Florence County, especially in regard to the discretionary funds, as Florence County is the only county in the state with this financial arrangement.

In conclusion, the editorial recommends that changes in county government policies are best accomplished when citizens vote for their representatives. I agree, but think this idea needs expansion. In the upcoming November election, only one county councilman, Mitchell Kirby, has opposition. Obviously, more citizen involvement is required to bring about change. FCCIA welcomes citizens interested in learning the issues and in promoting open government. Visit our Web site ForenceCIA.com or call (843) 346-9025. Citizen involvement also includes recruiting and supporting qualified candidates. Change will come about only if new representatives are elected. The time to start is now.