SC

Summey: The Truth About Those “Greenbelts”

Much has been made lately about Charleston County’s “Greenbelt” program by politicians looking to make political hay within the conservation community. While in many regards this program has been successful, that success has come at a tremendous price to citizens and visitors of Charleston County. There are many ways this…

Much has been made lately about Charleston County’s “Greenbelt” program by politicians looking to make political hay within the conservation community. While in many regards this program has been successful, that success has come at a tremendous price to citizens and visitors of Charleston County. There are many ways this program could have been done differently so the taxpayers could have gotten “more bang for their buck.”

The problem that I and many others have had is the way the Greenbelt money has been spent.

In 2006 Charleston County Council decided to divide the $222 million allocated out of our half cent sales tax program into two basic categories – $36 million for Parks and Recreation and a bond program to buy fee simple parcels and or conservation easements. In taking this path, County Council created two very simple but large problems that I personally have a philosophical problem with:

1) Generally speaking, a vast majority of the Greenbelt protected lands outside of the $36 million of parks have little public access and in some cases NO PUBLIC ACCESS.

2) Because the funding for these expenditures was bonded, over $66 million dollars of the Greenbelt money will go to pay for debt service and administration fees to operate the program.

I personally take great discomfort in knowing that over the next sixteen years or so, $155 million of our tax money will go to protect lands that will have little to no public access. In many cases, a large number of the acres protected by the Greenbelt program have been through fee simple purchases causing the county to pay fair market value for land it now controls.

A great deal of that land comes with hunting rights or other deed restrictions that keep the general public from visiting or enjoying the land for a majority of the year. In other cases, conservation easements are purchased at a much lower per acre number, but the land owner maintains title to the property and the public not only can’t use the property, but in many cases can’t even see it!

If you are going to take the route of protecting land that the public cannot enjoy, the conservation easement is the best course. At least you are paying normally 80-90 percent less of the value that you would normally spend if you were purchasing the property out right.

When County Council decided to bond the all of the money instead of “pay as you go,” a large vacuum of waste occurred. While I understand there will be administration costs associated with any project, the $55 million in interest payments is a ridiculous amount of waste. In my opinion, certain members of Council pushed this to happen for several political reasons.

First, they wanted to deploy as much money as fast as they could for pet conservation projects in their districts for various “associates” that stood to gain from this money.

Secondly, the reason most important to them is they were afraid that the projected cash for the entire half cent sales tax program would fall short, therefore leaving a future council to make a decision to balance the road program budget with Greenbelt money. Unfortunately they were right. When the recession hit in 2008, the projected revenue for the program went from $1.3 billion to $900 million, but because it was already bonded, the Greenbelt money could not be touched. Other valuable projects like mass transit, road resurfacing and road widening projects had to be cut or delayed.

There are times when bonding makes sense. Capital projects like roads, infrastructure and buildings need to be bonded in order to complete them in a timely fashion. However, conservation easements do not fall in that category. Sadly, the whole point of the half cent sales tax program was to fill in the gap of our inept S.C. Department of Transportation (SCDOT)’s ability to handle its own road issues. At its completion, this program will have spent over $700 million dollars of Charleston County tax dollars on SCDOT roads that the state is required to maintain.

Had the Greenbelt money not been bonded, $55 million more could have been used for more conservation easements or more valuable road projects.

I think that it is very important to protect our environment. In many regards a lot of what makes us who we are as people comes from our environment. Particularly in the Lowcountry, we identify ourselves to a large extent with our beautiful landscape and various and unique bodies of water that surround us on a daily basis. Thousands of people flock to Charleston County yearly as tourists and many never leave – choosing to relocate their families because of our wonderful beaches and their appreciation for the outdoor opportunities our environment has to offer.

I, too, want to protect what I love about living in the Lowcountry so my children will have the right to enjoy the outdoors like I do. However, there is a right way and a wrong way to do the people’s business. Government must be run like a business, and just because we are “the government” it does not give us the right to waste money. I find it hilarious that there are those running around using the terms “conservative” and “Republican” who would rather waste money on making interest payments for conservation projects than spend that same money on well thought out road projects that ease congestion and create opportunities for economic development. I guess the real question remains, what is better suited to further the quality of life for our community, better roads and more jobs, or conservation easements that protect private hunting estates?

I know what I would vote for if I had been given the opportunity …

Elliott Summey is vice chairman of Charleston County Council.

***

Related posts

SC

The Post And Courier Got Hacked …

Will Folks
SC

Charleston VA Investigating Employee’s Trump Assassination Attempt Comments

Dylan Nolan
SC

Letter: Is South Carolina Actually Getting Hotter?

Letters

46 comments

shifty henry March 31, 2013 at 9:56 pm

“the right idea the wrong way” —— yep, and here’s the proof!

Reply
Bonner April 1, 2013 at 10:12 am

Henry, I am not sure where you came from, but please stay as long as you want.

Reply
shifty henry March 31, 2013 at 9:56 pm

“the right idea the wrong way” —— yep, and here’s the proof!

Reply
Bonner April 1, 2013 at 10:12 am

Henry, I am not sure where you came from, but please stay as long as you want.

Reply
lowcorider March 31, 2013 at 10:16 pm

More tilting at straw men. Tilt on mofoes

Reply
nitrat April 1, 2013 at 9:25 am

I love your mixed metaphor.

Reply
Lowcorider March 31, 2013 at 10:16 pm

More tilting at straw men. Tilt on mofoes

Reply
nitrat April 1, 2013 at 9:25 am

I love your mixed metaphor.

Reply
jimlewisowb March 31, 2013 at 10:46 pm

OK

Reply
jimlewisowb March 31, 2013 at 10:46 pm

OK

Reply
W. Deas March 31, 2013 at 11:00 pm

…lands that will have little to no public access…

Mr. Summey, What are these lands, specifically? This is news to me.

Reply
MNMS4HIM April 1, 2013 at 7:39 am

One of these pieces of land is very near me. It was purchased for a PRIVATE group for PRIVATE use. Also know that I went to a meeting to fight against this purchase and found the board discussing how they needed to hurry and spend all the money for the year. They were afraid of having any left over so they would not be able to get the same amount the next year.

Reply
Durant Ave. April 1, 2013 at 5:08 pm

(cough) (cough) ahem (cough) Eliot Summey (cough) likes to write reading but (cough) not read writing. Looks like he won’t respond. There’s leadership for you.

Reply
Elliott Summey April 1, 2013 at 10:19 pm

Anything that has received a conservation easement is not considered “public” land. It is up to the individual private property owner who he does or does not allow on the property. In most cases these are private owners who hunt their land and only let friend or family use it. Some are farms.

Reply
W. Deas March 31, 2013 at 11:00 pm

…lands that will have little to no public access…

Mr. Summey, What are these lands, specifically? This is news to me.

Reply
MNMS4HIM April 1, 2013 at 7:39 am

One of these pieces of land is very near me. It was purchased for a PRIVATE group for PRIVATE use. Also know that I went to a meeting to fight against this purchase and found the board discussing how they needed to hurry and spend all the money for the year. They were afraid of having any left over so they would not be able to get the same amount the next year.

Reply
Durant Ave. April 1, 2013 at 5:08 pm

(cough) (cough) ahem (cough) Eliot Summey (cough) likes to write reading but (cough) not read writing. Looks like he won’t respond. There’s leadership for you.

Reply
Elliott Summey April 1, 2013 at 10:19 pm

Anything that has received a conservation easement is not considered “public” land. It is up to the individual private property owner who he does or does not allow on the property. In most cases these are private owners who hunt their land and only let friend or family use it. Some are farms.

Reply
vicupstate April 1, 2013 at 5:41 am

If the money had not been bonded, but instead land had been purchased on a ‘pay as you go’ basis, wouldn’t the cost of inflation have more or less equalled the interest cost being paid? Plus in the interim, some of the lands would,or at least could have been developed, the prevention of which is the whole point of the program.
I’d like to know the author’s thoughts on those points.

Reply
Elliott Summey April 1, 2013 at 10:25 pm

The conservation easement approach is you take a percentage of the potential value if it were to be developed then spread that cost over a income tax break. So for instance land that would be purchased at $10,000 per acre would then have an easement value of $1000 per acre.

Reply
vicupstate April 1, 2013 at 5:41 am

If the money had not been bonded, but instead land had been purchased on a ‘pay as you go’ basis, wouldn’t the cost of inflation have more or less equalled the interest cost being paid? Plus in the interim, some of the lands would,or at least could have been developed, the prevention of which is the whole point of the program.
I’d like to know the author’s thoughts on those points.

Reply
Elliott Summey April 1, 2013 at 10:25 pm

The conservation easement approach is you take a percentage of the potential value if it were to be developed then spread that cost over a income tax break. So for instance land that would be purchased at $10,000 per acre would then have an easement value of $1000 per acre.

Reply
William J. Hamilton April 1, 2013 at 9:26 am

Unfortunately, had we waited, most of the land would have been gone. There have certainly been some questionable decisions made. The problem is the same general one we always have: under-funding real problems, crisis oriented responses that subvert planning and the tendency of the Old Boy network to corrupt everything it touches. The good news is that in 25 years anything which still has trees on it will be worth it’s weight in gold. Our only regret then will be that we didn’t do more now. The roads will end up half empty. We’ll continue to expand transit. What little is left of the Lowcountry will be precious beyond measure. I ride down Rifle Range Road in Mount Pleasant now, telling my son I remember the Tomato Fields which once went for miles. He can’t comprehend what it was like. All he sees are Walmart, Gas Stations and Strip Malls.

Reply
Gumbo April 1, 2013 at 3:46 pm

***

What little is left of the Lowcountry will be precious beyond measure. I ride down Rifle Range Road in Mount Pleasant now, telling my son I remember the Tomato Fields which once went for miles. He can’t comprehend what it was like. All he sees are Walmart, Gas Stations and Strip Malls.

***

It’s true and it’s a pity. And it’s fine with most county councilmen (excluding Schweers & Sass). And fine with Joe Riley, Bobby Harrell, Chip Limehouse, and Jim Rozier, who can’t wait to bulldoze I-526 through the tomato fields and four black churches on Johns Island. You know, to help out their campaign donors.

Reply
William J. Hamilton April 1, 2013 at 9:26 am

Unfortunately, had we waited, most of the land would have been gone. There have certainly been some questionable decisions made. The problem is the same general one we always have: under-funding real problems, crisis oriented responses that subvert planning and the tendency of the Old Boy network to corrupt everything it touches. The good news is that in 25 years anything which still has trees on it will be worth it’s weight in gold. Our only regret then will be that we didn’t do more now. The roads will end up half empty. We’ll continue to expand transit. What little is left of the Lowcountry will be precious beyond measure. I ride down Rifle Range Road in Mount Pleasant now, telling my son I remember the Tomato Fields which once went for miles. He can’t comprehend what it was like. All he sees are Walmart, Gas Stations and Strip Malls.

Reply
Gumbo April 1, 2013 at 3:46 pm

***

What little is left of the Lowcountry will be precious beyond measure. I ride down Rifle Range Road in Mount Pleasant now, telling my son I remember the Tomato Fields which once went for miles. He can’t comprehend what it was like. All he sees are Walmart, Gas Stations and Strip Malls.

***

It’s true and it’s a pity. And it’s fine with most county councilmen (excluding Schweers & Sass). And fine with Joe Riley, Bobby Harrell, Chip Limehouse, and Jim Rozier, who can’t wait to bulldoze I-526 through the tomato fields and four black churches on Johns Island. You know, to help out their campaign donors.

Reply
John Cecil April 1, 2013 at 10:43 am

To help put this into context, the green belt was funded from the 2004 half cent sales tax. On the ballot “green spaces” and “public transportation” were listed, along with about a dozen local road projects to be improved. However, in 2005, County Council voted to reallocate some 350 million for the local matching funds for the extention of I526, which is 7 miles and two huge bridges to go across Johns Island, and cut through the James Island County Park. Meanwhile the public transportation hasn’t improved at all and the green space was just a slush fund with the county allowing hunting rights. Now had this been listed on the ballot, 350 million, for 526, the tax probably wouldn’t have passed, as it is now, people think it is free money, and Elliot Summey has already proposed another half cent sales tax to pay for the improvements needed around 26 and Boeing. So, yes, I am bothered by this because I voted on the half cent sales tax thinking it would improve public transportation and green spaces, as I pass people with one leg, walking on crutches to the grocery store, not a highway that cuts through our county park and a slush fund for special interest developers, that Summey and others are all to willing to accept funds and do their bidding at the tax payers expense.

Reply
Elliott Summey April 1, 2013 at 10:21 pm

All of the match money came from construction projects that we were doing, not actual new moneys.

Reply
John Cecil April 2, 2013 at 11:05 am

Thanks for the reply Mr. Summey. I came back to say I appreciate you being forthcoming about the green belt funds. I’m not sure what match money you are talking about? However, the TIFF for the Beach Company is a disgrace. You were not on County Council when the half cent sales tax was introduced. I remember the Coastal Conservation League was against it but I voted for the public transportation and expanding green spaces. I find it incredulous that county council was not aware of using such a large portion of the tax funds for 526, and that was the reason it was not listed on the tax in context of the actual cost. The ballot actually had a ramp listed for 526 even when there was no project yet for 526, so that indicates the bait and switch was deliberate, and implied that 526 was already approved, when it didn’t yet exist. It also avoided stating how much it would cost compared to other projects that are listed as a higher priority for our county. You want 526 so I respect your vote on that, but don’t agree with the cost benefit for the project, as you also need another tax increase for Boeing and 26. I hope you can see how the TIFF for the Beach Compay, Vic Rawl’s development, Chip Limehouse selling property adjacent to Kiawah, all appear as a conflict of interest and not in the best interest of tax payers. At this point don’t you think it would be best to simply put 526 on the ballot? You have been the unofficial spokes person for 526, and even said Charleston County shouldn’t be the one building it when you all tried to send it back to SCDOT, then the City, and now back to the County. Should have simply listed it on the ballot with the actual cost. But that’s just my opinion, as that was the most unique tax increase I’m aware of that included things that mean a lot to me.

Reply
John Cecil April 1, 2013 at 10:43 am

To help put this into context, the green belt was funded from the 2004 half cent sales tax. On the ballot “green spaces” and “public transportation” were listed, along with about a dozen local road projects to be improved. However, in 2005, County Council voted to reallocate some 350 million for the local matching funds for the extention of I526, which is 7 miles and two huge bridges to go across Johns Island, and cut through the James Island County Park. Meanwhile the public transportation hasn’t improved at all and the green space was just a slush fund with the county allowing hunting rights. Now had this been listed on the ballot, 350 million, for 526, the tax probably wouldn’t have passed, as it is now, people think it is free money, and Elliot Summey has already proposed another half cent sales tax to pay for the improvements needed around 26 and Boeing. So, yes, I am bothered by this because I voted on the half cent sales tax thinking it would improve public transportation and green spaces, as I pass people with one leg, walking on crutches to the grocery store, not a highway that cuts through our county park and a slush fund for special interest developers, that Summey and others are all to willing to accept funds and do their bidding at the tax payers expense.

Reply
Elliott Summey April 1, 2013 at 10:21 pm

All of the match money came from construction projects that we were doing, not actual new moneys.

Reply
John Cecil April 2, 2013 at 11:05 am

Thanks for the reply Mr. Summey. I came back to say I appreciate you being forthcoming about the green belt funds. I’m not sure what match money you are talking about? However, the TIFF for the Beach Company is a disgrace. You were not on County Council when the half cent sales tax was introduced. I remember the Coastal Conservation League was against it but I voted for the public transportation and expanding green spaces. I find it incredulous that county council was not aware of using such a large portion of the tax funds for 526, and that was the reason it was not listed on the tax in context of the actual cost. The ballot actually had a ramp listed for 526 even when there was no project yet for 526, so that indicates the bait and switch was deliberate, and implied that 526 was already approved, when it didn’t yet exist. It also avoided stating how much it would cost compared to other projects that are listed as a higher priority for our county. You want 526 so I respect your vote on that, but don’t agree with the cost benefit for the project, as you also need another tax increase for Boeing and 26. I hope you can see how the TIFF for the Beach Compay, Vic Rawl’s development, Chip Limehouse selling property adjacent to Kiawah, all appear as a conflict of interest and not in the best interest of tax payers. At this point don’t you think it would be best to simply put 526 on the ballot? You have been the unofficial spokes person for 526, and even said Charleston County shouldn’t be the one building it when you all tried to send it back to SCDOT, then the City, and now back to the County. Should have simply listed it on the ballot with the actual cost. But that’s just my opinion, as that was the most unique tax increase I’m aware of that included things that mean a lot to me.

Reply
Chucktown Gamecock April 1, 2013 at 11:21 am

What I think it ridiculous is how Summey admits to all of this corruption, but denies his involvement in it. He voted for the I-526 extension, which favors developers and will destroy Johns Island and James Island County Park.

Reply
Rate Dermatologist April 21, 2013 at 11:43 am

Dude, he’s a spoiled Silver Spooner who inherited positions and still hoist the “Don’t Tread On Me” flag as though he’s had it so bad…lol
What do you expect from his hypocritical type.

Reply
Chucktown Gamecock April 1, 2013 at 11:21 am

What I think it ridiculous is how Summey admits to all of this corruption, but denies his involvement in it. He voted for the I-526 extension, which favors developers and will destroy Johns Island and James Island County Park.

Reply
Rate Dermatologist April 21, 2013 at 11:43 am

Dude, he’s a spoiled Silver Spooner who inherited positions and still hoist the “Don’t Tread On Me” flag as though he’s had it so bad…lol
What do you expect from his hypocritical type.

Reply
Philip Branton April 1, 2013 at 12:41 pm

Dear Informational Cadets,

This is a prime example of a LOCAL politician doing….WHAT..?? Just think Cadets….why would Wil Folks run this article when the Post and Courier has not..?? or has it..?? Why would the fine Elliott Summey write this article NOW..??

How should this article be used in a MASS-Action Law suit as evidence and the fine citizens who comment being the witnesses for jurors to question..!!?

How would an “Erin Brockovich” type lawyer use this article to deposition Mayor Kieth Summey about the amount of TRASH Energy the City of North Charleston produces that is skimmed by Charleston COUNTY…?? How much diesel fuel is consumed and taxes funneled by Mayor Kieth Summey..??

How would the comments about the Greenbelt article here be used to question the future location of WIND Turbines that benefit ..WHAT…landowners..??

How would this article the used to illustrate how citizens are kept in the DARK..??

How would this website be used to illustrate just how “open” Mr Elliott Summey really is on a daily basis with his voters..??

We wonder if Mr. Elliott Summey will go to the military times website and actually read about Wind Turbines in New Port Rhode Island..??

Is Elliott Summey (Kieth) a sitting DUCK for Wil Folks or a backstabbing politician..??

Reply
Philip Branton April 1, 2013 at 12:41 pm

Dear Informational Cadets,

This is a prime example of a LOCAL politician doing….WHAT..?? Just think Cadets….why would Wil Folks run this article when the Post and Courier has not..?? or has it..?? Why would the fine Elliott Summey write this article NOW..??

How should this article be used in a MASS-Action Law suit as evidence and the fine citizens who comment being the witnesses for jurors to question..!!?

How would an “Erin Brockovich” type lawyer use this article to deposition Mayor Kieth Summey about the amount of TRASH Energy the City of North Charleston produces that is skimmed by Charleston COUNTY…?? How much diesel fuel is consumed and taxes funneled by Mayor Kieth Summey..??

How would the comments about the Greenbelt article here be used to question the future location of WIND Turbines that benefit ..WHAT…landowners..??

How would this article the used to illustrate how citizens are kept in the DARK..??

How would this website be used to illustrate just how “open” Mr Elliott Summey really is on a daily basis with his voters..??

We wonder if Mr. Elliott Summey will go to the military times website and actually read about Wind Turbines in New Port Rhode Island..??

Is Elliott Summey (Kieth) a sitting DUCK for Wil Folks or a backstabbing politician..??

Reply
Philip Branton April 1, 2013 at 12:55 pm

Dear Mrs Kieth Summey……(yes YOU …mama!!)

We wonder Mrs Summey…..have you actually taken time todday to read the Post and Courier concerning some CONDOS that are up for foreclosure..?? Where will the children who live in these Million DOLLAR condos actually play..?? Well, Mrs Summey, if you get out Google EARTH and take a look you will see a PARK that was funded by certain funds that is sitting right on TOP of a former SUPERFUND site…!! Mrs Summey, can you ask your SON and Husband where the water comes from to WATER the grass for the Soccer fields…!?! Mrs Summey….just think…..when Mrs Wil Folks goes to Google Earth and does a little of her own research….do YOU seriously think that Mrs Wil Folks would allow her son to play on those fields …??? One time may not hurt…..but how many times is too much..??

On another note Mrs Summey……how much wind energy tax revenue is sitting above WESCOTT Plantation…?? We really want you to thank Kieth for puttin up those turbines on top of City Hall…..it just really makes one wonder just how much WIND ENERGY is at 700 feet above City Hall instead of at roof top level..!!?

Mrs Summey…..do you think that Wil Folk’s wife is STUPID..?? Do you think that Mr. SMIRKS is dumb and blind to know Green Belt land will be used to LOCATE Wind Turbines…??

Mrs Summey we sure wish you would fix a helpin of your Macaroni and cheese and invite WIl Folks for dinner…!!! Maybe you could ask some questions that YOUR son failed to ASK and Answer in this article….!!!

Reply
Philip Branton April 1, 2013 at 12:55 pm

Dear Mrs Kieth Summey……(yes YOU …mama!!)

We wonder Mrs Summey…..have you actually taken time todday to read the Post and Courier concerning some CONDOS that are up for foreclosure..?? Where will the children who live in these Million DOLLAR condos actually play..?? Well, Mrs Summey, if you get out Google EARTH and take a look you will see a PARK that was funded by certain funds that is sitting right on TOP of a former SUPERFUND site…!! Mrs Summey, can you ask your SON and Husband where the water comes from to WATER the grass for the Soccer fields…!?! Mrs Summey….just think…..when Mrs Wil Folks goes to Google Earth and does a little of her own research….do YOU seriously think that Mrs Wil Folks would allow her son to play on those fields …??? One time may not hurt…..but how many times is too much..??

On another note Mrs Summey……how much wind energy tax revenue is sitting above WESCOTT Plantation…?? We really want you to thank Kieth for puttin up those turbines on top of City Hall…..it just really makes one wonder just how much WIND ENERGY is at 700 feet above City Hall instead of at roof top level..!!?

Mrs Summey…..do you think that Wil Folk’s wife is STUPID..?? Do you think that Mr. SMIRKS is dumb and blind to know Green Belt land will be used to LOCATE Wind Turbines…??

Mrs Summey we sure wish you would fix a helpin of your Macaroni and cheese and invite WIl Folks for dinner…!!! Maybe you could ask some questions that YOUR son failed to ASK and Answer in this article….!!!

Reply
One hand clapping April 1, 2013 at 1:07 pm

County Council created the GBB to select the best properties with the greatest impact on preserving wildlife. Council established GBB to be comprised of citizens with expertise in wildlife management, environmental resources, real estate law, land surveying, botany and zoology — and to be unpaid volunteers. GBB members love and want to preserve the lowcountry.

With no interference from politicians on County Council, the GBB voted (in open meetings) on properties they considered important to keep undeveloped and out of the hands of developers and in the domain of wildlife.

Once Council discovered that GBB was buying lands that Councilmen could make money on, Council removed from the GBB the final authority to select these lands.

This unusually political decision occurred during the tenure of Paul Thurmond’s tenure there. Having revoked GBB’s authority and replacing it with Council, GBB is nothing more than a wet sponge. I understand that GBB members are afraid of Council — afraid Council will “retaliate” against GBB members — explaining why GBB members are silent and do not publicly protest Council’s actions.

Councilman Thurmond persuaded Council to ignore the GBB in 2012 and buy swamp land that Thurmond’s law client needed to sell quickly in a divorce settlement. GBB did not want Thurmond’s mosquito-laden swamp land. The Post and Courier editorialized three times that the swamp-land purchase odd, not well researched, overpriced, “rushed,” and ill-advised.

Council now controls all $220 million of this GBB money.

Call it a slush fund.

Democracy at work, yes?

Reply
One hand clapping April 1, 2013 at 1:07 pm

County Council created the GBB to select the best properties with the greatest impact on preserving wildlife. Council established GBB to be comprised of citizens with expertise in wildlife management, environmental resources, real estate law, land surveying, botany and zoology — and to be unpaid volunteers. GBB members love and want to preserve the lowcountry.

With no interference from politicians on County Council, the GBB voted (in open meetings) on properties they considered important to keep undeveloped and out of the hands of developers and in the domain of wildlife.

Once Council discovered that GBB was buying lands that Councilmen could make money on, Council removed from the GBB the final authority to select these lands.

This unusually political decision occurred during the tenure of Paul Thurmond’s tenure there. Having revoked GBB’s authority and replacing it with Council, GBB is nothing more than a wet sponge. I understand that GBB members are afraid of Council — afraid Council will “retaliate” against GBB members — explaining why GBB members are silent and do not publicly protest Council’s actions.

Councilman Thurmond persuaded Council to ignore the GBB in 2012 and buy swamp land that Thurmond’s law client needed to sell quickly in a divorce settlement. GBB did not want Thurmond’s mosquito-laden swamp land. The Post and Courier editorialized three times that the swamp-land purchase odd, not well researched, overpriced, “rushed,” and ill-advised.

Council now controls all $220 million of this GBB money.

Call it a slush fund.

Democracy at work, yes?

Reply
Philip Branton April 2, 2013 at 10:09 am

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury……..

Just want to also add this article into evidence in a “public” manner for you to read …..

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/bribing_his_way_onto_the_ballot_3XFvV67oWZHFo7bVdoCkcO

….Jury members, we want you to consider the information that you have received about the Green “belts” up to this point before trial….

Reply
Philip Branton April 2, 2013 at 10:09 am

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury……..

Just want to also add this article into evidence in a “public” manner for you to read …..

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/bribing_his_way_onto_the_ballot_3XFvV67oWZHFo7bVdoCkcO

….Jury members, we want you to consider the information that you have received about the Green “belts” up to this point before trial….

Reply
Chris Lamar April 21, 2013 at 11:37 am

Did anyone proof this before print?

Reply
Chris Lamar April 21, 2013 at 11:37 am

Did anyone proof this before print?

Reply

Leave a Comment