Sunday, September 27, 2009

 

Courthouse…

I get so tired of repeating myself, but I will go for it one more time.

There are State and Federal requirements for courthouses.

The Old Robert Mills Courthouse did not meet these requirements, and had not met them for many years.

Unlike other jurisdictions throughout the State, where local officials had periodically renovated their courthouses, backward looking people in Lancaster had successfully blocked each and every attempt to spend money to renovate the Old Robert Mills Courthouse.

Frustrated judges, tired of inadequate security, inadequate space, overflowing toilets, and other problems too numerous to mention, had complained to local officials and to Court Administration for years, and had reached the end of their patience.

Lancaster County was left with two choices.

Construct a new courthouse, meeting all State and Federal requirements or have the courthouse shutdown.

As I have explained previously, shutting down the courthouse would have been financially disastrous for the taxpayers of Lancaster County.  Trials would have had to be moved to another County, with all expenses, including lease payments for the use of the other County's facilities, security, and transportation, paid by the taxpayers of Lancaster County.

Renovating the existing Old Robert Mills Courthouse was no longer an option, since the additions and renovations necessary to meet all State and Federal requirements would have cost more than the cost of building a new Courthouse.

You have to understand that the Old Robert Mills Courthouse is on the National Register of Historic Places, and any and all renovations have to approved.

The County Council was left with no option but to put the issue of a new courthouse to the voters.

Unfortunately, an arsonist then struck, torching both the courthouse and the solicitor's office within days of each other.

For anyone to suggest that any elected official, appointed official, or employee of local government would advocate the torching of the most historic structure in Lancaster County is absurd, and demonstrates the kind of ignorance and backward thinking that over many years successfully prevented needed renovations to the Old Robert Mills Courthouse.

However, once the arsonist had struck, County Council's options became even more limited.  There was no longer a choice as to building a new courthouse.  There was only a choice of how to pay for it.

Many people have questioned why Lancaster County does not simply use an existing vacant building.  The simple answer is that these building do not meet the State and Federal guidelines.

Others have suggested that Lancaster County continue to hold court in the old Wamsutta store building on the Highway 9 bypass.  That also is not an option.  First, it does not meet the State and Federal requirements.  We are able to use it temporarily because the Chief Justice of the South Carolina State Supreme Court granted Lancaster County a temporary waiver.  For your information, she did not have to grant that waiver.  Second, the old Wamsutta store lies outside the incorporated area of the City of Lancaster.  A courthouse must be located within the incorporated limits of the County seat.  Again the Chief Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court granted Lancaster County a temporary waiver.  And again, she did not have to grant that waiver.

I hope that this rather long explanation will put an end to the bickering over the construction of the new courthouse.  However, I doubt that that will be the case.

There seem to be far too many people who are unable or unwilling to look beyond the end of their noses.


Thursday, September 17, 2009

 

Live With It…

I have to say that I am surprised by the editorial written by the Chester News and Reporter which is forthcoming in Friday’s Lancaster News.

Although some of what the Chester News and Reporter states is on the mark, a lot of it is wide of the mark, and some of it is just plain wrong.

As the newspaper correctly reported, calling John Spratt a coward for initially saying that he would not hold town halls was distasteful, and was not the kind of response we should expect from our fellow southerners. After all, we proudly assert that we are gentlemen and ladies. We should take the time to live up to that assertion.

At the same time, a local resident of Lancaster called John Spratt's office in Rock Hill and was told that he would not be holding any town halls because the Democratic leadership in Washington had advised him against it. This did nothing to improve the congressman's image, and the justifiably angry response likely led to his reversal of course.

I will admit that I felt sorry for the congressman at the town hall. It was obvious to me that he was in pain and on pain medication. Clearly, he was not at his best. A couple of misinformed individuals even suggested that he looked drunk.

The Chester News and Reporter suggests that those of us who oppose H.R. 3200 and its various cousins organized our dissent in some great conspiracy. Please! I attended the town hall in Rock Hill, and the planning involved three individuals. Me, myself, and I. Truly, a grand conspiracy! I talked to dozens of attendees, and all came individually to listen and to voice their views. They were not there to voice someone else's preprogrammed commentary.

The Chester News and Reporter seems to be lock step with the Rock Hill Herald, who alleged that the attendees were "hostile" (i.e., dangerous, threatening). Nothing could be further from the truth. The crowd was loud and boisterous, yes, but the most rudimentary examination of American political history will tell you that that is what American politics is all about.

Finally, the Chester News and Reporter apparently has a very strange idea of what the 1st Amendment is all about. They assert that you are not permitted to be rude and obnoxious. Well I hate to break it to them, but that is exactly what the 1st Amendment does permit. It is certainly not the kind of conduct that we should expect from gentlemen and ladies, but they should be glad of that, since in my personal experience, the news media is profoundly adept at being rude and obnoxious.

What we saw at the town hall meeting in Rock Hill was nothing more than American politics at its best.

To the Chester News and Reporter I have but three remaining words, "Live With It".


Monday, September 14, 2009

 

HOPE In Lancaster

The Lancaster County Council voted tonight to waive the rent currently paid to Lancaster County by HOPE In Lancaster through June 30th, 2011.

The amount of the rent is roughly $255 per month.

HOPE In Lancaster is an organization that works to help residents going through short term emergencies by providing food, assistance with utility bills (electricity, gas, and water & sewer), and other services.

I believe that County Council is to be commended for this action to benefit an organization which acts to benefit the most needy among us.


Wednesday, September 09, 2009

 

Resignation or Impeachment… The Choice is Yours

Governor Sanford,

The people of South Carolina willingly forgive transgressions.

However, forgiveness is not forgetfulness, and the people of this state have a right to expect a full-time governor who is able to carry out the duties of his office without daily distractions arising from his own misconduct.

Your continuation in office is no longer tolerable, and you should be willing to accept that the needs of the people of this state supersede any personal desire you may have to hold on to the office to which you were elected.

It would be best for all concerned if you were to resign.

However, if you choose to try to remain, the people of this State, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents, will insist that the General Assembly take the otherwise unpalatable step of drafting articles of impeachment.

Be assured, you will be impeached, and you will be convicted.

It is time for you to show that you are a man, and accept the consequences of your actions.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?