|
As South Carolina's new governor touts efforts to make government more
transparent, Charleston County Council seems content debating big things
behind closed doors.
When council's Finance Committee took up the hot-potato issue of extending
Interstate 526 on Tuesday afternoon, it immediately adjourned into executive
session to receive legal advice.
When that session ended almost an hour later, council members emerged with a
written script of three motions: to reconsider their April 19 decision not
to build the I-526 extension; to rescind that decision; and to direct the
county attorney to cure the default in the county's agreement with the S.C.
Transportation Infrastructure Bank and return to council with options as far
as what to do next.
Each motion passed on a split vote.
There was limited public discussion -- Councilman Henry Darby briefly talked
about the value of compromise and Councilman Vic Rawl offered a brief
explanation of what council had done. Two mayors also were allowed to praise
what council had done.
Council Chairman Teddie Pryor said Wednesday the closed session was
necessary and by the book.
"We didn't discuss anything but legal matters," he said. "Our attorney is
not stupid enough to have us back there discussing anything that isn't
executive session material."
Jay Bender, an attorney for the S.C. Press Association, said public bodies
often go into closed session to avoid making anyone unhappy on a tough
decision.
"It would have been better to have those discussions in public because it's
the public's money and the public has to understand its ramifications," he
said.
But Bender said he found County Council's split vote "refreshing."
"Typically what happens after these executive sessions is there's no
discussion and the vote's unanimous," he added. "At least on its face, it
appears that this was a legitimate executive session and an appropriate
public vote and outcome."
The lack of council discussion meant the public had few insights into these
now-relevant questions:
--Is council's backtracking being done merely to gain leverage with the
Infrastructure Bank over its claims that the county must return $11.6
million if it doesn't build the road? Or does a majority now favor building
it -- or at least part of it?
--To what extent do council members have their own strong opinions about
this decision and to what extent are they responding to the bidding of state
and mayoral politicos?
--Do any council members agree with opponents' claim that there is a
legitimate legal argument -- such as federal law, which allows a "no-build"
option -- to be made against the county having to refund $11.6 million to
the bank?
Kate Parks of the Coastal Conservation League, an opponent to 526, said more
public discussion among council members would have helped.
"It would have helped answer questions that I have, like, 'Why do you have
to rescind the no-build option to approve no build?' " she said.
"To go back on that (April 19 no-build) decision without a clear explanation
is, I fear, disenchanting to those who have been involved," she added. "I
hope that's not the case because local involvement is so key to good local
government."
Others attending the meeting were less concerned.
Ledlie Bell of West Ashley's Crescent neighborhood has been to many public
meetings where officials go into executive session. "If you make the effort
to get to a public meeting and they go into executive session, there isn't
anything much more infuriating," she said.
But Bell stopped short of criticizing council's decision Tuesday because of
the legal and contractual complexities involved.
"You can fault the process, but they were in a divisive and very difficult
situation," she said. "They have to be careful. They cannot afford to blow
it again."
Cindy Floyd, a Johns Island resident and former county councilwoman who
opposes the project, also did not bash the decision to go into closed
session.
"I have to assume it was all legal advice and contract discussions, which
are appropriate for executive session," she said, adding that the motions
likely were scripted before the meeting began.
|