Wow, July is half over! Time is going by fast. Congrats to the 100th anniversary for the American Legion Post 52 Baseball! The game and fireworks on Monday 7/14 were awesome!
At the 7/15/25 council work session, discussions were held on Term Limits and the UDO draft as recommended by the Planning Commission. I am not sure if I agree with term limits but ended up not having as full discussion. It was determined the council will have a special work session to discuss the UDO.
And now, how I voted and why.
Voted Yes: Resolution 2025-08 -to award the audit services for the city to Mauldin and Jenkins LLC for an initial term of four years. The Municipal Association of South Carolina recommends the council to change their audit services to other accounting firms occasionally as this will give the city a new set of eyes on the financials. The current firm has been doing the audits for years; therefore, it was time to change. The contract is for 1 year, and renewable each year for three years. If this firm is unsatisfactory, the council can elect not to renew.
Voted Yes: Resolution 2025-09 – to formally adopt a Business Continuity Plan for the city. This is common practice to have a plan in place if there are disruptions in essential services, facility loss, IT outages or other major disruptions.
Voted Yes: Resolution 2025-10 – to formally adopt a Disaster Recovery Plan for the city. This is also common practice to have a plan in place in case there are critical outages and IT infrastructure disruptions.
Voted Yes: Resolution 2025-10 – to formally adopt a Backup Policy for the city’s information systems. This is another common practice to have a plan to safeguard against data loss due to hardware failure, cyber incidents, or other disruptions.
Resolution 2025-12 – to adopt and Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the city’s elected officials. This one hit a nerve with not only some members of council but the public as well. It boiled down to overstepping freedom of speech. I would have voted NO on this if it went to vote but a councilmember made a motion to table, which was approved by the council. The city attorney will review and work on the wording and will be presented to council, probably at the next meeting in August.
I want to share a thought that has come up more than once during my time on Council. Last year, I suggested that we adopt a practice of discussing proposed ordinances and resolutions the month prior to a scheduled vote. This would allow time for any necessary modifications, give councilmembers the opportunity to fine-tune the language, and ensure that when it comes time to vote, we are all reviewing a clear, final draft. Unfortunately, that suggestion was not was not brought before the council.
As a result, we have seen several instances where ordinances are revised during a work session or even at the regular council meeting itself, and we are then expected to vote on them without having the finalized language in writing. To add to that concern, these corrected versions are not distributed to councilmembers afterward, nor are they made available to the public online.
I want to ask — am I the only one who finds this troubling? I believe transparency and accuracy are crucial in public service, and having clear, final wording in advance benefits both Council and the public we serve.
One final note from the meeting: During public comment, a resident criticized me personally, referencing past issues and questioning my previous concerns about council procedures. This is even though last year, Council passed a resolution changing public comment rules. Under that resolution, speakers’ comments are to be directed to the City Council as a whole and not to any member. They shall be mindful and respectful of those participating in or present at the meeting. Speakers are expected to be civil in their language, and shall refrain from comments or behavior that involves disorderly speech or action, name calling, personal attacks etc. Yet the Mayor did not enforce this through a point of order. Selective enforcement is a real concern, especially under a strong mayor form of government. Protecting First Amendment rights means applying the rules fairly and consistently.
That said, I want to end on a positive note. A kind resident came up to me after the meeting to say, “Keep on doing what you’re doing.” I did not catch her name, but her encouragement truly made a huge difference. Thank you for that. (Whoever you are, please introduce yourself to me at the next council meeting you attend.)
Add comment
Comments