 = Supports HCP position = Does not support HCP position |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
recused | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
absent | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
recused | |
absent | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
recused |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
recused |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
recused |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
absent | |
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
absent | |
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
absent | |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
absent | |
= Supports HCP position
= Does not support HCP position
7/1/08 Ordnance 61-08. The 3rd and final vote to approve the Development Agreement for Carolina Station (despite the fact that negotiations on the Agreement were not complete) passed by a vote of 6-5.
COMMENT:
Horry County P.R.I.D.E. never opposed the development of Carolina Station. We did oppose the approval of an incomplete and inadequate Development Agreement that International Paper Realty, the developer, and its engineering firm, DDC, Inc. pushed through prematurely (business as usual in Horry County). Although the developer contributed land for two schools and approximately $5.75M In cash, it’s not even close to being their fair share. Once again, the existing taxpayers will get to pay, and pay, and pay.
6/17/08 Resolution R-114-08. Mike Ryan’s (4th District) nomination of Julie Harbin to a four-year term on the Planning Commission was DEFERRED by a vote of 9-2. (Mr. Allen moved to deter; Mr. Schultz, a partner in the Carolina Station engineering firm, DDC, Inc. seconded)
COMMENT:
Each County Council member nominates one resident of his/her district to serve on the Planning Commission with the consent and appointment of the entire Council. When Mr. Ryan’s nomination of Julie Harbin came up for approval, Mr. Allen from the 11th District said publicly it wasn’t fair for Mr. Ryan to appoint someone in July when his term would end in December….despite the fact that Planning Commission terms always begin July 1. Later discussions with Council members revealed Julie’s nomination was not approved because “she and Horry County P.R.I.D.E. are considered by some to be too extreme.” Horry County P.R.I.D.E. assumes that means “Promoting Responsible investment in Infrastructure, Development, and the Environment” is too extreme for the eight members who voted against this appointment.
6/17/08 2nd reading for Carolina Station Development Agreement was approved by a vote of 6-4.
COMMENT:
Horry County P.R.I.D.E. is NOT opposed to Carolina Station. We ARE OPPOSED to approving a Development Agreement where the developer will make hundreds of millions of dollars in profit and leave the existing taxpayers of Horry County to pay hundreds of millions of dollars over the next 30 years in both capital and operational expenses.
(*Mr. Schulz, a partner in the Carolina Station engineering firm, recused himself from voting because of a conflict of interest.)
5/13/08 Motion to defer the rezoning request for Carolina Station. (Ryan motion, Worley second) Motion failed 8-3. Mr. Schultz had the integrity to not vote because of potential conflict of interest.
COMMENT:
Mr. Ryan and Mr. Worley attempted to postpone a premature vote on 1st reading of the Carolina Station rezoning request until after staff completes negotiating the development agreement with International Paper Realty. Mr. Ryan, Worley, and Mr. Schwartzkopf are to be commended for their common sense votes in the face of intense lobbying by IPR, the developer.
5/13/08 Ordnance 60-08. 1st reading (of three) to approve the Carolina Station rezoning request. (Hardee motion, Prince second) Approved 8-3. Mr. Schultz had the integrity to not vote because of potential conflict of interest.
COMMENT:
Again, this was a premature vote by Council members BEFORE staff has finished negotiating the development agreement. Mr. Ryan, Mr. Worley, and Mr. Barnard are to be commended for voting against it.
5/13/08 1st Reading (of three) to approve the Carolina Station development agreement. (Prince motion, Grabowski second) The Carolina Station Development Agreement was approved 8-3 despite the fact that the DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HASN’T BEEN COMPLETED! Mr. Schultz had the integrity to not vote because of potential conflict of interest.
COMMENT:
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the effects of International Paper Realty’s behind the scenes lobbying efforts. The larger problem here is that these same Council members (the ones with the frowns above) are approving a development that will result in a County loss of $40M over twenty years, or an average annual loss of $2M. Guess who is going to get to make up that loss? Apparently, they have forgotten who voted them into office. When election time rolls around June 10 and again in October, taxpayers should VOTE OUT Council members looking out for the interests of an out-of-state developer over taxpayers interests.
4/22/08 Vote to add first (of three) readings to put the Carolina Station development on the agenda (Mr. Hardee).
EXPLANATION:
The first (of three) readings to approve Carolina Station was not on the Council’s agenda. Mr. Hardee’s motion to add it required a unanimous vote. Ms. Gilland, Mr. Ryan, and Mr. Schwartzkopf voted NO.
COMMENT:
This was a premature attempt by Mr. Hardee and the developer to start Council approval of this huge project before 1) serious legal questions have been answered, 2) staff has finished negotiating the developmental agreement, 3) the Council Workshop on Carolina Station scheduled for May 13, and 4) before the County has identified funds to pay the staff estimate of $200-$250M in new infrastructure needs.
3/4/08 Resolution R-47-08. Authorizing funds for an impact fee study.
EXPLANATION:
An updated study on developmental impact fees is required by State law before implementing such fees. HCP supports the imposition of impact fees on developers; therefore, we support the means to pay for the required study.
3/4/08 Ordnance 30-08. Third and final reading to authorize the issuance and sale of general obligation bonds in the amount of $62 million for jail expansion and five library projects.
EXPLANATION:
$50M in this bond is for the expansion of jails is required by State law. $12M is for five library projects.
COMMENT:
HCP recommended delaying the $12M in funds for the libraries AT THIS TIME. Normally, we would be VERY supportive of our libraries; however, as of March ‘08 the County has a $4M shortfall in revenue from development permit fees, etc. (due to the downturn in the real estate industry). This shortfall can be expected to keep increasing until the economy recovers. It’s not in the taxpayers’ best interests to increase their debt unnecessarily AT THIS TIME.
2/5/08 Ordnance 31-08 (sponsored by Council Members Barnard, Ryan, and Worley). The first of three votes required to impose impact fees on developers.
EXPLANATION:
On 1/5/08 the County Council voted 6-5 to pass the first “reading” of this Ordnance to impose impact fees on developers to help cover the cost of new infrastructure made necessary by new developments (roads, police and fire protection, emergency medical services, schools, hospitals, storm water management, natural resources, parks, recreation, libraries, and correctional facilities.)
COMMENT:
Currently, the existing taxpayers of Horry County are carrying the entire tax burden for maintaining ALL current infrastructure and for building ALL new infrastructure. If passed, this ordnance would shift some of the tax burden onto the developers and their buyers, the ones who are profiting from the new developments and the ones who will be using the new infrastructure. THIS IS NOT A TAX ON EXISTING TAXPAYERS.
The SC Association of Realtors has made this legislation a priority to DEFEAT saying this will inflate property prices unnecessarily.
Chair Liz Gilland made it clear that while she would vote for the first reading she was not committing to voting yes on any other readings.
2/5/08 Resolution R-27-08. Vote to spend $101,000 to update former impact fee study required by the State before impact fees can be imposed.
EXPLANATION:
According to the SC Development Impact Fee Act an impact fee study must be done prior to enacting development impact fees. The prior study is too old.
COMMENT:
HCP supports this resolution. Currently, the existing taxpayers of Horry County are carrying the entire tax burden for maintaining ALL current infrastructure and for building ALL new infrastructure. If passed, this ordnance would shift some of the tax burden of new development onto the developers, the ones who are profiting from the new developments. THIS IS NOT A TAX ON EXISTING TAXPAYERS.