Category Archives: Midlands

Pictures of what I’ve REALLY been doing

Or at least, from SOME of what I’ve been doing…

I feel like I’ve really been dropping the ball on the blog the last couple of weeks. I’ve been giving you quick and easy posts based on stuff that necessarily passes quickly through my hands during the day — an e-mail here, something from a proof there, maybe a quick take on a headline — and encouraged y’all to talk amongst yourselves while I chug along in meetings with candidates and others, one after another.

The thing is, if I were doing what I started this blog to do — giving you extra, in-depth, raw material that is over and above what I’m able to give you on the printed page (and South Carolina stuff at that, based on access I have to newsmakers by virtue of the job, stuff you can’t possibly get elsewhere) — I’d be writing about the meetings.

The trouble is, I’ve had no time to think about the meetings, or review notes to pull out highlights, or edit video from them, or anything. I’ve just chugged along, out of one meeting and into another. Again we see demonstrated the principle that you can either blog, or you can have experiences worth blogging about; you can’t have both. It’s frustrating.

So accept this quick-and-dirty photo essay, just to give you a taste of what’s been going on here in the editorial offices since Monday the 12th. Here you see at least one photo from each meeting I’ve had these two weeks with a guest or guest from outside the building (staff meetings are not documented), with the briefest possible summary. (I’ve got to get this done and move on to reading proofs for Friday’s paper.)

(In all this time, I’ve had one meeting outside the building. Tuesday afternoon I visited Providence Hospital to get an update on what’s happening there. I had a camera in my pocket, but it all went so fast I never had it out — more of a rush job, unfortunately, than a similar visit to Lexington Medical several months back, when we weren’t as rushed or as shorthanded.)

Here we go…

Monday, May 12, 11 a.m. — John Scott, Senate Dist. 19, Democrat:

Tuesday, May 13, 9:30 a.m. — Kit Spires, House Dist. 96, Republican:

1 p.m. — Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott, Democrat:

2 p.m. — Katrina Shealy, Senate Dist. 23, Republican:

Wednesday, May 14, 10 a.m. — Tony Lamm, House Dist. 79, Republican:

11:30 a.m. — Don Purcell, Richland County Council Dist. 9, Republican:

1 p.m. — Barbara Scott, Richland County Clerk of Court, Democrat:

Thursday, May 15, 9:30 a.m. — Jimmy Brazelle, Lexington County Sheriff, Republican:

11 a.m. — Kendall Corley, Richland County Clerk of Court, Democrat:

noon — Sheri Few, House Dist. 79, Republican:

1 p.m. — Damon Jeter, Richland County Council Dist. 3, Democrat:

Monday, May 19, 11 a.m. — Johnny Bland, Richland County Council Dist. 7, Democrat:

4:30 — Our own James D. McCallister, as part of a delegation advocating the 5 Points parking garage/multi-use development:

4:30 — Columbia City Councilwoman Anne Sinclair, in the same meeting as James:

Tuesday, May 20, 9:30 a.m. — Jake Knotts, Senate Dist. 23, Republican:

Wednesday, May 21, 11 a.m. — Tom Comerford, Lexington County Clerk of Court, Republican:

4 p.m. — Gloria Montgomery, Richland County Clerk of Court, Democrat:

Thursday, May 22, 9:30 a.m. — Val Hutchinson, Richland County Council Dist. 9, Republican:

11 a.m. — Kerry Johnson, Lexington County Sheriff, Republican:

1 p.m. — Napoleon Tolbert, Richland County Council Dist. 7, Democrat:

Hurrah for Columbia’s (eventual) smoking ban, but delay is inexcusable

60 Replies

Too late! Columbia City Council already approved the delay.

Now, to take a step back — it’s wonderful that the decision has finally been made — and look, it was by 5-2, not the expected 4-3…

But it’s bad that the current unconscionable state of affairs will continue for three more months. There’s just no excuse for that.

One of my colleagues disagreed with me on that point this morning, saying that it’s reasonable to wait and implement it at the same time as Richland County. But that’s ridiculous. One would only do so out of an abstract sense of administrative tidiness. There is no advantage to be gained by waiting for the county that is not outweighed by the wrongness of exposing city workers to carcinogens for three more months, after you’ve already decided that it’s right to protect them.

There is NO safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. And since any exposure greater than zero is unsafe, three months of unnecessary exposure is unconscionable.

For that matter, since Richland is expected to have a final vote on the subject by June 17, why can’t that ban go into effect July 1? It took what — three days after the referendum (a far less tidy and less predictable instrument than a council vote) for stores to start selling beer on Sunday in Columbia. If you know you have the votes, and you’re working toward it, how much gearing up is necessary to say smoking is now banned in the county? Why can’t it be in effect immediately? I’ll be told time is necessary for notification, but you know, you don’t have to penalize anyone who wasn’t notified yet (like there’s any bar or restaurant owner who won’t know about it the day of the vote, which seems highly unlikely). Enforcement will never be perfect, any more than enforcement of the law against murder is perfect (I mean direct, overt, immediate and obvious murder, as distinguished from the slow kind of forcing people to breathe smoke day after day). Most of the effectiveness of such an ordinance will result from the voluntary cooperation of law-abiding people. There is no reason not to let that begin immediately.

What next — postpone again to wait for Lexington County, or for Cayce and West Columbia. The town of Lexington is now thinking about discussing a ban. Must Columbia wait for them, too? It would make just as much sense to wait for them — especially for Lexington County — as for Richland. That is, unless you argue that waiting for Richland makes sense because Columbia is located within that county — but if that’s your argument, Columbia’s ban is superfluous, unless incorporated areas were to be exempted.

This delay is ridiculous, and it is wrong.

DON’T POSTPONE SMOKING BAN!

5 Replies

Employees of restaurants and bars in Columbia have breathed other people’s poisons far too long.

Thanks to the evil and stupidity that dwells in the hearts of too many state lawmakers, restaurant workers have already become two years more likely to die of lung cancer, emphysema or heart disease.

There is NO excuse for exposing them for three more months.

Don’t even propose it, Mayor Bob. Don’t.

God Bless E.W. Cromartie

16 Replies

Say what you will about the guy — and we’ve had a few things to say about him on the editorial pages of The State — but he just saved a lot of lives by switching his vote on Columbia’s smoking ban. By this change, he now forms a majority for a total ban, which is the only rational and moral approach:

Councilman to switch vote on smoking ban
City Councilman E. W. Cromartie said this morning he is now supporting a total smoking ban for Columbia, all but ensuring the a ban that includes bars will pass when council votes next week.
Cromartie, the most senior member of council whose district includes the bars and restaurants of the Vista, announced his decision during a public hearing today on the smoking ordinance.
“As the capitol city, we are leaders. We have to lead,” Cromartie said.
Opponents of the ordinance like Tony Snell, who owns Club Fusion in the Vista, are not giving up.
Cromartie has agreed to meet with Snell next week.
Snell meanwhile is mounting a campaign to have Mayor Bob Coble recuse himself from the vote, since his law firm Nexsen Pruett represents tobacco companies
“If the mayor recuses himself, it becomes a split vote and it is defeated,” Snell said.
Discussion of a banning smoking in bars reignited recently after Cromartie said he might reconsider his vote. A ban in public places, including restaurants, was passed in 2006. Bars, defined as businesses that make 85 percent of their revenue from alcohol sales, were excluded at that time.
Cromartie and council members Daniel Rickenmann, Kirkman Finlay and Sam Davis voted for a compromise plan to exclude bars.
Coble, Anne Sinclair and Tameika Isaac Devine voted against the compromise.

— Adam Beam

So God bless him for that. If he never does another good thing as councilman, he’ll deserve credit for this one…

Now we just need Richland and Lexington counties and other governments in our politically fragmented community to go along. But this is a start.

Mayor Bob is an op-ed machine

5 Replies

Recently, in a post headlined, "Now I know how Dr. Frankenstein felt," I mentioned that Bob Coble has enthusiastically embraced the new Saturday Opinion Extra venue. And as you probably noticed, we had a piece from Mayor Bob that Saturday.

We had another one from him this past Saturday. And today, I get this message from Cindi:

I see from Mike that Mayor Bob has already submitted TWO op-eds, and it’s barely Monday…

Yikes.

Just pronounce it right: It’s FRAHNK-en-steen.

‘I know you are but what am I?’

4 Replies

Being the sophisticated sort that I am, I had remained aloof from the "excitement" of having yet another motion picture being shot here in our fair city — although I admit that perhaps even my pulse would speed up a bit if I were to run into that Jessica Biel person, assuming of course that I were half my current age (ahem). I believe I did see her in something once, and as I recall she was rather symmetrical and pneumatic and so forth.

But that hasn’t happened. However, brother blogger Adam Fogle has experienced the next best thing (if you’re willing to reach far afield) — he bumped into ‘Pee-Wee Herman’ himself.

He wrote about the experience here. From his account, he’s still holding out hope of encountering Ms. Biel, so the lad still has his priorities straight.

Benjamin Byrd, S.C. House District 77

Mary Barber Kirkland, S.C. House Dist. 70

2 Replies

4 p.m. — Mary Barber
Kirkland, whose father and grandfather were both school principals and
has spent 39 years in public education herself, is challenging Rep. Joe
Neal. Originally from Hopkins, she has been involved in a lot of
community efforts in lower Richland. She says she’s running because she
"wanted a leader who is visible and focused." She declined to criticize
the incumbent, although those points are common to candidates who have
opposed Mr. Neal (unsuccessfully) in the past — assertions that he is
not engaged enough locally between elections.

But Mrs. Kirkland
preferred to talk about what she would do, and she would concentrate on
education and economic development, the latter being particularly
sorely needed in her district.

She believes that parental and community
involvement are the main elements needed for children to succeed in
school, and she has seen her share of children struggling — and says
she has seen gang involvement as young as the second grade — "I can
see the little ones joining now… seeking that family that they don’t
have at home."

She also favors programs that enable senior
citizens to share their wisdom with younger generations.

Happy 30th, Yesterday’s!

9 Replies

Last night we dropped in to Yesterday’s to help Duncan and Scotty McRae and the gang celebrate 30 years in the heart of Five Points. To drag in the ultimate of journalistic cliches, a good time was had by all.

Jack Van Loan was there with wife Linda. Jack is the one who first introduced me to Duncan (whom you can see at the very center of the photo above) years ago. We saw other friends, and met new ones. Our booth was popular because we’d brought along my daughter’s roommate Laura, a longtime Yesterday’s waitress who has been out for awhile recovering from surgery, and everybody was glad to see her.

Yesterdayscowboy
One of those who stopped by was the Yesterday’s cowboy himself, who had been missing from the bathtub over the front door during the last weeks of the countdown to the anniversary. (My apologies for the quality of the photos; I didn’t have my camera, and shot these with my phone.)

But guess who else we met? Frequent blog commenter James D McCallister, whose recent comments you can find on this post, and on this one as well.

There was live music by a man with a guitar immediately behind where I was sitting. His first number, of course, was "Yesterday."

Anyway, it was a fine party, and I wish the folks at Yesterday’s 30 more good years…

Yesterdaysneon

Mayor Bob says he likes Tomlin, too

Runyan concession letter

3 Replies

Catching up with e-mail, I ran into this from Wednesday:

CAMERON A. RUNYAN

02 April 2008
Dear Mr. Rickenmann,
Congratulations on your re-election to the Columbia City Council. Like me, I am sure that you are very grateful to your many supporters. Although I needed to limit my run for this important office to only a few months and ran a campaign built on small donations and many volunteer hours, I am pleased with the result. Our joint appearances raised many important issues, addressed a number of significant concerns, and challenged voters to consider what priorities they want to see addressed as we look to the future of our great city.
At times our conversations were spirited – as they should have been. We disagreed on many matters. And that is as it should be. We owed our constituents our directness, our honesty and our zeal as we challenged each other and offered differing visions for the city. We each presented a unique set of experiences and skills to be applied to Office of City Council Person.
While my support grew steadily throughout the campaign from 11 percent in its first days to 42 percent last night, it is clear that a majority of voters considered you worthy of a second term. I hope it is one marked by an overriding concern for the needs of our citizens.
I stand ready to be of assistance as you and your fellow council members grapple with how to ensure that every tax dollar is spent carefully with citizens able to access information related to this easily and in a timely manner. I stand ready to be of assistance as you all weigh in on the future development of Five Points especially in regards to the clean up of the recently identified contamination at the Kenny’s site and as you gather all the pertinent information regarding the best use of the property. I stand ready to be of assistance as the Council addresses safety in our city through innovative gang intervention programs, an expansion of the number of police officers on the streets, better pay and benefits for our officers to encourage retention, and the study of the establishment of a police reserve/auxiliary like those in our county and in so many other cities in this state.
I believe in local political action as the first step in any national movement toward reform. I will stay actively involved and committed to my city and its people. Call on me if I can be of help. I look forward to continued engagement with you and your fellow Council Members in the years ahead.
Respectfully,
Cameron Runyan
PO Box 1933 • Columbia, SC 29202

Last-minute ploys in city council race

22 Replies

Since I haven’t decided what I think about it myself, let me ask you: What do you think of the last-minute attacks in the Columbia City Council at-large race?

Two examples of what I’m talking about: Cameron Runyan holds a press conference to claim that incumbent Daniel Rickenmann had a conflict-of-interest on recent tentative decision to approve a six-story development in Five Points. There was a story about that in the paper the other day.

Then, on Sunday, the above flier shows up on windshields outside Bethel AME Church. (This was reported on in today’s paper.) There is no date on the photo, and little explanatory information. But to describe it as simply as possible, it purports to show Mr. Rickenmann at what has all the marks of a Kappa Alpha fraternity party. But I suppose it could be just about anything. As to whether that’s Mr. Rickenmann, well … all those preppy white boys tend to look alike to me. As I said awhile back, I think Cameron Runyan looks like Daniel Rickenmann, so don’t go by me.

Here’s what today’s news story said:

The fliers showed a picture of Rickenmann at a fraternity party while
he was a student at USC. He and a group of fraternity brothers, some
dressed in Confederate uniforms, are posing in front of a Confederate
battle flag. In the picture, Rickenmann, dressed in a tuxedo, is
toasting the camera with a drink.

Or, you could just look at the picture above.

No one has taken responsibility for the flier — neither Hamas nor the Symbionese Liberation Army has come forward, and Mr. Runyan denies it outright.

Both of these attacks came after we had endorsed Mr. Runyan for the seat, and we had no interest in running anything about them in editorial. We don’t even have an editorial position on the (relative) high-rise in Five Points — I’m at odds with my three associates on that one — much less what role Mr. Rickenmann should or shouldn’t have played in the decision thus far.

As for the "Confederate" picture… even if we had raised it to denounce Mr. Runyan (or whoever distributed it; I don’t know who), it would have focused so much negative attention on Mr. Rickenmann that it would look like we, as Runyan supporters, were piling on. (Add to that our usual reluctance to air any new charges in the last day or two of an election, when it’s too late for the accused to give a fair answer.)

Anyway, it all came out in the end for Mr. Rickenmann, so congratulations to him and his supporters. I just provide this post as a place for y’all to discuss the last-minute stuff.

Great news on smoking bans (I think)!

48 Replies

The S.C. Supreme Court says Greenville’s smoking ban is OK after all — as in, NOT pre-empted by the usual legislative attempts to prevent local governments from governing as local folks see fit:

By MEG KINNARD – Associated Press Writer
COLUMBIA, S.C. — Cities and towns have the power to ban indoor smoking in public places, the state Supreme Court ruled Monday in a decision that anti-smoking advocates predicted will spawn more rules against where people may light up in South Carolina.
The ruling upheld a ban against indoor, public smoking that the city of Greenville imposed last year. Dozens of bars and restaurants had sued, claiming their business would suffer. A judge then quashed the ban, ruling that local governments had to let the state lead the way when it comes to smoking bans.
In the justices’ unanimous decision Monday, the high court said local governments can impose more stringent regulations…

So, does this mean that Columbia can finally pull the trigger on its prospective ban on smoking in restaurants (but, unfortunately, not bars). It would appear so, since the ban supposedly waited only on a court ruling. A number of other communities had gone ahead with bans of their own. Here’s a list.

The jury’s still out on a statewide ban. But as long as the Legislature doesn’t move to make SURE locals can’t do it (and don’t put it past them for a second; they HATE the governments closest to the people), at least the will of local communities can now be acted upon, and relied upon to stick.

Lea Walker responds

2 Replies

Just now I finally got caught up with yesterday’s e-mail, and found this message:

Dear Sirs and Madam:

Your editorial today endorsed Runyon, and your
comments are not fair to me, nor to the city. My international background will
bring unique and broader vision and solutions to our City. I’m not motivated by
the zoning issue, but by my urge to contribute and get involved. The city
council should be diversified/open-minded, and not to be self-absorbed and not
to treat the minorities as invisibles.

The most important issues for this campaign
should get our city council think out of the box, but not just to get another
one who thinks alike. To me, all the other candidates talked about the same
issues, and suggested the same remedies.

Lea Walker, President
(US) Chinese Culture Center

Ms. Walker (pictured above) is one of the four candidates running for the at-large seat on Columbia City Council. I still hope to get around to posting something from our meeting with her before this thing’s over. If you’ll notice, I haven’t posted anything on our meeting with the guy we endorsed, either. I did put up something from our meeting with Daniel Rickenmann, but it wasn’t nearly as complete as what I’ve done on Brian Boyer and Belinda Gergel.

Unfortunately, those kinds of posts are very time-consuming (I stayed very late doing the Rickenmann and Gergel ones), and when things get busy around here, putting out the editorial pages comes first.

Joe Azar, The State on same page for once

9 Replies

Just saw this e-mail that Joe Azar sent out to his list:

Today The State editorial board endorsed Cameron Runyan over incumbent Daniel Rickenmann. Read it below. From all I can hear and see, Runyan should become our next city councilman. But don’t sit back and wait, forward this to everyone, call all your friends, and make sure to get everyone out to vote Tuesday, April 1. That is the only way to win, so do it!…

You should take note of this moment, because you won’t often find Joe so heartily agreeing with us. I for one intend to enjoy it while it lasts.

Here’s the editorial to which he refers.

The op-ed that came too soon

8 Replies

Speaking of Mayor Bob, as we were earlier… A few days ago, he sent us an op-ed submission. Then he resent it with an additional byline on it — that of Councilwoman Tameika Isaac Devine. It was about the recent city council retreat.

Trouble is, we had run a piece from him just days earlier — last Friday, as a matter of fact. And that piece wasn’t long after another one from him. We can’t just turn over the space we have for local guest columns to the mayor every time there’s something he wants to respond to — he’s a very responsive guy. We have space most days for one local, nonstaff column. There’s a lot of competition for that slot, most days. So we have a guideline — no more than one piece for the same person within 30 days. And we had already stretched that rule once for the mayor, since his earlier piece had been on Feb. 20. We couldn’t give him yet another pass and still face all the other folks we’ve said "no" to. We’d made the first exception because he was responding to an editorial that had been critical of the city. We could have made another for the same reason, but chose not to.

Instead, I offered to put it on the blog. Here’s the cover note that came with the most recent version of his latest submission:

In light of today’s editorial I wanted to submit again the op ed from myself and Tameika Isaac Devine. The editorial was based on Adam Beam’s story about our retreat. While the editorial and Adam’s story certainly describe legitimate issues, I believe the op ed addresses one issue that has been corrected. The City Council partly as a result of the study cited in the editorial has set specific goals and a specific strategic action plan to implement those goals. Both the goals and the plan will be on our website after the plan is updated from the comments at the retreat.

The editorial specifically addresses the report and lack of goals when the writer says: "The report, based on interviews with dozens of managers in city government, said the City Council set no vision or goals…" The editorial goes on to say: "Council members told the study commission that the 2001 report was accurate. But they declared things had changed under Mr. Austin. Mayor Bob Coble said he thought members followed state law in terms of how they interact with city employees. But the events at the recent retreat say things have gotten no better. The council remains a major culprit in ensuring the city’s government struggles."

Clearly the main thrust of the editorial is the "interferance" (the writer’s term in the opening paragraph) of City Council and the form of government and not the lack of planning. While City Manager Austin would be the one to say what improvements have been made in how City Council interacts with him, I would note that the lack of formal goal setting and planning has been addressed, I believe in fairness the op ed adds an important perspective on whether the City Council took steps to formally address that criticism (instead of using the State of the City for the last six years as the primary vehicle for setting goals as would be the common practice under a strong mayor form of government). Of course the op ed discusses the major issues that were addressed at the retreat in addition to the one that Adam addressed in his story. As always I appreciate your consideration.

And here is the text of the submission itself:

City Council Retreat Friday March 7, 2008
I wanted to give a report on the Columbia City Council Retreat that was held Friday March 7th at the Convention Center. The bulk of the day was spent reviewing the four broad goals that City Council adopted last year. Those goals were:
1. To enhance the quality of life in the City of Columbia for all citizens, customers and visitors.
2. To enhance and protect our natural and built infrastructure.
3. To enhance Columbia’s future role as the flagship municipality in South Carolina through the use of best practices for local government operations.
4. To grow the City’s tax base by facilitating opportunities for citizens and future generations to reach their full economic, social, and cultural potential.
Those broad goals are being implemented through Columbia’s Strategic Operational Plan that staff has developed, and that City Council reviewed at the retreat. Both the goals and strategic plan will be on our website www.columbiasc.net.
While a number of specific issues were discussed at the retreat, I think four were particularly important. First, City Council affirmed our plan for safety and security in Columbia. We established as our top funding priority, the police and fire retention plan to increase salaries by $2.5 million over a three year period. We reaffirmed our commitment to fund a security camera system and the goal of 375 police officers (an increase of 19 officers). Additionally, we are committed to fighting gang and youth violence with the implementation of the recommendations of our gang assessment.
Secondly, we reviewed the progress we are making in correcting the deficiencies in our Finance Department that were outlined in the September 2007 Management Letter. We have retained the Municipal Association of South Carolina to help us establish best practices and online financial reporting.
Thirdly, the City has made a real commitment to climate protection. Implementation of our energy audit, which will be released this month, will be a top priority for the coming year. Columbia must do our part to reduce global warming and protect our environment.
Fourth, we reviewed the implementation of the disparity study that was adopted by Council in August of 2006. City Council reaffirmed our strong commitment to the study’s implementation and the need for accountability in reaching our goal of economic fairness and inclusion for our diverse community.
Columbia City Council established last year our broad goals and the strategic operational plan to implement those goals. This year’s retreat was an important opportunity to review progress and take corrective steps where needed. Columbia is going through the greatest renaissance in our history. Innovista will transform our economy and create high wage jobs. The Columbia Metropolitan Convention Center and Hilton Hotel are bringing in tourists and conventions. We are creating new attractions such as EdVenture, the Three Rivers Greenway, and the historic Bethel AME Church Museum. The heart of Columbia, from the Riverfront, Downtown, Five Points, North Columbia, Two Notch Road to Read Street, has been revitalized. Private investment, both residential and commercial, has exploded. We have stronger neighborhoods with more residents, more homeowners, and greater home values in Columbia. We have achieved this growth with a commitment to diversity and inclusion. We have launched a new effort “Together We Can” to improve our public schools through greater community partnerships. This coming year will be an exciting though challenging time. Clear goals and our strategic plan will help us achieve success.

Thank you,

Mayor Bob Coble
3333 Heyward Street
Columbia, South Carolina

Councilwoman Tameika Isaac Devine

God bless Mayor Bob

12 Replies

Forgot to mention this yesterday, but as one who has worked at the south end of Assembly for over 20 years, about three or four years of which (by my highly scientific estimate) have been spent waiting for trains to move — and mind you, I long ago learned every trick for getting around them, but sometimes it’s impossible — I was deeply grateful to Mayor Bob for setting forth a vision for ridding us of this curse.

I’m not sure the city can afford it, and I’m not necessarily convinced that if it had the money it shouldn’t spend it on other things, but I do appreciate the thought.

The mysterious attack on the Gergels

12 Replies

A few days ago, I was sent this PDF file, which was attached to an e-mail that proclaimed, "Belinda Gergel Lies on Ethics Report." The accusation of lying, as near as I can determine, is unsupported, and therefore reprehensible. (The e-mail was forwarded to me by a Brian Boyer supporter who was unable to tell me where it originated.)

What you will see if you call up the document is that it includes scans of a lot of documents, including Belinda Gergel‘s SEC filing that explains that her husband is the president of Gergel, Nickles and Solomon, P.A., but under "Income and Benefits from State and Local Agencies in South Carolina" for the past year, cites only pay that she received for part-time teaching at the College of Charleston.

The implication is that she and/or her husband received income from work that Richard Gergel’s law firm did for the city. Richard Gergel answers the charge this way:

Brad:
      This document is floating around as part of a smear campaign against Belinda. There is no secret that I have done legal work for the city for many years, just like I have done for many other governmental agencies in S.C. including the Governor, the Supreme Court, the Budget and Control Board, the State Retirement System and the Workers Compensation Commission.
      When Belinda decided to run, we resolved that I would cease all work for the city once she was elected. I realized last October that I had no outstanding projects with the city and thought it was a good time to cut off any further work on my part. I wrote Council and have done no work for the city since that time. We also arranged that any work done by other members of my firm would be under a legal entity in which I have no financial interest and even with that Belinda would recuse herself from all votes relating to those legal services.
      Further, the smear states that the firm has paid an "estimated" rate of $300 per hour. Where do they get these things? The firm has never been paid more than $140 per hour for legal work, which is a significant discount from our normal hourly rate.
      I suspect this is just the beginning of the smear that will come over the next two weeks. Makes you wonder why you would ever seek to run for public office. You live an entire life of honor and integrity and have a bunch of folks hiding behind the anonymity of the internet to smear you. If they have something important to say, why are they insisting on communicating anonymously?

Richard Gergel

No one has come forward to defend the attack. When they do. I’ll be glad to present you with that argument as well.

A footnote: Richard Gergel does not know exactly where the PDF originated, but he did share with me something he had obtained: "the original FIOA request from a Charleston law firm seeking information on my legal work with the city." Here is a PDF , provided by Mr. Gergel, of that FOI request.

Mr. Gergel notes that:

The letter is dated May 2, 2007 but the fax transmittal of the firm indicates that it was sent May 7, 2007. Belinda began telling people she was considering the race in late April 2007 and the first press mention of her candidacy was May 3, 2007. These guys have been cooking this thing up from the moment she began her candidacy but have apparently been holding the smear back until late, apparently hoping to do it at a time and in a manner that Belinda could not defend herself.

Anybody who has other thoughts to share on this subject — and especially anyone who can add to our knowledge of the document’s origins — this would be the place to share.

The hottest City Council race money can buy

10 Replies

By BRAD WARTHEN
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR
MY QUOTE of the week — I don’t usually name a quote of the week, but I’ll make an exception — is from Charles T. “Bud” Ferillo:
“We will not be outspent.”
Bud was speaking in his capacity as campaign consultant to Belinda Gergel, who is seeking the 3rd District Columbia City Council seat being vacated by Anne Sinclair. This will, by all accounts, be the most expensive City Council district race ever in Columbia, with most of it spent by Ms. Gergel and rival Brian Boyer. A third candidate, Reed Swearingen, is running a much lower-key campaign.
Mr. Boyer started running a TV ad Wednesday depicting photos of him as a Dreher High School athlete and Army officer serving in Afghanistan and Iraq. In all, he plans to spend $50,000 on television between now and the April 1 election, out of a total campaign budget of $130,000 to $140,000.
Belinda Gergel has raised $164,000, and had not intended to use any of it for TV, but that changed this past week — her own campaign commercial started airing early Friday morning. (You can see both ads, plus video from our endorsement interviews with the candidates, on my blog at thestate.com/bradsblog/.)
Where does all the money come from? Mr. Boyer’s is replete with the names of local builders and Realtors, including that of Don Tomlin — the candidate’s brother-in-law and president of the homebuilding company of which Mr. Boyer is a vice president. Other names include Kirkman Finlay III and Gayle Averyt, who have been allied with Mr. Tomlin.
Ms. Gergel’s rather longer list includes a lot of names long associated with local political activism, such as Joel Lourie, Ed Sellers, Bill Boyd, J. Lewis Cromer, Zoe Nettles, Barbara Moxon … and Bud Ferillo.
Those lists play into the conventional wisdom that, despite City Council being nonpartisan, the two most visible candidates represent distinct, rival factions:
Mr. Boyer, a homebuilder, is seen as the “developer” candidate, representing the political faction led by Mr. Tomlin, who has also backed council members Tameika Devine, Kirkman Finlay III and Daniel Rickenmann. Ms. Gergel, as the past president of Historic Columbia Foundation, is perceived as the “preservationist” candidate, representing Mayor Bob Coble and other Democrats. (Never mind that Mr. Tomlin et al. supported Mr. Coble’s re-election in 2006; “conventional wisdom” overlooks such things.)
Ms. Gergel, the retired head of the history and political science departments at Columbia College, rejects that pigeonhole, stressing that “I believe in the nonpartisanship of this election.” And indeed, among her contributors are names such as Jack Van Loan, a Five Points business leader and confidante of John McCain.
“As far as this ‘camps’ thing,” Ms. Gergel says, “I don’t know where this is coming from, and I have no idea why someone would focus on what camp Belinda would be in. I am a strong, independent woman; that is what Columbia College did for me as a student, and what we worked on as faculty to encourage in our students. I have no permanent enemies and no personal friends on councilæ….”
And as the daughter of a developer herself, she was not brought up to be “anti-development.” She says she’s for smart development that enhances existing communities, and fully understands how vital such growth is to the local economy.
Mr. Boyer laughs off talk of factions, and of the Tomlin connection says he can’t help who his sister happened to marry. “I’m about as independent as they come.” As for the folks who are supposedly behind him, “none of them were there in the mountains of Afghanistan” or the “deserts of Iraq,” where he earned the Bronze Star before returning home to become a homebuilder.
“I sort of feel that I’ve proved myself, and proved my decision-making ability, long before I knew those guys.”
And he takes great pride in the kind of development he has been able to do, including homes priced for low-income buyers in the Arsenal Hill area.
In our endorsement interviews, all of the candidates stressed public safety issues — Mr. Boyer suggesting his military experience qualifies him in that area, Ms. Gergel speaking of her own experiences dealing with crime in her University Hill neighborhood, and Mr. Swearingen promising to spend more on police whatever the political cost.
All three decried the lack of accountability recently with regard to city finances. Messrs. Boyer and Swearingen both favor switching to a “strong-mayor” form of government to make city administration more answerable to the voters. Ms. Gergel, a veteran of the commission that considered changing city government, said she went in as a strong-mayor advocate, but realized it’s not going to happen politically, so the thing to do is “fix the system that we have now.”
This isn’t the only City Council race on the ballot — three challengers are running to unseat at-large member Daniel Rickenmann. We’ll get to that one another day.

Have an awesome time — responsibly, of course

bradwarthen.com

All The News That Gives You Fits