Recent Posts

Voters Continue Demand for Rice Resignation

Since voting to impeach President Donald Trump last week, 7th Congressional District Rep. Tom Rice has heard a rising wave of voices calling for him to resign or be defeated at his next election in two years.

Various local and state Republican organizations have run the gamut from strong denunciations of Rice’s vote to outright calls for the Congressman to resign immediately. The overriding theme of these statements is that Rice’s vote to impeach fails to represent the wishes of the voters in his Congressional district.

Stories and interviews about the Rice vote on both traditional media and social media venues have drawn a ratio of negative to positive comments about his vote to impeach of approximately 80% – 20%.

It is fair to say Rice has drawn more attention and comment about this one vote that he has in total about the rest of the eight years he has been in Washington.

One rumor being passed around the county is that Rice made a deal with the Democratic leadership in the House to vote for impeachment in exchange for funding for Interstate 73.

I find that one pretty far-fetched as the Democrats had the votes necessary to impeach Trump without Rice. Why make a deal like that for a vote when you already control the majority? Nevertheless, such is the type of frenzied comment that arises in today’s fractured political climate.

What is interesting is the absolute silence that has been heard from all the local politicians who used to flock to Rice events for photo ops with the Congressman when he was in town. Why aren’t Reps. Heather Ammons Crawford, Russell Fry and Case Brittain at least defending Rice’s right to vote as his conscience dictates on this or any issue?

Brittain gushed gratitude when he received Rice’s endorsement in the special election for the statehouse seat he won last summer. No defense for the man he was so happy to have on his side then or, conversely, no outcry as his constituents have voiced?

Continue Reading →

Tom Rice Voted His Retirement Wednesday

By voting to impeach President Donald Trump on Wednesday, South Carolina 7th Congressional District Representative Tom Rice effectively announced his retirement from Congress.

Representing one of the most solidly pro-Trump districts in the nation, Rice’s vote drew nearly 3,000 Facebook comments in a matter of a few hours after his vote. The overwhelming majority of those comments were telling Rice he would never get their vote again and he should immediately retire.

There has always been a debate about whether a Congressman’s vote should represent the wishes of his constituents or that by electing him, his constituents effectively give him permission to vote as he determines proper.

Most congressmen do some of both, but occasionally an issue arises that most congressmen understand that they must vote the wishes of their constituents or suffer the consequences. The question of whether or not to impeach the president was just such an issue in the 7th Congressional District and Rice either didn’t understand the mood of his constituents or just didn’t care.

It’s interesting to note that local officeholders who rush to get Rice’s endorsement at election time and always show up for a photo op with him when he is in town, Luke Rankin, Heather Ammons Crawford, Cam Crawford, Russel Fry and newly elected Case Brittain quickly come to mind, have offered no defense of Rice on this issue.

They understand discretion is the better part of valor on this issue and defending Rice’s vote would only serve to put their future election prospects in peril.

While the overwhelming number of Republican voters in Horry County, who also happen to be the overwhelming number of voters in the county, condemned Rice’s vote, he did garner thanks from the county Democrats.

A press release by the Horry County Democratic Party said in part, “Jan. 13, 2021 — The Horry County Democratic Party today thanked Rep. Tom Rice (R-SC-7) for joining nine other Republicans and every Democrat in the House of Representatives to impeach President Donald Trump.”

Continue Reading →

Lawsuit Challenging Proposed Campground Sale Latest Myrtle Beach Demonstration of Bad Public Policy

The pending lawsuit between Horry County and the City of Myrtle Beach over the proceeds from the proposed sale of the city owned portion of Pirateland and Lakewood campgrounds highlights another example of poor public policy that has been the lowlight of incumbent Mayor Brenda Bethune and city council’s last three years in office.

This will be at least the fourth major lawsuit involving the city, three of which have Horry County on the opposing side, since Bethune took office.

The lawsuit that does not include Horry County was brought by merchants affected by a supposed “family friendly overlay zone” on Ocean Boulevard that prohibits the sale of certain items which are readily available and sold throughout the remainder of the city.

These prohibitions appear to be not only a violation of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees equal application of the law, but since over 90 percent of the affected businesses are Jewish owned, also appear to be discriminatory and anti-Semitic. Bethune led the charge in passing these discriminatory restrictions by city council.

Unequal application of the law and discrimination against a certain segment of the business community is certainly bad public policy.

In the three lawsuits involving Horry County, it appears the city was attempting to get its hands on pots of money that the city used extremely suspect logic to lay claims to,

One lawsuit has the county and Horry County School District suing the city over alleged misuse of approximately $20 million in TIF funds collected from Market Common.

A second lawsuit was initiated by the city against Horry County for hospitality fee collection. In this one, the city attempted to allege that the county has been illegally collecting hospitality fees in the city since January 1, 2017 and was looking to lay claim to over $100 million in funds.

Continue Reading →

War on the Shore Provides Covid Break

If you are looking for a break from the boring Covid routine we are all suffering through, tune in to Sinclair Broadcasting’s WWMB CW21 channel at 7 p.m. this coming Friday night to watch what will be one of the best high school football games played in this area in many years.

The North Myrtle Beach Chiefs will host the Myrtle Beach Seahawks at “The Hank” at 7 p.m. the day after Thanksgiving for the Class AAAA Lower State football championship, a game being billed as the “War on the Shore.”

This game will be a rematch of the region championship game played at the same location three weeks ago. North Myrtle Beach won that game going away by a 34-6 margin over a Seahawks team that was depleted by injuries at the time.

That is not to take anything away from North Myrtle Beach. The Chiefs came out and served notice early in the game that there was only one result they would accept – a win over their main rival to the south and the region championship that would come with it.

Since that game, North Myrtle Beach (8-0), ranked number 2 in the state in Class AAAA by MAXPREPS, has methodically blasted its way through the first two rounds of state playoff games by scores of 41-12 over James Island and 35-10 over North Augusta.

Myrtle Beach (7-2) is ranked number 5 in Class AAAA. The Seahawks got their injured starters back to full health just prior to the start of the state playoffs. Having to travel on the road for their first two playoff games, Myrtle Beach defeated South Aiken 42-17 and a very good Beaufort team by a 49-37 margin.

Both the Chiefs and the Seahawks are expected to be at full strength for Friday night’s game. Both teams have explosive offenses and solid defenses.

Tickets are already sold out under the restricted rules during Covid times. If this were a normal year, there would be a standing only, overflow crowd in North Myrtle Beach for the game.

But, Friday night in front of your television from 7 to approximately 10 p.m. for a quality produced, top notch high school football game will be the next best thing to being there. It will be worth the watch.

Before closing, I want to give kudos to WPDE and Sinclair Broadcasting for televising its Friday Night Rivals local high school football games.

Continue Reading →

Hospitality Fee Lawsuit – What Does Myrtle Beach Really Want

With the City of Myrtle Beach announcing last week it plans to appeal the judge’s order on a settlement of the hospitality fee lawsuit it brought against Horry County, it appears the city has taken the stance of ‘my way or the highway’ on the lawsuit issue.

Everything has been settled and agreed to between the parties in the lawsuit except for the disbursement of approximately $19 million the county collected in the various city jurisdictions in the county between March and August 2019.

Horry County asked the judge to order that money be returned to the city’s in which it was collected. The judge agreed.

Myrtle Beach requested one half of those funds be returned to the cities and one-half established as a fund from which it may pay out refunds to individuals who paid the hospitality fee between the above months with any unclaimed amount going to the South Carolina Bar Association’s fund for legal services for low income residents.

Under the county plan, Myrtle Beach would receive $11,170,800 of the approximately $19 million total. This money could be spent on infrastructure and public safety services associated with tourism, according to state law.

Under the city plan, Myrtle Beach would receive $5,585,400. Why would the city want to receive less money and why would it appeal a judge’s order that awarded it more?

The dispute over the settlement money split is about interpretation of Rule 23 of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, which deals with class action lawsuits.

Myrtle Beach issued the following statement as an explanation, “This appeal is necessary to finally determine the rights of the other members of the class — those who paid the Hospitality Fee to Horry County during the period when it was in dispute — regarding distribution of the portion of the $19 million common fund that was not otherwise resolved by the settlement agreement.

Myrtle Beach Mayor Brenda Bethune and City Manager John Pedersen have both added the city’s attorneys said the appeal is necessary in order to shield the city from any potential liability related to a suit that may be brought by a potential claimant.

I have spoken to two attorneys not involved in the lawsuit who said the city is already shielded from any claim by the trial judge’s order. In addition, neither believe this is a class action suit.

Continue Reading →

County Ditches Masks, Cities Hold Firm

Horry County Council Tuesday night voted against passing a new emergency ordinance that would have included and extended requiring the wearing of face masks in public settings or another sixty days.

As a result of the county vote, face mask requirements in the unincorporated areas of the county will halt at midnight October 30, 2020 (the time the current emergency ordinance ends).

At the extreme opposite end of the emergency spectrum, North Myrtle Beach city council voted to extend the requirement to wear face masks in public settings “until the Covid emergency ends,” whenever that may be.

Both councils voted unanimously, North Myrtle Beach to extend the requirements, the county to not pass a new emergency ordinance. However, it appeared there was confusion among county council members who wanted a new emergency ordinance enacted. Immediately after the 12-0 vote, council member Harold Worley made several attempts to have a new mask ordinance voted on. Ultimately, council voted 8-4 to not reconsider the vote on whether to pass a new emergency ordinance with Worley, Gary Loftus, Bill Howard and Dennis DiSabato (those whose districts include Myrtle Beach, North Myrtle Beach and the county areas adjacent) voting for reconsideration.

Somewhere in the middle lies Myrtle Beach at this time. The Myrtle Beach emergency ordinance and face mask requirement currently ends October 30, 2020. However, the last time the ordinance was extended, it was done so with a declaration by Mayor Brenda Bethune and City Administrator John Pederson, not a vote of council. There is no reason to believe these two will not extend the requirements beyond the present October 30 date.

The face mask vs no face mask issue has been framed as one between individual liberty and government interference in what should be personal decisions.

What hasn’t been discussed in the local debate is that no real enforcement of face mask requirements has been made by any public safety entity in the county. Indeed, each of the local governments has admitted they do not have the resources to enforce face mask provisions.

These admissions bring up the question, why pass an ordinance that nobody enforces?

It is better to take the county approach of encouraging the wearing of face masks but not requiring it. The decision should be left up to the individual.

Continue Reading →

County Committee Stops Attempt to Restrict Gun Rights

The latest attempt to restrict the gun rights of Horry County citizens was stopped by a 3-1 No vote of the county’s Public Safety Committee Tuesday.

The vote defeated a motion by county council member Gary Loftus to send a new ordinance to full county council that would have seriously restricted the gun rights of citizens in the unincorporated areas of the county.

The ordinance, as proposed, would have affected a number of gun clubs being able to hunt on their club grounds as well as restricted citizens from hunting on their private property.

In addition, the ordinance proposed to allow individual council members to establish an overlay on their district to restrict gun use in violation of state law.

If passed, it is distinctly possible that citizens in council districts three and four, for example, could not have fired guns anywhere in the district while citizens in, say, districts ten and eleven would have not been affected at all.

Under provisions of equal application of the law, enumerated in state law as well as the 14th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution, such restrictions not applied equally throughout the county would be unconstitutional.

I chose council districts three and four in the above example because, according to numerous sources, council members Loftus and Dennis DiSabato worked closely with county attorney Arrigo Carotti in crafting the proposed ordinance.

This is at least the fifth time this issue has come up in the last eight years. Every time it has been strongly opposed by a number of citizens and in council votes.

Last year, local radio talk show host Chad Caton told council it should concentrate on local needs such as infrastructure rather than attempting to infringe on 2nd Amendment rights.

This is doubly true now. The proposed ordinance was so removed from reality to make one wonder why it was even attempted.

The Ninth U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals, among the most liberal in the nation, recently struck down a California law restricting the size of ammunition magazines. With the inevitable addition of Amy Coney Barrett on the U. S. Supreme Court, there will be a solid conservative 6-3 vote against any attempt to infringe on the rights outlined in the 2nd Amendment.

Continue Reading →

County Council Keeps Mask Mandate Despite Inability to Enforce

By a vote of 7-5, Horry County Council refused to cancel its emergency ordinance, maintaining mask mandates in the unincorporated areas.

Those voting to keep the mask mandate in place were the Deep Six (Dennis DiSabato, Harold Worley, Bill Howard, Gary Loftus, Tyler Servant and Cam Crawford) plus Orton Bellamy (who seems to be drinking more and more of the Kool Aid).

From the discussion by those voting to keep the ordinance in place, Howard, DiSabato and Loftus, it was obvious requiring masks to be worn is not about keeping the public safe. Rather it is about keeping the tourists coming, if possible. Howard said as much during his comments.

Loftus had nothing to add from himself. Instead he read a Facebook post that had been sent to him.

DiSabato attempted to give a history lesson about the smallpox and the Continental Army and a 1793 Yellow Fever breakout in Philadelphia. He told about George Washington requiring his subordinate officers to be inoculated against smallpox. Having never served in uniform, DiSabato probably doesn’t understand that an order from a commanding general has very different authority than a mask mandate from a local government.

As for the yellow fever outbreak, the local authorities in Philadelphia attempted to take some measures in line with the medicine of that time, but the federal government, of which Philadelphia was the capital at that time, had no authority to establish quarantines and the like and did not try to do so.

One other point about the 1793 outbreak – banks extended outstanding notes of businesses until the end of the outbreak with no penalty. Businesses today are suffering from the many demands on their credit, cash flow and employees while being forced into reduced business revenues as a result of the mask and social distancing mandates.

In short, their arguments were all designed to keep the county in line with city mandates, especially Myrtle Beach, to give the appearance that the area is safe for tourists. The Deep Six do as they are told by the Myrtle Beach cabal and Chamber.

Continue Reading →

SkyDive Myrtle Beach Lawsuit Advances to Deposition Stage

After being delayed for six months due to Covid 19 restrictions, depositions in the lawsuit SkyDive Myrtle Beach v. Horry County et al will begin September 30, 2020.

The lawsuit evolved from the county shutting down operations of SDMB and evicting them from the North Myrtle Beach airport using a Director’s Report from the FAA in which 112 alleged safety violations played a large part in the FAA claiming SDMB operations at Grand Strand Airport were unsafe.

This is where things get tricky. The county used an informal means of reporting the alleged safety violations, a county generated form called an “Unusual Incident Report”.

When responding to a Freedom of Information Request for documentation associated with these reports, the county responded by sending the Unusual Incident Reports but no supporting documentation.

A short memorandum from county attorney Arrigo Carotti included with the FOIA response said, “These records are provided in an abundance of caution, in that each may or may not demonstrate violation by Skydive Myrtle Beach of Horry County Department of Airports Minimum Standards, as that assessment has not been undertaken.”

In other words, the county reported SDMB had committed 112 safety violations without ever investigating any, according to Carotti’s memo.

When a FOIA request for documentation on the 112 alleged safety violations was sent to the FAA, the response from Thomas A Winston, Manager Flight Standards Division, Southern Region of the FAA was, “You requested information regarding 112 allegations of safety violations used to make the table in the Director’s Report dated October 7, 2015 by Randall Fiertz. We searched our files maintained in the South Carolina Flight Standards District Office. We could not find any documents responsive to your request.”

The FAA had no documents supporting any of the 112 alleged safety violations. Anytime a suspected safety violation has taken place at an FAA regulated airport, a Mandatory Occurrence Report is supposed to be filed with the FAA and entered into the CEDAR (Comprehensive Electronic Data Analysis and Reporting) system. . No MORs were found in the FAA system with respect to the alleged violations by SDMB.

Continue Reading →

County Council Refused to Discuss Extension of Emergency Ordinance

Using a parliamentary ruse that was erroneous, a majority of Horry County Council voted to have no discussion before extending, for 60 more days, the emergency ordinance controlling countywide requirements and restrictions with respect to the ongoing Covid 19 situation.

Council member Al Allen requested the item calling for an extension of the emergency ordinance be moved from the consent agenda, where there is no discussion on any item before a vote, to a discussion item, where discussion of the extension would have occurred before a vote.

Immediately upon Allen making the request the ruse began. Council member Dennis DiSabato called a point of order stating that changing the agenda in such a matter requires a two-thirds majority vote of council.

County attorney Arrigo Carotti, who also acts as council’s parliamentarian, confirmed to council that this was a requirement.

Subsequent to Carotti’s input, a vote was held in which a motion to move the item to discussion failed by a 5-7 vote with the Deep Six (DiSabato, Harold Worley, Bill Howard, Cam Crawford, Gary Loftus and Tyler Servant) plus Orton Bellamy voting no.

The entire episode appeared to be orchestrated. I don’t believe DiSabato is sharp enough to come up with the objection he raised on his own and Carotti was too quickly on his feet to support DiSabato’s objection.

Orchestrated or not, voting on any council member’s request to move an item from the consent agenda to the regular, or discussion, agenda is counter to over 20 years of precedent on the council dais.

I have covered many county council meetings in the last two decades since the use of a consent agenda came into being under Chad Prosser’s term as chairman. Prosser initiated the consent agenda to accommodate the many rezoning requests of the late 1990’s and early 2000’s by not having each read and considered separately when the reading did not require public review.

Numerous times over that span, a council member has requested an item be moved from consent agenda to a discussion item. The move was always made by the chairman without a vote. I cannot recall one instance in which the change was even questioned.

Continue Reading →
1 … 22 23 24 25 26 … 149