PRIMARY CANDIDATE ANALYSIS FINAL PHASE

BERKELEY COUNTY SUPERVISOR

This race has been in a constant state of flux for months. The field has changed many times. Finally, the race has shaken out with three candidates running, Minnie Blackwell, Henry Brown, and the incumbent, Dan Davis. Unlike the last Supervisor's race, a majority of Berkeley County citizens are involved, interested, and taking sides in this one. The Blackwell camp insists Brown should stick with his original plan to retire but their bottom line is, "Anyone but Davis". The Brown camp politely touts Brown's experience and genuine concern for the County but is prepared to take off the gloves on the issues. The Davis camp is sticking to form and spreading as many lies as possible to divert attention from the Davis record. We haven't gotten to the "flyers in the mailbox" phase yet but GE&P firmly believes, considering Mr. Davis' track record, this will be one of the dirtiest campaigns we have seen lately.

MINNIE BLACKWELL

Ms. Blackwell is the current Mayor of Hanahan. We would be safe to say she is no friend of the present Supervisor, Dan Davis. These two have had their issues for many years. Ms. Blackwell wants Mr. Davis out of office. On this issue, we agree with her completely.

Ms. Blackwell is very passionate in her campaign style. She is energetic and enthusiastic. But, being as Hanahan has an administrator form of government, Ms. Blackwell does not have the hands on experience necessary for the position of Supervisor in a county the size of Berkeley. We have seen what happens when a person is elected Supervisor but does not possess the necessary expertise. For this reason, we cannot support Ms. Blackwell's efforts.

DAN DAVIS

Analyzing Mr. Davis' record as Supervisor and listing his shortcomings is somewhat akin to trying to decide where to start the cleanup the morning after Hugo. There is so much to chose from. We will attempt to be brief but, if you are a regular reader, you know how well that will turn out. For brevity's sake, we will confine our analysis to only the false statements made by Mr. Davis at the Republican Breakfast on April 3, 2010.

FIRST LIE: On countless occasions (including the breakfast)and three times in the Berkeley Independent, Mr. Davis has said he is responsible for "the first balanced budget in BC in 18 years". To believe this, we would have to set aside the statute that requires a balanced budget. Also, we would have to disregard the county records that contain the budget books and yearly audits. Anyone who is interested can consult these records and learn the truth. These records contain the yearly amount (fiscal year) of revenue collected, the amount of expenditures, and the difference between the two. When this amount is in the positive, as it was before Mr. Davis took office, the budget is balanced and you have a surplus. When this number is in the negative (in brackets) you have a deficit and the budget is not balanced. Unlike the budgets prior to 2007, Mr. Davis' numbers have been in the negative every year since he took office. He has not balanced his budget once. Our statements are not a matter of opinion. They are statements reflecting official records.

SECOND LIE: Mr. Davis has said "he has increased the Fund Balance which was dangerously low when he took office". This statement is very interesting. The fact is, when Mr. Davis took office, the Fund Balance was at 16.78% or $7,289,721. After he was in office for one year, the Fund Balance fell to 9.61% or $4,707,489. By the second year, the Fund Balance fell further to 7.46% or $3,780,604. By the third year, the Fund Balance went back up to 9.28% or $4,737,383. Since the Fund Balance needs to be at least 15% to be considered healthy, how could Mr. Davis make his statement? It was 16.78% when he took office and is at 9.28% now. Technically, he added a small amount back from his all time low but isn't that a bit like taking $90 from your $100 savings account, then adding back $10 and bragging that you have added to your savings? Mr. Davis seems to take great pride in distorting the truth by playing with words.

THIRD LIE: Mr. Davis has said he saved the county a pile of money by paying off the debt to Santee Cooper and that of Cypress Gardens. When Mr. Davis took office there was an agreement between BC and Santee Cooper that BC would make an annual payment to Santee Cooper on their $5 million loan with money in the form of fee in lieu of taxes received from Google. This Google money amounted to approximately $1.2 million annually. This arrangement would have satisfied the loan in less than 5 years without affecting the remainder of the budget. Instead of following this plan, Mr. Davis borrowed $10 million, interest free, from BC Water and Sanitation to pay off Santee Cooper and the debt of Cypress Gardens. BC still owes the money, just to someone else. No accounting has ever been made as to where the Google money is now being spent. As to the Cypress Gardens issue , that deal is exactly like taking money out of one of your pockets and putting it into the other as BC owns the Gardens. No one seems to know where that $4 million went either. It's all smoke and mirrors.

FOURTH LIE: At the April Republican Breakfast, Mr. Davis painted on his cute face and laughed about his run- in with council on the "rebranding " issue. Mr. Davis said the entire issue "was a big misunderstanding". The fact is that Mr. Davis came to Council with a proposal to change the logo for the BC Water and Sanitation Authority. This proposal meant changing to new letterheads, business cards, branch office signs, water tower signs, and the huge sign on the new W&S building. Council decided this change would be a waste of tax payers' money in difficult economic times and rejected the proposal. Mr. Davis ignored the decision of Council and went on and did it anyway. Council took umbrage at Mr. Davis usurping its authority and called him on his actions. At that point, Mr. Davis defended his actions by contending it would cost too much money to change everything back. Council was forced into a compromise and Mr. Davis got part of what he originally wanted. There was no misunderstanding. The BC Council is the controlling legal authority of BC government and Mr. Davis willfully violated the will of Council. Mr. Davis' conduct concerning this issue was blatant and not funny in the least.

FIFTH LIE: Get out your calculator. As candidates began filing in the 2010 Republican Primary, salary figures for the various elected offices became public. It was learned that the salary for the office of Supervisor had gone from $110,000 in 2006 to $131,000 in 2010. This revelation raised a lot of eyebrows. Everyone wanted to know how the Supervisor could have gotten a $21,000 raise over the past three years when all County employees had taken a pay cut in the form of unpaid furlough days. Fear not, Mr. Davis has a simple explanation. He contends that "his starting salary was $119,000 and he received two 5% mandated COLA and Merit raises" bringing his salary to $131,000. He says "he had no control" over his pay raises.

First, lets look at the starting salary. If you look at the records of the Election Commission, you will clearly see the filing fee for the 2006 primary was based upon the Supervisor's salary of $110,000. This fact is supported by Mr. Davis' Statement of Economic Disclosure to the Ethics Commission in 2007 and, again, in 2008, where he reported his County income as being $110,000. When one is trying to support the unsupportable, a paper trail known as official documents can become very problematic. Everyone can go on the various web sites and read the facts presented here. If Mr. Davis' latest contention is in fact true, then the Election Commission, the Ethics Commission, and Mr. Davis' contemporary filings have to all be wrong. This strains reason.

Now, let's address the 1999 Resolution that, according to Mr. Davis, forced him to take a 5% COLA/Merit raise in 2007. The 1999 Resolution was very simple. It stated that, if County employees get a COLA and/or Merit raise, elected officials would get the same raise. Equally, if elected officials get a COLA and/or Merit raise, County employees would get the same raise. That's it. Coincidentally, check the minutes of the November 2007 Council meetings and you will find there were no COLA or Merit raises in the 2007/2008 budget. That's why Council passed a Resolution in December 2007 for a one time, one extra week's pay to county employees. There were no COLA/ Merit raises in the 2008/2009 budget either. Along with the no COLA/Merit raises, in the 2009/2010 budget, the unpaid furloughs were added. So, how did Mr. Davis get a COLA/Merit raise in 2008?

According to the official record, (including Mr. Davis' own filings) Mr. Davis' salary in 2007 was $110,000. According to the official record, there were no COLA/Merit raises since 2007. Still, Mr. Davis' present salary is $131,000. Where is the media on this issue?

SIXTH LIE: An April 2010 breakfast attendee asked Mr. Davis why he had not attended the breakfast in over three and a half years. Mr. Davis explained that he was caring for his aged parents and just didn't have the time to attend. Another attendee voiced the opinion that it didn't seem unreasonable for the Supervisor to take just a couple of hours every few months to come to the breakfast and bring the tax payers up to date on County business.

We were present at the last breakfast the Supervisor attended prior to April 2010. It was in July of 2006, right after the Primary run-off. The majority of the attendees of the breakfast that day were livid with Mr. Davis over one of his campaign flyers that had been mailed out two weeks before the run-off. Mr. Davis' flyer asserted that his opponent, Mr. Rozier, had taken five thousand dollars ($5,000) of BC tax payers' money to purchase a box at the football field at Clemson. A full two weeks before the flyer was mailed out, the Post & Courier had printed an in-depth article refuting this assertion. The P&C article had statements by Clemson officials explaining the legitimate purpose of the $5,000 check from BC to Clemson. For the P&C story, Mr. Rozier had provided his cancelled, personal check that reflected his payment for the football box. Numerous people at this breakfast reproached Mr. Davis for sending out his flyer containing what was known to be false accusations. Mr. Davis made no apologies for his action but this was his last visit to the breakfast until April 2010.

Since our fingers are getting tired and we know your eyes are getting tired, we will save issues like the reduction in the economic development status of BC by the State, the threat of downgrading BC's credit rating, water lines to no where as political payoffs, and other issues, until another time. Suffice it to say, GE&P does NOT support the reelection of Supervisor Davis.

HENRY BROWN: Mr. Brown's resume is diverse and impressive. He began his career working for the Piggle Wiggle Corp. He remained with them for 27 years. These years in the private sector provided him with a view of life from the working man's perspective that he has never forgotten. Stemming from a desire to contribute to the betterment of his community, Mr. Brown decided to seek public office. Mr. Brown stood for and was elected to the City Council of Hanahan. In 1985, thinking that he had more to contribute, he was elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives and remained there until 2000. During this time at the State level, Mr. Brown demonstrated his business sense and fiscal conservatism by leading the effort to secure the biggest property tax relief in the State's history and, after the establishment of the Infrastructure Bank Board, securing the new Arthur Ravenel Bridge. Examples of Mr. Brown's conservative thinking and actions are to be found in his record. To innumerate them all here would look too much like a laundry list. Suffice it to say, Mr. Brown worked very hard and successfully for the people of SC and of Berkeley County.

Mr. Brown was elected to the US Congress in 2000. During his tenure, Mr. Brown secured millions of dollars for highway projects in BC. He secured money for new technology for BC law enforcement. He protected our defense industries and prevented SPAWAR from being closed. In the latter part of the Bush administration, Mr. Brown voted for the first half of the TARP, having received assurances that there would be strict oversight of the disbursements of the funds. As time passed and it became evident that the promised oversight was non-existent, Mr. Brown withdrew his support. Mr. Brown actively opposed the second half of TARP, the GM bailout, the Stimulus Bill, and the Healthcare Bill.

During Mr. Brown's years of public service he has learned how to deal successfully with a myriad issues. He is comfortable negotiating with top executives and has the business experience to handle the most complicated of issues. Even though Mr. Brown's years of experience and fields of expertise are of the utmost importance as qualifications for the office of Berkeley County Supervisor, there are other elements to Mr. Brown's makeup that are of far more import to us. Mr. Brown has the reputation of being an unwavering fiscal Conservative. He, also, is known for his honesty and integrity. After our experiences over the last three and one half years, it would be a relief to hear our Supervisor say, "Good Morning" and not feel the necessity of looking out the window to see if the sun is shining.

For all these reasons, especially the honesty element, GE&P wholeheartedly, and with great enthusiasm supports Mr. Brown's bid for the office of BC Supervisor.