Sunday, August 28, 2011

FACTS DON'T SUPPORT SWMP FEES

The list of attempted justifications for a new SWMP FEE has proven to be as changeable as our low country weather. Each time one of the supporting statements made by one of Mr. Davis' administration is proven untrue, these folks miraculously come up with yet another. One would think that embarrassment alone would deter any further changes in tack. Apparently not.

When this issue first reared its ugly head several weeks ago, GE&P's first reaction was that "somebody's not telling us the truth". As the situation has developed, we are forced to consider an additional possibility, namely, many of the County employees tasked with getting this fee into place (come hell or high water) have not fully educated themselves as to the facts.

Early on, GE&P called for a fact-finding meeting with the Engineering Department. Our group was given many "facts" at that time that, upon investigation, turned out to be erroneous.

ALLEGED: BC is in danger of being fined for non-compliance with the SWMP.

TRUTH: As it turns out, we are in full compliance as we are operating under an extension of the old permit while the new one is being finalized. (Letters Dan Davis/Ann Clark, DEHEC dated 1/4/11, 1/12/11. and 1/14/11)

ALLEGED: The list of requirements contained in the new permit is extensive.

TRUTH: According to documents from DEHEC, Columbia, there are exactly 6 new requirements included in the new permit. 2 concern public education and involvement, 3 concern activities already being addressed by departments of BC government under existing BC Ordinances , and 1 concerns assurance to DEHEC that BC government, itself, is following the Rules.

ALEGED: The new requirements will impose a new heavy workload on BC.

TRUTH: BC already has Ordinances in place which address almost all of the requirements of the SWMP. Please consult BC Codes ( not limited to) Chapter 11, Article III, Chapter 26- Division 4- 26-61, Chapter 47, and Chapter 59.

ALLEGED: The SWMP would not require any additional employees.

TRUTH: NOW, it is contended that the program will require an additional engineer.

ALLEGED: Many BC employees involved in this issue will require extensive new training.

TRUTH: Being as these employees are already overseeing most of the issues connected to the requirements of the SWMP under BC Ordinance, they have been receiving regular required training.

ALEGED: Any training needed is VERY expensive.

TRUTH: BC employees now receive any needed training from the SC Institute of Governments at USC at a cost of $90 a course of study.

ALLEGED: BC is required to compile special expensive ariel photograph maps to comply with the requirements.

TRUTH: Under IDDE, ".......and, if possible, GPS and photograph."

ALLEGED: Additional funds will be required to pay for the man-hours required for compliance.

TRUTH: SWMP requirements parallel existing BC Ordinances. Compliance is already part of the job descriptions of existing employees.

This issue contains so many elements that it is very easy to get your eye off the ball. We must all endeavor to avoid allowing the superfluous components to cloud the main point which is, the new fee is not necessary. BC has salaried employees who are addressing the main issues of the SWMP at this time. The additional requirement is that BC sends an annual report of all the pertinent activities to DEHEC.

There is one additional fact that demands a mention. Under existing BC Ordinances, contractors must conform to an extensive list of requirements when they initiate a new project. Each step of this process requires a permit fee. The total sum of these fees is sizable. Also, following BC Ordinances, many of the fees cover elements included, in turn, in the SWMP. So, as we can clearly see, these elements of the SWMP impose no additional financial burden on BC government.

BC government has several Departments and Divisions of Departments that have historically addressed many of the issues involved with the SWMP: BCW&SA, Planning, Engineering, Flood Plans Review, Roads & Bridges, and Code Enforcement, to name a few. After reviewing official government documents and connecting the obvious dots, it is abundantly clear that Mr. Davis' ultimate plan is to transfer, from the General Fund and onto a new source of revenue, as much of the expense as possible that is involved in operating these Departments . Evidence that our conclusion is right on the mark is demonstrated in the administration's "Projected Cost Table". When the cost of the projected work is compared to the requirements of existing BC Ordinances, it is clear that these expenditures are being double billed or, at the very least, padded.

GE&P would encourage everyone to attend the SWMP Workshop on Monday evening, 8/29/11, at 6PM at the Supervisor's conference room. Being as Mr. Davis is so committed to compliance with the DEHEC mandate and that 1/3 of the new permit requirements are devoted to Public Education and Input, we are certain he will welcome your questions and comments. Ya think?









5 comments:

Capt Elaine Magliacane said...

So I wonder will Berkeley County's new Tea Party Councilman Bob Call be voting FOR or AGAINST this new fee?

Anonymous said...

Capt Elaine, remember, Bob Call publicly stated that he did not see a poblem with our County "making a profit"!! With that new information, how do you think he is going to vote?? Don't worry, I know your answer!!

Anonymous said...

GE&P, another outstanding job of revealing the leadership style of Dan Davis that, unfortunately, extended his time in office! Interesting that his supporters don't support him in your blog, letters to the editor of the Berkeley Independent, Post in Courier, his public County meetings, or during Council Meetings! He is in serious financial trouble with his "pet" project at Jeburg so he will resort to "anything" to come up with revenue to salvage it!! And by the way, our current Stornwater Management Program will cover any new industry locating to that site! They only have to worry about the already exorbitant fees placed on current and new businesses!! Please come to the meetings and let your concerns be heard!!

Anonymous said...

Are you going to have this information printed and available to the press if they show up??? Great stuff but if it just sits here of your blog the other side wins. You do such a wonderful job with your research it needs wider distribution.

Anonymous said...

Federal Regulations and present State Regulations do not require Towns under 10,000 to comply. Mr. Jack says he is looking for fairness and thinks it's unfair for the people living in the unincorporated area to be the only ones paying, what a joke. If the city of Charleston has a SWP then Berkeley County can not collect a fee for the same purpose. The same for that portion of Summerville that is in Berkeley County. The rest of the incorporated areas of BC can't have a fee imposed on them unless they want to join the County's program. It's typical of State Government and DHEC in particular to create convoluted rules that can have a number of different entities doing the same job. In the case of Storm Water, there will be hundreds of entities created. Of course with hundreds of entities to monitor, DHEC gets fatter and government get
bigger.

Council is being threatened with $20,000 per day fines for non-compliance. If we have already been doing the job, and have applied for a new permit without imposing a fees' WHAT'S UP. If we have been doing the job without paid consultants, why do we need them now? Can you say CASH COW.

Why will no one explain how they arrived at $18 for mobile homes and $36 for stick built house.