By Mike McCombs
The Island News
“Who can trust us if we rescind votes?” Beaufort County Council Chair Alice Howard said, summing up her thoughts at Monday night’s Beaufort County Council meeting.
Shortly after her statement, Howard held a roll-call vote on Councilman Logan Cunningham’s motion to rescind the 10-1 vote from the Sept. 22 Council meeting that upheld the Cultural Protection Overlay (CPO) installed on St. Helena Island years ago and denied a Pine Island development agreement put forth by the representative developer Elvio Tropeano.
And with a 6-4 “No” vote Monday, the Pine Island developer was once again dealt a setback in his efforts to put an 18-hole golf course and 49 houses on the property, which would ultimately be a gated golf resort.
Bluffton’s Cunningham, who is running as a Republican for the 1st Congressional District seat currently held by Nancy Mace, announced publicly at a November meeting his intention to make the motion, which was seconded by Councilwoman Paula Brown.
“I agree,” Cunningham said, as the overflow crowd of roughly 200 people inside the newly renovated Council chambers, as well as in the overflow room and out in the hallway, groaned at his motion. “I hate that we have to be here again doing this …”
According to Cunningham, there was simply no way that Council had made an educated decision in September with only just a couple days to accurately evaluate the development agreement proposed by the developers.
Cunningham made a passionate argument that his goal in rescinding the vote is consistent with his long and well known desire to limit the number of new homes being built, not just on Pine Island, but in the entire county. His argument was that the golf course resort plan lowers that number significantly, reminding those in attendance that without Council’s approval, more than 100 homes and nearly 100 docks could be built on Pine Island under the full-density plan.
“The first 40 [permits] have already been applied for” just a few days ago, he said.
There was debate among the Council members about whether, in this particular case, the vote could even be rescinded under Robert’s Rules of Order.
During the time Councilman York Glover spoke, County Attorney Brian Hubert was asked to the podium to address the legality of the potential rescission of the vote. Hubert advised that they could discuss it among themselves, but if he was to give advice, he recommended going into executive session. Otherwise, he said, the Council would be forfeiting their attorney-client privilege by discussing it in open session.
When pressed, Glover waved his hands and declined to make a motion to move to executive session.
Councilman David Bartholomew, an attorney and the Council’s parliamentarian, said though it might be unpopular, he believed a rescission of the vote would be permitted in this scenario. He also said there was an offer on the table, if Council rescinded this vote, that one of the two lawsuits by the Pine Island developers against the County would be dropped.
As an attorney looking to protect the County taxpayers, that is something that I would have to consider, Bartholomew said.
Vice Chair Anna Tabernik said her vote in the early morning hours of Sept. 23 was an educated one and her mind hadn’t changed. And rescinding a vote was a dangerous precedent to set.
Clearly, Howard agreed.
Ultimately, Howard, Tabernik, Glover, Joe Passiment, Gerald Dawson, and Mark Lawson voted against rescinding the vote. Cunningham, Brown, Bartholomew and Thomas Reitz voted in favor of rescission.
When the vote concluded, around 8 p.m., the majority of the crowd celebrated.
It was a different scene than what surrounded the original 10-1 vote to not move forward with the development agreement.
That meeting saw more than 500 people attend a 7½-hour public hearing that saw more than 50 people speak. Just 10 spoke this time, including Tropeano and his lawyer Kevin Dukes of Harvey and Battey.
Mike McCombs is the editor of The Island News and can be reached at TheIslandNews@gmail.com.
