WINNSBORO – After a number of missteps recently by the Accommodations and Hospitality Tax Committee in the process of voting to recommend a total of over $450,000 in awards from state and local accommodation tax revenue to promote tourism in Fairfield County, the county’s Public Information Officer Gene Stephens, who oversees the committee, said he plans to provide the committee with some general procedural rules to follow.
“We don’t have any right now, but we’re working on general rules for the committee,” Stephens said. “So, we will have them written out. It’s not right now, but we’re working on those.”
During the April 21 meeting, Committee Chair Paulette Mumma apologized for not complying with her intent to recuse herself during the March 31 meeting while receiving a request for funding for the Fairfield County Chamber of Commerce. Mumma is a member of the chamber and her daughter is the chamber’s tourism director.
Mumma said it was because of, “my newness and not knowing Roberts Rules or what we were doing and being nervous.”
A majority of the committee members are chamber members or otherwise affiliated with the chamber, according to Stephens.
But only two members, including Mumma, recused themselves and left the room when the Chamber of Commerce came before the committee April 21 to request local accommodation funding to promote tourism in Fairfield County.
Understanding Recusal
The rules of procedure for recusals for public officials and board and committee members are spelled out in Sec. 8-13-700 (B) in the SC code of laws. The rules and procedures for handling conflicts of interest and recusals by committee members are also covered on the Municipal Association of South Carolina’s website under ‘Conflicts and Recusals” in the online brochure ‘Handling Quorums Correctly.’
While state law does not require conflicted members to leave the room during recusal, the State Ethics Commission has long advised that members who recuse themselves from participating in a particular agenda item due to a conflict of interest, should physically leave the room.
Roberts Rules of Order also calls for conflicted board and committee members to leave the room during recusal to avoid any perceived influence on the vote.
According to the Municipal Association of South Carolina’s website, MASC breaks with Roberts Rules when, in an outlying case, it becomes impossible to get a quorum without counting the conflicted members in attendance.
In that case, according to Charlie Barrineau, Field Services Manager with the Municipal Association, “We suggest that the conflicted members properly recuse themselves under the State Ethics Act, but stay physically in the room, and state clearly on the record that their only reason for doing so is the preservation of the quorum.
“But the recused members, if they remain in the room, cannot vote and must sit in silence, not moving, not shaking the head, blinking or whatever to influence the vote,” Barrineau said.
If, however, four of the seven members are conflicted and can’t vote, as few as two members of a seven member committee could end up deciding the outcome of a large money award in a 2-1 vote.
Info Not Passed to Council
One committee member said that all the information regarding the committee’s recommendations was not passed along to council members who voted on the final state accommodations awards on April 26.
“So, the information we provided to council at the last meeting, that information was not shared during that council meeting that I watched in detail,” Councilmember Dwayne Robinson said. “I don’t remember any questions asked by council about the actual information packets themselves.
“To me, it looked like the hard work we put in was not actually passed over [to council] as it should have been,” Robinson said.
While Stephens insisted that the packets of the committee’s recommendations were given to council, Councilwoman Peggy Swearingen stepped to the podium, saying that neither she nor Councilman Don Goldbach received the information in their council packets. Committee member Tina Johnson said Councilman Dan Ruff said he didn’t remember if he got the packet or not.
Mumma assured Swearingen she would follow up and find out why council members didn’t get the state accommodation and hospitality tax award recommendation details in their packet.
The state accommodation tax awards recommended by the Review Committee on April 21, were to be presented to county council for a vote at 6 p.m. during the April 26 county council meeting. Those recommendations, however, were deferred for several reasons, including that the committee was not aware of how much accommodation tax funding was available for the awards; that the Chamber presented two requests for different amounts of funding – one for $199,228.00 submitted to the committee and a different one for $227,228.00 submitted to the finance department to be presented to the county council for a final vote, and that guidance and rules needed to be provided for the committee.
County Administrator Vic Carpenter, asked that the review committee reconvene at 10 a.m., on Monday, May 5 to reconsider the Chamber’s state accommodation tax award for $199,228.00 as well as a $23,288.00 award that was made to the Olde English District without any representative of the OED present to make the request. That meeting was cancelled.
An announcement will be made when the committee meeting will be held to reconsider the April 21 state accommodations tax revenue recommendation.
Five non-profits – the Fairfield Chamber of Commerce, Railroad Museum, Pinetree Playhouse, Wings & Wheels and the Palmetto Trail were previously awarded $197,552 in local accommodations funding by county council.
Three non-profits were not awarded any local funding: Grieving Needs Foundation ($9000 request), The Town of Winnsboro ($79,000) and Set in Stone Sustainable Farm ($7,000).
