During a March 11, 2024, closed-door Executive Session, the company behind “Project Sunny” made an informational presentation to City Council that was described as “flowery” by two Council members.

Prior to the Executive Session, the fact that Project Sunny involved a House of Raeford chicken processing plant was not publicly disclosed within the City Council’s meeting agenda information package. This vital information only emerged after the closed-door session. The City chose not to properly disclose the true nature of its proposed water and sewer services ordinance written on behalf of House of Raeford, thus avoiding considerable citizen objections.

The six House of Raeford representatives who attended the Executive Session chose not to speak during the regular Council meeting, instead leaving City Council members and a few audience members to speak on their behalf.

The South Carolina Freedom of Information Act (SC FOIA) has no exemptions to its Open Meetings laws for generic informational presentations from prospective businesses. As the House of Raeford presentation to Council should have been made in a public forum, the closed-door meeting arguably violated SC FOIA, at least in spirit.

by Don Moniak

(March 28th updated timeline: City Council announced on Monday, March 25th, that it would not proceed with a second public hearing on its Ordinance to provide water and sewer to House of Raeford until AFTER County Council acts on its Resolution to provide a Fee in Lieu of Taxes (FILOT) tax incentive to the company. County Council still has two votes on that matter, the first tentatively scheduled for April 16th, the second for May 7th—which is also the date for a public hearing to be held by County Council.

May 3, 2024 update: On April 16, 2024, Aiken County Council did not move forward on its FILOT tax incentive Ordinance. More details of that event can be found in Sewage Capacity Makes the News.)

Original article: March 25, 2024

As detailed in Executive Session Backgrounder, the open meetings clause of South Carolina’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) allows public bodies to hold closed-door Executive Sessions under certain conditions—but under no condition are closed-door meetings absolutely mandated. The State’s two highest elected officials have made it clear that if there is doubt about whether a meeting should be closed, then it should be open.

The backgrounder cites one example of Aiken City Council conducting a meeting behind closed doors on September 11, 2023, to hear an informational presentation from Aiken Corporation subcontractor McMillan Pazdan and Smith. The presentation by a publicly funded organization obviously should have been made in a public forum, and was arguably a violation of the state’s open meetings law.

Six months to the day after that questionable closed-door Executive Session, Aiken City Council appears to have met yet again in a closed-door Executive Session to hear a mere informational presentation that should have been presented in an open public forum.

History of Project Sunny Closed-Door Sessions

This was the third Executive Session involving Project Sunny, which is now known to involve a House of Raeford chicken processing plant to be located near I-20’s Exit 22 (Figure 1 above); five miles north of Aiken city limits, but within the City of Aiken’s water and sewer district.

The North Carolina-based company, and Project Sunny “sponsor,” is seeking to access more than 30 million gallons per month from the City of Aiken’s surface water supply—approximately 45 percent of the City’s surface water capacity.

The company’s chicken processing plant will also produce similar amounts of wastewater that will enter into the City’s sewer system, ultimately to be processed at Aiken County’s Horse Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant—which is already undergoing capacity issues.

As reported in Another Fifty Percent Off Sale, Aiken City Council, so far, seems to be very willing to help incentivize the company’s project by providing considerable discounts on both water and sewer rates.

The first two closed-door meetings to discuss these incentives were held on November 27, 2023 and January 8, 2024. Project Sunny representatives were not listed as attendees at either of the two meetings.

The March 11th Closed-Door PR Presentation

On March 7, 2024, the City announced the third closed-door Executive Session, to be held at City Council’s March 11th meeting. The notice read:

“City Council will go into Executive Session pursuant to Section 30-4-70(a)(2) and (5) of the South Carolina Code for the discussion of negotiations incident to proposed contractual arrangements and the provision of City services to encourage the location of a new business.

Specifically, City Council will discuss the following:

A discussion regarding the provision of City services to a new business to encourage the location of that business. This project is currently known as ‘Project Sunny.’” (1)

This past Thursday, March 21st, the City released the list of attendees at the March 11th closed-door session; it included “six representatives from Project Sunny.”

Based on the meeting minutes and video archive, at least a portion, if not the entirety, of this closed-door session did not involve a discussion of “contractual arrangements and provision of City Services” and at best only peripherally involved “provision of services to encourage the location of (the) business.”

Instead, a large portion of the closed-door meeting appeared to have involved an informational, public relations presentation by House of Raeford representatives to encourage Council members to accept the business; a presentation that should have been made in full public view.

To make matters worse, prior to the March 11th meeting, the City had declined to publicly disclose the Project Sunny company or the nature of its business. Only after the closed-door session did the City reveal that Project Sunny is a House of Raeford chicken processing plant. The City’s withholding of information from area residents proved to be an effective method to avoid public scrutiny during the first public hearing on its discounted water and sewer services ordinance written on behalf of the company.

The PR Presentation Aftermath

During the regular public meeting, which can be viewed here beginning at the 42:35 mark, not a single House of Raeford representative addressed the audience.

Instead, City Council members relayed the messages from the company’s presentation, with two members describing it as “flowery,” another describing it as “fluff,” and one describing millions of dollars of annual charitable giving from a company that is simultaneously seeking about a few million dollars a year in water and sewer rate discounts.

Councilwoman Gail Diggs initiated the testimonials, stating that:

“I had some questions. We all did. We had a good presentation tonight and we’re pretty pleased with the project, especially how they reach into the community and provide different programs for our young people.” 

(The meeting minutes reflect that Ms. Diggs described the presentation as being held during the Executive Session, even though that was not stated specifically.)

Councilwoman Kay Brohl followed with a more glowing review, stating in part:

“Madame Mayor, may I add on to what Councilman Diggs had just said? This company, it’s unbelievable what they give back to the community. There was a high school prom that could they couldn’t afford, this company underwrote the whole prom. They’ve taken 75 kids to DC and paid for all of their expenses. They’re very involved with the Junior ROTC.  They took some 26 kids on the anniversary of Pearl Harbor to Pearl Harbor. So far this year they’ve given six and a half million back to the community, that’s a pretty large commitment.” 

Councilwoman Lessie Price was the first to describe the presentation as “flowery,” and added, in part, that:

“We had a great meeting, a very informative meeting with the owners. Once we passed the flowery things,some of the things that I personally was concerned about was the environmental things that, as Laverne (Justice) mentioned that you’ve got to be careful about. I believe based on my interaction that they were pretty upfront and honest with what they knew and could determine or predict environmental concerns…They were not afraid of answering honestly with these questions and often times you can tell that someone will give you all the flowers but the details are what we have to look at when it comes to environmental concerns.” 

Councilwoman Price also expressed the desire to “visit some of their locations to see what is there. She said she would report her findings.”

Councilwoman Andrea Gregory spoke last. While she also used the word “flowery,” she later added the presentation involved “fluff” and asked for more environmental information before casting the only dissenting vote on the ordinance. She stated, in part, that:

“I want to thank Project Sunny personnel from House of Rayford for coming and presenting to us. I got tonight probably the bulk of the information that I have received since the beginning, a lot of it was very flowery. I would say a lot of fluff, good fluff, good community supporters. And that’s always nice but it has to do with the business aspect of the details. 

At the end of the day, we have a very valuable resource that we need to make sure that we are upholding, and so that’s where bulk of questions are.

I would love to follow up with you guys to see what what is done for Batesburg, Monetta, and what specifically is done for West Columbia because I didn’t hear about any of those communities and they’re our neighbors….Council took a lot of time to to invest in the Brunswick tract and we need to preserve it, we need to make sure it’s clean. “

She finished her speech by adding:

“I appreciate your presentation with all the fluff but I want to know the specifics as far as the environment is as well.”

The Chicken Plant PR Trip

Less than two weeks later, Councilwomen Diggs, Brohl, and Price did visit a House of Raeford chicken processing facility in North Carolina, along with State Representative Bill Taylor (and others who have yet to be identified).

Representative Taylor, who also worked for decades as a “media consultant,” was the first to publicize the trip by posting a glowing review on a newly created Facebook group page created to address project issues. The posting included a photo of the Raeford family (Figure 3 below), workers in the break room, the chicken drumsticks processing line (Figure 2 above), and a photo of the building exterior. According to Taylor, there were “no feathers and no odor” at the plant.

Because the tour only involved a minority of City Council, the City did not have to be announced in advance. But a few questions that immediately arise about the fact-finding public relations tour include:

• Who decided on which three Council members would attend? 
• Was Councilwoman Gregory, the only Council member to express concerns and a desire to learn more about local facilities before casting the lone dissenting vote on March 11th, invited on the tour? 
• Why has Councilwoman Price, who routinely champions “community meetings” on controversial issues, not yet advocated such a meeting before any tours and final votes, in order to gather community input and questions? 
  
  Commentary
  
  As the timeline (3) for Project Sunny shows, rollout of the House of Raeford project has had all the markings of a typical large economic development project vigorously pursued by local government and involving government subsidies: a decision is made, local officials help mount a public relations effort on behalf of developers, and then citizens are offered heavily filtered information. The closed-door presentation and subsequent North Carolina chicken plant tour had all the markings of the elitist, invitation-only, Project Pascalis “Influencer Meetings.”
  
  For this project, people were informed there was a Project Sunny, and that it would involve access to massive amounts of city water. Less emphasized by city government was the copious amounts of sewerage production.
  
  In this latest instance, City officials first attempted to pass a more generic “water guzzler” ordinance to favorably amend water and sewer rates for any high-volume customers—without mentioning Project Sunny by name.
  
  After that effort ran into stiff community resistance, the City pivoted to an ordinance to offer water and sewer services and discounted rates only to the potential Project Sunny customer.
  
  Officials then knowingly withheld vital information about the true nature of Project Sunny until after a closed-door session to hear the “flowery,” “fluffy” presentation by House of Raeford representatives, held prior to the announced public hearing. In doing so, City Council avoided, for the first public hearing, the inevitable objections to a large chicken processing plant to be located within a quarter mile of community residents who have no vote, and often no voice, in City business.
  
  The City has also has yet to announce the exact location of the business to which it intends to provide water and sewer service, a remarkable departure from normal city policies and planning procedures.
  
  For its part, The House of Raeford opted only to speak to Council behind closed doors, but not to the community, and allowed City Council members to act as the company’s public relations surrogates.
  
  In doing so, all but one Council member devoted the bulk of their efforts to lauding the company’s community profile instead of describing their corporate, environmental, and safety record. In fact, no evidence exists that Council has yet conducted any real due diligence on the company’s record.
  
  The fundamental role of government is to protect the health and welfare of its citizens, not to promote corporate projects based on the company’s public relations literature. To date, Aiken City Council, as well its counterpart in the County, has yet to show any evidence of its primary role, but has put forward ample evidence of its assumed role of chicken plant project promotion.

Footnotes:

(1) The full text of the cited SC FOIA public meeting exemptions are as follows:

SC 30-4-70(2): Discussion of negotiations incident to proposed contractual arrangements and proposed sale or purchase of property, the receipt of legal advice where the legal advice relates to a pending, threatened, or potential claim or other matters covered by the attorney-client privilege, settlement of legal claims, or the position of the public agency in other adversary situations involving the assertion against the agency of a claim.

SC 30-4-70(5): Discussion of matters relating to the proposed location, expansion, or the provision of services encouraging location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the area served by the public body.

(2) In a parallel effort, Aiken County Council has proposed a Fee in Lieu of Taxes (FILOT) resolution to negotiate a tax break to House of Raeford.. The ordinance authorizing a FILOT agreement— which is now standard for larger projects—with the Project Sunny “sponsor” has already been approved, “in title only,” during the First Reading of the Ordinance (Figure 3).

On March 19th, in response to public comment by Aiken County resident Vicki Simons, Chairman Gary Bunker announced the second reading is tentatively planned for April 16th; and the public hearing and third reading is scheduled for May 7th.

Aslo on March 19th, nine area residents spoke to Council about the project. Their speeches can be heard around the 30 and 42 minute marks, and after the 56 minute mark, on this audio recording of the meeting.

(3) Summary of the Timeline of Project Sunny.

Unknown date through November 2023. The the Western South Carolina Economic Development Partnership secretly negotiated, as per normal modern economic development procedures, with The House of Raeford to locate a new chicken processing plant in Aiken County. 

November 27, 2023: Aiken City Council held a closed-door Executive Session to discuss Project Sunny. The location was identified as Verenes Industrial Park. Neither the company nor the nature of its business was identified. 

January 8, 2024; Aiken City Council held a second closed-door Executive Session to discuss providing city water and sewer services for Project Sunny. Verenes Park was not identified as the location, and neither the name of the company nor the nature of its business was revealed. 

January 22, 2024: Aiken City Council held the FIrst Reading of the Public Hearing for an ordinance to amend city water and sewer rates to provide major discounts to any business or industry that used more than 15 million galllons per month of city water. The ordinance passed unanimously, with only one citizen asking questions during the public comment period. Additional information known at that time is available in The Water Guzzler Ordinance. 

February 13, 2024: Aiken City Council removed the Second Reading of the Public Hearing from its meeting agenda, citing citizen concerns and questions  Three area residents still expressed concerns and questions about the proposal during the nonagenda public comment period.

February 20, 2024: Aiken County Council voted to unanimously approve, on its first reading, a proposed resolution (Figure 4 above) to authorize execution of Fee in Lieu of Taxes (FILOT) for the “sponsor” of Project Sunny. New information was provided in the draft resolution that the project involved a potential $185 million investment; but it did not identify the project location, the name of the company, the nature of its business, nor the potential number of jobs. 

Aiken County Council later entered into closed-door Executive Session to discuss three economic development projects, of which one was likely to be Project Sunny. 

March 7, 2024: The City of Aiken released the agenda for the March 13th Aiken City Council meeting, and announced an Executive Session regarding Project Sunny.  The agenda included a new ordinance to provide discounted water and sewer rates, but only for a single customer that was only identified as Project Sunny. The potential number of jobs, 900, was identified; but not the investment amount provided in the proposed County ordinance, the location, the name of the company, or the nature of its business. 

Morning of March 13, 2024; Aiken Chronicles published Another 50 percent Off Sale detailing the known status of Project Sunny. City Council was emailed a link to the article and a series of questions, including whether the project was a chicken processing plant similar to that in West Columbia. 

Evening of March 13, 2024: Prior to its regular meeting, Aiken City Council held a one-hour long closed-door Executive Session to discuss Project Sunny. Attending the session were six representatives from “Project Sunny” who provided Council with a presentation about the company.  

During the regular meeting, City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh disclosed that the Project Sunny company was The House of Raeford and the nature of the business was a chicken processing plant—information not provided prior to the meeting.  After some discussion, Council voted 6-1 to approve the First Reading of the Ordinance, with Councilwoman Andrea Gregory casting the sole vote of dissent.

March 19, 2024: Eight Aiken County citizens traveled to Aiken County Council’s regular meeting to express their strong concerns about the project during the period allotted for public comment on nonagenda items. One citizen traveled to the meeting to support the project. 

Week of March 18th: Three members of City Council joined an entourage to view a House of Raeford chicken processing plant in North Carolina. 

March 21, 2024. The City of Aiken released the agenda for Aiken City Council’s March 24th meeting. The Project Sunny water subsidy ordinance was not on the agenda.

April 8, 2024: Tentative date of Aiken City Council’s Second Reading of the Public Hearing for the ordinance to provide House of Raeford with discounted prices on more than 30 million gallons of month of city water, as well as acceptance of similarly high levels of wastewater into the city’s sewer system.

April 16, 2024: Tentative date of Aiken County Council’s Second Reading of its Resolution to execute a Fee in Lieu of Taxes (FILOT) agreement with House of Raeford. If the City does not approve the water and sewer provision ordinance, the County is unlikely to proceed.

May 7, 2024: Tentative date of Aiken County Council’s Public Hearing on the Project Sunny FILOT Resolution, followed by a vote on the Third Reading.

(Post Approval: Wastewater and air permitting processes with SC Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC). )