All posts by Kelly Cornelius

April 2025, In the Demolition Zone, Project Pascalis 2022

The City of Aiken: Not Subject to FOIA Laws?

14 Comments

Is the City of Aiken ignoring local and state laws regarding an unnamed committee formed to advise the City in its sale of the ill-begotten Project Pascalis properties?

by Kelly Cornelius

April 23, 2025

The Unnamed Committee

One would think that City of Aiken administration would change their ways after the lessons learned from the failed Project Pascalis, which left in its wake a train wreck of debris including:

  • A decommissioned Aiken Municipal Development Commission (AMDC)
  • A defunct Economic Development Department
  • An economic development director fired or resigned depending on whom you ask
  • An incumbent Mayor shown the door by voters
  • A stain on the community and a loss of public trust over the secrecy that continues to define the history of Project Pascalis.

However, recent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) results reveal what appears to be an ongoing disregard for local municipal code and state FOIA laws in the business of the recently-formed, unnamed committee to advise the City in its disbursements of the ill-begotten Pascalis properties. 

Why Did Project Pascalis Fail? A Brief Recap

Project Pascalis was the public purchase of seven properties, including historic properties, in the heart of downtown by the city-derived Aiken Municipal Development Commission (AMDC). The purchase was funded by a $9.6M Bond procured by the city under the guise of “blight” and was made without so much as even an appraisal for the properties, which were worth roughly half of what the City paid. In a series of secret meetings, the City hatched a plan to demolish these seven properties to make way for the usual fare of a convention center, new hotel and parking garage. 

When Aiken citizens finally learned of the plot in March 2022, they fought back with huge turnouts in City Council meetings, a petition drive, a sign campaign, three lawsuits, numerous FOIA requests, and a series of citizen-researched articles published to inform the public about the project. Revealed in this research was the appearance of ethics, FOIA and redevelopment law violations. Also uncovered by citizens was that the winning developer was publicly announced ten days before the actual Request for Proposals was published. That winning developer also just happened to be led by the City Attorney’s law partner.

The project officially derailed on September 29th, 2022 but one of the three lawsuits filed against the city is still ongoing, the biggest issue being the release of information by former AMDC officials. A judge recently ruled that the city had to produce the information to the plaintiffs albeit with a clawback provision.

For more on this history, read;

The Pascalis Attorneys
Keeping Up Appearances
The City of Aiken’s Information Games

History Repeating

Despite the lessons of Pascalis, the secrecy and disregard for local and state laws appear to persist. Today, the story revolves around the sale of the Pascalis properties and the committee formed to advise the City on this sale. In March of 2024, the City Council chose Colliers International to market the properties and by January of 2025, City Manager Bedenbaugh was quoted in the local paper describing some of the members of an eight-person group formed to make a recommendation to the city council over the fate of the public purchase. When the City was asked, via FOIA request, for a complete list of the names in the group and a record of how it was formed, the City responded: 

“There are no records documenting the formation of this group. The group/committee members are: City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh, Assistant City Manager Mary Tilton, Mayor Teddy Milner, Mayor Pro Tempore Ed Girardeau, Tommy Tapp, Colliers Representative, Alia Bostaji, Colliers Representative, Barbara Price, Architect with McMillan Pazdan Smith, Mark Chostner, Project Manager .”

The city’s municipal code has regulations regarding the formation of and minutes kept by committees, yet it appears these were not adhered to when it comes to this noname advisory committee. 

  • Sec. 2-38. – Powers with respect to offices, boards, commission, etc.(a)The council, by ordinance, may create, change and abolish offices, departments, boards, agencies and commissions.(b)The council may appoint and remove all members of the municipal boards, agencies and commissions established by the council, state law or constitution, except as otherwise provided by state law. Such boards and commissions shall serve as advisory bodies to the council and shall not exercise administrative responsibility, except as may be otherwise provided by law. Terms of the board, agency or commission members shall be as provided by ordinance, state law or constitution.(Code 1980, § 2-21)
  • Sec. 2–69. – Hearings by special committees. The city council may appoint a special committee to assist in or hold a public hearing for the council at any time upon any matter pending before it. Minutes or reports of hearings held by special committees shall be filed with the city clerk as public records.(Code 1980, § 2-39)

Additionally, the State of South Carolina state Freedom of Information Act laws when it comes to public bodies and public meetings: 

SECTION 30-4-20.Definitions.
(a) “Public body” means any department of the State, a majority of directors or their representatives of departments within the executive branch of state government as outlined in Section 1-30-10, any state board, commission, agency, and authority, any public or governmental body or political subdivision of the State, including counties, municipalities, townships, school districts, and special purpose districts, or any organization, corporation, or agency supported in whole or in part by public funds or expending public funds, including committees, subcommittees, advisory committees, and the like of any such body by whatever name known,

Key Points and Questions on the Committee
  • As half of the eight-member committee are paid public employees or paid elected officials, the group appears to be funded, in part, by public funds which appears to make this committee a “Public Body”. 
  • According to information obtained via FOIA on the City’s contract with Colliers (the firm selected to market the properties) the firm will be paid in commission for their services upon the sale of the properties.
  • Committee member Mark Chostner, listed as ‘Project Manager” in the group was also involved with Project Pascalis and paid for his services. Are taxpayers paying for his services on this committee, or is he working on a volunteer basis? A FOIA request has been submitted for any invoices on this project. 4/24/25 Update: The City of Aiken has determined that there are no invoices from the period of April 2024 to the current date from Capstone Services for services regarding the sale of the Pascalis properties.
  • Committee member Barbara Price, architect with McMillian Pazdan Smith, (the same firm involved with the City’s “Mixed Use Project”) could also be paid for her services. A FOIA request was made for any invoices submitted regarding this project and The City of Aiken has determined that there are no invoices for services from McMillan Pazdan Smith from the time period of April 2024 to the present. 

If the unnamed advisory committee is deemed a public body according to Section 30-4-20 then it would also appear to be subject to FOIA laws according to Section 30-4-90 (those laws can be viewed in entirety here). According to South Carolina FOIA law: 

SECTION 30-4-90.Minutes of meetings of public bodies.
(a) All public bodies shall keep written minutes of all of their public meetings. Such minutes shall include but need not be limited to:
(1) The date, time and place of the meeting.
(2) The members of the public body recorded as either present or absent.
(3) The substance of all matters proposed, discussed or decided and, at the request of any member, a record, by an individual member, of any votes taken.
(4) Any other information that any member of the public body requests be included or reflected in the minutes.
(b) The minutes shall be public records and shall be available within a reasonable time after the meeting except where such disclosures would be inconsistent with Section 30-4-70 of this chapter.

No Public Notice, No Agendas, No Meeting Minutes

When the City was asked, via FOIA request for meeting notices, meeting agendas and meeting minutes the city responded by saying:

“The meetings were not public meetings, so notice was not required and no agendas were created. Additionally, there were no minutes taken of the meetings. “

So, in addition to ignoring municipal code on committee formation, the city feels their private meetings are not subject to SC Freedom of Information Act rules on meetings or notices of meetings. 

City Solicitor Laura Jordan was asked by this writer if she could explain why the city believes this committee is not subject to local municipal code or FOIA laws but at the time of this publishing, no reply has been received.

A January 25, 2025 email to the Mayor from citizen Don Moniak also inquired about the “unnamed committee” asking if the committee intended to follow SC FOIA requirements. This email went unanswered until Mr. Moniak sent a follow-up on March 10th, wherein he also suggested the unnamed committee was operating in violation of both state FOIA laws and city municipal code. Mayor Milner responded via email on March 10th saying she would get an answer to Mr. Moniak’s concern. At the time of this publishing, no answer has been forthcoming.

Small Businesses in the Crosshairs, Citizens on the Hook, and a Public in the Dark

The City’s ongoing, high-stakes development plots have left the hard-working, small businesses housed in the Pascalis properties dangling in the crosshairs, their month-to-month fate unknown. One such business is the restaurant Taj of Aiken, a tenant in one of the Richland Avenue buildings. Restaurant owner Alok Kumar Aske went on the record at the April 14th, 2025 City Council meeting requesting the option to purchase the building or sign an extended lease — options he has actively pursued with the City each month the past year, options that have been afforded to other other Pascalis tenants but not to Taj of Aiken. 

Citizen Jacob Goss Ellis followed with a strong endorsement of Kumar and the Taj crew, calling the establishment a “pillar of the community” and “an Aiken institution,” for their extraordinary community generosity, especially in times of crisis. Councilwoman Gail Diggs spoke of his generosity as well. However, no one on Council followed-up with a discussion of Kumar’s request. 

Aiken citizens have been likewise kept in the dark regarding the fate of these publicly-owned properties, their input unsolicited and, at times, even made to feel unwelcome by those officials empowered to represent the people’s interests. As evidence of the latter, there is the comment made by City Council member Ed Girardeau, also a member of the unnamed advisory committee, who recently described the public as “idiots” to a hot mic at a recent City Council meeting.

Regarding the anticipated recommendation from this unnamed advisory committee, City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh was quoted in a March 11 Aiken Standard article as saying: “The city council can accept the recommendation; reject it and pick another proposal; or reject it and all the other proposals and start the process again.” 

Might we recommend starting the process by following municipal code and state FOIA laws and asking the citizenry what they would like done with these publicly owned assets?

_________________________

April 2025, City Government, Downtown Aiken, Editorials

“An Aiken Institution” Taj Aiken – One of Downtown’s Crown Jewels Still in the Crosshairs After the Project Pascalis Failure.

5 Comments

by Kelly Cornelius

April 16, 2025

Alok Kumar Aske, owner of Taj Aiken, a tenant in one of the city-owned Pascalis properties went on the record at Monday night’s City Council meeting and asked city officials to give him the 5-year lease he has been promised.(1) Doing so was not easy for such a soft spoken and gentle soul but he explained he signed the lease they gave him in Feb of 2024 but has yet to get it back from them and he checks in with city officials once a month.

As he reached out for help those city officials sat mostly mum with the exception of Councilwoman Diggs who has witnessed this man’s generosity for herself. Aiken citizen Jacob Ellis, who has been active in preserving the history of Aiken’s downtown, spoke in glowing support of Taj calling it “An Aiken Institution” and Kumar “A pillar of this community”.

Taj Aiken is truly one of downtown Aiken’s crown jewels. The Indian cuisine restaurant sits amidst the “Pascalis Block” — the group of Parkway District properties that Aiken officials purchased in 2021. under the guise of addressing “blight”.  The $9.6M taxpayer-funded boondoggle was part of the City’s vision to demolish the very cornerstone of historic downtown and erect in its place a modern chain hotel, a parking garage and conference center. Public outrage stopped Project Pascalis, however Taj and owner Kumar have since been held in limbo, first in the crosshairs of city official’s wrecking ball — under the threat of demolition for nearly two years and now as the property is listed for sale.

In the aftermath of Pascalis there was the lab project, and when the SRNL announcement was made on January 23, 2023, Councilman Ed Woltz stated that the “the plan is to preserve the existing businesses on the block…the Taj Restaurant would remain on Richland Avenue.” That was a promise made but forgotten when the lab building was put on Newberry St.

Kumar broke his silence at Monday night’s city council meeting and asked that city officials grant him the lease he was given over a year ago and that he has signed but the city hasn’t. He also asked for the opportunity to purchase the property that houses his restaurant, an opportunity which one other Pascalis tenant has been granted.

The American Dream

Kumar Akse is the very poster child for the American Dream. Originally from India, he arrived in this country in 2009 after having to drop out of medical school, which he was attending in Russia. A family emergency required the family’s financial resources to go toward medical care of a family member, so medical school for Akse was over. It was only through great sacrifice that he was able to make the move to America.

Akse arrived in the United States in 2009 to Augusta where he worked as a waiter until 2017 when he got the opportunity to open Taj on the ground floor of the Hotel Aiken. The restaurant became an instant favorite with the Aiken community and, within months, enjoyed dozens of 5-star reviews from locals and tourists on online review sites. Going into its eighth year in 2025, the 5-star accolades for Taj Aiken only continue, with many patrons express their delight and surprise to find such an artistry of spices and authenticity of Indian cuisine right here in the heart of downtown Aiken.

This isn’t to say that path from 2017 to 2025 has been easy. Shortly after opening in the Hotel Aiken, Akse had to move his business several doors east, to its current location at 213 Richland Avenue, where he had to do many of the renovations himself before reopening the business. It took nearly a year of work before Taj could open the doors. The business is thriving, the food is fantastic, and his customer base is loyal. Akse returns that love to his community in many ways, including mentoring his staff of twelve. “This job is only temporary” he preaches to them, “in this country you can make whatever you want of yourself with hard work”. 

Akse does not does not take this country nor its opportunities for granted. He works hard and he is grateful. One encounter with this man and you see he is kind above all else. Akse believes in karma, and he believes in giving back to his community. 

Hurricane Helene

Kumar fed this community day after day free of charge in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene which left downtown and most of Aiken without power and nearly unrecognizable.

A petition online to give Kumar a key to the city has taken off since he spoke publicly with over 670 signatures at the time of this publishing. The petition page is filled with glowing comments about the man and the food.

To illustrate another example of his generosity and community spirit, Christmas Day, 2023 Taj Aiken posted a holiday greeting and an announcement on their Facebook wall: 

“Taj Aiken takes pride in acknowledging our forever supporting patrons and jolly little town. Your presence is requested by Taj Aiken on Tuesday, December 26th. We are offering free boxed lunches from 11:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. We sigh you all a Happy Healthy and Prosperous New Year!!”

On the afternoon of December 26, and in a drizzly rain, Akse and his staff gifted the Aiken community with a generosity of good cheer and over 475 boxed lunches to people from all walks of life. 

It’s past time the City of Aiken gives back to a man who gives so much to this community. Specifically, Taj Aiken should have the same opportunity available to some of the other Pascalis businesses to negotiate a contract with the right to purchase; or to provide an extended lease.

City officials gave Newberry Hall the right to purchase their property and they have given other tenants including Vampire Penguin and Ginger Bee 5-year leases but Taj Aiken has not been given that opportunity…. yet.

The City of Aiken has held the fate of Taj Aiken for long enough. Give this small business owner a fair contract and a fair price to purchase the property that taxpayers now own. With new leadership in the Mayor’s office — a shift in leadership that was largely due to backlash from the failed Project Pascalis — the City of Aiken has an opportunity to start to restore more than just the Hotel Aiken. They can start to restore public trust by supporting an independent small business beloved by many.

Footnotes:

  1. April 14th, 2025 Aiken City Council meeting youtube. Kumar Aske’s speech begins at the 39:30 mark.

Good evening Aiken City Council.

My name is Alok Kumar Akse.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak to you.

I am the owner of Taj Aiken restaurant at 211 Richland Avenue West. I am here to ask that you consider granting our business a 5-year lease.

Taj Restaurant serves authentic Indian Cuisine. I employ twelve workers. We have hundreds of regular customers. We are a profitable, successful business since 2017.

We learned in November 2021 that the City was buying our property and was going to demolish our building and force us to move elsewhere. Since December of 2021 the City of Aiken has been our landlord, just like Vampire Penguin and Warneke’s.

Just like other businesses, we had no peace of mind after Project Pascalis began.

Mr Tim O’Briant offered us assistance to relocate. The assistance was not enough for us to move. We could not find another suitable space for a restaurant downtown. . Still, I signed the relocation agreement and waited to see what would happen.

But then Project Pascalis was cancelled. I thought maybe I could buy my building from the city or sign a long term lease.

Then the Savannah River Laboratory project came and the City wanted to build around us. Mr. Woltz said that Taj Aiken would stay open. Dr Majidi told me he wanted us to stay in our building.

We were very hopeful. We invested more in our business.

Then we were told the laboratory needed some of our space. Mr Tim and Mayor Osbon said the City would move us next door to the Playoffs building at the city’s expense.

But then the city decided to build the lab on Newberry Street, not next to our restaurant.

Then Vampire Penguin and Ginger Bee were given five year leases one year ago and gained some peace of mind and I became more hopeful.

I too sought a five-year lease and was told by Mr. Bedenbaugh that if I signed one like Jeannette and Brook’s then he would seek approval from you. I signed the lease in February 2024 that he provided and delivered to his office. I was told to check back.

I checked back in April, in June, July, and September last year, and then in January this year.

Now my building is part of another big project and our future is still uncertain.

We wanted the opportunity to buy our building and stay where we are, like Newberry Hall did. But if that is not possible we want a long-term lease that we were promised was possible. We want the same opportunities Aiken is giving other businesses. We are happy where we are. Our customers are happy where we are.

Thank you again for this opportunity to speak to you.

Development Issues, Editorials, February 2024, Trees and Deforestation

Aiken Tree Math 506-230=494

3 Comments

By Kelly Cornelius
February 9, 2024

The City of Aiken has proposed destroying nearly half of the tree canopy at Smith Hazel Park, and they appear to be using the same formula that would apply to developers on a private project. Shouldn’t a public project in a city park in “Tree City” be held to a higher standard?

Imagine having $506 in the bank and heading out on the town in Aiken and spending $230 of that and still having $494 left in the bank! That’s the math formula City officials have used for the destruction of the Smith-Hazel trees. Let’s break it down.

The above document and its curious tree match were included in the agenda package for the Sept 11th 2023 Workshop for the Smith-Hazel plan.

According to the “Existing Conditions and Tree Replacement Calculations” document, above, the trees in the park total 506 inches of DBH or Diameter at Breast Height (393 +113 =506). The city proposes to destroy 230 inches (nearly half) leaving 276 inches, and here is where the city’s math gets sketchy, as it appears that they give themselves double credit for 247 of the 276 remaining inches simply because those remaining inches come from an “approved list” (see line B above).

The bottom line is by replacing ZERO trees they still give themselves a 494 inch tree-save credit, when they actually would destroy 230 inches.

Who in the city thought this tree math was appropriate? I’ll take Developer Math for 500 Alex. Surprisingly, this formula is actually in one of the city’s tree ordinances:

The cumulative caliper of replacement trees shall at least equal the cumulative DBH of the Grand and Significant Trees removed except that the DBH of any Grand or Significant Trees on the Approved Tree List saved or approved trees newly planted may count as double replacement inches under this provision.

As the citizens of Aiken fight to protect one of her greatest assets, the trees, this formula certainly deserves questioning. I called Cara Specht, pictured below, who is listed as an Urban Forester with the South Carolina Forestry Commission to see if she could help shed light on this math formula. She returned my call and was extremely helpful. She was one of the few professionals I have spoken with about who was willing to go on the record. She was not, however, familiar with the current formula being used.

She was also kind enough to send the forestry document listing the benefits of urban trees, and this one in particular should be reviewed by officials regarding the current plan to pave a significant portion of Smith-Hazel and put in a retention pond.

You can see the full document here and a link to their website here.

I also contacted Aaron Campbell, who is listed as the city’s Arborist/Horticulturist, via this form on the city’s website for an explanation of this formula and to see if this double credit formula is a standard practice and if the formula even has a name. At the time of this writing, he has not responded. A FOIA request has been submitted for “Any and all reports on the trees at Smith-Hazel Park from December 2022 -present from city arborist Aaron Campbell.”

This is not the first time citizens have questioned the city’s tree standards in recent months. From the 10/23/2023 minutes:

“Don Moniak stated it was admirable that the City of Aiken has a Tree Preservation Ordinance which dates back to 2005. The Tree Preservation Ordinance focuses on grand trees and not forest canopy. That is an unsustainable approach because large trees do get old and decay. As a result, they are labeled as nuisance trees or hazard trees, and they get cut down. If you don’t replace them, you end up with no forest at all. He suggested that at some time that Council revisit that ordinance. He also noted that the formula for determining how many trees stay is very confusing, and it does not resemble anything that is taught in any forestry school in America. He pointed out that forest canopy is what is really important because that is essential to any stormwater management process.”

While Aiken tree math is sketchy, one thing is becoming very clear, and that is that Aiken officials have some work to do when it comes to Aiken’s biggest assets, her trees. Citizens are calling for a public hearing for Smith-Hazel project. Process is important because what happens to one city-owned tree can happen to any of them. There appears to be no established process or specific protections to city-owned trees on public parcels over privately-owned trees. Recent mistakes resulting in the absolute butchering of the Farmer’s Market trees, and now a proposed leveling of 68 trees, have many of us wondering what could Tree City officials be thinking?

The need for a Tree Advisory Board as recommended by Tree City standards is becoming more and more apparent, as is the need for separate ordinances regarding city-owned trees vs developer ordinances for a private project.

Editorials, February 2024, Trees and Deforestation

Is Aiken Living Up to It’s Tree City Title?

10 Comments

After being known for all things equine, Aiken is widely admired for her trees. The revered South Boundary Oaks have graced the cover of magazines and posters nationwide. Our beautiful parkways, thoughtfully and sustainably designed without the need for irrigation, make you feel at one with nature, even in an urban setting. Downtown itself is nestled around the Hitchcock Woods, the nation’s largest urban forest. The City of Aiken also boasts an Arboretum Trail and the city-owned Hopelands Gardens whose first line on their website reads:

Wrapped behind a serpentine brick wall, under a canopy of ancient oaks, deodar cedars and magnolias, is Hopelands Gardens.

Trees are Aiken’s Crown Jewels, and the city has enjoyed the Tree City title for the past 38 years.

Sadly, recent events including the “accidental” destruction by the City of the Farmer’s Market Parkway trees, and now a city-proposed plan to destroy 68 trees in the historic Smith Hazel Park, have once again put citizens in a battle with the city to save an integral part of what makes Aiken special, her trees.

Despite requests from community leaders, including Bill McGhee, President of the Schofield Community Association, and a vote from the Recreation Commission to recommend pausing this project that would destroy these 68 trees, City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh charged ahead, informing the Aiken Standard that the project would move forward. Mr. Bedenbaugh was quoted saying the city “has held several public meetings to discuss the upgrades and tree removal, including a Sept. 11 public hearing,” but, as reported in What Public Hearing that does not appear to be the case at all.

There was a City Council Work Session on Septembr 11, 2023, however, as any city official knows, public comment is not permitted in work sessions. To date, city officials have not responded to email and FOIA requests for evidence that a public hearing ever occurred.

Citizens opposed to the proposed destruction of the trees undertook an online letter writing campaign that, within the first four days, saw over 1000 letters sent to the Mayor, City Council and the City Manager. To put that into perspective, more letters have been sent than the number of votes some of our council members garnered to win their seats. Excerpts from some of these citizen letters were posted by the Aiken Chronicles. One letter read:

“If not for Aikenites who said no, our downtown parkways would all be paved. Be the leaders today who our children and grandchildren will one day thank.”

To her credit, newly elected Mayor Teddy Milner responded, inviting some letter-writers to meet with her at the Smith Hazel Park on Sat Feb 10 at 9:30 am. It isn’t a public hearing but it is a first step in the right direction.

What Does It Take To Be Named A Tree City?

The Tree City title comes with four standards. In the wake of the Williamsburg Street “wrong plan” where 11 mature trees in the parkway were mistakenly destroyed last summer — and now a city-proposed plan that will destroy 68 trees in a City park — it’s time to review those standards. What protections are currently in place? And who has the final say over the fate of City-owned trees? Is Aiken living up to Tree City standards?

Not according to Standards 1 and 2.

ABOVE: Click to view Standard 1 (left) and Standard 2 (right) full size. Read the Tree City standards in entirety at this site.

According to Standard 1, “The public will also know who is accountable for decisions that impact community trees.” Both the Mayor and the City Manager were emailed with a question of who is this board? No response to the question to date.

According to later language in Standard 2, “Importantly, a public tree care ordinance protects public trees at all times, not just during the development process. In other words, the policies for tree planting, care, and removal of trees codified in the ordinance must be continuous, not triggered by an event like landscaping requirements or the land development process.”

The city of Aiken does have several tree ordinances, however, they appear to give top authority to the Planning Director.

Removal. No Grand Tree may be removed unless the Planning Director determines there is absolutely no alternative because of unavoidable grading or because of the required configuration of paving, essential utilities, or buildings. No more than 80 percent of the DBH inches of Significant Trees may be removed unless the Planning Director determines there is absolutely no alternative because of unavoidable grading or because of the required configuration of paving, essential utilities, or buildings.

This authority is of great concern, considering the nod our planning director has given to developers. Below is a video of current Planning Director, Marya Moultrie, working here in conjunction with City Attorney Gary Smith to pave the way for a car wash on a parcel of land that was conditioned to exclude Car Washes. 

Should a city planning director be given sole authority to make determinations about our City’s grand and significant trees? And shouldn’t city owned trees in a park enjoy greater protections than ordinances used for a developer on a private project?

Going Forward

In the short-term, City Council should immediately schedule a true agenda-item public hearing on the Smith Hazel plan before 68 trees are destroyed. In the larger picture, City Council should establish and appoint a Tree Advisory Board as suggested in the Tree City standards to make clear who has authority over public trees and to provide greater protection for publicly-owned trees in City parks, parkways and the Arboretum Trail.

What happens to one city-owned tree can happen to any of them. Here, it should go without saying that tree companies and others who profit from the cutting and removing of trees should not be appointed to the advisory board.

__________________

Credit:
Feature photo, “Chainsaw Piggy” used with permission from local artist Martin Buckley.

City Parks and Recreation, Editorials, February 2024

What Public Hearing? The City of Aiken’s Assault on Trees and Public Input Continues

7 Comments

By Kelly Cornelius
February 1, 2024

Trees in Tree City are no longer safe. They are not safe in our historic and storied Parkways, as evidenced by the recent Williamsburg Street “mistake” at the Farmer’s Market, and they are not even safe in a city park.

Aiken City Manager, Stuart Bedenbaugh, announced Friday that the city would proceed with plans to destroy 68 trees from Smith Hazel Park despite community leaders asking to save the trees and despite the Recreation Commission asking for a pause to rethink the destruction of trees after citizens and community leaders brought it to their attention.

Bedenbaugh was quoted in the Aiken Standard as saying  “The city has held several public meetings to discuss the upgrades and tree removal, including a Sept 11th public hearing”.

Except that it doesn’t appear the city ever held a public hearing to vet this particular plan. In fact, according to the city’s Sept 11, 2023 Meeting Agenda packet, there was no agenda item for this and no public hearing. There was a work session held before the city’s regular meeting that same night, with “Smith Hazel Recreation Center Improvements Update” on the agenda, however, there is no opportunity for public input or comment in City work sessions.

A FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request has been submitted for a September 11 public hearing — or any public hearing on the Smith Hazel Park plan. A subsequent FOIA was also submitted for receipt confirmation of public notice for said public hearing on Sept 11 — or for any public hearing where this plan was shown. In addition to the FOIA requests, both Mayor Milner and City Manager Bedenbaugh were emailed requests for evidence of the public hearing that Mr. Bedenbaugh referred to. Neither has responded to date.

As the timeline confirms in The Unlearned Lessons From Williamsburg Now Being Visited Onto Smith Hazel, citizens were not made aware of the number of trees to be cut until a Jan 12, 2024 email sent to Mr. Bill McGhee, despite that the question had been asked numerous times over the past 13 months.

Officials are ignoring community leaders and their own Recreation Commission, with apparently little memory of the heat they took last year after “the wrong plan,” as City Manager Bedenbaugh termed it at the time, destroyed 11 trees at the Farmer’s Market. This debacle, which was an embarrassment for all involved, could have been avoided had the public been allowed to see “the wrong plan” and give input before the plan was executed. Here we are again, less than a year later, the lesson already forgotten.

Below is a reminder of this lesson from a June 12, 2023 City Council meeting, which occurred after the Farmer’s Market trees had been destroyed.

The City should have a proper public hearing regarding this plan so that citizens can have input before these trees are destroyed and gone forever like the “mistake” at the Williamsburg Street Farmer’s Market. The oops-we-did-it-again excuse is not going to fly this time.

What Can You Do?

You can email or call city officials

803-642-7654

City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh sbedenbaugh@cityofaikensc.gov

Mayor Teddy Milner Tmilner@cityofaikensc.gov

Councilman Ed Girardeau egirardeau@cityofaikensc.gov

Councilman Ed Woltz   ewoltz@cityofaikensc.gov

Councilwoman Gail Diggs gdiggs@cityofaikensc.gov

Councilwoman Lessie Price lprice@cityofaikensc.gov

Councilwoman Andrea Gregory agregory@cityofaikensc.gov

Councilwoman Kay Brohl kbrohl@cityofaikensc.gov