Category Archives: October 2023

Aiken Corporation, October 2023, Pascalis 2023 - SRNL Lab

Aiken’s Cousin Problem – The Aiken Corporation Targets Newberry Street for SRNL Spec Project

16 Comments

by Kelly Cornelius
October 31, 2023

On September 25, 2023, the not-for-profit Aiken Corporation voted to recommend to the Aiken City Council their own recently purchased property for the site of the $20M Savannah River National Lab (SRNL) “mixed-use“ office building. The 1.01 acre parcel was acquired in July of 2022 for $650K by its for-profit arm called LED of Aiken. The parcel sits adjacent to Aiken Corp President Buzz Rich’s law office, it sits outside of the defined area of the contracted study and the seller was represented by Aiken City Councilman/real estate broker Ed Girardeau. In a town where recent events have revealed a very blurred line between public service and self-service, the path of how this winning parcel came to be put forth is certainly worth a look.

A Brief History

On Jan 23rd, 2023, four months after Project Pascalis failed, the City of Aiken announced their partnership with SRNL to build a $20M “Workforce Development Center” on three or more of those same ill-begotten Pascalis properties. The properties were still owned at the time, by the Aiken Municipal Development Commission (AMDC), who lacked a quorum. The announcement did not include the fact that the Aiken Corporation had been secretly involved in the project for two months at this point.

On March 13th of 2023, despite the fact that the city still had no signed contract with SRNL, Aiken City Council voted 4-0 to award a no-bid, $250,000 pre-development contract to the Aiken Corporation, which was recently described as a “cousin” of the City by Mayor Rick Osbon. The contract was specific, right down to the tax identification numbers on the properties to be included in the feasibility study, yet the parcel the Aiken Corp ended up recommending to City Council for the $20M “Mixed-Use” project did not even meet this very specific condition of the study – the location.

In addition to straying from the scope of the location, the feasibility study results curiously lacked the actual lab. The “workforce center“ had somehow morphed into being called a “Mixed-use project” by the overdue and long awaited study reveal. By this time, DOE/SRNL went from promoting it as the “Face of the Lab” in January of 2023 to “an expression of leasing office space should it become available” in July of 2023, in response to a story that Lauren Young of WXFG-FOX News aired featuring citizens questioning the project.

 

The would-be SRNL project still lacks a signed contract showing any commitment from SRNL, making it merely a speculative project at this point. The recent release of the feasibility study conducted by Aiken Corporation’s subcontractor McMillan Pazdan Smith (MPS) was five months past its due date and did not get a warm welcome from the citizenry. Considering the dismal track record of the Aiken Corporation’s other spec building, taxpayers should pay close attention to what their $250K has yielded thus far.  

Specifics on the parcel

The winning Aiken Corporation parcel is actually three smaller parcels that combined occupy a total of 1.01 acres.

One parcel housed a two-story home (shown below) that had already been approved by the Design Review Board in Jan of 2021 to be relocated to another part of Aiken’s Parkway District. According to Design Review Board (DRB) minutes, that move would later be nixed due to the number of trees that would have to be removed to allow for this relocation. The picture below was found in the 2021 agenda packet (1).

Pave Paradise to put up a Parking Lot Mixed-Use Project?

May 3, 2022. Demolition Request

At that meeting, Aiken Corporation President Buzz Rich lobbied the DRB for approval to demolish the Newberry Street structure to make way for a parking lot. He mentioned that Councilman Ed Girardeau—who was the real estate agent representing the seller for the property sale—was in attendance that evening. Mr. Rich also noted the subject property is adjacent to property he owns. Aiken Corp meeting minutes (2) will show that the Aiken Corporation has the property under contract at this time but they would not close on it until July of 2022.

The home on the property was portrayed as unsafe by the applicant and the photos would have made one believe it was an eyesore, which at the time was true.

As it turns out, the building was only in a state of disassembly which was revealed in the meeting agenda packet as it had been donated to Mr. McGhee for relocation on Williamsburg St. The photo of the building sharply contrasts the photo one year prior when the relocation was approved. The move, however, would never happen because of the number of trees that would require removal. Instead, demolition was approved by the DRB at their May 3rd, 2022 meeting.

FOIA Request To the City on 9/26/2023

On September 26th, 2023, a Freedom of Information Act request was submitted for the purchase and sale agreement and settlement statements for this property recommended for a $20 million city project. The City responded on September 28th that:

The City of Aiken has determined that LED of Aiken, Inc. is a separate entity from the City of Aiken and that the City is not in possession of any of the requested documents.

A second FOIA attempt was made on Sept 28th, 2023 this time via the contact form on the Aiken Corporation’s website. Results from that FOIA revealed that ReMax Tattersall, where Ed Girardeau is listed as an owner/broker, received over $42,000 in commission from the sale; and that Security Federal Bank was the lender for the purchase. These are good cousins to have.

June 8, 2022. Aiken Corp Meeting – Financing

The meeting minutes for June 8, 2022, show that Aiken Corporation Executive Committee members Tim Simmons and Joe Lewis were present during a unanimous vote to approve the Security Federal project financing, a $650,000 loan with interest-only payments for six months and minimal closing costs. Mr. Simmons is listed here as Chairman of the Security Federal Board and Mr. Lewis is listed here as Vice President of Financial Services.
_.

Between the July closing and the January 2023 SRNL project announcement, the old home was demolished. No mention was made of the Aiken Corporation during that January announcement, even though the organization was deeply involved at that point.

The involvement of the Aiken Corporation was not revealed until February 6th, and its Newberry Street property was never identified or considered as part of the SRNL project feasibility study until that study was revealed on September 14th, 2023.

Sept 11, 2023. Closed-Door Executive Session

On September 11th, 2023 prior to the regular meeting, City Council held a closed-door Executive Session to discuss two items, one of which was “The proposed purchase, sale and /or leasing of property for the Savannah River National Laboratory.”

The closed-door meeting was attended by five Aiken Corporation Board members and McMillan Pazdan Smith representatives. City Council cited exemption#2 for excluding citizens from what is otherwise allowable at a public meeting: “Section 30-4-70 (a)(2) of the South Carolina Code to discuss negotiations incident to proposed contractual arrangements and proposed sale or purchase of property.” Yet, the Aiken Corporation’s lawyer responsible for helping to negotiate a lease is conspicuously missing from the attendee list.

No summary or announcement of what was discussed was presented to the audience and there was still no signed contract with SRNL announced at the next meeting on Sept 25th, 2023.

Once again, City Council met in secrecy, repeating the same conduct displayed during Project Pascalis.

September 25th, 2023. Aiken Corp Meeting – 10 AM

On September 25, 2023, the Aiken Corporation Executive Committee voted 10-0 to approve the recommendation made by subcontractor MPS to locate what was by then the “Mixed-Use” office building on the Aiken Corporation property

Aiken Corp President Buzz Rich abstained from voting on the recommendation since his law office was adjacent to it, an abstention that contrasts with his negotiations to purchase the building and the signing of the purchase contract. Aiken County property records show Rich owns four commercial properties on that block. (3)

Aiken Corp Board Member Joe Lewis also abstained due to his company holding the Newberry St property mortgage, although according to the minutes he voted to approve the financing in June 2022.

Neither abstainee left the meeting which can be seen here, (see minute 33:40), and Chairman Rich continued to speak during the discussion. The Newberry St property was ultimately voted on to be recommended to City Council for the would-be SRNL spec project. Rich would present the recommendation to Council later that same evening.

Sept 25, 2023. City Council Meeting – 7 pm

Aiken Corp President Buzz Rich presented the Aiken Corp Executive Committee recommendation to the Aiken City Council even though he abstained from the recommendation vote. During his presentation, Rich never mentioned any of the public comments taken since Feb 6th.

Rich did describe to City Council all the extra hours that Aiken Corp members have put in on this project and the fact that they are volunteers. However, their monthly meetings are typically held at 10 am during banking hours, and there were no meetings in the two months preceding the release of the study and the Board’s discussion to vote to locate a $20 Million dollar project on their property.

Location Location Location

How did a site not within the prescribed scope of the study get included in the study? As documented in The Devil is in the Details, four out of the five sites in the bombed feasibility study release were actually outside the contracted scope of the project. In the May 10th, 2023 Aiken Corporation meeting there was an update on the project with no mention on the record about additional sites, however, when the Feasibility Study was finally released, presto change-o we magically had five sites.

Could it be that shoe-horning a 36,000 square foot building, reduced from the original 45,000 square foot building, over top of historic downtown was not only unpopular with taxpayers, it just wasn’t feasible? Somewhere along the way (and outside of the sunshine) they added four additional sites without divulging this to taxpayers until after the fact who are footing the bill for the study. Information obtained through FOIA requests show that $148K has been spent to date of the $250K approved.

One of those four additional sites was the old hospital site, which seemed to many the first sign of common sense displayed regarding this project so even Pascalis weary citizens were hopeful. The nine-plus acre site has plenty of room including parking and nearby lunch options. In addition, it would save a beautiful historic building without changing the very soul of downtown. That common sense option was quickly eliminated by K.J. Jacobs of MPS but not before forgetting to tell the Aiken Corporation Members about it before their big Q and A with citizens. So as stealthy as it was added, it was also eliminated in favor of the just over one acre property on a tree-lined portion of Newberry St.

Ironically, after Mr. McGhee was denied the relocation of the home on the subject property to Williamsburg St because of trees, City Officials had eleven trees destroyed on Williamsburg St in the Parkway including directly in front of the homes that Mr. McGhee had restored.

A FOIA request has been submitted to the Aiken Corp for the Tree Survey on the Newberry St. property referred to by Mr. Rich as “about a 50 page report” regarding the 23 trees on the property at the Oct 11th Aiken Corp meeting, which, thanks to citizen footage, we now know included a Monkey in the Room. (Update: The FOIA request was fulfilled and the tree survey can be found in the DRB’s May 2, 2024 agenda packet; along with the rest of the application for the lab building design).

The Aiken City Council listened to the presentation from the Aiken Corporation on the evening of September 25th, 2023 but to date has not put the item back on the agenda for a public hearing.

Footnotes:

  1. Jan 2021 Design Review Board Agenda Packet https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=540853&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF
  2. April 14th, 2022 Aiken Corp minutes confirm that Rich signed a contract to purchase the property as the Aiken Corp.

3. Map showing the commercial property Rich owns (in teal) on the same block according to Aiken County records with the subject property outlined in red.

Editorials, October 2023

Right Now, Aiken Needs Teddy Milner

10 Comments

Although she won the primary election for Mayor in a run-off against Rick Osbon, Teddy Milner will not actually be Mayor, unless she again has a majority when the votes are counted on Nov. 7. If there is truth to the rumor twice reported (as a warning, or a call to arms?) in the Aiken Standard, a stealth write-in campaign aims to keep Rick Osbon as mayor. The paper explained that Osbon is not involved with a write-in campaign, and had “congratulated Ms. Milner and wished her well and much success.” Yet, it is quite possible that in spite of the pledge “to abide by the results of the primary or convention” that Osbon signed prior to the Republican Primary, some may be willing to put him in an awkward position that, win or lose, would make it tough for any man to accept the seat with pride.

I voted for Rick Osbon twice when he was fresh and earnest, and I was convinced he was trying to Do it Right. I even defended him, and said he must have been duped, misled by the ones who stood to profit greatly on the Pascalis scheme. So, I was sorely disappointed to realize that under that sheep’s clothing was one of the wolves.

How many times have I heard, “Y’ all don’t want anything to change. Wrong- I do want a change.

I believe electing Teddy Milner as our new mayor will be a positive step in the right direction – for all of Aiken. Nobody believes she can single-handedly fix what ails downtown Aiken, the brown water problem, or Whiskey Road congestion. But, she can offer a fresh perspective and new leadership, which is desperately needed.

Downtown Aiken (in particular) has suffered greatly under currently-seated officials’ lack of leadership. The Renaissance, Pascalis Project and Municipal Development Corporation fiascos have left downtown Aiken mired in the muck.

After Project Pascalis was shut down, Mayor Osbon admitted that the Project “got too big”. All by itself? But during the years that city council and its convoluted and incestuous subsets ignored Aiken’s own ordinances and South Carolina’s Community Development laws, where was the voice saying, “Wait. Stop. This is not right.” Not a peep. Not from the Mayor, the city attorney, or the city council members to their left and right.

And when the lights came on – the one who should have been leader was standing in the midst of all the enthusiastic investors on the city’s most uneven playing field.

They are all still unwilling to talk about Project Pascalis – because lawsuits were filed and the lawyers advised them to keep quiet. Of course they did. But, long before the lawsuits, City Council, the Design Review Board and the Aiken Municipal Development Commission went silent and closed the doors to countless meetings.

The city spent $ 9.6 million of the Taxpayers’ Plutonium Settlement to buy un- appraised property they were then willing to sell for a fraction of the cost, with a chunk of Newberry Street thrown in. That was a real slap in the faces of tax- payers who were compelled to file ethics complaints, lawsuits and innumerable FOIA requests for documents.

How many years have we spent watching Hotel Aiken deteriorate? We are all ready to move on. But, the fallout from Project Pascalis cannot be swept under the rug. Citizens are owed explanations. Until we learn what in the world happened and who was responsible, how can we prevent the bad-actors from repeating their bad acts?

I support Teddy Milner and her pledge for transparency and accountability. As appropriate, she will advocate for doors to be opened and public records to be revealed to the public. That must make some people squirm – and want to elect somebody else.

Let’s carry Teddy over the finish line on November 7.

Jenne Stoker
Aiken, South Carolina

Elections, October 2023

Online Forum for City Council District 1

5 Comments

Aiken City Council candidates for Districts 1 and 3 were invited to take part in an online forum composed of twenty questions submitted by Aiken Chronicles readers. This is the third and final online forum published by the Aiken Chronicles this election season.

As stated to the candidates, the goal of the written, online forum is to provide time and opportunity for thorough and thoughtful consideration of issues of concern to area residents. The hope is to contribute toward a better-informed electorate, an enthusiastic voter turnout, and a healthier democracy. 

Candidates Kay Brohl (unopposed District 3 incumbent) and DeMarcus Sullivan (District 1 candidate) did not respond to the questions. Below are the responses provided by District 1 incumbent Gail Diggs.

ESSENTIAL SERVICES: WATER, SEWER, ROADS

What more can be done to address potholes and conditions of roads? 

Gail Diggs: The city is responsive & proactive on city owned roads. Most roads in the city are SCDOT’s responsibility.

Should City residents and business owners be told that there is nothing that can be done for mainline breaks, leaks, and sewer backups because those pipes are just too old? Should our norm be running the faucets until the water clears up, if ever? 

Gail Diggs: They are not told this. Running faucets are not the norm.

Do you think it is sound policy for the Aiken’s leadership to invest in expanding the infrastructure to I-20 and beyond while the existing residents and the existing infrastructure are wanting for solutions to the longstanding deterioration and deficiencies that have long gone unaddressed?

Gail Diggs: We are addressing both. We will always have to balance growth and maintenance.

Much of the city’s spending on infrastructure derives from Capital Project Sales Taxes, which are approved by voter referendums. What backup plan do you propose if voters reject the next round of one-percent sales tax?  

Gail Diggs: Funding sources change: however, our priorities are our priorities. We will adjust and make the most of the resources available. 

GOVERNANCE AND CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT

Are you in favor of a process that would better enable citizens to request and receive public hearings? If so, when should a public hearing involving an independent committee, as allowed by city ordinance, be held? 

Gail Diggs: We have not had this ever come up or had such a need.

How would you improve the lines of information and communication to ensure that the voices of citizens and experts will be given as much, if not more, weight as the voices of the developers and real estate speculators?  

Gail Diggs: I will always strive to do what’s best for Aiken. What’s best may come from both citizens and developers.

To avoid future conflicts of interest, should the city hire an attorney on staff, (as is the case with the Aiken County Government), whose only client would be the City of Aiken? 

Gail Diggs: Both approaches can be successful. Both have pros and cons.

Can you explain the relationship between the city and the Aiken Corporation? Are you willing to look at ending the City’s partnership with the Aiken Corporation and cease being its primary source of funds?  

Gail Diggs: Aiken Corporation is a tool, and we want to use the best tool for any given job. I am willing to consider our options.

HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS 

Do you think it would be reasonable for the city to amend the square footage requirements in existing zoning to accommodate the Aiken County Homeless Coalition building a tiny village? 

Gail Diggs: This will require more study. I am in favor of a tiny village that includes resource programs to assist the occupants and help them come out of homelessness. We need to make sure our citizens are housed in a safe structure in compliance with building codes.

Do you know the difference between affordable housing and low- income housing, and do you think the City of Aiken housing market is hostile or hospitable to low- income seniors, single parent families, veterans, and disabled persons? 

Gail Diggs: The government defines affordable housing “as any home, rented or owned, in which costs comprise less than 30 percent of the household monthly income. Public (low income) housing is owned/managed by the government which evaluates your expenses and income.” The City of Aiken continues to partner with community development corporations, local banks, and agencies that offer affordable homeownership programs, as well as develop creative ways to strengthen and enhance the quality of life for all citizens in Aiken.

What, specifically, do you think needs to be done to address the needs of Aiken’s homeless population, and do you see support of the Salvation Army emergency shelter and soup kitchen on Park Avenue as part of this? 

Gail Diggs: Yes. I do. Agency partnerships should be formed and work together to acquire funding sources. 

Given the definition of a slumlord as “an unscrupulous landlord who extracts profit by renting properties in ill repair without regard for codes, tenants and neighborhoods, while exploiting poor people with limited choices,” do you think the City of Aiken could or should take a proactive approach to slum lording by enacting a rental registry ordinance, as many cities across America have done, to provide checks and balances in the landlord-tenant relationship and to, in the bigger picture, help prevent deterioration and blight in residential areas, Crosland Park being a prime example of this?  

Gail Diggs: The City of Aiken already has an ordinance in place for Rental Registration in which landlords that own one or more rental properties within the City limits must register with the city. This program is intended to be used as a contact list in case of an of an emergency or if substandard conditions and city code violations have been discovered.

DOWNTOWN AND HISTORIC DISTRICT

What lessons have you learned from the failed Pascalis project?  

Gail Diggs: Because some will jump to the worst conclusions when all information is not presented, it is extremely important to share as much information reasonably possible in a timely manner.

How should the city manage the balance between preserving historic character and structures vs. the demands by economic development to demolish historic structures?  

Gail Diggs: Carefully and reasonably! A cost/benefit analysis is always a good idea.

How can City leadership best support our small business owners, who feel they are being pushed out of the downtown by rapidly rising rents?  

Gail Diggs: The Free Market determines rents. Not Aiken City Council.

GROWTH

What should be done to prevent Aiken’s northside, east side and west side repeat the mistakes that created the Whiskey Road corridor? 

Gail Diggs: It’s already been done! It’s called a bypass.

What would you propose to protect the interests of owners of residential and business properties which are threatened by inappropriate, and often non-conforming construction proposals? 

Gail Diggs: Work within the existing system.

THE EQUINE INDUSTRY

Do you think horses are important to your District? If so, why? 

Gail Diggs: Of course. They are a huge economic contributor.

Do you think horses are important to Aiken’s economy and its culture? If so, what do you plan to do to protect and promote the industry? 

Gail Diggs: We need to keep the zoning in place. This industry is thriving as things are now.

Should Aiken’s horseman be represented in City government? 

Gail Diggs: All voters should be represented. The City of Aiken has an Equine Commission. Each council member appoints members from the horse community to the commission.

___________________

Map showing District One in light blue. Click here to explore the City’s district location tool.

Nature News, October 2023

Trick or Treat! It’s the Bradford Pear

2 Comments

By Burt Glover
October 29, 2023

It may be the tree that I love to hate. Then again, maybe it is the tree I hate to love. When it comes to the Bradford pear, it all comes down to the season. Now, with autumn creeping in, I feel a certain excitement starting to build whenever I drive by one the grander specimens. This week, I saw the first color emerging in the tops of the trees. Soon, these Bradford pears will explode with stunning shades of mahogany-red, crimson, and orange-red, tinged with yellow. I will try to keep my car on the road as I drive by these beauties, slack-jawed and amazed; likewise in springtime, when witnessing their masses of delicate white flowers, usually one of the first to emerge after a barren, cold winter. So, why do I feel the urge to carry a chainsaw around to cut down every Bradford pear that I see? Why is the sale of this tree increasingly being banned by so many states? Is it the devil tree that it is now made out to be?

To make sense of it all, you must know how a Bradford pear is made. Yes, it is made. The process begins with the Callery pear, Pyrus calleryana, native to Western China and Vietnam. The Callery pear is a very vigorous tree, able to grow in arid lands, standing water, shade, sun, rich soil and poor, (some say it will even grow in concrete). It is fast-growing and resistant to the diseases that plague other pears, however, it tends to produce long, sharp, thorns along the stems and branches, which make for a very undesirable tree. Graft a more desirable pear cultivar onto the rootstock of the Callery pear, and you have a winner. That is what horticulturists did in the 1950s upon discovery of a single specimen of a Callery pear that was characteristically lovely in leaf and flower, yet uncharacteristically thornless. They took scions from this Callery pear tree — which would be named “Bradford” — and grafted them to common Callery rootstock. Every Bradford pear they “made” was a genetically-identical clone of that original cultivar. Because Callery pears cannot self-pollinate, the trees were sterile — incapable of producing viable seeds.

These Bradford clones were brought to market at garden centers and big box stores across the southern and eastern U.S. The trees were inexpensive, fast growing, and eagerly snapped up by landscapers and homeowners, who planted them as singular specimens and in picturesque rows along city streets, rural driveways, in parking lots, apartment complexes, schools, churches, front yards and backyards everywhere. Entire subdivisions were planted with them. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, Bradford pears were the most commonly planted tree in South Carolina.

The problems arose after plant breeders started making “improvements” to the original. Bradfords will grow 50 feet tall, if allowed. What about a shorter tree? Let’s see some more foliage colors. Wouldn’t a narrower crown be nice? Whatever. Consumer demand led to the production of more cultivars — Aristocrat, Autumn Blaze, Capital, Redspire, and many others. The problem with these trees is that they were no longer genetically identical to the Bradford stock, which meant they were only a bee’s flight from producing viable seeds. The birds did their part by eating the fruits of these trees and pooping the seeds throughout the countryside. Thus began the invasion.

ABOVE: A country lane on Aiken’s southside, sprouted with dozens of Bradford pears. These trees are among the earliest to show color in autumn. Spot them by the red leaves.

The seeds produced from these unions produced all manner of variations, including, notably, trees with the characteristic Callery “thorns.” These thorns can be wicked, often growing upwards of 3-inches long and easily capable of penetrating shoe leather and tractor tires.

ABOVE: Callery pear thorns are spaced about one-inch apart along the stem and can be quite long.

Clemson University deems them as one of the most aggressive invasive plants we have in South Carolina. They establish themselves in fields, forests, roadsides, right-of-ways and take over by means of newly-produced seeds or root sprouts, crowding out any other plant in their path.

ABOVE: Dilapidated Bradford pears in the parking lot behind South Aiken High, the green tree in the left photo a thorny Callery pear sprouted from the rootstock.

BELOW: Nearby are the telltale thickets of Bradford pears, perhaps the offspring from the trees above, sprouting into the landscape.

Deer and any other animal that might feed on their leaves avoid them due to the thorns. Being an introduced species, they are free of the insects and caterpillars that attack native trees, making Bradford thickets food deserts to insect-eating birds and animals. The Callery pear rootstock exudes chemicals that suppress other plant species that grow in their vicinity. They spread/escape to fields, forests and untended waste areas, growing in dense impenetrable stands that outcompete and crowd out native plants for light, water and nutrients.

You may wonder, how can this scourge be contained? We’ll slash and burn them out — yeah! For every stem of this plant that is burned, four more stems sprout in its place. Cutting them down only causes the vigorous Callery rootstock to burst into action. The Callery pear is the South’s equivalent of kudzu, occurring in the 21st century. The best hope for eradication is one tree at at a time — stop selling Bradford pears, stop planting them, and quickly phase out any existing trees in our landscapes, pretty as they may be at certain times of the year.

Love/hate? I’m still trying to decide which side of the coin I’m on. This is, after all, an invasive species of plant. I lived for a while in one of those apartment complexes that originally planted them to shade the parking lot . Come springtime came their beautiful flowers, smelling of….. rotted fish? Baby poop? Seems that Bradford pears evolved to attract fly pollinators with this stinky scent, rather than bees. Ours produced large fruits that collected and rotted in the parking lot. Walking from car to door was like walking in through a minefield of dog doo. Over time, heavy winds and ice storms shattered theirfragile branches, which crashed onto fences, cars, clotheslines…. the apartment building itself. 

Bradford pears? The original invention seemed like such a grand idea. But those unintended consequences… ouch! Let me get my chainsaw. Better, still, a camera. It is probably more effective than a chainsaw and an infinitely more pleasant way to spend a Sunday morning.

Aiken Corporation, Editorials, October 2023, Pascalis 2023 - SRNL Lab

The Monkey in the Room

13 Comments
The Chatter at a Recent Aiken Corporation Meeting:

SPEAKER 3: We’ve only got one or two more meetings ‘til you have change.
OTHERS: Yep. Yes.
SPEAKER 4: That’s the monkey in the room.
SPEAKER 5: What’s that?
SPEAKER 4: When the change of the mayor leadership happens.

For 58 days — ever since local businesswoman Teddy Milner won the Republican mayoral primary runoff against incumbent Rick Osbon on August 22 — there was talk. Not everyone talked, but some did. Not everyone listened, but some did. After all, one doesn’t expect something akin to a coup in the small-town South.

This all changed on October 18, when a credible rumor broke in the form of a leaked email. According to this email, a group of local elites was raising $25,000 to engage a “well-known, well-respected political consultant” to run a stealth write-in campaign on behalf of Mayor Rick Osbon, the losing candidate in the primary runoff. The language in the email was amateurish enough to invite skepticism, but its authenticity was later vouched-for by a firsthand source to the leaker.

While all three of last summer’s mayoral candidates signed an oath upon entering the contest to “abide by the results of the primary” and to “not offer or campaign as a write-in candidate for this office or any other office for which the party has a nominee,” and to even accept legal repercussions, should they violate this pledge, there’s been nothing stopping other persons from conspiring, on behalf of a losing candidate, to violate the spirit of the pledge by running their stealth campaign.

Apparently, people on both sides knew for 58 days that this could happen. The possibility was a topic in some circles. On any one of those days, Mayor Osbon could have cleared this up by saying, “Please don’t write in my name. I lost the primary contest to Teddy Milner. I respect the democratic process. I play by the rules. I signed a pledge when I entered the primary contest to abide by the results of the primary, and I intend to honor that pledge.” 

But he didn’t say any of that. Even after the rumor broke, he held his silence. Finally, however, when asked outright by the local newspaper, he spoke. His semantics were pitch-perfect: “I have no intention of running a write-in campaign.” 

It is no secret that Mayor Osbon is widely supported by realtors, developers, and others who have appreciated the current administration’s rubber-stamping of urban sprawl, deforestation, and high-density housing. It is no secret that this administration has not been averse to adding just one more car wash, one more strip mall, one more four-story motel, one more parcel of overdeveloped land on the flood-lands of Doughtery; just one more tree, one more historic place demolished; just one more bit of over-development to perpetuate the Whiskey Road insanity as far as the eye can see — our lovely landscapes being reduced, plot by plot, to deforested sprawl in every direction.

It is only natural that realtors and developers might feel a certain panic at the prospect of a new mayor — one who has promised a more deliberate approach to growth and development.

We don’t need a crystal ball to see the future envisioned by these developers. Behold the $37 million Powderhouse Road Connector project and its bait-and-switch promise to relieve congestion on Whiskey Road by opening 400 acres of woodlands and fields to create yet more high-density housing and sprawl along the Whiskey Road corridor. The Powderhouse Connector project is, in turn, dwarfed by the many tens of millions that are in the process of being spent to expand the City to the interstate and beyond, opening the woodlands between to yet more deforestation, more car washes, more dollar stores, more sprawl. Add to this the looming SRNL office complex that the Aiken Corporation is lobbying to build in the historic downtown using funds from the $20 million plutonium settlement pot.

So it came as no surprise to hear talk turn to Mayor-Elect Teddy Milner at the October 11, 2023 Aiken Corporation/LED of Aiken, Inc meeting during discussion of the City Council’s delay in approving a piece of Aiken Corporation-owned property to site the $20 million Savannah River National Lab office:

SPEAKER 1: I was a little shocked when Council just was going to hear our thing and not say, good, we like that. But so we, I feel the ball is in the City’s court right now. Let us know so we can get this MOU. I mean, you know, I think Tim [Simmons] is right, but they’re going to say, well where is the location; we’ll tell them the City hasn’t  approved it yet.

SPEAKER 2: I don’t think they’ll say that.

SPEAKER 1: You don’t? 

SPEAKER 2: No. 

SPEAKER 3: I may be over-reacting. We’ve only got one or two more meetings ‘til you have change. 

SPEAKER 4: That’s my question. 

OTHERS: Yep. Yes. 

SPEAKER 4: That’s the monkey in the room.

SPEAKER 5: What’s that? 

SPEAKER 4: When the change of the mayor leadership happens…

SPEAKER 5: That’s another…

SPEAKER 4: They throw another wrinkle into…

SPEAKER 1: Our mayor-elect who never comes to our Council  meetings now, hmm?

SPEAKER 6: Now, now…. We all sang Kumbaya. 

SPEAKER 3: I mean, at some level, she needs to — I mean, respectfully, we should be including her in these conversations.

SPEAKER 6: [speaking to the City Manager]: So you don’t anticipate any drastic change in course? 

CITY MANAGER: At this point in time, I have no reason to believe that. I guess, so, yes, to answer, no. 

Loud laughter and unintelligible chatter. 

Although Aiken is no banana republic, there may be those in the development industry who have convinced themselves that they would be justified in usurping democratic processes to retain control of the levers of power. 

Fortunately, Aiken residents have the power of their voices and their votes to advocate for the common good and to push back against a plot that, if true, may not be illegal, but it would certainly raise important questions of ethics. 

_______________

Early voting for the office of Mayor and City Council Seats 1 and 3 continues today and next week through Friday, November 3rd. Election Day is Tuesday, November 7th. Click here for information on voting. 

Cast Your Votes for Aiken Mayor and City Council Seats: What You Need to Know