[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6557290,"mediaKeyId","3302039-a8ec37531cface12024640cf432c8bbb","parentId",3302039,"title","Votes at a glance: minutes, resolutions, and multiple ordinances advanced or approved","audioSeconds",2585,"startMs",1123000,"endMs",3708000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3302039-a8ec37531cface12024640cf432c8bbb&start=1123&end=3708","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3302039-a8ec37531cface12024640cf432c8bbb/thumbnail_1123000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6557290/Florence-City/Florence-County/South-Carolina/Votes-at-a-glance-minutes-resolutions-and-multiple-ordinances-advanced-or-approved","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6557290-eada001f1621873c906668c45d2e2eb0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770443127&Signature=HoEDjuLhTHR8vsUKfv6VU--F2lQav2lUvKYbhwmLSWQISwPUyf4dXNJvZLQZRDxpkcgJSa9G5uI2P3paxHI4NKS~OlwAxCGsdxZul-xYBeREhLZp3OW-6J-iGoz6fMe3ptY-miFdjV1tTUv42wqANQeRIiWz1hpDhsULptkbmhAN1QKorFJEzGnOtkh7rnmlolaEXq9ndPYuMnUstoEkSWh9-o-5ErgC2gRSWEc3nnI577wmBYgvxBnhrpcOb7glF-A6rQWI885KKZOS2C8ejBwfcO2NTMm3QP8hSNI9IqOgn1aELi6k72PSdBHa5hE75mnhE5U0RoPrtJd8H5evtw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Florence South Carolina","date","2025-05-14T20:21:21.063Z","article","At its May 2025 meeting Florence City Council took multiple formal actions. Highlights below summarize each item, the council's recorded outcome (as stated in the meeting), and the relevant agenda identifiers when provided.

Minutes
- Approve minutes of March 7, 2025 and April 14, 2025: approved (voice vote). (Transcript block: 206.03–215.67)

Resolutions and Recognitions
- Resolution 2025‑15: Name amphitheater at Florence Veterans Park for Colonel Baringer Fox Wingard Jr. — approved. Family attended and speakers remembered Wingard's civic and military service. (Transcript block: 781.92–896.24)
- Resolution 2025‑17: Proclaim May 2025 Lupus Awareness Month — approved (sponsored by Councilmen McCall and Smith). Several speakers, including patients and advocates, were recognized. (Transcript block: 1123.87–1266.41)

Ordinances (second reading / action)
- Bill 2025‑08 (second reading): Adopt updated downtown design standard — passed on second reading (voice vote; one nay recorded). (Transcript block: 2030.855–2052.37)
- Bill 2025‑14 (second reading): Amend UDO regarding communication towers (setback amendment allowing certified fall zone for public utilities) — passed on second reading. (See separate article for details.) (Transcript block: 2072.1099–2195.15)
- Bill 2025‑15 (second reading): Amend Somerset Acre Planned Development on Jefferson Drive — passed on second reading. (Transcript block: 2195.29–2221.11)
- Bill 2025‑16 (second reading): Annex and zone MC 6.2 property at 1006 West Marion Street (Tax Map 90060‑13‑005) — passed on second reading. (Transcript block: 2248.24–2253.6)

Ordinances (first reading / introductions)
- Bill 2025‑17: Introduce ordinance to raise revenue and adopt FY 2025‑26 budget — first reading moved. (Transcript block: 2436.245)
- Bill 2025‑18: Ordinance to amend FY 2024‑25 budget for early purchases (use of fund balance to secure prices for capital items) — passed on first reading; staff explained $1,111,600 in early purchases. (Transcript block: 3987.515–4108.65)
- Bill 2025‑19 (first reading): Amend Unified Development Ordinance regarding cemetery preservation — first reading passed; staff outlined survey, deed and buffer requirements including a 25‑foot buffer and separate deeded lot for cemeteries found on development parcels. (Transcript block: 4128.635–4374.0947)
- Bill 2025‑20 (first reading): Rezone 1203 Sopkin Avenue from CA to NC‑6.1 (to allow single‑family detached) — first reading passed; planning commission recommended 8–0. (Transcript block: 4511.195–4578.92)
- Bill 2025‑21 (first reading): Annex and zone NC‑6.3, portion of Florence County Tax Map 00100‑01‑101 on Tuscant Drive (1.467 acres) — first reading approved amid public comment (see separate article on the annexation). (Transcript block: 4614.33–7710.545)

Other actions and administrative items
- Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) allocation public hearing — staff noted exact funding award amount to be announced in a few days and that last year's allocations totaled approximately $325,000 (breakdown included planning/admin, emergency rehab, down‑payment assistance and a community program). The council deferred a CDBG adoption resolution to a later meeting. (Transcript block: 1752–1878; 7738–7759)
- Resolution 2025‑16 (downtown redevelopment grant, 4th quarter) — approved in executive session and recorded on the public agenda after executive session. (Transcript block: 7760–7779; 8728.205–8734.945)
- Numerous reappointments and board actions (planning commission reappointment of Charlie Abbott, other items deferred or approved as noted in staff reports). (Transcript block: 8752–8872)

Why this matters: the business taken in this meeting affects land use (rezoning and annexation), city design standards downtown, cemetery protections, the operating budget and targeted community grants and programs. Several items will return for second readings or further implementation steps.

Documented votes: many items were adopted by voice vote; where a specific count was read into the record the meeting transcript notes it (for example, Bill 2025‑08 recorded one nay). Where the transcript reports only \"the ayes have it\" the article records the outcome without a roll‑call tally.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Florence City Council Meeting - May 12, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Council approved minutes, adopted resolutions naming the Veterans Park amphitheater and proclaiming Lupus Awareness Month, and advanced or passed several ordinances on second and first readings including the downtown design standard, cemetery preservation, early‑purchase budget changes, and several rezonings.","taxTitle","Florence City, Florence County, South Carolina","taxId",4287,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6557294,"Council amends setback rule for communication towers to allow public utilities to certify fall zones",63,3532000,3595000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3302039-a8ec37531cface12024640cf432c8bbb&start=3532&end=3595","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3302039-a8ec37531cface12024640cf432c8bbb/thumbnail_3532000.jpg","/articles/6557294/Florence-City/Florence-County/South-Carolina/Council-amends-setback-rule-for-communication-towers-to-allow-public-utilities-to-certify-fall-zones","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6557294-88dbf277007466c5f54221e3c4a48733/orig.mp4?Expires=1770443127&Signature=XBhiBJr6c064aKOavBjPIhCiVIaP0gzGHOSg5RLym6IhVrwm4nfn~Ez1YbLEWtURNGrmd-YtmGMPpYFb9I0OiHN5sl5hndBPdxMzbF8t6qiU2nlJmoZcYc2ddc8UsRWjuzMAhoswHNgsdmkldBNfEK-gpr1Ji18PEeMHeRWLZXdTjhiYiEf4v4xxX3uhZpwMGTHSDnY3KwEjGBUskkjMnfbk2AbzkluGb20~VSk-ibmK552obUPewmroiZzo8alMI6QkV7vkxvsQWK57Ln05Ujw1xcfxNrzV6pWWzEoVgooNJNANmeq~aZ38b4SoFavRPXws5sYCAnvqmxGMs~~OeA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Florence City Council on second reading approved an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance changing setback language for communication towers so that towers owned and operated by public utility providers may measure separation from residential uses by the tower's certified fall zone rather than the UDO's standard formula.

Planning staff read the exact amended language into the record. Under the revised text, tower or antenna structures generally remain separated from the boundary line of a residential district or a residential property line \"by a distance equal to 1 foot for each foot in height measured from the property line.\" The amendment adds an alternative for \"tower or antenna structures owned and operated by a public utility provider\" where separation may be the tower's fall zone \"as determined and certified by an engineer licensed in the State of South Carolina in a letter that includes the engineer's signature and seal.\" The fall zone is measured from the boundary line of the residential district or property line of the residential use.

City staff clarified the change applies only to public‑utility providers; all other towers remain subject to the original separation requirement. Council members asked staff to confirm the certificate and engineer's seal language and to ensure the fall‑zone engineering documentation is retained in the development file. The measure passed on second reading with an affirmative voice vote.

Why this matters: the change retains a distance‑based standard for most towers but gives public utilities a path to site towers that may otherwise fail the strict distance formula so long as a licensed engineer certifies the fall‑zone calculation. The amendment may affect siting decisions for transmission, utility and other publicly owned tower infrastructure and clarifies enforcement and documentation expectations.

Council action: measure passed on second reading and will be incorporated into the Unified Development Ordinance as amended.","On second reading, council approved an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance that keeps a standard distance formula for most towers but allows towers owned by public utilities to meet separation via an engineer‑certified fall‑zone letter.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6557299,"Council approves first reading to annex Tuscant Drive parcel amid residents' objections over density",3136,4574000,7710000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3302039-a8ec37531cface12024640cf432c8bbb&start=4574&end=7710","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3302039-a8ec37531cface12024640cf432c8bbb/thumbnail_4574000.jpg","/articles/6557299/Florence-City/Florence-County/South-Carolina/Council-approves-first-reading-to-annex-Tuscant-Drive-parcel-amid-residents-objections-over-density","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6557299-4ba7f588d21e705a06386097a8aa9c37/orig.mp4?Expires=1770443127&Signature=AYMOaHo3hLu956cWstKWlvM5ksAPowyzQkpnMbT87w5Tkc9wApspE87HzTmeuhsNrS2C-O0IWp6I2NugAUj6C1TC1pgf5~bb9F~X9Ub9oJpIyd7QaY5a943yB1akv1it69RWdAGaWsjP4AzxiwQbQivL-6WmFPc5XskPIq~QgUJRRMAhC9fmNvjenHYI8eL9MuWqsF4hQG3W1UGfiYcnLaIqG0BRWeG6pqd3V7c8ULHt7MxytDf~2iGTzW5d4XBPZuGc21-IpzhJ4GdSUHLqQUam4CoxnPPP7bsS99r0E9gk8AuVKmTW5vPJVvAGAlGZZFFoaNUpGzxM-3yMturUcQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Florence City Council voted on first reading to annex and zone approximately 1.467 acres on Tuscant Drive to NC‑6.3 after a contested public hearing in which nearby residents urged denial or a different outcome.

Planner Jerry (Planning Department) told council the property is currently unzoned in the county and that the NC‑6.3 designation would allow a mixture of attached and detached residential types, including townhomes and multifamily units. The planning commission recommended annexation and the NC‑6.3 zoning by a 4–2 vote.

Multiple Villa Toscana residents spoke against the annexation at council. Ken Winslow, a resident and former board member, said Villa Toscana is a 77‑home community that maintains a long entrance and that a proposed 23–25 units on the 1.47‑acre parcel would \"impact the character of our community.\" Gloria Lucia, another resident, told council she viewed the developer's statements about possible county approvals as coercive and said the neighborhood's conservation designation should be respected. Several residents asked the council to require larger buffers or to maintain the parcel as commercially zoned if annexed.

Council discussion acknowledged two competing principles: property‑owner rights and the council's responsibility to evaluate compatibility with adjacent city zoning. Several councilmembers noted the parcel's unzoned county status means the owner could pursue a range of county uses if annexation were denied; others said annexation triggers the city's obligation to apply city zoning standards and to consider neighborhood impacts. Councilman George Jabali and others asked whether alternative zoning would exist that allowed lower density; planning staff said NC‑6.3 is the city district that specifically allows townhomes, and a different residential category would not permit that product.

Council members also discussed mitigation options: additional buffer yard requirements, neighborhood gates or agreements, and traffic‑calming measures. Planning staff said a traffic study would be triggered only at higher density levels and suggested the developer could be asked voluntarily to consider access and design changes.

The motion to annex and zone the parcel to NC‑6.3 passed on first reading (voice vote with recorded opposition during the hearing). The annexation and zoning will return for a required second reading, and council members encouraged staff to seek additional engagement between the developer and neighborhood to explore mitigation measures before final action.

Why this matters: the decision sets the municipal zoning for a parcel immediately adjacent to existing single‑family neighborhoods and raises recurring questions about how Florence balances infill housing, density, property‑owner rights and neighborhood character.

Next steps: the proposal will return for second reading; staff said that final development plans (site plan, stormwater, access) must be submitted and would be subject to city development standards and any additional conditions council imposes.","Florence City Council granted first reading of an annexation and NC‑6.3 zoning request for about 1.47 acres on Tuscant Drive despite strong opposition from Villa Toscana residents who said proposed townhome density and potential rentals would change their neighborhood's character.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6557301,"Florence council advances $145 million budget that includes millage hike to fund police cameras, sports-park berm",1112,1443000,2555000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3302039-a8ec37531cface12024640cf432c8bbb&start=1443&end=2555","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3302039-a8ec37531cface12024640cf432c8bbb/thumbnail_1443000.jpg","/articles/6557301/Florence-City/Florence-County/South-Carolina/Florence-council-advances-145-million-budget-that-includes-millage-hike-to-fund-police-cameras-sports-park-berm","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6557301-d3482c88f4bf6c1e4dbd74b60b51a6d7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770443127&Signature=CHm1cJdtf31mKnk4YXXtfcg-dJbdTIJPYPOXWmy42BpMi4pqeyM1~3ypvuR1nbhiOA6bY9PV6yGwbQR22x5SzEjM-q~FKlfmKG8Bpe-HKM3szK4Ne4CBVo7W4sNfGHiG1u0nOmaqVNCUY6OsT15fSLHOz1DEeJLgQtsNxeIR1Qx8ro-POuY~KGEgnbAToSIeyUi~oO0~mDRDIV2-WCVUsAYTNs55U1wYQvgD7PZHSgjL8fbMeO3v6ZMB2SzCibXqqBuHYEXRbi6lfGkz2z~3y~qOBgjK2Sgu9zMQBffpUVJ7-PG~2aUjUr~ttWhwIIBiGKRSF~yd7JSQUtuIK6BoJg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Florence City Council on May 2025 advanced the first reading of a $145,011,050 proposed budget that includes a proposed 7.5‑mill increase in the city operating millage to pay for expanded public safety equipment, park improvements and other capital needs.

City fiscal staff and the city manager framed the budget as balanced but strained by lost state appropriations. Interim Finance Director Glenn Bodenheimer described the proposal as \"a balanced budget of $145,011,050,\" and said it reflected \"our continued commitment to financial responsibility, transparency, and the strategic priorities set by council.\" The package as presented includes $1.75 million in additional property‑tax revenue tied to the 7.5‑mill increase, targeted largely to 30 additional Flock public‑safety cameras, a downtown officer position and upgrades at the sports complex.

Council members and staff said the millage request responds in part to a late decision at the state level that eliminated expected appropriations. City Manager Scott (referred to in meeting as the city manager) told council the city had requested $16,000,000 in state appropriations this year and that the state decision to cut appropriations meant the city needed to replace some of that funding locally. \"We requested $16,000,000 this year from state appropriations,\" he said; with those funds not coming through, council and staff sought alternatives in the local budget.

Police Chief Heitler and council members discussed the performance of the existing Flock camera system. Heitler said the first 30 cameras—funded previously through a $500,000 state appropriation—were associated with arrests and recoveries between July 2024 and March 2025: \"we arrested 48 fugitives, we recovered 38 stolen vehicles, 35 stolen license tags... the Flock cameras were responsible for solving more than 20 crimes and we located 7 missing people,\" he said. Council members framed additional cameras as a deterrent as well as an investigative tool.

Council also approved funding in the proposed budget for an earthen berm at the sports complex off Cashew Drive. The city manager said the berm—a roughly 10‑foot earthen mound with plantings—responds to multiple shootings and safety concerns on properties adjacent to the fields and was estimated at roughly $150,000–$200,000. Staff said work could begin within weeks, weather permitting.

Beyond public safety, the budget packet presented line‑item totals by fund: a $53,148,430 general fund, $49,359,700 for Water and Sewer Utilities, and smaller amounts for hospitality, stormwater and equipment replacement funds. Staff also asked council to approve an \"early purchase\" ordinance using a portion of the city's 30 percent fund‑balance policy to lock in prices for capital items ($1,111,600 proposed) ahead of the next fiscal year.

Why this matters: council must adopt a final budget before the new fiscal year; the proposed millage change will affect property tax bills if adopted in subsequent readings. Council members repeatedly stressed the trade‑offs: maintain services and public safety investments or cut programs if state aid remains unavailable.

Council action and next steps: council voted to move the revenue and budget ordinance (first reading) forward; further readings and final adoption are scheduled before the fiscal year begins. Staff also indicated the city will circulate drafts of water distribution and sewer collection master plans for more detailed council review in coming weeks.

Community reaction at the public hearing included requests for continued city support for nonprofit programs. Speakers during the budget public hearing urged continued funding for Meals on Wheels and for small‑repair funding through the Helping Florence Flourish nonprofit; Meals on Wheels said demand had risen from roughly 150 people waiting for meals to about 220.

The council discussion made clear staff and council view the additional cameras and the sports‑field berm as near‒term priorities, but other infrastructure projects—water, sewer and stormwater master‑plan work—will face delays or will need alternative funding because of the state appropriation cuts.

Ending note: the budget described by staff is a short‑term response to lost state funding; final adoption and any amendments will appear in council packets before second and third readings.","City staff presented a $145,011,050 balanced budget proposal and council advanced the ordinance introducing a 7.5‑mill increase to fund additional Flock safety cameras, a berm at the sports complex and other capital requests after state appropriations were cut.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: minutes, resolutions, and multiple ordinances advanced or approved

Council amends setback rule for communication towers to allow public utilities to certify fall zones

Council approves first reading to annex Tuscant Drive parcel amid residents' objections over density

Florence council advances $145 million budget that includes millage hike to fund police cameras, sports-park berm