[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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],{"_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",6553316,"mediaKeyId","5071069-66838090dd90994a0ea680def00fdbd7","parentId",5071069,"title","Votes at a glance: Fairfield County Council actions and outcomes","audioSeconds",125,"startMs",2702000,"endMs",2827000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5071069-66838090dd90994a0ea680def00fdbd7&start=2702&end=2827","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5071069-66838090dd90994a0ea680def00fdbd7/thumbnail_2702000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6553316/Fairfield-County/South-Carolina/Votes-at-a-glance-Fairfield-County-Council-actions-and-outcomes","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6553316-d72cc0078ce4576442b3fe059541892a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771160568&Signature=lLJIZ34ZdFQ8~7zOrs~SYFUHvfj1BqNGJW~snVufBA~oEP0Y29NUuZimFPngnUbzrn3rCL6lXF2p7RAbXmhww9iCWc6qZw07zHa2Gwv6nNe5hkzqfq1lKF2vbcsR7p1xrprNHh0OMKlxjmwdOLu7JafPOVnlXpSSUbxFQ4xudbKQgFuzsXE1Xwx8B25O5HkJeeQglwV-9fPr73znRnWN5FTZ150UYjUCUZVelFNFrVJwNjAlbJ~3pCkS4buRG-UJImcrvb4pKjOiY0NyLxPS5XvER07auyTqSKoY-x2IdCZbM05azSujOpwzMzamt9WezYKHqVrKrTv~jXaKY20rlA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Fairfield County","date","2025-06-24T12:23:58Z","article","At its June meeting Fairfield County Council took or considered several formal actions; this summary lists each item and the recorded outcome.

- Ordinance (third and final reading) \u0012 Ordinance number 8 46: Lease purchase agreement between Fairfield County and Mega Metal. Outcome: passed, recorded 6-0.

- Resolution \u0012 Resolution number 2025-07: Requesting the South Carolina Department of Transportation to post \"No Through Truck\" signs on Jenkinsville Road and Jenkinsville Extension. Outcome: passed, recorded 6-0.

- Board appointment \u0012 Board of Zoning Appeals: Tamika Watts, District 5 representative (appointment to represent District 2 noted in transcript). Outcome: appointment confirmed, recorded 6-0.

- Minutes and agenda approvals \u0012 Routine approvals of the meeting agenda and prior minutes. Outcome: approved, recorded 6-0.

- Lake Wateree algae funding request \u0012 Motion to appropriate $30,000 from the general fund contingency to support a Lake Wateree algae treatment program. Outcome: motion tied 3-3 and failed.

- Behavioral Health Services loan conversion \u0012 Motion to convert a 2017 $500,000 note to Behavioral Health Services into a grant. Outcome: motion tied 3-3 and failed.

- Executive session \u0012 Council entered executive session for receipt of legal advice regarding ordinance summons number 3662 under state code as noted in the record; council returned and reported no action was taken.

These items and their recorded tallies are taken from the meeting transcript and the roll-call statements recorded during the meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Fairfield County Council Meeting 06-23-2025","oneSentenceSummary","Summary of formal actions taken or considered by Fairfield County Council at the June meeting, including ordinance adoptions, a resolution, an appointment and the failed algae and loan‑conversion votes.","taxTitle","Fairfield County, South Carolina","taxId",3364,"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},6553320,"Council declines to forgive $500,000 behavioral health facility note; motion fails after split vote",886,2556000,3442000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5071069-66838090dd90994a0ea680def00fdbd7&start=2556&end=3442","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5071069-66838090dd90994a0ea680def00fdbd7/thumbnail_2556000.jpg","/articles/6553320/Fairfield-County/South-Carolina/Council-declines-to-forgive-500000-behavioral-health-facility-note-motion-fails-after-split-vote","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6553320-b6eed938fc515e021f50deaf253d4ea5/orig.mp4?Expires=1771160568&Signature=NRWQPJzsWVxEXzE~LCJFMtTHkgv4fnRcGqfUJonr7Sxne4GKxobv8IlY9~3Fg7BESF67XPq5LegKkFQGV9-Z2qYP2er~1tL9J2Pk6tRE9XTFMwXc514uU2ifXrO8BpUqL8Eo~-wpkSJBSm2ro-CdmZkFkty6eAq~8T5AQ5bTXO57qusHg5wqFhwsThR-Dnflbu3R7wiVjWrXUD32ZDzBgcDYNLEqgEo29QGy8ytF6qJ4WqG8BpA4HuQGc1vnFhQcCSt5aAGQ-r0r3JIkUl6PDrhutFbpAJ~UOTFWEf0GwBfY2S-9a6oORHWx7xBFZXxYkN3W2E~Io3eQlSylMf-2~A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Fairfield County Council considered a request from the county's Behavioral Health Services board to convert a $500,000 note from 2017 into a grant but did not approve the change at the June meeting.

County staff described the 2017 instrument as a permissive, open‑ended note tied to a facility project; the note included a 25‑year term and stated that if Behavioral Health sold the building the county could be repaid from sale proceeds. County attorneys and staff said the note did not include regular repayment terms or an interest schedule; it was intended as an assurance the facility would remain in the county.

An executive of Behavioral Health Services explained the county funds were used during construction while state grant disbursements were phased and that the agency had no intention of selling the facility. \"We don't have any intentions of selling. We are the county authority for providing the services,\" the agency representative said, noting the organization has served the county for decades.

Some council members expressed concern about removing the note from Behavioral Health's balance sheet entirely, noting the county could lose the ability to recoup funds if the building were sold in a future, uncertain circumstance. One member asked whether another legal structure could preserve a county repayment claim while removing the liability from Behavioral Health's statements; county counsel said accounting treatment might not change merely by renaming the instrument and suggested a negotiated agreement could be explored but would likely remain visible in audits.

A motion to convert the $500,000 note to a grant was made and seconded; the vote was recorded as a 3-3 tie and the motion failed. Separately, a motion to table the item was discussed earlier in the meeting; council debate focused on obtaining additional financial information about Behavioral Health's balance sheet and the county's accounting treatment before making a final decision.

Council members asked for more time and information on the agency's assets and on possible legal mechanisms that would allow the county to preserve repayment rights while addressing the agency's concern about the liability showing on its books. No conversion was approved at the meeting.","Fairfield County Council considered converting a 2017 $500,000 note to Behavioral Health Services into a grant but did not approve the change after debate about accounting, stewardship and future contingencies; the motion failed on a 3-3 vote.",{"_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},6553325,"Fairfield County council deadlocks on $30,000 request to treat Lake Wateree algae",5787,858000,6645000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5071069-66838090dd90994a0ea680def00fdbd7&start=858&end=6645","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5071069-66838090dd90994a0ea680def00fdbd7/thumbnail_858000.jpg","/articles/6553325/Fairfield-County/South-Carolina/Fairfield-County-council-deadlocks-on-30000-request-to-treat-Lake-Wateree-algae","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6553325-fbac664554bf217eda1b1da06186be4a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771160568&Signature=LYu1dRfgTtAC4ovIrxFfjG1qQIhCo5cz-HOTVe0hoA-c-Osig1c6I51au~ekpthfmJYSOydnE6BpOwvXl4RHp75-J5rvUJP20ch6Dl1XICB235Nqp4fc6e7nJ2JzB2rV0OLneE1rsV-wXTXGWhqbQruxr~kBGjZOrogu2DqAnbrJxeE08Ep42k116RkF495onP07Y3o-iBPQ6iQM8XuIH4sZOkX7AdZeUbHI68q4NyOrYPm0DDwc-aooEjeZ56MmgCtTDeUwaunQ9nMhYg8gr9SrkwqeOxnq908N16rEioY-O3OiTlvDaDHJ1ZDan7GOlm459Bggi6-jMKstCTny8w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Fairfield County Council on June 9 heard hours of public comment and an expert presentation on toxic cyanobacteria affecting Lake Wateree and deadlocked on a request for $30,000 to support an initial algae-treatment program.

The council heard from Dr. John Rogers, professor emeritus at Clemson University, who described filamentous cyanobacteria (Lyngbya/lingbia) in the lake that can produce dermal toxins and other compounds harmful to animals and irritating to humans. \"It's irritating to people. It can cause adverse effects over time if you're a repeated swimmer,\" Dr. Rogers said, adding that targeted algaecides registered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency can be used and that he was offering pro bono work and in-kind support from manufacturers for field demonstrations.

The request was made by the Lake Wateree Association (LWA) and its members. Daniel Ting, speaking for LWA, described the association's fundraising and argued the fireworks and other community activities show local support and economic benefit tied to the lake. \"By law, funds designated for a specific purpose must be used accordingly,\" Ting said when describing how LWA raises earmarked donations for events and lake programs.

Supporters, including residents and LWA leaders, emphasized local economic stakes. Thomas Ford, a long-time association leader, said the association had approved $10,000 unconditionally toward treatment and described the association's reserve as a long-term investment used for legal contingencies and lake work. Speakers also said the full annual cost to treat the entire lake was estimated at about $320,000; the first-year plan would target roughly half the lake and seek about $160,000 in combined funding from multiple entities.

Opponents on council and some other speakers urged caution about committing recurring county funds. One council member noted competing county needs—singling out a request for senior services funding—as a reason for concern about committing $30,000 now and potentially more in subsequent years. The council attempted a motion to fund the LWA request for $30,000; the vote was tied 3-3 and therefore failed.

What was clear from the meeting: residents and the association urged early intervention, citing risks to recreation, fisheries and property values, while some council members sought firmer evidence of projected costs, limits on county exposure and clearer plans for multi-jurisdictional funding. Dr. Rogers and LWA representatives said they had in-kind contributions from algaecide manufacturers, volunteer monitoring programs and technical partners, and that the Catawba Water Management Group would manage funds and contracts if the program were funded.

Council members and staff also clarified that LWA would not receive the county check directly; the funds would be administered by the regional management group that would run the treatment program. Dr. Rogers volunteered his time and said he could match county funds; LWA leaders described additional fundraising and volunteer monitoring already underway.

The council did not adopt the $30,000 appropriation at the meeting. Members emphasized that a future appropriation could be considered at a later budget meeting and that any subsequent funding would require a separate vote.

The public record from the meeting shows considerable community engagement, including comments from residents who said they had developed rashes after contact with the algae, and statements that Lake Wateree generates significant property-tax and tourism revenue for Fairfield County.","After a public presentation and hours of testimony, Fairfield County Council split 3-3 on a $30,000 request to support a Lake Wateree algae treatment program; supporters urged immediate action while some council members questioned ongoing costs and priorities.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Fairfield County Council actions and outcomes

Council declines to forgive $500,000 behavioral health facility note; motion fails after split vote

Fairfield County council deadlocks on $30,000 request to treat Lake Wateree algae