Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics And Appointments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident accuses regional board appointee of conflict of interest; council member disputes claim
Summary
During public comment, Kathy Sturgis alleged a county appointee to the Southern Carolina Regional Development Alliance has a paid role and stands to profit from development projects, and she criticized a proposed $15 million bond as a tax to cover a budget hole; a council member disputed those assertions and said the regional board is volunteer-run and that an ethics complaint has been filed.
Kathy Sturgis used the public-comment period at the March 2 Colleton County Council meeting to voice two linked concerns: she said a regional-development board appointment publicized on that agency’s website (named in the meeting as "Mr. Murdo" or "Mr. Mardall") creates the appearance of a conflict because board members, she alleged, are paid or profit from state grants while helping to connect developers to large tracts of land for projects such as data centers. She also criticized a $15 million general-obligation bond on the agenda as effectively a tax to cover budget shortfalls and said she opposed it.
"I don't think that a voting member should be voting on any projects that have anything to do with zoning for any of those centers...that is definitely the appearance of impropriety," Sturgis said, adding that she believed the council member should resign from that appointment.
In response a council member addressed the chamber, saying the Southern Carolina Regional Development Alliance is a volunteer board appointed by seven counties, that only the agency director is compensated, that the council member serves in a representative capacity, and that an ethics complaint had been filed with the state ethics commission and acknowledged. The council member said the public-comment claims were false as presented and urged commenters to verify facts before speaking publicly.
The council later retained the appointment on the agenda as presented and moved forward with other business. The transcript records both the accusation from Sturgis and the council member's rebuttal; it does not include documentary evidence about board compensation, the appointee's employer or details of any grants or projects in the meeting record.
Next steps: The ethics complaint referenced in the rebuttal is a matter for the state ethics commission; council action on appointments and the bond proceed as recorded in the meeting minutes. Journalists and residents seeking verification should consult the Southern Carolina Regional Development Alliance public records, county appointment documentation and the state ethics commission for the status and details of any complaint.
