Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ballot Question topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chesterfield commission adopts ballot wording and resolution for proposed capital projects sales tax referendum
Summary
At a June 23 meeting, the Chesterfield County Capital Project Sales Tax Commission voted unanimously to adopt amended ballot-question wording (replacing “must” with “shall”) and approved a resolution formalizing the question’s form under South Carolina law to prepare for a referendum.
The Chesterfield County Capital Project Sales Tax Commission on June 23 voted unanimously to adopt the proposed form of a ballot question and a companion resolution aimed at putting a capital projects sales tax referendum before county voters.
County Attorney Coleman R. Bryant reviewed the governing law and sample language from other counties, telling the commission that he had "reviewed the relevant statutes for drafting the ballot question." After discussion, Vice-Chair Karen Short moved to adopt the ballot question as presented with a pair of textual amendments: replacing the word "must" with "shall" in the first paragraph and replacing "must" with "shall" following the phrase "Project Description." Commissioner Dr. Samuel Richardson III seconded the motion; the commission voted unanimously to approve the amended wording.
The commission next considered a resolution described in the meeting record as "A Resolution of the Chesterfield County Capital Project Sales Tax Commission regarding the form of the proposed ballot pursuant to Title 4, Chapter 10, Article 3 of the Code of Laws of South Carolina 1976, as amended, and addressing other matters related thereto." Commissioner Karen Watson moved to adopt the resolution and Commissioner James Crowder seconded; the resolution was approved unanimously.
Why it matters: The commission’s actions set the formal language and legal framework the county will use if it advances a capital projects sales tax referendum to voters. County Attorney Coleman R. Bryant told commissioners staff requests that the commission continue meeting to support County Council and staff in educating voters about the referendum, and commissioners agreed to remain engaged in that process.
Votes at a glance: the meeting record shows unanimous approval for the motions recorded. Motions and outcomes included adoption of the agenda (moved by Dr. Samuel Richardson III, seconded by James Crowder), approval of the June 9, 2026 minutes (moved by Jordan Seidhom, seconded by Dr. Samuel Richardson III), adoption of the ballot question with the stated textual amendments (moved by Vice-Chair Karen Short, seconded by Dr. Samuel Richardson III), adoption of the resolution formalizing the ballot form (moved by Karen Watson, seconded by James Crowder), and adjournment (moved by Dr. Samuel Richardson III, seconded by Jordan Seidhom). The record notes each motion passed unanimously.
The commission adjourned after the votes. The meeting record includes Clerk Betty M. Boswell’s attestation and Chair John Long’s signature line dated July 1, 2026.
