Reproduced from The
Post and Courier, Charleston, SC (used with permission)
Return to Kernodle, Root & Coleman home page
Return to Press page
James Island suedBY JASON HARDINOf The Post and Courier Staff Originally Published on: 07/25/02 Page: 1 Charleston alleges new town not constitutional The fragile legal peace between the city of Charleston and the new town of James Island blew apart Wednesday, as the city filed a lawsuit claiming the town was formed illegally and should be dissolved. Charleston Mayor Joseph P. Riley Jr. said the town will drain resources away from the city and that it makes no sense to have two governments on the suburban island. He said the town will take about $450,000 annually from the city in the form of local option sales taxes. "I feel a tremendous responsibility to the citizens of Charleston ... to protect their claim," Riley said. "I felt it was, believing that we have a sound case, that it was a matter of standing up for the citizens of Charleston now and standing up for the citizens of the future." The legal challenge sets in motion a replay of what happened when an earlier version of the town incorporated in 1992. The city sued in a case that finally went to the S.C. Supreme Court, which ruled against the town. In this case, the city maintains that a state law passed after the demise of the first town - one that gave town supporters new hope - is unconstitutional. The news of the suit came as no surprise to town leaders, who bitterly recalled the earlier battle but predicted victory this time around. James Island Mayor Mary Clark said Charleston is still reeling from the town's incorporation referendum, which passed by a large margin in May, and is attempting a long-shot legal strategy. "Even a dead rattlesnake can still poison you with its fangs," she said. "They won't win, because we're right. We will not fail. We will not be bulldozed under, and we will not have our town stolen again." She also said the sales tax money, which is distributed to municipalities in the county, rightly belongs to the town and its more than 20,000 residents. The city's successful suit against the first town argued that the town was cobbled together from several separate chunks of suburbia, connected by marshes and waterways already claimed by the city. The court ruled that the town could not use those areas to connect the separate pieces. In 2000, the General Assembly passed a law that allowed marshes and waterways to be, in essence, shared by two municipalities. The city claims that the law is "special legislation" that applies only to one area or one situation, something generally prohibited by the state constitution. "I think the strength of the suit is that they have passed an act that will only apply in Charleston County on James Island," City Attorney Bill Regan said. He said city attorneys can find no other place where the law would apply and noted the legislation was passed after town backers lobbied for it. But Trent Kernodle, a James Island attorney who assisted in the incorporation, said South Carolina has vast stretches of marshland and waterways, thus plenty of places the law could apply. "I don't see how ... it would apply just to James Island," Kernodle said. "I think they're grasping at straws." Kernodle said he worries the suit is an attempt to engage the town, which has no revenue yet, in a costly battle of attrition. "Another way to look at it is, they're saying, 'We're going to do whatever it takes, to use our vast power and vast resources, to crush this uprising,'" he said. "A lot has to do with just wearing folks out and outspending them." Other grounds for the suit include that the parts of the town are not connected even if the law stands, Regan said. He also said it makes no sense to create new municipalities right next to existing cities or towns, and that parts of the town are actually in the city. Kernodle said that is not the case. Riley said the suit makes sense from a policy as well as a legal standpoint. He said town residents benefit from their proximity to the city and use Charleston resources by doing things such as shopping, watching ball games or going to the hospital. That being the case, they ultimately should be brought into the city to help pay for those services, he said. He also said it would be far more efficient to have a single government provide services to the island. But Clark said many island residents think the city is too focused on downtown projects such as Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park and the aquarium. Money is siphoned from the suburbs to pay for such pet projects, she said, and suburban residents resent that. "If West Ashley could do it, they would. If Johns Island could do it, they would. Nobody wants to be part of the city of Charleston," Clark said. She also said it's simply unfair for the city to ignore the wishes of island residents. "It's a tyrant wanting to deny the people the right of self-determination after we've fought for 10 years for it," Clark said. The suit drew mixed reviews from Charleston City Council members. Councilman Henry Fishburne said the city should leave the town alone, although he said he understands the rationale for the suit. "Bottom line, the people out there have spoken twice," he said. "I just think we need to show some respect to their efforts and their votes." Riley said he is confident that a majority of council members agree with the decision to sue. In any case, doing so is well within the powers of the office of mayor, he said. The suit names as defendants Clark, other members of the Town Council, members of the town's election commission, election managers and Secretary of State Jim Miles, who approved holding the incorporation referendum. Two James Island residents joined the city as plaintiffs. The town does not have a lawyer or, at the moment, money to pay one. Clark said the town is close to hiring an attorney. The town would be able to borrow money to meet expenses in anticipation of receiving sales taxes and other revenues. |
Reproduced from The
Post and Courier, Charleston, SC (used with permission)
Return to Kernodle, Root & Coleman home page
Return to Press page