New twist in Watson Hill sagaS.C. Supreme Court backs N. Charleston By Dave Munday (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
The door could be open for more houses to be built near the historic plantations on two-lane S.C. Highway 61. 
GILL GUERRY A state Supreme Court ruling Monday backs North Charleston, which wants to annex Watson Hill, a 6,600-acre parcel targeted for development near Middleton Place, an 18th-century plantation. The battlefield is the Barry tract, a parcel on the Ashley River that's between North Charleston and Watson Hill. Summerville annexed the Barry tract to keep North Charleston from annexing Watson Hill. Summerville favored a much smaller development than North Charleston would allow. North Charleston annexed the Barry tract, along with Watson Hill, a few days later. The two municipalities sued each other. North Charleston argued that Summerville's annexation of the Barry tract was not valid. One of North Charleston's arguments was that Summerville did not give the proper 30 days' notice on its annexation hearing. The rulingCircuit Judge James Williams ruled that Summerville missed the requirement by 12 hours. Summerville appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court unanimously upheld the circuit court's decision. The case is not over. Now the circuit court will have to decide whether missing the requirement for the notice invalidates the annexation. North Charleston will argue that it does. Supreme Court decisionTHE RULING: The S.C. Supreme Court ruled that Summerville missed the requirement to publicize the annexation hearing for the Barry tract 30 days in advance. WHAT IT MEANS: The ruling is part of a battle over how many houses can be built at Watson Hill, a parcel near the historic plantations along S.C. Highway 61. The Barry tract connects North Charleston to Watson Hill across the Ashley River. Summerville annexed the tract, and North Charleston annexed the tract and Watson Hill. The municipalities sued each other over the Barry tract. WHAT'S NEXT: North Charleston says the ruling means Summerville's annexation of the Barry tract was invalid. Summerville argues the annexation is still valid. The case goes back to the circuit court. "Obviously it doesn't end the case," North Charleston City Attorney Brady Hair said Monday. "We believe it decides a very important legal issue. I think it's of key significance. We believe Summerville didn't follow the rules, and we believe their annexation will fail. We consider this a victory." Attorney Jack Scoville of Georgetown, Summerville's lawyer, downplayed the ruling. "There are a lot more issues than just this one," he said. There are plenty of legal precedents for upholding an annexation, even without the full 30 days' notice, he said. Charlie Miller, Summerville's director of planning and development, declined to comment other than say, "Everybody knew the case wouldn't be decided on this issue." North Charleston Mayor Keith Summey hailed the ruling as a victory for the city. "It says their annexation was invalid, which to my mind means ours was valid," he said. The original development plan called for 5,000 houses and hotel rooms around a golf course. A down-scaled version was proposed later. Summey said the developers are working up a new plan for Watson Hill to try to keep everybody happy. Developer Richard Lam, an investor with Property Markets Group of New York and a managing partner for S.C. Property Holdings, confirmed that he's revising the plans for Watson Hill and said he would talk about them later this week. "As far as we're concerned, we're ready to talk with the developer," Summey said. "Everybody needs to sit down and work for the best interest of everybody. People need to look at the new plan. Let's look at the reality of what's going to happen." Reach Dave Munday at dmunday@postandcourier.com or 745-5862. |
Article tools |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 50 comment(s)
Posted by Thomas1776 on May 20, 2008 at 1:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Bring us more heavy traffic, more illegal mexicans, your crowds, and your crime. Charleston is welcome to all as local politics has run foul with corruption and greed.
While you're at it, bull doze the plantations and build some condos. They are going to sink and suffer foundation cracks from all the heavy equipment vibration around them.
Glad I don't live on or around Bees Ferry road. It's gonna get very very messy in that area.
Posted by moonpie on May 20, 2008 at 6:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Yeah build them and let them sit! You think because it's WATSON HILL these homes will automatically sell and that people that live in Charleston will move there. OH YEAH AND WHO'S BUYING THEIR HOUSES SO THEY CAN MOVE? AND IT'S NOW IN NORTH CHARLESTON!
Homes are sitting every where I look and have been for a year and a half. Major projects have been delayed or slowed.
Posted by Slick50 on May 20, 2008 at 7:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
6600 acres = 5000 houses = 10000 cars per day on highway 61. Unless they plow a highway from 165 to Glenn McConnell, things are gonna be real ugly. Again, Charleston cannot have it both ways. Historic 61 will become congested 61.
BTW, Primary time is June 10th. Too late to change the decision, but not too late to let those involved know how you feel.
Posted by Paul on May 20, 2008 at 7:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The developers and politicians don't seem to want to "represent" us. Maybe its time for Stronger (passive ?) measures ...
Posted by a_set_love on May 20, 2008 at 7:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Did you notice how Summerville only annexed down the river side of Hwy 61 and the City of Charleston annexed up Hwy 61 (only the Hwy 61 roadbed) in an attempt to block North Charleston crossing the river. Charleston annexed the Cooper River when it grabbed Daniel Island.
Summerville has massive developement underway just above the plantations and Charleston has massive developement underway just below the plantations.
When Charleston finished there was Watson Hill to be the next conquest of Mr. Riley?
After all Mr. Riley doesn't care how he takes land into Charleston, or how massive he has it developed, does he.
Remember the Dill tract on James Island, how he took Daniel Island, heavy developement up Hwy 61.
North Charleston is being portrayed as the evil party in this process?
Posted by JohnS on May 20, 2008 at 8:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If the land is still Dorchester County why can't the county rule on how many houses can be built on the site even if the land ends up being the city of North Charleston?
Posted by Early on May 20, 2008 at 8:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Time to build another land fill!
Posted by greyrider on May 20, 2008 at 8:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
JohnS - You tell me. None of this makes sense. The Lowcountry is a great place to live and everybody and their brother is moving in. That's fine, but it needs to be controlled. One of the reasons people love the Lowcountry is because it is so unique. Places like the area involved here cannot be found anymore. To walk around this area is like taking a trip back in time. Putting up a few houses is fine, but don't let the place get overrun. If people wanted to live with houses on top of one another, they can move to New York.
Posted by icbmman on May 20, 2008 at 8:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And the dominance of a 35-year-old, crime-infested, illegal-alien-sanctuary-city SUBURB over more plausible cities in this metro area continues. Stupidity knows no bounds in this state.
A_set_love, you need to get your facts straight. According to state law and most other states as well, a body of water in of itself is not considered a barrier to annex land. Case in point, NYC has annexed areas across bays and rivers (Long Island, Staten Island). Chas annexation of Daniel Island was clean and legal...AND necessary since the north city is hellbent on encircling the primary city to stifle growth. One smart thing Riley did was annex DI to keep the city growing and viable. Another thing, since you are an anti-Rileyite, you must be blind if you think N. Chas is void of heavy development and greed. The city is sprawled all over the place.
The major point in this case is that the north city jumped across S'ville and Chas boundaries in order to get Watson Hill, and if city boundaries count for something, you can't do that.
You know, this just further substantiates the need for both the cities of Chas and N. Chas to merge/consolidate. If they were one unified city, I don't think this would even be an issue.
Posted by onedeep on May 20, 2008 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The problem is that Mayor Summey feels that the only way North Charleston can become better is to expand outward. That is a faulty assumption, and shows why he is unfit to be mayor.
The money they are wasting on fighting this battle with Summerville, along with the money they will waste building and maintaining infrastructure in a part of North Charleston that is completely separate from the rest of the city, is all money that could be put to better use in the existing city limits.
Build up, not out!
Posted by Chasgirlie on May 20, 2008 at 9:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
House's are not selling now. So why build more? AND... I agree with everyone commenting about the traffic. I don't live in the area but I am there in the morning frequently. THE TRAFFIC IS A MESS ALREADY.... NO NEED TO ADD TO IT!
Posted by DontSpamMeBro on May 20, 2008 at 9:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Suck it, Summerville and Little Joe! Bwahahahahahahahhaha!
Posted by wjhamilton3 on May 20, 2008 at 9:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Is anyone planning to make this area functional for service by public transit? Are there concentrated areas for population with walkable connections to bus stops? Is there employment in the area, community shopping, schools within walkable distance. Are the streets a functional grid which distributes traffic, shorten the amount of driving and make travel on foot, by bicycle and small electric vehicle practical?
If nobody is asking these questions now, we're planning a landscape which isn't going to work. We simply can't sprawl into the countryside and then expect people to drive everywhere. There will never be enough time, money and asphalt to make that work.
It makes a lot more sense to redevelop North Charleston and the Neck.
Posted by Hutch on May 20, 2008 at 9:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What about the roads?
Posted by nursenat on May 20, 2008 at 9:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It is absolutely crazy to build that kind of development on Hwy 61. Some reasons? The current economy; it is becoming increasingly difficult to sell houses and everything that goes into building a house has increased. The price of new homes has and will continue to increase dramatically if things stay the same or worsen. Everything from lumber to plumbing pipe has increased along with the gas prices.
My family moved from Hwy 61 in 1985 because the traffic had become so bad. If 61 cannot be widened, how in the world will that road handle the amount of traffic and heavy vehicles that come with the massive development?
Wouldn't it be nice if Mayor Summey spent this money and energy on the areas of his city that need it most? There are many areas within the city of North Charleston that desperately need the attention he is devoting to this battle. Why not take care of and maintain what is already within your borders than try to expand them? Oh, I know the answer: GREED! He is ready to sit down with the developers?? Of course he is! While the citizens of this community are struggling to make ends meet with the price of gas, groceries and everything else climbing almost daily he is foaming at the mouth with dollar signs in his eyes over the revenue this development would bring his city. It's disgusting.
Posted by SnaponRic on May 20, 2008 at 9:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hello all, My family and I moved here from NY seven years ago "Yes I am a Damn Yankee and proud of it" and bought property on historic Hwy 61 beacause of the peace and tranquility. I look at wht's going on here and see exactly what happened to Long Island NY 30 years ago. Overbuiling and overpopulating an area that does not have the infrastructure to support the population explosion. Put aside that fact that it should be a sin that one of the few remaining historic and scenic highways is at jeaporady of being destroyed by mass construction but do we really need another parking lot? (hwy 61 cannot handle the traffic that is on there now we need to stop building and leave things alone.) I hope to god that someone has the sense to scale this project way back and do what they can not to destroy the way of living we've grown to Love here in South Carolina or else I might as well move back to NY it's turning into that here anyway. Thanks and God Bless.
Posted by a_set_love on May 20, 2008 at 10:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
.... And the people who want to continue to delude themselves that Charleston is anything more than a slowly dieing joke, being strangled by Mr. Riley and his backers, spout their venom.
"The major point in this case is that the north city jumped across S'ville and Chas boundaries in order to get Watson Hill, and if city boundaries count for something, you can't do that."
icbmman - You let your venom and hate cloud what you understand. Go back and read the Supreme Court ruleing based on 'case' law. A lot of lies and attacks have been told about North Charleston by you people. Like every other city in America it has its good and bad points.
No matter how much you hope and pray it will never be taken over by Charleston. Though if Mr. Riley isn't stopped Charleston might fall into bankruptcy, from what I'm hearing.
Posted by NativeSC on May 20, 2008 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
johns and greyrider, city supersedes the county in these situations. Not that that's right, that's just the way it is. There should be a year long moratorium on any new residential development of any kind in Charleston and Dorchester counties. This would allow the current inventory to be consumed and then we could see what's what. But that won't happen as long as greed rules. Developers are the scum of the earth. They make lawyers look good. There are some good ones who use good judgment to create something practical and beautiful that fits with a particular area, but if you look at the fields of Ryland and Centex tract homes that litter MT Pleasant, it makes you want to puke. In 20 years, we'll get to see what throw-away houses look like when they get dragged off to the landfill and then Charleston National, Ivy Hall, Park West, etc, etc can be "re-developed". Maybe they can make them look like I'on and we will finally live in Utopia.
Posted by charlestonnative1963 on May 20, 2008 at 10:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
NO MORE CLEARING...KEEP 61 SCENIC...GONE ARE THE DAYS OF TAKING A NICE SUNDAY DRIVE UP 61...WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER HOUSE- OR A BIGGER ROAD. STOP THE CONSTRUCTION
Posted by commonsence on May 20, 2008 at 10:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
My condolences to all Hwy 61 and WA friends. What used to be a wonderful and peaceful place to live is about to become a nightmare. Say hello to your new N. Chas. neighbors...sigh.
Posted by icbmman on May 20, 2008 at 11:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
A_set_love, you are apparently another genius on this forum who is inept at reading comprehension. You quoted my concise statement explaining why Chas' Daniel Island annexation is completely different from the north city's annexation of Watson Hill, yet you fail to even address it, merely pointing out that I have "venom and hatred".
YOUR anti-Charleston hatred blinds you from reality: Chas is STILL a viable city, but greedy suburbs like the north city have inhibited it greatly. I'm no big fan of Riley (as I've said in this forum ad nauseum), but there is no objectivity when comparing what the different cities in the metro area do to each other...it is heavily slanted against Chas, but is approving of all the other suburbs.
The Supreme Court ruling merely said that S'ville's notice of annexation was 12 hours too short. This has nothing to do with the validity of N. Chas' annexation. If the court follows case law and precedent, the annexation will be considered void as long as the boundaries of S'ville and Chas form a continuous barrier along Hwy 61. As far as the Barry tract annexation, it is a tough call. Regardless, I question the north city's intentions when it has a ton of land ready to develop as it is. As far as revenue, the city is supposed to have the largest amount of retail revenue, so why the need to expand in an area where they have no interest?
Posted by a_set_love on May 20, 2008 at 11:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ya got a good point there - NativeSC.
Have you got a good look at I'on, medium sized homes on small lots at very high prices.
Posted by svilletruthhurts on May 20, 2008 at 11:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
the question that needs to be asked is why does Charlie Miller still have a job when he messed this up (why not wait 12 more hours to annex) and was the director of planning for the county when they had too much unbridled growth.
Posted by kerwandstarks on May 20, 2008 at 11:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree with the poster from NY above. I am also a Yankee and can't believe what these Rebels are doing to their land. Soon this will have all the appeal of South Central L.A. Yes, take a look at Wescott Plantation, what a Sumney joke. Numerous houses into foreclosure and bankruptcy and a new low rent apartment complex being built with in steps of an already over crowded and trailer laden elementary school.
In about ten years when all the beauty is gone, we will ask: Why?
Summerville - "The town with the flowers in the trees"
to
Summerville - "The town without trees"
Posted by greyrider on May 20, 2008 at 11:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
NativeSc, thanks for the info. I'm all for private property owners rights, but why not sell fewer, but more expensive homes spaced out on big lots (5 acres or so)? That way, it wouldn't be overcrowded, and the area could still maintain its unique southern and historic charm.
Posted by a_set_love on May 20, 2008 at 11:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"The Supreme Court ruling merely said that S'ville's notice of annexation was 12 hours too short. This has nothing to do with the validity of N. Chas' annexation. If the court follows case law and precedent, the annexation will be considered void as long as the boundaries of S'ville and Chas form a continuous barrier along Hwy 61."
icbmman - If Summervilles' annextion doesn't conform to state law North Charlestons came first. Summerville tried to beat them by redefining the meaning of time. There was only hours between first reading by both cities. There was no Summerville border to cross over at the time North Charleston held its first reading.
Charleston annexed the roadbed of Hwy 61 (so no one could complain) to within a few hundred yards of the Barry tract to meet up with Summerville.
Reading comprehension? You are funny. I enjoy reading your comments.
Posted by icbmman on May 20, 2008 at 12:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
OK, then the most important question in this issue is this: do the new Chas and S'ville boundaries actually meet up and block annexation from the Barry tract to Watson Hill? If so, N. Chas can get the Barry tract, but not Watson Hill. That would suck for N. Chas.
Second question: does "redefining" the notice time make the annexation null and void?
Well, I'm glad I can entertain. But I do call it like I see it.
Posted by Native_Ink on May 20, 2008 at 12:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This is a sad day for the Lowcountry. Summerville says there are other issues that might stop the development, but it seems like Watson Hill is halfway down a slippery slope. I can't believe North Charleston will control the future of all that land. Summerville better get busy annexing all the territory around Watson Hill to keep it under control.
Posted by kerwandstarks on May 20, 2008 at 12:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Rebels - You will answer to the man upstairs one day.
This is sin against nature!
Posted by kerwandstarks on May 20, 2008 at 12:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Rebels - How many empty and forclosed cheaply built homes do you need?
Take a look at the Sunday paper!
There are thousands for sale.
Get ready to explain to the Father one day.
Posted by Native_Ink on May 20, 2008 at 12:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Harpo- you're right. I heard a radio interview with a retiring S.C. Supreme Court justice. I forget his name, but when they asked him what his retirement plans were, he said he had a lot of coastal property he was hoping to develop. What was even worse is that he kept going on and on about how great development is for South Carolina. If you didn't know who was speaking, you'd just assume he'd been a developer all his life, not a judge.
Posted by icbmman on May 20, 2008 at 12:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
<<Native Ink wrote: "This is a sad day for the Lowcountry. Summerville says there are other issues that might stop the development, but it seems like Watson Hill is halfway down a slippery slope. I can't believe North Charleston will control the future of all that land. Summerville better get busy annexing all the territory around Watson Hill to keep it under control.">>
Chas better get proactive as well before West Ashley residents start calling N. Chas their residence...which is just insane if you ask me. WA is the birthplace of Chas, for crying out loud.
Chas needs to annex all the land, including the nearby plantations up to the county borders to prevent encroachment of N. Chas.
Posted by greyrider on May 20, 2008 at 12:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Native_Ink - That speaks volumes. I have been saying for years that people need to take the issue of electing judges A LOT more serious. Right or wrong, they have a huge impact on daily life. All judicial elections (where we get to elect them) AND the issue of electing those who appoint judges needs to become a bigger issue in the minds of voters.
Posted by greyrider on May 20, 2008 at 12:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
icbmman wrote: Chas needs to annex all the land, including the nearby plantations up to the county borders to prevent encroachment of N. Chas.
Amen!
Posted by sunshine on May 20, 2008 at 1:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The economy will control whether or not the property is developed . . . as someone said "houses aren't selling now" . . . a developer won't spend millions on a project to just have it sit and pay interest . . . do any of you NIMBYs own any property other than your home? . . . a simple solution would be to raise taxes and buy up all the undeveloped property . . . the property owners will be compensated and you will be happy that nobody else can move here . . . in case you don't know NIMBY stands for Not In My Back Yard
Posted by icbmman on May 20, 2008 at 1:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Is that a POS I stepped on, or is that TP, the calling-the-kettle-black troll?
Posted by icbmman on May 20, 2008 at 2:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
TP, what kind of response did you expect when I wasn't even addressing you, and I was having intelligent conversations with others here? Are you envious or something? My responses to you are hardly temper tantrums and outbursts...those are called retorts. All you have done with me is spew childish insults with comments that you've made to instigate me and others, especially when I wasn't even talking to you. That's what a troll does, my friend. If you don't want that distinction, I suggest you change how you post to others, at least to me.
Posted by NativeSC on May 20, 2008 at 2:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I didn't do a good job with the sarcasm in my earlier post when I compared I'on to Utopia. Narrow streets, houses twice the size that should be allowed for the corresponding lot, no off street parking so the narrow streets are packed with cars, neighbors so close they can reach through the window to borrow toilet paper, etc,etc. I can understand why people want to live here, I just don't understand why they would want to live on top of each other, literally. We DO NOT NEED anymore development. There are plenty of houses sitting empty.
Posted by Thomas1776 on May 20, 2008 at 3:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
SC Supreme Court Chief Jean Toal is a drunk. Never forget how she snaked her away out of a DUI charge after striking a parked vehicle and leaving the scene of the accident.
She is not the person she projects on the outside. She wears a mask of deception.
Posted by icbmman on May 20, 2008 at 3:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
TP, again, you seem to really think of yourself as some sort of intellectual deity, and you are nothing of the sort. I've had far more civil disagreements with people about other issues than you primarily because they actually make good points instead of constant denigration, which is your trademark. BTW, name one individual that sees me the way you do.
You refuse to see yourself as a troll, which is absolutely hilarious, because now we're posting about this nonsense instead of the article on this page...something you instigated. Did you have to say anything about me? I wasn't even disagreeing with anybody...my last posts about this subject were more questions about the situation with the north city and the state court. I notice that almost anywhere I post, you have to insert some comment about me. So please, don't even try to name me as the troll...you and your actions clearly define that term.
I really use the phrase "pot calling the kettle black" alot with you, because if anybody believes his own bulls--t, it's you.
You've shown little, if any, glaring flaws in my arguments. Again, you constantly use this declaration of a pseudo-victory in your posts, which further illustrates your intellectual impotence.
Posted by longview on May 20, 2008 at 3:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Manage growth by (re)focusing on the development of urban centers. This kind of growth is in no way good for Charleston, Summerville or North Charleston. Without meaningful industry and commercial economy, this great town is in trouble. To the people who believe that we are past "saving" this area and all is for not, please get lost. Go someplace else. We face to to many challenges in the Charleston Metro area to be weighed on by pessimism. This is my back yard. I intend to fight for it.
Posted by Native_Ink on May 20, 2008 at 4:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Looking ahead, I wonder if we can reduce this development by starving it of water. Dorchester County has gotten very skeptical about new development (thank God) and Charleston County probably wouldn't send a waterline out there either. Maybe they could force N. Chas to either build its own water treatment system, which would cause a huge tax hike, or to drastically cut the number of homes built there. We need something to hold over Mayor Summey's head if he wins this court battle.
Posted by idguy on May 20, 2008 at 4:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How sad. People are willing to bulldoze the beauty that makes that area so charming. And for what? Just so more houses and strip malls can be crammed into an already overcrowding metro area. Oh well, nothing says historical and environmental preservation like a housing development next to Middleton Place.
Posted by icbmman on May 20, 2008 at 4:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Nice twisting of words, TP. I never called you an intellectual (nor do I think of you in that way), and you hardly think of yourself as a simpleton from other posts I've read.
Name the "conservative cliches" or the "Rush Limbaugh quotes" I've made. You are such a liberal lemming, you have no idea what you're talking about. You are so deluded, you can't even see what you've done. I refused to discuss any issues with you because all you can do is be a "Bart Simpson", an annoying little brat. I ignored you for awhile, and I stopped today to address these inane comments you made about me. I'll continue posting to others, and I will not refer to you anymore. You should do the same. Deal?
Posted by icbmman on May 20, 2008 at 4:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
That's hardly a cliche; I could say many of your posts contain liberal cliches from environmental groups, etc. I'll continue to make my opinions as I see them. I don't know why you think I have to be less assertive with my opinions...if I feel and think something strongly I will say it. Don't try to control my speech or how I think.
Thanks. Have a nice life.
Posted by icbmman on May 20, 2008 at 5:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow, an intelligent riposte.
That is a true example of what a troll does, ladies and gentlemen.
Pot, meet kettle.
Posted by jifdeng3 on May 20, 2008 at 7:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
hgm
Posted by LoveDorchester on May 20, 2008 at 9:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Don't you love it? North Charleston builds MORE houses in Dorchester County, and Dorchester County HAS to educate the children. Charlie Miller did this dirty deed to us, and where is he? Sitting in the town of Summerville with no sense of responsibility at all. Town of Summerville doesn't have to educate the kids, run the sewer, build the roads, nothing!!! All because Charlie Miller can't use a calender and tell time, got to love it! DAMN.
Posted by now_ready1 on May 20, 2008 at 10:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Manage growth by (re)focusing on the development of urban centers. This kind of growth is in no way good for Charleston, Summerville or North Charleston."
"Without meaningful industry and commercial economy, this great town is in trouble."
Sorry longview but I don't understand which great town you refer to, Charleston, Summerville or North Charleston?
Posted by nursenat on May 20, 2008 at 11:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hey Icbmman and TP, why don't you take your little feud outside? It was amusing at first, but got old real quick. You two are acting just like the morons you say you are not. We already have enough judges, local, state and federal representatives (just to name a few) who would rather focus on their ego-driven personal agendas instead of the serious issues facing society.
Enough with the name-calling and whining...