THE ANSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS convened for a recessed meeting on Monday, October 22, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. in Courtroom #1 located in the Anson County Courthouse.
Commissioners present:Bill Thacker, Chair
Michael Livingston, Vice Chair
Blake Hildreth
Steve Lear
Dr. Jim Sims
Ross Streater
Staff members present:Chris Wease, County Manager
Bonnie M. Huntley, CMC, Clerk to the Board
James Bennett, Human Resource/Asst. Co. Mgr.
Rochelle Williams, Board of Elections
Chairman Thacker called the meeting to Order. Chairman Thacker stated the two topics for discussion tonight are redistricting of our county and courthouse security.
County Manager Wease explained that the maps before the Board tonight represent several options in the redistricting process. This process is necessary based on the population from the last census and we have a target number of 3611 citizens in each district, or as close as we can get. County Manager Wease, along with Rochelle Williams of our Board of Elections, Dr. George Truman, School Superintendent and a representative of the School Board went to Centralina and worked on option 2. Over the last week, the Commissioners have gone by the Elections office and made suggestions for more changes. He noted that logistical barriers need to be changed keeping in mind that citizens should travel only a reasonable distance to vote and all incumbents must remain in their same district.
Bill Duston of Centralina, noted the news was good. It seems that all four options meet all the criteria that we need to have in adopting districts. All incumbents are protected, all districts are relatively close to each other and all follow precinct boundaries. He reminded Board members that the districts couldn’t have more than a 10% spread in population. It was again noted that while prisoners do not vote, they do count for purposes of population and that is one reason district 4 is so out of balance. There was much discussion of the changes represented by each option. Mr. Duston reminded Board members that time was of the essence as the approved plan must be submitted to the Justice Department no later than November 7, 2001.
Rochelle Williams noted that the day they visited Centralina, Trisha had already prepared option 1 and they worked for three hours on option 2. After talking with several Commissioners, they devised option 4. It was noted that everything references population, not number of voters, as these are two different things. Rochelle stated that the Board of Elections feels it best that precinct lines match voting lines, not only for the voter but it also saves money for the County and a headache for the Commissioners. Splits within a district are too confusing and there is no guarantee that the voter will receive the proper ballot at the voting place. Lonnie Baucom of the Elections Board, cautioned the Board to remember in establishing the districts, that moving people cost money as you have more office expense and more mailings. Rochelle noted that option 4 escaped the most moving. She also noted that the primary next year will allow absentee voting by mail, and that along with no excuse voting, should handle any concerns a voter may have on their voting district. Chairman Thacker asked which option would require the least amount of work for her office with Rochelle answering that she sees very little difference between options 3 and 4. After discussion, motion by Vice Chair Livingston, seconded by Commissioner Streater, to go with option 4 as presented. Dr. Truman asked if this option had any impact on School Board members with Rochelle answering no. Motion carried unanimously.
Option 4
DistrictPopulationPercent from MinorityPercent
IdealPopulationMinority
13,586 -0.7%1,04929.3%
23,562-1.4%2,03157.0%
33,772 4.5%2,58566.5%
43,565-1.3%1,01928.6%
53,551-1.7%1,30736.8%
63,733 3.4%2,31662.0%
73,506-2.9%2,44969.9%
Total 25,275 12,75650.5%
Ideal population 3,611
Range: 7.4%
County Manager Wease noted that the Board would need to adopt a Resolution to establish the boundary description. He offered that the Board could authorize the Chairman to sign the Resolution and we could place it on the November Agenda to reaffirm or we could meet next week to formally adopt the Resolution. Commissioner Streater asked if the Justice Department would look favorably upon this decision since it was unanimously adopted by this Board with Bill Duston answering that he could not guarantee but he sees no red flag on this one.
After discussion, motion by Commissioner Lear, seconded by Vice Chair Livingston, to authorize the Chairman to sign the Resolution delineating the boundaries as presented in option 4. Motion carried unanimously.
Chairman Thacker called for a short break.
After the break, County Manager Wease reported on courthouse security. He stated that within the last twelve months, two of our neighboring counties have had a serious breech of security. Union County had a hostage situation while Richmond had a bomb explosion in their courthouse. These matters along with the attacks of September 11 have brought security to the forefront. Since the meeting with Resident Superior Court Judge Mike Beale, the Sheriff has put in place a skeleton security system, which requires all persons entering the courthouse to enter through the same door and pass through the metal detector. All doors in the courthouse open inward and for fire protection cannot be locked but are roped off in an effort to force everyone to pass through the guarded entrance. We realize this is not full proof but is a step in the right direction. County Manager Wease referred to the proposal given each Commissioner prior to tonight’s meeting from FreemanWhite on courthouse security. He stated his first reaction was sticker shock but after talking with Glenn Ware, he reduced the fee and County Manager Wease presented each member present with another proposal that is less than the first one. The second proposal shows changes in the scope of services and was presented as follows:
PROJECT SCOPE: The intent of the project is to secure access to the courthouse and the second floor of the annex building. This will involve securing all entry and egress doors to the exterior of the building, providing a video surveillance system, creating screening stations at the public entry to the two buildings, providing a card access system for controlled staff entry, addressing exterior lighting and site related issues.
The project shall involve the following work:
Modification of existing doors (5 at courthouse, 2 at annex) for provision of delayed egress hardware and alarm.
Delayed egress doors will be connected to the fire alarm system for automatic emergency release.
Delayed egress doors shall be connected to the video surveillance system for monitoring, additional cameras shall be provided where necessary.
Security station shall be located in Sheriff’s office for monitoring video surveillance system, card access system, door alarm system and intercom communication.
Existing handicap entrance to the courthouse shall be monitored by video surveillance, intercom shall be provided for communication to security station.
A card access system will be provided at proposed staff entry doors.
Provisions shall be made for locating a screening station in the first floor lobby of the courthouse and second floor lobby of the annex building. This shall include a metal detector and x-ray machine along with architectural barriers to control circulation and queuing within the lobby.
Exterior lighting of the buildings and grounds will be addressed to improve visibility at night.
Control of parking and services areas will be addressed
Electrical work associated with the items above will be included.
SERVICES. FreemanWhite Inc. will perform the following tasks:
Prepare base drawings utilizing existing plans provided by the County.
Make field investigation to verify existing conditions and determine electrical system requirements.
Prepare preliminary design plan indicating extent of proposed work
Meet with Sheriff and Manager to review the preliminary design plan.
Meet with the local fire marshal and building inspector to review the proposed preliminary design plan.
Prepare Construction Documents, drawings and technical specifications.
Assist the County with bidding and preparing the construction contract.
Review contractor’s submittals.
Provide four site visits/inspections during construction.
Meet with the Sheriff to assist with the development of policy and procedures for security operations and assist with staff training program
SCHEDULE:
Design – 4 weeks
Bidding – 4 weeks
Construction – 12 weeks
FEES
FreemanWhite Inc. fee, based on the stated Project Scope, is $20,000, not including reimbursable expenses for reproduction and travel estimated not to exceed $1,000. Fee shall be apportioned as follows:
Preliminary Design Phase$ 3,000.00
Construction Documents Phase 9,800.00
Bid Phase 1,800.00
Construction Phase 5,400.00
Total$ 20,000.00
County Manager Wease explained that this company did the security for Union County and will be working with Richmond County on their security upgrade. The advantage of using this company is they have the expertise to write the plan that the Manager and Sheriff do not have. County Manager Wease noted that whether we accept this proposal or do our own patch plan, either way it will require a significant amount of funds. Commissioner Sims commented that no matter what we do, he would like for us to considering making it portable to connect with the new county complex. County Manager Wease noted that when the county vacates this building, we will still have to maintain this as a court facility so certain items will need to remain. Sheriff Sellers noted that retrofitting this building will be more costly than putting a system in a new building. Chairman Thacker realizes that in the future we will have to renovate this building and hopes that whatever we do will fit in with that.
Commissioner Sims questioned if the x-ray machine was a requirement with Sheriff Sellers answering that he does not know but it would be good to check a purse or back pack. Commissioner Lear asked if they check everyone that comes in to the courthouse, not just those attending court with Sheriff Sellers answering that they check everyone that enters the courthouse for any reason. Vice Chair Livingston suggested putting a double fence around the entire area, like a prison, and having one checkpoint. Some members felt that if it were not for public perception, this would not be a bad idea and cheaper than the other option. Sheriff Sellers noted that whatever is done, it will require at least two more employees in his department.
County Manager Wease noted that in talking with Child Support, their enforcement is down due to the fact that warrants can’t be served. Vice Chair Livingston wondered if the National Guard could be called in to help with Sheriff Sellers explaining they could be called only in an emergency situation.
Commissioner Lear voiced a concern for the safety of employees and citizens using the courthouse but asked that we be mindful of the cost and wondered if any grants were available to assist in this situation. He also suggested all employees have picture id tags to wear during work hours.
County Manager Wease noted that the proposal presented was a flat fee for a Cadillac plan and stated that if security is left up to him and the Sheriff, the Board must accept their flaws. Board members felt this was a good plan but felt that we may be able to implement the plan without the assistance of FreemanWhite and asked the Manager and Sheriff to put together a committee and get started.
At this point, Vice Chair Livingston left the meeting.
Commissioner Hildreth felt that the Board needed to decide the level of security and once installed, unless something changes that would affect the level chosen, we maintain that level and not become laxed. Chairman Thacker asked the County Manager and Sheriff to include an Attorney and possibly a Judge on their committee and meet and bring a recommendation to the Board in November.
Motion by Commissioner Lear, seconded by Commissioner Sims, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Respectfully submitted:
Bonnie M. Huntley, CMC
Clerk to the Board
Meeting time: 1 hr. 45 min.