The South Carolina Senate’s proverbial bad boy and Gov. Mark Sanford’s latest adversary Jake Knotts officially endorsed presidential candidate John McCain, according to a campaign press release that just hit the wire.
“As a Vietnam veteran, John McCain is the only one I’d go to war with,” said Senator Knotts. “He understands the dangers facing freedom at home and abroad. John McCain’s life story can be summed up in one phrase; courageous leadership. I am proud to endorse this proven leader for president.”
John McCain thanked Senator Knotts, stating, “Jake Knotts is a distinguished public servant who has served his community and his country in the United States Navy, as a law enforcement officer, as a state legislator, and as a leader in the Republican Party. I look forward to working closely with him over the next few weeks, and I am grateful to have his support.”.
_________
Photo: FITSNews
This entry was posted on Thursday, January 3rd, 2008 at 2:51 pm and is filed under Primary Season, Republicans. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
talk about a once interesting and good-hearted guy gone scummy. Perfect example of what’s wrong with the GOP in the South. We elect good people, and once they get into power, they join forces with evil losers.
Jakie would be another Huey Long, if we’d let him. Not an all bad idea, I guess. Trouble is, McCain is more like the thugs who bought off old Huey than Huey himself. If you haven’t seen this movie, http://www.blockbuster.com/catalog/movieDetails/927, put it on your Blockbuster Queue immediately. Great stuff, and way, way, way better than the sh*tty 2006 Sean Penn remake.
Jake tells it like he sees it…so some people don’t like it.
But I do.
The lawsuit was brought against Yemassee in July 2006 by environmental watchdog the Coastal Conservation League and three Yemassee or Beaufort County residents who claimed Bindon is not contiguous to Yemassee, as required for annexation under state law. Before grabbing Bindon, Yemassee annexed a 20-foot-wide, 2-mile-long strip of land that connects the town to the plantation.
S.C. Attorney General Henry McMaster sought to join the lawsuit in July 2007, but state statute requires that anyone contesting an annexation must file a notice with the town and the county within 60 days of the annexation’s effective date and file suit within 90 days. The annexation became effective in April 2006.
The Attorney General’s Office claimed it did not learn of the annexation until July 2, 2007, but Circuit Court Judge James Lockemy noted in his decision that the attorney general did not file the required paperwork within 60 or 90 days after that date either.
The other plaintiffs filed paperwork within the required time frame, but Lockemy said none of them had standing to challenge the annexation, and deemed their arguments to establish standing “creative.”
The plaintiffs had hoped to establish that Shemuel Nahum Ben Yisrael could challenge the annexation because he is a resident of Yemassee. Any resident of a town that completes an annexation can challenge the action if at least one landowner’s property was annexed without the owner’s permission.
The lawsuit claimed that land owned by the state of South Carolina was annexed without its permission because state-owned tidelands and a portion of U.S. 17 were annexed into Yemassee. Lockemy, however, rejected that argument.
“I am hard pressed to conclude the legislature intended for the state to be consulted every time an annexation included a road or portion of a creek or lake owned or maintained by it,” the judge wrote in his decision. “State business would be brought to a standstill.”
Patrick Moore, south coast office director for Coastal Conservation League, said his organization is planning to appeal Lockemy’s decision. He stressed that Lockemy did not find Bindon was contiguous to Yemassee — Lockemy did not consider that question because the plaintiffs lacked standing.
“Nowhere in the decision does it say the annexation of Bindon Plantation meets the requirements of the law,” Moore said. “While it is not a clear-cut victory for us, there’s nothing in (the judgment) that contradicts our central legal point.”
Lockemy noted in his decision that he is “not unsympathetic to the challenge raised concerning the methodology used to accomplish the annexation.”
Bindon attorney Frances Cantwell said she was very pleased with Lockemy’s ruling, as well as his handling of an unusual phone call the judge received from Gov. Mark Sanford regarding the Bindon case. State Sen. John Knotts of West Columbia accused Sanford earlier this week of calling Lockemy in an attempt to influence the judge’s decision. A spokesman for the governor responded that Sanford has no interest in the Bindon case and his phone call was placed after the case had been resolved.
“The judge called the counsel involved in the case immediately after the governor called him to let us know what had happened and to ask if we thought (Lockemy) could still handle the case,” Cantwell said. “I thought the judge handled it very professionally, with promptness, courtesy and thoroughness in the situation, which was awkward at best.”
Her characterization of Sanford’s behavior was less complimentary.
“My initial reaction was one of being totally dumbfounded,” Cantwell said. “I was stunned. And then after it set in a little bit as to what happened … I’m still very surprised that he would do such a thing.
Judge throws out Bindon Plantation lawsuit
A lawsuit challenging Yemassee’s annexation of the 1,317-acre Bindon Plantation was thrown out of court this month because the judge found the S.C. Attorney General’s Office waited too long to challenge the town’s action, and the other plaintiffs had no right to challenge it.
“I don’t think it’s proper to speak to a judge when he’s got a case under advisement,” she continued. “No lawyer or party (should) do anything like that.”
Cantwell declined to describe the conversation between Lockemy and Sanford because she did not hear the phone call.
Neither Lockemy nor Coastal Conservation League attorney Trenholm Walker could be reached for comment Thursday or Friday.
http://www.beaufortgazette.com/local/story/136077.html
State Sen. John Knotts of West Columbia accused Sanford earlier this week of calling Lockemy in an attempt to influence the judge’s decision.
http://www.beaufortgazette.com/local/story/136077.html
BINDEN PLANTATION LLC - TOWN OF YEMASSEE - BINDON PLANTATION LLC
http://www2.beaufortgazette.com/blogs/post/17027
Three grounds for invalidating the annexation of Bindon:
(1) the property sought to be annexed was not contiguous to the City;
(2) the City Council’s actions were “arbitrary, irrational and capricious
(3) no one owning an interest in the waters, marshes, and roads of the Beaufort County had consented to the annexation of that property.
The annexation should be dismissed based on the action on the ground that, because Yemassee did not own real property in the area and had no proprietary interest or statutory rights in the annexed area, it lacked standing to pursue annexation. The court should reverse annexation by observing that Yemassee attempted to establish contiguity, not by merely crossing a roadway to annex an adjacent property, but by annexing the length of a road to establish a common boundary” and further noting that “that kind of annexation is not authorized by the laws of this state.”
Based on the supreme court’s recognition that private individuals have standing to attack and void annexation. The court should conclude that the newly annexed area to Yemassee, without either proprietary interests or statutory rights in the annexed area, does not have standing and the annexation is invalid.
In other words, if a municipality annexes property that is beyond its reach, the annexation must fail as a matter of law, even when there was compliance with the statutory requirements to effect the annexation. It follows, then, that if an annexation is void as a matter of law, a plaintiff need not “assert an infringement of its own proprietary interests or statutory rights in order to establish standing” to challenge it.
The annexation is necessarily defective.
As to the lack of contiguity, “The law authorizes the City to annex only contiguous territory, and since the property purportedly annexed is not contiguous as a matter of law, the annexation is void.” This is to mean that the requirement of contiguity was not met because of the presence of the roads, waters, and marshes between Yemassee and Bindon Plantation.
The Yemassee annexation is defective based on the issue of compliance with the statutory requirements for annexation. The annexation is unauthorized by the laws of this State.
Yemassee has infringed on statutory rights and proprietary interests of the residents of Beaufort County. The annexation will increase Beaufort County’s burden of taxation, and divert taxpayer funds other purposes intended by law and will affect them differently from other citizens and put an unfair burden on the taxpayers of the rest of Beaufort County.
Beaufort County residents have standing because the “the actions of Yemassee in annexing the subject property are void and were done without lawful authority” and would therefore result in the expenditure of municipal funds to provide services to the annexed territory.
Your Donated Money is All The Conservation League Cares About New
Saving the Lowcountry is serious business.
The Coastal Conservation League actions are about getting money and donations - not the issues they raise. They are an environmental fraud.
The Coastal Conservation League chose to use a known criminal in Yemasee to gain standing in this case. A man whose known behavior has had the police send him to a mental facility. A man who was about to be arrested who poured urine and paint on himself to avoid being taken in. A man police believe is capable of irrational and dangerous actions. All reported by this paper.
All this evidence and yet League Executive Director Dana Beach was quoted in this paper saying this man was “. . . fine and his personal actions were of no importance to (him or) the Conservation League”.
This “League” came from no where and now their Executive Director has an over $2 million annual budget. And another $10 million PAC to fund his favorite candidates for office.
Never mind he personally lives on the beach at very tony Sullivan’s Island (with neighbor Mark Sanford - was the phone call to the judge a coincidence?) and drives a gas guzzling Suburban.
Anyone that has known Dana Beach will tell you that money has always been and remains Dana Beach’s prime motivator.
More often then not, instead of pure actions, his group plays games for money. It’s a group that is tied tightly to a Governor that is hated by the state legislature of his same political party.
Can you imagine calling a judge and trying to influence his decision on a case he was hearing???
If Sanford was governor in any other state he would have been charged with an illegal act of attempting to tamper and influence the outcome of a case in litigation. That action would normally carry a fine and legal actions of their own.
Frankly, the corruption of this paper is clearly seen in its continued work to not report on Sanford and his actions. Can anyone imagine what the Atlanta Journal, NY Times, LA Times or any other leading paper would have done to their state’s governor had he/she attempted to influence a judge and his decision in an active case where that decision would have actively benefited that governor????
Of course, never mind the governor’s sister sits on the Conservation League Board. Never mind the only real reason the Sanford family cares about this area at all is they don’t want anything built near their own “plantation” of several thousand waterfront acres (taxed at nothing because it is in an agriculture zone).
Ever wonder where the absolute destitute and poor of our county live? Next to the Governors “plantation”. Now ask yourself - what has he done in the last 5 years as governor to help his neighbors? The answer - absolutely nothing
Oh, and the young fellow from the Coastal Conservation League who is so free with his legal comments? He has ZERO legal training. Contrasting his ignorance and stupidity with that of extremely well known and respected attorney Frances Cantwell points out how over matched the environmental group was in this case. But this is just another case where it is obvious that their primary motive was to get donations from the Beaufort area. It is expensive to run a local office.
The reality - the Lowcountry doesn’t need the corrupt Sanford patrician family or their anyone else of the “Old Point” ilk to Save the Lowcountry. These people could care less about the common man. They are rich and high and mighty. They know always know best.
Most important, we don’t need their money grubbing organization, the Coastal Conservation League. Especially their money grubbing environmental fraud Dana Beach.
It is time for locals to stop making donations and offering support for his lifestyle.
As I stated at the outset - Saving the Lowcountry is serious business. And for the Sanford’s and their complicit buddy Dana Beach - that is of secondary importance. Money and self interest lead their way.
We need law abiding people of thought and rational thinking. It is time local people take this on themselves. It is time for locals to begin to see the light - to do what is good for them. We can do this ourselves and deal with things effectively. It is time to stop listening to a governor that believes he and his family is above the law. Or an environmental fraud who is all about money.
The Lowcountry is ours to save. And we can do this ourselves. Now is the time.
http://www2.beaufortgazette.com/story/17006
Your Donated Money is All The Conservation League Cares About
Saving the Lowcountry is serious business.
The Coastal Conservation League actions are about getting money and donations - not the issues they raise. They are an environmental fraud.
The Coastal Conservation League chose to use a known criminal in Yemasee to gain standing in this case. A man whose known behavior has had the police send him to a mental facility. A man who was about to be arrested who poured urine and paint on himself to avoid being taken in. A man police believe is capable of irrational and dangerous actions. All reported by this paper.
All this evidence and yet League Executive Director Dana Beach was quoted in this paper saying this man was “. . . fine and his personal actions were of no importance to (him or) the Conservation League”.
This “League” came from no where and now their Executive Director has an over $2 million annual budget. And another $10 million PAC to fund his favorite candidates for office.
Never mind he personally lives on the beach at very tony Sullivan’s Island (with neighbor Mark Sanford - was the phone call to the judge a coincidence?) and drives a gas guzzling Suburban.
Anyone that has known Dana Beach will tell you that money has always been and remains Dana Beach’s prime motivator.
More often then not, instead of pure actions, his group plays games for money. It’s a group that is tied tightly to a Governor that is hated by the state legislature of his same political party.
Can you imagine calling a judge and trying to influence his decision on a case he was hearing???
If Sanford was governor in any other state he would have been charged with an illegal act of attempting to tamper and influence the outcome of a case in litigation. That action would normally carry a fine and legal actions of their own.
Frankly, the corruption of this paper is clearly seen in its continued work to not report on Sanford and his actions. Can anyone imagine what the Atlanta Journal, NY Times, LA Times or any other leading paper would have done to their state’s governor had he/she attempted to influence a judge and his decision in an active case where that decision would have actively benefited that governor????
Of course, never mind the governor’s sister sits on the Conservation League Board. Never mind the only real reason the Sanford family cares about this area at all is they don’t want anything built near their own “plantation” of several thousand waterfront acres (taxed at nothing because it is in an agriculture zone).
Ever wonder where the absolute destitute and poor of our county live? Next to the Governors “plantation”. Now ask yourself - what has he done in the last 5 years as governor to help his neighbors? The answer - absolutely nothing
Oh, and the young fellow from the Coastal Conservation League who is so free with his legal comments? He has ZERO legal training. Contrasting his ignorance and stupidity with that of extremely well known and respected attorney Frances Cantwell points out how over matched the environmental group was in this case. But this is just another case where it is obvious that their primary motive was to get donations from the Beaufort area. It is expensive to run a local office.
The reality - the Lowcountry doesn’t need the corrupt Sanford patrician family or their anyone else of the “Old Point” ilk to Save the Lowcountry. These people could care less about the common man. They are rich and high and mighty. They know always know best.
Most important, we don’t need their money grubbing organization, the Coastal Conservation League. Especially their money grubbing environmental fraud Dana Beach.
It is time for locals to stop making donations and offering support for his lifestyle.
As I stated at the outset - Saving the Lowcountry is serious business. And for the Sanford’s and their complicit buddy Dana Beach - that is of secondary importance. Money and self interest lead their way.
We need law abiding people of thought and rational thinking. It is time local people take this on themselves. It is time for locals to begin to see the light - to do what is good for them. We can do this ourselves and deal with things effectively. It is time to stop listening to a governor that believes he and his family is above the law. Or an environmental fraud who is all about money.
The Lowcountry is ours to save. And we can do this ourselves. Now is the time.
http://www2.beaufortgazette.com/story/17006
Illegal Annexation of Biden Plantation by Town of Yemassee
Has anyone ever been to Yemassee? Binden Plantation?
Let’s see, you could buy a used car at the used car lot, get a watermelon at the watermelon packing shed, play pool at the pool hall, and get a soda over at the convenience store all while you are waiting at Yemassee’s single stoplight.
Binden Plantation is gaining a name for itself now, and only because Binden Plantation might not be a plantation for long. Binden Plantation LLC wants to build up to 1,300 homes — one per acre — on a site that now has five buildings, creating a satellite subdivision more than 2 miles away that could eclipse Yemassee’s population of 850 and whose riverfront homes and accompanying commercial development would stand in contrast.
Developers petitioned in March 0f 2007 to annex Binden Plantation into the nearby town of Yemassee, giving the cash-strapped Town of Yemassee a mountain of money for annexation and for public services and to an escape from Beaufort’s County’s restrictive rural zoning regulations to develop Binden Plantation.
The development runs counter to the preservation goals of a privileged and dedicated community of plantation owners, many of whom have placed conservation easements on their land.
Members of the Yemassee Town Council say they couldn’t have asked for anything better.
Yemassee lies to the west of the ACE Basin, a 350,000-acre federal and private wetland preserve between Charleston and Beaufort where the Ashepoo, Combahee and Edisto rivers flow into the Atlantic Ocean.
The annexation deal gets even more intereasting when you look at the development agreement and the purchase price of this property. Over $22,000,000.00 and the developer promises to pay the Town of Yemassee if all goes to plan, something like $1,800,000 over time.
Here’s part of the deal:
Potable water will be supplied to the Property by Beaufort/Jasper Water and sewer Authority (BJWSA)…
Sewage collection, treatment and disposal will be provided by BJWSA and Solid waste collection shall be provided…by the Town.
The Town shall provide police protection services to the Property on the same basis as generally provided….Town.
The Town of Yemassee agrees….to provide fire protection to the Property.
Developer agrees to make a community development contribution to the Town in the amount of $250,000.00 not later than 30 days after the Property is annexed……
E. POLICE CRUISER
Within ten (10) days from the execution of this Agreement, the Developer shall contribute to the Town funds …..to purchase a new police cruiser…..not to exceed $35,000.00…..and shall further pay to the Town a sum not to exceed $35,000.00…..for providing an additional police officer whose primary duties shall be the provision of security for the mixed use areas outside the gated portions of the Property
F. SPONSORSHIP OF THE SHRIMP FESTIVAL
Developer agrees to pay to the Town each year the sum of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) to be a major sponsor of the Yemassee Shrimp Festival for a period of three (3) years…..Yemassee will purchase a suitable banner identifying the Developer as a major sponsor from these funds, and identify Developer as a major sponsor in the promotional materials.
Nestled among the area’s many country retreats owned by media tycoons, Charleston’s well-to-do, and heirs to the family fortune, Binden Plantation hasn’t garnered much attention since Ted Turner’s father, a Savannah billboard mogul, killed himself in an upstairs bathroom of the main house with a silver revolver in 1963, according to Porter Bibb’s biography of Ted Turner, “It Ain’t As Easy As It Looks.”
If you wanted to put together a plan to buy a Town, Town Officials, and Town Law Enforcement, this would be it. Pick an area that is TWO MILES AWAY and the annex it. This has to be the most bizarre and corrupt annexation in the history of the United States. And to top everything else, the annexation is ILLEGAL.