5/8/08
Court Battle
CSD1 files school lines injunction, complaint
By Jerriod Grizzle

Dr. Rose Wilder	John Tindal

One day before the Clarendon County Board of Education was supposed to meet on the issue of the school district lines, Clarendon School District 1 Attorney Dwight Moore filed an injunction temporarily barring the board from meeting on the matter.

Moore also filed a complaint on behalf of CSD1 naming Clarendon County Council Chairman Dwight Stewart, the Clarendon County Council as a whole, Clarendon County Board of Education Chairman George Wilson, the Clarendon County Board of Education as a whole, CSD2 Superintendent John Tindal and the district as a whole.

Moore sought the injunction and filed a complaint stating that the collection and disbursement of taxes is outside the scope of the Board of Education’s authority and that there is an existing conflict of interest because the Board of Education appoints the CSD2 Board of Trustees. Additionally, Wilson’s wife serves on that Board.

The complaint cites that the court should decide the dispute and issue its order setting forth findings of fact and conclusions of law.

The plaintiffs (CSD1) want the court to determine the amount of taxes assessed and collected from properties in CSD1 that was disbursed to CSD2 and the manner in which the tax money will be disposed.

It also states that the court should be the one to determine the voting lines for residents within the affected areas of CSD1 as well as declaring the boundary lines of CSD2.

The issue at hand is a discrepancy between the two districts that goes back to 1984 when the superintendents of the two districts used road maps during a statewide undertaking to update the district lines after the 1980 census.

The Clarendon County government uses a 1969 map for taxing district determination. The maps from 1969 and 1984 are different.

Moore stated in his complaint that since neither of the lines were actually approved by the Department of Justice, neither should be considered approved lines for the two districts. According to the complaint, no official map exists and the “official” line should revert back to the 1951 school district line when the three districts were created.

Chief Administrative Judge of the Third Judicial Circuit George C. “Buck” James Jr. granted the injunction pending a full hearing on the merits of the case on the grounds that the defendants would not suffer harm from Tuesday’s meeting being stopped.

At the last meeting between the two districts on April 22, Moore challenged the County Board’s authority to hear the matter and under advisement from County Attorney David Epperson, the issue was stalemated until documentation could be shown that the County Board had authority to rule in the matter.

Section 5 of the federal Voting Rights Act requires that state and local governments in certain parts of the country, including South Carolina, get federal approval, or “preclearance,” before implementing any changes they want to make in their voting procedures. Anything from moving a polling place to changing district lines in the county is covered under that statute.

During the past three months, several board meetings between the districts were arranged but the districts each drew the proverbial “line in the sand,” and voted opposite one another.

CSD1 voted in favor of the 1984 line early last month. CSD2 voted on the matter in March declaring that the 1969 line was correct.

In a summons attached to the complaint, the defendants have 30 days to return their answer to the complaint.

Epperson said that at this time he is abiding by the order not to conduct a meeting on the district line matter and that the County Council will respond within the 30 days.

Wilson said that even though he believes the board has the official capacity to rule on the matter, the members of the board are following the injunction.

“We will respond in court. The law is clear on who has the jurisdiction to hear the matter and now we will have to wait and see what the courts think,” he said. “There is no question that the board has jurisdiction over this matter.”

CSD1 Board of Trustees Chairman John Bonaparte said that he has hope that this matter can be put to rest.

“I am hoping the line issue, the school district’s, the tax line and the voting line are settled once and for all so that the county can resolve this speculative issue on lines,” he said. “It was a concern in the 1980s that was never addressed completely. If it had we would have had proper documentation on where the lines are. We want to make sure the county is going by what the statue says.”

Officials with CSD2 were not available for comment. Tindal was out of town at press time.