North Charleston rail battle turns to the courts

Late last week, lawsuits were filed by the City over the State of South Carolina’s unwillingness to honor the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed in 2002 that promised that rail access to the Port would only travel through the southern end of the former Navy Base.

The Federal suit was filed against the State of South Carolina, several state agencies, and the Army Corps of Engineers alleging that the State has embarked on a project that deviates from the permit application previously studied and approved by the Corps.  The State court suit alleges that the State has impermissibly broken its word.  The City is asking each court for an order prohibiting the State from taking any action to construct a rail yard in any manner that would violate the 2002 MOU.

Additionally, last Friday the Supreme Court of South Carolina denied a request filed by the State of South Carolina that asked for the 2002 MOU to be ruled upon in an expedited fashion by dispensing with normal court procedures.

North Charleston Mayor R. Keith Summey stated, “We believe that this decision made by the Supreme Court and the lawsuits filed in federal and state court are positive steps toward a meaningful outcome to this dispute for the citizens of North Charleston.  The State’s refusal to honor the 2002 MOU has led us to this point. Despite recent events, we would still prefer a solution to be found outside of the court room.  If the State will simply keep its promises I am confident that together we can find a solution.”

Mayor Summey on 1250 WTMA discussing rail lawsuits

Lawsuit filed in Federal Court
Lawsuit filed in State Court

Last minute budget amendment takes direct aim at North Charleston over rail issue

The following is a response from North Charleston Mayor R. Keith Summey regarding Senator Larry Grooms’ last minute budget amendment directed at North Charleston over the ongoing rail issue.

________________

Last night, less than an hour before passing the Senate version of the State Budget, which had been debated for five weeks, Senator Larry Grooms added an amendment to punish the City of North Charleston if legal actions against the State are not halted.  Specifically, the amendment demands that the City return funds received from the State of South Carolina if a lawsuit is filed in federal court against the State. 

Last week, North Charleston sent a Notice and Draft Complaint to the Federal government and several State agencies highlighting likely violations of federal environmental laws by the State of South Carolina as a result of a planned intermodal yard on the northern end of the former Navy Base.  The proposed yard and northern rail access are in clear violation of a 2002 Memorandum of Understanding between the City of North Charleston and the State of South Carolina. 

The City seeks to challenge the State in Court, where disputes are supposed to be settled. Senator Grooms’ threat seeks to stop the City from protecting the rights of North Charleston citizens by cutting funding to the City.  His actions go against the fundamental right to challenge government action and call into question the very Constitution that this Country and State were founded upon. 

This amendment and the State’s efforts to dishonor the 2002 Memorandum of Understanding are clear, yet disappointing efforts to damage the quality of life of the citizens of North Charleston. 

These bully tactics will not deter the City of North Charleston from fighting for the rights of its citizens.  I insist that the State of South Carolina do what it morally obligated itself to do and keep its promises. 

R. Keith Summey, Mayor
City of North Charleston

The amendment passed the Senate 25-12 and can be viewed from the South Carolina General Assembly’s website: http://www.scstatehouse.gov/php/amendments.php?PAGE=PREVIOUS&DATEKEY=981&chamber=S

___________________________

Here is a breakdown of which Senators voted for and against the amendment:

The Senate proceeded to Sect. 86 and 86A, Part 1A and Part 1B, Aid to Subdivisions.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:

Ayes 25; Nays 12 AYES

Alexander                 Campbell                  Courson
Cromer                    Davis                     Elliott
Fair                      Gregory                   Grooms
Hayes                     Hutto                     Knotts
Leatherman                Lourie                    Martin, Larry
McGill                    Nicholson                 O'Dell
Peeler                    Rankin                    Reese
Ryberg                    Setzler                   Thomas
Williams

Total--25 NAYS

Bright                    Bryant                    Ford
Land                      Leventis                  Malloy
Martin, Shane             Massey                    McConnell
Pinckney                  Scott                     Sheheen

Total--12Section 86 and Section 86A, Part 1A and Part 1B was adopted.

North Charleston to take further legal action to halt northern rail access

On May 17, 2011, the City of North Charleston sent a Notice and Draft Complaint to various state and federal officials to precede the filing of a lawsuit in federal court over the ongoing rail issue. Unless a resolution that is not detrimental to the citizens of North Charleston can be reached, a lawsuit will be officially filed in 60 days.

Full Notice and Draft Complaint

News coverage

Post and Courier
North Charleston to sue over rail line plan
North Charleston gives notice: Clock ticking on plan to sue over rail issue
Charleston Regional Business Journal
City lawsuit to challenge memorandum with state
WCIV ABC News 4
City plans to file suit in rail argument
WCBD NBC News 2
SC City Says it Will Sue if Rail Terminal Proceeds
Businessweek
SC city says it will sue if rail terminal proceeds