When Judge Paul Burch issued his order in 1992 on the dirt hauling issue, he was clear. Years later, when he issued a second order to clarify matters for the county council, he was clear again in what he expected of them. For those who do not remember, here’s a review.
In his order, Judge Burch stated:
1. That the County Policy dealing with E-911 Roadways violates the Order of the Court dated July 8, 1992 and is therefore void.
2. That Dillon County is held in Contempt of Court for violating the Order of the Court dated July 8, 1992. With the consent of the Defendant the Court will impose no punishment on any of the Plaintiffs for this violation. However the Court issues this stern warning that any further violation of the Order will lead to severe fines and perhaps jail time for those who are guilty of such violation.
3. That the Dillon County Council members are jointly and severally enjoined from dealing directly with county employees who are subject to the direction and supervision of the Dillon County Administrator and they are Ordered to comply with Section 4-9-660 of the South Carolina Code of Laws. Council Members shall deal with County Employees only through the Administrator except for the purposes of inquires and investigations. These inquiries and investigations must be approved by a majority of Council in advance of the inquiry or investigation. County employee personnel issues shall be handled through the County Administrator and in accordance with the County’s established personnel policies. Any violation of this Section 4-9-660 of the South Carolina Code of Laws and of this provision of this Order may lead to severe fine or jail time for those Council Members who violate this provision.
4. That the term “emergency” as used in the Order dated July 8, 1992, is intended to mean only those emergencies that have been so declared by the President of the United States, the Governor of South Carolina or by a public governmental entity or agency having the authority to declare emergencies.
5. That Dillon County is enjoined from using county personnel and county equipment for the preservation and protection of cemeteries until and unless said cemeteries have been abandoned. The Court notes that “abandon” as defined in Black’s Law Dictionary is defined as “To give up absolutely; to forsake entirely; to renounce utterly; to relinquish all connection with or concern in.” The Court finds that a cemetery that is still being used for burials or one which has been so used for a period of less than ten (10) years cannot be defined “abandoned.” Dillon County is therefore enjoined from using county personnel and or county equipment for the purpose of maintaining any cemetery which has been used for the burial of human bodies within the prior ten (10) year period.
6. The Court has issued an oral warning at the time this matter was presented. It is further ordered that a copy of the transcript of the hearing be attached to this Order for the purpose of expressing the Court’s disapproval of the actions of Dillon County and should be used by any future Judge who may hear a contempt charge.
7. That the Order of July 8, 1992 remains in full force and effect.
It seems pretty simple, doesn’t it? Don’t deal directly with county employees who are under the direction of the county administrator; an emergency must be declared by the President, the governor, or a governmental body or agency with the authority to do so; and don’t use county equipment or crews on cemeteries unless they have been abandoned for 10 years. The judge even sent in an expert to evaluate the total situation in Dillon County and make suggestions for improvement. However, as simple as it seems, the county seems to continue to stumble when following this order.
The latest incident involves a county crew cleaning a cemetery, that while overgrown and unkempt, was clearly not abandoned with burials as late as 2010. The Herald is told that this was a mistake, that this cemetery was on the abandoned list and that it will be taken off immediately.
While it does some like a simple and harmless error, the harm here is the county’s continued disrespect for the court and the judiciary by their repeated disregard for the orders issued by the court, whether by error or by choice. The county can’t just follow the order when it is convenient, they must follow it all the time—even when its inconvenient or unpopular.
It sets a bad example for the citizens when the county can’t or won’t follow an order of the the court and causes the same mistrust and lack of confidence in government that has been the standard in this county for years. The court has set a higher standard, and the citizens expect the council to live up to it.
The county administrator and the council must act expeditiously to do the things necessary to make sure that the court’s orders are followed. If that means that a list needs to be checked out and revised, then it needs to be done. If that means that some education is needed on particular issue or some clarification is needed, then the council needs to get it. It’s starting to be ridiculous that eight grown men can’t seem to get it together and follow a simple directive. It makes them look foolish, it makes the county look foolish, and quite frankly, many citizens are starting to get tired of it.
Getting done what is needed to make sure this order is followed should be a top priority.
