|
James Island Returns to Court |
|
Written by BY JENNY PETERSON, The Post and Courier
|
Town’s incorporation at issue for 3rd time
A long‑standing fight between the city of Charleston and the town of James Island over the town’s incorporation will be heard today in circuit court.
At issue is whether a law passed by the General Assembly that allowed James Island to incorporate is constitutional or not. If the city wins, the town could be dissolved by the courts, as it has been twice before.
The law allows towns to be formed from properties that are not
physically connected, using publicly owned land including roads, parks
and schools to connect them. This law was necessary to create the town
of James Island.
Trent Kernodle, lead attorney for James Island, said it would have been
difficult for James Island to incorporate in the traditional sense
because the city of Charleston has annexed several large swaths of land
in James Island, “disconnecting” some parts from others.
The city and four residents are suing the town, its mayor and council
members, saying the law is “unlawful, arbitrary and irrational” which
would make it unconstitutional, according to the lawsuit.
Attorneys for the city are not allowed to comment on court cases on the
docket, said Barbara Vaughn, public information officer for Charleston.
Another part of the city’s lawsuit claims the town had a host of errors
when it submitted its incorporation paperwork to the state, including
errors in the boundaries of the town and the properties that were to be
part of the town.
According to the lawsuit, the town’s incorrect paperwork and incomplete
list of properties also made the results of a 2006 referendum about
forming a town invalid. The majority of residents voted in favor of
incorporation.
This is the third time the town has incorporated. The first two towns,
in 1992 and 2002, were dissolved by the courts after Charleston filed
lawsuits. Kernodle defended James Island in both cases.
In 2002, the town tried to incorporate under a law that allowed
waterways and marshes to be used to connect properties. The court
declared that law unconstitutional.
Whoever loses this lawsuit is expected to appeal.
|