City Council Debates Texting Ban, Council Pay Cuts

Simpsonville City Council on Tuesday night shelved a proposal to pass a texting ban in the city.

Additionally, Council members debated a proposal floated by Mayor Perry Eichor to cut Council salaries in half, or eliminate them altogether. Support for the measure was mostly tepid, with Council members Geneva Lawrence and Sylvia Lockaby opposed to the idea. Nonetheless, Eichor said he still planned to formally introduce a measure later.

The texting ban had been suggested by the Council's Citizen Advisory Committee last month in a 4-1 vote. But many Council members said they felt that texting could be handled under current negligent driving laws, and many believed it was best to wait for a statewide ban instead of enacting a citywide law.

"The state needs to step up to the plate and pass [it] if it's going to be passed. We do have negligent driving laws that would apply…. I just don't see the sense of it [locally]," said Council member Geneva Lawrence.

"I think on the surface a texting ban is a great idea, but I'm not sure how easy or possible it is to enforce," said Council member Matthew Gooch. "I think it would be very difficult. I would be concerned about 4th and 5th Amendment rights. I have concerns about it. I think it's a good idea, but I need to know more."

The citizen's committee, after conferring with Police Chief Steve Moore, had suggested the city adopt an ordinance passed by the city of Columbia, which Moore stated was less intrusive than other such ordinances and would seem to eliminate constitutional concerns over privacy, according to minutes of that meeting.

Council member Julius Wellborn said 39 states have texting bans, "and South Carolina has drug its feet," he said. "The state needs to step up to the plate and do something." Wellborn said he supported a city ban, but took issue with a provision in the Columbia ordinance that exempted police and emergency personnel from the law in the course of their duties, saying that it was just as dangerous for them to text as it is the general driving population.

"I believe in personal freedoms, and I also believe that creating additional laws that restate the same thing are counterproductive," Council member George Curtis said. "However, if the law I read from Columbia — based on the way it's written seems to be a law in name only, it doesn't seem that it would be very easy to apply in any situation — if we were going to pass an ordinance that would be a symbol however, that [Columbia law] would certainly be the type of ordinance I could support."

After getting confirmation from Chief Moore that negligent driving laws would cover texting, Council member Sylvia Lockaby said she saw no sense in a separate texting ban. "I think it's obvious I don't care for it. If we've already got a law on the books, we don't need another one," she said.

Proposed Council pay cuts

Moving on to the subject of Council salaries, Eichor's proposal received pushback from at least two Council members, though he said he was determined to work with the city attorney to come up with ordinance proposals to cut pay by 50 percent or eliminate it altogether.

Eichor said, among other things, it would save the city money and make it easier for more people to run for office, since candidates must pay a filing fee that amounts to five percent of the salary of the position they are seeking. Currently, in addition to stipends and benefits, the salaries for the mayor, mayor pro tem, and Council members are $9,600, $7,000, and $6,000 respectively.

Eichor also noted that a portion of Council pay is deducted for retirement benefits, and that the city also makes a contribution, though Council members don't see any of those benefits.

The city attorney said typically a change in salary can only take effect after the next election. However, a reduction or pay elimination could likely be done in two readings of an ordinance. When Council member Lockaby asked whether working for free would jeopardize their status as city employees, the city attorney mentioned that that was problematical and that benefits such as health and retirement would also have to be addressed, since under state law Council members are treated as full-time employees.

"I don't agree with it. I don't agree with it for the simple reason … I earn my money," said Council member Lawrence. "I don't think it's something that needs to be fooled with. I can look at the budget and cut way more than the salary we make. I think it needs to remain where it is."

"My feeling is, we ought to be in office to do the good, to do what we can for the citizens, not for the pay," Eichor said, causing a few derisive comments from the audience.

"I agree with Miss Lawrence," said Council member Lockaby. "We do get calls at home. We do have to go out to people's houses. We do a lot. We take a lot of calls, answer a lot of emails." Lockaby said if anything could be cut, it would be the Council's travel pay.

"There's plenty of fluff that could be cut in the budget rather than salaries," Lawrence said.

Well, I'm still going to propose it," Eichor insisted. 

The mayor, under heavy fire since the December 2012 firing of Police Chief Keith Grounsell, received a few jeers from the audience after floating his proposal. That astounded Council member Gooch.

"I'm amazed," he said. "People complain about government…. Somebody stood up earlier and said, 'you're going to vote to give yourself a raise, how dare you.' [But the mayor] comes up and says no, we're going to cut it in half — and you're still not happy. I don't know what to do folks. We do this, you don't like it; we do that, you don't like it. I'm just amazed."