Has Surplus Property Committee Failed to Comply with SC Open Meeting Law?
WINNSBORO – Fairfield County is moving ahead with plans to dispose of 15 county-owned properties, with nine slated for auction and six larger properties to be offered through a request for proposals process.
During the March 2026 council meeting, Parks & Recreation Director Lucas Vance told council members that a six-member Surplus Property Committee—appointed by County Administrator Vic Carpenter—had identified 27 county-owned properties and made recommendations about what should happen to them. According to County Planning Manager Joseph Toledo, it has been decided to keep 12 of the properties for now with the other 15 to be sold.
The six members of the Surplus Property Committee include Toledo, County Parks & Recreation Director Lucas Vance, county designee DeWayne Simpson, Economic Development representative Devarius McDonald, GIS/Assessor staff Guerry Hensley/Jeff Bruorton, and Purchasing representative Timika Beaver.
But this committee have not been open to the public nor has it met any of the open meetings requirements of the S.C. FOI Act.
“This committee is not a committee that has to announce its meetings, post an agenda or keep minutes,” said County Public Information Officer Gene Stephens. “They are employees of the county, appointed by the county administrator. The committee’s observations and conclusions are presented to council, which makes them public. This committee just identifies the properties and makes recommendations to council for their best uses,” Stephens told The Voice.
Media Attorney Taylor Smith, who represents members of the S.C. Press Association, disagrees, referencing Section 30-4-20(a) of the South Carolina Freedom of Information Act, which defines a public body.
“It provides that committees, subcommittees, advisory committees, and the like of any such body, whatever name known,” Smith said, “are subject to the FOIA.
“It sounds like this staff committee, whatever it is, is advising the council on what and whether they should sell, so they are subject to the FOIA as a public body,” Smith said. “The law doesn’t say that the committee members had to be appointed by the council. The committee’s purpose and what it does is known. They are recommending, advising council. So yes, they are a public body. They are an advisory committee. Even though they were not appointed by the council, they are still subject to FOIA.”
A court ruled in the case of Quality Towing v. City of Myrtle Beach that a committee appointed by the city manager to help develop a recommendation that went to council was subject to the FOIA.
“It doesn’t matter whether the committee members are town employees. It matters that their recommendations go to the council,” Smith said.
County Administrator Vic Carpenter said during Monday night’s council meeting (Sept. 14) that the next step is to obtain professional appraisals of the 15 properties.
“We need to get our properties appraised so we know the actual value of them,” Carpenter said.”
Toledo told council Monday night that the county’s surplus property committee began reviewing county-owned real estate earlier this year to determine which properties are needed for county operations and which are underused and could be sold or otherwise disposed of.
“The purpose was created to take a comprehensive look at all the real property that the county owns and ask a simple question,” Toledo said. “Which properties do we need and which properties are underutilized? Should we dispose of them?”
Selling property the county no longer needs, he said, could free up capital that could be put to better use elsewhere in the county budget.
Nine of the initially 27 properties identified as surplus are expected to be sold through an auction, six will be marketed through a request for proposals, or RFP, process and the county will keep the remaining 12, according to Toledo.
The properties are located in various areas of the county and include residential, commercial and industrial zoning, Toledo said. He said the county plans to spend approximately $27,450 to have all 15 properties professionally appraised by CBRE, a commercial real estate firm the county has previously used for appraisal work. The money has already been allocated, according to Toledo.
“The appraisals are expected to take approximately 21 calendar days,” Toledo said.
For the nine properties headed to auction, Toledo said the county intends to use the appraised value as the starting bid in an effort to recover its investment in the property.
It has not yet been determined whether the auction will be conducted in person or online. Toledo said the surplus property committee will work with county administration and legal counsel to determine the auction procedures.
Many of the smaller properties came into county ownership after failing to sell through previous tax sales and the Forfeited Lands Commission, Toledo said. He noted that the Forfeited Lands Commission uses online auctions, which can provide greater exposure and potentially attract more bidders than an in-person sale.
Toledo said the nine auction properties are generally smaller residential lots that might accommodate one or two homes. The six properties designated to be sold through the RFP process, including the Farmers’ Market, the former county administration building on Columbia Road in Winnsboro, and the Megasite on Valencia Road, are larger, ranging from a few acres to thousands of acres and are generally commercially or industrially zoned and potentially more valuable for development.
“These are kind of our premier properties,” Toledo said. The entire list of the 15 properties can be viewed below.
Rather than simply selling those properties to the highest bidder, Toledo said the RFP process will allow the county to consider what prospective buyers propose to do with them.
“What kind of developments can we go ahead and put on here, and what kind of assets can profit the county?” Toledo said.
Proposals received for the six RFP properties will be brought back before County Council for review, he said, with council determining how to proceed with the individual properties.