BAMBERG – A $12 million bond issue for repairs and renovations on the Voorhees College campus received preliminary endorsement from Bamberg County Council Monday night.

Under the agreement, the county gives the college permission to put together the proposed bond issue before coming back to the council with a request for approval of a “concrete bond issue.”

The college is ultimately asking the county to become a conduit issuer for the bonds, the proceeds from which would be loaned to the college.

Voorhees President Lee Monroe said the college has 342 acres of land which it is presently surveying. There are plans to use 100 acres for the creation of a development corporation to develop “market value housing, possibly a mini theatre and a variety of things,” Monroe said.

“The remaining 100 or so acres is our campus, and what the (college) board has approved us to do is to go out into the bond market and borrow about $11 million to do renovations and repairs to the campus,” Monroe said. “So, we came tonight asking that the county be used as the conduit for that.”

Attorney Stanley Foster, who is handling the bond issuance for the college, said the bond issue is intended to be tax-exempt and that under the federal and state tax laws, the county can act as a conduit lender and not be responsible for bond repayment.

“The monies are loaned to Voorhees College once the bonds are sold, and the bonds say right on the face ... that the bond holders look solely to Voorhees College for repayment. This would not have any impact on your bonding capacity and, of course, your credit isn’t at all pledged,” Foster told the council.

The council, with Councilwoman Dot Tatum abstaining, agreed that the inducement resolution was only giving the college and its finance team permission to begin work on the bond issue. In the meantime, the council will await further recommendations from the county attorney, and a bonding attorney before taking a final vote.

Foster said the college would bring back a final bond issue for the council to “vote up or down,” noting that he was only requesting that the council express their interest with passage of the resolution.

In other business, the council approved a resolution supporting a study of and/or implementation of a county-wide water and sewer system as presented by Councilman Chris Wilson. The resolution states that the county has water and sewer needs which affect its ability to “attract investment and economic opportunity,” and authorizes County Administrator Rose Dobson-Elliott to begin work on assessing the study’s feasibility and cost.

The council referred plans for the development of a long-range building plan to its planning committee, from which it expects a report by July 1. Dobson-Elliott and Finance Director Booker Patrick will work with the committee.

Wilson said county service buildings have “severe” needs that require attention, with some more immediate than others.

In other business:

n Bamberg County Hospital Administrator Warren Hammett reported that the hospital and nursing center had a combined positive bottom line of $49,103, well below a budgeted bottom line of $210,000.

Year-to-date, the hospital fell short of an anticipated bottom line of $590,000 after reporting a loss of $331,000. Hammett said volumes have been down, including operating room numbers, for the past four months.

He said OR numbers were back up in February, changes are anticipated for April and that expenses had been under budget for the year.

“Patient revenue is 16 percent under what we had anticipated it to be for ... January; it’s 14 percent under budget from what we had anticipated year to date,” Hammett said, noting that the hospital and nursing center are currently awaiting a report from the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations.

Councilman Claire Guess questioned Hammett about advertisements placed in The Times and Democrat which he said stated that “regardless of the outcome of the lawsuits ... the hospital would be built on 301.”

“I thought that was a little assertive under the circumstances. I was wondering. Is the hospital paying for those advertisements, or is that coming from, like, a third party?” Guess said.

Hammett said the hospital and nursing home were paying for the ads out of its general fund, and Guess said the funds were county funds that shouldn’t be used.

Hammett said the funds were not county funds and that he and Guess differed on that point.

“You are an agency of the county. ... so all of your revenue is county revenue. If you want to state opinions of what the future may be, it’d be better to market your wares, especially considering your financial results, instead of getting into editorial policy at county expense,” Guess told Hammett.

“We’re trying to state the facts. If we stated that regardless of the outcome of the lawsuit that it would be placed on 301, I’ll go back and review the ad. But, we’re trying to make sure that we’re getting the facts out to the public,” Hammett said.

“I’ve missed that point,” Guess said, “but I would appreciate it if you would review the policy as well because the revenues that you do collect are at the benefit of a county agency.”

“I will go back and look,” Hammett said.

You must be logged in to comment.