Orangeburg County officials have met with their city of Orangeburg counterparts to discuss the city’s recent annexation push that would require DPU customers in unincorporated areas who seek new water and sewer taps to sign a statement agreeing to join the city when it’s ready to annex them.

Otherwise, the city’s Department of Public Utilities will not provide water or sewer services.

“The administrator and I have met with the mayor and the city administrator and we discussed this issue,” County Council Chairman Harry Wimberly said Monday. “But, as far as any type of conclusion on the issue, we have not drawn one yet.”

Wimberly was responding to questions raised during the public comments portion of the County Council meeting by Dr. Abe Salama.

Salama asked whether City Council had consulted with the county before it proposed the ordinance and whether County Council had a position on the issue.

The answer to Salama’s first question, Wimberly said is, “no,” County Council was not consulted.

Urging the change in DPU policy to help Orangeburg reach its “natural boundaries,” Mayor Paul Miller began a push in favor of annexation last year. He has noted that despite having more than 55,000 people residing within six miles of downtown Orangeburg, only about a fifth of them actually live in the city.

City Administrator John Yow has explained that “this is a common thing done in most cities that have grown in size.”

Salama complained that the city’s action could be detrimental since those “natural boundaries” are not known.

“That’s exactly right!” said Wimberly.

With water lines going all the way to Springfield, they could annex it all, he said.

Taking another jab at City Council, Salama commended County Council for allowing him the opportunity to speak during the time allotted for public comments.

“I could not do that at a City Council meeting,” he said.

Last fall, a 4-3 majority of City Council nixed the idea of a scheduled public comments period. Instead, council agreed to follow tradition and allow comments from those who get on the agenda in advance.

In other business, council gave first reading, by title only, to an ordinance to make sure that the section of the code of ordinances referring to animals and fowl conforms to current state law. The ordinance was then sent to the Public Health and Safety Committee for discussion before second reading.

County Attorney D’Anne Haydel explained that the state has “changed the definition of the word ’animal’ since we last passed” the ordinance.

During the recent council retreat, Haydel said, council indicated that it would like to get all county ordinances that mirror state laws into compliance.

“This is one of the many ordinances we’ll look at over the coming months,” said Wimberly.

In other business, council:

You must be logged in to comment.