Reporter’s Notebook: Silence only fuels the fire | Politics

The similarities between these two towns cannot be overlooked. But, at it’s core, it’s the same issue: residents and their concerns continue to be ignored, as do questions from the Index-Journal.

My job as a government reporter for your local newspaper includes trying to find answers to the questions residents are seeking. This week was a reminder of how frustrating government processes can be when those on the other end decide to stay silent.

It’s as if they think covering their eyes and ears will make us just go away.

My reporting into Ninety Six began in June when a resident was called out directly by Mayor Gregg Brown during a council meeting for comments made on a community Facebook page. The resident was later ejected from the meeting by the chief of police, who made comments during that same meeting personally threatening to file three lawsuits against residents.

Ninety Six residents had been trying to find out for months about how American Rescue Plan Act funds were used by town officials, and it seems like residents asking pointed questions is frowned upon. When I asked for comment on why he ejected a resident from the meeting, the mayor ignored me. Chief of police Chris Porter responded to my questions about ejecting a resident, his lawsuits and overall decorum of the meeting. He responded back with “It’s a NO to all of it but thank you for giving my attorney more evidence of slanderous activity.”

The Index-Journal continued trying to glean information from the Town of Ninety Six when we sent two Freedom of Information requests in August. The first was for the town’s Money Market Deposit Account (MMDA), a reserve fund that began in 2017. The second was for a forensic review performed in 2019 by Quick Group LLC. Initially in July, I repeatedly tried to get someone with council and town leadership to answer questions about the reserve fund account for the Aug. 1 article “The 153,000 General Journal entry.”

I heard nothing but crickets from the town. This wasn’t an isolated incident; practically every request for comment has been forwarded to Brown and met with little to no responses. And most recently, town administration is responding to questions by directing us to Ninety Six town attorney, Doug Bell. Emails to Bell have also gone unanswered.

Two weeks after the Aug. 1 story about the MMDA account was published, I received an email from Ninety Six Town Councilmember Bridget Porter in response to my July 29 email requesting clarification on how the MMDA had been used. Porter’s reply said that she “cannot comment,” and that answers to our requests would exceed “$50” for the town’s personnel to compile.

I then received an emailed letter from Brown saying my MMDA FOIA request was “too broad” and would cost $1,000 to fulfill and that a third party accounting firm would have to be hired by the town to locate the information we’d asked for in our FOIA request.

Then Brown sent another email a week later that said there was an “on-going investigation” and “the town will update you” regarding the 2019 forensic accounting review.

Surprised that the price tag for fulfilling our request for information jumped from $50 to $1,000, I asked Brown for a breakdown of that $1,000 fee, the name of the third party the town was using to fulfill the FOIA request, and I asked if the town could go ahead and provide documents, such as meeting minutes and bank statements, which should be readily available.

You’d think the town would’ve been more open to discussing the MMDA and could easily put their hands on minutes and bank statements.

The town’s own council drafted the rules it was supposed to follow regarding the MMDA, and, according to those rules, it should’ve documented every vote taken for the funds use and kept records of invoices and internal transfers. After all, this account at its peak had close to $200K in 2021, but in 2025? Statements from May show the town had a little more than $14K left in the account. Council and the mayor have yet to provide the current balance of the account.

Anyone would wonder: Where did the money go? Was the money used according to the rules set forth by council?

It would be two months before the Index-Journal learned anything substantial about either request. The only reason we finally received an update was because Certified Public Accountant Marc Wood of Camden, South Carolina-based firm Sheheen, Hancock & Godwin, LLP, who Ninety Six hired to fulfill the request, called to inform us of the cost of his time.

Brown said the town didn’t have the time to fulfill our request so they “had to” hire outside help, which is where Wood came into the picture. Wood said he’d need 30-plus hours to find documents that should have been kept on-hand, and, at $210 per hour, the work would cost $6,000. Wood also told both me and my editor, Mundy Price, he didn’t even know if the town still had some of the documents we were requesting. Wood also said even if he could locate the documents we were asking for, he didn’t know if the files were organized in a way he would be able to easily find the info we wanted.

“I’m not doing this for free,” Wood said. “I’ll bill the town of Ninety Six, and then they’re going to require y’all [the Index-Journal] to fight it.”

Let me ask this: Why is it up to newspapers to pay for a municipality’s bad bookkeeping and a lack of trained employees?

The Public Official’s Guide to Compliance with FOIA states if a town/city/state charges for finding, reviewing or blacking out records, they can only bill you at the hourly rate of the lowest-paid staff member who has the skills to do the job. The IRS requires businesses and municipalities to keep documents dating back at least seven years. Minutes of voting records should be taken every council meeting and made public. It would make sense that financial records would be available and organized by the town.

These records should be available, not just for the press, but most importantly for all Ninety Six residents. We do what we do at the IJ to inform the public so it can make its own judgments and hold leaders accountable.

Two formal requests for information should not have turned into a two-month game of email/phone tag. I shouldn’t have been surprised, after all, residents have been voicing concerns about the lack of communication for years.

Ninety Six hasn’t been the only town that has decided to play hardball with its residents and the press.

Back in May, after an interview with Viggo Lassen, a Calhoun Falls councilmember, I was told he had gathered an array of documents and was willing to send them to me after I filed a FOIA request. I emailed that request shortly after the interview. Lassen forwarded my email, copying the mayor, clerk, town attorney, town council and state representatives on the email. I never received an acknowledgement of that request from anyone.

Acknowledgement and completion of FOIAs isn’t an option, it’s South Carolina law.

Now, I understand most of employees with Calhoun Falls have quit by now, the town is neck deep in a SLED investigation, while also trying to get their water system back on track and pass a budget. But back in May? The town still had full staff — the mass exodus didn’t start until the beginning of July.

Former clerk Wendi Lewis wouldn’t answer the IJ’s calls or in-person questions; Mayor Terrico Holland refused to return emails or even answer his phone. No documents were provided to the press or residents during council meetings, and after the meetings adjourned, there was no opportunity to ask the mayor or clerk questions, and they were the two people with all the answers.

After months of silence and many glares during council meetings, I did a final check-in on Tuesday, Sept. 30. I heard from town attorney Juankell Shingles, who said he knew nothing about the request and was trying to coordinate with Lassen.

The next day, I received this email from Lassen, who finally responded to my FOIA check-in:

“Hey, just wanted to let you know ALL of the town files were mysteriously removed from the town hall a month ago, just after the acting town clerk had settled in. She contacted SLED and they came and investigated. I was not involved with any part of the investigation but am aware of it and just wanted to let you know. She has told me that she cannot discuss an ongoing investigation. I do not know if you are aware.”

I was not aware there were no files left. To quote one of Mayor Holland’s often-used sayings: “Thank you for that information.”

Until Lassen’s email, we had not been made aware that “ALL the town files” had been removed from town hall. What was in those files? Who took them?

Residents might never know.

Holland has gone radio silent. Lewis and most of the Calhoun Falls administration quit in July, and council seems to know about as much as I do. The skeleton crew who remain on payroll in Calhoun Falls is already stretched thin with the day-to-day operations.

Meanwhile, Calhoun Falls residents have continued to be kept in the dark.

Two towns, 50 miles apart, somehow sharing the same issues — a complete lack of organization, transparency and communication failures and questionable practices by town leadership. I’ve given both places ample opportunities to be forthcoming with information for their residents. Instead of taking any number of those opportunities, leadership stayed on-brand and continued to do what they have done this whole time — nothing.

If you can’t keep your financial records straight, spending documented, answer your taxpayers’ questions, have properly trained employees or simply provide meeting minutes that should be public information already, there’s nothing else I can describe it as besides clown shows masquerading as governments.

In order for journalists to do our jobs, and for residents to be properly informed about how their money is used, we need a little help from local leadership. The old saying “honesty is the best policy” is especially true in government. But you can’ tell the truth if you keep your mouth shut.

Residents and the press will continue to ask questions. Silence only fuels the fire.