Photos
Blog
NewslettersSigns, Signs, everywhere there's signs
I wake up this morning and walk out to get my newspapers and look up and down my street as I do every morning. Something looks different. What I saw really takes the cake. All I saw where Newton signs standing. Funny it was not like that last night. All of the Ceips signs were on the ground or half down. I return inside and called a friend who is a mechanic for a local shop in Shell Point to ask about my car problem. He had to call me back because he was at the shop rehanging the signs they have there. Funny. I have seen how they (the shop crew) put the big sign up out there. With no wind last night how did these signs come down? When he called me back I did ask him about the signs after getting the details on my car. " It seems that they just jump off every other night. But this time they were caught on tape and a report was filed." he stated. Me personally I am ready for the signs to go away. Blockin' up the scenery. Not just the political signs either. (do we still need the big flashing one at Bay and Ribault? I think the road block is enough.) But for someone the knock these things down on private property? Someone is either really juvenile
or Mrs. Ceips people have really struck a nerve. It seems to be all one sided. I don't want to look at the blue wave of signs on Bay stifling the bluff. Maybe this peon can come knock them down for me. I don't have time to act like a moronic hate monger in the middle of the night.
- happymom29902's blog
- Login to post comments
- 1063 reads
to put signs up in the public right-of-way?
Political or otherwise.
I'm not talking about the signs in Shell Point, but the political ones in the city along the Bluff and other places in town.
I guess when the governor and his brother-in-law are working for you it must be okay.
I'm sure the city will get right on that. Maybe if we went and put some ballons on them or had a machine that made bubbles the city boys would get fired up.
Another favorite of mine was when Mr. Stewart was building Talbots and had put up several large banners on the building. Those signs were against the city code. Lots of folks complained to the city sign police, but they never came down. The word from hizzoner was let them be. Try that on your building and see how much trouble you would get in.
It reminds me of my favorite definition of lawful:
Compatible with the will of a Judge having jurisdiction.
Ah, Beaufort!
They could have put the blasted color police on them. Or worse still they could crack down on the temporary "YARD SALE" signs. Do they really have to put that many in one spot? I mean come on. We can all see the first one. We get the point on who is backing Mr. Newton. With all the GOB pull on the bluff you would think that he would only put one up. And far off the road..... behind a bush... or in the marsh. Oh wait the would pollute the environment wouldn't it.
Isn't that the answer to:
"We get the point on who is backing" Fib Newton.
I like Fib's sign by Lowe's. The lot has been clear cut with the timber piled up in a big heap. His concern for the environment is quite evident there.
Or how 'bout that sign on Boundary where there once was a nice view of the marsh. Now we have Mr. Stewart's building up to the road and dominating the skyline. Great place to show your concern for over development, out of control growth, and protection of open space.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
They say a picture is worth a thousand words. This picture is probably worth ten thousand. This from the man that wants to control growth? Good one FIB. We were born at night, but it wasn't last night.
http://flickr.com/photos/7332328@N03/421132693/in/set-72157594588222281/
What no hard hat and hammer. I am just waiting to see what development company bought the land across from my Grandmother. Marsh front. They could put a huge condo complex there and force the homeowners to sell like they did on Greenlawn. Hey what happen to the affordable housing unit?? All I have seen are one bedroom apartments that start at $800 a month and that thing that is just waiting to get a truck run through it on Boundry.
I guess it is just too easy to take photos out of context to spin your point. The facts are clear:
CONSERVATION VOTERS OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Ann Timberlake
Wednesday, May 2, 2007 803-799-0716/446-6400
CONSERVATION VOTERS ENDORSES WESTON NEWTON FOR SENATE
Conservation Voters of South Carolina, the nonpartisan political arm of South Carolina’s
conservation community, announces its endorsement of Weston Newton for election to the state Senate in the Republican primary run-off set for Tuesday, May 15. This announcement follows as a result of Conservation Voter’s rigorous and non-partisan evaluation process. Ann Timberlake, Executive Director of CVSC, explained that “Beaufort
County voters are concerned about health, safety and the stability of their neighborhoods. Weston Newton will be a voice for protecting South Carolina’s clean air and water and he is a strong advocate of land conservation.”
Furthermore, the folks who have the Newton sign across from the Lowes have cut the wood for timber, not development. I guess we all see the world differently, as the GIANT bright red Ceips sign 100 yards down the road on the mobile home sales lot says more about the wrong kind of development to me.
Finally, "Fib" Newton does sound cute, but even the Island Packet has dressed down Ceips for her "loose words" in a March 5th editorial responding to her claim that the "Good Ol' Boys" were trying to stop her.
The Island Packet stated: "Ceips' hit-and run remark was a disservice to voters. If she knows of improper deal-making or favor-trading, she is obligated to share it with voters. They have every right to know. If she doesn't, she should zip her lip -- after apologizing -- and resolve to be more restrained in the future." The paper went on to say: "This isn't the first time Ceips' conduct has been questioned. Last summer, news surfaced that she had been accused in a divorce suit of having an extramarital affair with a fellow Republican legislator, Rep. Wallace Scarborough of Charleston. She denied it, saying she and Scarborough were only "close friends.""
Call him "Fib" Newton if you like, but again the facts are very clear.
Newton criticizes Ceips for not doing anything to help control growth. This is a local issue and Bluffton has been the largest area for growth and development. Since Newton lives there, what did he do on county council to control growth? He had a lot more say that Ceips did in the state. That statement is highly hypocritical.
I also do not care for the negative TV ads he has been showing on Savannah TV stations. That alone would cancel my vote for him.
My vote will be for Ceips.
The TV ads state the facts about her voting record. The only negative part of the ads is how the reasonable voter should feel about Ceips' record. Many of her supporters hear her claims of representation, but don't realize that her voting record stands against what caused them to move here. Hog farms and billboards will be her true legacy.
I'm willing to listen to how her "voting record stands against what caused people to move here." The Comprehensive plan, which attempts to keep areas rural and scenic, is a county plan to help control growth, enacted before Weston was elected. How does Ceips in the state, control what happens in the county? Also, how has Newton helped to control growth, especially in Bluffton, now the largest city in the state geographically? I haven't voted yet, so I'm willing to listen.
Egret, it is easy to outline some of the differences between Newton and Ceips. First, Ceips has supported a Takings Legislation that would allow developers to go after the county government should they feel that they have suffered a loss of income due to zoning restrictions. Conversly, Newton has long supported Smart Growth, whereby the local governments can establish and control their own zoning.
Ceips has taken money for her votes from several large billboard companies and the chicken farm lobby (talk about Good Old Boys). Ceips was instrumental in passing a state law that prohibits county governments from stopping chicken farms from locating in their area. Chicken farms are considered by most to be ecological disasters, due to the associated smells and flys, but Ceips has worked hard for the chicken farmers to guarantee our county can't stop them from coming here. Billboards as well, as she has voted to relax statewide billboard controls
Newton has fought (unsuccessfuly, so far) for a 1/2% real estate transfer fee to be used to purchase open spaces in the county. This fee must be enacted by legislation at the state level, but Ceips claims she does not want a new tax. Well, it may be a new tax, but this exact fee has generated many 10s of millions of dollars for the city of Hilton Head which does have the fee. Studies have proven that MOST of this fee will be carried by new people moving to our area. This small fee could help purchase and maintain many of the still wooded lots and open areas that make our area of the lowcountry so special.
Newton has worked hard for the county, both as Chairman of County Council, and by lobbying our state reps for legislation that benefits all of Beaufort County. Ceips claims that she is all about the environment, but the facts are clear. She has voted again and again to allow big businness to run over the county. Many environmentally aware people see that Newton offers the better alternative to help control growth and maintain our quality of life. The League of Conservation Voters has endorsed Newton because he is clearly the frontrunner in local environmental and growth issues.
The Island Packet states "Ceips often seems on the fringe of important, more complicated issues that come before the legislature. As Herbkersman noted, Ceips has filed bills calling for the legislature to express itself on the Dixie Chicks' political leanings and to make the marsh tacky, a small horse once common in the Lowcountry, the official state horse." The Packet goes on to say, "Such measures aren't exactly Brainiac material. And none has anything to do with reforming state government, which Ceips claims is her focus. One of the biggest problems with the General Assembly is that too many of its members spend time and energy on bills like these, nibbling at the edges, while avoiding meatier legislation that might move South Carolina forward."
We all have our own reason for living in this beautiful area. Happymom can spin about tearing down signs (my Newton sign was down today, as well), but the facts are clear. Beaufort County and its voters cannot afford to have Ceips (and her big busniness at all cost attitude) elected as our senator. Newton's positions represent a solid conservative approach to growth and the environment as they affect Beaufort County and its' residents. I hope that Newton can count on your vote tomorrow.
Most of your arguments depends on how you look at the issues.
On chicken farmers, those that meet the DHEC regulations do not have the problems you
stated. We have one on Lady’s Island that has been here for over 30 years. Have there
been any complaints? The issue on this is that outlawing legimate businesses within proper
proper zoning is unlawful and invites civil lawsuits by property onwers. The opposition is
based on emotional uninformed logic based on farms that did not meet guidelines.
As for the real estate transfer fee, I’m not up on the issue and it sounds like a good idea,
however Ceips is in the majority opposing it, so she is not alone.
As for bringing bills on the fringe and not being important, the bills were the result of
some of her constituents asking for these issue to be raised. She is listening to the home
folks. You didn’t mention that she is usually asked to support or not support bills from
other legislators. Not everyone gets to be on an important committee or to chair, but time
in office gets respect
The “takings” issue is important to property owners, which means most of us. The bill
may need tweaking, but anytime government takes or reduces the value of a private
property, it should fairly compensate the owner. If civil lawsuits occur, then the bill needs
to address those issues. Fearing lawsuits should not be an argument to kill a good bill.
WE have differences in opinions, but we agree on the importance of voting. Support the
candidate that you believe in.
I have listened to them both. I know they are both intelligent caring individuals.
Catherine Ceips is however the one with statehouse experience. Wes and everyone before him has struggled to bring Beaufort County to the state's attention. He's been fighting an uphill battle. To oppose Ceips based on the transfer fee is not a good argument. I agree with the transfer fee, because I WON'T BE PAYING IT. Tax the other guy, I always sez. (and BTW we shan't discuss what happens to 'conserved open spaces' here in Beaufort, shall we?).
I made an impassioned plea to my Beaufort County Legislative Delegation headed by Scott Richardson. Out of fear, I have to believe, during my presentation he responded to my plea by stating I was taking on a federal issue. I responded that NO I was not. I was looking at an amendment to State Code.
NOT ONE delegate responded to my presentation, my plea. EXCEPT for Catherine Ceips. That carries a lot of weight with me. NOT one of the GOB took the time to even drop a note.
I am an animal lover. I don't have a problem with the marsh tacky bill. I can't stand the so-called hollywood elite, so I don't have a problem with the dixie chicks issue. Keep em out of the state, sez I.
I won't be horribly disappointed if Wes wins, but I can tell you, Catherine is the better 'man'.
Karen, Andy's ^i^ mom
Proposed Legislative Amendment to SC Code of Law:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/andyschild/
If I had no other reason, I'd vote for Ceips simply because our 'illustrious' governor has endorsed the other candidate. All we need around Beaufort is another politician in his pocket.
Almost 65% of the state overwhelmingly reelected Sanford. He is an illustrious governor whom Ceips claimed (FIBed) supported her. She would have LOVED his endorsement, and claimed that he did support her in her early election "literature." But, again the facts are the facts. The Ceips camp's false claims of Sanford's backing were dashed when he openly endorsed Newton. How humorous now that the Ceips supporters are Sanford detractors. As far as Beaufort having politicians in his pocket, you had hoped it was going to be Ceips. That is how real politics (Ceips speak for Good Ol' Boy) happen.
Well, bless your little heart. I don't seem to recall that I claimed to be a Ceips supporter; my candidate was Tom Taylor all along. Sanford is not 'my' governor; he never has been and he never will be. 65% of those who voted elected him; not 65% of the state. Thanks to rampant voter apathy most likely. What I find amusing is that you feel the need to attack anyone here who does not support him or his cronies.
Every corner that Newton has a sign has had the grass (bushes) cut. So what on the note. How about the signs at the in process of devolopement Picket Fences? 280 and 802? The O.C Welch plot and the land next to it which is for sale? Now as for the "mobile" home dealer. Check their record on community service and donations the humanitarian causes. Look for South Carolina Mobile Home Assc.. I know that they have many times sponcered needy families during the holiday's. I was one of them at one time. An honored endorcement. But not trying to sway you. Get informed before you run too far off the edge on where the signs are. We can't all have everyone in town with a street named after us carrying our coat tail. OGB's all of them. Heck there is even one that hasn't hit that stature yet but boy is he trying. Hope he doesn't get my street.
" "This isn't the first time Ceips' conduct has been questioned. Last summer, news surfaced that she had been accused in a divorce suit of having an extramarital affair with a fellow Republican legislator, Rep. Wallace Scarborough of Charleston. She denied it, saying she and Scarborough were only "close friends.""
Wallace Scarborough. Now there is a Good Ole Boy for you. Complete with the seersucker suit. Didn't Ceips have a matching one?
Please don't be too hard on the seersucker suit. I kind of prefer a nice blue/white double breasted seersucker suit with a fine straw hat and a good pair of brown/white shoes. Some used to refer to it as a "dandy" outfit. A glass of good Burbon and a nice cigar, with good conversation complete the experience.
I agree, Shadows. If I were a man, I'd wear nothing but seersucker in the summer! A great southern classic. Ditto on the bourbon.
Just curious, about the cigar....
Please don't be too hard on the seersucker suit. I kind of prefer a nice blue/white double breasted seersucker suit with a fine straw hat and a good pair of brown/white shoes. Some used to refer to it as a "dandy" outfit. A glass of good Burbon and a nice cigar, with good conversation complete the experience.
Shadows , you certainly paint a "dandy" picture. I am fond of seersucker myself. Although I tend to look more like Matlock when I wear it.
The bourbon goes with anything.
Shadows, I don't smoke cigarettes, or anything else, so I can't weigh in on the cigar, except to say that I don't like the smell! I've known many a charming man who smoked them, though, so I'm certainly willing to believe there must be something to it...
The odor of a fine cigar has to be properly mixed with the odor and taste of Bourbon in order for it to be palatable. The proportions and methods of consummation are critical to the entire experience. In order for the taste and aroma to provide an optimal sensory experience every thing has to finish together at the same time. Nothing should linger and give the impression of dominating. As they say timing is everything.
The facts are clear:
The Conservation Voters of South Carolina are part of the larger League of Conservation Voters. In 2004 they violated Federal law wholesale (along with some other groups like the Swift Boat Veterans). In 2006 the League agreed to pay a civil penalty of $180,000.
http://www.fec.gov/pdf/record/2007/jan07.pdf
The facts are even clearer:
FIB has been attacking Ceips for a vote on billboards. Okay, but who has a big fat FIB Newton sign on a billboard?
How do you spell H-Y-P-O-c-r-i-t-e?
The facts couldn’t be any clearer:
FIB rants and raves about growth. Last time I checked, FIB was in charge of county council that votes on growth issues. FIB and his cronies complain about home rule, yet he wants the bureaucrats and politicians in Columbia to control growth. Which is it FIB – you didn’t do your job and now you want Columbia to screw it up or you’re just doing another FIB Newton?
When I last checked, its not hypocritical to advertise on a legal medium. Nice try on spinning the facts. Newton is against (like most people) relaxing the regulations prohibiting billboards; Ceips is not. I don't doubt that if she had raised more money, she too would have employed this successful medium. Ceips claims she stands for the environment, yet votes against it again and again.
Furthermore, county council is saddled with a bad comp plan that encourages developers to zone shop the cities for a better deal. He has fought against this shopping, BUT it requires state legislation to enact. Again, Ceips has failed her constituents.
The sad fact is that Ceips may win this election, but many of the votes will come from those who are not aware of her voting history. Good luck tomorrow. At least I know my informed vote will cancel out yours.
We can agree to disagree on many things, but let us not be disagreable.
The state law required counties to write a comp plan. I believe the first one was written in the early 1990's and revised recently.
To say that County Council is sadled with a bad comp plan is correct. But the solution to that problem rests soley with County Council and no one else.
Do we really want the State to dictate the comp plan for each county? What happened to the home rule thing?
If you want to fault Ceips for a vote on an issue, that's fair game. But be honest about it. But to say that she is responsible for the failed comp plan has absolutely no basis in fact.
The folks on County Council, past and present, voted on it and passed it.
You second point that additional state legislation would have helped the county's bad comp plan is really accurate. The county's most recent comp plan was not worked out the towns and cities in the county and that's the major source of the current annexations and growth issues. If the county had sat down and worked out a plan that was agreeable to all, the county's bad comp plan could have been workable.
At least give the county credit they now have tried to sit down and work out the growth patterns with the towns and cities.
Again, it is a county issue - not a state issue. If you have a problem with it take it up with your county councilman or councilwoman.
I understand why everyone thinks that they have the right person to vote for. I can respect your choices.
My vote is for Catherine Ceips. A warm, kind, caring individual who has been working hard. She gets my vote every time. I know in my heart that she cares about the public and wants to do a good job representing us. Catherine Ceips is a woman who you can count on to listen to us and represent what we want. Vote for her and you can rest assured that you will have a voice that will be heard.
Good Luck Catherine. I hope you do become our next Senator. I know you will do a great job.
Respectfully,
Joe W. Watson