S. 618 revises the statutory structure of the Board of Public Works for the City of Gaffney. It restates the board’s composition to include the original three commissioners, two commissioners previously added by the city council, and two new commissioners representing newly defined District 6 and District 7. The bill also sets out who may serve in those new seats: a qualified elector who lives in the district and in a household with an active utility account served by the board.
The bill establishes a special election in 2025 to fill the two new district seats, requires those elections to be held no later than the end of calendar year 2025, and provides that future commissioners will be elected to six-year terms in regular elections aligned with municipal elections. It also creates filing deadlines, requires filing fees comparable to those for Gaffney City Council candidates, and specifies procedures for filling vacancies. Finally, it repeals two older local acts from 1953 and 1967 that relate to the board.
Impact
This bill amends a local act governing the Gaffney Board of Public Works and changes the board’s membership and election procedures. It expands representation by adding two elected district commissioners, defines the geographic boundaries of those districts, and imposes eligibility requirements tied to residency and utility-account status. It also standardizes election timing, candidacy filing rules, and vacancy-filling procedures, while repealing obsolete local legislation.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests broad support for the bill, with the House passing it 99-0. No committee transcript is available, but the unanimous vote indicates little visible opposition in the recorded legislative action. The bill appears to be treated as a local governance measure rather than a controversial statewide policy issue.
Contention
The main substantive issue is likely representation and eligibility on the Board of Public Works: the bill creates two new district-based seats and limits candidates to residents of households with active utility accounts in those districts. That structure may matter to customers outside the city limits but within the board’s service area, especially because Districts 6 and 7 are defined by highway boundaries in Cherokee County. Another possible point of concern is the use of a special election in 2025 and the transition from the existing board structure to the new district-based seats, though no recorded debate is available to show active opposition.