Author: Staff

SC Public Interest Foundation Chairman, Mr. Vince Graham,  reminds us of the importance of our state’s struggle to stop tyranny in sharing the following comment and historical writing.  “The spirit of constitutional seriousness and long-term responsibility lies at the heart of the SC Public Interest Foundation’s work”   In early March 1776, acting through the revolutionary government of South Carolina’s Provincial Congress and Council of Safety, orders were issued directing Colonel William Moultrie to proceed immediately to Sullivan’s Island and begin construction of Fort Sullivan. Later that month, upon adoption of the Constitution on March 26, 1776, John Rutledge was elected President of a newly founded republic. South Carolina’s Constitution was among the earliest written in the modern world. It established a functioning government exactly 100 days before July 4th. Speed was paramount; permanence was secondary. With the British navy – then the most powerful in the world – bearing down upon them, South Carolinians did not await authorization from the Continental Congress assembled...

Written by Timothy J. Hegarty, A Concerned Citizen of York County: As the title indicates, a new feature now adorns the northeast corner of the Silfab Manufacturing Facility just above their logo. This simple feature is a red conical tube designed to indicate wind direction and relative speed and is commonly referred to as a windsock. This windsock made its debut appearance on or about April 1, 2026. You are probably familiar with them having seen them at airports and heliports to assist pilots with landings and take-offs. But there are no landings or take-offs occurring at the Silfab facility so why do they now have a windsock? A less familiar, but equally vital, use for a windsock is in an industrial safety role. Industrial windsocks are critical, regulation compliant (OHS/HSE Occupational Health and Safety and Health, Safety and Environment) safety tools used at chemical plants, refineries and industrial manufacturing sites to immediately identify wind direction and speed during hazardous gas releases and...

Written by Timothy J. Hegarty, A Concerned Citizen of York County: By now, it is abundantly clear that SCDES, also known as the SC Department of Environmental Services, would be more appropriately named if referred to as the SC Department of Economic Services as you will come to realize reading this article. Admittedly, the article is a little long but it clearly spells out why the Silfab issue in Fort Mill clearly underscores the impact to citizens when the top environmental regulatory agency in the state restructures to support economic competitiveness over its core environmental responsibilities. The recently issued Compliance Agreement between SCDES and Silfab Solar is an excellent example. The document is dated March 16, 2026, and is intended to allow Silfab to potentially return to the manufacture and production of solar cells and modules following a verified discharge of Potassium Hydroxide and what is described as a drip of Hydrofluoric Acid.  These are the issues I have noted as significantly concerning in this document: Page...

Chemical Spills Bring Crisis to the Community’s Doorstep One must question whether the Attorney General’s immediate inquiry and the release of the date for Silfab’s BZA appeal take on added urgency in light of the events that unfolded at the Silfab facility in the first week of March 2026. On March 3, 2026, a spill of potassium hydroxide prompted a HAZMAT response and drew immediate scrutiny from state regulators. Two days later, a second spill, this time involving hydrofluoric acid, a highly corrosive substance, caused Flint Hill Elementary School, located less than 1,000 feet from the plant, to close and bus students to another facility. The South Carolina Department of Environmental Services (SCDES) responded by ordering Silfab to immediately cease all operations pending a joint investigation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Operations partially resumed on March 9 after SCDES and EPA completed their on-site assessment, though Silfab was required to enter a Compliance Agreement and may not restart chemical manufacturing processes until...

On January 6th, the SC Public Interest Foundation wrote a an article outlining events that highlighted problems with the state’s finance and accounting practices from 2012 to the present. These included accusations of lost funds, leading to the resignation of the state’s Comptroller General and a Senate trial of the state’s Treasurer. As reported in the article, the investigation was plagued by accusations and allegations, which undermined citizens' trust in their state government’s financial transparency. The article concluded, “The silver lining is the General Assembly engaged The AlixPartners, an internationally recognized financial accounting firm, to review all aspects of the state’s financial reporting procedures and to provide a report with recommendations. Their report, released on January 15, 2025, identified twenty-five recommendations: twenty of which are specific to the Comptroller General’s Office, one recommendation specific to the State Treasurer’s Office, and three combined to the State Auditor, Treasurer, and Comptroller General. The General Assembly then directed the Governor and the agencies to...

The South Carolina Public Interest Foundation have alleged constitutional violations by the Greenville County Council, with regard to its recently-adopted biennial budget and tax increase. This suit is ongoing and on February 20, 2026, Fox News Carolinas covered the story and important recent updates. Watch their coverage of SCPIF's lawsuit against Greenville County Council in the video below https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UegJTs51jm0 FOX Carolina News. (2026, February 20). Greenville Co lawsuit challenges budget process, taxpayer funds. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UegJTs51jm0...

Court Dismisses Citizen Lawsuit, Questions Remain About Proper Permitting Process On January 21, 2026, Judge G.D. Morgan Jr. issued an order dismissing a lawsuit brought by Dennis Floyd Bivins against York County and several of its officials regarding the Silfab Solar manufacturing facility in Fort Mill, South Carolina. The 22-page order, which was likely more than necessary for an order of this sort, dismissed the complaint with prejudice, finding that Bivins lacked standing to challenge the project and failed to state valid claims. However, a closer examination of the court’s reasoning alongside York County’s own zoning procedures reveals significant concerns about whether proper processes were followed.[1] The Court’s Decision Judge Morgan’s order addressed a lawsuit challenging York County’s approval of Silfab Solar’s manufacturing operations at 7149 Logistics Lane. Bivins, a neighboring property owner, sought declaratory relief, injunctions, and writs of mandamus and prohibition to halt the project, arguing that the county had issued permits without proper zoning compliance approval. The court dismissed the case...

Citizens Alliance for Government Integrity President Andy Lytle speaks at the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on May 9, 2024. Written by John Lee, a Move Silfab contributor In June 2024, York County issued a public “Management Statement” assuring residents that concerns about the Silfab Solar facility were based on “misinformation,” and that the Board of Zoning Appeals’ (BZA) May 9 decision was narrow, generic, and did not apply to Silfab’s project. But in a sworn court filing submitted on December 22, 2025 by the same BZA, the Board explicitly states that the zoning interpretation was binding, enforceable, site-specific, and directly applicable to Silfab’s facility. Both declarations simply cannot be true. The June 25, 2024 management statement made three core claims: 1.  “The decision by the BZA on May 9th did not apply to Silfab” 2.  “The BZA decision on May 9th applies only to future projects in the light industrial district.” 3. An advisory zoning verification letter written by a zoning technician “gave Silfab the legal...

Silfab Solar's solar panel manufacturing facility is located next to two schools at 7149 Logistics Lane in Fort Mill, SC. Why did Silfab do this? Written by Timothy J. Hegarty, A Concerned Citizen of York County: There has always been a fundamental question lurking in the background of the Move Silfab campaign that has gone unanswered all this time. As an active supporter of this campaign, I can recall that this question was considered very early on in the group and has been asked repeatedly throughout this journey. That question is “Why 7149 Logistics Lane in the Town of Fort Mill?” Why this location?  We will come back to this question. In addition, we learned very early on that the location was zoned Light Industrial, which did not permit the proposed solar cell manufacturing use. Therefore, we chose to focus on the unlawful use presented by this zoning issue. Supporters of Silfab Solar at its proposed location, 7149 Logistics Lane, have consistently attempted...

As a kid, do you remember when your dad gave you an allowance and said, 'This is all you are getting, so make it last'? A simple command to follow, and for the most part, you did as you were told. This rationale clearly does not apply to South Carolina’s treatment of its fiscal responsibilities. Enacted in 1979 through Act No. 199, Part II, Section 8 (codified as Section 2-7-65), zero-based budgeting was designed to prevent unchecked spending growth by requiring agencies to justify every dollar from scratch each year. For nearly 30 years, this law served South Carolinians well, promoting efficiency and protecting taxpayer dollars. However, since 2009—amid the Great Recession—elected officials have ignored this mandate, reverting to incremental budgeting that justifies only new spending. This failure has allowed the state budget to balloon exponentially, eroding public trust and burdening future generations with unsustainable debt and taxes. Proof of Exponential Budget Growth Due to Non-Adherence (Since 2008) The unchecked growth in...