Beaufort County Council unanimously authorizes settlement negotiations after executive session
April 13, 2026 | Beaufort County, South Carolina
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
Beaufort County Council voted unanimously on April 13 to authorize the county attorney and outside counsel to negotiate a settlement in pending litigation with Nova Properties LLC, and to permit the county's account administrator to sign any resulting settlement agreement, council members said.
The action followed an executive session held under South Carolina Code §30-4-70(a)(2), the provision that allows local public bodies to meet privately for legal advice and negotiations involving pending litigation. The chair announced the meeting had been advertised in accordance with the South Carolina Freedom of Information Act before the council moved into closed session.
Councilman Passamut moved the post-executive-session measure, saying the county should "authorize the county attorney and our outside counsel for this case to negotiate a settlement in accordance with the terms and amounts as discussed in executive session, and that the account administrator be authorized to execute a settlement agreement for those terms and amounts." Vice Chairman Tabernick seconded the motion.
The chair called for a vote and announced the motion passed unanimously by show of hands. The motion authorized negotiation and execution but did not disclose any dollar amounts or the substantive terms; council members said those amounts and details were discussed during the closed session and were not read into the public record.
Earlier in the meeting the chair identified two litigation matters to be discussed in executive session: Cheryl Mundy et al. v. Beaufort County, and Beaufort County v. Nova Properties LLC. The council said it would take the Nova Properties matter first. After the vote, members confirmed broadcast readiness and the chair called a five-minute recess before resuming the public agenda.
No further details about the settlement terms, payment amounts, or implementation timeline were disclosed at the meeting. The council did not specify whether any settlement would require subsequent budget action or county administrator approvals beyond the account administrator's authority to execute the agreement.
The council will return to regular business after the brief recess; no additional votes on the litigation were recorded in the public session.
The action followed an executive session held under South Carolina Code §30-4-70(a)(2), the provision that allows local public bodies to meet privately for legal advice and negotiations involving pending litigation. The chair announced the meeting had been advertised in accordance with the South Carolina Freedom of Information Act before the council moved into closed session.
Councilman Passamut moved the post-executive-session measure, saying the county should "authorize the county attorney and our outside counsel for this case to negotiate a settlement in accordance with the terms and amounts as discussed in executive session, and that the account administrator be authorized to execute a settlement agreement for those terms and amounts." Vice Chairman Tabernick seconded the motion.
The chair called for a vote and announced the motion passed unanimously by show of hands. The motion authorized negotiation and execution but did not disclose any dollar amounts or the substantive terms; council members said those amounts and details were discussed during the closed session and were not read into the public record.
Earlier in the meeting the chair identified two litigation matters to be discussed in executive session: Cheryl Mundy et al. v. Beaufort County, and Beaufort County v. Nova Properties LLC. The council said it would take the Nova Properties matter first. After the vote, members confirmed broadcast readiness and the chair called a five-minute recess before resuming the public agenda.
No further details about the settlement terms, payment amounts, or implementation timeline were disclosed at the meeting. The council did not specify whether any settlement would require subsequent budget action or county administrator approvals beyond the account administrator's authority to execute the agreement.
The council will return to regular business after the brief recess; no additional votes on the litigation were recorded in the public session.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
