Wedding & Event Venue Near Lancaster, SC

The 10-year-old student has been placed on a "no-hug policy," the mother said. The child is accused of intimately hugging the teacher multiple times.

LANCASTER COUNTY, S.C. — A Lancaster County, South Carolina teacher has filed a sexual harassment complaint against one of her 10-year-old students after the child hugged her multiple times.

In the complaint, the teacher says the child in October had laid “his head on her chest while he hugged her.” In another instance, also in October, the teacher says he “pressed his body into hers and wrapped his arms around her.” The teacher claims that’s when she told him “hugging from behind is very inappropriate and not to do it again.”

Earlier this month the teacher claims he “approached her from behind, pressed his body into hers, and put his hands on her hip/side area” attempting to hug her from behind again. The teacher claims it was this incident that lead her to file the case.

The boy’s mom, Lyndsay Casey, said she is "hurt and confused" after being unaware aware it had gotten this far or that there was an issue.

The Lancaster County School District said they’re doing what they can to ensure both parties feel heard in the situation.

“As far as having a response one way or the other - our goal is to provide a safe environment for all our students and staff and we want to make sure they’re aware of their rights and we go through the correct process to protect those rights,” Elizabeth Bryant, the communications director for the school district, told WCNC Charlotte.

The child has now been put on a "no-hug policy" while the claims are being investigated, according to Casey. She finds its unfair.

“He’s a very loving child. I feel like school should be a safe place and him not feeling that way anymore has him in a whirl of emotions right now,” Casey said.

As of now, evidence is being reviewed and the district said it could take between 40 and 120 days before an official decision is made.

Contact Anna King at aking2@wcnc.com and follow her on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

You can stream WCNC Charlotte on Roku, Amazon Fire TV and Apple TV, just download the free app to get the news that impacts you.

2024 Participating Organizations

A Father's Way, Above and Beyond Tutoring, All For One Disaster Relief, Alston Wilkes Society, American Legion Post 250 Indian Land SC, Arts Council of Chester County, Battered But Not Broken, Big Thursday of Lancaster, Boy Scouts of America Troop 720, Call Me Beauty Mentoring Program, Cancer of Many Colors, Carolina Elite Panthers, Catawba Riverkeeper, Chester Center of Hope, Chester County First Steps, Chester County Historical Society, Child Evangelism Fellowship: Catawba River Chapter, Children’s Attention Home, Children's Cancer Partners of the Carolinas, Christian Services, Columbus Parker Track Club, Community Playhouse of Lancaster County, CURES For Chester, Educational Foundation of USC Lancaster, Elizabeth Hutchinson Jackson Chapter NSDAR, Fellowship of Christian Athletes, Fellowship of Christian Athletes - Chester County, FHV Christian Church- The Community Powerhouse, Fort Lawn Community Center, Foundation for the Chester County Sheriff’s Office, Friends of Andrew Jackson State Park, Friends of the Buford Massacre Battlefield, Friends of the Del Webb Library, Girls on the Run Tri County SC, GoldenCare, Good Samaritan Medical Clinic, Grace-Lynnwood United Methodist Church "The Bridge," GRASP, Great Falls Home Town Association, Greater Victory ER Center, Gregory Family YMCA, Habitat for Humanity of Lancaster County, Hook Line and Heroes, HOPE in Lancaster Inc., Horse N Around Therapeutic Riding Center, Hospice & Community Care, House of Pearls, i58 Inc., Indian Land YMCA, James R. Clark Memorial Sickle Cell Foundation Lancaster Satellite Office, KARE - Kershaw Area Resource Exchange, Katawba Valley Land Trust, Kershaw Community Park Council (KCPC), Kingdom Encounters Journey's Children Closet, Kingdom of God Church Intl of SC, Lancaster Children's Home Inc.,, Lancaster County Community Center (aka Barr Street), Lancaster County Council of the Arts, Lancaster County Council on Aging, Lancaster County First Steps, Lancaster County Good Samaritan Scholarship Foundation, Lancaster County Society for Historical Preservation, Lancaster Dixie Baseball, Lancaster Housing Services, Lancaster Promise Neighborhood, Lancaster SC250 Committee, Lancaster SPCA, Lindsay Pettus Greenway Inc., Lions Vision Services, Lynne's Haven of Hope, Mount Calvary Outreach Center Inc., NAMI Piedmont Tri-County, Palmetto Citizens Against Sexual Assault, Paws in the Panhandle Rescue and Adoption, ROTB Diplomat Center. Safe Passage Inc., Salt of the Earth 2022, Seth's Giving Tree, Sheltered, Simple Faith Ranch, Tender Hearts Ministries, The Beacon Foundation Inc., The Camryn Olivia Foundation Inc., The Children's Council, The Lord’s Lunchbox, The Turning Point of Chester, Therapy Resource Group, United for Baby, United Way of Lancaster County, Upper Midlands Rural Health Network, Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 12136 Indian Land SC, Women's Enrichment Center, WorkAbility

For drivers frustrated with the constant traffic in Indian Land, the road to some relief just got a whole lot longer.

After voters turned down a new transportation tax, Lancaster County Councilman Brian Carnes spoke with county administration Wednesday morning to determine what comes next. Specifically, the conversation centered on what might happen on the busy U.S. 521 corridor in Indian Land.

“It basically means it’s just put off,” Carnes said.

Almost 53% of voters countywide opted not to start a new one-cent sales tax for roads. Election day results are unofficial until they’re certified.

The tax proposal was similar to Pennies for Progress in York County, where voters approved their fifth road tax campaign since 1997. The Lancaster County program was expected to create $405 million over 15 years. Much of that money would’ve gone to widening or intersection improvements on Charlotte Highway.

Carnes doesn’t see a new transportation tax vote showing up on ballots for at least two years. That type of referendum has to be on a November election. Council will discuss its options during a retreat in January.

“We need to step back and assess the data,” Carnes said. “And maybe start over again and get the public involved. Get feedback on it.”

Had the sales tax passed, the county likely would’ve put $60 million toward what could have been a $150 million set of improvements on Charlotte Highway. The tax could’ve provided match money to go after federal or state infrastructure bank funding to cover most of the work.

The plan found support in Indian Land. The county’s 11 northernmost precincts, from Van Wyck north to the North Carolina state line, each voted in favor. They ranged from 51% to 62% support. All 25 precincts south of Van Wyck voted against the new tax.

The northern 11 precincts collected 62% of all the “yes” votes countywide. They did, however, bring in more than 42% of all the “no” votes.

Carnes believed large geographic areas of the county weren’t likely to support the tax, but hoped the higher voter turnout in the panhandle would overcome the gap.

Several similar ballot questions statewide failed, something Carnes sees as a trend.

“I think it had somewhat to do with the economy,” he said. “And maybe we didn’t do as good a job educating people.”

Carnes spoke after the election with Lancaster County school board member Melvin Stroble, who pushed a $588 million bond referendum voters also turned down on Tuesday. Both agreed national economic unrest that drove voters to the presidential polls made a difference.

“Economy ranked No. 1 (nationally),” Stroble said. “And we saw that in our community here, too.”

A recent county tax reassessment may have contributed to voter concern, Carnes said. Both Carnes and Stroble saw a challenge with the transportation and school decisions — about $1 billion combined — appearing on the same ballot.

The school bond had wider disapproval, at almost 60% of voters against it.

“When somebody votes no for one tax, it’s hard for them to vote yes for another one, for a lot of people,” Carnes said.

The transportation tax would’ve given Lancaster County the highest sales tax in South Carolina, matching three other counties at 9%.

The statewide base rate is 6%. Lancaster County has a local option sales tax and a capital use sales tax, bringing its rate to 8%.

One of those taxes funds large projects like a law enforcement facility or major park. The other provides for county services to help offset property taxes. The idea is that county residents pay sales tax but so does every visitor to the county who buys taxable goods.

Residents may not understand that one penny tax they pay lowers their property tax bills and uses others to help, Carnes said. If they only see it as a higher tax rate, he understands why people might not support another new tax.

York County’s first Pennies program in 1997 only got 51% support, but the four votes since to continue that tax have easily passed with more than 70% support each. Carnes had hoped to edge out a win in Lancaster County that voters could then see the value of as road work was completed.

York and Lancaster county road officials say relying only on the state Transportation Department to fix or widen roads would mean far less construction than a penny tax provides. Which is why, at some point, Lancaster County voters are likely to see one on the ballot again.

“We can either live with what we’ve got or we can all partner together to do something,” Carnes said.

The Herald

803-329-4076

John Marks graduated from Furman University in 2004 and joined the Herald in 2005. He covers community growth, municipalities, transportation and education mainly in York County and Lancaster County. The Fort Mill native earned dozens of South Carolina Press Association awards and multiple McClatchy President’s Awards for news coverage in Fort Mill and Lake Wylie.

More mobile classrooms, redrawn attendance lines and even a new bond referendum vote are possibilities in Lancaster County after voters turned down a $588 million bond package on Election Day.

“I think every option is on the table for us,” said Elizabeth Bryant, Lancaster County School District spokeswoman.

Almost 60% of county voters chose “no” on a bond package that would’ve built a new high school and elementary school in Indian Land. Two more new elementary schools in the county would’ve consolidated facilities in Lancaster, Kershaw and Heath Springs. Other renovations and upgrades would’ve stretched across the county.

Now the district has to reset and come up with a new plan to address school crowding.

Election day brings two new school board members, one of them replacing Chairman Brad Small. So it’s unlikely a timeline for next steps will be set by the board’s next meeting on Nov. 19, Bryant said.

The new plan will focus on creating space for students, she said. The district could raise its tax rate by a smaller amount than the bond would have, something the district could do without a public referendum.

Mobile classrooms at the most packed schools are a likely option. Redistricting, though often unpopular for school districts, could happen. “I’m not saying we’ll do that,” Bryant said. “That’s something that we might have to consider.”

A bond takes typically takes a year or two, she said, from start to election date. A new bond proposal could take less time since so much work was done on the failed bond.

Board member Melvin Stroble chaired the subcommittee that came up with Tuesday’s bond. It’s important to separate the vote, he said, from public support.

“The result of the bond in no way means that Lancaster County as a whole is not supportive of education and our students,” Stroble said.

Community members ahead of the bond questioned the high cost, the equity of devoting so much money to Indian Land and the need for a new high school there. Stroble heard so many variables, from curriculum to traffic, that he doesn’t see a single reason for the bond failure.

But larger voting trends on Tuesday seemed to point toward the wallet.

“Nationally, folks are concerned about the economy,” Stroble said. “And that concern certainly spills over into taxes.”

The election map in Lancaster County shows a geographic divide, too. The five precincts on the northernmost tip of the Indian Land panhandle each voted for the bond, with approval between 51% and 64%. The farther north the precinct was, the higher approval was.

The 31 precincts below where the Catawba River meets the panhandle each voted against the bond. In all, voter turnout across Lancaster County topped 79%.

Results aren’t official until they’re certified.

Stroble and Bryant are encouraged that the bond allowed district personnel and new Superintendent Raashad Fitzpatrick to connect with their community. Both want to see that process continue as next steps emerge.

The failed bond is a data point, Stroble said, that can help create a better plan. While it’s unclear exactly what will happen next, he said, it can’t be complacency.

“School bells rang all over Lancaster County regardless of the bond,” Stroble said Wednesday morning. “We’ve still got to educate kids. Our buses are still on the road. Our operations are still running.”

Indian Land has had new neighborhoods pop up for a generation now. More new home subdivision are under construction there, but also in Lancaster and Kershaw.

“The next steps start now,” Stroble said.

The Herald

803-329-4076

John Marks graduated from Furman University in 2004 and joined the Herald in 2005. He covers community growth, municipalities, transportation and education mainly in York County and Lancaster County. The Fort Mill native earned dozens of South Carolina Press Association awards and multiple McClatchy President’s Awards for news coverage in Fort Mill and Lake Wylie.

Latest results and news about the 2024 national elections, and key North Carolina and South Carolina elections.

Voters in several counties across the Charlotte region were asked to approve nearly $1 billion worth of bond referendums, mostly for schools and largely in the nearby counties of South Carolina. The largest of those bond votes, a $588 million bond package in Lancaster County, failed, according to unofficial results. A $227 million bond package in Chester County also failed.

When a government or school district issues bonds, it’s a bit like spending on a credit card or taking out a mortgage: The government borrows the money by selling bonds, pays for projects and then pays the bondholders back (with interest) over coming years using tax revenue.

York School District No. 1 bond

The York School District's $90 million bond package passed by a 64-to-36 margin, allowing the district to fund a new middle school, acquire property and renovate school facilities.

Lancaster County school bonds

Lancaster County voters rejected a $588 million school bonds package with a 60% to 40% margin. This would have funded the construction of several new schools in the district, as well as renovations at existing schools and the addition of security cameras with facial recognition to all schools.

Chester County school bonds

In Chester County, voters rejected a $227 million bond package that would have funded new and expanded high schools, as well as renovations at existing schools.

Union County, N.C. school bonds

Taxpayers in the Union County Public Schools District approved a $39 million bond package that school officials say will address some of the district’s aging facilities.

South Carolina voters also have two major transportation bonds on the ballot:

York County transportation sales tax

Voters in York County approved a one-cent sales tax increase to last for seven years, the latest in the county's "Pennies for Progress" program. The revenue would finance major road projects throughout the county, including widening U.S. Highway 21 and improving dozens of intersections. The total cost of the projects would be about $411 million.

Lancaster County transportation sales tax

In Lancaster County, voters opposed raising the sales tax by one cent for 15 years, in order to fund $405 million worth of transportation improvements. The big-ticket items of that package included widening Highway 521, widening Harrisburg Road, and widening Henry Harris Road, as well as dozens of intersection makeovers, road resurfacing and new roundabouts. Separately, voters opposed up to $250 million worth of bond spending for additional transportation projects, in order to borrow money upfront and start spending quickly on projects like the 521 widening.