| Printed Page 1670, Feb. 10 | Printed Page 1690, Feb. 10 |

I've been lucky enough not to be put in situations where I had to take an agency's side and advance an agency's interest in circumstances that I

Trying to figure out whether everybody is involved and if I pay for my own, everything would be okay or something like that, to me, would kill too many brain cells in an unworthy cause. It's just easier to have -- a judge doesn't have to be a hermit, but a judge shouldn't be looking for something to fly up and hit him in the face. He shouldn't invite it.

It can make you a lonely person, but like the Canons or the commentary to the Canons clearly puts forth, there are certain ascriptions put on your conduct that an ordinary person in any other walk of life would justly bridle at, but it's part of being a judge and if you don't understand that, you really shouldn't apply.
Q. Are you a golfer?
A. No.
Q. I don't need to ask the next one.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any other questions? I have one for you, Mr. Carruth.
A. Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: My question deals with the next two years of our Administrative Law Division. You're going to have six judges and it seems as though there are a couple of key questions that will need the input of the chief judge on them. First, would be areas of specialty and whether or not you would choose to try to devote one or more positions to specialized areas. Next year, tax obviously will be one of the big questions and the other is regional representation and whether or not you would feel that the division should move towards having regional offices and trying to rotate one or several of the attorneys into different areas of the state. I would like to know your thought on that?
A. I don't mean to beg the question, but as to the latter, I don't have a basis right now for prognosticating a need for establishment of regional offices. As to the former, as I said to you, we have -- we developed areas of expertise when I was on the staff at the Public Service Commission.

There could still -- here again, to raise the Canons again, the commentary to -- I reckon it is Canon 3, the one that says avoid any appearance of a conflict or anything that would lead somebody rationally to conclude that one might exist. I think the commentary says when you're dealing with judges who have been agency lawyers that that might be a problem and it's like so many other things in law, it's complicated.

The very background that would give a judge expertise as to such matters and familiarity with such matters also causes according to the official commentary to the Canon, the rules that are supposed to be applicable to require that judge to disqualify himself, and I'll be honest with you, I don't know how to resolve that. I don't know how anybody else should resolve that.

You want to take advantage of the expertise that's there and you want things to be fair. You very much want things to appear to be fair as well and as to whether or not the usual consideration apply, whether somebody's previous affiliation with and affinity for certain folks as an agency might cause him to be more for them or against them. That's an issue. You know, he might favor them. He might have a bias for the agency perspective. He might tend to rubber stamp them in the eyes of some folks. At the same time, in an effort to bend over backwards not to do that he might unduly put upon the agency and might not be as receptive to their reasonable arguments.
THE CHAIRMAN: Further questions? If not, thank you, Mr. Carruth.
A. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: The next candidate is John J. Fantry, Jr. Please raise your right hand.
JOHN JOSEPH FANTRY, JR., having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
THE CHAIRMAN: I'm going to review a few things with you prior to turning you over to our staff counsel for questioning. First, have you had a chance to review the Personal Data Questionnaire summary?
MR. FANTRY: Yes, I have.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is that correct?
MR. FANTRY: That is correct except for the most recent expenditures as far as this campaign is concerned, that should be modified to approximately $179.
THE CHAIRMAN: If you have -- do you have that in writing?
MR. FANTRY: That would be filed with the update on the campaign --
THE CHAIRMAN: Okay.

1. John Joseph Fantry, Jr.
Home Address: Business Address:
102 Marion Avenue 1310 Lady Street, #600
Winnsboro, SC 29180 Columbia, SC 29201

2. He was born in New York, New York on August 28, 1949. He is presently 44 years old.

4. He was married to Catherine H. Fantry on December 26, 1970. He has one child: Regan Christine, age 13.

5. Military Service: N/A

6. He attended Mount St. Mary's College, 1967-1971, B.S. in History; and the University of South Carolina School of Law, 1971-1974, J.D.

8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
In the past five years he has attended in excess of 12 hours per year of CLE courses as well as non-certified courses. These have covered such topics as legal ethics, personnel and employment law, rules of court, jury trials, environmental law, utility law, and economic development and municipal government.

9. Taught or Lectured: He has taught courses in Trustee Liability and Directors' and Officers' Liability under the Business Corporation Act.

12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
After graduation in 1974, he served as staff attorney to the SC Electric Cooperatives Association until 1979, when he became

13. Rating in Martindale-Hubbell:He is not rated, but he is listed as of 1992 in that the law firm he is associated with chose not to list until 1992.

14. Frequency of appearances in court:
Federal - None
State - Approximately every 60-90 days
Other-Appearance on an as-needed basis before the SC Tax Commission, DHEC, PSC, WCC, Labor Department, Coastal Council, and Ethics Commission

15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil - 90%
Criminal - 10%
Domestic - 0%

16. Percentage of cases in trial court:
Jury - 20%
Non-jury - 80%

Associate Counsel

17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
(a) Duke Power Co. v. PSC, Bd. of Public Works of the City of Gaffney, and Broad River Electric Coop., 387 S.E.2d 241 (1989), clarified the principles of the requirement of a Certificate of Necessity and Convenience under SC Code Section 58-27-1230.
(b) Broad River Electric Coop. v. PSC, Bd. of Public Works of the City of Gaffney, Duke Power Co., Saluda River Electric Coop., Thomas R. Lipscomb, and the SC Dept. of Consumer Affairs, established the right of the PSC to order the removal of lines built by a municipality without a Certificate of Necessity and Convenience. This case was the

18. Five (5) civil appeals:
(a) Broad River Electric Coop. v. PSC, Bd. of Public Works of the City of Gaffney, Duke Power Co., Saluda River Electric Coop., Thomas R. Lipscomb, and the SC Dept. of Consumer Affairs, appealed to Supreme Court, appeal dropped, presently in Circuit Court for contempt.
(b) Chambers of SC v. City Council of Lee County and Mid American Waste Systems, Inc., Supreme Court, 7/12/93, 434 S.E.2d 279 (1993).
(c) Miles v. Town of Ridgeway, Supreme Court, pending.

20. Judicial Office: He was appointed a hearing officer for the SC Department of Revenue and Taxation Alcoholic Beverage Licensing Division to serve in the interim period from 7/1/93 to 2/28/94.

21. Significant Orders or Opinions:

In light of the short time which he has served and the limited scope of authority, he does not feel any of his rulings warrant elaboration.

20. Public Office:

Presidential appointment, board member, District 50 Selective Service System, 1986-present; elected Board Chairman 1988-present

Lexington County Council appointment, board member, Richland/Lexington Council on Aging, 1979-1983

Lexington County Council appointment, Chairman, Lexington County Economic Advisory Council, 1977-1983

26. Officer/director or management of business enterprise:
With the exception of his ownership interest in Lewis, Rogers & Lark, P.A., he is not aware of any financial arrangement or business relationship which in any way would constitute or create a possible conflict of interest in the position he seeks. This would be corrected by the sale of his interest in the firm. He has represented certain electric cooperatives, municipalities, and water companies before DHEC, PSC, Tax Commission, and the Labor Department. For one year, he would recuse himself from cases involving a former client; thereafter, he would recuse himself from any matter he had worked on involving a former client.

36. Lobbyist or Lobbyist Principal:
He was registered as a lobbyist for the Electric Cooperatives of South Carolina, Inc. from 1975 through 1984.

37. Lodging, Transportation, Entertainment, Food, Meals, Beverages, Money or Any Other Thing of Value From a Lobbyist or Lobbyist Principal

The law firm with which he is associated presently performs legal services for the Electric Cooperatives of South Carolina, Inc., a lobbyist's principal, for which they bill on an hourly basis. He has not received anything from any lobbyist or lobbyist's principal.

40. Expenditures Relating to Candidacy:
Postage in the amount of $.87 on 10/27/93 for letters to his references.

46. Civic, charitable, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
Toastmasters International - Area Governor for SC; Fairfield Country Club - Board of Directors, 1987-1989; Fairfield County Education Foundation - Vice President, 1989-1990

48. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) Lisa M. Shoemaker, Branch Manager
Columbia Teacher's Federal Credit Union
2320 Washington Street, Columbia, SC 29201
252-5700
(b) Honorable Marion C. Smith
Magistrate - District 2
Fairfield County Summary Court
P. O. Box 423, Winnsboro, SC 29180
635-4525
(c) C. Pinckney Roberts, Esquire
P. O. Box 694, Columbia, SC 29202
779-4975
(d) Charles L. Compton, Esquire
Vice President of Corp. Relations and General Counsel
Saluda River Electric Cooperative, Inc.
P. O. Box 929, Laurens, SC 29360
682-3169
(e) John Jacques
667 Ferry Street, Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
884-9556

The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline reports that no formal complaints or charges of any kind have been filed against you. We've also reviewed the records of the applicable law enforcement agencies:Fairfield County Sheriff's Department, Winnsboro City Police Department, SLED and FBI records, all are negative. The Judgement Rolls of Fairfield County are negative and the Federal Courts as well. No complaints or statements were received and we have no witnesses who are present to testify against you.

I'll now turn you over to Mr. Elliott for questioning.

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, health, safety and public welfare is the constitutional foundation which the General Assembly uses in prescribing duties and responsibilities for the individual.

It is for health, safety and the public welfare that South Carolina requires the licensing of lawyers, cosmetologists, water system operators and a host other professionals. It is for health, safety and general welfare that South Carolina assigns electric, gas, telephone services. It permits water and waste water facilities. It protects navigable and scenic rivers. It oversees the opening and closing of landfills and establishes sediment control standards for construction.

It is for health, safety and general welfare that South Carolina issues permits for beer and wine sales, licenses underground gas tanks and promotes economic development and when the men and the women of the General Assembly have completed their task of prescribing the duties and responsibilities of the individual and the governor has signed that into law, it is the job of the state agency to implement and enforce those duties with a reasonable and equal hand.

To enhance the equity in application and the public perception of that equity, the roles of the fact finder and the regulator have been separated through the creation of the Administrative Law Judge Division. These judges are persons not assigned to any one agency who with knowledge of the Rules of Evidence and existing South Carolina case law serve as the preliminary tester of agency actions.

Whether that test be in the role of a hearing officer when public hearings are requested for development of new regulations, hearing officer for appeal an agency decision and when that agency has no Board of Commission or hearing officer for an appeal from a Board of Commission which is denied professional certificate, it is the responsibility of the Administrative Law judge to see that the actions of the agency and the individuals appearing before them are appropriately documented with findings of facts and conclusions of law which will protect the party's right for judicial review.

It's my understanding and belief that the role of the administrative law judge is to assist the departments of government to which they are assigned to carry out the activities and directive of the law by seeing that

In November of this year I will celebrate my 20th year as having the privilege of representing individuals before courts and tribunals in South Carolina. I consider myself fortunate during these years to be involved with clients who provide public services within South Carolina.

My involvement with services such as electricity, water, telephone, fire and, yes, even police protection has educated me in the process of reading and applying administrative regulations including the permitting, licensing and enforcement proceedings. It has also provided me the opportunity for petitioning the General Assembly to create or modify laws that better define the duties, rights and public obligations of those responsibilities and the people that are providing those services.

The restructuring of the South Carolina government last year created the opportunity to be a part of bringing to life the vision of the General Assembly through development of the first set of regulations for the Administrative Law Judge Division and the testing of that plan through service as a judge.

This is an intellectual challenge. A challenge that a student such as myself of law and government couldn't pass up and that's why I sit before you today.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Fantry. Mr. Elliott.
MR. FANTRY - EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIOTT:
Q. As you indicated in your opening statement, you have pretty extensive administrative law experience or it appears to be so from your statement -- in your PDQ, but it looks like most of that is in the area of utilities and the Public Service Commission; is that corrects?
A. No. I have appeared before the South Carolina Tax Commission --
Q. Well --
A. -- doing -- dealing with abandoned property.
Q. I was going to say, if you would, if you would develop that. I was going to mention that --
A. I'll be glad to do that.
Q. -- but if you'd develop that a little bit for us.
A. In 19, approximately, seventy -- 70 attached to the Appropriations Bill, there was an abandoned property tax law that was introduced in the South Carolina. In this area, the South Carolina Tax Commission would identify properties and accounts that were left in banks or interest in

| Printed Page 1670, Feb. 10 | Printed Page 1690, Feb. 10 |