NEWS

Budget impasse threatens county road funding

Tim Smith
tcsmith@greenvillenews.com

COLUMBIA – The Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday approved a contingency plan in the event lawmakers cannot agree on a budget before July 1, as some lawmakers raised the possibility that not having a budget would doom extra road funding and cause leadership confusion at the state's highway agency.

Meanwhile, leaders from various groups gathered at the Statehouse to rail against the failure of lawmakers to pass any reforms this year of the agencies that control road spending.

Officials with the South Carolina Policy Council, the Coastal Conservation League, the League of Women Voters of South Carolina, the South Carolina Campaign for Liberty and the South Carolina chapter of Americans for Prosperity said that before lawmakers pump more money into the system, they need to inject more accountability into the process by changing the system in which lawmakers appoint highway commissioners, and eliminate the State Transportation Infrastructure Bank, which finances major transportation projects.

Dana Beach, executive director of the Coastal Conservation League, argued that the current system is made to accommodate political influence in decisions about how transportation dollars are spent.

To make his point, he distributed photos of a staff member of his organization lying across State 51, which goes from Florence to Pamplico, at 5 p.m., with no cars in sight. The Infrastructure Bank, he said, has approved spending $150 million to expand the highway to four lanes. The project is in the district of Sen. Hugh Leatherman of Florence, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, president pro tempore of the Senate and a member of the Infrastructure Bank.

The project was mentioned in the last week of the session by Sen. Tom Davis, a Beaufort Republican, during his filibuster to prevent consideration of a bill that would raise the gas tax. Davis used it as an example of what he saw as wasteful spending. Leatherman said during the debate that many beach-goers use the highway.

"Over the past half century, we have seen massive diversion of literally hundreds of millions and billions of dollars to politically motivated projects that were either unnecessary or harmful," Beach said. "We've lavished public funds in a way that fails to pass the common sense test and it really defies understanding."

Ashley Landess, president of the Policy Council, said the estimates by the state Department of Transportation on how much money is needed to upgrade the state's roads and bridges over the coming three decades are questionable. DOT has estimated a funding shortfall of $1.4 billion per year for 29 years in the amount needed to bring the system up to good condition.

And she said the current transportation system encourages nepotism, cronyism and corruption.

"We have to change the system," she said.

Officials with the groups said they plan to work together to determine a more accurate number for the amount of needed additional infrastructure funding.

The Legislature adjourned last week without passing either a road-funding bill or a General Fund budget. They will return next week to take up budget-related matters and any legislation being negotiated in conference committees.

The House passed a road-funding bill earlier this year that also would have allowed the governor to appoint highway commissioners. The bill would reform the state Transportation Infrastructure Bank and offer counties a financial carrot if they agreed to take over local roads in the state's inventory.

The Senate amended the House bill with a road-funding plan of its own that would raise more than $700 million in new funds but does not address DOT reforms. The bill was debated one day but never voted on.

Hopes for any additional road money, in the form of funding for state secondary roads via county transportation committees, now rest in a surplus revenue bill to be debated in the House next week that would spend $150 million of about $300 million in surplus money on the secondary roads.

Senate leaders want to wait until they see that bill before continuing with budget negotiations. The Senate had voted unanimously to use all but $27 million of this year's surplus on local road maintenance.

Lawmakers say if the budget doesn't pass, that means there is no extra money for roads.

Rep. James Smith, a Columbia Democrat, urged members of the Senate Finance Committee to reject a continuing resolution, which allows state government to keep operating at the current year's funding levels if a budget isn't passed, arguing that passing a resolution eliminates the incentive to get a budget done.

"At this stage of the legislative session, a vote for a continuing resolution is a vote to delay a roads bill for another year," he said. "And we simply can't afford to wait another year. We're elected to fix these problems and all our leaders want to do is avoid them. It's time to get to work and do our jobs."

Leatherman told the panel that he would not engage in "what if" scenarios involving a failure to pass a General Fund budget for the fiscal year that begins July 1.

"We are going to pass an appropriations bill," he said, calling the continuing resolution "insurance." The resolution has already been passed by the House and will now head to the Senate floor.

Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler said the resolution is "purely a safety net, not a white flag." But Sen. Vincent Sheheen, a Camden Democrat who voted against the resolution, said he is worried that unless the Senate puts a date on the resolution, the open-ended measure could invite a budget stalemate that could last for months.

Others said they are concerned about what would happen if a budget doesn't get passed.

Davis, a member of the finance committee, said he is prepared to offer an amendment on the Senate floor next week to suspend a provision in a 2007 law that this summer sunsets the governor's authority to appoint the leader of DOT.

The Legislature had already placed such a suspension in the budget when it looked like a comprehensive roads bill might not pass.

Now that there is a possibility the budget might not pass, Davis wants some insurance that DOT's leadership will not be thrown into confusion, if it looks like passage of the surplus bill in the House will be delayed.