Funds for county projects fall victim to budget impasse – Coastal Observer

Funds for county projects fall victim to budget impasse – Coastal Observer

Earmarks for $10 million in state funds for projects in Georgetown County were left out of the budget passed by the General Assembly last week, and local lawmakers know who to blame. “We can’t just let one person control the budget,” said state Rep. Lee Hewitt, referring to state Sen. Harvey Peeler, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee. “They don’t like Harvey Peeler,” said state Sen. Stephen Goldfinch. “Harvey said how about half? They said no, so they’ll get none.” That’s the fault of state Rep. Bruce Bannister, who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee, he said. The dispute between the two chambers over earmarks left some $370 million in requests unfunded when the $15 billion budget passed six weeks after the start of the new fiscal year. Among the earmarks were $2 million for a project to dredge creeks and channels in Murrells Inlet, $2 million for drainage improvements along Martin Luther King Road and $2 million for a butterfly pavilion at Brookgreen Gardens. There was also $1.5 million for improvements to the Murrells Inlet Boat Landing, $1.5 million for housing redevelopment in Georgetown and $1.25 million for an operations center for the Murrells Inlet-Garden City Fire District. “We’re going to have to circle back and see what we can do,” County Council Chairman Clint Elliott said. The $1.5 million for the boat landing would have paid for improvements outlined to the county delegation almost two years ago. Elliott said the county will now look to federal lawmakers for help. It could also ask Horry County to help fund landing improvements since it is the only public access to the inlet that sits astride the county line. “It’s disappointing,” Council Member Stella Mercado said. The Martin Luther King Road project, which includes a multipurpose path, is in her district. The project will be funded through the capital project sales tax that voters approved in 2024, but it is expected to cost more than the $5.7 million estimate, so the county sought additional funds from the state. “The county’s moving forward with doing this project,” Mercado said, but the earmark would have allowed the sale tax funds to cover more of the contingency projects included in the 2024 referendum. Martin Luther King Road is also a project that the county will seek federal funds for, Elliott said. The funds for Brookgreen Gardens would go toward a $3 million expansion of the new visitors center that opened this year. The butterfly pavilion that was destroyed by a storm two years ago was a top attraction, said Page Kiniry, Brookgreen’s president and CEO. While Brookgreen isn’t traditional infrastructure, “it’s an important part of our economic development,” she said. The Purdy Center got funding through earmarks submitted by Goldfinch and Hewitt two years ago. Attendance at Brookgreen set a record this year, and Kiniry said the new center was a factor in that. Brookgreen has submitted plans for the pavilion to the county and will move forward by borrowing the funds, she said. “That’s a hit,” she added. “We work hard not to have a lot of debt.” There is still a chance that some earmarks could get funding. The budget conference committee proposed that the earmarks be reviewed as part of a supplemental appropriations bill. “It’s possible. It depends on the attitude of leadership,” Goldfinch said.  He wasn’t surprised by the outcome. “There’s been a fight coming,” he said. To the Senate, the issue is fairness. They proposed $130 million in earmark projects. The House proposed $325 million. “In theory, each body represents the same amount of people,” Goldfinch said. “But the House is double or triple, quadruple in many cases” in the amount of earmarks. He sought funds for the dredging and boat landing.  Some of Hewitt’s projects were also listed as earmarks for other House members. “I don’t have any problem with the projects he’s asked for, but it’s three times the projects I’ve asked for,” Goldfinch said. “It’s not right.” Whoever asks for them, Hewitt said the projects are all needed and a worthwhile use of the money, which is one-time revenue. “We have needs in the area that are not being met, and the cost is only going up,” he said. Hewitt also hopes that the legislature will move forward with the review committee to get some earmarks funded. “That opportunity is still there if the Senate wants to do that,” he said. “Stephen and I can work together to get what we feel is right.” Peeler, the Senate finance chairman, objected to the House requests so they were cut to $225 million, Hewitt said. “Then he said $173 million with no explanation,” he said. “He wasn’t cutting any of theirs.” Bannister’s position was “why are we even here,” he added. “The House feels like they need to assert some authority,” Goldfinch said.  If the spending issue isn’t resolved, the money will go into the state’s reserve fund, setting up another debate for next year. The money could also be returned to taxpayers, but Hewitt noted that the last time the state did that it cost $5 million to send out $250 refund checks. “I haven’t had anybody tell me, ‘send me a $250 check,’” Hewitt said. “They’re telling me, ‘fix my roads.’”