Georgetown Times Candidate Q&A - 09-10-06

Question: What can you do to push for quicker construction of the four-laning of Highway 521 to Interstate 95, especially through Williamsburg County?Answer: Eight years ago 521 was not on the SCDOT priority list. The Georgetown Delegation moved 521 to the top of the priority list and secured nearly $100 million in funding for Nine Mile Curve to the Williamsburg County line. This was accomplished by building partnerships at the federal, state and local level. The continued success of this project requires background knowledge, contacts and legislative seniority. I will continue to use my position as chairman of GSATS, Board member of the Waccamaw COG, NESA, and established relationships with the SCDOT director, commissioners and state and federal legislators for the implementation of this priority project, now in the Statewide Transportation Infrastructure Plan, funded with no additional cost to local taxpayers. The Andrews Bypass Phase II, $650,000 secured for preliminary engineering. Consultants are reevaluating Environmental Assessment for public review in late 2006. Highway 521 - Andrews to Greeleyville - the Office of Planning is currently working on Advanced Project Planning Report. $650,000 has been secured for preliminary engineering for the Greeleyville Bypass with preliminary planning to begin early 2007.Right-of-way acquisition is complete from the Williamsburg County Line to Highway 261.
Question: The property tax reform plan passed by the General Assembly this past session seems to be luke-warm at best. What will you do to offer real property tax reform? Answer: I will continue efforts to modernize the tax structure by reducing the number of special exemptions and corporate loopholes, which cost S.C. nearly $1.5 billion in revenue, promote taxes on Internet sales, service-related businesses and an earned income tax credit for property tax relief. Also, with 75,000 manufacturing jobs lost in S.C., it is imperative that state and local governments make economic development a top priority. According to a July 6 report from the S.C. Employment Security Commission, "Rural areas of the state continue to be plagued with layoffs in manufacturing and limited job opportunities keeping the overall unemployment rate well above the national average." Losses in property tax revenues from business and manufacturing shift the burden to local homeowners, many who have seen property values rise at a much higher rate than incomes. Having introduced the only property tax relief plan that passed in 2004, and having served on Speaker Harrell's property tax study committee, I realize this issue is complex and controversial but I remain an advocate for a much-needed system of tax reform, accountability, and equity.Question: Another tax reform question. This one deals with the 1 percent sales tax increase to replace the property taxes on schools. It appears to many educators that this takes local spending control away from local boards. What are your thoughts? Answer: Beginning with fiscal year 2007-08, the additional 1 percent sales tax will replace county property taxes levied by local school districts for operating costs from owner-occupied homes only, it does not affect revenues received or expenditures budgeted by districts from commercial, industrial and second-home taxes. The state will collect the additional 1 percent sales tax beginning next summer. School districts will then be reimbursed from the sales tax collections, based on an amount provided by the districts to the Comptroller General's office. This amount must be equal to the amount they would have received from owner-occupied property taxes and may be used for the same programs and salaries as before. Also, school districts will continue to benefit from the value of property assessment and growth. The General Assembly does not intend to micromanage school expenditures at the local level, which is a board responsibility, and statewide discussions are currently taking place to insure clarification of the legislation and a timely distribution of funding.Answer: What is your stand on the U.S. House version of a bill that would open up the coast of South Carolina and other Atlantic states to oil and gas drilling 50 or more miles offshore if state governors and Legislatures approve offshore drilling? How would you vote on this issue if it passes in Congress and comes before the S.C. House? Answer: My thought is we would have been better served by Congress with a long-term comprehensive policy on energy rather than lifting the moratorium on drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf. The U.S. Senate version of the bill opens 8.3 million acres of federal waters for drilling with proposals to give states the authority to drill closer to the shoreline. The Senate bill was facilitated by financial incentives to the Gulf states. Alaska is facing a loss of oil incentives and environmental issues with eroding pipelines. Last year hurricanes destroyed scores of offshore oil and gas rigs, damaged hundreds of pipelines and spilled 741,384 gallons of petroleum products into the sea, federal records show. An August 2006 damage assessment by the U.S. Minerals Management Service said the largest spill poured about 76,000 gallons of condensate, a toxic form of liquefied gas, into Gulf waters. If federal legislation passes, I cannot support state legislation that would allow drilling closer to our shores and will fight for a zone of protection for South Carolina's coastline.