Journal of the House of Representatives
of the Second Session of the 110th General Assembly
of the State of South Carolina
being the Regular Session Beginning Tuesday, January 11, 1994

Page Finder Index
| Printed Page 3290, Mar. 10 | Printed Page 3310, Mar. 10 |
Printed Page 3300 . . . . . Thursday, March 10, 1994
POINT OF ORDER

Rep. McABEE raised the Point of Order that Amendment No. 275 was out of order as it did not relate to a line item.

The SPEAKER sustained the Point of Order and ruled the amendment out of order.

Rep. J. WILDER proposed the following Amendment No. 282 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\CYY\15844AC.94), which was ruled out of order.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Part II, Permanent Provisions, by adding a new section, appropriately numbered, to read:

/SECTION ___

TO AMEND SECTION 48-48-80, AS AMENDED, OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO THE OPERATIONS OF THE BARNWELL LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY, SO AS TO DELETE PROVISIONS REQUIRING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO AUTHORIZE BY CONCURRENT RESOLUTION THE ACCEPTANCE AFTER JUNE 30, 1994, AT THE SITE OF LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE FROM OUTSIDE THE AREA OF THE SOUTHEAST LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT COMPACT, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE DISPOSITION OF THE REVENUES DERIVED FROM THIS PROVISION.

A. The General Assembly finds it necessary to amend Section 48-48-80(G) of the 1976 Code, relating to the requirement for the General Assembly to authorize acceptance of low-level radioactive waste from outside the Southeast Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Compact Area, in order to fund appropriations for capital expenses in Section 10, Part I of this act.

B. Section 48-48-80(G) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Section 70D, Part II, Act 501 of 1992, is further amended to read:

"(G) Reserved. Beginning July 1, 1994, in addition to the requirement set forth in Section 48-47-70(9) for an affirmative vote of both representatives from the State of South Carolina to the Southeast Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Compact Commission to accept the importation of waste from outside the southeast region, the General Assembly, by a concurrent resolution, must authorize the facility at Barnwell to accept the importation of waste generated outside the region before such waste may be disposed at the Barnwell facility."

C. The revenues derived from the deletion of subsection (G) of Section 48-48-80 of the 1976 Code must be credited to the general fund

Printed Page 3301 . . . . . Thursday, March 10, 1994
of the State. The State Treasurer shall allocate these revenues as additional general fund appropriations for specific agency programs as identified in Part I of this act./

Renumber sections & amend totals/title to conform.

Rep. J. WILDER explained the amendment.

Rep. J. WILDER'S remarks were ordered printed in the Journal as follows:

REMARKS BY

REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPH B. WILDER

Mr. Speaker, and members of the House, I do not plan to make a lengthy statement in support of the amendment before you today, so therefore I would appreciate your attention to my remarks.

The passage of this amendment has extremely important ramifications to my District, and for that matter, to the entire State. I want to speak primarily to the members of the House who were elected in November of 1992. You were not present through the lengthy discussions that took place concerning the continued placement of low-level nuclear waste in my county. The arguments were often technical, certainly legalistic, and at times, very emotional. The result was a decision to close the site forever on December 31, 1995, twenty-one months from now.

In the same period, the past twenty-one months, the State has received in revenue some $90 million, far above the $20 to $30 million that was projected. The decision to close the Barnwell Low-Level Nuclear Waste Site had other provisions. One was to close the site to out of Compact waste on June 30th of this year, and another known as the "Good Neighbor Policy." That policy said that if North Carolina chose a site within ten miles of our border, that state would lose immediate access to South Carolina and pay a fine as well. The deadline was last December.

As you know, North Carolina chose the Wake County site to the great relief of everyone concerned. There are other hurdles, other deadlines and other penalties, if North Carolina is unable to develop the Wake County site on schedule. So far, to the best of my knowledge, they are in compliance.

With your patience and your attention, I would like to continue my review of past history. I make no apologies for my part in siting Chem-Nuclear over 23 years ago. Dr. Henry Schultz, working for the State Development Board, came to Barnwell County to ask for the support of the project by Senator Brown and Speaker Blatt. They asked me to help

Printed Page 3302 . . . . . Thursday, March 10, 1994
the State Development Board. Remember this was in 1970 when nuclear power had great promise for electricity production and in the field of nuclear medicine. My area had already had 20 years experience with military applications of nuclear power. We were anxious to take part in the peaceful uses of the atom. These were the Nixon years, not the Carter years. The public outcry concerning waste was still years away, and after all, we were moving into a new age. I am sure you get the picture.

Looking back over the past twenty-three years, there has been, as far as Barnwell County is concerned, no environmental damage to our county, no threat to our safety, just a well-run state of the art landfill that has been the envy of the world. People have come from most states and many foreign countries to see how we handle one of this century's greatest problems. I know of no one in Barnwell County who fears it or would not be willing to keep it, but that's another story.

We get into the Southeast Compact and the battlecry, "We've done our share;" "We've had enough;" "It has hurt our economy," and so on. The state has never had greater industrial growth in Barnwell County, in Aiken County and the entire State. In Barnwell County, we lost, through changing technology, as many jobs as we gained, and that's why our unemployment rate has remained high.

Let's go back two years. After a great deal of discussion, a lot of heat and a little light, phantom votes and concern about what North Carolina would do or not do, we voted to close down Barnwell once and for all. It was a close vote. But we needed the money. When the Conference Committee worked out the Appropriation Bill for 1992, what do you know - we needed the money that would be generated by leaving the site open on conditions not set by you and me, but by the Free Conference Committee. Even those who had some terrible things to say about my county had to "bite the bullet" and vote for the compromise. Now where do we go from here?

The Ways and Means Committee voted down, by a vote of 10 for and 11 against, not to include $40 million for school buses out of money to be produced in the next year and a half. Their estimates - my estimates go up to $90 million. I think it is interesting to note that the first, second and third Vice-Chairmen of Ways and Means supported the promises. They, in their collective wisdom, want to borrow $100 million over a ten year period to replace 1,000 buses and stick the poor taxpayers of this State with $34 million in interest. $34 million we don't need to spend. All we have to do is spend the money on non- recurring items. School buses, yes. Replace half of the SLED automobiles that have over 70,000 miles each. Buy forest firefighting equipment to replace 20 year-old rolling stock.

Printed Page 3303 . . . . . Thursday, March 10, 1994
Buy needed equipment for Sheriff's Departments in every county in this State, if we are really serious in fighting crime. One-time money that will come from the Mayo Clinic, John's Hopkins, Massachusetts General, research centers across the land and power plants in 25 states. No new business, but the same people who have been paying up to $300 a cubic foot and need a depository through December 31, 1995, just 21 months from now.

I say, let them pay, and don't forget - when we close Barnwell and North Carolina opens, our hospitals, our power plants where we get 60% of our electricity now, instead of you and I paying $100 per cubic foot to place materials at Barnwell, we will pay North Carolina $300 per cubic foot and perhaps more, and guess who pays that increased cost!

But, as you know, we've done our share. Let North Carolina stick it to everybody for a change.

I want us to vote for this amendment, in part, that will leave the Barnwell site open to its present customers until December 31 next year. This is no change from the present law - the final closing date. The only change, to allow the same people who have been using Barnwell for the past 23 years to continue using it until the deadline that the House and Senate have agreed to. The money from the Southeast Compact is not enough to do much good in meeting some desperate needs that we have.

Those of you in the Pee Dee who voted against us last time wanted the Good Neighbor Policy, and you got it. You can vote with me now. Those of you who consider yourself pro-business and pro-industry, you can vote with me now. The Governor has told me he will not veto it. He won't fight for it. He has another agenda this year. Those of you who voted against me two years ago and apologized later, you can vote with me now. It is time for good business and common sense to prevail.

Regardless of what anyone else may say, the Barnwell site is safe and is absolutely no threat to anyone. The Barnwell County people who have elected me four times are willing to accept the responsibility. By our action, we are not changing the closing date of December 31, 1995. Instead of closing to out-of- state waste this June 30th, we want its present customers to continue using it through the life of the site. Let's get the maximum benefit for all of our people while it is here. We must fight crime, fight fires and protect the safety of our children. We can do it by our action.

I urge the passage of this amendment.

Printed Page 3304 . . . . . Thursday, March 10, 1994
POINT OF ORDER

Rep. WAITES raised the Point of Order that Amendment No. 282 was out of order in compliance with Act 501, Part II, Section 70, Section G, which states that beginning July 1, 1994, in addition to the requirement set forth in Section 48- 47-70 (9) for an affirmative vote of both representatives from the State of South Carolina to the Southeast Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Compact Commission to accept the importation of waste from outside the southeast region, the General Assembly, by a concurrent resolution, must authorize the facility at Barnwell to accept the importation of waste generated outside the region before such waste may be disposed at the Barnwell facility. She further stated that the Amendment deleted the provision requiring the General Assembly to authorize by concurrent resolution the acceptance after June 30, 1994. She further stated that on January 29, 1987, the Speaker ruled on Representative's Wilkins Point that the Amendment was violative of statutory law and this Amendment is violative of statutory law and is inconsistent with what the law said and therefore, out of order.

Rep. HASKINS stated that to say an amendment which repealed a statute violates the provision which it is repealing would be to invalidate most everything the General Assembly did. He further stated that this amendment would repeal the provision that Rep. Waites is referring to and that there was nothing in Section 48-48-80, Subsection G which prohibited the General Assembly from repealing the section. He further stated that it was entirely within the powers of the General Assembly to repeal that section of the law and that was what the amendment would do. He further stated that it was not violative of the law but repealed it.

The SPEAKER stated that it was the same procedural control that was on the General Assembly in relation to bond bills. He further stated that before the General Assembly could appropriate any money from any type of action, a concurrent resolution would have to be passed through the House before that money could be appropriated. He further stated that there was an additonal requirement that there be a vote of both of the representatives from the State of South Carolina Southeastern Low-Level Compact. He further stated that Rep. Haskins had drafted the language and it was designed to be a procedural control which alleviated the necessity of passing an Act by the General Assembly and a mere concurrent resolution would allow the General Assembly to do that and until that resolution was passed the amendment would be out of order. He sustained the Point of Order and ruled the amendment out of order.

Printed Page 3305 . . . . . Thursday, March 10, 1994
STATEMENT BY REP. FELDER

ON POINT OF ORDER RULING

Rep. FELDER responded to the ruling on the Point of Order that this limitation cannot apply to this General Assembly. He further stated that the answer cannot be found in the House Rules, but in Mason's, Section 24, Subsection 3, it described the rule that one General Assembly such as this one or our previous one cannot bind the next General Assembly. He futher stated that Section 24, Subsection 3, stated that the body at its preceding meetings does not have the power to bind its successors or to put shackles on it that might be cast off only in a particular way. He further stated that other provisions to be cited were Mason's, Section 22, Subsection 5, Section 22, Subsection 6, and Section 21, Subsection 4. He further stated that each one of this sections reaffirmed the proposition that a General Assembly cannot bind a subsequent General Assembly. He further stated that to not allow this General Assembly to repeal or to proceed with debate denied the House the right to debate the issue and it denies succeeding generations to debate an issue whether it be an environmental issue or whether it is a budgetary issue or way to spend revenue. He further stated that it was not an attempt to extend or expand the facilities, it was just simply a budgetary question quite appropriate in the Appropriations Bill. He further stated that if this were true, then the House could be bound in a way that the law does not even allow by will or testament in all cases or in trust. He further stated that the House could not deny the public to elect a representative to speak on their behalf and put shackles on them or gag them.

The SPEAKER stated that the House Rules and Precendents were very clear that this General Assembly could pass statutory procedural controls which stay in effect on all future General Assemblies until they are repealed. He further stated that this was written into the law the last time this debate came up. He further stated this was under the Precedents of the House and that Mason's did not come into play unless there is a failure of both House Rules and Precedents. He further stated that the Precedent was very clear in this instance and he had ruled the amendment out of order.

Rep. QUINN proposed the following Amendment No. 283 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\JIC\5754HTC.94), which was adopted.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Part II, Permanent Provisions, by adding a new SECTION, appropriately numbered, to read:

Printed Page 3306 . . . . . Thursday, March 10, 1994
/SECTION ___

TO AMEND SECTION 12-36-2120, AS AMENDED, OF THE 1976 CODE RELATING TO SALES TAX EXEMPTIONS, SO AS TO EXEMPT FROM SALES TAX FOOD STUFFS FOR THE HOMELESS OR NEEDY THAT ARE SOLD TO NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS OR SUBSEQUENTLY SOLD OR DONATED BY ONE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION TO ANOTHER NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION.

A. Section 12-36-2120(10) of the 1976 Code, as added by Act 612 of 1990, is amended by adding:

"(c) food stuffs, either prepared or packaged for the homeless or needy that are sold to nonprofit organizations, or food stuffs that are subsequently sold or donated by a nonprofit organization to another nonprofit organization. This subitem is only applicable to food stuffs which are eligible for purchase under the USDA food stamp program;"

B. This section takes effect July 1, 1994./

Renumber sections & amend totals/title to conform.

Rep. QUINN explained the amendment.

Rep. KIRSH moved to table the amendment.

Rep. QUINN demanded the yeas and nays, which were not ordered.

The House refused to table the amendment by a division vote of 33 to 55.

The amendment was then adopted by a division vote of 62 to 20.

Reps. BAKER, ROGERS, CLYBORNE, BOAN and HUFF proposed the following Amendment No. 292 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\GJK\20619DW.94), which was ruled out of order.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Part II, by adding an appropriately numbered SECTION to read:

/SECTION

TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING SECTION 12-37-257 SO AS TO ESTABLISH AN ADDITIONAL HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION FROM SCHOOL TAXES IMPOSED FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN CONSTRUCTION AND PROVIDE THAT THE EXEMPTION DOES NOT APPLY TO SCHOOL OPERATING TAXES LEVIED AFTER 1997, TO PHASE IN THE AMOUNT OF THE EXEMPTION, TO PROVIDE FOR THE METHOD OF REIMBURSEMENT OF REVENUES LOST BECAUSE OF THE EXEMPTION, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE PROPERTY EXEMPT FROM SCHOOL TAXES PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION IS NEVERTHELESS CONSIDERED TAXABLE PROPERTY FOR PURPOSES OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL
Printed Page 3307 . . . . . Thursday, March 10, 1994
DEBT LIMIT AND THE INDEX OF TAXPAYING ABILITY, TO PROVIDE A SPENDING LIMITATION FOR COUNTIES, MUNICIPALITIES, AND SPECIAL PURPOSE AND PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICTS AND AN AD VALOREM TAX REVENUE LIMITATION FOR SCHOOL DISTRICTS BEGINNING WITH FISCAL YEARS 1995-96 AND PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS; TO PROVIDE THAT ANY BILL OR JOINT RESOLUTION ENACTED AFTER JUNE 30, 1994, BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY REQUIRING A COUNTY, MUNICIPALITY, SCHOOL DISTRICT, SPECIAL PURPOSE OR PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICT TO SPEND FUNDS, INCUR COSTS, OR TO TAKE AN ACTION REQUIRING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS MUST PROVIDE ADEQUATE FUNDING TO THESE ENTITIES SUFFICIENT TO OFFSET THE COSTS INCURRED OR EXPENDITURES REQUIRED; TO PROVIDE FOR FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENTS REGARDING THIS REQUIREMENT, TO DEFINE WHAT CONSTITUTES AN UNFUNDED MANDATE FOR PURPOSES OF THIS PROVISION, AND TO PROVIDE THAT IF THE REQUIRED FUNDING IS NOT PROVIDED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, THE APPLICABLE SPENDING LIMITATIONS ON THESE POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS DO NOT APPLY; TO AMEND SECTION 12-37-930 RELATING TO PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENTS, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE MANNER IN WHICH THE ORIGINAL COST OF PROPERTY MAY BE REDUCED; AND TO AMEND SECTION 12-43-210, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO COUNTYWIDE REASSESSMENT PROGRAMS, SO AS TO REVISE THE MANNER IN WHICH SUCH PROGRAMS ARE IMPLEMENTED AND REQUIRE SUCH PROGRAMS EVERY FIVE YEARS ON A SCHEDULE DETERMINED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND TAXATION, PROVIDE FOR THE WITHHOLDING OF STATE AID TO SUBDIVISIONS' DISTRIBUTIONS TO COUNTIES FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE SCHEDULE, AND PROVIDE FOR AN INITIAL SCHEDULE OF REASSESSMENTS; TO PROVIDE THAT IF A COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION VOIDS THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION ALLOWED BY THIS ACT, THEN THE SPENDING LIMITATIONS IMPOSED ON COUNTIES, MUNICIPALITIES, SPECIAL PURPOSE PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICTS, AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS BY THIS ACT ARE SIMILARLY VOID.

SUBSECTION 1. (A) Article 3, Chapter 37, Title 12 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

Printed Page 3308 . . . . . Thursday, March 10, 1994
"Section 12-37-257. (A) In addition to any other homestead exemption allowed by law, the amount of fair market value provided in subsection (B) of every homestead qualifying for the assessment ratio provided pursuant to Section 12-43-220(c) is exempt from all school taxes except school taxes levied for:

(1) debt service;

(2) payments for lease-purchases of school facilities; and

(3) additional school taxes for operating purposes levied for property tax years beginning after 1997.

(B) Amounts of fair market value exempt pursuant to subsection (A) are as follows:

Property Tax Year Exempt Amount

1994 $ 5,400

1995 21,000

1996 54,000

After 1996 one hundred

percent of fair

market value

(C) (1) The exemption allowed by this section is conditional on full funding of the Education Finance Act and on an appropriation by the General Assembly each year reimbursing school districts an amount equal to the Department of Revenue and Taxation's estimate of total school tax revenue loss resulting from the exemption in the next fiscal year. If the appropriation for a year is less than the certified estimate, the department shall calculate a proportionate reduction in the exemption amount otherwise applicable sufficient to eliminate any loss of revenue to school districts. The department shall notify the appropriate county tax officials of the reduced exemption and the reduced exemption amount applies instead of the amount provided in Subsection (B) for the appropriate tax year.
(2) The Department of Revenue and Taxation shall provide to the General Assembly and the Governor annually before December fifteenth a certified estimate of the total amount necessary to reimburse school districts for tax revenue not collected because of the exemption allowed by this section in the next fiscal year.

(3) (a) From the general fund of the State, the Comptroller General annually shall pay to the county treasurer of each county for the account of each school district in the county a sum equal to the taxes not collected for the school district because of the exemption provided in this section. The county treasurer shall furnish the Comptroller General on or before April first following the tax year, or during an extension authorized by the

Printed Page 3309 . . . . . Thursday, March 10, 1994
Comptroller General not to exceed sixty days, an accounting or statement as prescribed by the Comptroller General that reflects the amount of school district taxes not collected because of the exemption. Funds paid by the Comptroller General as the result of an erroneous or improper application must be returned to the Comptroller General for deposit to the credit of the general fund of the State. The Comptroller General shall promulgate regulations as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this section.

(b) If reimbursement funds appropriated at least equal the estimated amount and the appropriated amount is insufficient to offset the revenue loss, the Comptroller General, from the general fund of the State, shall reimburse school districts the total reimbursement required regardless of the amount appropriated.

(D) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the fair market value of a homestead exempted from property taxation in the manner provided in this section is considered taxable property for purposes of bonded indebtedness pursuant to Sections 14 and 15 of Article X of the Constitution of this State and for purposes of computing the index of taxpaying ability pursuant to Section 59-20-20(3)."

(B) The provisions of Section 12-37-257(C)(2), as added by this act, first apply for property tax year 1995 and fiscal year 1995-96.

SUBSECTION 2. Beginning with county government spending for fiscal year 1995-96, total spending by a county government in a fiscal year may not exceed total county government spending in the prior fiscal year by more than the percentage increase in the consumer price index in the twelve months ending December 31 preceding the fiscal year as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of Labor. Total spending by a county government for purposes of this limitation is the total of all county government spending in a fiscal year from all sources of funds and for all purposes, but total county government spending does not include:

(1) spending in an amount not exceeding the amount represented by applying the county's tax millage for the most recently completed property tax year to the assessed value of new construction and improvements to existing property not previously taxed;

(2) spending of fee revenues generated by income-producing services first extended to customers in the current fiscal year;

(3) spending of funds derived from state or federal sources and spending of local sales and use tax revenues distributed to the county pursuant to Chapter 10, Title 4 of the 1976 Code;

| Printed Page 3290, Mar. 10 | Printed Page 3310, Mar. 10 |
Page Finder Index