Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter
The Senate assembled at 11:00 A.M., the hour to which it stood adjourned and was called to order by the PRESIDENT.
A quorum being present the proceedings were opened with a devotion by the Chaplain as follows:
Beloved, hear the words of St. Paul to the Thessalonians (I Thes. 5:21):
"Rejoice always, pray constantly, give thanks in all
circumstances; for this is the will of God for
you... do not quench the Spirit... but test
everything; hold fast what is good, abstain from
every form of evil."
Let us pray.
Most merciful and gracious God, You transcend space and time. But You are near to all that call upon You. You are our help from day to day. You are our hope for unknown tomorrows.
Help us in our decision-making to remember that there is a MIND beyond our mind... and a WILL beyond our will.
May we hear anew the words of St. Paul to the Philippians (2:5) "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus...:"
As we come to our tasks today... remind us: "Test everything... hold fast to the things that are good".
Amen.
Senator GIESE made the point that a quorum was not present. It was ascertained that a quorum was not present.
Senator GIESE moved that a call of the Senate be made. The following Senators answered the call:
Bryan Carmichael Cork
Courson Courtney Drummond
Fielding Giese Gilbert
Hayes, R.W. Helmly Hinds
Hinson Holland Land
Leatherman Leventis Lourie
Macaulay Martschink Matthews
McConnell McGill Mitchell
Moore Mullinax O'Dell
Passailaigue Patterson Peeler
Pope Reese Rose
Saleeby Setzler Shealy
Smith, J.V. Smith, N.W. Stilwell
Thomas Washington Williams
Wilson
The Senate resumed.
At 11:20 A.M., Senator PASSAILAIGUE assumed the Chair.
The PRESIDENT called for Petitions, Memorials, Presentments of Grand Juries and such like papers.
March 18, 1992
Mr. President and Members of the Senate:
I am transmitting herewith an appointment for confirmation. This appointment is made with the "advice and consent of the Senate," and is, therefore, submitted for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Carroll A. Campbell, Jr.
Reappointment, Member, Charleston County Voter Registration Board, with term to expire March 15, 1994:
Ms. Gertrude D. Brown, 1449 Swamp Angel Court, Charleston, South Carolina 29412
April 6, 1992
Mr. President and Members of the Senate:
I am transmitting herewith appointments for confirmation. These appointments are made with the "advice and consent of the Senate," and are, therefore, submitted for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Carroll A. Campbell, Jr.
Reappointment, Member, State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education, with term to expire July 1, 1998:
At-Large:
Mr. James S. Konduros, Post Office Box 11390, Columbia, South Carolina 29211
Referred to the Committee on Education.
Initial Appointment, Member, Permanent Advisory Council of the State Development Board, with term to expire June 30, 1996:
Lee\Darlington:
The Honorable Robert L. Grooms, Post Office Box 68, Lamar, South Carolina 29069 VICE Bob Vassey
Referred to the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry.
Initial Appointment, Member, State Development Board, with term to expire May 21, 1997:
1st Judicial Circuit:
Mr. William B. Cox, Jr., Post Office Box 1124, Orangeburg, South Carolina 29116-1124 VICE J.R. Bell
Referred to the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry.
Initial Appointment, Member, Children's Trust Fund of South Carolina, with term to expire June 30, 1996:
At-Large:
Mr. Joe M. Anderson, Jr., Southern Bell Telephone Company, Post Office Box 752, Columbia, South Carolina 29202 VICE Paula Bethea
Referred to the Committee on Medical Affairs.
Initial Appointment, Member, Hearing Aid Dealers and Fitters Commission, with term to expire January 27, 1996:
Dealer:
Mr. G. Charles Young, 1607 Brabham Avenue, Columbia, South Carolina 29204 VICE John H. Young
Referred to the Committee on Medical Affairs.
At 11:25 A.M., the PRESIDENT assumed the Chair.
Senator NELL W. SMITH introduced Dr. Larry R. Winn of Easley, South Carolina, Doctor of the Day.
At 11:25 A.M., Senator MITCHELL requested and was granted a leave of absence beginning at 12:15 P.M. today until 12:00 Noon Thursday.
At 11:25 A.M., Senator LAND requested and was granted a leave of absence from 3:00 until 7:00 P.M. tonight.
At 12:00 Noon, Senator ROBERT W. HAYES, JR. requested and was granted a leave of absence for Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of next week.
Senator SHEALY rose to a Point of Personal Privilege.
Columbia, S.C., April 8, 1992
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it concurs in the amendments proposed by the Senate to:
H. 3197 -- Reps. J. Brown, Scott, Glover and Cato: A BILL TO REQUIRE CERTAIN SECURITY DEVICES FOR CERTAIN LEASED OR RENTED ROOMS, LODGINGS, AND ACCOMMODATIONS, TO MAKE THE VIOLATION OF THIS REQUIREMENT A MISDEMEANOR OFFENSE, TO PROVIDE PENALTIES, AND TO PROVIDE THAT EVERY INSTANCE IN WHICH THE REQUIRED SECURITY DEVICES ARE NOT PROVIDED CONSTITUTES A SEPARATE OFFENSE FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROSECUTION AND CONVICTION.
and has ordered the Bill Enrolled for Ratification.
Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Senator SALEEBY, Chairman of the Committee on Ethics, with unanimous consent, addressed the Senate regarding matters incident to the committee.
To: Members, South Carolina Senate
From: Edward E. Saleeby
Re: Statement of Economic Interests
Date: April 7, 1992
Several questions have arisen concerning the application of the newly revised Statement of Economic Interests forms which members are using to disclose economic interests for the calendar year 1991. The new ethics act does not require the reporting of "transactions" which occurred during 1991 as there was no requirement in 1991 to maintain records which may be necessary to meet the reporting requirements that became effective January 1, 1992. In terms of responding to the specific questions of the new form which may relate to "transactions" that occurred in 1991, I suggest members simply indicate that "transactions which occurred in 1991 are not subject to disclosure as provided in Section 8 of Act 248 of 1991." In most instances the question of whether a "transaction" occurred in 1991 should be reasonably clear. However, the committee is available to assist members with specific questions.
Although not specifically required by law, as chairman of the committee, I do recommend that members report "transactions" which occurred in 1991 if the transaction would have otherwise been reportable under the old law. I suggest that you file this information as an addendum to your Statement of Economic Interests as the new form does not adequately provide a place for such a disclosure. For your convenience I have enclosed a copy of the relevant portions of the prior law.
Since 1991 "transactions" are exempt from reporting, several members have suggested that the old Statement of Economic Interests would more adequately address the information which should be disclosed. The decision was made to use the new forms because there are numerous economic interests which must be disclosed that are not subject to the "transaction exemption" of the new law. Additionally, the new law specifically states that a Statement of Economic Interests "in accordance with the provisions of [Chapter 13, Title 8]" must be filed with the Ethics Committee.
Finally, specific questions have been raised with regard to representation before boards and commissions. Fees earned for appearances before boards and commissions in 1992 must be reported on your Statement of Economic Interests form which is due April 15, 1993. The same response would apply to the items which must be reported that were discussed in Advisory Opinion 92-4 issued by the committee on March 11, 1992.
I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if the committee may be of further assistance.
To: Members, South Carolina Senate
From: Senator Edward Saleeby
Re: Candidate Campaign Committees
Date: January 29, 1992
The following question was presented to the Committee on Ethics and considered at its meeting on January 15, 1992.
May a candidate maintain and administer his campaign receipts and expenditures in his name and concurrently form a separate committee or one with which he is affiliated to receive and expend funds on his behalf?
Article 13 of Chapter 13 of Title 8 does not contain an express prohibition against a candidate forming a campaign committee to operate on his behalf while maintaining a separate candidate record of receipts, expenditures and savings or checking accounts in his name. By the same token, no provision of this article requires a candidate to make an election as to whether to file reports in his name or to organize a committee on his behalf.
If a candidate were allowed to file both in his name and as a committee formed on his behalf, the campaign contribution limits set forth in Section 8-13-1314 would be rendered meaningless. It also is instructive to note that an underlying principle of the campaign reform provisions of Act 248 of 1991 is to allow simplicity in public inspection and review which is facilitated by the express provisions that ensure a complete, accurate filing of receipts and expenditures. To have a candidate filing in his own name and in the name of one or more candidate committees would result in multiple checking and savings accounts rather than one savings and checking account, as is contemplated by Section 8-13-1312. This section provides evidence of the intent to simplify the tracking of receipts and expenditures of candidates and committees by its prohibition against multiple checking and multiple savings accounts. Since contributions would have to be attributed in the fashion discussed above, a fundamental purpose of the new law would be frustrated if a candidate organized in his name and in the name of a committee operating on his behalf. The committee also recognizes that a candidate's record keeping burden will be substantially reduced when only one set of contribution and expenditure records is maintained.
The committee concludes that in order to maintain proper oversight of campaign contributions, Article 13, taken as a whole, and Section 13-8-1322, in particular, compels a candidate for the office of State Senator to either organize a committee on his behalf at the time of filing an initial certified campaign report or file in his own name as an individual at the time that report is due.
To: Members, South Carolina Senate
From: Edward E. Saleeby
Re: Filing of Initial Certified Campaign Reports
Date: January 29, 1992
The Committee on Ethics was presented the following question at its last meeting on January 15, 1992.
Does a member who has not raised or expended $500 or more in 1992 which would trigger an initial certified campaign report pursuant to Section 8-13-1308(A) have to file a report within ten days of the close of the first quarter when a statement of inactivity is due?
Section 8-13-1308 expressly requires the filing of an initial certified campaign report within 10 days of the "receipt or expenditure of campaign contributions totalling, in an accumulated aggregate, five hundred dollars or more, ...." (Emphasis added.) If this threshold is not reached, an initial report is not required until fifteen days before an election. Item (B) of Section 8-13-1308 requires that "[f]ollowing the filing of an initial certified campaign report, additional certified campaign reports must be filed within ten days following the end of each calendar quarter in which contributions are received or expenditures are made, whether before or after an election." In contrast to the prior law, Section 8-13-1362 states that, "[i]f a candidate or committee has not accepted any contributions and has not made any expenditures during a reporting period, the candidate or a duly authorized officer of the committee must file a statement of inactivity."
In reading Sections 8-13-1308 and 8-13-1362 together, absent contribution or expenditure activity sufficient to meet the threshold, it could be reasonably determined that an initial certified campaign report would not be required until fifteen days before an election. The committee rejects this conclusion, as an equally reasonable determination may be reached which is consistent with the complete and regular filing schedule contemplated by the new law.
Therefore, assuming the $500 threshold has not been reached prior to April 1, 1992, the committee concludes that a member must file an initial certified campaign report as specified in Section 8-13-1308(E) within ten days of April 1, 1992. If the $500 threshold has been met prior to April 1, 1992, a member would be required to file an initial certified campaign report within ten days of the date when the threshold amount is met and then file a quarterly report within ten days of April 1, 1992. Although not expressly addressed by Section 8-13-1308(E), the committee further concludes that, in the initial certified campaign report, a member must report contributions received in the fourth quarter of 19911 and add this total to the amount which the member brings forward from the last campaign report filed with the committee. In addition to the initial certified campaign report, a member organizing as a candidate committee must file a statement of organization with the Senate Committee on Ethics pursuant to Section 8-13-1306.
To: Members, South Carolina Senate
From: Edward E. Saleeby
Re: In-Kind Contributions
Date: January 29, 1992
The following question was presented and considered by the Committee on Ethics at its meeting on January 15, 1992.
Are "legal research services and other research services" provided by a law student to a candidate committee an "in-kind contribution" and thereby subject to the reporting provisions of Chapter 13 of Title 8 when the student serves as a volunteer and is not compensated for these services from any source?
This question calls for the committee to review two definitional provisions of Section 8-13-1300. Item (7) provides:
"Contribution" means a gift, subscription, loan, guarantee upon which collection is made, forgiveness of a loan, an advance, in-kind contribution or expenditure, a deposit of money, or anything of value made to a candidate or committee to influence an election or ballot measure; or payment or compensation for the personal service of another person which is rendered for any purpose to a candidate or committee without charge. "Contribution" does not include volunteer personal services on behalf of a candidate or committee for which the volunteer receives no compensation from any source. (Emphasis added.)
Item (20) of that section states that an "`in-kind contribution' or expenditure" means goods or services which are provided to or by a person at no charge or for less than their fair market value." (Emphasis added.)
Read together, these provisions may seem to create an ambiguity at best and a contradiction at worst. An important distinction, however, may be deduced from the omission of the words "volunteer personal" before the word "services" in Item (20), when compared to the last sentence of Item (7).
This language leads one to the conclusion that the intent of this provision is to draw a distinction between "volunteer personal services" and "goods or services" provided at no charge or less than their fair market value. Although it cannot be said that the services of a law student providing legal or other research has no value, this type of service cannot stand alone in the market place. In other words, these services are provided to attorneys who, according to the Cannons of Legal Ethics, must assume responsibility for accuracy or completeness of the work product. A law student cannot independently establish himself in the marketplace as an attorney or provide such services to the general public.
Thus, a law student can easily be differentiated from an attorney, accountant, or someone who is or has been in the business of providing goods and services such as advertising, public relations, campaign consulting, sign making or printing. The committee, therefore, concludes that legal research services provided by a law student to a candidate or candidate committee is not an in-kind contribution and does not have to be reported as such when the student serves as a volunteer and is not compensated for these services from any source.
To: Members, South Carolina Senate
From: Ethics Committee
Re: Acceptance of Anything of Value From a Lobbyist's Principal or Non-Lobbyist's Principal and Proper Reporting Thereof
Date: March 11, 1992
The committee has received numerous requests for advisory opinions relating to the acceptance and proper reporting of anything of value from a lobbyist's principal or a non-lobbyist's principal. The analysis for each of the six questions presented below, in large part, if not exclusively, relate to two newly enacted Code sections (Sections 8-13-710 and 8-13-715). The committee addressed these specific questions in a single opinion so as to provide a broad overview of these provisions, an aspect which would not be readily apparent if each question was presented and answered in a separate opinion.
PART I -- INVITATION TO A SPEAKING ENGAGEMENT
May the "out-of-pocket" costs (transportation, lodging, food) incurred by a member while attending an in-state or out-of-state meeting of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), "a non-profit bipartisan association of legislators from all fifty states" be reimbursed by that organization, when ALEC "gets its funding" for these meetings from "private sector businesses, some of which operate within South Carolina"?
The member indicated that he would be attending certain "briefings" with federal officials but did not indicate whether he would be speaking or participating in panel discussions. As discussed below, whether a member is merely attending, rather than speaking before a public or private group, may have a bearing on the amount of reimbursement, if any, a member may appropriately receive. Whether the offeror is a lobbyist's principal or non-lobbyist's principal is also a key factor in determining whether, and in what amount, a member may accept reimbursement for expenses incurred in merely attending or speaking at a public or private gathering.
Sections 8-13-715 and 2-17-100, which are virtually identical, control the acceptance of a speaking engagement. Section 8-13-715 provides that a public official "acting in an official capacity"2 may not receive anything of value for "speaking before a public or private group." Thus, any sort of honorarium for a speaking engagement is prohibited. At the outset, it may also be helpful to note that lobbyists should not facilitate the offer of anything of value to a member, as a lobbyist is prohibited from facilitating the offer of anything of value to a member under Section 2-12-80.
Section 8-13-715 further provides that "[n]otwithstanding the limitations of Section 2-17-90,3 a public official or public member may receive payment or reimbursement for actual expenses incurred for a speaking engagement." The expenses subject to payment or reimbursement, however, must be reasonable and must be incurred in a reasonable time and manner in which to accomplish the purpose of the engagement.
With these general comments in mind, the threshold question of this inquiry is whether Section 8-13-715 is applicable to the facts presented by the member. In other words, in the absence of a statutory definition, how should "speaking engagement" or "speaking before a public or private group" be defined? The committee concludes that a "briefing" in its plain and ordinary meaning would not be a "speaking engagement" so as to make applicable the provisions of Sections 8-13-715 and 2-17-100 (which allow a lobbyist's principal to reimburse a member's reasonable expenses). The committee further concludes that being a panelist as a part of a panel discussion would meet the definition of a "speaking engagement". Therefore, the only limitation on the reimbursement of actual expenses incurred for an in-state speaking engagement is that they must be "reasonable" as referenced above. If the expenses relate to an out-of-state speaking engagement, a member of the Senate must receive prior written approval from the President Pro Tempore of the Senate for the payment or reimbursement of the reasonable expenses incurred. These conclusions are unaffected by whether the invitation is made by a lobbyist's principal or a non-lobbyist's principal.
If a member is merely attending a meeting rather than speaking before a meeting held by a public or private group, Section 8-13-710 does not relieve the member from the limitations established in Chapter 17 of Title 2 (lobbying provisions). Section 8-13-710(A) does not create an exception to Section 2-17-90,4 as is the case with Section 8-13-715, relating to speaking engagements. Section 8-13-710(A) simply requires that anything of value received from a lobbyist's principal must be reported on the statement of economic interests required to be filed by each member. Therefore, a lobbyist's principal may not invite one individual member of the Senate to attend a meeting or other function as the invitation is prohibited by Section 2-17-90.
The member did not indicate whether any lobbyist's principals would be contributing to defray a member's expenses for attending this meeting. The member's inquiry only states that ALEC "gets its funding for these meetings from private sector business, some of which operate within South Carolina." This sentence raises a question with regard to the involvement of lobbyist's principals in contributing to a conference or a meeting which warrants brief discussion. The new law clearly prohibits a lobbyist's principal from doing indirectly what may not be accomplished directly. Although the committee is expressing no opinion in this instance,5 it is possible that involvement by lobbyist's principals may rise to the level of effectively being an invitation from a lobbyist's principal. Factors which may be relevant to such a determination by the committee are the contribution level, the funding arrangements, and the costs to which any funds are allocated that are received from a lobbyist's principal. As stated above, resolution of this question can be essential as a lobbyist's principal may not invite an individual member to attend a meeting or conference, as to do so is prohibited by Title 2, Chapter 7.6 If the member determines that lobbyist's principals are involved with this organization, he may wish to present these details to the committee for further consideration.
If no lobbyist's principals are involved in the hosting of an event and so long as no lobbyist's principals are actually contributing to reimburse a member's expenses for attending a meeting, the provisions of Section 8-13-710(B) would be applicable. Except as specified in Section 7-13-705, there is no prohibition against or limitation on what a non-lobbyist's principal may provide to a member.7 However, in pertinent part, Section 8-13-710(B) requires a member to report, on his statement of economic interests, the receipt or acceptance of anything of value, from a person, worth twenty-five dollars or more in a day or two hundred dollars or more in the aggregate calendar year if:
"there is reason to believe the donor would not give the thing of value but for [the member's] office".8
Although, in the first instance, it is the member who must determine whether something would not be offered but for the member's office, the committee is certainly available to assist the membership with this determination. A relevant, but not totally determinative consideration would be whether the thing of value is provided to all public officials, all legislators, or some subunit such as a committee or a county delegation. The committee concludes that under the facts presented, a member would have to report on his statement of economic interests anything of value worth twenty-five dollars or more received from a non-lobbyist's principal while attending the meeting as provided in Section 8-13-710(B). The committee also concludes that approval by the President Pro Tempore in order to accept payment or reimbursement for expenses is not required for attendance at an out-of-state meeting where the member will not be speaking, as Section 8-13-715 applies only if a member is speaking before a public or private group. Please keep in mind, however, only a non-lobbyist's principal may make an invitation to an individual member to attend a meeting, conference, or other function. The committee further concludes that Sections 2-17-100 and 8-13-715 apply to both in-state and out-of-state speaking engagements. The difference in application is that prior written approval by the President Pro Tempore is required for out-of-state speaking engagements and not for in-state speaking engagements.
PART II -- INVITATION FROM A LOBBYIST'S PRINCIPAL TO A MEMBER FOR AN OUT-OF-STATE SPEAKING ENGAGEMENT
May a member who is invited to speak at an out-of-state conference on Friday afternoon accept lodging accommodations for Friday and Saturday night as a guest of a lobbyist's principal?
In his inquiry to the committee, the member indicates that he is "on the program to speak Friday afternoon and attend a dinner that night. I may or may not be speaking to the association on Saturday." The member also stated that a lobbyist's principal has offered to "pay for my room and meals on Friday night and Saturday and provide a mileage reimbursement."
As discussed in PART I, this invitation is governed by Sections 8-13-715 and 2-17-100. These provisions allow a member to receive payment or reimbursement for actual expenses incurred for a speaking engagement. The expenses must be reasonable and must be incurred in a reasonable time and manner in which to accomplish the purpose of the engagement. This section also requires that a member receive prior written approval for the payment or reimbursement of expenses from the President Pro Tempore when the expenses involve an out-of-state engagement.
As mentioned in Part I, members are cautioned with regard to invitations to speaking engagements from a lobbyist as a lobbyist is prohibited from facilitating the offer of anything of value to a member under Section 2-17-80.
Based on the facts presented, such as the location of the meeting and the cost-effectiveness of the travel involved, in this instance, the committee concludes that, unless the member is part of a panel or otherwise active as a program participant on Saturday, accepting lodging for Saturday evening would not be reasonable in time and manner to accomplish the purpose of the speaking engagement on Friday. Should the member be a part of the panel or otherwise active as a program participant, accepting lodging and meals for that day would be reasonable. PART III -- MEMBER RECORDKEEPING FOR ATTENDANCE AT FUNCTIONS HELD BY LOBBYIST'S PRINCIPALS AND NON-LOBBYIST'S PRINCIPALS
A member has asked for guidance as to:
Whether a member of the South Carolina Senate may attend a function to which he/she is invited as a legislator without maintaining an account of what, when, and where attended, and how much, if anything, consumed?
The appropriate response to this inquiry depends upon whether the host or hosts who are extending an invitation are a lobbyist's principal or a non-lobbyist's principal. As mentioned earlier, Section 2-17-80 prohibits a lobbyist or a person acting on behalf of a lobbyist from offering or facilitating the providing of anything of value to a member of the Senate. The following discussion is limited to invitations which do not involve an invitation to speak to a public or private group as this was addressed in Part I and Part II.
If the function is hosted by one or more lobbyist's principals and the invitation has been extended to appropriate groupings9, the acceptance of such an invitation would be permissible so long as a thing of value from each lobbyist's principal does not exceed twenty-five dollars in a day and two hundred dollars in a calendar year. Section 2-17-90, as it relates to members of the Senate, only allows a lobbyist's principal to invite the groupings10 as were addressed in Part I. Section 2-17-90(C) requires a member to report11 "the value of anything received" except those activities relating to state or local economic development as authorized in item (E).12 Section 8-13-710(A) also makes it clear that the value of anything received by a member from a lobbyist's principal must be reported on the member's statement of economic interests.
If a function is being hosted by a non-lobbyist's principal, Section 8-13-710(B) requires a member to report on his statement of economic interests the receipt of anything of value worth twenty-five dollars or more in a day and anything of value worth two hundred dollars or more in the aggregate in a calendar year. As discussed in Part I, the reporting requirements with regard to non-lobbyist's principals apply only if the member has reason to believe that the thing of value would not be given but for the member's office.13 It may also be helpful to note that a non-lobbyist's principal is not bound to invite members based upon the groupings specified in Section 2-17-90.
To assist the membership in complying with the reporting provisions relating to functions held by lobbyist's principals and non-lobbyist's principals, the Committee on Invitations has been requesting from each host, information discussed above relating to costs of each function to which the entire Senate has been invited. Thus, it should be as simple as having your staff periodically compare your personal calendar with the information on hand in the Invitations Committee. The committee also points out that the Invitations Committee would not report out an invitation to be placed on the Senate calendar if a lobbyist's principal informed the committee that more than twenty-five dollars is being spent per expected attendee. The Invitations Committee is also requesting a non-lobbyist's principal to indicate if a non-lobbyist's principal host is intending to spend more than twenty-five dollars per each expected attendee.
For purposes of record keeping in filing your statement of economic interests, the committee would suggest your attendance at an event hosted by a lobbyist's principal be reported as "twenty-five dollars or less". If a member becomes concerned as to whether you are approaching the two hundred dollar aggregate limit from a given lobbyist's principal in a calendar year, more detailed information could be requested from that lobbyist's principal, as they are required to maintain similar records. Non-lobbyist's principals are not subject to the reporting requirements of lobbyist's principals. However, if you believe that you have accepted anything of value in excess of twenty-five dollars and two hundred dollars in the aggregate, you may contact the Invitations Committee or the non-lobbyist's principal directly.
PART IV -- ACCEPTANCE AND REPORTING OF A THING OF VALUE RECEIVED FROM A NON-LOBBYIST'S PRINCIPAL
May a member and his spouse accept a dinner invitation from a mayor extended on behalf of the city council?
Although a city may be a member of the Municipal Association, which is a lobbyist's principal, the city would not be a lobbyist's principal unless it employs, appoints, or retains a lobbyist (see subitems (13) and (14) of Section 2-17-10). Thus, it is assumed for purposes of this response that the city would not be a lobbyist's principal.
Section 8-13-710(B) requires a member to report on his statement of economic interests anything of value received from a "person" worth twenty-five dollars or more in a day and anything of value worth two hundred dollars or more in the aggregate in a calendar year.14 Section 8-13-100(24) defines "person" to include a corporation. The city is a corporate entity and the mayor and council members are effectively the board of directors of the corporation.
The committee concludes that the member and his wife may accept a meal and transportation. If the cost of the transportation and meal exceeds twenty-five dollars, the member must report this information on his statement of economic interests. The committee concludes that a member should report any costs as near to the exact amount as practicable and suggests that the most prudent course of action would be to report the exact amount, if it is known.
PART V -- DISCOUNT OFFERED BY NON-LOBBYIST'S PRINCIPAL TO A MEMBER FOR LODGING
May a member accept discounts on lodging which are provided to all legislators and if so, how, if at all, must the acceptance of this discount be reported on my statement of economic interests?
Although a particular hotel may be a member of an association which is a lobbyist's principal, an individual hotel would not be a lobbyist's principal unless it employs, appoints, or retains lobbyist (see subitems (13) and (14) of Section 2-17-10). Thus, it is assumed for purposes of this response that the individual hotel would not be a lobbyist's principal.
Section 8-13-710 requires a member to report on his statement of economic interests anything of value received worth twenty-five dollars or more in a day and anything of value worth two hundred dollars or more in the aggregate in a calendar year. In relevant part, Section 8-13-100(1) defines anything of value or thing of value as a gift or any other item that is of pecuniary or compensatory worth to the person. Subitem (16) of this section defines gift to mean anything of value "to the extent that consideration of anything of equal or greater value is not received. A gift includes a rebate or discount on the price of anything of value unless it is made in the ordinary course of business without regard to that person's status."
Except as specified in Section 8-13-705, there is no prohibition against accepting anything of value from a non-lobbyist's principal. Therefore, if the value is worth twenty-five dollars or more in a day or two hundred dollars or more in the aggregate in a calendar year, the committee concludes that the value of the discount must be reported on the member's statement of economic interests. To arrive at the value of the discount, a member should subtract the legislative rate from either the standard rate offered all customers for a similar room or the corporate rate offered to business customers for a similar room rather than the "government rate" which may be applicable to other state or federal employees. For purposes of reporting, if the value of the total discount is two hundred dollars or more, a member need only report the aggregate amount of the discount and the number of nights for which this discount was given.
PART VI -- DISCOUNT OFFERED BY A NON-LOBBYIST'S PRINCIPAL TO A MEMBER FOR GOODS AND SERVICES
May a member accept a discount from a local dry cleaning establishment which is not offered to the general public and if so, must the value of the discount be reported on my statement of economic interests?
Following reasoning presented in PART V above, the committee concludes that a member may accept the value of the discount.
In the first instance, it is the member who must determine whether anything of value would not be offered but for the member's office. The member did not indicate whether he felt the discount was offered because of the office he holds. In fact, the member indicated that he was aware that similar discounts were provided to other customers, particularly eleemosynary organizations, but was not sure of why the offer was made to him. If the member is unable to resolve this question, he may submit additional information for the committee's consideration.
Assuming that the member decides that the discount is offered because of the office he holds and assuming that the dry cleaning establishment is a non-lobbyist's principal, the member must report anything of value which is worth twenty-five dollars or more in a day or two hundred dollars or more in the aggregate in a calendar year.
SUMMARY --
This advisory opinion has addressed six different questions which all primarily relate to the proper reading of Sections 8-13-710 and 8-13-715. It is essential to note that in each of these discussions it has been assumed that an offer of anything of value to a member was or would not be done in violation of Section 8-13-705. Among the other items contained in this Code section, Item (A) provides that:
"A person may not, directly or indirectly, give, offer, or promise anything of value to a public official, public member, or public employee with the intent to:
(1) influence the discharge of a public official's, public member's, or public employee's official responsibilities;
(2) influence a public official, public member, or public employee to commit, aid in committing, collude in, or allow fraud on a governmental entity; or
(3) induce a public official, public member, or public employee to perform or fail to perform an act in violation of the public official's, public member's, or public employee's official responsibilities."
(On motion of Senator STILWELL, ordered printed in the Journal)
The following were introduced:
S. 1454 -- Senators Washington and Matthews: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SYMPATHY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO THE FAMILY AND MANY FRIENDS OF THE LATE MOSES POLITE, JR., OF ALLENDALE IN ALLENDALE COUNTY.
On immediate consideration, the Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered sent to the House.
S. 1455 -- Senator Moore: A SENATE RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE DEEPEST SYMPATHY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SENATE TO THE FAMILY AND MANY FRIENDS AND ADMIRERS OF REVEREND AUGUSTUS T. STEPHENS, OF AIKEN, WHO DIED MARCH 23, 1992.
The Senate Resolution was adopted.
S. 1456 -- Senators Wilson, McConnell, Passailaigue, Fielding and Martschink: A SENATE RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SYMPATHY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SENATE TO THE FAMILY AND MANY FRIENDS OF THE LATE VIRGINIA W. LOGAN OF CHARLESTON.
The Senate Resolution was adopted.
S. 1457 -- Senator Mullinax: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-37-2725 OF THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY TAXES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT WHEN THE TITLE TO A LICENSED VEHICLE IS TRANSFERRED, OR THE OWNER OF THE VEHICLE OBTAINS LEGAL RESIDENCE IN ANOTHER STATE AND REGISTERS THE VEHICLE IN THE NEW STATE OF RESIDENCE, THE LICENSE PLATE AND REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE TRANSFEROR OR PERSON WHO OBTAINS OUT-OF-STATE RESIDENCY MAY BE RETURNED FOR CANCELLATION.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Finance.
S. 1458 -- Senator Matthews: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 26-1-55 SO AS TO REQUIRE POSTING A TEN THOUSAND DOLLAR BOND FOR A NOTARY COMMISSION TO BECOME EFFECTIVE AND TO PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
S. 1459 -- Senator Bryan: A BILL TO AMEND SECTIONS 56-1-520 AND 56-5-6150, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE VESTING IN MUNICIPAL COURTS THE JURISDICTION TO HEAR, TRY, AND DETERMINE CRIMINAL CASES INVOLVING VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 1, TITLE 56 (DRIVER'S LICENSE) AND CASES INVOLVING VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 5 OF TITLE 56 (UNIFORM ACT REGULATING TRAFFIC ON HIGHWAYS), SO AS TO INCREASE TRIAL JURISDICTION FOR MUNICIPAL COURTS FROM ONE HUNDRED TO TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
S. 1460 -- Senators Cork and Courtney: A BILL TO AMEND ARTICLE 31, CHAPTER 3, TITLE 56, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO SPECIAL MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSE PLATES FOR VOLUNTEER FIREMEN, SO AS TO ELIMINATE SUCH PLATES FOR "VOLUNTEER FIREMEN" AND PROVIDE INSTEAD FOR SUCH PLATES FOR "FIREFIGHTERS"; AND TO PROVIDE A GRACE PERIOD FOR SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES FOR VOLUNTEER FIREMEN ISSUED BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Transportation.
H. 4680 -- Reps. Rogers, Cromer, Byrd, Sturkie, Quinn, Klapman, Sharpe, Waites, Riser, Shissias and Rama: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DOOLITTLE RAIDERS AND THEIR HEROIC MISSION, WELCOMING THEM TO COLUMBIA UPON THE OBSERVANCE OF THE FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF THIS VICTORY, AND CONGRATULATING TRUSTUS THEATER FOR ITS NATIONAL RECOGNITION AND FOR ITS PRESENTATION OF A WORLD PREMIER OF INTO THE YONDER ZONE WHICH IS A UNIQUE RECOGNITION OF THE DOOLITTLE RAIDERS.
On immediate consideration, the Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.
H. 4688 -- Rep. G. Brown: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO FIX 12:00 NOON ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 29, 1992, AS THE TIME FOR ELECTING MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF CLEMSON UNIVERSITY TO SUCCEED THOSE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD WHOSE TERMS EXPIRE IN 1992.
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring:
That the House of Representatives and the Senate meet in joint session in the hall of the House at 12:00 noon on Wednesday, April 29, 1992, for the purpose of electing members of the Board of Trustees of Clemson University and members of the Board of Trustees of the University of South Carolina to succeed those members whose terms expire in 1992.
Referred to the Committee on Invitations.
H. 4689 -- Rep. Harvin: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION EXPRESSING GRATITUDE TO MR. JAMES N. MCFADDEN OF SUMMERTON FOR HIS YEARS OF DEVOTED AND DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE TOWN OF SUMMERTON.
On immediate consideration, the Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.
H. 4690 -- Rep. Harvin: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO EXPRESS GRATITUDE TO THE HONORABLE RALPH H. BELL, JR. OF SUMMERTON FOR HIS YEARS OF DEDICATED AND DEVOTED SERVICE TO THE TOWN OF SUMMERTON.
On immediate consideration, the Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.
H. 4692 -- Reps. Inabinett, Rogers, Whipper, Vaughn, Scott, Jaskwhich, Holt, L. Elliott, Kennedy, Sturkie, Kempe, McCraw, Anderson, Littlejohn, Cobb-Hunter, Manly, Beatty, Cato, D. Martin, Phillips, Byrd, Barber, J. Brown, Townsend, Lanford, Shirley, Snow, McLeod and Canty: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE FIRST THURSDAY IN MAY (MAY 7, 1992) AS "LEGISLATIVE FAMILY DAY 1992" IN RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF THE PATIENCE AND UNDERSTANDING SHOWN BY THE FAMILIES OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND THE WONDERFUL SUPPORT GIVEN BY THESE GREAT FAMILIES TO THE MEMBERS AS THEY CARRY OUT THEIR LEGISLATIVE DUTIES, AND INVITING A FAMILY MEMBER OF EACH MEMBER OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO THE STATE HOUSE AS SPECIAL GUESTS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO ATTEND AND OBSERVE THE RESPECTIVE SESSIONS IN THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON "LEGISLATIVE FAMILY DAY 1992".
Whereas, the families of the members of the General Assembly make tremendous sacrifices when their loved ones go to Columbia week after week during a large part of each year to render legislative services to the people of the State and the citizens of their respective districts who elected them to public office; and
Whereas, these are sacrifices that the families of legislators nobly and willingly make for the good of the State; and
Whereas, the members of the House of Representatives and the Senate should be, and are, truly appreciative of the patience, understanding, and support given them by their loved ones back home and feel strongly that the legislative families deserve recognition and thanks in a very special manner. Now, therefore,
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring:
That the members of the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina, by this resolution, designate the first Thursday in May (May 7, 1992) as "Legislative Family Day 1992" in recognition and appreciation of the patience and understanding shown by the families of the members of the General Assembly and the wonderful support given by these great families to the members as they carry out their legislative duties.
Be it further resolved that each member of the General Assembly invite a member of his or her family to the State House as special guests of the General Assembly to attend and observe the respective sessions in the Senate and the House of Representatives on "Legislative Family Day 1992".
Referred to the Committee on Invitations.
H. 4693 -- Rep. Waldrop: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO PUBLICLY RECOGNIZE AND COMMEND MISSY FRANKLIN OF NEWBERRY FOR HER OUTSTANDING WORK WITH THE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING AND FOR HER OTHER UNSELFISH SERVICE TO THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF NEWBERRY.
On immediate consideration, the Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.
H. 4694 -- Reps. Rogers, J. Brown, Byrd, Scott, Taylor, Waites, Cromer, Shissias, Harrison, Corning and Quinn: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO EXPRESS THE DEEP SORROW OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO THE FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF MODJESKA MONTEITH SIMKINS, THE MATRIARCH OF CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS IN THIS STATE FOR FOUR DECADES, WHO DIED SUNDAY, APRIL 5, 1992.
On immediate consideration, the Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.
H. 4697 -- Reps. Byrd, J. Brown, Cromer, Rogers, Taylor, Scott, Quinn, Harrison, Corning, Waites and Shissias: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO COMMEND REVEREND ROSCOE C. WILSON, SR., PASTOR OF SAINT JOHN BAPTIST CHURCH IN COLUMBIA, FOR HIS FORTY-FOUR YEARS OF UNSELFISH AND DEDICATED LEADERSHIP OF THIS OUTSTANDING CHURCH, AND TO EXTEND TO HIM BEST WISHES ON THE OCCASION OF HIS SEVENTY-FIRST BIRTHDAY.
On immediate consideration, the Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.
H. 3097 -- Reps. Baxley, Wilder, Manly, Whipper, Burch, Corning, Quinn, Wells and Waites: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 15-27-15, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO AN INTERPRETER FOR A DEAF PERSON WHO IS A PARTY TO A LEGAL PROCEEDING OR CONFINED TO AN INSTITUTION, SO AS TO ESTABLISH THE POSITION OF COURT INTERPRETER FOR THE DEAF AND TO PROVIDE FOR HIS FUNCTIONS, DUTIES, AND QUALIFICATIONS.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
H. 4474 -- Reps. Quinn, Wright, Riser and Klapman: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 21-352, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1962, RELATING TO THE EXEMPTION FROM THE PROHIBITION AGAINST EMPLOYMENT OF TEACHERS RELATED TO A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, SO AS TO DELETE THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN LEXINGTON COUNTY FROM THE EXEMPTION.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Education.
S. 414 -- Senator Waddell: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 12-1-220 SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE SOUTH CAROLINA TAX COMMISSION, COUNTY AUDITORS, ASSESSORS, AND COUNTY BOARDS OF TAX APPEALS, WHERE NOT PROHIBITED BY RULE OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT, TO PREPARE AND PRESENT CASES OR APPOINT THEIR EMPLOYEES TO PREPARE AND PRESENT CASES IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS, TO PROVIDE THAT A TAXPAYER MAY AUTHORIZE ATTORNEYS, CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS, APPRAISERS, OR OTHERS TO SPEAK FOR HIM IN ADMINISTRATIVE TAX PROCEEDINGS, TO REQUIRE THE TAXPAYER TO BE PRESENT AT ADMINISTRATIVE TAX PROCEEDINGS EXCEPT WHERE THE TAXPAYER HAS FILED A VALID POWER OF ATTORNEY NAMING AN ATTORNEY OR CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT AS HIS REPRESENTATIVE, AND TO REQUIRE CORRESPONDENCE AND NOTICES TO BE SENT TO THE TAXPAYERS EXCEPT WHEN HE IS REPRESENTED BY AN ATTORNEY OR CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT FOR WHOM THE TAXPAYER HAS FILED A POWER OF ATTORNEY.
The House returned the Bill with amendments.
On motion of Senator LOURIE, the Senate concurred in the House amendments and a message was sent to the House accordingly. Ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act and the Act enrolled for Ratification.
S. 555 -- Senators Pope, McConnell, Patterson, Courson, Drummond, Fielding, Giese, Gilbert, Hayes, Helmly, Hinds, Hinson, Holland, Leatherman, Long, Lourie, Macaulay, Martin, Martschink, Matthews, McGill, Mitchell, Moore, Mullinax, O'Dell, Passailaigue, Peeler, Reese, Rose, Russell, Saleeby, Setzler, J. Verne Smith, Nell W. Smith, Thomas, Waddell, Washington and Wilson: A BILL TO AMEND ARTICLE 15, CHAPTER 7, TITLE 14, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE STATE GRAND JURY SYSTEM, SO AS TO REVISE THE JURISDICTION AND CERTAIN PROCEDURES OF THE SYSTEM.
Senator McGILL asked unanimous consent to take the Bill up for immediate consideration.
The House returned the Bill with amendments.
Senator STILWELL explained the House amendment.
On motion of Senator STILWELL, the Senate concurred in the House amendments and a message was sent to the House accordingly. Ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act and the Act enrolled for Ratification.
Senator WILLIAMS spoke on the motion.
Senator STILWELL desired to be recorded as voting against the concurrence in the House amendments.
S. 1452 -- Senators Patterson, Lourie, Matthews, Washington, Fielding, Mitchell, Gilbert, Bryan, Carmichael, Cork, Courson, Courtney, Drummond, Giese, Robert W. Hayes, Jr., Helmly, Hinds, Hinson, Holland, Land, Leatherman, Leventis, Macaulay, Martin, Martschink, McConnell, McGill, Moore, Mullinax, O'Dell, Passailaigue, Peeler, Pope, Reese, Rose, Russell, Saleeby, Setzler, Shealy, J. Verne Smith, Nell W. Smith, Stilwell, Thomas, Williams and Wilson: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SORROW OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AT THE DEATH OF MODJESKA M. SIMKINS OF COLUMBIA, OUTSTANDING CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST AND HUMANITARIAN, AND EXTENDING SYMPATHY TO HER FAMILY AND MANY FRIENDS.
Returned with concurrence.
Received as information.
THE SENATE PROCEEDED TO A CALL OF THE UNCONTESTED LOCAL AND STATEWIDE CALENDAR.
At 11:49 A.M., Senator MOORE assumed the Chair.
Senator MOORE moved under Rule 3b to send for the absentee members.
At 12:05 P.M., Rule 3b was invoked.
Senator MOORE moved that a call of the Senate be made. The following Senators answered the call:
Bryan Carmichael Cork
Courson Courtney Drummond
Fielding Giese Gilbert
Hayes, R.W. Helmly Hinds
Hinson Holland Land
Leatherman Leventis Lourie
Macaulay Martschink Matthews
McConnell McGill Mitchell
Moore Mullinax O'Dell
Passailaigue Patterson Peeler
Pope Reese Rose
Russell Saleeby Setzler
Shealy Smith, J.V. Smith, N.W.
Stilwell Thomas Washington
Williams Wilson
The Senate resumed.
At 12:07 P.M., the PRESIDENT assumed the Chair.
S. 1446 -- Senators Lourie, Courson, Matthews, Washington, Passailaigue and Hinds: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 13, TITLE 31, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 4 SO AS TO ENACT THE HOUSING TRUST FUND ACT OF 1992 AND TO PROVIDE DEFINITIONS, TO CREATE THE FUND AND AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, TO PROVIDE FOR THE DUTIES OF AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR; AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE PURPOSE, USE, AND OPERATION OF THE FUND; TO AMEND SECTION 12-21-380, RELATING TO TAX ON INSTRUMENTS CONVEYING REALTY, SO AS TO INCREASE THE TAX FROM ONE DOLLAR TEN CENTS TO ONE DOLLAR THIRTY CENTS ON EACH FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS OF CONSIDERATION PAID FOR THE PROPERTY AND TO PROVIDE THAT THIS TWENTY CENT INCREASE BE PAID TO THE HOUSING TRUST FUND; TO REDESIGNATE ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 3, TITLE 31 AS ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 13, TITLE 31; TO REDESIGNATE SECTIONS 31-3-110 THROUGH 31-3-180 AS 31-13-20 THROUGH 31-13-90, RESPECTIVELY; TO REDESIGNATE SECTION 31-13-160 AS 31-13-10; AND TO DESIGNATE SECTIONS 31-13-170 THROUGH 31-13-340 AS ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 13, TITLE 31.
Senator GIESE asked unanimous consent to take the Bill up for immediate consideration.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the third reading of the Bill.
The Bill was read the third time, passed and ordered sent to the House of Representatives.
The following Bills and Joint Resolution having been read the second time were passed and ordered to a third reading:
H. 4622 -- Rep. Stoddard: A BILL TO AMEND ACT 171 OF 1967, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO LAURENS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS FIFTY-FIVE AND FIFTY-SIX AND THE ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGETS AND TAX LEVY THEREFOR, SO AS TO REVISE THE AUTHORIZED ANNUAL TAX LEVIES.
S. 1205 -- Senator Drummond: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 40-7-30, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE STATE BOARD OF BARBER EXAMINERS, SO AS TO REVISE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR MEMBERSHIP TO INCLUDE FOUR EXPERIENCED BARBERS WITH TWO AS MASTER HAIRCARE SPECIALISTS AND ONE PUBLIC MEMBER; TO AMEND SECTION 40-7-160, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO NONRESIDENT BARBERS, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE NONRESIDENT'S STATE OR COUNTRY TO HAVE LICENSING REQUIREMENTS WHICH MEET OR EXCEED SOUTH CAROLINA'S; TO REPEAL SECTION 40-7-80 RELATING TO BOARD RECORDS AND SECTION 40-7-90 RELATING TO BOARD REPORTS; TO PROVIDE FOR APPOINTMENT OF THE PUBLIC MEMBER; AND TO REAUTHORIZE THE EXISTENCE OF THE BOARD FOR SIX YEARS.
S. 1383 -- Senators Robert W. Hayes, Jr., Stilwell and Courtney: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 17-25-325 SO AS TO PROVIDE A JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE OF A COURT OF GENERAL SESSIONS IN A CRIMINAL CASE AGAINST AN INDIVIDUAL MAY BE ENFORCED AS A JUDGMENT IS ENFORCED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS IN CIVIL ACTIONS.
S. 1412 -- Senators Wilson, Thomas, Giese and Bryan: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 16-11-700, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE OFFENSE OF LITTERING, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT LITTER INCLUDES CIGARETTES AND CIGARETTE BUTTS.
S. 785 -- Senator Drummond: A BILL TO REPEAL SECTION 50-11-770, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO HUNTING, FISHING, AND TRAPPING ON LAND WITHOUT CONSENT.
Senator HOLLAND explained the Bill.
H. 3409 -- Reps. Gregory, Kirsh, Wilkins, Short, Nettles and J. Brown: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-27-1270, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE ACCOUNT TO BE REPLENISHED BASED ON FUNDS OBLIGATED OR COMMITTED BY THE COORDINATING COUNCIL FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR, DELETE THE LIMITATION ON THE AMOUNT OF THE ACCOUNT, AND DELETE OBSOLETE LANGUAGE; TO AMEND SECTION 13-3-20, RELATING TO THE OBJECTIVES OF THE STATE DEVELOPMENT BOARD, SO AS TO DELETE THE REFERENCE TO A STATEWIDE PLANNING PROGRAM; TO AMEND SECTION 13-3-90, RELATING TO THE DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE STATE DEVELOPMENT BOARD, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISION FOR A MASTER PLAN FOR AGENCIES TO CONSIDER CERTAIN STATE NEEDS AND DELETE THE REFERENCE TO A STATE PLANNING PROGRAM; TO AMEND SECTION 41-45-20, RELATING TO MEETINGS AND DUTIES OF THE COUNCIL, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR AND DEFINE A STRATEGIC PLAN FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REVISE DUTIES PERTAINING TO THE PLAN AND COORDINATION OF ACTIVITIES; TO AMEND SECTION 41-45-30, RELATING TO REPORTS BY THE COUNCIL, SO AS TO INCLUDE REPORTS TO THE CHAIRMEN OF THE SENATE FINANCE AND HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEES AND REQUIRE REPORTS ON THE ACCOUNT; TO AMEND SECTION 41-45-40, RELATING TO COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS, SO AS TO INCLUDE THE OBJECTIVES OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN, DELETE THE PROVISION FOR REFERRALS BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND STATE AGENCIES, AND REVISE THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING AGENCY REQUESTS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 41-45-50, RELATING TO COUNCIL FUNDS, COMMITTEES, AND DATA, SO AS TO REVISE THE DUTIES OF THE COMMITTEES; AND TO REAUTHORIZE THE EXISTENCE OF THE COORDINATING COUNCIL FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR SIX YEARS.
Senator PASSAILAIGUE asked unanimous consent to make a motion to reconsider the vote whereby the Bill was given a second reading with notice of general amendments.
Senator MULLINAX objected.
H. 3747 -- Rep. Cole: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 50-11-25 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE TAKING OF MIGRATORY WATERFOWL FROM BLINDS OR POSITIONS MORE THAN TEN FEET ABOVE SURFACE LEVEL, REQUIRE CONSTRUCTION FROM BIODEGRADABLE MATERIALS ON PUBLIC LANDS AND WATERS, PROVIDE FOR USE OF PUBLIC BLINDS, AND PROVIDE PENALTIES.
Senator HOLLAND explained the Bill.
H. 3875 -- Rep. Snow: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-17-618, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO WATERS CLOSED TO TRAWLING, SO AS TO CLARIFY THE PRECEDENCE OF THE SECTION.
S. 1445 -- Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL, RELATING TO NPDES PERMITS, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 1423, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.
Senator MULLINAX explained the Joint Resolution.
S. 1169 -- Senators Giese, Moore, Fielding, Patterson, Wilson, O'Dell, Courson, Shealy, Drummond and McGill: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 7 IN CHAPTER 3 OF TITLE 41, RELATING TO THE DEPARTMENT AND COMMISSIONER OF LABOR SO AS TO CREATE WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR THE ATHLETIC REGULATION DIVISION AND TO DEVOLVE ON THE DIVISION THE DIRECTION, MANAGEMENT, CONTROL, AND SUPERVISION OF BOXING, WRESTLING, AND SPARRING EVENTS, EXHIBITIONS, CONTESTS, AND PERFORMANCES FORMERLY EXERCISED BY THE STATE ATHLETIC COMMISSION, INCLUDING CRIMINAL AND CIVIL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS; TO AMEND SECTIONS 52-7-10, 52-7-15, AS AMENDED, 52-7-20, AS AMENDED, AND 52-7-30, AND 52-7-310, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CREATION, POWERS, AND DUTIES OF THE STATE ATHLETIC COMMISSION AND COUNTY ATHLETIC COMMISSIONS, SO AS TO REESTABLISH THE BODY AS ADVISORY TO THE COMMISSIONER OF LABOR AND ELIMINATE THE OFFICE OF CHIEF ATHLETIC COMMISSIONER; AND TO PROVIDE THAT COUNTY ATHLETIC COMMISSIONERS ARE APPOINTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF LABOR RATHER THAN THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE COUNTY, TO PROVIDE THAT THE COMMISSIONER SHALL DESIGNATE THE FUNCTIONS OF COUNTY COMMISSIONS, AND TO PROVIDE THAT CURRENT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SHALL CONTINUE TO SERVE UNTIL THE EXPIRATION OF THEIR TERMS; TO CONTINUE IN EFFECT REGULATIONS PROMULGATED BY THE STATE ATHLETIC COMMISSION; AND TO REPEAL SECTIONS 52-7-25, 52-7-40, 52-7-50, 52-7-60, 52-7-70, 52-7-75, 52-7-80, 52-7-90, 52-7-100, 52-7-110, 52-7-120, 52-7-130, 52-7-140, AND 52-7-150, RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF BOXING, WRESTLING, AND SPARRING BY THE STATE ATHLETIC COMMISSION.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry.
Senator STILWELL proposed the following amendment (JIC\6385.HC), which was adopted:
Amend the report of the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry, as and if amended, page 1169-1, by striking beginning on line 38 /the expiration of the term/ and inserting /the State Athletic Commission requests in writing for an appointment to be made/.
Amend title to conform.
Senator GIESE explained the amendment.
The amendment proposed by the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry (LCI1169.04) was adopted as follows:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking Section 52-7-310, as contained in Section 6(A), beginning on page 7, and inserting:
/Section 52-7-310. The athletic commission of each county consists of five members to be appointed by the governing body of the county for terms of four years and until their successors are appointed and qualify. If no appointment has been made within sixty days after the expiration of the term, the State Athletic Commission may make the appointment. The governing body of the county shall forward a record of the appointees to the commission for filing in the office of the State Athletic Commission which indicates the persons holding office and the duration of their terms. The State Athletic Commission shall designate the functions of county athletic commissions. The county athletic commission shall select its chairman and other officers to serve for terms as the commission may designate. All of the members shall serve without compensation; however, they may receive such the per diem, mileage, and subsistence that the county authorizes. No member may have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in the promotion, management, or result of any boxing, wrestling, or sparring event. The office of a commissioner who fails to attend three consecutive commission meetings is declared vacant and the vacancy must be filled as provided by law. No vacancy occurs if the unaffected commission members vote unanimously to excuse the absences.
Amend title to conform.
Senator REESE proposed the following amendment (N05\8072.BD):
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking Section 52-7-310 and inserting:
/Section 52-7-310. The athletic commission of each county consists of five members to be appointed by the governing body legislative delegation of the county for terms of four years and until their successors are appointed and qualify. If an appointment is not made within sixty days after the required time, the Commissioner of Labor may make the appointment. The governing appointing body of the county shall forward a record of the appointees to the commission for filing in the office of the State Athletic Commission which indicates the persons holding office and the duration of their terms. The County Athletic Commission shall select its chairman and other officers to serve for terms as the commission may designate. All of the Members shall serve without compensation;. However, they may receive such the per diem, mileage, and subsistence that the county authorizes. No member may have any a financial interest, direct or indirect, in the promotion, management, or result of any a boxing, wrestling, or sparring event. The office of a commissioner who fails to attend three consecutive commission meetings is declared vacant, and the vacancy must be filled as provided by law. No vacancy occurs if the unaffected commission members vote unanimously to excuse the absences./
Amend title to conform.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading with notice of general amendments.
S. 1320 -- Senators Land, Hinds, Passailaigue and Fielding: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING CHAPTER 44 TO TITLE 48, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA OIL SPILL RESPONDERS LIABILITY ACT TO CONFORM SOUTH CAROLINA LAW WITH THE FEDERAL OIL POLLUTION ACT OF 1990 AND WITH THE LAW OF ADJACENT STATES BY PROVIDING IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY FOR PROPERTY DAMAGE CAUSED BY ACTS OF SIMPLE NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF PERSONS RESPONDING TO OIL SPILLS AND TO ENSURE THAT A PARTY CAUSING AN OIL SPILL REMAINS LIABLE FOR REMOVAL COSTS AND DAMAGES.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources.
The amendment proposed by the Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources (N05\8281.BD) was adopted as follows:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, Section 48-44-30(A), SECTION 1, by striking the first sentence and inserting:
/Notwithstanding other provisions of law, a person is not liable for removal costs or damages which result from actions taken or omitted to be taken in the course of rendering care, assistance, or advice consistent with the National Contingency Plan or as otherwise directed by the federal on-scene coordinator or by the state official with responsibility for oil spill response./
Amend further by striking Section 48-44-30(B)(3), SECTION 1, and inserting:
/(3) if the person is grossly negligent or engages in wanton or wilful misconduct./
Amend title to conform.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading with notice of general amendments.
H. 4226 -- Rep. Koon: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 47-3-75 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT ANY PERSON, NOT A LICENSED VETERINARIAN, WHO BOARDS THE DOMESTIC ANIMALS OF OTHERS ON HIS OWN PREMISES FOR A FEE MAY TRANSFER THE ANIMAL TO AN APPROPRIATE ANIMAL SHELTER TEN DAYS AFTER THE DATE THE OWNER BY WRITTEN CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT AGREED TO PICK UP THE ANIMAL BUT FAILED TO DO SO IF SUCH ACTION IS PERMITTED IN THE WRITTEN CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources.
The amendment proposed by the Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources (N05\8288.BD) was adopted as follows:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking Section 47-3-75, SECTION 1, and inserting:
/Section 47-3-75. (A) An animal delivered to a veterinarian, a dog kennel, a cat kennel, an animal hospital, another animal care facility, or a person who boards domestic animals on his premises for a fee may be transferred to an appropriate animal shelter ten days after the date the owner failed to pick up the animal as agreed to pursuant to a written contract or agreement. The animal may be transferred only if the written contract or agreement provides for the transfer and if an attempt is made to notify the owner by regular mail at his last known address on the date the owner failed to pick up the animal as agreed.
(B) A person who boards animals of others as described in this section shall post written notice of the provisions of this section at his place of business./
Amend title to conform.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading with notice of general amendments.
The following Bills and Joint Resolution having been read the second time were passed and ordered to a third reading:
H. 4391 -- Rep. Felder: A BILL TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CALHOUN COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT TO CHARGE FEES FOR SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS; TO REVISE THE PER DIEM AND MILEAGE THAT MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES SHALL RECEIVE; TO ABOLISH THE CALHOUN COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT, AND DEVOLVE ITS FUNCTIONS, DUTIES, AND POWERS TO SPECIFIED ENTITIES; TO ABOLISH THE OFFICE OF CALHOUN COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION UPON THE EXPIRATION OF THE CURRENT TERM OF THE INCUMBENT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, AND DEVOLVE THE FUNCTIONS, DUTIES, AND POWERS OF THIS OFFICE UPON THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CALHOUN COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 1 OF ACT 743 OF 1976, RELATING TO THE CALHOUN COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION.
On motion of Senator MATTHEWS, H. 4391 was ordered to receive a third reading on Thursday, April 9, 1992.
S. 1440 -- Senator Holland: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 1-7-80, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE APPROPRIATIONS TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR EXPENSES OF LITIGATION, SO AS TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PROVIDE BLANK INDICTMENTS FOR THE CIRCUIT SOLICITORS, AND TO AMEND SECTION 1-7-940, RELATING TO THE DUTIES OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA COMMISSION ON PROSECUTION COORDINATION, SO AS TO ADD THE DUTY OF PROVIDING BLANK INDICTMENTS FOR THE CIRCUIT SOLICITORS.
Senator HOLLAND explained the Bill.
On motion of Senator HOLLAND, with unanimous consent, S. 1440 was ordered to receive a third reading on Thursday, April 9, 1992.
S. 1389 -- Senators Mullinax, Nell W. Smith and Macaulay: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 51-13-510 OF THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CREATION OF THE PENDLETON DISTRICT HISTORICAL AND RECREATIONAL COMMISSION SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT, SO AS TO RENAME THE DISTRICT AND PROVIDE THAT IT SHALL BE KNOWN AS THE "PENDLETON DISTRICT HISTORICAL, RECREATIONAL, AND TOURISM COMMISSION"; AND TO AMEND SECTION 51-13-520, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO POWERS OF THE PENDLETON DISTRICT HISTORICAL AND RECREATIONAL COMMISSION SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE COMMISSION IS EMPOWERED TO SUE AND BE SUED, ADOPT AND USE A CORPORATE SEAL, CHARGE ADMISSION FEES, AND PRESCRIBE RULES AND REGULATIONS WITH RESPECT TO ITS FACILITIES, PURPOSES, AND AFFAIRS, TO EMPLOY PERSONNEL, ACQUIRE PROPERTY, RECEIVE GRANTS, AND TO CONDUCT ACTIVITIES TO PROMOTE TOURISM.
On motion of Senator MULLINAX, with unanimous consent, S. 1389 was ordered to receive a third reading on Thursday, April 9, 1992.
S. 1352 -- Senator Bryan: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTIONS 6-11-435 AND 6-11-455 AND TO AMEND SECTIONS 6-11-440 AND 6-11-470, RELATING TO NOTICE REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED BY A COUNTY COUNCIL WHEN THE BOUNDARY OF A DISTRICT IS ALTERED, SO AS TO PROVIDE A PROCEDURE FOR CONSOLIDATING AND ENLARGING SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS WHERE THE CONSOLIDATION ENLARGEMENT RESULTS IN AN OVERLAPPING POLITICAL SUBDIVISION AUTHORIZED TO PROVIDE LIKE SERVICES.
S. 1382 -- Senators Robert W. Hayes, Jr., Stilwell and Bryan: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 5 OF TITLE 27, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 27-5-130 SO AS TO ABROGATE THE COMMON LAW RULE WHICH REQUIRES THE WORDS "AND HIS HEIRS" IN A DEED OF REALTY TO CONVEY PROPERTY IN FEE SIMPLE ABSOLUTE.
S. 760 -- Senator Drummond: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-11-180, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION ON THE TRAPPING OR SNARING OF QUAIL AND THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE PROHIBITION, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE AND MARINE RESOURCES SHALL ISSUE A PERMIT FOR THE SCIENTIFIC OR PROPAGATION EXCEPTIONS, TO REQUIRE THE APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO CONTAIN INFORMATION ON OWNERSHIP AND BOUNDARIES, AND TO ALLOW THE DEPARTMENT TO DENY OR REVOKE A PERMIT AT ITS DISCRETION.
On motion of Senator HOLLAND, with unanimous consent, S. 760 was ordered to receive a third reading on Thursday, April 9, 1992.
S. 1162 -- Senator Drummond: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-20-50, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO REQUIRED STAMPS AND PERMITS UNDER THE RECREATIONAL FISHERIES CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1991, SO AS TO DECREASE CERTAIN CHARTER VESSEL PERMIT FEES.
Senators HOLLAND and DRUMMOND explained the Bill.
On motion of Senator HOLLAND, with unanimous consent, S. 1162, was ordered to receive a third reading on Thursday, April 9, 1992.
H. 3873 -- Rep. Snow: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-17-810, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, AND SECTION 50-17-812, RELATING TO THE SEASONS FOR CATCHING SHAD, SO AS TO CHANGE THE SEASON ON THE EDISTO RIVER.
On motion of Senator HOLLAND, with unanimous consent, H. 3873 was ordered to receive a third reading on Thursday, April 9, 1992.
H. 4242 -- Reps. Gonzales, Hallman, Fulmer, Rama, R. Young, Whipper, Wofford, Holt, Inabinett, G. Bailey, J. Bailey, A. Young, D. Martin and Barber: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 50-21-137 SO AS TO ESTABLISH NO WAKE ZONES ON THE ASHLEY RIVER.
On motion of Senator PASSAILAIGUE, with unanimous consent, H. 4242 was ordered to receive a third reading on Thursday, April 9, 1992.
S. 128 -- Senator McConnell: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 47-1-200 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE OFFENSE OF TRANSPORTING AN ANIMAL UNDER INADEQUATE CONDITIONS AND IMPORTING OR EXPORTING A DOG OR CAT UNDER EIGHT WEEKS OF AGE WITHOUT ITS DAM AND PROVIDE PENALTIES.
Senator McCONNELL explained the Bill.
S. 1453 -- Fish, Game & Forestry Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE FORESTRY COMMISSION, RELATING TO HUNTING AND FISHING REGULATIONS ON STATE FOREST LANDS ESTABLISHED AS WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREAS, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 1476, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.
S. 552 -- Senator Hayes: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 16-13-420, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO FAILURE TO RETURN RENTED OBJECTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT FAILURE TO RETURN LEASED PROPERTY WITHIN SEVENTY-TWO HOURS AFTER THE LEASE EXPIRES BUT RETURNING IT WITHIN ONE WEEK AND FAILURE TO RETURN A LEASED MOTOR VEHICLE FOR MORE THAN ONE WEEK AFTER THE LEASE EXPIRES ARE MISDEMEANORS AND TO PROVIDE PENALTIES.
Senator ROBERT W. HAYES, JR. asked unanimous consent to take the Bill up for immediate consideration.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the second reading of the Bill.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading.
S. 768 -- Senator Drummond: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 50-11-55 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE INJURING OR WOUNDING OF WILDLIFE WITHOUT ATTEMPTING TO LOCATE IT AND TAKE IT INTO POSSESSION.
Senator HOLLAND asked unanimous consent to take the Bill up for immediate consideration.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the second reading of the Bill.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading.
On motion of Senator HOLLAND, with unanimous consent, S. 768 was ordered to receive a third reading on Thursday, April 9, 1992.
S. 1204 -- Senator Drummond: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 40-13-255 SO AS TO PROVIDE A MONETARY PENALTY FOR PERSONS LICENSED BY THE STATE BOARD OF COSMETOLOGY FOR VIOLATIONS OF SANITATION REGULATIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 40-13-30, RELATING TO THE BOARD, SO AS TO INCREASE THE MEMBERSHIP; AND TO REAUTHORIZE THE EXISTENCE OF THE BOARD FOR SIX YEARS.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the adoption of the amendment proposed by the General Committee.
The amendment proposed by the General Committee (GEN1204.001) was adopted as follows:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking SECTION 1 of the bill in its entirety and inserting therein:
/ SECTION 1. The 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"Section 40-13-255. The holder of a license issued by the board found to be in violation of this chapter, related regulations, or an order of the board is subject to a civil penalty in lieu of suspension or revocation of the license. The penalty may not exceed five hundred dollars." /
Amend title to conform.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading.
S. 1280 -- Senator Land: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 11, TITLE 48, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO WATERSHED CONSERVATION DISTRICTS, SO AS TO ADD SECTIONS 48-11-15 AND 48-11-185, DELETE SECTION 48-11-80, AND REVISE THE PROCEDURES FOR THE CREATION, ORGANIZATION, AND FUNCTION OF THE DISTRICTS; TO REPEAL ACT 1316 OF 1964, RELATING TO DISTRICTS IN NEWBERRY COUNTY, ACT 655 OF 1965, RELATING TO DISTRICTS IN JASPER COUNTY, ACT 1179 OF 1966, RELATING TO DISTRICTS IN ALLENDALE COUNTY, ACT 1196 OF 1966, RELATING TO DISTRICTS IN BEAUFORT COUNTY, ACT 1212 OF 1966, RELATING TO DISTRICTS IN CHARLESTON COUNTY, ACT 1254 OF 1966, RELATING TO DISTRICTS IN DARLINGTON COUNTY, AND OTHER ACTS OR PARTS OF ACTS INCONSISTENT WITH CHAPTER 11, TITLE 48; TO DELETE PROVISIONS FOR CERTAIN DISTRICTS WHICH WERE AUTHORIZED BY ACT BUT WERE NEVER CREATED AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AND, WHERE THE DISTRICTS WERE AUTHORIZED BY SEPARATE ACT, TO REPEAL ACT 1084 OF 1958, RELATING TO POLK SWAMP, FLORENCE COUNTY, ACT 1085 OF 1958, RELATING TO EBENEZER, FLORENCE COUNTY, ACT 1134 OF 1960, RELATING TO LYNCHBURG-SHILOH, SUMTER AND LEE COUNTIES, ACT 1097 OF 1962, RELATING TO COWARD, FLORENCE COUNTY, AND ACT 1195 OF 1962, RELATING TO CROW CREEK, PICKENS; TO DISSOLVE CERTAIN DISTRICTS WHICH HAVE NEVER IMPLEMENTED WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND, WHERE THE DISTRICTS WERE CREATED BY SEPARATE ACT, TO REPEAL ACT 471 OF 1961, RELATING TO EIGHTEEN MILE CREEK, PICKENS AND ANDERSON COUNTIES, LONG-CANE TURKEY CREEK, ABBEVILLE, ANDERSON, AND GREENWOOD COUNTIES, LITTLE RIVER, ABBEVILLE, ANDERSON, AND MCCORMICK COUNTIES, AND ROCKY RIVER, ANDERSON COUNTY, ACT 567 OF 1961, RELATING TO LONG CANE-TURKEY CREEK, ACT 1081 OF 1962, RELATING TO CATFISH CREEK-SMITH SWAMP, MARION, DILLON, AND MARLBORO COUNTIES, KENTYRE-HAMER, DILLON COUNTY, AND REEDY CREEK, DILLON AND MARLBORO COUNTIES, ACT 493 OF 1965, RELATING TO LONG CANE-TURKEY CREEK, ACT 640 OF 1965, RELATING TO SANDERS BRANCH-CROOKED CREEK, HAMPTON COUNTY, ACT 671 OF 1965, RELATING TO LITTLE RIVER, ACT 691 OF 1965, RELATING TO EIGHTEEN MILE CREEK, AND ACT 725 OF 1965, RELATING TO CLARK'S FORK-BULLOCKS CREEK, YORK COUNTY, STONY FORK, YORK COUNTY, AND SUGAR CREEK, YORK AND LANCASTER COUNTIES; AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE TERMS OF THE DIRECTORS OF THE DISTRICTS SERVING ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT AND FOR THE TERMS OF THEIR SUCCESSORS.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources.
The amendment proposed by the Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources (N05\8284.BD) was adopted as follows:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking Section 48-11-30, SECTION 1, and inserting:
/Section 48-11-30. The area embraced in a watershed conservation district shall must be contiguous, shall must lie within a well-defined watershed, and shall must be situated within one or more soil and water conservation districts. Such The area shall may not include lands located within the boundary of any an incorporated city or town, municipality, unless approved by its governing body, or lands embraced in another watershed conservation district. The boundary of each watershed conservation district in existence on the effective date of this chapter, as amended, is not affected unless otherwise provided in this chapter./
Amend further by striking Section 48-11-100(C)(1), SECTION 1, and inserting:
/(1) Of the directors first elected, the two three receiving the largest number of votes shall serve for terms of four years, and the two receiving the next largest number of votes shall serve for terms of three two years, and the one receiving the next largest number of votes shall serve for a term of two years./
Amend further by striking Section 48-11-210(A), SECTION 1, and inserting:
/(A) All acts or parts of acts inconsistent herewith are repealed, except that those watershed conservation districts authorized by law prior to April 14, 1967 and in existence shall not be affected and shall be deemed properly constituted, and the laws governing the constitution and operation of such districts shall continue in full force and effect until dissolved by resolution of the board of directors of such district, following a public hearing on the question of dissolution and with the approval of the board of commissioners of the soil and water conservation district in which the watershed is located. Any watershed conservation district in existence on April 14, 1967 and desiring to be organized under the provisions of this chapter may do so by resolution setting forth these facts and adopted at a public meeting of the board of directors and the same board of directors shall continue to serve as the new board of directors for the unexpired term to which elected and their successors shall be elected pursuant to the terms of this chapter. The organization and function of each of the following watershed conservation districts which have implemented works of improvement must be revised to comply with this chapter. Each watershed conservation district retains the authority to levy the millage rate for the district, established previously by the General Assembly or through the local creation or administration of the watershed conservation district, at which taxes may be levied each fiscal year on the real property in the district, until the millage rate is changed as provided in this chapter or increased by action of county council. This chapter applies to those districts notwithstanding contrary provisions in acts which may have created the districts. The districts and related acts, where created by separate acts, include:
(1) Back Swamp, Lee County, Act 602 of 1961;
(2) Beaverdam Creek, Edgefield County, Act 1407 of 1974;
(3) Beaverdam Creek, Oconee County, Act 1178 of 1962;
(4) Beaverdam-Warriors Creek, Laurens County, Act 599 of 1961;
(5) Big Creek, Anderson County;
(6) Broadmouth Creek, Anderson County;
(7) Brown's Creek, Union County;
(8) Brushy Creek, Anderson and Pickens Counties;
(9) Buck Creek, Horry County, Act 579 of 1961;
(10) Carters Branch-Muddy Creek, Marlboro County, Act 1355 of 1966;
(11) Crabtree Swamp, Horry County, Act 579 of 1961;
(12) Duncan Creek, Laurens County, Act 599 of 1961;
(13) Fishing Creek, York County, Act 1219 of 1958;
(14) Gapway Swamp, Horry County, Act 579 of 1961;
(15) George's Creek, Pickens County, Act 633 of 1963;
(16) Hill's Creek, Chesterfield County, Act 513 of 1961;
(17) Hollow Creek, Lexington and Saluda Counties, Act 1335 of 1966;
(18) Horse Range Swamp, Orangeburg County, Act 816 of 1967;
(19) Little Lynches Creek, Kershaw and Lancaster Counties, Act 1316 of 1966 and Act 583 of 1963;
(20) Little Walnut-Tom and Kate, Dorchester County, Act 584 of 1965;
(21) Lynches Lake-Camp Branch, Florence County, Act 1007 of 1960;
(22) Maple Swamp, Dillon County;
(23) Oolenoy River, Pickens County, Act 631 of 1961;
(24) Rabon Creek, Laurens and Greenville Counties;
(25) St. George-Gum Branch, Dorchester County;
(26) Salem Community, Florence County;
(27) Simpson Creek, Horry County, Act 579 of 1961;
(28) Rocky Creek, Chester and Fairfield Counties;
(29) South Tyger River, Greenville County, Act 544 of 1963;
(30) Thicketty Creek, Cherokee and Spartanburg Counties;
(31) Three and Twenty Creek, Anderson and Pickens Counties;
(32) Tinkers Creek, Chester and York Counties;
(33) Todd Swamp, Horry County, Act 579 of 1961;
(34) Wateree Creek, Fairfield County, Act 1077 of 1958;
(35) Wilson Creek, Anderson and Abbeville Counties;
(36) Willow Swamp, Colleton and Bamberg Counties, Act 1032 of 1962;/
Amend further, Section 48-11-210 by relettering subsection (C) as (D) and by adding:
/(C) The existing Jackson Creek Watershed Conservation District and Mill Creek Watershed Conservation District in Fairfield County, created pursuant to Act 596 of 1965, are combined into a single watershed conservation district named Jackson-Mill Creek Watershed Conservation District which encompasses the combined area of the two existing watershed conservation districts. The organization and function of the new Jackson-Mill Creek Watershed Conservation District must be revised to comply with this chapter. The district retains the authority to levy the millage rate authorized in Act 596 of 1965 until the millage rate is changed as provided in this chapter or increased by action of county council. This chapter applies to this district notwithstanding contrary provisions in Act 596 of 1965./
Amend title to conform.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading.
S. 1012 -- Senator McConnell: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-650, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE DUTIES OF LOCAL CHILD PROTECTIVE AGENCIES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR JUDICIALLY DETERMINED REPORTS INSTEAD OF INDICATED INVESTIGATIONS OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT TO BE COMMUNICATED TO THE STATEWIDE CENTRAL REGISTRY, DELETE THE PROVISIONS FOR A LOCAL REGISTRY AND REPORTS OF CHILD ABUSE, AND PROVIDE FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, BIRTH DATES, AND OTHER IDENTIFYING CHARACTERISTICS OF PERSONS NAMED IN JUDICIALLY DETERMINED INSTEAD OF INDICATED REPORTS OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Committee on Judiciary.
The amendment proposed by the Committee on Judiciary (JUD1012.007) was adopted as follows:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting therein the following:
/SECTION 1. Section 20-7-490 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding appropriately numbered items to read:
"( ) `Child Protective Services' means assistance provided by the local child protective services agency as a result of indicated reports or affirmative determinations of child abuse or neglect including assistance ordered by the family court or consented to by the family. The objectives of child protective services are:
(1) to protect the child's safety and welfare, and
(2) to maintain the child within the family unless the safety of the child requires placement outside the home.
( ) `Affirmative determination' means a finding that more likely than not the child was abused or neglected by the person who is alleged or determined to have abused or neglected the child and who is mentioned by name in a report or finding. This finding may be made only by:
(1) the court;
(2) the Department of Social Services upon a final agency decision in its appeals process; or
(3) waiver by the subject of the report of his right to appeal.
If an affirmative determination is made by the court after an affirmative determination is made by the Department of Social Services, the court's finding shall be the affirmative determination.
( ) `Court' means the family court."
SECTION 2. Section 20-7-650 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 20-7-650. (A) It is the purpose of this section to encourage the voluntary acceptance of any service offered by the child protective service agency in connection with child abuse and neglect, or any other another problem of a nature affecting the stability of family life.
(B) The local child protective service agencies shall must be adequately staffed adequately with persons trained in the investigation of suspected child abuse and neglect and in the provision of services to abused and neglected children and their families.
(C) Within twenty-four hours of the receipt of a report of suspected child abuse or neglect, the agency shall commence must begin an appropriate and thorough investigation to determine whether a report of suspected child abuse or neglect is `indicated' or `unfounded'. The finding shall must be made no later than sixty days from the receipt of the report. In conducting the investigation if the facts so warrant the agency investigator may petition the Family Court family court of the appropriate judicial circuit for a warrant to inspect the premises and condition of the child subject of the report. The Family Court family court shall issue the inspection warrant upon probable cause to believe the child is abused or neglected, as defined by this article.
(D) Indicated findings shall must be based upon a finding of the facts available to the agency that abuse or neglect is more likely than not to have occurred; whenever. Whenever the facts available to the agency indicate a lesser finding, determinations shall must be deemed `unfounded'. Indicated findings shall must include a description of the services being provided the child and those responsible for his care welfare, as well as all relevant dispositional information.
(E) Copies of indicated investigations Reports of child abuse and neglect shall must be communicated entered immediately to into the automated statewide Central Registry of Child Abuse and Neglect. The agency shall maintain a local registry and reports Reports of child abuse and neglect shall must be entered into the registry and maintained in the agency files in one of three four categories: Suspected, Unfounded, or Indicated, or Affirmative Determination. All initial reports shall must be deemed suspected. Reports of suspected child abuse and neglect shall must be maintained for no more than sixty days after the report was received by the agency. On or before the expiration of that time, they shall must be converted into either unfounded or indicated reports, pursuant to the agency's investigation. Upon an affirmative determination, indicated reports must be converted to the category of `affirmative determination'.
(1) Indicated reports shall must be maintained on the central and local registries by the agency only when accompanied by supplemental information as required under subsection (D).
(2) Unfounded reports shall must be classified `Unfounded by reason of insufficient evidence'.
(3) If no finding has been made by the agency after sixty days from the date a report was received, it shall the report must be classified `Unfounded for want of an investigation'.
(4) Affirmative determinations may be maintained by the agency only when accompanied by a description of the services being provided the child and those responsible for his welfare, as well as all relevant dispositional information.
(F) The names, addresses, and all other identifying characteristics of all persons named in all unfounded reports maintained in agency files may be used only for auditing and statistical purposes. All identifying information contained in unfounded reports shall must be destroyed immediately after use of the information for auditing and statistical purposes, and in no case later than one year from the date that the last report has been determined to be unfounded; provided, however, that all information in any such report which is unnecessary for auditing and statistical purposes shall must be destroyed immediately upon a determination that such report is unfounded and the remaining information shall must be kept strictly confidential except for auditing and statistical purposes. Notwithstanding Section 20-7-690 or any other provision of law, no information contained in unfounded reports may be disclosed under any circumstances.
(G) The Upon an affirmative determination, the names, addresses, birth dates, and all other identifying characteristics, and other information of all persons named in indicated reports maintained in agency files shall be destroyed seven years from the date services are terminated. must be converted immediately to the category of `affirmative determination'. The names, addresses, birth dates, identifying characteristics, and other information unnecessary for auditing and statistical purposes of persons named in affirmative determinations of child abuse or neglect maintained in agency files must be destroyed seven years from the date services are terminated. Upon a determination that more likely than not a person who is the subject of a report as defined by 20-7-690(E) did not commit child abuse or neglect, the name, address, birth date, and other identifying characteristics of that person must be purged immediately from the agency's files. This provision does not prohibit the agency from maintaining an `indicated report' which contains identifying information on the child who is the subject of the indicated report and those responsible for his welfare without identifying a subject of the report as defined by Section 20-7-690(E) or providing child protective services to the child who is the subject of the indicated report and those responsible for his welfare.
(H) A family court order resulting from proceedings initiated by the agency pursuant to Section 20-7-650(J) and Section 20-7-736 must include a judicial determination for inclusion in the statewide Central Registry of whether or not the subject of the report more likely than not abused or neglected the child.
(G) (I) The local child protective service agency shall be charged with providing, directing or coordinating the appropriate and timely delivery of services to children found to be abused or neglected and those responsible for their care welfare or others exercising temporary or permanent control over such children. `Services' shall not be construed to include emergency protective custody provided for in Section 20-7-736.
(H) (J) Where the agency initiates protective services in cases of indicated physical, mental, or sexual abuse, it shall petition the family court of the jurisdiction of the services offered within one week after the initiation of the services. The family court shall schedule a hearing within forty days after the filing of the petition to determine whether:
(1) the agency had reasonable cause to initiate the services offered;
(2) the services being offered are reasonable in light of the agency's justification for intervention.
In all proceedings under this section the agency has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence, except in cases where the agency has alleged mental injury, in which case the evidence must be clear and convincing.
(I) (K) In cases where a report has been filed with the Central Registry of Child Abuse and Neglect, as required by subsection (E), the outcome of these any further proceedings shall must be communicated entered immediately by the agency to into the Central Registry of Child Abuse and Neglect.
(J) (L) If at any time after After the initiation of protective services by the agency, if those receiving services indicate a refusal to cooperate, the agency shall withdraw. If the facts so warrant, the agency may petition the Family Court family court to invoke the jurisdiction of the court under the Family Court Act to intervene, but in no case shall the agency may not threaten such action to coerce participation.
(K) (M) The agency shall cooperate with law enforcement agencies and the circuit solicitor within the area it serves and establish such procedures as it deems necessary to facilitate the referral of child protection cases to the child protective services agency. Where the facts indicating abuse or neglect also appear to indicate a violation of criminal law, the agency shall notify the appropriate law enforcement agency of those facts within twenty-four hours of the agency's finding for the purposes of police investigation. The law enforcement agency must file a formal incident report at the time it is notified by the agency of such finding. When the intake report is of alleged sexual abuse, the agency must notify the appropriate law enforcement agency within twenty-four hours of receipt of the report to determine if a joint investigation is necessary. The law enforcement agency must file a formal incident report at the time it is notified of the alleged sexual abuse.
(L) (N) The agency shall actively shall seek the cooperation and involvement of all local public and private institutions, groups, and programs concerned with matters of child protection and welfare within the area it serves.
(M) (O) The local child protective service agency situated in the county of the mother's legal residence is charged with providing shall provide, directing direct, or coordinating coordinate the appropriate and timely delivery of services to children born of incarcerated mothers where no provision has been made for placement of the child outside the prison setting. Referral of such these cases to the appropriate local child protective service agency shall be is the responsibility of the agency or institution with custody of the mother.
(N) (P) The agency in all instances must shall act in accordance with the policies, procedures, and regulations that are promulgated and distributed by the State Department of Social Services pursuant to this chapter."
SECTION 3. Section 20-7-680 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 20-7-680. (A) The purpose of this section is to establish a system for the identification of abused and neglected children and those who are responsible for their care welfare, to provide a system for the coordination of reports concerning abused and neglected children, and to provide data for determining the incidence and prevalence of child abuse and neglect in this State.
(B) The State Department of Social Services shall maintain a Central Registry of Child Abuse and Neglect within the Department of Social Services child protective services unit. The registry shall receive and maintain indicated reports of child abuse and neglect from county departments of social services and from local child protective service agencies, and it shall transmit release information to authorized persons and agencies only as provided in authorized by Section 20-7-690. Reports of child abuse and neglect must be maintained on the registry in one of four categories: Suspected, Unfounded, Indicated, or Affirmative Determination. All initial reports shall be deemed suspected. Reports of suspected child abuse and neglect must be maintained on the registry for no more than sixty days after the report was received by the agency. On or before the expiration of that time, they must be converted into either unfounded or indicated reports, pursuant to the agency's investigation. Upon an affirmative determination, indicated reports must be converted to the category of `affirmative determination'.
(1) Indicated reports and affirmative determinations may be maintained on the Central Registry of Child Abuse and Neglect only when accompanied by a description of the services being provided the child and those responsible for his welfare, as well as all relevant dispositional information.
(2) Unfounded reports must be classified `Unfounded by reason of insufficient evidence'.
(3) If no finding has been made by the agency after sixty days from the date a report was received, the report must be classified `Unfounded for want of an investigation'.
(C) Local child protective service agencies shall transmit monthly immediately any data required by the Department of Social Services for purposes of statistical analysis and data gathering, subject to the limitations imposed on identifying characteristics contained in subsections (E) (F) and (F) (G) of Section 20-7-650.
(D) The Department of Social Services shall furnish annually to the Governor and the General Assembly a report on the incidence and prevalence of child abuse and neglect in South Carolina, the effectiveness of services provided throughout the State to protect children from such harm, and any other data deemed instructive.
(E) The names, addresses, birthdates, and all other identifying characteristics of all persons named in indicated reports contained in the Registry shall be destroyed seven years from the date services are terminated. The names, addresses, birth dates, identifying characteristics, and other information of persons named in unfounded reports maintained on the registry must be destroyed immediately upon a determination that such report is unfounded.
(F) Upon an affirmative determination, the names, addresses, birth dates, identifying characteristics, and other information of persons named in indicated reports must be converted immediately to the category of affirmative determination. The names, addresses, birth dates, identifying characteristics, and other information unnecessary for auditing and statistical purposes of persons named in affirmative determinations of child abuse or neglect must be destroyed seven years from the date services are terminated. Upon a determination that more likely than not a person who is the subject of a report as defined by Section 20-7-690(E) did not commit child abuse or neglect, the name, address, birth date, and other identifying characteristics of that person must be purged immediately from the registry. This provision does not prohibit the registry from maintaining an `indicated report' which contains identifying information on the child who is the subject of the indicated report and those responsible for his welfare without identifying a subject of the report as defined by Section 20-7-690(E), nor does it prohibit the agency from providing child protective services to the child who is the subject of an indicated report and those responsible for his welfare."
SECTION 4. Chapter 7, Title 20 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"Section 20-7-655. (A) The Department of Social Services shall provide a child protective services appeals process for review of indicated reports not otherwise being brought before the family court for disposition. The appeals hearing shall be scheduled and conducted in accordance with the department's fair hearing regulations.
(B) The Commissioner shall appoint a child protective services appeals committee for each case decision which is appealed. The committee must be comprised of three officials or employees of the Department of Social Services, none of whom may be a resident of or employed by the local child protective services agency in the county where the case originates or a member of the investigative unit which investigated the case if the case decision being appealed involves institutional abuse.
(C) If the case decision indicates child abuse or neglect, the local child protective services agency must provide notice of the case decision to the subject of the report by certified mail. This notice must include the information required by Section 20-7-690(D). The notice must inform the subject of the report of the right to appeal the case decision and that if he intends to appeal the decision, he must notify the local child protection agency of his intent in writing within thirty days of receipt of the notice. If the subject of the report does not notify the local child protective services agency of his intent to appeal in writing within thirty days of receipt of the notice, the right to appeal shall be considered waived by the subject and the case decision shall become the affirmative determination.
(D) Within fourteen days after receipt of a notice of intent to appeal, an interim review of case documentation and the case determination shall be conducted by the director of the local child protective services agency. The local review shall not delay the scheduling of the appeals hearing. If the local review supports the case determination, appeals must be considered by the child protective services appeals committee.
(E) The child protective services appeals committee shall determine whether or not the case determination is supported by evidence that the subject of the report more likely than not abused or neglected the child. If the appeals committee affirms the case determination, the subject has the right to judicial review in the family court of the jurisdiction in which the case originated.
(F) Proceedings for judicial review may be instituted by filing a petition in the family court within thirty days after the final decision of the agency. Copies of the petition must be served upon the agency and all parties of record. Judicial review must be conducted by the family court in accordance with the standards of review provided for in Section 1-23-380. The court may enter judgment upon the pleadings and a certified transcript of the record which must include the evidence upon which the findings and decisions appealed are based. The judgment must include a determination of whether the subject of the report more likely than not abused or neglected the child.
(G) Upon a determination by the local review, the appeals committee, or the court that more likely than not the subject of the report did not commit child abuse or neglect, the name, address, birth date, and other identifying characteristics of that person must be purged immediately from the agency's files and from the Central Registry of Child Abuse and Neglect. This provision does not prohibit the agency or the registry from maintaining an `indicated report' which contains identifying information on the child who is the subject of the indicated report and those responsible for his welfare without identifying a subject of the report, nor does it prohibit the agency from providing child protective services to the child who is the subject of an indicated report and those responsible for his welfare.
(H) When the appeals procedure is used for institutional abuse cases investigated by the Department of Social Services, the investigative unit of the Department of Social Services shall be substituted for the local child protective services agency for purposes of all notices and the case documentation review.
(I) For the purpose of this section, `the subject of the report' means any person who is alleged or determined to have abused or neglected the child who is mentioned by name in a report of finding."
SECTION 5. Section 20-7-690 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding an appropriately numbered subsection to read:
"( ) All reports made available to persons pursuant to this section must indicate whether or not an appeal is pending on the report pursuant to Section 20-7-655."
SECTION 6. This act takes effect six months after approval by the Governor./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Senator McCONNELL explained the Bill.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading.
S. 1084 -- Senator Leatherman: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 11-27-110 SO AS TO PROVIDE LEASE-PURCHASE OR LEASE-BACK AGREEMENTS INVOLVING REAL PROPERTY ENTERED INTO BY THE STATE OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS OF THE STATE WHEREIN THE STATE OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION IS THE LESSEE CONSTITUTES GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT FOR THE PERIOD OF THE LEASE AND TO PROVIDE THAT THIS GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT MAY NOT VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEBT LIMITATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE STATE OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION UNDER ARTICLE X OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Committee on Judiciary.
The amendment proposed by the Committee on Judiciary (JUD1084.001) was adopted as follows:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting therein the following:
/SECTION 1. The 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"Section 11-27-110. A lease-back or lease-purchase agreement involving real property entered into between this State or a political subdivision thereof which is subject to a constitutional limitation on the amount of general obligation debt which it may incur, as lessee, and a public or private entity, as lessor, constitutes general obligation debt for the period of the lease unless the agreement contains a non-appropriations clause or unless rent under the agreement is payable solely from a revenue producing project or a special source not involving the proceeds of any tax or license. The general obligation debt incurred by a lease-leaseback or lease-purchase agreement which does not contain a non-appropriations clause or rent under which is payable from sources involving the proceeds of any tax or license violates the constitutional debt limitations applicable to the State or political subdivision under Article X of the State Constitution. For purposes of this section, `non-appropriations clause' means a contractual provision stating that the lease may be canceled at the end of any fiscal year, if prior to the beginning of the next fiscal year, the lessee fails to appropriate funds sufficient to pay rent under the lease for the next fiscal year and the State or political subdivision incurs no pecuniary liability as a result of such cancellation. The amount of any general obligation debt incurred shall be determined under generally accepted accounting principles."
SECTION 2. The provisions of Section 11-27-110 apply to any lease-back or lease-purchase agreement entered into after the effective date of this act.
SECTION 3. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor./
Amend title to conform.
Senator McCONNELL explained the amendment.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading.
S. 767 -- Senator Drummond: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-11-2570, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO AUTHORITY OF WILDLIFE AND MARINE RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO ISSUE SPECIAL PERMITS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT FURBEARING ANIMALS CAUSING DAMAGE TO A PERSON'S HOME OR PROPERTY MAY BE CAPTURED WITHIN ONE HUNDRED YARDS OF THE HOME.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Committee on Fish, Game and Forestry.
The amendment proposed by the Committee on Fish, Game and Forestry (N05\8323.BD) was adopted as follows:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/SECTION 1. Section 50-11-2570 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 50-11-2570. (A) The department may issue special permits, at no cost to the applicant, for the taking, capturing, or transportation transporting of any a furbearing animal or of any other game which is destroying or damaging private or public property, timber, or growing crops so as to be a nuisance or for scientific or research purposes.
(B) The permit is not required by the property owner or his designee when capturing furbearing animals or squirrels within one hundred yards of the owner's home when the animal or squirrel is causing damage to the home or property. An animal captured pursuant to the exemption in this subsection must be destroyed."
SECTION 2. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor./
Amend title to conform.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading.
S. 769 -- Senator Drummond: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 50-11-65 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE ABANDONMENT OF WILDLIFE CARCASSES.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Committee on Fish, Game and Forestry.
The amendment proposed by the Committee on Fish, Game and Forestry (N05\8324.BD) was adopted as follows:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/SECTION 1. The 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"Section 50-11-65. It is unlawful for a person to take a big game species and abandon the carcass or remove only the head, hide, claws, teeth, antlers, feathers, or internal organs or all of these parts and abandon the carcass or body. It is unlawful to solicit, hire, or procure another person to do these acts. A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than two hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than thirty days. For the purpose of this section big game includes deer, turkey, and bear."
SECTION 2. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor./
Amend title to conform.
Senator DRUMMOND explained the committee amendment.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading.
On motion of Senator GIESE, with unanimous consent, S. 769 was ordered to receive a third reading on Thursday, April 9, 1992.
H. 3876 -- Rep. Snow: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-17-725, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE PROTECTION OF STONE CRABS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE CLAW ATTACHED TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE BODY INSTEAD OF THE LARGER OF THE TWO CLAWS.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the second reading of the Bill.
Senator HOLLAND asked unanimous consent to recommit the Bill to the Committee on Fish, Game and Forestry.
There was no objection.
S. 1418 -- Senator Pope: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE PALMETTO GIRLS STATE TO USE THE CHAMBERS OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE FRONT STEPS OF THE STATE HOUSE ON FRIDAY, JUNE 19, 1992, FOR ITS ANNUAL LEGISLATIVE DAY ACTIVITY.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered sent to the House.
H. 4657 -- Reps. Barber and Clyborne: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE CIVITAN INTERNATIONAL AND THE MANY CIVITAN CLUBS IN SOUTH CAROLINA AND THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TO OTHERS AND TO DESIGNATE THE WEEK OF APRIL 12-18, 1992, AS "CIVITAN AWARENESS WEEK".
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.
H. 4665 -- Reps. Gentry, Hendricks, Hodges and Glover: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO FIX 12:00 NOON ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 29, 1992, AS THE TIME FOR ELECTING A SUCCESSOR FOR AN ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT WHOSE TERM EXPIRES JULY 31, 1992; AND TO ELECT SUCCESSORS FOR CERTAIN JUDGES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT WHOSE TERMS EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1992.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.
H. 4597 -- Rep. Fair: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION TO USE THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CHAMBERS WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1992, THROUGH FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4, 1992, TO CONDUCT A YOUTH IN GOVERNMENT PROGRAM.
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Concurrent Resolution. The question being the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Committee on Invitations.
The amendment proposed by the Committee on Invitations (RES4597.01) was adopted as follows:
Amend the resolution, as and if amended, by striking all after the resolving clause and inserting the following:
"That the members of the General Assembly authorize the Young Men's Christian Association to use the Senate and House Chambers Thursday, December 3, 1992, and Friday, December 4, 1992, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. to conduct a Youth in Government program. No charge may be imposed for the use of the chambers by the Young Men's Christian Association for this purpose and such use must be in strict accordance with the policy of the respective chamber."
Amend the title to read as follows:
"TO AUTHORIZE THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION TO USE THE SENATE AND HOUSE CHAMBERS DECEMBER 3 AND 4, 1992, TO CONDUCT A YOUTH IN GOVERNMENT PROGRAM."
Amend title to conform.
There being no further amendments, the Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House with amendments.
The following Bills were carried over:
S. 1437 -- Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 46-49-10, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS PERTAINING TO THE SUPERVISION AND REGULATION OF MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS, SO AS TO DELETE THE DEFINITIONS OF "SUBSIDIARY", "AFFILIATE", "BOOKS AND RECORDS", AND "COSTS"; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 46-49-30 RELATING TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL REGARDING MILK PURCHASING PLANS AND PRODUCERS' MILK BASES AND SECTION 46-49-50 RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENTS TO MAINTAIN RECORDS AND FILE REPORTS FOR PERSONS LICENSED TO SELL MILK.
On motion of Senator THOMAS, the Bill was carried over.
S. 922 -- Senator Setzler: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 40-13-240, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO RENEWAL OF LICENSES FOR COSMETOLOGISTS, SO AS TO CHANGE THE REFERENCE TO AN INDIVIDUAL LICENSE TO AN ACTIVE LICENSE AND TO PROVIDE FOR AN EXEMPTION FROM THE CONTINUING EDUCATION REQUIREMENT FOR COSMETOLOGISTS WITH MORE THAN TWENTY-FIVE YEARS' WORKING EXPERIENCE.
On motion of Senator HOLLAND, the Bill was carried over.
H. 3777 -- Rep. Cromer: A BILL TO AMEND ARTICLE 13, CHAPTER 3, TITLE 47, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO REGULATION OF DANGEROUS DOGS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE ARTICLE TO APPLY TO DANGEROUS ANIMALS, REVISE PENALTIES, AND REQUIRE A SURETY BOND AND LIABILITY INSURANCE; AND TO AMEND SECTION 16-1-10, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CRIMES CLASSIFIED AS FELONIES, SO AS TO INCLUDE THE OFFENSES IN ARTICLE 13.
On motion of Senator HOLLAND, the Bill was carried over.
H. 4125 -- Reps. Wilkins and Harwell: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 14-1-215, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO RETIRED JUSTICES AND JUDGES PRESIDING OR SERVING IN CERTAIN COURTS OF THIS STATE AND THE REQUIREMENT THAT THESE JUSTICES OR JUDGES BE SCREENED, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT IF A JUSTICE OR JUDGE RETIRED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OF HIS THEN CURRENT TERM, NO FURTHER SCREENING OF THAT JUSTICE OR JUDGE IS REQUIRED UNTIL THAT TERM WOULD HAVE EXPIRED IF HE IS TO BE ASSIGNED TO SIT IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OR THE SUPREME COURT.
On motion of Senator HOLLAND, the Bill was carried over.
H. 3874 -- Rep. Snow: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-17-1010, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE STATE'S COASTAL FISHERIES LAWS AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PARTICULAR RESTRICTED AREAS OF BEAUFORT, CHARLESTON, AND COLLETON COUNTIES, SO AS TO DELETE FROM THE RESTRICTED-AREAS LIST THE AREA WITHIN ONE-QUARTER MILE OF THE SHORE OF THE OCEAN BEACHES OF HUNTING ISLAND AND WITHIN ONE-QUARTER MILE OF THE BEACH OF HILTON HEAD FROM BRADDOCK COVE ALONG THE BEACH TO FISH HAUL CREEK IN BEAUFORT COUNTY.
Senator HOLLAND explained the Bill.
On motion of Senator CORK, the Bill was carried over.
S. 1424 -- Senator Reese: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE SOUTH CAROLINA STATE STUDENT LEGISLATURE TO USE THE SENATE CHAMBER AND THE HOUSE CHAMBER OCTOBER 22-24, 1992, AND THE BLATT BUILDING OCTOBER 21 THROUGH OCTOBER 22, 1992, FOR ITS ANNUAL MEETING.
On motion of Senator GIESE, the Resolution was carried over.
S. 1443 -- Senators Pope, Martin, Lourie and McConnell: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO FIX 12:00 NOON ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 29, 1992, AS THE TIME FOR ELECTING A SUCCESSOR FOR AN ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT WHOSE TERM EXPIRES JULY 31, 1992; AND TO ELECT SUCCESSORS FOR CERTAIN JUDGES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT WHOSE TERMS EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1992.
On motion of Senator POPE, the Resolution was carried over.
S. 1255 -- Senators Macaulay, Peeler and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 44-75-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS IN THE ATHLETIC TRAINERS' ACT OF SOUTH CAROLINA, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF "ATHLETIC TRAINER"; TO AMEND SECTION 44-75-50 RELATING TO REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTIFICATION OF AN ATHLETIC TRAINER, SO AS TO CLARIFY THESE REQUIREMENTS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 44-75-100, RELATING TO CERTAIN EDUCATIONAL OR ATHLETIC ORGANIZATION EMPLOYMENT THAT CONSTITUTES EMPLOYMENT AS AN ATHLETIC TRAINER, SO AS TO INCLUDE EMPLOYMENT ON A CONTRACTUAL BASIS AND EMPLOYMENT WITH A HOSPITAL OR REHABILITATION CENTER AS CONSTITUTING EMPLOYMENT AS AN ATHLETIC TRAINER.
On motion of Senator GIESE, the Bill was carried over.
THE CALL OF THE UNCONTESTED CALENDAR HAVING BEEN COMPLETED, THE SENATE PROCEEDED TO A CONSIDERATION OF H. 3044 (GENERAL APPROPRIATION BILL).
The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the third reading of the Bill.
On motion of Senator DRUMMOND, with unanimous consent, Amendment No. 144 (FIN3044.100), proposed by the Senate Finance Committee was taken up for immediate consideration and adopted:
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 5, line 30 by striking /9,524,793/ and inserting therein /58,865,651/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 5, line 34 by striking /5,812,781/ and inserting therein /6,312,781/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 16 by striking /(23,722,194)/ and inserting therein /(8,346,133)/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 35 by striking /(2,322,301)/ and inserting therein /1,677,699/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 37 by striking /(5,481,100)/ and inserting therein /9,518,900/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 7, line 2 by striking /(336,481)/ and inserting therein /963,519/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 7, line 5 by striking /(854,518)/ and inserting therein /145,482/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 8, line 7 by striking /(13,430)/ and inserting therein /166,570/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 9, line 10, by striking /14,703,744/ and inserting therein /12,703,744/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 9, line 14, by striking /23,087,308/ and inserting therein /112,235,660/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 9, line 17 by striking /2,857,557/ and inserting therein /4,590,557/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, Page 9, by adding an appropriately numbered SECTION to read:
/SECTION __. Education Improvement Act fund appropriations as contained in Part I, Section 28 of Act 171 of 1991 are adjusted for Fiscal Year 1992-93 as follows:
ALLOC EIA - TEACHER SALARIES 4,590,557
TOTAL EIA 4,590,557 /.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 2, page 11, line 26, paragraph 15.8 by striking /$500,000/ and inserting therein /$1,000,000/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 22, after line 26, by adding a new proviso to read:
/14. It is the intent of the General Assembly that the Budget and Control Board develop a State Health Plan for calendar year 1993 that will maintain the same benefits as in the 1992 plan without increasing the rates to plan participants./.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 22, after line 26, by adding a new proviso to read:
/14.__ (Bonus Payment) Effective on the first pay day after October 31, 1992, each state employee, local health provider at the Department of Mental Retardation, the S. C. Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, and the Commission on Aging, and teacher as defined by the Department of Education codes 03 through 11, code 18, codes 36 through 40 and code 85 who has been in continuous state service since September 1, 1992, is eligible to receive a one-time lump-sum payment from the funds appropriated under DIVISION III, B&C BOARD - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS. Effective on the date of the lump-sum payment, a total of $37,770,858 shall be distributed to State, Federal, and Other Funded state employees, local health providers, and teachers described in this paragraph. This payment is not a part of the person's base salary and is not earnable compensation for purposes of employer or employee contributions to respective retirement systems. Legislative and Judicial employees, including permanent part-time employees, must receive the above one-time lump-sum payment. The lump-sum payment to a person, who was employed on September 1, 1992, and who died after September 1, 1992 but before October 31, 1992, and who would have been entitled under this provision had the person remained in continuous state service until October 31, 1992, must be paid to his estate if open, and to the residual heirs or beneficiaries of the person's estate if the estate has been closed. The payment required by this provision must be made by the State Treasurer upon warrant of the Comptroller General from the state general fund in the manner the Budget and Control Board shall direct within thirty days after the estate, heirs, or beneficiaries notify the Division of Human Resource Management of the Budget and Control Board of the person or entity to whom the payment should be made. The Division may require proof of proper inheritance as it considers necessary./.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, Page 23, Paragraph 28.151, by striking the paragraph in its entirety and inserting therein:
/28.151 Notwithstanding provisos 28.13 and 28.38, of the funds appropriated to the Department of Education, a minimum of $816,951,516 shall be allocated to the Education Finance Act for direct aid to school districts. The base student cost for Fiscal Year 1992-93 is determined to be $1,536. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the average teacher salary shall be $28,356 for the current fiscal year./.
Amend title and totals to conform.
Senator DRUMMOND explained the amendment.
Senator DRUMMOND moved that the amendment be adopted.
Senator HOLLAND spoke on the amendment.
Senator MOORE made a Parliamentary Inquiry as to whether or not any further amendments would be in order to be received by the desk.
Senator FIELDING spoke on the Inquiry.
Senator LOURIE spoke on the Inquiry.
Senator SETZLER spoke on the Inquiry.
The PRESIDENT stated that in accordance with the Motion made by Senator SETZLER on Monday, April 6, 1992, that "any amendments which spent or reallocated monies" would be accepted by the desk.
Senator MOORE asked unanimous consent to make a motion that leave be granted for further amendments to be placed on the desk pertaining to the expenditure or allocation of existing revenue funds even if Amendment No. 144 were adopted.
There was no objection.
Senator J. VERNE SMITH made a Parliamentary Inquiry as to whether or not the revenue pertains to existing revenue or additional revenue prognostications.
The PRESIDENT stated that amendments should be drawn to existing revenue.
Senator LOURIE made a Parliamentary Inquiry as to whether or not unanimous consent was required to allow further amendments to be placed on the desk.
Senator LOURIE raised a Point of Order under Rule 18 that the amendment could be divided.
The PRESIDENT sustained the Point of Order.
Senator SETZLER asked unanimous consent to make a motion that the desk be granted leave to conform all amendments on the desk to be in compliance with Amendment No. 144.
The question then was the adoption of Amendment No. 144.
At 1:30 P.M., Senator STILWELL made a motion that the Senate recede for one hour.
At 1:35 P.M., Senator BRYAN asked unanimous consent to make a motion to adopt Amendment No. 144 and that the Senate stand in recess for one hour.
At 1:40 P.M., Senator MOORE asked unanimous consent to make a motion to adopt Amendment No. 144 and that the Senate stand in recess until 2:45 P.M., during which time the amendments on the desk and those amendments being drawn would be conformed to Amendment No. 144.
Senator WILLIAMS spoke on the motion.
Senator LOURIE objected.
Senator LOURIE raised a Point of Order that Amendment No. 144 and the Bill were out of order inasmuch as they were violative of subsection (b) of Section 59-20-50 of the S. C. Code of Laws, 1976, as amended.
Senator SHEALY spoke on the Point of Order.
Senator THOMAS raised a Point of Order that the Point of Order raised by Senator LOURIE should have been raised prior to second reading and, therefore, came too late.
The PRESIDENT overruled the Point of Order.
Senator LOURIE spoke on the Point of Order.
Senator THOMAS spoke on the Point of Order raised by Senator LOURIE.
Senator J. VERNE SMITH spoke on the Point of Order raised by Senator LOURIE.
Senator PATTERSON spoke on the Point of Order raised by Senator LOURIE.
Senator McCONNELL spoke on the Point of Order raised by Senator LOURIE.
Senator DRUMMOND spoke on the Point of Order raised by Senator LOURIE.
Senator BRYAN spoke on the Point of Order raised by Senator LOURIE.
The PRESIDENT overruled the Point of Order raised by Senator LOURIE.
The question then was the unanimous consent request that the Senate adopt Amendment No. 144, that the Senate would stand in recess for one hour, and that the amendments on the desk, and those being drawn, would be conformed to Amendment No. 144.
Senator J. VERNE SMITH made a Parliamentary Inquiry as to whether or not the adoption of Amendment No. 144 requires unanimous consent.
The PRESIDENT stated that the motion did not require unanimous consent.
Senator J. VERNE SMITH moved that Amendment No. 144 be adopted.
Senator MOORE spoke on the motion.
Senator J. VERNE SMITH withdrew the motion.
At 2:15 P.M., Senator MOORE asked unanimous consent to make a motion that Amendment No. 144 be adopted and that all amendments on the desk and those being drawn would be conformed to the Bill as then amended, and that the Senate would stand in recess for one hour.
Amendment No. 144 was adopted.
Senator LOURIE requested that he be recorded as voting "no" on the adoption of Amendment No. 144.
Debate was interrupted by recess.
At 2:15 P.M., on motion of Senator MOORE, the Senate receded from business not to exceed one hour.
The Senate reassembled at 3:25 P.M. and was called to order by the PRESIDENT.
Senator SETZLER made the point that a quorum was not present. It was ascertained that a quorum was not present.
In the absence of a quorum, Senator SETZLER moved under Rule 3b to send for the absentee members.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Bryan Cork Drummond
Giese Helmly Leventis
Lourie O'Dell Setzler
Stilwell Thomas Wilson
Hinson Martschink McConnell
Moore Mullinax Passailaigue Reese Rose Saleeby
Shealy Smith, N.W. Williams
The PRESIDENT voted "aye".
At 3:30 P.M., Rule 3b was invoked.
The Senate resumed consideration of the Bill. The question being the third reading of the Bill.
On motion of Senator MACAULAY, with unanimous consent, Amendment No. 147A (FIN3044.202), proposed by Senator MOORE was taken up for immediate consideration:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 5, line 30 by striking /58,865,651/ and inserting therein /41,741,793/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 16 by striking /(8,346,133)/ and inserting therein /18,444,867/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 33 by striking /(3,903,109)/ and inserting therein /(2,859,109)/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 34 by striking /(8,456,085)/ and inserting therein /(7,681,085)/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 37 by striking /9,518,900/ and inserting therein /(1,967,242)/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 23, after line 35 by adding a new proviso to read:
/14.__. (Compensation - BPI Distribution) The Budget and Control Board shall develop a plan for the distribution of $12,520,000 of the funds appropriated in DIVISION III, B&C BOARD - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS so as to carry out the intent of the General Assembly.
1. Base pay increases shall not be awarded to employees in amounts having the effect of raising base salaries above the new adjusted maximum of their pay ranges.
2. Longevity payments shall not be considered a part of the base salary of the employee for the purpose of awarding a base pay increase.
3. The amounts appropriated to the Budget and Control Board for employee pay increases must be allocated by the Board to various state agencies to provide pay increases for employees in accordance with the following plan:
A. Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year, the compensation of classified employees shall be increased by one percent.
B. Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year, with respect to unclassified employees not elsewhere covered in this Act, each agency is authorized to allot the total funds for compensation increases among individual employees without uniformity. The funds provided for compensation increases for any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph are based on an annual average one percent increase. All of the salaries are subject to the provisions of Section 129.9 of Part I of Act 171 of 1991 and Division of Human Resource Management approval must be obtained before any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph may be granted an annual pay increase in excess of the guidelines established by the Budget and Control Board. Any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph shall not be eligible for the compensation increases provided in Paragraphs A and C.
C. Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year, with respect to unclassified executive compensation system employees, each agency is authorized to allot the total funds for compensation increases among individual employees without uniformity. The funds provided for compensation increases for any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph are based on an annual average one percent increase. Division of Human Resource Management approval must be obtained before any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph may be granted an annual pay increase in excess of the guidelines established by the Budget and Control Board. Any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph shall not be eligible for the compensation increases provided in Paragraphs A and B.
4. Statewide elected officials, constitutional officers, temporary positions, whether full or part-time, and agency heads, shall not be eligible for any compensation increases as provided in this Act unless otherwise specified in this Act.
5. The Agency Head Salary Commission shall recommend to the Budget and Control Board salary increases for agency heads of 0% to 2%. No agency head shall be paid less than the minimum of the pay range nor receive an increase that would have the effect of raising the salary above the maximum of the pay range. Funding shall be provided for an amount equivalent to the base pay increase for all employees. Any remaining increases recommended by the Agency Head Salary Commission shall be funded from the individual agency budget. All increases shall be effective on or after October 1 of the current fiscal year.
6. Agency chief executive officers not reviewed by the Agency Head Salary Commission shall receive an annual increase of one percent effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year, unless otherwise provided in this Act.
7. The Chief Justice and other judicial officers as prescribed by law shall receive an annual increase of one percent effective on the first pay date occurring on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year./
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 22, starting on line 39, by striking the paragraph denoted by "14.__. (Bonus Payment)" in its entirety and inserting therein:
/14.__. (Bonus Payment) Effective on the first pay day after October 31, 1992, each state employee, local health provider at the Department of Mental Retardation, the S. C. Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, and the Commission on Aging who has been in continuous state service since September 1, 1992, is eligible to receive a one-time lump-sum payment from the funds appropriated under DIVISION III, B&C BOARD - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS. Effective on the date of the lump-sum payment, a total of $8,127,000 shall be distributed to State, Federal, and Other Funded state employees and local health providers described in this paragraph. This payment is not a part of the person's base salary and is not earnable compensation for purposes of employer or employee contributions to respective retirement systems. Legislative and Judicial employees, including permanent part-time employees, must receive the above one-time lump-sum payment. The lump-sum payment to a person, who was employed on September 1, 1992, and who died after September 1, 1992 but before October 31, 1992, and who would have been entitled under this provision had the person remained in continuous state service until October 31, 1992, must be paid to his estate if open, and to the residual heirs or beneficiaries of the person's estate if the estate has been closed. The payment required by this provision must be made by the State Treasurer upon warrant of the Comptroller General from the state general fund in the manner the Budget and Control Board shall direct within thirty days after the estate, heirs, or beneficiaries notify the Division of Human Resource Management of the Budget and Control Board of the person or entity to whom the payment should be made. The Division may require proof of proper inheritance as it considers necessary./.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, Page 24, Paragraph 28.151, by striking the paragraph in its entirety and inserting therein:
/28.151 Notwithstanding provisos 28.13 and 28.38, of the funds appropriated to the Department of Education, a minimum of $838,641,078 shall be allocated to the Education Finance Act for direct aid to school districts. The base student cost for Fiscal Year 1992-93 is determined to be $1,578 which includes a 1% inflation factor. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the average teacher salary shall be $28,640 for the current fiscal year./.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, Page 25, Line 40, by adding the following paragraph to read:
/28.___ Notwithstanding any other provision of law and notwithstanding proviso 28.143, of the funds appropriated to the Campus Incentive Program, for fiscal year 1992-93 only, $10,500,000 shall be allocated to classroom teachers as defined by Department of Education position codes 03 through 11, 85, 18, 36 through 40, on the first pay day after October 31, 1992. These funds shall be used in the calculation of the South Carolina average teacher salary. Of the remaining funds, up to $3,462,250 shall be allocated to faculty members and other school personnel such as principals, assistant principals, and vocational education directors on the first pay day after October 31, 1992, with no employee receiving more than two hundred fifty dollars as determined by State Board of Education guidelines. This pay is not a part of the base salary of these employees and is not earnable compensation for purposes of employer or employee contributions to respective retirement system. The remaining funds shall be used to implement the Campus Incentive Program./
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 25, line 40, by adding the following paragraph to read:
/28. Of the funds appropriated herein, $600,000 shall be allocated to school bus drivers on the first pay period after October 31, 1992 according to guidelines of the State Board of Education. Furthermore, of the funds appropriated herein, a minimum of $3,244,000 shall be used to purchase new school buses./
Amend title and totals to conform.
Senator MOORE argued in favor of the adoption of the amendment and Senator DRUMMOND argued contra.
Senator WASHINGTON spoke on the amendment.
At 4:30 P.M., Senator LEVENTIS assumed the Chair.
Senator WASHINGTON continued speaking on the amendment.
Senator J. VERNE SMITH argued contra to the adoption of the amendment.
Senator GIESE argued contra to the adoption of the amendment.
At 4:42 P.M., Senator LEATHERMAN moved that a call of the Senate be made. The following Senators answered the call:
Bryan Carmichael Cork
Courson Courtney Drummond
Fielding Giese Gilbert
Hayes, R.W. Helmly Hinson
Holland Leatherman Leventis
Lourie Macaulay Martschink
Matthews McConnell McGill
Moore Mullinax O'Dell
Passailaigue Patterson Peeler
Pope Reese Rose
Russell Saleeby Setzler
Shealy Smith, J.V. Smith, N.W.
Stilwell Thomas Washington
Williams Wilson
The Senate resumed.
Senator MOORE spoke on the amendment.
At 4:57 P.M., the PRESIDENT assumed the Chair.
Senator MOORE continued speaking on the amendment.
Senator MOORE moved that the amendment be adopted.
Senator LEVENTIS argued contra to the adoption of the amendment.
Senator LEVENTIS moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Bryan Cork Courtney
Drummond Giese Hayes, R.W.
Helmly Hinson Leatherman
Leventis Macaulay McConnell
Pope Rose Setzler
Shealy Smith, J.V. Stilwell
Thomas Wilson
Carmichael Courson Fielding
Gilbert Lourie Martschink
Matthews McGill Moore
Mullinax O'Dell Passailaigue
Patterson Reese Russell
Saleeby Smith, N.W. Washington
Williams
The following Senator abstained from voting:
Peeler
The amendment was laid on the table.
Senator THOMAS proposed the following Amendment No. 145A (RES3044.107), which was tabled:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 5, line 30, by striking /58,865,651/ and inserting:
/22,044,793/
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 16, by striking /(8,346,133) and inserting:
/15,590,264/
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 24, line 11, by striking /$816,915,516/ and inserting:
/$838,641,078/
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 24, line 14, by striking /$1,536/ and inserting:
/$1,578/
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 24, line 16, by striking /$28,356/ and inserting:
/$28,640/
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 23, after line 34, by adding a new proviso to read:
/14. The Budget and Control Board shall develop a plan for the distribution of $12,520,000 of the funds appropriated in DIVISION III, B&C BOARD - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS so as to carry out the intent of the General Assembly.
1. Base pay increases shall not be awarded to employees in amounts having the effect of raising base salaries above the new adjusted maximum of their pay ranges.
2. Longevity payments shall not be considered a party of the base salary of the employee for the purpose of awarding a base pay increase.
3. The amounts appropriated to the Budget and Control Board for employee pay increase must be allocated by the Board to various state agencies to provide pay increases for employees in accordance with the following plan:
A. Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year, the compensation of classified employees shall be increased by 1%.
B. Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year, with respect to unclassified employees not elsewhere covered in this Act, each agency is authorized to allot the total funds for compensation increases among individual employees without uniformity. The funds provided for compensation increases for any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph are based on an annual average 1% increase. All of the salaries are subject to the provisions of Section 129.9 of Part I of Act 171 of 1991 and Division of Human Resource Management approval must be obtained before any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph may be granted an annual pay increase in excess of the guidelines established by the Budget and Control Boar. Any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph shall not be eligible for the compensation increases provided in Paragraphs A and C.
C. Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year, with respect to unclassified executive compensation system employees, each agency is authorized to allot the total funds for compensation increases among individual employees without uniformity. The funds provided for compensation increases for any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph are based on an annual average 1% increase. Division of Human Resource Management approval must be obtained before any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph may be granted an annual pay increase in excess of the guidelines established by the Budget and Control Board. Any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph shall not be eligible for the compensation increases provided in Paragraphs A and B.
4. Statewide elected officials, constitutional officers, temporary positions, whether full or part-time, and agency heads, shall not be eligible for any compensation increases as provided in this Act unless otherwise specified in this Act.
5. The Chief Justice and other judicial officers as prescribed by law shall receive an annual increase of 1% effective on the first pay date occurring on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Senator THOMAS argued in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
Senator GIESE spoke on the amendment.
Senator THOMAS explained the amendment.
Senator BRYAN argued contra to the adoption of the amendment.
Senator BRYAN moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Bryan Carmichael Cork
Courtney Drummond Fielding
Giese Hayes, R.W. Helmly
Hinson Leatherman Leventis
Macaulay McConnell McGill
Moore Mullinax O'Dell
Patterson Pope Shealy
Smith, J.V. Smith, N.W. Stilwell
Washington Williams
Courson Gilbert Lourie
Martschink Matthews Passailaigue
Peeler Reese Rose
Russell Saleeby Setzler
Thomas Wilson
The amendment was laid on the table.
Senator GIESE proposed the following Amendment No. 146A (FIN3044.59), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 22, beginning on line 39, by striking the entire paragraph and inserting therein:
/14. Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year the annual compensation of each state employee, local health provider at the Department of Mental Retardation, the S.C. Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, and the Commission on Aging, and teacher as defined by the Department of Education codes 03 through 11, code 18, codes 36 through 40 and code 85 shall be increased by $300.
Amend title and totals to conform.
Senator GIESE argued in favor of the adoption of the amendment and Senators SETZLER and PASSAILAIGUE argued contra.
Senator GIESE moved that the amendment be adopted.
Senator PASSAILAIGUE moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Cork Courson Fielding
Gilbert Helmly Macaulay
Moore Mullinax Passailaigue
Patterson Russell Saleeby
Setzler Shealy Thomas
Washington Williams Wilson
Bryan Carmichael Courtney
Drummond Giese Hayes, R.W.
Hinson Leatherman Leventis
Martschink McConnell McGill
O'Dell Peeler Pope
Reese Rose Smith, J.V.
Smith, N.W. Stilwell
The Senate refused to table the amendment. The question then was the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
The amendment to put into the base was represented to ensure that the bonus would be a salary increase. There was no explanation that I recall that this would abandon the EFA. Thus, I voted for it.
The amendment was adopted.
At 4:50 P.M., Senator POPE requested and was granted a leave of absence from 5:00-9:00 P.M. tonight.
At 4:50 P.M., Senator HOLLAND requested and was granted a leave of absence from 5:00-8:00 P.M. tonight.
At 5:30 P.M., on motion of Senator BRYAN, Senator MARTIN was granted a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.
At 5:30 P.M., Senator WILLIAMS requested and was granted a leave of absence from 6:00-10:00 P.M. tonight.
Senator PASSAILAIGUE proposed the following Amendment No. 149 (RES3044.116), which was ruled out of order:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, in Section 1 of Division III, page 4, line 32, by striking /2,009,665/ and inserting /(537,562)/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, in Section 1 of Division III, page 5, line 4, by striking /1,034,092/ and inserting /(194,807)/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, in Section 1, Division III, page 9, line 10, by striking /12,703,744/ and inserting /12,010,091/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, Division IV, page 10, by striking lines 16 through 20.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, Division IV, page 27, by striking lines 27 through 30.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, Division IV, page 32, by striking lines 7 through 22.
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Senator PASSAILAIGUE argued in favor of the adoption of the amendment and Senator WILLIAMS argued contra.
Senator WILLIAMS moved to lay the amendment on the table.
A roll call vote was requested.
Senator LOURIE raised a Point of Order that the amendment was out of order inasmuch as the proper course of action would be to reconsider the vote whereby Amendment No. 18B had been adopted.
Senators LEATHERMAN and GIESE spoke on the Point of Order.
The PRESIDENT sustained the Point of Order.
Senators GILBERT and McGILL proposed the following Amendment No. 155 (GILBERT.MKT), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, DIVISION 4, SECTION 3, Line 37, by adding
/124.___ Of the "C" funds allocated to Marion County, one-hundred thousand dollars must be expended for a drainage project and four thousand eight hundred dollars must be expended for a pavement project for the City of Mullins. The funds must be expended under the Local Paving Projects Criteria established by Marion County. The City of Mullins shall be the administrator of these funds./
Amend title and totals to conform.
Senator GILBERT explained the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
Senator ROBERT W. HAYES, JR., proposed the following Amendment No. 156A (RES3044.117), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 22, beginning on line 39, by striking the entire paragraph added by Amendment No. 146A, and inserting therein:
/14. Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year the annual compensation of each state employee, local health provider at the Department of Mental Retardation, the S.C. Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, and the Commission on Aging, and teacher as defined by the Department of Education codes 01 through 99 shall be increased by $293./
Amend title to conform.
Senator ROBERT W. HAYES, JR. argued in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
Senator ROBERT W. HAYES, JR. moved that the amendment be adopted.
The amendment was adopted.
Senators MULLINAX and MOORE proposed the following Amendment No. 157 (FIN3044.203), which was later withdrawn:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 5, line 30 by striking /58,865,651/ and inserting therein /41,741,793/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 16 by striking /(8,346,133)/ and inserting therein /17,694,867/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 34 by striking /(8,456,085)/ and inserting therein /(7,956,085)/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 37 by striking /9,518,900/ and inserting therein /101,758/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 23, after line 35 by adding a new proviso to read:
/14.__. (Compensation - BPI Distribution) The Budget and Control Board shall develop a plan for the distribution of $12,520,000 of the funds appropriated in DIVISION III, B&C BOARD - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS so as to carry out the intent of the General Assembly.
1. Base pay increases shall not be awarded to employees in amounts having the effect of raising base salaries above the new adjusted maximum of their pay ranges.
2. Longevity payments shall not be considered a part of the base salary of the employee for the purpose of awarding a base pay increase.
3. The amounts appropriated to the Budget and Control Board for employee pay increases must be allocated by the Board to various state agencies to provide pay increases for employees in accordance with the following plan:
A. Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year, the compensation of classified employees shall be increased by one percent.
B. Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year, with respect to unclassified employees not elsewhere covered in this Act, each agency is authorized to allot the total funds for compensation increases among individual employees without uniformity. The funds provided for compensation increases for any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph are based on an annual average one percent increase. All of the salaries are subject to the provisions of Section 129.9 of Part I of Act 171 of 1991 and Division of Human Resource Management approval must be obtained before any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph may be granted an annual pay increase in excess of the guidelines established by the Budget and Control Board. Any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph shall not be eligible for the compensation increases provided in Paragraphs A and C.
C. Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year, with respect to unclassified executive compensation system employees, each agency is authorized to allot the total funds for compensation increases among individual employees without uniformity. The funds provided for compensation increases for any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph are based on an annual average one percent increase. Division of Human Resource Management approval must be obtained before any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph may be granted an annual pay increase in excess of the guidelines established by the Budget and Control Board. Any employees subject to the provisions of this paragraph shall not be eligible for the compensation increases provided in Paragraphs A and B.
4. Statewide elected officials, constitutional officers, temporary positions, whether full or part-time, and agency heads, shall not be eligible for any compensation increases as provided in this Act unless otherwise specified in this Act.
5. The Agency Head Salary Commission shall recommend to the Budget and Control Board salary increases for agency heads of 0% to 2%. No agency head shall be paid less than the minimum of the pay range nor receive an increase that would have the effect of raising the salary above the maximum of the pay range. Funding shall be provided for an amount equivalent to the base pay increase for all employees. Any remaining increases recommended by the Agency Head Salary Commission shall be funded from the individual agency budget. All increases shall be effective on or after October 1 of the current fiscal year.
6. Agency chief executive officers not reviewed by the Agency Head Salary Commission shall receive an annual increase of one percent effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year, unless otherwise provided in this Act.
7. The Chief Justice and other judicial officers as prescribed by law shall receive an annual increase of one percent effective on the first pay date occurring on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year./
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 22, starting on line 39, by striking the paragraph denoted by "14.__. (Bonus Payment)" in its entirety and inserting therein:
/14.__. (Bonus Payment) Effective on the first pay day after October 31, 1992, each state employee, local health provider at the Department of Mental Retardation, the S. C. Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, and the Commission on Aging who has been in continuous state service since September 1, 1992, is eligible to receive a one-time lump-sum payment from the funds appropriated under DIVISION III, B&C BOARD - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS. Effective on the date of the lump-sum payment, a total of $8,127,000 shall be distributed to State, Federal, and Other Funded state employees and local health providers described in this paragraph. This payment is not a part of the person's base salary and is not earnable compensation for purposes of employer or employee contributions to respective retirement systems. Legislative and Judicial employees, including permanent part-time employees, must receive the above one-time lump-sum payment. The lump-sum payment to a person, who was employed on September 1, 1992, and who died after September 1, 1992 but before October 31, 1992, and who would have been entitled under this provision had the person remained in continuous state service until October 31, 1992, must be paid to his estate if open, and to the residual heirs or beneficiaries of the person's estate if the estate has been closed. The payment required by this provision must be made by the State Treasurer upon warrant of the Comptroller General from the state general fund in the manner the Budget and Control Board shall direct within thirty days after the estate, heirs, or beneficiaries notify the Division of Human Resource Management of the Budget and Control Board of the person or entity to whom the payment should be made. The Division may require proof of proper inheritance as it considers necessary./.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, Page 24, Paragraph 28.151, by striking the paragraph in its entirety and inserting therein:
/28.151 Notwithstanding provisos 28.13 and 28.38, of the funds appropriated to the Department of Education, a minimum of $838,641,078 shall be allocated to the Education Finance Act for direct aid to school districts. The base student cost for Fiscal Year 1992-93 is determined to be $1,578 which includes a 1% inflation factor. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the average teacher salary shall be $28,640 for the current fiscal year./.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, Page 25, Line 40, by adding the following paragraph to read:
/28.___ Notwithstanding any other provision of law and notwithstanding proviso 28.143, of the funds appropriated to the Campus Incentive Program, for fiscal year 1992-93 only, $10,500,000 shall be allocated to classroom teachers as defined by Department of Education position codes 03 through 11, 85, 18, 36 through 40, on the first pay day after October 31, 1992. These funds shall be used in the calculation of the South Carolina average teacher salary. Of the remaining funds, up to $3,462,250 shall be allocated to faculty members and other school personnel such as principals, assistant principals, and vocational education directors on the first pay day after October 31, 1992, with no employee receiving more than two hundred fifty dollars as determined by State Board of Education guidelines. This pay is not a part of the base salary of these employees and is not earnable compensation for purposes of employer or employee contributions to respective retirement system. The remaining funds shall be used to implement the Campus Incentive Program./
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 25, line 40, by adding the following paragraph to read:
/28. Of the funds appropriated herein, $600,000 shall be allocated to school bus drivers on the first pay period after October 31, 1992 according to guidelines of the State Board of Education. Furthermore, of the funds appropriated herein, a minimum of $3,244,000 shall be used to purchase new school buses./
Amend title and totals to conform.
Senator MULLINAX argued in favor of the adoption of the amendment and Senator J. VERNE SMITH argued contra.
Senator MULLINAX moved that the amendment be adopted.
Senator J. VERNE SMITH moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Bryan Cork Drummond
Giese Hayes, R.W. Helmly
Hinson Leatherman Leventis
Macaulay Martschink McConnell
Rose Shealy Smith, J.V.
Thomas
Carmichael Courson Courtney
Fielding Gilbert Lourie
Matthews McGill Moore
Mullinax O'Dell Passailaigue
Patterson Peeler Reese
Russell Saleeby Setzler
Smith, N.W. Stilwell Washington
Wilson
The Senate refused to table the amendment. The question then was the adoption of the amendment.
Senator LEVENTIS argued contra to the adoption of the amendment.
Senator LEVENTIS moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Bryan Cork Courtney
Drummond Giese Hayes, R.W.
Helmly Hinson Leatherman
Leventis Macaulay Martschink
McConnell Peeler Rose
Shealy Smith, J.V. Thomas
Carmichael Courson Fielding
Gilbert Holland Lourie
Matthews McGill Moore
Mullinax O'Dell Passailaigue
Patterson Reese Russell
Saleeby Setzler Smith, N.W.
Stilwell Washington Wilson
The Senate refused to table the amendment. The question then was the adoption of the amendment.
We have voted against across-the-board raises of 1% in Amendment No. 157 because it takes about $10 million from DSS and this means a reduction in AFDC payments and residential treatment funds. If we could spare this $10 million, it should be spread among the unfunded health programs, such as the medically needy, swing bed programs, physician visits, etc., before giving any more raises. We have already voted pay raises of three hundred dollars each for every employee. We cannot justify taking from people who cannot help themselves just to up a pay raise for a few.
Senator MACAULAY argued in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
At 7:25 P.M., on motion of Senator MOORE, with unanimous consent, Senator MACAULAY retaining the floor, the Senate receded from business not to exceed ten minutes.
At 9:25 P.M., the Senate resumed.
Senator MACAULAY argued in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
Senator J. VERNE SMITH spoke on Amendment No. 157.
On motion of Senator STILWELL, with unanimous consent, Amendment No. 158 (RES3044.118), proposed by Senators STILWELL, PASSAILAIGUE, J. VERNE SMITH and LEATHERMAN, was taken up for immediate consideration and adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 21, line 14, by adding a new proviso to read:
/3. The provisions of Section 2-1-185 of the 1976 Code are suspended for Fiscal Year 1992-93./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Senator DRUMMOND spoke on Amendment No. 157.
Senator MOORE spoke on the amendment.
Senator MOORE asked unanimous consent to make a motion that Amendment No. 175 (FIN3044.300) proposed by Senators MULLINAX and MOORE, be taken up out of order.
There was no objection.
Senators MULLINAX and MOORE proposed the following Amendment No. 175 (FIN3044.300):
Amend the bill, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 5, line 30 by striking /58,865,651/ and inserting therein /31,262,651/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 16 by striking /(8,346,133)/ and inserting therein /20,297,867/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 34 by striking /(8,456,085)/ and inserting therein /(8,206,085)/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION III, SECTION 1, page 6, line 37 by striking /9,518,900/ and inserting therein /8,227,900/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 22, starting on line 39, by striking the paragraph denoted by "14.__. (Bonus Payment)" in its entirety and inserting therein:
/14.__. (Compensation Increase) Effective on the first pay date which occurs on or after July 1 of the current fiscal year the annual compensation of each state employee and local health provider at the Department of Mental Retardation, the S. C. Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, and the Commission on Aging shall be increased by an amount determined by dividing the number of state funded FTE employees and local providers into $10,167,858. Of the amount appropriated under Division III, Section 1, B&C Board - Employee Benefits $10,167,858 shall be used for compensation increases for state funded FTE employees and local providers. The compensation of non-state funded FTE employees and local providers shall be increased by the amount determined in this paragraph in the same ratio that the base salary is paid. /.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, Page 24, Paragraph 28.151, by striking the paragraph in its entirety and inserting therein:
/28.151 Notwithstanding provisos 28.13 and 28.38, of the funds appropriated to the Department of Education, a minimum of $838,641,078 shall be allocated to the Education Finance Act for direct aid to school districts. The base student cost for Fiscal Year 1992-93 is determined to be $1,578 which includes a 1% inflation factor. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the average teacher salary shall be $28,640 for the current fiscal year./.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 25, line 40, by adding the following paragraph to read:
/28. Of the funds appropriated herein, school bus drivers shall receive a 1% base pay increase./
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, DIVISION IV, SECTION 3, page 46, line 32, by adding the following paragraph to read:
/SECTION __ Amend further by conforming all items and sections as may be required pursuant to the adoption of this amendment./.
Amend title and totals to conform.
Senator MOORE asked unanimous consent that if Amendment No. 175 was adopted, that all other amendments be withdrawn.
There was no objection.
Senator HOLLAND spoke on the amendment.
At 10:26 P.M., Senator HOLLAND moved that the Senate stand adjourned.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Bryan Cork Courson
Giese Hinson Holland
Leatherman Martschink McConnell
Peeler Rose Russell
Shealy Smith, N.W. Wilson
Carmichael Courtney Drummond
Fielding Gilbert Hayes, R.W.
Helmly Leventis Lourie
Macaulay Matthews McGill
Moore Mullinax O'Dell
Passailaigue Patterson Reese
Saleeby Setzler Smith, J.V.
Stilwell Thomas Washington
The Senate refused to adjourn.
Senator BRYAN spoke on the amendment.
Senator LEVENTIS spoke on the amendment.
Senator SETZLER spoke on the amendment.
Senator PASSAILAIGUE spoke on the amendment.
Senator MOORE moved that the amendment be adopted.
Senator LEVENTIS moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Bryan Cork Courson
Courtney Drummond Hinson
Leatherman Leventis McConnell
McGill Peeler Rose
Russell Shealy Smith, J.V.
Wilson
Carmichael Fielding Giese
Gilbert Hayes, R.W. Helmly
Holland Lourie Macaulay
Martschink Matthews Moore
Mullinax O'Dell Passailaigue
Patterson Reese Saleeby
Setzler Smith, N.W. Stilwell
Thomas Washington
The Senate refused to table the amendment. The question then was the adoption of the amendment.
Senator LEVENTIS argued contra to the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
Senators McCONNELL and ROSE desired to be recorded as voting against the adoption of the amendment.
Amendment Nos. 94A, 96, 150, 151A and 152, which had been previously carried over, were withdrawn.
There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the third time, passed and ordered returned to the House of Representatives with amendments.
Senator MITCHELL desired to be recorded as voting in favor of the third reading of the Bill.
Senators PASSAILAIGUE, McCONNELL and ROSE desired to be recorded as voting against the third reading of the Bill.
The economic forecast indicates that we are $100 million short of reaching our revised budget estimate of revenue for the current fiscal year. This means that this budget we are voting on has a built-in shortfall deficit for next year of $100 million.
While the debate centers on pay raises, needs in health care and some human service programs go wanting (such as swing beds, the medically needy, school buses, AFDC match and other things). Yet, the Senate increased appropriations for the courts and solicitors as a first priority.
The Barnwell amendment debate proved that the important concern was not protecting the compact and having off-site disposal, but rather having a revenue source. This amendment should have been handled in free standing legislation.
There were some legitimate revenue raising proposals such as elective licensing of Sunday sales of beer and wine. Instead there was a continued assault for regressive tax increases on an already depressed economy to fund acknowledged needs.
Even though the Finance Committee did an admirable job in holding the line on spending, there was not enough cut out of the base to cover the pressing needs.
We believe this budget is a prelude to further across the board cuts which will ignore priorities next year. Thus, we had no choice but to vote "no" on the bill as amended. If our revenues are to match our spending, there must be restraint and prioritization.
I voted against the appropriation bill because I believe we do not have the money for this year and will not have it next year to afford the monies expended.
I voted against the 1992-93 appropriation bill due to the unfair treatment of state employees and due to the failure to control the base budget which will make balancing the budget next year even more difficult.
Senator LOURIE moved that the Senate stand adjourned and, asked unanimous consent to make a motion that when the Senate adjourned, that the Senate reconvene in statewide session on Tuesday, April 14, 1992, at 12:00 Noon.
Senator LEATHERMAN requested that the motion be divided.
The question then was the motion that when the Senate adjourned, that the Senate reconvene in statewide session on Tuesday, April 14, 1992, at 12:00 Noon.
Senator MOORE raised a Point of Order that the motion required unanimous consent.
The PRESIDENT sustained the Point of Order.
Senator LOURIE rose to a Point of Personal Privilege.
Senator MOORE objected to the unanimous consent request that upon adjournment, the Senate reconvene in statewide session on Tuesday, April 14, 1992, at 12:00 Noon.
At 11:05 P.M., Senator SALEEBY requested and was granted a leave of absence for Thursday, April 9, 1992.
At 11:02 P.M., on motion of Senator MOORE, the Senate adjourned to meet tomorrow at 11:00 A.M.
* * *
This web page was last updated on
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 at 8:55 A.M.