Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter

The House assembled at 11:00 A.M.

Deliberations were opened with prayer by the Chaplain of the House of Representatives, the Rev. Dr. Alton C. Clark as follows:

Teach us, good Lord, to lean heavily upon You regardless of our circumstances, knowing that God's mountain climbers sometimes walk in uncertain places, not always on the easy paths of life, that God promises His followers a safe landing, not always an easy journey. Cause us to grumble not because roses have thorns; instead to be thankful that thorns have roses, that experience is what we get even when we did not get what we wanted. And even when we feel that we are but a spark, cause us to know that all fires are the same at the start.

We pray in praise and thanksgiving. Amen.

Pursuant to Rule 6.3, the House of Representatives was led in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America by the SPEAKER.

After corrections to the Journal of the proceedings of Friday, the SPEAKER ordered it confirmed.

Rep. J. BROWN moved that when the House adjourns, it adjourn in memory of Willie A. Pinckney of Columbia, which was agreed to.

June 3, 1997
Mrs. Sandra McKinney
Clerk of The House of Representatives
State House
Columbia, S.C. 29211

Dear Mrs. McKinney:

Under date of June 2, 1997, the State Election Commission certified to this office the results of the election in House District Fifty-three, held in South Carolina on May 27, 1997. The Certification shows that Honorable Anthony Harris has been elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives, District Fifty-three.

I, therefore, certify that Honorable Anthony Harris has been elected as a member of the South Carolina House of Representatives from District Fifty-three, for a term as prescribed by law.

Yours very truly,
/s/Jim Miles
Secretary of State

Mr. Anthony Harris, Member-elect from District No. 53, presented his credentials and the oath of office was administered to him by the SPEAKER.

TO:             The Clerk of the Senate

The Clerk of the House
FROM:     Glenn F. McConnell, Chairman

Judicial Merit Selection Commission
DATE:     June 3, 1997

In compliance with the provisions of Act No. 119, 1975 S.C. Acts 122, it is respectfully requested that the following information be printed in the Journals of the Senate and the House.

Respectfully submitted,
Senator Glenn F. McConnell, Chairman
Representative F.G. Delleney, Jr., Vice-Chairman
Senator Edward E. Saleeby
Senator Thomas L. Moore
Representative Wm. Douglas Smith
Representative Ralph W. Canty
Harry M. Lightsey, Jr.
Judge Curtis G. Shaw
Richard S. Fisher

Date Draft Report Issued:     Wednesday, May 28, 1997
Date and Time Final Report Issued:     Tuesday, June 3, 1997,

at 10:00 a.m.

The Judicial Merit Selection Commission is charged by law to consider the qualifications of candidates for the judiciary. The Commission has carefully investigated the candidates currently set for screening and found ten candidates qualified for judicial office. This report details the reasons for the Commission's findings and each candidate's qualifications as they relate to the Commission's evaluative criteria. Due to the large number of candidates in one of the races this round, it has been suggested that the Commission limit the number of candidates submitted to the General Assembly for consideration. The Commission would note that until July 1, 1997, it is without any statutory authority to limit the number of candidates forwarded to the Legislature for election. The Commission is cognizant of the need for members to be able to differentiate between candidates and, therefore, has attempted to provide as detailed a report as possible.

The Judicial Merit Selection Commission is composed of ten members and four of those members are non-legislators. The Commission has continued the more in-depth screening format started previously. The Commission has asked candidates offering for the Family Court their views on issues peculiar to service on that court. These questions were asked in an effort to provide the members of the General Assembly more information about candidates and their thought processes on issues relevant to their candidacies. The Commission has also engaged in a more probing inquiry into the depth of a candidate's experience in areas of practice that are germane to the office they are seeking. Candidates were asked to provide additional cases in domestic law that represent the breadth and scope of their family court practices. Candidates were also asked to provide an insight into their practices in the following areas: divorce and equitable division of property, child custody, abuse and neglect, adoption, and juvenile justice. The Commission feels that candidates should have familiarity with the subject matter of the courts for which they offer and feel that their responses should indicate their familiarity with most major areas of domestic law. Their written responses were incorporated into the transcript of each candidate's public hearing and can be referenced therein. In assessing each candidate's performance on the practice and procedure questions, the Commission has placed candidates in either the "failed to meet expectations" or the "met expectations" category. The Commission feels that these categories should accurately impart the candidate's performance on the practice and procedure questions.

The Commission has also created the Citizens Committees on Judicial Qualifications as an adjunct of the Commission. The Commission was concerned that since the decisions of our judiciary play such an important role in people's personal and professional lives that all South Carolinians should have a voice in the selection of those judges. It was this desire for broad-based grassroots participation that led the Commission to create the Citizens Committees on Judicial Qualifications. These committees composed of people from across the societal spectrum (doctors, lawyers, teachers, businessmen, and advocates; members of these committees are also diverse in their racial and gender backgrounds) were asked to advise the Commission on the judicial candidates in their regions. Each regional committee interviewed the candidates from its area and then others in that region who were familiar with the candidate either personally or professionally. Based on those interviews and its own investigation, each committee provided the Commission with a report on their candidates based on the Commission's evaluative criteria. The Commission then used these reports from the committees as a tool for further investigation of the candidate if the committee's report so warranted.

The Commission conducts a thorough investigation of each candidate's professional, personal, and financial affairs, and holds public hearings during which it questions each candidate on a wide variety of issues. The Commission's investigation focuses on its evaluative criteria. These evaluative criteria include the following: constitutional qualifications; ethical fitness; professional and academic ability; character; reputation; physical health; mental health; and judicial temperament. The Commission's investigation includes the following:
(1)     survey of the bench and bar;
(2)     SLED and FBI investigation;
(3)     credit investigation;
(4)     grievance investigation;
(5)     study of application materials;
(6)     verification of ethics compliance;
(7)     search of newspaper articles;
(8)     conflict of interest investigation;
(9)     court schedule study;
(10)     study of appellate record;
(11)     court observation; and
(12)     investigation of complaints.

While the law provides that the Commission is to make findings as to qualifications, the Commission views its role as also including an obligation to consider candidates in the context of the judiciary on which, if elected, they will serve and, to some degree, govern. To that end, the Commission inquires as to the quality of justice delivered in the courtrooms of South Carolina and seeks to impart, through its questioning, the view of the public it represents as to matters of legal knowledge and ability, judicial temperament, and the absoluteness of the Judicial Canons as to recusal for conflict of interest, prohibition of ex parte communication, and the disallowance of the acceptance of gifts.

The Commission expects each candidate to possess a basic level of legal knowledge and ability, to have experience that would be applicable to the office sought, and to exhibit a strong adherence to codes of ethical behavior. These expectations are all important and excellence in one category does not make up for deficiencies in another.

This report is the culmination of weeks of investigatory work and public hearings. The Commission takes its responsibilities very seriously as it believes that the quality of justice delivered in South Carolina's courtrooms is directly affected by the thoroughness of its screening process. Please carefully consider the contents of this report as we believe it will help you make a more informed decision. If you would like to review portions of the screening transcript or other public information about a candidate before it is printed in the Journal, please contact John Hazzard at 212-6610 or Beth Atwater at 734-3125.

This report conveys the Commission's findings as to the qualifications of all candidates currently offering for election to the Circuit Court and Family Court.

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)     Constitutional Provisions:

Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Armstrong meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.

Mr. Armstrong was born on August 12, 1956. He is 40 years old. He has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years. Mr. Armstrong also has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1982.

(2)     Ethical Fitness:

The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical behavior by Mr. Armstrong.

Mr. Armstrong demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

Mr. Armstrong reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)     South Carolina Bar Association
(b)     South Carolina Trial Lawyer's Association
(c)     Jasper County Bar Association
(d)     Beaufort County Bar Association
(e)     Children's Justice Act Task Force

Mr. Armstrong provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)     University of South Carolina Alumni Association
(b)     Beaufort YMCA

Mr. Armstrong testified that he has not:
(a)     sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)     sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)     asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.

Mr. Armstrong testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Mr. Armstrong testified that he had no campaign expenditures.

(3)     Professional and Academic Ability:

The Commission found Mr. Armstrong to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Mr. Armstrong attended the following CLEs in the immediate past 5 years:
1990 - 1995     Focused primarily on CLE courses in evidence and criminal law.
1995 - Present     Focused primarily on CLE courses in general civil law.

Mr. Armstrong provided that he has taught or given lectures on the following:
(a)     Presentation to "at risk" teens on the court system at Santee, South Carolina in March 1996.
(b)     Lectured and been a panel member for Leadership Beaufort and Senior Leadership Beaufort.
(c)     Presentation to the S.C. Association of Legal Investigators on becoming a more effective witness.
(d)     Appeared on several television shows in the Beaufort and Hilton Head area regarding criminal law.
(e)     Given presentations at Guardian Ad Litem training programs in Hampton and Jasper counties.

Mr. Armstrong provided that he has authored an article entitled, "Up From the Lowcountry, Who is this New Kid on the Block?", in the Fall 1993 issue of the South Carolina Trial Lawyer Bulletin.

(4)     Character:

The Commission's investigation of Mr. Armstrong did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Armstrong did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Armstrong has handled his financial affairs responsibly.

The Commission also noted that Mr. Armstrong was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)     Reputation:

Mr. Armstrong is divorced and has two children, ages 17 and 15.

Mr. Armstrong reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "BV".

(6)     Physical Health:

Mr. Armstrong appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)     Mental Stability:

Mr. Armstrong appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)     Experience:

Mr. Armstrong was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1982. Upon graduating from law school, he clerked for the Honorable William T. Howell. From 1983 to 1985, Mr. Armstrong was the Public Defender for Allendale, Hampton, and Jasper counties. From 1985 to 1990, he was an Assistant Solicitor for the 14th Judicial Circuit, and from 1990 to 1995, Mr. Armstrong was Deputy Solicitor for the 14th Judicial Circuit. Since July of 1995, Mr. Armstrong has been a sole practitioner with a general law practice.

Mr. Armstrong described his practice since becoming a sole practitioner as 40% criminal, 35% domestic, and 25% civil. He said that 75% of his court appearances over the past five years have been in state court, and that 75% of his cases over the last five years went to a jury. He said that he served as sole counsel in all of his cases except for ten death penalty cases where he served as co-counsel.

At the Commission's request, Mr. Armstrong provided a letter to the Commission that details his experience in family law. His letter describes cases in the areas of Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Adoption, Abuse and Neglect, and Juvenile Justice. Mr. Armstrong's letter was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing.

Mr. Armstrong provided the following as his 5 most significant litigated matters:

(a)     Hughes v. Hughes, 95-DR-18-1522, 95-DR-18-1526. Mr. Armstrong represented the wife in a divorce action in Dorchester County. The issues involved adultery, physical cruelty, and custody.
(b)     Broxton v. Broxton, 95-DR-25-333. Mr. Armstrong represented the wife in a divorce action in Hampton County. She was granted a divorce on the ground of adultery.
(c)     Rivers v. Boyd, et al., 96-CP-27-95. This was an action brought on behalf of the heirs of Mattie Rivers to quiet title to land in Jasper County.
(d)     State v. Elkins, 436 S.E.2d 178 (S.C. 1993). This was the first death penalty case in which Mr. Armstrong gave a closing argument during the sentencing phase. The jury returned the death penalty.
(e)     State v. McConnell, 449 S.E.2d 778 (Ct. App. 1994). Mr. Armstrong was appointed to be the special prosecutor in Dorchester County. The defendant was convicted of Reckless Homicide.

Mr. Armstrong personally handled one domestic appeal, as attorney for the respondent. Jasper County Department of Social Services v. William Bostic and Jackie Bostic. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court in Memorandum Opinion, Number 92-MO-181, filed July 6, 1992.

The Commission determined that Mr. Armstrong had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)     Judicial Temperament:

The Commission believes that Mr. Armstrong's temperament would be excellent.

(10)     Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)     Constitutional qualifications:

Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Beach meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.

Mr. Beach was born on May 15, 1947. He is 49 years old and a resident of Colleton County. Mr. Beach provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years, and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1972.

(2)     Ethical fitness:

The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Beach.

Mr. Beach demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

Mr. Beach is engaged in the operation of a title insurance company known as Tidewater Title. The business is a sole-proprietorship begun by Mr. Beach in 1980 and continued to the present. There are no employees of the business.

Mr. Beach reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)     Member, Commission on Lawyer Conduct (1997 to 2000)
(b)     Member, Board of Commissioners on Grievance and Discipline, South Carolina Supreme Court (1993 to 1996)
(c)     Member, South Carolina Bar Practice and Procedure Committee, Default Judgment subcommittee
(d)     Member, South Carolina Bar Criminal Law subcommittee
(e)     Member, South Carolina Bar Family Law Section
(f)     Member, American Bar Association Family Law Section, Divorce Laws and Procedure Committee, Trial Techniques Committee; Alimony, Maintenance, and Child Support Committee
(g)     Member, South Carolina Trial Lawyer's Association
(h)     Member, Association of Trial Lawyers of America
(I)     Member, South Carolina Trial Lawyers, Family Law Section
(j)     House of Delegates, South Carolina Bar Association (1995 to 1997)

Mr. Beach provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)     Board Member, Habitat for Humanity
(b)     Board Member, Colleton County Rice Festival Committee
(c)     Local Federal Emergencies Management Advisory Group
(d)     Chairman, Colleton County Old Jail Restoration Commission
(e)     Chairman, Colleton Jail Commission

Mr. Beach testified that he has not:
(a)     sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)     sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or

c)     asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.

Mr. Beach testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Mr. Beach testified that he had campaign expenditures of approximately $127.50.

(3)     Professional and academic ability:

The Commission found Mr. Beach to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Mr. Beach provided that during the previous five years he has attended many CLE courses through the law school and the South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association. Mr. Beach has taken about twice the required continuing legal education courses.

Mr. Beach reported that he had lectured on domestic law for a paralegal course sponsored by the Technical College of the Lowcountry. The subject of the lecture was the substantive law of divorce in South Carolina.

Mr. Beach reported the following articles that he has written and that have been published:
(a)     "Releasing Names of Biologic Parents, Justice or an Accident of Birth", South Carolina Lawyer, May-June 1996.
(b)     "Recanted Testimony, the Red-Headed Stepchild", South Carolina Lawyer, May-June 1996.
(c)     Mr. Beach has also for the last two years written a column on law and politics for the Press and Standard, a local newspaper.

(4)     Character:

The Commission's investigation of Mr. Beach did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Beach did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Beach has handled his financial affairs responsibly.

The Commission also noted that Mr. Beach was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)     Reputation:

Mr. Beach is married and has one child, age 23.

Mr. Beach was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army in 1969. Mr. Beach reported that he served on TDY and inactive reserve status until his honorable discharge in 1977 as a captain.

Mr. Beach served on the Colleton County Council as a member from 1978 to 1994. Mr. Beach served the first 14 years as vice-chairman. Mr. Beach also served as an appointed member of the Low Country Council of Governments from 1980 to 1994, serving one term as chairman of the board.

Mr. Beach was an unsuccessful family court candidate in 1994. Mr. Beach was also defeated in two elections for the South Carolina House of Representatives (1980 and 1990) and in a bid for reelection to the Colleton County Council in 1994.

Mr. Beach reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "BV".

(6)     Physical health:

Mr. Beach appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)     Mental stability:

Mr. Beach appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)     Experience:

Mr. Beach was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1972.

Since his graduation from law school, Mr. Beach has practiced as an associate with the firm of Ackerman, Butler and Boensch from 1972 to 1973. Mr. Beach provided that he handled commercial law almost exclusively although he did some domestic cases. Since 1973, Mr. Beach has practiced with the firm of McLeod, Unger and Frasier doing general civil litigation, domestic, criminal, and plaintiff's personal injury cases. Since 1975, Mr. Beach reported that he has handled Social Security cases and has been general counsel for a savings and loan association.

Mr. Beach described his practice over the last 5 years as 20% civil, 20% criminal, and 60% domestic. He said that he appears in federal court 10% of the time and in state court the other 90%. Mr. Beach indicated that over the last 5 years 25% of his practice has involved jury matters and 75% has been non-jury. He stated that he serves most often as sole counsel in these matters.

Mr. Beach listed his 5 most significant litigated matters as follows:
(a)     State v. Carlos Elliott, 88-GS-15-135, 136, and 138. Capital murder case tried to its conclusion. The case involved sensitive issues as to mitigation. The defendant received a life sentence.
(b)     Alewine v. Alewine, 89-MO-023 (1989). A complex divorce and child custody case arising out of a long-term marriage. Mr. Beach provided that it was the most emotional case in which he had ever been involved.
(c)     S.C. D.S.S. v. Rick Herndon, 96-DR-08-222. This was a child custody and termination of parental rights case. Before Mr. Beach became involved with the case and brought it to a conclusion, the matter had been litigated for almost eight years.
(d)     State v. Anthony Sherrill, 97-UP-219 (1997). A criminal case involving the "chop shop" statute which Mr. Beach has appealed on the issue of recanted testimony.
(e)     Christopher Allen Walker v. Tonya Amanda Taylor, 95-DR-15-753. Case involving the adoption of minor children by a single male uncle living with another male at the time. The adoption by the male uncle was granted.

Mr. Beach provided that he does not handle many appeals and refers most of those cases to appellate attorneys. The only domestic appeal that Mr. Beach reported as being involved with was Alewine v. Alewine, 89-MO-023 (1989). Although, Mr. Beach tried the case and assisted with the appeal, he did not write the brief nor did he argue the case before the court. Mr. Beach has appealed both civil and criminal cases.

At the Commission's request, Mr. Beach supplied a number of additional cases which he felt were representative of his domestic practice and a summary of his practice in the following areas of domestic law: Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Abuse and Neglect, Adoption, and Juvenile Justice. Mr. Beach's response was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing and can be referenced therein.

The Commission determined that Mr. Beach had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)     Judicial Temperament:

The Commission believes that Mr. Beach's temperament would be excellent.

(10)     Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)     Constitutional Provisions:

Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Clark meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.

Judge Clark was born on October 13, 1953. He is 43 years old. He has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years. Judge Clark also has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1977.

(2)     Ethical Fitness:

The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical behavior by Judge Clark.

Judge Clark demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

Judge Clark and his wife own, and his wife operates, Advertising Products/Southern Trophy & Awards.

Judge Clark reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)     South Carolina Bar Association
(b)     Greenwood County Bar Association -- Secretary/Treasurer 1984-86
(c)     National College of Probate Judges
(d)     South Carolina Association of Probate Judges
President, 1988-89
Assn. Representative to Assn. of Counties Board of Directors, 1989-90

Mental Health Committee Chairperson, 1987-88 and 1989-90
Probate Code Committee Chairperson, 1991-Present (6 yearly appointments)

Judge Clark provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)     Ninety Six Elementary School PTO -- Secretary, 1991-92
(b)     Ninety Six Elementary School Improvement Council -- Member, 1992-1993; Chairperson, 1993-94
(c)     Edgewood Middle School PTO and Athletic Booster Club

Judge Clark testified that he has not:
(a)     sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)     sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)     asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.

Judge Clark testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Judge Clark testified that he has campaign expenditures over $100, and that he has reported those expenditures to the House and Senate Ethics Committees as required by law.

(3)     Professional and Academic Ability:

The Commission found Judge Clark to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Judge Clark attended the following CLEs in the immediate past 5 years:
(a)     Attended all yearly Probate Judges JCLE's.
(b)     1993-95 -- Attended annual week-long sessions at National College of Probate Judges
(c)     Attended all South Carolina Bar-sponsored Probate and Estate CLE's and other training seminars on Estate Planning and Trust.
(d)     In the area of domestic law, attended "Hot Tips from the Experts" in July 1995.
(e)     1996 -- "Child Custody and Visitation" and "Family Law in South Carolina."

Judge Clark provided that he taught/lectured on the following law-related courses in the last five years:
(a)     1997 -- S.C. Probate Judges Association Meeting
Prepared materials and presented "The Omnibus Adult Protection Act"
(b)     1996 -- S.C. Probate Court Judges Association Meeting
Prepared materials and presented "The Elective Share under the Uniform Probate Code"
(c)     1995 -- Probate Court JCLE
Co-planner and co-moderator of the Third Annual Bench/Bar JCLE
(d)     1995 -- Court Administration
Training Lecturer for new and existing Probate Court Judges on "Laws Other than Probate and Commitment Laws that Affect the Probate Court"
(e)     1993 -- Court Administration
Lecturer to new Probate Court Judges and some court staff on Guardianships and Health Care Proceedings.
(f)     1993 -- Probate Judges Bench/Bar CLE
Discussion leader and panel member
(g)     1992 -- Court Administration
Led training sessions on Guardianships and Health Care Proceedings for Associate Probate Judges and Probate Court personnel.

(4)     Character:

The Commission's investigation of Judge Clark did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Judge Clark did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Judge Clark has handled his financial affairs responsibly.

The Commission also noted that Judge Clark was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)     Reputation:

Judge Clark is married and has four children, ages 14, 12, 8, and 3.

(6)     Physical Health:

Judge Clark appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)     Mental Stability:

Judge Clark appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)     Experience:

Judge Clark was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1977. In January 1978, Judge Clark opened a sole practitioner office in Ninety Six, S.C., in the general practice of law. In January 1984, he joined with another attorney and moved his practice to Greenwood, S.C. He also became Probate Court Associate Judge. In January 1987, Judge Clark was elected as Greenwood County Probate Judge and has served in that position since that time.

Judge Clark stated that during the last five years, 10% of his hearings have been as special referee for the circuit court, and 90% have been as Probate Judge. Over the last five years, 100% of his cases have been civil, non-jury.

At the Commission's request, Judge Clark provided a letter to the Commission that details his experience in family law prior to his election as Probate Judge. He handled cases in the areas of Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Adoptions, and Abuse and Neglect.

Judge Clark also noted that there are similarities between presiding over a Probate Court and a Family Court: the judge is the sole determiner of fact and law; the cases generally involve family disputes that often are emotional.

Judge Clark's letter was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing.

Judge Clark provided the following as his 5 most significant orders or opinions:

(a)     Kristine S. C. by her duly-appointed Guardian ad Litem, Sarah Frances Childs v. Pauline Williams Norman as Personal Representative of the Estate of Odell Norman, Sr., Estate File No. 93ES240008. This case involved a claim by an illegitimate child for an "omitted child's" statutory share of an estate. Judge Clark's ruling was upheld on appeal by the Circuit Court, Judgment Roll No. 49971.
(b)     Estate of Donald T. Redick, deceased, Kym I. Redick, Personal Representative, Estate Case No. 89ES2400256. This estate involved problems in connection with misappropriation of estate funds by the Personal Representative. The issues included proof and determination of a claim, removal of a personal representative, tracing of estate funds and seizing items purchased, and appointment of a special administrator to replace the personal representative.
(c)     In the Matter of Gertrude Murphy, Beth Harris and Charles Murphy, Co-Guardians, Guardianship Case No. 97GC2400017. This was an action brought by the Family Court Guardian, appointed pursuant to the Omnibus Adult Protection Act, to be appointed Guardian in Probate Court proceedings.
(d)     Emerson E. Westwood, III v. Thomas H. Westwood, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Ruth H. Westwood, Case No. 92ES3600171. This was a classic will contest that Judge Clark heard as Special Probate Judge for Newberry County. It is significant for the depth of testimony and comprehensive review of case law on the topic.
(e)     In the Matter of Estate of Frank Jones, Jr., deceased In Re: Claim of Leatherwood, Walker, Todd and Mann, P.C., attorneys, Estate File - Drawer 548, Package 56. This case involved a claim for attorney's fees against an estate. The ruling dealt with whether a contract existed between the law firm and the estate representative and standards of entitlement for attorney fees. This case is currently on Petition to the South Carolina Supreme Court.

Judge Clark handled one domestic appeal as an attorney: Clayton B. Allen, Petitioner - Appellant v. William Carlos Allen, Respondent. The case was dismissed several weeks before scheduled arguments due to an opinion issued by the Supreme Court in the case of White v. White. Judge Clark and the opposing counsel agreed that the Supreme Court case was controlling on their issue.

The Commission determined that Judge Clark has engaged in an active trial practice, and that he had an active trial practice in the Family Courts prior to becoming Probate Judge, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)     Judicial Temperament:

The Commission believes that Judge Clark's temperament would be excellent.

(10)     Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)     Constitutional Provisions:

Based on the Commission's investigation, Ms. DeWitt meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.

Ms. DeWitt was born on August 25, 1955. She is 41 years old. She has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years. Ms. DeWitt also has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1983.

(2)     Ethical Fitness:

The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical behavior by Ms. DeWitt.

Ms. DeWitt demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

Ms. DeWitt reported that she is President of the Beaufort County Public Defender Corporation. She is also Secretary of the Beaufort County Family Bar Association.

Ms. DeWitt reported that she was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)     South Carolina Bar Association
(b)     Beaufort County Bar Association
(c)     Beaufort County Family Court Bar Association, Secretary
(d)     American Bar Association

Ms. DeWitt provided that she was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)     Hendersonville Baptist Church, Walterboro, South Carolina
(b)     Shell Point Elementary School PTO, Burton, South Carolina
(c)     Battery Creek High School PTO & Booster, Burton, South Carolina

Ms. DeWitt testified that she has not:
(a)     sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)     sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)     asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.

Ms. DeWitt testified that she is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Ms. DeWitt testified that she has campaign expenditures over $100, and that she has reported those expenditures to the House and Senate Ethics Committees as required by law.

(3)     Professional and Academic Ability:

The Commission found Ms. DeWitt to be intelligent and knowledgeable. Her performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Ms. DeWitt attended the following CLEs in the immediate past 5 years:
3/21/97     Hidden Issues in Cases Involving Children
12/6/96     1996 Family Court Bench/Bar Update
11/8/96     Auto Insurance Update
4/12/96     Understanding the New SC Criminal Rules
1/12/96     Worker's Compensation Practice in SC
11/17/95     Marital Litigation Update
8/24/95     The Proposed New SC Rules of Evidence
1/7/95         Civility in the Profession
3/18/94     DUI Defense
11/19/93     Workers' Compensation Practice in SC
10/2/92     SC Public Defender Association Annual Meeting
9/18/92     Criminal Practice in SC
5/26/92     Ethical Issues in Criminal Defense

Ms. DeWitt provided that she taught/lectured on the following law-related courses in the past five years:
(a)     Legal and Ethical Issues in Management, Webster University, Beaufort, SC campus, MA/MBA program.
(b)     Business Law, Webster University, Beaufort, SC campus, MA/MBA program.
(c)     Criminal Evidence, Technical College of the Lowcountry, Beaufort, SC.
(d)     Family Law, Technical College of the Lowcountry, Walterboro, SC.
(e)     Interviewing and Counseling, Technical College of the Lowcountry, Walterboro, SC.
(f)     Criminal Law, Technical College of the Lowcountry, Walterboro, SC.
(g)     History of Beaufort Public Defender's Office, Port Royal Club, Beaufort, SC.
(h)     The Importance of Education for Women, Battery Creek High School, Beaufort, SC.
(I)     Careers in the Legal Profession, Technical College of the Lowcountry, Beaufort, SC.
(j)     Best Budget Proposals, SC Public Defender Association Conference. Myrtle Beach, SC.
(k)     Insanity Defense, U.S. Law, WHHI-TV, Hilton Head, SC.
(l)     Women and the Law, Marine Corps Air Station, Beaufort, SC.
(m)     Criminal Justice System, Panel Member, Leadership Beaufort, Beaufort, SC.
(n)     Pre-Trial Motions Practice, Public Defender Training Conference, Columbia, SC.

(4)     Character:

The Commission's investigation of Ms. DeWitt did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against her. The Commission's investigation of Ms. DeWitt did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Ms. DeWitt has handled her financial affairs responsibly.

The Commission also noted that Ms. DeWitt was punctual and attentive in her dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with her diligence and industry.

(5)     Reputation:

Ms. DeWitt is married and has five children, ages 24, 22, 21, 17 and 8.

Ms. DeWitt was the recipient of the Equal Employment Opportunity Certificate of Appreciation for significant contributions to the Federal Women's Program, MCAS/Beaufort, SC in 1993, and she also received the South Carolina Bar Certificate of Appreciation, for service as Mock Trial Competition Coach in 1985.
(6)     Physical Health:

Ms. DeWitt appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office she seeks.

(7)     Mental Stability:

Ms. DeWitt appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office she seeks.

(8)     Experience:

Ms. DeWitt was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1983. Upon graduating from law school, Ms. DeWitt worked for the Neighborhood Legal Assistance Program in Walterboro, SC, and served as managing attorney from 1984-1988. She served as Chief Public Defender in the Beaufort County Public Defender Office from July 1988 until April 1993. Since April of 1993, Ms. DeWitt has been in private practice as a sole practitioner, with 60% of her cases in the area of domestic law.

Ms. DeWitt has had one civil jury trial and one criminal trial in federal courts over the past five years. Since 1993, she has had 10-20 appearances per month in Family Court; Magistrate Court bench or jury trials six to seven times per month; General Sessions Court an average of four times per month for pleas or motions, eight completed trials; Master-in-Equity motions average six per year, one trial in four years; Common Pleas motions six times per year, one completed trial in four years, roster meetings and pre-trial conferences six times per year.

At the Commission's request, Ms. DeWitt provided a letter to the Commission that detailed her experience in domestic law. She has handled cases in the areas of Custody/Visitation, Divorce/Equitable Division, Divorce/Physical Cruelty, Divorce/Drug Use, Divorce/Adultery, Common-Law Marriage, Annulment, Divorce/One-Year Separation, Child Support, Paternity and Support, Adoption, Abuse and Neglect, and Juvenile Justice. Ms. DeWitt's letter was incorporated into the transcript of her public hearing.

Ms. DeWitt provided the following as her 5 most significant litigated matters:
(a)     State v. Christopher Lee Franklin, 425 S.E.2d 758 (S.C. App. 1992), Reh. Den., Cert. Denied. In this case, Ms. DeWitt represented the 15-year-old defendant charged with the murder of his father and stepmother. This case is significant because of the rarity of the crime, the brutality of the stepmother's killing, and the public's desire for an excuse or explanation. The legal issues at trial involved request for venue change, voluntariness of a child's confession, and sufficiency of evidence to give a manslaughter or self-defense instructions.

(b)     Case No. 83-DR-15-450. In this case a 23-year-old alcoholic had a sexual relationship with a 13-year-old. They married due to pregnancy, but there was physical abuse and drunkenness by the husband during marriage. At age 15, the wife vacated the home with the nine-month-old child. The husband burglarized the new residence and snatched the baby after a physical altercation with the wife. Ms. DeWitt represented the wife. The paternal grandparents and paternal aunt and uncle were allowed to intervene. The significant issues that arose in litigation were: Is age, lack of education and inability to support a child without public assistance sufficient for a finding of unfitness? Is a finding of mother's unfitness required to award custody to a third party or does the child's best interests control? Should the father or his family be awarded custody when the child is the result of the father committing criminal sexual conduct with a minor? Should a court temporarily maintain the status quo when possession of the child was obtained by the commission of a crime?

(c)     Case No. 95-DR-07-27. In this case Ms. DeWitt represented the husband in an action for equitable division of property, alimony and attorney's fees. The premarital net worth of the husband was $264,000, and the net worth when the litigation commenced was $4,200,000. With the assistance of accountants, Ms. DeWitt identified and traced premarital assets and appreciation due to market conditions. She identified and valued marital assets, calculated marital portion of debt on assets and tax consequences of various settlement alternatives. Negotiated settlement agreement whereby Wife and Husband were both satisfied and adequately provided for.

(d)     State v. Barbara Prince. In this case, the decedent's body was found in a young mother's mobile home while she was incarcerated on unrelated charges. There was a pre-trial motion to suppress the testimony of the four-year-old son on grounds that he was not competent to testify. This case was significant because competency of child witnesses often arises in Family Court and General Sessions Court.

(e)     Case No. 94-DR-07-1522. In this case, Ms. DeWitt served as Guardian ad Litem for six- and eight-year olds whose divorced mother died unexpectedly. The father appeared at the funeral to take them to Kentucky. The children had not seen the father in four years and there was a large child support arrearage. The grandparents who had significant connection with the children were awarded temporary custody at an emergency hearing and Ms. DeWitt was appointed. This case is significant because it demonstrates the importance of a Guardian's responsibility to thoroughly investigate and verify the facts relayed by the parties.

Ms DeWitt has handled one domestic appeal: Hess v. Hess. Court of Appeals, Unpublished Opinion No. 96-UP-468, submitted December 3, 1996, filed December 16, 1996. Ms. DeWitt represented the Respondent/Mother. Father appealed award of custody to Mother and property division. Custody award affirmed. Equitable distribution award to Mother vacated and remanded.

The Commission determined that Ms. DeWitt had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)     Judicial Temperament:

The Commission believes that Ms. DeWitt's temperament would be excellent.

(10)     Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)     Constitutional qualifications:

Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Dukes meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.

Mr. Dukes was born on November 25, 1961. He is 35 years old and a resident of Beaufort County. Mr. Dukes provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years, and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1987.

(2)     Ethical fitness:

The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Dukes.

Mr. Dukes demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

Mr. Dukes reported that he is a fifty-percent owner in a corporation known as Frogmore Aerospace, Inc. Frogmore Aerospace owns a single aircraft which is leased out for use.

Mr. Dukes reported that he was sued by the client of another attorney regarding an agreement that he and the other attorney reached concerning the disbursement of some insurance proceeds in 1993. The other attorney was uninsured. Mr. Dukes reported that his insurance company settled the lawsuit. Based on its questioning of the candidate concerning this matter, the Commission is satisfied that Mr. Duke's actions in this incident should not disqualify him from judicial service. Mr. Dukes reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)     South Carolina Bar Association
(b)     American Bar Association

Mr. Dukes provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)     Rotary Club
(b)     Beaufort Yacht Club
(c)     Boys and Girls Club
(d)     Leadership Beaufort

Mr. Dukes testified that he has not:
(a)     sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)     sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)     asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.

Mr. Dukes testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Mr. Dukes testified that he had campaign expenditures of approximately $65.00.

(3)     Professional and academic ability:

The Commission found Mr. Dukes to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Mr. Dukes provided that during the previous five years he has attended the following CLE courses: Legal Ethics; Estate Planning and Probate in South Carolina (1992); Domestic Practice: Hot Tips from the Experts (1993); Family Mediation Training (1994); Ten things you need to know before the end of the year (1995); The Masters in Trial (1996); Family Court Bench/Bar Update (1996); Ethics for Family Law Practitioners (1996).

Mr. Dukes reported that he had lectured numerous times on Family Law matters at the Technical College of the Lowcountry Paralegal Program.

Mr. Dukes reported that he has written and published numerous articles for the Beaufort Gazette on a wide variety of domestic law topics.

(4)     Character:

The Commission's investigation of Mr. Dukes did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Dukes did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Dukes has handled his financial affairs responsibly.

The Commission also noted that Mr. Dukes was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)     Reputation:

Mr. Dukes is married with no children.

Mr. Dukes has served as a member of the Beaufort County Planning Board since 1992. Currently, he serves as Vice-Chairman of the Planning Board. He serves as Chairman of the Port Royal Island subcommittee and is a past member of the Lady Island's/St. Helena Island subcommittee.

Mr. Dukes reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "CV".

(6)     Physical health:

Mr. Dukes appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)     Mental stability:

Mr. Dukes appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)     Experience:

Mr. Dukes was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1987.

Since his graduation from law school, Mr. Dukes has practiced law with the firm of Dukes, Williams, Infinger & Meeks, P.A. Mr. Dukes stated that his practice has consisted of Domestic Law, General Practice, Personal Injury, and Criminal Litigation. He provides that he has practiced primarily in the Family Court for the last five years.

Mr. Dukes described his practice over the last 5 years as 25% civil, 10% criminal, and 65% domestic. He said that he appears in federal court 2% of the time and in state court the other 98%. Mr. Dukes indicated that over the last 5 years 15% of his practice has involved jury matters and 85% has been non-jury. He stated that he serves most often as sole counsel in these matters.

Mr. Dukes listed his 5 most significant litigated matters as follows:
(a)     Ben Tillman Woods v. Lesa Brown Woods, 92-DR-07-933 and 94-DR-07-193. Case was for divorce, equitable division, and custody. The second case was an attempt by the mother to modify the original custody order based on a change in circumstances. Mr. Dukes believes the case is significant because in the first case the tender years presumption had not yet been abolished increasing the difficulty in winning custody of the 8-year-old girl for the father.
(b)     Rick McElroy v. Cynthia Sharon McElroy, 96-DR-07-433. A custody, division, and child support case in which Mr. Dukes represented the father. Mr. Dukes believes the case is significant in that it involved disturbing allegations of alcohol and drug abuse, child abuse, adultery, and allegations of "brain washing" the children. Also, the Final Order was novel because it allowed for a reconsideration without causing a change in circumstances.
(c)     Michael D. Boffeli v. Angelique T. Boffeli Moran, 95-DR-07-764. Mr. Dukes represented the mother in this modification of custody case. Mr. Dukes believes that the case is significant because it involved unusual UCCJA questions and Moore vs. Moore (third- party custody) questions.
(d)     Warner Advertising, Inc. v. The Cabral Company, Inc., 92-CP-07-1520, 94-UP-271. An accord and satisfaction case in which Warner sued Cabral for funds owed for advertising work. Mr. Dukes believes the case is significant for the economic duress defense employed during the case.
(e)     Amerlink v. Julia Frazier, Rebecca Hall and Joe Frazier, Inc., 89-CP-07-0430. The case involved a mechanic's lien claim and a counterclaim for lost endorsement and entertainment fees. Mr. Dukes believes the case is significant because it was his first complex litigation involving an appeal and also because Joe Frazier (former world heavyweight boxing champion) appeared for the trial.

Mr. Dukes provided the following domestic appeal he has personally handled:
(a)     William C. Miller v. Marianne M. Mikell, 96-UP-21 (S.C. Sup. Ct. filed Jan. 9, 1996).

At the Commission's request, Mr. Dukes supplied a number of additional cases which he felt were representative of his domestic practice and a summary of his practice in the following areas of domestic law: Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Abuse and Neglect, Adoption, and Juvenile Justice. Mr. Dukes' response was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing and can be referenced therein.

The Commission determined that Mr. Dukes had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)     Judicial Temperament:

The Commission believes that Mr. Dukes' temperament would be excellent.

(10)     Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)     Constitutional qualifications:

Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Fuge meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Family Court judge.

Mr. Fuge was born on October 4, 1947. He is 49 years old and a resident of Beaufort County. Mr. Fuge provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years, and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1974.

(2)     Ethical fitness:

The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Fuge.

Mr. Fuge demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

Mr. Fuge provided that he was sued by a former client, Susan Crowley. She alleged legal malpractice. Mr. Fuge was granted summary judgment. That order was appealed and reversed. A motion to reconsider the reversal was filed and granted. Currently, that motion is under advisement by the South Carolina Supreme Court. Based on its questioning of the candidate concerning this matter, the Commission's is satisfied that Mr. Fuge's actions in this incident should not disqualify him from judicial service.

Mr. Fuge reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)     South Carolina Bar Association
(b)     South Carolina Bar House of Delegates (1995)
(c)     Lawyers Caring About Lawyers Committee (1990 to present)
(d)     Family Law Section of the South Carolina Bar; Secretary (1994), Vice-Chairman (1995), and Chairman (1996)
(e)     South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association (1979 to present)
(f)     Chairman, South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association Family Law Section (1986 to 1987)
(g)     Beaufort County Bar Association (1974 to present)
(h)     Association of Trial Lawyers of America (1979 to 1995).

Mr. Fuge testified that he has not:
(a)     sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)     sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)     asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.

Mr. Fuge testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Mr. Fuge testified that he had no campaign expenditures.

(3)     Professional and academic ability:

The Commission found Mr. Fuge to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Mr. Fuge provided that he has continuously exceeded the minimum continuing legal education requirements. Mr. Fuge has also been very active in continuing legal education.

Mr. Fuge was appointed commissioner on the South Carolina Supreme Court Commission on Continuing Legal Education and Specialization from 1990 to 1996. Mr. Fuge served as Secretary from 1994 to 1995 and as Chairman from 1995 to 1996.

Mr. Fuge has served on the Family Law Section Council of the South Carolina Bar from 1988 to the present. He has served as Secretary, Vice-Chairman, and as Chairman from 1996 to 1997.

Mr. Fuge served as chairman of the Family Law Section of the South Carolina Trial Lawyer's Association from 1986 to 1987.

Mr. Fuge is currently Chairman of the Supreme Court Family Law Specialization Advisory Board.

Mr. Fuge reported that he served as city prosecutor for the City of Beaufort from 1979 to 1981.

Mr. Fuge listed the following CLE's at which he has been a speaker or moderator as follows:
(a)     South Carolina Trial Lawyer's Association 28th Annual Convention - "Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act" (1985).
(b)     South Carolina Trial Lawyer's Association 29th Annual Convention - "Alimony" (1986).
(c)     South Carolina Bar 1988 Annual Meeting - "Trends: Retirement & Pensions" (1988).
(d)     Timely Topics in Family Court - "Getting and Keeping Military Benefits" (1989).
(e)     Domestic Practice: Hot Tips from the Experts - "Third Party Litigation - Establishing a Client's Interest in Property Owned by a Third Party" (1991).
(f)     Family Law Issues - "The 1990 Alimony Statute and other Alimony issues" (1990).
(g)     Domestic Practice: Hot Tips from the Experts - "Returning Military Dependents to the United States: The Survivor's Benefits Plan in Marital Dissolution Actions" (1990).
(h)     Domestic Practice: Hot Tips from the Experts Rides Again - "Other Alimony - What is it; and Sequestration to Preserve Assets" (1992).
(i)     Mid-Year Meeting of the South Carolina Bar - "Moderator - Family Law Section" (1997).

Mr. Fuge has also presented over the last four or five years, the Law School for Non-Lawyers for Beaufort County on behalf of the Young Lawyer's Division of the South Carolina Bar.

(4)     Character:

The Commission's investigation of Mr. Fuge did not reveal any evidence of complaints or grievances made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Fuge did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Fuge has handled his financial affairs responsibly.

Mr. Fuge provided in his application that while he was in undergraduate school at the University of South Carolina in 1967 and 1968, he was involved in two fraternity party incidents in which a number of people were rounded up for being too loud that resulted in his being charged with disorderly conduct or some other minor infraction. On both occasions, Mr. Fuge reported that he was found not guilty.

The Commission also noted that Mr. Fuge was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)     Reputation:

Mr. Fuge is married with three children, ages 25, 21, and 21. One child is a housewife and two are university students.

Mr. Fuge reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "BV".

(6)     Physical health:

Mr. Fuge appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)     Mental stability:

Mr. Fuge appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)     Experience:

Mr. Fuge was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1974.

Since his graduation from law school, Mr. Fuge has practiced law in the firm of Dowling, Dowling, Sanders & Dukes, P.A., from 1974 to 1976, as a sole practitioner from 1976 to 1977, in the firm of Fuge & Denton, P.A., from 1977 to 1980, in the firm of Harvey & Battey, P.A., from 1980 to 1995, and since 1995 as a sole practitioner in Peter L. Fuge, P.A. Mr. Fuge provided that since the early 1980's, the general emphasis of his practice has been in domestic relations.

Mr. Fuge described his practice over the last 5 years as 10% civil, 5% criminal, and 85% domestic. He said that he has appeared in federal court approximately once or twice a year and in state court once or twice per week or more. Mr. Fuge indicated that over the last 5 years 3% of his practice has involved jury matters and 97% has been non-jury. He stated that he serves most often as sole counsel in these matters.

Mr. Fuge listed his 5 most significant litigated matters as follows:
(a)     State of South Carolina v. John Path., 277 S.C. 126, 284 S.E.2d 221 (19__). A death penalty case. Mr. Fuge was required to try, appeal, and re-try the case. He spent nearly 1000 hours working for free representing the defendant.
(b)     Rosemary Murphy v. James Lee Murphy, ___ S.C. ___, 461 S.E.2d 39 (19__). A divorce action in which Mr. Fuge represented the wife. The lower court decided, sua sponte, to appoint a sequestrator to accomplish the division of certain marital properties. Acting at times, pro se and at other times with counsel, Mr. Murphy, who is an attorney, has filed every conceivable motion and contested every order in one fashion or another. The appeal by Mr. Murphy was dismissed and he has contested the interest award on the judgment. Mr. Fuge is still representing Mrs. Murphy.
(c)     Hallie H. Hepner v. Lucy Hepner, 91-UP-175 (1991). Case involving an attempt by a father to win primary custody of his young daughter. This was the father's third or fourth marriage. Mr. Fuge was able to overcome the tender years doctrine by showing that his client possessed superior parenting skills and that it was in the best interests of the minor daughter that custody be awarded to the father.
(d)     Donald l. Parris v. Ruth H. Parris, ___ S.C. ___, 460 S.E.2d 571 (19__). Case in which the father was awarded custody of his son and the mother appealed claiming that the Court was guilty of gender bias against working women. Mr. Fuge believes that he presented an unbiased and factual case which demonstrated that the father exhibited a more active role in the day-to-day rearing of the child and that it was in the best interests of the child that custody be awarded to the father. The Supreme Court upheld the award of custody to the father.
(e)     Richard Keith McElveen v. Elaine Brennen McElveen, 277 S.C. 97, 283 S.E.2d 826 (19__). Mr. Fuge handled the appeal of this case. After the lower court changed custody from the mother to the father based on a substantial change of circumstances, Mr. Fuge was able to show on appeal that the trial judge improperly considered evidence which occurred prior to the date of the initial decree, thereby violating the doctrine of res judicata. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court ruling and reinstated custody to the mother. Mr. Fuge provided that this case has been cited many times for the proposition that a lower court should not consider evidence that predates prior final orders when parties seek a change of custody.

Mr. Fuge provided the following domestic appeals that he has personally handled:
(a)     State of South Carolina v. John Path., 277 S.C. 126, 284 S.E.2d 221 (19__).
(b)     Rosemary Murphy v. James Lee Murphy, ___ S.C. ___, 461 S.E.2d 39 (19__).
(c)     Hallie H. Hepner v. Lucy Hepner, 91-UP-175 (1991).
(d)     Donald l. Parris v. Ruth H. Parris, ___ S.C. ___, 460 S.E.2d 571 (19__).
(e)     Richard Keith McElveen v. Elaine Brennen McElveen, 277 S.C. 97, 283 S.E.2d 826 (19__).

At the Commission's request, Mr. Fuge supplied a number of additional cases which he felt were representative of his domestic practice and a summary of his practice in the following areas of domestic law: Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Abuse and Neglect, Adoption, and Juvenile Justice. Mr. Fuge's response was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing and can be referenced therein.

The Commission determined that Mr. Fuge had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)     Judicial Temperament:

The Commission believes that Mr. Fuge's temperament would be excellent.

(10)     Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)     Constitutional Provisions:

Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Laughlin meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.

Mr. Laughlin was born on February 28, 1952. He is 45 years old. He has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years. Mr. Laughlin also has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1977.

(2)     Ethical Fitness:

The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical behavior by Mr. Laughlin.

Mr. Laughlin demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

Mr. Laughlin reported that he is an officer of Daybreak Title Agency, Inc.

Mr. Laughlin reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)     South Carolina Bar Association
(b)     Beaufort County Bar Association (Secretary, 1982-84)
(c)     Hilton Head Island Bar Association (Secretary, 1978-79)

Mr. Laughlin provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)     Spanish Wells Golf Club

Mr. Laughlin testified that he has not:
(a)     sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)     sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)     asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.

Mr. Laughlin testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Mr. Laughlin testified that he had no campaign expenditures.

(3)     Professional and Academic Ability:

The Commission found Mr. Laughlin to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Mr. Laughlin attended the following CLEs in the immediate past 5 years:

11/96     SC Bar, Masters in Trial
9/96     SC Bar, South Carolina Tort Law Update
11/95     Chicago Title Ins., Claims/Underwriting Seminar
10/95     SC Bar, Client Relations LEPR Series
7/95     SC Bar, The Continuing Saga of Hot Tips from the Experts
12/94     SC Bar, Nine Things You Absolutely, Positively Need to Know
12/94     SC Bar, What Goes on in the Jury Room
11/94     SC Bar, Professional Responsibility
1/93     SC Bar, Appellate Practice Under the SCRAP
11/92     SC Bar, Mastering Evidence and Proving Your Case

Mr. Laughlin provided that he has been a guest lecturer for Professor Stephen Spitz of the U.S.C. School of Law.

(4)     Character:

The Commission's investigation of Mr. Laughlin did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Laughlin did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Laughlin has handled his financial affairs responsibly.

The Commission also noted that Mr. Laughlin was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.
(5)     Reputation:

Mr. Laughlin is married and has three children, ages 20, 16, and 8.

Mr. Laughlin reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "BV".

(6)     Physical Health:

Mr. Laughlin appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)     Mental Stability:

Mr. Laughlin appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)     Experience:

Mr. Laughlin was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1977. Upon graduating from law school, Mr. Laughlin worked for the law firm of West, Bowen, Cooper, Beard, & Smoot in Hilton Head until 1980. From 1980-82, he worked for Bowen, Cooper, Beard, & Smoot in Hilton Head. From 1982-83, Mr. Laughlin worked for Davis & Turlington, Inc., in San Antonio, Texas. He returned to Hilton Head in 1983 and worked for Bowen, Smoot, & Laughlin in Hilton Head until 1986. From 1986-87, he worked for Qualey, Laughlin & Qualey, PA, in Hilton Head. He worked for the McNair Law Firm, PA, in Hilton Head from 1987-90. Since 1990, Mr. Laughlin has been a partner of Laughlin & Bowen in Hilton Head.

His practice has been primarily general civil litigation, including Family Courts; he also has some real estate practice and municipal law practice.

Mr. Laughlin also provided a letter to the Commission that details his experience in domestic law. He handles the Family Court cases for his firm, which amounts to approximately 20% of his cases. He has handled issues in the areas of divorce, custody and visitation, equitable division of property, alimony, child support, division of marital property, and allegations of child and spousal abuse. Mr. Laughlin's letter was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing.

Mr. Laughlin provided that the other 80% of his practice was civil, and that 60% of his cases were jury cases, approximately 5% tried to verdict. Thirty percent of his cases were non-jury, most tried to Court decision. He served as sole counsel in these matters. Over the last five years, he has had approximately one federal court appearance per year and fifty or more state court appearances per year.

Mr. Laughlin provided the following as his 5 most significant litigated matters:

(a)     Barrington One Owners' Association, Inc., v. Greenwood Development Corp., Joe Harden Builder, Inc., and Eugene R. Smith & Associates, Inc.

Mr. Laughlin served as Co-Counsel representing condominium owners association and 111 individual owners in actions for recovery of damages for defective design and construction of condominium common elements and (in three related class actions) for recovery of damages for loss of use of condominium units. Settled cases for combined $11,050,000.

(b)     Brady Development, Inc. v. Town of Hilton Head Island, 312 S.C. 73, 439 S.E.2d 436. Mr. Laughlin represented Plaintiff in first of 55 actions against Town of Hilton Head Island seeking recovery of damages to purchaser of residential lot based on theory of negligent permitting of subdivision that lacked water or sewer service. Obtained judgment on jury verdict in the amount of $215,000, reversed on appeal based on application of public purpose doctrine.

(c)     Vacation Time of Hilton Head Island, Inc. v. Lighthouse Realty, Inc., 286 SC 261, 332 S.E.2d 781. Mr. Laughlin represented Plaintiff seller of real property in action against real estate broker for damages resulting from breach of fiduciary duty. Judgment on jury verdict in amount of $50,000 affirmed on appeal.
(d)     Hunter et al. v. Rose Hill Development Company. Mr. Laughlin successfully defended Defendant developer in suit brought by numerous Plaintiff property owners alleging fraud, breach of contract, violation of restrictive covenants, violation of development permitting, and violation of Interstate Land Sales Act. Summary Judgment obtained in United States District Court, District of South Carolina.
(e)     Keenan v. Keenan. Mr. Laughlin represented Defendant husband in divorce action involving marital estate valued in excess of $2,000,000. Case settled on day of trial.

Mr. Laughlin stated that none of his domestic cases had been appealed.

The Commission determined that Mr. Laughlin had engaged in an active trial practice, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.
(9)     Judicial Temperament:

The Commission believes that Mr. Laughlin's temperament would be excellent.

(10)     Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)     Constitutional Provisions:

Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Sanders meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.

Judge Sanders was born on July 24, 1952. He is 44 years old. He has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years. Judge Sanders also has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1977.

(2)     Ethical Fitness:

The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical behavior by Judge Sanders.

Judge Sanders demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

Judge Sanders reported that he is Broker-in-Charge of Sanders Real Estate.

Judge Sanders reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)     South Carolina Bar Association
(b)     Allendale County Bar Association (Treasurer, Vice-President)

Judge Sanders provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)     Fairfax Lions Club -- President, Secretary, Treasurer, and Lion of the Year
(b)     Allendale County Rural Health Program, Inc. (Board of Directors)
(c)     Allendale County Business Association

Judge Sanders testified that he has not:
(a)     sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)     sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)     asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.

Judge Sanders testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Judge Sanders testified that his only campaign expenditure was postage to send letters announcing his candidacy.

(3)     Professional and Academic Ability:

The Commission found Judge Sanders to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Judge Sanders has attended numerous CLEs and JCLEs in the immediate past 5 years and has met all attendance requirements mandated by the SC Bar.

Judge Sanders provided that he has been a part-time Associate Professor at the University of South Carolina - Salkehatchie Branch, teaching Business Law.

(4)     Character:

The Commission's investigation of Judge Sanders did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Judge Sanders did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Judge Sanders has handled his financial affairs responsibly.

The Commission also noted that Judge Sanders was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)     Reputation:

Judge Sanders is married and has two children, ages 14 and 10.

(6)     Physical Health:

Judge Sanders appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)     Mental Stability:

Judge Sanders appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)     Experience:

Judge Sanders was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1977. Upon graduating from law school, Judge Sanders worked as an Associate with the Law Firm of Lawton, Myrick & Detrick in Allendale until July 1979. Since August 1979, Judge Sanders has been a sole practitioner at Walter H. Sanders, Jr., P.A.

Judge Sanders has a general law practice and he has also been the Municipal Judge of the Town of Fairfax since 1980, the Municipal Judge of the Town of Varnville since 1984, and the Municipal Judge of the Town of Brunson from 1988-89 and from 1996 to the present. He was also appointed as the interim Municipal Judge of the Town of Allendale in 1992 and has been the Master-in Equity for Allendale County since 1991.

Judge Sanders reported that 95% of his court appearances over the past five years have been in state court and five percent have been in federal court. Over the last five years, 25% of his cases have gone to a jury and 75% were non-jury. Judge Sanders reported that 50% of his practice was domestic, 45% civil, and 5% criminal. He has most often served as sole counsel or associate counsel.

At the request of the Commission, Judge Sanders provided a letter to the Commission that details his experience in domestic law. Approximately 50% of his cases are in the domestic law area, and he has handled issues in the following areas:

Divorce/Adultery; Divorce/Physical Cruelty; Divorce/Habitual Drunkenness; Divorce/One-Year Separation; Custody; Visitation; Child Support; Equitable Division of Marital Property; Restraining Orders; Alimony; Annulment; Paternity; Contempt of Court; Adoption from State; Private Adoption; Sexual Abuse of children; Termination of Parental Rights; Child Neglect; and Juvenile Crime.

Judge Sanders' letter was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing.

Judge Sanders provided the following as his 5 most significant litigated matters:

(a)     Virginia Ruth Allen v. William Dale Allen (Family Court). This case involved the granting of a father and husband custody of the minor children and support from the wife.
(b)     H.J. Kinard and Flossie Kinard v. Beth Morris, Paul W. Morris and Amy Paulette Morris (Family Court). This case involved the conflict between natural parents and grandparents and what is in the best interest of the minor child in regards to custody and visitation privileges.
(c)     Joe L. Smith, Jr., Barry H. Smith, and Barnie K. Smith v. Sandra Grubbs Smith, John H. Mole, and Mole Funeral Home (Circuit Court and Probate Court). This case involved the disinterment and reinterment of Joe Laurie Smith, Sr., and the conflict between the stepmother widow and the natural children concerning who has the primary right to the possession of the body and to control the burial thereof.
(d)     State of South Carolina v. George Campfield (Circuit Court). This was a murder case of the Defendant's wife and her unborn fetus.
(e)     State of South Carolina v. Edward Lester Rhein (Circuit Court). This was a murder case by two individuals who were only 16 and 17 years of age.

Judge Sanders has handled one domestic appeal: Beth Morris and Paul Morris, Petitioners-Respondents v. Flossie Kinard, Respondent Appellant, H.J. Kinard and Flossie Kinard, Petitioners-Appellants. This case was in the Supreme Court of South Carolina and the date of the decision was June 26, 1979.

Judge Sanders provided the following as his 5 most significant opinions or orders:

(a)     Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation v. Judith Diane Bowers, et al. (Foreclosure Action)
(b)     Julius Jackson v. Everliner J. Lawrence, et al. (Partition Action)
(c)     Josie Yvone Broomfield Ingram v. Ernestine Walker, et al. (Quiet Title Action)
(d)     Small Business Funding Corp. v. Metric Constructors, Inc. (Order for Summary Judgment)
(e)     Cecil Chavous, et al. v. John Sanders, Jr. d/b/a Sanders Logging and Trucking (Breach of Contract)

The Commission determined that Judge Sanders had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)     Judicial Temperament:

The Commission believes that Judge Sanders's temperament would be excellent.
(10)     Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)     Constitutional qualifications:

Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Short meets the qualifications prescribed by law for continued judicial service.

Judge Short was born on January 13, 1947. He is 50 years old. Judge Short provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years, and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1971.

(2)     Ethical fitness:

The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Short.

Judge Short demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

Judge Short reported that he was a member of the following professional organizations:
(a)     SC Bar Association
(b)     American Bar Association
(c)     Chester County Bar Association
(d)     American Judicature Society
(e)     American Judges Association
(f)     SC Association of Circuit Judges (Legislative Reception Committee)

Judge Short listed the following organizations of which he is currently or has been a member:
(a)     Purity Presbyterian Church
(b)     Chester Sertoma Club
(c)     Chester Shrine Club
(d)     Chester Masonic Lodge
(e)     American Legion
(f)     Presbyterian College Board of Trustees

(3)     Professional and academic ability:

The Commission found Judge Short to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Judge Short has attended a variety of CLE classes, including classes at the National Judicial College in Phoenix and in Reno and Circuit Court Bench/Bar Seminars.

Judge Short taught a seminar on Rules of Civil Procedure for the South Carolina Legal Secretaries Association in 1995. He also facilitated a General Jurisdiction Course for new judges at the National Judicial College in Nevada.

(4)     Character:

The Commission's investigation of Judge Short did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Judge Short did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Judge Short has handled his financial affairs responsibly.

After becoming a Circuit Court Judge, Judge Short was sued by a prisoner acting Pro Se in Priest Gerald Garner v. Condon, et al. Judge Short was dismissed from the case.

The Commission also noted that Judge Short was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)     Reputation:

Judge Short is married and has two children. One is a school teacher in Chester County. The other is a student. His wife, Linda Short, is a South Carolina State Senator.

Judge Short served as a 1st Lieutenant in the Army from 1968-1971. He served in the South Carolina National Guard from 1971-1973. He was honorably discharged as Captain. His present status is Inactive Reserve.

Judge Short reported that his last Martindale-Hubbell rating was "AV".

(6)     Physical health:

Judge Short appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.
(7)     Mental stability:

Judge Short appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)     Experience:

Judge Short was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1971.

Since his graduation from law school, Judge Short practiced law in Chester, South Carolina with Fred Strickland and E.K. Hardin. In 1973, he began practicing with William Keels. He served in the SC House of Representatives from 1982-1981. He was appointed to the Chester County Airport Commission in 1978 and served until 1980. He was appointed Chester County Attorney in 1980 and served until 1982.

Judge Short was elected Circuit Court Judge, At-Large Seat 8, in February, 1991.

Judge Short listed his 5 most significant orders or opinions as follows:
(a)     Louis J. Truesdale v. Parker D. Evatt, and the SC Dept. Of Corrections, et al., The subject of this Order deals with the reimbursement of expenses incurred by expert witnesses called upon by Petitioner Truesdale in his death penalty case. The Appeal of his case is reported at 301 S.C. 546, 393 S.E.2d 168.
(b)     State of South Carolina v. Gary Allen Rimert, Op. No. 24093, 446 S.E.2d 400. The issue addressed in this Order is whether or not a jury in a criminal case is entitled to hear evidence regarding the sentence a defendant may receive if he is found guilty but mentally ill. I held that the jury's function was to determine guilt and that information about sentencing is irrelevant to such a determination. The Supreme Court affirmed.
(c)     Carol Ann Berkebile v. William C. Outen, 311 S.C. 50, 426 S.E.2d 760. This Order holds that losses from video poker playing are not recoverable pursuant to SC Code Section 32-1-10. Judge Short held that Section 32-1-10 removed the common law bar to the recovery of losses from engaging in illegal gambling. Therefore, if the loss resulted from legal gambling, this Code section would not apply and the Plaintiff cannot recover. The Supreme Court reversed.
(d)     City of Folly Beach v. Atlantic House Properties, Op. No. 24384. This order required Defendants in a condemnation action to pay the Plaintiffs reasonable attorney fees pursuant to SC Code Section 28-2-510. The SC Supreme Court reversed.
(e)     Betty Williams, et al. v. The Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Rock Hill and New Hope Carolinas, Inc., This Order affirms the City of Rock Hill Zoning Commission's issuing of a permit to New Hope Carolinas allowing it to operate an institution to care for emotionally handicapped children.

(9)     Judicial Temperament:

The Commission believes that Judge Short's temperament has been and would continue to be excellent.

(10)     Miscellaneous:

The Bar found that Judge Short meets established criteria for the position of Circuit Court Judge. The Bar based its decision on the results of its end-of-year survey conducted in 1996, the collective knowledge of its Committee members, and its investigation of the candidate.

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)     Constitutional qualifications:

Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Tunstall meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Family Court judge.

Mr. Tunstall was born on February 4, 1954. He is 43 years old and a resident of Greenwood County. Mr. Tunstall provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years, and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1980.

(2)     Ethical fitness:

The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Tunstall.

Mr. Tunstall demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

Mr. Tunstall reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)     South Carolina Bar Association
(b)     South Carolina Bar House of Delegates (1991 to present)
(c)     Resolution of Fee Disputes Board for the Eighth Circuit (1991 to present)
(d)     Family Law Section of the South Carolina Bar
(e)     South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association
(f)     Greenwood County Bar - past Treasurer

Mr. Tunstall provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)     South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers Association - Sustaining member
(b)     Main Street United Methodist Church member (1959 to present)
(c)     Cambridge Academy Board Member
(d)     Governor's Community Youth Council Member - Eighth Circuit

Mr. Tunstall reported that he owns and leases four rental properties. Mr. Tunstall provided that he would not hear any cases involving a resident of any of his rental properties.

Mr. Tunstall testified that he has not:
(a)     sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)     sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)     asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.

Mr. Tunstall testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Mr. Tunstall testified that he had campaign expenditures of over $100 and that he was aware of the requirement of reporting that amount to the House and Senate Ethics Committees.

(3)     Professional and academic ability:

The Commission found Mr. Tunstall to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Mr. Tunstall provided that he has continuously exceeded the minimum continuing legal education requirements, with an emphasis on Domestic matters. Most recently, Mr. Tunstall attended the two-day Governor's Youth Conference on Youth Crime on March 6-7, 1997.

Mr. Tunstall reported that he had served as the Attorney Coach for the South Carolina High School Mock Trial Competition from 1987 to 1993. He taught Greenwood High School students how to prepare and try a case for mock court competition including teaching trial tactics, rules of evidence, and courtroom demeanor.

(4)     Character:

The Commission's investigation of Mr. Tunstall did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Tunstall did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Tunstall has handled his financial affairs responsibly.

The Commission also noted that Mr. Tunstall was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

One affiant testified in opposition to Mr. Tunstall's candidacy. The affiant alleged problems in Mr. Tunstall's handling of a divorce and criminal matter. After a review of pertinent material and questioning of the affiant and Mr. Tunstall, the Commission is satisfied that Mr. Tunstall's conduct in the representation of the affiant should not disqualify Mr. Tunstall from service as a Family Court judge.

(5)     Reputation:

Mr. Tunstall is married with two children, ages 13 and 8.

Mr. Tunstall was a member of the South Carolina Human Affairs Commission from 1985 to 1988.

Mr. Tunstall has served as a school board member for Cambridge Academy. The Board sets policy for the school.

Mr. Tunstall provided on his application that he served as a part-time City judge for Ware Shoals in 1983.

Mr. Tunstall reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "BV".

(6)     Physical health:

Mr. Tunstall appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)     Mental stability:

Mr. Tunstall appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)     Experience:

Mr. Tunstall was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1980.

Since his graduation from law school, Mr. Tunstall has practiced law as a sole practitioner from 1980 to 1981. During that time, Mr. Tunstall was also the Public Defender for the Greenwood and Abbeville Family courts. In 1981, he joined the Law Firm of C. Rauch Wise as an associate. He also accepted a part-time position as City Judge for Ware Shoals. Since 1982, Mr. Tunstall has been a partner in Wise and Tunstall, Attorneys. Mr. Tunstall described his practice as general in nature and is now about 80% domestic.

Mr. Tunstall described his practice over the last 5 years as 15% civil, 5% criminal, and 80% domestic. He said that he has appeared in federal court approximately 3 times and in state court 3 to 5 times per week. Mr. Tunstall indicated that over the last 5 years 10% of his practice has involved jury matters and 90% has been non-jury. He stated that he serves most often as sole counsel in these matters.

Mr. Tunstall listed his 5 most significant litigated matters as follows:
(a)     S.C. Newton, South Carolina Highway Patrol vs. Stacy Ray A., child under the age of 17 years, Case No. 89-GS-24-113 and 114. Mr. Tunstall represented the minor defendant in Family Court. The defendant was arrested and charged with reckless homicide and involuntary manslaughter. The case was reversed on appeal in favor of the defendant in The Interest of Stacy Ray A., 303 S.C. 291, 400 S.E.2d 141 (1991).
(b)     McCormick County Department of Social Services vs. Jane Doe, Case No. 93-DR-35-016. In this action, DSS brought an action against Mr. Tunstall's client seeking a finding of medical neglect of her children. The issue was whether the defendant was neglecting her child because she refused to allow her child to have a second corrective surgery attempt on her spine and whether the court should order the surgery. The court ruled that the DSS should not interfere in a parent's right to accept or reject medical advice unless the child was in imminent threat of harm. Mr Tunstall believes the case is significant because it demonstrates that judges must detach themselves from their personal feelings and follow statutes and case law.
(c)     Department of Social Services of Laurens County vs. John Smith and Jane Smith, Case No. 93-DR-30-600. An action in which DSS sought removal of children from the defendants' home. Mr. Tunstall was retained by a third party from Michigan seeking custody of the allegedly abused children. The court removed the children from the parents and placed custody with Mr. Tunstall's client in Michigan. Mr. Tunstall believes the case is significant because it involved the complexity of a multi-state case and required him to coordinate with various governmental agencies in different states.
(d)     John Anthony Rhodes vs. Tessa McNair Rhodes, Case No. 94-DR-24-531. Case involved an action for custody of a 4-year old, child support, and an equitable division of the property of the marriage. The court granted custody to the father, Mr. Tunstall's client.
(e)     Waretex Industries, Ltd. And Waretex Manufacturing, Inc. vs. Town & Country Real Estate, Inc., M. Calhoun Mayes, III, Herbert Anderson, Jr., George Risley, d/b/a Anderson-Risley, Carolina Coating Systems, Inc., and Defiance Metal Products of South Carolina, Inc., and Town and Country Real Estate, Inc. vs. Piedmont Fire Protection, Inc., Case No. 6-95-1042-3. This was a complicated civil case brought by Mr. Tunstall on behalf of his client, Carolina Coating Systems. The case was originally brought in state court but was later joined to a pending case in federal court. Mr. Tunstall's client received one of the largest settlements in a Greenwood County case. Mr. Tunstall believes the case is significant because it demonstrates his ability to handle exceedingly complex litigation.

Mr. Tunstall reported that because of the division of work in his firm that he has not personally handled any domestic appeals as sole counsel. He stated that his partner is in charge of appeals. He has, however, assisted in the research and preparation of numerous domestic appeals handled by his firm.

At the Commission's request, Mr. Tunstall supplied a number of additional cases which he felt were representative of his domestic practice and a summary of his practice in the following areas of domestic law: Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Abuse and Neglect, Adoption, and Juvenile Justice. Mr. Tunstall's response was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing and can be referenced therein.

The Commission determined that Mr. Tunstall had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)     Judicial Temperament:

The Commission believes that Mr. Tunstall's temperament would be excellent.

(10)     Miscellaneous:

The following persons were unanimously found legally qualified:
Robert S. Armstrong     Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Harris L. Beach, Jr.     Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Curtis G. Clark     Eighth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Dianne P. Dewitt     Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Marvin H. Dukes, III     Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Peter L. Fuge     Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Drew A. Laughlin     Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Walter H. Sanders, Jr.     Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Paul E. Short, Jr.     Sixth Judicial Circuit Court, Resident Judge
Billy A. Tunstall, Jr.     Eighth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3

Respectfully submitted,
/s/Senator Glenn F. McConnell     /s/Rep. F.G. Delleney, Jr.

Chairman         Vice Chairman
/s/Senator Edward E. Saleeby     /s/Senator Thomas L. Moore
/s/Rep. Wm. Douglas Smith     /s/Rep. Ralph W. Canty
/s/Harry M. Lightsey, Jr.     /s/Judge Curtis G. Shaw
/s/Richard S. Fisher

On motion of Rep. DELLENEY, the report was ordered printed in the Journal.

The following was received.
Columbia, S.C., May 29, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that the Report of the Committee of Free Conference having been adopted by both Houses ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and the Act enrolled for Ratification:
S. 483 -- Senators Fair and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 16-3-635 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A PERSON ASSAULTING AN EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE WORKER OR A FIREMAN PERFORMING HIS PROFESSIONAL DUTIES IS GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR AND TO PROVIDE PENALTIES.
Very respectfully,
President

Received as information.

The following was received.
Columbia, S.C., May 29, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it concurs in the amendments proposed by the House to H. 3945:
H. 3945 -- Reps. Young-Brickell, Cato, Barrett, Woodrum, Seithel, Sandifer, Sheheen, H. Brown, Law, Meacham, Harrell, Chellis, Hamilton, Kinon, Sharpe, Bailey, Witherspoon, Hinson, Littlejohn, Keegan, Harrison and Haskins: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 38-73-500, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE MERIT RATING SYSTEM FOR WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE INCLUSION OF A CREDIT OF AT LEAST FIVE PERCENT FOR AN INSURED WHO PARTICIPATES IN A PROGRAM DESIGNED TO PREVENT THE USE OF DRUGS ON THE JOB BY EMPLOYEES OF THE INSURED, PROVIDE FURTHER FOR THE CREDIT TO BE ACTUARIALLY SOUND, PROVIDE FOR THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE TO ALLOW AND ORDER A CREDIT LESS THAN FIVE PERCENT WHEN THE CREDIT IS DETERMINED NOT TO BE ACTUARIALLY SOUND, PROVIDE FOR THE PROMULGATION OF CERTAIN REGULATIONS AND THE CERTIFICATION OF AN EMPLOYER DRUG PREVENTION PROGRAM, AND PROVIDE FOR RANDOM TESTING PROCEDURES; TO ADD SECTION 41-1-15, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR WORKPLACE PROCEDURES DESIGNED TO PREVENT DRUGS ON THE JOB; AND PROVIDE THAT WORKERS' COMPENSATION POLICIES ISSUED OR RENEWED ON AND AFTER OCTOBER 1, 1997, SHALL BE GRANTED PREMIUM REDUCTION OF NOT LESS THAN FIVE PERCENT.
and has ordered the Bill Enrolled for Ratification.
Very respectfully,
President

Received as information.

The following was received from the Senate.

Columbia, S.C., May 28, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it nonconcurs in the amendments proposed by the House to S. 489:
S. 489 -- Senator Elliott: A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 40, CHAPTER 38, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO OPTICIANS, SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING BOARDS IN CHAPTER 1, TITLE 40, AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE LICENSURE AND REGULATION OF OPTICIANS INCLUDING INCREASING CONTINUING EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS FROM THREE HOURS TO FOUR HOURS FOR A LICENSED OPTICIAN AND AN ADDITIONAL HOUR FOR AN OPTICIAN ALSO LICENSED TO DISPENSE CONTACT LENSES.
Very respectfully,
President

On motion of Rep. BATTLE, the House insisted upon its amendments.

Whereupon, the Chair appointed Reps. M. HINES, BATTLE and PARKS to the Committee of Conference on the part of the House and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.

The following was received from the Senate.

Columbia, S.C., May 29, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it insists upon its amendments to S. 269:
S. 269 -- Senators Setzler and Moore: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 7, TITLE 40, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REGULATION AND LICENSURE OF BARBERS, SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL BOARDS AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE LICENSURE AND REGULATION OF BARBERS.
and asks for a Committee of Conference and has appointed Senators Setzler, Moore and Alexander of the Committee of Conference on the part of the Senate.

Very respectfully,
President

Whereupon, the Chair appointed Reps. CHELLIS, LAW and G. BROWN to the Committee of Conference on the part of the House and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.

The following was received from the Senate.

Columbia, S.C., May 29, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it insists upon its amendments to H. 3744:
H. 3744 -- Rep. Wilkins: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A STUDY COMMITTEE TO FORMULATE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO CONSIDER FOR FUTURE LEGISLATION CONCERNING DRUG IMPAIRED INFANTS AND THE TREATMENT METHODS, COMMITMENT PROCEDURES, AND THE PROSECUTION OF MOTHERS OF DRUG IMPAIRED INFANTS, AND ALL OTHER RELATED ISSUES CONCERNING DRUG IMPAIRED INFANTS AND THEIR MOTHERS.
and asks for a Committee of Conference and has appointed Senators Rose, Short and Washington of the Committee of Conference on the part of the Senate.

Very respectfully,
President

Whereupon, the Chair appointed Reps. YOUNG, COTTY and GOVAN to the Committee of Conference on the part of the House and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.

The Senate returned to the House with amendments the following:

H. 3650 -- Reps. Felder, Harrison, Cotty, Young, Davenport and Haskins: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 20-7-515 SO AS TO PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES ISSUING A NOTICE OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO PERSONS OWING CHILD SUPPORT; TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-3470, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE EMPLOYER TAX CREDIT FOR EMPLOYING PERSONS WHO RECEIVED AID TO FAMILIES WITH DEPENDENT CHILDREN (AFDC), SO AS TO CHANGE AFDC TO FAMILY INDEPENDENCE, TO REVISE HEALTH INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN THE TAX CREDIT AND TO REVISE PROCEDURES FOR EMPLOYERS OBTAINING INFORMATION ON THE AVAILABILITY OF POTENTIAL EMPLOYEES; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-941, RELATING TO LICENSE REVOCATION FOR NONPAYMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF "LICENSE" WITH REGARD TO HUNTING, FISHING, OR TRAPPING; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-944, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO LICENSING ENTITIES WHICH MUST PROVIDE INFORMATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT, SO AS TO REVISE THE FORM IN WHICH THIS INFORMATION MUST BE PROVIDED; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-9520, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO SERVING A NOTICE OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ON PERSONS OWING CHILD SUPPORT DEBTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE NOTICE FOR A RESCHEDULED OR SUBSEQUENT HEARING; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-9530, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PROCEDURES FOR FAILING TO APPEAR FOR A NEGOTIATION CONFERENCE CONCERNING A CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATION, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE CONFERENCE TO BE RESCHEDULED IF THE PERSON DID NOT RECEIVE PROPER NOTICE; TO AMEND ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 5, TITLE 43, RELATING TO PUBLIC AID AND ASSISTANCE, SO AS TO, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONFORM PROVISIONS TO THE FAMILY INDEPENDENCE ACT OF 1995, TO REVISE PROVISIONS TO ASSIST IMPLEMENTING THAT ACT AND TO DELETE OBSOLETE PROVISIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-580, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT OBLIGATIONS OF ABSENT PARENTS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF AN APPLICANT FOR FAMILY INDEPENDENCE BENEFITS; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1110, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS IN THE SOUTH CAROLINA FAMILY INDEPENDENCE ACT OF 1995, SO AS TO CHANGE THE TERM "AFDC" TO "FAMILY INDEPENDENCE"; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1120, RELATING TO EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR FAMILY INDEPENDENCE APPLICANTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT REFERRING CERTAIN APPLICANTS TO A JOB CLUB IS OPTIONAL RATHER THAN MANDATORY; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1135, RELATING TO STATE AGENCY GOALS TO EMPLOY WELFARE RECIPIENTS, SO AS TO CONFORM TERMS AND TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL GOALS; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1150, RELATING TO THE JOB TRAINING AND PARTNERSHIP ACT (JTPA) INCENTIVE FUNDS, SO AS TO ESTABLISH A GOAL OF FORTY PERCENT OF FAMILY INDEPENDENCE RECIPIENTS PARTICIPATING IN JTPA PROGRAMS; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1185, RELATING TO FAMILY SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAMS, SO AS TO MAKE PARTICIPATION IN THIS PROGRAM BASED ON NEED RATHER THAN REQUIRED AS A CONDITION OF ELIGIBILITY; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1190, RELATING TO AFDC ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS, SO AS TO CONFORM TERM TO "FAMILY INDEPENDENCE" ELIGIBILITY; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1200, RELATING TO VEHICLE AND OTHER ASSET LIMITS FOR AFDC ELIGIBILITY, SO AS TO CONFORM TERMS AND EXEMPT ONE VEHICLE FROM THE ASSET LIMIT; TO REPEAL SECTION 43-1-130, RELATING TO THE FEDERAL WORK INCENTIVE PROGRAM; AND TO REPEAL SECTIONS 43-5-510, 43-5-520, 43-5-530, 43-5-540, 43-5-550, 43-5-560, 43-5-570, AND 43-5-640, ALL RELATING TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA EMPLOYABLES PROGRAM ACT.

Rep. FELDER explained the Senate amendment.

The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.

The Senate returned to the House with amendments the following:

H. 3286 -- Rep. Sharpe: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 2 OF ACT 387 OF 1996 RELATING TO THE ONE-YEAR PERIOD WITHIN WHICH A PERMANENT WAIVER OF EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS MAY BE GRANTED TO A MASSAGE/BODYWORK THERAPY APPLICANT FOR LICENSURE WHO MEETS CERTAIN OTHER REQUIREMENTS, SO AS TO REVISE THE AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED IN PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE AS A THERAPIST FROM FOUR YEARS TO ONE YEAR.

Rep. SHARPE explained the Senate amendment.

The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.

The Senate returned to the House with amendments the following:

H. 3137 -- Rep. J. Brown: A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 40, CHAPTER 67, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO SPEECH PATHOLOGISTS AND AUDIOLOGISTS SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL BOARDS IN CHAPTER 1, TITLE 40 AND, AMONG OTHER THINGS, TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF BOARD MEMBERS FROM SIX TO FIVE, TO CLARIFY THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BOARD, TO CLARIFY THE SCOPE OF PRACTICE, TO AUTHORIZE DISPENSING AND FITTING DEVICES TO PROMOTE COMMUNICATION, TO ADD LICENSURE FOR SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY ASSISTANTS, TO PROVIDE FOR BIENNIAL LICENSURE, TO INCREASE FEES, TO REQUIRE CONTINUING EDUCATION, TO CLARIFY EXEMPTIONS FROM THE CHAPTER, AND TO ESTABLISH CRIMINAL PENALTIES.

Rep. J. BROWN explained the Senate amendment.

The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.

The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration.

H. 3858 -- Reps. Vaughn, Haskins, Cato, Leach and Hamilton: A BILL TO AMEND ACT 432 OF 1947, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE GREENVILLE HOSPITAL SYSTEM, ITS CREATION, BOARD, POWERS, AND DUTIES, SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE BOARD FROM SELLING, LEASING, MERGING, CONSOLIDATING, OR TRANSFERRING CERTAIN OF ITS ASSETS OR ENTERING INTO A JOINT VENTURE OR OTHER BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE GREENVILLE COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION IF THE ACTION DISPOSES OF OR COMMITS TEN PERCENT OR MORE OF THE ASSETS; TO PROHIBIT THE BOARD FROM TRANSFERRING OR DELEGATING ITS RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITY OVER THE HOSPITAL SYSTEM TO ANY OTHER PERSONS, BOARD, OR ENTITY, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION ONLY MAY CALL FOR A REFERENDUM IF CONSENT IS REQUESTED TO TAKE SUCH ACTION; TO INCREASE THE BOARD FROM SEVEN TO NINE MEMBERS AND TO PROVIDE NOMINATING PROCEDURES AND TO PROVIDE ALTERNATIVE COMPOSITION AND PROCEDURES CONTINGENT UPON A GREENVILLE CITY COUNCIL STIPULATION BY ORDINANCE; TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARD TO PROVIDE SERVICES AND LOCATE FACILITIES OUTSIDE OF GREENVILLE COUNTY IF SUCH WOULD ENHANCE SERVICES; TO ENTER INTO JOINT VENTURES OR OTHER BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR OBTAINING CONSENT UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS; TO AUTHORIZE THE CHANGE OF NAME OF THE BOARD AND THE OPERATION OF THE BOARD UNDER A TRADE NAME; TO AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ONE OR MORE SUBSIDIARIES AND TO REQUIRE SUCH ENTITY TO COMPLY WITH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT; TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL HOSPITALS OR OTHER CLINICS; TO AUTHORIZE THE EXERCISE OF CERTAIN POWERS GENERALLY CONFERRED ON REGIONAL HEALTH SERVICE DISTRICTS; TO AMEND ACT 1285 OF 1966, RELATING TO THE NAME OF THE GREENVILLE HOSPITAL SYSTEM, SO AS TO CHANGE THE NAME OF THE BOARD TO THE GREENVILLE HEALTH SYSTEM BOARD OF TRUSTEES; TO REQUIRE THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES TO REIMBURSE THE COUNTY FOR ANY DAMAGES THE COUNTY MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY THE CITY UNDER A CONTRACT ARISING OUT OF ACT 432 OF 1947; AND TO REPEAL CERTAIN PROVISIONS CONTINGENT UPON STIPULATIONS OF GREENVILLE CITY COUNCIL.

Reps. VAUGHN and WILKINS proposed the following Amendment No. 1A (Doc Name P:\AMEND\PSD\7418AC.97), which was adopted.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:

/SECTION 1. Act 432 of 1947, as last amended by Act 1285 of 1966, is further amended by adding:

"Section 5A.     (A)     Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 5, item 19, without the consent of a majority of the Greenville County legislative delegation in a regular or special called meeting of the delegation, the board, with regard to property and assets acquired subsequent to the transfer of the hospital building and land adjacent to the hospital building pursuant to Act 432 of 1947, shall not:

(1)     sell, lease, or otherwise dispose of, or merge, consolidate, or transfer ten percent or more of its assets in the aggregate in any single fiscal year to a third party including, but not limited to, the three satellite hospitals in the Greenville Health Care System which, for purposes of this section, must be treated as individual entities and not as one entity;

(2)     enter into a third party joint venture, partnership, alliance, network, or business or contractual relationship, or organization committing, pledging, or contributing ten percent or more of its assets over the life of the joint venture, partnership, alliance, network, or business relationship or organization;

(3)     transfer or delegate its responsibilities, power, or authority to maintain, operate, or govern the property, facilities, operations, and assets under the jurisdiction of the Greenville Health System Board of Trustees to a third party.

For purposes of this subsection 'third party' means a person or entity not controlled by or affiliated with the board.

(B)     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the board seeks consent from the Greenville County legislative delegation to take an action provided for in subsection (A), the delegation, and only the delegation, may choose to hold a referendum which may be held as a special referendum or at the time of a general election. At the time the delegation determines that a referendum shall be held, the delegation, by majority vote, also shall determine whether or not the referendum will be binding.

(C)     Where the consent of a majority of the delegation is not required because of the threshold requirements of subsection (A)(1) and (2), written notice of the action must be provided in advance to the delegation."

SECTION     2.     Section 4 of Act 432 of 1947, as last amended by Act 546 of 1951, is further amended to read:

"Section 4.     For the purpose of operating and at all times maintaining adequate hospital facilities for the residents of Greenville County, including those residents of said County who shall reside in the City of Greenville, there is established a Board, to be known as the Greenville General Hospital Board of Trustees. Said Board shall consist of seven (7) members, all of whom shall be qualified electors. Three (3) of said members, designated for convenience as 'City however, the board, in accordance with this item, may enter into joint ventures, partnerships, alliances, networks, and business relationships and organizations with other governmental and nongovernmental Members', shall reside within the corporate limits of the City of Greenville; three (3) of said members, designated for convenience as 'County Members' shall reside within the corporate limits of Greenville County but without the corporate limits of the City of Greenville; and, the seventh member, designated for convenience as 'Member at Large', shall reside within the County of Greenville, either within or without the corporate limits of the City of Greenville. The initial membership of the Board shall consist of the following persons: R.S. Huntington, W.B. Ellis, Jr., and Sidney Bruce as City Members; John Ratteree, Allen League and Charles V. Verner as County Members; and Allen Sibley, as Member at Large, each of whom is found to have the qualifications for membership prescribed by the provisions of this Section. Of the initial Board, two (2) shall have a term ending October 1st, 1949, two shall have a term ending October 1st, 1951, and three shall have a term ending October 1st, 1953. Upon being apprised of the favorable result of the election, required by the provisions of Section 2 hereof, said Board shall meet as soon as may be practicable and organize by electing one of their number as Chairman, a second as Vice-Chairman, and a third as Secretary, whereupon, after the organization of said Board, it shall determine by lot and duration of the term of each member, in order that the requirements of this Section shall be complied with. And, upon the terms of the several members being thus determined, the Secretary of said Board shall certify the same to the Governor of South Carolina, who shall issue commissions to each member for the term required by this Act. A full transcript of the records of the initial organization shall be filed with the Clerk of Court of Greenville County, by the Secretary of said Board, and shall be recorded and indexed by that official. Subsequent terms of office of the members of said Board of Trustees shall be for a term of six (6) years. Vacancies on the Board, either among the initial appointees, or among their successors in office, occurring by reason of death, resignation, refusal to serve or otherwise, shall be for the remainder of the term of the office in which the vacancy shall have occurred. If, upon the expiration of the term of any member of the Board of Trustees, a successor shall not have been appointed, the member whose term has thus expired shall hold over until the appointment and qualification of his successor, but this provision shall not extend the term of the successor beyond the six (6) year period herein provided for. All vacancies shall be filled in the following manner: If the vacancy in office shall be for a "City Member", the remaining members of the Board, or a majority thereof, shall submit a nomination or nominations to the City Council of the City of Greenville for its approval; if the vacancy in office shall be for a "County Member", the remaining members of the Board, or a majority thereof, shall submit a nomination or nominations to the Greenville County Delegation to the General Assembly for its approval; and, if the vacancy in office shall be for the "Member at Large", the remaining members of the Board, or a majority thereof, shall submit a nomination or nominations to the City Council of the General Assembly for their approval. Upon the approval of a majority of the City Council of the City of Greenville, or a majority of the Greenville County Delegation to the General Assembly, as the case may be, or by both in the event the nomination be for the "Member at Large", then the Clerk of City Council, or the Secretary or Acting Secretary of the County Delegation, or both, as the case may be, shall certify their approval to the Governor of South Carolina, who shall commission the nominee for the term provided. By the provisions of this Section. All members of the Board shall service without compensation. Appointments and acceptances thereof shall be duly filed in the office of the Clerk of Court for Greenville County. 'PROVIDED, that from and after the effective date of this proviso, the Greenville General Hospital Board of Trustees shall be enlarged by the addition thereto of three (3) members, viz: Carl Morgan, C.S. Merriner and Waddy R. Thompson. Said additional members shall be members at large and their terms of office shall be to June 30, 1953, and their commissions shall, upon the approval of this proviso be issued by the Governor of South Carolina. They shall have the same duties, powers and authorities as the other seven (7) members of the Board. If any of these additional members shall fail to qualify or accept their appointment or in case a vacancy shall occur among their number, such vacancy or vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired term in like manner as provided above in this Section for the selection of the member at large. At the expiration of the terms of the three (3) additional members provided for in this proviso, the Board of Trustees of said Hospital shall revert to a seven (7) member Board as originally provided for in this Section.

(A)     For the purpose of operating and at all times maintaining adequate hospital facilities for the residents of Greenville County, including those residents in the City of Greenville, there is established the Greenville Health System Board of Trustees.

(B)(1)     If the Greenville City Council by ordinance so stipulates, the board of trustees shall consist of nine members to be appointed by the Governor pursuant to this section, all of whom must be qualified electors and whom must reside within the corporate limits of Greenville County. Of the nine members, one must reside in House District 17 or 19, one must reside in House District 18 or 21, one must reside in House District 20 or 22, one must reside in House District 23 or 24, one must reside in House District 25 or 26, and one must reside in House District 27 or 28; of these six house district members, no more than one may reside in the City of Greenville. Two members must be members at large and must reside within the corporate limits of the City of Greenville. One member must be a member at large who may reside in the county or city and must be a physician who is not principally employed in medical administration.

The board shall publicize vacancies and recommendations may be made to the board from any individual, organization, or group. The board shall submit at least two names for each vacancy on the board except that only one name is required to be submitted for the physician member. Names for all house district members and the physician member must be submitted by the board to the Greenville County legislative delegation, and names for the two members from the City of Greenville must be submitted by the board to the Greenville City Council. However, the legislative delegation may reject any or all of the names submitted to it, and the city council may reject any or all of the names submitted to it, and either may request the board to submit additional names. The county legislative delegation or the city council, as the case may be, with a quorum present and by majority vote shall select one nominee from the names submitted to it for each vacancy to submit to the Governor for appointment. All recommendations, nominations, and appointments to the board shall take into account race and gender so as to represent, to the greatest extent possible, all segments of the population of Greenville County.

(2)     If the Greenville City Council does not by ordinance stipulate to the composition and nominating procedures provided for in this subsection, the board of trustees shall consist of nine members to be appointed by the Governor pursuant to this section, all of whom must be qualified electors and whom must reside within the corporate limits of Greenville County. Of the nine members, one must reside in House District 17 or 19, one must reside in House District 18 or 21, one must reside in House District 20 or 22, one must reside in House District 23 or 24, one must reside in House District 25 or 26, and one must reside in House District 27 or 28; of these six house district members, no more than one may reside in the City of Greenville. Three members must be members at large with no more than one member residing in the corporate limits of the City of Greenville. One of the at-large members must be a physician who is not principally employed in medical administration.

The board shall publicize vacancies and recommendations may be made to the board from any individual, organization, or group. The board shall submit at least two names for each vacancy on the board except that only one name is required to be submitted for the physician member. Names for all vacancies must be submitted by the board to the Greenville County legislative delegation which, with a quorum present and by majority vote, shall select one nominee for each vacancy to submit to the Governor for appointment. However, the legislative delegation may reject any or all of the names submitted to it and may request the board to submit additional names. All recommendations, nominations, and appointments to the board shall take into account race and gender so as to represent, to the greatest extent possible, all segments of the population of Greenville County.

(C)     Members shall serve terms of six years and until their successors are appointed and qualify; however, members must be appointed no later than six months after a term expires. Vacancies must be filled in the manner of the original appointment for the unexpired portion of the term. No member may serve more than one consecutive full term. However, if a person is appointed to fill an unexpired portion of a term and the remainder of the term is less than four years, the person may be reappointed to one full term. Appointments must be filed in the office of the Clerk of Court for Greenville County.

(D)     The board shall elect from its members a chairman, vice chairman, and secretary. Members shall serve without compensation.

(E)     Notwithstanding the provisions of this subsection (B), four members must be appointed in 1997, two to fill terms expiring in 1997 and two added by the provisions of this act. Of these four appointees, one must be drawn by lot, shall serve a two-year term, and may be reappointed. When the term expires for the member whose name was drawn by lot, the board, in filling this vacancy, is not required to submit any name for consideration, other than this member's name.

(F)     Members serving on this act's effective date shall continue serving until their terms in effect at the time of their appointment expire, at which time new members appointed to replace these members must be appointed pursuant to this section."

SECTION     3.     Section 5 of Act 432 of 1947, as last amended by Act 1285 of 1966, is further amended by adding appropriately numbered items at the end:

"( )     To provide services and locate facilities outside Greenville County upon a finding by the board that such additional services and facilities would enhance the programs, services, or operations provided by the board;

( )     Subject to the requirements of Section 5A, to enter into joint ventures, partnerships, alliances, networks, business or contractual relationships, or business organizations with other governmental and nongovernmental health care providers and with purchasers of health care services and with others which the board finds will further the purposes of this act;

( )     To change the name of, or operate under one or more trade names, or both, of the board and the facilities it operates;

( )     To establish one or more wholly owned or controlled subsidiaries which, in its judgment, are in the best interest of the board; provided, however, that in establishing any such entity, the board shall require it to comply with all requirements of the South Carolina Freedom of Information Act;

( )     To establish, acquire, or operate additional hospital outpatient clinics, or other health care facilities which the board finds will further purposes of this act and will benefit the people of Greenville County;

( )     To exercise the powers conferred on regional health service districts by Act 490 of 1976 and Act 512 of 1984, as these may be amended from time to time."

SECTION     4.     Section 1 of Act 1285 of 1966 is amended to read:

"Section 1.     The name of the Greenville General Hospital Board of Trustees, as created by Act No. 432 of 1947, is hereby changed to the Greenville Hospital Health System Board of Trustees."

SECTION     5.     If the County of Greenville is required to pay the City of Greenville damages under a contractual obligation arising from provisions of Section 3(1) of Act 432 of 1947, within thirty days of the county paying the city the Greenville Health System Board of Trustees shall reimburse Greenville County for the damages paid, not to exceed one million five hundred thousand dollars.

SECTION     6.     If the provisions of Section 4(B)(2) of Act 432 of 1947 apply, as added by this act, then Sections 1 and 3 of Act 432 of 1947 are repealed."

SECTION     7.     This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor./

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend totals and title to conform.

The Senate amendments, as amended, were then agreed to and the Bill ordered returned to the Senate.

The Senate amendments to the following Concurrent Resolution were taken up for consideration.

H. 4184 -- Reps. Wilkins, Haskins, Harrison, J. Brown, H. Brown, Townsend, Sharpe and Cato: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE THAT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE III, SECTION 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS STATE AND SECTION 2-1-180 OF THE 1976 CODE, WHEN THE RESPECTIVE HOUSES OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADJOURN ON THURSDAY, JUNE 5, 1997, EACH HOUSE SHALL STAND ADJOURNED TO MEET AT 11:00 A.M. ON TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1997, AND TO CONTINUE IF NECESSARY UNTIL WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 1997, NOT LATER THAN 5:00 P.M. FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIED MATTERS; AND TO PROVIDE THAT WHEN EACH HOUSE ADJOURNS ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 1997, NOT LATER THAN 5:00 P.M., THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHALL STAND ADJOURNED SINE DIE.

Reps. WILKINS, HASKINS, HARRISON, J. BROWN, H. BROWN, TOWNSEND, SHARPE and CATO proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\GJK\20824SD.97), which was adopted.

Amend the resolution, as and if amended, by striking all after the resolving words and inserting:

/Pursuant to the provisions of Article III, Section 21 of the Constitution of this State and Section 2-1-180 of the 1976 Code, the mandatory sine die adjournment date for the General Assembly is extended, as authorized by law, to permit the General Assembly to continue in session after Thursday, June 5, 1997, under the following terms and conditions:

(A)     When each house adjourns on Thursday, June 5, 1997, to adjourn not later than 5:00 p.m., it shall stand adjourned to meet in statewide session at 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, June 17, 1997, and to continue in statewide session, if necessary, not later than 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 18, 1997, for consideration of the following matters:

(1)     a joint session of the General Assembly to be held at 12:00 noon on Tuesday, June 17, 1997, for the purpose of holding elections, if and only if a separate concurrent resolution for each election is adopted by the House and Senate scheduling an election for the specified date and time for each of the offices to be filled;

(2)     gubernatorial vetoes;

(3)     consideration and confirmation of appointments;

(4)     ratification of acts;

(5)     local legislation which has the unanimous consent of the affected delegation;

(6)     receipt, consideration, and disposition of conference and free conference reports, appointment of conference and free conference committees and messages pertaining to such reports and appointments; and

(7)     resolutions expressing sympathy or congratulations;

(8)     legislation to continue appropriation authorizations and necessary provisos of Act 458 of 1996 beyond June 30, 1997.

(B)     Each house may also provide for local session days during the period between June 5, 1997, and June 17, 1997, for consideration of local legislation which has the unanimous consent of the affected delegation.

(C)     The President Pro Tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House may ratify acts at a mutually convenient time between June 5, 1997, and June 17, 1997.

(D)     When each house adjourns not later than 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 18, 1997, the General Assembly shall stand adjourned sine die./

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend totals and title to conform.

The Senate amendments, as amended, were then agreed to and the Concurrent Resolution ordered returned to the Senate.

On motion of Rep. H. BROWN, with unanimous consent, the following was taken up for immediate consideration:

H. 4259 -- Reps. H. Brown and Hinson: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO THE HANAHAN HIGH SCHOOL "HAWKS" SOCCER TEAM, COACHES, AND STAFF ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 4, 1997, AT A TIME TO BE DETERMINED BY THE SPEAKER, FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING RECOGNIZED AND CONGRATULATED ON WINNING THE 1996-97 CLASS AA-A STATE CHAMPIONSHIP.

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives:

That the privilege of the floor of the House of Representatives is extended to the Hanahan High School "Hawks" Soccer Team, coaches, and staff on Wednesday, June 4, 1997, at a time to be determined by the Speaker, for the purpose of being recognized and congratulated on winning the 1996-97 Class AA-A State Championship.

The Resolution was adopted.

The following was introduced:

H. 4260 -- Reps. Scott, Allison, Altman, Askins, Bailey, Barfield, Barrett, Battle, Bauer, Baxley, Beck, Boan, Bowers, Breeland, G. Brown, H. Brown, J. Brown, T. Brown, Byrd, Campsen, Canty, Carnell, Cato, Cave, Chellis, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cooper, Cotty, Cromer, Dantzler, Davenport, Delleney, Easterday, Edge, Felder, Fleming, Gamble, Gourdine, Govan, Hamilton, Harrell, A. Harris, Harrison, Harvin, Haskins, Hawkins, J. Hines, M. Hines, Hinson, Hodges, Howard, Inabinett, Jennings, Jordan, Keegan, Kelley, Kennedy, Kinon, Kirsh, Klauber, Knotts, Koon, Lanford, Law, Leach, Lee, Limbaugh, Limehouse, Littlejohn, Lloyd, Loftis, Mack, Maddox, Martin, Mason, McCraw, McKay, McLeod, McMahand, McMaster, Meacham, Miller, Moody-Lawrence, Mullen, Neal, Neilson, Parks, Phillips, Pinckney, Quinn, Rhoad, Rice, Riser, Robinson, Rodgers, Sandifer, Seithel, Sharpe, Sheheen, Simrill, D. Smith, F. Smith, J. Smith, R. Smith, Spearman, Stille, Stoddard, Stuart, Townsend, Tripp, Trotter, Vaughn, Walker, Webb, Whatley, Whipper, Wilder, Wilkes, Wilkins, Witherspoon, Woodrum, Young and Young-Brickell: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING THE SOUTH CAROLINA CHAPTER OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BENCH AND BAR SPOUSES, INCORPORATED, ON SPONSORING ITS FOURTH ANNUAL SCHOLARSHIP GALA AND WISHING IT MUCH SUCCESS IN ITS FUTURE ENDEAVORS.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4261 -- Reps. H. Brown and Hinson: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE CONGRATULATIONS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TO THE HANAHAN HIGH SCHOOL "HAWKS" SOCCER TEAM, COACHES, AND STAFF ON WINNING THE 1996-97 CLASS AA-A STATE CHAMPIONSHIP.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4262 -- Rep. Bailey: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SORROW OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AT THE DEATH OF TERETHA LEMON-LINCOLN OF DORCHESTER COUNTY AND EXTENDING SYMPATHY TO HER FAMILY AND MANY FRIENDS.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The Senate sent to the House the following:

S. 795 -- Senators Saleeby and Leventis: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO URGE THE FEDERAL RESERVE TO MAINTAIN ITS PROCESSING CENTER IN COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, AND TO CONSOLIDATE SERVICES INTO THE COLUMBIA OFFICE BECAUSE OF ITS DEMONSTRATED EFFICIENT OPERATION AND ITS ESTABLISHED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED EMPLOYEES RATHER THAN RELOCATING THE CENTER TO CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA.

The Concurrent Resolution was ordered referred to the Committee on Invitations and Memorial Resolutions.

The Senate sent to the House the following:

S. 799 -- Senator Leventis: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING LEROY A. THOMPSON, JR., OF SUMTER ON BEING SELECTED TO RECEIVE THE "OUTSTANDING STATE EMPLOYEE AWARD" FOR 1997 AND COMMENDING HIM FOR HIS DEDICATION AS A STATE WORKER AND FOR HIS OUTSTANDING ABILITIES.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered returned to the Senate with concurrence.

The Senate sent to the House the following:

S. 800 -- Senators Setzler, Lander, Ryberg and Wilson: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO COMMEND MRS. BETTY BAIRD OF BATESBURG FOR HER MANY YEARS OF DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AS LEXINGTON COUNTY EXTENSION AGENT WITH CLEMSON EXTENSION SERVICE UPON THE OCCASION OF HER RETIREMENT.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered returned to the Senate with concurrence.

The following was introduced:

H. 4263 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING JACOB SVENSSON OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4264 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING RICARDO ALMEIDA OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4265 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING CLAES PERSSON OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS ROLE IN ASSISTING LANDER WIN THE 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4266 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING FRANK POTTHOFF OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4267 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING MARTIN KAHM OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4268 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING LAIO TEIXEIRA OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4269 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING MAURICE SZPYDOWSKI OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4270 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING JANNE VILHUNEN OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4271 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING COACH JOSEPH CABRI, LANDER UNIVERSITY MENS TENNIS COACH, FOR LEADING THE UNIVERSITY'S MENS TENNIS TEAM TO ITS NINTH NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP AND ON HIS SUCCESS AS AN OUTSTANDING FACULTY MEMBER.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4272 -- Rep. Cave: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO EXTEND SINCERE CONGRATULATIONS AND BEST WISHES OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO THE BELOVED MRS. SARAH MAE McCRADY LAWTON OF ALLENDALE COUNTY ON THE OCCASION OF HER 100TH BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION.

The Resolution was adopted.

The following was introduced:

H. 4273 -- Rep. McLeod: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING MARYLAND STATE SENATOR GLORIA GARY LAWLAH, A NATIVE OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF NEWBERRY, SOUTH CAROLINA, FOR HER DISTINGUISHED LEADERSHIP RECORD AND ACHIEVEMENTS.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following Bills and Joint Resolution were introduced, read the first time, and referred to appropriate committees:

H. 4274 -- Reps. Robinson, Sandifer, Barrett, Vaughn, Hinson, Simrill, Sandifer, Young, Woodrum, Kelley, Cooper, McMaster, Harrison, Cotty, Limbaugh, Trotter, Allison, Koon, D. Smith, Maddox, Klauber, Spearman, Jordan, Stuart, Mullen and Jennings: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 16-15-455 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT NO PERSON WHO HAS BEEN CONVICTED OR PLED GUILTY OR NOLO CONTENDERE TO CERTAIN SPECIFIED CRIMINAL OFFENSES INVOLVING MINORS MAY ENTER THE GROUNDS OR BUILDINGS OF AN ELEMENTARY OR SECONDARY SCHOOL OR COME WITHIN A ONE HUNDRED-YARD RADIUS OF THE SCHOOL EXCEPT UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, AND TO PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION.

Referred to Committee on Judiciary.

S. 411 -- Corrections and Penology Committee: A BILL TO AMEND ACT 1377 OF 1968, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUE OF STATE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SO AS TO DELETE AN EXISTING BOND AUTHORIZATION FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION, PAROLE AND PARDON SERVICES AND AUTHORIZE PARTIAL FUNDING FOR A FACILITY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS IN THE SAME AMOUNT.

Rule 5.12 was waived by a division vote of 21 to 0.

Without reference.

S. 593 -- Senators Ravenel, Passailaigue, Rose, McConnell and Hayes: A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 45, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO LODGING FACILITIES, BY ADDING CHAPTER 4, SO AS TO ENACT THE "SOUTH CAROLINA BED AND BREAKFAST ACT", WHICH PROVIDES DEFINITIONS AND REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO BED AND BREAKFAST ESTABLISHMENTS IN SOUTH CAROLINA.

Referred to Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry.

S. 707 -- Senator McGill: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 13, TITLE 50, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO PROTECTION OF FISH, BY ADDING SECTION 50-13-390, SO AS TO PROHIBIT FISHING FROM PUBLIC ROADS WHICH ABUT LANDS THAT ARE POSTED AGAINST TRESPASSING OR FISHING; TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS; AND TO PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS.

Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs.

S. 780 -- Education Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, RELATING TO AREA VOCATIONAL CENTERS, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2128, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.

Referred to Committee on Education and Public Works.

The roll call of the House of Representatives was taken resulting as follows.

Allison                Altman                 Bailey
Barfield               Barrett                Battle
Bauer                  Baxley                 Boan
Breeland               Brown, G.              Brown, H.
Brown, J.              Byrd                   Campsen
Carnell                Cato                   Cave
Chellis                Clyburn                Cobb-Hunter
Cooper                 Cotty                  Cromer
Davenport              Easterday              Felder
Fleming                Gamble                 Hamilton
Harrell                Harris, A.             Harrison
Haskins                Hawkins                Hines, J.
Hines, M.              Hinson                 Hodges
Howard                 Inabinett              Jennings
Jordan                 Keegan                 Kelley
Kennedy                Kinon                  Kirsh
Klauber                Knotts                 Koon
Law                    Leach                  Lee
Limbaugh               Littlejohn             Lloyd
Loftis                 Mack                   Maddox
Martin                 Mason                  McCraw
McKay                  McLeod                 McMahand
McMaster               Meacham                Mullen
Neal                   Neilson                Parks
Phillips               Pinckney               Quinn
Rhoad                  Rice                   Riser
Robinson               Rodgers                Sandifer
Scott                  Seithel                Sharpe
Sheheen                Simrill                Smith, D.
Smith, R.              Spearman               Stille
Stoddard               Stuart                 Townsend
Tripp                  Trotter                Vaughn
Walker                 Webb                   Whatley
Wilder                 Wilkins                Witherspoon
Woodrum                Young                  Young-Brickell

I came in after the roll call and was present for the Session on Tuesday, June 3.

William K. Bowers                 F.G. Delleney, Jr.
Vida Osteen Miller                Timothy C. Wilkes
Tracy R. Edge                     Ralph W. Canty
James Emerson Smith, Jr.          Fletcher Nathaniel Smith, Jr.
Steve P. Lanford                  Jerry N. Govan, Jr.
C. Alex Harvin III                Scott Beck
Jackson S. Whipper                Harry R. Askins
Theodore A. Brown                 H.B. Limehouse III

The SPEAKER granted Rep. LIMEHOUSE a temporary leave of absence due to a death in the family.

The SPEAKER granted Rep. BECK a temporary leave of absence.

The SPEAKER granted Rep. DANTZLER a leave of absence for the day.

The SPEAKER granted Rep. MOODY-LAWRENCE a leave of absence for the day, due to attending a Women in Education Service Conference in Lexington, Kentucky.

Announcement was made that Dr. Mark O'Rourke is the Doctor of the Day for the General Assembly.

Rep. R. SMITH and the Aiken Delegation presented to the House the Silver Bluff High School "Lady Dogs" Track and Field Team, winners of the 1997 Class AA State Championship, and their coach.

Rep. BECK and the Aiken Delegation presented to the House the North Augusta Yellow Jackets Baseball Team, winners of the AAAA State Championship, and their coach.

Rep. R. SMITH and the Aiken Delegation presented to the House the Midland Valley High School "Mustangs" Baseball Team, winners of the 1997 Class AAA State Championship, their coaches and other school officials.

The following Bill was taken up, read the third time, and ordered sent to the Senate.

H. 4254 -- Rep. Wilkes: A BILL TO DEVOLVE THE POWERS, DUTIES, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE FAIRFIELD COUNTY RECREATION DISTRICT ON THE GOVERNING BODY OF FAIRFIELD COUNTY, TO TRANSFER ALL ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF THE DISTRICT TO THE COUNTY, AND TO REPEAL ACT 1059 OF 1970 RELATING TO THE CREATION OF THE FAIRFIELD COUNTY RECREATION DISTRICT.

The following Bill was read the third time, passed and, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.

S. 233 -- Senators Hayes and Russell: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 4-37-30(A), CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO LOCAL SALES AND USE TAXES FOR TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE TAX MAY BE IMPOSED FOR SINGLE OR MULTIPLE PROJECTS; TO CLARIFY THE TYPES OF PROJECTS FOR WHICH THE PROCEEDS OF THE TAX ARE TO BE USED; TO REQUIRE THAT THE REFERENDUM HELD BEFORE A TAX MAY BE IMPOSED NOT BE HELD MORE OFTEN THAT ONCE IN TWELVE MONTHS AND MUST BE HELD ON THE TUESDAY FOLLOWING THE FIRST MONDAY IN NOVEMBER; AND TO DELETE OBSOLETE PROVISIONS.

Rep. HARRISON moved to adjourn debate upon the following Bill until Wednesday, June 4, which was adopted.

S. 60 -- Senator Holland: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-2990, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE SUSPENSION OF A PERSON'S DRIVER'S LICENSE FOR DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE REINSTATEMENT OF THE DRIVER'S LICENSE OF A PERSON WHOSE LICENSE HAS BEEN REVOKED FOR A FIFTH OFFENSE; AND TO ADD SECTION 56-1-385, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR REINSTATEMENT OF THE DRIVER'S LICENSE AFTER A FIFTH OFFENSE.

The following Bill was taken up.

H. 3974 -- Reps. Campsen, Seithel, Woodrum, Altman and Young: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 20-7-1635 SO AS TO PROHIBIT PLACING A MINOR IN A FOSTER HOME IF THE MINOR HAS BEEN ADJUDICATED OR CONVICTED OF OR PLED GUILTY TO A SEX OFFENSE, AND TO PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION FOR PLACEMENT IN A THERAPEUTIC FOSTER HOME IF NO OTHER MINORS ARE IN THE HOME.

The Judiciary Committee proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\PSD\7394AC.97), which was adopted.

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 20-7-1635.     No minor may be placed in a foster home if the minor has been adjudicated delinquent for or has pled guilty or nolo contendere to or has been convicted of a sex offense, unless the placement is in a therapeutic foster home."

SECTION     2.     This act takes effect upon approval of the Governor./

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend title to conform.

Rep. YOUNG explained the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

Rep. NEAL proposed the following Amendment No. 2 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\PSD\7416AC.97), which was adopted.

Amend the report of the Committee on Judiciary, Section 20-7-1635, page 3974-1, line 27 before the /./ by inserting /or unless the minor is the only child in the foster home at the time of placement and for the length of that minor's placement in the foster home/

Amend title to conform.

Rep. NEAL explained the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

The Bill, as amended, was read the second time and ordered to third reading.

The following Bills and Joint Resolution were taken up, read the second time, and ordered to a third reading:

S. 640 -- Senator Rankin: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 31-17-525 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE MANNER IN WHICH AND CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH A RALLY FOR RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AT WHICH ARE DISPLAYED OR EXHIBITED SUCH VEHICLES MAY BE HELD INCLUDING A REQUIREMENT THAT A PERMIT BE OBTAINED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AT A FEE OF TWO HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS IN ORDER TO CONDUCT SUCH A RALLY, TO LIMIT SUCH RALLIES TO NO MORE THAN EIGHT A YEAR AT A CAMPGROUND, TO PROHIBIT THE SALE OF VEHICLES AT A PERMITTED RALLY; AND TO DEFINE "CAMPGROUND" AND "RALLY" FOR THE ABOVE PURPOSES.

Rep. TOWNSEND explained the Bill.

S. 23 -- Senator Mescher: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 29-15-60, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, SO AS TO REDUCE FROM SIXTY TO FIVE DAYS THE TIME IN WHICH THE OWNER OF AN ANIMAL MUST SATISFY A LIEN PLACED UPON THE ANIMAL FOR EXPENSES RELATING TO COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH BOARDING OF THE ANIMAL FOR UPKEEP, REST, AND TRAINING; TO REDUCE FROM FIFTEEN TO SEVEN DAYS THE TIME PERIOD DURING WHICH THE OWNER OF THE BOARDING FACILITY MUST ADVERTISE THE SALE OF AN ANIMAL WHEN ITS OWNER FAILS TO SATISFY A LIEN FOR BOARDING AFTER NOTICE; AND TO PROVIDE THAT AN ANIMAL NOT PURCHASED AT THE ADVERTISED SALE BECOMES THE SOLE PROPERTY OF THE BOARDING FACILITY OWNER WITH ALL RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES, AND OBLIGATIONS OF OWNERSHIP.

Rep. RHOAD explained the Bill.

S. 784 -- Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION, MANUFACTURED HOUSING BOARD, RELATING TO MANUFACTURED HOMES, PRACTICES IN THE INDUSTRY, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2176, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.

Rep. BAILEY explained the Joint Resolution.

Rep. H. BROWN moved to adjourn debate upon the following Bill, which was adopted.

S. 575 -- Senator Ryberg: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-37-220, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTIONS, SO AS TO DELETE THE FIVE-YEAR LIMIT ON THE EXEMPTION ALLOWED PROPERTY ACQUIRED BY NONPROFIT ENTITIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUILDING OR RENOVATING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES FOR DISADVANTAGED PERSONS.

The following Bill was taken up.

S. 616 -- Senators Holland, Lander, McConnell and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 16-3-1350 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS OF VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSAULTS; TO AMEND SECTION 16-3-1210, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PERSONS ELIGIBLE FOR AWARDS FROM THE VICTIM'S COMPENSATION FUND, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISIONS THAT MAKE CERTAIN HEALTH CARE AND MEDICAL FACILITIES ELIGIBLE FOR AWARDS TO COVER CERTAIN COSTS; TO AMEND ARTICLE 15, CHAPTER 3, TITLE 16, RELATING TO THE VICTIM'S AND WITNESS'S BILL OF RIGHTS, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ARTICLE AND REPLACE IT WITH PROVISIONS PROVIDING FOR VICTIM AND WITNESS SERVICES; AND TO PROVIDE A SEVERABILITY PROVISION.

The Judiciary Committee proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\DKA\4659CM.97).

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 16-3-1350. (A) The State must ensure that a victim of criminal sexual conduct in any degree, criminal sexual conduct with a minor in any degree, or child sexual abuse must not bear the cost of his or her routine medicolegal exam following the assault if the victim has filed an incident report with a law enforcement agency.

(B)     These exams must be standardized relevant to medical treatment and to gathering evidence from the body of the victim and must be based on and meet minimum standards for rape exam protocol as developed by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, the South Carolina Hospital Association, and the Governor's Office Division of Victim Assistance with production costs to be paid from funds appropriated for the Victim's Compensation Fund. These exams must include treatment for venereal disease, and must include medication for pregnancy prevention if indicated and if desired. The South Carolina Law Enforcement Division must distribute these exam kits to any licensed health care facility providing sexual assault exams. When dealing with a victim of criminal sexual assault, the law enforcement agency immediately must transport the victim to the nearest licensed health care facility which performs sexual assault exams. A health care facility providing sexual assault exams must use the standardized protocol described above.

(C)     A licensed health care facility, upon completion of a routine sexual assault exam as described in subsection (B) performed on a victim of criminal sexual conduct in any degree, criminal sexual conduct with a minor in any degree, or child sexual abuse, may file a claim for reimbursement directly to the South Carolina Crime Victim's Compensation Fund if the offense occurred in South Carolina. The South Carolina Crime Victim's Compensation Fund must develop procedures for health care facilities to follow when filing a claim with respect to the privacy of the victim. Health care facility personnel must obtain information necessary for the claim at the time of the exam if possible. The South Carolina Crime Victim's Compensation Fund must reimburse eligible health care facilities directly.

(D)     The Governor's Office Division of Victim Assistance must utilize existing funds appropriated from the general fund for the purpose of compensating licensed health care facilities for the cost of routine medical exams for sexual assault victims as described above. When the director determines that projected reimbursements in a fiscal year provided in this section exceed funds appropriated for payment of these reimbursements, he must direct the payment of the additional services from the Victim's Compensation Fund. For the purpose of this particular exam, the one hundred dollar deductible is waived for award eligibility under the fund. The South Carolina Victim's Compensation Fund must develop appropriate guidelines and procedures and distribute them to law enforcement agencies and appropriate health care facilities."

SECTION     2. Section 16-3-1210 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 181 of 1989, is further amended to read:

"Section 16-3-1210. (1) Except as provided in Section 16-3-1220, a victim, surviving spouse, or a parent or legally dependent child of a victim is entitled to file for benefits under this article if either:

(a)     the offense was committed in this State; or

(b)     the victim was a resident of this State when the offense was committed in another state. In either case, the award payable under this article must be reduced by the amount paid or payable under the laws of another state as a result of the criminal act giving rise to the claim.

A surviving spouse, parent, or legally dependent child is not entitled to file for benefits under this section if that person is the subject of an investigation, has been charged with, convicted of, or pled guilty or nolo contendere to the offense in question or acted on behalf of the suspect, juvenile offender, or defendant.

(2) A licensed health care or medical facility is eligible for an award to cover the specific cost for a routine medicolegal exam of an alleged victim of criminal sexual conduct in any degree or child sexual abuse provided the victim has filed an incident report with the police, provided the health care facility has performed the exam adhering to sexual assault exam protocol standards developed by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division and the South Carolina Hospital Association, and provided that the crime occurred in South Carolina."

SECTION     3.     Article 15, Chapter 3, Title 16 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:

Section 16-3-1510.In recognition of the civic and moral duty of victims and witnesses of crime to fully and voluntarily cooperate with law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies, and in further recognition of the continuing importance of this citizen cooperation to state and local law enforcement efforts and to the general effectiveness and the well-being of the criminal justice system of this State, the General Assembly declares its intent, in this article, to ensure that all victims and witnesses of crime are treated with dignity, respect, courtesy, and sensitivity; that the rights extended in this article to victims and witnesses of crime are honored and protected by law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and judges in a manner no less vigorous than the protections afforded criminal defendants; and that the State has a responsibility to provide support to a network of services to victims of crime, including victims of domestic violence and criminal sexual assault.

Section 16-3-1520. For the purpose of this article, "witness" means any person who has been or is expected to be summoned to testify for either the prosecution or the defense or who by reason of having relevant information is subject to call or likely to be called as a witness for the prosecution or defense, whether or not any action or proceeding has yet been commenced.

Section 16-3-1530. This section is known and may be cited as the "Victim's and Witness's Bill of Rights". To the extent reasonably possible and subject to available resources, victims and witnesses of crime are afforded the following rights where applicable:

(A)     VICTIMS AND WITNESSES HAVE A RIGHT TO BE TREATED WITH DIGNITY AND COMPASSION.

(1)A victim has a right to basic human services to meet emergency and long term needs caused by financial, physical, or psychological injury.

(2) A victim or witness has a right to be treated with dignity by human service professionals who provide basic assistance.

(3) A victim or witness has a right to receive courteous assistance as they cooperate with criminal justice personnel.

(B)(1) A victim has the right to be free from intimidation when involved in the criminal justice system.

(2) When the threat of damaging intimidation cannot be avoided, law enforcement agencies must take measures to protect the victim or witness, including, but not be limited to, transportation to and from court and physical protection in the courthouse.

(3) The court must provide the victim or witness courthouse waiting areas that are separate from those that will be used by the defendant, his or her family, or friends.

(4) If a witness is threatened, the solicitor must, to the extent reasonably possible, attempt to prosecute the case.

(C)     A victim or witness who wishes to receive notification and information must provide the solicitor, the Department of Corrections, and the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services his current address and telephone number. This information, as it is contained in Department of Corrections and Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services files, is privileged and must not be disclosed directly or indirectly, except between these two departments, or by order of a court of competent jurisdiction. The solicitor's office which is prosecuting the case has the responsibility of the rights in this subsection, except items (6) and (7) which are the responsibility of the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services and the Department of Corrections.

(1) victim or witness has a right to be informed about the procedures and practices of the criminal justice system.

(2) victim has a right to be informed of financial assistance and other social services available to victims and witnesses.

(3) A victim has a right to be informed of any compensation or fees to which they are entitled.

(4) A victim has a right to know the status and progress of his case from the police investigation to final disposition.

(5) A victim or prosecution witness has a right to be informed of a defendant's release on bail and to provide recommendations to the magistrate.

(6) A victim or prosecution witness has a right to be informed of post-sentence hearings affecting the probation or parole of the offender.

(7) A victim or prosecution witness has the right to be informed when the convicted offender receives a temporary, provisional, or final release from custody or the offender escapes from custody.

(8) Unless there is a judicial determination to restrict attendance, a victim or witness has the right to attend all hearings and procedures involving his case. A victim or prosecution witness has the right to be informed of all hearings and procedures in time to exercise his right to attend.

(9) A victim has the right to be informed of whatever rights to legal counsel are available to him in this State.

(10) A victim has the right to discuss his case with the prosecutor.

(11) A victim has a right to be informed of all available civil remedies respecting his case and to proceed in civil suits for recovery for damages if possible, including placing a lien on any profits received by the offender as a result of publication or media coverage resulting from the crime.

(12) A victim has the right to discuss his case with the solicitor or other prosecutor and be informed of any offers to plea bargain with the defendant.

(13) A victim or prosecution witness has the right to be notified in advance when a court proceeding has been rescheduled or cancelled.

(14) A witness has a right to be informed of financial assistance, compensation, or fees to which they are entitled.

(D)(1)     A victim or witness has the right to receive a reasonable witness fee plus reimbursement for necessary out-of-pocket expenses associated with lawfully observing a subpoena. The court must determine the rate of reimbursement and reimburse all eligible persons in a timely manner.

(2) A victim or his surviving dependents have the right to receive financial compensation for physical or emotional injuries suffered as a result of being a victim of a violent, bodily crime. The eligibility and award will be determined by the South Carolina Crime Victim's Compensation Fund.

(3) A victim has the right to receive restitution for expenses or property loss incurred as the result of the crime. The judge must order restitution at every sentencing for a crime against person or property or as a condition of probation, unless the court finds a substantial and compelling reason not to order restitution. The court must diligently, fairly, and in a timely manner enforce all orders of restitution.

(E)(1)     A victim or witness has the right to respond to a subpoena without fear of retaliation or loss of wages from his employer. Victims and witnesses must be provided, where appropriate, employer and creditor intercession services by the solicitor who (a) must seek employer cooperation in minimizing employees' loss of pay and other benefits resulting from their participation in the criminal justice process, and (b) must seek consideration from creditors if the victim is unable, temporarily, to continue payments.

(2) A victim has the right to have recovered, or taken personal property returned as expeditiously as possible unless the property is contraband, property subject to evidentiary analysis, property the ownership of which is disputed, or the property is needed for law enforcement or prosecution purposes. The property must be returned by the court, the solicitor, or law enforcement agencies using photographs of property as evidence whenever possible.

(F)     The court, the solicitor, and the defense must recognize the rights due victims and witnesses and protect them as diligently as the defendant's rights.

(1)     A victim has the right to participate in the criminal justice process directly or through representation.

(2)     A victim or witness has the right to retain counsel with standing in court to represent him in cases involving the victim's reputation.

(3)     A victim or witness has the right to a speedy disposition of the case so as to minimize the stress, cost, and inconvenience resulting from his involvement in a prosecution.

(G)     The court must treat "special" witnesses sensitively, using closed or taped sessions when appropriate. The solicitor or defense must notify the court when a victim or witness deserves special consideration.

Section 16-3-1535. General law enforcement agencies must provide crime victims, free of charge, a copy of the crime incident report relating to their case and a document which describes the statutory rights the State grants crime victims in criminal cases that list the local crime victim assistance providers. The statutory rights contained in this document must include all rights contained in Section 16-3-1530.

Section 16-3-1540. Nothing in Section 16-3-1530 of this article creates a cause of action on behalf of any person against any public employee, public agency, the State, or any agency responsible for the enforcement of rights and provision of services set forth in this article.

Section 16-3-1550. (A) The provisions of this section govern the disposition of any offense within the jurisdiction of the General Sessions Court, excluding any crime for which a sentence of death is sought, in any case which involves an identified victim whose whereabouts are known.

(B)     It is the responsibility of the solicitor's Victim or Witness Assistance Unit in each judicial circuit or a representative designated by the solicitor or law enforcement agency handling the case to advise all victims of their right to submit to the court, orally or in writing at the victim's option, a victim impact statement to be considered by the judge at the sentencing or disposition hearing in General Sessions Court and at a parole hearing. The solicitor's office or law enforcement agency must provide a copy of the written form to any victim who wishes to make a written report. In cases where the solicitor determines that there has been extensive or significant impact on the life of the victim, the Victim or Witness Assistance Unit must assist the victim in completing the form. The victim must submit this statement to the solicitor's office within appropriate time limits set by the solicitor to be filed in the court records by the solicitor's office so it may be available to the defense for a reasonable period of time before sentencing. The court must allow the defendant to have the opportunity to rebut the victim's written statement if the court decides to review any part of the statement before sentencing. If the defendant is incarcerated, the solicitor must forward a copy of the impact statement and copies of all completed Victim/Witness Notification Requests to the Department of Corrections, the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, and to the Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services Board. Solicitors must begin using these victim impact statements no later than January 1, 1985.

(C)     The Attorney General's Office must develop a standard form for the victim impact statement. For this purpose, the Attorney General may seek the assistance of any other state agency or department in developing this form. The Attorney General's office must distribute this form to all solicitor's offices no later than November 1, 1984.

(D)     The victim impact statement must:

(1) Identify the victim of the offense;

(2) Itemize any economic loss suffered by the victim as a result of the offense;

(3) Identify any physical and psychological injury suffered by the victim as a result of the offense, along with its seriousness and permanence;

(4) Describe any changes in the victim's personal welfare or familial relationships as a result of the offense;

(5) Identify any request for psychological services initiated by the victim or the victim's family as a result of offense;

(6) Contain any other information related to the impact of the offense upon the victim; and

(7) The original of the statement must be included in the court file with one copy for the solicitor and one copy for the victim.

(E)     [Deleted]

(F)     No sentence may be invalidated because of failure to comply with the provisions of this section. This section must not be construed to create any cause of action for monetary damages.

Section 16-3-1560. (A) The State must ensure that alleged victims of criminal sexual conduct in any degree or child sexual abuse must not bear the cost of his or her routine medicolegal exam following the assault provided the victim has filed an incident report with a law enforcement agency.

(B)     These exams must be standardized relevant to medical treatment and to gathering evidence from the body of the victim and must be based on and must meet minimum standards for rape exam protocol as developed by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division and the South Carolina Hospital Association. These exams must include treatment for venereal disease, and must include medication for pregnancy prevention if indicated and if desired. The South Carolina Law Enforcement Division must distribute these exam kits to any licensed health care facility providing sexual assault exams. When dealing with a victim of criminal sexual assault, the law enforcement agency must immediately transport the victim to the nearest licensed health care facility which performs sexual assault exams. Any health care facility providing sexual assault exams must use the standardized protocol described above.

(C)     A licensed health care facility, upon completion of a routine sexual assault exam as described in (B) above performed on an alleged victim of criminal sexual conduct in any degree or of child sexual abuse, provided the crime occurred in South Carolina, may file a claim for reimbursement directly to the South Carolina Crime Victim's Compensation Fund. The South Carolina Crime Victim's Compensation Fund must develop procedures for health care facilities to follow when filing a claim with respect to the privacy of the victim. Health care facility personnel must obtain any information necessary for the claim at the time of the exam if possible. The South Carolina Crime Victim's Compensation Fund must reimburse eligible health care facilities directly.

(D)     There is hereby appropriated from the general fund of this State the sum of one hundred and ten thousand dollars to the South Carolina Victim's Compensation Fund for the purpose of compensating licensed health care facilities for the cost of routine medical exams for sexual assault victims as described above. For the purpose of this particular exam, the one hundred dollar deductible is waived for award eligibility under the fund. The South Carolina Victim's Compensation Fund must develop appropriate guidelines and procedures and distribute them to law enforcement agencies and appropriate health care facilities.

(E)     When the director determines that projected reimbursements in any fiscal year provided for in this section will exceed funds appropriated for payment of these reimbursements, he must direct payment of additional services from the Victim's Compensation Fund.

Section 16-3-1505. In recognition of the civic and moral duty of victims of and witnesses to a crime to cooperate fully and voluntarily with law enforcement and prosecution agencies, and in further recognition of the continuing importance of this citizen cooperation to state and local law enforcement efforts and to the general effectiveness and the well-being of the criminal and juvenile justice systems of this State, and to implement the rights guaranteed to victims in the Constitution of this State, the General Assembly declares its intent, in this article, to ensure that all victims of and witnesses to a crime are treated with dignity, respect, courtesy, and sensitivity; that the rights and services extended in this article to victims of and witnesses to a crime are honored and protected by law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and judges in a manner no less vigorous than the protections afforded criminal defendants; and that the State has a responsibility to provide support to a network of services for victims of a crime, including victims of domestic violence and criminal sexual assault.

Section 16-3-1510. For the purpose of this article:

(1)     'Victim' means a person who suffers direct or threatened physical, psychological, or financial harm as the result of the commission or attempted commission of a criminal offense, as defined in this section. 'Victim' also includes the person's spouse, parent, child, or the lawful representative of a victim who is:

(a)     deceased;

(b)     a minor;

(c)     incompetent; or

(d)     physically or psychologically incapacitated.

'Victim' does not include a spouse, parent, child, or lawful representative who is the subject of an investigation for, who is charged with, or who has been convicted of, or pled guilty or nolo contendere to the offense in question. 'Victim' also does not include a spouse, parent, child, or lawful representative who is acting on behalf of the suspect, juvenile offender, or defendant.

(2)     'Person' means an individual.

(3)     'Criminal offense' means an offense against the person or an offense against the property of the person when the value of the property destroyed or the cost of the damage is in excess of one thousand dollars, including both common law and statutory offenses. 'Criminal offense' does not include the drawing or uttering of a fraudulent check.

(4)     'Witness' means a person who has been or is expected to be summoned to testify for either the prosecution or the defense or who by reason of having relevant information is subject to be called or likely to be called as a witness for the prosecution or defense for criminal offenses defined in this section, whether or not any action or proceeding has been commenced.

(5)     'Prosecuting agency' means the solicitor, Attorney General, special prosecutor, or any person or entity charged with the prosecution of a criminal case in general sessions or family court.

(6)     'Summary court' means magistrate or municipal court.

(7)     'Initial offense incident report' means a uniform traffic accident report or a standardized incident report form completed at the time of the initial law enforcement response. 'Initial offense incident report' does not include supplementary reports, investigative notes or reports, statements, letters, memos, other communications, measurements, sketches, or diagrams not included in the initial offense incident report, or any material that may be considered the work product of a law enforcement officer or witness.

(8)     'In writing' means any written communication, including electronically transmitted data.

Section 16-3-1515.     (A)     A victim or prosecution witness who wishes to exercise his rights under this article or receive services under this article or both must provide a law enforcement agency, a prosecuting agency, a summary court judge, the Department of Corrections, the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, the Board of Juvenile Parole, or the Department of Juvenile Justice, as appropriate, his legal name, current mailing address, and current telephone number upon which the agency must rely in the discharge of its duties under this article.

(B)     A victim who wishes to receive restitution must, within appropriate time limits set by the prosecuting agency or summary court judge, provide the prosecuting agency or summary court judge with an itemized list which includes the values of property stolen, damaged, or destroyed; property recovered; medical expenses or counseling expenses, or both; income lost as a result of the offense; out-of-pocket expenses incurred as a result of the offense; any other financial losses that may have been incurred; an itemization of financial recovery from insurance, the offense victims' compensation fund, or other sources. The prosecuting agency, court, or both, may require documentation of all claims. This information may be included in a written victim impact statement.

(C)     A victim who wishes to be present for any plea, trial, or sentencing must notify the prosecuting agency or summary court judge of his desire to be present. This notification may be included in a written victim impact statement.

(D)     A victim who wishes to submit a written victim impact statement must provide it to the prosecuting agency or summary court judge within appropriate time limits set by the prosecuting agency or summary court judge.

(E)     A victim who wishes to make an oral victim impact statement to the court at sentencing must notify the prosecuting agency or summary court judge of this desire in advance of the sentencing.

Section 16-3-1520. (A) A law enforcement agency must provide a victim, free of charge, a copy of the initial incident report of his case, and a document which:

(1)     describes the constitutional rights the State grants victims in criminal cases;

(2)     describes the responsibilities of victims in exercising these rights;

(3)     lists local victim assistance and social service providers;

(4)     provides information on eligibility and application for victims' compensation benefits; and

(5)     provides information about the rights of victims and witnesses who are harassed or threatened.

(B)     A law enforcement agency, within a reasonable time of initial contact, must assist each eligible victim in applying for victims' compensation benefits and other available financial, social service, and counseling assistance.

(C)     Law enforcement victim advocates, upon request, may intervene with, and seek special consideration from, creditors of a victim who is temporarily unable to continue payments as a result of an offense, and with the victim's employer, landlord, school, and other parties as considered appropriate through the investigative process.

(D)     A law enforcement agency, upon request, must make a reasonable attempt to inform a victim of the status and progress of his case from initial incident through:

(1) disposition in summary court;

(2) the referral of a juvenile offender to the Department of Juvenile Justice; or

(3) transmittal of a general sessions warrant to the prosecuting agency.

Section 16-3-1525. (A) A law enforcement agency, upon effecting the arrest or detention of a person accused of committing an offense involving one or more victims, must make a reasonable attempt to notify each victim of the arrest or detention and of the appropriate bond or other pretrial release hearing or procedure.

(B)     A law enforcement agency, before releasing to his parent or guardian a juvenile offender accused of committing an offense involving one or more victims, must make a reasonable effort to inform each victim of the release.

(C)     A law enforcement agency, upon effecting the arrest or detention of a person accused of committing an offense involving one or more victims, must provide to the jail, prison, detention, or holding facility having physical custody of the defendant, the name, mailing address, and telephone number of each victim. If the person is transferred to another facility, this information immediately must be transmitted to the receiving facility. The names, addresses, and telephone numbers of victims and witnesses contained in the files of a jail, prison, detention, or holding facility are confidential and must not be disclosed directly or indirectly, except as necessary to provide notifications.

(D)     A law enforcement agency, after detaining a juvenile accused of committing an offense involving one or more victims, must provide to the Department of Juvenile Justice the name, address, and telephone number of each victim.

(E)     After effecting the arrest or detention of a person accused of committing an offense not under the jurisdiction of a summary court, and involving one or more victims, the arresting law enforcement agency must provide, in writing, to the prosecuting agency before a bond or release hearing before a circuit or family court judge, the name, address, and telephone number of each victim.

(F)     After the arrest or detention of a person accused of committing an offense involving one or more victims and which is triable in summary court or an offense involving one or more victims for which a preliminary hearing may be held, the arresting law enforcement agency must provide, in writing, to the summary court the name, mailing address, and telephone number of each victim.

(G)     A law enforcement agency must provide any measures necessary to protect the victims and witnesses, including transportation to and from court and physical protection in the courthouse.

(H)     In cases in which a defendant has bond set by a summary court judge:

(1)     the facility having custody of the defendant reasonably must attempt to notify each victim of each case for which bond is being determined of his right to attend the bond hearing and make recommendations to the presiding judge. This notification must be made sufficiently in advance to allow the victim to exercise his rights contained in this article;

(2)     the summary court judge, before proceeding with a bond hearing in a case involving a victim, must ask the representative of the facility having custody of the defendant to verify that a reasonable attempt was made to notify the victim sufficiently in advance to attend the proceeding. If notice was not given in a timely manner, the hearing must be delayed for a reasonable time to allow notice; and

(3)     the summary court judge must impose bond conditions which are sufficient to protect a victim from harassment or intimidation by the defendant or persons acting on the defendant's behalf.

(I)     In cases in which a defendant has a bond proceeding before a circuit court judge:

(1)     the prosecuting agency reasonably must attempt to notify each victim of each case for which bond is being determined of his right to attend the bond hearing and make recommendations to the presiding judge. This notification must be made sufficiently in advance to allow the victim to exercise his rights contained in this article;

(2)     the circuit court judge, before proceeding with a bond hearing in a case involving a victim, must ask the representative of the prosecuting agency to verify that a reasonable attempt was made to notify the victim sufficiently in advance to attend. If notice was not given in a timely manner, the hearing must be delayed for a reasonable time to allow notice; and

(3)     the circuit court judge must impose bond conditions which are sufficient to protect a victim from harassment or intimidation by the defendant or persons acting on the defendant's behalf.

(J)     In cases in which a juvenile has a detention hearing before a family court judge:

(1)     the prosecuting agency must reasonably attempt to notify each victim of each case for which the juvenile is appearing before the court of his right to attend the detention hearing and make recommendations to the presiding judge. This notification must be made sufficiently in advance to allow the victim to exercise his rights pertaining to the detention hearing;

(2)     the family court judge, before proceeding with a detention hearing in a case involving a victim, must ask the prosecuting agency to verify that a reasonable attempt was made to notify the victim sufficiently in advance to attend. If notice was not given in a timely manner, the hearing must be delayed for a reasonable time to allow notice; and

(3)     the family court judge, if he does not rule that a juvenile must be detained, must impose conditions of release which are sufficient to protect a victim from harassment or intimidation by the juvenile or a person acting on the juvenile's behalf.

(K)     Upon scheduling a preliminary hearing in a case involving a victim, the summary court judge reasonably must attempt to notify each victim of each case for which the defendant has a hearing of his right to attend.

Section 16-3-1530.     (A)     A jail, prison, detention, or holding facility having custody of a person accused, convicted, or adjudicated guilty of committing an offense involving one or more victims reasonably must attempt to notify each victim, upon request, of the release of the person.

(B)     A department or agency having custody or custodial supervision of a person accused of committing an offense involving one or more victims, reasonably must attempt to notify each victim, upon request, of an escape by the person.

(C)     A department or agency having custody of a person accused, convicted, or adjudicated guilty of committing an offense involving one or more victims, must inform each victim, upon request, of any transfer of the person to a less secure facility.

(D)     A department or agency having custody or custodial supervision of a person convicted or adjudicated guilty of committing an offense involving one or more victims must reasonably attempt to notify each victim and prosecution witness, upon request, of an escape by the person.

Section 16-3-1535.     (A)     The summary court, upon retaining jurisdiction of an offense involving one or more victims, reasonably must attempt to notify each victim of his right to:

(1)     be present and participate in all hearings;

(2)     be represented by counsel;

(3)     pursue civil remedies; and

(4)     submit an oral or written victim impact statement, or both, for consideration by the summary court judge at the disposition proceeding.

(B)     The summary court must provide to each victim, who wishes to make a written victim impact statement, a form that solicits pertinent information regarding the offense, including:

(1)     the victim's personal information and supplementary contact information;

(2)     an itemized list of the victim's economic loss and recovery from any insurance policy or any other source;

(3)     details of physical or psychological injuries, or both, including their seriousness and permanence;

(4)     identification of psychological services requested or obtained by the victim;

(5)     a description of any changes in the victim's personal welfare or family relationships; and

(6)     any other information the victim believes to be important and pertinent.

(C)     The summary court judge must inform a victim of the applicable procedures and practices of the court.

(D)     The summary court judge reasonably must attempt to notify each victim related to the case of each hearing, trial, or other proceeding.

(E)     A law enforcement agency and the summary court must return to a victim personal property recovered or taken as evidence as expeditiously as possible, substituting photographs of the property and itemized lists of the property including serial numbers and unique identifying characteristics for use as evidence when possible.

(F)     The summary court judge must recognize and protect the rights of victims and witnesses as diligently as those of the defendant.

Section 16-3-1540.     (A) The Department of Juvenile Justice, upon referral of a juvenile accused of committing an offense involving one or more victims, must make a reasonable effort to confer with each victim before:

(1)     placing the juvenile in a diversion program;

(2)     issuing a recommendation for diversion;

(3)     referring the juvenile to the prosecuting agency for prosecution;

(4)     issuing a recommendation for evaluation at the agency's reception and evaluation center; or

(5)     taking other action.

(B)     The Department of Juvenile Justice must make a reasonable effort to keep each victim reasonably informed of the status and progress of a case from the time it is referred by law enforcement until it is referred to the prosecuting agency.

Section 16-3-1545. (A) The prosecuting agency, when a juvenile case is referred or a general sessions charge is received involving one or more victims, reasonably must attempt to notify each victim of his right to submit an oral or written victim impact statement, or both, for consideration by the circuit or family court judge at the disposition proceeding. The victim also must be informed that a written victim impact statement may be submitted at any postadjudication proceeding by the Department of Corrections, the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, the Board of Juvenile Parole, or the Department of Juvenile Justice. The prosecuting agency must provide to each victim, who wishes to make a written victim impact statement, a form that solicits pertinent information regarding the offense that may include:

(1)     the victim's personal information and supplementary contact information;

(2)     an itemization of the victim's economic loss and recovery from any insurance policy or another source;

(3)     details of physical or psychological injuries, or both, including their seriousness and permanence;

(4)     identification of psychological services requested or obtained by the victim;

(5)     a description of any changes in the victim's personal welfare or family relationships; and

(6)     any other information the victim believes to be important and pertinent.

(B)     The prosecuting agency must offer the victim assistance in preparing a comprehensive victim impact statement, and assistance in reviewing and updating the statement as appropriate before the case is disposed.

(C)     The prosecuting agency must inform victims and witnesses of the applicable procedures and practices of the criminal or juvenile justice system, or both.

(D)     The prosecuting agency must inform each victim of his right to legal counsel and of any available civil remedies.

(E)     A law enforcement agency, the prosecuting agency, and the circuit and family courts must return to a victim personal property recovered or taken as evidence as expeditiously as possible, substituting photographs of the property and itemized lists of the property including serial numbers and unique identifying characteristics to use as evidence when possible.

(F)     The prosecuting agency must inform victims and prosecution witnesses of financial assistance, compensation, and fees to which they may be entitled, and must offer to the victims and witnesses assistance with applications for these items.

(G)     The prosecuting agency, upon request, must make a reasonable attempt to keep each victim informed of the status and progress of a case, with the exception of preliminary hearings, from the time a juvenile case is referred to, or a general sessions charge is received by the prosecuting agency for disposition of the case in general sessions or family court.

(H)     The prosecuting agency must discuss a case with the victim. The agency must confer with each victim about the disposition of the case including, but not limited to, diversions and plea negotiations.

(I)     The prosecuting agency reasonably must attempt to notify each victim of each hearing, trial, or other proceeding. This notification must be made sufficiently in advance to allow the victim to exercise his rights contained in this article. When proceedings are canceled or rescheduled, the prosecuting agency must reasonably attempt to inform victims and witnesses in a timely manner.

(J)     The prosecuting agency victim advocate, upon request, may intercede with, and seek special consideration from, employers of victims and witnesses to prevent loss of pay or benefits, or both, resulting from their participation in the criminal or juvenile justice system and with the victim's creditors, landlord, school, and other parties as appropriate throughout the prosecution process.

(K)     If a victim or witness is threatened, the prosecuting agency immediately must refer the incident to the appropriate law enforcement agency for prompt investigation and make a reasonable attempt to prosecute the case.

(L)     The prosecuting agency must take reasonable and appropriate steps to minimize inconvenience to victims and witnesses throughout court preparation and court proceedings, and must familiarize victims and witnesses with courtroom procedure and protocol.

(M)     The prosecuting agency must refer victims to counselors, social service agencies, and victim assistance providers, as appropriate.

Section 16-3-1550.     (A)     Employers of victims and witnesses must not retaliate against or suspend or reduce the wages and benefits of a victim or witness who lawfully responds to a subpoena. A wilful violation of this provision constitutes contempt of court.

(B)     A person must not be sequestered from a proceeding adjudicating an offense of which he was a victim.

(C)     For proceedings in the circuit or family court, the law enforcement and prosecuting agency must make reasonable efforts to provide victims and prosecution witnesses waiting areas separate from those used by the defendant and defense witnesses.

(D)     The circuit or family court judge must recognize and protect the rights of victims and witnesses as diligently as those of the defendant. A circuit or family court judge, before proceeding with a trial, plea, sentencing, or other dispositive hearing in a case involving a victim, must ask the prosecuting agency to verify that a reasonable attempt was made to notify the victim sufficiently in advance to attend. If notice was not given in a timely manner, the hearing must be delayed for a reasonable time to allow notice.

(E)     The circuit or family court must treat sensitively witnesses who are very young, elderly, handicapped, or who have special needs, by using closed or taped sessions when appropriate. The prosecuting agency or defense attorney must notify the court when a victim or witness deserves special consideration.

(F)     The circuit or family court must hear or review any victim impact statement, whether written or oral, before sentencing. Within a reasonable period of time before sentencing, the prosecuting agency must make available to the defense any written victim impact statement; and the court must allow the defense an opportunity to respond to the statement. However, the victim impact statement must not be provided to the defense until the defendant has been found guilty by a judge or jury. The victim impact statement and its contents are not admissible as evidence in any trial.

(G)     The circuit and family court must address the issue of restitution as provided by statute.

Section 16-3-1555.     (A)     The circuit or family court must order, in a timely manner, reasonable expert witness fees and reimbursement to victims of reasonable out-of-pocket expenses associated with lawfully observing a subpoena.

(B)     The prosecuting agency must forward, as appropriate and within a reasonable time, a copy of each victim's impact statement, or the name, mailing address, and telephone number of each victim, or both, to the Department of Corrections, the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, the Board of Juvenile Parole, or the Department of Juvenile Justice. The names, addresses, and telephone numbers of victims and prosecution witnesses contained in the records of the Department of Corrections, the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, the Board of Juvenile Parole, and the Department of Juvenile Justice, are confidential and must not be disclosed directly or indirectly, except by order of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as necessary to provide notifications, services, or both, between these agencies, these agencies and the prosecuting agency, or these agencies and the Attorney General.

(C)     The prosecuting agency must file with an indictment a copy of a written victim impact statement with the victim's personal information deleted.

(D)     The prosecuting agency must inform the victim and the prosecution witnesses of their responsibility to provide the prosecuting agency, the Department of Corrections, the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, the Board of Juvenile Parole, the Department of Juvenile Justice, or the Attorney General, as appropriate, their legal names, current addresses, and telephone numbers.

(E)     The prosecuting agency must inform the victim about the collection of restitution, fees, and expenses, the recovery of property used as evidence, and how to contact the Department of Corrections, the Board of Juvenile Parole, the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, the Department of Juvenile Justice, or the Attorney General, as appropriate.

Section 16-3-1560.     (A) The Department of Corrections, the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, the Board of Juvenile Parole, or the Department of Juvenile Justice, as appropriate, reasonably must attempt to notify each victim of post-conviction proceedings affecting the probation, parole, or release of the offender, and of the victim's right to attend and comment at these proceedings. This notification must be made sufficiently in advance to allow the victim to exercise his rights as they pertain to post-conviction proceedings.

(B)     The Attorney General, upon receiving notice of appeal or other post-conviction action by an offender convicted of or adjudicated guilty for committing an offense involving one or more victims, must request from the Department of Corrections, the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, the Board of Juvenile Parole, or the Department of Juvenile Justice, as appropriate, the victim's personal information.

(C)     The Department of Corrections, the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, the Board of Juvenile Parole, or the Department of Juvenile Justice, upon receipt of request for the victim's personal information from the Attorney General in an appeal or post-conviction proceeding, must supply the requested information within a reasonable period of time.

(D)     The Attorney General must confer with victims regarding the defendant's appeal and other post-conviction proceedings.

(E)     The Attorney General must keep each victim reasonably informed of the status and progress of the appeal or other post-conviction proceedings until their resolution.

(F)     The Attorney General reasonably must attempt to notify a victim of all post-conviction proceedings, and of the victim's right to attend. This notification must be made sufficiently in advance to allow the victim to exercise his rights pertaining to post-conviction proceedings.

Section 16-3-1565.     (A)     Nothing in this article creates a cause of action on behalf of a person against a public employee, public agency, the State, or an agency responsible for the enforcement of rights and provision of services set forth in this article.

(B)     A sentence must not be invalidated because of failure to comply with the provisions of this article.

(C)     This article must not be construed to create a cause of action for monetary damages."

SECTION     4.     A.     Section 14-1-206 of the 1974 Code is amended to read:

"Section 14-1-206.     (A)     Beginning January 1, 1995, and continuously after that date, a person who is convicted, pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, or forfeits bond for an offense tried in general sessions court must pay an amount equal to sixty two one hundred percent of the fine imposed as an assessment. This assessment must be paid to the clerk of court in the county in which the criminal judgment is rendered for remittance to the State Treasurer by the county treasurer. The assessment is based upon that portion of the fine that is not suspended and assessments must not be waived, reduced, or suspended.

(B)     The county treasurer must remit thirty-eight percent of the revenue generated by the assessment imposed in subsection (A) to the county to be used for the purposes set forth in subsection (D) and remit the balance of the assessments revenue to the State Treasurer on a monthly basis by the fifteenth day of each month and make reports on a form and in a manner prescribed by the State Treasurer. Assessments paid in installments must be remitted as received.

(C)     The State Treasurer shall deposit the assessments received as follows:

(1)     47.17 percent for programs established pursuant to Chapter 21 of Title 24 and the Shock Incarceration Program as provided in Article 13, Chapter 13 of Title 24;

(2)     16.52 percent to the Department of Public Safety program of training in the fields of law enforcement and criminal justice;

(3)     .5 percent to the Department of Public Safety to defray the cost of erecting and maintaining the South Carolina Law Enforcement Hall of Fame. When funds collected pursuant to this item exceed the necessary costs and expenses of the Hall of Fame operation and maintenance as determined by the Department of Public Safety the department may retain the surplus for use in its law enforcement training programs;

(4)     16.21 percent to the Office of Indigent Defense for the defense of indigents;

(5)     13.26 percent for the State Office of Victim Assistance;

(6)     5.34 percent to the general fund;

(7)     1.0 percent to the Attorney General's Office for a fund to provide support for counties involved in complex criminal litigation. For the purposes of this item, 'complex criminal litigation' means criminal cases in which the State is seeking the death penalty and has served notice as required by law upon the defendant's counsel and the county involved has expended more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars for a particular case in direct support of operating the Court of General Sessions and for prosecution related expenses. The Attorney General shall develop guidelines for determining what expenses are reimbursable from the fund and shall approve all disbursements from the fund. Funds must be paid to a county for all expenditures authorized for reimbursement under this item except for the first one hundred thousand dollars the county expended in satisfying the requirements for reimbursement from the fund; however, money disbursed from this fund must be disbursed on a 'first received, first paid' basis. When revenue in the fund reaches five hundred thousand dollars, all revenue in excess of five hundred thousand dollars must be credited to the General Fund of the State. Unexpended revenue in the fund at the end of the fiscal year carries over and may be expended in the next fiscal year.

(D)     The revenue retained by the county under subsection (B) must be used for the provision of services for the victims of crime including those required by law. Any funds distributed to or retained by the county treasurer pursuant to this item which are not used for the provision of victim services at the end of the fiscal year may be used for the capital or operating needs of the judicial system."

B. For fiscal year 1997-98, each county's monthly disbursement under Section 14-1-206(B) must be reduced, unless the monthly disbursement made pursuant to Section 14-1-206(C)(1) through (C)(7) are equal to or greater than the disbursements made for the same month in fiscal year 1996-97. The reduction of the monthly disbursement to the county pursuant to Section 14-1-206(B) may not be any greater than the amount necessary to bring a monthly disbursement pursuant to Section 14-1-206(C)(1) through (C)(7) to the same amount as the same month in fiscal year 1996-97 and the total reduction of disbursements to the county for the year pursuant to Section 14-1-206(B) for the fiscal year 1997-98 must not be any greater than the amount necessary to bring the total of the monthly disbursements pursuant to Section 14-1-206(C)(1) through (C)(7) to the same amount as in fiscal year 1996-97. The monthly report by the county treasurer must show the amount forwarded to the State Treasurer for the same month in fiscal year 1996-97, the amount being retained by the county for the month, and the amount of adjustment, if any, made to the remittance to the State Treasurer pursuant to this provision.

SECTION     5.     A.     Section 14-1-207 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:

"Section 14-1-207.     (A)     Beginning January 1, 1995, and continuously after that date, a person who is convicted, pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, or forfeits bond for an offense tried in magistrates' court must pay an amount equal to 88 100 percent of the fine imposed as an assessment. This assessment must be paid to the magistrate and deposited as required by Section 22-1-70 in the county in which the criminal judgment is rendered for remittance to the State Treasurer by the county treasurer. The assessment is based upon that portion of the fine that is not suspended and assessments must not be waived, reduced, or suspended.

(B)     The county treasurer must remit 12 percent of the revenue generated by the assessment imposed in subsection (A) to the county to be used for the purposes set forth in subsection (D) and remit the balance of the assessments revenue to the State Treasurer on a monthly basis by the fifteenth day of each month and make reports on a form and in a manner prescribed by the State Treasurer. Assessments paid in installments must be remitted as received.

(C)     The State Treasurer shall deposit the assessments as follows:

(1)     35.12 percent for programs established pursuant to Chapter 21 of Title 24 and the Shock Incarceration Program as provided in Article 13, Chapter 13 of Title 24;

(2)     22.49 percent to the Department of Public Safety program of training in the fields of law enforcement and criminal justice;

(3)     .65 percent to the Department of Public Safety to defray the cost of erecting and maintaining the South Carolina Law Enforcement Hall of Fame. When funds collected pursuant to this item exceed the necessary costs and expenses of the Hall of Fame operation and maintenance as determined by the Department of Public Safety the department may retain the surplus for use in its law enforcement training programs;

(4)     20.42 percent for the State Office of Victim Assistance;

(5)     8.94 percent to the general fund;

(6)     11.38 percent to the Office of Indigent Defense for the defense of indigents;

(7)     1.0 percent to the Attorney General's Office for a fund to provide support for counties involved in complex criminal litigation. For the purposes of this item, 'complex criminal litigation' means criminal cases in which the State is seeking the death penalty and has served notice as required by law upon the defendant's counsel and the county involved has expended more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars for a particular case in direct support of operating the Court of General Sessions and for prosecution related expenses. The Attorney General shall develop guidelines for determining what expenses are reimbursable from the fund and shall approve all disbursements from the fund. Funds must be paid to a county for all expenditures authorized for reimbursement under this item except for the first one hundred thousand dollars the county expended in satisfying the requirements for reimbursement from the fund; however, money disbursed from this fund must be disbursed on a 'first received, first paid' basis. When revenue in the fund reaches five hundred thousand dollars, all revenue in excess of five hundred thousand dollars must be credited to the General Fund of the State. Unexpended revenue in the fund at the end of the fiscal year carries over and may be expended in the next fiscal year.

(D)     The revenue retained by the county under subsection (B) must be used for the provision of services for the victims of crime including those required by law. Any funds distributed to or retained by the county treasurer pursuant to this item which are not used for the provision of victim services at the end of the fiscal year may be used for the capital or operating needs of the judicial system."

B. For fiscal year 1997-98, each county's monthly disbursement under Section 14-1-207(B) must be reduced, unless the monthly disbursements made pursuant to Section 14-1-207(C)(1) through (C)(7) are equal to or greater than the disbursements made for the same month in fiscal year 1996-97. The reduction of the monthly disbursement to the county pursuant to Section 14-1-207(B) may not be any greater than the amount necessary to bring a monthly disbursement pursuant to Section 14-1-207(C)(1) through (C)(7) to the same amount as the same month in fiscal year 1996-97 and the total reduction of the disbursements to the county for the year pursuant to Section 14-1-207(B) for the fiscal year 1997-98 must not be any greater than the amount necessary to bring the total of the monthly disbursements for the year pursuant to Section 14-1-207(C)(1) through (C)(7) to the same amount as in fiscal year 1996-97. The monthly report by the county treasurer must show the amount forwarded to the State Treasurer for the same month in fiscal year 1996-97, the amount being retained by the county for the month, and the amount of adjustment, if any, made to the remittance to the State Treasurer pursuant to this provision.

SECTION     6.     A.     Section 14-1-208 is amended to read:

"Section 14-1-208.     (A)     Beginning January 1, 1995, and continuously after that date, a person who is convicted, pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, or forfeits bond for an offense tried in municipal court must pay an amount equal to 52 64 percent of the fine imposed as an assessment. This assessment must be paid to the municipal clerk of court and deposited with the city treasurer for remittance to the State Treasurer. The assessment is based upon that portion of the fine that is not suspended and assessments must not be waived, reduced, or suspended.

(B) The city treasurer must remit 18.75 percent of the revenue generated by the assessment imposed in subsection (A) to the municipality to be used for the purposes set forth in subsection (D) and remit the balance of the assessments revenue to the State Treasurer on a monthly basis by the fifteenth day of each month and make reports on a form and in a manner prescribed by the State Treasurer. Assessments paid in installments must be remitted as received.

(C) The State Treasurer shall deposit the assessments received as follows:

(1)     25.79 percent for programs established pursuant to Chapter 21 of Title 24 and the Shock Incarceration Program as provided in Article 13, Chapter 13 of Title 24;

(2)     25.5 percent to the Department of Public Safety program of training in the fields of law enforcement and criminal justice;

(3)     .67 percent to the Department of Public Safety to defray the cost of erecting and maintaining the South Carolina Law Enforcement Hall of Fame. When funds collected pursuant to this item exceed the necessary costs and expenses of the Hall of Fame operation and maintenance as determined by the Department of Public Safety the department may retain the surplus for use in its law enforcement training programs;

(4)     19.06 percent for the State Office of Victim Assistance;

(5)     6.97 percent to the general fund;

(6)     19.38 percent to the Office of Indigent Defense for the defense of indigents;

(7)     1.63 percent to the Department of Mental Health to be used exclusively for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug addicts within the department's addiction center facilities;

(8)     1.0 percent to the Attorney General's Office for a fund to provide support for counties involved in complex criminal litigation. For the purposes of this item, 'complex criminal litigation' means criminal cases in which the State is seeking the death penalty and has served notice as required by law upon the defendant's counsel and the county involved has expended more than one hundred thousand dollars for a particular case in direct support of operating the Court of General Sessions and for prosecution related expenses. The Attorney General shall develop guidelines for determining what expenses are reimbursable from the fund and shall approve all disbursements from the fund. Funds must be paid to a county for all expenditures authorized for reimbursement under this item except for the first one hundred thousand dollars the county expended in satisfying the requirements for reimbursement from the fund; however, money disbursed from this fund must be disbursed on a 'first received, first paid' basis. When revenue in the fund reaches five hundred thousand dollars, all revenue in excess of five hundred thousand dollars must be credited to the General Fund of the State. Unexpended revenue in the fund at the end of the fiscal year carries over and may be expended in the next fiscal year.

(D)     The revenue retained by the municipality under subsection (B) must be used for the provision of services for the victims of crime including those required by law. Any funds retained by the city treasurer pursuant to this item which are not used for the provision of victim services at the end of the fiscal year may be used for the capital or operating needs of the judicial system."

B. For fiscal year 1997-98, each municipality's monthly disbursement under Section 14-1-208(B) must be reduced, unless the monthly disbursements made pursuant to Section 14-1-208(C)(1) through (C)(8) are equal to or greater than the disbursements made for the same month in fiscal year 1996-97. The reduction of the monthly disbursements to the municipality pursuant to Section 14-1-208(B) may not be any greater than the amount necessary to bring a monthly disbursement pursuant to Section 14-1-208(C)(1) through (C)(8) to the same amount as the same month in fiscal year 1996-97 and the total reduction of disbursements to the municipality for the year pursuant to Section 14-1-208(B) for the fiscal year 1997-98 must not be any greater than the amount necessary to bring the total of the monthly disbursements pursuant to Section 14-1-208(C)(1) through (C)(8)to the same amount for the year as in fiscal year 1996-97. The monthly report by the city treasurer must show the amount forwarded to the State Treasurer for the same month in fiscal year 1996-97, the amount being retained by the municipality for the month, and the amount of adjustment, if any, made to the remittance to the State Treasurer pursuant to this provision.

SECTION     7.     The 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"Section 14-1-211.     (A)     In addition to all other assessments and surcharges, a one hundred dollar surcharge is imposed on all convictions obtained in General Sessions Court and a twenty-five dollar surcharge is imposed on all convictions obtained in magistrates and municipal court in this State. The surcharge must not be imposed on convictions for misdemeanor traffic offenses. However, the surcharge applies to all violations of Section 56-5-2930, driving under the influence of liquor, drugs, or like substances. No portion of the surcharge may be waived, reduced, or suspended.

(B)     The revenue collected pursuant to subsection (A) must be retained by the jurisdiction which heard or processed the case and paid to the city or county treasurer, for the purpose of providing services for the victims of crime, including those required by law. Any funds retained by the county or city treasurer pursuant to this subsection which are not used for the provision of victim services at the end of the fiscal year may be used for the capital and operating needs of the judicial system."

SECTION     8.     If a provision of this act or the application of a provision of this act to a person or circumstance is held to be invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of this act which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this act are severable.

SECTION     9.     Sections 1, 2, and 3 take effect on October 1, 1997. All other sections take effect on July 1, 1997./

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend totals and title to conform.

Rep. LIMBAUGH explained the amendment.

Reps. KIRSH, MEACHAM, BAXLEY, McLEOD, LOFTIS, LIMBAUGH, HARRISON, D. SMITH, SIMRILL, YOUNG and KNOTTS requested debate on the Bill.

The following Bill was taken up.

S. 83 -- Senator Rose: A BILL TO AMEND ARTICLE 11, CHAPTER 7, TITLE 20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO DISPOSITION OF CASES BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, BY ADDING SECTION 20-7-1530, SO AS TO PROVIDE FACTORS WHICH MUST BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING THE CUSTODY OF MINOR CHILDREN; AND TO ADD SUBARTICLE 2, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR SPECIAL VISITATION PROVISIONS WHICH A COURT MAY ORDER WHEN AWARDING VISITATION IN CASES INVOLVING DOMESTIC AND FAMILY VIOLENCE.

The Judiciary Committee proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\PSD\7410AC.97) which was adopted.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Section 24-21-645, page 4, beginning on line 2 by deleting / as defined in Section 16-1-60 / and inserting / as defined in Section 16-1-60 / so when amended Section 24-21-6 reads:

"Section 24-21-645.     The board may issue an order authorizing the parole which must be signed either by a majority of its members or by all three members meeting as a parole panel on the case ninety days prior to the effective date of the parole; provided, that however, at least two-thirds of the members of the board must authorize and sign orders authorizing parole for persons convicted of a violent crime as defined in Section 16-1-60. A provisional parole order shall include the terms and conditions, if any, to be met by the prisoner during the provisional period and terms and conditions, if any, to be met upon parole. Upon satisfactory completion of the provisional period, the director or one lawfully acting for him must issue an order which, if accepted by the prisoner, shall provide for his release from custody. Provided, that However, upon a negative determination of parole, prisoners in confinement for a violent crime as defined in Section 16-1-60 must have their cases reviewed every two years for the purpose of a determination of parole., except that prisoners who are eligible for parole pursuant to Section 16-25-90, and who are subsequently denied parole must have their cases reviewed every twelve months for the purpose of a determination of parole. This section applies retroactively to a prisoner who has had a parole hearing pursuant to Section 16-25-90 prior to the effective date of this act."

Amend the bill, further, by adding an appropriately numbered SECTION to read:

/SECTION     ____.     Section 16-25-70 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 83 of 1995, is further amended to read:

"Section 16-25-70.     (A)     A law enforcement officer may arrest, with or without a warrant, a person at the person's place of residence or elsewhere if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person is committing or has freshly committed a misdemeanor or felony under the provisions of Section 16-25-20, 16-25-50, or 16-25-65 even if the act did not take place in the presence of the officer. The officer may, if necessary, verify the existence of an order of protection by telephone or radio communication with the appropriate police department.

(B)     A law enforcement officer must arrest, with or without a warrant, a person at the person's place of residence or elsewhere if physical manifestations of injury to the alleged victim are present and the officer has probable cause to believe that the person is committing or has freshly committed a misdemeanor or felony under the provisions of Section 16-25-20, 16-25-50, or 16-25-65 even if the act did not take place in the presence of the officer. The officer may, if necessary, verify the existence of an order of protection by telephone or radio communication with the appropriate police department.

(C)     In effecting a warrantless arrest under this section, a law enforcement officer may enter the residence of the person to be arrested in order to effect the arrest where the officer has probable cause to believe that the action is reasonably necessary to prevent physical harm or danger to a family or household member.

(D)     If a law enforcement officer receives conflicting complaints of domestic or family violence from two or more household members involving an incident of domestic or family violence, the officer shall evaluate each complaint separately to determine who was the primary aggressor. If the officer determines that one person was the primary physical aggressor, the officer need must not arrest the other person believed to have accused of having committed domestic or family violence. In determining whether a person is the primary aggressor, the officer shall consider:

(1)     prior complaints of domestic or family violence;

(2)     the relative severity of the injuries inflicted on each person taking into account injuries alleged which may not be easily visible at the time of the investigation;

(3)     the likelihood of future injury to each person; and

(4)     whether one of the persons acted in self-defense.;

(5)     household member accounts regarding the history of domestic violence.

(E)     A law enforcement officer must not threaten, suggest, or otherwise indicate the possible arrest of all parties to discourage requests for intervention by law enforcement by a party.

(F)     A law enforcement officer who arrests two or more persons for a crime involving domestic or family violence must include the grounds for arresting both parties in the written incident report and must sign and attach to the report an affidavit attesting that the officer attempted to determine which party was the primary aggressor pursuant to this section and was unable to make a determination based upon the evidence available at the time of the arrest.

(G)     When two or more household members are charged with a crime involving domestic or family violence arising from the same incident and the court finds that one party was the primary aggressor pursuant to this section, the court, if appropriate, may dismiss charges against the other party or parties.

(H)     No evidence other than evidence of violations of this article found as a result of a warrantless search is admissible in a court of law.

(H)(I)     In addition to the protections granted to the law enforcement officer and law enforcement agency under the South Carolina Tort Claims Act, a law enforcement officer is not liable for an act, omission, or exercise of discretion under this section unless the act, omission, or exercise of discretion constitutes gross negligence, recklessness, wilfulness, or wantonness."/

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend title to conform.

Rep. YOUNG explained the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

Reps. KNOTTS and WHATLEY proposed the following Amendment No. 2 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\PSD\7415AC.97), which was adopted.

Amend the Committee on Judiciary report, as and if amended, Section 16-25-70(F), page 83-3 by deleting line 17 and inserting /must include a statement in the report that the officer/

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend title to conform.

Rep. KNOTTS explained the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

Rep. YOUNG explained the Bill.

The Bill, as amended, was read the second time and ordered to third reading.

The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration.

H. 3595 -- Reps. Stuart, Gamble, Knotts, Koon, Riser and Spearman: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS FOR JOINT MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEMS, SO AS TO REVISE THE MEANING OF THE TERMS "REVENUE BONDS" AND "BONDS"; TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-100, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO POWERS OF JOINT MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEMS, SO AS TO ALLOW LOANS, BONDS, OR NOTES ISSUED TO A JOINT SYSTEM TO BE PAID FROM OTHER FUNDS AS MAY BE AVAILABLE AND TO ALLOW MEMBERS OF A JOINT SYSTEM TO CREATE, AS THEY CONSIDER NECESSARY, ADDITIONAL PROCEDURES WHICH GOVERN THE ISSUANCE OF ANY NOTES OR BONDS; TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-110, RELATING TO AUTHORIZATION OF A JOINT SYSTEM TO INCUR DEBT AND ISSUE BONDS, SO AS TO ALLOW A JOINT SYSTEM TO USE OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDS AVAILABLE TO IT TO PAY FOR ISSUED BONDS; TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-113, RELATING TO SOURCES FROM WHICH JOINT SYSTEM BONDS ARE PAYABLE, SO AS TO ALLOW A MEMBER COUNTY OR MUNICIPALITY TO PROVIDE A PLEDGE OF ALL OR PART OF ANY REVENUES DERIVED AS PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES WITH RESPECT TO A PROJECT; TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-120, RELATING TO PAYMENT OF NOTES, OBLIGATIONS, OR BONDS, SO AS TO REQUIRE ONLY REVENUES AND OTHER FUNDS AVAILABLE TO THE JOINT SYSTEM TO BE USED TO PAY OR PLEDGED TO THE AMOUNT OF ANY NOTES, OBLIGATIONS, OR BONDS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-128, RELATING TO CONTRACTS BETWEEN MUNICIPALITIES AND JOINT SYSTEMS, SO AS TO ALLOW A MUNICIPALITY UNDER CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF CAPACITY AND OUTPUT FROM A JOINT SYSTEM TO PAY FROM REVENUES DERIVED FROM THE OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION OF THE WATER SYSTEM AND FROM OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDS AS MAY BE AVAILABLE, INCLUDING ANY AMOUNTS RECEIVED AS PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES.

Rep. STUART proposed the following Amendment No. 2, which was ruled out of order.

Amend H. 3595 to H. 3823 as passed by Senate.

Rep. STUART explained the amendment.

Rep. KIRSH raised a Point of Order the Amendment No. 2 was improperly drawn.

SPEAKER WILKINS sustained the Point of Order and ordered the amendment stricken.

Rep. R. SMITH moved to adjourn debate upon the Senate amendments, which was adopted.

The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration.

S. 343 -- Senator Leatherman: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-51-50, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE SALE OF PROPERTY FOR DELINQUENT TAXES, SO AS TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE SITE FOR THE SALE AND TO SPECIFY FORMS OF PAYMENT.

Rep. BOAN explained the Senate amendment.

The House refused to agree to the Senate amendments, and a message was ordered sent accordingly.

The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration.

H. 3802 -- Rep. Boan: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-54-240, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO EXCEPTIONS TO THE PROHIBITION AGAINST DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION FILED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SO AS TO EXCEPT A DISCLOSURE MADE TO A STATE OR FEDERAL LEVEL GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL ELECTED FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA FROM WHOM THE TAXPAYER HAS SOUGHT ASSISTANCE.

Rep. BOAN explained the Senate amendment.

The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.

The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration.

H. 3551 -- Rep. Boan: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-37-251, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE STATE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF FUND, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR CALCULATION OF THE PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION USING THE LOWER OF THE SCHOOL OPERATING MILLAGE IMPOSED FOR TAX YEAR 1995 OR FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR; TO AMEND SECTION 12-37-750, RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION OF PROPERTY NOT RETURNED, SO AS TO INCLUDE BUSINESS PERSONAL RETURNS FILED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE; TO AMEND SECTION 12-43-220, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE EQUALIZATION AND ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY, SO AS TO PROVIDE A REVISED FORMULA FOR CALCULATION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES; TO AMEND SECTION 12-51-40, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO LEVY AND EXECUTION BY DISTRESS AND SALE OF PROPERTY TO SATISFY DELINQUENT COUNTY TAXES, SO AS TO PROVIDE COUNTIES THE ALTERNATIVE COLLECTION PROCEDURES PROVIDED FOR IN CHAPTER 56, TITLE 12; AND TO AMEND SECTION 12-60-2150, RELATING TO THE RIGHT OF A CONTESTED HEARING IN REFUND DETERMINATIONS, SO AS TO REPLACE "COUNTY ASSESSOR" WITH "LOCAL GOVERNING BODY".

Rep. BOAN explained the Senate amendment.

Rep. STUART made the Point of Order that the Senate amendments were improperly before the House for consideration since the Senate amendments have not been printed in the House Calendar at least one statewide legislative day prior to second reading.

The SPEAKER sustained the Point of Order.

The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration.

H. 3665 -- Ways and Means Committee: A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 11, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO PUBLIC FINANCE BY ADDING CHAPTER 42 SO AS TO ESTABLISH THE SOUTH CAROLINA TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE BANK ACT AND TO PROVIDE FOR ITS POWERS AND DUTIES; TO AUTHORIZE THE BANK TO PROVIDE LOANS AND OTHER FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO GOVERNMENT UNITS AND PRIVATE ENTITIES TO FINANCE PUBLIC HIGHWAY AND TRANSIT PROJECTS; TO AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO FUND THE BANK WITH UP TO FIVE PERCENT OF FUNDS APPROPRIATED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF STATE HIGHWAYS; TO ALLOW FEDERAL GRANTS, LOAN REPAYMENTS, AND OTHER AVAILABLE AMOUNTS TO BE CREDITED TO THE BANK; TO AUTHORIZE LENDING TO AND BORROWING BY GOVERNMENT UNITS AND PRIVATE ENTITLES THROUGH THE BANK; TO AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE BANK REVENUE BONDS; TO AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE BANK GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS; TO AMEND SECTION 57-3-615, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO TOLL PROJECTS SO AS TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENT THAT CERTAIN TOLL PROJECTS BE INITIATED AS PROVIDED IN CHAPTER 37 OF TITLE 4 AND TO AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO TOLL INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS AND TO USE THE TOLL FOR PROJECTS OTHER THAN THE TOLLED INTERSTATE HIGHWAY; AND TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-910, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO DISPOSITION OF CERTAIN FEES AND PENALTIES SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE PLACEMENT OF THE FEES AND PENALTIES IN THE SOUTH CAROLINA TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE BANK.

Rep. SHEHEEN spoke upon the Senate amendments.

Rep. KIRSH made the Point of Order that the Senate amendments were improperly before the House for consideration since the Senate amendments have not been printed in the House Calendar at least one statewide legislative day prior to second reading.

The SPEAKER sustained the Point of Order.

The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration.

H. 3272 -- Reps. Cato, Limehouse, H. Brown, Tripp, Cooper, Chellis, Seithel, Young-Brickell, Carnell, Mason, Meacham, Bailey, Haskins, Gamble, Allison, Trotter, Robinson, Sandifer, Lee, Govan, Law, Sharpe, Loftis, Phillips, Limbaugh, Harrell, J. Smith, J. Brown, Boan, Simrill, Wilkes and Neilson: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 37-10-105, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLATION OF CERTAIN LOAN PROVISIONS UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION CODE, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS, TO CREATE AN INDIVIDUAL CAUSE OF ACTION, AND TO PROHIBIT A CLASS ACTION FOR A VIOLATION OF THE CHAPTER; AND TO MAKE THESE PROVISIONS APPLY TO CAUSES OF ACTION, INCLUDING APPEALS, PENDING ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT AND TO ACTIONS FILED ON AND AFTER THAT DATE.

Rep. BAXLEY made the Point of Order that the Senate amendments were improperly before the House for consideration since the Senate amendments have not been printed in the House Calendar at least one statewide legislative day prior to second reading.

The SPEAKER sustained the Point of Order.

The following Bill was taken up.

S. 381 -- Senator Holland: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 7-11-15, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO STATEMENTS OF INTENTION OF CANDIDACY, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT IF A FILING DATE FALLS ON A SUNDAY OR LEGAL HOLIDAY, THESE DATES SHALL BEGIN OR END, AS APPROPRIATE, ON THE NEXT DAY WHICH IS NOT A SUNDAY OR LEGAL HOLIDAY; AND TO AMEND SECTION 7-11-210, RELATING TO THE DEADLINE FOR FILING A NOTICE OF CANDIDACY AND PLEDGE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT IF MARCH THIRTIETH FALLS ON A SUNDAY OR LEGAL HOLIDAY, THE NOTICE AND PLEDGE MUST BE FILED ON THE NEXT DAY WHICH IS NOT A SUNDAY OR LEGAL HOLIDAY.

Reps. HARRISON and CROMER, with unanimous consent, proposed the following Amendment No. 4 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\PT\1352DW.97), which was adopted.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, SECTION 1, page 2, Section 7-11-15, line 18, by inserting after /a/ /Saturday,/.

Amend further, page 2, line 19, by inserting after /noon/ /the following day/.

Amend further, page 2, beginning on line 26, by inserting after /a/ /Saturday,/.

Amend further, page 2, at the end of line 26, by inserting after /noon/ /the following day/.

Amend further, SECTION 3, Section 7-13-351, page 5, line 15, by inserting after /Monday/ /next day which is not a Sunday or legal holiday/.

Amend further, page 5, line 23, by inserting after /Sunday/ /or legal holiday/.

Amend further, page 5, line 24, by striking /following Monday/ and inserting /following Monday next day which is not a Sunday or legal holiday/.

Amend title to conform.

Rep. CROMER explained the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

The Bill, as amended, was read the third time and ordered returned to the Senate with amendments.

The following Bill was taken up, read the third time, and ordered sent to the Senate.

H. 3690 -- Rep. Askins: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 47-3-640 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT CANINES CERTIFIED TO WORK WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OR FIRE SERVICE PERSONNEL FOR THE PURPOSE OF FIRE INVESTIGATIONS, TRAINING, OR OTHER RELATED MATTERS MUST BE PERMITTED TO STAY OVERNIGHT WITH THESE OFFICIALS WHEN THEY ARE STAYING IN A PLACE OF PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS AND TO PROVIDE CIVIL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS.

Rep. HASKINS moved to recall the following Bill from the Committee on Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs, which was not agreed to by a division vote of 20 to 36.

S. 24 -- Senator Mescher: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 47-5-50, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION ON THE SALE OF WILD CARNIVORES AS PETS, SO AS TO DELETE THE REFERENCE TO FERRETS AND EXEMPT THEM FROM THE PROHIBITION.

Rep. SCOTT moved to recall the following Bill from the Committee on Ways and Means.

H. 3256 -- Reps. Scott, Kennedy, Cobb-Hunter, Cromer, Whatley, Bailey, Parks, Cave, Lloyd, Breeland, Inabinett, Mack, Clyburn, Whipper, Limehouse, Rhoad, Knotts, Jennings, Spearman, Young-Brickell, Lee, Dantzler, Wilkes, Keegan and Hinson: A JOINT RESOLUTION PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 7, ARTICLE XVII OF THE CONSTITUTION OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1895, RELATING TO LOTTERIES, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE LOTTERIES CONDUCTED ONLY BY THE STATE AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE USE OF THE REVENUES DERIVED FROM THE LOTTERIES.

Rep. SANDIFER moved to table the motion.

Rep. YOUNG-BRICKELL demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Allison                Altman                 Barfield
Barrett                Boan                   Brown, G.
Brown, H.              Campsen                Canty
Carnell                Cato                   Cooper
Davenport              Delleney               Easterday
Edge                   Fleming                Hamilton
Harris, A.             Harvin                 Haskins
Hawkins                Hines, M.              Jordan
Kirsh                  Koon                   Leach
Loftis                 Maddox                 Martin
McKay                  McLeod                 McMahand
Meacham                Neal                   Neilson
Rice                   Robinson               Sandifer
Sharpe                 Simrill                Smith, F.
Stille                 Stoddard               Townsend
Tripp                  Trotter                Vaughn
Walker                 Webb                   Wilder
Wilkins                Witherspoon            Woodrum
Young

Those who voted in the negative are:

Battle                 Bauer                  Baxley
Beck                   Bowers                 Breeland
Brown, J.              Cave                   Chellis
Clyburn                Cobb-Hunter            Cotty
Cromer                 Felder                 Gamble
Govan                  Harrell                Harrison
Hines, J.              Hinson                 Howard
Inabinett              Jennings               Keegan
Kelley                 Kennedy                Kinon
Knotts                 Lanford                Law
Lee                    Littlejohn             Lloyd
Mack                   Mason                  McCraw
Miller                 Mullen                 Parks
Phillips               Pinckney               Quinn
Rhoad                  Riser                  Rodgers
Scott                  Seithel                Sheheen
Smith, J.              Smith, R.              Spearman
Stuart                 Whatley                Whipper
Wilkes                 Young-Brickell

So, the House refused to table the motion.

The question then recurred to the motion to recall H. 3256 from the Ways and Means Committee.

Rep. SHARPE demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Battle                 Bauer                  Baxley
Beck                   Bowers                 Breeland
Cave                   Chellis                Clyburn
Cobb-Hunter            Cotty                  Cromer
Felder                 Gamble                 Govan
Harrell                Harrison               Hines, J.
Hinson                 Howard                 Inabinett
Jennings               Keegan                 Kelley
Kennedy                Kinon                  Knotts
Lanford                Law                    Lee
Lloyd                  Mack                   Mason
McCraw                 McMaster               Miller
Mullen                 Parks                  Phillips
Quinn                  Rhoad                  Riser
Rodgers                Scott                  Seithel
Sheheen                Smith, J.              Smith, R.
Spearman               Stuart                 Whatley
Whipper                Wilkes                 Young-Brickell

Those who voted in the negative are:

Allison                Altman                 Barfield
Barrett                Boan                   Brown, G.
Brown, H.              Brown, J.              Campsen
Canty                  Carnell                Cato
Cooper                 Davenport              Delleney
Easterday              Edge                   Fleming
Hamilton               Harris, A.             Harvin
Haskins                Hawkins                Hines, M.
Jordan                 Kirsh                  Klauber
Koon                   Leach                  Limbaugh
Littlejohn             Loftis                 Maddox
Martin                 McKay                  McLeod
McMahand               Meacham                Neal
Neilson                Rice                   Robinson
Sandifer               Sharpe                 Simrill
Smith, F.              Stille                 Stoddard
Townsend               Tripp                  Trotter
Vaughn                 Walker                 Webb
Wilder                 Wilkins                Witherspoon
Woodrum                Young

So, the motion to recall H. 3256 was rejected.

Rep. COTTY moved to recall the following Bill from the Committee on Judiciary.

S. 604 -- Senators Rose, Drummond, Courson and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 1-5-10, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE COMPENSATION OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A PERSON ELECTED SECRETARY OF STATE IN THE 1998 GENERAL ELECTION OR THEREAFTER SHALL RECEIVE NO COMPENSATION AND EXERCISE NO FUNCTIONS OR DUTIES, AND THAT THE FUNCTIONS AND DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE MUST BE DEVOLVED UPON THE GOVERNOR OR HIS DESIGNEE.

Rep. KNOTTS moved to table the motion.

Rep. SIMRILL demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Battle                 Bauer                  Boan
Brown, J.              Cooper                 Fleming
Hines, M.              Hinson                 Inabinett
Knotts                 Law                    Maddox
McLeod                 Miller                 Riser
Smith, F.              Spearman               Wilkins

Those who voted in the negative are:

Allison                Altman                 Bailey
Barfield               Barrett                Baxley
Beck                   Brown, G.              Brown, H.
Campsen                Carnell                Cato
Chellis                Clyburn                Cotty
Cromer                 Davenport              Delleney
Easterday              Edge                   Felder
Gamble                 Hamilton               Harris, A.
Harrison               Harvin                 Haskins
Hawkins                Jennings               Jordan
Keegan                 Kelley                 Kennedy
Kinon                  Kirsh                  Klauber
Koon                   Lanford                Leach
Lee                    Littlejohn             Loftis
Mack                   Martin                 Mason
McCraw                 McKay                  Meacham
Mullen                 Neilson                Parks
Phillips               Quinn                  Rhoad
Rice                   Robinson               Rodgers
Sandifer               Scott                  Seithel
Sharpe                 Sheheen                Simrill
Smith, J.              Smith, R.              Stille
Stuart                 Townsend               Tripp
Trotter                Vaughn                 Walker
Webb                   Whatley                Whipper
Wilder                 Wilkes                 Witherspoon
Woodrum                Young                  Young-Brickell

So, the House refused to table the motion to recall S. 604.

The question then recurred to the motion to recall S. 604 from the Judiciary Committee, which was agreed to by a division vote of 68 to 13.

Rep. WALKER moved to recall the following Bill from the Committee on Ways and Means.

H. 3297 -- Reps. Walker, Altman, Beck, R. Smith, Tripp, Barrett, F. Smith, Mason, Simrill, Townsend, Whatley, Barfield, Law, Spearman, Stille, Wilder, Cooper, Stoddard, Allison, Littlejohn, Lanford, Klauber, Leach, Knotts, Phillips, McCraw, Davenport, Lee, Haskins, Trotter, Riser, Rhoad and Gamble: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 11 IN CHAPTER 36 OF TITLE 12, SO AS TO INCREASE THE RATE OF THE STATE SALES, USE, AND CASUAL EXCISE TAX FROM FIVE TO SIX PERCENT ON ITEMS NOT SUBJECT TO A MAXIMUM TAX AND PROVIDE FOR THE CREDITING OF THE REVENUE OF THIS ADDITIONAL TAX TO A SEPARATE FUND STYLED THE "MOTOR VEHICLE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF FUND" AND TO CREDIT THE EXCESS REVENUE TO THE EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT ACT FUND; TO AMEND SECTION 12-36-2110, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE THREE HUNDRED DOLLAR MAXIMUM SALES AND USE TAX ON MOTOR VEHICLES AND CERTAIN OTHER ITEMS, SO AS TO RAISE THIS MAXIMUM TAX TO THREE HUNDRED SIXTY DOLLARS; TO AMEND SECTION 12-37-220, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTIONS, SO AS TO EXEMPT FROM TAX ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF ALL PRIVATE PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRUCKS WITH AN EMPTY WEIGHT OF NOT MORE THAN FIVE THOUSAND POUNDS FROM SCHOOL OPERATING MILLAGE, TO PROVIDE FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS FOR REVENUES NOT COLLECTED BECAUSE OF THIS EXEMPTION FROM THE MOTOR VEHICLE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF FUND, AND FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF EXCESS REVENUES; AND TO AMEND SECTION 12-36-2120, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO SALES TAX EXEMPTIONS, SO AS TO EXEMPT FOOD ITEMS ELIGIBLE FOR PURCHASE WITH UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD COUPONS.

Rep. H. BROWN moved to table the motion.

Rep. SIMRILL demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Askins                 Bailey                 Barfield
Battle                 Boan                   Breeland
Brown, H.              Campsen                Carnell
Cato                   Chellis                Cobb-Hunter
Cooper                 Cotty                  Easterday
Edge                   Govan                  Hamilton
Harrell                Harris, A.             Harrison
Haskins                Hines, M.              Hinson
Howard                 Inabinett              Jennings
Keegan                 Kelley                 Kinon
Kirsh                  Lanford                Law
Leach                  Lee                    Lloyd
Loftis                 Mack                   Meacham
Miller                 Mullen                 Neal
Parks                  Pinckney               Quinn
Rhoad                  Rice                   Riser
Robinson               Scott                  Seithel
Sharpe                 Smith, D.              Smith, R.
Stoddard               Stuart                 Tripp
Vaughn                 Whipper                Wilkins
Witherspoon            Woodrum                Young-Brickell

Those who voted in the negative are:

Allison                Altman                 Barrett
Bauer                  Baxley                 Beck
Brown, J.              Brown, T.              Canty
Cave                   Clyburn                Cromer
Davenport              Delleney               Felder
Fleming                Gamble                 Harvin
Hawkins                Hines, J.              Klauber
Knotts                 Koon                   Littlejohn
Maddox                 Martin                 Mason
McCraw                 McKay                  McLeod
Phillips               Rodgers                Sandifer
Sheheen                Simrill                Smith, F.
Smith, J.              Spearman               Stille
Townsend               Trotter                Walker
Webb                   Whatley                Wilder
Wilkes

So, the motion to recall H. 3297 was tabled.

Rep. ROBINSON moved dispense with the balance of the Motion Period, which was agreed to.

The following was received.
Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it concurs in the amendments proposed by the House to S. 641:
S. 641 -- Senators Holland and Bryan: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 62-1-100, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PROBATE CODE, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS IN AN ESTATE ARE DETERMINED BY THE LAW IN EFFECT AT THE DATE OF DEATH; TO AMEND SECTION 62-1-201, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF "MINOR", SO AS TO EXCLUDE THOSE PERSONS UNDER THE AGE OF EIGHTEEN WHO ARE EITHER MARRIED OR EMANCIPATED; TO AMEND SECTION 62-1-302, RELATING TO SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE PROBATE COURT, SO AS TO GIVE THE PROBATE COURT EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER ACCOUNTS AND DISPUTES ARISING UNDER THE UNIFORM GIFTS TO MINORS ACT; TO AMEND SECTION 62-1-308, RELATING TO APPEALS, SO AS TO ADD A PROVISION ALLOWING PARTIES NOT IN DEFAULT TO APPEAL DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT; TO AMEND SECTION 62-1-403, RELATING TO THE REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY OF PARENTS, SO AS TO ADD "UNBORN CHILD"; TO AMEND SECTION 62-2-109, RELATING TO THE MEANING OF "CHILD", SO AS TO CLARIFY WHEN AND HOW PATERNITY MAY BE ESTABLISHED; TO AMEND SECTION 62-2-302, RELATING TO PRETERMITTED CHILDREN, SO AS TO SUBSTITUTE "SPOUSE" FOR "PARENT OF THE OMITTED CHILD"; TO AMEND SECTION 62-2-501, RELATING TO WHO MAY MAKE A WILL, SO AS TO PROHIBIT MINORS, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 62-1-201(24) FROM MAKING A WILL; TO AMEND SECTION 62-2-802, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF "SURVIVING SPOUSE", SO AS TO NOT INCLUDE A COMMON LAW SPOUSE UNLESS HE OR SHE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED AS SUCH BY AN ADJUDICATION COMMENCED WITHIN A SPECIFIED PERIOD; TO AMEND SECTION 62-2-803, RELATING TO THE EFFECTS OF HOMICIDE ON INTESTATE SUCCESSION, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A KILLER WHO DIES WITHIN ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY HOURS OF THE DECEDENT IS DEEMED TO HAVE PREDECEASED THE DECEDENT; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-203, RELATING TO THE PRIORITY AMONG PERSONS SEEKING APPOINTMENT AS A PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, SO AS TO DELETE LANGUAGE CONVEYING THE PRIORITY OF A NOMINATOR TO THE NOMINEE FROM SUBSECTION (7), AND TO ADD THIS LANGUAGE TO SUBSECTION (8) WITH THE QUALIFICATION THAT PERSONS NOMINATED BY THE DECEDENT SHALL HAVE THE HIGHEST PRIORITY; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-603, RELATING TO BOND REQUIRED OF PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES, SO AS TO CLARIFY WHEN BOND IS REQUIRED; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-610, RELATING TO THE TERMINATION OF APPOINTMENT OF A PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, SO AS TO CLARIFY THE PROCESS FOR RESIGNATION OF A PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-614, RELATING TO THE APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL ADMINISTRATOR, SO AS TO ALLOW INFORMAL APPOINTMENT UPON THE APPLICATION OF A CREDITOR OF THE DECEDENT'S ESTATE; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-719, RELATING TO THE COMPENSATION OF A PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT COMPENSATION IS BASED UPON THE VALUE OF THE PROBATE ESTATE; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-914, RELATING TO THE DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMED ASSETS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT UNCLAIMED DEVISES OF ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS OR LESS MAY BE TRANSFERRED TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA STATE TREASURER; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-1001, RELATING TO PETITION FOR SETTLEMENT, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT THE PROPOSAL FOR DISTRIBUTION PERTAINS ONLY TO ASSETS NOT YET DISTRIBUTED; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-1101, RELATING TO THE EFFECT OF APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS INVOLVING TRUSTS, INALIENABLE INTERESTS, OR INTERESTS OF THIRD PERSONS, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT SETTLEMENTS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION NEED NOT COMPLY WITH SECTION 62-5-433; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-103, RELATING TO PAYMENT OR DELIVERY TO A MINOR OR INCAPACITATED PERSON, SO AS TO CLARIFY FOR WHAT PURPOSES SUMS RECEIVED ON BEHALF OF THE MINOR OR INCAPACITATED PERSON MAY BE USED; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-104, RELATING TO THE DELEGATION OF A GUARDIAN'S POWERS, SO AS TO ALLOW THE POWERS TO BE DELEGATED TO ANOTHER PERSON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED THIRTY DAYS; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-310, RELATING TO TEMPORARY GUARDIANS, SO AS TO REQUIRE A HEARING TO REVIEW THE APPOINTMENT OF A TEMPORARY GUARDIAN WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF THAT APPOINTMENT; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-405, RELATING TO NOTICE OF APPOINTMENT OF A CONSERVATOR, SO AS TO REQUIRE THAT THE PERSON TO BE PROTECTED BE PERSONALLY SERVED WITH NOTICE AT LEAST TWENTY DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-424, RELATING TO THE POWERS OF THE CONSERVATOR, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A CONSERVATOR MAY, WITH COURT APPROVAL, ENCUMBER ASSETS FOR PERIODS WITHIN OR BEYOND HIS TERM OF CONSERVATORSHIP; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-425, RELATING TO DISTRIBUTIVE DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE CONSERVATOR, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT MARRIAGE DOES NOT END A CONSERVATORSHIP, BUT RATHER ONLY MAJORITY OR EMANCIPATION RESULTING FROM A PROCEEDING BEGUN PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE CONSERVATORSHIP; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-428, RELATING TO CLAIMS AGAINST PROTECTED PERSONS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT ANY CLAIM DENIED BY THE CONSERVATOR REMAINS BARRED UNLESS THE CLAIMANT FILES A PETITION WITH THE COURT WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE OF THE DISALLOWANCE; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-501, RELATING TO POWERS OF ATTORNEY NOT AFFECTED BY DISABILITY, SO AS TO REPEAL SUBSECTION (D); TO AMEND SECTION 62-7-705, RELATING TO THE RESIGNATION OF A TRUSTEE, SO AS TO ALLOW RESIGNATION ONLY UPON SPECIFIED CONDITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 20-1-550, RELATING TO SERVICE UPON A NONRESIDENT OR ABSENT DEFENDANT IN AN ACTION TO ANNUL A MARRIAGE, SO AS TO ELIMINATE THE DUTY OF THE PLAINTIFF TO FORWARD NOTICE TO THE PROBATE COURT; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-150, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS UNDER THE UNIFORM GIFTS TO MINORS ACT, SO AS TO CLARIFY THE DEFINITIONS OF "COURT" AND "MINOR"; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 14-23-650, RELATING TO THE DESCRIPTION OF DEVISED LANDS.
and has ordered the Bill Enrolled for Ratification.

Very respectfully,
President

Received as information.

The following was received.
Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it concurs in the amendments proposed by the House to S. 315:
S. 315 -- Senator Thomas: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 24-3-550, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO WITNESSES AT AN EXECUTION, SO AS TO REVISE THE NUMBER OF PERSONS WHO MAY WITNESS AN EXECUTION.
and has ordered the Bill Enrolled for Ratification.

Very respectfully,
President

Received as information.

The following was received.
Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it concurs in the amendments proposed by the House to H. 3461:
H. 3461 -- Reps. McMahand, F. Smith, Sheheen, Allison, Breeland, Spearman, Littlejohn, Lee, Stoddard and Davenport: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 59-67-545 SO AS TO AUTHORIZE PARENTS AND OTHER ADULT SCHOOL VOLUNTEERS TO RIDE SCHOOL BUSES ON A SPACE AVAILABLE BASIS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THEIR VOLUNTEER SCHOOL ACTIVITIES UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS.
and has ordered the Bill Enrolled for Ratification.

Very respectfully,
President

Received as information.

The following was received from the Senate.

Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it nonconcurs in the amendments proposed by the House to H. 3858:

H. 3858 -- Reps. Vaughn, Haskins, Cato, Leach and Hamilton: A BILL TO AMEND ACT 432 OF 1947, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE GREENVILLE HOSPITAL SYSTEM, ITS CREATION, BOARD, POWERS, AND DUTIES, SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE BOARD FROM SELLING, LEASING, MERGING, CONSOLIDATING, OR TRANSFERRING CERTAIN OF ITS ASSETS OR ENTERING INTO A JOINT VENTURE OR OTHER BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE GREENVILLE COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION IF THE ACTION DISPOSES OF OR COMMITS TEN PERCENT OR MORE OF THE ASSETS; TO PROHIBIT THE BOARD FROM TRANSFERRING OR DELEGATING ITS RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITY OVER THE HOSPITAL SYSTEM TO ANY OTHER PERSONS, BOARD, OR ENTITY, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION ONLY MAY CALL FOR A REFERENDUM IF CONSENT IS REQUESTED TO TAKE SUCH ACTION; TO INCREASE THE BOARD FROM SEVEN TO NINE MEMBERS AND TO PROVIDE NOMINATING PROCEDURES AND TO PROVIDE ALTERNATIVE COMPOSITION AND PROCEDURES CONTINGENT UPON A GREENVILLE CITY COUNCIL STIPULATION BY ORDINANCE; TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARD TO PROVIDE SERVICES AND LOCATE FACILITIES OUTSIDE OF GREENVILLE COUNTY IF SUCH WOULD ENHANCE SERVICES; TO ENTER INTO JOINT VENTURES OR OTHER BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR OBTAINING CONSENT UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS; TO AUTHORIZE THE CHANGE OF NAME OF THE BOARD AND THE OPERATION OF THE BOARD UNDER A TRADE NAME; TO AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ONE OR MORE SUBSIDIARIES AND TO REQUIRE SUCH ENTITY TO COMPLY WITH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT; TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL HOSPITALS OR OTHER CLINICS; TO AUTHORIZE THE EXERCISE OF CERTAIN POWERS GENERALLY CONFERRED ON REGIONAL HEALTH SERVICE DISTRICTS; TO AMEND ACT 1285 OF 1966, RELATING TO THE NAME OF THE GREENVILLE HOSPITAL SYSTEM, SO AS TO CHANGE THE NAME OF THE BOARD TO THE GREENVILLE HEALTH SYSTEM BOARD OF TRUSTEES; TO REQUIRE THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES TO REIMBURSE THE COUNTY FOR ANY DAMAGES THE COUNTY MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY THE CITY UNDER A CONTRACT ARISING OUT OF ACT 432 OF 1947; AND TO REPEAL CERTAIN PROVISIONS CONTINGENT UPON STIPULATIONS OF GREENVILLE CITY COUNCIL.
Very respectfully,
President

On motion of Rep. VAUGHN, the House insisted upon its amendments.

Whereupon, the Chair appointed Reps. VAUGHN, HAMILTON and CATO to the Committee of Conference on the part of the House and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.

Rep. SPEARMAN moved that the House recede until 2:30 P.M., which was adopted.

At 2:30 P.M. the House resumed, ACTING SPEAKER MASON in the Chair.

The question of a quorum was raised. A quorum was later present.

Rep. LIMBAUGH moved that the House recur to the morning hour, which was agreed to.

The Senate returned to the House with amendments the following:

H. 3528 -- Rep. H. Brown: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 2-7-71, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR A REVENUE IMPACT STATEMENT ON BILLS RELATING TO STATE TAXES REPORTED OUT OF STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS STATEMENT MUST BE CERTIFIED BY THE BOARD OF ECONOMIC ADVISORS OR ITS DESIGNEE RATHER THAN AN AGENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE BOARD MAY REQUEST THE TECHNICAL ADVICE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE WITH RESPECT TO THE PREPARATION OF THESE STATEMENTS.

Rep. H. BROWN explained the Senate amendment.

The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.

On motion of Rep. JENNINGS, the House non-concurred in the Senate amendments to the following Bill, and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.

S. 29 -- Senators Holland and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 24-13-450, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE CRIME OF TAKING OF A HOSTAGE BY AN INMATE, SO AS TO INCREASE THE POSSIBLE PENALTY TO A MAXIMUM OF THIRTY YEARS IMPRISONMENT; TO AMEND SECTION 16-1-60, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF VIOLENT CRIMES, SO AS TO DEFINE THE CRIME OF TAKING OF A HOSTAGE BY AN INMATE AS A VIOLENT CRIME; TO AMEND SECTION 16-1-90(A) AND (C) RELATING TO THE CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMES, SO AS TO CLASSIFY THE CRIME OF TAKING OF A HOSTAGE BY AN INMATE AS A CLASS A FELONY; AND TO AMEND SECTION 17-25-45(C)(1), RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF MOST SERIOUS OFFENSE, SO AS TO DEFINE THE CRIME OF TAKING OF A HOSTAGE BY AN INMATE AS A MOST SERIOUS OFFENSE.

The following was received from the Senate.

Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it nonconcurs in the amendments proposed by the House to S. 271:
S. 271 -- Senator J. Verne Smith: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 3, TITLE 40, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE LICENSURE AND REGULATION OF ARCHITECTS, SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING BOARDS IN CHAPTER 1, TITLE 40 AND, AMONG OTHER THINGS, TO CLARIFY REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRM LICENSURE; TO PROVIDE THAT THE BOARD MAY INITIATE AN INVESTIGATION; TO EXPAND GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION; AND REVISE EXAMINATION PROCEDURES.
Very respectfully,
President

On motion of Rep. CATO, the House insisted upon its amendments.

Whereupon, the Chair appointed Reps. TROTTER, PHILLIPS and LAW to the Committee of Conference on the part of the House and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.

The following was received and referred to the appropriate committee for consideration.

Document No. 2191
Promulgated By Department of Natural Resources
Statutory Authority: 1976 Code Section 50-9-150
Hunt Units and Wildlife Management Areas
Received By Speaker June 3, 1997
Referred to House Committee on Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs
120 Day Review Expiration Date October 1, 1997
(Subject to Sine Die Revision)

Rep. QUINN, from the Committee on Invitations and Memorial Resolutions, submitted a favorable report, on:

H. 4180 -- Reps. Gourdine, H. Brown, Law, Hinson and Dantzler: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO NAME A PORTION OF SOUTH CAROLINA HIGHWAY 45 IN BERKELEY COUNTY "DEWITT WILLIAMS BOULEVARD".

Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

Rep. QUINN, from the Committee on Invitations and Memorial Resolutions, submitted a favorable report, on:

S. 705 -- Senator Land: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO NAME THE CAUSEWAY RUNNING THROUGH THE POCOTALIGO NATURAL PRESERVE IN CLARENDON COUNTY IN HONOR OF VIRGINIA RICHARDS SAULS.

Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

The following was introduced:

H. 4275 -- Rep. Miller: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING WACCAMAW HIGH SCHOOL OF PAWLEYS ISLAND ON BEING SELECTED TO RECEIVE THE DOE TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION GRANT BASED UPON THE EFFORTS AND STUDIES OF MARY GINNY DUBOSE, ENGLISH DEPARTMENT CHAIR AT THE SCHOOL.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The following was introduced:

H. 4276 -- Reps. Cave, Wilder, Meacham, Young-Brickell, Cobb-Hunter, Campsen, Simrill, J. Hines, M. Hines, Kennedy, Bailey, Lee, Parks, Knotts, Koon, J. Brown, Byrd, Clyburn, Cave, Inabinett, Lloyd, McMahand, Neal, Howard, Seithel, McCraw, Rice, Robinson, Breeland, Fleming, Cotty, Wilkes, Hamilton, Miller, Leach, Mason, Jordan, Stille, Mack, Phillips, Rodgers, Pinckney, Martin, Kinon, Barrett, Kirsh, McLeod, Klauber, Sandifer and Whatley: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO EXPRESS THE SINCEREST CONGRATULATIONS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF SOUTH CAROLINA TO MR. AND MRS. CARL F. MCINTOSH ON THE JOYOUS OCCASION OF THEIR FIRST WEDDING ANNIVERSARY ON JUNE 29, 1997, AND TO EXTEND BEST WISHES FOR A LONG AND HAPPY LIFE TOGETHER.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The Senate sent to the House the following:

S. 719 -- Senator Jackson: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE TO AUTHORIZE THE PLACEMENT OF A MARKER ON THE GROUNDS OF THE FORT MOULTRIE NATIONAL MONUMENT THAT RECOGNIZES THE ROLE OF SULLIVAN'S ISLAND AS THE "ELLIS ISLAND" FOR THE ENTRY OF AFRICAN-AMERICANS INTO THIS COUNTRY.

The Concurrent Resolution was ordered referred to the Committee on Invitations and Memorial Resolutions.

The Senate sent to the House the following:

S. 769 -- Senator Moore: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO DESIGNATE AND NAME A SECTION OF STATE HIGHWAY 7 IN MCCORMICK COUNTY AS THE "DON R. SAGGUS, JR. MEMORIAL HIGHWAY" AND TO INSTALL APPROPRIATE MARKERS OR SIGNS.

The Concurrent Resolution was ordered referred to the Committee on Invitations and Memorial Resolutions.

Rep. HARRISON moved to adjourn debate upon the following Bill until Wednesday, June 4, which was adopted.

S. 60 -- Senator Holland: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-2990, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE SUSPENSION OF A PERSON'S DRIVER'S LICENSE FOR DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE REINSTATEMENT OF THE DRIVER'S LICENSE OF A PERSON WHOSE LICENSE HAS BEEN REVOKED FOR A FIFTH OFFENSE; AND TO ADD SECTION 56-1-385, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR REINSTATEMENT OF THE DRIVER'S LICENSE AFTER A FIFTH OFFENSE.

The following Bill was taken up, read the second time, and ordered to a third reading:

S. 575 -- Senator Ryberg: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-37-220, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTIONS, SO AS TO DELETE THE FIVE-YEAR LIMIT ON THE EXEMPTION ALLOWED PROPERTY ACQUIRED BY NONPROFIT ENTITIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUILDING OR RENOVATING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES FOR DISADVANTAGED PERSONS.

Rep. KOON explained the Bill.

Rep. SCOTT withdrew his request for debate on H. 3274; however, other requests for debate remained upon the Bill.

Rep. SCOTT withdrew his request for debate on H. 3690; however, other objections and requests for debate remained upon the Bill.

Rep. J. BROWN withdrew his request for debate on H. 3274; however, other requests for debate remained upon the Bill.

Rep. BOWERS asked unanimous consent to recall H. 3880 from the Committee on Ways and Means.

Rep. YOUNG-BRICKELL objected.

The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration.

H. 3595 -- Reps. Stuart, Gamble, Knotts, Koon, Riser and Spearman: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS FOR JOINT MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEMS, SO AS TO REVISE THE MEANING OF THE TERMS "REVENUE BONDS" AND "BONDS"; TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-100, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO POWERS OF JOINT MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEMS, SO AS TO ALLOW LOANS, BONDS, OR NOTES ISSUED TO A JOINT SYSTEM TO BE PAID FROM OTHER FUNDS AS MAY BE AVAILABLE AND TO ALLOW MEMBERS OF A JOINT SYSTEM TO CREATE, AS THEY CONSIDER NECESSARY, ADDITIONAL PROCEDURES WHICH GOVERN THE ISSUANCE OF ANY NOTES OR BONDS; TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-110, RELATING TO AUTHORIZATION OF A JOINT SYSTEM TO INCUR DEBT AND ISSUE BONDS, SO AS TO ALLOW A JOINT SYSTEM TO USE OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDS AVAILABLE TO IT TO PAY FOR ISSUED BONDS; TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-113, RELATING TO SOURCES FROM WHICH JOINT SYSTEM BONDS ARE PAYABLE, SO AS TO ALLOW A MEMBER COUNTY OR MUNICIPALITY TO PROVIDE A PLEDGE OF ALL OR PART OF ANY REVENUES DERIVED AS PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES WITH RESPECT TO A PROJECT; TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-120, RELATING TO PAYMENT OF NOTES, OBLIGATIONS, OR BONDS, SO AS TO REQUIRE ONLY REVENUES AND OTHER FUNDS AVAILABLE TO THE JOINT SYSTEM TO BE USED TO PAY OR PLEDGED TO THE AMOUNT OF ANY NOTES, OBLIGATIONS, OR BONDS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 6-25-128, RELATING TO CONTRACTS BETWEEN MUNICIPALITIES AND JOINT SYSTEMS, SO AS TO ALLOW A MUNICIPALITY UNDER CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF CAPACITY AND OUTPUT FROM A JOINT SYSTEM TO PAY FROM REVENUES DERIVED FROM THE OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION OF THE WATER SYSTEM AND FROM OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDS AS MAY BE AVAILABLE, INCLUDING ANY AMOUNTS RECEIVED AS PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES.

Rep. R. SMITH moved to table the Bill, which was agreed to.

The motion period was dispensed with on motion of Rep. H. BROWN.

Debate was resumed on the following Bill, the pending question being the consideration of Amendment No. 1, Rep. LIMBAUGH having the floor.

S. 409 -- Senators Drummond, Bryan, Ford, Hayes, Holland, Hutto, Jackson, Land, Lander, Leventis, Martin, Matthews, McGill, O'Dell, Patterson, Rankin, Reese, Short, Waldrep, Williams, Peeler, Moore and Saleeby: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 4-9-55, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO ENACTMENT OF GENERAL LAWS AFFECTING COUNTIES' EXPENDITURES AND REVENUE RAISING, SO AS TO DELETE PROVISIONS IN THE GENERAL AND SPECIAL APPROPRIATION BILLS AS EXEMPTIONS; TO DESIGNATE SECTIONS 4-10-10 THROUGH 4-10-100 AS ARTICLE 1, ENTITLED "LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX"; TO AMEND SECTION 4-10-10, 1976 CODE, SO AS TO DEFINE "POSITIVE MAJORITY"; TO ADD SECTION 4-10-16, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A COUNTY MAY NOT BE SUBJECT TO MORE THAN ONE PERCENT LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX AT THE SAME TIME; TO ADD SECTION 4-10-21 TO PROVIDE FOR LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX BY ORDINANCE OF ONE PERCENT ENACTED BY A POSITIVE MAJORITY; TO AMEND SECTION 4-10-25, RELATING TO APPLICATION OF TAX TO CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THESE PROVISIONS APPLY TO SECTION 4-10-21; TO AMEND CHAPTER 10, TITLE 4, BY ADDING ARTICLE 3, ENTITLED "CAPITAL PROJECT SALES TAX ACT" SO AS TO ALLOW FOR A ONE PERCENT LOCAL SALES TAX TO FUND CAPITAL PROJECTS BY REFERENDUM; ALLOW A COUNTY TO CREATE A COMMISSION TO CONSIDER PROPOSALS FOR FUNDING CAPITAL PROJECTS WITHIN THE COUNTY AREA; TO PROVIDE FOR THE COMPOSITION OF THE COMMISSION; AND TO AMEND TITLE 6, CHAPTER 1, RELATING TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, BY DESIGNATING SECTIONS 6-1-10 THROUGH 6-1-110 AS ARTICLE 1, ENTITLED "GENERAL PROVISIONS"; TO ADD SECTION 6-1-85 TO REQUIRE THE BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD, DIVISION OF BUDGET AND ANALYSES TO MONITOR AND REVIEW THE RELATIVE PROPERTY TAX BURDEN ON EACH CLASS OF TAXABLE PROPERTY AND DEVELOP MODELS TO ESTIMATE THE SHIFT IN PROPERTY TAX BURDENS AMONG THE CLASSES; TO ADD ARTICLE 3, ENTITLED "AUTHORITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO ASSESS TAXES AND FEES", SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A LOCAL GOVERNING BODY MAY NOT IMPOSE A NEW TAX AFTER DECEMBER 31, 1996, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY; TO PROVIDE THAT A POSITIVE MAJORITY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO IMPOSE OR INCREASE A BUSINESS LICENSE TAX; TO PROVIDE THAT MILLAGE RATES MAY ONLY BE INCREASED ABOVE THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX BY A POSITIVE MAJORITY VOTE AND TO LIST EXCEPTIONS; TO PROVIDE THAT FEES MUST BE ENACTED BY A POSITIVE MAJORITY AND THAT REVENUE FROM FEES MUST BE KEPT SEPARATE FROM THE GENERAL FUND UNLESS IT IS LESS THAN FIVE PERCENT OF THE TOTAL BUDGET; TO PROVIDE FOR UTILITY FEES; TO ADD ARTICLE 5, ENTITLED "LOCAL ACCOMMODATIONS TAX", TO ALLOW FOR A FOUR PERCENT LOCAL ACCOMMODATIONS TAX, AND TO SPECIFY HOW THE REVENUE MUST BE HELD AND USED; TO ADD ARTICLE 7, ENTITLED "LOCAL HOSPITALITY TAX" SO AS TO ALLOW FOR A TWO PERCENT HOSPITALITY TAX AND TO SPECIFY HOW THE REVENUE MUST BE HELD AND USED; AND TO AMEND CHAPTER 11, TITLE 6, RELATING TO SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS, BY ADDING ARTICLE 15, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR DISSOLUTION OF SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS BY PETITION AND REFERENDUM.

Debate was resumed on Amendment No. 1, which was proposed on Thursday, May 29, by the Committee on Judiciary.

Rep. LIMBAUGH continued speaking and moved to table the amendment, which was agreed to.

Reps. WILKINS, HARRISON, LIMBAUGH and D. SMITH proposed the following Amendment No. 2 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\KGH\15309JM.97), which was adopted.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking Section 6-1-320, as contained in SECTION 7 beginning at line 38 on page 12 and ending at line 7 on page 14, and inserting:

/Section 6-1-320.     Millage rate increase limitation; exceptions.

(A)     Notwithstanding Section 12-37-251(E), a local governing body may only increase the millage rate imposed for general operating purposes above the rate imposed for such purposes for the prior tax year to the extent of the increase in the consumer price index for the preceding fiscal year. However, in the year in which a reassessment program is implemented, the rollback millage, as calculated pursuant to Section 12-37-251(E), must be used in lieu of the previous year's millage rate.

(B)     Notwithstanding the limitation upon millage rate increases contained in subsection (A), the millage rate limitation may be suspended and the millage rate may be increased for the following purposes:

(1)     in response to a natural, environmental, or other disaster as declared by the Governor;

(2)     to offset a prior year's deficit, as required by Section 7, Article X of the South Carolina Constitution;

(3)     to raise the revenue necessary to comply with judicial mandates requiring the use of county or municipal funds, personnel, facilities, or equipment;

(4)     to meet the minimum required local Education Finance Act inflation factor as projected by the State Budget and Control Board, Division of Research and Statistics, and the per pupil maintenance of effort requirement of Section 59-21-1030, if applicable.

(C)     The millage rate limitation provided for in subsection (A) of this section may be overridden and the millage rate may be further increased by a positive majority vote of the appropriate governing body. The vote must be taken at a specially-called meeting held solely for the purpose of taking a vote to increase the millage rate. The governing body must provide public notice of the meeting notifying the public that the governing body is meeting to vote to override the limitation and increase the millage rate. Public comment must be received by the governing body prior to the override vote.

(D)     The restriction contained in this section does not affect millage that is levied to pay bonded indebtedness or payments for real property purchased using a lease-purchase agreement or used to maintain a reserve account. Nothing in this section prohibits the use of energy-saving performance contracts as provided in Section 48-52-670.

(E)     Notwithstanding any provision contained herein, this article does not and may not be construed to amend or to repeal the rights of a legislative delegation to set or restrict school district millage, and this article does not and may not be construed to amend or to repeal any caps on school millage provided by current law or statute or limitation on the fiscal autonomy of a school district as currently in existing law.

(F)     The positive majority vote of the governing body required by this section does not apply to school districts that have their budgets approved by qualified electors at a town meeting./

Amend further, in Section 4-10-310, as contained in SECTION 3, by striking lines 21 and 22 on page 4 and inserting:

/subject to a referendum, within the county area for a specific purpose or purposes and for a limited/

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend title to conform.

Rep. LIMBAUGH explained the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

Rep. BAXLEY proposed the following Amendment No. 3 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\GJK\20831SD.97), which was tabled.

Amend the report of the Committee on Judiciary, as and if amended, page 409-4, line 8, by adding an appropriately numbered item to read:

/ ( ) that, notwithstanding items (1), (2), (3) and (4) of this subsection and subsection (B), twenty-five percent of the revenue collected pursuant to the authorization of this section must be applied first by the local governing body to roll back ad valorem taxes on person property./

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend totals and title to conform.

Rep. BAXLEY explained the amendment.

Rep. D. SMITH moved to table the amendment, which was agreed to by a division vote of 41 to 25.

Rep. BAXLEY proposed the following Amendment No. 4 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\GJK\20832MM.97), which was tabled.

Amend the report of the Committee on Judiciary, as and if amended, page 409-4, line 8, by adding an appropriately numbered item to read:

/ ( ) that, notwithstanding items (1), (2), (3) and (4) of this subsection and subsection (B), ten percent of the revenue collected pursuant to the authorization of this section must be applied first by the local governing body to roll back ad valorem taxes on personal property./

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend totals and title to conform.

Rep. BAXLEY explained the amendment.

Rep. LIMBAUGH spoke against the amendment.

Rep. BAXLEY spoke in favor of the amendment.

Rep. LIMBAUGH moved to table the amendment, which was agreed to by a division vote of 43 to 28.

Rep. BAXLEY proposed the following Amendment No. 5 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\PT\1358DW.97), which was tabled.

Amend the report of the Committee on Judiciary, as and if amended, page 409-11, line 41, by inserting after /percent/ /only after a favorable referendum in the municipality or county/.

Amend title to conform.

Rep. BAXLEY explained the amendment.

Rep. HARRISON moved to table the amendment, which was agreed to.

Rep. BAXLEY proposed the following Amendment No. 6 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\PT\1360DW.97), which was tabled.

Amend the report of the Committee on Judiciary, as and if amended, page 409-13, line 24, by inserting after /beverages/

/only after a favorable referendum in the municipality or county/.

Amend title to conform.

Rep. BAXLEY explained the amendment.

Rep. LIMBAUGH moved to table the amendment, which was agreed to by a division vote of 51 to 18.

Rep. BAXLEY proposed the following Amendment No. 7 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\PT\1361DW.97), which was tabled.

Amend the report of the Committee on Judiciary, as and if amended, by page 409-13, by inserting after line 33:

/(C)     The local hospitality accommodations tax imposed pursuant to the provisions of this article may be abolished upon a favorable referendum initiated by a ten percent petition of the qualified electors of a municipality or county. The abolition is effective upon the certification of the results of a favorable referendum which abolishes the tax./

Amend title to conform.

Rep. BAXLEY explained the amendment.

Rep. LIMBAUGH moved to table the amendment.

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

The amendment was then tabled by a division vote of 57 to 11.

Rep. BAXLEY proposed the following Amendment No. 8 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\PT\1359DW.97), which was tabled.

Amend the report of the Committee on Judiciary, as and if amended, page 409-12, by inserting after line 9:

/(C)     The local accommodations tax imposed pursuant to the provisions of this article may be abolished upon a favorable referendum initiated by a ten percent petition of the qualified electors of a municipality or county. The abolition is effective upon the certification of the results of a favorable referendum which abolishes the tax./

Amend title to conform.

Rep. BAXLEY explained the amendment.

Rep. LIMBAUGH moved to table the amendment.

Rep. BAXLEY demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Allison                Altman                 Bailey
Barfield               Barrett                Battle
Bauer                  Beck                   Brown, T.
Campsen                Cave                   Chellis
Cotty                  Cromer                 Davenport
Delleney               Easterday              Edge
Fleming                Gamble                 Govan
Hamilton               Harrell                Harrison
Haskins                Hinson                 Hodges
Jennings               Jordan                 Keegan
Kelley                 Kinon                  Knotts
Koon                   Law                    Leach
Limbaugh               Maddox                 Martin
Mason                  McCraw                 McKay
McMaster               Mullen                 Phillips
Quinn                  Rhoad                  Rice
Riser                  Robinson               Rodgers
Sandifer               Sharpe                 Sheheen
Simrill                Smith, D.              Smith, R.
Spearman               Stille                 Stoddard
Stuart                 Tripp                  Trotter
Vaughn                 Walker                 Webb
Wilder                 Wilkes                 Wilkins
Woodrum                Young                  Young-Brickell

Those who voted in the negative are:

Baxley                 Breeland               Brown, G.
Brown, J.              Byrd                   Harvin
Hines, J.              Hines, M.              Inabinett
Kennedy                Lloyd                  Mack
McLeod                 McMahand               Meacham
Neilson                Parks                  Scott
Smith, F.              Smith, J.              Whipper

So, the amendment was tabled.

Rep. BAXLEY proposed the following Amendment No. 9 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\GJK\20833MM.97), which was tabled.

Amend the report of the Committee on Judiciary, as and if amended, page 409-5, line 9, Section 4-10-340(B) by adding an appropriately numbered item to read:

/( )     upon the initiation of a referendum by ten percent of the qualified electors, which referendum results indicate a majority of the votes cast are in favor of abolishing the tax./

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend totals and title to conform.

Rep. BAXLEY explained the amendment.

Rep. LIMBAUGH moved to table the amendment, which was agreed to.

Rep. BAXLEY proposed the following Amendment No. 10, which was tabled.

Amend page 409-11, line 41 by striking "three" and inserting "two".

To reduce the maximum local accommodations tax from three to two percent.

Rep. LIMBAUGH moved to table the amendment, which was agreed to.

Rep. BAXLEY spoke against the Bill.

The question then recurred to the passage of the Bill, as amended, on second reading.

Pursuant to Rule 7.7 the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Allison                Altman                 Askins
Bailey                 Barfield               Barrett
Battle                 Bauer                  Beck
Boan                   Bowers                 Brown, H.
Brown, J.              Brown, T.              Byrd
Campsen                Cato                   Chellis
Clyburn                Cobb-Hunter            Cooper
Cromer                 Davenport              Delleney
Easterday              Edge                   Felder
Fleming                Gamble                 Hamilton
Harrell                Harrison               Harvin
Haskins                Hawkins                Hines, J.
Hinson                 Hodges                 Howard
Inabinett              Jennings               Keegan
Kelley                 Kennedy                Kinon
Klauber                Koon                   Law
Leach                  Lee                    Limbaugh
Littlejohn             Lloyd                  Loftis
Maddox                 Martin                 Mason
McCraw                 McKay                  McLeod
McMaster               Miller                 Mullen
Neilson                Parks                  Phillips
Quinn                  Rice                   Riser
Robinson               Rodgers                Sandifer
Scott                  Seithel                Sharpe
Smith, D.              Smith, R.              Spearman
Stille                 Stoddard               Stuart
Tripp                  Trotter                Vaughn
Walker                 Webb                   Whatley
Wilder                 Wilkes                 Wilkins
Witherspoon            Woodrum                Young
Young-Brickell

Those who voted in the negative are:

Baxley                 Breeland               Brown, G.
Carnell                Cave                   Cotty
Govan                  Hines, M.              Kirsh
Knotts                 Mack                   McMahand
Meacham                Sheheen                Simrill
Smith, F.              Smith, J.              Whipper

So, the Bill, as amended, was read the second time and ordered to third reading.

Rep. HARRISON moved to reconsider the vote whereby the following Bill was given a second reading.

S. 409 -- Senators Drummond, Bryan, Ford, Hayes, Holland, Hutto, Jackson, Land, Lander, Leventis, Martin, Matthews, McGill, O'Dell, Patterson, Rankin, Reese, Short, Waldrep, Williams, Peeler, Moore and Saleeby: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 4-9-55, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO ENACTMENT OF GENERAL LAWS AFFECTING COUNTIES' EXPENDITURES AND REVENUE RAISING, SO AS TO DELETE PROVISIONS IN THE GENERAL AND SPECIAL APPROPRIATION BILLS AS EXEMPTIONS; TO DESIGNATE SECTIONS 4-10-10 THROUGH 4-10-100 AS ARTICLE 1, ENTITLED "LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX"; TO AMEND SECTION 4-10-10, 1976 CODE, SO AS TO DEFINE "POSITIVE MAJORITY"; TO ADD SECTION 4-10-16, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A COUNTY MAY NOT BE SUBJECT TO MORE THAN ONE PERCENT LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX AT THE SAME TIME; TO ADD SECTION 4-10-21 TO PROVIDE FOR LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX BY ORDINANCE OF ONE PERCENT ENACTED BY A POSITIVE MAJORITY; TO AMEND SECTION 4-10-25, RELATING TO APPLICATION OF TAX TO CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THESE PROVISIONS APPLY TO SECTION 4-10-21; TO AMEND CHAPTER 10, TITLE 4, BY ADDING ARTICLE 3, ENTITLED "CAPITAL PROJECT SALES TAX ACT" SO AS TO ALLOW FOR A ONE PERCENT LOCAL SALES TAX TO FUND CAPITAL PROJECTS BY REFERENDUM; ALLOW A COUNTY TO CREATE A COMMISSION TO CONSIDER PROPOSALS FOR FUNDING CAPITAL PROJECTS WITHIN THE COUNTY AREA; TO PROVIDE FOR THE COMPOSITION OF THE COMMISSION; AND TO AMEND TITLE 6, CHAPTER 1, RELATING TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, BY DESIGNATING SECTIONS 6-1-10 THROUGH 6-1-110 AS ARTICLE 1, ENTITLED "GENERAL PROVISIONS"; TO ADD SECTION 6-1-85 TO REQUIRE THE BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD, DIVISION OF BUDGET AND ANALYSES TO MONITOR AND REVIEW THE RELATIVE PROPERTY TAX BURDEN ON EACH CLASS OF TAXABLE PROPERTY AND DEVELOP MODELS TO ESTIMATE THE SHIFT IN PROPERTY TAX BURDENS AMONG THE CLASSES; TO ADD ARTICLE 3, ENTITLED "AUTHORITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO ASSESS TAXES AND FEES", SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A LOCAL GOVERNING BODY MAY NOT IMPOSE A NEW TAX AFTER DECEMBER 31, 1996, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY; TO PROVIDE THAT A POSITIVE MAJORITY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO IMPOSE OR INCREASE A BUSINESS LICENSE TAX; TO PROVIDE THAT MILLAGE RATES MAY ONLY BE INCREASED ABOVE THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX BY A POSITIVE MAJORITY VOTE AND TO LIST EXCEPTIONS; TO PROVIDE THAT FEES MUST BE ENACTED BY A POSITIVE MAJORITY AND THAT REVENUE FROM FEES MUST BE KEPT SEPARATE FROM THE GENERAL FUND UNLESS IT IS LESS THAN FIVE PERCENT OF THE TOTAL BUDGET; TO PROVIDE FOR UTILITY FEES; TO ADD ARTICLE 5, ENTITLED "LOCAL ACCOMMODATIONS TAX", TO ALLOW FOR A FOUR PERCENT LOCAL ACCOMMODATIONS TAX, AND TO SPECIFY HOW THE REVENUE MUST BE HELD AND USED; TO ADD ARTICLE 7, ENTITLED "LOCAL HOSPITALITY TAX" SO AS TO ALLOW FOR A TWO PERCENT HOSPITALITY TAX AND TO SPECIFY HOW THE REVENUE MUST BE HELD AND USED; AND TO AMEND CHAPTER 11, TITLE 6, RELATING TO SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS, BY ADDING ARTICLE 15, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR DISSOLUTION OF SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS BY PETITION AND REFERENDUM.

Rep. LIMBAUGH moved to table the motion to reconsider, which was agreed to.

Rep. H. BROWN made a statement relative to H. 3400, the General Appropriations Bill.

The following was received from the Senate.

Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it insists upon its amendments to S. 236:
S. 236 -- Senators McConnell, Passailaigue and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 9, TITLE 6, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO BUILDING CODES, SO AS TO REVISE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THESE CODES AND THE MANNER IN WHICH COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES MUST ADOPT AND ENFORCE SUCH CODES, REVISE THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE BUILDING CODES COUNCIL, REVISE PENALTIES, PROVIDE FOR DUTIES OF THE STATE FIRE MARSHAL AND DEPUTY FIRE MARSHALS IN REGARD TO THESE CODES, AND PROVIDE FOR LIMITED APPLICATION OF THE CHAPTER; TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER 8 TO TITLE 6 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR BUILDING CODES ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AND FOR THEIR FUNCTIONS, DUTIES, AND REGISTRATION; BY ADDING SECTION 38-7-35 SO AS TO PROVIDE THE FIRST TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS OF THE PREMIUM TAX LEVIED ON FIRE INSURERS MUST BE USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPLEMENTING THE TRAINING, CERTIFICATION, AND CONTINUING EDUCATION PROGRAM FOR BUILDING CODES ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.
and asks for a Committee of Conference and has appointed Senators McConnell, Bryan and Lander of the Committee of Conference on the part of the Senate.

Very respectfully,
President

Whereupon, the Chair appointed Reps. BAILEY, SANDIFER and TRIPP to the Committee of Conference on the part of the House and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.

The following was introduced:

H. 4277 -- Rep. Limehouse: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SORROW OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TO THE FAMILY AND COUNTLESS FRIENDS OF THE HONORABLE THEODORE B. GUERARD OF CHARLESTON, A FORMER LEGISLATOR AND PROMINENT ATTORNEY, WHO RECENTLY PASSED AWAY.

Whereas, the death of this most distinguished statesman brings to a close the career of one of South Carolina's most brilliant in corporate law; and

Whereas, Theodore "Teddy" Guerard was born in Charleston, on March 10, 1930, the son of Russell Bogert Guerard and Margaret Lowndes Walker Guerard; and

Whereas, he graduated from the College of Charleston in 1950, and received his law degree from the University of South Carolina; and

Whereas, he married the former Elizabeth deRosset Maybank of Charleston and was the proud father of two daughters, Elizabeth deRosset Parker of Charleston and Anne Branford Coletta of Carlsbad, California, and a son, Russell Bogert Guerard of Charleston; and the grandfather of several grandchildren; and

Whereas, Theodore Guerard was elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives at age thirty-four and served from 1965 until 1970. He was an effective legislator who tackled tough issues and was one of the finest parliamentarians on the floor of the House. Among his accomplishments were pushing to consolidate Charleston's multiple schools into one district, advocating home rule, and legalizing the sale of liquor by the drink; and

Whereas, in 1986, his law firm became one of the largest in the State when his firm of McKay and Guerard merged with the Greenville firm of Haynsworth, Perry, Bryant, Marion and Johnstone. It was the first firm in South Carolina's history to have three offices operating in all three major cities; and

Whereas, one of his greatest passions was promoting his alma mater, the College of Charleston. He served as a past president of the College of Charleston Alumni Association and the Board of Trustees, and also served as president of the college's foundation; and

Whereas, Teddy Guerard was an outstanding leader and was listed in "Best Lawyers In America" from 1986 to present; and

Whereas, he was actively involved in community and church endeavors as evidenced by his service on the Roper Hospital Board of Commissioners, a director of the Bank of South Carolina, a member and Vice President of the Preservation Society of Charleston, former President of the Huguenot Society of South Carolina, a member of the Society of the Cincinnati Sons of Colonial Wars, the Architectural Society of South Carolina, and the Hibernian Society; and

Whereas, in 1987, he was appointed by then-Governor Carroll A. Campbell, Jr., to a seven-year term on the State Ports Authority; and

Whereas, the members of the General Assembly and all those with whom he came in contact will miss his standards of excellence, his brilliant insight, his courtesy, and his humor; and

Whereas, it is with great sadness that the career of such an extraordinary individual has come to a close, but due to his unselfish dedication to Charleston and his State, he has ensured that generations to come will benefit from the work he has so diligently crafted. 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 express their sorrow to the family and countless friends of The Honorable Theodore B. Guerard of Charleston, a former legislator and prominent attorney, who recently passed away.

Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to his wife, Elizabeth deRosset Maybank Guerard.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.

The Senate sent to the House the following:

S. 804 -- Senator Ford: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE DR. ARTHUR A. FLETCHER FOR A LIFETIME OF ACHIEVEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY AND THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA.

The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered returned to the Senate with concurrence.

The following Bills and Joint Resolutions were introduced, read the first time, and referred to appropriate committees:

S. 468 -- Senators Lander and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 5, TITLE 10, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE BOARD FOR BARRIER FREE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS FOR ACCESS BY HANDICAPPED PERSONS, SO AS TO INCREASE THE BOARD MEMBERS FROM SIX TO NINE AND REVISE MEMBERSHIP, TO REVISE DEFINITIONS, TO CLARIFY DUTIES OF THE BOARD, TO ADOPT THE LATEST NATIONAL TECHNICAL STANDARDS, TO ESTABLISH CRITERIA FOR ADMINISTRATION OF THE CHAPTER, AND TO CLARIFY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES.

Referred to Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry.

S. 567 -- Senators Wilson and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 13, TITLE 40, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE LICENSURE AND REGULATION OF COSMETOLOGY AND COSMETOLOGISTS, SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED FOR PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS IN CHAPTER 1, TITLE 40, AND AMONG OTHER THINGS, TO DISCONTINUE THE ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY PERMITS AND TO TRANSFER STUDENT RECORDKEEPING RESPONSIBILITIES FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION TO BEAUTY SCHOOLS.

Referred to Committee on Medical, Military, Public and Municipal Affairs.

S. 632 -- Judiciary Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE VI, CONSTITUTION OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1895, RELATING TO OFFICES BY ADDING SECTION 7A SO AS TO ABOLISH THE OFFICE OF SECRETARY OF STATE ON JULY 1, 1999, AND PROVIDE FOR ITS FUNCTIONS AND DUTIES TO BE DEVOLVED UPON STATE AGENCIES IN THE MANNER THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHALL PROVIDE BY LAW.

Referred to Committee on Judiciary.

S. 791 -- Judiciary Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, RELATING TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMY, E-911 OPERATORS, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2181, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.

On motion of Rep. HASKINS, with unanimous consent, the Joint Resolution was ordered placed on the Calendar without reference.

S. 792 -- Judiciary Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, RELATING TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMY, LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2186, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.

On motion of Rep. HASKINS, with unanimous consent, the Joint Resolution was ordered placed on the Calendar without reference.

The Senate returned to the House with amendments the following:

H. 3780 -- Reps. Young, Askins, Woodrum, Inabinett, Simrill, Bailey, Riser and Kirsh: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 16-11-110, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO ARSON, SO AS TO REVISE THE ELEMENTS OF ARSON IN THE FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD DEGREES, AND REVISE THE PENALTIES FOR ARSON IN THE FIRST AND SECOND DEGREES.

Rep. YOUNG explained the Senate amendment.

The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.

The Senate returned to the House with amendments the following:

S. 510 -- Senator Leatherman: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-1290, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE TRANSFER OF LICENSE PLATES FROM ONE MOTOR VEHICLE TO ANOTHER MOTOR VEHICLE OF THE SAME VEHICLE OWNER OR LESSEE, SO AS TO ALLOW THE TRANSFER OF THE PLATE ONLY WHEN THE OWNER OR LESSEE HAS ASSIGNED TO ANOTHER THE TITLE TO OR LEASE ON THE VEHICLE FROM WHICH THE PLATE IS TRANSFERRED.

Rep. TOWNSEND explained the Senate amendments.

The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.

The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration.

H. 3919 -- Rep. Harrell: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 12-6-3365 SO AS TO ALLOW A TAXPAYER WHO OPERATES A QUALIFYING DISTRIBUTION FACILITY TO USE INCOME TAX CREDITS AGAINST OTHER STATE TAX LIABILITIES OTHER THAN PROPERTY TAX; TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-3490, RELATING TO THE LICENSE TAX CREDIT FOR CASH PAID TO PROVIDE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR A QUALIFIED PROJECT, SO AS TO ALLOW A PUBLICLY BUILT OFFICE PARK TO QUALIFY AS A QUALIFYING PROJECT AND DEFINE A QUALIFYING PROJECT; AND TO AMEND SECTION 12-14-60, RELATING TO THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ZONE INVESTMENT TAX CREDIT, SO AS TO ALLOW A TEN YEAR CARRY-OVER OF THE CREDIT.

Rep. BOAN explained the Senate amendment.

Reps. TOWNSEND and HARRELL proposed the following Amendment No. 1A (Doc Name P:\AMEND\BBM\9521MM.97), which was adopted.

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

/SECTION     _____.     Section 59-20-20 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 497 of 1994, is further amended by adding at the end of item (3):

/ For purposes of disbursing EFA funding and for purposes of the index of taxpaying ability, the value of a fee in lieu of taxes shall be computed by the Department of Revenue by basing the computation on the net fee received and retained by the school district. The value thus computed shall not be inflated by any portion of the fee shared with or used by any other local taxing authority. Provided however any revenue received by a taxing entity as a result of this section must be considered taxable property for purposes of bonded indebtedness pursuant to Sections 14 and 15 of Article X of the Constitution of this State, and for purposes of computing the "index of taxpaying ability" pursuant to item (3) of this section./

Amend title to conform.

Rep. TOWNSEND explained the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

Rep. BOAN proposed the following Amendment No. 2A (Doc Name P:\AMEND\GJK\20839MM.97), which was adopted.

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

/SECTION ___.     A.     Section 4-12-30(G) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 462 of 1996, is further amended by adding at the end a new item to read:

"(3)     For purposes of determining the cumulative property tax millage rate under subsection (G)(2), the millage rate assessed by a municipality must not be included in the computation even if the subject property was located in the jurisdiction of the taxing entity as of June 30 preceding the calendar year in which the millage rate agreement is executed, if, pursuant to agreement on the part of the taxing entity at the time of execution of the millage rate agreement, the taxing entity de-annexes the subject property before execution of the initial lease."

B.     The amendment to Section 4-12-30(G) of the 1976 Code as contained in subsection A is effective for millage rate agreements executed after July 1, 1996./

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend totals and title to conform.

Rep. BOAN explained the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

Rep. BOAN proposed the following Amendment No. 3A (Doc Name P:\AMEND\JIC\6179HTC.97), which was adopted.

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

/SECTION     ___.     A.     Title 13 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

Section 13-4-10.     There is created a body corporate and politic to be known as the South Carolina Economic Development Authority. The authority is an instrumentality of the State of South Carolina.

Section 13-4-20.     The purposes of the authority include, but are not limited to:

(1)     the promotion and encouragement of industrial development, private business and commercial enterprise, international investment development, and the utilization and investment of capital in the State;

(2)     assisting the development of existing state and interstate trade, commerce, and markets for South Carolina goods and in the removal of barriers to the industrial, commercial, and agricultural development of the State; and

(3)     assisting in ensuring stability in employment, increased opportunities for employment for all citizens of the State, and devising ways and means to raise the living standards of the people of the State.

Section 13-4-30.     The authority has the powers and authority to do all things necessary or convenient to carry out its activities and affairs including, but not limited to, the following:

(1)     to sue and be sued, complain, and defend in its corporate name;

(2)     to have a corporate seal, which may be altered at will, and to use it, or a facsimile of it, by impressing or affixing or in any other manner reproducing it;

(3)     to purchase, receive, lease, or otherwise acquire, and own, hold, improve, use, and otherwise deal with real or personal property or any legal or equitable interest in property, wherever located;

(4)     to sell, convey, mortgage, pledge, lease, exchange, and otherwise dispose of all or any part of its property;

(5)     to purchase, receive, subscribe for, or otherwise acquire, own, hold, vote, use, sell, mortgage, lend, pledge, or otherwise dispose of, and deal in and with, interest in or obligations of any entity;

(6)     to make contracts and guaranties, incur liabilities, borrow money, and secure any of its obligations by mortgage or pledge of any of its property, franchises, or income. No indebtedness of any kind incurred or created by the authority shall constitute an indebtedness to the State or any political subdivision thereof, and no such indebtedness shall involve or be secured by the faith, credit, or taxing power of the State or any political subdivision thereof. Any liabilities in excess of one hundred thousand dollars must be approved in advance of incurring the debt by the Joint Bond Review Committee and the State Budget and Control Board;

(7)     to lend money, invest and reinvest its funds, and receive and hold real and personal property as security for repayment, except as limited by Section 33-31-832;

(8)     to be a promoter, partner, member, associate, or manager of any partnership, trust, or other entity;

(9)     to conduct its activities, locate offices, and exercise the powers granted by this chapter within or without this State;

(10)     to employ, elect, appoint, dismiss, or terminate directors, officers, employees, and agents of the authority, define their duties, and fix their compensation; employees of the authority are not considered state employees pursuant to Title 8, Chapter 11, or for purposes of the State Employee Grievance Procedure Act pursuant to Title 8, Chapter 17, except for eligibility for participation in the State Retirement System and the State Health Insurance Group plans. Employees of the authority shall receive the usual mileage, per diem, and subsistence provided by law and regulations as applied to state employees of the executive branch of government;

(11)     to pay pensions and establish pension plans, including contributing to the South Carolina Retirement System, pension trusts, and other benefit and incentive plans for any or all of its current directors, officers, and employees. Contributions to the South Carolina Retirement System may be paid only on earnable compensation derived from state or other governmental appropriated funds;

(12)     reserved;

(13)     to accept gifts, devises, and bequests subject to any conditions or limitations contained in the gift, devise, or bequest so long as the conditions or limitations are not contrary to this chapter or the purposes for which the corporation is organized;

(14)     solicit, receive, and expend privately donated funds from any source or entity to carry out the purposes of the authority; any private funds received do not become public funds; such private funds must be held in separate accounts controlled by the authority; the receipt and expenditure of such private funds shall be reported in an annual fiscal audit of the authority;

(15)     receive, expend, and control under its own name and account any appropriated funds, federal funds, donations, and grants made available to the authority;

(16)     conduct an annual fiscal audit by a certified public accountant selected by the authority, who shall review the accounts of the authority and report such findings of the audit to the Governor and the General Assembly in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards;

(17)     prepare and submit an annual budget to the Governor for approval by the General Assembly. The annual budget must identify line items including, but not limited to, personal services, operating expenses, and FTE's by program area. The annual budget must be affirmatively approved by the General Assembly in the annual general appropriations act; and

(18)     to do all things necessary or convenient, not inconsistent with law, to further the activities and affairs of the authority.

Section 13-4-40.     The authority is authorized to establish profit or not-for-profit corporations as the authority considers necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter.

Section 13-4-50.     (A)     The authority is headed by a director appointed by the Governor. The director is subject to removal by the Governor as provided in Section 1-3-240(B). At the pleasure of the Governor, the Secretary of Commerce may also serve as the director of the South Carolina Economic Development Authority and, if so, the Secretary of Commerce shall serve as director, ex officio. Compensation for the director must be established in the manner provided by law for establishing the salary of the Secretary of Commerce. The director is vested with the duty and authority to oversee, manage, and control the operation, administration, and organization of the authority subject only to the laws of this State and the United States.

(B)     The director of the authority may appoint an assistant director who shall serve at the pleasure of the director and who is responsible to the director for the operation of programs outlined by the director.

Section 13-4-60.     The authority shall retain unexpended funds at the close of the fiscal year of the State regardless of the source of the funds and may expend the funds in subsequent fiscal years.

Section 13-4-70.     If a term or provision of this chapter is found to be illegal or unenforceable, the remainder of this chapter nonetheless remains in full force and effect, and the illegal or unenforceable term or provision is deleted and severed from this chapter."

B.     Section 1-11-720(A) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 458 of 1996, is further amended by adding an appropriately numbered item at the end to read:

"( )     the South Carolina Economic Development Authority established pursuant to Chapter 4 of Title 13."

C-.     Section 8-11-260 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 452 of 1994, is further amended by adding an appropriately lettered item at the end to read:

"( )     officers and employees of the South Carolina Economic Development Authority."

D.     Section 8-17-370 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 284 of 1996, is further amended by adding an appropriately numbered item at the end to read:

"( )     officers and employees of the South Carolina Economic Development Authority."

E.     Section 11-35-310(18) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 171 of 1991, is further amended to read:

"(18)     'Governmental body' means a state government department, commission, council, board, bureau, committee, institution, college, university, technical school, legislative body, agency, government corporation, or other establishment or official of the executive, judicial, or legislative branches of this State. Governmental body excludes the General Assembly, Legislative Council, the Office of Legislative Printing and Information Technology Resources, the South Carolina Economic Development Authority, and all local political subdivisions such as counties, municipalities, school districts, or public service or special purpose districts."

F.     Those functions, powers, and duties of the South Carolina Department of Commerce that the South Carolina Economic Development Authority, as established by this act, considers necessary to enhance the economic development and growth of this State, and as approved by the State Budget and Control Board, are transferred to the authority together with all records, property, personnel, and unexpended appropriations for the functions that have been transferred to the authority with the approval of the Budget and Control Board. Provided, that the department has until December 31, 1998, to make the transfer authorized pursuant to this measure; and provided, further, that any subsequent transfer must be approved by joint resolution of the General Assembly."

G.     This section takes effect upon approval by the Governor./

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend title to conform.

Rep. BOAN explained the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

The Senate amendments, as amended, were then agreed to and the Bill ordered returned to the Senate.

The Senate amendments to the following Concurrent Resolution were taken up for consideration.

H. 4231 -- Reps. Delleney, Canty and D. Smith: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO FIX 12:30 P.M. ON TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1997, AS THE TIME FOR ELECTING A SUCCESSOR TO A CERTAIN JUDGE OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, WHOSE UNEXPIRED TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30, 1998; TO ELECT A SUCCESSOR TO A CERTAIN JUDGE OF THE FAMILY COURT OF THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, SEAT 3, WHOSE TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30, 2001; AND TO ELECT A SUCCESSOR TO A CERTAIN JUDGE OF THE FAMILY COURT OF THE FOURTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, SEAT 3, WHOSE TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30, 2001.

Reps. DELLENEY, CANTY and D. SMITH proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name P:\AMEND\GJK\20842SD.97), which was adopted.

Amend the resolution, as and if amended, by striking all after the resolving words and inserting:

/That the House of Representatives and the Senate shall meet in joint assembly in the Hall of the House of Representatives on Tuesday, June 17, 1997, at 12:30 p.m. to elect a successor to the Honorable Don S. Rushing, Judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, whose unexpired term expires June 30, 1998; to elect a successor to the Honorable William K. Charles, Jr., Judge of the Family Court for the Eighth Judicial Circuit, Seat 3, whose term expires June 30, 2001; and to elect a successor to the Honorable Donald A. Fanning, Judge of the Family Court for the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit, Seat 3, whose term expires June 30, 2001.

Be it further resolved that all nominations shall be made by the Chairman of the Judicial Merit Selection Commission and that no further nominating or seconding speeches shall be made by members of the General Assembly on behalf of any candidate./

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend totals and title to conform.

The Senate amendments, as amended, were then agreed to and the Concurrent Resolution ordered returned to the Senate.

The Senate returned to the House with amendments the following:

H. 3207 -- Reps. Seithel and Haskins: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 61-6-35 SO AS TO PROHIBIT DRINKING GAMES IN ESTABLISHMENTS WHICH SELL ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS FOR CONSUMPTION ON THE PREMISES, TO PROVIDE PENALTIES, AND TO DEFINE "DRINKING GAMES" AND "ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS".

Rep. HARRISON explained the Senate amendment.

The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.

The Senate returned to the House with amendments the following:

H. 3419 -- Reps. Cobb-Hunter, R. Smith, Harrell, Kennedy and Harvin: A BILL TO AMEND SECTIONS 59-127-310, 59-127-320, 59-127-400, 59-127-440, AND 59-127-460, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO SPECIAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY, SO AS TO DEFINE "NET ATHLETIC REVENUES" AND ADD THESE REVENUES TO THOSE REVENUE SERVICES PREVIOUSLY AVAILABLE FOR DEBT SERVICE ON THESE BONDS, TO REMOVE THE THREE MILLION DOLLAR OUTSTANDING DEBT LIMIT FOR THESE BONDS, TO AUTHORIZE BOND PROCEEDS TO BE USED FOR ACQUIRING, CONSTRUCTING, RECONSTRUCTING, RENOVATING, OR EQUIPPING ATHLETIC FACILITIES, AND TO REFUND PREVIOUSLY ISSUED BONDS, AND TO DELETE PROVISIONS RELATING TO ADVERTISING OF ISSUES.

The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.

The Senate returned to the House with amendments the following:

H. 3607 -- Rep. Sharpe: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 44-96-60, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA SOLID WASTE POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1991 AND THE STATE SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COUNCIL, SO AS TO, AMONG OTHER THINGS, INCREASE THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COUNCIL, PROVIDE FOR VARIOUS TERMS OF OFFICE, AND DELETE THE PROVISION REGARDING EXPIRATION OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE COUNCIL; TO AMEND SECTION 44-96-100, RELATING TO ADDITIONAL POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL UNDER THE SOLID WASTE POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ACT, SO AS TO ADD PROVISIONS WHICH PROVIDE, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT THE DEPARTMENT MAY ISSUE AN ORDER REQUIRING COMPLIANCE WITH A REGULATION OR BRING A CIVIL ACTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF OR REQUEST THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO BRING CIVIL OR CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, THAT THE DEPARTMENT MAY IMPOSE CERTAIN CIVIL PENALTIES, AND THAT WILFUL VIOLATION OF CERTAIN REGULATIONS IS A MISDEMEANOR; AND TO AMEND SECTIONS 44-96-400, 44-96-410, AND 44-96-420, RELATING TO THE SOLID WASTE POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ACT AND PROVISIONS GOVERNING WASTE MANAGEMENT, SO AS TO DELETE REFERENCE TO "ARTICLE" AND SUBSTITUTE "CHAPTER" THEREFOR.

Rep. SHARPE explained the Senate amendment.

The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.

The following was received.
Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has appointed Senators Moore, O'Dell and Alexander of the Committee of Conference on the part of the Senate on S. 271:
S. 271 -- Senator J. Verne Smith: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 3, TITLE 40, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE LICENSURE AND REGULATION OF ARCHITECTS, SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING BOARDS IN CHAPTER 1, TITLE 40 AND, AMONG OTHER THINGS, TO CLARIFY REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRM LICENSURE; TO PROVIDE THAT THE BOARD MAY INITIATE AN INVESTIGATION; TO EXPAND GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION; AND REVISE EXAMINATION PROCEDURES.
Very respectfully,
President

Received as information.

Rep. YOUNG-BRICKELL moved that the House do now adjourn, which was adopted.

The Senate returned to the House with concurrence the following:

H. 4236 -- Reps. McMahand and F. Smith: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION COMMENDING DR. C. STEPHEN SANDERS OF GREENVILLE COUNTY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING AND DEDICATED TWO YEARS OF SERVICE AS PRESIDENT OF THE BAPTIST MINISTERS FELLOWSHIP OF GREENVILLE AND VICINITY.

H. 4238 -- Reps. Spearman, Allison, Byrd, Cobb-Hunter, Gamble, Hinson, Lee, Martin, Meacham, Miller, Moody-Lawrence, Mullen, Neilson, Parks, Rodgers, Seithel, Stuart and Young-Brickell: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING PHYLLIS O. BONANNO ON HER APPOINTMENT AS THE FIFTEENTH PRESIDENT OF COLUMBIA COLLEGE AND ON BECOMING THE FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT IN THE COLLEGE'S HISTORY.

H. 4243 -- Reps. Wilkins, Haskins, Allison, Altman, Askins, Bailey, Barfield, Barrett, Battle, Bauer, Baxley, Beck, Boan, Bowers, Breeland, G. Brown, H. Brown, J. Brown, T. Brown, Byrd, Campsen, Canty, Carnell, Cato, Cave, Chellis, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cooper, Cotty, Cromer, Dantzler, Davenport, Delleney, Easterday, Edge, Felder, Fleming, Gamble, Gourdine, Govan, Hamilton, Harrell, Harrison, Harvin, Hawkins, J. Hines, M. Hines, Hinson, Hodges, Howard, Inabinett, Jennings, Jordan, Keegan, Kelley, Kennedy, Kinon, Kirsh, Klauber, Knotts, Koon, Lanford, Law, Leach, Lee, Limbaugh, Limehouse, Littlejohn, Lloyd, Loftis, Mack, Maddox, Martin, Mason, McCraw, McKay, McLeod, McMahand, McMaster, Meacham, Miller, Moody-Lawrence, Mullen, Neal, Neilson, Parks, Phillips, Pinckney, Quinn, Rhoad, Rice, Riser, Robinson, Rodgers, Sandifer, Scott, Seithel, Sharpe, Sheheen, Simrill, D. Smith, F. Smith, J. Smith, R. Smith, Spearman, Stille, Stoddard, Stuart, Townsend, Tripp, Trotter, Vaughn, Walker, Webb, Whatley, Whipper, Wilder, Wilkes, Witherspoon, Woodrum, Young, Young-Brickell: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE MRS. ANN B. MARTIN OF MCCORMICK UPON BEING NAMED FEMALE STATE EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA STATE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION.

H. 4253 -- Reps. Neilson, Stuart and Rhoad: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE GRATITUDE AND BEST WISHES OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TO KELLER H. BARRON FOR HER PIONEERING WORK IN BETTERING THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE AGING AND ELDERLY DURING HER TENURE AS RESEARCH DIRECTOR FOR THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON AGING.

H. 4257 -- Rep. Govan: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE AND CONGRATULATE THE CLASS OF 1947 OF WILKINSON HIGH SCHOOL FORMERLY OF ORANGEBURG COUNTY ON THE OCCASION OF THEIR FIFTIETH HIGH SCHOOL REUNION.

H. 4258 -- Reps. Wilkins, Allison, Altman, Askins, Bailey, Barfield, Barrett, Battle, Bauer, Baxley, Beck, Boan, Bowers, Breeland, G. Brown, H. Brown, J. Brown, T. Brown, Byrd, Campsen, Canty, Carnell, Cato, Cave, Chellis, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cooper, Cotty, Cromer, Dantzler, Davenport, Delleney, Easterday, Edge, Felder, Fleming, Gamble, Gourdine, Govan, Hamilton, Harrell, Harrison, Harvin, Haskins, Hawkins, J. Hines, M. Hines, Hinson, Hodges, Howard, Inabinett, Jennings, Jordan, Keegan, Kelley, Kennedy, Kinon, Kirsh, Klauber, Knotts, Koon, Lanford, Law, Leach, Lee, Limbaugh, Limehouse, Littlejohn, Lloyd, Loftis, Mack, Maddox, Martin, Mason, McCraw, McKay, McLeod, McMahand, McMaster, Meacham, Miller, Moody-Lawrence, Mullen, Neal, Neilson, Parks, Phillips, Pinckney, Quinn, Rhoad, Rice, Riser, Robinson, Rodgers, Sandifer, Scott, Seithel, Sharpe, Sheheen, Simrill, D. Smith, F. Smith, J. Smith, R. Smith, Spearman, Stille, Stoddard, Stuart, Townsend, Tripp, Trotter, Vaughn, Walker, Webb, Whatley, Whipper, Wilder, Wilkes, Witherspoon, Woodrum, Young, Young-Brickell: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO EXPRESS THE SINCERE CONGRATULATIONS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TO OUR ESTEEMED AND LEGENDARY UNITED STATES SENATOR, THE HONORABLE STROM THURMOND, ON SURPASSING ANOTHER LONGEVITY RECORD BY BECOMING THE LONGEST-SERVING SENATOR IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES.

H. 3837 -- Reps. Stille, Parks, Carnell and Townsend: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO NAME A SECTION OF S. C. HWY. 72 IN ABBEVILLE COUNTY IN HONOR OF CHARLES L. POWELL AND TO ERECT APPROPRIATE MARKERS OR SIGNS TO THAT EFFECT.

H. 4260 -- Reps. Scott, Allison, Altman, Askins, Bailey, Barfield, Barrett, Battle, Bauer, Baxley, Beck, Boan, Bowers, Breeland, G. Brown, H. Brown, J. Brown, T. Brown, Byrd, Campsen, Canty, Carnell, Cato, Cave, Chellis, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cooper, Cotty, Cromer, Dantzler, Davenport, Delleney, Easterday, Edge, Felder, Fleming, Gamble, Gourdine, Govan, Hamilton, Harrell, A. Harris, Harrison, Harvin, Haskins, Hawkins, J. Hines, M. Hines, Hinson, Hodges, Howard, Inabinett, Jennings, Jordan, Keegan, Kelley, Kennedy, Kinon, Kirsh, Klauber, Knotts, Koon, Lanford, Law, Leach, Lee, Limbaugh, Limehouse, Littlejohn, Lloyd, Loftis, Mack, Maddox, Martin, Mason, McCraw, McKay, McLeod, McMahand, McMaster, Meacham, Miller, Moody-Lawrence, Mullen, Neal, Neilson, Parks, Phillips, Pinckney, Quinn, Rhoad, Rice, Riser, Robinson, Rodgers, Sandifer, Seithel, Sharpe, Sheheen, Simrill, D. Smith, F. Smith, J. Smith, R. Smith, Spearman, Stille, Stoddard, Stuart, Townsend, Tripp, Trotter, Vaughn, Walker, Webb, Whatley, Whipper, Wilder, Wilkes, Wilkins, Witherspoon, Woodrum, Young and Young-Brickell: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING THE SOUTH CAROLINA CHAPTER OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BENCH AND BAR SPOUSES, INCORPORATED, ON SPONSORING ITS FOURTH ANNUAL SCHOLARSHIP GALA AND WISHING IT MUCH SUCCESS IN ITS FUTURE ENDEAVORS.

H. 4261 -- Reps. H. Brown and Hinson: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE CONGRATULATIONS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TO THE HANAHAN HIGH SCHOOL "HAWKS" SOCCER TEAM, COACHES, AND STAFF ON WINNING THE 1996-97 CLASS AA-A STATE CHAMPIONSHIP.

H. 4262 -- Rep. Bailey: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SORROW OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AT THE DEATH OF TERETHA LEMON-LINCOLN OF DORCHESTER COUNTY AND EXTENDING SYMPATHY TO HER FAMILY AND MANY FRIENDS.

H. 4263 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING JACOB SVENSSON OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

H. 4264 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING RICARDO ALMEIDA OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

H. 4265 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING CLAES PERSSON OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS ROLE IN ASSISTING LANDER WIN THE 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP.

H. 4266 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING FRANK POTTHOFF OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

H. 4267 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING MARTIN KAHM OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

H. 4268 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING LAIO TEIXEIRA OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

H. 4269 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING MAURICE SZPYDOWSKI OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

H. 4270 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING JANNE VILHUNEN OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.

H. 4271 -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING COACH JOSEPH CABRI, LANDER UNIVERSITY MENS TENNIS COACH, FOR LEADING THE UNIVERSITY'S MENS TENNIS TEAM TO ITS NINTH NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP AND ON HIS SUCCESS AS AN OUTSTANDING FACULTY MEMBER.

H. 4273 -- Rep. McLeod: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING MARYLAND STATE SENATOR GLORIA GARY LAWLAH, A NATIVE OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF NEWBERRY, SOUTH CAROLINA, FOR HER DISTINGUISHED LEADERSHIP RECORD AND ACHIEVEMENTS.

At 5:05 P.M. the House in accordance with the motion of Rep. J. BROWN adjourned in memory of Willie A. Pinckney of Columbia, to meet at 10:00 A.M. tomorrow.

This web page was last updated on Monday, June 29, 2009 at 10:39 A.M.