NO. 21

Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter

The House assembled at 10:00 a.m.
Deliberations were opened with prayer by Rev. Charles E. Seastrunk, Jr., as follows:

Our thought for today is from Psalm 95:7: "For He is our God, and we are the people of His pasture, and the sheep of His hand."

Let us pray. Dear Lord, guide us as these people carry out the duties assigned to them. Bless them in all they do to provide for the people of this State. As these women and men serve here, encourage them to serve the people. Give us the challenge to help those in need. Bless our defenders of freedom and first responders as they protect and care for us. Look in favor upon our World, Nation, President, State, Governor, Speaker, staff, and all who serve in this vineyard. Heal the wounds, those seen and those hidden, of our brave men and women who suffer and sacrifice for our freedom. Lord, in Your Mercy, hear our prayers. 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 yesterday, the SPEAKER ordered it confirmed.

Rep. HERBKERSMAN moved that when the House adjourns, it adjourn in memory of Cecil "Jay" Odom, which was agreed to.

The following was received:

The College and University Trustee Screening Commission found the following individuals qualified and nominated for the Trustee seats to which they applied. A complete transcript of the hearings for these candidates will be printed in Senate and House Journals on February 18, 2021.

THE CITADEL
One (1) At-Large, Seat      
- terms expire June 30, 2026    

--   C. Douglas Barnes - Lancaster

--   Kenneth L. Davis III - Columbia

--   F. Gregory Delleney, Jr. - Chester

--   Andrew L. Helfer - Columbia

LANDER UNIVERSITY
At-Large, Seat 9      
- terms expire June 30, 2022    

--   Esther R. "Toni" Able - Laurens

--   James C. Shubert - Simpsonville

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY
At-Large, Seat 10      
- terms expire June 30, 2024    

--   Macie P. Smith - Columbia

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
5th Judicial Circuit      
- terms expire June 30, 2022    

--   Robert F. Dozier, Jr. - Columbia

--   Alexander English - Blythewood

--   Kevin M. Hunter - Irmo

TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS

Date:       Monday, February 1, 2021
Time:       1:02 P.M.
Location:     209 Gressette Building

1101 Pendleton Street

Columbia, South Carolina 29201

Committee Members Present:

Senator Harvey S. Peeler, Jr., Chairman

Representative William R. Whitmire, V. Chairman

Representative John King

Senator Thomas C. Alexander

Representative Kirkman Finlay III

Representative Chris Murphy

Senator John L. Scott, Jr.

Senator Daniel B. "Danny" Verdin III

Also Present:

Martha Casto, Staff

Julie Price, Staff

CHAIRMAN PEELER: You have the agenda before you. First up is South Carolina State University At- Large Seat Ten. It's all under Tab A, Macie P. Smith from Columbia. MS. Smith, if you would, come forward.
MS. SMITH: Yes, sir. Good afternoon.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Good to see you.
MS. SMITH: Can you see me? Do you want me to --
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Oh, no, you're good. If you're comfortable, you're all right, yeah.
MS. SMITH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Well, first of all, let me swear you in.
MS. MACIE SMITH having been duly sworn, testifies as follows:
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Would you like to make a brief statement on why you'd like to serve on the South Carolina State University board of trustees?
MS. SMITH: I sure would. I am a small town country girl from Orangeburg County, North, and South Carolina, to be specific. And I obtained my bachelors of social work from SC State University, my master's in rehabilitation counseling from SC State University. And that education and experience prepared me to pursue a doctorate in higher education leadership from Nova Southeastern University. And I aspire to help to promote excellence in our HBCU students. The same thing SC State did for me, I want to do for the upcoming HBCU students at my alma mater.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Good. I think we screened you before earlier-
MS. SMITH: Yes, sir I just got a couple of changes that's all.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Okay. What are the changes?
MS. SMITH: Oh, my hair.
SENATOR SCOTT: Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Scott.
SENATOR SCOTT: I think it's been less than six months or right before we left that we just screened her. Unless there's something major that's changed since the last screening, I move a favorable report and we can move on.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Scott moves a favorable report.
SENATOR VERDIN: I would be more than happy to. I just want to make sure my understanding of the rules don't require the prerequisite -- or the requisite questions.
MS. CASTO: No, sir. Not for this one --
SENATOR VERDIN: Second the motion.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: All right. Moved and seconded as favorable report. Any discussion? (No response is heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: We'll take a vote on it. All in favor say, aye. (Ayes are heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Opposed, No. (No response is heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: And ayes have it. Thank you so much for your willingness to serve. Next up we have in Tab B, Ester R. "Toni" Able from Laurens. And I have an excuse for messing up your name: this mask fogs up my glasses and I can't see. So I'll have an excuse today.
MS. ABLE: Good afternoon.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Good afternoon, ma'am.
MS. ABLE: Good afternoon, sir. How are you today?
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Let me swear you in.
MS. ESTER R. "TONI" ABLE having been duly sworn, testifies as follows:
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Would you like to make a brief statement of why you would like to serve on Lander University Board of Trustees?
MS. ABLE: In thinking about that question, many things came to mind, the first being that there are several places in this great state of South Carolina I truly feel I'm home. You know, you get that feeling if you've been gone away for a long time and you step back into your house, you're like, I'm home. Lander University is definitely that place, second in line to my home, and third in line to Hickory Knob, South Carolina just because of the family memories that we have at Hickory Knob. Lander, when I first stepped on that campus, when I first moved to the great state of South Carolina in 1984, for some reason brought me to Lander; I'm not really sure why. It was like, wow, this is a neat place. And then lo and behold, I ended up spending my undergraduate years at Lander and absolutely loved the campus. I loved every part of Lander. Lander was an important part of my family, even before I knew it. My husband graduated from Lander, along with his late wife Mary, who I've had the pleasure of raising their children since Mary passed away. Our daughter, Andrea, graduated from Lander. I have formerly served on the Board of Trustees of Lander. And whenever I get to go on the Lander campus now, with my class of 2020 students who are there are, it's just a wonderful, exhilarating feeling that I know that they are having as well. And I want to be able to continue to serve back to my alma mater in a very productive way. And I feel as serving on the Board of Trustees will give me that opportunity to do that.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Thank you. Any questions? Representative King.
REPRESENTATIVE KING: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
MS. ABLE - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE KING:
Q. Ms. Able, can you tell me what you know as what the time of commitment is to being on the Board?
A. From what I understand, the Board of Trustees meets on a quarterly basis. However, I do know they have called meetings throughout the year as well. I think they've got a called meeting coming up this week to discuss some issues that have arisen. And time commitment for me, that's -- does not bother me, whatsoever.
Q. All right. When you think of diversity and Lander, give me your definition as to how you can continue in the process of diversity there at Lander and what would you do different, if there is anything you would do different?
A. Thank you. I think Lander has made great strides, when it comes to diversity. I do know that they have recently formed a diversity -- I believe it's a diversity action council that is meeting to address diversity issues on campus, not only with the student body but with the employees at Lander as well within that. And I think that is incredibly important because students do need to look around and see individuals who have similar backgrounds to themselves and strive to emulate what those individuals are doing on campus. I also note that Lander is always working very diligently to recruit students throughout the state, which I know gives competition to other universities that are across the state. And Lander has been very successful in recruiting some diverse student bodies in the past. I know that they will continue to do that. As far as what I would do differently, that's kind of hard to say because I'm not familiar 100 percent with what they have currently done, since I have not been a part of those conversations with the Board of Trustees. So I don't want to say what I would do differently with them, prior to knowing exactly strives that they have maintained to change some things. I think that I would definitely need to sit down with them and say, okay, what we are doing to recruit diverse employees as well as diverse students from the state of South Carolina and beyond its walls.
Q. Do you know what the population is, in reference to South Carolinians that attend Lander, percentage-wise?
A. It's pretty high up there. I don't know the exact percentage, but I would have to guess it's at least above 70 percent, to my knowledge.
Q. And what is your view on priority for South Carolinians being accepted into Lander?
A. As a state supported school, I believe that they should have priority. Q. Thank you.
A. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Scott.
SENATOR SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MS. ABLE - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR SCOTT:
Q. Thank you for your willingness to serve, Ms. Able.
A. Thank you.
Q. As a member of Laurens County School District Five, which are you're pretty well adjacent to the college --
A. Yes, sir.
Q. -- now that when we're in the middle of a pandemic, and hopefully we get it calmed down, we're going to probably watch most local students start going to the closest college that they can get. What's your approach, as you work with these students at your school and encouraging them go to some of the schools, and what impact would broadband have on your particular area, especially these children are going to have to do their homework and do the class instruction at home?
Just talk a little bit about your thought pattern on that.
A. Okay.
Q. Because education is changing.
A. Yes, sir. It definitely has changed. And I was remiss to state earlier in my opening statement, I have been involved with Laurens School District 55 now since 2015 as their college support specialist. I've had the utmost pleasure and honor of serving as a college counselor to the class of 2020 since Laurens 55 students were in the seventh grade. There was a brief period of time when I got held back in middle school for two years to work on the EEDA grant for all five middle -- three middle schools and the alternative school, but then I was able to return back to my students when they were juniors in high school. I have definitely seen and witnessed the struggle students are having with some online education, and I know that Lander has done a tremendous job with online education because they started just a little bit ahead of the curve with that with some summer programming about having online course work. And I do understand that broadband is an issue. Through the Garrett grant that I'm a part of, we've actually been able to give hot spots out to our students. I even went to the Dollar General in the big city of Gray Court to meet a student when it was raining out of my trunk and taught her how to use the hotspot so that she could complete her college course work. I do think that if students are to be successful in this era that we're in now, that we need to make sure that they have all the tools and resources available to them, you know, for that and have the education to access those tools and know how to use those tools. It had definitely been a great challenge for our students.
Q. Do you have recommendations for changes as move forward, because we're going to be looking to colleges and universities especially boards of trustees and others for input in terms of how we're going to be able to do this process --
A. I think --
Q. -- especially --
A. Yes, sir. I think --
Q. I'm almost --
A. I'm sorry, sir. I don't mean to interrupt.
Q. Especially as we look at the transition from high school to college. A. I think we need to start with them very early on about online course work. As much as a lot of us don't care for it, it's here to stay for a while, at least. And I know through virtual school, you know, that's definitely been a challenge. But I do believe that we need to start with students at a young age to say, okay, this is -- you know, this is here now, this is how you do this. I believe we also need to train our parents because I know parents have struggled, not even just my college kids' parents, they have struggled.
Q. Right.
A. You know, I know that high school kids' parents have struggled, along with the middle school students that have struggled. I think there's a whole lot of education that needs to be done about how to interact in the online world. Also, a lot of education needs to be done with our students on how to interact with adults in the online world, because I have found that a lot of our students do not know how to interact with adults. You know, we in the gear-up program, along with the rest of the world, feels somewhat cheated because March, we left for a three -- a long weekend, and we didn't get to see our students again. You know, and that was March of 2020, and -- other than virtually. And we just weren't prepared, you know, for that -- what came up, but we've done great strides in trying to help our kids out to make sure that they know how and what they're doing. And we're partnered a lot more with our colleges and universities to make sure that those transitions are being done correctly. So it takes partnership and it takes a lot of education.
SENATOR SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Anyone else? Representative Whitmire.
REPRESENTATIVE WHITMIRE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MS. ABLE - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE WHITMIRE: Q. Boy, it's hard talking through these things.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Welcome, Ms. Able. Quite an impressive resume.
A. Thank you, sir.
Q. I see that you say that you think that one of the weaknesses of Lander is retention rate. Do you have any ideas about how to address that issue? A. As I said earlier, Lander has increased the retention over the last few years, but, you know, with -- I think the average is about 25 percent of the students don't return. I'd like to see that number decrease and keep all that -- you know, keep all the students and their cohorts, you know, from year to year. I think that kids now, unfortunately, they need a lot of hand- holding, I've discovered. That, you know, we need check-ins, whether it's from a program such as Gear Up or on the college itself to say make sure that our students are doing what they need to do in order to be successful. I mean, naturally, you are going to have some students that realize, hey: this is not for me; this is not what I bargained for; I need to find something else to do, as far as my future education is concerned. But I do think that letting students know up front what the expectations are is highly important, you know. We had kiddos that, you know, especially in the online world right now that really don't understand when you have class Monday through -- Monday, Wednesday, Friday from 8:00 a.m. until 9:00 a.m., whether it's in front of a computer or in class, you have to be there; you know, your butt needs to be in the seat.
Q. Well, you know, that's not just Lander, but all our state supported schools.
A. Yes, sir. Right.
Q. That's something that's always concerned me is the students who receive our lottery scholarships, they go one year, maybe two, then they're gone.
A. Yeah.
Q. And that money is gone too.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. So hopefully --
A. Yeah. And I --
Q. -- you can take a look at maybe seeing how -- I don't know if the University has a way to find out exactly why students drop out. Some things you said, I'm sure, are true.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. It could be financial.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. It could be like me, have a big time in school and --
A. Got asked not to come back, maybe.
Q. Yes.
A. And I think, you know, colleges and universities across the board are doing a lot better job when it comes to tutoring programs, when it comes to reaching out that says, hey, kiddo, you know, why were you not in Art 101 these past -- you know, this past week, what's going on. I know that Lander does have a great alert system when a student's not present in class, you know, they get a phone call, they get a text. If those two options don't work, then actually somebody, from what I understand, does appear at their doorways.
Q. But one thing I appreciate about Lander is you make sure that you take care of the in-state students first.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That doesn't always happen in all our schools.
A. No, sir.
Q. And we've mentioned that several times. The last thing you said that Lander's got a weakness being in a small town. Obviously, you have not been to where Senator Alexander and I live. That is a small town.
A. I understand, yes, sir.
Q. Greenwood's a city. Thank you very much.
A. Yes, sir. I appreciate it, sir, and thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Verdin.
SENATOR VERDIN: Mr. President, I've had the pleasure of knowing and observing Toni -- Ms. Toni Ables' dynamic and energetic career, not just in education but other facets of our life in Laurens. And I would be pleased to make a -- to move for a favorable report.
SENATOR SCOTT: Second.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: I think senator from Oconee, no? Other questions or comments before we take it to a vote? All right. All in favor of a favorable report say, aye. (Ayes are heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Opposed, no. (No replies are heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: The ayes have it. Thank you, ma'am. I appreciate your willingness to serve.
MS. ABLE: Thank you, all. And I appreciate your service as well. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Next under Tab C, Lander University At-Large Seat Nine, James C. Shubert from Simpsonville. Afternoon, sir.
MR. SHUBERT: Good afternoon, everybody. Hope y'all are doing well.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Let me swear you in.
MR. JAMES C. SHUBERT having been duly sworn, testifies as follows:
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Would you like to make a brief statement on why you'd like to serve on the Lander Board of Trustees?
MR. SHUBERT: Yes, sir. Thank you, Senator. I'm the class of 1988. I met my wife there. I have three children. I live in Simpsonville. And Lander has certainly been a major of my life. I'd like to say without Lander, there's not Grayson, Jackson and Campbell, right, so that's one of those neat things to meet your spouse. Greenwood's my hometown, so I grew up there. I've watched Lander evolve over the years. I've had friends and family attend there as well, so it's certainly got a dear place in my heart. I previously ran for Seat 4. I think you may recognize me; I was also with Terry Pruitt. Had some circumstances towards the end due to the fact that with my vocation I'm in the OR for heart transplants, and get COVID exposure, or close to COVID exposure every day, so that's why I have to kind of be careful with what I do. But anyway, I appreciate the opportunity to turn and be screened for this. I had, I think, sent a letter to you, sir, just stating that any other opportunities that come up I would be looking to try to serve in that regard, so. So I'm a private business man, I mean, that's what I do. I do a weird thing called going into the heart operating room to help patients either receive a new heart or ventricular assist device. So it's kind of a neat job. It gets me the opportunity to travel around the southeast, to travel around this state, and I get to meet a lot of different people. As a result, you obviously talk about your background, you talk about what you do, and you talk about where you're from. And so, invariably, you know, who you know, where you went to college comes up. So I've appreciated seeing, as my careers unfolded, the type of education I got in physiology and cardiac physiology at Lander. It put me on a very competitive playing field to be able to do what I do. So that's why I'm here today, just to see -- see what -- or to show what service is all about. I'm a servant leader. I believe that's the way you do it. I think if you do it any other way, you're doing it wrong. I had a mentor years ago that kind of shared with me that, you know, you need to find a place to serve where you don't benefit from it, as that's the ultimate form of service. And so I don't have any, you know, extrinsic desire or looking to get something out of this. I'm just at that place in life where the opportunity to serve is happening. And so with that, I'd be happy to take any questions you have of me.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Any questions? Representative King.
REPRESENTATIVE KING: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. SHUBERT - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE KING: Q. With the many challenges that colleges and universities had prior to the pandemic, and I'm sure there are many, many more now since the pandemic. One that I'm interested in hearing your response on is how colleges should and universities now deal with the mental illness components that many of our students will now face because of some of the things that have happened with the pandemic and their education?
A. All right. I think the pandemic's affected all of us, right. I've got -- I had a child in high school and two children in college that were trying to navigate through how to learn in this environment. And kind of as I tried to help my only son and youngest daughter kind of navigate through this, the one thing I was noticing is, you know, there wasn't good support systems in place. I think it took us all by surprise, so it shouldn't be a finger pointing thing. It should be more of a how can we do -- how can we work partnerships. So I think we need to get some, you know, private business partnerships with some of our public entities. I mean, we need broadband across the state, don't we? We need it in areas of the state that, you know, I go down that -- we need to get with Spectrum and Charter and those types of people and see if we can provide that. We also need to kind of work to help people understand what -- you know, what their passions and visions are. And so I think there's got to be some sort of counseling component to this online education to help steer kids in a time when, quite frankly, getting steered is difficult and doing the steering is more difficult, you know, I've noticed as a parent. So without the support systems in place, it makes it very, very difficult. And of course, you know, I mean, being in the field I'm in and having to read daily about the pandemic and what's happening, especially with regards to vaccines and safety and masks and, you know, all that goes with it, you know, and being able to kind of filter out what's true, false and somewhere in the middle, I think we need to probably, you know, help them realize this is going to get back to normal at some point. I mean, as a country, we're going in the right direction, even though it doesn't seem like it. But with what's happening with vaccinations and different things, I think we'll be -- I think we'll be back on point here soon. So we have to give our kids hope to understand that, you know. You know, we've got hope, we're the United States of America. You know, this state is a wonderful state. And with the hard work of everybody I know -- I see in the state legislature and senate, you know, we should get back to school soon and make it happen.
Q. If elected to the Board, I would hope you all would take a hard look at mental illness; mental illness is real. And I was reading an article, I want to think it was last weekend. I can't remember where it was, but there is about a 50 percent increase in suicides now amongst our youth. And so I think it's a conversation that we're going to have to have on all college campuses. And so I hope that you would take an opportunity to understand what impact it may have at your institution. Thank you.
A. You're welcome. And I agree with you on that point, because right now, that is probably the worst age group, are school-aged kids for suicide right now.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Scott.
MR. SHUBERT - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR SCOTT:
Q. First, let me thank you for your willingness to serve.
A. You're welcome.
Q. I tell you, when you look at college boards and along with university and college boards now, it's almost like this group, when you're there to serve, and you're it.
A. Yeah.
Q. It becomes your responsibility to find solutions to the problem, outside consultants or creating those relationships. I still want to go back to the other question a minute ago, mental illness. And I'm hoping that given that background that you do have, and especially in the sciences and the healthcare, it becomes one of the major issues that you have. We just finished dealing with college and universities not long ago when we had a lot of kids taking un-prescribed medication on these opioids. And so now, we're into a whole another world. What I'm saying with the background that you have, I'm hoping that if you are elected to this board that you're able to utilize what you see across this country. So what have you seen at other universities that you could bring to this university to make it stronger, especially in the fields where you are. It could be classroom instruction because there's a lot of sciences you took. And also it could be some programs that are out there that can strengthen it. As I mentioned before, most of these kids that will be going to school, the community schools, you won't find them going all across the country because it costs too much and because of the pandemic. So what do you bring to the school that you think can make a real big difference at the school, based on the experience that you have out there?
A. Yeah. That's a -- I'll tell you, when I talk to my fellow parents and I listen to them talk about their children and what their children are faced with, and I've had the misfortune, or it's been unfortunate, to see a couple of my good friends have kids get into substance abuse as a result of this pandemic and then a friend who had a child commit suicide as a result of this. So it's a real thing that's occurring. Generally speaking, what I see is, with guidance, children seem to do wonderful things. And that seems to be regardless of socioeconomic structure. They tend to thrive with good structure. So as I think about what my son, who's on scholarship at The Citadel, and you know, that is a very unique place all the way around, but as I listen to what he's talking about to me, after watching a friend cadet of his commit suicide over Christmas break last year, he said, you know, Dad, they put good support structures in place because with the pandemic they understood that we had to communicate and we need each other face to face. And so they did, they put ways of doing that face to face. If masks work let's wear a mask and let's help our children. And that kind of was their attitude. So the places that I seem to recognize as thriving, they tend to put that at the forefront. They understand that kids are struggling with this. So I would say if I was at Lander and they wanted to talk about mental illness, I would just ask them, what do you have in place currently and how have you changed it relative to the pandemic. And do you understand the statistics relative to the pandemic now with regards to suicide, mental wellness and it's different. And so what kind of resource dollars could we bring in to keep those kids healthy and moving towards their degree. Because I was listening to the earlier question, and I think a lot of kids, and my kids being college-aged right now, ones that drop out and don't go to school, they don't have good guidance on why they're there or they didn't get good guidance as to why they should go there. And that's why I'm a big believer in trying to put resources towards that to help them make the decisions they need to make. Does that help?
Q. That helps some.
A. Okay.
Q. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Verdin.
SENATOR VERDIN: Mr. President, at the appropriate time, I'd like to move for a favorable report for Mr. Shubert to the full Senate.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: The motion is favorable. Second? Second. Any other discussion? All in favor say, aye. (Ayes are heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Opposed, no. (No reply is heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: The ayes have it. Thank you, sir.
MR. SHUBERT: Thank y'all. (Off the record.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: The Citadel at large, under Tab D. C. Douglas Barnes from Lancaster. Good afternoon, Sir.
MR. BARNES: Good afternoon.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Let me swear you in.
MR. C. DOUGLAS BARNES having been duly sworn, testifies as follows:
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Would you like to make a brief statement on why you'd like to serve on The Citadel Board?
MR. BARNES: Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman and Committee Members, I'd like to thank y'all for the opportunity to be here today. The primary reason I'm here is because I love The Citadel. What it means to me when I think of The Citadel, I think of the staff, faculty and the corp of cadets and the alumni of the system of the corp of cadets. And I want to make sure that we can give the young men and women of today the opportunity to be boiled down to their lowest common denominator, which is we actually refer to as a nob, and then rebuild them to become graduates of The Citadel. And I believe that's what the purpose of The Citadel Board of Visitors should be, among other things. My application packet lists a number of involvement I've had over the years with The Citadel, both financially and with my time and involvement with the different boards and commissions related to The Citadel and other community entities. I've been blessed with the resources to give back to The Citadel, financially and with my time. I look forward to having the opportunity to do that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Thank you. Questions or comments? Senator Scott.
MR. BARNES - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR SCOTT:
Q. Thank you for willingness to serve. When your board makes a decision at The Citadel and you were part of that decision, whether you like the decision or not like the decision, as a member of that board, are you willing to stand with your board on the decision that's made or would you deviate on a decision made by the board?
A. In my packet and with my experience of being involved with boards and commissions, it's incumbent upon board members to realize that they're not individual representatives, but they're member of a team and they're a member of a board. And as a member of a board, the board needs to function together and the members need to support the actions of the board.
Q. The reason why I asked that, we've had previous members who have run for the board and special members who were members of the board who, in fact, the board made a decision as it relates to the culture of The Citadel, and that's a big issue down there. And it was a -- the reality was would members stand with the decision that they made with the board, would they deviate from the decision made for the board for the purpose of just getting back on the board; that's important. Do you recognize the culture of The Citadel? Has that culture changed over the many years since you were there in '86?
A. I think there's been a lot of subtle changes, but overall, the system and the process is very similar to what I went through as a cadet.
Q. Do you see any -- do you see any culture changes that need to occur at The Citadel?
A. Now, as far as the Board of Visitors, one thing I would like to see is a little more transparency. It seems with some of the more recent issues, one in particular having to do with the sophomore shuffle, that there was an incident --
Q. Correct.
A. -- where a board member made a motion to have a discussion about it in the public meeting and he didn't get a second. I would have like to have seen more discussion on that subject and have it, you know, more thoroughly discussed. And I was disappointed. That's one of the reasons I'm here is I was disappointed that that wasn't more -- a more public process of having that open discussion.
Q. And that's a pretty hot issue for The Citadel. A matter of fact, I think you lost your chairman as a result of a decision related to that sophomore class. So again, in looking at how you can improve the culture of The Citadel -- or is it your position that The Citadel needs to remain with the same culture it has had for the many, many years there or would you like The Citadel to begin? And if so, moving in the direction to improve The Citadel?
A. Well, I think I would like for The Citadel to be better and more inclusive and certainly have an improved culture where it needs to be improved and there's lots of things within the culture of The Citadel that needs to continue to be the same.
Q. You gave me a glass -- you gave me an answer with the glass half filled. Thank you.
SENATOR SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Representative King.
REPRESENTATIVE KING: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
MR. BARNES - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE KING:
Q. On your response to the COVID and virtual learning, you mentioned that the tuition should be adjusted. Could you elaborate a little more on that?
A. To the extent that the school doesn't bear the expense of having -- and from what I gather, they've -- they're having -- the cadets are back on campus and, you know, with -- from what I can understand that's going on there now that it probably doesn't need to have an adjustment made. But if they were doing online classes only, then there's a lot of expenses associated with physical facilities that the cadets wouldn't be taking advantage of and probably should not be responsible for.
Q. So is it true that they last semester went virtual or was it half of the school? Or how did they do it last semester?
A. I think they sent them home for a portion of that time. And from what I understand now, there's some classes where half the class meets one day and the next class period they're remote. So they are able to rotate through the facility.
Q. I have two questions for you, and the first one is similar to what I just asked in reference to mental illness and how we address that for our college students.
A. I think The Citadel is in a unique position the way they have the facilities and all the cadets are on campus, and so there's not a lot of interaction -- or there's better facilities to keep the cadets together and not interact and expose themselves to the possibility of contracting the virus. So they're not going to experience as much of the problem as some other schools might. And then like the previous gentleman who was sitting here talking about the opportunities for the -- the support systems that are in place, just making sure that the cadets and students are aware of those opportunities and take advantage of them and make sure that nobody gets any -- or they don't try to stigmatize any of the cadets for participating in those programs.
Q. Thank you.
MR. BARNES - EXAMINATION BY CHAIRMAN PEELER:
Q. Mr. Barnes, I was looking at ways to improve The Citadels, need to engage the not-one-dime crowd.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Not-one-dime crowd?
A. They're some folks on the, you know, the rabble- rousers, so to speak, on the internet that they don't like changes that have been made, so they say they're not going to give one dime to The Citadel. And they're very vocal. And if we could somehow harness some of that energy and turn it around and maybe even make them contributors that would be helpful.
Q. I was just curious.
A. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Representative Whitmire.
REPRESENTATIVE WHITMIRE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. BARNES - EXAMINATION BY MR. WHITMIRE:
Q. Explain to me what changes you're talking about that they want. Do they want to keep The Citadel as it was or do they want changes at The Citadel now? What are the changes?
A. What do you mean by who?
Q. Well, the not-one-dime crowd.
A. Oh, there are some that would like to have it be all male again. They have various issues. There's one issues where the pipers in the pipe band have been merged into the marching band, so there's a group that wants the pipe band out front. I support that, but not to the extent that I have withheld financial resources from the school. I contribute regularly. And the sophomore shuffle's been one of the issues. The mess halls where we have -- used to have family- style meals, we would meet for breakfast, lunch and dinner formation, and now the capacity of the mess halls inadequate to allow that to continue. So there's folks that think that's a really big issue. I would love to see that issue addressed. And some of those folks carry it to the extreme to say that they're not going to give one dime to The Citadel.
Q. That's interesting. It seems like they would be more inclined to contribute so you'd have a larger mess hall or something like that, so.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. All right. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Alexander.
SENATOR ALEXANDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. BARNES - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR ALEXANDER:
Q. Good afternoon. Thank you for being here. I just was looking over as far as the biggest weakness for The Citadel. Can you elaborate on how you can resolve that, from the facilities and cost of keeping the facilities and academic degrees? Or they're not matching up or how would you...
A. Well, I think part of it is the geographical location and the constriction of the limited space. One of the big arguments against replacing the mess hall is where would they feed the cadets for the two years it might take to replace the mess hall, so there's limited space. And then some of the buildings are old. They just in the last week or two, they've opened up Basting Hall, which is a really nice addition to the campus. And they're going to be tearing down Capers Hall, which is an old academic building that's -- was probably in need of replacement when I was there, but it's finally made it around. So it's just taken time and money to upgrade the facilities, just like every other entity.
Q. How about if you could just briefly on the academic degrees, do you think -- is there a disconnect there in the degrees, or --
A. No, sir. I don't think so. I think they've got a nursing program, some outstanding engineering programs. It would be interesting to some aeronautical engineering come online. But other than that, it looks like their experts that decide what programs to offer are probably offering the right programs right now.
Q. Okay.
SENATOR ALEXANDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Anyone else? Motion?
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Second. Now we'll take it to a vote. All in favor say aye. (Ayes are heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Opposed, No.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: The ayes have it. Thank you, sir.
MR. BARNES: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: And I appreciate your willingness to serve. The next candidate is Kenneth L. Davis, III from Columbia. Good afternoon, Mr. Davis.
MR. DAVIS: Good afternoon.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Let me swear you in.
MR. KENNETH L. DAVIS, III having been duly sworn, testifies as follows:
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Would you like to make a brief statement?
MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir. Chairman Peeler and members of the screening committee, thank you for allowing me time to -- your time to express my interest in serving on The Citadel Board of Visitors. I'm proud to have been born and raised in the great state of South Carolina and previously served in the South Carolina Army National Guard with three deployments to Iraq. I'm currently and airline pilot on the Airbus 8320 aircraft with over 4,000 hours of flight time. I graduated The Citadel in the class of 2001. Along with my Citadel degree, I also have a second bachelor's degree and a master's degree, both in aeronautics. I travel the world, and anytime I meet another Citadel graduate, it's always the two same questions: what year did you graduate and what company are you from. The twelve of us who graduated in 2001 as members of Hotel Company are as close today as we were almost 20 years ago. We see each other several times a year and talk to each other almost every day. If selected to serve on The Citadel Board of Visitors, I'll be against what's been labeled as the sophomore shuffle and would do what I can to make sure that it's not implemented. As a major airline pilot, I will not gain anything politically or professionally by holding this position. The Board of Visitors' job is to set policy and it's the president's job to implement that policy. I decided to complete an application packet for the Board of Visitors after reading that the previous Board of Visitors' chairman, when asked about the sophomore shuffle, failed to recognize the responsibility of the board by stating that he hired General Walters and was letting him do his job. Additionally, I was disturbed when the previous Board of Visitors' chairman also stated that almost all the Board of Visitors' decisions were unanimously approved. That statement tells me that either the board members are afraid to voice their opinion that goes -- doesn't go along with the majority of the Board or there needs to be greater diversity among board membership. My father served his institution as a professor and administrator, including dean of the University of South Carolina Union campus for more than 30 years. Since The Citadel has had such a profound impact on my life, I would like to follow in his footsteps and also serve my institution. Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Thank you. Questions or comment? Representative Whitmire.
MR. DAVIS - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE WHITMIRE:
Q. Explain the sophomore shuffle to me. I got a ton of emails from former students I've taught that went to The Citadel who were totally against -- I guess against it; is that correct?
A. Yes, sir. That's correct.
Q. All right. Explain it to me.
A. Sophomore shuffle -- whenever you go to The Citadel, you're assigned a company, like Hotel company, Echo company. And it used to be based off height a long time ago, but now it's just randomly, unless you're a legacy cadet. Like I have a six-year-old son, if he were to go to The Citadel, he could be in Hotel company based off because I was a Hotel company graduate. Normally, you stay in the company all four years unless you leave your sophomore or junior or senior year to be a senior rank holder as in like battalion commander, battalion first sergeant, company commander for another company. But some people turn down rank and some people just stay in the company all four years and hold rank within their company. The bond that you -- there's a bond between classes, but the bond is greater between company members for The Citadel experience.
Q. How many members are in a company?
A. It depends. For Hotel one there was 32, I believe, and only twelve of us didn't quit our freshman year.
Q. Okay. All right. What was the reason -- do you know the reasoning why they were going to do away with this shuffle?
A. I've heard due to hazing, but I've never -- I don't know all the dirty laundry of The Citadel since I haven't been there in 20 years almost, but I don't feel like there's a major hazing problem. I feel think it's more of a homing problem with the barracks. There used to only be four battalions and now there's five. There's four extra companies than what was there when I was there. They've increased enrollment, and I think it's more of a homing issue, is what I've heard.
Q. Well, I can tell you from the emails I received, they were totally against changing it.
A. There's actually a study that this one graduate did online. He randomly sampled 450 alumni, and 90.2 percent were against the sophomore shuffle.
Q. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Verdin.
SENATOR VERDIN: Thank you, Mr. President.
MR. DAVIS - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR VERDIN:
Q. Mr. Davis, did you aspire to a professional pilot vocation prior to attending The Citadel or was that something that was developed -- fostered while you were there?
A. I had always been interested in aviation. My grandfather wanted to be a pilot and his dad wouldn't let him do it in World War II. And I'd always been interested in it, and I never really pursued it until after I went in the National Guard and served in the aviation unit, and then pursued it and got a second bachelor's degree in aviation.
Q. Okay. Because my experience now, especially with young pilots, if they're oriented in that direction, they get into that field early. And - - A. I was a little late to that game.
Q. Yes, you were because -- well, what I was driving at, I was trying to just gage your personal fealty and affinity for The Citadel. Because to overcome what would be considered a delay in your entry into that profession, it would have to have been a major point of draw, which would not be surprising. Anybody that's ever -- I've never met a Citadel man, or certainly woman, that has not been -- you don't -- you don't hear many gripers, back stabbers or recalcitrant members of the community, The Citadel community. But I was -- and mainly because I've got some family members that are also in this profession, not flying air buses, flying 737s, but I'm -- I've always been -- I'm a little nervous about air buses because I'm a traditionalist and I want to see a wheel or a stick right in front of you, and this business from flying over here just unnerves me a little bit.
A. It's a lot easier than the 737. But to your question about aviation, I did see recently where Charleston Southern got an aviation program, and I wish The Citadel would have jumped on that instead of them. I feel like it would benefit our college a lot better than Charleston Southern.
Q. So you think the history -- you think the future of flying the plane rather than engineering the plane here in South Carolina might be a little greater? I guess I'm asking --
A. Yes, sir. Like before COVID, there was a tremendous pilot shortage, and it's going to come back eventually, but it's definitely an area that -- Q. Well, and I would -- and as far as the degree programming offerings, the aeronautical engineering that Citadel's partnering with Boeing, I think we're all holding our breath a little bit, as far as the overall national -- international, global environment in automotive -- aeronautic manufacturing. I certainly hope and trust that our future still remains bright here, as well as the Citadel's involvement with Boeing. But thank you.
A. Yes, sir.
SENATOR VERDIN: Mr. President.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Anyone else? Senator Scott.
MR. DAVIS - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR SCOTT:
Q. Thank you, Mr. Davis, for your willingness to serve. I may have been out of the room. Any discussion on diversity at the campus, since it appears that culturally it remains the same? And I'm trying to figure out how do you create some diversity if your dad was there and your granddad was there and others who want to be in that who need the shuffle so you can diversify the campus, how do you actually do that?
A. For the sophomore shuffle, I don't think diversity really applies to that, but I do believe as The Citadel as a whole, we need to recruit more women and minority students. There's definitely been an improvement since we've gone from being all male, but I think there could be a lot more done in that aspect.
Q. Expand on that. You said you don't think it would. So if I don't have a generation of family who was a member of The Citadel and I come in as a freshman, a sophomore, and I want to be at another in a location, but because you don't do the shuffle, it's virtually impossible for me to be in that group simply because those who had many years because of a family is going to be the first to be chosen to go in that group. And so I'm not following you in your answer for when I asked you about diversity is not going to affect it, because it is going to affect it. Now, please elaborate. A. Yes, sir. Well, for the company shuffle, before you come to The Citadel, you don't know anything about the company's reputations or it's not so much that we're -- when you're in the company, you bond together as a class and you come together as one. So like everybody, say your son got into The Citadel this year and he's in Alpha Company. Ever how many cadets, 32 cadets that freshman year, they're going to bond together and come together as a whole, and they're going to be best friends the rest of their lives. And when you -- if they're in Alpha company for their freshman and then they all transfer out to different companies the rest of the year, there's 2,400 students in the college right now, roughly, they might not hardly see each other on campus anymore. And they're going to make more friendships, but that bond is not going to be as great between those 23 ladies and gentlemen as it would be if they were in the same company.
Q. Now, suppose if I was in Uncle Sam's army in the military and you get your assignment, you're going to leave those folks you were in basic training with.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You're going to leave those folk you had class instructions with, especially if you're an officer, a junior officer trying to be a senior officer. Tell me why that's so important that all these comments I'm getting about shuffling on the campus. Because if you're military, somebody might be sent to Kuwait, somebody might be sent to Japan, sent anywhere, and you may not be seeing these people again, I guess, until you have some class reunion or another. So tell me - - I'm not following why it's so important to maintain that on the college campus. It's like an inside fraternity is what you're talking about.
A. It's not like a fraternity. As an Army veteran, I understand what you're saying. And it's more of The Citadel experience and it's more of a connection you make with those guys. Like, the twelve guys I graduated with, like we -- we've been to everybody's weddings, we've been to funerals for each other. Like, we've -- we do everything for each other. Like, we're like a family. I mean, I would say it's more like you're a family than a fraternity.
Q. And so the shuffle creates a problem that you can't maintain that relationship because you're not inside with that group all the time; is that what you're saying?
A. Yes, sir. That's what I'm saying.
SENATOR SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Anyone else?
SENATOR ALEXANDER: Motion.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Motion for a favorable report. Seconded. Any other discussion? If none, we'll take it to a vote. All in favor say aye. (Ayes are heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Opposed, No. (No reply is heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: The ayes have it. Thank you, sir. I appreciate your willingness to serve.
MR. DAVIS: Thank you guys for your time.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Next under Tab F, F. Gregory Delleney, Jr. from Chester. Good afternoon, sir.
MR. DELLENEY: Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Welcome back. Let me swear you in.
MR. DELLENEY: Yes, sir.
MR. F. GREGORY DELLENEY, JR. having been duly sworn, testifies as follows:
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Would you like to make a brief statement?
MR. DELLENEY: Other than to thank you for what you do, I'll waive opening statement.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Thank you. Brevity is a plus, you hadn't forgotten that. Any questions? Senator Scott.
SENATOR SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. DELLENEY - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR SCOTT:
Q. Good to see you.
A. Yes, sir. You too, Senator.
Q. Your Honorable. Tell me a little bit about what you know about this sophomore shuffle.
A. Okay.
Q. Since you are presently serving on the board as an appointee --
A. Right.
Q. -- for the --
A. That was -- that came about before my time.
Q. Okay.
A. Right before my time on the board. There are two ways of looking at it.
Q. Okay.
A. You know, already for various reasons a lot of people are moved around anyway. Sometimes it's a disciplinary problem, sometimes it's a rank opportunity. But a lot of people are moved around. It's not like everybody stays. For me, in my Citadel experience, I was going to law school and my two best friends, who are also lawyers, were in the company next door. And so I spent most of my time with them. My son, on the other hand, he went there and he was a private all four years. And he has a core group of friends. And just like the gentleman that just spoke before, I mean, they do everything together. They go to each other's children's birthday parties, you know, they're in each other's weddings, and that's real important to him, okay. And the way this shuffle came about was there was a study, I think John Palms was in charge of it. And they came up with all these ways to understand how we could be more like West Point. Well, West Point has a shuffle, but they don't shuffle every year. Matter of fact, I have a friend who's a lawyer up at West Point, and he is the lawyer up at West Point, and he tells me that they don't really like the shuffle too much. And they've only used it once or twice. They came about they figured they will use it when they needed to, if they had something they needed to bust up or whatever. But in any event, although, you know, the shuffle didn't aggravate me that much, it aggravated my son a lot. And I really think the shuffle -- you know, we're going to have to an opportunity to reevaluate the shuffle here very shortly. And I'm certainly going to be looking at it very hard when it comes back up.
Q. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Anyone else?
MR. DELLENEY - EXAMINATION BY CHAIRMAN PEELER:
Q. I got a quick question. You serve on the Board of Visitors now, right?
A. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
Q. Gubernatorial appointee.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know when you would have to --?
A. 2024.
Q. Okay. But if you were elected to this position - -
A. Excuse me, '25. I would be on until '26.
Q. Okay. So at that point, it would vacate and the governor would need to replace you at that point?
A. In '25. Whoever is the governor in '25 would appoint somebody else.
Q. What I'm getting at, if you were elected to this position, you would have to vacate the gubernatorial appointment?
A. Yes, sir, I would.
Q. At what point would that happen, if you were lucky enough to be elected?
A. When I was elected. I would not vacate that position until I was elected.
Q. Until then. Just wanted to clear that up.
A. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Anything else? Senator Alexander.
MR. DELLENEY - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR ALEXANDER: Q. What do you think is the greatest opportunity for The Citadel?
A.   I look at myself. There's no way that I would have ever accomplished as much as I've accomplished in my life had I not gone to The Citadel. The Citadel gives you -- it gives you - - it teaches you how to deal with adversity plus it puts drive in people. You know, at The Citadel, you've got -- when you're put in a company, you've got three things that you've got to do that you're graded on, because companies are graded on it. One is academics, one is your military and three is intramurals. Well, when you go to The Citadel, you might not be doing real well in academics, but you might be shining your brass and doing real good at the military or you might be a star in intramurals. And because you're graded on all those things, people in your company, if you're doing -- if you're slack in one area, you know, it gives you drive to try to correct the other area. And so you've always got something that you've got that you have an opportunity to succeed in. So if you're not succeeding in another area, you know, you got help, people will help you. And also at The Citadel, they didn't have -- they've got now that I didn't have, back in my day, we had academic officers. And if you were struggling as a freshman, they would assign an upperclassman to try to help you in math or whatever. We had these tutorial labs at night that are not staffed by cadets, they're staffed by professors. So if you have -- if you were having trouble in math, you can go over there and get help. So The Citadel just offers you all kinds of opportunities to succeed. And once you succeed in one thing, it helps you succeed in another. And then the loyalty that Citadel graduates have for one another. It doesn't matter who you are or where you came from or what you look like, we stick together. And we always try to help one another. But that's the thing, The Citadel teaches you loyalty, it teaches you how to deal with adversity, and it gives you a drive to succeed.
SENATOR ALEXANDER: I have one follow-up, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Alexander.
Q. And thank you for that response. Under you talking about here just changing gears on the can improve, you talk about needs to continue tighten the belt, reduce the FTEs through attrition and retirement. Have y'all been successful -- you say continue since you've been there. Have y'all -- is that something y'all have addressed and --
A. Yes, sir. That's something that's ongoing.
Q.   And what you've done so far, you would deem that as being successful?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Thank you.
A. We have a new provost, and she came -- she's University of Virginia graduate. And she came from a private school where she had to -- you know, you have to eat what you kill. And anyway -- and she's done a masterful job at looking at like -- looking at classes that aren't used very much. And one of the things I'm real proud of at The Citadel is we've become an engineering school. Matter of fact, we're number 17 for undergraduate engineering in the country. And I know when I -- one of the -- one of my -- when I first went on the board and I went to graduations, I hadn't been to graduation in several years, since my nephew graduated -- or no, since my son graduated. My nephew graduated a couple years before he did, or a year before he did. And when the engineering graduates stood up, it was a third of the class; I couldn't believe it. In years before, it would have been, you know, liberal arts or something. But they -- we've really got it on the ball now and I really like the direction in which we're going. We've got great leadership. We've got a great general. We've got a good provost, and things are really going in a good direction.
SENATOR ALEXANDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Anyone else? It's a favorable report, seconded. Any other discussion? Take it to a vote. All in favor say, aye. (Ayes are heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Opposed, no. (No reply is heard).
CHAIRMAN PEELER: The ayes have it.
MR. DELLENEY: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Thank you. Now to Tab G, Andrew L. Helfer from Columbia. Good afternoon, sir.
MR. HELFER: Good afternoon, committee. Thank you for having me here.
MR. ANDREW L. HELFER having been duly sworn, testifies as follows:
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Would you like to make a brief statement?

MR. HELFER: Yeah. I think I'm probably the granddaddy here. I attended The Citadel at probably the worst time in modern history, '60s. It was a very interesting time to be a cadet, to be a freshman. It was probably the worst time in modern history to be a freshman at The Citadel because the hazing was terrible at that time. There was a study done of about 1,000 Citadel graduates, and they asked when was the worst year, from a hazing standpoint, to be a freshman at The Citadel, and it came out 1968. Well, guess who was a freshman in 1968, me. And I was listening to Mr. Scott over here and his interest in diversity is very great. And believe it or not, in 1968, we did not have a black cadet in 1968 to be the class of '72, which was my class. So when people ask me about diversity at The Citadel, Mr. Scott, I say I was one of 20 Jewish cadets at The Citadel. So I can imagine what it would be like to be a black cadet at that time, because being a Jewish cadet was pretty tough when there was only 20 of us on campus. And you know, other people would go to Sunday chapel; the Jewish cadets would go to Mark Clark hall and hang out there and the rabbi locally from Charleston would come and, you know, have prayers with us. So it was very interesting. And when the class of '73 came in, there were about seven or eight black freshmen at that time, most of which were athletes. I went to The Citadel because I wanted to be a pilot. And I was an Air Force cadet for three years, and back then you had to have 20/20 vision, not correctable, but 20/20 to fly. Well, my senior year when I took - - or when I entered my junior year, took the eye test, I did not pass it. So I went to my tack officer, Captain Jones, who was an Army tack, and I switched from Air Force to Army. Well, back during Southeast Asia, the only openings they had were in infantry. So I owed the Air Force six years, and I couldn't fly. So I switched to Army, and Captain Jones said to me you're going to be in the infantry. And I said, well, I only have two years and it looks like we're running down toward the end of Southeast Asia. Well, soon as I graduated, I ended up in special operations in the Army, and I ended up in Southeast Asia. So it was a funny thing. My mother, who was a little Jewish lady, first of all said to me, you know, Jewish boys don't go to The Citadel. And then when I went in the Army, Jewish boys don't go in the Army. And I had gone to The Citadel to play football. And I don't know if you read my resume, but I lettered in three varsity sports at The Citadel. I played soccer, football, I was a shot putter on the track team. Now, I wasn't the most military cadet, but I was able to get by in M company with all of my classmates not doing the sophomore shuffle. And this seems to be something that is really irritating to all Citadel graduates, and I understand why. And I think Mr. Scott made mention about military basic training, maybe an OCS or whatever you might do, you never see those guys again; they're gone. And I think young Mr. Lewis (sic) talked about how closely knit Citadel guys are. And it is true and will always be true that the guys that you're in that company with are your friends forever. Those are the guys you go through your nob year with, you're tortured together, you help each other, you study together, you do whatever you do together and you live and die by those guys in your company. The second morning we were at The Citadel, it was General Hugh Pate Harris' first day at The Citadel. He had taken over for Mark Clark. And General Harris got us in Mark Clark Hall. There was 825 freshman. And he looked at us and he said look to the left and look to the right because in four years two of three of you will not be here. Well, in the class of 1972, we had 282 graduates. So General Harris was exactly right. And what ends up happening, and I think a couple of the other gentlemen addressed it is when the companies start running low on freshman, they have to switch a few here and there. As they get to be upper classmen, they have to switch a few. And what happened in my freshman year was the first year that they didn't put freshman in companies by height. It used to be A company and T company and B company and R and N all had all the athletes in it so when they marched on the parade ground it would look good. But when you have all the football players in A and B company and you're taking a good many cadets out of those companies, when it was time to go to parade, there wasn't enough cadets from those companies to actually march. So they had to shuffle them around, especially as they became upper classmen. When I was a freshman, we were still division one in football, and we had about 85 guys on our freshman football team. When I finished The Citadel, of the 85 guys who were on the freshman football team, there were fourteen left; that was it. So either they were walk-ons or, you know, they decided to do academics or military or they flunked out for some reason or whatever reason they were gone. So what they did our freshman year was they took guys -- athletes and put them throughout the whole corp of cadets. And I was in M company, and they had never had a football player in M company, and they ended up - - we had five of us. They put five football players in M company so they could start diversifying and getting people in the different companies so that the athletes would not be getting that special treatment that all the other cadets thought they got because they ate in a separate place. And I think we were talking about the mess hall here earlier. Well, we had something called core squad. And that's where all the athletes would eat in a separate place. And that was the only time as a freshman we got a break. Because when we got back to the barracks as freshman, the upper classmen thought we were getting a break because we were out there knocking our heads off playing football or doing whatever athletes do. But we did get to eat in a different place, and we didn't have to eat square meals and we didn't get screamed at, so we were just a little bit different. So my whole purpose of being here today is I see The Citadel changing, but I also see there's some things that are at the school that need to change back a little ways the way it used to be and some ways needs to move forward. And as the other gentleman was talking about, I've been a big supporter of The Citadel financially over the years. I've got a scholarship fund down there. I've donated lots of money. But if it hadn't been for The Citadel, I would have never graduated from college. It kept me focused when I was ADHD and it gave me the ability, even though I never held rank as a Citadel cadet, I ended up in special operations in the military. I earned a bronze star. I earned a purple heart and was a good officer. So The Citadel prepared me to do that, even though I wasn't real military when I was there and not active in cadet rank. So I'm glad to entertain any questions you guys might have for me.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Interesting story. Questions? Representative Whitmire.
REPRESENTATIVE WHITMIRE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. HELFER - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE WHITMIRE:
Q. First off, I want to say thank you for your service to our country. And you kind of went beyond the call of duty. I was in that same time frame, and it was kind of scary times, it really was.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. For you younger people, you probably don't know about it, but it was tough. How in the world did a little Jewish boy from Brooklyn get to The Citadel? That's -- did somebody recruit you or did you hear about or what?
A. Actually, my grandparents were from Russia. And you, having been in the military during the Vietnam era, when I got accepted in the special operations, because my grandfather was in the White Russian Army, he -- and he came to the US during the Bolshevik Revolution, they moved to Brooklyn, New York. And he had been a fur skinner. And he opened up a fur shop in Brooklyn, New York, and my dad worked for him. And when business went south, my mom and dad moved to South Carolina and followed some friends here to Columbia, and that's when we moved here when I was seven years old. So, you know, I was here. I went to Rosewood School. I went to Satchel Ford School. I went to Keenan the first year, and I graduated from AC Flora. So I'm really a southern boy at heart. And now even --
Q. You didn't have much of a Brooklyn accent, I noticed.
A. No, I don't. But we still have family there. But I went to The Citadel, believe it or not, out of my class at AC Flora, in 1968, there was eight of us that went The Citadel. And I think probably five or the eight finished, and two of us went there to play football and the other guy that was with me, he finished as well, and he was a football player.
Q. I'm a student of history. It'd be fascinating -- was your grandfather alive when you were born or --
A. Yeah. He moved to South Carolina.
Q. Did he ever tell you about the whites and the reds and everything? A. He did. It was very, very interesting. And he had a heart attack and died instantly at 62. But he was a vodka drinking, cigar smoking, as somebody might say, a SOB, but he was -- he was a tough old coot.
Q. It sounds like he had a very fascinating life, for sure.
A. He did. He did. And he met my grandmother on the ship coming over. He was about 21 and she was about 14. And he married her when she was 15.
Q. Well, very interesting. Thank you very much.
A. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Speaking of tough, you said you were a shot putter?
MR. HELFER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Only shot putters look like me. They don't look like you. You must have been a bigger guy back then.
MR. HELFER: Yeah. I played ball at about 225.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: What position did you play, football?
MR. HELFER: I played nose guard.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: You must have been a tough fellow. Senator Verdin.
MR. HELFER - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR VERDIN:
Q. I can't help but remark about how similar your life experience is with the Sedrin family in Greenville.
A. Is that right?
Q. If you ever look at them, look at their history, they were in the fur business, the family was in the fur business for 60 or 70 years and have the same migration to South Carolina as you just gave testimony of, and I love it. It's rich. I appreciate all your contributions as mentioned by Representative Whitmire.
SENATOR VERDIN: Mr. President, appropriate time. Mr. Chairman, I'd move for a favorable report.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Alexander offers a second. Any other discussion? And now we'll take it to a vote. All in favor say, aye. (Ayes are heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Opposed, no.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: The ayes have it. Thank you, sir, for all you've done and all you're going to do. I'll move to University of South Carolina, Fifth Judicial Circuit, Tab H, Robert F. Dozier, Jr. from Columbia. Let me swear you in.
MR. ROBERT F. DOZIER, JR. having been duly sworn, testifies as follows:
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Would you like to make a brief statement?
MR. DOZIER: Yes, sir. Thank you. Is it okay to take off the mask from back here? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished commission members. I'm a passionate Gamecock, 1990 graduate who believes in the University. And it's an honor to sit before you today with an offering to give back to the University and serve you as well and the citizens of South Carolina. Having said that, I acknowledge that more work needs to be done so the University can reach its full potential in educating students and serving the state of South Carolina. I know you have the bio. Your staff has done a remarkable job of putting packets together and getting us to fill out our questionnaires. But I'm a life-long South Carolinian, except for the nine years I've been away as executive vice president for the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta. A lot of people ask what the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta is. It's the largest bank that nobody's heard of, $150 billion bank serving 900 financial institutions around the southeast. And I was honored to spend some time there, but I'm even more pleased to be back home. With that, Mr. Chairman, I know we have just a little bit of time and I know y'all have questions. Thank you for the opportunity. It means more than you know to be here today.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Thank you, sir. Questions, comments? Senator Scott.
MR. DOZIER - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR SCOTT:
Q. Thank you, Mr. Dozier. Good to see you.
A. Good to see you again.
Q. Thank you for your willingness to serve. Your new president has come in with an aggressive agenda, as it relates to diversity on the campus. Not only with students, but also with faculty, staff, and is even in -- as provost as an African-American. Where are with you diversity along with where your president is trying to carry the University. The president, I happen to like the guy.
A. We can do a lot more, sir.
Q. I understand. Well, give me some of your thought patterns to, you know, what you would do. Like I stated earlier when you weren't in the room, when you're on the board, kind of like this group here, you're it. So you have to figure out how you solve the problems and what you bring to the table that can make it better.
A. So diversity inclusion to me is about access, it's about telling the story, it's about making sure that you're recruiting. I spoke with an associate superintendent of a midland's school district last week, and I asked the question, well, the strategic plan that the University talks about recruitment; how are we doing? And she said, not that great. And so the accountability, the oversight of a board, now that there's a strategic plan and there is a president who's doing -- has said the right things. And it looks great on paper. But to move from seven percent to right above ten percent right now to move towards, what, 27 percent of African-Americans in South Carolina we can do more. But it's about getting out. It's about providing that access. It's providing -- or telling a story to make sure that the environment is right for people to come. There are a lot of opportunities, a lot of places folks can go. If the University wants to be ahead of that game, to me, it's about access. As far as the faculty and staff, I think hiring Bill Tate has gone a long way as provost to make a statement. The diversity inclusion officer I spoke about in my questionnaire is a good first step. But as an oversight board, we're going to have to track that as it goes up. I don't know if one board member can make all the difference, but one board member can sit with 19 other board members and hold the administration accountable.
Q. I would like to think one board member can make a big difference sitting in a room every time we're here for another 45. And I do the best that I can to try to share experiences and ideas and things of that nature, in terms of where we want to go. So I do believe one person can make a big difference, especially if they put themselves out there and get it done. The University has been balancing its budget for years with out-of-state students, and I know Darla Moore School of Business is so very important. Where you and what are are your recommendations in terms of resources once we get past the pandemic? Because I know you've had some troubling times, especially spending reserve to make sure that you can balance your budget.
A. Absolutely.
Q. So where are you with ideas that we can to try to attract some of the best and brightest who used to leave this state try to keep them at home so they become a part of...?
A. So several pieces to that. I think over time it has been real easy to go to the out-of-state tuition and look and say a kid coming in from out of state at 33,000 is a lot more than 12,000, and it made it easy. No different than you as a group with your expertise when you do when tax incentives for companies to come into South Carolina. The difference is I think y'all lay out the accountability factor a little greater than we've done in the past. I think we've gotten used to saying let's go get the out-of- state tuitions. What's happened, though, is some of those out-of-state tuitioned students came in and then they got tuition abatements and nobody tracked the success of that. I'll give you an example, my two children. I lived in Atlanta for nine years. For the first couple of years of their time, I paid out-of-state tuition. I didn't know there was something called the common marketplace. The final two years of theirs, I got in-state tuition. Nobody tracked that at the University of South Carolina. Now, I'm pleased to say my daughter is a graduate and is working at First Citizens and is a tax payer of South Carolina. My son, who's worked with the Atlanta Hawks, moved back -- is moving back at the end of this month, took a job with a local Columbia company. And so those are successes. But we don't track that. And the accountability and the transparency and the information that comes back to y'all about that has been lacking. So that's the out-of-state piece that I've been concerned about. The in-state piece is back to accessibility and accountability and making sure that we're casting a wide net and getting the students who are ready, willing and able to go to the University of South Carolina that they have their shot to do it.
Q. Could it be one of the reasons why they don't track it -- and I like the idea that your son is doing very, very well, is that we educate out of state students and they don't stay with us?
A. That's a huge concern.
Q. We continue to recruit Fortune 500 companies, but we don't have the young people because we educate them from out of state. They went back and they participated and got those economies and those states they came from stronger. So we'd like to see, going forward, some of your ideas. Because I'm glad you've lived in Atlanta, back in South Carolina and can share what we need to be doing to keep some of these best and brightest here in South Carolina so we can stimulate our own economy. A. Yes, sir. So on the stimulate the economy, the other concern would be the exporting of ideas.
Q. All right.
A. I worry that we focus so much on research and we get real excited when we create a new idea and we incubate it over at the University of South Carolina, but incubating ideas without partnering -- and you and I worked together when I was at Midlands Technical College on the board. Without taking an incubated idea and accelerating that idea and manufacturing it in here, we could be the largest exporter of great ideas in the country, and Georgia and North Carolina and Virginia and Florida and Alabama can just sit at the state line and wait for ideas to be created here at the detriment of the tax payer of South Carolina, and the ideas can go. We've got to keep them here. And those partnerships that you helped us create at Midlands Technical College where we could accelerate and manufacture those ideas are really important.
Q. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Representative Finlay.
REPRESENTATIVE FINLAY: Yes, sir. And in full disclosure, Mr. Dozier and I have been friends for the better part of 20 years. But I'm going to ask this question of everyone.
MR. DOZIER - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE FINLAY: Q. Senator Scott stated that for over 30 years the University of South Carolina has balanced its budget by bringing in affluent out-of-state students paying two-and-a-half times what in- state students pay. The side effect of that has been that today in the university that's doubled it has roughly the same number of African- American students as it did in 1990. Your president made a very strong statement about that, but I believe the state has also doubled in during that period of time. Do you feel like you are up to the financial challenges that are going too presented by weaning the University off of that revenue source? Because I don't know that there is a pool of -- large enough pool of out- of-state full-pay students to continue this practice. Do you agree with that diagnosis and what do you think we do to fix it?
A. I absolutely agree with it. Companies like mine, whether it was the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta or we're now First Reliance Bank where I'm president of First Reliance Bank shares, when you get used to single source revenue sources without diversifying you can get in really big trouble. And so the diversification of that model, especially in the middle of a pandemic, has got to be forefront. I mean, listen, just like I'm doing in banking with technology -- there's a good question in your packet about online delivery. We're going to deliver differently education. We have to understand that bricks and mortar might not be in the capital outlay or that bricks and mortar that might have to be a cost that we don't have to bear going forward. So the focus has got to be South Carolina first, South Carolina first, South Carolina first; it's why I'm back from Georgia.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: You have another?
REPRESENTATIVE FINLAY: Yes, sir.
Q. And I think there's an add-on question that you've touched on because I sit on it in the House, y'all's deferred maintenance is out of control. I mean, USC has got -- the chickens have come home to roost, in terms of the -- a 100 -- it may approach $100 million, let's call it $75 million a year in deferred maintenance that's going to have to be dealt with over 20 years. Do you feel like that's a number that you can help them manage through? And how would you manage through it, because it is a huge issue?
A. So back to the revenue sources and being careful and not living off of one revenue source. I think it's a multi-pronged approach. Number one -- and I don't know how much time y'all have spent with either the president or new board leadership, but the budget model that's been created over the last couple of years, which was board-driven, by the way, has really given an insight of how much it costs to educate a student in a particular field or study. And I think you got to take that data, number one, to figure out where you are budget-wise. Number two, the cuts that are going have to be made, this -- we're in the middle of a pandemic. Nobody planned for it, nobody thought about it, and we weren't prepared for it. So I do believe that over time the cuts that are going to have to be made, personnel cuts, programmatic cuts, building costs, we'll have to go a long way with that. The third piece -- and I haven't been on the board since ex- officio as president of the alumni association since last summer. But the word about the TV revenues that will come, as you know very well, all of you, South Carolina runs its South Carolina budget and then it has an athletics budget. If there is to be additional television revenue coming in for athletics, I think at this point in time you can't run two separate organizations. You got to bring those closer together and put a big fence around the additional revenue that's going to come in and use that pay back all the things that have been tough over the last couple years with the pandemic and will be. And deferred maintenance is one thing that probably needs to be addressed with that. But assume that that's 15 to $20 million a year in additional TV revenue, you can see this thing getting out of control where all of a sudden it's just in the athletics department revenue growth comes in. It looks great, coaches want more money, programmatic things and athletics. But you're going to have to pull that together and put a fence around it.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Any other questions or comments? Senator Alexander.
SENATOR ALEXANDER: Thank you.
MR. DOZIER - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR ALEXANDER:
Q. Thank you, sir, and good afternoon.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Thank you for being here. Appreciate your work and glad you're back in South Carolina. On ways to improve U of SC, you talk about economic development. Also, graduate -- graduating more doctoral students. Are there any -- with your background in banking and things, do you see any particular area there to focus on in those doctoral students?
A. So, I think healthcare is a huge piece across the spectrum. Just with the aging population in South Carolina, I think that's going to be a need. I think Dorn Smith as chairman is the right leader for the right time to kind of focus on that. I think that piece of it is huge. I think they're probably can be some areas in the business side of the house to keep and grow institutions. I know you serve on the board in the upstate. I think there's some financial opportunities. I worry about big banks and big financial institutions leaving -- either leaving, mergers and acquisitioned out, but I think there's a place for South Carolina banking and finance right now. I think the doctoral program can go a long way for that. And back to Senator Scott, to come back to that a little bit, sir, I think there's a huge opportunity in the financial services space where there's an opportunity for minorities to have access and egress, if you will, to financial services and banking. And we're working on some partnerships in South Carolina with the Federal Home Bank of Atlanta and the Federal Reserve to try to move that along.
Q. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Representative King.
MR. DOZIER - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE KING:
Q. Thank you. And this question I probably should have been asking of all the candidates, but it just popped in my mind. With the pandemic, we have noticed that many of the students across the state, or really across the country, have had problems with being able to access or take the ACT or the SAT. We have now here in South Carolina seen the disparities across the state when it comes to broadband. And when we're looking at the overall student, many of these students who come from these areas where there's a disadvantage already, but they are students who have done well, how do you think that universities and colleges across this state should be evaluating these students since they lack some tools because of the pandemic?
A. Yeah. I think that we all need to say that are a lot of things in life that we need to take a break from and make sure we're digging into success factors at that moment in time, pandemic aside. I agree with you on the access. I think Congressman Clyburn has some great ideas around the state of how to open up access. It would lead into another piece of that that what we do to make sure, though, once they get here is that we're balancing and understand online and remote learning. I think we've come a long way on that, but the accountability and the transparency in making sure that everybody's getting equal access. I can tell you, my daughter had four classes, and each one of them was done and distributed differently. There was no consistency in any of that. And that concerns me a little bit. And as -- you are right, Senator, one person can make a difference. One of the questions that I did ask at one of my last board members is how we hold meetings, is how we're holding these online classes accountable for transparency, accuracy and consistency. Q. Last year, I proposed a bill that would eliminate for South Carolina students the application fee. Now, top that with the pandemic and a lot of people are out of work or parents who are just barely making it -- and I know you can apply for waivers, but what do you feel about the application fee being waived for all South Carolina residents?
A. I think that's an idea. I think from a board position the last couple months, I've been out of that. I'd like to look at that. I think that's a -- but sitting in your seat, you're looking at the numbers, that's probably a good suggestion.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Desire of the Committee? Motion is favorable. Seconded. Any other discussion? We'll take it to a vote. All in favor say, aye. (Ayes are heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Opposed, no. (No reply is heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: The ayes have it. Thank you, sir. Appreciate you.
MR. DOZIER: Thank you, sir. Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Thank you. Under Tab I, Alexander English from Blythewood.
MR. ENGLISH: Hello.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Thank you, sir. Let me swear you in.
MR. ALEXANDER ENGLISH having been duly sworn, testifies as follows:
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Would you like to make a brief statement?
MR. ENGLISH: Yes, I do. Is it okay to read a prepared statement?
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Sure.
MR. ENGLISH: Okay. My full name is Alexander English. The University of South Carolina gets the credit for much of whatever success I've enjoyed. While I publicly know that I'm known for athletic achievement, without the solid education and leadership development I gained at USC, my most enduring work in business and philanthropy would not have been possible. So I'm a grateful and proud graduate of this institution that I'm seeking to assist again. As a proud Columbian, it was my honor to serve on the Board of Trustees many years ago. And I'm honored to have been called by Governor McMaster to finish the term of former trustee William Hubbard who is now the dean of our law school. During the six months since I have taken my seat, I have immersed myself in learning about both the overall goals and the complex details pertaining to my fiduciary responsibility as a trustee of this great University. I am still doing so. This short amount of time, of course, also occurs while we're dealing with just a few epic circumstances. A worldwide pandemic that threatens the very fiber of our existence, political upheaval in our country and a racial reckoning that has sparked both brutality and opportunity. And it's put a microscope on every public institution charged with improving the quality of life through fairness, excellence and accountability. These are macro issues playing out across the country, across the globe, but there are also micro issues that affect our great University of South Carolina. I want to be part of continuing in growing the greatness that we have attained here in at this university. That's why I'm running for this Fifth Judicial Seat. As a trustee, I'm beholden only to the University of South Carolina and the guidance -- and its guidance from the legislature in upholding my fiduciary duty to the students that trust the flagship university of the state of South Carolina to provide one of the best college educations they can experience anywhere in the world. I am honored that the governor selected me to help steer my Alma mater through these unprecedented times and challenges. I feel that I am the right person at this time. With that, I am finished. If you give me a minute to kind of catch my breath under this mask here.
MS. CASTO: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Go ahead.
MS. CASTO: Mr. English did submit, this morning, and addendum to his PDQ. He was waiting to on some figures I think from the University, that he gets paid $250 per game for broadcasting four basketball games last year?
MR. ENGLISH: I did four games last year.
MS. CASTO: Yeah. And then he does receive a coach's pension from the National Basketball Association. Those are addendums to this.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Mr. English, I see where you have, in your list here, ways to improve USC. One of your answers was better football team.
MR. ENGLISH: That's just one of them.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: It'd suit me if you don't have one.
MR. ENGLISH: Well, I, like all the other Gamecocks, would like to see it happen.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: I'm a Tiger. It would suit me to stay just where you are. Representative King.
REPRESENTATIVE KING: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. ENGLISH - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE KING:
Q. And Mr. -- is it English?
Yeah. Mr. English, thank you for your service to the board. Since you are presently on the board, can you tell me what you all are doing to assess -- or to assist students who will be applying in the fall because of the pandemic who are unable to take the ACT or the SAT who you may see that their grades may have declined during the pandemic because they may have not been able to access broadband? What are you all doing at the college to prepare yourselves for the incoming freshman? A. Well, one of the things that we're trying to establish a relationship with some of the -- with Midlands Tech, which is a school with a bridge program, to if there is a possible problem with kids or students getting into the University, they're putting together a bridge program that will allow them to go to Midlands Tech, get an education while they bridge -- while they're bridging their opportunity with the University to come once they get their grades back right and get an opportunity to come and attend the University. At the same time, they get to stay on campus at USC so that they can feel, you know, like they're a part of this system. Q. If I'm correct, you and Mrs. Moody are the only two African-Americans on the board?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What are you doing as an African-American to ensure that diversity is a part of the plan to diversify USC, not only with students but with your faculty and staff?
A. As a newcomer, the Board of Trustees put together a strategic plan. And in that strategic plan, it addresses different opportunities for bringing students, as well as faculty members, on board at the University of South Carolina through a process that would allow them to be seen by a board of diversity and equality and inclusion, making sure in putting together programs. I know I spoke with Provost Tate. They put together programs that will allow students that can't afford to come to the University that are qualified, putting together different programs to help them out and to kind of guide them through the process.
Q. Thank you again for your service. And I see that you played in the NBA.
A. I did, sir.
Q. I had two brother-in-laws that played in the NBA, JR Reed and Tony Delk.
A. I know both of them.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Whitmire.
REPRESENTATIVE WHITMIRE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. ENGLISH - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE WHITMIRE:
Q. I didn't have anybody that played in the NBA, unfortunately.
A. I wanted to be a football player.
Q. Well, I wasn't that good at that either. I just want to say for those of you that aren't old enough to remember, I'm a Clemson fan, but I sure did enjoy watching you and those Subway kids play basketball back in the '70s.
A. Thank you.
Q. You were a joy to watch.
A. Thank you.
Q. In fact, I've got a real good friend that's about as loyal a Gamecock fan as you'll ever hear. And I told him that you would be testifying before us today. And he wanted to know if you would suit up and go play for the Gamecocks now because they sure do need the help.
A. Unfortunately, I'm 67 years old --
Q. Yeah, you'd probably still be better than them. Well, anyway, thank you for your willingness to serve.
A. Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Representative Finlay.
MR. ENGLISH - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE FINLAY: Q. Good to see you.
A. And you, sir.
Q. We've -- I think our families have been friends on and off for the better part of 40 years.
A. Yes, they have.
Q. Wanted to throw you the same question that I've thrown Robert Dozier. One of the problems, and one of the nice parts is this is not of their creating, is it as the University imported more out-of-state kids, it has become less representative of our state. Now, the problem is that they brought those kids to bring in the revenue ostensibly.
A. Uh-huh.
Q. So how would you, on a look-forward basis, help the University think about how they absorb those costs, especially in terms of the potential deferred maintenance that they've got overhanging now?
A. Well, I do understand the problem and I understand why. In speaking with Provost Tate, I understand that the reason why they've got -- they had so many out-of-state students is that they could charge them double the price, and that allows them to bring in another in-state residence. I can't really -- I think it's going to take some time to kind of sift through everything and see where the opportunity is to be able to address your question. But I am -- you know, I am all about educating young people form the state of South Carolina. That's -- I think that's very important because we just need to. We've been -- we've lagged behind in a lot of states when it comes to educating young people. And I think it's something that we have to address because, you know, most people, especially from rural South Carolina and some minority communities, they have a difficult time affording college tuition. And I know that just from reading the strategic plan that there are programs that they are putting place, that we're putting in place to address that so that we can bring more minorities and more people from South Carolina and give them an opportunity that they can afford now adjusting the tuition.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Scott.
SENATOR SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. ENGLISH - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR SCOTT:
Q. Good to see you, Alex.
A. How do you do, sir?
Q. Doing fine, sir. You're class of 1976 at the University?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You and I were in high school right along the same time. I think you're a year behind me. Tell me what differences -- how has the University changed at all since 1976, as it relates to African-American students, faculty and staff, especially involvement at the institution and their input? I know you got -- you know we got -- we've always had one or two who professional jobs there. But tell me, in the overall scheme of things, what have you witnessed have changed or need to change in that 45 -- 44 year time since you were there?
A. Well, if you were at Carolina during that time --
Q. I was there.
A. -- you know, at that time, we probably had maybe less than two percent professors teaching the students at the University.
Q. Right.
A. But at the same time, we had more students. We had students from all over the state that were coming, but we didn't have the representation among the faculty. And that's one of the things that's being addressed in the strategic plan, which I think and agree we must address. We've got to make our faculty and staff resemble the population of the state, you know. And I think we have to do the same thing with the students. You know, we have to bring in -- find a way to bring in more minority students, bring in some of the people from the rural areas without them having to -- I think the online program helps that but I think we can do a better job.
Q. Athletes, I know you can speak well to that, has not been a problem recruiting a number of African-American athletes. But some of the courses and degrees they pursue, because most of them who play don't stay long. Type of degrees and who's talking to these kids about if you don't do well in the professional world, if you don't get drafted, how are you going to make it. If you go and you stay a year or two, the degree that you went after, and does that make you employable. And if you are able to stay and become successful, can you change that into creating wealth based upon the time you spent at the institution. If you don't try to get them back so these kids can graduate. Tell me a little bit about what's going on in that particular arena.
A. Well, I know that, you know, among the student athletes, you know, looking at the numbers, we were one of the top GPAs in the system in the SEC. As far as the type of degrees that they're getting, I haven't seen that.
Q. Okay.
A. I know that they are doing well with the grade with the GPAs and they're managing to stay in school. I would think that they're getting -- excuse me sir, I'm sorry.
Q. That's all right.
A. But like I was saying, you know, being a former athlete and graduating from this University, when I was here, I was an English major. I wasn't able to finish in English, so I had to go and add other courses that were able to help me get my degree. You know, I went through the retail and management school. But also being a professional athlete, I think it's so important that we channel our young athletes toward opportunities that are going to give them access to quality jobs once they leave this University, because all of them aren't going to be able to play sports. And if I -- you know, if I get the time, that's something that I would address. I mean, I think it's something that's important. It's not just important to have great grades, but what are those great grades in, you know. What is -- is it something that's going to give you the opportunity to be a business man or be a doctor, lawyer. The numbers are really bad when you look at athletes that haven't gotten that opportunity. You know, most of us -- most of the athletes want to believe that we are one of the best and we've got to be able to go to college and we're going to go to the pros after that, and that's not always the case.
Q. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Alexander.
SENATOR ALEXANDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. ENGLISH - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR ALEXANDER:
Q. I want to just follow up on that from Representative Whitmire. Personally as a Clemson fan, certainly followed your time playing at South Carolina and then also your pro career, and just appreciate you making South Carolina so proud and your willingness to come back.
A. I almost went to Clemson.
Q. Is that right?
A. Tates Locke tried to get me there, but I said Frank McGuire wants me.
Q. That was some great time in both schools. Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Senator Verdin.
MR. ENGLISH - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR VERDIN:
Q. Back in that area, if you wanted to watch any basketball in South Carolina, you had tune in to the Carolina broadcast because you couldn't get a ticket.
A. Yes.
Q. At the new arena coliseum. Now, you could watch basketball if you were willing to travel over to the nearly new Littlejohn Coliseum, but even then, it was -- I went over there to Littlejohn last week for the Louisville game and squeezed in there with about 1,000 other people. A. It's not the same place.
Q. I remember we used to stand in line and beg for tickets back in the '60s and '70s, and yeah, not the same place, but I do remember watching -- back then, when you get to the charity stripe, the game was riding on every one of those shots.
A. Yeah.
Q. And the electricity and the excitement and just the nerve tingling experience of the hardwood, it's not the same today. I can't stand the shot clock. We might not have heart attacks as much. Back then, if you only had a certain number of possessions and every one of them counted, it was just -- I just going -- I can't remember much anymore, but for you to be here and for them to start recalling those days, it's enervating for me. But no, I, on a serious note, appreciate all the contributions and appreciate the insight that you and all the other candidates for USC has shown, demonstrated today. And I'll let someone close to you make the motion.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Favorable report. Second? Second. Any other discussion? I'll take it to a vote. All in favor say, aye. (Ayes are heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Opposed, no. (No reply is heard.)
CHAIRMAN PEELER: The ayes have it. Thank you. Next on the Tab J, Kevin M. Hunter from Irmo. Good afternoon, sir.
MR. HUNTER: How are you, sir?
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Let me swear you in.
MR. KEVIN M. HUNTER having been duly sworn, testifies as follows:
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Would you like to make a brief statement?
MR. HUNTER: I would. Kevin Hunter, lifelong resident of the state of South Carolina. I have had the pleasure of serving on a company that allowed me to travel and do business on five continents and 48 states. And throughout that, I never left this state, and that was intentional. I had opportunities to move to Chicago, LA, Tokyo. You name it, I was there. Probably didn't enjoy it as a young man, I was so focused on that brass ring, but I did realize through all those travels that we have a tremendous treasure, and it is a hidden little secret. It still amazes me to this day when I talk about South Carolina with folks that don't live here that still don't get it. They think we're either Myrtle Beach or they think we're football, and that's about it. But I'm going to tell you the reason I'm running, because I got asked by my wife and my children, which are a huge priority for me. And I said I honestly believe that every single one of us has been given an opportunity for experience and expertise to cross at a moment when it's needed. And I really feel like we're at a place, both with this pandemic, as well as other economic factors that are coming in that are causing tremendous amounts of conflict, arguments and fighting in this country. But I really feel like my experience could be use of the University, and I look forward to sharing some of my ideas with you guys today. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Thank you. Questions? Senator Alexander.
MR. HUNTER - EXAMINATION BY SENATOR ALEXANDER:
Q. Thank you for being here. Good to see you this afternoon.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I was noticing here your commenting about the virtual and that there needs to be some type of moderately adjusted from that aspect. Do you have some thoughts on that in this particular time with this COVID-19? A. Yes, sir. I do. And I can tell you, I actually was working for a Japanese company and was told because of my age that if I wanted to be on the board I either needed to get a law degree or get an MBA. Well, traveling all over the world doesn't really lend itself well to sitting still to get either one of those. So I can tell you one of the first online universities, University of Phoenix gave me an opportunity to get my MBA while traveling all over the world and the father of a two-year-old son at the time. And I kind of put that aside until now. And both my children are doing virtual school. I've met many, many folks that have worked for us that are sons and daughters or former employees of my wife and I that are in college that are either embracing an experience of the online or fighting that experience. To me, it is what it is. We're going to have to find a way for our universities and all of our public education to embrace online learning. I feel like the University has multiple different customers, students and sources of income that I've heard come in and instead of trying to take a traditional student that wants to come in for a traditional experience at the University, well, let's look and see if there's an opportunity for an online one. Let's talk about those students that maybe can't get in initially or some kind of bridge program that allows them to become a part of the University community but also use those online technologies there. I can tell you one of the things that has surprised me the most, I'm turning 50 this year, I never would have thought that Zoom and online connects people the way it does. But I got to tell you, young people, my son and daughter, it is amazing how they will have play dates, play together, do games -- they've even done board games together. They even watch movies together. And I see this every day, and I'm like there is -- we can't fight it. We can't ignore it. We've got to find a way to make that an inclusion part of the student experience.
Q. And a follow up, if I could just briefly, from that standpoint, do you see that the fiscal footprint of the University would be altered as a result of -- and the cost affiliated with the expenses of maintaining the buildings be impacted from that standpoint as to what that future looks like for the University?
A. Yes, sir. I do. I think you're going to have to adjust to it, but I also don't think you're substituting one for the other.
Q. Right.
A. I know in my business when I consider a new product or a new strategy, I don't ever look at it of taking what I've already got to substitute over to something new. I almost look at it as a new track, and that's what I see the online as. We've got societal shifts that, in my opinion, things like meetings, things like even some of the stock trading. When I went to Carolina with a degree in finance, I thought I wanted to be a stock broker. My roommate was a computer engineer and showed me how you can go on Merrill Lynch's website back in 1992, and it scared me so bad I didn't want to be a stockbroker anymore because I saw stockbrokers control information, and now that information is everywhere. So traditionally, yeah, the model's going to be different, but I think you have to look at the tracks of a traditional student, maybe a post or a life-student, somebody's that gotten out of the military, somebody that's a working dad or mom or owning a business wanting to further their education. But I also think that online track is a completely different revenue source. Now, the good thing I see with that is you can actually build something that doesn't have a lot of those traditional expenses on it. I've watched again and gotten some information from students. They're online with 50, 60, 70 students, and they're able to get that information in a much more efficient manner, as well as they don't have to go to a classroom, they don't have parking. So their cost is actually lower. It's much easier to provide them with a return on their investment in those education dollars.
Q. Thank you.
A. Yes, sir.
SENATOR ALEXANDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN PEELER: Representative King.
MR. HUNTER - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE KING:
Q. Quick question. USC, did you start off at the Lancaster?
A. I did not. I grew up in Lancaster, South Carolina, but we moved to the Irmo area in 1985. So I went from little Lancaster, South Carolina to Irmo High School. And I was a wide-eyed kid, didn't know what that was all about. But what it did was show me the disparity in the education. Man, what a difference going from AP Biology in Lancaster High School where we had two pigs for a whole class to I show up at Irmo and you got your own chemistry set.
Q. Got your own chemistry.
A. Yeah.
Q. So my question that you probably heard me ask earlier in reference to the pandemic and how we ensure that students have an opportunity to matriculate at USC first by just getting accepted into USC with what we are dealing with the pandemic and them not being able to take the SAT or the ACT. And because of broadband, maybe some of them's grades have now dropped. How do you think that the University should look at the overall student to see if they are eligible to get into the institution? A. Well, I can speak from my experience both personally as well as other close friends. The ACT or SAT is not a direct correlation to your success in life, much less your success in college. I had fraternity brothers when I was in college that got perfect scores and almost failed out of school. I got others that had to get exceptions that now own their businesses and employ 30, 40, 50 people. So to me, when you've got -- and a pandemic like this, you've got a life societal rattling changing event, it's time to put all the rules over here. I'm not saying put the institution down, I'm saying put the barriers down. And you start developing a strategic plan that puts an incentive for the behavior you're after. You know, I've heard some of the questions sitting in the back is about diversity and inclusion and how do we get people in. Well, I can tell you in my company, we have 17 jobs that I proudly created in the state of South Carolina. We employ four African- Americans. It's not intentional it's because I wanted the best people in those jobs. And I can tell you the number one thing that I have seen that is needed is just simply communicating. One of these young men I gave a second chance. He had a mess up with marijuana drugs when he was younger, and it was an albatross around his neck. But I just for some reason, you know, and when God taps you on the shoulder and said you need to listen, and I did. And this young man has probably turned out to be one of the best employees I've ever had. Now, I have put him in touch with lawyers that are helping him to get his record clean. I'm not some miracle man. But what it showed me was it's about communicating, but most importantly taking action. I can't tell you how many times I have seen, read, heard about another committee started, another directive started, but action always seems to be lacking. I can tell you in my business if we don't take action, we don't survive. That is my number one thing, whether it comes to eliminating the SAT, ACT, application fees, whatever it is, education, to me, is about a return on your investment dollars and, more importantly, your time.
Q. Well, thank you for your willingness to serve. And you probably were in school with a few of my cousins, if you know any of the Ruckers
A. Oh, yeah.
Q. -- in Lancaster, those are my first cousins.
A. Okay. Awesome.
VICE CHAIRMAN WHITMIRE: Any others? Yes, sir. Representative Finlay.
MR. HUNTER - EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE FINLAY: Q. Yes, sir. I'm sure you heard my question to the other two board members -- or potential board members. I guess they are actually technically have been former board members, but nonetheless. The University embarked probably 20 year ago on a policy of bringing in out-of-state students as a way to generate revenue dollars. I think that plan -- that program has probably reached its zenith and is now starting to shrink. There are less students, the prices have gotten higher. We're seeing more and more abatements. At the same time, the University is in probably the -- has the greatest deferred maintenance that it's ever seen. And we have created a university that in many regards no longer represents our state. How would you go about solving those as someone who's run their own business?
A. Well, I --
Q. I admit it's a tough question.
A. Oh, it is. It is. And understand not knowing all of the background on it because I also believe when you come to a decision the most important part is to listen first. You got to make sure you understand it. One of my strengths has also been to process information quickly because often in business if you don't act, by the time you think about it and talk about it, that opportunity is shot. To me, the deferred maintenance thing is kind of an ill of our society, right? We want everything now and pay for it down the road at some point. But again, going back to what I was talking with Representative King there is when you've got a societal shift, man, you can put down a lot of why you did something in the past. I can tell you as a business owner, it amazes me how many buildings are owned by the University. I don't know all the details of it, but I can tell you at sometimes it makes more sense to lease. Sometimes it makes more sense to make it a virtual program completely to get yourself out from under some of these things. I know a lot of these are sacred cows. I worked for a Japanese company that there was a lot -- there was a list you were handed when you joined the board, do not say these words, do not discuss these things. I get it. But we're also under new rules here. And I think this whole pandemic has shown everybody that you need to question everything. It's not because -- don't use the virus and the pandemic as an excuse, but use it as an opportunity to make improvement. Because if you're not improving, you're dying. It's the cold hard reality of it. Status quo will never ever stand firm, it has to be changed. Out of state students, I think they're an important part of it. But I also think if you're going to have an out-of-state student, you got to figure out a way to get them some incentive to stay here. In my business, like most business, you decide what strategic behavior you want, and then you come up with an incentive plan to get that behavior achieved. Maybe you come up with something in an out-of-state student that says, hey, you're paying out of state tuition, but here's some incentives. Maybe they're tax credits if you start a business. Maybe there's something we can do instead of you having that talent flight and running away, you stay here, you help us grow this economy. I'm a big believer of you have to get incentives on people, you got to be careful using the carrot or the stick, cuts being the stick. Carrots usually work better. And I think it's just a matter of deciding what percentage of out-of-state money you want and what can we do to keep people here.
Q. Okay. The problem, of course, is where we are is there's a whole lot less incentive because of past decisions. And that's going to sort of be the tougher part. How would you deal with -- or how would you formulate that decision when you have to start deciding about the number of carrots and who gets them and what --
A. Well, and I can tell you. And that's a fair thing because I've looked at buying businesses before. And you know, usually when somebody's selling you something they show you how pretty the curtains are and how great it drives. They don't show you the reality of what's underneath the hood there. To me, Representative Finlay, you're going to have to look at degrees. There may be some degrees that Carolina does not need. There may be some programs that Carolina needs to say, I'm sorry, but we no longer can afford to do that. I can tell you in my business, we support quite a few of the tech schools. And I'm going to use one as an example, Denmark Tech. You want to talk about some dedicated people. I have seen nothing short of miracles with the right attitude and just a tiny bit of money and a whole lot of hard work can make things happen. So when I pull up in an impoverished area and I see what those folks are able to do, and then you turn around and you're facing things that are just kicking things down the road there, then those are tough decisions. And maybe we need to look at some of those colleges, look for some of those ideas. I think someone asked about diversity and how do we get more -- the faculty to reflect what's in our state, the population makeup of our state. I can tell you, if I was making a hiring decision, that would be one of the first places I'd go is some of these technical schools. Because I'm telling you, it is absolutely incredible what these folks are able to do, and it's creativity and hard work. It's what it's all about.
VICE CHAIRMAN WHITMIRE: Anybody else? Is there a motion?
There's a favorable motion before us. All those in favor signify by saying, aye. (Ayes are heard.)
VICE CHAIRMAN WHITMIRE: Opposed, no. (No reply is heard.) VICE CHAIRMAN WHITMIRE: Ayes have it. Congratulations, sir.
MR. HUNTER: Thank you, gentlemen.
VICE CHAIRMAN WHITMIRE: Any other business before the committee before we adjourn? All right. We're adjourned. Thank you.

(There being nothing further, the proceeding concluded at 3:14 p.m.)

Received as information.

The following was received:

Columbia, S.C., February 17, 2021
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:

The Senate respectfully invites your Honorable Body to attend in the Senate Chamber at a mutually convenient time for the purpose of ratifying Acts.

Very respectfully,
President

On motion of Rep. FORREST the invitation was accepted.

Rep. MURPHY, from the Committee on Judiciary, submitted a favorable report on:

H. 3696 (Word version) -- Reps. Lucas, G. M. Smith, Murphy, Simrill, Rutherford, Bannister, Bradley, Erickson, Gatch, Herbkersman, Kimmons, W. Newton, Rivers, Stavrinakis, Weeks, S. Williams, McGarry and Carter: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 14-5-610, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE DIVISION OF THE STATE INTO SIXTEEN JUDICIAL CIRCUITS, SO AS TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES BY ONE IN THE NINTH, FOURTEENTH, AND FIFTEENTH CIRCUITS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 63-3-40, RELATING TO FAMILY COURT JUDGES ELECTED FROM EACH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, SO AS TO INCREASE BY ONE THE NUMBER OF FAMILY COURT JUDGES IN THE FIRST AND SIXTEENTH CIRCUITS.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

Rep. MURPHY, from the Committee on Judiciary, submitted a favorable report on:

H. 3214 (Word version) -- Reps. Bernstein, Collins, Kimmons, Felder, Cobb-Hunter and W. Cox: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 63-7-2320, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE KINSHIP FOSTER CARE PROGRAM, SO AS TO DEFINE "FICTIVE KIN"; TO PROVIDE THAT FICTIVE KIN ARE ELIGIBLE TO BE FOSTER PARENTS UNDER THE KINSHIP FOSTER CARE PROGRAM; AND TO PROVIDE THAT RELATIVES AND FICTIVE KIN MAY FOSTER A CHILD BEFORE BEING LICENSED AS A KINSHIP FOSTER CARE PROVIDER UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

Rep. MURPHY, from the Committee on Judiciary, submitted a favorable report with amendments on:

H. 3509 (Word version) -- Reps. Fry, Felder, Bernstein, Collins, Kimmons, Robinson, Haddon, V. S. Moss, Pope, Forrest, J. L. Johnson and W. Cox: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 8 TO CHAPTER 7, TITLE 63 SO AS TO ESTABLISH AN EXTENDED FOSTER CARE PROGRAM AND RELATED PROCEDURES TO ENABLE CERTAIN CHILDREN IN THE CUSTODY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES ON THEIR EIGHTEENTH BIRTHDAY TO CONTINUE TO RECEIVE SERVICES AND SUPPORTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT UNTIL THE AGE OF TWENTY-ONE; TO DEFINE TERMS; TO PROVIDE FOR VOLUNTARY AND COURT-ORDERED EXTENDED FOSTER CARE; TO REQUIRE CASE REVIEW AND PERMANENCY PLANNING; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES; AND TO AMEND SECTION 63-7-1700, RELATING TO PERMANENCY PLANNING HEARINGS, SO AS TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

Rep. MURPHY, from the Committee on Judiciary, submitted a favorable report on:

H. 3567 (Word version) -- Reps. Bernstein, Collins, Felder and Hosey: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 63-7-20, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO TERMS DEFINED IN THE CHILDREN'S CODE, SO AS TO ADD A DEFINITION FOR "QUALIFIED RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAM" AND OTHER TERMS; TO AMEND SECTIONS 63-7-1210 AND 63-7-2350, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO INVESTIGATIONS OF INSTITUTIONAL ABUSE AND RESTRICTIONS ON FOSTER CARE PLACEMENTS, RESPECTIVELY, SO AS TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES; BY ADDING SECTIONS 63-7-1730 AND 63-7-1740 SO AS TO REQUIRE ASSESSMENT, CASE PLANNING, AND JUDICIAL REVIEW FOR CHILDREN PLACED IN QUALIFIED RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAMS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 63-7-1700, RELATING TO PERMANENCY PLANNING, SO AS TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

Rep. MURPHY, from the Committee on Judiciary, submitted a favorable report with amendments on:

H. 3772 (Word version) -- Reps. Bernstein, G. M. Smith, Stavrinakis, Herbkersman, Rutherford, Elliott, Collins, W. Newton and Bannister: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 61-4-280 SO AS TO ALLOW A RETAIL DEALER LICENSED TO SELL BEER AND WINE IN THIS STATE TO USE A DELIVERY SERVICE, OR ITS OWN EMPLOYEES OR INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS TO FACILITATE THE DELIVERY OF CERTAIN BEER AND WINE, TO PROVIDE FOR A DELIVERY LICENSE, TO SPECIFY CERTAIN DELIVERY PROHIBITIONS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DELIVERY OF SUCH BEER AND WINE.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

Rep. MURPHY, from the Committee on Judiciary, submitted a favorable report with amendments on:

H. 3575 (Word version) -- Reps. Fry, Collins, Elliott, Kirby, Forrest, W. Newton, McGarry, B. Newton, Caskey, Hosey and Herbkersman: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 61-4-45 SO AS TO ALLOW A QUALIFYING RETAILER TO OFFER CURBSIDE DELIVERY OR PICKUP SERVICE OF BEER OR WINE AND TO PROVIDE LIMITATIONS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 61-2-170, RELATING TO DRIVE-THROUGH OR CURB SERVICE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, SO AS TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

Rep. MURPHY, from the Committee on Judiciary, submitted a favorable report with amendments on:

H. 3444 (Word version) -- Reps. Lucas, McGarry, Burns, Haddon, Pope, McCravy, Forrest, Caskey, McGinnis, Hosey, Hixon, Hewitt, Bailey, W. Newton and Herbkersman: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 7-3-10, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE CREATION, COMPOSITION, POWERS, AND DUTIES OF THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, SO AS TO RECONSTITUTE THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION AND REVISE THE COMMISSION'S COMPOSITION, POWERS, AND DUTIES; AND TO AMEND SECTIONS 7-17-70 AND 7-17-220, BOTH RELATING TO MEETINGS OF THE STATE BOARD, SO AS TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

Rep. MURPHY, from the Committee on Judiciary, submitted a favorable report with amendments on:

H. 3262 (Word version) -- Reps. Fry, Huggins, Davis, B. Newton, G. R. Smith, Morgan, Burns, Erickson, Bennett, Thayer, Taylor, Bryant, Elliott, Willis, Felder, McGarry, V. S. Moss, Haddon, Long, Pope, Forrest, Hixon, Hewitt and Bailey: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 7-11-15, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO QUALIFICATIONS TO RUN AS A CANDIDATE IN GENERAL ELECTIONS, SO AS TO REQUIRE ALL CANDIDATES FROM EACH POLITICAL PARTY IN THIS STATE TO PAY A FILING FEE, INCLUDING CANDIDATES FROM PARTIES THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED TO CONDUCT A PRIMARY ELECTION, AND TO AUTHORIZE POLITICAL PARTIES TO CHARGE A CERTIFICATION FEE TO ALL CANDIDATES SEEKING NOMINATION BY POLITICAL PARTY PRIMARY OR POLITICAL PARTY CONVENTION; AND TO AMEND SECTION 7-11-210, RELATING TO THE NOTICE OF CANDIDACY AND PLEDGE, SO AS TO REQUIRE CANDIDATES TO AFFIRM THEIR PARTICIPATION IN AT LEAST THREE OF THE LAST FOUR STATEWIDE PARTY PRIMARIES, OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, IF PRECLUDED FROM PARTICIPATION DUE TO AGE, PERSONAL HEALTH, RESIDENCY, OR ACTIVE MILITARY SERVICE, CANDIDATES MAY PLEDGE THAT THEY ARE BONA FIDE MEMBERS OF THE POLITICAL PARTY WHOSE NOMINATION THEY ARE SEEKING, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE STATE PARTY CHAIRMAN, IF PERMITTED BY PARTY RULE, MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL VERIFICATION WHEN A CANDIDATE'S AFFIRMATION OF BONA FIDE PARTY MEMBERSHIP IS DISPUTED, AND THAT THE STATE CHAIRMAN IS THE FINAL AUTHORITY TO RESOLVE QUESTIONS REGARDING BONA FIDE PARTY MEMBERSHIP.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

Rep. MURPHY, from the Committee on Judiciary, submitted a favorable report on:

H. 3263 (Word version) -- Reps. Fry, Huggins, Davis, B. Newton, G. R. Smith, Morgan, Burns, Erickson, Bennett, Thayer, Taylor, Bryant, Elliott, Willis, Felder, McGarry, Hewitt, Bailey, W. Newton and Herbkersman: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 7-17-560, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES TO HEAR CERTAIN PROTESTS AND CONTESTS, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE STATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES ALSO TO HEAR PROTESTS AND CONTESTS IN THE CASE OF COUNTY OFFICERS AND LESS THAN COUNTY OFFICERS; AND TO REPEAL SECTIONS 7-17-520, 7-17-530, 7-17-540, AND 7-17-550 RELATING TO HEARINGS BY COUNTY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES AND APPEALS FROM DECISIONS OF COUNTY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

Rep. MURPHY, from the Committee on Judiciary, submitted a favorable report on:

H. 3264 (Word version) -- Reps. Fry, Huggins, Davis, B. Newton, G. R. Smith, Morgan, Burns, Erickson, Bennett, Thayer, Taylor, Bryant, Elliott, Willis, Felder, McGarry, Haddon, Hewitt and Bailey: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 7-9-70, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REQUIRED NOTICES OF COUNTY CONVENTIONS, SO AS TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT THAT A COUNTY COMMITTEE PUBLISH CERTAIN NOTICES REGARDING COUNTY CONVENTIONS IN A NEWSPAPER HAVING GENERAL CIRCULATION IN THE COUNTY.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

Rep. TAYLOR, from the Aiken Delegation, submitted a favorable report on:

H. 3679 (Word version) -- Reps. Taylor, Clyburn, Blackwell and Oremus: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE AIKEN COUNTY COUNCIL AND THE AIKEN CITY COUNCIL TO TRANSFER THE VIETNAM WAR MEMORIAL, ETERNAL FLAME, AND UNITED STATES FLAG INSTALLATIONS TO THE AIKEN COUNTY VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

The following was introduced:

H. 3912 (Word version) -- Reps. Garvin, Dillard, King, Simrill, B. Newton and Huggins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE AND HONOR DR. CYNTHIA PLAIR RODDEY, MEMBER OF THE WINTHROP UNIVERSITY CLASS OF 1967, AND TO CONGRATULATE HER FOR BEING SELECTED TO RECEIVE THE WINTHROP UNIVERSITY ALUMNI DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD AS THE UNIVERSITY CELEBRATED FIFTY YEARS OF RACIAL INTEGRATION.

The Resolution was adopted.

The following was introduced:

H. 3913 (Word version) -- Reps. Garvin, Dillard, King, Simrill, B. Newton and Huggins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO HONOR DELORES JOHNSON HURT, A 1968 GRADUATE OF WINTHROP COLLEGE, AS THE FIRST AFRICAN AMERICAN STUDENT ACCEPTED INTO THAT VENERABLE INSTITUTION.

The Resolution was adopted.

The following was introduced:

H. 3914 (Word version) -- Reps. Garvin, Dillard, King, Simrill, B. Newton and Huggins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO REMEMBER ARNETTA GLADDEN MACKEY, MEMBER OF THE WINTHROP UNIVERSITY CLASS OF 1967, AND TO HONOR HER FOR BEING SELECTED TO RECEIVE THE WINTHROP UNIVERSITY ALUMNI DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD AS THE UNIVERSITY CELEBRATED FIFTY YEARS OF RACIAL INTEGRATION.

The Resolution was adopted.

The following was introduced:

H. 3915 (Word version) -- Reps. Garvin, Dillard, King, Simrill, B. Newton and Huggins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO HONOR SUE FRANCES MERIWETHER STEED, A 1967 GRADUATE OF WINTHROP UNIVERSITY, AS THE FIRST AFRICAN AMERICAN STUDENT TO EARN A DEGREE AT THAT VENERABLE INSTITUTION.

The Resolution was adopted.

The Senate sent to the House the following:

S. 576 (Word version) -- Senator Fanning: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE AND HONOR EDWARD Y. "EDDIE" MURPHY, JR., DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR OF CHESTER COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND CHIEF OF THE LANDO FIRE DEPARTMENT, UPON THE OCCASION OF HIS RETIREMENT AFTER SIXTEEN YEARS OF EXEMPLARY SERVICE, AND TO WISH HIM CONTINUED SUCCESS AND HAPPINESS IN ALL HIS FUTURE ENDEAVORS.

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

The Senate sent to the House the following:

S. 580 (Word version) -- Senator Shealy: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE CAPITAL CITY/LAKE MURRAY COUNTRY UPON THE OCCASION OF ITS FORTIETH ANNIVERSARY.

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:

H. 3916 (Word version) -- Rep. Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 40-59-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF A RESIDENTIAL SPECIALTY CONTRACTOR, SO AS TO INCLUDE SWIMMING POOL INSTALLERS AMONG THE AREAS OF RESIDENTIAL SPECIALTY CONTRACTING RECOGNIZED BY THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDERS COMMISSION.
Referred to Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry

H. 3917 (Word version) -- Rep. Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 59-104-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO QUALIFICATIONS FOR PALMETTO FELLOWS SCHOLARSHIPS, SECTION 59-113-20, RELATING TO QUALIFICATIONS FOR SOUTH CAROLINA TUITION GRANTS, AND SECTION 59-149-90, RELATING TO QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE INCENTIVES FOR FUTURE EXCELLENCE (LIFE) SCHOLARSHIPS, ALL SO AS TO REMOVE CONVICTIONS FOR MISDEMEANOR ALCOHOL-RELATED OR DRUG-RELATED OFFENSES FROM THOSE OFFENSES WHICH DISQUALIFY PERSONS FROM RECEIVING THESE SCHOLARSHIPS AND GRANTS.
Referred to Committee on Education and Public Works

H. 3918 (Word version) -- Rep. Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 23-1-250 SO AS TO PROVIDE CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS, TO PROVIDE A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OR OFFICER SHALL NOT INSTALL, ACTIVATE, OR USE A BIOMETRIC SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM IN CONNECTION WITH AN OFFICER'S CAMERA OR DATA COLLECTED BY AN OFFICER'S CAMERA, AND TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary

H. 3919 (Word version) -- Rep. Stavrinakis: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO RATIFY A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PROVIDING THAT EQUALITY OF RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW MUST NOT BE DENIED OR ABRIDGED ON ACCOUNT OF SEX.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary

H. 3920 (Word version) -- Rep. Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 2-17-30, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO A LOBBYIST'S REPORT OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES, SO AS TO REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC REPORT WHEN A LOBBYIST HAS PERFORMED LOBBYING ACTIVITIES OR HAD OTHER WORK-RELATED CONTACTS WITH A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, OR WITH AN EMPLOYEE OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, OR THE OFFICE OF REGULATORY STAFF; TO AMEND SECTION 2-17-35, RELATING TO A LOBBYIST'S PRINCIPAL'S REPORT OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES, SO AS TO REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC REPORT WHEN A LOBBYIST ACTING ON BEHALF OF A LOBBYIST'S PRINCIPAL HAS PERFORMED LOBBYING ACTIVITIES OR HAD OTHER WORK-RELATED CONTACTS WITH A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, OR WITH AN EMPLOYEE OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, OR THE OFFICE OF REGULATORY STAFF; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-700, RELATING TO USE OF OFFICIAL POSITION FOR FINANCIAL GAIN, SO AS TO PROHIBIT MEMBERS OR EMPLOYEES OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OR THE OFFICE OF REGULATORY STAFF FROM RECEIVING ANYTHING OF VALUE FROM A UTILITY, COMPANY, CORPORATION, ENTITY, JOINT VENTURE, OR PERSON WHOSE BUSINESS, ENTERPRISE, OPERATIONS, OR ACTIVITIES ARE REGULATED, WHETHER WHOLLY OR IN PART, BY A GOVERNMENTAL REGULATORY AGENCY PURSUANT TO TITLE 58; AND TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-1332, RELATING TO UNLAWFUL CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES, SO AS TO PROHIBIT A UTILITY, COMPANY, CORPORATION, ENTITY, JOINT VENTURE, OR PERSON, WHOSE BUSINESS, ENTERPRISE, OPERATIONS, OR ACTIVITIES ARE REGULATED, WHETHER WHOLLY OR IN PART, BY A GOVERNMENTAL REGULATORY AGENCY PURSUANT TO TITLE 58 FROM OFFERING, FACILITATING, OR PROVIDING A CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION TO A MEMBER OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OR A CANDIDATE FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, OR A STATEWIDE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICER OR A CANDIDATE FOR A STATEWIDE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICE.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary

H. 3921 (Word version) -- Rep. Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 58-23-1610, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE TO THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANY ACT, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITIONS OF "PERSONAL VEHICLE" AND "PREARRANGED RIDE".
Referred to Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry

H. 3922 (Word version) -- Rep. Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 12 TO CHAPTER 11, TITLE 8 ENACTING THE "SOUTH CAROLINA STATE EMPLOYEE EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK ACT" SO AS TO PROHIBIT DISCRIMINATION BY GENDER REGARDLESS OF GENDER IN COMPENSATION PAID STATE EMPLOYEES FOR SAME KIND, GRADE, AND QUALITY OF STATE EMPLOYMENT, TO PROVIDE DEFINITIONS, EXCEPTIONS, AND PROHIBIT SPECIFIC EMPLOYER ACTIONS WITH REGARD TO THE ENFORCEMENT OF THIS ACT, AND TO PROVIDE ADMINISTRATIVE AND, WHERE APPLICABLE, JUDICIAL REMEDIES FOR VIOLATIONS.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary

H. 3923 (Word version) -- Rep. Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-36-2120, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO EXEMPTIONS FROM THE STATE SALES TAX, SO AS TO INCLUDE THE GROSS PROCEEDS OF SALES OR THE SALES PRICE OF MACHINERY, MACHINE TOOLS, AND PARTS OF THEM, USED IN THE PRODUCTION OF ELECTRICITY FROM A RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCE.
Referred to Committee on Ways and Means

H. 3924 (Word version) -- Rep. Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-36-2120, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO EXEMPTIONS FROM THE STATE SALES TAX, SO AS TO INCLUDE THE GROSS PROCEEDS OF SALES OR THE SALES PRICE OF ANY DEVICE, EQUIPMENT, OR MACHINERY ACTUALLY USED IN THE PRODUCTION OF ELECTRIC OR HYBRID MOTOR VEHICLES.
Referred to Committee on Ways and Means

H. 3925 (Word version) -- Reps. Allison, Trantham, Felder, Simrill, Ligon, Collins, Calhoon, Huggins, McCabe and Pope: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO WAIVE CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF SECTION 59-63-100 OF THE 1976 CODE RELATING TO LIMITATIONS ON HOMESCHOOL STUDENT ELIGIBILITY TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLIC SCHOOL INTERSCHOLASTIC ACTIVITIES FOR THE 2021-2022 AND 2022-2023 SCHOOL YEARS.
Referred to Committee on Education and Public Works

H. 3926 (Word version) -- Rep. J. Moore: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH THE HEIRS' PROPERTY STUDY COMMITTEE TO EXAMINE CURRENT AND PROSPECTIVE METHODS TO ADDRESS HEIR'S PROPERTY ISSUES IN SOUTH CAROLINA, TO PROVIDE FOR THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE, TO REQUIRE THE COMMITTEE TO PREPARE A REPORT FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, AND TO DISSOLVE THE STUDY COMMITTEE.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary

H. 3927 (Word version) -- Reps. Stavrinakis and Murphy: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 22-3-545, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO TRANSFER OF CERTAIN CRIMINAL CASES FROM GENERAL SESSIONS COURT, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT CRIMINAL CASES IN WHICH THE PENALTY DOES NOT EXCEED THREE YEARS, RATHER THAN ONE YEAR, MAY BE TRANSFERRED FROM GENERAL SESSIONS COURT.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary

H. 3928 (Word version) -- Rep. Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 14-17-325, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT CLERKS OF COURT REPORT DISPOSITIONS OF CASES IN GENERAL SESSIONS COURT, SO AS TO REQUIRE THAT EVERY CLERK OF COURT SHALL REPORT TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION WITHIN TEN DAYS, WEEKENDS AND HOLIDAYS EXCLUDED, THE DISPOSITION OF EACH CASE IN GENERAL SESSIONS, AND TO REPORT WITHIN FORTY-EIGHT HOURS THE ISSUANCE OF A RESTRAINING ORDER, ORDER OF PROTECTION, ORDER FOR THE PREVENTION OF POSSESSION OF A FIREARM, CONVICTIONS OR ORDERS RELATED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ORDERS RELATED TO STALKING, INTIMIDATION, OR HARASSMENT, AND ORDERS FOR BOND WITH ANY LIMITATIONS LISTED IN THIS SECTION; BY ADDING SECTION 22-1-200 SO AS TO REQUIRE MAGISTRATES TO REPORT TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION WITHIN TEN DAYS, WEEKENDS AND HOLIDAYS EXCLUDED, THE DISPOSITION OF EACH CRIMINAL CASE, AND TO REPORT WITHIN FORTY-EIGHT HOURS THE ISSUANCE OF A RESTRAINING ORDER, ORDER OF PROTECTION, ORDER FOR THE PREVENTION OF POSSESSION OF A FIREARM, CONVICTIONS OR ORDERS RELATED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND CONVICTIONS OR ORDERS RELATED TO STALKING, INTIMIDATION, OR HARASSMENT, AND ORDERS FOR BOND WITH ANY LIMITATIONS LISTED IN THIS SECTION; BY ADDING SECTION 14-25-250 SO AS TO REQUIRE MAGISTRATES TO REPORT TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION WITHIN TEN DAYS, WEEKENDS AND HOLIDAYS EXCLUDED, THE DISPOSITION OF EACH CRIMINAL CASE, AND TO REPORT WITHIN FORTY-EIGHT HOURS THE ISSUANCE OF A RESTRAINING ORDER, ORDER OF PROTECTION, ORDER FOR THE PREVENTION OF POSSESSION OF A FIREARM, CONVICTIONS OR ORDERS RELATED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND CONVICTIONS OR ORDERS RELATED TO STALKING, INTIMIDATION, OR HARASSMENT, AND ORDERS FOR BOND WITH ANY LIMITATIONS LISTED IN THIS SECTION; BY ADDING SECTION 23-1-250 SO AS TO REQUIRE EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY TO REPORT TO SLED WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR HOURS, THE FILING OF EACH INCIDENT REPORT, ORDER OF PROTECTION, RESTRAINING ORDER, ANY ORDER OR REPORT RELATING TO AN INCIDENT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, OR ANY INCIDENT IN WHICH A PERSON MAY BE PROHIBITED FROM OBTAINING OR POSSESSING A FIREARM BY STATE OR FEDERAL LAW; BY ADDING ARTICLE 9 TO CHAPTER 23, TITLE 16 SO AS TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS, TO REQUIRE THAT NO GUN TRANSFER PRECEDED BY A CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK MAY PROCEED, UNLESS THE CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK HAS CONCLUDED THAT THE SALE MAY PROCEED, OR UNTIL AT LEAST FIVE DAYS HAVE PASSED FROM THE INITIATION OF THE BACKGROUND CHECK AND THE NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM HAS NOT REPORTED THAT THE SALE WOULD VIOLATE STATE OR FEDERAL LAW, AND TO PROVIDE FOR CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THIS ARTICLE; AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE SUN SETTING OF THE FIVE-DAY BACKGROUND CHECK PROVISIONS UPON THE FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OF THIS ACT BUT NOT LATER THAN TWO YEARS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ACT.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary

S. 221 (Word version) -- Senators Shealy, Alexander, Hutto, Jackson, Gustafson and McElveen: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 7, TITLE 63 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY, BY ADDING ARTICLE 8, TO PROVIDE FOR EXTENDED FOSTER CARE FOR PERSONS EIGHTEEN TO TWENTY-ONE YEARS OLD, TO CREATE THE EXTENDED FOSTER CARE PROGRAM, TO PROVIDE FOR VOLUNTARY PLACEMENT, TO PROVIDE FOR THE REVIEW OF VOLUNTARY PLACEMENT AFTER AGE EIGHTEEN, TO PROVIDE FOR COURT-ORDERED FOSTER CARE PLACEMENT AFTER AGE EIGHTEEN, TO PROVIDE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CASE REVIEW, TO PROVIDE FOR PERMANENCY PLANNING FOR PERSONS EIGHTEEN TO TWENTY-ONE YEARS OLD, TO PROVIDE FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW, TO PROVIDE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS; TO AMEND SECTION 63-7-1700(H) OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO PERMANENCY PLANNING, TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES; AND TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary

S. 441 (Word version) -- Senators Shealy, Hutto, Jackson, McElveen and Gustafson: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 63-7-1210(A) OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES INVESTIGATIONS OF INSTITUTIONAL ABUSE, TO PROVIDE FOR INVESTIGATIONS OF ABUSE IN QUALIFIED RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAMS; TO AMEND SECTION 63-7-2350(A) OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO RESTRICTIONS ON FOSTER CARE OR ADOPTION PLACEMENTS, TO PROVIDE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH A CHILD MAY NOT BE PLACED IN A QUALIFIED RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAM; TO AMEND SUBARTICLE 11, ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 7, TITLE 63 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS, BY ADDING SECTION 63-7-1730 AND SECTION 63-7-1740, TO PROVIDE ASSESSMENT, CASE PLANNING, AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS FOR CHILDREN PLACED IN QUALIFIED RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAMS, AND TO PROVIDE JUDICIAL REVIEW REQUIREMENTS FOR CHILDREN PLACED IN QUALIFIED RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAMS; TO AMEND SECTION 63-7-1700(B) OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO THE CONTENTS OF A SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT FOR PERMANENCY PLANNING, TO INCLUDE JUDICIAL REVIEW REQUIREMENTS IN THE REPORT; AND TO AMEND SECTION 63-7-1700 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO PERMANENCY PLANNING, TO PROVIDE FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE PLACEMENT OF A CHILD IN A QUALIFIED RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAM; AND TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary

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

Alexander                Allison                  Anderson
Atkinson                 Bailey                   Ballentine
Bannister                Bennett                  Bernstein
Blackwell                Bradley                  Brawley
Brittain                 Bryant                   Burns
Bustos                   Calhoon                  Carter
Chumley                  Clyburn                  Cobb-Hunter
Cogswell                 Collins                  B. Cox
W. Cox                   Crawford                 Dabney
Daning                   Davis                    Dillard
Elliott                  Erickson                 Felder
Forrest                  Fry                      Gagnon
Garvin                   Gatch                    Gilliam
Gilliard                 Govan                    Haddon
Hardee                   Hart                     Henderson-Myers
Henegan                  Herbkersman              Hewitt
Hill                     Hixon                    Hosey
Howard                   Huggins                  Hyde
Jefferson                J. E. Johnson            J. L. Johnson
K. O. Johnson            Jones                    Kimmons
King                     Kirby                    Ligon
Long                     Lowe                     Lucas
Magnuson                 Martin                   Matthews
May                      McCabe                   McCravy
McDaniel                 McGarry                  McGinnis
McKnight                 J. Moore                 T. Moore
Morgan                   D. C. Moss               Murphy
Murray                   B. Newton                W. Newton
Nutt                     Oremus                   Ott
Parks                    Pendarvis                Pope
Rivers                   Robinson                 Rose
Rutherford               Sandifer                 Simrill
G. M. Smith              G. R. Smith              M. M. Smith
Stavrinakis              Taylor                   Tedder
Thayer                   Thigpen                  Trantham
Weeks                    West                     Wetmore
Wheeler                  White                    Whitmire
R. Williams              S. Williams              Willis
Wooten                   Yow                      

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

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

The SPEAKER granted Rep. V. S. MOSS a leave of absence for the day.

The SPEAKER granted Rep. STRINGER a leave of absence for the day due to a death in the family.

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

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

In accordance with House Rule 5.2 below:

"5.2 Every bill before presentation shall have its title endorsed; every report, its title at length; every petition, memorial, or other paper, its prayer or substance; and, in every instance, the name of the member presenting any paper shall be endorsed and the papers shall be presented by the member to the Speaker at the desk. A member may add his name to a bill or resolution or a co-sponsor of a bill or resolution may remove his name at any time prior to the bill or resolution receiving passage on second reading. The member or co-sponsor shall notify the Clerk of the House in writing of his desire to have his name added or removed from the bill or resolution. The Clerk of the House shall print the member's or co-sponsor's written notification in the House Journal. The removal or addition of a name does not apply to a bill or resolution sponsored by a committee."

Bill Number:   H. 3012 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   W. NEWTON and CRAWFORD

Bill Number:   H. 3042 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   BENNETT, WILLIS, TRANTHAM, G. R. SMITH, FRY, ELLIOTT, NUTT, T. MOORE, MORGAN, MARTIN and BALLENTINE

Bill Number:   H. 3096 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   CRAWFORD

Bill Number:   H. 3105 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   ELLIOTT and BRYANT

Bill Number:   H. 3161 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   BENNETT, JONES, BUSTOS, COGSWELL, MORGAN, MAGNUSON, ELLIOTT, TRANTHAM, G. R. SMITH and MCGARRY

Bill Number:   H. 3208 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   CALHOON

Bill Number:   H. 3223 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   BENNETT, JONES, BUSTOS, COGSWELL, MORGAN, BURNS, ELLIOTT, TRANTHAM, G. R. SMITH and MCGARRY

Bill Number:   H. 3232 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   GAGNON

Bill Number:   H. 3238 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   DILLARD

Bill Number:   H. 3244 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   ANDERSON

Bill Number:   H. 3416 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   GARVIN

Bill Number:   H. 3443 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   DAVIS

Bill Number:   H. 3477 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   BRYANT

Bill Number:   H. 3510 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   GAGNON

Bill Number:   H. 3518 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   CALHOON

Bill Number:   H. 3610 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   W. NEWTON

Bill Number:   H. 3620 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   HENDERSON-MYERS

Bill Number:   H. 3664 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   KIRBY, ANDERSON and B. COX

Bill Number:   H. 3755 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   ELLIOTT

Bill Number:   H. 3769 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   DAVIS and KIMMONS

Bill Number:   H. 3772 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   BANNISTER

Bill Number:   H. 3863 (Word version)
Date:   ADD:
02/18/21   ANDERSON, RIVERS, S. WILLIAMS, JEFFERSON, R. WILLIAMS, GILLIARD and MURRAY

Bill Number:   H. 3094 (Word version)
Date:   REMOVE:
02/18/21   ROBINSON

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

Pursuant to House Rule 1.6, the SPEAKER addresses the Body concerning a matter of importance to the House.

The following Bills and Joint Resolution were taken up, read the third time, and ordered sent to the Senate:

H. 3017 (Word version) -- Reps. Davis, Atkinson, B. Newton, Magnuson, Fry, Daning, Felder, May, Long, Pope, Forrest, Oremus, M. M. Smith, Yow, McGinnis, Govan, Brawley, Willis, Henderson-Myers, Jones and McDaniel: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 59-104-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO ELIGIBILITY FOR PALMETTO FELLOWS SCHOLARSHIPS, SO AS TO INCLUDE TWO-YEAR INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES AMONG INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING WHOSE STUDENTS MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE SCHOLARSHIPS.

H. 3501 (Word version) -- Reps. Collins, V. S. Moss and Jones: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 147 TO CHAPTER 3, TITLE 56 SO AS TO PROVIDE THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MAY ISSUE TWO HUNDRED FIFTY YEAR ANNIVERSARY REVOLUTIONARY WAR COMMEMORATIVE SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES.

H. 3900 (Word version) -- Reps. G. M. Smith, Herbkersman, Howard and Weeks: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE CERTAIN PODIATRISTS TO ADMINISTER PREMEASURED DOSES OF THE COVID-19 VACCINE.

The following Bill was taken up:

H. 3539 (Word version) -- Rep. Davis: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 47-9-55 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE TRANSPORTATION OF LIVE SWINE ON A PUBLIC ROAD OR WATERWAY WITHOUT AN OFFICIAL FORM OF IDENTIFICATION, AND TO PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION AND PENALTIES; TO AMEND SECTION 50-16-25, RELATING TO THE UNLAWFUL RELEASE OF PIGS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT IT IS UNLAWFUL TO TRANSPORT A LIVE MEMBER OF THE FAMILY SUIDAE TAKEN FROM THE WILD; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 50-9-655 RELATING TO PIG TRANSPORT AND RELEASE PERMITS.

Rep. FORREST made the Point of Order that the Bill was improperly before the House for consideration since its number and title have not been printed in the House Calendar at least one statewide legislative day prior to second reading.
The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE sustained the Point of Order.

The following Bill was taken up:

H. 3765 (Word version) -- Reps. Burns, Chumley and Long: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 27-40-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE PURPOSES AND RULES OF CONSTRUCTION FOR THE RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT, SO AS TO EXEMPT CERTAIN TENANCIES FROM THE ACT; AND TO AMEND SECTION 45-2-60, RELATING TO THE EJECTMENT OF A PERSON FROM A LODGING ESTABLISHMENT, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE AN INNKEEPER TO REQUEST ASSISTANCE FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT TO EJECT A PERSON AND TO PROVIDE THAT A PERSON EJECTED FROM A CAMPGROUND HAS TEN DAYS TO MAKE A CLAIM FOR PROPERTY LEFT AT THE TIME OF EJECTMENT.

Rep. FORREST made the Point of Order that the Bill was improperly before the House for consideration since its number and title have not been printed in the House Calendar at least one statewide legislative day prior to second reading.
The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE sustained the Point of Order.

The following Bill was taken up:

H. 3308 (Word version) -- Reps. Huggins, Hill and Forrest: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-21-870, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO PERSONAL WATERCRAFT AND BOATING SAFETY, SO AS TO INCREASE DISTANCE LIMITS BETWEEN A WATERCRAFT OPERATING IN EXCESS OF IDLE SPEED UPON CERTAIN WATERS OF THIS STATE AND A MOORED OR ANCHORED VESSEL, WHARF, DOCK, BULKHEAD, PIER, OR PERSON IN THE WATER.

Rep. FORREST made the Point of Order that the Bill was improperly before the House for consideration since its number and title have not been printed in the House Calendar at least one statewide legislative day prior to second reading.
The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE sustained the Point of Order.

The following Bill was taken up:

H. 3684 (Word version) -- Reps. Herbkersman, Erickson, Bradley and W. Newton: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 50-5-1713 SO AS TO PROVIDE LIMITS FOR COBIA CAUGHT IN THE WATERS OF THIS STATE AND PROHIBIT THE TAKING OR POSSESSION OF COBIA WHEN FEDERAL REGULATIONS PROVIDE FOR THE CLOSURE OF A RECREATIONAL OR COMMERCIAL COBIA FISHERY IN THE WATERS OF THE SOUTH ATLANTIC OCEAN; AND TO AMEND SECTION 50-5-2730, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE APPLICATION OF FEDERAL FISHING REGULATIONS IN THE WATERS OF THIS STATE, SO AS TO REMOVE THE EXCEPTION FOR COBIA.

Rep. KING made the Point of Order that the Bill was improperly before the House for consideration since its number and title have not been printed in the House Calendar at least one statewide legislative day prior to second reading.
The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE sustained the Point of Order.

The following Bill was taken up:

H. 3549 (Word version) -- Reps. Ott, Kirby, Bryant and Pope: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-9-40, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TO OFFER A LICENSE, PERMIT, OR TAG MADE OF A DURABLE MATERIAL AND TO ESTABLISH A FEE; AND TO AMEND SECTION 50-9-50, RELATING TO THE POSSESSION OF A HUNTING OR FISHING LICENSE, PERMIT, OR STAMP, SO AS TO ALLOW FOR A PERSON HUNTING OR FISHING TO DISPLAY THEIR LICENSE, PERMIT, OR STAMP ELECTRONICALLY.

Rep. HART made the Point of Order that the Bill was improperly before the House for consideration since its number and title have not been printed in the House Calendar at least one statewide legislative day prior to second reading.
The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE sustained the Point of Order.

The following Bill was taken up:

H. 3548 (Word version) -- Reps. Ott and Forrest: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-13-670, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE POSSESSION OF NONGAME DEVICES, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROHIBITION ON THE POSSESSION OF A GAME FISH DEVICE WHILE POSSESSING OR USING A NONGAME DEVICE.

Rep. HART made the Point of Order that the Bill was improperly before the House for consideration since its number and title have not been printed in the House Calendar at least one statewide legislative day prior to second reading.
The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE sustained the Point of Order.

Upon the withdrawal of requests for debate by Reps. MCGARRY, B. NEWTON, OREMUS, HEWITT, YOW, WEST, FRY and CALHOON, the following Bill was taken up:

H. 3502 (Word version) -- Reps. Long, Burns, Haddon, V. S. Moss, Calhoon and Govan: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-1538, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO EMERGENCY SCENE MANAGEMENT, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF THE TERM "EMERGENCY SERVICES PERSONNEL" TO INCLUDE TOW TRUCK OPERATORS.

Rep. HILL requested debate on the Bill.

The following Bill was taken up:

S. 1 (Word version) -- Senators Grooms, Verdin, Kimbrell, Garrett, Martin, Shealy, Climer, Corbin, Cromer, Rice, Adams, Hembree, Gambrell, Loftis and Campsen: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, TO ENACT THE "SOUTH CAROLINA FETAL HEARTBEAT AND PROTECTION FROM ABORTION ACT" BY ADDING ARTICLE 6 TO CHAPTER 41, TITLE 44 SO AS TO REQUIRE TESTING FOR A DETECTABLE FETAL HEARTBEAT BEFORE AN ABORTION IS PERFORMED ON A PREGNANT WOMAN, TO PROHIBIT THE PERFORMANCE OF AN ABORTION IF A FETAL HEARTBEAT IS DETECTED, TO PROVIDE MEDICAL EMERGENCY AND OTHER EXCEPTIONS, TO REQUIRE CERTAIN DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDKEEPING BY PHYSICIANS PERFORMING ABORTIONS, TO REQUIRE PHYSICIANS TO NOTIFY LAW ENFORCEMENT AFTER PERFORMING AN ABORTION IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, TO CREATE A CIVIL ACTION FOR A PREGNANT WOMAN UPON WHOM AN ABORTION IS PERFORMED, TO CREATE CRIMINAL PENALTIES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES; TO AMEND SECTION 44-41-460, RELATING TO THE REQUIRED REPORTING OF ABORTION DATA TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL, SO AS TO ADD REPORTING OF FETAL HEARTBEAT TESTING AND PATIENT MEDICAL CONDITION DATA; TO AMEND SECTION 44-41-330, RELATING TO A PREGNANT WOMAN'S RIGHT TO KNOW CERTAIN PREGNANCY INFORMATION, SO AS TO REQUIRE NOTIFICATION OF THE DETECTION OF A FETAL HEARTBEAT; AND TO AMEND SECTION 44-41-60, RELATING TO ABORTION REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, SO AS TO ADD REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. - ratified title

Rep. HART raised the Point of Order on S. 1 (Word version) that Rule 5.1 requires the Speaker to refer the Bill to the appropriate committee. He stated that the Senate referred the Bill to the Medical Affairs Committee, but the Speaker had referred the Bill to the Judiciary Committee. He further stated that the Speakers referral of the Bill was inappropriate and that he should have referred the Bill to the Medical, Military and Municipal Affairs Committee.
The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE stated that the Point of Order came too late and should have been raised at the time the Bill was referred to committee. The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE also stated that the Senate does not determine where the House Speaker refers legislation and that the Speaker had referred the Bill to the committee he deemed appropriate. The Point of Order is overruled.

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

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Allison                  Atkinson                 Bailey
Ballentine               Bannister                Bennett
Blackwell                Bradley                  Brittain
Bryant                   Burns                    Bustos
Calhoon                  Chumley                  Collins
B. Cox                   W. Cox                   Crawford
Dabney                   Daning                   Davis
Elliott                  Erickson                 Felder
Forrest                  Fry                      Gagnon
Gatch                    Gilliam                  Haddon
Hardee                   Herbkersman              Hewitt
Hixon                    Huggins                  Hyde
J. E. Johnson            Jones                    Kimmons
Ligon                    Long                     Lowe
Lucas                    Magnuson                 Martin
May                      McCabe                   McCravy
McGarry                  McGinnis                 T. Moore
Morgan                   D. C. Moss               Murphy
B. Newton                W. Newton                Nutt
Oremus                   Ott                      Pope
Sandifer                 Simrill                  G. M. Smith
G. R. Smith              M. M. Smith              Taylor
Thayer                   Trantham                 West
White                    Whitmire                 Willis
Wooten                   Yow                      

Those who voted in the negative are:

Alexander                Anderson                 Bernstein
Brawley                  Carter                   Clyburn
Cobb-Hunter              Cogswell                 Dillard
Garvin                   Gilliard                 Govan
Hart                     Henderson-Myers          Henegan
Hosey                    Howard                   Jefferson
J. L. Johnson            K. O. Johnson            King
Kirby                    Matthews                 McDaniel
McKnight                 Murray                   Parks
Pendarvis                Rivers                   Robinson
Rose                     Rutherford               Stavrinakis
Thigpen                  Weeks                    Wetmore
Wheeler                  R. Williams              S. Williams

The 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.

Due to being hospitalized with Covid-19, I was unable to vote for S. 1 (Word version), if able, I would have voted 'yes' on the Bill.

Rep. Jackie Hayes

In accordance with House Rule 7.6, I respectfully submit the following relative to my refusal to vote on S 1:
1. Among an array of other concerns, S 1 intrudes too far into relationships between women and their physicians and fails to sufficiently protect women in cases of ectopic pregnancies.
2. This bill has been determined unconstitutional - and consequently unenforceable- in every state where it has been enacted (Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota and Ohio).
3. Louisiana passed this law to be effective upon the United States Supreme Court ruling rendering such a law enforceable.
4. Efforts have been to amend S 1 bill in similar fashion failed, and it is abundantly clear that no amendments in any form will be entertained by the majority.
5. Use of taxpayer funds to litigate unconstitutional legislation does not represent a wise or prudent course of action.
6. Based on past experience and awareness of current intent of the majority, there is simply no opportunity for meaningful debate or discussion. Rather than engaging in meaningless, purely dilatory "debate", I decline to vote on S 1.

Rep. Will Wheeler

House District 50

The following Concurrent Resolution was taken up:

S. 492 (Word version) -- Senators Jackson, Scott, Harpootlian, McLeod and McElveen: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NAME THE PORTION OF SHOP ROAD IN RICHLAND COUNTY FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH PINEVIEW DRIVE TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH LONGWOOD ROAD THE "HONORABLE JIMMY C. BALES HIGHWAY" AND TO ERECT APPROPRIATE SIGNS OR MARKERS ALONG THIS PORTION OF HIGHWAY CONTAINING THESE WORDS.

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

The following Concurrent Resolution was taken up:

H. 3739 (Word version) -- Reps. J. L. Johnson, Brawley and Henegan: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NAME THE PORTION OF GARNERS FERRY ROAD IN RICHLAND COUNTY FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH UNITED STATES HIGHWAY 601 TO THE POINT WHERE IT CROSSES THE WATEREE RIVER "LIEUTENANT ULYSSES FLEMMING MEMORIAL HIGHWAY" AND ERECT APPROPRIATE SIGNS OR MARKERS ALONG THIS PORTION OF HIGHWAY CONTAINING THESE WORDS.

The Concurrent Resolution was adopted and sent to the Senate.

The following Concurrent Resolution was taken up:

H. 3785 (Word version) -- Reps. J. Moore, Jefferson, Daning, Davis, Matthews and M. M. Smith: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NAME THE PORTION OF OAKLEY ROAD IN BERKELEY COUNTY FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH UNITED STATES HIGHWAY 52 TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH OLD FORT ROAD "DR. TONIA AIKEN TAYLOR MEMORIAL HIGHWAY" AND ERECT APPROPRIATE MARKERS OR SIGNS ALONG THIS PORTION OF HIGHWAY CONTAINING THESE WORDS.

The Concurrent Resolution was adopted and sent to the Senate.

The following Concurrent Resolution was taken up:

H. 3801 (Word version) -- Rep. Brawley: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NAME THE PORTION OF SOUTH CAROLINA HIGHWAY 48 IN RICHLAND COUNTY FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH AVALON STREET TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH PINEVIEW ROAD "REVEREND JAMES JEFFCOAT MEMORIAL HIGHWAY" AND TO ERECT APPROPRIATE MARKERS OR SIGNS ALONG THIS PORTION OF HIGHWAY CONTAINING THESE WORDS.

The Concurrent Resolution was adopted and sent to the Senate.

The following Concurrent Resolution was taken up:

H. 3808 (Word version) -- Rep. Alexander: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NAME THE PORTION OF RAVENEL STREET IN THE CITY OF FLORENCE FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH CHEVES STREET TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH PINE STREET "REVEREND DOCTOR NORMAN GAMBLE WAY" AND ERECT APPROPRIATE MARKERS OR SIGNS ALONG THIS PORTION OF HIGHWAY CONTAINING THESE WORDS.

The Concurrent Resolution was adopted and sent to the Senate.

The motion period was dispensed with on motion of Rep. FORREST.

The following Bill was taken up:

H. 3588 (Word version) -- Reps. Allison, Felder and Carter: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 59-149-50, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE CRITERIA FOR LIFE SCHOLARSHIPS, SO AS TO STRENGTHEN ENGLISH, MATHEMATICS, AND COMPUTER SCIENCE FOUNDATIONS OF HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS SEEKING LIFE SCHOLARSHIPS BY REQUIRING SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF CERTAIN ENGLISH AND MATHEMATICS OR COMPUTER SCIENCE COURSEWORK DURING THEIR SENIOR YEARS, AND TO EXCLUDE MEMBERS OF THE 2022-2023 SENIOR CLASS FROM THESE REQUIREMENTS.

The Committee on Education and Public Works proposed the following Amendment No. 1 to H. 3588 (Word version) (COUNCIL\WAB\3588C001. RT.WAB21):
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/   SECTION   1.   Section 59-149-50(A) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:

"(A)   To be eligible for a LIFE Scholarship, a student must be either a student who has graduated from a high school located in this State having earned at least one unit of credit in mathematics or computer science and one unit of credit in English/language arts which may be accomplished by dual enrollment during the senior year beginning July 1, 2025, a student who has completed at least three of the final four years of high school within this State, a home school student who has successfully completed a high school home school program in this State in the manner required by law, a student who has graduated from a preparatory high school outside this State, while a dependent of a parent or guardian who is a legal resident of this State and has custody of the dependent, or a student whose parent or guardian has served in or has retired from one of the United States Armed Forces within the last four years, paid income taxes in this State for a majority of the years of service, and is a resident of this State. These students also must meet the requirements of subsection (B) and be eligible for in-state tuition and fees as determined pursuant to Chapter 112, Title 59 and applicable regulations. In addition, the student must have graduated from high school with a minimum of a 3.0 cumulative grade average on a 4.0 scale and have scored 1100 or better on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) or have the equivalent ACT score 22 on the ACT; provided that, if the student is to attend such a public or independent two-year college or university in this State, including a technical college, the SAT/ACT requirement does not apply. If a student chooses to attend such a public or independent institution of this State and does not make the required SAT/ACT score or the required high school grade point average, as applicable, the student may earn a LIFE Scholarship after his freshman year if he meets the grade point average and semester credit hour requirements of subsection (B). For the purpose of meeting the rank criteria pursuant to this section, the existing high school rank of a South Carolina resident attending an out-of-state high school may be used provided it is calculated pursuant to a state-approved, standardized grading scale at the respective out-of-state high school. If the Commission on Higher Education determines that a state-approved standardized grading scale substantially deviates from the South Carolina Uniform Grading Scale, the state-approved standardized grading scale shall not be used to meet the eligibility requirements for the LIFE Scholarship."
SECTION   2.   Section 59-149-50 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding an appropriately lettered subsection to read:

"( )   Verification of a student earning at least one unit of credit in mathematics or computer science and one unit of English/language arts during the senior year of high school as required by subsection (A) must be evidenced by an easily identifiable and uniform notation developed by the State Department of Education in consultation with the Commission on Higher Education. This notation must be prominently included on an eligible student's official high school transcript."
SECTION   3.   In the event that the SAT or ACT changes their respective scoring ranges, the Commission on Higher Education shall adjust the minimum scores required by this chapter in order to ensure equivalency.
SECTION   4.   The provisions of this SECTION do not apply to students in the senior class of the 2024-2025 School Year.
SECTION   5.     This act takes effect July 1, 2023.   /
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

Rep. FELDER spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. GOVAN spoke against the amendment.
Rep. GOVAN spoke against the amendment.

Rep. ALLISON moved to adjourn debate on the Bill until Tuesday, February 23, which was agreed to.

The following Bill was taken up:

H. 3610 (Word version) -- Reps. Lucas, Allison, Felder, Hixon, Taylor, Calhoon and W. Newton: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 16 TO CHAPTER 18, TITLE 59 SO AS TO PROVIDE REVISED ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

The Committee on Education and Public Works proposed the following Amendment No. 1 to H. 3610 (Word version) (COUNCIL\WAB\3610C002. RT.WAB21), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/   SECTION   1.   Chapter 18, Title 59 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

Section 59-18-1615.   As used in this article:

(1)     'Chronically underperforming school' means:

(a)   an elementary school or middle school where fewer than twenty-five percent of its students are at 'meets' or 'exceeds expectations' on the English/language arts and mathematics SC READY assessment or its successor assessment for at least three consecutive years; or

(b)   a high school where fewer than twenty-five percent of its students receive a grade of 'D' or better on the End of Course assessments in English and mathematics, or fewer than twenty-five percent of its students fail to achieve at least a 'bronze' level on the career readiness assessment for three consecutive years.

(2)     'School district' is defined pursuant to Section 59-1-160.

(3)     'Turnaround plan' means a plan outlining goals for a school or district's educational improvement that includes specific strategies designed to increase student achievement and measures to evaluate the success of implementation of the plan so that the school or district is no longer underperforming or chronically underperforming. The department is required to provide schools and districts with a template to complete the turnaround plan.

(4)     'Underperforming district' means a district in which sixty-five percent or more of the schools in the district are considered to be 'underperforming' as defined in item (5).

(5)     'Underperforming school' means:

(a)   an elementary school or middle school where fewer than twenty-five percent of its students are at 'meets' or 'exceeds expectations' on the English/language arts and mathematics SC READY assessment or its successor; or

(b)   a high school where fewer than twenty-five percent of its students receive a grade of 'D' or better on the End of Course assessments in English and mathematics, or fewer than twenty-five percent of its students fail to achieve at least a 'bronze' level on the career readiness assessment.

Section 59-18-1620.   (A)   The department shall implement a tiered system for providing technical and other assistance, professional development, and monitoring for schools and districts. By December thirty-first of each year, the State Superintendent of Education shall report on the tiered system's progress relating to assistance provided to schools and local school districts to the General Assembly. The report shall include data documenting the impact of the assistance on student academic achievement, college and career readiness, and high school graduation rates.

(B)   As a component of determining if and where assistance and changes are necessary, the department shall:

(1)   monitor the professional development of teachers, staff, and administrators provided by or approved through districts and schools;

(2)   monitor local school board operations for efficient and effective management; and

(3)   identify and provide a summary of improvements and changes to the school districts, district school boards, and other involved parties.

Section 59-18-1625.   (A)   Upon a school or district's designation as an underperforming school or district, the department shall immediately place the school, district, or both into a tiered status to provide technical assistance. The department shall notify the underperforming school or district and the district superintendent of the tiered status.

(B)(1)   Upon receiving notification from the department, the district superintendent, in consultation with school and community stakeholders, must review and revise the school and/or district's strategic plan with the assistance of the School Improvement Council, as established in Section 59-20-60, to include a turnaround plan component for any underperforming school or district.

(2)   The turnaround plan component of the revised strategic plan must:

(a)   be based on data or needs assessments to identify specific improvement strategies related to underperforming school turnaround;

(b)   include, at a minimum, specific and measurable goals, actions, activities, resource needs, student achievement goals, professional development plans, and academic interventions that are reasonable and necessary to improve student progress toward achieving the Profile of the Graduate for each school;

(c)   include broad-based community input, including, but not limited to, input from parents, teachers, principals, local school board members, businesses, community leaders, health providers, social services agencies, school improvement councils, or early childhood providers; and

(d)   be submitted by the district superintendent to the local board of trustees for approval.

(C)   Upon approval by the local board of trustees, the turnaround plan component of the revised strategic plan must be submitted to the department for review and approval. Thereafter, the district superintendent and the local board of trustees shall annually submit updates to the department regarding the implementation of the turnaround or revised strategic plan, including metrics assessing the impact of the activities included in the plan.

(D)   Once approved by the department, the revised strategic plan must be prominently posted on the respective websites of the department, district, and school. The department shall monitor the district's implementation of the revised strategic plan and evaluation of students' academic progress, as provided for in the plan, and shall apprise the State Board of Education of the district's progress once a quarter.

(E)   For a school receiving an underperforming rating, the district and local board of trustees must work with the school principal to inform the parents of enrolled children of the rating. The notification must outline the steps in the revised strategic plan to improve performance, including the support that the local district board of trustees has agreed to give the plan.

Section 59-18-1630.   Upon the release of the annual report card issued pursuant to Section 59-18-900, the department shall notify the appropriate legislative delegation of any school receiving an overall unsatisfactory rating. The local school board and district superintendent with jurisdiction over the unsatisfactory school shall:

(1)   notify parents of students in writing and electronically;

(2)   schedule, prominently publicize, and hold a public meeting to explain the school's rating, its implications, how it must develop and implement a revised strategic plan for improvement, and how it will involve and engage the community in its plans, within thirty days of receiving the rating;

(3)   immediately review and revise its strategic plan, which must incorporate and focus on turnaround plan components for each school designated as unsatisfactory in accordance with the template and guidelines provided by the department; and

(4)   upon department approval, immediately list the revised strategic plan as a topic on the local district board meeting agenda at least once a quarter.

Section 59-18-1635.   (A)   The State Superintendent of Education may seek a state-of-education emergency declaration in a school for which he has a capacity to serve under the following circumstances:

(1)   the school is chronically underperforming;

(2)   the school's accreditation is denied;

(3)   the district refuses to submit a turnaround plan; or

(4)   the State Superintendent of Education determines that a school's turnaround plan results are insufficient.

(B)   If the State Superintendent of Education determines that a state-of-education emergency declaration is justified, then he must request that the State Board of Education meet to approve or disapprove the declaration. The State Board of Education must meet within ten business days of the request to approve or disapprove the declaration.

(C)   Upon approval of a state-of-education emergency declaration, the State Superintendent of Education shall:

(1)   notify the district superintendent, local school board, local legislative delegation, and Governor; and

(2)   assume management of the school.

(D)   The district superintendent and members of the local district board may appeal the State Board of Education's approval of the declaration to the Administrative Law Court within ten business days of receipt of the notice of the declaration. A request for a hearing must be made in accordance with the court's rules, provided, however, that a request for a contested case hearing for an emergency declaration does not stay the declaration.

(E)   Once a school subject to subsection (C) has met annual targets identified in the revised strategic plan for sustained improvement for a minimum of three consecutive years, the State Superintendent of Education shall submit to the State Board of Education documentation of such. Upon an affirmative vote by the State Board of Education to end the state-of-education emergency, the department, in consultation with the district and local board of trustees, shall develop a transition plan and timeline for returning management of the school to the district.

Section 59-18-1640.   (A)   The State Superintendent of Education may seek a state-of-education emergency declaration in a district for which he has a capacity to serve under the following circumstances:

(1)   the district is identified as underperforming for three consecutive years or for five out of the last seven years;

(2)   the district's accreditation is denied;

(3)   the Superintendent of Education determines that a district's turnaround plan results are insufficient; or

(4)   the district is classified as being in a fiscal emergency status pursuant to Section 59-20-90, or financial mismanagement resulting in a deficit has occurred.

(B)   If the State Superintendent of Education determines that a state-of-education emergency declaration is justified, then he must request that the State Board of Education meet to approve or disapprove the declaration. The State Board of Education must meet within ten days of the request to approve or disapprove the declaration.

(C)   Upon approval of a state-of-education emergency, the State Superintendent of Education shall:

(1)   notify the State Board of Education, the district superintendent, local school board, local legislative delegation, and Governor; and

(2)   assume management of the district.

(D)   The district superintendent and members of the local district board may appeal the State Board of Education's approval of the declaration to the Administrative Law Court within ten business days of receipt of the notice of the declaration. A request for a hearing must be made in accordance with the court's rules, provided, however, that a request for a contested case hearing for an emergency declaration does not stay the declaration.

(E)(1)   Upon the State Board of Education's approval of a state-of-education emergency declaration, the local district board of trustees is dissolved. The State Superintendent of Education shall assume the authority and responsibilities of the district superintendent and local board of trustees until district management is transitioned to the jurisdiction of an interim local district board of trustees appointed pursuant to this section.

(2)(a)   Once a district subject to subsection (C) has met annual targets identified in the district's revised strategic plan for sustained improvement for a minimum of three consecutive years, the State Superintendent of Education shall submit to the State Board of Education documentation of such. The State Board of Education shall approve that an interim local district board of trustees be appointed. The interim local district board of trustees shall consist of five members appointed in the following manner with a chairman elected by the appointees:

(i)   one member appointed by the Governor;

(ii)   one member appointed by the local legislative delegation; and

(iii)   three members appointed by the State Superintendent of Education in consultation with the local legislative delegation.

(b)   All appointees must be residents of the school district for which the interim appointments are being made. In making appointments to the interim local district board of trustees, the appointing authority shall take into account race, gender, and other demographic factors, such as residence in a rural or urban area, so as to represent, to the greatest extent possible, all segments of the population of the affected district; however, consideration of these factors in making an appointment in no way creates a cause of action or basis for an employee grievance for a person appointed or for a person who fails to be appointed. The members of the interim local district board of trustees shall represent the educational needs of the district.

(c)   The interim local district board shall be appointed to begin serving within forty-five days of the State Board of Education's approval of the appointments of the interim local district board and shall serve for a minimum of three years.

(d)   Any vacancy shall be filled in the original manner of appointment.

(3)   For a minimum of three years and until the State Board of Education votes to end the state-of-education emergency, the interim local district board shall remain in place, and its appointed members shall continue to serve.

(F)(1)   Upon an affirmative vote by the State Board of Education to end the state-of-education emergency, the department, in consultation with the district and interim board, shall develop a transition plan and timeline for returning management of the district to a local board of trustees. Beginning with the next regularly scheduled election, local district board of trustees members will be elected or appointed pursuant to statutory requirements.

(2)   Upon the swearing in of a new local district board of trustees, the declaration of a state-of-education emergency shall expire, and the powers and duties of the district superintendent and local district school board of trustees are restored.

(G)   Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a district in a state-of-education emergency pursuant to this section shall have its fiscal authority relating to taxing authority and levying millage transferred to its county council until the state-of-education emergency is lifted. County council may not exceed millage limitations established pursuant to Section 6-1-320 or otherwise established prior to the state-of-education emergency declaration."
SECTION   2.   Article 15, Chapter 18, Title 59 of the 1976 Code is repealed.
SECTION   3.   This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor. /
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

Rep. FELDER explained the amendment.

Rep. FELDER spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. MCKNIGHT spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. MCKNIGHT spoke in favor of the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

Rep. KING proposed the following Amendment No. 4 to H. 3610 (Word version) (COUNCIL\VR\3610C001.BH.VR21):
Amend the bill, as and if amended, SECTION 1, by adding a new Section at the end to read:
/   Section 59-18-1650. If the State Board of Education takes over a school or school district and the school or school district continues to be chronically underperforming or underperforming as defined in this article, the State Superintendent of Education must be removed by the Governor.   /
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

Rep. KING explained the amendment.

Rep. HART spoke in favor of the amendment.

Rep. HART moved to adjourn debate on the Bill until Tuesday, February 23.

Rep. SIMRILL moved to table the motion.

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

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Alexander                Allison                  Bailey
Bannister                Bennett                  Bernstein
Blackwell                Bradley                  Brittain
Bryant                   Burns                    Bustos
Calhoon                  Carter                   Chumley
Collins                  B. Cox                   W. Cox
Crawford                 Dabney                   Daning
Davis                    Elliott                  Erickson
Felder                   Forrest                  Fry
Gagnon                   Gatch                    Gilliam
Haddon                   Hardee                   Herbkersman
Hewitt                   Hixon                    Huggins
Hyde                     J. E. Johnson            Jones
Kimmons                  Kirby                    Ligon
Long                     Lowe                     Lucas
Magnuson                 Martin                   May
McCabe                   McCravy                  McGarry
McGinnis                 McKnight                 T. Moore
Morgan                   D. C. Moss               Murphy
B. Newton                W. Newton                Nutt
Oremus                   Pope                     Sandifer
Simrill                  G. M. Smith              G. R. Smith
M. M. Smith              Taylor                   Thayer
Trantham                 West                     Wheeler
White                    Whitmire                 Willis
Wooten                   Yow                      

Those who voted in the negative are:

Anderson                 Brawley                  Cobb-Hunter
Dillard                  Garvin                   Gilliard
Govan                    Hart                     Henderson-Myers
Henegan                  Hill                     Hosey
Jefferson                J. L. Johnson            K. O. Johnson
King                     Matthews                 McDaniel
J. Moore                 Murray                   Ott
Parks                    Pendarvis                Rivers
Rose                     Rutherford               Tedder
Thigpen                  Weeks                    Wetmore
R. Williams              S. Williams              

So, the motion to adjourn debate was tabled.

The question then recurred to the adoption of the amendment.

Rep. COLLINS moved to table the amendment.

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

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Alexander                Allison                  Bailey
Bannister                Bennett                  Blackwell
Bradley                  Brittain                 Bryant
Burns                    Bustos                   Calhoon
Carter                   Chumley                  Collins
B. Cox                   W. Cox                   Crawford
Dabney                   Daning                   Davis
Elliott                  Erickson                 Felder
Forrest                  Fry                      Gagnon
Gatch                    Gilliam                  Govan
Haddon                   Hardee                   Henderson-Myers
Herbkersman              Hewitt                   Hixon
Huggins                  Hyde                     J. E. Johnson
Jones                    Kimmons                  Kirby
Ligon                    Long                     Lowe
Lucas                    Magnuson                 Martin
May                      McCabe                   McGarry
McGinnis                 McKnight                 T. Moore
Morgan                   D. C. Moss               Murphy
B. Newton                W. Newton                Nutt
Oremus                   Ott                      Pope
Sandifer                 Simrill                  G. M. Smith
G. R. Smith              M. M. Smith              Stavrinakis
Taylor                   Thayer                   Trantham
West                     Wetmore                  Wheeler
White                    Whitmire                 Willis
Wooten                   Yow                      

Those who voted in the negative are:

Anderson                 Bernstein                Brawley
Cobb-Hunter              Dillard                  Garvin
Gilliard                 Hart                     Henegan
Hill                     Hosey                    Jefferson
J. L. Johnson            K. O. Johnson            King
Matthews                 McDaniel                 J. Moore
Murray                   Parks                    Pendarvis
Rivers                   Rose                     Rutherford
Tedder                   Thigpen                  Weeks
R. Williams              S. Williams              

So, the amendment was tabled.

Rep. KING proposed the following Amendment No. 5 to H. 3610 (Word version) (COUNCIL\VR\3610C003.BH.VR21):
Amend the bill, as and if amended, SECTION 1, by adding a new Section at the end to read:
/   Section 59-18-1650. If the State Board of Education takes over a school or school district and the school or school district continues to be chronically underperforming or underperforming as defined in this article, the State Superintendent of Education may be removed by the Governor.   /
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

Rep. KING explained the amendment.

Further proceedings were interrupted by the House standing at ease.

The House stood at ease subject to the ratification of Acts.

At 1:53 p.m. the House resumed, the SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE in the Chair.

The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE granted Rep. G. M. SMITH a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.

The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE granted Rep. WHITMIRE a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.

The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE granted Rep. WHITE a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.

The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE granted Rep. W. COX a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.

The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE granted Rep. WETMORE a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.

Rep. R. WILLIAMS moved that the House do now adjourn.

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

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Brittain                 Dillard                  Gilliard
Henderson-Myers          Henegan                  Hill
Hosey                    J. L. Johnson            King
Matthews                 McDaniel                 J. Moore
Murray                   Pendarvis                Rivers
Rose                     Tedder                   Weeks
R. Williams                                       

Those who voted in the negative are:

Alexander                Allison                  Anderson
Bailey                   Bennett                  Bernstein
Blackwell                Brawley                  Bryant
Burns                    Bustos                   Calhoon
Chumley                  Collins                  B. Cox
Dabney                   Daning                   Davis
Elliott                  Erickson                 Felder
Forrest                  Fry                      Gagnon
Garvin                   Gatch                    Gilliam
Haddon                   Hardee                   Herbkersman
Hewitt                   Hixon                    Howard
Huggins                  Hyde                     J. E. Johnson
Kimmons                  Kirby                    Ligon
Long                     Lucas                    Magnuson
Martin                   May                      McCabe
McCravy                  McGarry                  McGinnis
T. Moore                 Morgan                   D. C. Moss
Murphy                   B. Newton                W. Newton
Nutt                     Oremus                   Ott
Pope                     Sandifer                 Simrill
G. R. Smith              M. M. Smith              Taylor
Thayer                   Trantham                 West
Willis                   Wooten                   Yow

So, the House refused to adjourn.

Debate was resumed on the following Bill, the pending question being the consideration of amendment number 5:

H. 3610 (Word version) -- Reps. Lucas, Allison, Felder, Hixon, Taylor, Calhoon and W. Newton: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 16 TO CHAPTER 18, TITLE 59 SO AS TO PROVIDE REVISED ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

Rep. KING proposed the following Amendment No. 5 to H. 3610 (Word version) (COUNCIL\VR\3610C003.BH.VR21):
Amend the bill, as and if amended, SECTION 1, by adding a new Section at the end to read:
/   Section 59-18-1650. If the State Board of Education takes over a school or school district and the school or school district continues to be chronically underperforming or underperforming as defined in this article, the State Superintendent of Education may be removed by the Governor.   /
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

Rep. KING spoke in favor of the amendment.

Rep. COLLINS moved to table the amendment.

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

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Alexander                Allison                  Bailey
Bannister                Bennett                  Blackwell
Bradley                  Brittain                 Bryant
Burns                    Bustos                   Calhoon
Chumley                  Collins                  Crawford
Dabney                   Daning                   Davis
Elliott                  Erickson                 Felder
Forrest                  Fry                      Gagnon
Gatch                    Gilliam                  Govan
Haddon                   Hardee                   Herbkersman
Hewitt                   Hixon                    Huggins
Hyde                     J. E. Johnson            Jones
Kimmons                  Kirby                    Ligon
Long                     Lucas                    Magnuson
Martin                   May                      McCabe
McCravy                  McGarry                  McGinnis
McKnight                 T. Moore                 Morgan
D. C. Moss               Murphy                   B. Newton
W. Newton                Nutt                     Oremus
Ott                      Pope                     Sandifer
Simrill                  M. M. Smith              Stavrinakis
Taylor                   Thayer                   Trantham
West                     Willis                   Wooten
Yow                                               

Those who voted in the negative are:

Anderson                 Bernstein                Brawley
Cobb-Hunter              Dillard                  Garvin
Gilliard                 Henderson-Myers          Henegan
Hill                     Hosey                    J. L. Johnson
K. O. Johnson            King                     Matthews
McDaniel                 J. Moore                 Murray
Pendarvis                Rivers                   Rose
Tedder                   Weeks                    Wheeler
R. Williams                                       

So, the amendment was tabled.

Rep. BRAWLEY spoke against the Bill.

Rep. MATTHEWS moved that the House do now adjourn.

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

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Anderson                 Brawley                  Cobb-Hunter
Dillard                  Felder                   Garvin
Gilliard                 Govan                    Henderson-Myers
Henegan                  Hill                     Hosey
J. L. Johnson            K. O. Johnson            King
Matthews                 J. Moore                 Murray
Ott                      Pendarvis                Rivers
Stavrinakis              Tedder                   Weeks
R. Williams                                       

Those who voted in the negative are:

Alexander                Allison                  Bailey
Bannister                Bennett                  Bernstein
Blackwell                Brittain                 Bryant
Burns                    Bustos                   Calhoon
Chumley                  Collins                  B. Cox
Crawford                 Dabney                   Daning
Davis                    Erickson                 Forrest
Gagnon                   Gatch                    Gilliam
Haddon                   Hardee                   Herbkersman
Hewitt                   Hixon                    Huggins
Hyde                     J. E. Johnson            Jones
Kimmons                  Kirby                    Ligon
Long                     Lucas                    Magnuson
Martin                   May                      McCabe
McCravy                  McGarry                  McGinnis
McKnight                 T. Moore                 Morgan
D. C. Moss               Murphy                   B. Newton
W. Newton                Nutt                     Oremus
Pope                     Rose                     Sandifer
Simrill                  G. R. Smith              M. M. Smith
Taylor                   Thayer                   Trantham
West                     Wheeler                  Willis
Wooten                   Yow                      

So, the House refused to adjourn.

Rep. BRAWLEY continued speaking.

The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE granted Rep. ELLIOTT a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.

Rep. BRAWLEY continued speaking.

Rep. MATTHEWS moved that the House do now adjourn.

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

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Anderson                 Brawley                  Cobb-Hunter
Daning                   Dillard                  Garvin
Gilliard                 Govan                    Henderson-Myers
Henegan                  Hill                     Hosey
Howard                   J. L. Johnson            K. O. Johnson
King                     Matthews                 Murray
Ott                      Pendarvis                Rivers
Stavrinakis              Tedder                   Weeks
R. Williams              S. Williams              

Those who voted in the negative are:

Alexander                Allison                  Bailey
Bannister                Bennett                  Bernstein
Blackwell                Brittain                 Bryant
Burns                    Bustos                   Calhoon
Chumley                  Collins                  B. Cox
Crawford                 Dabney                   Davis
Erickson                 Felder                   Forrest
Fry                      Gagnon                   Gatch
Gilliam                  Haddon                   Hardee
Herbkersman              Hewitt                   Hixon
Huggins                  Hyde                     J. E. Johnson
Kimmons                  Kirby                    Ligon
Long                     Lucas                    Magnuson
Martin                   May                      McCabe
McCravy                  McGarry                  McGinnis
McKnight                 T. Moore                 Morgan
D. C. Moss               Murphy                   B. Newton
W. Newton                Nutt                     Oremus
Pope                     Rose                     Sandifer
Simrill                  G. R. Smith              M. M. Smith
Taylor                   Thayer                   Trantham
West                     Wheeler                  Willis
Wooten                   Yow                      

So, the House refused to adjourn.

Rep. BRAWLEY continued speaking.

Rep. PENDARVIS spoke against the Bill.

The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE granted Rep. GILLIARD a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.

Rep. PENDARVIS continued speaking.

Rep. J. L. JOHNSON moved that the House do now adjourn.

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

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Anderson                 Brawley                  Garvin
Govan                    Henderson-Myers          Henegan
Hill                     Hosey                    Howard
J. L. Johnson            K. O. Johnson            King
Matthews                 Pendarvis                Rivers
Stavrinakis              Tedder                   Weeks
R. Williams              S. Williams              

Those who voted in the negative are:

Alexander                Allison                  Bailey
Bannister                Bennett                  Bernstein
Blackwell                Brittain                 Bryant
Burns                    Bustos                   Calhoon
Chumley                  Collins                  B. Cox
Crawford                 Dabney                   Daning
Davis                    Erickson                 Felder
Forrest                  Fry                      Gagnon
Gatch                    Gilliam                  Haddon
Hardee                   Herbkersman              Hewitt
Hixon                    Huggins                  Hyde
J. E. Johnson            Jones                    Kimmons
Kirby                    Long                     Lucas
Magnuson                 Martin                   May
McCabe                   McCravy                  McGarry
McGinnis                 McKnight                 T. Moore
Morgan                   D. C. Moss               Murphy
B. Newton                W. Newton                Nutt
Oremus                   Pope                     Rose
Sandifer                 G. R. Smith              M. M. Smith
Taylor                   Thayer                   Trantham
West                     Wheeler                  Willis
Wooten                   Yow                      

So, the House refused to adjourn.

The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE granted Rep. ANDERSON a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.

The SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE granted Rep. BALLENTINE a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.

Rep. PENDARVIS continued speaking.

Rep. HILL spoke against the Bill.

Rep. HILL requested that the Bill be read in its entirety.

The Reading Clerk read the Bill in its entirety.

The question recurred to the passage of the Bill.

The yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Alexander                Allison                  Bailey
Bannister                Bennett                  Bernstein
Blackwell                Brittain                 Bryant
Burns                    Bustos                   Calhoon
Chumley                  Collins                  B. Cox
Crawford                 Dabney                   Daning
Davis                    Erickson                 Felder
Forrest                  Fry                      Gagnon
Gatch                    Gilliam                  Haddon
Hardee                   Herbkersman              Hewitt
Hixon                    Huggins                  Hyde
J. E. Johnson            K. O. Johnson            Jones
Kimmons                  Kirby                    Ligon
Long                     Lucas                    Magnuson
Martin                   Matthews                 May
McCabe                   McCravy                  McGarry
McGinnis                 McKnight                 T. Moore
Morgan                   D. C. Moss               Murphy
B. Newton                W. Newton                Nutt
Oremus                   Pope                     Rose
Sandifer                 Simrill                  G. R. Smith
M. M. Smith              Stavrinakis              Taylor
Thayer                   Trantham                 West
Wheeler                  Willis                   Wooten
Yow                                               

Those who voted in the negative are:

Brawley                  Cobb-Hunter              Dillard
Garvin                   Govan                    Henderson-Myers
Henegan                  Hill                     Hosey
Howard                   J. L. Johnson            King
McDaniel                 Ott                      Pendarvis
Rivers                   Tedder                   Thigpen
Weeks                    R. Williams              S. Williams

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

I was not in the House Chamber for the vote on second reading on H. 3610 (Word version). I support the Bill and would have voted for it.

Rep. Jason Elliott

I was temporarily out of the Chamber on constituent business during the vote on H. 3610 (Word version). If I had been present, I would have voted against the Bill.

Rep. JA Moore

Pursuant to an invitation the Honorable Speaker and House of Representatives appeared in the Senate Chamber on February 18, 2021, at 12:50 p.m. and the following Acts and Joint Resolution were ratified:

(R. 2, S. 1 (Word version)) -- Senators Grooms, Verdin, Kimbrell, Garrett, Martin, Shealy, Climer, Corbin, Cromer, Rice, Adams, Hembree, Gambrell, Loftis and Campsen: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, TO ENACT THE "SOUTH CAROLINA FETAL HEARTBEAT AND PROTECTION FROM ABORTION ACT" BY ADDING ARTICLE 6 TO CHAPTER 41, TITLE 44 SO AS TO REQUIRE TESTING FOR A DETECTABLE FETAL HEARTBEAT BEFORE AN ABORTION IS PERFORMED ON A PREGNANT WOMAN, TO PROHIBIT THE PERFORMANCE OF AN ABORTION IF A FETAL HEARTBEAT IS DETECTED, TO PROVIDE MEDICAL EMERGENCY AND OTHER EXCEPTIONS, TO REQUIRE CERTAIN DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDKEEPING BY PHYSICIANS PERFORMING ABORTIONS, TO REQUIRE PHYSICIANS TO NOTIFY LAW ENFORCEMENT AFTER PERFORMING AN ABORTION IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, TO CREATE A CIVIL ACTION FOR A PREGNANT WOMAN UPON WHOM AN ABORTION IS PERFORMED, TO CREATE CRIMINAL PENALTIES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES; TO AMEND SECTION 44-41-460, RELATING TO THE REQUIRED REPORTING OF ABORTION DATA TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL, SO AS TO ADD REPORTING OF FETAL HEARTBEAT TESTING AND PATIENT MEDICAL CONDITION DATA; TO AMEND SECTION 44-41-330, RELATING TO A PREGNANT WOMAN'S RIGHT TO KNOW CERTAIN PREGNANCY INFORMATION, SO AS TO REQUIRE NOTIFICATION OF THE DETECTION OF A FETAL HEARTBEAT; AND TO AMEND SECTION 44-41-60, RELATING TO ABORTION REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, SO AS TO ADD REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

(R. 3, S. 478 (Word version)) -- Senator K. Johnson: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 2 OF ACT 183 OF 2020, RELATING TO THE CONSOLIDATION OF CLARENDON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS ONE AND THREE INTO CLARENDON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 4, SO AS TO INCREASE THE INITIAL MEMBERSHIP OF THE CLARENDON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM SEVEN TO NINE MEMBERS, TO PROVIDE THAT THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES SHALL BE COMPRISED OF SEVEN MEMBERS BEGINNING WITH THE 2024 GENERAL ELECTION, AND TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES.

(R. 4, H. 3707 (Word version)) -- Ways and Means Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO MAKE APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE STATE'S PUBLIC HEALTH RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 VIRUS, INCLUDING VACCINATIONS, AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 VIRUS.

The Senate returned to the House with concurrence the following:

H. 3905 (Word version) -- Reps. Allison, Chumley, Henderson-Myers, Hyde, Long, Magnuson, T. Moore and Nutt: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE SPARTANBURG REGIONAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM ON THE OCCASION OF ITS ONE HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY AND, ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, TO EXPRESS THE APPRECIATION OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY FOR THE SYSTEM'S MANY YEARS OF DEDICATED SERVICE TO THIS GREAT STATE.

Rep. T. MOORE moved that the House do now adjourn, which was agreed to.

At 4:00 p.m. the House, in accordance with the motion of Rep. HERBKERSMAN, adjourned in memory of Cecil "Jay" Odom, to meet at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow.

This web page was last updated on Friday, February 19, 2021 at 9:36 A.M.