Our View: County voters, taxpayers are stakeholders too

”A politician should be able to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month and next year, and after that, have the ability to explain why it didn’t happen.”

Those words, a slight twist on a classic Winston Churchill quote, were uttered by Steve Brown, Greenwood County Council chairman, at the start of the State of the City/County address hosted by the Greenwood SC Chamber of Commerce last month.

Perhaps Brown knew how relevant those words would be as a prelude to what he would next address: Greenwood County’s capital project sales tax, at two years in, is not keeping pace with original projections, and that would mean some of the 27 projects detailed on the 2016 referendum put before the county’s voters would quite possibly wither on the vine.

Apparently a number of the nearly 200 assembled for the meeting were not caught off guard. They knew or had heard that was the case. In fact, it had been a given out the gate that a penny sales tax with an eight-year cap might not raise the revenue hoped for. The figure, after all, was based on what are billed as best estimates and current financials.

The possibility always existed that the economy might not be as robust as anticipated. But the state was not anticipating any major economic changes. It did, in fact, anticipate steady growth. No fears of another 2008 crash and burn. By the same token, it was entirely possible that collections could exceed expectations, especially if Greenwood saw growth in the retail industry.

So just how off were things now that the county had two years of data to dive into ahead of the Aug. 28 announcement? By now, you know that a full third of the 27 projects are potentially in peril. And by now — although again, it’s only an estimate — the county might come up $20 million shy of the nearly $88 million projected to be collected and that would, ostensibly fully fund those projects that dot the county.

You probably recall that when County Council brought forth the referendum, it included an array of projects, from an educational manufacturing center at Piedmont Tech to a park in south Greenwood. From a refurbishment of Katherine Hall in Ware Shoals to water lines being run to Harris Landing. Again, all tallied up there were 27 projects deemed the best of the best and worthy of funding with an extra penny attached to the county’s sales tax rate. And while Greenwood County residents would be contributing to the projects through their own purchases, the best part of the idea is that non-county residents would help us reach that dollar goal. In short, it was and is reminiscent of the tax county residents voted in favor of to build the spillway at the Buzzard Roost dam while also funding the construction of the county’s library.

But while that capital sales tax project exceeded expectations and sunset ahead of schedule, what voters approved this time around in 2016 appears to be falling short. Woefully short, at least at this point. So short, in fact, that county leaders thought it a good idea to let some of the project stakeholders know they might be in for a big Christmas disappointment.

Yes, with such a dire prediction based on two years of data collection, we agree it was a good idea to let Mayor Bruce Holland of Ware Shoals know that Katherine Hall is likely to remain a shell of its former self as the town’s central gathering spot, to let Karen Park Jennings know that the Railroad Museum’s planned depot exhibit hall has been derailed, to let Anne Craig know that renovations to the Arts Center will likely sit on a blank canvas.

Those people are considered the stakeholders who represent the 10 projects that could be left undone when the sales tax collection period ends in 2025. What county leadership apparently forgot, however, is that the voters and taxpayers of Greenwood County are also stakeholders. After all, 65% of those voters were convinced supporting the capital sales tax project was the right thing to do.

We were also convinced and threw our support behind the initiative. We, like most others, had every reason to believe that pen was put to paper, that costs and revenue projections were analyzed and honed and that all, if not most of the projects would come to fruition.

Frankly, we still believe a “yes” vote was the correct vote. Many viable and worthwhile projects will get done and, as such, prove to be positive initiatives for the county now and well into the future.

While the eight-year collection period is six years out and the outlook could change for the better, we and many others were scratching their heads after the Aug. 28 announcement and subsequent story that spelled out in more detail how far off the figures seem to be. OK, maybe $1 million or even $2 million, but as much as $20 million? Fuzzy math? Pie-in-the-sky get the votes math? It’s easy to see why many residents are cynical about the matter, especially given how the potential revenue shortfall was unceremoniously rolled out.

County taxpayers and voters might feel a little less chapped about it all had there been a more public revelation and explanation of the situation. It would have been a good idea for the county manager, Toby Chappell, and the CPST projects manager, Josh Skinner, to make a formal presentation before County Council. In public session.

Sure, it doesn’t look good that upwards of a third of the projects might not get done because upwards of $20 million might not get collected, but it looks worse when transparency took a back seat.

Think about it. The 2006 capital project sales tax that will fund the dam project and built the library are spelled out in great detail on the county’s website. The 2016 CPST? Well, that has yet to find a home where residents — voters and taxpayers, that is — can track it.

“A politician should be able to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month and next year, and after that, have the ability to explain why it didn’t happen.”

Agreed. The ability was there. It just did not happen without a good amount of effort.

Originally Published by Index-Journal on:Sep 8, 2019

Article Link: https://www.indexjournal.com/opinion/editorials/our-view-county-voters-taxpayers-are-stakeholders-too/article_4d16c98a-5284-53f1-a1bc-4b6d0d9740a5.html