Sanford Rejects School Funding Bill (SC)

June 29, 2010

Gov. Mark Sanford has vetoed a bill that would have given spending flexibility to Sumter school districts 2 and 17.

"We are sympathetic to the difficulty in which (these) school (districts), and others like (them), find themselves, but we are compelled to do as we have done in the past and veto this legislation," Sanford wrote in his June 21 letter to the Senate. "It breaks a cardinal rule of prudent finance. Bonded indebtedness should not be used by school districts to fund operating expenditures because an absolute rule of sustainable financial management that you do not fund short-term operations with long-term debt."

Sen. Phil Leventis, D-Sumter, chairman of the Sumter County Legislative Delegation, said the local lawmakers will take the bill up again when the General Assembly reconvenes today.
<br /&g t;
"We're trying to be in communication with all the members to see what their thoughts are and what they 'd like to do," Leventis said Friday. "(We're trying to see) what we can do to make this work in this crisis situation in education in general and in our Sumter school districts in particular. I believe this (bill would) contribute to a successful transition."

Senate Bill 1372 served as an amendment to Senate Bill 639, the bill that was signed into law in February 2008 and states the two Sumter school districts will become one on July 1, 2011. The new bill proposed that the two school districts could use the bond money they can borrow, up to 8 percent of the assessed value of the individual school district, for their general operating budget. Normally such money is restricted to capital expenses, such as bricks-and-mortar construction.

The bill also originally proposed to extend the terms of the seats on the current school districts’ board of trustees that would be up for election in November. Rep. Murrell Smith, R-Sumter, and a few others questioned the constitutionality of such a move, and the language was removed in the latest draft.

In the same updated draft, the bill also changed who is responsible for the start-up cost of the new consolidated school district. Originally, in Bill 639, County Council was responsible for the start-up costs. The new bill, 1372, would pass that responsibility to the current school districts.

The new bill also changed the wording of the consolidation bill so that the superintendent of the new consolidated school district would appoint an assistant superintendent instead of the new school board hiring both a superintendent and an assistant superintendent and extends the term of the chairman of the new board from one year to two yea rs.