County officials have decided they have no option but to move forward with the reassessment process as they had planned, before the state legislature in June passed a measure that, if signed by the governor, would limit increases in property value to 20 percent.
After the legislature unexpectedly passed the measure, the county's plans to calculate this year's tax bills using updated property values were thrown into turmoil. If the governor signed the bill, making it law, everyone's tax bill would be calculated with different values, different tax rates or both.
But more than a month later, the governor has not yet signed or vetoed the bill. Sanford could not be reached for comment Monday. His spokesman Will Folks said the governor has made no decision yet and Folks had no estimate of when he would.
Tax notices are scheduled to be sent out in late summer, followed by actual tax bills in October. That leaves the county no choice but to move ahead with the laws on the book, said county administrator Gary Kubic.
"We have no (20 percent) cap because the legislation is unsigned," Kubic said.
Other counties scheduled this year for reassessment, required every five years by state law, have the option of putting the process off for one year.
But Beaufort County Council used up that option last year, when delaying reassessment to consider a local 15 percent cap on property value increases. In the end, council members decided against the local cap, in part because a court case on whether such a limitation on property value increases is constitutional remains undecided.
In that lawsuit, the city of North Charleston sued Charleston County, the only county to adopt a local 15 percent cap, to determine whether the cap complies with taxing procedures outlined in the state constitution.
Even without that verdict, however, state lawmakers pushed through the mandatory 20 percent cap, saying constituents were crying out for property tax relief.
Opponents of the legislation, however, claim that it simply shifts the tax burden from owners of high-valued property to everyone else. A March 2004 study from Clemson University's Strom Thurmond Institute of Government and Public Affairs also came to that conclusion.
The last reassessment in Beaufort County was in 1998. All properties have been taxed at 1998 values since then.
Beaufort County officials had considered delaying the scheduled reassessment a second year, an option suggested by S.C. Department of Revenue officials. But while state law does allow counties to delay reassessment if they cannot finish updating property values on the tax rolls by Oct. 1, Beaufort County has completed that process, Kubic said.
It was completed in 2003, before the council decided to delay calculating tax bills based on the updated values until 2004.
When considering the second-year delay in more detail, county and state officials realized that Beaufort County legally could not take that route, said council Chairman Weston Newton.
"We are in a position to send out reassessment notices," Newton said. "To do otherwise would amount to a willful delay.
"We don't see it as an option. It was not a matter of debate by County Council. It is what is required by the law that exists today."
The county is preparing for the possibility that Sanford could sign the bill while there is still time to change course. Officials have purchased software that allows them to calculate tax bills with and without the 20 percent cap.
"But with each day that (the legislation is) unsigned, it makes it more difficult to make that switch," Kubic said.
If Sanford signed the bill after county tax bills are sent out, new bills would have to be sent.
The governor could simply never sign the bill. If never signed or vetoed, the bill would become law automatically on the fifth day of the next legislative session, in January.
But then the county would be forced to issue refunds for tax payments and send out new bills. Officials have said the county might have to borrow money under that scenario to continue operations.
Or Sanford could instead veto the bill, maintaining the current law. But if lawmakers override his veto in January, a good possibility, refunds also would have to be issued, meaning new bills and borrowed money for operations.
"It's going to be an interesting few months for us and the public because of this unknown factor of whether the governor will sign or veto this legislation," Kubic said.
County officials are making plans for getting information out to the public about the reassessment, possibly using information hot lines, radio and newspaper ads, and the county Web site, he said.