Manage your Post and Courier subscription online. Click here!
  HOME | NEWS |BUSINESS | SPORTS | ENTERTAINMENT SHOP LOCAL | FEATURES JOBS | CARS | REAL ESTATE
 
Editorials - Opinion
Friday, February 24, 2006 - Last Updated: 6:48 AM 

Shameful vote on billboards

Email This Article?
Printer-Friendly Format?
Reprints & Permissions? (coming soon)

The General Assembly believes that the free-spending billboard industry deserves special treatment, and at the expense of local government. Its override of the governor's veto on the billboard bill is a triumph of a special interest at the expense of local taxpayers. The Legislature should be ashamed.

Gov. Mark Sanford vetoed the bill, arguing persuasively that it provided the billboard industry special treatment inconsistent with that afforded other businesses. He also complained that it trumps local government, which should be the regulatory authority on local matters within its jurisdiction. And he pointed out that the requirements upon local government are more stringent than those related to billboard management by state agencies.

He was particularly critical of the Legislature's decision to invalidate the billboard ordinance of several local jurisdictions retroactively. Those governments, including the city of Charleston, sought to preserve their options with amortization provisions that allow non-conforming billboards to be used for a period of years, ensuring that owners get a return on their investment. Critics of the bill estimate that removing a billboard now could cost as much as $400,000. That would make their removal prohibitive by local governments.

The compensation plan for the billboard industry places them in a "position superior to homeowners, farmers and other businesses," the governor wrote.

It's no secret that the outdoor advertising industry lobbied heavily for this legislation that gives it special status. It spent nearly a quarter million dollars in lobbying expenses and campaign contributions, according to The Greenville News. From the industry's standpoint, it was money well spent. If local governments want to get rid of billboards that are viewed as eyesores, the decision will cost local taxpayers an arm and a leg.

Of the tri-county House delegation, Reps. Seth Whipper, Wallace Scarborough, Chip Limehouse, Robert Brown, Ben Hagood, David Umphlett and Vida Miller voted to sustain the governor's veto, according to the House clerk's office. In the Senate, they were joined by Sen. Chip Campsen. Good for them.

Several members didn't vote at all: Reps. Floyd Breeland and Tom Dantzler, and Sens. Clementa Pinckney and Bill Mescher.

Voting to override the governor's veto were House Speaker Bobby Harrell and Reps. Jim Merrill, David Mack, John Graham Altman, George Bailey, Converse Chellis, Annette Young, Shirley Hinson and Joseph Jefferson; Sens. Glenn McConnell, Robert Ford, Larry Grooms, Randy Scott, John Matthews and Raymond Cleary.

Local residents should be concerned about their legislators' cavalier attitude toward Home Rule. Ask those who voted against the veto and supported the billboard protection act why they favor special treatment for a special interest.