![]() |
May 21, 2003
Legislature forgetting meaning of home rule
Back in the 1970s, the concept of
home rule for cities and counties in South Carolina became a
reality when the General Assembly enacted legislation that
would give local elected officials more authority in governing
themselves without undue interference from state
legislators.
Until then, state senators had an
inordinate amount of control over local matters, and city and
county councils were too often overruled or dictated to by
those legislators. Local elected authorities were and are more
attuned to the needs of their constitutents. The purpose of
home rule was to give them more control in the operation of
their cities and counties without undue interference from
legislators, who could concentrate on pressing statewide
issues.
Unfortunately, home rule is now
threatened by current proposed legislation. Case in point: the
“hog bill” recently passed by the state House of
Representatives that would prohibit country governments from
adopting more stringent regulations than those required by the
state on the location of swine and poultry operations. The
bill has moved to the Senate, where a subcommittee expanded it
even more by restricting local control over all industrial
operations.
Several counties have already
approved laws that would restrict large-scale hog farming
operations such as those that have wreaked so much
environmental damage in North Carolina. Supporters of the hog
bill contend that the state’s 46 counties should not have more
restrictive regulations than those of the state Department of
Health and Environmental Control, and that they should be
uniform for each and every county.
But each
county in this state is unique in population concentrations,
road systems, lakes, soil types, water resources, mountains,
seashore, historic and public places and growth patterns.
Local governing bodies should have the right to develop their
own laws that would balance competing land-use issues
affecting their communities and counties without direction
from bureaucrats in Columbia.
Over in
neighboring Kershaw County, its county council chairman, Steve
S. Kelly Jr., in a recent letter to the editor in The
State newspaper, argued that DHEC regulations as currently
proposed would allow waste lagoons filled with hog waste to be
located near creek beds, the Wateree River (which flows
through Sumter County) and Lake Wateree. Is that responsible
environmental stewardship? We think not.
Existing regulations have until now allowed local choice,
enabling county councils to act on behalf of their
constituents by developing sensible economic goals for their
respective counties. Under the proposed bill, counties will be
stripped of the ability to balance land-use needs and protect
environmentally-sensitive areas.
County
governments and those elected to operate them are uniquely
qualified to respond to local needs and circumstances through
their planning commissions, which follow a deliberate and
thorough staff review process, public comment, discussion and
a final recommendation to county councils. Because of that
process, the public interest is safeguarded.
Now we have a state Legislature under the control of
Republicans who talk out of one side of their mouths extolling
“limited government” and out of the other side seeking to
impose not only more heavy-handed “big government” but also
favoring special interests — the big hog farms — in supporting
flawed legislation.
Home rule is supposed to
mean something. The majority in the state Legislature seems to
have forgotten why it was adopted in the first place.
Is this state prepared to walk down the same
soiled path as North Carolina? We hope not.
 E-mail
This Page |
![]() |
May 21, 2003 
Tigers roar into
tourney
