Recreation panel shows why special districts should go

THE RICHLAND COUNTY Recreation Commission is making the strongest case in recent memory for why special purpose districts shouldn’t exist.

The commission’s members sit in positions of trust and are able to spend public funds at will, but are accountable to no one. The majority of the current group of recreation commissioners has worn out its welcome. It’s bad enough that five of the seven are suing to block a new law that rightly transfers appointment powers from local legislators to Richland County Council. To make matters worse, they’re using public money to finance their attempted power grab.

Commission chairman Jim Davis had said no public money was being used in the lawsuit against the governor and the county legislative delegation. But at a meeting last week, it was revealed that $38,301.43 used to pay for the suit indeed came from agency funds. The money comes from fees the commission charges for programs.

A memo said the payment was to come from the commission’s “self-sustaining income account” instead of a “tax allocation income account” to avoid using tax dollars. Money in the self-sustaining income account primarily comes from fees users pay to access agency facilities built with tax dollars.

To make matters worse, during last week’s meeting, the commission increased fees for using Hopkins and Trenholm pools by 50 cents for adults and 75 cents for children. The hikes are to offset a projected $30,000 operational deficit at the pools. But if the commission had not raided the agency funds for this frivolous lawsuit, it could have plugged the deficit without raising fees.

Fees or taxes, these public funds are being used to the detriment of Richland County. County lawmakers acted responsibly last year when they approved legislation giving County Council the power to appoint commission members. The council must levy taxes to fund recreation; it should appoint the commission. Unelected special purpose districts such as Richland’s recreation commission undermine local government authority.

Five commissioners didn’t like the change and sued as individuals, saying the law is unconstitutional. But a circuit judge ruled they had no standing as individuals. The five then voted as a commission to file the lawsuit.

While the state Supreme Court has yet to hear the case, changes are under way. Recently, County Council wisely replaced two members on the commission instead of waiting for the high court to rule. The legislative delegation sent a letter to Gov. Mark Sanford nominating new commissioners to replace two whose terms expired in December. County Council sent those same two nominees to Gov. Sanford, who approved them. There are also plans to replace commissioner Robbie Robinson, who lives outside the Recreation Commission tax district. Mr. Robinson's replacement is expected to come from the Irmo-Ballentine area.

While those are welcome developments, we anxiously await the Supreme Court’s ruling on this case. The county can’t be rid of this bunch soon enough.