Port Royal officials may not want to look a gift horse in the mouth, or should they? Officials seem content with a proposed $2 million gift from proceeds from the sale of the more than 40 acres of state-owned property that constitutes the port in their community.

Local and state officials have been brainstorming since July 2003 when Gov. Mark Sanford suggested shutting down the port, selling the state-owned property for an estimated $25 million and splitting the proceeds between the state and the S.C. State Ports Authority, which technically owns the land.

This week Sens. Scott Richardson, R-Hilton Head Island, and Clementa Pinckney, D-Ridgeland, introduced a bill that calls for closing the port and selling the land. Port Royal would get $2 million and the Ports Authority would get the remainder to be used for improvement projects. Rep. Catherine Ceips, R-Beaufort, has authored an identical bill in the House. Other members of the county's Legislative Delegation are unanimous in their support.

Identical bills in both chambers puts the legislation on the fast track. It eliminates a conference committee to meld the bills to an acceptable form and a second routing through both chambers for final passage.

The bills differ from the governor's vision outlined in his executive budget and in his State of the State address. Sanford would split the proceeds between the Ports Authority and the state treasury, where it would be used to balance a budget that is $350 million short of revenue. The governor also didn't envision giving Port Royal $2 million.

The county's Legislative Delegation is on the right track when it proposes using the money for capital needs by the Ports Authority and Port Royal. State taxpayers already have paid for the land and enhancements once. The money should go to infrastructure of some type, not into one-time money for balancing the budget. If the governor succeeds and uses the money to help balance the budget this year, or a future year, where will he find money for future budgets?

The two bills also don't envision being able to dispose of the property in this budget cycle as the governor's executive budget would suggest.

A $2 million gift to Port Royal should be the minimum. Lawmakers should make sure that the town gets a percentage of the sales price. To our knowledge, no independent property appraisal has been done to determine its value. And, maybe it would bring more than its appraisal. Port Royal should get a larger chunk of the change because the town:

Has put up with the port for many years; and

Hasn't received a tax benefit from the property, even though the Ports Authority has been benevolent, but maybe not quite as much as it should have.

Port Royal could put such a windfall to work on many projects: sidewalks, sewer lines and parks, for example. One only has to look to Beaufort's Henry C. Chambers Waterfront Park to see how expensive it is to refurbish a park -- $5 million and counting. But the town has other economic needs, too.

Ceips, Richardson and other members of the Legislative Delegation deserve accolades for proposing legislation to close the port and for trying to ensure that Port Royal doesn't go away empty handed. But they also should help to ensure that the $2 million is the minimum the town receives; 25 percent wouldn't be out of the question, but 10 percent would be a good starting point.