Over the veto of Gov. Mark Sanford, S.C. legislators this year set aside $7 million for land acquisition for an international trade center in Myrtle Beach. To bag the money for added exhibition space on more than 40 acres adjacent to the Convention Center, the council needs only to apply for it.

But judging by the hesitancy that some council members expressed about the trade center at last week's workshop, you'd think that the General Assembly had shoved bamboo splints under their fingernails to get them to approve it. They don't like it that destiny has put them in the position of having to make a tough decision.

It's anybody's guess whether council members will agree, at their meeting Tuesday, to go after that state money. The hope must be that at least four realize that this is an opportunity that Myrtle Beach might never have again.

If the council doesn't go after the land, its owner, Burroughs & Chapin Co. Inc., eventually will find another use for it. The Convention Center could become forever unexpandable.

Legislators had Myrtle Beach in mind in approving the grant as an economic-development measure, but Greenville also wants it - and is aggressively going after it. If the council lets Greenville take it away, the state likely would never make "free" money available to the city again. And failure to act would cut the legs from under U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-Seneca, who has a line on up to $3 million in federal economic-development grants that could go toward land acquisition for the project. He wouldn't feel much motivation to help the city again if the council says no to the trade center.

The options available to the council Tuesday are buying the 40.6 acres for about $10 million, using the state's $7 million to buy a smaller tract at the same per-acre price or offering B&C a lower price for the full tract. We recommend the third option because the trade center would benefit local businesses, including B&C.

But if council members don't like that option, they should go for one of the others. As a worst case, Graham's federal grant money could supplement the state money to pay for the land. Nor would it hurt to buy less land - as long as the council buys enough. If members blow this opportunity, local history will treat them less kindly than Mayor Mark McBride would treat them in the present for the "sin" of doing the right thing.