COLUMBIA--The high-stakes turf war between the State
Ports Authority and Jasper County inched toward resolution Tuesday as the South
Carolina Supreme Court considered whether the county's plans to build a $500
million shipping terminal infringes on the state agency's maritime powers.
During the nearly hour-long oral arguments, the justices interjected often in
the debate, poking holes in both sides' arguments.
The justices acknowledged they where venturing into unknown legal territory.
"This is the first time this issue has been litigated," Chief Justice Jean
Toal said before the packed courtroom. "The issue (is) whether the ports
authority has got the kind of authority they claim."
The decision, which is expected later this year, will have major
ramifications on the future of maritime business in South Carolina. The Savannah
River property at issue is one of the few remaining locations for a major port
on the Eastern Seaboard.
Ports Authority attorney Mitch Brown argued that only the authority has the
power to "promote, develop, construct, equip, maintain and operate a harbor or
harbors within the state." The ports authority proposed building an 11-berth
container facility at the site.
Jasper County's arrangement with a private company to operate a 1,800-acre
cargo-container terminal encroaches on the Ports Authority's jurisdiction, Brown
said.
Cam Lewis, the attorney for Jasper County, told the court that the county has
the power to build the facility under the "home rule" provision, a state law
designed to let local governments control their own issues.
In their questioning, the justices' placed the burden on the Ports Authority
to prove it had the sole ability to develop ports in the state.
Using the privately run terminals in Charleston as an example, the justices
questioned Brown's arguments that the agency has such a right.
"We know we don't have anything to absolutely nail down (that) says Ports
Authority gets an exclusive," Toal told Brown. "The case is much too important
to worry about that gray area."
Brown's second argument, that the county's development conflicts with the
agency's statewide responsibilities, appeared to carry more weight.
"In 1942, when the General Assembly created the Ports Authority, it said if
you ever have to construe this law, construe it in favor of powers for the Ports
Authority, not ... in favor of limitations on the Ports Authority," said Brown
before listing several ways the Jasper effort interfered with the agency's
mission.
In making Jasper's case, Lewis equated the county's proposed terminal on the
river to a service station off the highway.
"There's no exclusive right to the Highway Department to put all those
facilities along their highways," Lewis argued. "Not at all. That's just the way
they try to come in here and mish-mash things together."
Jasper County Council Chairman George Hood, who traveled to Columbia along
with about 20 other county officials, was confident as he left the courtroom.
"I think our attorney was able to point out the laws are in our favor," he
said. "We are just trying to bring economic development to our area."
Bernard Groseclose Jr., Ports Authority CEO, said he wouldn't comment on the
arguments and would wait for the court's decision.
Another battle looms with Georgia, which owns the property and already has
filed a federal lawsuit to prevent condemnation of the site.
John Frank covers state politics and the Legislature from Columbia. He can be
reached at (803) 799-9051 or jbfrank@postand
courier.com.
