Tax reform still possible if Sanford, lawmakers want

WHETHER YOU want to reform a broken school funding system or overhaul an antiquated tax structure or simply reduce property taxes, there doesn’t seem to be much reason for optimism as the Legislature enters the final three weeks of the session.

The Senate’s purely local-option approach is so completely different from the House’s plan to have the state take over a large chunk of city, county and school funding that it’s hard to imagine how lawmakers could come up with any sort of compromise, let alone a reasonable one.

Yet there remains one last chance for not only property tax relief but real reform that could move our state forward educationally and economically.

Perhaps surprisingly, it is Gov. Mark Sanford who could play an important role in breathing new life into the ailing reform movement.

In a meeting with our editorial board last week, Mr. Sanford for the first time signaled his interest in a comprehensive approach, which he said he is coming to see as a key to both educational improvement and rural economic development.

“Right now we fund school districts, and some school districts are wealthier than other districts,” Mr. Sanford said. “And if you ever got to a point where you were funding kids and you put the money in the kid, it would lead to complete portability, which is something I’m after, and it would lead to equity, which is something y’all are after.”

Mr. Sanford was reluctant to explore the idea in detail with us. But if he is willing to explore it with lawmakers, his approach could create the environment in which they can come together in a way that advances the best ideas from all, rather than the worst.

That’s not nearly as far out of reach as it may seem.

We know that the House desperately wants to pass some sort of property tax relief package this year; Speaker Bobby Harrell has threatened to hold up the budget, even through an extended session, as leverage. And we know that there is strong interest in both political parties and both bodies of the Legislature for the general approach put forward by Sens. Larry Grooms and Vincent Sheheen: eliminating all local school property taxes and creating a statewide funding source that would fund schools based on the needs of the students rather than the wealth of the districts.

Nearly half the members of the Senate have voted over and over for that approach, and even some who voted against it say they like the idea, but simply aren’t ready to move forward with it now. Moreover, the idea has its genesis in the House, where a substantial number of representatives still would prefer it to the plan that body passed earlier this year.

But time is of the essence. The House would need to take a first step in this direction when it receives the Senate bill sometime this week. And that means conversations need to start right away.

If Mr. Sanford is serious about advancing economic development throughout the state and offering choices within the public education system, he should reach out to legislators to explore his still-evolving ideas. If Mr. Harrell and other leaders of the House are serious about reducing property taxes this session, they should seize this opportunity. It may be the only one they have left. It undoubtedly is the best one.