Editorial: Richland County, SC, sales tax watchdog panel is mere window dressing

RICHLAND COUNTY Council should either empower the Transportation Penny Advisory Committee so that it functions as a true watchdog over the transportation sales tax or acknowledge that the panel was simply a ruse to dupe voters into approving the new levy.

The advisory panel has spent much of its two years of existence struggling to find its way. While County Council outlined duties and responsibilities for the group when it was established in 2013, there are limitations on what the panel can do because of a lack of resources, expertise, independence and, most importantly, access to information.

Frankly, some council members only agreed to establish the committee because it was deemed necessary to get voters to approve the $1.07 billion, 22-year plan to upgrade the public bus system and pay for roads and other projects. Voters had defeated the tax in 2010 in part because of a lack of trust in the council; many believed the council would use the $769 million meant for roads and other projects as a slush fund and wouldn’t stick to stated priorities.

In 2012, supporters sold the sales tax by assuring voters that a watchdog panel would closely monitor the program, review projects and make recommendations — or cry foul — when necessary. Then-Council Chairman Kelvin Washington stated, “The advisory group is going to be instrumental in managing and pushing these projects forward.”

That has not happened. And when the committee has asked for help in clarifying its authority, it has run into a brick wall. Councilman Norman Jackson attempted to bring some clarity when he proposed placing the advisory committee on par with the county Planning Commission, which makes recommendations on planning and land use. While that might not have been the ideal answer, it was at least a genuine effort to help the panel.

But the council rejected Mr. Jackson’s proposal and instead voted last week to send a copy of the existing duties and responsibilities to panel members and tell them to take it or leave it. That’s a slap in the face not only to committee members but also to the voters who approved the sales tax thinking a legitimate watchdog group would look out for their interests.

But the advisory committee serves as mere window dressing. This isn’t about giving the panel decision-making authority; the council is the final authority on all decisions related to this project. But the panel should have the ability and access to closely and thoroughly monitor progress, review projects and analyze information so it can give public reports and raise red flags when necessary.

In prepared remarks at the Jan. 26 State of the Penny address, the panel’s chairman, Hayes Mizell, expressed the committee’s frustration, noting that its ability to carry out its duties is limited. “Some people apply the words ‘watchdog’ and ‘oversight’ to the TPAC’s role, but in light of the limitations under which the TPAC functions, neither word is accurate,” he said.

“As implementation of the penny has begun to pick up steam, and as the TPAC has gained experience with the program, the TPAC’s role has become less clear. A concern is that the TPAC is often informed about matters of the penny implementation after decisions have been made rather than asked for the committee’s advice and recommendations before decisions are made.”

If voters lacked confidence in the council before, what are they to think now? Frankly, the council’s integrity is at stake; it hasn’t delivered on the promise to establish a true watchdog committee empowered to ask tough questions, demand answers and reveal any flawed or potentially corrupt activities.

While County Council has final say over how transportation sales tax revenue for roads and other projects is spent, it must not dismiss the importance of having this committee review its progress. Frankly, given the size and complexity of this program, an active, independent advisory body could help ensure the county doesn’t seriously stub its toe.

County Council should revisit the panel’s charter and provide it with sufficient access and support so that it can help make sure the public’s money is spent responsibly.

This story was originally published March 26, 2015 at 5:00 PM with the headline "Editorial: Richland County, SC, sales tax watchdog panel is mere window dressing."