Bill would give Richland County control of troubled Rec Commission

Richland County Council soon could get long-sought oversight over the county’s troubled Recreation Commission.

A bill, prefiled by state Sen. John Courson, R-Richland, would pave the way for Richland County’s State House delegation to give County Council the power to hire and fire the commission’s board.

State Rep. Beth Bernstein, D-Richland, plans to file a similar bill, plus an alternative that gives the delegation itself hiring and firing power.

The proposals come after six of the commission’s seven board members either resigned or were fired by S.C. Gov. Nikki Haley following allegations of nepotism, public corruption and sexual harassment at the agency.

The months-long debacle highlighted concerns about the commission’s public accountability. County Council funds the Recreation Commission but cannot control it. Meanwhile, Richland legislators nominate the commission’s members but do not have the power to fire them.

“There’s no accountability or oversight for these commissions,” Bernstein said. “It’s a quandary that we’re all in.”

The proposals have support from County Council and roughly half of the divided Richland County delegation, but still could face a bumpy road to passage.

For one, legislators must be persuaded to surrender their appointment powers.

Then, there are concerns about the bill’s constitutionality.

A similar proposal passed in 2005 but was struck down by the S.C. Supreme Court on grounds the state Constitution prohibits laws that apply only to a single county.

Courson said his bill avoids that pitfall. His bill would apply statewide, giving each county’s legislative delegation power to choose whether its county council should hire and fire commissioners.

“This would give the county delegation the option, statewide,” Courson said. “It doesn’t mandate anything.”

Still, state Sen. John Scott has doubts. A lawyer could challenge the legality of a delegation unilaterally transferring power over an agency that was created decades ago by a voters in a referendum, Scott said.

“We can’t just come in and change it and do what we want to do because we’re the delegation,” the Richland Democrat said.

Scott also doubts the agency would be better off under Richland County’s control. Recent turmoil at the commission has not affected park and program services, he said.

“We will have a detailed discussion on the pluses and minuses,” Scott said. “But I’m not willing to say it’s been a bad operation because we’ve got some personnel issues.”

Other Richland legislators and County Council members say that, with more oversight, the commission might have steered clear of firings, civil lawsuits and an ongoing public corruption investigation.

“It is the only way to give true oversight and accountability to the Recreation Commission,” Richland County Councilman Seth Rose said. “A part-time board cannot be expected to provide full-time oversight over a multi-million-dollar agency.”

Richland County Council currently is withholding $8.4 million of the commission’s $13.3 million-a-year budget pending an audit. “That’ll be the first time in my 18 years I know anything about where our money is going,” councilman Greg Pearce said.

Pearce said Recreation Commission board members do not work with County Council. He said he has not heard from one in at least a decade.

Granting the county power to hire and fire the board would ensure its members cooperate, he said.

“There’s a lot of frustration on council,” he said. “They’re tired of this.”

This story was originally published December 27, 2016 at 5:24 PM with the headline "Bill would give Richland County control of troubled Rec Commission."