Ignoring South Carolina’s Zero-Based Budgeting Law: The Governor, the General Assembly and all State Agencies

Ignoring South Carolina’s Zero-Based Budgeting Law: The Governor, the General Assembly and all State Agencies

As a kid, do you remember when your dad gave you an allowance and said, 'This is all you are getting, so make it last'? A simple command to follow, and for the most part, you did as you were told. This rationale clearly does not apply to South Carolina’s treatment of its fiscal responsibilities. Enacted in 1979 through Act No. 199, Part II, Section 8 (codified as Section 2-7-65), zero-based budgeting was designed to prevent unchecked spending growth by requiring agencies to justify every dollar from scratch each year. For nearly 30 years, this law served South Carolinians well, promoting efficiency and protecting taxpayer dollars. However, since 2009—amid the Great Recession—elected officials have ignored this mandate, reverting to incremental budgeting that justifies only new spending. This failure has allowed the state budget to balloon exponentially, eroding public trust and burdening future generations with unsustainable debt and taxes. Proof of Exponential Budget Growth Due to Non-Adherence (Since 2008) The unchecked growth in...
Read More
Development Rights in York County, SC? I think not…

Development Rights in York County, SC? I think not…

Written by Timothy J. Hegarty, A Concerned Citizen of York County: As a concerned citizen, I have tracked the Silfab Solar issue very closely in the last two years since I first became aware of it. I think it is fair to say that I am very well acquainted with the specific details of this issue. While there have been many perplexing opinions, statements, and events that have occurred in this attempt to justify an unlawful development, there are two that are especially conspicuous to me. The first one has to do with comments from elected officials and York County staff that Silfab has somehow been granted a development right, which I will address in the following paragraphs. The second one has to do with the fact that Silfab Solar has been allowed to file a legal appeal (June 28, 2024) in our court system to challenge the May 9, 2024, Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) ruling that they claim “aggrieved” them...
Read More
Student Safety, not #1 priority for Fort Mill School Board?

Student Safety, not #1 priority for Fort Mill School Board?

Written by Timothy J. Hegarty, A Concerned Citizen of York County: A very simple dictionary definition of “bias” is “an inclination or preference for or against an individual or group that interferes with impartial judgment “. Remember this statement, as it will relate to the story below. If you’ve read the previously posted “Damn the Citizens, Full Speed Ahead! in York County” article, then you have a thorough understanding of many of the actions and/or inactions that have contributed to the attempt to foist the Silfab Solar chemical manufacturing facility onto the citizens of Fort Mill. What you may not know is that the Fort Mill School Board (FMSB) and District have played a passive role to date in allowing this to happen. The Fort Mill School District (FMSD) is, without a doubt, the most influential adjoining property owner to the Silfab Solar location and may share the largest common property line. In their capacity as an adjoining, thereby aggrieved, property owner, the...
Read More
“Damn the Citizens, Full Speed Ahead!” in York County, SC

“Damn the Citizens, Full Speed Ahead!” in York County, SC

Written by Timothy J. Hegarty, A Concerned Citizen of York County: When Admiral David Farragut shouted, “Damn the Torpedoes, Full Speed Ahead!” at the Battle of Mobile Bay in August 1864, it was viewed as a bold, reckless statement in the face of overwhelming odds. Fast forward to today, and with slight editing, the statement very much applies to the Silfab Solar production facility in Fort Mill, SC, specifically the reckless part. Silfab Solar plans to manufacture solar cells and solar modules, which involve the use of extremely hazardous chemicals. It started out as “bold”. The Biden administration introduced the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which did nothing of the sort. What it did was earmark billions of dollars in incentives and tax credits to boost solar production within the US. It’s been referred to as reshoring solar production because 50 years ago, the US was the leading solar energy producer in the world. Not so today. It was “overwhelming odds” because we’ve been...
Read More
Are Citizens’ Rights and the Law Taking a Back Seat in York County?

Are Citizens’ Rights and the Law Taking a Back Seat in York County?

Photograph from CAGI History of the Issue Zoning issues have broad implications for the health and safety of nearby citizens. Silfab Solar is constructing a solar panel manufacturing plant in Fort Mill, South Carolina directly off Highway 21 near the I-77 interchange and surrounded by residential housing and adjacent to two public schools. The facility is being built in an area zoned as “Light Industrial” by the York County Zoning Department sparking significant controversy whether such an operation is appropriate for the location. The Rockefeller Group originally purchased the vacant building for $9 million. It now has a real estate deal in place to sell the building for $106 million to Exeter, with Silfab as the tenant. In December 2022, a York County zoning technician, not the Zoning Administrator, issued a letter stating that Silfab’s production may be permitted in the Light Industrial zone. The letter stated, the use described in your request (manufacturing of photovoltaic cells and PV modules) is considered electrical...
Read More
Can South Carolina’s Courts Change Clemson’s Board of Trustees?

Can South Carolina’s Courts Change Clemson’s Board of Trustees?

Written by: Laird Minor, Eamon Flynn The Lawsuit A suit was brought against Clemson University over its “life trustees” serving on their board of trustees. NOLAS Trading Co. and John Sloan, taking over from his father, Ned Sloan, brought suit against Clemson over these trustees. Plaintiffs argued that these trustees violated the South Carolina Constitution of 1895, which states that no public officer, other than officers of the militia or notaries public, can serve for life or for good behavior. Thomas Clemson’s will states, “The university shall be under the management and control of a board of thirteen trustees, composed of the seven members nominated by the will and their successors, and six members to be elected by the General Assembly in joint assembly.” The will was accepted by the State legislature in 1894, a year before it adopted the South Carolina Constitution of 1895, which prohibits the appointment of public officers, such as the life trustees mentioned in the will. Clemson defended the...
Read More
How a Centuries-Old Debate is New Again in Oconee County, One SC County Thought They Could Ignore The State Constitution—We Are Fighting Back

How a Centuries-Old Debate is New Again in Oconee County, One SC County Thought They Could Ignore The State Constitution—We Are Fighting Back

In Oconee County, South Carolina, there’s something in the water–taxation. In the fall of 2023, the county issued $25 million in bonds to fund wastewater and sewer treatment for an area near Interstate I-85, but it only benefits part of the county. When the bond proposal was first discussed during County Council meetings, several citizens took issue with the idea and attempted to engage the council to express their concerns.  With no firm budget being presented on how the bond monies would be spent, the group publicly called for a town hall meeting to discuss the issues and question the legality of the proposal.  That offer was firmly rejected, and the county quickly moved to secure the bond amidst public opposition.  The public learned shortly after that the bond was secured, and the monies were to be spent on sewer expansion.  It was then that the citizens approached SCPIF for legal help. Knowing this was a blatant violation of the clear...
Read More

When South Carolina Wins in Court, the State Should Win – Not Lawyers

What Happened? What would an extra $75 million mean to South Carolina? That amount of money could fund more than 5,000 students for an entire school year. It is nearly the entire public safety budget for the city of Columbia last year. The state could use it to pay down some debt or put it toward fixing the roads. Instead, when Attorney General Alan Wilson won a windfall for the state in court, he directed $75 million of it toward his former law firm in attorney’s fees. South Carolina Public Interest Foundation (SCPIF) is working to get that money back into the public coffers, and making sure something like this can never happen again.   There has been a long history of South Carolina storing plutonium at the Savannah River site. Former Gov. Hodges negotiated with the Department of Energy (DoE) to get the nuclear waste out of South Carolina, which would generate a lot of income for the areas around Aiken and...
Read More

Drawing the Line: Legal Limits on SLED License Plate Tracking

In the age of AI, police departments across the country are using increasingly powerful and complex technology every day. In South Carolina, the State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) is using one such tool, automated license plate readers, without legislative permission—and without the limitations placed on them by many states. SCPIF has teamed up with The Policing Project at NYU School of Law to prevent SLED from operating this illegal vehicle surveillance program. Improper Data Collection SLED is not only utilizing license plate readers without legislative authority, but they’re also taking full advantage of the lack of oversight. For example, other states have laws limiting how long captured data can be stored or which crimes it can be used to investigate. In New Hampshire, for example, data has to be purged within three minutes unless it is matched to a vehicle of interest to law enforcement. In South Carolina, there are no state laws limiting how long police can retain vehicle surveillance information....
Read More

Ensuring a Transparent and Constitutional County Council in Greenville *Updated on August 18, 2025

A group of Travelers Rest citizens are alleging constitutional violations by the Greenville County Council. The claims include that the county council has used technical loopholes to violate the state constitution by adopting a bi-annual budget rather than the required annual budget. Other claims involve council members holding closed-door meetings, violating South Carolina’s open meetings law under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). “One of the main focuses of this lawsuit and a lot of others like it, is it requires our public officials to follow the law. We have good laws. The problem is, our public officials are not as faithful and diligent as they should be with following the laws,” said SCPIF’s principal attorney, Jim Carpenter. What's the violation? The state constitution requires that the county adopt a budget every year, but Greenville County has been budgeting bi-annually for approximately ten years. “They have no idea in the next fiscal year whether their revenue is what they projected and what...
Read More