“When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. ”
- I Corinthians 13:11
By Sarah B. Nuckles || When we were children we played the game of “hide and go seek,” the goal of which was obviously to find out where everyone was hiding. It was especially fun to play the game on those long summer nights, because it was much harder to find someone in the dark.
I am concerned that the S.C. Department of Transportation (DOT) and its commissioners are still playing this childish game, but with much greater consequences. While they are busy hiding, business being conducted on behalf of the taxpaying public is being conducted “in the dark.”
I cannot read the mind of our state’s Secretary of Transportation, or his staff or our transportation commissioners, and, in fairness, some things that have been hidden may be the result of an inability to communicate. On the other hand, I think that there are deliberate efforts underway to obfuscate or make it more difficult for the taxpayers to understand how their transportation dollars are being spent.
In my opinion, a calculated effort was undertaken recently by the chairman of the DOT commission, Danny Isaac, and five other commissioners to “hide” a plan authorizing a $300+ million bond issue for five projects. This critical vote was not advertised on the agendas of either the commission workshop or the commission meeting, nor were details of the projects involved (including specific cost estimates) provided to commissioners until the day of the workshop.
Not only that, in direct contravention of the intent of recent DOT reforms passed by the General Assembly, there were no project priority numbers listed on these documents. The new law specifically states: “the Commission must consider, but is not limited to …” those priority rankings.
This plan was hidden from the public – and from me in my role as a Commissioner – but it was apparently being circulated among state legislators. In fact, the first I heard of it was in a phone call from a House member a few weeks before the Commission meeting. This lawmaker suggested that I call an Horry County Legislator, because “a deal was going down” and if I wanted to include widening Interstate 85 in Cherokee County, I “had better call him.”
Here’s how it worked.
Chairman Isaac wanted money for a $200 million interchange for Interstate 73 – but the only way he could get this money was to have each Commissioner include a project for their districts in the bond offering. Prior to hatching this plan, Isaac did not have the four Commission votes he needed to get funding for the Interstate 73 exit approved.
Regarding required public communication from DOT, all projects must lawfully have what is called “public notice.” In the case of this $300 million bond proposal, the “public forum” page on the commission website contained a posting that failed to include the amount of the bond proposal on the front page – something the taxpayer might wish to know.
In fact, interested parties must follow a labyrinthine series of links to get to the individual projects – which finally list the estimated cost of each project (although not on the front page of the document). Also, these documents fail to list the project’s priority ranking in accordance with the intent of the new state law (Act 114).
On April 24 (and again the following day) I e-mailed the Secretary of Transportation asking that this information be made readily available on the S.C. DOT website – but received no response. Also, no changes were made on the website.
I recall the uproar in Greenville, S.C. when there was insufficient public notice regarding the I-385 project. Even though the S.C. DOT had met its “lawful” obligation for public notice, it did not reach legislators and others who would be impacted. How many people read the fine print?
This is critically important, because the “public notice” period is the one opportunity taxpayers have to “vote” on transportation projects. If enough people go to this site and make a comment before May 26 – they can CHANGE the vote of the Commission – BY FEDERAL LAW – as they did recently with the $400 million Mark Clark Expressway project in Charleston.
To view the link to this page, click here.
Over the past three years, I have made requests to the commission that we provide a “public comment” period during the commission meetings AND post detailed minutes of the workshops, committee meetings, and commission meetings on the DOT web site.
I have also encouraged the agency to make it easier for the public to comment on projects or other issues. One other commissioner concurred regarding public comment, but Chairman Isaac has – thus far, anyway – not taken the lead. In fact, he has stated that he wants the commission meetings to be as brief as possible, and that he wants to hold ALL discussion in workshops that often are hurried or too jam-packed to permit public feedback.
In light of ongoing news stories regarding the lack of transparency in our state government, it is clear that we are still playing “hide and go seek” with taxpayer dollars and with the voting public.
As adults, we should not be playing these childish games. Nor should we be approving projects that do not maximize value to the taxpayers.
AUTHOR’S NOTE: Sarah B. Nuckles represents South Carolina’s fifth congressional district on the S.C. Department of Transportation Commission.
By eggaday May 12, 2011 at 8:51 pm
well said
By Dana Beach May 12, 2011 at 10:25 pm
Let me be clear (to quote a well known politician), Sarah Knuckles is the only commissioner with the courage to tell the truth about the back room dealing and corruption in the DOT. The losers are the citizens and taxpayers of SC, who are saddled with the financial burden of hundreds of millions of dollars of wasted funds that could otherwise be used to reduce congestion in their daily commutes, to support job creation by facilitating freight movement through the state, and to sustain and improve the quality of life in SC metropolitan areas by providing more efficient access to jobs. If we sit on the sidelines and allow this enormous misuse of resources to handicap the state for decades to come, we have only ourselves to blame.
By costcutter May 13, 2011 at 9:58 am
The citizens cannot win on this. Commissioner Reardon stated it well. (paraphrased)The public doesn’t have a say. Its a Commission decision.
The DOT Staff knows who butters their bread and provides the information with this in mind. These are the same DOT staffers(some of who are retired and hang around) who provided the information were behind the movement to rid the agency of Elizabeth Mabry whose only fault was trying to please the legislature and their appointed commissioners. The staff and career commissioners know the Secretary is a temporary figure head. By the time he learns his way around while spending a considerable amount of time dealing with politicians and commissioners, he will be gone.The recent scam pulled by Chairman Danny Isaacs is a pure violation of the Act 114 and they know it. Sarah Knuckles is not one of the good ole boys and will not play along. In closing We waste more gasoline tax money by the bloated bureaucracy at DOT. Do some research and find out how much in money and efficiency was lost when the Highway Department restructured. This is a Department out of control.The political bureaucratic intrigue at DOT never ends. A recent 67 page audit by USDOT reinforced the problems at the agency including the latest debacle over SCEIS. The system can’t change when the key Senators have interests in projects at DOT such as I-73 in Leatherman’s District and the Hardee Expressway named for Senator Leatherman’s son-in-law and former commissioner who continues to provide advice to DOT. The Senator is Chair of the Joint Bond Review Committee who must approved the bonds for the projects. Will he recuse himself from voting on this bond bill? Will the Governor as Chair of the Budget and Control Board vote against these wasteful projects that are not in compliance with Act 114? Where is the Legislative Audit Council and our new IG?
By NEWCASTLE May 13, 2011 at 1:25 pm
The attempt(ha!) at public comment is a joke if not a crime in itself. I mean a CRIME like firing or investigation by a Federal agency(Fed grants canceled/repaid). All you have five or six numbers and a map. The EPA would never let you get away with that. There has to be a narrative. What are you trying to do(goals), why are you trying to do it, what State and Federal laws and regulations cover this project, what you are doing to meet the laws and regs., how this approach meets your goals? A little bureaucratic and tedious, but everybody can figure what is going on and why.
Pingback: Playing “Hide And Go Seek” With SC Highway Funds
By That Boz Guy @ The Beach May 27, 2011 at 2:08 pm
Look where Danny is from. Look who put him where he is. I’ve known him for 35 years, and know him as a nice guy and a good businessman, but he is also an assimilated good ol’ boy (he is, to the best of my knowledge, of Lebanese descent).
Danny is very closely associated with Brad Dean, CEO of the Myrtle Beach Chamber, and Ken Ard’s Chief of Staff Brant Branham — both reportedly targets of the Coastal Kickback (or Chambergate) investigation by the Feds.
It didn’t surprise me to learn that Danny may be running a scam on highway funding, especially where I-73 is concerned. Look at who heads up both the state and the national organizations devoted to promoting that road: The aforementioned Brad Dean, of course. Playing Hide and Go Seek with money is his specialty. Another way of putting it is that he plays shell games with it — and Danny is obviously doing the same.
The Feds are very likely looking closely at this crap, and how it ties in to all the pay-offs and land/money/power grabs by the MB Chamber, its cronies in local government and business, and the cabal that runs and owns them all — or they are not doing their job worht a damn.