Beaufort Co. referendum has incorrect wording; some question cities’ ethics in pushing tax
Beaufort County’s upcoming referendum on a proposed 1% sales tax has inaccurate wording, according to the spokesperson for Beaufort County.
On Tuesday, voters in Beaufort County will be asked whether they approve of the tax, which, according to state law, would be levied on most sales countywide and would be used to offset property taxes (71%) and provide funding to county and municipal operations (29%).
But the question that voters will see on Tuesday says the tax “may” be used to offset property taxes and pay for government operations. The language appears to be a misleading representation of state law, which requires governments to use at least 71% for a property tax rollback and 29% for county and municipal revenue.
Of the 71% rollback amount, 67% would be distributed to county government and 33% would be distributed to municipal governments, based on population, according to the Municipal Association of South Carolina.
State law supersedes the confusing ballot language.
In a text to a reporter Thursday, County spokesperson Chris Ophardt said the language in the ballot was a typo. He confirmed that state law requires at least 71% to go toward property tax relief, but the typo cannot be fixed because the ballots are already printed.
“A clerical typing error was made when the county submitted the ballot language to election officials,” he said.
Called Thursday, Beaufort County Board of Voter Registration and Elections Director Marie Smalls said the board of elections takes the language given by County Council. She said she did not have authority to change the wording.
Compounding the confusion surrounding Tuesday’s referendum, two marketing campaigns — one funded by local governments and drawing criticism for its alleged bias, and another by the Beaufort County GOP — have differing takes in their attempts to inform the public about what’s on the ballot.
The first marketing campaign, called BOOST, was created by the Charleston-based firm MRB Group Consulting with funding from the City of Beaufort and at least three other municipalities. An agreement between the firm and Beaufort, signed Sept. 17, states that Beaufort will pay the firm $49,975 for “consulting services for public education campaign.”
An intergovernmental agreement, obtained by The Island Packet and Beaufort Gazette, shows that the town of Bluffton and the cities of Hardeeville and Yemassee have agreed to pay a portion of the $49,975.
The taxpayer-funded marketing campaign has drawn criticism from some, who argue that the campaign is a thinly veiled attempt to influence the upcoming referendum — a violation of state law.
A call to MRB Group was not returned Thursday.
The other campaign, SayNoInNovember.com, was organized by the Beaufort County Republican Party and asks voters to vote against both the sales tax referendum and the county’s referendum to change the form of government.
Kevin Hennelly, chair of the Beaufort County GOP, said he was concerned about the BOOST campaign.
“They’re supposed to show two sides of the story, and they’re not, and it’s kind of troubling,” he said. “They’re being very careful, but it’s very clear that it is the towns and cities that are pushing this.”
Hennelly said he doesn’t think the sales tax will pass and questioned whether the BOOST marketing campaign constituted ethics violations because of the use of local government funds.
The Island Packet and Beaufort Gazette have combed through both marketing campaigns and what the campaigns are representing to the public. Here’s what we know:
BOOST Campaign
The debate over the sales tax referendum appears to have entered a gray area of state ethics law, where elected officials who previously supported the tax are now paying a firm to inform the public about its benefits while they tow the line of support.
Over the last year, local governments lobbied Beaufort County Council to place the local option sales tax question on the Nov. 2 ballot. In April, the mayors of Beaufort, Bluffton, Hardeeville, Hilton Head Island, Port Royal and Yemassee all signed a letter to the council in support of the tax being placed on the ballot.
In May, Beaufort County Council voted 7-4 to place the issue on the ballot.
Three months later, Beaufort City Council issued a request for proposal, seeking consulting companies to apply for a “Multi-Jurisdictional Public Education Campaign” related to the sales tax.
As part of the request, the city compiled answers to questions from various consulting companies — although it’s unclear which companies asked the questions. One of the questions asked: “Are we allowed to develop a campaign that would target more likely voters that would support the LOST increase, even if just providing them with non-persuasive materials?”
The city, according to the addition, responded: “Yes, that is permissible.”
On September 14, Beaufort City Council voted to select Charleston-based MRB Group Consulting for the campaign. An agreement between the two entities, signed three days later, states that the city would pay the firm $34,975 for professional services and $15,000 for campaign expenses.
The city, according to City Finance Director Kathy Todd, has not yet paid the amount.
An intergovernmental agreement dated Sept. 30 shows that the town of Bluffton and the cities of Yemassee and Hardeeville have agreed to share a portion of the cost:
▪ Bluffton: $10,000
▪ Yemassee: $5,000
▪ Hardeeville: $5,000
Although their towns are named on the agreement, Hilton Head and Port Royal did not sign it.
The decision on whether to sign on to the marketing campaign was a source of debate on Hilton Head and Beaufort County councils, and both entities ultimately decided instead to publish their own information about the tax on their websites.
In an Oct. 5 discussion about the campaign, Hilton Head voted 7-0 to allow Town Manager Marc Orlando to spend up to $15,000 to create neutral education materials about the tax.
Orlando referred to the BOOST campaign and said he would have to “massage the information a little bit” to appease town council.
The BOOST marketing campaign appears to be focused on the website boostourcommunities.com. The website includes information about the sales tax and lists the benefits for the area. It also includes a calculator for residents to figure out how the tax would offset their property taxes.
Along with the website, the campaign has social media sites and a YouTube channel with videos from local mayors.
One video, from Bluffton Mayor Lisa Sulka, twice encourages voters to “help boost Bluffton in November.”
Sulka did not return a call for comment Thursday.
Called Thursday, former Beaufort County Council member Steven Baer said he thinks the BOOST campaign is a violation of state law.
“They keep stretching the boundary to see if someone will complain about it,” he said. “This is a one-sided program. .. Even the word ‘boost’ is a positive message, and it’s supposed to be neutral. It’s also deficient in information.”
According to state law, a person may not use or authorize the use of public funds, property, or time to influence the outcome of an election. A 2018 opinion from the S.C. Ethics Commission states that information presented by a public body relating to a referendum must be neutral in content.
Contacted this week, the Ethics Commission and the Municipal Association of South Carolina said it could not provide an opinion on whether the BOOST marketing campaign violated the law.
Called Thursday, Bluffton Town Manager Stephen Steese said the campaign sought only to educate people about the upcoming referendum. He blamed confusion on the ballot’s misleading language.
Asked why Bluffton did not vote to join the campaign in public before he signed the agreement, Steese said council had already expressed interest in supporting the sales tax placement on the ballot and that he had authority to sign it because the expense was within his authorization limit.
Beaufort Mayor Stephen Murray, whose municipality is spearheading the marketing campaign, said he hadn’t seen any content that “crossed the line” of encouraging people to vote in favor of the tax. He said all of the information is being vetted by staff and attorneys before it goes to the public.
Last week, Murray also wrote an op-ed in The Island Packet and Beaufort Gazette that said he supported the tax.
SayNoInNovember
On the other side, the Beaufort County Republican Party has rallied against both referenda on Tuesday’s ballot.
“The Executive Committee, freedom loving members of our community, unanimously voted against increased taxes and giving up their right to vote,” Chair Hennelly said on the website. “If you think government has enough money and power, vote no to both referendums on the 2021 ballot.”
In an interview, Hennelly said his main concern with the tax is that it’s regressive — favoring high-income property owners over renters. He also said it’s unclear why the county is pushing for both issues.
After the group’s executive committee voted not to support the referenda, volunteers created the new website and cards and fliers opposing both proposals.
“The sense we’re getting in the field — and we had people out all weekend handing out thousands of postcards — is that there’s not a lot of stomach for either of these issues,” he said.
This story was originally published October 28, 2021 at 3:49 PM.
