Did an older South Carolina transit authority have to follow new board-appointment rules?

Plain-English summary

A legislator asked whether the Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority, formed before July 1985, had to follow later board-appointment rules while otherwise operating under older law. The 2000 informal opinion said yes as earlier appointees' terms expired. A 1985 act let older authorities continue under prior law but specifically required new appointments and board composition to follow § 58-25-40 when those terms ended. The AG said all pre-1985 terms should have expired by 2000 and noted that the authority's own bylaws had adopted the newer provision.

The letter also said the legislative delegation had to appoint three additional board members because the authority received state funds. It acknowledged uncertainty about the exact method by which the delegation should choose those appointees, while treating the delegation's appointment authority as clear.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2000. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later
AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current
legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy
mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Did operating under pre-1985 law preserve all old board-appointment rules?
A: No. The AG said the 1985 act expressly moved appointments and board composition to the newer rule as old terms expired.

Q: Why were three additional delegation members required?
A: The opinion applied the provision requiring three such members when the authority received state general-fund or highway-fund grants.

Q: Did the AG specify the exact selection procedure?
A: No. It said that procedure was unclear but that the legislative delegation had the authority to appoint the members.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion read § 58-25-40 together with Section 4 of Act No. 169 of 1985. The latter preserved older operating terms while shifting appointments and composition as incumbent terms expired. The AG applied that transition rule to the authority's reported funding and bylaws.

Citations and references

• § 58-25-40, transportation authority board appointments and composition.
• Section 4 of Act No. 169 of 1985, the transition rule for older authorities.
• Worthington v. Belcher, cited for applying unambiguous statutory text.

Official title

Asking about the legal status of the current legislative delegation appointees to the Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority.

Requester

The Honorable Herb Kirsh, Member, House of Representatives

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/august-15-2000/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/00aug15kirsh.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
(HARLIE CONDON
.-\ITOR.' IEY GENERAL

August 15 , 2000

The Honorable Herb Kirsh
Member, House of Representatives
Box 31
Clover, South Carolina 29710

RE: Informal Opinion
Dear Representative Kirsh.
Thank you for your letter of May 3, 2000. requesting an opinion of this Office. You ask about the legal status of the current legislative delegation appointees ro the Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority. You present two questions: 1.) Shall a transportation authority formed under Chapter 25 of Title 58 of the South Carolina Code of Laws ( 1976. as amended) prior to July 1. 1985 and choosing to operate in accordance with the terms and conditions of that law follow the terms and provisions of Section 58-25-40?

2.) Shall a transportation authority formed under Chapter 25 of Title 58 of the South Carolina Code of Laws (I 976, as amended) prior to July I. 1985 and choosing to operate in accordance with the terms and conditions of that law and receiving a grant of funds from the state general fund and/or the highway fund have three legislati\ e delegation appointees to its board chosen by a method determined by a majority of the delegation members of the member counties involved in the authority acting jointly excepting the case where the method of appointment of the legislative delegation members is speci tied in the agreement establishing the authority?
\Ve are also advised that although the Authority chose to operate in accordance with the tem1s and conditions of the law prior to July L 1985. the Authority specifically adopted in its by-la\vs S.C.

Representative Kirsh
August 15. 2000
Page 2of3
Code Ann.§ 58-25-40. Furthermore. we are advised that. consistent with S.C. Code Ann.§ 58-2540. the terms of the appointees on the governing board are only three years. The law relating to regional transportation authorities was found in South Carolina Code of Laws Section 58-25-10 et seq .. prior to the adoption of Act No. 169of1985. The current S. C. Code
§ 58-25-40 provides for the appointment terms. and removal of appointees to the governing board of a transportation authority. The first two paragraphs address the composition of the core representatives. The third paragraph reads. in pertinent part: As many as three additional members of the governing board of a transportation authority may be appointed by the legislative delegations of the member counties if approved in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 58-25-30. If the authority receives a

grant of the state fimds from the general jimd or the highway fund. the delegation shall appoint three additional members. Unless the agreement provides othenvise. the members of the governing board appointed by the delegation must be apportioned as detern1ined by a majority of the delegation members. including the resident senator. ... (emphasis added)

Also relevant to your inquiry is Section 4 of Act No. 169 of 1985. which states: Any transportation authority formed under Chapter 25 of Title 58 of the 1976 Code prior to July I. 1985. may continue to operate in accordance vvith the terms and conditions of that law. However. as the terms of appointees to the governing board expire. appointments and composition must be in accordance with the provisions of Section 58-25-40 .... This provision --grandfathers .. appointees under the old law. but specifically applies § 58-25-40 as nevv terms begin. even if othenvise the A.uthority continues to operate under the old law. Your questions address whether the current § 58-25-40 applies to a board operating under the old law. Because the Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority chose to operate under the pre1985 amendments. it is generally governed by the provisions of the old law. However. the J 985 amendment made clear that with respect to the appointment and composition of the representatives on the governing board. the provisions of the nevv law .vould control as the tenns of the pre- I ll85 representatives expired. regardless ohvhether the old law controlled as to other provisions. In other words. a board composed entirely of pre-1985 members .vhose tem1s had not yet expired ma; not be governed by § 58-25-40 at all. But once ne\v terms are introduced. the appointmt.'.nt prO\ isions of§ 58-25-40 are implicated. As of the year ::WOO. all prt.'.-1985 terms of appointees tl) the go\ erning hoard should h;l\c expired. Therefore. applying the plain and literal meaning of the statute. \hich must be Jone in the absenct.'. of ambiguity. Worthington v. Belcher. 274 S.C. 366. 264 S.E.2d 148 ( ! 980 ). this Office

Representative Kirsh
August 15, 2000
Page 3of3
advises that the Authority must follow the provisions of§ 58-25-40. Furthermore. this conclusion is in accordance with the Authority's own by-laws. which as we are told. have adopted § 58-25-40. Finally, § 58-25-40 requires the legislative delegation to appoint three additional members to the board if the Authority receives state funds. Although the exact method for the legislative delegation to choose the appointees is unclear, see Op. Atty. Gen No. 90-9 (Jan. 17, 1990). the statute plainly states that the legislative delegation has the authority to appoint the members.

l,

In sum, to answer your two questions. it is the opinion of this Office that the Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority must follow the provisions of S.C. Code Ann. § 58-25-40. Because the Authority receives state funds, the legislative delegation must appoint three additional members to the governing board.

~
!

This letter is an informal opinion only. It has been written by a designated Senior Assistant Attorney General and represents the position of the undersigned attorney as to the specific question asked. It has not, however. been personally scrutinized by the Attorney General not officially published in the manner of a formal opinion.

I

With kind regards. I remain
Very truly yours.

Zeb C. Williams. III
Deputy Attorney General