APRIL 25, 2014 -- The state Senate is expected to vote Tuesday on a bill that could allow for more solar power in South Carolina. Depending on whom you talk to, the measure is either “the most comprehensive” in the nation or, at best, “a compromise.”

The Distributed Energy Resource Program Act would allow for easier net metering, or private solar generators to sell electricity they create to the state’s power grid.

If the bill passes both chambers as written, private citizens and business will be able more easily to cover the roofs of their homes and facilities with a solar array and sell metered power.

For years, utilities have been “stonewalling” the effort, according to state Sen. Chauncey “Greg” Gregory (R-LancasterRock Hill). In the past, utilities were asked to regulate solar power, which Gregory said was akin to “hitting a gnat with a sledgehammer.”

This bill would move the regulation of solar to the state’s Office of Regulatory Staff, which already represents the public interest in dealing with utilities.

From comprehensive ...

Danny Kassis, vice president of customer service and renewables at SCE&G, said the bill was not only “the right thing to do,” but it was also the most comprehensive of its kind in the country.

Kassis also said the bill reflects the interests of conservation, the consumer and power generators coming together on the same page. He said the bill was not written the way utilities would have wanted it and that it was a compromise in the best sense of the word.

Kassis defended utilities’ actions related to solar in recent years, stating that SCE&G has never been a “foe” of solar, and that it, like other renewables, holds an important place in the company’s diversified energy portfolio going forward.

... to a big step forward

Greenies like Hamilton Davis, energy and climate director at the S.C. Coastal Conservation League, said the bill was “not the most advanced” in the country, but that it was a “huge step forward.”

Davis said the bill was a product of compromise, in that no one side got all it wanted.

“One thing we didn’t get was direct third-party sales,” Davis said, adding that the bill didn’t allow for tax-exempt entities, like churches, to take part in net metering because of complicated IRS rules.

And Davis said the utilities had to give up on blocking net metering. “They’ve been opposed to solar leasing in the past,” he said, adding that now utilities have to acknowledge that solar energy is a legitimate product in the energy marketplace.

State Sen. Brad Hutto (D-Orangeburg), like Gregory a sponsor of the bill, said the act would provide a road map for the next five years as related to evolving renewable energy in the state.

“The bill, as it is written, is not as favorable as I would have like for solar energy,” Hutto said. But it would allow for solar to “prove itself” over the next five years and likely expand other renewable energy sources in state, he added.

Renewable energy increasing here

According to a recent study of the South Carolina economy, renewable fuels already:

• Support more than 5,500 jobs and nearly $200 million in wages,
• Drive $933 million in economic output,
• And generate $19.7 million in state tax revenue every year.

Hutto argued that construction of future energy plants could be avoided via solar, even with the technology that exists now. Critics have always pointed to storage issues with solar and that generation only happens when the sun is shining.

Hutto saw a silver lining. He contended that solar delivers electricity at peak demand times in the state – during the day when everyone is at work and the temperatures are at their highest.

Hutto said that asking for a defined percentage of solar-generated power to be provided by utilities wouldn’t “fly” in the state at this time.

Gregory said because of bipartisan support in the Senate, the bill would have already been delivered to the House by now had it not been for some procedural and scheduling glitches.

Gregory said the bill will likely be voted on successfully in second and third readings by Wednesday, well before the May 1 deadline when new bills need two-thirds support to pass between chambers.

Bill Davis is senior editor of Statehouse Report.  He can be reached at: billdavis@statehousereport.com.

RECENT NEWS STORIES

• 4/18: The high cost of saying no to Medicaid expansion
  
• 4/11: House, Senate battle over education
• 4/4: House incumbents get another free pass
• MORE NEWS: Archives

The “crossover deadline” -- the date after which the House or Senate has to have a supermajority to consider a new bill from the other chamber -- looms on May 1, which will mean the House will spend next week rushing to finish all of the bills on its floor calendar.

In the Senate, lawmakers will continue to work on the state budget in the Finance Committee. On the floor, senators are expected to debate H. 3198, a measure to put county boards of registration and election under the State Election Commission. Also up for possible debate is statewide third reading of  a bill to make superintendent an appointed position. Also next week:

Education Oversight. The Education Oversight Committee will meet 1 p.m. April 28 in 433 Blatt to discuss academic standards, EIA and a communications plan. Agenda.

Senate Medical Affairs. A subcommittee will meet 9 a.m. April 30 to discuss bills related to long-term care facilities, the state’s Certificate of Need Program and abortion. Agenda.

House Ag. The Environmental Affairs I subcommittee will meet 8:30 a.m. Wednesday in 410 Blatt to discuss two bills related to coastal zone areas and wave dissipation devices. Agenda.

House Judiciary. The Constitutional Laws subcommittee will meet after House adjournment on May 1 in 516 Blatt to discuss a major ethics reform bill, H. 3945. Agenda.

• All Senate committee meetings

• All House committee meetings

State funding for two-year and four-year public colleges and universities in the proposed 2014-15 budget -- $458 million -- is about where it was 27 years ago when lawmakers appropriated $441 million for higher education. 

After 1988, funding steadily grew to a high of $781 million in 2001. For several years, it hovered around $650 million before taking a dive in recession years to a low of $410 million in 2012. 

But one thing has been pretty consistent over these three decades -- the percentage of General Fund revenues, or state tax dollars, that has gone to higher ed has dropped year after year, from 16.8 percent of appropriations in 1986 to 7.1 percent in 2013. 

So to say that proposed funding of $458 million in 2014-15 is more than it was 27 years ago is, in reality, misleading. Why? The numbers haven’t been adjusted for inflation. If that is done, $441 million in 1988 dollars had the buying power of $881 million today. In other words, higher education has been squeezed out of about half of its General Fund appropriation over the years.

What’s really damning about the state’s downward spiral of support for higher education operating budgets is the impact it has on South Carolina in several ways:

• Higher tuition rates. Because costs at colleges are not going down, having less in state money has put pressure on schools to generate revenues in new ways. That has meant skyrocketing tuition rates, particularly for out-of-state students. South Carolina colleges on the whole have the highest tuition rates in the Southeast, according to the Southern Regional Education Board. In a 16-state region stretching from Delaware to Texas, the Palmetto State’s public four-year college tuition rate last year was $9,776. Most were under $7,000 a year.
  
  
• Lack of vision. A strategy pursued for decades by North Carolina to pull people out of poverty was to invest in higher education so they could get better jobs and make more money. As reported in the March 28 issue of Statehouse Report, Clemson says a graduate will earn $872,000 in a lifetime more than someone without a degree.
  
  
• Specific neglect. After the Great Recession ended three or so years ago, the state started taking in more tax dollars and restoring budget cuts made at the end of the Sanford administration. In recent years, state coffers have had $1.4 billion in new tax revenue, according to Statehouse sources. Want to guess how much has been restored to higher education in the intervening years? Just $20 million.

So why has the General Assembly neglected higher education, recently and over a period of three decades? Here are three reasons:

• Other sources of money. Because higher education institutions have their own revenue -- tuition -- the General Assembly doesn’t take its funding responsibility too seriously. Members figure if schools need more money, they can raise it, not rely on taxpayers.
  
  
• Short-term thinking.   State lawmakers have no long-term plan on how to nurture the state. Instead of having a vision for what South Carolina can be, they head to Columbia every year with only one true mission -- to get a budget for that year to meet the next year’s needs. This approach is similar to Wall Street’s focus on quarterly reports over long-term, steady growth.
  
  
• Stuck in past. South Carolina still has a plantation culture replete with bosses (legislators) who want to control workers (taxpayers).   By providing more education to people, bosses lose some control. And Lord knows, bosses don’t want to lose control.

It’s time for South Carolina to get away from plantation spending on higher education and invest in a long-term strategy to prepare students for college and for them to be able to attend at affordable rates so they can have more knowledge and build more wealth. The status quo of incrementalism is unacceptable.

Andy Brack is editor and publisher of Statehouse Report.  You can reach Brack at: brack@statehousereport.com.

• 4/18: United Ways help in a million ways
• 4/11:  Waring's impact big on politics, too
• 4/4: Some good news for the Palmetto State
• MORE BRACK:  See our archives

Instead, students will take two tests, one of them the Work Keys assessment that gives an indication of an individual’s readiness for the work place.  The other test has not yet been selected, but will be either of two college entrance exams, the ACT or the SAT.  There is no minimum score required on either test, at least not initially.

According to the ACT, only 22 percent of South Carolina 2013 graduates were considered fully qualified for college or a meaningful career.  The SAT set the percentage of college or career readiness at 34 percent .

So, what does this mean?  First it does away with a pretty useless test.  Thought not formally acknowledged, the HSAP was generally considered to be an eighth grade test given in the tenth grade that was supposed to indicate a student’s readiness for a high school diploma.  It did not do that. Good bye and good riddance to HSAP.

For some South Carolina’s students, the HSAP was the thing that stood between them and a diploma. They could earn the required 24 credits, but they couldn’t pass, even after multiple attempts, the exit exam – which as I have already said was acknowledged to be an eighth grade exam given for the first time in the tenth grade.  And that, in my mind anyway, raises grave doubts about the quality of those 24 credits.  And those grave doubts are only reinforced by the ACT and SAT results cited above.

Second, expect to see the number and percentage of high school graduations soar next year.  Districts will award diplomas to students who heretofore could earn the credits, but who couldn’t pass the eighth grade test.  Expect Districts to talk about the great improvement. But do not expect to see any more South Carolina high school graduates genuinely prepared for college or career.  In fact, I predict that percentage to fall.

The demise of HSAP is a good thing. It did not ensure that students who passed it received a college- or career-ready education.  It has been replaced by two national level tests the results of which we can’t manipulate and which will show where our students stand compared to students across the nation.  The new tests won’t prevent a student from getting a diploma that they don’t deserve.  It will be up to the rest of us to insist that a high school diploma is worth something and that every South Carolina student earns one. 

Hats off to the EOC for pushing this bold step and to the Legislature for taking it. Now, if we will only use the results from the new tests the way we should use the results from every test, to improve instruction and student outcomes.

If you are interested in reading the legislation, you can find it here.

Jon Butzon is an education policy analyst from Summerville who blogs at JonButzon.com.

ArtFields. Good luck to folks around Lake City as they kick off their arts festival. It’s an example of how a small town can be creative in generating interest and income for a rural area. More.