‘Let us do our work’: Hilton Head town officials bristle at private group urging speed on U.S. 278 project

Near the end of the public comment portion of Tuesday’s town council meeting, Ward 4 Councilwoman Tamara Becker punctuated a message she and other councilmembers had sent throughout the evening: “Let us do our work.”

The issue on the table is whether or not council should accelerate the 278 project’s timeline by approving a ‘municipal consent resolution. This resolution, while not officially on the council’s agenda, resulted in an hour of residents parading to the microphone to add their voices to the debate.

The Greater Island Council, a private group of volunteer Lowcountry residents who advance initiatives from education to parks and rec, passed a resolution in early May requesting Hilton Head provide its municipal consent on the U.S. 278 corridor project. The GIC is unrelated to any government or agency.

Members of the GIC appeared before town council requesting a “sense of urgency” on the project, lamenting the ongoing town study of potential alternatives as a delay to the process. However, town, county and state officials have repeatedly pointed out that the lack of municipal consent is not delaying the project at this stage, leaving many outside of the GIC to wonder why the group is petitioning to rush the process.

The friction between private residents pushing public officials on the matter eventually led Becker to question if the group’s lobbying was overstepping the bounds of its nonprofit status at the end of the public comment period.

“I would like to ask the Greater Island Council this question,” Becker said. “As a 501(c)(3) organization, do you comply with the Internal Revenue Service’s (requirements)? Have you met the ‘insubstantial amount’ (of lobbying) test that is in Section 4911 C2 of the code?”

Would municipal consent speed up the project?

At Tuesday’s meeting, the town approved a request for qualifications document crafted by a citizen’s advisory committee on the U.S. 278 project. The RFQ will be used to recruit engineering firms interested in conducting a broader study of the impacts the 278 project will have on traffic, safety, and the environment on Hilton Head that extends beyond the scope of the current county-town joint study.

Assistant Town Manager Shawn Colin preempted any comments about the town halting the project’s progress when he took the podium to discuss the new RFQ.

“No action the town is currently taking is holding up the project,” Colin said.

That sentiment was echoed last week, when Hilton Head Mayor Alan Perry told The Island Packet the same. It was reinforced once more in a text message the state’s Secretary of Transportation, Christy Hall, sent to state Sen. Tom Davis (R-Beaufort)

“Based on my understanding of the current project timeline, the town would need to provide consent prior to the end of the calendar year,” Hall’s message read. “It’s not delaying anything at this point, but the town should probably begin their dialogue and any necessary committee work in earnest within the next 90 days.”

Davis was present at the meeting as well and confirmed the town withholding municipal consent for the time being — a proviso that was a key component in finally reaching an agreement with county officials last fall to progress the project — is not impeding the project.

The proverbial ball remains in the county’s court on several important steps that Colin outlined at the meeting, including submitting an environmental assessment to the federal level, acquiring a finding of no significant impact, or FONSI, and closing a $27 million funding gap in the project.

Last week, Assistant County Administrator Jared Fralix told The Island Packet the design on the project is still only about 30% complete.

Peter Kristian, a member of the GIC and general manager of Hilton Head Plantation, spoke at the meeting and indicated he was “disappointed” in town council for pushing back against the resolution. He spoke to the impacts worsening traffic on the bridges connecting Hilton Head to the mainland have on his ability to hire workers as reasons town officials should hurry the project along.

“I can’t get people to come to work, and I’m paying them a higher salary over and over again,” Kristian said.

In some cases, potential hires don’t show up to interviews at all, which Kristian attributed to the commute’s traffic dissuading off-island workers from wanting to cross the bridges.

Becker acknowledged the traffic issue and its impact on Hilton Head’s hiring prospects, and suggested a more immediate solution than waiting for the 278 construction. She revisited an idea she’s posed in the past to arrange for shuttle services like Palmetto Breeze to pick up employees off the island and bring them to their workplaces, reducing the amount of cars that need to cross the bridge daily.

Carlton Dallas, a GIC member who spoke at the meeting, said solving the congestion issue is just one of two ways island employers must compete for labor with businesses in Bluffton and elsewhere.

“The other is, the businesses will have to pay more if that’s the route you go,” Dallas said. “That is something I think we have to come to a reality check on.”

When asked how the town’s municipal consent would solve the issues GIC members brought up at the meeting, and speed the project along, Kristian acknowledged it may not have any effect.

“Well, it may not,” Kristian said. “It may not help the project move forward. There are some aspects of the project that can move forward without municipal consent, but we don’t want it to hold up the rest of that planning. ... I just get the sense that we are studying this endlessly.”

The town-county joint study is expected to wrap up around August or September, Fralix told The Island Packet. Colin said the town’s independent study would conclude by the end of this year or into the first quarter of 2024.

Ultimately, municipal consent would prove the town is viewing the project with a “sense of urgency,” Kristian said.

“Let’s move it along.”

Did the GIC violate nonprofit lobbying law?

The legal issue Becker brought up from the dais remains unclear.

According to the IRS, a 501(c)(3) organization “may engage in some lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks loss of tax-exempt status.”

“An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation,” the agency’s website states.

The organizational status of the GIC is also unclear, however. The Island Packet contacted an IRS spokesperson Thursday morning. In the agency’s database of tax exempt organizations, the GIC appears alongside record of 990-N forms filed back to 2009.

The database entry does not indicate the GIC’s exact classification, and the spokesperson was unable to determine it at the time.

“You’re seeing (on the database) the same thing that I’d see,” the spokesperson said.

The Island Packet contacted the South Carolina Secretary of State’s office as well, and staff weren’t able to confirm the GIC’s exact organizational status.

After Becker’s comments, Kristian and GIC treasurer Ray Warco convened outside council chambers on whether the GIC was classified as a 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) organization.

“They’re going to go back and they’re going to look at that,” Kristian said. “Ray Warco, who’s the treasurer, believes it’s not a charitable organization, so he’s going to go back and look at it.”

Third party online databases present conflicting information, with some listing the group as a (c)(3) organization and others showing (c)(4) status. The distinction is important to Becker’s point, as (c)(4) groups can engage in “unlimited” lobbying, “provided that the lobbying is related to the organization’s exempt purpose.”

Residents sound off

Islanders who spoke in opposition of the GIC’s push praised the town council for staying the course on its independent study.

“This town council is showing backbone,” said Diederik Advocaat, a member of the advisory committee that constructed the study RFQ council approved Tuesday evening. “(It is) standing up for the greater good of the island.”

Linda Harrington, another resident who spoke at the meeting, said the GIC’s resolution was an “under-handed” attempt by a private group to influence town policy.

The GIC’s resolution appeared before some boards of the island’s private communities, and was originally on an agenda to come before Indigo Run’s board, where Harrington lives. She said discussion of the resolution was ultimately removed from that agenda.

In the past, the town has taken resolutions passed by the GIC onto its agendas. The January 17 agenda saw consideration of a GIC resolution asking the town and county to jointly improve local recycling facilities. The town ultimately took no action on the item at that meeting.

“The only people to make motions which then become resolutions after they’re passed are you that are elected,” Harrington said. “No Greater Island Council should be submitting resolutions, no other organizations. It’s your job as an elected official not to have the work done by an outside council. ... it isn’t a proper action.”

Harrington further said the GIC’s resolution coming before plantation managing boards was tantamount to residents of those neighborhoods who signed a petition asking the town to reconsider the county’s current 278 plan having their voices removed from the discourse.

After the meeting, Kristian called the legitimacy of the petition’s 10,000 signatures into question. He added that some neighborhood managers that supported the GIC’s effort didn’t come to the meeting to avoid being “vilified” for their support.

“That’s unfortunate, because it has a chilling effect on the public’s ability to provide input,” Kristian said.