July 3, 2024

Dear Mr. Speaker and Members of the General Assembly:

I am vetoing and returning without my approval certain line items in R-252, H. 5100, the FY
2024-25 General Appropriations Act.

Everywhere we look, South Carolina is growing. More and more people are visiting our state –
with many deciding to stay for good. Employers are creating new jobs, entrepreneurs are
opening new businesses, and companies are deciding to relocate here.

Our economy is booming, once again creating a record budget surplus, this year totaling over
$2.8 billion in unexpected revenue. Last year, 2023, was the second most successful year in state
history for industry recruitment with $9.22 billion in new investment and 14,120 new jobs. This
followed 2022, which was the most successful in history with $10.27 billion in new investments
and 14,083 jobs. Since 2017, we have announced over $38.99 billion in new investments and
89,713 new jobs.

Through collaboration, cooperation, and communication, our successful partnership has produced
resounding win after win for the people and prosperity of South Carolina. This year’s budget
includes a historic 292 proposals from my executive budget totaling $2.4 billion – this represents
an increase of 126 more than were included two years ago.

In addition, and for the first time in recent memory, the General Assembly did not override a single
gubernatorial veto from the FY 2023-24 General Appropriations Act.

No endeavor better illustrates our state’s leadership style than the SC Nexus for Advanced
Resilient Energy (SC Nexus) consortium. SC Nexus is the culmination of groundwork laid in
prior years through collaborative public-private initiatives and was developed by the South
Carolina Department of Commerce in collaboration with our research institutions of higher
education, technical colleges, state agencies, the Savannah River National Laboratory, economic
development non-profits, and private businesses.
Page Two
July 3, 2024

This budget builds on my request by providing $20 million to support SC Nexus and serve as the
“state” match as required to be eligible for federal funding.

Until recently, South Carolina had the highest personal income tax rate in the southeast and the
12th highest in the nation at 7%. No more. A few years ago, I was honored to propose and sign
into law the largest income tax cut in state history, followed by income tax cuts in each
subsequent state budget. This budget continues to cut the state’s personal income tax rate,
lowering the rate from 6.4% to 6.2%.

This year taxpayers will keep an additional $199 million of their hard-earned money instead of
sending it to state government. If future revenues allow, we should continue cutting the personal
income tax rate each year until we are well below the 6% rate.

In the area of K-12 education, we continue to make remarkable progress in raising teacher pay.
Six years ago, the minimum starting salary of a teacher in South Carolina was $30,113, and the
average teacher salary was below the Southeastern average. Today, the minimum starting salary
of a teacher in South Carolina is $42,500, and the average teacher salary now exceeds the
Southeastern average.

This budget increases teacher salaries by $4,500, making the new minimum starting teacher
salary $47,000. My goal of a minimum starting salary of $50,000 – by 2026 – is within close
sight.

We all know that cell phone use is distracting. Four years ago, I began including a proviso in my
executive budgets prohibiting the use of cell phones or other personal electronic communication
devices by students at school. Studies show that students’ anxiety and stress related to social
media are reduced when cell phone access during school hours is prohibited.

I commend the General Assembly for including this proviso in this year’s state budget. Teachers
should be free to teach and students free to learn without the burden of added distraction.

As you are aware, placing an armed, certified school resource officer in every school, in every
county, all day, every day, has been one of my top priorities. At my request, the General
Assembly began providing funds to hire more resource officers for our state’s 1,284 public
schools. The grant program has been very successful. This year’s budget provides $2 million to
continue adding officers in the remaining 175 schools without an assigned officer.

Access and affordability to higher education for every South Carolinian is essential to ensuring
that our state has the trained and skilled workforce to compete for jobs and investment in the
future. That means we must invest to make all higher education – our colleges, universities, and
technical colleges – accessible and affordable for the sons and daughters of South Carolina.
Page Three
July 3, 2024

This year marks the fifth consecutive year that we froze college tuition for in-state students,
while providing additional funding for needs-based financial aid at any in-state public or private
college, university, or at our 16 technical colleges.

Additionally, the General Assembly agreed with my executive budget proposal to provide $1
million for operations and security for the Anne Frank Center and $1 million for the Center for
Civil Rights History and Research, both located at the University of South Carolina in Columbia.

To address the high demand for skills, training, and knowledge, this budget once again provides
$94 million in lottery funds to South Carolina Workforce Industry Needs Scholarships (SC
WINS) through the South Carolina Technical College System.

In the last four years, this very successful program has provided over 108,095 South Carolinians
with scholarships to cover the cost of tuition and required fees at any of our technical colleges to
earn a post-secondary or industry credential in high-demand careers like manufacturing, nursing,
computer science, information technology, transportation, logistics, or construction.

Despite the high demand for skills, training, and knowledge, many colleges across the nation are
seeing declining enrollments. To address these challenges, my executive budget proposed – and
the General Assembly declined to fund – a systemic review of our state’s 33 public institutions
of higher education. I am hopeful you will reconsider next year. The time has come to evaluate
whether the courses, degrees, and certificates that are offered at our public colleges and
universities are meeting our state’s future workforce needs.

There is no infrastructure more in need of continued investment than our state’s roads, bridges,
highways, and interstates. According to the Department of Transportation, there are nearly
9,000 bridges on primary and secondary roads across our state that need to be repaired,
rehabilitated, or rebuilt. Many of these bridges are 60, 70, and even in excess of 80 years old and
are crumbling before our eyes each day.

While the $200 million that was appropriated by the General Assembly was less than the $500
million my executive budget proposed for emergency bridge replacement and repairs, it is
nevertheless, a good start.

We cannot allow our state’s culturally and environmentally significant structures, monuments,
lands, islands, and waters to be overcome by development, mismanagement, flooding, erosion, or
storm damage. It is our duty to preserve and protect our history, our culture, and our
environment, and the public’s access to them, before they are lost forever.

For the second year in a row, the General Assembly has agreed and has appropriated $30 million
to the Office of Resilience and $28 million to the Conservation Land Bank and the Department
of Natural Resources. These funds will enhance these agencies’ existing efforts for preserving
Page Four
July 3, 2024

culturally or environmentally significant properties, disaster recovery, and flooding mitigation

efforts.

To keep South Carolinians safe, we must maintain a robust law enforcement presence – and
properly “fund the police.” Our state law enforcement and criminal justice agencies have begun
to stem the tide of personnel loss with recruitment and retention pay raises provided in previous
years’ state budgets.

This state budget continues that investment in our state law enforcement professionals by
providing an additional $6.1 million for recruitment and retention pay raises. It is my hope that
we will continue this annual investment in every state budget going forward.

Animal fighting, especially dog fighting, is one of the cruelest criminal activities in our society.
Law enforcement estimates that most of the people participating in this barbaric activity have
long criminal records.

In September 2022, a State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) agent was dedicated to
combating animal fighting and working in collaboration with other law enforcement agencies.
Shortly thereafter, the agent helped execute one of the “biggest takedowns of a dogfighting
operation in South Carolina history,” according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

This budget expands upon this success by providing an additional $566,000 to hire three
additional SLED agents dedicated to animal fighting.

Finally, I applaud the General Assembly for their remarkable evolution and strides made with the
disclosure of earmarked appropriations, which were previously shielded from public scrutiny or
debate.

After decades of overriding the gubernatorial vetoes of innocuous sounding appropriation titles
inside of which the earmarks were hidden, the leadership of the Senate and House of
Representatives now disclose the sponsors and recipients of earmarked appropriations, as well as
the activity, function, or project for which each earmark is intended.

There are approximately 512 earmarks totaling $424.7 million in the FY 2024-25 General
Appropriations Bill. Many of these earmarks are investments in local governments for the
purchase of new patrol cars, body armor, firetrucks, upgraded weaponry, and even K9 officers.
There are earmarks for infrastructure, buildings, roads, bridges, wastewater and sewer projects,
recreational parks, walking trails, and traffic improvements.
I have included a few examples of the many deliberative and meritorious “earmark”
appropriations that were sponsored by members of the General Assembly.
Page Five
July 3, 2024

Senator Ross Turner sponsored a $2.0 million earmark to construct a new facility for Meals on
Wheels of Greenville. Research documents that food insecure seniors are 60% more likely to
have congestive heart failure or suffer a heart attack and are three times more likely to suffer
from depression. In 2023, Meals on Wheels of Greenville delivered 382,936 meals to 2,569
clients. With South Carolina’s population of individuals who are 60 years of age or older to grow
by 27% by the year 2030, Meals on Wheels of Greenville needs a new site that will triple meal
production.
Representative Chris Murphy sponsored a $500,000 earmark for Turn90 to provide reentry
services to men at risk of rearrest as they return home from incarceration. For every dollar
invested in Turn90, the state saves an estimated $1.76 in avoided prison costs. This March, the
Riley Institute awarded Turn90 the 2024 OneSouthCarolina Partners in Progress Award, which
recognizes a significant contribution to the social and economic progress of South Carolina.
Representatives Ivory Thigpen and Annie McDaniel and Senators Vernon Stephens and Deon
Tedder sponsored a $300,000 earmark to the University-Industry Demonstration Partnership
(UIDP) in support of the 2025 HBCU Engage National Conference to be held in Charleston in
March 2025. The UIDP supports collaborations between universities and industry by
developing and disseminating strategies for addressing common issues between the two sectors.
Annually, UIDP sponsors a national conference that focuses on collaborations between industries
and historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) to highlight academic programs and
research efforts. The 2025 conference will provide an opportunity for national and international
companies to visit the campuses of South Carolina’s HBCUs, showcasing, promoting, and
maximizing the exposures of South Carolina’s HBCUs nationally.
Senator Chip Campsen sponsored an earmark of $500,000 to the town of James Island. Testing
of water samples has indicated that old and failing septic tanks in the James Island Creek
Watershed are the likely source of pollutants in the area. The objective of the earmark is to fund
new sewer lines to replace these septic tanks, thus addressing an environmental hazard.
However, I must repeat my proposal for a better way to accomplish this transparency and
accountability for the taxpayers. I once again ask the General Assembly to consider my proposal
to create a public, merit-based competitive grants process for these types of appropriations,
especially as it relates to non-governmental organizations.

Administered by state agencies, funds would be made available only to entities which
demonstrate required community support and missions consistent with the policy goals and
outcomes intended by the General Assembly. Further, all applications and award criteria would
be placed online, allowing for public scrutiny and total transparency.

To my colleagues in the General Assembly, I say: The people of South Carolina have benefited
from our ongoing cooperation, communication, and collaboration. Let us continue to work
Page Six
July 3, 2024

together vigorously, thereby ensuring that future generations of South Carolinians can keep
winning and prospering.

In that spirit, I ask that you thoughtfully consider and sustain each of the following vetoes:

Veto 1

Department of Education, Part IB, Section 1, Page 302, Proviso 1.89, SDE:
Competency-Based Education

Act 127 of 2024 codified the ability of schools or school districts to implement
competency-based education, which previously had been authorized by this recurring
proviso in the annual general appropriations act. The law went into effect on May 13,
2024; therefore, the proviso is no longer needed.

Veto 2

Department of Education, Part IB, Section 1, Page 310, Proviso 1.122, SDE: Activity
Buses

This proviso authorizes school districts to provide activity school bus access to
community nonprofit organizations for non-educational purposes. This is not an
appropriate use of school district resources and may raise legal, ethical or liability issues.

Veto 3
Commission on Higher Education, Part IB, Section 11, Page 351, Proviso 11.24, CHE:
SC University Cyber Leadership Council.
This proviso creates the South Carolina University Cyber Leadership Council at the
Commission on Higher Education.
On September 9, 2022, I issued Executive Order 2022-27, directing the South Carolina
Department of Commerce to lead a collaborative effort among industry, academia,
nonprofit organizations, and government to enhance the competitive standing of South
Carolina’s cybersecurity ecosystem and workforce. The result of that effort is a South
Carolina Statewide Cyber Ecosystem Strategic Plan that will be published this summer.
Individuals from several institutions of higher education participated on working groups
that created the plan including representatives from Clemson University, the University
of South Carolina-Columbia, The Citadel, College of Charleston, Coastal Carolina
University, South Carolina State University, the University of South Carolina-Beaufort,
Technical College of the Lowcountry, Trident Technical College, the Commission on
Higher Education, and the South Carolina Technical College System.
Page Seven
July 3, 2024

This proviso would circumvent and possibly duplicate work that is already being done on
this critical issue by the State of South Carolina through the Department of Commerce
and other state agencies.

Veto 4
Clemson PSA, Part IB, Section 45, Page 398, Proviso 45.11, CU-PSA: Feasibility Study
This proviso directs the Clemson Public Service and Agriculture (PSA) to conduct a
feasibility study to establish a “Center for Civic Engagement” to promote leadership
and civic engagement.
The Clemson PSA website describes their mission as a “state agency comprised of four
units: Clemson Experiment Station, Clemson Cooperative Extension, Livestock Poultry
Health, and Regulatory Services. Clemson PSA safeguards the health and safety of
livestock, poultry and companion animals and protects the food supply and public
health of South Carolinians through its Livestock Poultry Health division, while PSA’s
Regulatory Services division ensures the safe, effective use of fertilizers and pesticides,
and the quality of seeds and plants grown in the state and conducts programs that
prevent agroterrorism. Clemson PSA works collaboratively with Clemson’s College of
Agriculture, Forestry and Life Sciences for research and outreach through the Clemson
Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service. Clemson PSA outreach and
research facilities also include the Clemson Experimental Forest and South Carolina
Botanical Garden, and a host of centers and institutes whose missions support and
advance South Carolina’s agribusiness and forestry industries while also developing
solutions to sustainability manage the state’s natural resources.”
https://www.clemson.edu/public/
I do not believe this proviso is consistent with the Clemson PSA mission. An institution
of higher education with an established civic entity like the Riley Institute at Furman
University would be a more appropriate platform for this initiative.

Veto 5
Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Part IB, Section 49, Page 404, Proviso
49.22, PRT: State Road S-46
This proviso prohibits the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism from expending
funds to establish additional vehicular public access to Paris Mountain State Park in
Greenville County.
Limiting the public’s access to a state park through a budget proviso is not an appropriate
way to address residential traffic concerns. I am therefore vetoing the proviso.
Page Eight
July 3, 2024

Veto 6
Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Part IB, Section 49, Page 404, Proviso
49.24, PRT: Advertising Funds
This proviso directs the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism to expend
advertising funds to promote “inland lakes for tourism and fishing, hunting opportunities
throughout the state, and public and non-profit owned and administered trail systems in all
areas of the state.”
The proviso is unnecessary. The Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism
advertising efforts already promotes and markets tourism opportunities at inland lakes and
trail systems across the state.

Veto 7
Department of Environmental Services, Part IB, Section 55, Page 414, Proviso 55.25,
DES: Erosion Control
Veto 8
Department of Environmental Services, Part IB, Section 55, Page 415, Proviso 55.26,
DES: Beaches

These two provisos seek to alter critical beach-management policies and procedures for a
single fiscal year and establish novel procedures that risk exposing the State to significant
financial liability without adequate justification.

To be sure, I understand the special importance of the underlying issues to affected coastal
residents. But as I noted several years ago in vetoing an eleventh-hour effort to exempt
certain erosion control devices from the applicable permitting provisions, because the
state has worked for decades to develop a comprehensive statutory and regulatory
framework to protect our shared coastal resources, it would be unwise to enact special
exceptions to the Beachfront Management Act in a hasty manner. The same rationale
applies here, with even greater force.

A piecemeal attempt to address beach erosion and management through provisos, which
are only in effect for one fiscal year, is not good policy.
In addition to exposing the State to significant potential legal liability and financial risk,
these one-year provisos—which are seemingly intended to undo previous enforcement
efforts, stall pending actions, and chill the Department of Environmental Services from
initiating future ones—would, if adopted, likely lead to the inconsistent application and
enforcement of critical laws and regulations designed to protect and preserve our state’s
pristine coastline.
Page Nine
July 3, 2024

For these reasons, I am vetoing these two provisos.

Veto 9
General Provisions, Part IB, Section 117, Page 543, Proviso 117.134, GP: Permanent
Improvement Projects
S.314 (R 239) of 2024 amends the process by which public colleges and universities seek
review from the Joint Bond Review Committee and approval by the State Fiscal
Accountability Authority for permanent improvement projects. The proviso is no longer
needed.

Veto 10

General Provisions, Part IB, Section 117, Page 555, Proviso 117.156, GP: Name Image
Likeness

Act 207 of 2024 amended Act 35 of 2021 pertaining to compensation for intercollegiate
athletes for Name, Image, or Likeness (NIL). The law went into effect on May 21, 2024;
therefore, this proviso suspending Act 35 of 2021 is no longer needed.

Veto 11

General Provisions, Part IB, Section 117, Page 560, Proviso 117.180, GP: Federal Funds
Oversight Committee

On June 22, 2022, I vetoed from the FY 2022-23 General Appropriations Act a proviso
creating a similar study committee, the Justice Forty Oversight Committee, to enact the
social and justice policies of President Biden and his administration.

This proviso creates the Federal Funds Oversight Committee, whose membership is
essentially identical to the membership of the Justice Forty Oversight Committee. The
Federal Funds Oversight Committee is “to study and oversee the expenditure of federal
and other funds’ effectiveness in creating targeted efforts to address long standing issues
in certain rural and urban communities in South Carolina and recommend opportunities.”
Without a clear definition of the issues to be addressed and opportunities created, I am
vetoing this proviso.
Page Ten
July 3, 2024

Veto 12

General Provisions, Part IB, Section 117, Page 561, Proviso 117.183, GP: Healthcare
Market Reform Measures Study Committee

This proviso creates a legislative study committee to conduct a comprehensive healthcare

market reform study with its findings and recommendations required to be reported to the
General Assembly by December 1, 2024.
We must strive to ensure that every South Carolinian has access to quality affordable
healthcare, much of which can be accomplished by unleashing competition through the
free market, and by eliminating burdensome and anti-competitive rules and regulations.
I believe that studying and working toward that goal is a worthy endeavor. However, I
believe it requires more than a five-month treatment by a legislative study committee.
In addition, I remain unconvinced that the expansion of Medicaid benefits – which this
legislative study committee is tasked with considering – is necessary, nor do I believe it is
fiscally responsible.
I am therefore vetoing this proviso.

Veto 13
Statewide Revenue, Part IB, Section 118, Page 579, Proviso 118.20 (SR: Nonrecurring
Revenue) (66) H630 - Department of Education, (b) ActivEd Walkabouts - Active
Learning Program, $400,000 – Representative Bill Whitmire and others.
In FY 2018-19, the General Assembly created by proviso an Innovation Grants Program at
the South Carolina Department of Education, whereby providers of educational programs
and services could apply for state funds. Applications are reviewed, and awards made by
the Grants Committee. The objective of the Innovation Grants Program was to replace
earmark appropriations with a transparent and accountable process for vetting education
programs to be piloted in our public schools. Grantees are required to participate in an
external evaluation as prescribed by the committee and agreed upon in the application and
award process. Each year the General Assembly has funded the Innovation Grants
Program using Education Improvement Act (EIA) revenues. In this budget, the General
Assembly has appropriated approximately $15 million to the Grants Committee.
This veto deals with the direct appropriation of non-recurring revenues to a for-profit
business, which had previously participated in the Innovation Grants Program. In FY
2021-22, ActivEd received a grant from the Innovation Grants Committee in the amount
of $454,000. In FY 2023-24, ActivEd applied for a grant of $1,006,750 from the
Innovation Grants Committee, but the Committee did not award any funds.
Page Eleven
July 3, 2024

An earmark that expressly bypasses the state’s procurement process and the Grants
Committee process is not good policy. The vendor can apply again to the Grants
Committee or can contract directly with school districts to provide its services in the
upcoming school year.

Veto 14
Statewide Revenue, Part IB, Section 118, Page 580, Proviso 118.20 (SR: Nonrecurring
Revenue) (69) H790 – Department of Archives and History, (a) African American
Settlement Communities Historic Commission, Inc. – 1904 Long Point School House
Restoration, $150,000, Representative Kathy Landing
Veto 15
Statewide Revenue, Part IB, Section 118, Page 584, Proviso 118.20 (SR: Nonrecurring
Revenue) (78) L040 – Department of Social Services, (l) My Community’s Keeper
Mentor Group – Advance Peace, $70,000, Representative Tiffany Spann-Wilder
Veto 16
Statewide Revenue, Part IB, Section 118, Page 588, Proviso 118.20 (SR: Nonrecurring
Revenue) (85) P280 – Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, (vvv) N.O.W.W.
Empowerment Housing and Community Projects, $25,000, Representative Jackie Hayes
Veto 17
Statewide Revenue, Part IB, Section 118, Page 589, Proviso 118.20 (SR: Nonrecurring
Revenue) (86) P320 - Department of Commerce, (f) SC Center for Visual Arts –
Downtown Building Revitalization Acquisition, $400,000, Representative Carla
Schuessler
These earmarks (Vetoes 14, 15, 16, and 17) are vetoed because the entity or organization
designated to receive state funds has not registered as a charity with the Secretary of State,
has an expired charity status, or has not submitted an accurate annual financial report.
Section 33-56-30 of the South Carolina Solicitation of Charitable Funds Act (S.C. Code of
Laws Section 33-56-10 et. seq.) states that “a charitable organization which intends to
solicit contributions within this State or have contributions solicited on its behalf must file
a registration statement with the Secretary of State, on forms prescribed by the Secretary
of State, by the date provided pursuant to Section 33-56-60 (A) but in all cases before
solicitation.” Section 33-56-60(A) states that a charitable organization must provide an
annual report of financial activities that covers “the preceding fiscal year and must be filed
within four and one-half months of the close of the organization's fiscal year unless a
written extension has been granted by the Secretary of State.” A contribution is defined
Page Twelve
July 3, 2024

by Section 33-56-20(4) to be “the promise, grant, or pledge of money, credit assistance, or

property of any kind or value.” An earmark in the state general appropriations bill meets
the definition of contribution.
Beginning May 1, 2024, the Secretary of State’s Office assisted our Office in reviewing all
nonprofit organizations that received an earmark in the Senate or House passed version of
the FY 2024-25 general appropriations bill to determine if the organization had registered
as a charity, if the organization had renewed its annual registration statement, and if the
organization had submitted its annual financial report. My Office then communicated the
information discovered with the staffs of the Senate Finance Committee and the House
Ways and Means Committee. Many organizations that had previously not registered with
the Secretary of State’s Office registered following this communication.

Veto 18
Statewide Revenue, Part IB, Section 118, Page 581, Proviso 118.20 (SR: Nonrecurring
Revenue) (69) H790 – Department of Archives and History, (l) Phoenix Correspondence
Commission, $50,000, Senator Rex Rice.
The Phoenix Correspondence Commission supports and promotes federalism, monitors
the progress of passage of Article V resolutions by states to apply for a constitutional
convention and facilitates states in the convening and administration of any potential
Article V constitutional convention of the states.
I am supportive of the mission of the Phoenix Correspondence Commission. However, if
the purpose of this earmark appropriation is intended to support members of the General
Assembly’s direct participation, the budgets of the House of Representatives and the
Senate would be more appropriate and transparent vehicles for funding membership dues,
conference registrations and travel expenses – rather than the Department of Archives and
History.

Veto 19
Statewide Revenue, Part IB, Section 118, Page 584, Proviso 118.20 (SR: Nonrecurring
Revenue) (75) J120 – Department of Mental Health, (d) The Giving Back Fund c/o
Mental Wealth Alliance – Mental Health Gym, $175,000 – Representative JA Moore
As I did last year, I am vetoing this earmark because this is not an appropriate use of state
funds. This earmark first goes to a national charity, The Giving Back Fund, in care of the
Mental Wealth Alliance. The explanation states that the funds are for operations of a
mental health gym in North Charleston. There was no budget identifying how the funds
are to be spent.
Page Thirteen
July 3, 2024

Veto 20
Statewide Revenue, Part IB, Section 118, Page 584, Proviso 118.20 (SR: Nonrecurring
Revenue) (77) J200 – Department of Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Services, (b)
Decisions.org - Cope EMS Wingman App, $820,000 – Representative Chris Murphy
This veto deals with the appropriation of $820,000 for statewide implementation of an
electronic device application that provides information and support to survivors of an
overdose. The objective is that the application will increase the ability of individuals to
make a long-term recovery.
Rather than funding this initiative through an earmark, the South Carolina Department of
Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Services should make a budget request to the General
Assembly for such an investment and then monitor the implementation of this technology
to document evidence of any outcomes.
Veto 21
Statewide Revenue, Part IB, Section 118, Page 593, Proviso 118.20 (SR: Nonrecurring
Revenue) (94) R600 - Department of Employment and Workforce, Heart of Life - Youth
Workforce Development Program, $200,000 – Representatives Terry Alexander and
Jackie Hayes
From the information provided, the funds will be used by the charity, Heart of Life, to
provide career development services to youth between the ages of 13 and 25 at an average
cost of $5,000 per participant. The CEO of Heart of Life currently works for Eckerd
Connects, providing Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (“WIOA”) services in SC
Works Centers in the Pee Dee area.
WIOA is a federal workforce development grant program administered in South Carolina
through the Department of Employment and Workforce (“DEW”). The United States
Department of Labor provides funds to DEW who, in turn, funds local workforce boards
that competitively procure service providers whose staff assist workers in obtaining
employment by providing job search assistance and core training opportunities. The Pee
Dee Regional Council of Governments Workforce Development Board awarded its
WIOA service provider contract to Eckerd Connects.

Clearly, the work of the charity, the professional responsibilities of the charity’s CEO, and
the expenditure of the state’s WIOA funds could be undermined by this earmark.
Page Fourteen
July 3, 2024

For the foregoing reasons, I am vetoing and returning without my approval the above provisions
in R-252, H. 5100, the FY 2024-25 General Appropriations Act.
.

Yours very truly,

Henry McMaster