Here’s why Myrtle Beach wants to extend deadline to borrow for Market Common upgrades
The window for Myrtle Beach to borrow money to pay for improvements to the Market Common area is set to close soon, but the city is seeking a court order to extend that option.
City officials are also asking the court to quickly resolve the majority of its ongoing lawsuit with Horry County and Horry County Schools. The city and school district jointly filed the suit in December 2018 alleging the city and Myrtle Beach Air Force Base Redevelopment Authority are misusing tax increment financing (TIF) funds on a project that’s already been completed.
Tax revenues have been frozen on properties within the former Air Force base area since 2004 while the assessed value of the land has increased from about $4.2 million to more than $38.2 million, according to court documents.
As a result, the school district, county and other tax districts cannot collect additional tax revenue on the increased value because it is earmarked for development and infrastructure within the TIF district.
The city had entered into an agreement with Wells Fargo for the sale of $12.6 million in bonds prior to the filing of the lawsuit, but failed to close the deal due to the suit, according to court documents.
The city’s statutory authority to issue these bonds expires Dec. 13, and its lawyers have argued the county and school district are prolonging this “baseless” suit to run out the clock.
As part of its latest filing submitted Monday, the city motioned to toll its deadline, which would extend it by the amount of time from the filing of the suit until its conclusion.
“The City likely will not meet that deadline as a result of Plaintiffs’ diversionary tactics to keep this frivolous lawsuit alive,” the filing states. “Equity demands that the Plaintiffs’ abusive litigation not result in a forfeiture of the City’s statutory right to issue these bonds, and that the deadline for their issuance be tolled.”
As part of that same filing, the city also motioned for a partial summary judgment ruling that only the redevelopment authority can deem the project complete, the court can’t dissolve the TIF district, their current plan is valid, and that money in the special fund can be used for future projects and maintenance of active projects.
The city previously filed an unsuccessful attempt to dismiss the suit completely and appealed that decision to the state Supreme Court, which declined to consider the case.
In a separate Monday filing, the city also motioned for a protective order barring the plaintiffs from pursuing any further discovery, arguing that their desire for further depositions is simply “to annoy, harass, and oppress” the defendants with no legal basis.
The city requested the court schedule a hearing on these latest motions within 10 days or soon thereafter.
An accounting firm retained by the county and school district to audit the city’s spending as part of the suit has identified millions of potentially misspent funds among other issues, court filings show, but city officials have argued the accountant doesn’t understand the law and is making assumptions based on an incomplete review of information.
The public agencies involved spent more than $500,000 combined in legal fees through the end of 2019, according to multiple open records requests from The Sun News.
This story was originally published September 23, 2020 at 4:35 PM.
