Use your voice
Hilton Head Town Council is very close to making a final decision on the 278 corridor project.
The project as currently espoused by the SCDOT will not solve our traffic congestion problems. The Technical Working Group, which has been studying this issue for years, submitted a bypass option which would require no taking of any Gullah property in Stoney and improve traffic congestion but this plan has been rejected by the town.
The plan included a direct link from 278 to the Cross Island Parkway, where 50% of the traffic coming onto Hilton Head wants to go.
Two critical meetings are scheduled soon and we need your support.
We have one final chance to save Hilton Head as we know it.
On Monday, June 17, at 5 p.m., the council will conduct a workshop and the only item on the agenda is the 278 project.
The following day, June 18, at 3 p.m.,the council will decide whether to grant municipal consent to the entire project or not.
It is up to all of us to let our voices be heard.
We must not give up. Never give up.
Richard Bisi, HHI
‘Lambs out to slaughter’
Ambulances, police cars, and fire trucks.
Typical scenes at some of the hotspots for car accidents in Hardeeville, Okatie, and Bluffton.
We get to know the hotspots after a while, but poor unsuspecting motorists from out-of-town haven’t a clue.
Councils and governmental agencies are working on what is known as “The Project Triangle.” It should really be called “The Bermuda Triangle.”
Big plans are in place to fix accident-prone locations.
If my understanding is correct, it could take years to complete.
It is sickening to see cars getting smashed-up on a regular basis as they exit Palmer Grace Drive east onto Okatie Hwy. 170, the roadway between Burger King and Dunkin’ Donuts.
An interim fix like putting up “No left turn” signs on the entire stretch of 170 from Commerce Place to Palmer Grace Drive just might work. And how about “High Collision Area” signs in strategic locations just outside the triangle?
What bothers me deeply is that the traveling public are like lambs out to slaughter when they enter this triangle.
In the meantime, some of those lawyers from Savannah (you know, the ones who cram their TV commercials down our throats all day long), are laughing all the way to the bank.
If our elected officials really care about the motoring public, (about families traveling within the triangle), they will not wait for years to implement some temporary fixes.
Otherwise, it shows a callousness towards the suffering and injuries of others.
Gene Ceccarelli, Sun City
Who wins here?
Gov. Henry McMaster and state Attorney General Alan Wilson are likely very happy with a recent federal court ruling allowing South Carolina’s lawsuit to proceed against President Biden’s Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) student loan plan.
Likely not so happy are the approximately 2,500 borrowers in the state who would benefit under the plan.
Interestingly, the court ruling is based on the state government’s position that it would make less money on fees if the loans are forgiven.
In other words, it appears South Carolina would officially prefer that 2,500 of its residents remain indebted, solely so it can rake in the resulting revenue.
K.W. Busey, HHI
Simplify primaries
The June primary season is another reminder that South Carolina must end its most archaic election practice – the runoff.
The state should employ instant runoff voting (IRV), (also called “ranked choice voting”), to eliminate dragging voters and volunteers back to the polls two weeks after primary elections.
Rather than cast a vote for one candidate, voters in IRV elections are able to submit a list of candidates ranked in order of preference.
SC voters stationed overseas already do this for primary elections.
Once all ballots are cast, if there is no candidate with a majority of first place votes, the candidate with the fewest first place votes is eliminated.
For any ballot that placed the eliminated candidate as the first choice, the ballot would then count toward that ballot’s second choice.
This process is continued until one candidate has garnered a majority of the ballots. (A simple internet search will yield ample resources explaining the process).
The result is one primary election day.
A handful of states (both “red” and “blue”) have employed IRV and the process has been well received.
IRV would save taxpayer money and eliminate the need for election volunteers having to work two separate election days.
Christopher Elliott, Columbia
