Advertisement

Lexington County Council wants to cut non-road projects from $450 million penny tax list

Lexington County Council is asking the body charged with drawing up a list of penny tax projects to drop items that aren’t about paving roads.

Council members voted Tuesday not to give final approval to the list of projects drawn up by a specially-created sales tax committee and asked the committee to review submitted projects that aren’t focused on road work. They asked for a revised list by the next council meeting June 7.

The volunteer committee reviewed submissions from the county and all of its cities and towns to draw up a list of hundreds of projects to be funded with at least $450 million to be raised by a new penny sales tax if the tax is approved by voters in November.

But council members raised questions about some projects and whether voters concerned about the state of Lexington County’s roads would ultimately vote to fund them.

The city of Cayce, for example, had recommended drainage improvements in the Avenues neighborhood, wastewater collection in the Avenues and Broadacres, relocating a utility line at Interstate 26 and S.C. 302, and improvements to the Riverwalk.

West Columbia had requested a number of resurfacing and utility projects, including “corridor improvements” and wastewater extensions to the section of U.S. 378 inside the city limits.

“It’s like the college football playoffs. It goes off the rankings,” said Kyle Clampitt, a consultant with Alliance Engineering, on how the projects list was drawn up. “Every municipality got their top five, and some of them didn’t have five, so they’re all pretty well represented.”

Some smaller towns did not have large transportation projects on their list of submissions, Clampitt said, “and we wanted to make sure all the municipalities are represented.”

But some council members said a roads-focused tax proposal shouldn’t be used to fund other items — such as utility work or Riverwalk improvements — and expressed fears that voters would be less likely to approve a package that included them.

“This might just not be the proper funding plan for those items,” said Councilman Todd Cullum. “I don’t know that the nine of us are going to go out and say this is the best funding recommendation for our county.”

Council Chairman Scott Whetstone argued the tax should be used for one-time expenditures, while some of the proposed improvement plans, like planting trees along a roadside, would create a continuing cost if those new features will have to be kept up.

Whetstone also suggested the unincorporated parts of the county would be underrepresented in the list. He suggested the projects should be divided up by council district instead.

But Cullum said focusing on county-wide priorities would deliver the best results. “The public road system is just bad, regardless of where you live,” he said. “If you travel more than 5 miles from your home, you’re going to get something.”

The council ultimately voted to send the list back to the tax committee, saying that a repeat of a failed 2014 penny tax referendum would just mean higher costs for the same projects when the county asks for funding again.

“We all agreed if you can’t drive on it and put rubber on it, we don’t support it,” Whetstone said.