Richland County Voters Approve Extension of Penny Transportation Tax Despite Divided Community

Richland County Extends Its Penny Transportation Tax: Community Divided

In a significant move for Richland County, voters have opted to keep the highly debated 1% transportation tax, affectionately known as the penny tax. This decision came earlier this month and saw over 60% of voters in favor of extending the tax, though not all areas within the county shared the same enthusiasm.

Mixed Reactions Across the County

50% of voters showing support. However, seven precincts in the northwestern part of the county, primarily around the communities of Chapin and Irmo, bucked the trend. Here, support for the penny tax dipped below 50%, with the Spring Hill precinct near Chapin recording the lowest approval at just under 42%.

Meanwhile, just a stone’s throw across the county line, Lexington County leaders are advocating for their own version of the penny tax to help maintain their often tarnished roadways. They attempted to put the measure on the ballot twice in the past decade but faced defeat on both occasions.

Understanding the Dissonance

Don Weaver expressed understanding regarding the confusing pocket of opposition. “Fiscal conservatives don’t vote for taxes,” he noted, pointing out that the areas with the least tax support share ideological similarities with their Lexington neighbors.

Weaver was one of the few council members who hesitated to support the penny tax extension, as the approval granted it for an impressive 25 years. However, he also witnessed the positive impacts the tax has brought—such as widening projects on Clemson Road and bolstering the COMET bus system.

Need for Effective Communication

Lexington County’s council members recognize the necessity of clear communication about how these taxes can improve their community. Councilman Jason Branham, whose precinct felt less favorable, remarked, “The most notable project of the 2012 penny tax for my district—widening Broad River Road—has yet to happen.” He also mentioned the absence of bus services in his area funded by the tax, further distancing constituents’ perspective.

Branham pointed out that a combination of not utilizing tax funds, unfulfilled promises, and previous issues with mismanagement has muddied the waters of public opinion. “Our district was the least supportive because of things like the bus system that my constituents don’t use,” he said.

Lessons Learned?

Beth Carrigg, chair of the Lexington County Council, are contemplating the differences in their counties. “Richland is more aggressive with development and larger in population,” she said, observing the nuanced differences in community perspective.

Greg Brewer, a former candidate for Lexington Town Council, believes there’s a path forward. “You must meet voters on their terms and ensure they’re informed,” he indicated, voicing frustration over the lack of energy to engage residents. Councilman Darrell Hudson expressed optimism about the work achieved with Richland’s penny tax, suggesting that clearing areas that have benefitted from similar initiatives could foster trust in the community.

Looking Forward

Angelle LaBorde, head of the Lexington Chamber and Visitors Center, affirmed the goal. “We remain hopeful; a lot of neighboring counties are on board with this tax approach,” she said, highlighting that a successful penny tax could shift costs to visitors rather than local residents.

As we look ahead, it’s clear that leaders in Lexington will need to take cues from Richland’s recent experience—hopefully crafting a more unified message that can sway public opinion in their favor.