Can owning a vacant lot get your kid into the SC school you want? This Zillow post says so
An undeveloped parcel of trees in Lexington County could hold the key to your child’s education, if you’re willing to pay $40,000.
The less-than-2-acre wooded property at 229 Andrew Corley Road does not have any structure on it, and according to a Zillow listing, it won’t have anything built on it any time soon, as ownership of the parcel is split three ways.
But one of those current owners is willing to sell you a stake of up to 50% of the plot for a very specific reason: “This sale is only two 25% portions OF INTEREST for this Lot to allow attendance at the Lexington One schools,” the listing says. “This lot is zoned for River Bluff High School, Lakeside Middle and Midway Elementary.”
It might sound questionable, but actually, using an undeveloped plot of land to get a child into a good school is allowed under South Carolina law.
Lexington 1 has a district policy allowing non-resident students to attend its schools if they own property in the district. The student must show “a certificate from the county auditor verifying that he/she, in his/her own name, owns real estate in the district assessed at $300 or more.”
But the non-resident student would be required to pay tuition “equal to the prior year’s per student revenue less the amount of school taxes paid on the real property.”
If the student enrolls before Nov. 30, they would have to pay half of the sum at the time of enrollment and the other half at the beginning of the second semester. A student who registers after Nov. 30 would have to pay the entire amount up front, the policy says. “In cases of nonpayment, state law requires the district to remove a child after giving notice,” the policy says.
Currently, 11 students in Lexington 1 are paying out-of-district tuition, the district told The State.
Such an admissions policy complies with state law, but the listing for a portion of an undeveloped lot may highlight a loophole that the school district may want to account for in its policy, said Derek Black, a law professor at the University of South Carolina who specializes in education.
“If it’s not just creative advertising, then it’s something Lexington 1 might want to think through a bit more,” he said.
Josh Eagle specializes in property law at USC’s Rice School of Law. He said any restrictions on the development of the property should be factored into the admission policy.
“In that case, you could sell one-millionth shares and it wouldn’t matter,” Eagle said. “Ownership is probably not defined in the statute. So if I sold you my Yeti, but I put the restrictions on it so you can never touch it, never use it or even see it ... do you really own it?”
There are no restrictions on building on the property, other than the buyer would not be full owner of the parcel and would need the agreement of the other owners, according to James Spangler, the listing agent for the property with Fuzion Business & Real Estate Solutions. But “nobody can veto it as far as ownership,” he said. “It’s not an LLC or a trust.”
But Spangler couldn’t say if a 50% ownership would necessarily get a buyer into the surrounding schools. “I would presume so. That’s up to the school district,” Spangler said.
“It’s extremely unique for me,” he said of the listening. “It’s not what I normally do.”
Black said the law about using property ownership to get into a school district dates back to 1962, which suggested to him it was meant to facilitate “white flight” from desegregating schools.
“It’s just so strange, it doesn’t even make good sense to me why that would be the rule,” Black said.
But the law professor said the law would allow a student to enroll in the school district, but if they don’t live there, it doesn’t necessarily guarantee them a spot in a particular school.
”They could say, that’s fine, but we’re sending you to Gilbert,” he said.
