Richland County to ask for another penny tax for roadwork, bus system
Richland County voters may see a new penny tax on the November ballot, pending final approval from the county council, that would help pay for road projects and public transit.
The Richland County Council unanimously agreed Tuesday to place the tax on the ballot. Two more votes will be required before it is placed on the ballot.
Since October, the county has discussed asking voters to approve another 1% sales and use tax to help pay for road projects and the COMET bus system once the current tax reaches its collection cap, potentially as early as November 2025.
Officials did not say how much the new tax would generate, but a presentation from a consultant to council pitched a $2.2 billion tax that would pay for big road projects across the county.
The last transportation tax voters approved was fraught with tension. It failed on the ballot in 2010 before being approved in 2012, and its management led to dueling lawsuits between Richland County and the South Carolina Department of Revenue.
By the end of 2025, that tax will have collected $1.07 billion for road projects and public transportation in Richland County. But when it reaches that figure, the 1% tax will expire. Without another tax, officials will have to look elsewhere to pay for road work and the bus system.
County Councilman Don Weaver previously said he worries the county will have to raise property taxes if another penny tax fails.
How the tax collection would be spent
Staff presented more than $2 billion worth of possible road work to council members in March. County Council may not choose to include all of those projects in what would be paid for with the new 1-percent sales tax.
Of the projects the council is considering, the most expensive include:
Work to separate rail lines from Assembly Street, estimated at $300 million;
A $63.5 million project to widen a portion of U.S. 76 near Lake Murray, between Shadowood Drive and the Richland County line;
A $62 million project to widen Spears Creek Church Road in Pontiac between Interstate 20 and Percival Road;
And a nearly $59 million project to widen Langford Road between Blythewood’s Main Street and Hardscrabble Road.
But the dollar amount for the new tax is still being discussed. Work sessions on April 23 and May 7 will be dedicated to those conversations.
Details on how much the tax will collect and how the money will be divided between roadways and the COMET bus system are expected to be decided by the second reading on May 7. If approved, the new tax would start collection a month after the previous tax ends, estimated in December 2025.
The money would be spent in three categories: community investment projects, like road improvements, new sidewalks and bike lanes; county advancement projects, like new construction and work on major commuting corridors; and the COMET bus system.
One proposal allocates 40% each for community investment projects and county advancement projects with the bus system getting 20%. Currently, the money is split in thirds in those categories.
“This is not the final (version) by any means,” said Council Chair Jesica Mackey Tuesday before council approved the ordinance that puts the question on the November ballot.
Previous turmoil
There has been scrutiny in the past over how the county handled the current sales tax.
In 2015, the South Carolina Department of Revenue began questioning how the county was using the sales tax money. The Department of Revenue alleged that the county was unlawfully spending millions of dollars on non-transportation work, including “routine office expenses” from computers to coffee to company cars.
A half-decade of legal strife followed, with the Department of Revenue and Richland County suing each other over the tax.
An initial audit report by the department identified $41 million in misspent dollars. The amount was later reduced to roughly $32 million.
In 2021, Richland County reached a settlement agreement with the Department of Revenue and agreed to pay $15.5 million back into the program. Under the settlement, the county did not have to pay anything to the DOR.
