Voters in Lancaster County will likely see a $400 million proposal to repair roads. It’s just a matter of when.
Lancaster County Council this week postponed a decision on a new referendum on transport sales tax. The new tax could still make it into the Nov. 5 general election, or the province could push it to next year.
Council members worry about the cost of the plan, which could push the sales tax to the highest rate in the state, but also see it as the only way to get major road work done without waiting — perhaps decades — for state financing.
“This would help us have control over which roads can be done,” said District Administrator Dennis Marstall.
Here are details about the route plan, plus questions the county still needs to answer before voters can decide whether to approve it:
What is the transport tax?
The county began working on a new one-cent sales tax for roads about a year ago.
It is similar to the Pennies for Progress program that York County started in 1997. Pennies will go before voters for the fifth time this fall asking whether York County’s road construction and repair tax should be expanded.
The Lancaster County tax would likely last 15 years, more than double the tax up for vote in York County. Lancaster County planners estimate the one-cent sales tax would raise about $400 million.
The province has approximately 1,400 kilometers of public roads. Since 2018, approximately 90 miles have been improved through a separate project tax on county capital sales, state gas tax financing and road taxes.
The new tax would be in effect for 15 years or until the $400 million on the ballot is collected, whichever comes first.
The $400 million is a conservative estimate. County figures show the tax would likely raise $419 million over that period, Marstall said.
“This also doesn’t take into account any new revenue streams, or more retail, or other things within the province that could come online within the next 15 years,” he said. For example, it doesn’t include revenue from the planned Costco and Target stores coming to Indian Land.
Lancaster County wants to quickly plan for a sales tax increase to help repair roads
Which roads would be repaired?
Recommended road expenses include:
▪ $100 million for repaving roads identified by the province and its four municipalities
▪ $60 million for widening or intersection work of US 521 north of SC 75
▪ $30 million to widen Henry Harris Road to three lanes from US 521 to Marvin Road
▪ $30 million for 11 intersection upgrades, many in Indian Land
▪ $30 million for various needs such as matching funds, inflation and project management
▪ $30 million to widen Harrisburg Road to three lanes from Calvin Hall Road to the North Carolina line
▪ $30 million to widen Barberville to three lanes from SC 160 to the North Carolina line
▪ $25 million to repave 11 state highways
▪ $15 million for roundabouts at Henry Harris/Marvin Road, Steel Hill/Van Wyck Road, University/Hubbard Drive, Shiloh Unity Road/Monroe Highway and Shiloh Unity/Camp Creek Road
▪ $15 million for traffic signals and road lighting
▪ $10 million to widen Riverside Road from SC 9 Bypass to University Drive
▪ $8 million for economic development (business parks, land for connecting roads)
▪ $7 million for greenways and sidewalks
▪ $5 million for maintenance of Vance Baker, Calvin Hall and Reece/Lymon Reece roads, plus Sandra Lane
When is the away vote?
The two options for putting a transportation tax on voters are this fall and next fall. The provincial voter registration office would need city council approval by Aug. 1 to hold the referendum this fall.
There is already a $588 million school bond on the ballot this year. Adding the transportation tax on top of that would overburden voters, Councilman Allen Blackmon said.
“If they want it, they will vote for it,” he said. “If they don’t, they won’t. But I really think we’re bringing it to market at a bad time, and I think we doomed it to failure because of that timing.
The concern for next year is that the council still needs a legal opinion on whether the odd-year election qualifies as one they can use for the ballot. Moreover, road construction costs typically increase every year.
“Either we do it now or it doesn’t happen,” said Councilwoman Charlene McGriff. ‘Do you think next year will be better? There will be no changes. It will still be an increase.”
How high will the taxes be?
South Carolina has 46 counties. There is a base tax rate of 6%, and provinces have options to add more to fund public infrastructure, roads and other projects. Last year, three counties charged 6% and 15 of them (including York) charged 7%.
Lancaster was one of 17 counties charging 8%. The county applies a local sales tax for general use fund options and a sales tax for capital projects for major expenditures. Each adds 1% to the statewide base amount.
Three counties – Berkeley, Charleston and Horry – charge 9%, the highest rate in the state. Lancaster County would join that list if voters add a new transportation tax.
That increase is significant, said Councilman Terry Graham. It’s enough for people who might drive to the Lowe’s in Indian Land or another in Waxhaw, North Carolina, to change their plans, he said.
“I already have constituents complaining that sales taxes are higher in Lancaster County,” Graham said.
Groceries already cost more than in the past, Councilman Billy Mosteller said, and residents would feel the increase.
“Everything you do is going to cost you more,” he said. “People don’t have a lot of money right now.”
What will the ballot question ask?
The proposed referendum raises two questions. One wonders whether the province should be able to collect the tax. A second question is whether the province should be able to issue bonds for road work, which would have to be repaid from the new tax.
Bonding would allow upfront funding for major projects like US 521, which could generate matching dollars to attract grants or other outside funding.
“The only way we’re going to be on the state’s radar (or for federal dollars) is to have some local money in the game,” Marstall said.
The vote has not yet been completed and details are under discussion, such as whether some or all of the more than 125 road projects should be named.
“I am particularly concerned about roads 521, Henry Harris, Barberville and Harrisburg,” said Councilman Jose Luis. “And ensure that those funds are allocated and can only be used for those purposes.”
Several council members expressed concern about widening and improving so many roads without a clear plan to address the community’s rapid growth. Issues such as impact fees, developer contributions for roads and others need to be addressed, they said, otherwise the improved roads could worsen the problems.
“The Council hasn’t shown much foresight on growth,” Graham said. “It happened around Charlotte. Look what happened at 485. They built it and all the growth came around it because they didn’t slow down the growth.”
Still, bad or busy roads are a problem that affects all parts of the province, councilors said. There are also outside pressures, such as plans in North Carolina to break ground on a third southbound lane of U.S. 521 entering Lancaster County in 2026, Marstall said.
“We have a problem,” McGriff said. “And this is the only way we can control it locally.”
