Lexington County Council’s Decision Sparks Controversy

Introduction

Lexington County Council has decided after 46 years to not renew an agreement to maintain roads in a city that has worked well, unless ….

Background

Hidden in some county council members’ statements is the real reason for their actions, but not out there where we all can understand because it’s a “fast one“ they are trying to pull. By the way, has the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and the Bible been rewritten in the last 46 years? No. So what’s wrong with the 1978 agreement, nothing really. According to Lexington County Council statements in a HERE NEWS article, the county “can’t keep up with the cost of paying for this.” So is this a tax issue that the county council, some of whom will be up for re-election this year, doesn’t want to deal with?

Raising taxes before an election brings out opponents, and those anti-growth opponents have earned some power and lots of support. So how do you please a loud, vocal constituency and resolve this issue of cost escalating to maintain roads without an accompanying escalation in revenue to pay for it? Especially when that constituency did not vote to approve the past Penny tax or the capital project sales tax. You blame it on someone else and shift the blame and the cost to others. Sounds brilliant until the others say no. Then the other side of the story the county council members left out, comes out.

Being my past as a municipal elected official and knowing more of the story that some county council members are not being truthful about, I decided I would speak to some of those comments being made and finish their statement. Will be addressing at least four articles and or posts I have read including the HERE NEWS article, Lexington Chronicle article, and from a couple of social media sites. Will be long and maybe four separate articles here.

According to the HERE NEWS article, it was stated that “unincorporated areas of Lexington County didn’t want to continue to be annexed into municipalities.” That may be true for a majority of residents and some areas, but I also know many residents who do want to be annexed into municipalities and get the added services that the municipalities offer. Not all municipalities are the same; they offer different services, and some cannot annex without permission of the property owner.

Another reason the old agreement worked and the new one doesn’t is that it penalizes some municipalities for what some county council members misbelieve is an issue with other municipalities. More about this issue and Swansea in another article. “She explains when a property becomes annexed, the new agreement is a tool to help preserve the Lexington County ordinances.” Not sure what she is referring to, but if the property or subdivision is annexed into municipalities after it is developed, the road and the development density meet the county standard/ordinances when completed, then nothing about the property or development has changed, all is “preserved”, as was in the county or in a municipality.

Conclusion

You’ve heard it said in the past to “follow the money” and it will be “up to these towns and cities to figure out how they take care of the roads.” In other words, they can raise taxes to pay “for this” but not us.

To delve deeper into this issue of passing the “Tax buck” on to others, the “us versus them” mentality among county council members and residents, and proper planning for growth in Lexington County, further discussions and analysis need to be done. Ultimately, the focus should be on finding solutions that benefit all residents and communities in the county as growth continues.