Here’s a look at 11 years of hurdles Richland County’s penny tax program has faced
Richland County’s penny tax transportation program came with promise and controversy.
The $1 billion program was designed to improve roads, build sidewalks and greenways and fund the Columbia-area public bus system.
Rural communities were promised dirt roads would be paved. Suburban commuters were promised relief from 5 o’ clock traffic with wider roads. Rivers would get beautiful walks. The county’s bus system would finally be fully funded for years.
But the county’s 2012 election was a disaster, marked by hours-long lines and an insufficient number of voting machines. Ultimately, the penny tax was passed that year, but an ominous tone was set for its future.
Over the last 11 years, the penny tax has gone through a series of controversies that overshadowed its triumphs.
Here’s a timeline of the county’s penny tax program:
Richland voters approve program in controversial 2012 referendum
▪ 2010-2011: A Richland County penny tax is rejected by voters in a referendum. County officials and community leaders expand the road improvement projects to new areas to gain more support.
▪ November 2012: After a fraught election day, the penny tax referendum passes. The penny tax will generate more than $1 billion. About $600 million will go to road widening, paving dirt roads, creating new sidewalks and greenways as well as other projects. The remaining $400 million goes to the bus system that operates in the county.
▪ 2012-2014: A citizens council known as the Transportation Penny Advisory Commitee (TPAC) is created as a watchdog group for the project. The county hit a snag when it had to scrap plans for one company to oversee the program. In 2014, a year after collection of the penny tax started, some dirt road projects had started. But large projects like the widening of Bluff Road hadn’t started and were six months behind schedule. Later in the year, the county selected three companies, which became known as the Program Development Team (PDT), to run the penny transportation program. The projects were prioritized.
▪ June 2015: Improvements to Greene Street around the University of South Carolina’s basketball arena, Colonial Life Arena, break ground. It’s the first major penny tax project to begin and will later be a source of controversy.
SC DOR questions penny road tax spending
▪ December 2015: The penny tax program is hit with serious allegations that will mar it for years to come. The S.C. Department of Revenue delivered a letter to county leaders detailing myriad concerns with the county’s handling of the program, such as potential public corruption, fraud and millions of dollars in wasteful and possibly illegal spending of the tax money. By the end of the year some major and visible projects like a pedestrian bridge at Riverbanks Zoo are unveiled.
▪ January 2016: Frustration by members of TPAC becomes more vocal. Members say they aren’t overseeing anything and are just a rubber stamp.
▪ May 2016: Richland County sues the state revenue department, which collects taxes, for threatening to withhold penny tax money that was set to go to the county. The revenue department launched a 36-page legal counter-attack, asserting the companies hired by the county to run the penny tax program were “engaged in a civil conspiracy” with the county to spend penny tax revenues “in an illegal manner.”
▪ 2016-2018: The legal battle between the revenue department and the county throws mud on the penny transportation program. The state’s grand jury probes the programs. The county’s transportation director leaves. In 2018 the county hires a person with no transportation experience to lead the program. In the 2018 election, the problems with the penny program cost some county council members their seats. Still, major projects like the Saluda Riverwalk broke ground, which would later be completed.
▪ March 2019: About this time Transportation Director John Thompson leaves and Michael Niermeier assumes the job.
▪ October 2019: With a few new council members, the county takes control of the penny program away from the PDT and brings the program in house.
▪ May 2020: The county fixes a $154 penny transportation program budget shortfall by scaling back projects.
▪ August 2020: After coming out on top of the legal battle, the state revenue department orders Richland County to repay at least $32 million in misused penny tax funds.
Road tax project near USC questioned
▪ Throughout 2020: The State reported on questionable spending and projects connected to the penny tax, including improvements to a road with a politically connected church, a company’s licensing issues, and USC getting priority projects over Black communities and other areas. In December The State reported that the county could have avoided repaying $32.5 million for mishandling the penny tax program if it had accepted a revenue department offer four years prior.
▪ June 2021: Less than a year after taking over management of the penny program, Richland County’s in house penny tax Transportation Director is suddenly fired. The county administrator says in an email to the council that “a Professional Engineer” will be hired to lead the transportation department.
▪ July 2021: The revenue department and the county settle the lawsuits over the penny tax. The county agrees to pay $15.5 million back into the program and the department said it had “no finding of civil or constructive” wrongdoing in its final audit of the county.
The county said more than 250 projects have been completed under the penny tax program as of July.
This story was originally published July 21, 2021 at 12:56 PM.