IRMO — Tucked within the nook of a residential neighborhood on the shores of Lake Murray in an unincorporated space of Richland County is a 4-acre peninsular property made up of fields, forests and a grand lake view.
Vines creep out of the door and home windows of the white home on the location. The home quantity has been scratched off the mailbox. On the entrance of the property, an indication hangs from a series fence: “Entry Restricted, Richland County, South Carolina.”
The lakefront property on Bonuck Highway final bought in 2015 for $2 million to the present proprietor — Richland County.
The county acquired the lakeside actual property with hospitality tax funds, which South Carolina legislation requires a neighborhood authorities use to advertise tourism. On the time, county officers hoped to develop the location for recreation.
However after the sale of the property was finalized, the Richland Council confronted a public backlash from neighbors over these plans, which by no means got here to fruition.
Since then, greater than seven years in the past, the property has remained unused. Richland County zoning administrator Geo Worth mentioned this month he has no details about any plans to develop the property right into a public recreation space or anything.
County officers have additionally given no indication that they plan to promote the property to unencumber the $2 million in tourism funds, roughly a 3rd of their 2015 hospitality fund revenues, which have remained tied up within the lot ever since.
Challenge LM
Whereas Lake Murray is a vital a part of the Columbia space, solely a small part of the shoreline southwest of Irmo is in Richland County. Bonuck Highway could be the one alternative for a Richland tourism website on the lake in accordance with a feasibility research, the county mentioned in an announcement launched shortly after buying the land in 2015.
“A feasibility research advised a number of choices for the location,” the assertion mentioned with out additional elaboration.
Richland council members then voted 9-1 in favor of buying the property, which they known as Challenge LM in council conferences. State Rep. Seth Rose, D-Columbia, who was on the council on the time, solid the only vote towards the challenge.
He opposed the acquisition as a result of he thought the county didn’t have a sufficiently clear plan in place, Rose mentioned in a current interview. “I voted towards the land buy as a result of (with out a plan) it was unclear to me that this might be a legally legitimate use of hospitality tax {dollars},” Rose mentioned.
State legislation requires hospitality tax revenues for use for tasks that can drive tourism and generate more cash for the county, Rose mentioned.
Particularly, hospitality tax revenues could also be used towards tourism-related buildings, leisure amenities, seashore entry, infrastructure tasks to help tourism-related calls for and vacationer website preparation, in accordance with the South Carolina Native Hospitality Tax Act.
The county’s assertion following the acquisition additionally mentioned it could not undertake plans for the property with out first listening to from group members.
Trying again, Rose mentioned the county ought to have gotten extra enter from the group earlier than the council’s vote to buy the land.
“I do bear in mind lots of people reaching out within the communities (who) had been very alarmed that that they didn’t know what was going to be occurring this property,” he mentioned.
A kind of folks was Les Tweed, president and longtime member of the Ballentine Neighborhood Affiliation, which objected to the county’s plans. Neighbors had been involved about elevated visitors on their roads and the shortage of parking area on the website, Tweed mentioned.
Elevated visitors on residential streets has been a sizzling situation for neighborhoods round Lake Murray earlier than, and the roads main as much as the Bonuck Highway property are slim and wind by way of quiet communities.
“It simply did not seem to be it was ever going to be possible to coexist with the group,” Tweed mentioned.
Ultimately, the county backed off plans to show the property right into a public recreation website.
“It simply sort of pale away,” Tweed mentioned.
Since then, the land has gone unused and the county’s plans transferring ahead stay unclear.
An inhospitable scenario
Hospitality taxes, like every other authorities funds, must be spent in a accordance with the legislation, mentioned Bob Coble, former Columbia mayor.
If hospitality taxes had been spent with the intention to create a tourism website, however the challenge by no means materialized, “the sensible factor to do could be to, you realize, to reimburse the hospitality tax, to just remember to did not have any authorized points, however I do not know that you’d,” Coble mentioned.
Nonetheless, it’s not unusual for counties or cities to buy land with out a clear plan, Coble mentioned.
“I feel it is sensible to plan forward,” Coble mentioned, “however there’s simply no means you possibly can plan out each element of each plan prior to buying land in some instances, just because it is simply isn’t potential.”
If taxpayers assume a neighborhood authorities has tied up hospitality funds outdoors of their authorized use, they’ve the correct to sue that authorities.
“I do not assume that is simply pie within the sky stuff.” Coble mentioned. “Municipalities and counties get sued on a regular basis … so you have to be actual cautious.”
Tweed, nevertheless, mentioned he holds out hope that the county will promote the land to develop for a number of residential houses.
“And for change, let or not it’s a superb funding, the place they really made one thing out of it,” Tweed mentioned.
Requested in regards to the property not too long ago, Councilman Invoice Malinowski, who voted in favor of the challenge and in whose district the property sits, referred questions in regards to the property to Richland County Administrator Leonardo Brown.
Brown didn’t reply to repeated requests for remark for this text.