Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council narrowly approves moving forward with transportation sales-tax referendum process
Summary
Lancaster County Council voted 6–4 with 1 abstention to begin legislative steps for a possible transportation sales tax referendum; supporters said dedicated funding is needed, opponents urged more public education before a ballot measure.
Lancaster County Council voted to advance legislation that would allow a referendum on a transportation-dedicated sales tax, with the motion to begin the ordinance/resolution process passing 6–4 with one member recorded as opposed or abstaining.
The county’s transportation presentation recapped the prior 2024 proposal and a revised staff recommendation that emphasized a mix of large widenings and a sizable allocation for resurfacing and municipal roads. County staff presented revenue projections and a staff plan that would shift $115 million to resurfacing and municipalities and roughly $60 million for a large widening on SC 521, among other priorities. Staff said a 1% sales tax could generate $16.5 million in FY 2024 and estimated $256 million over 10 years using a 9% growth assumption.
At the meeting, members of the public and the County Transportation Committee urged putting a 1-cent sales tax back on the ballot. Rudy Carter, chair of the County Transportation Committee, told council: “We want to try and revive it and put it back on the agenda for a vote again this year.” Carter said prior outreach was inadequate and called for renewed education efforts.
Council debate split on timing and detail. Supporters said the county is behind on road maintenance and widening and urged placing the question before voters this year. Opponents warned that last year’s measure failed and said the county should spend more time educating voters and clarifying which projects and corridors would be funded. Several council members asked for more granular descriptions of what “521 widenings” or specific corridor improvements would mean before broad public outreach.
Councilman Jose Luis made the motion, amended on the floor per county attorney/staff guidance, directing staff to prepare the resolution and ordinance necessary to call a referendum and to refine project definitions and analysis for the ballot process. The motion passed 6–4 with one member opposing; staff will proceed to draft ballot language and the legislative steps needed to place a question before voters.
Council directed staff to deliver refined project lists and financial analyses so the council and the public can review specific allocations before final approval of ballot language. The council also discussed whether the transportation tax could replace the county road fee and staff said that would require careful accounting because the road fee provides roughly $35 million over 10 years for road maintenance.
