Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Industrial Park Sale topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council waives right of first refusal on industrial park parcels; buyer identified as Nicotine Plus LLC

Aiken City Council · August 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council gave first-reading approval to waive its right of first refusal on three parcels in Vereen's Industrial Park to allow a Maryland-based flavored-nicotine manufacturer (Nicotine Plus LLC) to pursue purchase; councilmember voiced reservation and asked for more detail before second reading.

The Aiken City Council on Aug. 11 approved on first reading an ordinance waiving the city's right of first refusal over three parcels totaling about 44.4 acres in Vereen's Industrial Park, clearing the way for discussions between the owner, Avera Management Services LLC, and a prospective buyer identified as Nicotine Plus LLC.

City staff said the parcels are privately owned and that the waiver is required by the industrial-park covenants if the property is sold. Staff described the site’s prior use — nicotine-product manufacturing by Avara — and recommended waiving the city’s purchase option so the sale may proceed. Molly Campelong, identified in the meeting packet as representing the potential buyer (Robinson Gray, Columbia), answered council questions and said Nicotine Plus is based in Maryland and produces flavored nicotine products for tobacco suppliers.

Councilman Gerardo moved the waiver and Councilwoman Gregory seconded. Several council members noted they were approving the waiver of the purchase right only, not endorsing the buyer’s operations. Councilwoman Price said she would approve first reading but recorded a reservation and said she wanted more information ahead of second reading. Staff noted the county had vetted zoning for the proposed use and that the restrictive covenants are old and of uncertain enforceability.

The ordinance advances on first reading; staff said any subsequent approvals or permits would follow applicable county or state regulations.