[et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”3.0.91″ custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px” next_background_color=”#000000″][et_pb_row custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px” _builder_version=”3.0.47″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″][et_pb_image admin_label=”Top Image” _builder_version=”3.0.106″ show_in_lightbox=”off” url_new_window=”off” use_overlay=”off” always_center_on_mobile=”on” force_fullwidth=”off” show_bottom_space=”on” src=”http:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/ILVotefeature.jpg” \/][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][et_pb_row custom_padding=”2px|0px|8px|0px” _builder_version=”3.0.47″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″][et_pb_text admin_label=”Top Image caption” _builder_version=”3.0.106″ text_font=”|600|||||||” text_font_size=”12px” background_layout=”light”]<\/p>\n
After months of debate, Indian Land voters voted no to incorporation and has decided to leave its governing to Lancaster County.<\/p>\n
[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section][et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”3.0.92″ custom_padding=”2px|0px|37.9062px|0px” prev_background_color=”#000000″ next_background_color=”#000000″][et_pb_row custom_padding=”0px|0px|18.9531px|0px” custom_margin=”10px|||” _builder_version=”3.0.92″][et_pb_column type=”1_3″][et_pb_image admin_label=”Image 1″ show_in_lightbox=”on” show_bottom_space=”off” _builder_version=”3.0.106″ custom_margin=”||2px|” custom_padding=”|||” animation_style=”slide” box_shadow_style=”preset2″ box_shadow_horizontal=”4px” box_shadow_vertical=”4px” url_new_window=”off” use_overlay=”off” always_center_on_mobile=”on” force_fullwidth=”off” src=”http:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/ILVoteW3.jpg” \/][et_pb_text admin_label=”Caption 1″ _builder_version=”3.0.106″ text_font=”|600|||||||” text_font_size=”12px” text_line_height=”1.4em” custom_margin=”8px|||2px” custom_padding=”|||” background_layout=”light”]<\/p>\n
The map of the proposed town of Indian Land greeted voters as they entered the polls at Pleasant Valley Methodist church.<\/p>\n
[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_image admin_label=”Image 2″ show_in_lightbox=”on” show_bottom_space=”off” _builder_version=”3.0.106″ custom_margin=”||2px|” custom_padding=”|||” animation_style=”slide” box_shadow_style=”preset2″ box_shadow_horizontal=”4px” box_shadow_vertical=”4px” url_new_window=”off” use_overlay=”off” always_center_on_mobile=”on” force_fullwidth=”off” src=”http:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/ILVoteW5.jpg” \/][et_pb_text admin_label=”Caption 2″ _builder_version=”3.0.106″ text_font=”|600|||||||” text_font_size=”12px” text_line_height=”1.4em” custom_margin=”8px|||2px” custom_padding=”|||” background_layout=”light”]<\/p>\n
Sings of a growing area is the building site for the new high school along U.S. Highway 521 towards Lancaster. The county approved the new school to meet the demands of overcrowding at the current Indian Land high school, which opened in 2007.<\/p>\n
[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_image admin_label=”Image 3″ show_in_lightbox=”on” show_bottom_space=”off” _builder_version=”3.0.106″ custom_margin=”||2px|” custom_padding=”|||” animation_style=”slide” box_shadow_style=”preset2″ box_shadow_horizontal=”4px” box_shadow_vertical=”4px” url_new_window=”off” use_overlay=”off” always_center_on_mobile=”on” force_fullwidth=”off” src=”http:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/ILVoteGraphic.jpg” \/][\/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”2_3″][et_pb_text admin_label=”News Story” _builder_version=”3.0.106″ custom_margin=”0px||0px|” background_layout=”light”]<\/p>\n
The small South Carolina community of Indian Land rejected an incorporation effort last month, choosing to continue letting the Lancaster County government dealing with the heavy growth from metropolitan Charlotte, just north of the Carolina border.<\/p>\n
\u201cIncorporations are not that common in South Carolina,<\/strong>\u00a0so that is not surprising,\u201d said Jeff Shacker, the region\u2019s field services manager for the Municipal Association of South Carolina that represents the 271 incorporated municipalities in the state. \u201cBut we did not see this wide of a margin coming.\u201d<\/p>\n The unofficial results revealed Indian Land went against incorporation by a whopping 83 to 17 percent in the March 27 referendum. Turnout for the vote was at\u00a042 percent as nearly 11,000 residents\u00a0casted ballots. The referendum was defeated in every precinct in the area, including a shutout\u00a0from Van Wyck\u2019s 79 registered voters.<\/p>\n Van Wyck, a town of fewer than 1,000\u00a0people, sits south of Indian Land and north of Lancaster. The town is rural,<\/strong>\u00a0almost all\u00a0farmland. The Indian Land incorporation effort wanted to cut into Van Wyck and bring it within the town of Indian Land. When the Indian Land incorporation effort began,\u00a0Van Wyck’s residents themselves quickly incorporated to stay out of the potential limits of the Charlotte suburb. Van Wyck then annexed land towards the north, mostly farmland that also did not want to become part of the town of Indian Land.<\/p>\n It works for Van Wyck, but it makes a future potential incorporation of Indian Land more problematic.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Van Wyck annexations will cause more issues,\u201d\u00a0Shacker said. \u201cThe land area they have added would have to be excluded in future proposals. That would have a major impact on the area of incorporation.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe size of the incorporated area was too much, almost 80 percent farmland, \u201csaid Lancaster County Councilman Brain Carnes, who represents Indian Land in the seventh district of the county. \u201cThere was strong belief the budget was not going to work and that the taxes were going to come.\u201d<\/p>\n The failed proposal included\u00a058\u00a0<\/span>square miles\u00a0with a $7.7 million town budget. Under those circumstances, Indian Land would have been the fifth largest city in South Carolina in terms of land mass. With such a large land area and a population of around 30,000 people, the budget was a big talking point in the months leading towards the vote.<\/p>\n \u201cIt was just a bad plan across the board,\u201d said Mike Neese, an organizer of No Town of Indian Land, which lobbied against incorporation. \u201cWe knew this two years ago. It was a bad plan with bad leadership that tried to divide the community. We just told folks the truth and let them decide, and they sure did.\u201d<\/p>\n Now that the incorporation effort has been defeated, Lancaster County will continue to provide services to Indian Land and control its governance. The county council of seven members will be tasked with continuing to control the growth of the community as they have done in recent years.<\/p>\n \u201cThe growth came when the county approved about 16,000 homes to be built in Indian Land from 2008 to 2012,\u201d said Carnes. \u201cSince then, we have only approved around 5,000, so we are controlling the growth.\u201d<\/p>\n A driving factors of the mass approvals a decade ago was to help the county recover after the Springs textile plant, once the largest employer in Lancaster, closed its doors. With that now in the rearview mirror, the county has worked to control the growth of the area. The community\u00a0will also continue receiving services from the county, something that could have led to hiked taxes under the incorporation effort.<\/p>\n \u201cWe already have everything from the county,\u201d\u00a0Carnes said. \u201cWhy pay for more?\u201d<\/p>\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section][et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ fullwidth=”off” specialty=”off” prev_background_color=”#000000″][et_pb_row][et_pb_column type=”4_4″][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" After months of debate, the community of Indian Land in Lancaster County took to the polls to heavily reject an incorporation referendum. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":54,"featured_media":7216,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":""},"categories":[67,39],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7213"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/54"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7213"}],"version-history":[{"count":15,"href":"https:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7213\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7440,"href":"https:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7213\/revisions\/7440"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7216"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7213"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7213"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/carolinanewsandreporter.cic.sc.edu\/test\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7213"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}