Is ‘dark money’ influencing Lexington council race? County growth hinges on election

Residential development has become a central, hotly contested issue in next week’s Republican primaries for Lexington County Council — races that will, in the absence of any Democrats filing to run, likely decide who will make up more than half of the county’s elected leadership starting next year.

Despite tensions between more aggressive and more conservative approaches to building new homes in parts of the rapidly growing county, the candidates all say they’re fighting for the future of Lexington County. But sitting council members allege there’s been a concerted effort by home builders to influence the outcome of the election — and the future growth of the county.

Late last month, four incumbent Lexington County Council members facing primary challengers, along with Council Chair Beth Carrigg, accused the Building Industry Association of Central SC of funneling “dark money” into the campaign through a recently formed nonprofit, Protecting Lexington’s Future.

That organization — founded solely by Building Industry Association CEO Bin Wilcenski — has pushed out ads and mailers supporting challengers in the four races that feature an incumbent.

The nonprofit, along with some of the challengers vying for seats on the council, question council’s move in recent years to limit residential development in unincorporated areas of the county to four houses per acre. The builders’ group wants the county to at least go back to allowing 12 homes per acre, the previous limit.

It’s not clear just how much money Protect Lexington’s Future has funneled into the council race, because South Carolina currently can’t require campaign spending by third-party groups to be reported.

The association hosted a meeting for its members at The Dales Biergarten and Bottle Shop in Springdale late last month, announcing that “endorsed candidates” Michael Bishop, Brent Munnerlyn, Todd Cockrell, Doug Leonard, and Jason Resnick would be in attendance. Incumbents Glen Conwell and Todd Cullum, whose districts aren’t up until 2026, are also listed, as well as District 4 Councilwoman Debbie Summers, who isn’t seeking reelection, and state Sen. Katrina Shealy.

The association also hosted a fundraiser for Resnick in April.

One candidate, District 1 hopeful Bishop, confirmed to The State that he accepted $1,000 and an endorsement from the Building Industry Association, which hasn’t yet responded to requests for comment. The latest campaign contribution reports available via the S.C. Ethics Commission don’t yet show that the money has been given to Bishop.

“The industry is supporting me because they know I want to communicate,” said Bishop, who previously served as mayor for the Lexington County town of Springdale. He stressed that County Council needs to work with builders to form a plan that works for their interests while also ensuring that the county’s future residential growth proceeds responsibly.

Bishop also stressed that his acceptance of the association’s money doesn’t mean he’ll be doing their bidding.

“I said, ‘If you think I’m going to owe you a favor, I will not,’” he said of his conversation with the association. “I’m going to be the same guy. No matter what. But I do think (council has) done a pretty terrible job of sitting down with the builders and developers and working with them. I hear complaints all the time that they’ll submit plans, and it’s taken six months or more to get plans back to them. It shouldn’t be so complicated.”

Bishop further accused his opponent, incumbent Councilman Scott Whetstone, of taking contributions from developers. The councilman’s ethics filings show he’s received donations from two companies involved in trucking, hauling and grading, but no developers. Whetstone didn’t respond to requests for comment.

How to manage residential development moving forward is certainly on the minds of Lexington County residents, with grassroots organizations such as Save Lexington SC and Develop Lexington County Responsibly advocating for more conservative growth that doesn’t further tax already crowded roads or erode the small-town feel that’s key to why they love the area.

“Save Lexington SC calls on Town and County Councils to team together for citizen interests to protect our infrastructure and better manage growth, including partnering with Statehouse legislators for funding of road projects and updating annexation and impact fee laws to give local governing bodies better tools to do their jobs for citizens and businesses,” the organization said in a statement.

Develop Lexington County Responsibly often shows up at council meetings with decent numbers, most wearing blue shirts to show their unified position that growth needs to be controlled. The group picked a side when reached by The State.

“We appreciate what all the Lexington County Council incumbents have done for the citizens of Lexington County,” the group said in a statement. “Their unwavering efforts to strengthen our (county’s) infrastructure and to better manage growth will go a long way toward responsible development for our county in the future. We wish them the best in the election.”

Conflicting views on growth

Council has made several moves to control growth in recent years, including:

• New developments of more than 10 houses were limited to no more than four houses per acre sitting a minimum of 20 feet apart in 2021.

• In 2022, council put a freeze on new subdivision permits.

• More recently, council has enacted concurrency requirements — meaning services such as schools, fire, EMS and law enforcement must affirm they can handle new developments before they are built — along with limiting the amount of land that can be cleared at one time.

At the same time, County Council remains at odds with local municipalities after canceling a 45-year-old agreement to maintain roads within their borders late last year, seeking to add a new provision to that agreement that dictates new residential developments in annexed areas must meet the standards set by the county.

The election challengers who spoke to The State varied in their stances on development, but the majority argued for giving builders and developers more of a seat at the table moving forward.

“I have nothing against the builders, but I think it’s a bunch of silly nothing,” said Clifford Fisher, who is challenging Councilman Bimbo Jones in District 5.

He asserted that several incumbent members of Lexington County Council have taken donations from builders in the past, including some who took part in last week’s ”dark money” press conference. “When did the builders become bad people?” Fisher said. “Everybody moves into their houses.”

Fisher said it was the county’s land needs that led him to run for the Red Bank area’s County Council seat in the first place.

“I’m the only one who’s ever built roads, who has experience surveying land and how to lay it out, so I have some abilities that are needed on council, and have the time to do it now that I’m retired,” he said.

While he said he had never previously heard of the builders’ group Protect Lexington’s Future that was the subject of council members’ accusations, he wouldn’t rule out accepting donations from the building trades himself.

“I would take money from anybody,” he said. “I’ve had a lot of friends come through, not builders but clients of mine who have been kind enough to support me, and I’ve had a variety, and I’m financially blessed.”

Bishop, running to represent rural areas around Pelion, Gaston and Swansea, argued that if the county stalls development too much, new home construction could push just over the line into neighboring counties, meaning the loss of potential additions to the tax base while still putting more cars on the roads.

“All you’re doing is pushing them to the outskirts, and we’re still gonna have all those issues with no money,” he said.

District 3 candidate Munnerlyn — who interrupted the council members’ press conference, shouting accusations and getting into arguments with several people in attendance — said limiting the number of houses to four an acre could hamper the local economy, which doesn’t help anybody. He said he hasn’t and won’t take money from the Building Industry Association. He is running to unseat Councilman Darrell Hudson in District 3, which covers parts of Lexington and Lake Murray.

District 4 candidate Leonard is wary of the impacts growth is having on the county. He is running for the seat representing Springdale and parts of Lexington, which is coming open due to Councilwoman Summers choosing not to run again.

“We’ve had pretty much unbridled development and no connection to infrastructure,” Leonard said. “So I don’t think you have any choice but to make sure that the infrastructure and development is connected.”

“You’ve got to make sure that if you’re going to issue 7,000 building permits, that you’ve got the capacity as far as roads, as far as EMS, as far as all the infrastructure, water sewer, to handle that,” he added.

The realtor said he hasn’t taken any money from the Builders Industry Association. He advocated for the county forming a comprehensive plan that takes into account residential and commercial growth. Leonard said builders and developers need to have a voice in shaping that plan, but council needs to set expectations that are best for residents and those looking to bring residential developments to the county will have to adapt.

“The building industry is only going to dance to the music that the county sets,” he said. “They can’t do anything that’s not outlined in the ordinances and laws that the county sets. So council’s got to deal with it.”

Leonard’s opponent, Cockrell, responded to The State with a statement when approached about his position on development and contributions.

“I am not the person to respond to that matter as I have chosen not to take PAC money or money from special interest groups,” Cockrell said in a statement. “My financials have been filed as required, with the S.C. Ethics Commission and are visible to the public.”

Resnick — who is challenging Charli Wessinger in District 6, which covers Chapin and parts of Irmo and Lexington — also provided a statement.

“These accusations are nothing but a desperate attempt by a desperate politician trying to distract from her disastrous record,” he said. “Ms. Wessinger failed to plan for growth, failed to keep our residents safe, and failed to protect our tax dollars. No amount of political spin changes these facts and voters know it.”