IOP to pay 20% of sand bill

By Prentiss Findlay
The Post and Courier
Friday, January 11, 2008



ISLE OF PALMS — The town will pay about 20 percent of the nearly $10 million cost of pumping sand onto the beach where erosion threatens homes at the northeast end of the island, Town Council decided Thursday night.

Wild Dunes resort property owners and management would pay for most of the work. The state and county would chip in about 9 percent of the project cost. "I do feel the city has a responsibility to those people, and we do need to participate at some level," said Mayor Mike Sottile.

The city will borrow $1.7 million over six years and repay it through accommodations and hospitality tax revenue. With interest, the cost to the city is about $2 million. The average annual payment will be $336,000, said Dee Taylor, Council Ways and Means Committee chairman.

Taylor proposed the details of the city revenue bond plan to help residents of erosion-plagued Wild Dunes. His council-approved plan calls for entities such as the Wild Dunes Community Association and Destination Wild Dunes to pony up about 70 percent of the necessary funds before the work begins. The total cost of the project will be deposited in a city escrow account ahead of time.

"This is an historic vote," Taylor said.

The project, which will restore the beach from 46th Avenue to Dewees Inlet, will not affect city operations or cause a property tax hike, Sottile said.

Council also approved entering a $560,000 contract with Coastal Science and Engineering to move forward with obtaining permits for the project from state Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources Management and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In addition to the $2 million bond issue approved Thursday, the town committed $200,000 to the project in November. The renourishment could begin as early as the spring, but the timing will depend on whether government officials require a lengthy environmental study.

The stretch of mostly private beach approved for renourishment has severe erosion that threatens houses and a golf course. Affected property owners have been using thousands of sandbags to try to lessen the effect of tides, which are washing under buildings, damaging utility lines and edging the buildings closer to being condemned. Last month, state regulators refused to extend an emergency order letting the sandbags stay, saying that they worsen erosion.

Council explored a number of scenarios for the beach renourishment project, including having the city pick up anywhere from 100 percent to 25 percent of the project tab. Council rejected those options because they would require a property tax hike.

As an alternative, Councilman Dick Cronin proposed using $700,000 of the $1.6 million in accommodations and hospitality taxes that the city has on hand in addition to the $2 million it would spend on revenue bonds. No one seconded the motion.

Reach Prentiss Findlay at 937-5711 or pfindlay@post andcourier.com.

Share this story:
E-mail this story E-mail this story  Printer-friendly version Printer-friendly version  

Copy and paste the link:

Comments

theronce (anonymous) says...

Great. Every tax payer to the IOP gets to help their privileged neighbors hold back the sea just like Canute. Would it be easier if every IOP tax payer just go down to the beach and throw in a roll or two of quarters.

January 11, 2008 at 8:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

obrbob (anonymous) says...

The tax payers of IOP are not flipping the bill for this. The only dough coming from income or sales tax coffers are the dollars the state and county get. The rest the tourists are paying for...and the people that live at Wild Dunes. Seems pretty fair to me. The tax revenue they generate contribute to the local economy...so why shouldn't the local economy help keep the revenue flowing?

January 11, 2008 at 8:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

realscientist (anonymous) says...

This is great news for the beachfront owners! IOP residents won't get a tax increase, and when the owners win the $700 million lawsuit (for something less than that, of course), the state will pay for OCRM's obtuseness!

January 11, 2008 at 9 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

lexylady (anonymous) says...

No. The rest of us poor tax payers will foot the bill. It will come under some kind of hidden tax. I say if you want to live in the water get a house boat.

January 11, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

theronce (anonymous) says...

obrbob, you ought to run for office. You mean to tell me that you have a pocket that has money in it that I can take and not be taking any money from you? Too cool. Really though, I know the correct answer to that. You took that lesson from how the state sold the lottery and this last sales tax increase. It's bs, of course. But, most of us are so easily fooled, so keep it up. It still works.

January 11, 2008 at 9:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

CHRISJIII (anonymous) says...

This is crazy!!! If they want to build on sand and pretend that they have to live in a gated community to feel at home then let them pay for the luxury themselves!!!!

January 11, 2008 at 9:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

oldglory (anonymous) says...

Dang! We all should have bought a place there, right? We'd be rich!

January 11, 2008 at 9:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

KidYendor (anonymous) says...

The Isle of Palms Town Council have caved in to the nanny state mentality of government that reverberates throughout America. The town council could have set the path for governments not to rescue careless beachfront condo buyers. Instead they chose to tax many to save a few. Now council, you have set the precedent. What will you do when this $10 million is also washed away? Beach renourishment lasts until the next severe tide. Bad government, though, seems to last forever.

January 11, 2008 at 10:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

outrage (anonymous) says...

Honey! get the checkbook again.

January 11, 2008 at 12:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

crankyyankee (anonymous) says...

I want to thank all of you local overtaxed landlubbers for voting in the politicans that are fixing my beach. You folks truely are a product of public education! Be sure to vote ya'll!

January 11, 2008 at 1:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

lexylady (anonymous) says...

Go sit on your sandbag and gloat!!

January 11, 2008 at 1:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

theronce (anonymous) says...

Crank, the apostrophe should be between the "y" and the "a".

January 11, 2008 at 1:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

IslandLife4Me (anonymous) says...

Gee, don't we all live on an island? Isn't the island surrounded by sand? Therefore, isn't this "our" problem as a community? We all need to share in resolving this problem. If not, we will all be oceanfront one day. Stop throwing stones at the residents of Wild Dunes. This isn't their fault, and by the way they're not all beachfront. The problem is on the ISLAND regardless where and who lives there. The problem will keep moving down the coast and impact everyone who lives here. There won't be any beach to visit, and those complaining about beachfront property owners will soon be talking about themselves. Eventually it will reach Sullivan's Island. Maybe then the state will step in to help? On the bright side, this could be nature's way of solving the parking problem on Palm Boulevard.

January 11, 2008 at 2:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

theronce (anonymous) says...

The vast majority of people will always have beach. It may not be in front of your house. It may be a block or two behind where your house once stood. Those who bought there are smarter than most of us. I expect that they should know that these islands are not permanent. My problem is simply getting to OUR beach sand beyond THEIR property. The only thing stopping me from having beach sand is their property. I do not feel inclined to spend money futilely trying to hold back the ocean from land that all of know is not permanent. Since I cannot readily get to our beach and those in power will throw money at this, I would be more inclined to favor erecting a sea wall barrier. This would tend to be a one-time expense, and those property owner would realize an increase in the property value for have a lot on deep water.

January 11, 2008 at 3:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

ttrainor (anonymous) says...

Not seconding Councilman Cronin's motion is just another case of the majority of the IOP council shirking its responsibility to provide Wild Dunes with some support in their time of need. Shame on you councilman (and Wild Dunes resident) Michael Loftus. Perhaps Wild Dunes should get MORE serious about secession and then we would have no problem funding the nourishment.

January 11, 2008 at 6:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

lexylady (anonymous) says...

YEAH, go getem Harpo!! LOL!!

January 11, 2008 at 7:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

PushingDaisies (anonymous) says...

IslandLife4Me:

"The problem is on the ISLAND regardless where and who lives there. The problem will keep moving down the coast and impact everyone who lives here. There won't be any beach to visit, and those complaining about beachfront property owners will soon be talking about themselves. Eventually it will reach Sullivan's Island."

WRONG. The problem is not on the island. The problem is the people that live on the island. A barrier island erodes. That's what it does, and that's what it will always do. Erosion doesn't move down the coast. It's not like the plague, it's not contagious. I think to be able to build on barrier islands, people must be educated as to what a barrier island IS. That way they can't be spitting out nonsense like this.

January 13, 2008 at 9:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Notice about comments:

Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.

Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!

Full terms and conditions can be read here.

Thank you for your interest in this story. The comment thread for this article has been closed.



Most Popular

 

Sponsored Links