CAYCE — A state oversight authority is investigating the Greater Cayce West Columbia Chamber of Commerce after receiving a complaint that the organization may be violating the law, according to documents obtained by The Post and Courier.
The investigation comes on the heels of months of infighting between Mayor Elise Partin and the four other council members over a 4-to-1 vote to award all of the city’s accommodations tax money to the chamber. It was a break from earlier years, when funding was dispersed between three local tourism agencies: Experience Columbia, Lake Murray/Capital City and the chamber.
In a Sept. 10 letter obtained by The Post and Courier, Tourism Expenditure Review Board Chairman Ed Riggs said the oversight committee within the S.C. Department of Revenue initiated an investigation after receiving a complaint that the chamber “has not been spending accommodations tax revenues in accordance with S.C. Code Ann. 6-4-10(3).”
TERC did not identify who made the complaint, and a spokesperson declined to comment.
But Partin, who opposed sending all of the city’s accommodation tax funding to the chamber, believes an Oct. 13 special-called council meeting was a direct response to the TERC investigation. During the meeting, the other four council members voted unanimously to open an investigation into an employee complaint against a council member. She believes the decision to hire outside counsel to investigate the unnamed council member is an attempt to distract from this investigation.
“The timing of this special-called meeting of City Council is significant because Friday (Oct. 10) was the deadline for the city of Cayce to turn in documents for a state investigation regarding how the majority of council has voted to spend taxpayer dollars,” Partin said.
That was also the day Mayor Pro Tem Tim James sent out a call notice for the special Oct. 13 meeting.
“This effort to circumvent our normal city processes is likely rooted in a desire to distract public attention from the fact that this council is being investigated for the way taxpayer money has been spent,” Partin said.
She would not confirm whether she was the target of the council’s investigation, but council members and a former city manager for months have accused her of violating the city’s style of government by directly discussing day-to-day city business with city employees.
A Chamber employee reached for comment Tuesday morning directed all inquiries to James, who is also the chamber’s president and CEO. Repeated attempts to reach James were unsuccessful.
No other council member returned requests for comment.
What the law says
The state statute in question outlines how municipalities can distribute a portion of revenues received from their local accommodations tax to local nonprofits promoting tourism. Under the law, those organizations must use the funds they receive exclusively to promote and advertise tourism in the municipality from which they received the funds.
Organizations are required to submit line-item budgets in their applications for the money. The law also requires organizations to send a detailed, line-item expenditure review, complete with invoices, to the municipality at the end of the fiscal year. The municipality then sends those reports to the Tourism Expenditure Review Board, which double-checks that the funds are being used in accordance with the law.
Riggs requested documentation sent to Cayce by the chamber spanning the last three fiscal years, including “all budgets and accounting of expenditures.”
According to finance reports received by The Post and Courier, the chamber received more than $53,000 from Cayce over the last three years, but the chamber failed to submit an expenditure report, accounting how they spent the funds.
According to a Dec. 6, 2022, email from then-City Manager Tracy Hegler, the chamber was awarded the money to be spent in the following order for the 2022-23 fiscal year:
-
Social media costs and staff in the amount of $2,000
-
Targeted out-of-state ads in the amount of $2,000
-
Print and magazine advertising in the amount of $6,000
-
Rack card printing (to be placed 50+ miles away) in the amount of $6,000
-
Website advertising in the amount of $4,000
But that wasn’t reflected in the report submitted by the chamber’s Membership and Events coordinator, Christina Nelson.
Email correspondence obtained by The Post and Courier indicates that a city official told the chamber a less detailed report would be acceptable.
In a July 31, 2023, email to Cayce Administrative Coordinator Amanda Rowan, Nelson said another city employee had told her it was sufficient to submit their profit/loss report, which does not differentiate between how the group spent funds awarded by Cayce and funds from other municipalities.
“We submitted our annual profit/loss report for the Visitor’s Center for the line item — grant expenses,” Nelson wrote. “(City Clerk Mendy Corder) mentioned this should be sufficient in lieu of providing the invoice reports since we are the Visitor’s Center and not an individual event.”
In reply, Rowan agreed the submitted information “appears to be sufficient.”
While the report breaks expenditures down into categories like “Advertising – TV” and “Advertising – Web” and includes examples of advertisements promoting Cayce, it doesn’t provide invoices for how much each ad cost. It also doesn’t list any vendors for any of the expenditures listed. Both are required in state statute.
The report submitted for 2024-25 was even slimmer. Like the previous years, Nelson submitted a profit/loss report in lieu of an expenditure report “per confirmation with the City of Cayce staff.”
But it didn’t include any examples of Cayce-specific ads, despite listing $15,400 spent on print, web and radio advertisements. No invoices were included.
The report also didn’t provide any data points for how much tourism was affected by these advertisements — a statistic Cayce’s council specifically requested, according to the documents. The form asks recipients to submit two years worth of data tracking total tourist attendance, broken down into local tourists and those who traveled from more than 50 miles away, and hotel rooms/overnight stays booked as a result of the program. That section was left blank.
When reached for comment, Nelson said she was not authorized to speak on the matter.
What TERC is investigating
The TERC investigation is seemingly looking into why the Cayce council didn’t catch a potential problem with the chamber’s spending earlier.
TERC requested the following information from the city for “the three most recent fiscal years:”
-
All communications with the chamber regarding its application to receive a distribution of accommodations tax revenues.
-
All documents provided by the chamber regarding its application to receive a distribution of accommodations tax revenues.
-
All document relating to the accommodations tax advisory committee’s consideration of the chamber’s application, including but not limited to meeting minutes and communications.
-
All document relating to City Council’s consideration of the chamber’s application and any recommendation of the advisory committee, including but not limited to meeting minutes and communications.
-
All budgets and accounting of expenditures provided by the chamber.
-
Any other documents or information which reflect how the chamber is spending accommodations tax revenues.
-
All policies or guidelines governing the use of accommodations tax funds.
-
Any other records the city believes are relevant to TERC’s investigation.
You can read the TERC letter and resent financial reports below:
