Greenwood County officials hear stark road‑funding outlook; no fee action taken

Public Works Director Rob Rushin presented a detailed review of Greenwood County’s road system to the County Council on Sept. 2, warning that current revenues leave the county far behind a state‑recommended paving cycle and that closing the gap would require significant new revenue.

Rushin told the council the county maintains roughly 227 paved miles and 102 unpaved miles, part of a roughly 1,269‑mile countywide network. He said the county’s FY26 road operating budget is about $1.716 million for maintenance and operating expenses only, and noted the county relies on an annual allotment from the County Transportation Committee (CTC) for resurfacing projects.

Why it matters: Rushin said the county’s recent average resurfacing pace — about 6.38 miles per year over the last four years — produces roughly a 35‑year paving cycle, far longer than the state’s goal of 20 years. He said reaching a 20‑year average would require roughly 11–11.4 miles paved annually and an annual resurfacing budget nearer $2.5 million. With a likely CTC allocation of about $800,000, Rushin estimated an annual shortfall in the neighborhood of $1.68 million.

Rushin presented several ways to close the gap and the tradeoffs involved. He identified the county’s per‑vehicle road fee (currently $26) as the main local revenue source and described two sets of estimates that appeared in his presentation: an earlier calculation that an additional roughly $27.80 per vehicle would be needed to hit a 20‑year cycle, and a later, restated estimate of about $20 per vehicle. Rushin and council members discussed those differing figures during the meeting; council did not adopt a fee change. To avoid overstating precision, Rushin’s estimates can be summarized as a range of roughly $20–$28 per vehicle for a 20‑year target, with higher charges needed if the county assumes additional privately maintained roads.

Private roads and other costs: Rushin said about 9% of county roads are privately maintained. He estimated that taking all private roads into the county system (roughly an additional ~89 miles) would add roughly $775,000 in annual operating cost and could require about a $30 per vehicle increase on top of the fee needed just to maintain the existing system — pushing total additional per‑vehicle needs toward the $50 range and producing a potential total fee near $76 per vehicle depending on the options chosen.

Staffing and hidden liabilities: Rushin told council the road department has 15 authorized positions but only nine filled (roughly a 40% vacancy rate), and that competitive pressure from the state DOT — which raised some field wages by about 20% — makes recruiting difficult. He also highlighted bridge needs (11 county bridges, two recently repaired, nine needing major work) and one recent sinkhole repair that cost over $30,000.

Council response and next steps: Council members asked for clarity on the County Transportation Committee (CTC) appointment process and how other counties handle private roads. Several members said the topic should be included in the county’s strategic plan. The council took Rushin’s presentation as information — no fee change, motion, or ordinance was adopted at the meeting. Rushin offered to meet with council members for follow‑up data.

Quotes: "If we do nothing... we're managing decline," Rushin said, describing the long paving cycle the county faces. He noted, "Our current road fee is $26 per vehicle," and walked council through the range of projected increases and tradeoffs.

What’s next: Council members asked staff to include road‑funding and road‑assumption policy options in upcoming strategic planning and follow‑up sessions; no binding direction or fee increase was approved at the Sept. 2 meeting.