The Sumner County Highway Commission on Jan. 5, 2026, voted to defer action for one month on accepting Wolfpack Way as a county road after residents and speakers described recurring flooding, damaged sidewalks and alleged diversion of historic water flows tied to the development.

Residents and area stakeholders told the commission they had documented damage and recurring flooding that they said began after the subdivision’s storm system was installed. David Twine, a former developer who inspected the site and shared photographs, said he found ‘‘structural failures in the asphalt’’ and low sidewalk spots that collect mud, and he urged the commission not to accept the road until repairs are made. An unidentified resident who said he has farmed the property for decades contended the storm drain ‘‘cut off the water’’ that historically fed his stock pond and asserted the change violated his riparian water rights.

Steven King, a speaker who said he has raised the issue with the school board, requested the commission defer the road acceptance and asked the school district to hire a civil engineer to inspect and recommend fixes. King also cited district reserve balances, saying the school system has more than $100 million in reserves and pointed to budget figures referenced during public comment.

During the ensuing discussion, the superintendent described the road’s design elements — curb, gutter and catch basins — and said some hairline cracking is typical for roads a few years old, while commissioners and another speaker argued the drainage and property impacts go beyond ordinary maintenance. Commissioners debated procedural options, including referring the matter to the education committee or asking the school board to act; one commissioner moved to amend the pending acceptance to defer for one month and to notify the school superintendent and school board so they could work on a plan. The amendment passed on a voice vote, and the amended motion to defer likewise carried.

The commission’s action was procedural: the body tabled the formal acceptance pending a school-led plan and further information. No formal determination of legal liability for water rights or a directive assigning payment responsibility was made at the meeting. Speakers threatened legal remedies if the issue is not resolved, but no formal lawsuit or court action was filed or recorded during the hearing.

The commission asked the superintendent to work with the school district and indicated the item would return for further consideration after the one-month deferral period. Other public commenters asked the county to pursue accountability with the project's engineer or contractor and requested a public punch-list of outstanding items before any acceptance.

The meeting record shows the technical dispute centers on stormwater conveyance and whether the project's design diverted flows from downstream landowners; those claims were presented as allegations by residents and have not been adjudicated in the meeting record. The commission’s deferral leaves the issue open pending the school district’s review and any follow-up reports.