Sumter County Council declines first reading of ordinance to allow limited maintenance of private dirt roads after divided vote

Councilman Carlton B. Washington proposed a policy change and ordinance intended to let Sumter County provide minimum maintenance on privately owned dirt roads when those roads are the sole means of access to occupied residences and are impassable to emergency vehicles. Washington said the change would require property owners to execute an irrevocable deed conveying the road to the county before maintenance begins and asked the county administrator for a plan and cost analysis.

"I believe there is a pathway for us to help our citizens," Councilman Carlton B. Washington said, citing several Attorney General opinions he provided to the council. He read legal excerpts that, he said, supported using public funds when the legislature (or county council) determines a public purpose of health and safety is met.

The ordinance text labeled 24-1001 described triggers for activation that include roads that are the sole means of access to one or more occupied primary residences, more than 300 feet from the nearest public road, and impassable to emergency response vehicles and equipment. Washington framed the proposal as a narrowly targeted public-safety measure and asked for a plan and a first reading on the ordinance.

The motion that the county administrator provide a plan and cost analysis failed on a 5–2 vote (Council members Byrd, Baker, Edens and Chairman James T. McCain, Jr. opposed; Washington and Eugene R. Baten voted in favor). Washington then moved first reading of Ordinance 24-1001; the motion failed when Chairman McCain, Councilmen Edens, Baker and Vice Chairman James R. Byrd, Jr. voted against first reading.

Opponents raised concerns about long-term liability, the county’s capacity and budget, and precedent. Councilman Artie Baker questioned whether accepting private roads would force the county to relocate utilities or assume ongoing maintenance obligations; Councilman Charles T. Edens emphasized the current limits of county resources. Mr. Gary Mixon, the county administrator, clarified later in the meeting that a separately approved budget amendment to purchase a bulldozer was intended for landfill operations, not road repairs.

The discussion drew an extended public comment period. Dozens of residents described roads that become impassable after rain, delayed or obstructed emergency responses, and daily hardships. "It took the emergency people about an hour and a half to get to her," said Rev. Eugene Dennis, describing a family emergency on a dirt road. Jackie Hughes and several other speakers urged the council to consider using capital-project sales-tax funds or county resources to address the worst roads.

Council members who opposed the ordinance said they supported finding solutions but were not willing to advance the proposed text without more data on costs, liabilities and how the county would manage a sudden increase in road miles to maintain. Several members suggested sending the issue to the Public Works Committee for further study; a separate motion to refer the matter did not carry at the time of the meeting, though members subsequently agreed that estimates discussed in the committee should be returned to full council for consideration.

Washington framed the vote as a choice between siding with residents or with conservative fiscal practice. After the failed motion he told the chamber he was "ashamed of Council," reflecting his frustration that a first reading did not pass. Other council members said they wanted more detailed numbers and a clear plan before changing policy.

Next steps: councilmembers agreed to study the road issue further. A number of residents asked councilmembers to visit affected roads and to prioritize emergency access when the Public Works Committee or full council next takes up the matter.