Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appointments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee recommends Michael Farino for Sumner County Solid Waste Board after brief debate
Summary
The Committee on Committees voted 3–2 to issue a positive recommendation for Michael Farino to the Solid Waste Board after members discussed the board’s role and qualifications, citing coordination with the resource authority and uncertainty about statutory requirements.
The Committee on Committees recommended that the mayor’s nominee, Michael Farino, be forwarded for appointment to the Sumner County Solid Waste Board after a 3–2 vote.
The recommendation matters because members said the Solid Waste Board approves waste management plans and coordinates with the resource authority, and some commissioners said they were unclear on statutory qualifications for board membership.
Committee discussion focused on Farino’s experience and the board’s responsibilities. A committee member who interviewed the nominee said, “I interviewed mister Farino, and, as far as solid waste, he's very capable. He, he owned a company that did big freeways and highways in, the on the East Coast, he and his brother. And they actually developed and ran a solid waste grinding company.” That same member said they spent hours trying to locate governing law, noting, “I spent a couple hours today hunting down TCA 68 dash 2 11 dash 8 13.” Other members described the Solid Waste Board as coordinating with the resource authority and approving its plans; one member summarized, “Solid waste, as I understand it, is, you know, demolished concrete and asphalt.”
The committee recorded concern that the exact membership qualifications and the board’s duties were not clear to all members. One member said the Solid Waste Board “meet[s] once a year” and that at the last meeting they “passed the information that the resource authority put forward.” No committee member identified legal disqualifications or specific statutory appointment criteria beyond the citation mentioned.
The committee put the recommendation to a vote after limited discussion. The chair called for the vote; the motion passed 3–2. The meeting transcript records, “Any opposed? I'm a no. No. K. So it passes 3 to 2.” The recommendation is a positive recommendation to the full commission; the transcript does not show a formal full-commission appointment vote.
The discussion included procedural and factual clarifications but no formal direction to staff or implementation timeline. Committee members said they would review April minutes and the mayor’s explanation for additional context; one member noted, “I'll go back and watch the minutes from April.”
(Ending) The committee’s positive recommendation moves the nomination to the full board for the mayoral appointment process; the transcript does not record the full commission’s final appointment action.
