Clark County officials discuss compost facility complaints, tests and possible public giveaway

Clark County Fiscal Court members heard extended public and staff discussion about runoff, odor complaints and operational limits at the countycompost facility, and discussed short-term and long-term options to reduce stockpiles and address potential water contamination.

The discussion matters because residents reported E. coli in samples and repeated odor and runoff problems, and the court must balance public-health concerns, grant reporting requirements and the facilityoperations that currently store and process large volumes of compost.

Judge (presiding) and county staff described two recent complaints: one homeowner who posted photos and reported runoff, and a cluster of residents near the facility who said wind-driven turning of piles created strong odor that reached homes. Manager Davis said a French drain and a berm were installed after the complaint "so there should be no way that any more runoff will go on to this man's property." County staff said they would arrange E. coli testing with the health department to determine sources.

County staff and Magistrates discussed multiple potential sources for bacteria: leachate from the old landfill that feeds a branch near the animal shelter, a neglected lagoon serving the animal shelter and the compost piles themselves. A staff member said the lagoon "has 6 inch trees growing in that lagoon" and that it appears to have been neglected for years; the court directed health and emergency-services staff to test and report findings.

Extension and compost staff described the facility's processing cycle and market realities. The county extension agent had completed tests of the compost makeup, and a staff speaker said those tests "nowhere mentioned on there is there anything outside of what there should be." Court members noted that shorter-than-ideal turning times (three months in some rows rather than the preferred five to six months) can leave coarser wood chips in the finished product and weaken decomposition, producing odors and lower sales.

Officials detailed operational constraints and potential investments: extending processing rows by about 200 feet, adding an open-sided roof to control moisture and installing electricity to support year-round processing. Staff said they were pursuing a small grant for infrastructure improvements and that the county had previously spent "hundreds of thousands of dollars" on the facility. In the short term, several magistrates supported a one-day or limited "free compost" event to reduce on-site volume, with controlled pickup rules and staff support to keep costs low.

Court members asked for an update on grants and reporting deadlines at the next meeting, emphasizing the need to comply with grant requirements to avoid potential repayment. Several magistrates also requested follow-up on the trammel (sifting) machine status; staff confirmed it was operating.

Court direction: staff were asked to arrange water-quality testing, provide a grant/reporting update at the next meeting, and to prepare a plan for a possible public pickup day to reduce stockpiles. No formal policy change or appropriation was made at this meeting.

Minor operational background and local assistance options were discussed: earlier compost was trucked to Rumpke Landfill in Montgomery County when space ran out, and staff noted compost sales had declined this season.

The court closed the discussion without taking a vote; members asked staff to return with testing results, grant timelines and a plan for a reduction event or other operational fixes.