Hardin County Fiscal Court approves solid waste personnel resolution after split vote

Hardin County Fiscal Court voted 5-4 on Jan. 14 to approve Resolution 2025-009, authorizing the hiring of solid waste personnel and filling a budgeted coordinator post removed from the consent agenda for discussion.

Supporters said the coordinator post is needed to provide administrative oversight, grant preparation and continuity for the county’s solid waste operations and related offices. Opponents argued the public works director job has been hollowed out and recommended restoring a standalone solid waste director position instead of filling a coordinator role.

Judge Executive Keith Tull presided over the discussion and noted the vacancy had left several administrative duties unassigned, which staff, engineering and code enforcement have covered in the interim. A number of magistrates voiced concern about the county’s organizational structure; one magistrate said the public works director job “is now a title only,” arguing duties previously in that job have been reassigned and that the county should recruit an experienced solid waste director.

Supporters responded that the county currently lacks dedicated backup for grant application preparation and compliance, and that solid waste administration has operational consequences for other county services. During debate a court member said the solid waste operation is the county’s only revenue-positive department and that its net contribution partially funds other functions; the speaker also cited both an $8,000,000 gross revenue figure and an unclear $222,000,000 figure mentioned during remarks, which was not clarified in the meeting record.

The resolution was moved and seconded (mover and seconder not specified in the meeting transcript). Roll call produced these votes: Squire Clem — No; Squire Hicks — Yes; Squire Muse — Yes; Squire Pennington — Yes; Squire Saltzman — No; Squire Thompson — No; Squire Whitehead — Yes; Squire Yates — No; Judge Executive Keith Tull — Yes. The tally was five yes, four no; the motion passed.

Magistrates who opposed asked that the court revisit the structure and suggested advertising for an experienced solid waste director when retirements occur. In response, Tull offered to provide a report in six months on the coordinator’s performance to inform whether further organizational changes are appropriate.

The resolution had been removed from the consent agenda earlier in the meeting to allow for debate and was approved at the end of the regular voting meeting. No change to the county’s budgetary appropriation for the position was announced during the session.

A record of the full debate and the roll-call vote is entered in the meeting minutes; next regular Fiscal Court meeting is scheduled for Jan. 28, 2025.