Rutherford County DSS staff praise on-site Apex security; board to renegotiate sheriff MOU

Rutherford County Department of Social Services employees told the board that two contracted security officers from Apex Security have improved staff safety and day-to-day operations, and the director said the agency will seek renegotiation of the county sheriff's memorandum of understanding so the two contracts do not conflict.

At the meeting, Elaine Connor, a receptionist in the income maintenance unit, said the presence of the officers "gave us a feeling of security" and noted officers "communicate with us daily" and "go outside before we leave and sit in the parking lot and watch us exit the building just to make sure everybody's safe." Britney Logan, who works in the food and nutrition office, said the officers show "confidence, pride, and integrity" and that "employee safety and well-being has been their top priority since the beginning." Heather Wright, income maintenance staff, said having on-site officers created a relationship with staff and provided reassurance where previously there had been incidents and delays responding to safety concerns.

Director Hunt told the board the department holds two separate arrangements: an existing contract with the sheriff's office to deliver civil papers and provide occasional security presence, and a newer contract with Apex to provide a consistent 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. security presence at DSS. Hunt said Apex was brought in after the department logged repeated safety incidents and that the Apex contract was funded by moving an existing, lapsed position's salary rather than adding new recurring county expense. Pam Price, fiscal staff, told the board the county claims roughly half of those contract costs as state-reimbursable in most months.

Board discussion focused on inconsistent language in the sheriff's MOU and operational conflict between the two arrangements. Several board members and staff observed that sheriffs assigned to DSS often must leave to serve papers in the community, which limits their on-site security availability. Hunt said the MOU language is vague in places and that the department will "go back to the table with the sheriff's office" to clarify expectations; she invited board members to attend that discussion. Hunt also said the department would obtain guidance from state fiscal partners on the reimbursement rules.

Apex officers who addressed the meeting supported the department's decision to add paid security. Bruce Green, a retired sheriff's deputy working for Apex, said the job "has been a pleasure" and that the on-site presence allows officers to "keep our head on the swivel" and deter risky behavior. Allen Harden, also a retired deputy with Apex, urged installation of cameras and described practical steps Apex has taken, such as using radios tied to the sheriff's office and running body-camera and iPad systems to review incidents.

Board members did not vote to change either contract at the meeting; they asked staff to arrange follow-up talks with the sheriff's office and with state fiscal partners to clarify language, supervision expectations, and reimbursement. The director said the Apex contract was implemented to address urgent safety concerns and that the department will continue discussions rather than terminate either arrangement immediately.

The board did not set a firm date for a renegotiation but agreed to be available to join staff discussions with Sheriff Elenberg and with Captain Ellis.