Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Government Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fiscal court approves series of routine resolutions, FEMA grant contract and GIS engineering agreement
Summary
The Hardin County Fiscal Court approved multiple consent-agenda items and individual resolutions Oct. 28, including a FEMA Public Assistance Master Contract, updated personnel policies, an IT services renewal, information security policy version 2.4 and a Lincoln Trail agreement for engineering and GIS services.
Hardin County Fiscal Court on Oct. 28 approved a package of consent-agenda items and individual resolutions covering finance, personnel, IT, emergency management and engineering services.
Among items approved on the consent agenda were financial reports and claims, payroll registers, and Resolution 2025-206 authorizing financial transfers. The court also approved Resolution 2025-204, a renewal of an IWork service agreement for public-works, code-enforcement and fleet-management software; Resolution 2025-205, updates to personnel policies and procedures clarifying terminations and resignations; and Resolution 2025-215, adoption of Information Security Policy version 2.4 (which the county said adds AI security restrictions).
The court approved Resolution 2025-209 reappointing three members to the LINK control/advisory board (Rebecca Eits, Jeff Key and Kyle Silarette) and several personnel actions for road, 911 and EMS staff (Resolutions 2025-210, 212, 213 and 216 as listed on the consent agenda). The court also approved Resolution 2025-214, the FEMA/Commonwealth of Kentucky Division of Emergency Management Public Assistance Grant Master Contract, which the county must sign to receive federal disaster assistance funds through the state.
Separately, the court approved Resolution 2025-208, an agreement with Lincoln Trail A.D. for engineering and GIS services; that resolution was moved, seconded and passed on roll call. All roll-call votes taken on the consent agenda and the Lincoln Trail agreement were recorded as affirmative. No dissenting votes were recorded in the publicly read roll calls.
The court did not discuss detailed contract terms or funding amounts for these items during the meeting; officials indicated some documents were revised shortly before the meeting and that updated versions were circulated for review.
