Tag Archives: history

From Goat Roping to Good Government: Hardin County Plans for Public Safety 

19 Jul

By T.W. Shortt,

Former Radcliff City Councilman and Local Business Owner

The primary purpose of local government, whether at the city or county level, is public safety. It is not the government’s only responsibility, but it is the first. Roads, recreation, economic development, and community events all matter, but none of them should take priority over protecting lives and property. 

In Radcliff, there is often a great deal of attention placed on what I call the four P’s: parties, picnics, parades, and pancakes. There is nothing wrong with community events. They bring people together and help build civic pride. However, those activities should never distract from the community’s basic public safety needs. Considering the level of crime being reported in Radcliff, along with concerns about police staffing, emergency response, and the demands placed on public safety personnel, it may be time to shift the focus. 

At the Hardin County level, public safety must also remain a primary concern. The proposed 2026–2030 Emergency Fire Services Strategic Plan is a move in the right direction. It recognizes growing call volumes, simultaneous emergencies, aging fire equipment, limited staffing, and the pressure created when a small group is expected to serve a large and growing community. 

One of the largest proposals is an estimated $8 million emergency services building in Glendale, with approximately $6.5 million expected to come from state funding. The plan also calls for establishing the Hardin County Fire System, adding paid weekday firefighters in key districts, beginning replacement of fire apparatus in 2028, and creating the county’s first full-time, 24-hour paid fire crew by 2029. 

The planning phase is critical. Without a plan, every incident becomes a shock and a surprise. Government then finds itself reacting from one emergency to the next instead of working from an organized system with clear priorities, staffing goals, equipment schedules, and funding needs. Without that preparation, emergency management can begin to look less like organized county government and more like goat roping—everyone moving at once, but no one certain who is in charge or where the effort is headed. 

Judge-Executive Keith Taul deserves recognition for his leadership in this area. The judge-executive serves as the county’s chief executive officer, comparable to a mayor but on a countywide scale. Working with the members of the Fiscal Court, the judge-executive plays a leading role in planning, setting priorities, coordinating departments, and preparing the county for future needs. 

Fortunately, Judge Taul brings years of professional experience in which planning, organization, and leadership were developed and tested. That background is especially valuable when county governments must look beyond the next meeting or the next emergency and prepare for what Hardin County will need five, ten, or even twenty years from now. Every member of the Fiscal Court is also responsible for studying the plan carefully, asking tough questions, and supporting the necessary public safety improvements. 

This plan is not yet final, but it gives Hardin County direction and provides a standard by which the public can measure progress. Planning does not solve every problem, but it identifies weaknesses before the next crisis exposes them. A serious county government should not wait for an emergency to reveal what it failed to prepare for. It should establish priorities, assign responsibility, and make sure the people, equipment, facilities, and funding are in place. 

Hardin County is growing, and its public-safety services must grow with it. Community events are worthwhile, but the government’s first duty remains the protection of life and property. This strategic plan is an important first step, and Judge Taul and the Fiscal Court should be encouraged to continue advancing it. 

Tags: , , , ,

A New Kentucky Law May Open the Door for Church-Sponsored Senior Housing

14 Jul

By: TW Shortt, CRB 

Kentucky Real Estate Broker  

The Kentucky General Assembly was active during its most recent session, passing many new laws. One of those laws, House Bill 333, stands out as an opportunity for certain churches and religious organizations. 

There could be a reasonable argument that HB 333 was written with a particular project or influential constituent in mind. Whether that is true or not, the law now applies statewide. It may have a practical application here in Hardin County for a church that has considered developing housing for its senior members. 

HB 333 creates a special exception for qualifying religious institutions seeking to develop small affordable housing projects on certain church-owned property. In some cases, the development may be treated as a permitted use instead of going through the usual discretionary zoning process. 

In plain language, this law may help grease the wheels of local approval. 

A Possible Local Opportunity 

Many churches own more land than they currently use. Some have several acres around the church, an unused school building, excess parking areas, or other property that may be suitable for development. 

A church may also have older members who want to remain close to their church family but no longer need or can maintain a larger home. A small senior apartment development could allow those members to live near familiar friends, worship services, transportation, and community support. 

A practical project might include 12 to 24 one-bedroom apartments for income-qualified seniors. It could also include accessible entrances, a community room, laundry facilities, walking areas, and a pickup area for transportation. 

The strongest application of the law would be independent senior apartments rather than a nursing home or a full assisted-living facility. Nursing homes and assisted-living operations are subject to separate healthcare, staffing, safety, and licensing requirements. 

The Law Has Important Limits 

HB 333 does not allow every church to build housing anywhere it chooses. 

The church must be a qualifying tax-exempt religious organization. The property must also meet certain ownership, zoning, location, and development requirements. 

One of the most important limitations is that the church must have purchased the property before January 1, 2026. That means a church buying property now may not qualify for the special treatment. 

The property must also fall into one of the categories covered by the law. This may include commercially zoned property, certain residential property near a state’s primary road, and commercial or industrial land, or a former school building that will be converted into housing. 

The development must be limited in size and must consist entirely of affordable housing. The residents must meet income qualifications, and the affordability restrictions must remain in place for 15 years. 

The church would need a system to verify income, control rents, maintain records, and report compliance. 

Local Rules Do Not Completely Disappear 

The law may reduce the ability of a planning commission or local government to deny the basic land use. However, it does not eliminate building codes, fire-safety requirements, water and sewer rules, stormwater controls, accessibility standards, utility requirements, or emergency vehicle access. 

The project must still be carefully planned, financed, engineered, and constructed. 

Most churches are not experienced housing developers. A church considering this type of project should work with an attorney, an architect, an engineer, an affordable-housing developer, a lender, a real estate professional, and a property-management company. 

Worth a Serious Look 

Church-sponsored senior housing will not be right for every congregation. It creates financial obligations, management responsibilities, and long-term legal requirements. 

However, churches have traditionally helped meet both the spiritual and practical needs of their members. Providing safe, affordable housing for older residents could be a natural extension of that mission. 

HB 333 is an exception specifically designed for churches and religious organizations. For a qualifying church that already owns a large or underused property interest, it may offer a path around some local zoning obstacles. 

It is not automatic approval, but it may make a worthwhile project easier to move forward. 

For churches, developers, community leaders, and real estate professionals in Hardin County, HB 333 is worth looking at. 

This article is for general information only. Any church considering a housing development should obtain legal, tax, zoning, and development advice before acting. 

Tags: , , , ,

When “Why Are You Running?” Is Not Enough 

9 Jul

By T.W. Shortt
Former Radcliff City Council Member

Hardin Local, the local podcast and media platform operated by Phil Taul, did Hardin County voters a real service leading up to the May 19, 2026, primary election. It gave candidates a place to speak directly to the public, on camera, in their own words. Hardin Local reported that it offered candidates in contested races a free interview opportunity and made the candidate videos available to voters. 

That matters. 

In local elections, voters rarely get the benefit of major televised debates, large editorial boards, or wall-to-wall newspaper coverage. More often, citizens are left with yard signs, campaign cards, Facebook posts, and word of mouth. A serious candidate interview gives voters something better: a chance to see how a candidate thinks, speaks, prepares, and responds when asked basic questions about public service. 

One of the most important races in Hardin County is the race for Mayor of Radcliff. The primary narrowed the field to two candidates, Toshie Murrell and Terry Owens. According to Hardin Local’s posted primary results, Murrell received 862 votes, and Owens received 857 votes, a five-vote difference at the top of the field. The general election is scheduled for November 3, 2026. 

That narrow result alone should get every Radcliff voter’s attention. 

During the interview process, the moderator gave the candidates the perfect opening question: tell the audience your “why” for seeking this office. 

That is a good question. It is fair, simple, and open-ended. It gives a candidate room to explain personal motivation, public service, love of community, experience, and vision. It allows voters to hear whether a candidate is running out of ambition, concern, frustration, duty, or a sincere belief that he or she has something useful to offer. 

But here is the problem: there is a difference between a personal “why” and a governing “why.” 

A candidate can love Radcliff and still not explain how Radcliff should be governed. A candidate can have years of city council experience and still owe voters a clear statement of what needs to change, what needs to be protected, and what needs to be improved. Personal affection for the city is commendable. Public service is honorable. Experience matters. But the mayor’s office requires more than good intentions, warm feelings, or a résumé. 

It requires direction. 

For a race this important, the “why” question should not be treated merely as a personal introduction. It should be the doorway into a four-year agenda. 

What has the candidate learned from serving on the city council? What areas of city government need tightening up? Is public safety adequately staffed, supported, and prioritized? Are streets, drainage, code enforcement, housing, business development, and city services moving in the right direction? Is Radcliff doing enough to present itself as a strong, orderly, business-friendly community next door to Fort Knox? 

Those are fair questions. They are not attacked. They are the ordinary questions citizens should ask anyone seeking executive leadership in city government. 

The mayor of Radcliff is not simply a ribbon-cutter or ceremonial figure. The mayor helps set the tone for the city government. The mayor works with the council, represents the city to citizens, speaks to outside investors, and helps shape the public image of Radcliff. The person elected mayor will have influence over how Radcliff is seen, how Radcliff is managed, and how Radcliff moves forward. 

That is why voters need more than “I love the city.” They need more than “this is the next step.” They need more than biographies. They need an agenda. 

Hardin Local may offer another opportunity for candidates to speak to voters before the November general election. If that opportunity comes, both candidates should take full advantage of it. They should come prepared not only to explain why they want the office, but what they intend to do with it. 

There must be some meaningful difference in how these two honorable candidates would govern. If there is no difference, voters are left to choose based on personality, name recognition, or habit. That is not enough for a city to face real decisions about growth, public safety, infrastructure, business development, and quality of life. 

There is no reason for a serious candidate to be afraid to make a clear case for herself. In fact, that is part of leadership. A candidate for mayor should be able to say: here is what I see, here is what I believe, here is what I would focus on, and here is how I would measure progress. 

Congratulations to both candidates for advancing the general election. That is an achievement. 

Now comes the harder part. 

Give the voters something solid to hang their hat on. 

Tags: , , , ,

Political Economy, Classical Liberalism, and Marx’s Critique

5 Jul

In Chapter 27 of Introduction to Political Philosophy, Barracca emphasizes that economics and politics are inseparable forces shaping modern society. This foundational idea frames the relationship between classical liberalism and Marxism. Economic power, Barracca explains, is never separate from political life, and Karl Marx’s work remains one of the most enduring critiques of that relationship. 

Marx believed that classical liberalism—despite its promises of freedom, equality, and individual rights—was protected by a system of inequality rooted in capitalism. His critique targeted both the economic structure and the political institutions that, in his view, reinforced those inequalities rather than correcting them. 

This tension between political ideals and economic realities continues to influence American politics today. Democrats typically present themselves as advocates for the working class, while Republicans tend to prioritize individual liberty, limited government, and free-market values. In many ways, this divide echoes Marx’s central challenge: are political rights enough, or must genuine freedom include economic security as well? 

Marx’s Three Criticisms of Classical Liberalism 

Marx’s first major criticism concerns what he called “formal” versus “substantive” freedom. Liberal democracies guarantee rights on paper, but Marx argued that these rights remain hollow for individuals lacking the economic means to exercise them. The legal right to own property, for example, has little value to someone without the resources to acquire any. Without material conditions that enable individuals to exercise their rights, freedom remains theoretical. 

The second criticism focuses on the concentration of economic power. Marx believed capitalism naturally funnels wealth and influence into the hands of a small group of owners. Although liberal democracies hold elections, he argued that the wealthy shape political agendas in ways that protect their interests, creating an illusion of political equality. In practice, economic domination often overshadows political rights. 

Marx’s third criticism is his concept of alienation. Under capitalism, workers become disconnected from the products they create, from the meaning of their labor, and even from each other. Work becomes merely a means of survival rather than a fulfilling activity. Because the products belong to someone else, and the labor is repetitive and controlled by others, Marx viewed alienation as a deep social failure—one that classical liberalism ignored in its focus on property rights. 

Criticisms of Marxism 

Despite raising legitimate concerns, Marxism faces several well-known criticisms. One common objection is that Marxist systems tend to reduce incentives. Without private ownership or market rewards, the motivation to innovate or increase productivity weakens. Historically, societies that eliminated market competition often struggled to sustain long-term economic growth. 

Another major criticism concerns political freedom. Because Marxism requires extensive state control and the abolition of private property, attempts to implement it frequently produced authoritarian governments. In seeking to end economic inequality, they often suppressed dissent and undermined democratic institutions—creating new forms of oppression. 

A third objection is that Marx reduces society to economic categories. Critics argue that he overlooks cultural, religious, moral, and personal influences that also shape human identity. People are more than their economic class. By focusing primarily on economic structures, Marxism struggles to account for the complexity and diversity of modern life. 

Personal Position 

When evaluating whether I lean more toward Marxism or classical liberalism, my position remains firmly on the side of classical liberalism. Growing up in the 1950s and 1960s, Marxism was viewed with deep suspicion, and that cultural context shaped my early outlook. Yet my adult life—especially decades spent in business—confirmed my belief that classical liberalism, with reasonable regulation, best reflects the economic realities of American life. 

Its emphasis on private property, individual liberty, and free markets has supported entrepreneurship, innovation, and personal responsibility. Marx raises valid concerns about inequality and power, but classical liberalism offers a more practical and freedom-centered framework for modern society. 

Conclusion 

Chapter 27 highlights Marx’s three core criticisms: the limits of “formal” freedom, the concentration of economic power, and the alienation of workers in capitalist systems. These critiques reveal real tensions within liberal societies, yet they do not persuade me that Marxism provides a workable or desirable alternative. The United States mixed economic system, grounded in classical liberal principles, remains the most stable and morally sound approach—protecting individual rights while allowing government to address market failures. It offers the balance Marx never fully acknowledged. 

Terrell Shortt 
Eastern Kentucky University 
  November 19, 2025 

Tags: , , , ,

Aristotle’s Three Principles for Legislating Morality 

5 Jul

Aristotle believed the law’s purpose was to maintain order and cultivate virtue among citizens. The state, in his view, exists to make people good by guiding them toward moral excellence through wise legislation. This essay explores Aristotle’s three principles for legislating morality—laws should promote virtue, reflect the mean, and serve the common good—and applies them to a familiar but straightforward example: a homeowner’s association (HOA). 

Aristotle believed that law should promote virtue. While on an everyday basis we may not realize this as citizens of a community, state, or country, more profound observation reveals that many rules are meant to shape behavior for the better. Those responsible for making and enforcing laws must keep this higher purpose in mind. Even in something as small as an HOA, the principle can be seen in action. For example, a rule specifying what type of fencing a homeowner may install helps maintain a uniform appearance and encourages respect for shared standards. The purpose of such regulation is not to control for its own sake, but to foster discipline, cooperation, and pride in one’s community. These laws also carry consequences for noncompliance, reinforcing Aristotle’s idea that moral growth often requires accountability and correction (Barracca, 47). 

According to Aristotle, good laws must also reflect the mean, the balanced middle ground between two extremes. In the HOA example, one extreme would be having no rules at all, leading to inconsistency and disorder; the other extreme would be overly harsh rules that restrict personal freedom and create resentment. A well-written rule about fencing or property appearance strikes a balance by encouraging moderation—promoting community harmony without excessive control. In this way, the law reflects Aristotle’s belief that virtue lies in balance and that good governance seeks fairness through moderation rather than extremity. 

Finally, Aristotle taught that all laws should serve the common good rather than the interests of a few. Continuing with the HOA as an example, the goal of neighborhood rules is to benefit all residents by preserving standards that protect property values and community quality. This principle applies not only to small associations but also to cities, states, and entire nations. When laws serve the common good, they build trust, cooperation, and a sense of shared responsibility. Conversely, laws created for private benefit or political favoritism weaken justice and damage the civic bond. Aristotle would argue that the highest aim of any legal system is to promote the flourishing of all citizens, not the power of a few. 

There are times when the government attempts to legislate morality where it should not be. For example, laws that restrict private, consensual relationships between adults impose moral beliefs that do not advance the common good. Aristotle would view this as a misuse of law because it enforces behavior through compulsion rather than encouraging virtue through reasoned choice. Such laws fail to educate or elevate the citizenry, instead risking division and resentment. 

Conversely, the government sometimes fails to legislate morality where it should. A clear example is the inconsistent enforcement of environmental laws that protect air and water quality. When corporations pollute without proper accountability, they act with excess and greed, violating the principle of moderation. Stronger environmental laws would reflect Aristotle’s idea that good legislation upholds justice and safeguards the welfare of the entire community. 

Aristotle’s three principles—promoting virtue, reflecting the mean, and serving the common good—demonstrate that law is more than a system of rules; it is a moral framework guiding citizens toward a better life. When laws strike the proper balance and serve the collective welfare, they embody Aristotle’s ideal of universal justice and fulfill the ultimate purpose of the political community: to help its members live not merely as individuals, but as virtuous participants in a just and flourishing society. 

T.W. Shortt 

Eastern Kentucky University

Tags: , , , ,

Accountability Is Not Division 

4 Jul

Public accountability is not a division; it is a cornerstone of democratic government. 

In his Feb. 7, 2026, letter to the editor, Some Seem to Fan Flames of Division and Blatant Hatred, Kevin Russell criticized the filing of an ethics complaint against the Radcliff mayor, describing it as “another example of mischaracterization” and suggesting it fanned “division and blatant hatred,” while acknowledging he had not reviewed the complaint or spoken with the complainant.  

Our constitutional tradition has a different view. In New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), the United States Supreme Court held that debate about public officials must remain “uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.” The Court recognized that self-government depends on citizens’ freedom to question and criticize those in authority without fear of reprisal. That landmark decision became a pillar of modern First Amendment protection and strengthened the broader civil rights movement by safeguarding open public discourse. 

Filing a formal ethics complaint is not an act of division. It is a lawful, structured process designed precisely to remove personal animus from public disputes and to place allegations before an independent body for review. The right to question the government is a civil right that belongs to every citizen. It is not a franchise, a brand, or a prerogative reserved for any single organization. 

Ethics boards exist so concerns can be examined transparently and impartially, rather than filtered through informal conversations, personal loyalties, or political alliances. When citizens utilize established legal procedures, they participate in the system as it was designed to function. 

Leaders of advocacy organizations carry added responsibility when speaking publicly on behalf of their members. Exercising restraint until the facts are known preserves institutional credibility and protects the integrity of the process itself. 

Government accountability is not a division. It is the practical expression of constitutional self-government — a partnership between citizens and the institutions that serve them. Open scrutiny, conducted lawfully and respectfully, strengthens a community rather than weakens it. 

TW Shortt 
Radcliff 

Tags: , , , ,

Ridding Small Cities of Trailer Parks Deteriorated Beyond Livability: Turning Yesterday’s Trailer Parks into Tomorrow’s Neighborhoods 

4 Jul

by: TW Shortt 

Small cities across America face a recurring problem in their housing landscape: aging mobile home parks that have deteriorated beyond reasonable repair. Many of these parks were built decades ago during periods of rapid housing demand, often with minimal infrastructure standards. Over time, the homes wear out, utilities fail, roads deteriorate, and the property slowly declines. 

The question for communities is simple but important: What should be done when a trailer park has reached the end of its useful life? 

The Fort Knox area has already seen a successful answer to that question. 

In Radcliff, the Magnolia Point Neighborhood stands today as a clear example of how distressed land can be transformed into a stable residential neighborhood. The site was once occupied by a mobile home park that had deteriorated to the point of being beyond practical use. Instead of allowing the property to continue to decline, the land was redeveloped into a small residential neighborhood containing 39 permanent homes. 

The project was developed in 1988 by TW Shortt Realty, a local brokerage firm.  At the time, the redevelopment demonstrated that aging trailer parks need not remain permanent fixtures in a community’s landscape. With thoughtful planning and cooperation with local planning authorities, a distressed property could be transformed into a neighborhood of traditional homes. 

What was once a trailer park is becoming a residential subdivision with permanent foundations, paved streets, and individually owned lots. The development integrated naturally with surrounding neighborhoods and replaced temporary housing with permanent homes. 

Projects like Magnolia Point illustrate an important planning tool known as Planned Unit Development (PUD). 

A Planned Unit Development allows a city to approve a comprehensive development plan rather than forcing every lot to meet rigid zoning rules. Instead of focusing solely on minimum lot sizes or strict dimensional standards, the planning authority evaluates the neighborhood’s overall design and determines whether the development improves the community. 

This flexibility often makes redevelopment possible, where conventional zoning would make it difficult. 

Former mobile home parks are particularly well-suited for this approach. These properties already have defined boundaries and internal roads, but the original layouts were rarely designed for long-term residential use. Through Planned Unit Development, the property can be redesigned to include modern infrastructure and permanent homes. 

Streets can be rebuilt, drainage systems engineered properly, utilities modernized, and the land subdivided into individually owned lots. In many cases, the density remains similar to that of the original park, while the quality of housing improves dramatically. 

This transformation accomplishes several important objectives. 

First, it replaces deteriorating housing with homes built to modern construction standards. Permanent homes constructed on foundations become real estate rather than personal property, allowing buyers to obtain standard mortgage financing such as FHA, VA, or conventional loans. 

Second, redevelopment allows the property’s infrastructure to be rebuilt correctly. Older trailer parks often contain undersized utility lines, improvised drainage, and narrow internal streets. A redevelopment project offers the opportunity to rebuild those systems to meet modern engineering standards. 

Third, surrounding property values often stabilize or improve when a distressed property is replaced by an attractive residential neighborhood. What was once a declining parcel is becoming a productive part of the community. 

Importantly, redevelopment of aging trailer parks does not necessarily mean eliminating affordable housing. Instead, it can improve the quality of that housing while maintaining reasonable density. Small homes, modular cottages, or compact residential lots can still provide attainable housing options while functioning as traditional real estate. 

Cities across the country are increasingly reconsidering the redevelopment of aging mobile home parks through this strategy. The key conditions are usually straightforward: the property must be under unified ownership, the site must be vacant or ready for redevelopment, and local planning authorities must be willing to use flexible zoning tools such as Planned Unit Development approval. 

When those conditions come together, a property that once supported deteriorating temporary housing can be transformed into a stable residential neighborhood. 

Every community eventually faces decisions about how to handle land that has reached the end of its original life cycle. The choice is whether those properties remain trapped in decline or whether they are reimagined for the future. 

The Magnolia Point development in Radcliff shows that the path forward can be both practical and beneficial. With thoughtful planning and a willingness to rethink outdated housing patterns, trailer parks that have deteriorated beyond livability can give way to neighborhoods that serve the community for generations to come. 

Tags: , , , ,