Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Workforce Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission warns $6 million workforce-development grant may miss vulnerable residents
Summary
Members raised concerns that a $6 million state grant to refurbish a building and relocate the college’s workforce development office lacks plans to reach low-income residents, address student housing and food insecurity, or coordinate with Micron-related regional efforts.
Commission members reviewed the context and community implications of a recent $6,000,000 grant awarded to refurbish a building and relocate a college-run workforce development office and said the proposal risks benefiting the college more than the county residents it purports to serve.
Lehi, commission member, described how the college president wrote the RFP and secured the $6 million to refurbish a building behind a downtown location; the grant included a plan to move the college’s workforce development staff into that space. “They responded to a grant and got $6,000,000 to refurbish that building,” Lehi said.
Commissioners criticized the region’s workforce-development coordination: the regional economic-development committee had not produced the basic labor-market data (how many jobs exist, what they pay and which employers need workers), commissioners said, and the relevant committee did not meet for eight months after the grant was awarded. The commission also said there was no clear, active partnership with OnPoint for College, Cornell University or the colleges and high schools that could link training spots to internships and paid placements tied to Micron and related employers.
Commissioners said the grant’s RFP language emphasized increasing student enrollment at the college, but did not include plans to address supports that would affect retention — housing and food insecurity, for example. Lehi said many students who come to the college are not county residents and sometimes have no stable housing or reliable access to food. Commissioners said the workforce plan would be unlikely to reduce long-term dependence on social services unless it included housing, food supports and targeted pathways to higher‑paying jobs.
The commission also cited other regional investments in workforce infrastructure: OnPoint for College programs, a reported $5,000,000 award to OCC (noted as clean-room investment), and larger awards to Cornell; commissioners argued Auburn has not captured comparable opportunities for local students.
No formal motion or vote was recorded on the workforce-development topic at this meeting. Commission members asked staff to follow up with the county economic-development committee, the college and other partners to request more detailed plans on how the grant’s outcomes will serve low-income residents and students who need housing and food assistance.
Background: Commissioners tied the workforce discussion to broader county planning tied to Micron and to past regional efforts; they asked for data on the number of jobs, wages, internships and program outcomes that would connect training to sustained economic mobility.
