Delaware County council tables request for countywide grant writer and software; commissioners committed partial funding

Delaware County Council on Jan. 28, 2025, tabled a request from the auditor’s office to fund a grant writer/administrator position and a web-based grant management system, after more than an hour of discussion that included department heads saying maintenance and reporting demands are preventing offices from keeping existing grants.

The council heard from Tanya Dunsmore, chief deputy auditor, who described the request as originally budgeted at $80,000 (roughly $40,000 for salary, $25,000–$30,000 for the software product and the balance for benefits) but said county commissioners have already approved a contract that would reimburse $40,000 a year for two years, reducing the county’s net ask. Dunsmore said the software would let departments search federal and state grant opportunities, integrate with the county financial system, and provide compliance alerts.

The request prompted detailed comments from department heads. Jane Miranda of Community Corrections said her office manages seven or eight grants and is responsible for the reporting and financial information the Department of Corrections requires; she said she was not comfortable with an administrator unfamiliar with Community Corrections’ specific reporting needs. Emily Anderson, court administrator, described the data demands of some federal grants — outcome measures, detailed client demographics and daily inputs — and said her office lacked manpower to both apply for and maintain several sizeable grants, noting they had declined a $60,000 award because they could not meet the maintenance demands.

Doug Zimmer, HCC director, and other department heads said parts of the county’s reporting and data collection could be centralized or assisted by a dedicated administrator, even if the person could not perform all departmental work. Multiple speakers recommended splitting the funding into a salary line and a contractual/software line so departments could evaluate the product and staffing separately.

Several council members pressed for more detail, suggested soliciting input from additional department heads and recommended revisions to the proposed job description. After discussion, Councilmember Brad Polk moved to table the request until the next meeting; Councilmember Dan seconded. The motion to table carried on a roll call vote and the item will return to the council with additional departmental feedback and written job-description materials.

Why it matters: Council members were unanimous about the county’s need for better capacity to both find and — crucially — administer complex grants. Multiple department heads said not having maintenance capacity led to lost awards. The council’s decision to pause seeks more detail on scope, whether the position should be countywide or departmental, and how contractual software and staffing costs would be split between the general fund and commissioner-provided reimbursements.

Next steps: Council staff will collect feedback from department heads and circulate a revised job description and detailed funding split ahead of the February meeting. The commissioners’ $40,000-per-year reimbursement for two years remains in place pending the council’s decision.