Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Federal Grants And Advocacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
McCracken County Fiscal Court discusses hiring consulting firm tied to Scott Duff for federal grants and advocacy
Summary
Court members discussed whether to engage a consulting firm affiliated with former Senate staffer Scott Duff to identify grant opportunities and provide federal-level advocacy for a suggested retainer of about $5,000; no contract was approved and members requested a written proposal and clarification of the firm's limitations.
McCracken County Fiscal Court members discussed on Jan. 13, 2025 whether to retain a consulting firm affiliated with Scott Duff to help identify federal grant opportunities and provide advocacy, with a proposed initial amount of about $5,000 for county-only work or $4,000 apiece if the city joined.
The discussion centered on what the county would receive for the payment and whether Duff's recent federal employment imposes limits on which elected officials he can contact on the county's behalf. Court members said the firm would both identify grant opportunities and — for an additional fee — write grant applications. Court members also noted that Duff himself might not do the day-to-day work; other firm staff would handle tasks because of ethical restrictions following his departure from the Senate.
County leaders said the firm's value would be access and contacts in Washington tied to Duff's previous role working near Senate leadership. But multiple members asked for a written proposal spelling out deliverables, hourly or additional fees, billing practices, and precisely which contacts Duff or his partners could pursue while under any postemployment restrictions. One court member emphasized that the firm's contacts could be useful because the county currently has a pending federal land-transfer request involving the U.S. Department of Energy.
No vote was taken to hire the firm. Instead the fiscal court directed staff to obtain a written proposal that details the retainer, what is included, what costs would be extra (e.g., grant writing), and clarification of any lobbying restrictions tied to Duff's post–Senate employment. The matter will return to a future meeting for further consideration.
Court members asked that the proposal include references from prior clients and exact billing rates so the court could evaluate whether the potential access would justify the fee. Several members said they were open to a short-term, one-year arrangement to "test the waters" if the proposal showed clear deliverables and limits.
