Clay County tables rural access grant awards after lengthy review of statutory criteria

The Clay County Board of Commissioners discussed applications for the Rural Access Infrastructure Grant (RAIFT / "rate" program), reviewed statutory criteria in state law and agreed to table awards to the next meeting to allow new commissioners time to study the proposals.

The discussion centered on statutory requirements in South Dakota Codified Law 31-34 and practical questions about applicant eligibility and required match amounts. County counsel and staff reviewed the statute and grant guidance and told commissioners that the commission’s decisions are final and nonappealable under the statute, though denied applicants may reapply in a subsequent year.

"I would encourage everyone if they haven't to look at the specific codified law. It's found in 31 dash 34," said Michael (county legal staff), citing the statute’s award criteria and noting subsection 12 allows the commission to consider "any other matters deemed applicable." Michael summarized the statute's requirement that the county consider 11 enumerated criteria and an additional discretionary item the commission may apply.

Staff described prior awards: Garfield Township had received a substantial award in the previous cycle, and other townships such as Star and Bethel have received funds in past years. Staff estimated the county receives roughly $110,000–$116,000 annually for this program and stated there was about $120,000 available to award this cycle. They also emphasized statutory requirements and common practice: a minimum township or county share of 20% and that funds cannot be used on no‑maintenance roads.

Commissioners raised practical questions: how to weight the statute’s criteria, whether applications lacking clear documentation (for example, a stated local match or residence counts) should be rejected or queried, and whether exceptions or flexibility used by other counties could be applied. One commissioner asked whether it would be fair to request applicants revise their applications; staff recommended the commission consider only the applications as submitted and noted the deadline for a decision in the current cycle was the following Wednesday.

After discussion, the board voted to table consideration of the RAIFT applications until the next scheduled meeting so new commissioners could review the materials. Staff was directed to prepare the applications for the follow-up meeting; staff noted a portion of prior awards left approximately $46,100 unspent from an earlier cycle and roughly $120,000 was available for new awards.

Ending: The commission tabled RAIFT award decisions to the next meeting; the board and staff plan to review statutory criteria and application completeness before returning to the issue.