Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Food Hub Demolition Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County clears demolition plan for local food hub site, authorizes grant applications and backup county funding
Summary
Klamath County authorized staff to proceed with demolition of the county‑owned site for a proposed local food hub, directed staff to apply for Business Oregon and DEQ Brownfield grants, and approved county backup funding (with an amendment naming L.A.T.C.F. as an alternate source) if grants do not cover abatement costs.
Klamath County commissioners on Sept. 16 voted to proceed with demolition work at a county‑owned site intended for a local food hub and authorized staff to pursue state grant funding for abatement and demolition costs.
Kayla Westwood of the Tax and Property Department told the board the bid documents are out and that the county needs to decide whether to proceed. Staff recommended applying for Business Oregon grants and the DEQ Brownfield (abate/reimbursement) program, which could reimburse some or all abatement costs if the application is successful. County staff said the county could pursue grant reimbursement for prior abatement work and noted grant applications typically return a decision in a few weeks, though extra time may be needed if reviewers request additional detail.
Because the contractor expects an answer quickly, staff recommended proceeding on a parallel track: allocate county funds to proceed with demolition now, while applying for reimbursement through grants. During discussion, staff said the project is slated to be completed by Dec. 31, 2025, and stressed the county may need to extend that date during contract negotiations if grant timing requires it.
Commissioners discussed possible funding sources. Staff said the county has not funded SCOED (the regional economic development organization) in the last two years and could use economic development reserves. A commissioner moved to authorize staff to proceed with the application and to provide county funding for the demolition if grants do not cover the cost; the motion was amended to name L.A.T.C.F. as a backup funding source if economic development funds do not fit. The motion passed by voice vote.
Staff noted the abatement portion of the demolition might be eligible for reimbursement and recommended preparing a detailed line‑item breakdown for grant reviewers rather than a single lump‑sum estimate to increase chances of award. Commissioners asked staff to proceed with the grant application, continue contract negotiations (including potential extension of the completion date), and return with updates.
No exact total county commitment figure was finalized at the meeting; staff discussed potential figures in the range of tens of thousands up to roughly $150,000 depending on grant results and scope, but the board did not set a specific dollar appropriation during the meeting.
