Gilliam County review: small-business grants spent $175,000 last year; commissioners discuss renewing program, infrastructure asks

BRITNEY, Gilliam County economic development staff, presented the county udit of the small-business grant program for fiscal 2024 nd 2025, saying applicants requested roughly $315,340 and the county expended about $175,000 in awards.

The county received a total of three applications from Arlington (two were awarded, one not funded for lack of remaining funds) and 13 from Condon (11 awarded), Britney said. Awarded businesses in Condon included the Condon Community Food Pantry (for freezers/refrigeration and moving into a new space), Summit Springs Village (IT equipment), Buckeye Knives and Crafts (supplies), Omakase TeaBlends (labeling and branding), Conway—offee (outdoor seating, signage), Thistlebrand LLC (instruction supplies and training), USA Prime Products (log processor), and Condon Main Street Property LLC (restaurant equipment tied to a building rehabilitation grant). In Arlington, 70 Services LLC (Seth Dams) and Paradise Rose Chuckwagon received awards, Britney reported.

"Today, what I'm presenting to you is the Gilliam County small business grant report for the last fiscal year," Britney told the court.

Nut graf: The county—ourt indicated general support for renewing the small-business grant program at the prior-year funding level and asked staff to return with options for earmarking some money for building infrastructure (roofs, facades) versus the existing expense categories. Commissioners and staff also discussed a related "second stories" facade/rehab initiative that had one applicant withdraw and whether the county should allow staff to seek another eligible project to use the remaining $100,000.

Key details and next steps

- Funding and applications: Britney said applicants requested about $315,340 and the county expended about $175,000 in the 07/01/2024to06/30/2025 program year. The review committee established interim and final reporting forms to capture outcomes from awardees.

- Geographic allocations and outreach: The grant committee has been tracking earmarked allocations for Condon and Arlington and a separate set of emergency funds. Staff said they will do more outreach to the north end of the county, where they had only three applications this cycle.

- Infrastructure asks and program design: Commissioners raised the possibility of creating a separate infrastructure fund or earmarking a portion of the small-business grant pool specifically for building repairs (roofs, facades, kitchen replacements) and discussed permitting multi-disbursement versus single-disbursement approaches. Britney said the committee can accept a single disbursement and that full disbursement would be "easier." A county official observed that the county has previously distributed the full amount early in the cycle when funds were needed by applicants.

- Second Stories initiative: Staff reported one applicant withdrew from the second-stories program (the unit described as "Cindy's flat" above the M & A building). The withdrawn request was for about $100,000 in planning or execution. Staff asked whether they may solicit another downtown property under the same agreement; the court told staff they may pursue outreach and, if the new applicant meets the same agreement terms, the county would consider reimbursement for eligible costs.

Directives and decisions recorded in the meeting

- Commissioners directed staff to proceed with administration of the existing small-business grant program and to present options for renewing funding in the next budget cycle. Staff said they can administer additional county funds if the court chooses to invest more in the program.

- On disbursement timing, staff stated a preference for one full disbursement rather than split payments; commissioners did not object and asked for reporting.

- On the Second Stories $100,000: staff were authorized to approach other downtown property owners to identify an eligible replacement applicant under the same terms.

Quotes

"If the county would like to invest any additional funds into the small business grant program, we'd be happy to administer that," Britney said.

"I could earmark it for infrastructure specifically within that small business grant fund," Britney said when describing options for targeted funds.

Background and context

The county has been working with a nonprofit consulting partner and a review committee to create scoring guidelines aligned with Gilliam County strategic goals and local city plans. The committee is drafting forms for interim and final reports, and criteria emphasize job creation, historic impact and alignment with local plans. Staff said prior rounds were highly subscribed and that some applicants could not be funded when the program exhausted its budget.

Ending

Staff will return with options and clearer budget numbers when the court considers renewal of the small-business grant program in the county budget process; commissioners asked staff to present options for earmarking infrastructure funds versus continuing the current small-business award approach.