Klamath County hears presentations from incumbent Casita and national consulting firm Better City as EDO contract nears end

Klamath County commissioners heard 20‑minute presentations from the two respondents to the county’s request for proposals (RFP) to provide economic development services after the current contract ends at the close of the fiscal year.

Vicky, the county finance director, told the board a five‑person committee reviewed and scored both submissions but had not yet released scores or recommended a winner. Marcus Henderson, county counsel, summarized the RFP’s written selection standard, noting that price is one factor balanced against other criteria: “The proposed fee is one factor in determining the successful proposer… No single factor such as cost will determine the final decision to award,” he said, and that the board and finance office could recommend an award and authorize negotiations.

Casita presentation: Randy Cox, president of Casita (the incumbent local economic development organization), asked the board to renew Casita’s contract at the same funding level and reviewed outcomes the group said it had delivered over five years. He said Casita manages a budget “of over $800,000” and is handling 53 active projects with roughly $4.9 billion in proposed capital investment in the pipeline. He listed program areas Casita provides: site selection, infrastructure and operating‑cost assistance, workforce and talent pipelines, marketing and demographics research, stakeholder engagement and advocacy, administration of enterprise zones and strategic investment programs (SIPs), and placemaking.

Cox provided Casita’s funding mix as discussed with the board: “the county's portion funds 36.8%,” private enterprise about 38.6%, other sources 15%, and the city about 11% after recent adjustments. He described housing work that Casita helped catalyze, a private equity fund to create local builders, and enterprise zone expansions tied to a $50 million sawmill investment in Gilchrist.

Better City presentation: A representative of Better City (a national economic development consulting firm) and team member Trina described Better City’s approach of tailoring strategies to local assets, building grassroots coalitions and using incremental (“win‑first”) steps to catalyze investment. The presenter emphasized a “fractional economic development” model: a local hire embedded in the community supported by a broader remote team with specialized capabilities (grant writing, industrial recruitment, downtown development) that can be deployed as priorities shift.

Board reaction and next steps: Commissioners asked questions about who contracts with Casita besides the county, Casita’s principal investors, and whether the city’s contract was finalized (staff said city approval was in process but one minor execution step remained). Commissioners also asked for clarity about the RFP review process: one commissioner asked who appoints the five‑person review panel; staff said the panel is not appointed by the board. The board did not vote to award the contract at the meeting; counsel and staff were asked to provide additional process information and bring the item back to a future meeting for a decision.

No formal award or contract authorization was recorded in the meeting minutes; the board scheduled follow‑up for procedural clarification and to receive counsel guidance before making a selection.