Washington County raises alarm over federal grant attestations; commissioners move to executive session

Washington County commissioners heard detailed briefings on federal grant language that county staff say could jeopardize large streams of federal funding and agreed to move the matter into executive session for further discussion.

County finance and health staff told the board that the county expects to expend roughly $130,000,000 in federal funds in fiscal year 2025, with about 70% of that coming from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and roughly 90% arriving as direct federal awards. Staff said new contract and grant language being circulated by federal agencies, including attestations tied to executive orders and civil‑rights assurances, requires recipients to certify they will not operate programs that “advance or promote DEI, DEIA, or discriminatory equity ideology” and to comply with federal antidiscrimination laws.

The change matters because the new clauses attach financial liability and enforcement mechanisms to grant awards. Alex, the county’s legal adviser, told the board that the False Claims Act lets private parties bring a qui tam action seeking damages and potential recovery when the government believes money was improperly received. "The False Claims Act ... deputizes private citizens to bring what's called a qui tam action," Alex said, explaining there is an incentive for private parties to initiate claims when they believe a recipient has violated contractual terms.

Staff outlined programs that could be affected if federal funding were withheld or narrowed, including HUD rental assistance (housing choice vouchers), community development block grants, transportation projects (staff referenced roughly $11,000,000 in federal transportation funding the county had been counting on), WIC nutrition services funded through USDA, nurse‑home‑visiting and maternal and child health programs, climate‑resiliency planning and public‑health preparedness and response activities. Staff warned these programs are often funded through blended federal and state streams and that internal cost allocations make it impractical to separate federal and nonfederal funding for a single activity.

Commissioners pressed staff on whether Washington County was currently violating federal nondiscrimination law; staff replied that the county is not currently in violation but that the newer attestation language — particularly the addition of executive‑order references and broader definitions — applies to future grant agreements and could constrain eligibility for new awards. "We are not violating federal antidiscrimination laws, period. That does not mean we're eligible for these grant funds according to the federal administration," one staff member summarized.

After the briefing and follow‑up questions, the board agreed the matter required private consideration. The board later approved a motion to proceed to executive session under ORS 192.660(2)(f) to discuss exempt records; the motion carried unanimously, 5–0.

Staff recommended continued monitoring of contract language, coordination with the state on litigation and legal strategy, and taking specific pending grant applications forward only after legal review of the attestation language. Grants staff identified William Bass as the county grants coordinator leading internal tracking of federal dollars and Shannon Bays as the HHS administrative manager who has helped staff translate program impacts into local budget terms.

Commissioners asked for a timetable for decisions on pending applications and for staff to return with specific suggested options — including the potential to decline some awards — but did not adopt any final policy or resolution in open session.

Ending: Commissioners scheduled continued, confidential discussion on the issue in executive session and directed staff to prepare follow‑up materials and legal analysis for the board’s review.