Clinton County weighs outsourcing CDBG administration while re-adopting annual CDBG policies

Steve Gibson, Clinton County director of planning, told commissioners at a work session that the county is considering two agreements with a regional council (referred to in the discussion as CITACOG) to administer the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program for specific projects and years.

Gibson said Clinton County has historically administered the CDBG program in-house and is the only county in the region doing so. He described proposals for the regional council to take over full administration — including hearings, construction contracts and recordkeeping — because the program has become more complex and because staff are taking on other planning work such as a comprehensive plan and open-space and greenways planning. He said the county would receive about $42,000 a year to administer the program under the arrangement and that environmental review fees of about $4,000 each would be charged for two 2023 reviews. "So the contract would essentially be a 100% covered by CDBG," Gibson said of those environmental review costs.

Gibson outlined three project-year groupings discussed in the agreements: a wrap-up of some 2022 projects (which he said the county may not need to hand off because they are nearly complete), the 2023 projects including a Twelfth Street water-main and associated paving work, and a 2024 submittal the regional council still must finalize. The county solicitor reviewed the agreements and suggested edits, mainly to termination clauses, Gibson said.

Beth Weddy, Clinton County community development housing coordinator, told the board that, separate from the administration question, the county must readopt annual CDBG processes — including conflict-of-interest procedures, code of conduct, drug-free workplace certification, a citizen participation program and a complaint process — as part of the 2025 CDBG program requirements. Weddy said the 2025 application typically opens in June.

Commissioners discussed whether to remove the 2022 wrap-up agreement from the agenda if county staff will finish outstanding items rather than pay the regional council to close them out; Gibson said he did not see the need to pay roughly $6,500 to have the council finish work that is 99% complete.

No formal vote was taken at the work session; Gibson said the two agreements will be before the commissioners at the upcoming Thursday meeting for consideration. The county solicitor’s recommended edits will be incorporated before final execution, Gibson said.