Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Economy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Summit County grant panel recommends contingencies; council presses for clarity and applicant guidance
Summary
County staff proposed increasing several RAP (wrap/restaurant tax) grant awards above applicants’ requests to include contingency funds; council members questioned the methodology and urged staff to either return awards at requested amounts or justify increases and provide clearer application guidance.
County staff presented recommendations for 2022 restaurant/WRAP-tax grant awards and the Summit County Council discussed whether to add contingency funding to several projects to cover inflation and supply-chain delays. The grant-review committee recommended adding contingency amounts — typically a 20% allowance — to several awards because project costs are rising, and staff said leftover contingency would return to the fund if unused.
Council members pressed for transparency about how contingency percentages were selected and whether it was appropriate to give recipients more than they requested. One council member summarized the majority view: that awards should default to the amounts applicants formally requested unless an application explicitly included a contingency. “I don't ever want a nonprofit or any other potential grantee asking for padding,” a council member said during the discussion, arguing that applicants should submit accurate budgets and that committees should fund the amounts requested.
Staff explained the committee’s rationale: applicants reported supply-chain issues and rising costs during interviews, and because the funding pool this year was smaller than some prior cycles, the committee recommended augmenting several awards to ensure projects could be completed. Staff also described steps it could take to reduce applicant confusion, such as producing a brief training video or mandatory information session that explains eligibility, required documentation, and allowable uses of funds.
Council did not adopt final awards at the Jan. 4 meeting. Members asked staff to revise recommendations to either match requested amounts or to provide a clear, consistent methodology for any increases and to return with a finalized list for approval. Staff also agreed to consider educational materials for future application cycles.
