Grant County board splits on HRA levy; vote to table request until Dec. 29

The Grant County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) asked the Grant County Board of Commissioners for a $200,000 levy for 2026 to help cover maintenance, insurance, office remodeling and a proposed new storage area. Jim Standish, presenting for the HRA, said the authority owns roughly 20 buildings (about 114 rental units), administers public housing and voucher programs, and faces increasing insurance and replacement costs that motivate the levy request.

The board's review focused on whether HRA audit balances provided sufficient justification for the $200,000 request. Several commissioners pointed to the 2024 audit pages showing what appeared to be substantial unrestricted cash and investment balances. Standish and HRA supporters countered that many of those balances are restricted by program (for example, HUD public housing or rural development funds) and therefore cannot be used to cover non‑federal, market‑rate building shortfalls. Standish also noted an extraordinary insurance‑related capital improvement this year that shows up in the audit as proceeds but is applied to capital, not operating revenue.

Key developments: Commissioner Ken Johnson moved to lower the levy request to $100,000, arguing the HRA had completed several capital projects and had reserves; that motion failed. A subsequent motion that the HRA's submitted materials constituted a sufficient budget for statutory review passed (four votes in favor, one abstention). Because disagreement remained about whether $200,000 was justified, the board ultimately voted to table the HRA portion of the levy resolution to a special session on December 29, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. The roll call on the tabling motion was Ken (Aye), Doyle (Aye), Dwight (No), Bill (No), Troy (Aye), and the motion carried.

Why it matters: The levy would be a separate HRA tax levy (not part of the county's main levy totals) and would increase the amount collected from local taxpayers for HRA operations. Standish told the board that levy dollars are applied only to HRA‑owned projects that do not receive federal funds and used examples of market‑rate rentals and non‑HUD buildings to illustrate need.

What was decided and next steps: The board did not set a final levy amount. The HRA levy portion of the resolution was tabled for further review on 2025‑12‑29 at 9:00 a.m.; the board directed staff and commissioners to review the HRA audit details and to consider internal policy changes about when levy requests and budgets should be submitted to the county for review.

Quotes: "We cannot just take money out of one and use them for another — each one of those funds is regulated by HUD or other program rules," Jim Standish said, defending the need for a county levy for non‑federal projects. Commissioner Ken Johnson said he was "not questioning the need" for the HRA but argued the audited numbers suggested a $100,000 levy would be sufficient.

The board will revisit the HRA levy request at the special meeting on December 29, 2025, or at another date if members require more information beforehand.