Grant County board approves $200,000 levy for HRA after debate over budget authority and timing

The Grant County Board of Commissioners approved a $200,000 levy for the county Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) for 2026 after a heated discussion over whether the materials presented by the HRA constituted a formal budget under state statute.

Board members opened debate by questioning whether the December presentation and submitted documents satisfied the statutory requirement to file a budget by Aug. 1. An unidentified commissioner cited a reviser’s copy of the statute and said the county ‘‘should have had a request in the bureau budget by August 1,’’ noting that the board is past the statutory time frame for such a request.

The debate focused on several line items the HRA had listed as reasons for a proposed levy increase to $200,000 — including remodeling, new storage space and equipment replacement. One commissioner noted the HRA’s audit listed ‘‘unrestricted cash and investments of $1,355,000’’ and questioned whether those funds were available for non-federal projects. An HRA representative replied that federal public-housing funds are restricted by HUD regulations and that ‘‘levy funds do not go into the federal programs’’ cited in the public-housing audit.

The board first considered a motion read back by the clerk: "A motion was made by Ken Johnson, seconded by Doyle Spear to levy $100,000 for HRA for 2026." During the roll call, Ken Johnson was recorded voting yes while Bill Valley, Dwight O'Baughton, Troy Johnson and Phil Spear were recorded voting no, and that motion failed.

Milton Bales then moved to levy $200,000 for the HRA; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote, with multiple members responding "aye." Following the vote, county staff and commissioners agreed to create a standardized budget template and a uniform submission process so future levy requests from outside entities (Humane Society, Historical Society, HRA and others) will arrive earlier and in comparable formats.

The board also discussed that while certain audit lines may be labeled ‘‘unrestricted’’ within the HRA’s public-housing project, federal regulations limit the uses of those funds and the county’s levy funds are intended for non-federal, county-eligible projects. Commissioners asked that the HRA provide clearer, project-level budgets in future requests.

The board moved on to other business after the levy vote; a closed-session negotiation followed later in the meeting.