Kane County board moves to model $50,000 small-business grant program on Iron County plan

The Kane County Economic Opportunity Board on Feb. 10 advanced the design of a small-business grant pilot that would use a portion of the county’s rural-county grant funding to support established local businesses with expansions that create jobs.

Board Chair Kelly Stowell said the county receives $200,000 annually through the state Rural County Grant program administered by the Governor’s Office of Economic Opportunity and that commissioners approved earmarking $50,000 for business support in December. Pat Guerrero, president of the Kanab Area Chamber of Commerce, presented a draft process adapted from Iron County, which has run a similar small-business grant program for three years.

Guerrero said Iron County “just gave out $65,000 to 5 businesses” in its most recent round and walked the board through a process that begins with a public marketing campaign and a short pre-application form on the county website. Under the model Guerrero proposed, applicants must have an active business license, be located in Kane County, and provide a 1-to-1 cash match; grants would fund projects that demonstrably expand operations or create jobs rather than address business distress or startups.

The board debated award caps and examples drawn from Iron County’s recent recipients — a restaurant awarded $15,000 for remodeling to add seats, an ice-cream maker award of roughly $4,500, and a small manufacturer awarded $5,000 for a productivity machine. Board members proposed different cap options, including $20,000, $15,000 and $30,000 per business, and discussed whether the pilot should allow partial awards (Iron County’s policy was to fund projects in full or not at all).

Celeste Myers, the county commissioner liaison, raised the risk that a nontransparent selection process could appear arbitrary or favor insiders. “It gives me some pause to have a decision-making board making decisions about money and potentially being accused of arbitrary and capricious decisions or favoritism or self-dealing,” Myers said. Board members responded that standard safeguards — objective scoring rubrics, a multi-stage review, and recusal of any member whose business is an applicant — can reduce those risks. Guerrero said final reviews in Iron County used a scoring rubric plus a small finalist panel and that the objective point totals generally matched the panel discussion.

The board also debated payment timing and legal paperwork. Members preferred a reimbursement-based model to reduce fraud risk and ensure projects submit receipts at completion, but noted that many small businesses lack upfront capital and asked whether partial upfront payments should be allowed. The county’s legal counsel will review whether an MOU or contract is required for recipients and what signature authority is needed to bind grant terms.

On logistics, members agreed to host a grant information page on kane.utah.gov that links to a Google pre-application form and to route submissions to an official county email address; they discussed using chamber newsletters and local Facebook groups for outreach. The board tentatively agreed to target an April application window (April 1 or April 15 through mid-May was discussed) to allow businesses time to plan seasonal projects and to meet state reporting schedules.

The board took no final vote on award caps or the reimbursement/upfront split at the Feb. 10 meeting; members assigned staff and volunteers to draft final timeline, application materials, rubric and marketing collateral, and set a follow-up meeting for March 3 at 3 p.m. to review materials before launching the pilot.

What’s next: staff will circulate an updated draft application and timeline to the board, the county attorney will advise on contract/MOU language, and marketing materials will be prepared for an April application opening if timelines hold.