Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates keeping $10,000 with EDC while weighing $40,000 in Chamber requests
Summary
At a budget workshop, councilors disagreed over continuing a $10,000 payment to the regional Economic Development Corporation amid performance concerns and reviewed a Chamber request totaling about $40,000 (a $25,480 partnership plus $15,000 Main Street revitalization). Council left amounts in the draft budget pending contract and performance conditions.
A Council budget discussion on economic development on Tuesday centered on whether to continue a $10,000 contribution to the regional Economic Development Corporation (EDC) and how much to grant the local Chamber of Commerce.
One council member argued to maintain the $10,000 contribution "to keep us a seat at the table" while acknowledging the EDC has struggled to hire a director and to produce consistent results for the Quartzsite/Port Said area. "They're teetering on the brink of even surviving," the council member said, and recommended giving the organization one more year to demonstrate sustainability.
Other members pushed back, saying the county has subsidized the EDC for years with little local benefit. "We've been at the table for years and nothing has ever happened for courtside," another council member said, urging the council to consider redirecting funds to local programs instead.
Separately, the Chamber presented a line-item request asking the county for $25,480 in partnership funding and an additional $15,000 for a Main Street revitalization program. The Chamber representative said the $25,480 request covers rent for an office and visitor center, administration, web development and advertising, and reported a projected 2026 net operating loss of $12,167. "We've requested $25,480 for the chamber," the presenter said, and described specific uses including $4,800 for visitor-center rent and administrative costs.
Councilors proposed several conditions and safeguards for any payment. One suggested placing the Chamber funding "in contingency" and disbursing it only after specific performance milestones are met; others said a contract should spell out deliverables, limits on use, rent and the town's share of event expenses. The Clerk noted that if the Chamber failed to meet council standards, the county could withhold payment or reallocate the funds to other economic-development activities.
After discussion the council agreed it could retain the requested figures in the draft budget for now and revisit the amounts once contract language, performance measures and any legal constraints are in place. There was no formal vote recorded on the floor at the end of the discussion.
The next step is to draft a contract that defines deliverables and rent/payment shares and to return to the council with recommended terms before any funds are released.
