Rural Grant Bill Slashes Local Match by 50% for High-Public-Land Counties, Prioritizing Broadband and Development

The new MORE USDA Grants Act is a targeted effort to unlock federal funding for some of the most isolated and under-resourced rural areas. Essentially, this bill creates a special fast-track lane for federal grant money going to counties where the federal government owns more than half the land, provided those counties have fewer than 100,000 residents. The core of the Act is simple: it cuts the required local matching funds for key USDA grants in half and mandates extra support for these communities. This is a big deal because the local match requirement is often the single biggest hurdle for small towns trying to afford big projects.

The 'High-Density' Advantage: Cutting the Cost of Entry

For a county or Tribal government that qualifies as a "High-Density Public Land County" (HDPLC), the financial barrier to entry for federal grants just got significantly lower. Section 3 mandates a 50 percent reduction in the required local match for a long list of "Qualifying Grant Programs." Think of programs covering rural business development, community facilities (like fire stations or libraries), and critical infrastructure like the ReConnect Program for rural broadband. If a small town needed to put up $200,000 to secure a $1 million grant to build a new water treatment plant, they now only need $100,000. This provision, regardless of any other existing law, directly frees up local budget dollars that can be spent elsewhere, potentially making the difference between getting a project off the ground or letting it die on the drawing board.

Leveling the Playing Field for Small Communities

This Act recognizes that federal grant applications are often structured in a way that favors big cities or large regional organizations. It addresses this by giving the Secretary of Agriculture significant flexibility to adjust the rules for HDPLCs. For instance, the Secretary can now offer flexibility on scoring criteria that rely on numerical size, like the number of jobs created or people served, which naturally disadvantages a town of 500 people compared to a town of 50,000. They can also waive requirements for mandatory partnerships if partners like community colleges or foundations simply don't operate in the HDPLC's remote area (Section 3). This is the policy equivalent of allowing a small local business to compete with a corporate giant by adjusting the rules so the small guy can actually reach the starting line.

Priority Status and Built-In Support

The bill doesn't just lower the financial bar; it also provides dedicated support. If an HDPLC or a local government within one hasn't received funding from a specific qualifying grant program in the last 10 years, their application must be given priority during the approval process (Section 3). This aims to ensure that federal dollars cycle into truly underserved areas rather than continually flowing to the same places. Furthermore, the Secretary is required to provide extra technical help to these governments, both before and during the application period, just for the asking. This technical assistance is crucial, as often the biggest barrier for small communities isn't the money, but the lack of staff time or expertise to navigate hundreds of pages of complex federal paperwork.

The Trade-Offs and Administrative Reality

While this is a win for rural communities, it does have a few administrative wrinkles. The definition of a "Qualifying Grant Program" is extremely broad, sweeping in almost every discretionary rural development grant under the USDA umbrella (Section 2). This gives the Secretary a lot of power to apply these new preferential rules, which could lead to inconsistent application across different programs. Also, the mandated priority for HDPLCs means that other rural communities that don't meet the land ownership criteria—but still desperately need funding—might find themselves pushed further down the waiting list for grants. Federal agencies will need to quickly implement these new matching requirements and technical support mandates, which is always a heavy lift, but ultimately, the Act is a clear attempt to inject much-needed resources and fairness into the federal grant process for the most remote parts of the country.