Agenda - Council - 02/22/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I ! Attachment C ADMIN 1000 IRov, 1/?B) STATE OF MINNESOTA S F-OOOOG-O 1 TO · Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission and Staff FROM : Louis F. Jambois, Asst. Supervisor PHONE: 6-1567 Parks and Recreation Grants Section DATE: January 18, 1982 SUBJECT: Status Report of FY'82 Funding Cycle Attached is the combined DEPD/Metroplitan Council final ranking list of FY'82 LAWCON/ LCMR outdoor recreation grant applications. The list illustrates the priority ranking of the applications within each Metropplitan Policy Planning Area, the applications that were programmed for funds, and the current status of the programmed applications. You may note that more applications were programmed for funds than we originally anti- cipated. The reason, believe it or not, is there were available federal LAWCON funds in the amount of $250,000. The LAWCON funds came from two sources. First, when Congress finally released the entire FY'82 appropriation last fall, Minnesota's apportionment was slightly higher than what the National Park Service had been indicating previously. Second, federal funds were made available through the s?ecial reapportionment account. The account is generated .by local sponsors of previously approved LAWCON projects that either could not spend all of their LAWCON money or chose to withdraw their projects altogether. In an effort to make the relatively small amount of federal funds available to as many local governments as possible, the Parks and Rec Grants Section deviated from the traditional 50% federal, 25% state grant funding formula'. Instead, the top projects within each planning area have been programmed for a 30% federal grant. State law dictates that state grants are available for up to 50% of the total project cost or 50% of the non-federal share. As a result, those projects that were programmed for 30% LAWCON grants were also eligible for 35% state grants. Those projects that were not programmed for LAWCON funds were programmed for state grants of up to 50% of the total project cost. That means that the highest ranked applications could receive combined federal/state grants of up to 65% of the total project cost. The next group of applications were programmed for 50% "straight state" grants. Finally, the last and largest group of applications were not programmed for any financial assistance. Before you commit those funding percentages to memory, however, there are at least four factors that influence grant percentages. First, there is the LCMR building policy. Stated simply, a state grant for any park building cannot exceed 12½% of the building' cost. Second, no project can receive more than $200,000 in state funds regardless of the number of phases the project may have. If an applicant chooses to acquire and develop a park site over many years the maximum cumulative state grant is $200,000. Third, the Parks and Open Space Commission has recommended grant maximums for each of the four planning areas. Fourth, the last programmed application in each planning area is rarely programmed for a "standard" grant percentage. Instead, the applicant is programmed for the balance of the remaining funds. For instance, ranked third in the rural planning area, the City of Andover was programmed for $6,900 in federal LAWCON funds. That figure represents only 6% of the total project cost but 100% of the remain- ing LAWCON funds. As a result of those factors, actual grant percentages vary dramati- cally. PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER