The URL can be used to link to this page

Item E1 Revised 3/99 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY EMERGENCY ADD-ON Meeting Date: Tuesday. Feb. 6, 2001 Division: BOCC Bulk Item: Yes 0 No X .," .' Department: AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Approval of three related items: (a) agreement to set up a special grant funding for unknown system grants for homeowners with household incomes that qualify them for affordable housing, fQl addition of a single clause to our contracts with DCA and DEP as follows (words in italics are to be added): " ." The entire contract is attached. i9 and agreement to send the attached fetter at County expense to the homeowners who received DOH packages fast month informing them of this new program (expected cost: $36) - with direction to approve either Growth Management or DOH to qualify candidates, depending upon agreement between those wo entities. ~ d C"Z4~t -to ' II-) \ow., ~f I __.(j ITEM BACKGROUND: A homeow er recen y received a letter from the epartment of Health concerning her unknown system. She reported that she fears she may be unable to accept the grant, even though she is not well-to-do, because those on a fixed income may reduce potential social security benefits if taxable reported income exceeds a certain limit. I imagine we have a number of resident homeowners whose income is low enough that we would like to establish a special grant program for them to render the grant non-taxable. The standards for affordable housing should serve to protect those with the greatest need. PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: The BOCC requested information from the County Attorney's office concerning how to make our grants to homeowners non- taxable. According to the back-up materials with this item, doing that for the general population impacted might well require a purchase and oversight program BY a government entity. No one is ready to take on that task at this point, although it is hoped that the FKAA, with the help of an EPA grant, will eventually move into that role. HOWEVER, right now there is the possibility of setting up a particular grant that is solely income dependent that would be rendered non-taxable because of its dependency upon income. That will save those who are most in need from having that additional expense. TOTAL COST: $36 (rest from existino orant fundino) BUDGETED: Yes 0 No 0 COST TO COUNTY: N/A REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes 0 No 0 AMOUNT PER MONTH YEAR APPROVED BY: COUNTY ATTY 0 OMS/PURCHASING 0 RISK MANAGEMENT 0 n / ,/i/}.' "~ . ~PPROVAL: . ~()mtfll~ ~ NAME:Nora A. Williams. BOCC. District IV DOCUMENTATION: INCLUDED: 0 TO FOLLOW: X NOT REQUIRED: 0 ( DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM #: . '. Memo To: Ed From: Joe Date: January 22, 2001 Re: "Monroe COUJlty - Septk Systems" FACTS Certain owners of residential real estate in a certain sC(;tion Monroe County are being forced to replace their septic systems if they are determined to be illegal or inadequate. The cost of replacing the system is estimated to be approximately $13,500.00. The County was concerned that some owners would not be able to afford the new systems, so it petitioned the State of Florida for a grant to assist these families. The State and County have entered into an agreement whereby the State will grant approximately $1,450,750.00 to the County to be distributed to the property owners. The County has also set aside roughly $959,000.00 for the benefit of the property owners. The agreement provides that the property owners will each receive at least $8,400.00, based on the following sliding scale: I) If the homeowner's property value is less than or equal to $100,000.00, then the individual will receive 84 percent of the cost of the system ($11,440); 2) If the homeowner's property value is between $100,000.00 and $200,000.00, then the individual will receive 70 percent of the cost of the system ($9,400.00); 3) If the homeowner's property value is greater than $200,000.00, then the individual will receive 62 percent ofthe cost of the system ($8,400.00). The State contends that the amounts granted to such individuals is taxable income, and therefore the State will issue 1099's to them. ISSUE Is the State correct in its contention that the amounts granted to the individuals represent taxable in<:ome? ANALYSIS According to I.R.C. ~ 61 and the regulations thereunder, gross income includes all wealth that flows to the taxpayer unless specifically exempted by law. Unfortunately, the grants at issue in the present case are not specifically exempted by law. However, the IRS has ruled that \\Nt-proxy\WORl(.\MC Septk; OllOOllMetnC! Q IIWt Joe..4oc ~-.... Memo Regarding: Momoc COWlty - Septic Systems January 22. 2001 Page 2 of4 payments made under legislatively provided social benefit programs for the promotion of the general welfare arc not includib,~e in an individual's gross income. For example, in P.L.K 9829049, a city established a community development program in order to: 1) improve conditions for Jow and moderate income persons, 2) benefit low and moderate income neighborhoods, and 3) prevent blighted areas. The program provided housing assistance to individuals to facilitate the purchase of newly constructed homes. In order to participate in the program, an individual must certifY his income to the city to ensure that he is a low-income homebuyer. The city defined low-income homebuyers as families whose income was not more than 80 percent of area median income, adjusted for family size, as determined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. Funhennore, the individual must not have bank account savings (excluding certain retirement accounts) of more than a specified amount, plus one month's gross income, in order to obtain assistance. The IRS held lhat the payments made to the individuals pursuant to this program were in the nature of general welfure, and therefore not includible in their gross incomes. A similar result was reached in Rev. Rul. 76-395, 1976-2 C.B. 16. In lhat case, a city issued home rehabilitation grants to lower income homeowners. The purpuse of the grants was for the development of viable urban communities. In order to quality for a grant, the individual must own and occupy the home, and the annual income of the individual could not exceed a specified amount. Moreover, the recipient must agree to pennit the city to inspect the home, screen and improve contractors. and inspect the contractors' work. The individuals who received the grants could only use the funds primarily for the correction of critical code violations, and the remainder must be used for noncritical code violations. Again, the IRS ruled that the grants were in the nature of general welfare and not includible in their gross incomes. In Bailey v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1293 (1987), a city instituted an urban renewal project that provided f~ade grants to purchasers of property within a designated area. The only requirements for partiCipation in the fa~ade grant program were ownership of the property and compliance with the building code. The IRS argued that individuals who received the fllfade grants should include such amounts in their gross incomes. The taxpayer in the case argued that the grant payments are excludable from gross income because the project Wlder which the payments were made was a social benefit program fOT the benefit of general welfare. The court rule(} for the IRS with regard to that argument, holding that the fa~ade grants awarded under the project were not tax exempt under the general welfare doctrine. The court distinguished the revenue rulings where the general welfare doctrine had been applied, stating that in each of those revenue rulings, the grant was received under a program requiring the individual recipient to establish need. On the other hand, the fa~ade grants at issue in Baile'y were awarded without regard to any need of the recipients. In the ca~e at bar, the individuals are being forced to replace their septic systems. Because many individuals will face financial hardships due to the replacement of the systems, Memo Regarding: Monroe County - Septic Systems January 22, 2001 Page 3 of 4 the County will grant money to assist such individuals. In order to receive financial assistance, the individual must own the h~e, and have a septic system that is illegal or inadequate. The individual will then receive a grant, of at least $8,400.00, the actual amount of which is determined by the value of his home. In order for these grants to be considered non-taxable, they will have to appear to be in tIle nature of general welfare. The grants at is:;ue in the present case have similar characteristics as the grants di~ussed above. In all cases, the grants will benefit the community in some way. The grants in all cases also contain SOffit: sort of restriction as to who can receive assistance. The restrictions in the present case, however, are more liberal that the restrictions in the rulings. For example, it appears that as long as an individual owns a home and his septic system needs replacing, he will receive some sort of assistance. The actual dollar amount he will receive varies according to the value of his home. The IRS would argue that the grants at issue here are therefore most analogous to the grants in Bailey, supra, because they are not awarded on the basis of need. The grants in the present Case can be distinguished from those in Bailey, however, because while the grants in the present case are not awarded on the basis of need, they are limited on the basis of need. Whether or not a court would hold that these grants are not includible in gross income based on that distinction is difficult to predict. It could also he argued that the restrictions in the case at bar were the only realistic way of limiting those individuals who receive assistance. Forcing individuals to prove their income levels and net worth is uncomfortable for them, and also much more time consuming for the County. The sliding scale based on home value provides the most relief to those individuals who have a home with a small value. This restriction is similar to the restrictions in the rulings that linlit the grants to those individuals who have an income less than a certain amount. Presumably, individuals who have a home with a small value will also have a lower income than individuals with a home with a higher value. Thus, the low-income residents are receiving the most assistance. If these new septic systems will benefit the County financially in any way, however, the IRS could point to P .L.R. 8924002 to claim that the grants should be included in gross income. In that ruling, an electric cooperative exempt from tax initiated a program to encourage its customers to reduce power consumption by installing an alternative heating system. The cooperative provided an incentive for installing the alternative heating system in the form of cash payments to customers. The systems provided short-tenn savings to the cooperative by reducing its current opentting costs, and long-tenn savings by reducing or eliminating the need for the cooperative to construct additional generation plants. The IRS ruled that the payments the customers received were includible in gross income, claiming that they were compensation to the customeI'5 for providing to the cooperative the service of not using electricity during certain periods ofthe day. . '. Memo Regarding: Monroe COl1nty - Septic System!: January 22,2001 Page4of4 In sum, whether or not the grants at issue here will be considered by the IRS to be in the nature of general welfare is difficult to determine. The individuals certainly do have a viable argument that the grants arc in the nature of general welfare, and should not be included in their gross incomes. Therefore, because of this uncertainty, it may be beneficial to request a ruling from the IRS to determine whether or not the grants should be included in income before the individuals arc issued 1099's. An alternative approach is available to the County in order to ensure that the grants will not be taxable to its residents. 1n aai1e~, supru, while the cow:t did not accept the taxpayer'li general welface argwnent, it nonetheless held that the fa~ade grants should nor be included in the recipients' gross incomes. The court stated that gross income includes all accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have complete dominion. In order to receive the fayade grant, an individual was required to grant an eaSement to the city permitting its agents to enter the property to perform the initial rehabilitation work on the fa~ade, and to repair the fa~ade at the recipient's expense at any later date. Also, the recipients had no control over the rehabilitation WOIX perfonned on the f~ade of his property, and no payments for the rehabilitation were made directly to the recipients. Furthermore, the city was the party that selected the contractor, negotiated the terms of the contract, and paid for the work that was performed on the fa~ade. Because of these factors, the court held that the taxpayer lacked complete dominion and control over the funds, and they should therefore not be included in gross Income. The County in the case at bar should consider structuring the grants so that the individuals never receive any of the funds. The County should also have any individual who was receiving a new septic system grant an easement to the County allowing it to initially replace the system, and to make necessary repairs in the future, at the individual's expense. The individual should have no control over the work perfonned with regard to the septic system, and the County should select the contractor, negotiate the tenns of the contract, and pay for all work perfoIUlcd. For those amounts that the individual is responsible for, the County should pay the contractor for the work and submit a bill to the individual. If the grants are structured in this way, the individuals who receive the new septic systems should be deemed to lack complete control over the funds, and the amounts should therefore not be included in their gross incomes. . , PAI,F 01 'SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION ROOM 110 FEDERAl BUilDING 301 SIMONTON ST KEY WEST Fl 33n0-8303 (305) 294 . 2970 FAX (305) 296 _ 4381 IPM L~f9 r::L/ Of I 0 I I ~ ~-= ~..~~ ;.,; L Number 01 Pafl6$ TO:~~ 0~~ -~--_.._-- REMARKS: ~ ~ -~~-~ ~ ~~. (j'. , " . ) I I "- ~ C) I ~ 1> '" ~ 'v ~ (f) 'oJ - f ~ ), ,. . --------=~-~ -~ .-- ~ 0 ,;}p - ;:J "0 V> ~ :-J ,...,. ::r ,...,. ::r ~ ~ (U t-- ~ ~ Vl 0 cr c ~ - :3 0 ro -. C' ,...,. .J ....... ~ ,...,. (,I) (\: '< -< ..... 0 <'1:> ro ro C ..... n <r. "'" , l- . , ""'0 PJ ::J ;:;"C C '< U> C '< M" V ~ 2! ~ ro ::l :J ~ ro ~ --. I cro, (") ::r""'l 0 ~ '" 0 -en 3 --,., V> 0 0- _. --, ::l :J '< 8 8- 0 c 3 -. "'" :J c.n(l) n (')'1;;:1 3 (") - _. c !::.. V> (l) ~ I "'t - .., -, C6 :1 t: c:.> ~ "'t o ro ,.... l>' U 3 c.:i ro ~3 z:g- .-....: "'1, ~~ =t>J "Q ("> CJ 0 '<c ~'t:l ~(Q (l) ~ V> ;j o~ ~~ ro ~ o c , :r. 0-"" ro't:l ::l '" ro "'l ~e." ,...,. ,...,. ~ ro . ::;;;. VI V> 0.> c..n- I/> t;1;(") 0-' c- - ou'(5 o-003<'1:>s;: ~ggo-~-. ,,_. 9"";;.; ~c::;::.~a~ ou,<o...o~ -. ...... 0 _. ........... ;:) 0 c ::l "= ~. (')00-,80::) 9U1n3c- 3'Ooro""'"1 rtl",~ "g~ ~;:;9':""'::Jt: x ro :J ::r (1) 3 ::l ro to> ::l:_ ,.......CL::-~'-:: 2,:J U> _. 0 ~(')tT'~C oO~63 C i3 s , ", 'ro~w'< (,I) * ro ::l ::; g Vi' :J 0.. co -, -'< < e:..3~0'" (,1)0- Co ro ..... 0......... n (l) 0 Vl t;; c: ..... 0"0' -......: """::;~o ~. r>1 ::l s:: PI '< :::l 0... '" X ro (1) g- ,I" t.n :J ~ 0 ro -:: ::I ~ (t) ...... V> ~~-c t:;) C C :::';0--0--'; ~ ~n' ~ ~~~3 ::J:JOOO ~:J::l;:;: ~ <.D U1 _. ~....... U1::l l';) U1 of>. 0-" ;::; - - """ ~ ~ ~~ ~ .....~~~ b:l S:S. ~ ':. C1:) ......;:; 0 -3 V) c._::J l';) l';) ""I ---,,-('"; ~'l:::;:; t>J '" ""I t::::;- - ..... - -. '<:::0, b:l~~ C1:)O'O :-:s " OJ ~aN ..... __ <..D V, :::t. ' c,l1:lW ;:;-'0-. ~t~ ~n:, '@ ~.~ <::.;;; ~ c::. ::::! ~~ 2 ::2..PJ oJ a. ." n,< -'0 ~'c rtl s:..> ::J ' rtl c:: !J?3';: <: ;;; =-.: r"" '< '" -"0 o c ::rn> CCT'PJO VI ~. <: --0 :;rn(1)n> o ..... c c,...,.'O:f _O.~ ~ 0."""00 :J 2: !\,J 0.> ~"'~(ti ~ ~ (A ~ -XU", c.n '" l"t> -, 0:J.....::r Qo..g~ e:. 'C5 ~ ..... enc:o~ ~o--::-c.: ~ ~ ~g -. 0 _.~ '';!:3 .... '" . ",CT.::::s CJ ~ ~ C:~n en ~. c-: N ~ ~.~ ~. s: V) CL:-rO :;~;:;' a. ::r o n> ""< c:r --< '"< V> 0 V:l :::J e;r <"rJoro~~~ ~('t) ::JC2"",,0-~~!:"::lZ ~I ~ 3 3 <V ;;; ~ n;~"", 0 ~ Vl ~ :3.~ n~: 0 woog:::JC1:)'< 8~::J ~t.l r-t-::sL........... (t) :::J",=-"""I/>-,..r.: a.c.n o :J 5 < '-r_ ---...;;:) _. c ~ 5cCL::rO"TJc ::J3~ .....:~~~~; ~~: ::r _. 0 ~ (n'< r>1 '< ~ ('ll-'C (no ~~U> (nQ.lr.:~~c 'xO cn~ ~ o..:.:;E :3 ro::J ? 0 (") S' '0 =: ~ 0'" 3 ~-'o <C 0'< ~ ....,. <.0 ~ OJ::J 0 <.0 0 ;;;J ::J"" ~- n 0.. OJ ~ = c: n ro _. '" :;: V> -- .., ro'O :J _. - ::r <.......~~~< ~3OJ ::r (i; -. (1: ::r ro r>1 ('tl ::l ~ ~. (l) 0.> .g _:J :::I", o;.:Jc..-,~:;fR '-"' =:'6 C Q o ;;; C Vl ~,!:1 c:r tIJ '0 C '-:: -- ~. '< 3 ~ ,:::,2:-croVl"""-_cn t'll '" ~~ 5~ :::ac rt> n>t.r.", ;:" C/)::l:::J 0.. C """ -<.:::. ~ ,oo-PJO::l.... --, 'ru' - r: lX\ ~. o (') -. 0 ,;::;:- o..-..::lru;::;:........ --'.--8::Jro~ 2.oaf=c;~ '< n>~3~ o ~ '" 0 ::::-: c ~::rc"'" ..... x :::l o 0 .......- ;:~ ro V> :; 0 0-.... (to ::r :::l ro ro .... en:;E ro _. 2::r~ ~. 0;:'- 0 ..-.. ::r ~ 0::...... :3 S' e~ '< n 0 o c: 3 ~ 'O~ ~:::i ....,. ....,. ro """0 ~3 ~~ j".ro <0.> PI 0 :::J::r 0...:'5 Vlcro, ~ '" D...-O ;:;,: .., (" 0'0- ':./JU o o::r i"'''' . .-. VI (,1)'< '< _ U)<-Jro-:....0~ I/>~()cc~ C - C ..... 0 ~ g ~.:3 c; t: (1) 0"'" OJ 0-, ~- L-::'-<3~ c tT:r- 0- (Ii o D '" OJ _. ~ :J < ::J _. .......... ro ('t) ro ..-. :J(")-......c....~ 8 ~ ~ 0 5' ~ 3u::::~8~ ~~6~~~ ><~c~ *'"< ~ Vl _.~ v80;;'c .:?3:::J(U"'l OO'"Vl:;TO c::; :;' o;i; e: (1)D", cno.~=~ o -'n_ !::? :J (l) N :: ~8 ~...U)E;- en30oe: roro......,~<: () ........ '--'-. r ;;;. <:3 '" fr' ::.0.> C ::l t>o ......O-""<O-j;;;.., '<OCl) ~_ ~;:;; 0 ~ ';01- ::l c-,.4 :J (V Qj'oo.. ~ -0 D." 0 . ~. ::r v) e:.roO -.::;3 .., '" n cr "0 0(1)", :3 ~ 0 ro :::J "2... _.~ ('0 ::l Vl ..... ~ .< a.~::r 0.. . 0 _. t;;; (JQ. g-.~ ~ ::J:':(n Ou ~ '< 'I:l 0:;' 0-- c '< cr. -. 0' tv C/) '< 2 00..... 2.c ~. -0'--<' (J?:::J::r (1) - 0.> n'< < ~ :=.::: -.,< 0 -:Tou C tIJ g- ::r '< ::1W,...,. ~;i;~ -. '" t;"'Vl . &0 ~==' 0.> :J I """ ~ '< S" ()'O, -3 ~ (tl CIl o := -< o c "'< O:l ~ ;::s l'\:l I~ I - , ~d Qao. I (l) '"-1~ ~- ~~ ':"'l"t> tv 0.> _CL we- . ro ~ '" o --,., '< o c .... u b; en;p.~O'-,. O;:+>N,d E' ~ ~ 3 3 d -oO'lo-.....;::r en 0 "-oJ '< ::r 0> ro3 O'ln (1) < 2u -- ~ 5"~ .....;;-~ =:""'ro ;;0: c: o--:J ~ Q.. '<::1,-::00:;,~ (;),00. .... g:. w. n.r, ~ ~ ~: ~ ~.-,.. n ......-roP-J ro 0.. -. ;0 <: >< e;r Vl ::l r~ ~ '" '-<:: -'l7l'\, ..,';:) tn :3 ~ en 0' c ~. . -. en - rtl ...... ~.::1 )>;- (,I) ::r - llo. Vl - :::;- ro ::r O,.,.........~...ro ..... =r::l ro :::. Q:: _. (t) ....... _ ~ ow :::l ..... ~ !!. ('t; '<:: "::! 0;:, m_o ~3(l)'OS5C ;;1. ......~en== g~~;:)':-':J ,......,.crm~rn l::"":::JO(\) ..... -. C c.. :J~C: OJ _. 3 Q ~ ;:::5~::l~ o <:: _"'" ao. :3 '< ~ ('t) O~7"'rT~ ~~~S.A -110. 0, v; '< o 0 2 <: (,I) .::> Q. ~ ~ o c .:::. .,. '"<;. o -, :::: n ~ n tIJ ~ .,.. tn <: ::. s: > :3;;.r-;=;:- "'(1)::r .....-0 roo.c Q..- 00 - "'""=' ;J- ~g,< ~30 '" C '\.or-:: o..~ . f.. 3'<::'" ro ~:J ::l ;:J 0 ~O-~ -. ..... ,...,. '" ",.0 '" C VI (1)'~ ..... CL ......~ ::To ~~ u~ PJ '" ~.~ ::> ro ao.g- .0..... C DJ ~~ ~ ~ '< [j1l Kit- Oata Search Results Page 1 of 1 /~ "7':J;y~ Jaws Menu _ffi'5",,~ Rqon~Q Rz:rr-'.~. h.r.~-llif~ 1;j'Mo'nI~~ :' ,.? "ll-'~_ ~,,!:.;rodoi" ~I"]II!""',, ~fY1-lqt.'. .........~. \ \~J , ReSOurce Kits: .A""",,~l"I" .~"\.'1"~1."""" ..:..I:IIIIIlI.lII:.... 11m.. "'~~q;.ar.... 1I~1~~ , ,;, ...-~'~, 11111: BIF RIF Data Search Results Ar,," OfficeCode Date D02 67~ DECO Beneficiaries-In-Force (BIF) the 1000's #'5 in the 100's $in Total # RSI-DIB 130 Total $ RSI-OIB 10392 # RSI 115 $ RSI 9269 # OIB 15 $ OIB 1123 Recipients-In-Force (RIF) $ in the 1000's ) Total # RIFs 1- 1154 - . Total $ 399 Total #. Aged 295 Total # Blind 11 Total # OIB 848 Back to BlF RIF Data Request Page updated: 05/30100 ATLnet created: 08/24/97 ATLnet WebMaster: ATLnet Intranet Team non-ATLnet inTRAnet link ~, Fj L .. inTERnet link If '. ~~€- oSSA (~ ~~ ~~ .J ~ http://1 0.101. 218.16 7/orc/mos/cos/mioat/reports/blfrtf/bifrif3.asp 2/1/01 We will need to make one simple change to our agreement with DCA to make this income-based, non-taxable grant for low income homeowners possible. It is the addition of a single sentence to the Scope of Work in the contract we have already approved. The change is on page one and the new wording is underlined. ATTACHMENT A Scope of Work Illegal and Severely Inadequate Onsite Sewage System Replacement Program 1. The Recipient shall provide services and provide payment as described in this Scope of Work, to achieve the objectives of this Agreement in compliance with the following: 1. Rule 28-20.1 00 of the Florida Administrative Code, as amended. 2. The Recipient shall establish the following relating to assistance to both single family and multi-family, private residential property owners in Monroe County in eliminating illegal and inadequate On-Site Treatment and Disposal Systems (OSTDS): 1. Procedures for the selection of property owners to receive financial assistance via the Contractor under this Agreement. Such procedures mal' provide (hI' income- based selection criteria. 2. The amount of financial assistance to be given to property owners under this Agreement, by the Contractor in eliminating illegal and inadequate OSTDS. The assistance shall be comparable with the level of financial assistance estimated, at the time of the Department's acceptance of the initial submittal under Item 6.A below, to be realized by the residents of the Little Venice area to be served by centralized wastewater transmission, treatment and disposal facilities resulting from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Grant C120602-04. 3. The Recipient shall implement a properly value-based sliding scale grant assistance program using the County's funds, to supplement the assistance made available under the agreement to Monroe County private property owners for eliminating illegal and inadequate OSTDS if the County finds such additional assistance is desirable to carry out the purposes of Rule 28-20.1 00 of the Florida Administrative Code. Such a sliding scale grant program must emphasize assistance to financially needy households. Additionallv. Countv funds mav be used to establish an income-based qrant assistance proqram. 4. The Recipient shall establish procedures for procurement of equipment, materials and services relating to elimination of illegal and inadequate OSTDS and replacement with On-site Wastewater Nutrient Removal Systems (OWNRS), the funding of which is wholly or partly provided under this Agreement. Procurement procedures shall assure that only OWNRS meeting the statutorily required treatment levels are furnished and installed using funds made available under this Agreement. The Department recognizes the Contractor's regulatory determination in the issuance of the construction permit and the issuance of the operating permit to ensure that the installed OSTDS eliminates the illegal and inadequate OSTDS. Alternatively, procurement procedures may allow for replacement of illegal and inadequate OSTDS with centralized wastewater transmission, treatment and disposal facilities. Procurement procedures-shall not arbitrarily preclude any responsible firms and companies possessing the ability to successfully perform services related to elimination of illegal and inadequate OSTDS and meeting other requirements pursuant to this Agreement from providing such services. In conjunction with these procedures, a standardized sub agreement or work order authorizing specific costs to be incurred by third parties and incorporating appropriate requirements set forth in this Agreement shall be developed; similarly, standardized documentation of costs incurred or invoiced by third parties shall be developed. 5. As consideration for the services to be rendered under the terms of this Agreement, the Department shall authorize disbursements as described below. 1. An amount not to exceed $624,850 shall be made available as the State's share of the eligible cost to eliminate illegal and inadequate OSTDS located on privately owned residential properties classified as either single family or multi-family residential properties. Eligible costs include abandonment of illegal and inadequate OSTDS; furnishing and installing OWNRS, including any required disinfection facilities; providing centralized wastewater transmission, treatment and disposal facilities; and required technical services excepting those required to be performed by a governmental entity (e.g., Florida Department of Health's permitting activities). Reimbursement for the purchase of equipment and materials for the furnishing and installing of OWNRS on private property is specifically authorized. Such equipment and materials may be retained by property owners provided the equipment is to be properly operated and maintained. The Recipient shall retain the documentation listed below for each illegal and inadequate OSTDS eliminated using funds made available under this agreement. 1. Identification of each property location, including the individual area designated in the County's Rate of Growth Ordinance, at which an illegal and inadequate OSTDS was eliminated. 2. Description of each OWNRS or the connection to centralized wastewater transmission, treatment and disposal facilities provided as part of the illegal and inadequate OSTDS elimination. 3. For each property location under Item i above, the identification of the brand name or manufacturer of the OWNRS furnished; the name of the contractor that installed the OWNRS or that made the connection to centralized wastewater transmission, treatment and disposal facilities; and the engineer responsible for preparation of construction drawings and specifications. 4. Certification by the appropriate permitting authority that the OWNRS is designed to meet the required treatment levels was furnished, and was installed and made operational or that the connection to centralized wastewater transmission, treatment and disposal facilities was made. 5. Identification of the total cost of each operational OWNRS or connection to centralized wastewater transmission, treatment and disposal facilities; the share due under this agreement; the share of the cost paid from the County funds (if any); and the local resident's share. 6. Certification of no double benefits (i.e., no part of the costs invoiced for disbursement by the Department under this agreement has been or will be requested to be paid, reimbursed, or otherwise funded by another agency). 7. Certification that the initial report under Item 6.A below and all quarterly reports due under Items 6.C and 6.D below have been submitted to the Department. 8. Certification by the owner of the property on which an OWNRS was installed that the OWNRS will be properly operated and maintained on a continuing basis. 2. The Recipient shall not use State funds made available under this agreement for direct salaries and multipliers (i.e., fringe benefits, overhead, and/or general and administrative rates) for its employees or for any of its employees' travel expenses. No funds made available under this agreement shall be used for contract management expenses that may be incurred by the Recipient or Florida Department of Health. 6. The Recipient shall submit, or cause to be submitted the following deliverables to the Department. The Department shall have twenty (20) days to review and accept reports or return reports to the Contractor or County, as appropriate, for correction. The deliverables are as follows: I. The Department shall pay $624,850 to the Recipient following the Department's receipt, review, and acceptance of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Florida Department of Health, Monroe County Health Department and the County to implement a Homeowners Assistance Program that is revised to reflect the additional funding in this contract received no later than January 15, 200 I. B. Progress reports from the Recipient for the calendar year quarterly periods ending September 30, December 31, March 31, and June 30 of each year beginning January I, 2000, and continuing throughout the remainder of the period during which this Agreement is in effect. Progress reports shall be submitted to the Department within twenty (20) days after the end of each quarter and shall contain the following information relating to the elimination of illegal and inadequate OSTDS. 1. The number of OSTDS eliminated and their location indicating, at a minimum, the County's Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) area and a description of either the OWNRS installed or the connection to centralized wastewater transmission, treatment and disposal facilities. II. The number and status of OSTDS for which elimination is underway. Ill. The projected schedule to complete all project work under this agreement. IV. The funds expended during the reporting period and the funds remaining to be disbursed for OSTDS elimination under this agreement. 3. A completion report (ten copies) from the Recipient to be received by the Department no later than December 31, 2001, summarizing the quarterly reports prepared by each party. COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN FOR CANALS The Recipient shall prepare a comprehensive master plan (hereinafter called "Canal Study") for improving water quality in residential canals to fulfill the requirements of Objectives 202.14 and 202.15 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. 2. The Recipient shall submitr;or cause to have submitted to the Department the deliverables in 3. to the Department The Department shall have twenty (20) days to review and accept reports or return report to the County for correction. 3. The Department shall pay a total amount not to exceed $175,000 in accordance with schedule of deliverables and disbursements as specified below: A The Recipient shall submit by no later than November 10, 2000, to the Department for its review and approval, a draft Request for Proposal package for soliciting consultant responses to prepare the Canal Study. B. The Recipient shall submit by no later than January 15, 2001, to the Department for its review and approval, a draft copy of the work scope for services to be performed to prepare the Canal Study and its estimated costs. C. If the Department approves the Scope of Work and its estimated costs the Department shall pay the Recipient up to $175,000 upon its receipt of the executed contract to prepare the Canal Study between the Recipient and its consultant which shall be submitted no later than May 31,2001. D. The Recipient shall submit a final draft Canal Study by no later than March 15, 2002, to the Department for its review, comment, and approval. E. The Recipient shall submit to the Department a final Canal Study by no later than thirty (30) days after receiving the Department's written comments. F. The Recipient shall prepare progress reports for quarterly periods ending March 31, June 30, September 30, and December 31 of each year beginning January 1, 2001 and continuing throughout the remainder of the period during which this Agreement is in effect Progress reports shall be submitted to the Department within twenty (20) days after the end of each quarter and shall contain information on work completed during the quarter, consultant invoices and reports, work expected to be comple!ed in next quarter, and identify any unanticipated problems or delays in completing the project on schedule and within budget G. The Recipient shall submit a completion report (ten copies) to the Department no later than May 31,2002, summarizing the quarterly reports prepared. POST-DISASTER REDEVELOPMENT PLAN The Recipient shall prepare a Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan to fulfill the requireme9ts of Objective 217.2 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The Recipient shall submit, or cause to have submitted to the Department the deliverables in 3. to the Department. The Department shall have twenty (20) days to review and accept reports or return report to the County for correction. The Department shall pay a total amount not to exceed $87,950 in accordance with schedule of deliverables and disbursements as specified below: A. The Recipient shall submit by no later than November 30, 2000, to the Department for its review and approval, a draft Request for Proposal package for soliciting consultant responses to prepare the Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan. B. The Recipient shall submit by no later than February 29, 2001, to the Department for its review and approval, a draft copy of the work scope for services to be performed to prepare the Post- Disaster Redevelopment Plan and its estimated costs. C. If the Department approves the Scope of Work and its estimated costs the Department shall pay the Recipient up to $87,950 upon its receipt of the executed contract to prepare the Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan between the Recipient and its consultant which shall be submitted no later than May 31,2001. D. The Recipient shall submit a final draft Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan by no later than December 31,2001, to the Department for its review, comment, and approval. E. The Recipient shall submit to the Department a final Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan by no later than thirty (30) days after receiving the Department's written comments. F. The Recipient shall prepare progress reports for quarterly periods ending March 31, June 30, September 30, and December 31 of each year beginning January 1, 2001 and continuing throughout the remainder of the period during which this Agreement is in effect. Progress reports shall be submitted to the Department within twenty (20) days after the end of each quarter and shall contain information on work completed during the quarter, consultant invoices and reports, work expected to be completed in next quarter, and identify any unanticipated problems or delays in completing the project on schedule and within budget. G. The Recipient shall submit a completion report (ten copie$) to the Department by no later than March 31, 2002, summarizing the quarterly reports prepared. We will need to make ohe simple change to our agreement with DEP to make this income-based, non-taxable grant for low income homeowners possible. It is the addition of a single sentence to the Scope of Work in the contract we have already approved. The change is on page one and the new wording is underlined. The same wording is suggested for the DCA contract. ATTACHMENT A Scope of Services 1. The County shall provide services, pursuant to Item 5.A below and the Contractor shall provide services, pursuant to Item 5.B below to achieve the objectives of this Agreement in compliance~with the following: A. Rule 28-20.100 of the Florida Administrative Code, as amended. B. Memorandum of Understanding between the County and the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, as amended. 2. The Contractor shall establish the following relating to assistance to both single family and multi-family, private residential property owners in Monroe County in eliminating illegal and inadequate OSTDS: A. Procedures for the selection of property owners to receive financial assistance via the Contractor under this Agreement. Such procedures may provide for income-based selection criteria. B. The amount of financial assistance to be given to property owners under this Agreement, by the Contractor, in eliminating illegal and inadequate OSTDS. The assistance shall be comparable with the level of financial assistance estimated, at the time of the Department's acceptance of the initial report under Item 6.A below, to be realized by the residents of the Little Venice area to be served by centralized wastewater transmission, treatment, and disposal facilities resulting from the US Environmental Protection Agency Grant C120602-04. 3. The Contractor shall implement a property value-based sliding scale grant assistance program, using the County's funds, to supplement the assistance made available under this Agreement to Monroe County private property owners for eliminating illegal and inadequate OSTDS if the County finds such additional assistance is desirable to carryout the purposes of Rule 28-20.100 of the Florida Administrative Code. Such a sliding scale grant program would emphasize assistance to financially needy households. A dditiona IIv, County funds may be used to establish an income-based qrant assistance proqram. 4. The Contractor shall establish procedures for procurement of equipment, materials, and services relating to elimination of illegal and inadequate OSTDS and replacement with OWNRS, the funding of which is wholly or partly provided under this Agreement. Procurement procedures shall assure that only OWNRS meeting the statutorily required treatment levels are furnished and installed using funds made available under this Agreement. The Department recognizes the Contractor's regulatory determination in the issuance of the construction permit and the issuance of the operating permit to ensure that the installed OSTDS eliminates the illegal and DEP Agreement No. SP527, Attachment A, Page 1 of 5 inadequate OSTDS. Alternatively, procurement procedures may allow for replacement of illegal and inadequate OSTDS with centralized wastewater transmission, treatment, and disposal facilities. Procurement procedures shall not arbitrarily preclude responsible firms and companies possessing the ability to successfully perform services related to elimination of illegal and inadequate OSTDS and meeting other reqLdrements pursuant to this agreement from providing such services. In conjunction with these procedures, a standardized subagreement or work order authorizing specific costs to be incurred by third parties and incorporating appropriate requirements set forth in this Agreement shall be developed; similarly, standardized documentation of costs incurred or invoiced by third parties shall be developed. 5. As consideration for the services to be rendered under the terms of this Agreement, the Department shall authorize disbursements as described below. A. An amount not to exceed $150,000 shall be made available by the County to the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority (FKAA) under a subagreement for the performance of administrative duties associated with the operation of the Little Venice wastewater management system during the one-year period immediately following start-up of system operation. Administrative duties include legal, technical, fiscal, clerical, and managerial activities necessary for a financially self-sufficient wastewater management system to be fully operational. Disbursements under this Agreement shall be made to the County and on a reimbursement basis and no more frequently than monthly. Invoices shall be accompanied by supporting documentation and shall be subject to limitations and requirements as follows: I. Aqreement - The County shall not be reimbursed for direct salaries and multipliers (i.e. fringe benefits, overhead, and/or general and administrative rates) of its employees. II. Subaqreement - Reimbursement requests for payments to the FKAA must be substantiated by documentation in conformance with Attachment B. Disbursement by the Department shall be contingent on the County's approval of FKAA's invoices. III. Travel - No travel expenses are authorized under the terms of this agreement. B. An amount not to exceed $850,000 shall be made available as the State's share of the eligible cost to eliminate illegal and inadequate OSTDS located on privately owned residential properties classified as either single family or multi- family residential properties. Eligible costs include abandonment of illegal and inadequate OSTDS; furnishing and installing OWNRS, including any required disinfection facilities; providing centralized wastewater transmission, treatment, and disposal facilities; and required technical services excepting those required DEP Agreement No. SP527, Attachment A, Page 2 of 5 to be performed by a governmental entity (e.g., Contractor's permitting activities). Reimbursement for the purchase of equipment and materials for the furnishing and installing of OWNRS on private property is specifically authorized. Such equipment and materials may be retained by property owners provided the equipment is to be properly operated and maintained. A Property Reporting Form (Attachment D) shall not be required by the Department. The Contractor shall retain the documentation listed below for each illegal and inadequate OSTDS eliminated using funds made available under this agreement. I. Identification of each property location, including the individual area designated in the County's Rate of Growth Ordinance, at which an illegal and inadequate OSTDS was eliminated. II Description of each OWNRS or the connection to centralized wastewater transmission, treatment, and disposal facilities provided as part of the illegal and inadequate OSTDS elimination. III. For each property location under Item i above, the identification of the brand name or manufacturer of the OWNRS furnished; the name of the contractor that installed the OWNRS or that made the connection to centralized wastewater transmission, treatment, and disposal facilities; and the engineer responsible for preparation of construction drawings and specifications. IV. Certification by the appropriate permitting authority that the OWNRS, designed to meet the required treatment levels was furnished, installed and made operational or that the connection to centralized wastewater transmission, treatment, and disposal facilities was made. v. Identification of the total cost of each operational OWNRS or connection to centralized wastewater transmission, treatment, and disposal facilities; the share due under this Agreement; the share of the cost paid due from the County funds (if any); and the local resident's share. VI. Certification of no double benefits (i.e., no part of the costs invoiced for disbursement by the Department under this Agreement has been or will be requested to be paid, reimbursed, or otherwise funded by another agency). VII. Certification that the initial report under Item 6.A below and all quarterly reports due under Items 6.C and 6.D below have been submitted to the Department. DEP Agreement No. SP527, Attachment A, Page 3 of 5 viii. Certification by the owner of the property on which an OWNRS was installed that the OWNRS will be properly operated and maintained on a continuing basis. C. Neither the Contractor nor the County shall use State funds made available under this Agreerpent for direct salaries and multipliers (i.e., fringe benefits, overhead, and/or general and administrative rates) for its employees or for any of its employees travel expenses. 6. The Contractor or the County, as appropriate, shall submit, or cause to be submitted, deliverables to the Department. The Department shall have 20 days to review and accept reports or return reports to the Contractor or County, as appropriate, for correction. The deliverables are as follows: A. An initial report (ten copies) to be submitted to the Department no later than December 31, 1999, documenting the following: I. The selection procedures and the assistance level determination under Item 2 above. II. The details of any sliding-scale grant program proposed under Item 3 above. III. A description of the procurement procedures required under Item 4 above. IV. The subagreement between the County and the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority pursuant to 5.A above. B. Invoices from the County for completed work under its subagreement with the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority. C. Progress reports from the Contractor for the calendar year quarterly periods ending September 30, December 31, March 31, and June 30 of each year beginning January 1, 2000, and continuing throughout the remainder of the period during which this Agreement is in effect. Progress reports shall be submitted to the Department within 20 days after the end of the period and shall contain the following information relating to the elimination of illegal and inadequate OSTDS: I. The number of OSTDS eliminated and their location indicating, at a minimum, the County's Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) area and a description of either the OWNRS installed or the connection to centralized wastewater transmission, treatment, and disposal facilities. II. The number and status of OSTDS for which elimination is underway. DEP Agreement No. SP527, Attachment A, Page 4 of 5 III. The projected schedule to complete all project work under this Agreement. IV. The funds expended during the reporting period and the funds remaining to be disbu[;sed for OSTDS elimination under this Agreement. D. Progress reports from the County relating to activities under Item 5.A above, for the calendar year quarterly periods ending September 30, December 31, March 31, and June 30 beginning one-year immediately preceding projected start-up of the Little Venice wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal facilities and ending one year after the actual start-up. Progress reports shall be submitted to the Department within 20 days after the end of each quarterly period. The status of the effort to identify the permanent funding source(s) for all of Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority's wastewater operation and maintenance costs, including all administrative costs relating to the Little Venice project, and the projected date for imposing the fees and charges necessary for a financially self-sufficient wastewater management system specifically shall be addressed in the progress reports. E. A completion report (ten copies) from both the Contractor and the County to be received by the Department no later than July 12, 2003, summarizing the quarterly reports prepared by each party. REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK DEP Agreement No. SP527, Attachment A, Page 5 of 5 To the recipient of a recent package from the Department of Health concerning unknown wastewater treatment systems: This letter will serve as notification that a new grant program is now in place for homeowners who can demol:1,strate that household income falls within the criteria that qualify a household for affordable housing in this County The County Code considers all those households with an adjusted annual gross income of $49300 or less as meeting the affordability guidelines. If you believe that you may be able to qualify for this grant, please bring last year's 1040 Tax Form to the Department of Health office closest to you (or Growth Management office should we decide that they should make that determination) so that determination can be made. If you so qualify, you will not owe taxes on that grant amount, unlike the grant for which you received information in your DOH packet. You may also call the Department of Health for additional information (again, may be Growth Management should we decide to go that way) # to be included). (to be sent this week upon approval on County Stationery) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING NO. DOH 01 2000 NO. DOH-OJ 2001, BETWEEN MONROE COUNTY AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, MONROE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT, TO IMPLEMENT A HOMEOWNERS WASTEWATER SYSTEM ASSISTANCE PROGRAM " " This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is entered into between Monroe County (County) and the Florida Department of Health, Monroe County Health Department (MCHD), under the authority granted in Section 163.01, F.S. I. PURPOSE The purpose of this MOU is to outline the shared responsibilities of the Monroe County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) and the MCHD concerning the implementation of: · Ordinance 03 I - I 999, the Cesspool Identification and Elimination Ordinance, and · a grant assistance program for the replacement of cesspools and other unknown on-site wastewater systems. II. BACKGROUND On 15 April 1993, the Board of County Commissioners adopted its 2010 Comprehensive Plan as required under Chapters 163 and 380 of the Florida Statutes. Mter lengthy litigation through two separate administrative hearing processes, the final adoption of the Monroe County 20 I 0 Comprehensive Plan (2010 Plan) occurred on 17 July 1997. The Comprehensive Plan, including the seven-year work program, were recently revised in Rule 28-20.100, by the Governor and Cabinet in June of 1999. The seven-year work program and Comprehensive Plan policies require that the County cause cesspools and unknown systems to be replaced with permitted On- site Wastewater Nutrient Reduction Systems (OWNRS) in areas which are not identified for central sewer service systems (referred to as "Cold Spots"). This program has been re-codified recently in Ordinance 03 I - I 999 (revising Chapter 15.5, Monroe County Code), known as the Cesspool Identification and Elimination Ordinance. That Ordinance focuses on areas that will not receive sewer service within the next ten years. As required in the seven-year work program, the program to eliminate all cesspools and unknown systems outside "Hot Spots" must be completed by 12 July 2003. cess - dohmouOl02 Page 1 of 166 The BOCC and the State of Florida retain a concern that those individuals who must replace a cesspool or unknown, unpermitted system under the requirements of Ordinance 03 I - I 999, should be provided an opportunity for grant funding in order to assist in their replacement efforts. Thus, the County and the State have initially set aside up to approximately $3. I 8 million for a cesspool and inadequate, unknown systems replacement grant assistance program. Under the three-party Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Contract SP527, approved by the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) in October 1999, the FDEP has agreed to provide $850,000 in funding to the grant assistance program. This grant money is to be distributed to eligible residential property owners in an amount comparable to the subsidy to be received by property owners in the Little Venice Wastewater Project. Little Venice residential property owners will receive approximately a sixty-two percent (62%) subsidy for that wastewater project. The Florida Department of Community Affairs (FDCA) has provided up to $1,325,600 in funding to the grant assistance program, in three separate contracts. These funds are expected to be granted to eligible property owners in accordance with technical and eligibility guidelines specified in FDEP Contract SP527. The cost of constructing an OWNRS under current standards is estimated to be approximately $ 13,500 (including engineering fees and removal of any cesspool). Sixty-two percent of this amount is approximately $8,400, which will be provided as a flat subsidy to residential property owners replacing cesspools or other unknown systems under Ordinance 03 I -1999. Using its infrastructure funds, the County has agreed to provide a sliding-scale subsidy in addition to the flat subsidy provided using state funds. The County will provide up to $910,788 of infrastructure sales tax money toward this effort. The amount provided to each residential property owner will be based on the current assessed value of improvements to the subject property. The MCHD has agreed to administer the Homeowners Wastewater System Assistance Program (HWSAP) using State and County funds for ten (10) percent of the amount provided under the grant program. On November 10, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners approved DOH OI- 1999 Memorandum of Understanding, which was executed by the MCHD on December 15, 1999. Subsequently, the Board of County Commissioners cess - dohmouOlOZ Paze 2 of 166 approved two Amendments to the original MOD, which revised the amount of funds involved and certain eligibility requirements. It is contemplated that the MOD will be revised to reflect available grant fund dollars and the adequate administrative match monies. This document replaces ~ll previous versions of the MOD incorporating all previous amendments and providing for changes reflected in this document. Changes are intended only to reflect new Contract grant dollars and to establish a payment schedule to MCHD. III. AGREEMENT A. Implementation of the Cesspool Identification and Elimination Ordinance. I. The County and MCHD agree to coordinate implementation of the Cesspool Identification and Elimination Ordinance, Ordinance 03 I - I 999, revising Chapter 15.5, Monroe County Code. 2. The MCHD shall prepare notification packages and official notification letters to be sent to property owners under the Cesspool Identification and Elimination Ordinance. The notification packages shall contain basic consumer information on the HWSAP. The official notification letters shall constitute formal notice to the property owners requiring them to come into compliance with the requirements of the Cesspool Identification and Elimination Ordinance. Included with each official notification letter shall be necessary forms and instructions for complying with MCHD requirements and instructions on how to receive grant assistance for the replacement of the cesspool or inadequate unknown system. 3. The MCHD shall have responsibility for sending out notification packages to owners of all properties identified on the MCHD "unknown systems" list within Cesspool Identification and Elimination Areas ("CIEAs") delineated by resolution of the BOCC, as specified in Ordinance 03 I -1999. After consultation with the Monroe County staff, the MCHD shall send official notification letters to all owners of non-residential properties and some portion or all of the owners of residential properties identified on the MCDH "unknown systems" within a "CIEA." The number of official notification letters sent to owners of residential properties shall be limited to the number of cesspools and unknown systems anticipated to be replaced for which grant funding is available. Wherever possible, the official notification letters shall be sent to concentrated geographic areas and subdivisions. cess - dohmouOl02 raze 3 of 166 4. The County and MCHD shall cooperate to develop the content of the mail-out to those property owners receiving notification packages and official notification letters as noted in Section III. A. 2. above. 5. The County and MCHD shall develop a public outreach effort to inform the County's citiz.ens about the implementation of the Cesspool Identification and Elimination program - who will be affected, where, what will be required of them, and what it is expected to cost. This program will be carried out in fulfillment of task requirements identified in the seven-year work program adopted by the Governor and Cabinet in Rule 28-20.100. B. Implementation of the Homeowners Wastewater System Assistance Program. I. General Provisions a.) The County and MCHD agree to coordinate a grant assistance program for replacement of cesspools and unknown systems on residential properties in accordance with the provisions of the three- party FDEP contract SP527 and this Agreement. b.) The MCHD shall administer the grants assistance program in accordance with all the terms and provisions of FDEP Contract SP527 and this Agreement. The payment conditions, schedules, record keeping and audit requirements of FDEP Contract SP527 also apply to this Agreement. A copy of FDEP Contract SP527 is hereby attached to this Agreement (Attachment I). In furtherance of the objectives of this Agreement, the MCHD shall provide the County with a copy of all reports required by FDEP Contract SP527 and provide quarterly status reports to the County beginning with the calendar year beginning on January I, 2000. The quarterly reports shall outline the grant assistance program's administrative activities and expenditures for the reporting period. 2. State Grant Sources a.) State funding sources for replacement of unknown and inadequate on-site waste treatment and disposal systems include $2,175,600 in one FDEP Contract and three FDCA grant Contracts. The FDCA grants shall be administered in the same general manner and under the same basic guidelines as the FDEP SP527 grant Contract. Quarterly reports required under SP527 will be expanded to include cess - dohmouOlOZ Page 4 of 166 funds expended under the mCA grants and will be provided to the FDCA Contract Manager. Specifically these contracts include: Contract Number County Account Amount SP527 NA $850,000 99-DR-1 Q-11-54-91-001 125-53009-530490-GW9903-530340 $100,000 00-DR-1W-11-54-01-002 125-53009-334500-GWOO03-530340 $600,750 01-DR-1?-11-54-01-00? 125-53011-530490-GW0102-530340 $624,850 The FDCA Contracts are attached as Attachments 2 through 4. 3. County Grant Funds a.) The County shall provide for the entire share of the eligible costs for replacement of inadequate on-site waste water treatment and disposal systems eligible for assistance under the shared use of a system provisions of Section III B 6. f.). b.) Predicated on Section III B. 2. a.) immediately above, Monroe County shall make available to MCHD up to $716,271 as a grant match to the mCA and mEP funds. These funds have been provided in part in ($220,787) the County's first payment of $509,975 to MCHD, February 2000. 4. Administrative Funds a.) Through the duration of this grant assistance program, and unless otherwise modified by an amendment to this Agreement, the County shall provide ten percent of the cumulative total of all available grant funds to MCHD for administration of the cesspool replacement grant assistance program. b.) Based on the sum of the current State contracts available to fund the HWSAP and the projected requirements of County match dollars identified in Section III. B. 2. c.) above, the County will be required to expend an estimated $289,188 for MCHD administrative overhead. These funds have been provided in their entirety in the County's first payment of $509,975 to MCHD, February 2000. 5. County Budget Appropriations cess - dohmouOlOZ Page 5 of 166 a.) The County will provide up to $1,821,084 (State grant dollars and County match dollars) in five lump sum amounts. The first $200,000 will be provided no later than 1 November 2000, corresponding to the FDCA Contract 99- D R -1 Q-ll- 54-01-001 which must be allocated and spent by 31 December 2000. Use of rDCA Contract 99-DR;;'lQ-11-54-01-001 will be prioritized until those funds and County match funds are exhausted. The remaining grant funds amounting to $1,621,084 will be provided in four lump sums of $406,021 on the following approximate schedule; 31 January 2001 30 June 2001, 30 April 200 I 30 September 200 I, 3 I July 200 I 3 I December 2001,-and 30 November 2001 30 April 2002. b.) If at any time MCHD determines that additional monies are not immediately required for a given quarter, as identified above, then they will notify the County that a quarterly payment is not required. However, in no case shall such payment lapse more than 60 days from the last required payment and in no case shall monies be provided after the last identified quarter, 30 November 2001 30 April 2002. c.) This sub-section is subject to revision based on the progress of the HWSAP and the possibility of rDCA Contract extensions for Contracts approved in 2000. 6. Homeowners Wastewater System Assistance Program (HWSAP) a.) The MCHD shall administer a sliding scale, improved property value and income based, HWSAP on behalf of Monroe County and the State of Florida. . b.) The grant assistance program shall be available to property owners of all eligible residential properties, including mobile home and trailer parks. These funds shall be used to partially defray the costs for the replacement of cesspools or unknown systems or eligible inadequate systems with an approved OWNRS, small off-site cluster systems, or DEP approved wastewater treatment facilities, in accordance with FDEP Contract SP 527 and this Agreement. c.) Only owners of residential properties identified through implementation of Ordinance 03 I - I 999 and owners of residential properties under the provisions of Section III B. 6. f.) shall be eligible for the grant assistance program. Except for residential properties made eligible for grant assistance under the provisions of Section III B. cess - dohmouO 102 Page 6 of 166 6. f.), these properties must be listed on the MCHD's "unknown systems" list and subsequently identified as existing within a "CIEA" as defined in Ordinance 031-1999 and adopted by Resolution of the BOCC. Owners of residential properties identified on the "unknown systems" list within a designated " CIEA" that receive an official notification lette:f from MCHD or owners of residential properties under the provisions of Section III B. 6. f.) shall be eligible for grant assistance funding. Owners of other residential properties on the "unknown systems" list situated within a "CIEA" shall not be eligible for grant funding until they receive an official notification letter from MCHD. Commercial properties shall be ineligible for any grant assistance funding under this program. d.) The grant assistance levels provided per each replaced on-site system through this grant program are identified in Attachment 5 and may be modified through amendments to this Agreement. These assistance levels shall be the maximum amounts that may be granted to an eligible property owner per system replaced. e.) If the actual cost of construction of an OWNRS or eligible replacement system is less than the $13,500 average cost estimated by the County, the grant assistance applicant shall only be eligible to receive a proportionate share of the costs for reimbursement. Under the sliding scale property value based program, +1his share shall be calculated as follows: sixty-two percent (62%) of total costs for properties with improvements valued over $200,000; seventy percent (70%) of total costs for properties with improvements valued between $100,000 and $200,000; and eighty-four percent (84%) of the total costs for properties with improvements valued less than $100,000. Under the income-based program, the share shall be calculated as eighty-four percent (84%) of construction cost. Income shall be based on Median Income for Monroe County as validated by Gross Adiusted Income provided in IRS Form 1040 (or equivalent). See Attachment 5. f.) Owners of residential properties located within a "Cold Spot," who want to replace their permitted systems through the shared use of a new system with an adjacent property owner, who has received an official notification letter, as provided for in Section III B. 6. c.), shall be eligible for the grant assistance program. The grant to be provided to each property owner shall be in accordance with Attachment 6. g.) MCHD shall not provide grant funds to any property owner, who has been found to be in violation by the County Code Enforcement cess - dohmouO 1 02 Paze 7 of 166 Special Master of failing to comply with any of the prOVISIons of Chapter 15.5 of the Monroe County Code. h.) Any nutrient credit that is generated by replacement of an on -site system for which grant assistance is provided under this program shall be the property o,f Monroe County. As a condition of receiving grant assistance, the property owner shall be required to sign a statement waiving any right to such nutrient credits. 7. Incorporation of Amendments a.) This Agreement replaces Memorandum of Understanding, Ne. DOH 01 1999, as amended, dated October 16, 2000 No. DOH 01- 2000, dated 18 Tanuary 2001. 8. Effective Date and Termination a.) This Agreement shall be effective on the date the last party signs this agreement. It shall remain in effect until July 12, 2003, unless modified in writing between the two parties; or terminated as provided in Section III 8. b.) below; or, unless the FDEP Contract SP 527 and subsequent FDCA Contracts are terminated. b.) This Agreement may be terminated in whole or part by any of the signed parties for convenience without cause, provided that no termination may be effected unless the other party is given (1) not less than sixty (60) calendar days written notice (delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested) of the intent to terminate and (2) an opportunity for consultation with the terminating party. If termination for convenience is effected by the County, the MCHD shall return to the County all unexpended County funds adjusted for work performed and settlement costs reasonably incurred by MCHD relating to any commitments or contracts (e.g. suppliers, contractors), which had become binding prior to receipt of the notice of intent to terminate. 9. FDEP Coordination a.) Both parties agree that any amendment to this Agreement revising the grant assistance levels in Attachment 2 or guidelines for shared systems in Attachment 3, requires the prior written consent of the FDEP Project Manager for FDEP Agreement No. SP. 527. cess - dohmouO 1 02 paze 8 of 166 REMAINING PORTION OF PAGE - BLANK cess - dohmouO 102 Page 9 of 166 THE PARTIES, by their duly authorized undersigned representatives have executed this Agreement on the dates and year below written. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: MA YORI CHAIR PERSON DATE: (SEAL) AITEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK BY: DEPUTY CLERK FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, MONROE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT BY: AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY DATE: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY BY: COUNlY AITORNEY cess - dohmouOl02 Page 10 of 166 ATTACHMENT 1 cess - dohmouO I 02 Page 11 of 166 ATTACHMENT 2 cess - dohmouO 1 02 Paze 1 Z of 1 66 ATTACHMENT 3 cess - dohmouO 1 02 Paze 1 3 of 166 , ,I , ATTACHMENT 4 cess - dohmouO 1 02 Paze 14 of 166 ATTACHMENTS Grant Assistance Levels - Sliding Scale Property Value Based Program Improved Property Value State Subsidy County Subsidy Total Percent of Cost < $100,000 $8,400 3,000 $11,400 84 $100,000 - $200,000 $8,400 $1,000 $9,400 70 > $200,000 $8,400 $0 $8,400 62 Grant Assistance Levels - Income Based Program 1. Under the income-based program. the share shall be calculated as eighty-four percent (84%) of construction cost. Income shall be based on Median Income for Monroe County as validated by Gross Adiusted Income provided in IRS Form 1040 (or equivalent). 2. Homeowner must be able to demonstrate an household income of $49.300 or less, which is the median income for Monroe County. 3. Homeowner must provide IRS Form 1040 (or equivalent). 4. Income Based Program will be based on Gross Adiusted Household Income. Estimated Total Cost of Construction Construction Cost: Engineering Fees: Removal of Cesspool: $11,500 $ 1,500 $ 500 Total Cost $13,500 cess - dohmouO 102 Page 15 of 166 ATIA CHMENT 6 SUBSIDY GUIDELINES FOR SHARED SYSTEMS I. The total eligible project construction costs shall be divided by the number of on-site systems tdibe replaced to determine the per unit cost allocation 2. The owners of unknown systems to be replaced with a shared system that have received an official notification letter from the Monroe County Health Department in accordance with Section III B. 6. c.) shall be provided grant assistance in accordance with Attachment 5, " Sliding Scale Homeo\vners \Vaste'l/-ater System Assistance Program," and Section III B. 6. e.), based upon the per unit cost allocation in Point I. 3. The owners of property with permitted systems that are not in compliance with current on-site wastewater treatment standards shall be provided grant assistance in accordance with Attachment 5, "Sliding Scale Homeovvners '.Vastewater Assistance Program," and Section III B. 6. e.), based upon the per unit cost allocation in Point I. This entire grant assistance shall be paid entirely from County grant funds. cess - dohmouO I 02 Page 16 of 166 Page 1 of I From: Nora Williams <noraw@mail.state.fl.us> To: Danny Kolhage <dkolhage@flakeysol.com> Date: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:43 AM Subject: Notes on add-ons for tomorrow's meeting Ya'lI, I need to ask for two emergency add-ons at tomorrow's meeting and I'll need everyone's support to be able to. Those two items are: 1) an update on the Hurricane Evacuation Issue: see attached. 2) and a request for an addition of a single phrase in our agreements with DOH and DCA concerning unknown system grants so that we can save low-income folk from having to pay taxes on the grant. This is VERY time sensitive as the letters from DOH have already gone out WITH A NOTICE THAT TAXES MUST BE PAID. See attached... Nora Williams 490 63rd St. #110, Ocean Marathon, FL 33050 305-289-6000; Fax 305-289-6306 2/5/01 JEB BUSH GOV.EJIJIIOR ~ ,,~ Florida Department of Transportation DISTRICT SIX DIRECTOR OF PRODUCT/O/V OFFICE /(J()()NW JJITlt AI'DVUE /11/,4/111, FL }JJ 7] (J05.1 n()-_~~M THOMAS F. BARRV, JR. SECRETARY February 1,2001 The Honorable Nora Williams Monroe County Commissioner 490 63fd St. SUIte # 110 Marathon, FI 33050 Dear Commissioner Williams' Thank you for calling me at home last mght regarding this very important matter. I discussed with you a proposal which constltutes the following: one lane 10 each direction with a wide shoulder adjacent to the northbound lane, two lane brIdges with shoulders, a barrier separated median and passing zones. You and Mike Collins were both receptive to the idea. Although this is not the best solution from a technical perspective, It is better than the status quo. I have instructed Miller Consultants to address the challenge of providing a shoulder width that would serve evacuation, but yet discourages everyday travelers from using the shoulder for the dangerous maneuver of passing I have asked that the recommendatIOns regarding the shoulder treatment be included 10 the evacuation study report. I wIll be scheduling a meeting next week to discuss the concept and some of the details (lane and shoulder widths, median treatments etc.). The Department is eager to mutualJy develop a solution which balances the quality of life with preserving life itself. Sincerely, ~~k~ Of Production cc: Tom Barry, Secretary, FDOT Ken Morefield, Assistant Secretary, FDOT Jose Abreu, District SIX Secretary Mike Collins, SFWM Mike CisciU, FDOT Javier Gonzalez, FDOT www.dotstateJlus CI) I'IfCYCLH) P..PE" Revised 3/99 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY EMERGENCY ADD-ON Meeting Date: Tiesdau. Feb. 6 Division: BOCC Bulk Item: Yes No X Department: AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Approval of three related items: (a) a request to the Department of Health to set up a special grant funding for unknown system grants for homeowners with household incomes that qualify them for affordable housing, fQl addition of a single clause to our contracts with DCA and DEP as follows (words in italics are to be added): " ." The entire contract is attached..i.9 and agreement to send the attached letter at County expense to the homeowners who received DOH payments last month informing them of this new program (expected cost: $36). ITEM BACKGROUND: A homeowner recently received a letter from the Department of Health concerning her unknown system. She reported that she fears she may be unable to accept the grant, even though she is not well-to-do, because those on a fixed income may reduce potential social security benefits if taxable reported income exceeds a certain limit. I imagine we have a number of resident homeowners whose income is low enough that we would like to establish a special grant program for them to render the grant non-taxable. The standards for affordable housing should serve to protect those with the greatest need. PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: The BOCC requested information from the County Attorney's office concerning how to make our grants to homeowners non- taxable. According to the back-up materials with this item, doing that for the general population impacted might well require a purchase and oversight program BY a government entity. No one is ready to take on that task at this point, although it is hoped that the FKAA, with the help of an EPA grant, will eventually move into that role. HOWEVER, right now there is the possibility of setting up a particular grant that is solely income dependent that would be rendered non-taxable because of its dependency upon income. That will save those who are most in need from having that additional expense. TOTAL COST: $36 (rest from existinQ Qrant fundinQ) BUDGETED: Yes No COST TO COUNTY: N/A REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No AMOUNT PER MONTH YEAR APPROVED BY: COUNTY ATTY OMS/PURCHASING RISK MANAGEMENT APPROVAL: S" "@ NAME:Nora A. Williams. SOCC. District IV f .1