The URL can be used to link to this page

Item B BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: December 11, 2012 Division: 11 OMB Bulk Item: Yes No _ Department: Grants Staff Contact/Phone#: Lisa Tennyson/292-4444 AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Discussion and direction on RESTORE Act. ITEM BACKGROUND: 1. Introduction and roles of various consultants 2. Overview of RESTORE Act 3. Local RESTORE Act committee and project application procedure PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: • BOCC approval of Inter-local agreement to join the RESTORE Act Gulf Consortium; • BOCC selection of Mayor Neugent as representative and Commissioner Rice as the alternate representative to the RESTORE Act Gulf Consortium; • BOCC selection of Mathews/Webster as consultants for Monroe County on RESTORE Act. CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: TOTAL COST: INDIRECT COST: i BUDGETED: Yes No x DIFFERENTIAL OF LOCAL PREFERENCE: COST TO COUNTY: SOURCE OF FUNDS: REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No AMOUNT PER MONTH Year APPROVED BY: County Atty_ OMB/Purchasing Risk Management DOCUMENTATION: Included x Not Required DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM# rJ Revised 7/09 It.- store A Cit Of 2 I 12 l e o onri, BOCC Special Meeting ' f December 11, 2012 RESTORE Act Clean Water Act grants the Federal EPA auth orit y t o i mpose fines on parti es responsibl e f or oil spills ■ Penalti es are not requi red t o be spent i n j urisdicti ons such as th e Gulf of Mexico where the damage occurred .. z Act 'of 2012 -,1 ...d • Conference Report to accom an H.R. -00) . accompany '', 4348) ...i t • . : • Short Title (Section i6o1 - Resources & Ecosystem Sustainabiity, Tourist Opportunities, Revised Economies of the Gulf Coast State Act of 2012 (RESTORE Act) f .„____:=___..„,____ . __,_.....__ ._,,,, � ,it z_ , , ,i ,,, ,, ,i 01w, I 14. 4 + y ' •-`-.. . . wig, ' .1:-.“. - • , �1 i ` ,! }� � II 1 _ .S^:.mot.".k�: - IL vY S. •..t t. Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund Establishes Gulf. Coast Restoration Trust 2, Fund ■ Transfers 8o% - Administrative and civil penalties . . - Expenditure for prescribed purposes and. eligible activities - No time constraints on expenditures ■ US Treasury i8o days - Develop policies and procedures - Develop oversight (auditing) requirements RESTORE Act of 2012 ' • Gulf Coast Region - The coastal zones (defined in Section 304) - Gulf Coast States (AL, FL, LA, MI, TX) - Management Act of 1972, except that this section includes land within the coastal zones that is held in trust or use by the federal government that border the Gulf of Mexico - Any adjacent land, water, and watersheds that are within 25 miles of the coastal zones - All federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico 5 Eligible Uses of Funds ■ Restoration & protection of natural resources in • ...Mitigation of natural resources • Implementation of a "federally approved" � marine, coastal, or conservation management plan • Workforce development and job creation ■ State parks ■ Infrastructure projects benefitting the economy or ecological resources (ports) • Coastal flood- protection • Promotion of tourism and seafood consumption - Clean Water Act -, 1 _ -.= - 20% to Oil Spill RESTORE Act Liability Trust -4: Fund 8o% Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund _ Federal State Fund Research, Fund % o% Local Fund o Monitoring 3 3 35% o Council Consortium 5 /o Federal Council ■ Decisions made by Federal Council composed of federal agencies and appointees from all 5 Gulf States ■ Federal funds allocated for large scale regional competitively awarded ■ Develop Comprehensive Plan Structure : Federal State, Local Treasury/Council State o Consortium Local - Counties 1 U ml01 3o% 35% Competitive Gulf Region Plan "Directly Competitive (Min) tI c 1;'! *No Formula Weighted Formula Chart provided through Florida Association of Counties ROSJIA o HOLM JACKSON a WALTON GUN GADSD Z NASSA Iiiii -,,p, OJ LEON ;; MADISO HAMILTON 3 C BAKERL DUVAL • 11‘111 0 LIBER WAKULLA TAYLOR �AFAY- �' �N�� CIAY '.-.4 ( l BRADFORD 2 '' DIXIE ALACHUA "� LEVY MARION VOLUM.� CITRUS c LAKE Ali Icy/0 ANBOr SE R ORANGE 8 Disproportionally PASCO 1-� A . HILLS OSCEOLA ca i Impacted Counties BaROUGH �� d PINELLAS INDIAN o 'RIVER MANATEE HARDEE HIGH- . ' �, - ( I LANDS WCIE Z % l DESOTO MARTIN 5 GLADES 15 Non- LOTTE HENDRY PALM BEACH Disproportionally Impacted Counties t COWER BROWARD 11111 �o MIAMI- ,�y DADE t ^e 0 CT- + State Consortium 3 ■ Consortium of counties includes one rep from each of the 23 counties ■ Allocation of funds unclear at present time r v � ,, pul .State, .. on r i , , so um . t � . ., � � � 0 , , . . f.,,, . , , , . , , , n , .' , " , 0 , . , g ,, . Treasury/Council '' Local - Counties State" Corisettab i s o 35% ' . 30/o ,x Competitive •,.- Gulf Region Plan "Directly Competitive (Min) *No Formula Weighted Formula Chart ided through Florida prov Association :of Counties Local Counties 1) • Monroe County Board of County Commissioners have sole authority over distribution of funds ;1 • A Division of U.S. Treasury maintains oversight and final approval authority for expenditure of funds • Allocation of funds to all counties based on State Consortium formula (75/25) • Estimated allocation for Monroe County is $5.8 to $23.2 million based on estimates provided by the Florida Association of Counties Population Proportionate Sales Tax Proportionate Distance to Proportionate Inverse Estimated 2010 Census Share Per Capita Share DWH Share Proportion Allocation 0 Charlotte 159,978 3.27% 127.40 6.45% 698,666 7.4% 5.85% 5.17% N , . Citrus 141,236 2.89% 85.90 4.35% 590,799 6.3% 6.92% 4.70% Collier 321,520 6.57% 183.07 9.27% 775,680 8.3% 5.27% 7.03% Dixie 16,422 0.34% 48.47 2.45% 525,021 5.6% 7.78% 3.49% 0 Hernando 172,778 3.53% 90.93 4.60% 592,839 6.3% 6.89% 4.99% Hillsborough 1,229,226 25.11% 156.36 7.92% 610,369 6.5% 6.69% 13.36% lbJefferson 14,761 0.30% 52.62 2.66% 472,097 5.0% 8.66% 3.84% Lee 618,754 12.64% 156.12 7.91% 715,632 7.6% 5.71% 8.79% n , Levy 40,801 0.83% 74.52 3.77% 568,273 6.0% 7.19% 3.90% Manatee 322,833 6.60% 144.26 7.30% 622,336 6.6% 6.57% 6.82% 0 Monroe 73,090 1.49% 378.34 19.16% 913,479 9.7% 4.47% 8.31% Pasco 464,697 9.49% 95.31 4.83% 593,404 6.3% 6.89% 7.09% Pinellas 916,542 18.73% 142.00 7.19% 590,602 6.3% 6.92% 11.02% , Sarasota 379,448 7.75% 149.56 7.57% 634,421 6.8% 6.44% 7.26% Taylor 22,570 0.46% 90.00 4.56% 494,401 5.3% 8.26% 4.39% 4,894,656 100% $ 1,974.86 100% 9,398,019 100"h 101% 100% 6„,,,q1 Five Ten Billion Fifteen Billion Twenty Billion Billion Charlotte $3,619,072 $7,238,144 $10,857,217 $14,476,289 Citrus $3,289,174 $6,578,348 $9,867,522 $13,156,696 Collier $4,921,602 $9,843,203 $14,764,805 $19,686,406 ' Dixie $2,444,616 $4,889,232 $7,333,849 $9,778,465 Hernando $3,495,884 $6,991,767 $10,487,651 $13,983,535 Hillsborough $9,352,415 $18,704,829 $28,057,244 $37,409,659 Jefferson $2,686,624 $5,373,248 $8,059,873 $10,746,497 Lee $6,153,756 $12,307,511 $18,461,267 $24,615,023 Levy $2,731,032 $5,462,064 $8,193,095 $10,924,127 Manatee $4,773,857 $9,547,715 $14321,572 519,095,429 Monroe $5 814140, $11628 281, >$17 442 421 $'23`256;561, Pasco $4,965,041 $9,930,082 $14,895,123 $19,860,165 Pinellas $7,715,794 $15,431,588 $23,147,382 $30,863,175 Sarasota $5,082,248 $10,164,496 $15,246,743 $20,328,991 - Taylor $3,071,633 $6,143,266 $9,214,899 $12,286,532 $70,116,887 $140,233,775 $210,350,662 $280,467,550 Source: Florida Association_of Counties .. . Status o m ■ Federal Council - 1st meeting - Several public meetings and listening 4- sessions in each of the Gulf States in the coming months • US Treasury - mid December • Consortium - meeting monthly •:Pill Next Steps for Monroe .-.,., ......„, n y .. ..----- ..,...., ..., ,...„ , . . ... .• ... _ .... , . .. ... , \ ' ''.. • - . . . .... .• • ' 4, ........„, , . Jr . t • -t.••1.- II . , •. q. • . . • • •", • ,44.1 • .." • 1 ;.• 1 •' , . , .... ... . l •t. , •r• .• l.• • • • ... t. . . , • ' • , • • , . 4 •0 — .... . . e . 1-,,:z:-.. . list„.•,: , . „,,,v, 4,,..t... -ie....i.. •1..A.: , ...No. . • ' ,.. . . - 't..,..:,' .*I;. . ' ' s•• • ‘. • , . . . • . .,, '.;11,, -,, 4.': .. -k," '''' , ,• , . • . •- , • It . I • , . I. . . , • . .-..,„,.... . . (' , :•••.':.27-. '' 0.••t•..- • ';'. 4,,..• "...:' ...:itk;,'"*.1.* ' .:' ' ''" , -P • ':ii. ' '''' -•.. . ,. .' :':::2'1 ' E'' '''„, •-, it M .. • \rt Monroe County RESTORE ACT ... __ _, . •._ :. \,.„ ,,,_ , . . ,, _ ___ . _ .. Creation of LocaI RESTORE Act TCommftteean.dTGü.idèlines •, . . . , . • BOCC Special Meeting • December 11 , 2012 a'"°� "Gf, . . 7 414-- --e, .....„4 .. J• ,......, m. ' \\\,,,,,....._ . Office of Management and Budget Local Funds RE T RE Act Monroe County will receive an automatic allotment of ( t. RESTORE Act funding in the event of a settlement. Here are estimates for Monroe County's local amount, based on range of settlement amounts: SettlementAmount Local Distribution to Monroe $ 5B $ 5.8M IOB 11 .6M I5B 17.4M 20B 23.3M Why is the money coming to the County? The RESTORE Act legislation directs the State of Florida's funding to "coastal political subdivisions" defined in the Act as "any local political jurisdiction that is immediately below the State level of government, including a county, parish or borough, with a coastline that is contiguous with any portion of the United States Gulf of Mexico." 2 r I r9 ,A rtrtr, r Distributionof Local Funds To distribute these funds, the County will need to: Establish a local Restore Act Committee. • The main responsibility of committee is to solicit project applications, review applications, evaluate projects,rank projects, and present itsrankediist to the County Commission for_ approval. (BOCC has final authority): 2. Develop selection process for projects to be funded with RESTORE dollars. • In order to solicit, evaluate and rank projects, we will need to develop an application,; an application process and scoring criteria. 3 � h� t ' Gen Requirementsfor the { Local Committee -- n Ethics, Sushine, Public Records As a general reminder, the following requirements apply to the Committee and its members: • As members of advisory body, all members are governed by standards of conduct and code of ethics in FSCh 112 _-_-- • The committee and its members will be subject to state Sunshine laws (FS Ch 286) • The committee and its members will be subject to Florida Public records law (FS Ch 119) • No member or their designee shall receive any personal gain from serving on the committee • Members will not be required file a statement of financial interests 4 N1 +,l ba Role of Local Committee J t P : 4 i • Its main responsibility will be to review and rank each proposed project based upon the guidelines provided in the RESTORE Act, federal rules, and community needs. : :" • Hold advertised public meetings . • Provide regular status reports to the BOCC Establish an application and application procedure (in consultation with. BOCC?After specific direction and input from BOCC?) • . Solicit and accept all applications for projects that comply with RESTORE Act eligibility • Review, score and rank projects, and present the ranked project list to BOCC (BOCC will review its ranking, and make the final decision regarding best use of the RESTORE Act funds.) • May provide input and assistance to the County's responsibility to develop and submit a multi-year implementation plan for RESTORE Act projects . 5 '' -- ,,,, . - ,,,,;:, ::/ Local RESTORE Act Committee Composition f J=;�. • BOCC needs to determine: O General composition of this committee, and Selection/appointment process for each member N---- i • Considerations for Committee Composition: • Appropriately representative but manageable in size (9?) • Expertise:_Members_with_diversified_ backgrounds,_including the knowledge related to the allowable uses of the funds, and expertise to perform the responsibilities of the committee. • Subject area expertise: env, ecol, fisheries, tourism, eco development, financial/gov contracts/grants • Reps from: SAC,TDC, Fishing Industry, etc. • Keys-wide geographic representation and/or specific municipal representation • Representatives of applicants for funding on committee yes/no? (If yes, conflict of interest issues. If no, limiting our pool of expertise on committee.) • Elected officials on committee — yes/no? (If yes, officials will be constrained by sunshine.) L_______i O Inclusion of non-voting advisory members, such as technical experts 6 / $ Committee Composition• .H l SJ r Additional considerations: _ .� • Only 4 or 5 of the 23 affected counties have started down this path . . . we may learn a lot as other counties start to develop their committees and application procedures. • Considering all of the uncertainty that still exists, we may wish to allow ourselves some flexibility with the local council make-up and its role. One recommendation would be to make it clear in the resolution that the BOCC anticipates that additional changes may be made to the composition and representation on the local Council as this whole thing evolves, as we learn the rules from the Treasury, and as we learn from other counties. 7 ' i ' , , ,,, , ,r ,,/ Committee Selectio 7 “,. " • BOCC must establish a process for selection of committee members. Options for consideration: _ • Appoint oint members ` , __� 0 Nomination process • Combination of appointments and nominated positions • For appointments: BOCC and/or other entities represented may make their own appointments. , r e . O For nominations: • Those interested and qualified to be on committee can submit a letter of interest with their CVs, resumes or statement of qualifications. • Each commissioner will review the submissions and make his/her own list of nominations for the committee appointments. • BOCC will discuss and approve, as a group, and name to the seats those with the most votes. 8 7,7777 Models for Committee Composition Model # I : Model #2: • . • 9 members • 9 members O 3 from U erKeys pp ° Commissioner District • 3 from Middle Keys Appointments (5) • 3 from Lower Keys 0 I-from Upper- Keys O I from Middle Keys • • I from Lower Keys • This is geographic I At Large representation; not district, representation. • Commissioners make • No appointments; all appointments for each nominated positions from respective district among those interested and most qualified • Nomination process for the other4 9 ' , y /�r Models for Committee Composition . . '77/;--''------ Model #3: Model #4: \\ i • 9 members ,..,: ... - o I member appointed by each • 10 members of the following: ° Commissioner District • Monroe County BOCC Appointments (5) • City of-Key West I member appointed by • City of Marathon each of the following: • Village of Islamorada • City of Key West • City of Layton • City of Marathon • City of KCB • Village of Islamorada o I memberTDC o I member FKNM SAC • City of Layton • o I member FK CFA City of KCB • Municipal appointments; with • All municipal appointments. specific areas of expertise 9® fI r t.1 RESTORE Act Funding—General Conditions The County must adhere to general conditions for funding: • Agree to US Treasury audit requirements • Certify that a project, requesting funding: • Is designed to restore and protect the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, coastal wetlands or economy of the Gulf Coast • Carries out one or more of the eligible activities . • Was selected based on meaningful input from the public • In the case of natural resource protection or restoration project is based on the best available. science • Certify that the project or program and the awarding of the contract are consistent with standard procurement rules and regulations, inc. applicable competitive bidding and audit req. • Develop and submit.a multi-year implementation plan for the use of funds, which may include milestones, timelines, and evaluation (Note: The responsibility for ongoing oversight of local projects and administration of contracts is not clearly established. We will have to wait for the rules.) s o ,, , try� RESTORE Act Funding — Eligible Uses ,, , __ Projects must meet the following criteria to be eligible for funding, per RESTORE Act legislation: O • Restoration and protection of nat resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and j � wildlife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region. • Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, and nat resources • Implementation of a federally approved marine, coastal or comprehensive conservation managementplans including fisheries monitoring • Workforce development and job creation • Improvements to state parks in coastal areas affected by Deepwater Horizon I spill • Infrastructure projects benefitting economy or ecological resources, including ports • Coastal flood protection and related infrastructure - • Planning assistance • Promotion of tourism, including recreational fishing • Promotion of consumption of seafood harvested from the Gulf Coast region (Note: US Treasury rules, when they are promulgated, may impose additional criteria, details, and 12 clarifications.) ` r itry rm RESTOREAct Funding — -` Project RankingCriteria The BOCC may wish to assign a higher ranking for some projects based on additional project benefits or components, such as: • The project's impact(s) or benefit(s) is Keys-wide • Demonstrated economic benefit • Demonstrated environmental benefit • Ability to leverage other sources of funding (match) • Long-term implications/lasting value • Shovel-readiness • Comprehensive Plan projects • Consistency with local government comprehensive plans • Capital Improvement Plan projects • Consideration of request amount (setting of min or max amounts to funding requests) I3 a �� Funding APPlication . Process Project applications will be developed. In addition to the ranking I criteria, applications will require standard grant request information, such as: .., , • Project descriptions/need/science/benefits, costs and timelines • Demonstrated applicant, experience/expertise related to the proposed project, and ability to manage project type and size • Demonstrated applicant experience managing government grants and contracts, financial history and track record, etc. Process.: A timeframe and process for soliciting and accepting applications will be developed. Pre-proposals: Due to the uncertainty regarding the amount of funding and when the funding might be available, we may wish to consider developing an interest form or pre-proposal initially, so e, that we can start gauging the level of interest and range of projects, without asking applicants to devote an inordinate amount of time to full-blown applications. 14 Recapfor Next Steps • Decide upon Committee composition • Decide uponon selection process (appointments and/or nominations) • Develop/approve a resolution • Develop parameters for project ranking — scoring criteria or guiding principles (inc. in reso?) • Develop an interest for funding/pre-proposals form, in advance of full, formal application ti • Continue to post information and links on County website 15 `. ` ,I.,- tr ,,,,,1:: , , , . , ,,,if..,..,„, _ ...4 1111* .±.7- to/1Th — ' *O. e. . The RESTORE Gulf Coast Act of 2012FAb 1 Pi _ . FLORIDA 0 ___ „._ ASSOCIATION OF ` ^-$ ° 4 „:,,,,10-2: tat a. 7/19/12 Florida Association of Counties COUNTIES24 Ali About Florida41 ill::: , ' 4,,t,f = '1-. i'lbs,,,,,i1:', ,_:: : =a \ 11111ilL ,,, ",,,,, _.‘t:H" 7: Clean Water Act — Current Law • The Clean Water Act grants the federal Environmental Protection Agency authority to impose fines on parties responsible for oil spills. �- • These penalties are not required to be returned or spent in the injured jurisdictions. 7/19/2012 2 . .+u� .... .. .. , . „ . .. „ . ... .. . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . , ,,. . ... . - . . , . ., _, , . - . -. . . . „ , . -• • - •-.• , , . . . . .' — . `_-:-.- • ' . - -- — '. RESTORE Act, of 2012,. ... ... ...--,--. -.. -.- - ' .' , ,,..,:-...,,, ,,,, ..-::,. .-... ....:.:?-. . ,:„ ....,. • , _ . ,. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . „ „. ,. . . . . , . . . „ . . . , . . . , ,. . . . . . .. . . . . ._ . . . . . . . „ , • , .....,,., .,. , . . ,_. , . ... .. . . . . ... . _ . ., . . . . . . _ , . , . . . , . .. . .. _ _ _ . „ . .. .... . .„, _ . „ . . . „ . . , . . . . ., _ _ ___ _ __, ; . ...., . ... .. . ... . ___ ... _ _ _ _ .. _ _ _ . _ . . „. . .. . .... . ...: ‘, • . . . .. . . . ' port -to accom a .nY :: _ . R. , , . ,. . . . . . . .. .. . , , _ . ., . ... .... . . . .4348) ,.,,,::.:, ,,,,,,:„,..:. .. , , „ .. .. . , ' - - .. • • _ ... . ..., . . . . . , . . . . : Short Title (Section 1601) — Resources ._.::::::::_ -.:-_:::.:;:-:.,.. .,r__ ,„...,:i4r,,,...,:„_-:--:::::-::::_---:_71 . . , . :and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist' ' :n ' Opportunities,. . . and Revived Economi es of. :. ,.. . . ,„ ' '' the Gulf- Coast State Act of 2012 . . . . . .... .._ _,___. ... . . • . ... . , „ . . • . . . , . , . ,„ . , , „.. . . . . . . . .._ .. . , _ _.:.., :_ ... ,. ... , .. .. . . ... . , _ .. , ,, , .. ... ., . •.... . . . . .. , . .„. _: . , _. . . . . . . _. . . . . „. .. _ ,. . ...... .. , , ,„ . . ... . , . .. „ . . , . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . „ . . . .. . „ . . , . . . .. _ , , , .. . .. .„. . .. . .. . „ .. . , ___ _ „.„ . .,_ .„. _ .,_ __. „ , ._ __ __ __ __ _ __ ,. . .. . _ ,_. ,. ... ,... . _ . , ,- , . . .... ..._ _ , ..:_...... . . . _ , _ . . . , .,. , . . . . , . , , . . . - ., = _- FAREDA 1 7/19/2012 3 enneow m Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund . u . • Section 1602 • Establishes Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund • Transfers Eighty (80�) percent - Administrative and civil penalties - Expenditure for prescribed purposes and eligible activities - No time constraints on expenditures - au • I U. S Treasury (Interior & Commerce) — 180 days - Develop policies and procedures Develop..oversight (auditing) requirements �- ...-N v - - Develop identification and allocation of funds • *Allocation formulas — Florida 75/25 — Review State & County Compliance ation/County (35%) State Alloc F FLARIDor 7/19/2012', 4 , Gulf Coast Natural Resources Restoration and Economic Recovery t Section 1603 Amends Section 311 of the Federal ater PoPollution Act "Coastal Political Subdivision" — any local political subdivision that is immediately below the state, including s = a county, parish or borough, with a coastline that, is contiguous with "any" portion of the U.S., Gulf of Mexico • Deepwater Horizon OilSpill — blow and explosion of the mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater Horizon on` _, April 20, 2010 FF 7/19/20.12 .5: enA o Io,d y. Organizational Framework - Florida Model Only • Council (Eleven Members) - Comprehensive Plan — Thirty (30%) percent - Competitive • Oil Impact Allocation - Consortium (State/Regional) - Comprehensive Plan — At least one representative of each affected county — Thirty (30%) percent o 1 — Weighted Allocation formula (19-20%) State Allocation - County - Local Plan — Thirty (35%) percent — Equal Shares — 75/25 FLORIDAtiir' ASSO:IATION OP '` ,:4 COUNTIES xt 3 7/19/2012 7 AuAeo�rwl;aa Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council (30%) • Members (11) Federal (6 including Chair) — Interior, Army, Commerce, EPA, Agriculture, Coast Guard (Dept) - State (5) — Governor (or designee) from each state Advisory Committees . Develop Comprehensive Plan Proposed (180 days) Shovel`ready/large scale • Gulf Coast Restoration Task Force • Existing Gulf Coast State Comprehensive Plans Coastal Zone Management Plans - Initial (360 days) Approval of State Plans - Oil Impact Allocation (30%) • Fifty (50%) percent of interest payments 7/19/2012 8 nnnru 4 it Spill Restoralocationtion �Impact Al (30%) • Consortium of counties that include at least one rep of each affected county • Allocation Formula (roughly 20%) Number of miles of shoreline experienced oiling (40%) — Inverse-proportion of the average distance (oiled shoreline) from the- spill (40%) Average population (20%) • State/Regional Comprehensive Plan - Eligible Uses • *No limitation on administrative costs qr Cap:25% on Infrastructure (Exception) Council - Approval (within 60 days) ' FIARIDA - - COUNTIES 7/19/2012 9 nunn�eru as • State Allocation/Counties (35%) • Equal Shares (20%) - Disproportionately Impacted (75%) • No Allocation Criteria — Nondisproportionately Impacted • Weighted average population (34%) — Annual vs. Census • Weighted average of per capita sales tax (33%) — Fiscal year 2012 • Weighted Average distance from spill (33%) - Administrative Costs • *Limitation of 3% • U.S. Treasury — Reviews for Compliance • Develop and Submit Multiyear Plan _ ___ _ - FA FI.ORIDA COUNTIES 7/19/2012 10 4UAbOI OSIJ Eligible Uses 9f -Funds• * ' ' ' i, ., :: * : ' ' •' . ' , . .. -': . ' '.;',:::•"-: '.. : „_, ', '- '' • Restoration & Protection of natural resources • IIitigationof natural resources 1-‘ , : ,. ' ,_ "'' * . „ ....... * ' ii Implementation of a federally approved marin . coastal, or conservation management plan Workforce development and job creation State parks Infrastructure r projects benefitting the economy or . . .-..„-_,.-„,:_.,..__.;, ' - ::: - -- ' ^ eco-logical resources (ports) Coastal flood rotection = , p • - Planning.assistance ' Ad m i n•istrative Costs . 7/19/2012 11 :u�"°`r�ems° • .. • • - ..,,......,..-'--,..',..:.,,:.,.....5..,-.....:-.2.- .;,,:.,.r-,,,,,,.,,5,._,a,,, Activities to..' Pr.. o• mo..._ te To-. .. urism an.. . • d_. . seafood :--'-,r:..,.-,.-4•„,....'.5-..,.,,e.,„,.-.r,:.:.'--'..-,,„...;.,...,'..,-.i....'.',{.,' .. .. . . _ .., .., . • . , . _ , .. . . . . . _ __ _ _. , . . . . . .„ .. . .. . ,, . . .,7,,.4...,...,....'4.,.„-.:',„.7._.TA.,-- . . , . . .. ., , . . . „ . _ .. . . .. • • , . , . . • . . . . . . • . , „ . . , , , , . . . , . , . . • . .. . • . . . . ..,'..'-.',.''-. -.m'' ' o tourism, . . including recreational fishing _. , . .. .... .•...._.,.„.........:...„•, ..,. w ry, Promotion. of seafood consumption m. , , ., • • • • • • k aC • y *r . , FAQ .. . r C 7• /19/2012 12 anne��e . . � s Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration and Science, Observation, Monitoring and Technology Program (2.5%) • Section 1604 • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration — Marine Research — Marine Monitoring — Data Collection and Stock Assessments — Pilot Programs — Cooperative Research • Interest (25%) __-__-_ .__ .-_ -- -_=_-- — --- --- -_ - FA A&SOCIATIONOAA COUNTIES 7/19/2012 13 AuesowBoam • • xx Centers of Excellence (2.5%) • : ',.' ' '. - : Each State equal shares . • Grants Coast Sustainability Coastal Ecosystem Research Offhore:Energy.. Development — Comprehensive observation, monitoring and mapping of the Gulf of j Mexico i Interest (25%) a FA ` . • FZARIDA - - 1 - A1OU TtUN OP COL7NTIFS ". 7/19/20.1Z 14 AQA6oW Fonda Assumes RESTORE ACT FUNDING POTS RESTORE Act $10B `" Total f $88 to Gulf Coast \+ Region Pot# 1 - "Local Pot" Pot#2 Pot#3 "Consortium Pot" "Federal or Regional 35% Council Pot" t Equal shares Directly to $2 86 30% 30% 5% 5 Gulf States ,Will be Disbursed to 5 states 'To Council to develop/carry Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration a — ---— by formula,min 5%to each state) out the Comprehensive Gulf 'g — — Science,Observation,Monitoriri In Florida this is the23-County Region Restoration plan to d ' g $ - and.Tech ogy Program v Consortium pot,to develop a r restore and protect GulYs , , :: ono M 0 . Florida wide Gulf Region natural resources,ecosystems, To Florida - restorattoo plan/progra fisheries,habitat(competitive Pot # 4 y Pot# 5 $560M _ $the 5 . Directly to Counties Gulf Gulf Regional Consortium states Council 2.5% 2.5/ %of5%) ,: (50 0 (50%of 5%) ? Equal shares to States fore, ' To carry out;the 1" - -_ __ grants-to establish centers , Science/Restoration,, ,tc to 15 Cot'?ties, 'c g of excellence to conduct r Program a,' } to 8 Counties (Equal share ; research only on Gulf , (Formula distr) $laorvi Coast region $200M $2ooM s' " $420M r_ 'To , Monroe, °< Countyilip Local Restore Act '',Comm ittee