Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> www.casscountynd.gov <br />under this category must be in response to the disease itself or the harmful consequences of the economic disruptions resulting from or exacerbated by the COVID–19 public health emergency.’’ The enumerated eligible uses were presumed to meet this criterion. Pg. 4341 In response to comments, Treasury is adjusting the structure of the public health and negative economic impacts eligible use section of the final rule to improve clarity and make it easier for recipients to interpret and apply the final rule. Pg. 4342 This restructuring is intended to make the rule easier to navigate and to implement, including any criteria or conditions on particular uses of funds. The reorganization of the public health and negative economic impacts section of the final rule is also intended to clarify the enumerated eligible uses described in the interim final rule. The reorganization itself is not intended to change the scope of the enumerated uses that were included in the interim final rule or that were allowable under the interim final rule. Pg. 4342 The final rule streamlines and aligns services and standards that are generally applicable or are provided for public health purposes. Under this approach, eligible uses to respond to the public health emergency are organized based on the type of public health problem: (1) COVID–19 mitigation and prevention, (2) medical expenses, (3) behavioral health care, and (4) preventing and responding to violence. Pg. 4343 If a recipient intends to fund capital expenditures in response to the public health impacts of the pandemic, recipients should refer to the section Capital Expenditures for details about the eligibility of capital expenditures. Pg. 4343 b. Capital Expenditures The interim final rule expressly permitted use of funds for a limited number of capital expenditures that mostly pertained to COVID–19 prevention and mitigation. These included capital investments in public facilities to meet pandemic operational needs, such as physical plant improvements to public hospitals and health clinics; adaptations to public buildings to implement COVID–19 mitigation tactics; Pg. 4389 Overview of General Standards In considering whether a capital expenditure would be eligible under the public health and negative economic impacts eligible use category, recipients must satisfy the requirements for all uses under the public health and negative economic impacts eligible use category, including identifying an impact or harm and designing a response that addresses or responds to the identified impact or harm. Responses must be reasonably designed to benefit the individual or class that experienced the impact or harm and must be related and reasonably proportional to the extent and type of impact or harm. Pg. 4390 For projects with total expected capital expenditures of $1 million or greater, recipients must complete and meet the substantive requirements of a Written Justification for their capital expenditure, except for Tribal governments as discussed below. This Written Justification helps clarify the application of this interpretive framework to capital expenditures, while recognizing that the needs of communities differ. Pg. 4390 Capital expenditures may involve long lead-times, and the Written Justification may support recipients in analyzing proposed capital expenditures to confirm that they conform to the obligation and expenditure timing requirements. For example, construction of a new, larger public facility for the purpose of increasing the ability to socially distance generally would not be considered a reasonably proportional response compared to other less time and resource-intensive options that may be available and would be equally or more effective. Pg. 4390 The needs of communities differ, and recipients are responsible for identifying uses of SLFRF funds that best respond to these needs. Pg. 4390 The Written Justification should (1) describe the harm or need to be addressed; (2) explain why a capital expenditure is appropriate to address the harm or need; and (3) compare the proposed capital expenditure against alternative capital expenditures that could be made. 1. Description of harm or need to be addressed: 2. Explanation of why a capital expenditure is appropriate: 3. Comparison of the proposed capital expenditure against alternative capital expenditures: pg. 4390 Specifically, recipients should assess the proposed capital expenditure against at least two alternative types or sizes of capital expenditures that are potentially effective and reasonably feasible. Where relevant, recipients should compare the proposal against the alternative of improving existing capital assets already owned or leasing other capital assets. Pg. 4390/4391 In determining whether their proposed capital expenditure is superior to alternative capital expenditures, recipients should consider the following factors against each selected alternative. a. A comparison of the effectiveness of the capital expenditures in addressing the harm identified. Pg.4391 $10 million or more: Written Justification required, and recipients must submit as part of regular reporting to Treasury.