Okaloosa RESTORE Advisory Committee (ORAC) October 3, :00 PM 8:00 PM Northwest Florida State College

Transcription

1 Okaloosa RESTORE Advisory Committee (ORAC) October 3, :00 PM 8:00 PM Northwest Florida State College

2 Agenda Minutes Approval Consultant s Administrative Report Scheduled Presentations - None Regional Updates - Gulf Consortium, September 18, 2013 Treasury Rules Review Evaluation Tool Presentation Discussion ORAC Members Open Discussion Old topics New topics Public Comment

3 Consultant s Administrative Report Meeting dates and locations NWFSC, Room 302, 6 PM Oct 3, Dec 5 (may move to a different room), Feb 6, Apr 3, Jun 5 ECCC, various rooms, 2:30 PM Nov 6, Jan TBD, Mar 5, May 7, Jul 2 Desire for a mid-month meeting? Still awaiting confirmation from ORAC members on Okaloosa County account conductivity

4 Public Input / Full Transparency Roadmap Form the ORAC Establish administrative ground rules Educate the ORAC on the RESTORE process Establish ORAC goals we skipped this step Develop a model to help evaluate projects Evaluate Treasury Rules Test the model with several projects Refine model as necessary Develop project information collection tool Collect project requests Use model to score and rank projects Develop Multi-Year Implementation Plan Funding Sources /Rigorous Evaluation

5 No Scheduled Presentation

6 Regional Updates

7 Gulf Consortium Update West Palm Beach, Sept 18 Attended by 20 Directors or Alternates (3 absent) Draft Treasury Rules Posted to the County s RESTORE website on Sept 6 Comprised bulk of meeting; topics consolidated with our input Consultant services RFP tabled until clarification is provided for reimbursement Reduction of originally proposed assessment for Okaloosa County for Consortium dues Due to passage / implementation of SB 50, Public Comment will be moved to the front of future meetings; allows comments on agenda items that Consortium will vote on Next meeting - Oct 25 (Tallahassee) to review Consortium counties input to Draft Treasury Rules; submission NLT Nov 5

8 Treasury Rules Overview Consortium Concerns / Comments Reimbursement of planning expenditures prior to approval of the State Expenditure Plan (SEP) Interfacing with the FL Clerk of Courts Assn. to standardize handling of RESTORE grant funds at the county level Awaiting GCERC input on factors to be used for Pot 3 ; particularly how to measure impacted shoreline within State Additional guidance on the format and criteria of the SEP Clarification on who certifies projects and programs in SEP meet the criteria of the RESTORE Act and the Treasury Rules Matrix Concerns / Comments Need additional clarity that allows coastal political subdivision (county in our case) the ability to recoup funds spent on planning assistance Recommend Pot 3 section be expanded to read like Pot 2 section Will Treasury produce a standard format for plans and additional information? Clarification on who certifies plans (especially for Pots 2 and 3)

9 Evaluation Tool -Terminology Evaluation Tool method to evaluate and rank-order potential projects using quantitative and qualitative factors Quantitative Factor item that can be measured and scored Quantitative Score the total value of the quantitative factors Qualitative Factor items that requires expert judgment and not easily measured or scored Qualitative Score the total value of the qualitative factors Final Score the sum of the quantitative and qualitative scores Scale the point system that will be used to evaluate quantitative factors ORAC Weight the importance (likely reflected as a percentage) placed on the factors comprising the evaluation tool Allowable Activities Official RESTORE Act term used to describe the types of projects that can be funded under various pots

10 Proposed Evaluation Tool Quantitative Score Recommend ORAC Weight 75% Qualitative Score Recommend ORAC Weight 25% Final Score

11 Other Environmental Economic Quantitative Score Proposed Quantitative Factors Weight Factor Score 1. Economic Diversification (within Sector) (%) Scale 2. Job Creation / Job Opportunity (%) Scale 3. Sustained Economic Impact of Project (%) Scale 4. Taxpayer Return of Investment (%) 5. Restore, Enhance and Protect Habitats (%) Up to ORAC to select and weight factors Quantitative Score: Note: Once established, this portion of the model will be used by the consultants

12 Qualitative Score Proposed Qualitative Factors 1. Community acceptance 2. Quality of life enhancement 3. Expert judgment Up to ORAC to select factors Qualitative Score: Note: Once established, this portion of the model will be used by the ORAC

13 Proposed Evaluation Tool Quantitative Score (slide #4) ORAC Weighted as X% Qualitative Score (slide #5) ORAC Weighted as Y% Final Score

14 Terminology (Re-visited) Evaluation Tool method to evaluate and rank-order potential projects using quantitative and qualitative factors Quantitative Factor item that can be measured and scored Quantitative Score the total value of the quantitative factors Qualitative Factor items that requires expert judgment and not easily measured or scored Qualitative Score the total value of the qualitative factors Final Score the sum of the quantitative and qualitative scores Scale the point system that will be used to evaluate quantitative factors ORAC Weight the importance (likely reflected as a percentage) placed on the factors comprising the evaluation tool Allowable Activities Official RESTORE Act term used to describe the types of projects that can be funded under various pots

15 ORAC Open Discussion

16 Public Comment